International Guild of Knot Tyers Forum

General => New Knot Investigations => Topic started by: X1 on August 31, 2012, 12:16:58 AM

Title: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: X1 on August 31, 2012, 12:16:58 AM
  Trying to simplify the TackleClamp hitch (1), I have arrived at the hitch shown at the attached pictures. It is a very effective gripping hitch, which uses the same tail-through-two-opposed-Us "lock" mechanism. ( See (2),(3) and (4), for other applications of the same idea). The standing ends/tails can be pulled against the pole very hard, a lot of tension can be accumulated within the 4 riding turns, yet, - despite, or because, of this ? ? -, it will remain tightly attached on the pole, and firmly "locked" - so there is no need for any additional ending ( half-hitches, or whatever). (I do not know if this hitch is already published somewhere.)

1.http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3813.0
2.http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1870.msg17364#msg17364
3.http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1870.msg17414#msg17414
4.http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3104.msg18513#msg18513
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: SS369 on August 31, 2012, 12:27:51 AM
Very interesting and I like that it has gotten simpler.

Your findings show that it releases easily?
Would you favor a one side loading (SP or WE) or is this better if both lines are loaded?
Any ideas as to how this can be employed?

SS
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: X1 on August 31, 2012, 01:20:26 AM
  I believe that it releases more easily than it should...  :). Those hitches, that, if pulled hard, are capable of accumulating strong tensile forces ( i.e., be pre-tensioned / pre-stressed ), are not supposed to be released easily - they are not meant to serve as quick to tie and untie hitching solutions, but rather as more permanent attachments around/on slippery poles. 
  Due to its symmetry, I believe that it is better if both its lines are loaded - at least initially, until the knot settles to a tight, compact form, and "locks" there. After this phase, I guess one can load it from the one end only, without any consequences.
  I think that all those pre-tensioned / pre-stressed hitches may be useful as means one can attach ropes on tubes, when he anticipates a lengthwise pull, and he prefers the hitch to remain tied on the same spot - and not to slip alongside the axis of the tube.   
   This hitch might be simpler, but it can not reach the power of the TackleClamp hitch - because there the two bights are independed, they can move towards each other, and, doing so, they load the riding turns they drag along. Here the two bights are inteconnected by the common opposing third one, so the loading of the riding turns can be achieved only through the pull of the ends.
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: X1 on September 01, 2012, 01:30:25 AM
   Just one step further, we arrive at the even simpler 3-wraps hitch, shown at the attached pictures. It is still a very secure and tight hitch, able to withstand a lengthwise pull, that might be considered as a variation of the family of hitches shown at (1).

1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3104.msg18513#msg18513

P.S. 2012-11-08
I have included a new picture of this hitch, so the reader can compare it easily with the second and the fourth pictures at (2).

2. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3104.msg18514#msg18514
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: X1 on September 02, 2012, 12:19:47 PM
   When I say " simpler", I mean "simpler to tie", not "simpler in form". If we compare the 3-wraps TackleClamp hitch to the hitches shown in this thread, he will see that their form simplicity is at the same lever. However, in the TackleClamp hitch one needs to anticipate the room he will lhave to leave between the two bights, at the start of the pre-tensioning procedure, and this might not happen to be achieved right from the first attempt - as the amount of slippage of the bights on the intermediate riding turn(s) depends upon the friction characteristics of the surfaces of the rope and of the pole, as well as upon the direction of the pull of the two ends. So it may happen that the first-time tyer would leave less than the required room, and the bights will approach and will " kiss" each other before he would be able to tighten the hitch to the maximum degree.
   However, the mechanical advantage that is offered by the TackleClamp hitch mechanism, and/or the fact that the ends pull the bights, and the bights, by their turn, pull the riding turns that grip the pole, can not be reproduced by the " simpler" hitches presented in this thread. They are "simpler" to tie and untie, secure and tight, but less powerful than the TackleClamp hitch.
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: X1 on October 07, 2012, 10:06:07 PM
     It is amusing that tenths of thousands of people ( 78.000 ! ! ) were eager to learn how NASA ties Curiosity s shoelaces ( which, incidentally, is exactly the way my son was tying the shoelaces of his sneakers, when he was a little kid - before he has leant the less ingenious common knot used by the layman... ), while, at the same time, almost nobody speared a click on this thread s pictures...  :).
   So, I suppose that almost nobody has noticed that the "simpler TackleClamp hitch" presented here can be tied in the bight, because it is topologically equivalent to the unknot - while the TackleClamp hitch cannot, because it is topologically equivalent to the overhand knot. We can also form it as a free quadruple loop/noose, and then pass it over an accessible end of the pole - in place of a pile hitch, for example.
   At the time I had taken the first pictures, presented at the first post, I used to pass the working ends underneath riding turns, in an effort to secure them further. Since then I have seen that this may be not as necessary as I thought. It seems that the opposing bights ( two U s) locking mechanism is sufficient to secure the tails, because each of them has made a round turn around the pole already ( so the load they bear when they finally pass in between those two opposing bights ( two U s ) is greatly reduced ).
   At the attached pictures, the interested reader can see that this hitch is essentially a double Cow hitch, and it can be tied in the bight as easily as the single Cow hitch. However, it can be pre-tightened a lot, much more than the Bull hitch, for example. Pulling the one end after the other, I have been able to tighten the paracord seen at the pictures to an unbelievable degree - but I guess that one needs a quite smooth pole to achieve similar results.
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: Sweeney on October 08, 2012, 06:04:52 PM
So far I have only tried this with a piece of 2mm polyester around a pencil while I was reading the above post but it does seem to have potential both as a clamping mechanism and possibly to suspend or carry something long, horizontally, by starting with a sling and making two double cow hitches spaced apart - there was quite good grip around a shiny hexagonal pencil. I will be interested to see how useful it turns out in the real world.

Barry
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: X1 on October 08, 2012, 07:30:02 PM
   It might be easier to remember how tie it, if we tie it as a Cow hitch on/after a Cow hitch, indeed - that is, tie a "first" Cow hitch, then tie a "second" one, adjacent to the "first", so that the continuation of the tail of the "first" passes underneath its standing end, makes a U-turn and becomes the tail of the mirror-symmetrical "second" Cow hitch ( the terms "first" and "second" denote the temporal, not the spatial order ). In other words : Each individual Cow hitch has two free ends ( four ends in total ). The Double Cow hitch described here should be tied so that the two "side" free ends are connected in a U shape, while the two "middle" free ends pass "over" this U shape and become the free ends of the new hitch. ( Just an exercise on " knottoloquence"... :) )
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: X1 on October 09, 2012, 09:56:03 AM
   I do not know if this really simple 2-wraps hitch belongs to this series, or if it is already known or not. The " lock" remains the same, the efficient squeeze of the tail in between two opposing U s - but now the one U is a part of an overhand knot tied along the tail segment. Numerous similar solutions are possible - I show here only the one that seemed simpler to me. The interested reader will discover many others, equally secure with this one.
   I have seen that this hitch is also able to be pre-stressed, and to accumulate the tensile forces that would be stored in its turns during a pre-tightening phase - in this sense it is similar to the previously posted, more complex hitches of this thread. I suppose that here is the end of the line of the " simplification" process of the original TackleClamp hitch. However, I have to say that not a single hitch of all the hitches I have tied and tried, and the few I had posted in this thread, reached the gripping power that the TackleClamp hitch can deliver - because it is the only gripping hitch that utilizes the mechanical advantage of two opposing - but not interlocked - bights, participating in a rope-made block and tackle mechanism.
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: X1 on October 09, 2012, 04:43:47 PM
   Another variation of the same, 2-wraps hitch, presented in the previous post. The same old story : a standing end emerging out of a "lock" made of two opposing bights - where in place of the second bight we use a segment of an overhand knot. I believe I have tied all the possible entanglements of this overhand knot with the other parts of the " lock", and I think that the two solutions presented in this thread are the most simple, secure and easy to remember - but the interested reader should better try his own hand on this.
Title: How to tie the Double Cow hitch in two stages.
Post by: X1 on October 13, 2012, 12:50:25 PM
   How to tie the Double Cow hitch in two stages.

   Tie a first Cow hitch around a pole.
   With the left side free end, tie a second Cow hitch, on the right side of the first one , at two stages :
   Stage 1 :
   The left side free end has to pass under the right side free end.
   Stage 2 :
   The second Cow hitch should be mirror-symmetric to the first Cow hitch.

   ( Alternatively, if you wish to use the right side free end of the first Cow hitch, then you should tie the second Cow hitch at the left side of the first one.)
   The interested reader is kindly requested to compose a better, brief and precise set of verbal instructions.
 
Title: How to tie the "One-and-a-half Cow hitch".
Post by: X1 on October 20, 2012, 09:05:04 PM
   In the following series of pictures I will show how we can tie a variation of the symmetric 3-wraps hitch presented in this thread ( Reply#3, (1)), so it can also be tied in the bight.
   The reason I tie it this way is double fold.
   First, I want to tie it as a more complex Cow hitch : I call it " One-and-a-half Cow hitch" . I start from a simple common Cow hitch, and add another round turn.
   Second, as the simple Cow hitch, it can be tied in the bight - although I do not show how in the present post.
   I try this variation because I want to compare it with the beautiful Andalusian hitch presented recently, and another TIB hitch that can also be tightened by pulling the standing end and/or the tail against the pole, the Tom Foul s hitch (2).
The moment the reader will understands how the standing end and the tail are themselves " locked" , going through / passing in between the interlocked opposing bights, he will never forget how to tie this hitch.
We can tighten it by pulling the free ends against the pole, the one after the other. This way we can store a great sum of tensile forces into the riding turns - we can pre-stress /pre-tighten the hitch, so it can later be able to withstand a strong lengthwise pull, for example.

1.   Start by tying a simple common Cow hitch. We have the Standing end and the Working end encircled by the first bight of the hitch. We will form a second bight, interlocked and opposed to this first one, so that, at the end both ends will be encircled by both bights - and they  would be " locked" there, when those bights would be under tension.
2.   Pass the working end UNDER the Standing end. Why under ? Because in this way the second bight that would be formed at the next step would encircle the Standing end. So the Standing end would be locked in between the first and the second bight. We will later pass the working end through the same opening those two opposing bights form, so it will be locked as well.
3.   Pass the Working end over the poll and ...
4.   ...around it, to form the additional round turn this hitch has, in relation to the simple Cow hitch. So we have completed the three round turns, another reason I call this hitch as " One-and-half Cow hitch" .
Title: How to tie the "One-and-a-half Cow hitch".
Post by: X1 on October 20, 2012, 09:08:12 PM
5.   Let us mow see the pole and the almost finished hitch from another angle. We see the Standing end - that is already encircled by the two interlocked opposing bights -, and the Working end - that has just gone around the pole and has formed the additional third round turn. Now, the only thing we have yet to do, is to pass the Working end from the same opening the Standing end passes, so it, too, will be locked there by the two interlocked opposing bights, just like the Standing end.
6.   So, which path does the Working end have to follow, to go through both the first and the second bights, and be locked there - just as the Standing end has already done ? The red line shows this path. In a sense, that is the only "difficult?" thing one has to do to tie this hitch - but it becomes really easy, and self-evident, the moment one realizes that the Standing end as well as the Working end have to penetrate the opening in between the two interlocked opposing bights, in exactly the same way ? because that will be the means  they themselves would be " locked"  there. When the two bights will be tensioned, they will encircle / embrace /nip the two ends from both sides, just like a single nipping loop -  and much harder than a nipping  loop ! The nipping action this opposing bights mechanism provides is much more efficient than the one provided by nipping loop - in the improved Cow hitch called Bull hitch, for example.
7.   The hitch where the Working end has followed the path of the red line, and has penetrated the same opening in between the two opposing bights the Standing end does - and towards the same direction, perpendicularly and away from the pole. The fact that he two ends follow this direction means that they can be pulled against the pole, so they can be pulled harder. The harder the two free ends are pulled, the harder the nipping action of the two opposing bights would be, so the two ends would be locked in a most secure way. To pull the ends with greater force, I often pull the one end after the other with both hands, stepping on the pole with my foot. At the end of this procedure, I have a rock-solid hitch, capable to withstand a great deal of lengthwise loading.
8.   The tightened " One-and-a-half Cow hitch" .

( I apologize for this lengthy and sometimes repetitive description. I exercise a form of knottoloquence that I hope has not degraded into a knottorrhoea ! :) )

1.   http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4035.msg24106#msg24106
2.   http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3197.msg19074#msg19074
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: X1 on October 26, 2012, 10:34:26 AM
  In a beauty contest, either you do not participate at all, or you do as the Romans do - but you do not present a frog, and hope that somebody out there will kiss it, and transform it into a prince/ess... :)
  So. I am obliged to compare the Double Cow hitch presented in this thread, to the second Cinderella of DL ( the first is the TIB 2+1 overhand knots loop, that is "conceptually" a "Zeppelin loop" (2) - both contenders are either barefoot, or share the same lent sandal, I am afraid...), also a 4 wraps hitch.
  Enjoy !  :) :) :)

1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4090.msg24521#msg24521
2. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4084.msg24517#msg24517
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: X1 on November 06, 2012, 12:54:42 AM
   Playing with the TackleClamp hitches and their lighter, simpler variations presented in this thread, I came upon the variation of the Double Cow hitch shown in the attached pictures. It is not as secure a knot as the original Double Cow hitch, but it has a great advantage : It can be released instantly, without any manipulation of its two ends. Moreover, to release it, we have only to use three fingers of one hand, and a minimum of force. The tied and pre-tensioned hitch can can be released very quickly and easily, indeed, even if/while its round turns are tensioned to a high degree. This is due to the fact that, as both ends pass through the same opposed bights, the final, outer bight can be pushed out of its grip around the two ends, and release the whole knot at a glance. ( I am afraid I can not explain it in a more precise way - one has to tie the knot, tighten it as hard as he can by pulling both ends against the pole, and then release it by pushing this last/outer bight, to see what I mean.)
   Of course, like the single and double Cow hitches, this hitch can be tied in the bight, and used in place of the Pile hitch, for example. It can be described as an elongated Cow hitch, where the the bight that connects the two ends in the common Cow hitch makes two more turns around the pole - so the ends pass through three bights, the last one ( the " trigger" of the release mechanism...) being opposed to the other two. I call it quick/easy release (QER) Double Cow (hitch), but I can change this label if it reminds anything else...
   When I first tied this hitch, I dismissed it, because I thought that the "trigger", the last/outer bight, could easily slip over the two ends. Yes, it can, but not by itself ! It needs a light, intended, directional push- so this seemingly weak point is a hidden advantage : this hitch can serve in applications where we need a tight grip, able to withstand lengthwise pull, but we also need a hitch that can be released quickly and easily.
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: X1 on November 10, 2012, 01:24:14 AM
   When, after a long journey in the KnotLand, I arrive at something that catches my eye and makes my heart beat faster, I can not help but ask myself : What would Ashley have said about it ?
   There is no need for any overhand knot at the end of the line, as I thought at Replies #8 and #9 of this thread... (1),(2). Just a simple U-turn underneath the two round turns, a strong pull of the standing end against the pole, and the hitch is locked in the same way and degree as it did at the hitches presented there.
   And which hitch is this ? Holy Cow ! It is the Cow hitch. :)  I have not seen this most simple and secure addition/lock to the humble Cow hitch, which transforms it to a Bull ! ( Unfortunatelly, the name "Bull hitch" is taken, by something much weaker than the hitch presented here. The fact that the Bull hitch can not be pre-tension-ed as hard as the hitch presented here, is a direct consequence of the fact that the opposed bights lock is stronger than the lock achieved by a double nipping loop. ) Why nobody told me about this hitch, I do not know.
   The interested reader can read the previous posts of this thread, and follow the reasoning that brought us here. The "locked Cow hitch" is much simpler than the Tom Foul s hitch (3), much easier to tie and inspect, probably simpler even from the beautiful Andalusian hitch presented recently (4). I believe that is a fine, almost perfect solution for the not-easy problem of a 2-wraps pre-tension-able hitch, able to withstand lengthwise pull.

1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4035.msg24356#msg24356
2. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4035.msg24357#msg24357
3. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3197.msg19074#msg19074
    http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3197.msg19224#msg19224
4. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4069.0
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: X1 on November 10, 2012, 12:13:54 PM
  As it happens in the case of the TackleClamp hitch (1) and all those extremely tight pre-tension-able hitches, it may be difficult to untie it after it has been tightened hard, by pulling the standing end against the pole. ( I often use my hands and my feet, at the same time, like a rower  :), and I obtain a very tight grip, a difficult to release hitch, and a pain in the back...) So, it may be better to tie it in its slipped form in the first place, so it can be released easily by pulling the "trigger", and dis-placing the local paths of the segments of the rope which keep the mechanism loaded and locked.
  See the attached pictures for two slightly different versions of the slipped locked Cow hitch. At the second ( the B ), the tail passes underneath itself, deeper into the space between the pole and the nub of the knot. This way it raises the bulk of the knot a litle bid, something that may be beneficial for the locking mechanism - because the locking bight meets now the standing end at a less obtuse angle- closer to the optimum right angle. However, all those depend upon the relative dimensions of the pole and the rope, and the friction coefficients of their surfaces. So the user should try both versions with the materials at hand, and judge which one is better suited to them.

P.S. I would never had imagined that we could ever discover a 2-wrap hitch that is tighter even from the Constrictor... How many other things are still there, just under our nose, waiting for us to reveal them ? 

1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3813.msg24500#msg24500
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: SS369 on November 11, 2012, 01:13:13 AM
I am finding that this "locked" cow hitch stays set better than the Pedigree Cow hitch and is a bit harder to untie after an approx. 200 lbs load. (Not the slipped-untested version) This may be due to the  particular rope construction I used.
Though, I have not found either of them provides a good resistance to lengthwise pulling on a smooth pole.

SS
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: X1 on November 11, 2012, 04:00:53 PM
  Thank you SS369 - it is good that there are some members of the Forum that are not airborne all the time ! :)

  It would be interesting to compare the Pedigree Cow hitch with the locked Cow hitch. I argue that, although they might look similar, they belong to two different worlds, far apart the one from the other !  :)
  I do not believe that any of those two hitches have a problem with "security", i.e. slippage. However, the locked Cow hitch can be pre-tensioned, can accumulate any tension forces that are stored in it ( in its two turns) however strong they might be, while the Pedigree Cow hitch can not. A pre-tension-able and pre-tensioned hirtch can withstand a lengthwise pull much better than a simply tied and tightened one. To see the difference, it is better if you use nylon ropes, which can be elongated much more that the other materials. A slight slippage of the locking mechanism would release the grip on a non-nylon rope, but it would not make much difference on a nylon rope.
  The Pedigree Cow hitch works just like all the common hitches, by squeezing the tail underneath a riding turn. No relation whatsoever with the locked Cow hitch. In the later, the working end is locked in place by the opposing bights mechanism - where, in the place of the second bight, we use the U-turn of the continuation of the tail. The squeezing of the tail itself plays but a minor, secondary role. If we could measure it, we would see that there are almost no tension forces arriving all way to the tail - most of them have been nipped already in the intersection of the standing end with the two rims of the two opposed bights.
   One has to be careful to load this hitch in the proper longitudinal - related to the axis of the pole - orientation, so that the locking mechanism is not distorted - so, in the one way, not the other ! ( it is a highly asymetric hitch, despite the appearances...). On the contrary, it makes no difference how you are going to load the Pedigree Cow hitch, because the tail is nipped there by its position between the rope and the surface of the pole, not between the various segments of the rope itself, as it happens in the case of the locked Cow hitch.
   We can not expect anything better from ANY two wraps hitch, I believe. I have tested the most tight 2-wrap hitches we have, the Strangle and the Constrictor, and I have seen that the locked Cow hitch :
1. can be tightened much more ( because it can be tightened by pulling the end against the pole, perpendicularly to the axis of the pole, so we can apply a much greater hand and feet force ),
2. its two turns are tensioned at the same time, so the elognation of the tighten segment is greater,
3. it keeps the tension that is inserted and stored into it as well as the Constrictor- its standing end does not slip even one mm
4. the direction of the loaded standing end alongside the pole does not distort the shape of the knot, as it does in the cases of the Strange or the Constrictor.
  If you want more gripping power, you should rely on the 4-wraps Double Cow hitch presented at the start of this thread - I guess that a double Cow hitch can store twice as much energy as a locked (single) Cow hitch can, so grip the pole with twice as much force. I would nt use the locked Cow hitch to withstand a heavy lengthwise pull on a slippery pole, of course. We have the marvel of the original TackleClamp hitch for this purpose, or the lighter, but also very tight, Double Cow hitch - provided we hang the load from both their ends.
   I have also tied the locked (single) Cow hitch with more that two turns. It seems that 3 ( at the one-and-a-half locked Cow hitch)(or even 4 ?) wraps make some difference, but after that we can not tension the turns as much as we wish, because of the friction on the surface of the pole and the reverse capstan effect.

   P.S. I have noticed the quotation marks on the "locked" :). I do not give much attention to names, and I do not have the feeling of this unknown to me language that would allow a proper selection... I though that " lockable" would, perhaps, be more correct - but I had no other, better idea. I would appreciate any suggestion, because I am afraid we have to name things, even if they are tangles of ropes , i.e. pure shapes... They have become too many !  :)
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: X1 on November 11, 2012, 04:29:05 PM
   There is another test one can perform, to see how tight a locking mechanism is. Instead of pulling the standing end, drive the knot to iits limits, and see how well the lock behaves at those limits, make the opposite/reverse : Push the standing end of a locked knot, to see if it will obey to your action, or not !  :)
   I have tied the locked Cow hitch, and the Pedigree Cow hitch, on the same slippery pole and with the same slippery rope, and tensioned them with the same force ( same hands and feet !  :)). I have seen that the locked Cow hitch will not give to a push of the standing end, while the Pedigree Cow hitch was much more willing ! That is an indication ( not a proof...), that the local forces that act on the standing end of the locked Cow hitch are stronger and more efficiently applied in order to prevent its displacement, than those of the Pedigree Cow hitch.   
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: kd8eeh on November 11, 2012, 08:52:27 PM
looking at the locked cow hitch, at first i was under the impresion it was a modified munter hitch.  i began experimenting and found another working tackle clamp hitch based on a zigzag knot.  what you do is tie a zigzag knot, but every other time the rope comes around, pull the initial line back to the pole, and continue a few times.  then secure the end as desired.  slipping it underneath as in the locked cow hitch seems to be ideal, but not necesary.  then it may be easily tightened, and will not loosen easily because it  has to go through these segments.  the only problem with it is it will tighten the middle strand incredibly tight, but the other strands get progressively looser as you go out.  still, the middle line can have an incredible amount of tension.  perhaps this is not the most useful tackle clamp hitch, but it is food for thought.  i don't really have a good pole to tie it on, but you can see the point
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: X1 on November 11, 2012, 10:30:27 PM
looking at the locked cow hitch, at first i was under the impression it was a modified munter hitch.

  Yes, It can be seen as such - or as a "down under"  :) Pedigree Cow hitch ( ABoK#1683), as mentioned by SS369.    However, I examine the lock, not the looks - how the standing end is locked after it has been tightened as much as possible - so the tensile forces accumulated within the round turns remain in action, and help the hitch to better withstand lengthwise pull when it will later be loaded accordingly. Notice that I am talking about the mechanism of the lock of the Standing end, not of the tail - which is a much easier to achieve (with hitches tied on hard surfaces ), minor issue.
   If you read the thread from the start, you will see that my staring line was the TackleClamp hitch, not the Cow hitch. It was only later that I thought to utilize the apparent resemblance with the Cow hitch, to help the user visualize and remember all those hitches. The Cow hitch, in general, has only one bight, and the Pedigree Cow hitch, in particular, does not use the U-turn of the tail to secure the Standing end, but the tail itself. In the locked Cow hitch, the U-turn locks the Standing end, so it will not slip and release whatever tensile forces have been accumulated within it during the pre-tensioning phase.
   Lock the Standing end, that is the purpose of any pre-tensionable hitch that is intendebed to remain tensioned, when it will be loaded by a lengthwise pull. The lock of the tail itself is an easy task, and we have dozens of other hitches that achieve this in a most secure way. We have to lock the Standing end AND the tail in the same time, in order to store the energy we will later need/use, inside the multiple wraps, to withstand a lenghtwise pull.

 
what you do is tie a zigzag knot, but every other time the rope comes around, pull the initial line back to the pole, and continue a few times.

   If you continue TWO times, you have the TackleClamp hitch... :) It could well be named "ZigZag hitch", but perhaps the person who named it had not thought of this adjective... :)

  the only problem with it is that it tightens the middle strand incredibly tight, but the other strands get progressively looser as you go out.

  Why are you saying this ? It would be like the shoelaces of shoes, I suppose : All bights will eventually be tightened at the same degree, because the segment(s) of the rope that penetrate(s) them will slip through them, and the tension forces would eventually be equalized. I have not tested this, I only make a guess...
  Perhaps you can do a relevant experiment by yourself, and try to "measure", in a way, the tensile forces in each segment - by evaluating the individual resistance of each one in a perpendicular pull.

Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: kd8eeh on November 12, 2012, 04:10:33 AM
so, firstly, i was under the impression that a tackle clamp hitch is family of hitches that hold tension around an object, like a constrictor knot, or many of these others.  secondly, i read the term zigzag knot in abok, although i don't remember the number.  thirdly, the tension in each string is different, because each string is separated form the loaded end by yet another turn, a caracteristic that i am generally very fond of about a zigzag hitch/knot, because it makes it so that even after an extremely heavy load the end is loose, esentially it is another type of tensionless hitch.  i have tested the tightness of each loop by trying to slide it up and down, and i have conclusively proved in multiple types of rope that this is tightened irregularly.  also, from what i looked at, i found that these hitches tend to have a loop component that is then pulled closer to the origin as the knot is tightened, or at least the more elaborate ones do.  this knot has that property, really on multiple levels, and then to lock the loaded stand i used the bends induced by the bends that pull the rope in a bumpy path.  i do see how your locking mechanism seems to work, and this knot can be locked in the same manner, should you choose to.  however, what i really like about it is how easy it is to untie. 
on a less related topic, i do think that zigzag knots are widely underused, seems how they are the only tensionlesss hitch, to my knowledge, that is only dependent of fricton between the rope and itself.  here it is secured with a clove hitch around my finger.  although i tied it with many wraps here, it generaly has almost no tension left after only two wraps. 
on an even less related note, can someone please explain how to quote other people?  i can't tell how to, and it makes these look so nice.
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: X1 on November 12, 2012, 02:35:06 PM
i was under the impression that a tackle clamp hitch is family of hitches that hold tension around an object, like a constrictor knot, or many of these others.

   Please, stay under this impression !  :)
   However, this "many" is not sooo many - better, it is not many at all ! What else do you have in mind, except the Constrictor ? ( Which can not be tensioned as hard as those hitches, because its ends can not be pulled against the pole - and, of course, it does not makes use of a mechanical advantage, as the TackleClamp hitch does.)

the tension in each string is different, because each string is separated from the loaded end by yet another turn

   If that is so, yes, you are right. I had not realized you were meaning this. ( Your new photos, although focused neither on the knot, nor on the knot-tyer  :), are telling ).If the connecting segment(s) between a first opposing bight and a second one, makes a whole turn around the pole before it goes through the second one, the tensions would not equalize very easily. However, this round turn would absorb a great deal of the connecting energy ( reverse capstan effect ), so any pull on the first bight would not pull the second bight very easily...
   Could you, please, make some rough sketch or take some clear pictures that will illustrate what you say ?
   Have a look at the hitches shown at (1) and (2). Can can consider the " ZigZag hitch" you show, as a multiple, super-imposed U-hitches, like the ones shown there ?

even after an extremely heavy load the end is loose.

   As I have tried to explain in my previous reply, the TackleClamp hitch is not answering in the problem of securing the tail, but the problem of securing the Standing part. It is very easy to secure the tail - any hitch worth its salt does it ! It is a completely different thing to secure the standing end, so any tension that has been accumulated within the round turns during a pre-tensioning phase will remain in place, even after the standing end is not loaded any more. 


i have conclusively proved

  Unfotunately, we can not "prove" something about knots without repeated, detailed laboratory experiments, with instruments, measurements, etc. We can have indications, but not "proofs"- conclusive or not.

although I tied it with many wraps here, it generally has almost no tension left after only two wraps. 

  That is why we use 2-wrap hitches most of the time, and we seldom need 3 or more wraps. It is due to the capstan effect. However, to tie a hitch that would be able to withstand a lengthwise pull, we need more wraps. I have seen that this is achieved easier, if, before we apply the load, the hitch is already pre-tensioned, so those multiple wraps would not take an elliptical form when the hitch will be pulled from its one side, alongside the axis of the pole. That is what the original TackleClamp hitch does, and what the various lighter versions of it do, albeit in a lesser degree. The pre-tensioning benefit is more pronounced if we tie those hitches on nylon, because nylon can be stretched / elongated a lot, and many times, without losing its strength ( without fatigue).

1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3104.msg18513#msg18513
2. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3104.msg18514#msg18514
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: kd8eeh on November 13, 2012, 04:32:41 AM
so, i tried to take better pictures of a zigzag hitch.  a zigzag hitch is a way of multiplying a munter hitch, which is the simplest zigzag hitch.  then, your come around the loaded end and go back around the other direction, like the first step in tying a munter hitch (assuming you actually tie the munter hitch around something, not just to wrap around a carribeaner) .  repeat, and you have a zigzag hitch.  it is a great tensionless hitch, because eatch wrap exponetially reduces tension, instead of linearly as in a normal tensionless hitch.  also, if you look at the zigzag tackleclamp hitch, i basically said to secure the end with any hitch worth its salt.  the hitch does secure the standing part, by pushing it between segments going closer and then leaving the pole. 
as far as super imposed u hitches, i think yes, but i have never heard of a u hitch, although i can guess it seems to be that.  personally, i don't see why this hitch isn't more used.  it is incredibly strong with respect to perpendicular pull, and is extremely easy to untie.  also, it will tie securely on surfaces with essentialy no friction. 
as far as use of the zigzag tackleclamp for lengthwise pull, i do not think it would be exceptionally secure, because only the middle strand is really tight.
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: X1 on November 13, 2012, 06:55:03 AM
a zigzag hitch is a way of multiplying a munter hitch, which is the simplest zigzag hitch.


   Very good description ! So, in a ZigZag hitch the working end forms/passes through only one bight each time, and then it makes a round turn, forms/passes through another bight, etc. It is a kind of weaving the working end(s).
   It is better if you show it with 2 or three bights ( not many), because the many-wraps ZigZag hitch looks like a messy tangle of ropes. Also, I think it would be easier for you if you place the knot on a horizontal surface, so you can focus on it. If you hold the knot in mid-air, without even looking through the lens or the viewfinder, it is difficult to focus on anything...

 
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: kd8eeh on November 13, 2012, 10:47:34 PM
i'm using my laptop's webcam, not a camera, so the picture is tied in midair at the hieght of the webcam.  i can see it fine, but when i let it get into good focus, the file output is often over 100 kb and i have to try again.  but overall, yes, that is exactly what a zigzag hitch is.  i would think it would be much more commonplace.
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: X1 on November 13, 2012, 11:38:46 PM
   Dowload GIMP 2.8
   http://www.gimp.org/
   After you open a file, export it in a smaller file, less than 100 KB.

Title: 6-wrap Double Cow hitch
Post by: X1 on December 03, 2012, 04:34:37 AM
  When we compare hitches designed to withstand a lengthwise pull, we should always compare hitches with the same number of round turns - because we have seen that, in such hitches, one more round turn can make a big difference. In the case of pre-tensionable hitches, like the hitches presented at this thread, this effect is ever greater, because one or more additional round turns are able to be elongated more, and accumulate and store a much greater amount of tensile forces - so, when an already tightened ( by a pull of its standing end(s) against the pole ) hitch, with a larger number of wraps, will confront a subsequent lengthwise pull, it will be able to withstand this pull much more efficiently than a similar hitch with a smaller number of wraps. Of course, this effect will not continue ad infinitum, as, beyond a certain number of wraps, it is difficult to tighten the hitch pulling the one, or even both the ends of its multi-wraps coil. I do not know which is the optimum number, and I suppose that it will depend on the friction coefficients of the rope and the pole, but, with the slippery poles and ropes I use, it is at least 6, and perhaps even 8.
   Now, one may ask : Why is this so ? If the total friction forces are independent of the apparent area of contact ( Amontons second law of friction), the number of wraps should make no difference. Yet it does, as one can easily verify by himself, if he compares the 4-wrap Double Cow hitch with the 6-wrap same hitch, shown at the attached pictures. And which is the optimum number of wraps ? I wish I knew, and I will say that a theoretical model of hitches has some relation to the physical reality of practical knots, only if it will be able to address those simple questions. Otherwise, one can always figure out ( fabricate ) an equation coming out of the blue, with a sufficiently large number of freely adjustable coefficients, and, by trial and error, succeed in selecting the best-fit coefficients that will "predict"/"explain"  anything he wishes (1).
   By the way, it is interesting to compare this "beefed" 6-wraps Double Cow hitch, with a 6-wraps Pile hitch (2)...No relation ( "relevance" (3) :)) whatsoever.

1. http://www.theuiaa.org/upload_area/files/1/sdarticle.pdf
2. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4139.msg25030#msg25030
3. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4139.msg25045#msg25045
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: kd8eeh on December 04, 2012, 05:37:14 AM
The reason that more wraps improves the ability of a hitch to withstand lengthwise pull is not so complicated as you make it seem (at least to me).  If you have more wraps, then when you pull lengthwise on one end of the rope, you are not making it into an elipse as much.  I can't quite solve the integration associated with it, but if a force is applied twisting one wrap around the pole, that wrap truns into an elipse.  Then the normal force must act to keep the elipse from rotating.  I belive this to be somehow proportional to the secant of the angle the wrapping makes with the pole; the normal force goes to infinity as the wrapping is closer to perpendicular.  Therefore, if you have your hitch become less eliptical, then the normal force between it and the pole increases.  It follows that the more wraps you have, the more of a complete cylinder you form, meaning that it will twist less when the force is applied, meaning that you will have a much grater normal force resulting in much more friction.
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: X1 on December 04, 2012, 03:23:03 PM
The reason that more wraps improves the ability of a hitch to withstand lengthwise pull is not so complicated as you make it seem

   Correct. It is much more complicated than it seems... :)
   The ( tiny, a few degrees ) difference in the angle between a less elliptical, almost circular round turn and a more elliptical, elongated one, and the axis of the pole, cannot explain the great difference in the resulting friction forces. On the contrary, sometimes the more elliptical round turns are more efficient than the less elliptical ones - as it happens in the case of ABoK#1755-#1756, for example. Hitches that work when their round turns are very elongated ellipses, lose their gripping strength and start to slip alongside the pole when the same round turns are brought closer together, and become less elliptical. Ashley, in Chapter 22, shows many other hitches where the round turns are tied so that they are deliberately tied in the form of obliquely oriented in relation to the axis of the spar, elongated ellipses. In fact, only a few round turns and only a few hitches in this chapter are tied so that the plane of the round turn is at a right angle with the axis of the pole.
   I have tested hitches where the angles between the long axes of the ellipses of the round turns and the axis of the poles were equal ( as far as I could measure them, with my limited means ). Ceteris paribus, the hitches with the greater number of round turns were always tighter than the ones with the fewer round turns.
   It is true that the original TackleClamp hitch, and the simpler locked, one-and-a-half and Double Cow hitches presented here, are meant to increase the tensile forces induced into the round turns during a pre-tensioning stage. As the standing ends are secured against any slippage, these tensile forces are accumulated, effectively stored, and finally added to the forces induced by the lengthwise pull itself.  However, I do not know which portion of the greatly enhanced gripping power of those hitches is due to the greater magnitude of this sum of gripping forces, and which is due to the smaller eccentricity of the round turns during the lengthwise pull. Another effect that is not often taken into account is the friction between the round turns, which, in a multi-wrap friction hitch, should also play a significant, perhaps major role.
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: kd8eeh on December 13, 2012, 05:43:58 AM
I just realized something: the reason is simply that there is more tension squeezing the pole with each wrapping.  if there are two wraps, then you have 2 times the tension in total squeezing the pole, while if you have ten wraps, there are 10 ropes, all equally tight, squeezing the pole.  that means that the normal force is proportional to each wrap, so every wrap adds more friction linearly.  That makes a whole lot more sense. (although it's sad, i really liked the other physics problem, as it involves some interesting math)

I also just noticed there is no facepalm emonicon.
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: X1 on December 13, 2012, 07:40:20 AM
the normal force is proportional to each wrap, so every wrap adds more friction

   No, for many reasons... Let me mention just two :
   1. The total normal force depends on the force with which you pull the two ends of the friction hitch . You can not multiply this force by just multiplying the number of wraps - if you will ever manage to do that, you will discover a means to produce infinite force (on the wraps) by a finite force (on the ends) - that is, perpetual motion - or something very close to it...
   2. The tension is not constant along the length of the rope - because, as you move away from the  standing end(s), the friction forces consume a considerable portion of the tensile forces. This is the "capstan effect", which makes the life of a sailor much easier - he just wraps his tensioned ropes two to four times around a drum, and he is able to counterbalance the great forces of the elements.
   Friction is not such a simple thing as it might look - and the complexity of the construction of the ropes we use does not make it simpler ! I had also mentioned an effect that is not taken into account, although it might play a major role : the friction forces between adjacent wraps. I have seen that one multi-wraps Clove hitch is much more efficient than many common Clove hitches with the same total number of wraps, and I believe that this is due to this effect : the oblique riding turn squezes the round turns the one upon the other, and this locks the accumulated tensile forces within the "coil tube" of the hitch.
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: kd8eeh on December 15, 2012, 05:24:35 AM
Additive friction is likely not the only reason that multiple wraps is more secure, but still I do believe it helps in the same way as before.  Your first argument, that this finite force yeilds an infinite force as the number of wraps goes to infinity, does not cause a problem because the normal force is just a force.  There is no work done by the normal force, and no energy associated with it, so we don't break physics by saying this.

The second point is valid, but as most hitches may be tied, you wrap the pole while the rope is under tension, therefore you can minimize this effect.  Also, I have found a zigzag hitch is much more effective for this type of wrapping, as it produces friction between the rope and itself, in addition to with the pole.

To more clearly demonstrate the effect i am talking about, consider a system of pullies.  The rope wraps around the top pully, then around the bottom pully, then back around the top, forming a complete loop.  For these purposes, we may assume both ends are loaded (equivilant to pulling both ends of the hitch).  In this case, it is obvious that it will be easier to lift the bottom pully if there are more wraps; and there is less tension required to keep the bottom pully in equilibrium.  So, with one wrap, inducing some amount of tension on the ends will yeild less force upward on the bottom pully than if there are more wraps and the same tension.  Friction would put a limit on this effect, but this is the effect i am describing when you wrap a rope many times around a single pole; the bottom of the pole may be treated as the bottom  pully.

I devised an experiment to test this, and it was true.  The experiment involved putting two identical caribeaners next to each other, with there gates on the same side, but hinging opposite directions, so that you don't have to account for the leverage the rope may have with only one caribeaner.  Then i wrapped the rope around this once, and tied the ends together around a weight that was not quite heavy enough to cause the gates to open.  Then i put the same weight on the same carribeaners, but with extra wraps, and the gates oppened.  Granted, it's a little crude, but it's the best i can do with what i had sitting around.
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: X1 on December 15, 2012, 09:46:13 PM
  ...[that] this finite force yields an infinite force as the number of wraps goes to infinity, does not cause a problem.
  There is no work done by the normal force, and no energy associated with it, so we don't break physics by saying this.

   No, you just break the pole !  :) When you find that something is infinite, think that there are only two such things - and, regarding the first one, we are not so sure .  :)

I devised an experiment to test this, and it was true.

   You could just tie a 4 and a 6 wraps Double Cow hitch on the same pole with opposing standing ends, pre-tension and then load them with equal forces, and see which slips first...

   ( The many wraps around a pole is a friction complex system, it is not a frictionless simple mechanism ! You can not describe, explain and predict the peculiar characteristics of the former, by the simple mechanics of the later. I believe that what you have described is an attempt to reduce the working of the multi-wraps friction hitch to that of the many-pulleys block and tackle system. After Archimedes, nobody can deny the notion of the mechanical advantage, with the help of which, "if we would have had a sufficiently long beam of a lever, we could move the earth..." The same can be said with the system of many pulleys you describe - in fact, with any compound system of the 6 simple machines ( lever, wheel and axle, pulley, inclined plane, wedge, screw ). What is not taken into account in those simple machines is the energy loss due to friction  ( between the rope and the pole/pulley, and between the adjacent round turns), and the deformations of the rope and/or the pole ( change of the length of the rope or of the cross section of the pole ). So, you wish to describe, explain and predict a mechanism based on friction, by mechanisms where friction is not taken into account... When you add friction, you will see that there " every wrap [DOES NOT] add more friction linearly ", and that every linearity disappears. That does not mean, of course, that if you add another wrap, you will not get more friction, and that an infinite number of wraps would not be attached on the pole with an "infinite" force !  :) It means that, starting from the outer wrap, every new wrap is offering less friction than the previous one, and it is dissipating the tensile force it receives from the previous and transmits to the next one more, to the point the addition of another wrap on the friction hitch would be practically pointless. The same is true with a block and tackle system of many pulleys. It is no co-incidence that we never see more than 3 or 4 pairs of pulleys ( threefold or fourfold purchase ).)
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: kd8eeh on December 16, 2012, 01:53:47 AM
That is all true, and this is why the best (or at least most of the best) hitches for lenghtwise pull are tied with the rope under continuios tension, so that you can make it very tight as you tie the knot and don't encounter this problem afterward

.
:) When you find that something is infinite, think that there are only two such things - and, regarding the first one, we are not so sure .  :)

What do you mean by this?
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: X1 on December 16, 2012, 03:25:31 AM
What do you mean by this?

   Forget it, it was just a joke, which loses its lightness if it is taken seriously.
   The meaning was that, when our calculations predict the appearence of an actually infinite number, when it is obvious that, in nature, we do experience only potentially infinite quantities, it is our calculations that we should blame, not nature !  :)
   ( The procedure of somehow "cuting off" the infinite quantities, so we get the observed finite ones, is called "re-normalization" - for good reason. An infinite quantity is an ab-normal thing...)     
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: kd8eeh on December 16, 2012, 05:56:28 AM
It's an infinite limit, not actually an infinite quantity.  Those happen all the time in nature.

In the end, let's leave it at friction is complicated.
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: X1 on December 16, 2012, 01:56:45 PM
   The distinction between actual and potential infinity I mentioned quantities is a diferent thing.
   " In accordance with the traditional view of Aristotle, the Hellenistic Greeks generally preferred to distinguish the potential infinity from the actual infinity; for example, instead of saying that there are an infinity of primes, Euclid prefers instead to say that there are more prime numbers than contained in any given collection of prime numbers (Elements, Book IX, Proposition 20)." (1) Im can assure you that the magnitude of the normal forces is NOT ( never ever ) infinite...Heraklas knew it !  :) (2)

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinity
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heraklas
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: xarax on May 15, 2014, 07:43:40 PM
  Pictures of the Double Cow hitch, on a monochromatic rope.
  Tied on a 11 mm climbing rope, and pre-tensioned by hand as tightly as possible, by pulling the ends the one after the other.
  Rock solid, no sign of any release after the pre-tensioning, good-looking : what more can one demand of a tight hitch ?
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: DerekSmith on May 31, 2014, 11:14:28 AM
what more can one demand of a tight hitch ?

Ease of tying might come top of answers to that question, followed closely by intrinsic security (because just 30 seconds of flogging and it fell to pieces)
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: xarax on May 31, 2014, 03:00:46 PM
what more can one demand of a tight hitch ?

Ease of tying might come top of answers to that question, followed closely by intrinsic security (because just 30 seconds of flogging and it fell to pieces)

   If I judge from the top of your answer to my question, you have never tied it properly... because it can be set up in-the-bight in a few seconds ( literally ), and it can be tightened hard in a few more. However, I will suppose that you had not seen the attached pictures ( illustrating how it can be tied in-the-bight ), or that you may find difficult, indeed, to tie two Cow hitches, the one next to the other, in-the-end... Also, I will not question WHICH ONE ( =1 ) other hitch is even remotely as tight as this hitch, and can also be tied in-the-end AND in-the-bight so easily and quickly, because I know you do not like comparisons... :)  So, I will answer the bottom of your answer : 300 seconds of flogging ( measured with my watch - yours may run slower... :)), had not ANY noticeable effect on the grip. In fact, its only problem is that it so tight and irresponsive to ANY flogging, that it should better be slipped always, even if one does not tension it very hard.
   Frankly, Derek, it seems to me you have lost something ( regarding knots...) - but I hope you have gained something else ( regarding something else ). :)
   The good thing with superb knots, like this, is that they do not need to be advertised ( like the mediocre knots - the fake, so-called "Sailors" hitch, for example, or the fake so-called "Zeppelin" loop ) - so I will say nothing else in favour of the Locked Double Cow hitch. When this old generation of knot tyers, and the rocks in our heads we carry, will become dust, this hitch will occupy the place in the knotting toolbox it deserves.
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: xarax on June 01, 2014, 02:55:39 AM
   This tread was meant to present "a simpler TackleClamp hitch", and that is exactly what the Locked Double Cow hitch is. It is not as tight as the original TackleClamp hitch, and it even uses more material - but it can be tied veeery easily in-the-end AND in-the-bight. Its overall shape and structure is very simple, and very nice, too ( once one has tied it just a few times, it is almost impossible to forget it... provided he remembers the Cow hitch, of course  :)). Even its mere name, by itself, is able to describe the knot quite sufficiently and accurately ( so, it is NOT irrelevant or misleading, as it happens with the names of most other hitches...). Now, the original TackleClamp hitch can tied easily, ( starting from the Clove hitch) only if we are allowed to use both ends ( i.e. the ends of a relatively short rope - because, to follow this easy to remember and execute method described at (1), we have to tuck both of them once ). To tie the TackleClamp hitch in-the-end, one has to remember the mnemonic picture, and follow the sequence of moves described at (2), which are not-so-easy to memorize, indeed. ( Dan Lehman, for once, was right on this.. ). To tie the TackleClamp hitch in-the-bight, it is even more difficult (3), and this was the reason I tried to find something tight but easier to remember how to tie in-the-bight, in the first place -  a replacement of the mediocre Pile hitch, in short... With the Locked Double Cow hitch, I believe I was lucky to succeed in this, and to meet a most useful and beautiful hitch, able to withstand a lengthwise pull. I do dare to describe it as a superb knot, although I always measure my words most carefully, when it comes to superlatives...
   Of course, an even simpler, two-wrap tight hitch, is the Locked Single Cow hitch, which is also TIB ( See (4), and the attached pictures ) - another superb knot :) - and I still wonder why Ashley, who came so near to it with the "similar", yet less tight, well-known ABoK#1683 (5), had not tied it 70 years ago...

1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4224.msg26058#msg26058
    http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4224.msg26059#msg26059
2. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4224.msg26178#msg26178
    http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4224.msg26331#msg26331
3. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4224.msg26364#msg26364
4. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4035.msg24785#msg24785
    http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4035.msg24787#msg24787
5. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4441.msg28170#msg28170
    http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4814.0

P.S. I have described what I mean by a "tight hitch" = "binder", at (6) and (7) :
6.  http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4155.0
7.  http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4673.0
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: Sweeney on June 03, 2014, 02:04:49 PM
what more can one demand of a tight hitch ?

Ease of tying might come top of answers to that question, followed closely by intrinsic security (because just 30 seconds of flogging and it fell to pieces)

   If I judge from the top of your answer to my question, you have never tied it properly... because it can be set up in-the-bight in a few seconds ( literally ), and it can be tightened hard in a few more. However, I will suppose that you had not seen the attached pictures ( illustrating how it can be tied in-the-bight ), or that you may find difficult, indeed, to tie two Cow hitches, the one next to the other, in-the-end... Also, I will not question WHICH ONE ( =1 ) other hitch is even remotely as tight as this hitch, and can also be tied in-the-end AND in-the-bight so easily and quickly, because I know you do not like comparisons... :)  So, I will answer the bottom of your answer : 300 seconds of flogging ( measured with my watch - yours may run slower... :)), had not ANY noticeable effect on the grip. In fact, its only problem is that it so tight and irresponsive to ANY flogging, that it should better be slipped always, even if one does not tension it very hard.

Although I am not sure I have a use for this hitch it is easy to tie around a pole etc where the ends are not available by starting with a slingstone hitch (ABoK #272) and taking the ends around and down through the bights on each side (the photos posted by Xarax should be easy to follow from the slingstone hitch point).

Barry
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: xarax on June 03, 2014, 03:36:34 PM
starting with a slingstone hitch (ABoK #272) and taking the ends around and down through the bights on each side

  Thank you, Sweeney. I have met this hitch while I was trying to simplify the TackleClanp hitch, which is a 3 /4 wraps very tight, self-locking hitch / binder ( the most tight I know ) able to withstand a lengthwise pull even in its simplest form ( for more gripping power, one can always tie it with 6 wraps, as shown in (1)). So, although it may seem strange, I had NOT started from the Cow hitch, or any other similar 2 wrap hitch, utilizing a mechanical advantage... In other words, I was trying to find simpler ways to implement the opposing bights locking mechanism mainly, not the leveraged tensioning of the wraps offered by the mechanical advantage due to the zigzag path of the Standing part on the surface of the pole. It was some time after I had already tied and tried this hitch, when I realized that it was just two Cow hitches, the one next to the other... It had happened to me many times, to arrive at India through West India ! :)
   And after I had tied this hitch, exploring the possibility to work with less wraps, I had reduced them to three and finally to two, and I had arrived at the Locked Single Cow hitch, NOT starting from the Cow or the Pedigree hitch, as one would, again, had expected ! I believe that you can follow the indirect, zigzag path of my reasoning, by reading the posts of this thread. I am not clever enough to find the one best way to connect the dots right from the start, but I dare to do the next less dumb thing, to connect the dots in every possible way... :)

1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4035.msg25143#msg25143
Title: Locked Double Prusik
Post by: xarax on July 03, 2014, 07:27:18 PM
   I believe that most real(tm) knot tyers would sacrifice some ropelength, to tie a more convoluted but simpler, conceptually, knot, even if this might look as an overkill. So I think that, instead of tying the 6-wrap Double Cow hitch shown at (1), to avoid any thinking on how he should arrange the wraps along the pole, one should better make just another step, and tie the 8-wrap one instead. To the devoted believers, I would reply that, yes, it is nothing but a double Prusik  :) - but a locked one ! So, if the Prusik appears tight to them, they should tie, try and see what this beast is able to do, when it will be properly tensioned.
   "Properly tensioned" here, means only that one should tighten the wraps following the method I had described : by pulling each end at a time, the one after the other. I have seen that this hitch continues to shrink, even after I had been pulling the one end after the other for 10 times ( each !  :))( After that, my back refuses to serve my curiosity...)   
   I have only tied it around rather slippery poles and on rather slippery ropes, so I suspect that, on most "ordinary" situations, where the friction forces between the rope and the pole, on the one hand, and between the adjacent wraps, on the other, is much stronger, it would be quite difficult to tighten it very much - but then, in such circumstances, the Double Cow hitch would be adequate, I think.   

1.  http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4035.msg25143#msg25143
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: xarax on September 29, 2014, 03:45:04 PM
   [ In an attempt to copy/paste and quote a sentence of this post, I had deleted it by mistake, and now I can not restore it - because it has not been cached by the site s server, or by any web engine I know during the time it was posted for the first time ( 2014-09-29, 15:45:04 ). If a member of the Forum keeps records of the posts, his/hers help would be much welcomed ].
Title: Re: A simpler TackleClamp hitch.
Post by: xarax on October 26, 2014, 08:55:48 PM
"... the Single and Double Locked Cow hitches and the TackleClamp hitch ( which can be considered as two Single Cow hitches joined in an anti-symmetric way, i.e., as opposed to the symmetric way they are joined in the case of the Double Cow hitch )."

   Strictly speaking, the antisymmetric way two Single Cow hitches are joined together generates the knot shown in the attached picture - which is different from the TacleClamp hitch. However, this knot is not so stable, and its locking mechanism does not work so efficiently, due to the oblique ( = not "right" ) angle the short segment which connects the two Cow hitches ( the "stop trigger" of the mechanism ) immobilizes the ends by passing "under" them.