Putting Excellence

 Daniel McGunnigle | Brad Alvarez | Cole Thaxton

 

Table of Contents

Introduction - Background Info .:|:. Hypothesis .:|:. Question Description

Method - Experimental Setup .:|:. Gathering Data

Results - Data .:|:. Graphs .:|:. Experimental Uncertainty .:|:. Conclusion .:|:. Bibliography .:|:. Related Web Pages .:|:. Photographs

Back to Previous Page - Where all Projects are Located

 

Introduction

Background Info

            Object A, in motion, crashes squarely into object B, stationary. As a result of this collision, object B will be set in motion on a set path. Assuming both objects are resting on the level ground, object B will be set on a straight path, leading away from object A. This is a fairly easy concept to understand. However, if object B is not struck squarely by object A, what will be the subsequent results of the collision? Let’s assume that object A is a golf putter, and that object B is a golf ball. If the putter is swung directly back and directly forward from the ball, striking it directly in the middle of the club face, the ball should take off in a line perpendicular to the club face. But if the ball is not struck directly in the center of the club face, deviating up to ½” from the center, what path will the ball take on? Will it shorten the length of the putt, extend the length of the putt, and make the putt veer right, or make the putt veer left? Furthermore, what effect does new technology have on the consistency of these putts in comparison to the same putts made with older  technology (just a metal faced putter) Each of these circumstances will be investigated in this paper and hopefully a conclusion can be made about the advantage a modern golfer has over an older golfer who used previous technologies.  

 

Weighting of the putter is an important factor which determines the direction of the ball after contact with the face of the putter.  Typically the weight distribution of a putter is focused on the center of the club face.  Due to this fact: when one makes contact with a ball off-center the ball with generally goes off course.  If one hits the ball toward the toe of the club the ball will veer toward the right of the center line due to the face of the club rotating at impact; in addition, if one hits the ball toward the heel of the club the ball will veer toward the left of the center line.  After doing this experiment with both the new putter and the old putter we hope to find that the new putter’s technology has diminished the effect of an off center putt.

 

Hypothesis

If the new technology is tested for its consistency (accuracy and distance) against the older technology then the newer technology will produce more consistent putts because of the new technology’s weight distribution and softer face which allows for less club face rotating at impact and creates a more square face at the moment of impact.

 

Question description

            What role does new technology play in the effectiveness (accurate and distance) of golfers’ ability to putt? New technology has swept the golfing market, flooding stores with new putters, drivers, and balls. However is all this new expensive equipment necessary? Of course it all depends on natural talent and practice, but can a little more dollar lower your score? 

 

 

Method

Experimental Setup

We had the brilliant idea of using PVC pipe to build our putting apparatus.  So we went to Home Depot to find the right kind of pipe we needed to build it.  It was easiest to assemble it their so we could find all the right elbows we needed and size of the pipe.  The pipe is very cheap so it didn’t really matter how much we used.  We already had in mind what we were going to build we just needed to build it.  It didn’t take us long to figure everything out.  Within about thirty minutes we had it all put together. We still weren’t sure how were going to swing the putter accurately.  So we took it home and tried to figure out a way to get the putter to swing.  This is how we came up with our first design.  We put screws in the pipe on top, which ‘locked’ in an elbow looking pipe, which the putter would be attached to.  This is the apparatus that we showed in class when we presented them.  We knew that this way was most likely not the route we were going to be heading at the end but we needed something.  Later our physics teacher, Mr. Murray, one of our fathers suggested implementing bearing in our design so the putter could swing freely with the least amount left to error.  A couple weeks later, we began to finalize our apparatus. We realized we needed a working device; therefore, enabling us to perform our experiment. We began by going into Brad’s garage with his father. This is where we found the paintbrush roller device, and realized it was just what we needed.  All we needed to do was to attach the putter to the handle of the device and hook the roller part to our apparatus.  We went to Home Depot again to finalize it. We used the exact design of out old one but just changed the top a little bit to fit our paintbrush roller device on it.  We discovered just by messing around that if you put the actual paintbrush part on the roller device it would fit very snugly inside a one inch PVC pipe.  

 

 

 

 

That’s how we connected the roller to the pipe, and then we made it hang down from the apparatus with a connector thing we created out of PVC pipe.  So we brought all the supplies home. Then by using pipe clamps, we were able to attach the putter to the roller device. 

          

 

We then, had to bend the device so the angle would work and the bottom of the putter would be perfectly horizontal with the ground. Then, after getting the apparatus set up, we began finally testing it.  To our relief, it was a success.  Following the construction, we took it to Cole’s house where we ran our experimental tests for our data.  We set up in his room where we thought the carpet was most neutral.  We marked the carpet every foot with chalk so we could measure distance and used string to measure accuracy.  We also placed books and other supports to allow the putter to again be horizontal with the ground.  We had to re-adjust the height with supports due to the apparatus sinking into the carpet; contrary to the garage floor where we had initially tested it.  Weights were also added so there was less movement throughout the apparatus. 

 

 

                      

Gathering Data

1. Gather all necessary materials for the experiment

2. Find proper ground to putt on

3. Once finding a flat surface we used a string to mark a center line

4. Secure the putter and bearings to the supports

5. ensure the putter properly aligns with the string

6. Place ball in the correct section of the putter face

7. Pull putter straight back from the device and lift to marked height

8. Let the putter swing freely and hit the ball.

9. Once the ball has stopped measure the distance traveled

10. Measure the distance from the string to the center of the ball to see how far off, left or right, it traveled

11. Repeat steps 6-10 until desired number of data points have been collected

12. After collecting data at all three spot of the putter, change out the putters carefully

13. Repeat steps with the other putter 6-11

 

 

 

Results

 

 

 

Data File

 

 

Experimental uncertainty

We attempted to determine the experimental uncertainty of our experiment by allotting estimated values of each measurement and then from those estimations we will use the experimental uncertainty formula to find a percent of uncertainty.

Length/distance - 1 in

Width/accuracy - 0.2 in

 Uncertainty for distance

 Uncertainty for accuracy

Our experiment was by no means perfect because of basic design flaws.  The only way to perform this experiment nearly perfect would be to go into a factory, such as nike, and test out clubs with their robot club swinging arms.  They swing the club identical every single time.

 

 

Conclusion

            Our data did support our original hypothesis that the newer putter would gain modern golfers an advantage on the putting green. The newer putter was more accurate throughout the face of the putter in distance, while the older putter had various results. The older putter on average, ended up 40 inches shorter when hit on the toe, compared to when hit in the center of the club face. The only advantage to the older putter was it did not deviate from the center line as much as the newer putter. However, if you hit a putt all the way to the hole it is only going to at maximum 5 inches off, but if you hit a putt short as the older putter did you can be up to 40 inches away from the target. Additionally, the newer putter was very accurate and precise when hit from the center. Even below average golfers are going to hit the center region of the putter face way more than half the time they putt. Average to above average golfers and professionally will almost hit the center of their putter face every single time. The results showed that the newer putters are going to give you an advantage on the green because it is going to get you closer to the hole on a more consistent basis.  Furthermore, the standard deviation data proves that, the newer technology is much more consistent when discussing the distance, and much more consistent concerning accuracy in the middle of the club face.

            I believe if we researched this again we would measure the accuracy of the putters more. We would setup a controlled target on a set spot and measure total distance away from the target. This would give a more accurate assessment as to which putter does give you the best advantage on the greens because the overall goal of putting is to get it in the hole or as close as possible. Although, we believe the same results would happen and the putters with the newer technology would prevail. Also, we suggest that someone does the research to determine if it is the rotation of the ball upon contact of the club face or whether it was the rotation of the actual club face at the point of impact. Overall, this experiment was a success.

 

 

 

 

 

Bibliography

"The Beginning of a New Era in Putter Design." Dandy Golf. 29 Nov. 2008 <http://www.dandygolf.com/putter.htm>.

Peyton, Kyle. "A Study on the Effects, Variance, and Correlation of Data Obtained From the Off-Center Strikes of a Golf Ball on a Club." TuHS Physics. 30 Nov. 2008 <http://tuhsphysics.ttsd.k12.or.us/Research/ib01/Peyton/physics.htm>.

"Putter Buying Guide." Golfalot. 09 Dec. 2008 <http://www.golfalot.com/Equipment/BuyingGuides/Putters.aspx>.

"The Sun has set on Old Technology Golf Putters." QUANTUM PUTTERS. 2008. 12 Dec. 2008 <http://www.quantumputters.com/>.

Giancoli, Douglas C. Physics 3rd Edition. 1991. Prentice-Hall. New Jersey

 

We also used this site to calculate standard deviation… http://www.easycalculation.com/statistics/standard-deviation.php

Related Web Pages

- this showed a diagram on how to stroke the golf ball for the most accurate, straight putts.  In a back and forth fashion, not in rotational way which is quite common for inexperienced golfers.

- A previous research assignment done by a student which is highly related to this topic.  Their Topic was more on a putter in general and not on the difference of technology.

- this gives us a bunch of information about the weight distribution and technology used in the construction of putters.

- This site is a great one for someone who needs to know every part of a club and the differences that one can make with them.  From the face to the shaft and even the grip - This site has it all

- A site which shows a new putter technology.  It explains the technology which is USGA approved!!!!

- A site where you can purchase your new putter and much much more. 

 

Various Other Photographs