Strain ellipse mechanics adjacent to clamps

sparkyx had proposed the idea that deformation of tissue adjacent to clamps is where girth gains come from in aristocane’s clamping thread. The idea made sense to me from the standpoint of strain ellipses which I tried to explain:

I followed that up with an attempt to describe how strain ellipses work with an example:

Turned out that not much understanding was conveyed. Figured a few sketches would help. So I drew up a few. The main aspect of sparky’s hypothesis that strain ellipses explain very well is deformation of clamp adjacent tissue in both radial and longitudinal directions. Because, in this clamping scenario, long axes (tension vectors) of strain ellipses are oriented in both the radial (girth growing) and longitudinal (length growing) directions, deformation and therefore growth, in both girth and length would be expected if strain ellipse mechanics is operant. Aristo says he’s gained both from his multiple clamping training. Proof that strain ellipse mechanics are operant adjacent to clamps? Nah. Supporting evidence for it? I’d say so. Anyhoo, here’s the sketches, I hope they help guys make sense of my earlier posts.

I belive the third pitcure is inacurate, he places the clamps right next to eachother. There would still be 2 at the begining and end thought. Thanks for the sketches it makes visualizing your explanation alot easier.

Xeno, maybe you should patent a ribbed clamp with say 10 or so ribs, each rib 3/4” or so apart?

Maybe so mbuc. Definitely worth considering. Although based on experimentation, this idea works really well too:

Just clamp every other clamp. The name isn’t exactly confidence inspiring…any suggestions for something a bit more positive?

Xeno,

I understand where you are coming from and agree with your theory.

Please take a look at this and tell me what you think the mechanics of it is.

Andrew-

It’s actually a hypothesis, and it’s not mine, it’s sparky’s, but I’m glad you understand my interpretation of the operant mechanics of it. I’ve always thought that base ballooning was a neat idea. I’ve not done much in the way of girth exercises…high erection level jelqing and clamping, a little pumping…but never tried BBing. However, once my current decon break is over, I’ll start my first girth gains campaign and there’s a good likelihood that I’ll try some BBing. With respect to the mechanics operant in BBing, I’ll have to think about it some, but my first thought is that ballooning is an apt description. If I can come up with anything more meaningful I’ll post it in your BB thread and if I try BBing, I’ll post my thoughts there also. Thanks for your comment.

This multiple clamping thing has always scared the shit out of me.

With no anectodal or other evidence to back this up, it seems to me that the more overlapping you have in these “strain ellipses” to acheive “maximum strain”, the much easier it would be to really fuck yourself up permanently. Particularly if you do anything else penis related while you are clamped, such as any side-side up-down tugging on the shaft, or manually “pulse squeezing” the area with your fingers, or any other supplemental activities that are often associated with single clamping.

Hopefully no one gets hurt!

I agree Size. As BG correctly, IMO, pointed out in the God thread, the unknown is scary. My little effort here with strain ellipse modelling represents a small step towards peeling away some of our ignorance about clamping. If things progress as they normally do in science, another small step will be taken based on this one, probably by someone else. And so on and so on, etc. And we’ll become less and less ignorant. And less and less scared. I think the next logical step would be to put real numbers into the model…dimensions, modulus of elasticity of the tunica and more importantly, if it is known, time rate of deformation of the tunica (Poisson ratio as a function of time) and see what magnitude of deformation is indicated at what magnitude of normal force (degree of clamping) at what duration of time to reach the yield condition, i.e. plastic deformation.

As always, guys should keep safety and caution at the forefront of their minds when engaging in PE exercises.

Please, don’t anyone hurt themselves with multiple clamp clamping, I’ll be super pissed. I don’t want to be pissed.

Xenolith,

I like your idea of gluing a couple of clamps together. But based on your knowledge, where does the danger of clamping come in?

1. Clamping with 1 clamp very tightly yields X pressure.
2. Clamping moderately with 2 clamps and very high erection level yields same X pressure.

Basically is the danger in the pressure of the overall penis or the pressure from the clamp or both?

Is one safer than the other? If #2 is safer you could glue 6 clamps together and close 3 at a time (every other) and alternate. The actual clamp down could be less pressure, but yields the same pressure in the penis (with a high erection level.)

all-

I think that the most likely danger from any type of clamping is tunica rupture. If I’m right about this, emphasis on if, 2 clamps and the overlapping strain ellipses that they, according to my interpretation of sparky’s hypothesis, generate between them, would have the potential for production of higher strain than would a single clamp. As you’ve indicated, this could be moderated by applying less normal force, i.e. less clamping force. There may, however, be other, potentially more likely and/or more severe dangers associated with multiple clamp clamping. I don’t know. Your description of the 6 clamps glued together alternatingly clamped alternatingly demonstrates that you understand the design and usage concept of the CCCC.

We’ve observed for some time that for whatever reason girth gains sometimes occur at or near the constricting device - Uli things in particular, but even in some cases of heavily ridged/toothed hangers or stretchers. A “tenderizing” effect was/is postulated as a reason for this.

Maybe you’ve pinned down the explanation behind the effect, or at least a component. Very interesting

Yes, the “tenderizing” effect is what Bigger told me was the cause of base girth growth, which I’ve seen a lot of, having hung a lot with a BIB located at the base of my unit. His explanation never really made sense to me, but I may have misunderstood him, as the BIB is ribbed, hmmm. In any case, I never gave it much thought. Until sparky proposed his hypothesis of clamp-adjacent growth, which I understood to be different than Bigger’s concept and made more sense. Some more thought about it produced the strain ellipse mechanics interpretation.

When I get around to it I’m going to try to find info on Poisson ratio of the tunica as a function of load and time. Probably wont find it, but whatever I can find, I’ll try to work with computationally to arrive at predicted geometries for optimal loading conditions for getting the tunica into the plastic deformation field (I’m going to assume that plastic deformation of the tunica is operant in girth growth for this exercise).

If anyone wants to help me by searching for tunica deformation data, I’d sure appreciate it.

Thanks for your comments hobby.

Xeno,

I was just reading the Hanging Fatigue thread in the hangers forum and it reminded me of the hanging I used to do with a fulcrum and then it struck me that a penis hung over a fulcrum would also be subjected to a strain ellipse.

This explains to me why I could hang at a much lower weight using a fulcrum and gain faster than a hanging with a higher weight minus the fulcrum.

Interesting Andrew. Did you notice any girth gains in the vicinity of the fulcrum?

Xenolith. Have you taken the Myers Briggs personality test? (Ask Twatteaser)

Ok, I will cast my vote with you and sparky that the restraining force applied to the shaft creates a significant tensile force within the tissues immediately surrounding the clamp. It stands to reason that one side might have a slightly higher tensile force than the other (but I won’t speculate at this point).

However, I am skeptical that a series of clamps applied at the same time will accomplish the same effect over the whole length of the shaft. The additional clamps may effect the strength of the erection and prove to defeat the effort. I would suggest multiple sessions, moving the clamps to new locations each time. What do you think?