Foot Stomping Experiment

[FatBoy]

if you make your grippers weaker you are only cheating yourself and wasting good money. i think i'll grind down my plates and set a world record squat.

[JoeGrip]

Did my own experiment. Used my RB300 since it was the least used out of the bunch<- "Cause it was nice". 3/4 dowell rod through the spring, steadied on one side w/ a 2x4 so it wouldnt slip or let the handles pass. 100 steps, 25rep incriments, 5 min pause between sets. 200lbs of me STEPING down on it at a medium to slow pace definantly more on the slow side. No way to know what it would have measured on a calibrater. It came out WAY easier than when it went in. All I know is it was between my SE and GE to start w/, judgeing by how close I could get each. Afterwards it was just like the SE, almost easier. I really wanted to try it on a BB or IM since they are more widely used but I couldnt bring myself to do it. I cant beleive I did this to such a nice gripper, it was really to try and put the nail in the coffin since there is obviosly lost sheep still out there. Let it be known that I have a mutalated RB 300 aluminum. If I ever here any more about this outside this thread I am going to puke.

[carusom1]

The molecular components of a torsion spring gripper move and load up to the points of force. In other words, the molecules in the coil will run to the legs of the spring as the handles are compressed.

What????

[Rick Browne]

The molecular components of a torsion spring gripper move and load up to the points of force. In other words, the molecules in the coil will run to the legs of the spring as the handles are compressed.

What????

The molecules of the spring coil will become active and roll toward the point from which the force is generated. The spring legs which are in the handle, creates the force that start the molecules to move and bunch up in the legs when the handles are squeezed.

The spring coil is designed to give a force of forward action as well as a return force of action. The materials used for springs are elastic in nature to be able to produce the positive rotational or twist action it is designed for. Exceeding the max elasticity point of the spring will damage this elastic property.

[gripmaniac]

Sean,

Thanks for posting the results of your experiment and for taking the time and expense to establish a fact that quite a few of us had up until this point intuitively believed.

Whilst open discussion and theory on this issue - as per my previous thread:

http://www.gripboard.com/index.php?showtopic=21026

are fine and thought provoking, it’s actual unbiased experiment results that really count.

I hope everyone (including newbies) will take note of these results. Thanks for getting off your backside to help clarify this for everyone’s benefit.

Dave

[apttdwler]

Ok, I've never footstomped anything, so I'm not 100 percent on how it's done. But I think you put a pipe threw the spring and step on it. I would think unless you are real careful that you might get some twisting, side to side, movement of the handles. Could this result in the greater strength drop? I'd think with hand/chest closes this would be less of an issue?

Edited December 7, 2006 by apttdwler

[gaster]

I have a theory on why foot stomping is different than a hand close or a close by a chest crush.

Everyone assumes that these are the same thing, and that once the ends of the handles touch, the spring does not and cannot move anymore.

Well, let's think about that for a minute. If the ends of the handles touch, but much more force is applied midway on the handle, (like with stomping), isn't it possible that the spring and other end of the handles can move a slight bit more? And if a person is foot stomping, isn't is possible they apply a lot more force than with a chest crush?

Even a slight bit of extra handle and spring movement from a foot stomp means more stress and strain on the spring, even if the handles do not go past each other.

[Teemu I]

I have a theory on why foot stomping is different than a hand close or a close by a chest crush.

Everyone assumes that these are the same thing, and that once the ends of the handles touch, the spring does not and cannot move anymore.

Well, let's think about that for a minute. If the ends of the handles touch, but much more force is applied midway on the handle, (like with stomping), isn't it possible that the spring and other end of the handles can move a slight bit more? And if a person is foot stomping, isn't is possible they apply a lot more force than with a chest crush?

Even a slight bit of extra handle and spring movement from a foot stomp means more stress and strain on the spring, even if the handles do not go past each other.

I also think along those lines.

[carusom1]

The molecular components of a torsion spring gripper move and load up to the points of force. In other words, the molecules in the coil will run to the legs of the spring as the handles are compressed.

What????

The molecules of the spring coil will become active and roll toward the point from which the force is generated. The spring legs which are in the handle, creates the force that start the molecules to move and bunch up in the legs when the handles are squeezed.

The spring coil is designed to give a force of forward action as well as a return force of action. The materials used for springs are elastic in nature to be able to produce the positive rotational or twist action it is designed for. Exceeding the max elasticity point of the spring will damage this elastic property.

Rick

I know you probably don't want to spend forever explaining this to me but I really don't understand. Maybe I can get Dave to explain to me because I am curious.

Molecules become active?? I don't know what this means. What are the springs made of (what molecules)?

active?? How do you activate these molecules?

Roll toward the point from wihich the force is generated? Roll? Do you mean Spin? Align?

This may not be the place to get these questions answered but it does make for interesting conversation versus the normal training talk.

thanks

[Deano]

Wow. Just read the whole thread through and my brain is aching. Good work guys. I'm an engineer and have a passing knowledge of these things. It has been mentioned before that the outside radius of the spring is in tension whilst the inside is in compression. During the action of the spring being opened and closed (always bearing in mind that this movement isn't very big) an amount of work hardening is going to occur to the material. Once this happens, the affected area (which will be tiny) will act a lot less like a spring and a lot more like a bar having had an amount of its springy behaviour reduced. If enough of the springs area becomes affected by this, then this will be felt as a reduction in the strength of the spring. There is no way to repair it, just throw it away and buy another, because as stated here before, you have permenantly altered the properties of the material.

Springs do wear out, even the large ones in the grippers and the work hardening of the outside radius of the spring can sometimes have a large part to play. If this work hardening is allowed to continue, the material will become brittle and can actually snap altogether.

I spend too much of my time trying to diagnose faults in machinery, and sometimes it comes down to a weak spring (of all shapes and sizes). Since a weak spring and a new spring look the same, it's quite a frustrating exercise.

Perhaps the above may in part give further explanation to what is happening to these grippers.

Fascinating discussion guys, brilliant. Thanks very much.

Deano.

[mbcx6pmw]

The molecular components of a torsion spring gripper move and load up to the points of force. In other words, the molecules in the coil will run to the legs of the spring as the handles are compressed.

What????

The molecules of the spring coil will become active and roll toward the point from which the force is generated. The spring legs which are in the handle, creates the force that start the molecules to move and bunch up in the legs when the handles are squeezed.

The spring coil is designed to give a force of forward action as well as a return force of action. The materials used for springs are elastic in nature to be able to produce the positive rotational or twist action it is designed for. Exceeding the max elasticity point of the spring will damage this elastic property.

Rick

I know you probably don't want to spend forever explaining this to me but I really don't understand. Maybe I can get Dave to explain to me because I am curious.

Molecules become active?? I don't know what this means. What are the springs made of (what molecules)?

active?? How do you activate these molecules?

Roll toward the point from wihich the force is generated? Roll? Do you mean Spin? Align?

This may not be the place to get these questions answered but it does make for interesting conversation versus the normal training talk.

thanks

I'm not sure I understand this either. I'm not exactly a metallurgist, but my understanding is the molecules / atoms in steel are locked into a material lattice in a 'body centred cubic' or 'face centred cubic' pattern, depending on the type of steel. When the metal behaves plastically, portions of these lattices move relative to one another along 'slip lines'. This causes stress redistribution and is in fact what gives steel its strength and prevents (up to a point) brittle behaviour.

I think Gaster is probably right about the footstomping, even if you do it pretty carefully, it's likely you will apply a bit of extra force, or otherwise move the spring in a slightly different way, subjecting it to greater stress than a normal close

[twig]

If that's all there was to it this board would have 1 thread. "i squeaze gryperz" with 7000 replies saying "me 2"

Me 2.

I love threads like this, it proves that, just because we train heavy, that doesn't mean we're just lumps of meat.

[sixlitre]

The molecular components of a torsion spring gripper move and load up to the points of force. In other words, the molecules in the coil will run to the legs of the spring as the handles are compressed.

What????

The molecules of the spring coil will become active and roll toward the point from which the force is generated. The spring legs which are in the handle, creates the force that start the molecules to move and bunch up in the legs when the handles are squeezed.

The spring coil is designed to give a force of forward action as well as a return force of action. The materials used for springs are elastic in nature to be able to produce the positive rotational or twist action it is designed for. Exceeding the max elasticity point of the spring will damage this elastic property.

Rick

I know you probably don't want to spend forever explaining this to me but I really don't understand. Maybe I can get Dave to explain to me because I am curious.

Molecules become active?? I don't know what this means. What are the springs made of (what molecules)?

active?? How do you activate these molecules?

Roll toward the point from wihich the force is generated? Roll? Do you mean Spin? Align?

This may not be the place to get these questions answered but it does make for interesting conversation versus the normal training talk.

thanks

Mike, not sure on this one. During my studies, if a material had the ability to let its molecules slide past each other/ move freely (getting that from the move to the legs and bunch up part), we called it a fluid, and not a solid. Seeing how steel in question is a solid, he must be referring to what Noob Siabot said when he referred to elasticity, or the ability of the molecules to give along "slip lines" which lets them transfer shear forces along their faces.

:FOR INFORMATIONAL USES ONLY: When we analyze what forces do to a material in the classroom, we generally break it down into a unit square (2D is much easier to work with than 3D), and draw a free body diagram of the forces acting on the unit. Normal stresses act perpendicular to the unit face, while shear stress acts parallel. Plug and chug through a series of equations, and battabing you have your principal stresses, angle of the failure plane with respect to the principal, and normal stresses on the failure plane, which all come from the stresses acting on the unit body (unit body has sides of 1 and 1 for you guys who are wondering "what about area?", so A=1).

Hopefully that will help you visuallize Mike.

Oh yeah, I sqeeeeze griprz 2. Got my #3 for 4 good reps last night, and barely missed the fifth rep close (around 1/8 in). Not bad for no chalk. Ready for the MM1.

Edited December 7, 2006 by sixlitre

[Matt Brouse]

You people need to stop this.

[climber511]

I make no claims at really understanding all the technical explanations but please keep it up - those of you with the expertise. I'm learning more and more from this discussion - and that's always a good thing.

[StalwartSentinel]

I'll preface this by apologizing to Bill if he feels that this post flys in the face of his post earlier today concerning discussions of how to weaken grippers. This experiment was not intended to be a lesson in how to make weak grippers, but rather a demonstration of what exactly "Foot Stomping" will do to a brand new gripper. This is not a personal attack directed towards anyone. I assumed people used this method because they were ignorant of what was occuring, I hope that they will be educated by the following and make an educated decision.

Here's what went down....

I bought a brand new Supermaster from Warren. I measured the spread at 2.75", the mounting is about 1/16". The coils bound pretty bad. I closed it maybe 5 times in my usual no set style before I took it with me to Chris's on Saturday. We put it in the Redneck Calibrator, it came out to 138 pounds which is the highest rating of a Supermaster that has gone thru the RC (9 Supermaster's have been measured).

We wanted to try the most "legit" manner of foot seasoning we could think of so, we took the gripper and ran a piece of 3/4" CRR thru the spring coil to steady the gripper and gave it 200 foot stomps. These closes were at a medium pace, and each cycle was clicked shut, no cycles were done with the handles "passing each other", and the spring coil at no point bound on the steel rod. We put the gripper back in the RC and it measured 126.35. A loss of 11.65 pounds, making it now the easiest Supermaster measured. The gripper did not lose any spread at this point.

To continue the experiment, we tried foot stomping as above, but we pushed the handles "past each other" for 200 cycles. The gripper lost an additional 1.35 pounds in the RC. Again the spread remained unchanged.

The next experiment was to see what happened when the coil bound against the rod. We inserted a 7/8" steel rod in the coil to steady the gripper and gave it one stomp to get it to shut. The spread was now 1.77", the "dogleg" was gone and the gripper was laughably easy. The RC showed 87.4 pounds. About the rating for a #1.

Now to see what happens if the spread is opened back up....We put the gripper in a vise and using a piece of pipe opened the handles up until the spread once more measured 2.75. In the RC, the mangled Supermaster now showed 115.3 (a stiff #2 range). The dogleg returned and it appears outwardly just as it did fresh from the package.

I came to 4 conclusions as a result of this experiment.

1) Foot stomping artificially increases the "seasoning" effect. Even if you are not trying to weaken the gripper....if you choose to season your grippers in this manner that is your choice, but you've now seen exactly what happens. A gripper that was a good, hard SM was turned into a wimpy SM....before we "tried" to weaken it. I don't feel like spending $$$ to run this experiment several more times, but I'll make a wild guess that this experiment will show repeatable results. Go ahead, try it. You'll be surprised

2) If anyone posts a video of a gripper close, I will doubt their ability until they either climb the MM ladder, cert with IM under the new rules, perform in a competition, close said gripper in front of me after I've inspected the gripper, or has earned my trust.

3) Some of you folks have too much free time. Foot stomping grippers is boring, even more so than training grippers. I can't imagine how boring it would be to "season" every gripper I bought like this.

4) The safest way to maintain the integrity of your grippers and your word is to just train with the darn things, and let the seasoning process take care of itself.

I'm not trying to get into a fight. I just have a couple of questions or observations...

1) You brought a brand new BBSM, that had only been squeezed 5 times.

2) You tested the BBSM with the RC and got 138 pounds.

3) This was the highest rating of all of the BBSM's.

4) It had to be the highest, it was brand new.

5) You then foot stomped the BBSM 200 times.

6) Measured it again in the RC and now it was the weakest at 126.35 pounds.

7) How were all of the other BBSM's seasoned? How many reps and what method?

8) Maybe your new BBSM would have gotten to 126.35 pounds by regular use anyways.

9) Could filing and overcrushing (working a gripper PAST its normal range) give the same results?

10) All other things being equal (no pushing handles past each other, no twisting of gripper spring, stabilizing rod not tight and impeding the spring coils from compressing, pressing the handles only until they touch and finally, not closing it too fast, so that no heat is generated) how can 100 closes with a foot, hand or chest be any different?

Thanks Doc.

[Trevor111]

fluid or solid the molecules are ALWAYS moving. unless you get to absolute zero you cannot stop the movement of molecules in an object. i do also agree that the force application by foot to the centre of the handle is much different than just closing the handles with a chest crush or hand crush.

[Alawadhi]

I'm not trying to get into a fight. I just have a couple of questions or observations...

1) You brought a brand new BBSM, that had only been squeezed 5 times.

2) You tested the BBSM with the RC and got 138 pounds.

3) This was the highest rating of all of the BBSM's.

4) It had to be the highest, it was brand new.

5) You then foot stomped the BBSM 200 times.

6) Measured it again in the RC and now it was the weakest at 126.35 pounds.

7) How were all of the other BBSM's seasoned? How many reps and what method?

8) Maybe your new BBSM would have gotten to 126.35 pounds by regular use anyways.

9) Could filing and overcrushing (working a gripper PAST its normal range) give the same results?

10) All other things being equal (no pushing handles past each other, no twisting of gripper spring, stabilizing rod not tight and impeding the spring coils from compressing, pressing the handles only until they touch and finally, not closing it too fast, so that no heat is generated) how can 100 closes with a foot, hand or chest be any different?

Thanks Doc.

Because Doc said he inserted a steel rod in the coil to steady the gripper. In a chest crush you won't put a steel rod in the coil. In addition, no matter how strong you fingers or chest crush is; it won't be stronger than foot stomping. The easier you do it, the faster the gripper get closed, the more heat goes into the coil. So logically this is the cause.

Edited December 7, 2006 by Alawadhi

[climber511]

There have been a lot of "what ifs" thrown out and that's a good thing - all I can say is - "this is what we did and this is what happened" - I welcome results from anyone else who is willing to do what Doc did in ruining a gripper with whatever experiments you might choose to do on it.

If any of you choose to do your own experiment - please share the results with all of us.

[diesel]

Because Doc said he inserted a steel rod in the coil to steady the gripper. In a chest crush you won't put a steel rod in the coil. In addition, no matter how strong you fingers or chest crush is; it won't be stronger than foot stomping. The easier you do it, the faster the gripper get closed, the more heat goes into the coil. So logically this is the cause.

which might be true, but i don't think are answers to mat's questions. i think stalwart is going for more controls in the experiment so that a truly conclusive answer is drawn. can't say i disagree. if you want to call it an experiment, a few things need to be tested in order to make it valid.

[THOR]

To all of you who "season" a gripper WHY WHAT IS THE POINT??? SERIOUSLY WHY DO YOU NEED TO DO THAT!?!?

[THOR]

Received my 2.5 yesterday and put it in the device I made to hold it and did 50 closes with my foot in groups of 5, so YES I like to season a new gripper. Lost NO spread and didn't feel any easier.

WHY?!?! MAN THIS PISSES ME OFF, THERE IS NO REASON TO DO THAT!!! IF YOU CANT CLOSE IT GET A WEAKER ONE AND TRAIN WITH THAT!!!

Edited December 7, 2006 by THOR

[lifesnotfair]

THOR: I don't do that and have never done it, but the reason why SOME people do it, is because they think the gripper will weaken after "X" closes, and they don't want to think that they got stronger, while in fact it could be the gripper getting "seasoned".

I pay no attention to that and just close the darned things.

[Jonathan McMillan]

Just a quick observation. There has been a few comments that I'll paraphrase as "how come foot stomping and chest crushing, or normal use leads to different results when the handles are basically repeatedly closed in any method you chose". Here is where an error is being made imho. Foot stomping is completely different then using your hand or chest crushing. The reason why is with foot stomping one handle is predominantly stationary while the stomped handle is doing the majority of movement. WIth normal grip use and chest crushing both handles move. Could this be the reason why the forces in foot stomping are more dramatic???

Jon@han

[mbcx6pmw]

I don't think so Jon, it shouldn't matter whether one or both handles are moving. In fact, when you shut one in your hand generally the palm handle stays pretty still and it's the finger handle that moves.