The little girl talking about, "How was church today?" Won you a new subscriber. Thanks for raising the next generation with respect for God and others.
This is great. So much different than all the other “fletching test” videos out there. I really like how this isn’t a “which one wins” test as all the vanes were similar. Very unbiased and technical way of doing this! Thank you!
This pretty much confirms a lot of what we already knew. I’m really interested to see surface area vs surface area, like a long low profile vs a short high profile with similar surface areas. Keep up the good work! I might build one of these wind tunnel for my own arrow builds.
if you build a wind tunnel you should record your testing as well more information to the community. Take care, Lucas hoping to have more testing coming soon
I think it would be interesting to see how 4 arrows fletched up with the same vanes at 4 different offsets preform. Might get an optimal stabilization at a specific offset angle. Thanks for taking your time and efforts to post your experiments and results.
Filling the tube with a bunch of straws will dramatically reduce turbulence. It’s how we made wind tunnels in my mechanical engineering program. Interesting way to test vanes keep it up
Very good point I actually did this as well surprisingly it didn't change the wobble of the shaft. So my conclusion from that was the fixture holding the arrow must be distrusting the flow enough to cause the disturbance. Thank you very much for the suggestions and thanks for watching. Luc
Your talking about creating a laminar flow, which should not be in the tube rather above the tube, so the air flow is semi regulated as the air enters the testing tube. Yes, you could do that, you will probably find enhancement possibilities every time you do testing.
Good job Lucas, you have started down the rat hole of testing. I have been there, its actually very fun learning all the nuisances. Q: how are you holding the tip of the arrows? If your not using a magnet, consider that. Also, on the bare shaft test, I noticed it did not spin, I think a bare shaft will still spin out of a bow, based on the archers parallax, perhaps some slow motion video work would be needed. Keep up the good work!
@@sooooooo8 yes absolutely bare shaft will spin out of a bow due to contact between Nock and serving acting like a screw. But should not change the difference in this test! I am in fact using a small cylindrical magnet. Thank you for your suggestion take care! Luc
@@Lucas_Palmer_Archery perfect, kind of thought it looked like they were spinning friction free… BTW, I worked in mechanical engineering for the past 40 years, hit me up if you need someone to bounce ideas off, or brain storm; dig what you are doing!
As always awesome video! Thank you. Can’t wait for the next one. You should test Aerovane as well. I’d also like to see different size shafts. Not enough time in the day I know. Thanks again, I really like what you are doing and appreciate it!
Other than testing different fletchings at different offsets, are you able to attach different broadheads to the front as well and test how different vanes stabilize different broadheads? Great video and has become one of my favorite series. Appreciate the time and effort!
Not with the current support the arrow is suspended from the tip so changing the broadhead would have minimal differences.... However I am trying to measure the drag created by different broad heads in the tunnel. Designing a fixture right now for that.... Hopefully I'll be able to start testing heads in a couple months. I am glad that the information has been useful. If you have any questions please reach out and thank you for the support. Luc
This is awesome, very interesting! Thanks for doing this. I’d love to see how each of these vanes would stabilize with a max helical using the Arizona ez fletch
Hey Lucas, As someone working in the aerospace industry with experience in wind tunnel systems, I wanted to share some insights regarding your data on vane damping times. While your data shows that most vanes have similar "damping out times" in the 10-second range, this might not fully capture the differences between vanes due to the nature of exponential decay in damping. Exponential decay typically involves a steep initial decline followed by a gradual leveling off, never truly reaching zero. While many vanes may reach a steady state within the same 10-11 second window, focusing on the initial 0.5-1 second could reveal more significant differences. The steepness of the initial decline in the curve might better indicate the vane's efficiency in stabilizing the arrow quickly, which is crucial for optimal performance. By analyzing the first 0.5-1 second, you can better understand the immediate damping/restoring forces each vane exerts, offering a clearer picture of their performance. This approach can provide more granular data on how effectively each vane stabilizes the arrow, highlighting differences that the overall damping time might obscure.
That is something I didn’t even consider thank you very much for the suggestion. I’ll have to re-evaluate this and try to determine this for future test! Thank you very much for the suggestion! Take care, Luc
@@Lucas_Palmer_Archery I cant say for certain how much of a difference you will see but I think you can go back and look at the videos of all the trials you did and examine the first 1 second and see if there is any appreciable difference between vanes. simply take a measurement at the peak amplitude at various times and see which one has the strongest initial restoring force.
Great work Lucas. Have you considered a terminal velocity wind tunnel blowing from underneath. You would need to be able to vary the tunnel airflow velocity. Should give an estimate of vane drag.
Wat would be really interesting to me would be to see how different numbers of vanes compare as well as slight size and placement changes. The former would be especially interesting for the crossbow section that's following your content. But nonetheless you're doing great and super interesting work!
Very interesting. Thank you for doing this. What I find most interesting is the similarity between vanes with similar offset / helical. What I'd be interested to see is same vanes with different offsets / helical. Perform this like a design of experiments (DOE).
Awesome content Lucas! Love the engineering and analytical mindset that you bring to this testing! I would recommend for your imperfections you might be able to 3D print a hexagonal flow straightener on the forward side of the wind tunnel and have the air flow suck through that. The other takeaway that I would love to see is whether or not the same vein with different offsets or helicals make a difference in your stabilization time. Thanks for all the great content. Looking forward to the Android app
I don't know if you have a way of measuring, but it would be interesting to see the drag force applied. Especially when you get to testing different offsets, the related force during stabilization and after stabilization would be really cool to see!
@@loganchapman105 thank you will do! I realized too late after I posted that I never did that. It’s kinda like watching paint dry isn’t it. 🤣. Take care, Luc
Would love to see some of the more unique and quick fletch options like FOB, zinger and easy vanes(Australian based company, I think NAP also has something out they call easy vane). Also interested in which vanes are less effected by crosswinds.
Nice test. It would be interesting to see how a 4 fletch compares to the 3 fletch in stabilization. I don't know if you would be able to test this, but stabilizing with a fixed blade broadhead would be very good data for hunters.
I’d be very interested to see if there is a difference at all from placing of the fletching. As far as stabilization time goes. For instance, I run all my vanes about an inch and a quarter from my nock to keep the pressure away from my face, and I’ve had a lot of guys tell me that my stability is gonna be a lot worse 🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️ them arrows be shooting good
That lil wobble after stabilizing could be due to some dyes are heavier than others so even the same vanes from manufacturers can vary in weight slightly color to color
@@Mr.bowbender I have a short video addressing this question. The fan is pulling air across the vanes so airflow is from top to bottom same direction as an arrow actually experiences. Thanks for the question you and many others have had the same take care, Luc
Food for thought - The shorter the vane the total distance that a helical goes around the shaft is shorter. Logically, it makes sense to me that to get the same spin out of a 2" vane you need more helical than a 2.8". I like 1.5-2 degrees on a Max Stealth and more like 2.5-3d on a 2".
Interesting thought I’m trying to figure out the best way to measure spin rate. If I can figure out an accurate measurement I’ll see if I can test that theory. Thanks for the suggestion!
for that fan the wind speed is an average of 16.8 feet per sec. I plan on doing a whole series where we will look at each vane at angles from straight fletch all the way to the maximum such as an ez fletch.
I wonder if suction from behind the arrow would be better than a blower from the front? Just thinking about the fan itself creating imperfect turbulence in the tunnel but suction from behind the arrow might create a more uniform airflow across the vanes?
@@Lucas_Palmer_Archery oh nice! Did you chamfer and de-burr the intake tube’s mouth? Probably would make for very minor discrepancies either way but just throwing ideas out mostly haha
Absolutely love all your content firstly.... but wanted to ask if the test with the Balzer vanes is accurate if the offset is not the same as the other vanes? I would assume that the helical plays a big role in the performance of the shaft as a whole... a rotation shaft definitely stabilises faster
The test is not inaccurate as long as we are careful about what we are saying results are. At best the test only shows that vane angle has much more to due with stabilization than vane shape but more testing is needed. The blazer is not worse than others the blazer being at a different angle performed different but we still have to test the other vanes at said angles as well to determine if they perform as expected which is longer to stabilize.
@@bbrinkley77 the wind is coming from the top the fan is sucking air down the tube. Fans in suction create better laminar flow than blowing. But the fan propeller design has spot that are inconsistent. However, changing the vane direction would certainly change the results.
center of pressure - center of gravity = rate of stabilization, so as you said if the surface area is the same, they will correct the same, altho there might be miniscule effects on airflow with different type of vane design, some introduce more drag due vortexies
My thought as well since all of theses fletching are relatively the same size. That is making me think we maybe able to classify fletchings in terms of surface area facing the apparent wind. This would be great if we can determine the fletching size needed to stabilize a broadhead of a certain size with both arrow length and FOC to complete the equation. Maybe we will get there maybe not. Thanks for watching and the discussion. Luc
@@Lucas_Palmer_Archery measure pressure in different angles with broadhead and vanes, wouldnt that create some value for the lift? lets say you measure it vertical on fixed broadhead from flat size and sharp size, then on 45 degree and straight ahead, do the same for vane, there it could be possible to calculate estimate for value of center of pressure, center of pressure needs to stay behind center of gravity for arrow to stabilize
@@flyfin108 yes we could approach it from that direction as well. However the only variable we don't know is rate of stabilization. You may also create a teeter totter effect with your arrow as you stabilize which we would not want. If CP is behind CG the arrow will be listed as stable all this means is that the tail will follow the tip, However the rate at which the arrow gets to stabilization if not launched perfectly (hand torques, poor tuning) or if the arrow is acted on by an external force is important. External forces can be drag, cross wind, a stick, etc. If you are familiar with damping think about the differences between underdamped, critically damped, and over damped. Ideally for an arrow we want rapid stabilization without oscillation. Thanks for the comment!
@@Lucas_Palmer_Archery im trying to tune suspension of an 911 at assetto corsa currently, wish i knew more about damping but going with trial and error, front is insanely hard to get balanced over the bumps as its so light, if i remember right the "rocket guy" at ranch fairys podcast said that how much behind CP is of CG dosnt matter (much) as long as it stays there, so it could be just over all spine, im no rocket scientist for sure
@@Lucas_Palmer_Archery been learning the bow tuning for almost an year now, i think its possible to make fixeds fly straight without vanes, fixeds thats not balanced
I tried a leaf blower the fluid flow pattern is extremely turbulent I have a larger fan now that will be much faster. The fan in the video is a 195cfm inline duct fan.
I bet if you fletch the blazers like the others it will perform the same. I’ve been shooting different size fletch through radar and all slow down around 30-31 fps at 80 yards. All arrows have been fletched with the same jig.
I would assume you are correct based on the results so far. I had this already fletched so rather than waste a fletching I thought I would leave it as is but I will test blazer at 2.5 degree as well.
Awesome stuff! I guess the short arrows make the arm roughly same as in an actual arrow, but does the fact that the test arrows are rotating radialy about the point and not about the C of G or C of L, whichever it is, have any effect?
Yes absolutely rotation about the tip is different than how a true arrow behaves. Essentially this would be an arrow with 100%foc. However to compare fletchings it’s a fair comparison. I’m working on how to support the shaft from the cg while still allowing it to spin.
@@Jsfea01 spin rate does helps to balance out imbalance in the arrow system. Imbalance created by shaft flex, weight imbalance, geometry imbalance, shaft straightness, insert straightness etc. so ideally we want a rapid spin up. However, I have not gotten to the point of determining how much spin is necessary hopefully I can create some guidelines to follow for that. Surface area and where the surface area is relative to the shaft is the most important factor. Thanks for the question.
Hi Trevor's just want to share a thought with you about a stable air flow and how u can achieve that,I saw this done on a tube video,they got a lot of plastic drinking straws together and placed them in front of there fans,when the air was pushed through them with the fan then the flow was stabilised hope this may give u something to try.also it's cheep to do if it works for u.cheers Rene from Aus
My theory is nearly the same as the others but I’ll have to test it to be sure. I have hundreds of more test coming but the video was already getting lengthy! Thanks for watching, Lucas
Hello again. Interesting test. Can you attach a load cell to the arrow attachment to measure aerodynamic drag during the stabilization and after arrow is stabilized as well as way to measure rpm of the arrow. Question I have in mind is, how much of stabilization is purely aerodynamic and does spin rate actually have an effect if drag forces are equalized through some other means?
@@smau990 I have been trying to figure out the load cell attachment still working on it. The spin rate I am going to mark the arrows to more effectively measure but that can be done with the video. Thanks for the questions and suggestions. Your questions are very similar to mine. As far as stabilization of a torqued shot or slightly out of tune bow which is what this would represent I don’t think the spin rate has much affect. However, on a well tuned shaft I think spin rate is more of the deciding factor. But we will see if I can answer any of these questions.
The fan is pulling air from top to bottom. Air flow is flowing across the vanes as it should from tip to tail. The fan is sucking air past the vanes rather than blowing. Suction creates more laminar airflow.
That was the hardest part to figure out was how to allow the arrow to spin. The arrow is free to move and spin relative to its point, there is minimal friction between the magnet and the point of the shaft. Thanks for watching.
I think there's two main flaws in the testing. 1) the arrows are not able to spin freely. 2) the wind force is pushing from the back of the fletchings as opposed to the front. I believe there's a reason for fletching taper and that is to increase surface area as wind passes from the front of the arrow (short end of the taper)
Watch the second half of the video. 1) The arrows can spin freely it was a requirement I set for the fixture. While there is slight friction between the tip of the arrow and the magnetic suspension it is minimal and equal to all arrows. 2) the fan is in suction pulling air across the fletchings. The air flow is from top to bottom not bottom to top. My apologies I should have made both of these points for clear. Yes vane angle purpose is for exactly what you said to increase relative surface area towards the wind. Thanks for watching and the support. Lucas
the arrow is allowed to spin, early on in the video the air is off causing no spin. When I turn the fan on the arrow will spin skip to about the 13 min mark or so. Sorry I am long winded in my discussion at times haha.
@@schoolDenisE great question no it is much slower, there are a couple reasons for this. I am delaying the reaction time equally across the board so that the %difference is easier to measure accurately. For example the difference between 1 second of time and 3 seconds of time is easy to see, however the difference between 1 millisecond (0.001 seconds) and 3 milliseconds (0.003seconds) is nearly impossible for me to measure accurately but it is the exact same percent change. The Japanese Institute of sports technology did a great study on arrow aerodynamics. They found that the flow would remain laminar through a large range of fletch types and angles and gave specific Reynolds numbers for this. So far only crossbows shoot fast enough to possibly fall outside of the range of laminar flow so long as the bow is properly tuned. This means that we can use a slower laminar flow for comparison purposes. The reaction time discussed is not what your arrow coming off your bow will do however comparing one fletching to another would be appropriate. Thanks for asking the question!
I've always wondered if arrows from a traditional bow are slow (~150 fps) enough to experience linear drag, whereas I assume arrows from a compound are fast enough (~300 fps) to experience quadratic drag.
So interestingly enough it turns out shaft flex is the bigger cause of laminar vs turbulent. Because traditional bows create a large paradox of the shaft they experience a larger drag coefficient roughly 2.6 where a compound bow with a shoot through riser and a stiff enough shaft has much less shaft paradox. If the arrow is stiff enough, and therefore the drag coefficient is lower at about 1.5-1.6 and experiences laminer flow The Japanese sports institute has shown this to hold true for Reynolds number up to 2.4 x 10^4. Very fast bows north of 320fps depending on arrow geometry or larger shaft flex the flow changes to turbulent and the drag coefficient increases to roughly 2.6.
Can I just ask, is your wind tunnel blowing air from the top or bottom? I can't tell from the video. The way the vanes are designed the wind should be blowing in from the top to play to their strengths, but I don't know if that's what's happening or not. Interesting video anyway.
@@thewhiskybowman the wind is blowing from top to bottom, many people had the same question so thank you for asking. More videos to come thanks for the support. Take care, Lucas
@@Lucas_Palmer_Archery Thanks for the reply, I did have a look at the questions before posting and hadn't noticed that it had already been asked. Unfortunately I don't think youtube always shows us (the viewers) all the comments, which must be frustrating for content providers having to answer the same things over and over.
@@thewhiskybowman Its all good! I don't mind the comments with questions, it helps me to know what I need to explain more next time. I made that comment such that you didn't feel bad for asking since many people thought the same thing. It's a good question to answer multiple times makes the answer easier to find. You are absolutely correct UA-cam does not show all or even in order the comments. Sometimes I miss comments as well and I am supposed to get a notification for each one! Anyway take care and thanks for you support! Luc
Yes absolutely, however the wind in the wind tunnel is just under 17fps. The results can only be compared to each other rather than arrow in flight. So the test compares vanes to each other. Whichever performs best likely will perform the best on an arrow shaft.
Haha just remember the wind tunnel speed is much slower than your actual arrow so stabilization would scale and be significantly faster in arrow flight. If it’s linear the speed is 15 times slower so if the stabilization time is 15 times quicker stabilization would be around 0.64 seconds…. If it is linear I don’t believe(don’t know for sure) it is but it’s just an example. Regardless the test is comparing each cane to one another independently of a lot of other variables. Thanks for watching.
Me too there is a whole section that was supposed to be sped up not sure what happened there but. I will try to condense and make it less boring in the future. Thanks for the feedback…. Unless you have insomnia in which case you’re welcome glad I could help! 🤣
Not really. It's testing stabilization in a controlled environment...you're asking for testing in a dynamic environment with many more variables...that's not what he's testing in this video, big boy.
@@j.s.3414 I'm saying that the stabilization from your fletchings is only going to see variants when you're introducing the flex of an arrow. As we can see here, everything did the same. We learned nothing. I'm not saying he's dumb for the test but I'm saying if you want to see the difference in veins you have to introduce shaft flex
@@j.s.3414 it's very easy for a vein to stabilize an arrow that's not flexing and acting erratically. You can shove that big boy shit, that's literally so weak of character.
@@sheyanderson4371 actually a lot of Target archers tune far less than you think. A slightly out of tune bow is technically easier to reproduce than something that's perfect when shooting field points, but that's a whole other conversation. Target archers use way lower profile veins with far less helical or offset because they're not steering broadheads
I know this is a different video. But I have a question for you: Did you get the information for the HHA site tapes???? I'm planning to buy a Tetra Ryz Max one pin. Would like to use your app. Thank you
The little girl talking about, "How was church today?" Won you a new subscriber. Thanks for raising the next generation with respect for God and others.
We are trying our best! Thank you for the kind words we are blessed for sure.
This is great. So much different than all the other “fletching test” videos out there. I really like how this isn’t a “which one wins” test as all the vanes were similar. Very unbiased and technical way of doing this! Thank you!
Thank you I try to be as unbiased as possible!
Take care,
Lucas
This video is remarkable value to our archery community.
Thank you hoping to do more testing soon!
take care,
Lucas
Be cool to see 3 vs 4 fletch as well
Agree!
Coming soon hoping to get back to testing soon.
Thanks for your support,
Lucas
Exceptional video, thank you for taking the time to do this.
@@gowithabow your welcome stay tuned lots more to discuss!
This pretty much confirms a lot of what we already knew. I’m really interested to see surface area vs surface area, like a long low profile vs a short high profile with similar surface areas. Keep up the good work! I might build one of these wind tunnel for my own arrow builds.
if you build a wind tunnel you should record your testing as well more information to the community. Take care,
Lucas
hoping to have more testing coming soon
Crazy cool and interesting. Can't wait to see more tests and results
Thanks for watching.
Luc
The effort you have put into this is awesome. You’re obviously a smart fellow…. 😉👍
Thank you kindly! I appreciate the support.
Appreciate the time and effort you're putting into these videos.
Glad you like them! Thanks for your support.
I think it would be interesting to see how 4 arrows fletched up with the same vanes at 4 different offsets preform. Might get an optimal stabilization at a specific offset angle. Thanks for taking your time and efforts to post your experiments and results.
@@EMFT that’s exactly what I am working towards just too much information for one video. However, thank you for the suggestion!
Take care,
Luc
John Stallone on UA-cam did something like this a few years back with labradar.
@@CEMuhlbeier John has done a lot of great videos. Thanks for sharing!
Great video! Looking forward for more test! I very much appreciate your afford you put into this.
Thank you!
Science is awesome! Keep up the great work! Vanes are super cool!
Filling the tube with a bunch of straws will dramatically reduce turbulence. It’s how we made wind tunnels in my mechanical engineering program. Interesting way to test vanes keep it up
Very good point I actually did this as well surprisingly it didn't change the wobble of the shaft. So my conclusion from that was the fixture holding the arrow must be distrusting the flow enough to cause the disturbance. Thank you very much for the suggestions and thanks for watching.
Luc
Your talking about creating a laminar flow, which should not be in the tube rather above the tube, so the air flow is semi regulated as the air enters the testing tube. Yes, you could do that, you will probably find enhancement possibilities every time you do testing.
Good job Lucas, you have started down the rat hole of testing. I have been there, its actually very fun learning all the nuisances. Q: how are you holding the tip of the arrows? If your not using a magnet, consider that. Also, on the bare shaft test, I noticed it did not spin, I think a bare shaft will still spin out of a bow, based on the archers parallax, perhaps some slow motion video work would be needed. Keep up the good work!
@@sooooooo8 yes absolutely bare shaft will spin out of a bow due to contact between Nock and serving acting like a screw. But should not change the difference in this test! I am in fact using a small cylindrical magnet.
Thank you for your suggestion take care!
Luc
@@Lucas_Palmer_Archery perfect, kind of thought it looked like they were spinning friction free… BTW, I worked in mechanical engineering for the past 40 years, hit me up if you need someone to bounce ideas off, or brain storm; dig what you are doing!
Fascinating. Love you're work.
Thank you very much!
Interested to see some smaller vanes like the X3...very cool, appreciate the time you put into this!
@@j.s.3414 I have a bunch of vanes and feathers in the upcoming videos. I’ll see if I have an x3 thanks for the suggestion.
You son are definitely a force to our knowledge.
Thank you!
Take care,
Luc
As always awesome video! Thank you. Can’t wait for the next one. You should test Aerovane as well. I’d also like to see different size shafts. Not enough time in the day I know. Thanks again, I really like what you are doing and appreciate it!
Great suggestion thank you! You are right about that not enough time in the day or night haha.
Awesome video very cool test!!
My take away is that offset/helical has much more effect than the specific vane shape/design/material/brand.
Excited for more!
Great job 👏 very interesting and informative as usual.👍😊 keep up your great work!💪😁
God Bless you and your family 🙏😇❤️🇺🇸
Thank you god bless! Take care,
Other than testing different fletchings at different offsets, are you able to attach different broadheads to the front as well and test how different vanes stabilize different broadheads?
Great video and has become one of my favorite series. Appreciate the time and effort!
Not with the current support the arrow is suspended from the tip so changing the broadhead would have minimal differences.... However I am trying to measure the drag created by different broad heads in the tunnel. Designing a fixture right now for that.... Hopefully I'll be able to start testing heads in a couple months. I am glad that the information has been useful. If you have any questions please reach out and thank you for the support.
Luc
Thanks for a proper test! It would be interesting to know how much it differs if you have a fourth vane and alter the degrees as well.
Fill the wind tunnel full of straws, that should create laminar flow. Keep up the awesome content!
This is awesome, very interesting! Thanks for doing this. I’d love to see how each of these vanes would stabilize with a max helical using the Arizona ez fletch
Absolutely! That is the plan eventually test every vane from angles ranging from straight to 6 degrees or so or whatever the maximum is.
Hey Lucas,
As someone working in the aerospace industry with experience in wind tunnel systems, I wanted to share some insights regarding your data on vane damping times. While your data shows that most vanes have similar "damping out times" in the 10-second range, this might not fully capture the differences between vanes due to the nature of exponential decay in damping.
Exponential decay typically involves a steep initial decline followed by a gradual leveling off, never truly reaching zero. While many vanes may reach a steady state within the same 10-11 second window, focusing on the initial 0.5-1 second could reveal more significant differences. The steepness of the initial decline in the curve might better indicate the vane's efficiency in stabilizing the arrow quickly, which is crucial for optimal performance.
By analyzing the first 0.5-1 second, you can better understand the immediate damping/restoring forces each vane exerts, offering a clearer picture of their performance. This approach can provide more granular data on how effectively each vane stabilizes the arrow, highlighting differences that the overall damping time might obscure.
That is something I didn’t even consider thank you very much for the suggestion. I’ll have to re-evaluate this and try to determine this for future test! Thank you very much for the suggestion!
Take care,
Luc
@@Lucas_Palmer_Archery I cant say for certain how much of a difference you will see but I think you can go back and look at the videos of all the trials you did and examine the first 1 second and see if there is any appreciable difference between vanes. simply take a measurement at the peak amplitude at various times and see which one has the strongest initial restoring force.
Great work Lucas. Have you considered a terminal velocity wind tunnel blowing from underneath. You would need to be able to vary the tunnel airflow velocity. Should give an estimate of vane drag.
I’ll look into that thank you for the suggestion.
Wat would be really interesting to me would be to see how different numbers of vanes compare as well as slight size and placement changes.
The former would be especially interesting for the crossbow section that's following your content.
But nonetheless you're doing great and super interesting work!
Thanks for the suggestion I have a dozen or so test arrows made just refining the testing. Thanks for the suggestion and feedback.
@@Lucas_Palmer_Archery Huge compliment coming from you! Thank you! Can't wait to see the next tests.
Very interesting. Thank you for doing this. What I find most interesting is the similarity between vanes with similar offset / helical. What I'd be interested to see is same vanes with different offsets / helical. Perform this like a design of experiments (DOE).
coming soon we also have different shaft diameters to see what affect that might have.
Take care,
Lucas
Awesome content Lucas! Love the engineering and analytical mindset that you bring to this testing! I would recommend for your imperfections you might be able to 3D print a hexagonal flow straightener on the forward side of the wind tunnel and have the air flow suck through that. The other takeaway that I would love to see is whether or not the same vein with different offsets or helicals make a difference in your stabilization time. Thanks for all the great content. Looking forward to the Android app
Thank you for the suggestion! I’ll look into that.
Great stuff! Feathers? ps: love hearing the kids!
Quality content
thanks for your support!
I don't know if you have a way of measuring, but it would be interesting to see the drag force applied. Especially when you get to testing different offsets, the related force during stabilization and after stabilization would be really cool to see!
@@davidvedder2145 I’m working on a way to measure this. We will see if it works
Keep it up!!
I absolutely love this video and info. But my only critique is, please speed up the video when looking at the longer timers
@@loganchapman105 thank you will do! I realized too late after I posted that I never did that. It’s kinda like watching paint dry isn’t it. 🤣.
Take care,
Luc
Amazing video, you should also do one testing degrees of helical and see if the parachute effect really affects arrow flight
And also to what degree is helical better than straight for stability, or up to what level of helical it begins to be detrimental
That's something I am trying to determine if I can replicate in the tunnel. Lot and Lots of testing to do to get there. Thanks for watching.
Luc
Thanks for sharing
Thanks for watching Dennis I appreciate your support.
Would love to see some of the more unique and quick fletch options like FOB, zinger and easy vanes(Australian based company, I think NAP also has something out they call easy vane). Also interested in which vanes are less effected by crosswinds.
Nice test. It would be interesting to see how a 4 fletch compares to the 3 fletch in stabilization. I don't know if you would be able to test this, but stabilizing with a fixed blade broadhead would be very good data for hunters.
I’m trying to figure out a way to incorporate this as well. Thanks for the suggestion.
You should try this test with Zinger Fletchings and see how they compare to vanes.
I’d be very interested to see if there is a difference at all from placing of the fletching. As far as stabilization time goes. For instance, I run all my vanes about an inch and a quarter from my nock to keep the pressure away from my face, and I’ve had a lot of guys tell me that my stability is gonna be a lot worse 🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️ them arrows be shooting good
Thanks Michael I’ll add it to the list of variables to change!
Can you please do a test of the Blazers fletched at the same 2.5 degree offset as the others?
absolutely coming soon!
Great test. Are you going to do a same one with spin wings or similar?
I have dozens of fletchings and feathers coming, I'll see if I have spin wing vane as well. Thanks, Lucas
Hoping to get back to testing soon!
That lil wobble after stabilizing could be due to some dyes are heavier than others so even the same vanes from manufacturers can vary in weight slightly color to color
very good point I'll have to look into this as well, it is interesting because the bare shaft had almost no movement.
Nice to see 4 fletch test
More to come! Thanks for watching.
This is awesome. My only concern is that the airflow is going in the wrong direction across the arrow and vanes.
@@Mr.bowbender I have a short video addressing this question. The fan is pulling air across the vanes so airflow is from top to bottom same direction as an arrow actually experiences. Thanks for the question you and many others have had the same take care,
Luc
@@Lucas_Palmer_Archery ok that makes more sense. Keep up the good work. Can't wait to see more tests.
@@Mr.bowbender thanks for the support. I’ll keep them coming a little at a time!
Food for thought - The shorter the vane the total distance that a helical goes around the shaft is shorter. Logically, it makes sense to me that to get the same spin out of a 2" vane you need more helical than a 2.8". I like 1.5-2 degrees on a Max Stealth and more like 2.5-3d on a 2".
Interesting thought I’m trying to figure out the best way to measure spin rate. If I can figure out an accurate measurement I’ll see if I can test that theory. Thanks for the suggestion!
@@Lucas_Palmer_Archery Always!
Would be cool to see how fast all those vanes stabilize with the Arizona ez fletch full helical. Also what’s the wind speed?
for that fan the wind speed is an average of 16.8 feet per sec. I plan on doing a whole series where we will look at each vane at angles from straight fletch all the way to the maximum such as an ez fletch.
Can you do severe 3 fletch helical vs 4 fletch with offset
Coming soon!
I wonder if suction from behind the arrow would be better than a blower from the front? Just thinking about the fan itself creating imperfect turbulence in the tunnel but suction from behind the arrow might create a more uniform airflow across the vanes?
You are correct this is exactly the setup I have as well the fan is pulling/sucking air across the arrow.
@@Lucas_Palmer_Archery oh nice! Did you chamfer and de-burr the intake tube’s mouth? Probably would make for very minor discrepancies either way but just throwing ideas out mostly haha
@@tmalonso I did not I’ll give that a try I am also making a large intake cone as well. The flow has very minor turbulence.
@@Lucas_Palmer_Archery best of luck with it, great experiment, excited to see more!
Absolutely love all your content firstly.... but wanted to ask if the test with the Balzer vanes is accurate if the offset is not the same as the other vanes? I would assume that the helical plays a big role in the performance of the shaft as a whole... a rotation shaft definitely stabilises faster
The test is not inaccurate as long as we are careful about what we are saying results are. At best the test only shows that vane angle has much more to due with stabilization than vane shape but more testing is needed. The blazer is not worse than others the blazer being at a different angle performed different but we still have to test the other vanes at said angles as well to determine if they perform as expected which is longer to stabilize.
Tacs have a stable quiet platform and instant recovery.
I'll add them to the test thank you!
Please test Firenock Aerovane 2 & 3, and TAC.
I’ve got all of those coming up! Thanks for the support Lucas
Nice! What’s the brand and model of the arrow scale you got there? The orange one. Keep up the good content 👍 thank you.
It’s a fusion Amazon special.
amzn.to/460koHU
amzn.to/460koHU
is the wind coming from the bottom? if so i wonder if changing the direction the vanes are facing would change outcome.
@@bbrinkley77 the wind is coming from the top the fan is sucking air down the tube. Fans in suction create better laminar flow than blowing. But the fan propeller design has spot that are inconsistent. However, changing the vane direction would certainly change the results.
@@bbrinkley77 thanks for the suggestion
center of pressure - center of gravity = rate of stabilization, so as you said if the surface area is the same, they will correct the same, altho there might be miniscule effects on airflow with different type of vane design, some introduce more drag due vortexies
My thought as well since all of theses fletching are relatively the same size. That is making me think we maybe able to classify fletchings in terms of surface area facing the apparent wind. This would be great if we can determine the fletching size needed to stabilize a broadhead of a certain size with both arrow length and FOC to complete the equation. Maybe we will get there maybe not.
Thanks for watching and the discussion.
Luc
@@Lucas_Palmer_Archery measure pressure in different angles with broadhead and vanes, wouldnt that create some value for the lift? lets say you measure it vertical on fixed broadhead from flat size and sharp size, then on 45 degree and straight ahead, do the same for vane, there it could be possible to calculate estimate for value of center of pressure, center of pressure needs to stay behind center of gravity for arrow to stabilize
@@flyfin108 yes we could approach it from that direction as well. However the only variable we don't know is rate of stabilization. You may also create a teeter totter effect with your arrow as you stabilize which we would not want.
If CP is behind CG the arrow will be listed as stable all this means is that the tail will follow the tip, However the rate at which the arrow gets to stabilization if not launched perfectly (hand torques, poor tuning) or if the arrow is acted on by an external force is important. External forces can be drag, cross wind, a stick, etc.
If you are familiar with damping think about the differences between underdamped, critically damped, and over damped. Ideally for an arrow we want rapid stabilization without oscillation.
Thanks for the comment!
@@Lucas_Palmer_Archery im trying to tune suspension of an 911 at assetto corsa currently, wish i knew more about damping but going with trial and error, front is insanely hard to get balanced over the bumps as its so light, if i remember right the "rocket guy" at ranch fairys podcast said that how much behind CP is of CG dosnt matter (much) as long as it stays there, so it could be just over all spine, im no rocket scientist for sure
@@Lucas_Palmer_Archery been learning the bow tuning for almost an year now, i think its possible to make fixeds fly straight without vanes, fixeds thats not balanced
What are you using for a fan? Would a leaf blower give you more speed?
I tried a leaf blower the fluid flow pattern is extremely turbulent I have a larger fan now that will be much faster. The fan in the video is a 195cfm inline duct fan.
I bet if you fletch the blazers like the others it will perform the same. I’ve been shooting different size fletch through radar and all slow down around 30-31 fps at 80 yards. All arrows have been fletched with the same jig.
I would assume you are correct based on the results so far. I had this already fletched so rather than waste a fletching I thought I would leave it as is but I will test blazer at 2.5 degree as well.
Awesome stuff! I guess the short arrows make the arm roughly same as in an actual arrow, but does the fact that the test arrows are rotating radialy about the point and not about the C of G or C of L, whichever it is, have any effect?
Yes absolutely rotation about the tip is different than how a true arrow behaves. Essentially this would be an arrow with 100%foc. However to compare fletchings it’s a fair comparison. I’m working on how to support the shaft from the cg while still allowing it to spin.
Cool video - thank you. Any value in the spin rate speed vs time to stabilize or is it all about surface area?
@@Jsfea01 spin rate does helps to balance out imbalance in the arrow system. Imbalance created by shaft flex, weight imbalance, geometry imbalance, shaft straightness, insert straightness etc. so ideally we want a rapid spin up. However, I have not gotten to the point of determining how much spin is necessary hopefully I can create some guidelines to follow for that. Surface area and where the surface area is relative to the shaft is the most important factor. Thanks for the question.
Hi Trevor's just want to share a thought with you about a stable air flow and how u can achieve that,I saw this done on a tube video,they got a lot of plastic drinking straws together and placed them in front of there fans,when the air was pushed through them with the fan then the flow was stabilised hope this may give u something to try.also it's cheep to do if it works for u.cheers Rene from Aus
Thanks for the tip! I appreciate the support take care,
Lucas
I wonder how the Blazers would done had they had a decent offset?
My theory is nearly the same as the others but I’ll have to test it to be sure. I have hundreds of more test coming but the video was already getting lengthy! Thanks for watching,
Lucas
Wind direction coming from behind the arrow or is the fan pulling air?
Pulling air.
Hello again. Interesting test. Can you attach a load cell to the arrow attachment to measure aerodynamic drag during the stabilization and after arrow is stabilized as well as way to measure rpm of the arrow.
Question I have in mind is, how much of stabilization is purely aerodynamic and does spin rate actually have an effect if drag forces are equalized through some other means?
@@smau990 I have been trying to figure out the load cell attachment still working on it. The spin rate I am going to mark the arrows to more effectively measure but that can be done with the video. Thanks for the questions and suggestions. Your questions are very similar to mine. As far as stabilization of a torqued shot or slightly out of tune bow which is what this would represent I don’t think the spin rate has much affect. However, on a well tuned shaft I think spin rate is more of the deciding factor. But we will see if I can answer any of these questions.
Question is fan blowing from bottom up or top down?
The fan is pulling air from top to bottom. Air flow is flowing across the vanes as it should from tip to tail. The fan is sucking air past the vanes rather than blowing. Suction creates more laminar airflow.
Thank you for the question and support.
Take care,
Lucas
I think your onto something here but none of it matters unless the arrows are spinning.
That was the hardest part to figure out was how to allow the arrow to spin. The arrow is free to move and spin relative to its point, there is minimal friction between the magnet and the point of the shaft. Thanks for watching.
I think there's two main flaws in the testing. 1) the arrows are not able to spin freely. 2) the wind force is pushing from the back of the fletchings as opposed to the front. I believe there's a reason for fletching taper and that is to increase surface area as wind passes from the front of the arrow (short end of the taper)
Watch the second half of the video. 1) The arrows can spin freely it was a requirement I set for the fixture. While there is slight friction between the tip of the arrow and the magnetic suspension it is minimal and equal to all arrows.
2) the fan is in suction pulling air across the fletchings. The air flow is from top to bottom not bottom to top.
My apologies I should have made both of these points for clear.
Yes vane angle purpose is for exactly what you said to increase relative surface area towards the wind.
Thanks for watching and the support.
Lucas
Not that I know anything but if you made a tip where the arrow could spin with airflow it would be more realistic I would think
the arrow is allowed to spin, early on in the video the air is off causing no spin. When I turn the fan on the arrow will spin skip to about the 13 min mark or so. Sorry I am long winded in my discussion at times haha.
What is the air speed in the tunnel? It looks like it's nowhere near the same as when the arrow is flying
@@schoolDenisE great question no it is much slower, there are a couple reasons for this. I am delaying the reaction time equally across the board so that the %difference is easier to measure accurately. For example the difference between 1 second of time and 3 seconds of time is easy to see, however the difference between 1 millisecond (0.001 seconds) and 3 milliseconds (0.003seconds) is nearly impossible for me to measure accurately but it is the exact same percent change.
The Japanese Institute of sports technology did a great study on arrow aerodynamics. They found that the flow would remain laminar through a large range of fletch types and angles and gave specific Reynolds numbers for this. So far only crossbows shoot fast enough to possibly fall outside of the range of laminar flow so long as the bow is properly tuned. This means that we can use a slower laminar flow for comparison purposes. The reaction time discussed is not what your arrow coming off your bow will do however comparing one fletching to another would be appropriate.
Thanks for asking the question!
I've always wondered if arrows from a traditional bow are slow (~150 fps) enough to experience linear drag, whereas I assume arrows from a compound are fast enough (~300 fps) to experience quadratic drag.
So interestingly enough it turns out shaft flex is the bigger cause of laminar vs turbulent. Because traditional bows create a large paradox of the shaft they experience a larger drag coefficient roughly 2.6 where a compound bow with a shoot through riser and a stiff enough shaft has much less shaft paradox. If the arrow is stiff enough, and therefore the drag coefficient is lower at about 1.5-1.6 and experiences laminer flow The Japanese sports institute has shown this to hold true for Reynolds number up to 2.4 x 10^4. Very fast bows north of 320fps depending on arrow geometry or larger shaft flex the flow changes to turbulent and the drag coefficient increases to roughly 2.6.
Can I just ask, is your wind tunnel blowing air from the top or bottom? I can't tell from the video. The way the vanes are designed the wind should be blowing in from the top to play to their strengths, but I don't know if that's what's happening or not. Interesting video anyway.
@@thewhiskybowman the wind is blowing from top to bottom, many people had the same question so thank you for asking. More videos to come thanks for the support. Take care,
Lucas
@@Lucas_Palmer_Archery Thanks for the reply, I did have a look at the questions before posting and hadn't noticed that it had already been asked. Unfortunately I don't think youtube always shows us (the viewers) all the comments, which must be frustrating for content providers having to answer the same things over and over.
@@thewhiskybowman Its all good! I don't mind the comments with questions, it helps me to know what I need to explain more next time. I made that comment such that you didn't feel bad for asking since many people thought the same thing. It's a good question to answer multiple times makes the answer easier to find. You are absolutely correct UA-cam does not show all or even in order the comments. Sometimes I miss comments as well and I am supposed to get a notification for each one! Anyway take care and thanks for you support!
Luc
Test should have included FOBS
This is only video 1 I have dozens of more fletching to test. I'll see if I can get some FOBS to add in. Thanks.
But typical arrow flight is under a second, maybe well under a second.
Yes absolutely, however the wind in the wind tunnel is just under 17fps. The results can only be compared to each other rather than arrow in flight. So the test compares vanes to each other. Whichever performs best likely will perform the best on an arrow shaft.
Great vid. It it tells me that my arrow would travel @ 200yds before complete stabilization😅
Haha just remember the wind tunnel speed is much slower than your actual arrow so stabilization would scale and be significantly faster in arrow flight. If it’s linear the speed is 15 times slower so if the stabilization time is 15 times quicker stabilization would be around 0.64 seconds…. If it is linear I don’t believe(don’t know for sure) it is but it’s just an example. Regardless the test is comparing each cane to one another independently of a lot of other variables. Thanks for watching.
These are bolts for a crossbow not a standard bow, so it wasn't be accurate study for a arrow for a Bow
Why are you so rude to your co-host?! Maybe I want to hear what she thinks... LOL I'm just playing.
hahaha maybe that will be a podcast.... toddlers talk archery! haha
I own every vane you tested and in real life the DCA vanes stabilize arrows faster than any other vane.
Sorry but this test proves nothing
Absolutely, in fact I said in the video, that the test proves and shows nothing. 👍 thanks for watching.
Bout fell asleep.
Me too there is a whole section that was supposed to be sped up not sure what happened there but. I will try to condense and make it less boring in the future. Thanks for the feedback…. Unless you have insomnia in which case you’re welcome glad I could help! 🤣
test is relatively useless without the shaft flex induced by a bow
Not really. It's testing stabilization in a controlled environment...you're asking for testing in a dynamic environment with many more variables...that's not what he's testing in this video, big boy.
@@j.s.3414 I'm saying that the stabilization from your fletchings is only going to see variants when you're introducing the flex of an arrow. As we can see here, everything did the same. We learned nothing. I'm not saying he's dumb for the test but I'm saying if you want to see the difference in veins you have to introduce shaft flex
@@j.s.3414 it's very easy for a vein to stabilize an arrow that's not flexing and acting erratically. You can shove that big boy shit, that's literally so weak of character.
Target archers group tune bareshafts at 60yds+. Is flex really that big a factor, assuming arrows aren’t severely underspined?
@@sheyanderson4371 actually a lot of Target archers tune far less than you think. A slightly out of tune bow is technically easier to reproduce than something that's perfect when shooting field points, but that's a whole other conversation. Target archers use way lower profile veins with far less helical or offset because they're not steering broadheads
I know this is a different video. But I have a question for you: Did you get the information for the HHA site tapes???? I'm planning to buy a Tetra Ryz Max one pin. Would like to use your app. Thank you
I replied to your other comment but feel free to reach out by email at proarcheryballistics@gmail.com. We will get any sight added that is needed.
@Lucas_Palmer_Archery ok Thank you.