Results 86 to 102 of 108
02-11-2009, 06:42 AM #86
02-11-2009, 01:44 PM #87
i am using the method ST is proposed for about 5 racket 23 to 26 lb with no problem.
i do order an extra headplate to follow Pete's setup but mike run out off the badminton set when i order, expect delivery b4 Friday this week.
i can not say which is better because i did not try both but for the last string problem i already have a idea to mod the headplate. picture attached. cut those red cross part off.
02-11-2009, 01:54 PM #88
Thanks Yanansi for the advise.
A special badminton centre piece is on our list.
We first have to get the cross stringers on the market.
02-11-2009, 02:16 PM #89
I might have some problems with the post at 12 o'clock.
1) Is the screw in direct contact of the frame? If not, is there a chance to the screw contacting? It might damage the paint job the best, damage the frame the worse.
2) Also, is there some give on the 2 side supports on top because they are padded with rubber? If so, what is the chance of frame change shape?
3) The diagram is for Oval shaped racquet. The 4 side supports might not be enough or in wrong position for ISO. Need to have a clear instruction on how to mount the racquet for the user when this implemented.
These are just suggestions.
02-11-2009, 02:33 PM #90
2, so far i have no problem with it, tension under 26lb. But i would like to try out pete's setup and see how is that when i get the badminton set.
3, the top two support is adjustable. but i do not have any ISO racket in hand.
BTW i am a newbie for ML100
02-11-2009, 02:51 PM #91
I first mount the throat side, tighten the hold down clamp half way. and them loose the top side support arm, set the top side racket on, screw the T hold down half way, generally rail the support arm outward until the racket is completely support by the supporter(red). tighten all three hold down.
04-12-2012, 04:16 PM #92
any updates on this mounting system? i was looking to purchase a stringway machine but there seems to be various potential problems with the mounting system for badminton rackets...
04-13-2012, 02:38 AM #93
Best mounting of badminton on Stringway machine.
What are the problems you heard of?
We advise to use the other way around method for badminton so that the wide side of the badminton frame is supported by 3 and the narrow side by 2 supports.
This also makes it easier to clamp the first strings from the head.
Please understand that outside supports introduce bending stress, the closer they get to 3 and 9 o’clock the higher the stress.
You can compare this with the beam in the wall as shown below;
It is not true that no deformation means no stress in the racquet material!
04-13-2012, 02:57 PM #94
do you have any photos with a more square/isometric head shape?
there aren't that many oval head badminton rackets anymore...
04-14-2012, 01:11 AM #95
I do not have these photos but it is easy to make some.
We have some Yonex ones on stock.
For those who are technically interested, this is the other page of the "beam-story"
04-15-2012, 07:15 AM #96
no disagreement that having internal support is a good thing.
but isn't it just a matter of making a really wide load spreader like the load spreader we can buy today?
granted there are a few different head shape, but with the understanding that these load spreaders do flex under load, then we should be able to cover pretty much all head shapes with 3 or at most 4 shapes.
current load spreader we can buy are 5 fingers. we can make a 9 or even 11 fingers ones.
04-15-2012, 11:37 AM #97
The outside supports causes the bending force!
The load spreader is a very good part because it reduces the pressure between the frame and the centre support.
But the bad thing with outside supports is the fact that the outside support causes a bending stress in the frame were there is hardly stress without the support.
Compared to the beam in the wall:
- Without a support there is no stress between point C and A.
- With the support in A, there occurs a bending stress between C and A because the supporting force in A has to be transferred to the position of the load [C].
- With the support in C (direct support) there is no stress at all between C and A.
In the racquet.
- Lets say that the main strings pull the frame inwards between 12 and 1.30 average in 12.45.
When the support is at 2.30, the supporting force has to be transferred to 12.45 causing a bending stress that is not there at all with inside supports.
- With a direct (inside) support, the supports against the inside directly generate a “contra force” against the force of the mains. Because there is no distance between the position of the main strings and the supports there is no bending force.
So it would be much better to use a very wide load Spreader without the outside supports then a narrow load spreader with outside supports.
Forgot to take the pictures will do it now.
04-15-2012, 12:25 PM #98
The other way around on SW machines.
Hereby some pictures of a modern frame on the SW support with the “other way around” method.
04-15-2012, 01:05 PM #99
can you take a photo of those red supports without the racket? i am curious what shape they are and how they support racket.
04-15-2012, 02:32 PM #100
Shot at 2012-04-15
04-15-2012, 03:36 PM #101
Okay, a question for you then.
If all the forces during stringing are inwards, then the inward supports are very well suited offcourse.
But, if you string cross-strings you can clearly see the frame moving outward (say you string bottum-up and arrive at the last 3-8 crosses)
If all forces and support is inward, why does this happen?
04-15-2012, 04:05 PM #102
because the model used is too simplistic.
By iain1953 in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / OfficiatingReplies: 3: 05-15-2009, 07:05 PM
By CkcJsm in forum General ForumReplies: 12: 03-19-2009, 08:26 AM
By weeyet in forum Commonwealth Games 2006 BadmintonReplies: 92: 04-02-2006, 09:05 PM
By taneepak in forum Badminton Stringing Techniques & ToolsReplies: 11: 06-30-2004, 06:34 PM
By mojoe in forum General ForumReplies: 5: 11-10-2002, 01:02 AM