Results 1 to 10 of 10
11-24-2002, 11:12 PM #1
A proper study between nylon and feather shuttles
Some time ago there was this informative discussion regarding the differences between a nylon and feather shuttles between several of you (cooler, gregr, cheung and mag come to mind). Several good ideas were presented and I would like to open that discussion here again.
The reason behind this is simple: I'm a Masters of Engineering student in the Mechanincal Engineering Sch in Cornell University and my masters project here will focus on the differences between these two types of shuttles. My professor has told me that as far as he knows there has been a lot of speculation and postulations but no real study has been published. What we have at our disposal are high speed cameras and equipment to measure properties of flight and conduct dynamic simulations. I will be working with 2 of my friends who are undergrads here too.
I intend to study several of the phenomenon listed in the posts, eg the deformation of the shuttles upon contact with a racquet, the variation in trajectories and flight paths, the differences of spins of the shuttles in flight etc.
What I'm hoping to get from the more experienced players here are ideas and opinions on what the differences are. Anything goes so please feel free to voice out ANYTHING at all. If they are testable, I will definitely try to study them in greater detail.
And if anyone would care to share their contacts to people I could speak/email to at Yonex, Charlton etc, I'd be glad to contact them to compare whatever results I have with theirs.
It should be fun =)
11-25-2002, 12:38 AM #2
Hi james... we get credit if you publish your paper right
dont forget to post your results when you're done!
11-25-2002, 02:41 AM #3
I must say that Iīm both surprised and dissapointed that nylonshuttles hasnīt been better for the last ten years. Nothing has happened to improve the synthetic birds, why?
15 years ago I used Hatachi nylon shuttles and they where much more like a real feather shuttle than any Yonex Mavis crap is today.
Nothing compares to feathers, but why canīt anyone improve the synthetic and more durable and cheap alternative? Can money have something to do with it...?
11-25-2002, 03:05 AM #4
James, i would love to read what you have published.
one of the factors that was advertised by some manufacturers is the tumbling characteristics. esp after a birdie contact the string, it has to turn around 180deg and go the other way. the way and rate it turns around is one of the factor to consider.
and i would love to see the deformation sequence of a birdie upon impact.
as i said, it will be very interesting to read the paper, look forward to it!
11-25-2002, 03:12 AM #5
If you go on with your tests, do not forget that some feather shuttles are pretty fast, so the top of the feather should be bend.
You can bend 1 on 4 feathers, 1 on 2 or all feathers, depends on the speed.
Maybe it is something you already know, maybe it is interested...
Good luck on your project!
11-25-2002, 09:57 AM #6
In terms of flight speed characteristics, I feel that compared to
feather shuttles, nylon ones have a more even speed and path,
i.e feather loses velocity quicker to a point when it may suddenly
start to drop steeply whereas the path of nylon seems closer
to parabolic. I'm also interested in what the initial speed of each
compares, i.e. on leaving the racquet face, and the cumulative
effect of feather-fraying on the flight pattern of the shuttle and
behaviour the fraying causes on contact with the racquet strings.
Following on from that, how do strings of different gauge and
tension, plus rigidity/stiffness of the frame influence the flight
of the shuttle? It is my feeling that feather shuttles are more
suitable for high-tensioned strings. In addition, it seems that
putting spin on the shuttle seems more effective in making a
feather one drop more steeply (closer to the net).
Looking forward to your results!
12-07-2002, 03:45 AM #7
I forgot respond to this thread. I think this study is very interesting to us badminton fanatics. I personally play both plastic and feather shuttle. Most people view feather as superior to plastic shuttles but to me the two shuttles are just different standard of plays, both have their good and bad features.
If you gonna measure the flight profile of feather vs plastic, please use Yonex mavis 300 or 350 as they are most used plastic shuttle where as feather shuttlers uses many many brand of feather shuttles. Better to stick with one brand maker of shuttles to reduce unknown variables. Ideally, the shuttles should have a constant impact velocity so a machine driven racquet would be ideal, just like a machine used to swing a golf club to keep the equipment variables are constant as possible. If possible, try to measure shutte velocity at various points and just 3 points in previous test (impact point, net, and ground velocities). For the velocity profile, are u planning to use empirical expression or equations derived from first principles? The latter would be very difficult but not impossible but u would need a NASA budget to complete it. Do u have access to a wind tunnel? Your high speed camera, what kind and how accurate is it?
Last edited by cooler; 12-07-2002 at 03:48 AM.
12-08-2002, 04:41 PM #8
since James hasn't responded back at all, i'm guessing he probably picked something easier or more presteigious to do his research on. Given the length of most Masters programs, he's probably half-near graduation by January. And in any case, it's a lot easier to get grants with more traditional research topics.
12-08-2002, 09:22 PM #9
Why Nylon ?., I was like many of you who would like to see the use of nylon for the shake of saving cost. But twenty years past since my last played with nylon and technology and science advance in the last few years, my thought has change.
Research put into producing genetically lasting goose's feathers would be more viable and much enviromentally friendly considering that nylon is not biodigradable.
Or perhaps much more simple than we think, feed the goose with diet that can strengthen their feathers ?, steroid ?.
12-08-2002, 10:23 PM #10
there are biodegradable plastic out there, long time ago, and yes, will be still cheaper than bioengineering a stronger feather from geese/ducks. In term of environmental friendlyness, plastic is way more better than feather.
1. one plastic can last 1/2 dozen MD games, where i would need 12 to 20 feather shuttles
2. plastic can be recycled, feather can't (not talking about the corks)
3. one to 4 feather per goose/duck, So one feather shuttle required 4 to 16 geese/ducks. Do you how much a goose / duck eats and deficates in a day?
4. Do you know how much heat and chemical are use to wash and bleach the feathers?
5. Unless someone is sweeping the floor, feather bits on the floor can be hazardous during game play.
6. Feather bits and dusts can get into the eyes (ex. sigit )
7. etc etc etc
By Stinge in forum ShuttlecockReplies: 3: 10-12-2008, 12:51 AM
By Stinge in forum ShuttlecockReplies: 0: 10-09-2008, 02:35 AM
By Taijis in forum ShuttlecockReplies: 283: 07-25-2008, 03:55 PM
By SystemicAnomaly in forum ShuttlecockReplies: 36: 07-22-2008, 12:47 AM
By bigredlemon in forum ShuttlecockReplies: 6: 04-04-2003, 12:36 AM