Innovative Golf Putter

Innovative Golf Putter
Cody Jackson, Jeffrey Keenan, Corey Tillson, Victoria Thacher
Mentor: John Novotny
Liaison: Tyler Sullivan
1
Problem Statement







Improves consistency of short game performance
Complies with USGA regulations
Visual alignment cues
Generates pleasant sound
Generates pleasant feel
Aesthetically pleasing
Promotes smooth ball roll
-Topspin
-Decreased ball loft
2
Project Importance
 Putting accounts for over half the shots taken
in



a game of golf
BombTech golf released their first club in 2012
Putter will be crucial in branding BombTech
Ensure user enjoyment
3
Objectives and Constraints
 USGA Conforming





- Appendix II: Design of Clubs
Improved performance
Aesthetically pleasing
Machinable
Corrosion, temperature, and wear
resistant
BombTech color scheme
4
Background Research
 Examined all aspects of putter geometry
 Scholarly articles and research
 Looked at other top market putters
 USGA regulations
 Difficult to find competitors information
 MOIz and center of mass were crucial
 Sound and feel hard to estimate in
preliminary stages
5
Background Research
 Biomechanics of swings
 Alignment cues
 Psychological impacts of putting
 Yips, nerves, and the average terrible golfer
High
Contrast
Alignment
Cues
6
Requirements










COM < 8mm above the club base
COM > 15mm behind club face
MOIz approaching 5900 g cm2
Majority weight positioned on outer 25% of club
High contrast, distinctive alignment cues
Heavy head > 400g
Acceptable sound
Acceptable feel
Face angle 2°-3° degrees
Comparable results with market putters
7
Design Evolution
Phase 1 (August – October)
8
Design Evolution
Phase 1 (August – October)
 Phase 1 focused on Aluminum as primary
material
 Aluminum considered for potential machining at
UVM and lowered costs
 Considered using inserts in body and face
 Aluminum discarded in favor of carbon steel,
which is a higher quality putter material
9
Design Evolution
Phase 2 (October – January)
10
Design Evolution
Phase 2 (October – January)
 Phase 2 focused on carbon steel as primary
material
 Inserts were discarded as a possibility in favor of
a one-piece design
 Preferred design shown below
 Preferred design discarded due to high
machining and production costs
11
Design Evolution
Phase 3 (January – May)
12
Design Evolution
Phase 3 (January – May)
 Phase 3 focused on carbon steel as the primary
material
 Designs were created with consideration for
minimizing machining cost
 Distribution of weight to outer portions
dominated design themes
 Final design chosen by client as design best
suited for market and distribution
13
Final Design Overview
14
Final Design Overview




Precision CNC milled by Stephens Precision Inc.
One-piece 12l14 Carbon Steel Head
E-nickel plated
Dot peen engraved logos
15
z
Toe Side
50% of the club head
weight is on the outer
25% of club geometry
x
y
Heel Side
 Large MOIZ - 5850 g cm2
 C.O.M. located at 0.4 cm
above bottom and 1.7 cm
behing the face
 Increased sweetspot
 Mishit management
16
z
Hole in which center
mounted shaft is epoxied
Toe Side
x
Cut out added for
weight reassignment
and alignment
assistance
y
Heel Side
17
Face angle 2.5°
 Promotes topspin
 Reduces backspin
 Reduces skipping
Rounded bottom
 Helps with club
lies when player
rests it on the green
 Prevents digging
18
Hand-painted, bright
green alignment cues
19
Analysis
 Consistency Testing
 Initial Roll Characteristic Analysis
 Pilot/Qualitative Testing
20
Consistency Tests
21
Consistency Tests
 Determined dispersion of putts hit off the
center of the club, also known as the
“sweetspot”
 Velocity on off center hits decreases due to
energy loss as ball deviates from the center
point on face
 Lose of energy leads to putts that stray away
from desired target and travel shorter
distances
22
Consistency Tests
 Consistent pendulum-style putting rig
developed to produce constant, low error and
bias putts at a fast rate
 Radial dispersion distances of shots varying
from the clubface center compared to
determined optimal distance on shots off the
center of the face
 Three putters used for comparison – BombTech
Grenade, Odyssey Rossie, TaylorMade Rossa
23
Testing Rig
24
Test Parameters
 Three Putters
 Control set as average
distance and location on
shots from sweetspot
 One cm variations off of the
center: up to four
cm toward heel and toe
 20 trials per face location
 Results averaged and
variance/standard
deviation analyzed
25
Consistency Results
BombTech Grenade (Sweetspot Distance: 360 inches)
Face Location (cm off face)
Heel -- 4
Heel -- 3
Heel -- 2
Heel -- 1
Center -- 0
Toe -- 1
Toe -- 2
Toe -- 3
Toe -- 4
Average Radial
Dispersion (in)
Standard Deviation (in)
RDispersion/DSweetSpot
37.250
26.850
16.813
16.200
N/A
12.775
12.050
35.675
59.500
8.447
10.577
10.130
3.918
N/A
6.219
6.547
8.580
11.371
0.104
0.075
0.047
0.045
N/A
0.036
0.034
0.099
0.166
26
Consistency Results
TaylorMade Rossa (Sweetspot Distance: 359 inches)
Face Location (cm off face)
Heel -- 4
Heel -- 3
Heel -- 2
Heel -- 1
Center -- 0
Toe -- 1
Toe -- 2
Toe -- 3
Toe -- 4
Average Radial
Dispersion (in)
77.575
48.163
27.500
22.175
N/A
18.145
28.100
54.815
100.588
Standard Deviation (in)
RDispersion/DSweetSpot
10.700
7.940
7.210
8.430
N/A
10.630
7.870
9.670
12.130
0.216
0.134
0.077
0.062
N/A
0.051
0.078
0.153
0.280
27
Consistency Results
Odyssey Rossie (Sweetspot Distance: 348 inches)
Face Location (cm off face)
Heel -- 4
Heel -- 3
Heel -- 2
Heel -- 1
Center -- 0
Toe -- 1
Toe -- 2
Toe -- 3
Toe -- 4
Average Radial
Dispersion (in)
Standard Deviation (in)
RDispersion/DSweetSpot
132.458
86.163
57.920
31.855
N/A
17.030
22.798
64.053
110.588
10.670
13.090
14.470
16.150
N/A
8.490
15.150
18.980
17.110
0.380
0.240
0.170
0.090
N/A
0.050
0.070
0.180
0.320
28
Consistency Results
Analysis of Variance (One-Way ANOVA) of Normalized Consistency/Accuracy Test Data
BombTech Grenade
TaylorMade Rossa
Odyssey Rossie
Face Location
Standard
Standard
Standard
RDispersion/DSweetspot
RDispersion/DSweetspot
RDispersion/DSweetspot
(cm off face)
Deviation
Deviation
Deviation
Heel -- 4
Heel -- 3
Heel -- 2
Heel -- 1
Center -- 0
Toe -- 1
Toe -- 2
Toe -- 3
Toe -- 4
0.104
0.075
0.047
0.045
N/A
0.036
0.034
0.099
0.166
0.022
0.030
0.027
0.013
N/A
0.017
0.020
0.027
0.036
 One-way ANOVA used for analysis
0.216
0.134
0.077
0.062
N/A
0.051
0.078
0.153
0.280
 Predetermined level of significance
set at 5%
 Null Hypothesis: all mean
dispersion ratios are statistically equal
 Alternate Hypothesis: The mean
dispersion ratios statistically differ
0.029
0.026
0.020
0.024
N/A
0.027
0.024
0.026
0.032
0.380
0.247
0.166
0.091
N/A
0.049
0.065
0.184
0.317
0.032
0.051
0.040
0.044
N/A
0.026
0.042
0.056
0.047
Level of
Significance
(α=0.05)
1.306*10-36
1.949*10-20
8.087*10-18
3.027*10-5
N/A
0.103
5.379*10-5
2.949*10-8
1.276*10-17
 Significant reduction in dispersion
by Grenade compared to other tested
putters (Except at 1 cm toward toe)
 Comparable precision compared to
TaylorMade and increased precision
compared to Odyssey
29
Radial Dispersion Vs. Club Face Location
Ratio of Radial Dispersion to Ideal Distance From Starting
Point
0.4
0.35
0.3
0.25
BombTech
0.2
Odyssey
TaylorMade
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Distance from Center of Club Face: Heel to Toe (cm)
4
30
Initial Roll Characteristic Analysis
31
Test Parameters
 Automated testing rig used for consistency/
accuracy
tests used to ensure consistent trials
 500 frames/second high-speed camera
 Three putters
 Five trials per putter
 First ¼ turn determined to be representation of
pure roll
 Skipping, angular rotation, angular velocity, and
translational velocity examined
32
Initial Roll Characteristic Results
Normalized Results
Comparison of Normalized Time Parameter
1.40
Odyssey, 1.14
t(skip) / t(1/4 turn)
1.20
TaylorMade, 0.89
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
Grenade, 0.19
0.20
0.00
Putter
 Lowest time ratio indicates that the Grenade achieves pure roll the
quickest, while minimizing time spent skidding
33
Initial Roll Characteristic Results
Normalized Results
Comparison of Normalized Velocity Parameter
3.50
Odyssey, 3.00
TaylorMade, 2.91
ω(1/4) / V(1/4)
3.00
2.50
Grenade, 2.23
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
Putter
 Low velocity ratio indicates that the Grenade induced a lower
rotational velocity on the ball, thus less skidding and over-rotation of
the ball
34
Initial Roll Characteristic Results
High-Speed Footage
BombTech Golf Grenade Putter - Initial Roll Characteristics High Speed Camera
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyFuyrtW3ok
35
Pilot/Qualitative Testing
36
Test Parameters
 Survey created to gather independent tester’s
opinion on sound, feel, and appearance
 Portable putting mat set up in public space
(between Davis Center and Bailey-Howe Library) to
attract potential testers
 Three putters provided for comparison
 Project explained to tester’s, who were encouraged
to give honest feedback
 Surveys taken by friends of team members and
non-golfers discarded for accurate analysis
37
Pilot/Qualitative Testing Results
Results of Head to Head User Testing (n=10)
(Rating out of 10)
BombTech Grenade
TaylorMade Rossa
Odyssey Rossie
Sound
8.28±0.29
7.00±1.67
7.50±1.38
Feel
8.50±0.53
7.00±1.41
6.86±1.57
Appearance
8.29±0.83
7.43±1.81
6.43±1.90
 Not enough data points to perform full statistical analysis
 Low sample pool (10 golfers) does show initial opinion trends
 Sampling at a golf course would’ve been preferred, but local
courses had yet to open at time of testing
38
Issues With Testing
 Unable to test with truly comparable CNC, high
end putters due to monetary and availability
constraints
 Would’ve preferred to test different parameters of
putting – different impact points, shorter vs. longer
putts, variable green speeds
 Testing occurred on carpet and synthetic putting
mats due to poor conditions of local putting
greens
 Difficult to accurately calculate roll ratio due to
estimation of geometric parameters
39
Conclusions
 Putter exceeded expectations in the consistency
test
 ~50% reduction in radial dispersion
 Statistically conclusive data
 Roll testing clearly showed quicker production of
pure roll
 ~70% reduction in skipping
 Received nearly unanimous positive qualitative first
impression feedback
 Putter entered the market April 28th
40
Looking Forward
 Current design could be modified to produce a blade
style putter if BombTech desires
 The Grenade will be presented and used during
“Demo Days” at local golf courses
 Upcoming independent reviews
 Possibly see it in the hands of a pro on the PGA
Tour!
41
Acknowledgments and Thank You’s










BombTech Golf and Tyler “Sully” Sullivan
John Novotny and Jeff Frolik
Stephens Precision and Julian Stephens
UVM FabLab and Hunter O’Folan
UVM-CEMS Student Services
Karen Bernard
Catamount Country Club
Gonzo’s HD Sports
John Dow, GM of Golf & Ski Warehouse
All of our friends and family and their support
42
Questions?
#PullThePin
43