![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
rb608 wrote:
On Nov 10, 1:35 pm, " wrote: Whether the mathematical model is entirely accurate, I am no longer sure. I will have to check it again. I believe the magnitude of the air resistance to be relatively inconsequential to the casting mechanics (though on a windy day, it's effect is undeniable afterward), so with your permission, I'll leave it out for simplicity. That makes your equation to be: Frt = Fi * Fa * Flt It's my contention, however, the the force terms should be grouped, and that the unbalanced force causing the line acceleration is actually (Frt - Flt). This allows your model to fit into the F=ma equation as: (Frt - Flt) = Fi * Fa I don't think that's a great deal different than you were describing it verbally; but it *is* a great deal more accurate as a physics equation. The units issue I mentioned is manifest in this series of equations from your post: 30g * 1m/sē * 0.3 = Flt / 0.01kgm/sē 30g * 1msē = 0,03kgm/sē * 0,3 = 0.09 kgm/sē Note that between the first and second equations, you simply discarded the kg.m/sē units in the demoninator, using only the same units that go with the Flt force in the numerator. Had you retained those units as you should have, the numerator and denominator units would cancel and you'd have ended up with no units at all on the right side, but g.m/sē on the left. Indeed, I think you are correct. Seems I made another mistake copying this stuff over, and I am still having trouble with the mathematical model. I will have to check the originals and see if I made the same mistake there. otherwise somebody would have picked up on it. Or maybe they just read the theory and ignored the faulty equations? (Frt - Flt) = Fi * Fa = (0,01kgm/sē - Flt) = 0,03kg * 1m/sē I am going to try and graph it with the data I have. Thanks a lot for that, it seems to be correct, and agrees with some other actual data I have. I am still not entirely sure it is correct, but it seems to make sense. My apologies for being somewhat short with you, I am rather inured to some things by now, and they colour bo9th my judgement and my reactions. TL MC |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Hauling, Rod-loading. | [email protected] | Fly Fishing | 103 | November 14th, 2008 04:00 PM |
Hauling, Rod-loading. | rb608 | Fly Fishing | 7 | November 12th, 2008 08:47 AM |
Hauling, Rod-loading. | rb608 | Fly Fishing | 1 | November 10th, 2008 10:55 PM |
Hauling on the foward cast? | [email protected] | Fly Fishing | 16 | September 20th, 2007 11:40 PM |
Loading new line | Mike Keown | General Discussion | 10 | October 27th, 2003 12:35 PM |