TeXtreme® carbon without registered trademark real or fake?

Back by popular demand, the general all-things Road forum!

Moderator: robbosmans

ninjasloth
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2017 12:14 pm

by ninjasloth

Cervelo Felt Scott Canyon and the likes are considered

innovators and early adaptors

While Specialized Trek Giant Merida would be a late majority

It is obvious if you compare their revenue.

Image

They all try to achieve the same goal with different means

TeXtreme doesn't generate enough revenue to be considered by giant manufacturers

See how the uses are limited to pinnacle of super high tech machines and equipments.

Although Textreme tennis racquet is a bit too much imo

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



Stefano
Posts: 295
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2010 4:24 am
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan

by Stefano

Let's not be mean to thumper88. He has some good points and is not wrong. Neither are the rest of you.

There are plenty of areas in a bike frame where having unidirectional composite makes the most sense from a theoretical perspective. Most of them in fact. If you are designing a bike on paper, it makes no sense to use woven composites except locally near holes or crush-prone surfaces (dropouts, BB shell, headtube, seatpost). In this context, Textreme makes little sense and just looks like added weight.

However, bikes aren't made on paper. Most bikes are made in factories in asia, where there are varying degrees of production skill. Having structural uni as a top layer often means that there will be liberal and unpredictable removal of potentially critical material (as opposed to a sacrificial outer layer). If you have ever seen a "marbled" look uni part, you are actually seeing the sand-through of several critical structural layers in an unplanned fashion. How cool is that :/

In an effort to mitigate these issues, designers are forced to use several more layers of fabric than necessary to make up for production variance... taking us back to square one in the weight department. In addition, even if they wanted to use woven fabrics, often it is very difficult to convince a factory to carry more than a few different types of carbon textile, so they are stuck using what they have. Textreme, and woven fibers in general, have a place in the bike industry. Look at the lightest components in the world: THM, AX lightness, etc... all use woven fibers as an outer layer.

Stefano
Posts: 295
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2010 4:24 am
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan

by Stefano

double post :oops:

thumper88
Posts: 176
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 7:27 pm

by thumper88

Stefano wrote:Let's not be mean to thumper88. He has some good points and is not wrong. Neither are the rest of you.

There are plenty of areas in a bike frame where having unidirectional composite makes the most sense from a theoretical perspective. Most of them in fact. If you are designing a bike on paper, it makes no sense to use woven composites except locally near holes or crush-prone surfaces (dropouts, BB shell, headtube, seatpost). In this context, Textreme makes little sense and just looks like added weight.

However, bikes aren't made on paper. Most bikes are made in factories in asia, where there are varying degrees of production skill. Having structural uni as a top layer often means that there will be liberal and unpredictable removal of potentially critical material (as opposed to a sacrificial outer layer). If you have ever seen a "marbled" look uni part, you are actually seeing the sand-through of several critical structural layers in an unplanned fashion. How cool is that :/

In an effort to mitigate these issues, designers are forced to use several more layers of fabric than necessary to make up for production variance... taking us back to square one in the weight department. In addition, even if they wanted to use woven fabrics, often it is very difficult to convince a factory to carry more than a few different types of carbon textile, so they are stuck using what they have. Textreme, and woven fibers in general, have a place in the bike industry. Look at the lightest components in the world: THM, AX lightness, etc... all use woven fibers as an outer layer.



Let them be mean. I don't care. They keep posting photos of things that don't really disprove what I say about the use of woven in bikes. We did use it on high-end carbon masts as well but pretty much as you describe, around holes and fittings. Often it's easy to make, say an exit hole reinforcement or gooseneck attachment using woven either for the entirety of the small part or the outer layer and attach it with a secondary bond.
But the mast proper, the structure of it, no.
Sure you can make a canoe or kayak from woven and it makes sense there as the skins are so thin.
Bike frames, no. As you point out, when you go to woven, you have a reason to head for a heavier solution.
This is true even if it's just the outer layers of the frame. Using woven to improve production issues such as, I dunno, speeding up lamination times, or improving QC due to the skill level of the work force for example, yes, I can see that. But clearly some major bike manufacturers don't use it and it would seem they don't need it. The Fuji SL and Cannonade Supersix Evo Hi-mod are examples of really light frames that don't use it. Ive had a tarmac that got down close to that range. The list is long.
This cloth is clearly not a requirement to make a proper, light, strong frame.
I remain puzzled about the intent of this thread. Engineers might be a little interested in this but it's kind of an esoteric topic for weightweenies.
It's hard to see this cloth, no matter how wonderful, as a selling point, something a cyclist would seek out.
Last edited by thumper88 on Thu Jun 01, 2017 4:14 pm, edited 2 times in total.

thumper88
Posts: 176
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 7:27 pm

by thumper88

53x12 wrote:
thumper88 wrote:
1. Larry Ellison did not buy Oxeon, the creator and maker of TeXtreme.




This was meant to be a quip. It appears no one here is in a light-hearted mood.

tranzformer
Posts: 846
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:36 pm

by tranzformer

Stefano wrote:Let's not be mean to thumper88. He has some good points and is not wrong. Neither are the rest of you.

There are plenty of areas in a bike frame where having unidirectional composite makes the most sense from a theoretical perspective. Most of them in fact. If you are designing a bike on paper, it makes no sense to use woven composites except locally near holes or crush-prone surfaces (dropouts, BB shell, headtube, seatpost). In this context, Textreme makes little sense and just looks like added weight.

However, bikes aren't made on paper. Most bikes are made in factories in asia, where there are varying degrees of production skill. Having structural uni as a top layer often means that there will be liberal and unpredictable removal of potentially critical material (as opposed to a sacrificial outer layer). If you have ever seen a "marbled" look uni part, you are actually seeing the sand-through of several critical structural layers in an unplanned fashion. How cool is that :/

In an effort to mitigate these issues, designers are forced to use several more layers of fabric than necessary to make up for production variance... taking us back to square one in the weight department. In addition, even if they wanted to use woven fabrics, often it is very difficult to convince a factory to carry more than a few different types of carbon textile, so they are stuck using what they have. Textreme, and woven fibers in general, have a place in the bike industry. Look at the lightest components in the world: THM, AX lightness, etc... all use woven fibers as an outer layer.


I don't see anyone being mean to thumper88. He is the one that posted in the thread that TeXtreme layer is for aesthetics and completely ignored its mechanical, structural, weight, durability and cost saving benefits. I'd expect anyone on this thread spreading incorrect information to be called out on it when they make big claims like that when the reality is different. TeXtreme has a very specific purpose. No one is stating that a complete frame should be made of TeXtreme fabric in this thread. What people have been stating, from my reading of it, is that TeXtreme serves a very specific purpose and does a very good job of that.

I also found it very funny that thumper88 made a boisterous claim that he never saw BMW-Oracle trimaran use the material when he was in their fabrication shop, thereby making the argument that it must not be good stuff since BMW-Oracle trimaran didn't find it worth using. Then a few posts later he gets shown that Oracle Team USA has been using it for over 4 years. Guess he wasn't high enough up in the food chain at the fabrication shop to be a person in the know. :lol: :lol: :beerchug:

thumper88
Posts: 176
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 7:27 pm

by thumper88

tranzformer wrote:
Stefano wrote:Let's not be mean to thumper88. He has some good points and is not wrong. Neither are the rest of you.

There are plenty of areas in a bike frame where having unidirectional composite makes the most sense from a theoretical perspective. Most of them in fact. If you are designing a bike on paper, it makes no sense to use woven composites except locally near holes or crush-prone surfaces (dropouts, BB shell, headtube, seatpost). In this context, Textreme makes little sense and just looks like added weight.

However, bikes aren't made on paper. Most bikes are made in factories in asia, where there are varying degrees of production skill. Having structural uni as a top layer often means that there will be liberal and unpredictable removal of potentially critical material (as opposed to a sacrificial outer layer). If you have ever seen a "marbled" look uni part, you are actually seeing the sand-through of several critical structural layers in an unplanned fashion. How cool is that :/

In an effort to mitigate these issues, designers are forced to use several more layers of fabric than necessary to make up for production variance... taking us back to square one in the weight department. In addition, even if they wanted to use woven fabrics, often it is very difficult to convince a factory to carry more than a few different types of carbon textile, so they are stuck using what they have. Textreme, and woven fibers in general, have a place in the bike industry. Look at the lightest components in the world: THM, AX lightness, etc... all use woven fibers as an outer layer.


I don't see anyone being mean to thumper88. He is the one that posted in the thread that TeXtreme layer is for aesthetics and completely ignored its mechanical, structural, weight, durability and cost saving benefits. I'd expect anyone on this thread spreading incorrect information to be called out on it when they make big claims like that when the reality is different. TeXtreme has a very specific purpose. No one is stating that a complete frame should be made of TeXtreme fabric in this thread. What people have been stating, from my reading of it, is that TeXtreme serves a very specific purpose and does a very good job of that.

I also found it very funny that thumper88 made a boisterous claim that he never saw BMW-Oracle trimaran use the material when he was in their fabrication shop, thereby making the argument that it must not be good stuff since BMW-Oracle trimaran didn't find it worth using. Then a few posts later he gets shown that Oracle Team USA has been using it for over 4 years. Guess he wasn't high enough up in the food chain at the fabrication shop to be a person in the know. :lol: :lol: :beerchug:


No there wasn't any when I was in the shop, which was 2009. And I did not work there, I was invited in to inspect the construction methods, talk with Smyth and the other Kiwi running the place etc.
Clearly they use it now, but it does not appear they use it in ways that have an analog with entire skins on bicycle frames.
I stand by the assertion it has no major role that makes it important for bike frames, which is clear from the vast majority of examples. Does that mean Felt for example doesn't have reasons to use it? Apparently so, and Dave Felt is known for being a really savvy bike maker.... but it is just another approach to woven and carbon run 0/90 is simply not the best approach if the goal is the lightest, strongest frame that you can build. It does add a marketing point if the right words are used, like "Formula One." The manufacturer of the cloth seems pretty handy with that kind of marketing material. And the visual might be compelling for some bike buyers.
When you build up a matrix of what you want out of a laminate schedule it ALWAYS includes durability, impact resistance etc. sure, but that is a slippery slope. Whenever you add more impact resistance in an all-carbon laminate (not going off on a tangent of adding boron layers etc) you add more weight and you can make thick-walled carbon frames at 1800 grams that have a lot more, but still not much.
Any frame currently built with a layer or two of this stuff would be stiffer torsionally etc. with the same amount of uni.
It may not have the same impact resistance, but could be built to acceptable standards for that, too.
The amount of weight we are talking about here that is added or subtracted by using or not using this stuff is pretty tiny, probably not worth worrying about.
I'm certain there is a much greater difference between say a Specialized Tarmac with what they call 11r carbon vs 10r, but it is a reasonable judgement call to decide you would rather eat a few more grams and go with the 10r because it might be more impact resistant due to simply the additional wall thickness of tubes that the lower modulus 10r probably requires to perform well.
With hi-mod masts, at some point you have to stop engineering weight out of the walls. The high stiffness allows ultra thin walls that work well under normal loads while sailing, but can't take a sharp point load like a tiny metal shackle on a line accidentally whacking into them.
So... they work as a mast but aren't practical. Not what you want for $200k or whatever.
And you don't want a bike frame that fails or has to be sent to calfee every time a pebble kicks up into the downtube.
Last edited by thumper88 on Thu Jun 01, 2017 5:39 pm, edited 2 times in total.

kulivontot
Posts: 1163
Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 7:28 pm

by kulivontot

Is op looking to sue somebody for unlicensed use of textreme [REGISTERED SIGN]️
I am also confused by this thread.

thumper88
Posts: 176
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 7:27 pm

by thumper88

NJCyclist wrote:There's also interesting discussion of Textreme here (with actual responses in the comments from an Oxeon rep):

Article


Yes, many of the comments there are pretty sharp and knowledgeable. The laminate expert who talks about "black aluminum" seems to know the topic thoroughly.
A lot of the discussion can be summed up that woven can be easier to use, and that if you are going to use it, Textreme is likely the best choice because it offers a significantly lower level of compromise vs uni than other types of woven cloth.

tranzformer
Posts: 846
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:36 pm

by tranzformer

thumper88 wrote:No there wasn't any when I was in the shop, which was 2009. And I did not work there, I was invited in to inspect the construction methods, talk with Smyth and the other Kiwi running the place etc.

Clearly they use it now, but it does not appear they use it in ways that have an analog with entire skins on bicycle frames.
I stand by the assertion it has no major role that makes it important for bike frames, which is clear from the vast majority of examples. Does that mean Felt for example doesn't have reasons to use it? Apparently so, and Dave Felt is known for being a really savvy bike maker.... but it is just another approach to woven and carbon run 0/90 is simply not the best approach if the goal is the lightest, strongest frame that you can build. It does add a marketing point if the right words are used, like "Formula One." The manufacturer of the cloth seems pretty handy with that kind of marketing material. And the visual might be compelling for some bike buyers.

When you build up a matrix of what you want out of a laminate schedule it ALWAYS includes durability, impact resistance etc. sure, but that is a slippery slope. Whenever you add more impact resistance in an all-carbon laminate (not going off on a tangent of adding boron layers etc) you add more weight and you can make thick-walled carbon frames at 1800 grams that have a lot more, but still not much.

Any frame currently built with a layer or two of this stuff would be stiffer torsionally etc. with the same amount of uni.
It may not have the same impact resistance, but could be built to acceptable standards for that, too.
The amount of weight we are talking about here that is added or subtracted by using or not using this stuff is pretty tiny, probably not worth worrying about.

I'm certain there is a much greater difference between say a Specialized Tarmac with what they call 11r carbon vs 10r, but it is a reasonable judgement call to decide you would rather eat a few more grams and go with the 10r because it might be more impact resistant due to simply the additional wall thickness of tubes that the lower modulus 10r probably requires to perform well.

With hi-mod masts, at some point you have to stop engineering weight out of the walls. The high stiffness allows ultra thin walls that work well under normal loads while sailing, but can't take a sharp point load like a tiny metal shackle on a line accidentally whacking into them.

So... they work as a mast but aren't practical. Not what you want for $200k or whatever.
And you don't want a bike frame that fails or has to be sent to calfee every time a pebble kicks up into the downtube.



At this stage your trolling is becoming obvious. A spread tow fabric like TeXtreme (or those made by others like Harmoni Industry Inc., Sakaiovex, Teknomax Corp...etc.) are lighter than a 0/90, stronger than a 0/90, is better resistant to compressive stress than a 0/90 and help saves costs compared to a 0/90. As this is weightweenies forum, being lighter than a 0/90 layer is of utmost interest to members of this forum and the reason this community is in existance. When you can get the weight of TeXtreme to around 40 g/m2 versus significantly more for other fiber types being used in a 0/90.

Image

What is there not to like about TeXtreme and its current use except the price? TeXtreme offers siginificant benefits over what most do with a 0/90. Lighter is better to have. Stronger is better to have. More resistance to compressive stress and shear is better to have. For those that actually produce things with carbon fiber, using TeXtreme will also reduce lay-up time and lead to cost savings which is better to have. So again, where is the negative other than the price? You are either trolling or have some unfounded hate (or ignorance of the material) against TeXtreme. For no real reason or data to support your viewpoint.

Also, would it be too hard for you to hit return and put space between your paragraphs? It is just one key, and makes your posts easier to read. Do your employers allow one big paragraph for work related writeups?

User avatar
53x12
Posts: 3708
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 6:02 am
Location: On the bike

by 53x12

thumper88 wrote:
53x12 wrote:
thumper88 wrote:
1. Larry Ellison did not buy Oxeon, the creator and maker of TeXtreme.




This was meant to be a quip. It appears no one here is in a light-hearted mood.


You made it sound so literal when you spoke about being in the fabrication shop for BMW-Oracle and that you were sure Larry would buy the company if there was any advantage to its use. So if you were just quipping about being in the fabrication shop for BMW-Oracle, then it all makes sense.

If you want to read published articles on this subject of spread tow carbon fiber fabrics, you can read these two articles published in the journal Reinforced Plastics by Fredrik Ohlsson. They will answer any question you have and explain the clear benefit for their use.


Ohlsson F. "An introduction to spread tow reinforcements: Part 1 – Manufacture and properties." Reinforced Plastics, 59 (2015), 194-198.

Ohlsson F. "An introduction to spread tow reinforcements: Part 2 - Design and applications." Reinforced Plastics, 59 (2015), 228–232.
"Marginal gains are the only gains when all that's left to gain is in the margins."

antonioiglesius
Posts: 290
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2016 9:08 pm

by antonioiglesius

Is this correct:
When the application structurally requires primarily 0/90 fiber orientation (e.g. boats, hockey sticks), TeXtreme is a better option because it offers higher strength-to-weight ratio.
When the application structurally requires primarily single-direction fiber orientation (e.g. bikes), then TeXtreme effectiveness is less and is largely relegated to improving impact resistance and aesthetics?

thumper88
Posts: 176
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 7:27 pm

by thumper88

antonioiglesius wrote:Is this correct:
When the application structurally requires primarily 0/90 fiber orientation (e.g. boats, hockey sticks), TeXtreme is a better option because it offers higher strength-to-weight ratio.
When the application structurally requires primarily single-direction fiber orientation (e.g. bikes), then TeXtreme effectiveness is less and is largely relegated to improving impact resistance and aesthetics?


Yes, this is a much more elegant and succinct version of the points I've been trying to make with my un-paragraphed bloviating.

But I might make some tweaks to this sentence, probably something like this:
"When the application structurally or for manufacturing reasons requires primarily 0/90 fiber orientation (hockey sticks, etc ), TeXtreme is a better option than more conventional woven options because it offers higher strength-to-weight ratio."

The caveat is that there simply isn't much need for woven fabric on bikes.
And boats are a pretty complicated thing... small craft like canoes etc yes 0/90 is useful... but some you will need a lot of material run mostly in one direction with some really elaborate additions off axis.

thumper88
Posts: 176
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 7:27 pm

by thumper88

tranzformer wrote:
At this stage your trolling is becoming obvious. A spread tow fabric like TeXtreme (or those made by others like Harmoni Industry Inc., Sakaiovex, Teknomax Corp...etc.) are lighter than a 0/90, stronger than a 0/90, is better resistant to compressive stress than a 0/90 and help saves costs compared to a 0/90. As this is weightweenies forum, being lighter than a 0/90 layer is of utmost interest to members of this forum and the reason this community is in existance. When you can get the weight of TeXtreme to around 40 g/m2 versus significantly more for other fiber types being used in a 0/90.

Image

What is there not to like about TeXtreme and its current use except the price? TeXtreme offers siginificant benefits over what most do with a 0/90. Lighter is better to have. Stronger is better to have. More resistance to compressive stress and shear is better to have. For those that actually produce things with carbon fiber, using TeXtreme will also reduce lay-up time and lead to cost savings which is better to have. So again, where is the negative other than the price? You are either trolling or have some unfounded hate (or ignorance of the material) against TeXtreme. For no real reason or data to support your viewpoint.

Also, would it be too hard for you to hit return and put space between your paragraphs? It is just one key, and makes your posts easier to read. Do your employers allow one big paragraph for work related writeups?



If you read my posts on other topics I think it will be clear that I don't troll, and it's unpleasant to be accused of it for the first time in my life.

I'm not being personal here, and I'm certainly not going to get emotional about a specific type of carbon fiber cloth.
I was simply puzzled as to why this thread was started (and I'm not the only one) and I do think it is reasonable to question whether woven cloth is of "utmost interest" to the community here. It's just not an important factor in light bike construction anymore. Some parts, sure.. brake tracks where texture is important for bite, for example.
But not many. I think I have an unpadded saddle now with a layer of woven, and that's it.
My last frame with any woven on it was made in 2006 and I've had I think seven or eight carbon frames since then.

I do not in any way shape or form disagree that these cloths are "are lighter than a 0/90, stronger than a 0/90, is better resistant to compressive stress than a 0/90 and help saves costs compared to a 0/90."
On the contrary it's almost certain you're right.

I also agree with you completely that there's nothing to dislike about them. It seems like a smart idea and a great product. And I'm glad it exists, there is a great need in laminate construction for innovative, stronger, lighter, high-quality approaches to woven.

I just think it doesn't bring much to bicycle construction because bikes don't use much woven. And I'm not the only one. Read the comments at the bottom of that bike rumor story. Which dates to what, 2013? It has been four years, and I don't see this stuff on a lot of bikes still.

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



User avatar
53x12
Posts: 3708
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 6:02 am
Location: On the bike

by 53x12

antonioiglesius wrote:Is this correct:
When the application structurally requires primarily 0/90 fiber orientation (e.g. boats, hockey sticks), TeXtreme is a better option because it offers higher strength-to-weight ratio.
When the application structurally requires primarily single-direction fiber orientation (e.g. bikes), then TeXtreme effectiveness is less and is largely relegated to improving impact resistance and aesthetics?


Oxeon makes TeXtreme in a variety of configurations. You can get their spread tow reinforcements in 0/90 and +45/-45, unidirectional tapes, and hybrids.

https://compositeenvisions.com/composit ... ments-168/
"Marginal gains are the only gains when all that's left to gain is in the margins."

Post Reply