Guys,

If things get personal or nasty, I'll pull the whole thread.

Cheap shots towards me are allowed, but not towards anyone else.

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

I think scientific/engineering theory (without the arrogance) is a good thing. A lot of it is what I refer to as “reverse engineering”. Being a retired mechanical designer without formal education (degree), I recall being accused (by one of my educated superiors) of being an “intuitive designer”. Although it was not meant as a compliment, I was flattered by it. It was enlightening to have someone more knowledgeable than I, explain why my design concepts worked. LOL. I assumed that my prior experience as a tool & die maker and some mechanical aptitude helped.
Anyway, I think most of us know (from experience) that minimum weight out toward the rod tip greatly enhances rod performance. I also know from building a race car back in my “glory days” that getting an extra measure of performance in a rod is like trying to get another mile or two faster in a race car or a tenth of a second off the elapsed time. Very difficult!

Eugene,
I suspect that you may have an “ax to grind” or maybe you just want recognition for your thesis…..some of us cretins are interested in what you have to say……if we can keep up. At the very least, you may be able to further develop your interpersonal skills.

Jim,
We have a lot in common. I hope to be a retired mechanical designer in 7 or 8 years. I also never obtained a degree while working in tool and die shops.
I've no ax to grind even if it appears that way and have been told often to work on my "communication skills"( a personal shortcoming ). I get to the point and accomplish tasks. I lack the patience to sit on my hands and wait.
The learning is from reading books and understanding the complex math in them. Dynamic calculation is my thing and understanding how to reshape cam lobes for more torque coming out of the corner on a dirt track was also one of my earlier passions.

Hey 98% of us are not engineers or phics majors. We are just normal blue colar working stiffs with a few doctors included oh yes there are a few salesmen included as well. As for myself if I like the action of a blank and the guides do there job I give a ripe about all this oscillation stuff. Just to stir the pot. You talked about the guides effect on oscillation. What about the effect of grips and reelseats, do they have an effect on a rods oscillation? I thought grips and reelseats dampend the oscillation effect.
Good Wraps Bob. PS Emory Harry where are you when we need you? My spelling is correct

Ahhhh Bob B
The disappointment of not quite getting it right
Emory will flog you
Ist line middle....... "Collar".................sorry Sir. ( blame it on a sticky key..........I have a couple ).
Maybe if you do a quick edit & bribe Tom to delete the edit tag Emory won't see.
DenisB

Eugene,

Over the last 50 years, I have personally experienced the transition of fishing rod blanks and I dare say that I have used most of them in different types of rods and application. Even today, I have noticed Tom K, not once but may times, trying to explain the correct way of defining the simple term, "Action", which is a major characteristic of the rod blank. Ask 10 rod builders what this term means and you may get 10 different answers. So what? Do these guys build inferior rods? Do these rods catch as many fishes? Will the fishes know any difference? You resemble someone I know who likes to talk about " a touch of Zen" regarding his fly rod. By all means, if you can come out with any better system of quantifying and qualifying rod blanks, you should do so. But before you do that, remember that none before you have managed to come to anything close to what you want. Aren't there smarter men or is it all that neccessary for us to waste our time searching for something that may not be needed. I. for one, have wasted most of my years sleeping and working, and I prefer to spend more time out there fishing. And I own about 60 rods of all kinds, and if time permits, I will own 100 before I go. So, if you have something better, let me know fast.

Cheers,

Anthony Lee

Good Grief! Thank God that's over!

Thanks Denis. I just wanted you all to know the old Bob is back. By the way (calor is a certain type of gas). Which is a lot of what this topic is about.
Good Wraps Bob

Seems to me that with many of these types of threads, that it becomes a matter of separating the “wheat from the chaff”. Some interesting points can be gleaned from the discussion, if one can maintain their objectivity......and/or sense of humor.
The effect of inertia on guides on a longer rod (say 8’ vs. 6’) would surely be a factor, wouldn’t it? After replacing the titanium 5.5’s on my rods with the lighter/smaller 3.5’s, I did see (feel) some improvement, but nothing dramatic. I suspect that had the rods been longer, the difference would have been more noticeable. My preference for shorter rods (under 6’) for (bass) fishing is based primarily on lure control and accuracy, and of course, my type of fishing. Admittedly casting distance suffers, but its an acceptable trade-off. Also, as I’ve gotten older with less stamina, I’ve also found that fishing with a rod that weighs around 3 ozs. (less than 10 oz. with rod/reel) is preferable to a combo weighing considerably more.

Darn, here I logged onto this thread hoping to learn something about Private Mortgage Insurance!


Tom Kirkman - mechanical engineer, top 2 or 3 most influential rodbuilders ever. Out of his league. Man, now THAT is funny!!! LOL!!

Do you think some rodbuilders never actually fish? Or that they don't even build rods? I do, oh yeah, I do.

Good point Jim! I think it all comes down to knowing exactly how to apply any information you have to what you are doing.

I know my rods don't vibrate or oscillate after I cast because when I want to go long I always point the rod tip at the outgoing line immediately upon the line release. The tip stays straight. If there is any vibrating going on it must be very tiny because I can't see it. Maybe high speed slow motion photography would catch it, but I sure don't see it and if it's that tiny that it takes a camera to catch it then I doubt it's upsetting anything on my line or cast.

Now I won't argue that if you take and clamp your rod to a solid object and then flex and release it then it will vibrate and bounce around for many seconds. But I don't fish with my rods clamped to a desk or anything so for me that's not something I feel is going to affect how my rods perform. I"m concerned with how the rod casts in a real world situation.

I do understand that the lighter the guides are the more quickly the rod will stop vibrating and I think everybody here has talked about that before. I've certainly read it in the magazine over and over. But at some point I think you have a hard time improving on it any further. I have used the micro guides on a set up and like them. I did not lose any casting distance and might have picked up a couple feet.

Knowing Mr. Kirkmans credentials and his engineering background, that comment also struck me a funny!

I enjoy reading this sort of discussion, as I can sometimes learn a thing or two.

But in this case ...

I would have to think that if the amount rotation remaining in post spring release of a composite tube from line load is so slight that it can only be calculated with macro photography <> Then it is probably not that much of a consideration in regards to a real world fishing application of that tube.

Would not the laws of PMI in this particular scenairo be best defined as "Pretty Much Irrelavant" ?

Bob Meiser

Love it, Bob!!!!!!!

Mike (Southgate, MI)
If I don't want to, I don't have to and nobody can make me (except my wife) cuz I'm RETIRED!!

Hi Bob glad to see your comment. There IS a REAL world concept deeply buried here. I hope the value of the micro guide system does not suffer from malicious information contamination.

It is a shame that somehow personal matters got entwined in this very interesting subject. The basic issue in the thread deals with the value of a new system of building rods, i.e. micro guides, where the mass of added materials including guides, finish and thread can be reduced approximately 80% or more for certain types of bait casting rods.

Much of the weight reduction is on the tip section of the rod. Performance improvements involved in a bait casting situation like bass fishing can be enormus. Some fishermen using the system have even noted improved reel performance under certain conditions that minimize backlash that is not presently well understood.

You comment about "line loading" is really not applicable in this case because bass fishermen using bait casters are are dealing with a situation where lure weight is being pitched with a casting rod with very little if any blank deflection - this is different when considering that you deal in a world where the fly rod blank is structured to load and cast the line with zero lure weight. Bass fishermen may ask for a rod to accurately propel a lure 35 feet with minimal blank deflection.

1. The use of micros result in a significantly lighter fishing rod

2. Fishermen report the rods are more "sensitive" than conventional rods

3. Tip top line tangle is virtually eliminated

4. For long range casting reel settings can be "backed off" while maintaining backlash control. Longer casts. Lateral and standing wave line losses are minimized due to control of line path.

5. A bass fisherman can increase his active pitching range with improved accuracy

6. Lighter weight finess worms can be accurately pitched with heavier power blanks

7. More durable and can be easily removed from a rod box on a bass boat

Credentials and Qualifications for above statement:

Cook, Fish Cleaner, Rod Builder, Boat Driver, Deck Hand, Janitor, Yard Boy and Keeper of Clyde

Hey Bill,

Bottom line: I agree.

I think that it is generally a good idea to reduce component weight burden whenever possible to enhance blank performance <> As long as overall fishing performace of the finished rod is not compromised by doing so.

Bob Meiser

OK Dennis I'll jump in after just getting back up from hurricane Ike.

Question: How can it be possible for a small micro ring to have more friction than a larger ring? The contact area (line to ring) is miniscual (sp) between the two.

Bobby Feazel

[www.shockwaverods.com]

Conventional wisdom will not open the box.

Bill - I think I'm confused, and maybe so is Bob, because Eugene uses his fly rod experience as examples for most of his responses (e.g., "The fastest rod I own 7.8 ERN and 78 degrees AA or I use #2 single foot titanium for rods 5 weight under and #2 titanium double foot for rods to 8 Weight"). Also, this thread carries forward from a "discussion" of the merits or lack of of the CCS system in measuring critical properties of fly rod blank performance.

This current conversation jumps between styles and the poster's application of his general veiw of what Eugene is attempting to say to his rod style knowledge. One thing I agree with Eugene on is the caster/rod system when casting is extremely complex. If some agreement is not reached about which parameters are defined as in play and which are "all else being equal" parameters I'm not sure that this thread has an ending. The number of statistically valid combinations of parameters in the System is mind boggling.

The trick of course is understanding which of the parameters have the most deterministic impact on what is being optimized. Or, to paraphrase Bob, what's relevant and why. Even the question of what is "optimal" should be defined and held fast. In Complexity Theory there is the Principle of Suboptimization which states: Optimizing each subsystem independently will not in general lead to a system optimum, or more strongly, improvement of a particular subsystem may actually worsen the overall system.

My early practical experience with this Principle was building Bass rods that would cast a country mile in the first tournament and then be returned for guide repair. I quickly learned to tweak my components for a different optimal - minumum tip occiliation was not it.

btw, we haven't even got to the caster. A fishing buddy of mine who is a FFF Master Instructor kids me during discussions of rod properties that most of my customers would be better off spending the difference in cost in my rods and factory rods with him for lessons. For many of them, he's not far off. I can't engineer around bad stroke mechanics.

Ahhhhhh
Now we are getting somewhere in this thread & the thrust of the discussion.
1.
Everyone has a tendency to view the impact of a particular rod parameter in their own context.
ie if you are a dedicated bass fisherman you view the context of the discussion in terms of your use of a rod & even in technique specific terms.
if you are a dedicated fly fisherman you view the context of the discussion in that context etc etc.
- That was not the intent of the discussion.................the concept was raised in general terms of rod dynamics & is best discussed in that general context.
- the value of potentially improving the rod dynamic to any specific rod or technique is an issue for the specific application & the compromise of benefits that might be achieved in that application.
ie
shaving a gram off guide weight in an ultralight rod might be significant but shaving a gram off guide weight in a 40# spinning rod is probably achieving little benefit.........................so the context changes its significance from one of being worth doing to one of not being worth the effort.

The value of the discussion is understanding the dynamic in play and adapting it to your particular circumstance where you assess it has some significant benefit.
Whilst it might seem esoteric to some; understanding the relevant dynamics has significant value.

2.
Bill S has a good approach at the end of his post:-
My background: Metallurgist, rod builder , blank modifier, & reel modifier - 50 yrs, Recreational fisher 55 yrs everything from fly thru spinning & baitcasting to heavy duty jigging & game fishing , Commercial fisher 30 yrs. 8 boats & Never went to sea without rods on the boat & used them at every opportunity. If its got fins in fresh or saltwater I'm keen to get it on the end of a line.

3.
The highspeed imagery bit................ useful to actually see what is happening in rod dynamics & see what is happening in the rod where things are happening so fast you barely get a glimpse of it , so its difficult to actually see changes in rod dynamics without it & impossible to assign the benefit of changing components & their relative benefit without it. To a large extent we are left to guess what is happening and the extent of change in dynamics when we change components...................we might see a good outcome but are left to guess what actually caused it.

4.
Inertial effects play an enormous part in generating dynamic effects in casting with a rod.
Its why a 1/4 oz lure can deflect your rod at the start of a cast to the same extent that a much, much larger weight is needed to achieve in a static test.
Its why casting reels can be problematic & require a bit more skill to use than a threadline ( spinning ) reel...................you have to get the weight of that spool revolving & it has significant inertia at the start & then momentum you have to control after that.
5.
One of the values of highspeed imagry is understanding the dynamics of the rod as it reflexes at the release, its oscillations after release , line behavior in the guide train, & line behavior close to the tip IN THE CAST..........not on the test bench in an unnatural situation.

OK thats the prelude now to the nitty gritty of Eugene's PMI.

- Its value is in potentially understanding the significance of decreasing guide weight & that it is more significant the further towards the tip for three reasons
a) the polar moment bit..................where its further up the lever that is our rod so it has more effect than if it was closer to the butt.
b) the tip undergoes acceleration at the tip to a greater extent than at the butt & the resultant inertia is proportional to the acceleration & the duration of that acceleration. ( ie inertia is the resistance to movement ........vis a vis increased movement )
c) the tip is lower in mechanical strength than any other part of the rod so it deflects more for the same forces on any other part of the rod & the polar moment bit & the acceleration bit is imparting more inertial force for the same weight the further up the rod towards the tip we go during the cast.

- Thats not the end of it:
The stored energy in the deflected rod has to go somewhere at the release of the cast.
some goes into the lure to accellerate it further than the velocity of the 'sweep' of our cast
the velocity of the rod reflex and the 'sweep' of the cast convert the weight of the rod & its components into momentum.
the rod blank then has to absorb that momentum by bending again ( in the opposite direction to the cast ) until it has absorbed all
of that momentum & then it flings it back again and we create an oscillating tip .
There are energy losses in the blank movement which include air resistance & line friction etc etc. & the oscillations decrease
until the blank is stable.
While the tip is oscillating it is dragging the line outside the tip up & down..............this creates a wave form in the line which the lure
has to drag sideways thru the air ( for a distance until it straightens out as a result of the air resistance )
This is still not the end of it:
The line has a jet of air travelling with it so the movement of the tip oscillating has to move that jet of air up & down too , not just the
small diameter line.
The lure has to move that wave form in the line near the tip , caused by the tip oscillations, with its attendant jet of air ..................
.................. sideways too ( not just the line ) until it straightens out.

This wave form in the line near the tip stops when the tip oscillations stop as the rod stabilises.
Eugene's PMI has a role here in the oscillations of the tip .............I think .........maybe....................need help here Eugene & others ?????
Does PMI have a role in this phase ?????? ( but please read on before commenting )

So what we have is a situation where Eugene's PMI has a significant impact on rod dynamics in the cast & a resultant impact translated into that period where the rod is oscillating.
More guide weight, more momentum, more oscillation, bigger wave form in the line near the tip, more line decelleration combating the air resistance of the wave form .............................until the tip stabilises.

All this is happening in the blink of an eye or a bit longer...........................this also happens to be at the worst possible time for a baitcasting reels with a revolving spool.
We have in an instant released the spool, accelerated it ,and then are subjecting the line coming of that spool to deceleration forces of the resistance of the lure & line passing thru the air & the wave form of the line & its jet of air ...........................backlash territory.
So its not hard to see that reduced tip oscillation reduces the line drag & deceleration from a reduced wave form at the tip & therefore the backlash siluation is reduced.
If there is less line deceleration we need less artificial braking of the reel spool to control spool deceleration.
One expects that both the reduced line deceleration from the reducedtip oscillations AND reduced artificial braking on the revolving spool would increase casting distances possible.
In a flip cast the rod deflection is almost all tip deflection and the oscillations are small & extremely rapid. it is cumulative amplitude & frequency of the wave form near the rod tip just after release that influence line deceleration.
In an overhand cast the rod deflection is 'whole of blank' and the resultant oscillations are larger in amplitude & lower in frequency, compared to a flip cast.
Similarly PMI effects are more significant in the components near the tip in a flip cast and have more significance further down the blank in an overhand cast.

Anyone wishing to provide constructive critique of the above dynamics is welcome.
So highspeed imagry has enabled us to see what was going on rather than guess.
We can now potentially understand the significance of the changes we make in rod components & why a gram makes a difference worth chasing in some situations and not others.
Eugene has put a context to the inertial bit with PMI................ thanks Eugene.
I for one had a context for inertia but not the significance of the Polar Moment bit.
A couple of questions remain in regard to PMI.

- What role does PMI play in the oscillation phase of the rod tip...............is it energy absorbtion contributing to the decline of the oscillations or what ??????????
- can we use PMI as a measure to quantify "feel" in a rod or devise a relative test for "feel" which considers PMI.?????????????
- or is it more that an understanding of PMI enables us to estimate what components in our rod construction might be changed & where to change "feel".?????????????
Pheeeeew..................that took a while.
I trust that whilst this could be an esoteric discussion it does have a contribution to our understanding of what is at play in rod dynamics & what we can think about in our rod constructions with a view towards what benefit might be worth chasing in the individual situation .
This is just my view .....................constructive critique & contributions please.
DenisB

You guys are making this WAY too difficult. First off, modern rods don’t oscillate for seconds on end unless you’re using guides that are way too large and way too heavy. You can’t get your graphite rod tip to oscillate for even a tenth of a second using average components and casting with your own arm. Discussing that sort of thing is trying to fix a problem that just doesn’t exist. I'm not even going to bother talking about clamping your rod in a vise or something. That's too silly to even comment on for obvious reasons.

Any sensible rod builder understands that you want to use the lightest and smallest guides that you can use without sacrificing durability or useability. It’s not that hard guys, just tape up a set and go out and try it. Then try some smaller guides, and smaller and smaller until you see an increase or decrease in performance. You'll find out pretty quickly what you can by with. What works and what doesn't.

You’ll learn a heck of a lot more in an hour of test fitting and casting that you will in a month speculating on this stuff.