Especially if one is determined to make it as complex as possible.
"Don't let perfect be the enemy of good." Perhaps we only really need "good enough" to explain the concept of swing weight, eh?
Cheers,
Graeme
Moderator: Torsten
Especially if one is determined to make it as complex as possible.
I've computed charts with the parallel axis theorem and above assumptions:Walter wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2024 5:16 pm Torsten,
If I keep the same simplifying assumptions:
1) 9 foot rod with a swing weight of 70
2) the rod does not bend during the casting stroke
3) the line is straight and remains horizontal throughout the stroke
4) rotation about the butt
Then yes, the results would be the same.
Yes it isWhen looking at the moi of the rod alone is it acceptable/sufficient to assume a smooth taper from butt to tip?
You can consider it solid if you adapt the density and Young modulus of the material to compare with an actual rod (mass, stiffness).Is is okay to assume the rod is solid or do we need to consider it as a thin walled conic frustum?
I would chose the butt otherwise you have to consider the MOI of forearm, arm, etc.For the axis of rotation is the butt tip acceptable or would it be best to assume rotation about elbow (wrist and shoulder not rotating) or shoulder (wrist and elbow not rotating). If not the butt then what offset angle from point of rotation to butt tip?
Even if it is wrong I think you can take this assumtion to get an estimate of MOI variation for the rod.Is a semicircular bend form of the rod acceptable for small tip displacement? What about for larger displacements?
I would forget it for the time being.Do we need to include moi of the reel? Especially when rotating about elbow or shoulder.