The Breitling Watch Source Forums

Breitling Watch Information Forums, Navitimer, Chronomat
It is currently Sat May 17, 2025 9:52 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 4:40 am 
Offline
Contributing Moderator
Contributing Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 5:09 am
Posts: 36521
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 489 posts
Location: Ontario, Canada
sharkman wrote:
O2AFAC67 wrote:
ssrhythm wrote:
...If I go with a SOH 46, can I play golf, hammer nails, handle my magnetic money clip, play guitar in a room full of big amplifiers, and work in the OR suite environment of a hospital in it???? Do I need to be looking at something more along the lines of the Ball Engineer? Thanks

From a post I wrote on another forum...

Shock Resistance?....
Viewed a program on the Learning Channel about building and testing watches. The watch illustrated was a Tag Heur "Carrera" and the program showed the process start to finish. At one point, after the movement is encased, the watches are given a drop test from three different heights to simulate a range of possible "G" force acceleration imparted on the piece. The description was thus...


150 G = Swinging a golf club.
500 G = Playing tennis.
1000 G = Accidentally banging the watch into a wall.

Having watched the program I can feel better about forgetting to remove my watch during a round of golf if I ever do that (forget). I've always erred on the side of prudence and removed the watch first but hey, that's just me... Anyway, remember to have your wrist over a bed or couch when you put a watch on or remove it. An accidental fall of 3 1/2 ft. to a hard surface will indeed impart potentially expensive damage to your watch. Ask me how I know...
Best,
Ron



Whoa now, hold on.

150 Gs swinging a golf club assumes a nice full swing without an abrupt ground impact (involuntarily burying the club head into the ground).

A full swing that blasts dead into the ground (particularly hard ground) stopping the momentum of the club, can produce considerably more Gs than a walking (<6ft/sec) wall strike because the starting velocity is much greater and therefore the delta V is much higher over about the same duration. (if the swing is not truncated the impulse is much, much longer thereby dramatically reducing the Gs due to the delta V occurring over a couple seconds rather than milliseconds.)

An average golfer's swing is about 85mph which is 125 ft/sec. So the starting velocity is TWENTYONE times greater than a watch hitting a wall at walking speed(4mph). If the end velocity for both is zero and the change in velocity occurs in about the same duration, the Gs for an abruptly stopped golf swing is many magnitudes greater than striking your watch on a wall.

There are other factors such as the amount of force absorbed by the club head and shaft, collapse of the wrists, etc...that would decrease the forces on the watch in the golf swing scenario. On the other hand, golfing results in repeated exposures of high Gs. It is reasonable to assume a cumulative effect of repeated exposures over time.



That was my first thought too :shock:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:48 am 
Offline
Cult of Breitling Leader
Cult of Breitling Leader
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:34 pm
Posts: 3405
Likes: 27 posts
Liked in: 9 posts
Location: Portland, Oregon, USA
sharkman wrote:
An average golfer's swing is about 85mph which is 125 ft/sec. So the starting velocity is TWENTYONE times greater than a watch hitting a wall at walking speed(4mph)....There are other factors such as the amount of force absorbed by the club head and shaft, collapse of the wrists, etc...that would decrease the forces on the watch in the golf swing scenario.

I'm no physicist, nor a golfer for that matter, but it seems to me that the Gs at the point of impact - where the club head meets the ball - would be the greatest, and would lessen the closer one gets to the pivot point of the swing. Assuming the pivot point in a golf swing is somewhere between the shoulders and the elbows, it seems the wrists are closer to the pivot point than the point of impact. At any rate, to bear the full brunt of force in a golf club swing, wouldn't the watch would need to be mounted on the head of the club, rather than on your wrist? Conversely, when you bang a watch into a wall at walking speed, the watch is inherently at the point of impact.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 9:51 am 
Offline
All Roads lead to Breitling
All Roads lead to Breitling
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 6:01 pm
Posts: 8010
Likes: 3 posts
Liked in: 33 posts
JacksonStone wrote:
sharkman wrote:
An average golfer's swing is about 85mph which is 125 ft/sec. So the starting velocity is TWENTYONE times greater than a watch hitting a wall at walking speed(4mph)....There are other factors such as the amount of force absorbed by the club head and shaft, collapse of the wrists, etc...that would decrease the forces on the watch in the golf swing scenario.

I'm no physicist, nor a golfer for that matter, but it seems to me that the Gs at the point of impact - where the club head meets the ball - would be the greatest, and would lessen the closer one gets to the pivot point of the swing. Assuming the pivot point in a golf swing is somewhere between the shoulders and the elbows, it seems the wrists are closer to the pivot point than the point of impact. At any rate, to bear the full brunt of force in a golf club swing, wouldn't the watch would need to be mounted on the head of the club, rather than on your wrist? Conversely, when you bang a watch into a wall at walking speed, the watch is inherently at the point of impact.



I know a couple biomechanical engineers who would be happy to figure this out. They charge a lot though. But yes, presumably the average golfer gets to 86mph -125ft/sec at the moment of impact - either with the ball or the ground. Your arms, wrists, and hands are moving at 125ft/sec as well. IF you bury the club and otherwise keep your footing, everything stops and the delta V occurs in maybe 50 milliseconds. Bam! As I said before, some of the energy will dissipate in deformation of the club shaft and induced movement to the wrists, but it is still going to be many times the gs of a wall strike. A nice perfect swing without a hitch will produce 150g. That isn't produced by the impact with the ball - the ball impact is negligible due to, among other things, the club face and ball having HUGE coefficients of restitution. Rather, it's simply the process of the swing going to Zero ft/sec at the end of the swing. Your Delta V on an average swing is 125 ft/sec, but it occurs over nearly a full second, not milliseconds. The time factor greatly impacts the amount of gs.

Look at it this way - if I'm sitting in the driver's seat of a car and get from behind by a target vehicle, my vehicle accelerates from zero to some velocity (Delta V). So do I. Once you know the Delta V and impulse, you can calculate g (we've all been using G, but that is the vertical force of gravity - g is the horizontal application in equivalent measurements). If I am strapped the the rear bumper, the g (acceleration I experience is no different than if strapped to the front bumper. It's effectively the acceleration of the car for both guys, even though the guy in front is farther from the impact point. I'm just along for the ride. Granted, perhaps the poor dude on the back bumper has broken bones from blunt force trauma. But the effect of horizontal gs on him is no different than the guy in the front.

And the golfer, a good golfer, who golfs once a week and spends a bit of time on the range before the round swings about 200 times per week. How many times do any of us bang our watches full force and straight on into a wall?

_________________
SHARKMAN


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 3:14 pm 
Offline
Breitling Newbie
Breitling Newbie

Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 1:32 pm
Posts: 3
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
sharkman wrote:
JacksonStone wrote:
sharkman wrote:
An average golfer's swing is about 85mph which is 125 ft/sec. So the starting velocity is TWENTYONE times greater than a watch hitting a wall at walking speed(4mph)....There are other factors such as the amount of force absorbed by the club head and shaft, collapse of the wrists, etc...that would decrease the forces on the watch in the golf swing scenario.

I'm no physicist, nor a golfer for that matter, but it seems to me that the Gs at the point of impact - where the club head meets the ball - would be the greatest, and would lessen the closer one gets to the pivot point of the swing. Assuming the pivot point in a golf swing is somewhere between the shoulders and the elbows, it seems the wrists are closer to the pivot point than the point of impact. At any rate, to bear the full brunt of force in a golf club swing, wouldn't the watch would need to be mounted on the head of the club, rather than on your wrist? Conversely, when you bang a watch into a wall at walking speed, the watch is inherently at the point of impact.



I know a couple biomechanical engineers who would be happy to figure this out. They charge a lot though. But yes, presumably the average golfer gets to 86mph -125ft/sec at the moment of impact - either with the ball or the ground. Your arms, wrists, and hands are moving at 125ft/sec as well. IF you bury the club and otherwise keep your footing, everything stops and the delta V occurs in maybe 50 milliseconds. Bam! As I said before, some of the energy will dissipate in deformation of the club shaft and induced movement to the wrists, but it is still going to be many times the gs of a wall strike. A nice perfect swing without a hitch will produce 150g. That isn't produced by the impact with the ball - the ball impact is negligible due to, among other things, the club face and ball having HUGE coefficients of restitution. Rather, it's simply the process of the swing going to Zero ft/sec at the end of the swing. Your Delta V on an average swing is 125 ft/sec, but it occurs over nearly a full second, not milliseconds. The time factor greatly impacts the amount of gs.

Look at it this way - if I'm sitting in the driver's seat of a car and get from behind by a target vehicle, my vehicle accelerates from zero to some velocity (Delta V). So do I. Once you know the Delta V and impulse, you can calculate g (we've all been using G, but that is the vertical force of gravity - g is the horizontal application in equivalent measurements). If I am strapped the the rear bumper, the g (acceleration I experience is no different than if strapped to the front bumper. It's effectively the acceleration of the car for both guys, even though the guy in front is farther from the impact point. I'm just along for the ride. Granted, perhaps the poor dude on the back bumper has broken bones from blunt force trauma. But the effect of horizontal gs on him is no different than the guy in the front.

And the golfer, a good golfer, who golfs once a week and spends a bit of time on the range before the round swings about 200 times per week. How many times do any of us bang our watches full force and straight on into a wall?



No need for any engineer; the amount of shock transferred to your wrist on a 280 yard drive down the middle is significantly less than the same swing speed into the sod resulting in a topped 75 yard embarrassment...trust me :roll:

I have compared the black to black. I wore the dssd for a bit, and I like its face size but not its thickness. That thing is a beast and I don't have the stature to pull it off. I don't know what it is about the sub vs the SOH. The sub just looks really small. Maybe it is the mesh bracelet...I don't know. I think I'm going to leave this one up to the Mrs. and let her surprise me.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 3:50 pm 
Offline
Cult of Breitling Leader
Cult of Breitling Leader
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:34 pm
Posts: 3405
Likes: 27 posts
Liked in: 9 posts
Location: Portland, Oregon, USA
ssrhythm wrote:
I don't know what it is about the sub vs the SOH. The sub just looks really small. Maybe it is the mesh bracelet...I don't know. I think I'm going to leave this one up to the Mrs. and let her surprise me.

The Sub at 40mm will look small if you're comparing it to the 46mm SOH. That doesn't mean it will look small on its own. A lot of it is a matter of perspective, what you're used to, your wrist size, etc. When I first got into Breitlings, I was in a "bigger is better" frame of mind. After having contended with a couple big chunks of steel, I now realize my sweet spot is 39-41mm. With a 6.5-inch wrist, this makes sense. For me, the 46mm SOH would likely be too big, although the new 42mm could work. The Sub looks perfect on my wrist, as it does on Otto's 6.75-inch wrist. But again, you've got to go for what you like. If you like the SOH, don't let us talk you into spending double on something you won't like as well.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 47 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
 




Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group