# New arrow design, testing needed!



## b0w_bender (Apr 30, 2006)

do you think this will be for a hunting application only or for target practice as well?
What happens to the tip on impact of a target? 
If the tip stays intact what happens to the target when this turbine enters it? How would you extract the tip from the target?


----------



## Cotton-Eye (Oct 28, 2012)

Very cool. The above question has merit. In a hunting situation the arrows (and your "fletching") need to be TOUGH. If you really want to make money you'll have to appeal to the masses and make them for hunters as well as target shooters. I think target shooters are much more of a niche market, especially in competitions where your arrow is probably against regulations (?).

Good luck in your endeavor, wish you the best!


----------



## bbjavelina (Jan 30, 2005)

I'm not too bright, but what does this do for me. Is there some advantage? How would this stand up to impact with various target materials, or even game animals?

Is it a one shot and done kind of thing or am I missing something?

I wish you well.


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Hi bOw bender,
thank you for your questions.
The hand made arrows were made of paper and glue, reinforced by a fibreglass. The turbine slid onto a shaft. I protected it by a ring made of aquarium tube. It withstood quite a lot, about 5 shots from 5 meters using 35 lb bow and full draw length.
The real tips will depend on what you use them for. For practice arrows I will use epoxy along with long (70 mm) tip sticking out, perhaps with added rubber ring. The blades will break eventually and will need to be replaced. The very tip will be made of steel nail that I will stick into mold prior to adding epoxy.
For hunting arrows the turbine will be made of alluminium, iron or bronze, and it will be stronger then flash.
Extracting tip from a straw target is quite simple, it burries itself up to turbine. With hunting I don't know, I suppose it will need to be cut out using a knife or lever of a sort, or else pushed all the way throug. Maybe it will slide out easily, but I doubt it.
Jan


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Hi Cotton Eye,
thank you for your reply. Yes, I also think hunters will be my target group. I will make the turbines for hunting of cast iron, bronze or similar material. About the competitions it is hard to tell right now. In present it doesn't interfere with the rules (I checked with olympic archery rules), but the rules may change as this is a completely new aspect noone was expecting ahead of the time.
Jan


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Hi BBjavelina,
as I said. The practice arrow tips will get destroyed eventually, althoug I do what I can to protect them. I am planning on making them cheap and dispensable, like a practice golfball. I am not anywhere near the commercial production yet, so for now they will be only for those who can afford them or for those that help me and get their infinite supply from themselves.
The metal tips will get quite expensive, yes. They will bring you more accuracy, more distance, drilling instead of stabbing and will kill quickly by bleeding the game out, not bleeding it inward. It will kill no matter where it hits, it just needs to be a place that does bleed.
Jan


----------



## b0w_bender (Apr 30, 2006)

View attachment 1771947
OK so for clarification, the other folks I think are having the same thought as me.

If this big plastic thing is on the front of the arrow then I cannot image it surviving an impact with the majority of the bows and target combinations that I shoot. If I'm shooting a 65# compound into a foam target my expectation is that it will explode into a thousand pieces or be mangled in some way. Now if this turbine slid down the shaft perhaps it would hold up but that would be something I would say needs to be tested.

Target Shooting:
Even if it slid down the shaft I cannot see how this would function as a target tip. You are not allowed to touch the shaft prior to scoring so inevitably I would think the turbine would interfere with the visual shaft edge and scoring would be a guessing game. Alternatively if the turbine entered the target it would creat so much damage to the target face you would likely need to change it regularly. Both scenarios make it less than viable for target shooting. 

Hunting:
I question if an average archer would be interested in a product that functions differently from their practice arrows or the arrows they use for target shooting. If this point does penetrate a 3D target then I doubt that most clubs would allow you to use them. It would simply cause too much damage to the 3D targets. All of this adds up to a niche sort of market and so you should be aware of this before you try to take this any further. I'm not sure how to say this gently so I'll just come out and be clear, I don't really think it is as revolutionary as you may be hoping. I think the idea may have some merit but you'll need to work out some of these details before you move forward and don't expect to get rich of the idea. It may seem like I'm being overly negative but I'm really trying hard not to rain on your parade, I highly encourage innovative thinking I applaud your efforts. Having said that also I'm not sure how unique the idea is. I know these are not exactly the same but there are some eerie similarities in what you are proposing and they have been around for 50 years. By the way they never gained broad acceptance and I believe they were a commercial failure.


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Hi bOw bender,
your input is incredibly valuable for me, thank you very, very much. I will be more than happy to answer your unasked questions.

The durability of the turbine needs to be indeed tested. It exceeded my expectations, but that doesn't mean it will fulfill yours or those of others. I made a flexibility work for me. The turbine itself works as a spring. The plastic springs. The arches spring. The ring from a rubber hose I attached to the tip acts like a bumper - spring. In order to make the arrow withstand some more I replaced original short metal tip with long nose that will protect the turbine little more. The practice arrows will not last forever, they will break eventually, and will get bulkier and bulkier as you glue them over and over, unless you manage to sand the excess glue off nicely without impairing the shape too much.

The same applies to the targets. They get hole punched through with the tip, but the turbine stays outside. In none of the shots did the turbine burry itself, nor did the arrow spring itself back from the target.

The question of arrows inflicting too much damage is a similar scenario as with broadheads. What is more humane? Killing quickly with terrible wound, or killing slowly with a small hole? The chances are that with my arrows the wound will be somewhere between broadheads and round arrow, but it will bleed more then either. I don't know what will hunting clubs say about this, but I believe that my arrows are more humane.

Thank you very much for the photos, bOw bender. They are beautiful. When I was a kid I got a hunting book from my grandpa, and there was an arrow like that. It was a bad picture, I couldn't even recognize that it was all around like my present arrows. It said something about Hill and elephant bow. I never found a picture of these arrows, and I was looking for them.

About the novelty I have little concerns. In order to stabilize an arrow with just rotation and making it fly further than ordinary arrows at least 3 conditions must be met:
1/ The turbine needs to be horizontal, meaning the axis of rotation has the same direction as the direction of flight.
2/ The turbine needs to work due to lift forces, not by the drag forces, as drag action will be either insufficient to stabilize arrow, or too great of a drag for an arrow or little of each, like helical fletches used today.
3/ The turbine mustn't have any sharp tips or desks extending outwards as they will cause vertex shaped turbulences and will slow the arrow down just like fletches do.
There is, at present time, one turbine that fulfills all three criteria, and that is my turbine. There are other turbines that work with lift, such as Tesla or Gorlov. But they are vertical, therefore useless. There is an airplane propeller, which is both horizontal and lift powerd. But it extends it's tips far away, creating drag. The rest of existing turbines are drag powerd, ergo useless.

As far as commercial success, I am sure it will come, I just don't know when. I will make arrows or shotgun projectiles for hunting for starter. They are small and can be placed into a nice box with price tag on it. I refuse to make or allow others to make rifle bullets, missles, torpedoes and drop bombs. I would happily allow the turbine to be used in rockets and satellites.

But there are many other applications for my turbine. It rotates in a stream of water, and it doesn't need a dam, therefore it will be possible to use it pretty much anywhere where water flows. I tested it and found a start-up speed to be below 0.5 kmh-1, which I think is pretty good, better than what we've got so far. The turbine will work on wind as well, and likely just as well. And it can be made multi stage, meaning it can be used for steam, too. And other applications come along, it can be used like a drill, a pump, a ventilator, or airplane/ship/submarine propeller, to give you few examples.

(and I have more inventions comming online when I make sufficient capital off turbines).

I hope that answered some questions you may have had in your mind. If you have more suggestions and points and so on, I will treasure them. Thank you once more.

Jan


----------



## bonecollector66 (Mar 2, 2011)

^^^


----------



## brtesite (May 24, 2002)

me thinks there is a tongue & cheek thing going on here:shade:


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Hi brtesite,
I don't know what you mean. You could mean I am joking or you could be for unclear reasons referencing to an extremely perverted behavior. It is none of the two.
Jan


----------



## b0w_bender (Apr 30, 2006)

OK still have no idea what happens to the "turbine" when it impacts the target. I guess you'll need to provide a video of that.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

Why does the turbine need to be on the front of the arrow? Could they not be put on the back of the arrow like traditional fletching and still keep the same benefits that you describe? If they were on the back of the arrow, I'd be very interested in trying them. As they are now, they are very cool and unique but they are not quite practical to the archery world.


----------



## ArcherFletch (Jul 8, 2012)

Huntinsker is right - it is common sense that if you want to stabilize an object you need to do it at the back.

I have a lot of respect for what you have accomplished so please don't take this as negative - here are some problems with your design.

You state that "this design uses lift instead of drag". This statement sounds like you don't have basic understanding of physics. Lift IS Drag. 

You cannot create a force in one direction without an equal and opposite force (normal force). So your design will be inherently unstable - there is a reason that most planes have stabilizers on the rear, and the ones that don't (use canards etc) have very complex flight control systems to keep them stable. Think about every missile since the dawn of time - even guys throwing spears would stick a tassel on the back to stabilize it - nobody ever put anything on the front (or if they did, no-one copied it because it didn't work)

Also all of the points about destroying your tip every shot are good points and can't be ignored.

You state that "The arrows fly straight, unlike fletched arrows that fly with snake like motion." This also doesn't pass the common-sense test. A properly tuned setup will shoot even a bare shaft straight out to 40m! If you are shooting a bow that doesn't have a cut-past-center shelf, then you need something to stabilize the rear of it even more.

I could see this being used in conjunction with a fletched arrow if you just want to have an interesting tip design. But then it looks like those have already been invented, what is the difference between your concept and the pictures that were posted?


----------



## dwagoner (Sep 27, 2007)

Huntinsker said:


> . As they are now, they are very cool and unique but they are not quite practical to the archery world.


yeah theres a reason the indians started with a heavy point in front and feathers in rear of arrow, and why were still pretty much doing the exact same thing. no way a "turbine" piece in front of an arrow will ever work in the archery world..... would like to see in rear of arrow also


----------



## dwagoner (Sep 27, 2007)

ArcherFletch said:


> I have a lot of respect for what you have accomplished so please don't take this as negative -


yeah its very creative and ingenius


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

dwagoner said:


> yeah theres a reason the indians started with a heavy point in front and feathers in rear of arrow, and why were still pretty much doing the exact same thing. no way a "turbine" piece in front of an arrow will ever work in the archery world..... would like to see in rear of arrow also


I agree. That simple video of him dropping the arrows was pretty impressive in how the turbine started to spin so soon after release. It looked to be spinning quite quickly as well. Put that on the back of an arrow and you may have something special.


----------



## brtesite (May 24, 2002)

kokes said:


> Hi brtesite,
> I don't know what you mean. You could mean I am joking or you could be for unclear reasons referencing to an extremely perverted behavior. It is none of the two.
> Jan


 having a perverted behavior doesn't mean I'm a bad guy


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Hi everybody,
I am so glad to get so many answers. Thak to all of you that took their time to reply. I will try to answer you, but first thing first.
I was thinking how comes noone seems to want to try this out. I figured it may be because you have to ask me. So I decided to make that part easier for you, you can just download the 3D file here. It is it stl format, all normals calculated outside, all faces triangulated, no doubles. In other words it is 3D printer ready. The chepest printers cost about 500 dollars and many places offer prints at about 10 dollars apiece. I will have sufficient funds on Monday to get one printed myself, so when the sun is shining I will borrow my dad's camera and do filming for you. Meanwhile you can do the same. Feel free to print and test, just don't sell these. 









There is a hole in front of the tip with 3 mm diameter. You can stick a nail in there, as heavy as you like, up to 130 mms in length. Or you can put metal shavings in the hole and plug it with nail, or you can leave part of the arrow hollow, as you like.

And now the answers.

bOw bender,
I remembered I didn't anwer that when I left the internet place. Thank you for reminding me. I covered my turbine with fibreglass. When it did break, it was as if one breaks an arm. It was limp, it wobbled, but it stayed in place. It broke at the point where turbine and tip meet, as one would expect. Front first, than back, than in between, and than the rotation ceased altogether and I needed to do the gluing. Which I did, many times over. I still have the hand made turbine that I was dropping from my parents' balcony.

Huntsinker:
The turbine doesn't need to be at the front. It can be at back as well as anywhere in between. I fitted it to front since I didn't want to cut my fingers with it. The arrow never overturned, it kept it's direction, despite the turbine being in front. That is what I have seen with my eyes, so that is what I claim, regardless of what books or indians may say. Print it, test it. If you insist on a turbine in the back, I can make another model with turbine in the back. I will happily do so if you test it.

ArcherFletcher:
I will only answer what I haven't answered yet.
I am not sure we use the same terminology, but either way you are correct. The turbine does create drag, as any object. It also is partially drag powered. I made sure that drag and lift work hand in hand, spinning turbine in the same direction. It just uses a lot of lift, and I should have stated this more clearly at the beginning. By lift I mean the air that goes around the blade, never touching it. That air is forced to go a bit faster because of limited space between blades. Increased speed creates low pressure that powers the rotation. If you leave door open and two windows in opposing sides of a house open, the door will slam shut. This will not happen bacause the air would be pushing door (that's what I call drag action), but because it is going through it (I refer to that as lift action). Please take a time to explain to me your terminology if you can, it will make the matter less confusing to me.
Very interesting point about bare shaft going straight for 40 meters, I didn't know this was possible. I only have a rubber luggage fastener, that was the best bow I could afford for now. I tried atlatl, but I failed to launch an arrow of it. More testing is definitely needed. I don't care if turbine goes front or rear. It worked in front for me.

brtesite
I agree. That wasn't my point. My point was, give me arguments, that is what I came for. Thank you.

That's all for now. Thank you once more for the replies.

Jan


----------



## edthearcher (Nov 2, 2002)

so now i have to chime in. shoot a rocket it has to have rear guidence, fly a jet or prop plane it is guided by the rear, shoot an arrow it is guided by the rear end. now einstein here says he can do it diffrent. I truly doubt it


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

If you make a turbine that you can add to the back of an arrow like more traditional fletchings, I'd be very happy to test it for you as I'm sure many others would as well. If you could make it so that it slides over the arrow shaft and then can be glued in place, I think you would have a legitimate product that the archery world would embrace, assuming that testing goes well and it actually works. My arrows have a .297 inch outer diameter.

You would need to make it something like the Outer Limit Blood Vane http://www.outerlimitarchery.com/blood-vane.html.


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Here you go. It is stl file again, printer ready, .297 inch inner diameter 3 bladed turbine, 30 mm outer diameter 70 mm in length. I thought three blades would spice the thing up a little, it is mind twisting. 









Happy shooting. Jan


----------



## foreign (Aug 26, 2013)

hey Kokes.
I dont have access to a 3D printer but id be more than wiling to make some of these if you gave me a mould and test them. i guess i could make them out of epoxy resin reenforced with glass fibres. i could try the front and he back ideas. im a little doubtful that the front idea will work for target or hunting purposes but ill definatly give them a go. im interested in the degree of the spiral on those blades. i know that FOB's have only a 2 degree angle and they spin an arrow very well. i wonder if your angle may be a little aggressive and may have a slowing output to it. 
i can test that too as i have a chronograph to shoot though. 
i shoot a 70 pound bow and recurve bows too. would be interesting to try an arrow with one of your fletchings on the front of an arrow out of a recurve. could also try on a crossbow if you really desire. 

you could also print a few off if you have access to a printer and then send them to me. 
your second design for the back of the arrow i think has a potential

you can contact me on here or a faster way is on my email. 
[email protected]

i look forward to playing with these. 

cheers
Rob


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

kokes said:


> Here you go. It is stl file again, printer ready, .297 inch inner diameter 3 bladed turbine, 30 mm outer diameter 70 mm in length. I thought three blades would spice the thing up a little, it is mind twisting.
> 
> View attachment 1773737
> 
> ...


That thing looks awesome! Looking cool is definitely a plus in my book. I hope I can find a 3d printer near me that doesn't charge too much so I can try this.


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

huntinsker said:


> why does the turbine need to be on the front of the arrow? Could they not be put on the back of the arrow like traditional fletching and still keep the same benefits that you describe? If they were on the back of the arrow, i'd be very interested in trying them. As they are now, they are very cool and unique but they are not quite practical to the archery world.


foc.

Depending on the WEIGHT of the turbine air foil,
may be BETTER for FOC,
to have the turbine air foil
at the FRONT side of the arrow.

If the WEIGHT of the turbine air foil,
approaches the weight of your typical field point...
then,
putting the turbine air foil in the BACK
would be a BAD idea,
cuz the FOC would get TOO LOW.

3 BLAZERS weighs about 18 grains TOTAL.

This airfoil design is PROBABLY much much HEAVIER than 18 grains,
so,
if the AIR FOIL is say 100 grains total weight,
then,
MOVING it to the FRONT of the arrow
is BETTER for center of lift.

MUST keep the center of lift FORWARDS of the middle point of the arrow.


----------



## dwagoner (Sep 27, 2007)

nuts&bolts said:


> foc.
> 
> Depending on the WEIGHT of the turbine air foil,
> may be BETTER for FOC,
> ...


yeah and how you gonna shoot an arrow with this in the front of it???? its not about the weight but the principal of having this "turbine" thing in the front of the arrow and praticallity of it, which its NOT pratical at all and will never be....so theres really no point in worrying about the weight of it...


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

dwagoner said:


> yeah and how you gonna shoot an arrow with this in the front of it???? its not about the weight but the principal of having this "turbine" thing in the front of the arrow and praticallity of it, which its NOT pratical at all and will never be....so theres really no point in worrying about the weight of it...


Experimentation.

Edison was told to GIVE UP on the light bulb.
It'll never work.

Same for telephones.

Lots of Research and Development is building prototypes,
and then,
based on EARLY testing results,
you REFINE the prototype
make design changes.

Soooo,

kokes...

NEVER give up...
ALWAYS remain curious..

PUSH then envelope of current understanding,
and MAYBE
you will find NEW information...

about the practicality
or possibly,
you may discover the NEXT stage of improvements.

I have contacted a fella with extensive 3D printing capability,
and your design will be printed and tested.


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

nuts&bolts:
Thank you, thank you, thank you!!!
Jan


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Hi Rob,
thank you for your reply. There is no haste, so I will answer here, and everyone who wants to see it can see it.

I was thinking about making the angle less aggressive, but I tested this angle and it worked very well, so I didn't feel like taking chances. I can change it very easily as I have a whole program to compute various modifications of my turbine. I can change the shape completely, including diameter and width. I can change the number of blades and their orientaion. I can make them wide or narrow, as I wish. I can also change their profile, which is also based on numerical parameters and computed on the fly. And I can change precission, making the mesh out of say hudreds or from say millions of triangles. At top of all that, this is just one of the modifications of my turbine. It can also be made lift only, similar to bOw bender's arrows from post #8, or drag only, or grayscale between. This particular design is about mid way. Just to give you a brief introduction. If you wish I can dive deeper the next time around, talking about multiple stages and chained turbines. There is a lot to test.

3D printers are hard to come by and their output is not cheap, that is if you don't already have one. I spend my time working hard to keep afloat while advancing at the same time. Sometimes I sink a little, but I advance faster. Like right now. If I had money to print 3D molds, I would rather make my living easier by selling arrow tips, and not wasting my time programming for others. If I had money to mail modls on demand, I wouldn't need testing any more, as I could just have my tests submitted in pear review. If you want to have a mold, you can. Either you help me while I need it, in which case I will send you a 3D file with the mold. Or you can buy a mold from me for production purposes, along with licence to do so. But these will be very expensive, as you can imagine. And if you can't, take my output, multiply it by my skills, and multiply that by your wage, times say 12 hours a day, times say 330 days a year, times say 13 years. I don't want all of that from one mold, but I do want my time invested to pay back, along with interests for paying in advance and taking 100% of the risk on my shoulders.

I hope that wasn't too harsh, it wasn't suppossed to be. Thank you for your offer. If you are still interested, and I hope you are, do little research yourself, find a place to print and do the testing. I don't need too many testers, just enough to prove my point.

Jan


----------



## Stevie777 (May 2, 2013)

Men in sheds with curious minds changed the world....I hope this idea works out for you....

If you can come up with something that will replace fletching excellent....as you say...people have been using fletchings for 10,000 years...not without good reason....Good Luck....

Cant wait to see a working Model that will withstand 300+ fps impact into it's target.

Ps...if you dont have the money right now for a 3D printout, maybe come to some arrangement with a company that does...ie....if this idea works you can have the first 10,000 units of business from me....seem like a fair proposition.


----------



## TheScOuT (May 9, 2011)

Pretty neat idea...people like you throughout history have changed the world. Keep going with testing, you never know where this will go.


----------



## icemanls2 (Mar 15, 2007)

There have been many attempts at creating a turbine effect to stabilize arrow flight from turbine cut field tips, turbine style broadheads, etc. With drop away rests being so prevelant now, would a turbine stabilize arrow flight and add spin rate much more than a high rate of vane helical? Not trying to discredit your design, just wondering if you have ran a test against an arrow with a high rate of helical?


----------



## ArcherFletch (Jul 8, 2012)

kokes said:


> ArcherFletcher:
> ...
> By lift I mean the air that goes around the blade, never touching it.
> 
> Jan


OK but if you look at your cross section in the "z-axis" (this is the axis head-on to the arrow that ALL your air force is coming from) you will see a significantly larger cross section by area then just feathers which are extremely thin in that axis.









Everything you are "seeing" in this picture above is just going to translate into drag. You cannot induce a rotational force without some component of that force back into the z-axis (DRAG) and slowing your arrow down. You can't say "ah this will act as lift and rotate the arrow" - you're right that it will rotate the arrow faster, but it's at the expense of arrow velocity. You are solving the wrong problem! Your design may be excellent for harnessing power of wind/water with a generator but it is exactly wrong for archery* and even wronger for long distance shooting. 

*there may be some value to the head design causing an animal to bleed more, or something. 

Lots of people in aeronautics engineering have tried to solve the problem of reducing drag caused by vortices - and the problem is that as they add structure to reduce it, they are adding cross section and adding drag. This is why the circular "loop" style wingtips never really caught on... every couple years people try them but the fact is physics proves it is like playing a poker game that you can never win, you can't even break even! 

So you are kind of on the right track trying to get rid of vortices, some people are doing this with fletchings by shrouding them:







But these aren't catching on... because they are "catching on" people's risers haha. No seriously you have to have a drop-away or nicely tuned setup to avoid contact with any big shape that doesn't deform like feathers.


What is the problem this is really trying to solve - making an arrow spin faster? An arrow really doesn't need to spin that fast to stabilize it! Compare an end-on look of this design and conventional fletchings and you will see a huge disadvantage in your design. Faster spins mean you used up arrow momentum to convert it to rotational intertia - NOT a good trade for a guy trying to make his arrow reach further!

All the usual disclaimers apply about your being a genius and stuff, I love the hard work you have put into this and the technology you're using to your advantage. It just needs some common sense. Do you know anyone with a background in aeronautics or physics that you can talk into doing some simulations of the shapes? 

And keep at it - don't give up just because the first pass isn't a success! I know because I have been trying to invent stuff for 5 years and only failing so far haha!


----------



## Cotton-Eye (Oct 28, 2012)

Great post there A.F.


----------



## Vortex69 (Jul 8, 2007)

Thinking outside of the box is a great thing even if it don't pan out. Creative people are exciting to be around, so, keep on keepin on.


----------



## dwagoner (Sep 27, 2007)

nuts&bolts said:


> Experimentation.
> 
> Edison was told to GIVE UP on the light bulb.
> It'll never work.
> ...


didnt einstein have something like 100 or 1000 patents???? i understand about not giving up, im just more a pesimistic person so i do give up easily on things like this....LOL its all good though....


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Stevie777:
Thank you. I will be happy to discuss your proposition with you when there is a proof.
Jan


----------



## Stevie777 (May 2, 2013)

kokes said:


> Stevie777:
> Thank you. I will be happy to discuss your proposition with you when there is a proof.
> Jan


Just to be clear. I dont have a 3d printer, i was trying to point out it's a route you could go down with a local company who does.


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Hi ArcherFletch,
your input is very valuable to me. I will answer as much as I can.

I will start by decomposing my statement. In the picture of my turbine you can see two types of surface. One that belongs to the turbine and one that is around it, seen as gray backround. The air that travels from the viewer into the grey doesn't touch the arrow, but it does cause rotation by creating lift. In other words, if the turbine was facing us with their thinnest crossection exclusively, this would be a turbine that is lift only, with the exception of shaft and tiny fraction of surface we are seeing now. That is exactly what my lift only turbine is all about.

However, we are not seeing only the grey background, but also quite large surface of the blades. The blades are shaped in such way that they catch wind, as you said, and rotate the turbine, too. And yes, they create drag. I cannot say how much, but not as much as the thin profile in fletches. This is empiric result from my tests. I came to this conclusion because the further I shot the arrows (one with turbine, one with fletches), the greater was the gap between them. And not only was this gap greater in absolute values (ie steps), but also as a percentage. By that I mean that at slower speed my arrow would be 20% further, and in greater speed it would fly 30% further. I got up to 40% with my rubber baggage strap. This is indeed puzzling. I have my theories about it, but I am by no means certain.

Before I dive into my theories I will briefly mention another interesting thing that we should note before we start making conclusion. When I was testing a water, the start up speed of my turbine was below 0.5 kmh-1. Very, very slow. When I was testing the freefall, it started spinning after about 1.8 meters, at which point it reached speed of about 20 kmh-1. It was a terrible result, ordinary two or three blade wind turbine starts at lower speeds than that. I felt miserable. But than I shot the arrow from a bow made of branch and I found to my amazement, that it starts rotating at about the same distance. The arrow is powered by the bow exclusively, so after the string stops touching it, it can gain no more speed, it only loses it. How come that the thing didn't start up at the start up speed, but later? That makes no sense! This means that my startup speed test was not valid, and that there clearly is some sort of lag period that must be caused by something.

Ok, and now I get into my theories. My main theory is that of a chewing gum. I visualize the air around the turbine as made of chewing gum that sticks to it's surface and stretches until it finally snaps off. If chewing gum is too much for you to stomach, visualize a drop o water falling into the sink. The drop sticks upside down to the surface of the faucet, it is flat, than it starts stretching, and finally snaps off and drops. Air behives much like water, except for compression, viscosity and density, but it still is pretty similar. It will stretch further, and that is the lag. Now if my arrow rotates quickly, it sheds these drops more easily as centrifugal forces help to shed them. And since the forces holding air to an arrow are quite large and forces needed to power my turbine quite low, the arrow is better off with turbine, despite it's large surface. Please note that lift turbines spin faster than the air passing them, unlike drag turbines. Drag turbines in general rotate slowly with greater torque. No rotation means no forces trying to shed the drops off (fletchings).

Now into another theory. The main principle that powers my turbine is lift. I conclude that from the high rate of spin. If the wind speed is slow relatively to the rotation of turbine, how exactly does the air impact the blades? I mean, if I imagine myself as a tiny particle of air. I am like 1 mm from the blade, heading towards it. What is the blade doing? It is moving away from me, propelled by the lift. Lift spins it in the same direction that I would like to spin it, away form me, but lift does so at greater speed, so in effect the turbine blade never gets hit by me. Instead I will become a part of the air that goes around the blade, and I will be pulling it by passing near by. I am well aware that this may be one of those arrow - turtoise paradoxes, but there also may be a lot to it.

Jan


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

While I am at it, here is why I think front mounted turbine is better than rear turbine, that is despide weight differences. Ship propeller is known to be more efficient if mounted in the rear. Horizontal turbine and propeller are basically the same. The only difference is that turbine catches flow and generates power, while propeller takes power and turns it into flow. They also face opposite directions. Now if propeller is more efficient in the rear, and turbine is a propeller turned into opposite direction, where does it make sense to put it? I place my bets on front.

Jan


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Sorry, I screwed up at the end of #40, when I was an air particle. I missed the blade all right, but I ended up at the side that doesn't cause lift, so I will just continue my journey in space and time, and I will have to leave the spinning in hands of the particles on the other side of the blade.
Jan


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

kokes said:


> While I am at it, here is why I think front mounted turbine is better than rear turbine, that is despide weight differences. Ship propeller is known to be more efficient if mounted in the rear. Horizontal turbine and propeller are basically the same. The only difference is that turbine catches flow and generates power, while propeller takes power and turns it into flow. They also face opposite directions. Now if propeller is more efficient in the rear, and turbine is a propeller turned into opposite direction, where does it make sense to put it? I place my bets on front.
> 
> Jan


That may be true of turbines that they work more efficiently on the front however, designs are only useful when they are practical. In archery, it would be highly impractical to have to replace this turbine every time you took a shot if it were to break. For hunting purposes, I don't want anything on the front of my arrow that may slow/stop penetration. I want only my broadhead to be on the front so that it can penetrate as deeply as possible into my target. 

I'm excited to try your design if I can figure out how to print a few for a decent cost. 

1 question about your design that you made for me, Which way will it cause the arrow to rotate? Looking at it, it seems that it would make the arrow rotate counter clockwise. Can you make another file that would cause it to rotate clockwise so that when an arrow hits the target, the point on the end tightens rather than loosens?


----------



## thwackaddict (Sep 1, 2006)

Put a sharp point on it. Sharpen the "blades" up and let it eat! Vanes and broadhead all in one!

Hope it works out for ya!


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Huntinsker:









The turbine at this picture is facing us, as if the arrow flew towards us. From our point of view it will rotate clockwise. Mirroring it will make it spin in opposite direction, and it is very easy to do in 3D.

I agree that if the turbine broke every time it would be impractical for target archery, unless it was very cheap, and therefore disposable. It can withstand a lot since it supports itself and springs, but I don't know yet how much impact resistant it can be made and at what cost.

I partially agree with your hunting point. I agree that it is good to penetrate as deep as possible. I don't agree that my turbine will be in a way more or less than broadhead will. I prepared pictures and explanation, but I will dedicate a separate post to it, so please read further to discover more.


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

I expanded upon the particle and moving away surface idea. To illustrate my point I made a quick scatch:









I the image you can see two types of vectors. One is the wind, represented by grey horizontal arrows, and the other is spin, represented by black vertical arrows. I made the arrow stationary and air moving, as it is easier to understand. As the wind approaches the profile, the profile runs away to the top. The particle of air that gets right below the front tip will travel around the profile in a straight line and it will be passing right by the rear tip, which at the time needed to travers the x-distance will have moved upwards by the y-distance. In other words, the profile that is rotated with (air on the upper side of the profile does that) needs to be tilted at an angle vA:vDiameter. 

The greater distance of profile from axis of rotation , the greater the speed of rotation, and the greater the tilt. There is a nice illustration of how that would look like in 3D in my previous post.

So, in conclusion. If the flatches are about the same thickness as the turbine blades, and the turbine lift is powered, and the outer diameter ot the two arrows is similar, such as in the picture in my previous post, than both arrows may have equal frontal surface area.

I know this is counter intuitive, as you would say that the turbine has much greater frontal surface. It does on a picture, but not if we also consider the change in time. 

Perhaps little comparison will clear my point. Have you ever seen lines of airplane traffic on a map? These lines are curved because the Earth spins. On a map it looks as if they are longer than a straigh line from A to B. But the curve is in fact shorter. Another similarity of the two is that both save (or will save) fuel.

Jan


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Ok, and here is the real surface height of a turbine blade:









And finally, if you start comparing the principle and the model, you will need the actual shape of the turbine outline:









Jan


----------



## thwackaddict (Sep 1, 2006)

If you can get an arrow to fly a much flatter trajectory with something like this... and have it be fairly tough (reusable).... and retain accuracy. I can see bowhunters buying this. Even if it slides down the arrow upon impact.


----------



## thwackaddict (Sep 1, 2006)

Have you turbine slip on over the shaft like a wrap, then screw the broadhead on. Maybe have super short, super low profile vanes on the tail end if needed.


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Ok, just to finish the physics off. If you look at the front view of a turbine arrow, you will notice that the profiles are narrow towards center of the shaft, and they get broader towards outside. It is just like the side view of a profile from #46. That means that the principle of the turbine is correct. However the speed vs. tip speed ratio, and therefore max angle of the blades, remains to be determined.

I am done with physics, you can unplug your ears again.

About the testing. I was thinking about how to convince you that this works. I need to make more tests, but my client failed to pay me, so I still cannot afford to print a new arrow myself. I will have to make another turbine by hand because the old one is in a very bad shape. I tried to fix it by putting more glue on, but it only gets worse. I have a plan how to build 3 blade turbine that will be front mounted and still indistructable, ready for target archery. Questions, comments, everything is welcome.

Jan


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

thwackaddict,
thank you for your input.

My newest plan is to make turbine that will slide upon impact, just like you suggest. I will use rubber bands to hold it sufficiently when it flies. That is for practice archery.

For hunting I will make the arrows of some metal, most likely iron. That should be strong plenty. I will make a mold, pour glue in it, let it harden, take the imprint, cover it with plaster of paris, burn the glue out and the form is ready for pour. It is not fast, nor is it easy, but it works with shape like that.

Btw I found a picture with bitting turbine for you.









Jan


----------



## ClintonVoris (Feb 26, 2013)

Hello Kokes;

I've written a patent application before, and am used to dealing with 'nay-sayers.' We all wish you well, it's just human nature for a million questions and what-ifs to pop up like this (you gave us the opportunity to do so.) However NOT A ONE OF YOU asked a valid question about this turbine's hunting application regarding SOUND! If it whirrs like a V2 rocket coming into London, well...

Kokes: How much sound or noise does your arrow turbine produce? Does it whistle, whine, whirr, buzz, humm, etc...? Noise is a deal breaker, at least for the large-game hunting application. I doubt ground hogs or bunnies would be too disturbed by any humm.

Look forward to seeing more of this. Also, have you tried reaching out to students at any local colleges, tech schools, (even high schools) for assistance in produce 3D printed arrows? These students would benefit from adding this project to their CV or resume.

Yours,

Clint


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Hi Clint,
thank you for your reply and kind words.

I never noticed any sound with my arrow, but I never payed any attention to it. I will now. Yesterday I took my hand made turbine apart and prepared scaffolding for a new one, as the old one got too bulky and started losing speed, and gaining startup speed. I will let you know probably tomorrow, I plan on doing a video.

Thank you for the idea of students, I never considered it. I will give it a shot.

I recently improved a turbine design to click onto an arrow and slide when it hits a target. It opens like so: /\/\/\/\ , accordeon style. The pink ring gets srewed between tip and arrow shatft, the assembly fits 6 mm arrows.
















Here is the stl file if anyone is interested. The usual stuff. Print, don't sell. 

Upgrade to the challenge: First 13 people who post a video of my arrow vs. flatched arrow here will get a mold of three choices, the three choices designs and measurements will be picked by the first three people that submit their video here.

Nice day.

Jan Kokes


----------



## b0w_bender (Apr 30, 2006)

OK this latest design is starting to make sense. Now you can slide it onto a shaft and test it in the front or the back. As long as it slides on the shaft when it hits a target it would be reusable. Like many others I'm skeptical that the steering being in the front of the arrow would be inherently unstable but that's what testing is for. There are many things that are intuitively strange but turn out to be true. So testing the front position is at least plausible now. I think this design will impart a greater amount of spin because the foil and drag surface is positioned further from the shaft increasing the leverage of the surface.


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Hi NWSpinner, glad to hear from you. I did my best to make testing as easy as possible. I have pretty much final design for target shooting:









The Stl is here. It was built to fit Easton titanium arrows and should fit any arrow with 6.5 mm diameter. It will also accomodate broadheads up to 17.5 mm of width (so it will slide between blades of the turbine).

Otherwise I am still working on new hand made arrow as one already broke. I am also working on a new bow made of bamboo straps. I should have the video on Wednesday, but I am too afraid to promise anything now, since everything seems to take longer than how I plan it.

Jan


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

Hello Jan,

Just checking to see if any updates were made. I found out that a local Library where I live actually has a 3d printer available to use but I'm not sure if the software is compatible with your file type. I am pretty ignorant about the design software and how they interface with the actual printer software so if you would follow this link and tell me if you think I would be able to use your file to print one of these designs, I would really appreciate it. http://www.jocolibrary.org/templates/JCL_InfoPage.aspx?id=24413&epslanguage=EN

I hope that this works out because I still am very interested in testing this. I think it's a great idea and can't wait to see if it works.


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Hi Huntinsker,

great to hear from you. The MarkerBot Replicator will print STL files, as pretty much any 3D printer will.

I actually came to let enyone interestet know of the progress I have made so far.

I made 3 more turbines and destroyed them all while testing. I used cattail seed fluffing instead of fiberglass as fiberglass wouldn't bend well. Unfortunatelly the cattail didn't hold very well. All in all the turbines were not worth much, they were pretty uneven etc. But I managed to find an investor who would pay for the prototype. So I asked various printers for quotes and I got extremely lucky. One of them printed the file right away and discovered that the details were ****ty, so he asked me if I wanted it anyways, and eventually sent it to me for free.

The tests I made this morning were very promissing. I tested sliding the turbine onto an arrow. I discovered my arrow is thicker than I guestimated, so I needed to use little force. But it works. The wings behave like a spring, just like I expected, and I can move the two halves of the turbine further apart to accomodate thicker shaft.

The turbine does slide upon the impact, just like expected. I don't know how much abuse it will withstand, and I was obviously only simulating the impact in slow motion.

I was also testing the freefall. The turbine grip was strong enough to hold onto the shaft and spin it. Checked.

The freefall test gave me first valid figure. I discovered that my higher precision turbine starts spinning at the distance of about 30 cms, or 1 foot. That translates to the speed of about 9 kmh. That means that my turbine will be extremely useful for harvesting wind, as today's lift turbines have a typical cut in speed of about 25 kmh, and the most efficient one I was able to find claimed a cut in speed of 12.6 kmh. So I guess my turbines will perform better than any existing wind turbine.

I am also convinced that my arrows will fly even further than I expected after the first set of tests. I will see when I get there. I don't want to destroy my little turbine just yet, I want to have witnesses and cameras around.

Please stay tuned, I am starting to believe that the videos will eventually appear here. Getting access to a camera, and perhaps to a bow and two undamaged arrows, should be pretty easy task compared to getting the prototype.

Jan


----------



## tunertype (Oct 28, 2013)

Just a couple of tips from an aerospace engineer. 

Dropping the arrow will not accurately describe linear flight as having a weighted front will help keep the front pointed down. In linear flight the heavy front will provide the inertia to keep the arrow flying forward and the vanes on the back will provide drag to keep the tail from moving around. Any time the arrow gets out of line with its trajectory the vanes will force it back in line. Without vanes the arrow can potentially tumble or hit the target off camber. 

Drag is another consideration. You should probably test your arrow speeds with chronograph. I would guess that the design with these large sails to cause the spin are going to greatly increase drag and decrease range.


----------



## tunertype (Oct 28, 2013)

Also the gyroscopic stability of a bullet or football is related to the moment of inertia in force. Since an arrow is long and light not heavy and wide its relative moment of inertia to its area and weight is fairly small.

So you may want to incorporate some sort of weight further from the axis of rotation to increase these forces.


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

tunertype:

Thank you for your input. Here are my thoughts on this:
There will always be at least two areas that will create a drag. On on the tip and one in the rear of the arrow. The stability can be achieved by:

a/ increasing drag on the rear, as we all know from arrows with fletches
b/ making the object rotate, such as in satellites.

I maintain that in theory the drag needed to spin a turbine could be lower than drag caused by the fletches while maintaining the same degree of stability. I use a turbine that uses very little drag, and it is possible (certain, from my point of view) that I will prove this in a real world. Which will in turn prove that these turbines really cause very little drag, which in turn is essencial for harvesting wind power and for electricity generation in general. Which is what I am after. 

To the second post:
Since the moment of innertia of an arrow is low, I only need only little energy to spin it, which is what I need. I want just enough of a spin to stabilize, not a dash more. I can always add more blades and/or more stages for hydro and especially steam turbines (or increase weight of the blades as you suggest), but for now I concentrate on slow winds, which have enormous economic potential due to their frequent ocurrance, but they cannot be efficiently harvested with present technology.


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

I was away for weekend, but I managed to get few pictures and photos of the prototype on Thursday.

The first one is of me trying to find the right position of fingers to hold it. This discovery made me really happy as these can be used by little children learning to hold a pencil or by seniors who are no longer able to hold it with three fingers. Friend of mine suggested it as a holder when he was playing around with it, and I tested it and found that it gives me firmer grip while using less fingers. But on the other hand it didn't make me happy at all. I think that since now if people remember this at all, they will not remember the turbine that harvests life supporting energy and took 13 ears to complete, but rather will they remember a grabber that came to an existence by a pure accident.

Anyways, I fell in love with my little thing, call it what you will. Here are few pictures of us.

























One video made by cell phone...





Jan


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

I may look as I am talking to myself, I have few more things to add.

I just discovered that something like gripper already exists and obviously doesn't sell very well. No easy way there. Oh, well. I will use it when cutting with scalpel as it gives me nice controll over force of a cut. Maybe when I get old and my hands start to shake I will be very happy to write with it.

Now the video. It is not very good quality, but at least you can see the turbine is spinning. If not, pay attention at the end of the fall. The arrow hits the ground, it stops, bounces and - starts spinning. You cannot see the original spin because of camera quality and the speed, but at the very least you can see residual forces of momentum that makes it spin again after an abrupt stop.

That's all I have for now, the turbine is encrusted in something that is about to become a mold.

Jan


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Hi everyone,
it seems like noone cares about this any more. I think it is my fault as I was being a jerk at the beginning. I will try to behave more like a human being next time around. Be it as it will, I think it is time to finish this thread off.

Firstly, I am terminating my contest as I have no contestants. If anyone of you guys did print the turbine, please make the video and post it here. I have made one mold model already complete with locks and all, so I can send it to you. It fits 7 millimeters shaft. I will give you a week to claim your prize, otherwise sorry, too late.

There is one question unanswered, and that is the stabilization of controlled flight of missles. I am no big fan of guided missles as they are mainly used for domination over people or nations by few who need no more but will fight other's peoples a**es off to get more. But there are also few peaceful implications, so I will give you the answer.









This machine is a jet with an engine of my own that can also fly under water and in the outer space. Don't worry, it doesn't work, as none of my inventions does. You had an opportunity to see that in videos and the testimonials I was trying to stuff down your throats. Anyway, you can see on the picture the principle of stabilization that would be far cheaper on fuel than the stabilization with flights. If it worked, that is, which it doesn't.

I am not planning to return to this forum. I will rather build up my company from within my country and with real electricity generation which is in dire need, instead of trying to kiss behinds of those who do have money for luxury. There is nothing that can improve my reputation that I would need to get from oversees. The only exception would be a space program, in which I would still like to participate, even if it was America based. So if you guys know someone from NASA or someone else who is capable of extra heavy investment, please direct him to my youtube channel.

If you are with NASA and reading these lines, you are on the right track. If you can sign my contract, please contact me. If not, please hand this over to your boss.

For the rest of you who got this far and discovered I have nothing more to offer, I have at least some good news. I have an investor for the real mold now, so you may see these rotating arrows in the future, along with pen grippers, wind, hydro and steam turbines, ventilators, propellers, dynamos, drills, compressors and other fun gadgets made in the shape of my turbine.

I wish you all well, and let me cite from a favorite game of my youth:

Give'em Hell, Polecat!

Jan


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

My dear diary,

yesterday I discovered that I once again wrote something that could be interpreted in a wrong way, and that was the America statement in the post above. I realized it could sound racist, if racism can be applied not to the race, but to the nationality. I should have written "abroad" or rather "oversees". I don't like flying and don't like the idea of being away from my friends and family. When I think of space program US usually comes to my mind.

Jan


----------



## Stevie777 (May 2, 2013)

I think you should invent the mother of all Broadheads...85-100 gr max...


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Great suggestion Stevie, will do. I have my mold in a printing facility. I was forced to do it all in 3D because I couldn't mold the prototype. I did mold it, but never released it from the mold, it got glued. I am working on it, also searching for more investors.
I am planning on making these turbines off steel anyway, I discovered it will be invaluable for the electricity generation as well. It will take time and money. I found a place that would print it out of stainless steel, but that would cost me over USD 200 just for the prototype. It would weight about 17 grams. Do you think that is too little? Should I make them heavier?


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Today I was cutting my arrow tip to get paralell planes for iron/steel mold I am planning on building from sheets of etched thungsten. I thought I could use the visual output to demonstrate you some of the principles of my turbine I wasn't able to explain well without them.









You can see now what I meant by stating that the arrow tip will accomodate even a broadhead. Interior of my turbine will match arrows that are 7 mms in diameter, or slightely larger (it springs). Note you can use even wider arrow tips, up to 17 mms in width. They simply need to pass between the blades of the turbine, as seen in the lower right corner, right orthographic view. Thickness of the broadhead wings should be below 1 mm with the gap I made. They can be slightely thicker, the springiness comes in play once again, and once more upon the impact. The jaws of the turbine will spread apart and let the arrow slide through into the target. The turbine will stay outside, falling on a ground if the arrow goes all the way in. (This is what you get when anti aircraft warheads come into mind while you are watching your dog lick his dick.)









Now the shape. My turbine is much more intricate than it seems. You may have already noticed that it looks like 8 from the front view, and it also looks like 8 from the side view. Infinity any way you look at it, so to speak. The same goes for the profiles. As you can see, the crossection of the blades parallel to the direction of flight will allways be in the shape of an airfoil, as seen in the picture. Just like a crossection parallel to the axis of the profiles, that is airfoil too, at the same time. Airfoil any way you cut it. Airfoil is what makes my turbines rotate. There is still a slight impurity in the shape of a hump in the crossection shown. I already have come up with an algorhythm to improve that, but it will take a while to readjust my turbine and mold calculating application. I mitigated the hump by hand for the mold that is being printed for me, but that is imprecise. I want it perfect in the future.

Now the action. Once airborn, the turbine starts to rotate. The rotation is caused by the lift, which acts at the upper half of the blade. In order to minimize the drag on the blade, the axis of the profile should be pointing straight foreward, or so it seems. But that is not the case. Imagine the pulling lift forces as a motor rotating the arrow. The arrow is moving through the air in a foreward motion. Will the blade hit the AIRFOIL word that is just hanging there in the air? No, it won't. The reason is that by the time the arrow travels foreward far enough to hit the word, the blade will have rotaded upwards already, and the word will now find itself to be below the blade, not in it. The ideal angle of the airfoil will therefore be determined by the foreward/angular speed ratio, as seen in the graph. If the angle is smaller, the lower half of the profile gets hit. If it is larger, upper half gets hit. The exact angle of profile is uknown to me yet. It will depend on the density and viscosity of surroundings (air in this case), and it may also depend on speed, in which case different angles for slow and fast projectiles would need to be employed in order to get the best results. Let's hope this is not the case. Tests in the future will show whether the foreward/angular speed ratio will change with speed or not, and what precise angle I should target. So far I am content with the angle I eyeballed based on results from my imprecise turbines. I will simply shoot the new arrow once I get it, measure the ratio foreward/angular, make better turbine based on that, and over and over again, until I get precise enough angle. Kind of like a Newton's approximation, only in a real life.


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

I got e-mail yesterday, the mold is getting shipped today, I expect it to arrive tomorrow or on Friday.


----------



## Stevie777 (May 2, 2013)

kokes said:


> I got e-mail yesterday, the mold is getting shipped today, I expect it to arrive tomorrow or on Friday.


Cant wait to see it in Action..


----------



## Hannes (Jun 8, 2007)

This is gonna be very noisy I think. Looks like a good idea.


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Me to, Stevie. I am also very interested in sound of the thing, Hannes. I didn't pay any attention to it so far, but it is the noise that will indicate how aerodynamic those arrows are. I haven't noticed any sound whatsoever in the past, but I wasn't paying attention to it, either.
Jan


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Today my mold arrived. I tried to assemble it right away. It doesn't fit snugly yet, but it is much easier to assemble than I expected it to be. It seems the next one will require only 7 pieces, and the next perhaps even 5. This one will take some time to clean off and fill cavities and possibly add more locks if necessary. I am very happy with it. I think I will have dreams about it tonight. I will work on it slowly in order not to damage it, I only have this one shot. If I scucceed, I will have plenty of arrows of a high quality to play with. I wish you all well.
Jan


----------



## Bow Me (Sep 30, 2010)

Isn't having something steer the front of the arrow a big no-no?

This question is pertaining to the broadhead idea.


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Hi BowMe,

I am not sure I understand your question. Big no-no for what? What broadheads? The ones that will slide throug the turbine or the ones where the turbine itself will work as a broadhead? If you mean the slide-through design, that will only enclose the real broadhead, no change there. The turbine will stay outside of the animal, only the arrow with actual broadhead will burry in it. The turbine used as a broadhead will act as, say, a cookie cutter. Except for it will not release easily and will pry the wound open to allow for as much bleeding as possible.

Jan


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Just to let you know how things are progressing. I am using little time while my glue is drying to do so. So far I am working on a mold, big time. I finally figured out way to make back-up mold, it should be finished tomorrow. It is a mold for a mold, so day after tomorrow I will be casting mold out of it and day after that I will cast once more, an arrow out of a mold. It may take longer if anything goes wrong. I sincerely believe everything went wrong that could have, but it is too early to say now. Here is one of my testing casts:









I also took advantage of my parents' camera and made two short footages. One is about the testing equipment I am gonna use. The second demonstrates a functionality of my whip/kestrosphendone/fustibalus crossbreed I am going to use for shooting. Both videos are in MOV format, so I need to take them home to my Linux machine to encode them in flv and bring them to my parents' place again to upload them to youtube. I will post links here as soon as I have them.

Jan


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)




----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

I hope your testing goes well now that you have your mold. I still really want to try this but I still haven't been able to get one made. Hopefully after the new year when things slow down for me I'll be able to make a few and see what happens.


----------



## Charon (Apr 17, 2011)

I understand that creativity should be encouraged. But am I the only one to see the absurdity of this?

kokes clearly has no practical knowledge of archery. Doesn't even own a bow for his own testing. Has no working understanding of aerodynamics. But he is going to teach us all a new and revolutionary method of arrow flight control. We just need to ignore that the method has been proven unsuccessful several times in the past, and run out and blow $500+ on a 3D printer so we can help him out. You know from the goodness of our hearts. 

And when people don't just fall all over themselves to help him out, after he has made it clear that those who help are to receive nothing in return, his solution to drum up support is to attempt to instill guilt and resort to thinly veiled anti-Americanism. 

Oh yeah, I'm REALLY going to go out of my way for this guy NOW! You bet!



kokes said:


> I think it is time to finish this thread off....
> 
> I am terminating my contest...
> 
> I am not planning to return to this forum...


And worst of all he's not even a man of his word.


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Charon, please give me valid arguments, something I can reply to, I am not interested in vague expressions of distaste.

Thank you for a support Huntsinker. I very much appreciate it. The 3D model can be printed anywhere and shipped. I found out that superglue works as a great tool for a finish, it slowly disolves the plastic and can be worked and scraped off little at a time. I will have arrows available soon, so I will give you one if you like. The postage from Czech will likely be less than to have it printed, and without all the hassle and extra work you would need to go through. Let me know once my videos appear here, we can arrange the details. 

I just wanted to peek in today to let you all know I had to postpone the testing, it still isn't ready. The arrow is drying now. I found even better staff, I will use my 25 years old fishing rod. Oh yes. Yesterday I beat my own distance record using the bamboo sling, it gave me more distance than the best bow I was able to obtain from materials at hand. Fishing rod should be supperior to that.

Take care and keep your fingers crossed, as I do. I also keep my toes and eyes crossed, just to make sure.
Jan


----------



## Anynamewilldo (Jan 3, 2008)

There is youtube video of a guy making a recurve out of pvc and some kind of cheap rod. Think he said he had 7.00 or something in it. Got like 140 fps.


----------



## Stevie777 (May 2, 2013)

Charon said:


> and resort to thinly veiled anti-Americanism.
> 
> Oh yeah, I'm REALLY going to go out of my way for this guy NOW! You bet!


In all fairness he did try and explain about the Anti American thing.... feel free to try and write something in Kokes's language and see if you can do it without insulting someone.. :wink:


----------



## criss-p-bacon (Sep 5, 2013)

i just skimmed through all this so might be missing something...lol...not sure what your doing throwing an arrow with some stick..or fishing rod?.. that way. you dont have a bow but are trying to design and test arrows?..confused


----------



## Anynamewilldo (Jan 3, 2008)

Technicly I think he is trying to test a way to stabilize and arrow but I agree its a hard way to go. Why I suggested making a bow. There a vid somewhere of some kind of twister vanes and the guy dropped it to show how fast they spin. Were popular for awile but can't find anything on them now. This guys idea is a little different but I think there is a lot to over come to make them popular than just showing they stabilize faster. There is production,marketing,cost,and more and none of that even has to do with how good the product is. Going to need to make make it work and then WOW the socks off an investor.


----------



## cgs1967 (Sep 29, 2011)

criss-p-bacon said:


> i just skimmed through all this so might be missing something...lol...not sure what your doing throwing an arrow with some stick..or fishing rod?.. that way. you dont have a bow but are trying to design and test arrows?..confused


Me too! I hope it goes well for you and I think it is great when people think outside the box and are innovated.


----------



## criss-p-bacon (Sep 5, 2013)

i dunno...if you want to get in the arrow bizz id think at least buy a real bow. doesnt have to be hi end. could drop a measly 100 buck on an older used one. till then id imagine all this is for nothing till that higher pound draw shoots the arrow.
i think the whole way of doing this is wrong. he should be doing the initial testing....with a proper bow. and prove they even fly right. and wont break like a toy. ...then come to us to get testers and outside opinions. shouldnt be expecting us to spend money to make him money...makes no sence at all


----------



## Anynamewilldo (Jan 3, 2008)

He lives in another country and getting a bow might not be easy.


----------



## Bender (Dec 6, 2006)

I have been following this and I can already see a couple of serious problems here.

How much does this thing weigh? As no material for its construction has even been selected yet, impossible to say. Its pretty big, so it would be reasonable to figure that it will weigh a lot. 50 grains? 100 grains?

And while on the subject of size, it appears to be about 3" long, maybe more. That slide on design would mandate the use of full length arrows for those with a 28" true draw length. Anybody with a draw longer than that would not be able to use them. 

Looking into having custom extra long arrows manufactured?

The screw in design would solve the length problem, but, none the less, this idea in either configuration eliminates that large segment of the market that is into competition and uses clickers.

This is just a guess on my part but I just don't see the tuning process as going well.

And finally there is this:



criss-p-bacon said:


> i think the whole way of doing this is wrong. he should be doing the initial testing....with a proper bow. and prove they even fly right. and wont break like a toy. ...then come to us to get testers and outside opinions. shouldnt be expecting us to spend money to make him money...makes no sence at all


And really, given that the OP has access to the internet, he has access to archery equipment. There is no reason that he can't spend his own money for his own R & D for his own profit. This would also solve his concerns over patent protection and ensuring that no else accidentally receives any benefit or return from helping him out.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

I guess the way I see it is he designed this turbine to create rotation period. He's talking about using it to create energy from wind and water and he probably thought it may work in our chosen sport to stabilize an arrow. He, having limited knowledge about archery, came on here looking for opinions from people versed in the subject. He never said anything about all of us running out and buying a 3d printer and doing his work for him. Some people already have 3d printers and are able to make these with no real expense or trouble to themselves. He tried to get good insight from us and allow us to be part of a new design that potentially could be a game changer. Personally I think that's pretty cool. I'd assume what he didn't expect was to run into a bunch of negative criticism that has nothing to do with his design. If you don't like how he asked for help, don't help. Personally I think it's great that he is trying this and I'd love to help him if and when I can.


----------



## Jester1023 (Dec 16, 2010)

If you can get some my way, I'll try to get an animal on the ground before the end of Feb. I've got a lot of coyotes to kill this winter. I am also a logo designer. Shoot me a PM if interested.


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Hi all, I shot my arrow today, and have videos for you. I will scan through your replies now while they are uploading to YouTube and answer any unanswered questions.

Anynamewilldo:
Yes, I think I have seen the guy. He popped out on me when I was looking for mongolian draw demo. The bow is not so much of an issue to me right now, I need to proof the concept. Any bow will do, as the staff sling will do. I simply need something that shoots far enough to show that rotating arrows fly further than the fletched ones.

Stevie777:
Thank you. I should have said this right away so that you all understand. I have been to US on several occasions, more so than in say Germany that is right next door. When I think abroad I usually think US. I even have my own SSN. I realized I could have sounded like anti-american few days later, and couldn't leave it like that. I have met many good people oversees and want to see the places again in hope to meet some of them again. I especially want to visit Rockford, MI, where I studied ath high school in 94/95. I didn't want to be recognized as an enemy or something when I have time and money and overcome my dislike of flying to do so. Anyway, Stevie, I reserve one arrow for you, free, just like to Huntinksker.

criss-p-bacon:
Sorry for the confusion. I am trying to proof my concept, the increased distance and stability in wind, so anything that hurls arrows far enough is good enough for me. Fishing rod is the best I have.

Anynamewilldo:
Exactly. That is what is taking me so long. I am working on a production at the same time, I worked out a process that will eneble me to grow as fast as market demands. I agree with the bow thing, and I made the first videos with a bow. I am completely broke and cannot buy anything, not even a glue, so materials for a new bow are out of question. Yet.

cgs1967:
I replied to Anyname already. Thank you for encouraging words.

criss-p-bacon:
That is exactly how I would do it if I could. I cannot, so I am taking a path I can take. I was left with no income whatsoever, having lost my job, and getting no wellfare support whatsoever. I had been working for over 10 years, so I can work some more and need no support, according to my government reasoning.

Anynamewilldo:
You bet.

Bender:
The arrows I will use are short, they were crippled before I got them. I wish they were longer. If somebody can send me two identical arrows to the Czech republic, I will be more than happy to test them. The same goes for a used bow. The arrows as they are weight in at 16,93 grams and 16.76 grams. The turbine weights another 2 grams, or 30 grains, roughly.

The market segmentthese arrow should be useful for is about 100%. They can slide down any shaft with roughly proper diameter, any arrow can be used. You just remove the flethches, that's all. You won't need them and will slow the arrow down if you keep them on. Anyway, you just stick the arrow in into the opening of a turbine/gripper, which opens up slightly and holds onto the shaft, like jaws of pliers. It holds enough to rotate the shaft, but loosely enough to open up even more upon impact to let the arrow slide foreward, through the turbine, into the target. The arrow and the turbine are two separate items.

I must confess I didn't understand the last paragraph, and could use clarification. Was it concerning me?

Huntinsker:
Yes, yes, YES!!!!!! Right on spot!!! Thank you so very much.

Jester1023:
I will send you one when I can. I need a promo. My original idea was that archers will love this and print it like crazy, so I will not need to convince anybody, and the market will create itself, archers among archers being far more trustworthy than some unknown foreigner. Anyway, now I consider I will send one turbine to anybody who asks me, free of charge. The only problem is I cannot afford it yet.


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

There is another thing that I realized after few days. It was the post from Charon, and his argument about me not keeping my word. I thought it was making no sense and ignored it. But it did. I did promise to close this thread off, even though I only promissed it to myself. I was forced to continue due to friends of mine oversees that did a lot for me and I didn't want to hurt them in return. Yes, my statement could be taken as if I promissed closing it to some of you, but the reasoning is so twisted that I didn't understand at first.

Since Charon rightfully claimed the end of this thread I am left with no option but to close it. But that doesn't mean that I give up. Quite the contrary. I now have my proof of concept, and that starts a whole new chapter in the issue of rotating arrows. The cards are now on a table and everybody can see them. The new thread is called "Rotating arrows" and is to be found at this very forum.

Charon took me over to the other side of Styx, to the place where everything that was hidden is now visible. I payed him with my words that he took from me and put into his mouth. I will be happy if you decide to follow my journey with me, whatever is looming on the other side. Thank you Charon, and to all of you, Horus be with us.

Continue here.


----------



## criss-p-bacon (Sep 5, 2013)

problem is it needs to be good enough for an archer...to an archery flinging them by a fishing rod dont cut it though. no where near the energy involved compared to a #70 bow and 32 inch draws


maybe a tip to rethink your direction...find a real archer local to you. chat him/her up of your goal and what youve done so far. you need a tester with a real bow. plain n simple.,..without having to ship something over here to test. costs will kill the idea. ..like you said funds are tight..i get that. get this archer to join you and help finance what needs doing. or find someone to help finance so you can get a cheepo bow yourself, but then you need to learn bow on top of that..


----------

