Not being a big soccer fan, not across the latest on the design, authorised use and reasons for the shape and construction of soccer balls. Looking at the opening game I noticed the truncated icosahedron ball is no longer in use. I found this article which compares the properties of different shaped balls http://www.nature.com/srep/2014/140529/srep05068/full/srep05068.html Does anyone know why the truncated icosahedron is no longer used in the World Cup? Sent from my iPhone
"SA" == Stuart Anderson <stuart.errol.anderson@gmail.com> writes:
SA> Does anyone know why the truncated icosahedron is no longer used in SA> the World Cup? This site has some commentary: http://www.soccerballworld.com/HistoryWCBalls.htm It says the new designs are supposed to give better control and accuracy. I thought I remembered the opposite from the coverage of the 2006 world cup, but evidently not. -JimC -- James Cloos <cloos@jhcloos.com> OpenPGP: 0x997A9F17ED7DAEA6
The sense I get from various web pages is that some felt it was too easy to kick a seam and get unpredictable behavior from the ball. It's not clear how the new design (as well described on the first page of the site below) avoids this. (Six propeller-shaped panels each with 4-fold chiral symmetry, fitting together like the faces of a cube.) I think the improvement isn't just in the geometry of the panels, but also in the way the seams are sealed, making the seams a smaller fraction of the total surface area. --Dan On Jun 13, 2014, at 12:11 AM, Stuart Anderson <stuart.errol.anderson@gmail.com> wrote:
Not being a big soccer fan, not across the latest on the design, authorised use and reasons for the shape and construction of soccer balls. Looking at the opening game I noticed the truncated icosahedron ball is no longer in use. I found this article which compares the properties of different shaped balls http://www.nature.com/srep/2014/140529/srep05068/full/srep05068.html Does anyone know why the truncated icosahedron is no longer used in the World Cup?
Sent from my iPhone _______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com https://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
New scientist has had several articles on this, both current and back when the old ball was introduced. The gist I got was that the seam pattern influences the point at which the ball becomes unstable as it loses velocity and spin.
This non-article in the NY Times gives a nice exploded view of the three large balls depicted, at least if you click on them. Warning: This does not work on my iMac with Mavericks when I use Firefox, butg works with Safari. --Dan On Jun 13, 2014, at 10:51 AM, Dave Dyer <ddyer@real-me.net> wrote:
New scientist has had several articles on this, both current and back when the old ball was introduced. The gist I got was that the seam pattern influences the point at which the ball becomes unstable as it loses velocity and spin.
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com https://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
Dan didn't give a link for the new ball (or it didn't show up for me), b ut my wife sent this one: http://nyti.ms/Uz077y <http://p.nytimes.com/email/re?location=InCMR7g4BCIUPVhKEeaZKesjGnkewooQ&user_id=440a59b5da415034701d13048362148f&email_type=eta&task_id=1402672110292443®i_id=0> which is probably the same. So the new ball is apparently chiral. Do they manufacture both a left and right handed form? Is there any noticeable difference in flight? On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Dan Asimov <dasimov@earthlink.net> wrote:
This non-article in the NY Times gives a nice exploded view of the three large balls depicted, at least if you click on them.
Warning: This does not work on my iMac with Mavericks when I use Firefox, butg works with Safari.
--Dan
On Jun 13, 2014, at 10:51 AM, Dave Dyer <ddyer@real-me.net> wrote:
New scientist has had several articles on this, both current and back when the old ball was introduced. The gist I got was that the seam pattern influences the point at which the ball becomes unstable as it loses velocity and spin.
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com https://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com https://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
I thought about that, and decided it depends on a) whether the ball is rotating clockwise or counterclockwise and b) in which hemisphere.* --Dan ____________________ * But not seriously. On Jun 15, 2014, at 7:11 AM, James Buddenhagen <jbuddenh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dan didn't give a link for the new ball (or it didn't show up for me), b ut my wife sent this one: http://nyti.ms/Uz077y <http://p.nytimes.com/email/re?location=InCMR7g4BCIUPVhKEeaZKesjGnkewooQ&user_id=440a59b5da415034701d13048362148f&email_type=eta&task_id=1402672110292443®i_id=0> which is probably the same.
So the new ball is apparently chiral. Do they manufacture both a left and right handed form? Is there any noticeable difference in flight?
New scientist has had several articles on this, both current and back when the old ball was introduced. The gist I got was that the seam pattern influences the point at which the ball becomes unstable as it loses velocity and spin.
participants (5)
-
Dan Asimov -
Dave Dyer -
James Buddenhagen -
James Cloos -
Stuart Anderson