Risk of batted-ball injury for slow-pitched softball pitchers

I am not very interested in sports specifically, but I did always think that softball compared to baseball, was a much less risk involved sport.  This evaluation by Bomani Sports Research made me feel differently after reading their article.
The test was to see if the new polyurethane-centered softballs introduced in the 1990's can still be a great risk to the pitcher. In light of this change, a softball of this structure was used for the test. Another major variable giving the ball a range of reactions at impact is the bat material.  Since, many different types of bats get used frequently, there were five different bat types used.  Each bat was labeled through their variables, such as, material, weight, and balance point.  In order to get a consistent pitch each time, a pitching machine was introduced and placed at the exact distance away from home plate.  Four softball players with a variety of age, height, and weight were chosen purposely for real life accuracy, to bat the balls in which the ball speeds after impact were measured.  One other tested experiment showed that by using the cheaper, less performing equipment can decrease the probability of a ball to pitcher impact due to the decreased speed of the returning ball.  The slower speed gives the pitcher a significantly larger time to react.  This reaction time was concluded to be the highest in young adults. 
Some of the results showed that a composite bat greatly outperformed a wooden bat which would magnify the injury of the pitcher if an impact were to occur between ball and pitcher.
A chart was made showing how each batter, bat, and pitch speed affected the resulting batted-ball speed.  It was concluded that slow-pitch soft-ball players are in a dangerous situation regardless of which commonly used equipment is used.  If sports currently were more interested in safety rather than performance, then the probability of injury's could still be decreased drastically.
After comprehending the whole article it makes me wonder why the batter, especially in slow-pitch softball, wears the helmet and not the pitcher.  Is there some huge performance related downside that would occur from the pitcher wearing a helmet, because of not then I think that rule needs to be implemented.  How do you feel about this?

Tension Loss in Tennis Strings

If you have ever played tennis, especially over an extended period of time, you will notice how the strings in the racket get loser over time.  This scholarly article experiments how depending on string material, racket material, court material and style of play.  I found it amazing how these variables can be calculated in to make charts for how the strings will have tension loss.  Once the equations are created, the way each variable is added is by designating them an individual number based on intensity such as a flat style of play = 1 or a top spin style of play = 3. 
When the final values have been calculated, then charts can then be made.  For example, one chart that was created was the court material v.s. tension loss (%) considering the style of play.  It showed that with a flat style of play, playing on a clay court will result in a higher tension loss in the racket strings.  Ironically, with a top spin style of play, playing on a hard court will result in a higher tension loss.  I found this extremely interesting because i would not think that the material of the court would effect the strings so drastically different considering the style of play.
In conclusion, it was shown that the worst combination in tennis concerning string endurance is to play using a 16-main-string racket frame, strung with CS2/S1 or CS1/S2 strings, on a clay court.  The result of this combination was the complete fracture in the strings during the same play duration as the other combination's.
I have not played tennis in some years, but has anyone that plays tennis more often notice these same kinds of results?

My First Article From "Journal of Sports Engineering and Technology", 2008-2009

The name of the article is "Characteristics of Head Impacts Sustained by Youth Ice Hockey Players".  Overall this was an interesting article partly because it was my first time reading a scholarly article focused on mechanical engineering.  The study focused to measure the magnitude of head impacts sustained by 14 young male ice hockey players wearing instrumented helmets, and to compare impacts across a game, player position, and location.  The reason for this study was because it was understood that in young teenage males, that the developing brain would be more resistant and recover quicker.  Now it is thought that the child's brain is more vulnerable to long term effects from head trauma.

I can go on and on explaining the process of how the experiment came along, but  I am sure you are wondering now how this has anything to do with mechanical engineering, especially if you're not a mechanical engineering major.  There are some major concepts of materials, instrumentation, and dynamics that are directly related to this case in hockey.  The understanding of the resistance of the helmet and the hockey stick needed to be known for analysis of the actual impact of the child's head.  Also, the tools used to measure the data will need to be known how to use and analyze the date, such as accelerometers and telemetry instrumentation.  The most obvious mechanical engineering related study is dynamics having to do with the acceleration of the player, hockey stick, and target as well as the effects of gravity and resistances.

After going through the whole article including the data and conclusion, I found it amazing how humans have come so far as to pick a subject, create an experiment, and come up with results with precision.  Has anyone else been surprised as to how their major can relate to an unexpected subject?

Decisions.... Decisions

Now that the class has finally finished the instructions project and given the new assignment, it is time to start..... or is it? We have gotten into our groups and did some initial introductions, ect., but when it comes to the actual project, we ran into some decision making. Once we each have talked to our individual bosses, mentors and co-workers, we had some trouble in finding a legitimate technical document that is needed to be made for a company.  Either there was nothing needed or nothing lengthy enough for the whole group to comtribiute or too specific for the whole group to have knowledge about.  I wish the assignment of "a technical document" is a little more specific so there are aren't sooooo many options to find and choose from.

At the moment, we have some more possible alternatives for the decision of our final project topic.  Hopefully there will be one topic that everyone can agree on, will be enough for mutual group work and simple enough for all in our group to be somewhat knowledgeable about.  With all of these points met, it is more than likely that there will be none of the "bad" characteristics of group members as portrayed in the previuos articles.

Have any other groups also had trouble or are still having trouble deciding on a topic?

The Report

I thought the Robert Report that we watch in class on Thursday was hilarious.  He magnified the flaws of Wikipedia, but with still keeping the facts true.  It makes me realize why so many professors in high school and college try to persuade their students away from using Wikipedia too much.  Such as in keeping the sources sited to one or none in the Wikipedia department.  Personally, even though I know that most information on Wikipedia is correct, I try first to find the same information on a more creditable site first to verify everything is correct. One time just to see if all of this Wikipedia hatred was for real, I went on there to a random factual page and changed a minor grammatical part of it to see if it would really changed for everyone to see. And it did! I thought it was crazy that I could really change something that easily on such a "creditable" site. I think that regardless of a professor's rules on using Wikipedia, I am going to try and steer clear of using it for my personal research. Anyone feel the same way?