What is in your wallet Carbon a waste of $ for small poles

[CrossBarHOpper]

I dont think i would want to buy a pole that i have the risk of it blowing up on me

[rainbowgirl28]

None of the new carbon weave poles have ever done this, and there is no evidence that they ever will.

Remember this is a material that is being used by the military for stealth bombers and the like. If there was any danger of it's properties changing over time, I am sure they would not be using it.

Interdelamination is when carbon just like a pencil lead is glued to itself
and bound by a wrap the wrap holds togeather but the two carbon pieces are working against each other as they torgue in differrent directions.
The resin or glue to hold and support this may not after time and the inside lets go but the outside holds. If the outside cannot with stand the load then the part will blow up, Not break Blowup

How is this any different than fiberglass pieces torquing in different directions?

[USMC Vaulter]

Remember this is a material that is being used by the military for stealth bombers and the like. If there was any danger of it's properties changing over time, I am sure they would not be using it.

Go Us!!! (the US military)



And on a more serious note - are there any reps from Gill on this site that could give us their take on carbon poles and the technology involved? I'm not looking to start any kind of argument between two manufacturers - just curious from more information.

[rainbowgirl28]

And on a more serious note - are there any reps from Gill on this site that could give us their take on carbon poles and the technology involved? I'm not looking to start any kind of argument between two manufacturers - just curious from more information.

They aren't able to post anymore. PM Decamouse and PVJunkie and they will tell you all about carbon and the testing that they put into the new poles.

[USMC Vaulter]

Awesome - Thanks!

[Bruce Caldwell]

Remember this is a material that is being used by the military for stealth bombers and the like. If there was any danger of it's properties changing over time, I am sure they would not be using it.

How is this any different than fiberglass pieces torquing in different directions?

The F117 wings takes a lot of vibration and carbon dampening is crucial to its success but they do not flex the glass the amount required by a vaulting pole. I do not see the comparison.

Interlaminate failure is what we found when laying carbon going opposite directions laid against each other.
We use T620 and T700 carbon, anything less such as T300 would have a strain to failure ratio that is less than ours in a uni-glass.
IN a weave one might gain more ratio of strain to failure but our experience shows that after time of use, interlaminate failure occurs, unless they have found a solution to this common industry carbon problem.
IF they have they should state so and I applaud them for such a technological accomplishment!!

Chaos is caused when one comes to me with a flex number on the brand pole they are using, and I match it to find that the company changed the flex spans without telling the industry or even the customer who had purchased their product!
Safety is a concern and as a result we will not match flex numbers of other brand poles unless we have flexed the pole on our deflex machine. The coach, athlete is clueless to what flex to go to even if he has old poles in stock of the same brand. This is a safety hazard.
Sorry back from Church had to correct my mis-spellings
Happy EASTER all!!!

[Bruce Caldwell]

A study of inner laminate failare is a carbon industry problem and we are not the only type of industry that has made studies or tests.
One of my favorite studies about Inner laminate shear failare from torsional load is done by M. Sonnen, C. Laval, A. Seifert
on a part used a pressure vessel and a tube under pressure developed with T-700 (which is stronger than T-300) carbon on carbon going plus or minus 45% in two differrent directions. Make note a vaulting pole has resin or adhesive of about 30% this part had 60% resin.
This will provide interested readers information about carbon never discussed on an open forum before and other various properties of glass fiber fracture modes. Enjoy

http://www.material.be/products/cs_samp ... /paper.htm

Make note about the progressive failare paragraph!
Let me quote the article so you will see I was not making this up to slam anyone, it is a carbon industry problem.
"If the angle of the fracture plane exceeds ±30° the wedge shape of the crack then can damage the neighboring plies in the laminate and thus result in an explosive failure of the whole laminate"

[altius]

I am intrigued by all this chat about carbon poles and quicker recoil etc etc. Can anyone explain to me why Bubka stayed on fibreglass poles made by Steve Chappel - originally Pacer American and now UCS spirit - if there were superior poles out there? Ditto Isinbyeva/Feofanova etc etc. Surely they could get free poles from anyone -probably even get paid to use some brands!

I have no idea whether or not Carbon poles meet all of the claims for them -except that they are lighter - but it seems to me that the vast majority of vaulters should be looking for poles which are durable and consistent, because as a previous respondent suggested, few people would be able exploit these poles even if they did have some special properties.

By consistency i mean that a 16' 16.0 flex pole is always that -so if the airlines destroy your poles -not unknown - and you buy a replacement 16/16.0 it will respond identically to the one you lost. And if you move up five pounds or .4 of a flex that is exactly what you get if the pole says that what it is. My experience is that is the case with Spirit poles. Here I will declare my interest and admit that Steve has been a friend for forty years and I ave being selling his poles in OZ for almost thirty. However I would also add that as a coach i would never have disadvantaged my own athletes by putting them on inferior poles.

If weight is the only issue then I would argue that the very small differences between the weight of equivalent fibreglass and carbon poles is completely irrelevant -- IF you employ the Petrov/Bubka technical model. This is because the real problem is NOT THE ACTUAL WEIGHT OF THE POLE but the TORQUE forces when a pole is carried near the horizontal. This issue is resolved if you use a high carry early in the run and then actually exploit the weight of the dropping pole to increase cadence over the last 6/8.

Of course if you really want to run forty metres with the pole held horizontally you need all the help you can get!

Thought for the week "Wisdom can come from any place, any time and in any language."

[Bruce Caldwell]

HELLO some good points you have brought up from down under

I am intrigued by all this chat about carbon poles and quicker recoil etc etc. Can anyone explain to me why Bubka stayed on fibreglass poles made by Steve Chappel - originally Pacer American and now UCS spirit - if there were superior poles out there? Ditto Isinbyeva/Feofanova etc etc. Surely they could get free poles from anyone -probably even get paid to use some brands! "

What was told to me by bubkas manager that young Bubka made a switch to Carbon poles with Nordic from Pacer American after Steve left , Bubka was very close to the manager at Nordic and he even when young was a Nanny to one of the workers children for them. He tried very hard to excell on the Nordic poles but he had a lot of breakage as this was the beginning of the Carbon era. After having so many break he then found that Steve was opening a company to make spirit poles and he tried many of them. None broke as these were not Carbon but he did go through a few designs before Steve hit on one Bubka was totally happy with.
I was inpressed by the poles Bubka had at the 1996 Olympic they were very big and for their size relatively light in carry weight. He has jumped on Spirit ever since.

I have no idea whether or not Carbon poles meet all of the claims for them -except that they are lighter - but it seems to me that the vast majority of vaulters should be looking for poles which are durable and consistent, because as a previous respondent suggested, few people would be able exploit these poles even if they did have some special properties. "

I agree with you durability and consistancey are important traits to winning more meets and jumping higher. We have made the ESSX carbon lighter than what we have seen in other Carbons but we feel that performance must come first then a lighter pole.

By consistency i mean that a 16' 16.0 flex pole is always that -so if the airlines destroy your poles -not unknown - and you buy a replacement 16/16.0 it will respond identically to the one you lost. And if you move up five pounds or .4 of a flex that is exactly what you get if the pole says that what it is. My experience is that is the case with Spirit poles. Here I will declare my interest and admit that Steve has been a friend for forty years and I ave being selling his poles in OZ for almost thirty. However I would also add that as a coach i would never have disadvantaged my own athletes by putting them on inferior poles."

If a manufactuer keeps records like we do of patterns, processes, and a scientic approach to building poles one can zero in on making a poles again with tremendous simularity and consitancy. In the past I have seen a few other brand poles with the same flex number that did not react the same. There are other varibles other than flex number to maintain consitancy, humidity, resin flow, is it made on the very same manderal, how the pattern is cut,etc. I agree with you and consitancy is our middle name.

If weight is the only issue then I would argue that the very small differences between the weight of equivalent fibreglass and carbon poles is completely irrelevant -- IF you employ the Petrov/Bubka technical model. This is because the real problem is NOT THE ACTUAL WEIGHT OF THE POLE but the TORQUE forces when a pole is carried near the horizontal. This issue is resolved if you use a high carry early in the run and then actually exploit the weight of the dropping pole to increase cadence over the last 6/8."

I agree again weight should not be the only issue. However we have noticed we can cut out about 2-4 lbs of carry weight in a pole when it is designed properly and still maintain good performance. I have seen some very well made Spirits some that were very light weight and lighter than the same size flex and length of a CARBON POLE made within the same year and I was impressed. Coaches who learn more about pole making will become more tuned to perfromance and less on weight. As mentioned above cadence, the balance of the pole is a big fractor most coaches overlook.
Technique as well as being on the right rated pole are GOLD to jumping your best. Yes carry the pole higher or go to the weight room to handle the additional 3 oz. of pole (SMILE)

Of course if you really want to run forty metres with the pole held horizontally you need all the help you can get!

Thought for the week "Wisdom can come from any place, any time and in any language."

Well thought out post love to see more like this as these type educate people.

PS How was my Australian accent
Bruce 492