Driver sound and the Law of Conservation of Energy

First of all, Lizardman wishes to apologise for the nerdy thread title. But this has been a point of heated discussion between my friends for the past couple of weeks.

We are arguing that a driver which makes the loud "WHACK" upon impact is less efficient than one which makes softer noise.

This is because the above law of physics which states that energy can only be converted, and not created or destroyed. ie. the louder driver is converting clubhead speed to ball velocity (and distance) less efficiently than a driver which makes the softer sound. For the louder driver, more kinetic is converted into sound energy.

I would like to tap on the reservoir of knowledge and experience of the laocheow golfers in this forum. Have you ever played with loud and not so loud drivers and noted any difference in ball distance?

Please share your stories and thoughts. All views appreciated.

Wow, very interesting theory which cause my brain to go into nerd mode for quite a bit. First conclusion upon contemplation would be that you'll then have to factor in the elasticity equation as well (i.e. hollow vs not-so-hollow driver head/face)

Reason: Hollow objects usually produce a louder sound, ceteris paribus in conditions. But let's imagine dropping a golf ball onto a hard surface, compared with dropping onto a hollow surface. Depending on the material and layout, we may garner either absorption (less bounce since enrgy resonated to other areas) or elastic reaction (more bounce from repulsion effects).

Sorry for answering the question with another which complicates it further... heh.
Any physicists around here??

Good point. Leads me to another thought: Assuming both clubheads are of equal size(460cc), a less hollow clubhead (that makes a softer sound) would most likely be heavier so club speed would be compromised, negating any savings in kinetic-sound energy conversion.

Er.... then there will be no way of doing a fair comparison, will there?


help....

Sound really depends on a lot of factor. In a driver, I believe it really depends on the material and design of the clubhead (interior).

The main point of discussion is that whether the louder the driver could mean lower the distance, right? I personally don't think so. There are many more prominent factor which can compromise overall force to the golf ball: angle of attack, how well the driver compress the ball, how much spin the driver induces, aerodynamic (affect swing speed), etc..

In my experience, same loudness can be produced with a dead straight long drive in comparison with the one with super slice.

Then I guess the only scientific proof is the "take ruler and measure" comparison method.. haha

Newtons 3rd law = explain the sound

Newtons 2nd law = explain the distance (well technically its not). Distance is more E = 1/2mv2 (dont take into account aerodynamics...forgot which physis law liao...daydream thru all the lectures)

I could hardly believe that we are having such a discussion over this here. Its hard enough to drive a straight ball with the driver, and here we are trying to squeeze another couple of inches from the effects of sound? My friends, just try to land your ball on the fairway everytime you drive and that will be better than any extra inches you can gained from sound effects when YOUR F..$#^% ball is OB or in the hazard. If I can squeezed another 5 to 10 metres from my Kajiki, which is technology based, its already a feat. Now you want to see if sound effects can squeezed a couple of YARDS from it ?????

titu

Ok wait a second for me to pick up my net and ready to catch those balls flying my way. But just for YOUR info, I only accept Pro Vs. All other brands, just save your balls

Aiyah Titu don't misunderstand my intention of starting this thread. The whole argument started because one fella in my group said that a more expensive branded driver will hit longer than his last not so (but still) expensive one. Another one said club makers tune the sound of clubs to that it gives off an aural illusion of power.

The rest of us tried to reason from the technology/scientific angle.

So you see, the whole discussion went down a slippery slope from there and never recovered. Ha ha ha.

Hi Lizzy, no offence. Let me ask you whether you have heard of any low handicapper ever ask such a question? I doubt so because they achieved their low handicap thru hours of practices. So its the higher handicapper who are just trying to squeeze some extra distances from whatever they can dream up. I am a high handicapper but I don't subscribed to such thoughts. Just me.

titu

Interesting. In theory, a driver that makes no sound at all should deliver the longest drive. Not sure about that, but I did notice that my tour drivers tend to sound far more muted, but that said, they also weigh slightly more than my retail heads. HMMMM

Sound is not the only thing, there is heat, deformity of the ball etc etc. And the end result is how elastic the collision is and how much momentum is transfered and the efficiency. Sound alone does not tell the complete picture.

And yes. This very chim theory is actually applied during manufacturing balls and clubs and it is equally strict when it comes to enforcing the technology. This is why there are so many regulation on the tiny balls and the driver which they measure the coefficient of restitution which is a physical measurement of how much energy is lost during the collision and thus how much momentum is transferred.

Errr anyone still awake?

ghoonk wrote:

Interesting. In theory, a driver that makes no sound at all should deliver the longest drive. Not sure about that, but I did notice that my tour drivers tend to sound far more muted, but that said, they also weigh slightly more than my retail heads. HMMMM

Ghoonk my friend, it stands to reason that tour drivers would sound more muted since they would probably be swung at much faster speeds. The same tour driver in the hands of a much slower swinger would hardly create a ripple of sound. Exactly why forgiving drivers sound so explosive at impact for the slower swinger. Imagine how much more earsplitting it would sound in the hands of a tour level player, that is, if the face doesn't cave in first.

whichever way u try to achieve max energy transfer, it cannot go beyond the Max COR allowed by the rule...

If they manufacture a driver that is very very loud (more energy loss) and maintain the COR at max and another driver that is very quiet (less energy loss), the COR still not suppose to go beyond the max COR... so in the end no difference.

Lizardman, The theory is not sound (pun intended). Consider that in the early days of the metalwood driver, the drivers were deliberately muted by filling the hollow metal head with foam to sound as close as possible to a persimmon wood headed driver. Golfers then thought the first metal drivers sounded way too loud. Hit one of those now, and I'm sure most would think it sounds dead.

So for two identical drivers, one filled with foam to mute the sound, the other left hollow to resonate at impact, which would then hit further? The one filled with foam? Or would the foam absorb the kinetic energy, thereby having an adverse effect on distance instead?

Another spanner in the works?

weesern wrote:

whichever way u try to achieve max energy transfer, it cannot go beyond the Max COR allowed by the rule...

If they manufacture a driver that is very very loud (more energy loss) and maintain the COR at max and another driver that is very quiet (less energy loss), the COR still not suppose to go beyond the max COR... so in the end no difference.

I think it's more the other way around Weesern. That is for two drivers at max COR, would the louder one hit shorter than the muted one.

See why you all are high handicapper? You all are wasting so much time on all this rubbish which will bring you nowhere while those low handicapper are spending more time to perfect their swing

Why am I here too? Because I am also high handicapper

what u said sound like an engine... need a muffler to mute the noise

because we are going nowhere (how to improve with 1-2 hr range time a week and playing 1-2 times a month) so no choice have to talk cock.

sound is no indication of the efficiency of the transfer of energy. Sound is the product of Newtons third law on the harmonics of the the driver (titanium vs wood gives different sound, when the same ball exerts the same force back onto the driver)



so let me ask u this? in Space, will there be more energy transferred to the ball (NOT will the ball travel further) since there is no sound in Space........

So u are the muffler? Taking in all the shit from the engine?

i referring to Birdman's post on the foam in the driver...

weesern wrote:

what u said sound like an engine... need a muffler to mute the noise

Exactly weesern. When TaylorMade came out with the first metal driver, even with the foam inside, many purists still preferred the impact sound of a ball off a cycolac inserted persimmon wood. Everyone complained they were too loud. And when someone used one at the range, people would stop and look to see who was hitting one.

Birdman wrote:

ghoonk wrote:

Interesting. In theory, a driver that makes no sound at all should deliver the longest drive. Not sure about that, but I did notice that my tour drivers tend to sound far more muted, but that said, they also weigh slightly more than my retail heads. HMMMM

Ghoonk my friend, it stands to reason that tour drivers would sound more muted since they would probably be swung at much faster speeds. The same tour driver in the hands of a much slower swinger would hardly create a ripple of sound. Exactly why forgiving drivers sound so explosive at impact for the slower swinger. Imagine how much more earsplitting it would sound in the hands of a tour level player, that is, if the face doesn't cave in first.

Thought so too, but my swing speed is the same between retail and tour drivers, at least the ones that I have. sk jurongtiger how the tour TM driver feels...

jimmychoo wrote:

See why you all are high handicapper? You all are wasting so much time on all this rubbish which will bring you nowhere while those low handicapper are spending more time to perfect their swing

Why am I here too? Because I am also high handicapper

Ya da man.....

tronos wrote:

so let me ask u this? in Space, will there be more energy transferred to the ball (NOT will the ball travel further) since there is no sound in Space........

I think so. In vacuum, no sound or heat would be produced so the ball should go further. In space, where there's no gravity or friction, the ball will go forever in a straight line.

Lizardman wrote:

tronos wrote:

so let me ask u this? in Space, will there be more energy transferred to the ball (NOT will the ball travel further) since there is no sound in Space........

I think so. In vacuum, no sound or heat would be produced so the ball should go further. In space, where there's no gravity or friction, the ball will go forever in a straight line.

the ball will travel further, but will there be more efficient transfer of energy?