TD’s OK on a non-carving board?

[icebiker]

Allow me to clarify since there’s only so much I can squeeze into the title line:

Question: Would a board that is isn’t made by one of the more traditional carving board makers (Donek, Coiler, etc) be able to handle what I assume is the greater leverage applied to the board by a plate binding, particularly the TD’s?

Reason for Asking:  I have found riding my 2010 Ride Yukon 172 board (8m SC) is a better fit for the narrow and often bumped up trails at the small PA mountains I frequent than my 2012 Donek Axxess 172 (9-11 VSR). The Yukon has Burton/Ibex race plates. The Donek has TD SW SI’s   I would like to try using the TD’s on the Yukon since I like the step-in set up,  but before I do I want to be sure they don’t run any risk of pulling out inserts or other issues.  I don’t pull serious g’s while carving but I do weigh 200 lbs. the Race plates have been fine on the Ride, but these as we know are not the stiffest if plate bindings   

My assumption (which is admittedly not well informed) is that makers of carving boards beef up the insert area to account for the stresses of carving and perhaps more traditional builders don’t given that thier clientele is more freestyle oriented. Then again, Park/pipe riding likely stresses the inserts quite a bit too?  

Please set me straight if you will. Thanks  

FYI I still plan to use the Donek at bigger mountains as it’s just too much fun not to. 

Edited September 26, 2018 by icebiker

[barryj]

Hey Ice,

I ride TD's on everything I got.......... pow boards, softboot carving boards, old beater rock boards..... it's all good!

The inserts in most modern boards are designed to take a beating from the typical park rat abuse of jumps, grinds, rails, etc ............ so typically good/strong enough for plate bindings.

I say go for it!!    

[BlueB]

TD1 not recomended. TD2 with suspension kit and TD3 are ok, but still have small foot print and are overkill for that type of the board. 

Race plates are actually perfect, along with F2 Carve RS or Proflex. Extra flex is benefitial in the conditions you describe, as well for the softer, wider board and lower angles that you'll be riding. 

[JRAZZ]

The only problem I'm aware of is that the HB interface can introduce a lot of stress. Most SB boards are softer than HB boards and might not have the ability to handle the load. YMMV.

[Donek]

Most snowboard manufacturers have gone to an insert with an even smaller base and lower retention strength.  At this point in time, we order the old inserts as a special order.  I would not trust a board made by a mass producer to handle the loads created by an aluminum binding.  Our construction on everything but the phoenix and park twin can handle at least 12,000 lbs of axial load at each insert.  You won't find this in a mass produced board.  Mark Kress rides our Saber with Bomber bindings and usually pops and insert by the end of the year.  He is on snow several days a week and rides hard.

[Eboot]

3 hours ago, Donek said:

Our construction on everything but the phoenix and park twin can handle at least 12,000 lbs of axial load at each insert.  

Interesting fact!  I was discussing same with a colleague and mentioned that (I believe) that hard carving can result in several g's of force and the source of my information was challenged.  Anybody have any fact based stats for g's bulled in a hard carving turn?  Happy to take this to a separate thread if required.

[Donek]

56 minutes ago, Eboot said:

Interesting fact!  I was discussing same with a colleague and mentioned that (I believe) that hard carving can result in several g's of force and the source of my information was challenged.  Anybody have any fact based stats for g's bulled in a hard carving turn?  Happy to take this to a separate thread if required.

There was a device for measuring g-forces that was being passed around a few years back at a couple of SES events.  No you can just put an app on your phone.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.haofu.gforcemeter&hl=en_US

[Jack M]

1 hour ago, Eboot said:

Interesting fact!  I was discussing same with a colleague and mentioned that (I believe) that hard carving can result in several g's of force and the source of my information was challenged.  Anybody have any fact based stats for g's bulled in a hard carving turn?  Happy to take this to a separate thread if required.

12m sidecut at 60 degree bank would make about a 6m turn.  To balance this, you need to be going about 10m/s (22.5mph), and you'd be pulling about 1.7 g's.

http://alpinesnowboarder.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Physics-of-a-Snowboard-Carved-Turn.pdf

http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/newtonian/centrifugal

[Keenan]

21 minutes ago, Jack Michaud said:

12m sidecut at 60 degree bank would make about a 6m turn.  To balance this, you need to be going about 10m/s (22.5mph), and you'd be pulling about 1.7 g's.

http://alpinesnowboarder.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Physics-of-a-Snowboard-Carved-Turn.pdf

http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/newtonian/centrifugal

That would explain the compressed discs in my spine.  And all these years I thought it was from off road Hippety Hopping.

[Corey]

Original topic:  Coiler will beef up boards if you're using Cateks or TD1s.  You mentioned Sidewinders, so that means TD3s with the much bigger base.  Go with softer bindings if you can.  I ran TD3 SW on an O-Sin 3800 for 3 days so far without failures, but that's 95% powder if I'm on that board.  I'll switch to F2s this year once I figure out some 3D-printed cant/lift shims.  

G-forces: I recall Bill Stauer pulling max Gs at that session with Fin's G-meter.  I think it was 1.8 or something.  No idea on filtering or how that thing worked, but the number seemed low to me.  

To simplify, you can draw a line through the rider's center of mass to the edge and calculate from there.   Unless they touch the snow like I am in my avatar, then all bets are off because you don't know how hard the rider is pressing on the snow.  Plus we tend to be very transient and don't settle into a steady-state like a motorcycle on a long turn on a road course.  

1 / tan(angle) = Lateral G-force

45 degrees = 1G, 34 deg = 1.5G, 27 deg = 2G

 

Going full nerd (did anyone expect any less?) - We actually feel the combined G-force from gravity plus your turn, so:

1 / sin(angle) = Total G-force

Upright in the lift line = 1G, 42 deg = 1.5G, 30 deg = 2G

[west carven]

howdy

what about the forces when you bury the nose and and rip the inserts out like a can opener?

the downward force would be spread out by the cant disc...

[philw]

2 hours ago, west carven said:

what about the forces when you bury the nose and and rip the inserts out like a can opener?

Dunno, but presumably precisely the same as the forces on your ankles in the same scenario immediately prior to whatever gives first?

I only did that thing once, and actually the boots (Indy 700 I think they were) were blown out by the force my legs put on them. The F2 bindings and Burton board were undamaged

[carlito]

7 hours ago, west carven said:

howdy

what about the forces when you bury the nose and and rip the inserts out like a can opener?

the downward force would be spread out by the cant disc...

Hmmm.  This isn't the usual "best practice" approach to damaging the binding zone of boards (he hee hee).  As Phil mentioned:

 

5 hours ago, philw said:

Dunno, but presumably precisely the same as the forces on your ankles in the same scenario immediately prior to whatever gives first?
 

and this makes it a pretty good approach to getting damaged on a personal level.  Binding zone damage is usually a result of extreme board flex that,  in the binding zone act as a stress riser because the "corner" of a binding starts to push really hard on a small point of the top laminate of the board.  Plate bindings (especially older all alloy ones that didn't allow much flex) and stiff plastic boots can really push this over the top load-wise.  My personal favorite approach to destruction is not the nose hook/flip over (though this is definitely the most spectacular - especially when followed by a "scorpion" landing!) but the shuddering low side slip out to desperate try to stop sliding off the side of the run into the trees "judder stop" on heelside - on occasion this even includes a secondary nose hook!  This particular maneuver really loads up the board in front of the front foot. 

Now,  general purpose boards aren't really designed with resisting this sort of loading in mind.  They tend to be longitudinally soft (especially older, longer models (burton supermodels, ride timeless come to mind...) and this leads directly to the point loading described above, especially when combined with the teenier inserts sometime being spec'd now.  I am sure that Donek, other alpine focused manufacturers, and the like (I know I definitely do!) take steps to help with this.  This can include lots of stuff from more robust cores in that zone, to more glass/metal/strength in the zone, and basically making the board stronger/stiffer around the feet than typical soft-boot boards are made as well as better inserts and insert reinforcement.

That said,  I would still do it.  Life's short.  Ride the board that works for you.  Keep in mind that it'll probably blow up someday and be prepared to get something from one of the manu's that will address the binding issues and perform in those conditions.  Just quickly looked up the specs for those two boards, and despite the same overall length the Ride's ECL is over 10 cm shorter!  That'll make a difference....

[icebiker]

Thanks very much everyone.  Lots of excellent perspective here.  I agree that the race plates are the most appropriate setup for the board/terrain in question. I was just looking to simplify the launch/load sequence.  SI’s are so much easier on my aging/aching back than stooping to flip the toe bails on the Race Plates.   Seeing as the launch and end of run load is a microscopic part of the end to end process, me thinks it’s best to focus on the bigger picture (the run itself) and stick with the RPs.  Many thanks again, The nerd in me especially appreciates (though doesnt necessarily fully grasp) the math that’s been shared.  

[Ernie00]

I've used TD2 on softboot Prior without any problems in the past. 

[b0ardski]

yukons were pretty stout boards, If I had td 2-3 there would be no qualms at all putting stepins on it for all mt use, but I'd be leery of hard carving.

my old nitros are way harder on the boards than tds with pads, but I used them on all my eldos with no issues as well as all these

`

Edited September 30, 2018 by b0ardski