Working Dog Forums banner

Maybe something scientific around collar correction force...

767 Views 20 Replies 11 Participants Last post by  Bob Scott
I've developed an unhealthy obsession with types of collars and the nature of the corrections they administer. I think everybody (whether they use chokes or not) uses that German study about the autopsied GSDs and the relative neck damage of choked dogs versus prong dogs...I have never seen a scientific interpretation of that study, only a random anedotal reference, which bugs me to no end. I hate ambiguity on scientific claims.

Moreover, I am not a fan of dead ring prong corrections because I absolutely believe that a prong correction on the live and dead rings is a different type of correction entirely...much more force on the neck, and a different sensation for the dog, which generally undermines the point of a prong collar (to me, anyways...which is to give a correction with less lateral force [but more constrictive force] which mimics the correction a dog got from mom as a puppy).

So what to do? Luckily I work around technologists way smarter than me. I was sharing this with a guy this morning--my unhealthy irritation with getting real data around collar and prong differences--and gave him corrections to prove my point (which I have to admit amused me greatly). He works a lot on shock (like, instantaneous force generated from things being dropped on floors, etc.) I think he can help me.

Hopefully, and shortly, we're gonna get a piece of PVC or something and attach a few accelerometers on th end of it (approximate a dog's neck). I'll attach (in different tests) typical choke, fursaver, dead prong, and live prong to a leash attached to a small weight which will be dropped at least ten times from a consistent height. We'll measure the acceleration and extrapolate force generated, I'll analyze the results statistically.

I'm not sure how we'll measure constrictive force yet (e.g., live prong relative force around the neck). But again, I work with people smarter than me. :lol: I create technical problems they solve (kind of my job description, now that I think about it).

So perhaps this will work and we'll get some quantitative data to back up our own unchangeable opinions :lol:. For now, any thoughts on how to do this test consistently, improve it, etc. would be appreciated.
See less See more
1 - 1 of 21 Posts
i'm not sure what you're trying to do with this experiment woody. if you're trying to measure the acceleration of the constriction, i think even if you get different results, the end conclusion will still be flawed. acceleration, in this case, should largely be effected by friction. a choke has only one point of friction and a prong has two. so in theory, given equal force, the choke correction should accelerate faster. so again, in theory, with force equallying mass X accelaration, the choke should give more force if the mass used (the hammers) is the same.

but this does not tell the whole story. the whole choke vs prong debate hinges on the prong distributing the force over a larger area than the choke. so to be a true test of potential damage from both, you'd have to have some sort of circular mechanism to measure pressure in lbs/sq. inch. i think what you'd see is the choke giving more pressure in a much more localized manner and the prong with less pressure over a greater area.

just thinking more about it, acceleration is change in distance over time. the choke has a much greater distance to travel before the correction stops so the distance will be greater, but so will the time. i'd be curious to see if the accelaration from start to finish is constant on the choke...
See less See more
1 - 1 of 21 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top