Golf ball cover compositions

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
The present invention concerns improved hard-soft ionomeric resin mixtures (or blends) which are particularly well suited for the formulation of the cover composition of a golf ball.
More specifically, the present invention relates to novel golf ball cover compositions of intermediate modulus comprising blends of about 90 to about 70 (preferably from about 90 to about 75) weight percent of hard ionomer resins and from about 10 to about 30 (preferably, from about 10 to about 25) weight percent of soft ionomer resins. The new compositions of the present invention, when utilized for golf ball construction, particularly the construction of two piece golf balls, produce golf balls exhibiting enhanced travel distance and/or playability characteristics without sacrificing the properties of roundness, impact resistance and/or durability.
Ionomeric resins are polymers containing interchain ionic bonding. As a result of their toughness, durability, and flight characteristics, various ionomeric resins sold by E. I. DuPont deNemours & Company (see U.S. Pat. No. 4,884,814) under the trademark "Surlyn.RTM." and more recently, by the Exxon Corporation (see U.S. Pat. No. 4,911,451) under the trademarks "Escor.RTM. and the tradename "Iotek", have become the materials of choice for the construction of golf ball covers over the traditional "balata" (trans polyisoprene, natural or synthetic) rubbers. The softer balata covers, although exhibiting enhanced playability properties, lack the durability necessary for repetitive play.
Ionomeric resins are generally ionic copolymers of an olefin such as ethylene and a metal salt of an unsaturated carboxylic acid, such as acrylic acid, methacrylic acid, or maleic acid. Metal ions, such as sodium or zinc, are used to neutralize some portion of the acidic groups in the copolymer resulting in a thermoplastic elastomer exhibiting enhanced properties, i.e. improved durability, etc., for golf ball cover construction over balata. However, the advantages gained in increased durability have been offset to some degree by the decreases produced in playability. This is because although the ionomeric resins are very durable, they tend to be very hard when utilized for golf ball cover construction, and thus lack the degree of softness required to impart the spin necessary to control the ball in flight.
As a result, while there are currently more than fifty commercial grades of ionomers available from DuPont and Exxon with a wide range of properties which vary according to the type and amount of metal cations, molecular weight, composition of the base resin (i.e. relative content of ethylene and methacrylic and/or acrylic acid groups) and additive ingredients such as reinforcements, etc., a great deal of research continues in order to develop golf ball cover compositions exhibiting not only the improved impact resistance and carrying distance properties produced by the "hard" ionomeric resins, but also the playability (i.e. "spin") characteristics previously associated with the "soft" balata covers, properties which are still desired by the more skilled golfer.
In various attempts to produce such an ideal golf ball, the golfing industry has blended the hard ionomeric resins with a number of softer polymeric materials, such as softer polyurethanes. However, the blends of the hard ionomer resins with the softer polymeric materials have generally been dissatisfactory in that these balls exhibit numerous processing problems. In addition, the balls produced by such a combination are usually short on distance.
In addition, various "hard-soft ionomeric blends", i.e. mixtures of ionomer resins which are significantly different in hardness and/or flexural modulus, have been attempted. However, until the development of the specific blend combination set forth in U.S. Pat. No. 4,884,814, directed to relatively low modulus golf ball cover compositions, these balls were not particularly commercially viable. In this regard, although the balls produced using the hard-soft ionomer blends exhibited enhanced playability characteristics, they lacked the durability needed for continuous play.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,884,814, one of the inventor's previous patents, is directed to the finding that if various "hard" methacrylic acid based ionomer resins (i.e. those ionomer resins having a hardness of about 60 to 66 on the Shore D scale as measured in accordance with ASTM method D-2240) were blended with similar or larger quantities of one or more "soft" ionomer methacrylic acid based ionomer resins (i.e. those ionomer resins having a hardness from about 25 to 40 as measured on the Shore D scale) that relatively low modulus golf ball cover compositions could be produced that are not only softer than the prior art hard ionomer covers but also exhibit a sufficient degree of durability for repetitive play. These relatively low modulus cover compositions were generally comprised of from about 25 to about 70 percent of hard ionomer resins and from about 30 to about 75 percent of soft ionomer resins.
As a result, a golf ball covered in accordance with the "hard-soft" methacrylic acid based ionomer blends of the '814 patent, exhibits properties of enhanced playability (i.e. softness and spin) and durability. However, notwithstanding the above, some sacrifice in carrying distance is also exhibited in comparison with the balls produced utilizing the hard ionomer resins.
The present invention is directed to new golf ball cover compositions which exhibit properties of enhanced carrying distance (i.e. possess higher coefficient of restitution values) than the hard-soft ionomer blends set forth in U.S. Pat. No. 4,884,814, without sacrificing characteristics such as playability (i.e. softness and spin) and/or durability. It has been found that these properties can be produced using improved hard-soft ionomer blends in order to produce an intermediate modulus golf ball cover.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
The present invention is directed to intermediate modulus cover compositions for golf ball construction and the resulting golf balls produced utilizing the improved cover compositions. The novel golf ball cover compositions of the invention comprise a blend of about 90 to about 70 (preferably from about 90 to about 75) weight percent of hard ionomeric resins and from about 10 to about 30 (preferably from about 10 to about 25) of soft ionomer resins. In a more preferred embodiment of the invention, the soft ionomer resin is a methacrylic acid based soft ionomer resin. When the cover compositions of the invention are utilized to manufacture golf balls, the golf balls produced thereby exhibit properties of improved distance without sacrificing playability and/or durability characteristics when compared to known hard-soft ionomer blends.
Two of the principal properties involved in the performance of golf balls are resilience and hardness. Resilience is determined by the coefficient of restitution (C.O.R.), the constant "e", which is the ratio of the relative velocity of two elastic spheres after direct impact to that before impact. As a result, the coefficient of restitution (i.e. "e") can vary from zero to one, with one being equivalent to an elastic collision and zero being equivalent to an inelastic collision.
Resilience (C.O.R.), along with additional factors such as clubhead speed, angle of trajectory, and ball configuration (i.e. dimple pattern), generally determines the distance a ball will travel when hit. Since clubhead speed and the angle of trajectory are not factors easily controllable, particularly by golf ball manufacturers, the factors of concern among manufacturers are the coefficient of restitution (C.O.R.) and the surface configuration of the ball.
The coefficient of restitution (C.O.R.) in solid core balls is a function of the composition of the molded core and of the cover. In balls containing a wound core (i.e. balls comprising a liquid or solid center, elastic windings, and a cover), the coefficient of restitution is a function of not only the composition of the center and cover, but also the composition and tension of the elastomeric windings. Although both the core and the cover contribute to the coefficient of restitution, the present invention is directed solely to the coefficient of restitution which is affected by the cover composition.
In this regard, the coefficient of restitution of a golf ball is generally measured by propelling a ball at a given speed against a hard surface and measuring the ball's incoming and outgoing velocity electronically. As mentioned above, the coefficient of restitution is the ratio of the outgoing velocity to incoming velocity. The coefficient of restitution must be carefully controlled in all commercial golf balls in order for the ball to be within the specifications regulated by the United States Golf Association (U.S.G.A.). Along this line, the U.S.G.A. standards indicate that a "regulation" ball cannot have an initial velocity (i.e. the speed off the club) exceeding 255 feet per second. Since the coefficient of restitution of a ball is related to the ball's initial velocity, it is highly desirable to produce a ball having a sufficiently high coefficient of restitution to closely approach the U.S.G.A. limit on initial velocity, while having an ample degree of softness (i.e. hardness) to produce enhanced playability (i.e. spin, etc.).
The hardness of the ball is the second principal property involved in the performance of a golf ball. The hardness of the ball can affect the playability of the ball on striking and the sound or "click" produced. Hardness is determined as the deformation (i.e. compression) of the ball under various load conditions applied across the ball's diameter (i.e. the lower the compression value, the harder the material). As indicated in U.S. Pat. No. 4,674,751, "softer" covers permit the accomplished golfer to impart proper spin. This is because the softer covers deform on impact significantly more than balls having "harder" ionomeric resin covers. As a result, this allows the better player to impart fade, draw, or backspin to the ball thereby enhancing playability. Such properties can be determined by various "spin rate tests", such as the "nine-iron" spin rate test set forth below.
Accordingly, the present invention is directed to new hard-soft ionomer blends which produce, upon molding around solid or wound cores to formulate a intermediate modulus cover composition, golf balls exhibiting enhanced distance (i.e. resilience) without adversely affecting, and in many instances, improving the ball's playability (i.e. hardness/softness) and/or durability (i.e. impact resistance, etc.) characteristics.
These and other objects and features of the invention will be apparent from the following description and from the claims.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to improved cover compositions for golf ball construction. More particularly, the present invention is directed to improved blends of hard and soft ionomers, which, when utilized to formulate the cover stock of golf balls, produce intermediate modulus golf balls having enhanced properties, including longer distance (i.e. improved C.O.R. values) with similar or improved playability properties (i.e. similar and/or slightly higher Riehle compression, etc.), when compared to golf balls produced by the hard-soft ionomer blends of the prior art. The improved properties produced by the hard-soft ionomer blends of the present invention are due to the use of relatively low amounts (i.e. from about 10 to about 25-30 percent) of soft ionomers, which produce cover compositions having lower flexural modulus and hardness (i.e. enhanced softness) and improved coefficients of restitution when incorporated with relatively high amounts (i.e. from about 90 to about 75-70 percent) of the hard ionomer resins.
The hard (high modulus) ionomers suitable for use in the present invention include those ionomers having a hardness greater than 50 on the Shore D scale as measured in accordance with ASTM method D-2240, and a flexural modulus from about 15,000 to about 70,000 psi as measured in accordance with ASTM method D-790.
The hard ionomer resins utilized to produce the cover compositions are ionic copolymers which are the sodium, zinc, magnesium or lithium salts of the reaction product of an olefin having from 2 to 8 carbon atoms and an unsaturated monocarboxylic acid having from 3 to 8 carbon atoms. The carboxylic acid groups of the copolymer may be totally or partially (i.e. approximately 15-75 percent) neutralized.
Preferably, the hard ionomeric resins are copolymers of ethylene and either acrylic and/or methacrylic acid, with copolymers of ethylene and methacrylic acid being the most preferred. In addition, two or more types of hard ionomeric resins may be blended into the cover compositions in order to produce the desired properties of the resulting golf balls.
Although the scope of the patent embraces all known hard ionomeric resins falling within the parameters set forth above, only a relatively limited number of these hard ionomeric resins are commercially available. In this regard, the hard ionomeric resins sold by E. I. DuPont de Nemours Company under the trademark "Surlyn.RTM.", and the hard ionomer resins sold by Exxon Corporation under either the trademark "Escor.RTM." or the tradename "Iotek" are examples of commercially available hard ionomeric resins which may be utilized in the present invention in the particular combinations described in detail below.
The hard ionomeric resins introduced under the designation "Escor.RTM." and now sold under the new designation "Iotek", are somewhat similar to the hard ionomeric resins sold under the "Surlyn.RTM." trademark. However, since the "Iotek" ionomeric resins are sodium or zinc salts of poly(ethylene acrylic acid) and the "Surlyn" resins are zinc, sodium or lithium salts of poly(ethylene methacrylic acid) some distinct differences in properties exist. In addition, various blends of "Iotek" and "Surlyn" hard ionomeric resins, as well as other available ionomeric resins, may be utilized in the present invention.
Examples of commercially available hard ionomeric resins which may be utilized in the present invention include, but are not limited to the hard sodium ionic copolymer sold under the trademark "Surlyn.RTM. 8940", the hard zinc ionic copolymer sold under the trademark "Surlyn.RTM. 9910" and the hard lithium ionic copolymers sold under the trademark "Surlyn.RTM. 7930" and "Surlyn.RTM. 7940". Surlyn 8940 is a copolymer of ethylene with methacrylic acid with about 15 weight percent acid which is about 29% neutralized with sodium ions. This resin has an average melt flow index of about 2.8. Surlyn.RTM. 9910 is a copolymer of ethylene and methacrylic acid with about 15 weight percent acid which is about 58% neutralized with zinc ions. The average melt flow index of Surlyn.RTM. 9910, is about 0.7. Surlyn.RTM. 7930 and Surlyn.RTM. 7940 are two similar lithium neutralized poly(ethylene-methacrylic acid) ionomers differing in melt indexes. The typical properties of Surlyn.RTM. 9910 , Surlyn.RTM.8940 and Surlyn.RTM. 7940 are set forth below in Table 1.
TABLE 1__________________________________________________________________________Typical Properties of Commercially Available HardSurlyn .RTM. Resins Suitable for Use in the Present Invention ASTM D 8940 9910 8920 8528 9970 9730 7940__________________________________________________________________________Cation Type Sodium Zinc Sodium Sodium Zinc Zinc LithiumMelt flow index, D-1238 2.8 0.7 0.9 1.3 14.0 1.6 3.0gms/10 min.Specific Gravity, D-792 0.95 0.97 0.95 0.94 0.95 0.95 0.93g/cm.sup.3Hardness, Shore D D-2240 66 64 66 60 62 63 64Tensile Strength, D-638 (4.8) (3.6) (5.4) (4.2) (3.2) (4.1) (3.7)(kpsi), MPa 33.1 24.8 37.2 29.0 22.0 28.0Elongation, % D-638 470 290 350 450 460 460 220Flexural Modulus, D-790 (51) (48) (55) (32) (28) (30) (61)(kpsi) MPa 350 330 380 220 190 210Tensile Impact (23.degree. C.) D-18225 1020 1020 865 1160 760 1240KJ/m.sub.2 (ft.-lbs./in.sup.2) (485) (485) (410) (550) (360) (590)Vicat Temperature, .degree.C. D-1525 63 62 58 73 61 73__________________________________________________________________________
In addition, examples of the acrylic acid based hard ionomer resins suitable for use in the present invention sold under the "Iotek" tradename by the Exxon Corporation include "Iotek 4000" (formerly "Escor 4000"), and "Iotek 4010", "Iotek 8000" (formerly Escor 900), "Iotek 8020", and "Iotek 8030". The typical properties of the Iotek hard ionomers are set forth below in Table 2.
TABLE 2__________________________________________________________________________Typical Properties of Iotek IonomersResin ASTMProperties Method Units 4000 4010 8000 8020 8030__________________________________________________________________________Cation type zinc zinc sodium sodium sodiumMelt index D-1238 g/10 min. 2.5 1.5 0.8 1.6 2.8Density D-1505 kg/m.sup.3 963 963 954 960 960Melting Point D-3417 .degree.C. 90 90 90 87.5 87.5Crystalliztion Point D-3417 .degree.C. 62 64 56 53 55Vicat Softening Point D-1525 .degree.C. 62 63 61 64 67% Weight Acrylic Acid 16 11% of Acid Groups 30 40cation neutralizedPlaque Properties(3 mm thick,compression molded)Tensile at break D-638 MPa 24 26 36 31.5 28Yield point D-638 MPa none none 21 21 23Elongation at break D-638 % 395 420 350 410 3951% Secant modulus D-638 MPa 160 160 300 350 390Shore Hardness D D-2240 -- 55 55 61 58 59Film Properties(50 micron film 2.2:1Blow-up ratio)Tensile at BreakMD D-882 MPa 41 39 42 52 47.4TD D-882 MPa 37 38 38 38 40.5Yield PointMD D-882 MPa 15 17 17 23 21.6TD D-882 MPa 14 15 15 21 20.7Elongation at BreakMD D-882 % 310 270 260 295 305TD D-882 % 360 340 280 3451% Secant modulusMD D-882 MPa 210 215 390 380 380TD D-882 MPa 200 225 380 350 345Dart Drop Impact D-1709 g/micron 12.4 12.5 20.3__________________________________________________________________________
The soft (low modulus) ionomers utilized to formulate the blends of the present invention are acrylic acid or methacrylic acid based soft ionomers with the methacrylic acid based soft ionomers being the more preferred. These soft ionomers may be generally characterized as comprised of sodium, zinc, magnesium or lithium salts of the reaction product of an olefin having from about 2 to 8 carbon atoms, acrylic or methacrylic acid, and an unsaturated monomer of an acrylated ester class having from 1 to 21 carbon atoms. The carboxylic acid groups of the copolymer may be totally or partially (i.e. about 15-75 percent neutralized).
Preferably, the soft ionomer resins are sodium or zinc salt of a terpolymer of an olefin having 2 to 8 carbon atoms, either acrylic and/or methacrylic acid, and an unsaturated monomer of an acrylated ester class having from 1 to 21 carbon atoms, with those comprising ethylene, methacrylic acid and methyl or butyl acrylate being the more preferred. Moreover, two or more types of soft ionomer resins may be blended into the cover compositions in order to produce the desired properties of the resulting golf balls.
The soft (low modulus) ionomers suitable for use in the invention have a hardness from about 20 to about 40 as measured on the Shore D scale and a flexural modulus from about 2,000 to about 10,000 psi as measured in accordance with ASTM method D-790.
More particularly, the present inventors have discovered that if relatively low amounts of the above indicated soft ionomers are utilized with the specific hard ionomers described above, in the combinations more clearly defined below and demonstrated in the Examples, the overall combinations, when utilized for golf ball construction, produce golf balls having higher coefficient of restitution values (i.e. longer distance) at similar compression values than golf balls produced by known hard-soft ionomer blends, including the hard-soft ionomer blends utilized to produce Spalding's current Tour Edition.RTM. 100 ball (i.e. U.S. Pat. No. 4,884,814).
In this regard, the inventors have found that when the ethylene-acrylic acid based soft ionomer resins recently developed by the Exxon Corporation under the designation "Iotek 7520" (referred experimentally by differences in neutralization and melt indexes as LDX 195, LDX 196, LDX 218 and LDX 219) and "Iotek 7510" and more preferably, the ethylene-methacrylic acid based soft-ionomers sold by Dupont under the designations "Surlyn.RTM. 8625" and "Surlyn.RTM. 8629" are combined with the known hard ionomers indicated above, the combination produces higher C.O.R. values at equal or similar compression.
While the exact chemical composition of the resins to be sold by Exxon under the designation Iotek 7520 is considered by Exxon to be confidential and proprietary information, Exxon's Experimental Product Data sheet lists the following physical properties of the ethylene acrylic acid zinc ionomer developed by Exxon:
TABLE 3______________________________________Physical Properties of Iotek 7520 TypicalProperty ASTM Method Units Value______________________________________Melt Index D-1238 g/10 min. 2Density D-1505 kg/m.sup.3 0.962Cation ZincMelting Point D-3417 .degree.C. 66Crystallization D-3417 .degree.C. 49PointVicat Softening D-1525 .degree.C. 42PointPlaque Properties(2 mm thick CompressionMolded Plaques)Tensile at Break D-638 MPa 10Yield Point D-638 MPa NoneElongation at Break D-638 % 7601% Secant Modulus D-638 MPa 22Shore D Hardness D-2240 32Flexural Modulus D-790 MPa 26Zwick Rebond ISO 4862 % 52De Mattia Flex D-430 Cycles >5000Resistance______________________________________
In addition, test data collected by the inventors indicates that Iotek 7520 resins have Shore D hardnesses of about 32-36 (per ASTM D-2240), melt flow indexes of 3.+-.0.5 g/10 min (at 190.degree. C. per ASTM D-1288), a flexural moduluses of about 2500-3500 psi (per ASTM D-790). Furthermore, testing by an independent testing laboratory by pyrolysis mass spectrometry indicates that the Iotek 7520 resins are generally zinc salts of a terpolymer of ethylene, acrylic acid, and methyl acrylate.
Examples of the most preferred methacrylic acid based soft (low modulus) ionomer resins suitable for use in the invention include Surlyn.RTM. 8625 and Surlyn.RTM. 8629. The typical properties of these ionomers are listed below:
TABLE 4______________________________________Typical Properties of Surlyn .RTM. LowModulus Ionomer ResinsTypical Properties ASTM-D AD-8265 AD-8629______________________________________Cation Type Sodium SodiumMelt Flow Index, gms/10 min. D-1238 0.9 0.9Specific Gravity D-792 0.94 0.94Hardness, Shore A/D 92/39 84/25Tensile Strength, (kpsi) D-638 (4.2) 28.8 (3.1) 21.2MPaElongation, % D-638 660 770Flexural Modulus, (kpsi) D-790 (7.1) 49.1 (2.8) 19.3MPaTensile Impact (23.degree. C.) D-18225 494 (235) 447 (213)KJ/m.sup.2(ft-lbs/in.sup.2)Melting Point, .degree.C. DTA 81 72Freezing Point, .degree.C. DTA 51 38Vicat Temperature, .degree.C. D-1525 51 48______________________________________
The superior golf balls of the present invention containing the improved hard-soft ionomer blends can be generally produced from a central core and an outer cover wherein the outer cover is made from a composition comprised of a blend of from about 90 to about 70 weight percent of at least one hard ionomer, and from about 10 to about 30 weight percent of at least one soft ionomer, preferably a methacrylic acid soft ionomer.
More preferably, it has been found that a golf ball exhibiting properties of enhanced travel distance (i.e. higher C.O.R. values) with similar or improved playability (i.e. compression characteristics etc.) without a sacrifice in durability, can be produced from a core and a cover, wherein the cover is made from a composition comprised from about 90 weight to about 75 percent of at least one hard ionomer resin, and from about 10 to about 25 weight percent of at least one soft ionomer resin, preferably a methacrylic acid soft ionomer.
Additional materials may also be added to the compositions of the present invention, including dyes (for example, Ultramarine Blue sold by Whitaker, Clark, and Daniels of South Plainsfield, N.J.) (see U.S. Pat. No. 4,679,795), pigments such as titanium dioxide, zinc oxide, barium sulfate and zinc sulfate; UV absorbers; antioxidants; antistatic agents; and stabilizers. Moreover, the cover compositions of the present invention may also contain softening agents, such as plasticizers, processing aids, etc., and reinforcing materials such as glass fibers and inorganic fillers, as long as the desired properties produced by the golf ball covers of the invention are not impaired.
The cover compositions of the present invention may be produced according to conventional melt blending procedures. Generally, the hard ionomer resins are blended with the soft ionomeric resins in a Banbury type mixer, two-roll mill, or extruder prior to molding. The blended composition is then formed into slabs and maintained in such a state until molding is desired. If necessary, further additives such as inorganic fillers, antioxidants, stabilizers, and/or zinc oxide may be added and uniformly mixed before initiation of the molding process.
The golf balls of the present invention can be produced by molding processes currently well known in the golf ball art. Specifically, the golf balls can be produced by injection molding or compression molding the novel cover compositions about wound or solid molded cores to produce a golf ball having a diameter of about 1.680 inches and weighing about 1.620 ounces. The standards for both the diameter and weight of the balls are established by the United States Golf Association (U.S.G.A.). Although both solid core and wound cores can be utilized in the present invention, as a result their lower cost and superior performance, solid molded cores are preferred over wound cores.
Conventional solid cores are typically compression molded from a slug of uncured or lightly cured elastomer composition comprising a high cis content polybutadiene and a metal salt of an .alpha., .beta., ethylenically unsaturated carboxylic acid such as zinc mono or diacrylate or methacrylate. To achieve higher coefficients of restitution in the core, the manufacturer may include a small amount of a metal oxide such as zinc oxide. In addition, larger amounts of metal oxide than are needed to achieve the desired coefficient may be included in order to increase the core weight so that the finished ball more closely approaches the U.S.G.A. upper weight limit of 1.620 ounces. Other materials may be used in the core composition including compatible rubbers or ionomers, and low molecular weight fatty acids such as stearic acid. Free radical initiator catalysts such as peroxides are admixed with the core composition so that on the application of heat and pressure, a complex curing or cross-linking reaction takes place.
The term "solid cores" as used herein refers not only to one piece cores but also to those cores having a separate solid layer beneath the cover and above the core as in U.S. Pat. No. 4,431,193, and other multilayer and/or non-wound cores.
Wound cores are generally produced by winding a very large elastic thread around a solid or liquid filled balloon center. The elastic thread is wound around the center to produce a finished core of about 1.4 to 1.6 inches in diameter, generally. Since the core material is not an integral part of the present invention, a detailed discussion concerning the specific types of core materials which may be utilized with the cover compositions of the invention are not specifically set forth herein. In this regard, the cover compositions of the invention may be used in conjunction with any standard golf ball core.
As indicated, the golf balls of the present invention may be produced by forming covers consisting of the compositions of the invention around cores by conventional molding processes. For example, in compression molding, the cover composition is formed via injection at about 380.degree. F. to about 450.degree. F. into smooth surfaced hemispherical shells which are then positioned around the core in a dimpled golf ball mold and subjected to compression molding at 200.degree.-300.degree. F. for 2-10 minutes, followed by cooling at 50.degree.-70.degree. F. for 2-10 minutes, to fuse the shells together to form an unitary ball. In addition, the golf balls may be produced by injection molding, wherein the cover composition is injected directly around the core placed in the center of a golf ball mold for a period of time at a mold temperature of from 50.degree. F. to about 100.degree. F. After molding the golf balls produced may undergo various further processing steps such as buffing, painting, and marking.
The resulting golf balls produced from the novel hard-soft ionomeric resin combinations of the present invention exhibit enhanced distance and playability properties over the art without sacrificing durability. This is due to the use of methacrylic acid based ionomers as the soft ionomer in the overall cover stock composition.

The present invention is further illustrated by the following examples in which the parts of the specific ingredients are by weight. It is to be understood that the present invention is not limited to the examples, and various changes and modifications may be made in the invention without departing from the spirit and scope thereof.
EXAMPLES
By blending the ingredients set forth in the Tables below, a series of cover formulations were produced. In the examples, cover formulations containing the soft ionomer-hard ionomer blends of the present invention (Examples 2-5 and 9-23) were compared with the hard-soft ionomer blends of the prior art including the hard-soft ionomer blends utilized to produce the current Top Flite.RTM. XL II ball (see Example 1) which is the subject of U.S. Pat. No. 4,911,451, the current Tour Edition.RTM.100 ball (see Examples 8 and 24) which is the subject of U.S. Pat. No. 4,884,814, and the current Tour Edition.RTM. 90 ball (Example 7) which is the subject matter of co-pending U.S. application Ser. No. 559,177.
In addition, the properties produced by the cover compositions formulated with the soft ionomer-hard ionomer blends of the present invention (Examples 2-5 and 9-23) were compared to the properties produced by the commercial representatives of the Tour Edition.RTM., Tour Edition.RTM. 100 and the Top Flite.RTM. II balls currently being sold by Spalding & Evenflo Companies, Inc., Tampa, Florida, as well as a wide variety of competitive golf balls available in the market place.
Along this line, the current Tour Edition.RTM. ball is unique in that it is a two piece (solid core, molded cover) ball that meets the needs of golfers who demand superior control, historically obtained only with balata covered wound balls. It offers superior playability at the sacrifice of coefficient of restitution, which relates directly to distance.
The Tour Edition.RTM. 100 ball has a slightly softer cover than the Tour Edition.RTM. ball and utilizes a unique octahelix dimple design. The Tour Edition.RTM. 100 ball more closely meets the demands of the pro tour golfer than any other Spalding ball previously produced.
The Top Flite.RTM. ball is considered to be a "hard" Surlyn or Iotek ionomeric resin ball. As a result of the ball's hardness, the Top Flite.RTM. ball is a difficult ball for golfers to control. Generally, the harder the golf ball, the more difficult it is for a golfer to impart spin to the ball, and hence, control the ball during flight. However, as a result of its outstanding durability and maximum distance, the ball is widely accepted by a large percentage of golfers.
The present invention is directed to various blends of hard ionomers and soft ionomers, which, when utilized for golf ball cover construction, produce intermediate modulus golf balls closely approaching the superior distance properties exhibited by the current Top Flite.RTM. ball without sacrificing the playability characteristics of the current Tour Edition.RTM. ball.
The cover formulations set forth below in Tables 5, 6 and 7 were injection molded at 400.degree. F. around identical solid type cores having a finished diameter of 1.545 inches to produce golf balls approximately 1.680 inches in diameter having nominal cover thickness of 0.0675 inches. The properties of Riehle compression, coefficient of restitution (C.O.R.), Shore Hardness, impact resistance, and spin rate for the cover formulation were determined. The data for each example represents the average data for one dozen balls produced according to the desired manner. The properties were measured according to the following parameters:
Riehle compression is a measurement of the deformation of a golf ball in inches under a fixed static load of 225 pounds.
Coefficient of restitution (C.O.R.) was measured by firing the resulting golf ball is an air cannon at a velocity of 125 feet per second against a steel plate which is positioned 12 feet from the muzzle of the cannon. The rebound velocity was then measured. The rebound velocity was divided by the forward velocity to give the coefficient of restitution. Shore hardness was measured in accordance with ASTM Test 2240.
Cut resistance was measured in accordance with the following procedure: A golf ball is fired at 135 feet per second against the leading edge of a pitching wedge, wherein the leading edge radius is 1/32 inch, the loft angle is 51 degrees, the sole radius is 2.5 inches, and the bounce angle is 7 degrees.
The cut resistance of the balls tested herein was evaluated on a scale of 1-5. 1 represents a cut that extends completely through the cover to the core; a 2 represents a cut that does not extend completely through the cover but that does break the surface; a 3 does not break the surface of the cover but does leave a permanent dent; a 4 leaves only a slight crease which is permanent but not as severe as 3; and a 5 represents virtually no visible indentation or damage of any sort.
The spin rate of the golf ball was measured by striking the resulting golf balls with a pitching wedge or 9-iron wherein the club-head speed is about 80 feet per second and the ball is launched at an angle of 26 to 34 degrees with an initial velocity of about 110-115 feet per second. The spin rate was measured by observing the rotation of the ball in flight using stop action Strobe photography.
Initial velocity is the velocity of a golf ball when struck at a hammer speed of 143.8 feet per second in accordance with a test as prescribed by the U.S.G.A.
TABLE 5__________________________________________________________________________Formulations__________________________________________________________________________Ingredients 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8__________________________________________________________________________Surlyn .RTM. 8269 -- 7.0 10.5 17.5 21.0 35.0 -- 49.1Surlyn .RTM. 8625 -- 3.0 4.5 7.5 9.0 15.0 -- 21.4Surlyn .RTM. 9910 -- 60.2 56.5 49.0 45.3 30.3 -- 15.2Surlyn .RTM. 8940 -- 20.2 18.9 16.4 15.1 10.1 -- 4.72714 White MB.sup.1 -- 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6 -- 9.6Iotek 8000 45.2 -- -- -- -- -- 22.7 --Iotek 7030 45.2 -- -- -- -- -- 22.7 --Iotek 7520 -- -- -- -- -- -- 45.0 --2810 White MB.sup.2 9.6 -- -- -- -- -- 9.6 --PropertiesWeight, grams 45.1 45.3 45.2 45.1 45.3 45.4 45.1 45.2Riehle Compression 56 59 60 62 61 61 64 64C.O.R. .824 .815 .812 .809 .808 .804 .800 .801Shore D Hardness 56 59 60 62 61 61 64 64Cut Resistance 4-5 4-5 4-5 4-5 4 3-4 3-4 3-4(5 = No visible mark)(1 = Clean cut throughcover)Spin Rate (RPM) 6,255 7,744 7,986 8,339 8,383 8,856 9,246 8,966(Tour Edition #9 Iron)__________________________________________________________________________Also tested:Titleist (Balata) Tour 100: .784 C.O.R. 9,397 RPM 1-2 cutTitleist DT 90: .789 C.O.R. 7,658 RPM 4-5 cutTitleist DT 100: .799 C.O.R. 7,928 RPM 4-5 cut__________________________________________________________________________ .sup.1 2714 White MB (Master Batch) is comprised of 75.85% Surlyn .RTM. 8528, 23.77% Unitane 0110, 0.05% Ultra Blue, 0.22% Unitex O.B. and 0.03% Santonox R. .sup.2 2810 White MB (Master Batch) is comprise of 75.85% Iotek 7030, 23.77% Unitane 0110, 0.05% ULtra Blue, 0.22% Unitex O.B., and 0.03% Santonox R.
TABLE 6__________________________________________________________________________Formulations__________________________________________________________________________Ingredients 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20__________________________________________________________________________Surlyn .RTM. 8269 17.5 25.0 -- 7.0 8.8 10.5 12.3 14.0 15.8 19.3 15.0 --Surlyn .RTM. 8265 7.5 -- 25.0 3.0 3.7 4.5 5.2 6.0 6.7 8.2 -- 15.0Surlyn .RTM. 9910 49.0 49.0 49.0 60.2 58.4 56.5 54.6 52.7 50.9 47.1 56.5 56.5Surlyn .RTM. 8940 16.4 16.4 16.4 20.2 19.5 18.9 18.3 17.7 17.0 15.8 18.9 18.92714 White MB 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6PropertiesWeight, 45.0 45.1 44.9 45.1 45.1 45.1 45.1 45.1 45.3 45.1 45.2 45.1gramsRiehle 64 64 63 62 61 62 62 62 63 64 62 61CompressionC.O.R. .805 .802 .807 .809 .809 .807 .806 .807 .804 .802 .807 .808Shore D 61 61 59 62 60 63 61 61 60 60 62 62HardnessCut Test 4/4 34/5 4/5 4/5 4/5 4/5 4/5 4/5 4/5 4/5 4/5 4/5Spin Rate 8610 8552 8695 8390 8250 8506 8424 8392 8604 8875 8396 8306(RPM, 9Iron)__________________________________________________________________________Additional Balls Tested: Spin (RPM) Shore D Hardness Cut__________________________________________________________________________Titleist Tour 100 Balata 9812 50 4/5Titleist DT 90 8485 66 4/5Tour Edition 100 9947 52 4/5Tour Edition 90 9765 54 4/5Top-Flite XL II 7479 65 4/5__________________________________________________________________________
TABLE 7______________________________________FormulationsIngredients 21 22 23 24 25 26.sup.1______________________________________Surlyn .RTM. 17.5 17.5 17.5 49.1 49.1 --8269Surlyn .RTM. 7.5 7.5 7.5 21.4 21.4 --8625Surlyn .RTM. 49.0 -- 24.5 15.2 -- --9910Surlyn .RTM. 16.4 -- 8.2 4.7 -- --8940Surlyn .RTM. -- 65.4 32.7 -- 19.9 --79402714 White 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6 --MBPropertiesWeight, 45.2 45.1 45.0 45.5 45.5 45.3gramsRiehle 63 62 63 57 59 54CompressionC.O.R. .811 .812 .812 .812 .812 .815Shore C 93 93 93 86 86 98HardnessCut Re- 4-5 4-5 4-5 4 4 4-5sistance(1 = cut thruto core5 = no visi-ble marking)Spin Rate 8,935 8,830 8,656 10,240 10,219 7,881(RPM, 9Iron)______________________________________ .sup.1 Production TopFlite .RTM. XL-II
DISCUSSION OF THE EXAMPLES
The above Examples indicate that use of relatively low amounts of soft ionomers (i.e. from about 10 to about 25-30 percent) in combination with relatively large amounts of hard ionomers (i.e. from about 70-75 to about 90%) produces golf balls exhibiting higher C.O.R. values (i.e. thus better distance) while maintaining, and in some instances slightly improving the compression and playability characteristics of the balls.
In addition, as it can be seen when comparing Examples 6 and 8 (i.e. U.S. Pat. No. 4,884,414) with Examples 2-5 (the present invention), the balls of the '814 patent produced enhanced spin properties versus the present invention. However, the enhanced spin rates of the '814 patent were produced at the expense of C.O.R. (and hence distance) and cut resistance.
Furthermore, when the balls of the present invention (i.e. Examples 2-5) containing relatively low amounts of soft ionomer resin (preferably methacrylic acid based soft ionomers) were compared with the balls comprised of 100% hard ionomer resin (Example 1), the balls of the present invention produced greatly enhanced spin characteristics, although some loss in distance was also noted. Examples 2-5 in Table 5 and Examples 9-20 in Table 6 also indicate that a slight decrease in C.O.R. and an increase in spin occurs as the amount of the soft ionomer was increased. Along this line, the data shows that the addition of only 10 percent of the soft ionomer (see Example 12) was enough to produce spin rates much higher than balls deficient in soft ionomer content (i.e. the Top-Flite.RTM. XL II ball).
The data suggests that the preferred range of the present invention is from about 10 to about 30 percent of soft ionomer, a more preferred range being from about 10 to about 25 percent of soft ionomer, and a most preferred range being about 25 percent of soft ionomer (i.e. Examples 4 and 9).
In addition, when comparing the spin rates and C.O.R. values of the balls of the present invention with the Titleist.RTM. DT 90 and the Titleist.RTM. DT 100 balls (i.e. the ionomer resin-covered wound balls trademarked and sold by the Acushnet Co.), a significant advantage in distance (higher C.O.R. values) and/or spin rates were observed without any significant decreases in durability (i.e. cut resistance, etc.) being noted. Consequently, while the Titleist.RTM. DT balls are reportedly advantageous as a result of the use of the wound versus solid core (i.e. because the wound core is softer than the solid core, the softer core is said by Acushnet to have the ability to deform, thereby giving better control to the golfer) the test results indicated that the present invention produces substantially similar playability characteristics at much longer distances.
Furthermore, the data set forth in Table 7 indicates than in addition to the sodium and zinc neutralized hard ionomer resins, lithium neutralized hard ionomer resins can be incorporated into the hard/soft ionomer blends to produce very similar results. That is, there is no measurable advantage or disadvantage in using a lithium neutralized hard ionomer resin as the hard ionomer component of the hard/soft blends of the invention in comparison to the sodium and/or zinc neutralized hard ionomer resins.
More specifically, in Table 7, Example 21 is representative of the more preferred formulations of the present invention (see Examples 4 and 9 also) produced utilizing various combinations of sodium and zinc ionomer resins as the hard ionomer component of the hard/soft blends. In addition, Example 24 is representative of Spalding's Tour Edition.RTM. 100 cover formulation. Examples 22 and 23 contain the same ratio of hard to soft ionomer as Example 21, but in Example 2, the hard ionomer component is all lithium neutralized (excluding the hard ionomer content comprising the white masterbatch), and in Example 23, the hard ionomer component is a blend of zinc, sodium and lithium ionomers. Moreover, Example 25 comprises the same ration of hard/soft as Example 24, but in Example 25, the hard ionomer component is all lithium. As indicated in Table 7, Example 26 is representative of Spalding's production Top-Flite.RTM. XL II ball. Example 26 has been included for comparison purposes.
The results set forth in Table 7 clearly indicate that the choice of the metal cation (i.e. lithium, sodium or zinc) employed in the hard ionomer component of these blends have little bearing in determining the properties (i.e. C.O.R., spin, cut resistance, etc.) of the molded ball as long as the remaining characteristics (i.e. hardness, flexural modulus, etc.) are met. However, as indicated in the Formulations set forth in Tables 5, 6 and 7, the use of relatively low amounts of soft ionomers (i.e. from about 10 to about 25-30 percent) in combination with relatively large amounts of hard ionomers (i.e. from about 70-75 to 90% of sodium, zinc and/or lithium neutralized hard ionomers) produces golf balls exhibiting higher C.O.R. values (i.e. better distance) while maintaining, and in some circumstances, improving the compression and playability characteristics of the molded balls.
In addition to the above indicated test results, the distance and playability properties of the more preferred formulations of the present invention (i.e. Examples 4, 9 and 21), which are representative of the chemical composition of Spalding's new, longer distance and slightly softer, Top Flite.RTM. Tour 90 golf balls (i.e. Top Flite.RTM. Tour XL, Top Flite.RTM. Tour 90 and Top Flite.RTM. Tour Plus 90 based upon differences in dimple patterns) were compared with various combinations of Spalding's current Top Flite.RTM. golf balls having similar dimple patterns (i.e. Top Flite.RTM. XL, Top Flite.RTM. II and Top Flite.RTM. Plus golf balls), as well as a number of competitive golf balls, such as Titleist.RTM. DT 90. The following performance results were produced:
TABLE 8______________________________________Distance TestConditions Before Test After Test:______________________________________Launch Angle - degrees 8.9 N/ABill Speed - fps 214.2 N/ASpin Rate - rpm 2850 N/ATurf Condition FIRM FIRMWind - mph/dir. 0/0 0/0Temp/RH - det/% 99/48.4 100/50______________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________Test Results__________________________________________________________________________Ball Flight Carry Total TotalType Traj Time Carry Diff Ctr Dev Roll Dist Diff__________________________________________________________________________TFXLCON 12.7 6.0 229.5 -0.9 6.17 29.3 258.8 -2.9TRIICON 12.2 5.9 228.7 -1.7 6.21 33.0 261.6 0.0TFPLCON 12.4 5.9 229.4 -1.0 7.13 28.2 257.6 -4.0TOURXL90 12.7 6.0 230.4 0.0 7.00 30.3 260.7 -1.0TOUR90 11.9 5.8 227.5 -2.9 4.29 31.8 259.3 -1.8PLUS90 12.2 5.8 227.8 -2.6 6.67 32.3 259.9 -1.8TITDT90 12.6 6.2 226.8 -3.5 8.8 23.2 250.0 -11.6__________________________________________________________________________ KEY TO BALL TYPES: TFXLCON = TFXL CONTROL (410 Hex Dimple) TFIICON = TF II CONTROL (422 Octa Dimple) TFPLCON = TF PLUS CONTROL (422 Tri Dimple) TOURXL90 = TF TOUR XL 90 (422 Hex Dimple) TOUR90 = TF TOUR 90 (422 Hex Dimple) PLUS 90 = TF TOUR PLUS 90 (422 Tri Dimple) TITDT90 = TITLEIST DT 90
The distance testing demonstrated a 9-10 yard advantage of the present invention over the Titleist.RTM. DT ball, a ball demonstrating comparable spin characteristics to the balls of the present invention. Furthermore, the distance test demonstrated that the balls of the invention produced relatively similar distance data when compared to the balls of U.S. Pat. No. 4,911,451, while exhibiting greatly enhanced playability (spin rates, compression etc.) properties.
As a result, the new hard-soft ionomer blends of the present invention produce golf balls exhibiting properties of enhanced distance and playability without sacrificing durability.
The invention has been described with reference to the preferred embodiment. Obviously, modifications and alterations will occur to others upon reading and understanding the preceding detailed description. It is intended that the invention be construed as including all such modifications and alterations insofar as they come within the scope of the appended claims or the equivalents thereof.

Number	Name	Date
3264272	Rees	Aug 1966
4431193	Nesbitt	Feb 1984
4674751	Molitor et al.	Jun 1987
4679795	Melvin et al.	Jul 1987
4690981	Statz	Sep 1987
4884814	Sullivan	Dec 1989
4911451	Sullivan et al.	Mar 1990
5120791	Sullivan	Jun 1992

	Number	Date	Country
Parent	865212	Apr 1992
Parent	559177	Jul 1990

Golf ball cover compositions

Information

Patent Number

Date Filed

Date Issued

Inventors

Original Assignees

Examiners

CPC

US Classifications

Field of Search

US

International Classifications

Abstract

Description

Claims

Parent Case Info

US Referenced Citations (8)

Non-Patent Literature Citations (2)

Continuation in Parts (2)

Entry
E. I. Du Pont de Nemours & Co., Inc., "Ionomer Blends for Golf Ball Covers," Research Disclosure #27103, Kenneth Mason Publications Ltd., Nov. 1986.
E. I. Du Pont de Nemours & Co., "Golf Balls Based on Lithium Ionomers or Blends with Lithium Ionomers", Research Disclosure #27221, Kenneth Mason Publications Ltd., Dec. 1986.