NEXT

On Mon, 08 Jun 2015 18:43:04 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Tue, 09 Jun 2015 07:38:01 +0700, John B.
wrote:

I suggest a little reading before design work commences :-)

Probably a good idea, except that there was no library available on
the golf course. I also suspect that reading while trudging between
holes would be considered unacceptable behavior. Besides, it's more
fun to work these things out from basic principles. It's also more
fun to ask really irritating questions, such as "are rocket assisted
golf balls and motorized clubs acceptable"?

A real golfer would be saying things like, "Gee, I noticed when you
hit that shot into the bunker that you raised your head just as you
hit the ball", or "By gorry, that was a good shot. Think you can do it
again?"

A golf
ball, were it launched without spin would travel a considerably
shorter than one launched with spin.

To a point:
http://ffden-2.phys.uaf.edu/211_fall2002.web.dir/josh_fritts/flight.html
Too much spin and the range is shorter. Please note that I didn't
care much about range. It was accuracy that I was trying to achieve.

That is a tactic that many women use. They can't hit it very far but
they can hit it straight so they go bump, bump, bump down the fairway
and end up one over par. Meanwhile their husband hits it a mile....
out in the bushes and takes three shots to get back and ends up with
two over par :-) The clever women seldom mention this until the game
is over, the scores totted up, and it is time to pay off the bets :-)


One simplified article, written for the unlettered :-) states that a
well hit drive, with back spin, will travel about 290 yards. One hit
without spin would travel 140 yards.

I would think that by now, golfing would have been converted to
metric, but I guess not. Something about sacred cows and tradition.

I don't think I have any advanced degrees or acronyms that I can pre
or postpend to my name. I do have a BS, which might be more
descriptive of my content than my sheepskins, and is therefore not
suitable.

My favorite proof, also by the unlettered, is when Mythbusters covered
an automobile with modeling clay complete with dimples to simulate a
golf ball, and got better gas mileage than a similar automobile with a
smooth surface.
http://videos.howstuffworks.com/discovery/39251-mythbusters-dimpled-car-minimyth-video.htm
http://www.fordgt500.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=11243&stc=1&d=13408828 29
Why don't auto manufacturers do the same to their vehicles and bicycle
frame makers do the same to their frames? I think we can ignore the
idea of spinning the automobile or bicycle to obtain further
improvements.

I am not a aficionado of Myth Busters but automobile makers do spend
considerable effort to make their automobiles more streamlined as it
results in better gas mileage which seems to be a rather important
feature in auto sales at the moment.


However, I still consider golf to be a terminal bore, have done
nothing with the idea for about 25 years, and have no plans to change
golfing as we know it, which would certainly be banned by whatever
governing body sets the tournament equipment standards.

Boring, perhaps. But it appears that in the 1400's someone observed
that a roughened golf ball went further. In 1672, Newton recognized
that transverse forces existed when spinning tennis balls flew through
the air, Magnus explained these forces in the 1740s and in 1890,
Professor Guthrie Tait of Edinburgh University was the first to
publish an understanding of the aerodynamic principles of a golf ball.
:-)

I find the science fascinating, but not the game. Apparently little
has changed in golfing since the aerodynamics was explained. Like
bicycling, once the basic mechanisms, kinematics, and fizzix were
understood, someone raised the red flag and demanded that everything
be frozen in place in order to obtain a level playing field. I'm told
that Formula whatever racing is much the same. At least sailboat
racing has somewhat seen the light and allowed modern and quite
futuristic sailing craft to race.

Actually there have been a lot of small improvements in the golf
equipment. Pro scores keep improving and they keep increasing the
length of the holes.


I wonder what golf would be like if allowed to progress. A golf tee
that pre-spins the ball. Gyro stabilized golf balls. A computah
controlled rudder on the trailing edge of the golf club to guarantee
perfect ball contact. Also air brakes and gas jets to obtain the
perfect head velocity. Radio controlled golf balls. Locate the golf
hole and golfer accurately with DGPS (differential GPS), carry a
portable weather station, and use the data to optimize the ballistics
calculations. Hmmm... Probably would be even a bigger bore than with
the current 100 year old technology. Never mind.


Radio controlled golf balls.... ever tried to control something that
is 1.68" (or 1.62" if you are British) in size and traveling at 160
MPH?

Maybe we should also replace the golfer?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ft2fLuz9mF0 (Think accuracy)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/08/darpa-robot-challenge_n_7537534.html
--
cheers,

John B.

-snip snip snip-

On 6/8/2015 8:43 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

My favorite proof, also by the unlettered, is when Mythbusters covered
an automobile with modeling clay complete with dimples to simulate a
golf ball, and got better gas mileage than a similar automobile with a
smooth surface.


In the Midwest we do that occasionally:
http://www.dentrepairny.com/wp-conte...ge-Repair1.jpg

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 6/9/2015 7:33 AM, John B. wrote:


Radio controlled golf balls.... ever tried to control something that
is 1.68" (or 1.62" if you are British) in size and traveling at 160
MPH?

Well, the U.S. Army is going beyond that. See
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...ghanistan.html


--
- Frank Krygowski

https://www.google.com/search?q=unus...A&ved=0CB0QsAQ

On Tue, 09 Jun 2015 18:33:00 +0700, John B.
wrote:

A real golfer would be saying things like, "Gee, I noticed when you
hit that shot into the bunker that you raised your head just as you
hit the ball", or "By gorry, that was a good shot. Think you can do it
again?"

A real mechanical engineer would say something like "I can make the
ball fly faster, more accurately, or cheaper, pick any two". The
industrial engineer would say "Looks like the human to golf club
interface is far from ergonomic or optimum. Some human factors
redesign will improve consistency and accuracy". Some of my friends
might ask "How can we cheat at this game and make a killing on
wagers"? A land developer might say "I wonder how many condos I can
build on this oversized lawn". The first step to solving a problem is
to define the problem. My problem was "What can I do to keep from
falling asleep?"

To a point:
http://ffden-2.phys.uaf.edu/211_fall2002.web.dir/josh_fritts/flight.html
Too much spin and the range is shorter. Please note that I didn't
care much about range. It was accuracy that I was trying to achieve.

That is a tactic that many women use. They can't hit it very far but
they can hit it straight so they go bump, bump, bump down the fairway
and end up one over par. Meanwhile their husband hits it a mile....
out in the bushes and takes three shots to get back and ends up with
two over par :-) The clever women seldom mention this until the game
is over, the scores totted up, and it is time to pay off the bets :-)

If my observations are correct, most of the men are drunk on the
course, while a much lesser percentage of women are intoxicated. The
men seem to be there to show off to each other, while the women are
there to cash in. Different objectives require different strategies.

I can add some aerodynamic drag to the men's drivers so that the ball
doesn't go quite as far. Presumably, that might improve their
accuracy. However, I doubt anyone would pay money for such a club.
Adding control surfaces to the club shaft would provide the necessary
accuracy. A video camera in the club head would recognize the ball
and home in on it using the control surfaces as a rudder. Dead center
contact between the ball and club face would be guaranteed. If it
could be operated by an inebriated duffer, it would probably sell at
any price. Investors can inquire at the address below.

http://videos.howstuffworks.com/discovery/39251-mythbusters-dimpled-car-minimyth-video.htm
http://www.fordgt500.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=11243&stc=1&d=13408828 29

I am not a aficionado of Myth Busters but automobile makers do spend
considerable effort to make their automobiles more streamlined as it
results in better gas mileage which seems to be a rather important
feature in auto sales at the moment.

If the Mythbusters video clip is believed, then streamlining is
counterproductive beyond some point. I consider streamlining a fad
and somewhat undesirable. If all the car makers seriously adopt the
various government regulations, rules, restrictions, demands, edicts,
and threats of fines, then all cars would look roughly the same. That
could easily be a disaster in an industry that relies heavily on
fashion, style, and designed obsolescence for sales. A dimpled
surface just might be an advantage if it supplies the necessary
product differentiation as well as a few gas mileage points.

Actually there have been a lot of small improvements in the golf
equipment.

Of course. Changes in fashions, color, texture, labeling, packaging,
sponsor, celebrity endorsements, warranty terms, and plugging unfair
advantage holes, have always been required to provide the necessary
illusions of progress. However, the fundamental design and function
of the basic tools of the game have not changed for 100+ years. One
still tries to smash the ball through an obstacle course with a nearly
useless example of inappropriate technology that requires years of
training to master and which fails to take advantage of modern
aerodynamic and missile guidance technologies.

Pro scores keep improving and they keep increasing the
length of the holes.

That's another reason why I wasn't interested in improving distance. I
suppose it would be possible to extend the handicap system to the
equipment, where professionals would be required to play with
overweight balls.

Radio controlled golf balls.... ever tried to control something that
is 1.68" (or 1.62" if you are British) in size and traveling at 160
MPH?

No. I have enough trouble controlling a quadcopter. The difficult
part is adjusting to the idea that there's no frame of reference as to
what constitutes "forward" in a quadcopter. Controlling a golf ball
simply extends the problem from 2 dimensions to 3 dimensions (or 4 if
I include spin control).

I hadn't planned to fly the balls with a joystick. It was my
intention of offer a consumerized version of the military smart
munitions. The ordinance adjusts its trajectory in accordance to a
suitable target designator, in this case, the image of a standard golf
hole. Initially, it could be done with an oscillating mass gyroscope,
similar to what stabilizes satellites, which is controlled by a
computah from the ground, which knows the location of both itself and
the target. Later, I would add close in visual target location
refinements. If I wanted to cheat, an IR heat source in the hole.


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Tue, 09 Jun 2015 07:52:55 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 6/8/2015 8:43 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
My favorite proof, also by the unlettered, is when Mythbusters covered
an automobile with modeling clay complete with dimples to simulate a
golf ball, and got better gas mileage than a similar automobile with a
smooth surface.

In the Midwest we do that occasionally:
http://www.dentrepairny.com/wp-conte...ge-Repair1.jpg

Yeah, hail can be a problem:
http://www.consumerinsuranceguide.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Monster-hail.jpg

It looks like one of the $50 cars that I drove in college. It may
have originally been from the midwest. Is it fashionable to drive
such a car in the midwest? If not, would the promise of 11%
additional gas mileage be sufficient to have body shops do the damage
intentionally?

Why is it called the midwest when it's nowhere near the western part
of the country? Wouldn't the mid be sufficient?


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On 6/9/2015 11:07 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 09 Jun 2015 07:52:55 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 6/8/2015 8:43 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
My favorite proof, also by the unlettered, is when Mythbusters covered
an automobile with modeling clay complete with dimples to simulate a
golf ball, and got better gas mileage than a similar automobile with a
smooth surface.

In the Midwest we do that occasionally:
http://www.dentrepairny.com/wp-conte...ge-Repair1.jpg

Yeah, hail can be a problem:
http://www.consumerinsuranceguide.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Monster-hail.jpg

It looks like one of the $50 cars that I drove in college. It may
have originally been from the midwest. Is it fashionable to drive
such a car in the midwest? If not, would the promise of 11%
additional gas mileage be sufficient to have body shops do the damage
intentionally?

Why is it called the midwest when it's nowhere near the western part
of the country? Wouldn't the mid be sufficient?



Good point, it's relative. Northwestern University in
Evanston IL was founded in the Northwest Territories. Case
Western Reserve was placed in Ohio on part of Massachusets'
western reserve lands. You're living in what may well become
China's Eastern Province.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Tue, 09 Jun 2015 11:40:11 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 6/9/2015 11:07 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Why is it called the midwest when it's nowhere near the western part
of the country? Wouldn't the mid be sufficient?

Good point, it's relative. Northwestern University in
Evanston IL was founded in the Northwest Territories. Case
Western Reserve was placed in Ohio on part of Massachusets'
western reserve lands.

That was 200 years ago. Little wonder that names, golf, and cycling
don't change much in that part of the country.

Looking at the map:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midwestern_United_States
It would seem that mid-west should be called north-central or maybe
top-central. Certainly no mid-west as it's neither in the middle or
on the left coast.

You're living in what may well become
China's Eastern Province.

Yeah, I know. However, I would hate to think what we would be paying
for our toys and bicycles had China maintained its isolationism as
under Chairman Mao. We would be forced to pay domestic prices. What
a horrible thought.


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

http://dailypicksandflicks.com/wp-co...sportation.jpg

On Tuesday, June 9, 2015 at 9:43:45 PM UTC-4, wrote:
http://dailypicksandflicks.com/wp-co...sportation.jpg

http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j...33987824410380