-
By applying advanced laser
technology, the information of both ball and club can be
captured in great detail, which enables the product to
achieve the most complete data set with the highest accuracy
possible. Such accuracies of ball flight and swing
information are not obtainable by any other known technology
today.
-
By applying the proprietary
and innovative means to construct a two-dimensional laser
optical net, the product is capable of catching all swing
related information in a restricted area. The laser sensor
net arrangement is unique and patented.
-
By applying proprietary
computer algorithms, instant ball tracking and swing
analysis can be achieved, based on a three-dimensional space
coordinate calculation with techniques of laser image
recognition, mirror image rejection and image
re-construction.
|
|
Physical
Parameters and Resolutions |
Physical
Parameters |
Measurement
Resolution |
Interpolated
Resolution |
Principle of
Measurement |
Field
Tested |
| Swing Path |
1.5
degrees |
< 1
degree |
Laser image
interpolation |
Yes |
| Ball
Speed |
0.25% |
<
0.25% |
Laser
image cross section |
Yes |
| Ball
Take-off Angle |
1.0
degrees |
< 0.1
degree |
Laser
positioning |
Yes |
| Ball
Azimuth Angle |
1.0
degrees |
< 0.1
degree |
Laser
positioning |
Yes |
Ball
Back Spin
(100% capture rate) |
Approx. 10% |
Approx. 10% |
Laser
positioning & angular momentum conservation |
Yes |
Ball
Side Spin
(over 85% capture rate) |
Approx. 20% |
Approx. 15% |
Laser
positioning & angular momentum conservation |
Yes |
| Clubface
Impact Angle |
1.0
degrees |
< 0.5
degree |
Laser
image interpolation |
Yes |
| Club
Head Speed |
2% |
< 1% |
Laser
image interpolation |
Yes |
| Club
Head Impact Position |
0.5
inch |
0.25
inch |
Laser
image recognition |
Yes |
| Carry
Distance
(downrange) |
4.9% |
|
Aerodynamic calculation (Based on robot field test) |
Yes |
| Total
Distance (inc. offline) |
9.2% |
|
Aerodynamic calculation (Based on robot field test) |
Yes |
|
Note: measured numbers indicate resolution or accuracy which are
physically obtained with laser grids prior to additional image
processing, bold numbers indicate interpolated resolution or
accuracy achieved by advanced laser image processing, and
verified by over 500 robot shots data from actual field test.
|
All physically measured resolutions and interpolated resolutions
are field tested with robot, high-speed camera, and human
golfers, and fitted for actual data accuracy. The values listed
in the resolution table are depicted within realistic dynamic
ranges (i.e., ball speed from 50 mph to 150 mph, take-off angle
from 0 degree to 55 degrees, etc.). Measurement resolutions
under test conditions outside the dynamic ranges do not
necessarily meet the specifications quoted in the table.
|
|
Why Use Lasers? |
One apparent fact is that the
laser beam is exceedingly directional and highly collimated.
Because the laser beam consists of only plane waves and narrow
frequency bandwidth, it is both spatially and temporally
coherent. Unlike other light source such as an incandescent
light bulb, which incoherently pours out the radiant energy over
a large solid angle, it delivers high flux and radiant power in
a single diffraction-limited beam. The laser beam will thus
generate ball and club swing images in a crisp and clearly
defined pattern with great details, which provide the needed
resolution to calculate ball and club swing information to
within 1% of ball speed and less than 0.1 degree of ball launch
and azimuth angles. In the case of incoherent light source with
typical TO packaged detector arrangements, used by most of our
competitors in the floor mat based club head detection or IR LED
ball detection systems, the images are blurry, of low contrast,
and highly indecisive. It is worthwhile to point out that a 0.2
inch uncertainty with a 6-inch measurement distance represents
about a 2-degree error in ball take-off angle and azimuth angle,
which translates into about 40 yards error in driver distance
calculation for a 200-yard drive.
|
To illustrate the difference between coherent and incoherent,
non-collimated images, Figure 1 and Figure 2 show the contrast
of image edge definition between white light or IR LED images
and collimated laser images, respectively.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 1(a)
|
Figure 1(b)
|
Figure 1(c)
|
|
|
|
Figure
1(a) and 1(b) show the blurring image as result of incoherent,
non-collimated light sources such as incandescent light bulb or
IR LED, at shorter and longer distance from the detector plane,
respectively. Figure 1(c) indicates a double blurry image when
multiple light sources (in this case two sources) are used as in
the case of IR LED technology. Thus special and expensive
electronic signal process schemes of either signal modulation or
emitter signal scanning must be applied to distinguish the
actual position of the ball with respect to the spatial
coordinates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 2(a)
|
Figure 2(b)
|
Figure 2(c)
|
Figure 2(d)
|
|
|
|
Figure 2(a) shows a well-defined, sharp image created by a
coherent, collimated laser light source. Because the edge of the
image is well defined with excellent contrast, it is then
possible to use limited number of laser beam cross sections to
re-construct the ball image in three-dimensional space. Figure
2(b) shows multiple laser beams (four beams in this case)
generated from a coherent single laser source. The cross
sectional information is then presented in Figure 2(c) and
Figure 2(d) with superior spatial resolution (for a 120 mph golf
ball, the resolution is better than 0.25%).
The spatial resolution inherent to floor mat detection systems
is limited by detector spacing and electronic complexity to
roughly 2 degrees of ball trajectory and swing path angle. For a
200-yard drive, this translates into about 7 yards in lateral
distance error, but most importantly it gives over 40 yards in
driver distance error, with an uncertainty of 2 degrees in ball
take-off angle. Mainly, the physical dimensions and arrangement
of the detectors with other than laser light sources are
responsible for this large deviation.
Arrangements to achieve better spatial resolution with IR LED
technology are possible only if the measurement distance between
the ball detection and hitting tee position is increased from a
preferred position of about 1 foot to over 10 feet. However,
even at that large distance, the IR LED or white light shadowing
techniques can detect only “Yes” and “No” of a passing ball.
They cannot produce high enough contrast or data to re-construct
the golf ball image to calculate accurately the ball take-off
angles (both inclination and azimuth angles) and ball speed, as
in the case of laser imaging technique.
This is the reason that some expensive golf simulators need to
have a space setup of up to 12 x16 feet, which increases the
cost of electronics and optical components drastically, not to
mention floor space! With our low cost laser technology and our
proprietary image recognition and processing algorithms, the
angle resolution is improved more than 10 times to approximately
0.1 degree. This angle resolution gives uncertainty errors of
less than 0.5 yard in lateral distance and less than 2 yards in
driving distance for a 200-yard drive.
|
|
Additional Advantages of Using Laser |
Another advantage of using a laser source is the narrow
frequency band (or wavelength) which allows
detectors to distinguish real
signal image from strong ambient and/or sun light to allow
outdoor usage without expensive signal modulation/demodulation
scheme. Additionally, because of its light weight, high output
power and added efficiency, compact size, and the reliability of
today’s solid state semiconductor lasers, it is possible to
design a portable and battery operable Golf-Station. With other
light sources such as incandescent light bulb or multiple LEDs
(in fact, over 250 LEDs are needed to cover a detection area of
8x8 sq. feet), the idea of having a portable and battery
operable unit becomes an impossible task.
|
|
|
|
|