Disc throwing robot a possibility?

[Putt for D'oh]

the reason i had for starting to talk about the PDGA was just to have THEM set the flight numbers. . and for that a machine would be nice to have.
...but that´s never going to happen

Its just not what a governing body does.

You can look at any sport. Ball golf is a biggie when it comes to claims about balls going further or adding control or what a driver can do. The manufacturer or retailer can make whatever claim they want the governing body just wants them to be legal per their specs.

Same with all kinds of equipment from hockey sticks to tennis rackets. Its actually odd in some sense that the manufacturers have given us sorta standardized flight number scheme its really a concession to the player base where maybe in another sport there would be a lot more claims of performance that are way outside what we see in comparison between similar discs from different manufacturers.

 

[TheirTheir]

I've often thought about this and am very confused by the pessimism some folks in here are having for such a machine. Regardless of how well you personally throw the disc, you could have DEFINITIVE evidence on how two discs fly differently. You could dial in at what speed specific discs will start to flip and decide if that is right for your arm speed. If each new run of discs came out with its own "flip rating" I would be absolutely ecstatic. And yes, controlled conditions are not the same as real-life weather conditions but I assume you are smart enough to figure out how weather would affect the flight on your own.

Anyway, I see a lot of good in such a precise machine to determine how a disc will fly for your particular arm speed.

 

[DoWork]

Ton of views? As in 2000? Yeah probably. Derail alert.. I was just looking at view counts on dg videos. I haven't watched any dg on YouTube in a couple years. The views used to be 10K maybe 30K for big tourneys. Now I'm seeing jomez videos with 200-500K or more? I think they are buying a substantial number of views...

Admits he hasn't watched in years, yet immediately fabricates a conspiracy theory explaining the phenomenon he is just now becoming aware of.

Bravo, man. You just got promoted to the rank of Internet Lieutenant.

 

[DoWork]

I've often thought about this and am very confused by the pessimism some folks in here are having for such a machine. Regardless of how well you personally throw the disc, you could have DEFINITIVE evidence on how two discs fly differently. You could dial in at what speed specific discs will start to flip and decide if that is right for your arm speed. If each new run of discs came out with its own "flip rating" I would be absolutely ecstatic. And yes, controlled conditions are not the same as real-life weather conditions but I assume you are smart enough to figure out how weather would affect the flight on your own.

Anyway, I see a lot of good in such a precise machine to determine how a disc will fly for your particular arm speed.

So much this. From an engineering standpoint, it would be a huge advantage to quantify the values expressed in the flight numbers with repeatable results that can be demonstrated.

 

[zgmc]

Admits he hasn't watched in years, yet immediately fabricates a conspiracy theory explaining the phenomenon he is just now becoming aware of.

Bravo, man. You just got promoted to the rank of Internet Lieutenant.

Fake views bro.

 

[zgmc]

So much this. From an engineering standpoint, it would be a huge advantage to quantify the values expressed in the flight numbers with repeatable results that can be demonstrated.

If you really need a robot to produce repeatable results, maybe you shouldn't be throwing plastic discs.

How much do you think the existing numbers would change? Aren't they pretty much in the ballpark right now? I really don't see how this would be a huge advantage, at all. It would be a minuscule improvement.

 

[zgmc]

I've often thought about this and am very confused by the pessimism some folks in here are having for such a machine. Regardless of how well you personally throw the disc, you could have DEFINITIVE evidence on how two discs fly differently. You could dial in at what speed specific discs will start to flip and decide if that is right for your arm speed. If each new run of discs came out with its own "flip rating" I would be absolutely ecstatic. And yes, controlled conditions are not the same as real-life weather conditions but I assume you are smart enough to figure out how weather would affect the flight on your own.

Anyway, I see a lot of good in such a precise machine to determine how a disc will fly for your particular arm speed.

:doh: You would still need to throw the discs to figure out how they work with your throw! That flip rating will still be different between any two players. And, the same mold inconsistencies will still exist. we are talking about PLASTIC DISCS. These are not precision milled objects like golf clubs are!

Regarding golf clubs, sure you have numbers based on loft of club. But that still doesn't mean that every 41 degree 9 Iron is going to hit the same for every player. Many factors involved in matching your swing to the proper club/shaft/grip combo. Factors that you can't assess by watching a robot hit those clubs.. Same thing with discs, only the discs themselves are inconsistent, so all this talk about dialing in the ratings using a robot is just friggin DUMB.

 

[DiscyBusiness]

If you really need a robot to produce repeatable results, maybe you shouldn't be throwing plastic discs.

Well-trolled, salute

 

[Cgkdisc]

I think the issue, even if a device could be made, is dealing with the inconsistencies from run to run of a mold that's been tested. Even within a run, could you get samples from each end and various points in the middle? Would you need to test how well the plastic in a mold ages? Over what time period and what usage level?

While I don't doubt the "cool factor" as an engineer, if it can be done, I just question the functional usefulness of the data other than comparing discs both within a run and between runs of similar discs made by different manufacturers. And by functional usefulness, I mean economic return. For if the idea made sense economically for any entity within the sport, it would have been done by now. As others have said, it shouldn't be that tough to do compared to the hundreds of technological breakthroughs we've all witnessed or used.

 

[ballgolfconvert]

I think the issue, even if a device could be made, is dealing with the inconsistencies from run to run of a mold that's been tested. Even within a run, could you get samples from each end and various points in the middle? Would you need to test how well the plastic in a mold ages? Over what time period and what usage level?

While I don't doubt the "cool factor" as an engineer, if it can be done, I just question the functional usefulness of the data other than comparing discs both within a run and between runs of similar discs made by different manufacturers. And by functional usefulness, I mean economic return. For if the idea made sense economically for any entity within the sport, it would have been done by now. As others have said, it shouldn't be that tough to do compared to the hundreds of technological breakthroughs we've all witnessed or used.

I think this is the last thing the disc manufacturers want. It would show that every disc, even from the same run, have their own individual characteristics, as no two would fly exactly the same. Ball golf has Iron Byron. Certainly that could be used as a blue print for a machine, but again it would only expose the inconsistencies of the discs, so I don't see anyone putting up the cash to build it.

 

[DoWork]

If you really need a robot to produce repeatable results, maybe you shouldn't be throwing plastic discs.

How much do you think the existing numbers would change? Aren't they pretty much in the ballpark right now? I really don't see how this would be a huge advantage, at all. It would be a minuscule improvement.

Easy there Lieutenant, nobody is trying to force you to pay attention or care. Maybe try treating it like Jomez coverage and just ignore it if you can't handle people discussing ideas you aren't subscribing to.

 

[DiscyBusiness]

I think the issue, even if a device could be made, is dealing with the inconsistencies from run to run of a mold that's been tested. Even within a run, could you get samples from each end and various points in the middle? Would you need to test how well the plastic in a mold ages? Over what time period and what usage level?

While I don't doubt the "cool factor" as an engineer, if it can be done, I just question the functional usefulness of the data other than comparing discs both within a run and between runs of similar discs made by different manufacturers. And by functional usefulness, I mean economic return. For if the idea made sense economically for any entity within the sport, it would have been done by now. As others have said, it shouldn't be that tough to do compared to the hundreds of technological breakthroughs we've all witnessed or used.

Just brainstorming, but it could be used as a part of the QA process, so that discs that fly outside of the expected flight path are either recycled and remolded, or added to the factory seconds pile. I understand there is a potential decrease in production throughput involved in the recycle/remold option.

This would eliminate the inconsistencies that everybody complains about. But I wonder if being able to confidently sell a mold as having a 99.9% guaranteed stability would provide enough benefit to set this up. With the proper marketing I could see it reaping benefits ("____ is the brand you can *trust*")

Alternatively, they could go the transparency route and be able to accurately advertise a specific run (or discs within a run) as being more overstable/understable than what's expected.

 

[zgmc]

Easy there Lieutenant, nobody is trying to force you to pay attention or care. Maybe try treating it like Jomez coverage and just ignore it if you can't handle people discussing ideas you aren't subscribing to.

 

[zgmc]

Just brainstorming, but it could be used as a part of the QA process, so that discs that fly outside of the expected flight path are either recycled and remolded, or added to the factory seconds pile. I understand there is a potential decrease in production throughput involved in the recycle/remold option.

This would eliminate the inconsistencies that everybody complains about. But I wonder if being able to confidently sell a mold as having a 99.9% guaranteed stability would provide enough benefit to set this up. With the proper marketing I could see it reaping benefits ("____ is the brand you can *trust*")

Alternatively, they could go the transparency route and be able to accurately advertise a specific run (or discs within a run) as being more overstable/understable than what's expected.

Just think about how much that process would add to the manufacturing costs. How much are you willing to pay for a disc?

 

[bsammons]

Just think about how much that process would add to the manufacturing costs. How much are you willing to pay for a disc?

If it means I get it exactly how I like the particular mold, an extra buck is much better than the 4-5, maybe 20-30, extra to dig up a particular run.

If a company wants to do it, and they think it's a wise choice, I think it would be an excellent free market roll of the dice to see if it would increase product movement. I'm willing to bet it would. If infinite had such a device and sacrificed a few per run to test out, and people realized that run of done destroyers ran less stable than the last, they'd get bought up fast. If a run of firebirds came out board flat and stupid OS, some players would love that. Others, who don't care, would buy them anyway and the stock would still move. Think it would be a really great innovation that could assist those interested but could be ignored if not wanted, much like a back up camera.

 

[jakebake91]

Just brainstorming, but it could be used as a part of the QA process, so that discs that fly outside of the expected flight path are either recycled and remolded, or added to the factory seconds pile. I understand there is a potential decrease in production throughput involved in the recycle/remold option.

This would eliminate the inconsistencies that everybody complains about. But I wonder if being able to confidently sell a mold as having a 99.9% guaranteed stability would provide enough benefit to set this up. With the proper marketing I could see it reaping benefits ("____ is the brand you can *trust*")

Alternatively, they could go the transparency route and be able to accurately advertise a specific run (or discs within a run) as being more overstable/understable than what's expected.

That would put companies like Innova out of business.....they can't mold 2 identical discs to save their butt. The super obvious QC issues get sent thru, I can't imagine they are going to scrap a disc for something not obvious. And it would drive the costs of the discs thru the roof. Instead of being able to box, for example, 45 discs per hour, you'd be individually testing each disc, making it take forever to get a disc in a box. Especially since we are assuming full pro level power on distance drivers....so discs in theory flying well over 600'. Not feasible, or needed.

So to sum up....could such a robot be built? Of course. Anyone doubting that needs to get a new lease on life. Would it be awesome to see? Sure, it'd be neat. Would the data from it be useful? Doubt it. Would the PDGA be the ones benefitting and therefore doing any kind of testing? Hard no.

 

[Hampstead]

Just brainstorming, but it could be used as a part of the QA process, so that discs that fly outside of the expected flight path are either recycled and remolded, or added to the factory seconds pile. I understand there is a potential decrease in production throughput involved in the recycle/remold option.

This would eliminate the inconsistencies that everybody complains about. But I wonder if being able to confidently sell a mold as having a 99.9% guaranteed stability would provide enough benefit to set this up. With the proper marketing I could see it reaping benefits ("____ is the brand you can *trust*")

Alternatively, they could go the transparency route and be able to accurately advertise a specific run (or discs within a run) as being more overstable/understable than what's expected.

You're assuming that how you like how a particular run of a particular disc flies is how everyone wants that disc to fly. The beauty of run variations is that not everyone wants the same flight for various reasons.

 

[ThrowBot]

I can't believe nobody tagged me in this thread!

In my experience, robots throwing discs are just as inconsistent as humans.

[[Just my humble opinion; your footage may vary.]]

 

[TheirTheir]

:doh: You would still need to throw the discs to figure out how they work with your throw! That flip rating will still be different between any two players. And, the same mold inconsistencies will still exist. we are talking about PLASTIC DISCS. These are not precision milled objects like golf clubs are!

Regarding golf clubs, sure you have numbers based on loft of club. But that still doesn't mean that every 41 degree 9 Iron is going to hit the same for every player. Many factors involved in matching your swing to the proper club/shaft/grip combo. Factors that you can't assess by watching a robot hit those clubs.. Same thing with discs, only the discs themselves are inconsistent, so all this talk about dialing in the ratings using a robot is just friggin DUMB.

It is not dumb. It is simply an additional tool to help you make a purchasing decision. Of course the disc will fly differently for each player and the machine in no way should be viewed as a definitive flight guide for every person who buys that disc. However, each player will begin to understand how the "flip rating" correlates with their particular form/speed by throwing several discs that have been rated. This is simple stuff, you guys. Contrarians are alive and well here.

 

[Monocacy]

You would need to program the robot to add personalized amounts of off-axis torque and nose-up to accurately forecast flight for each customer.

With extra OAT for sidearm-flinging ThrowBots