Golf Club Head Support Structures: Continuous Curvature for Binder Jetting

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Traditional CAD modeling and additive manufacturing techniques for golf club heads, particularly putters, result in structures with angular appearances, stress concentrations, warping, porosity, and cracking, and are constrained by overhang angles, limiting design freedom and material choices.

Innovation Solution

The use of binder jetting technology to create support structures with continuous curvature and controlled geometric features, allowing for self-supporting lattice structures without overhang constraints, and enabling the use of diverse materials and manufacturing methods like investment casting, plastic injection molding, and metal injection molding.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of manufacture

If traditional CAD modeling techniques are used to design support structures, then the structures have angular styles and common characteristics, but the transitions between surfaces are not smooth and the surface curvature changes are discrete

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveease of manufactureVSAvoidsurface curvature smoothness
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies spheroidality by implementing continuous curvature through splines with varying radius of curvature. The support structures use smooth transitions between surfaces rather than sharp angular connections, with curvature radius continuously changing along the spline path. This creates organic, aesthetically pleasing transitions while improving manufacturing precision.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #14Spheroidality (Curvature)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent changes the geometric parameters of the support structures by using variable cross-sections and varying curvature radius along the spline. The cross-sectional area and curvature radius are continuously varied to optimize both the aesthetic appearance and structural performance, moving away from constant parameter values in traditional designs.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Ease of manufacture

If traditional additive manufacturing techniques (DMLS, DMLM, EBAM) are used to create support structures, then the structures can be manufactured, but warping, porosity, distortion, surface defects, and cracking occur during the build process

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveease of manufactureVSAvoidstructural reliability
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent reduces warping and structural defects by using support structures with continuous curvature. The smooth spline transitions and varying curvature radius distribute thermal and mechanical stresses more evenly throughout the structure during the additive manufacturing process, preventing the concentrated stress points that cause warping, porosity, and cracking in traditional angular designs.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #14Spheroidality (Curvature)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent optimizes manufacturing reliability by continuously varying geometric parameters such as cross-sectional area and curvature radius along the support structure. This parameter variation allows for controlled material deposition and reduces thermal gradients during printing, minimizing defects like porosity and cracking while maintaining structural integrity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Ease of manufacture

If traditional additive manufacturing techniques are used, then the structures can be built, but the overhang angle is constrained and design freedom is limited

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveease of manufactureVSAvoiddesign freedom
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The patent enables greater design freedom by using support structures with continuous curvature that can accommodate complex geometries without being constrained by traditional overhang angle limits. The smooth spline transitions allow for organic shapes and angles that would be impossible with conventional angular support structures, while the varying curvature radius maintains manufacturability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #14Spheroidality (Curvature)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent achieves design freedom through continuous parameter variation along the support structure splines. By varying cross-sectional area, curvature radius, and spline path in three-dimensional space, the design can accommodate complex geometries and angles without being limited by fixed overhang constraints, while still remaining suitable for additive manufacturing.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

4Ease of manufacture

If traditional additive manufacturing techniques are used, then the structures can be created, but significant post-processing is required to remove supports and support footprints

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveease of manufactureVSAvoidpost-processing time
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent reduces post-processing requirements by designing support structures with continuous curvature that can be integrated into the final part geometry. The smooth spline transitions allow for support structures that either become part of the final design or can be removed with minimal impact on the surface finish, reducing the time and complexity of post-processing operations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #14Spheroidality (Curvature)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent optimizes the manufacturing process by continuously varying geometric parameters to create support structures that minimize post-processing. The variable cross-sections and curvature radius are designed to facilitate easy removal or integration, reducing the time required for support removal and surface finishing operations.

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 solution reduces stress concentrations, porosity, and cracking, enhances design freedom, and allows for customized, cost-effective production of golf club heads with improved performance characteristics.

Implementation Method 1

depositing liquid binder on regions of each layer of powder so that the binder bonds adjacent particles of powdered material together

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectAdsorption: Adsorption

Implementation Method 2

sintering the green part to create a final part

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectSintering: Sintering

Data Source

PatentUS20250235756A1Support Structures For Golf Club Heads And Methods Of Manufacturing Improved Support Structures
Publication Date: 2025.07.24 CALLAWAY GOLF COMPANY
  • US20250235756A1 patent drawing
  • US20250235756A1 patent drawing
  • US20250235756A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A golf club head, preferably a putter head, comprising at least one structural support member is disclosed herein. The structural support member has a smooth, organic-looking aesthetic, with a continuously changing curvature along its spline and at least one surface, and preferably connects one portion of the golf club head to another portion. Where the support member connects to other portions of the golf club head, the surfaces of the member have a curvature that changes smoothly and continuously, lacking any sharp corners. The support member may be part of a lattice structure formed via binder jetting.