Using Cross Stringing Tool

[grhcan99]

Let's say I use the Stringweaver tool. So I lift the mains, thread the string through and before releasing the mains I tension the cross. I do this for all the crosses. If this is possible, what will this do to the final stringbed DT? I'm thinking it will tighten it up a bit compared to pulling the crosses normally, wouldn't it? Wouldn't it also mean that crosses are pulled at the correct tension? And if so isn't this the goal?

 

[Irvin]

Because there is less resistance between the DT it appears should be higher. Having the crosses at a higher tension may or may not be what you want. I remember looking at the stringing for the USO and the crosses were never strung higher than the mains unless the mains were poly and the crosses were gut. OTOH crosses were very often strung lower than the mains when one string was uses poly was in the crosses.

 

[esgee48]

You should use RT or a RDC to check the DT and determine the answer yourself. I strongly suspect that the overall DT of the bed will be higher than what you would normally want. But the answer would also be gauge dependent as well as selected ref tension. So let's assume a simple 16 Ga SG case.

When crosses are tensioned, they have to fight against string friction from the mains AND the tension in the mains that want to keep the mains straight. You can remove a lot of string friction by moving the cross as it is tensioned. You cannot affect the issue created by the tension in the mains. They help your crosses achieve ref tension by pushing back.

By raising the mains out of the way, the crosses will be tensioned at ref tension without interference from string friction AND tension in mains. But when the tool is removed, the mains will have to come back to equilibrium by pushing the tension in the crosses higher or by increasing the tension within themselves. Each time you use the tool, it will increase the tension in the strings as the artificial displacement is removed.

You can argue that the tension difference is not significant since in both cases, the mains have to reestablish equilibrium. I would not be able to refute that. Only way to really know is to compare the DT or ref tension of the string bed in both cases.

 

[grhcan99]

You guys are right. I'll leave things as they are It looks fun to try but nah. I have better things to do. Appreciate the input.

 

[Irvin]

You guys are right. I'll leave things as they are It looks fun to try but nah. I have better things to do. Appreciate the input.

If you want to see what higher tension on the cross would feel like without buying a stringweaver. Try holding a constant tension on each cross for 30 seconds before clamping or just increase you tension. You don’t need another tool to get the tension up.

 

[Jerry Seinfeld]

I have used and am testing/measuring this tool. I am finding when tensioning with channel open, the overall tension increases by approximately 3% - 5%. This result surprised me as I was convinced it would be significantly higher. However, I only did this to test. I prefer to use the tool with my one ahead stringing method. Using it this way, I flip the lever before tensioning so the channel is reversed and not wide open when pulling tension. This increases friction and the overall tension is then no different than when stringing without the device. So far I am enjoying the device and am finding it compatible with my style of stringing while producing accurate and consistent results. I have moved from testing and using on personal frames to now using on customers frames.

 

[OccasionalStringer]

I have used and am testing/measuring this tool. I am finding when tensioning with channel open, the overall tension increases by approximately 3% - 5%. This result surprised me as I was convinced it would be significantly higher. However, I only did this to test. I prefer to use the tool with my one ahead stringing method. Using it this way, I flip the lever before tensioning so the channel is reversed and not wide open when pulling tension. This increases friction and the overall tension is then no different than when stringing without the device. So far I am enjoying the device and am finding it compatible with my style of stringing while producing accurate and consistent results. I have moved from testing and using on personal frames to now using on customers frames.

Did you check the frame width ?

Pulling the crosses when the tool is active may also result in narrower frame !

 

[Irvin]

Did you check the frame width ?

Pulling the crosses when the tool is active may also result in narrower frame !

Pulling the mains or crosses at any tension could result in a distorted frame. When you change the method you use to pull tension on the mains or crosses you may have to adjust the tension on one or the other to counteract the method you use.

 

[Jerry Seinfeld]

Strung two Head YouTek Radicals this past Wednesday. One regular method, no tool. One using the tool with open channels for tensioning. I measured the frames and there was zero distortion. I did have distortion on a demo frame, but the RA on that frame was only 40...yes 40...it was a prototype frame we were testing for a racquet company who often asks us to test and demo unreleased products for them. Other than that specific instance, we have not noted any frame distortion and we have been measuring frames as part of our review process.

 

[grhcan99]

If you want to see what higher tension on the cross would feel like without buying a stringweaver. Try holding a constant tension on each cross for 30 seconds before clamping or just increase you tension. You don’t need another tool to get the tension up.

I agree. But no the thought only came up because I was considering getting the tool just out of curiosity and apart from being helpful with the Weiss Canon Ultra Cable on the crosses I was thinking of other ways to do with it to justify buying the three sizes

 

[grhcan99]

Strung two Head YouTek Radicals this past Wednesday. One regular method, no tool. One using the tool with open channels for tensioning. I measured the frames and there was zero distortion. I did have distortion on a demo frame, but the RA on that frame was only 40...yes 40...it was a prototype frame we were testing for a racquet company who often asks us to test and demo unreleased products for them. Other than that specific instance, we have not noted any frame distortion and we have been measuring frames as part of our review process.

So apart from the absence of distortion how did the DTs compare?

 

[Jerry Seinfeld]

We do not use DT, because frequency measurements have a set of issues that make them something we find not so useful, but that is another story for another day. The RDC stringbed stiffness for the Radical strung using normal method was 65. The applied set tension was 62 on both frames. The RDC stringbed stiffness of the second frame, the one strung with tool and tensioned with opened channels was 68. Using the Stringmeter I was getting a reading of 46 - 48 on crosses using normal method and was getting a reading of 48 - 50 on the crosses of the frame strung with the tool and open channels. When we string with the tool and do not use open channels we are either the same or within 1 pt on the RDC stringbed stiffness scale.

 

[OccasionalStringer]

Pulling the mains or crosses at any tension could result in a distorted frame. When you change the method you use to pull tension on the mains or crosses you may have to adjust the tension on one or the other to counteract the method you use.

It is obvious the pulling crosses too hard makes a narrower frame. If you pull mains at 20 kilos and crosses at 40 kg you either brake the frame or quite likely have narrower frame

My point or course was that if you use cross tension that does not normally change frame width (very much) then pulling the crosses with the tool active using the same tension may lead to decreased width of the frame and also tighter stringbed at the same time.

To my understanding the point of the discussion here was what happens if you pull crosses the with the tool at active position using your normal tensions

 

[grhcan99]

We do not use DT, because frequency measurements have a set of issues that make them something we find not so useful, but that is another story for another day. The RDC stringbed stiffness for the Radical strung using normal method was 65. The applied set tension was 62 on both frames. The RDC stringbed stiffness of the second frame, the one strung with tool and tensioned with opened channels was 68. Using the Stringmeter I was getting a reading of 46 - 48 on crosses using normal method and was getting a reading of 48 - 50 on the crosses of the frame strung with the tool and open channels. When we string with the tool and do not use open channels we are either the same or within 1 pt on the RDC stringbed stiffness scale.

Interesting. So the net result is almost the same. No distortions. What about times? Did using the tool take longer or did it save time?

 

[Jerry Seinfeld]

Times are similar. For us, it probably adds a couple of minutes...definitely not more than 5. The main reason we use it is because it makes stringing sharp shaped polys less harsh on fingertips and we also like it on sticky multis as it reduces the friction and we can pull through a little faster. With sticky multis, stringing time may be slightly faster, but again, nothing significant.

 

[grhcan99]

Times are similar. For us, it probably adds a couple of minutes...definitely not more than 5. The main reason we use it is because it makes stringing sharp shaped polys less harsh on fingertips and we also like it on sticky multis as it reduces the friction and we can pull through a little faster. With sticky multis, stringing time may be slightly faster, but again, nothing significant.

Good to know, thanks. Your feedback has been very helpful.

 

[Booger]

How is it possible that this tool isn't stretching the mains out when you separate them like that 18+ times? Seems like this would be an issue with stiff poly where you want to preserve elasticity as much as possible.

 

[Irvin]

How is it possible that this tool isn't stretching the mains out when you separate them like that 18+ times? Seems like this would be an issue with stiff poly where you want to preserve elasticity as much as possible.

Using the tool stretches the mains just like tensioning the crosses stretches the mains. But even worse hitting a tennis ball hard that is coming at you fast stretches the mains. So I guess if you don’t want your stiff poly getting stretched out you should never hit the ball to preserve elasticity as much as possible.

It’s a tool that is helpful to some stringers, just like a starting clamp. If you like it use it if you don’t like it don’t use it. Why does it have to be difficult?