International Guild of Knot Tyers Forum

General => Practical Knots => Topic started by: roo on June 13, 2010, 04:59:48 AM

Title: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on June 13, 2010, 04:59:48 AM
UPDATED:

For those familiar with both the Zeppelin Loop and the Zeppelin Bend (or for those at least willing to learn them), I'm looking for your objective opinion.

Which method of tying the Zeppelin Loop do you find easiest and most memorable?

Option 1, The Alternative Method at the bottom of the page:
http://notableknotindex.webs.com/zeppelinloop.html

or

Option 2, which approximates the bend method at the top of the page:
http://notableknotindex.webs.com/zeppelinloop.html

There is no rush.  You can take all the time you need to toy with both approaches.   Thanks in advance.   :)

Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: jcsampson on June 13, 2010, 06:05:37 AM
Without a doubt, I prefer Option 2, which approximates the bend method:

http://notableknotindex.webs.com/zloopbendmethod.png

Don't try that with Hunter's Bend, whatever you do. It'll turn out to be even MORE lopsided, and it'll JAM!  :o

On a side note:

Before I allowed Hunter's Bend into my personal library of knots, I heard stories of it's jamming and said to myself, "Well, if it jams, it cannot have a place in my library, because I hate knots that can't easily be untied." So, I tried it and--based on relative experiences with knots that I found to be difficult to untie--said, "Oh, that's fine. All I have to do is pull the side bumps down" and welcomed it into my library.

Here's how I see it:

A knot that becomes compressed with no easy way to decompress it is a knot that jams.

A knot that becomes compressed but that retains an adequate way to decompress it is a knot that simply becomes compressed.

So, maybe it's just that our definitions of jamming differ.

But, one thing's for certain: I'll never use the Hunter's Bend Loop--it's way too lopsided!

JCS
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Transminator on June 13, 2010, 04:29:38 PM
Hi Roo

Its funny that this topic comes up just now, cause I have been toying around with the zeppelin loop all week to find a better way of tying it. I have only been aware of option 1 (from your knot index) and always found it a bit awkward, as it is a two-step operation.
I came up with version 2 a few days ago and wondered if somebody else found it already as I have not seen it on the web. I was thinking of posting a question here and next thing I find this new thread.

I definitely prefer method 2, as it saves the trouble of tying an overhand knot first. Well, the overhand knot is tied in the process but you don't have to stop and re-arrange yourself. It is one smooth threading process with the standing end in one, the working end in the other hand.

I form a 6 and start threading the end through from the back, go around, thread it through the upper small loop from the back, form a 9 (the gray bit in the pic) and then the end needs to be threaded through the two eyes of the 6 and 9 as in the bend> done. With a little practice, this is a very smooth, quick AND memorable operation (after a few times, your hands do it automatically), which should make the loop more attractive for beginners. This is my preferred method since I found it.

It could help to promote the zeppelin loop more, which would be well deserved, considering all its merits: easily adjustable, reliable (strong and secure), non-jamming, can be tied around an object easily and with method 2 there is a quick (and fun) way to tie it too.

thanks for posting this
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: knot4u on June 13, 2010, 04:45:42 PM
Option 1 = Easiest for loop and bend
Option 2 = Most memorable for loop and bend

Maybe something's wrong with me.  :P  Option 1 is easier and quicker for both the Zeppelin Bend and the Zeppelin Loop.  Option 1 involves first quickly tying a loose overhand, breathing, and then easily weaving the working end through that overhand.  Also, I can tie Option 1 using one hand.  Note that I learned the Option 2 method before I learned the Option 1 method.

Option 2 is more memorable, but I cannot tie Option 2 quickly or with one hand.  Using Option 2 for the loop is an unnecessarily awkward combination of steps.  Nevertheless, I occasionally practice Option 2 ("69") for both the bend and the loop because it's more memorable.  For example, if someone asked me to tie the Zeppelin loop after 15 years of not even thinking about these knots, then I could remember "69" and brute force my way into correctly tying the knot.

By the way, if I were going to teach the "69" method to someone who is unfamiliar with these knots, then I would definitely start with the Zeppelin bend (a.o.t., loop).  The "69" version in the loop would be confusing as heck until one practices the bend several times and digests the "69" concept.  Even after I had already learned the "69" method for the bend, I sometimes tied the bend incorrectly until the correct method finally clicked.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: jcsampson on June 13, 2010, 09:14:19 PM
Look at both of roo's diagrams carefully and realize that they are nearly the same. They both require the tying of an Overhand, first, in the standing part.

The first diagram has these differences:

- The (first) Overhand goes under (the standing part) and over and under the part that went under, whereas in the second diagram the (first) Overhand goes over (the standing part) and under and over the part that went over

- The working end goes under the appropriate first Overhand part from above, whereas in the second diagram it goes over the appropriate first Overhand part from below

- The second, finishing Overhand on the working end goes over (what is now the new standing part that matters) and under and over the part that went over, whereas in the second diagram it goes under (what is now the new standing part that matters) and over and under that part that went under

Of course, the first diagram is also rotated 90 degrees clockwise in relation to the second.

The second diagram, however, goes out of its way to showcase a nice, symmetrical view of a partially formed Zeppelin knot. This allows a knotter to grasp the perspective very quickly, easily, and comfortably.

(Applauds loudly.)

JCS
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: knot4u on June 13, 2010, 09:21:52 PM
I fully understand that both methods require an overhand knot initially.  We can go further and say that both Options are technically the same.  I think Roo is fully aware of the sameness of the Options, but I don't think that's the point of the question.  

It's important to note that the original question is specifically about the loop, not the bend.  Roo distinctly did make an Option 1 and an Option 2 for us to examine.  If I follow Option 2 strictly as diagrammed, that method is unduly complex (but easy to remember because of the "69").  Again, if I start a beginner with this "69" for the Zeppelin loop (a.o.t. the bend), then I think the beginner would NOT appreciate how the heck the "69" is supposed to make things easier.  The "69" does NOT make things easier until one has mastered the "69" in the bend first.  Meanwhile, Option 1 is simple and intuitive for me after only one try.

Perhaps Roo is asking the wrong crowd and needs to ask "average" people who don't know much about knots and who have never heard of a Zeppelin loop/bend.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: jcsampson on June 13, 2010, 09:39:55 PM
That is, the "69" form is in both diagrams, but only in the second is it excruciatingly clear.

Also excruciatingly clear in the second are the two Overhands' overlapping portions that receive the double "go-through."

Remember that I'm mentioning these things mainly for those visitors who are new to knotting; one of your responses gave me the idea, which is good, because it gave me reason to think and formulate. . . . (I like to think and formulate; that's why I come here!)

JCS
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: knot4u on June 13, 2010, 09:44:47 PM
The "69" and the overhand are technically in every Zeppelin bend formation, but again I don't think that's the point of the question.  In Option 1, the overhand is obvious, while the "69" is NOT obvious.  In Option 2, the "69" is somewhat obvious, while the overhand is NOT obvious.

Again, if we're talking about beginners, then I think the easiest method is to start with the obvious "69" for the BEND.  If a student has never heard of a Zeppelin loop/bend, and you lead off with the "69" method for the loop (Option 2), then I believe you would be doing that student a disservice.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: jcsampson on June 13, 2010, 10:03:05 PM
I bet that this is why roo is asking the question! That is, to find out what folks immediately notice about the diagrams, so that he can use that information to tweak and create the ultimate diagram of all Zeppelin diagrams. He is the master of all things Zeppelin!

JCS
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Transminator on June 13, 2010, 10:16:01 PM
Again, if we're talking about beginners, then I think the easiest method is to start with the obvious "69" for the BEND.  If you teach the Zeppelin system by starting with the "69" for the loop (Option 2), then I believe you would be doing your students a disservice.

I agree. The 69 is the best for the bend and the option 2 only makes sense, if you teach the 69 method bend first.
Option 2 seems more complex then it actually is though, because it shows the entire process in one picture (just before the final tuck).
If you show somebody person to person, I think it is not so complicated.
When I first learned the zeppelin loop a few years ago, from roo's first diagram, I sometimes tied the overhand the other way round without realizing it and wondered why I failed (it would have worked tying it on the left then, which I figured out on closer inspection). with the 69 method (option 2) that problem does not arise, as the overhand knot is automatically tied when threading through the end.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: jcsampson on June 13, 2010, 11:27:10 PM
If a method instead of the "69" method is taught for the loop, then the student might need to learn more than one method for what is basically the same knot in different forms. This could be good.

If the "69" method is taught, then the student will need just one method for both Zeppelin forms. This could be good.

Six of one, half a dozen of the other. This could be good.

I say we teach a student everything that could be good, and then ask the student, "Which method do you prefer?"

JCS
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Transminator on June 14, 2010, 08:45:00 AM
[...] if I start a beginner with this "69" for the Zeppelin loop [...] , then I think the beginner would NOT appreciate how the heck the "69" is supposed to make things easier.

Well, you could teach a beginner the "69" method, without pointing out the "69". I just show him step by step what I do. Form an eye (6), thread the end through the eye from behind, go around and thread through the small loop thus created from behind (forming a 9> arriving at the situation in the picture) and finish it off with the final tuck. All they need to remember is: eye, thread twice from behind and then from the front through both eyes (which is to say: follow the line through that already goes through both eyes).

I say we teach a student everything that could be good, and then ask the student, "Which method do you prefer?"

I second that. I would take the time to teach both the bend and the loop using both methods and how to adjust it easily. This should give the student excellent inside in the structure (there is an overhand knot, a 6 and a 9 in both forms) and how the knot works.
Then pick the method that you are more comfortable with.
Knot4u is more comfortable with method 1, JCSampson and I apparently find option 2 easier and our student?

This only shows again why it is so important to show different tying methods for one and the same knot, as one might be so awkward for one person that he decides to turn his back on a particular knot, because he finds the tying method so awkward that he rather picks a different (perhaps less secure) knot.
The Zeppelin Loop in particular might have been a victim already, as it is, compared to the bowline e.g., rather complex. I am sure that is one of the reasons why it is never found in a boyscout manual or a list of "6 (or 12) knots everybody should know". I say: The zeppelin loop and bend should be in that list and the two tying methods are an opportunity to (perhaps) make it more popular. Teaching both methods (and how they are connected) makes it more likely that at least one of them sticks in the memory.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Transminator on June 14, 2010, 10:53:32 AM
 So I believe that one can find still another method for the Zeppelin loop

Well, there is this other method. The one in which you have to tie a reef knot, fold it and put the loop through.
Roo should remember the discussion he had in this thread: http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Rec/rec.crafts.knots/2007-01/msg00002.html
(Unfortunately the picture links don't work anymore and therefore it should be difficult to figure out how that works just from the description.)

As I tried it when the links still worked (a year ago or so) I still remembered enough to get it working again.
Basically you have to tie a reef knot with the two ends of a line (as you want the loop at the end of the line, one "end" stays very long, which is to say: tie a reef knot with one end around the standing part), which creates a loop. Fold the loose reef knot back into the loop and push the loop through its center from the front. The secret then is to pull the loop all the way through, till the reef knot flips inside out and you end up with the zeppelin loop, which is quite amazing and unexpected, to say the least. I now get it to work every time but I am not sure what to make of it yet. (*)
Unfortunately my Laptop is broken but I will see if I can get a new set of pictures taken to illustrate this new, mysterious "reef knot method" of tying the zeppelin loop for the guild to scrutinize...

(*) Edit: after playing around with it some more, I find this method very counter-intuitive. I manage to get a zeppelin loop out of it (you need to get the knack for it), but sometimes the short end ends up as the standing part, which means a lot of adjustment. If it does not work, the "reef knot" might have been a granny knot instead. I doubt that this will replace the other two methods (too awkward and too many places to go wrong), but it is still interesting for theoretical reasons. I haven't quite figured out yet, why exactly this works in the first place.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on June 14, 2010, 08:23:13 PM
 So I believe that one can find still another method for the Zeppelin loop

Well, there is this other method. The one in which you have to tie a reef knot, fold it and put the loop through.
Roo should remember the discussion he had in this thread: http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Rec/rec.crafts.knots/2007-01/msg00002.html
Yes, I remember that discussion.  That method is entertaining and a great brain-teaser, but I do feel that it is important for an end loop to be able to close off around an object as you tie it, regardless of the size or geometry of the object.  So that rules out methods where the loop "grows" out of the knot form.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Dan_Lehman on June 15, 2010, 05:31:19 AM
... , or there is a profound difference between the two knots that I can not pinpoint.
So I believe that one can find still another method for the Zeppelin loop, a method
perhaps more akin to the character of the specific knot, ...

Maybe your senses yearn for a true eyeknot manifestation of the knot?

Where is it decreed that the corresponding eyeknot to a bend is defined
by returning one half-of-the-bend's tail back as though it is the other
end to be bent to the first?  Mostly this is how it seems, with such common
eyeknots as the Overhand & Fig.8; it is a biased/particular case with the
Bowline (since the Sheet bend is asymmetric); it is a highly dubious case
with the Square/Reef (but I found one, in the wild (and have at long last
recently re-found the specimen I feared lost)!).

Now, there are a variety of ways to better match Rosendahl bend mechanics
with an eye knot, and the "pure" knot is TIB (tiable in the bight)!!
-- bonus, that, eh?!)
 ;)

--dl*
====
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: jcsampson on June 15, 2010, 07:26:01 PM
Quote from: Transminator
"This only shows again why it is so important to show different tying methods for one and the same knot, as one might be so awkward for one person that he decides to turn his back on a particular knot, because he finds the tying method so awkward that he rather picks a different (perhaps less secure) knot."

Beautiful statement.

I, myself, had once turned my back on the Butterfly Loop, because it was propagated with that wrap-the-rope-around-your-hand method, which gave me no insight whatsoever on how the loop was constructed and how one could manipulate and adjust it. Therefore, in frustration, I dismissed it as its being "a loop that is unable to be adequately positioned and resized." (Additionally, I couldn't see how to adequately dress the thing and thought it was a bulky, ugly mass of unadjustable nonsense.) Well, I finally analyzed its construction in detail, devised for myself a simpler and more efficient way to make it, and saw, very clearly, not only that it is easily manipulated and adjusted, but very clearly HOW. Then, I went on to make myself a Double Butterfly Loop and adjusted that one, too. (Though I'd rather not have to adjust that one too often, if you know what I mean. . . .)

JCS
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: jcsampson on June 15, 2010, 07:31:11 PM
Quote from: xarax
". . . never managed to achieve the same understanding and ease for the Zeppelin loop . . ."

Attached are a couple more options. Perhaps they will be the key to your final understanding.

JCS
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on June 15, 2010, 08:41:52 PM
My conjecture here is the following : The more symmetric is the bend, the less obvious is the memory image and the tying method of the derived loop. I have tried to test it on a loop derived from the Ashley bend, and it seems that this loop is easier to tie than the Zeppelin loop indeed , as expected.

What about the (overhand) ring bend and the corresponding overhand loop?  Both are easy.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on June 15, 2010, 09:09:21 PM
It's interesting to read the responses so far and to see the mental processes employed by different individuals.  I hope the lurkers join in (I see you out there  :D).

The method that attempts to hide the first overhand knot in a "b" distributes the mental energy required over two halves of the knot.  The other (follow the leader) method puts nearly all of the mental energy in the last half of the knot in order to deal with whatever handedness of overhand knot is first tied.  

I find myself seeing merits in both approaches and will likely try to keep both.  The feedback I get will help me determine how to best present the options.

Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on June 16, 2010, 12:29:51 AM
Now, there are a variety of ways to better match Rosendahl bend mechanics
with an eye knot, and the "pure" knot is..tiable in the bight

Care to share a diagram?
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Dan_Lehman on June 16, 2010, 06:26:44 AM
Maybe your senses yearn for a true eyeknot manifestation of the knot?

Maybe, but I think that what confuses me most is the completely different - asymmetric- loading of the threads in the case of the Zeppelin loop, ...
???
What did I just say, that you quoted, for your reply?!
The highlighted phrase is exactly what you're missing
and gives you the discomfort vis-a-vis the bend.

Quote
Now, you take the most symmetric interlocked overhand bend ...
???
How is it any more symmetric than any of the others, several of which
I've presented photos of in the recently bumped thread on Interlocked
Overhands like #1452 ?!  (It is less interlocked.)

JCSampson, your diagram of Rosendahl's bend has the silhouette
that you should use for SmitHunter's -- and this accents the symmetry,
and makes for a neat comparison (w/careful attention to over/under)
of the two knots.

Roo, yes, I have diagrams ... ; but words should suffice at first:
 - your two supposed different but actually equal (why don't others
 see this?) tying methods begin with the formation of one Overhand
 component (in the SPart); okay, do this, but ...
 - at the point of completing the Overhand, do so with a bight
 (i.e., form a Slip-knot), and then with this bight (which is destined
 to become the eye),
 - now finish(!) tying the 2nd Overhand component
 (that formed by the "end")  in reverse !

(In a sense, the SPart's and end's Overhands share a tail
--consider one fused into the other-- , and the actual eyeknot's tail
is provided by the "twin" of the end-strand.)

So, Xarax, you'll still lack a perfect symmetry; but see the eye-side
as an equal whose material got twinned for the sake of an eye.
This is a general method to making an eyeknot corresponding to a
bend (corresponding with like loading, but w/twin strands opposing single).
The idea came to me via a structure presented in Barne's book on
angling knots, in which there is a knot in which one essentially
ties a Blood Knot with a leader to the two legs of a bight
of separate material for the eye; and, I thought, what if the leader's
end flowed right into one of those two eye-tails?  --bingo!

--dl*
====
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on June 16, 2010, 04:23:54 PM


Roo, yes, I have diagrams ... ; but words should suffice at first:
 - your two supposed different but actually equal (why don't others
 see this?) tying methods begin with the formation of one Overhand
 component (in the SPart); okay, do this, but ...
 - at the point of completing the Overhand, do so with a bight
 (i.e., form a Slip-knot), and then with this bight (which is destined
 to become the eye),
 - now finish(!) tying the 2nd Overhand component
 (that formed by the "end")  in reverse !


Ack!  I know we sometimes discuss certain knots for academic interest only, but this may be pushing it.  

As far as the two methods in the original post being "equal", yes, in one aspect they may be equal, but certainly not in all aspects.  Not in terms of apprehension.  Not in terms of how the knot is held to accentuate the "b" in one method, etc.  It is the issue of memorability, apprehension, and the resultant ease of execution that is being discussed.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: jcsampson on June 16, 2010, 04:54:35 PM
For those who haven't yet formulated the Zeppelin Loop for themselves, I say this:

The hope is that you will analyze diagrams and devise for yourself YOUR OWN method or methods. You might notice a particularly easy substructure within and then see how the working end intersects it in particularly important spots and then just remember those special spots.

One of the most important things that studying Math in college taught me is this: "If you think about something long enough, you'll eventually figure it out." You've got to analyze one little step at a time, slowly, and make a point of thoroughly enjoying every minute of it. You'll make discoveries when you do this. There are probably more good discoveries to be made in the simple, than there are in the complex.

When I tie Hunter's Bend, e.g., I say to myself, "Left goes over, right goes in from the top and under; left goes in from the bottom, right goes in from the top." In order to remember how to begin, I use the mnemonic aid of "leftovers."

Zeppelin Bend is, "Left goes over, right goes in reverse and under; left goes in from the bottom, right goes in from the top."

With the Zeppelin Loop, you need to complete one of the two Overhand substructures first simply because the line coming in from the "other side" is nothing more than a continuation of what would have been that first substructure's working end. (This further allows you to make the loop over a post, which is an extremely important option to have.) You just need to discover the special spots where the working end is to go.

Final tips: Use something in the vicinity of 1/2" rope when formulating a knot for yourself, instead of using smaller cord. It'll give you significantly greater control over . . . everything. Keep the rope and knot-in-progress flat on a tabletop or bed top as you proceed from one little step to the next. Keep the knot very loose, so that it mimics the knot diagram exactly. Follow the flow of the arrows in the diagram, which represent the movement of your working end. Think in terms of overs and unders and devise for yourself your own verbal syntax to describe those overs and unders. Once the knot is complete, tightened, and confirmed to be correct, loosen it while keeping it complete and examine it at various angles to see whether there is anything else to discover about it.

"If you think about something long enough, you'll eventually figure it out."

Tackle it. Head on. Redefine enjoyment. You're in charge.

Such is knotting.

JCS
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: knot4u on June 16, 2010, 05:17:51 PM
Roo, yes, I have diagrams ... ; but words should suffice at first:
 - your two supposed different but actually equal (why don't others
 see this?) tying methods begin with the formation of one Overhand
 component (in the SPart); okay, do this, but ...
 - at the point of completing the Overhand, do so with a bight
 (i.e., form a Slip-knot), and then with this bight (which is destined
 to become the eye),
 - now finish(!) tying the 2nd Overhand component
 (that formed by the "end")  in reverse !

(In a sense, the SPart's and end's Overhands share a tail
--consider one fused into the other-- , and the actual eyeknot's tail
is provided by the "twin" of the end-strand.)

So, Xarax, you'll still lack a perfect symmetry; but see the eye-side
as an equal whose material got twinned for the sake of an eye.
This is a general method to making an eyeknot corresponding to a
bend (corresponding with like loading, but w/twin strands opposing single).
The idea came to me via a structure presented in Barne's book on
angling knots, in which there is a knot in which one essentially
ties a Blood Knot with a leader to the two legs of a bight
of separate material for the eye; and, I thought, what if the leader's
end flowed right into one of those two eye-tails?  --bingo!

--dl*
====

If your goal is to exclude even more people from an already arcane conversation, then I see the point of not providing diagrams.

Few people are going to sit here and spend 5 minutes imagining what you're saying when a diagram (which you have) will make it clear in 10 seconds.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Dan_Lehman on June 16, 2010, 06:24:06 PM
Few people are going to sit here and spend 5 minutes imagining what you're saying ...

Sadly, you're right (in part, because there are only a few people here at all)
-- which says a lot!

Quote
when a diagram (which you have) will make it clear in 10 seconds.

You have quickly forgotten even this OP:  where the same --quite-- method
was shown in two diagrams and yet several responded about how obviously
one was better than the other (!!), or even that one negated tying an initial
Overhand, or was like the bend method -- which at least is often put forth
as a more flashy pair-&-twist-&-make-2-tucks wizardry, sometimes extended
for both SmitHunter's & Ashley's (1452) bends.

You could've (I'll still hope) have had the simPLEasure of following tying
guidance to reveal the novel eyeknot while waiting for sometime-later my
offloading images et cetera, instead of posting!

Which method --as I stated-- in generalizable to most any end-2-end knot,
for which I'll surely not be providing all images!  (E.g., working it into
the Sheet Bend and comparing results with the Bowline is an interesting
exercise (don't discard the Bowline!).)

--dl*
====
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: knot4u on June 16, 2010, 07:10:45 PM
You have quickly forgotten even this OP:  where the same --quite-- method
was shown in two diagrams and yet several responded about how obviously
one was better than the other (!!), or even that one negated tying an initial
Overhand, or was like the bend method -- which at least is often put forth
as a more flashy pair-&-twist-&-make-2-tucks wizardry, sometimes extended
for both SmitHunter's & Ashley's (1452) bends.

You could've (I'll still hope) have had the simPLEasure of following tying
guidance to reveal the novel eyeknot while waiting for sometime-later my
offloading images et cetera, instead of posting!

Which method --as I stated-- in generalizable to most any end-2-end knot,
for which I'll surely not be providing all images!  (E.g., working it into
the Sheet Bend and comparing results with the Bowline is an interesting
exercise (don't discard the Bowline!).)

--dl*
====

I discussed the sameness of the two diagrams above in Reply #5.  ;D  Also, the sameness was discussed in posts before and after that Reply #5.  The important differences were also discussed.

Anyway, the original poster provided two diagrams to analyze.  Diagrams are a requirement for discussing knots with efficiency.  Diagrams get everybody on the same page quickly and absolutely.  The original poster deserves a thoughtful analysis of his question.  Jcsampson also provided diagrams above.  Anybody who doesn't post a diagram won't get much analysis in return.

I come to this site to learn about knots.  Your post about a new tying method seems interesting, but it's not clear to me what you mean.  So, just post your diagram that you said you already have.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: dmacdd on June 17, 2010, 03:35:09 AM
Wow! The Option 2 diagram is a lovely invention.  I will remember it, practice the Zeppelin Loop, and see how it sits over the long term, whereas I long ago decided not to bother with the Zeppelin Loop because of the ugliness of the option 1 diagram and the difficulty of remembering it.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: jcsampson on June 18, 2010, 02:26:48 AM
To dmacdd and those with similar objectives:

Since having a non-jamming knot is your ultimate desire and objective, I urge you to just figure out a way to remember the Zeppelin Loop once and for all and be done. Clearly, the Zeppelin Loop sports the easiest of all knots to tie and untie--once you figure it out.

Three Easy Steps

(1) Tie the Overhand (crossing OVER the line) and hold its leftmost section (of the Overhand's three sections) farthest from you.

(2) Take your working end around a post (from underneath the post, if the post is horizontal), to form the loop, and bring the working end through the leftmost Overhand section from underneath (rotate your structure-in-progress as necessary, if your post is horizontal).

(3) Take the working end through the formed loop from underneath and thread it ALONG the OTHER loop part until it goes through the two internal subloops that that other loop part goes through.

Viola! Zeppelin Loop. Adjust the size of your loop when the knot is loose, by manipulating the appropriate Overhand (of the two Overhands that make up the Zeppelin Knot).

See also the following:

- http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1872.msg12700#msg12700
- http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1878.msg12776#msg12776

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to make a tightly compressed Double Harness Bend with Parallel Ends (ABOK #1421)--my favorite bend. See

http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1150.msg12484#msg12484

for an explanation of the Double Harness Bend with Parallel Ends (ABOK #1421).

JCS
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: dmacdd on June 18, 2010, 04:47:18 AM
Three Easy Steps [to a Zeppelin loop]

(1) Tie the Overhand (crossing OVER the line) and hold its leftmost section (of the Overhand's three sections) farthest from you.

(2) Take your working end around a post (from underneath the post, if the post is horizontal), to form the loop, and bring the working end through the leftmost Overhand section from underneath (rotate your structure-in-progress as necessary, if your post is horizontal).

(3) Take the working end through the formed loop from underneath and thread it ALONG the OTHER loop part until it goes through the two internal subloops that that other loop part goes through.

Viola! Zeppelin Loop.

A very clear description. I followed it successfully second time. The first time I was not able to see how the knot was forming and failed to shift the forming q into a position in which the WE would slide through it.  I now understand how knot4u uses the "same method" for the ZB and the ZL. I also see that rather than using the bend method for the loop, knot4u is using the loop method for the bend. Furthermore, roo's option two diagram is essentially the same method. (How could it not be.) Which suggests that it should be used to teach the bend as well as the loop, as an alternative at least, at notable knots.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: knot4u on June 18, 2010, 05:11:44 AM
Three Easy Steps [to a Zeppelin loop]

(1) Tie the Overhand (crossing OVER the line) and hold its leftmost section (of the Overhand's three sections) farthest from you.

(2) Take your working end around a post (from underneath the post, if the post is horizontal), to form the loop, and bring the working end through the leftmost Overhand section from underneath (rotate your structure-in-progress as necessary, if your post is horizontal).

(3) Take the working end through the formed loop from underneath and thread it ALONG the OTHER loop part until it goes through the two internal subloops that that other loop part goes through.

Viola! Zeppelin Loop.

A very clear description. I followed it successfully second time. The first time I was not able to see how the knot was forming and failed to shift the forming q into a position in which the WE would slide through it.  I now understand how knot4u uses the "same method" for the ZB and the ZL. I also see that rather than using the bend method for the loop, knot4u is using the loop method for the bend. Furthermore, roo's option two diagram is essentially the same method. (How could it not be.) Which suggests that it should be used to teach the bend as well as the loop, as an alternative at least, at notable knots.

exactly  ;)
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: dmacdd on June 18, 2010, 12:01:45 PM
  A clear description, of a not so clear manipulation, almost torture..., of the most beautiful, simple, symmetric Zeppeln bend...( And, please, don t leave the written instructions back home...) There is a loud dissonance between the original bend and the tying method of the derived loop..  Sorry, but my hard disk / brain memory is foul, and I always find so convenient to return to my/ours/anybody s first love, the bowline... :)

Actully, I no longer think the 3 step instructions are unambiguous for a mind not as prepared as mine was to receive them -- a right handed mind correctly (luckily) assuming a right handed instructor, a mind seeking and being guided by the b and q evolving in the manipulation.   At the moment, though, these instructions, now explicitly disambiguated in my mind, b and q, and roo's clever new diagram, all overlap and coincide in my mind to produce a uniform method for the loop and the bend that I'm not likely to forget.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: knot4u on June 18, 2010, 04:22:54 PM
I'm sure you know what you're doing, and it's probably simple to you.  However, without diagrams, what you wrote is not simple, and I don't know exactly what you're doing... grrrr  >:(
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: dmacdd on June 18, 2010, 05:48:28 PM
    Here is a picture of the unfinished knot, just before the fifth (5) step . The standing end is coming from the top of the picture, the first, auxiliary loop is the one with the vertical long axis, the second, the main Zeppelin loop, is the one with the horizontal long axis, and the working end is showing here looking like a hook, just before the stage when it becomes a tail that passes through both eyes.( initially through the first, and finally through the second eye.)

Hmmm... I don't see the b and q in that. There may be a way to see them, but I don't.  The utility of JCS's three steps is that they can easily be imagined to correspond to a b and q embedded in the evolving knot.  The Overhand knot is just a distorted "finished" b -- the b with its top bending over and passing through its base, as pictured in roo's new diagram.   The subsequent manipulations can be imagined as the construction of a finished q, again as in roo's new diagram  This correspondence makes it obvious how the same method can be used for the bend.

Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: knot4u on June 18, 2010, 06:31:22 PM
    Here is a picture of the unfinished knot, just before the fifth (5) step . The standing end is coming from the top of the picture, the first, auxiliary loop is the one with the vertical long axis, the second, the main Zeppelin loop, is the one with the horizontal long axis, and the working end is showing here looking like a hook, just before the stage when it becomes a tail that passes through both eyes.( initially through the first, and finally through the second eye.)

I tried that, and it's pretty sweet.  Let me practice that a few times and see if I like it better than Roo's "Alternative Method" (Option 1).
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: dmacdd on June 18, 2010, 07:13:39 PM
Suggestion to roo:

re-draw the alternative method so that it can be seen to correspond by easy mental distortion to the new diagram and to JCS's instruction.  E.g.  it needs a starting overhand knot of the other hand.  When I follow JCS's instructions, my overhand knot can be easily seen as a "finished" b, a b with it's top leaning over and passing back through its base, like the new diagram .... etc. I'm not suggesting making it look obviously like the new diagram, necessarily, but currently it requires mental operations that are too difficult to establish the correspondence. The correspondence is easy and useful in understanding the alternative method, and should therefore not be obscured.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on June 18, 2010, 07:16:45 PM
Suggestion to roo:

re-draw the alternative method so that it can be seen to correspond by easy mental distortion to the new diagram and to JCS's instruction.  E.g.  it needs a starting overhand knot of the other hand.  When I follow JCS's instructions, my overhand knot can be easily seen as a "finished" b, a b with it's top leaning over and passing back through its base, like the new diagram .... etc. I'm not suggesting making it look obviously like the new diagram, necessarily, but currently it requires mental operations that are too difficult to establish the correspondence. The correspondence is easy and useful in understanding the alternative method, and should therefore not be obscured.

But the point of the alternative (follow the leader) method is that  it can be employed regardless of the handedness of the first overhand knot.  
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on June 18, 2010, 07:23:51 PM
...if we try an imitation of the tying method of the (two lines) bend on the (one line) loop, we will spoil the essence of both...

So am I wrong to tie the Sheet Bend with the same method and mental imagery as the Bowline?  What precisely is spoiled?  The duplication of procedure sure saves on my mental burden.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: knot4u on June 18, 2010, 07:48:01 PM
Suggestion to roo:

re-draw the alternative method so that it can be seen to correspond by easy mental distortion to the new diagram and to JCS's instruction.  E.g.  it needs a starting overhand knot of the other hand.  When I follow JCS's instructions, my overhand knot can be easily seen as a "finished" b, a b with it's top leaning over and passing back through its base, like the new diagram .... etc. I'm not suggesting making it look obviously like the new diagram, necessarily, but currently it requires mental operations that are too difficult to establish the correspondence. The correspondence is easy and useful in understanding the alternative method, and should therefore not be obscured.

I currently prefer Roo's "Alternative Method" (Option 1) for both the loop and the bend, but I'm open to seeing other diagrams.

Because the loop is harder to conceptualize, I think it's better to tie the easiest loop method and then use that method for the bend (assuming you want to remember only one method for both the loop and the bend).
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on June 18, 2010, 07:59:41 PM
I currently prefer Roo's "Alternative Method" (Option 1) for both the loop and the bend, but I'm open to seeing other diagrams.

One nice thing about the bend's b & q (kid friendly moniker:barbeque  ;)) method is that if you get the "b" right, you can easily check the "q" form against the "b" knowing there should be a certain symmetry (point symmetry for you math fans out there).



Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: knot4u on June 18, 2010, 10:22:39 PM
  I do not want you to see any b and q, or 6 and 9, because that is the whole idea of this method: Do not try or pretend to use the tying method of the original Zeppelin loop ! There we had a perfect symmetry of forms and loadings that we do not have here any more, and iI feel that, if we try an imitation of the tying method of the (two lines) bend on the (one line) loop, we will spoil the essence of both... It is  an end of one line loop that we have to deal here, and we want to tie this loop like we tie an end of line loop, i.e. using eyes and loops, like we tie the bowline ...So tie an eye, then a loop, then another loop, then another eye, pass the tail through both eyes, and here comes the Zeppelin loop!
So forget all about overhand knots and interlocked overhand bends, about b-bitches and q-queens doing 69 or whatever, follow the pure spirit of your first love, the bowline, and just tie another end of line loop!  :)
   I post a few more pictures presenting the succession of the 6 elementary steps.( Step 1 is the formation of a single eye, the stage just before Step 5 was already posted in my previous post, and Step 6, the contraction of the first, the auxiliary loop, just because it is a function, can not be pictured in a still picture. )

I thank you for posting your pics.  I've practiced your method a few times.  I just can't get it to click like the other methods I know.  That's not a slight against your method.  It's just that my brain is already set and happy with the other methods I know.  Before seeing your method, I could already tie Roo's "Alternative Method" backwards, forward, upside-down, one-handed, etc.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: jcsampson on June 19, 2010, 02:18:34 AM
Quote from: dmacdd
". . . all overlap and coincide in my mind to produce a uniform method for the loop and the bend that I'm not likely to forget."

Beautiful statement.

This is why I have said, and will say many times again, that the combination of different perspectives is beneficial to learning, understanding, the development of intelligence, etc.

How many times have I tried to learn something, had a hard time, finally figured it out, and said to myself, "If only they would have said THIS, I would have understood it immediately."

I say also this: "An education is taken--not given." There is nothing that I can do to teach a person. Whether a person learns something owes itself only to that person who is in charge of taking (from some resource or resources) a thing to be learned. Therefore, by learning something, you have shown yourself to be in charge!

JCS
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: jcsampson on June 19, 2010, 02:22:11 AM
Quote from: dmacdd
"The Overhand knot is just a . . ."

substructure.

Substructures are VERY important, because they allow us to see more easily how things are, or can be, constructed.

. . . similar to the concepts of "top-down design" and "subroutines," in computer science.

JCS
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on June 19, 2010, 05:04:23 PM
...if we try an imitation of the tying method of the (two lines) bend on the (one line) loop, we will spoil the essence of both...

So am I wrong to tie the Sheet Bend with the same method and mental imagery as the Bowline?  What precisely is spoiled?  The duplication of procedure sure saves on my mental burden.

Yes, if you do two different things with the same method and mental machinery, you are wrong !  :)
The satisfaction of mental parsimony you get at the end is only superficial, because it is based either on a wrong assumption you had in the first place, ( when you were confused by appearances and believed that those things were really different ), or on the wrong perception you have now, when you fail to notice the fundamental differences and conceive two really different things as two different aspects of the same single thing. But really different things are really different, no matter how identical they look! And those two things, the Zeppelin bend  and the Zeppelin loop, are really different things, because the strands in the knots are loaded differently in each of the two cases. When we think of a practical knot, not an ornament, when this knot is functioning, it is not only its appearance, but also its mechanical state that matters. If we could look closer, and we could see how the distribution of loads alter the rope diameters on different places, among other things, we would really tell the real differences that are hidden behind the looks.
The truth is that the b and q, the 6 and 9, that you think you see when tying the Zeppelin loop are only faint memories of the method you have used when tying the Zeppelin bend. You could have not been led there, or get any satisfaction of getting there, if you had not used the real b and q, 6 and 9, in the Zeppelin bend. I try to deal the Zeppelin loop as a loop, and tie it without the prerequisites of the Zeppelin bend, try to pretend that the Zeppelin bend is not yet invented! With this I try to look at the loop in a way that is genuinely appropriate for it, and only for it, because only this way gets me into the heart of the particular knot. I try to understand, not because understanding offers anything more in this case, ( the finished knot would be the same, no matter how it is tied, if it is dressed correctly ) but because understanding is a good thing, is the only thing we have to get deeply involved in reality and enjoy our shorts lives, and because understanding would really offer something more in the next case, the next knot that is presently unknown !
 Things are as simple as they are, but not simpler...What you think is a mental burden, for me is a mental tool that is appropriate with the given specific problem. I do not like to use a tool discovered and used for something else on whatever I see in front of me, as a man carrying a hammer that sees everything as nails...Abstract mental images and general methods are welcomed of course, when they address the identical situations that are hidden behind appearances, but we have not such a case here.
I simply try to tie this end of the line loop as a loop, without using the accidental historical fact that it is discovered after a similar, but not identical, knot that is a two lines bend.

Goodness!  I think you are confusing analyzing a knot with constructing a knot.  They can be divided quite effectively.  I can understand the differences in a Sheet Bend and a Bowline through various tests while tying them the same quick way that prevents errors.

It's funny you should mention pretending that the Zeppelin Loop is not yet invented (with regard to a tying method).  I did just that long ago, and came up with a method that seems to be preferred only by a minority of tyers when given the alternative visualization that replicates the "b" & "q" method of the bend.

Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: knot4u on June 19, 2010, 05:25:11 PM
Here's an interesting way to tie the bend.  I haven't analyzed it yet to say if it's a new way to think about the procedure:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7O7PgfkqskA
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on June 19, 2010, 07:21:35 PM
Here's an interesting way to tie the bend.  I haven't analyzed it yet to say if it's a new way to think about the procedure:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7O7PgfkqskA

It's not new.  It's the dreadful Thompson method.  I've tried to figure out what some see in this method, and I just don't get it.  If I wanted to put people off of the Zeppelin Bend, I would present this method.   :P

There are about a dozen easy ways to go wrong with it.

By the way, despite the caption on the presentation, the Zeppelin Bend may be used with dissimilar ropes.  It does far better with dissimilar ropes than the Sheet Bend, for example, which used to be often touted for being used with dissimilar ropes.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: knot4u on June 19, 2010, 07:42:06 PM
By the way, despite the caption on the presentation, the Zeppelin Bend may be used with dissimilar ropes.  It does far better with dissimilar ropes than the Sheet Bend, for example, which used to be often touted for being used with dissimilar ropes.

In that case, I may have to put the Zeppelin Bend over the Double Sheet Bend when joining dissimilar fishing lines (or dissimilar ropes generally).

We'll see...
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on June 19, 2010, 08:02:23 PM
By the way, despite the caption on the presentation, the Zeppelin Bend may be used with dissimilar ropes.  It does far better with dissimilar ropes than the Sheet Bend, for example, which used to be often touted for being used with dissimilar ropes.

In that case, I may have to put the Zeppelin Bend over the Double Sheet Bend when joining dissimilar fishing lines (or dissimilar ropes generally).

We'll see...

The knots employed for fishing lines are not typically the ones used in rope.  Why not use fishing knots?
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: jcsampson on June 20, 2010, 12:38:22 AM
Hold on to your seat, roo: Here comes the Zeppelin Double Loop.

(I hope you don't tell me that this is the wrong thread for it.)

Following the instructions set forth in

http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1872.msg12734#msg12734,

see whether you can make the Zeppelin Double Loop.

Just wrap around your post twice and make the knot itself in the same fashion as in the above instructions.

The symmetry of the Zeppelin Knot remains, but is hidden by the extra thread that is introduced into the Zeppelin structure AND by the crossing of that thread through the structure. It therefore APPEARS as though the symmetry has been destroyed. All Zeppelin properties remain, however. And get this: It's easy to untie!

I'm sure that there are those who will be utterly HORRIFIED by my tampering in this manner, and who will sling all sorts of angry comments my way. So be it.

JCS
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on June 20, 2010, 01:02:57 AM
Hold on to your seat, roo: Here comes the Zeppelin Double Loop.

(I hope you don't tell me that this is the wrong thread for it.)

Following the instructions set forth in

http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1872.msg12734#msg12734,

see whether you can make the Zeppelin Double Loop.

Just wrap around your post twice and make the knot itself in the same fashion as in the above instructions.
As with most loops, there are a number of ways to make a dual-loop version.  I'm not sure if I'm clear as to which approach you are thinking of.  Does your version have loops that communicate with each other, such that expanding one shrinks the other? 

If you want to start another thread for this, you can, but as minor diversion, I don't object to the discussion in this thread either.

Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: jcsampson on June 20, 2010, 01:19:46 AM
Unlike the loops in, say, the French Bowline, the sizes of the loops in this Zeppelin Double Loop are adjustable only when the Zeppelin structure has been loosened. Once the knot is tightened, the sizes of the loops stay put, which can be considered an advantage over the French Bowline in certain contexts.

JCS
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: knot4u on June 20, 2010, 03:59:49 AM
Hold on to your seat, roo: Here comes the Zeppelin Double Loop.

(I hope you don't tell me that this is the wrong thread for it.)

Following the instructions set forth in

http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1872.msg12734#msg12734,

see whether you can make the Zeppelin Double Loop.

Just wrap around your post twice and make the knot itself in the same fashion as in the above instructions.

The symmetry of the Zeppelin Knot remains, but is hidden by the extra thread that is introduced into the Zeppelin structure AND by the crossing of that thread through the structure. It therefore APPEARS as though the symmetry has been destroyed. All Zeppelin properties remain, however. And get this: It's easy to untie!

I'm sure that there are those who will be utterly HORRIFIED by my tampering in this manner, and who will sling all sorts of angry comments my way. So be it.

JCS

I don't see any description of a Zeppelin Double Loop there.

=====

Anyway, I do have something called Double Zeppelin Bend, and a Double Zeppelin Loop can be tied in a similar manner.

The Double Zeppelin Bend is tied basically by looping the working ends through the "69" twice instead of just once.  It's just as symmetrical and about twice as bulky as a Zeppelin Bend.  Does somebody have a diagram?  I don't feel like making a diagram because I think the Double Zeppelin Bend may very well be an unnecessarily monstrous jumble of rope.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on June 20, 2010, 04:05:45 AM
So, I, personally, would be very glad if you did tell me about this other method you have found, because it is of an academic interest, and I admit that I have an academic - and not a sheer "practical" - interest on knots and knot tying.
   
I was simply referring to the follow-the-leader "alternative" method at the bottom of this page:

http://notableknotindex.webs.com/zeppelinloop.html

I'm having a hard time finding many people who actually prefer it to the b&q visualization method.  I must admit that I find myself gravitating toward the b&q visualization, not only for mental expediency, but also because it seems to naturally eliminate paths of error and thereby reduce hesitation during tying.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on June 20, 2010, 04:10:18 AM
Anyway, I do have something called Double Zeppelin Bend,...
The Double Zeppelin Bend is tied basically by looping the working ends through the "69" twice instead of just once.
I agree that repeating the final tuck of the knot form is the best candidate for the Double Zeppelin knot forms.  This may be something that doesn't need a diagram (but I have an image on the Notable Knot Index).

PS:  If you want a comical "double" version, try making an extra coil in the b & q of the bend.  I'd never use it, but I might call it a double-wide Zeppelin bend. :D
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Transminator on June 20, 2010, 10:30:16 AM
Just a few things here:

By the way, despite the caption on the presentation, the Zeppelin Bend may be used with dissimilar ropes.  It does far better with dissimilar ropes than the Sheet Bend, for example, which used to be often touted for being used with dissimilar ropes.

1. I can confirm that the zeppelin bend is (in my experience and lay-man testing) very reliable for dissimilar ropes (different material and or different diameters). I tried e.g. a piece of string with a synthetic rope and I could not get it to slip, no matter how hard I pulled or how I pulled (shock-loading, steady pull). The knot distorted considerably but it did not seem to make it less secure.
The sheet bend and double sheet bend failed miserably in many of my tests, in which the zeppelin bend performed excellent.

Anyway, I do have something called Double Zeppelin Bend, and a Double Zeppelin Loop can be tied in a similar manner.

The Double Zeppelin Bend is tied basically by looping the working ends through the "69" twice instead of just once.  It's just as symmetrical and about twice as bulky as a Zeppelin Bend.  Does somebody have a diagram?  I don't feel like making a diagram because I think the Double Zeppelin Bend may very well be an unnecessarily monstrous jumble of rope.

Even though the zeppelin performs well with dissimilar ropes, to make sure it does not slip, I would tie the zeppelin bend with ropes of (considerably) different diameters as a one and a half zeppelin bend, meaning that I would thread the thinner rope twice through the eyes (instead of both), which is similar to the concept of the double sheet bend.)

2. Another way of tying a double zeppelin loop is to tie it on the bight. This results in a very bulky knot though, which uses a lot of rope. I discarded it as an option straight away for better alternatives (the KDL, dbl. bowline etc.)

But the method described by jcsampson is interesting and worth a closer evaluation. I will play around with it and compare it with other dbl loops.

Think of the method again : Eye, loop, loop, eye, tail through both eyes. It sounds simple because it is simple, and it is a most natural way of tying this end of one line loop that we conviniently call "the Zeppelin loop."

It sounds simple and is simple in concept, but I don't find it natural or simple to tie in hand at all. Maybe I have not found the knack yet. But this only confirms what jcsampson and I said before: different methods (intrinsically the same) for different people.

Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: dmacdd on June 20, 2010, 03:33:17 PM

I was simply referring to the follow-the-leader "alternative" method at the bottom of this page:

http://notableknotindex.webs.com/zeppelinloop.html

I'm having a hard time finding many people who actually prefer it to the b&q visualization method.  I must admit that I find myself gravitating toward the b&q visualization, not only for mental expediency, but also because it seems to naturally eliminate paths of error and thereby reduce hesitation during tying.

But there is an alternative alternative method that avoids this dichotomy. As currently drawn, the alternative method makes b and q visualization very difficult for someone learning the method, and even for those who know the method.  Constructing the ZL by following the current drawing requires you to start with a left hand overhand knot that can only be visualized as a b viewed from behind or in a mirror.  Starting from a right hand overhand allows an easy identification of the overhand with the "finished" b of your new diagram.  Such is the method given verbally by jcsampson, which is why I was able to comprehend it immediately. I see the b and q evolving as  in your new diagram every time I tie the loop (or the bend) by the method described by jcs, which I'm sure is just the mirror image of your "alternative method".
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Dan_Lehman on June 20, 2010, 09:03:40 PM
Anyway, I do have something called Double Zeppelin Bend,...
The Double Zeppelin Bend is tied basically by looping the working ends through the "69" twice instead of just once.
I agree that repeating the final tuck of the knot form is the best candidate for the Double Zeppelin knot forms.  This may be something that doesn't need a diagram.

PS:  If you want a comical "double" version, try making an extra coil in the b & q of the bend.  I'd never use it, but I might call it a double-wide Zeppelin bend. :D

Here we see a difficulty with "double":  the better knot is that (and others
like it) suggested by knot4u, but the version Roo describes more suits
the term if taking the bowline/sheet-bend correspondents as guides.

As for the first, the extra diameters got by the 2nd tucking of the ends
might have some effects worth testing (strength, or ... ?).

As for Roo's suggestion, note that there's a compromise:  make just an
extra half turn, so that each rope (assuming two ropes vs. just
the ends of the same...) collars the opposite, not itself, having made
a 360- vice 180-degree turn for the nipping loops.

--dl*
====
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: knot4u on June 20, 2010, 09:35:26 PM
1. I can confirm that the zeppelin bend is (in my experience and lay-man testing) very reliable for dissimilar ropes (different material and or different diameters). I tried e.g. a piece of string with a synthetic rope and I could not get it to slip, no matter how hard I pulled or how I pulled (shock-loading, steady pull). The knot distorted considerably but it did not seem to make it less secure.
The sheet bend and double sheet bend failed miserably in many of my tests, in which the zeppelin bend performed excellent.

I have found similar results so far.  In that case, the Double Zeppelin (as described here) will be my go-to knot for joining ANY fishing line.

http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1874.0

For vastly different diameters, what do you think about tying two loops together (e.g., two Zeppelin loops)?  I know that's technically not a bend, but it'll get the job done with confidence.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: jcsampson on June 21, 2010, 12:41:29 AM
Quote from: knot4u
"I don't see any description of a Zeppelin Double Loop there."

Right. There is no description THERE; however, the operative sentence in my post is this, which occurs at some point after the link:

"Just wrap around your post twice and make the knot itself in the same fashion as in the above instructions."

The point of making the structure in that manner is to accomplish two things:

(1) To make a double Zeppelin Loop without bulking up the Zeppelin Knot too much

(2) To make a double Zeppelin Loop quickly and easily, merely by extending what has already been learned

Thinking in terms of item (2) above--at least some of the time--can be very useful; yes, of course, there are times when it would be unwise to think in those terms.

I tried knot4u's Double Zeppelin Bend. I like it. However, the Zeppelin Bend's type of symmetry is such that there is little room for improvement. This situation makes the Double Zeppelin Bend . . . a very pretty knot.

Contrast the beauty of the above knot with the ugly monstrosity that my loop-doubling method turned the Zeppelin Knot into. But, the method works, and works well and consistently, once you figure out how to dress the beast.

I tried roo's Double-Wide (by making a double-coil b and a double-coil q). Now THAT'S one wide beast.

Then whaddaya think I did? I made a Double-Wide Double Zeppelin Bend. It was BIG. REAL big. But it was NOT easy to untie! It JAMMED!

If I got it right, Dan_Lehman's extra half turn on the b and extra half turn on the q resulted in something quite interesting, which was easy enough to untie.

JCS
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: jcsampson on June 21, 2010, 02:43:47 AM
Attached is a prettier, more symmetrical-looking Zeppelin Double Loop.

Unlike the different Zeppelin Double Loop that I described earlier, this one has loops that--like the French Bowline--remain somewhat variable even when the knot is tight.

The color red identifies the two loops that are to be brought together.

JCS
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Transminator on June 21, 2010, 08:29:11 AM
    Here is a picture of the unfinished knot, just before the fifth (5) step . The standing end is coming from the top of the picture, the first, auxiliary loop is the one with the vertical long axis, the second, the main Zeppelin loop, is the one with the horizontal long axis, and the working end is showing here looking like a hook, just before the stage when it becomes a tail that passes through both eyes.( initially through the first, and finally through the second eye.)

I have several problems with this:

1. No matter how hard I try, but this does not result in a zeppelin loop!
2. You say it starts like a bowline. But when I look at the first eye I see the working end crossing under the standing part.
    When I tie a bowline the "landlubbers way", it is the other way round
3. When I form the eye as in the bowline (WE crossing over the SP) and all other things like in your picture, I end up with
    something that looks a bit like a zeppelin loop, but is not.

Am I the only one who has a problem with this?
Could you double-check that the picture is correct?
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Transminator on June 21, 2010, 08:31:59 AM
Attached is a prettier, more symmetrical-looking Zeppelin Double Loop.

Unlike the different Zeppelin Double Loop that I described earlier, this one has loops that--like the French Bowline--remain somewhat variable even when the knot is tight.

The color red identifies the two loops that are to be brought together.

JCS

Could you make a diagram of the other method you described earlier, because the Zeppelin dbl Loop I tied from your description also acts like a french bowline. Maybe I am tying it different.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: knot4u on June 21, 2010, 08:50:35 AM
For all you young bucks who may be a little unsure of yourselves, here's the certified best way to tie the Zeppelin Loop, which is also Roo's "Alternative Method" (Option 1):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocoUUu1E520
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Dan_Lehman on June 21, 2010, 06:06:21 PM
    Another method of tying the Zeppelin loop.

     Forget all about  the compound element called "overhand knot". We can tie the Zeppelin loop using the simpler/simplest elements called "eyes" and "loops". The Zeppelin loop is made by two eyes and two loops, after the contraction of the first loop.

6 elementary steps :
 [...]
Now,  unfortunately there is a problem with this method. There are two ways one can accomplish Step 4., as the working end can form an eye around the second leg of the first loop in clockwise or anti-clockwise direction.

Goodness, how can such an ambiguous set of instructions past muster at all?
Yes, step 4 has that problem, but so too many prior steps -- i.p., the very first.
And your use of "eye" and "loop" run directly opposite to the course I set in
a nomenclature thread, some time ago (to run parallel with "soft eye", "eye
splice" usage; to limit "loop" to a knot component/structure).  argh@#$


One needs to establish a frame of reference.  In this particular case, the eyeknot
was to be oriented eye-downward, SPart going away upwards.  One can refer to
the clock or compass rose to provide precise guidance.  E.g., for this image, one
should establish the general orientation-to-be, and start "bring the rope south
and make a 360-degree anti-clockwise turn, crossing under,
and continue south to form a small bight (much smaller than shown, please!),
also turning anti-clockwise;
then go up through the loop crossing over->under
and now make an eye of desired size to the east,
this time rotating clockwise, to return to turn around the near leg of the bight
(of Step-X -- if giving Step-wise labeling, a good idea for reference)
anti-clockwise 270degrees and crossing over-under & over;
take the tail north to turn 180deg and drop back south through the two loops;
...

Frankly, though, this method is a tedious way to do what Roo shows quite
clearly with different orientations of the starting Overhand in the SPart (and
which I remain surprised that others find so different).

--dl*
====
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Dan_Lehman on June 21, 2010, 06:34:59 PM
My Net-connection willing   ::) ,
voici images of a set of so-called Rosenthal's Zep. eyeknots,
where the design goal was to make the eye-legs loading more
"in line / parallel" with the axis of tension -- simply, to not
directly load the tail of the SPart's Overhand.  The three knots other
than the leftmost one all have a common base structure, which one
might see as some sort of "Rosenthal knot", the same "coming as going."
The rightmost eyeknot presented here is the fullest manifestation of
matching the "b" & "q" loading profile; compare to Roo's diagram.
But, necessarily, with the twin legs of the eye vs. the single SPart,
one has that imbalance.  I can see the grounds for "monstrosity",
however much an exaggeration that might be; if one needs to tie
in the bight, this does it.

How to dress the ends is something I think I've settled with the end-2-end
knot, but am less settled here with the eyeknots.  What I'd like to effect
is a bending of the SPart over the two diameters of the "ends" (well, one
is rather "middle" as far as this goes) --the nipped parts-- something like
this (with the SPart seen as drawing leftwards down over cross sections
shown as 'O's) :

...<<<===\\
----------------O\\
------------------O\\
     ===>>=//

but often find it just the other way 'round, SPart making a hard u-turn
around a tail.


...<<<===\\
---------------O||
-------------O//
 ===>>=


--dl*
====
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: jcsampson on June 21, 2010, 06:45:23 PM
Four Easy Steps to Making the Zeppelin Double Loop

(1) Tie the Overhand (crossing OVER the line) and hold its leftmost [sic] section (of the Overhand's three sections) farthest from you.

(2) Take your working end around a post (from underneath the post, if the post is horizontal), to form the first loop, and bring the working end through the rightmost [sic] Overhand section from underneath (rotate your structure-in-progress as necessary, if your post is horizontal).

(3) Take the working end through the formed loop from above [sic] and then around the post again, to form the second loop, and bring the working end through the leftmost [sic] Overhand section from underneath (rotate your structure-in-progress as necessary, if your post is horizontal).

(4) Take the working end through the formed loops from underneath [sic] and thread it ALONG the OTHER loop part until it goes through the two internal subloops that that other loop part goes through.

Viola! Zeppelin Double Loop. Adjust the sizes of your loops when the knot is loose, by manipulating the appropriate Overhand (of the two Overhands that make up the Zeppelin Knot).

See also the following:

- http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1872.msg12791#msg12791
- http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1872.msg12734#msg12734

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to make a Bowstring on the Double-Knotted Bowline.

JCS

Edit: I should stop saying "Viola!" and start saying, "Voila!"
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: jcsampson on June 21, 2010, 07:21:41 PM
Quote from: Transminator
"Could you make a diagram of the other method you described earlier, because the Zeppelin dbl Loop I tied from your description also acts like a french bowline [?] . . ."

Well, that version is really just . . . an experiment, so the value of its diagram wouldn't be worth the pain of the effort needed to create it. I wouldn't prefer that version of the double loop to this one:

- http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1872.msg12800#msg12800

Perhaps you didn't tighten the knot itself enough for it to keep the loops from being easily variable as they are in the French Bowline?

It could also be argued that the resistance to loop variability in that ugly bulky version is somewhat . . . limited to begin with. It's just the odd positioning and crossing, within the Zeppelin Knot, of the part that joins the two loops, that offers the "resistance" to loop variability. Perhaps the rope that I used, which has a nice grip, fooled me into thinking that the resistance is adequate. . . .

JCS
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: knot4u on June 21, 2010, 09:02:48 PM
Just to summarize, the following is the certified best way to tie the Zeppelin Bend, which is similar to Roo's "Alternative Method" (Option 1):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wSVdUQhBt8&feature=PlayList&p=4117BBE322087898&playnext_from=PL&index=0&playnext=1
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Transminator on June 22, 2010, 09:49:49 AM
Just to summarize, the following is the certified best way to tie the Zeppelin Bend, which is similar to Roo's "Alternative Method" (Option 1):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wSVdUQhBt8&feature=PlayList&p=4117BBE322087898&playnext_from=PL&index=0&playnext=1

Realy? Who certified that?

I find it both easier and more memorable to tie it from the rear (which points out the "sameness" of the "69" and "overhand" methods more clearly)
as I demonstrated here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9HRegcP9NU

and here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FNj-Q-3pQ4 (how the zeppelin bend's 69 method "evolves" into the zeppelin loop (via the overhand knot))

The beauty of the this thread here is that different methods are presented
to give the user/learner a choice. Its up to the user, which one he prefers and chooses for himself.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on June 23, 2010, 12:52:20 AM

    The "other" Zeppelin Loop.

    What happens when we use the Zeppelin bend as the base of a loop, using the tail of the original bend as the  standing end of the loop ? We get another Zeppelin loop !, probably as good as its major relative, but me, for one, I have never read something about it. In its loaded form it looks quite different from "the" Zeppelin Loop we have been discussing about on this thread, but it is more compact, and perhaps, as an end of one line loop, an even better knot ! Who knows ? It might be an easier knot to tie... :)
 

Since the standing part takes 100% of the load and the two legs take 50%, such a loop would be more akin in loading to the inverse of the Zeppelin Bend (which jams if I recall, unlike the Zeppelin Bend).  So the loop form would probably be more appropriately labeled whatever you want to call the inverse of the Zeppelin Bend.

I wouldn't be so quick to assume that it would have good qualities at all. 
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on June 23, 2010, 04:37:26 PM
There is a major difference with the inverse of the Zeppelin bend. As in this loop  the two legs are loaded while they run to the same ditrection almost parallel to each other

Can you be more specific?  Are the legs the standing parts of the original bend?  If you just look at the knot form without worrying about what is the standing part, legs and free end, does it exactly match the Zeppelin/Rosendahl Bend form?
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on June 23, 2010, 06:52:25 PM
  1. Yes.
   2. Yes and No... :)  
   Tie the Zeppelin bend. The two standing parts of the two ropes, the two ends, run to opposite directions. Now, swivel the two halves of the knot around the two tails, ( pivot the two hinged overhand knots around the axis ...
Such a loop based on the inverse of the Zeppelin Bend became difficult to untie after a heavy strain during a quick test.  I also noticed that the part of the knot that was holding the free end tended to loosen up.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: knot4u on June 23, 2010, 08:09:16 PM
Xarax, that first pic in Reply #88 is freakin' sweet!  Why didn't I think of that before?  I have no comment about the performance though.

It's been said that the Honda Loop provides the most perfect circle.  Correction, I think we have a knew winner.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Dan_Lehman on June 24, 2010, 05:10:17 AM
Xarax, that first pic in Reply #88 is freakin' sweet!  Why didn't I think of that before?

Because you don't think so well?  -- or because thinking isn't
the best way ... .

It kinda takes the fun, the serendipity out of finding ELFEKS
(empirically less-frequently-encountered knotted structures(s))
--a "new"-in-knotting denier's long-winded term-- ,
but one could develop a rigorous checklist to employ for each
new tangle encountered, to be sure to touch all the bases.

E.g., with an end-2-end knot, one has 4 exit-parts ("ends"?),
in two connected-through-knot pieces, A & B, and assume that
the given knot has a canonically defined loading A1-v-B1,
ends A2 & B2 free; then one can go down the list and check:
end-2-end knots A2-v-B2 (unless highly symmetric like Reef knot),
  A1-v-B2, and if asymmetric A2-v-B1 ;
eyeknots A1-v-A2+B1, ...+B2, A2/B1,B2, and if asymmetric B1/B1, etc.
eyeknots by my "twinning" method (for each case above (!!)),
stopper knots A1->B1, A1->B2, A2->B1, A2->B2, and if ... ;
and that's w/o variances in dressing to consider.
(Such rigor should, e.g., discover Ashley's Stopper from the
Sheet Bend (or from the Bowline); or "should" => "might"/"could".)


It quickly gets overwhelming!
(Mind you, I'm not suggesting that one will have a high ratio
of "keepers" in these discovered ELFEKS, but they will have at
least been considered (though even here there is risk of missing
value).)


Quote
It's been said that the Honda Loop provides the most perfect circle.  Correction, I think we have a knew winner.

Another "round" one is the Anchor bend as the base, tail brought around
through it, and secured in various ways -- pretty secure w/o tying, which
was part of its creation for a rockclimbing tie-in eye (to guard against
situations in which one forgot to finish the tying).  But the Honda's eye
is small and not really in need of roundness; the knot is compact (one
I found has I think just a melted-strands stopper of its end (nylon (VERY
hard-laid))).
And the Eskimo Bowline.  And similar treatment w/SmitHunter's bend.

 :)
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: knot4u on June 24, 2010, 05:36:57 AM
Because you don't think so well?

Naw... It's because I have more important things to think about.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Dan_Lehman on June 24, 2010, 06:53:33 PM
   Does the loop based on Ashley s bend (ABOK #1452) belong to that Subject ? [#1452 & its Ilk]
No, here is bertter, with eyeknots not end-2-end knots.

Quote
I tried to tie this loop with the " Alternative method" one ties the Zeppelin loop http://notableknotindex.webs.com/zeppelinloop.html
   and, to my mind, it looks as easy, perhaps easier, to do so. I wonder if such a  loop has the same good qualities the Zeppelin supposedly has...
   
 P.S. (24 June). Dressing the derived loop, I discovered that it makes a big deal how exactly the tails of the knot are crossed while they are coming out of it . They are crossed like an X, so the loop is loaded differently if the one leg of the X, the loaded one leg of the loop, is coming above or below the other. ( The same can be said in the case of the original Ashley Bend also, but there the loading are different and it does not seem to matter much.) So we have here two similar-but-not-exactly-the-same loops, that I call Ashley Loop 1 ad Ashley Loop 2 , for the moment. Can we tie them with a common method, that produces the one or the other without much alteration? Which loop is more secure ? ( I tend to believe that the Ashley Bend 1, and the loop derived from it, is probably more secure, as the tail(s) is (are) nipped better by the first nipping loop(s) of the standing end(s). This Asley Bend1 looks also  prettier, to my eyes, because of this braid-like appearence...)

Ashley's #1452 has a more favorable geometry for being an eyeknot.

An even more favorable geometry is realized in what Harry Asher
named the Shakehands knot, which Ashley shows --though
loading the other end-- as #1031 (and one other #); this knot
has the additional benefit of being TIB (tiable in-the bight) (which
he presents in the other #'d place, IIRC).  It's "more favorable"
because the tail conveniently exits roughly parallel with the
opposite SPart, in contrast to emerging from the side of the
body at a right angle.

As for Roo's assertion of jamming, that is simply not something
I've found, if the knot is properly tied to avoid that.  Rather, it
is a possibility I find --again, by deliberate dressing-- attactive,
if, e.g., joining the somewhat intractably springy-slick laid PP
rope so common, for maybe making a long dog leash, which
would be slack & jostled.

--dl*
====
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Dan_Lehman on June 24, 2010, 07:32:14 PM
As for Roo's assertion of jamming,

[ to wit: ]
Quote
I'm not at this point seeing the ease of tying an Ashley Loop, but that may come with time if it has good qualities (more on this next).  But I would expect there would be more to remember, since there is more to remember in the corresponding bend.  There's not just the geometry of the b and q, but also how they initially interlink.

On to testing, I find that the loop, like the bend, is prone to jamming.  This may be mitigated by dressing a certain way, but this jamming tendency cannot thereby be ignored.  Tyers will randomly arrive at both configurations (assuming that there are only two).  Having a duality or multiplicity of stable knot forms for a single knot increases the odds that unfavorable attributes will arise and obviously increases the amount of investigation that must be done to ferret out the knot properties for all forms or shapes.

... that is simply not something I've found, if the knot is properly tied
to avoid that.

And such tying is pretty natural, IMO.  E.g., I just loaded (w/body
weight and 5:1 pulley, so w/more than normal working load)
some 5/16" cheap ("Home Depot" is the common moniker)
kernmantle (multifilament polypropyline ?) that is wellworn & frictive.
The knot hardly jammed in any real sense as far as untying is
concerned (it got tight enough to resist loosening).

I repeated this loading with super-slick PP monofilament marine
kernmantle of like diameter; this stuff loosens easily (did I say
"super-slick"? !!).

As for what knot tyers "will" do, well, yeah, all sorts of things
can happen.  In other places, one can read of Rosendahl's bend
("Zep.") being capsized in part and jammed to the point of
needing tools (and special verbal utterances) to untie; that is
a circumstance of (a) loosely set knot from big stiff bull rope
(laid), (b) disturbance of being hauled through a rocky surface,
and (c) high load.  Knot tyers might well mis-tie anything, and
indeed one can see mistaken presentations of various knots as
simple as the ones discussed here.  Often, a good final result
is not presented; the words given "dress & set" have an empty
ring, thus, for there is no guidance to what that means (often
because the author doesn't know).

--dl*
====

Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on June 24, 2010, 07:38:05 PM
  It's "more favorable"
because the tail conveniently exits roughly parallel with the
opposite SPart, in contrast to emerging from the side of the
body at a right angle.
That's your reason?  

Quote
As for Roo's assertion of jamming, that is simply not something
I've found, if the knot is properly tied to avoid that.

But of course it won't be dressed as you wish since the knot doesn't force that dressing.  It'll be tied with some difficulty according to a diagram, where the jamming form will often come up due to the random movements of the tyer.  
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on June 24, 2010, 07:47:16 PM
As for what knot tyers "will" do, well, yeah, all sorts of things
can happen.  In other places, one can read of Rosendahl's bend
("Zep.") being capsized in part and jammed to the point of
needing tools (and special verbal utterances) to untie; that is
a circumstance of (a) loosely set knot from big stiff bull rope
(laid), (b) disturbance of being hauled through a rocky surface,
and (c) high load.  Knot tyers might well mis-tie anything, and
indeed one can see mistaken presentations of various knots as
simple as the ones discussed here.  

Please don't quote other threads.  It gets very confusing.

A Zeppelin Bend being distorted due to a user failing to set the knot is an entirely separate problem from an Ashley bend having various stable forms, one of which will jam even if it is set firmly.

One case is user error (with a rare result), the other case is a problem with the knot failing to easily draw up to an optimal form on its own (with a common* result).  The Ashley Bend is difficult enough to tie as it is, it doesn't need another separate diagram to remind users of the optimal way of dressing it even after it's tied correctly.

* http://davidmdelaney.com/jam-testing/jam-testing-several-bends.html
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Dan_Lehman on June 25, 2010, 05:34:47 AM
.. an Ashley bend having various stable forms, one of which will jam even if it is set firmly.
... a common* result).

* http://davidmdelaney.com/jam-testing/jam-testing-several-bends.html

No number of citations of this experiment with thin cord is going
to change the results I have with Real(tm) cordage -- rope.

I should note that the jamming orientation also provide for
forcible loosening : pull the tails apart (which levers the
collars back out over the SParts a bit, sufficient to then
loosening manually).  Heavily loaded (think big rope, big things)
knots might take some handy help.

--dl*
====
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: jcsampson on June 25, 2010, 07:47:48 PM
To roo:

ABOK #1408 appears to be somewhat related to the Zeppelin Bend's design--if you do not cross the tails as shown in the diagram. What do you think of this ABOK #1408?

JCS
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on June 25, 2010, 09:51:49 PM
ABOK #1408 appears to be somewhat related to the Zeppelin Bend's design--if you do not cross the tails as shown in the diagram. What do you think of this ABOK #1408?
Starting a new thread for this:
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1885.msg12902#msg12902
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: dmacdd on June 27, 2010, 12:15:34 AM
I've integrated what I've learned from this thread in a complete revision of my web page on the Zeppelin Bend, also expanding it to include the Zeppelin Loop.

http://davidmdelaney.com/zeppelin/Zeppelin-bend-and-Zeppelin-loop.html (http://davidmdelaney.com/zeppelin/Zeppelin-bend-and-Zeppelin-loop.html)

I hope that the presentation there usefully integrates b and q visualization based on roo's new diagram with JCS's verbal procedure based on the overhand knot  (presented earlier in this thread), the result being a uniform way of tying the bend and the loop that neither abandons nor requires b and q visualization, b and q visualization being always applicable to the evolving knot structure if the knot maker wishes to bring it to conscience.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: jcsampson on June 27, 2010, 02:45:45 AM
Quote from: dmacdd
". . . the result [is] a uniform way of tying the bend and the loop that neither abandons nor requires b and q visualization, b and q visualization being always applicable to the evolving knot structure if the knot maker wishes to bring it to conscience."

Very well-put.

Beautiful job you did on your new web page for the Zeppelin Bend and Zeppelin Loop:

- http://davidmdelaney.com/zeppelin/Zeppelin-bend-and-Zeppelin-loop.html

Here are the precise URLs of the verbal procedures for the Zeppelin Loop and Zeppelin Double Loop, respectively, should you ever want to refer to them directly:

- http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1872.msg12734#msg12734
- http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1872.msg12800#msg12800

JCS
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on June 27, 2010, 04:28:55 AM
I've integrated what I've learned from this thread in a complete revision of my web page on the Zeppelin Bend, also expanding it to include the Zeppelin Loop.

http://davidmdelaney.com/zeppelin/Zeppelin-bend-and-Zeppelin-loop.html (http://davidmdelaney.com/zeppelin/Zeppelin-bend-and-Zeppelin-loop.html)

I hope that the presentation there usefully integrates b and q visualization based on roo's new diagram with JCS's verbal procedure based on the overhand knot  (presented earlier in this thread), the result being a uniform way of tying the bend and the loop that neither abandons nor requires b and q visualization, b and q visualization being always applicable to the evolving knot structure if the knot maker wishes to bring it to conscience.

Here's a possible objection that could be made to making the overhand knot first for the b part of the bend:

Some tyers might make their "q" while tucking through the wrong part or parts of the "b" overhand knot, versus having no tucking to do whatsoever during a nearly simultaneous "b" and "q" formation.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: dmacdd on June 27, 2010, 04:44:31 AM

Here are the precise URLs of the verbal procedures for the Zeppelin Loop and Zeppelin Double Loop, respectively, should you ever want to refer to them directly:

- http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1872.msg12734#msg12734
- http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1872.msg12800#msg12800

Now incorporated as references at the bottom of

http://davidmdelaney.com/zeppelin/Zeppelin-bend-and-Zeppelin-loop.html
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: dmacdd on June 27, 2010, 04:55:36 AM

Here's a possible objection that could be made to making the overhand knot first for the b part of the bend:

Some tyers might make their "q" while tucking through the wrong part or parts of the "b" overhand knot, versus having no tucking to do whatsoever during a nearly simultaneous "b" and "q" formation.

But that objection is applicable to _any_ method that is not the lay-the-b-over-the-q method.

Perhaps those who make the bend only infrequently and the loop never would be better off learning only the lay-the-b-over-the-q method.  But those who either tie the bend frequently, or need or want to know both the bend and the loop, would be better off to know the uniform method for both well enough not to make that mistake. 

And the fact that this particular alternative method allows b and q visualization would tend to prevent such errors by allowing a mental check on the correctness of the evolving knot.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on June 27, 2010, 07:02:30 AM
Here's a possible objection that could be made to making the overhand knot first for the b part of the bend:

Some tyers might make their "q" while tucking through the wrong part or parts of the "b" overhand knot, versus having no tucking to do whatsoever during a nearly simultaneous "b" and "q" formation.
But that objection is applicable to _any_ method that is not the lay-the-b-over-the-q method.
I don't want to overemphasize the issue.  I present it mostly as something to keep in mind given that knot enthusiasts can overestimate the knot-tying abilities of occasional knot users. 

Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: dmacdd on July 02, 2010, 06:00:59 PM
A nice video presenting the Zeppelin Bend and the Zeppelin Loop. From the blurb on the video:

"This is to demonstrate that the "overhand knot" method of tying the Zeppelin Loop is the "69" method of the Zeppelin Bend in disguise. They are both the same. Tying the Zeppelin Loop this way makes it in my opinion a lot easier and more memorable as it is one smooth threading process, in which you have the 6 and 9 structure of the Zeppelin Bend for guidance"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FNj-Q-3pQ4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FNj-Q-3pQ4)
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: knot4u on July 02, 2010, 06:39:05 PM
Here are some pretty cool stress tests on Zeppelin Bend:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Givv9cBB_Hw&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-uQrx7yPYM&NR=1

Actually, this topic is more fit for a new thread:
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1902.0
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: DDK on October 28, 2010, 04:55:27 AM
I prefer Option #2, sort of...  When I have made the loop, I have made it by rethreading the bend.

By this I mean that I have used two ropes and produced the bend while leaving one working end very long (this will become the loop).  I use this long working end and follow (by rethreading) the standing part of the other rope through the bend until reaching the other working end.  Then I remove the superfluous rope.

This general method requires an additional rope, but, elliminates the need to learn a method applicable only to the Zepplin Bend.  The one additional piece of information required is that the loop is formed by the connection of the standing part to the working end of the bend (like the Sheetbend / Bowline).  This method could be tedious for more intricate bends, but, tends to work well enough for the interlocking overhand bends, i.e. the Ashley or the Smith/Hunter's.

DDK

Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: B.M. on November 15, 2010, 09:21:39 PM
I've been back and forth with both methods now, and I find the alternative method (first tying an overhand knot and threading the working end through) by far the easiest for me to remember.  Maybe it's slower since it has to be done in two steps, but it makes it easy to remember both the bend and the loop since they are tied with the same technique.  The 6+9 method is best suited for the bend, and I screw it up half the time I try it, and it requires that I have to remember two ways to tie the same (in essence) knot.

BM
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: [Inkanyezi] gone on November 25, 2010, 03:24:35 PM
I didn't find any of the two patterns really easy, but in the course of trying to learn them, I found a way to tie the knot in a way that is easier for me.


Of course, any pattern devised will do the same thing, as this is indeed a mirror of the first scheme, but I devised this as a simpler way to set it into the hands rather than just remembering a pattern.  And of course, the tying method can be applied also to the bend; it is identical with what is shown on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgzH9YP_vaw&feature=related
The difference is that I start the first overhand a bit differently, not turning the thing over but maintaining its orientation, and use the thumb as a guide, which for me makes it easier to follow.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Transminator on November 26, 2010, 10:44:20 AM
I've been back and forth with both methods now, and I find the alternative method (first tying an overhand knot and threading the working end through) by far the easiest for me to remember.  Maybe it's slower since it has to be done in two steps, but it makes it easy to remember both the bend and the loop since they are tied with the same technique.  The 6+9 method is best suited for the bend, and I screw it up half the time I try it, and it requires that I have to remember two ways to tie the same (in essence) knot.

BM

Have a look at this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FNj-Q-3pQ4

With this method you only have to remember one way of tying both the bend and the loop and I find it fairly easy.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Seaworthy on June 29, 2014, 11:10:59 AM
For those familiar with both the Zeppelin Loop and the Zeppelin Bend (or for those at least willing to learn them), I'm looking for your objective opinion.

Which method of tying the Zeppelin Loop do you find easiest and most memorable?

Option 1, The Alternative Method at the bottom of the page:
http://notableknotindex.webs.com/zeppelinloop.html

or

Option 2, which approximates the bend method at the top of the page:
http://notableknotindex.webs.com/zeppelinloop.html

There is no rush.  You can take all the time you need to toy with both approaches.   Thanks in advance.   :)

I know this is an old thread Roo, but here you have a someone who is experienced only in tying a limited number practical knots for sailing purposes, trying out this loop for the very first time this morning and reporting back.

Firstly, Method I and Method 2 are identical to me apart from having the initial overhand reversed (in Method one the tail initially goes over the SP and in Method 2 it goes under the SP). Otherwise it is just a case of Method 1 drawn as a stylised diagram and Method 2 as depicting the actual loop you would tie with line.

I find it far easier following an illustration as shown in Method 2 (more like a photo of the real thing), BUT it is a reverse of how I usually tie a Zeppelin Bend and therefore it is harder to remember.

Let me see if I can explain coherently:
I tie a Zeppelin bend with the 6 on top and the 9 on the bottom.
Method 1 has the 9 on the bottom (so fits in with the bend).
Method 2 has the 9 on the top.

So, the easiest way I find of tying it and remembering it is to use Method 1, but drawn in the style of Method 2.

This is also "oh so easy" to remember as it is very much in the manner of how I tie a bowline (that beloved loop that is so ingrained in my memory tied from all 4 directions):

Photo 1:
- Start with a reverse bowline (ie initial turn to the left not right) and

Photo 2:
- Continue to form an overhand, then form the big loop anticlockwise as you would for a standard bowline

Photo 3:
- Then the rabbit goes out of the top hole
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Seaworthy on June 29, 2014, 11:23:31 AM
Continued:

Photo 4:
- Form your 9 as you usually would in a Zepp bend. Apart from the big loop at the bottom it now looks identical to a Zepp bend with the tail of the 6 already poked through.

Photo 5:
- Lastly poke the tail of the 9 through the two overhands as you would in the final step of the Zepp bend.

Photo 6:
- Tighten up.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Seaworthy on June 29, 2014, 03:03:09 PM
I have had a bit more of a play :).

If you learn to tie the Zeppelin as an overhand to start with (as above) then bring the tail of the other line up through the top right hole and form the '9' from underneath (also exactly as above), then the Zeppelin bend and loop are tied almost absolutely identically (one differs from the other only in that a seperate line is used for the '9' rather than the tail of the first line).
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Seaworthy on July 27, 2014, 08:09:04 AM
This is for those interested in seeing the Zepp Bend in action underwater.

Two nights ago the wind whipped up unexpectedly and we needed to let out more scope. Rather than hauling up some of the chain to undo the snubber and reattach it after more chain was deployed, I added an extra length of line to extend it.

At 2am I needed a quick, easy, reliable bend (that could be subsequently untied) for joining the nylon snubber to some spare braided polyester line. 'Reliable' is the key. With nearly 20 tons of boat and the wind gusting 25-35 knots this bend needed to be very secure.

Note the thinning of the standing end of the nylon line as it stretches under load. The polyester line shows minimal thinning. The stretch helps absorb the shock loads and that is why nylon is the choice for snubbers.

The chain on the bottom is the loose portion between the winch and the soft shackle securing the snubber. The force of the wind is stretching the line nearly horizontal (it was roughly 10-20 degrees in the gusts as there was little catenary effect then).

The bend does not look very symmetrical simply because the nylon snubber was very stiff following months of use underwater.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on July 27, 2014, 09:40:57 PM
  The previous post is irrelevant to the contents of this thread,
As is yours.  I'd ask for any moderator to remove your deposit from the punch bowl.
Quote
which are about the so-called "Zeppelin loop"
It's so called because of it's undeniable relation to the Zeppelin bend.

Quote
The Zeppelin bend is a genuine Zeppelin-like knot
What a useless tautology.

Quote
, while the fake, so-called "Zeppelin" loop is not
Multiple people have indicated how tired they are of your pointless rejection of the Zeppelin Loop name.  It gets you nowhere, makes you look like a kooky zealot, and you never offer any "real" Zeppelin Loop, because you know what messes the alternatives are.

Quote
difficult to tie
And yet we have this very lengthy thread of people willing to tie it.

Quote
and untie loop
False. 

Quote
to learn the fake and forget the real
This forum would be greatful if you forgot your fake appearance-based analysis of knots, and started real, reproducible, performance-based analysis of knots.

Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: xarax on July 28, 2014, 10:39:19 AM
   This mediocre and difficult to tie and untie loop is a perfect example of how misleading and dangerous the parroting of a knot can be, on the one hand, and how useful and revealing the understanding of a knot is, on the other. Of course, anybody who is really familiar with a genuine Zeppelin knot, as the Zeppelin bend is - not only with one of its tying methods, but also with its mechanism, with the structure and the way it works - will never buy the so-called "Zeppelin loop" - which is not a Zeppelin-like knot, and which, moreover, is difficult to tie, AND to untie ( because it is a not-PET eyeknot, and also because it is based on two overhand knots, which can clinch too tightly around themselves after heavy loading, a disadvantage from which a genuine Zeppelin knot, the Zeppelin bend, for instance, will never run the danger to suffer from...). Another, not so-evident shortcoming of this low quality merchandise is that, if the first overhand knot, the one tied on the Standing Part before-the-eye, happens to "close" first ( and it does so, most of the times, if this is not prevented manually and properly, during the tightening and shrinking of the knot ), the second overhand knot, the one tied on the continuation of the returning eye leg, may remain slack, thus making it redundant, and not contributing in any constructive and beneficial way to the distribution and absorption, within the nub, of the tensile forces coming through the Standing End. (2) 
  How did this whole ridiculous story emerge in the first place ? Somebody who was parroting knots, had this descent of the Holy Spirit, his moment of "Eureka", his great, ingenious idea : The Zeppelin bend is easy to untie, so, if we want an eyeknot that will be also be easy to untie, the only thing we have to do is to "convert" a Zeppelin bend into a loop, by joining the Standing End of the one link with the Tail End of the other.
  Ingenious or knot I am not qualified to judge, but what I can tell, for sure, is that this idea was the most stupid idea, regarding knots, I had ever met in my life !  :)
   We do not want an eyeknot that looks like a Zeppelin knot ! We want an eyeknot that is easy to untie, like a Zeppelin knot ! Why a Zeppelin knot is easy to untie ? THAT is what we should understand first, and only then "translate", so to speak, this understanding in the case of a loop, and tie a loop that will be easy to untie.
   Anybody who is really familiar with a Zeppelin knot, in general, and with the Zeppelin bend, in particular, will see at a glance that the two overhand knots of each link can not clinch too tightly around each other, and make the knot difficult to untie, for two simple reasons : First, they are not loaded through both their ends : in a bend, each link is loaded only by one end, not two, so each overhand knot is loaded only by one of its two ends, meaning that it will not be prone to jamming. Second, they are minimally interlocked, they are not entangled the one over and around the other, so that when the one "closes" tightly, it will force the other to "close" tightly, too. The parts of those overhand knots that are most heavily loaded, their first curves ( where the segments of the rope are loaded by 100% of the tensile forces coming through the Standing Ends ), are not interweaved within each other : the first curves are not "hooked" within each other, they remain adjacent but only parallel to each other, and they are independent, regarding how much they may shrink and how compact they may become - so the 'closing" of the one overhand knot tied on the first link does not generate, or interfere with, any "closing" of the other overhand knot tied on the second link. The two first curves stay close to each other only because they are hooked around a third agent, the pair of the Tail Ends that penetrate them both, NOT because they are hooked around each other ! That fact is what I had described by the whimsical ( yet revealing the truth about its mechanism, so useful, indeed ) description of the Zeppelin bend as a "rope-made hinge". The pair of the first curves works like the "knuckles", and the pair of the Tail Ends works like the "pin"/pivot/axle. 
   So, the Zeppelin bend is easy to untie because the Tail Ends are not loaded, and because the heavily loaded first curves are not "hooked" within each other. THOSE are the characteristics a genuine, not fake, Zeppelin knot should have, in order to be able to be untied easily. And THOSE characteristics are exactly what the fake, so-called "Zeppelin loop" destroys completely, in its effort to mimic, blindly, the superficial, skin-deep appearance of the Zeppelin bend, its "looks", and not its essence, its mechanism. By loading the second end of the most important overhand knot, the one tied on the Standing Part before-the-eye ( and thus loaded by the 100% of the tensile forces ), and by interweaving within the nub the now highly tensioned by both ends segment ( which previously, as a Tail, was used to be loaded only by one of its ends), BOTH properties which had allowed the knot to be easily untiable in the first place are lost for ever, in one single stroke of a genius, yet stupid transformation ! In this relic of a genuine Zeppelin knot, this fake, torn apart copycat, the so-called "Zepelin loop", the "looks" of the "parent" Zeppelin bend are retained, but the mechanism which prevents the two overhand knots to clinch tightly around themselves and each other was torn apart : so much for the genius knot-parroting-tyers, who blustered troothlessly that I am the one who makes "fake appearance-based analysis of knots"(sic) !
   The negative publicity against the few more-Zeppelin-like eyeknots we have (1), try to blur one thing : that we do not need the appearance of a real Zeppelin knot, as the Zeppelin bend is, in order to ascertain a easily untiable eyeknot : we need its essence. Its essence is the absence of convoluted around each other overhand knots ( or, for that matter, fig.8 knots as well ), because, under heavy loading, they can not be untied as easily as the bowlines, for example, which are based on more "open", not clinching around themselves nipping structures. ( Moreover, I have seen that the overhand and the fig.8 knots can close too tightly, even if they are tied at the continuation of the returning eye leg, which is loaded with 50%, only, of the total load - so these "closed" structures should better be avoided even there.)
   So, the Zeppelin bend  is a Zeppelin knot - and that is not a tautology : it reveals that the "Zeppelin" mechanism is present, and not destroyed in any stupid way, in the Zeppelin bend. And the fake, so-called "Zeppelin loop" is not, and that is not an opinion, it is a fact, that is based on the differences of the mechanisms, despite the "similarity" of the superficial appearances.
   Regarding how "mess"(sic) is a Zeppelin-like eyeknot, which is PET, and it is not based on an overhand knot tied on the Standing Part before-the-eye ( so it can be released instantly, the moment the Tail End / pin / pivot / axle is pulled out, and its nub can not "close" too tightly ), the interested reader can judge by himself, looking at the attached pictures. The slipped tail can be avoided, of course, but I had included it because it makes the pin / pivot / axle stiffer.

1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4095   
2. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4606.msg29767#msg29767
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Dan_Lehman on July 28, 2014, 02:28:28 PM
you never offer any "real" Zeppelin Loop, because you know what messes the alternatives are.
  So, the secure/locked bowlines are "messes"(sic) !
Or you misunderstand what he meant:
that the alternative "zeppelin(-like) eyeknots" are messes.

Indeed, some that I've presented are bulkier, by
virtue of bringing --for the very sake of being more
"zeppelin=knot-like"-- both eye legs into the body
as is the SPart --i.e., making the complementary "q"
to the "b".  My most recent discovery, though, is not
so bulked nor so awkardly so as one of the earlier
ones (which I deemed most *pure*) --and is both
TIB & PET (= "PEtIB"   ;D  ).


--dl*
====
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: [Inkanyezi] gone on August 03, 2014, 10:43:23 PM
   This mediocre (λογόρροια removed) ---
  Anybody who is really familiar with a Zeppelin knot, in general, and with the Zeppelin bend, in particular, will see at a glance that the two overhand knots of each link can not clinch too tightly around each other, and make the knot difficult to untie, for two simple reasons : First, they are not loaded through both their ends : in a bend, each link is loaded only by one end, not two, so each overhand knot is loaded only by one of its two ends, meaning that it will not be prone to jamming. --- (more λογόρροια removed)

Again, as it is not the first time, you falsely refer to the appearance, and not the function of the knot - whether the eye-knot or the bend.

There is no "hinge" in the structure, only the appearance of one, and the workings of the bend and eye-knot are essentially the same, seen from the standing part. Any further tightening of the knot under load does not depend on the load on the eye-leg of the first overhand. In both knots, bend or eye, there is negligible slippage under load. When you observe it from the eye-leg of the first overhand, you might perhaps be able to understand, that as long as nothing can be pulled out from the nub at this end, any load on this part will not draw the first eye-knot any tighter. The only force that tends to draw it tighter is the load on the standing part, as long as there is no slip in the part that emerges from the first overhand.

The only difference from the bend, as seen from the standing part, is that the knot distorts a bit, due to the off-center load of the eye leg that comes out from the first overhand knot. If there's no slip, the knot will not draw up any tighter. The first overhand of the bend will draw up in exactly the same way as the eye-knot, the difference that as it is symmetric, the same goes for the other end. The eye however has only half the load on each of its parts, and thus will not draw up as tight as the first overhand. Nevertheless, the relative tightness of the knot, in both cases, depends on the load. I have had zeppelin bends tied in small stuff draw up very tight, so that some difficulty is experienced in untying.

In use, the eye-knot does not jam any more than the bend. It is quite as easily untied, although, for obvious reasons, the first overhand cannot be undone before the eye is opened.

Maybe you should open yours?

Anyway, zeppelin is but a name, only a name. The knot probably has nothing whatsoever to do with airships, and we don't really know the origin. We use the moniker for a knot that is tied with two overhands in a particular way, with a screwed symmetry. The knot structure is the same in the loop and the bend, and that is why we use the same name, discerning it by the addition of 'loop' or 'bend'.

The loop form does not deserve any bad-mouthing. It is a valid knot, just as much as the bend, and by using "loop" or "bend" as determinant, it is quite clear which knot you refer to.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: enhaut on August 04, 2014, 02:51:27 AM
This is a quote from "Complete Guide to Knots and Knots Tying 2001, by Goeffrey Budworth regarding the Zeppelin Bend;
"This is one of a family of bends comprising two interlocked overhand knots. It is both strong and secure, and the fact that both working ends stick out at right angles to their standing parts is only a minor snag that may be somewhat unsightly but is rarely inconvient.
 The American naval officer and aeronautics hero Charles Rosendahl required his massive dirigible Los Angeles to be moored with this bend-and no other- in the 1930's; and the US Navy continued to employ it
for lighter-than-air ships until as recently as 1962"

For me the correct way of making the Zeppelin into a loop is the method showed below, but again as Xarax pointed out there is always a flaw one overhand knot works harder than the other, there is no balance.
I agree with you when you are stating the the loop works anyway!  It does.

Please excuse the pictures' quality, the flash is obvious!
Ps
As for the logorrhea, for my part I know what it means and in my language it is even more brutal and precise;

[MEDECINE] Besoin morbide de parler sans arret, qui survient surtout dans les etats de choc, d'excitation ou les etats maniaques.

[Soutenu] Discours abondant, confus et interminable.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on August 04, 2014, 03:38:29 AM
For me the correct way of making the Zeppelin into a loop is the method showed below,
Since the standing part of a loop is expected to take 100% of the applied load, that image would be the loop version of whatever you'd want to call the inverse of the Zeppelin Bend (http://notableknotindex.webs.com/Zeppelin.html).  Just as the inverse of the Zeppelin Bend jams badly, so too does the loop version you show.
I'd like to take this occasion to gently steer this thread back to its topic (http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1872.0) which was asking about the preferred method of tying the Zeppelin Loop (http://notableknotindex.webs.com/zeppelinloop.html).
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: xarax on August 04, 2014, 05:06:43 AM
  The loop "corresponding" to the reverse Zeppelin bend, shown at the attached pictures.
  In general, the "corresponding" loop should retain the same two loaded ends of the parent bend, and add a third one - by loading one of the Tail Ends of the parent bend. Moreover, the Standing End of the eyeknot should take the place of a Standing End of the parent bend - and not of a Tail End. This way, we can hope, at least, that the geometry of the "corresponding" eyeknot will not differ very much from the geometry of the parent bend - because the loaded third end, which will replace a Tail End of the parent bend, will become an eye leg, and an eye leg is usually loaded with the 50%, only, of the total load.
  In a fake "Zeppelin" knot, when we pull the unloaded Tail End out of the nub, the knot does not fall apart, as it should had happened, had it been a genuine Zeppelin eyeknot. When we pull the pin out of a hinge, the two "knuckles" are released, because they are not connected to each other with anything else. Similarly, if we pull the Tai End out of the nub of a genuine Zeppelin knot, the first curves of the two links will separate, because they are not "hooked" within each other : they are adjacent, but only parallel to each other, and the only thing that keeps them close to each other is this perpendicularly placed pin, which is able to confront the dominant forces acting on it, the shear forces. ( Of course, when I am talking about shear forces, I "falsely refer" to the "appearance", and not the "function" :) - because whoever claims this, has evidently not yet learned what is a mechanism, a loaded structure, and a shear force... A rod "looks" like a rod, when it is tensioned and when it is compressed, so it remains "the same structure" - and that is why we always call it "a rod"- and not "a wire" or "a column", for example... Yeah, a rod is a rod is a rod, and a Zeppelin Lulu is a Zeppelin Lulu is a Zeppelin Lulu... :))   
   I have seen that the "common" fake, so-called "Zeppelin loop" is more difficult to untie than an equally loaded Zeppelin bend - as it was anticipated, because, as it is loaded by both ends, the first overhand knot "closes" around itself more tightly than any overhand knot in the "corresponding" Zeppelin bend. Alan Lee has even shown telling relevant pictures, about which the faux bijoux sellers prefer to remain silent...
   We have dozens of easy-to-untie symmetric bends that can be "converted" into "corresponding" loops. The Zeppelin bend is not the only one which is completely altered and deteriorated, as a mechanism, when one of its Tail Ends is loaded - but, taken into account its unique balanced form and its hinge-like function, which is the main cause of the easiness of its untying, despite its interlocked overhand knots, it is probably the most severely affected one... From all those bends, the genius knot tyer who was trying to "transplant", blindly, the easiness of their uniying to a "corresponding" loop, has chosen the one in which, during this "transplantation", the very cause which was responsible for the easiness of its untying in the first place, is now lost for ever !       
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: [Inkanyezi] gone on August 04, 2014, 08:42:18 AM
Discours abondant, confus et interminable.
J'suis d'accord.

And it should be noted that most any expression in any language could have more than one very precise meaning. A medical term has its precise meaning among medical professionals, but may have alternate meanings in other contexts. AFAIK this is a general discussion about a particular knot on a board about knots, not a scientific discussion between medical professionals about the psychological conditions of their patients. Horses for courses, anything should be interpreted in context.

What I was trying to convey, was that all that verbiage about hinges and stuff is completely irrelevant to the knot discussed. As long as its working end, or the loop leg, does not slip out of the knot in its own direction, they cannot contribute to any tightening of the knot. It is only the load on the standing part that tends to draw the first overhand any tighter. Like any knot in flexible rope, it totally depends on friction, and it can be drawn up more tightly, provided sufficient force is applied.

The topic - how to tie - is another. I still have my preferred way of tying both the bend and the loop, as it facilitates tying blindly, in the dark; my "rule of thumb". Using the thumb as a guide, and holding the stuff firmly in the hand, is very helpful when I have to trace with my fingers the maze that will finally make up the knot. The whole thing may be mirrored easily as well, facilitating swapping with which hand to work.

That is indeed different from the schemes mostly shown, as it includes the hand all the way through tying movements. It is more like a choreography than a series of static patterns. Of course the same could be done without the "rule of thumb", thinking of overhand knots, but I find it far simpler to include body parts in the forming of the knot. I take the working end around my thumb after twisting up the loop that will form part of the first overhand, and then I reeve it through said loop and continue with the second overhand, following alongside my thumb in the first of its moves. It's a dance performed with hands and rope, using the thumb as guide, and once mastered, it can easily be performed without the aid of vision.

The only difference from the loop when forming the bend is that it is not the working end of the same rope that will follow the thumb when the second overhand is formed, but the working end of the other rope.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: enhaut on August 04, 2014, 03:10:56 PM
Quote
This may be described as the loop "corresponding" to the reverse Zeppelin bend

Funny how people see things :D
The loop that I showed IS a Zeppelin Bend  made with the two ends of the same rope ::)
I have simply pulled one of the two tag ends (when Zep is completed) transforming it in a Standing Part.
It will never be use as a real loop, considering its time consuming modus operandi. :P
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: enhaut on August 04, 2014, 06:11:14 PM
Ok that's what reverse means!
Now show me an exploded version of the knot you tied at reply #29 in the post on figure 8 bends that you refered.
I will be able to judge by myself if it's really a "reversed" version of mine at #28.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: xarax on August 04, 2014, 09:09:08 PM
   What is an "exploded" knot ? It is not a loose knot, that is for sure !  :) A loose knot is something rather vague, resembling the parent compact knot, and a tying diagram of it : it may be useful, but it is not geometrically accurate.
  What is "exploded" in the "exploded knot" is the "empty" space, the "openings", in between the "filled" with material space - and that "explosion" is meant to be accurately proportional throughout the volume of the knot.
   Now, it turns out that the "exploded", regarding the "empty" space, knot, is equivalent to the "imploded", regarding the "filled" space, knot : In other words, if we can imagine a compact / tight knot, where, miraculously, the diameter of the rope shrinks to the same degree along the whole rope length, we get  a corresponding "imploded" knot, regarding the size of the rope - which is equivalent to a properly "exploded" knot. 

   I usually provide "front" and "rear" pictures of the knots, but when a knot is "side symmetric" ( as the Zeppelin bend ) I do not see any reason for this. However, my pictures are usually quite sharp, so one can easily follow the paths of the lines, and re-tie the knot. In case you can not discern those paths, please ask, and I will provide a picture of a "loose" knot, which may be of some help, as soon as possible.
   
    I had commented on this fig.8 Zeppelin knot/bend, and had shown two pictures of its loose form, at :
    http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4090.msg27751#msg27751
    http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4090.msg30245#msg30245
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: enhaut on August 05, 2014, 01:43:47 AM
So you prefer loose form? Your choice, for my part I will go with the mass and stay with "exploded", anyway.
Thanks for the pictures, I have tied them both.
Here I present the "exploded" version of the fig 8 bend I presented at reply #28.
Characteristics;
Each eye (4 total) encircle two diameter of rope.
The two standing ends are embraced together two times, once by their own fig 8 then by the other.
It is very nice!!!
For now It is not in my view any reverse form of a fig 8 bend shown in this forum....
I sorry for the author of this thread if we digress a little. :-[
The second image shows an exploded view, a term adopted by all illustrators in the WORLD
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on August 05, 2014, 06:42:44 AM
I sorry for the author of this thread if we digress a little. :-[
Quite a bit more than a little.  I guess everyone has forgotten how to start a new thread.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Seaworthy on August 05, 2014, 07:37:44 PM
This evening I logged on for the first time since the response to my last post was posted.

Sorry if my post was considered off topic. I could not find a more appropriate spot to show how the Zepp bend was performing under high load underwater (it hardly warranted starting a new thread) and I thought members may be interested.

Anyway, squarely back on topic now. Reading through these recent posts and remembering how one of the overhands jams in an Alpine Butterfly loop when load is applied to the loop and one standing end, I was not convinced the Zepp loop could be untied as stated.

So I tied a Zepp loop (by the way, nonsense that it is difficult to tie) and tested in out on my winch (Lewmar 55, five turns around before being winched a maximum amount).

Photos will follow in a moment.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Seaworthy on August 05, 2014, 07:57:02 PM
This is the loop I tied.

The line was 10 mm double braided polyester (not new).
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Seaworthy on August 05, 2014, 08:15:16 PM
This is the how it looked after load was applied.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Seaworthy on August 05, 2014, 08:17:47 PM
Trying to untie it, one throat opened up easily.
The other side where load was applied to what is essentially the tail in the Zepp bend was jammed tight. The overhand had clamped down and even a marlin spike had no impact.

This is exactly what occurs with an Alpine Butterfly loop when load is applied to the loop. I have never heard of the AB loop referred to as 'not a real Alpine Butterfly', despite its inability to be untied after moderately high load is applied, so I see no reason why this the term 'not real' should be applied to the Zeppelin loop. The bend and loop just perform differently due to load in the latter essentially being applied to the tail in the former.

By the way, the Bowline and Bowline on the Bight untie easily under similar load. I have found though that the Bowline can jam in stiff line if the knot is not dressed well and high load is applied suddenly.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on August 05, 2014, 08:41:26 PM
Trying to untie it, one throat opened up easily.
The other side where load was applied to what is essentially the tail in the Zepp bend was jammed tight. The overhand had clamped down and even a marlin spike had no impact.
While this isn't exactly on topic of which of the two tying methods you prefer, this had come up in another thread, and it seemed that a tyer only had problems untying the Zeppelin Loop when they grossly exceeded the safe working load for the line.  You should have no issues with untying if the safe working load for the line is heeded.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: xarax on August 05, 2014, 08:47:05 PM
I have never heard of the AB loop referred to as 'not a real Alpine Butterfly'... so I see no reason why this the term 'not real' should be applied to the Zeppelin loop. The bend and loop just perform differently due to load in the latter essentially being applied to the tail in the former.

   The Alpine Butterfly is just one of the dozens of dozens bends based on two interlocked overhand knots, where the first curve of the one is "hooked" within the first curve of the other. The Hunter s bend is the most "similar" to the Zeppelin bend, which has this property ( "similar", so to speak, of course ! ). Do you know many bends like the Zeppelin bend, where this does NOT happen ? Where the first curves are parallel to each other, and they are only connected / remain adjacent to each other by the presence of the penetrating Tail Ends ? If yes, please, show them to us !  :)
   In the case of the corresponding loops, in those many cases this property does not change ( the first curves which were "hooked" within each other in the bend, remain "hooked" in the loop ), so there is no need to point out any major difference in the mechanism of the two knots. However, in the case of the Zeppelin bend, and the fake, so-called "Zeppelin loop", the unique property of the parent, genuine Zeppelin-like knot disappears, and that is what I am trying to tell. If you Google and read again all the posts where the term "fake, so-called Zeppelin loop" is written, you may understand this.
   The Zeppelin bend, and the more genuine Zeppelin-like loops shown at (1), are rope-made hinges : Just pull out the tail(s)/pins, and see what happens ! Do the same with the fake, so-called Zeppelin loop, and then try to understand where was the rocket science in this !

1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4095
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: xarax on August 05, 2014, 08:57:48 PM
  The other side where load was applied to what is essentially the tail in the Zepp bend was jammed tight. The overhand had clamped down and even a marlin spike had no impact.

   Welcome to the difficulty of untiability of all the loops where an overhand knot ( or, for that matter, a fig.8 knot as well ) has been tied on the Standing Part before-the-eye. It is not only they are not PET ( which is veery important for the sailor, for example, as a PET knot can be untied in one step, without any relic of the knot remaining tangled on the line of the released loop ), it is that their first / main overhand knot clinces very tightly around itself.
   I have seen that, under heavy loading, an overhand or fig.8 knot can be too tight, even when it is tied on the continuation of the returning eye leg, after (post)-the-eye.
   There is a name for the knots which are PET, AND their nipping structure does not "close" around itself as tightly as an overhand or fig.8 knot : BOWLINES !  :)
   
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Seaworthy on August 05, 2014, 09:05:17 PM
Trying to untie it, one throat opened up easily.
The other side where load was applied to what is essentially the tail in the Zepp bend was jammed tight. The overhand had clamped down and even a marlin spike had no impact.
While this isn't exactly on topic of which of the two tying methods you prefer, this had come up in another thread, and it seemed that a tyer only had problems untying the Zeppelin Loop when they grossly exceeded the safe working load for the line.  You should have no issues with untying if the safe working load for the line is heeded.

The safe working load of the line was possibly exceeded. I had no load cell attached to measure this. The safe working load is considered only 1/5 of the line's breaking strength. For the 10mm double braided polyester (Dacron) I used, this is merely 750 lbs.

Regardless, after similar load using the same type of line, the bowline and bowline on the bight can be untied easily, as can the Zeppelin Bend.

Roo, the strength of the Zeppelin loop may well be greater than the bowline (this needs testing), but it definitely performs less well when it comes to ability to be untied. And the Zeppelin loop performs very differently to the Zeppelin bend in this regard.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on August 05, 2014, 09:39:56 PM
Roo, the strength of the Zeppelin loop may well be greater than the bowline (this needs testing),
In rope, strength really isn't much a concern.  The Zeppelin Loop (http://notableknotindex.webs.com/zeppelinloop.html)'s improved security and stability over a standard bowline is mostly what draws attention. 

Since none of the recent discussions apply directly to this thread's topic, new thread creation for further discussion is warranted.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Dan_Lehman on August 05, 2014, 09:47:14 PM
Trying to untie it, one throat opened up easily.
The other side where load was applied to what is essentially the tail in the Zepp bend was jammed tight. The overhand had clamped down and even a marlin spike had no impact.
I have discovered a version in which one makes
an encircling/twist with the tail on its final tuck
and then pulls the tail straight to impart the twist
to the eye leg of this SPart-side overhand; I will
hope that this version helps, though it might be
that one needs care in dressing/positioning ... .
Also, I wonder if the dressing of the common
zeppelin loop can affect its vulnerability to jam;
I suspect that there are better, not-so-good ways
(again, which require some care in tying, which
we'd prefer not to need).

Quote
I see no reason why this the term 'not real' should be applied to the Zeppelin loop.
The bend and loop just perform differently due to load in the latter essentially being applied to the tail in the former.
Xarax is a purist on z. mechanics and denies
membership into his exalted realm of z. knots
if certain criteria aren't met.
BUT please note that you have here just pointed
to two knots that differ in end-2-end & eye-knot
relations : e.g., were one to begin with the
"straight bend" (butterfly) and form an eyeknot
be the same recipe as done for most knots, you
would NOT get the famous knot --NB!  (The eye knot
loads both tails of the end-2-end, not just
one and both SParts.)

Quote
I have found though that the Bowline can jam in stiff line if the knot is not dressed well and high load is applied suddenly.
PLEASE EXPLAIN!!!
I would like to see a photo of the jammed form.
Except if the tied-in-stiff-rope (and thus not set
in snug enough form) capsizes, I cannot see how
one can get jamming.  Is it a question of stretch
that so diminished the SPart to slide out through
(typically not binding) collar so that relaxation
gives a *swollen* SPart now not able to return
into the knot?  I've seen this sort of behavior,
but still think that the knot can be loosened.


Re "safe working load", this is at best a sort of casual
indication of conditions : i.e., diameter & other factors
should have more influence on jamming/etc., and not
how strong (and thus the SWLoad) the rope is.  --just
to note the indirect relation of this datum.


Thanks,
--dl*
====
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Seaworthy on August 05, 2014, 09:55:46 PM
I have found though that the Bowline can jam in stiff line if the knot is not dressed well and high load is applied suddenly.

PLEASE EXPLAIN!!!
I would like to see a photo of the jammed form.
Except if the tied-in-stiff-rope (and thus not set
in snug enough form) capsizes, I cannot see how
one can get jamming.  Is it a question of stretch
that so diminished the SPart to slide out through
(typically not binding) collar so that relaxation
gives a *swollen* SPart now not able to return
into the knot?  I've seen this sort of behavior,
but still think that the knot can be loosened.

Thanks,
--dl*
====

Here you go.

One side of a bowline its jammed state:
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Seaworthy on August 05, 2014, 10:11:07 PM
Dan, this is the other side. I cut the knot before realising I did not have a photo of this side, so I have tucked in some line to reproduce it.

The loop was tied in nylon octoplait stiffened by salt water and use. As I stated, it was most likely not dressed well. The line did not bend easily and the initial loop would not have snugged down well and not recognising the importance, I doubt I would have wasted a lot of time doing this. It was not, however, super loose.

It addition, it was likely high load was applied rapidly. I cannot recall when it was tied, it would have been a long while ago, but it was likely in high wind when the snubber needed to be extended and before I was using an Alpine Butterfly.

The Zepp bend I showed a photo of earlier was in similar line and did not need excessive dressing and could be undone with two fingers after 48 hours of 25-35 knot winds putting a lot of load on the line and creating high snatch loads as the 18 ton boat veered around in gusts. I found this bend extremely impressive in these conditions.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on August 05, 2014, 10:27:17 PM
  Xarax is a purist on z. mechanics and denies membership into his exalted realm of z. knots if certain criteria aren't met.

  I am purist, indeed, because this is one rare case where I can !  :) Because the mechanism, per se, of a genuine Zeppelin-like knot IS pure !
It's so ironic that you propose a loop that destroys the so-called "hinge" mechanism by jamming extra material in, making the shear plane into more of a cantilever that capsizes in elastic material.  This bloated loop based on the blimp knot isn't realistically "tiable" at all without pages of instructions.  You even admit in another thread that you hijacked on another website that it isn't practical.  Absurd!
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: xarax on August 05, 2014, 10:59:34 PM
   More material in place of the hinge s pin, does not destroy its mechanism at all - on the contrary, it enhances the mechanism, because it makes the pin stiffer, so it helps it confront the main forces a pin of a hinge is meant to confront : the shear forces
   
  (  The repeated reference to "elastic material"(sic) is irrelevant : I do not tie fixed loops on "elastic material", or on boiled material ( = spaghetti )  :) ).
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on August 05, 2014, 11:03:43 PM
More material in place of the hinge s pin, does not destroy its mechanism at all - on the contrary, it enhances the mechanism,
   
Wrong again, xarax.  By increasing the distance between the shear planes, it allows bending of the "pin" and capsizing can occur.  The stretchier the rope, the worse the problem.   
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: xarax on August 05, 2014, 11:10:09 PM
More material in place of the hinge s pin, does not destroy its mechanism at all - on the contrary, it enhances the mechanism,

Wrong again, roo.  The distance between the "shear plane"s, does not increase, because the two first curves remain adjacent to each other, i.e., at the same zero distance ! The diameter of the pin does not affect the distance between the "knuckles" - as everybody who has seen one hinge once in his life knows !

Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on August 05, 2014, 11:15:38 PM
The distance between the "shear plane"s, does not increase, because the two first curves remain adjacent to each other, i.e., at the same zero distance ! The diameter of the pin does not affect the distance between the "knuckles" - as everybody who has seen one hinge once in his life knows !
In your bloated blimp loop, the mean line of force (if both legss are loaded equally) does move away from the shear plane another half rope diameter from the standard Zeppelin configuration.  The situation is even worse if the legs are unevenly loaded.  In that case the shear plane can move over a full rope diameter from the standard Zeppelin configuration!

In your quest for purity, you've become your own worst enemy.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on August 05, 2014, 11:47:17 PM
I do not know what this "bloated blimp loop" is
You posted it:
(http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1872.0;attach=15614;image)

What's stranger is that you were arguing about it.  Shoot first, and ask questions later?
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on August 06, 2014, 12:12:25 AM
I do not propose this [bloat blimpl loop] loop as an "alternative"
Oops, another "real" loop bites the dust.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: xarax on August 06, 2014, 12:26:36 AM
   I understand you may find difficult to tie a Girth hitch-based loop without "pages of instructions"(sic) ... so I make you a favour, and show pictures of the loose and of the compact knot.
   Enjoy !   
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: roo on August 06, 2014, 12:29:13 AM
- keep citing your <edited> website, with any"thing" it contains.
What's this new diversion?  Now you're upset that something in my website might be edited?  ::)  Can you be more specific with your new pointless, off-topic gripe?

Quote
Do hope that Seaworthy, [...] will buy your so-called "Sailor s hitch" this time !  :)
It's actually Clifford Ashley's (read the footnote (http://notableknotindex.webs.com/sailorhitches.html)).  You can start a new topic if you feel like bashing him.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Dan_Lehman on August 06, 2014, 06:57:38 AM
I have found though that the Bowline can jam in stiff line if the knot is not dressed well and high load is applied suddenly.

PLEASE EXPLAIN!!!
I would like to see a photo of the jammed form.
Except if the tied-in-stiff-rope (and thus not set
in snug enough form) capsizes, ...

Here you go.
One side of a bowline its jammed state:

I hope you and all can see that this bowline
has indeed capsized, and the knot's initial
"turNip" is opened now towards straightening
and casting most of the knotting into the
once tail bight which is now more nearly
a pile hitch !  --lovely.  I surmise that the
frictive nature of aged rope might play some
role in this working --to make parts grip and
pull apart vice sliding and tightening!?

--dl*
====
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Dan_Lehman on August 06, 2014, 07:14:50 AM
I do not know what this "bloated blimp loop" is
You posted it:
(http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1872.0;attach=15614;image)

And it's a lovely knot, worth seeing again!
It's "bloated"ness comes in sort of doubling
of the central nipping *turns* --one being
of the "bowled over" sort.  My unshown
discovery lessens bloat there, but adds a
2nd collar on the SPart (some prior variant
did this around the eye legs, which don't
stand to benefit from it as the SPart might).

And the tail-twist version I described above
(where the final tail-tuck is made to encircle
its logical opposite/corresponding part, and
then the tail hauled straight to impart that
encircling to that opp/corr. part) I now see
is really a sort of corruption/version of X.'s
prettier but more awkward-to-tie variant,
which is more straightforwardly larksheady
(to coin a term).

The jamming of the zeppelin loop can be
thwarted by making a full turn of the SPart's
tail-tucking ("tail" in this inchoate stage),
which leaves the to-become-collar part free
of direct force from the SPart-side eye leg.
.:. minimal bloat, should float your boat.


--dl*
====
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: Seaworthy on August 06, 2014, 07:58:19 AM
I have found though that the Bowline can jam in stiff line if the knot is not dressed well and high load is applied suddenly.

PLEASE EXPLAIN!!!
I would like to see a photo of the jammed form.
Except if the tied-in-stiff-rope (and thus not set
in snug enough form) capsizes, ...

Here you go.
One side of a bowline its jammed state:

I hope you and all can see that this bowline
has indeed capsized, and the knot's initial
"turNip" is opened now towards straightening
and casting most of the knotting into the
once tail bight which is now more nearly
a pile hitch !  --lovely.  I surmise that the
frictive nature of aged rope might play some
role in this working --to make parts grip and
pull apart vice sliding and tightening!?

--dl*
====

When I first looked closely at this monstrosity I had a moment's doubt that I had tied it correctly (the tail on the outside looked downright odd). After I cut it and carefully loosened it, I reproduced each curve in some new line, poked and prodded and tightened it up and low and behold it was a perfect bowline. Yes - it was the initial loop that had tried to straighten rather than clinching.

I suspect the sudden high load was as much to blame as the stiffness of the line preventing a tighter initial loop being formed when it was tied.

I had never imagined a bowline could behave like this. First time for everything :).

Sorry for the thread drift Roo, but Dan did ask.
Title: Re: For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend
Post by: xarax on August 06, 2014, 08:53:55 AM
  My unshown discovery

WHERE is it ? Spill the beans, spell the oracle !  :)