Quick question about bullets and golf balls

Published 9/26/07

For you physics people (or inventors): If a golf ball flies farther because it’s dimpled, why don’t bullets and hunting arrows have dimples?

Add to del.icio.us Digg it! Add to Technorati Add to Furl Add to reddit Stumble it!

The Fray


Gnomic says:

There are many reasons. Golf bals are round and have an indeterminate trajectory (by design) from things like spin. Bullets cylindrical (from a physics point of view) and have all the force applied to one end, which is flat, and spiral for strait line stability. Dimpling a calendar would not have the same effect. Besides, if the gun fired a round dimpled ball, it wouldn’t have a significant impact - a couple of yards at best. Where a couple feet make a big difference to a golfer, it doesn’t do much for a shooter.

Also, I suspect that dimples would introduce significant drag at supersonic velocities, as well as instability as its hard to maintain the symmetrical precision of dimples at high speed - the bullet would act like an out-of-balance tire and tumble.

September 26th, 2007 at 12:42 PM

lionemom says:

Many bullets tumble already. I don’t have hard data on what caliber or ammo type, but that much I know from forensic shows (not CSI.)

September 26th, 2007 at 4:20 PM

Vince says:

Typically bullets will begin to tumble after an extended period of time, or once they make contact with an object (human body). That is when they are the most deadly. If a bullet were to simply pass through you it may not hit any major organs, but by tumbling on impact, its more likely to 1.) not go through you, or 2.) if it does go through you it won’t leave a nice clean hole.

When shot to within the range of the bullet, the bullet should not tumble at all. Only after you exceed this range. For example, if the M16 fires 400 meters and is still accurate, if you were to shoot it say 800 not only would it not be as accurate, but the nice clean hole in the target wouldn’t necessarily be clean (perfectly round) any longer indicating the bullet slowed down and began to tumble.

September 26th, 2007 at 4:56 PM

gnomic says:

Few bullets tumble any significant distance in the air. The tumble after hitting someone. Different bullets have different characteristics. The M16 round slug is known for tumbling once it hits a body, as are many small arms. A hunting caliber and sniper bullet are more likely to pass right though because they are designed for accuracy.

And while CSI isn’t as bas as many programs, don’t believe everything your see on TV. Or on the INTERNET for that matter.

September 26th, 2007 at 9:24 PM

greyrat says:

Hey gnomic:

s/someone/something/

Just sayin’…

September 27th, 2007 at 1:14 PM

Jason says:

If this wasn’t a trick question, i.e., Andrew, you already know the answer, then it’s quite simple. As the first poster pointed out, golf balls are round. Because they are round they have to be dimpled in order to create lift and reduce certain types of spin, improving distance and accuracy when struck as a result. Also, because golf balls are traveling considerably slower than bullets or arrows (fastest club head speed is still well under 200 MPH) they are more at the mercy of the elements (wind) and as such must accommodate for their forces in transit more than higher velocity projectiles.

Bullets don’t have dimples because they need to cut through the air as quickly as possible and remain (sans windage) on as straight a line path as possible. To this end bullets are propelled at very high velocities and spun along the axis of travel to reduce the effects of drag and cross winds. If the bullets were dimpled they would behave in much more unpredictable ways because they would interact with more air currents of varying velocities and directions. If bullets were round balls, like musket shots, they would need to be spun differently than along the axis of travel in order to reach their target with any kind of accuracy. They would also, as one other poster pointed out, behave differently at varying speeds depending on the size and configuration of the dimples.

Actually, early human arrows made of flint or obsidian were dimpled. I don’t know what effect the dimples had on the arrow flight, but given that the dimples would have been horribly unevenly sized and been of no formal configuration designed to assist in the flight of the arrow they were probably bad for accuracy. I’m sure if dimples helped we would have kept them in arrow head design to this day.

September 30th, 2007 at 12:17 PM

Jason says:

An interesting aside, go check out how hypercavitating torpedos work. Now that stuff will blow your mind!

September 30th, 2007 at 12:21 PM

Weigh in

Yer name:

Yer e-mail (to be notified of responses or I can respond privately -- never ever shared):

Yer Web site (if you like):

What you have to say (Be civil, or it might be removed; comments with links
might be held for moderation, just so you know):




Site created with

and


Blog run by