The characteristics of the tunica albuginea revisited

Hi Krypa I am struggling to fully understand how this translates into widening the CC in plain words. If one was causing internal pressures are you saying in effect that more pressure is pointless and that one should be focused on longer periods under less load with heat applied? What techniques would then approximate an optimal simulative effect for growth?

This is an interesting topic which deserves another thread in the future. Applying pressure past the naturally occurring pressure level during erection leads to interesting things regarding the PE point of view.

There are relatively recent studies available modeling the cavernous structure and analyzing stress levels at tunica.
It is suggested that even modest pressure elevation can multiply the stress at the tunica.

Now making an analog between the stretching TA at the flaccid state and erect state(clamping) would suggest when going beyond the naturally occurring erectile pressure, additional pressure increments should be made in really small steps.

If we look at the stress-strain curve of the TA, at natural erection we should be on the verge of the tissue stiffening, at the transition region.
Buckling forces during sex are high enough to cause pressure elevation up to (400-500 mmHG) stiffening the structure radically, at the tissue level as well.
As we already know we are not causing the penis to grow even with daily sexual intercourse, so the instantaneous high-pressure level surely is not going to be the optimal way.

Long story short, as you already pondered, the way you described is really close to the optimal.
Only slightly past the natural erectile pressure (110 -120mmHG), for long enough periods of time under the therapeutic temperature of 40- 42 C, produced the way there is the possibility to expand girth beyond the physiological range.

The real difficulty is the pressure component. Mainly the pressure calculation and the monitoring of the pressure.
As the stress caused by the pressure elevation is unmeasurable, the finding of the threshold pressure has to be empirical at this point.

Monitoring of the intracavernous pressure can be relatively easy with a clamp made of a sphygmomanometer and a rubber cuff between a rigid collar and the penis shaft.
I have made some rudimentary trials with such a device already and it is promising at least.

Now, I am not very comfortable steering the conversation further in that direction as the easy part, stretching the flaccid unit successfully based on the information provided above is just taken the first step. There is more to come for sure.

Most interesting points. And seem consistent with what Igigi has theorized and what I seem to have been experiencing with PGE-1 and similar vasodilators. Although my experiments are not yet concluded (with recent set backs), what I have concluded is that in the Tri-mix days where I follow with pump pressure (heated) the tunica seems to be straining to expand. It follows that when under internal pressure, such as from a maximum erection via Tri-mix or similar, adding pressure via a pump only would cause further possibility for expansion. Be aware it can hurt, and I strongly counsel caution. The pressure may not even reach the levels you quote (around 5inHG for conversion), but the internal pressure is already maximized, so not much more seems required. Many report pain just from the erection caused by injections, which I suspect is the same effect: strain against the tunica from within. What I had been noticing, at least earlier-on, were marked gains on the post Tri-mix days. Not for the faint of heart….

To be accurate 5 inHG is actually 127 mmHG, so it is beyond the upper margin which is considered to be at a consistent fully erect state.
PGE-1 surely has some other effects than the pressure mechanism only, so the actual pressure doesn´t have to be at the high end at all.

Not in my catalog though, as I have chosen different ways.

Yes, I was just eyeballing my gauge, and could see it was slightly higher. But yes, that high is typically too high when the erection is already straining at maximum possible when under effect of Tri-mix or similar.

And…I am concerned about US on an erect member, especially that hard. Do you have any opinion on dangers of US use while erect?

Unknown territory.
What I suspect, not knowing for sure, is that applying the ultrasound with your method, the erection no longer is that hard and the pain you are describing will subside.

About the risks, they have been evaluated elsewhere and are not much different from clamping risks.

It’s taken me a while to get time to read the paper and look through your calculator. Great find on the paper it is great aid to our understanding and good work on the calculator. I have a couple of questions, more for my understanding, the value of 0.17MPa for the start of the elastic range do you get this from the graph of the results (page 16. The blue longitudinal results on the stress strain garph or the inflection points on page 26)? I didn’t see it called out in the paper by number though I could have missed that.

Also your are targeting the start of the elastic region in your calculator, is that with the understanding that heat can do the rest to allow permanent deformation to happen?

Glad you had the time to take a closer look and reflect.

Actually, it is Fig.13 showing it best as it presents collective datapoint regions.
You can also look into figures 15 - 19 using figure 22 as guidance(stress at an inflection point)
Some of the samples show lower inflection points, but nevertheless, all samples are on the verge of the elastic range at 0.17 MPa.

The data presented in the thesis is remarkable in many ways.

- It shows that with most of the PE applications we are operating at the toe region of the TA, transitional region, and the very start of the elastic region
- This means that using loads significantly less than the 0.17MPa (average of 2.5- 3.8 kg ) we are not causing much of a “micro damages” if any, the strain rate is kept low enough.
(We can gain with as minuscule damage as possible on the tissue.)
Until we travel on the elastic region different mechanisms are involved in the elongation and growth triggering responses.
- Any PE method theory of reaching a plastic zone or region is plain bullshit. Does not have any ties to reality. Does not happen.
- Going beyond the 0.17 MPa bonds between the fibrils start to break up though, again with a slower strain rate less and with a higher pace more.
- Operating below with as low a load as possible we are using loads determined as low force applications and strain described in the literature.

You have already figured out where I am going with this.
Strain is the determiner of the gains. If there is not enough displacement during the exercise, it is a worthless exercise.
At a minimum, we need to reach the transitional region, in the thesis the inflection point.
The tissue needs to be stretched continuously in this region and aiming beyond. Even slightly.

We have put out our own stress-strain curves showing comparable data presented in the thesis. The tissue stiffens drastically at a certain threshold point.
It is the inflection point we are talking about. If the individual is not gaining the strain achieved with his methods is simply not enough.
The inflection point is reached too soon at the curve. There can be many reasons for this.

So what they usually do then. Put more load and time. I already hinted at how much it is needed for the extra displacement of 1% strain.
And because of the viscoelasticity of the tissue, it has the time-variant stepping in very prominently when making excessive increments on load.
Going cold is simply a nightmare for most of us. Undoable. Without making significant damage impossible.

With enough heat, we can easily achieve the extra 1% strain with the load at the inflection point (or lower), without any need to increase the loading.

Thanks for this. I am unsure where the extra 1% comes in. Is this simply saying we want to be a small amount past the inflection point so we are very slightly beyond the start of the elastic region?

That is the understanding at the moment. Beyond the strain at inflection point.
How much , can’t say for sure.

But the 1 percent extra is not that far away from the goal when seeking relatively fast gains.
For example I have been able to go beyond the inflection point average of 1-1.5% with the heat during all of my campaigns.
The peaks being 2.5% .

Maybe lesser is enough with lower gain expectancy.

And you go to this one percent and beyond by increasing the force to 0.5 MPa and beyond?

With the 0.17MPa and average of 41C temperature on the penis for 13min.

I think you missed this

“With enough heat, we can easily achieve the extra 1% strain with the load at the inflection point (or lower), without any need to increase the loading”

Ok. Are there any equations that show the relationship with heat and how it affects the stress strain relationship? Or how was the 1% worked out? Or is this assumed with the stress strain relationship and the affects of temperature in that region ie the quote in your signature?

It is done in practice for three years already with me. Others not so long.
The percentages reached and set as a goal are empirical data at the moment.
There is not much help from the literature about the minimum displacement for triggering growth.
For the skin and bone, there is knowledge already, maybe for the penis as well in the future.

The scientific basis has been solid decades ago, as you pointed out.
Nothing new there. The heating tools and the understanding have been ineffective and poor more or less for the PE community.