Need Help Please Static test for guide placement

[babachu]

Need a referral to some sort of tutorial that explains the proper way to do a static test for guide placement. Thanks in advance.

[SALTYDAWG]

Originally Posted by babachu

Need a referral to some sort of tutorial that explains the proper way to do a static test for guide placement. Thanks in advance.

I think there may be one on Raymond Adams' site. Hang on, I'll get the link

[SALTYDAWG]

The Rod Builder's Library - Welcome

[REP]

We wrote just such an article in the Guild magazine a while ago. Go to the Guild site and find the listing - I think it was the last issue for 2007 or the first one for 2008. It includes photos and a step-by-step methodology for exactly what you're asking.

Uncle Russ
Calico Creek Rods

[babachu]

This is the link I found just in case anyone else is looking for this info. Thanks for you referrals.

[Comedie]

David, you are definitely on the right track with that thought. Static testing for guide placement is one of the performance differences between a truly custom rod and a 'paint-by-numbers' assembly. There is certainly more to it than just keeping the line off the blank, as a lot of folks seem to think.

From what I've seen, Russ aka REP is one of the best proponents of it. So go after him for that write up. And Russ,,,, why not ask them to put that article of yours in the How To section online?

First few times it can seem a bit daunting, but once you get used to the dynamics of individual guide moves and replacement on the guide train in static test, it becomes second nature. Personally, I start with any canned measurements I find online for the rod length/type, or the results I have from prior builds, and then work from there to make adjustments in static testing.

This may be a curt explaination, but basically what I aim for is a straight line path unloaded, from reel to line tip, and then as the rod bends, to have each guide, from tip to stripper come into play sequentially, one by one. Then, under higher load, when all the guides are in play, I check to be sure that none of the line angles become too acute, and if a conventional set up, that the line still has clearance from the blank. Basically, you want the line to follow the bend of the rod under load and to somewhat smoothly/evenly distribute the load across the entire guide train.

My semantics and word usage might be a little iffy there, but the idea should come across

[DenisB]

Pass

[Flagtails50]

Rep,

Do you have the link to the "Guild site".


Juan
Miami, FL

[babachu]

Guess I forgot to paste it in-sorry- Rodbuilding.org - Static Guide Placement

[Comedie]

Originally Posted by babachu

Guess I forgot to paste it in-sorry- Rodbuilding.org - Static Guide Placement

Flawed methodology there. Read this piece: "Why use a separate line to load the rod instead of the line coming from the reel? Well, if you load the line coming from the reel, you don't get a true picture of how you blank wants and needs to flex. That's right - the line pulling between the guides can force the blank into a bend it wouldn't otherwise take."

Basically what that says is that if the line is loaded to perform the bend, that the curvature can be different. But of course that is exactly how the rod will be loaded in real usage. Load the actual line, rather than tying a weight to the tip, and what you see is what you get. If you were to do it as detailed there, at the minimum you need to do the final work with the line loaded. Otherwise you are not seeing reality.

With the line loaded, differing amounts of load will distribute differently amongst the guide train componenets. An obvious example is that at light loads, the tip and first guide will be disproportionately loaded, while at high loads they may have little or no load at all and more rearward guides carry the burden. Higher loads are the realm where some interesting leverages can occur that want to snap blanks, because you are concentrating the stresses into a smaller section of the guide train, toward the rear where you have more distance between guides for leverage to increase, and with fewer guides in play carrying the increased line load, the line angles get more acute. You begin to get compound leveraging that even more wants to bend and snap the blank.

Another example of this is a highstick break. Elevated angle of attack for the rod concentrates the stresses into a small portion of the guide train. The compound leveraging between the guides in that section contribute to making a bad situation worse,,, and snap.

Denis Brown has done quite a bit of highbrow work on this stuff,,, and it gets complicated. If you load the line rather than the tip, however, those forces are all in play during your static testing, and you are sure you are working with reality.

[babachu]

Then I guess the next question is, how much load do I put on the blank? how much bend should I put in it to get the proper results during a static test? I suppose it depends on the type of rod (light inshore type or heavy tuna rod). When inshore fishing for bass or ? the rod very rarely gets fully taxed. In tuna fishing the rod is almost always bent to the butt. Is this my answer or is there more to consider? Do you load the blank at it's most common load? Thanks

[Comedie]

Originally Posted by babachu

Then I guess the next question is, how much load do I put on the blank? how much bend should I put in it to get the proper results during a static test? I suppose it depends on the type of rod (light inshore type or heavy tuna rod). When inshore fishing for bass or ? the rod very rarely gets fully taxed. In tuna fishing the rod is almost always bent to the butt. Is this my answer or is there more to consider? Do you load the blank at it's most common load? Thanks

That's a question with little concensus to the answer I fear.
For myself, I put a stake in the ground based on the recommended line ratings the manufacturer put on the blanks. Not that those ratings are that standardized across the industry either, but it is at least a solid known number that the maker puts faith in.
Recommended drag settings vary a bit, but 25% and 30% come up quite commonly. So I chose to use 30%, as it is more of a stress test than 25%.
As an example, let's say I've a 7' blank with a 20-40# rating. I would stress that blank all the way up to 12#,,,, 30% of 40#. I also use the lower line rating as a measurement point,,, so 6# in this example. My rationale with that is that I think all guides on a rod should be bearing load at it's minimum rating. My own judgement call there, but seems sensible.
Generally what I would end up doing on this example for a conventional is :

• Mount the tip
• Put the reel on the rod that you are likely to use. Or at least something that yields the same line height off the spool.
• Mark all the guides on the rod as a starting point. Usually I end up with 1 guide per foot of blank length on a spinning or spiral, and one extra beyond that for a conventional. That count is not including the tip. I use whatever I find online for canned spacing charts, or my own prior results, as a starting point.
• Now running the line from reel to tip, I pick a stripper that is tall and wide enough to not impede the line path.
• With stripper and tip in place, I then pick out and attach all the intermediary guides, scaling their size from stripper to tip. All along trying to maintain a straight line path. My first guide is usually around 3.5" from the tip, because I happen to like it that way.
• Now from that initial starting point, I load the line by hand. I look for each guide to bear load sequentially, from tip to stripper, as the load increases. I rearrange and replace guides as needed to get to that condition.
• Then I'll hang 6# off the rod. I want to see all the guides loaded. I look at the angles of the line going into and exiting each guide, and how smoothly the line path converges with the blank tip. If I don't like what I see, I step back and replace or add guides.
• Once satisfied with that, then I'll hang the 12# weight. And again, look at the stress distribution across the guide train and how smooth the line path follows the blank. Again, if I don't like what I see and I go back and make adustments.

My thought when all done is that I've somewhat optimized the line path and stress distribution within the recommended line test range. Some different things I do for spirals and spinning rods, and I've probably left out a few things that I do automatically w/o thinking about it now,,, but that's pretty much the gist of how I optimize during static testing.

I have been doing all this with the rod blank level, and supported at the butt and foregrip, just as you do in fishing. Just sticking the butt in a tube can give a very different bend to the rod, which is not what you get in actual usage. After I've done the horizontal work, I then play around with a weight on the rod at higher angles, to see if I still like the look of the line path and stress. I haven't setup my static test rig to do elevations yet, so it is a bit seat-of-the-pants.

Personally, for the load I use a smallish bucket that I fill with sand to the weight I want. And I tend to use either heavy spectra or 200# dacron line between the reel and weight, because it is easy to see and unlikely to have a knot failure. I also don't rely on the reel's drag to hold, and instead have a loop tied in the end of the line that I put around the reel foot, and then run the line around the back of the reel and over the spool.

And BTW,,,, I believe you are right on the offshore vs inshore thought. The freshwater tackle most bass guys use is quite heavy compared to the fish they typically catch. In comparison, saltwater gear is usually more highly stressed and 'ultralight'. So there's a lot of lattitude on being able to do dumb things on that FW stuff before things break,,, and much less margin of error on the SW side.