NOOB - I invented... now what?

[Mike]

i am not able to get the knot to grip very well in 550 cord.    I did, however, find another way to tie it.   It is simply a clove hitch with the sides reversed.   Just make a standard clove hitch, and then bring one side around the other side.

[[Inkanyezi] gone]

i am not able to get the knot to grip very well in 550 cord.    I did, however, find another way to tie it.   It is simply a clove hitch with the sides reversed.   Just make a standard clove hitch, and then bring one side around the other side.

I don't find any problems in getting a grip with paracord. When tying in paracord, if the cord is just long enough, i.e. the object(s) sufficiently large, there will be no problem to get it to grip. Mind that 550 cord needs more than 500 pounds tension for 30% elongation; a thinner paracord might be a better choice for small objects.  550 cord might not have enough elasticity for tying around a small object that is not resilient enough. The nip relies heavily on resilience, as all parts must have equal tension for the knot to hold. Very elastic cord, as shock cord, can capsize if there is too much tension on the center part, and too little tension on the center part will allow slippage in any material.

Your way of tying is simple when the knot can be passed over a rather small object, like for closing a sack, but it is unfeasible for larger ogjects and situations where an end of the object is not accessible.

I'm getting used to this knot and its behaviour, and I have already used it in several real life situations. Like any knot, it has to be learned, so that you understand its virtues as well as its limitations.

[Dan_Lehman]

i am not able to get the knot to grip very well in 550 cord.    I did, however, find another way to tie it. ...

Good Mike.  NB, you could've found that method on p.2 of this thread
-- to wit:

Here's another twist on the structure, tying in the bight (which, yes, will
not suit many tasks):  form a Clove Hitch but spread flat and such
that the crossing part is generally perpendicular to the ends; take one
side/loop and rotate it around 360deg back into position -- thereby
putting in this "floating" nipping loop in the crossing part, and sort
of crossing the ends 'a la Constrictor.  This structure inverts the central
loop (it points down into bound area rather than up away from it).
It's a quick method of making a similar binding structure for cases in
which the binding material can be put around some (likely known)
collection of objects -- set of stakes or paddles, e.g..

 

[Mike]

i am not able to get the knot to grip very well in 550 cord.    I did, however, find another way to tie it. ...

Good Mike.  NB, you could've found that method on p.2 of this thread
-- to wit:

Here's another twist on the structure, tying in the bight (which, yes, will
not suit many tasks):  form a Clove Hitch but spread flat and such
that the crossing part is generally perpendicular to the ends; take one
side/loop and rotate it around 360deg back into position -- thereby
putting in this "floating" nipping loop in the crossing part, and sort
of crossing the ends 'a la Constrictor.  This structure inverts the central
loop (it points down into bound area rather than up away from it).
It's a quick method of making a similar binding structure for cases in
which the binding material can be put around some (likely known)
collection of objects -- set of stakes or paddles, e.g..

 

    I guess I need to slow down my speed reading.   I missed that post.

[[Inkanyezi] gone]

The similarity with the sheepshank has been pointed out, but I find it a lot more interesting to see its relationship with the bowline.

The question has been raised whether "capsizing" the bowline is deliberate, and although I think it is not, the most common form in which we see the bownline is with the bight drawn out, half capsized, in a form rather different from the one that is tought, and very different from the sheet bend knot form.

When "capsized", the round turn, or rather the elusive half hitch that nips the knot, is in line with the pulling force, exactly as in the Gleipnir binder. I demonstrate it here below with a bowline tied in 4 mm cord, where I have attached a monkeywrench with a carabiner, so that it is under load.

• The first picture is the "theoretical" bowline, before it has been capsized.
• The second picture is the practical bowline after capsizing.
• The third picture is the same bowline, where the end has been withdrawn from the nip. The monkeywrench still hangs in the carabiner. The knot still holds, in exactly the way that the Gleipnir knot holds.
• The last picture is a detail of a bowline captured in the wild.

I think this new knot casts new light on the bowline and why it is such a good knot, as well as pointing out why a half hitch can be used for hanging a coil or in the sheepshank. The sheepshank might be a useless knot, but there is something to learn from it, something that tells us more about how many common knots work. I'm thankful to Gleipnir for pointing it out.

[Dan_Lehman]

When "capsized", the round turn, or rather the elusive half hitch that nips the knot, is in line with the pulling force, exactly as in the Gleipnir binder.

I'd say not "exactly":  for the TurNip of Gleipnir's structure is held more in the
half-hitch orientation by virtue of each end's un-ending side, which sustains
tension resisting the opening of the Half-hitch into Round Turn form.  Without
such resistance, the TurNip is a fickle thing -- YMMV with material, et cetera.

The Bowline with such a hard turn in it I'm guessing is one that gives a lower
reading then were the bending around the tail significant.  But these details
remain to see deliberate testing.

--dl*
=====

[[Inkanyezi] gone]

Of course it is fickle when the bight that hugs the SP is removed, security then is nigh to nil, no better than the balancing pole hitch, but I did try putting more load on it, and it still holds as long as both legs are loaded.

And in the Gleipnir, the end that comes from the opposite end helps to hold the HH from untwisting, as well as the bight hugging the SP does in the bowline. What I wanted to show is the relationship, and how maybe some new light is shed on the mechanism that makes the bowline work. Its 'capsized' form is the one most often seen when it has taken some strain after seeing some use. Its HH then is similar to the Gleipnir HH, with the force mainly in line with the turn.

Maybe this deviation from the original theme is more akin to knot theory than practical knots, but nevertheless, I put it in the Gleipnir thread for the similarity, which might help us understand how knots work.

[lcurious]

How does one  get to see your pictures??

[[Inkanyezi] gone]

How does one  get to see your pictures??

You might have to enable scripts in your browser to see the pictures, but in most browsers you should see miniatures of the images in the post, and clicking on them should open a larger popup. Under the picture also is a text link with the image name, and it can be downloaded by right-clicking.

[Dan_Lehman]

... .   With an eyeknot having a long tail, form a round turn in the eye and run
the tail through that to go around whatever needs to be pulled tight (S.Part
of eye being anchored in opposition), and return the tail to again pass through
the round turn in the eye in the same direction as first done.
So, now one hauls on the end, and the round turn tightens to nip it.
For illustration purposes, I locked a white nylon solid braid cord
onto the tail of the eye knot, and that thus is what I've run through
the red PP cord's round turn.  The eye knot is up, out of view.

I got to employ both Gleipnir's binding (with rather short run, to bind together
two shelving sides, for temporary support while installing X brace), and also
a variation of the one shown here, with the TurNip in an eye knot.
But unlike what I'd done previously with this eye knot where I used its
end running long out & back, the S.Part anchored separately, I used the
eye with TurNip in one end of a long loop/grommet with the opposite
side running through it en route to a remote anchorage, where the cord
turned and returned through the TurNip, then to become a hauling end
for that mythical Two-to-One (theoretcially more, 3:1, here?) mechanical
advantage, all the while being directly nipped and directly tensioning that
nip -- that is the point!  -- worked great, while the Gleipnir binder
had the problems previously experienced, where the TurNip is too far
removed (by bends of material around corners, here) from the direct
input of force to quickly gain increased binding effect; it worked for
me, in quite frictive old marine kernmantle sheath (?! -- an odd find),
but showed the difficulty in gaining nipping power.

--dl*
====

[Dan_Lehman]

Attached is a photo of the TurNip-in-Eye structure that I used in tensioning
some shelving frames (to hold in place while a metal X brace was installed).
This structure will give stronger nip in cases where the material cannot flow
around the object and tighten the TurNip so well.

Image explanation:  the 3/16" solid braid nylon(?) cord (soft, flexible) is
run through some half-inch thin polyester cable-hauling webbing secured
to the lower left side of the shelf, in a sling, and an end from this point
forms a Myrtle/Quick Bowline with a round turn (TurNip) around the other
side, which side reaches up to the shelf's top-right post and comes around
that smooth surface back to enter the TurNip from the opposite side, end
pointing upwards here.  Haul on the end to tighten the long loop formed
and the TurNip's grip as well; the main pull is on the eye knot side.

--dl*
====

[Dan_Lehman]

On the Gleipnir, if one shrinks the one of the two loops around the object, one gets the Eskimo bowline,

   You'll have to do better than this, for, no, just collapsing either loop
around the object (by which I mean remove the object, pull on one end
-- what else is there ... ?) gets one a nothing, or a form of "Fig.10".

( which works better than the standard bowline when the loop is stretched wide

Hmmm, the bowline works rather well, wide; greatly wide is something that
one should prefer to avoid, but if the material's got the strength, it can be
done.

The zipper was invented between 1905 and 1915, AFTER the special or the general theory of relativity!

Now there are two achievements of mankind to contemplate together!

 

[[Inkanyezi] gone]

If I'd do any guesswork on precedence, the mesh knot for netting probably would be preceding, as a historically more fundamental knot, than both the bowline and the sheet bend, which both might be derived from the mesh knot.

The fisherman's net is essential for growth of the human society, and it has been invented in all continents, and they all use the same form of knot, which is the basic form with which we make the sheet bend and the bowline. The bowline afterwards, by collapsing, takes its form with the Gleipnir turn, which someone might think is not accidental, but done on purpose. The turn is not the same in the net or in the sheet bend. The reason is that the bowline is loaded on both legs of the loop.

So historically, afaik, there is no former appearance of the Gleipnir, although it is closely related to the bowline after it has 'collapsed', as well as the sheepshank. I think one reason why it is not common would be that anyone accidentally making one would be reluctant to trust such a fickle contraption. We like to add something for security, but the Gleipnir in its basic form will not be improved by an extra half hitch. It relies on tension, and the fact that all legs of the knot bear equal load. It works better if there is slip over the object around which we bind it, and it takes its form by a cooperation of the elasticity of the binding stuff and the bound objects, as well as the slip over what it binds. It should not, however, slip where it is nipped.

I think it is rather a very specialised knot; a knot that takes a specialist, one in the know. It has a distinct minimalistic beauty. It is hard to think of anything simpler that would do the job that it does. It isn't just coincidence that its inventor thinks of it as a constrictor; what it shares with the constrictor is utter simplicity and the ability to hold the tension applied to it. I really love this knot and consider it one very basic knot that explains a lot about what knotting is about. I regard it as one of the most beautiful knots that can be found. And it sure does explain the riddle of the bowline; however, I don't think it relates to the bowline in any other way, than explaining why a 'collapsed' bowline is still an excellent knot.

It's not that it would precede the bowline, but when dissecting the collapsed bowline that has taken its final form, we find the Gleipnir turn, which makes it hold.

[[Inkanyezi] gone]

I managed to do the transformation, but it involves one extra step that's missing in the instructions. The "first loop", before collapsing, must also be taken around end B to form the Eskimo bowline. I think the operation is a bit far-fetched, and it does not show any real relationship between those knots.

[DerekSmith]

I managed to do the transformation, but it involves one extra step that's missing in the instructions. The "first loop", before collapsing, must also be taken around end B to form the Eskimo bowline. I think the operation is a bit far-fetched, and it does not show any real relationship between those knots.

Well, this has been an interesting post - I have learnt three things;

I have learnt (yet again) to trust my convictions - I have struggled for days to translate the Gleipnir to the Eskimo bwl., yet no matter what variant of interpretation of the instructions I took I only achieved a Reef, a fancy rethreaded Eskimo bwl. or a Non-Knot.  Then thanks to Inkanyenzi, I dread that it is necessary to partially undo the knot by its 'B' end before the translation is possible.  Undoing the 'B' end one step is not simply a matter of collapsing the first loop as claimed, so I feel Dan's protestations and my own failure to be somewhat vindicated.

Second, I have learnt (yet again) that the value of a knot is hugely influenced by the means of creating it.  If the method is clumsy and unmemorable, then the knot is virtually useless, while a less ideal knot that is easy to tie will posses greater utility.  I have always felt that the Eskimo is essentially valueless for this reason.

But third, and by far the most important, I have discovered an easy way of tying a very useful knot.  The knot - yes, it is the Eskimo bwl.  The method - NO it is not the collapsed Gleipnir !! 

Take the end of the rope and pass it around or through whatever you are going to make the loop to, and take the end back to the rope where you want to make the Eskimo.  In the rope tie a simple slipped overhand and poke the end through the slipped loop.  Pull the rope to collapse the slip and to pull the end into a bight, pulling it back into the OH.  As the bight forms, the OH collapses to form the bwl. collar.  It is a stunningly simple method of making the Eskimo bwl. exactly where you want it.

I think I would have to say that this method makes the Eskimo the easiest bwl. to tie.

As the slipped OH is possibly the simplest of knots to make (and therefore possibly amongst the oldest), I think it is reasonable to surmise that the Eskimo was likely to have been the very first bwl. to be discovered, and that the other variants of the basic structure, predominantly the Bowline and the Sheetbend, evolved from it - Not from the Gleipnir as xarax proposed.

I think this method of creating a loop even beats the Constrictor / Myrtle method for speed, and simplicity, and now I can tie the knot so easily, I can even see the utility of the loop legs leaving at 90 degrees instead of parallel.  A part of my barn roof has just been blown off in a storm, and I had to lash a tarp over the damage.  I fed a rope through two adjacent tarp eyes, brought the end back to where I would have made a myrtle, folded a slipped OH, popped in the end and pulled - the resultant Eskimo sat naturally with the two loop legs leaving at a wide angle to the tarp eyes, and the collar left the knot at right angles to the tie down point - the perfect knot for the job and tied so easily even with a high wind flogging the tarp and trying to pull the rope out of my hands.

Thank you xarax for stimulating the thought provoking challenge - I can see that if we can convince you to stay around, we can look forward to having a lot of fun with you.

Derek