In Search Of The Holy Grail Bowline: A Bowline For All Reasons

[Luca]

Hi,

A banal idea: to make Inuit/ Eskimo forms for the versions of the knot's nub of the Tresse Bowline:to do an example,the diagram below shows a(corresponding to type A(because I want to give a chance also to the losers)) Inuit/Eskimo "translation" of a left handed+"over"(or"improperly dressed"Doubled Cowboy Bowline) Tresse Bowline(OK I admit it: I did not feel more than continue to ruin the thread of Alan Lee, so I decided to start doing it with the thread of Alpineer, to which I apologize right away);I do not know if it adds something to a normal Inuit / Eskimo or to a "regularly dressed" Doubled Inuit / Eskimo.

                                                                                                                             Bye!

[Luca]

I am not able to attach more than one image in one post: the complete knot is this:

[X1]

   Is this your loop, Luca, or not ? If it is, it is a fine variation of the 8 Loop, shown at (1), so I guess you should keep doing what you have been doing there ( you will be much welcomed !  )
   A problem with those tight "Eskimo"- like loops is that, even under moderate loading, they would clinch around their compact nub and they could jam - while the elongated common bowline - like loops, as the Tresse bowline, would not.

1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4340.msg27168#msg27168

[Dan_Lehman]

I am not able to attach more than one image in one post: the complete knot is this:

Really?  I wonder why not --how does this IGKT
system fail to work for you (but works for others)?

The knot you show is an eye-knot correlate to one
variant of Lapp knot end-2-end knots.  You should
find that the variation jams.  A way towards getting
a knot that can be pried loose (by pulling tail and
tail-side eye leg apart, to pry IN some SPart material)
is to have the tail-side of its collaring bight --i.e.,
that part after its U-turn heading straight out
through the SPart's turn-- go outside of all of
the SPart wraps until its tuck out through the
turn.  The wraps, then, won't bing this tail,
enabling it a fighting chance at working as the
lever to pry out some SPart, and thus liberating
itself, and untying.

Conceivably, the SPart wraps will just bind too
tightly; but, often, the loosening is possible,
as one is pulling (initially) the SPart straight
out, with no deflections in its path to impede
such movement --and you need only enough
to free the nip on the tail.  In the end-2-end
knot, the SPart's tail won't be loaded, so there
should be a little less tightness in its wraps.



--dl*
====

[Luca]

Hi X1,

   Is this your loop, Luca, or not ? If it is, it is a fine variation of the 8 Loop, shown at (1), so I guess you should keep doing what you have been doing there ( you will be much welcomed !  )
 
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4340.msg27168#msg27168

I thank you again, I'm glad I made a decent knot for once!(well, after the cockroaches and various junk I have presented, you are fully empowered to think that I gave money to someone for secretly pass to me a knot to show it as "mine"...but I did not understand: If the loop is by someone else becomes something else? )
In fact I have started from a simple idea to make an Inuit/Eskimo version of the Tresse Bowline , and from there I started to fumble;now that you mention it, in fact, there are similarities with the 8 Loop; I noticed that just by appropriately changing the way the second leg of the collar enters the nipping turns I get a knot nub's very similar, but arranged in "common bowline sauce"(I did not expect this!).

[Luca]

   Is this your loop, Luca, or not ?

Or perhaps yours was instead a reference to a couple of unfortunate loops that bear my name without having a guilt?

A problem with those tight "Eskimo"- like loops is that, even under moderate loading, they would clinch around their compact nub and they could jam

The knot you show is an eye-knot correlate to one
variant of Lapp knot end-2-end knots.  You should
find that the variation jams.  A way towards getting
a knot that can be pried loose (by pulling tail and
tail-side eye leg apart, to pry IN some SPart material)

It is true, I actually quite easily untie this loop, but not acting more immediately on the tail, as it should be the most direct and fastest way to untie a loop, but that in this case is too tight to be pulled out easily, if not before I act by pulling on the portion of the rope adjacent to the first eye leg,that passes through the collar's bight;but, thinking about it, if, during the loading of the loop, it happens that the second eye leg pull tight the collar's bight around this portion of rope,before the tail is closed (too) strong,as is more likely to occur in the bend version, also this operation may become difficult.

I am not able to attach more than one image in one post: the complete knot is this:

Really?  I wonder why not --how does this IGKT
system fail to work for you (but works for others)?

I do not know where I'm wrong! Saves only the last selected image

A way towards getting
a knot that can be pried loose (by pulling tail and
tail-side eye leg apart, to pry IN some SPart material)
is to have the tail-side of its collaring bight --i.e.,
that part after its U-turn heading straight out
through the SPart's turn-- go outside of all of
the SPart wraps until its tuck out through the
turn.  The wraps, then, won't bing this tail,
enabling it a fighting chance at working as the
lever to pry out some SPart, and thus liberating
itself, and untying.

Thank you!Is that so?(Below)

                                                                                                                           Bye!

[X1]

  If the loop is by someone else, does it become something else? )

 I guess not !  There are many knot tiers who have not yet noticed this simple fact, I am afraid...

   Is this your loop, Luca, or not ?

Or perhaps yours was instead a reference to a couple of unfortunate loops that bear my name

   No, I was not sure about the spatial order of lines, at the point where three of them are superimposed, and it is difficult to tell witch goes over or under which... I believe it is better to draw the knots without such "triple" points.
   ( The Luca s TIB bowline, where the collar structure is a fig.8 knot entangled within the nipping loop, is a very secure / very nice post-eye-tiable AND tiable-in-the-bight eyeknot ! )

[X1]

Thank you ! Is that so? (Below)

   I do not know who ordered this knot, because I have not been able to pay a visit to the Oracle of Delphi lately (1)...
   However, I think it is a very secure and nice knot - which will not jam so easily as the previous one.(*) ( Although it is not related to the Tresse bowline any more - it is a variation of the "Eskimo" bowline, where the single nipping loop is transformed into a 540 degrees coil ).

   (*) Noope ! It jams, as easily as the previous one ! I have now submitted it in the same torture as the previous one ( same amount and pattern of loading, same rope ), and I know ! 

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythia

[Dan_Lehman]

I am not able to attach more than one image in one post: the complete knot is this:

Really?  I wonder why not --how does this IGKT
system fail to work for you (but works for others)?

I do not know where I'm wrong! Saves only the last selected image

This sounds as though you are clicking the wrong space
for the subsequent files --you need to click the spot
for attaching another file and not the one with a filename
listed beside it (which, as you've seen, will replace that
first-named file with the new (which can be useful to
correct a mistake)).  Look more closely at your options!

A way towards getting
a knot that can be pried loose (by pulling tail and
tail-side eye leg apart, to pry IN some SPart material)
is to have the tail-side of its collaring bight --i.e.,
that part after its U-turn heading straight out
through the SPart's turn-- go outside of all of
the SPart wraps until its tuck out through the
turn.  The wraps, then, won't bing this tail,
enabling it a fighting chance at working as the
lever to pry out some SPart, and thus liberating
itself, and untying.

Thank you!Is that so?(Below)

Close : I see myself tying to a bight, not a loop which
is more what your drawing shows in its crossed legs.
The draw of the SPart should bring the tail with it
up against the other parts.  And X1's exclaimed "nope"
can be discarded to the pile of his others; "yep" is fine,
but high loads and various conditions leave the judgement
to one of tools and forces for untying --"YMMV".  The
advantage is the pulling pretty well aimed at a part
running straight, although tightly bound w/wraps;
and just to gain enough material to enable loosening
--not immediately "loose" after merely prying.
(Elastic line might be the more difficult.)


--dl*
====

[X1]

X1's exclaimed "nope" can be discarded to the pile of his others; "yep" is fine,
but high loads and various conditions leave the judgement to one of tools and forces for untying --"YMMV".

  The knot shown at the pictures I have shown, is not "yep, fine"... unless one belongs to the "over 105 kgr" weightlifting class (and use to bend coins with his fingers...), or belongs to the "light flyweight" wrestling class - although it would be more than "yep, fine", indeed, if one could belong to both those Olympic athletic disciplines- not possible under the present rules, I am afraid.
  I do not believe that there is an objective way we can tell if one knot jams or not - but I was under the impression that, when we are forced to use tools to untie it -any tools -, we are talking about a jammed knot. I had loaded the knot shown in the pictures ( tied on the same 8mm cord I had tied the previously presented one ) with my weight, and submitted it to 8 bounces / jumps - then, to untie it, I was forced to use a pencil as a marlinspike. Even when the "higher" turn of the coil is released, the "lower" one holds very tightly, because the "Eskimo" s collar does not allow any material be inserted into it - and it does not allow it, because itself it is constricted and immobilized by the tensioned standing part s first curve / bight, so it can not be eased even a little bid...

[Dan_Lehman]

X1's exclaimed "nope" can be discarded to the pile of his others; "yep" is fine,
but high loads and various conditions leave the judgement to one of tools and forces for untying --"YMMV".

  The knot shown at the pictures I have shown, is not "yep, fine"...

Noting that that image shows the tail on the opposite
side from what I've recommended --and when, e.g.,
tying to an eye, whose legs are both loaded, one should
*model* a leg-free bight by putting such slack into
the side first drawn by the SPart--,
I'm a little surprised that you don't find enough
ability to loosen the SPart-side eye leg,
for I'd expect the collaring bight to not be drawn
so tightly given the SPart's nip of it; but you do say
"bouncing", and that can do the tightening!  (And
this way isn't what I see as the knot's "forcible
loosening" avenue, anyway.)

I do not believe that there is an objective way we can tell if one knot jams or not;
but I was under the impression that, when we are forced to use tools to untie it
--any tools--, we are talking about a jammed knot.

Well, I see "jammed" in a couple senses.  The first is
that the knot will stay tied when slack, which can be
a highly desired atrtribute; this need not exclude there
being a method for untying the knot, reliably.  THIS
knot's corresponding end-2-end knot I believe fits
this criterion pretty well, with some vagaries per
material(s) and forces.  And then there is the sense
of "welded", where tools and maybe not even tools
only can untie it.  (I recall being happy to find that
I could fit the fairly pointed tip of a pulley hook into
a part of a knot and use the 5:1 MA to haul it loose!)

There is some merit to being able to at least untie
using tools, maybe in a not so difficult manner,
but mostly to get one's man-sized force up to the
rope-sized forces (think, large lines).  --as contrasted
with the rather hopeless cases of "jammed".

I had loaded the knot shown in the pictures ( tied on the same 8mm cord
I had tied the previously presented one ) with my weight,
and submitted it to 8 bounces / jumps;
then, to untie it, I was forced to use a pencil as a marlinspike.

--a pencil qua marlinespike??!!!  Wow, that
sounds quite feeble!  * * S N A P * *

I'll later give this a try with relatively frictive (age)
7mm kernmantle, whose smoothness should enable
fairly severe tightening, yet whose frictiveness impede
the movement I hope to see.  AND, to show that I'm
not so confident of success, my pulley will be applied
deliberately at lower effect first, and only increase if
successful.

Still, I think that for many applications, one can already
see utility in the end-2-end version, where the main
goal is slack-security.  (In my pocket, this knot qua
bight-hitch in 3/16" silky flexible nylon solid braid
regularly loosens tied around thinner binding cord
--essentially, a knot that is a stopper-ish one tightened
by itself (the binder cord hardly adding much of bulk);
and #1425 joining the ends of the solid braid also
gradually loosens after being set tight.


--dl*
====

[X1]

Noting that that image shows the tail on the opposite side from what I've recommended

   I have just followed Luca s interpretation of Oracle s "description" ...

   I'm a little surprised that you don't find enough ability to loosen the SPart-side eye leg, for I'd expect the collaring bight to not be drawn so tightly given the SPart's nip of it;
   but you do say "bouncing", and that can do the tightening! 

   It did nt move ( a hundredth of ) an inch ! The Standing s part nip immobilized it, and that, by its turn, was immobilized by the lower coil.
   The " bouncing" / alternating loading can make a difference, indeed. The jamming mechanism of the reversed Buntline hitch (1) was a revelation to me... The two ends of the jammed tangle ( the limbs of the Clove hitch) leave the nub towards opposite directions, while, at the same time, they are squeezed upon each other by the tensioned "bridge" ( the riding turn of the Clove hitch ) that encircles them. At each "bounce", any portion of the rope that, at the peak of loading, manages/suceeds to be pulled out of the tangle, however small it might be, reduces the remaining rope length inside the tangle a little bid more - so the "bridge" gets shorter and tensioned even more, and it pulls and then pushes the two ends of the tangle the one upon the other even more forcefully. With each "bounce', the friction forces between the two ends are getting stronger and stronger - in fact, they become so strong that the two ends themselves become almost "geared", and coupled to each other : any small portion of rope that is released / set free by the one, is automatically gathered / enslaved by the other : a rope-made racheting device, that can only reduce the total amount of rope length within the jammed tangle, just because nothing can get inside this most tight "gate".
  The jamming of the adjustable loop based on the reversed Buntline hitch, this rope-made racheting mechanism, has offered me a most valuable lesson that I was not able to receive from anywhere else. In the light of it, I can now understand / explain much better the "miraculous" ability of the Gleipnir to "lock" within its bights any accumulated tension inserted into them by the pull of the two opposing ends. I advice any interested kmot tyer to tie this most simple knot, the adjustable rev. Buntline loop (1), submit it to a heavy "bouncing' / alternating loading, and, for once, enjoy the jamming of a knot, that he will now understand / explain ! 

--a pencil qua marlinespike??!!!  Wow, that sounds quite feeble!  * * S N A P * *

  Nooope ! No shear forces ! Just compression. Use the pointed conical shape of the pencil to pin it into the jammed knot s nub, i.e. use it as a nail, and so force the widening of a previously tightly shrank opening. We can consider a cone as a 3D wedge - and a wedge is a "simple machine", that uses its small angle to gain a mechanical advantage. I guess that this fact was implemented in sparrows, hooks and arrows, well before the tying of any jammed knot ! 

   I do not deny that this is an interesting, secure and nice knot ! However, now we have its non-jammable twin, the original 8-loop, that is also very easy to remember how to tie and to tie ( to my view, it is even easier - but perhaps I am biased on this...), why we will ever have to risk by tying the jammable variation ?   

1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4347.0

[Luca]

Hi,

I'm sorry, nothing significant to write, and I write it also delayed due to lack of time + connection problems that I encountered in these last days.

   Is this your loop, Luca, or not ?

Or perhaps yours was instead a reference to a couple of unfortunate loops that bear my name

 No, I was not sure about the spatial order of lines, at the point where three of them are superimposed, and it is difficult to tell witch goes over or under which... I believe it is better to draw the knots without such "triple" points.

Uuh.. just now I get it! Your doubts was related to whether the photos you showed in that post (with regard to them I have forgotten to thank you)were corresponding to my diagrams; now everything makes sense! (I'm sorry, I did not realize, I thought your were a joke,due to the fact that it seemed strange that I showed an acceptable loop!)

( The Luca s TIB bowline, where the collar structure is a fig.8 knot entangled within the nipping loop, is a very secure / very nice post-eye-tiable AND tiable-in-the-bight eyeknot ! )

It's just what I said: a deserving loop..which must bear my name ...poor fellow loop!

This sounds as though you are clicking the wrong space
for the subsequent files --you need to click the spot
for attaching another file and not the one with a filename
listed beside it (which, as you've seen, will replace that
first-named file with the new (which can be useful to
correct a mistake)).  Look more closely at your options!

Indeed it is written: "MORE ATTACHMENTS": I'm just a block-head! Thank you for having the patience to explain to me!

Close : I see myself tying to a bight, not a loop which
is more what your drawing shows in its crossed legs.
The draw of the SPart should bring the tail with it
up against the other parts.

OK, I take the opportunity to show a further correction of my diagram, + a diagram of what may be the corresponding "Common Bowline version" of the loop that I showed at reply # 46, performed with the intent to show (following the line of Alpineer in his first post) a(perhaps) useful way to prepare the nipping turns,and(as actually I only realized last night, due to a link posted by Sweeney from another thread!) then "modelling" to get  the # 97 http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4321.msg26999#msg26999 (i.e. it does not show the # 97 setting(is more corresponding as initially I set the knot,in a more "compact" manner,similar to the Inuit/Eskimo version), but a way that however might be helpful to get there).

                                                                                                                Thanks again, and bye!









   
 
 

[Dan_Lehman]

... then "modelling" to get  the # 97 http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4321.msg26999#msg26999 (i.e. it does not show the # 97 setting(is more corresponding as initially I set the knot,in a more "compact" manner,similar to the Inuit/Eskimo version), but a way that however might be helpful to get there).

Oh, that's hardly my #97 --which is, after all,
a significant re-dressing of the double bowline
(so, one can see that dressing is critical to getting it right).

Glad you're now past one-attachment-per-post limit.   


--dl*
====

[X1]

   The first two pictures show the Luca s Nice Jamming Loop - it is a pity that it jams, but it does jam, no question about it.
   The third picture shows Luca s Non-Lamming loop. Not very different from the Tresse bowline itself ( in fact, it may be considered as a variation of the Tresse bowline, where the tail and the continuation of the returning eye leg are crossed ) - or even from the 8 Loop, shown at (1) and at the fourth picture : more "common" bowline-like, in comparison to the 8 Loop, which is more "Eskimo" bowline-like. I hope Luca is going to actually test those two variations, and report his results to us.

1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4340.msg27168#msg27168