@kwun I found a video about that true tension stringing machine. And it as like infinite point of support Look at that tension head!!! the difference with most lockout is most lockout is compression principle, the spring compress a certain amount and triggers a lever to activate the break. I belive this one is the spring that does the tentsionning as it pulls the string. I think. Very interesting machine. would love to have one just for the kick to have one. The stringWay ms200 has some similarities with that I think.
Wow. Thanks for posting that. I have been dreaming of building something like that for badminton for a while. It seems rather doable. And for badminton, it can be less extensive due to lower forces.
2 more observations. The rail fixed clamp is absolute bomb. There is no setback at all. Even the best Yonex regular fixed base with fixed clamp has some amount of setback. As mentioned, the string separator reduces friction while tensioning cross string, which will result in a more "true" tension. The device is like the stringweaver but used for a different purpose, not for weaving, but for tensioning. I imagine with these 2 factors alone, stringjob will come out feeling 1-2lbs tighter. Obviously the guy who came up with this gave some really innovative thoughts on his process. very nice.
The control pillar is also nice idea. Looks like it has built in cartridge bearings which is exactly the right thing to do.
Giving this more thoughts. There is high potential that this can be built at home. With the advancement in 3D printing, some of the side support can be printed with a suitable filament. PC or even PLA might suffice given the forces are spreadout around the racket. It will also allow more leeway in the design. The support bed/ring will still need to be machined from aluminium. Since it is flat, can be cut from a flat sheet using a wood template and a router. Obviously CNC would be nice.
Yes the clamp are a beast. Also there is badminton clamp. ho man the web site is not active anymore... it was there few years ago and the guy was still giving support and selling parts. He was not making money just to helping people. You know it pops out sometimes in craiglist. Once I've was on vacation in florida and almost bought it but someone was faster than me.
The guy was a NASA engineer. As avid tennis lover he put I guess a lots work and love into it. But some review of the stringing is a bit complicated because you can't just string the same tension for every string. There some math involved and there were no easy app to program before('90s). Also one guy at tennis warehouse said the stringbed is a little bit dead and he prefer jobs done with a prince neos 1000. You know sometimes technical prowess doesn't always mean desire result. But like you said, if would be really interesting to test a racket from that machine.
We can do something similar. Design it and open source the design. The side support can be designed and prototyped with 3d printing. I think 3d printed should be strong enough but once there is a 3d model, can be sent out to CNC a dozen copy in Aluminum in some Asia fab. The string clamps themselves is probably the most difficult part. The rail (linear rails), support bar (aluminum rod), and the body (3d printed) is alright. But the clamp body will require not only a precision design but also have to be done in metal which requires CNC machining.
absolutely agree on that. Having the "perfect" machine (whatever that means) doesn't always means better feel for the stringjob. over the past decades ppl have strung with very minimal machines and they managed to produce good results but working with/around what they have. However, having something close to "perfect" means there is less uncertainties (or external limiting factors) in the tensioning and can allow for more opportunities for different tensioning configurations.
Did you notice the clamp/rail is different from old machine that we are used to see. Like the old gamma, eagnas or the still running prince, most of the "anchor" or glide is on the base. In this machine the glide is like in the middle of the top of the base. I wonder what's the use. Also there's many clamp for this machine, if you notice the main clamp a full, no teeth. For maximum force. That guy who build that machine was really going all out. Too bad the website is down. otherwise we can know more. He even included the blue print of his tensionner in the website if I remember.
Yes. I did noticed the rails are hidden underneath the ring. Which makes sense given the ring is fixed so why not mount from there. Shorter clamp body means less flex. Arguably the rail also increase the ring's stiffness (can see the beefy bolts bolting it down) though it look like at least 1/2" aluminium plate is used so pretty stiff already. There is limited view on how the tensioner works so I am not sure how the exact mechanism is like.
I found a review that I've read a while ago: http://www.racquetbase.com/PDF/reviews/26.pdf Just for your curiosity
