Tonight I'll post some files with wierd arcs and other values if you want to?
Also, I want to to record some really long carries. I just need someone to hold the analyser for me. I unplug the cord all the time othervice.
I am sure there is some creep in that stroke. We saw it and I did a few without too but I actually got better results with it, there was a bit of a tailing wind.
So, I need more rotational speed and much less of that uneccesary "stopping power". I should go for more of a follow through.
In Mikes terms "Hit the fucker harder/faster and all the way through". Is that your concusion?
It will be interesting to see how things change when I carry more line. But the highest peak I recorded so far is 730 d/s so I am clearly rotating too slow.
How the hell does Paul reach 770 d/s in his BC :O That is a helluva lot of rotational speed, no wonder that rods shatter for him!
I was guessing something like that, it appears from our tests that the FC usally is a faster cast. You must loose a fair deal of rotation in the FC with your style since the sensor would be very much in the way.
Smoothness of 38, that is a very abrupt application of power. I got one with over 200 here but it must be a sensor error.
My aim is to get around 20 both ways for distance. I get a very low smoothness in the BC almost regardless how I hit it. In the FC I can play around with this much more. I think it is grip related? The butt-push with the lower arm/supersonic backast that I used in that recording has a very evenly distrubuted rotation. That also shows clearly in Grundes videos of Mattias Lilleheim.
Funny, I always thought my BC was more powerful and had a faster rotation than my FC. That is not the case and it is an eye opener really. The file I posted was an attempt to get the BC faster and it worked so the analyser is really helping me.
But, the biggest eye opener since a long while is the new haul I am working on, thanks Paul!
Do you have the time to post graphics on Fredriks cast aswell, please? I would be very thankful for it.
I would also really like to hear your comments on it. He is carrying 25 meters in it and it was a very nice cast. He has had a massive near half year of practise in total... :p
I'm not convinced you want a low smoothness ratio Stefan, at least not if you are delaying rotation. If you look at how smoothness ratio is calculated it may be something you want for a short cast, but I remain unconvinced that it is what we want for a long cast.
Getting interesting Stefan. Look at the timing. You are using a higher MAV (remember that's not tipspeed at RSP) and a shorter pause/higher cadence.
The MAV value seems to me to be about how hard you're 'hitting it.'
That doesnt explain the cadence. Creep could account for a little of that I guess. But it could simply mean Fredrik's line is more fully straight than yours before he starts acceleration? I don't think gear should make that sort of difference.
What it suggests to me is that you really hit the cast and feel the rod pre-load - you feel a tug or surge as the line comes straight. Fredrik doesn't. When the line comes straight in relation to your cast? I don't think the CA can say.
Smoothness of 38, that is a very abrupt application of power.
Stefan - I think Paul's right. A low smoothness figure suggests a stroke where the rate of angular acceleration increases but the increase is very controlled. IMHO its designed for control before speed.
To achieve the same MAV using that type of acceleration compared with the form it takes when you guys are casting would require far more rotation.
Compare these - constant acceleration vs acceleration increasing cubically. If those were drag cars racing side by side they reach the same speed in the same time but the distance they cover to do that is totally different. To get that you need to calculate the area under the graph. Using a linear increase in acceleration the distance travelled is far more than necessary for acceleration increasing geometrically.
The torque you apply is high but it comes late (it's delayed) and you build it up. The type of acceleration I think we want to avoid starts high - that would be abrupt. I've sketched some v/t graphs using constant acceleration to reach high rates of rotation and I simply don't believe we can use constant acceleration for distance casting. The initial force would be very high and we would need to maintain that through a very wide arc.
