Nanotechonology in graphite got my attention when I tried out the Wilson Triad series of tennis rackets using this technology. It made a huge difference even though I thought for sure it was a gimmick before trying it. The 2004 Wilson triad tennis rackets were raved about and the T5 model received Tennis Mag's editor's choice. This year, they still use the triad technology but changed to graphite using nanotechnology. The concensus is that the improvement was clearly felt. (control, damping etc.) It is also supposedly a lot more durable. I'm told that this technology is now used in golf clubs and high end racing bicycles with proven results.

My point - Anyone know if any current blank makers plan to use nanotechnology in the immediate future?

The only rod manufacturer I know who is going to announce this is Airrus (www.rodsbyairrus.com). Ken Whiting, the president is very interesting to converse with. Anyways, I do know that one major sponser of this board has been after Ken to release blanks and not just sell completed rods. Ken's rods have won ICAST's product of the year three years in a row. I'm not sure how significant this is since I do not know about ICAST but some seem quite impressed. So far, Airrus has not decided to release blanks but are thinking about it.

Anyways, back to nanotechnology. Ken is a quite innovative and have very strong opinions about certain things. (For example, he's not impressed by the slight reduction in weight of guides using titanium frames as he said that they basically engineer the response they want to take into account the guides. My impression is that he feels very strongly about this.) For example, they are the first to use Spectra in blanks and he said that the identical blank with Spectra reduced the oscillations of the rod from 1+ minute to 27 seconds. This is a huge improvement in damping. Supposedly, this greater damping actually improve sensitivity.

Ken's feedback is that nanotechnology is really a very significant advancement in graphite technology. What I know of tennis rackets would resonate with that opinion.

SO.....anyone know if other major blank makers are considering using nanotechnology soon? Tom Kirkman, care to wade in on this one? Dan Craft, care to share your thoughts?

Mo

Nanotechnology is a real science, but for most intents and purposes, it's still a ways out. I'm a bit skeptical about companies that claim to be using it today, since most scientists have yet to figure out exactly how to make it all work in a way that would be practical. In a nutshell, it involves building items at the atomic, rather than the cellular level, which should result in more precise materials that are more efficient. But that technology, the ability to manipulate individual atoms in the desired fashion, isn't exactly routine at this point.

I'm not exactly sure what portion of the current manufacture of sporting goods really would be based on actual nanotechnology, but I'm leery of such claims and feel that at this time most are mere word play - an attempt to use a catch phrase as a marketing ploy. Surely fibers will be made this way at some point, but not yet, at least as far as I'm aware.

Ken's rods have won the ICast award mostly for innovation in handle design and overall appearance. They're great rods but I have used others that I personally prefer. I don't see them as any great leap in performance over many other rods on the market today. Have you actually felt or used one?

I also wouldn't downplay the role of lighter components with regard to damping and rod efficiency. Every bit of weight counts as well as where we put that weight. Right now, the custom rod builder can greatly affect rod performance and efficiency by the wise choice and use of lightweight components. The statement that you just "engineer the response you want" is a bit odd in my book - if you reduce weight and the position of that weight, the natural result is going to be quicker damping and greater efficiency. Sure you can "engineer" a sharper taper, or larger diameter and thinner walls to damp oscillations more quickly, but this isn't anything new nor does it substitute for what else you can do with regards to saving weight.

Nanotechnology was little more than a theory at the time when I was leaving the scientific community. I am aware that great strides in the actual practical phase of this technology have been made in the last decade and most scientists now feel that it will revolutionize industry (and life in general) in another 10 years. But to my knowledge, no current fibers used in rod building today are made by this exact technology. I'm afraid that right now I remain skeptical of those companies who use the phrase in their marketing and advertising. I tend to feel that any increase in actual damping or efficiency of these products is due to weight reduction achieved by means other than actual nanotechnology.

..................

While I'm at it, let me add this very brief explanation of how this nanotechnology would be used, if and when it can be implemented... There's no use throwing the phrase around if people don't really have some sort of explanation behind it (that's why companies can use it as a catch phrase - nobody actually knows what it means).

Right now, if you wanted to build a rod blank, you take graphite fibers and mat them with resin into a prepeg, roll them around a tapered mandrel and heat the entire thing until it flows and cures. In other words, you go through a process of manipulating larger items or pieces until you have what you want. With nanotechnology, you would dispense with all this and simply create the graphite blank from individual carbon atoms assembled and aligned as you go. In other words, you would not build with linear fibers, resin, wrapping around mandrels, heating, etc., - you would start with the required carbon atoms and move directly to a rod blank. Scary, huh?

Another example, maybe a simpler one, can be found in the bed on your rod lathe. Somebody smelted a type of metal into being, then it was extruded and perhaps even machined into its present configuration. With nanotechnology, you would skip the smelting, extrusion and machine work - you'd just arrange the atoms in such a way that you would have the exact bed you want, shaped as you want, without any of the in-between work. No longer would you go from step A to B to C to D, you'd just go from A to D and be done.

Granted, this is a real nutshell and simplified mini-course on the subject and it really only touches on one aspect of the science, but hopefully it will help explain what we're talking about with regard to making rod blanks or graphite fibers. If Ken or anyone else out there is using the technology in a different way, I'd be more than happy to hear about it. But it would be nice to have some specifics rather than just touting a rod or tennis racket as being built with "nanotechnology."

............



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/18/2005 11:12PM by Tom Kirkman.

Haleluya! Tom,!!
I don't mind marketing but I hate mumbo-jumbo & nul-speak, catch phrases & such!

Raymond Adams
Eventually, all things merge, and a river runs through it..

"Nano technology" has hit the golf shaft manufacturing industry. I don't claim to know any about "nanotech," but I know a little about golf shafts. Fishing rod blanks and golf shafts are formed using the same methods, and similar if not identical materials.

As for the nano technology applied to golf shafts (and other sporting goods), I've not been able to determine if it's true nano-tech, or just some hype. It does appear that the industry has made some advancements in reduction of "fiber size," and are able to produce a shaft with fewer voids between the fibers. The big benefit being touted is strength and longer life.

I have hit the "nano-tech" stuff, and could see no benefit that justified the cost. On the other hand, there have been major advancements in the last couple years with the manufacturing of graphite shafts- the materials, resins, and manufacturing processes. This would apply to rod blanks as well. They are better than ever.

I do think they are using "hype" when comparing the benefits of nano-tech to the higher quality wrapped shafts. One thing that gets my goat is- they know we are suckers for the latest hi-tech stuff, and since we know very little about it, take them at their word, and spend the big bucks hoping it will improve our golf game, or our casting ability. Not! At least I don't see fishermen as being as vulnerable (and gullible) to this as golfers. Oh yeah- I also hate buzzwords!

Here's some discussion on nano-tech golf shafts- [www.freegolfinfo.com]

Here's a manufacturers hype- [www.nanoshaft.com]

A Google search will turn up lots of nano-tech info. I don't unerstand it, but even if they could apply it to fishing rods in the truest sense, I don't see me catching any more fish with it than with my $12.00 Zebco.

Just received a SPAM email from someone promoting Nanotechnology Health.
Who would'a thought? LOL LOL LOL

Raymond Adams
Eventually, all things merge, and a river runs through it..

I think that Redington claimed to use nanotechnology in their NTi rods before Sage bought the company. By reading Tom's posts it seems very unlikely that it is an actual nanotechnology that they used to make the blanks but having tried one #7 9' rod, it was very fast, light, powerfull and slim. Perhaps Sage uses this tech in their TCR's and as their new "G5"-technology.? ;)

What, I think I will just wait for Emory to get better to confuse me more.

Nanotechnology has many branches - many scientists think that one day it can be used to make tiny atomic "machines" that can put into the human body to travel throughout and destroy or repair cells. Or that these tiny atomic machines will be able to create the tiniest possible computer chips. But that branch of the science, to my knowledge anyway, is still 50 to 100 years out.

Materials construction seems to be where it will hit first, but I still am not aware of any actual use of nanotechnology in these areas at the present time. I keep hearing the term with regard to golf shafts, fishing rods, etc., but unless I've really missed something (and that's possible) I tend to see it all as just a marketing phrase.

If you were going to use nanotechnology in the process of building pine 2x4s, you'd no longer grow a tree, cut it down and run it through the sawmill - you'd just manipulate and arrange the atoms so that you'd have a pine 2x4 at the outset - you wouldn't have to start with a tree. I don't think anyone is making rod blanks that way and I'm not aware of anyone even making graphite or carbon fibers that way, yet.

I think Ken's blank making process is sort an update of the older Howald Process, where you spin or create your shaft rather than using all linear construction where all the fibers run tip to butt. Linear construction has been favored for a good while now because it puts all the material used into play providing stiffness. Aligning the fibers any other way means that the structure is going to be less efficient as a fishing rod because you've got fibers in there that are only "along for the ride" and not contributing to the blank's stiffness or power. But what Ken's process can do, as I understand it, is allow you to use sort of a computer numerical controlled process to create any taper or power you want, verbatim from blank to blank. There's something to be said for that, but it's not nanotechnology and it won't necessarily provide the highest stiffness to weight ratio among blanks being made today.

As I said, I don't want to spread bad information on Ken's blank making process, so if someone has greater technical information on it, please share it.

................

Jeff Foxworthy's definition of Nanotechnology: the technique your wife uses to layer the nanas tween the nilla wafers when she makes nana puddin.

I can not really appreciate the impact on society of E = M(CxC) either! I really feel sorry for them fish! Jesse can you shed some light on this mysterious subject?

Gon Fishn

Tom hit on it in his second post, but if I could just explore a minute theory I have on "creative" marketing.

The nanotechnology being incorporated into today's marketed tools is the equivalent of first grade education versus a master's degree. These company's may use a branch of what could be loosely thought of as nanotechnology.

Think of this, using Tom's excellent example of true nano technology of going from Step A straight to D. If you're a marketing genius, you could claim enhancement via nanoT has been applied to your product even if only one facet of your design incorporates a resemblence of this process.

Lets just say that the carbon has been purified at the manufactoring stage. Would you consider the process enhanced by nanotechnology? You would if I hype a one pager on how great the purified carbon is when it is put through my company's nanotechnology enhanced process before assembly! LOL! See where I am going with this?

It is so difficult to believe the hype that flows from almost every company today. I think Jeff Foxworthy said this or maybe George Carlan "How can something be new and improved?" If it is new that it couldn't possibly have been improved. If it is improved, then it certainly isn't NEW! Yet, we read this catch phrase on boxes in the supermarket and on infomercials without a second thought!

I think that when this process is truly incorporated into everything we do from healthcare to something as insignicant as fishing (in the grand scheme of things, the technology's importance dwarfs our applicational needs) the world could be a much much different place.

Scary thoughts:

Why go through the hassle of childbirth? Mothers- why torment your figure and psychological wellbeing and at the expense of 6 months of your life.(by then the term will have been reduced by the pollution to the environment and in everything we eat) My company "Fetus R US" will unspiral your DNA chain and you're significant other's (male or female) using our state of the art nanotechnology. We will identify which facets of your design are most attractive and incorporate it into your newborn. In one day, we'll assemble the atoms and with a small electrical charge as well as large financial charge, you'll go home with a brand new perfect little baby.

Do you wish to skip the entire child rearing stages, the poopy diapers, the endless night time crying. For an additional $XXXXX.XX we can send you home with a 18 year old offspring. Additional options include. memory incorporation. Choose the upbringing that best fits the way you WOULD HAVE brought the child up, college education, private schools, specific areas of study, etc. The possibilities are endless.

Sorry Tom, I tend to take things to the extreme.

Welcome to the NEW WORLD!

Domenic Federico
Inifinity Rod Creations
Wickliffe, Ohio

infinityrodcreations@yahoo.com

P.T. Barnum would be delighted to learn of our modern word games for marketing purposes. Didn't he re-label his circus tent exit sign as "egress" in order to stimulate curiosity and cause his customers to leave the tent and then have to pay another admission to re-enter? Seems like we are still doing this in marketing in one way or another.

While I am sure that Toms remarks on nanotechnology are spot on, I don't think it is quite fair to consider anything less than a integrated, total, grown in place from the atomic level, as not nanotechnology.

Sure, nano is a buzz word right now, particularly in the goverment research funding world. Sure, it can be hyped in a product in almost any context.

But basically the term nano refers to an approximate size or order of magnitude. There are indications that many materials, when reduced to nano level particle sizes, exhibit the characteristics of another "state" of matter. Solid, gas, liquid, and nano, so to speak. So it seems okay to me for companies making "hollow nano fibers" to think that they are doing nano work. It is thought that if you can work at the nano level, or even just introduce nano sized particles into the composition of, the fibers of a composite you can reap benefits in the material properties.

Will this help fishing rods? I don't know. I use flyrods mostly. I have heavy bamboo rods, I have wimpy glas rods, I have carbon fiber rods. I have examples of each one that feels good and I like to use. I have examples of each one that I hate.

I know the ideal spinning rod would weight 0. I am not sure that is the case for fly rods though. I get awful used to the stroke of the rod itself with a little line loading when I am fishing. And it does not have to be responsive to a tug from the fish.

Bill, Not much I can add to this topic, I'm just a rod builder, you know wrap string on a stick. Jesse

I think Bill makes some good points and more than likely, something along the lines of what he said is where the companies get the idea to use the term for their products.

Most rod manufacturers buy their prepegs from just a couple of places, so if one has this "nano" fiber technology, then all rod makers would also have that same technology. I can't see it being the property of just one rod maker unless he's making his own fiber and with a process that is somewhat different than what the well known fiber manufacturers are using.

Most of you have seen the Orvis ads touting how the graphite fibers in their rods are individually sleeved in resin. The artist's illustration is quite impressive. And technically what they're claiming is true, sort of - once you embed the fibers in the resin to form the prepeg, each fiber is encased in a "sheath" of resin. So everybody making blanks or rods has this same "technology." Always have. But Orvis has used it to a marketing advantage. I suspect the "nano" technology being touted today is pretty much along the same lines and the reason the companies using the term don't go into much detail on what aspect of the technology they employ, is because you're not going to be nearly as impressed if you found out what's really being done there.

.........



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/19/2005 06:11PM by Tom Kirkman.

There are some areas in the microchip industry where extremely fine carbon fibers are advancing chip manufacturing. Maybe the carbon fiber building process is benefiting from it also. Right now it sure would be spendy stuff.

This is an interesting excange of information. The rapid development of newer technologies had greatly improved the quality and the performance of both - in the hands of people who know how to use them.

Here's my bet about the future of golf shafts and fishing rod blanks: Fishing rods and golf clubs will continue to improve in quality and performance. The average golfer will still struggle to break 100 (despite unbelievable advances in equipment the average golf handicap hasn't changed much in decades) and the average fisherman still can't find the fish and, if he does, can't make a decent cast. He will, however, have nicer equipment to make a quadruple bogey 8 with or to whip a length of fly line into a pile cast 20 feet short of the target.

Better equipment further enhances the skills of people who have already mastered the basics. Advances in equipment technology already exceeds the ability of the average user to take advantage of the improvements. I'm not complaining - just observing.; I'm the same as most people. Our desire for newer and better things create new jobs - lots of them and we all like the latest and greatest.

IMHO most people would be better off spending the money they set aside for new equipment and use it for a lesson with a qualified professional. Fortunately they don't - and it keeps the users and sponsors of this board hard at work.

Sounds like the thing that the cereal companies use. Put " new and improved " on the box that has a little more suger on it then charge more for it.

I think the first inroads into nanotech that you see in sporting goods is in the area of nanocomposites. Nanoparticles offer improvements in mechanical properties of polymers and could be added to improve the properties of the matrix resins in rod blanks. Redington may have dabbled a little in this area with their NanoTi blank. If I recall correctly the first generation nanoTi was a scrim-less design and may have relied on some improved properties in order maintain hoop strength. I'm not sure you could do that with a nano-composite though, esp a titiania particle as the name might imply. I think Redington also had another rod that was quartz filled in order to improve impact toughness. Not a bad idea but I'd guess that would have added a noticeable amount of weight, which would be a negative. It does seem like they were experimenting with some filled resin systems, which I thought was innovative.

I agree with Tom on the significance of light weight. I'd also be a little curious about the claims made of the 100% spectra fiber composites. The addition of fibers such as Spectra or Kevlar or Xylon would add a significant amount of strength, however since the modulus of materials like Spectra is quite a bit lower than carbon fiber, all else equal (power) a rod made with spectra (linear fibers) would also be quite a bit heavier.

Here's a link which shows a table of the mechanical properties for some of the common fibers and matrices for comparison:

[www.mse.mtu.edu]

Mark