Golf Ball Core Crosslinking Density Gradient

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing golf ball cores lack optimal durability and shot feeling due to inconsistent crosslinking density and hardness distribution, which affects the overall performance and user experience.

Innovation Solution

A golf ball core formed from a rubber composition containing high-cis polybutadiene as the base rubber, blended with α,β-unsaturated carboxylic acid or its metal salt as a co-crosslinking agent, and an organic peroxide as a crosslinking initiator, with specific crosslinking density and hardness differences between the core surface and center to achieve enhanced durability and shot feeling.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If the crosslinking density difference between core surface and center is increased to improve durability, then the shot feeling deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovedurabilityVSAvoidshot feeling
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSObject-generated harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies parameter changes by precisely controlling the crosslinking density difference between core surface and center to fall within 1.0×10² to 9.0×10² mol/m³, and the hardness difference to be 13.0 to 30.0 Shore C. This quantitative parameter optimization resolves the contradiction by finding the optimal balance point where durability is sufficient while shot feeling remains acceptable.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements local quality by creating a specific crosslinking density gradient within the core structure. The crosslinking density is intentionally made higher at the surface than at the center, with the difference controlled within specific ranges. This localized variation in crosslinking density allows the surface to provide durability while the center maintains elasticity for good shot feeling.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Reliability

If the hardness difference between core surface and center is increased to improve durability, then the resilience deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovedurabilityVSAvoidresilience
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSStrength

Solution Approach 1:

The patent optimizes the hardness difference parameter by controlling it to be within 13.0 to 30.0 Shore C. This parameter optimization ensures that the core surface is sufficiently hard for durability while the core center remains soft enough to maintain resilience, thus resolving the contradiction between durability and resilience.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The patent creates local quality differentiation in the core by establishing a hardness gradient from surface to center. The surface hardness Hs and center hardness Ho are controlled to have a specific difference range, making the surface durable while keeping the center resilient. This localized property variation resolves the contradiction between durability and resilience.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

3Object-generated harmful factors

If the crosslinking density is increased to improve shot feeling, then the durability deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveshot feelingVSAvoiddurability
Core Design Contradiction:
Object-generated harmful factorsVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by creating a crosslinking density gradient within the core, where the surface has higher crosslinking density than the center. The difference is controlled within 1.0×10² to 9.0×10² mol/m³. This localized variation allows the surface to provide durability while the lower crosslinking density in the center maintains elasticity for good shot feeling.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The patent optimizes the crosslinking density parameter by controlling both the absolute values and the difference between surface and center. This parameter optimization ensures that the core achieves the right balance between durability (requiring higher crosslinking density) and shot feeling (requiring appropriate elasticity).

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

The golf ball exhibits improved durability and shot feeling due to the controlled crosslinking density and hardness distribution, providing better resilience and performance during shots.

Implementation Method 1

the core is formed from a core rubber composition containing (a) a base rubber, (b) an α,β-unsaturated carboxylic acid having 3 to 8 carbon atoms and/or a metal salt thereof as a co-crosslinking agent, and (c) a crosslinking initiator

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectCrosslinking: Chemical Bonding

Implementation Method 2

an organic peroxide as a crosslinking initiator

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectFree radical polymerization: Photopolymerisation

Implementation Method 3

a heat-molded product of a rubber composition containing the following components (A) to (C)

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectVulcanization: Heat Treatment

Data Source

PatentUS11633649B2Golf ball
Publication Date: 2023.04.25 SUMITOMO RUBBER INDUSTRIES LTD
  • US11633649B2 patent drawing
  • US11633649B2 patent drawing
  • US11633649B2 patent drawing

AI summary

An object of the present invention is to provide a golf ball having excellent durability and good shot feeling. The present invention provides a golf ball comprising a core, wherein a difference (crosslinking density at surface of core-crosslinking density at center of core) between a crosslinking density at a surface of the core and a crosslinking density at a center of the core is more than 1.0×102 mol/m3 and less than 9.0×102 mol/m3, and a hardness difference (Hs−Ho) between Hs and Ho is 13.0 or more and 30.0 or less, and the core satisfies H50−Ho>Hs−H50, wherein Hs (Shore C hardness) is a hardness at the surface of the core, Ho (Shore C hardness) is a hardness at the center of the core, and H50 (Shore C hardness) is a hardness at a midpoint between the center of the core and the surface of the core.