Sewer bill
Eagle Member
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2022
- Messages
- 608
In the most up to date revision:
"8) Flexibility - The disc is held on its edge in a vertical position perpendicular to a scale with
a precision of at least 2 oz. (56.7 g). The upper rim of the disc is then gradually pressed
down within 5 seconds. The flexibility rating is determined at one of two points, depending on
how the disc reacts to applied pressure.
For discs that buckle, the flexibility rating corresponds to the point when the maximum weight
is registered on the scale. For discs that do not buckle, the rating refers to the weight at the
point when the inside rim-to-rim distance is at 50 percent of the disc's diameter. The
temperature of the disc is to be no higher than 25 degrees Celsius (77 F) when the test is
performed. The ratings of three samples are determined, and the median score is used as
the final rating. Discs that are unable to be bent to 50% of their diameters fail the flexibility
test. Manufacturers are required to send samples of the most rigid discs they want
considered for PDGA approval."
In my opinion, this needs revisiting, more transparency, and results posted for each batch of discs tested in a specific blend of plastic. Here's my points.
1. This current language of the rule leaves open the possibility of dangerously stiff discs and plastic compounds as are already present in discs today that can and do pose a danger to pedestrians, fellow disc golfers, spotters and spectators.
2. There isn't a defined deformation per weight applied range it's simply referred as the rating with no description of the range of what a pass or fail actually is.
3. There are already industry standards for plastic hardness and durometer readings should be mandatory for each plastic blend available. There is a direct relationship with respect to durometer and overall stiffness independent of wing geometry.
4. Temperature not exceeding 77f is absolutely ridiculous, people throw discs in below freezing. If a disc is approved at room temperature it could easily fail the same deformation test at 30f.
5. For people like me, the consumer, the user of the allegedly regulated product, nothing is more irritating than completely arbitrary descriptions from manufacturers and intentionally vague language from governing bodies. For example, I recently purchased 10 esp wasps from discraft described as "These ESP Swirl Wasps were made to Chris' exact preferences. These are softer and grippy with a little bit of give and a slight dome."
These wasps are easily the stiffest blend of discraft plastic I have ever owned. It implies there's even more stiff plastic available.
6. I as a regular person with a pdga number should have access to the specific ranges and metrics used to determine a pass or fail I belive this section d(8) is worded intentionally vague so people like me can't go and prove with their own standards that there are and were discs that should not be pdga approved for play in sanctioned events.
Final point. If the pdga wants to be as murky as possible about flexibility they should be just as murky about paint or stickers on discs as those don't actually pose an increased danger to pedestrians or any measurable advantage to the player.
With minimal ribbing I can also be convinced to rant about disc weight.
"8) Flexibility - The disc is held on its edge in a vertical position perpendicular to a scale with
a precision of at least 2 oz. (56.7 g). The upper rim of the disc is then gradually pressed
down within 5 seconds. The flexibility rating is determined at one of two points, depending on
how the disc reacts to applied pressure.
For discs that buckle, the flexibility rating corresponds to the point when the maximum weight
is registered on the scale. For discs that do not buckle, the rating refers to the weight at the
point when the inside rim-to-rim distance is at 50 percent of the disc's diameter. The
temperature of the disc is to be no higher than 25 degrees Celsius (77 F) when the test is
performed. The ratings of three samples are determined, and the median score is used as
the final rating. Discs that are unable to be bent to 50% of their diameters fail the flexibility
test. Manufacturers are required to send samples of the most rigid discs they want
considered for PDGA approval."
In my opinion, this needs revisiting, more transparency, and results posted for each batch of discs tested in a specific blend of plastic. Here's my points.
1. This current language of the rule leaves open the possibility of dangerously stiff discs and plastic compounds as are already present in discs today that can and do pose a danger to pedestrians, fellow disc golfers, spotters and spectators.
2. There isn't a defined deformation per weight applied range it's simply referred as the rating with no description of the range of what a pass or fail actually is.
3. There are already industry standards for plastic hardness and durometer readings should be mandatory for each plastic blend available. There is a direct relationship with respect to durometer and overall stiffness independent of wing geometry.
4. Temperature not exceeding 77f is absolutely ridiculous, people throw discs in below freezing. If a disc is approved at room temperature it could easily fail the same deformation test at 30f.
5. For people like me, the consumer, the user of the allegedly regulated product, nothing is more irritating than completely arbitrary descriptions from manufacturers and intentionally vague language from governing bodies. For example, I recently purchased 10 esp wasps from discraft described as "These ESP Swirl Wasps were made to Chris' exact preferences. These are softer and grippy with a little bit of give and a slight dome."
These wasps are easily the stiffest blend of discraft plastic I have ever owned. It implies there's even more stiff plastic available.
6. I as a regular person with a pdga number should have access to the specific ranges and metrics used to determine a pass or fail I belive this section d(8) is worded intentionally vague so people like me can't go and prove with their own standards that there are and were discs that should not be pdga approved for play in sanctioned events.
Final point. If the pdga wants to be as murky as possible about flexibility they should be just as murky about paint or stickers on discs as those don't actually pose an increased danger to pedestrians or any measurable advantage to the player.
With minimal ribbing I can also be convinced to rant about disc weight.