Club-Bend, Rosenwind-Bend, crossed Club-Bend, crossed Rosenwind-Bend

[Edmund Berndt]

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen!

I need Your help!
I state, that Club Bend and Rosenwind Bend are new bends and knotted in a similar way.
This is what I want to find out and to confirm.

These Bends are constructed like Hunter's Bend, Zeppelin Bend ore Captains bend and so on, which are common. The feature of all these knots is, that they are a connection e.g. a bend of 2 overhand knots each one in the other. The loose ends comeing out from the center connection hole, parallel one way or opposite. I named this family of knots "conjugated overhand knots".

Until now I didn't find this kind of classification . Conjugated Overhand knot is my expression (definition). The difference between Rosenwind-Bend and Club-Bendt is, that the Rosenwind-Bend is unsymmetrical, because one overhand knot is done in the other way round.

I've not found Club-Bend and Rosenwind-Bend in publications. It seems, that these knots nowhere mentioned except in previous articles of my own.

The next variation is to "cross" the loose parts, which are coming out from the center of the knot . Only one of the two facility to cross the loose parts will work, but if done so very good.
So we get the "crossed bends" as shown in the pictures.

Of course you also can cross the loose parts of Hunter's Bend and Zeppelin Bend. This also will result in a "change" of the properties of the original knots . Some of the new variations seems to be more save. And in case of the Hunter's Bend one of the crossed variations will result in an Ashley Nr. 1425, which is the same knot but the fixed and the loose parts are changed

When working with the crossed Rosenwind Bend and the crossed Club Bend you also can change the loose and the fixed part. This change of the load does not matter. The knot is also working well under these conditions.
Because the crossed Rosenwind bend is "unsymmetrical" you can tie at least 8 different loops. They are all looking very nice!


with kind regards
Edmund

[Luca]

Hello Edmund,

I am a newbie like you.
I must confess I do not know English well,unfortunately I have not the time to analyze what you wrote.
Briefly,the second bend posted by you appears like a sort of variation of Zeppelin Bend.
The third bend seems to me a reconised knot called Shakehands Bend.
The other two knots seems not to know by me at a first glance,
about these and the other two, you will get answers most authoritative


                                                                               Bye,stay well!

[Edmund Berndt]

Hello Luca!
I find this Shakehands Bend in the WEB. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yckxG32Zcw I knotted this bend according to the video. It is, as I would say, a "crossed Hunters Bend". Of course, as I wrote above, you can cross the loose ends in two ways. On that video the loose ends are crossed in that way, that the resultung knot is not so compact as the original Hunters Knot. If You cross it the other way round, the resulting knot is much more tight and I'm sure more safe! 
Edmund

[X1]

   The knots presented in this thread are identical - or variations of - the Mark s A and the Mark s B bend, presented by Mark Gommers ( agent_smith), at :
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3204.msg19281#msg19281
(for intrerlocked overhand knots)
and at:
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3251.msg19426#msg19426
( for interlocked fig.8 knots)

See pictures of those knots and their crossed-tails variations - as well as of some other, similar ones, that belong to the same class) at :
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3204.msg19381#msg19381
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3204.msg19382#msg19382
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3251.msg19606#msg19606
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3251.msg19607#msg19607
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3251.msg19608#msg19608
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3251.msg19609#msg19609

[Edmund Berndt]

Hello X1

http://home.tiscali.nl/knotsandknottying/downloads/Conjugierte%20supramanuale%20Nodi.pdf

Sorry, but it is written in German, but You are right. This is an early paper from me. It is the topic I'm also dealing with.
Here is written from interlocked Overhand knots (conjugated overhand knots) and following twisting the not-working-ends (loose parts, loos ends - which are not under load)
I stae, that all the above mentioned knots are distinct konts and not variations of the Hunters bend.

So I count 3 "T- like" bends Ashlys Bend, Captn's Bend, and Alpine Butterfly Bend. The other type of bends of that family are "X- like" shaped.

There we have the Zeppelin Bend, Hunters Bend, a decorative Bend (Zierknoten), the Rosenwind Bend and the Club Bend. Counts 5 different bends.
All together 8 different knots. And the later 5 X- like knots you can modify by crossing or twisting the loose ends.
Is that o.k?

[Luca]

Hi Edmund,

Thanks for your reply,
I must tell you that the knot on youtube does not help:
is incorrect in my opinion,because it effectively shows this Hunter's Bend
with "crossed ends",which is not the Shakehands Bend like I know.
If you tie a real Shakehands Bend without the improvement of crossing the tails,
you obtain the first knot posted by you(yesterday I had not aware).
The way the tails are crossed, as I have seen shown, is how you do
in your third picture.
A good example of this(mirror version of yours)can be found here:

http://daveroot.co.cc/Knots/Knots_Bends.htm#ShakehandsBend

[a good thing of this page is that the author starts
the"interlinked simple knots-based"bends present here
(Butterfly,Ashley,Hunter's,Shakehands)always in the same manner,
(the loop on the left in every first step picture)
so that they are very clear the differences.
As the author points out, the only knot that does not difference,
about how the two loops are intersected,is the Butterfly Bend,
because the two loops are symmetrical in form and position,
and in this case if you interchange the way to intersect the two
initial loops,the result is always a Butterfly,
but a mirror version of the other].


                                           Thanks,bye!

[Edmund Berndt]

My security anti virus system don't allow to enter the link!

[Luca]

Hi Edmund,

The link for me is good,the site is real,good and regular for knots;
maybe your  antivirus is set too"alert";
currently  I'm on a Linux O.S.,and I no have a resident antivirus installed,
I hope the site will no be a victim of something.

I must say however that in the text above the pictures of link posted by me,
it contained an inaccuracy in regard of Ashley Bend:
what is written should be reported for Hunter's Bend.

the second bend posted by you appears like a sort of variation of Zeppelin Bend.

As the author points out, the only knot that does not difference,
about how the two loops are intersected,is the Butterfly Bend,
because the two loops are symmetrical in form and position,
and in this case if you interchange the way to intersect the two
initial loops,the result is always a Butterfly,
but a mirror version of the other

About the Butterfly, I had to be more accurate:
the symmetry must being understood in the sense of the vertical axis between the two
interlocked loops in first step picture of Butterfly in the same page:

http://daveroot.co.cc/Knots/Knots_Bends.htm#AlpineButterflyBend

this because,for example,in the Ashley Bend too
"the two loops are symmetrical in form and position", but in this case
the axis of symmetry is diagonal  between the two
interlocked initial loops:

http://daveroot.co.cc/Knots/Knots_Bends.htm#AshleysBend

in this case,if you interchange the way to intersect the two
initial loops,the result is not a mirror version of Ashley,
but another knot(ABOK #1408),the same of Captain's bend in your document.
Both these knots,after dressing and setting,
results to be very symmetrical in front/rear view sense.
Now,your Rosenwind Bend (which from now on, as rightly pointed out by X1,
we are obliged to call Mark's Bend or Rosendahl Variant),
is closely related to 1408/Captain 's rather than with the Zeppelin
(that night I wanted to respond to you briefly without tying the knot, I did not have time!);                                 
Moreover, even agent_smith (despite having called Rosendahl Variant),
in the text above the pictures of the first link posted by X1, says:
"This variation can also be tied from #1408 as a starting base - and then untying one side and then re-threading so that the tail goes in the opposite direction to obtain the crucifix / Rosendahl form.".
If the Mark's Bend don't have this front/rear symmetry is because
the two initial loops are symmetric in position(diagonal axis),
but not in form.
EDIT:A bend more closely related to the Zeppelin is the
" falsely tied Hunter s bend"presented here:

 http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?PHPSESSID=cccb55c76f162ec461f0ff528d1386a4&topic=1992.msg13968#msg13968

it  only resemble a Hunter's,but ,like the Zeppelin,the two knots
are interlocked only by the tails,and this is the genuine reversed version
of ABOK #1425(sorry,yesterday I forgot to write).

                                                                              OK,stay well!

[Dan_Lehman]

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen!

I need Your help!
I state, that Club Bend and Rosenwind Bend are new bends and knotted in a similar way.
This is what I want to find out and to confirm.

Which can be a challenging task!  What's at the end of it,
what motivates the pursuit?

(Or, what is felt unsatisfactory of the known, symmetric
such knots?)

Hunter's Bend, Zeppelin Bend ore Captains bend and so on, which are common.

Hmmm, "common", you say?  Of "knots in the wild", I have only
found the zeppelin of these (not sure where "Captain's" name
comes from --new to me!), and that where some knotty types
were maintaining an old oystering boat (where Ashley saw his
infamous "oysterman's stopper" ).

Because the crossed Rosenwind bend is "unsymmetrical" you can tie at least 8 different loops. They are all looking very nice!

THIS might be where these structures shine,
where asymmetry comes in the loading, anyway,
so might well be matched by the structure.


--dl*
====

[Luca]

Hey Edmund,

I am aware of the fact that you did not get the welcome you expected,
but generally(in life as we know)it never happens!
Maybe someone points out with dry (a bit brutal?) precision
those knots that are not yours, maybe someone else took the opportunity
to show his small muscles (hey, but maybe that's me!).
Maybe you thought that someone doubt your honesty:
is not my case, and It is also for this reason that I continue to reply to you.
Anyway, I hope you continue to ask, say and propose.
But this is a forum regarding the knots,so enough with this chatter.
So,now I'm curious of this:

When working with the crossed Rosenwind Bend and the crossed Club Bend you also can change the loose and the fixed part. This change of the load does not matter. The knot is also working well under these conditions.
Because the crossed Rosenwind bend is "unsymmetrical" you can tie at least 8 different loops. They are all looking very nice!

OK,in my opinion,if you reverse a knot,something changes, however, that a version will be better than the other,
or at least one will be better in certain situations, and the other better in other situations
(but this can be explained well by so many people here,if they want);
but(my curiosity),if I cross the tail of the Rosenwind Loop(if not comes out that has already been presented in,we can call it that)
in a way, is 1,in the other way is 2;now,if I make the reversed version of the loop,
I cross in a way is 3,in other way is 4, fourth version.
Four versions,why you say"at least 8 different loops"?,and,
why you says"Because the crossed Rosenwind bend is "unsymmetrical",
related to this?

                                                    Made you to feel to us!

[X1]

   Hi Luca,

Maybe someone points out with dry (a bit brutal?) precision those knots that are not yours

   I am really sorry if my previous post might have been read like this, and I apologize for its unintentionally improper style. I did not meant to be dry, and, of course, not " brutal", not at all - believe me, please. I have only tried to refer to a senior member s ( Mark Gommers ) contribution that might had escaped Edmund s attention, with a note as short as possible. A new member is not expected to read all the previous posts of this forum, so I just tried to point out some of them that are more relevant to his/hers presentation - just as some starting points that could possibly help him to continue his own explorations. There are many other posts where other members discuss similar knots, but I thought that it would not be useful to refer to all of them at once. However, I have sent to Edmund some more pictures and comments, that are not directly related to his presentation, via personal messages / e-mail .

  ( P.S. Personally, I do not believe that a knot " belongs"  to anyone, in any way. To speak about " Your knot" or "His knot"  does not make much sense. Simple practical knots have been tied over and again many times in human history, on purpose or accidentally, independently or not. We can never be sure who tied them for the first time, but, even if we knew, it would not mean much - what would you say about the person who added "1"  and " 2"  for the first time ?  Does this means anything about this particular mathematical operation ? )

[Luca]

Hi X1,


First of all I want to sincerely thank you:while I am a little embarrassed,
on the other side I am really glad to have read your post,
because I believe that you, with your good words, has given me
the best opportunity to apologize to you.
Unfortunately, writing is not like talking,and I realize now
which may be a thousand reasons,for how you wrote your first post.
Therefore, at this point is I who must apologize,
for having an incorrect feeling about how
the things were written in your post, but especially for
carelessly externalized that impression.
If I can afford, from a certain point of view,I can say that i'm glad to have done this,
because this was the occasion of your reply (I'm sorry also for the time that I made you lose),
through which I realizized my mistake, and that you're a different person
than the idea that I could begin to make me.
And at this point I can say that I am not exaggerating,
when I say that to me is a pleasure to extend to you my apologies.

which from now on, as rightly pointed out by X1,
we are obliged to call Mark's Bend or Rosendahl Variant

if not comes out that has already been presented in,we can call it that

Unfortunately, even these were a couple of little arrows at you;
obviously in this case I proved to be a blind shooter!
I read your words about "fatherhood" of knots,about these I can not say more,
except to reaffirm that once again I was wrong about you,
and that I totally agree about what you write.


                                                              Thanks again!(And again sorry for my bad!)


                                                                                                                    Luca

[Dan_Lehman]

Four versions,why you say"at least 8 different loops"?,and,
why you says"Because the crossed Rosenwind bend is "unsymmetrical",
related to this?

With the asymmetric end-2-end knot (a class of knot with
2 pieces of knotted material and so 4 *ends* exiting it),
one has 4 ends, each of which is a candidate to be
the SPart of an eye knot;
for each such SPart, the one eye leg is determined by
the other end of the SPart's part; but there are TWO
ends to be candidate's for the re-entry of this part to
close the eye : 4 x 2 = 8.

(I have thought about the task, but haven't yet tried to do it :
building a checklist of such exploration for any *knot* that
comes before one for consideration --to put it through the
full extent of possibilities for the entanglement.  (Which is
not quite so easy as simply making the various connections,
alas, for there are issues of dressing that will arise.) )


--dl*
====

[Edmund Berndt]

@all
First i have to remark that it is for the first time i found "Cklub Bend" and "Rosenwind Bend" in the WEB. Be sure I'm not angry!
My former opinion was to look a little bit behind the common knots sailors use.
Among few books about knots I don't find technical classifications how the knots are constucted.
Even in the bible of knotting-admiral Ashley the are no comments, or very rare comments in this case. Of course thousand of knots were collected, but they are listed in respect of there use and so on.
if you look at a sheet bend and a bow line so it is obvios the these two knots are the same construction. They are working withe the same trick. There secret is the "special" connection between a bight and an eye, which are the two simple basic figures in that knot to create the friction.
And after realizing this basics You can start to find out how many variations could be done in that way and if this construction of a knot is hidden in other used knots.
I am sure You all know this but for me it is the basic way to evaluate the knots.
And if You join a sailing school you will be trained to tie a bow line and a sheet bend, but no one tells you that.

I will write more, but I'm on holydays and I've only limited acces to my papers and so on!
 

[Edmund Berndt]

@ all
@Dan Lehman
There are more points of views, which can be considered.
First of all, when I tied Zeppelin or Hunters bend, I tied it starting with one already done overhand knot and not following the pictures and procedures in various books. So I learned to see the pattern, which is the special conjunction of the two overhand knots.
And then I started to tie as much as possible variations in similar way, and I found that more variations are possible. To achieve only symmetric knots, was not the challenge. I would not speak of falsely tied Hunters Bend and so on.

I was curious about results and I tested the Club Bend and the Rosenwind Bend practically tying the bends for lifting loads with crane. I can say therefore, the knots are working. Und under strain these knots show good behaviour. They locked well, they keep in shape, they didn't slip and they could be easily untied.
Among the 8 knots which are possible (of course there are more possibilities, but these are only stereo or mirror variations) I found one which is already more symmetric than Zeppelins or Hunters bend. This knot has identically running working and playing ends, but under strain this knot appears not to lock enough. It shows tendency to slip apart and of course a good knot should make ?click?. So I thought that this knot is only good for decoration.

Twisting the tails, as you say, I did not try, because Hunters Bend and Zeppelin Bend are not twisted.

Once tangling with the Club Bend I crossed the tails. The change of the knots properties is dramatically, when done in the right turn. All the ends are now in line. The shape of the knot is as slim as possible. You feel the click when you tighten the knot. The slim line leads to the idea to try to change the working and the playing ends. And the reverse variation also shows good behaviour.  It seems to me, that this reverse knot is on one hand locking better but on the other hand not so easy to untie.

So twisting the tails of interlocked (conjugated) overhand knots was a new game.
The results are different for the various overhand knots.
The two twist variations of the Zeppelins Bend seem to be equal. In the case of Hunters Bend, only one variation is an improvement. This knot is mentioned in reverse in Asleys Book.