International Guild of Knot Tyers Forum
General => Chit Chat => Topic started by: alanleeknots on November 12, 2012, 05:45:54 AM
-
Hi All, I have some good looking loops here, not practical loops, too difficult to tie, but no bad to untie. even thought they are so complex, but the tucking sit in place nicely. they all quite secure, except picture # 06, cannot get the tial nip tight, I wonder with all the twist and turn on the tail, will it be enough to hold the tail from slipping ?
Thanks alan lee.
-
More loops here.
-
by taking the end of your sixth in an effort to secure it, i made this. it seems to be fairly strong, particularly for loops that are spread wide around something. the it seems secure, and looks nice, at least in front. all of your knots seem to be just different ways to present almost the same structure. i will look for some similar things and keep you posted.
-
Hi All, Double check the loops again, seem like loops #005 not quite nipped 100% on the tail, may be better of to turn the structure around, Thanks alan lee.
-
I have some good looking loops here, not practical loops, too difficult to tie
A good-looking loop, would, most probably, be proven to be a practical loop, too...
Why am I saying this ? Because a good - looking loop would be a simple enough loop, so we it can be easily remembered and tied. We do will never characterize as "good-looking" an amorphous mass of tangled ropes ! :)
A good-looking loop would retain a certain fluidity of lines, so the rope path would not make tight, abrupt U-turns. The eye likes to follow a smooth curvilinear path, without any ugly acute angles or protuberances. The eye knows much the brain does not realize at once...
The first loop presented here is definitely good-looking. It is a two-collar "Eskimo"-like bowline, which means that it is a secure loop. I believe that, when we are talking about a "secure" bowline, that can be used for rescue purposes, for example, we should always mean a two-collar bowline. I have not seen a bowline on which a life can depend on, that has only one collar. It may be a matter of psychology only, true, but psychology plays a major role in such circumstances - in relation to the rescue personnel as well as to the victims. In boating and other not-so-critical uses, where the material is not-so-slippery, the use of a two-collar bowline may indicate ignorance about the marvellous effectiveness of the nipping loop+collar mechanism of the common bowline, and the insecurity and fear that stems out of such an ignorance...
What I would like to see in a secure bowline is a nipping loop encircling three rope diameters. Not because the segments of the rope are better nipped there - they might well be nipped less tightly - but because the nipping loop itself takes a rounder and wider form, which means that it is more evenly tensioned, and stronger.
The second loop is similar to the first, and one may even say that it is more secure, because the tail is squeezed by the eye-leg-of-the-bight in two distinct points ( at the first loop, it is adjacent and runs along a long segment of it ). However, I think that, at the first loop, the eye-leg-of-the-bight of the bight follows a smoother, easier path as it enters into the bight - that is why I would prefer the first from the second loop.
I do not like the other loops, for a simle reason : I do not like the abrupt turn of the rope at the 1-rope diameter collar around the eye-leg-of-the-standing-part. It is not good-looking ! :) I have many ropes that will not turn around a 1-rope diameter curve, if they are not tensioned very hard. At this point of the knots, this second collar will remain loose, unless the knot is tied on a very soft material. Who likes voids in his knots ? ( Nature does not !)
The last loop belongs to a slightly different breed. I do not see the point of the second turn around the rim of the nipping loop - without it, the loop would belong to the family of the Janus (two-collar) bowlines, which are already very secure, without this additional complexity.
-
Hi Xarax, Thanks you very much for your valuable comments, I added an additonal full turn on the middle of "8" sturcture of the loop,she turn out very nice too, have 3 ropes diamete on the nipping loop.
Thanks alan lee.
-
i would dissagree. even basic loops like a bowline feature a collar around a single strand. often, this is not a detriment to a knot, but rather makes it exceptionally easy to untie, and usually without too much stress on rope. i can see how an abrupt pinch in the rope may be bad, but most ropes do have the capacity to bend around themselves, and moreover, if they don't, then the knot is still just as secure in most cases, even if there may be a slight loss of strength in the rope. also, i was looking at these knots, and found what seems to be a simpler loop, that is quite secure and very easy to untie. does anyone recognize it?
-
an additional full turn on the middle of the "8" structure of the loop
The path of the rope in the collar structure became too long and convoluted now - too complex. Moreover, the rope is following a path without any simple and easily memorisable pattern - like the "mirror bowline" , for example. Tied on your soft material the knot may look compact and neat, indeed, but my stiff ropes do not follow this path very easily. It is difficult to dress, because even a strong pull of the two ends of the collar structure is often not sufficient to eliminate all the slack left in the long, convoluted middle section of it - so a proper dressing that will lead to a compact knot needs attention, and time.
The problem is that the working end does not pass through the nipping loop for the second time when it has the chance, while it goes upwards to form the second collar - so it has to complete the desired three passages by this additional round turn. At the Janus bowlines, the three passages are achieved without additional waste of material, because the working end pass through the nipping loop every time it has the chance, at its route from the one collar to the other.
I have tried to tie a decent two-collars "Eskimo" Janus bowline, but I have not found anything good-looking... It seems that, for some reason I can not pin point, if the first collar of a two-collar secure bowline is a standard bowline s collar, and not an "Eskimo" collar, the paths of the rope inside the knot s nub are shorter, and their curves are smoother.
-
Hi All, Just to add two more here. I think they are not bad.
Thanks alan lee
-
Yes, these are simple "Eskimo" Janus bowlines. As you would have seen by now, it is not easy to have three rope diameters through the nipping loop, without distorting the good-looking aspect of those knots.
As it happens with the standard Janus bowlines, there are many similar versions of those knots. See the attached picture for two other variants, where the two collars are interlinked, and the final segment of the tail is nipped by the first curve of the standing part. The last two pictures show a 3-rope-diameter-through-the-nipping-loop "Eskimo" Janus bowline. Not very good-looking, but because it uses a "not-proper", "Myrtle" configuration for its second collar, it remains very compact.
-
i tried to respond earlier, but the computer didn't let it through. as far as knots with a collar around just one strand, i find that this generally is just a mark that it tends to be easy to untie. even a simple bowline has this type of collar, and i do not think it puts undue stress on the rope, or at least the benefit of untying it outweighs the slight cost to strength.
-
....as far as knots with a collar around just one strand
....this generally is just a mark that [the knot] tends to be easy to untie
There is no relation between those two things (unfortunately...Otherwise we would have discovered the anti-jamming cure ! :) )
Some knots where the collar turns around a single strand are easy to untie, and some are not. The bowline can be untied because of the nipping loop, which can not jam, not because of the collar.
-
Hi kd8eeh,
found what seems to be a simpler loop, that is quite secure and very easy to untie. does anyone recognize it?
The loop that you show, is a bit similar to the result that is obtained by setting the Carrick loop (Abok # 1033) in the wrong way, so that the nipping loop becomes a false collar; a description of how this must not take place, you can read here:
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3902.msg23140#msg23140
Both the Carrick loop wrong-setted,and the the loop that you show, have the drawback that if one pulls the leg of the loop adjacent to the tail, the loop is at serious risk of spill.
A pair of better loops related:
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3944.msg23427#msg23427
Bye!
-
however, when you untie the bowline, you use slack between the collar and the rest of the knot. in many anti-jamming knots, the slack comes from the space where the loaded end being attached to some collar, which will not tighten when the end is loaded. that gives you slack in a point you wouldn't have otherwise had. there may be more to it than that in complicated knots, but as far as simpler knots go, that collar is a key to successfully untying it. consider a bowline, sheet bend, zeplin knot, alpine butterfly, and a carrick bend, to name a few.
-
The fact that we often make a collar loose, or use a loosened collar, and then use this loosened or loose collar to pull out of or push into the knot s nub some rope length, and release the grip the collar could have on the rest of the knot, has no relation with the mechanism that makes one knot to jam, and one other to be untied easily.
What exactly makes knot to jam or not ( or to jam earlier or later... ), is unknown to me, and I do not know id it is known to anybody - but I know that it has no relation with a collar that turns around one or more than one rope diameters, or with how tight this collar encircles another segment or area of the knot.
For a bend that was designed so that it can be untied by a manipulation of its collars, see (1).
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3670.0
-
Hi All, I work on my loops have found some interesting discovery. picture A 1 Both loop the frond view look exactly the same.
Picture B 2 is two in one loop, just to move the nipping loop to the left or right,
picture C3 is loop IMG_009, move the nipping loop to other side, it will become very bad, so do loop IMG_004.
Thanks alan lee.
-
Here, i am considering mostly the bend formed by tying a lark's head around a lark's head tied in the other rope, but the easy to untie bend and several other bends follow this trend.
If there are collars tied around the standing part of the rope, then those collars may, in many cases, be pulled outwards to give slack in the rope and hence make it easy to untie. there could be a case where these collars are just an auxiliary part of another knot that will be hard to untie on it's own, but so long as they are not, the collars seem to be the means by which a knot is untied. now, a jamming mechanism may be ultimately responsible for the slack there, but based on how these two things are coupled, i would speculate that collars in the rope are part of the jamming mechanism or crucial to it's function. So, the best way i see to evaluate the roles collars play in looseness of a knot would be to see how they are related to jamming mechanisms.
So far, the most common jamming mechanism I can isolate is either trying to have the rope bend in two opposing directions as tension is placed on each strand, at least within the realm of knots that are generally considered good. This generally requires a collar to provide the rope with a strand to bend, or at least many knots that i have identified to jam like this have collars (bowline, zeplin knot, alpine butterfly, carrick bend), but doesn't always in cases like a glumpir knot. so, i don't know the topological correlation here, but i suspects something does exist still, as many of these knots do require a collar, and my counterexample, the glumpir, is often very difficult to untie.
Another jamming method is to try and rotate something that can't be rotated. A good example of a knot that binds like this is a whatknot. So far as i know, there is no particular correlation between this and having collars in the rope.
Another jamming method is to just pinch one strand really really hard. Most knots that are typically insecure will jam like this, and this just makes them a pain to untie. I question whether this is even considered jamming, but some knots, like an overhand on a byte as a loop, bind like this.
This is not a complete list, but it's just some observations of mine.
-
Hi All, I have two loops here, out of this kind of structure I don't know what it called,
I don't know if it any good.
Thanks alan lee.
-
There is no reason to form a crossed-coils double nipping loop, and then to drive the working end only through one of those two coils. The crossed-coils nipping loop is already weaker, as a nipping mechanism of a bowline, than a normal, parallel-coils double nipping loop - which, in its turn, it may be weaker than the common single nipping loop !
So, its addition in your loops seems redundant to me. I had transformed those two loops a little bid, by replacing the crossed-coils double nipping loops with parallel coils double nipping loops, and driving the continuation of the eye-leg-of-the-bight through both of them - but I have seen that they suffer from another problem. The rope is not nipped very well at the last/third passage of the working end through this double nipping loop - so this last passage seems redundant, too. As I had noticed, it is better if the last passage of the working end through the nipping loop, the last line of defence against slippage, is also the last to give up in an extreme loading, so it should better be the hardest one.
For a crossed-coils double nipping loop PET loop, where this configuration of the two coils has an important role to play, see (1).
An unreasonably convoluted knot, is a bad knot, by definition. Another problem with the very complicated knots is that they can be dressed in many ways, and the stiffness and friction coefficient of the material itself alter their final tightened form too much ! We do not want knots that their tightened forms would depend sooo much on the material on which they are tied on - because we would not be able to visualise/remember any such knot in advance, before we would have already tied it on a specific material ! In short, beyond a certain degree of complexity, a convoluted knot can not be a practical knot, for many reasons.
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3951.0
-
The second knot appears to me to be some type of eskimo bowline, with a double loop instead of a single loop and an extra nipping turn on the tail end.
-
Hi Xarax, I am Sorry, I work on my rope very late that night, I post the wrong loop IMG_888 , and the other one is IMG_88 two "8" structure, this is the one I intend to post.
Regarding the first two loops :
There is no reason to form a crossed-coils double nipping loop, and then to drive the working end only through one of those two coils. The crossed-coils nipping loop is already weaker, as a nipping mechanism of a bowline, than a normal, parallel-coils double nipping loop - which, in its turn, it may be weaker than the common single nipping loop !
So, its addition in your loops seems redundant to me. I had transformed those two loops a little bid, by replacing the crossed-coils double nipping loops with parallel coils double nipping loops, and driving the continuation of the eye-leg-of-the-bight through both of them - but I have seen that they suffer from another problem. The rope is not nipped very well at the last/third passage of the working end through this double nipping loop - so this last passage seems redundant, too. As I had noticed, it is better if the last passage of the working end through the nipping loop, the last line of defence against slippage, is also the last to give up in an extreme loading, so it should better be the hardest one.
For a crossed-coils double nipping loop PET loop, where this configuration of the two coils has an important role to play, see (1).
Regarding the last, third knot :
it looks like it is not that bad.
To me, an unreasonably convoluted knot, is a bad knot, by definition - and this knot shown here is closer to be such a knot, than any of the many you have presented ! :)
Moreover, when I tie it on various stiff materials, it does not fold like the one you show in the picture - another problem with the very complicated knots. They can be dressed in many ways, and the stiffness and friction coefficient of the material itself alter their final tightened form too much ! We do not want knots that their tightened forms would depend sooo much on the material on which they are tied on - because we would not be able to visualise/remember any such knot in advance, before we would have already tied it on a specific material ! In short, beyond a certain degree of complexity, a convoluted knot can not be a practical knot, for many reasons.
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3951.0
Thanks alan lee.
-
This may be even more convoluted than the previously posted one, and consume even more rope length, but it is much simpler :) ! Why is that so ? Because here I see a pattern, and a reason. So, my mind can pay attention to the shape, as millions of years of evolution had taught it to do, and remember it. The pattern is that of the two "8" shapes, interlinked to each other. The reason is to tie a nipping structure that is as convoluted and complex as the collar structure ( or vice versa).
I do not like this particular one, but I am sure that you can find other "8" structures, that would be linked to each other in a "88" nub in a more harmonic way, with fewer voids, confined within a more compact volume.
My "golden standard" for such "88" structures is the Tweedledee bowline :
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3989.msg23724#msg23724
-
Hi All, I have two "8" structure loops here, have 3 ropes diameter on the nipping loop and seem like nipping the tail quite nice.
Thanks alan lee
-
I have two "8" structure loops here
I would nt characterize them as shape "8" based nipping loops - they look more like Pretzel-like nipping loops, which you have already used in the past. The shape "8" is more symmetric, and more " fluid" . However, the Pretzel-like nipping loop offers also two openings, the one above the other, through which we can drive the working end of the collar structure, following many different paths. In the loops you present here, I think that the potential of the Pretzel-like structure has not been exploited as much as it could : The working end follows a convoluted path, that makes the knot difficult to dress and tighten, but, at the same time, it is not nipped in the course of this path in as many points as it could. During a ring loading, a short tail will run the danger to be pulled out of the knot s nub. Also, the knot is based on a difficult to memorize structure, with no apparent pattern, or clear idea...
( My golden standard of the various Pretzel-like bowlines remains the one at the attached pictures. Easy to tremember, tie, dress, tighten, and with a transparent structure. I had asked a number of sailors to learn how to tie it - and they did, quite quickly and easily... It has an easy to understand pattern, which is visible from both sides, so the knot can be tied and inspected easily.)
-
Hi All, I have a loop here, just something to see,even thought it will lenghten the tail coller little bit, I think it still able grip on the tail nicely.
Thanks for the comments, I learn little more each time with the loop I had posted. alan lee.
-
Many of those crossing knot + overhand knot based loops are very secure, very interesting knots, and I believe that they have not received the attention they deserve - probably because they try to grow under the shadow of the bowline ! :)
See :
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3944.msg23427#msg23427
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4095.msg24585#msg24585
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4095.msg24592#msg24592
-
Hi All, I have a loop here, have 3 ropes diameter on the nipping loop, and all 3 legs are nipping on the tail.
I think over all is quite nice.
Thanks, alan lee
-
I do not see what you gain by using this very convoluted Pretzel-like nipping structure. that is topologically equivalent to a figure 8 knot... If you transform this loop into a bowline-like (PET) loop, by using a simpler Pretzel-like double nipping loop, and a Myrtle, not an " Eskimo" collar structure, you may tie the loop shown in the attached pictures.
-
Hi All, I notice two of the loops I have presented above, there are some room to make some change and improvement.
first set of photo just alter the tail little bit, it make the loop little more secure and stable.
second set is good looking and quiet secure loop, After heavy object loading on the loop, she still easy enough to untie.
Interesting after I finished with the loop just before I am going to post it, founded out it is one of my loop ( Lee Zep X bowline (V) )rigged it up side down.
Third set also good looking and quiet secure loop. After heavy object on the loop, it seem to have hard time to untie it,
but if you tie the loop with little longer tail , when you untie it, as the last photo, slack off the standing part and pull the tail to the left again the right eye leg, she will come apart. Hope to hear from you.
Thanks alan lee.
-
Hi Alan Lee,
The eyeknot shown at the right side of the first picture is much better than the one shown at the left, that is for sure. As you say, the last part of the tail is now secured more efficiently in its new position - where it is squeezed by two different segments of the nipping structure, not only by one, as it happened in the previous version. However, I still do not believe that this particular overhand-knot "collar structure" preserves the integrity and the compactness of the crossing-knot nub very well - it seems that ring loading can force the overhand knot to be loosened, and, if that happens, the crossing knot s nub is deformed quite a bid : it "opens up" (more than I would like), and the whole eyeknot is transformed into a peculiar "Eskimo"- looking bowline, where the second eye leg first makes a U-turn around the crossing knot s nub and the first eye leg, and then it enters into the nipping loop from the other side, and collars itself again ! A still secure knot - but a knot which works now in a different way, and has lost its initial compactness.
I do not understand why you have abandoned your very secure and nice bowline-like loops, and started tying loops based on a single or double overhand-knot nipping structure, like the ones shown at the second and third attached pictures ! :) They are not more secure than the Lee Zep X "bowline", they are not easier to tie or untie, they are not bowline-like knots, and, last but not least, they are not beautiful any more !
-
Hi X1, Thanks for the comment, just wonder around don't know where to go, Anyway I got you. Here are two real Bowline, Hope you like it. Thankss alan lee.
-
wander around, don't know where to go..
You have found where ! :) Tie double nipping loop / double collar bowline-like ( post-eye-tiable ) eyeknots (loops) - just as you did at your previous post !
I believe that a really secure bowline should have two nipping loops and two collars. It sounds like a simple rule of thumb, but I think it is a reasonable requirement and a safe receipt as well - if we need a knot that can stand on the same level of security with the retraced fig.8 knot.
There are many double "nipping structures", and many double "collar structures", but the problem is how to match the one to the other, so that they would prevent, and they would not disfigure, neither their own nor their pair s integrity and form. Another problem is that the two nipping loops should remain close to each other, in a compact entanglement with the collar structure, even under heavy loading - a task not always so easy as it sounds !
I have tied a double collar Girth hitched bowline (1), which turned out to be very similar to your own most secure and beautiful Eskimo" 8 bowline (2). I believe that this subject of "Double-Double" eyeknots is very interesting, and you will tie many nice knots. Good luck ! :)
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4009.msg26872#msg26872
2. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4125.msg24806#msg24806
-
Hi All,
1 photo-Just another thought,The two water bowline like loops above, I take the cowboy bowline retuck the tail to the right side, she look nicer more compact and both nipping loop squeeze the tail more harder.
2 photo- Base by my Lee s Eskimo 8 bowline idea, I came up with this one, I don't know what I shell call it, I think this one is better it have 3 ropes diameter on the nipping loop, more compact and after loading with heavy load,it can untie little easy than Lee s Eskimo 8 bowline , only thing is little complicate to tie the loop.
3 photo- Same idea, she is complicate to tie and after heavy load on it, she hard to untie, when the tail is out, there is an over hand knot have to undo. This is not a good loop, but she is so beautiful I enjoy looking at it.
Thanks alan lee.
-
As you have seen, to be able to form the second collar in this double collar Water Bowline shown in your first picture, you had to pass the returning eye leg through one only of the two nipping loops ( the "upper" one). That does not affect its security, that is true, because the eye leg can never be secured while it is going straight upwards - but it does not improve the "look" of the knot either ! :) I would nt prefer that particular eyeknot from the Mirrored Bowline, or the Double Collar Bowline shown at (1).
At your second and third pictures, you present bowline-like (post-eye-tiable) eyeknots that are based on the slipped overhand knot, as their nipping structure. Very clever and original idea - a well known, much used, easy to tie nipping structure, that has tight spots within it, and can serve as a most stable "double crossing knot" s nub.
However, you go one step further, and you twist the slipped bight . I do not believe that this is really needed : it makes the nipping structure too complex, more difficult to tie, without offering much. You have an already very convoluted, very tight nipping structure, I am sure you can find many ways to weave the collar structure within it, without having to add this additional / final twist.
See the attached picture for the first simple knot that crossed my mind, based upon this slipped overhand knot nipping structure you have thought of. The first round turn of the collar structure ( actually, a nipping loop ON the collar structure ), binds the lower parts of this complex "double crossing knot" together - and the tail passes in between the standing part s and the returning leg s first curves, where it can be squeezed and secured very efficiently. I am sure one can discover many more ways to do achieve the same thing : retain the integrity of the form of this "double crossing knot", and secure the tail into one of the more tightly squeezed points of it.
Now, in both of your shown knots, the paths of the returning eye legs to the collar tips remains almost straight - that is not the best thing we can have ! It would be much better if this path of the continuation of the eye leg inside the knot s nub contains an L-shaped segment, a "step" that would help it to be "hanged" by the nipping structure, and a means to dissipate the flow of the tensile forces, before it arrives at the collar and at the tail - just as it happens at the "Eskimo" (-) bowlines. In short, your nipping structure is very complex, but your collar structure is almost naive compared to it - something that I do not hesitate to mention repeatedly over and over again when I see it, but without much success :) ( as one can see in the case of the dialogue about the Tresse bowline, published in another thread ).
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4306.msg26951#msg26951
-
HI X1, Thanks for the comments, I have another loop here I like, see what you think.
Thanks alan lee.
-
A beautiful "Link bowline" - especially if you compare its beauty to the one shown at (1). :)
My concern is that, under heavy loading, this wrap around the rim of the nipping loop will be unwound, and the tension forces coming from the returning eye leg would be transferred to the collar without been diminished - but, even in that case, the round turn would justify its existence, by the enhanced security it offers regarding the slippage of the tail.
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4314.msg26928#msg26928
-
Hi, X1, Thaqnks again. I got two more loops here, hope you like it.
Thanks alan lee
-
The first loop has a very weak collar, where the second leg enters into the nipping loop from the wrong side - so it does not contribute to the stability of the nipping loop as much as it does in a "proper" collar. Under heavy loading, this nipping loop will run the danger to open up... A similar ( with a second nipping loop tied on the eye leg ), but much safer solution, is shown at (1).
The second loop is a fine eyeknot - well balanced, with its tail very well nipped into the core of a compact and tight knot. To my eyes, it is very similar to the Lee Zep X bowline, but the path of the working end ( while it forms the collar structure within and around the nipping loop ) is more complicated, and more difficult to remember. :) Moreover, in that eyeknot the nipping loop encircles two rope diameters, and not three, like it does in the Lee Zep X bowline. It would be useful to show front and back side views of both loops in the same picture, the one next to the other, so the interested reader would see the similarities and the differences between them.
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1929
-
Hi All, Thanks for the reply X1, I have another loop here, I think is not that complicate or too much efford to tie, and we have a double nipping loop / double collar bowline-like loop.
Thanks, alan lee.
-
we have a double nipping loop / double collar bowline-like loop.
No, we do not ! :) The "double nipping loop" means a double nipping loop tied on the standing part before/ante the eye - and I see only a single nipping loop tied on the standing part here... The secondary nipping loop tied around the rim of the main nipping loop, is part of the collar structure, not of the nipping structure. It plays the role of a second collar, before the main collar, not of a second nipping loop.
This knot is not very different than the knot shown at Reply#34 (1). In fact, the secondary nipping loop of the knot shown at (1) constricts the tails harder than the crossing-knot-like one shown in this post. Of course, this convoluted crossing-knot-like structure hanging from the rim of the nipping loop absorbs the greater portion of the tensile force before they even arrive at the main collar, so there is not much left that need to be secured further at the very end of the tail.
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4125.msg27039#msg27039
-
Hi X1, Thanks you very much the valuable comment, I learn little bit more from your reply. anyway is fun to create.
Thanks alan lee
-
Hi All, I love tying knot, good way to pass time. I don't know much on the theory side, all I know is to tuck it here and there, make the rope sail nicely, and smooth, as X1 said a good looking knot , there is some chance become a good knot. X1 you are right most of the time,after your comment on my knots,and I had little more test and thought myself, I found the problem as you said (even though I am not 100% follow what you said, due to my poor english) Please correct me if the knot that I have present don't make sense to you. Anyway I am glad and I am gaining everyday from all the reply.
I love dealing with bowline, because Bowline is the best. after many attempt , I have a loop here littler similar to one of my loop Lee+Zep+X+bowline+(V). and hope you like it.
Thanks alan lee
-
I don't know much on the theory side
You are not losing much - because there is nt much to lose ! :)
I do not follow 100% of what you said, due to my poor English
Knots do not speak English - and it seems that many knot tyers that do, can only talk about them ! :) Keep tying nice knots, as this.
Of course ! ::) How fool and blind I was... One can encircle the "higher" part of the nipping loop s rim - not the "lower" one, as I have done in this ugly Link bowline presented at (1) ! This way the secondary nipping loop is tied closer to the crossing point of the main nipping loop and the main collar, and so the knot s nub becomes compact - and good-looking ! Your solution is 1000% better than the poor one shown at (1).
Your pictures are not showing its true loaded / "final" form - the tail does not point towards the tip of the bight, like it does in the much inferior knot shown at (1). See the attached pictures, where I have tied your knot on a slippery rope, I have pulled the tail with 10 kg, and I have loaded the loop with 150 kg - to get a more accurate idea of its "final" form. The standing part s first curve drags the tail upwards - so, in the loaded, tight knot, the tail settles in the position shown below, and not in the position shown in your first picture / second and third knots.
Both bowlines, the one shown here (B) and the previous one shown at Reply#34 (A) are, to my view, beautiful knots - I can not decide which is better / more secure...
( At the Lee Zep X bowline I prefer ( which I show in my previous post - the X=crossed tails version of the Lee Zep bowline shown at the third attached picture ) the turn around the rim of the nipping loop encircles its crossing point as well. The Lee Zep X you show ( the X=crossed tails version of the Lee Zep bowline shown at the fourth picture) is a simpler knot - a minor advantage of it is that it looks more like a Zeppelin-bend-looking eyeknot, so its pattern may be easier to remember (?) )
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4314.msg26928#msg26928
2. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4125.msg27039#msg27039
-
I have tried the X=crossed tails variations of the Lee Zep (H) and the Lee Zep (V), with loose collars - as I use to do with all bowlines : I have not been able to notice any substantial differences... One has to untuck the collars altogether, to see that the Lee Zep (H) still holds ( as a Myrtle loop ), while the Lee Zep (V) does not. Is this a reason to chose the former rather than the later ? I believe it is - because the X=crossed tails variation of the Lee Zep (H) is, in a sense, "safer" : even if the collar is caught up somewhere, and the tail is pulled out of the knot s nub, the remaining portion of the eyeknot would still hold, at least for some valuable brief moments.
-
Hi All, I have another loop here, is a cowboy bowline, take the tail around the right leg and tuck it in the middle of the nub, it seem fine to me. after loading with heavy object and it can untie easy too.
Thanks alan lee
-
A Janus bowline - one of the many possible (1). See Pictures #30, #31, at (2). Also, see the attached picture for yet another one. Most of those two-collars ( or, "two bights" ) eyeknots are easy to tie and secure "locks" of the common or the "Eskimo" (-) bowlines.
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3150.msg19418#msg19418
2. http://www.paci.com.au/downloads_public/knots/Bowlines_Analysis.pdf
-
Hi All, Thanks again X1, I have two more loops here, both of them are compact and solid loops, both nipping loops are doing the work well, but the same situation very complicate to tie.
I think when we want to have extra nipping loop and collar, has to have more length of rope, and the rope have to travel more distant to get there.
Well I thinks that all I can do to the bowlin, my holiday is over, time for me to report to my work.
Good Luck to All of you.
Thanks, alan lee
-
The first loop shown utilizes this very stable "twisted Pretzel" collar, that is a very tight form, indeed - either as a nipping structure ( first attached picture ) or as a collar structure ( second attached picture ). However, the way that it is interweaved within your knot is not as straightforward and easy to remember, as I would have wished it to be : I can not see a reason, a clear idea, or a pattern, that would enable the knot tyer to understand and memorize the particular way this collar structure is entangled to the nipping loop. For example, why the first collar around the eye leg of the standing part does not go around / through the nipping loop, as one would have expected ? A practical knot has to be a simple knot, and a simple knot has to serve a reason, a clear idea, or has to be based on an easy to recognize and to follow visual / mental pattern.
The second loop utilizes a shape "8' nipping loop, perpendicular to the axis of the loading. I believe that a Constrictor-like "8" structure is a tighter, better balanced and more symmetric knot for this purpose. (1). However, I am not sure that any perpendicular "8" shaped nipping structure, be it the shape "8" form you use or the Constrictor-like shape "8" form I had used, can be stabilized in this position by such a very simple collar structure : if the eye legs will be loaded unevenly, the knot s nub will lean towards the one or the other direction. If the knot will happen to be compact and strong when it leans towards the one eye leg, the chances are that it would not be so compact or so strong when it will lean towards the other. A possible asymmetry of the loading would not matter much when an elongated shape "8* nipping structure is placed parallel to the axis of loading, but it would have unknown consequences when it will be placed perpendicular to it. An "Eskimo" type (-)bowline is probably a more self-stabilizing / stable solution in such cases.
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=19.msg26753#msg26753
-
Hi,
The feature of the loop below that immediately catches the eye,is that it is really ugly!(Alan,I apologize if I allow myself to use this thread to present this bad stuff!)I made this knot a few days ago as an attempt to "curve" the leg(s) of the collar,inspired by the Bowline presented by alpineer http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4321.0 .I do not think that X1 meant something similar when he wrote about "perpendicular to the axis of the loading Constrictor-like 8 "in the post above.When properly set,the loop does not seem to behave badly (but I'm not good at test knots), and is easy to untie.If someone wants,can try both versions:if one stops at the end of the rope in red in the diagram, the curvature of the first leg of the collar would remain more pronounced, if one continues "with the green", the curvature is attenuated (but the two legs of the collar's bight around the standing part should instead curves a little more).
Bye!
(http://)
-
Hi Luca, you are very welcome, we all come here to discuss , share and learn, we have the same goal, through the exchange, regardless of "perfection",sometimes it is the ideas of another that can instigate sparks of creativity.
Thanks alan lee.
-
The "red" eye leg will be free to pull the "blue" one, and vice versa - and any heavy ring loading would also tend to twist the knot s nub, while the weak collar structure will not be able to stabilize it in one definite final form. See the first two attached pictures for the most "natural" and easy to remember solutions, where the returning eye leg penetrates the two openings of the shape "8" double nipping loop from the opposite side, and along one, straight line. ( Those bowlines can also be considered as variations / implementations of a twisted / reversed "Constrictor" bowline. Compare them with the untwisted, plain Constrictor bowline, shown in the last picture ). Not so ugly any more... :) Of course, doing this, the shape "8" does not remain perpendicular to the axis of loading - but, contrary to the "Tresse" bowline, that may be an advantage here.
The issue one has to deal with those double nipping structures, is how they will remain self-stabilizing and compact, while, at the same time, they will not absorb the greater amount of the flow of the tensile forces converging into them from their three limbs... because, if that happens, they will not nip the penetrating tail sufficiently hard - the tensile/constricting forces will be "wasted" within the nipping structure itself, and the collar structure will be allowed to slip through the nipping structure without much resistance. ( In particular, we seek nipping structures where the first curve of the standing part and/or the first curve of the returning eye leg would bite the last portion of the tail.)
-
Hi Alan,
I thank you for your kind words,but equally I want to try to "remedy" the ugliness of the loop that I showed above with the loop in diagram below, that actually I made by mistake:I thought I remember how to tie the second loop you show at reply #36 http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4125.msg27043#msg27043 , but I found in my hands this other loop: I do not know if it's worth from the practical side, but at least it seems nice to look at!
Bye!
(http://)
-
Hi X1,
I want to thank you for the patience you have for decide that my stuff is worth a comment,thus giving me an opportunity to think more about what I do.
As far for the loop, I have to say that in fact it is difficult to set it in what I consider the most appropriate manner (the initial Constrictor-shape should curves on itself, tending to align itself to the axis of loading, softening in this way those that appear "elbows" in the two legs of the collar in the diagram), but I'm beginning to think that,also in this case,in facts, the knot does not have a behavior much more than mediocre( the Twisted 8 Bowline maybe is the loop I wanted to do!).
I would also note that I realized that the structure of this loop can be considered a variation on the theme of Abok # 1073!
Bye!
(http://)
-
it seems nice to look at !
I can only guess that your diagram is unclear or mistaken, and does not correspond to your knot - because I do not see how, under loading, this already open nipping loop would remain closed :) This eyeknot looks like a falsely tied "Eskimo" Janus bowline ! Could you, please, post another diagram ?
... the initial Constrictor-shape should curve on itself, tending to align itself to the axis of loading
That is the problem with all those elongated nipping structures... In order to stabilize them, so they can remain perpendicular to the axis of loading, we need very complex collar structures - but then, what is the purpose of such a complex nipping structure ( that can not be self-stabilized, without the help of a collar structure ) in the first place ?
I realized that the structure of this loop can be considered a variation on the theme of Abok # 1073 !
I suspect that I have lost the ability to tell what is a "variation" of a knot, and what is a different knot... All knots start to look very "different" to my eyes - I am stuck to a little difference here and a little difference there - while, at the same time, I tend to believe that all knots are nothing but variations on very few knotting themes / elements ! :)
-
I can only guess that your diagram is unclear or mistaken, and does not correspond to your knot - because I do not see how, under loading, this already open nipping loop would remain closed :) This eyeknot looks like a falsely tied "Eskimo" Janus bowline ! Could you, please, post another diagram ?
Ready with the reserve-diagram!(Below)
However, I think it's useless, it's the same thing:by how you describe the loop, seems that you have it tied rightly: no real nipping turn here, and also it is not an "Eskimo", is.. a mistake-loop!
Regarding the normal loading seems to me that behaves decently (and I could say that I do not understand the reason!); regarding the ring loading the knot tends to distort, and the portion of the rope adjacent to the tail tends to be "swallowed "by the portion of the false nipping loop around the second leg of the eye.But, anyway,as says Alan Lee,this loop was only for visual pleasure!If you do not like, well, then "de gustibus ...",... or maybe I'm a blind mother (in Naples it also says something that sounds "Every cockroach is beautiful to his mom")!
but then, what is the purpose of such a complex nipping structure ( that can not be self-stabilized, without the help of a collar structure ) in the first place ?
Mine was a bit clumsy attempt to curve the legs of the collar,the left blue turn in the diagram above(which does not much justice even to the mediocrity of the knot)serves mostly to "bend", rather than nip;In short, I wanted to keep things simple: 1 real (approximately) nipping turn +1 collar + "bending".(I tried!)
I suspect that I have lost the ability to tell what is a "variation" of a knot, and what is a different knot...
No,is that I am a block-head!
OK, then maybe we can say that is topologically identical to a "cowboy version" of ABOK #1073 with crossed loops! ;D
Thanks again,and bye!
(http://)
-
OK, I see its idea : A twisted Pretzel collar structure, weaved around a, hmmm, would-like-to-be single nipping loop, which, for unknown / mysterious reasons, does not wish to cross its legs, and decides to be and to remain "open", right from the beginning ( no crossing point...). Brave, bravo ! Now, forget this beloved cockroach, because it will not withstand a heavy loading - its "nipping loop" will burst open, and this weakly secured tail will not save its arch. Reverse the way the eye leg enters into the nipping loop, drive it around the crossing point, and tie the knot shown at the attached picture. The same three-foil symmetry, so a nice knot/cockroach, and a very secure, too. I am not an expert knot tyer, but I do know some things about knot s cosmetic surgery ! :)
-
Hi All, Again just to share another loop that I like, very complicate to tie, well secure, 3 ropes diameter on both nipping loop.
Thanks alan lee.
-
very complicate to tie
Indeed ! :) One of the most unconventional knots you have presented. You have to wait till the last tuck, to see how on earth this tangle is going to become a closed knot... :) and, even then, you have to dress it carefully, otherwise it does not settle in a tight, compact form.
I do not see anything that would justify this odd complexity, that is not already achieved by the normal "Eskimo" Janus bowlines (1)(2)- where the path of the working end makes sense, so it is very easy to remember.
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4329
2. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4125.msg27149#msg27149
-
Hi X1,
a nice knot/cockroach, and a very secure, too
Oh ... no! Another unlucky knot that does not deserve to bear the disgrace of my name!
But... however,there is something wrong : that is a regular Eskimo/falsely tied cockroach loop!Take a look below to appreciate the shivering sight of a true,bulky,absurd, genetically modified by atomic radiation,cockroach loop, which I would never wish anyone to find itself to deal with it(the portions of the line in green can be inverted with respect to pass over/under:if one chooses the other alternative rather as shown in the diagram, one gets a loop perhaps less horrid-looking,and easier to untie (maybe too much, if it remains stuck somewhere ..)).
Bye!
(http://)
-
that is a regular Eskimo/falsely tied ... bulky, absurd, genetically modified by atomic radiation, cockroach loop
No, the loop shown at Reply#55 (1) is a a variation of the more robust "Eskimo" Janus bowline(s), where the nipping loop encircles three rope diameters - so the radius / curvature of the nipping loop s "circle" is larger, and the standing part s first curve is smoother. Regarding this characteristic, your beloved cockroach looks like the loops shown at Reply#8 (2). I do not say they can not crawl, I say that their legs can not be squeezed so much - the "bridge" / belly lies outside the nipping loop. For a discussion about similar knots, visit (3).
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4125.msg27149#msg27149
2. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4125.msg24818#msg24818
3. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4329.msg27171#msg27171
-
Hi All, I have two loops here, first photo is Eskimo+overhand knot loop, well secure. second photo is Eskimo+Figure 8 loop, well secure and 3 ropes diameter on both nipping loop.
Sorry, I am working out of town, so I don't have anything to test it, that all I can tell you.
Thanks alan lee.
-
The first loop shown above is just an "Eskimo" bowline, where the returning eye leg makes a 360 degrees turn around the rim of the nipping loop, before it makes the collar. I do not believe that the collar of the standard "Eskimo" bowlines suffers so much in this respect, so we should try to alleviate the pressure on it applied by the returning eye leg. On contrast with what we see in the case of the common bowline, this returning eye leg has already made a 90 degree turn on the point it meets the rim of the nipping loop, its form is already L-shaped, so a further complete round turn there would not offer much more. If one really wants to strengthen the join there, he should better encircle the crossing point of the nipping loop as well, as you have already done in other loops you have tied.
-
I am glad when I already have a file on my computer where I can put a new knot, as a variation of a previously presented one. Moreover, when the new knot that is to be shorted there is as beautiful as the already filed one, I am really happy !
Click, Knots - Click, bowlines and other post-eye-tiable eyeknots - Click, Lee s eyeknots - Click- Lee s Eskimo 8 loop - Click, Rename, Lee s Eskimo loop (A) - Click, Paste, Lee s Eskimo loop (B), - Click, Close. I am done ! That is a nice sunny spring day, which starts well ! :)
I will try to pin point any structural differences that may differentiate the behaviour of those beautiful eyeknots some other day. Today, let me tie this knot on different ropes, and just enjoy the sight of it.
-
Hi X1, Thanks for everthing, I have a simple and convenience loop here, I can not find anything wrong with it, I have a little doubt myself, seem like little simple to be true. may be I have miss something. like to hear from you.
Thanks alan lee.
-
I can not find anything wrong with it... seems like [too] simple to be true, maybe I have missed something.
No, you have not missed anything, that is a fine crossing knot + overhand knot loop. It is us, the knot tying community, that had missed the opportunity to explore those very simple and safe eyeknots...
See :
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3944.msg23427#msg23427
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3962.msg23525#msg23525
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4095.msg24591#msg24591
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4095.msg24592#msg24592
-
Hi All, Look alike loops, Loop A and B are the some loop, Just move the nipping loop to the left and right, this loop is little more complicate to tie, Just another loop does exist and interesting,and I like to share with.
Thanks for the reply X1.
Thanks alan lee.
-
Congratulations, Alan Lee.
Those two pairs of twins are the most "similar" eyeknots we know - and I bet they will remain the most similar ones, for ever ! :)
They could serve as a kind of "Same or Different" Knot puzzle - I believe that many knot tyers would fail to recognize which is which at the first sight - I myself have tied them many times, but I need to "retrace" visually the paths of the lines carefully, before I am able to distinguish them...
For such pair of end-to-end knots / bends ( the Strangle bend, and the re-tucked Matthew Walker 2 strands bend ), see (2), and the attached picture.
1. http://www.interestingtopics.net/two-pairs-of-twins-on-same-date-id-547
2. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1919.msg16859#msg16859
-
Hi All, Just another loop that I like, simple, easy to tie, well secure and easy to untie.
Thanks again X1. Thanks alan lee
-
Another crossing knot + overhand knot loop. See (1),(2),(3).
I had just discovered that many of those loops are tiable-in-the-bight (TIB). That offers an advantage, because one can tie them as end-of-line bowline-like loops, or as midline loops. Since you have shown great skills in manipulating TIB loops, you can possibly discover more of those simple, versatile, self-stabilizing and secure knots, based on the crossing knot "nipping structure" plus the overhand knot hitch / "collar structure". The task is to secure the tail in the most favourable area within the knot s nub, in between the standing part s and the returning eye leg s first curves - and to keep the standing part s first curve as wide as possible.
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4095.msg24592#msg24592
2. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4354.msg27284#msg27284
3. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4354.msg27287#msg27287
-
Hi All, Thanks for the reply X1, I have a good looking loops here, have some similar look to my loop at (Reply #65 ), this loop is more then complicate to tie. One you dress it up, it settle in compact form,and become a close knot. If you like knots you have fun tying it. Thanks alan lee
-
this loop is more than complicated to tie.
Say that again ! :) I had tied it wrongly three times before I was able to understand what you have been coming after here ...
When knots start to look like two or more entangled clefs, I believe we have better change the tune ! :)
The collar structure is too complicated, while the nipping structure remains too simple. Also, the 'back" side view of the knot is ...well, not pretty. :)
-
**correction this is the picture i meant to attach as the other picture had the wrong top 2 loops.
Hi All, Thanks again for you time X1, again another twin loop, just move the nipping loop to the left or right.
I thinks she is alright and nice looking too.
Thanks alan lee.
-
I prefer the "lower" ( second + fourth in the row ) "second" variation, where the turn around the standing part s leg lies "outside" the nipping loop. Those double parallel segments form a very nice, compact knot, no question about that. However, I still do not like the somewhat odd sight of a simple, single AND narrow nipping loop entangled with such a complex, double collar. Something like a very fat, tall woman embraced by a very thin, short man... :). At the other, the "first" variation, the nipping loop is wider, indeed, but the dressing is more tricky, and requires some care, otherwise the knot, under heavy loading, will degenerate into the "second" variation ( or something in between ). In general, I believe that the fact two topologically identical but geometrically and structurally different knots ( "bistable" knots ) can easily - and/or by lack of proper care during their tying - be transformed the one into the other, although very interesting, may be confusing - and it may be confusing for the experienced knot tyers, too... See (1). Also, see the similar DDK s 3 "locked bowline" (2)(3).
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4201
2. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=19.msg20960#msg20960
3. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=19.msg20961#msg20961
-
Hi All,The interesting Twin loop that I have, can transform to third variation, now it make thing little easy, have clearer picture how to tie this loop, we can make a normal bowline and add an additional tuck you have 3 in 1 loop. I think this one is better than other 2 variation.
Last picture as X1 suggestion, I think not bad too. That all I can write, see the picture will tell everything.
Thanks alan lee.
-
Hi All, The loops on reply #71 and #73 have two pair of look alike loops, I got to it sort it out , make it easier to see, other wise I got myself confused too. ( first variation with IMG_1277 ) and ( second variation with third variation )
Thanks alan lee.
-
Hi All,
Since over hand knot can fit in right hand bowline, might as well give left hand bowline a try, this time the tail has to go around the cross over of the nipping loop to make it smooth. I do a simple test with small rope on both loops, loaded it with heavy object, right hand bowline can untie quiet easy, left hand bowline is easier to loosen the tail collar first and then the rest come apart easy.
Bowline is Bowline secure enough for general use, now the tail extend two u turn and go around the left leg and thought the rabbit hole and out, and form a over hand knot, and two difference part of the tail in between the two u turn are nipped by the nipping loop, and there are 3 ropes diameter in the nipping loop, these loop with the double parallel segments make it look beautiful and compact too. with all these I am sure it will increase the security of the bowline, to what degree I don't know? we may need to do more test with difference ropes and my be extreme test in order to know how well it will hold on. I have a job out of town for year, no much I can do.
I am very happy, I can do a simple analysis on my own knot, I am improving every day since I join this forum, look back at the very beginning, I don't even know what is nipping loop mean. EASY ON ME, if my analysis don't make sense to you. and hope you understand my broken english.
Thanks X1, Dan and all other had been reply to my post, you speed thing up for me.
Thanks alan lee.
-
**correction second picture had replace, this is the picture i meant to attach IMG_1278 (variation) 2
Hi All,
I have two loops here are the variation of the loops above .Now may make it more confuse and more difficult to tie these loops.
Regardless of "perfection", it is the fact that it can be tie it this way. I thinks there are few more of my loops can do the same thing, when ever I am free again, I will dig it out and post it here.
Thanks alan lee.
-
Regardless of "perfection", the fact is that it can be tied this way.
However, after the knot tyer has exhausted ALL the ways, and has tied ALL the possible "similar" knots that happen to belong to a certain class, he would feel the need/temptation to classify, and then "rank" each one of them, according to some criteria - and one of those criteria would always be the "compactness" of a knot and the "smoothness" of its lines - which is probably what you call "perfection".
To my view, of all the knots you had presented at those last posts of yours, the "third variation" ( in its left- or its right-hand form ) is the most "perfect" one, by far ( and the second one, shown in the previous post, the least ...:) ). A very secure and very beautiful "locked" bowline, which deserves further examination. I believe you should re-post it in the " Simple lock for the bowline" thread - and find a better name ! :)
-
Hi X1,
Thanks you for letting me know there is a fat lady in there, I don't like her too.
I have four variation of loops here, I like the two variation of IMG_1277, as your advise make the overhand knot turn around its crossing point of the nipping loop, she really look good and well secure.
Thanks alan lee.
-
That is what you have to suffer, in order to tie ALL the possible knots that belong to a certain class...You tie all those fat ugly ladies, sitting next to your shinning beauty ! :) Usually I do not post "similar" knots that are so inferior to their classmates, but this may be wrong : Comparisons to the less "perfect" knots do reveal the advantages of the "perfect" ones, at a glance.
Regarding the Lee s locked bowline ( my provisional name for the "third variation" ), I have to say two things : first, I am not sure which one of the two variations is more secure - however, the right-hand one, which is a "proper" locked bowline, is probably more easy to remember how to tie and to tie. I have tested both variations with three very different 6-8mm cords ( the one being a solid braided one, very similar to the one you use to show the knots in your pictures ) and submitted them in 32 alternating 100 kgr. loadings each. They were very easy to untie, while the Luca s and Oracle s loops, which were submitted to the same torture, were jammed badly. So, a beautiful post-eye-tiable knot, which, at least in the "right-hand" variation is a simple "bowline lock", which is very secure, easy to remember how to tie and to easy and quick to tie, and does not jam. We could nt order something more, could we ?
-
Hi All,
Here is a figure + over hand loop, it look quite similar to Lee s locked bowline. except when it loaded.
Thanks for the reply X1. alan lee.
-
Hi X1, Thanks you very much, here is the picture of loops.
Thanks alan lee.
-
Alan, can you, please, forget those dressings ? Both of them ! :) The dressing of the original, genuine Lee s Locked bowline is a much better knot !
( See the first attached picture, and the third and fourth picture, for a left- and right-hand Lee s Locked bowline, in a front and a back view).
Now, regarding those two dressings of the variation of the loop, shown in the previous post, as I had said at Reply#72 :
I prefer the ... "second" variation, where the turn around the standing part s leg lies "outside" the nipping loop. Those double parallel segments form a very nice, compact knot, no question about that. However, I still do not like the somewhat odd sight of a simple, single AND narrow nipping loop entangled within such a complex, double collar. Something like a very fat, tall woman embraced by a very thin, short man... :) . At the other, the "first" variation, the nipping loop is wider, indeed, but the dressing is more tricky, and requires some care, otherwise the knot, under heavy loading, will degenerate into the "second" variation
-
Hi All, I modify my Lee s Eskimo bowline (B), now she is true (double nipping loop / double collar) loop, very well secure. quiet compact, may be little harder to tie, I don't know you call it bulky or not, no problem to untie after loading with heavy object. well come your comment.
Thanks again X1.
Thanks alan lee.
-
Hi Alan,
Another beautiful compact double nipping loop / double collar loop . One can also consider it as a modification of your double collar "Eskimo" 8 bowline, you had presented earlier (1).
When I tie such loops, I try to alleviate the burden carried by the collar structure as much as possible - so I try to figure out which nipping structure would be more self-stabilizing, i.e., be able to retain its "closed" compact form even if the collar structure gets very loose. A well-balanced self-stabilized nipping structure, by itself, without the need of any substantial participation on behalf of the collar structure, is the key to any secure bowline. Following this line of thought, I had tied the Girth hitch - based "Eskimo" double collar bowline presented at (2) - a very similar eyeknot with the one you show here.( See the attached pictures). If you examine both knots in detail, you will see that, in the Girth hitch - based "Eskimo" bowline. the standing part s eye leg is leaving the knot s nub from the centre of the "lower" collar - so the nipping structure used there ( a common Girth hitch ) is more self-stabilizing that the nipping structure you use here ( a part of a more complex, thee-coil Girth hitch ). If you tie both loops with veeery loose collar structures, and you start loading them, you will see that the common Girth hitch would be able to hold the penetrating strands of the collar structure, remaining compact and retaining a large portion of its initial balance, while the more complex nipping structure you use will start to twist, it will lose its initial orientation, and degenerate into a common double nipping loop - which is not a self-stabilizing nipping structure !
Now, all these are but mere estimations based on the geometrical properties of the unloaded, or the loosened knots. In a well dressed, pre-tightened, and heavy loaded knot, I can not say what will happen - and I am sure that I can not even imagine many things that will happen ! :) For example, the "lower" collar of your knot, itself shrunk by the pull of the returning eye leg, may be able to pull the standing part s eye leg towards its centre, and, so it may help the nipping structure to retain its initial, perpendicular to the standing end orientation.
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4125.msg24806#msg24806 (http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4125.msg24806#msg24806)
-
Hi X1, I think you got thing mixed up here, the loop on reply #83 are the same with your (Double Girth hitch Eskimo bowline), the difference is left and right hand version only.
When Lee s Eskimo bowline (A) turn into double nipping loop / double collar loop and loading it, with loose collars she will start to twist, and will lose its initial orientation.
Anyway I have another variation here based upon a Pretzel-like two interlinked nipping loops structure, she seem fine too. The second picture as you said I leave the collars loose and loaded it, she still able to stay in stable form.
The third picture is my simple tool to load and test my knots, is a piece of 1 1/2" x 5 1/2 " x 5 feet wood (in Canada we called it 2x6) drilled 1 1/4" hole and 1" deep and 2" apart, with a aluminum bar rounded the end , it is 3/4" diameter x 35" long, it can generate good 5 time the force that I pull on the rope. hope you like it. Thanks again X1.
Thanks alan lee
"correction" Some how I have giving the wrong dimension of my force multiplying tensioning device, the aluminum bar is 7/8" diameter
-
I think you got thing mixed up here, the loop on reply #83 are the same with your (Double Girth hitch Eskimo bowline), the difference is left and right hand version only.
Noope ! :) Just follow the Standing Part, after it enters into the knot s nub : How many turns does it make, before it forms the rim of the "upper" collar ( the collar around the standing end ) ?
Two, in the case of "your" loop - One, in the case of "my" loop. Mirror symmetry does not affects numbers ! :)
Your new loop, based on a Pretzel-like nipping structure, is fine, indeed - and those two crossed round turns keep the eye leg of the standing part aligned at the centre of the "lower" collar and of the whole nub - a more balanced arrangement than the one you had used in your previous loop. I, too, had used this nipping structure a number of times, and I have seen that it is very tight and stable - but I have not been able to persuade anybody about this ! :) See how efficient it is, its superb gripping power and its great inherent stability, even in the case of a simple adjustable "Eskimo"-like loop, where there is no collar structure at all.
However, in the case of a double nipping loop / double collar bowline, I believe that the Pretzel-based nipping structure does not offer anything more than what the simple, much easier to tie and inspect Girth hitch does. Also, the Pretzel has those two "odd" X s = two crossings, one at each side, which disturb the smooth, nice flow of the lines we see within and around the nub of the Girth - hitch based loop. So, although I, too, was seduced by the Pretzel nipping structure ( when used in "common" as well as in "Eskimo"- like eyeknots ), now I have "returned" to the more simple Girth hitch.... Anyway, both loops are almost equivalent in every aspect, and my recent preference for the Girth hitch-based one might be nothing more than a matter of personal prejudices or taste. De gustibus et coloribus non est disputandum...
I do like your laboratory, very much ! I hope that I will persuade you to proceed, and perform some destructive tests some day, so we can have an idea about the ultimate strength of all those loops.
-
Hi All, I have a loop here, everyone would see it is cowboy bowline + what structure s loop, but I said it is a figure 8 structure + bowline nipping loop s loop. because I start with figure 8 knot and fit the bowline nipping loop into it, this is how I create it.
This loop I am is not sure you call it complicate to tie or not, well secure and compact, after loading with difference size of ropes find no problem to untie it.
It have the main nipping loop and auxilialy nipping loop at the end part of the left leg, when I apply load to this loop, the aux nipping loop is just snug and not doing much, because the main nipping loop grab it hard, the left leg only travel very little and stop, nothing transfer to the aux loop, so I guess this Aux loop only act at an emergency nipping loop, good thing I found the aux loop is holding the tail kind of parallel to the lower half of the main nipping loop, it offer softer cushion more smooth and round turn for nipping loop,and the tail are in the middle and kind of embrace by the nipping loop, it make the nipping loop nipped more effectively. and also reduce the friction on the cross over to the main nipping loop.
I had severer destruction test with 5/16" rope, I tied my loop on one end and normal bowline the other end, all the normal bowline broken at the cross over on the nipping loop. I hope my analysis make sense to you, If it is not please correct me.
Thanks again X1, In the future i will find time to gather all the tool to do the destruction test to finish my project.
Thanks alan lee.
-
Hello Alan, thank you for another offering.
I followed your explanation well enough, the pictures helped!
I would suggest that when you do your testing, comparing to the "standard" bowline is good and it shows that your project loop fairs better. Now what happens when you compare it to another tied the same?
If you can contribute pictures of the loops (winner and loser) I would love to see them.
Thank you for sharing your explorations!
SS
-
Hi All,
Thanks for the reply SS. I love to do the testing, when ever I have more spare time, I will get some Blue water rope and start with some of the loops that I have, test it one by one again standard bowline, take some picture and I will post it here.
I have another variation of the loop from ( reply #87 picture IMG_1399 ), the structure function are the same, the front view look the exactly same, the back view just slightly different. new variation have 3 rope diameter on aux nipping. (IMG_1399) have 2 rope diameter , but it look lot smooth then the new one.
I don't know which one more secure. I have leave it to you guys.
I loaded the new variation loop, the aux loop are little tighter then (IMG_1399), I think because the left leg is kind of parallel to nipping loop near the standing part side, and also the left leg was in the middle of the aux loop, which mean the main nipping loop's force need more time to get to the left leg , that give little time for left leg to pull little slack out of the aux loop. Hope you understand what I mean.
Please give me your comments.
Thanks alan lee.
-
Nice knot, Alan. Congratulations. Simple, easy, transparent, almost straightforward. Secure the tail, by the easiest possible way
What I like most in this is its simple concept - that makes it very easy to remember, to tie and to inspect, relatively to other more convoluted secure bowlines you have presented.
Just an overhand knot, tied with the end of the second leg of the collar ( the ex-tail ) , around the first leg of the collar and the eye leg of the tail side,. Elementary, my dear Allan ! :)
It is such a simple solution that I would be surprized if it is not already tied in the past - but I have been surprised many times in the past ! :)
A notable secure bowline, indeed .
-
This is a nice loop knot indeed, according to my own investigation. I have been trying and tying variations of the standard bowline incorporating an overhand knot into the tail structure at every place I can think of. It makes for some very secure loops, although I have not found one that is not jam prone, this included.
Thank you Alan for bringing it to us with a good photo display.
SS
-
I have been trying and tying variations of the standard bowline incorporating an overhand knot into the tail structure at every place I can think of.
! ! ! Elementary, my dear SS369. :) ( Yet, it had never crossed my mind...)
...although I have not found one that is not jam prone, this included.
Too bad for this simple nice eyeknot ! So, it seems that we should abandon the overhand. Let us now try the fig.8, at every place we can think of.
-
Not too bad if you want a neat, relatively enduring loop.
Eight based from here on? Go for it. ;-)
SS
-
the Pretzel [nipping turn] has those two "odd" X s = two crossings, one at each side, which disturb the smooth, nice flow of the lines we see within and around the nub of the Girth - hitch based loop
See the attached pictures, for an explanation of what I try to say here. Inside the yellow circles, you can see the two "crossings", each at each side, the two "kinks", where the angle of the two strands that meet each other there is very small, and the one goes "over" the other, like a riding turn. Those two strands do not meet each other at the optimum angle re. friction, the right angle, neither they remain parallel to each other - parallel strands mean a smooth flow and more extended distribution of the tensile forces, and easy to inspect, good-looking knots ! Look at the Lee s locked bowline : no kinks whatsoever ! Look at the pseudo-Zeppelin loop (1) : No "kinks" whatsoever, too.
On the contrary, the Pretzel hitch nipping turn + shape "8" collar structure eyeknot you show has two kinks, and the Girth hitch nipping turn + shape "8" collar structure has one. That is why I prefer the later from the former - although the Pretzel hitch is more stable than the Girth hitch.
If we wish to present post-eye-tiable alternatives to the most beautiful and smooth retraced fig.8 knot, we should better reduce the number of those ugly "kinks" as much as possible.
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4095.msg24546#msg24546 (http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4095.msg24546#msg24546)
-
Hi All,
Thanks for the comments SS and X1, Thanks for the support and encouragement from both of you.
X1 Thanks for your valuable time to reply on all my knots all these days for guiding me every step, without you I won't be able to create the few good looking knot. Thanks again.
I think my bowline run is almost completed to the end. That all I can do for (Bowline and Eskimo nipping mix with overhand and figure 8 knots,) I am going to concentrate and learn how to do the test on few of the loops.
Hopefully I can find some spare time to create new knots in the near future.
I have two loops here, have the same structure, just the tail exit at the difference side of the main nipping loop, both of them are secured, compact, no problem to untie after loaded the loop. may be loop (IMG_1413) little more secure then loop (IMG_1412) .
P/S I realize the structure set up very weird, and difficult to tie too.
Thanks alan lee.
-
Hi Alan, and thank you for the good words. The knot were tied by you, and you only, I had only played the role of a willing audience.
Regarding those two loops, I do not like that the eye leg of the Tail side is not connected more directly to the nipping turn. It seems to me that it can slide downwards, along the eye leg of the Standing Part side, and drag the tail with it - because of its link with the collar, and of the collar with the tail ! May be it will not because it can not, but certainly it looks like it can, and this is, at least for purely psychological reasons, not a good thing ( for the climber, the rescue worker, etc,. who should always work with the maximum piece of mind...)
I hope you will find the time to TEST some of the loops you had tied, regarding security when tied on very slippery materials, or strength. We have reached a point where we NEED test more than anything else, before we can proceed further.
Good luck !
-
Hi 75RR,
Beautyful work,I like it very much. Nice to have you with your great efforts and contribution to this forum.
Thanks you very much.
I have some fast knot videos at youtube, I did mention it a few time in this forum, in case you and all other miss it , I like to share it with all of you, it call alanleeknots at youtube.
Hope you like it.
Thanks alan lee.
-
Hi All,
I have a loop here, it seem like well secure, and after loaded the loop, I find very easy to untie,I don't see anything wrong with it.(may be I am wrong) when we take the bowline nipping away, the tail part have no knot on it.
Your comment is valuable to me, so far with all the knots that I have posted, whether is good or bad knots, I do learn something from your comments.
Have a great day. alan lee.
-
You see the Tail and the Eye leg of the Tail part, as they are encircled by the "lower" collar ? What prevents them of being dragged by the legas of this collar, and be "swallowed" into the nipping turn ? Their stiffness, the fact that they work in tandem as a stiff toggle, that can not pass through the nipping turn. This is the last thing we should do, if we are not forced to do it, because the stability of our knot would depend on the "knotted material" too much ! We do not know if it will hold in the case the knot is tied on soft and slippery materials.
Anyway, the Lee s locked bowline offers all this knot offers, with the same amount of complexity, and without been forced to rely on this material-depended toggle mechanism.
-
Hi All,
Thanks for the reply X1. I have a fix loop ( figure + over hand knot ), well secure, compact and easy to untie.
She seem fine to me. Well come for any comment.
Thanks alan lee.
-
I can not start by anything else than my disappointment you have abandoned the PET camp.
I do nor see why one has to tie such a complex knot on the Standing Part, ante-the-eye... Even if you like very much the shape of it, (as I do...), you could well tie a simpler overhand knot, in its nice 8-shaped form. An overhand knot is more than enough to serve as an anchor for the eye leg of the Tail - because a topologically equivalent to the unknot single nipping turn IS already enough !
There are HUNDREDS of eyeknots that can be tied with an overhand-knot based nipping structure, and an overhand knot based bight component structure ( collar structure ). None of them seems better or worse than the other - all are mediocre eyeknots, that are not PET, and are not even anything else...
If you wish to start from a fixed fig.8 knot tied on the Standing part, you are very close to THE Fig. 8 eyeknot, so I do not see the reason for this... Perhaps you wish to tie a knot that is easier to untie, than the retraced fig. 8 knot. In this, you have succeeded, indeed. I have modified your knot a little bid, re-arranging the strands so they remain parallel to each other, and do not form "kinks" of riding turns over round turns below them, and I arrived at the familiar "smooth" knot shown in the first picture. Then, I tried this slightly re-dressed knot in my laboratory, and find it non-jamming, even after 64 alternate loadings with my full body weight, jumping on a loop hanged from the kitchen ceiling s heating pipe...( See the attached pictures ). Definitely a non-jamming eyeknot - the manipulation / twisting of its two collars is enough to be untied very easily. However, I have seen that the last turn of the Tail was left rather lose, and this tells us that the "last line of defence" is redundant - not a good sign for a knot which has to work as a whole, by the balanced contribution of each and every individual strand inside its nub.
If you wish to start from a fig.8 knot, you can see the many fig.8 based bends I have submitted in this forum (1). Or, you can start from the HFP adjustable loop, shown by roo at his "Notable" knots index site, which is nothing more than an "Eskimo"- like noose, based on the fig. 8 knot. Not bad a knot ( roo s knots have this in their favour, they are not bad - just most of them are mediocre, and even the superb ones, as the bowline or the Zeppelin bend, he does not understand - or, if he does, he does not wish to say - how they work, as structures...). However, you know what the best nipping structure for a noose is, because you have already used it in a bowline of yours - which, on top of all the rest ( being stable and secure ), it is also PET : The "Eskimo"- like one based on the Pretzel, or Reversed Girth hitch double nipping turn (2). The common Girth hitch, or the 8 loop based ones are also not bad, and they do not jam as the Clove hitch based one does (3), although they are less stable than the Pretzel / Reversed Girth hitch adjustable loop. Start from those strong, stable and secure nipping structures, and weave your working end around their PET nipping structures, to form nice bight component structures ( collar structures ).
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3148.0 (http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3148.0)
2. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4464.0 (http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4464.0)
-
Hi All,
I have tied many over hand knot into bowline, seem like I miss this one here, well secure easy to tie and easy to untie.
She seem alright to me. as long as you dress it up nicely.
謝謝 alan lee
I see the warning sign, this topic passed 120 days, I don't know where to go, If I am in the wrong place, please let me know.
-
Hi Alan.
I'll give your latest offer a whirl. Thank you!
You are in the "right place". If you feel that this addition does not belong in the "Look alike loops" thread we can move it.
For those with a question about the warning about the topic being 120 days old. It is just an advisory to alert the poster to refrain from "bumping". If the poster is truly adding something of merit, germane to the thread, please do so.
SS
-
...
Perhaps you wish to tie a knot that is easier to untie than the retraced fig. 8 knot.
In this, you have succeeded, indeed. I have modified your knot a little bid-t,
re-arranging the strands so they remain parallel to each other, ...
I tried this slightly re-dressed knot in my laboratory,and find it non-jamming, even after 64 alternate loadings with my full body weight, jumping on a loop hanged from the kitchen ceiling's heating pipe...
( See the attached pictures ). Definitely a non-jamming eyeknot :
the manipulation / twisting of its two collars is enough to be untied very easily.
However, I have seen that the last turn of the Tail was left rather loose,
and this tells us that ...
... the tyer did not set the knot well! ;)
Indeed, the overhand component of *my*
"Lehman8" should be set tight, in part to shape
the passage of the SPart into what I thought
(and will keep hoping, in some materials...)
would be a strong curvature of the SPart.
cf. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3810.msg22474#msg22474
--dl*
====
-
I can not edit my previous post (1), so I have to post a new one here. Indeed, I should had offered the due reference about the Lehmans8 loop, at ;
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3810.msg22474#msg22474
( I do not pay much attention to non-PET loops, so it this may influence my ability to remember or set them well, as well ! :))
( Also, I have to correct a previous remark of mine, and tell that the exclusive club of knot tyers + knot testers has, as far as I know, 3, at least, members - as one can see at the reference above, the author of the Lehmans8 loop has tested this knot ).
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4125.msg29139#msg29139
-
I have not found one that is not jam prone, this included.
Does this observation of yours apply in the case of this last Lee s secure bowline (3), as in the previous ones (1)(2) ? I think that this last cow is prettier than the others - which were not ugly, either, not ugly at all !
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4125.msg28421#msg28421
2. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4125.msg28473#msg28473
3. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4125.msg30432#msg30432
-
Love the pink rope :P, makes it very pretty. lol
This particular loop is not so "jammy" to me. The way the tail runs leaves the untying manageable. Mileage may vary due to the nature of the media used.
I actually prefer Lee's offering at http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4125.msg28209#msg28209 (http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4125.msg28209#msg28209) reply #82 for its looks.
Of course beauty is in the eye of the beholder.....
SS
-
The way the tail runs leaves the untying manageable.
Although I had tried to seduce you with the pink rope :), you remain sceptical, and you basically say about the same thing, in a more mild way... You just can not say : This knot does not jam, period... Too bad for the pink ! :) It seems that the bulk of the one-line tail of the overhand-knot based lock is not enough to reduce the risk of jamming, so we probably need more keys / lines inserted into the lock / nub, more material - as in the Lee s locked bowline you mention.
-
Yes, I remain skeptical, to a degree. I can not say unequivocally that it will or will not jam. That is subjective to the material being used. Pink seduction can only go so far, :D, and it may only be skin deep. I can say that in my exploration with my materials, what I experience and determine.
I can say that there are knots that just do not jam, when they don't...
If I were to do near destructive testing, then I would have something a bit more concrete to report. The future may hold some of this, but not nearly as comprehensive as some might care for. Nor as far ranging.
There comes a point, lets say 3 diameters within the nub, where there is so much bulk that a jam just won't happen. But, we've sacrificed streamlining and compactness and possibly introduce detrimental movement under extreme loads. Where this movement occurs there can be harmful friction reducing the sheath/core, fiber's integrity and there goes the unit.
Difficultly in untying is a step below jamming, to me, and this is different for all people. Some have strong hands, some weak, some use tools and don't say, but they untie some beasts. Some ropes or cords deform/compress severely or they can be of a small dimension and make untying near next to impossible and to salvage the remaining length the knot has to be cut off.
Many of the knots in this thread alone, when tied in paracord, will stay there until the end of time if sufficiently loaded.
Perhaps someone can come up with a untie-ability rating system when they do their knot testing.
More pink knots? ;)
SS
-
Hi All, Thanks very much for all the reply. I have another loop here, I don't what should I call it. Seem like it make sense to rig it this way too. very well secure, 3 ropes diameter on the nipping loop, very easy to untie, and all 3 legs are nipping everywhere of the tail portion.
Second photo I take away the main nipping loop, there is no knot in there.
謝謝 alan lee
-
Hi All,
Few month ago I have this loop and I don't know why? I didn't post it in reply 75.
Now I have more time to look at it again, she is solid simple loop, secure, easy to tie, easy to check
and untie.
謝謝 alan lee.
-
Hi All,
I have two loops here, I like it very much. They are simple,compact ,very well secure, easy to tie to check, and super easy
to untie.
謝謝 alan lee
-
Hi,
I create this two photos here, make it easy for all the viewer include me to see the difference between them. All of these loops here have the same tye of long u shape collar and the last part of the tail is inline with the standing part, it make it so easy to untie.
I like to tell you more, but is beyond my laungue barrier. I think the photo already worth the a thousand words.
謝謝 alan lee
P/S firsts photo the second loop is the same at reply #110.
-
Hi All,
I have another overhand locked bowline here, I don't see anything wrong with it, I have a 9/16 diameter rope and loaded heavy and find very easy to untie. she don't look bad at all.
謝謝 alan lee
Merry Christmas and Happy New year and good luck to all of you.
-
Hi Alan. Thank you for your work and "gifts". :)
I hope you have Happy Holidays as well and a prosperous New Year too!
SS
-
Hi All,
Thanks for the reply SS369. I share my loops here, whether it is practcal, easy to tie or untie or not,
but just want to show these good looking with everyone.
謝謝 alan lee.
-
Hi All,
I have this simple locked bowline here, I thinks this one is better than Lee s overhand locked bowline(B).
This simple lock is not a positive overhand knot, but it do act like a positive overhand knot. it use less material fit
smoothly into the structure nub make it little more compact then Lee overhand locked bowline(B).
Second picture I have 9\16 rope and loaded it heavy and fond super easy to untie.
I like to do more study and test on this group of loops, I will be back in the near future and tell you more.
謝謝 alan lee
-
I like this one Alan! It performs well. Thank you.
Have you tried it till it breaks? Maybe in the smaller stuff.
SS
-
Hi All,
Thanks SS369, I just bought some blue water ropes, can't wait to tie some knots on this beautiful ropes, and now I got a
lots of used 1/4 " solid brace ropes, it is prefect for breaking test. I will work on it when I am free again.
謝謝 alan lee.
-
You're welcome Alan.
Nice supplies! Now you will be in for a treat and see how real rope performs. ;) :) ;D
Try your favorite loops and see what a difference the media makes.
Happy New Year! Looking forward to many broken ropes in 2014. ;D
SS
-
Hi All,
I have this simple locked bowline here, I thinks this one is better than Lee s overhand locked bowline(B).
This simple lock is not a positive overhand knot, but it do act like a positive overhand knot. it use less material fit
smoothly into the structure nub make it little more compact then Lee overhand locked bowline(B).
Nice looking knot, Alan, particularly the reverse(?) in the middle picture of the three. As you say very easy to untie even in paracord and seems to work well in 10.5mm semi-static climbing rope.
Happy New Year to one and all.
Barry
-
Hi All,
Thanks SS369,Sweeney.
I have this beautiful loop here to share with and Happy New Year to all of you.
謝謝 alan lee.
-
I have a 9/16 diameter rope and loaded heavy
...
Merry Christmas and Happy New year and good luck to all of you.
Happy New Year 2014, Alan.
What exactly is "loaded heavy"
--what forces (pounds/kg), or how ... ?!
(E.g., Xarax I think now can do some body-weighting
in some manner(s)? I can use a lousy 5:1 pulley with
body weight of approx. 175# --which could be bumped
with weights of even +130# (!)--, and can also impart
some shocks of jumping a little when suspended.
(and have actually used a sheepshank for shortening
my haul line in such loading, imagine that! :D )
Also, have you photo'd any such heavily loaded knot
tied in this 9/16" rope? --have we even seen the rope?
--dl*
====
-
Hi All,
You are right Sweeney, this reverse version, l think she is better the it classmate,
Not that hard to tie and inspect, very well secure, I like it.
謝謝 alan lee.
(the rope is 7/16")
-
Hi All,
I like this Lee s lock bowline(left hand version)
She is very nice too.
謝謝 alan lee.
(1/2" rope)
-
Hi All,
Dan I got photos and weight info and how I test this loop with 7/16" blue water rope.
Hope you like it.
謝謝 alan lee.
-
Hi All,
Dan, I have this 9/16" solid brace rope here, she is kind softer then blue water rope.
After I got the weight on, I bounce it about 6" up and down for 10 time, and here are
the photo result of the the loop.
You have a great day.
謝謝 alan lee.
-
Hi Dan,
Two more photos here
謝謝 alan lee.
-
To post #110 :
I think I understood what you were trying to do : By crossing the Tail this way ( see the attached picture, inside the blue circle ), you avoid some of the MANY different dressings all those bowlines with a fig.8 - shaped collar structure can take ( but not ALL...). However, personally I consider this "un-natural", so to speak, over/under crossing at this point, as a "kink": The strands are inter-weaved too much, you do not really need them to jump the one over the other all over the place... They better follow parallel paths as long as possible, so the overall distribution of forces is spread over more extended areas, and the knot s nub remains more compact / less voluminous and more easy / less confusing to inspect. ( When the over/under crossings are fewer, the eye can trace each individual part of the rope easier ) - but this generates the danger of a too tight knot, difficult to untie... Crossing the two parts of the Tail otherwise, you drive your working end along a much smoother, nice path - and you end up with the Lee s locked bowline ! :)
-
...easy to tie, easy to check...
Easy to tie, perhaps - because the last segment of the Tail retraces the path of the returning eye leg. However, I do not find it easy to check / inspect, not at all ! The "back" side of the knot is very nice, with this pair of adjacent rings ( the two "low" collars ) around this pair of adjacent and parallel straight lines ( the last segment of the Tail and the returning eye leg). Unfortunately, the "front side" looks ( to my eyes ) a real mess, with THREE lines crossing each other at one point - a triple "kink" ! Especially the Tail, before it makes it final U-turn and becomes parallel to the returning eye leg, jumps over the eye leg of the Standing Part in a very oblique = unstable and ugly angle.
With the rather soft braided ropes you use, you can squeeze the lines, flatten them, and make those kinks look less pronounced. Tied on stiff, uncompressible kernmantle ropes which retain their round cross section, the kinks can not be smoothened out, and the nub can not take the compact form shown in your pictures. When the lines cross each other at very oblique angles, they can not "bite" each other hard and deep, so the one can not remain stable, canalized into the groove formed on the surface of the other. This means that they are more free to move sideways relatively to each other, so the knot is not very stable at their mutual crossing point. ( I am glad you did nt post it at reply#75... :) )
To post #112:
I, too, like the secure way the tail is squeezed in between the two parallel legs of the collar, and them stems out of them, at right angles - but not anything else. I am afraid. In particular, the "lock", the last overhand knot, is placed too low, almost outside the rest of the knot. More important is the almost one rope diameter around which the tail is forced to turn, in order to tighten the overhand knot, in both loops. This is because, although the lines it goes around are two, the one is placed "under" / lower than the other, so the Tail makes a sharp turn around the (lower) one only of them. I suspect that the knot will remain secure, because the tail is already locked in between the two legs of the collar, but that the final overhand knot will remain slack most of the time - that is, it will look like it is redundant. One would have to pull the tail from time to time. in order to make this overhand knot as compact as possible, and, in doing this, the almost one-rope-diameter turn would be an obstacle. Stiff ropes are more like vertebrates, not molluscs ! :)
I don't see anything wrong with it, I find very easy to untie. she don't look bad at all.
There is nothing wrong with it, and it is not bad at all, but I believe you wish something more than negations of negatives ! :) Although the lines meet each other at right angles. mostly - which is always a good thing, re. security -, and although there are no sharp one-rope-diameter turns anywhere, and although one can even say that there is almost a pattern of braided / interweaved lines there, to my eyes this thing still looks more like hastily knitted than meticulously knotted... I do not doubt that it can be untied very easily, because, usually, this pattern of over/under lines, crossing each other at non-oblique, almost right angle angles, is a sign of a very secure knot, which will "lock", and will block any further inner movement and shrinkage within it long before it becomes too compact and rock-solid - that is. long before it can possibly jam, to any degree. However, this pattern is not as clearly implemented as I would had wished it to be - so, to my mind, the original beautiful Lee s locked bowline is still a much better knot. Perhaps I would need some time to digest it a little more, but, for the time being, I can feel that it is not my cup of tea.
-
This simple lock is not a positive overhand knot, but it does act like a positive overhand knot. It uses less material, it fits smoothly into the structure of the nub...
Aha ! This is an altogether new idea ! No need for the overhand knot any more. No wonder that some old foxes picked it up at once... I believe this simple locked bowline deserves further study, indeed - however I am not sure that the "reverse" form will offer much more than the original non-reversed one.
-
Hi All,
Thanks for the value comments Xarax, you give me some answer that I am not able to answer myself.
謝謝 alan lee.
"correction" Some how I have giving the wrong dimension of my force multiplying tensioning device, the aluminum bar is 7/8" diameter
-
To answer is easy - what is much more difficult is to find out which are the questions that can be answered. And the really difficult thing is to create the things themselves that generate questions ! ( I guess that is why people are still building temples to somebody who never asked a question to me - or, for that matter, never asked a question to anybody else, I suppose - about anything He created... :)) Keep creating knots, and leave the rest, third-class part, to us. :)
I do not like the "reversed" "Sweeney s variation". I feel that :1, the returning eye leg - which is tensioned most of the time - should, in this case, better be connected directly to the "high" collar around the standing end, so this collar would never run the danger to remain slack and thus allow the nipping loop to open up and disintegrate into an helical turn, and, : 2, the "lock" ( the "low" collar around the rim of the nipping loop ) would involve the Tail end as much as possible, as the last line of defence against slippage. If between the returning eye leg and the "high" collar around the standing end, there is this intermediate very tight "low" collar / round turn around the rim of the nipping loop and the Tail end, I think that a substantial part of the tension which keeps the one limb of the nipping loop ( the standing end ) firmly attached to the other ( the eye leg of the standing part ) at the crossing point, will be uploaded too soon. Now, in the somewhat similar case of the "Link bowlines", this "low" collar around the rim of the nipping loop is never very tight, so any pull from the returning eye leg could be transported through the "low" collar around the rim of the nipping loop and reach, indirectly but easily, the 'high" collar around the standing part - and so it can always retain the required tension which pushes the two limbs of the nipping loop towards each other and secures the integrity of the nipping loop itself as a closed loop. Also, I think that a lock should be a lock should be a lock, and a lock of the bowline should secure the Tail end by forcing it to fully participate into an added structure - not just pass through it, as in the case of the "reverse" variation. Just my two pence on the "reverse" variation of this interesting locked bowline ( so, not even an answer ! :)).
-
... The strands are inter-weaved too much, you do not really need them
to jump the one over the other all over the place ... . They better follow
parallel paths as long as possible, so the overall distribution of forces is spread
over more extended areas, and the knot s nub remains more compact / less voluminous
and more easy / less confusing to inspect. ...
+1 !
The securing of the tail / knot are better with the crossing
reversed at Xarax's circled point, the tail then well nipped
by a twin-strand bearing upon it. (And I think that it is this
revised version that is somewhere sketched among my
papers.) There is the variance in the revision of whether
the tail is pulled sharply to lie between eye legs or to be
on the outside --a matter of dressing & setting. Having
it inside is probably better.
--dl*
====
-
Hi All,
Thanks Xarax and Dan for the reply.
Dan I read you description, I have this photo here, did l tie it right as you have said?
I found quite easy to dress it tight by hand.
謝謝 alan lee.
-
Hi All,
Only recently I have Blue water ropes, I have a piece of 7/16"Kernmantle rope,is quiet a stiff rope. I tie all the overhand locked bowline(since Reply #102) and loaded 330 lbs, some of the tail of the loops are not that tight, I can push the tail out easy. that mean no good for this Kernmantle rope.(I didn't try the reverse version yet.)
Well this time I modify the Lee s simple locked bowline and Lee s overhand locked bowline, give them an additional truck.
again l use the Kerrmantle rope, tie and dressing it as good as l can, while the loop is in tight form, l push the collar inward and pull on the tail eye leg little more. This way when l am loading the loop, it will pick up some more slack of the overhand knot, and make the loop in more tighter form.
Here is the photos result of the loops, good looking, are quiet compact, very well secure, 4 ropes diameter on the nipping loop and sitting on kind of 45 degree angle, the nipping loop don't look that fat the way it set up. They all are easy to untie, I don't know you call it hard to tie or not, you may need more effort to dress it.
謝謝 alan lee.
-
Second set of loop. this one is three ropes diameter on the nipping loop.
謝謝 alan lee.
-
Third set of loop.
謝謝 alan lee.
-
Alan, I think that static 330 lb is a relatively light load for a 1/2" stiff kernmantle rope...
The most important thing we would like to know is the easiness of untying of each one.
Could you, please, tie the first Lee s locked bowline ( shown at the attached pictures ) and show it to us to see how it is deformed under heavy loading ?
-
Hi Xarax,
The Kernmantle rope is 7/16", How heavy you want me to load it. I can find some weight to do it.
You have a great day.
-
12. 5 mm or 1/2" is not very different from 7 / 16". I see that they have a tensile strength of about 7.200 lb. If the knotted rope can withstand half, give or take, of this load, I guess that, as a rule of thumb, "heavy loading" would mean something like half of that half, = 1800 lb ( about the same as the recommended / safe working load ). Now, 300 lb is the 1 / 6 , only, of this...
A friend of mine tells me that the recommended / safe working load is a certain percentage of the breaking load, that varies from 1 : 5 to 1 : 10 ( for climbers ), even to 1 : 15 ( for firemen, rescue workers ). I do not know if by "heavy loading", and its impact on the ropes and the knots tied on them, we should take into account the recommended / safe working load of the unknotted or of the knotted rope, and the safety factor of 1 : 5, of 1 : 10, or no safety factor at all - we want to know how our knot will behave, even in the case of an exceptional, although not yet catastrophic event, don't we ?
P.S. I have searched for some working load / breaking load recommendations, but I have not been able to find something as concrete as I would had wished... Read, for for example :
Working Loads:
No blanket safe working load (SWL) recommendations can be made for any line because SWL's must be calculated based on application, conditions of use, and potential danger to personnel among other considerations. It is recommended that the end user establish working loads and safety factors based on best practices established by the end user's industry; by professional judgment and personal experience; and after thorough assessment of all risks. The SWL is a guideline for the use of a rope in good condition for non-critical applications and should be reduced where life, limb, or valuable property is involved, or in cases of exceptional service such as shock loading, sustained loading, severe vibration, etc. The Cordage Institute specifies that the SWL of a rope shall be determined by dividing the Minimum Tensile Strength of the rope by a safety factor. The safety factor ranges from 5 to 12 for non-critical uses and is typically set at 15 for life lines.
-
Hi All,
As it was suggested by Xarax, I am submitting this photos result of heavy loading Lee s locked bowline.
Photos #1 to #6, these loops loaded with 1400 lbs.
Photos #7& #8 loaded with approximately 1800 lbs.
It seem like holding very well.
謝謝 alan lee.
-
More photos here.
謝謝 alan
-
More photos here.
謝謝 alan
-
More photos here.
謝謝 alan lee.
-
Hi All,
SS369 you are right, as you said I should turn some of my loops into bend, seem like this Lee s locked bowline can turn
into very nice secure bend.
謝謝 alan lee.
-
Any symmetric bend, where the links are topologically equivalent to the unknot ( the "A" bends" of Miles s "Symmetric Bends" book ), can be turned into a PET loop, almost by definition... So, if you take a PET loop and turn it back into a bend, either you have completed a round turn ( that is, a perfect 0 ... :)), or you have tied a non-symmetric bend - which, most of the time, is not an interesting knot... There are some rare cases where we have tried to do the opposite, i.e., to turn interesting non-symmetric bents into loops - as, for example, in the case of the simple non-symmetric bends presented by Hoban (1) - no luck (2) ! :) The original simplicity of the parent bend is lost, and the loading of another, third, limb of the initial end-to-end knot can deform it to the point it becomes unrecognizable.
Now, regarding your attempt, as a result / consequence which, perhaps, should have been expected, the nice flow of the strands into the parent loop s nub leads to a nice non-symmetric bend, looking like an enhanced Sheet bend. However, as a potentially practical knot, does it offer anything more than a symmetric bend ? I doubt it. In a sense, the simpler link begs to be completed, and acquire the same amount of complexity - and the same degree of participation in the workings of the knot - as the other one. And if you re-tuck the end of this end, you end to some known symmetric bend :) - or you "tie" some ugly tangy, a desperate act which you would nt even think to do, of course.
Balance of the amount of complexity of the path each rope follows into space, as it turns around the other and itself, is not just a demand of aesthetics - it is a requirement of the mechanics of a tool, so the forces that run within its parts are evenly distributed along greater areas. Look at a humble nut-and-bolt simple machine : the male and the female parts are equally complex, you can not say the one is more "worked", more sculptured into the metal, than the other. Look at the common bowline : the nipping loop and the collar, although they play different roles, are equally simple. Look at Buster Keaton :) ! Although the form and the material of his body are sooo different from the form and the material of the current of air, those two things are in a perfect balance - a situation which, of course is such a rare thing in life, so it makes us admire it, or laugh with it.
I am not convinced by any non-symmetric bend - and I am not even convinced by any too-clever-by-half knot :), where we add 1 and 1 to make 1, = we interlace two hitches to make one bend... There should be a sound reason for the addition and the duplication, in place of a new creation. On the same footing, there should be a sound reason for the subtraction of a symmetric bend s portion / part, and the resulting unbalanced knot, in place of a simpler, right from the start, symmetric bend. However, as Ashley says, "There are always people who believe that if a single thing is good, two are bound to be better." Well, I can only say that I am not among those... :)
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4116
2. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4116.msg27762#msg27762
-
Hi All,
SS369 you are right, as you said I should turn some of my loops into bend, seem like this Lee s locked bowline can turn
into very nice secure bend.
謝謝 alan lee.
Hi Alan.
I'm glad you've decided to explore some more. ;-)
If you test any of these with heavy loadings (slow and quick), Checking security when slack, etc., and find them getting a passing grade, please share what you find.
But, let's start a new thread for them. You can always refer to the corresponding loop from this thread if you want.
Have fun.
SS
-
Hi All,
Thanks for the comments Xarax and SS, I love to do the serious test on few of my loops, but now just too busy.
when ever I am ready, I will start a new thread, and get some opinion and advice from guys how to do the complete test.
Hope I can make it happen in the near future,
謝謝 alan lee
-
Hi All,
This double simple collar loop is well secure, little easier to tie then wrong consent loop , after loading 1400 lbs and find no problem to untie it. these two loops look alike too.
謝謝 alan lee.
-
look alike loop
-
Alan, perhaps because it is 6.30 in the morning here, or because your pictures are not very informative, I do not understand the difference between your two loops...
The tail does not penetrate the nipping loop, but it is secured on its rim, in a plane parallel to it, by the two legs of the collar in a way that reminds me of the very similar "Fontus bowline" - a variation of the "Janus bowline " ( Fontus was the son of Janus... :)).
-
Hi All, Thanks for the reply Xarax. I have a better picture here to show the different.
謝謝 alan lee.
-
Thank you, Alan,
I had just not imagined the "open" nipping bight of the "Wrong consent loop" - and my sight is not as good as it was during the last century ! :)
Now, a humble advice : In your pictures, try to avoid having more than two ropes passing through the same crossing point, because it is difficult for the viewer to see the relative "over"/"under" position of the lower ropes, if they are three or four of them. See the blue circles in the attached pictures, to see what I mean.
-
Hi All,
I have this double simple collar loop(left hand version) here, she is more compact, more secure then the right hand version,
after loading 1400 lbs. and found no problem to untie it.
謝謝 alan lee.
-
This is the left-hand version of the Double simple collar loop, presented by you at Replies#150-#153. I think it would be better to present the right-hand and the left-hand versions together, in one post, so the reader does not run the danger to get confused.
I still believe that the Fontus bowline is simpler, closer to the common bowline and to the Janus secure bowlines, which are already well known by the knot tyers. I can not imagine that the left- or the right-hand Double simple collar loop would be sooo much better, regarding strength or easiness of untying, to persuade us to use this loop, and not the well known and simpler to remember how to tie and to tie Janus or Fontus bowlines. However, I can not be sure, of course ! Now you have started, go all the way ! :) Test all these loops - I mean, all the Janus- and Fontus-like bowlines, and all the "Link bowlines", at least those we believe that they should be stronger, where the nipping loop and the second collar around the eye leg encircle three or more rope diameters - and tell us which are easier to untie. Beware of their number, though, and the effort this would require. I have not counted them, but they are NOT few ! :)
If I will have to select one of all those, I would select a TIB one, even if I will never tie it as TIB ! :) - so the Alpineer s TIB bowline (1) is still my favourite.
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4697.0
-
Hi All,
Thanks for the comment Xarax. After little more test on these loops, start to like this left hand version (A), even though seem like it have less nipping force apply to the tail from standing part, but this nipping structure is a one continuous nipping loop, once the standing part pull on it, all the force will apply to all three points of the tail evenly. Beside this I found she is more smooth and compact loop then it classmate.
謝謝 alan lee
-
For people who have not followed all the recent posts, the loop at the upper part of your picture is the right-hand version.
On the contrary, I like the B version ! :) The nipping loop and the collar around the eye leg are wider and rounder, more O-shaped than U shaped.
-
You know Allan, I find it difficult to tie your latest bowlines without looking at your pictures ! They are so deceivingly similar to the Janus bowlines, that I always have to pay attention so I will NOT tie a corresponding Fontus-like bowline... If I will not be persuaded, by NUMBERS, that they are really better, re. slippage, untying-easiness and strength, to the Janus or the Link bowlines, where both legs of the collar go through the nipping loop, I will not tie them any longer - they put my brain in pain ! :) I have been tying bowlines for half a century now, and I just can not learn to tie something so close, but also so different than them. If they were really different knots, I would had no such problem, but with those "almost" Janus bowlines, with the first or the second leg of the collar passing out of the nipping loop, I am confused ! :)
-
Hi All,
The first picture here, both of loop need 3 step to tie and using almost same amount length of rope to tie these loops. only little difference on 2nd step, they tuck in difference place ,and need no extra effort for either of them. I cannot tell which one is easier, I thinks because we are so use to bowline, rabbit come out of the hole, have to go back the hole then there is a tail for the the nipping loop to grip on, this is the way we tie bowline we modify bowline, we are so use to it this way, any other way may make no sense to us.
even though it look quiet similar, these are two totally difference structure. I think we need time to familiar with this new structure.
I did few breaking test all three of my loops again Fontus bowline with small rope, so far I founded Lee's Double simple collar loop, right hand and left hand(B) version is stronger then Fontus bowline, and Fontus bowline is stronger then left hand version(A)
Just a few test may no enough, I will get more rope with difference size and test it again. next time will come with the picture.
also so far with maximum load I found Fontus bowline is the harder one to untie. all these loops here need the help from tail collar to untie.
see Second picture , Standing part eye leg of Fontus bowline didn't have the bow shape like my loop to crank tail collar backward to make room for easy untie.
Third picture, If there is loop beauty contest, I thinks Fontus bowline may not qualify for the entry.
謝謝 alan lee
-
I cannot tell which one is easier,
Easier, conceptually, regarding the mental picture of the bowlines we already have, I can tell ! The Fontus bowline.
...because we are so used to the bowline, rabbit come out of the hole, have to go back into the hole...
Me, for one, I do not use this popular ( but naive, and not revealing anything of the true mechanism of the bowline ) mental picture, but I still see the bowline as a three-limbs eyeknot, where the Tail End forms a "collar" around some of the three limbs, and then penetrates the nipping loop once, at least, more.
...even though they look quiet similar, these are two totally difference structures. I think we need time to familiar with this new structure.
I guess I have been tying bowlines for too long, and I have not that much time left ! :)
...with maximum load, I found that the Fontus bowline is the harder one to untie.
All these loops here need the help from tail collar to be untied. ...the Standing part s eye leg of the Fontus bowline didn't have the bow shape, like my loop, to crank the tail collar backwards to make room for an easy untie..
Good point. I have not tested a Fontus bowline under heavy loading, to be able to tell. However, if there is a substantial difference in the easiness to untie them, I think we have to abandon it in favour of your loops, that is for sure.
Please, if you have the time and will, test, under the same conditions, the Alpineer s TIB bowline (1), which is my favourite for the time being.
If there is a loop beauty contest, I think the Fontus bowline may not qualify for the entry.
Oh, you killed it, Allan ! Not even qualify for the entry ? :) Is such an ugly beast ? :)
I agree, the Fontus bowline is NOT pretty... but neither are the similar loops you have tied here - compared with a real beauty, the Lie locked bowline you have forgotten ! :)
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4697.0
-
Hi All,
I have a improvement version of loop here, I call it Lee's Double simple collar loop (version A).
The previous Lee's Double simple collar loop (right hand version), rename it to Lee's Double simple
collar loop (version B)
This (version A) have better collar, both version A and B are very well secure, so far I see this one
continuous nipping loop when it apply pressure on to the nub, nothing had slip yet. I like (version A) more because
the last portion of the tail are nipped more directly by the standing part eye leg, make you feel more secure.
I am home, I did few load test with the smaller size rope, I found (version A) is easier to untie than (version B).
How easy or hard to tie this class of loop ? people may said too complicate to tie, I may not agree with this.
Bowline is easy to tie because it only have two collars, because Bowline is the King of the knot, and because
you want to tie it.
Now we are no happy with Bowline, we want more secure loop, here I have this four collar's loop here, and now you have to deal
with two more collars, sure it will not be as easy as Bowline.
This (version A) four collars compact loop, consume the least amount of length of rope to form this loop,
there is no unnecessary move, fit in and flow nicely in to the nub, all four collars doing the nipping work well, and one of the
collar give it all it can to the last part of the tail. Beside all those, you only need two step to untie the loop.
How much more can we ask for.
謝謝 alan lee
-
First, those two loops are NOT two "versions" of the same knot ! They are two different knots - as different as they could possibly be ! :)
Starting from the second, its resemblance to the Ampersand TIB bowline is obvious - although, to my aging mind, at least, it has this drawback of the "strange" path the second leg of the collar follows, as it does NOT go through the nipping loop like the first one, as I use to expect... My mind has ceased to evolve ! :) I still find it easier to tie a bowline-like eyeknot where both legs of the collar pass through the nipping loop ( from the same, or even from opposite sides, as in the Mytrle-collar loops ).
However, the great thing with the Ampersand TIB eyeknot, which is absent here, is that it is a TIB eyeknot ! :) Having a loop that is PET AND TIB is a GREAT convenience, which nobody can deny ! :)
Now, the first loop is an altogether different animal. It is also not a TIB eyeknot, and I do not see how one can change it to become one either. It looks complicated, and it is ! :) However, this ( counter-clockwise, 180 degrees ) "twist" of the eye during its tying, right after the second stage, is an ingenious move ! ! ! I had not seen it before, and, of course, I had not thought of trying something like this, never ! It is a very simple yet potentially very productive move, which can generate many new eyeknots ! Twist the eye of the to-be-tied loop, in one stage of its tying, is a new idea, which deserves further exploration. Who knows how many more loops you can tie by implementing this...Moreover, IFF those loops just happen to be TIB, too :), it would be a great thing, indeed !
-
Hi All,
Thanks for the reply Xarax, All I know all this class of loops is Double collar loop, I didn't pay attention
and aware they are so much different.
I have another two variation of loop here, I don't know what should I call them now.
This two loops work as good as those previous two loops, well secure and easy to untie.
謝謝 alan lee
-
they are so much different.
They may be "no so much different", but they are different nevertheless. Look at the shapes of the collar structures : the one is a shape"8", the other is an ampersand. Look at the shapes of the nipping structures : version B s is almost a crossing knot s, the way it almost "folds" on itself.
-
In the two loops of your previous post, both "collar structures" are Pretzel-shaped - but they are weaved in a different way within the "nipping structures". So, again, I would characterize them as different knots.
I have admitted that I always prefer a bowline-like loop where both legs of the collar go through the nipping turn from the same side, or even from opposite sides. However, if one of them does not, I would prefer it to be the second leg, not the first. One may argue that this is a difference of the sequence of tying moves mainly, not of the shapes of the finished knots - but, to my mind, at least, the way we tie a bowline is important. So, I would prefer to tie the first of the your two new loops rather than the second. However, I want to stress that this may be nothing more than a personal prejudice, forced upon me by years of tying "common" bowlines : in other words, old dogs don't learn new tricks ! :) This trick of yours, to have the second or even the first leg of the collar pass outside the nipping loop, is a new trick to me ! I have to wait a few years, to see if I will become able to master it, or if I will become younger :).
So, one ties bowlines all his life, and here comes a guy who tells him that there are other ways to skin this cat... It happens to knot tyers all the time. What should they do ? Hide the new knots under the rug, snub them by carefully warping them into their silence, hoping ( and, perhaps, praying... :)) that those nouveautes will be forgotten soon ? No, of course not ! They should be happy, I would even say that they would be grateful, that the KnotLand offered to them is bigger that they had imagined, that there are, and there will ever be, new knot tyers, able to go further away from the beaten path which themselves had been following for so many tears, into new, unchartered territories. So, go on Alan Lee, go further. And if, by planning or by chance, you discover any TIB bowline-like loops ( PET AND TIB ), do not forget to mail them to the people at the museum ! :)
-
Hi All,
Thanks again Xarax, I have few more loops here, They are all very nice too. just little busy at this moment
and getting little confuse with all these loops, I don't know to call them yet ,have time I wil reorganize all
these picture again.
謝謝 alan lee.
-
You have mastered this new technique, to tie bowline-like PET loops, where the first or the second leg of the collar do not go though the nipping loop : this means that you have opened a new gate of the bowline s Paradise - or a new can of worms ! :) Numerous secure and easy to tie and untie bowline-like loops can be generated this way - although in many of them the "nipping structure" looks more like the nipping structure of a "crossing-knot" based loop, where the Standing Part meets the rim of the nipping loop in two points. ( The Samisen TIB bowlines, presented recently, are based on a Pretzel-like nipping structure, which also looks like a crossing knot - although what, exactly, did Ashley mean by this "crossing knot", is something that himself, probably, was the only one who knew ! :) )
The shape of the nipping structure in a vertically hanged such loop reminds me the lower-case Greek letter φ ( phi ), used as a symbol in many areas of mathematics, to denote various quantities - the golden ratio, for example.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phi
Another picture one can use is that of the number 6 : We can say that those nipping structures are "6" shaped.
I was lucky to stumble upon a bowline with a collar structure of an immediately recognizable shape, the ampersand. The shape of the nipping structures of many of the bowlines you had tied is also immediately recognized, but I can not think of a way to represent it, other than the φ ( phi ), or the number "6".
( As an exception to those φ or 6 shaped nipping structures, you had also used an S-shaped one ( in the upper loop of the second picture ), DO NOT DO THIS ! This structure is unstable, it can "open up" if the loop is loaded in a certain way, and, generally, there is no reason whatsoever to incorporate it into a "secure" bowline. Even the humble single nipping loops, and all the more complex nipping structures we use, have an inherent stability which is absolutely indispensable for the security of the bowline : it is not wise to force the collar structure to play the principal role in this.)
See the attached pictures. where a slight modification of one of yours loops is attempted ( just an over/under change in the path of the Tail ) : It leads to a possibly more compact and good-looking nub, which retains all the other advantages of the original knot.
( If you have tied more knots than the names you can think of, it is time to use numbers ! :) - or thing of a greater cataloguing scheme, into which they will occupy certain places. Perhaps a way to denote the particular shape of the nipping structure, from the one hand, and the path of the Working End within this structure while it forms the collars structure, on the other. )
-
Hi All,
Xarax, thanks for the modification, very good idea, I like it very much.
I have one more that can modify as your way, she turn out very nice too.
I have another loop here, she is fine too.
謝謝 alan lee
-
One of the best crossing-knot based eyeknots I had ever seen. An extremely wide Standing Part s first curve, a clear φ-shaped nipping structure, and a clear Pretzel-shaped collar structure. In short, a real gem. Congratulations, Alan Lee.
P.S. (23-08-2014)
The reader should compare this beauty with the other, similar one :
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4988.msg32929#msg32929
-
As the number of the bowline-like / PET loops presented in this thread surpasses now the one hundred ( ! ! ! ), I believe it is time for some bookkeeping. :)
I propose the following two categorizations :
A. The loops can be classified according to the 2D or 3D shape of their nipping and of their collar structures.
For example : the recent loop is based on :
1. a φ-shaped, or 6-shaped nipping structure, which is a form of a crossing knot. ( Another form is the form of an S, rotated 90 degrees clockwise. In both those forms, the Standing part meets itself, or approaches itself very much, at two points.)
Other shapes the nipping structure may have are the Girth hitch, the Constrictor, the Clove, or any other self-stabilized, mainly, closed form, topologically equivalent to the unknot.
2: a Pretzel-shaped collar structure, which is a form "resembling" the classic asymmetric shape of the overhand knot. ( The two limbs of the Pretzel may lay on the same side of its "belly", or on different sides, and they can also be twisted around each other. As one can see at the pictures of Reply#170, the limbs of the Pretzel there lay on different sides of the belly ).
Other shapes the collar structure may have are the Constrictor, the Clove, the overhand knot, the fig.8 knot, the S-shaped double collar, or the simple O-shaped collar.
B. The loops can be classified according to the path the continuation of the returning eye leg follows, when it enters into the eye of nipping structure just before and just after the tip of the first bight it forms as it makes a U turn around one of the three limbs of the eye-knot, i.e., just before or just after the collar.
It may pass through the nipping structure before and after, only before, or only after the tip of the collar.
For example, in the recent loop the continuation of the returning eye leg does not pass through the eye of the nipping structure just after the tip of the collar.
This is perhaps the greatest novelty of many of those loops, that they are bowline-like PET loops where the returning eye leg does not pass through the nipping loop just before and just after the tip of the collar, as it happens in most the loops we knew till now.
-
Hi All,
Thanks for the comments Xarax. I have another loop here, it is a very well secure solid loop.
This is a very well balanced loop, the tail was perfectly buried into the middle of the nub,
the two eye leg and the standing part are nipping very effectively on the tail,
it has a very wide collar. So far I only tested it with 1/4" rope, I found it is very easy to untie with just two steps.
Second picture, I have the sequence to show how to tie the loop, Is it easy or hard to tie? I'm not sure..
Third picture, if you rig the loop the other way around, the standing part eye leg becomes standing part, they are identical.
Fourth picture does the same thing too.
謝謝 alan lee
-
It is interesting that, after 100 bowline-like loops, you return to a Carrick-like loop ! :)
The many different Carrick mats can serve as bases for many different loops - I remember I have enumerated them all, sometime at the not so distant past, but I have forgotten them already... :) In general, there are 7 crossings in a Carrick mat, where the line of the second link can go "over" or "under" the line of the first link and itself - and then there are 7 openings through which one can re-tuck the Tail End of this second link once or twice. In short, there are as many possibilities as we would had wished, and then some ! :)
However, not all of them can form stable and self-stabilizing nubs, so we can start from an already stable and self-stabilizing base, and only afterwards weave the Tail end once or twice through this sufficiently coherent base. I do not think it is wise to start from an unstable Carrick mat ( which, if it were left alone, without the help of the collar, could open up or be deformed easily ), and then try to weave the rest of the collar structure within it, in order to offer the missing but required coherence, and "save" it : I believe that, even if the collar and the Tail End of a secure bowline-like or a Carrick-like remain somehow loose, the nipping structure itself, by its own geometry, should already be able to be stable and self-stabilized, to a satisfactory degree. So, if we seek stable and self-stabilizing Carrick mats to weave the rest of the collar structure within them, our options are drastically reduced.
See the Tennessee slider (1) and the Pretzel knot (2), which are arthroscopic slide-and-lock knots, and which are based on Carrick mats.
It is not difficult to describe the particular Carrick mat you use : Just describe the "over" / under" crossings the continuation of the returning eye leg ( i.e. the line which forms the collar structure ) follows : In your loop shown in this post, it is : over, over, under, under, over, over, under ( or, +,+,-,-,+,+,- ) - alternating, and quite easy to memorize ! :)
Then, you have to describe the two selected openings ( out of the seven possible ) through which the line should be re-tucked, after it forms the collar around the Stranding End. I had found that this is the stage where we are offered many options, indeed - because the stable and self-stabilizing Carrick mats are few.
In the thread where I was trying to describe the many possible bends we can get, if we re-tuck ( once ) a particular ( different from the one you use here ) Carrick mat ( before I was interrupted, in the usual way, by the usual troll...)(3), I had used this convention : left, upper Left, lower Left, Right, upper Right, lower Right, Central, for the seven openings of any Carrick mat.
So, if you would have described the particular Carrick mat you use, and the two openings of it the second leg of the collar follows, you would have described the way you had tied this Carrick loop.
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4107.msg24688#msg24688
2. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4107.msg24689#msg24689
3. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3086.msg18601#msg18601
-
Hi All,
Thanks again Xarax. I have another loop here, well secure, so far with few simple load test, I find she is
very easy to untie. Beside not that good looking, I think she have the criteria of a good knot.
Recently I have start to do some load test to some of my knots that had posted recently.
When ever I am ready, I will start a new tread and post it.
謝謝 alan lee
-
This loop starts as a common bowline, continues as an "Eskimo" one, and finishes with a "Myrtle" collar - but it seems that, in this case, the sum of three one-thirds is less than a whole one ! :) :) :) At the end, the nipping structure is not sufficiently well-balanced by itself, so it needs all the help it can get from the collar structure, in order to remain closed. Its orientation is almost "vertical" ( = parallel to the axis of loading ) - not a good thing, regarding balance... If the "Myrtle" collar is not very tight ( and a "Myrtle" collar can never be as tight as a "proper" collar ...), the nipping loop can open up - because an "Eskimo" first/lower collar ( around the eye leg ) is not can not stabilize the nipping loop of a common bowline , and a "Myrtle" second/higher collar ( around the standing End ) can not stabilize the collar of an "Eskimo" bowline ...
The corresponding "normal" Eskimo Janus bowline is a much better eye-knot...( See the attached picture )
-
Hi All,
Just another PET loop, seem fine to me, may belong to here.
謝謝 alan lee
-
... it may belong to here.
Its nipping structure looks similar to the nipping structure of the Samisen bowlines (1)- which, although they are called "bowlines", in fact they are crossing-knot-based loops.
( However, it does not belong here - because, as shown at the left, it is not TIB. Perhaps you submitted the wrong picture ? )
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4883
-
Hi All,
I add another collar to Lee s lock bowline, this fifth collar make it much more secure. may be way over kill.
when we have some many collars tangled together, even though she is no bad looking at all, is getting complicated
to tie and harder to untie. Not sure it worth to have this fifth collar. I had few simple test on this loop,
I found it is little hard to untie, but is manageable.
謝謝 alan lee
-
In the bowlines ( but also in many other simple knots) when we add even one double nipping loop, we subtract a considerable portion of how easy we can and untie it - so I believe that we should always think twice before we make this decision (1). Another reason we should not "overkill" the security of the bowline, is that nobody would tie a bowline more complex than the retraced fig.8 or fig.9 knot ! :) Now, when we add two double nipping loops, we should expect that the knot can become too tight, and it can even jam.
However, I have to say that this is not just "not bad looking", or "good looking"- it is a most beautiful knot - probably more beautiful even from the Lee locked bowline.
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4777.msg32554#msg32554
-
...this fifth collar
Not sure it worth to have this fifth collar.
The collars are four, not five. The fact that two of them are "closed" U-turns ( around 270, rather than around 180 degrees ) does not mean that we should add the 90 + 90 excessive degrees of each, and count the sum as a new, fifth collar...
Beautiful knot, nevertheless.
-
Drawing (.km) files of the Lie s Pretzel collar, φ-shaped crossing knot bowline, presented at Reply#169 (1).
The ( blue) symmetric Pretzel-shaped collar structure is clearly shown, and the (red) φ-shaped crossing knot nipping structure is clearly shown, too.
A beautiful secure bowline, with the most wide nipping loop I have ever met - and easy to remember how to tie, because its two parts / links have such clear, easily formed and inspected shapes.
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4125.msg32011#msg32011
-
Hi All,
Xarax you are my lucky star, Thanks for the beautyful and clear picture, right away I found another nice loop here.
very well secure compact and easy to untie loop.
also compare a picture of two loops here, from (Reply #162)
謝謝 alan lee.
-
I do not think that those two loops ( shown at the second picture ) should be considered as variations of the "same" knot... Their nipping and collar structures are very different.
The second one is much better than the first - ( which has so many essentially one-rope-diameter sharp turns, because the two segments the turn encircles each time are unfavourably placed regarding the path of the turn, the one on top of, not next to the other).
However, even in the second one I feel that the Working End does not follow the most proper, "optimum" path, so that all curves become as smooth as possible. I believe you can modify it, and possibly make the curves more "fair", and the whole nub more streamlined.
-
Drawing (.km) file of the Lie s 8-shaped collar, φ-shaped crossing knot bowline, presented at Reply#167 and also shown at Reply#168 (1), and at the attached pictures.
The ( blue) "open" 8-shaped collar structure is clearly shown, and the (red) φ-shaped crossing knot nipping structure is shown, too - although not as clearly as I had wished...
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4125.msg31986#msg31986