Bindings Vibrations & Carving

Various topics, technical questions, announcements, events, resorts, ...

Moderators: fivat, rilliet, Arnaud, nils

Locked
User avatar
rcrobar
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 238
Joined: Sunday 24 March 2002, 1:09
Location: BC, Canada

Bindings Vibrations & Carving

Post by rcrobar » Thursday 11 April 2002, 6:40

In the equipment thread it is said that bindings should be ..... “reactive and able to absorb shocks and vibrations.” A composite base plate is also used/recommended ...... “ The advantage of this kind of plate is that it has a similar stiffness as the snowboard.”

How much affect does binding vibration have on a boards ability to carve smoothly? On a scale of 1 - 10?

It seems that so many racers and carvers use aluminum bindings, doesn’t this metal transmit vibrations more than they absorb them?

Can bindings, which generally transmit too many vibrations, be dampened by putting some type of pad between the board and binding?

Rob

User avatar
rilliet
Swoard & EC founder
Swoard & EC founder
Posts: 714
Joined: Tuesday 26 March 2002, 10:39
Location: Lausanne, Switzerland
Contact:

Post by rilliet » Friday 12 April 2002, 12:05

The bindings themselves don't vibrate. They transmit the board vibrations to the rider's feet. So it is a problem of comfort and fatigue. Of course every piece of damper between the board and the bindings (as well as dampening boot sole) will reduce this vibration transmission. I personaly use Ptex-2000 sole pads (the same as on my gloves) because they last (the rubber lasted 3 days..).

Aluminium bindings are most of the time very stiff and transmit vibrations.

They are few problems with too stiff bindings:

1. They don't bend, and obstruct the board's natural bending. So when the board bends, it is more flat under the bindings.
To provide this, some manufacturers decreased a lot the pad surface. But this introduces a huge lever on the board and increases the risk of breakage... :(
Furthermore, with our "low" angulation settings the we need to have the heels and toes in direct contact with the board, that is not the case with such bindings.

2. With our settings we need a little bit of lateral elasticity (but no play) to move toward the board and to get some reactivity.

We found in composite base plate a very good solution to these problems.

Jacques

User avatar
nils
Swoard founder
Swoard founder
Posts: 3043
Joined: Friday 22 March 2002, 19:22
Location: Lyon, France - Swoard team
Contact:

extreme bindings

Post by nils » Friday 12 April 2002, 12:27

Extending my thoughts on this topic; why not think of a board with preset angles and included bindings, that would be part of the board itself, rather than added on... the boot would lie directly on a small ptex or vibration absorbing device..The hard thing would be to have the metal wires strong enough not to tear out from the board...

I think there is a need to rethink the whole principles of the bindings we have today> Since we don't need no release, why not even imagine the boot beeing part of the board too...

We are always compromising > its time for expert tools :)

Nils

User avatar
rcrobar
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 238
Joined: Sunday 24 March 2002, 1:09
Location: BC, Canada

Post by rcrobar » Friday 12 April 2002, 19:30

Hi Nils

You mentioned that you use ..... "I personaly use Ptex-2000 sole pads"

What is sole pad? Sole of the binding or sole of your boot?

I don't quite understand how you are using the Ptex-2000

Thanks
Rob

User avatar
nils
Swoard founder
Swoard founder
Posts: 3043
Joined: Friday 22 March 2002, 19:22
Location: Lyon, France - Swoard team
Contact:

Post by nils » Friday 12 April 2002, 19:33

its jacques> he uses board base (ptex 2000) as a layer under the binding :)

Locked