User Tag List

Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    Regular Member Maklike Tier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,171
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Are strings the main cause of aerodynamic drag?

    I'm one of those weird people that constantly think about racket design, and I have this theory that the frame design only contributes minimally to drag, and that the real cause of drag is the strings.

    So the natural step in this process, is to think about how to reduce the amount of strings to test the theory.

    Not being a stringer, I got one of my 80 hole prototypes and drew out a design that eliminates 10 strings, making it a 16 x 20 pattern.

    Is something like this possible? I'm guessing that having more horizontal strings would mean that the tension would have to be dropped on them proportionally more than the vertical ones?

    Would this pattern result in some strange and potentially bad frame distortion?

    Name:  Photo-19-05-13-5-52-23-PM.jpg
Views: 509
Size:  51.5 KB

  2. #2
    Regular Member visor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    9,333
    Mentioned
    100 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    interesting... since you're at it, why not reduce a few cross strings too to balance the frame tension and cut down on more air drag?

    also, time for you to switch to zm62 strings...

  3. #3
    Regular Member Maklike Tier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,171
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I was hoping to get some custom strings made in an aerofoil shape

  4. #4
    Regular Member Mark A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    St Helens, UK
    Posts
    4,163
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    A racket contains roughly 9.5 m of string. Given a diameter of, say, 0.70 mm, the total frontal area of the strings is 66.5 cm^2 (or 10.30 in^2). (String intersections can be subtracted, but they're pretty much negligible - no more than 2 cm^2).

    The area of a badminton racket head is around 360 cm^2. This means that roughly one fifth of the head is "blocked off" by the strings!

    Edit: subtract the loops outside the frame as well... probably down to a one-sixth loss.
    Last edited by Mark A; 05-19-2013 at 04:04 AM.

  5. #5
    Regular Member visor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    9,333
    Mentioned
    100 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark A View Post
    A racket contains roughly 9.5 m of string. Given a diameter of, say, 0.70 mm, the total frontal area of the strings is 66.5 cm^2 (or 10.30 in^2). (String intersections can be subtracted, but they're pretty much negligible - no more than 2 cm^2).

    The area of a badminton racket head is around 360 cm^2. This means that roughly one fifth of the head is "blocked off" by the strings!
    No wonder I can swing an unstrung racket at the store faster than I can play with a strung one on court...

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Brunei Darussalam
    Posts
    1,644
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    should send your design to Yonex and see if they like it

  7. #7
    Regular Member Maklike Tier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,171
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Frontal area is only part of the aero equation, Mark.

  8. #8
    Administrator kwun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Santa Clara, California, United States
    Posts
    35,918
    Mentioned
    54 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maklike Tier View Post
    I was hoping to get some custom strings made in an aerofoil shape
    not gonna work. string crossings will naturally twist the string to the least aero profile.

  9. #9
    Administrator kwun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Santa Clara, California, United States
    Posts
    35,918
    Mentioned
    54 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maklike Tier View Post
    Frontal area is only part of the aero equation, Mark.
    agreed.

    aerodynamic drag increases with more boundary layer. and the cylindrical shape of the string has a pretty high drag.

    while the racket frame of modern design are designed to be more aero.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Mark A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    St Helens, UK
    Posts
    4,163
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kwun View Post
    not gonna work. string crossings will naturally twist the string to the least aero profile.
    Unless it's some kind of isotropic aerofoil... in which case, badminton strings should be the least of our concerns.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Western Hemisphere
    Posts
    979
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Maybe someone can make a clamp to clamp the strings into the right aerodynamic profile. You may have to re-clamp after each game though.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Maklike Tier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,171
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I was joking about making the actual string aero foil shaped, geez.

    So anyway, Stringers.....is it possible to string like this?

  13. #13
    Regular Member Mark A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    St Helens, UK
    Posts
    4,163
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maklike Tier View Post
    I was joking about making the actual string aero foil shaped, geez.
    I think we were all running with it, mate.

    So anyway, Stringers.....is it possible to string like this?
    I don't see why not - surely it would leave the frame under less stress (but there's a slight imbalance between the top and bottom of the pattern, not that it should matter).

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Brunei Darussalam
    Posts
    1,644
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    then it will be called the maklike string pattern

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Danmark
    Posts
    213
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think it would be better to do a 16X18, to get more equal stress.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •