I trust my scales more than your math based on these two and another mast that had smaller wall thickness, so there is too much unknown in it to draw any exact conclusions.
Come on !
I also gave you a series of actual aluminium tip weight measurements taken at the time our F16's overhere were all officially measured by a ISAF certified measurer. I also gave you several weights of bare sections we weighted.
If our identically shaped and fully fitted alu masts, incl. halyards, have tipsweights in the range of 7.8 to 8.2 kg then how on earth can your bare alu mast section weight 19 kg and have a tipweight of at least 9.5 kg without any fittings or halyards included at all ?
That is not math, that is common sense saying that something very weird happened somewhere. Now I for one don't believe that the aluminium alloy suddenly increased over 30% in density for your mast alone. We checked compliance in crossectional shape, so that isn't the cause either.
Now I still want to find out what really caused this weight measurement that you are upset about. If anything we can make you happy again and address the situation techically (new mast die ? lay claim at producer ?) if that is required.
The most logical culprit at this time are your scales or your method of weighting.
<img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />Either that or some 8 people in 3 different continents measuring about 10 different masts over a time frame of several years did all make the exact same measuring mistakes to arrive at very similar values. Not to mention the guys in the official engineering literature all making similar typos with respect to aluminium density and the way to calculate the total weight of thinwalled extruded sections. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
Nahhh !
Wouter
