Dear Rob,

With a proper structurally-sound design, many alternative sheet-material options become potentially viable...

Happy modelling,
Aim to Improve,
Prof Klyzlr

Professor we are in agreement.

@jimfitch what is your problem now? If you have finished with the radius analysis you can notice the title of the op, the gatorboard, it's properties, the way the helix is built etc. Maybe then you will feel better and stop thinking about balls.

Firstly, no negativity in my comments. I found very nice the OP. Secondly I can't reach the negativity masters here.

 

@vggrek.  Dunno about balls, but as MIchael T pointed out, the curve radius was, maybe, a distraction for some, and for understandable reasons.  Sorry if it got some panties in a twist.

As for no negativity in your earlier comments - matter of interpretation - some saw it.  Negativity this time around - much.  Why join in with those you call negativity masters? (your words)  Welcome to the growing club.  Outta here - cheers.

The basic tennant of this thread's video was fine, if a bit on the edge as to cheating the laws of physics.

But the rudeness side of folks really seems to have come out on this thread, and it's apparently becoming the focus rather than the modeling itself.

We don't really care to keep debating who was or was not being rude on here, we prefer to focus on the modeling. If someone wants to start a new thread to discuss the modeling considerations of tight radius helix building, that's fine.

But we're shutting down the who was nasty to whom debate because it's not helpful.