Bat tech talk with norbs
Advertise on CBF

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4

Author Topic: Bat tech talk with norbs  (Read 8710 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

norbs

  • County 1st XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 821
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Bat tech talk with norbs
« Reply #30 on: September 15, 2010, 10:01:28 PM »

I might ask your wife that same question but fear I'll get the blame......

Luckily shes away

Talisman

  • County 1st XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 603
  • Trade Count: (+76)
Re: Bat tech talk with norbs
« Reply #31 on: September 15, 2010, 10:03:04 PM »

You should really release the hound 10 seconds before bedtime.....
Logged

norbs

  • County 1st XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 821
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Bat tech talk with norbs
« Reply #32 on: September 15, 2010, 10:04:48 PM »

How efficient are bats? Ie approximately what proportion of energy is transfered back onto the ball, assuming the ball hits the middle? I know there are lots and lots of factors..but just curious how much performance could yet be gained. Even a very very rough figure would be amazing, as i havent got the slightest clue.

Yep loads or factors from pressing, shaping and to the shot selection of the player himself

but if you think you can get a 33% performance from the handle [illegal] alone you can see what potential there is!

norbs

  • County 1st XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 821
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Bat tech talk with norbs
« Reply #33 on: September 15, 2010, 10:06:12 PM »

Explain the tapping up theory, and not the kind Chelski do :)

tap with fingers listen ,look either happy or disgusted depending on the discount you are after.  has to be done with confidence though  :D

norbs

  • County 1st XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 821
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Bat tech talk with norbs
« Reply #34 on: September 15, 2010, 10:13:33 PM »

Norbs, you have pretty much answered a discussion that petehosk and I were having earlier.

It raises an interesting question for a bat maker though. If you were to make two bats of equal weight, and as close as possible identical profile, from different density willows, would you see a performance difference?

I am happy to put myself forward to tet this, if someone wants to make the bats... :D

hmmmm  when you say identical profiles do you mean the same size [area] 



Colesy

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7677
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • I hate losing more than I even wanna win.
Re: Bat tech talk with norbs
« Reply #35 on: September 15, 2010, 10:18:43 PM »

Two identical bats but one made with a different density willow to the other?
Logged
High scores: 255, 124, 114              Best figures: 5-19, 5-24, 5-26

norbs

  • County 1st XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 821
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Bat tech talk with norbs
« Reply #36 on: September 15, 2010, 10:21:03 PM »

Two identical bats but one made with a different density willow to the other?

They can't be identical

Density = Mass / Volume

So I asked the question

Colesy

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7677
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • I hate losing more than I even wanna win.
Re: Bat tech talk with norbs
« Reply #37 on: September 15, 2010, 11:00:22 PM »

If you insert rubber strips into a handle to give it more flexibility, then GN put Titanium into the handle what affect does this give?
Logged
High scores: 255, 124, 114              Best figures: 5-19, 5-24, 5-26

tim2000s

  • Administrator
  • International Superstar
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10678
  • Trade Count: (+21)
  • If I only could bat....
Re: Bat tech talk with norbs
« Reply #38 on: September 16, 2010, 06:01:49 AM »

No, they won't be identical, but given that they can be of similar shape and have the sweet spot in about the same area, as close to identical as you can get with two different density pieces of willow. I guess something like giving them both a Redback Surefire shape.
Logged

Canners

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5085
  • Trade Count: (+10)
  • go hard or go home
Re: Bat tech talk with norbs
« Reply #39 on: September 16, 2010, 06:21:18 AM »

Norbs

i understand using lighter clefts give the batmaker scope to produce bigger bats for the weight, but in theory your still hitting the ball with say a 2.8 bat, so why will this perform better than say a smaller profiled 2.8 (heavier wood)?

I think what im trying to ask is can you produce a bat at 2.7/2.8 that will out perform any 2.10/2.11 bat

Logged
I don't know how to put this, but, I'm kind of a big deal.

tim2000s

  • Administrator
  • International Superstar
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10678
  • Trade Count: (+21)
  • If I only could bat....
Re: Bat tech talk with norbs
« Reply #40 on: September 16, 2010, 06:41:08 AM »

Norbs

i understand using lighter clefts give the batmaker scope to produce bigger bats for the weight, but in theory your still hitting the ball with say a 2.8 bat, so why will this perform better than say a smaller profiled 2.8 (heavier wood)?

I think what im trying to ask is can you produce a bat at 2.7/2.8 that will out perform any 2.10/2.11 bat

Spot on Canners. That's what I was wondering, in a round about way. And as an adjunct to the question, would a 2lb11oz bat from a less dense cleft perform better than one from a denser cleft?
Logged

norbs

  • County 1st XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 821
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Bat tech talk with norbs
« Reply #41 on: September 16, 2010, 08:16:32 AM »

Norbs

i understand using lighter clefts give the batmaker scope to produce bigger bats for the weight, but in theory your still hitting the ball with say a 2.8 bat, so why will this perform better than say a smaller profiled 2.8 (heavier wood)?

I think what im trying to ask is can you produce a bat at 2.7/2.8 that will out perform any 2.10/2.11 bat


Spot on Canners. That's what I was wondering, in a round about way. And as an adjunct to the question, would a 2lb11oz bat from a less dense cleft perform better than one from a denser cleft?

Lets get a couple of things right here 1st now the question is easier to understand. 2 bats of equal weight [mass], and as close as possible identical profile [volume] will have the same density  ;)

Secondly Tim2000s as much as I like Gary and love the Surefire I'd probably try this with 2 SAF Fabrica's :D :D

Ok this is question Talisman and me discussed a few years ago now on another forum!!!!  I believe that makes us pioneers

Swing weight of a cricket bat & batted ball speed!


What the blimming heck are you on about now?

If you have 2 bats one heavier then the other and you can swing them at the same speed [assuming the ball speed is constant for both] then based on theoretical momentum equations the heavier bat will win….  :o

Why!?!

as the batted ball velocity depends on the mass of the ball and bat. The elasticity of the ball, bowling ball speed and the bat swing speed. The other bit of this is based on moment of interia and with this you get into the realms of coefficient of restitution and coefficent of precussion.

Huh!!!!!


The techie bits as I know you love them

Ok something quick on both Coefficient of Restitution [CoR] [Ping] . CoR is the square root of rebound height divided by Original height. [this just gives you a number as you probably know]. But you can understand, see and measure a rebound difference between two cricket bats. CoR is dependant on a number of things but in this context it is related to the cricket bat shape and where it hits [or lands] on the bat.

Centre of percussion [CoP] - hang a bat where you normally hold it and hit it with a mallet. At the point it swings like a pendulum that is the CoP. Or when playing its when the ball hits the cricket bat at a point that it neither pushes your hands forwards or backwards.


Hold on to your hats the Math

Ok it is getting a bit scary now so I should stop but I won’t [a sly grin] There are varying articles on this [mainly baseball, some tennis and limited number on cricket bats!!!]

The general consenus though is this equation:

Batted ball speed = q x Velocity of ball + (1 + q)Velocity of bat

Where q is calculated as follow q is the Bouncabilty of a bat or Apparent Coefficient of Restitution [ACoR]

For CoR q = CoR - r / 1 + r

r is made up of many factors and it beings to get overly technical at this point and I dont want to go down that road…. you are bored already!!!!

In simple terms q can be defined as Velocity of ball after the collision [divided by] Velocity of ball before collision. [Velocity, by the way if you want to drop a ball on a bat and measure it for a baseline and rebound to calculate q, is Distance / time]

Ok some theoretical calculations for batted ball speeds

Which Cricket bat is better, stick with me here….

 [A Big Note: Made up numbers for the forum for q and velocity but proper calculations with those numbers]

A normal cricket bat, our datum point…. [Example 1]

q = 0.45
Vel of Bat = 50
Vel of ball = 60
[color=]Ball exit speed is 99.5

Now add 10% on the cricket bat mass resulting in a slightly slower bat speed lets say 10% slower and lets keep it 10% and for the increase in q [bouncabilty] which is Apparent CoR or [ACOR]

So [Example 2]
q = 0.5
Vel of bat = 45
Vel of ball = 60
Ball exit speed is 97.5

Ok let assume you have a bat and the swing weight is the same as the first bat but has more mass therefore a higher q [ACOR]
[Example 3 - Canners - Tim please note this is the same as the bat in Example 1 but with more mass]
q = 0.5
Vel of Bat = 50
Vel of ball = 60
Ball exit speed is 105


Are you still talking about Cricket Bats?

So what do those theoretical values tell us… Swing speed offset against bat weight is when plotted on a graph is a curve it slowly raises and plato’s and then slowly drops off.

Therefore there is a range of bat weights that with good pickup will allow you to have the same reaction time and swing speed but due the weight distribution in the bat areas of mass etc and ball impact points you can raise the ACOR [q] bouncabiity.

Mass behind the sweet spot [hopefully in the main hitting area] will be ideal especially if the swing weight of the bat means you are hitting the ball at close to maximum speeds in the position and batting shapes you normally hit a ball at… [that is your normal ball impact areas] cricket bat middle postion etc etc

Does this mean there is an optimum weight for everyone, depending on their strength?

Yes this optimum weight would be where they could swing the bat fastest and without to much compromise on size of the bat.

Few is that it my coffee got cold?


No sorry, willow is organic a live piece of timber and you will never really know how a bat will go until it is used. But being the person that I am I like to get an idea on the science behind it all and it is complex due to the numerous varibles associated to the timber and person using it and level at which it is all used.

My view is a bat with good pickup allowing someone to use a slightly heavier bat or wood mass distributed properly with the middle in the correct place will go a long way in to giving a batsman what he wants….

Finally…..
You don’t always slog the ball and I will agree with you pratical, theoretical and variation on ball, bat and bowling speeds doesn’t make it conclusive but you can get a good baseline and I hope it makes sense

« Last Edit: September 16, 2010, 08:20:54 AM by norbs »
Logged

norbs

  • County 1st XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 821
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Bat tech talk with norbs
« Reply #42 on: September 16, 2010, 08:22:54 AM »

Please note Norbs - Bat Tech questions are now closed

I might do this again I might not

roco

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6991
  • Trade Count: (+16)
Re: Bat tech talk with norbs
« Reply #43 on: September 16, 2010, 08:23:51 AM »

Will get my mate to explain the last one to me when I see him on sat as he is a physics nut
Logged
The first cricket box was used in 1874.  The first cricket helmet was introduced in 1974. So, it took 100 years for men to twig that their brains were also worth protecting.

tim2000s

  • Administrator
  • International Superstar
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10678
  • Trade Count: (+21)
  • If I only could bat....
Re: Bat tech talk with norbs
« Reply #44 on: September 16, 2010, 08:24:14 AM »

So, basically, two bats with the same mass but made of different density willow having similar shape and similarly positioned sweet spot, but not necessarily identical profiles should, according to the maths, provide similar performance....

Happy to test the theory with a couple of Fabricas..... Got a couple of the same weight but made from different density willow clefts around? ;)
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4
 

Advertise on CBF