String Shooter

[Merlin]

Thanks Gordy

I sent you some data from Maxime so that you can challenge the calculation of moments he made in his paper (note: sometimes my mails to you are rejected) .

The fact that the string shooter works with skin friction is unfortunately not directly transferable to a fly line. The yarn aerodynamic characterisitcs (Cx) might well be out of usual scope. The situation which would approach the shooter is an untetherd cast with a rotating loop, rod leg having backward speed by comparison to the fly leg.

It remains difficult to demonstrate why the line seems to stay aloft during the rollover (I know, tension etc.), with or without a lifting effect. This is what I am after. I think Noel and Caroline jumped a little bit too quickly to conclusions, even if their statement seems to fulfill common sense. We see things, but we interpret things, and the proof is nowhere.

Merlin

[gordonjudd]

The situation which would approach the shooter is an untetherd cast with a rotating loop, rod leg having backward speed by comparison to the fly leg.

Merlin,
I think looking at the fly loop in a moving frame where the tangential velocity of the line is constant is a better analogy.

You would still have to include an incoming wind in the moving frame so that form drag would also be included on the drag calculation however as there is no form drag in the string shooter.
Gordy

[gordonjudd]

You would still have to include an incoming wind in the moving frame so that form drag would also be included on the drag calculation however as there is no form drag in the string shooter.

Merlin,
With that in mind an even better analogy might be a cast with pull back such that the velocity on the fly leg is matched by the negative pull back velocity in the rod leg. In that case the propagation velocity of the loop is zero and thus has no form drag force.

Gordy