The sensitivity might be "pretty bad" but you can still see it. Don't watch for the rod tip to flex - watch for it to move. Two different things.

The angler will feel it because the lever he holding is subjecting him to an increase in resistance. The one thing that should not be up for debate is whether a longer rod is more sensitive than a shorter rod (all else being equal). This is something anyone can prove for themselves in their backyards. And yet the longer rod will have a lower TNF and I suspect it will have lower vibrometer reading, but I'll wait for the Expo and see how that shakes out.

..........



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/30/2023 04:33PM by Tom Kirkman.

For those not attending the Expo, and for those want to get their own answers:

Anyone wishing to test their own blanks on their own “vibrometer” can email me for instructions on how to easily and cheaply run TNF. My email address is open.

After all, there are a lot of indications that TNF and the “vibrometer” get the same answer, and no proof that they do not.

“The "vibrations" imparted by mechanical devices for these "tests" do not replicate the "vibrations" generated in real world fishing situations.” While that is certainly true, it is missing the point HERE. What Aleks and Michael are attempting to measure is the ability of any particular blank to transfer the input it receives at the tip while fishing, NOT MEASURE THAT INPUT. The more “sensitive” a blank is = the better the input at the tip will be felt in-hand near the butt.
Case in point: Take 2 different tubular structures with the same length, ID and OD but constructed of different material. For visualizing the test scenario, let's take extremes like rubber and FG. Perform “vibrometer” and TNF test on both. Safe to say that the FG will produce a higher frequency / vibration / oscillation than the rubber in either test. Now, with a line tied to one end while holding the opposite end, have someone pull on the line. It is also safe to say that the pull will be felt in-hand more by the FG than the rubber.
I find it logical that the results from the Aleks’ vibrometer and Michael’s TNF will be interrelated. The procedure and free apps to perform TNF have already been explained. Apparently the cost of a vibrometer is cost inhibitive to most. It will be a pleasure to learn of their relationship to one another during simultaneous testing at the ICRBE. Hopefully, so-close-yet-so-far will be put to rest and we all will have yet another aspect of rod building to split hairs over.

Mark Talmo
FISHING IS NOT AN ESCAPE FROM LIFE BUT RATHER A DEEPER IMMERSION INTO IT!!! BUILDING YOUR OWN SIMPLY ENHANCES THE EXPERIENCE.

>> " It will be a pleasure to learn of their relationship to one another during simultaneous testing at the ICRBE" I have read that the vibrometer will be demonstrated at the Expo, but I have not read that TNF will be compared to it. Do those who will be demonstrating the vibrometer know the procedure for TNF? Am I missing something? Tom?

Anyone wishing to test their own blanks on their own “vibrometer” can email me for instructions on how to easily and cheaply run TNF. My email address is open.

After all, there are a lot of indications that TNF and the “vibrometer” get the same answer, and no proof that they do not.

These type "vibrations" introduced at the tip and measured in either time or quantity do not indicate on-the-water sensitivity. You may find a blank with the highest TNF or highest vibrometer reading but I seriously doubt either would prove to be the most sensitive rod or blank in an actual fishing situation because these are not the things you feel when you are retrieving a lure or sensing a fish bite. Totally different types of input.

The vibrometer will be interesting because if it does indicate what we can already prove to be true in terms of real world rod sensitivity then it becomes possible to put a number on it. There are a good many experiments that can be conducted in the interest of learning exactly what the vibrometer is capable of indicating. To that end, we will have an hour seminar on Sunday morning where attendees can bring their rods and blanks, particularly those they feel are "sensitive" on the water and see how they measure. I expect much to be learned and more questions to be raised. And that's fine.

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

Michael Danek Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >> " It will be a pleasure to learn of their
> relationship to one another during simultaneous
> testing at the ICRBE" I have read that the
> vibrometer will be demonstrated at the Expo, but I
> have not read that TNF will be compared to it. Do
> those who will be demonstrating the vibrometer
> know the procedure for TNF? Am I missing
> something? Tom?
>
> Anyone wishing to test their own blanks on their
> own “vibrometer” can email me for instructions
> on how to easily and cheaply run TNF. My email
> address is open.
>
> After all, there are a lot of indications that TNF
> and the “vibrometer” get the same answer, and
> no proof that they do not.

I'm not up to speed on what Aleks will be doing in his booth. I think somebody with enough interest should run some TNF measurements on a handful of blanks and either bring them or ship to the Expo where they can then undergo a vibrometer rating in the seminar. Then you can see if the readings tend to back each other or if not, why not and what does each reading actually indicate. There's an opportunity here for certain.

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

There has been an opportunity here since the challenge was made on TNF, with dozens of comments on NFC's expertise, resources, hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on R & D, post after post about blank design and manufacture. And yet that opportunity to correlate the vibrometer with TNF has been ignored. NFC has the blanks, the vibrometer, the resources, and the money, and they can run the correlation before the Expo. If they choose to. That fact has been obvious for quite a while now.

Doing it at the Expo in front of an audience, which includes the owners and operators of a half dozen high-end blank manufacturers, likely carries more weight than doing it in a single closed operation. Aleks appears willing to do that.

...........

I'm in! Showdown- Throwdown! And Dave Baylor, make sure you keep an eye on that tiptop. Lol

>> "Doing it at the Expo in front of an audience, which includes the owners and operators of a half dozen high-end blank manufacturers, likely carries more weight than doing it in a single closed operation. Aleks appears willing to do that"

So Aleks has the TNF process documented? So that he can run it as it has so far been used by many of us builders?

Lynn, there should be a "like" button.

Michael Danek Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >> "Doing it at the Expo in front of an audience,
> which includes the owners and operators of a half
> dozen high-end blank manufacturers, likely carries
> more weight than doing it in a single closed
> operation. Aleks appears willing to do that"
>
> So Aleks has the TNF process documented? So that
> he can run it as it has so far been used by many
> of us builders?

Someone that does the TNF tests could be there or ship in some blanks that have been through the process. There's going to be a couple thousand rod builders there. Surely a handful of them know the process.

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

And to be sure, if vibrations didn't travel up a line we wouldn't have music.

I have to ask. Has anyone who is commenting on TNF ever run it? I keep hearing all these predictions and conclusions, but no one commenting has asked for the process description. It's going to be done at the Expo? Exactly what process is going to be done at the Expo?

I suspect that if no one that knows your TNF process shows up then there will be no testing done with TNF.

As far as musical vibrations - that's not the same sort of "vibration" that takes place in fishing. None of my fishing rods make musical notes when I'm retrieving a lure or getting a fish to bite. Sort of like a guy putting a blank in a spine finder or rolling it by hand and proclaiming that unless you build on the spine the rod is going to twist under load. It won't - because neither a spine finder nor hand rolling approximates a real world fishing situation.

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

There is zero chance that vibrations can travel along a fishing line in an underwater medium. The water will damp out any such vibrations in an instant. Not the same as vibrations along a line suspended in the air. In water you are talking about a medium that is almost 800 times denser than air at sea level. Any feeling or feel has to be something else. I think it is probably a pull or resistance as has been mentioned by others. But it is not any sort of vibration such as you would have in a musical instrument or a tin can and string kid's telephone. They won't work underwater.

I’ll be at he expo. If someone wants to know how to do the TNF analysis I can certainly show them. I think both blank attributes (TNF and Vibration transmission) probably play a part in sensitivity, but neither is the complete answer. However, I have no idea what is the complete answer, so I won’t even speculate. As I mentioned previously, I believe there are a lot of different things involved as far as sensitively is concerned, some can be measured and some can’t.. Over the years I’ve used all kinds of rods and they all had sufficient sensitivity to detect a fish at the end of the line.
Norm

Vibrations whether be they be heard or felt, are vibrations nonetheless.

Michael,

I think the more appropriate quote is "If you give a man a fish, you will feed him for a day, if you teach him how to fish, you will feed him for a lifetime"

The point of this post was to share a part of what we have found in regards to vibrational sensitivity as it relates to blanks, the results of which are completely contrary to the notion that faster recovery is equal to greater sensitivity. (Which is what TNF measures, recovery, and what certain people use that measurement for is to impart that a higher TNF equals greater sensitivity.)

To test what is stated:

1) Get a vibrometer
2) Get a speaker that can buzz at 55hz (any speaker will do, but a flat one facing up is best.
3) Use an online tone generator for example: [www.szynalski.com] at a volume of 75%
4) Put the tip of the blank against the speaker
4) Attach the vibrometer to the butt of the blank
6) Record results

You can do the above at home, in a lab, in a settings with other rod builders, (or at the Expo!)

I think what is outlined above hardly justifies stating something like "I have trusted your integrity up until now, but I'm beginning to doubt my judgment."

I am not asking you to "trust" me - I am asking you to replicate the results following the steps above (which were good enough for a patent examiner) - In fact, I am also asking the broader rod building community to do the same, and let the results speak for themselves.

I could ask both Al Jackson and Gary Loomis to record a short video - stating that a blanks rate of recovery and a high TNF do not equate to greater sensitivity - there are too many variables (some of which are discussed above), but the problem is that people will continue to argue about the meaning of the word "is" is. (in this case, "is" is sensitivity) and I already see a few posts trying to suggest that we are not talking about the same "sensitivity"

I only care about vibrational sensitivity - because this can be measured - and it can be measured using steps 1-6 above.

As far as the Expo - we are bringing blanks, a vibrometer, speaker, etc. For those that want to learn, we will teach how we do that measurement - We are also bringing blanks that have a fast recovery (high TNF) and a low vibrational sensitivity, and blanks that have a slow recovery (low TNF) but a very high vibrational sensitivity, to prove the point that faster recovery does not equal to greater vibrational sensitivity.

For those that want to stick by TNF - they are welcome to do so, but I would imagine that at some point, they would provide an explanation of how a higher TNF equals a more sensitive blank.

And while as a manufacturer, we can get behind CCS, AA, ERN, etc. - the above is intended to explain that 1) we do test for vibrational sensitivity and take it seriously - but also why we will not get behind a notion like TNF - as it is being imposed on something that it was never intended to do.

As far as "releasing the vibrometer data" as it compares to other manufacturers and TNF - why? None of them have claimed that their blanks have a higher TNF and are thus more sensitive. Other rod builders may have incorrectly made this claim, but not the manufacturers.

What I am stating about TNF and that it does not equate to a higher vibrational sensitivity does not require one manufacturer to be stacked against another. You can test within their blank range, and compare to others if you wish - the result does not change.


Best,
Aleks


Michael Danek Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> “If we have data, let’s look at data. If all
> we have are opinions, let’s go with mine.” –
> Jim Barksdale, former Netscape CEO

“The "vibrations" imparted by mechanical devices for these "tests" do not replicate the "vibrations" generated in real world fishing situations.” While that is certainly true, it is missing the point HERE. What Aleks and Michael are attempting to measure is the ability of any particular blank to transfer the input it receives at the tip while fishing, NOT MEASURE THAT INPUT. The more “sensitive” a blank is = the better the input at the tip will be felt in-hand near the butt."

The problem is that neither measure what is happening when you are fishing, which is that you feel either something pulling or something stopping pulling. Mick is measuring recovery speed and Aleks is measuring vibration transfer. Neither is measuring the rod's ability to transmit fishing information. What Tom is pointing out, and I agree, is that a blanks' ability to transmit vibration may not be directly related to its ability to transmit fishing information. Probably some sort of correlation, but certainly not enough to say better vibration transmission = better fishing sensitivity.