Gaining volume with Kyrpa

As I previously mentioned these strain percentages need to be modulated in to penile environment.
Tendon and ligament stretching studies in vitro present these items as fully elastic material with linearly behaving elasticity by their behavior. But taking these curves on living creature they start to show nonlinear behavior.

When it comes to stretching living penis it is a whole different scenario again.
Things we know and have been discussing lately about elastic materials behaving in linear fashion do not apply here. Tutt has beautifully described the nature of the linearly behaving elastic material, but it is not the nature we are seeing when stretching these penises.
Penis is an organ made of biological tissues and it is alive. Layered and composed out of components having different kind of elastic characteristics. As combination it presents nonlinear elastic behavior during strain.
Stress Strain curve of the penis shares same kind of characteristics as do, arterial tissues or soft tissue or aortic tissues like mitral valve for example.

Because of the nonlinear behavior, even though elastic region is very large, the biological tissues when stretched do not obey Hooke’s law over most of the region.

Attached as a picture Stress Strain Mitral Valve, is a typical stress strain curve of the soft tissue, presenting here the nature of mitral valve Here is the link for the source :
http://www.butc herlab.com/site … nd%20repair.pdf

The initial slope which with penis is almost linear is supposed to present fully elastic behavior. The transition area around the knee point is the area where more collagen is recruited and aligned with the direction of the force. The stiff slope portion presents the fully recruited and aligned collagen stretched.

Next caption is explaining characteristics of aortic tissue and the transition area where the initial slope( which seems to be very linear with penis), turns for the steep slope presenting tissues getting stiffer at multiple rate. Stiff slope should present plastic zone and somewhere further along the slope damages start to occur.
“The knee point is an indication of when the collagen fibers are being recruited to help bear the loading, and so the stress-strain curve transitions from the initial slope to the stiff slope [15, 19]. As the collagen fibers are straightened out and become aligned, there is an increase in stiffness. The stiff region is a result of all the collagen fibers having been recruited and being aligned/pulled upon [21, 42].”
Changes in the Mechanical and Biochemical Properties of Aortic Tissue due to Cold Storage Ming-Jay Chow, M.S.,* and Yanhang Zhang, Ph.D.*, †,1 *Department of Mechanical Engineering; and †Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts Submitted for publication December 23, 2009

Now getting back to penises the picture is clear as there have already been demonstrated by “early adopters” plotting stress strain curves. I suppose never caught the attention as it should have.
This link shows a load strain curve of the penis. Here we can already see the effect of heat on strain rate and the transition of the knee point as a result of the heat cycle.
stress strain0003.jpg
Rightly so a fellow PE practitioner have here tuned the presentation as it should be seen. Axis swapped.
Stress_Strain.JPG
The whole thread seen here if someone is interested. They just touched the surface but they were on it.
Penile stress/strain relationship

Intrestingly there are aspects that make me think that if someone behind the knowledge of extenders have had a thought on the transition around 1 kg and the location of the knee point or transition area in general. With the stress relaxation enough and with creep under low load I suppose the transitional area could be reached if only briefly.
There are only few studies available but the indications presented above have been confirmed .

Here is the study which took a good look on stress strain reactions of artificial inflation of corpora cavernosa from the ninebanded armadillo.
These creatures share the similar two layer TA which we have as well. The true stress strain curve of the TA ,measured from the actual lengthening of the penis due the artificial inflation presents unsurprisingly identical curve we can plot if measuring ourselves.

Here it is perfectly presented as we can all confirm if we do some testing on our own.

Link to this study. It have been presented also here at TP´s already.
[PDF] Expansion of the tunica albuginea during penile inflation in the nine-banded armadillo (Dasypus novemcinctus). | Semantic Scholar

I have done my own testing as well and the results of three day cycle with the exercise involved are presented in picture 1 attached below.
With the heat cycle in use the knee point which is dependent of the strain, is located at the 2,5% of strain.
Depending of the effectiveness of the heat / stretch cycle it then fluctuates in some degree .

Test produced to finding the knee point more precisely with some data points is shown in the picture 2.
Within the heat cycle the loads are incrementally increased by 10 minute intervals.
So far the linearity of the elastic slope has been found.

Problem is to find the precise location of the knee point and the of the transitional area.
More test should be produced, though it is not easy as the millimetrical elongation on transition area is rather minute.

The steep linear stiff slope starting where the transition area ends, is the targeted zone I am reaching with my concept. By stress relaxation and the heat cycle the knee point and the stiff slope of the stress strain curve have been extended further enough for having the environment for permanent elongation.

As we are not dealing with linearly behaving materials, should we prefer not use the terms either?
The proportionality limit does not exist and elastic limit is below the transitional area. Yield point I imagine is nearly impossible to determine? Taking in consideration the really high tensile strength of the TA, we don´t need to be anywhere near the yield point I suppose.

This is turning into an epic thread full of useful information.

The only thing that could improve it and make it more widely appreciated would be if every now and then you could sum up your findings in laymans terms, an idiots guide for us simple folks :)

Well just started with Tutt, but after we have reached consensus at some point and have made some experiments as well it could be a good idea to summarize it all.

I’ve been considering this discussion relative to what I try to ascertain in terms of effort, when is it during the effort, that we enter into the “environment for permanent elongation”. And beyond that how do we work that to best get the tissues to yield. Thinking in evidence based terms, is why I’ve thought a lot about the tug back response, because intuitively the correlation between the triggering of the response, subsequently working though it and observing the accommodation of the tissues, appears to be in the neighborhood of where all this happens, at least for my process.

Furthermore there seems to be the a correlation to the experience of “riding the fatigue”, but correlation does not mean causation. It gets even more complicated as there are other factors that need to be managed simultaneously unrelated to the treatment, such as management of the glans condition.

There is a lot to unpack.

And it’s not as if we don’t get there anyway, but seeing how messy it is, can’t help but think there’s a good bit of time wasted. But maybe not, yet given that it takes so much time, it would be nice to reduce that if possible. The other thing is the intellectual curiosity, the complexity of this process is fascinating.

Enough said, back to work…

Well it has gone scientific. At least deep in some extend. It have gave me some extra motivation to start hammering.

Purchased luggage scale for used as a tensiometer for pulling forces.
Also went take additional measurements for plotting the load strain curves.
And I went to additional BPFSL measurements from the retroglandular sulcus as a more accurate reference point. Now the overall strain percentage is calculated as an average from tip of the glans and retroglandular sulcus .

Attached you can see the three day curves mentioned at previous post which I forgot to attach earlier.
Also the whole workout as an attachment.

Day 1 Cycle1

50 minutes in vac stretch with 2kg SO.

Followed with a US heated 20 min stretches left and right with a workload of 3,6 kg.
Manual stretching routine for a 10 minutes. Usual 30 second pulls as hard as the grip allows. Half of the time manual fulcrum variations.
This is the most non scientific part of my routine as the load fluctuates anywhere between 8- 12kg. And with fulcrums who knows how much.
I did an experiment though pulling 50 times against my newly purchased tensionmeter and get out with ~9 kg average.

Keeping it simple and controlled.

Measured pre BPFSL 22.7cm and post BPFSL 23.4 cm. Strain of 3.2%.

Day 2 Cycle 1

Exact copy of the day 1. Loads differing slightly
Measured pre BPFSL 22.8cm and post BPFSL 23.5cm. Strain of 3.2%.

Day 3 Cycle 1

Exact copy of the day 1. Loads differing slightly
Measured pre BPFSL 22.9cm and post BPFSL 23.6cm. Strain of 3.2%.

Knowing that you are running your operation with extender, the problem with those things are the signals which they give to the penis nervous system operating at the load range precisely of the strength level of the healthy Ischiocavernosus muscles.

Sometimes such a low stretching forces should trigger arousal and accelerating blood flow in the penis.
There it is when starts Ischiocavernosus muscles contract by reflex which is their job. These muscles controlling erection partly through autonomous nervous system are working against your aspirations.

Partially the tug back respond be could traced on muscles working slightly against extender and is felt by muscular contraction until the muscles are recovered. Taking to account you are using this extender everyday basis twice a day I wouldn´t be surprised if they happens to be slightly tense sometimes?

There is that much to unpack that the intellectual curiosity takes over sometimes.

Kyrpa,

I almost completely agree with the studies you linked. We are all talking about the same load strain curve, but referencing different points along it. That’s why my earlier posts were referencing a precise definition of the toe region. In the studies you linked, the toe region starts at the TA expansion from flaccid NON-STRETCHED length. A description of those studies in terms that are used on this site would be the following;

Starting Point — Bone Pressed Flaccid non-Stretched Length; rested with no load
Toe region — Linear (horizontal) portion of load-strain curve associated with stress below the maximum erection induced stress.
End of Toe Region — Bone Pressed Erect Length after long rest period (The length of the TA with normal erection induced loads having un-crimped the fibers. Admittedly, typical BPEL as used here may be affected by the Poisson effect, so I am actually describing just the condition of the TA collagen structure)
Transition Region — Non-linear strain initially produced by stress in excess of that produced by normal erection.
End of Transition Region — BPFSL after rest
Linear Region — TA fibers are actually stretching in this range. The three dimensional structure has compressed. This range is relying fully on the elastic properties of the fibers themselves rather than the straightening/flattening of a 3-dimensional structure; the ability of molecules to shift past one another.

The mitral valve study you linked fully acknowledges the linear region seen in other tendon and ligament studies. If the studies linked had tested the strain further along the curve they would’ve realized a proportionality limit that is evident in other studies as well. But the studies you linked stopped before that point, and the mitral valve study was actually computer modeled instead of physically strained. The armadillo study unfortunately has several weaknesses. The method they used was an artificial erection by injecting fluids. Once the penis reached normal erection capacity, any additional fluid injection simply displaced an equivalent amount of existing fluid. So there was no way for that study to progress past the transition region. As soon as more pressure was introduced, there was a natural pressure release. They also have too few data points to accurately determine linearity. They used a binomial curve fit from a couple data points to demonstrate non-linearity. That is not an acceptable practice and doesn’t hold up to peer scrutiny. Their non-linearity is also fully within the margin of error on their measurement technique. Because the vast majority of studies from arterial walls, mitral valves, tendons, and ligaments all claim the existence of the linear region, makes the armadillo study highly suspect.

You are completely correct that the penis behaves somewhat differently as a living structure. That is, non-living structures exhibit only passive response to stress. Living structures exhibit passive and active response; they have the ability to begin an inflammation and repair response immediately. Also, there has to be no doubt that as the TA lengthens, other surrounding tissues begin to activate and contribute at least some resistance.

As I look at all the studies as well as the data posted by you and other members, I become increasingly convinced of my previous assertions. Your protocol moves you through the toe and non-linear transition region. If you were to continue increasing in load without stress relaxation or cyclical stretch, you would start to progress up the linear portion as the loads got heavier, but the load would be increasing at such a drastic rate that you would suffer injury before realizing dramatic short term extension. Because you utilize a cyclical stress relaxation protocol over a 30 day period, a few things can happen. First, with each strain cycle, the toe region extends and the transition region becomes easier to progress through. The protocol has the effect of shifting and pivoting the linear region and making increased strains possible without increased load. IMO, this is only possible because you’ve exceeded the proportionality limit so each successive stress is able to achieve increased strain at static load. Apparently at a cumulative strain of about 6%, the elastic limit is fully reached and going further would begin to damage the underlying structure.

Just for clarity when I say tug back I am referring to is on a subsequent session(next day) the inability to sustain a previous tension for the full duration and not for some time. I wonder if maybe it’s just inflammation that is triggered by a session at a particular point in the progression, which causes resistance to stretching of the 3 dimensional structure.

Hearkening back to university days. An excerpt from “Biomechanics of Musculoskeletal Injury”.

“In a generalized stress-strain curve for biological tissues, there are a few important features to the curve that correspond to changes in the structure of the tissue in response to increasing stresses. When the tissue is initially loaded, the gradual increase in stress in the tissue will be represented as the toe region of the curve. With increasing stress, the stress-strain curve will then have a linear region which represents the region where the tissue functions under normal, physiologic stresses. Once the proportional limit is reached, however, the tissue response becomes nonlinear. The elastic limit represents the maximum stress that is possible in the tissue in order for it to return to its original shape once the load is removed. As the stress is increased to the yield point, the material starts to rapidly deform until the point of maximum stress is reached at its ultimate stress. The rupture point will occur at a stress level below the ultimate stress due to the time taken for all the tissue to undergo complete failure.”

The attached pic accompanies the text. Each tissue type has different load requirements, but they all follow this pattern, especially collagenous tissues with a structural function like the TA. Again, deformation within the linear region is considered to be within the physiological capacity of the tissue. Stress that takes the tissue beyond its physiogical capacity and results in a residual weakening or deformation is by definition past the proportionality limit.

The most valuable thing in this thread is Kyrpa’s willingness and desire to produce practical data points. That will be key in building out a layman’s protocol. Unfortunately, because of the effectiveness of the methods discussed here, I don’t think he has enough runway left to continue the search for optimal protocol indefinitely.

I have no doubt that with 50-75 volunteers we’d be able to nail down the exact mechanisms for growth as well as the optimal devices and procedures that would take the guesswork out of PE. Much like the state of bodybuilding or weight loss now. People can quibble over the nuances, but we all pretty much know how to get the desired result, it’s just a matter of committing to it. But despite having the educational background and technical experience, I don’t think any of us are looking to monetize this. So the proper clinical research is unlikely.

Tutt,

You have come a long way from your initial input already.
We have ditched going for the flow region.
We have also indications that the proportionally limit of the penis is so high on the curve that the loads should be many fold the level we are using now. Maybe several tens of kilos at least being heated or not.

Don´t get fixed on the studies I showed as they are on purposes of introducing the model I am preferring.

You simply can´t separate the toe region from elastic slope with penis.
It is all toe region up to the transitional region where the penile tissue while stretched drastically stiffens.
With heat this point of elasticity is moved further but the sudden stiffening of the tissue is inevitable.

You can´t change the curve like it or not. It is the reality. Penis while stretched behaves like soft tissues.

Curves I have plotted from my own dick are presented the way you wanted.
Baseline is found with the 0,6kg extending for 10 minutes. And I can find that the results are the same as I just grab the glans as hard as hell and take a the initial measure. I can´t find any other toe region than the one I described above.

We simply can´t use the model you have been introducing from the day one. Which is this one:

And it is pointless to continue without confirming which is the case of the true nature of the behavior of the stretched penis.

Unless following your model and the toe region is up to 2.5-2.8 % and the elastic linear region of the penis starts at such high percentages felt and measured really stiff already.

You would know the plastic region then being that high on the curve that only few of them craziest hangers have ever reached it if at all. If that would be the case it would wreck everything you and me have been promoting.

If we have just have touched the start of the elastic region, I am the first to admit being very wrong all the time.

The stress strain curve up to 9kg is what it is ,and I am not willing to go further.

Therefor I am relaying on soft tissue model as it in my point of view would explain partly why some are able to gain with very low loads and others high heavy duty hanging. It would be because all of them operate on same region, minimum the transitional region all along the stiff slope .

Otherwise it would be pointless for me continue this discussion much further, I would prefer to grow some dick instead and move along.

Now that you seem to have access on knowledge, could you put your efforts on helping to understand, what is the range I should operate on the stiff slope after transitional region? Being able to stick with with the model is crucial. Can you take this stand?

So we are now at the point shown in the attached pic?

That would be a problem for both of us .

Sounds contrasting to me . That would mean the toe region being up to 2,8% and still reaching proportionally limit at 3,2%.
In the relation of the tensile strenght of the TA I find it rather odd.

Another take on this. Yes the protocol is shifting the pivot of the transitional region forward seen as immediate effect with heat and also as cumulative strain on 30 days,

So does this pivoting around certain fixed load , pivot moving forward on strain axis, mean also several other things as well. If the proportional limit is coming down on needed loads, would mean that the elastic limit, yield point as well are coming down in the scale. This would mean with the protocol there would be real risks involved if increasing loads drastically.

What I’m trying to do, Kyrpa, is reconcile your empirical data with everything that I’ve known about structural tissues exhibiting viscoelastic behavior. The standard load-strain curve excludes viscoelasticity, because it cannot be modeled with a single function. But my contension here is that your emperical results are made possible by viscoelasticity, which cannot be adequately represented on a 2D chart. That’s why I keep bringing in the proportionality limit, because it allows your emperical data to align with generally accepted theory.

I’m gonna give it additional thought because there is another possibility as well.