Designing and Manufacturing a Putter

[hebron1427]

[quote name='Headshot' timestamp='1316702444' post='3582350']
My 2 cents....don't weld the hosel to the putter body. Attach using a machine screw, and make the hosel out of lightweight material, like aluminum, and the body out of something heavier, like stainless steel. OR......don't even HAVE a hosel, just drill the hole at 90* and use a double bend shaft. That way all of the weight is in the head, and you have the face balance that you want.

I wish I had the skills you are learning.....I have 4 putter designs that I would love to make, so keep doing what you are doing. Who knows, maybe the next generation of GolfWRXer will be showing off pics of their putter made by you.....
[/quote]

if you have designs that you want to make, you should talk to lamont. he's made customs for a lot of people and can smooth out some of the details that you don't think about. there's one in the Good-Looking Putters thread that's completely off the wall that he did.

[hebron1427]

[quote name='Headshot' timestamp='1316702444' post='3582350']
My 2 cents....don't weld the hosel to the putter body. Attach using a machine screw, and make the hosel out of lightweight material, like aluminum, and the body out of something heavier, like stainless steel. OR......don't even HAVE a hosel, just drill the hole at 90* and use a double bend shaft. That way all of the weight is in the head, and you have the face balance that you want.

I wish I had the skills you are learning.....I have 4 putter designs that I would love to make, so keep doing what you are doing. Who knows, maybe the next generation of GolfWRXer will be showing off pics of their putter made by you.....
[/quote]

the problem with screwing it on is that, unless your tolerances are really tight on the threading interaction with the machine screw, the screw will eventually come loose. i know the guys at dog leg right have figured it out, but i don't know how. maybe it's using a set screw instead of a machine screw, but i really dont know. i can see a lot of problems with the twisting of the head torque-ing the screw out and loosening the hosel unless the tolerances were just perfect.

using a double-bend shaft is a good option if you just don't want to fool with it. however, i would say that you need to know which you're going to use before making the putter--otherwise, the balance will be off, and the COG won't be in the right place. In other words, don't start out thinking "i'm going to make this a plumber's neck, but if i can't get the weld right i'll just drill a hole."

Also, a few things i didn't mention before: 1) think about the weight of the head. "preferred" weight is going to be in the 330-350 gram area, although this is WIDELY subjective. It's something to know before going at it, though, as the dimensions you choose will determine the volume and, thereby, the mass. also, if you do elect to use different materials, account for that in your solid models so that you can estimate what the final mass and balance will be. 2) think about the sole profile. Although it should definitely have a draft angle front to back, you want to think also about how it will sit. will it have a tri-plane sole? will it be one radius? will it be mostly flat? 3) one thing that not many people mention that affects the balance is a concept called "high toe." in essence, the look of hte putter is beneficial if the toe of the putter sits a little higher than the heel. This also helps you put more mass on the toe to balance the head.

if you need help, ask questions, and be sure to show us your solid models.

[NP04]

Hey guys!


Thanks so much to everyone who has contribute so far, all of this really helps in my project. I just have a few more pictures of the equipment I will be using, as people have asked for them.

Here is the lathe, which I will be using (thanks LaMont) to create the hosel. There are a few pictures here:
[attachment=863514:SANY0052.JPG]

[attachment=863515:SANY0053.JPG]

[attachment=863518:SANY0054.JPG]


So I will probably be designing a Santa Fe hosel style, which I would weld on. Talking about welding, here is the one of the welding machines we have at school, the technician said this is probably the bestone they have. Can I weld using this one?

[attachment=863520:SANY0057.JPG]

Finally, I will be using this belt sander to create the sole grind, as I cannot do it on the milling machine:

[attachment=863519:SANY0055.JPG]


Thanks GolfWRX, you guys are awesome!

[sergizmo]

Hi Neal,

I want to make an initial suggestion before getting to the details. Make multiple putters instead of just one. You have 6 months and 400 pounds. If you want to study the differences from an engineering standpoint, it only makes sense to have different putters to evaluate real world. Start with a simple center shaft design first. It will also allow you to build on your skills.

hebron1427 and others have already given you great information on balance, toe hang, etc... so I won't get into that.

Some excellent intro videos can be found on the Glacern Machine Tools site. Look at the "Crash Course in Machining" videos.
[url="http://www.glacern.com/videolounge"]Intro videos[/url]

1) [b]Info from pics[/b]

The mill is variable speed which is great. You can set the spindle speed to whatever you want in the RPM range instead of having to choose from 8 different speeds as with the earlier Bridgeports.

The display on the mill is called a digital read out or DRO for short. It measures the actual position and movement of the X axis (side to side) and Y axis (front to back). Either or both axis can be zeroed at any position. It uses what are called glass scales to measure actual movement and is not tied or linked to the lead screws in any way. This is good, as lead screws have something called backlash. When a screw switches rotation direction in a nut (from clockwise to counter-clockwise or vice-versa) it doesn't engage immediately. There is a little bit of play to allow the screw to turn freely that gets worse over time. Usually this start's as about .010" and gets worse with use (.020" plus on older frequently used machines). So you can reverse direction and turn the hand wheel .010" graduation or more without the table actually moving. That's why DRO's are almost a necessity on a manual mill. The Z axis doesn't have a DRO, but that's OK. The weight of the saddle, table, vise, etc... (400-500 pounds) ensures that the Z is always on the "bottom" of the nut so there is really no backlash and the dial can be trusted.

The clamp on the table is a vise. There is a work stop on the right side of it. The work stop will allow repeatable clamping. The vise looks very old. It doesn't look like it will open up very far either, which could limit clamping options. Check yourself to see how far it will open. I don't think it will "pull down" like modern Kurt style vises. The nozzle is for what is called coolant. This cools the cutting tool, reduces cutting friction and evacuates chips. The mill should have a tank with a small pump somewhere linking to this hose and nozzle. If this works it will help improve surface finish and increase the life of your cutting tools.

The lathe does not have a compound slide that can be set at different angles. (at least from what I can tell from the pictures. You may want to ask about this). So turning a taper is pretty much out of the question unless you want to offset the tail-stock which is a real PITA. What this means in real terms is that making a shaft over neck is a no go and you should stick with shaft in neck. The rest of the lathe looks solid though.

2) [b]Tools you need to ask about[/b]

There are some tools besides the actual machines that need to be used in order to make a putter or machine anything really. You need to ask the owner/manager of the shop what tools he has available and what you can use. I'll break it down into consumable and non-consumable. Consumable is stuff that gets used up or wears out, non consumable doesn't (if used with care).

Non-consumable tools:
- Safety glasses (safety first)
- Welding mask and gloves (again, safety first)
- Parallels (for raising work up in the vise)
- Edge finder (for finding the edge of the workpiece and setting your zeros)
- Ground angle blocks (for setting the workpiece at various angles in the vise)
- Ground precision square (for checking squareness and help in clamping parts square)
- 1-2-3 blocks (helps with setups and measuring)
- "Test" dial indicator (to set up the vise square to the mill)
- Caliper; digital, dial or vernier (to measure your work)
- Surface plate with height gauge (another useful tool to measure your work)
- Files, both needle and standard size (For de-burring and help with edge rounding. Half round needle file is my most used file, both at work and at home)
- Collets and tool holders (holding cutting tools in the mill)

Consumable tools
- End mills (Will do the majority of the cutting on the mill. I'll get into this more)
- Drills (for drilling shaft hole)
- Cutting bits (for the lathe. Not expensive)
- Welding electrode and gas (You will be using so little of this I wouldn't worry about it. They should provide it free)
- Sanding belts (You may use up a belt or two)

You don't need all this stuff but the more you have the easier it will be. The shop should have the non-consumable stuff and be willing to let you use it. The files are kind of borderline consumable items as they do wear. If you have to purchase these I would suggest a 8"-10" warding smooth file and a med-fine needle half round file. You will probably have

3) [b]Cutting Tools and Materials[/b]

[i]Cutting tools[/i]
Your primary cutting tool will be end mills. Glacern video 8, choosing and using end mills.

I would recommend a single end mill type for simplicity. It will also allow you to bring an operation/stage to a finished dimension without re-zeroing the height, etc... Using a ripper and switching to a finisher would speed things up a bit but would add a new level of complexity and increased risk of error.

Something like this would work well. 10mm diameter, 4 flute TiAlN coated end mill with 38mm cutting length. Center cutting so you can plunge with it if you have to. The coating will extend tool life in all steels, not just harder ones.
[url="http://www.engineeringsupplies.co.uk/10mm-long-series-flute-tialn-coated-carbide-cutter-p-1347.html"]end mill[/url]

Stay away from sets of end mills. They are lower quality and you are paying for a lot of tools you will not use. Also, if you do buy your own end mills, don't lend them out. Trust me on this.

For drills stub length is preferred to jobber length for increased rigidity. Again, just buy what you need, not a set.

In terms of lathe tool bits the standard square HSS/cobalt pre-ground ones or brazed carbide ones in the appropriate size are fine. You want a RH cutter to turn from right to left. Check the lathe tool post to see what size of bit it takes.

For sanding I would suggest a coarse belt (50 grit) for roughing and rapid material removal and a fine belt (220 or so grit) to smooth it out.

[i]Material[/i]

Stay away from stainless. It is harder on tools and can be difficult to machine. Not for beginners and quite frankly a real PITA in general, especially on a manual mill.

Copper is very gummy and wants to pull instead of chip away when being cut. Tools have to be razor sharp and speeds and feeds pretty much perfect (tough on a manual mill). Also it is very expensive.

Brass is very easy to machine and provides great feel but being primarily copper based is expensive. Also it cannot be welded.

I would suggest free cutting steel/leaded steel. The designation here in North America is 12L14. It is the easiest to cut commonly available steel and is reasonably priced. Get cold rolled, not hot rolled. Smoother initial surface to start with. You could also go with 1018/1020 steel but 12L14 is easier to machine and is only slightly more expensive.

So you will need to buy the steel (flat bar for the head and round stock for the neck), end mill(s), drill(s), cutting bit(s) for the lathe and at least 2 sanding belts. You should have quite a bit of space in that 400 pounds to buy your own caliper if you want to.

There is going to be more about design, job planning etc... but for now that is enough to get you started.

Serge

Serge

[Mizgoodie]

if you are practicing. try some aluminum first. it really easy to mill ... will let you get a feel for the controls on the brigdeports if you use them. to cut straight remember to cut against your backlash in x or y on the machine depending on age and how often they get serviced.....


I would ask your school if they offer and G code or cnc programming classes.... ( that is how you can take your solidworks to machine code)



also look at the edgecam software.. just for fun that is what Bettinardi uses for some of his machines

[mgcfc]

This is a very interesting thread. A few things i was wondering which might help NP04 if someone could answer them.

[list=1][*]For a drafted sole what ange would you need? 2 degrees?[*]For an in hosel shaft what diameter should the hole be? should it be exactly .355 or .370? that's the outside diameter of the shaft isn't it?[*]For and over hosel shaft what diameter does the hosel need to be? and is it best for the part of the hosel than the shaft slips over to taper to a smaller diameter?[*]Does .355 or .370 shafts work better for in or over hosels?[/list]

[Topshelf01]

Great thread...I took a Machining class in 98/99 and this is bringing back tons of memories. I love working with my hands and clearly you do to. I would love to attempt a project like this but now lack all the tools. TAKE ADVANTAGE!!! One thing I would like to ask for anyone out there, Some putters have a woven milled face, meaning that the mill marks overlap but only every other mark how is this acheived without it taking hours to reverse the feed back and forth all the time?

[Wolsey]

Its done by milling the face with a fly cutter i believe.

[hebron1427]

Any update on this?

[KYMAR]

For real! I just came across this from your post hebron and was engrossed then POOF! Nothing. Hopefully the OP will give us an update.

So much great info in here, maybe it's me but I would be far more interested in watching a show about this (the engineering/design, through completion of a one off putter) than a good Half of the junk golf channel currently produces.

OP lets hear from you!

[moocherpix]

Some of my favorite threads are the ones that the little guys post with step by step photos of the work going on or how the piece looks at different stages.
I say it is time for another of these.
Serge? LaMont? Tom? Byron? Any of you guys listening?
Let's see another one of your gems come to fruition.
Just an idea,
Nick

[NP04]

Extremely sorry to everyone who has been disappointed. I did not realise the amount of other work that entailed with the A level I am taking (Engineering Extended Project), and for the Christmas term they were teaching us engineering concepts, equations etc. and the teachers told us we would start the work on the project this coming term. So I have unfortunately not done much outside of the lessons because of other schoolwork (doing 5 A levels is tough, as well as running societies and actually keeping up the golf). However, I have drawn up a few sketches, researched into limits/restraints into the size of the putter, materials etc. so I can get off to a quick start. I know like it sounds I am making so many excuses, but its true!

Anyway, I will definitely be devoting a lot of time into this in the next few months (after all I have to complete it by May), and it will be around 1.5 hours a day. This will virtually be my life for the next few months, and I can't wait. I aim to complete the CAD drawings by the end of this month, and get them printed on the 3D printer for visualisation purposes just after, then start on the actual milling beginning of February.

So this thread will have a lot more updates weekly, if not daily! I promise to get the sketches scanned and onto here by next week, and the CAD drawings by end of this month. I will also be filling in the research I have done, if any you are interested. There will be pictures, sketches, calculations, videos (maybe not a show production KYMAR, but you never know!) You can hold me to that promise!

I really appreciate everyone who has helped me so far, especially Serge, Hebron, Wolsey, Shaggyhawkings and Lamont, as well as all of you who are interested in the thread, I won't let you down! It feels really good knowing that there are at least a few people interested in the progress of the project, and want to here how its going (although I have disappointed). All suggestions, comments and criticism will be most welcome, and would really help me with the project.

So full steam ahead, no more long written posts/excuses from me, and just all goodness

[NP04]

A first update!!!

So for the last few weeks I have been using SolidWorks, and developing my idea. I found the software hard to grasp and put my ideas on computer at first, but just using it and 'messing around' on it improved my skills greatly, and anything I was not sure of I googled, and watched videos to learn how to do everything. I came up with this idea based on the principles of increasing perimeter weight, and wanted to create a mallet style putter head, but with a higher Moment of Inertia, and I somehow had the idea that increasing the perimeter weighting VS the weight near the centre of the clubhead would increase the MOI (is this true?). I have organised a lesson this Monday with my maths professor, where he will teach me how to calculate Moment of Inertia for simple models, so this might be of use, as we only learn Moment of Inertia next year for our syllabus.

Also, you might realise that the arc of the face is not a semi circle, the mass is more towards the toe of the putter. I did this as I thought the centre of mass should be nearer the toe without the hosel, then when I added the hosel to the drawing, the centre of mass will therefore move closer to the heel, in the plane of the centre of the putterface. Again, does this make sense, and should the centre of gravity of the putter be directly behind the centre of the putter face? I'm still not sure.

So here are the screenshots, I merged them into one picture to minimize the usage of my upload quota. Top left is a side shot, with the face of the putter on the left hand side. Top right is the isometric view. Bottom left is the top view. The orange dots in all screenshots is the centre of gravity. I found a really good tutorial on the internet showing how to locate the centre of gravity. As you can see, as I said before, at the moment the centre of gravity is nearer the toe. Once I add the hosel, hopefully this point will move near the centre of the face. Does anybody know whether you can set a wanted centre of gravity on Solidworks, and tweak your design to fit that?

[attachment=999157:neal golf.jpg]


So according to Solidworks, the mass of the putter thus far is 585.55g. This is way too high so far, but I have used the measurements for my putter for the face (115mm) (However this is a blade putter, and as I write am realising that the face of a mallet is smaller in length, so will have to change this.) I will reduce the mass by curving the base of the putter, but I don't know yet how much mass this is going to take away.

So tomorrow I aim to do the curve of the base, and add a hosel, and will hopefully update then as well.

All comments and answers are much appreciated!

Thanks

[golfluvzme]

I like it. It does not surprise me that the weight is high. When you start out, you have to learn just how much weight the metal will carry and that is exactly where you are at. You already know this, but the majority of your weight is coming in the form of your heel and toe "bumpers" being very pronounce and beefy. I like the look of them, so you might consider hollowing them out, from the bottom of the putter, if you don't want to change the overall dimensions. It looks like you could remove a great deal of mass without really having any effect on the look of the putter, from address.
You guys who can use SolidWorks or any of the other computer design software make me jealous. My only real tools in design are a Magic Marker, a level and a pair of calipers, LOL. I love what you guys are able to create in 3D. The information you gather from this type of work is priceless, IMHO.
Putter looks very cool, unique and will stand on its own as a one-off design. So far, so good.
Keep up the postings and I am looking forward to seeing this one play out.
Thanks,
LaMont in AZ

[NP04]

Thanks LaMont for the advice and comments!

I have looked at a few more mallet style putters, and it is clear the length of the face is not the same as a blade putter face. So I needed to change it, which I wanted to do without recreating the whole model. To do this, I changed the dimensions from just a constant to it being a number relating to a different dimension. So in total there are 8 equations I used for dimensions, all based around the length of the face, for example the distance from the front of the face to the back is - Length of Face / (115/60) - and so when I change the face distance, this length will change. I did this for 7 other dimensions.

So I changed the face from 115mm to 100mm, and this reduced the mass to 478.92g, which is again way too high. What I then did was to change the distance from the top of the face to where the slope starts from 5mm to 10mm, and now the mass is 417.41g. Hopefully once I curve the sole this will decrease to around 350g +/- 10g. I can always tweak some dimensions to change it if necessary. Hopefully LaMont, this will mean that I will not need to hollow it out, but I can always do that if the mass is still too high.

So I just wondered what everyone thought, does it still look as good with the distance at 10mm instead of 5mm? And also could anyone tell me about what options there are for the curvature of the sole, and what is the draft angle?

[attachment=999973:putterday2.png]


This took me a few hours to sort out the dimensions and sorting out a few errors that this brought up, so have unfortunately not got on to curving the sole or the hosel. I hope to do one of them on Monday, as I am playing golf all day tomorrow

Thanks

[jaskanski]

Thanks for keeping us updated.

The putter looks good - thankfully, you've gone for a design that is refreshingly different than the norm. Keep up the good work and keep thinking outside the box!

[hebron1427]

i think it looks great. I'll have to digest it a little more to give you more feedback.

one thing you definitely need to consider in your models, however, is how you are going to make this thing. You've done a good job putting together a lot of fairly straight lines to mill. but there are some spots were you're going to be really fighting your mill. For example, on the back side of the face, there's essentially a diagonal line where the back side of the face meets the bumpers. however, because of the flange sticking up at the back, you wont be able to end mill that. so, essentially, you're going to have to climb mill the back of the face, which will be hard to do with a bridgeport. Not saying it can't be done, but it will be work. Also, you wont be able to get a belt sander in there to clean it up, and climb milling doesn't look all that good.

Also, the curve on the outside will be hard to make on manual equipment. It will require a lot of shaping time on the belt sander. I think it looks great, just wondering how you might address some of these issues.

re your question with MOI, yes, MOI will be higher with the mass placed along the outside. MOI is something we covered in college physics (and onward into my degree), but every shape has its own formula for calculating moment of inertia--it's based partially on some linear algebra that is way above anything that should be discussed on a golf forum. However, the MOI of this putter will be closer to the moment of inertia for a ring than for, say, a disc, because the mass is pushed out to the periphery (like a ring) instead of evenly distributed throughout (like a disc). And, as you can see here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_moments_of_inertia), the moment of inertia of a ring (with all the mass on the outside) is half of the moment of inertia of a disc (with the mass evenly distributed) (explanation: look at I-z in the chart, the moment of inertia around the Z-axis).

let me know if yo uhave any questions.

[quote name='NP04' timestamp='1327772193' post='4167539']
Thanks LaMont for the advice and comments!

I have looked at a few more mallet style putters, and it is clear the length of the face is not the same as a blade putter face. So I needed to change it, which I wanted to do without recreating the whole model. To do this, I changed the dimensions from just a constant to it being a number relating to a different dimension. So in total there are 8 equations I used for dimensions, all based around the length of the face, for example the distance from the front of the face to the back is - Length of Face / (115/60) - and so when I change the face distance, this length will change. I did this for 7 other dimensions.

So I changed the face from 115mm to 100mm, and this reduced the mass to 478.92g, which is again way too high. What I then did was to change the distance from the top of the face to where the slope starts from 5mm to 10mm, and now the mass is 417.41g. Hopefully once I curve the sole this will decrease to around 350g +/- 10g. I can always tweak some dimensions to change it if necessary. Hopefully LaMont, this will mean that I will not need to hollow it out, but I can always do that if the mass is still too high.

So I just wondered what everyone thought, does it still look as good with the distance at 10mm instead of 5mm? And also could anyone tell me about what options there are for the curvature of the sole, and what is the draft angle?

[attachment=999973:putterday2.png]


This took me a few hours to sort out the dimensions and sorting out a few errors that this brought up, so have unfortunately not got on to curving the sole or the hosel. I hope to do one of them on Monday, as I am playing golf all day tomorrow

Thanks
[/quote]

[mgcfc]

Good to see you up and running again.

Regarding the weight have you lofted the face yet? from one of the pics it looks like you have but if not i would do this now so you don't get the weight to where you want it then have to remove more material.
As you have said i would also sort the curving of the sole including the draft angle - i assmue somthing like 2 degrees from flat but maybe lamont or someone could confirm.

Can i ask what kg/m3 you have set your material mass at in solidworks, make sure it is correct for the material you intend using so as to not undo or your good work later.

For the hosel you could use a straight in double bend shaft which would work well with your head style (something like a Scotty Kombi) and would mean drilling a hole in the head and so removing some weight. or if you want to weld on a neck just add a spud neck to avoid adding too much weight.

[oneunderbogey]

I know you said your instructor is going to tell you more about MOI and how to calculate it. The shape of your putter is pretty complicated though, and would take a lot of calculation to do by hand. Luckily for you this is why we have computers. In solid works when you have your object up go to tools > mass properties > moment of inertia. You want to know the moment of inertia for the axis perpendicular to the top of the putter face. And you will have your answer. I would still have your instructor show you how to calculate it by hand, because it will help you understand what the number means and how you can make it larger, and you will see how amazing Solidworks truly is.

[NP04]

Jaskanski - Thanks I took on board your advice in your first post saying to make it different, so thanks.

hebron1427 - Yeah, I was realising as I was designing it that it would be hard to manufacture :/ However, I was going through it with my professor, and he said to design it on SolidWorks to be a putter the best I can do without worrying about manufacturing on the Bridgeport, as he said in the end it is an engineering project so to concentrate on the geometry and physics. He then told me I can simplify the CAD design later so it is able to be made using the machine. I was thinking, however, that if it is too complicated to be made with the Bridgeport, I could send it off to a machinist to be made exactly (as long as it is able to be made on the CNC mill), as ideally I would prefer a putter in my hand I designed exactly rather than rough job. But hopefully I can make it very similar to the CAD design.

mgcfc - Yep, I have lofted the face at 4 degrees. Perhaps this is too much (?), but I can change it easily. As for the material, I assigned 'cast carbon steel' as I could not find the exact 'number' of steel. I do know, however, that it is 7800kg/m^3. As for the hosel, I think I'll try and do a Santa Fe, but will see how hard it is to do on SolidWorks. I want to add mass on the heel side to centre the centre of gravity (?!!), so can't really drill a hole.

oneunderbogey - Thanks! Saw the figures of MOI, but didnt really make sense to me, so will ask my teacher what they mean. My lesson is in 30min so in my next update I'll tell you how it goes.

Thanks guys for commenting


So I have curved the soles, done the sole draft and the curve of the bottom. It is now 371.77g, and after I add the hosel, it will be around 380-390g. This is obviously too much, so I will have to again change the size of the face, which I hopefully will do tomorrow, and shouldn't take that long. I will try to get a bit of the hosel done as well.

[attachment=1003239:curvedsolespublic.png]

So I used a constant radius for the sole curvature. Was I right to do this? And also, what should the inner diameter be for the hosel?

Thanks


Edit: I said I will change the size of the face. Just did so, reduced by 5mm to 85mm, and now the mass is 341.24g

[hebron1427]

[quote name='NP04' timestamp='1327939447' post='4178235']
Jaskanski - Thanks I took on board your advice in your first post saying to make it different, so thanks.

hebron1427 - Yeah, I was realising as I was designing it that it would be hard to manufacture :/ However, I was going through it with my professor, and he said to design it on SolidWorks to be a putter the best I can do without worrying about manufacturing on the Bridgeport, as he said in the end it is an engineering project so to concentrate on the geometry and physics. He then told me I can simplify the CAD design later so it is able to be made using the machine. I was thinking, however, that if it is too complicated to be made with the Bridgeport, I could send it off to a machinist to be made exactly (as long as it is able to be made on the CNC mill), as ideally I would prefer a putter in my hand I designed exactly rather than rough job. But hopefully I can make it very similar to the CAD design.

mgcfc - Yep, I have lofted the face at 4 degrees. Perhaps this is too much (?), but I can change it easily. As for the material, I assigned 'cast carbon steel' as I could not find the exact 'number' of steel. I do know, however, that it is 7800kg/m^3. As for the hosel, I think I'll try and do a Santa Fe, but will see how hard it is to do on SolidWorks. I want to add mass on the heel side to centre the centre of gravity (?!!), so can't really drill a hole.

oneunderbogey - Thanks! Saw the figures of MOI, but didnt really make sense to me, so will ask my teacher what they mean. My lesson is in 30min so in my next update I'll tell you how it goes.

Thanks guys for commenting


So I have curved the soles, done the sole draft and the curve of the bottom. It is now 371.77g, and after I add the hosel, it will be around 380-390g. This is obviously too much, so I will have to again change the size of the face, which I hopefully will do tomorrow, and shouldn't take that long. I will try to get a bit of the hosel done as well.

[attachment=1003239:curvedsolespublic.png]

So I used a constant radius for the sole curvature. Was I right to do this? And also, what should the inner diameter be for the hosel?

Thanks


Edit: I said I will change the size of the face. Just did so, reduced by 5mm to 85mm, and now the mass is 341.24g
[/quote]

a couple of quick thoughts:

first, there are ways to make this. I wasn't saying it couldn't be done, just that it might be more work. Climb milling the back of the face while end milling the bumpers is one way. another way is end milling the back of the face and making the flange as a separate part and welding the flange on. If it were me, I wouldn't want to send it out to be milled. JMO, using the machines is the most fun part of hte project.

second, try making a solid model of a golf ball and then making an assembly with the golf ball and the putter head. It will give you an idea of the size of the head relative to a golf ball. That'll be great for looking at some of the visual lines you have. a putter can look really good at a certain size and look very different when it's smaller or larger than expected. the only way to really be able to tell is to put a golf ball up next to it.

third, one thing you might try doing to reduce a little weight is angling the toe. there's no rule that says the toe of hte putter has to be straight up and down--and you'll see many examples where the toe is angled a bit. Visually, there is almost no difference to the user as long as the angle isn't too severe, and it can help you reduce the toe weight and high weight (move the COG both heelside and down a little bit), if htat's needed. ideally, the COG will line up with the impact point on the golf ball. Actually getting that to happen is a feat of engineering marvel.

Last, dont go too low on the weight. While you don't want to be at 500g (!), you also don't want to model it out to, say, 340 g and then have nowhere to go if you need to make a mod. Ask Lamont about this, but you can always take weight off--it's much harder to put it back on.


I'll have more as you keep going, but it looks good. nice to see a solidworks model again--it's been awhile since I did one lol.

[mgcfc]

I would have thought 85mm is a bit short from heel to toe. 95mm would be the shortest i would go. A weight in the 380/390 range would work well for a belly putter.

[hebron1427]

one thing i did think of, as well--you might want to a finite element analysis (FEM) or a frequency analysis to figure out if the resonance of the structure is in the audible range. God forbid you make this thing and makes a horrible sound when you putt with it. Solidworks has modules to do such analysis, but you'll need to talk to an instructor.

[oneunderbogey]

FEA in high school, good lord the fact that he has solid works in high school is already crazy to me. If he figures out how to do finite element analysis and actually understand it in high school I will me amazed.

Any progress on understanding MOI and what is the MOI of this thing anyways?

How does this compare to mass produced putters, blades, mid mallets and mallets?

Any progress on where you are going to college? Should be hearing back from college around now right?

[NP04]

Hi again!

Sorry for the long delay since the last post, mainly I was having problems with creating the hosel. I went through around 7 different ways of trying to do it before I finally came up with what I hope is a decent effort at a Santa Fe hosel. So I think the design is finished! (well nearly)

I needed an alignment aid, and came up with an idea. As you can see from the gaps in the drawing, there are two lines 3x3mm from the face of the putter to the back bumper. One is at the top, one is near the bottom. The top one will be white (not sure on material) bottom will be black. The idea is that golfers are meant to have their eyes over the ball. This way, if your eyes [i]are[/i] over the ball, then you will only see one line, the white one. If your eyes are too much over, then you see a bit of the black line above the white. Similarly, not over enough, you see the black line under the white one. This way, golfers can keep their eyes over the ball on the course, and without eye alignment training devices (eg. mirror).

As for the hosel, I made the outer diameter of the curved part 9.4mm in diameter. The first inner ring is 8.8mm. Are these the right dimensions? And is this the correct way to do that hosel? Also, the angle from the perpendicular line of the end circle on the hosel to the perpendicular line of the ground is 29 degrees, as I wanted the lie angle to be 71 degrees. Hopefully I've done that correctly. Another question to do with the hosel... I made mine so the offset is 1/2 a shaft length. Otherwise thats the only real dimension as I created the Swept Boss using a spline. Are all Santa Fe hosels certain dimensions, as in are they all the same? Or is there a defining characteristic of the Santa Fe hosel?

The mass (including hosel) is 368.69g.

The centre of gravity is 3/4mm out. If you've been following, I was hoping that when I change the curvature of the outside, the mass will change. It does, but the centre of gravity does not change in a systematic way. I think I'll leave the curvature when looking at the top constant, then raise the toe as someone suggested to increase mass there. I tried doing that, but it was hard :/ I'll try again tomorrow. Another question - Mallet putters aren't symmetrical when viewed from the top. This is to move the COG. Then why raise the toe? I thought raising the toe would move the COG...


Oneunderbogey - I had the Moment of Inertia lesson, which was interesting. What I learnt, is that there is an equation to generally increase the MOI, and the important part of it is to increase the distance from the axis to the edge of the putter (in this case), because this distance in the formula is squared. I will be doing a couple of 'experiments' on SolidWorks hopefully on Friday to test this. Also, which I guessed beforehand, increase the mass on the perimeter. As for the Solidworks MOI, I got the number out of the many (the Lzz number) so again I'll be testing to increase this. The numbers are below...

Moments of inertia: ( grams * square millimeters )
Taken at the center of mass and aligned with the output coordinate system.
Lxx = 323137.60 Lxy = -18389.59 Lxz = -26498.47
Lyx = -18389.59 Lyy = 353907.84 Lyz = 39272.74
Lzx = -26498.47 Lzy = 39272.74 Lzz = 120726.06

[attachment=1014655:Picture1.png]

This coming week, I break up from school on Thursday, so all of Friday and a bit of the weekend I'll be using SolidWorks and doing all the MOI tests. I'll also be modelling a similar but simplified Scotty Cameron to compare MOI. I am then going to Portugal to play golf for a week (a nice change to all the snow in England) and hopefully when I restart school I will be ready to print the model on the 3D printer

It's 00:20, so sorry if bits don't make grammatical sense, and now I'll finally be getting to bed :pSorry for all the questions, but I would really appreciate it if anyone could answer any of them!!



N.B The two images are not the same version. I did the bottom one when I was coming up with the alignment aids. I have yet to create the sticks for the top one.

[hebron1427]

[quote name='NP04' timestamp='1328661363' post='4234145']
Hi again!

Sorry for the long delay since the last post, mainly I was having problems with creating the hosel. I went through around 7 different ways of trying to do it before I finally came up with what I hope is a decent effort at a Santa Fe hosel. So I think the design is finished! (well nearly)

I needed an alignment aid, and came up with an idea. As you can see from the gaps in the drawing, there are two lines 3x3mm from the face of the putter to the back bumper. One is at the top, one is near the bottom. The top one will be white (not sure on material) bottom will be black. The idea is that golfers are meant to have their eyes over the ball. This way, if your eyes [i]are[/i] over the ball, then you will only see one line, the white one. If your eyes are too much over, then you see a bit of the black line above the white. Similarly, not over enough, you see the black line under the white one. This way, golfers can keep their eyes over the ball on the course, and without eye alignment training devices (eg. mirror).

As for the hosel, I made the outer diameter of the curved part 9.4mm in diameter. The first inner ring is 8.8mm. Are these the right dimensions? And is this the correct way to do that hosel? Also, the angle from the perpendicular line of the end circle on the hosel to the perpendicular line of the ground is 29 degrees, as I wanted the lie angle to be 71 degrees. Hopefully I've done that correctly. Another question to do with the hosel... I made mine so the offset is 1/2 a shaft length. Otherwise thats the only real dimension as I created the Swept Boss using a spline. Are all Santa Fe hosels certain dimensions, as in are they all the same? Or is there a defining characteristic of the Santa Fe hosel?

The mass (including hosel) is 368.69g.

The centre of gravity is 3/4mm out. If you've been following, I was hoping that when I change the curvature of the outside, the mass will change. It does, but the centre of gravity does not change in a systematic way. I think I'll leave the curvature when looking at the top constant, then raise the toe as someone suggested to increase mass there. I tried doing that, but it was hard :/ I'll try again tomorrow. Another question - Mallet putters aren't symmetrical when viewed from the top. This is to move the COG. Then why raise the toe? I thought raising the toe would move the COG...


Oneunderbogey - I had the Moment of Inertia lesson, which was interesting. What I learnt, is that there is an equation to generally increase the MOI, and the important part of it is to increase the distance from the axis to the edge of the putter (in this case), because this distance in the formula is squared. I will be doing a couple of 'experiments' on SolidWorks hopefully on Friday to test this. Also, which I guessed beforehand, increase the mass on the perimeter. As for the Solidworks MOI, I got the number out of the many (the Lzz number) so again I'll be testing to increase this. The numbers are below...

Moments of inertia: ( grams * square millimeters )
Taken at the center of mass and aligned with the output coordinate system.
Lxx = 323137.60 Lxy = -18389.59 Lxz = -26498.47
Lyx = -18389.59 Lyy = 353907.84 Lyz = 39272.74
Lzx = -26498.47 Lzy = 39272.74 Lzz = 120726.06

[attachment=1014655:Picture1.png]

This coming week, I break up from school on Thursday, so all of Friday and a bit of the weekend I'll be using SolidWorks and doing all the MOI tests. I'll also be modelling a similar but simplified Scotty Cameron to compare MOI. I am then going to Portugal to play golf for a week (a nice change to all the snow in England) and hopefully when I restart school I will be ready to print the model on the 3D printer

It's 00:20, so sorry if bits don't make grammatical sense, and now I'll finally be getting to bed :pSorry for all the questions, but I would really appreciate it if anyone could answer any of them!!



N.B The two images are not the same version. I did the bottom one when I was coming up with the alignment aids. I have yet to create the sticks for the top one.
[/quote]

tough to get to all of your questions in one post, so i'll do my best. one thing that i see, before i get going, is that you have created a square profile for your sight lines. while it's nice, i don't see how you're going to make the one on the bottom. it's almost impossible to mill a perfectly square hole. the one on top, you can come down it vertically and sweep across the top to make the inset for the sight light, but the one on the bottom will take more thought. i like the alignment aid idea, though, and i would recommend you consider filing a design patent (US) on it....lest one of the major manufacturers with no scruples try to take your idea.

the hosel looks fine, but it's not a santa fe (i.e., flow neck) hosel per se. this one seems to have little or not offset. maybe that's just the angle the screenshot is taken at. it can be set up however you want, and it looks good. i can't tell you about the dimensions, though. lamont would be the person to ask. of course, everything that we see here in the US is done in inches, so the MM refernce doesn't help me =)

when you say that the COG is 3/4MM "out," what does "out" mean? toward the toe? if so, you can stop trying to raise the toe. putting more mass on the toe portion will only serve to move the COG out that way. I'd suggest some kind of small port i the sole that you can do asymmetrically to both raise and move teh COG heelside, if toeside is what you mean by "out." it would also help you lower the mass from the almost 370g bohemoth you have. even getting it down to 360g is preferable. the purpose of raising the toe is twofold: first, it does help move the COG toeside a little bit; many designs have problems with the COG being heelside and various designers choose various ways to get it back closer to the center. it's also because a lot of players prefer the visual look of the toe angle coming up off the ground. many peopel putt with the actual putter toe sitting off the ground, so a high toe helps them keep the head down on the correct lie angle without sacrificing what looks correct.

hope all of that helps. that's all iv'e got for now.

[stuyellis]

I know this thread has been quiet for a little while now but do you have any pictures of the final product?