Gaining volume with Kyrpa

That is the exact wild card to my postulates. You’ve hit the nail right on the head. Is fibril sliding THE driver of permanent elongation? Is it just one of many or is it perhaps the primary driver of a multivariate function? While it is very possible that most or all permanence comes from sliding, I’m very skeptical. This would imply that the best method would be to tug hard and fast on the penis, which would provide the greatest amount of sliding. Guys have been doing that on these forums for decades with poor results. The baseline assumption, supported by literature, is that the body has a rapid mechanism to prevent further sliding. This manifests as more cross linking and increased fibril density.

I think that sufficiently high heat makes sliding achievable at lower stress. But I think that it is more optimal to achieve permanence through deformation of the fibrils themselves and widening of gaps.

With that type of setup, what is your view when it comes to approaching the cool-down phase? Do you think it is better to:

1) stay with the weight that was used while applying heat

2) incrementally add a bit of weight while cooling down (with another sand clock type mechanism for example)

3) detach the hanger, attach the extender, and fix the position using same force that I ended hanging with (using either springs or weight scale for force measurement)

This is something that I’m currently thinking about, because with the setup I have, if I want to fix my penis during cooldown I need to detach the hanger, which puts off the stretching force from the tissues for a while. At the same time, it is known that the force needed to keep the tissues at the same length during cooldown changes in a cyclic fashion, but the forces exceeds those which are used to stretch under heat.

That is why I’m wondering which approach would be more beneficial, and if time used for attaching the extender is counterproductive in any significant way.

Body movement has always been a concern to me, and I see that on the scale with my current setup while sitting down. Perhaps a scale inside a traction device world better for this, but I have thought many times to eventually move my setup into a bed/lay down position in order to minimize involuntary movement as much a possible.

The sand clock style can still be made suitable for stress relaxation. Sand can come down a rubber tube in which a clamp can be installed to stop the flow at any point in time as part of a relaxation protocol.

Generally I would go for the additional load method. It really isn’t that much extra load. I favor a slow “warm down” in which the heat isn’t removed outright, but rather the energy reduced to slowly bring the heat down. This would be done while adding about 25% additional load.

The body movement issue is why I built mine to anchor off the pubic bone. I can move around with only minor load feedback to the scale.

This still describes a creep protocol. The key characteristics of stress relaxation is that the load decreases as the tissue relaxes. Anything that leaves the load constant would be creep.

To be clear, I don’t think creep is awful provided that the strain rate was slow through the entire treatment. I do think that stress relaxation is better though. In fact, my opinion is that it is precisely the stress relaxation characteristics that have allowed Kyrpa to use a faster strain rate and still achieve outstanding results.

I believe what is happening based on the literature is that the initial heated fast strain is debonding the stiff matrix and there is some fibril sliding. (My opinion is that it is likely that this is the mechanism that triggers the body to stiffen and densify the tissue over time.) Then during stress relaxation, I believe the tropocollagen molecules begin to glide past each other and the cross-links between triple helices stretch (not to be confused with stiff matrix debonding and fibril sliding), gap regions within the fibrils widen, and overall fibril-level deformation occurs, which is not the case with a single quick strain-release method (e.g. manuals like jelquing and such). Creep methods are sort of a hybrid. My hypothesis is that this mechanism can provide permanence with a substantially more muted residual stress buildup, significantly mitigating the tissue level stiffening and densifying response.

We can forget everything the Guys have been doing. Taking into consideration them never showing any strain data there is not much to speculate.

Now what we are seeing, as the main study you are referencing shows, the overall strain is a summary of all of the strain models( mode1, mode2 ,mode3 )
All of them happening simultaneously at different scales. We can´t predict to have total strain we are experiencing from the mode1- mode 2 strain model.
We are already beyond the realms of tropocollagen molecule extensions, as we are out of the boundaries of periodicity changes.

What the study suggests is that the strain rate dependency is implicated by the relative relations between the models.
The slow strain rate application involves less of the latter model engagement but does not exclude fibrillar sliding at the total strain numbers we are reading.

As far as I understand there is a threshold strain that induces permanent change possibility. The strain large enough the involvement of fibril sliding is necessary.
I would like to discuss this further as at this point I have not seen anything denying that.

I consider this as a start of a hopefully fruitful discussion. Not expecting it to be the much-wanted breakthrough though.

I do consider the method me personally using to be a slow strain rate application.
The conditioning stretch managed without heating can produce 2% / 30min of absolute elongation using the tugging method for measuring.
That equals a 0,001 %/ s.
Continuing with heating from there on the additional strain rate can be 1.5% / 20 min, equaling 0,00125/ s

As we can detect the full toe region and the heel region on the stress-strain curve, this alone suggests this being a slow strain rate application.
I would suggest the high-velocity stretch users are never experiencing any of the strain numbers we are seeing as the loads needed for high strain rates were to be out of reach.

I agree that simply by virtue of the fact that we can see a toe/heel region, we are down in the “slow” rate category. I don’t think that is true of almost any of the traditional PE here though. I think tradition PE (jelqs, manual stretches, etc) are all above 1%/s rate.

You have wisely discovered a very slow conditioning stretch, and then a modest rate strain with heat and stress relaxation. IMO, all those things are just getting closer and closer to the optimal, which is very slow heated cyclic strain, no single moment within the protocol exceeding 0.001%/s rate.

I agree that being the direction of development.

The concept so far has been a iteration of the things found in literature and with testing.
As we stand , there is a confirmation from the followers that we are already thereabouts.

About the loading, just recently I found further backing from literature about the loading being very close to optimal. The proportional range of stress strain curve of the tunica albuginea starting at 0.15 - 0.17MPa.
Estimating the load bearing cross sectional area of the tunica at the thinnest part as closely we can we are ending up on the category of 2.5- 3.2 kg loads.
Already showed in few plotted curves, not just mine.
This is the sweetspot, I suggest any load below this threshold to be considered as a low load application.

I will get into details soon enough.

I’m just now approaching 2.5kg after 6 full months of PE. On a 30 day decon and planning to drop back to ~2kg when I return in August. Am I approaching the correct path considering that I use a heating pad not US? I’m trying to avoid building a dick that can pull a train.

I have 5-6 weeks of weekly strain data and 30 days of daily strain data. How do I share it?

Great.

Since you have the progress log well sorted out, you can put the data available there in excel format and link here if you wish.

You are doing correct moves and seeing you gaining with the current methods at the moment, you don´t need to upgrade your heating method.
You should reserve the upgrades for the times it gets harder to achieve such strain percentages.

Done. Had to rename from xlsx to xls to upload. You may need to rename back to .xlsx
5.5Squared - 5.5Squared Log

The camera setup has been capturing thermometer readings every 5 to 10 second with still pics.

Then I went through the pics and typed the readings in excel sheet.
Sometimes over 1200 datapoints were put in from one singular event.

Several graphs you can see on this tread and more likely in my progress log has been produced this way.

Looks like I followed my own link replied as it was new posting.

Anyways, the topic has remain alive as the inquiries for pictorial or videos keep coming every once in a while.

Unfortunately my time an interestes don’t bend to everything. I expect some of the early adopters will get into these aspects.
Surely there are already guys over there capable for doing this.
Surely these tasks should be delegated over time.

2cm in 3 months? You’re a superstar!