I have another one I want you to plot that ought to go along with Patrick's and Jean's swords..... my new A&A which is a bit on the heavier side. its an Oakeshott type XVIII/XVIIIa very similar to Oakeshott XVIIIa.4 in Records
blade length 31.5
blade width 2.0
total length 40.6
POB 3.0
PP for cross 21.75
weight 1530

thanks Vincent, tr

Hi Thom!

Here is a representation of your new sword, along with your other longswords and the 'big swords':

[ Linked Image ]

Seems to make about the same design choice as the other heavier swords, the additional mass goes in the point mass but not much in the stick... And still the point mass is nearly at the cross. To be more accurate with numbers if you like: 378g in stick, 1152g in a point mass located 7.5mm from the cross.

Thanks again!

Hello all!

Jean Thibodeau has recently sent me data about three other swords he owns (thanks again Jean :cool: !), and I finally get around to post about these. They are Albion Gaddhjalt, Tritonia, and Doge. They are quite interesting for me because they challenge some of the patterns I have been seeing and describing in earlier posts.

But first, here are the swords Jean has told me about so far:

[ Linked Image ]
(the measurements for the Black Prince were actually from David E. Farrell but Jean owns this sword as well)

I have sorted them from top to bottom by the inertia of their 'stick' around the cross. This is apparently a fair measure of how easy the swords are to stop after a cut, a sort of 'blade presence' if you like. It matches what Jean told me except maybe for the Del Tin. He wrote earlier that the DT5146 felt more agile than the Gaddhjalt... So there is still something to sort out there, inertia alone should probably be composed with other indicators to fit the subjective evaluation.

For example, the mass concentration (relative amplitude of the point mass) could enhance the feeling of agility. It's probably what explains that the RavenWolf feels different, it has a relatively high inertia but also a high mass concentration. In a way it could make it feel agile but actually tiring to use...

The three new swords have fairly heavy sticks, which lends a lot of authority to their strikes. I had only sparse data on swords with this property. The Tritonia is the heaviest hitter, or at least the heaviest stick.

The location of the point mass surprised me in the three new swords. It is significantly inside the handle (enough that I don't think a measurement error alone could explain it). It is possible that the actual effect of this variation is barely noticeable in actual use, or that building such swords with a point mass at the cross is not practically possible. I will have to make more experiments with objects differing only by the location of their point mass to get a better idea.

Note that the Black Prince looks very light on the diagram, belying its overall weight completely. Very light stick, very low inertia, high mass concentration... A radically different compromise in mass distribution. Even without considering that it can be used in two hands ;)

Overall these are three very interesting swords because they do not look like any other I had data about previously. They are filling a blank area, so to speak. But there are still plenty of blank areas, as well as certain trends that start to emerge... For example, there is a definite trend that swords with a high stick mass have a proportionally high inertia, and variations around this trend show how swords are shortened to optimize impact, or lengthened to optimize reach. I still feel there are many ways I can inspect the data, trying to correlate with how the sword feel and how I know they can function.

I'm going to steadily keep trying to measure as many swords as I can to fill in the blanks :) But I wish to thank again the community for the measurement effort, which has helped me a bunch. I'm trying to develop web tools that will be specifically made so that anyone can play with the computations without having to wrap their heads around the math. Hopefully this will allow further progress in our knowledge of swords!

Kindest regards,

Going through your post line by line there is little if nothing that contradict my subjective impressions:

The Black Prince feels like a feather and might still cut well because one could accelerate it the most ?

The RavenWolf would be tiring but still fast to move until one did tire: Would prefer to use a shield with it and use timing rather than complex defensive moves with the sword i.e. use the sword when the shield has set up the opportunity to attack. if I was redesigning it with my current fencing experience I might scale the sword down to 5/6 in all dimensions and end up with a 3 pound sword rather than a 5 pound sword. This sword is very much for a very strong swordsman and should be very hard to parry when up to speed, except obviously if one does it correctly on it's weak but stopping it with a mid blade parry might be difficult.

Oh, and I've mentioned before, even though the handle is short I find the pommel very easy to use for a twohanded grip: With such a short grip one does lose a lot of the leverage advantages of a longer handle but one would and could use the RavenWolf with two hands if one was tired. ;) And in two hands one would move it as much using one's entire body and not just from the arm and shoulder: One would almost rotate one's body around the sword rather than just moving the sword i.e. the sword/body moving as a unit ! Under these conditions the sword is fast and NOT tiring ...... it's almost as if one would have to create a fencing style specifically adapted for it ?

Totally subjective but the more I get used to a sword the less tiring it seems, all thing being equal, or the less it's handling seems odd as I adapt to it. ( Assuming it's a good sword ! But maybe GOOD comes in different FLAVOURS when it comes to swords ? ).

I find the Del Tin very easy to move around and not slow but at the same time very VERY long blades have their disadvantages when fencing as one's weak is way out there and very weak and when too long the point might jamb on the floor or hard to bring back far enough to disengage from a parry ? ..... On the other hand a lot of reach can be good ! Well fencing styles with the Del Tin or these other swords is another Topic but handling imposes what styles will work with a specific type/length of sword. ( Not a fencing expert so I'm guessing here ).

When comparing the point masses positions of the Tritonia and the Gaddhjalt the differences in positions might be cancelled out by the size of the point masses ? Change the point mass but also changing the position could result in very minor differences in subjective feel ?

Hello!

Jean Thibodeau wrote:

Totally subjective but the more I get used to a sword the less tiring it seems, all thing being equal, or the less it's handling seems odd as I adapt to it.

Yes, I think we do get used to weapons. After a while our body learns how the weapon moves and how to control it with the least effort. However I think we have some sort of 'default controler' built in that enables us to adapt quickly enough :) Or perhaps we just develop it through the handling of many swords?

Since my first post in this thread I've been wondering if this stick+mass equivalent could be close to the representation our brain uses as a basis for the 'default controler'. This would be quite difficult to test though ;)

At the very least it seems to allow for comparisons, meaning that if you have a favourite sword it should be possible to determine how close another sword is to it as far as mass distribution is concerned.

Jean Thibodeau wrote:

But maybe GOOD comes in different FLAVOURS when it comes to swords ?

Most probably :D There seems to be much variability in the thickness of the stick, and plenty of variations in the magnitude of the point mass. I'm starting to toy around with an illustration of the possible variations, but it's not ready yet.

Jean Thibodeau wrote:

When comparing the point masses positions of the Tritonia and the Gaddhjalt the differences in positions might be cancelled out by the size of the point masses ? Change the point mass but also changing the position could result in very minor differences in subjective feel ?

Indeed, I'm starting to compare the moments of the point masses relative to the cross (that is, weight of the point mass times distance to the cross). It seems to lessen the variations a bit. Still experimenting on that...

David E. Farrell wrote:

Jean Thibodeau wrote: The Black Prince feels like a feather and might still cut well because one could accelerate it the most ? For me, the BP feels heavy in the hand (when static) but moves gracefully and with power, especially in the thrust. Probably our respective reference points though.

I don't think your opinions are in contradiction; The Black Prince has this big point mass at the cross and a more concentrated mass than any sword I have numbers for. This big point mass feels heavy at rest, and lends a fair deal of impact in thrusts. On the other hand the stick part is ligther, which means it is relatively easy to accelerate or decelerate the sword in rotation. I think that's what Jean means when he writes 'like a feather'. Of course you could also argue that Jean seems to have a natural taste for big swords and a collection fitting his taste :) And yes, in order to cut you can favour mass or speed, the effects will be different but both can work in the right conditions...

By the way, if you guys manage to measure the Albion and Tinker blunts, I'll be happy to compare their mass distribution to the Black Prince and between one another :D

Regards,