Alexy,

Every new submission will have its initial test result published the day that it is received. This will occur regardless if the aging test cycles may have started for the first batch's submissions. We will stop accepting new submissions when we decide to end Protocol B batch aging tests (explained below).

My plan is to begin aging tests on all coated submissions (Cuben, silnylon, sil/PU nylon, and PU coated nylon/polyester) in multiple batches. All submissions received by this Saturday mid-day will be categorized as the first batch submissions. Before my local post office closes this Saturday, all virgin submissions received to date, will be shipped to Roger Caffin. The submission number, determined by the order received, followed by the letter (A) is labeled with a permanent marker in the upper left corner for each submission. These (A) sample submissions are the ones that I have posted virgin results for in the Protocol B thread.

I will begin aging tests for the submissions labeled (B) starting Monday. After each aging cycle, I will post the results for each (B) submission, in the batch, to the Protocol B forum. After the 8 aging cycles are complete, all (B) aged samples in the batch, labeled with the submission number followed by (B) in the upper left corner will then be shipped to Roger via BPL Bozeman.

A new batch aging cycle will begin after the prior one ends. Additional batches will continue to be aged only until the point that Roger and I agree that enough data has been collected for any reasonable person to draw an informed conclusion; other commitments in our lives dictate that we suspend Protocol B testing; or some new protocol is required to resolve unanswered questions.

In parallel with the above heavy testing schedule, I will attempt to honor the requests for higher resolution micrographs and micrographs at more testing stages. I have begun to look at options to accomplish these requests. I will propose a new micrograph plan and provide sample results for review and discussion by the end of next week.

OK Dan. Thanks for the clarification on that. Good to know what I'm looking at.

They can actually be seen with as little as 8x magnification - like with a photographers loupe. They are tiny at that mag though.

Edited by wildlife on 04/02/2011 00:01:01 MDT.

I blame this thread for the headache I just got lol good read though

Monday? Great! I guess one aging step (out of eight) a day?

Yes, one aging step will be reported for every coated sample in that batch each day. If a significant variance occurs during aging, then a high resolution micrographic will highlight the problem. The high resolution micrographs will be hosted on another site to bypass the photo size restrictions on the BPL site.

Others said:

"My biggest concern is whether the material wears down over time."

"My interest now is in durability - the low weight is amazing but so is the cost. To justify the latter the tent needs to be last."

This is what matters to me on the cuben issue. I simply can't justify cuben's cost if it is going to deteriorate inordinately through reasonable field use. What is "inordinate"? I can't quantify that, but my OWare silnylon tarp is chugging along fine after years of faithful service. If a cuben tarp is going to shat the bed after a year or two of use with reasonable care, it ain't worth the weight savings to me.

Edited to add:

Here's a small download from Cubic Tech that lists the individual part numbers and (some) specs for their CTF3 line:

http://www.cubictechnology.com/CTF3%20PRODUCT%20INFO%20PACK%2007192010_4c.pdf

Edited by El_Canyon on 11/08/2011 11:25:13 MST.