I sure hope thats a dynamic constant 
This forum began as Clark's Classic Bamboo Rod Forum, founded by Clark Davis for all who share a passion for classic rods. The forum is now owned by Whitefish Press aka Dr. Todd Larson - banjo.
For those who don't use English as their primary language we now have a translator for your language of choice hosted by Google.
0 Kudo
- Members Corner
- Forum Announcements
- Collecting Bamboo Fly Rods
- Fishing Bamboo Fly Rods
- Rod making, restoration, repairs and discussion on those related topics concerning bamboo rods.
- Rod and Reel Makers Forum
- Information About Makers & Manufacturers
- Taper Exchange
- Appraisals & Identification of Bamboo Fly Rods
- Ephemera, empherma and Ephemerella.....
- Book Talk
- Photos, paintings, written stories and talents.
- Classic Reels
- Collecting and Tying Classic Flies
- The Cooks Kitchen
- The Classic Fly Rod Classifieds
- Technical Support
Garrison Tapers
| Author | Comment | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
 J W Foster |
#21 | |||
|
Posts: 38 04/03/2009 19:31 |
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
wbinn |
Re:Garrison Tapers | #22 | ||
|
Posts: 80 04/03/2009 19:38 |
Judas!!! I knew there was something I forgot to get when I started collecting tools to build bamboo rods. AN ENGINEERING DEGREE!!! If debating engineering
principles and physics amuses you folks, great! But how many of you can say you utilize these debated principles in designing better casting cane rods? And if
you do, does the rod end up drastically different than one already designed by one of the old masters?
WBINN
Last Edited By: wbinn 04/03/2009 19:41.
Edited 1 time.
|
|||
|
|
||||
 jayhake |
#23 | |||
|
Posts: 193 04/03/2009 22:32 |
I heard over my police scanner that Markus just called the FBI hostage rescue team. He wants his thread back. :0
Actually, a very interesting discussion, if only I could understand all of it. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
J W Foster |
#24 | |||
|
Posts: 39 04/03/2009 23:14 |
WBINN
Interesting in that you don't have to read this thread, this is free info and as far as it goes is very good. Now for your questions the answer is Yes and Yes. Gee, can we make better cars than Volkswagons? Do you plan on making replicas or clones? We all honer the masters because they were masters of their craft, rodmaking, not taper making. All they required was a workable taper that people liked and it was converted to food. I might even wander out on a limb and suggest that if they were around today they would embrace the software (knowledge) and machinery that is available today. Regards Jerry |
|||
|
|
||||
|
J W Foster |
#25 | |||
|
Posts: 40 04/03/2009 23:55 |
FB, Wow, neat stuff..
Now the reality test.. looking at Garrison stress curves. Lets say a Payne 100. The tip stress is high ( max for the rod), If I interpret what you wrote, does that mean that is the maximum deflection point, we know that isn't true? Conundrum, the problem with using static modeling with a truly iteratively dynamic function, one not fixed to 10" and 5". Does Beam theory yield a workable constant for comparison and design, yes, is it the correct model, ?. Regards Jerry |
|||
|
|
||||
|
fishbum |
#26 | |||
|
Posts: 272 04/04/2009 09:52 |
J W Foster wrote: Hi Jerry Keep in mind Garrison' beam was broken up into 5" sections and each section can be represented by a small deflection model. Also as the rod deflects the angle of the applied force with respect to the rod increases. The extream case is the rod held vertical with a weight suspended from the tip-top. The rod is in tension with no deflection. Here is another tid-bit. "The path traced by the tip of a continuously tapered cantilever beam undergoing large deflection is a function of the ratio of the moments of inertia of the endpoints. This path can be described as an ellipse." (1) Tests performed by these guys indicate the accuracy of there prediction is within 1.8% through 70 degrees of deflection.
One of their tests used a Loomis 9', 5 weight flyrod for the beam. Their prediction of the deflection path was within 2% of
the test data. I think that will work for our flyrods.
Mathew B Parkinson University of Michigan Gregory M. Roach Brigham Young University Larry L. Howell Brigham Young University |
|||
|
|
||||
|
J W Foster |
#27 | |||
|
Posts: 43 04/04/2009 16:54 |
Hi FB The reality part was the question about tip deflection..I think I received another definition as an answer. This does relate to rodmaking and Garrison..
Regards Jerry
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
nwdlj |
y'all are all right | #28 | ||
|
Posts: 46 07/01/2009 21:13 |
In my late night insomnia, I do like to go back and read older threads...I like the way y'all (a nice tribute from Mr. Paducah to my home language from
where I grew up) think about this stuff...and being a rocket scientist, I understand everything everyone stated...but I will say one thing is that the best
parser for all this calculating is my right hand, what feels right with it has the right calculating done to it...keep on writing and I'll keep on
reading...dj
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
swalker9513.ultralightflyfi... |
#29 | |||
|
Posts: 8 07/02/2009 12:57 |
Wow! I'm an artist/philosopher/theologian. I haven't understood anything written on this thread--other than y'all. Good stuff though. I truly
admire people who do understand this. I've always thought flyfishing was aesthetically beautiful. I didn't know there was so much math involved. So, if
anyone would like to discuss the character and nature of God, I'm in.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
mer |
#30 | |||
|
Posts: 3125 07/02/2009 13:18 |
See, the math involved is just another language that is being used to describe the beauty of flyfishing, although strictly speaking, the math and moments and
beams are actually talking about what is happening to the rod as it it being cast. Is it for everyone? Heck no. Does it let someone gain a better
understanding? Perhaps. Is it actually a way to pick up chicks? Absolutely (not)
Just remember Engineers are by definition weird (myself included) and are
often excited by things that noone else cares about.
Being able to model something is often better at eliminating something that won't work, rather than finding the something that does. But it all depends on the accuracy of your model, which means theorize (often resembles sitting motionless with a Scotch in hand), scribble furiously on a piece of paper, bang away on a computer keyboard for hours on end, then test (often resembles fly casting). If you want a mathematical model of the character and nature of God, I'm sure one or three of the engineers would take that challenge Me, I just take
Him on faith.
This signature left intentionally blank.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
nwdlj |
#31 | |||
|
Posts: 47 07/02/2009 13:27 |
yep, gotta agree...that concept of god revealed in nature and what my right hand feels when it holds a aggregation of bamboo, cork and metal, parses all the
math that I need to know while I pursue this beautiful obsession of fishing the fly...dj
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
bobnorwood |
Garrison Tapers | #32 | ||
|
Posts: 5 07/07/2009 16:52 |
I think it is correct to say that all of Garrisons Tapers are simliar in design, but there are some small differences for example the 193 is the fastest taper
design. The larger rods tend to have more flex in the butt and are a little slower.
The differences between the E tapers and the regular numbers is that they are slightly stronger, the E taper is larger. Just look at the regular and the E type and subtract the two and you will see this. I don't think that I could tell the difference between the regular number and the E version, but then I am not that good a caster. BobN |
|||
|
|
||||
|
BigTJ |
#33 | |||
|
Posts: 761 07/08/2009 18:08 |
I'm now really glad I spent all that hard work on my engineering degree and PE it's worth it now I can understand this thread. I find this stuff really
interesting, and it's given me inspiration about how to understand the physical characteristics of bending stresses in a fly rod. Thanks guys.
OK now to add fuel to the fire, Bob Milward showed pretty convincingly that Garrison's underlying assumptions are flawed because fly rods do not bend like beams, relatively they deflect hundreds of times more. Milward's deflection analysis using time-lapse photography shows that the highest bending stress in a fly rod occurs in the middle of the rod, not at the tip or butt as Garrison's theoretical static analysis indicates. From a practical standpoint I think that Garrison's work is useful for comparing tapers, so there is nothing inherently unuseful about what he did, it's just that the assumptions are wrong so the calculated stresses are wrong. As long as you are using the same yardstick (garrison's method) then it is OK. However, if you really want to understand the stresses more accurately I think a static deflection test or dynamic test using time-lag photography is probably a better way to go. Too bad it's a big pain in the rear, but probably a good road for a serious rod designer. I am seriously considering setting up a static deflection test in my rod shop and cataloging tapers that way. BTW I think the original question can be answered simply, as some folks have chose, as follows: the "E" just means the rod is a little bit thicker than the base model, so it can either a) cast a little heavier line b) flex a bit more towards the time and have a "quicker" feel than the standard model. Also, it's worth mentioning that an additional factor affecting the action of Garrison's tapers is the size of the butt swell. Garrison recommended a range of butt swells for most all his tapers, the thicker the swell the more the action is truncated in front of the grip. I think most everyone is aware of this but thought it would be worth mentioning. And lastly I think that you would greatly enjoy fishing any combination of 212, be it E or not, with any butt swell. They are a good family of tapers, try different lines until you dial in the one you like they are a nice medium paced rod and very versatile for trout.
Last Edited By: BigTJ 07/08/2009 18:31.
Edited 5 times.
|
|||
|
|
||||
- Members Corner
- Forum Announcements
- Collecting Bamboo Fly Rods
- Fishing Bamboo Fly Rods
- Rod making, restoration, repairs and discussion on those related topics concerning bamboo rods.
- Rod and Reel Makers Forum
- Information About Makers & Manufacturers
- Taper Exchange
- Appraisals & Identification of Bamboo Fly Rods
- Ephemera, empherma and Ephemerella.....
- Book Talk
- Photos, paintings, written stories and talents.
- Classic Reels
- Collecting and Tying Classic Flies
- The Cooks Kitchen
- The Classic Fly Rod Classifieds
- Technical Support
Quick Reply
The Orvis database by Greg Reynolds Finally available again!!
Check out the Paul Young Rod Co. database which is owned and maintained by member Robert Golder (quashnet).
Paul Young Rod Co. database by quashnet
DISCLAIMER:The views, and opinions, posted here are the sole responsibility of the poster. Negative comments, when directed at individuals, or other private concerns, will not be tolerated, posters should treat this media no differently than any other media source, in other words, if you would not submit what you are going to post in the newspaper, or a magazine, and sign your name as the author, kindly refrain from doing so here. The Classic Fly Rod Forum is not an open air forum for vendor/maker complaints. If you seek resolution, it is recommended you talk to the vendor/maker. If you seek an audience, it is recommended you go elsewhere. The admin and the Moderators reserve the right to remove any items deemed inappropriate according to the rules of conduct prominently displayed on each forum. If you have any questions or concerns you are free to email us at
send email to the Classic Fly Rod Forum
Posting to sell Domain names and the like, i.e. SPAM, is against YUKU Policy, if you post these types of posts here you will be banned from this board and YUKU will more than likely ban you from the site entirely. Thank you..........
The Fly Fishing Loop is sponsored by flydepot.com
[ Home Waters | Next | Random | List | Search ]
