16 replies to this topic
Posted 15 June 2008 - 03:44 PM
I've been seeing alot of these lipless swimbaits latley and was wondering how the hell they get them to have good swimming action without a lip. I'm thinking weighting and balance would be absolutly critical, but what triggers the swimming action?
Posted 15 June 2008 - 08:28 PM
The joints create the swimming action. And hopefully someone else will chime in with more precise information, but this is what I was told by a big time swimbait maker on the "big market".
It's about water pressure. As one side recieves pressure, it attempts to achieve an equilibrium and to do so, swings the joints around to "balance" the pressure, which in turn repeats itself and creates a swimming action.
I would have to assume, like yourself, that the weight and balance plays a large part in this process.
Posted 15 June 2008 - 08:48 PM
Check out the Gliders on this site. Lurebuilding 101
Posted 15 June 2008 - 09:59 PM
Um, er, ah, vortices. I know it's a dirty word, but it is what makes swimbaits swim (thanks Vodkman).
Also, grooving the top of the lure from the line tie to the top of the first section, like the top of a rattle trap, seems to make the lures a little more erratic.
Posted 15 June 2008 - 10:03 PM
Vortexes arranged in Von Karman street.
You beat me to it, Mark!
Edited by KcDano, 15 June 2008 - 10:05 PM.
Posted 16 June 2008 - 12:28 AM
Husky, no luck with the link, I'll try again tonight.
I haven't studied swimbaits yet, they are my next project. But I have been collecting ideas. There are three possibilities (in my head):
1. Vortices, forming across the back, in a similar fashion to lip vortices (Many of you may not like the idea of vortices and are probably tired of reading this word, but they are a fact of life).
2. Aerodynamic type forces. The smooth flow past the sides of the body, draws the sides to swing out into the flow. One side is always going to be slightly stronger than the other and will swing out. It does not explain how the lure swings back. I thought maybe it stalls (like a wing stalls) and the suction collapses and the body swings back. Inertia carries it past neutral and the process repeats on the other side. I built a lure to explore this idea, more curvature on one side. It did not waggle and just took off at an angle. But I cannot discount the theory yet.
3. A combination of the above. The aerodynamic movement reaches a stall and vortices are created over the back. This vortex draws the body back to neutral, but inertia of the movement carries the body past neutral. The vortex fades and aerodynamic forces continue to pull the body now in the opposite direction until it again stalls and the process repeats.
Now that I have written it down, the combo theory looks very promising. The problem is how to prove it. The best indication of the forces acting on a body, is how the body reacts to those forces. For example, if the bait has excessive rolling action, this would indicate to me a vortex across the back, causing a rotation. If the lure wiggled without roll, this would indicate aero theory. If the lure wiggled with a slight roll towards the end of the cycle, this would indicate combo theory.
As stated above, it could be the hinges, or something we have not considered yet.
Edited by Vodkaman, 16 June 2008 - 12:29 AM.
Posted 16 June 2008 - 12:44 AM
On The German site KoederDesign.de - alles für den Köderbau there recently was a request upon a swimbait , that wouldn't wiggle at all !
It looked pretty well-done on the pic , so I asumed , that the tow point was located at the wrong spot(inside the slightly opened mouth of that trout resemblance) .
In my theory the tow point has to be set in a way , that the oncoming current during retrieve is putting pressure either more on belly,-or more on back portion of the front section , causing it to drift away sideward .
At a certain stage of this sideward movement the force of the pulling line would then cause the bait to change direction again towards the angler , and since the first section with that towpoint is hinged to the rear sections , these must follow these movements , generating this "snakelike" swimming pattern .
The above mentioned lure has its towpoint at a location , that renders the oncoming current on retrieve equal either on back ,- or belly portion of front section , this is why , it is not forced sideward and can't wiggle , but swims straight .
Off course it is essential to first create the right conditions by properly weighting and balancing the lure , otherwise the best towpoint position won't help anymore to gain a well-performing swimbait .
And there must be something physical about it as well :
Just came to my mind watching a truck with a trailer(connected with a kinda hinge just like a swimbait) going backward to switch .
The steering wheels always have to be set in opposite direction to the desired direction of the trailer , just similar to that desired "snakelike" movement !
Well , nothing but theory , but that's my prefered explanation upon why swimbaits do swim the way , they do .
Greetz , diemai
Edited by diemai, 16 June 2008 - 01:24 AM.
Posted 16 June 2008 - 05:32 AM
Diemai, I like it. This theory should be easily tested out, when I catch up.
Posted 16 June 2008 - 07:08 AM
One interesting observation regarding this matter is that there are parameters of lure thickness that you have to work within or the lures won't swim. It's the same thing with jerkbaits. The wood must be a certain thickness for a given lure length or it won't "glide".
Interestingly though I use thinner wood (3/4") for my swimbaits and they swim perfectly than I can get away with when building gliders of the same overall length of about 10". I've also noticed that the taller side profile shapes such as the shad or panfish have a more exaggerated wiggle to them as a lipless swimbait and a tighter side to side glide when built up as a solid bodied glider jerkbait.
Food for thought!
Posted 17 June 2008 - 07:52 PM
Laminar flow! I don't know what that means, but I've always wanted to say it.
Seriously, I think the water passing along the sides of the lure is interrupted by the space in the joints, and that creates uneven pressure on the sides of the second section, causing it to swing from one side to the other as it tries to reach equilibrium. And that side to side moves the next section, which lags a little, and then cracks like a whip. That's why I think open, loose fitting joints swim much better than tight fitting joints.
Also, weighting the first section toward the rear makes it unstable, as the front is lighter and is constantly moving sideways from the water pressure on it as it's towed through the water.
My three piece lures flap like a flag, if that makes sense, with the second section moving wildly side to side, and the tail being flapped behind it.
My four piece lures swim like a snake, I think because the fourth section makes them a little more stable by dampening the wild swing of the third section. Kind of like how big rigs with three trailers (illegal here in California) are less prone to jackknife that the tandem trailer rigs you see all the time.
At least that's my considered opinion.
And you know what they say about opinions. They're like armpits...everyone has them, and they all stink to someone else.
Posted 01 July 2008 - 12:55 PM
found this on a patent site...........
a lipless head section pivotally hinged to the tail section, wherein the
head section is shaped such that hydrodynamic forces generated when moving
through water cause the head section to lift and shift an impact point of
the water to a bottom of the lure thereby causing the head section to
wobble side-to-side, the head section comprising a top portion and a
bottom portion shaped in converging arcs and meeting at a mouth portion,
the bottom portion including a throat section having an external perimeter
outline when viewed from a side of the lure that is curved in a direction
opposite from the converging arc of the bottom portion,
Edited by carpholeo, 01 July 2008 - 12:56 PM.
Posted 01 July 2008 - 06:01 PM
After I made the original reply, I thought about it, and I didn't mean to minimize or belittle you search, so please don't take it that way.
Man, if you can get a patent with such a general, vague description........
Seriously, it describes the action of the lure, but it really doesn't say why it does what it does except in very general terms.
At least that's how I read it. And you know how well I read....
I wonder if a better description of the actual mechanics of the movements and the forces that act on the lure might be found on an aerospace site. Water and air should act the same on a lure.
Or maybe I should just hang my lures out of my truck window at 60mph to test how they swim.
Edited by mark poulson, 01 July 2008 - 06:35 PM.
Posted 03 July 2008 - 08:24 PM
I fish lipless primarily. I have played with the same lures in diferent thicknesses and learned quite a bit from it. Weight placement can make quite a diference too.............especially when weight is required in both the front and tail section. Simply moving the tail weight location slightly can change action dramatically.
I got some advice from diemai a while back about messing with the weight for a Ludela I was building. After doing such I started messing around with everything. You would be suprised at what you can change about a given design without changing the over-all pattern.
Posted 03 July 2008 - 08:38 PM
I lucked into a jointed bait design that swam well after I made one that didn't. My first jointed bait was a punker that I cut up into sections, using the punker weighting. It is now a twitch bait, since it swims like a stick.
For my first successful jointed lure, I copied the hook placement of the triple trout, and, since I used weighted hook hangers, that started my weight positioning, and, as it turned out, it was pretty successful. Making the joints loose, and putting the weight to the rear of the front section, and, as much as possible, to the rear or evenly placed in each of the rest of the sections, worked.
I had made quite a few punker type lures, and I'd figured out the middle and tail weighting needed in those for them to walk, and so I had an idea that moving the weight to the rear of a section would contribute to it's tendency to move to the side. Like a truck jack knifing.
And it worked! No one was more surprised than me!
I guess that just proves that whole blind pig thing.
Posted 04 July 2008 - 03:41 PM
Im the blindest.....and according to my wife...Im the piggiest.....lol
One thing I learned from this site is that the common materials used have some limits but the mechanics have endless posibilities......................
Have a great 4th of July.............
Posted 04 July 2008 - 06:44 PM
Same to you, Sonny. Have a happy and save Fourth.
And that goes for all the TU asylum inmates!