Problem with weaving ahead...

[bartol]

...hard polys.

Whenever I try to weave one ahead the string that is still not tensioned firms into the shape of the hard weave while weaving one ahead. So when I'm done with the weaving of the 'one ahead' string and go back to tension the immediate next string it needs to almost be yanked out of its position.

Am I doing something wrong or is it common to not weave one ahead with hard polys?

 

[loosegroove]

I'm a little confused. Why would the string need to be yanked out of its position? After you're done weaving the one ahead, you should only need to pull tension on the previous string.

 

[bartol]

I'm a little confused. Why would the string need to be yanked out of its position? After you're done weaving the one ahead, you should only need to pull tension on the previous string.

Yanking is needed because it took the shape of the hard weave. It's a bit difficult to explain better than that. Basically you have the last tensioned and clamped string (X). You have one that is not tensioned yet and is in the shape of a hard weave (X+1) and then there's the one ahead (X+2). When I'm done with weaving X+2 I go back to X+1 and try to tension it but it requires a lot of force to move it out of the position it's in. It's not exactly a yanking as it should obviously be avoided but it is quite a bit more difficult to get that string move again to get rid of the slack that is left (for example the loop between X and X+1 that was used to tension X).

 

[loosegroove]

...but it is quite a bit more difficult to get that string move again to get rid of the slack that is left (for example the loop between X and X+1 that was used to tension X).

I guess that's my point. There shouldn't really be any slack or a loop remaining between X and X+1.

You pull tension on X, while X+1 is already weaved. Then you fan and hand pull X+1 to get rid of the slack and loop. Then you weave one ahead on X+2. So when you go back to pull tension on X+1, it's all set to go.

 

[bartol]

I guess that's my point. There shouldn't really be any slack or a loop remaining between X and X+1.

You pull tension on X, while X+1 is already weaved. Then you hand pull and fan X+1 to get rid of the slack and loop. Then you weave one ahead on X+2. So when you go back to pull tension on X+1, it's all set to go.

Hmm. In retrospect this sounds painfully simple. I shall try this the next time I'm stringing. So now I've got to set to the courts to tear some strings now!

But in theory, just because I use the tensioner and don't feel the rigidity in X+1 it's still there, isn't it, slack or no slack. Also, when weaving X+2 where to keep X+1? Should I tuck it up to X(tensioned) to leave the max amount of space for weaving X+2 or should I leave it in a fairly big loop downward towards the throat to leave it as loose as possible? This is especially a though dilemma the closer I get towards the throat and have to be smart with the space that is left.

 

[loosegroove]

!
But in theory, just because I use the tensioner and don't feel the rigidity in X+1 it's still there, isn't it, slack or no slack. Also, when weaving X+2 where to keep X+1? Should I tuck it up to X(tensioned) to leave the max amount of space for weaving X+2 or should I leave it in a fairly big loop downward towards the throat to leave it as loose as possible? This is especially a though dilemma the closer I get towards the throat and have to be smart with the space that is left.

True, that "rigidity" is essentially still present. But that is simply the nature of having the crosses weaved opposite of the adjacent cross, and not a product of stringing one ahead. The whole reason for stringing one ahead is so you don't encounter this "rigidity" while weaving.

If you've conceptualized the process, then your second question should be answered. Since you're hand pulling X+1 to remove any loop and slack before weaving X+2, why would it be left in a big loose loop towards the throat? Situate X+1 so it's ready to have tension pulled with no further finagling. Your query leads to two other questions:
1) Are you weaving at an angle, such that your going 45 degrees to the mains rather than perpendicular/straight across?
2) Do you fan out the string as you're pulling a cross through to minimize friction?

And lastly, yes, the last few crosses are a little more difficult, and you may have to make some adjustments.

 

[jim e]

I try to keep the cross string to be tensioned pushed next to the last tensioned cross string.
This way since the string once tensioned has tendency to pull down towards the throat, (assuming you are stringing crosses top down) ,it will pull relatively straight, and keep it straight as it is tensioned. Use fingers keeping string straight while being pulled.
Very important that it is kept straight as it is tensioned, as if it is left with a curve and straightened later there will be loss of tension depending on size of curvature.
If each string has a different curvature there will be an inconsistent loss of tension.
Stringers strive for consistency.

 

[bartol]

True, that "rigidity" is essentially still present. But that is simply the nature of having the crosses weaved opposite of the adjacent cross, and not a product of stringing one ahead. The whole reason for stringing one ahead is so you don't encounter this "rigidity" while weaving.

If you've conceptualized the process, then your second question should be answered. Since you're hand pulling X+1 to remove any loop and slack before weaving X+2, why would it be left in a big loose loop towards the throat? Situate X+1 so it's ready to have tension pulled with no further finagling. Your query leads to two other questions:
1) Are you weaving at an angle, such that your going 45 degrees to the mains rather than perpendicular/straight across?
2) Do you fan out the string as you're pulling a cross through to minimize friction?

And lastly, yes, the last few crosses are a little more difficult, and you may have to make some adjustments.

IME the rigidity comes with time and weaving one ahead. When I'm done weaving X+1 and don't do X+2, it is still very easy to move X+1. If I wait 10sec its still easy. However if I weave X+2 during that 10sec the rigidity appears. Based on all of this I can only assume that its the method and not the time that makes X+1 stiffen up. If you think about it when only X and X+1 are done a main that is pushed up by X is then pulled done (albeit with much less force) by X+1. If then comes X+2 it will then push it back up and I suspect it's that horizontal "S" that makes the rigidity that is not there with only X and X+1 since the main only does a shallow "U". Does this make sense? And this is why I ask should I keep X+1 in as big of a smiley face as possible to make it less "wavy" or at least shallower waves.

I try to keep the cross string to be tensioned pushed next to the last tensioned cross string.
This way since the string once tensioned has tendency to pull down towards the throat, (assuming you are stringing crosses top down) ,it will pull relatively straight, and keep it straight as it is tensioned. Use fingers keeping string straight while being pulled.
Very important that it is kept straight as it is tensioned, as if it is left with a curve and straightened later there will be loss of tension depending on size of curvature.
If each string has a different curvature there will be an inconsistent loss of tension.
Stringers strive for consistency.

I read this on this board some time ago and this is why I asked if I should tuck the string up to the last tensioned one. However this seems to put more stress on X+1 as the "waves" it makes are closer together and the rigidity sets in harder.

oh, BTW yes I am pull weaving in an angle (a steep "V" pattern really) and always pull the string through while fanning it and I also take my time pulling through. I am pulling it much slower than pros or youtube videos because I care more I guess. LOL Might be just a waste of time though. And I'm keeping it straight while tensioning as per a Youlitle video, and try to tension it as slowly and steadily as possible.

 

[loosegroove]

I understand what you're saying. However, I'm not sure how leaving X+1 in a big smile is going to help, as eventually X+1 is going to have to be pulled taut, and maybe better to do it when there isn't the opposing force/friction from X+2. Seems like you'd be exacerbating the problem. Not to mention you'd also be giving yourself limited area to work with for weaving X+2.

If anything, would make more sense to leave X+2 in a big smiley face. But I really don't believe that's necessary, and you're probably over thinking things. If you don't feel like you're getting enough tension on your crosses due to friction, just up the tension a few lbs.

 

[canta_Brian]

I have never encountered a string that doesn't pull to straight under 50lbs of tension. If there is a slight curve a continuous pull machine will pick this up as you straighten the string prior to clamping.

I can't think what effect the x2 string could have in x1 as you thread it. It is under the high mains and over the low so has very little friction when you pull the length of string through.

 

[Irvin]

I understand what you're saying. However, I'm not sure how leaving X+1 in a big smile is going to help, as eventually X+1 is going to have to be pulled taut

I think it helps a lot to leave a big smile on the string you’re tensioning. To begin with is the string you’re tensioning is straight there is greater friction between the mains and crosses. If the string you’re tensioning is straight you’re alway pulling the string straight cross the mains and you may be growing the mains as you pull. If the string being tensioned is curved it has less friction and the cross tends to slide over the mains in different points as it’s tensioned causing no friction burn.

 

[loosegroove]

I think it helps a lot to leave a big smile on the string you’re tensioning. To begin with is the string you’re tensioning is straight there is greater friction between the mains and crosses. If the string you’re tensioning is straight you’re alway pulling the string straight cross the mains and you may be growing the mains as you pull. If the string being tensioned is curved it has less friction and the cross tends to slide over the mains in different points as it’s tensioned causing no friction burn.

So you're telling me that you leave a big smile in a cross string, while weaving the next cross? I don't think so. I'm not sure you've fully read the context of my comments.

 

[Irvin]

So you're telling me that you leave a big smile in a cross string, while weaving the next cross? I don't think so. I'm not sure you've fully read the context of my comments.

I have been leaving a big smile in my cross string as I Tension them, yes that’s exactly what I’m saying. As the string straighten I pull up on the cross to get it pretty much straight right about the time it reaches reference tension, then I clamp it off. I then straighten the presides cross if it needs straightening and go on to finish pulling through the next cross. But I pull that string loosely so it has about a 2” smile. I weave one ahead and tension that string with a 2” smile.

EDIT: I realize this is completely different from the ‘conventual’ way of stringing but it is now how I Tension crosses.

EDIT: @loosegroove what do you think may be an issue stringing that way?

 

[jwocky]

@Irvin
That then means there would be an optimal curvature for a smile (for each cross location based on string pattern and string characteristics and the reference tension used) to minimize installation stress and to achieve some optimal SBS in addition to all the other factors (stringer, machine, time before clamping, etc) that already generate much discussion.

Will a few continue to claim that a 15 minute product then yields the same SBS quality and play ability as a 30 minute product that factors in the "optimal smile" at each cross location?

Typed with a 2" smile as I go to play table tennis!

 

[loosegroove]

@Irvin, I don't think there's an issue stringing that way. The way I string, there is a small "smile" left in the string when I weave the one cross ahead, as I fan and hand pull the slack out, but don't pull it up against the previous cross as @jim e does. But I guess my point is, what does it matter if a majority of the curve is being pulled via hand, rather than by the tensioner as you propose.

And it sounded to me like @bartol was talking about leaving a huge smile, which I thought could be an impediment while weaving. And if his theory were to hold true, was noting it would be better to pull out the slack before weaving the cross ahead.

 

[Irvin]

what does it matter if a majority of the curve is being pulled via hand, rather than by the tensioner as you propose.

On a Star 5 the pulling speed varies dependent on the stiffness of the string. When the string you’re pulling seems easier to pull it makes a noticeable difference in the speed it takes to pull the string. Just something I’m trying and it seem s to be working well.

 

[Irvin]

@Irvin
That then means there would be an optimal curvature for a smile (for each cross location based on string pattern and string characteristics and the reference tension used) to minimize installation stress and to achieve some optimal SBS in addition to all the other factors (stringer, machine, time before clamping, etc) that already generate much discussion.

Will a few continue to claim that a 15 minute product then yields the same SBS quality and play ability as a 30 minute product that factors in the "optimal smile" at each cross location?

Typed with a 2" smile as I go to play table tennis!

Not sure I understand what your saying. The string starts out with a smile when I Tension it but I always straighten the previously tensioned string after I clamp. When I’m finished string the racket the strings require very little work.

 

[Rabbit]

One issue is that you lose tension on the crosses if you leave a bow in them. The string should be as straight as possible while tension is pulled on it to be as close to tension as possible.

 

[Irvin]

@loosegroove I was stringing some Champions Choice this morning and noticed some I had forgotten before. When you weave one ahead the benefit you get is you're going over low smains and under high mains when you weave the crosses. Gut Mains are easily deflected while poly crosses tend to stay straight. If you pull the poly string straight it bends the high gut mains down and the low gut mains up, so you loose the benefit of going over low string and under the high ones. While I tension a string i pull that string I'm tensioning up right near the end of the pull so the tenisioned string is always moving and not burning into the mains in one spot. That may be difficult with a LO or DW machine, but still doable. After I clamp I go up and make sure the previous cross(es) are perfectly straight.

EDIT: When you're up to your neck in alligators it is difficult to remember you came to drain the swamp. If y;ou have a stiff cross string that tends not to bend easily you're almost negating the benefit of weaving ahead. It's like weaving 5 or 6 ahead. You stiffen up the main strings even more and they close to being straight.

 

[bartol]

and you're probably over thinking things

I did agree with this sentiment so set out experimenting (and playing a lot) in the past several days during which I've come to the conclusion that weaving ahead hard poly puts unnecessary stress on the strings as evidenced by the stiffening of it.

I've tried all the suggestions in this thread and concluded that leaving a smile won't mitigate the issue nor the size (or existence) of the loops. The problem arises in the outer mains where you cannot significantly alter the distance between the crosses and the opposing forces of X, X+1 and X+2 will cause X+1 to stiffen up as it is the one getting caught in between two up (or down) forces. There simply isn't enough space for the waving of the main. Also even if there is no loop left there is still a significant slack in the cross that the tensioning mechanism will have to get rid of by first moving the string out of the rigid state and then continue with the tensioning.

I tried several brands and gauges of hard polys with playtests and found that longevity of both tension and the actual lifespan of the string is noticeably longer when not weaving ahead.

As a side note: if you set the cross perfectly in line and then start the tensioning on it while keeping it straight you are essentially doing what you're trying to avoid by fanning it when pulling through, isn't it? So it's better for the string to start in a smile and while tensioning continuously pushing it up towards the straight so there's minimal movement across the same spot on the mains.