CCS Common Cents System measurements double check -- action angle seems too high

[bottomfeeder]

Hi guys.  Hobbiest rod builder here.  I'm getting deeper and deeper into the game on each build.  I want to characterize some off-the-shelf rods and compare to new blanks.  As long as I'm doing all the measuring I'm all good, but I would like to be able to compare to other folks' measurements as well.  I was getting IP in the 500g to 800g range, which seems OK, but my action angle readings were all quite high -- all within 84 to 89 degrees for a variety of blanks.  I expected it to be lower and with a broader range.

 

My method:

 

Measure total rod length.  Divide by 3 to determine deflection point for used for IP.  For instance old GL3 G Loomis SJR783 is 6'6" = 78".  78/3 = 26".  With the rod horizontal I mark a reference horizontal line on my wall.  26" below this I mark another horizontal line.  Using a paper clip and a paper coffee cup to hold the weight I add weight until the tip of the rod reaches the lower 26" line.  Using an angle finder app on my phone I align one straight edge of my phone with the first few inches of the blank nearest the tip.  The rod tip is ~1" away from the wall at this point.  My phone is flat on the wall behind the blank.  I sight it in the best I can and capture the measurement.  Once I record the angle I carry the weight used to deflect the tip to a scale and measure in grams.  The SJR783 6'6" MH spinning took 575g to deflect to 26" below starting point.  The tip angle when deflected 26" below the starting point was 84 degrees.  Does this make sense? 

 

For my length measurements I used the total length of the rod ignoring grip length differences and reel seat position.  Is this the preferred way?  If I was going to measure a bare blank I would measure the whole thing, right?

 

I'll keep looking online for other reference measurements and descriptions of processes but most of search results return fly rod stuff or ancient threads arguing how it does or does not appropriately assign a power and action to a rod.  I'm interested in making simple and repeatable IP and AA measurements in a way that is compatible with others for comparison purposes.  Thanks for reading! Please let me know what you think.

 

Tight lines, Screamin' drags and full livewells friends! 

[MikeK]

What about the support of the rod?  It should be 10% of the rod length which is 7 13/16" from the butt.

[MickD]

The distance between the butt mounting points should be 10 % of the length of the blank.  As mentioned above.  A minor deviation from this spec has not resulted in significant errors based on my experience, but if you can get it right do it.  It will eliminate a possible question about your process. 

 

For AA have you attached a straight indicator right at the tip of the blank and are you using that as the AA refrerence?  See figure 8 at this link https://www.common-cents.info/part1.pdf

 

Can you provide the model numbers and data from your questionable tests?  Please also provide the subjective description of the action of the  blanks, (slow, moderate, fast, Xfast, etc).

 

If you make any errors on the high side of IP it will also increase the AA, so be sure you are not over-estimating the IP with testing errors.  

 

The process was  designed based on fly rods, but there is no discrepancy introduced by using it on faster action/more powerful rods.  The work done by Hanneman many years ago is all still valid.

 

He added weight to get the natural frequency into a slower range where it could be counted, but if he had had more modern technology, he certainly would have used it.  For example, I have found a way to check the true natural frequency of blanks and rods by using a cell phone/Kindle app and it is very accurate.  It allows one to see what adding components (guides/wraps/tiptops) does to natural frequency, which most believe is a good indicator of sensitivity.

[bottomfeeder]

Thanks for the replies guys.  I guess I missed the 10% offset for the handle.  I took a few minutes after work today and measured a rod built on a rodgeeks B470MF blank. It's a 7' fast-tip st-croix medium blank.

 

I'm re-reading some of the docs now and I think I identified something I'm doing wrong.  I'm leveling the rod by aligning the mid and tip sections on my horizontal "0" line.  The below link suggests leveling it nearest the handle and ignoring "tip droop".  It's possible I'm tilting it up in a way that requires more mass to reach the 1/3 critical displacement point.  

https://www.common-cents.info/CCS_basic_Layout_1.pdf 

 

I want to try again tomorrow but I'll share my results anyway for anyone interested.  I have the mudhole CRB blank mount tool on my wall ( https://mudhole.com/products/crb-deflection-tool ). As best I could I made the front support 10% from the butt end --> 84 * 0.1 = 8.4" ~ 8 & 3/8"

 

84" / 3 = 28"

Mass needed to displace tip to 28" = 530g

Angle with tip displaced 28" = 83 degrees

 

 

I'm not using the tiny rod taped to the tip section to help determine the angle.  I'm doing it visually on the first 3 or 4 inches of the rod.  My method has already gotten me into the 84-85 degree range on rods I would describe as moderate.  Extending a tangent line from the very tip would give the steepest angle so I think that is not the issue.  I think it's a setup or initial measurement issue.  Using the "Angle Level" app is tricky and annoying for now but it's accurate enough I think.

 

Below are rods I have available to compare. If you know of accurate CCS data on these please let me know so I can use it to dial in my setup:

 

Loomis GL3 SJR783 6'6" MH F

Loomis GL3 SJR782 6'6" M F

Falcon Cara Reaction heavy cover jig (would really like to clone this blank) 7'4" H 1/2-1 oz

Falcon Cara Mansfield 7' M 1/4 - 5/8oz

Falcon Cara Finesse Jig 6'10" MH+ F

Falcon LowRider Carolina Lizard Dragger II 7' H 

Falcon Bucoo Trapcaster 1/4 -3/4 MH (good casting... wish it was available with better components)

RodGeeks B470MF 7' M

RodGeeks B470MHF 7' MH

Liberty Flipping FP764 

Rainshadow RX6 844 popping blank

St Croix mojo "topwater" rod 6'8" or 6'9", 'medium' XF

 

Thanks Again

[MickD]

Unless you use the extension when you get your other discrepancy fixed you will still have an issue.  Why not do it right and eliminate the issue?  With your logic, when you get the current issue fixed you will have a slight error on the low side.  I use a digital level meter placed against the extension and find it very repeatable.  I have one Rainshadow blank that I say has about 4 degrees higher AA than they publish.  In the past I have correlated well with Rainshadow and Point Blank factory data.

 

Not sure if the rod blank below is same as yours, I think it is.  It came out very similar to St CroixSCV70MF exc just a little more power.

 

RodgeeksC47MF#1MetGrnPearl  AA 75 ERN 18.6

blank

84

spin

6-14

1/4-5/8

Med/Fast

211

75degrees

18.6

ERN

527

I would expect your RS 844 popping blank to have an AA of close to 65 degrees based on other RS popping blanks I've checked.  I don't have that one.

[bottomfeeder]

Thanks for the reply and the data.  I'll try the tip extension angle indicator soon. I have the chart printed out. I'm just trying to prioritize my troubleshooting.  I'm not advocating for sloppy work and saying it's OK to ignore the recommended method.  The whole point for me is to get my process aligned with others --  so thanks for your input!

 

 

[MickD]

I think the chart thing has about + - 2 degrees of accuracy, but I think putting an electronic level closely parallel to the indicator extension even touching it so lightly that it doesn't move,  is probably under 1 degree.  I always had trouble with the chart, holding it level behind the object then trying to read which line most closely matched the extension, and interpolating.  

 

Exact leveling of the blank is not a significant issue, in my opinion.  But it's best to get it as right as possible.  You mentioned tip droop.  Except for fly rods and possibly long salmon rods, droop is not significant.  But the process specifically calls for doing the deflection measurement from the theoretical extension point from the butt, not from the drooped tip.  The reason is that the rod has to carry its own weight, so droop figures into the power.  If you base your measurement on the drooped tip you will get a lower power rating and a lower AA.  At least that's how I see it.

 

One thing you can do also is to ask the manufacturers for specific model data.  While they don't publish it because we builders just hassle them about correlation, they do have it and most will share their numbers on specific blanks of theirs.  Of course if you get it, you DON'T want to imply that a correlation difference is their problem.  I trust their data most of the time.  Just one example of a significant difference.

[bottomfeeder]

Mystery solved.  The app I was using is off by about 20 degrees in the range I'm trying to measure.  I compared it with a speed square and protractor tonight.  I should have checked it sooner.  technology...

 

Shoutout to the guys from Batson that were nice enough to provide a reference measurement for a rainshadow popping blank I had. Thanks to everyone who commented. 

[MickD]

Popping blank AA about 65?