This was truly awesome mate, although the tests were not completely controlled like you said, it was still extremely informative!

@Tharandriel99

5 жыл бұрын

Shadiversity Love your content and the video referred to here. Forgive me if I am wrong, but I was under the impression, that a flail was used specifically to counter opponents who had a heavy guard, such as, but not limited to, shields, parrying daggers and bucklers. The idea being to make contact with the edges of the opponents guard, in an effort to make the chain propel the “star” into your opponent behind their guard. Thus, while I am in perfect agreement with the idea of the mace being superior in control and overall kinetic power, it strikes me as a more relevant test, to see how much kinetic force is lost, from a flail impacting a shields guard, and then whipping over and hitting the pressure plate behind it. Likewise I feel that, while the mace is superior in power, the flail is more capable of scoring hits on opponents that prefer a defensive approach to combat, and barring that, at the very least it’s difficult to defend against in a conventional way, which would also be a point in its favor as a niche weapon. The chain may dampen its power to some extent, when the opponents guard stops the haft, but a hit is still a hit. That being said, I’d personally still prefer a sword... Apologies if any of this is wrong, since I admit to not having done extensive research, and any correction you may offer on the subject is appreciated. Keep up the good content!

@WushuEngineer

5 жыл бұрын

Thank you kindly for the mention, Shad. I appreciate it.

@drago2210

5 жыл бұрын

@@Tharandriel99 bypassing guards could be useful if you had a longer chain, but most useable flails dont. so if the defender extends their guard far enough as Shad said, the chain wouldnt be long enough to reach them anyway. Also lacking a fixed connection with the shaft, its easier to deflect and push it away, the flail user having less control over his weapon too.

@Tharandriel99

5 жыл бұрын

Drago thank you for the reply. I think you’re right, at least in terms of 1-handed flails. Their use would likely be diminished to a degree, so perhaps it would be more interesting to see a larger type of flail instead. And while I agree that a defender may use techniques to defend against the flail, I still think the general appeal of the flail is to use the chain to reach around a guard. Otherwise I fail to see its utility at all. On a side note. If a defender is forced to extend their guard, they also leave their guard more open in order to do so. Maybe that holds some value as well, though that would require an extra attacker to utilize the opening or perhaps the use of dual flails... but who on their right mind would use two of those death traps I really don’t know...

@Krethak

5 жыл бұрын

@@Tharandriel99 Personally I see the flail more as a disarm and control weapon, than one which is supposed to "go around the defenses". Because of the chain and the weight, when an opponent tries to block your strike with a weapon the weight would swing around the sword/spear/axe/whatever and coil the chain around it so you would be able to "catch" that weapon and control your opponent, ridding him of an effective weapon. Having a secondary weapon yourself you could attack your opponent, or use the pommel of the flail to deal (some) damage, or try to completely disarm your opponent with a yank. Furthermore you could explicitly attack arms or legs to disbalance your opponent and use that as opening to bring your enemy down. In that regard the flail would be easier to use than for example a parry dagger which would need more control to effectively disarm your opponent, for the flail you "just" need to swing it against your opponents weapon.

Very interesting, thanks for doing this test! From my own tests I've been skeptical of the claim that flails hit harder, and I'm not fond of flexible weapons in general. They are harder to control, and I have a suspicion that the flexible chain doesn't transfer force as well as a rigid haft. After all you want a solid kinetic chain (no pun intended) going through the legs, hips, and arms into the weapon in order to deliver a powerful strike.

@WushuEngineer

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the comment, Skallagrim! I've been silently watching your content for years and appreciating your work!

@donsancho6690

3 жыл бұрын

The worst part for me is that, even if a flail were to pack more of a punch, once you strike you won't really be able to take advantage of it. It's not a strike, it's a smack. With a mace, you can strike somebody and continue pushing and applying force after contact is made. A flail would smack the opponent and then, well, flail. My distaste for this weapon is immeasurable

@unifiedhorizons2663

3 жыл бұрын

@@donsancho6690 if you miss your left completely open for counter acounter

@Goddess_Moros

3 жыл бұрын

Well don't forget Skallagrim, 2x speed produces 4x force. The whip speed seems to more than compensate,even when force is lost via flex.

@shoeofobama6091

2 жыл бұрын

@@vanivanov9571 but in that case, its not a matter of the flail itself, its just a bigger arc, so why not just make a long mace

Husband makes and tests maces for fun, wife's Backfist is at 4k+ newtons. Marriage made of pure badassery.

@modisp

3 жыл бұрын

That joke was unexpected but welcome one :D

@keevanalrasyidumar5450

3 жыл бұрын

And a scientist isn't she? I can't really hear what he says but if this is true, it just adds a whole another level of badass

Wow, somebody found a use for a phone book! Well-done Sir!

@jamestickle3070

5 жыл бұрын

Stephen Baldassarre top comment points

@quantumastrologer5599

3 жыл бұрын

I wondered if it was plato's republic at first but the phone book makes a lot of sense too!

Best use of a Historically Accurate Phonebook; ending rightly with a pommel on a stick.

I was fully expecting a literal "hold my beer!" moment in the intro 😁

Great one. Very rare instance of test on youtube and/or tv when tester is aware of it possible flaws, still seems much more accurate then most of those, when tester wasn't aware of measurment errors and complexity of involved variables)

Pesky knights in shining armor. Can I have that for my folk-metal band name?

As you mentioned at the end: IMO a usefulness of a flail or rope weapon is that less reverberation will travel up your arm so you'll get less fatigued in a longer battle. I couldn't imagine how much your arm would hurt after a longer medieval battle using a long sword.

@draxthemsklonst

4 жыл бұрын

Similar to a metal baseball bat hitting a metal shed and rock walls, probably.

@GeraltofRivia22

4 жыл бұрын

Yeah, but you won't have to worry about a sore arm when you're dead because you were using an inferior weapon

@Jamie-tx7pn

4 жыл бұрын

Blah blah semantics I know but there's a lot wrong in this thread 1) You'd not be using a sword in a battle. (Polearms are generally a better idea.) 2) Swords are not comparable to metal baseball bats, and hitting shields/armored men (which have at least some give) are not comparable to hitting a metal shed or rock wall. 3) You would not be hitting anything solid with a sword unless you screwed up. And if you did, one, the flexibility of the blade would probably absorb most of the reverberation, and two, the grips fit the hand better and are likely padded very well.

@GeraltofRivia22

4 жыл бұрын

@@Jamie-tx7pn not to mention most soldiers simply did not wear full plate mail.

@icantthinkofabetteraccount9031

3 жыл бұрын

@@Jamie-tx7pn 1) depends a lot on the time in the renaissance era, yeah probably but in like the 1400's i do not believe so 2) fair 3) though inferior to just a mace or a warhammer against an armored opponent, you could just half sword, wich was done historically, but you definitely weren't entirely useless against an armoured opponent

Shad's videos on nunchaku also present general issues with using flail-types in general. One of which is the higher difficulty of driving your entire body's force into a blow.

Just got sent here from Mr. Shadiversity. I was suspicious that you might swing the flail in a manner similar to the mace, taking away any advantage the flail could have. But you did wonderfully and I'm sorry for doubting you. This was informative!

As a person working on how to transfer some of the physics of these weapons to the TTRPG space, this was extremely helpful. Thanks!

This video is basically a lab report. Ten years ago, I would've laughed at the idea of men doing science for fun, but here I am watching it.

Absolutely top tier freaking content. I loved this test and the data analysis presentation. I would love to not only try these types of tests myself when I have the equipment, but to also see more of these test videos. Thank you for presenting the question and posting this video Shad. I really enjoyed watching and I found a new channel to sub to.

That was a hell of an analysis there at the end. Well spoken, well thought, and objectively so. Great job. Data is useless unless it's interpreted properly.

You taught that phone book a darn good lesson, mate.

Another thing that raises questions to me is the fact, that we naturally do the flail swings very short and let the kinetic energy of the loose propelled flail head do the job. maybe there are techniques to use full body swings to accelerate the flail head faster?

@WushuEngineer

5 жыл бұрын

I recently produced a follow-up to this video in which I tried to get fuller extension in the swings. As I mentioned in my follow-up, I would say that more familiarity with the weapon (as you might expect from a peasant or agricultural worker who may have used the agricultural versions of the flail on a regular basis) would almost certainly improve striking technique.

Thanks for taking the time to do this comparison, I know I was certainly curious as to which had the most force after watching Shads video.

Thanks for doing this test, and I appreciate the analysis. I think you were spot on about the flail not rebounding impact forces the way a mace or hammer would. If the armor or shield you strike with all your power doesn't move or buckle, you'll probably be the one hurting; unless you can mitigate those forces being transmitted to the weakest part of that kinetic chain.

I absolutely loved this video, I was directed here through the comment on Shads vid, but I expect that I’ll be watching many of your videos in the near future! I had never really considered the flip side of the kinetic chain mechanic, that the force is exerted back onto the wielded when you hit armor/shields, and in this case the flail head simply bounces and spins around. That’s the scariest part, the idea of it hitting you, but also the part that might save you, all of that force not being forced back into your hands will give you better reflex times to redirect your weapon back at your opponent again!

Yes! I really wanted someone to mention about the hand shock! I remember trying to break some ice from my rain gutter with a steel baton only to drop it from the pain of the shock! So I thought that the flail was just a mace without the feel of hand shock. The chain is also very short on most flails I've seen and I believe this supports my argument. Great video! I'll be checking out others of yours

@alex.projects1400

5 жыл бұрын

If the shock hurts, grab harder! than the shock decreases extremely

Great vid, came over from Shad's flail video and I think you nailed it.

the things that i always 'figured' about flails was that it would benefit from the same physica that make whips crack i.e the swing the flail, then you stop it, and the flexible flail arm will then whip around at a much shorter arc, and thus move VERY quickly.. thus amplifying the force. it sounds like that view only works for certain strikes... and not as well as i posited

Before I say anything I just want to admit my slight bias towards the flail cause it's cool and the physics of it are cool. So yeah take this with as much salt as you like. This seems like a decent test. Admitedly more refined versions of the weapons would have made things a little nicer and perhaps using a plywood made from full sheets rather than pieces would have also given more acurite and consistent measurements. I also feel a warm-up prior to testing would have been in order to help get familiarized with the unique handling of each weapon. I personally expected a little more from the flail and think that more varied modes of testing would be helpful. I'm admittedly an armchair engineer in this scenario but those are my thoughts.

To understand these results, consider the moment of inertia of each object. Kinetic energy in a swing is K=Iw^2 where I is the moment of inertia and w is the angular velocity. When you swing a flail, the chain straightens and effectively becomes a pole. Thus, w is the same between the flail and the pole. Moment of inertia depends on the mass distribution. Assuming the pole and flail are the same length and the flail has less mass than the pole, its moment of inertia is smaller. It carries less kinetic energy. It hits softer than the pole. Thus, the *only* "benefit" of the flail is its flexibility, but you pay for it in the energy deposited in the strike.

Super cool my man! When you were talking about the comparative weapons for wushu being used for range and self defense my first thought was that they probably weren’t used against fully armored opponents. The flail seems to be almost a disarming type weapon(chain around weapon then pull down or hit the wrist) or an intimidation factor. The giant heavy (spiked?)ball on the end of this menacing looking chain may give off the impression “I don’t want to be hit by that!” It’s seems a rigid option is the better choice. Unless you are a Witch King and have a 300 lb flail and have the inhuman strength to swing it like a wrecking ball. That’s intimidating for sure!!!

good work, i like how you acknoledge the limitations of your tests, lot of effort, well done.

Your last note about kick back vibrations through the weapon strike makes sense why the flail would be used in large scale medieval combat as they were fighting for hours on end if not all day in mud and dead bodies. Even if the flail did less damage per strike you only had to do so much for exhaustion and other factors across such a battle. The longer your arm lasts, the longer you last. A 'slow and steady wins the race' mentality.

Great test. What I missed was a test for the flail where you let it spin for a bit to add some impact speed. I'm pretty sure that would add some additional force. At the same time of course it makes the weapon harder to control.

@WushuEngineer

5 жыл бұрын

I did some testing of this in my latest video: kzread.info/dash/bejne/aId6lraAfLSyZ7Q.html

I would guess that the main purpose of flails was to bypass the shield and daze the opponent with a helmet hit. While it would not do a lot of damage, i would hate to be on the receiving end of the flail wearing a full helm... It would be like sticking a head into a church bell while it's ringing - plus there would be some concussive force that might damage a spine... A blow like that would disorientate the knight and he might lower his guard enough to be injured with other weapons...

@-Rome-

5 жыл бұрын

Well, that and for the use on horseback. Rigid weapons are much more tricky to wield on horseback (Newton's 3d Law and all).

@j_d_gamer2091

5 жыл бұрын

To quote Lindybeige “ it doesn’t ring like a bell, because it’s got my head stuffed in it”. Lindybeige is a pretty cool KZreadr check him out

@jakelowery7398

5 жыл бұрын

It would not be like a bell, padding was often worn under helmets and helmets were not just loose buckets

@nighthunter3039

5 жыл бұрын

@@j_d_gamer2091 it would ring loud enough though to disorientade someone, just look at the "end him rightly" tactic.

@j_d_gamer2091

5 жыл бұрын

@Night Hunter ah, the throwing pommel tactic. Still funny that no one knows if it was a prank or an actual tactic

I came here from the link in the comments section on Shadiversity. It is awesome that you showed yourself watching this very video. I appreciate your time and information To any one that knows and just cos I'm curious what do the two(red and blue) output readings on the screen epresent. I feel that they both represent different time frames but I'm not sure

An excellent video, I applaud your attention to detail and openness about the limitations of the tests. Your closing thoughts at the end were an excellent touch, and left the matter still open and ripe for exploration. I for one would love to see this explored more thoroughly, though I might suggest more accurate analogs.

Very useful. Thanks for the demonstration and insights.

My tip for eliminating the human element would be to add an accelerometer to the weapons to make sure the velocities are within a determined range

The building you filmed the testing in is BEAUTIFUL! So jelly lol Thanks for the vid! Definitely informative! ANd urmehgursh, why have I not found this channel sooner! Love your stuff X)

@WushuEngineer

5 жыл бұрын

Thank you for the kind words. I appreciate it.

Thank you for the time and effort you put into this.

This was fun to watch and I appreciate you using science to test a theory. Really cool. One item that I would be curious about is if you had fuller arm extension with the flail. For the mace swings, your fist was raised at head level or above creating a greater distance between the striking head and the phone book. For the flail, you were more at shoulder level. That bit of difference in the height of your fist before starting the downward motion I would anticipate makes a very significant difference in impact force. I also know that having the weighted end on a chain or rope would dispel the energy from traveling back up the weapon and into your hand and arm. While maybe not an ideal close quarters weapon, I could see it being used to devastating effectiveness by someone skilled in it's use from 1-2 paces away. I'm not an engineer but I've always been curious how things work. I think the truest test would be to build a machine with a robotic arm that would consistently raise the weapon to the same height and bring it down at the same velocity on the downward swing. Sounds like something we could have Adam Savage build! I've never swing a real mace but I used to make my own as a kid with wood and nails (I don't know how I survived into adulthood!). I know that when I managed a full swing of my arm (say like trying to through a rock or a baseball as far as you possibly can) the spikes of my "mace" would fully sink into the tree I was aiming for versus when I started to get tired and would only do a half swing or a swing all in the shoulder it would more often then not just ricochet off and bounce back at me....and yes I still have a scar from those early days of trying to best that old apple tree.

@WushuEngineer

5 жыл бұрын

Thank you for your comment. I have received a number of requests to redo the test, so I am planning on doing so and will endeavour to try some full extension movements. I hear you about the exciting childhood. I remember beating bedroom carpet fires out with my jeans from failed explosives experiments in my youth. It seems as though I must have failed to mature past that point because here I am still doing the same stuff.

@SirDokk

5 жыл бұрын

@@WushuEngineer lol. The things we did as kids before video games and cell phones were invented.... I grew up on the west coast of the United States and love knowing that a half a world away people experienced the same childhood shenanigans as I did :-)

@WushuEngineer

5 жыл бұрын

I have revisited the mace and flail tests and tried to incorporate more extension in my movement. I juat posted the video today: kzread.info/dash/bejne/aId6lraAfLSyZ7Q.html

when you want to strike harderest bent the knees with strike you'll supposedly put more weight behind the strike

i enjoyed the conclusion about it being a more ergonomic tool for bashing at those who may have a more superior armor/shield that would otherwise cause troublesome shock injuries to the users of a mace/warhammer vs a more flexible flail. great reply video.

Great job! Thank you for doing this!

Awesome to see the test requested by Shad. Very nice video Mr. Engineer! You said yourself that the test did have some shortcomings which is completely understanderble, but from my perspective it seemed like a good representation of the force-relation between each type of weapon. You should have more subscribers and you defenitely have my subscription. Keep up the good work! :)

Came here from Shad, thanks for bringing up China, concealment and deploy, i'd much rather small, even sections, but didn't remember why

i will only say a couple of things regarding the experiments. its interesting to see the short club outperform the flail, because i tended to think the chain was actually there to virtually extend the mace for more impact. what i would have made better is to choose a posture to action all weapons similarly. For boths clubs you dropped them from overhead, while the range of motion for the flail was lower, less direct and more limited (and i understand. the flail feels very threatening to the wielder. To give better criticism, i wouls suggest to start all hits from a stationary position comparable between all weapons, like an over the shoulder load with an oblique swing to not hit your head with the flail. Very good video regardless and much respect for actually doing the test.

@vittocrazi

4 жыл бұрын

and just for the sake of it, one test with the flail could have been performed to strikea barrier with the shaft, and measure how much of the enery would actually bypass the shield, given a parry, as it is believed it was used for it (myself included)

This is pretty cool. Thanks for doing these.

Good stuff, thanks for posting the reply video.

Great video! Sounds like the time to train someone in a weapon might be the main factor on its popularity through history.

Cool video. You brought up some good counter points!

@Wushu Came here from chadiversity. As I mentioned there, the point of flails with barbed points was not so much the impact, but the excruciating pain inflicted upon the yank back. But yes, I have used a flail in sparring and the key is like you describe. It is still scary as f*ck to novice with! Definitely wear a head protection. I have a chipped tooth because I did not. I was practicing on a tree and it hit me back in slow motion 😁

I know this is a year old but its fascinating! Thanks for doing this! It seems as though shads hypothesis was correct, you can in fact generate more force by adding your own stability and mass to a swing. But I hadn't considered that while you do this, you're also recieving plenty of force right back (much more so if your target is solid and doesnt move like in the video). Cool stuff! New sub

I saw a program where they tested different weapons on dummy, and scientifically explaining results. Reason why non chain weapons yielded more kinetic energy, is because the whole structure of the weapon could take the impact from the hit, whereas chained weapons that might have higher velocity, the kinetic energy is lost in the chain part.

Technique would've changed a lot.

Very informative, thank you

It wasn't even Covid season yet.

There was a lot more time for the flail to accelerate as you swing it in a three-quarter circle while the mace barely got a quarter. I wonder if the mace would have done even better with similar amount of acceleration.

What I found most interesting was body language. Watch closely the body language during the rigid haft strikes of the mace and your body staying forward throughout the entire strike from the wind up to the follow though. But when you use the flail there is a more awkward wind up and a consistent and noticeable reflexive recoil from your head through your shoulders and down to your feet. This really puts into practice what Shad said about the innate danger of using a flail. Your natural instinct is to protect your head from an object which is not entirely in your control. A mace which does have that kinetic extension of your body feels naturally in your control, but your body has no connection to that flail head. Obviously your brain understands the damage that head can do so your body naturally responds by wanting to stay away from it. This would mean that in training to use a flail in combat a person would have to train themselves to ignore this innate "danger sense" of the flail.

Enjoyed it, thanks.

Surprised by the result, but what I find really interesting is that the wood beneath the phone book broke. It's a great demonstration of what mace type weapons are built to do, to transmit force through objects. That poor phone book though, what did it ever do to you?

"pesky knights in shining armor" That comment made me chuckle a bit ^_^

Cool test but I think if you gave yourself an hour or 2 practice to swing the flail for maximum impact you would definately increase those numbers, it looked a lot like you were swinging it like a regular hammer. I suggest maximum extension from your body midway through the swing and bring everything close and tight as you strike. Not unlike the energyeffiecent way to split wood but with more emphasis on force. (axe brought up to vertical, never behind the head and simply letting it fall while guiding it to hit the precise spot, you will quickly feel you can get quite a bit more power by simply pulling the handle closer before impact as I write this I am struck by the irony that you can probably do the same thing very well with the long handled mace.)

@alveolate

5 жыл бұрын

yea... the angle of striking with the flail end is very variable as well; there could be some deflected momentum without proper practice. it was also very noticeable that his flail swing was much shorter/restrained than with the maces. without sufficient distance to build momentum/acceleration, the impact would obviously be reduced. however, if this observation is valid, it may mean that flails really do require _less energy_ to transmit a similar amount of impact to the short mace (shorter swing to deliver the 3,000 newtons).

I think the significant problem was with your technique. Your long strait armed swing of the flail made the head essentially rotate at the same speed as the shaft causing the reduced damage to be directly related to the swinging technique.

Shadiversty recommend you. Keep up the good work.

i was half expecting him to mutilate his own hand on the table with the way he was holding the mace at 4:50

the biggest problem I see is that with the flail you had a vastly different and somewhat shortened swing.it was more of a forearm swing from the hip than the over hand chop you did with the mace.

@WushuEngineer

3 жыл бұрын

Yes. The weapons are mechanically different, so maintaining identical swing dynamics is not easy. However, I did attempt to standardize the movement more in the follow-up video.

The flail looks like a handgranade on a stick.

Just found your channel, nice!

Well, in order to get out anything of the flail you should probably hit something with the shaft, letting the head swing on with much more velocity (reduced radius of a circular movement accelerates the tip). I think you would strike the flails shaft to the shield of a defender so the head would swing around and hit with multiple times the speed it would otherwise have.

Just watch the flail fail shad and saw your comment. Comments up engagement so this is to help your video perform better in the algorithms.

My belief is that the flail is not a one handed weapon but a two handed one. One hand low on the shaft and the other close to the chain end. With this configuration of holding the flail the upper hand becomes the force generator and the lower hand counter balances the weapon pretty much like a three section staff. If you do another test try using the two handed method and see what results you get.

@WushuEngineer

5 жыл бұрын

Based on a casual search, there do seem to be more references in historical art/treatises along with surviving examples of two-handed flails and spiked ball and chain type weapons. Although 1-handed variants do exist which appear to have been used predominantly by cavalry. I would agree that the two-handed infantry designs would most likely be more effective in terms of generating impact force and energy. I did put together a follow-up video in which I addressed some of the requests that came up in the first video, although I did not test two-handed flails. I'll have to see if I can do that at some point in the future.

you should circle your grip the same way as you did with the flail. vs hammer striking with the mace.with the hand at the base of the haft just like the flail, control test the same motion.

Clean, and well spoken, it really feels like you wanted to put out a professional product.

Great video mate

so in the end to point of the flail is to make bludgeoning a knight to death easier on the hands, for those softer cultured hands of nobility

Very nice vid!

I wonder if there's a meaningful difference in performance between a chain-jointed flail and a hinged flail.

Great video!

Nicely done, I do agree with Shad in that it is an over rated weapon otherwise you would see them in more paintings as well as burials. I, however, do think it is much more nuanced then just force. Force by itself does little to harm through armor. Were as speed is always the best factor for armor piercing. For example arrows, javelins and spears traveling fast enough to pierce armor did happen. With the flail I think there were spikes small enough to by pass chainmail links and the head was traveling fast enough to puncture through a gambeson underneath said chainmail. With enough of these pricks one would start to bleed out faster as well as increase the risk of infection or tetanus (sp?). Death by a thousand cuts...or pricks...moving on! Speaking from 27 years of Larp combat experience there are some things I would like to share about the flail. 1. A flail hits faster and harder when the haft is blocked allowing the momentum to all be transferred to the head striking the victim behind the block. It sounds counter intuitive but a flail that isn't blocked hits softer then if it was blocked. Conservation of angular momentum is what is being used here and it is worth looking into. 2. One thing that isn't talked about is the weapon trapping ability of the flail. You can trap the blade by wrapping the flail around it and pulling it towards you. Possibly disarming your opponent but effectively rendering their weapon useless. (BTW I have only seen this happen a handful of times out of the thousands of instances a flail was used) This could also be possible with a wooden shield. If the spiked head of the flail were to be lodged into the wood on the back side (read the wielders side) you could pull the shield down and/or out of position allowing for an ally to get an undefended strike in. If this were to be used two handed it could increase the force and control. Once the weapon or shield are incapacitated you can unsheathe your side arm (such as a dagger) and close in on your enemies throat or any other vulnerable spots. 3. One universal flaw with flails that I have seen was the overly heavy tip weight causing a significantly slower recoil action. With enough skill I have seen people mitigate this recoil- but not by much. If you miss or it is effectively blocked it takes much more time to put the flail back into a ready position ( as compared to other weapons). This will give your opponent an opportunity to strike back at you when you are more vulnerable. Just my thoughts and experiences with flails over the years. I would love to see this tested in other ways. Thanks for the video :)

The flail is far more nuanced than strike force, it's purpose was to get around the shield and break the arm attached to the shield taking out the common defence of the time. After that the flail offers a much more difficult target to keep track of because in order to use it effectively you have to keep it moving (To flail, is to continuously move around). At least that's the understanding I've had for some time. I could be wrong.

Nice video. My criticism would be that your should is contributing much less motion to your trials with the flail that with the mace.

Interesting video!

An interesting video, however I would imagine the flail would scale its force better when the weight is increased since as you said it's not receiving any of its force from bridging.

@WushuEngineer

5 жыл бұрын

I would agree that more mass would increase the kinetic energy in the impact provided that the velocity of the swing didn't suffer. There would be an optimal weapon mass for a particular wielder based on their physical characteristics.

I think you employed a rather high level of control over variables for KZread content.

In a Novel (Master of war) at around 1350 someone used a chainmace while riding... maybe there is indeed an advantage... while riding you sometimes have just one chance for an strike depending on your speed... also the chance of hurting your wrist could be lower... except if you hit yourself :P... and you might better strike on enemys on the left side (over your own shield) ... and there would be no big problem if you loose the weapon if you still have a sword. (just like if a lance was your first weapon)

I wonder how these factor in different circumstances. You have force and reach, but you could have different maneuvers. A full force swing is much different than dancing around your opponent and striking when there is opportunity. This changes the options to defend. Dodging the strike, blocking with a shield and parrying, either at the far end or closer to the attackers hands. Also is the defender on horseback, are there multiple attackers? In all these cases the situation depends a lot on the skill and gear of the combatants. I think there will be a niche for the flail. Could it be that a highly skilled attacker can more easily preserve the momentum of swings and reuse it for the next swing. Or swinging around, partly like nunchuks for intimation and showing off, but also sowing confusion how fast and where exactly the next swing will be from? Lastly, if the attacker is well trained in both sword and flail, but the defender isn't, could the attacker have an advantage in certain unexpected tricks?

What sort of gains may be made by using the flail in more of a jump rope form, where you whip the weight around continuously until you flick it in a full strike?

@WushuEngineer

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks for your comment and question. I did a follow-up analysis and video trying to swing the flail around before striking the load cell to see if there was any benefit. Based on my tests and personal experience, the short answer is no because it is quite an awkward weight to swing around swiftly enough to store any kind of rotational energy. With a significantly lighter weight, this may be possible.

hard to say from watching, but it looked to me like the impact force of the mace was largely dependent on the strength of the user, but perhaps not so with the flail?

I heard that the meteor hammer was actually used in a battlefield sometime in ancient china. But from what I know about ancient chinese warfare was that soldiers were drilled into formation combat. for instance shield walls, spear walls with backup weapons like swords, axes, maces. I am thinking that probably the meter hammer was used like a backup weapon when the enemy manages to breach the formation. most likely a simple vertical strike was used to bypass enemy shields and guards. also because the strike was simple and in a vertical motion it most likely won't hit your comrades by accident. I am not 100 percent sure this is how it was exactly used. But I do know it was used on the battlefield.

Did not see that coming.

Could you try putting a shield in the way so that the end of the shaft hits the shield and the chain end gets shorter therefore increasing angular momentum?

@WushuEngineer

3 жыл бұрын

Hi. Thanks for your comment. I did perform a follow-up investigation in which I did some tests involving an interposed blocking object as you suggest: kzread.info/dash/bejne/aId6lraAfLSyZ7Q.html

I would have been interested to see you use a flail with a chain instead of a wire. in that configuration you may have been able to spin up or twirl the weighted end before the strike. The potentially increased velocity might just compensate for the loss of kinetic transmittal of the users mass through a solid haft. Like you seemed to imply the technique employed would make a difference. All in all I liked the demonstration.

@WushuEngineer

5 жыл бұрын

I did upload a follow-up video to this one in which I tested the pre-strike spinning in response to another comment. Take a look at that video if you would like to see the testing, but the summary was that it was not a feasible technique for a one-handed flail. It may, however, be feasible if the flail was two-handed, allowing the shaft to be stabilized during the spinning process.

@lukesteele4510

5 жыл бұрын

@@WushuEngineer thanks I wish you had included a link.

@WushuEngineer

5 жыл бұрын

@@lukesteele4510 sorry about that. It's a very cold Queensland morning. I'll blame it on that. kzread.info/dash/bejne/aId6lraAfLSyZ7Q.html

I noticed something with the mace, when you hit the rim of the target most of the time the handle hits the target rather the flail sort of curves around the rim but has lesser momentum I am writing this so late because its something else to think about rather than thinking of my dogs death yesterday

Excellent video. Many documentaries could benefit by your lessons. I've got a question, just for the sake of fathoming the levels of impact force, how many Newtons would a punch of a common man generate?

@WushuEngineer

5 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the kind words. It's difficult to put a number on that, there are not many studies that have been done on untrained individuals. One study looked at novice boxers and found that they could generate approximately 1600 N in a front punch. Working with novice students in my own system puts the range between 800 N to 2000 N depending on sex/weight/build etc. These subjects all have a couple of years of experience, though. Based on the tests that we have performed, I would estimate that an untrained individual would be capable of anything from 500 N to 1200 N based on sex/weight/build etc. For comparison purposes, the PowerKube manufacturers (a device I have used to perform tests with in a few of my other videos) indicate that an untrained adult male would be capable of generating approximately 5000 franklins in a punch.

@Kriegerdammerung

5 жыл бұрын

@@WushuEngineer Many thanks, sir. Your answer is just what I wanted.

I wonder if there would be a proportional difference in the RMS of the impacts between the ridged and flexible weapon, due to a lack of dampening as a because of the mechanical decoupling.

@WushuEngineer

5 жыл бұрын

I did a follow up video which showed some more comparative tests between these weapons and my backfist strikes. Taking a single typical impact from this set of tests for the mace, flail and my backfist strike yields the following RMS values Backfist: 1502 N, Flail: 933 N, Mace: 1570 N (over a time period of 46 mS).

You should have rickrolled us

I wonder how swinging with two hands would affect the mace, since that is one area where the straight, rigid haft has a definite advantage in practicality of use.

@WushuEngineer

5 жыл бұрын

I did not investigate using the mace with a two-handed grip, although I have investigated other weapons using such a grip. Baseball bats, flutes and staff weapons. In these other tests, the use of a two-handed grip definitely improved the impact forces.

@robertlewis6915

5 жыл бұрын

@@WushuEngineer Thanks for replying! Awesome video.

Impact force on the user being significantly reduced never really occurred to me before. Then again you do risk hitting yourself with the weapon if too close to the target. Also ricochets can be a problem.

Subbed instantly science and martial arts! Count me in :)

Well, I think, it would also be interesting to see how much force horizontal and upward strikes would have. In the shown case, gravity is doing a lot of the work. But how would the values change, if we look at swings without support by gravity.

@WushuEngineer

5 жыл бұрын

I uploaded a follow-up video in which I performed a set of tests using horizontal strikes (although I did not try upward strikes): kzread.info/dash/bejne/aId6lraAfLSyZ7Q.html

very interesting

I wonder if there is a specific technique one needs to practice before the flail comes into its own... Or if it's totally obvious how to optimally swing it once you are actually holding it?

@WushuEngineer

5 жыл бұрын

I have revisited this in a video I just published today. Take a look kzread.info/dash/bejne/aId6lraAfLSyZ7Q.html . To cut a long story short, I think the people who would have gravitated towards using this weapon would have been peasants and farmers who had a lot of experience using similar agricultural implements. It is only to be expected that they were particularly good at maximizing its effect after so much practice. Though of course, having very effective striking technique and knowing how to apply that in combat are different skill sets and the typical peasant would not have had the time to develop combat skill.

After you used the long handle you could have cut it down for the short handle test