How "breaking in" effects flight characturistics

[disc_noobee]

Howdy,

I've been playing for rec for about a year, but still don't quite understand how/what breakin a disc does, and why it's desireable. Seems I read a lot about peeps complaining about losing their favorite "broken in" Roc, King, ect. So my questions are:

How does various stages of "breakin in" effect the stability? Does it make understable discs more stable, more understable? Do overstable discs get more stable, more overstable?

I understand every disc is unique, as is each disc in different plastics. Just would like a "general" guideline.

Thanks

 

[Quinntastic]

How "breaking in" effects flight characturistics

In gerneral discs break in more understable. To which degree will be depended too on plastic and mold. DX or baseline plastic gets beat in very fast and is almost "chewed" away, the clear style plastics, champion and such, are more durable and usually more overstable than other plastics, breaks in slowly, higher end like star, 400g, s-line are more towards mold flight characteristics i.e. break in understable then clear style but will keep flight character longer than dx.

Whichever one works best for you is mostly dictated on personal preference, though I usually have a mix of plastics so I can use whichever feels best for the shot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[UhhNegative]

The more you use a disc, the more "broken in" it becomes. Basically the edges get worn down, the flight plate gets slightly warped, etc. The effect this has on a disc is that it will fly more understable, always. It's desirable because it allows you to throw one mold for a variety of stability shots. For example, Philo Brathwaite carries only aviars, rocs, teebirds, firebirds, and destroyers (maybe I'm missing one here, but the point stands). All of these molds start out stable to overstable (except aviar). This means that as his discs get wear, they will start flying more understable. Then you can throw a new disc of that mold in the bag and now you have two discs of the same mold, but one is more stable than the other. You repeat this process and you can have an entire range of stability from just one mold.

 

[ru4por]

The more you use a disc, the more "broken in" it becomes. Basically the edges get worn down, the flight plate gets slightly warped, etc. The effect this has on a disc is that it will fly more understable, always. It's desirable because it allows you to throw one mold for a variety of stability shots. For example, Philo Brathwaite carries only aviars, rocs, teebirds, firebirds, and destroyers (maybe I'm missing one here, but the point stands). All of these molds start out stable to overstable (except aviar). This means that as his discs get wear, they will start flying more understable. Then you can throw a new disc of that mold in the bag and now you have two discs of the same mold, but one is more stable than the other. You repeat this process and you can have an entire range of stability from just one mold.

This is pretty on the mark. I can carry three destroyers of the same plastic in different stages of "breaking in". The oldest, most "broken in" will be less stable than the less old disc and the new one will be the most stable. This gives the thrower a familiarity with the flight pattern, but options to easily make the disc achieve a different flight pattern. I am not in the "break them in" crowd. You always run the risk of losing that oldest disc and face a dilemma for that slot in the bag until replacement is broken in. With the tons of molds now available, I prefer to find a mold that fits that slot in the bag and replace it when the flight characteristics change to create a mold overlap in my bag. Certainly plenty of players that don't agree with me, but there are two views.

 

[disc_noobee]

Just as an example. Lets say I have a disc rated at 10 6 -2 1 (slightly understable). After beating it up for a year or so, it will eventually be more understable, so its actually more like its 10 6 -3 1?

I kind of agree with ru4por a little. Dont really see the reason for having 3 or 4 of the same disc, all with minor differences in stability, when you could simply use a different mold to get the flight you need for a particular shot. To each his own I guess.

Thanks for the explanation guys. Learning stuff everyday about my new addiction...I mean hobby

 

[ru4por]

Just as an example. Lets say I have a disc rated at 10 6 -2 1 (slightly understable). After beating it up for a year or so, it will eventually be more understable, so its actually more like its 10 6 -3 1?

I kind of agree with ru4por a little. Dont really see the reason for having 3 or 4 of the same disc, all with minor differences in stability, when you could simply use a different mold to get the flight you need for a particular shot. To each his own I guess.

Thanks for the explanation guys. Learning stuff everyday about my new addiction...I mean hobby

Yes to your above question, but.....it might not be as simple as that. The "beat in" effect could also impact the end fade of a disc as well.....maybe even glide. I am not expert in aerodynamics. But as a disc wears, it would seem possible that all four of the numbers used above could be impacts to varying degrees.

 

[disc_noobee]

Gotchya...

 

[slowplastic]

I kind of agree with ru4por a little. Dont really see the reason for having 3 or 4 of the same disc, all with minor differences in stability, when you could simply use a different mold to get the flight you need for a particular shot. To each his own I guess.

For lots of disc types I agree that it's really easy to get basically the same flight from a new disc off the shelf, in a durable plastic so it stays close to that way for a long time.

Pro's tend to cycle the same disc mold and have multiples because they play every day, their discs beat in fast, and they have stacks of their favourite discs. So it makes sense for them, compared to someone who plays once a week.

But I do think that overstable discs break in to fly really nicely, somehow compared to a similarly "rated" or flight numbers of a disc that would be brand new. For example say that I have a Destroyer that should be 12/5/-1/3 according to its numbers...when it breaks in to be 12/5/-2/2 or so it will actually handle wind better than a Tern or something that is off the shelf supposed to be similar. For some reason the broken in disc tends to hold a turn but not be too flippy, and the fade will still happen but be mellowed out. The fade of a broken in disc is usually delayed a bit compared to a less overstable disc that is brand new (newer discs tend to have a bit more of a hooking fade...of course generally speaking etc.). It's subtle differences and kind of hard to explain until you've thrown some beat in discs to compare...but there is a reason why lots of people like to break in distance drivers compared to buying less stable ones.

 

[sidewinder22]

How does various stages of "breakin in" effect the stability? Does it make understable discs more stable, more understable? Do overstable discs get more stable, more overstable?

I understand every disc is unique, as is each disc in different plastics. Just would like a "general" guideline.

Thanks

Essentially disc "break in" works like dimple technology with golf balls. Dimpled golf balls can fly about twice as far as non-dimpled golf balls due to the way it affects drag. Discs are by nature much more aerodynamic than a ball, so the distance doesn't change as drastically.

So the roughed up surface creates a turbulent boundary layer over the disc to the outer airflow which becomes more laminar which reduces drag and deceleration - typically increases speed/distance. The relative increase of speed increases gyroscopic turn and reduces fade by moving the center of pressure/lift further back on the disc. The turbulent boundary layer may also affect the center of pressure/lift point pushing it further behind the center of mass which would also increase turn and reduce fade.

It may also increase sideways lift/Magnus effect. When really beat in it may also affect the gyroscopic stability via changing the distribution of mass like a driving on a tire that is out of balanced and increase wobble. So the beat in effect may be quadratic.

 

[armiller]

I kind of agree with ru4por a little. Dont really see the reason for having 3 or 4 of the same disc, all with minor differences in stability, when you could simply use a different mold to get the flight you need for a particular shot. To each his own I guess.

Thanks for the explanation guys. Learning stuff everyday about my new addiction...I mean hobby

I'm kinda with you guys, but I do see the benefit. When you say "minor differences in stability," you're underestimating how differently different discs of the same mold can fly, owing both to differences in that mold and the stage of wear. The guys who cycle Rocs or Destroyers also tend to be the guys who can throw them much farther than we mortals. So while we can observe smaller differences in how they fly, those players will notice larger differences since they throw farther (and probably more consistently) than we do.

Even if you don't want to use multiple discs of the same mold, there's no doubt that you'll eventually have some experience to make you value a beat-in disc. You'll come to like it more and more, and then you throw it more so it gets beat-in. And discs that start out fairly overstable tend to get even better as this happens. Then one day you lose it, and you need to find a replacement... That's when you start to miss a perfectly worn disc.

 

[Putt for D'oh]

Even if you don't want to use multiple discs of the same mold, there's no doubt that you'll eventually have some experience to make you value a beat-in disc. You'll come to like it more and more, and then you throw it more so it gets beat-in. And discs that start out fairly overstable tend to get even better as this happens. Then one day you lose it, and you need to find a replacement... That's when you start to miss a perfectly worn disc.

This. And the. When you go to get the replacement maybe buy a few different plastics and find they fly a bit different off the shelf but feel the same and none of them fly like your favorite you lost but you start throwing one of them more to get back to that glory but keep the others for their off the shelf flight.
Basically I've only started down this path with cycling but happened when I lost a star Teebird that I bought used that I loved. I replaced it with three plastics and none of them fly like the one I lost but they do fly different a bit from one another., especially the DX

 

[Nenja]

Essentially disc "break in" works like dimple technology with golf balls. Dimpled golf balls can fly about twice as far as non-dimpled golf balls due to the way it affects drag. Discs are by nature much more aerodynamic than a ball, so the distance doesn't change as drastically.

So the roughed up surface creates a turbulent boundary layer over the disc to the outer airflow which becomes more laminar which reduces drag and deceleration - typically increases speed/distance. The relative increase of speed increases gyroscopic turn and reduces fade by moving the center of pressure/lift further back on the disc. The turbulent boundary layer may also affect the center of pressure/lift point pushing it further behind the center of mass which would also increase turn and reduce fade.

It may also increase sideways lift/Magnus effect. When really beat in it may also affect the gyroscopic stability via changing the distribution of mass like a driving on a tire that is out of balanced and increase wobble. So the beat in effect may be quadratic.

Wow seriously? I assumed that a smooth and new disc would have the least drag dye to being aerodynamic... So the increaseed air resistance of the uneven edge is increased but it decrease the drag over the disc more by creating a air tunnel?

At this speed the sharpest knife doesn't cut wind most efficient?

 

[Jake V]

Essentially disc "break in" works like dimple technology with golf balls. Dimpled golf balls can fly about twice as far as non-dimpled golf balls due to the way it affects drag. Discs are by nature much more aerodynamic than a ball, so the distance doesn't change as drastically.

So the roughed up surface creates a turbulent boundary layer over the disc to the outer airflow which becomes more laminar which reduces drag and deceleration - typically increases speed/distance. The relative increase of speed increases gyroscopic turn and reduces fade by moving the center of pressure/lift further back on the disc. The turbulent boundary layer may also affect the center of pressure/lift point pushing it further behind the center of mass which would also increase turn and reduce fade.

It may also increase sideways lift/Magnus effect. When really beat in it may also affect the gyroscopic stability via changing the distribution of mass like a driving on a tire that is out of balanced and increase wobble. So the beat in effect may be quadratic.

The trick here is that lift without turbulence is impossible, so objects that are "more aerodynamic" also generate less lift.

Because discs do not have upward trajectory (like golf balls do) they are much more dependent on lift to stay in flight.

 

[sidewinder22]

The trick here is that lift without turbulence is impossible, so objects that are "more aerodynamic" also generate less lift.

Because discs do not have upward trajectory (like golf balls do) they are much more dependent on lift to stay in flight.

You are correct about lift without turbulence is impossible. However more aerodynamic things create more lift with less drag.

Discs do have upward trajectory on distance throws. Golf balls rely more on shear ball speed and trajectory for distance than lift though. If you throw a golf ball and disc at the same speed and trajectory, the disc will produce more lift.

 

[Doofenshmirtz]

Essentially disc "break in" works like dimple technology with golf balls. Dimpled golf balls can fly about twice as far as non-dimpled golf balls due to the way it affects drag. Discs are by nature much more aerodynamic than a ball, so the distance doesn't change as drastically.

So the roughed up surface creates a turbulent boundary layer over the disc to the outer airflow which becomes more laminar which reduces drag and deceleration - typically increases speed/distance. The relative increase of speed increases gyroscopic turn and reduces fade by moving the center of pressure/lift further back on the disc. The turbulent boundary layer may also affect the center of pressure/lift point pushing it further behind the center of mass which would also increase turn and reduce fade.

It may also increase sideways lift/Magnus effect. When really beat in it may also affect the gyroscopic stability via changing the distribution of mass like a driving on a tire that is out of balanced and increase wobble. So the beat in effect may be quadratic.

Are you making this up or do you have some evidence that points to change in the surface of the disc as the source of the change in stability?

 

[FlipFlat]

Essentially disc "break in" works like dimple technology with golf balls. Dimpled golf balls can fly about twice as far as non-dimpled golf balls due to the way it affects drag. Discs are by nature much more aerodynamic than a ball, so the distance doesn't change as drastically.

So the roughed up surface creates a turbulent boundary layer over the disc to the outer airflow which becomes more laminar which reduces drag and deceleration - typically increases speed/distance. The relative increase of speed increases gyroscopic turn and reduces fade by moving the center of pressure/lift further back on the disc. The turbulent boundary layer may also affect the center of pressure/lift point pushing it further behind the center of mass which would also increase turn and reduce fade.

It may also increase sideways lift/Magnus effect. When really beat in it may also affect the gyroscopic stability via changing the distribution of mass like a driving on a tire that is out of balanced and increase wobble. So the beat in effect may be quadratic.

I agreed with all of what posted except i don't think the "Magnus Effect" can effect a disc. It does effect ball shaped objects and even Barrel shaped objects. I could be (wrong) though but everything i have ever read about disc physics has dismissed the Magnus effect.

 

[ILUVSMGS18]

The main reason that I would cycle a disc mold is for feel consistency and cost effectiveness. For example an Eagle (7,4,-1,3) flies similarly to a TeeBird (7,5,0,2) but they will beat in differently. Discs with a negative turn rating like the Eagle will usually gain turn and lose fade about the same. Discs that have 0 or positive turn like the TeeBird will lose fade before they develop turn. Discs almost always beat in to be more understable but I've had discs hit a tree or get left out in the sun and end up more overstable but it is rare. Basically as a disc hits things the wing of a disc is bent down which increases understability. If the wing on a disc was bent upwards the disc would fly more overstable. An extra bonus of the disc beating in is that it gains glide so a disc rated 10,6,-2,1 might be closer to 10,7,-3,0 once it is beat in.

 

[slowplastic]

This is all very interesting. I've always simplified it as impacts lowering the wing/nose by denting it downwards, and any notches/scuffs/gouges destabilizing the gyroscopic properties to reduce stability as well...of course with no measurements at all.

 

[atison]

Golf balls fly farther with dimples because of the backspin imparted on them at impact. The dimples give the air something to "grab onto" and help create negative net pressure on the top of the ball versus the bottom of the ball resulting in it staying aloft longer (until the inertia of the initial impact slows down to the point that the air moving over it isn't strong enough to create the differential). Without dimples, a golfball simply knuckes through the air with no consistent net negative pressure on any side of the ball regardless of spin.

There is a great video of a guy dropping two basketballs off a damn. One he drops with no spin. The other he drops with backspin. Great video explaining why golf drives need spin to fly far (optimal amount of backspin is a whole other discussion).

A disc stays aloft primarily because of the airfoil design of the leading edge of the wing. 2 things bring it down out of the air. 1) loss of inertia, 2) it slowing down past its point of continuing a stable and level flight. Roughing up a disc makes it less stable because there is more negative pressure on the wing that is spinning forward (left edge on a RHBH throw).

The part of this that makes the disc fly farther is the decreased stability (resistance to fading) at low speeds. When the disc is slowing down, the outside edge is being held up longer by increased negative net pressure on the top side of the outside edge due to the increased turbulence.

There is a great video of a guy dropping two basketballs off a damn. One he drops with no spin. The other he drops with backspin. Great video explaining why golf drives need spin to fly far.

 

[Doofenshmirtz]

A disc stays aloft primarily because of the airfoil design of the leading edge of the wing. 2 things bring it down out of the air. 1) loss of inertia, 2) it slowing down past its point of continuing a stable and level flight. Roughing up a disc makes it less stable because there is more negative pressure on the wing that is spinning forward (left edge on a RHBH throw).

On a RHBH throw, with clockwise spin as viewed from the top, any imbalance in lift on the left/port side (as moving forward) would result in a change in the angle-of-attack, caused by precession, moving the nose up, which would cause an earlier fade.