Yet, another midline eyeknot

[Kost_Greg]

I have another midline loop here, may be ok, have not a test on it yet.

This is a very good knot Alan, i don't think i have seen it before.

I'm refering to your first image of your previous reply#59, where the knot is shown in loose, front and back view.

I see it as a retucked version of Abok #1054 farmer's loop. One has to remove the "around the eye legs" collar to find the correspondance.

No overhand is embedded into the structure, due to the retucking function, which appears to improve the knot stability (compared to farmer's). It surely worths investigating the jamming profile.

[Kost_Greg]

Most tyers use the bight method to form the constrictor.

First image illustrates the first stage of this process, a shaped eight TIB scheme, with the SParts in axial alignment, just before the folding of the two bights (upper, lower) and the final insertion of the object through these very bights.

Now let's give some more rope and enlarge the lower bight, which is designated as the final eye.

Pass the lower bight under the SParts or in particular, under, over, under, over, as shown in the loose version of the knot (second image) . The same operation might be performed with the upper bight too.

Another rather stable inline profile (more stable than 1059 i suppose), with no closed form links, but we can't underestimate the shaped eight, (unknot), more complex link, which appears to constrict the core enough, especially in BTL mode.

[Kost_Greg]

                                                One more stable harness

It is known that the cowboy bowline is not vulnerable to cross (ring) loading, which means that if formed in the middle of the line (the TIB version), it would rather feature a stable BTL response.

The left side of first image illustrates such a knot, also known as flash bowline or tugboat A, with familiar tying methods. The right side configuration, is the same knot with the eye legs swapped, lesser known i presume, which i have defined as cowboy harness, obviously being more stable than the 1050 harness when through loaded.

Nonetheless, provided that nothing is close to perfection, the CH would probably develop cycling loading/slack shaking issues, if it would had been formed with a stiffer large diameter cordage, therefore, an improved, retucked version is demonstrated in the following three images.

A figure eight is embedded into the structure by the retucking function, but in the form of a crossing knot + nipping turn. Note that the collar encircling both eye legs, cinches only from one eye leg, and it is not a direct continuation of the SPs, hence appears to be jamless, undistorted and easily removed.

Several loading schemes, (SP to eye from both sides and SP to SP), indicate stability that worths investigating.

PS: The retucking function of the cowboy harness takes place from the crossing knot link of the knot.

[Kost_Greg]

Round turn harness (first version)

1. Form a Z and an S loop from left to right respectively and flip the S loop. The S loop is designated as the final eye of the knot (first image).

2. Pass the S loop, SP continuation, under the Z loop (second image).

3. Pass the S loop down through the Z loop, and under its continuation (third image, loose form).

4. Load the knot from the SPs, to bring it in the BTL state of fourth image.

Do not load the knot from the right SP link (the crossing knot), as it is shown in third image loose form, because it will rather deform to a noose like state.It is essential to transform it in its BTL, fourth image stable state, and load it afterwards from any of the two links.

I've been experimenting with this, in the last couple of days, it didn't give me a hard time to untie it, even when loaded from the round turn, more complex component, side.

The round turn component, is designed in a way to stay clear of overhands.

                                                            EDIT NOTE :

I 'd like to add a few words about the inline knot testing.

1. The simplest way that comes easily to mind, is to tie two identical inline knots on our testing line and apply an eye to eye stretching.

In this case, one can notice, that the internal links which are those that mostly engage in the tensile process, are different.

So, ιn order to get a full range of results, and a comprehensive picture about the knot's jamming profile and its strain status, the same test must be conducted for one more time, but with the previous line reversed.

Eventually, the results of both tests should be combined, for the overall  response of the knot, in the eye loading scenario, and the SP loading scenario of both links, and that would be very confusing.

2. In my view, a less complex way, is to learn the mirror of the initial inline knot in question.

The test, must also be conducted twice, with the mirror knot tied, firstly to the left and then to the right of the original inline knot.

Doing so, the internal links that mostly engage, are now the same, hence it can be obtained a more straightforward understanding, about the eye/SP loading scenario, of this very link, directly from the first(and second) test, without having to combine the results of both tests.

Are there any thoughts as to which is the most scientifically correct method of testing?

[Kost_Greg]

A visual of what i was trying to describe previously about the inline knot testing in eye to eye fashion.

The left knot is the original knot to be tested, and its mirror is formed to its right.

Note that the internal links that are mostly engaged in the tensioning process, are the same, in this case, the simple loops.

Considering that the loading direction is towards left, one can get test data about the eye loading scenario (left knot), and the SP loading scenario (right knot), employing only the simple loop SP component, with just one simple test.

If more data are required about the response of the knot, when employing the other more complex round turn component, then the test is conducted one more time , with the mirror knot now formed to the left of the initial subject knot.

[Kost_Greg]

Round turn harness (version 2)

Anyone can figure the next coherent step, which is to place the round turn component at the other link, SP continuation of 1050 harness.

One of the tying methods is to form the harness first, and then tuck the eye under the right line right next to it, as shown in first image.

If the eye is tucked under the left line, a similar function knot is formed, the re-harnessed harness by Xarax.

https://forum.igkt.net/index.php?topic=5440.msg36800#msg36800

Besides the round turn component, there is also a topological correlation between this knot and the one at the previous reply.

Performing some TiB maneuvers, one might establish a topological relation, between the midine V1 with the end of line of V2 and vice versa.

[Kost_Greg]

                 Enhanced false butterfly, EFB (one overhand)

An alternative header for this demonstation would be, adding another wheel to Enhaut's, inline, wheel house bowline.

I prefer to present this knot from a wheel house perspective, because i kind of like this knot (fourth image).

The knot may exhibit a vulnerability when through loaded, but for me it is not a critical loading scenario, since the major function of an inline knot, is to be loaded from the eye side, and the eye loading profile of this knot appears to be stable and pliable, whatever SP employed in the process.

Would that happen to be an advantage afterall, as the loading from SP to SP  would render the loosening situation more manageable after heavy stretching?

Anyway, the through loading scenario, is fortified here with a round turn component, at the weak, simple loop, SP link.

The tying process is shown in first image, where the central bight is reeved through the turns or in particular, over, under, over, under, over, under.

Basically, it's the same procedure like the one at reply#63, with just an extra bight formed at the right SP continuation.

The inline wheel house, also comes from the first image, if the middle S loop is replaced with just a  straight, unknotted line.

The resulting knot, in second and third image, is the cinched compact profile with parallel lines within its core.

The false butterfly, is generated if the EFB is subjected to a suspension of the collar that encircles the eye, along with the swapping of both eye legs.

Of course, such a retucking to a false butterfly, cancels out one of its overhands.

Edit note: All things considered, only one false butterfly overhand is being cancelled out, in the EFB profile.

I am still working on the knot, to replace the overhand with a more pliable component.

To be continued.....

[Kost_Greg]

Hybrid false butterfly enhancement (no overhands)

There has been an extensive reference in the forum, quite recently, about knot structures that comprise figure eight and overhand components, intergrated in one single configuration.

Something analogous will be presented here, at least over its initial, primordial form, which will be subjected to some geometrical and topological modification enhancements.

I don't think that i need to describe how to tie the parent knot with the moniker of "hybrid false butterfly" of first image, (figure eight overhand components), as most people are able to figure it out.(In short, crossing knot, central bight, Z loop from left to right, place the Z loop over the crossing knot, and pass the central bight down through both loops).

I don't also expect anyone to start the tying process from the parent knot, but i'm going to mention it anyhow, since i'm presenting it from a hybrid false butterfly perspective.

It goes like so, flip the figure eight, swapp the eye legs, reeve the eye from the overhand side.

Of course there is an easier and simpler way, whereon......

1. A crossing knot is formed in the middle of the line.

2. The right SP line, is passed under the crossing knot, forming the central final bight at the same time.

3. Another bight is formed at the right SP continuation one more time.

4. The central bight is reeved through the turns and under the line.

All the four tying steps, are summarized, in the second loose form of the knot.

Describing the tying method appears to be more difficult than actually tying it, it's super easy.

Induce a twist at the S loop of the previous tying method of reply#66, and you are done.

Basically, i have replaced the overhand component, of the previous knot, with a more pliable, flipped figure eight.

The improvement comes from the creation of  another interface point ( figure eight collar), that will be useful for nub depressurization after heavy strain.

Of course there is bulkyness, but in my view, it worths sacrificing some more rope, to investigate the amazing qualities of this knot, like stability towards all loading directions, jam resistance, and core solidity.

[Kost_Greg]

Pseudo butterfly enhancement

This is another enhancement at some type of false butterfly.

Since i have already used the false butterfly descriptor, i now forward to the term  "pseudo butterfly", which is pretty much the same thing.

As a matter of fact, provided that i was not so descriptive at the previous tying method of reply#67, one, by simply following the instructions, could have formed the configuration shown here, which is also a super decent knot, (dare i say a little better than the previous one), that points directly to the pseudo butterfly.

Siriuso might want to denature this and the others to their corresponding bends, and include them in his files.They appear very strong for asymmetrical bends, with their three lines of defence against slippage, and their ease of untying.

The two overhands of pseudo butterfly have been subjected to a transformation, where the first overhand takes the form of a turn +collar (unknot) that encircles both eye legs, and the other overhand is a closed form knotted component that takes the form of crossing knot + nipping turn.

Of course if the collar is removed, the PB shows up with some eye leg rearrangement.

The question that raises here.....
 
Is it feasible to apply all this modification enhancements to a 1053 butterfly?

More specifically, if someone develops a butterfly form, where its two overhands are being transformed, in a way that is shown here at this reply, is strongly encouraged to post it here (or anywhere else he desires), no matter the complexity induced, i would be very interested in analyzing it.

I haven't find it yet, but i'm sure that exists.

Edit note : The parent knot of this configuration, all things considered, appears to deviate from the conventional false butterfly geometry, despite its two overhands.

I'll attach some photos to a later post to show the difference.

[siriuso]

Hi Kost_Greg,

In my knotting folder there are three bends that can be turn to midline loop knots. They are Axia Bend, Mantis Bend and Enhanced Harness Bend. Hope you will find them useful.

Happy Knotting
yChan

[Kost_Greg]

Hello Ychan

I think i have checked Axia in the past but can't remember for sure, of course the EHL (or Cask), i will surely start from the Mantis first, and generally i 'm going to check all of your asymmetrical bends that place their ends side by side, provided of course that they forge a TIB topology , which is feasible to be formed in the middle of the line.

In my view, when both links of an inline knot are somehow commensurate with each other, the inline eyeknot may be transformed to its corresponding bend(and vice versa), like those at the previous three replies.

Best regards

[Kost_Greg]

In correcting the mistake that appears i have made mixing up false butterfly forms, i have attached an image found in RopeLab.

https://www.ropelab.com.au/ropelab-quiz-4-knot-or-not/

The third knot from left to right, is the original false butterfly, that corresponds to the parent knot of reply#66.

The fourth knot from left to right, corresponds to the parent knot of reply#68, and has been given the moniker "pseudo butterfly", unless there is another one that i'm not aware of.