Look alike loops

[xarax]

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.

[xarax]

   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 ! 

[alanleeknots]

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.

[xarax]

   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. )

[alanleeknots]

 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
         

[xarax]

   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

[xarax]

   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.

[alanleeknots]

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

[xarax]

   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

[alanleeknots]

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

[xarax]

   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 )

[alanleeknots]

Hi All,
        Just another PET loop, seem fine to me, may belong to here.

        謝謝  alan lee

[xarax]

... 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

[alanleeknots]

  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
       

[xarax]

   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