Those Turbulators

[Thin2win]

So, I was really diving down the rabbit hole of the internet this morning. Trying to research Drag Coefficients (Cd) and dynamic properties of swing weight vs swing speed. Yeah.... all for another post. Anyway, I found this research paper done by Arizona State University. Turns out the turbulator stuff is/was legit: 

 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274150302_Experimental_Investigation_of_Golf_Driver_Club_Head_Drag_Reduction_Through_the_use_of_Aerodynamic_Features_on_the_Driver_Crown

 

 

 

 

[RickyBobby_PR]

It’s one of the qualities about ping and titleist I like. They do things that make things better to be better and not just to market something.

The engineers behind all the brands are great but those two companies don’t do something unless it shows to be an improvement. Ping waited to jump on the adjustable weight in drivers til it had what it took to make them better than the previous ones. While other brands were changing weight or weight track ping was able to make drivers just as good if not better without it especially in the g400 line

[bens197]

57 minutes ago, Thin2win said:

So, I was really diving down the rabbit hole of the internet this morning. Trying to research Drag Coefficients (Cd) and dynamic properties of swing weight vs swing speed. Yeah.... all for another post. Anyway, I found this research paper done by Arizona State University. Turns out the turbulator stuff is/was legit: 

 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274150302_Experimental_Investigation_of_Golf_Driver_Club_Head_Drag_Reduction_Through_the_use_of_Aerodynamic_Features_on_the_Driver_Crown

 

 

 

 

PING’s HQ in Phoenix was one of the coolest experiences of my golf career. If you ever get the chance to visit, I would take full advantage.  The putter vault was surely one of the highlights of the trip.  What always stuck with me, was how focused they were on QC for specific density and consistency within metal sampling for irons and wedges.  It’s too bad that the foundry has since closed; I still love the Solheim family’s passion for science and innovation.   

 

[Thin2win]

I had the g30, and now the 400 max. So I'm good on the tubulators for sure. Was just interesting finding a research paper on them. I figured ping did their own testing to prove it, and I know Callaway /cobra did some stickers for a year or two, but odd that it didn't gain more traction. 

[azstu324]

Found a pretty legit video that is 100% informative

Paired with a  Double XS shaft, should go at least tree fiddy

 

 

the more I practice, the luckier I seem to get..
 

 

Edited February 6, 2020 by azstu324

[toehold57]

Trying to research Drag Coefficients (Cd) and dynamic properties of swing weight vs swing speed.
 
 

 

What? Can you put that in 5th grade English?




Sent from my iPad using MyGolfSpy

[FrogginBullfish]

It's very much the real deal. Acts in the same fashion as dimples do on a golf ball.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using MyGolfSpy mobile app

[fixyurdivot]

At first glance "turbulators", much like "speed slot" and similar features, look to be mere marketing hype. We consumers are so use to being sold hype in so many other products that our natural tendency (at least mine) is to be skeptical. I've heard that PING and ASU have teamed up on a number of projects over the years.  As mentioned, they do a good job of testing and developing data to support product claims. 

Callaway teamed up with Boeing to help with driver club head design and wind tunnel tests.  I bet the other major OEM's have similar partnerships with research universities. 

https://www.popularmechanics.com/adventure/sports/a18972/boeing-callaway-driver/

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/callaway-teams-with-boeing-to-speed-up-xr16-drivers

[RickyBobby_PR]

49 minutes ago, fixyurdivot said:

At first glance "turbulators", much like "speed slot" and similar features, look to be mere marketing hype. We consumers are so use to being sold hype in so many other products that our natural tendency (at least mine) is to be skeptical. I've heard that PING and ASU have teamed up on a number of projects over the years.  As mentioned, they do a good job of testing and developing data to support product claims. 

Callaway teamed up with Boeing to help with driver club head design and wind tunnel tests.  I bet the other major OEM's have similar partnerships with research universities. 

https://www.popularmechanics.com/adventure/sports/a18972/boeing-callaway-driver/

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/callaway-teams-with-boeing-to-speed-up-xr16-drivers

Cobra has teamed up with aerospace industry for awhile and they had a huge media day talking about it when the Ltd line came out.

the interesting thing about the Callaway partnership is they only referenced Boeing the first year. In the next release they still used the tech but there was no reference to Boeing.

There are some true rocket scientist working for these brands. 

[PlaidJacket]

I'm just not buying it. I don't even like the looks of "tabulators". Why not put some winglets on drivers like airplanes do? Sure, there is some "DATA" that says turbs work. However, I've yet to see anyone I play with that uses a driver with these features gain anything. Honestly, the only thing that has ever improved a driver that I've owned was the ShotMaker. Sadly they went out of business.

[fixyurdivot]

3 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Cobra has teamed up with aerospace industry for awhile and they had a huge media day talking about it when the Ltd line came out.

the interesting thing about the Callaway partnership is they only referenced Boeing the first year. In the next release they still used the tech but there was no reference to Boeing.

There are some true rocket scientist working for these brands. 

Rumor had it that the senior exec who was buddies with a Callaway exec left the company... even more rumors as to why .

 

3 minutes ago, PlaidJacket said:

Why not put some winglets on drivers like airplanes do?

Because these guys have that design patent .

[RickyBobby_PR]

21 minutes ago, PlaidJacket said:

I'm just not buying it. I don't even like the looks of "tabulators". Why not put some winglets on drivers like airplanes do? Sure, there is some "DATA" that says turbs work. However, I've yet to see anyone I play with that uses a driver with these features gain anything. Honestly, the only thing that has ever improved a driver that I've owned was the ShotMaker. Sadly they went out of business.

I gained 7 yards of carry from the 917 to the g400 and both drivers were fitted. I also saw 3mph of ball speed from the g driver over every driver in 2016 except m1/2.

[FrogginBullfish]

The whole basis of turbulators, or Cobra's rumble strips and now milling lines is that it's tripping the boundary layer on the surface of the driver's crown from laminar flow to turbulent flow. It's done to delay where flow separates from the crown which in turn limits the size of the wake created by the driver head moving through air. Smaller wake equals less drag equals faster club head speeds.

That being said, performance gains through aerodynamics are going to be different from person to person and they are decidedly skewed to faster swing speed players.

This has to do with the size of the aerodynamic shapes and how at faster speeds, airflow can be redirected much easier by very small shapes. To obtain the same kind of performance gains for lower swing speeds, the turbulators would have to be a heck of a lot bigger, which is undesirable from both an aesthetics perspective, they're divisive enough, and a weight placement perspective.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using MyGolfSpy mobile app

[HardcoreLooper]

On 2/7/2020 at 9:11 PM, FrogginBullfish said:

The whole basis of turbulators, or Cobra's rumble strips and now milling lines is that it's tripping the boundary layer on the surface of the driver's crown from laminar flow to turbulent flow. It's done to delay where flow separates from the crown which in turn limits the size of the wake created by the driver head moving through air. Smaller wake equals less drag equals faster club head speeds.

That being said, performance gains through aerodynamics are going to be different from person to person and they are decidedly skewed to faster swing speed players.

This has to do with the size of the aerodynamic shapes and how at faster speeds, airflow can be redirected much easier by very small shapes. To obtain the same kind of performance gains for lower swing speeds, the turbulators would have to be a heck of a lot bigger, which is undesirable from both an aesthetics perspective, they're divisive enough, and a weight placement perspective.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using MyGolfSpy mobile app
 

This makes me wonder (and I'm a former software engineer, not a real engineer), for some slower swing speed players (maybe only players that are short but hit it on the button more often than not), would a significantly smaller driver head yield less drag and higher swing speeds?

[FrogginBullfish]

I received my mechanical engineering degree in 2017 but haven't been working in the field yet. I did specialize in fluids in my final year so aerodynamics, computational fluid dynamics, and experimental methods in fluids were a few of the courses I took. I'm a bit rusty on the nitty gritty of it all but the short answer to your question is yes, a smaller head size, provided the overall shaping remained the same, would result in less drag.

This makes me wonder (and I'm a former software engineer, not a real engineer), for some slower swing speed players (maybe only players that are short but hit it on the button more often than not), would a significantly smaller driver head yield less drag and higher swing speeds?

Sent from my Pixel 2 using MyGolfSpy mobile app

[Thin2win]

7 hours ago, HardcoreLooper said:

This makes me wonder (and I'm a former software engineer, not a real engineer), for some slower swing speed players (maybe only players that are short but hit it on the button more often than not), would a significantly smaller driver head yield less drag and higher swing speeds?

So... This is the reason that I was looking into drag properties in the first place. 

 

What I think I can safely say, is that yes and no. Less drag would ice clubhead speed. But... The amount of drag created is so low that for 99% of golfers, a smaller clubhead wouldn't by itself increase clubhead speed. 

 

In a practical sense, I don't think any of us swing our 5w faster than our driver. Much of that has to do with shaft length, and in practice, you could put your 3W/5W head on a driver shaft and get faster swing speeds, but much of that would be due to the swing weight difference and not the aerodynamic properties of the head. 

 

After doing the superspeed training and realizing that I could swing that 355g total weight head and 20% faster than my current driver I was trying to figure out why an OEM doesn't make a driver that is that weight/swing weight. I calculated kinetic energy for the different superspeed sticks and found that I create the most joules with the lighter club. 

Some math and some rough estimates of surface area to volume calculations, and I'm guessing that a driver head in the 330cc / 220g range would be able to have the same strength, and able to achieve club head speeds about 20% faster than current drivers using a standard length driver shaft. 

 

That said, playing an A1 Swing weight is probably a bad idea, and the MOI would be about the same as a 3W. Or in practical terms, about 1/5th a current driver. But if you are that guy who hits the screws everytime and just needs more distance off the tee.. 

 

[Rchang]

7 hours ago, FrogginBullfish said:

I'm a bit rusty on the nitty gritty of it all but the short answer to your question is yes, a smaller head size, provided the overall shaping remained the same, would result in less drag.

 

Sent from my Pixel 2 using MyGolfSpy mobile app
 

 

When I was testing out the G400 range, I ended up finding the regular G400 was few mph faster than the G400Max. I chalked it up to the smalller club head. Suspect this is why the “Tour preferred “ heads from all manufacturers are slightly smaller than the regular heads.  The main issue is enough MOI to be usable. 

[RickyBobby_PR]

1 hour ago, Thin2win said:

So... This is the reason that I was looking into drag properties in the first place. 

 

What I think I can safely say, is that yes and no. Less drag would ice clubhead speed. But... The amount of drag created is so low that for 99% of golfers, a smaller clubhead wouldn't by itself increase clubhead speed. 

 

In a practical sense, I don't think any of us swing our 5w faster than our driver. Much of that has to do with shaft length, and in practice, you could put your 3W/5W head on a driver shaft and get faster swing speeds, but much of that would be due to the swing weight difference and not the aerodynamic properties of the head. 

 

After doing the superspeed training and realizing that I could swing that 355g total weight head and 20% faster than my current driver I was trying to figure out why an OEM doesn't make a driver that is that weight/swing weight. I calculated kinetic energy for the different superspeed sticks and found that I create the most joules with the lighter club. 

Some math and some rough estimates of surface area to volume calculations, and I'm guessing that a driver head in the 330cc / 220g range would be able to have the same strength, and able to achieve club head speeds about 20% faster than current drivers using a standard length driver shaft. 

 

That said, playing an A1 Swing weight is probably a bad idea, and the MOI would be about the same as a 3W. Or in practical terms, about 1/5th a current driver. But if you are that guy who hits the screws everytime and just needs more distance off the tee.. 

 

As Ian from TXG talks about swing speed is an input and the output is important and maybe even more important. Swing speed will obviously help generate mor ball speed but one needs to strike close to center to optimize that as well as the launch characteristics. 
 

Some people play better with a smaller head and can generate same or better speeds with them but companies are marketing to the broader golfing community so they need to consider speed but also forgiveness and playability. 
 

Taylormade has done away with 430 and 440 heads, Ping increased the size of the g410 to 455 from 445 in g400. I would imagine they geniuses in r&d at these companies and the partnerships many have with aerospace community would have looked as size of head and playing length and if there was a benefit to a smaller head would sell them.

While the pros arent us mere amatuers they have gained ball speeds and distance while maintaining similar swing speeds.  Brooke Henderson added 25 yards just by going a a 48” driver 

[fixyurdivot]

8 hours ago, FrogginBullfish said:

I received my mechanical engineering degree in 2017 but haven't been working in the field yet.

This post makes me feel old.  My BSME was in 1985 followed by 30 years with Boeing. All the best to you in your career!  

 

1 hour ago, Thin2win said:

In a practical sense, I don't think any of us swing our 5w faster than our driver. Much of that has to do with shaft length, and in practice, you could put your 3W/5W head on a driver shaft and get faster swing speeds, but much of that would be due to the swing weight difference and not the aerodynamic properties of the head.

You've got it Chris.  Much like hitting Blueprints vs. GMax, the OEM's find the happy place between optimum design numbers and hittable numbers for that big fat, revenue generating, portion of the bell curve. 

[Thin2win]

4 hours ago, fixyurdivot said:

This post makes me feel old.  My BSME was in 1985 followed by 30 years with Boeing. All the best to you in your career!  

 

You've got it Chris.  Much like hitting Blueprints vs. GMax, the OEM's find the happy place between optimum design numbers and hittable numbers for that big fat, revenue generating, portion of the bell curve. 

Yep, bell curves win. I'm still surprised I haven't seen an infomercial for an A5 swing weight driver that is built for pure distance. 

I golf with some older guys on the course that hit every fairway, I could see a commercial targeted at those golfers who just need distance help at all costs. 

 

I did find that in general, golf drivers look to have a Cd of right around 1.0. So all things that have been said before definitely hold true. Some clubs might have slightly better aero. But at the speeds we swing, the best to worst aero in clubs is only going to vary club head speed by about 1%.

I did find a small study on swing weight affect on swing speed. Not big enough that I would tout it as gospel, but it did have compelling evidence that for every 3 swing weights lighter you made a club you would pick up 2mph of head speed. 

And that was keeping the overall weight the same. 

I can't think of a practical way to test that. But if any one else can I'd be interested. The only way I can think of to decrease my swing weight would be to put a heavy grip on, but that would obviously increase club weight in the process. 

 

Anyway, as to the original post, tubulators add about 1% to ping's design. Mavrik is looking for that aero in its own way, as are SIM and Speedzone. Without my own wind tunnel and testing lab, I'm guessing they all offer about the same aero impact over their previous designs. 1%.

[fixyurdivot]

9 minutes ago, Thin2win said:

Yep, bell curves win. I'm still surprised I haven't seen an infomercial for an A5 swing weight driver that is built for pure distance. 

I golf with some older guys on the course that hit every fairway, I could see a commercial targeted at those golfers who just need distance help at all costs. 

 

I did find that in general, golf drivers look to have a Cd of right around 1.0. So all things that have been said before definitely hold true. Some clubs might have slightly better aero. But at the speeds we swing, the best to worst aero in clubs is only going to vary club head speed by about 1%.

I did find a small study on swing weight affect on swing speed. Not big enough that I would tout it as gospel, but it did have compelling evidence that for every 3 swing weights lighter you made a club you would pick up 2mph of head speed. 

And that was keeping the overall weight the same. 

I can't think of a practical way to test that. But if any one else can I'd be interested. The only way I can think of to decrease my swing weight would be to put a heavy grip on, but that would obviously increase club weight in the process. 

 

Anyway, as to the original post, tubulators add about 1% to ping's design. Mavrik is looking for that aero in its own way, as are SIM and Speedzone. Without my own wind tunnel and testing lab, I'm guessing they all offer about the same aero impact over their previous designs. 1%.

I'm sure the PING team really celebrated that gain. 1% sounds pretty insignificant unless you're searching for fractions against the competition and in the quest for "true" performance gain.  That's pretty well the ceiling the OEM's have come up against... unless the USGA changes course and starts a more driving distance needed campaign . 

[rascott_09]

Interesting article.....Ping R&D is always at the front of the business!  I picked up about 3 mph switching to a newer Ping driver after my fitting....no joke!

[zrumble]

Drag = 0.5 * (density of air) * Velocity^2 * (reference area) * (coefficient of drag) 

At the relatively low velocity clubhead speed (jets take off at 160mph, cruise near 600mph) and clubhead area you are going to get very little drag. Also the main contributor of drag is going to be the flat plate you are pushing through the air (the face), not the parasitic drag caused by the separation of flow from the crown as air is forced to bend over it. Without crunching the numbers or putting a club in a subsonic wind tunnel, I wouldn’t expect even a percent of efficiency gained. But any small increase in efficiency when most other variables are maxed out is probably cause for celebration.

I thought the reason for small clubheads were the MOI properties tend to make them a bit hotter off the face, with less spin.  

[Micah T]

On 2/7/2020 at 9:39 AM, PlaidJacket said:

I'm just not buying it. I don't even like the looks of "tabulators". Why not put some winglets on drivers like airplanes do? Sure, there is some "DATA" that says turbs work. However, I've yet to see anyone I play with that uses a driver with these features gain anything. Honestly, the only thing that has ever improved a driver that I've owned was the ShotMaker. Sadly they went out of business.

I I didn’t like how they looked either, but I’ll be damned if I didn’t pick up 10 yards of carry over my GBB epic when I switched to the G410 plus last month. It’s turned my biggest liability ( driver tee shots) into an asset!

[Manimal26]

On 2/5/2020 at 12:53 PM, Thin2win said:

So, I was really diving down the rabbit hole of the internet this morning. Trying to research Drag Coefficients (Cd) and dynamic properties of swing weight vs swing speed. Yeah.... all for another post. Anyway, I found this research paper done by Arizona State University. Turns out the turbulator stuff is/was legit: 

 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274150302_Experimental_Investigation_of_Golf_Driver_Club_Head_Drag_Reduction_Through_the_use_of_Aerodynamic_Features_on_the_Driver_Crown

 

 

 

 

Okay so I just took the time to read this article and WOW! great find and information!!! Ping to me has kind of been like Volvo. Over engineered and finally starting to catch up on looks! When I do my WITB it will no longer feature the sim...