yeah, that's a good point. CoolDoo, you seem to be ignoring the fact that you can NEVER swing a 90g racquet as fast as a 120g racquet, the swing velocity will be so much less it counter's the weight advantage. for your table, it's taking into account you are swinging with the SAME FORCE, which is totally unrealistic. let's face it, if we can swing a 120g racquet at 98 miles per hour, HOW THE HELL can we then swing a lighter racquet at a LOWER speed??? you are also treating the impact velocity the same, at 100m/s which is totally unrealistic. i ask you, how can we swing a 90g racquet and a 120g racquet the same? if you think it's about the weight, play badders wit a tennis racquet and see how much power you get out of that huh? and why would you think too much power is bad? if you want a real life, World Champion example, ask Fu Haifeng why he doesn't play with a metal racquet. ask every pro player why they don't play with wooden racquets to get more power??
Exactly my point, CoolDoo6 uses only the logic he chooses so that he may "seem" correct in our eyes, but then he excludes many crutial factors that greatly determine the outcome.
More MOI also means more momentum (angular momentum), so a head heavy racket like the AT700 will have larger MOI than a light-headed racket of similar weight and allows the AT700 to smash harder. I'll try to explain the basics of momentum for everyone, not many people understand how angular momentum works. The total momentum of a racket is actually the angular momentum + linear momentum. so Total momentum = (MOI * angular vel) + (mass * linear vel), and this is conserved before and after you hit the shuttle. Therefore lowering the Moment Of Inertia will NOT simply increase your smash power, it's a lot more complicated than that. Therefore claims that a light-headed 120kg racket can smash harder than a heavy-headed 90kg racket is unrealistic to say the least.
Since it still isn't clear to you what racket power is, let me recap: ** When the shuttle is made to fly fast by a racket, the racket is considered powerful. The faster, the more powerful ** Now, what is the minimum speed of shuttle after an imapct with the racket, assuming no mis-hitting ? The shuttle must fly at least a little bit faster than the racket head, or the shuttle would never leave the racket. In reality the shuttle would fly at the racket head speed plus X. Where X is the additional velocity producted by the effects of string and racket flex. Lets keep things simple and assume we have horrible stiffness in string and flex and neither produce any repulsion at all thereby giving X=0. With this racket, the only determining factor for power is how fast the racket head is after shuttle impact. From this we can deduce the general rule: ** Faster the racket head speed is after impacting the shuttle, the more powerful the racket is. ** It can be accepted that a heavy low-MOI racket would have greater angular velocity than a high MOI racket from the same torque. It can also be accepted that a heavy racket would have lower linear velocity from the same force. Because the racket motion is disproportionate in its angular travel compared to it's linear travel (compare how much disance the racket head covers to the distance covered by the racket handle), the benefit of greater angular velocity, by virtual of it being used more often, out-weights the drawbacks of lower linear velocity. The result is a surplus of overall racket velocity from the heavy low MOI racket. This produces a faster racket head speed after an impact.
I must say I've been following this thread for the chuckle factor because so many people get drawn in by the off the wall comments but there are a few things that I would like to say. Before I started playing badminton I was a fairly good squash player and one night I stopped by the badminton courts after playing squash and started hitting it with some friends who were doing drills. When I got the timing right, say once in 6 tries, the smash with a squash raquet was amazing. Pretty much unreturnable. The drawback though is that trying to drive was useless and there was no touch. I also couldn't have lasted a game with the weight. The game of badminton is not just about power. The gain by a top player using a heavier raquet would be more than offset by the reduced feel and the slower reaction on defense. I believe a company could make a raquet that would be a pure smash weapon but for the one time in ten you would be able to time it right and get to use the available power it would feel good for one point but you would be shaking hands early. Like anything it's about balance and I liken this disussion to long drive competitions in golf where the swings and equipment are geared towards one thing. I personally have played with a guy who has won world chamionships in long drive and playing 18 holes I can take him. When he competes in long drive he uses a club that is longer in length, different swingweight, and the head is made just for that one swing, one time on the contact point on the one spot on the face that will launch it 400 yards. Miss that spot and it's 350 towards the sidelines. He doesn't use his long drive driver to play with. Too many shots in the trees. If you had a fastest smash competition then you could find that one beast of a raquet to do that with. Until then you will have to return the other guys smash, drops, and clears. The game is so fast now compared to 15 years ago you couldn't compete with a smash only raquet. Perhaps I'll get a proper radar gun next fall and see if we can put up a prize for the hardest smash here in Calgary. Anybody interested?
what do you suggest me look for in your table? your table and my points can't be both true. besides, your table displays numbers of your calculation, not of your measurements. if they were indeed numbers from measurements, then reading glasses are definitely necessary for me because i wouldn't believe my eyes. i might even need someone else read them for me. that's sarcastic, not really a good sense of humour. firstly Mr Newton didn't play badminton and now reading glasses. Neither was necessary in the discussion. i can safely tell you your numbers are way off, as a result of the model your calculation was based on. i can give you at least 5 more parameters which one cannot afford to miss in one's model for a serious calculation like you were attempting to do.
problem is, can you swing the heavier racquet faster or just as fast as a lighter racquet? and keep it up for the whole game
i wasn't offended... i quit this convo because it is pointless. all the stats in here are focused on "constants" in rl, nothing is constant. ideal case doesn't apply... newton's law only applies so far, couple by many other LAWS AND EQUATIONS (some of what i do not know and some that i do). using statics, you can calculate you "ideal case" then using dynamics, you can pretty much calculate the whole motion. however... that would probably require a couple pieces of paper of calculation (front and back of the paper) if you really want to know... go take some courses in that field and find out. already gave you the name of the subject. STATICS AND DYNAMICS. goodluck... thread should be pretty much considered close unless you have done those calculations in which case, i would be really interested if you can post up pictures of them =) CHEERS! =D
faster =/= good higher MOI could be 'good' in a different way (nót faster, but different) eitherway..hwo do you 'reduce' MOI by adding mass...no matter where you add it you're increasing it...perhaps a lot, perhaps just marginally..but always increasing..
I already know you'll say you're adding the weight to the handle... sorry for baiting.. But then..why not wear a sweatband? or maybe a wrist-weight..that'll surely boost the momentum!
I will tell you something unpredicted by you: perhaps my points are still not clear enough for you. less MOI, more accerlation. why is more accerlation necessarily good?
Played again with my heavy racket. When I wasn't warmed up, the racket felt heavy. But the heavy feel went away as soon as I was into a game. The power remained consistently good at the end of the night as I got more and more tired from all the running around. Although the racket produced no tire feel for my arm at all. Once again, the defense was top notch. The clearance power was excellent and under control. Very few shots were overshooting the base line. A few more sessions of observation and the racket could become my best mod yet. The BP was shifted by 5mm to 236 achieving the lowest MOI ever, and the highest racket head acceleration ever. The 125g racket weight is at or very close to my upper limit of tollerance. I don't see this going any higher in the foreseeable future.
that you have found the right place doesn't necessarily mean your map you used is not wrong. besides, you claim you have found the right place, (so your map is correct). but have you really? how wonderful you can smash and defend with your new MOI-lowered-by-adding-weight-at-the-grip racket is very subjective. LD or Taufik can't care less about momentum or MOI. they can find the right racket, string and tension without knowing all these junk. we *are* talking about junk, but there are still true junk and false junk.
