Alex Table Tennis - MyTableTennis.NET Homepage
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Blade Hardness & Flexibility
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Blade Hardness & Flexibility
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Imago View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 07/19/2009
Location: Sofia
Status: Offline
Points: 5897 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Imago Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06/27/2011 at 4:14am
Originally posted by TheRobot99 TheRobot99 wrote:

Originally posted by pnachtwey pnachtwey wrote:

This takes a lot of time and money to do right.  I think analyzing TT blades and rubbers and comparing the actual with modeled data would be a good master's or doctorate project.

In what major?  Unless you're thinking a team of people getting their doctorate.
 
You have to be Rishi (mystic seer) to predict the real behavior of a TT combo. Lot of nirvicara-samapatti needed, tons of yogaja-pratyaksa... just forget it.
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Imago View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 07/19/2009
Location: Sofia
Status: Offline
Points: 5897 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Imago Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06/27/2011 at 2:05pm

I was thinking of making it 3D
Back to Top
TheRobot99 View Drop Down
Silver Member
Silver Member
Avatar

Joined: 10/21/2010
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 915 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TheRobot99 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06/27/2011 at 3:03pm
Originally posted by fatt fatt wrote:




Fascinating thread...JRSdallas is the man today! (thanks for the link btw).
 
This thread gave me an idea. to increase the flex of a blade that is very stiff in the first place, would it make sense to have the core in one piece but all other plies in 2 pieces?
 
For all intermediate and outter plies, one piece would be the head all the way to the neck (or a little higher than that); the other would be the continuation of the ply from the neck (or a little higher than that) to the bottom of the handle.
 
Such a blade would have more flex wouldn't it?
 

 
I wonder if that is in any way similar to WSI technology from JOOLA.
 
Ross Leidy Custom, DHS Hurricane III Neos, Nittaku Nodias

Xiom Fuga, Globe 999 National 39, Nittaku Nodias

JOOLA Torre All+, DHS Hurricane II #19 Sponge, Galaxy Moon 38

PTTC VP - 2011-12
Back to Top
JRSDallas View Drop Down
Silver Member
Silver Member
Avatar

Joined: 09/03/2005
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 585 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JRSDallas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06/27/2011 at 10:21pm
Originally posted by fatt fatt wrote:

Fascinating thread...JRSdallas is the man today! (thanks for the link btw).
 
This thread gave me an idea. to increase the flex of a blade that is very stiff in the first place, would it make sense to have the core in one piece but all other plies in 2 pieces?
 
For all intermediate and outter plies, one piece would be the head all the way to the neck (or a little higher than that); the other would be the continuation of the ply from the neck (or a little higher than that) to the bottom of the handle.
 
Such a blade would have more flex wouldn't it?
 
 
Creating a break in the top plys at the neck of the blade would reduce the stiffness somewhat since you are losing the coupling of the top plys into the handle.  One of the Yasaka blades (I think) introduced small scroll saw cuts through the blade just above the neck to reduce the stiffness in this zone and thereby cause a more gradual change in system stiffness from the handle to the blade face.  These cuts undoubtedly caused widened distribution of the bending of the blade, a  decrease in overall stiffness, and an increase in dwell.    Cutting the top plys would have a similar but more abrupt bending stiffness re-distribution versus if the top plys were continuous from the bottom of the handle to the top tip of the blade. 


Edited by JRSDallas - 06/27/2011 at 10:22pm
Galaxy T1 89 gm

FH: HRT Huaruite Wujilong 2 - Dragon 2 II, Max, Black

Donic Acuda S2, Max, Red
Back to Top
TheRobot99 View Drop Down
Silver Member
Silver Member
Avatar

Joined: 10/21/2010
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 915 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TheRobot99 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06/27/2011 at 11:31pm
Originally posted by JRSDallas JRSDallas wrote:

I think this makes sense.   Tacky and grippy are surface friction effects at the top of the sheet that also effect the interaction with the ball and have to be accounted for.  
 
Example:  An incoming topspin ball impacts a vertical tacky surface of a racket.  The tacky surface stops the incoming ball's slip against the surface almost instantly.   The ball's rotational momentum acts on the non-slipping patch by trying to make it rotate with the ball which drives a tangential force into topsheet that tries to stretch the sheet.  The topsheet resists this attempt to stretch it with an equal and opposite tangential force that acts as a torque against the ball's center of mass that causes the balls center of mass to lift (i.e. the top spin of the ball makes it climb up the rubber).  The more strongly the topsheet resists the stretching, the larger the lifting torque back on the ball and the higher the observed throw on the rebound.   
 
Example:  A grippy topsheet does not as instantly stop the slipping between the ball and the topsheet surface.  During this period of slipping the tangential slipping force is still trying to stretch the topsheet but this force of stretching is less strong since there is some slipping.  This also means that the equal and opposite force from the topsheet onto the ball's surface is less which results in a lower upward torque on the ball's center of mass.  As a result, the ball still tries to climb the rubber but it does not climb it as stongly and so the rebound throw is lower.
 
Both of these scenarios do not account for how the topsheet may deform due to the balls forward motion into the topsheet causing the sheet to wrap more around the ball both alone and as an effect of the pips below the topsheet also contributing to the wrap. 
So given two rubbers with equal tackiness, one being "soft" and the other "hard" (combinations of topsheet and sponge harnesses) is there some point where the rubber is too hard or too soft to grab the ball well and react or generate spin (given the same stroke (block, loop, drive, etc))?


Edited by TheRobot99 - 06/27/2011 at 11:46pm
Ross Leidy Custom, DHS Hurricane III Neos, Nittaku Nodias

Xiom Fuga, Globe 999 National 39, Nittaku Nodias

JOOLA Torre All+, DHS Hurricane II #19 Sponge, Galaxy Moon 38

PTTC VP - 2011-12
Back to Top
bbkon View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member


Joined: 04/19/2005
Location: Afghanistan
Status: Offline
Points: 7260 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote bbkon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06/28/2011 at 1:38am
Originally posted by JRSDallas JRSDallas wrote:

I think this makes sense.   Tacky and grippy are surface friction effects at the top of the sheet that also effect the interaction with the ball and have to be accounted for.  
 
Example:  An incoming topspin ball impacts a vertical tacky surface of a racket.  The tacky surface stops the incoming ball's slip against the surface almost instantly.   The ball's rotational momentum acts on the non-slipping patch by trying to make it rotate with the ball which drives a tangential force into topsheet that tries to stretch the sheet.  The topsheet resists this attempt to stretch it with an equal and opposite tangential force that acts as a torque against the ball's center of mass that causes the balls center of mass to lift (i.e. the top spin of the ball makes it climb up the rubber).  The more strongly the topsheet resists the stretching, the larger the lifting torque back on the ball and the higher the observed throw on the rebound.   
 
Example:  A grippy topsheet does not as instantly stop the slipping between the ball and the topsheet surface.  During this period of slipping the tangential slipping force is still trying to stretch the topsheet but this force of stretching is less strong since there is some slipping.  This also means that the equal and opposite force from the topsheet onto the ball's surface is less which results in a lower upward torque on the ball's center of mass.  As a result, the ball still tries to climb the rubber but it does not climb it as stongly and so the rebound throw is lower.
 
Both of these scenarios do not account for how the topsheet may deform due to the balls forward motion into the topsheet causing the sheet to wrap more around the ball both alone and as an effect of the pips below the topsheet also contributing to the wrap. 


its a little bit overwhelming. so JRSDALLAS  how can i get powerful hits? ; soft sponge(short pips)+hard thick blade or hard sponge+flexy blade,  for flat hits(SP) what would be best: thin stiff blade, mid stiff thick blade....?

what would be the way to go?: faster stiffer blade +hard sponge or hard sponge+flexy blade..i  think  semi hard sponge with a stiff blade gives more flatter flight
Back to Top
pnachtwey View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 03/09/2010
Location: Vancouver, WA
Status: Offline
Points: 2035 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pnachtwey Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06/28/2011 at 2:25am
You get powerful hit with paddle speed and a paddle with a high COR.   How hard or soft the sponge is doesn't make that much difference within reason.   The key thing is how much energy that sponge returns to the ball.  The sponge with the lowest internal friction will be the fastest.  So now the next question should be what combination of wood and rubber results in a high COR?   I think JRSDallas is mostly right about having a higher frequency blade.    The rubber part I am not sure about except that the rubber should have low internal friction and be able to spring back to the initial shape quickly.

There can be relatively hard sponges that seem to not return any energy to the ball.
Back to Top
HowToPlayChineseLoop View Drop Down
Super Member
Super Member
Avatar

Joined: 02/06/2012
Location: 0
Status: Offline
Points: 266 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote HowToPlayChineseLoop Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03/06/2012 at 11:05pm
It depends on your style.


If you love chinese looping style : Ma Long, Qang Hao, Zang Jike. Use the flex blade + hard rubber.
Flex blade capture the ball, hard rubber generate the spin.


If you love europe looping style : Timo Boll, Saive, Waldner. Use the hard blade + soft rubber.
Hard blade generate speed, soft rubber captures the ball.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 3.187 seconds.

Become a Fan on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Web Wiz News
Forum Home | Go to the Forums | Forum Help | Disclaimer

MyTableTennis.NET is the trading name of Alex Table Tennis Ltd.

Copyright ©2003-2024 Alex Table Tennis Ltd. All rights reserved.