Taper & Deflection
- Thread starter Slasher
- Start date
I think Meucci proved a while ago that a longer taper lessens deflection due to the way the shaft flexes. Meucci also had a very thin lite ferrule that did have less mass. Drilling out the front of the shaft and lightning it more added to what Meucci was already advocating.
RBC
Deceased
For all practical purposes, cue ball squirt, or deflection, is all about tip end mass.
If you can change the tip end mass with taper, then it will change the cue ball squirt.
Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com
If you can change the tip end mass with taper, then it will change the cue ball squirt.
Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com
Hypothetically, say if 12 inches of a conical (or compound) taper weighs the same as 12 inches of a pro taper, would they both "perform" equally, having the same deflective qualities? or maybe it could be a shorter length from the tip....
All the same, if two shafts had drastically different tapers, but shared the same relative front end mass, would they swerve the cueball the same?
As the deflection is reduced,the pivot point/ bridge point gets to be further back from the tip.
LD shafts are a complex thing. It is possible to have a shaft that is light at the front end, yet still not be as low in deflection as a heavier front end shaft.
It needs to be both light, and have a certain amount of flex in the shaft.
2 shafts with the same flex, but one being lighter in the front end,the lighter one will be a lower deflecting shaft.
Or you can have 2 shafts that are light at the front end, but one shaft is really stiff and the other is flexable, the flexable shaft will have a lower deflection.
LD shafts are a complex thing. It is possible to have a shaft that is light at the front end, yet still not be as low in deflection as a heavier front end shaft.
It needs to be both light, and have a certain amount of flex in the shaft.
2 shafts with the same flex, but one being lighter in the front end,the lighter one will be a lower deflecting shaft.
Or you can have 2 shafts that are light at the front end, but one shaft is really stiff and the other is flexable, the flexable shaft will have a lower deflection.
From the development I have been doing, shaft stiffness and frequency seems to be very important to the LD performance.
Wood shafts are different, but I think the principles still apply.
If you are referring to you doing the playing it may have been a shaft you really liked and you compensated with it. It may have been more your skills then the shaft. I know the first time I played with a LD shaft I could not play with it. It was hard to break a life time of aiming with compensation. I could not make any long cut with the LD shaft for a month I had zero confidence. I went back to my usual shaft.
Hi,
Sheldon is always someone who has showed to have a great knowledge of the physics involved and his last post and observation is one I agree with.
The shafts and parbolic geometry on my cues are very stiff by design and I can attest that the stiffer shaft with more spine will will tend to deflect less that a normal or for conventional shaft but the low end mass factor is the biggest factor ( as seen in the Predator Designs ). I am old school concerning shafts and just hate Predator shafts and would never put one on my cues no matter what. However that being said, their concept does work and there is nothing wrong with playing with them if it makes your game better. If someone goes to playing Predator they might as well get rid of all of their other shafts because they become useless. The hit point on the Predator is dramatically different that a normal wooden shaft without the front end technology. Once you go to Predator you can't just pull out another cue with a traditional shaft and play at the same level without a period of adjustment. It is that critical of a factor
As for the whippy doing the same thing, I have not investigated it either but there may be a point where it does have some positive effect concerning lower deflection. The vibrations or oscillations that occur in that split second of contact may produce some kind of cancellation effect to the way the resilient shaft bends or does not bend before the ball leaves the cue, who knows.
Have spoke to Neil several times about his thoughts in this area and he is doing things down there in New Zealand that are cutting edge with minute details concerning shafts and plability and I take my hat off to him for his intense enthusiasm and technical prowess. He is a trend setter with a futuristic attitude.
Grest Post,
Rick G
Last edited:
Me thinks Joey is correct, and so does Sir Issac Newton.
RBC
Deceased
Steve,
You and Joey are right, but the only tip deflection that really matters is that which occurs while the tip is in contact with the cue ball.
So, very often, you will see a cue shaft that is very stiff, but still deflects the cue ball less. Our Classic line is exactly that. They are stiff, but still very low cue ball deflection or squirt.
Remember, once the ball leaves the tip, all the squirt or deflection is over!
Taper
Can't argue with that, I was thinking more about how
coefficient of restitution would be effected by the stiffness of the shaft.
And even thou the transfer is over once the tip leaves the ball,
where it goes does give you a bit of a visual clue of what
happened at impact. We are talking about very small
amounts when it come to stiffness. No doubt that
mass is the biggest factor in the whole equation.
We need to find some really high speed camera's
or get the Myth Busters involved.
Can't argue with that, I was thinking more about how
coefficient of restitution would be effected by the stiffness of the shaft.
And even thou the transfer is over once the tip leaves the ball,
where it goes does give you a bit of a visual clue of what
happened at impact. We are talking about very small
amounts when it come to stiffness. No doubt that
mass is the biggest factor in the whole equation.
We need to find some really high speed camera's
or get the Myth Busters involved.
I personally do not care for LD shafts, except for a break cue. I'm too used to compensating for the squirt, and hook myself so often, I need a shaft that will jump a ball.
I test deflection by shooting a spot shot with the object ball frozen to the center of the end rail and cueball on the spot. You need extreme english to cut the ball in, and the deflection becomes glaringly obvious. With a very LD shaft you pretty much aim where you want the ball to go (right next to the object ball). With a high deflecting shaft, you aim straight at the object ball, and the squirt puts it where you want it. :grin:
Try it, you'll see that it's a great test....
Dave has it right:
From: http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/squirt.html#endmass
Endmass is also related to stiffness. A stiffer shaft will typically be thicker and heavier at the end. Also, transverse elastic waves will travel faster in a stiffer shaft, effectively increasing the "endmass." For more info, see the paragraph after Equation 4 in TP A.31. A carbon-fiber shaft illustrates these principles well. The shaft end can be much lighter (which tends to reduce "endmass"), but it will also be much stiffer (which tends to increase effective "endmass").
From: http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/squirt.html#endmass
There is too much emphasis put on LD, too much emphasis put on aiming, too much emphasis on what is the best cue, who is the best player, and not enough emphasis on the development of our game and enjoyment as a whole. If people would quit worrying about all the small stuff, we could actually find time to enjoy pool. :wink: