User Tag List

Page 2 of 22 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... LastLast
Results 18 to 34 of 367
  1. #18
    New Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    AVIGNON
    Posts
    1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Racket stringing. The Answer...

    Hi.
    Very interesting all that. I play tennis, and have a stringing machine ( Tyger Profi 55 ) and although we are talking about different tensions and guages, the principles remain the same ...
    I have been bothered for some time about the fact that the crosses are obviously less tight than the mains because of the reasons already mentioned, i.e. that the crosses tighten the mains as they ( the crosses )are pulled. An effect of this must surely be that the ball/shuttlecock is send back mainly under power from the resilience of the main strings only. The crosses must have little to do with it as the mains reach their maximum stretch point well before the crosses will even be tight !
    This seems like a pretty undesirable situation. Surely if the mains and crosses had the same tension, better ball control would be the result - although, as the crosses are shorter, their maximum stretch point would be reached before that of the mains, so pêrhaps a slightly lower tension is after all desirable for the crosses !
    But how can this be achieved ?... The tighter you pull the crosses, the more tension will be put on the mains, so a much lower tension seems desirable for the mains, and higher for the crosses... But, I've tried this, and it doesn't seem to work, as, the high tension on the crosses just pulls the mains even tighter !
    For information, when I string my racket normally, the mains measure at 25Kilos, but the crosses at at only 12. This is lamentable ...
    The only way I can see to keep tension even would be, starting at the middle of the racket, to string one main followed by one cross, one main, one cross, etc. etc... That way a main will tighten the cross, then a cross will tighten the main etc...
    Trouble is, you will need around 4 clamps to acheive this. It is not possible with just 2 fixed clamps, and resorting to flying clamps results in less accuracy ....!
    Another big problem, is that in normal stringing, each cross string has progressively more friction on it from the mains, resulting in less tension on the final crosses. Most people worry about even tension on both sides of the mains, but look at the way a ball is hit, and you will see that the racket is more in a horizontal position than a vertical one ( in tennis anyway ), so the balance of the crosses on either end is actually more important...
    I remember I once saw on the Fischer website, a factory worker stringing a racket, and he was using a device which held apart the mains, while he strung the crosses. The crosses did not touch the mains, and therefore avoided any friction. But where does one obtain such a device ?....
    One final point. When I have my rackets strung on the big, expensive Babolat machines, they play better than mine ! However, they are strung conventially, with less care and attention than I give. I can only assume that the clamping system is of very high tolerence, with little freeplay, therefore minimizing tension loss. This is perhaps after all, the most important factor of all ... If only I could afford one .... !!

  2. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    19
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hi All,

    I just noticed that Yonex recommends 2 pounds higher tension for cross for their old models such as Ti10. But for the latest models, they only recommend 1 tension for both main and cross. Can anyone come up an explanation for it?

    http://www.yonex.co.jp/badminton/old...ket/ti10r.html
    http://www.yonex.co.jp/badminton/old...cket/mp80.html
    http://www.yonex.co.jp/badminton/old...t/cab20lo.html
    http://www.yonex.co.jp/badminton/pro...et/ns7000.html
    http://www.yonex.co.jp/badminton/pro...ket/at800.html
    http://www.yonex.co.jp/badminton/pro...cket/mp90.html

    縦 means main. 横 means cross

    Regards,
    CB

  3. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    That is not how I read it. The 1lb difference is between a 2U and a 3U, or a 3U and a 4U. Even when Yonex is more specific, like when suggesting both main and cross tension, the 2lbs difference is a rough guide. A more accurate difference is 10%.

  4. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    New York, US
    Posts
    10,283
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak
    That is not how I read it. The 1lb difference is between a 2U and a 3U, or a 3U and a 4U. Even when Yonex is more specific, like when suggesting both main and cross tension, the 2lbs difference is a rough guide. A more accurate difference is 10%.
    I agree.

    The "1 lb" difference is referring to the "min and max" recommend tension between different models with different "U".

    The "2 lb" difference that we are talking about, is the "main vs cross" for the same racket.

  5. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    19
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hi Taneepak and LazyBuddy,

    You guys misunderstood me. There is a 1 pound difference between 3U and 4U rackets. But for old models, they also recommend two tensions for main and cross:

    For Ti 10:

    3U縦17〜20、横19〜22
    2U縦18〜21、横20〜23

    For NS7000:
    3U:19〜24
    2U:20〜25

    So for the older models, they recommended different tensions for main and cross, but this is no longer the case for the latest models...

    Regards,
    CB

    Quote Originally Posted by LazyBuddy
    I agree.

    The "1 lb" difference is referring to the "min and max" recommend tension between different models with different "U".

    The "2 lb" difference that we are talking about, is the "main vs cross" for the same racket.

  6. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    There is no inconsistency. One is a brief classification of tension range, usually used in circumstances where space is limited, like on the cone of a racquet. The more detail tension range is usually indicated in Yonex's spec chart. For example, on my MP99 2U the small label on the cone of my racquet says 18-22lbs, 8-10kg, but the spec chart says Main 18-20lbs 8-9kg, Cross 20-22lbs 9-10kg.
    Despite its modest tension range of 18-22lbs, I string my MP99 to 27-29.5lbs.

  7. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Cannock, UK
    Posts
    2,908
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by catbear
    For NS7000:
    3U:19〜24
    2U:20〜25

    So for the older models, they recommended different tensions for main and cross, but this is no longer the case for the latest models...
    It might depend on your source.
    I have the UK Yonex badminton catalog 2005 and it says

    NS7000 3U Main 19-22 lbs Cross 21-24 lbs
    NS8000 3U Main 19-22 lbs Cross 21-24 lbs
    AT800OF 4U Main 19-22 lbs Cross 21-24 lbs
    AT800DE 4U Main 19-22 lbs Cross 21-24 lbs
    AT500 3U Main 20-23 lbs Cross 22-25 lbs
    AT300 3U Main 20-23 lbs Cross 22-25 lbs
    MP99 3U Main 17-20 lbs Cross 19-22 lbs
    MP88 4U Main 16-19 lbs Cross 18-21 lbs
    Last edited by Neil Nicholls; 03-10-2005 at 03:38 AM.

  8. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Richmond, BC; Hamilton, ON
    Posts
    552
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Nicholls
    From measurements on a strung racquet, I calculate that the mains are stretched by about 0.027mm per cross string. This is for 0.7mm diameter string.

    With 23 crosses this adds about 0.6mm to the mains.
    Centre mains are 24cm, or 240mm
    Stretched length becomes 240.6mm
    An increase of about 0.25% (maybe 0.5% for the side mains)
    Small enough to be ignored (in my opinion. 0.5% of 20lb = 0.1lb )

    So any increase in mains tension as a result of stringing the crosses may be mostly due to the frame changing shape during stringing.
    at first when i read this, it kinda made sense, but come to think of it, if you were to pull a rope with 200lb of strength in opposite directions as opposed to pulling the two ends with only 100lb of strength in opposite directions, the rope isn't going to stretch a whole lot more, because it is not very stretchy

    just my analogy.. dunno if it can apply to badminton strings

  9. #26
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Cannock, UK
    Posts
    2,908
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SWC_Ant
    just my analogy.. dunno if it can apply to badminton strings
    exactly.
    if your rope is elastic, it will stretch.

  10. #27
    Regular Member ants's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Malaysian Citizen of the World
    Posts
    13,157
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It all actually depends.. guess what.. 2 days ago i tried tensioning the other way round Main 28 Cross 26lbs.

  11. #28
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Richmond, BC; Hamilton, ON
    Posts
    552
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Nicholls
    exactly.
    if your rope is elastic, it will stretch.
    what i meant was i dont think badminton strings are THAT elastic, far enough that tension increase will be directly proportional to length increase, if you know what i mean... so even if the string is stretched for less than 1mm, 1lb of tension increase isn't impossible (im not saying that <1mm is going to give 1lb of extra tension, just saying its not impossible)
    Last edited by SWC_Ant; 03-31-2005 at 02:43 AM.

  12. #29
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Cannock, UK
    Posts
    2,908
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SWC_Ant
    far enough that tension increase will be directly proportional to length increase
    isn't that what elastic means?

    real example with BG66

    I took a length of BG66 and hung 24lb of weight on it and measured the increase in length.
    2570mm stretched to 2795mm

    so a 240mm centre main would stretch to 261mm under 24lb tension
    so how much extra tension do you think you'll get by stretching it another 0.6mm?

    <edit>
    umm, 0.5lb+
    bit less than 0.6mm using BG66 though.
    different strings would react differently though.
    The stiffer the string, the bigger the difference.
    So I would expect a smaller tension change with BG65 than BG66 because it is more stretchy
    Last edited by Neil Nicholls; 03-31-2005 at 03:06 AM.

  13. #30
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Richmond, BC; Hamilton, ON
    Posts
    552
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Nicholls
    isn't that what elastic means?

    real example with BG66

    I took a length of BG66 and hung 24lb of weight on it and measured the increase in length.
    2570mm stretched to 2795mm

    so a 240mm centre main would stretch to 261mm under 24lb tension
    so how much extra tension do you think you'll get by stretching it another 0.6mm?
    oh.. i didn't know string stetches that much under tension (im no stringer ) but thanks for all the measuring

    2570mm (0lb) => 2795mm (24lb), so 240mm (0lb) => 261mm (24lb), so each extra pound should increase the total length by 0.875mm, so 0.6mm would make the tension go up about 0.69 pound...

    also, the BG 66 is probably one of the more stretchy strings, considering its only 0.66mm thick. if say BG 65 stretches less, then 0.6mm can easily equate to 1lb

    edit: oh is BG 65 more stretchy? then im not sure.. maybe you should measure the BG 65 lengths for us too.. that would be great thx

  14. #31
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Cannock, UK
    Posts
    2,908
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    BG66 0.81%/kg
    BG70Pro 0.92%/kg
    BG65 1.17%/kg
    BG80 1.23%/kg
    BG68Ti 1.33%/kg

    the values are (change in length) / (original length) per Kilogram tension

    the 66 and 70pro where done quite a while ago, and I don't have any more lying around.
    The 65, 80 and 68Ti were done today

    It would be nice if someone else would have a go and see if they get anything similar.

  15. #32
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Richmond, BC; Hamilton, ON
    Posts
    552
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Nicholls
    BG66 0.81%/kg
    BG70Pro 0.92%/kg
    BG65 1.17%/kg
    BG80 1.23%/kg
    BG68Ti 1.33%/kg

    the values are (change in length) / (original length) per Kilogram tension

    the 66 and 70pro where done quite a while ago, and I don't have any more lying around.
    The 65, 80 and 68Ti were done today

    It would be nice if someone else would have a go and see if they get anything similar.
    wow thanks for measuring out all those strings!!
    i think it would be helpful if an experiment were conducted here at BC regarding string tension loss over say.. 1 month's time. i'll post about it (possibly in a new thread) tomorrow if im not busy
    meanwhile, anybody else able to try this measuring thing would be helpful

    cheers

  16. #33
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Cannock, UK
    Posts
    2,908
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Nicholls
    The 65, 80 and 68Ti were done today
    straight from the reel. no pre-stretching. stretched on a drop-weight machine.

  17. #34
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Richmond, BC; Hamilton, ON
    Posts
    552
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    http://www.badmintoncentral.com/foru...247#post229247

    as promised i hope my experiment makes sense tho

Page 2 of 22 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Non-isometric head. 2lbs difference main/cross necessary?
    By KinkySmasher in forum Badminton String
    Replies: 2
    : 07-07-2012, 06:56 AM
  2. 2lbs on cross
    By lalalala in forum Badminton String
    Replies: 2
    : 10-15-2010, 06:50 PM
  3. 2LBs Cross Failed
    By dreamzboy in forum Badminton Stringing Techniques & Tools
    Replies: 34
    : 12-05-2009, 04:56 PM
  4. crosses and mains?? 2lbs more
    By azn_123 in forum Badminton String
    Replies: 1
    : 11-12-2006, 10:47 AM
  5. 2lbs higher on cross with 4 knob string job
    By batrachian in forum Badminton Stringing Techniques & Tools
    Replies: 6
    : 10-28-2006, 06:34 AM

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
  •