BIB Has Spoken... A New Hanging Technique Is Born In 2006!

Exactly what I was wondering. The hanger still has to grip and resist X amount of force however the force is applied. The only real difference I can see is that using pure weight would apply the force along the hanger axis, whereas using the fulcrum offsets the axis of the hanger from the applied forces. This could have some effect.

These arguments are the same as the ones for v-stretches and have the same frailties.

mbuc,

Single cord, right, so the tension after the pivot point must be equal to the tension before the pivot or there would be movement. That tension must be caused entirely by Fw.

All you can do is alter the way the tension is distributed in cross-sections of the penis.

No. The sum of the moments of force around the pivot point must be zero, for equilibrium.

The tension in the penis does not have to equal the tension in the suspension cord.

If the hanger itself is sitting on a hard pivot point then the penis is carrying on past the pivot. Would you agree that the penis is a single cord?

Where do you think the tension in this single cord changes?

It changes where the hanger attaches to the penis. Any part of the penis beyond the hanger is obviously not subject to any force from the applied weight.

I am comparing the force of the applied weight, to the force in the penis between the body and the hanger. These definitely do not have to be the same magnitude.

Who cares? :shrug:

The theory is largely beside the point— it’s not as if you have to concentrate on the principles to get the hanger to stay put (it’s not an exercise in telekinesisO:-) ), you just have to set it up as shown in the diagram. :mona:

Click me for the Diagram :)

This setup has a three-fold effect: it creates a ‘double fulcrum’ and it tugs the penis away from the body at the same time.

The setup doesn’t amplify the weight, it just distributes the force in a more effective way.

Having said that, all the brain-work might lead to an even better technique, so carry on I guess. :)

Mem,

THis is like applying a crowbar to the penis. You’re essentially torquing the hanger down. Without the penis to resist, the hanger would rotate down about the contact point formed where the back of the hanger meets the plastic stop. In equilibrium, force is multiplied to conserve the moments.

It differs from the V-stretch idea because in a V-stretch you’re pulling on the cord (the penis), which turns an angle (over the V) but keeps the same tension.

Here, you’re pulling on part of the hanger (not on the penis directly) and inducing leverage so that a multiplied force is applied to the penis.

Isn’t that impossible? I thought energy couldn’t be created or destroyed?

It just distributes the forces in such a way that the effect is amplified.

The question is whether this is a breakthrough or just an interesting anomaly. I’m not convinced that there’s really a “double fulcrum” effect here. I think the rice sock creates a gradual arc that tends to focus the force on the dorsal surface. The “stop” is where the rubber really meets the road. That’s where the force multiplication comes to play. The rice sock is really just useful to hold the plastic stop in place.

I have accomplished the same effect with my Wenchette. I did this by moving the straps (which attach to the weight) to the dorsal surface of the hanger. As a result, the weight pulls on the very top of the hanger and induces a downward bending moment similar to the one you have here.

Can’t do that with the Bib Hanger ;) .

Force is different from energy. Energy = Force * Distance. Force can be multiplied or divided all you want as long as you conserve energy. Energy is not really a useful concept when analyzing static systems.

First, I’m not so sure the rice sock is a minor player at tall - it give the upper half of the tunica an extra shot, since the valley in the sock keeps the shaft itself from tvisting/slipping to the side as it tends to do (for me atleast) when using mem:s pill bottle stretch. Secoond, I’m not entirely sure I agree about the importance of stopping the hanger from slipping backwards - it goes as far as it can due to the weight, and then the weight keeps it there. It’s not a ratchet system á la a medieval crossbow (now there’s a thought! :) ) On the contrary, I believe the benefit is partly that it allows the hanger to not dig into the sack - when it digs in, that will stop it from slipping forwards as the tissues soften/stretch/give up and rip.

Imagine you had a pulley for ropes, the kind you screw into a ceiling. The pulley wheel itself is tapered for the rope to not slip out (valley). Now take that pulley and mount it upside down on your chair, put shaft in pulley wheel and attach hanger and pull downwards. Since the pulley wheel is on ball bearings, there will be very little to resist a full stretch (= full weight) being transferred to the base of the penis. When you bend a rope around an edge (such as a carabiner), inner folding and bending of the rope will take out some of the force; not all force is transferred to the other end unless you live in a perfect world or use a ballbearing with zero friction (bash me, physicists - this what happens in the real world of rock climbing and rope over carabiners!). I’m not sure that this is entirely transferrable to penises; ropes over carabiners are usually dynamic situations, not static systems. Anyway, back to the pulley wheel - the abscence of inner resistance etc when the penis gets “caught” trying to slide over the fulcrum rice sock allows full force on the base and along the entire shaft. When the hanger slides over the plastic cup, there is nothing (little) to keep it from keep sliding, thus putting the full weight to work.

However, if you look at is as the tilt in the hanger being the main cause of force, then you need something to keep it from slipping backwards.

If I understand mbuc right, the force from the tilt will increase as the angle of tilt is increased - as Bib noted this is achieved by shifting positions or one can simply add weight; if weight is added, the momentum will be increased from hanger towards cup, and the angle of hanger versus cup will change, leading to increased force

My understanding of these things is that from the penis’s point of view, weight or force is irrelevant (as long as we are located on terra firma).

Mbuc and other knowledgeable persons know more about this. Looking forward to read your input.

I’m not too convinced of the double-fulcrum myself — to be honest I was just quoting Bib— I’d kind of taken it for granted that it’d been established that the BibHanger created a fulcrum of it’s own.

((Maybe the second fulcrum is where the penis curves up against the top of the inside of the BibHanger once it’s held level/horizontal by the leverage against the hard surface.))

I still think it’s an effective technique however— basically because there’s at least a two-fold benefit that can be achieved at higher tension in relative comfort.

This is the first time I’ve fulcrum hung so I don’t know too much about the topic or the specific differences from regular fulcrum hanging, but I’m definitely getting a good pull from this setup.

I don’t see the difference. :confused:

I get it— like using pulleys to spread effort (I think)

What do you mean by ‘Torque the hanger down’?

Another way at looking at this would be to imagine the hanger itself be attached to a ballbearing on a rod; imagine the hangers bottom corner (the bottom closest to the base) being attached to a rod that is perpendicular to the shaft. Now fix the rod, insert head in hanger and attach weight - the hanger will want to tilt forwards, and there will be a bend around the bottom half of the hanger where the shaft exits the hanger. However, the rice sock that is slightly higher than the rod will keep the shaft from being totally bent out of shape around that sharp corner - the shaft of the penis is not allowed to fall downwards towards that bend and thus the force is sent along the shaft towards the base.

There’s a lot of that going around.

That was my initial sense, but, if anything, it looks like the Big Hanger would rotate down with this arrangement.

Maybe, maybe not. As Mbuc and I discussed above, force is still force as far as the penis is concerned. If the leverage multiplies the force by 1.5, a 10# weight still feels like 15#.

On thing I would caution about this arrangement is that the force on the penis can vary significantly depending on the angle of the Bib Hanger. Maybe Mbuc could run the numbers to be sure, but I’m pretty certain that the force multiplier changes dramatically with different angles. Since the angle is tricky to maintain with precision (no shifting forward or back in your seat), there’s a possiblity, maybe even a likelihood, that the penis could be severely strained if more than moderate weight is used.

You can’t move the attachment points for the straps on the Bib Hanger. They’re molded into the plastic. You can move them on the Wench(ette), however. Different attachment points focus the weight’s force on different surfaces of the shaft. If the straps of the Wench(ette) are on top, the weight will pull primarily on the dorsal surface of the shaft, creating a “fulcrum” effect.

Exactly. Or like kids on a see-saw. The fat one needs to sit closer to the middle.

I mean pulling it down by the straps so that it tends to rotate down in the configuration you drew.

I’m still not sure whether this is a solution or a problem.