'Locked'

[Mobius]

What constitutes a knot that is 'locked'? A knot will sometimes jam under load, though that is not what I am hoping to discuss here.

I first provided a very open question. As an example of the concept I am alluding to, and hoping to discuss is (Scott won't mind me using this example I think ) Scott's Locked Bowline. And, to be very clear from the outset, I have no problem with the word "Locked" pertaining to this particular knot.

So, when we are talking 'locked', are we talking cyclic-loading or slack-security, or, a combination of both? If both, what is the mix of importance? 1:1, 2:1, 3:1.... or something else? Please note that I have deliberately not said which of these two possible measures of 'locked' is of more importance, if either.

I have my own views (of course ) though I would appreciate some thoughtful comments first, please.

If nothing else, would you at least point me towards a discussion of this? Better still, offer something relevant here! Are there tests of knot locked-ness (that word was made up) or is this whole idea of a 'locked knot' subjective?

[SS369]

What constitutes a knot that is 'locked'? A knot will sometimes jam under load, though that is not what I am hoping to discuss here.

I first provided a very open question. As an example of the concept I am alluding to, and hoping to discuss is (Scott won't mind me using this example I think ) Scott's Locked Bowline. And, to be very clear from the outset, I have no problem with the word "Locked" pertaining to this particular knot.

So, when we are talking 'locked', are we talking cyclic-loading or slack-security, or, a combination of both? If both, what is the mix of importance? 1:1, 2:1, 3:1.... or something else? Please note that I have deliberately not said which of these two possible measures of 'locked' is of more importance, if either.

I have my own views (of course ) though I would appreciate some thoughtful comments first, please.

If nothing else, would you at least point me towards a discussion of this? Better still, offer something relevant here! Are there tests of knot locked-ness (that word was made up) or is this whole idea of a 'locked knot' subjective?

Good day Ian.

In my own opinion, the locking of a knot is to add security to an existing/known knot that has a known vulnerability to work loose under circumstances. Generally the security is enhanced with an additional tuck or wrap, etc.
The result of this added feature can be that it will inhibit or do away entirely with reasonable possibilities of coming undone or loosening, even doing away with other failings such capsizing due to ring loading, etc.

The locking of a knot should not necessarily add too much complexity, nor should it add much to the deliberate untie-ability.

In my mind, it should be something like this - Tie the basic knot or eye knot, then add the feature for the adding of security.

The word "locked" came from the thread started by someone inquiring of a method of simply locking the standard #1010 Bowline. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=19.0   Lots of reading there and some pretty good knots too...

For me, jamming is another subject and a problem even though the knot is "locked".

Looking forward to your views and ideas.

SS

[roo]

What constitutes a knot that is 'locked'? A knot will sometimes jam under load, though that is not what I am hoping to discuss here.

I first provided a very open question. As an example of the concept I am alluding to, and hoping to discuss is (Scott won't mind me using this example I think ) Scott's Locked Bowline. And, to be very clear from the outset, I have no problem with the word "Locked" pertaining to this particular knot.

So, when we are talking 'locked', are we talking cyclic-loading or slack-security, or, a combination of both? If both, what is the mix of importance? 1:1, 2:1, 3:1.... or something else? Please note that I have deliberately not said which of these two possible measures of 'locked' is of more importance, if either.

I have my own views (of course ) though I would appreciate some thoughtful comments first, please.

If nothing else, would you at least point me towards a discussion of this? Better still, offer something relevant here! Are there tests of knot locked-ness (that word was made up) or is this whole idea of a 'locked knot' subjective?

I think generally it is a good idea to avoid using the term "locked" with knots as it implies an absolute security against motion that does not exist.  Promoting an accurate sense of security is a better practice.

UPDATE:  Loop snagging vulnerability found in Scott's Lock Bowline: https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=6773.msg44594#msg44594

[SS369]

I think generally it is a good idea to avoid using the term "locked" with knots as it implies an absolute security against motion that does not exist.  Promoting an accurate sense of security is a better practice.

But, there are additions to a knot that can impart an absolute lock. It is just unreasonable to use them if the knot is to be untied. And most of these permanent locks are not quite user-in-the-field friendly.

I believe that most knot tyers have the good sense to understand what the term "locked" implies. Locks can be unlocked.
 

[roo]

I think generally it is a good idea to avoid using the term "locked" with knots as it implies an absolute security against motion that does not exist.  Promoting an accurate sense of security is a better practice.

But, there are additions to a knot that can impart an absolute lock. It is just unreasonable to use them if the knot is to be untied. And most of these permanent locks are not quite user-in-the-field friendly.

What, glue?  I've seen quite a few users be surprised that their impossible-to-untie knot came apart after a few minutes of shaking by severe winds.  We've even seen experienced users on this forum surprised that certain knots slipped out of low-friction material.

I believe that most knot tyers have the good sense to understand what the term "locked" implies. Locks can be unlocked.

Maybe you understand what you mean, but many newcomers and casual users will think "locked" implies an absolute security against motion as seen in a padlock.  Locks can be unlocked, but not by shaking. 

[SS369]

I think generally it is a good idea to avoid using the term "locked" with knots as it implies an absolute security against motion that does not exist.  Promoting an accurate sense of security is a better practice.

But, there are additions to a knot that can impart an absolute lock. It is just unreasonable to use them if the knot is to be untied. And most of these permanent locks are not quite user-in-the-field friendly.

What, glue?  I've seen quite a few users be surprised that their impossible-to-untie knot came apart after a few minutes of shaking by severe winds.  We've even seen experienced users on this forum surprised that certain knots slipped out of low-friction material.

I believe that most knot tyers have the good sense to understand what the term "locked" implies. Locks can be unlocked.

Maybe you understand what you mean, but many newcomers and casual users will think "locked" implies an absolute security against motion as seen in a padlock.  Locks can be unlocked, but not by shaking.

Why yes, glue, or adhesives, epoxy, whipping/sewing, splicing, heat shrink materials and probably more.
Yes, there are materials that resist a simple lock that have been reported here and there and the search continues for simple ones that work well.
Actually some locks can be "unlocked" by knocking around. "Locked" does not imply an absolute state of security. Locks can be picked, you can saw them open, etc. Locks are just a hindrance.

I think you should perhaps poll the newbies and casual users about what their thoughts are about the "locked" implication before making willynilly statements as though they are factual. Most will likely read the thread and gain knowledge to the point of their desired level.

I believe you will most likely have additional rejoinders to try and prove your point, as you normally do, but, regardless, my opinion stands unchanged.

So, let us get back to what Mobius was inquiring about.