Hy guys
Starting to see a lot of blanks being made from carbon fiber. One I am thinking of getting is of this. So I started to look for info. As fare as I see it is not a graphite but a different materal used for it's streaghth and lightness.
Check this :
[www.google.com]

Your link doesn't work. I was looking at these myself: www.wheelsreels.com I see Clyde Roberts carries some of their prodcut, maybe he can give us some background or first hand info?

Batson Enterprises has them as well, some awfully nice bass blanks in the bunch.

Maybe this one will
[www.geocities.com]

[www.google.com]

Or what I did was just put - what is carbon fibor - in my search
Tried these, they work.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/03/2006 10:29AM by bill boettcher.

I'll see if I can get Tommy Wheeler ot reply here in greater detail, but I'll reply the best I can.

Wheel's Reel's Inc. introduced the carbon fiber technology to the Hatteras surf fishing scene last year. It's taken off like a rocket (pun intended). From a user's/caster's point of view, the first thing I noticed was the extremely quick recovery during the cast. You've simply got to cast one to truely get it. I know guys who have sold all their Breakaway's after useing these rods. There are three blanks out now, with more to come. They are all true "Hatteras Heavers". The strongest is the Nail, then the Inferno, and the latest is the Fusion. I've really fallen in love with the Fusion this spring. Considerably lighter than the others, with plenty of power to spare still. I've got more details on my website, www.clydescustomrods.com, and Tommy does as well at www.wheelsreels.com.

As to the differences between graphite & carbon fiber, Tommy will have to fill you in on the technical details.

On a side note, last week we had a little casting test with Tommy Farmer, the USA distance casting champion (who happens to live just a few miles from me here in Wilmington). He took the Fusion, the Inferno, a Rainshadow SU 1569, and the new HDX from Breakaway and cast them all side by side with the same reel using an 8oz weight. The Fusion won the contest easily with casts well over 600 ft useing a standard Hatteras cast.

I'll call Tommy and see if he'll come on here and expand on the technical aspect of carbon fiber.

Clyde

When I did a search of this site I was seeing that some people thought it was another name for graphite ?? Seems to be a better material ?? There is a lot of info on the web. Many, many sites on the stuff. The egg heads here would understand the technical stuff on it more then I.

Clyde Roberts Wrote: He took the Fusion,
> the Inferno, a Rainshadow SU 1569, and the new HDX
> from Breakaway and cast them all side by side with
> the same reel using an 8oz weight. The Fusion won
> the contest easily with casts well over 600 ft
> useing a standard Hatteras cast.

To me this is all that would matter.

very nice, but will the price of blanks go up using it ??? get a IM 6 graphite blank with a big company name on it and it goes for 300.00, but you can buy them for a lot less. Some of these prices are getting a little nuts

I do not know anything about these blanks but when we use the term graphite it is a bit of a misnomer. The blanks that we call graphite are actually not made of graphite but are all made of carbon fiber. Carbon fiber is not something new to blanks.

Jeff you need to post with your full last name, I copied and pasted this for you, as I'm sure your post will be removed at some point:

Let me see if I can describe the difference in graphite and carbon fiber and not butcher it.

Both start out as pure carbon. When it is heated to a certain temp you get graphite. The molecules are situated like blocks in a straight line with slight gaps in them. This is why graphite can be torn. When carbon fiber is made it is heated to a different temp and the molecules are aligned in the block fashion but with much tighter/packed configuration. Not as easily torn or ripped. Being tougher than the graphite and with much tighter molecules it is more sensitive and responsive. You can get greater strength with less material making a lighter, more sensative rod.

Man that hurt trying to explain that. That is my take on it as it was explained to me a few weeks ago.

The possibilities are endless in carbon fiber rods and I am sure we will begin to see things in the next few years that will blow our minds. With lighter, more powerful rods in extremly small diameters just on the horizon.

Jeff

This says just that:

[www.pslc.ws]

Here's another explanation taken from the web.

Both Carbon Fiber and Charcoal belong to carbon material group. Both have crystal structure of graphite structure but are quite different in regularity and way of line up from each other. In case of Carbon Fiber, carbon atoms line up regularly and orderly, form mesh structure with layers piling up and entwining each other, whereas in case of Charcoal, this layer structure is amorphous and irregular without strong entwining each other, resulting in fragility and low strength.
Graphite belongs to the same group having advanced regular graphite structure. It is known that graphite is soft and slippery. Natural graphite is produced in China, India and other countries.

All of the blanks we call "graphite" are actually carbon fiber. Graphite is a higher modulus form of carbon fiber in the 70 million psi range. It's still carbon per se, but at that point it's considered to be in a different category.


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

Same material group, just treated differently to come up with a different type of " fiber" Lack of a better word.

If I am not mistaken Carbon Fiber can have quite a bit higher modulus than graphite and still remain more durable. We have to remember that the higher modulus you get , the more brittle it will get. I believe that is where carbon fiber is at its best as it has a higher strength ratio when you begin getting into the higher modulus.

I do believe that since carbon fiber has a greater strength to weight ration that graphite, an experienced rodmaker could build a lighter, stronger, smaller diameter rod than out of traditional graphite than we see used so commonly on the market today.

I know there are 1000's of different combinations of resins, fiber counts, thicknesses and blank layouts to try to hit on the magical combination for the ultimate rod. I think the trend is leaning toward Carbon Fiber as the next step in rod making.

Jeff

Good to know. Now I can get one of those really light blanks and not worry to much or baby sit it.
Sounds good to me.

One of my family's hobbies is bicycling. A lot of work to use composites has been invested in bicycling. Similiarly to rods, the end result is often paying more for less (weight that is). Here is an interesting article concerning carbon fiber vs graphite from the Zipp Technologies page. Zipp is a leading maker of high end "carbon fiber" bicycle components. One take away from the article for me is that technically technically we have been fishing carbon fiber rods, not graphite. But like the term Action, graphite has seemed to have become the conventional common use term. Another take a way from other technical articles at Zipp is that it is most likely the lay up of the plys of the new "carbon fiber" blanks that is a material contributor to the enhanced performance. It seems that most major advances in the use of composites comes from advances in the very difficult and complex manufacturing processes associated with the carbon fiber based composites. At least that's my primitive understanding.

Fiber and Composites
Graphite vs. Carbon
Zipp began producing carbon fiber wheels over ten years ago, and recently we have been receiving many questions as to whether or not we use ‘graphite’ in our wheels. In fact, carbon fiber and graphite fiber are really one in the same. For years engineers, sales people, and technologists have debated what exactly to call the material as Andrew Marshall points out in his book Composite Basics, “(from the inception)…the scientists involved could not seem to agree on exactly what it was they were producing, some calling it “carbon fiber”, while other equally qualified authorities termed it, “graphite fiber.”

To see where the debate began and why we feel that the correct term actually is carbon fiber, let’s look at how the material is made. The carbon used in Zipp rims, is actually made by extruding and refining PAN: poly-acrylonitrile, fibers to a diameter between 5 and 7 microns. Theses fibers exhibit the highest tensile and compressive strengths of any of the carbon-based fibers, while being the least dense, making them ideal for strong, lightweight components. Numerous time and energy intensive steps are required to convert PAN to carbon fiber, beginning with Oxidation, followed by Carbonization and Graphitization. The final step of graphitization, which is generally considered under the umbrella of carbonization, is likely the origin of the term “graphite” when used in this context. Graphitizing typically occurs just after carbonizing, and is analogous to the heat treatment of steel. The difference, however, is that the temperatures of carbonization must held below about 2500° C to avoid actually turning the carbon into pure graphite, while the time duration is much longer for the carbonization of the fibers to improve integrity and produce ideal molecular structure. Care must be taken as a quick blast at 2800° C can turn the carbon into pure graphite, losing all structural integrity of the product.

The final carbon fiber exhibits incredible structural properties in that it has higher tensile strength and modulus than steel, while being 40% less dense than aluminum. The primary reason for the strength and stiffness of the material comes from its molecular structure, which is where the graphite debate becomes heated (sic). Though visually similar to graphite, even under microscopy, high-grade carbon demonstrates a highly amorphous internal structure with very strong bonding. This folded, random structure allows for the incredible mechanical properties mentioned above. Graphite, on the other hand, exhibits a beautiful, perfect crystalline structure similar to that of table salt, making the material weak and brittle. The mechanical difference becomes obvious when you look at the uses of graphite in pencil lead, or as a dry lubricant. The structural differences of the two materials go a long way towards demonstrating the difficulty in manufacturing high quality carbon fiber materials. The difference between the two is only about 200 °C during the carbonization (graphitization) process, and unfortunately, the results are irreversible. The best explanation we have ever seen can be found at the University of Wisconsin web site.

Ultimately we learn that you can turn carbon fiber into graphite if you are not careful, but you cannot turn graphite back into carbon fiber. You can, however, refer to the material either way. In fact, our material supplier uses both terms interchangeably in their own product literature, further proving that nobody seems to have made up their minds yet.

For a more in depth discussion or pictures of the process check out either Andrew Marshall’s book mentioned above, or Vince Kelly’s Carbon Fiber home page: [www.geocities.com]








Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/03/2006 02:48PM by Steve Rushing.

Jeff,

Actually the higher modulus fiber is not more "brittle" - you are simply using less of it to get the same stiffness as before, thus you have a less substantial structure overall.


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

Dick Kantner discussed the differences between carbon fiber and graphite in the RodMaker interview done in volume 6 #6. The manufacturing temperature differences in Steve's post seem about right.

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



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/03/2006 03:17PM by Tom Kirkman.

Hello All. My first time posting here, so try to not be too mean to me. There are really three main issues to consider when thinking about rod design, regardless of material. 1. Tensile properties. 2. Modulus of elasticity 3. Notch Sensitivity
Point 1 and 2.
Typically speaking as the modulus of carbon or graphite is increased, the tensile properties are reduced, hence making it more responsive but proportionately less durable. So when we talk about a rod being fragile or brittle as the modulus is increased, that is correct, but is probably better explained in terms of overall fatigue resistance. Solme of this is changing now due to de-classification of alot of high end aerospace carbon fiber manufacturing methods, which should really improve the materials we can get for fishing rods in the very near future. (If not already!!!!!! Hint, Hint) As for carbon vs. graphite, there is a major difference with how the fiber is produced. Carbon fiber has a much higher tensile rating than equivalent graphite for the same modulus. Think of it as a tensile to moduls relationship. Carbon clearly wins here.
Point 3
Notch sensitivity is something that really must be considered in the material game. Basically, its a measure of how durable a rod should be or put another way impact toughness. Carbon really shines in this area for a couple of reasons. One the amorphous structure of the material can distribute load and is a stronger bond. And second, because due to the structural components that have been produced out of carbon, the resin and hardener systems have advanced much further than in the graphite market. REMEMBER, without a resin/hardener system the best material in the world does nothing. Every time carbon or graphite is stressed the fibers will and do fracture. The resin and hardener's job is distribute this load over a larger number of fibers, so that a failure site isn't born.

In the pros and cons game you must weigh out what you are going for. For carbon the pros are clearly modulus and tensile properties. (for the factors mentioned above) For cons, currently it would be cost and some processing concerns. For graphite the pros would be relative low cost. Cons would be its limits in terms of which rods it is really suited for.

One important thing to remember is that each rod is different and each one has different concerns. For example, we can not currently utilize modulus in surf blanks that is used in say fly rods. Why is that? Well simple the tensile concerns that we have for surf blank designs are completely different than backcasting (Or whatever its called) for fly fisherman. As the new materials become available, we will see an increase in modulus in the surf arena, but only once we can acquire materials that have increased tensile. Hence the reasoning that we have gone to Carbon fiber instead of Graphite.

I know this is long, but hopefully it answers more questions than it raises.

Tommy Wheeler
Wheels Reels Inc.

One thing I like to remind people of is that we are not dealing just with the material - we are dealing with a structure. We can make two blanks out of the exact same graphite (carbon fiber) material and create one that is vastly more durable than the other.

In fact, even with the very highest modulus fibers, it is more than possible to build a rod that is darn near unbreakable due to any usual type of fishing use (but of course, there will be a trade off in other areas to obtain such a thing). There are different ways to use any material and different ways to lay up a rod blank. The final properties of the item are determined not only by the material used, but by the resulting structure you've created.

The material is only one piece of the puzzle. The structure itself is the other, and sometimes larger, piece of that puzzle.

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



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/03/2006 09:47PM by Tom Kirkman.