Gonna build a low squirt shaft

If you take what Whammo57 said about the glue line adding strength when a butt is cored with the same material, you can combine that with what I said. The further out you move that glue line (which is stronger than the wood), the more the resultant assembly would resist bending, because you are adding stronger material further from the neutral axis.

<==== Not a cuemaker, but a former repairman, and an engineer that is remembering his Mechanics of Materials classes:)
 
Its shape, and its surface tension. I'm not an expert, but I just brushed up on specific gravity and buoyancy on wiki...

Was the bamboo piece you threw in the water hollow?
 
im not concerned about the maple versus bamboo ferrule. I know the bamboo is lighter. Ive weighed it. first, im more concerned about the question of how exactly the cork filled ferrule on the lucasi and universal shafts is supposed to lower deflection. second, exactly what effect shaft stiffness or spine has on the deflection. I have read several articles including all of dr. daves on this subject. Common sense would say that a more flexible shaft would push sideways less on the cue ball than a stiffer shaft therefore producing less cue ball squirt. If you have read ron shepards article on cue ball squirt he states that the shaft stiffness has no effect on squirt other than the speed of sound in a stiffer cue is higher effectively increasing the apparent endmass. however, dampening the waveform using dissimilar materials and intelligent construction counter acts this effect. A shaft with no balsa and only air would definitely be lighter in weight than one with balsa. How would the resulting wave form traveling down this act?

http://billiards.colostate.edu/physics/Shepard_squirt.pdf
http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2008/feb08.pdf

read these two articles that have sections directly dealing with shaft stiffness versus cue ball squirt.
 
I have an idea on something you can try. Make a cue to accept replaceable dowel/ferrule/tip combinations.

Take a house cue and cut it off where its about 3/4" and bore a 1/2 hole in it. Maybe 2" deep.

Make up some 6" long dowels, one out of Hard Maple and another out of soft light flexible wood. Make sure they are the same Dia. and length. Put a cheap medium tip on each without a ferrule.

Run a saw down the length of the cue to cut a slot through the hole you bored and use a hose clamp to secure the different 6" dowels you made. This will hold it tight so you know you're not getting any deflection from slop between the dowels and the hole.

Try shots down the full length of the table aiming between 2 balls and see which dowel/ferrule/tip combinations give a fuller hit on the balls. Fuller hit = more deflection. The hard part will be consistently hitting the cueball in the same spot with the same aiming point. You can use those little round reinforcements rings they use for loose leaf paper to make sure the balls are in the same spot each time. You could also get a heavy block of wood, cut a "V" in it and use that instead of your bridge hand. Then you'd only have to concentrate on hitting the ball off-center the same distance each time. You'd also want the cue rotated in the same position each time due to that slot you cut. I would think having the slot vertical would induce the least amount of unintended deflection.

Now make up some different dowels using balsa, CF, different ferrules, etc using the same tip type on each and try those.
 
the breed said:
im not concerned about the maple versus bamboo ferrule. I know the bamboo is lighter. Ive weighed it. first, im more concerned about the question of how exactly the cork filled ferrule on the lucasi and universal shafts is supposed to lower deflection. second, exactly what effect shaft stiffness or spine has on the deflection. I have read several articles including all of dr. daves on this subject. Common sense would say that a more flexible shaft would push sideways less on the cue ball than a stiffer shaft therefore producing less cue ball squirt. If you have read ron shepards article on cue ball squirt he states that the shaft stiffness has no effect on squirt other than the speed of sound in a stiffer cue is higher effectively increasing the apparent endmass. however, dampening the waveform using dissimilar materials and intelligent construction counter acts this effect. A shaft with no balsa and only air would definitely be lighter in weight than one with balsa. How would the resulting wave form traveling down this act?

http://billiards.colostate.edu/physics/Shepard_squirt.pdf
http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2008/feb08.pdf

read these two articles that have sections directly dealing with shaft stiffness versus cue ball squirt.
Click to expand...

If you read and understand every scientific article on cues at Dr Daves site then you already know all the theories, what's proven true, and what's proven myths. I doubt there is another person here (thats not banned) that has read every one. Coming here the answers you are going to get are more subjective and also emotion based.

I read maybe a third of his cue articles and the impression I got in all of them is its only end mass of any measurable consequence.
 
iusedtoberich said:
Its shape, and its surface tension. I'm not an expert, but I just brushed up on specific gravity and buoyancy on wiki...

Was the bamboo piece you threw in the water hollow?
Click to expand...

Only the object's weight per unit volume (it's density) compared to water has an influence on whether it floats or not; once it's submerged it's shape and surface tension have nothing to do with it. The bamboo was just a piece of bamboo. I threw it in water. It sank, since it's heavier than water. Maple floats since it's lighter than water. This is not high science.

Anyone who thinks bamboo is lighter than maple needs a new scale. This has nothing to with anything subjective.

Breed, are you a cuemaker? Just curious.

See ya later guys, I have cues to build.

Robin Snyder
 
carguy said:
Only the object's weight per unit volume (it's density) compared to water has an influence on whether it floats or not; once it's submerged it's shape and surface tension have nothing to do with it. The bamboo was just a piece of bamboo. I threw it in water. It sank, since it's heavier than water. Maple floats since it's lighter than water. This is not high science.

Anyone who thinks bamboo is lighter than maple needs a new scale. This has nothing to with anything subjective.

Breed, are you a cuemaker? Just curious.

See ya later guys, I have cues to build.

Robin Snyder
Click to expand...

Edit: My sample piece of bamboo sank all right but I notice all the charts I consulted list it as a pretty light material.
Sooo...I may be wrong. Curious....I need it do more tests.
Just when ya think ya know something....
Isn't this fun?

Edit: Every chart on the internet lists bamboo as much lighter than maple, so it seems I was wrong.
But it sank! ??????
 
Last edited:
carguy said:
Edit: My sample piece of bamboo sank all right but I notice all the charts I consulted list it as a pretty light material.
Sooo...I may be wrong. Curious....I need it do more tests.
Just when ya think ya know something....
Isn't this fun?

Edit: Every chart on the internet lists bamboo as much lighter than maple, so it seems I was wrong.
But it sank! ??????
Click to expand...

Actually, this is a fun thread.

I have to find a 5th grader to ask about this.... they'd probably know right away. You are on the right track with surface tension. It can't be weight, if you went by just that than ships and barges would sink.

Hmmm, just looked it up

Things sink or float due to the effect of buoyancy. If an object is dense and displaces insufficient water to counter its own weight, it will sink and if it displaces sufficient water to counter its weight, it will float.

Someone said above that it is strictly the endmass. Those articles seemed to say the same thing. But like someone said above everyone has their own idea of how it works. It just doesn't make sense to me that is all there is to it. If I took a 1/2" piece of steel and a 1/2" equally rigid piece of, say Carbon Fiber, I just can't wrap my head around the idea that the CF produces less squirt just because its lighter. Doesn't make sense. Something has to give on the action to lighten up on the reaction. A softer ferrule makes sense.

I thought about it another way. What am I more like to miscue with, a soft or a hard tip? I am sure most people would agree a hard tip. Isn't that same the same as deflection? The cue bounces off to one side and the cueball off to the other. Would it make any kind of difference if the end of the cue was lighter?
 
bruppert said:
Actually, this is a fun thread.

I have to find a 5th grader to ask about this.... they'd probably know right away. You are on the right track with surface tension. It can't be weight, if you went by just that than ships and barges would sink.

Hmmm, just looked it up

Things sink or float due to the effect of buoyancy. If an object is dense and displaces insufficient water to counter its own weight, it will sink and if it displaces sufficient water to counter its weight, it will float.

Someone said above that it is strictly the endmass. Those articles seemed to say the same thing. But like someone said above everyone has their own idea of how it works. It just doesn't make sense to me that is all there is to it. If I took a 1/2" piece of steel and a 1/2" equally rigid piece of, say Carbon Fiber, I just can't wrap my head around the idea that the CF produces less squirt just because its lighter. Doesn't make sense. Something has to give on the action to lighten up on the reaction. A softer ferrule makes sense.

I thought about it another way. What am I more like to miscue with, a soft or a hard tip? I am sure most people would agree a hard tip. Isn't that same the same as deflection? The cue bounces off to one side and the cueball off to the other. Would it make any kind of difference if the end of the cue was lighter?
Click to expand...

To make the cue ball deflect less, the end of the shaft has to deflect more.
The more that tip deflects off the cue ball, the less the cue ball will deflect off the tip.
LD shafts miscue more often imo. Specially on close to the rail highball shots.
 
JoeyInCali said:
To make the cue ball deflect less, the end of the shaft has to deflect more.
The more that tip deflects off the cue ball, the less the cue ball will deflect off the tip.
LD shafts miscue more often imo. Specially on close to the rail highball shots.
Click to expand...

I would agree with all of that. I remember having problems with miscues and couldn't draw for crap with my 314 but it had a hard tip. I think LePro. Once I went to a Sniper both problems went away. I still miscue occasionally using extreme english but I think that is mostly because I use an open bridge.
 
JoeyInCali said:
To make the cue ball deflect less, the end of the shaft has to deflect more.
The more that tip deflects off the cue ball, the less the cue ball will deflect off the tip.
LD shafts miscue more often imo. Specially on close to the rail highball shots.
Click to expand...

The first is missing the words... relative to the line of stroke.

The second line should say relative to the line of stroke... not "off the tip".

The last line is, as you state, your opinion.

And while Barioni has been pooh-poohed for stating the results of his testing... most of what I read confirmed things what other testings does not, most importantly that it is not just the last few inches of the shaft that define what you are looking for.
 
I agree whole heartedly there is more to squirt than just endmass. the way that the waveform travels down the shaft specifically the speed and magnetude that it does is very important to squirt. this is the reason for vibration dampening.
 
My carbon has a density of about 1.8gm/cc
I do not know the density , modulus of their carbon,resin type,fibre orientation,fibre type.
But all the above mention have a dramatic impact on the properties of the carbon fibre.
That is why they now have composite engineers working on lots of different things.
And actually, you do not have to have a core to control the harmonics in a carbon cue shaft if the parameters are right.
Carbon also have a very high frequency compared to maple wood.

What type of arrow shaft did you use?
What wall section are they?
Neil
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top