Technical Field
[0001] The present invention relates to a golf gear fitting system, a golf gear fitting
method, a golf gear fitting program, a golf swing classification method, a golf shaft
fitting system, a golf shaft fitting method, and a golf shaft fitting program.
[0002] The present application is based upon and claims the benefit of priority to Japanese
Application No.
2015-102548, filed May 20, 2015, the entire contents of which are incorporated herein by reference.
Background Art
[0003] In 2008, a regulation on the repulsive force of a golf club head was put into effect
by the Rules of Golf, making it difficult to optimize ball carry by the club head
alone. In response to the regulation, manufacturers switched their focus to the shaft,
aiming to increase ball carry by optimizing the bending of a shaft. Accordingly, variations
in shafts increased as of 2012, and combinations of shafts and club heads thereby
brought about a further increase in variations of golf clubs. As an undesirable effect
of such an increase, it is difficult for a player to select the most suitable golf
gear, especially the most suitable shaft, at time of purchasing a golf club.
[0004] Fitting techniques are intended to be a solution for the aforementioned problem.
The technique described in Patent Literature 1 is an example of a fitting technique
focusing on the entire golf club. The head behavior at the moment of impact is photographed
by a high-speed camera, and the behavior is converted into three-dimensional coordinates
by a DLT (Direct Linear Transformation) method so as to quantify the position of the
head. By so doing, the head position of each club at the moment of impact is determined,
allowing the player to choose a suitable golf club. However, when such a technique
is used, it is necessary for a player to test many golf clubs by actually hitting
golf balls. Therefore, the player can only make a better choice, but it is still hard
to make the best choice.
[0005] The technique described in Patent Literature 2 is intended to solve the above problem.
In the technique, the swing is first measured, and the head behavior is simulated
based on the swing data. When the technique is used, by performing one swing for measurement,
the player obtains the results corresponding to test hitting with hundreds of clubs.
However, when a player uses actual golf clubs each having a different rigidity and
weight, the player hits a ball by changing the swing itself. Thus, when clubs and
shafts with significantly different properties are simulated based on the data of
one swing, the problem is that the simulation results do not correspond to actual
solutions.
[0006] The technique described in Patent Literature 3 is intended to solve the above problem.
By using a response surface methodology approach, the technique computes swings that
vary as factors are changed in shaft properties (flex, kickpoint and torque). Based
on the modified swing data, simulations closer to actual behaviors can be performed.
[0007] However, when the technique described in Patent Literature 3 is used, the issue is
that it is difficult to simulate by changing, for example, the "weight" and "length"
of members of a golf club. That is because when the weight and length are changed,
even with the same player, swing time is significantly different from address (the
position when the golf club is in contact with the ground) to top (the position when
the golf club is at the top of backswing) and from top to impact (the moment the head
hits a ball), making it difficult to obtain sufficiently accurate computations. Accordingly,
specifications of golf clubs as variables used in the technique of Patent Literature
3 are limited to those excluding the weight, length and the like that significantly
affect the swing time.
[0008] The technique described in Patent Literature 4 is intended to solve the above problem.
By using a swing response surface and a time response surface, the technique is capable
of accurately performing simulations even on such specifications that significantly
affect swing time.
CITATION LIST
PATENT LITERATURE
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
PROBLEMS TO BE SOLVED BY THE INVENTION
[0010] However, to use the technique described in Patent Literature 4, it is necessary for
the player to swing multiple golf clubs. Therefore, if the test hitter is a beginner
whose swing is unstable, variations are observed among swings, and desired results
may be difficult to obtain.
[0011] The present invention was carried out in consideration of the aforementioned issues.
Its objective is to provide a golf gear fitting system, a golf gear fitting method,
a golf gear fitting program, a golf shaft fitting system, a golf shaft fitting method,
and a golf shaft fitting program, capable of determining suitable golf gear for the
user by a small number of test hits.
SOLUTIONS TO THE PROBLEMS
[0012] The present invention has the following aspects.
- [1] A golf gear fitting system, having: a swing data acquisition unit to acquire swing
data from a sensor installed on multiple golf clubs with different specifications;
a swing data storage unit to store the swing data acquired by the swing data acquisition
unit; a data classification unit to classify the swing data stored in the swing data
storage unit; and a data prediction unit to predict swing data of specifications not
measured by the sensor by referring to the swing data classified by the data classification
unit.
- [2] A golf gear fitting method, including: a swing data acquisition step for acquiring
swing data from a sensor installed on multiple golf clubs with different specifications;
a swing data storing step for storing in a swing data storage unit the swing data
acquired by the swing data acquisition step; a data classification step for classifying
the swing data stored in the swing data storage unit; and a data prediction step for
predicting swing data of specifications not measured by the sensor by referring to
the swing data classified in the data classification step.
- [3] A golf gear fitting program to be executed by a computer, including: a swing data
acquisition process for acquiring swing data from a sensor installed on multiple golf
clubs with different specifications; a swing data storing process for storing in a
swing data storage unit the swing data acquired by the swing data acquisition process;
a data classification process for classifying the swing data stored in the swing data
storage unit; and a data prediction process for predicting swing data of specifications
not measured by the sensor by referring to the swing data classified in the data classification
process.
EFFECTS OF THE INVENTION
[0013] According to the present invention, suitable golf gear can be determined by a small
number of test hits. Therefore, the present invention is also a preferable tool for
a beginner with an unstable swing. Moreover, since the measurement time is reduced,
more time is made available for listening to a golfer as the actual user as well as
for test hitting the gear the golfer plans to purchase.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0014]
FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing a golf gear fitting system according to a first
embodiment;
FIG. 2A is a view showing an example of flexural rigidity (flex) of a shaft;
FIG. 2B is a view showing an example of the kickpoint of a shaft (flexural rigidity
distribution L(x));
FIG. 3A is a view showing an example of torsional rigidity (torque) of a shaft and
an example of specifications of a head;
FIG. 3B is a view showing an example of the depth of the center of gravity in the
head;
FIG. 3C is a view showing an example of the height and distance of the center of gravity
in the head;
FIG. 4 is a table showing specifications of nine golf clubs used for test hitting
to obtain swing data;
FIG. 5A is a graph showing an example of swing data (acceleration);
FIG. 5B is a graph showing an example of swing data (angular velocity);
FIG. 6 is a view showing classification results of swing data;
FIG. 7 is a flowchart showing processes of a golf club fitting system;
FIG. 8 is a series of views illustrating a method for predicting swing data;
FIG. 9 is a graph showing swing data when the shaft weight is the same;
FIG. 10 is a graph showing swing data when the shaft weight is different;
FIG. 11 is a graph showing swing data computed using only a swing response surface;
FIG. 12 is a graph showing swing data computed using a swing response surface and
a time response surface;
FIG. 13 is a graph showing simulation results;
FIG. 14 is a table showing examples of degree of impact;
FIG. 15 is a table used by the data classification unit in a second embodiment; and
FIG. 16 is a table used by the data prediction unit in the second embodiment.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE EMBODIMENTS
[0015] In the following, a golf gear fitting system, a golf gear fitting method, a golf
gear fitting program, a golf swing classification method, a golf shaft fitting system,
a golf shaft fitting method, and a golf shaft fitting program according to an embodiment
of the present invention are described by referring to the attached drawings. Note
that as an example of the specifications of golf gear, a golf shaft is described below,
but that is not the only option in the present invention.
(First Embodiment)
[0016] FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing a golf gear fitting system according to a first
embodiment. In the diagram, golf club 1 is prepared in advance by installing a golf
shaft with known specifications. Golf club 1 is equipped with sensor 11 and transmitter
12 inside the shaft at the grip portion. Transmitter 12 transmits the output from
sensor 11 to the outside via wireless communication.
[0017] Sensor 11 may be installed outside of a shaft. For example, sensor 11 may be installed
on the outer side of a shaft beneath the grip portion. By so setting, sensor 11 is
installed on golf club 1 owned by a player. Alternatively, sensor 11 may also be installed
inside a shaft of golf club 1 at the grip edge. By so setting, even more accurate
swing data are obtained. Sensor 11 and transmitter 12 are preferred to be integrated.
When sensor 11 and transmitter 12 are not integrated, it is preferred that transmitter
12 and the battery or the like built into the transmitter be set to be attachable
to an arm or the like of the golfer. Such a setting reduces the weight of a sensor
main body to be installed in a club, thus preventing a change in specifications of
the club caused by installation of sensor 11.
[0018] Sensor 11 is a six-axial sensor that detects and outputs acceleration in triaxial
directions and angular velocity in triaxial directions. However, that is not the only
option; for example, sensor 11 may be a nine-axial sensor that measures orientation
in triaxial directions using geomagnetism in addition to acceleration in triaxial
directions and angular velocity in triaxial directions. Also, sensor 11 may be formed
with two sensors, having a six-axial sensor and a triaxial geo-magnetometer, or with
two accelerometers with different measuring ranges and one gyro sensor. In such a
setting, a sensor with a narrow measuring range is used for slow motions such as backswing,
and a sensor with a wide measuring range is used for quick motions such as downswing.
By so setting, measuring accuracy is enhanced. The frequency of 200 Hz was used for
the sensor here, but the preferred frequency is 500 Hz or higher, more preferably
1000 Hz or higher. The higher the frequency is, the greater is the detail in which
slight changes in motion are captured
[0019] Golf gear fitting system 2 is a computer apparatus having a processor such as a CPU
(Central Processing Unit) and a memory that stores a program for the processor to
execute. Golf gear fitting system 2 includes receiver 20, swing data acquisition unit
21, swing data storage unit 22, data classification unit 23, data prediction unit
24, swing response surface computation unit 25, time response surface computation
unit 26, simulation execution unit 27, and results output unit 28. Those functions
are implemented when the CPU executes the program stored in the memory.
[0020] Receiver unit 20 receives output data (swing data) transmitted by transmitter 12
of the sensor. Swing data acquisition unit 21 acquires the swing data through receiver
unit 20. In swing data storage unit 22, multiple swing data obtained when a large
number of players swung multiple golf clubs are stored in advance. In addition, the
data stored in swing data storage unit 22 are not limited to swing data. For example,
swing data storage unit 22 may also store data on head behavior computed based on
swing data.
[0021] Data classification unit 23 classifies swing data stored in swing data storage unit
22. Data classification unit 23 classifies swing data using a self-organizing map;
a detailed description is provided later. The method for classification is not limited
to using a self-organizing map. For example, data classification unit 23 may also
use various clustering methods such as a neural network, support vector machines,
Bayesian networks, hidden Markov models, k-means, cluster classification, principal
component analysis, machine learning, and multivariate analysis. Moreover, classification
may be conducted by golf experts based on their experience. Classification by data
classification unit 23 is not limited to swing data, and may also include classification
of head behavior.
[0022] Data prediction unit 24 refers to swing data storage unit 22 and extracts swing
data similar to the swing data acquired by swing data acquisition unit 21. Then, based
on the data of the player corresponding to the extracted swing data, data prediction
unit 24 predicts swing data of a golf club that has not yet been swung by the player.
Note that data predicted by data prediction unit 24 are not limited to swing data,
and may include head behavior computed by the swing data.
[0023] Based on the swing data acquired by swing data acquisition unit 21, swing response
surface computation unit 25 computes a swing response surface when golf club 1 is
swung. Based on the swing data acquired by swing data acquisition unit 21, time response
surface computation unit 26 computes a response surface of swing time when golf club
1 is swung. Simulation execution unit 27 performs a simulation through the FEM (Finite
Element Method) using the swing response surface and time response surface. Results
output unit 28 outputs the results of the simulation executed by simulation execution
unit 27.
[0024] Next, golf club 1 used for obtaining swing data is described below. Swing data obtained
by swinging golf club 1 are stored in swing data storage unit 22. Players swing golf
club 1 according to its specifications (weight, flexural rigidity, torsional rigidity
and the like of the shaft). Different specifications of golf club 1 produce a different
swing by the player. Therefore, if a simulation is performed based on swing data obtained
by using one golf club, it is difficult to achieve appropriate simulation results.
[0025] Therefore, the following describes an example of the method for selecting golf club
1 used for simulations. First, based on experimental design, three different specifications
are selected from among numerous specifications of golf club 1. Then, a total of 27
golf clubs are prepared by setting three levels for each of the three specifications.
Among them, 9 golf clubs 1 are selected based on an L9 orthogonal array. To obtain
data on three levels for each of the three different specifications without using
an experimental design, it is necessary to perform simulations on 3
3=27 golf clubs 1. Accordingly, using an experimental design reduces the load when
acquiring swing data.
[0026] Here, an example of three specifications of golf club 1, namely, the weight of a
shaft, the flexural rigidity of a shaft (hereinafter referred to as flex), and the
flexural rigidity distribution of a shaft (hereinafter referred to as kickpoint),
are used. As for golf clubs 1 to be used, three different levels are prepared for
each of the three specifications, but such a setting is not the only option.
[0027] FIG. 2A is a view showing an example of the flexural rigidity (flex) of a shaft.
In FIG. 2A, a point 920 mm from the tip end of a shaft is supported from below, a
point 150 mm farther away toward the butt end (1070 mm from the tip end) is supported
from above, and a load of 3.0 kgf is exerted on a point 10 mm from the tip end. The
value of displacement of the tip end at that time is the flex of a shaft (flexural
rigidity).
[0028] FIG. 2B is a view showing an example of the kickpoint of a shaft (flexural rigidity
distribution L(x)). The kickpoint of a shaft is determined by coefficient (C) of function
(P), showing the point of maximum bend of the shaft. In FIG. 2B, El (i) indicates
the flexural rigidity, and (x) shows the position on a shaft based on the tip end
of the shaft. The kickpoint of a shaft is expressed by the formula below.

[0029] The kickpoint may also be defined as follows. When a shaft is curved, the point protruding
the most in the shaft circumferential direction is set as the apex, and the distance
(Lk) is measured from the apex to the tip end. The ratio of the distance (Lk) to the
shaft length (Lb) when it is curved (linear distance between both ends of the shaft
when it is curved) is the value of a kickpoint. Namely, the kickpoint is obtained
by the formula below.

[0030] Kickpoint values in the present application are those obtained by a shaft kickpoint
gauge "FG-105RM," made by Fourteen Co., Ltd. For example, shafts with a kickpoint
lower than 44.0% are classified as low kickpoint shafts, shafts with a kickpoint of
44.0% or higher but lower than 45.0% are classified as middle kickpoint shafts, and
shafts with a kickpoint of 45.0% or higher are classified as high kickpoint shafts.
[0031] Moreover, (Lk) and (Lb) are strictly defined as follows.
[0032] Lk: when a shaft is curved by a compression load applied on both ends of the shaft
so that the linear distance between both ends is 98.5∼99.5% of the entire shaft length,
(Lk) is the distance from the tip end of the shaft to the point where the straight
line connecting both ends intersects a vertical line drawn from the apex of the curve.
[0033] Lb: when a shaft is curved by a compression load applied on both ends of the shaft
so that the linear distance between both ends is 98.5∼99.5% of the entire shaft length,
(Lb) is the linear distance between both ends of the shaft.
[0034] The kickpoint of a shaft is classified as the point of maximum bend: when it is closer
to the grip it is called a high kickpoint, when it is closer to the head it is called
a low kickpoint, and when it is in the middle it is called a middle kickpoint. In
addition, kickpoints are allotted to be any of high, low, and middle depending on
the value determined by coefficient (C) of function (P). Swing data are acquired by
using nine golf clubs 1 described above.
[0035] Other specifications that may be used are the torsional rigidity of a shaft (hereinafter
referred to as the torque), torsional rigidity distribution of the shaft, weight distribution
of the shaft, length of a golf club, weight of a head, club balance, depth, height
and distance of the center of gravity in the head, grip weight, loft angle, lie angle
and face angle.
[0036] FIG. 3A is an example showing the torsional rigidity (torque) of a shaft. As shown
in FIG. 3A, the torque of a shaft is determined by the torsional angle of a shaft.
In FIG. 3A, a position 1035 mm from the tip end of a shaft is fixed, and a torsional
load is exerted on a position 45 mm from the tip of the shaft. In addition, a torsional
load of 1.152 kgf is exerted on a position 120 mm from the shaft axis. That would
be the same as exerting a torsional load of 1 ft·lb on the tip of the shaft. The torsional
angle at the tip end of the shaft is defined as the torque of the shaft.
[0037] FIG. 3B is a view showing an example of the depth of the center of gravity in a club
head. As shown in FIG. 3B, the depth of the center of gravity is the depth (distance)
from the face surface to the center of gravity in the head. FIG. 3C is a view showing
an example of the height and distance of the center of gravity in a club head. The
height of the center of gravity is the length from the leading edge to the center
of gravity on the face surface. The distance of the center of gravity is the length
of a vertical line extending from the shaft axis toward the center of gravity on the
face surface. The torsional rigidity distribution of a shaft and weight distribution
of a shaft are described the same as the relationship of the flexural rigidity distribution
and kickpoint.
[0038] The club balance (also called the swingweight) is how the head of a golf club feels
when the golf club is swung. The swingweight of a head means the feel of weight of
the head during a swing or waggle. Club balance is measured by using a club balance
scale "Golf Club Scale" made by Kenneth Smith, Inc.
[0039] The stiffness of a club is specified by the frequency of golf club 1 when a grip
and head are attached onto a shaft. The frequency is measured by using a "Golf Club
Timing Harmonizer," made by Fujikura Rubber, Ltd. For example, a point 180 mm from
the grip end is fixed and the club head is vibrated. The stiffness of the club is
specified as the number of vibrations per minute obtained at a point 760 mm from the
grip end.
[0040] FIG. 4 is a table showing specifications of nine golf clubs used for test hitting
to obtain swing data. Specifications of nine golf clubs are determined by an L9 orthogonal
table based on experimental design. The shaft weight shows a normalized value; a smaller
value means a heavier shaft. In the present embodiment, when the shaft weight is rated
as "0" it is 80 grams; when rated as "0.5" it is 70 grams; and when rated as "1" it
is 60 grams.
[0041] Also, flex shows normalized values; a smaller value means a higher rigidity. In the
present embodiment, when the flex is rated as "0" it is 130 mm; when rated as "0.5"
it is 180 mm; and when rated as "1" it is 220 mm.
[0042] Moreover, the kickpoint is also normalized. When the shaft is rated as "0" it is
a low kickpoint; when rated as "0.5" it is a middle kickpoint; and when rated as "1"
it is a high kickpoint. The number of golf clubs to be used is not limited to nine,
but may be any number that enables practical experiments.
[0043] The same type of head is attached to nine golf clubs 1 shown in FIG. 4. Each of nine
golf clubs 1 has the same length and the same weight. As described, when using golf
clubs 1 whose specifications are the same except for those that are subject to fitting,
variations derived from other factors are eliminated.
[0044] Moreover, sensor 11, transmitter 12 and other devices necessary to operate them are
inserted into each shaft of nine golf clubs 1. The total weight of sensor 11, transmitter
12 and other devices necessary to operate them is capped at 30 grams. Accordingly,
the impact on swing derived from an increase in the weight of golf club 1 is suppressed.
The total weight is preferred to be 20 grams or less. When those devices are installed,
by choosing a generally available lightweight grip whose total weight is below 30
grams, measurement for data acquisition can be performed without changing the total
weight or balance of the club.
[0045] Next, the method for classifying swing data is described. In the present embodiment,
126 players each swing nine golf clubs 1. A large volume of swing data is obtained
accordingly. More specifically, since a six-axial sensor is used as sensor 11, 126
players × nine clubs × 6 axes=6804 pieces of data stored in swing data storage unit
22.
[0046] FIG. 5A shows an example of swing data (acceleration). In FIG. 5A, the swing data
(acceleration) of five players are shown; the solid lines show acceleration in the
axis-x direction, broken lines show acceleration in the axis-y direction, and one-dot
chain lines show acceleration in the axis-z direction. The vertical axis shows acceleration
values normalized to have an absolute value of 1. The horizontal axis shows time from
top (the position when the golf club is at the top of backswing) to impact (the moment
the head hits the ball). The time from top to impact is divided into 40 sections.
[0047] FIG. 5B is a view showing an example of swing data (angular velocity). In FIG. 5B,
swing data (angular velocity) of five players are shown; the solid lines show angular
velocity around axis-x, broken lines show angular velocity around axis-y, and one-dot
chain lines show angular velocity around axis-z. The vertical axis shows values of
angular velocity normalized to have an absolute value of 1. The horizontal axis shows
time from top to impact. The time from top to impact is divided into 40 sections.
[0048] As described above, swing data of 126 players are acquired in the present embodiment.
When complex swing data of 126 players are stored, it is difficult to classify them
by analysis through visual inspection by human beings. Therefore, data classification
unit 23 classifies swing data using a self-organizing map in the present embodiment.
[0049] A self-organizing map (SOM) is an algorithm to conduct clustering through unsupervised
learning, and is a data analysis tool for nonlinear mapping of high-dimensional data
on a two-dimensional plane. A self-organizing map is a tool capable of clustering
swing data by mapping high-dimensional complex data on a two-dimensional plane.
[0050] A self-organizing map has an input layer and an output layer. The input layer of
the present embodiment is swing data. Among swing data of players, data classification
unit 23 in the present embodiment uses the swing data of golf club 1 with club number
"5" shown in FIG. 4. As described above, each set of swing data is divided timewise
into 40 sections from top to impact. Moreover, each set of swing data is normalized
to have an absolute value of 1.
[0051] The input vector (s) in formula (1) below shows the swing data of one player. Since
the time from top to impact is divided into 40 sections, D=40 in the formula.
[math 1]

[0052] Moreover, swing data (S) of 126 players are represented by formula (2) below. Note
that N=126.
[math 2]

[0053] Next, the output layer is described. Reference vector (m) is defined by formula (3)
below using a neuron (u). Note that (i) is a positive integer.
[math 3]

[0054] Moreover, the matrix (M) is represented by formula (4) below. Note that (L) is the
number of nodes in matrix (M).
[math 4]

[0055] Data classification unit 23 allots a random value to each neuron (u). Data classification
unit 23 provides the input layer with input vector (s). Data classification unit 23
determines the node of an output layer having a reference vector (m) that most closely
matches the input vector (s) provided for the input layer. The node determined here
is a winning node (c). Data classification unit 23 computes the winning node (c) based
on the Euclidean distance between input vector (s) and reference vector (m) as shown
in formula (5) below.
[math 5]

[0056] When the winning node (c) is determined, data classification unit 23 updates the
winning node (c) and nearby nodes via a learning process. More specifically, data
classification unit 23 updates the winning node (c) in reference vector (m) and the
nodes in its neighborhood to be closer to the input vector (s) according to formula
(6) below.
[math 6]

[0057] Here, according to formula (7) below, data classification unit 23 computes function
(hci) that determines the size of learning. Coefficient (α) is a positive constant
smaller than 1 and shows the rate of learning. In the present embodiment, (α) is set
at 0.5 (α=0.5). Note that (ri) is a position on the output layer, (rc) is the coordinate
of winning node (c), and (σ) is a positive constant, which corresponds to the standard
deviation in the normalized distribution.
[math 7]

[0058] Data classification unit 23 repeats the above learning process a predetermined number
of times, and the swing data of 126 players are each separately classified into six
data plots: acceleration on axes (x, y, z) and angular velocity on axes (x, y, z).
In the present embodiment, data classification unit 23 repeated the learning process
10,000 times. Six separate sets of data may be connected in series to be one set of
data.
[0059] FIG. 6 is a view showing classification results of monoaxial swing data (acceleration
on axis-x) as an example. As shown in FIG. 6, data classification unit 23 mathematically
classifies swing data in swing data storage unit 22 by using a self-organizing map.
In FIG. 6, swing data are each classified into any of hexagonal blocks; however, that
is not the only option. For example, regular polygonal (such as rectangular) blocks
may be used. Moreover, an on-line SOM was used here, but a batch SOM may also be used.
Since six different data groups, that is, acceleration data on axes (x, y, z) and
angular velocity data on axes (x, y, z), are separately classified, six maps are actually
created.
[0060] FIG. 7 is a flowchart showing processes of a golf gear fitting system. First, a player
as a fitting target swings golf club 1 with the club number "5" among nine golf clubs
1. Sensor 11 outputs the detection results (swing data) obtained during the swing
motion to transmitter 12. When swing data are outputted from sensor 11, transmitter
12 sends the swing data to receiver 20 by wireless transmission. Receiver 20 outputs
the received swing data to swing data acquisition unit 21. Swing data acquisition
unit 21 acquires the swing data outputted from receiver unit 20 (step S1).
[0061] Next, data prediction unit 24 refers to swing data in swing data storage unit 22,
which are classified in advance by data classification unit 23 so as to predict swing
data of eight other golf clubs 1 (club numbers "1∼4, 6∼9") (step S2).
[0062] The following describes the method for predicting swing data executed in step (S2).
FIG. 8 is a view illustrating the prediction method of swing data. Swing data (SD1∼SD9)
correspond respectively to the swing data of club numbers "1∼9". Difference data (DD1∼DD4,
DD6∼DD9) respectively show the differences between swing data SD5 and swing data (SD1∼SD4,
SD6∼SD9). Difference data (DD1∼DD4, DD6∼DD9) of multiple players are respectively
stored in swing data storage unit 22.
[0063] From the classification of golf club 1 of club number "5", data prediction unit 24
predicts swing data of the other eight golf clubs 1. The process is conducted based
on the assumption that a player with similar swings makes similar adjustments when
swinging another shaft. Therefore, data prediction unit 24 computes eight sets of
difference data (DD1∼DD4, DD6∼DD9) by subtracting data of club number "5" from each
cluster with eight club numbers "1∼4, 6∼9".
[0064] When new data (ND) of golf club 1 of club number "5" are acquired by swing data acquisition
unit 21, data prediction unit 24 determines where the new data (ND) are to be classified
in the self-organizing map. More specifically, data prediction unit 24 searches all
the swing data in swing data storage unit 22, and extracts the classification of swing
data that lie most closely to the new data (ND), thereby identifying the swing data
of a player with swings similar to those of the test hitter. Data classification unit
23 may perform a reclassification by adding new data (ND).
[0065] For example, to predict swing data of club number "1", data prediction unit 24 computes
average values of all difference data (DD1) in the extracted classification. By adding
the average values of computed difference data (DD1) to new data (ND), data prediction
unit 24 computes the swing data of club number "1". Data prediction unit 24 also computes
the swing data of other golf clubs 1 (club numbers "2∼4, 6∼9") in the same manner.
Here, the average values of (DD1) of a classified group are added to (ND), but it
is another option to add the (DD1) of a player with most similar swing data to (ND).
Moreover, six sets of data obtained by a six-axial sensor are separately computed,
but six sets of data may be connected in series and be processed as one set of data.
[0066] By the above process, data prediction unit 24 holds time-series swing data predicted
as those when nine golf clubs 1 are used for one swing each. Data prediction unit
24 converts one acquired set of swing data (club number "5") and eight predicted sets
of swing data (club numbers "1∼4, 6∼9") into grip motion velocity data and shaft axis
rotation data of golf club 1. Such conversion is processed geometrically based on
the installation position of sensor 11 inserted in golf club 1 and two positions of
the grip in golf club 1 predetermined in advance.
[0067] In the above, data prediction unit 24 is set to convert only the swing data from
top (the position when the golf club is at the top of backswing) to impact (the moment
the head hits a ball) into motion velocity data and axis rotation data. However, that
is not the only option. For example, data prediction unit 24 may also convert swing
data from address (when golf club is in contact with the ground) to impact (moment
golf club hits a ball) into motion velocity data and axis rotation data. As described,
when data are predicted using a database obtained by swinging multiple golf clubs
with different specifications, swing variations are identified for each specification.
In addition, prediction values related to data of two or more different specifications
(such as stiffness, kickpoint and weight) are obtained all at once. Accordingly, even
easier fitting is made available, and interactions of specifications are also considered.
[0068] Next, swing response surface computation unit 25 reads out swing data of nine golf
clubs held in data prediction unit 24 and computes a swing response surface by converting
the skills and habits of a test hitter into a linear function (step S3). A swing response
surface means a relational expression of the motion velocity data and axis rotation
data obtained by test hitting nine golf clubs shown in FIG. 4 and three different
specifications of golf club 1 (shaft weight, flex, kickpoint). A linear function is
employed here, but higher-order functions such as a quadratic function may also be
used.
[0069] The following describes a swing response surface computation process to be executed
in step (S3). Swing data measured by test hitting multiple golf clubs 1 are expressed
"f1∼f9" as shown in formula (8) below. Time (t) is digitized as t={t1, ..., tn}. Note
that swing data "f1∼f9" are expressed since nine golf clubs 1 are used for test hitting
in the present embodiment. However, the values differ by the number of golf clubs
1 used for test hitting. Moreover, "fj(ti)" indicates the measured value by golf club
1 of club number "j". More specifically, "fj(ti)" indicates acceleration in three
directions {ax, ay, az} and angular velocity in three directions {ωx, ωy, ωz} respectively.
[0070] When three specifications (design variables) of each of nine golf clubs are set as
{xj, yj, zj} (j=1, ..., 9), the relationships in formula (8) are obtained. Swing response
computation unit 25 solves formula (8) for each (ti).
[0071] Here, (x, y, z) are design variables respectively; "x" is a first specification (shaft
weight), "y" is a second specification (flex) and "z" is a third specification (kickpoint).
Numbers (1∼n) in (x1∼xn, y1∼yn, z1∼zn) respectively correspond to the club numbers.
Any value convenient for analysis is given to bar "x", bar "y" and bar "z". For example,
middle values of design variables may be respectively assigned to bar "x", bar "y"
and bar "z".
[math 8]

[0072] By solving formula (8), swing response surface computation unit 25 computes coefficients
(a1∼a4) of a response surface as shown in formula (9). When n=5 or greater, formula
(8) is in over-conditions, and no exact solution exists. Thus, swing response surface
computation unit 25 uses a generalized inverse matrix A
+ (also called a Moore-Penrose inverse matrix, or pseudoinverse matrix). The approach
is a tool for computing approximation when there is no exact solution. Namely, the
approach is for computing a solution to minimize an error |Ax-b| 2. The tool is a
generally used mathematical method; a detailed description is omitted here. To solve
formula (8), a mathematical computing software "MALTAB" made by The MathWorks, Inc.
was used.
[math 9]

[0073] Coefficients (a1∼a4) obtained in formula (9) are values corresponding to the skills
and swing habits of a test hitter. According to formula (10), swing response surface
computation unit 25 computes swing data (f) of specifications that are not actually
measured. In other words, swing response surface computation unit 25 computes according
to formula (10) the approximate values of acceleration in triaxial directions and
angular velocity in triaxial directions relative to any specifications (x, y, z).
[math 10]

[0074] Then, swing response surface computation unit 25 computes according to formula (11)
the swing data of golf club 1 of club number (m) that are not actually measured. In
formula (11), "fm(t)" represents a swing response surface.
[math 11]

[0075] Next, time response surface computation unit 26 reads out the swing data of nine
clubs held in data prediction unit 24. Then, time response surface computation unit
26 computes a time response surface for specifying the swing time of a player (step
S4).
[0076] The following describes the computation process of a time response surface to be
executed in step (S4). When swing time varies depending on golf club 1 and when the
number of clubs of golf club 1 is set as "k" (k=1, ..., 9), sampling times are normalized
as formula (12); "tk" is the swing time of each golf club 1.
[math 12]

[0077] When there is no significant difference in swing time, to save time in the normalization
process, time response surface computation unit 26 may cut off the computation process
at the shortest swing time "tmin" among nine golf clubs.
[0078] A time response surface is a relational expression of each swing time of nine different
golf clubs 1 shown in FIG. 4 and three specifications of golf club 1 (shaft weight,
flex, kickpoint). Time response surface computation unit 26 computes a time response
surface according to formulas (13)∼(15).
[0079] In formula (13), "g1∼g9" are swing times of nine golf clubs 1. Time response surface
computation unit 26 computes coefficients (b1∼b4) according to formula (14). Coefficients
(b1∼b4) are values each corresponding to the swing time of a player. By such a process,
time response surface computation unit 26 computes the difference in swing time that
depends on differences in the weight of golf club 1.
[math 13]

[math 14]

[0080] Next, time response surface computation unit 26 computes "gm" according to formula
(15). In formula (15), "gm" represents a time response surface.
[math 15]

[0081] As shown in formula (16), swing data "fm'(t)" is computed. Swing data "fm'(t)" are
those newly computed data obtained based on the swing data response surface and time
response surface.
[math 16]

[0082] Using swing response surface "fm" computed by swing response surface computation
unit 25 and time response surface "gm" computed by time response surface unit 26,
simulation execution unit 27 computes swing data "fm'(t)" of golf club 1 that are
not used for measurement. Then, based on the computed swing data "fm'(t)", simulation
execution unit 27 simulates the motion of the head of golf club 1 through dynamic
finite element analysis (step S5).
[0083] The simulation results obtained by the above analysis showing the motion of golf
club 1 represent the club speed at impact, face angle and impact loft (loft angle
at impact). The club speed affects the ball carry, face angle affects the ball flight
patterns, and impact loft affects the trajectory height. The simulation results computed
by simulation execution unit 27 are not limited to the club speed, face angle and
impact loft. For example, simulation execution unit 27 may also compute simulation
results of the club path, attack angle, ball speed, and ball carry.
[0084] For analysis using a dynamic finite element method, since a known tool (such as a
commercially available dynamic finite element software) is used, a detailed description
of the process is omitted here. Using a swing response surface obtained by converting
the skills and habits of a test hitter into a linear function, and a time response
surface obtained by formulating the swing time of a player, simulation execution unit
27 analyzes the motion of a golf clubhead. Accordingly, simulation execution unit
27 is capable of simulating the motion of golf club 1 by considering the skills, habits
and swing time (variation of swing time depending on the specifications of golf club
1) of a player.
[0085] As described above, swing time is significantly affected by the weight and length
of a club. FIG. 9 is a view showing swing data when shaft weights are the same. FIG.
10 is a view showing swing data when shaft weights are different. FIGs. 9 and 10 show
angular velocity (ωx) around axis-x as an example of swing data. When the shaft weights
are the same, fewer variations are observed in swing time as shown in FIG. 9. By contrast,
when shaft weights are different such as 40g, 60g and 80g, significant variations
are observed in swing time as shown in FIG. 10.
[0086] In the above case, to solve formula (9) above using a generalized inverse matrix,
it is necessary to set (t) to be constant. As shown in FIG. 9, if there is no significant
difference observed in swing time, no significantly greater error will result by any
method taken to set swing time to be constant. However, if swing times differ significantly
as shown in FIG. 10, a much greater difference will be derived from artificially setting
the (t) to be constant. Therefore, time response surface computation unit 26 computes
a time response surface after each (t) is normalized. Simulation execution unit 27
computes swing data that reflect proper swing time by converting (t) again according
to the time response surface.
[0087] As described above, even when specifications of golf club 1 are changed, swing data
that reflect proper swing time are obtained. Accordingly, in the event of changing
specifications (weight, length) that significantly affect swing time, accurate simulation
results are obtained. Strictly speaking, swing times vary even with a slight change
in specifications that have less impact on swing time. When simulation execution unit
27 computes swing data by using a swing response surface and time response surface,
computation accuracy is enhanced even when specifications are changed that have less
impact on swing time.
[0088] FIG. 11 is a graph showing swing data computed using only a swing response surface.
FIG. 12 is a graph showing swing data computed using a swing response surface and
time response surface. As is clear from those graphs, even further accurate simulation
results are obtained when simulation execution unit 27 performs simulations by using
a swing response surface and time response surface.
[0089] The following provides descriptions of a resultant data generation process conducted
by results output unit 28. In the present embodiment, the level of shaft weight (number
of divided levels "i" of the first specification) was 3, the level of flex (number
of levels "j" of the second specification) was 5, and the level of kickpoint (number
of levels "k" of third specification) was 5. The number of divided levels is set to
have any selected number of levels for the specifications of nine clubs actually used
for test hitting.
[0090] Specifically, the shaft weight has three levels (60g, 70g, 80g), flex has five levels
(X, S, R, A, L listed in the order from hardest), and kickpoint has five levels (zero
(low kickpoint), 0.25 (mid-low kickpoint), 0.5 (middle kickpoint), 0.75 (mid-high
kickpoint), 1 (high kickpoint)).
[0091] By so setting, simulation execution unit 27 obtains simulation results of the motions
of golf clubs 1 each having 3×5×5=75 types of shafts. Results output unit 28 displays
simulation results by plotting, for example, club speeds on the vertical axis and
simulation results numbers on the horizontal axis.
[0092] FIG. 13 is a graph showing simulation results. FIG. 13 indicates that the greater
the value of club speed, the faster the speed (longer ball carry), and the smaller
the value of club speed, the slower the speed (shorter ball carry). As shown in FIG.
13, to maximize the club speed, golf club 1 that has a shaft weight of "60 g", a flex
of "X" and a kickpoint of "mid-high" is selected. Selection of golf club 1 is performed
by simulation execution unit 27. Alternatively, a user may confirm simulation results
and select a golf club 1 having optimal specifications accordingly. Moreover, other
than the club speed, the face angle, impact loft and the like may also be expressed
by the same method.
[0093] Furthermore, results output unit 28 may display the tendency of specifications by
using a natural language. Namely, when results output unit 28 displays results of
a simulation performed by simulation execution unit 27, the results are converted
into a natural language in association with the corresponding absolute value and inclination
for each result. For example, if the purpose of fitting is to increase club speed,
results output unit 28 displays "club speed will increase if the flex is stiffer,"
"club speed will increase if the shaft is lightweight," "increase in club speed is
maximum when the kickpoint is high," "the impact from the shaft weight is greatest,"
and the like. If the purpose of fitting is to increase the impact loft (higher ball
flight), results output unit 28 displays "the ball flight is higher if the flex is
stiffer," "the ball flight is higher if the shaft is lightweight," "the ball flight
is maximum if the kickpoint is low," "the impact of the flex is greatest" and the
like. Accordingly, it makes it easier for a user of golf gear fitting system 2 to
grasp the tendency of specifications in natural language and to select golf equipment
more easily.
[0094] As described, results output unit 28 outputs simulation results by associating the
purpose of fitting with specifications, thereby enabling a user to understand the
association with specifications at a glance. In addition, results output unit 28 is
set not only to output the specification of a shaft that exhibits the maximum club
speed but also to output all the available specifications. Accordingly, the user can
identify such specifications that allow the user to achieve a moderate carry, a moderate
trajectory height, and a moderate trajectory curve. Therefore, the user can select
specifications of golf club 1 according to preference. That is especially effective
when face angles are computed. If a user chooses a shaft that exhibits a maximum bend
because the user intends to produce a trajectory curve, the user may face an issue
of excessive trajectory curve. Therefore, it is preferable for users to have a selection
of shafts that exhibit a moderate trajectory curve.
[0095] FIG. 13 shows examples where results output unit 28 displays information using characters
associated with specifications. However, related specifications may also be displayed
in different colors. To make the display easier to grasp, results output unit 28 may
devise a plotting method, or may use a bar chart or a three-dimensional graph for
displaying results. Moreover, results output unit 28 may output the results by changing
the color density of the lines or the like so that reviewing the results is even easier
and those including the best values will stand out.
[0096] In the above descriptions, the shaft weight (3 levels) is set as a first specification,
the flex (5 levels) is set as a second specification, and the kickpoint (5 levels)
is set as a third specification. However, other specifications may be used. For example,
it is an option to set the torque (5 levels) as a first specification, the flex (5
levels) as a second specification, and the kickpoint (5 levels) as a third specification.
Alternatively, it is another option to set the flex (5 levels) as a first specification,
the torque (5 levels) as a second specification, and the weight (3 levels) as a third
specification.
[0097] The present embodiment is described as an example by employing specifications of
a shaft. However, simulation execution unit 27 may also perform the simulation of
the present embodiment by using specifications of a club, specifications of a head,
specifications of a grip and the like.
[0098] Next, procedures are described to output complex conditions such as club speed and
trajectory height, or club speed and trajectory curve, as the results of fitting.
Generally, a player expects golf club 1 to exhibit not a single performance but complex
performances; for example, preventing slice, while maximizing club speed and simultaneously
increasing trajectory height, or the like. The trajectory of a ball is determined
by the height and direction of the trajectory. In the present embodiment, trajectory
height is sorted into three levels, "High" (high trajectory), "Mid" (medium trajectory)
and "Low" (low trajectory), and the trajectory direction is sorted into three levels,
"Fade," "Straight" and "Draw." Among nine combinations of trajectory height and trajectory
direction, one trajectory is selected based on the request of the player.
[0099] Here, "Fade" means the trajectory curves to the right when a user is right-handed,
and "Draw" means the trajectory curves to the left when a user is right-handed. Then,
results output unit 28 outputs conditions that satisfy the selected trajectory while
the club speed is maximized. To output complex conditions, specifications that maximize
an objective function (F) are selected. Objective function (F) is expressed by the
formula below.

[0100] In the above formula, "f1" represents first result data (club speed, for example),
"f2" represents second result data (face angle, for example), "f3" represents third
result data (impact loft, for example), and "α, β, γ" are weighting factors. Here,
"α, β, γ" are selected properly according to the request of a player. Generally, "α"
is preferred to be 1∼3 times the value of (β+γ.) That is because club speed is most
important for a golfer.
[0101] Results output unit 28 may display the specifications that show the maximum simulation
results (club speed, impact loft, face angle and the like) by converting the results
into actual product names of golf gear. By so doing, the golf gear fitting system
2 is put into more practical use.
[0102] As described, results output unit 28 is capable of displaying whether or not the
golf gear is suitable to achieve the trajectory selected according to the request
of a player. Accordingly, the user of golf gear fitting system 2 can easily select
a golf gear suitable to achieve desired trajectory. Namely, golf gear fitting is conducted
by the aforementioned golf gear fitting system 2. The system is capable of performing
measurement, analysis and results display in a short period of time, thus enabling
users to visually determine specifications of the most suitable golf gear.
[0103] In the example above, the shaft weight, flex and kickpoint are selected. However,
that is not the only option. Also, the number of specifications is not limited to
3. Specifications to be used for simulation are preferred to be those that tend to
affect swing time. Other specifications to be selected are any of the following: flexural
rigidity, torsional rigidity, weight, flexural rigidity distribution, torsional rigidity
distribution and weight distribution of a shaft, length of a golf club, head weight,
club balance, depth, height and distance of the center of gravity in the head, grip
weight, loft angle, lie angle and face angle.
[0104] Moreover, time response surface computation unit 26 may compute a time response surface
by stretching each piece of swing data to correspond to the longest swing time so
that all the swing times are set equal. In such a case, computation time is shortened.
[0105] FIG. 14 shows degrees of impact. An impact degree means the degree of impact on head
behavior when certain specifications are changed. When multiple different specifications
are selected for simulations, it is preferred to select a combination of those having
similar impact degrees. The reasons are as follows.
[0106] For example, when simulation execution unit 27 performs simulations based on three
different specifications consisting of head weight (impact degree: 5), torsional rigidity
distribution of a shaft (impact degree: 1), and height of the center of gravity in
the head (impact degree: 1), the obtained data are mostly affected by the specifications
with a greater degree of impact (head weight), and the results of the rest with a
smaller degree of impact (torsional rigidity distribution of a shaft and height of
the center of gravity in the head) are hardly recognizable. Thus, it is preferred
to select specifications having degrees of impact within a certain range (in the present
embodiment, within 2). Also, the degrees of impact of three different specifications
are more preferred to be the same.
[0107] When simulations are performed by selecting three specifications, it is most preferred
to use shaft weight, flexural rigidity (flex) and flexural rigidity distribution (kickpoint).
Optimal shaft fitting is achieved using such a combination.
[0108] In addition, it is an option to employ a combination of flexural rigidity (flex),
torsional rigidity (torque) and shaft weight. Yet other options are a combination
of flexural rigidity (flex), torsional rigidity (torque) and flexural rigidity distribution
(kickpoint); and a combination of flexural rigidity (flex), shaft weight and shaft
weight distribution. By employing such combinations, the results of the present embodiment
are applicable for shaft design.
[0109] Furthermore, a combination of flexural rigidity (flex), length of a club, and head
weight may be used. Club fittings are preferably conducted using such a combination.
[0110] Also, a combination of the height, depth and distance of the center of gravity in
the head may be used. In such a combination, the results are preferably used for head
fittings. Yet furthermore, a combination of the loft angle, lie angle and face angle
of a head may also be available. In such a combination as well, the results are preferably
used for head fittings.
[0111] It is yet another option to employ a combination of the hardness, length and total
weight of a club along with club balance. As described, examples of preferable combinations
are listed above. However, the present embodiment is not limited to such combinations.
(Second Embodiment)
[0112] Next, a second embodiment is described by referring to FIG. 1. In the first embodiment,
head behavior is computed through the process of swing data acquisition unit 21, swing
data storage unit 22, data classification unit 23, data prediction unit 24, swing
response surface computation unit 25, time response surface computation unit 26 and
simulation execution unit 27. Simulation execution unit 27 is set to compute the head
behavior from the posture of the head and the coordinates of its position by simply
assuming that the shaft is rigid. In the first embodiment, a high-performance computer
is required as simulation execution unit 27. Therefore, a computer to operate as simulation
execution unit 27 is preferred to be set at a server or the like, separately from
swing data acquisition unit 21.
[0113] By contrast, in the second embodiment, head behavior is computed without using simulation
execution unit 27. More specifically, swing data acquisition unit 21 is set to directly
measure head behavior by using a camera, acoustic waves and the like. Swing data storage
unit 22 stores the head behavior measured by swing data acquisition unit 21. In the
second embodiment, a high-performance computer is not necessary; for example, a smartphone
or the like may also be used.
[0114] Data classification unit 23 classifies the head behavior stored in swing data storage
unit 22 based on the table shown in FIG. 15. Data classification unit 23 determines
which group the newly obtained data of head behavior belongs to among groups 1-45
classified in advance as shown in FIG. 15. In the present embodiment, data classification
unit 23 classifies data focusing on three categories -- club speed, club path and
attack angle.
[0115] For example, when the measured data are a club speed of 33 [m/s], a club path of
1.2 [deg], and an attack angle of -2.0 [deg], data classification unit 23 determines
that the measured head behavior belongs to group 14.
[0116] Based on the table shown in FIG. 16, data prediction unit 24 predicts the specifications
of a most suitable shaft. In the present embodiment, the weight and flex are predicted
from the club speed, the level of flex is predicted from the club path, and the kickpoint
is predicted from the attack angle.
[0117] For example, when data classification unit 23 determines that the measured head behavior
belongs to group 14, data prediction unit 24 predicts that the most suitable specification
(a weight of 40∼50 [g], flex of "A", and kickpoint of "middle").
[0118] Results output unit 28 outputs recommended golf club 1 based on the specifications
of a shaft predicted by data prediction unit 24. In the present embodiment, swing
response surface computation unit 25, time response surface computation unit 26 and
simulation execution unit 27 can be omitted from golf gear fitting system 2.
[0119] Data classification unit 23 is not limited to the table in FIG. 15, and is capable
of classifying a head behavior stored in swing data storage unit 22 based on various
other classification methods. In addition, data prediction unit 24 is not limited
to the table in FIG. 16 and is capable of predicting specifications of golf club 1
based on various other prediction methods.
[0120] As described above, golf gear fitting system 2 of the present embodiment is formed
to include swing data acquisition unit 21 to acquire swing data from sensor 11 installed
on golf clubs 1; swing data storage unit 22 to store the swing data acquired by swing
data acquisition unit 21; data classification unit 23 to classify the swing data stored
in swing data storage unit 22; and data prediction unit 24 to predict specifications
for swing data not measured by sensor 11 by referring to the swing data classified
by data classification unit 23. By so setting, appropriate golf gear is selected through
a smaller number of test hits.
[0121] The program to execute functions of the golf equipment fitting system 2 may be recorded
on a computer readable recording medium, and a computer system may read out the stored
program on the medium and execute it to perform the above process at each unit. Here,
"a computer system reads out the stored program on a recording medium and executes
the program" includes installing the program in a computer system. Here, a "computer
system" includes the OS and hardware such as peripheral devices. Also, a "computer
system" may include multiple computer devices connected through the Internet, WAN,
LAN and networks that include exclusive communication lines. "Computer readable recording
media" means portable media such as flexible disks, magneto-optical disks, ROM and
CD-ROM, and memory devices such as hard discs built into a computer system. The recording
medium to store the program may be a non-transitory recording medium such as a CD-ROM.
Also, a recording medium includes a recording medium installed internally or externally
to be accessible for a distribution server to distribute the program. The program
code stored in the recording medium of the distribution server may be different from
the code that allows the terminal device to execute the program. Namely, the memory
code to be stored in a distribution server is not limited specifically as long as
it allows the terminal device to download and install the program from the distribution
server in executable code. Moreover, the program may be divided into multiple sections
and integrated back in a terminal device after the sections are downloaded at different
times, or distribution servers for each divided section may be different. Furthermore,
"computer readable recording media" includes a medium for retaining the program for
a certain duration such as volatile memory (RAM) inside a computer system that becomes
a server or a client when the program is transmitted through networks. In addition,
the above program may be intended to implement part of the functions described above.
Alternatively, the above program may be a so-called difference file (difference program)
for implementing the above functions in combination with another program already installed
in the computer system.
[0122] Also, some or all of the above functions may be implemented as an integrated circuit
such as an LSI (large scale integration). The functions may be set individually in
separate processors. Some or all of the above functions may be integrated and set
in a processor. To integrate the functions, LSIs, or exclusive or generic processors
may be used. Also, when new integration technology is made available to replace LSIs
through the development of semiconductor technology, integrated circuits by such technology
may also be applied.
[0123] So far, embodiments of the present invention have been described. However, those
embodiments are described as examples, and are not intended to limit the scope of
the present invention. Various modifications are possible when practicing those embodiments.
Various omissions, replacements, changes and the like may be made within a scope that
does not deviate from the gist of the present invention. It should be understood that
those embodiments and modifications thereof are included in the scope and gist of
the present invention, while also being included in the present invention specified
by the scope of patent claims and in any equivalent thereof.
DESCRIPTION OF NUMERICAL REFERENCES
[0124]
- 1
- golf club
- 2
- golf gear fitting system
- 11
- sensor
- 20
- receiver
- 21
- swing data acquisition unit
- 22
- swing data storage unit
- 23
- data classification unit
- 24
- data prediction unit
- 25
- swing response surface computation unit
- 26
- time response surface computation unit
- 27
- simulation execution unit
- 28
- results output unit
1. A golf gear fitting system, comprising:
a swing data acquisition unit to acquire swing data from a sensor installed in a plurality
of golf clubs with different specifications;
a swing data storage unit to store the swing data acquired by the swing data acquisition
unit;
a data classification unit to classify the swing data stored in the swing data storage
unit; and
a data prediction unit to predict swing data of specifications not measured by the
sensor by referring to the swing data classified in the data classification unit.
2. The golf gear fitting system according to claim 1, further comprising:
a swing response surface computation unit to compute a swing response surface by a
response surface methodology using the swing data predicted by the data prediction
unit;
a time response surface computation unit to compute a time response surface by a response
surface methodology using the swing data predicted by the data prediction unit; and
a simulation execution unit to compute swing data of a specification not measured
by the sensor by using the swing response surface and time response surface, and to
perform simulation on the swing of a golf club based on the computed swing data.
3. The golf gear fitting system according to claim 2, wherein the simulation execution
unit computes the head behavior at impact using the finite element method and the
swing data predicted by the data prediction unit.
4. The golf gear fitting system according to claim 2, further comprising a results output
unit to output the results of a simulation executed by the simulation execution unit.
5. The golf gear fitting system according to claim 4, wherein the results output unit
converts into a natural language the results of the simulation executed by the simulation
execution unit, and outputs the language accordingly.
6. The golf gear fitting system according to claim 2, wherein the difference in the degree
of impact is set within a predetermined level among the specifications of a plurality
of golf clubs used for the simulation.
7. The golf gear fitting system according to any of claims 1 to 6, wherein the data classification
unit classifies the swing data stored in the swing data storage unit by using an unsupervised
learning method.
8. The golf gear fitting system according to claim 7, wherein the data classification
unit classifies the swing data stored in the swing data storage unit by using a self-organizing
map as an unsupervised learning method.
9. The golf gear fitting system according to any of claims 1 to 8, wherein the swing
data storage unit stores difference data, which are the difference between the swing
data of a specific golf club and the swing data of another golf club, for each of
the plurality of players; and
when the swing data of the specific golf club are newly acquired by the swing data
acquisition unit, the data prediction unit reads out from the swing data storage unit
the difference data of swing data that belong to the same classification of the newly
acquired swing data, and predicts swing data of the other golf club using the readout
difference data.
10. The golf gear fitting system according to claim 1, wherein the swing data acquisition
unit measures the head behavior of the golf club,
the data classification unit determines which group the head behavior acquired by
the swing data acquisition unit belongs to among a plurality of groups classified
in advance,and
the data prediction unit predicts the most suitable specifications of the golf club
based on the group determined by the data classification unit.
11. The golf gear fitting system according to any of claims 1 to 10, wherein the sensor
is a six-axial sensor to detect acceleration in triaxial directions and angular velocity
in triaxial directions.
12. The golf gear fitting system according to any of claims 1 to 11, wherein the sensor
is a nine-axial sensor to detect acceleration in triaxial directions, angular velocity
in triaxial directions, and orientation in triaxial directions.
13. The golf gear fitting system according to any of claims 1 to 10, wherein the sensor
is formed to include a six-axial sensor to detect acceleration in triaxial directions
and angular velocity in triaxial directions and a geo-magnetometer to detect orientation
in triaxial directions.
14. The golf gear fitting system according to any of claims 1 to 13, wherein the sensor
is attached to the grip of the golf club.
15. The golf gear fitting system according to any of claims 1 to 14, wherein the swing
data storage unit is a database that stores swing data of a plurality of players.
16. The golf gear fitting system according to any of claims 1 to 15, wherein the plurality
of golf clubs with different specifications are selected based on an L4 orthogonal
array specified by experimental design.
17. A golf gear fitting method, comprising:
a swing data acquisition step for acquiring swing data from a sensor installed on
a plurality of golf clubs with different specifications;
a swing data storing step for storing in a swing data storage unit the swing data
acquired by the swing data acquisition step;
a data classification step for classifying the swing data stored in the swing data
storage unit; and
a data prediction step for predicting swing data of specifications not measured by
the sensor by referring to the swing data classified in the data classification step.
18. A golf gear fitting program to be executed by a computer, comprising:
a swing data acquisition process for acquiring swing data from a sensor installed
on a plurality of golf clubs with different specifications;
a swing data storing process for storing in a swing data storage unit the swing data
acquired by the swing data acquisition process;
a data classification process for classifying the swing data stored in the swing data
storage unit; and
a data prediction process for predicting swing data of specifications not measured
by the sensor by referring to the swing data classified in the data classification
process.
19. A golf swing classification method for classifying swing data by using a self-organizing
map when swing data are acquired from a sensor installed on a golf club.
20. A golf shaft fitting system using the golf gear fitting system according to any of
claims 1 to 16.
21. A golf shaft fitting method using the golf gear fitting method according to claim
17.
22. A golf shaft fitting program using the golf gear fitting program according to claim
18.