Measuring the whole picture - Volume

I am going to add another column to my personal training speadsheet so that I can track volume.

I think huff’s idea of using the displacement method is a much more practical way to get a relaible volumetric measurement. I am skeptical that typical length and girth measurements, as they are taken with cloth tape, rigid rulers, and kite string (etc.) can be used to find accurate volumes even with applied calculus. The formula is sound, but the methodology has a weakness. Your result still relies too much on a steady hand, keen eye, and consitent benchmark.

Water displacement can solve this with relative ease. I am working to come up with a methodology that will be easily reproducible by any of our members so we can have a new (and reliable) number to add to our signatures.

Design Program:
1) Accurate measurement of erect (bone pressed) volume based on water displacement
2) Use materials that are readily available to most (all?) members
3) Easy setup, measurement, and disassembly with consideration for time, money, and storage

Any thoughts?

Good luck. This was kicked around in the early days of Thunder’s. Would be decent if you could fugure it out.

Goonbaby, volume measurement was one of my first questions when I joined the forum, and no one replied, so there seems to be a need to address this.

I would be interested in seeing your spreadsheet if you are willing to share it.

My approach to volume is:

1. Fill a tall glass or jar with water to the rim; tip it into a measuring jug and measure the amount it holds, and record that figure.

2. Put the glass on the floor in a tray to catch overflow. Again fill it to the rim. Straddle it (with erect penis) and lower your member into it up to the pubic bone. I do this like doing a pressup at the gym.

3. Measure the amount left in the glass and find the difference between the two measurements. This is penile volume.

I don’t think it would be accurate to measure the overflow, because some water may adhere to the catchment vessel.

Best wishes

Thanks so very much for your time & effort there remek!!! I found this all very interesting & informative. I just found this thread & took the time to fill out the survey& I guess I should be pleased with a volume of 20.39? Again, much obliged, Oli

I still tend to think that surface area may be a better measure of size than volume, as was discussed here.

Any thoughts?

Perhaps an empty pumping cylinder would be appropriate for measuring Bone-Pressed Erect Volume Displacement (BPEVD). Anything with a large mouth and no exit point for the fluid aside from around the rim would certainly make bone pressing an interesting problem. The way the fat pad and skin bunch up under that arrangement may still be problematic.

If that problem could be reliably addressed, it would still require a fairly granular measuring device. A graduated cylinder could be good enough, but I doubt most of us have one of those at home and a standard measuring cup wouldn’t suffice. If one has a postal scale or some other accurate scale, you could weigh the difference, then calculate the volume displaced by using the density of water: 0.9982 g/cm3 or 62.28 lb/ft3 @ 20 degrees C or 68 degrees F.

I’d tend to agree with Thunder that this isn’t exactly feasible for most of us and the perfect cylinder estimation is a close enough approximation to understand the effect.

The cylinder might not be the problem as much as erection consistency. Even if you perfect the means of measurement you can not guarantee the erection will be 100% every time you attempt a measurement.

I have not forgotten this, but I have become frustrated with it. Volume is vexing.

Edit: The best I can come up with thus far involves vacuum pumping with a water-filled cylinder. More later…

Can’t we use de frustum formula 1/3pie(r^2+rR+R^2)h

Where r and rR are the 2 girth from base and end

Pie is 22/7

R^2 means r square

H is the length

Can’t we use de frustum formula 1/3pie(r^2+rR+R^2)h

Where r and R are the 2 girth from base and end

Pie is 22/7

R^2 means r square

H is the length

I don’t know what you ae talking about. Why don’t you answer your own question? Can you? Please explain.

HAHAHA - this is priceless.

First, I do appreciate the concept of volume as a measuring method. When I first input my stats years ago into the database, it was amazing to see the volume calculations as I increased in size. It really, to me, is a great way of conceptualizing the increase.

However….

The desire, or let’s be more blunt - need (and I’ll skip the adjectives here that I could use) - to be so minutely accurate in determining actual volume (as opposed to estimated or rough volume) is insane. This is honestly the type of stuff women look at in men and want to barf. ‘Get a grip and focus on me’, they would tell you. And with good reason.

Hey, seriously - I can see cc’ing a combustion chamber, ok? That has serious value. But c’mon…

Yes, my opinion, it is.

Somewhere, in some thread, someone once provided a formula for determining volume that more accurately captured the true shape of a dick. The dick, of course, is not a cylinder. Anyone know where that or any other formulas that might capture the true shape better? The current formula would exaggerate changes in volume in terms of not only beginning and end volumes, but more importantly, the % change in volume.

Ps — what puneet is talking about is a formula that captures the variation in girth lengthwise. That mould be somewhat useful too. What I had in mind would be something that captures the true shape of cross section better — the area is clearly less than that of a perfect circle (which is what is used in the simple cylindrical formula here) with circumference = the girth measurements we take.

I like this article a lot, haven’t commented it before so here goes.
There’s one thing I disagree with, and that is when gaining girth. When you gain, it might not be throughout the whole stick, maybe only the base girth - and sinking upwards. Therefor, its very hard to calculate the total volume. But when you gain an inch in length, its always an inch extra. Maybe I am totally off about this but that is how I look at it.

I however agree with all your other speculations, like the ‘whole package’ visually thing and of course that girth gains more often increases your total volume more than length (except if you’re like 5 inches in length and 10 in girth already xD).

I would say 8x6 is important.

Hi Guys, this is my first post on the forum, even though I have done ADS for almost 3 years before starting to jelq. But I have an idea to measure volume of the penis, a method I have used in the past to copy the volume and form of a person’s body for making costumes.

Materials needed: plastic food wrap, scotch tape.

Method: 1. Have a piece of plastic wrap large enough to cover your erect penis if you place your glans in the center of the wrap. This is important to avoid leaks.

2. Cover your erect penis with the plastic, wrapping so there are no air bubbles between your dick and the wrap.

3. Start taping with small pieces the plastic wrap, pressing the tape so it follows the contours of the penis body. Continue taping until the entire penis is covered. Add additional layers of tape to stiffen the shell.

4. Once the shell is stiff enough to hold it’s own shape, allow your penis to soften and remove it from the shell. You should now have a saran wrap and tape mould of your hard-on.

5. Carefully pour water into the mould, supporting it so it doesn’t distort. Once full, pour the water into a liquid measuring cup (large enough to contain all the water without overflowing *duh!* ). The volume of the water inside the mould is the volume of your erect penis.

I used this method to find the volume of a person’s head; the tape holds well enough on it’s own like a delicate sculpture.

I hope this is useful.