INPUT NEEDED -- Regarding Counter-Weight System for Equinox shafts

Gary --

I hear you; some of that "flexibility" is only limited by "cost."

For instance, consider this picture...



This is a picture of two drawings -- my proposed counterweight system "not assembled," in the top drawing, and then the counterweight "assembled" and inserted into the upper shaft, in the bottom drawing.

But what if I were to do this...



...in other words, include a threaded end cap (which screws into a female connector inserted into the end of the counterweight tube)? THEN -- a simple unscrewing of the end cap, insertion or removal of lead pellets, and then screwing the cap back on, would make the counterweight entirely "weight-adjustable" for the end user.

HOWEVER, adding that female connector, and that threaded end cap, would add about $15 to the cost of the counterweight. And hence, the problem. How to do make the counterweights flexible, to meet the needs of everyone, and yet keep it from becoming prohibitively expensive...

Steve

>>HOWEVER, adding that female connector, and that threaded end cap, would add about $15 to the cost of the counterweight. And hence, the problem. How to do make the counterweights flexible, to meet the needs of everyone, and yet keep it from becoming prohibitively expensive... <<

Nice illustrations. That makes it much easier to understand what you’re describing. I guess I pictured it the same as the divers weight belt where you just add extra packets in the same shaft configuration, as though you would a small pack of BBs. Re: cost - Good question, I’ll bet there’s enough engineers on here but somebody may have a great alternative idea for you.

Great idea. This is what I was wanting but wasn't sure what your design looked like and was unable to put thoughts into pics.. so one easy way to make it cheaper. Do not send lead shot. Sell them the shaft with the finished tube for the lead shot but let the customer buy them at thier local store. Could be and shooting supply store or a Walmart fishing section..

Guys --

THANKS for the additional thoughts.

Yes, basstrackerman, that's certainly another option...and it would help, some. BUT -- the real cost of that piece, as shown, are the fittings. Each one of those adds cost...they are not NEARLY as cheap as one might think. If I was a "large operation," I'd have molds made, and each of those fittings would be injection-molded, and would probably then cost 50 cents apiece. Problem is -- the MOLD FEES...the up-front cost to have the molds made, which runs well into the THOUSANDS of dollars. And thus, my alternative is to have each one of those fittings produced individually, via the CNC machining process, using blocks of engineering-grade plastic (Delrin, in this case, which is a DuPont-created homopolymer structural plastic).

Steve



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/16/2018 01:14PM by steveg.

Then stick to the rubber cap.. make it fit snug. Don't send lead shot. Again shipping costs won't be necessary as the only ones buying these will be buying your shaft and will ship with shaft. Also the end cap could be just a pop in cap like what comes with the standard detector shafts.. the come in all sizes and push in snugly and will easily hold lead shot inside

I think he has a point.... provide the enclosure with suggestions of say lead shot as weight......cut down on shipping costs and total costs.

Dew --

Thanks for your thought -- seconding the idea of offering the option of sending them WITHOUT lead. It's certainly NOT a bad idea, to sell the counterweights WITHOUT the lead...and allow the end user to fill them with the desired amount...

Yes, basstrackerman, the non-threaded end caps are the way to go, as you say. I was just showing that there is a way to make a more convenient counterweight, in terms of facilitating customizable weight adjustment, but that is cost-prohibitive.

Steve

Absolutely. If you make the tube with the ability to screw it into the end of shaft like you said, then just ad a push in cap which should be just a few cents then do not send lead shot.. I may use another weight source to put inside the tube. Saves cost in shipping as lead could ad alot of costs, plus the price to buy the lead.. also the end cap could easily be a push in cap. I mean I could use those flat stick on wheel weights and stick them on the bottom of my arm cuff. Cheap is always good lol.





dewcon4414 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think he has a point.... provide the enclosure w
> ith suggestions of say lead shot as weight......cu
> t down on shipping costs and total costs.

basstrackerman -- I think I've decided, thanks to your suggestion and Dew's confirmation of it, that I'll offer "empty" and partially assembled counterweight tubes as one of the purchase options. Then, the customer can then add the amount of weight to the tube that he/she desires, and then attach the end cap.

Thanks for the feedback, it definitely helps!

Steve

Maybe u just need to make a cost effective container with suggestions like lead to fill it? Lower your cost and shipping.

Not sure if this will work since I am not on my laptop and on my phone. This should be a pic or link to pic or my weight system that I'm using with the 12x15. Each disc is 1 oz so there's 10 oz there. If I go any higher on the top end with weights, they hit my forearm. If I go any longer on the lower end then the weight block is longer than the factory arm cuff stand and it falls over if you sit it down to dig. 10 oz puts enough weight back there to offset the large coil some and takes most of the nose heavy feel out of it.

[flic.kr]

Steve,
You might want to look at tungsten derby weights.
Just a thought.

I'm always happy to see it when someone is looking into ergonomics.

I see and feel the lack of it in many detector & accessory designs.
This is not a problem of the detector world per se, but
is basically found in nearly everything that is produced.

I'm not sure if this is a case of "They know better, but it costs too much"
or if "They just don't know it any better".
The latter would indicate a lack of awareness & perception,
something can be done about that ... or not!?.

My direct input:
Years ago I slid a pipe on the butt-end of my detector with an attached lead weight.
There are 4 different coils I have, so made it adjustable.

As you say, you can balance the detector on your finger. It's like magic.
Detecting with counterweight was easier for me, BUT

1.) to have less weight I made the pipe longer.
I ran into the problem that I was hitting myself in the back.
The solution here would be finding the right length/ratio
depending on individual physique as not to become annoying.

2.) I now use the weight only about half of the time. Why?
If you've seen Tom's Beach Hunting Video, you see him swinging
really fast at the beginning on the beach.
I really noticed the inertia of the extra weight/leverage
when slowing down the coil to change direction
of a fast swing like that. This I did not like so much.
This is surely also very individual depending on physique.

Slow swinging with this solution works very well for me.

That's my input for now.

Go for it and all the best!
Who knows what interesting things will come out of it.


P.S. I didn't get into the mechanics, there are ample ideas here already.

dewcon -- I hear you. I'll address your thoughts (and those of several others) below.


Daniel -- VERY cool setup/system! While you are limited with weight than can be added, ten ounces is enough to make a nice difference, which I will also address below (when I talk about what 12 oz. of weight will do).

tnsharpshooter -- since I may be changing the plan, to send the counterweight tubes EMPTY, and thus allow the end user to fill them, then the end user could CERTAINLY use tungsten...

Scoopy_Doo -- thanks for the kind words. What I am going to say below will address several of your thoughts -- the "adjustable" part, and the need for making the counterweight "short." (Yes, swinging fast means more "momentum" to overcome at the end of the swing on a heavy machine, vs. a light one; meanwhile momentum of course is minimal, with a slow/deliberate swing speed).



SO -- HERE are my latest thoughts, based on all of the feedback here, and elsewhere. I'd like to hear input/thoughts on the new idea.

I am considering making the counter-weight tube of black PVC, instead of carbon fiber.

If I were to use black PVC, here are some thoughts to consider.

Using PVC, the threaded insert into the end of the shaft would not change, and the threaded end cap FOR THE SHAFT would not change (i.e. the cap used to cap the shaft whenever the counterweight is not being used). The PVC tube would screw into the shaft the same way the carbon-fiber one would.

HOWEVER -- if I use 1 1/4" PVC, there are some advantages.

1. PVC is heavier -- and since we are TRYING to add weight, heavier is better, in this case.
2. With the PVC, I will be able to add a threaded end cap onto the PVC counterweight and not have the cost of the counterweight increase from my initial pricing thoughts; the advantage there is having the end cap that screws on and off would make it VERY easy to add/remove weight as necessary (the "adjustability" or "flexibility" that many folks have asked for, with the weights).
3. With 1 1/4" PVC, the inside diameter is larger than the carbon-fiber tube I was going to use. And therefore, the length of the PVC tube can be reduced by 30%, and still hold the exact same amount of weight (and this does not include the fact that the PVC counterweight can be even shorter still, since the tube itself weighs more than a carbon-fiber tube).

SO -- what this means is, you could make a counterweight extension only 2 1/2" long, that would give you 12 ounces of counterweight, for instance.

And 12 ounces of counterweight is 1/2 of that needed to PERFECTLY balance the 11" coil; in other words, the machine would feel MUCH better to swing with 12 oz. counterweight, AND STILL would weigh only about 3 1/2 pounds total, including the counterweight.

OR, another way to look at it is, 12 ounces is the weight needed to make swinging the 12" x 15" coil feel exactly like swinging the 6" coil (i.e. it counter-balances ALL of the additional weight that the 12" x 15" coil adds to the machine, compared to having the 6" coil attached). So, if you feel the machine is comfortable with the 6", but not so, with the 12" x 15", then a 2 1/2", 12 oz. counterweight accomplishes making the 12" x 15" feel like the 6" coil.

I would still give the customer the option to have the weights sent WITH, or WITHOUT, the lead/weight included.

The only negative I can think of, going this "black PVC" route, would be that it would not be as aesthetically pleasing as a carbon-fiber tube would be.

Thoughts?

Steve

Steve that actually sounds like a great idea. And I doubt it would be too big around to get in the way of your elbow hanging over the end of the arm cuff.. I know on my whites style cuff it would interfere they way the cuff is made my arm lays on the shaft itself..

basstrackerman --

Thanks for the input. No, I don't think it would be in the way of your elbow at all; 1 1/2" roughly is the outside diameter of the 1 1/4" PVC tube, not enough to be a nuisance in terms of your elbow position.

Steve

Well at 1.5" total diameter it will hit my elbow.

basstrackerman -- the counterweight would only extend 3/8" above the top plane of the shaft...

Steve

Yes and that is enough to rise hi enough to be above the low point of the cuff.

No, it's actually not. The top part of my weights are also exactly 3/8 from the top of the shaft. It clears fine with no contact at all. It actually sits about 1/8 of an inch below the arm cuff's low point.

basstrackerman --

I am 99% sure it will work perfectly. I just did some checking/measuring. PLUS -- I don't think you are considering that your elbow does not sit "flush" with the bottom of the arm cuff, when you are swinging. The fatter part of one's arm is generally the forearm, and I am nearly SURE this is the case with you. Looking at a side view of your arm, it actually curves "up," away from the shaft, from the largest part of the forearm, back to the elbow. I looked at my arm in the mirror, while holding the detector, and my elbow is a large distance, like 1/2", above the bottom-most part of the arm cuff, when my forearm is resting in the cuff. I'm 6' 2" tall, and so not much shorter than you, and I have long arms also, that extend back past the butt end of the rod. My elbow sits WELL above the plane that the base of the arm cuff is on...

Check it out for yourself, in a mirror. I would be quite surprised if your actual elbow bone sits as low as the very base/trough of the arm cuff...

Steve



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/17/2018 04:24PM by steveg.

I wait to see what weigh number u come up with Steve. But when I made mine.... my fist thought was...making something that work like the tube of th Xcal....THEN what to use for weight. I think most people has something to add weight to the container it’s the idea of how to do it they lack.

dewcon -- I am thinking, more and more, than unless someone wants "perfect balance," that using lighter weight, to achieve "partial" but "much improved balance," is still very beneficial. Like I said, as just one example, 12 ounces of counterweight will make swinging the 12" x 15" coil feel exactly the same as when swinging the 6" coil without the counterweight.

So, I plan to make my sale of the weights a very much "individual preference" thing. I'll probably sell a few different weights as "standard," and then I'll also sell "kits" -- where the tubes are ready to go, including a screw-on cap, but allow the customer to -- like you said -- add whatever amount of weight they desire. I can send them some "loose lead," if they wish, or they can supply their own weight.

Bottom line is, I want to be flexible on this; I think what I've learned through these discussions is that everyone prefers something a little different. Therefore, offering that "kit" -- which like you said will essentially be a nice, screw-on "container" that can accept the amounts of weight the user desires at any given time, for any given situation -- is a good option to provide, along with the "standard" weights.

Steve

I just think you are over thinking that plug ....... a simple plunger style lock where the PVC has some added length might cut costs.

When the large Deus coil came out because the centre of gravity was thrown out very similar i guess to the large Nox coil,some folks started producing a small nylon coil block that bolted onto the bottom shaft and then the coil was mounted on the coil block,this did not in theory add alot of weight being nylon but shifted the 'centre of gravity' and this made the Deus with the larger coil more user friendly so that you swing it much better,so could the same be used on the large Nox coil as well ??

How about using a couple different fixed weights (user selectable) but make it adjustable to each persons preference.

ie: female connector to male to small inner rod with a sliding weight that can be fixed with a set screw or locking ring. Simple yet elegant.

dewcon -- please elaborate on what you mean by me "overthinking that plug" and a "plunger-style lock." I'm not following, but am interested...

Junk and Disorderly -- sounds like a concept to change the way the coil bolted to the lower rod, to offset the place/angle with which the coil attached to the shaft? Interesting.

Jackpine -- I SORT of follow, parts of what you are saying, but I'd need to see a drawing Not sure I can picture the "sliding weight" part...

Meanwhile, I am still thinking through the idea of the PVC or carbon-fiber tube, with needed, threaded fittings, INCLUDING a removable end-cap, so that weight can be added/removed per user preference...

Steve

add an inner rod for the counter weight to slide back and forth on

Jackpine --

GREAT idea, in theory. Elegant, like you said. The down side to the design is with the inner rod taking up a good bit of volume, it would lead to a longer extension needed, than would otherwise be the case; and sliding it back, to its "rearward" position, would ALSO then make it even longer. But otherwise, it is a cool concept...

There are SO many different considerations here, that when you adjust one thing to make it "optimal," it makes something else "sub-optimal."

Steve

Sounds great, easy installation, somewhat adjustable weight-wise, and counterbalances right out of the box. And when you consider your (secondary) objective of trying to keep the costs down, this seems like a ideal solution. Well done. I’m on board, looking forward to giving it a try.