LOT question

MM,

What units did you use for tugback strength, or is this a unit-less measurement? I plugged in my measurements and jiggered tugback strength around until it showed the correct amount of retraction (turned out to be a TBS of 31) and the simulator gave me my correct LOT value. This is a cool program. Nice work!

Everything is in millimeters, except tugging angle, which is in hours. That said, 31 corresponds to a 3.1 cm tugback, which is enormous. I did a poll here once and typical numbers were 5-7mm. Remember, the idea with the simulation is to enter your tugback strength and then click on the “Kegel” button. When you do this, the inner penis retracts by the specified tugback strength, but everything else stays the same. Then you can click the same button (now labeled “Relax”) to restore the inner penis to its original length.

You’ll notice that LOT is computed automatically from the entered parameters; however, you can also swing through different tugging angles (the roller on your mouse works for this, as well as for any of the other “select” boxes), clicking “Kegel” and “Relax” every couple of hours to observe the actual changes in glans location as you Kegel at different angles.

Okay, in real life, when I pull my penis to moderate tension at 9:00 and pull back with the IC muscles, I get 0.25” (6.4 mm) retraction of the glans relative to my pubic bone.

On the simulator during pull-back, there is a label at the glans that says Retraction X.X mm. In order to get that number close to 6.4 mm given my measurements (High ligs, 25mm lig length, 125mm inner length, 213mm outer length) I have to enter 31 into the Tugback Strength field.

Is this not correct?

Pria,

The issue appears to be that you’ve made your inner penis length (125 mm) very long in relation to your ligs. It’s so big that there is no tension on it unless you kegel (hit the Kegel button). You can tell whether there’s tension by the weight of the line: a heavy line indicates that the structure is under tension and a light line indicates that it is not.

The reason you need such a large tugback strength is that you’ve oversized your inner penis so much that there’s considerable slack in the system. Reduce the inner penis length so that you have tension (at least at high angles) and give it another try.

I doubt the dimensions you’ve entered accurately represent your anatomy; the inner penis is so big that it would tend to buckle during an erection. It’s probably more accurate to set it to a value that keeps it under tension when tugging at your normal erection angle. This is consistent with an erection that is not pinned back by your suspensory ligament.

Lol, okay, I see how you’ve done it. Thanks!

Really, though, my pelvis is big and my inner penis, as measured from crura to lig, is about five inches. I’m a freak - go figure :D

ModestoMan,

How do you determine what number to put in the Tugback Strength field, and what is the relationship between the Tugback Strength field number and the number given as Retraction?

Thanks!
Pri

“Tugback Strength” (TS) is really a misnomer. It would more accurately be called “Tugback Length.” This is the amount that your inner penis shortens when you kegel. You can measure this as the maximum distance your glans pulls back at any angle, with your penis pulled out with the force you normally use to do the LOT test.

TS differs from “Retraction.” TS is how much the inner penis shortens when you do a kegel, whereas Retraction is how much the glans moves as a consequence of the inner penis’ shortening. From the system point of view, TS is an input and Retraction is an output.

Got it. I should have measured my tugback strength with my penis in the 12:00 position, instead of the 9:00 position, to eliminate the effects of the suspensory ligs. Duh.

So, with that in mind, I plugged numbers into the simulator to achieve a 6.5mm retraction at 9:00, which required a tugback strength of 10mm. I’ll measure the actual length tonight. I also noticed that these modifications dropped my LOT by about 20 minutes to 7:20, which seems reasonable since I have good tugback at 8:00 and no tugback at 7:00

Thanks for your help. That is a cool program and I’m looking forward to the modifications.

Cheers!
Pri

I think it’s best to measure tugback strength/length at about 10 o’clock. That angle maintains the penis in very close to a straight line all the way back to the ischium. It’s neither wrapping up around the pubic symphysis nor bending down under tension from the suspensory ligament.

I measured my tugback strength at high angles and found that ~11:00 is the strongest. At that angle, I got a tugback length of 14mm. At 10:00, I felt my triangular ligament giving some resistance and measured less tugback length, about 12mm. Given that my tugback lengths change so rapidly (6.5mm at 9:00) and the general appearance of my attachment, I am pretty confident that I have high, tight ligaments and a steeply angled pubic bone.

I checked the ‘harp strings’, and found that the fundiform ligament runs about 50mm from pubis to penis, while the leading edge of the triangular is only about 25mm. Also, the triangular ligament attaches approximately 30mm below the top of the pubic bone. Obviously, I was palpating through the skin, so allowances for dermis and subQ fat and connective tissue must be made.

With such a high, tight lig attachment, I am surprised that I have such a low LOT. I figure that my tugback length is long enough to compensate for the tight ligs, even at lower angles.

I modified one of my previous diagrams to show some of what I was talking about yesterday, and to add a few important elements.

Pri,

Could you add the dimensions you mention above to your drawing? I’m having some trouble following exactly what you’re measuring.

:)

Thanks, Pri.

The new version of the simulator will let you adjust each of these except the fundiform lig. I haven’t bothered adding that, and, frankly, all these bends and kinks in the penis are getting hard to manage. I need a new algorithm but have had no time to think about it.

Your train of thought seems reasonable. I have the benefit of an MRI (which you can find here by searching) that shows the exact angle of my pubic symphysis—no guesswork needed.

Neither Bib nor I had really much considered the angle of the pubic symphysis in the LOT equation. The new version of the simulator allows you to adjust PS angle, as well as shape. I’m curious about what varying the angle will reveal about LOT changes versus lig length and other factors.

NP, ModestoMan. Thanks for your input.

I think that the pubic symphysis/ischiopubic rami compound angles and their effects on, and the length of, the inner penis maybe prove to be important.

On another topic, I was thinking about what you (or Bib?) has said about peeling the ligs back, and conjectured that lig pops may be the outward evidence of this peeling. My thought is that high, tight ligs attached to a steep-angle pubic bone are subject to stress along a greater arc than are low, loose ligs attached to a shallow-angle pubic bone. If you look back at my drawings, you will see that in the first case, the triangular lig (importantly, not the fundiform lig, though) will suffer peeling stress from about 10:00 all the way down to BTC. In the second case, the triangular lig will not suffer peeling stress until about 6:00 or 7:00, at which point the fundiform lig is beginning to take some, or most, of the load at the outer anchor point. My point is that the first case presents ample opportunity for abrupt peeling of the triangular lig, which may manifest as lig pops, while the second case presents fewer opportunities for abrupt peeling.

I got on this train of thought because I had a lig pop yesterday, and it occurred to me that it happened while manually pulling at about an 8:30 angle, and that all of the lig pops that I’ve ever had have happened between 9:30 and 8:00. These are angles at which the fundiform lig is out of the equation and all stress is being applied to the triangular lig.

The fundiform lig is kind of a wildcard in the whole process of mapping stress response, since its effects are different from those of the triangular ligament and it has so much mobility.