Braid Classification

[Trevour]

Hi guys, the invention of braid has changed fishing forever. It's main benefit is it's superior strength to size ratio. But its impossible to compare one to another in the traditional way of comparing size to breaking strain. And I say size rather than diameter because this is the first classification I'd like to analize.

Diameter is a word referring to round objects. But braid is very often flat or even square, often with a height around half of it's height, with the 8 strand braids being more round. Mono was classified according to its diameter, and from that volume was worked out. Typically volume within a certain range is directly related to its breaking strain. If you look at mono typically a 0.2mm would have a breaking strain 25% of 0.4mm. That is because despite being half the diameter it is actually 4 times the mass and 4 times the volume, and you would thus get 25 percent of the line capacity on your reel. With regards to braid I think the only way it can be correctly classified is according to volome, something along the lines of 100m is equal to a number in cubic millimeteres. If you think of a reel, it can easily state how many cubic millimeteres are available for line space, and from there its easy to work out line capacity. It would also make comparing different braids easy, because you can compare a flat to a square to a round braid. Volume is easily measured and is a science man conquered ages ago. The only reason mono was measured in diameters is because it is always round, and its diameter is directly related to its volume. It would make a change in our lingo, but it won't take long to get used to, and at least braid classification would start to make sense, and be more accurate.

The second problem is the breaking strain of braid. What is the point of saying 50 lbs braid, but it is actually 90 lbs braid. Irrespective of the target market I think we are clever enough to sort out our favorite based on accurate measurements. Problems with regards to how they grab the braid in order to measure has received some of the blame, but if I can achieve much higher results by tying a pr knot, then really I don't understand the problem, and if some braids are able to be accurate, then the others ( and it's often the big popular brands) can as well. If you think about it you can't really suggest someone puts 30lbs braid on a reel if the stated breaking strain of the braid is not accurate. Also if I have say .55 or 50 lbs topshot, and wish to go slightly heavier with backing braid say 65 lbs, having accurate breaking strains for braids may dramatically increase line capacity. It's also good from a fishing point of view to know what you are fishing with. Imagine catching that dream fish, submitting it for a catch record in the 20lbs class, and having your claim rejected because your line failed the 20lbs test.

I know I'm ranting and raving somewhat, and that my single voice will change nothing but I would like to hear how others feel about the matter.

[REEFMAN]

It's been a pet hate of mine for a long time now...

As you say, it's very difficult to measure braid by it's diameter, because very few braids are perfectly round. This why the Japs brought in the PE rating system, which seems to be taking over the classification slowly but surely.

Here's an interesting thread on this discussion we had last year....http://www.ultimateangling.co.za/index.php?topic=20334.0

[REEFMAN]

Pinched this info from Craig Neil, who knows his stuff:

PE (Polyethelene) Rating in short refers to diameters and has been   devised by the Japanese long before it was used for measuring braid.    They do use the PE rating to indicate diameters of the braid so you can   know exactly how much you need to fill a PE rated reel.
 
  Below is a guide that lists the diameter (in millimetres) of each PE rating.
 
  PE # Diameter
  PE 0.6 ………………………….. 0.128mm
  PE 0.8 ………………………….. 0.148mm
  PE 1 …………………………….. 0.165mm
  PE 1.2 ………………………….. 0.185mm
  PE 1.5 ………………………….. 0.205mm
  PE 1.7 ………………………….. 0.218mm
  PE 2 …………………………….. 0.235mm
  PE 2.5 ………………………….. 0.260mm
  PE 3 …………………………….. 0.285mm
  PE 3.5 ………………………….. 0.310mm
  PE 4 …………………………….. 0.330mm
  PE 5 …………………………….. 0.370mm
  PE 6 …………………………….. 0.405mm
  PE 7 …………………………….. 0.435mm
  PE 8 …………………………….. 0.470mm
  PE 10 …………………………… 0.520mm
  PE 12 …………………………… 0.570mm
  PE 14 …………………………… 0.620mm
  PE 16 …………………………… 0.660mm
  PE 18 …………………………… 0.700mm
  PE 20 …………………………… 0.740mm
  PE 22 …………………………… 0.780mm
  PE 24 …………………………… 0.810mm
  PE 28 …………………………… 0.870mm
 
  The PE standard of measurement is based on a numbering system known as   “gouw”, the system that the Japanese originally used to measure the   diameter of silk thread.
 
  This measurement system has since been applied to monofilament and   braided fishing lines. The “PE” stands for Polyethylene, the fibre used   to make Dynema and Spectra braided lines.
 
  The PE rating is a constant measurement, so while two lines advertised   as being rated to 50lb may actually test at different breaking strains,   two lines with the same PE rating will always be the same diameter.
 
  As a very general rule, you can multiply the PE# by 10 to get an   approximate breaking strain of a braided line, i.e. PE4 x 10 = 40lb, as   it will rarely test below (10xPE#).
 
  However, the breaking strain can vary a great deal between different   lines of the same diameter. This is especially true in many of the high   end braids that use more strands and a tighter weave, resulting in a   rounder, smoother finish and higher breaking strain for the same   diameter as lines of lesser quality.
 
  For instance, YGK Galis Ultra Jig Man X8 in PE5 is rated to 86lb, but   Sunline Super PE PE5 is rated to 50lb. Higher end lines are often   specialised for either casting or vertical jigging, and usually carry a   higher price tag to match their superior finish and higher breaking   strain/diameter ratio.
 
  Sources:
  http://www.oceanbluefishing.com/pre-rating-fishing-line-diameter-chart/
  http://yoz-ami.jp/
  https://www.facebook.com/MahigeerWS/posts/676602492364682
  http://www.fishing.net.nz/forum/pe-line-ratings-rod-ratings_topic27164.html

[Trevour]

Thanks for the info, at least pe rating should take care of the diameter issue. The breaking strain issue is probably going to take the manufacturers being more accurate on packaging, I'm sure they're fully aware of actual breaking strain compared to what they advertising.

[John F]

Interesting read gents!

I guess the breaking strain really becomes an issue if one is fishing comps or looking for IGFA records... still pretty basic stuff that in this day and age is unjustified on the manufacturers side!

[travelmember]

You do get IGFA rated braid - expensive but available. Both FINS and Platypus make it. I think the issue is that many national angling bodies (like SADSAA) ban it from comps, even though it is IGFA legal - as long as it tests under the limit as per mono.


Having recently respooled with 300m of 50lb braid and only getting 200m on, I think the reel maker was using PE ball hair! It is very frustrating not having a level playing field, but at the end of the day, your personal experience will dictate what you prefer, much like mono.


If they were all the same, the marketing guru's wouldn't be able to spout so much rubbish.
The issue has been around for a while - see the excerpt below from IGFA to NZSFC.



,

I am in receipt of your letter dated July 15, 2014 regarding braided or multifilament fishing line and the issue of it over-testing the stated breaking strength on the packaging. Unfortunately, this problem existed in monofilament long before braided line became mainstream. For instance, manufacturer’s statements such as “strongest 12 pound test on the market” really meant the “lowest diameter 20 pound test on the market”. Braided line simply intensified the issue because of its exceptional tensile strength.

After many discussions with various people in the industry, we have come to the conclusion that as long as manufacturers can utilize this as a “positive” marketing tool to sell more line, they will.There are many organizations around the world that vehemently disagree with this practice. Indeed the European Fishing Tackle Trade Association has gone so far to create a “Line Charter” for companies to join pledging to utilize accurate labeling on their products in exchange for advertising and promotional support from the Charter. More can be seen on their website at http://www.efttalinecharter.com/en. This may be the ultimate answer.

Although certainly not the only ones, anglers who seem most concerned with this practice are game fish record seekers and tournament anglers. And as we all know, these groups compose a small fragment of the global fishing market. Based upon my past experiences with this issue, the IGFA has had little influence over the world’s tackle manufacturers who are producing these lines. They are simply more concerned about profit. The unfortunate consequence of this practice just means that more lines will over-test and subsequently more records applications will be rejected, which remains the number one reason for record application rejection today. Should you or any of the other members have ideas on how to push the industry, please let us know and we will do our best to assist.[/font][/size][/font]

[Vandit]

Very elegant an simplistic suggestion - that is irrespective of the type of line and material properties:


What you are actually doing is working out the average cross-section of the line A = V/L (m^3/m=m^2), with V the spool volume and L the line length.


Specify cross-section, calculated with a spool volume over a large length of line say 300m, and UTS (Ultimate tensile strength).


Want the thinest 30lb line? Chose the one with the smallest cross-section or (Volume/length).


Want a 300m length of line to fill the spool? Chose the strongest line where the cross-section equals the spool volume divided by the required line length A = V/L.


Other nice heuristics are available through this also. Go casting - measure and document the spool diameter after every cast, work out the lost volume -> estimated casting distances.

The trick here would be to get the manufactures to bin line break strength very accurately and use the same line testing standards (especially with braid), remember these okes will do anything to increase sales.

[Trevour]

Vandit, that is exactly what I was referring to. Volume is easily measurable, you could even use water displacement to measure it provided you get all the air out between fibres etc which is easy. Grom there a standard length 100m, 300m or whatever. from there you don't need to care if the line is oval, square, round, it doesn't matter. What matters is that you know how much product has been used to manufacture a 100m length (the length can be measured with the braid being under a specified tension), and from there we will know who truly makes the 'thinnest' braid.

As for the strength, With all respect to Paulus and his methods I think the standard test should involve a grab method etc that reflects best case scenario under reel fishing conditions. He himself says don't bother testing yourself, you will get nowhere near the results he achieves.

[Vandit]

Yip, I'd use an optical measurement and then integrate or average to obtain a final volume estimation. It will then volumetrically penalise stiffer line that doesn't lay optimally, instead of tolerating air gaps (between fibres and line lay).


The point is if they were to do a proper cross-section normalisation, you'd see that for most REPUTABLE braids (HMPE) the breaking strength is very close to linear w.r.t. cross-section.  Premium grade HMPE will test 25% stronger, anything stronger and they'd be lying.  Easy as that.

[Trevour]

@travelmember, that letter you posted probably sums the problem up. A company with a big budget has the ability to dominate the market. Think of how much influence the tv fisherman or the big names in our industry have. To use Craig Neil as an example, millions of rands have been spent on his recommendations by less informed anglers. I use him because I actually trust his opinion and have and will continue to do business with him. The problem is that it is still very much an opinion, and will often differ from person to person.

One week ASFN is sponsored by Penn, next week by Shimano, and somehow the product that is hard to beat changes. And this is not a critisizm because they probably do have confidence in both products, but are aware of where their bread is buttered. The difference is that with a reel the writing on the box/advert represents the product that you are buying more accurately.