Regarding the weighing of hypothetical guide wraps & configurations: There are several ways to do this. They can include:
An actual construction on a scrap segment of rod blank. Weigh the rod segment as a naked blank first, then as a finished rod. The difference is your Additional Mass per Guide (AMPG).
A guestimation of the amount of material used and a quick weighing. To estimate wrap weights, you could simply peel off a length of thread that would cover your winding. Add a drop of finish or water, and your guide and weigh. The largest variable and most imprecise component is the mass of the thread finish applied.
A third way is to use the Table of Wrap Strengths & Weights ** and calculate the ratio of thread in your scenario compared to the Table's assumptions (Rod Blank OD = 3.18mm, and Wrap Width is 10 mm). The Table does NOT include a thread finish mass. But you can make some reasonable assumptions from Emory Harry's work and his RMM Article on the subject. Basically it is convenient to assume that the mass of the thread finish will equal the mass of the thread itself.
Therefore, for each guide added onto the rod blank:
Additional Mass per Guide = Guide + Thread + Epoxy
Additional Mass per Guide = Guide + 2 x (Thread)
AMPG = Guide + 2(Thread)
For calculating this, based on your Thread Material & Size: :
Your Thread Mass = (Tabulated Value) x Correction Factor (CF)
CF = [(Your Rod Blank OD) / (3.18 mm)] x [(Your Wrap Width) / 10 mm]
Even with my passion for precision, I would still say that a very precise calculation of the new point masses distributed up & down your new fishing rod is not really going to effect the rod design or performance that much. So long as you are already using sound principles for your guide selection & layout in the first place.
You still have to pass a good Loading Layout & Casting Test no matter what your AMPG's may run.
And the effect of total mass on a rod's Resonance Frequency (RF) is inversely proportional to the SQUARE ROOT of the total effective mass. You would have to QUADRUPLE the total mass (ROD + AMPG) in order to HALVE the RF.
Since the RF's even on a quality rod blank are already down in the range of well below 10 Hz, the frequency is so thumping low that the difference between 5.25 Hz and 4.75 Hz (10%) may not be as appreciable as we may think. I don't know what a sensory scientist would tell us. A 10% decrease in RF may require something like a 25+% increase in AMPG, depending on the relative massivenss of the rod blank.
New calculations of the new built rod's Point Mass distribution and Effective Lever Force (ELF) calculation would still not tell us enough information until we were able to correlate RF, with ELF and with "feel".
ELF would tell us that the built rod was "XY.Z" Ounce-Inches of torque
operating against the Angler merely from the sheer weight of the rod blank.
And frankly, even then, the balance of the rod would effect that value, because a heavy butt can balance out a heavier tip in some designs.
So, I'll lay down my pen and calculator and say in closing that the K.I.S.S. (KEEPING IT SIMPLE, Sherlock) it not just convenient - it is an inherently advantageous and even intelligent approach to overall rod design. Yes - Minimize a rod's mass, as much as practical, but don't lose sleep over it.
Fishing with a half-tired brain is not only less fun - the car drive home is that much more dangerous. Get more sleep, and don't fret the AMPG too much, ... IMO, ...-Cliff hall+++, Gainesville, FL-USA*****
** TITLE: "Gudebrod Thread Table: Strength & Weight of Guide Wraps for Size 2/0 - E" For general reference, a Table of Calculated Strengths and Weights of UNFINISHED Gudebrod Thread Wraps for Sizes 2/0-E, for Silk, Regular Nylon, NCP and HT Metallics, assuming a thread wrap bandwidth of 1 cm, around a rod blank of circumference of 1 cm (OD = 1/Pi = 3.18 mm), is available at: [
www.rodbuilding.org]
Calculated values, not direct "in-situ" measurements.
-Cliff Hall+++, Gainesville, FL-USA*****
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 04/09/2006 01:28AM by Cliff Hall.
