PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

Folks, We have a Legitimate Hero in Our Midst


Status
Not open for further replies.

Danger Zone

In the Starting Line-Up
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
3,718
Reaction score
4,544
Patsfans.com @Palm Beach Pats Fan emailed Peter King about the science of deflating footballs and is being prominently cited in Peter King's new column.

On Monday, Palm Beach Pats Fan makes the below post where he explains his findings about the science of deflating footballs in the cold.

Later in the thread he let's us know that he has emailed Peter King along with some of the bigger names in the media in the hope of explaining some of the science behind what could have happened that night -as well as the plausibility of why the Colt's footballs might have remained within spec.

That last part seems to have been a major stumbling block in King's golden retriever-like mind, but to give King credit, he reads Palms Beach Pats Fans email.. and later even contacts him by phone.

This is Palm Beach Pats Fan's original post on Patsfans.com
http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...lease-post-scientific-evidence.1115584/page-5
Nerd alert: What I have summarized below is the comprehensive, correct gas law predictions and real-world analysis for “deflategate”. It is explained from the basic ideal gas law, but anyone can hopefully follow. I go through it very clearly, I believe. While a great many people have posted the gas law calculations on the internet, most have been wrong in that they confused absolute pressure with relative pressure. Absolute pressure takes barometric pressure into account.

Follow me here, please:

The ideal gas law: PV = nRT
The ideal gas law modeled for two conditions 1 and 2: P1V1 = nRT1 and P2V2 = nRT2
Solving for Volume V in each case: V1 = nRT1/P1 and V2 = nRT2/P2

Now we will assume that V1 = V2; that is, the volume of the football will not change during the game; therefore; nRT1/P1 = nRT2/P2;
Dividing each side by the constants n and R; leaves: T1/P1 = T2/P2

Now let‘s determine the real values based upon:
T1 = initial temperature of inflation (indoors) = room temperature, likely equals 72 degrees F = 22.22 degrees C = 295.37 Kelvin;
T2 = final temperature = game time temperature (published value at kickoff) = 51 degrees F = 10.56 degrees C = 283.71 Kelvin
P1 = absolute pressure at the onset, equals relative pressure + atmospheric pressure, and since

reported atmospheric pressure at the time point nearest kickoff time, as reported by Weather Underground, equals 29.75 in = 14.61 psi at 6:53 PM; thus
P1 equals 12.50 psi + 14.61 psi, = 27.11 psi

All that we need to do is solve for P2:
Since T1/P1 = T2/P2; thereciprocal is true and P1/T1 = P2/T2
Multiplying both sides by T2 solves for P2:
P2 = P1T2/T1

Plugging in the actual values for the known quantities P1, T1 and T2;
P2 = (27.11) x (283.71) / (295.37) = 26.04 = absolute pressure of the football at the end condition (halftime).

Relative pressure = absolute pressure – atmospheric pressure = 26.04 – 14.70 = 11.34 psi
Therefore, the drop in relative pressure P2 – P1 thus equals 12.50 – 11.34 = 1.16 psi

Plain English: By the ideal gas law, a football inflated to 12.50 psi at 72 degrees F and cooled to 51 degrees F will have a final pressure of 11.34 psi, thus a loss of 1.16 psi.

Carnegie Mellon Finding #1: Footballs inflated to 12.50 psi at 75 degrees F and cooled to 50 degrees F had a final pressure of 11.4 psi, a loss of 1.1 psi (summarized in the pdf document at http://www.headsmartlabs.com/

Conclusion #1: Experiment seems to match ideal gas law prediction rather closely. Note hat they used a slightly larger temperature drop, 25 degrees, not 21 degrees. We do not know room temperature in the ref’s room, though, anyway.

Carnegie Mellon Finding #2: Footballs inflated to 12.50 psi at 75 degrees F and cooled to 50 degrees F and then soaked with water had a final pressure of 10.7 psi, a loss of 1.8 psi.

Conclusion #2: A second factor, the expansion of a football as it gets wet, also leads to a drop in psi. This factor contributes another 0.7 psi in pressure drop. This in essence shows that the “constant volume assumption” of the ideal gas law is not fully valid since a football is not infinitely rigid.

One important caveat on the Carnegie Mellon Experiment #2: In this experiment they immersed the football in water for a time. Is that analogous to heavy rain, or is it overkill? That criticism concerns me a bit. The real world effect of a heavy rain is probably between their dry ball result (1.1 psi) and the soaked ball result (1.8 psi). But to err on the side of caution, let’s ignore the water effect for now and go with the dry ball result: 1.1 psi drop at Carnegie Mellon, in agreement with the 1.16 psi calculation.

Plain English ultimate conclusion for the Patriots footballs: It would be reasonable to expect, based on both experimental results and ideal gas law calculations, for a pressure drop of at least 1.1 psi to have occurred within the Patriots footballs in the first half of the AFCCG, based on the known game time conditions and the observation that the footballs were inflated to 12.5 (relative) psi at room temperature.

Aha, though- what about the Colts footballs? We don’t know their initial pressure, unfortunately, but if we assume that they were at the maximum legal pressure of 13.5 psi relative pressure (since they apparently knew that ball pressure loss would be monitored), we can calculate the expected pressure drop.


T1 = 295.37 Kelvin, as before
T2 = 283.71 Kelvin, as before
P1 = absolute pressure at the onset = 13.50 psi + 14.61 psi, = 28.11 psi

P2 = (28.11) x (283.71) / (295.37) = 27.00
Relative pressure = 27.00 – 14.70 = 12.30 psi

Thus the Colts footballs should have been a final pressure of 12.3 psi. The legal lower limit is 12.5 psi. The Colts footballs should have been illegal by 0.2 psi.

Question: Would a referee call a reading of 12.3 rather than 12.5 to be clearly out of specifications and illegal? Maybe yes, maybe no. It certainly depends on both the accuracy and precision of the pressure gauge. A digital readout often shows significant drift/fluctuation in the last digit. If in real time the ref saw values pop up such as these: 12.3, 12.4, 12.5, 12.4, 12.3, 12.4; he would likely say: It looks to be about 12.5; pass! Similarly at the beginning, if he saw in real time 13.5, 13.6, 13.5, 13.6, 13.5, 13.6; he would likely say: It looks to be about 13.5, pass!

Final conclusion: It is not unreasonable at all to assume that the Patriots balls would fail the inspection and the Colts balls would (barely) pass or (barely) fail, based upon logical assumptions of inflation levels and inflation temperatures in concert with the issues of temperature-related gas expansion, and the human-element: deciding when (and if) you are sure about that last digit on the pressure gauge.

Not taken into account at all in this analysis is the ball preparation (rubbing) procedure. Thus in essence I am assuming that the ball preparation procedure does not affect psi in the least, which is Bill Nye’s assertion. To me, a 1 psi drop based on friction, even severe friction, seems a bit high. I disagree, though, that the effect must be zero. It is probably non-zero, but unknown and unknowable unless we knew the exact ball prep procedure. Still, it is not needed to explain a pressure drop of the magnitude seen. A key piece of the puzzle is the actual ref-recorded data for the Colts footballs, clearly.
 
Last edited:
This is the column that Peter King wrote where he cites Palm Beach Pat's Fan's email to him.
http://mmqb.si.com/2015/01/27/nfl-deflategate-investigation-patriots/
Peter King said:
I got a great and well-reasoned email from Tom Bannister, a chemistry professor from The Scripps Research Institute in Jupiter, Fla., Monday. I will save the explanation of the difference between absolute pressure and relative pressure, and other complex topics. But I called Bannister after getting his smart email, and you’ll see why in a moment.

Key points from his email:

“By the ideal gas law, a football inflated to 12.5 at 72 degrees and cooled to 51 degrees [the temperature on the field during the first half] will have a final pressure of 11.43 psi, thus a loss of 1.16 psi … A second factor, the expansion of a football as it gets wet, also leads to a drop in psi. This factor contributes another 0.7 psi in pressure drop … Plain English ultimate conclusion: It would be reasonable to expect, based on both experimental results and ideal gas law calculations, for a pressure drop in excess of 1.5 psi to have occurred within the Patriots footballs in the first half, based on the known game-time conditions and the observation that the footballs were inflated to 12.5 relative psi at room temperature.

“[But] what about the Colts footballs? We don’t know their initial pressure, but if we assume that they were the maximum legal pressure of 13.5 psi relative pressure, we can calculate the expected pressure drop. Thus the Colts footballs should have been a final pressure of 12.3 psi. The legal lower limit is 12.5 psi. The Colts footballs should have been illegal by 0.2 psi. Question: Would a referee call a reading of 12.3 rather than 12.5 to be clearly out of specifications and illegal? Maybe yes, maybe no. It certainly depends on both the accuracy and precision of the pressure gauge.

“Final conclusion: It is not unreasonable at all to assume that the Patriots balls would fail the inspection and the Colts balls would (barely) pass, based upon logical assumptions of inflation levels, inflation temperatures in concert with the issues of temperature-related gas expansion, the expansion properties of a leather football as it becomes water-soaked, and the human-element.”

So I called Bannister Monday, and we discussed it. I said the assumption is the Colts footballs were at the higher pressure level, and that’s perhaps why they didn’t flunk the halftime pressure test; but there’s no proof of that. But if the Colts did deliver footballs to the officials at 13.5 PSI, then clearly there’s a chance the pressure level would have hovered around 12.5 PSI, and it’s possible the differing results have to do with where each football that was tested was set before the game.

In other words, there’s much we don’t know.

“There’s a lot of missing pieces in this story,” Bannister said.

In this case, truer words have never been spoken. Wells has much to discover. I just hope he gets to discover everything that’s important here.
 
Last edited:
You sir, broke through the brickwall of Peter King's assumption of our guilt with your clear-headed, diplomatic and easily understood explanation of the matter.

You are a hero to me. Thank you, on behalf of every frustrated Patriot's fan, thank you.

And for what little it's worth in the end, may I recommend that the Likes and Usefuls and Winners be given to @Palm Beach Pats Fan original post instead of any of mine here.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...lease-post-scientific-evidence.1115584/page-5
 
Last edited:
Amazing stuff. Tell him that colder Colts balls at first pressure test would explain why they didn't lose pressure.
 
You sir, broke through the brickwall of Peter King's assumption of our guilt with your clear-headed, diplomatic, concise explanation of the matter.

You are a hero to me.

Absolutely "Well Done" !!!!
I am sure glad he is on our team !
 
There's an important side lesson here -- a lot of media guys like Peter King try to do good work. Complain about their success rate all you want, but if they put in serious effort to do their best, as I believe King does, some of the personal insults are unfair.
 
I want to hear about how smart and careful King did or didn't sound on the phone call. Most of all, I'm curious as to how well he seemed to understand the content. I've certainly had plenty of calls with reporters who I regard as smart and honest, but who know the material is over their head and openly struggle to understand enough of it to get a useful story written.
 
First - major props to PBPF for all this work and for talking to King.

As an aside, I've always liked King, for the most part. He's written some of the most glowing stuff about the Pats that anyone has.

Say what you want about the guy - but the reality is that if he had an agenda he never would have bothered following up.
 
So we will find out today that King "discovered " the mystery behind the deflating balls!
 
There is no way I believe this over a rogue ball boy heading to the can, hauling out his needle and sucking the air out of 11 balls in 90 seconds.

Come on man....
 
Last edited:
Congrats, at least King acknowledged this.. most will not and just resort to salacious headlines.

Do not want to take away from Palm Beach Pats fans admirable work, but on Monday there was a guy on WEEI, a Professor Colllins from MIT, who broke it down really well for us less scientifically inclined folks..

Unfortunately, cannot find that commentary..
 
It's just pathetic that the expert analysis on football issues is coming from fans while media "experts" like King and Company are yelling out opinions first, then reporting facts way later only after they can't deny them.

It's why I refer to them as sports writers, not journalists. There's no hint of journalism going on here.
 
Patsfans.com @Palm Beach Pats Fan emailed Peter King about the science of deflating footballs and is being prominently cited in Peter King's new column.

On Monday, Palm Beach Pats Fan makes the below post where he explains his findings about the science of deflating footballs in the cold.

Later in the thread he let's us know that he has emailed Peter King along with some of the bigger names in the media in the hope of explaining some of the science behind what could have happened that night -as well as the plausibility of why the Colt's footballs having remained within spec.

That last part seems to have been a major stumbling block in King's golden retriever-like mind, but to give King credit, he reads Palms Beach Pats Fans email.. and later even contacts him by phone.

This is Palm Beach Pats Fan's original post on Patsfans.com
http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...lease-post-scientific-evidence.1115584/page-5
Great stuff! Don't forget, the Colts knew going into the game that they were going to challenge the Patriots' footballs. Thus, I don't doubt for a second that the Colts slightly overinflated their own, to assure upon pressure drop, they would not be under.
 
Plus it was 51 degrees at start, what would the temperature be by halftime (or shortly before halftime/effective temperature where the balls could reach equilibrium - same temperature inside and outside I assume is what is meant by that)
 
14 December 1911- Roald Amundsen becomes the first man to make the 2000 mile trek to the South Pole.

29 May 1953- On his second attempt Sir Edmund Hillary becomes the first man to Summit Mount Everest.

27 January 2015- After an arduous eight day journey Palm Beach Pats Fan becomes the first man to ever penetrate Peter King's thick skull.

Bravo sir
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


MORSE: Patriots Draft Needs and Draft Related Info
Friday Patriots Notebook 4/19: News and Notes
TRANSCRIPT: Eliot Wolf’s Pre-Draft Press Conference 4/18/24
Thursday Patriots Notebook 4/18: News and Notes
Wednesday Patriots Notebook 4/17: News and Notes
Tuesday Patriots Notebook 4/16: News and Notes
Monday Patriots Notebook 4/15: News and Notes
Patriots News 4-14, Mock Draft 3.0, Gilmore, Law Rally For Bill 
Potential Patriot: Boston Globe’s Price Talks to Georgia WR McConkey
Friday Patriots Notebook 4/12: News and Notes
Back
Top