Golf ball gets flattened

[hogan64]

is this real?????

Check out this vid and tell me what you think.
http://www.flixxy.com/golf-ball-slow-motion.htm

[TourBound3617]

that's amazing if it's real. i guess I don't see why someone would fake that...

[Man In The Miura]

C'Mon, Man!

That's so completely fake it's silly.

[Guia]

Bull******

[chri55]

Sadlowski swings at that speed. I've seen slow mo videos of his swing and the ball behaved nothing like that. I call BS.

[Relaxxx]

The video says 'BALL hits STEEL at 150MPH per hour.'
Not "Titanium golf club hits golf ball at 150 MPH"

This is a ball hitting a piece of STEEL at 150 MPH.
I still think the video is fake. The ball would have broken if it hit steel that fast.

[honketyhank]

Naaaaah. Foam rubber ball meets steel. Certainly not a TopFlite. Not even a ProV1.

[freshprince99]

anyone else notice the dimple pattern on that golf ball? it looked like one of those old one piece balls that were really cheap and really soft. i dont know about the physics of it, im sure any golf ball would compress, but im not sure any golf ball would flatten like that.

[hoganfan924]

I see no reason to believe that it is fake. You have to realize that a ball fired at a solid steel plate at 150 mph is a much higer energy impact than a light titanium driver swung at 150 mph at a stationary ball.

Here's the rough math/physics: Assuming that the ball rebounds at about 80% of the speed at which it approached the plate (coefficient of restitution), the change in velocity of the ball is actually 150 mph + 150*0.8 = 270 mph (because the ball changes direction). So this collision is analagous to the ball being hit with a 200 gm. driver with a non-compressible clubface (with a .83 COR) swung at approximately 180 mph (270 mph divided by 1.5 smash factor).

The fact that it is impossible to make a 200 gm. driver with a non-compressible face and a .83 COR means that the club would more likely have to be swung around 190-95 mph (about 1.4 COR) to achieve a 270 mph ball speed.

BTW, you guys that have never seen really high speed video would be amazed at what it reveals.

[Relaxxx]

[quote name='hoganfan924' timestamp='1296018605' post='2925390']
I see no reason to believe that it is fake. You have to realize that a ball fired at a solid steel plate at 150 mph is a much higer energy impact than a light titanium driver swung at 150 mph at a stationary ball.

Here's the rough math/physics: Assuming that the ball rebounds at about 80% of the speed at which it approached the plate (coefficient of restitution), the change in velocity of the ball is actually 150 mph + 150*0.8 = 270 mph (because the ball changes direction). So this collision is analagous to the ball being hit with a 200 gm. driver with a non-compressible clubface (with a .83 COR) swung at approximately 180 mph (270 mph divided by 1.5 smash factor).

The fact that it is impossible to make a 200 gm. driver with a non-compressible face and a .83 COR means that the club would more likely have to be swung around 190-95 mph (about 1.4 COR) to achieve a 270 mph ball speed.

BTW, you guys that have never seen really high speed video would be amazed at what it reveals.
[/quote]

But due to the characteristics of this ball(If they are what I think they are) the ball would shatter after the rebound from the wall. Around 5 seconds into the video. IF that ball is what I think it is, it wouldn't be able to handle the amount of pressure and it would either crack in half or shatter.

Please, correct me if I'm wrong.

[hoganfan924]

[quote name='Relaxxx' timestamp='1296019148' post='2925406']
[quote name='hoganfan924' timestamp='1296018605' post='2925390']
I see no reason to believe that it is fake. You have to realize that a ball fired at a solid steel plate at 150 mph is a much higer energy impact than a light titanium driver swung at 150 mph at a stationary ball.

Here's the rough math/physics: Assuming that the ball rebounds at about 80% of the speed at which it approached the plate (coefficient of restitution), the change in velocity of the ball is actually 150 mph + 150*0.8 = 270 mph (because the ball changes direction). So this collision is analagous to the ball being hit with a 200 gm. driver with a non-compressible clubface (with a .83 COR) swung at approximately 180 mph (270 mph divided by 1.5 smash factor).

The fact that it is impossible to make a 200 gm. driver with a non-compressible face and a .83 COR means that the club would more likely have to be swung around 190-95 mph (about 1.4 COR) to achieve a 270 mph ball speed.

BTW, you guys that have never seen really high speed video would be amazed at what it reveals.
[/quote]

But due to the characteristics of this ball(If they are what I think they are) the ball would shatter after the rebound from the wall. Around 5 seconds into the video. [i][b]IF that ball is what I think it is, it wouldn't be able to handle the amount of pressure and it would either crack in half or shatter[/b].[/i]Please, correct me if I'm wrong.
[/quote]

How do you know that?

I my experience with high speed impacts and ductile materials, fracture is both a stress and time phenomena. So while attempting to smash a ball that flat in a slow moving press would certainly crack it, that may not be the case in a high speed impact. The film itself (assuming it is a real ball, which I have no reason to doubt) is proof of that.

[Relaxxx]

[quote name='hoganfan924' timestamp='1296019600' post='2925414']
[quote name='Relaxxx' timestamp='1296019148' post='2925406']
[quote name='hoganfan924' timestamp='1296018605' post='2925390']
I see no reason to believe that it is fake. You have to realize that a ball fired at a solid steel plate at 150 mph is a much higer energy impact than a light titanium driver swung at 150 mph at a stationary ball.

Here's the rough math/physics: Assuming that the ball rebounds at about 80% of the speed at which it approached the plate (coefficient of restitution), the change in velocity of the ball is actually 150 mph + 150*0.8 = 270 mph (because the ball changes direction). So this collision is analagous to the ball being hit with a 200 gm. driver with a non-compressible clubface (with a .83 COR) swung at approximately 180 mph (270 mph divided by 1.5 smash factor).

The fact that it is impossible to make a 200 gm. driver with a non-compressible face and a .83 COR means that the club would more likely have to be swung around 190-95 mph (about 1.4 COR) to achieve a 270 mph ball speed.

BTW, you guys that have never seen really high speed video would be amazed at what it reveals.
[/quote]

But due to the characteristics of this ball(If they are what I think they are) the ball would shatter after the rebound from the wall. Around 5 seconds into the video. [i][b]IF that ball is what I think it is, it wouldn't be able to handle the amount of pressure and it would either crack in half or shatter[/b].[/i]Please, correct me if I'm wrong.
[/quote]

How do you know that?

I my experience with high speed impacts and ductile materials, fracture is both a stress and time phenomena. So while attempting to smash a ball that flat in a slow moving press would certainly crack it, that may not be the case in a high speed impact. The film itself (assuming it is a real ball, which I have no reason to doubt) is proof of that.
[/quote]

If it's the oldish two piece ball I think it is, it would have shattered or cracked. Back when I was in 9th grade, we went to a science museum and saw the impacts of high velocity. The scientist had an old top flite strata that he propelled at a piece of steel at 140 mph. It shattered. He didn't just do it one time. He went through 12 balls doing this.
But, like I said, if it isn't the ball I think it is, it might definitely be real.

[502 to Right]

Fake as a sold from China Scotty Cameron putter.

[LUMA]

Theres no way the ball could flex that way with that amount of energy and not shatter. It expands way to much for the materials it is made not to shatter of imo. I just dont see it happening.

It was cool none the less.

Text below the video states that the type of ball used is inconclusive - "[b]Can golf balls deform that dramatically? What you see in this clip is happening in less than 1/1000 th of a second. That's too fast for the human eye to perceive in detail, but a super-slow motion camera can capture it. [/b]Editor's note: The footage comes from the BBC and was shown during golf coverage. We were unable to establish whether a regulation golf ball or a 'practice ball' (with higher elasticity) was used for this experiment. It looks like a more flexible ball than the one Canadian golf champion Jason Zuback used to break the world ball speed record on the [url="http://www.flixxy.com/golf-ball-speed-world-record.htm"]Sports Science episode[/url], where he accelerated a golf ball to a speed of 328 km/h (204 mph). Wikipedia: [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golf_ball"]Golf Ball[/url]"

[g3333]

I agree that this is probably a foam practice ball.

This is supposedly a USGA test of a real golf ball at 150 mph. It compresses quite a bit, but doesn't pancake like the other one.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00I2uXDxbaE

[wescottlefty]

I am believing the second video over the one that the ball is almost all the way flat. That first video looked like a water balloon. If you search high speed camera footage on youtube there is a whole channel with all kinds of things being shot dropped rolled and exploded.

[mrikking]

OK someone get this to the Mythbusters!

[Snufles]

No wonder my putts don't roll properly.

[hogan64]

Just for the record, I am not claiming this is real or fake. a friend sent it to me and I immediately cried foul, but I'll be the first to admit that I don't know everything (that's an understatement) and thought it would fire up a nice debate.
Mission accomplished.
Yippie!

[honketyhank]

I gay-rahn-tee you, if you deformed any modern golf ball to the extent shown in the OP's linked video, it would be kibbles and bits inside and would go maybe 150 yds at most before falling like a shot duck. I think maybe an old wound ball with liquid center rubber core construction might (emphasize MIGHT) withstand such deformation, but I still would wonder about the cover. Huge localized deformation. Maybe. But I still think it is a foam practice ball.

I can believe the subsequent video.

And in response to a respondent's comment that materials tend to behave differently when time and load are taken into account together, I would agree, but say that in my experience, High load and short time = shock loading. Shock loading, in general, tends to produce brittle fracture as opposed to elastic deformation.

We are witnessing one of two things in that first video: 1) highly elastic behavior suggestive of something like foam rubber, or 2) complete and utter brittle failure of the guts of that ball with an elastic cover holding everything together though impact. In either case, it would not be a golf ball that could be even remotely successful commercially.

my 2 cents worth. 2 cents at a time could well add up. cheers.

[braydenboy21]

Something you don't see everyday!!!!!