New GRP foil delaminating

jeffers

Active Member
Hi all,

I friend of mine has finally got his new boat from LP (he only had to wait 6 months).

He has sailed it a few times and is having real issues with the new foils. He says they are quite brittle and chip very easily (even more easily than the old boards).

He also reports that they are delaminating. He got on the LP who have sent hime a new set however he says these are as bad if not worse than the set he got with the boat and he has not even used them yet.

Has anyone else had any experience/usses with the new GRP foils? I was under the impression that they were supposed to be everything that the old ones were but more durable....

Cheers,

Paul
 
Re: New GRP foild delaminating

Hi Jeffers, at the worlds this year all the charter boats came with the new GRP foils. Every day laser spent all day repairing the breakages (and there were lots).

The foils seemed really fragile and lots of them were snapping and/or delaminating.
 
Re: New GRP foild delaminating

It will take a year or so for LP to get it right, PSA has taken 4 years and LP has the advantage of being able to copy PSA.
 
Re: New GRP foild delaminating

another quality Laser product...I am glad they don't manufacture cars as they would be flimsy, overpriced and unreliable
 
Re: New GRP foild delaminating

another quality Laser product...I am glad they don't manufacture cars as they would be flimsy, overpriced and unreliable

Plus you would have to stoke their boiler with class approved coal whilst the rest of the world drove round with petrol engines. Of course the class would be reviewing alternative power sources but would have to wait until ... and ensure that there was no performance changes ...

Ian
 
Re: New GRP foild delaminating

I got a new boat in germay in august 2010. How can I detect whether I got the new or old foils?
 
Seriously folks...

ask yourselves a couple questions?

How many phone calls do you believe it would take to find a manufacturer capable of reverse engineering the Compton foils and building exact replicas of the foils supplied with all ONE DESIGN Laser racing sailboats from 1980 until recently??

Do you suppose any of us who are experienced boat builders might know EXACTLY how to build blades that would be shaped just like the Compton foils but stronger and more durable than those Compton foils?? ( yes they would make the boat go slightly faster...SO WHAT??? Are we seriously believing the hold up is that nobody can figure out how to build a blade that is just exactly as slow as the Compton blades?? Yeah Right...I have a bridge to sell you too)

Knowing the foils retail for over $200 and materials for such things cost well under $50 per pound ( I'm thinking maybe $4 per pound would be plenty), do you suppose someone in the plastics molding business might be interested in having a contract to supply Laser foils worldwide and willing to spend some effort and work out a molding system?

...

The simple fact is somebody who controls the building and distribution of Laser brand sailboats has chosen to purchase a particular new type of foil...

Do you suppose it has to do with perceptions related to potential profits or do you suppose it has to do with some sort of belief related to potential profits??
 
Seriously folks...

ask yourselves a couple questions?

How many phone calls do you believe it would take to find a manufacturer capable of reverse engineering the Compton foils and building exact replicas of the foils supplied with all ONE DESIGN Laser racing sailboats from 1980 until recently??

Do you suppose any of us who are experienced boat builders might know EXACTLY how to build blades that would be shaped just like the Compton foils but stronger and more durable than those Compton foils?? ( yes they would make the boat go slightly faster...SO WHAT??? Are we seriously believing the hold up is that nobody can figure out how to build a blade that is just exactly as slow as the Compton blades?? Yeah Right...I have a bridge to sell you too)

Knowing the foils retail for over $200 and materials for such things cost well under $50 per pound ( I'm thinking maybe $4 per pound would be plenty), do you suppose someone in the plastics molding business might be interested in having a contract to supply Laser foils worldwide and willing to spend some effort and work out a molding system?

...

The simple fact is somebody who controls the building and distribution of Laser brand sailboats has chosen to purchase a particular new type of foil...

Do you suppose it has to do with perceptions related to potential profits or do you suppose it has to do with some sort of belief related to potential profits??

nwa.jpg
 
My local Laser dealer also mentioned that the new foils are coming out of China and that the issues with the delaminating etc. are due to excessive amounts of moisture in them when they are made. This causes them to blister and delaminate.
 
Re: New GRP foils are going to delaminate

I got a new boat in germay in august 2010. How can I detect whether I got the new or old foils?

Eberhardt, I guess you bought her at Hamburg. Ask (phone) Ferdi Ziegelmayer, he definitely knows what he sells.

At NA the GRP blades have the black stripe at their head (as mentioned above), yes, I have seen that at photos in the web. I am not so sure about this "indicator" for European GRP foils.

All I heard, new boats (produced in GB) at GER come with the GRP blades only. You know, we have a 6 month "dealer warranty" (For all the others that read here: It means: At GER the Laser store (aka LP) has to verify, the product he has sold to the customer is free of failures. Aft the six month: the burdon of proof shifts to the customer).

P.S.: Many do not know here: The blades we used beginning from the 80ties up to the end the first decade of the 2000ties have been produced by a company called "Crompton". So, one says: "Crompton foils".
Now, the blades we have to buy are called "GRP" foils. Shevy (drLaser) just a few weeks ago, did teach me some details about the GRP foils, by giving me an article of a sailing magazine (view link below). Also, there are very old blades in use, called "foam"-blades. Much older than those foam blades, are the original wood blades of the first (CAN/US-) Laser of the early 70ties. The wood blades are permitted to use at very old boats, only, that originally came from the builder with such wooden blades.

Not long ago, here the hearsay is: LP did buy a company that produce the GRP foils, for other sailboats (such as "420"), too. Also the hearsay here is: They have generally problems with the epoxy they use, in the moment. I am not able to say if that is correct.

Not to forget, the Australian "yellow" (fibreglass) blades. Those yellow blades look very nice, really. I have seen them just a few weeks ago on a local race where a Laserite sailed a Laser made by PSA (Australian Laser). The hearsay here is: the yellow blades are sold out /went "out of production". Is that true?? Alan, I would be interested in your opinion about the question: Is ist permitted to use the yellow blades on a Laser that not is produced at PSA. From my understanding the answer would be: No (reason: "Lex J.-L. Michon"-rule). I know the fundamental rule well. But it do not particularly says: The equipment that one uses should be produced on the same continent like the hull. The F-rule only says, that the equipment should be manufactured by a licensed builder in accordance with the "LCM". I ask that, because I have a friend, living at Singapore, where he perhaps is able to buy and deliver one set of the yellow blades to me (and for me only :) ).

Here is the link to the article of the sailing magazine about the GRP foils (I guess, it already has been posted at TLF somewhere in the past):

http://www.yachtsandyachting.com/news/printarticle.asp?article=153198



Ciao and all have a nice "1st Advent"-Sunday (we just got 1st snow...)
LooserLu

(If I haven’t described correct something above, feel free to post a correction.)
 
I have a set of the new infused foils and have been sailing with them for 2 months now. I have worked in the composites business for the last 25 + years and I think that the foils look pretty good and a massive improvement on the old foam ones. They should be much stronger and should not break up as the old ones used to. I have had a good look at mine and they have no signs of problems. Interestingly when I picked up the boat the guy at LP said that these foils were epoxy. I commented at the time that it didn't look much like epoxy as it was too clear ( epoxy normally has quite a yellow tinge). When I had to sand away some of the rudder head to get it to go down correctly it clearly wasn't epoxy as it stank of styrene. So the foils are either polyester (or vinylester) not epoxy.

Hopefully these reported problems are teething problems with the process - may be a bit of poor impregnation giving the odd dry area, hopefully when they get the process sorted we will all benefit from great foils that don't fall to bits or get rusty stains after a few seasons.
 
This weekend Walmart was selling 19 inch TV sets for $100.

Every one of you who thinks Laser centerboards are more difficult to build and need to cost more is a damned fool.

The structural foam blades were perfectly adequate.

They were a huge step foreward from laminated sandwich over foam cores and served the game well for thirty years.

The reinforcing rods were always stupid. They did nearly nothing to help the structure and contributed to its failure.

Laser blades could have been mightily improved simply by using the Compton process and a slightly stronger mix of material.

The recent step backwards to a foil whose creation is much more complicated than making a blade from a "homogenized" material does nothing to lower the cost of production and make sailing more available to the community.

It seems the builders are not even trying to figure out how to build and distribute the Laser so it can sell for under $1000 at Walmart.

Someday, some entrapeneur will see the ten speed bikes for $79 and the family tents for $100 and think, "I could build Laser style sailboats for $500 and sell them for double the money."
 
The new GRP boards are no stronger than the Crompton Boards, they have been reverse engineered to have the same mechanical (stiffness etc) and physical properties as the old boards.
 
Try as I might, I cannot and wish I could believe that the new blades are going to be exactly as the old blades. One way to have been certain would have been to simply find a new supplier willing to produce exactly the same blade.
As the builders did not contract with someone to build blades exactly as the old ones, I find it extremely hard to believe the primary and foremost goal was to preserve our one design.

If the new blade is the same , will we still be provided with 28 mm blades and a class max thickness of 33 mm and will the sailors still be allowed to add coatings to make the blade full "legal" thickness??

and will we still close our eyes and shut off our brains and tell everybody that a full thickness blade does not necessarily have its shape changed??

Sorry. I don't buy any of this crap about trying to help the game with these new blades. Blades ought to cost under $25 at dealerships.

As it is, you can buy a high definition TV set that is the same size as one of our centerboards for the same price. I call that bul.....OOPs sorry this is the polite forum...
 
The old blades were crap, the trailing edge was usually warped straight out of the box. The whole board warped easily if they were exposed to any heat and were a pain to straighten. The new GRP boards being supplied in Australia may still warp, but turning them over and exposing them to a similar heat source will straighten them extremely easily. The surface finish of the old boards was poor which meant that you had to sand them and potentially have them re-sprayed. As for breaking centreboards, many people lost big chunks off the trailing edge, whilst the PSA boards have only lost the a very small bit off the bit of the bottom corner of the trailing edge. The old rudders often cracked near the rudder head. Yes, the PSA boards have suffered badly as various stages of their development, including delamination, but I believe this has been resolved. The LP GRP are still very much in the development stage, as would any board being produced to replicate the old boards.

Gouvernail you're living in the past and need to move on.
 
Whilst I'm sure that every effort has been made to make the new foils similar in performance to the old ones ( bending stiffness ?). It is very difficult to match the strength characteristics of the old foils with an infused foil with glass skins and a lightweight core. The material properties of the old material, lightweight filled resin with the odd steel rod, is to use Alan D's words are "crap" in comparison to a glass reinforced laminate. The glass reinforced laminate even if it uses a basic woven fabric will be much stronger than the old material. This will show itself as no more chunks coming off the trailing edge, no more C/B heads shearing off under impact. I also expect that the outer surface will also be more robust and hold it's surface finish for longer.
 
What I find surprising is that the new boards were not adequately "developed" before the old ones were discontinued. As many have said before, the builders have a policy on not single sourcing so even if there was a problem with one supplier they can still get stock. Thus, why not continue with the old boards until the new ones are adequately developed and most problems solved.

Unless of course the builder has not been maintaining its dual/multiple source policies (and the reasons why they might not are obvious and look like yet again we are the ones to suffer).

Ian
 
The problem is that you do the development work, and you think that you have a handle on the process, so you press the button and go into full production. Often the process has to be refined once in the production phase. This happens with all products ( i-phones for example) not just the flakey marine trade. What is important is that you have good production staff that can get their heads around the issues and fix the problem quickly before the problems get out of hand (a skip full of scrap parts, and a load of warranty claims, and the product gets a bad reputation and dies in the market).
 
The problem is that you do the development work, and you think that you have a handle on the process, so you press the button and go into full production. Often the process has to be refined once in the production phase. This happens with all products ( i-phones for example) not just the flakey marine trade. What is important is that you have good production staff that can get their heads around the issues and fix the problem quickly before the problems get out of hand (a skip full of scrap parts, and a load of warranty claims, and the product gets a bad reputation and dies in the market).

The product gets a bad reputation and dies in the market.

I hate to be negative, but it seems like LP is trying to do just that....
 
Everyone can handle a product failure as long as the company stands behind the product and is quick to respond with replacment and fixing the issue.
 
What I find surprising is that the new boards were not adequately "developed" before the old ones were discontinued. As many have said before, the builders have a policy on not single sourcing so even if there was a problem with one supplier they can still get stock. Thus, why not continue with the old boards until the new ones are adequately developed and most problems solved.

Unless of course the builder has not been maintaining its dual/multiple source policies (and the reasons why they might not are obvious and look like yet again we are the ones to suffer).

Ian
Crompton appears to have pulled out quite quickly, which has forced the ILCA/LP to quickly find a alternate supplier and hence he development period has been too short. As Tracy indicated a few weeks ago, Crompton did not want to continue supplying boards.

Crompton has been the sole source of board for several decades until PSA started looking at supplying boards in their market, unfortunately their set up is fairly small and I doubt they could supply the world, even on a temporary basis.

Unlike what has been said by someone earlier, a huge percentage of the cost of these boards is not in the raw materials, but the machine used coat them in resin (it's a press where the resin is injected hot into a mold, the foam core coated in unresined glass is produced offsite. But from my observation, you'd be lucky to produce 10 boards an hour, it's a semi automated process and very messy.
 
What I find surprising is that the new boards were not adequately "developed" before the old ones were discontinued. As many have said before, the builders have a policy on not single sourcing so even if there was a problem with one supplier they can still get stock. Thus, why not continue with the old boards until the new ones are adequately developed and most problems solved.

Unless of course the builder has not been maintaining its dual/multiple source policies (and the reasons why they might not are obvious and look like yet again we are the ones to suffer).

Ian

My guess is two things happened. The original board vendor first found out that they were being replaced with a new vendor. Next, volumes were cut with a drop in demand due to the global recession. The original vendor had no incentive to continue producing boards, and the new design was rushed in to fill the gap.

Dual-sourcing suppliers would be nice, but I suspect LP doesn't have the volume (especially in this economy) to make that practical. LP's reputation has taken a pretty good beating as of late, but I suspect much of it is supply chain/economy related.
 
Whilst I'm sure that every effort has been made to make the new foils similar in performance to the old ones ( bending stiffness ?). It is very difficult to match the strength characteristics of the old foils with an infused foil with glass skins and a lightweight core.
I wasn't involved in the process, but I have spoken to PSA about it, the ILCA did a lot of testing of both the Crompton boards and the PSA boards. The mechanical properties (bending, strength, twist etc) and even some of the dimensions (and weight) had never been determined before PSA started. The ILCA didn't want boards which were mechanically superior to the Crompton boards in the market, so the ILCA determined the tolerances by measuring the Crompton boards and PSA had to develop a board that would fit inside those tolerances. The PSA guy behind the project has had a lot experience in high end laminating development and the product we've ended up with, has significantly worse mechanical properties than what could have been produced, simply because they were having to meet the mechanical properties of the Crompton boards to gain ILCA approval, that is the boards could have been stronger, stiffer, lighter etc.
 
My guess is two things happened. The original board vendor first found out that they were being replaced with a new vendor. Next, volumes were cut with a drop in demand due to the global recession. The original vendor had no incentive to continue producing boards, and the new design was rushed in to fill the gap.

Dual-sourcing suppliers would be nice, but I suspect LP doesn't have the volume (especially in this economy) to make that practical. LP's reputation has taken a pretty good beating as of late, but I suspect much of it is supply chain/economy related.
Tracy indicated that that this wasn't a key area for Crompton and that they didn't want to continue producing, rather than losing their monopoly, remember that PSA has been developing their board for almost a decade. If anything, rather than Crompton having an issue with an alternate authorised supplier, I'd be looking a their market being impacted by the replica parts market. I have no idea what else Crompton produces, but I very much doubt that supplying rudders and centreboards to the Laser Class would be a major money spinner for any business, the world wide volume is very small and the manufacturing process tedious.
 
I just ordered a new GRP Centerboard from APS out of the box it had a large bulging area about 3 inches in diameter and 3 mm higher off one of the sides where the board sits in the centerboard trunk. The other side of the board had a similar but smaller bulge The white finish on the bulge was clearly thinner than the finish around it. Has anyone else had this issue. I have called up APS they sent me a shipping label and I shipped it back to them VIA UPS yesterday.
 
Once you get your new board, be real careful with it. The main topic of this rather old thread still holds true.
 
well i got new grp foils with my new 2011 laser and theyre fine i feel like the lucky one for once :) apart from the gelcoat does chip easily and it looks like the gelcoat didnt bond properley to the grp i think that they may have used the same resin that vandercraft makes their hulls out of which gelcoat does not bond to properley as they are opposing polymers due to their atomic structure being too simular leaving too few free bonds to stick too to make a good hold but if you rough it up a bit with the dremel and gel it again its fine because it has something to actually key into as the gelcoat is the first part of the manufacturing process then the grp if they did it the other way it would be fine but you would never get that smooth finish.
 

Back
Top