Ampersand TIB bowline

[SS369]

Good day Derek.

We should not confuse pressure with temperature.

When you do work upon a rope it's temperature may well go up, but heat is mobile.  An increase in temperature will cause a heat gradient and that heat will conduct away.  If we apply a load gradually, any heat generated will conduct out of the rope.  By loading a rope sufficiently slowly, its temperature can be maintained at any chosen value, so heat, i.e. elevated temperature, cannot be the cause of that rope to fail, yet fail it eventually will - but it won't be through temperature melting.

I understand to a limited place what you've written and can see the point(s) you make.

I don't know how you can have pressure without temperature and perhaps that is my confusion, if I am confused.

Yes, the heat is mobile, I agree, but there seems to be a limit as to how fast the surrounding material can allow the transfer. If it is not fast enough, then there is a build up of surplus heat. It follows, in my mind, that if the surplus is there long enough, the chemical bonds could be effected. What I have read about polymers, this heat can influence the bonds, perhaps weakening them.

I previously posted a link to video of a tensile test involving two Fig.8 eye knots.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3fHYGY3YTo The tester used thermography to view the heat within the knot till failure. The friction and pressure (my term - crushing) heat building does seem to be greater than the the material's ability to allow it to escape quicker than it builds. From this I can hypothetically conclude what I stated.

Perhaps we should not take anymore away from the OP. Possibly start another knot breaking thread? Again.
This eye knot deserves a good deal of scrutiny as it seems to be quite sturdy in many aspects.

SS

[xarax]

   As the "right-handed" Ampersand bowline and the "left-handed" Scot s TIB bowline are the one the "reversed" eye-knot of the other ( here, the "reversal" is referring to the swapping of the Standing and the Tail Ends ), it should had been expected that their "other-handed" forms would retain the same properties / relations : indeed, they are also TIB, and they are also "reversed" to each other. In this thread I had shown only the "right-handed" Ampersand bowline, because I think it is simpler, visually and structurally - and that, as it is a two-collar ( = double collar ) "secure" bowline, it does not suffer from the instability during ring-loading the common, "right-handed" bowline does. The interested reader is advised to tie the "left-handed" Ampersand bowline, too, and convert it to the "right-handed" Scot s TIB bowline, shown at (1)-(2).
   { I would also like to mention here that, after I had "swallowed" and "digested" the TIB tying method of the Ampersand bowline presented at (3), I tie the Scot s cow, sorry, TIB bowline, following the same method - so, I start from a triply-twisted bight, and not from a slipped overhand knot, as JP does in (4).)}

1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4517.msg29939#msg29939
2. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4517.msg30269#msg30269
3. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4877.msg31923#msg31923
4. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4517.msg29687#msg29687

[xarax]

  I always tie the knots I want to study in detail on very soft and on very stiff ropes, to see if they have any drawbacks which I had not noticed, but which may be revealed, somehow, this way. See the attached pictures for the left- and the right-handed Ampersand bowline(s), tied on the most stiff rope I have : its diameter is 11mm, but it should be filled with a peculiar stuff, because the sharper curve I can bent it, between my thumb and my index fingers, can not be less than 2 rope diameters...( but I should say I am no weight-lifter... )
   In the left-handed Ampersand bowline the second leg of the "upper"/first collar follows a curve which turns around the same, always, direction : the "bridge" that joins this collar ( the U-turn around the pair of the Standing and the Tail ends ) and the other, the "lower"/ second collar ( the U-turn around the rim of the nipping loop and the eye leg ), is an almost straight segment. In the right-handed Ampersand bowline, this same second leg of the "upper"/first collar makes an S-turn before it reaches the "lower"/ second collar. This may mean ( ) that, in this S-shaped segment, the differences in the stretching of the "inner' and the "outer" threads at each turn are smoothed out, so the material of the collar structure is used more evenly. I would be glad if I could see, literally, what happens inside the core of the rope at each turn, how the individual threads are loaded, and transfer the various kinds of the forces acting on them along the axis of the rope, and to each other !    Is it better to have two U-turns joined by a straight segment, or by an S-shaped segment ? This is a general question, of course, which concerns the "bridges" ( the segments between the two collars ) of all the Janus bowlines, and then some... Only KnotGod knows. 
   However, after I had loaded both eyeknots lightly, with about half my weight, all the O-, the U- and the S-shaped turns had been smoothed out to the same degree ( see the attached pictures ), and this tells me that the there is no great difference in the amount of strain which forces the segments of the rope in the two similar structures to bend - against their will !   

[Luca]

Hi xarax,

   As the "right-handed" Ampersand bowline and the "left-handed" Scot s TIB bowline are the one the "reversed" eye-knot of the other ( here, the "reversal" is referring to the swapping of the Standing and the Tail Ends ), it should had been expected that their "other-handed" forms would retain the same properties / relations : indeed, they are also TIB, and they are also "reversed" to each other....
  ....The interested reader is advised to tie the "left-handed" Ampersand bowline, too, and convert it to the "right-handed" Scot s TIB bowline, shown at (1)-(2).

I had luck in transforming the right-handed Ampersand Bowline in the left-handed Scott's TIB Bowline, and vice versa, but I have not had the same luck in transforming the left-handed Ampersand Bowline in the right-handed Scott's TIB Bowline:the second link(the collar) of the left-handed Ampersand Bowline is (unlike as is the case of the right-handed version) not an un-knot,but is topologically equivalent to an Overhand knot,then I am not able to transform it into the nipping loop of a right-handed Scott's TIB Bowline(and I must say that,despite the fact that both links of the right-handed Scott's TIB Bowline are topolgically equivalent to un-knots,I could not get something similar to an Ampersand Bowline starting from this loop).What I'm missing?

                                                                                                                                          Bye!

[xarax]

What I'm missing ?

  Nothing ! 
  First, I should better re-post something I said some time ago, although in a more restricted sense :

   When the Tail end penetrates the nipping loop ... it can follow more than one distinct paths, because it can go "over" or "under" the returning eye leg, and perhaps " over" or "under" further continuations of it, that have already gone through the nipping loop. The interesting thing is that, regarding the TIBability, the particular path the Tail end follows through the nipping loop does not matter: the resulting eyeknot is always TIB.

   So, regarding TIBability, the particular path the second leg of the collar of the "left"-handed Ampersand bowline follows through the nipping loop does not matter : the resulting eyeknot is a TIB, in both cases.( See the attached picture, where, in the red circle, we see the second leg of the collar going "over" the first ).
   I had shown the "left"-handed bowline in its one form, where the second leg of the collar passes "over" the first, for three reasons : 1 : because I think that so it is tied in-the-end in a more straightforward way, that is, more easily/quickly. 2 : because that this way the second, "lower" collar becomes wider, as it goes around the returning eye leg, so it encircles three rope diameters. And, 3 : last but not least, because, during ring loading, I believe that, this way, the nub will remain more coherent and compact, so it will behave better.
   Those advantages, and the fact that both knots are TIB, had lead me to show this form and not the other, where the second leg of the collar goes "under" the first - and where this "second link" of the knot, this "collar structure", remains topologically equivalent to the unknot. Strictly speaking, the other form is what should be named as "left"-handed Ampersand bowline, corresponding to the "right"-handed Scott s TIB bowline - but I though that this almost negligible, geometrically, difference was not worth the loss of the advantages I had described above, and the trouble to explain all this. Well, in that last, it seems that I was wrong !  I am glad you had noticed it and you had offered me the opportunity to clarify the matter - as you always do !  Thank you.

[xarax]

  In this particular case of the two forms of the "left"-handed Ampersand bowline, we KNOW why they are both TIB : to tie them in-the-bight, the only thing we have to change, in relation to the TIB tying method of the "right"-handed Ampersand bowline, shown at (1) and at the attached picture,, is the twist of the collar. In the "right"-handed Ampersand bowline, the bight that will become the first/"upper" collar should not be twisted. In the "left" handed Ampersand bowlines we have to twist it 180 degrees clockwise or counter-clockwise. If we twist it towards the one or the other direction, the second leg of the collar goes "over" or "under" the first. So, both eyeknots, tied in-the-bight this way, are TIB, and we now know why.
   I believe that this "proof" can be generalized, and we can always justify the observation about the TIB ability of both forms of the TIB bowlines described in the previous post, because the two bowlines that we want to know why they are both TIB, can always be tied in-the-bight by a similar tying method, where only the orientation of the twist of the bight that will become their first/"upper" collar will change.     

1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4877.msg31923#msg31923

[xarax]

  A picture of the two forms of the "left"-handed Ampersand bowline, tied on my most stiff rope. Regarding their differences, one can distinguish the slightly wider second/"lower" collar of the knot at the right ( where the second leg of the collar goes "over" the first", so this collar encircles three rope diameters ), but not much else. If it is anticipated that the eyeknot would be ring-loaded, I would prefer the one shown at the right - although it is not the corresponding to the "right" handed Scott s TIB bowline. Perhaps another reason is that this was the form I was tying right from the start, because it looked more streamlined and coherent, before I discovered the correspondence...

[alanleeknots]

Hi All, Xarax no longer here, his works and contribution still here with us, I like his well secure Ampersand bowline,
          I have a quick way to tie these knots, see you guys like it or not ?
            alanleeknots at YouTube.
              謝謝 alan lee.
         

[Dan_Lehman]

I like his well secure Ampersand bowline,

Why?

I don't like it, for from-the-start separating the crossing
of the nipping loop, such that it begins loading already
halfway into a (significant) helix vs. contracting circle.
(And with soooo many other bowlinesque eyeknots to
choose from, why ... ? !!)

--dl*
====

[alanleeknots]

Hi All,
         Dan, you have said "soooo many bowlinesque to chose from" can you please show me some of them,
         are they PET and TIB knot ?
         Xarax already described some advantages of the Ampersand Bowline in here" http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4877.0"
         see if you can find anything you like, if you happan to find something you like, Please share it with our reader,
         of cause incleded me.
         Oh, Just about to foget to asK you, Do you like the way I tie this well secure Ampersand TIB bowline?
          謝謝 alan lee.

[SS369]

Hi All, Xarax no longer here, his works and contribution still here with us, I like his well secure Ampersand bowline,
          I have a quick way to tie these knots, see you guys like it or not ?
            alanleeknots at YouTube.
              謝謝 alan lee.
         

Thanks for the good work Alan.

I find your tying of it ingenious and I salute you for working hard to come up with a way. It is not so simple unless one practices and memorizes it.

That said, I personally don't find a need, very often at all, for tying eye knots in the bight. I generally need to thread the rope through something and then finish tying.

But, it is good to know for the sake of knotting information nevertheless.

Thank you.

SS

[Dan_Lehman]

Hi All,
         Dan, you have said "soooo many bowlinesque to chose from" can you please show me some of them,
         are they PET and TIB knot ?
         Xarax already described some advantages of the Ampersand Bowline in here" http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4877.0"

Somewhere on this site there is the presentation of the
simpler-than-Yosemite Bwl like version (the YoBwl has
a fig.8 tail path; the "simpler than..." an overhand one,
which is PET/TIB.
The obvious case is just tying the bowline with a bight from
the tail, giving sheet bend geometry for *through* loading,
but not offering eye-loading of the tail (not decently, anyway).

Xarax's

A bowline-like PET loop is a versatile and a useful knot
--so a TIB PET loop, is even more versatile, and at least as useful as a non-TIB one.
It would be great if we could discover and tie the same ONE knot ( instead of tying two different knots )
either when we want/need to tie a loop in the end of the rope,
or when we want/need to tie a loop in the bight, in the middle of the rope
--provided, of course, that we do not jeopardise the qualities required from
the different knots we are accustomed to use in each of the two cases.

should raise one of the issues re What is a *knot*? in its "same"
--to wit: Is it "same" if made by different tying algorithm?  Because if
one must do something different when TIB vs. PET, one might as well
be finishing differently, IMO (but for some assertion of great simplicity
in resulting in the same geometry to check for correctness) !
Note that the bowline tied w/bight of tail can use the single tying
method.

--dl*
====

[alanleeknots]

Hi All,
         I know I am the worst one in the forum,I have  hard time  try to follow words to tie knots, I try and try, and try, eventually I give up.
         I hate wasting time on this issue, for all the hours I waste, I would have use it to do some more constructive thing for myself,
            or may  be create  another new way to tie a some knots.   謝謝 alan lee.

         VERY SAD, WE COME HERE TO TIE KNOTS, WHY NOT HAVE SOME PICTURE OF KNOTS.
         

       

[enhaut]

hi Alan

VERY SAD, WE COME HERE TO TIE KNOTS, WHY NOT HAVE SOME PICTURE OF KNOTS

Same here, I understand you; less words more pictures and btw thanks for yoursl!

Regarding TIB'ness maybe a member with enough time to spare would be kind and commence a post in containing ONLY  TIB structures  and ONLY post with photos; that would be marvelous.

[alanleeknots]

 Hi All,
         enhaut Thanks for the positive and constructive comment.
          I like your idea, nice to have few places just to post picture knots for different category knots.
           謝謝 alan lee.