User Tag List

Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    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 VIDEO: 50/50 Pattern with Hybrid clamping

    here is the method to do the 50/50 stringing pattern.

    i like the idea of a 50/50 pattern because it allows symmetrical tension of the top and bottom half of the crosses. afterall we don't do the mains from side to side why do we want to do the cross from one end to the other?

    the issue with the 50/50 is that it is impossible to do it properly with fixed clamps alone. a possible method is to use the help of a starting clamp.

    the easiest method however, is the one presented here which is to use 2 flying clamps to assist the fixed clamps. which is what i called a hybrid clamping method.

    as usual, comments and suggestions are welcomed.


  2. #2
    Regular Member Mark A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    St Helens, UK
    Posts
    4,170
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hmm... might have to give this another try. I do TD because it seems to end up dumping all the stress at the bottom of the racket (which is where we'd want it), but it does cause slight "egging" at the top of the racket... can't win them all.

    Did you miss the top cross?

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Germany / Karlsruhe
    Posts
    147
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Thats the "head stringing pattern". I was using this pattern a long time ago (only for head rackets) but the weaving of the last crosses at the top AND bottom is a little bit hard.

    afterall we don't do the mains from side to side why do we want to do the cross from one end to the other?
    hmmm... on the mains we have supports inside, not outside. so the frame can't move inwards on the first pull. when we start the crosses in the middle, there is no supports inside. when we start at the buttom (or maybe top) the stress on the frame is a little bit lower because of the angle of the grommet from inside to outside (ONLY speculation).

  4. #4
    Regular Member Mark A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    St Helens, UK
    Posts
    4,170
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Were I doing this I'd do the first three or four crosses in the upward direction, then the same amount downwards. The upward crosses would put some stress at the bottom of the frame, then the downward crosses should equalize it. Then go up for another few, and down to equalize again. This way there always a bit of stress at the bottom of the frame, but little asymmetrical tension at the top.

    This could all be in my head, but it makes sense given my experiences with TD.

  5. #5
    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 Mark A View Post
    Were I doing this I'd do the first three or four crosses in the upward direction, then the same amount downwards. The upward crosses would put some stress at the bottom of the frame, then the downward crosses should equalize it. Then go up for another few, and down to equalize again. This way there always a bit of stress at the bottom of the frame, but little asymmetrical tension at the top.

    This could all be in my head, but it makes sense given my experiences with TD.
    right. but the stress at the bottom of the frame using this method should be smaller than if you do top-down all the way from the top.

  6. #6
    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 Alex82 View Post
    Thats the "head stringing pattern". I was using this pattern a long time ago (only for head rackets) but the weaving of the last crosses at the top AND bottom is a little bit hard.
    certainly head took the idea and gave it their own name. this method has been around for a long time.

    hmmm... on the mains we have supports inside, not outside. so the frame can't move inwards on the first pull. when we start the crosses in the middle, there is no supports inside.
    but when we start the cross in the middle, the frame is already loaded with main string which in a way is providing support?

    when we start at the buttom (or maybe top) the stress on the frame is a little bit lower because of the angle of the grommet from inside to outside (ONLY speculation).


    the net forces at the corner will always be higher, i think. each string alone might be lower, but in total the sum of the two force will result in a higher net force. that's why in oval rackets very often you will see the tear drop shape at the top sides of the frame gets squeezed in. ("egging" in Mark A's word.)


  7. #7
    Regular Member Mark A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    St Helens, UK
    Posts
    4,170
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ^Good illustration. The diagonal 35 lb vector not only causes the top to narrow, but applies all the way through the racket and causes the bottom to widen.

    I use the 10% rule and have found that doing the top cross at the main tension, and adding 1 lb to each subsequent cross until I reach the target cross tension, is the best way to keep the racket shape when doing TD. The 50/50 should require no such adjustments, though.

  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

    that also explains why the victor pattern says the top and bottom crosses should be 2 lbs lower.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Mark A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    St Helens, UK
    Posts
    4,170
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kwun View Post
    that also explains why the victor pattern says the top and bottom crosses should be 2 lbs lower.
    Hmm... very plausible - it'd be a good safety factor. The tennis stringer part of me (playability) thinks it's because they're shorter, and less tension would ensure the same "dynamic" tension as the longer crosses. No reason why it can't be both, I suppose.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Germany / Karlsruhe
    Posts
    147
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    certainly head took the idea and gave it their own name. this method has been around for a long time.
    thats why i put head stringing pattern in quotes...

    but when we start the cross in the middle, the frame is already loaded with main string which in a way is providing support?
    yes, true. but its not the same i think. in your video i can see a small distortion when you start the crosses moving (maybe i don't see it correct, its only a video).

    when we start at the buttom (or maybe top) the stress on the frame is a little bit lower because of the angle of the grommet from inside to outside (ONLY speculation).
    what i mean is that (red lines):
    Name:  blah.jpg
Views: 223
Size:  32.1 KB

    when you start in the middle, there is no angle of the string on pull. so there is only one point where there is stress on the frame -> outside.
    when you start at bottom (or top), there is an angle of the string. so there are two points where force produces ?less? stress on the frame:
    first one inside of the frame. an which bend the frame outside down. this one is "hold" by the main string.
    second one outside the frame, with less force as you start in the middle.
    @kwun: you can test this maybe its equal because of the less friction of the less main strings.


    i hope you understand what i mean. its already hard to explain it in german, so in english is much more difficult... i also don't know if my speculation is correct. its only a speculation.

Similar Threads

  1. VIDEO: Haribito 76 holes (22x21) professional pattern
    By kwun in forum Badminton Stringing Techniques & Tools
    Replies: 31
    : 12-21-2013, 07:19 PM
  2. VIDEO: How to do the Victor 80 holes stringing pattern
    By kwun in forum Badminton Stringing Techniques & Tools
    Replies: 22
    : 04-16-2012, 03:45 PM
  3. Clamping Racket in for Stringing
    By del1803 in forum Badminton Stringing Techniques & Tools
    Replies: 8
    : 09-26-2011, 01:05 PM
  4. Eagnas ST-200 Clamping Problem
    By bazzaman in forum Badminton Stringing Techniques & Tools
    Replies: 42
    : 11-16-2010, 01:11 PM
  5. clamping down a racquet
    By bazzaman in forum Badminton Stringing Techniques & Tools
    Replies: 9
    : 07-26-2010, 11:53 PM

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
  •