do static weights really matter? bowl expo monday, june 27, 2011
TRANSCRIPT
Do Static Weights Really Matter?
Bowl ExpoMonday, June 27, 2011
SR
- R
a
On
-La
ne
CO
F
SR
- R
S
Dry
La
ne
CO
F
Oil
Ab
sorp
tion
RG
To
tal D
iffe
ren
tial
Sp
in T
ime
Dia
me
ter
Sid
e W
eig
ht
Int.
-Diff
Oil
@ 3
2'
Ro
om
Hu
mid
ity
Oil
@ 8
'
To
p W
eig
ht
Ro
om
Te
mp
.
Th
um
b W
eig
ht
La
ne
Te
mp
.0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
x-variable Influence on Overall Ball Motion
X- variables
Wei
ghte
d Po
ints
bas
ed o
n P-
Valu
e
From Ball Motion Study
Ball Path
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65
Feet
Bo
ard
s
Skid
y = -mx + bHook
y = ax2 + bx + c
Roll
y = mx + b
Full Factorial Designs
# of runs = 2k
• 6 Factor Full Factorial• 26 = 64 runs
Fractional Factorial Designs
# of runs = 2k – n
• 6 Factor Half Fractional• 26 – 1 = 32 Runs
• Sparsity of effects principle• Higher order interactions are very rare
• Resolution 6• Main Effects confounded with 5-way• 2-way confounded with 4-way, 3-way• 3-way confounded with other 3-way
Resolution and Confounding
6 Factor – Half Fraction DOE 26 - 1
A center point was also ran.
6 Factor – Half Fraction DOE 26 - 1
From Ball Motion Study
Ball Path
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65
Feet
Bo
ard
s
Skid
y = -mx + b Hook
y = ax2 + bx + c
Roll
y = mx + b
6 Factor, Half Fraction DOE
6 Factor, Half Fraction DOE
6 Factor, Half Fraction DOE
6 Factor, Half Fraction DOE
6 Factor, Half Fraction DOE
6 Factor, Half Fraction DOE
6 Factor, Half Fraction DOE
6 Factor, Half Fraction DOE
Our Understanding of Ball Motion
Side
Top/Bottom
Finger/Thumb
-5.875 5.875-3.75
3.75
3.75
-3.75
-1 -
3 3
1-1
1
Phase II – Response Surface Design
• Factorial Design
• Center point
• Axial Points
3 Factor Central Composite Design
Test Ball Data
3 Factor Central Composite DOE
0 10 20 30 40 50 600
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
f(x) = − 0.0155288615067752 x² + 1.62725345816014 x − 34.7536766914041R² = 0.99878208633875
f(x) = 0.0622499999999999 x + 4.84525R² = 0.958358451194064
f(x) = 0.0165370046620046 x² − 1.01190792540792 x + 21.1442403846153R² = 0.979386018123757
f(x) = − 0.446857142857143 x + 16.3912857142857R² = 0.996491842714458
Ball Motion
FEET
Boar
ds
0 10 20 30 40 50 600
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
f(x) = 0.522706714612398 x − 15.2116230016914R² = 0.999306081365045
f(x) = 0.0222023809523808 x² − 1.41934523809523 x + 26.8900595238094R² = 0.983032613052637
f(x) = − 0.474857142857143 x + 16.4491428571429R² = 0.996004210648723
Ball Motion
Feet
Boar
ds3 Factor Central Composite DOE
0 10 20 30 40 50 600
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
f(x) = − 0.00816951825918429 x² + 0.808199257830348 x − 13.9947475423809R² = 0.989587936589872
f(x) = 0.0474999999999999 x + 3.83250000000001R² = 0.93041237113402
f(x) = 0.00906994047619032 x² − 0.611547619047608 x + 15.5716741071427R² = 0.924087739790673
f(x) = − 0.388319672131148 x + 15.6756967213115R² = 0.992906746808845
Ball Motion
Feet
Boar
ds
3 Factor Central Composite DOE
Influence to Overall Ball Motion - Central Composite
Ball Path
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65
Feet
Bo
ard
s
Skid
y = -mx + bHook
y = ax2 + bx + c
Roll
y = mx + b
Terms
ABC
AABBCCABACBC
Intended Path at 49’
XXX
Intended Path at 60’
XXXX
Average Path at 49’
XXXX
Ball Path
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65
Feet
Bo
ard
s
Skid
y = -mx + bHook
y = ax2 + bx + c
Roll
y = mx + b
Terms
ABC
AABBCCABACBC
Vel Dec at 49’
XX
Δ in Angle to HP at 49’
XX
1st Transition
XX
X
Ball Path
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65
Feet
Bo
ard
s
Skid
y = -mx + bHook
y = ax2 + bx + c
Roll
y = mx + b
Terms
ABC
AABBCCABACBC
2nd Transition Skid Slope
X
X
Roll Slope
XX
Ball Path
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65
Feet
Bo
ard
s
Skid
y = -mx + bHook
y = ax2 + bx + c
Roll
y = mx + b
Terms
ABC
AABBCCABACBC
Total Angular Displacement
XXX
X
Hook Length A Score
XXX
Ball Path
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65
Feet
Bo
ard
s
Skid
y = -mx + bHook
y = ax2 + bx + c
Roll
y = mx + b
Terms
ABC
AABBCCABACBC
Breakpoint
XX
1st Transition to BP
XX
X
2nd Transition to BP
“Center Point” AnalysisWithin the -1 oz to +1 oz box
“Center Point” Analysis
Average at 49’2.274
Average at 60’4.268
Intended at 60’4.06
Roll Slope0.1602
8.12 boards 8.536 boards 4.548 boards 0.3204 (1.6364°)
Coefficient
Influence
From -1 oz to 1 oz of Side Weight
“Center Point” Analysis
(60, 22.88)
(60, 14.94)
SR
- R
a
On
-La
ne
CO
F
SR
- R
S
Dry
La
ne
CO
F
Oil
Ab
sorp
tion
RG
To
tal D
iffe
ren
tial
Sp
in T
ime
Dia
me
ter
Sid
e W
eig
ht
Int.
-Diff
Oil
@ 3
2'
Ro
om
Hu
mid
ity
Oil
@ 8
'
To
p W
eig
ht
Ro
om
Te
mp
.
Th
um
b W
eig
ht
La
ne
Te
mp
.0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
x-variable Influence on Overall Ball Motion
X- variables
Wei
ghte
d Po
ints
bas
ed o
n P-
Valu
e
Influence to Overall Ball Motion - Central Composite
