The present invention relates to a golf ball dimples, and more particularly, to the contour of the dimple surface being defined by superposed curves. More specifically, the cross section of a dimple is based on the superposition of two or more continuous and differentiable functions that yield valid solutions. In one embodiment, the present invention even more specifically relates to a golf ball dimple having a cross section shape based on the superposition of a catenary curve and a Witch of Agnesi curve. In another embodiment, the present invention even more specifically relates to a golf ball dimple having a cross section shape based on the superposition of a spherical curve and a cosine curve.
Golf balls were originally made with smooth outer surfaces. In the late nineteenth century, players observed that the gutta-percha golf balls traveled further as they got older and more gouged up. The players then began to roughen the surface of new golf balls with a hammer to increase flight distance. Manufacturers soon caught on and began molding non-smooth outer surfaces on golf balls.
By the mid 1900's, almost every golf ball being made had 336 dimples arranged in an octahedral pattern. Generally, these balls had about 60 percent of their outer surface covered by dimples. Over time, improvements in ball performance were developed by utilizing different dimple patterns. In 1983, for instance, Titleist introduced the TITLEIST 384, which, not surprisingly, had 384 dimples that were arranged in an icosahedral pattern. About 76 percent of its outer surface was covered with dimples and the golf ball exhibited improved aerodynamic performance. Today, dimpled golf balls travel nearly two times farther than a similar ball without dimples.
The dimples on a golf ball are important in reducing drag and increasing lift. Drag is the air resistance that acts on the golf ball in the opposite direction from the ball flight direction. As the ball travels through the air, the air surrounding the ball has different velocities and, thus, different pressures. The air exerts maximum pressure at the stagnation point on the front of the ball. The air then flows over the sides of the ball and has increased velocity and reduced pressure. At some point it separates from the surface of the ball, leaving a large turbulent flow area called the wake that has low pressure. The difference in the high pressure in front of the ball and the low pressure behind the ball slows the ball down. This is the primary source of drag for a golf ball.
The dimples on the ball create a turbulent boundary layer around the ball, i.e., a thin layer of air adjacent to the ball flows in a turbulent manner. The turbulence energizes the boundary layer of air around the ball and helps it stay attached further around the ball to reduce the area of the wake. This greatly increases the pressure behind the ball and substantially reduces the drag.
Lift is the upward force on the ball that is created from a difference in pressure on the top of the ball to the bottom of the ball. The difference in pressure is created by a warpage in the air flow resulting from the ball's back spin. Due to the back spin, the top of the ball moves with the air flow, which delays the separation to a point further aft. Conversely, the bottom of the ball moves against the air flow, moving the separation point forward. This asymmetrical separation creates an arch in the flow pattern, requiring the air over the top of the ball to move faster, and thus have lower pressure than the air underneath the ball.
Golf ball manufacturers extensively study the effect of dimple shape, volume, and cross -section on overall flight performance of the ball. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,737,757 discusses making dimples using two different spherical radii with an inflection point where the two curves meet. In most cases, however, the cross-sectional profiles of dimples in prior art golf balls are parabolic curves, ellipses, semi-spherical curves, saucer-shaped, a sine curve, a truncated cone, or a flattened trapezoid. One disadvantage of these shapes is that they can sharply intrude into the surface of the ball, which may cause the drag to become greater than the lift. As a result, the ball may not make best use of momentum initially imparted thereto, resulting in an insufficient carry of the ball.
Golf ball manufacturers also research dimple patterns, including, for example, overall dimple count and surface coverage, in order to improve the aerodynamic forces on the ball during flight and increase the distance traveled by a golf ball. A high degree of dimple coverage is generally beneficial to flight distance, but only if the dimples are of preferred size and shape. For example, dimple coverage gained by filling spaces with tiny dimples is generally not very effective, since tiny dimples are not good turbulence generators.
Most prior art dimple patterns utilize a dimple count of 250 to 400 with a surface coverage of 75% or greater. For dimple counts less than 250, if the surface coverage is to be maintained, larger average dimple diameters are required, which may lead to diminished aerodynamic efficiency. The present invention seeks to address this issue by providing novel dimple shapes wherein additional variation is created on the dimple surface. These novel dimple shapes potentially create a more turbulent dimple surface, allowing for dimple patterns having unconventionally low dimple counts and large average dimple diameters to simulate the aerodynamic performance of dimple patterns having conventional dimple counts and average dimple diameters.
The present invention is a golf ball having a surface with a plurality of recessed dimples thereon, wherein at least one of the dimples has a cross-section that can be defined by the superposition of two or more curves defined by continuous and differentiable functions that have valid solutions. The golf ball dimples preferably have a circular boundary and maintain an axis coincident with a center of the circular boundary.
In one embodiment, the dimple profile is defined by combining a spherical curve and a different curve, such as a cosine curve, a frequency curve or a catenary curve. In a particular aspect of this embodiment, the dimple profile is defined by a superposed function resulting from the sum of a spherical function and a cosine function. In a further particular aspect of this embodiment, the profile includes at least two, or at least three, or at least four, localized peaks. Localized peaks are points on the profile, not including the points where the profile meets the land area of the golf ball, where the first derivative of the superposed function at that point is equal to zero and the second derivative of the superposed function at that point is less than zero.
In another embodiment, the dimple profile is defined by combining a cosine curve and a different curve. In yet another embodiment, the dimple profile is defined by the superposition of a frequency curve and a different curve. In still another embodiment, the dimple profile is defined by the superposition of a catenary curve and different curve. In a particular aspect of this embodiment, the dimple profile is defined by the superposition of a catenary curve and a Witch of Agnesi curve.
The present invention is also directed to a golf ball having a surface with a plurality of recessed dimples thereon, including a plurality of axially symmetric cat-witch dimples having a profile defined by a function resulting from the sum of a catenary function and a Witch of Agnesi function. The plurality of cat-witch dimples comprises at least one cat-witch dimple having a first diameter (DD1) and a first chord depth, and at least one cat-witch dimple having a second diameter (DD2) and a second chord depth. DD1 is at least 0.005 inches greater than DD2. The chord depth difference, δCD, between the first chord depth and the second chord depth is at least 0.001 inches. The profile depth difference, δPD, between the profile depth of the cat-witch dimple having the first diameter and the profile depth of the cat-witch dimple having the second diameter, at every distance DC from the center of the dimple, where
is from
The present invention is similarly directed to golf ball having a surface with a plurality of recessed dimples thereon, wherein at least one of the dimples has a cross-section that can be defined by the superposition of three or more curves defined by continuous and differentiable functions that have valid solutions.
It is preferred that all of the dimple profiles on the ball be similar. However, in certain embodiments, the profiles can be varied over the surface of the ball and the dimples can have different diameters and depths.
These and other aspects of the present invention may be more fully understood with references to, but not limited by, the following drawings:
The present invention is a golf ball which comprises dimples having a cross section defined by the superposition of two or more continuous and differentiable functions. Additionally, the dimples preferably have a circular boundary and maintain an axis coincident with the center of the circular boundary.
Dimples that are defined by superposed curves provide greater opportunity to control the dimple cross-section and therefore, provide dimples that improve the flight characteristics of the golf ball. This method is capable of producing an unlimited number of unique dimple shapes produced using the superposition principle. In embodiments herein where the dimple shape is axially symmetric and maintains a circular boundary, hob and cavity manufacture remains similar to those for conventionally shaped prior art dimple profiles.
The Superposition Principle states that for linear homogenous ordinary differential equations, if y1(x) and y2(x) yield valid solutions, then the sum of y1(x) and y2(x) will also yield a valid solution. (Weisstein, Eric W. “Superposition Principle”) This allows the combination of equations that are continuous and differentiable, and combining their solutions creates unique dimple profiles.
Several examples of dimple cross sections according to the present invention are illustrated by referencing
Another example of a dimple profile is illustrated by reference to
Yet another example of the present invention is the superposition of more than 2 functions. For example, a frequency curve, catenary curve and cosine curve as shown in
Another example of the present invention is the combination of a catenary curve 30 and a spherical curve 21 to form the catenary-spherical curve dimple profile 53 shown in
Each of
In
where dCAT is chord depth (in inches), DD is dimple diameter (in inches), and SF, referred to as shape factor, is a constant selected to alter the steepness of the sidewall. In
In
where DD is dimple diameter (in inches); C1, referred to as steepness factor, is a constant selected to alter the steepness of the sidewall; C2, referred to as curvature factor, is a constant selected to alter the radius of curvature of the sidewall; and a, referred to as depth factor, is a constant selected to alter the depth of the profile. In
Golf ball dimple profiles defined using catenary curves are further disclosed, for example, in U.S. Pat. No. 7,641,572, the entire disclosure of which is hereby incorporated herein by reference. Golf ball dimple profiles defined using Witch of Agnesi curves are further disclosed, for example, in U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0122613, the entire disclosure of which is hereby incorporated herein by reference.
Dimples having a profile shape defined by the superposition of a catenary curve and a Witch of Agnesi curve, herein referred to as cat-witch dimples, preferably have a circular plan shape and a dimple diameter of from 0.100 inches to 0.220 inches. The chord volume of the cat -Witch dimple profile is calculated by summing the individual chord volume contributions of the catenary profile and the Witch profile. The chord volume of a catenary dimple profile, VCAT, is defined as:
where DD is dimple diameter (in inches).
The chord volume of a Witch of Agnesi dimple profile, VW, is defined as:
Thus, the chord volume of the cat-witch dimple profile, VD, is equal to VCAT+VW.
ν1=407.14DD2−17.79DD−0.09
curve 2 is defined by the equation:
ν2=66.67DD2+35.33DD−2.80
curve 3 is defined by the equation:
ν3=319.05DD2−3.76DD−0.81
and curve 4 is defined by the equation:
ν4=152.86DD2+20.59DD−1.93
where DD is the dimple diameter and v is the respective chord volume. In a particular embodiment, the cat-witch dimples have a chord volume within a range having a lower limit defined by curve 2 and an upper limit defined by curve 1. In another particular embodiment, the cat-witch dimples have a chord volume within a range having a lower limit defined by curve 4 and an upper limit defined by curve 3.
Cat-witch dimples of the present invention preferably have a surface depth, defined herein as the distance from the phantom ball surface to the bottom of the dimple, of 0.020 inches or less, or 0.015 inches or less.
Cat-witch dimples of the present invention preferably have a chord depth, defined herein as the distance from the chord plane to the bottom of the dimple, of from 0.004 inches to 0.013 inches.
In a particular embodiment, the present invention provides a golf ball comprising cat -witch dimples of two or more different diameters. For purposes of the present invention, dimple diameters are generally considered to be different if they differ by at least 0.005 inches. It should be understood that manufacturing variances are to be taken into account when determining whether two dimples have different diameters. For purposes of the present disclosure, dimples with a non-circular plan shape have an effective dimple diameter defined as twice the average radial distance of the set of points defining the plan shape from the plan shape centroid.
In a preferred aspect of this embodiment, at least two cat-witch dimples having different diameters have a consistent depth variation, i.e., have a similar shape. The cat-witch dimples of this preferred aspect of the invention have a circular plan shape and are axially symmetric. The determination of “consistent depth variation” between two cat-witch dimples having different diameters is conducted on the profile of the dimples according to the following procedure. An evaluation zone is defined as the portion of the two dimple profiles extending from the center of the dimple to a distance
measured radially outward from the center, where DD is the diameter of the dimple having the smaller diameter of the two dimples being evaluated for consistent depth variation. The difference in the chord depth of the two dimples being evaluated, δCD, is calculated, and is typically at least 0.001 inches. If, within the evaluation zone, at every given distance from the center of the dimple, the difference in the profile depth of the two dimples being evaluated, δPD, falls within a range having a lower limit of
and an upper limit of
then the dimples have consistent depth variation. For purposes of the present invention, profile depth is defined herein as the distance from the chord plane to the profile of the dimple at a given distance from the center of the dimple.
For example,
In a particular aspect of the embodiment shown in
where dCAT is 0.0027 inches and SF is 100. The value for DD is different for each of profiles 210, 220, and 230, and is given in Table 1 below. The Witch of Agnesi curve is defined by the equation:
where C1 is 4 and C2 is 4. The values for DD and a are different for each of profiles 210, 220, and 230, and are given in Table 1 below.
DD being the diameter of the dimple having the smaller diameter of the two dimples being evaluated. Thus, distance 226 is
or 0.0375 inches. The difference in the chord depth of the two dimples being evaluated, δCD, is calculated as 0.0018 inches. For the dimple having the profile 210 and the dimple having the profile 220 to be considered as having consistent depth variation, the difference, δCD, between the profile depth of profile 210 and the profile depth of profile 220 must be within a range having a lower limit of
0.0009 inches in this example, and an upper limit
0.0027 inches in this example, at every distance from the center axis 202 that is within the evaluation zone 206. The maximum difference between the profile depth of profile 210 and the profile depth of profile 220, within the evaluation zone 206, was determined to be 0.0018 inches. The minimum difference between the profile depth of profile 210 and the profile depth of profile 220, within the evaluation zone 206, was determined to be 0.0009 inches. Thus, within the evaluation zone 206, at every given distance from the center axis 202, the profile depth difference, δPD, falls within a range of from 0.0009 inches to 0.0027 inches. The cat-witch dimple having the profile 210 and the cat-witch dimple having the profile 220, therefore, have consistent depth variation.
DD being the diameter of the dimple having the smaller diameter of the two dimples being evaluated. Thus, distance 236 is
or 0.0250 inches. The difference in the chord depth of the two dimples being evaluated, δCD, is calculated as 0.0048 inches. For the dimple having the profile 210 and the dimple having the profile 230 to be considered as having consistent depth variation, the difference, δCD, between the profile depth of profile 210 and the profile depth of profile 230 must be within a range having a lower limit of
0.0024 inches in this example, and an upper limit of
0.0072 inches in this example, at every distance from the center axis 202 that is within the evaluation zone 206. The maximum difference between the profile depth of profile 210 and the profile depth of profile 230, within the evaluation zone 206, was determined to be 0.0048 inches. The minimum difference between the profile depth of profile 210 and the profile depth of profile 230, within the evaluation zone 206, was determined to be 0.0024 inches. Thus, within the evaluation zone 206, at every given distance from the center axis 202, the profile depth difference,δPD, falls within a range of from 0.0024 inches to 0.0072 inches. The cat-witch dimple having the profile 210 and the cat-witch dimple having the profile 230, therefore, have consistent depth variation.
In a particular embodiment, dimple profiles of the present invention optionally include at least two localized peaks. Localized peaks are defined as follows. The minimum distance from a point along the dimple profile to the chord plane is given as dprofile. For any given point along the dimple profile, not including points having a dprofile value of 0 (i.e., not including points where the profile meets the land area of the ball), if the point to either side along the profile of said point has a higher dprofile value than said point, then said point is a localized peak. In other words, a localized peak is a point along the dimple profile where (1) the slope of a line tangent to the profile at that point is parallel to the chord plane and (2) the profile at that point is part of a concave down curve. In mathematical terms, a localized peak is a point along the dimple profile, not including any point where the profile meets the land area of the ball, where the first derivative of the superposed function at that point is equal to zero and the second derivative of the superposed function at that point is less than zero.
For example,
In a particular embodiment, the present invention provides a golf ball with a surface coverage of about 79.1% and a dimple count of 148, wherein each of the dimples is a spherical -cosine dimple having a profile shape corresponding to dimple profile 23 of
In another particular embodiment, the present invention provides a golf ball with a surface coverage of about 79.1% and a dimple count of 148, wherein each of the dimples is a spherical-cosine dimple having a profile shape corresponding to dimple profile 23 of
While dimple profiles of the present invention having at least two localized peaks can be used in conventional dimple patterns utilizing dimple counts of 250 to 400 and providing a surface coverage of 75% or greater, such profiles are particularly useful in dimple patterns providing a surface coverage of 75% or greater but utilizing dimple counts of less than 250. Thus, in a particular aspect of embodiments of the present invention wherein the dimple profile includes at least two localized peaks, the golf ball has a total dimple count of less than 250, or less than 220, or less than 200, or less than 180, or less than 160, and a surface coverage of 70% or greater, or 75% or greater, or 80% or greater. In order to maintain surface coverage in dimple patterns having low dimple counts, a relatively large average dimple diameter is required. Thus, in another particular aspect, the average dimple diameter for all of the dimples on the surface of the golf ball is 0.180 inches or greater, or 0.200 inches or greater, or 0.220 inches or greater, or 0.240 inches or greater.
Dimple profiles of the present invention which include at least two localized peaks optionally have a dimple depth of 0.005 inches or 0.010 inches or 0.023 inches or 0.025 inches, or a dimple depth within a range having a lower limit and an upper limit selected from these values.
Dimple profiles of the present invention which include at least two localized peaks optionally have a chord volume within a range having a lower limit and an upper limit selected from the values within REGION 1 of
Golf balls of the present invention include at least one dimple on the surface thereof having a profile defined by a superposed function resulting from the sum of two or more functions, and, optionally, additionally include one or more dimples having a profile that cannot be defined by a superposed function resulting from the sum of two or more functions. In a particular aspect of embodiments of the present invention wherein the golf ball includes dimples having a superposed function profile and dimples having a profile other than a superposed function profile, each of the dimples having a superposed function profile has a dimple diameter of 0.180 inches or greater, or a dimple diameter of 0.200 inches or greater, and each of the dimples having a profile other than a superposed function profile has a dimple diameter of less than 0.180 inches.
The superposition method disclosed herein has the potential to generate dimple profiles that have not been utilized on prior art golf balls. Since the dimple boundaries of the golf ball are preferably circular, previously developed patterns can be utilized, refined and optimized for potentially improved distance and flight control. The visual appearance of golf balls produced from this method can be significantly different. The present invention may be used with any type of ball construction. For instance, the ball may have a 2-piece construction, a double cover or veneer cover construction or other multi-layer constructions depending on the type of performance desired of the ball. Examples of these and other types of ball constructions that may be used with the present invention include those described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,713,801, 5,803,831, 5,885,172, 5,919,100, 5,965,669, 5,981,654, 5,981,658, and 6,149,535, for example, the construction and materials disclosed in the patents being expressly incorporated herein. Different materials also may be used in the construction of the golf balls made with the present invention. For example, the cover of the ball may be made of polyurethane, ionomer resin, balata or any other suitable cover material known to those skilled in the art. Different materials also may be used for forming core and intermediate layers of the ball.
After selecting the desired ball construction, the flight performance of the golf ball can be adjusted according to the design, placement, and number of dimples on the ball. As explained above, the use of a variety of dimples, based on a superposition profile, provides a relatively effective way to modify the ball flight performance without significantly altering the dimple pattern. Thus, the use of dimples based on the superposition profile allows a golf ball designer to select flight characteristics of a golf ball in a similar way that different materials and ball constructions can be selected to achieve a desired performance.
Each dimple of the present invention is part of a dimple pattern selected to achieve a particular desired lift coefficient. Dimple patterns that provide a high percentage of surface coverage are preferred, and are well known in the art. For example, U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,562,552, 5,575,477, 5,957,787, 5,249,804, and 4,925,193 disclose geometric patterns for positioning dimples on a golf ball. In one embodiment of the present invention, the dimple pattern is at least partially defined by phyllotaxis-based patterns, such as those described in co-pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/418,003, which is incorporated by reference in its entirety. Preferably a dimple pattern that provides greater than about 70% surface coverage, or greater than about 75% surface coverage, or greater than about 80% surface coverage, is selected. Once the dimple pattern is selected, several alternative dimple profiles can be tested in a wind tunnel or indoor test range to empirically determine the properties of the profiles that provide the desired lift and drag coefficients at the desired launch conditions.
While the invention has been described in conjunction with specific embodiments, it is evident that numerous alternatives, modifications, and variations will be apparent to those skilled in the art in light of the foregoing description.
The present application is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/935,393, filed Mar. 26, 2018, which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/172,440, filed Jun. 3, 2016, now U.S. Pat. No. 9,925,420, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/586,289, filed Dec. 30, 2014, now abandoned, which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/976,109, filed Dec. 22, 2010, now U.S. Pat. No. 9,782,630, the entire disclosures of which are hereby incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4681323 | Alaki | Jul 1987 | A |
4979747 | Jonkouski | Dec 1990 | A |
5653648 | Thurman | Aug 1997 | A |
6039660 | Kasashima | Mar 2000 | A |
6331150 | Ogg | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6336873 | Yamagishi et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6346053 | Inoue et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6558274 | Shimosaka | May 2003 | B1 |
6796912 | Dalton et al. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6951520 | Ohama et al. | Oct 2005 | B2 |
7018308 | Kasashima | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7094162 | Sajima | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7201674 | Ohama et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7229364 | Aoyama | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7252602 | Sajima et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
20010002373 | Yamagishi et al. | May 2001 | A1 |
20010005700 | Kasashima et al. | Jun 2001 | A1 |
20010034273 | Ogg | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20010036872 | Kasashima et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020045502 | Ogg | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20030158001 | Morgan et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20040132549 | Aoyama et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20050043119 | Veilleux et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20080220907 | Aoyama et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20110195802 | Nakamura | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20120122613 | Madson | May 2012 | A1 |
20120165130 | Madson | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20130172123 | Nardacci et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130172125 | Nardacci et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20140024477 | Sato | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20150119171 | Madson | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20160129314 | Nardacci et al. | May 2016 | A1 |
20160175658 | Nardacci | Jun 2016 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20190209895 A1 | Jul 2019 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 14586289 | Dec 2014 | US |
Child | 15172440 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 15935393 | Mar 2018 | US |
Child | 16354408 | US | |
Parent | 15172440 | Jun 2016 | US |
Child | 15935393 | US | |
Parent | 12976109 | Dec 2010 | US |
Child | 14586289 | US |