Gaining volume with Kyrpa

My personal opinion… any strain inducing load should be only applied under heat.

@Kyrpa

Was just reviewing an interesting study that affirmed a couple interesting points.

(1) Elongation was confirmed to be the result of 3 mechanisms; inter-fiber relaxation, inter-fibril relaxation, and intra-fibril relaxation. But they all happen on different time scales in respective order; 0.3-1.0 seconds, 3-90s, and >200s. The indication being that the fibers will slide quite quickly to accommodate acute strain. Over about 90s, the fibrils begin sliding, and then if the stress remains, after about 200s the molecular bonds begin to break down.

(2) As it turns out there is a distinct difference between tendon and ligament. Tendon was shown to have a positive relaxation relationship to initial stress. That is, high initial stress results in faster relaxation. Ligament is shown to have an inverse relationship. Higher initial stress results in slower relaxation.

As we are discussing something more akin to ligament and not tendon, this supports the mindset of starting with low loads and very slowly increasing.

Tutt,

1) The time spectrum sounded familiar and I went through some sources.

To me, it appears as a result of a collagen gel study produced with different stages of cross-linking.

If the results have been emulated in actual ligaments, that I did not know.

Would you be kind and lead us to the source.

About the different mechanisms, not only do they happen in different time scales they do happen in different length scales as well.
As your previously shared study prevailed already.

The inter-fibrillar slipping is the major source of elongation no matter the scales.

At low strain rate applications, it means 6% if the total strain percentage being 10%.

If the maximized inter- fibrillar relaxation is proportionally analogous to inter-fibrillar sliding, I can´t say for sure.

The mechanism beyond >200s surely is very different when operating under influence of therapeutic heat.

What is described as breaking of the molecular bonds, which resembles as a result of forceful disassembly, is happening in a more controlled smoother fashion under heat.

The bonds do get under denaturation processes but by mechanisms that allow significantly less all-level damages, and are quickly reconstructed once the temperature drops back to resting temperature.

2) Tendons are build to cope with loads and stresses greater than ligaments.

So different behavior should be expected.

I would still not rush to claim the there being all inverse relation with the stress level only.

We need to understand that ligaments do have strain-related stress relaxation properties, which might be the major contributor to different stress-relaxation relations to initial stress levels.

Ligaments have been found to show greater stress relaxation properties at low strain and inverse at larger strain percentages. Although the authors do speculate the differences between species and even different ligaments for the very same donor.

Surely we can confirm the TA behaving as a ligamentous element. Which most of the literature suggests as well.

And yes, the classic low force long-duration stretch scenario is the basis.

The evolution should be the low strain rate, low increment loading application.

Did you see this yet?
The characteristics of the tunica albuginea revisited
There are some hints on what should be deemed as low-force applications.

To me, it seems clear operating under or slightly above 0.17Mpa stress threshold can be labeled as low force applications. That is the point we enter to the elastic region with TA.

Just posted the initiative, there is more to follow as you might suspect.

I am really convinced that the optimal stress levels can be determined with the tools introduced.

Hopefully, you could join in and collaborate on this particular thread and help to bring the knowledge in the present time, and beyond.

I’ve enjoyed exploring the science of this topic. I’m afraid that the only way for me to help advance things from here is to run my own controlled trials. Others unfortunately don’t have the resources and access to equipment that I do. This puts me in a bit of a predicament. My wife is quite hesitant for me to increase my size. Even just last night, I had to back off twice because when I’m really into it at very high EQ, I go too deep and end up hurting her.

So I don’t know where to go with it. If I only added 0.5" or so, that would probably be ok, but I don’t think that’s valuable info here. What we want to see is if my devices and methods can produce 2+" and that would certainly be too much. I really don’t have much interest in being 9"+ BPEL. She said she would be ok with additional girth because I’m only about 5.25" to 5.375" MEG, and she can adapt better to more girth. But I still haven’t finished designing an optimal girth device. And IMO, 5.5" is optimal girth.

I don’t know. Seems kinda selfish if I just go ahead and do it to satisfy my own curiosity.

Actually I see it differentially. Since you have the access and the opportunity you could still run some proper test protocols.
Surely we don’t get into gigantic proportions accidentally, despite the superior concepts.

Just go for it. Lol. Tell your wife that you were targeting girth and accidentally you developed an elephantine apparatus. Just be careful to not hurt her. That is all. If you are careful, she will forget about the length thing and you will be able to carry on with your trials.

The one thing I’m still wondering about is whether a 1:4 protocol is optimal long term, like a Mon:Thurs. Or perhaps something like a 1:1:1:4, like a Tues:Thurs. But long term tests require me to find the plateau. Which means adding size until it stops.

If feel like much of the short term stuff you have nailed down already, like how much to heat, and what loads to use. Most work from here seems to be around mitigating the plateaus and decons.

Doesn’t really work that way. She likes body contact while thrusting. But if I’m bottoming out before contact, that’s no good.

I’ll tell you what… I’ve been wanting to make a phantom that will work better with the Therasound Autosound. I’ll make that, and then we’ll see where it goes from there.

But I do wanna spend some time figuring out the girth dilemma. I have 3 different methods, but none are optimal. I keep thinking there has to be something better that I’m missing.

Whats your BPEL now and how much have you gained doing PE before US protocol and since starting using US.

re:Therasound Autosound

I’ve been thinking about that 4 head, hands free applicator since you posted earlier. Not sure that I’ll do ultrasound, but if I did. That is a tool that I would need.

We may be reaching the stage soon, where the controlled group trials would be justified in some form.

I do think that the adaptation to the exercise is not the only concern as the gains as come fast and in large numbers is a major contributor to the plateau as well.
Recovering from huge gains may even take a longer time than having the reverse adaptation from the exercise campaigns.

The short-term stuff, yes I agree can be considered roughly covered with a small experimental group already.
The BPFSL gaining program is manageable by many, but converting it into BPEL gains is not so simple for all.

Mitigating the plateaus and decons, like you put it is the great unknown still and it can´t be solved during one man´s journey.
That would need a scientific approach with groups divided into different protocols at least for two years.

Actually, do we need to mitigate them in the first place? How about maximizing gains for a year. Then take another year off and enjoying the initial gains. Then start another campaign if there is a need for it , might even be that lucky there is no need for such left anymore. To me it sounds great.

That is a reasonable course. In the absence of widespread controlled trials, just focus on how to optimize maximal gains prior to plateau and then know that a 9-12 month decon will be needed for full tissue turnover before the next cycle can begin. I suspect that a fully optimized program could produce 1.5” gain before plateau. That might be optimistic.

Hey Tutt, I’ve got a few concerns with this:

1) How long would you take to work up to 2.5-3.5kg? Without RF, which I think none of us here have used effectively besides you, I was under the impression prolonged US radiation for heating would be dangerous for the tissues after 25 or so minutes. Am I mistaken?

2) With RF, it might be quite easy to accomplish that heat consistently, but with US, I think it’s quite difficult, especially if you were stretching straight out or up and not pressed against your leg.

3) Aren’t you forgetting the 20% increase in load needed after the heat is removed? For the duration of the cooldown?

For me, personally, I’ve found success in hitting the target temperatures only by using side-to-side with it pressed against my thigh. What I do is use my LG hanger to hang SO with a slight angle up, and I add 8 oz at a time up to 6-7.5#. What annoys me is that I then have to remove the LG (which only takes a second) then manually create the tension while I use the transducer because I can’t wear the LG w/o the sleeve that blocks the US :(

I think I could do the single stretch heat up and then cool down with the LG if there was some kind of gel of fluid I could use to make sure the suction was kept with a very short sleeve. Any ideas? Is my problem clear? Thanks!

25-30 minutes is about how long it should take if you follow my method. But keep in mind, Kyrpa’s procedure is more demonstrated at this point. Mine starts with the penis about 40mm shorter than BPFSL and sets the motor to lengthen 1.5mm/min until the load reaches 1kg. At that point I slow the motor down to 1mm/min and start the US. It generally takes less than 25 minutes at this strain rate to reach 3.0kg.

Keep in mind, it isn’t the amount of time using US that’s the problem, but rather the amount of time the tissue is heated to various temperatures. So the several minutes it takes to warm the tissues up doesn’t really matter that much until the tissues reach a consistent 40C+, at which point you should pay attention to the clock.

If using the US Pro 2000, I think you need 2 of them. The Soundcare model is better but more expensive. I’ve just purchased the Therasound Evo with the Autosound applicator to make this hands free. It has 4 heads in a row that transmit for about 1 sec each in sequence. And it can be set to alternate between 1mHz and 3mHz. I also use a phantom because the device pulls straight out.

I don’t have to worry about this because my device uses a fixed strain. The load automatically increases when the heat drops. You only need to add load if you are using a creep style hanging device.

I’m not familiar with the kind of sleeves the LG hanger uses. The silicon sleeves that come with the Phallosan do not impede US. Right now I’m messing around with making a full sleeve from Dragon Skin that better incorporates with the vacuum cup.