Does Shaft Flex Affect Distance in Golf Swings?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the impact of golf shaft flexibility on distance and accuracy during a swing. It is noted that while increased shaft flex may enhance distance, it can also compromise accuracy if the shaft is too flexible. The energy transfer at the moment of impact is crucial, as a more flexible shaft can allow the clubhead to decelerate more, potentially directing more energy to the ball. Additionally, the relationship between swing speed and shaft stiffness is emphasized, suggesting that a stiffer shaft is necessary for higher swing speeds to ensure the shaft is straight at the moment of contact. Overall, the conversation highlights the balance between flexibility and stiffness in optimizing golf performance.
fdb2
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I hope this comes under the classic physics roof. Do any of you play the game and would like to offer your opinions on the physics of the club swinging into and propelling the ball toward the target?

If any would like to take on a problem of shaft flex I would enjoy hearing about your views. Here goes: As a good player swings the club the golf shaft flexes. All shafts ( steel or graphite) have different flexes ranging from extra-stiff ( think telephone pole) to ladies flex. ( think fly rod ). Now the problem is this: Will increasing flex ( bending) on the downswing increase the players distance. I know for a fact ( empirical here) that a too flexible shaft decrease accuracy, however I would like to hear thoughts on distance only versus flexibility. Some parameters if you like, Head mass is 200 grams and shaft length is 44 inches. Let's not get into materials. Shaft weight is a compromise between steel and graphite and for argument sake let's say shaft mass is 85 grams.

Your commentary is appreciated.

Regards, FDB
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Just off the top of my head, I would have to say that shaft flexibility must effect distance. At the moment of contact, energy is transferred from the clubhead to the ball. At that instant, two things happen; the ball accelerates foreword and the clubhead accelerates backward (decelerates). There is only a certain amount of energy generated by the impact between these two. Whatever portion of that energy is expended in accelerating the clubhead backward is energy not available to accelerate the ball forward.

This energy transfer could be pictured in the form of an "explosion" of energy between the ball and the clubhead. If you imagine placing a golf ball and the head of the golf club next to each other with a small explosive charge (perhaps a firecracker) between them, you can see that when the explosive detonates the energy from that detonation will push on both objects. If the clubhead is not attached to anything, both objects are equally free to move. Both will travel equal distances (d) in opposite directions from the point of the explosion (if we use a clubhead that's the same mass as a golfball). If the clubhead is attached to a very flexible shaft and the other end of that shaft is held stationary, then the clubhead might only travel 1/2 as far, (.5d) in which case the ball should travel twice as far (2d). Given a more rigid shaft, the clubhead could be restricted to traveling only 1/10 that distance (.1d), directing the remainder of the available energy to propel the ball nine times as far (9d).

These differences are, of course, greatly exaggerated. However, the principal which they illustrate remains sound.
 
Last edited:
Thanks, anyone else have thoughts?
 
Shaft flex is directly related to swing speed. The idea is that the shaft should be perfectly straight when you strike the ball (otherwise you get the inaccuracy you were talking about, plus you don't recover all of the energy from the flex). When you are accelerating the clubhead, it lags behind, bending the shaft. When you get to the contact point, it bends back, adding energy to the shot. The faster your swing, the stiffer the shaft has to be to "rebound" in time to be straight at the contact point. A stiffer shaft has a higher natural frequency than a more flexible one, and you essentially tune the frequency to your swing speed.
 
Consider an extremely long and perfectly calibrated scale. A car with a mass of 1000 kg is placed on it, and the scale registers this weight accurately. Now, suppose the car begins to move, reaching very high speeds. Neglecting air resistance and rolling friction, if the car attains, for example, a velocity of 500 km/h, will the scale still indicate a weight corresponding to 1000 kg, or will the measured value decrease as a result of the motion? In a second scenario, imagine a person with a...
Scalar and vector potentials in Coulomb gauge Assume Coulomb gauge so that $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A}=0.\tag{1}$$ The scalar potential ##\phi## is described by Poisson's equation $$\nabla^2 \phi = -\frac{\rho}{\varepsilon_0}\tag{2}$$ which has the instantaneous general solution given by $$\phi(\mathbf{r},t)=\frac{1}{4\pi\varepsilon_0}\int \frac{\rho(\mathbf{r}',t)}{|\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r}'|}d^3r'.\tag{3}$$ In Coulomb gauge the vector potential ##\mathbf{A}## is given by...
Thread 'Griffith, Electrodynamics, 4th Edition, Example 4.8. (First part)'
I am reading the Griffith, Electrodynamics book, 4th edition, Example 4.8 and stuck at some statements. It's little bit confused. > Example 4.8. Suppose the entire region below the plane ##z=0## in Fig. 4.28 is filled with uniform linear dielectric material of susceptibility ##\chi_e##. Calculate the force on a point charge ##q## situated a distance ##d## above the origin. Solution : The surface bound charge on the ##xy## plane is of opposite sign to ##q##, so the force will be...
Back
Top