Controlling Counterflex

[Paul Arden]

Hi guys,

does anyone think that they can control Counterflex after the rod has started to unload? If so then by what techniques? Thrust?

Thanks, Paul

[Graeme H]

I seem to have nailed controlling it on my back cast but I'm still trying to get the timing right on the front cast. Close, but not quite. That is, assuming I have the right terminology. Maybe I'm only controlling rebound after counter-flex?

I'm doing it by rotating my wrist towards the cast at the point of maximum counter-flex so the tip stays in place while the rest of the rod catches up to its position. I still can't make that happen properly on the front cast every time.

(The video here is with a 'glass rod: it shows what I'm referring to pretty well.)

Cheers,
Graeme

[easterncaster]

Graeme, sweet casting !

[Paul Arden]

There's not only counterflex (huge) but also significant after waves, Graeme? Minimising counterflex would be removing the initial kick down of the tip. After this it's about rod build, design and damping. I think it would be possible to design a glass rod that damps well but it would require a thick butt section.

The only way I can think of removing CF - I'm discussing the video posted in the rod deflection thread - would be to thrust I think. This would be attempting to slow to a stop using air friction to remove the spring energy in the rod. It might be possible to damp some of it away but I question this.

Cheers, Paul

[Paul Arden]

The only way I can currently be sure that I reduce CF is to reduce rod bend during the casting stroke. It's possible that a late haul can do it too. Maybe one for the TA guys? I've always thought CF to have a direct relationship to the bend occurring at MCL and that One techique of minimising its effect is to stop closer to the vertical so that CF more aligns to loop direction.

It would be great to see adjustments of CF with a fixed length roll cast to see if it's possible.

Cheers, Paul

[Graeme H]

So, Paul, the question is not about controlling CF, but preventing CF?

(An analogy is that a rally driver can drive quickly on dirt roads by controlling their skidding around corners. They don't prevent the skid but control it.)

Cheers,
Graeme

(Thanks Craig.)

[Walter]

I seem to have nailed controlling it on my back cast but I'm still trying to get the timing right on the front cast. Close, but not quite. That is, assuming I have the right terminology. Maybe I'm only controlling rebound after counter-flex?

I'm doing it by rotating my wrist towards the cast at the point of maximum counter-flex so the tip stays in place while the rest of the rod catches up to its position. I still can't make that happen properly on the front cast every time.

(The video here is with a 'glass rod: it shows what I'm referring to pretty well.)

Cheers,
Graeme

I think you are controlling (almost eliminating actually) rebound rather than counterflex. I agree with Eastern Caster btw - sweet casting.

I'm not sure we want to eliminate CF as Paul is alluding to because, no matter how much we argue about it, we are recovering potential energy as the rod straightens. Finding a way to critically dampen the rod would result in losing some of that potential energy. I guess the question should be, "What is the ideal amount of counterflex?"

The only way I can think of to eliminate CF would be to cast with a rod that has no F, i.e. a broomstick as Merlin refers to it, in the first place. This still wouldn't completely eliminate waves in the rod leg unless we could force the rod to stop rotating at exactly the point of line launch and since the rod has mass (or moi if you prefer) it would take an infinite amount of force/torque to get it to go from max rotation speed to dead stop instantaneously. I know Paul has strong wrists but...

[Paul Arden]

I was watching this video here...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRqF2Ez67tw[/youtube]

"All the energy goes to the line" later in the video. My thinking is that if there is no CF then you've had to slow the tip to get there, i.e. max tip speed is not RSP but before this and you create some sort of energy sink to remove energy from the rod so that there is no CF (or tip speed at RSP). There is CF in this video of course, the question is can you control it apart from be altering the amount of energy put into the cast in the first place? Pull-back creates significantly more CF of course but that's another subject.

My current thinking is that I can't. Maybe the haul does it to some extent, perhaps Thrust. I know that the angle of the rod at RSP has an effect - I do control this particularly with shooting heads. But apart from that I don't believe it - but would love to learn!

The question I raise, to give an example, is if I throw a 130ft cast, can I some how modify my CF so that this cast travels further? And if so, how?

Cheers, Paul

[Lasse Karlsson]

Two things, first it see s to be show in a low frame rate, would like ti see the same cast with 120fps or more to really see how much counterflex there is. And secondly Hans casts with a 7 foot rod and its tilmed tomandshånd the camera. Higher frame rate, vertical cast rod and a 9 foot rod would be a nice starting point for analyse.

Cheers
Lasse

[crunch]

Reducing blank/guides weight should decease the counterflex almost directly. Only fly line weight and rod and line air drag would bend weightless rod.

Esa