The big penis and mens' sexual health source, increasing penis size around the world.
Great point!Ttt, do you rotate locations you clamp? Aren’t you concerned about an accordion or bellows-like tunica (wavy)?
Don’t worry - I want a well functioning and good locking piece of meat. And yes, I change locations, more from session to session (rather than within one session).
Later - ttt
Perhaps a “Don’t try this at home” warning and disclaimer?Oh, and how does one measure 102% erection so precisely, I wonder?
Ok, Mr Happy, Sir. I forgot. Don’t try any of that at home (I know you will, and that’s ok, but at your own risk, and after considering and balancing benefits and risks. Attention no negative PI’s!! Respect your body’s signals !! Right so, Mr. Happy, Sir?
And 102%, well, to tell you the truth, although I am a scientific mind, and pressure measurements in the corpora cavernous are technically feasible - 102% really is just a guesstimate. Might be just 100 or so :) .
Later - ttt
pudendum,
LA Pumps or Vacutech. Or you can do the assemble oyurself thing by buying the pump from an auto parts store and just buying a tube from one of these outfits.
I brought the girth gains under the clamp thing up earlier but it got passed over. And as t3 points out, hangers often report girth gains under their hanger attachment points.
Crazy shit that points to “we don’t know everything”.
Penis Enlargement Forum -- How To Jelq -- Free Penis Enlargement Videos
Make a Donation This place runs on donations, help out if you can. Thanks.
I would like to put here my 2 cents again, if you guys don’t mind.
Wow! This is more than 2 cents.
I think things are becoming confusing because we have adopted a too much abstract point of view. If we are speaking about physics phenomena, we have to start by what we can observe. Let’s suppose an average penis is 6” length (NBP) x 5” girth. If we clamp so tight that 3” inch of the penis is practically “void”, we are raising the pressure at roughly double of when starting. So, if pressure in erect penis is 3 HG, clamping up to half length raise the pressure to about 6 HG.
I’ve never clamped, so I’ll leave comments regarding “voids” to those that do. However, I find it hard to believe that you can crank down a clamp that hard on a peak erection without causing severe damage.
I think you’re underestimating pressure increases in the erect penis. As mentioned before, compliance plays a role. As the penis gets very firm, it begins to act like a rigid pipe. The pressure increase with small increases in volume (say when you push blood away from a clamp) will not be linear; it will cause an extremely rapid increase (exponential). Clamping half the length, will cause more than twice the pressure, far more.
Let’s see what happens with a pump: raising pressure to 6 HG will lead to same injury? Do a try, you’ll find the answer is “Not”.So: analogous levels of pressure aren’t affecting in the same way the tunica when pumping as it happens when clamping. This is a fact.
This is likely. The mechanical force is different.
Is theoretically possible raising pressure in the pump so much that same degree of stress on the tunica is obtained? Theoretically, yes. But let’s see what happens with lower numbers.
A clamp (so tight that volume under of the penis gripped is zero) wide 1 inch should cause a raise in the pressure inside tunica of roughly 1/6 higher. A practical experiment will tell us that 1) the expansion obtained is near (or above) dangerous levels; 2) the penis is rock-hard.
Translating that pressure to pumping, it would be a 3.5 Hg; this is a level of pressure not dangerous at all. This confirm what we have observed above.What would be a level of pressure so high that tears or break of tunica would happen by pumping? I don’t think that even at 12 HG of pressure this could happens – let’s relate to what ttt just said about his experiment with pump. But what would happens (for most of us) using a 12 HG pressure when pumping? Easily, “fluff” penis, temporary ED, loss of sensitivity etc..
So: using a pump, the pressure is deforming other penile tissue’s than tunica more than it happens by clamping. It means: pressure is affecting (and deforming) tunica more when clamping than when pumping. It means again that, for our goals, pressure is more profitably used when clamping than when pumping. In the first case, tunica resistance is the limit; in the second, not.
The explanation of this fact could be that others tissue than tunica (and/or limph build-up) are, to use a metaphoric term , absorbing the pressure.
I agree with you here. I think that translating pressures is difficult because the true pressures in clamping are not assessable. Clamping to 102% as ttt describes will cause pressure to jump quite high (because of the low compliance). If at peak you’re 200-300 mmHg, the clamp may even double (or more) the pressure.
Even if you could match pressures with pumping, I agree, you’d be hard press to believe that you could cause tunica damage before your penis would first fill up with fluid (edema).
I want to add an attempt of a more formal description of what I mean. This is in blue color, so those not interested in details can miss it- it is not essential, and could be confusing.
All of you have also to remember that I’m not a phisicist, and this is just a try for a “second level” reading, if you get what I mean.Pressure (P) is what we want to use for deforming the tunica.
Pressure should act on volume (V) of tunica.
Changes in volume are (dV).
Deforming effect is D.
While the absolute value of D should be P/dV, if we want a relative measure, or index, we have to relate dV to starting V.
So: D= P/(dV/V).
If penis was only made of tunica, higher levels of P should lead to higher D values in a linear way.
But if penis was made of, in example, three different tissues, the higher pressure level could be not so linear; i.e., I suppose (a physicist or engineer should chime in) this:P = (P1+P2+P3)/3=(D *dV1/V1 + D *dV2/V2 + D *dV3/V3)/3.
Otherwise said, when clamping P is pressure hitting tunica entirely. When pumping, P is the median pounded value of those P(n) values- this is what we read on the pump-gauge.
Moreover, the maximum level of P that can be obtained is correlated to the mini-max of that these P(n) we want : the lower value of each max P(n) value.
This mini-max P(n) is, itself, dependent to the maximal D value we want on each tissue : the lower value of each max D(n) value.Others things related to penis anatomy, observed by our thread-MEDS, can of course concur as well in limiting the maximum value of P that can be obtained, or the effectiveness of P on tunica deformation.
I know we’re lose 99.9% of the readers of this thread by discussing this further, so I’ll just add a few comments to help you refine your explanation:
Deforming effect (D) is descriptive (qualitative) and not numerical (quantitative). Also because deforming effect is, say stretching of the tunica (which is very tight already), it’s hard to imagine its response will be linear.
The penis is complex because of its unique construction and connective tissue arrangement. All this said, if you consider all the erection chambers as one, there really is only one important fluid compartment in the penis.
A tissues volume varies. The tunica for example has little fluid volume. So its volume is ignorable. The same is true for the skin and the tissue between it and the tunica. Unless you accumulate a significant amount of edema, this is also negligible.
You’re saying that each tissue (of the three you propose) represents a fraction of the total volume change ; dV/V. This is not necessary because the penis, for our purposes is a single compartment. The volume changes in the erection chambers dwarf any changes in fluid in other tissues. This would definitely be true if the change in volume you are considering for the erectile chambers is from flaccid.
Because of the compliance of the tunica at peak erection, this change in (dV) for a given pressure change may be almost immeasurable, in my mind.
Is the deformation directly related to pressure or is the pressure response a result of the poor ability to deform? Or both? That will be hard to quantify.
This is interesting. Did you derive this yourself or adapt it from somewhere else? You will need to refine it.
Just another thought:
To make pumping comparable to clamping physically, it would be necessary to clamp the base of the penis while in the pump.
Intuitively, I would argue that in this case the pressure difference would be fully effective. However, when unclamped, there is a third compartment (total blood volume connected to the corpora and all our nice equations don’t apply because the variables can change independently from each other (more or less, and thereby violating our nice equations).
Later - ttt
Sorry moderators - help - this is a triplicate post.
Later - ttt
Just another thought:To make pumping comparable to clamping physically, it would be necessary to clamp the base of the penis while in the pump.
Intuitively, I would argue that in this case the pressure difference would be fully effective. However, when unclamped, there is a third compartment (total blood volume connected to the corpora and all our nice equations don’t apply because the variaples can change independently from each other (more or less, and thereby violating our nice equations).
Agree. Equations tend to explain static situation. Nothing about the penis is static.
Ok, Mr Happy, Sir. I forgot. Don’t try any of that at home (I know you will, and that’s ok, but at your own risk, and after considering and balancing benefits and risks. Attention no negative PI’s!! Respect your body’s signals !! Right so, Mr. Happy, Sir?
ticker, I have to say this pisses me off.
You are essentially advocating the use of three clamps at an erection level of 100% or higher.
It is, in all seriousness, a very risky proposition. Your glib tone in this regard is inappropriate. You are, apparently, comfortable with taking serious risks with regard to your approach to PE. The cortisone shots to the suspensory ligament comes to mind. Not a standard PE practice to be sure, and one fraught with risk.
Nor is it particularly standard to clamp so hard with so many clamps at such an erection level.
Your interest in taking such risks is your own business, and your willingness to share is absolutely appreciated - no question, but to make light of the concern expressed in this regard is irresponsible. I would ask you to seriously consider this. My request to you was made respectfully. Please do the courtesy of returning the favor.
Thunder's Place can be used to discuss many approaches, but it is not in the business of supporting extreme PE.
And 102%, well, to tell you the truth, although I am a scientific mind, and pressure measurements in the corpora cavernous are technically feasible - 102% really is just a guesstimate. Might be just 100 or so
A guess.
Fair enough.
Sorry moderators - help - this is a triplicate post.
You’re welcome.
Before: I'd like to show you something I'm very proud of, but you'll have to move real close.
After: I\'d like to show you something I\'m very proud of, but you guys in the front row will have to stand back.
God gave men both a penis and a brain, but unfortunately not enough blood supply to run both at the same time. - Robin Williams (:
marinera used the pressure unit Hg for negative pressures for pumping in his last post. I was not familiar with what this was since Hg is the abbreviation for mercury which is the liquid used in pressure measurement. A measurement stated as Hg is imprecise and used all over this forum (and probably on the dials of many pump gauges).
After searching the forum, I found that Hg appears to be the unit of pressure measurement that is actually inches of Mercury (in Hg).
On 3/27/2003 westla90069 wrote a very informative post in the thread Pumping 101 regarding this incorrect terminology:
Remember when giving “units” of vacuum it’s not 6 Hg, it’s 6 inches Hg or 6” Hg or approximately 15 cm Hg. Saying a number with Hg and not including inches or centimeters leaves out important information.
I agree with his recommendation and would hope that others would use the correct terminology.
The reason I wanted to know that the units are in in Hg was so I could convert the units of negative pressure to millimeters of mercury (mm Hg), the units used to measure blood pressure. I want to see how the recommended negative pressures for pumping (2 - 6 in Hg) related to the pressures in the tunica.
2 - 6 in Hg converts to 50 - 150 mm Hg (1 in Hg = 25 mm Hg).
The pressure in the tunica at peak erection with Ischiocavernosus muscles contracted is between 200 - 300 mm Hg. If -6 in Hg negative pressure was transmitted completely to the tunica, cavernosa pressure would drop to between 50 and 150 mmHg. With the pressure in the arteries at about 120 mm Hg, the lowered cavernosa pressure would allow new blood volume into the penis from the body. This drop in cavernosa pressure is what important for increased blood volumes as the penis expands toward full erection.
I hope we are all (mostly) in agreement that in the very special circumstance of peak erection, that only a fraction of the pumps negative pressure makes it through the stiff tunica, so that the cavernosa pressure does not fall below arterial blood pressure to bring more new blood to the penis from the body.
I will agree that it is probably enough of a pressure drop to cause the movement of blood from the internal portion of the penis (base to root) into the outer penis under the cylinder to give a volume tension-stress (no matter how small) to the tunica and affects growth through connective tissue remodeling.
Ticker, I have to say this pisses me off.You are essentially advocating the use of three clamps at an erection level of 100% or higher.
It is, in all seriousness, a very risky proposition. Your glib tone in this regard is inappropriate. You are, apparently, comfortable with taking serious risks with regard to your approach to PE. The cortisone shots to the suspensory ligament comes to mind. Not a standard PE practice to be sure, and one fraught with risk.
Nor is it particularly standard to clamp so hard with so many clamps at such an erection level.
Your interest in taking such risks is your own business, and your willingness to share is absolutely appreciated - no question, but to make light of the concern expressed in this regard is irresponsible. I would ask you to seriously consider this. My request to you was made respectfully. Please do the courtesy of returning the favor.
Thunder's Place can be used to discuss many approaches, but it is not in the business of supporting extreme PE.
A guess.
Fair enough.
You’re welcome.
Mr. Happy, I am very sorry and I do apologize.
I am not sure why you are so upset, may be you were supposing some ironic tone in my last response. However, my answer was 100 % serious and only language problems might have made it sound ironic or unrespectful.
I highly respect you, I have always enjoyed the conversations with you.
Clamping with several clamps is not an invention of mine. In fact, I read this in YOUR pe forum in here. Let me expand a little on the idea: if you clam, at max erection, and don’t keep edging all the time (which I don’t like if my glans is so expanded - in order to keep it in good shape, by the way9 THERE WILL BE SOME LEAKAGE DESPITE THE PRESENCE OF THE CLAMP- THE SECOND CLAMP RESTORES FULL PRESSURE BUT AGAIN; THERE WILL BE SOME LEAK: I DON#T USUALLY PLACE SEVERAL CLAMPS IN THE BEGINNING OF A SESSION:
REGARDING CORTISONE 8AND GROWTH HORMONE, AND calcium antagonists) into the ligs I have done this in the past, yes, and reported on the practice of doing so, just like other guys in here who practice different techniques of chemical pe. As a physician I personally mad approximately 400 cortisone injections in patients and never had a serious adverse effect. Consequently (unlike pudendum, I am not afraid of shooting myself) I felt sufficiently safe to inject into my ligs. Everything I used was pharmaceutical grade for injections, all materials were sterile, disinfection was performed as if preparing minor surgery.
So, dear Mr. Happy, don’t be afraid of my dick. And again, the disclaimer was meant honestly. Let’s stay friends, or, of you prefer, let’s become friends.
Later - ttt
It is 2am and I am drunk!I will not attempt to answer your questions but will extent you a hearty welcome!
Mwaahaahahaha!!!
I am replying to this thread for one simple reason. Every single “new post will now show up as being by me on the first page of results!
Running a Massive Co-Front.
The pressure in the tunica at peak erection with Ischiocavernosus muscles contracted is between 200 - 300 mm Hg. If -6 in Hg negative pressure was transmitted completely to the tunica, cavernosa pressure would drop to between 50 and 150 mmHg. With the pressure in the arteries at about 120 mm Hg, the lowered cavernosa pressure would allow new blood volume into the penis from the body. This drop in cavernosa pressure is what important for increased blood volumes as the penis expands toward full erection.
I am not convinced that you have to subtract the negative outer pressure from the positive pressure inside the corpora. The negative pressure expands, therefore, the absolute values would have to be added and one would obtain 300 + 150 = 450 mmHg. However, since the system is open, the calculation may be wrong because the equation does not apply in that context. May be I am having an intellectual problem here and I would be happy to be convinced that I am wrong.
I hope we are all (mostly) in agreement that in the very special circumstance of peak erection, that only a fraction of the pumps negative pressure makes it through the stiff tunica, so that the cavernosa pressure does not fall below arterial blood pressure to bring more new blood to the penis from the body.
THE TUNICA IS INCOMPRESSIBLE AND INEXPANDIBLE: THEREFORE I CANNOT SEE why the pressure should not “make it through the tunica”. What would otherwise happen with that pressure? Reflection? Or what? I can’t see - is it because I am in the dark or is it that my eyes .
Later - ttt
I am not convinced that you have to subtract the negative outer pressure from the positive pressure inside the corpora. The negative pressure expands, therefore, the absolute values would have to be added and one would obtain 300 + 150 = 450 mmHg. However, since the system is open, the calculation may be wrong because the equation does not apply in that context. May be I am having an intellectual problem here and I would be happy to be convinced that I am wrong.
Turn the tables. If instead of using negative pressure in the pump, let say you apply a positive pressure of 6 in Hg (say you have the ability to seal it). If negative pressure is added to cavernosa pressure, than positive pressure must be subtracted. Can you imagine that by adding positive pressure outside the penis that cavernosa pressure would decrease? I can’t.
As in my example of the fluid filled balloon exposed to a negative pressure. The balloon with the fluid will expand and in so doing decrease the pressure of the fluid within. The opposite would occur with positive pressure. Is the cavernosa of the penis different, no matter how small the pressure change might be because of the stiff tunica at peak erection? I don’t think so.
If you add the negative pressure to pressure within the erectile chambers, then instead of inflating a flaccid penis, it would push the blood out. It would have never been a medically approved method for impotence (before Viagra and the other phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors) if this was the case.
So which way is it? It can’t be both ways. Help me to understand this here.
Mr. Happy, I am very sorry and I do apologize.I am not sure why you are so upset, may be you were supposing some ironic tone in my last response. However, my answer was 100 % serious and only language problems might have made it sound ironic or unrespectful.
I highly respect you, I have always enjoyed the conversations with you.
Clamping with several clamps is not an invention of mine. In fact, I read this in YOUR pe forum in here. Let me expand a little on the idea: if you clam, at max erection, and don’t keep edging all the time (which I don’t like if my glans is so expanded - in order to keep it in good shape, by the way9 THERE WILL BE SOME LEAKAGE DESPITE THE PRESENCE OF THE CLAMP- THE SECOND CLAMP RESTORES FULL PRESSURE BUT AGAIN; THERE WILL BE SOME LEAK: I DON’T USUALLY PLACE SEVERAL CLAMPS IN THE BEGINNING OF A SESSION:
REGARDING CORTISONE 8AND GROWTH HORMONE, AND calcium antagonists) into the ligs I have done this in the past, yes, and reported on the practice of doing so, just like other guys in here who practice different techniques of chemical pe. As a physician I personally made approximately 400 cortisone injections in patients and never had a serious adverse effect. Consequently (unlike pudendum, I am not afraid of shooting myself) I felt sufficiently safe to inject into my ligs. Everything I used was pharmaceutical grade for injections, all materials were sterile, disinfection was performed as if preparing minor surgery.
And again, the disclaimer was meant honestly.
Ok, ticker, I appreciate your response. Maybe I am misunderstanding you. It wouldn’t be the first time.
I’m not opposed to experiments. Nor am I opposed to the discussion thereof. I’m also not asking you to defend your practices to me or anyone else here.
I just feel that when such experiments go outside the bounds of generally accepted levels of safety that it’s important we earmark those practices specifically with words of caution.
Your injection experiment, for example, as practiced by you - a medical professional - does not constitute the same risk as a random Thunder's member (most likely a young man) without any training doing the same thing.
With regard to clamping: it has long been a controversial form of PE.
I’m well aware that the use of multiple clamps has been discussed long before you or I arrived here at Thunder's; I wasn’t finding fault with that, per se. More that you presented it casually, as if it were common practice.
Generally speaking, the risks inherent with clamping do seem to be greater than other forms; though one can certainly argue that any of these practices carry risk and, as long as proper caution is exercised, clamping can be done without incident. I still think it should be recognized that clamping does have a somewhat narrower margin for error than pumping, using a stretcher, manual forms of PE, or hanging, etc.
That said, I did indeed misunderstand your intent previously and thought you were being ‘ironic’ or even sarcastic. That you were not is good to hear.
You should know that I have respect for your candor, your participation, and your overall positive attitude. You are certainly valuable to the forum, no question.
So, dear Mr. Happy, don’t be afraid of my dick.
LOL
Maybe part of the problem is the Deutsche/English thing (prepositions can be a bitch). Your English is so good I sometimes forget that it’s not your first language.
I was, maybe, afraid for your dick, but, so far, I haven’t been afraid of anyone’s dick.
Not yet, anyway. If I ever go to prison I’ll let you know. :D
Let’s stay friends, or, of you prefer, let’s become friends.
Aber sicher! Natürlich, mein freund.
Before: I'd like to show you something I'm very proud of, but you'll have to move real close.
After: I\'d like to show you something I\'m very proud of, but you guys in the front row will have to stand back.
God gave men both a penis and a brain, but unfortunately not enough blood supply to run both at the same time. - Robin Williams (:
Mr. Happy,
I really totally agree with you. Whenever I forget or forgot to mention that caution is necessary, it’s only because I am overenthusiastic or - to use a new word (adapted from German): hyperfocussed.
Of course you should not be afraid OF my dick, FOR would have been correct, sorry for that ridiculous fault. Shit happens, all the time unfortunately.
Danke für deine freundlichkeit und für deine freundschaft.
Later - ttt