View Full Version : Physics of billiards
Researching a paper for school on the "Physics of Billiards". Any rocket-scientist or rack-physicist out there have any info on the subject? Info doesn't need to be authored by Einstein...any info would be helpful. Thanks.
03-27-2003, 09:36 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bugndean:</font><hr> Researching a paper for school on the "Physics of Billiards". Any rocket-scientist or rack-physicist out there have any info on the subject? Info doesn't need to be authored by Einstein...any info would be helpful. Thanks. <hr /></blockquote>From the RSB Frequently Asked Questions:
12. ** How can I learn about billiard physics?
There are several books available that discuss the physics of balls on
cloth struck by pointed sticks. A fairly non-technical treatment is in
Jack Koehler's "The Science of Pocket Billiards". It has many good
observations and plausible explanations but no real theory or
equations. For the latter, get Wayland Marlow's "The Physics of Pocket
Billiards" which has great steaming piles of equations. It is available
from the author at MAST, Wayland C. Marlow, 2738 Ohina Street, Kihei HI
96753-8548, for $41.50 including shipping. Email: Wcmarlow@aol.com
A 100-page online discussion is in Ron Shepard's "Amateur Physics
for the Amateur Pool Player" available at the download section of
PlayPool.com at http://www.playpool.com/download.php. ( Note, I don't know if this is available through Playpool.com anymore. Someone else has provided a link recently ) Also
available there is Shepard's 19-page analysis of the causes of
squirt. These include theory and equations and diagrams, along
with useful worked examples.
If you have access to a college physics library, many "mechanics" texts
from around 1900 have entire chapters devoted to billiards physics
(Williamson or Routh). The granddaddy in this field is a 176-page book
by Coriolis (1835) in French. It has recently been republished by
Jacques GABAY in Paris, ISBN 2-87647-081-0. A recent book in French is
"Billard - Theorie du Jeu", ISBN 2-7027-0573-1, by Regis PETIT,
published by Editions CHIRON/CASTEILLA, 128 pp., price: 98FF. In
Canada, available from PROLOG (Bois-Briand QUEBEC), for $31.95 It
contains material for the player as well as the theoretician.
Some results of recent measurements:
The tip is on the ball for about one thousandth of a second. During
this time the ball moves no more than a few millimeters on a typical
shot. It is unlikely that the grip hand can have much effect on the
shot during this brief time. The tip has only one contact with the ball.
The fastest cue ball reported (shot by a martial arts student)
was about 35MPH (15.6 meters/second). More typical break speeds
are around 20MPH. The energy in the ball goes up with the
square of the speed, so the first is about three times as
energetic as the typical break.
03-27-2003, 10:11 AM
03-27-2003, 04:43 PM
Post deleted by John G
That's the dead link, here's the alive one:
"Amateur Physics for the Amateur Pool Player"
"Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Cue Ball Squirt"
Not sure how much help this will be to you but it's worth a try. Go the link I'll provide below and go through the lessons they have listed [all of them]. If I recall correctly in some of the lessons they explain the physics of pool play and how it effects the game. I've not gone through all of them myself yet but from those I did I was quite pleased in their explanation. I thought better than some I've read from other sources. Example; a far better explanation of the diamond system I've seen yet. As an added plus it includes very good diagrams in it's explanation and explains it where you don't need to be a rocket scientist to understand, as you put it. You maybe able to gather some data for your research from there. Hope this might help you but if not you still might learn some things that you might have overlooked in your play.
Ciao; All things are difficult before they are easy.
03-28-2003, 06:22 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote John G:</font><hr> Fred Agnir
"The tip is on the ball for about one thousandth of a second. During this time the ball moves no more than a few millimeters on a typical shot. It is unlikely that the grip hand can have much effect on the shot during this brief time. The tip has only one contact with the ball."
<hr /></blockquote>John, please go back to the post which is part of Bob Jewett's Pool & Billiards Frequently Asked Questions. It's a direct copy/paste quote. Please also look at the sentence that you inadvertantly cut out: "Some results of recent measurements."
So, first off, this isn't me lecturing to a crowd. I apologize if anyone read it that way. It's obvious that this is how you took the post. It is nothing more than a copy and paste. I could have simply put a link to Bob Jewett's FAQ. That might have been less confusing.
Secondly, the measurement is a measurement, pure and simple. It's not an opinion nor an explanation of anything. It's a measurement of actual contact time of several different hits using Predators Iron Willie and a high-speed (12,000 fps) camera.
[ QUOTE ]
A few posts back you referred to specific people and thier advancements in joint design. That doesn't seem to be consistant with your aforementioned quote.<hr /></blockquote>I personally don't think the joint adds anything to the performance of the tip/cueball interaction, but I was interested in your studies.(<font color="red">Author edit: I said "add." A poorly fit or constructed joint can certainly subtract.</font color>) I could easily be persuaded with proof. My comments on joint design are aimed at feel and vibration dampening only . Not on how it affects the tip/cueball collision. The three joint designs that aim to accomplish this seem to be Schuler, Lambros Ultra, and the Layani conical.
[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, after our discussion a few weeks ago and the implication of your attitude toward me and my work I thought it would only be proper to give you an opportunity to show why your so much more knowledgeable then the rest of us. Be that as it may I'll continue.<hr /></blockquote> I have no idea what you're getting at here. I was genuinely interested, and suggested that you post to RSB about it. That newsgroup would be more interested in those type of studies than this one, IMO.
[ QUOTE ]
This isn't intended to be mean Fred, I just thought it would be fun make comment on your statements in the same tone as you reply to others<hr /></blockquote>What tone? You hear a tone? It was a freakin' quote.
03-28-2003, 07:47 AM
Notice you havent been here too long. Try not to read into things too much. Fred is fred. Knowlegeable, usually helpful except when he is being silly.And he can be real silly /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
Laura --->knows fred doesnt need a defense, couldnt resist
03-28-2003, 12:18 PM
Actually I think Fred Is very bright and quite knowledgeable. I enjoy reading his posts ( don't tell him that) I just wanted to needle him and see what type of responce I'd get. Just having fun. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif John G
Being ill has me with to much time on my hands and the meds have given an evil mind /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif
03-28-2003, 02:17 PM
"The Science of Pocket Billiards" by Jack Koehler is very thourough, and many of the Cuetech instructors use it in their teaching.
I read Byrne's "Advanced Technique in Pool and Billiards". The book for the most part discusses pool from a physics standpoint i.e. throw, friction, etc... There is a section where he discusses an experiment he conducted with a couple of college prophessors where they determined it was possible to generate a greater ball velocity with an 18 Oz. cue as apposed to a 21 Oz. cue. Check it out, might be a decent point of referance. JMO.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.