If you're going to do two piece it is really easy using a starting clamp. Tis is going to raise a ruckus but what I would do is run in the two top crosses and hold the top cross with your starting clamp while tensioning the second. Tension and clamp all your crosses down the racket and tension and tie off the top cross last.
No real reason a ruckus should be raised. This is probably the least laborious method which will still end up just fine (will detail below).
Specifically I was wondering if I can use the short side mains to weave the first cross, pull tension and then clamp to the outside of a frame using a starting clamp (to be tied off later).
After this I would proceed to weave the 2nd, 3rd cross etc. with the long side mains clamping off as necessary before going back eventually to tie off the first cross.
To my inexperienced self this seems like a good way to go about it with floating clamps and w/ minimal tension loss. My question is, is this good stringing 'hygiene'. Is there a better way to go about this? Would I run into any problems (e.g. clamp being too close to the tie off spot on the first cross)? This way you also avoid having to use a floating clamp on one cross string with the mains as the counter-force (which seems like the way some folks somewhat wrongly go about it).
The racquet is a Dunlop Aerogel 4D100 if anyone was wondering.
This method is fine, and it's what I do on most all one piece frames that end at the top. IF you really do understand the theory behind this method, and you have sound reasoning for using it, by all means, go for it. If it's a brand new machine and a brand new stringer (as in you), I'd start out with two piece so you can understand the tension imbalance between a traditional one piece better (intuition). It sounds like you've thought about it, though, so go for it.
The one thing I'll point out is that your flying clamps have a fixed width/spacing between teeth. This is almost always problematic on the outermost crosses. The center of a frame tends to be denser than the outside on most frames. This isn't really avoidable anyways, but in terms of tension loss, it's going to feel a little exaggerated on the top cross. A sneaky trick you can use to make this feel a little less dramatic is to string the second cross with your short side, and then do a little loop from the first to the third with your long side. It's sneaky because it hides the tension loss from the end user, but puts it in a less "good" place. It's a hacky mask for a limited system (clamps). I wouldn't recommend depending on tricks like this in general, though.
Sometimes when people get rackets they tug on the outside mains. I find no problems explaining how the outside mains should be different but when one is looser than the other (like when you tie off the short side outside main) how do you explain it?
If you learn to tie knows well you can minimize drawback but you can't eliminate it not even when you over tension the outside main.
Yep. This is one of the main reasons why I string the top cross with the short side. It's an asinine way to judge a string job, but people/customers tend to do this, for whatever reason. While I can adequately explain this reason away, I never feel like my explanations are really taken to heart, so I try to avoid things like one main being looser than the rest.
Can you elaborate on this? I can't seem to picture/grasp it...
I always use this method when the mains end at the head (run the short side main across the top cross and tie off). My reasoning is that I rather tie off on 2 crosses on a 1 piece job vs a short side main and a cross.
Which part is confusing? The uneven tension? One side has a knot tied on the main, and there's extraneous string outside the frame which causes tension loss. This is normal, but unattractive if you're... shall we say... "detail oriented." If you're asking about the short length of frame for support, generally speaking there's a sharp bend at the top of a frame (holes spaced close together), and if/when this short length of frame is in between the last main and the top cross, the structural integrity of the frame (theoretically) is stressed more so than it needs to be.
With that said, though, with all due respect to Irvin, I think this issue is blown slightly out of proportion. I've only seen short frame length supports as problematic with extremely, extremely small amounts of frames over the entire frame population. Ultra light weight frames (with less physical graphite), as well as some Prince O3 type frames (with very small amounts of bumper guard to distribute the stress) are the only frames that I really think twice about. In a theoretical sense, of course, I have no problems with this point -- it's true, but not something I generally worry about.
Also, another question.
Could I start the way you mentioned in post 16, which is: "run in the two top crosses and hold the top cross with your starting clamp while tensioning the second" BUT while the 2nd cross is still under tension, use your flying clamps on the end away from the tension head inside the frame to clamp the 1st & 2nd strings together. Then retension the first cross, clamp it again, then tension the 2nd one, move flying clamp and proceed down the string bed.
This is kind of a hybrid of the method used to start the mains in the video I posted and what you wrote in Post #16 (double pulling). The (perceived) benefit of this is that you would set a tension in the flying clamp much closer to desired tension of the strings. The only drawback I can see is that you would be pulling the strings to full tension twice.
It's a waste of time. Irvin's method is actually completely fine. Here's why (elaborating on above):
Grommets, and sharp bends in strings actually will hold a dramatic tension differential with little to no slipping. If you've done any reading on proportional stringing, you'll find that there are often deltas of 10-20 lbs between one string and the next. With a loose "empirical" test (a not-very-scientific-sharpie-marker-method), there was no string movement to be found. We can abuse this knowledge with the starting clamp method as detailed above. Assume you use a starting clamp, pull two strings (a true "double pull"), and then clamp off with your flying clamp. In general, this is bad practice because there's some tension loss between the first and second string. The first (top cross) string will be at a lower tension than the second. The second cross should be at reference tension, however. The tensioner DID come to rest, so there is no string movement or tension loss from slippage/"equilibrium" (your system is pseudo-at-rest). When you come back up to tie your knot at the end, or even just a few strings down, you're re-pulling the topmost string, and it too will come back up to reference tension (barring a slight tension loss from releasing a clamp -- IF you re-tension as soon as your floater is free). If you re-tension at the end, provided no slippage occurred from when you released your floating clamp, both the top and second cross should be at reference, and there's no reason to fiddle with any bizarre/advanced methods.
My 2 cents.
