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
21 - 21 of 21 Posts
Andres Martin said:
I think you'll get double the pressure expressed in lbs/sq. in. for the prong and choke, if the prong is on the live ring, because of the "pulley" effect of the chain working on two sides, vs the regular choke, which only works on one. Obviously, the contact areas on the neck for each type are different, but if you make them equivalent mathematically (quadratic function), I think the prong should be roughly double the pressure. Furthermore, I think you should take into account the type of link, as a fursaver will have (I think) higher drag, than a small-linked choke style collar.
Also, your experiment will have to take into account the direction from which "the pull" is coming from, because it can either be quite direct (if a regular choke is placed more towards the left of a dog's neck, e.g.), or quite indirect if the choke is placed correctly. The first will exercise direct pressure, the second will tighten all the way around.
Lbs/sq. in. for the dead rings should be pretty straight forward.

Interesting...FROM A PURELY ACADEMIC perspective...

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Prediction: WAY, WAY, WAY more lbs/sq. in from the prongs. Pssst...why do you think dogs react more to it? The pressure is not over a larger's over a MUCH smaller area.
Will the pressure be still measured with the same equiptment?
Seems the direction of pressure is quite different between the choke collar and the pinch.
One is a solid pull. The other is a squeeze.
21 - 21 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.