David Baylor Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Samuel ..... if you read the first post in this
> thread
> [www.rodbuilding.org]
> 07#msg-563907 you'll see why it is possible to
> have blanks with widely varying powers. It's a
> very informative post.
>
> There is discussion following the first post that
> adds light to what the first post contains.

Aleks mentioned in that post that for light rods such as the MB733 it has to be within .5" of the curve test. The CCS IP for this blank ranged from 438 to 557. Would those two blanks be within .5" of one another? I am unfamiliar with the CCS test process so if you veterans say its good then its good.

To add: not only do you have the acceptable blank build tolerances to take into account, but also the CCS setup/measurement error of the individual contributors who are taking these CCS measurements. While I am certain everyone measures with the best intentions, few have a "professional" level setup to take these measurements.

When data is provided by a manf, i assume it to be a "representative sample" that falls within 1 standard deviation of the mean blank (the middle-ish range of a bell curve).

When multiple data points are provided by different builders, i assume the average of those points represents the mean of the blanks range.

So the wide variance in multiple entries for the MB733 likely represent the range of acceptable tolerance from NFC PLUS the fudge factor of the setups of the different builders. I would take their average as the likeliest example of a blank you would receive .

ETA: in this specific case, when you average the 3 entries you get: IP 498, AA 77.5



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/23/2024 09:37AM by Patrick Coco.

There are so many versions of the CCS that you may not be seeing the same numbers due to different measurements constants, etc., being used. So be careful. The original, authentic CCS is found here: [common-cents.info]

Note the chart for ERN goes to 600/43.09. In the CCS, Intrinsic Power is expressed as ERN.

...........

You also have to remember that many of the CCS values found in the CCS data base were measured by different individuals, which introduces a lot of variability. So the data base contains is not only blanks to blank variability but also individual to individual measuring variability.
Norm

Agree with Norman. I haven’t posted my CCS numbers because I don’t feel like I have a good enough set up to be fully trustworthy. The CCS database should be taken with a grain of salt. I typically take numbers from here, search for posts on here, and (if NFC) look at the rod bend pictures to get an idea of action.

Thanks for taking the time in helping me understand better. Much appreciated ????

I don’t post mine either because I don’t have a consistent set up I truly trust. I’ve only been doing CCS testing the IP (power), not the AA. I definitely look over the CCS database when I order though. I haven’t tested the power on my last few builds (SJ-725 X-Ray, DS-710 X-Ray C6O2, SJ-764 C6O2). All are completed and I do plan to test their power. I’ll get around to it eventually. I cut 4” off the SJ-764, so I plan to test in the next few days. I should have tested it before I trimmed it so I could compare it with the trimmed blank.

Aside from the variances from one persons CCS numbers for a specific blank, versus another ..... I think there is another thing that needs to be considered ...... and that is, we don't know what load NFC uses to flex test a blank. We know by reading discussion further into the thread I linked, that NFC uses a specific load to flex test a blank, but is that flex test load the same amount of weight it would take to determine the IP / ERN of the blank in question?

I know some of the loads they show blanks loaded with in the pictures on their web site, are not enough weight to determine that blanks IP / ERN. Using the MB 733 X ray blank as an example. It is pictured with a 12 oz load attached to its' tip. 12 oz = 340.2 grams. The lightest IP for the MB 733 in the CCS data base is 438 grams.

I also know that some of those loads are well above the weight it would require to determine that blank's IP / ERN. Using the SJ 703 X ray as an example. There is a picture of that blank loaded with 24 oz. 24 oz = 680.4 grams. 360 grams is the highest IP for an SJ 703 X ray, in the CCS data base. I'd also think it highly unlikely that all of the loads pictured with individual blanks, are the loads used to flex test that particular blank.

My point is, the CCS data is for a fully loaded blank per CCS standards. But is flex test based on a fully loaded blank per CCS standards?

As far as the 1/2" variance for a light powered blank .... since a blank passes the flex test if it doesn't go into an adjacent power range. A range that can be lighter, or heavier, that 1/2" tolerance is actually 1". It's like if you have a machined part with a +/- .003" tolerance, there can be .006" difference in two different parts, and each part would have passed QC. a 1" difference in vertical tip travel, can translate into a somewhat considerable number of grams. I will say this ..... I have rods with almost identical AAs, with differences in IP of 60 grams, and I can't tell a difference in how one rod fishes over the other.

No, it isn't the same weight as you would wind up with in the CCS. Keep in mind that most manufacturers use weight as the constant and then measure the deflection. The CCS uses the deflection distance and then measures the weight it took to get it there.

The reason the CCS is the only across the board rod rating system is precisely because it uses distance as the constant, so all rods regardless of power, type, etc. can be measured under the same constant. All other systems have to vary their constant (weight) because the amount of weight it would take to even move a surf rod would break an ultra-light. This is why all other systems are not universal in nature - their numbers are specific to rod type.

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

I added some RodForge blanks that were listed in the 110 pointer Thread. See below and also in the Google Spreadsheet: [docs.google.com]

Manufacturer Series Model ID Length (Inches) IP (Grams) AA ERN
RodForge HTD 63MXF 75 430 83 15.93
RodForge HTD 66MF 78 500 78 17.86
RodForge HTD 610MLXF82 400 82 15.1

Also, to comment about the variation keep in mind that the source of the measurements come from a lot of different places including rod builders, from other databases, and from manufacturers. I list the source in the spreadsheet so make sure to pay attention to source as well when reviewing info.

If anyone has measurements try and post them on this thread to make it easier for me to track them down and add to spreadsheet. Keep the info coming and I'll keep adding to spreadsheet.

Also, another call to any manufacturers that have data. Send them to me via this thread or can be emailed using the email address rodbuildingccs@gmail.com that is also found on the readme tab of spreadsheet.