The Borden Number?

You can post any bowling related topics here.

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
bowl1820
Trusted Source
Trusted Source
Posts: 1470
Joined: July 9th, 2012, 10:09 pm
Location: Central Florida

The Borden Number?

Post by bowl1820 »

I was reading some old bowling information from back in 2002 and it talked about The Borden Number.

Which you could use to compare balls and would give you a estimate of which ball will most likely tend to snap more. Higher numbers more snappy, lower more arcy.

The Borden Number Definition:
The Borden Number is defined as BN = Grit * DRG / RG
(BN = Grit multiplied by the DRG and then divided by the RG)


Did it actually work? I've never seen it talked about, was it one of those things big back then, but not done anymore, something better and more accurate came along?
"REMEMBER, it isn't how much the ball hooks, it's where."
User avatar
jbungard
Rest In Peace
Rest In Peace
Posts: 203
Joined: January 25th, 2010, 7:08 pm
THS Average: 209
Positive Axis Point: 5 1/4" over, 3/8" up
Speed: 17 foul line, 15 pindeck
Rev Rate: 330
Axis Tilt: 13
Axis Rotation: 45
Heavy Oil Ball: Radical Ridiculous Asymetrical
Medium Oil Ball: Radical Guru Limited
Light Oil Ball: Radical Rack Attack Solid
Preferred Company: Radical
Location: Festival Ranch, Arizona

Re: The Borden Number?

Post by jbungard »

Dusting off some notes from a few years back, I find the Borden Number of limited to no value. It doesn't take into account ball surface differences (polyester, urethane, reactive, particle, chemical modifiers, etc.). It doesn't take into account intermediate differentials (core strength and asymmetry), and, perhaps above all, it doesn't take into account layout: The RG and intermediate RG of the drilled ball.

For example, here are three Lane Masters balls for comparison: Hornet, Buzz and Buzz Attack. The Hornet uses the Buzz core with essentially identical RG and differential RG values as undrilled balls. Both are two-piece balls consisting of the core and coverstock only. The Hornet uses a higher surface hardness reactive pearl cover: 75 or so hardness on the Shure D scale for the Buzz and 79 or so hardness for the Hornet. Their Borden Numbers are virtually identical in the 18.20 to 18.23 range. The Buzz Attack uses the Buzz core but also uses filler material and a shell-type coverstock that lowers the RG susbtantially and raises the differential moderately. The Buzz Attack also uses a mica-enhanced coverstock. Even so, the Buzz Attack has a slightly higher Borden Number (18.70) than the Buzz and Hornet. With Borden Numbers so close, one would expect similar roll characteristics, right? But this just isn't so. The Buzz Attack is much more midlane than the Buzz and even more so in comparison to the Hornet.

Another good comparison is the Legends Black Diamond to the Legends Black Pearl Reactive. Exact same core, two-piece (core/coverstock only) construction. The only difference is the Black Diamond's solid particle coverstock versus the BPR's pearl reactive (no particles) covertstock. But the Borden Number for the BD and BPR are 32.24 and 25.79 respectively, meaning the Black Diamond is more downlane reaction than the Black Pearl Reactive? This is definitely not the case. The pearl reactive BPR exhibits significantly more length and back end than the solid particle BD.

Comparing the Buzz to the Black Diamond, the Borden Number for the Buzz is 18.23 while the Black Diamond is 32.24. Again, the Black Diamond actually reads sooner than the Buzz due to its aggressive particle coverstock and high differential/high flare core.

Much better comparisons are obtainable by looking at the graphs Joe Cerrar provides in Bowlers Journal magazine and similar graphs included each month in Bowling This Month. Bowling ball reaction is truly a complex aggregate of factors that are best represented by actually rolling and comparing drilled bowling balls on a range of conditions that bowlers are likely to encounter.

Finally, using undrilled ball specifications will always yield misleading results. As Mo Pinel and many others who have contributed to scientific analysis and testing using dynamic physics principles, the specifications of the drilled ball and all of the design/construction parameters play into each balls roll and hit characteristics. I respect Fred Borden immensely but the Borden Number doesn't take into account all that is necessary to provide a meaningful comparison.
My specs: 15 pound equipment, PAP is 5 1/4" over and 3/8" up, ball speed 17 mph at release, 14 1/2 to 15 mph down lane, 13 degrees of axis tilt, 45 degrees of axis rotation, 330 rpm, for my normal release.
User avatar
bowl1820
Trusted Source
Trusted Source
Posts: 1470
Joined: July 9th, 2012, 10:09 pm
Location: Central Florida

Re: The Borden Number?

Post by bowl1820 »

Bout what I figured, just happened to run across that in a old pdf (Matching Up-The Ball to the
Bowler)that had info about a lot of thing's:
Speed Calculation
Layout Instability Number
Release Rev Rate Calculation
Normalized DRG Number (DRGN)
Permission to Flare Number
Actual Flare Realized Number
Release Strength and Energy Comparison - The Rudy Numbers
Ball Snappiness Comparison - The Borden Number
Mass Bias Comparison - The MO Number

The Taylor Ball Dynamics Diagram
"REMEMBER, it isn't how much the ball hooks, it's where."
Post Reply