Go Back   AzBilliards.com > Main Category > Main Forum
Reload this Page Squirt. End Mass and Cue Flexibility.
Reply
Page 3 of 42 123 4513 Last »
 
Share Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 7 votes, 2.71 average.
Old
  (#31)
ENGLISH!
Banned
ENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 19,489
vCash: 500
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Join Date: Jun 2012
   
01-23-2016, 11:10 AM

I am ALL FOR scientific research & development...

but like it has been done for golf it NEEDS to be ONGOING.

They are NOT manufacturing golf club heads in the same manner based on the same "scientific thinking" & principles that they were just 10 or less years ago.

They found a way to get so much more distance that restrictions had to be placed on club heads.

The same thing had to be done for non wooden bats used in college, etc.

Science should be an ongoing study & should not stagnate at a point & then have definitive statements made SO definitively as to suggest that ALL is known.

Certain statements should have qualifiers attached to them so has to not give false impressions or 'allow' false assumptions to be made.

If shaft flex is merely a 3% contributor then it should NOT be said that the ONLY component that contributes to the reduction of CB squirt is a reduction of front end mass.

And what defines how much is "front end"? Where does the reduction of mass stop effecting squirt? Is THAT dependent on the flex of a shaft?

I have a McDermott i2 shaft that has a hollow carbon fiber tube running the 'full' length of the shaft. The G-Core shaft has one for just the first 9" or so.

The I2 squirts less then the G-Core in every human comparison that I've seen. Granted that has only been a few. But it brings up food for thought. Should the G-Core maybe go all the way to what would have been the normal pivot point of the shaft before it was cored? Where in the i2 does the coring & tube insertion stop being of benefit? Does it matter in any negative way that it goes the 'full' length?

That probably is not how the manufacturing process is done but perhaps 12" or 15" would yield better results than just the 9" of the G-Core.

And that is just for solid cored maple shafts & not pie, etc. pieced together shafts that certainly affect flex in some manner.

Then we get to the tip end & the composition of a ferrule. What about a long light weight flexible ferrule?

What about the load on a shaft or an entire cue say at the joint & perhaps beyond for 1 tip of offset vs 3 tips of offset?

Should an individual that likes staying closer to center be playing with a different cue than one that prefers going farther out for what ever reason?

Pool research & development is light years behind that of other sports & is only relatively recently starting in that direction.

When Predator started out they made a visit to Bob Meucci.

ALL of the above is intended just as food for thought.

PS If anyone wants to jump the 'light years' reference as not technically correct, have at it.

Last edited by ENGLISH!; 01-23-2016 at 05:10 PM.
  
Reply With Quote

Old
  (#32)
Corwyn_8
Energy Curmudgeon
Corwyn_8 has a reputation beyond reputeCorwyn_8 has a reputation beyond reputeCorwyn_8 has a reputation beyond reputeCorwyn_8 has a reputation beyond reputeCorwyn_8 has a reputation beyond reputeCorwyn_8 has a reputation beyond reputeCorwyn_8 has a reputation beyond reputeCorwyn_8 has a reputation beyond reputeCorwyn_8 has a reputation beyond reputeCorwyn_8 has a reputation beyond reputeCorwyn_8 has a reputation beyond repute
 
Corwyn_8's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 507
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Midcoast Maine
   
01-23-2016, 11:23 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by 336Robin View Post
Im not qualified to talk about such but what about off center hits, high or low? Do they not spin sideways while rotating end over end to some degree?
Not really (or at least, that is a confusing way to think of it). Imagine, if you will, a cue ball with only side spin, the axis of rotation is vertical (up for right spin); it is perpendicular to the line between the contact point and the line parallel to the cue direction, passing through the center of the ball; it is also perpendicular to the direction of the hit. On the other hand imagine hitting with just draw, the axis is pointing directly to the right (relative to cue direction). Hitting with low right, therefore gives you an axis in between those two, namely an axis canted to the right, in the plane perpendicular to the direction of the cue.

Now as the draw wears off, it is easy to visualize the axis swinging from that slanted axis to one straight up, followed by one slanted to the left, as forward roll is acquired. If you practice this with a striped ball you can sometimes get it to show in an obvious way. Try it with the stripe angled at your intended start axis.

This in a excellent demonstration of precession, should you want further thought on the matter.


Thank You kindly.

Last edited by Corwyn_8; 01-23-2016 at 11:31 AM.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#33)
Patrick Johnson
Fish of the Day
Patrick Johnson has a reputation beyond reputePatrick Johnson has a reputation beyond reputePatrick Johnson has a reputation beyond reputePatrick Johnson has a reputation beyond reputePatrick Johnson has a reputation beyond reputePatrick Johnson has a reputation beyond reputePatrick Johnson has a reputation beyond reputePatrick Johnson has a reputation beyond reputePatrick Johnson has a reputation beyond reputePatrick Johnson has a reputation beyond reputePatrick Johnson has a reputation beyond repute
 
Patrick Johnson's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 19,524
vCash: 1700
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jun 2007
   
01-23-2016, 11:40 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by 336Robin View Post
...what about off center hits, high or low? Do they not spin sideways while rotating end over end to some degree?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corwyn_8 View Post
Not really (or at least, that is a confusing way to think of it).
For understanding the effects of rotating balls in pool, I think that's the clearest way to think of it. For instance, a rolling ball with sidespin curves a little - that's easiest to understand when we realize that a component of its total spin is some rotation about the horizontal axis parallel with its direction of travel ("masse spin").

And when the same rolling ball with side spin hits a rail, it's easiest to understand the angle change that occurs when we realize that another component of its total spin is some rotation about the vertical axis.

pj
chgo
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#34)
dr_dave
Instructional Author
dr_dave has a reputation beyond reputedr_dave has a reputation beyond reputedr_dave has a reputation beyond reputedr_dave has a reputation beyond reputedr_dave has a reputation beyond reputedr_dave has a reputation beyond reputedr_dave has a reputation beyond reputedr_dave has a reputation beyond reputedr_dave has a reputation beyond reputedr_dave has a reputation beyond reputedr_dave has a reputation beyond repute
 
dr_dave's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 9,673
vCash: 1700
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Colorado
   
01-23-2016, 02:54 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_dave View Post
I haven't calculated and/or measured this before, but I'll add it to my list.

I would suspect that the direct stiffness effect would be a tiny fraction (maybe less than 1%) of the effective endmass effect.

I'll reply to this post if and when I'm able to do the calculations.
FYI, to those interested, I did some measurement and calculations. The analysis is here:

TP B.19 - Comparison of cue ball deflection (squirt) "endmass" and stiffness effects

For the example numbers I used, the direct stiffness effect is only about 1.5% of the total cue ball deflection (squirt) effect. That is indeed very small.

Regards,
Dave
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#35)
Patrick Johnson
Fish of the Day
Patrick Johnson has a reputation beyond reputePatrick Johnson has a reputation beyond reputePatrick Johnson has a reputation beyond reputePatrick Johnson has a reputation beyond reputePatrick Johnson has a reputation beyond reputePatrick Johnson has a reputation beyond reputePatrick Johnson has a reputation beyond reputePatrick Johnson has a reputation beyond reputePatrick Johnson has a reputation beyond reputePatrick Johnson has a reputation beyond reputePatrick Johnson has a reputation beyond repute
 
Patrick Johnson's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 19,524
vCash: 1700
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jun 2007
   
01-23-2016, 07:54 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_dave View Post
FYI, to those interested, I did some measurement and calculations. The analysis is here:

TP B.19 - Comparison of cue ball deflection (squirt) "endmass" and stiffness effects

For the example numbers I used, the direct stiffness effect is only about 1.5% of the total cue ball deflection (squirt) effect. That is indeed very small.

Regards,
Dave
Wow - quick turnaround, Dave!

The effect of stiffness on squirt appears to be even smaller than I thought - inconsequential at the level you suggest.

Thanks for keeping us as real as possible under the circumstances.

pj
chgo

P.S. Does 1.5% include the increase of involved end mass attributable to stiffness?

Last edited by Patrick Johnson; 01-23-2016 at 07:57 PM.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#36)
Corwyn_8
Energy Curmudgeon
Corwyn_8 has a reputation beyond reputeCorwyn_8 has a reputation beyond reputeCorwyn_8 has a reputation beyond reputeCorwyn_8 has a reputation beyond reputeCorwyn_8 has a reputation beyond reputeCorwyn_8 has a reputation beyond reputeCorwyn_8 has a reputation beyond reputeCorwyn_8 has a reputation beyond reputeCorwyn_8 has a reputation beyond reputeCorwyn_8 has a reputation beyond reputeCorwyn_8 has a reputation beyond repute
 
Corwyn_8's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 507
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Midcoast Maine
   
01-23-2016, 07:57 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Johnson View Post
For understanding the effects of rotating balls in pool, I think that's the clearest way to think of it.
Opinions clearly differ, but whatever works for you.

For me, I never understood ball spin until I got that there is only one axis (and the torque acted at right angles to applied force). What really did it for me was trying figure out what a natural rolling left english ball would do after hitting cushion. Now 'top' isn't top any longer. What is it? Can you quickly intuit what the new direction of travel will do to the current spin? It is pretty easy if you consider the existing spin axis and the new force applying torque perpendicular to the new (friction) force. For me anyway.

Thank you kindly.
  
Reply With Quote
I understand
Old
  (#37)
336Robin
aimisthegameinpool.com
336Robin has a reputation beyond repute336Robin has a reputation beyond repute336Robin has a reputation beyond repute336Robin has a reputation beyond repute336Robin has a reputation beyond repute336Robin has a reputation beyond repute336Robin has a reputation beyond repute336Robin has a reputation beyond repute336Robin has a reputation beyond repute336Robin has a reputation beyond repute336Robin has a reputation beyond repute
 
336Robin's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 12,510
vCash: 1700
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: West of Winston-Salem, NC
   
I understand - 01-23-2016, 08:23 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corwyn_8 View Post
Not really (or at least, that is a confusing way to think of it). Imagine, if you will, a cue ball with only side spin, the axis of rotation is vertical (up for right spin); it is perpendicular to the line between the contact point and the line parallel to the cue direction, passing through the center of the ball; it is also perpendicular to the direction of the hit. On the other hand imagine hitting with just draw, the axis is pointing directly to the right (relative to cue direction). Hitting with low right, therefore gives you an axis in between those two, namely an axis canted to the right, in the plane perpendicular to the direction of the cue.

Now as the draw wears off, it is easy to visualize the axis swinging from that slanted axis to one straight up, followed by one slanted to the left, as forward roll is acquired. If you practice this with a striped ball you can sometimes get it to show in an obvious way. Try it with the stripe angled at your intended start axis.

This in a excellent demonstration of precession, should you want further thought on the matter.


Thank You kindly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Johnson View Post
For understanding the effects of rotating balls in pool, I think that's the clearest way to think of it. For instance, a rolling ball with sidespin curves a little - that's easiest to understand when we realize that a component of its total spin is some rotation about the horizontal axis parallel with its direction of travel ("masse spin").

And when the same rolling ball with side spin hits a rail, it's easiest to understand the angle change that occurs when we realize that another component of its total spin is some rotation about the vertical axis.

pj
chgo
I understand the both of you. I get it very much and thank you both.


"Let your "Stick" do the talking!"

336Robin
"Improve your shot making forever for $5.99!"


The Target Ball Concept-Aiming,
The Flight of the Cue Ball-Aiming Adjusted for Side Spin,
Robbing the Bank Shot!-Pass Over Banking
Change your game for a couple of Bucks! and
Comes with a lesson!

website:http://aimisthegameinpool.com
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#38)
LAMas
AzB Silver Member
LAMas has a reputation beyond reputeLAMas has a reputation beyond reputeLAMas has a reputation beyond reputeLAMas has a reputation beyond reputeLAMas has a reputation beyond reputeLAMas has a reputation beyond reputeLAMas has a reputation beyond reputeLAMas has a reputation beyond reputeLAMas has a reputation beyond reputeLAMas has a reputation beyond reputeLAMas has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 32,453
vCash: 1700
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Los Angeles
   
01-23-2016, 10:57 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_dave View Post
FYI, to those interested, I did some measurement and calculations. The analysis is here:

TP B.19 - Comparison of cue ball deflection (squirt) "endmass" and stiffness effects

For the example numbers I used, the direct stiffness effect is only about 1.5% of the total cue ball deflection (squirt) effect. That is indeed very small.

Regards,
Dave
Thanks Dave,
I hope that I get a 1.5% raise next month...it will mean a lot to my wife...rather than getting cut.

Rod Cross, Physics Department, University of Sydney invested a lot of time resources and science to conclude that a thinner shaft reduces squirt. I hope that he is informed that his study was not for naught and contributes 1.5% according to your calculation. Even scientist can be punked.


dumluk

Last edited by LAMas; 01-24-2016 at 12:18 AM.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#39)
LAMas
AzB Silver Member
LAMas has a reputation beyond reputeLAMas has a reputation beyond reputeLAMas has a reputation beyond reputeLAMas has a reputation beyond reputeLAMas has a reputation beyond reputeLAMas has a reputation beyond reputeLAMas has a reputation beyond reputeLAMas has a reputation beyond reputeLAMas has a reputation beyond reputeLAMas has a reputation beyond reputeLAMas has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 32,453
vCash: 1700
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Los Angeles
   
01-23-2016, 11:27 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by 336Robin View Post
Im not qualified to talk about such but what about off center hits, high or low? Do they not spin sideways while rotating end over end to some degree?
Hi,
From the OP by Rod Cross:

III. EXPERIMENTAL METHODS
When a ball is struck with side spin on a billiard table, the amount of sidespin is difficult to measure experimentally because the ball initially slides and then rolls forward. The ball therefore rotates about two different axes simultaneously.

Be well


dumluk
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#40)
SilverCue
Sir Raksalot
SilverCue has a reputation beyond reputeSilverCue has a reputation beyond reputeSilverCue has a reputation beyond reputeSilverCue has a reputation beyond reputeSilverCue has a reputation beyond reputeSilverCue has a reputation beyond reputeSilverCue has a reputation beyond reputeSilverCue has a reputation beyond reputeSilverCue has a reputation beyond reputeSilverCue has a reputation beyond reputeSilverCue has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 741
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Maryland
   
01-24-2016, 05:48 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_dave View Post
FYI, to those interested, I did some measurement and calculations. The analysis is here:

TP B.19 - Comparison of cue ball deflection (squirt) "endmass" and stiffness effects

For the example numbers I used, the direct stiffness effect is only about 1.5% of the total cue ball deflection (squirt) effect. That is indeed very small.

Regards,
Dave
Dr Dave
Wouldn't it depend on the end mass vs flexibility?
What if you had a 14 mm tip with brass ferrule and the last
10 inches shaped like an hour glass with the mid point 9 mm?
Verses same 14 mm shaft with pro taper?






Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk


I find that I can do a lot of things that I didn't know how to do before I started.

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

1 R030 Bocote wood Schmelke Custom Cue.
1 Dominiak w/Jacoby Hybrid Edge shaft.
1 Adams used for breaking.
1 McDermont C-11 (retired for now).

Al

Last edited by SilverCue; 01-24-2016 at 09:22 AM.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#41)
ENGLISH!
Banned
ENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 19,489
vCash: 500
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Join Date: Jun 2012
   
01-24-2016, 06:38 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by LAMas View Post
Thanks Dave,
I hope that I get a 1.5% raise next month...it will mean a lot to my wife...rather than getting cut.

Rod Cross, Physics Department, University of Sydney invested a lot of time resources and science to conclude that a thinner shaft reduces squirt. I hope that he is informed that his study was not for naught and contributes 1.5% according to your calculation. Even scientist can be punked.
Big E,

I doubt in about 5 hours or less that Dr. Dave could compared every type of shaft taper & all of the various degrees of flex to all of the various amounts of front end masses to arrive at his definitive figure of which PJ then determines to be "inconsequential". I would also surmise that his research was not done with robotic testing.... so as to take out any human subconscious interpretations & variances out of the the picture for all of the results.

But what I'm left with is that if I'm playing using the TOI method that relies on the use of squirt, what flex shaft would be best for me so that the amount of squirt that I get will be the most consistent, because a 1.5% variation can mean the difference between a make or a miss, the win or loss of a game, who wins the match, & who gets the money, trophy, or bragging rights.

It seems that if I want the most AND the most consistent amount of squirt that I should go with the stiffest shaft that I can find...

& if I want to reduce the squirt & maybe bring other components into play that would make the squirt more variable like what loads are put on it, then I should go with a very flexible shaft.

What do you think? Is my thinking correct or is it in ANY way in error? I know that I used the 1.5% thing not technically correct but I think you get the idea.

I'm fairly sure that CJ Wiley varied the diameter of shaft for the size of table that he would be playing on for a given tournament. I think he went bigger & more stiff (& a bit more natural front end mass) for smaller tables & thinner (& a bit less natural front end mass) with more flex for the larger tables.

Be & Stay Well,
Rick

Last edited by ENGLISH!; 01-24-2016 at 08:27 AM.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#42)
Jal
AzB Silver Member
Jal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 1,231
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jan 2005
   
01-24-2016, 08:14 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_dave View Post
...For the example numbers I used, the direct stiffness effect is only about 1.5% of the total cue ball deflection (squirt) effect. That is indeed very small
Dr. Dave, in view of the conservation of momentum (transverse), I don't understand the dichotomy between stiffness and endmass. In other words, I humbly suggest that all of the lateral force on the ball has to be attributed to accelerating mass. (The endmass itself, though, is a function of stiffness and mass.)

Jim
  
Reply With Quote
The 1.5% differences
Old
  (#43)
336Robin
aimisthegameinpool.com
336Robin has a reputation beyond repute336Robin has a reputation beyond repute336Robin has a reputation beyond repute336Robin has a reputation beyond repute336Robin has a reputation beyond repute336Robin has a reputation beyond repute336Robin has a reputation beyond repute336Robin has a reputation beyond repute336Robin has a reputation beyond repute336Robin has a reputation beyond repute336Robin has a reputation beyond repute
 
336Robin's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 12,510
vCash: 1700
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: West of Winston-Salem, NC
   
The 1.5% differences - 01-24-2016, 08:38 AM

I read but did not understand the physics of the paper but here are some observations that I have noted during the work I am completing now on Side Spin.

Squirt is not irrelevant as more can be increasingly difficult to deal with however if you understand the squirt values of your current cue shaft in a measurable sort of way you can calculate and apply them accurately over distance by using the stroke that you planned the shot with.

So any formulas for squirt allowance would be subject to stroke speed as the cue ball travels in an arc towards the object ball.

For what I have seen this 1.5% is negligible in the sense that shaft stiffness, end mass such as the use of an Ivory ferrule is so small that when you use a cue over time that you easily adapt to if you understand the values of your stroke over distance and the allowance amount for your cue.


Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_dave View Post
FYI, to those interested, I did some measurement and calculations. The analysis is here:

TP B.19 - Comparison of cue ball deflection (squirt) "endmass" and stiffness effects

For the example numbers I used, the direct stiffness effect is only about 1.5% of the total cue ball deflection (squirt) effect. That is indeed very small.

Regards,
Dave


"Let your "Stick" do the talking!"

336Robin
"Improve your shot making forever for $5.99!"


The Target Ball Concept-Aiming,
The Flight of the Cue Ball-Aiming Adjusted for Side Spin,
Robbing the Bank Shot!-Pass Over Banking
Change your game for a couple of Bucks! and
Comes with a lesson!

website:http://aimisthegameinpool.com
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#44)
Jal
AzB Silver Member
Jal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 1,231
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jan 2005
   
01-24-2016, 08:39 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Johnson View Post
For understanding the effects of rotating balls in pool, I think that's the clearest way to think of it. For instance, a rolling ball with sidespin curves a little - that's easiest to understand when we realize that a component of its total spin is some rotation about the horizontal axis parallel with its direction of travel ("masse spin").

And when the same rolling ball with side spin hits a rail, it's easiest to understand the angle change that occurs when we realize that another component of its total spin is some rotation about the vertical axis.
Couldn't agree more with your posts on this. I think some people incorrectly believe the components are just a convenient mathematical (or logical) fiction.

Is there an easy way to retain multiple and/or nested quotes?

Jim
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#45)
Jal
AzB Silver Member
Jal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond reputeJal has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 1,231
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jan 2005
   
01-24-2016, 08:48 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corwyn_8 View Post
Not really (or at least, that is a confusing way to think of it). Imagine, if you will, a cue ball with only side spin, the axis of rotation is vertical (up for right spin); it is perpendicular to the line between the contact point and the line parallel to the cue direction, passing through the center of the ball; it is also perpendicular to the direction of the hit. On the other hand imagine hitting with just draw, the axis is pointing directly to the right (relative to cue direction). Hitting with low right, therefore gives you an axis in between those two, namely an axis canted to the right, in the plane perpendicular to the direction of the cue.

Now as the draw wears off, it is easy to visualize the axis swinging from that slanted axis to one straight up, followed by one slanted to the left, as forward roll is acquired. If you practice this with a striped ball you can sometimes get it to show in an obvious way. Try it with the stripe angled at your intended start axis.

This in a excellent demonstration of precession, should you want further thought on the matter.
Corwyn, that's not precession, but a demonstration of the independent evolution of the horizontal component.

Jim
  
Reply With Quote
Reply
Page 3 of 42 123 4513 Last »

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.