If I remember my physics correctly (and I probably don't), I expect any system like this to have some natural vibration; the twang you induce for FLO would cause this particular system to vibrate at its natural frequency. If the system is FLO aligned correctly this vibration is along the target line at impact, i.e 3-9 o'clock. Otherwise this vibration has a 12-6 o'clock component to it, which would help take the clubface out of the line with the ball. Please note that I have no idea how large this component would be. Are we talking fractions of millimeters here? If the NBP is aligned to COG, the local minima for shaft rigidity, then the vibration should be at a minimum because this is the most inherently stable shaft orientation for the force applied (I used the term damping to describe this ... I shouldn't have, it isn't the correct term). If the spine were aligned at COG, then when force is applied from the downsing, the shaft wants to rotate away (as in a spine finder), because this is the most inherently unstable shaft orientation and you would get the most vibration.
Again, I have no idea if the deflection due to this oscillation could cause a toe or heel hit. When I started reading up on this, I was suprised aligning the spine would have any noticable affect on your shot at all.
Thank you for your patience.
Scott
Dave Tutelman wrote:
At 08:40 PM 10/7/03 -0600, Scott Stephens wrote:
It makes sense to me to align a NBP to the COG, since this should contribute the least amount of oscillation of the club head/shaft. I was originally thinking that the spine should be here so that the least amount of bending of the shaft would happen at the bottom of the downswing, but that would result in the most amount of oscillation.
Scott,
I'm sorry, but you lost me. Why would there be more oscillation with the spine aligned with the CG than NBP-CG? Here's my take on it; please tell me where I'm wrong:
If you align either the NBP or the spine with the CG, then any force arising from bending at the bottom of the swing will be in the plane of the shaft and the CG. Any other alignment will have forces outside that plane, which could cause bending (and perhaps oscillation) in other planes as well.
Then I read about FLO alignment where it is stated that alignment should be along the target line (see "SPINE FINDING AND WHAT TO DO WITH THEM AFTER YOU FIND THEM"). Am I correct that these orientations would be close to 90� out of phase in a 3 iron (but not nearly that much for a driver or sand wedge)? It seems to me that aligning the NBP(s) along the target line would not maximally dampen the oscillations, but would keep whatever oscillations are present going parallel to the target line (so you should hit closest to the sweet spot). Is that the essence of FLO alignment?
Again, I'm confused by your statement. In particular, I don't have a clue what would cause damping of oscillations to be different in the different planes. I can see a difference in the creation of oscillations and their size, but I see no difference in how the oscillations would be damped.
Thanks in advance, DaveT
