Wanted : A bend for very stiff ropes

[xarax]

   Looking for a bend where the rope strands are following gentle, wide curves all over the knot s nub, I have tied a promising bend ( I named it "the trefoil bend", for obvious reasons ( See the first post, at (1)). I post here a picture of the loose knot, ( that gives an indication about how it can be tied - a very easy thing ). If there is an interested reader, who is more skilful in testing knots than me ( that last thing is really easy... ), he is kindly requested to have a look, and tell me/us his results.

P.S. If the two "trefoil"- looking links / retucked-overhand-knots are not identical, i.e., if they are not both right handed, or both left-handed, they are not "locked" to each other very well. So, we have to pay attention to tie the second knot in the same orientation in which we have tied the first one.

1) http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1919.msg16396#msg16396

[Dan_Lehman]

Xarax, notice that if the crossing of the ends (S.Part & tail)
is reversd (over/under), you move from a double overhand
to a #525 (what I call "Symmetric Fig.9").  That form can
be traced (like the oh. is in the Water knot/Ring bend).
Abbreviated (to overhand from nine), it is in that form #1425.

It makes a good eye-knot (S.Part flowing through symmetric 9,
tail stopping short at the overhand formation, emerging roughly
perpendicular to tension axis).

I worry that your shown knot will tend to rotate-roll undone
in loading in stiff stuff.


--dl*
====

[SS369]

Hello Xarax.

Interesting development of the trefoil knot into bending use.

I think it is a bit too "round" in its dressed, but unloaded form. When I tied it in very stiff rappelling rope and loaded it using arms and legs it did distort from the very pretty form. And since it is so bulky I feel sure that it will not replace some bends that are used with abseiling gear.
Though it is simple in design I feel that the tying procedure is slower than a re-tucked Zeppelin (yes bulky, but it is My go-to knot). For me at least.

Having read long ago (where, who knows) that interlocking hitches make good bends I went about trying some with the stiff rope I have. Didn't find anything I care to share at the moment. But maybe someone will find a great bend whilst fiddling around with this idea.

For the hay of it I tried using a Ashley style stopper knot on a whim. What I did was to form the stopper knot loosely and the reverse traced the original line using the second.
Pretty symmetrical and the nipping points were matched. Nothing world shattering with this, but it indicates that you can try just about any knot out there and arrive at something that can work.
Maybe even best some out there.

Tried doing the same with the bowline loop, reverse tracing the original with the second line and it was interesting. Tried it in the big loop form and cinched and dressed form.

As far as these being best in class for stiff lines, I don't think so. But it is fun.

The merits of these reverse traced "bends" deserve to be in the other thread >"Interlocking knots" http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1919.0
IMHO

SS

[xarax]

   Thank you Dan Lehman, SS369,
  
   Probably I should have presented the second variation of the "trefoil bend" along with the first, but, because their differences are so minute, I decided not to confuse the reader more than necessary. The main thing in my interest with this knot was the wide curves of the rope strands all over its nub, and, in this, the two variations do not differ much...( in fact, they are almost - for all practical purposes - identical). Moreover, the "trefoil"/re-tucked overhand form I have used and shown, is the most "natural" that one is inclined to tie, I believe. It is produced by any careless re-tucking of (the/one) tail of a simple overhand knot through its central opening, without passing between the other end and the already shaped perimeter of the overhand knot. So, I have called this second form "trefoil X", meaning that the standing end and the tail are crossed before they exit the central opening. ( Of course, the first form is also an X / crossed form of the second, as well. But I believe that the first form is more "trefoil-looking" than the second   ) ( See the first attached picture).
   To tell the truth, I have tied both variations, and I thought that the second one, the "trefoil X" bend was slightly better, as the standing end goes over the tail as it exits the knot s nub, so it secures it "more". But that is so secure a bend, its strands are so convoluted, embracing/twisting around each other so many times...I decided that "theoretical" "added" security was of no importance. So, I have to admit that I presented only the first variation for KISS and marketing purposes !    
   As of the relation/transformation of ABoK#525 to a figure 9 shape, I have not investigated how this could produce other bends. I think that, during that transformation, the most symmetrical form is the initial "trefoil X" one, and I have a soft spot on symmetry ! Moreover, it is unlikely that other bends will force the rope strands to follow that wide curves, everywhere, all over the knot. I am sure one can tie many different bends if he interlocks some of those "transitional" knot forms, from #525 to figure 9. I have learnt about this transformation only recently, from a page of Charles Hamel s site, (1), from which I have copied and re-posted a picture here. (2) More pictures are shown at (3)( I thank SS369 for the information about this site and this wonderful man).
   SS369, you have very strong arms and legs, to be able to distort the symmetrical round form of this bend!   May be you could have not achieved it if you have tightened it pulling the standing end/tail pairs of each link/part, independently and in succession, before you load the interlocked whole.
   The "trefoil bend" is not sooo bulky, certainty less than the double Zeppelin. It is wide, but not fat !   The Double Zeppelin is perfect, almost as perfect as the Zeppelin, but one should not stay all his life with the first perfect woman he finds, should he ?   Your re-tucked true lovers / MWalker 2strands bend is also perfect, much more elegant than the double Zeppelin. ( It is one of the most beautiful knots I have seen ! ) If I have the time, or the experience to dress it correctly, I would tie this bend instead of the Double Zeppelin ! Its curves are a lot wider, so it is worth the added effort for a more "permanent" stiff ropes bend, I believe.
  SS369, start a new thread about re-tucking common, old, known knots. There are much interesting things waiting for us there, I guess.

1. http://charles.hamel.free.fr/knots-and-cordages/bats_belfry_5.html
2. http://charles.hamel.free.fr/knots-and-cordages/img/525-to-fig9-sum.jpg    
3. http://charles.hamel.free.fr/knots-and-cordages/PICASA_Slideshow/Du-525-au-Fig9/index.html    

[xarax]

   The Strangle bend
  ( I wonder what made me to miss this bend for soooo long !
   It seems that sometimes, one has to go from Europe to India through West Indies...)
   Two interlocked strangle hitches/binding knots, form a beautiful bend, that I call as it should have been named : " The Strangle bend ". 
    A fine solution for a bend of very stiff ropes.
   (We can also see it as two interlocked (rearranged) double overhand knots.)

Pictures are incorrectly named and should be "Strangle Bend".

[SS369]

Hello Xarax.
First of all that is a beautiful bend. I like the second picture best of all!

What is the rope you've used in your pictures? Is it dynamic climbing rope or static? Diameter?
The reason I ask is that I have a varied supply of rope from the manufacturer BlueWater and the static rope I have will not conform to these curves very well. I am wrestling an anaconda and it just stays loose.
I have to use the softer dynamic rope of the same size to tie it.

SS

[xarax]

   Thank you SS369,

  I, too, use static ropes, mostly, from 9.5 to 10.5 mm ( the orange/red rope is 11 mm). (Dynamic ropes are more expensive !) I prefer large diameter ropes, because I can set and inspect the knots easily for a correct picture, but I can not load those ropes to their limits...  I have a quite large collection of them, as, I have to confess this, I have used all means to persuade the stores to sell short pieces of such ropes to me ! However, I think that those particular ropes I use in my pictures should have been tamed, softened, somehow, from old age and the many knots that I have tied on them...I have some new, springy ropes, too, that should be tightened quite a bid to hold some knots, as the new Rusty s knot in its compact, capsized form, for example! I had not any such problems with "my" knots, or I had, but I have not noticed it ! 
   
   

[xarax]

   As with the "trefoil bend", too, we should tie similarly oriented strangle knots, in order to get a properly tied Strangle bend. (See first picture) If we tie the Strangle bend like this, the two links are tightly interlocked, and the two standing ends are more aligned as they exit the knot.
   What happens if we do not ? If we interlock one right-handed strangle knot, with one left-handed ? The result is a knot that is, probably, not so well suited for a bend - in this case, the standing ends exit the knot s nub in right angles - but it is a very interesting knot ! And it might be useful, too, as a 4-ends bend : a bend where the ends that are loaded are more than two - they might be three, or even four. Because of this possibility, I call this bend "the Strangle 4-ends bend" (at least for the time being, to distinguish it from the "normal" Strangle bend discussed in the previous posts ). Have a look to this interesting, compact, nice, "ordered rope-tangle". ( See attached pictures)   

P.S. The 4-ends" Strangle bend was also tied by Max Miller, and presented at Knotting matters 17. I was not aware of this publication when I had written this post.

[SS369]

I've tied it, it is clean as a whistle, but I would like to request that you include the rope's ends in the pictures (always please) to double check the orientations. For me at least.
It may not perform as well with opposite loading. (?)

SS

[xarax]

include the rope's ends in the pictures ... to double check the orientations.

   SS369, I deliberately do not include the rope s ends in my pictures, when ( and only then...) it does not matter. Because of the particular high symmetry of those bends, and the indication the two ropes/links ( with a different colour),
 the indication of which end is the standing end and which is the tail offers no new information. On the contrary, it might obscure, the symmetry of the bend!
   However...you are right ! Because including the rope s ends, facilitates the reader to check the orientations. So, I will try to follow your advice from now on, even if this spoils the (decorative) balance of the picture of a symmetrical bend, placed in the centre of the frame...