/cgl/ - Cosplay & EGL

>>9412549
>I meant how do you rationalize the comparison, not the actual physical process. I am sure the actual recorded data would prove the difference between the two just fine.


you don't.
you record the cutting ability at identical force outputs. that identifies the performance characteristics of each one.

any other measurement is subjective - to state its "lighter" or heavier" or the likes if entirely down to the individual user's preferences, and as such is an unreliable method of recording data.

as such I would, as I mentioned, use Vincent le Chevalier's work on handling dynamics as the primary form of graphing the characteristics irrespective of user.

http://blog.subcaelo.net/ensis/visual-representation-mass-distribution/

I'd likely work with Peter to re-assess that work by Vincent in a similar fashion to his work for the Solingen 2015 exhibition, as its a better graphic design layout for ease of understanding.

http://blog.subcaelo.net/ensis/sword-form-thought/


At least, that's certainly my intention to be the method used to quantify the data for when the book on all the single-edged arms is finally published, because at this stage, I do not believe there is a more reliable method to catalogue the data..

>>9403366

the reality of mass distribution in falchions is that there is less than a 10% difference in the *relative* percentage of mass in point of percussion between the heaviest falchions, and the average two-edged swords of contemporary date, and many of the falchions are very much within the ballpark with similar weighting - those of Type F3c, d, and e, and the type 5 blades in particular.
In terms of actual mass, by dint of often being lighter, the falchions tend to have significantly less mass in thier blades at the point of impact, even when in terms of relative mass they have greater distribution.
as an example since I have the stats to hand just now, against a privately-owned 14th C type XIII, and one of the single-edged lubeck messers, the messer is more than 150g *lighter* than the XIII at their respective points of percussion, despite having 4% more mass at that point. In real, physical terms, what that means is that the single-edged arms, while having "presence" in the cut are often lighter, easier to manoeuvre, and more agile than their counterparts, in some cases (Type 1's) due to being more compact, and in other cases due to their low mass. These weapons are in no way about mass - thier design places an emphasis on the cleaving cut, but in blade dynamics, they are far closer to a medieval type XIII or XVIII in thier blade weight at the point of harmonic percussion than a 16th century rapier is. And you dont go around claiming that rapiers are spears or lances, do you?

Continued: