Bending stiffness and the playability of badminton frames
Because our new tool can also measure the stiffness of the racquet we were talking about the importance of the stiffness of badminton racquets for their playability.
For tennis the stiffness of the frame is very decisive for the playability of it.
A stiffer racquet offers more power, because less energy is lost in bending it.
A more flexible racquet offers a longer dwell time, the contact between the ball and the strings is longer so the player feels more control on his strokes.
The stiffness of tennis racquets can be measured with a Babolat RDC and is shown in the RA value.
We are quite convinced that the stiffness of a badminton is very decisive for its playability but this can be quite different from tennisracquets.
We would like to know more:
- If the stiffness is quite low in relation to the stiffness of the stringbed, this could offer a springy effect that offers more power. Is this so?
- Or does a stiffer racquet offer more power for the same reason as for a tennisracquet.
- Does any supplier of badminton racquets mention values for the stiffness of the frames that he supplies?
Stiffness is quite important for badminton as well and every retailer and manufacturer mention the stiffness values of their racket.
However, the relation between power and stiffness is not as simple as the relation you mentionned for tennis.
In badminton, a player with less technique and/or power will find more power into flexible rackets because of the "springy" effet, or a whip like effect. Better players will find more power into stiffer rackets because of the better energy transfer into the shuttle. It is also the same for the stringbed stiffness. A player that uses a racket that is too stiff can somewhat compensate with less tension on their stringbed.
The stiffness' effects on control are a bit different and many people say different things about it. In general though, stiff rackets (or strings) are considered to offer better control.
I'm not about to try
on my rackets but here it states at the T joint. Measuring degree of deflection.
it doesn't say where the support points are either. that's the crucial part. putting 20kg on the t-joint make no sense when it comes to measuring shaft stiffness. the only thing that make sense would be supporting at the handle, but 20kg on the handle, we are talking about 10cm+ of deflection.
i bet whoever wrote that page was just told by some SOTX engineer/marketing, and never ever seen it done before.
It is obvious that the position of the supports is very important. And if you want to measure that stiffness tells something about the playability you need one support at the position of the handle.
We have positioned the support at the same position of the Babolat RDC, did anybody put a badminton racquet on that system.
We know the relation between RA value and kg/cm.
Of course we can do tests with badminton racquets with our tool as soon as it is ready.
i've found that different racquets flex differently as well,
i.e. on the i-slash or the gosen issen, it tends to flex more at the cone area of the handle, the gosen shiden, it flexes more towards the T joint.
would have made more sense for measurements if shafts etc are proper full cylindrical rods, but in many cases they are tapered either upwards or downwards, so taking it at a single spot, does not necessarily represent the full playing feel
The position on the shaft where the pressure is applied. From the bottom end of the shaft I (I presume), not the end of the handle (they don't even have a handle on them yet ). BUT, putting a tape measure across, it looks more like it is from the end of the theoretical handle.