Seeking the truth about Titanal/ Ti, ceramics, and metal dam

[flatlander]

I'm still relatively new to the forum, but the use of metal as a structural layer has caught my attention. From what I've read metal obviously provides isotropic stiffness (Volant, etc), but the damping aspect has me beefumbled if thats a word.... What I've read has metal providing a damped ride at high speed and is commonly featured in many GS race skis. Is metal actually considered a damper.... or in a relative sense better than composite?

I have scavenged some of the older posts on Titanal and how its not Titanium. Agreed. But in almost every buyers guide, marketers claim titanium is featured in their skis. Is this false advertising/ stupid marketers, or are there actually ski companies using titanium?


Whats up with the Armada Ceramic base, does anybody know if this is a base additive, ceramic base plate underfoot, or I've heard somewhere in fibre form?

thanks for taking the time to respond.

[Easy]

The Armada ceramic base plate is probably the same stuff atomic has been using (I don't know for sure because this is the first I heard of Armada using ceramic plates under foot).

The base/grind plates in ski's improve the durability slightly, but an importer told me that it's primarily marketing (mind you he was talking about his own product!).

About metal in skis, I am not a big fan of the concept. If you look at the history of ski construction you will find that (in short) wood was replaced by metal and metal was replaced by composites. Metal skis lack damping, ski manufacturers like HEAD (which was one of the first companies to build metal skis) and Volant used all kind of constructions and materials to get some good damping and ski caracteristics out of a metal ski construction.

The titanal that is currently applied is so thin that it won't negatively effect damping. But I don't think that it ads anything to your ski either (except ofcourse weight). Yes, metal is springy, but composites are springy aswell. Manufacturers use exotic materials for marketing purposes. Their websites are filled with nonsense about their great ski construction and material selection.

Carbon (bands) don't make much sence to me either (mainly because of the cost), but atleast u can use carbon to reduce weight. When looking at weight reduction I would change the core material(s) first, because more weight can be lost (without adding much costs) compared to the use of carbonfibre.

Ofcourse this is just my personal opinion and it is entirely possible to build a good set of skis with these materials, but I would save my money to build another pair

[mark]

........Metal skis lack damping, .........The titanal that is currently applied is so thin that it won't negatively effect damping. But I don't think that it ads anything to your ski either (except ofcourse weight)........

???????

I was under the impresion that making a ski more damp is the primary reason for adding metal, titanal particularly, to skis and boards today.

[plywood]

i`d second parts of what you wrote...
the metal is just so thin, i`d say it isn`t worth to spend more money on it than on fibreglass. my main concern about metals is the bonding. i think it`s not that easy to get a good bonding and you can waste easily money and work. and as easy said: metal is heavy - i suppose heavier than glass that added the same strengthness.

but i completely disagree with you on carbon: carbon makes much sense. you can "feel" the difference. it flexes back faster than glass - can be a problem regarding vibrations... i use carbon bands to design mainly my torsional flex. there it really has an impact.
but if you only use carbon because of the smaller weight i agree with you: there are more effective and cheaper options to reduce weight

[flatlander]

Both metal and composite are bad for damping, but my research has shown that its a question of picking the lesser of two evils. As you know the optimization of damping and responsiveness is complicated.

I have seen charts of the natural modes for rec alpine skis and GS race skis and the metal seems to have an effect at high frequencies. But when you think about it, metal used to damp vibrations.....You gotta think there would be a better way.

The only way it seems to get around both is to apply a reverse bending moment canceling out incoming oscillations like the Head chip models. That way damping can be achieved using stiff materials.

But then again look at the World Cup rankings, its all Atomic.... I'm not a racer btw.

BTW, I just heard that marketers use titanium in place of titanal to avoid paying rights to use the name. Brutal that they can get away with that if true.

[mark]

But when you think about it, metal used to damp vibrations.....You gotta think there would be a better way.

The only real expirience I've had with reducing vibration has been reducing frequency spikes in my brother's recording studio. We use three basic methods, one of which seems to relate to the use of materials like metal in skis. The basic concept is that any given material resonates at it's own frequency; i.e. if you strike a metal bar it will sound the same tone regardless of how fast or slow you strike it. So by passing sound (vibrating air) through materials that resonate at vastly different frequencies, it can be reduced from a broad spectrum of frequencies to just a few and then nothing but heat.

Seems to me that the same principals would work on vibrations in skis and the dampening qualities of metal would not have to do with the fact that it doesn't have a tendancy to vibrate, but the fact that it vibrates at a very different frequency than the other materials the ski is constructed of. The different materials end up working against each other and energy is transformed into heat rather than resonating the material.

This is all just conjecture on my part. Perhaps someone with more of a backround in this sort of thing could chime in?

[Svimen]

I don´t know much about the resonant frequencies of different metals, but if you are thinking of the ski as a whole, a heavier ski will tend to have a lower resonant frequency, thus dampening out faster vibrations better than a light ski.

Companies who build light skis with a lot of carbon tend to be criticized for having skis that are not damp at all, and get bounced around very easily. (http://www.goode.com/skis.htm) However, dps (www.dpsskis.com) seem to have a much better construction (according to reviews I´ve read), that is both light and damp, don´t know how they do it though...

[Axelerate]

check out my post on vibration damping skis in the ski design and layup topic.

[Easy]

I don´t know much about the resonant frequencies of different metals, but if you are thinking of the ski as a whole, a heavier ski will tend to have a lower resonant frequency, thus dampening out faster vibrations better than a light ski.

True, a heavier object will have a lower resonant frequency and will dampen out fast vibrations better. But materials also have damping characteristics. For instance steel has low damping, if you strike it with a hamer it will cary the impact through the material and can be registered over long distances. Rubber has high damping, it will damp out a strike a lot quicker (indifferent of the resonant frequency).

However, dps (www.dpsskis.com) seem to have a much better construction (according to reviews I´ve read), that is both light and damp, don´t know how they do it though...

You can see on their website how they do it, because it shows their lay up.

They might be damp, mainly because they use a lot of rubber. I don't think they will be light (relative to other skis) because their construction has more components than a regular ski, so it will be heavier. Ofcourse this is an educated guess based on the (little) information on their website.