|
|
dwelltime |
Post Reply | Page <1 1314151617 19> |
Author | ||||||||||
zeio
Premier Member Joined: 03/25/2010 Status: Offline Points: 10833 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
Thank god. I've got someone who understands what's really happening. |
||||||||||
Viscaria FL - 91g
+ Neo H3 2.15 Blk - 44.5g(55.3g uncut bare) + Hexer HD 2.1 Red - 49.3g(68.5g 〃 〃) = 184.8g |
||||||||||
Sponsored Links | ||||||||||
AgentHEX
Gold Member Joined: 12/14/2004 Location: Yo Mama Status: Offline Points: 1641 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
I guess we've established you really do still believe 97.7% of the kinetic energy of the paddle has been transferred to the ball during the collision. No further comment is necessary. |
||||||||||
wturber
Premier Member Joined: 10/28/2008 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 3899 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
Exactly! If he simply meant something else he should just say so. We all mis-type/mis-speak or mis-read from time to time. if you simply goof, no big deal. Just say so and we can all move forward and put the thing behind us. And while doing the math is fine, it is not necessary. The simple fact that the racket continues to move after contact with about the same velocity that it had before contact is all the evidence you need lo know that it retains most of the kinetic energy that it had before contact. This is basic stuff I learned in my first year of high school. Or was it earlier? Not sure. |
||||||||||
Jay Turberville
www.jayandwanda.com Hardbat: Nittaku Resist w/ Dr. Evil or Friendship 802-40 OX |
||||||||||
zeio
Premier Member Joined: 03/25/2010 Status: Offline Points: 10833 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
Same here. It can't be helped if you truly think what happens after the collision must also be what's happened during the collision.
OTOH, don't try to cover up your dwell time opinion with that. |
||||||||||
Viscaria FL - 91g
+ Neo H3 2.15 Blk - 44.5g(55.3g uncut bare) + Hexer HD 2.1 Red - 49.3g(68.5g 〃 〃) = 184.8g |
||||||||||
wturber
Premier Member Joined: 10/28/2008 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 3899 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
You seem to be missing the point of what I've been saying. What I've been saying has nothing to do with the contact time. Zippo. Nada. Zilch. I took no issue with the idea that the vast majority of the energy that does get transferred to the ball occurs during the contact. That's obvious. Everyone gets that. The only other transfer methods possible would be ridiculously minor from things like air pressure, static charges and so forth. Even among this group, I can't imagine anybody being so silly as to consider those items as being important considerations given the context of this discussion. So yeah. Energy gets transferred during the collision. We all get that. No debate. But it is quite beside the point. My point was clear and simple. Most of the kinetic energy of the racket does not get transferred to the ball. Most of it remains with the racket. And I've made this point clearly and simply at least twice. Obfuscate as you wish, but at the end of the day there is no debate that most of the kinetic energy that the racket gains during the swing does not get transferred to the ball. That's the very simple and clear point that I made. Geez!! I now wish I hadn't. |
||||||||||
Jay Turberville
www.jayandwanda.com Hardbat: Nittaku Resist w/ Dr. Evil or Friendship 802-40 OX |
||||||||||
pingpongpaddy
Gold Member Joined: 06/27/2006 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 1286 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
are there any useful conclusions to be drawn by the ordinary player from this discussion?
|
||||||||||
inactive dotec carbokev
yin he galaxy 1 p ly FH moristo sp AX MAX bh moristo sp ax max |
||||||||||
wturber
Premier Member Joined: 10/28/2008 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 3899 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
No. |
||||||||||
Jay Turberville
www.jayandwanda.com Hardbat: Nittaku Resist w/ Dr. Evil or Friendship 802-40 OX |
||||||||||
tt4me
Gold Member Joined: 01/17/2013 Location: RC Poverty Zone Status: Offline Points: 1019 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
1. I think most of us agree the dwell time is much shorter that 4 ms that was suggested before. 2. Baal seems to be pretty sure we can't tell the difference 1ms dwell time and a 1.1ms dwell time. I think this is significant to most people think they want more dwell time for more spin but the question that remains is does the extra micro seconds of dwell time result in more spin. 2. The dwell time can be longer than 1 ms under certain conditions but no one has decided to tackle that problem. I think this is important because so many obsess about dwell time. 3. Lower CORs result in longer dwell time. I think this is intuitively obvious. 4. Tangential force or torque spins the ball. One can get the same amount of spin by using a low force over longer dwell time or a higher force over a shorter dwell time as along as the Force*DwellTime is constant. 5. I provided some high speed videos so that people can see for themselves and stop arguing but we can see it hasn't made any difference. @pingpongpaddy, I said at the beginning I knew what the dwell times are ( high speed videos plus I can do the math to make pretty good estimations ) and it really didn't affect how I play or what I buy. I don't see why some are so obsessed about this. I look at this more from and engineering curiosity point of view. I have no idea what mercuur is going to do with all of this information. |
||||||||||
Tassie52
Gold Member Joined: 10/09/2010 Location: Australia Status: Offline Points: 1318 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
1. wturber is usually correct - except in this instance. There are useful conclusions to be drawn, such as: 2. Some people believe that more posts equals useful posts, and 3. Point 1 trumps point 2. |
||||||||||
wturber
Premier Member Joined: 10/28/2008 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 3899 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
Yeah. It was supposed to be a humorous exaggeration. :^) |
||||||||||
Jay Turberville
www.jayandwanda.com Hardbat: Nittaku Resist w/ Dr. Evil or Friendship 802-40 OX |
||||||||||
bluebucket
Platinum Member Joined: 02/20/2011 Location: 16 Status: Offline Points: 2882 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
Well it's blatantly obvious slower more flexible blades make more spin, why? does it really matter?. As you get older and see more things you realise most experts know very little about the field they are in and most explanations are nothing more than guesswork. In the end we know slower blades make more spin so it's nothing more than casual chit chat to talk about why or how :D
|
||||||||||
tt4me
Gold Member Joined: 01/17/2013 Location: RC Poverty Zone Status: Offline Points: 1019 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
No, and I made it very clear earlier.
Did you look at the high speed videos? The high speed videos makes it easy to verify assumptions are in a valid range. So who is guessing? |
||||||||||
AgentHEX
Gold Member Joined: 12/14/2004 Location: Yo Mama Status: Offline Points: 1641 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
While zeio isn't exactly unfamiliar with backtracking, if this were the case here he wouldn't have made the quite clueless statement highlighted above well after your rather clear posts. Backtracking involves rationalizing prior errors, not committing egregious new ones. |
||||||||||
AgentHEX
Gold Member Joined: 12/14/2004 Location: Yo Mama Status: Offline Points: 1641 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
To expand slightly on why I expounded on various types of students to explain this situation, generally in industry where being right matters the former group who grasp the concepts are best sorted into creative/design type roles, while the latter are fit for menial work assigned by the former. This is an important and valuable distinction to make even outside a professional capacity in places of limited context like the internet, because there's a vast difference in reliability of info presented by the two. |
||||||||||
mercuur
Super Member Joined: 01/06/2004 Status: Offline Points: 384 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
High speed video,s decrease both accelleration and decelleration. That gives the out of space illusion : aerodynamic decelleration is decreased, gravity influence is decreased.
Most here have seen astronauts in spaceships in realtime movies and can then recognize this from this glassplinter video. Logic when A and D have sec^2 in a unitnotation and frames per second is manipulated for slow motion effect. Different camera rates and/or slow motion and/or display rates will give various values. Never look at slow motion videos of proplayers and try to learn from it for tt (or advice this to someone) would be one thing I learned then. (I had a tt book in the seventies with all photographs taken of a player demonstrating a topspin stroke and all that without a ball as if it where ballet. No idea what rate the photo,s where taken and wether I learned from it or not. I learned tt from thinking tabletennis for sure. Very little from thinking about tabletennis.). Edited by mercuur - 09/23/2013 at 9:00am |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
tt4me
Gold Member Joined: 01/17/2013 Location: RC Poverty Zone Status: Offline Points: 1019 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
No, the values will be the same within the quantizing of the sample time. When something moves x pixels per frame you have to multiply that by mm per pixel and seconds per frame to get the mm per second.
This is so very wrong. Higher frame rates provide more information which is good if you know how to interpret it. You simply don't understand what you are seeing or don't no how to apply what you are seeing to the real world. I would like to video my coach serving. My coach has wickedly deceptive serves that look pretty much the same. One could easily see the difference between the serves with a high speed camera. I would learn a lot from this. I would like to video the serve scenario where the paddle is moved horizontally and the paddle itself is horizontal. I would compare that to the calculations. One would be able to see the ball not spinning at first and then after impact one could look at the ball spinning and its horizontal speed. One could figure out how the energy is divided between the transitional energy and rotational energy. I deal with motion and motion control every day. We provide a means for out customers to capture data at rates up to 4KHz which is twice rate of the high speed videos. We can gather position, velocities, accelerations, pressure, forces, etc as a function of time. Most people have a difficult time understanding what they are looking at at first and some never catch on. The reason why we provide this is because most people will look at an event and what they think they see is not what really happened when you look at recorded data. When you deal with this day after day you get a little tired of people telling you what they think they see or feel or hear when you have recorded evidence shows what they perceive isn't so. mercuur, if you had a high speed camera at your disposal and used it enough you would feel the same way I do.
That is the fault of the author, not the high speed camera. I always posted the frame rate because I know it is important.
?????? Makes no sense. |
||||||||||
AgentHEX
Gold Member Joined: 12/14/2004 Location: Yo Mama Status: Offline Points: 1641 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
mercuur is just jelly that zeio has outdone him for a moment.
|
||||||||||
Tassie52
Gold Member Joined: 10/09/2010 Location: Australia Status: Offline Points: 1318 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
Thank you for confirming my second point. |
||||||||||
AgentHEX
Gold Member Joined: 12/14/2004 Location: Yo Mama Status: Offline Points: 1641 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
Just because something isn't useful to you doesn't meaning it's not useful. The world is likely full of such things.
|
||||||||||
bluebucket
Platinum Member Joined: 02/20/2011 Location: 16 Status: Offline Points: 2882 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
+1
|
||||||||||
tt4me
Gold Member Joined: 01/17/2013 Location: RC Poverty Zone Status: Offline Points: 1019 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
Then why are you reading this thread? |
||||||||||
Tassie52
Gold Member Joined: 10/09/2010 Location: Australia Status: Offline Points: 1318 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
IIRC, the question I am responding to is:
There's lots of interesting discussion, some thinly veiled insults, and a huge amount of mathematical argument, but not one jot of it makes any difference when anyone (the calculating genii included) picks up a bat and steps up to the table. And before you want to know why I bother to read the thread, I'm only here to help boost the number of posts towards 500. |
||||||||||
AgentHEX
Gold Member Joined: 12/14/2004 Location: Yo Mama Status: Offline Points: 1641 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
What's amusing is that I was prolly the only person other than tt4me to write about the practical implications of this, but didn't get any other replies to that post despite the subsequent whining. This thread also reasonably established once and for all the folly of considering a blade's dwell as a meaningful metric.
What's even more comedic is that for all zeio's confidence about this and prior threads, his mistakes here are by far the most atrocious and he still can't figure it out despite very directed pointing at them. All things considered, humor has its own value even if you didn't find the technical part interesting. Edited by AgentHEX - 09/24/2013 at 1:57am |
||||||||||
tt4me
Gold Member Joined: 01/17/2013 Location: RC Poverty Zone Status: Offline Points: 1019 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
I was criticized for dismissing this thread early on. None of this makes any difference to the average player yet many ordinary players seem to be obsessed with dwell time. This can't be denied.
I agree that it shouldn't make much difference but I say again, you can't deny there are many obsessed by a few extra microseconds of dwell time. There are all many that think that accelerating through the ball is good. While I agree it does increase dwell time for the most part it is only micro seconds.
Actually, back when this thread began I made a post to Fatt saying I would participate if he would screen out all the 'noise'. I got no reply, I think he must have been 'burned out' by then. So I decided to take a chance. I am very disappointed that this thread will be out of sight and out of mind once it scrolls down the bottom of the post list and that there is so much 'noise' that no one will bother to read it all. I think the high speed videos are useful because NOW YOU KNOW. There will be no more nonsense about long dwell times under normal conditions although I am still trying to get somebody to tell us under what conditions the dwell time can be extend. Edited by tt4me - 09/24/2013 at 3:02am |
||||||||||
AgentHEX
Gold Member Joined: 12/14/2004 Location: Yo Mama Status: Offline Points: 1641 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
If you filter out the noise this thread'll literally be like one page long but also far less entertaining.
|
||||||||||
mercuur
Super Member Joined: 01/06/2004 Status: Offline Points: 384 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
Thats mm /sec. A mm/ sec change needs at least three fremes. http://www.mijnbestand.nl/Bestand-WUP7FSWMBORN.bmp. Change of aerodynamic decelleration (higher velocity higher decelleration) would need a minimum of even four frames for aerodynamics study of a celluloid ball because the decelleration decreases with a decreasing velocity. So maybe that explains the out of space resemblance for the breaking lamp video ? When someone knows my thinking is fault or comes short (I,m certain for that) I.m all open for a better explanation to that resemblance. Has it to do with the more uniform accelleration from gravity compared to aerodynamic decelleration for instance ? The resistance of a thick soft "aery" spongerubber (for as far as the ball penetrates the rubber/sponge) resembles the resistance in a viscous medium somewhat. That compares with aero dynamics. So an approach from that angle is another possible approach. Difference is that it has a medium with increasing density. With a constant density for a medium decelleration decreases with lesser velocity (as it increases with higher velocity). Increasing density does the opposite. That way a spongerubber has a more gradual decelleration as ox rubber. Sponge thickness, - density, impact,, bladeflex, blade softness/hardness,, topsheet soupplesse all affect this. So (to the "know it alls" here) give a few dwelltime related tips to readers what sponge thickness, density, bladeflex variation all do for this then. Like what does the additional "give" from a more flexible blade (larger amplitude) do for this ? Or what does it different then the give of a soft sponge for this ? When this thread means nothing for most forum readers you, instantly knowing how to correct others, should be able to make it more meaningfull instead of almost blaming me for starting it. Edited by mercuur - 09/24/2013 at 7:02am |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
tt4me
Gold Member Joined: 01/17/2013 Location: RC Poverty Zone Status: Offline Points: 1019 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
Calculating the speed only requires two positions and the time between them. This should be basic. If I have 3 frames I can do a better estimate.
No, only 3 frames are required.
I went to the link but didn't download anything. I can't answer this.
A spring with a damper is the usual model. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damping
Yes the spring compresses. You can look at that has increasing density. Most examples ignore this fact so this is a good realization for you. What most examples don't take into account is that the mass of the spring must be moving too and the mass of the spring must be taken into account but there is a way of doing it without worrying about the density. I won't go through the math here but the effective mass of the spring is 1/3 its true mass. So if you consider that a tt ball may compress 1 cm^2 of rubber and we know the mass of the 1 cm^2 is about 0.2gm then 1/3 of 0.2gm must be added to the mass of the ball when calculating how the ball decelerates and accelerates during impact. I realize that the whole 1 cm^2 is not being compressed equally.
This isn't clear.
OK.
This has already been done above. Softer, slower and more flexible result in longer dwell times. Take this to an extreme and you have an inelastic collision where the ball and paddle will be moving at the same speed and in contact after impact.
But the conclusions above are ones we already know. I will make this clear again. I have known for quite a while how long the dwell times can be and under what conditions. I have the high speed videos and I can do the math. My interest in this topic is one of an engineer, not a tt player. I can understand why most of the forum doesn't care. |
||||||||||
wturber
Premier Member Joined: 10/28/2008 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 3899 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
Maybe he's EXTRAordinary. :^) |
||||||||||
Jay Turberville
www.jayandwanda.com Hardbat: Nittaku Resist w/ Dr. Evil or Friendship 802-40 OX |
||||||||||
tt4me
Gold Member Joined: 01/17/2013 Location: RC Poverty Zone Status: Offline Points: 1019 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
I didn't see this earlier.
You can't point out what part is wrong can you? You are reduced to name calling now just as before. You still think you can fool the rest of the forum as before? I think the moderators should moderate you unless you can justify what you say about ignorance. I am waiting. It would be more fun to do this on an engineering forum though where all can have a good laugh. I don't think many care here except AgentHex likes the entertainment value. |
||||||||||
mercuur
Super Member Joined: 01/06/2004 Status: Offline Points: 384 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||||||||
The last part is more relevant for tt then first long part. (not meant to shout )
The faster you drive on a bike the higher the decellerating force from driving wind. The velocity kept as a constant uniform speed has a balance of accellerating and decellerating forces. Thus also for decelleration and accelleration in geometry. Say this is a bike at constant speed on a Dutch flat road. : <---------- x -----------> Vectors for accelleration and decelleration in opposite direction are even for geometry so it has a uniform speed. Same as in an elevator going up with gravity and liftforce. F= Ma hence A=F/M (up) and F=Mg : g=Fz/M (down). Going upward g is a decelleration to that for geometry to the velocity for lift with or without people in it. The weight force the people feel as normal weight on their feet works inside the system (lift + people) and has no additional influence on accelleration when the passagers weight is allready taken in account as part of the total weight for lift plus people. For the lift engine to pull up this weight force (as experience) this experience has no meaning in technical sense. Not for uniform velocity and not for accelleration or decelleration with experiencing more or less weight, It makes more sense in notation (for yourself) when consekwently using a D for A when it,s from a decellerating force to the velocity (with vector) and an a when it,s from an accellerating force. Or A(a) and A(d) can do or (A-) and A(+). The wind is to a bike what gravity is for an elevator. It can have four types of vector then for geometry of accelleration on one workingline : ----Accelleration----> , <---Decelleration.----- , <--- Acc------- , -----Dec--->.. A child can distinct between these four when driving a bike and doesn,t need Physics for that. Even against a decellerating wind it,s often possible to accellerate offcourse. Then it has ----Aa----> + <--Ad- = --A-> as resultant accelleration for instance. A shorter accelleration for kinetic geometry as resultant of a decelleration and accelleration in opposite direction. A push from mothers or on the pedals (accelleration), a frontal wind (decelleration) and driving from home and back home for direction with both of these in both direktions, Turning the neg and pos for direction while the kid's at school would not have it come home again. Can,t adopt the mathrule that all numbers are positive for decelleration and accelleration (or use a lot of minusses to compensate).
Sponge compression compares to a viscosity increase for something moving into/through a medium (gas. fluid or solid). For decelleration a brakesystem works constant (W=constant) when it has a constant force. With decreasing speed it keeps doing same work per second but with much less energy, Brakes can even melt at high speed or burn but don,t do more work then per second as at lower speed. It has decreasing distance/sec (velocity now not speed) for the brakeforce to work the longer it wirks. That,s why the energy per second becomes lower with still doing same work per second. When energy per second becomes lower decelleration to the velocity per meter decreases with lower speed. Likewise as experiencing a much stronger force from wind driving at higher velocity on a bike. Work per second that this wind does to the bike (or opposite) (FS/sec) is the same but not work per meter and also not FS/T.. When T > sec FS/T < FS/sec and T<sec FS/T > FS/sec. This is the reason why energy and work must be distincted. So work on the ball (bat outside the system) and energy for the bounce and decelleration, rel speed (bat plus ball) is totally different from that. You can,t use part of the energy in the system for the bat to do work as on another system. That,s like trying to speed up a sailboat with a ventilator in the boat forgetting that the ventilator is on board of the ship and investing energy can not do work then. That,s also why unitnotation always belongs between brackets for physics. Not E=10 Joule as if 10 joule work but W=10 (J) E = ? or vice versa. As if Joule is more then a unit. The paddle/clamp floor can be seen to do work to the ball while energy adressed to and for the collision. That,s a choice of system to have a reactionforce do work then. But the actionforce from the ball can,t do the same work also then. That would be double work from same energy ; both actionforce and reactionforce doing work. When that would work (action and reactionforce both doing work for accelleration) throwing pingpongballs balls to the frontwindow of a car while driving to a gym would also accellerate the car. You won,t do that because you kbow it won,t work so why do it here ? With a low cor it has more work to decellerate a ball more as with a high cor while it has same energy for the collision. Not more energy and same work (or irrelevant). The ball does no work then to the paddle as it stays in the hand or vice at same position. The paddles reactionforce does work on the ball during the tensioningphase. Lost energy for kinetics maybe but not at all for playing tt. The more or most interesting part for tabletennis. In-elastic collision does not say the parts are less or more elastic (even a piece of paper recovers to original shape after bending so fully elastic) or even degree of resilience for the parts (plus ball) alltough that plays a role. Dwelltime matters for this in a different way. As on the toxic five video. It shows the blade has not rebounced full the moment the ball jumps off. It rebounces mostly with the ball allready on it's way. Clearly visible and trusthworth also. So the blade is all resilient but not the bounce. The natural resilience of the ball is just quicker then the paddle. The rendition of resilience is low from lack of resonation. But same blade in your hands with enough skill will have much better resonation for a flathit. It,s in your hands to make it a faster or slower paddle. It,s the idea of gears for a racquet to what extend this can be varied. Fastest blades don,t allow much variation, Slower blades lack a top gear because to achieve resonation is more difficult. To some extend skill can compensate this for a higher gear but only to some extend. Likewise on a swimmingboard for diving. Jumping off the moment the board has a large downward amplitude leaves the plank and energy behind in the board with heavy all resilient residue vibration as result. Just not effectively resilient for the bounce, Players influence the effectiv resilience for the bounce this way making the racquet slower or faster. (that,s why these speed numbers for blades and rubbers are idiot just as cor numbers would be). One can interrupt/break the resonance to slow down and control a ball or aim for maximum resonance for maximum accelleration. Tt players do this probably unconscious in the sense of not aware of the physics but they do it and, in tt sense, all conscious of what they do. Edited by mercuur - 09/25/2013 at 12:28pm |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
Post Reply | Page <1 1314151617 19> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Forum Home | Go to the Forums | Forum Help | Disclaimer
MyTableTennis.NET is the trading name of Alex Table Tennis Ltd. |