Bends

[Festy]

1.  For joining cord of equal diameter - Butterfly, Carrick, Zeppelin or Sheet?

2.  For joining cord of unequal diameter - Butterfly, Carrick, Zeppelin or Sheet?

....or maybe a different bend entirely?

Cheers guys,
F

[SS369]

Hello Festy.

Do you have a particular use for the joined cord or ropes?
Some bends have peculiarities that may not make them appropriate or best suited for some uses.
And then there is the question of permanence or not.

SS

[Festy]

Hello Festy.

Do you have a particular use for the joined cord or ropes?
Some bends have peculiarities that may not make them appropriate or best suited for some uses.
And then there is the question of permanence or not.

SS

Hi SS,

No particular use, just wondering if there is one bend which trumps all the others. Similar to way that the Bowline is known as the King of all knots.

F

[NotSure]

Point 1 - equal diameter cords

• I agree with SS, your application will dictate which knot is best depending on the most overwhelming attribute(s) you're seeking at the time. (I.e. strongest knot or smallest or most secure or fastest to tie or least amount of rope used or easiest to untie after heavy loading, or easiest to inspect, etc, etc - pick one).

Point 2 - unequal diameter cords

• Use the same bend (and for the same reasons) that you would have chosen for Point 1.

There is no perfect bend that will satisfactorily join all cases of dis-similarly sized cords. As the size difference increases ALL bends suffer a corresponding decrease in security. Eventually the difference will be so great that no bend can effectively accomplish the task and will force you to use a hitch instead. (Interesting side note is that the inverse is true with hitches. Smaller size difference equals reduced effectiveness until eventually tying a bend will usually make more sense).

So with that being said, my current favorite(s) (for general purpose usage) goes to the "Secure Carrick" (http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4649.msg30310#msg30310) and the Well Pipe Hitch ABoK #504 (when the size difference eventually becomes too great to form the desired Secure Carrick structure.).

As far as the "king of the knots" thing goes, one man's king is another man's fool is all I got to say...

[Dan_Lehman]

Butterfly, Carrick, Zeppelin or Sheet?
//
if there is one [end-2-end knot] [that] trumps all the others.
Similar to way that the Bowline is known as the King of all knots.

What's the appeal here : "King of the Hill" thinking?!
We should note that you come already with a set
of knots of which only one is in common use (guess).
And citing butterfly points to what IMO is a silly bit
of popular favor, ignoring the symmetric and IMO better,
like knots long presented (and ignored) in ABOK/"Ashley"
of #1425, 1452, & 1408 --the first has more capability than
is readily apparent on a cursory glance; the 2nd having
a couple of dressings which can be targeted to specific
needs (slack security & jamming, or not); and the last
being one of the most eaily untied/non-jamming knots
(like the zeppelin).

There are so many known end-2-end knots, it can seem
a loss of *friends* to eliminate (m)any from consideration.
As has been asked/suggested, particular uses will favor
particular knots.  None of the end-2-enders cited above
will do what the venerable fisherman's knot has done :
join ends securely, compactly, and w/good abrasion resistance
& strength --noting that the 3rd attribute contributes to
the overall durability and practical "strength".

And yet any of these, even, might fail in cases needing
really quick tying!

I'll here toss in a suggestion for an uncommon one, not
presented anywhere (perhaps) except by me, so far, in
this forum's pages : the multiple Lapp bend --the single
of which is simply a reverse sheet bend (same-side tails).
This end-2-ender covers a fairly broad range of differing
diameters, is pretty easily tied, has a forcible-loosening
method (pull bight ends apart, then work loose) for easy
untying, and is pretty slack-secure.  The secret is to make
the additional wraps of the tail --lie the finish-- between
the bight legs of the stouter rope; it is these additional
ones that give the slack-security, but not to such degree
(YMMV per rope & forces, I surmise) that one cannot get
sufficient loosening --some draw of material of the SPart
of the hitching (smaller) line back through the wraps-- by
pulling bight legs apart.


--dl*
====

[xarax]

   I suspect that the so-called "Well Pipe hitch" ( a grandiose name for a mediocre knot ) is the less clever hitch there can be in this Universe : just many wraps, and two half hitches at the end : an ingenious knotting "solution", indeed !    However, I am not sure about this. What I am sure about, is that with 12 wraps and ANY means of connecting the Tail end to the Standing end, there can be NO hitch that will fail to do what the "Well Pipe hitch" - or, for that matter, ANY other known hitch - can do... How one can be "a king", when the job he does could have been done by anybody in his kingdom ? On the other hand, that explains why most kings, once they grip the sceptre, they succeed to not let it slip through their hands - their job is as easy, and perhaps easier, than of any other subject of their kingdom ! In other words, with 12 wraps, there is no hitch that will let the Pipe fall into the Well ...
   Most knotting problems either they have many absolutely correct solutions, or they have none - and bends, i.e., end-to-end knots, are no exception to this rule. Now, I believe the following is a legitimate question to ask : If, in some cataclysm, all of knotting knowledge were to be destroyed, and only one bend passed on to the next generation of creatures, which bend would it be ? I believe it should be the Zeppelin bend.

[Festy]

    Now, I believe the following is a legitimate question to ask : If, in some cataclysm, all of knotting knowledge were to be destroyed, and only one bend passed on to the next generation of creatures, which bend would it be ? I believe it should be the Zeppelin bend.

So, would the Zepp be ok for unequal diameters?

[Festy]

So with that being said, my current favorite(s) (for general purpose usage) goes to the "Secure Carrick" (http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4649.msg30310#msg30310) and the Well Pipe Hitch ABoK #504 (when the size difference eventually becomes too great to form the desired Secure Carrick structure.).

As far as the "king of the knots" thing goes, one man's king is another man's fool is all I got to say...

the secure Carrick is a bit tricky to remember how to tie (for me, that is)

the 'King of Knots' is mentioned in lots of places (there must be something to it, no?)

[xarax]

So, would the Zepp be ok for unequal diameters?

Yes. See (1).

1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=2159.0

[Festy]

And yet any of these, even, might fail in cases needing
really quick tying!

could they fail if tied and dressed properly though?

[Festy]

So, would the Zepp be ok for unequal diameters?

Yes. See (1).

1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=2159.0

copy that, X

nice one,
F

[Luca]

Hi Dan,hi Festy(..your boss is then succeeded to evade? ),

like knots long presented (and ignored) in ABOK/"Ashley"
of #1425, 1452, & 1408...

...And yet any of these, even, might fail in cases needing
really quick tying!

A quick method for tying  #1425:this method in some way is a bit similar to the method shown in ABOK for #1425a/Hunter's bend:the only thing to be really careful to do,is to not swap the above/below position of  the two loops in the third diagram, otherwise the result will be a "false Zeppelin / falsely tied Hunter's" bend(starting from the second diagram is also possible to obtain #1408 and #1452,but.. is a little more tricky!).

                                                                                                                         Bye!

P.S.The scale of the diagrams is smaller of those I usually present, but the drawings are simple; however,if it is not clear let me know!

[Dan_Lehman]

A quick method for tying  #1425 :
this method in some way is a bit similar to the method shown in ABOK
for #1425a/Hunter's bend ...

You really can't believe this, can you?
This is anything but "quick"!
(And note that it entails some capsizing of the
final stage in order to achieve the #1425 form.)

But now you've got me fiddling with tying #1425
as a bight hitch (to start), and musing over unfinished
variations of them ... .  <sigh> ... more *new* knots ...


--dl*
====

[Luca]

Hi Dan,

A quick method for tying  #1425 :
this method in some way is a bit similar to the method shown in ABOK
for #1425a/Hunter's bend ...

You really can't believe this, can you?
This is anything but "quick"!

I can :quick,fast and rapid;and I would add also easy:with regard to this method,I am enough blowhard to write that  I can safely achieve the bend in question with the hands under the table and the eyes facing towards the monitor of my PC(and to write that I assure you that my manual dexterity is not above the average)!

(And note that it entails some capsizing of the
final stage in order to achieve the #1425 form.)

The method illustrated in ABoK for #1425a implies something similar;one of the differences is that,using the above method for #1425, the dressing and the shrinking of the knot  take place in a more natural way by simply pulling on the standing parts!(well, perhaps we need to do a bit of attention that the portions of rope adjacent to the tails not be overlapping ,that is all..)

I know you like this bend .. damn,I thought I made ​​a small gift for you! .. and I thought it was a little better than the method illustrated by Ashley for this very good,but "not pratical", "decorative"bend..at this point I should ask you if you have a better method!

But now you've got me fiddling with tying #1425
as a bight hitch (to start), and musing over unfinished
variations of them ... .  <sigh> ... more *new* knots ...

I'm glad I was however in some way a source of inspiration! But I must confess that I did not understand what you mean by "#1425 as a bight hitch ".

                                                                                                                   Bye!

[Luca]

OK,another way in which one starts with two "interwoven" bights;this also seems to me quite better than the method proposed by Ashley, and does not involves any capsizing of the knot,but, despite appearances, I think it's more difficult to remember and coordinate movements for determining at the time of the (quick)tying "what goes above or below of what" ,with respect to the method proposed above(but in all cases these things are very individual).(I also add a second diagram similar to the first ,showing the mistake that led me to the realization of a sort of Hunter's bend with interwoven standing parts, which I believe has only a decorative value (if one likes ..) as it gives me the impression of being not very reliable)

                                                                                                           Bye!