{"id":437,"date":"2023-12-18T22:13:12","date_gmt":"2023-12-18T22:13:12","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.paddlingscience.net\/?page_id=437"},"modified":"2024-02-04T22:09:32","modified_gmt":"2024-02-04T22:09:32","slug":"putting-theory-into-practice","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"http:\/\/www.paddlingscience.net\/?page_id=437","title":{"rendered":"Putting Theory into Practice"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>It\u2019s good fun \u2018winding\u2019 the numbers up in the comparison tool to find larger improvements, but the paddles still need to be useable!<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Having seen the improved &#8216;values&#8217; by increasing the paddle crank (rake), it was found when testing that the tip angle needed to be reduced (from it&#8217;s newly increased angle), to allow the paddle to enter the water satisfactorily at the catch.&nbsp; Interestingly the tip angle we settled on (of around minus 11 degrees) is similar to some \u2018pre-wing\u2019 wooden flatwater blades.  (Typically wing blades are nearer minus 20-22 degrees).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>While Increasing the crank angle improves efficiency, it also increases the &#8216;out of balance forces&#8217; of the paddle.  The paddle shaft connects onto the back of a Physic blade to reduce these &#8216;out of balance forces&#8217; to a little lower than typical wing paddles.  (To eliminate them completely you would need to add an Ivan Lawler &#8216;Featherweight&#8217; to the paddle shaft).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>There&#8217;s no arguing with the science, bigger blades are more efficient.  But while blades the size of dustbin lids would in themselves be more efficient, there are a number of reasons why this might not be a good idea, (their unwieldiness and dire impact on the paddlers cadence for starters!)  Hence only small increases in blade size (perhaps around 10%) might be considered practical, which would be combined with a slightly shorter shaft to avoid the &#8216;load&#8217; experienced by the paddler changing.  (The paddler still needs to be able to operate at the cadence which works best for them).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>It\u2019s good fun \u2018winding\u2019 the numbers up in the comparison tool to find larger improvements, but the paddles still need to be useable! Having seen the improved &#8216;values&#8217; by increasing the paddle crank (rake), it was found when testing that the tip angle needed to be reduced (from it&#8217;s newly increased angle), to allow the&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":126,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"full-width-page.php","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-437","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.paddlingscience.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/437","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.paddlingscience.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.paddlingscience.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.paddlingscience.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.paddlingscience.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=437"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"http:\/\/www.paddlingscience.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/437\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":474,"href":"http:\/\/www.paddlingscience.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/437\/revisions\/474"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.paddlingscience.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/126"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.paddlingscience.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=437"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}