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!

Hauling vs. None hauling

Moderator: Torsten

Post Reply
User avatar
Bernd Ziesche
Posts: 3436
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 10:01 pm
Answers: 0
Location: Whereever the fish are!
Contact:

Hauling vs. None hauling

#1

Post by Bernd Ziesche »

Hi everyone,
when comparing a hauled with a none hauled cast, I think most fly casters would tell the hauled cast to be more efficient.
There are of course different effects having an impact on efficiency for both casts.
One effect/difference I yet haven't read anything about, that I have thought about for a while, I'd like to discuss.
When I pull my line into the first guide, (almost) at the same time my line moves 1 to 1 into the tip ring. That is momentum in the wrong direction for the line below the tip. This momentum has to be overcome by the line outside the tip, when I stop pulling line in and let go. So in terms of efficiency I have for example 10m line mass outside the tip moving in launch direction to then overcome the moving for example 5m line mass below the tip to line hand.
For a DT line I think this would be quite a large loss since the line outside the tip is tapered down... For a shooting head combined with a thin RL this would be much less of an effect.
In terms of efficiency this made me think about the perfect hauling length.
In my teaching though I always have been teaching:
Short line (outside tip) = no haul
Medium line = short haul
Long line = long haul
It probably would be more accurate to say low line mass instead of short line, since a short but heavy head can well be hauled.
Have there ever been made any calculations on the rates of momentum outside vs below (inside) the tip in relation to line tapers and line length?
Oh, btw. would you haul a static roll cast? :ninja: :p :???:
Cheers
Bernd
http://www.first-cast.de
The first cast is always the best cast.
User avatar
Merlin
Posts: 2111
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 8:12 pm
Answers: 0
Location: France

Re: Hauling vs. None hauling

#2

Post by Merlin »

Ok Bernd, let’s specify the comparison basics:

• The line length out of guides is given at start (e.g. 10 m), the line length down to the hand line is something like 3.5 m at start and we pull some line within 300 ms (haul duration). Haul length is then define by max haul speed and I take 5 m/s here, just for the same reason that you tune the length of the haul to the length of the cast.

• We aim at same line speed at launch time with and without a haul, the haul itself being optimized. That imposes two different casting arcs, the longer one for the non hauled cast.

• Although there is some difference we accept not to consider the consequences of loop size at this stage (pretty difficult to consider, needing more assumptions).

• We consider the total amount of energy produced by rod hand and line hand and compare it to energy in the fly leg at launch time, one line being necessarily shorter than the other because of the haul.

Would that be OK for you?

Thanks

Merlin
Fly rods are like women, they won't play if they're maltreated
Charles Ritz, A Flyfisher's Life
User avatar
Bernd Ziesche
Posts: 3436
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 10:01 pm
Answers: 0
Location: Whereever the fish are!
Contact:

Re: Hauling vs. None hauling

#3

Post by Bernd Ziesche »

Thanks Merlin.
Sounds plausible.
Just the arc can, but doesn't have to be smaller for the hauled cast. I can also increase force application within the same arc for the none hauled cast to hit the same final speed.
Personally I do both mostly, reducing the arc slightly and reducing force application via rod hand when hauling.
Besides me... just as as a side note....
Most casters in reality will not shorten the arc when hauling, but increase overall line speed, which results in an extra line speed not being necessary. Many students are impressed how much less line speed still brings their fly smoothly to the same target. Too often I hear the haul to be for increasing (overall) line speed, by instructors, too (as I again saw in the other thread about max rod bend).
Regards
B
http://www.first-cast.de
The first cast is always the best cast.
User avatar
Merlin
Posts: 2111
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 8:12 pm
Answers: 0
Location: France

Re: Hauling vs. None hauling

#4

Post by Merlin »

Thanks Bernd, that helps me and I shall define a few scenarios along your descriptions.
Maybe I shall consider a different carry at start in order to have the same line length for the launch, with or without a haul.

Merlin
Fly rods are like women, they won't play if they're maltreated
Charles Ritz, A Flyfisher's Life
User avatar
Merlin
Posts: 2111
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 8:12 pm
Answers: 0
Location: France

Re: Hauling vs. None hauling

#5

Post by Merlin »

Bernd

Here is a table with a first set of runs. In terms of energy efficiency, there is little difference, the main one comes from the maximum torque which has to be used by the caster. It is much smaller in case of haul (e.g. 20% less).
Haul table.JPG
Merlin
Fly rods are like women, they won't play if they're maltreated
Charles Ritz, A Flyfisher's Life
User avatar
Bernd Ziesche
Posts: 3436
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 10:01 pm
Answers: 0
Location: Whereever the fish are!
Contact:

Re: Hauling vs. None hauling

#6

Post by Bernd Ziesche »

Thanks Merlin,
too late today to get this into my head. Will come back to your findings asap. ;)
Good night for now. :ninja:
B
http://www.first-cast.de
The first cast is always the best cast.
Post Reply

Return to “Flycasting Physics”