Print

[Kulli]

Hi was reading through some old threads on the train last night where @Ryan had experimented a bit with making different types of laminates, drilling a hole done the cleft Hunt style etc.

While it might not sell bets, I'd argue that it would on here, it makes for fascinating reading/viewing.

Anyone got any ideas for other possibilities that could be tried, and even better any budding batmakers keep to give some of the better ones a go?

[blindowl]

When I was a nipper playing cricket in the garden I always found that holding the bat backwards (spine forwards) always made for some interesting play. Neither I nor the fielders had a clue where the tennis ball would go.
 

[JK Lewis]

Hi was reading through some old threads on the train last night where @Ryan had experimented a bit with making different types of laminates, drilling a hole done the cleft Hunt style etc.

While it might not sell bets, I'd argue that it would on here, it makes for fascinating reading/viewing.

Anyone got any ideas for other possibilities that could be tried, and even better any budding batmakers keep to give some of the better ones a go?

I've been wondering about marking out a regular pattern (maybe 20mm gaps) on the back of an oversized cleft, and drilling out holes with a 4mm / 5mm drill bit. Drill out a lot of wood, but to a set depth, leaving around 25mm of thickness right across the face of the blade. My theory is that I could remove a considerable amount of weight, but leave enough structure to be able to cope with a hard ball. End up with a 'big' bat - full profile, no concaving, shaped to the limit of the new regs - but weighing maybe around 2lb 5 or 6, something like that.

[InternalTraining]

I've been wondering about marking out a regular pattern (maybe 20mm gaps) on the back of an oversized cleft, and drilling out holes with a 4mm / 5mm drill bit. Drill out a lot of wood, but to a set depth, leaving around 25mm of thickness right across the face of the blade. My theory is that I could remove a considerable amount of weight, but leave enough structure to be able to cope with a hard ball. End up with a 'big' bat - full profile, no concaving, shaped to the limit of the new regs - but weighing maybe around 2lb 5 or 6, something like that.

@JK Lewis , I have an idea for you and it could make you money: invent a mechanical system for measuring and grading bat ping. You can collect royalties off your invention from the bat makers who will use it to measure and grade bat ping. This invention will standardize the ever elusive and subjective bat "ping"! It will also help bring the prices down for, us, consumers. You can name the unit of measurement of the ping as you deem fit. Imagine the possibilities.

[edge]

@JK Lewis , I have an idea for you and it could make you money: invent a mechanical system for measuring and grading bat ping. You can collect royalties off your invention from the bat makers who will use it to measure and grade bat ping. This invention will standardize the ever elusive and subjective bat "ping"! It will also help bring the prices down for, us, consumers. You can name the unit of measurement of the ping as you deem fit. Imagine the possibilities.

Plot twist: what if I told you this already exists...

[JK Lewis]

@JK Lewis , I have an idea for you and it could make you money: invent a mechanical system for measuring and grading bat ping. You can collect royalties off your invention from the bat makers who will use it to measure and grade bat ping. This invention will standardize the ever elusive and subjective bat "ping"! It will also help bring the prices down for, us, consumers. You can name the unit of measurement of the ping as you deem fit. Imagine the possibilities.

Ah, the mystery of 'ping'! How sad it would be if there was a tool available that negated all the arguments that we so enjoy! 

I'm pretty sure it could be done though, with a machine that mimics the action of knocking a ball up off a bat face. Rather like one of those tester machines for chairs or drawers that IKEA have on display. One would just need to remove the variables, so that the 'knock' was completely standardised, and each result could be measured. I like the idea of a special unit of measurement very much. How about 'pongs'?

[edge]

I've been wondering about marking out a regular pattern (maybe 20mm gaps) on the back of an oversized cleft, and drilling out holes with a 4mm / 5mm drill bit. Drill out a lot of wood, but to a set depth, leaving around 25mm of thickness right across the face of the blade. My theory is that I could remove a considerable amount of weight, but leave enough structure to be able to cope with a hard ball. End up with a 'big' bat - full profile, no concaving, shaped to the limit of the new regs - but weighing maybe around 2lb 5 or 6, something like that.

@JK Lewis  I like the theory, reminds me of the Hunts County Modulus with the cutouts and honeycomb insert in the back of the blade. Maybe even try and work some extra rigidity in with the way you take the wood out, that's an idea that's got me ticking!

[JK Lewis]

@JK Lewis  I like the theory, reminds me of the Hunts County Modulus with the cutouts and honeycomb insert in the back of the blade. Maybe even try and work some extra rigidity in with the way you take the wood out, that's an idea that's got me ticking!

I've never seen a Modulus, I might have to go to see Steve at Hunts and ask if he has one. Probably somewhat superior to my efforts with a Bosch hammer drill tbh! It's too damn cold to hang out in the garage right now, so this project will have to wait for a few months yet.

Tell us more about the ping machine.

[InternalTraining]

Ah, the mystery of 'ping'! How sad it would be if there was a tool available that negated all the arguments that we so enjoy! 

I'm pretty sure it could be done though, with a machine that mimics the action of knocking a ball up off a bat face. Rather like one of those tester machines for chairs or drawers that IKEA have on display. One would just need to remove the variables, so that the 'knock' was completely standardised, and each result could be measured. I like the idea of a special unit of measurement very much. How about 'pongs'?

Call the "special unit of measurement" JKL-Unit or JKL-Balls. "This bat is rated 4 out of 5 JKL-Balls".

The machine should be small and easy to carry, like the vernier (sp?) callipers. How about a spring loaded gizmo whose frame sits flush on the bats and the spring loaded prong strikes off the face of the bat? The trick would be to measure the deflection and correlate to a 5.5 oz ball going a certain distance.

[GDP1964]

@JK Lewis liking your idea a lot but why worry about the new Regs that will not affect 98% of your Customers for at least another 3 Years . Any light oversized Clefts that are not going to be used to make big bats by any manufacturers because they want to stick to the Regs Please Please call me I will gladly take them off your hands

[InternalTraining]

Plot twist: what if I told you this already exists...

That would be sweet like a twizzer effing twist!
https://www.hersheys.com/twizzlers/en_us/home.html

Why is it  that the current grading system that is in place is ripping off consumers?

[JK Lewis]

Call the "special unit of measurement" JKL-Unit or JKL-Balls. "This bat is rated 4 out of 5 JKL-Balls".

The machine should be small and easy to carry, like the vernier (sp?) callipers. How about a spring loaded gizmo whose frame sits flush on the bats and the spring loaded prong strikes off the face of the bat? The trick would be to measure the deflection and correlate to a 5.5 oz ball going a certain distance.

Gotcha, a pocket sized 'ping-ometer' as it were. Much better than my big contraption. I don't think that the size or weight of the 'ball' really matters, as each bat will be tested with the same device, and the results will be comparable. But yes, a spring loaded device, that measures the rebound, would probably be effective.

[edge]

I've never seen a Modulus, I might have to go to see Steve at Hunts and ask if he has one. Probably somewhat superior to my efforts with a Bosch hammer drill tbh! It's too damn cold to hang out in the garage right now, so this project will have to wait for a few months yet.

Tell us more about the ping machine.

Best photo of a Modulus I could find, basically channels cut in the back of the bat and then filled with a honeycomb insert to keep the stiffness of the blade while losing weight. Worked well iirc but obviously the ICC ban hammer came down.


Regards ping testing - all you need is a machine or arm that will swing the bat at a set speed and a method of measuring the resulting ball speed; high speed camera plus a graduated background or similar. It's then reasonably simple maths to convert that speed result into a value of coefficient of restitution for the bat (i.e. ping). Plenty of research labs have this setup in some form or other for sports testing, in baseball there's even a testing standard for non-wooden bats.

Problems with cricket - wood's a natural product so even if one example of a bat model produces a certain result, another may not. How much do you knock it in pre-test, etc etc. Balls are also not very heavily regulated so you'd get very different results due to variations in balls. In a potential future where we ditch willow and bats are made from composites COR would be very useful indeed but probably isn't now. Also, the middle position on cricket bats varies - to have a standardised test you'd need a set impact point, which would potentially discriminate against bats that had different middles. To be honest, the effect of middle position on cor would be far more interesting than just looking at ping!

On a more mundane note, a ruler and a camera would do the job - drop a ball on a bat from a set height and measure how high it bounces.

[Mel Jessop]

The original/prototype Modulous lives next door to me with the man who co designed it alongside Hunts.

Also the original Modulous had honeycomb in the blade also then covered with a laminate.

I did post some pictures somewhere on here.

[InternalTraining]

Gotcha, a pocket sized 'ping-ometer' as it were. Much better than my big contraption. I don't think that the size or weight of the 'ball' really matters, as each bat will be tested with the same device, and the results will be comparable. But yes, a spring loaded device, that measures the rebound, would probably be effective.

Attach this to a small LCD display with a chip inside that calculates the JKL-B unit () would be great!

PS (Edit): Thanks to @JK Lewis for reminding that this is my 3000 th. post! So, I have to mark it. #3000_th_post