PLEASE NOTE: In order to post on the Board you need to have registered. To register please email paul@sexyloops.com including your real name and username. Registration takes less than 24hrs, unless Paul is fishing deep in the jungle!

Analysing loop propagation

Moderator: Torsten

Michael Rebholz
Posts: 66
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2019 8:24 am

Re: Analysing loop propagation

#101

Post by Michael Rebholz » Sat Oct 03, 2020 6:33 am

Hi Paul,
I just use the word cast
Open, tight and tailing cast

And I use the expression line picture

You an hear casts a little because a cast is always a mix outta the three types of waves.

Transverse pulse
torsional
And soundwaves

If we now learn to combine the Transverse and the torsional ones in tackle design and casting, we will cast further and faster as we make more use of the available potential that is only accessible with thinking casts in waves.

TL
Michael

John Waters
Posts: 958
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:16 pm

Re: Analysing loop propagation

#102

Post by John Waters » Sat Oct 03, 2020 7:04 am

So if the loop is not a wave you will still hear a sound wave?

If so, any reference to to sound is spurious.

I am still confused about the rod tip wiggle and its purpose. Such a movement will always set up a sine wave in the line, will it not? If so, what import has that to the claim the shape of the line caused by a cast is a wave.

John

User avatar
Merlin
Posts: 1506
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 8:12 pm
Location: France

Re: Analysing loop propagation

#103

Post by Merlin » Sat Oct 03, 2020 7:21 am

Hi Mike

You have seen gymnast playing with a ribbon attached to a stick I think, they make nice wobbles and then they suddenly change for circles: would you say those circles are like wobbles transversal waves since they just follow the wobbles?

Wobbles are continuous motions so when you say that you change the frequency to come to a loop you forget that you change the input: it is no more continuous, you have split the motion in two, and the rod is “stopped” in between, there is no continuity anymore. Think about the gymnast. You just moved from one input to another. You know that the line will always follow the tip so you can produce mends, wobbles, and circles, etc. and end up with a normal cast. That does not prove that all line shapes you produced between the beginning and the end are transversal waves.

I hardly see an application on rod design here; wobbling is the enemy of the rod designer.

Merlin
Fly rods are like women, they won't play if they're maltreated
Charles Ritz, A Flyfisher's Life

User avatar
Paul Arden
Site Admin
Posts: 14241
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 11:20 am
Answers: 1
Location: Belum Rainforest
Contact:

Re: Analysing loop propagation

#104

Post by Paul Arden » Sat Oct 03, 2020 7:33 am

Hi Michael,

The term “cast” already has several uses in fishing, in one case it is the throwing action to propel a line or lure, and in another is refers to the leader. And now you also wish to refer the semi circular unrolling line as a “cast”?

Why do you think it will be better to change from a word that has been in service for many decades that has no other conflict in fly fishing to another term that’s already in service (several times)?

When we created the Sexyloops Fly Casting Definitions (see link below) some 12 or so years ago, we came up with an issue with (Overall) Stroke Length and (Casting) Stroke Length that is contained within. Both Bill Gammel and I wanted to have terms that were less similar in name and we spent about a week trying to find one that made sense and didn’t cause a conflict elsewhere. I proposed calling the acceleration package (the part of the stroke with the intent to accelerate the line to form a loop) the “cast”. I argued this case however Magnus, Mark and others all said - and I believe quite rightly now - that this would only sow confusion since the term was already in the uses that I first mentioned above.

For example we can currently say, “we cast the fly by forming a loop”. If you change loop to cast, you would say “we cast the fly by forming a cast”. Furthermore we have very many types of casts in existence - the steeple cast, the curve cast, the back and forward cast. These don’t refer to the shape of the line unrolling through the air, rather the total package being delivered.
cast1
/kɑːst/

Angling

verb
throw the hooked and baited end of (a fishing line) out into the water.

noun
FISHING
a throw of a fishing line.
"I swung the rod out for a cast"
BRITISH
the leader of a fishing line.
Cheers, Paul
It's an exploration; bring a flyrod.

Flycasting Definitions

Michael Rebholz
Posts: 66
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2019 8:24 am

Re: Analysing loop propagation

#105

Post by Michael Rebholz » Sat Oct 03, 2020 10:05 am

@merlin
It still is a controlled vibration in the rod that is created with every cast or even wobble. The line follows the tip. And gravity too.
Why can't your gymnast make a cast like we can?

@paul
The definitions u have there suit perfect. I have no problem with them they are consistent with our cast.
Hence if u look up definitions of loop they wouldn't.
Loops cannot unroll by definition. They have to reoccur. Hence the path of the rod tip is makibg the only correct loop as in its definition.

Why do I think this is important?
Because I see too many people struggling with their casting for too long and I set myself

Dirk le Roux
Posts: 482
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:09 pm
Location: Pretoria, South Africa

Re: Analysing loop propagation

#106

Post by Dirk le Roux » Sat Oct 03, 2020 10:13 am

Michael Rebholz wrote:
Fri Oct 02, 2020 8:58 pm
hi Folks,
i am delighted to see this discussion here....
A fresh view. I enjoyed that, thanks Michael!

John Waters
Posts: 958
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:16 pm

Re: Analysing loop propagation

#107

Post by John Waters » Sat Oct 03, 2020 10:21 am

The gymnast can make a casting action but again, how does that make the resulting shape a wave?

John

Michael Rebholz
Posts: 66
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2019 8:24 am

Re: Analysing loop propagation

#108

Post by Michael Rebholz » Sat Oct 03, 2020 10:39 am

@paul
It is important for a while bunch of reasons:
1 If you produce sound, u produce the wrong type of wave,( or at least unnessecary ones) if u can hear things u are wasting energy out of your cast. The Soundwaves leave the cast in form of energy that doesn't contribute to it.
2 beginners often produce a lot of sound and it's well known that that shouldn't be, but the understand g in waves makes this far better understandable, clear and physically explainable.
What does the concept of the loop do for you and other casters? Where does it come from?
In my opinion it doesn't do much at all but set a lot of people under pressure to throw the tightest possible loop at all times which is nonsense and also not necessary in a lot of angling situations.

Why do the torque twist torx thingies work like rockets when u get them right? What your explanation for this?

Seeing the waves plays in all of these aspects and it takes a while to get used to this. It is far too consistent to ignore it. Especially in front of a background that the casting loop is bare of any historical sout é and definitions.

Don't get me wrong here, the work u and others were doing here with all these definitions is outstanding.
Nevertheless it was called a loop already long before you started that great work...

So this has happened long before. I m looking for this source for nearly 2 years now. I wrote emails to several casting organisations and also the museums. No-one knows about it. It's not there. No one knows about it or has ever asked for it. It's called a loop, yes why is it called a loop? Where does it come from? Where is its legitimate first ever mentioned definition?
No scientific work would ever pass without reference to sources. Another reason why the loop fails drastically in this context.

I attach u here the oldest source of a loop: and it says different. It also agrees with what is say in my superbubble model. The path of the rod tip makes the loop and is the loop.
Superbubble is the first 3 D Modell in flycasting and looks at casts like swivel cones in 3D. The flatter the cone the better, still its all happening in 3D and not in 2D
Because that's another thing the loop has a problem with: it's only two dimensional like a lot of other casting analogies we use like the clock face or casting planes for example.

Cheers and TL
Michael

Michael Rebholz
Posts: 66
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2019 8:24 am

Re: Analysing loop propagation

#109

Post by Michael Rebholz » Sat Oct 03, 2020 10:45 am

Sry I can't figure out how to attach pictures in here
TL
Michael

John Waters
Posts: 958
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:16 pm

Re: Analysing loop propagation

#110

Post by John Waters » Sat Oct 03, 2020 10:50 am

In addition to my above unanswered questions, your comment about producing a sound equating to wrong waves and wasting energy makes no sense to me. I'm just an average caster but if your statement is correct why do the best casters in the world produce sound on each of their delivery casts in distance? In fact the opposite is true. The corollary is also relevant because when the sound is absent, the cast is shorter than when the sound is produced. Why is that the case?

I may be absolutely misunderstanding your position Micheal, but I would appreciate an explanation as to why I am wrong.

John

Post Reply

Return to “Flycasting Physics”