Oscillating Fishing Lure
20210267181 · 2021-09-02
Inventors
Cpc classification
International classification
Abstract
The oscillating fishing lure is a fishing lure comprising: a body with a longitudinal axis, an uppermost surface, at least one hook, said first hook including a shank and a hook end, said shank being coupled to said body; a blade having an edge proximal to said body, wherein, during retrieval, a majority of said blade is oriented below said uppermost surface of said body; a joining mechanism whereby said blade is moveably coupled to said body, wherein said blade has freedom to move with respect to the roll, pitch and yaw axis only within strict mathematical limits; a line attachment mechanism, through which a fishing line is attached to the lure; and whereby retrieval of the lure causes the blade to oscillate in at least one dimension, and thereby causing the lure to erratically hunt. The oscillating-blade action imparts a natural swimming motion to the lure, emulating prey-species movements.
Claims
1. A fishing lure comprising: a body with a longitudinal axis, an uppermost surface, a rearward surface, at least one hook, said first hook including a shank and a hook end, said shank being coupled to said body; a blade having an edge proximal to said body, wherein, during retrieval, a majority of said blade is oriented below said uppermost surface of said body; a joining mechanism whereby said blade is moveably coupled to said body, wherein said blade has freedom to move with respect to the roll, pitch and yaw axes only within strict mathematical limits; a line attachment mechanism, through which a fishing line is attached to the lure; whereby retrieval of the lure causes the blade to oscillate in at least one dimension, and thereby causing the lure to hunt in a erratic path, but still return to the bore path periodically.
2. A fishing lure as in claim 1 wherein said joining mechanism limits the amount of roll achievable by the blade to 0 degrees.
3. A fishing lure as in claim 1 wherein said joining mechanism limits the amount of roll achievable by the blade to less than 5 degrees.
4. A fishing lure as in claim 1 wherein said joining mechanism limits the amount of roll achievable by the blade to less than 12 degrees.
5. A fishing lure as in claim 1 wherein said joining mechanism limits the amount of pitch achievable by the blade to less than 10 degrees.
6. A fishing lure as in claim 1 wherein said joining mechanism limits the amount of yaw achievable by the blade to less than 45 degrees.
7. A fishing lure as in claim 1 wherein said joining mechanism limits total angular motion of the blade in which the combined values of the roll, pitch and yaw angles are less than 60 degrees.
8. A fishing lure as in claim 1 wherein the hunting action is erratic.
9. A fishing lure as in claim 1 wherein the hunting action is off bore.
10. A fishing lure as in claim 1 wherein the hunting action is active while the lure is retrieved at high speed.
11. A fishing lure as in claim 1 wherein the hunting action is active while the lure is retrieved at low speed.
12. A fishing lure as in claim 1 wherein the hunting action is active independent of the retrieval speed.
13. A fishing lure as in claim 1 wherein the blade width is at least 25% the width of the body at its widest point.
14. A fishing lure as in claim 1 wherein the blade width is at less than 200% the width of the body at its widest point.
15. A fishing lure as in claim 1 wherein the length of the extension of the blade beyond the front edge of the body measured along the longitudinal axis is less than 10% the length of the body.
16. A fishing lure as in claim 1 wherein the length of the extension of the blade beyond the front edge of the body measured along the longitudinal axis is less than 50% the length of the body.
17. A fishing lure as in claim 1 wherein the length of the extension of the blade beyond the front edge of the body measured along the longitudinal axis is less than 100% the length of the body.
18. A fishing lure as in claim 1 wherein said line attachment mechanism comprises at least one through hole located in said body.
19. A fishing lure as in claim 1 wherein said line attachment mechanism comprises an eyelet affixed to said body.
20. A fishing lure as in claim 1 wherein said line attachment mechanism comprises at least one through hole located in said blade.
21. A fishing lure as in claim 1 wherein said line attachment mechanism comprises at least one eyelet located affixed to said blade.
Description
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0028] The invention will be described in detail with reference to the accompanying drawings. Each of the figures is a schematic diagram more fully described below.
[0029]
[0030]
[0031]
[0032]
[0033]
[0034]
[0035]
[0036]
[0037]
[0038]
[0039]
[0040]
[0041]
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0042] The present invention is a fishing lure with an oscillating blade, designated generally as 10 in the drawings. Referring to
[0043] In
[0044]
[0045] If the blade was fixed, as in most prior inventions and nearly all currently available devices, and the lure was retrieved slowly, a steady laminar flow regime develops over the blade, allowing these past lures to move in a linear fashion with little if any hunting action. However, as the retrieval speed is increased, the fixed blade-body combination would eventually face uneven forces typically causing the lure to rotate about its longitudinal axis until it was belly up.
[0046] Attempts to stop this from happening and create a more natural hunting motion were proposed by Pfeiffer (U.S. Pat. No. 5,337,508) and Renaud (U.S. Pat. No. 4,777,761). Their proposed solutions comprised a blade that was allowed to swivel laterally. However, both of these solutions fail because they failed to appreciate the hydrodynamic forces impacting the blade (and blade-body combination) upon retrieval. While the swiveling blade does create some limited hunting action, because the lateral motion is uncontrolled, the designs have inherent hydrodynamic instability—the blade gets locked into it farthest left or right position, causing lift on only one side of the lure, which causes the lure to rotate over its longitudinal axis, and the lure goes belly up.
[0047] In order to stop their inherent hydrodynamic instability, both attempted to limit the lateral range of motion of their blades by physical contact with the lure body, or with internal structures in the mouth of the lure. The greater the reduction in yaw allowed, the lower the chance of dynamic instability. However, the greater the reduction in yaw allowed, the lower the chance of achieving actual hunting action. Thus, regardless of their efforts to randomly physically limit yaw, any increase in speed above bare minimum headway speed would result in dynamic instability, the blade would lock into its farthest left or right position, the lure would rotate, and eventually, the lure would be belly up. As such, the designs expressed in their patents, attempting to blindly limit yaw without understanding the hydrodynamic forces at play, fail to operate with the hunting motion they describe, and more often than not, result in their lures rotating belly up and failing to hunt at all.
[0048] The present invention overcomes these deficiencies by strictly limiting the motion of the blade with respect to roll, pitch and yaw within prescribed boundaries. While the prior art discusses somewhat random (i.e., uncontrolled) limitations solely with respect to yaw based on physical interference with the blade, the present invention controls the freedom of motion of the blade within strict 3-dimensional boundaries. Although various mechanisms for achieving this control are well known, the need for strictly limiting the 3-dimensional freedom of motion of the blade within prescribed boundaries, and the boundaries themselves, were not known prior to the present invention.
[0049] While the general boundary limits are expressed within the present invention, they can be tailored depending on various physical features of the body and blade. Doing so allows the lure of the present invention to mimic not only the size and shape of various baitfish, but the motions typically expressed.
[0050] Examples of some of the sizes and shapes of bodies 30 are shown in
[0051] Different blades with different geometries and features can be used with a particular body style, giving the lure a different hunting action. The differences in the size, length, width, and geometries of the blade can be more readily observed in
[0052]
[0053]
[0054] As has been seen, the length and width of blade 20 can be changed in order to accommodate different hunting actions. Likewise, as in
[0055]
[0056] Aside from the various 3-dimensional shapes and edge geometries already expressed, blade 20 can incorporate various surface features, which can change the flow regime over the blade, and thus alter the hunting path and action of the lure.
[0057] The lure must be pulled by a line to be retrieved. The location of the attachment of the line can alter the flow regime over the blade due to the angle of the force imparted from the line during retrieval. As shown in
[0058]
[0059]
[0060]
[0061]
[0062] Lastly, it is to be understood that the present invention is not limited to the embodiments described above, but encompasses any and all embodiments within the scope of the following claims, individually, or in variations combinations.