how is dose carbon fiber bend differently?

[htheodore]

I have kids that have used some of the smaller ESSX carbons. They like them and they were priced right.

[golfdane]

And your right, the vault is just a little faster because the carbons release the energy a little bit quicker.

The release rate depends on stiffness of the pole and the weight the pole have to move. If stiffness is the same, the only thing that will make you go up faster, is the lower weight of the pole (which is part of the whole pole/vaulter system). I think, choosing a lighter shoe, or taking a leak, would have an equally "big" effect.

The advantage of carbon is weight. Everything else is a matter of design (how stiff the manufacterer make the pole, and the bend characteristics they design it with).

[VTechVaulter]

ive sat down with jeff watry (chief engineer for pacer poles) and looked at ridiculous amounts of data that argues against golfdanes last post.

carbon poles def. "come back faster". Now this is not 100 percent a property of carbon vs glass. It also is about how poles are designed to incorporate the carbon. How the carbon affects the "hoop shape" or the overall bend shape/characteristics of the pole.

On thing that comes to mind is an experiment that pacer did a short time back where they built 8 poles with the same flex number that were various designs. Each pole acted different despite being the same flex number. Now enter carbon, we can change the designs even more! the patters for a 15' 160 glass pole and 15'160 carbon pole cant look the same, therefore they cant act the same. Im not sure if pacer knew that carbon poles would react faster than glass when they first designed them way back when, but it is def. a nice side effect of the original intent, which is indeed lighter carry weights

[KirkB]

And you're right, the vault is just a little faster because the carbons release the energy a little bit quicker.

The release rate depends on stiffness of the pole and the weight the pole have to move. If stiffness is the same, the only thing that will make you go up faster, is the lower weight of the pole (which is part of the whole pole/vaulter system). I think, choosing a lighter shoe, or taking a leak, would have an equally "big" effect.

The advantage of carbon is weight. Everything else is a matter of design (how stiff the manufacterer make the pole, and the bend characteristics they design it with).

I'm absolutely no expert AT ALL on carbon vs. pure fiberglass, but I understand what golfdane is saying ... that energy out equals energy in, minus leakage. You can't avoid the laws of physics!

So VTV, can Pacer actually PROVE to you in those heaps of data that there's less leakage with carbon, or that it recoils faster than it coils? If they can't, then their data isn't worth beans.

I now understand that there's differences due to the design of the sail that affect WHERE the bend occurs, and how if FEELS to the athlete, but I'm still stuck on the basic formula that says the pole can't uncoil any faster than it coils - even assuming zero leakage. And I think I was set straight a couple weeks ago on that - ALL pole manufacturers minimized leakage long ago - no longer any difference mfr to mfr.

I'm not about to argue against you, VTV, and your heaps of data here, but I will defend golfdane in his assertion that there's no silver bullet in finding a "faster pole". Are you sure that Jeff Watry wasn't giving you a "sales pitch"?

Although I have no vaulting experience on carbon, or on sails that caused the pole to bend higher than on my fiberglass poles (something I would have liked to expirement with), I absolutely believe that the FEEL of each pole design can be different (because they ACT different, as you say), and that you need to find a pole design that fits your body type and technique. I buy this. I just don't buy any defiance of the laws of physics. If leakage is no longer a factor, how can a pole be "faster" to recoil now? Isn't it 100% the technique of the vaulter that affects where/when HE moves faster/slower, thus the pole (an inert object) "follows" the vaulter's body motions?

Explain this scientifically - prove me wrong.

If LEAKAGE is a LOSS of energy, could these poles that "act different" just be a REDISTRIBUTION of energy, rather than a CREATION of energy? Of course! So if they don't CREATE more energy, then how can they be FASTER?

Is this not just sales hype?

And golfdane has another good point. Taking a leak will improve your strength-to-weight ratio, won't it?

Kirk

[VTechVaulter]

its not leakage or loss, its just resulting action of design. Difference in material properties means that you cant design a pole to act the exact same way out of different materials. What the actual data made quite clear was that 2 poles of EQUAL FLEX require different amount of energy to get the pole to roll over, have different roll over timing, and therefore different action up top. I dont have any of the data sitting in front of me, but I recommend everyone who wants to know more about poles takes a trip to visit the gill factory and let them explain it better.


also... jeff has no reason to make "sales pitches" to me. never has needed to and never will. they have been incredible to me since my dad was buying poles from them in high school. they have worked with me every step of the way and always made sure i've had the poles i've needed. I have sets of glass poles, i have sets of carbon poles, and i have a set of weaves being built right now. I own over 30 poles from a 4.90 19.2 to a 5.10 11.9, and every single one says pacer and always will. my looking at their data was on a meet up in illinoise where i stopped by because i wanted to see the factory. Jeff was kind enough to show me some of their r & d so I could compare what i believed with actual numbers.

[vtcoach]

Sure, energy in = energy out cannot be argued. But that does not mean the pattern of energy return can't be different. Consider a recurve bow vs a compound bow, or compare the various kinds of catapults, or compare a metal shaft golf club to a carbon fiber shaft club. Each returns the same total energy in a much different pattern. A compound bow returns very little of the stored energy in the beginning of the recoil but alot of the energy at the end of the recoil. Since poles are not as radically different in design as a recurve vs a compound bow the difference is not as clear or as significant but there can be a difference. We primarily buy carbon poles because of the carry weight but the poles do seem to fit the pattern of some vaulters better than others. I can't say (like alot of things in the vault) I've figure out why but it is interesting to speculate, to look at data when they are available, and to read what folks like you have to say on the subject.

[KirkB]

Sure, energy in = energy out cannot be argued.

Yeh, that was my main point in defense of golfdane. I know you guys are well past that issue! It's just that when we hear "faster recoil", some people (not me) might assume that means "extra energy for the same amount of input". I know that veterans don't think this way.

But that does not mean the pattern of energy return can't be different.

For the rest, I'm learning, and will not argue with you, vtcoach, or you, VTVaulter. I only mean to ask prying questions. You have current experience about carbon, and I have none. I just want to understand it, and I'm beginning to.

Consider a recurve bow vs a compound bow, or compare the various kinds of catapults, ... Each returns the same total energy in a much different pattern. A compound bow returns very little of the stored energy in the beginning of the recoil but alot of the energy at the end of the recoil. Since poles are not as radically different in design as a recurve vs a compound bow the difference is not as clear or as significant but there can be a difference. ...

I'm not familiar with bow technology, but I'll research it when time permits. Nice analogy!

... or compare a metal shaft golf club to a carbon fiber shaft club. ...

I'm reasonably familiar with golf club technology, but isn't that more like the steel pole vs. glass pole comparison? Don't metal clubs have more of what I call "leakage" i.e. energy loss thru bad, inefficient vibrations when the ball is struck? Plus the club "whips" the ball more efficiently as it bounces off the clubhead??

I'm guessing that the cross-bow analogy hits the mark better than the golf club analogy?

Kirk

[vtcoach]

You are correct Kirk, there is no free energy and yet many times you hear things that seem to imply it. I was just trying to clarify the difference between total energy stored in a spring and the pattern of energy ruturn (changing force) when the spring is unloading. The biggest difference I ever felt in poles was between a Pacer III (I am showing my age) and a Yellow Catapole. The yellow cats had a big pre-bend that must have been about 3 inches. I don't know if it was that or some other attribute but I could never get my vault to time up with them. They just felt radically different and yet a number of vaulters jumped well with them. I would love to see plots of force and cord length for those poles.

[powerplant42]

I have both a Pacer III and a banana pole at my school (shows you how well we're funded). I could compare them perhaps, if you tell me what I need to do. (I can't jump on the Pacer, it's mauled at the top... but, consequently, I have no real objection to breaking it to further our knowledge. )

[Barto]

You are going to need some very sophisticated and specialized equipment to measure the pattern of energy return from any pole. I would advise listening to the people who have already invented and invested in that equipment.

I would also caution both coaches and vaulters that the rate of energy return is not going to be the holy grail in new pole technology. We can and have built poles that return far faster than anyone can use. And unless you have the blow to takeoff at 17' a more flexible pole is not going to solve the problem either.

6.40 - not in our lifetime

Barto

[Borntovault]

I use carbon poles and I love them. I don't think there is a better pole than another. I think that depending on a vaulters style and size a certain pole is beter than another. I have tried Spirits and I have tried Carbons and I find that the Carbons fit my technique much better than a Spirit. I tend to have a quicker swing and get to my topend quicker than most and with the carbon poles I am synced up perfect with them so that I am in the right position for the release of the pole. So the big thing is that there is no one pole that is beter than another, it is all just personal preference. I do agree with the comments that Brian said about the releasing of the poles and the poles with the same flex numbers because I too have talked to Jeff and he told me about the data as well. Btw Brian I heard you been becoming a beast out in Jonesboro...that's awesome. Take care of my boy Mitch don't let him go too Crazy

[VTechVaulter]

im working on it.. figuring things out one piece at a time

sadly i wont be here when mitch arrives. I'm returning to VT on the Dec 17th where in the spring semester I will finish my masters degree (hopefully). It will most likely take my sprint and part of the fall, and then I will most likely be moving down to JB for the long haul