I can put a ski into 3 different sidecut calculators and get 3 different results, which is usually different than what is shown on the ski. We need a definitive calculator.
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Sidect calculator...what gives?
Featured Stories
Recent Reviews

I created this account specifically to provide my review of KneeBinding. My hope is that I can help others to learn from my experience. My KneeBinding's were given to me as...

DO NOT GO if you are not advanced  while I've been skiing for 15 years and am advancedintermediate, this place scared me. There are NO runs I felt comfortable or easy, especially off the...

This is the most incredibly overthetop countryclublike resort we've been and we've skied all over USA. It's so cool I took pictures of the bathrooms! Beautifully done. Three gondolas keep...

I went to Maverick the day after a day at Big Sky and what a dramatic difference. As opposed to Big Sky's massive area (which seemed to me to ski much smaller than its size), hard skier packed...

Easily the best hill (let's not get crazy calling these mountains) in Minnesota. It's fairly spread out across four separate hills (though, I'd call them two). There's a gondola that connects the...
Sidect calculator...what gives?
post #2 of 12
3/23/08 at 8:45pm
Which ones are you using?
I ask because chalmers.se seems dead.
I ask because chalmers.se seems dead.
post #3 of 12
3/23/08 at 9:13pm
 spindrift
 Trader Feedback: 0
 online
 6,305 Posts. Joined 3/2002
 Location: Seattle, WA
 Select All Posts By This User
pmans has generally been pretty accurate when I toyed with it. Remember these are all approximations. At least the ones I know of...
Are you seeing massive divergence or +/ 5 or 10% ?
Are you seeing massive divergence or +/ 5 or 10% ?
post #4 of 12
3/23/08 at 9:26pm
 Garrett
 Trader Feedback: 0
 offline
 7,440 Posts. Joined 9/2004
 Location: An innocent prisoner will become more angry by the hour due to...
 Select All Posts By This User
Quote:
I can put a ski into 3 different sidecut calculators and get 3 different results, which is usually different than what is shown on the ski. We need a definitive calculator.

Page two of this PDF
One reason you may get different results from what is marked on the ski is that dimensions marked on the ski are not always correct. Also there isn't any standard I know of for this measurement outside what is in this PDF and that I believe to be what FIS uses, so if a marketing dbag decides 14m sounds better than 16m there isn't anything to stop him unless it is a race ski meant for use in competition.
post #5 of 12
3/24/08 at 6:35am
 skier219
 Trader Feedback: 0
 offline
 4,131 Posts. Joined 3/2004
 Location: Virginia
 Select All Posts By This User
Even the "definitive" USSA formula is nothing but a convention, and you can definitely question their definition of tip and tail lengths as a fixed percentage for all skis. Obviously that's not true for all skis nowadays. But it's one possible convention you can standardize on, even if not truly accurate.
If you want to do it absolutely right, you need to know the exact sidecut curve (ie, the equation for it) and then calculate the radius of curvature using Calculus. It's actually quite simple, but the problem is that nobody other than the ski designer will know that curve. But Phil, maybe you can get access to that info. In lieu of that, most formulas assume a cubic for the ski sidecut, which only requires tip, waist, and tail dimensions and the lengths between them. Where the formulas may differ is the definition of the lengths from tip to waist and waist to tail; they may only input a single length and then make assumptions like the USSA formula for tip/tail geometry.
When I get a chance, I will derive and scan the general formula. You can then make your own assumptions, or if you know the various lengths directly, then calculate R with no assumptions.
If you want to do it absolutely right, you need to know the exact sidecut curve (ie, the equation for it) and then calculate the radius of curvature using Calculus. It's actually quite simple, but the problem is that nobody other than the ski designer will know that curve. But Phil, maybe you can get access to that info. In lieu of that, most formulas assume a cubic for the ski sidecut, which only requires tip, waist, and tail dimensions and the lengths between them. Where the formulas may differ is the definition of the lengths from tip to waist and waist to tail; they may only input a single length and then make assumptions like the USSA formula for tip/tail geometry.
When I get a chance, I will derive and scan the general formula. You can then make your own assumptions, or if you know the various lengths directly, then calculate R with no assumptions.
post #6 of 12
3/24/08 at 6:55am
 WILDCAT
 Trader Feedback: 0
 offline
 4,339 Posts. Joined 8/2005
 Location: Have skis, will travel
 Select All Posts By This User
Tip & tail shape can make a huge difference. I would add a few CM to any race or racelike ski and subtract up to 10cm for twin tips.
If I do this, Physicsmans calculator is accurate and consistent with factory data.
Michael
If I do this, Physicsmans calculator is accurate and consistent with factory data.
Michael
post #7 of 12
3/24/08 at 7:45am
 skier219
 Trader Feedback: 0
 offline
 4,131 Posts. Joined 3/2004
 Location: Virginia
 Select All Posts By This User
OK, here's the most general formula for radius while still assuming a cubic fit:
http://hunter.pairsite.com/craig/Scan001.PDF
At a minimum, you need to know the width of tip, waist, and tail, and the distance from tip to waist and tail to waist. A simplification is given when those two distances are equal, and that's the same formula PM's calculator is based on, though he makes assumptions about tip/tail geometry (akin to, but not the same as the USSA formula).
Here's a spreadsheet with the general formula derived in my PDF:
http://hunter.pairsite.com/craig/radius032408.xls
I put a few example skis in there, with educated guesses for the various lengths. If you have actual measurements for the tipwaist and tailwaist lengths, then the calculation should be very realistic.
http://hunter.pairsite.com/craig/Scan001.PDF
At a minimum, you need to know the width of tip, waist, and tail, and the distance from tip to waist and tail to waist. A simplification is given when those two distances are equal, and that's the same formula PM's calculator is based on, though he makes assumptions about tip/tail geometry (akin to, but not the same as the USSA formula).
Here's a spreadsheet with the general formula derived in my PDF:
http://hunter.pairsite.com/craig/radius032408.xls
I put a few example skis in there, with educated guesses for the various lengths. If you have actual measurements for the tipwaist and tailwaist lengths, then the calculation should be very realistic.
 Philpug
 Trader Feedback: 0
 offline
 33,776 Posts. Joined 9/2000
 Location: Pugski.com
 Select All Posts By This User
Here is another one that helps, but is still different... http://members.fortunecity.com/hhitme/skiradius.html
post #9 of 12
3/24/08 at 12:44pm
 Garrett
 Trader Feedback: 0
 offline
 7,440 Posts. Joined 9/2004
 Location: An innocent prisoner will become more angry by the hour due to...
 Select All Posts By This User
Right, but it is the only convention that matters. (at least if you are a ski manufacturer and your stuff goes into an equipment tent)
Interestingly the FIS chooses not to publish that particular convention in the equipment rules. The FIS equipment rules leave a lot of things to the imagination. So it could be a different convention altogether they are actually using.
Even such a calculation must rely on convention to some extent AFAIK. It isn't going to be useful to calculate the radius of curvature at fifty different points along the ski using accurate info, as you still then have to come up with a single number to print for the sake of comparison. So somehow you must represent a mean RoC of sorts, and I don't know how you produce a meaningful, comparable result without some convention.
(or is there some real pretty result I'm unaware of? I know enough calculus to bury my head in the sand, and not much more.)
Interestingly the FIS chooses not to publish that particular convention in the equipment rules. The FIS equipment rules leave a lot of things to the imagination. So it could be a different convention altogether they are actually using.
Quote:
If you want to do it absolutely right, you need to know the exact sidecut curve (ie, the equation for it) and then calculate the radius of curvature using Calculus. 
(or is there some real pretty result I'm unaware of? I know enough calculus to bury my head in the sand, and not much more.)
post #10 of 12
3/24/08 at 4:35pm
 skier219
 Trader Feedback: 0
 offline
 4,131 Posts. Joined 3/2004
 Location: Virginia
 Select All Posts By This User
Garrett, I think calculating the RoC at the waist would make the most sense, but you are correct in noting that may itself be arbitrary. But I have no idea what kind of shapes are used for sidecuts these days; it's entirely possible that they are using a circular arc which would have a single RoC. It would be interesting to get some mold lines from a ski manufacturer and see what kind of shape is used.
post #11 of 12
3/24/08 at 4:45pm
 Garrett
 Trader Feedback: 0
 offline
 7,440 Posts. Joined 9/2004
 Location: An innocent prisoner will become more angry by the hour due to...
 Select All Posts By This User
No one really talks about it much with skis (at least not since back when VĂ¶lkl started marketing "3D" sidecuts in the late 90's) but snowboard marketing lit pretty commonly refers to different types of curves being applied to different boards in the line. With the extremely short radius most snowboards have, the differences in the shapes are probably more noticeable. Can't say I know enough about snowboarding to verify that suspicion.
It would be interesting to know more about the curves in use. I read a paper that said sidecuts were typically elliptic curves (which are special cubics, right?) but I don't know how accurate that was, and I can't remember where I read it now.
It would be interesting to know more about the curves in use. I read a paper that said sidecuts were typically elliptic curves (which are special cubics, right?) but I don't know how accurate that was, and I can't remember where I read it now.
post #12 of 12
3/24/08 at 5:09pm
 skier219
 Trader Feedback: 0
 offline
 4,131 Posts. Joined 3/2004
 Location: Virginia
 Select All Posts By This User
Return Home
Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
 Sidect calculator...what gives?
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Sidect calculator...what gives?
Currently, there are 2615 Active Users
(166 Members and 2449 Guests)
Recent Discussions
 › Ready for black? 6 minutes ago
 › Do not buy Rossignol SOUL 7's (or any of their products for that... 14 minutes ago
 › Should I be conservative or go for the better one? 17 minutes ago
 › How to get a razor edge? 18 minutes ago
 › How Long Do Skis Last? 26 minutes ago
 › 105110 powder ski that can handle ice 33 minutes ago
 › Can you please comment on my skiing? 1 hour, 1 minute ago
 › How much wax does everyone use? 1 hour, 2 minutes ago
 › Stowe  This Weekend 1 hour, 5 minutes ago
 › Ski Pants... 1 hour, 18 minutes ago
View: New Posts  All Discussions
Recent Reviews
 › Kneebinding Knee Friendly Binding by barunrm
 › Snowbird by MBrady
 › Snowbasin by MBrady
 › Maverick Mountain by Roadrash
 › Lutsen Mountains by comfortstarr
 › Tremblant by jzmtl
 › Panorama Mountain Village by Pacobillie
 › 1988 Salomon SX91 Equipe by vieuxcrouton
 › Mt. Baker by jhkc
 › Manning Park Resort by davidykay
View: More Reviews
New Articles
 › 1000 Shuffles
 › Skate to shape drill
 › 2018 Blizzard Black Pearl 88 and 98...
 › 2018 Nordica Navigator 90 Ski Review
 › 2018 Volkl Kanjo Ski Review
 › 2018 Blizzard Women's Sheeva 10 Review
 › 2018 Blizzard Bonafide Ski Review
 › 2018 Blizzard Ski Preview
 › Fan Traverse Drill
 › Complete Ski Packages  Skip the Rental Line!
View: New Articles  All Articles
Home  Gear, Resorts & More  Forums  Articles  My Profile
About EpicSki  Join the Community  Follow us on Twitter!  Advertise
© 2017 EpicSki is powered by Fandom Lifestyle  FAQ  Support  Privacy/TOS  Site Map
About EpicSki  Join the Community  Follow us on Twitter!  Advertise
© 2017 EpicSki is powered by Fandom Lifestyle  FAQ  Support  Privacy/TOS  Site Map