Paradox of the Archer's Paradox

[boatman]

A lot of us will have seen the neat diagram of the Archer's paradox in action where the arrow bends to allow the fletching to clear the bow. I have ever only seen this drawn for a right-handed archer who holds the bow in their left hand with the arrow on the left. However, a left-handed archer must if the theory is correct be inherently less accurate as that which makes the arrow clear the bow to the left should make it touch the bow if shot from the right.

Not having observed excessively bad left hand shots I wonder if we have the whole story. Does the arrow in fact oscillate along its length around the axis of the direction in which is aimed? If so then minor disturbance at the fletching might also be evened out for left or right shooters.

Another problem with the bendy paradox is the cut that can develop when shooting barebow with no arrow rest. The cut is usually in the same place on the top side of the hand depending on how the bow is held but if the paradox was working as described then the lower fletching should be at an angle as it passes the bow.

Aiming for the instinctive archer depends a lot on experience so maybe, left or right, one offsets all the effects of paradox anyway.

 

[blacktimberwolf]

The only paradox in the Archers is Joe Grundy's accent

 

[boatman]

No, the return of Clarie speaking the original Borsetshire accent is.

 

[mrcharly]

A lot of us will have seen the neat diagram of the Archer's paradox in action where the arrow bends to allow the fletching to clear the bow. I have ever only seen this drawn for a right-handed archer who holds the bow in their left hand with the arrow on the left. However, a left-handed archer must if the theory is correct be inherently less accurate as that which makes the arrow clear the bow to the left should make it touch the bow if shot from the right.

I dunno why you'd think that. The effect of the paradox is just mirrored.

It's not about the fletch clearing; it is about the arrow shooting 'around' the bow.

 

[dwardo]

The string should track down the center of the handle or ever so slightly favour the side of the arrow pass dependant on which hand the archer shoots with.
If the string on the bow does track slight to one side and you shoot from the other you will have problems spining the arrrows and getting a clean pass.
Thats why bows tend to be made with a hand in mind. Either that or straight down the center and can be used with either hand.

Cuts on the bow hand knuckle are usually caused by the nocking point on the string being too high or too low. I have a permanent scar on my hand from these fletch cuts but that's because I am tuning the bows I make and often get it wrong. Once setup properly the arrows should pass clean.

 

[boatman]

I dunno why you'd think that. The effect of the paradox is just mirrored.

It's not about the fletch clearing; it is about the arrow shooting 'around' the bow.

But if it goes to the right then it touches the bow, why would it be be mirrored, same string same impulse to the arrow to start it moving. Any you tube etc of left-hand shots?

 

[21st century pict]

I think in an ideal world perhaps the fletching should clear the bow every time especially with the consistency of modern arrows with nearly identical spine stiffness (aluminum and carbon) and with the correct length of arrow matched to the bow poundage must give more constant and predictable results but less so with wooden arrows, I have had everything from the arrows slapping the bow the burnt match smell from the friction of the wooden arrow running along the side of the bow or bow shelf to getting feather quills stuck in my index finger knuckle, Ouch not nice pulling them out I can tell you.
Then again perhaps I just have a terrible loose.

Isn’t archer’s paradox only really a problem when shooting an arrow through the narrow arrow slit of a castle and therefore the preference for centre shot crossbows in castle defense? Or is that just an old wives tale? A bit like the new two fingers’ chopped off myth.?

 

[mrcharly]

But if it goes to the right then it touches the bow, why would it be be mirrored, same string same impulse to the arrow to start it moving. Any you tube etc of left-hand shots?

Same impulse to the string but the arrow is on the opposite side of the bow. So the buckling and hence sine wave in the arrow starts in the opposite direction.

 

[boatman]

Arrow slits are interesting as those meant for the purpose rather than for decoration show clear design in their construction and sighting. Standing to loose an arrow the view is restricted but there is a very clear sector of the outside that it would be one's duty to control. The gap is certainly wide enough to allow for any paradox oscillation.

 

[boatman]

Same impulse to the string but the arrow is on the opposite side of the bow. So the buckling and hence sine wave in the arrow starts in the opposite direction.

Are you saying that the friction of the side of the bow on the arrow is enough to control the sine wave production?

 

[dwardo]

Are you maybe confusing center shot bows with a standard string bisecting the handle?
The string loose should be as near to straight down the bow intersecting the handle no matter which hand is used. If you dont do this right you are either plucking the string or throwing, both of which will cause problems.
The arrow has to bend round the bow or it will veer off to the side of the bow that it passes.

This is one of those things that would take one minute explain face to face but much harder with this medium.

 

[21st century pict]

Are you saying that the friction of the side of the bow on the arrow is enough to control the sine wave production?

Aye now friction, there's a thing that I have never really entirely believed in, friction and drag being responsible for the sine wave.
I think it’s more of the combined weight or mass of the shaft and pile up front.
In fact if the arrow doesn't touch the bow after the loose where is the friction coming from?.

 

[santaman2000]

Aye now friction, there is a thing that I have never really entirely believed in,being responsible for the sine wave.
I think it’s more of the combined weight or mass of the shaft and pile up front.
In fact if the arrow doesn't touch the bow after the loose where is the friction coming from?.

I've no idea how any of it affects the sine wave. But there's always friction with any object in atmospheric flight. Simply moving through the air has friction.

 

[21st century pict]

I've no idea how any of it affects the sine wave. But there's always friction with any object in atmospheric flight. Simply moving through the air has friction.

It certainly is present and all things being equal, in flight the friction is generated equally and would be constant on all sides of the arrow only resulting in drag and loss or speed.

 

[santaman2000]

I've no idea how any of it affects the sine wave. But there's always friction with any object in atmospheric flight. Simply moving through the air has friction.It certainly is present and all things being equal, in flight the friction is generated equally and would be constant on all sides of the arrow only resulting in drag and loss or speed.

Actually no. Friction or drag isn't equal. It's higher at certain points: on an aircraft it's highest at the landing gear, the wings, and the flight controls, or protruding areas; on an arrow the fletching is an example of the fight control and the broadhead is an example of protruding areas.

 

[boatman]

So conveniently the effect reverses although what side of the bow touches the arrow is unimportant. So. What reverses the effect?

 

[Goatboy]

Arrrrrgghhhh!!!

 

[dwardo]

Lets have a stab at this. I may be wrong as i have always just taken this for granted but to piece it together..

When you let go of the string the energy is transferred from the string to the arrow. Now, the arrow point is not immediately aware of this and does not immediately move, instead the arrow tries to store this energy by flexing/compressing, this is is going to take the path of least resistance so its going to bow slightly away from the bow. The alternative is it goes this other way and moves the bow over, not going to happen given the weight of the bow and the fact your holding it.

When the arrow is then in flight it will snake all the way to the target.

Any clearer or have i missed the point?

 

[mrcharly]

So conveniently the effect reverses although what side of the bow touches the arrow is unimportant. So. What reverses the effect?

There is a nice diagram on the Wikipedia article about this:

The string pushes straight forward towards the centre of the bow stave. The arrow isn't aligned with that, so bends under the force. The initial direction of the bend depends on which side of the bow the arrow is on.

If a bow is utter centreshot (the arrow rest being in the centre of the stave), then the force is very much less. The correct spine is less critical.

 

[boatman]

Yes, I wondered about the string pushing back towards the centre line as the initial impulse to set up an ascillation. If so then change sides and it would reverse.

Would take issue with the idea of not aiming the arrow at the bit of the target you want to hit. of course if you find that you are consistently missing then one could correct one's point of aim to allow for this. Far better to be able to hit what you are aiming at though even if you are really applying all the necessary corrections unconsciously.