Thanks for visiting us!

Badminton Central is a free community for fans of badminton! If you find anything useful here please consider registering to see more content and get involved with our great community users, it takes less than 15 seconds! Everybody is welcome here.

Click here for a FREE account!

Adding one extra cross string

Discussion in 'Badminton Stringing Techniques & Tools' started by Blitzzards, Feb 10, 2010.

  1. Blitzzards

    Blitzzards Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,413
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    GMT-04:00
    I have been analysing our Alan Kakinami's technique of adding one extra cross string at bottom 8, which he says gives an overall stiffer feel for the whole string bed.
    What I really like about this pattern is that IMHO I'm hoping to be able to apply that to an overall less tensioned racquet string bed to sort of simulate an overall higher tension feel so that I can actually protect the racquet frame from unnecesary high tension stress while still be able to play with high tensions.

    I'm thinking of this as I have been using tensions of 30lbs plus sometime ago but then dropped down to 27-28lbs to protect my racquets but recently felt that I'm not able to get enough feel and repulsion from the string bed to my satisfactory as I could when I used 30lbs plus. I recently also cut the strings on my AT900P and found that one grommet at the bottom has sunk in very slightly, and that racquet had only been strung to 28lbs tension once, ever since I bought it brand new (I wouldn't want to think what 30lbs would do to it lol). One of my friends advised me that for his case, he would actually rather risk racquet damage then to limit himself to playing less tension that he is used to (which is about 30-32lbs plus), but I think that is a bit extreme.

    So the important thing that I want to inquire here is, if I add an extra cross at bottom 8, will the grommet there (which may not exactly be designed for shared strings, from my humble experience) be able to withstand both the lateral and horizontal (meaning both way) tension stress of the stringing?

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    I also propose to tie the main tie offs at bottom 7 rather than tie them at bottom 9 or bottom 8. What do you more experienced stringers think?
     
  2. Distanc3

    Distanc3 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006
    Messages:
    617
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    stringer for community centers
    Location:
    vancouver
    armortec is not that durable especially in the lower main area as you've mentioned. forcing open B8 (sharing M and C strings) will only facilitate more sinking of the grommets and lead to the death of your racket =(

    Solution. Instead you can put small peices of credit/gift cards under and between grommets it'll prevent sinking :D
     
  3. Blitzzards

    Blitzzards Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,413
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    GMT-04:00
    My AT700s were strung to 30lbs plus before, and nothing has ever happened (so far and I hope it stays this way) to any of the grommets like it does with my AT900P (worst thing to know is that [those of] my AT700s are SP/IP while my [this one] AT900P is a JP). The sinking is actually at bottom 4, contrary to what you have in mind (my humble guess).

    Yonex has already introduced the new long muscle power strip style grommets to counter the sinking grommets at those areas for at least 28lbs tension (which is the new tension warranty limit), so I won't have worries using the grommets and stringing up to 28lbs without using the hard plastic protection you suggested. I'm actually planning to string my racquets to 28lbs and yet get the stiffness that I like of 30lbs plus :D

    But the important thing is that will force opening the grommet at bottom 8 be advisable? For my AT900P the bottom 8 is pretty much like new and unharmed like the others.
     
  4. taneepak

    taneepak Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,527
    Likes Received:
    6
    Occupation:
    Designing and producing quality feather shuttlecoc
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    The number of crosses and their placement can be varied but not the mains.
    In principle strings, in the number of strings and in their diameter, will affect air resistance.
    As the top of the racquet frame has the greatest velocity air resistance from strings at this location is not as serious as it is at or near the T-joint or towards the throat. The greatest impediment to racquet speed is here-hence the need to have as slim a T-joint and frame cross-section, without sacrificing mechanical strength, rigidity and stabilty, as possible.
    As the player has no say in the T-joint or X-section profile there is not much he can do about it except to buy top end racquets.
    However, every player can play around with the stringing pattern. It is here that the choice of a thin string, compatible with your affordabilty for more frequent restring, and the omission of at least one cross string at the throat end, can pay big dividends in the form of reduced air resistance.
    For racquets that require 22 cross strings, reduce this to 21 strings. The first cross string should be across grommet #7 at the top. The last cross string at the bottom should be across grommets #9, not 8. The further you go down towards the throat the greater the air resistance, and grommets #9 is the lowest you should go. Skip grommets #10 and go to grommets #11 at the throat end. Of course it would in principle be even faster if you skipped grommets #9 and #10, but you need the last cross string at grommets #9 to minimize mishits that will easily snap the string.
    For racquets that require 21 cross strings, you reduce this to 20 strings with the bottom cross string across grommets# 9 leaving grommets #10 empty.
    The above will reduce air resistance at a critical location and will result in increased speed and power.
    Contrary to what others say, having more cross strings further down the throat will not improve playability. It will only have added air resistance.
     
  5. Blitzzards

    Blitzzards Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,413
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    GMT-04:00
    So in summary, if increasing one extra cross string really does increase the overall perceived stiffness of the string bed, it will be more advisable to weave that cross string at the top most of the other cross strings?

    Do you think this will have consequence on the grommets at the top or the tension stress distribution on the racquet frame, taneepak?
     
  6. taneepak

    taneepak Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,527
    Likes Received:
    6
    Occupation:
    Designing and producing quality feather shuttlecoc
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    Most racquets have grommets that are too narrow to allow cross strings at the top beyond grommets #7. Even if you can get a string across the top grommets #6, which incidentally in many racquets are drilled for a starting knot, you will have a problem finding a place for the starting knot that is as nearby as possible.
    If you use a real starting knot stringing the cross from the top, it will make the stringbed stiffer than using a double half hitch knot. Increasing the cross tension 10% or slightly more in a dynamic sequence for the first 11 top cross strings will stiffen the stringbed more effectively.
    In my opinion, starting the crosses from the bottom, as recommended by racquet manufacturers, is inferior to starting from the top. The trade-off in starting from the top is an increased risk of frame breakage during high tension stringing by inexperienced stringers. It is understandable why manufacturers opt for the safer pattern.
     
  7. cooler

    cooler Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Messages:
    22,050
    Likes Received:
    13
    Occupation:
    Surfing, reading fan mails:D, Dilithium Crystal hu
    Location:
    Basement Boiler Room
    a less stressed frame setup worth alot more to non-sponsored players. Having a tight/stiff stringbed on the top half can be achieved even if starting from the bottom.
     
  8. cooler

    cooler Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Messages:
    22,050
    Likes Received:
    13
    Occupation:
    Surfing, reading fan mails:D, Dilithium Crystal hu
    Location:
    Basement Boiler Room
    it can be done if stringer is creative enough, and have the right equips.
    http://www.badmintonforum.com/vb/showthread.php?t=49772&highlight=strange
     
  9. taneepak

    taneepak Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,527
    Likes Received:
    6
    Occupation:
    Designing and producing quality feather shuttlecoc
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    I have a Li Ning N55 which was strung by the Chinese national team stringer, using the cross bottom up. Believe me, the top part, especially the first two cross strings at the top, were anything but stiff and I decided to cut it and restrung it using my top cross down, using a real starting knot with 5 loops. The difference is very obvious.
     
  10. cooler

    cooler Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Messages:
    22,050
    Likes Received:
    13
    Occupation:
    Surfing, reading fan mails:D, Dilithium Crystal hu
    Location:
    Basement Boiler Room
    which is better, 1 extra bottom cross or, 1 or 2 less bottom cross is user dependent. There some pro players and stringers out there that have preference for each method, majority of us just go for the manufacturer suggested pattern. IMO, there are pros and cons for each method. Best method is what works for 'you'. Key is stringer understanding your need and string it as part of the whole system, not a last minute add on or subtraction. I have seen all kinds beyond those of 1 or 2 extra or missing cross. Some i chuckled and some are ok.

    here are some discussions

    2 missing bottom cross http://www.badmintonforum.com/vb/showthread.php?t=71351&highlight=missing

    1 missing bottom cross http://www.badmintonforum.com/vb/showthread.php?t=61501&highlight=missing
    http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53172&highlight=bottom

    1 extra bottom cross http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24632&highlight=bottom
     
    #10 cooler, Feb 10, 2010
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2010
  11. cooler

    cooler Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Messages:
    22,050
    Likes Received:
    13
    Occupation:
    Surfing, reading fan mails:D, Dilithium Crystal hu
    Location:
    Basement Boiler Room

    i said can be achieved but i didn't say can be achieved by every stringers:p:D
     
    #11 cooler, Feb 10, 2010
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2010
  12. Blitzzards

    Blitzzards Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,413
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    GMT-04:00
    I think this discussion has evolved to "how to make (either by technique or weaving pattern) a slightly lower string tension feel overall stiffer with the same string".

    Since you understood my point a few posts earlier do you mind to give some comments? :D
     
  13. Grotius

    Grotius Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2009
    Messages:
    123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Toulouse France
    My Z slash was recently restrung and the stringer put an extra string on the 8 cross. I don't like it at all. IMHO it takes the 'trampoline' effect from the mains and your smash is slower. I prefer the standard Yonex setup by far. I believe that their pattern allows for a variety of shots, whereas stringing the 8 hole limits the repetory of the racquet.
     
  14. taneepak

    taneepak Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,527
    Likes Received:
    6
    Occupation:
    Designing and producing quality feather shuttlecoc
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    But it will not be as good as stringing from the top with a true starting knot. Starting the cross from the bottom will mean you end the cross at the top with a knot that is not a starting knot, because using a starting knot as a tie-off for the last cross at the top is even worse.
    Perhaps you can explain how it can be done.
     
  15. silentheart

    silentheart Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Messages:
    4,366
    Likes Received:
    18
    Location:
    USA
    1) You are right that it is easier to have tighter top cross by starting from top down. However, what is the purpose? It is to decrease displacement of the mains on the top during the impact in case of miss hit during a clear or smash. That was the original reason when we were using oval 20 year ago. If you look at the MP line or some of the newer racquet, the top cross is much closer to the top frame now. So the need to have tight top cross is not as obvious. For throat up, it give a little tighter feeling on the upper string bed which most of player prefer to have the better control feeling. Also it is easier to the frame even if the stringer screw up.
    2) The major top string tension loss during the tie off is after you clamp the final top, the small piece of string fron the clamp to tie off knot is untensioned (I hope you know that already). To min that tension loss, you can a) top down so the tension loss is on the throat end. b) Tension the string through tie off grommet. Stick a awl in to stop the string from slipping out. Release tension head and tie off. I know you feel awl should not be used in any situation. However, this is necessary evil. Give it a try, it does work.

    For Blitzzards' original question, Master Cooler is right. However, I just want to add 1 more point. You can not add additional string on B8 using 2 pieces method without become creative on the tie off because on the new YY racquet, B7 is a single pass grommet. If you tie off on the B7, it will damage the grommet or may be the racquet.
     
  16. taneepak

    taneepak Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,527
    Likes Received:
    6
    Occupation:
    Designing and producing quality feather shuttlecoc
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    Stringing the crosses from the top down will always give a tighter upper stringbed than stringing the crosses from the bottom up.
    The main purpose of stringing the crosses from the top is not to minimize breakage from mishits. As a matter of fact, AOTBE, stringing the crosses from the top down will always have a higher tendency to have the top cross string snap from mishit than stringing the crosses from the bottom up at high tensions.
    Using an awl to stick into the grommet at very high tension is suicidal. I am shocked by this silly suggestion. At very high tensions the heat generated by the awl when it is inserted into the grommet after the last cross is strung will snap the string. You are playing with fire with your string.
    You can actually test this with two identical racquets /strings/tensions.
     
  17. silentheart

    silentheart Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Messages:
    4,366
    Likes Received:
    18
    Location:
    USA
    Please stop redirect issues. Stringing from top down will prevent string breaking on the main on the top. Also, unless you have a post grad degree in mechanical engineering or related engineering degree, you still don't know a lot. we are not talking about high tension here. Never did. You ask how it can be done, I am telling you how it is done. I never said you will like it nor I say it has to be done this way. If you have nothing right to say, just read. you might learn something.
     
  18. kklam

    kklam Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2002
    Messages:
    58
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    engineer
    Location:
    BC
    I have over 1000 racquet restrungs under my belt. I use a 2-point machine and max tension I strung was 28/30 Lbs. I always use the method described by Master Silentheart to tension the last untensioned bit of string. I don't encounter any problem using an awl. Taneepak, can you tell us how much heat have induced to the string by doing that? Can you back up what you said by calculation or factual info?

    Thanks,



    KK
     
  19. cooler

    cooler Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Messages:
    22,050
    Likes Received:
    13
    Occupation:
    Surfing, reading fan mails:D, Dilithium Crystal hu
    Location:
    Basement Boiler Room
    on awl usuage.

    awl usage is dangerous only when misused and/or is of the wrong type/shape/diameter. In silentheart example of assisting tying off the last cross, i don't see any danger of it. In fact, it is how stringings were done long ago without stringing machine. Back then, the string is even more delicate (guts) than today's synthetic polymer fibers.

    i wasn't aware of the fire hazard of using an awl LOL. The heat generated do exist theoretically but it is so infinitesimally small that we r talking about at molecular level, like <10C degree on the outer polymer layer but heat dissipate in <0.25 second if u r using a metallic awl which i believe 99.9% awl points are metallic. Heat generated by friction while passing string through each and every grommets and against all other strings while stringing is far far far >>>>>>> than what the awl can do. For those who claim that they can string a racket in < 30 mins, i suggest they wear fire resistant gloves, safety goggle and have smoke detector located above the stringing machine:p LOL

    :cool:er
     
    #19 cooler, Feb 11, 2010
    Last edited: Feb 11, 2010
  20. cooler

    cooler Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Messages:
    22,050
    Likes Received:
    13
    Occupation:
    Surfing, reading fan mails:D, Dilithium Crystal hu
    Location:
    Basement Boiler Room
    a truly good stringer is the one that is able to provide a consistent job and/or as per customer specification. If a customer ask for a cross tension of 25 lbs (and no PT), i give them a cross stringbed that is 25 lbs across the entire racket, top to throat, NOT TIGHTER NOR LOOSER UPPER STRINGBED.
     
    #20 cooler, Feb 11, 2010
    Last edited: Feb 11, 2010

Share This Page