How Much Clubhead Speed Is Generated by Forearm Rotation?

[iacas]

2 hours ago, Warlock said:

You mean velocity= radius x angular velocity?

I mean that a club might be traveling the same speed, but if it's at a shorter radius, when you lengthen that radius out it can be traveling faster. It still has the "unhinge" move left to add speed.

2 hours ago, Warlock said:

An uncocked wrist will also increase the MOI of the 'lead arm/club' unit, therefore its angular velocity will decrease even as the radius increases.

It's not a closed system.

[Warlock]

11 hours ago, iacas said:

I mean that a club might be traveling the same speed, but if it's at a shorter radius, when you lengthen that radius out it can be traveling faster. It still has the "unhinge" move left to add speed.

It's not a closed system.

So, if I've interpreted this correctly:

1. SIM1 - The 'In Plane MOF' unhinged the wrist and angularly accelerated the clubhead earlier in the downswing than SIM3. This is why the clubhead speed could be nearly the same as SIM3 (hinge intact ) at the 0.2 sec mark.  This 'In Plane MOF' will continue accelerating the clubhead until impact. 

2. SIM3 -  The 'In Plane MOF ' that starts to unhinge the wrist at 0.2sec is greater than SIM1 and will accelerate the clubhead to an even greater speed than SIM1 by impact.  That this forms most of that 22% increase in clubhead speed plus maybe a little extra speed caused by the active musculature rotation of the forearms.

How am I doing? 

Edited September 12, 2022 by Warlock

[Warlock]

Found another  interesting article by Dr Sasho MacKenzie , so maybe that 22% increase in clubhead speed is due to linear work applied to the club and not forearm rotation. In the original article that I mentioned in my opening post he said:

 "The clubhead speed for Sim3 (44.1 m/s) was 22% higher than that generated during Sim1 (36.2 m/s), which indicates as to how much active rotation of the forearm from a muscular torque can contribute to clubhead speed"

Here is another article I found where he conducted regression testing (which I'm not too familiar with to be honest):

Forces Applied During the Swing (rccssc.ca)

It says the following:

Linear Work predicts 90 % of the variability in CHS by itself

Angular Work adds extra 9% (does predict 44% if entered alone first)

I'm assuming that this recent article is more up to date on what can increase clubhead speed.

[saevel25]

[iacas]

On 9/12/2022 at 9:54 AM, Warlock said:

1. SIM1 - The 'In Plane MOF' unhinged the wrist and angularly accelerated the clubhead earlier in the downswing than SIM3. This is why the clubhead speed could be nearly the same as SIM3 (hinge intact ) at the 0.2 sec mark.  This 'In Plane MOF' will continue accelerating the clubhead until impact. 

Possibly, sure.

On 9/12/2022 at 9:54 AM, Warlock said:

2. SIM3 -  The 'In Plane MOF ' that starts to unhinge the wrist at 0.2sec is greater than SIM1 and will accelerate the clubhead to an even greater speed than SIM1 by impact.  That this forms most of that 22% increase in clubhead speed plus maybe a little extra speed caused by the active musculature rotation of the forearms.

How am I doing? 

I think that's close to what I'm suggesting may be at play here, yes.

Delaying the unloading of "lag" (not a fan of the term but I think we know what we mean here - forearm to shaft angle, basically) increases clubhead speed.

SIM1 and SIM3 don't isolate "forearm rotation versus none." The whole sequencing is different — different forces at different times yielding different results.

2 hours ago, Warlock said:

I'm assuming that this recent article is more up to date on what can increase clubhead speed.

What are the dates of the two? I'm on my phone so can't look around too much.

[Warlock]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

Possibly, sure.

I think that's close to what I'm suggesting may be at play here, yes.

Delaying the unloading of "lag" (not a fan of the term but I think we know what we mean here - forearm to shaft angle, basically) increases clubhead speed.

SIM1 and SIM3 don't isolate "forearm rotation versus none." The whole sequencing is different — different forces at different times yielding different results.

What are the dates of the two? I'm on my phone so can't look around too much.

The 1st article was published 5th Jan 2012

The 2nd article has 11/06/2019  on each slide.

[iacas]

10 minutes ago, Warlock said:

The 1st article was published 5th Jan 2012

The 2nd article has 11/06/2019  on each slide.

Hmmm, maybe that answers that.