Sponge Hardness new Video

[igorponger]

ЕSN has always been using the Shore O scale invariably. You're strongly advisable to fold up arguing about nothing. This is a direct evidence to sustain the afore fact once and for all .
NOTE: This given Tibhar product comes from ESN German mills/

 

[DukeGaGa]

Me: I could narrow it down to Asker C or Shore E with a single image, and one from ESN.
You: Nothing but speculation and conjecture.

Who do you think people will find is closer to the truth and more informative? Refer to first image below to see why knowing the specific scale in addition to the number is useful. Refer to second image below to see why knowing something is better than knowing nothing.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348184425_Science_Speculation


http://www.sundns.org/discuz/forum.php?mod=redirect&goto=findpost&ptid=257228&pid=6111427

https://web.archive.org/web/2012081...ristics-of-blade-materials/Page-3.html#120733

Yeah yeah, sure, mhmm, cool, right, great. So you can tell anyone what hardness of what rubber they should use then? If not, then it’s not very helpful at all, no more helpful then having soft/medium/hard marked on the packaging, one still needs to try out the rubber to know whether it suits them.

 

[latej]

COR - or simply how bouncy the rubber is - is a valuable information. But it is far from being the only important or most important value. I'm sure this has been repeatedly said, and repeatedly not understood.

We could actually say "nobody is interested in COR". Or equivalently we could say, no, no, "everybody is interested in COR", because everybody (at some not that high level actually) wants to know how the rubber works (how is the COR among other things) across the *whole range of strokes* one is performing. And that is what the hardness tells.

So hardness actually provides an information to players on a higher abstraction level, than COR. On a level, which matters.

This simply cannot be understood by someone who argues that he is capable of giving any impuls with any usual blade/rubber combo.

 

[latej]

The important thing is not the relationship to other rubbers, it's how they make you feel when you play with them. I'm pretty sure mostly everyone knows that the hardness is for the sponge only, not the entire sheet (sponge + top sheet = entire sheet).

Yes, of course, that is the ultimate important thing for you, for me, and for everybody else individually. But here it is not about "individually". We exchange information, and for me, measured hardness is a valuable information.

Let me give you an example. Michael measures consistently his H3 H40 to be 53 on his-own-scale. And then he measures Bloom Power 49, which I've expected to be say 52-53 to be 50. That is a valuable information for me, to not buy it. Because I know I prefer slightly harder. Yes, you are right - there is some chance, that I'd actually like it anyway - but I have my experience, and that is enough for me to decide not to go for it, and try something else. If Michael say, well yeah, the 49 is hard-as-brick, or softer than dignics, it really doesn't tell me anything to base my decision on.

Anyway, you can see it differently, that's OK. I actually like your approach of simply getting whatever you want and trying it, feeling for yourself, why not. There is a joy in it. I proceed a bit differently, I like to speculate/read about it first a bit. But generally I agree with the spirit of friendly exchange of information, where one doesn't assume to be better than others. That is worth preserving, and that is also why I replied to you.

 

[Zwill]

COR - or simply how bouncy the rubber is - is a valuable information. But it is far from being the only important or most important value. I'm sure this has been repeatedly said, and repeatedly not understood.

We could actually say "nobody is interested in COR". Or equivalently we could say, no, no, "everybody is interested in COR", because everybody (at some not that high level actually) wants to know how the rubber works (how is the COR among other things) across the *whole range of strokes* one is performing. And that is what the hardness tells.

So hardness actually provides an information to players on a higher abstraction level, than COR. On a level, which matters.

This simply cannot be understood by someone who argues that he is capable of giving any impuls with any usual blade/rubber combo.

There really isn't anything holding back the handful of actual manufacturers to publish COR graphs just like how speaker or headphone companies publish frequency response graphs. I don't see Butterfly or big brands doing this but I could imagine some obscure Chinese brand starts to do it. For them marketing BS doesn't work as well as for already established brands, but maybe some objective tests could.

 

[brokenball]

COR - or simply how bouncy the rubber is - is a valuable information. But it is far from being the only important or most important value. I'm sure this has been repeatedly said, and repeatedly not understood.

It is the most important. Hardness is just a preference.

We could actually say "nobody is interested in COR". Or equivalently we could say, no, no, "everybody is interested in COR", because everybody (at some not that high level actually) wants to know how the rubber works (how is the COR among other things) across the *whole range of strokes* one is performing. And that is what the hardness tells.

The normal and tangential COR are directly related to speed and spin. Even what you guys call throw. So how can one not be interested.

So hardness actually provides an information to players on a higher abstraction level, than COR. On a level, which matters.

Again COR determines the performance. Hardness is just a preference

This simply cannot be understood by someone who argues that he is capable of giving any impuls with any usual blade/rubber combo.

It is the impulse on the ball that determines its trajectory. An impulse is the integral of the force over the contact time. Except for that fact that faster rubbers can generate a larger impulse at the high end, all normal inverted rubbers can generate the same impulse during normal play It may take a different stroke, but it can be done except for cases like anti or LP where is to hard to generate a lot of spin no matter what you do.

The problem is that most people don't know what an impulse is much less how to calculate it.

Hardness affects the contact time and how much of the impact energy that gets absorbed by the ball, rubber sheet and blade. A hard rubber doesn't necessarily need to be springy.

I once bought a sheet of SST Pro Team ( god farvor ). I submitted the trimming to whomever keeps track of the sponge hardness and weight per cm^2 database. So why wasn't SST Pro Team popular 12 years ago? SST Pro Team was the hardest rubber in the data base at the time. I think this hardness craze is just a fad.

 

[latej]

This simply cannot be understood by someone who argues that he is capable of giving any impuls with any usual blade/rubber combo.

It is the impulse on the ball that determines its trajectory. An impulse is the integral of the force over the contact time. Except for that fact that faster rubbers can generate a larger impulse at the high end, all normal inverted rubbers can generate the same impulse during normal play It may take a different stroke, but it can be done except for cases like anti or LP where is to hard to generate a lot of spin no matter what you do.

The problem is that most people don't know what an impulse is much less how to calculate it.

Hardness affects the contact time and how much of the impact energy that gets absorbed by the ball, rubber sheet and blade. A hard rubber doesn't necessarily need to be springy.

I once bought a sheet of SST Pro Team ( god farvor ). I submitted the trimming to whomever keeps track of the sponge hardness and weight per cm^2 database. So why wasn't SST Pro Team popular 12 years ago? SST Pro Team was the hardest rubber in the data base at the time. I think this hardness craze is just a fad.

Thank you for the wonderful confirmation.

I actually honestly thought it's possible that you'd get it by now. But no, we gotta wait.

 

[zeio]

Bounce height from a drop height of 100 and 150cm. Data were collected by 桂花田.

	SPEED70	SPEED90	KTS	CYPRESS 9MM	Senkoh A
470 MAX	50----71	50----69	50----70	50----67	50----67
470 (2.0)	54----76	53----75	53----77	53----75	52----74
430 MAX	52----72	52----73	52----73	51----70	50----69
430 (2.0)	52----72	54----72	52----73	52----72	52----71
SRIVER MAX	44----63	45----66	45----66	45----63	43----62
SRIVER EL MAX	48---67	48----67	48----67	47----67	46----66

Plasma 470 - 47° (According to Table Tennis Kingdom, the Plasma series is the first product to market and incorporate the hardness in its model name.)
Plasma 430 - 43°
Sriver - 38°
Sriver EL - 35°

COR determines the performance.. Hardness is just a preference.

 

[zeio]

There really isn't anything holding back the handful of actual manufacturers to publish COR graphs just like how speaker or headphone companies publish frequency response graphs. I don't see Butterfly or big brands doing this but I could imagine some obscure Chinese brand starts to do it. For them marketing BS doesn't work as well as for already established brands, but maybe some objective tests could.

Butterfly has actually published experimental data in its own magazine Takurepo. I think DHS has supplied data similar to the COR on a small card for blades since early 2010, starting with the Hurricane King 655 and Hao 655.

 

[brokenball]

Thank you for the wonderful confirmation.

I actually honestly thought it's possible that you'd get it by now. But no, we gotta wait.

It is you and the rest of the forum that is clueless. I have been waiting for 14 years now.

 

[zeio]

Figured it out. In China, the Shore C as specified by HG/T 2489-2007 is based on Asker C.

However, the Shore C durometer from China, be it analog or digital, that is commonly seen on the internet is actually based on the older revision HG/T 2489-1993, which is identical to Shore E. I believe that is also the one used by 729 (华氏球式/邵氏W).

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32224751269.html
https://www.huatecgroup.com/sale-89...durometer-silicone-rubber-durometer-lx-c.html

It is beyond doubt that DHS use Shore A for in-house rubbers and highly likely Asker C for ESN rubbers. There is a paper from 1999 by DHS on the making of sponge, authored by none other than the former senior engineer, and a female, who developed the Hurricane series etc., in which it is stated the Shore A hardness scale is used. Other than the articles in Table Tennis World, there is also the official DHS FAQ from the 2nd link from 2017 above (reproduced below).