• Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
    It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)

Explanation of the physics of flying discs (FIXED)

The speed thing makes sense, as a disc shouldn't turn if it's going slower.
But the drag thing does make sense to me - as if you increase drag - and have the same speed, this would alter the flight characteristic into a less stable flight pattern.

But that in itself seems paradoxical to me because drag is conducive to slowness. All other variables left the same, you can't increase drag without lowering the rate at which the disc slows down. Interestingly, (I just found this information now), a higher drag, in airfoils, reduces the pitching moment (the angular momentum resulting from the radially asymmetric center of lift that I described). This isn't, however, because of a tail-drag. It's actually because of a head-drag. From what I gather, this head-drag causes the center of lift to actually be pushed back, so precession is retarded.

52655408.png

Figure 6: Discs from side-view, flying to the left.

This actually gets back to willstradamus' question as well, about speeds. It explains why "slower" (more blunt/rounded edges) discs turn over when given too much power. Precession isn't permitted to be as dominant in these situations, because of the compensatory properties of the disc, such as having rounded edges. This is something I didn't really explain in my first post, only vaguely touched upon.

So yes, craigg, you were partially right. Sorry for the confusion.


On a side note, I'd like to add something to my reply of harr0140's question about nose-down release. Since turn and lift are directly associated, throwing a nose-down disc will cause it to go fast, and consequently turn, and as a consequence of that, lift. The downward tendency imparted from the nose-down release and the lift should cancel eachother out, leaving the disc to turn, level to the ground, without banking right into a roller.
Obviously, the path will change for different stabilities, but that's the general effect.


On another side-note: ERicJ and Omega SuperSloth, let's please keep on topic. Cheers :p
 
Last edited:
All other variables left the same, you can't increase drag without lowering the rate at which the disc slows down.

Sorry, craigg; what I meant to say here is that, all other variables left the same, you can't increase drag without speeding up the rate at which the disc slows down.


I really hate the 5-minute edit function on this forum.
 
yo doc ur makin this to complicated with your big words and long paragraphs basically spin fights the drag created by air the faster u throw the more drag u get, the air wants to stop ur spin so it can take over so the more spin the farther it goes before the drag stops the spin and your disc fades. spin(right)no spin(left) it dosnt take a phd to watch a disc fly it just takes a brain and some eyes put down the book and go play:rolleyes:
 
Rameka

Good stuff, im not sure if you are aware but the founder of Discwing discs, Dr. Johnny Potts, actually got his doctorate researching disc flight physics. Much of his research information is avaliable at the Discwing website.

I have a question too, how can you explain discs like the Tee-Bird which is a speed 7 disc, but reportedly doesn't turn till you throw it over 450ft??
 
yo doc ur makin this to complicated with your big words and long paragraphs basically spin fights the drag created by air the faster u throw the more drag u get, the air wants to stop ur spin so it can take over so the more spin the farther it goes before the drag stops the spin and your disc fades. spin(right)no spin(left) it dosnt take a phd to watch a disc fly it just takes a brain and some eyes put down the book and go play:rolleyes:

I'm certainly not a doctor; in fact, I don't have a degree of any sort. I simply enjoy dissecting certain phenomena I see in the real world to get a better understanding of them. As I said earlier in this thread: if nobody gets anything out of this except me, it still won't have been a waste, as I enjoyed writing it. I prefer to explore both practice and theory in a given area of interest.

No one's forcing you to read and/or learn it. :p


To Jungle Tim: I didn't know that. That's very interesting, and I'll look into it. Thanks! As for the Teebird question, this is where my knowledge wanes--I really have no idea. I am curious, though, and I'll let you know if I figure it out.
 
Last edited:
My friend who got a degree in aerospace engineering did one of his final papers on the physics behind a golf disc. Didn't understand it then, and don't understand it now, but I did help him test his hypothesis's on the course and in open fields. Maybe I could get his paper and post here to see how closely it relates to your theories.
 
Travis Greenway did his Master Thesis on "A BIOMECHANICAL ANALYSIS OF THE BACKHAND DISC GOLF DRIVE FOR DISTANCE".
 
It is obvious that discs of the same mold but different plastics have different flight characteristics but I have noticed something. It may just be coincidence but I have noticed that a plastics ability to absorb permenant marker seems to be directly proportional to it's drag. If you take two discs of the same mold like a champion wraith and a dx wraith and write your name on them with a sharpie and then use acetone to remove the sharpie, the disc with the least amount of sharpie left in it (DX plastic) will fly farther and have less fade than the other one(Champion plastic).

My theory is that at a microscopic level air will absorb into the plastic just as the sharpie ink did and adhere better and therefore slow the disc down faster.

So if this is true, if you could create a plastic that sharpie will not stick to then you would have the ultimate long flying plastic.
 
I'm certainly not a doctor; in fact, I don't have a degree of any sort. I simply enjoy dissecting certain phenomena I see in the real world to get a better understanding of them. As I said earlier in this thread: if nobody gets anything out of this except me, it still won't have been a waste, as I enjoyed writing it. I prefer to explore both practice and theory in a given area of interest.

No one's forcing you to read and/or learn it. : if my dyslexia would let me read your charts and long paragraphs i would probally agree with your science just dumb it down a little for us 8th grade graduates :)
 
It is obvious that discs of the same mold but different plastics have different flight characteristics but I have noticed something. It may just be coincidence but I have noticed that a plastics ability to absorb permenant marker seems to be directly proportional to it's drag. If you take two discs of the same mold like a champion wraith and a dx wraith and write your name on them with a sharpie and then use acetone to remove the sharpie, the disc with the least amount of sharpie left in it (DX plastic) will fly farther and have less fade than the other one(Champion plastic).

My theory is that at a microscopic level air will absorb into the plastic just as the sharpie ink did and adhere better and therefore slow the disc down faster.

So if this is true, if you could create a plastic that sharpie will not stick to then you would have the ultimate long flying plastic.

I'm thinking....wipe all my discs with acetone or only write my name in shaprpie on discs that I want to be understable.......the beat in part of this thread peaks my curiosity. One thing pitchers know.....a ball with scuffs will behave less predictably than a fresh baseball. Pitchers like that. Golf ball dimples....beat in discs.....where we going?
 
This is a highly interesting thread and really crystallized somethings for me. Thank you rameka. Can you perhaps explain this to me....Whip and snap the effect on flight. I am 6'3" and over 250 lbs but can't come close to what the wirey kids I see out there can throw...I have seen old men with short little alligator arm releases throw over 350..WTF! Seems they generate a quick release like a softball pitcher perhaps and perhaps the less motion allows for more control as opposed to a big long wind up. What is more important control or whip as it relates to distance?
 
This is a highly interesting thread and really crystallized somethings for me. Thank you rameka. Can you perhaps explain this to me....Whip and snap the effect on flight. I am 6'3" and over 250 lbs but can't come close to what the wirey kids I see out there can throw...I have seen old men with short little alligator arm releases throw over 350..WTF! Seems they generate a quick release like a softball pitcher perhaps and perhaps the less motion allows for more control as opposed to a big long wind up. What is more important control or whip as it relates to distance?

A smaller arm requires less force to accelerate as fast as a long arm. An analogous example is the martial art of Muay Thai, in which combatants commonly use elbows or knees instead of fists or feet. This is why you often see better players using a quick extension of the elbow across from the chest, instead of a huge wind up.

This doesn't necessarily answer your question, though. As far as I'm concerned, "whip" or "snap" is all part of control and form. As a general rule, the more spin you can get, the further the disc will fly. However, an understable disc released with too much zing will turn into a roller as we all know. You can compensate for that in two ways: get a more stable disc, or release on a hyzer. If your angle/stability cancels out with the speed you release, you get the longest flight path possible.
This is just a really simple optimization problem. Disc turns over too much? Distance lost. Disc precesses too much and fades over? Distance lost. How do you get the most distance? Make it about 50-50. You want the disc to turn, and come back. The S should almost always get you the most distance. If the human arm could put infinite force into a throw, and discs could be infinitely overstable, you could theoretically throw a disc that flies for miles, assuming the properties that affect fade and turn were balanced.

I still don't know if I've managed to directly answer your concern... :p

skurf: Please do, I'd love to compare and see how much I've managed to convey accurately.

Omega SuperSloth: As far as I'm concerned, Innova and Discraft both dumb it down enough for anyone to understand. This is intrinsically more rigorous and hard to grasp, so you can take it or leave it, as I said :p

sidewinding: Interesting and amusing, tell me more... :p
 
Last edited:
This is going to be long thread with lots of the information that I've got for further reading.

I. Resources

"Frisbee Flight Simulation and Throw Biomechanics "
Masters Thesis by By Sarah Ann Hummel
This is the most technical with many equations and advanced math involved.

"Identification of Frisbee Aerodynamic Coefficients using Flight Data"
by Hummel, Sarah and M. Hubbard, 4th International Conference on the Engineering of Sport, Kyoto,
Japan, September 2002.

"Frisbee Physics: How does physics play a role in Frisbee flying?"

Simple Aerodynamics of a frisbee- in layman's terms

"The Physics of Disc Flight"

"The Flight Of The Frisbee" excerpt
By Louis A. Bloomfield
$7.95 for the Scientific American article

Book- Spinning Flight: Dynamics of Frisbees, Boomerangs, Samaras and Skipping Stones, by Lorenz, Ralph; Copernicus, New York (September 2006); ISBN 978-0-387-30779-4
Synopsis

II. "The Flight Of The Frisbee" By Louis A. Bloomfield

by Louis A. Bloomfield
Professor of Physics, University of Virginia
Author of How Things Work: The Physics of Everyday Life

Modern Frisbees don't look much like tins from Bridgeport, Conn.'s, Frisbie Pie Company—the decades-old platters behind the name. But they fly through the air for the same reasons. Both are essentially spinning wings that stay aloft thanks to aerodynamic lift and gyroscopic stability.

Forward flight splits rushing air at the disk's leading edge: half goes over the Frisbee; half goes under. Because that edge is tipped up, the disk deflects the lower airstream downward. As the Frisbee pushes down on the air, the air pushes upward on the Frisbee--a force known as Aerodynamic lift. The upper airstream is also deflected downward. Like all viscous fluids, flowing air tends to follow curving surfaces--even when those surfaces bend away from the airstream. The inward bend of the upper
airstream is accompanied by a substantial drop in air pressure just above the Frisbee, sucking it upward.

Limits to the airstream's ability to follow a surface explain why a Frisbee flies so poorly upside down. When the upper airstream tries to follow the sharp curve of an inverted Frisbee's hand grip, its inertia breaks it away from the surface. A swirling air pocket forms behind the Frisbee and destroys the suction, raising the air resistance. Once this air resistance has sapped the inverted disk's forward momentum, it drops like a rock. Players can take advantage of this effect in a hard-to-catch throw called the hammer.

Rotation is crucial. Without it, even an upright Frisbee would flutter and tumble like a falling leaf, because the aerodynamic forces aren't perfectly centered. Indeed, the lift is often slightly stronger on the forward half of the Frisbee, and so that half usually rises, causing the Frisbee to flip over. A spinning Frisbee, though, can maintain its orientation for a long time because it has angular momentum, which dramatically changes the way it responds to aerodynamic twists, or torques. The careful design of the
Frisbee places its lift almost perfectly at its center. The disk is thicker at its edges, maximizing its angular momentum when it spins. And the tiny ridges on the Frisbee's top surface introduce microscopic turbulence into the layer of air just above the label. Oddly enough, this turbulence helps to keep the upper airstream attached to the Frisbee, thereby allowing it to travel farther.

Bernoulli Effect

The higher the speed of a fluid, the lower the pressure. So increasing fluid speed decreases pressure and decreasing fluid speed increases pressure. With airplane wings the air over the top of the wing has to go farther because of the curved shape, so the speed of the air on top is greater than the speed of the air below. Therefore, on the top the pressure drops so that the air can speed up. So the pressure below is greater than the pressure on top, which results in an upward force of lift. In summary, anything that increases air speed increases lift. (Lift increases with the square of the air speed.)

III. Definitions

·Boundary layer- the thin layer of air next to the surface of the disc. Boundary layers are laminar at the front and turbulent at the rear.
·Drag- any disturbance in the airflow increases drag.
·Gyroscopic inertia- the ability of a spinning axle of a gyroscope to always point in the same direction.
·Gyroscopic precession- the tendency of a gyroscope to move at right angles to the direction of any force applied against it.
·Nutation- oscillatory movement of the axis of a rotating body; wobble
·Precession- a comparatively slow gyration of the rotation axis of a spinning body about another line intersecting it so as to describe a cone caused by the application of a torque tending to change the direction of the rotation axis.
-OR the ability of a spinning axle of a gyroscope always to point in the same direction.
·Parallel flow- orderly wind paths parallel to the surface
·Profile drag - drag from shape and skin friction
·Skin friction – friction at the surface between the disc and the boundary layer. Skin friction is lowered by delaying the change in air flow, from laminar at the front to turbulent at the back, as long as possible.
·Stall- when lift stops.
·Turbulent flow- irregular air flow

IV. Forces on a flying disc:
Aerodynamic drag
Gyroscopic stability
Static stability?
Dynamic stability
Tractability
Bernoulli Effect
Air Friction
Laminar air flow
Turbulent air flow
 
Last edited:
geez Lowe. I am amazed everyday at how much you know about this great hobby.
 
Omega SuperSloth: As far as I'm concerned, Innova and Discraft both dumb it down enough for anyone to understand. This is intrinsically more rigorous and hard to grasp, so you can take it or leave it, as I said :p

hard to grasp, not really dude its p.f.s. and thanks for dumbing it down on that last one commen sense cant be compensated with dictionaries
 
p.s. the only people who are gonna understand all your hot air(the english language can be remarkabley brisk try to take more advantage of that) and graphs should be smart enough to figure disc dynamics on their own but dont let me interupt you the choir needs its preachin
 
This is a highly interesting thread and really crystallized somethings for me. Thank you rameka. Can you perhaps explain this to me....Whip and snap the effect on flight. I am 6'3" and over 250 lbs but can't come close to what the wirey kids I see out there can throw...I have seen old men with short little alligator arm releases throw over 350..WTF! Seems they generate a quick release like a softball pitcher perhaps and perhaps the less motion allows for more control as opposed to a big long wind up. What is more important control or whip as it relates to distance?

whip(spin) is control:confused: the more whip the longer you control the disc before old newton takes over and to answer the height question longer arms just like a longer whip makes more snap(pop) watch that slo mo show on tv the episode with that long drive champ on it i think that will explain whip dynamics. also being taller allows more time for the disc to go down before its lift brings it back up so yes being taller is better, try to think of it like being up on a hill, taller players need more strength though to compete with the spped of the smaller players snap ,so start hittin them weights because you already have a natural advantage look up the heights of some of the top pros i mean climo looks just like icabod crain . if your throwin your disc nose up instead of down you might be losing some d on your long drives
 
I consider whip to be the arm and body action and spin to be the motion produced by the wrist.......maybe we are just arguing semantics here..they are different components of a throw
 

Latest posts

Top