L.O.S.T. post on Rodbuilding.org forum

[minner]

This is deep.... Static loading, dynamic loading....this would make for a differential equation from hell!!!

engineers...........

[rodblder]

Originally Posted by minner

This is deep.... Static loading, dynamic loading....this would make for a differential equation from hell!!!

engineers...........

typical engineer attempting to fix a problem that doesn't exist. Spiral wraps have been in use for 100 yrs and all methods of getting the line under the black work just fine. He seems to think his method is better for some reason but can't prove it in the field where it really counts. So he can only do as he does and try and confuse everybody with his gibberish. As i've said before, he needs to spend more time on the water learning to fish, and less time static testing his gay creations

[SALTYDAWG]

Originally Posted by Comedie

Yeah I've heard the bit about a rod loads by the tip. It ain't exactly true. What you do in the guidetrain can influence how the blank visibly bends. More importantly, the guidetrain will change how the blank is stressed even when you can't see it.
Put just a few guides on a rod and load up the guidetrain. The rod doesn't bend the same, does it. That's because the guides and the line tension between them are bending the rod in a manner like a compound bow. OK,,, so add enough guides and you should see the bend go more toward what you see from loading the blank w/o the guide train. That's because you have spread the line tension load over the blank and now deny a large part of the compounded leverage between guides.

If you got that, then you understand. It is one of the things that tuning during static testing does afterall,,, minimizing and balancing out the line angles at the guides. So nothing new there,,, just perhaps a different light shed on the value of static testing.

Now,,,,, work the thought in reverse. Start with a perfectly balanced rod. What happens when you remove a guide under load? The rest of the guidetrain readjusts to carry that load now, and primarily the guides on either side of what you removed. Those two guides now want to pull towards each other more than before, and in doing so apply more stress to the blank between them. Now consider that removing the guide is the same thing as having a guide that carries no load.

That line of thinking is what was behind LOST in the first place. To not leave any large sections of blank unprotected. And because of the line path change a spiral has in transition from top to bottom, a spiral is predisposed to have this problem in spades. The taller the reel, thicker the blank, and the closer to the reel the transition from top to bottom is, the worse the problem can be.

So load/stress distribution is a key piece of LOST. But there is another piece in there.... line path. The low stripper and 1st 180, and the 'wave' in the running guide sizing is not just about loading. Put a somewhat flexy piece of plastic dowel thru the tip, a first 180 guide, and then on top of the reel spool. The shape it will form is quite similar to what you see in LOST. And the reason it forms that shape between those 3 points is because that is the path of least resistance thru those points for that dowel. What it is doing is avoiding acute linepath changes in a small distance. And that's the other piece of what LOST is up to.

Easy to see in real time and hands on, and a real bugger to write up concisely.

You "Lost" meToo many perdy werds

[CALCOfshr]

Whether or not a problem exists...why don't we all go back to wrapping what we do best and leave others alone. Why do we need to start ANYTHING like this?

Dave...thank you for your further explanations of your LOST concept. Rock out with your cock out!

Jim,
STFU and behave. Stop trying to degrade your status from weave guru to asshat! Nobody has issues with your great work. So why bother with his? Have you ever met Dave?

I like both of you guys. Each of you have your merits.

Peace out!
Chuck

[DocSki]

AMEN Chuck. NO ONE ever wins a pissing contest and most everyone loses. Back to the cave I go, I go. I am working on my new Avatar thanks to Randys imput and pics, it should be fun

[MKUHN138]

Originally Posted by rodblder

typical engineer attempting to fix a problem that doesn't exist. Spiral wraps have been in use for 100 yrs and all methods of getting the line under the black work just fine. He seems to think his method is better for some reason but can't prove it in the field where it really counts. So he can only do as he does and try and confuse everybody with his gibberish. As i've said before, he needs to spend more time on the water learning to fish, and less time static testing his gay creations

And you should spend less time getting all worked up like an old lady over a post on a rod building forum. Pretty pathetic if you ask me...

[Comedie]

Originally Posted by minner

This is deep.... Static loading, dynamic loading....this would make for a differential equation from hell!!!

engineers...........

Absolutely! You can build it and see it easy enough, but to model and quantify it all is very difficult.
A friend of mine with some interest in this a few months back was telling me about his friend who can spare time on the JPL supercomputer. So if you care to fully model and quantify, it really does become rocket science.

[Lou W]

At least on this site we can have disagreements, some feathers can be ruffled and nobody gets 86'd.

[Comedie]

Originally Posted by rodblder

typical engineer attempting to fix a problem that doesn't exist. Spiral wraps have been in use for 100 yrs and all methods of getting the line under the black work just fine. He seems to think his method is better for some reason but can't prove it in the field where it really counts. So he can only do as he does and try and confuse everybody with his gibberish. As i've said before, he needs to spend more time on the water learning to fish, and less time static testing his gay creations

So lets see,,,, you don't understand something and that means you hate it and piss on it. Very commendable.

Others seem to catch on. No reason everyone must. If you are more comfy using century old tech based on eye of newt, wing of bat, and some infomercial level rubber stamps, go ahead. It'll catch fish.

I like to understand things. And I try to build the best engineered rod I can and put a lot of effort into exactly that. Everything can be improved upon. It is called progress thru evolution, and I try to help it along.

[Red Monster]

Originally Posted by rodblder

typical engineer attempting to fix a problem that doesn't exist. Spiral wraps have been in use for 100 yrs and all methods of getting the line under the black work just fine. He seems to think his method is better for some reason but can't prove it in the field where it really counts. So he can only do as he does and try and confuse everybody with his gibberish. As i've said before, he needs to spend more time on the water learning to fish, and less time static testing his gay creations

That's just plain rude. What an asshole.

[Comedie]

Originally Posted by SALTYDAWG

You "Lost" meToo many perdy werds

Sorry Bill. But hey, at least I see you trying to think about spirals now. The Power of the Darkside I guess

Think of it this way. Just take a blank alone, no guides, and start applying load. The tip bends first, then more to the rear, and then the tip starts carrying less load as it points downward and even more bend goes to the rear.

Pull up a conventional rod and look at how the guides load up as you apply load. You should see the same sequence occuring, as the guides sequentially load from tip to stripper.

Now, try to do the same thing with a spiral. It is far trickier, because the line path is not running parallel to the blank, but is crossing it. The shorter the transition distance, the harder it is to do, and the less straight the line path. But also, the shorter the transition distance, the stronger the resulting spiral effect because you have more 180 guides. So,,, LOST is really about optimizing the load distribution and line path for a given placement of the 1st 180. Just start with the tip, 1st 180, and reel and static test to get sequential guide loading, and what you will end up with eventually is LOST.

[SALTYDAWG]

Originally Posted by Comedie

Sorry Bill. But hey, at least I see you trying to think about spirals now. The Power of the Darkside I guess

Think of it this way. Just take a blank alone, no guides, and start applying load. The tip bends first, then more to the rear, and then the tip starts carrying less load as it points downward and even more bend goes to the rear.

Pull up a conventional rod and look at how the guides load up as you apply load. You should see the same sequence occuring, as the guides sequentially load from tip to stripper.

Now, try to do the same thing with a spiral. It is far trickier, because the line path is not running parallel to the blank, but is crossing it. The shorter the transition distance, the harder it is to do, and the less straight the line path. But also, the shorter the transition distance, the stronger the resulting spiral effect because you have more 180 guides. So,,, LOST is really about optimizing the load distribution and line path for a given placement of the 1st 180. Just start with the tip, 1st 180, and reel and static test to get sequential guide loading, and what you will end up with eventually is LOST.

I actually do get it Dave, Just fucking with you and stirring the pot I personally dont like spirals, Lost or otherwise, And yes I have fished them, Just not my thing. I've only had a couple of customers inquire about acidrods and told them there are probably other builders that could build them better. Both opted to have me build a conventional. It's fun watching you guys piss on each other though, So "Game On"