Scientist explains why laminated tips perform as they do

[Patrick Johnson]

The conversation originated when geno said layered tips "grab too much". Where I'm from, that means draw.

Where you're from the tip doesn't "grab" for side spin or follow? Can you see Earth from there, Ron? How about if I wave?

pj
chgo

 

[Patrick Johnson]

50RPMs? On a pool ball? Really? Could you show me that? A ball struck with sidespin of about 1 revolution per second....that strikes the back rail with enough force to even HIT the side rail?

What does it matter? Use any numbers you like, the results are the same.

Veering off on tangents like this makes me think again that we aren't communicating. Maybe another time.

pj
chgo

 

[Shawn Armstrong]

What does it matter? Use any numbers you like, the results are the same.

Veering off on tangents like this makes me think again that we aren't communicating. Maybe another time.

pj
chgo

No, Pat....we're communicating. I did some math, and in retrospect, made a calculation error. The problem with using side spin as a measure of how much spin is placed on the cueball is that for pure sidespin (skidding), the ball needs to be moving with pure sidespin, and to use the back rail as a "catcher" to show how much spin there was, would require complete transfer of spin between the cueball and the rail. That doesn't happen. You only get roughly 20 to 30 percent transfer of spin and speed due to fabric rail coverings, and a compressible rail.

 

[Blue Hog ridr]

Gathered from circumscision wards from some of the best hospitals in the country

Tramp, I used to hang out at as many of the Brit Milahs as possible.

Unfortunately for the Rabbis, there is not much money in it any longer.

But, as they said, The Tips are pretty good.

 

[Colin Colenso]

Tip and shaft width can have a large effect on many things, including squirt and net CB deflection. For more info, see cue tip size and shape effects.

Cue tip hardness and density differences can affect some things (see the cue tip hardness effects resource page); however, in my experience, the effects on squirt seem to be negligible. For proof, see:

NV D.15 - Cue and Tip Testing for Cue Ball Deflection (Squirt)

and the explanations at the bottom of the what causes squirt resource page.

Best regards,
Dave

Hi Dave,

It's a little anecdotal, as it's hard to get precise pivot point measurements, but after changing to a new tip recently, it appears that my pivot point has moved back approx 3/4 inch, from 8.25" to 9", on my 9mm english pool cue.

I probably have 3mm more leather in front of my brass ferrule. (Which I had made thinner and shorter than usual). This would influence tip end mass to some degree, though I've not seen any attempt at a formula for doing such.

I guess with plastic ferrules, the effect would be less noticeable, if significant at all.

Thought you might be interested in that as density differential is worth considering especially when a material like brass is involved.

Another point of interest, as to why snooker players use brass, may be because with 10mm tips and 2 1/16" balls, the pivot points are often in the 14" and longer range, so near to that of low deflection shafts in US pool. Lighter ferrule materials can send pivot points toward the 20" range, which I tend to think is not ideal.

Colin

FWIW: I think PJ's test is a great way to settle claims about some tips or cues getting more english with the same offset.

Note: To those wondering what the relevance of 'pivot point' is, it's basically a measure of a cue's squirt. It's the length at which the angle produced by pivoting the cue at the bridge is equal and opposite to the squirt produced. (Not taking into account swerve)

 

[Colin Colenso]

No, Pat....we're communicating. I did some math, and in retrospect, made a calculation error. The problem with using side spin as a measure of how much spin is placed on the cueball is that for pure sidespin (skidding), the ball needs to be moving with pure sidespin, and to use the back rail as a "catcher" to show how much spin there was, would require complete transfer of spin between the cueball and the rail. That doesn't happen. You only get roughly 20 to 30 percent transfer of spin and speed due to fabric rail coverings, and a compressible rail.

The test itself can confirm if the spin transfer is repeatable /consistent / non-variable, by repeating with the same tip, at the same speed, with the same offset several times.

The test is not an attempt at some pure measure of spin applied to a ball, it's a comparison of two tips, with offset, direction, speed and spin transfer kept constant.

Also, side english does not convert to rolling english, it dissipates from friction with the cloth and when it turns and accelerates or decelerates the ball on impact with a rail.

 

[ENGLISH!]

Pat's test is flawed. No need for the "i" word. Problem with Pat's test is that it doesn't account for the lost of sidespin due to forward roll picked up from friction with the cloth.

I've always thought that there's a magic blend between the speed and spin produced by a tip. The most speed will be achieved with a hard tip, as there is little compression of the tip at contact. With a softer tip, the tip will compress more, thus remaining in contact with the cueball slightly longer. You'll get increased spin, but with a slight loss of energy, due to the cue slowing down as the tip compresses.

Cuemakers are increasing spin transfer and reducing cueball deflection by using softer ferrules, and reducing end mass of shafts. To say that a softer tip doesn't transfer more spin is flawed. All of those softer materials allow the shaft to buckle when it hits the cueball, as it moved out of the way of the heavier object during collision. The softer tip will give more as well.

It will be interesting to see if the science guys jump you or if it is just me that they don't like saying things like this.

I just don't want to get into it as 'science' has not yet done enough significant real scientific tests to make a real conclusive statement. Some have common sense & some don't.

 

[arnaldo]

I think most players judge a tip by the feedback it gives. I played with Future Tips, while they were available. They had two grades, a blue and a brown. The brown was made to more closely replicate the "feel" of a leather tip. The blue had a really weird feel, but the things that tip could do was amazing. It held chalk well, didn't glaze like a hide based tip, and its compression characteristics were fantastic. It felt like a mushroom, compared to a crisp Le Pro or Water Buffalo tip. But, I played really well with them. I wish they were still available...

--------------------------------------------------------------
Shawn,
It might be quite interesting for you to give a good trial to a Black Kamui Super Soft tip. Won't be too appreciably close to the weird (but enjoyable) feel you experienced with Future Blues, but you'll like the compression-induced "grab" and will likely play very well and accurately with the Kamui SS.

If you don't trim off a third of the full height of the very tall new Kamui (as many users reflexively do) you'll completely experience what they really can do insofar as a modern-day approximating of the Future Blues feel and performance for you.

Arnaldo

 

[Ron Swanson]

Where you're from the tip doesn't "grab" for side spin or follow? Can you see Earth from there, Ron? How about if I wave?

pj
chgo

Where I'm from, england, we have invented this language called "english", you may have heard of it. When you grab something, you don't throw it away.

You science guys like precise terminology, and use it to your advance when it suits your purpose.

Find more precise terminology.

 

[dr_dave]

Tip and shaft width can have a large effect on many things, including squirt and net CB deflection. For more info, see cue tip size and shape effects.

Cue tip hardness and density differences can affect some things (see the cue tip hardness effects resource page); however, in my experience, the effects on squirt seem to be negligible. For proof, see:

NV D.15 - Cue and Tip Testing for Cue Ball Deflection (Squirt)

and the explanations at the bottom of the what causes squirt resource page.

Hi Dave,

It's a little anecdotal, as it's hard to get precise pivot point measurements, but after changing to a new tip recently, it appears that my pivot point has moved back approx 3/4 inch, from 8.25" to 9", on my 9mm english pool cue.

I probably have 3mm more leather in front of my brass ferrule. (Which I had made thinner and shorter than usual). This would influence tip end mass to some degree, though I've not seen any attempt at a formula for doing such.

I guess with plastic ferrules, the effect would be less noticeable, if significant at all.

Thought you might be interested in that as density differential is worth considering especially when a material like brass is involved.

Agreed. Tip height differences could definitely make a difference, especially with a a heavy ferrule. Pushing that heavy weight back even a little can make a significant difference.

FYI, for the tip hardness experiments I did (in the video), I made sure each tip had the same height and shape to eliminate as many variables as possible.

It is difficult to come up with a simple "formula" describing endmass and how mass at different distances from the tip affects squirt, but I have some done some experiments to show this effect. If you or others are interested, the results are documented in Diagram 4 of:

"Squirt - Part VII: cue test machine results" (BD, February, 2008).

Another point of interest, as to why snooker players use brass, may be because with 10mm tips and 2 1/16" balls, the pivot points are often in the 14" and longer range, so near to that of low deflection shafts in US pool. Lighter ferrule materials can send pivot points toward the 20" range, which I tend to think is not ideal.

Excellent point.

FWIW: I think PJ's test is a great way to settle claims about some tips or cues getting more english with the same offset.

I agree. The physics on this is also clear. The key is to control the CB speed carefully in any comparisons between tips and shafts. With different shot speeds, swerve and sidespin loss with distance will vary, which can lead people to believe there are differences in spin-generating capability. Here's an excerpt from my cue tip hardness resource page that addresses this issue:

There is no question that a harder tip "feels" different and provides different "feedback" (a softer tip dampens the impact a little and the force of the hit isn't felt as strongly). It is also true that a harder tip can result in a more efficient hit, providing more speed to the CB for a given cue speed. And it is true that with slower CB speed, more backspin will wear off on the way to the OB with a draw shot and more sidespin will wear off on the way to the cushion with a sidespin shot (especially on slow and sticky cloth with slower shot speed). These effects might make it seem like a softer tip is applying less spin to the CB. Regardless, the quality of spin (i.e., the spin-speed ratio) delivered to the CB depends only on the tip contact-point offset from center. The physics on this is very clear. If anybody doubts this, they should do a careful and objective experiment to compare any tips they think would produce different results. For those who have math and physics backgrounds and are interested, the physics showing how the spin-to-speed ratio depends only on tip offset from center, even when accounting for tip efficiency, can be found in TP A.30 - The effects of cue tip offset, cue weight, and cue speed on cue ball speed and spin.

Note: To those wondering what the relevance of 'pivot point' is, it's basically a measure of a cue's squirt. It's the length at which the angle produced by pivoting the cue at the bridge is equal and opposite to the squirt produced. (Not taking into account swerve)

If people want more information on this and/or want to see demonstrations dealing with how to find a cue's pivot point, go here:

cue natural pivot length resource page

Regards,
Dave

 

[Donny Lutz]

tip care

Regarding the largely unresolved question (in scientific terms) about the often-cited performance superiority of laminated tips versus traditional single-layer ones, a few years ago I contacted Jack H. Koehler who is renowned in pool circles for his scientific analysis and explanations about the physics of pool. He’s the best-selling author of “The Science of Pocket Billiards,” “Upscale Nine-Ball,” and
“Upscale One-Pocket” as well as more than 20 scientific papers on subjects unrelated to pool.

I thought he’d be the perfect man to understand and hopefully explain the physical mechanisms or science underlying the commonly discussed unique characteristics and superior performance of laminated cue tips compared to conventional non-layered tips. (Varied opinions continue of course in matters of "superiority" with more than a few players returning to conventional tips after trying laminated ones.)

Below is his then-emailed reply to me which contains his very creditable thoughts on layered tips (and which I thought would be interesting to share with fellow AB-ers
--------------------------------------------------------------
“Leather (from the donor animal) is not homogenous. The texture (and hardness) changes from the hair side to the inside. If the tip is made of one piece of leather, you get a simple progression from hard to soft. The thin pieces of leather skived for lamination purposes have these same characteristics but when you stack them, to get the proper thickness, the final product is much more homogeneous. The randomness of grain from layer to layer when compiling the stacks, which you properly mention, probably also plays a part in the resulting superiority and performance characteristics.”
---------------------------------------------------------------
I think that, as usual and as expected, he got right to the heart of the matter.

I would add that the nature of the adhesive (and the process) involved in lamination also affect the often discussed pros and cons of performance when comparing the two overall categories (laminated vs. single-layered) with respect to "grab", glazing, mushrooming, longevity, change in hardness over time, chalk retention, etc.

Arnaldo

I played with LePro tips for many years. Then I tried Elkmasters and they were better. Then I tried Mooris and loved them. Then I got a Predator sneaky with a LePro and could really work old Whitey. Then I put on a Tornado and got lots of draw, but I liked Snipers the most. Till I tried a Kamui soft and loved, till I realized I had actually put on a Hard. So I went back to the Sniper till I tried the Onyx. My favorite is the Emerald, though the Ultraskin beats them all.

It's kind of like an old musician friend of mine who used to say, "No question, the Beatles are the best...but the Stones are really the best!"

Been playing more than sixty years now, and still can't name my favorite tip!

But seriously, I must ask...isn't how one cares for the tip a rather important variable?

When I was playing a lot (a lot for an amateur) I knew people who played about as much as I did and went through three or four tips a year. I once had a tip last for five years. I always chalk and "groom" a tip very gently and remove the excess chalk after each time I play. I'm a fanatic about keeping the inside of my cue case clean. And I never blast shots for fun or doing trick shots with my best cues.

 

[Tramp Steamer]

I don't care what anyone says about layered tips vs whatever.

The Ki tech medium that I switched to from a layered tip plays consistent and doesn't overspin the rock.

The layered tips just grab too much.

My game went up a ball by switching back. But not just to any tip.

The ki tech medium.

Do tips actually "grab"?
I know ex-wives do, but I'm not so sure about cue tips.

 

[joelpope]

Great post.
Why anyone would want to use a single-layer tip (Le Pro, et al) is beyond me.

easy, I like my tip to be leather as opposed to leather, glue, leather, glue, leather, glue, leather, glue, leather, glue, leather

feel the same way about shafts

 

[arnaldo]

That's correct, Jim Odom, here in Ft. Worth put a "Milk Dud" on my cue three days ago and I already won two local tournaments and $800 in a "break and run contest"

-------------------------------------------------------------
CJ -- Very off-topic on my part, but just scratching my head wondering why anyone running "a break and run contest" would be nutty enough to allow you to enter? Seems like that would be like giving the $800 away, and pretty unfair to locals (unless in fact, many of the other entrants were pros like yourself).

Just curious. The reply is the teacher.

Arnaldo

 

[xplor]

If epoxy resin layered tips are better than whole leather , why use leather at all ? Where are the peer-reviewed articles*from other scientists.

 

[mortuarymike-nv]

Cues for Efren

It isn't a "cheap assed Elk Master". He uses a "milk dud" of his own recipe. I got the recipe years ago from someone that made a cue for Efren. Still use it to this day. Makes one hell of a milk dud

I don't want to say this in a argumentative way but I know some who made him a cue too and it had a triangle Tip on it.

This hasn't been mentioned but Efren doesn't not like LD shafts either.

 

[hang-the-9]

That's correct, Jim Odom, here in Ft. Worth put a "Milk Dud" on my cue three days ago and I already won two local tournaments and $800 in a "break and run contest" with it.

I have had some that he replaced, however, I have Milk Duds on all my cues now. I wore the last one down to the ferrule before replacing it.


Chris Renfro also has some great tips, although they are a variation of the standard "Milk Dud" (he uses some high-tech milk)

I used Mike Dechaine's OB shaft with a layered Kamui Soft on it, and right after I put it on I won my local tournament twice in a row, including one week where I lost 2 games (not sets, games) the whole night.

So clearly the layered fancy tips and LD shafts are as good :grin:

 

[hang-the-9]

Why so much debate, go to the first page of the thread, setup my diagramed shot, try combinations of shafts/tips and see where you can get the cueball to. If you shoot the shot 5-10 times each time you will pretty much remove variances in your hit, you'll see it head towards the same general area.

It's like arguing who the prettiest girl is by just reading her face specs on paper. Nose, .21 inches across the bottom, .2 inches on top, lips .3 inches tall at widest point, 1.5 inches wide mouth, hair 23.1 inches long, etc...

You'll never know till you actually look at her in person.

You'll never know what gets the most spin for you till you try it on a table.

 

[Hungarian]

Are you sure about when you had this conversation? Jim Buss has been making cues since the mid 1980's and I don't recall layered tips then? I do remember seeing some of his first cues in Houston. Back then he was still working for NASA and building cues.

I had a chat with Jim Buss years ago. Before Jim was a cuemaker, he was a rocket scientist, so he knows a few things besides wood. Anyways, he told me about his dislike of layered tips, due to the exposed face, and all of the glue lines. I've found that layered tips are a little more consistent in hardness, but they don't hold chalk nearly as well as a standard one piece tip.

 

[PoolBoy1]

I agree mostly, but the milkduds available from Pooldawg8 are the best tip I've ever used.
That could be because the pressing of the tips makes them more uniform, but who knows I'm just guessing :thumbup:

seems to me the batches could be problematic. I'm no scientist but slicing 8 slices to make 8 layers and gluing them together doesn't sound as uniform as a one piece tip soaked and pressed would be. It still seems to be a matter of preference rather than science and absolute facts. I personally believe from a common sense point of view it's more important to find one's preference as to soft, medium or hard rather than layers which I believe are a con job because of price and profit. It is reported take it for what it's worth that Efren uses Milkduds.