Is there an engineer in the house?

I’m hoping to get some input from someone who is preferably smarter than me, has an engineering background, and possibly some experience in computer-aided design.

Consider the structure of the tunica albuginea of the penis. It is generally considered to classically have 2 layers, the outer layer consisting of collagen and elastin fibers oriented primarily in a longitudinal direction, and an inner layer with fibers oriented primarily in a radial direction. Actually, I think it is a bit more complex than that. There are some individuals in which tissue analysis has revealed three layers, and some with a single layer, presumably with fibers oriented in multiple directions, or perhaps on a bias, like a Chinese finger trap.

Assuming the 2 layer, outer-longitudinal, inner-radial model, and assuming that the layers can be successfully deformed and/or remodeled independently of each other:

Lets say we do something that either physically lengthens the structure of the outer layer, or increases its compliance, or both, but has no effect on the inner layer. It seems to me in this circumstance if the intra-cavernosal pressure at erection remains the same, the erect penis will be longer than before, but probably the same diameter and circumference.

What happens if we do the opposite? If the outer layer remains unchanged in physical stretched length and compliance but the inner radial layer is either more compliant or its fibers have been physically elongated and the erection pressure remains the same, it seems clear that the penis diameter and circumference will be greater. But will the erect penis now be at least fractionally shorter since those same longitudinal fibers are now stretched around a penis of substantially more volume, sort of like the long, thin balloons that shorten as you blow them up?

It seems that someone here might be able to devise a computer model to give some input regarding this question.

This is a pursuit not worth unraveling, it is next to impossible to get gains from this theoretical approach. It requires destructive forces that will do permanent damage. If it were possible or even remotely successful the results would be easily replicated, unfortunately or at least from my understanding there is no evidence of any gains of significance reported.

So you are saying that no one as had any significant gain in either penis length or girth without destroying their penis?

Hmmm, something is going on, my dick is getting bigger.

>>> Chinese finger trap…

I can see that analogy making sense. I have gained over an inch of erect and flaccid penis over three years or so and believe most of that is permanent. Over time, jelqing and stretching change the structure of the penis so that it remains larger. A freshly jelqed dick will be larger than a rested one LOL… but again, over time it will become larger. Maybe as we get older and have sex less and PE less things ultimately will go back to their original size. But during an active sex life, PE provides a larger penis for everyone to enjoy. I’ve gotten years of great pleasure from my PE experience. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, my girlfriend nicknamed me Horsedick and told all her friends. Ten years ago I was just an average guy. Also, as proof to me, there’s a skin line near the bass of my penis where it used to connect to my body. That visible line is about an inch from my body. I believe i pulled my ‘inner penis’ out from PE.

Interesting. I always wondered about the same thing. If accurate, I figure you can kinda estimate the potential for girth versus length by the relative gain in girth versus length going from the flaccid to erect state. Maybe you set up a poll.

My take on what redbear is asking is simply: if there are two structural layers that we are dealing with in the makeup of the shaft, and, if one of these layers is designed for active support and control of the longitudinal (or length) direction while the other layer is designed for support and control of the circumferential (or hoop) direction, can the properties be dealt with separately and/or how do they interact.

I do not think it is quite as simple as that model, and even if it were that simple a model the material characteristics of each layer would have to be understood, which I do not believe they are, along with the interrelation of the layers. But, taking that model, and thinking of it in the most simple terms, then if the two layers were completely independent and the material properties of each layer were not constrained at all in the direction perpendicular to their control direction, as length grew the circumference would not change and if the circumference grew it would not effect the length. This is if the two layers are truely independent and the material properties are imaginary.

Lets look at the layers being interwoven, so not independent, and consider more realistic material properties. For a material there is a variable defined as poisson’s ratio which describes how much the material will change in the wide direction if the long direction is stretched or made longer than it’s resting state. Some materials are equal in their length and width change so if you pull the material an inch longer it will shrink an inch in the width. Some materials you can pull an inch longer and it wont shrink at all in the width, and, there are a few materials that if you pull it an inch longer it will actually grow in the width.

If using the two layer model, consider the two layers interwoven like a piece of fabric, but, the fibers running the length have different properties than the ones running the hoop. Then, there is also another material holding all the fibers together coating or encasing them. Any activity will effect both sets of fibers but primarily the direction targeted. The activity will also have an effect on the surrounding material.

As far as a computer model the actual penis is much more complex than a simple single or double layer tube. A computer model would be fairly simple if that is all it was, if the material properties were understood. The penis is made of several layers and each layer is not homogeneous making the modeling of the material properties all the more difficult, simply because the inter-relationship would be hard to define.

All this being said, I personally believe there is value in considering this while developing your own personal PE program.

Let’s assume:

1. One guy’s flaccid is 4 x 4. His erect state is 7 x 4.5.
2. Another guy’s flaccid is also 4 x 4. His erect state is 5 x 5.5.
3. Another guy’s flaccid is also 4 x 4. His erect state is 6 x 5.

Would this imply any difference in the potential for length versus girth gains regardless of exercise used?

Very interesting comparison.

Person 1
- he has a much stretchable tunica and Buck’s fascia (BF) to accommodate a full 3” erection length (a “grower”)
- his flaccid to erection ratio is 4:7 (1.75 ratio)
- as I have seen from most gainers, flaccid length usually proceeds erection length, and overtime, the gap between the ratio reduces
- indicates that as tunica becomes more “stretched out”, bigger potential to PE gains, but tougher tunica to work with (slower gains at first)
*I think I am in this category. I feel my tunica and BF are very strong, so my approach is slow and progressive. Less intensity but longer time to slowly deform to stretch out tunica. Higher intensity exercises tend to irritate tunica/BF so the result is a toughened and stronger penis (yikes!).

Person 2
- he has a much less flaccid to erection ratio 4:5 (1.25 ratio); a “shower”
- tunica doesn’t stretch out as much as person 1; suspects that the less-toughened tunica may provide “quicker gains” with PE exercises
*People who fall into this category may get “newbie gains” quickly vs the above; and exercises can be more intense (ie. heavier hanging) to achieve faster result since tunica is not as tough as person 1)’s. The overall gain may not be as much as Person 1), theoretically.

I am doing a test on myself with this slow and progressive approach. Based on Wadzilla’s Big Gainer high school friend’s amazing PE gains, the guy started slowly and increased “time” instead of intensity. He never took a break day since his routine was mild. The end result was 3”+. If I remember correctly, Wad said that the guy’s flaccid was really small in high school.

There are just my assumptions anyway. Gotta try different things to figure out what works for me.

I like where this thread is going.

It always amazes me with the same routine and same PE exercise, one can gain both length and girth, while another can only gain length (or neither!). There seems to be many factors in how our penis responds to physical pressure.

If only we can pin-point what exercise will work better for different individuals.

Actually I was suggesting that maybe:

1. one guy may have a very stretchable inner circular tunica layer (5 x 5.5 guy)

2. the other guy may have a very stretchable outer longitudinal tunica layer (7 x 4.5 guy)

The first guy will find girth gains easy to come by. The second guy length gains. Not sure if this makes sense.

oh I see where your comparison comes from.

Penis is a mystery!

This is why I still think jelqing is the best PE that will hit both length and girth.

Each dick is different, that`s why we have to dedicate the first period of our PE career to experimenting with different exercises.

I`m coming up to a year of PE and mix things up regularly to see how my dick reacts.

The first inch is cemented, now I`m looking for the second.

Has anyone tried Cordyceps?