Boat Building Forum

Find advice on all aspects of building your own kayak, canoe or any lightweight boats

Re: Why?
By:Kyle T
Date: 10/31/2003, 3:20 pm
In Response To: Re: Why? (Ted Henry)

: Let's see, if a yard of both weigh the same, and have nearly the same
: thickness, then could one conclude that the specific gravity of each type
: of material is nearly the same? Sounds like it to me, but some research
: shows a specific gravity range for carbon fiber of 1.3 - 1.8 and for glass
: fiber of 2.5 - 2.6. That's about what I expected based on my experience
: with these two fabrics. This strongly suggests that for two samples of
: equall weight but of unequall material density, one must be thicker than
: the other to make up for the lack of density. Is there some other variable
: I have missed?

: Ted

This material is not a solid. Sort of. It's woven with air spaces inside. The diameter of the strands and how closely they are packed together will effect the thickness and the overall weight. The Carbon appears to be laid down with each strand side by side with it's neighbors. The glass looks fuzzy by comparison. Sort of like apples and oranges.

So the material of the threads isn't the only factor in the density of the woven cloth.

--KT--

Messages In This Thread

Material: is CF lighter>
Jay Doorly -- 10/31/2003, 2:53 am
Summary
Jay Doorly -- 11/1/2003, 1:15 am
Also fame and prestige! *NM*
Sam McFadden -- 11/1/2003, 10:35 am
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
Chuck -- 10/31/2003, 7:33 pm
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
LeeG -- 10/31/2003, 10:29 am
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
Sam McFadden -- 10/31/2003, 10:15 am
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
Mike and Rikki -- 10/31/2003, 12:43 pm
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
mike loriz -- 10/31/2003, 2:11 pm
How about Spectra??
Mike and Rikki -- 11/1/2003, 1:00 pm
Re: How about Spectra??
mike loriz -- 11/1/2003, 4:13 pm
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
ChrisO -- 10/31/2003, 11:58 am
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
srchr/gerald -- 10/31/2003, 5:36 pm
Re: Material: is CF lighter> *LINK*
srchr/gerald -- 10/31/2003, 12:15 pm
Re: Why?
Mike Scarborough -- 10/31/2003, 10:27 am
Re: Why?
Sam McFadden -- 10/31/2003, 4:16 pm
Re: Why?
Ted Henry -- 10/31/2003, 10:45 am
Re: Why?
Kyle T -- 10/31/2003, 11:31 am
Re: Why?
Ted Henry -- 10/31/2003, 2:32 pm
Re: Why?
Kyle T -- 10/31/2003, 3:20 pm
Re: Material: is CF lighter> *Pic*
Kyle T -- 10/31/2003, 8:09 am
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
Mike and Rikki -- 10/31/2003, 5:02 am
Re: Material: is CF lighter> *LINK*
JeffHouser -- 10/31/2003, 11:31 am
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
Mike and Rikki -- 10/31/2003, 12:54 pm
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
ChrisO -- 10/31/2003, 1:09 pm
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
Malcolm Schweizer -- 10/31/2003, 6:32 pm
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
Malcolm Schweizer -- 10/31/2003, 5:48 am
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
Mike and Rikki -- 10/31/2003, 12:03 pm
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
Malcolm Schweizer -- 10/31/2003, 6:20 pm
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
Mike and Rikki -- 11/1/2003, 1:05 pm
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
Malcolm Schweizer -- 11/1/2003, 11:49 pm
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
Mike and Rikki -- 11/2/2003, 1:50 am
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
LeeG -- 10/31/2003, 10:32 am