'New' simple loop knot?

[rusco7614]

I found myself tying this loop knot last year, while playing with some bowline variations. It's not a bowline, but I originally formed it in a similar way - working end 'up the hole, round the tree' - except that the working end didn't go straight 'back down the hole' again. It's sort of halfway to being a carrick-bend loop, but certainly not one of those either.

It's so simple in structure, that I can't believe that it's a genuinely 'new' knot, yet I have been totally unable to identify it in any of my knotting literature (including ABOK) or online.

I haven't really used it, so don't have much to say about it's practical applications, but I do have some observations:

- It requires a little dressing if tied bowline 'up the hole' style, with just a single turn through the nub.
- Once dressed, it appears to be reasonably secure (I've tried it in 550 paracord and 4mm kernmantle climbing accessory cord).
- It is reasonably easy to untie after being loaded, in the same way that a bowline can be loosened by 'lifting' the collar around the standing part.
- It appears to be a little more stable and secure when the working end makes two turns through the nub.


Forming the loop bowline 'up the hole, round the tree' style.


However working end goes back up through hole again.


Dressed.


Alternate view of undressed knot (showing single turn more clearly).


Variation with two turns through nub.


Alternate view.


Dressed 'two turn' variation.


Comments and feedback appreciated. Hoping that someone will simply say 'but it's obviously just a ...'

Russ

[roo]

It might be instructive to look at ABoK #1444.

[rusco7614]

Hi roo,

Great - thanks for the pointer. I'd been looking at loops and not bends in ABoK and elsewhere.

So I'm guessing this could be referred to as a 'single carrick loop'. Mystery solved.

I note that the single carrick bends are not very highly rated by Ashley (to put it politely)...

Russ

[Dan_Lehman]

It might be instructive to look at ABoK #1444.

Hi roo,
Great - thanks for the pointer. I'd been looking at loops and not bends in ABoK and elsewhere.
So I'm guessing this could be referred to as a 'single carrick loop'. Mystery solved.

I note that the single carrick bends are not very highly rated by Ashley (to put it politely)...
Russ

It would be more instructive to look for an eye knot in the
eye knot chapter --and esp. at #1033, the carrick loop .
Note that Ashley ties it better re the point of exit for the tail;
his version puts it where it's strongly nipped, and IMO makes
a better curvature of the SPart.

There was some discussion of this knot under the Concepts
forum, as it is to my mind a structure that falls into different
categories/groups/<?> depending upon how it is set.  I.e.,
as you dress it --and esp. as you *double* it--, I would deem
it NOT of the bowline family, but of a crossing-knot-based
eye-knot family; but if you don't pull the tail's part so tight,
the (IMO defining) characteristic central nipping loop of the
bowline obtains and one has a knot that to my mind fits
into that family.  --and, yes, some fuzzy boundary between.

Ashley is somewhat dismissive of it in suggesting that there
are simpler (!) knots, but I see value in it in its being
non-jamming (a bowline can get jammed, in nylon rope
where diameter diminishes and the collar snugs ...) and
more resistant to capsizing (I've found numerous capsized
bowlines in trawler mooring lines (not sure why...?)!).
But it bulks *wider* than the bowline and probably too
insecure-when-slack for many applications.

And for the bowlinesque dressing of this knot being *doubled*,
do so by making another turn of the SPart --doubling the
nipping loop--, not of the tail's completion (so, similar to what
has been called a "round-turn" or "double bowline" ).


--dl*
====

[rusco7614]

Hey Dan,

Thanks for the detailed and constructive response.

Yes - I see ABoK #1033 carrick loop is virtually identical to my originally presented knot, and I understand your comment about the superior exit point of the tail.

So, for the sake of clarity (my own and anyone else following the post), I hope a few more pics are useful:


ABoK #1033


ABoK #1033 (partially tightened)


ABoK #1033 (fully tightened)


I think I understand your suggestion for improving #1033 with a double turn of the standing-part as well, which I assume gives you this:


ABoK #1033 with double turn (front)


ABoK #1033 with double turn (back)


ABoK #1033 with double turn (tightened, front)


ABoK #1033 with double turn (tightened, back)


Very happy for this thread to be moved wherever appropriate.

Russ

[Dan_Lehman]

Yes - I see ABoK #1033 carrick loop is virtually identical to my originally presented knot,
and I understand your comment about the superior exit point of the tail.

So, for the sake of clarity (my own and anyone else following the post),
I hope a few more pics are useful:


ABoK #1033

NB: This form is what I would use (more likely), and is
what I regard as being in the bowline family --not the
"tightened" version you show after this.

I think I understand your suggestion for improving #1033 with a double turn
of the standing-part as well, which I assume gives you this:

Not so; my
"And for the bowlinesque dressing of this knot being *doubled*,"
is referring to the un"tightened" form, not the "tightened" one.
(Though perhaps there are also reasons, at times, to prefer
the other, as well.)


--dl*
====

[rusco7614]

Cool - thanks for the correction.

Russ

[Dan_Lehman]

I tried a "doubling" of this bowlinesque version of the
knot with the tail making a repeat of its circular passage,
in old 11mm  Bluewater II low-elongation (caving) rope.
The knot's about 6.5cm wide and 9cm along the axis!!
--very stiff rope, at this stage of its life.  This particular
knot tends to push the central nipping loop towards
being a crossing-knot, with some pressure of it upon
itself, vs. a pure circle or --as can be, under load--
towards being a helix.


--dl*
====