Lets design a machine to test CTE

[RMS]

RMS:

I understand, you are basically using a dual 4 jaw chuck methodology to align the beam. That is a great idea.

Hey thanks, I'm happy to help.

If I'm understanding you completely, you are describing a typical laser pointer (aligned precisely). This forms a 1 dimensional straight line.

Yes, it would generate a "dot".

What I am describing is a 2 dimensional plane. That projects a line onto any surface that it intersects.

Yes, like a curtain.
I remember you mentioning that but in went in one eye and out the other.
You gave a good example, like one of those miter saws.
Instead of a dot, it generates a "line".

The main difference between the two, is the 1 dimensional line would not go "through" the CB, or the stick, or the OB. It would be blocked by the first thing it hits. Getting this line to be visible on multiple locations of interest for this machine is problematic.

The plane type laser would not have this problem.

I don't know if you've fooled around with 1 dimensional laser type levels/pointers on a pool table before to line up shots. I have, and they are awkward to use, because the beam only touches one thing at a time.

No I haven't.

As far as aligning a rotating plane type laser, that too could be made adjustable.

Yes, sure, just tune it in and your off and running.


You know, I'm just not sure how that is done.
It is likely that the beam is shot through something.
Maybe a type of beam splitter?
I don't think a prism.

My friend Keith owns a metrology lab, very sharp guy. He works on a lot more modern projects than I do.

I'll ask him, I'm pretty darn sure he will know how that is achieved.
And, how to do it for just a few dollars.

I'll give him a call.

 

[RMS]

I called and left a message.
He might be in the field.

I'll get back to you when I hear from him.


Take care,
RMS

 

[iusedtoberich]

I called and left a message.
He might be in the field.

I'll get back to you when I hear from him.


Take care,
RMS

Hey, thanks

http://www.amazon.com/Oshlun-LG-M01...id=1444410253&sr=8-1&keywords=miter+saw+laser

Here is a link to one of the lasers on amazon that mount to a miter saw arbor. They turn on and off with centripetal force. As long as the beam were perpendicular to the axis of rotation, it "should" be planer Getting it to be perpendicular could be achieved with some adjustment setscrews, like you mentioned.

 

[RMS]

Ahhh, they "spin" it.
I'll be darn, that does make sense.

If you took the guards off the machine that line would be on the floor,
on the walls, on the ceiling....

Like tying a 1/2" nut to a piece of string, it can just hang there.
But if you spin it like a zoot suiter spins a watch chain.....

Yes that makes sense.

Oh brother, now I see the challenge. How to incorporate the spinning
curtain of laser death into that fixture.

Hmmm, I will think on that one while I finish what I'm working on.

Sorry for being so slow on the up take. I don't own anything modern.
The newest machine in my shop was made in 1964.

I'm old school

 

[iusedtoberich]

All good

I think we could design a machine to accomplish the pivot, the laser line of sight, and a perfectly straight stroke.

From a physics standpoint, I don't know if the cue stick has to be decoupled from the mass of its guide system. Dr Dave has cautioned that it must be decoupled when discussing prior pool-robot designs. But, if this robot only hits center ball to test CTE aim of a center ball hit, I don't know if that is important.

I think the most important thing is whether or not the feature set of the design we come up with can answer any of the CTE questions. If the answer is no, then its probably not worth going further.

 

[RMS]

I have seen the designation CTE, and read somewhere
that it represents "Center To Edge", but I have not read up on the subject.

Where can I study and get up to speed about it?
I may be able to toss an idea or two into the hat.

 

[iusedtoberich]

Stan Shuffett, a professional player who posted earlier in this thread, is the foremost authority on it. He teaches it, and sells 2 dvd's about it on his website, justecueit.com

He aslo has a youtube channel with a bunch of videos on the topic.

If you go to his AZ profile page, and read through his posts, you will find a lot of info about the system.

Warning, the system has been an ongoing debate for 20 years. Reading too much about it might make your head explode... seriously.

 

[RMS]

All good

I think we could design a machine to accomplish the pivot, the laser line of sight, and a perfectly straight stroke.

Yes, no problem there.

From a physics standpoint, I don't know if the cue stick has to be decoupled from the mass of its guide system. Dr Dave has cautioned that it must be decoupled when discussing prior pool-robot designs. But, if this robot only hits center ball to test CTE aim of a center ball hit, I don't know if that is important.

Daveo is correct.
Ideally there should be no additional friction and no added mass.

If the cue could be suspended, in a magnetic field for instance......
Floating, without any external influences.

That would be a tough nut to crack.


I remember something Hillery said.
He was near base camp on Mt. Everest when the team arrived and told him what they were there to do.
It was in the filming, "The Man That Skied Down Everest"

He said,
"Challenge is what makes Men", "When men stop looking for challenges,...meeting challenges,..well,.. we human beings will be in a very bad way"

This guy climbed to the summit of Mt. Everest in 1953.

They don't make people like this anymore.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rVKnm4jswA

I think the most important thing is whether or not the feature set of the design we come up with can answer any of the CTE questions. If the answer is no, then its probably not worth going further.

I would have to study up on that.
I am in the dark as to what that entails.

 

[RMS]

Stan Shuffett, a professional player who posted earlier in this thread, is the foremost authority on it. He teaches it, and sells 2 dvd's about it on his website, justecueit.com

He aslo has a youtube channel with a bunch of videos on the topic.

If you go to his AZ profile page, and read through his posts, you will find a lot of info about the system.

Warning, the system has been an ongoing debate for 20 years. Reading too much about it might make your head explode... seriously.

Sure, I understand.

I'll speak up right now about aiming systems.

They have to be accurate, and above all they have to repeat.

There you have it in a nutshell.


Thank you all for coming, there is coffee and doughnuts in the back against the wall.

Feel free to ask any questions that you have.



LOL

 

[duckie]

How is this cueing device gonna test the CTE visuals?

It has been stated that visual perception is critical to CTE working. How is this cueing device gonna test visual perceptions?

For CTE to be valid.....the person has to be taken out of the equation. This means the machine has to do everything on its on with little to no human input.

Now you can do this with ghost ball contact patch, just look at the pic in my signature. It is all based on points and direction of travel.

 

[RMS]

How is this cueing device gonna test the CTE visuals?

It has been stated that visual perception is critical to CTE working. How is this cueing device gonna test visual perceptions?

For CTE to be valid.....the person has to be taken out of the equation. This means the machine has to do everything on its on with little to no human input.

Now you can do this with ghost ball contact patch, just look at the pic in my signature. It is all based on points and direction of travel.

If it's like that, this unit just got real expensive.

A vision system, an aiming system, laser or sonar distance system.
And now it will need..... well, software

This would be a "whole banana" unit.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

How is this cueing device gonna test visual perceptions?

RMS:
A vision system, an aiming system, laser or sonar distance system.
And now it will need..... well, software.

There are already pool and snooker robots that can aim and shoot (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HMx1xW2E4Gg), but it's not possible to program them to see things that can't be coherently described.

In fact, that's your proof. The player is the pool shooting computer and the system programs him to aim. But if the system isn't fully described then programming is impossible - the computer must program itself.

pj
chgo

 

[RMS]

There are already pool and snooker robots that can aim and shoot (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HMx1xW2E4Gg), but it's not possible to program them to see things that can't be coherently described.
pj
chgo

Great video.
Last couple of days I was day dreaming about a robot that could play pool.
In my mind the robot looked like one of those bomb disposal robots.
I figured, get some university students to trick it out and your on your way.

Well, it's already been done,.... it's a modern world.

 

[iusedtoberich]

I thought about this more, and agree, even with the laser line, it will not solve anything on the CTE debate. I even thought of 3 laser lines, one through the center of the stick, and one through each edge of the ferrule.

I think I'd like to one day build a machine like this, but maybe for testing shots in general, not CTE. If anyone has ideas for a pool shot testing machine in general, they would be fun to brainstorm and sketch out.

Thats all for now No more CTE for me for a while!

 

[cutemonster]

what about just a mechanical shooter for a start? that way we can eliminate the stroke issue. Something that Predator used for their demo.

 

[JB Cases]

There are already pool and snooker robots that can aim and shoot (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HMx1xW2E4Gg), but it's not possible to program them to see things that can't be coherently described.

In fact, that's your proof. The player is the pool shooting computer and the system programs him to aim. But if the system isn't fully described then programming is impossible - the computer must program itself.

pj
chgo

Because a robot can plot the position of all the balls with 100% accuracy it can also "aim" using GB because it can then project a 100% accurate GB position every time.

Since these robots are "aiming" from a 2d top down image they can't use the CTE perception method. They aren't actually aiming in 3d as a player does when addressing the balls from behind the cueball.

See how well a robot does when it doesn't have the luxury of a perfectly plotted 2d map to use.

To me the way to test CTE is super simple. You take any player who is well versed in CTE and you set up a bunch of shots. Set up a laser that lays down a perfect shot line and align it to the GB position for each shot. The CTE user has to use their method to get down into the shooting position and then laser is turned on to see if the cue stick is pointing down the GB line or not.

This can be done with shots to pockets from all angles and bank shots. If the shooter is on the GB line most or all of the time then the conclusion must be that CTE works to bring the shooter to the shot line. The assumption would have to be that the shooter is being 100% truthful about using CTE to line up. Which should be a fair assumption.

I am pretty sure that a robot can be programmed to use CTE though. It's a mechanical method that can surely be duplicated. Especially with a certain method to use manual CTE......that method is so strong it's almost like cheating how easy it makes CTE to use. I'd do the laser line test any time.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

To me the way to test CTE is super simple. You take any player who is well versed in CTE and you set up a bunch of shots..

NEWS FLASH: John Barton still clueless about testing.

If the shooter is on the GB line most or all of the time then the conclusion must be that CTE works to bring the shooter to the shot line.

So if a pure feel shooter makes most shots, then the conclusion must be that pure feel "brings him to the shot line".

So pure feel is totally objective.

pj <- who knew?
chgo

 

[ENGLISH!]

John,

You are a devoted member & advocate for CTE but you fail miserably in all of your proposals of ways to test CTE for subjective input.

Those are the hard facts.

That said, I'd like to ask you a few questions in PM if that is all right.

Please advise.

Best Wishes.

 

[LAMas]

jb,
The robot will have to have CIT algorithms.
Is the robot expected to get shape? More algorithms.:wink:

al·go·rithm
/ˈalɡəˌriT͟Həm/
noun
plural noun: algorithms

a process or set of rules to be followed in calculations or other problem-solving operations, especially by a computer.
"a basic algorithm for CTE, SIT and CIT"

 

[Patrick Johnson]

jb,
The robot will have to have CIT algorithms.
Is the robot expected to get shape? More algorithms.:wink:

al·go·rithm
/ˈalɡəˌriT͟Həm/
noun
plural noun: algorithms

a process or set of rules to be followed in calculations or other problem-solving operations, especially by a computer.
"a basic algorithm for CTE, SIT and CIT"

We don't need to complicate the question with throw. No program (that a human can follow) can prescribe the objective steps necessary even to arrive at a simple, no-throw, no-squirt shot to any part of a pocket (even allowing for pocket slop).

Those who say otherwise simply (and definitely) don't understand.

pj
chgo