Terminal Length Graphs

[florenonite]

So, I was procrastinating yesterday, as usual, and found this (http://forums.longhaircommunity.com/vbjournal.php?do=article&articleid=75) article by Igor. Being the geek that I am, I had to try out the first method myself, and came up with the following graph:

http://forums.longhaircommunity.com/picture.php?albumid=1012&pictureid=38856

So c'mon, let's share our graphs of our terminal lengths :p

[neon-dream]

I worked mine out one and it came out at like 80+"
So I'm not too sure I did it right lol, i think the best way to figure out your terminal length is simply to let your hair grow though, I don't think these things can be too accurate.
But I'm glad you're able to reach your goal :D!

[florenonite]

I worked mine out one and it came out at like 80+"
So I'm not too sure I did it right lol, i think the best way to figure out your terminal length is simply to let your hair grow though, I don't think these things can be too accurate.
But I'm glad you're able to reach your goal :D!

Yeah, it's probably not accurate, but fun to do anyway (I'm a total geek for this sort of thing :p)

[UrsaMama]

I can't see your graph. :confused:

[neon-dream]

Haha yeah it's fun, that's why I worked mine out - as well as curiosity :D

[florenonite]

I can't see your graph. :confused:

It's linked from an album, so you might need to have 25 posts to see it. I don't have a Photobucket account so I don't have anywhere else to post it, sorry.

[kam984420]

It's linked from an album, so you might need to have 25 posts to see it. I don't have a Photobucket account so I don't have anywhere else to post it, sorry.

I guess i dont understand how you came up with your graph.:confused:

[florenonite]

I guess i dont understand how you came up with your graph.:confused:

I put elastics round my hair every four inches starting at the nape, and measured the circumference at each of these elastics. I then plotted them on the graph with the x-axis being the distance from the nape of my neck and the y-axis being the circumference. Then I did a line of best fit through the existing points, and where it meets zero should be the distance from the nape of my neck at terminal.

[kam984420]

I put elastics round my hair every four inches starting at the nape, and measured the circumference at each of these elastics. I then plotted them on the graph with the x-axis being the distance from the nape of my neck and the y-axis being the circumference. Then I did a line of best fit through the existing points, and where it meets zero should be the distance from the nape of my neck at terminal.

oh ok now it makes sense.:cheese:

[Madame J]

For a minute, I misread your post and thought you said you plotted it in Igor (a graphing/fitting program). Which I will do, when I am back at work tomorrow, since then I can figure out not only my terminal length, but also my error!

[SimplyViki]

Hmm... I am fascinated by the idea of trying to calculate terminal length, but I am thinking that based on what you describe, the fact that I have layers would probably completely mess up any calculations. What do you think?
Definitely an interesting concept though! Maybe once my layers are longer I could do something like that up to the point where my layers start. Right now my shortest ones are about armpit length or so.

[Unnamed]

SimplyViki -- I'm thinking layers if you include any measurements for them in the graph it'll lower the estimated number (but yes, you could omit them and just use measurements from above the taper, though). My graphs are messed up due to large health-related sheds and old brush damage...aka I don't have a proper natural taper to go off of(see below).


Well, I did this using old data (I measure thickness along the length every few months).

Using December 2004 info the line crossed at 30" (pony was 19" at this time).
Using April 2008 info the line crossed at 34" (pony was 37-38" at this time).
Using April 2009 info the line crossed at 38" (pony was 40" at this time).

For the second two doing a graph with a trend line puts my actual hair length longer than where the line crosses. :lol: Between two major sheds my thickness/taper is really messed up. Forget that the last 18" or so is all broken ends from old brush damage (and so had a taper before the sheds). :oops:

My present estimated minimal terminal length is around 56-58" depending on how I do it, and has to do with (present) length of longest hairs.

[ImperfectBrat]

Very interesting. By that method, my hair should have stopped growing over a foot ago :D I always new I was a rule breaker !

[Anje]

I like the idea, but it seems to discount the fact that you can thicken your length if you maintain it over time. My ends were a lot thinner when they first hit tailbone last year than they are now, just from maintaining the length to allow the slower hairs to catch up. It might work well if your hair has been at roughly the same length (or was formerly longer) for at least a growth cycle's time, but the taper of newly growing hair might cause people underestimate their terminal length. (It also assumes that hair tapers linearly. Probably some does and some doesn't.)

Bottom line: if you're growing and you don't like the results, don't despair over this.

[freznow]

I like the idea, but it seems to discount the fact that you can thicken your length if you maintain it over time. My ends were a lot thinner when they first hit tailbone last year than they are now, just from maintaining the length to allow the slower hairs to catch up. It might work well if your hair has been at roughly the same length (or was formerly longer) for at least a growth cycle's time, but the taper of newly growing hair might cause people underestimate their terminal length. (It also assumes that hair tapers linearly. Probably some does and some doesn't.)

Bottom line: if you're growing and you don't like the results, don't despair over this.

To continue on the 'hair does not taper linearly, idea', there seem to be natural places where thickness decreases abnormally (I think about 3~5 inches from the nape, it was found that there's a significant drop. There are likely others.) This would be the result of hairs with different terminal lengths - who knows, you may have 2 dozen hairs that have a terminal length of floor, a few hundred at knee, but the majority have a terminal length of hip. Taper is not uniform, for a variety of reasons.

[teela1978]

Alright, I'm up for a little goofing off. Here's mine :)

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e117/lchamber78/TerminalLengthGraph.jpg

I did opposite axes to yours because I'm lazy and didn't want to solve for x. Apparently my terminal length would be at 21.8 inches, add on 14.5 for LHC-style measuring and I guess I can make it to 36ish... which would be about tailbone on me. Probably not a bad guess for a quick experiment. Surprisingly good R^2 value in my opinion.

[lynnala]

The Igor link doesn't work for me for some reason. Can you relink? I'm very curious about this but I have no idea how to do it.

[florenonite]

The Igor link doesn't work for me for some reason. Can you relink? I'm very curious about this but I have no idea how to do it.

Does this work?

http://forums.longhaircommunity.com/vbjournal.php?do=article&articleid=75

[enfys]

Well, I'm refusing to try it, since I have layers. In about 3 years, when I'm shot of them, I'll give it a go. I can imagine it will be most effective on those of us who have using good hair practice for a long long time, since our hair will be in pretty good nick.

It's great how many people are already past calculated terminals!

[ilovelonghair]

I put elastics round my hair every four inches starting at the nape, and measured the circumference at each of these elastics. I then plotted them on the graph with the x-axis being the distance from the nape of my neck and the y-axis being the circumference. Then I did a line of best fit through the existing points, and where it meets zero should be the distance from the nape of my neck at terminal.


It probably won't work for everybody, for example I had a massive shedding last year and can clearly see that in my braid: it becomes thin all of a sudden at one point. So if I would do this graph I end up with a much shorter terminal length then I should.

And would terminal length always be the same? I can imagine that at some times it can be longer than at others, depending on health or other reasons.

[teela1978]

Oh I'm pretty sure my terminal length is well past this estimation. During undergrad (10-ish years ago) I grew my hair out to tailbone, and I'm pretty sure it would've gone past that point. My guess is that these graphs are giving us severely shortened 'terminal lengths' for several reasons, inaccurate measuring being one complication, non-linear decreases further down being another. It's a fun activity if you have some hairbands, a tape measure, and a spreadsheet program though (something most LHCers have). Definitely not something to take very seriously :)

ETA: I think you're also kinda measuring when your hair will be non-measurable by your measuring device. My ends get a lot thinner at tailbone, definitely thin enough to not be measurable with my little tape measure. Perhaps a better definition of what this graph tells you is where your hair will start to get a lot wispier?

[florenonite]

Oh I'm pretty sure my terminal length is well past this estimation. During undergrad (10-ish years ago) I grew my hair out to tailbone, and I'm pretty sure it would've gone past that point. My guess is that these graphs are giving us severely shortened 'terminal lengths' for several reasons, inaccurate measuring being one complication, non-linear decreases further down being another. It's a fun activity if you have some hairbands, a tape measure, and a spreadsheet program though (something most LHCers have). Definitely not something to take very seriously :)

ETA: I think you're also kinda measuring when your hair will be non-measurable by your measuring device. My ends get a lot thinner at tailbone, definitely thin enough to not be measurable with my little tape measure. Perhaps a better definition of what this graph tells you is where your hair will start to get a lot wispier?

That's possible, yes. Eventually it would get so whispy that you can't measure it anymore (I used a measuring tape), so maybe that's what's going to happen to me at 33.5". Or maybe my hair will still be nice and thick there (so I hope, as I want a blunt hemline), because I haven't cut my hair in months so it probably has more taper than it would have if I had been trimming regularly on my way to this length.

Still a fun way to procrastinate, though :p

[shadowclaw]

I was thinking about this thread last night and how I didn't own enough elastics at the time to do this little experiment. I do now, so I decided to give it a whirl.

I was pretty sloppy with where I put my elastics. They weren't exactly 4 inches apart. In fact, my measurements were at 0 (first elastic around the nape of my neck), 3, 8, and 12. But they were close enough, IMO.

The equation the trend line gave me is y=-.11x + 3.49, which means that when y = 0 (the thickness of the pony is 0), x = 31.72 (the hair will be 31.72 inches long). Add about 14 inches for LHC measurements, and that puts my possible terminal at 45.72 inches.

That's approximately classic for me. Not bad for someone who chemically lightens their hair, eh? I imagine my hair could go longer, considering the thickness was exactly the same at lengths 3 and 8 (3 inch circumference), and then at 12 I lost a whole inch. I imagine those last four inches, plus the four below the last elastic, were pretty badly treated. Before LHC, I wasn't really very kind to my hair.

[LittleOrca]

I remember trying this once before and it told me my terminal length was 24 inches... strange... since my hair is currently 40. I redid it then and still got the same answer. I'd be willing to do it again and see how it has changed (if it has) but the link takes me to Wikipedia explaining the term "http" rather than the article. :shrug: Gonna have to search for it the old way lol

[Vrushali]

This won't work for layered hair would it??:(

[Arriens]

According to that my lenght is 75 inch or 190.5cm :cheese:



So my body is 0.5cm taller then my hair.
Well, at least I won't be stepping on it. :p

[florenonite]

I remember trying this once before and it told me my terminal length was 24 inches... strange... since my hair is currently 40. I redid it then and still got the same answer. I'd be willing to do it again and see how it has changed (if it has) but the link takes me to Wikipedia explaining the term "http" rather than the article. :shrug: Gonna have to search for it the old way lol

That's odd, I'll have to see if I can fix the link.

[Ally<3]

This may sound dumb. Does terminal mean that they hair can't grow anymore? That's so strange!

[JamieLeigh]

My terminal length is supposed to be about 46".....but I'm at 44" with no major taper, so I dunno. I've been at about 48" once in my life before, but that was with thicker, pre-kid hair. :p

[shadowclaw]

Even if it's not that accurate, it seems more accurate than the mathmatical terminal length formula. That one is (12 months * number of hairs * monthly growth rate) / (365 days * shed hairs per day).

For one, I don't know how many hairs I have, so I just use the supposed number for blondes (120,000). My hair grows fairly quickly, between .75 and 1 inch per month. Using a whole inch and 100 shed hairs per day, the formula yields 39.45 inches. Using .75 per month, I get 29.59, and my hair is already longer than that!

Of course, I really don't know exactly how many hairs I shed each day, either. I would estimate between 80 and 100. Using 80 hairs, I get 49.31 for terminal, which is closer to the graph's approximation.

[Anje]

This may sound dumb. Does terminal mean that they hair can't grow anymore? That's so strange!
Yep. Hairs only grow for so long before the follicle decides to take a break. It rests there for a while, then the hair sheds. How long the follicle is producing hair and how fast it makes it determines how long your hair can possibly get. A few people hit terminal not far past their shoulders, somewhere between hip and classic is pretty standard, and other people's hair can grow to the floor.

[Naamah]

I used the second method and came up with about 82 inches. Wow. Either I did it wrong, or my hair has the ability to grow very long. xD

[growingmyhair]

found this (http://forums.longhaircommunity.com/vbjournal.php?do=article&articleid=75) article by Igor
thanks. this actually gives me the same result I suspected when I read that human hair is normally within 60 to 120 cm. I suspected mine will be 60. and that formula gives me about that number. which means that I'm not gonna be able to grow long mane because I am very curly.
how sad... :(