JR wrote:I got you. The problem is that i don't know if my eyes are good enough for measurement accuracy that JHern needs so how about it JHern?
JR wrote:I was thinking that a longer tube would be more accurate. Preferably from end to end but that may prove to be more difficult. Assuming half filling the tube looking at it trying to match the tube water level at the ends at exactly half height of teh tube's inner diameter is the most accurate way to do this. Unfortunately JHern needed quite a long measurement distance so the construction would get even more challenging and probably expensive.
JR wrote:NMTC: Dave Dunipace wrote on the PDGA forum that a disc stops spinning about between 20 and 25 seconds. The disc can still fly forward after complete stopping of the spin. If the HSS is good enough and the disc is aligned correctly relative to the flight path. And there's no wind to tilt the disc off of the direction of the flight. As to degrees of slope it's way beyond my knowledge at this point to calculate that for any given discs. And not many probably have proper data of the performance of any disc for that kind of calculations. The more height there is between the equilibrium flight path of the disc and the ground and the steeper and faster the disc is flying at when the spin stops the farther the momentum has the possibility of carrying the disc. It's another matter to which direction it will go.
I think the nose angle and the angle of attack(nose angle relative to the flight path) do influence the rotational momentum vs gravity. At least in that if you change the nose angle and angle of attack or keep them the same and adjust the steepness of the dive the vector of the gravity is gonna be different. Aerodynamic precession is something that needs to be looked at in conjunction with the previous things. Somebody else had better explain that.
Last winter i tried to putt with minimal arm motion and filmed myself obliquely from above and behind toward my practice basket. It is difficult to minimize spin. At best i got about a fifth of a rotation on putters flying for about 7' without wobble. Not only was it difficult to reduce the spin rate that much but it was even more difficult to do it simultaneously with a wobble free flight. My success rate was low with so low spin rates. I was able to increase spin rate without wobble to much higher success rates. I didn't write down or memorize exact numbers but the magnitude was almost one offs to IIRC one half rotation of the putter in that 7' of flight without wobble for like 50-66% range of attempts. With slight wobble the success rate went way up with half a revolution of spin to 7'. Had i trained more for one specific version of putting the success rate of both spin rates would have likely gone up. Neither way is or has ever been my normal putting motion. So the success rates should be higher for those using one or the other of the kinds of putts all the time. I had virtually no practice for either kind of putting motion then.
JR wrote:Wouldn't one need to account for the speed range where the disc ain't flipping or fading flying flat maintaining height and not vs falling under that speed and exceeding the cruise speed. I wrote speed range on purpose because some discs seem to maintain altitude flying flat at different speeds. What i mean is that aren't parameters a continuum that may not be linear across different speeds?
How about the Coriolis effect? =)JR wrote:As long as we are talking theoretical issues that may not be that visible in the accuracy of a throw:
Anode|ION|JOKERi|MD2|FD|TD|PD|LEGENDaParks wrote:If the posts on this forum are any indication, the PD is like a Teebird with sunshine coming out of its butthole so hard that it flies faster.
Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 2 guests