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. kakinami

    kakinami Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    491
    Likes Received:
    7
    Occupation:
    Professional Stringer SAP Open and Bank of the Wes
    Location:
    Newark, CA
    To add the cross on 8 you must preweave 3 crosses before you put in your last main if you are doing the out and in main pattern (9main to 11 main back to 10 main). having your crosses in enables you to tie your main at 9 and if you tried to do your cross after you tied your main, then you would have your knot block the hole making it sometimes very difficult.
     
  2. kakinami

    kakinami Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    491
    Likes Received:
    7
    Occupation:
    Professional Stringer SAP Open and Bank of the Wes
    Location:
    Newark, CA
    If you have a good machine, and tie a good knot, tension loss is minimal.
     
  3. kakinami

    kakinami Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    491
    Likes Received:
    7
    Occupation:
    Professional Stringer SAP Open and Bank of the Wes
    Location:
    Newark, CA
    I string a few rackets here and there and have noticed most of the grommets I replace are due to the string friction, or knots. I would have to disagree your awl theory.
     
  4. kakinami

    kakinami Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    491
    Likes Received:
    7
    Occupation:
    Professional Stringer SAP Open and Bank of the Wes
    Location:
    Newark, CA
    I found badminton string protector pads from mybadmintonstore.com and they work well. come in different colors too.
     
  5. kakinami

    kakinami Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    491
    Likes Received:
    7
    Occupation:
    Professional Stringer SAP Open and Bank of the Wes
    Location:
    Newark, CA
    I hate to agree with cooler but TRUE. If you tie a good knot you would have minimal tension loss.
     
  6. Pete LSD

    Pete LSD Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Messages:
    6,304
    Likes Received:
    11
    Occupation:
    Soul Searching
    Location:
    Canada
  7. kakinami

    kakinami Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    491
    Likes Received:
    7
    Occupation:
    Professional Stringer SAP Open and Bank of the Wes
    Location:
    Newark, CA
    If you tie a good knot you would have minimal tension loss. I dont hear Taufik or Tony complain about that string pattern(bottom up).
     
  8. silentheart

    silentheart Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Messages:
    4,366
    Likes Received:
    18
    Location:
    USA
    I think you miss my point. Most of newer YY with 21 cross pattern. The B9 is a single pass grommet. If you are using 2 piece method, I am advising not to string through B8 and tie off on B9. Because you will damage B9 grommet.
     
  9. Pete LSD

    Pete LSD Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Messages:
    6,304
    Likes Received:
    11
    Occupation:
    Soul Searching
    Location:
    Canada
    Two-in-one concept is good! :D

     
  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
    u r too exotic or is it erotic for us:D:D
     
  11. FIVEs

    FIVEs Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2010
    Messages:
    114
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Victoria
    It would seem that everyone is attuned to an engaging topic, then it becomes cerebral (neurotic at times, for a lack of better word or intentional lack of a better word, ah well, perhaps guys are just passionate about their craft) and then it always comes off-topic, or erroneous, or erogenous:D?

    ...so which kind of stringbed (metaphorically) are we talking:D? Top bottom, throat up:D? Why high tension:D? Isn't it about relieving tension:D?
     
  12. 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 am not in favour of an extra cross, especially across the bottom grommet #8. It increases air resistance at a vulnerable point of the racquet.
    On the contrary, reducing one cross string specifically on the bottom grommet #10 from the standard 22 or 21 cross strings will see an improved playability.
    Preventing or minimizing tension loss at the last cross string is subjective. Some will claim there is no tension loss. Some will say there will be. However, a tensioned tie-off will always lose more tension than a starting knot. With this in mind you are free to choose where you want to have your cross starting knot and your cross tie-off knot. That half of the stringbed with the starting knot will always have a stiffer stringbed bed than the other half of the stringbed with the tie-off knot.
    Obviously the top half is more important than the bottom part insofar as badminton racquets are concerned. You can even allow for one missing cross string at the bottom, say at grommet #10, for improved playability. Now, for those who champion for a stiffer bottom half stringbed which a bottom up cross stringing pattern will achieve, do you think you can omit one cross string at the top half the way you can do with the bottom half? Hence the importance of a stiffer top half stringbed relative to the bottom half.
    Also, contrary to what someone has said earlier stringing from the bottom will not give you a stiffer stringbed at the top half relative to the bottom half.
    Why is it that difficult to see the real forest for the trees?
     
  13. silentheart

    silentheart Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Messages:
    4,366
    Likes Received:
    18
    Location:
    USA
    Hummm, I think you are so right on the air resistance. Let's do a quick calculation here.
    Assuming all the string are same length. 45/44-1=2.2%. Factor into the total cross section of the entire racquet frame which is about 3x (or close to 4x) of cross section of the total cross section of the string all together. That give you about 2.2%*0.25=0.55% increase in air resistance. WOW! that means if I can smash at 200 km/h max, it will slow down my smash to 199 km/h. Gee, what a difference.
    You know what, we proved you wrong time and time again. All you can say is I know a method, but I won't tell you how. Please provide the calculation or any real prove. Other wise, if you have nothing smart to say, just don't say anything.
     
  14. kakinami

    kakinami Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    491
    Likes Received:
    7
    Occupation:
    Professional Stringer SAP Open and Bank of the Wes
    Location:
    Newark, CA
    How would 2 pieces of .7mm increase drag in such a significant way that it affects the racket?
     
  15. taneepak

    taneepak Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,527
    Likes Received:
    6
    Occupation:
    Designing and producing quality feather shuttlecoc
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    You can conduct some tests on the courts either with different diameter strings or with the same string, one with one missing cross string at bottom grommet #10, bith using identical racquets.
    It is well known in badminton circles that thinner strings have more power from faster racquet speed due to reduced air resistance as well as better control. Do you need to come publish a scientific paper to support this?
    It is also well known among racquet manufacturers that the area around the T-joint is the biggest culprit affecting air resistance. For those who are friends of Yonex, ask Yonex for their patent papers on their T-joint patent filing in which mention was made about the need to reduce this T-joint area to reduce air resistance for incresed power/speed. BTW, Yonex of course did not come out with any scientific paper/calculations about this.
    You don't have to use rocket science to find this out. That would be work hours wasted.
     
  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
    That is the trouble with calculations that are misguided. A racquet in play is not a stationary object placed inside a wind tunnel. Follow the movement of the racquet and arm and you will see the late acceleration of the hand/wrist before impact. Notice why the shaft is slim and round? This affects air resistance. But as you go up the racquet to midpoint, ie the T-joint, there is a sudden rather massive thing relative to the air-cutting slim design of the shaft. Air resistance factors get bad from the shaft to the T-joint or waist. They are weighted more than those parts of the racquet at the top. This is why the velocity at the tip of the racquet is higher than at the butt end. You move half an inch with your hand, it translates to a few feet at the racquet tip.
    Sometimes common sense makes better sense. At least it won't jump to a silly conclusion like what you are saying above that string thickness is irrelevant to power/playability.
    Also, I don't know what rocket science calculations you have used to support your earlier claim that stringing the crosses from the bottom up will result in a stiffer upper half stringbed than the bottom half. Without any detailed scientific calculations, I say this is a wrong conclusion.
     
  17. 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
    again, u r making exaggeration to make your points because your points are weak.

    [1] not incorrect on less air resistance from thinner string but i believe those pros who chosed thinner strings (bg66, ngy98, bg80, etc for examples) did it for the string qualities like repulsion, feel, not air resistance reduction. If air resistance is such a big factor to them, why NOT all pros use thin strings?

    [2] not incorrect but u r missing yonex's objective, which are 3 of them. (1) The T joint surface area is significant unlike 1 cross string. Reduction of 10-20% of area is a mark improvement where as SH had indicated, a reduction of 0.5% in air drag due to strings does not even warrant a minor footnote. (2) the old external T joint has sharp edges which increase air drag. Shape affect air resistance too, not just surface area. By hiding the T joint internally, the T joint external surface can be smooth out to reduce drag significantly on shape form factor alone. (3) with a 1 piece looking frame+shaft, the racket cosmetically look much sexier. Yonex doesn't need to do any scientific paper/calculations about this because it's a no brainer. Too bad u only manage to come up with just 1 of the 3 reasons why yonex did it.
     
    #57 cooler, Feb 14, 2010
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2010
  18. druss

    druss Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2009
    Messages:
    1,519
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Edmonton, AB
    I'm not going to get involved in any of the rest of it but... will 1 string increase the velocity of a racket? I very much doubt it. Beyond the whole cross sectional area aspect, there is the fact that we're not talking about laminar flow, it's turbulent flow due to the number of strings involved.

    You can't even just isolate the strings in order to compare cross sections. If you consider the cross section of the entire racket, from handle to top of racket, the area that resists airflow is the addition of the frame and strings.

    Just to do some math: assuming the string is 9.2m long and 5% is actually in the grommets and outside the frame, and you have a 0.7mm diameter string, you end up with 9.2m x 0.95 x .0007 = 0.0067 square meters. If you look at the frame and assume an average thickness of 7.5mm and a length of 710mm (ignoring the shaft for the moment), you get 0.0075 x 0.7 = 0.00525 square meters.

    Add the two together and you get 0.01195 square meters. Now 1 string at the bottom is 0.016m long and 0.0007 m in diameter. This is 0.0000112 square meters.

    0.0000112 / 0.01195 = 0.1 percent decrease in cross sectional area and this is ignoring the shaft.

    I may not be a rocket scientist but I am an engineer. Can 0.1% in the right place affect airflow and air resistance? Definitely... can a human feel the difference? NO! There is almost no way that a person will be able to tell the difference of 0.1% decrease in cross sectional area that's offering air resistance.

    To look at the strings, let's compare 0.7mm to 0.66mm. We've already done the calculations on the head so for just the string you get 9.2m x 0.95 x 0.00066 = 0.00577, add that to the racket head and you get 0.0110.

    The difference is 7.8%... that is an appreciable difference and should be felt.

    Keep in mind that if you include the area of the shaft it will lower both those percentages but I wanted to keep it simple for now.

    So math has both disagreed with you in that 1 string will make a difference but has also agreed that thickness of the string will make a difference.

    Please don't put down math as it's pure science and logic, I've also found that "common sense" really is not that common... quite rare actually.
     
    #58 druss, Feb 14, 2010
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2010
  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
    you are being conservative. The last cross is ~45cm from the handle base. Since your calculation was based on average string length and average radius to the sweet spot of ~54cm, correction to angular velocity must be adjusted because air drag is highly function of velocity. U assumed 200 km/hr as average, that would be at the sweetsport but the last cross is located lower. Simple math of 45/54*200= 166.7 km/hr. So that 166.7^2/200^2*0.55%=0.382% increase in air resistance. There are several more correction can be made but it's late now:D
     
  20. druss

    druss Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2009
    Messages:
    1,519
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Edmonton, AB
    Just to clarify here because I didn't want to clutter my other post with side comments...

    The velocity at the tip is higher because it has to travel a longer arc than any other part of the racket, since the rotation of the racket is the same for all parts of the racket (ignoring bending for now), that means that it has to travel a higher distance in the same amount of time as the rest of the racket.

    Since velocity = distance / time, it's pretty easy to see why the velocity is higher at the tip. This has absolutely nothing to do with weight.
     

Share This Page