The present invention relates to a wood-type golf club head having a hollow interior, and more particularly a hollow wood-type golf club head having a spring effect suppressed without excessively increasing the weight of a face portion of the club head.
It has been recently set in golf rules that the design, material and/or construction of, or any treatment to, the club head must not have the effect of a spring which exceeds the limit set forth in the Pendulum Test Protocol on file with the R&A (upper limit: 239 μs+error of 18 μs). Simply put, the spring effect is an ability of a club face which depresses and then springs back into shape, when striking a ball, to act as a spring or trampoline, adding extra oomph to a shot.
However, in case that a large-sized hollow golf club head is formed from a metallic material having a high specific strength, the club head tends to have a spring effect which exceeds the limit set forth in the golf rules. Therefore, in order to produce golf club heads which meet the golf rules, it may be required hereinafter to further lower the spring effect.
The smaller the rigidity of a face portion of a club head, the larger the spring effect. Specifically, the smaller the thickness of the face portion or the smaller the Young's modulus of a metallic material constituting the face portion, the larger the spring effect of the club head tends to become. Therefore, assuming the use of metallic materials conventionally used for golf club heads, it is required for lowering the spring effect to increase the thickness of the face portion and to decrease the flexure of the face portion at ball striking. However, if the face portion is made thick, a margin of weight capable of using in weight distribution design of club heads is decreased, so the degree of freedom in design about position of the club head's center of gravity is decreased. Therefore, it is desired to lower the spring effect without increasing the thickness of face portion.
US 2007/0275792 A1 proposes disposing at least one stiffening member such as a mass member or a rib at a junction interconnecting a sole, a crown and a skirt to a striking face, thereby allowing a reduction in thickness of the striking face while maintaining a maximum coefficient of restitution of 0.830 or less per USGA rules.
It is an object of the present invention to provide a wood-type golf club head capable of easily controlling the spring effect within a range provided in the R&A rules without excessively increasing the weight of a face portion of the club head.
This and other objects of the present invention will become apparent from the description hereinafter.
In accordance with the present invention, there is provided a hollow wood-type golf club head comprising a face portion having a hitting face for hitting a golf ball, a sole portion constituting the bottom of the club head, and a junction interconnecting the face portion and the sole portion and including one or more thick wall portions, said one or more thick wall portions having a thickness larger than a thickness at a lower edge of the face portion and having a length L of 20 mm or more wherein the length L is a total of lengths in a toe-heel direction of said one or more thick wall portions disposed in the club head.
A single thick wall portion may be disposed at the junction, or a plurality of thick wall portions may be disposed at intervals at the junction.
Preferably, the thickness of the thick wall portion is larger than that of the lower edge of the face portion by at least 0.5 mm.
In a standard state that the club head is placed on a horizontal plane at prescribed lie and loft angles, the thick wall portion is preferably disposed so as to extend across a vertical plane including the head's center of gravity and the sweet spot.
It is important in suppressing the spring effect of a club head that the flexure of a face portion at the time of hitting a ball is as small as possible. The wood-type golf club head of the present invention includes one or more thick wall portions at a junction interconnecting the face portion and the sole portion, wherein the thick wall portions have a thickness larger than that of a lower edge of the face portion and a total length of the thick wall portions in a toe-heel direction of the club head is regulated within a specific range. Such thick wall portion or portions can enhance the rigidity of a lower part of the face portion without excessively increasing the weight of the face portion, thus suppressing the flexure of the face portion. Therefore, according to the present invention, the spring effect can be reduced to meet the golf rules without large increase in weight of the face portion.
An embodiment of the present invention will be explained below with reference to the accompanying drawings.
The term “standard state” of a golf club head as used herein denotes the state that, as shown in
The club head 1 is formed into a wood-type club head having a hollow structure that a hollow portion “i” is formed inside the club head, as shown in
Preferably, the club head 1 of this embodiment has a head volume of at least 380 cm3, especially at least 400 cm3, more especially at least 420 cm3. Such a large head volume is useful for increasing the moment of inertia or the depth of the center of gravity of the club head 1. On the other hand, if the volume of the club head 1 is too large, problems may arise, e.g., increase of head weight, deterioration of swing balance and violation of golf rules. Therefore, it is preferable that the volume of club head 1 is at most 500 cm3, especially at most 470 cm3, more especially at most 460 cm3.
Further, it is preferable that the whole weight of club head 1 is at least 180 g, especially at least 185 g, and it is at most 220 g, especially at most 215 g. If the weight is too small, the swing tends to be not stabilized since a player is hard to feel the weight of the head during swing. Further, the repulsion property tends to lower. If the weight of the club head is too large, it is difficult to follow through a golf club, so the flight distance and directionality of a hit ball tend to deteriorate.
The golf club head 1 in this embodiment includes a face portion 3 having a face 2 for hitting a golf ball on its front side, a crown portion 4 forming the upper surface of the head 1, a sole portion 5 forming the bottom surface of the head 1, a side portion 6 which extends between the crown portion 4 and the sole portion 5 from a toe side edge 2c of the face 2 to a heel side edge 2d of the face 2 through a back face BF (a face facing the opposite side of the face 2) of the head 1, and a hosel portion 7 which is disposed on a heel side of the crown portion 4 and has a shaft inserting hole 7a to attach a shaft (not shown). In case that no shaft is attached to the club head 1, an axial center line CL of the shaft inserting hole 7a is used instead of an axial center line SL of the shaft.
The club head 1 in this embodiment comprises, as shown in
The face member 1B in this embodiment is formed into an approximately cup-shaped body in which the face portion 3 and an extension 13 which extends toward the rear of the head 1 from peripheral edges 2a, 2b, 2c and 2d of the face 2 to provide respective front parts of the crown portion 4, sole portion 5 and side portion 6, are integrally formed. Of course, the face member 1B may be in the form of a plate which can be fit in the face portion 3.
The head body 1A and the face member 1B can be produced by a known method, e.g., casting, forging or pressing. The club head 1 is produced by welding them in a known manner.
The head body 1A and the face member 1B are produced from one or more kinds of metallic materials. Preferable examples of the metallic materials are, for instance, a stainless steel, a marageing steel, titanium, a titanium alloy, an aluminum allow, a magnesium alloy, an amorphous alloy, and combinations of these metals. Further, although not shown in the drawings, non-metallic materials having a lower specific gravity such as fiber-reinforced resins may be used in a part of the head body 1A, or one or more weight members having a larger specific gravity may be fixed to the head body 1A, whereby the center of gravity G can be adjusted to an optimum location.
The club head 1 of the present invention is provided with a junction 8 connecting the face portion 3 to the sole portion 5. Portion A of
The term “face portion” as used herein denotes a portion having the face 2 on its front surface. Further, the term “face” as used herein denotes a hitting face surrounded by a face perimeter edge, i.e., an upper edge 2a on a crown portion 4 side, a lower edge 2b on a sole portion 5 side, a toe side edge 2c and a heel side edge 2d, as shown in
In the case that the edges 2a to 2d of the face 2 forms a visible clear ridge line, this ridge line denotes the face perimeter edge. However, in the case that the face edges 2a to 2d are not clear, they are determined as follows:
Firstly, as shown in
Then, as shown in
As shown in
Further, as shown in
In the present invention, as shown in
It is important in suppressing the flexure of club head 1 to decrease the spring effect at impact of the face portion 3. In the club head 1 of the present invention, a rigidity on a lower edge 3E side of the face portion 3 is enhanced by the thick wall portion 9, so the flexure at impact of the face portion 3 is suppressed. Therefore, the club head 1 of the present invention can decrease the spring effect to meet the golf rules without increasing the thickness or the like of the face portion 3. Further, the thick wall portion 9 is helpful for achieving a low center of gravity and for enhancing the durability of the face portion 3 and the sole portion 5. In particular, as a result of suppression of the spring effect by the thick wall portion 9, there is exhibited an effect that the durability of the whole head, particularly a peripheral portion of the face portion 3, is enhanced.
As shown in
Examples of the sectional shape of the thick wall portion 9 are shown in
The thick wall portion 9 of
The thick wall portion 9 of
The thick wall portion 9 of
The thick wall portion 9 can have one or more of various sectional shapes. However, the shapes of
It is preferable that the thickness t2 of the thick wall portion 9 is at least 2.0 mm, especially at least 2.2 mm, more especially at least 2.5 mm, still more especially at least 3.0 mm. If the thickness t2 is less than 2.0 mm, there is a possibility that deformation at impact of the face portion 3 cannot be sufficiently suppressed. Further, if the thickness t2 is too large, there is a possibility that the weight of that portion becomes large, so the degree of freedom in weight distribution design is impaired. Therefore, it is preferable that the thickness t2 of the thick wall portion 9 is at most 8.0 mm, especially at most 7.0 mm, more especially at most 6.5 mm.
On the other hand, it is preferable that the thickness t1 at the lower edge 3E of the face portion 3 is at least 1.5 mm, especially at least 1.8 mm, more especially at least 2.0 mm, and it is at most 4.5 mm, especially at most 4.2 mm, more especially at most 4.0 mm. If the thickness t1 is too small, the durability of the face portion 3 tends to deteriorate, and if the thickness t1 is too large, there is a possibility that the weight of the face portion 3 becomes large, so the degree of freedom in weight distribution design is impaired.
From the same points of view, it is preferable that the thickness t3 at the front edge 5E of the sole portion 5 is at least 1.5 mm, especially at least 1.6 mm, more especially at least 1.7 mm, and it is at most 4.0 mm, especially at most 3.5 mm, more especially at most 3.0 mm.
It is preferable that the thickness t2 of the thick wall portion 9 is larger than the thickness t1 at the lower edge 3E of the face portion 3 by at least 0.5 mm, especially at least 0.8 mm, more especially at least 1.0 mm. If the difference t2−t1 in thickness is less than 0.5 mm, there is a possibility that the effect of enhancing the rigidity of a lower edge portion of the face portion 3 is insufficient, so deformation at impact of the face portion 3 is not sufficiently suppressed.
Further, it is preferable that a ratio t1/t2 of the thickness t1 at the lower edge 3E of the face portion 3 to the thickness t2 of the thick wall portion 9 is at least 0.30, especially at least 0.50, more especially at least 0.70. If the ratio t1/t2 is less than 0.30, the durability of the face portion 3 may be deteriorated since the thickness t1 at the lower edge 3E of the face portion 3 is relatively small, and increase in weight of the club head 1 may occur since the thickness t2 of the thick wall portion 9 is relatively large. In contrast, if the ratio t1/t2 is too large, there is a possibility that deformation at impact of the face portion 3 is not sufficiently suppressed. Therefore, it is preferable that the ratio t1/t2 is at most 0.95, especially at most 0.90, more especially at most 0.80.
Similarly, it is preferable that a ratio t3/t2 of the thickness t3 at the front edge SE of the sole portion 5 to the thickness t2 of the thick wall portion 9 is at least 0.10, especially at least 0.20, more especially at least 0.30. If the ratio t3/t2 is less than 0.10, the durability of a front edge portion of the sole portion 5 may be deteriorated since the thickness t3 at the front edge SE of the sole portion 5 is relatively small, and increase in weight of the club head 1 may occur since the thickness t2 of the thick wall portion 9 is relatively large. Further, it is preferable that the ratio t3/t2 is at most 0.90, especially at most 0.70, more especially at most 0.50.
In the embodiment shown in
The term “length L” in the toe-heel direction of the thick wall portion 9 denotes a length along the vertical plane VP when the thick wall portion 9 is viewed from above (when viewed in the plane view of
The upper limit of the length L of the thick wall portion 9 is not particularly limited. Therefore, the length L may be identical to the whole length La of the junction 8 located between the lower edge 3E of the face portion 3 and the front edge 5E of the sole portion 5. However, as the length L of the thick wall portion 9 approaches the whole length La of the junction 8, the effect of lowering the spring effect approaches a plateau and, moreover, the weight of the club head tends to become excessively large. Therefore, it is preferable to select the length L so that a ratio L/La is at most 0.90, especially at most 0.70, more especially at most 0.50. On the other hand, if the ratio L/La is excessively small, a stress is easy to concentrate on a neighborhood of the thick wall portion 9 when hitting a ball. Therefore, the ratio L/La is preferably at least 0.10, more preferably at least 0.15.
The term “whole length La” of the junction 8 denotes a distance between intersecting points K1 and K2 at which a second horizontal plane HP2 passing a location with a height “h” of 10 mm from the horizontal plane HP intersects the face perimeter edge, i.e. edges 2a to 2d of the face 2, as shown in
A plurality of the thick wall portions can be disposed at intervals in the junction 8. In embodiments shown in
As shown in
While preferable embodiments of the present invention have been described with reference to the drawings, it goes without saying that the present invention is not limited to only such embodiments and various changes and modifications may be made.
The present invention is more specifically described and explained by means of the following Examples and Comparative Examples. It is to be understood that the present invention is not limited to these Examples.
Wood-type golf club heads having a head volume of 460 cm3, a real loft angle of 10° and a lie angle of 7.5° were prepared according to the specifications shown in Table 1, and tests of spring effect and durability were made. Each of the club heads was prepared from Ti-6A1-4V alloy by integrally forming a head body by a lost-wax precision casing method, press forming a rolled material into an approximately cup-like face member and then plasma-welding them. Specifications of all portions excepting a junction were common to all club heads. Thicknesses of respective portions were as follows:
The tests were made in the following manner.
<Spring Effect>
“Characteristic time” (CT) of each club head was measured according to the Pendulum Test Protocol of R&A. The CT value is a value (unit: μs) showing an efficiency at impact, and the larger the value, the higher the spring effect. The upper limit of the CT value provided by the golf rules is 239 μs (error of +18 μs being permissible).
<Durability>
The same FRP shafts (SV-3003J: flex X made by SRI Sports Limited) were attached to all club heads to be tested to give wood-type gold clubs having a full length of 45 inches. Each of the golf clubs was attached to a swing robot (made by Kabushiki Kaisha Miyamae), and struck up to 10,000 golf balls per club at a head speed of 54 m/s. Presence of damage of the club head at its face portion and a peripheral portion thereof was visually observed every 100 shots, and the number of shots up to generation of damage was measured.
The results of the tests are shown in Table 1.
From the results shown in Table 1, it is confirmed that the golf club heads of the Examples according to the present invention have a CT value which is suppressed to 257 μs or lower without weight increase and deterioration in durability of the face portion.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2008-193805 | Jul 2008 | JP | national |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5028049 | McKeighen | Jul 1991 | A |
5131986 | Harada et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
RE34925 | McKeighen | May 1995 | E |
5501459 | Endo | Mar 1996 | A |
6048278 | Meyer et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6074310 | Ota | Jun 2000 | A |
6162133 | Peterson | Dec 2000 | A |
6193614 | Sasamoto et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6254494 | Hasebe et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6325728 | Helmstetter et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6339869 | Peterson | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6402637 | Sasamoto et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6425832 | Cackett et al. | Jul 2002 | B2 |
6458043 | McCabe et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6508722 | McCabe et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6719645 | Kouno | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6783465 | Matsunaga | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6789304 | Kouno | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6832961 | Sano | Dec 2004 | B2 |
6852038 | Yabu | Feb 2005 | B2 |
6875130 | Nishio | Apr 2005 | B2 |
6929566 | Sano | Aug 2005 | B2 |
7070512 | Nishio | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7137905 | Kohno | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7278925 | Oyama | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7303488 | Kakiuchi et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7431668 | Tateno et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7435191 | Tateno et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7462109 | Erickson et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7559853 | Hirano | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7585233 | Horacek et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7611424 | Nagai et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7699719 | Sugimoto | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7798916 | Matsunaga et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
20070275792 | Horacek et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
08243194 | Sep 1996 | JP |
2000116823 | Apr 2000 | JP |
2004057645 | Feb 2004 | JP |
2007037921 | Feb 2007 | JP |
2008142403 | Jun 2008 | JP |
2010029379 | Feb 2010 | JP |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20100022328 A1 | Jan 2010 | US |