I was wandering if any one has tried this system for working with spiining and bait casting for bass fishing rods,one piece?

Lu,
The CC System was developed by Bill Hanneman primarily with fly rods in mind but it works equally well for any blank. I use it all of the time for casting and spinning rods.

Because most casting and spinning blanks are rated by the manufacturer for both relative power and casting lure weight range, it is not so often used for these type blanks. Fly blanks have no power rating and their line weight rating is purely subjective and is not dependent on any sort of relative standard. Thus the CCS is more often helpful with those type blanks and rods.

However, the ability to make relative power and action ratings can be helpful in a wide variety of applications. I'm sure you will find many uses for it.

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

Lu,

I’ve made a number of load/deflection measurements on bass casting and spinning blanks/rods and the one thing I would caution you on is that the higher deflections used in the CCS system can cause a little bit of compression in the results for blanks such as bass casting and spinning rods/blanks. It's most likely due to the faster tapers on casting spinning rods vs fly. This has been hashed over a bit here in the past and on another board so I won’t bore you with the details, but when the defections (of the working length) exceed something in the range of 35%, some casting blanks enter into a non-linear region. This is due to the blank entering into it's shut off point. The handles on two-handed rods will also exaggerate this effect. The tendency is that you'll get fairly high (70+) degree Action Angles on many rods, and esp. on built rods so it becomes more difficult to differentiate actions. There are some simple work arounds, but in any case, the basic principle of measuring the fundamental power and tip angle at some deflection is a very good idea.

Here's a link to a couple of graphs that shows the effect when the tip angle starts to roll off and the rod starts to go no-linear above 30% deflection:

[www.cptelecom.net]

[www.cptelecom.net]


The manufactures do rate their rods, but as it turns out, there's a lot of variation in the ratings....both power and action. St. Croix tends to underrate the power on many of their fast action rods... compared to Loomis for example. On top of that, a med-moderate Croix is a quite a different power than the med-fast. Then turn to some of the Rogues and find that they overrate the powers in comparison to many others. Anyway, you can easily see that as a builder you'd benefit from understanding these things.


mark

Mark,

Very nice work. As you noted the AA values (by definition) cannot exceed 90 degrees. I have essentially classified any values above 66 as fast and sort of let it go at that. I recently encountered a new fly rod which, if enough power was incorporated, could be bent so as the tip would meet the butt. Its AA was determined to be 65. There are many spinning type rods which will give angular readings very close to 90 (even greater and approaching 180 if one tilts the rod vertically).

For this reason, in my forthcoming article on characterizing fast action fly rods, I introduced a new measurement I called PR or Power Reservoir. This is used to measure the relative strengths of rod butts. It is basically a simple measure of the rod's stiffness, strength, or power. It is determined in the typical CCS manner, except the rod is deflected downward a distance equivalent to one half of the rod's length. The measurement is made in common cents and that value converted to equivalent ERN values by the Rosetta Stone conversion table. Since the AA values are so closely approaching 90, there is insufficent precesion to make an AA measurement useful, so it is simply ignored and the PR value recorded.