International Guild of Knot Tyers Forum

General => New Knot Investigations => Topic started by: djh860 on November 04, 2012, 12:54:21 AM

Title: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: djh860 on November 04, 2012, 12:54:21 AM
**** I posted better pictures with two color ropes below***
Can you tell me who invented it first and what it's name is or anything about it?
First you create 2 similar bends in two ropes.
(http://i831.photobucket.com/albums/zz240/killoyz/IMG_3518.jpg)

Next push the right bend through the middle of the left bend .
(http://i831.photobucket.com/albums/zz240/killoyz/IMG_3519.jpg)

Now grab the tail end of the left line and wrap it under around up and through the right bend.
(http://i831.photobucket.com/albums/zz240/killoyz/IMG_3520.jpg)

Grab the tail of the right bend and poke it through right to left through the right bend.
(http://i831.photobucket.com/albums/zz240/killoyz/IMG_3521.jpg)
Tighten the knot.
(http://i831.photobucket.com/albums/zz240/killoyz/IMG_3523.jpg)
(http://i831.photobucket.com/albums/zz240/killoyz/IMG_3524.jpg)
Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: kd8eeh on November 04, 2012, 03:05:23 AM
Firstly, in the knotting world, these "bends" are called bites. This is to avoid confusion with bends, which are knots used to tie two ropes together. Secondly, this knot you made is a sheet bend, but with a finishing tuck on one rope andthe other loaded by what is typically the tail. I have never seen it tied before, but that's not to say it is new.if you have a copy of Ashely book of knots, try looking in the bends chapter to see if you can find it. If you don't have it, get a copy.it's a great book. I'll look it up when i get home. Anyway, your bend appears to be moderately strong and fairly secure, although it has the flaw that if not worked tight enough, one end will pull the two trails through, and then it pinches the rope in a manner that reduces it's strength. In both forms it is very bulky, and there are existing knots that serve the same purpose but are generally more versatile.
Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: Dan_Lehman on November 04, 2012, 06:47:04 AM
A. Firstly, in the knotting world, these "bends" are called bites.

B. This is to avoid confusion with bends, which are knots used to tie two ropes together.

C. Secondly, this knot you made is a sheet bend,
but with a finishing tuck on one rope and the other loaded by what is typically the tail.

Wrong on A & B, which I suggest you look up in ABOK.
Wrong on C until reaching the qualification, then right on.

So, this is what has been called a "Lapp knot" but with the
extension of making an extra tuck with the tail of the bight side.
.:.  Interesting!


--dl*
====
Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: kd8eeh on November 05, 2012, 03:11:38 AM
ok.  i would have looked up in abok this knot, but i wasn't home at the time i replied, so i didn't have my copy.  seems how most of my knotting experience comes from fuddling around with shoelaces, not actualy talking to others, what would these be called?  i know knots used to tie two ropes together are called bends, so when i read two bends in the ends of ropes, i thought of two distinct knots, something like that bowline around the loop of another bowline thing, and i figured the term bend would be confusing.  what do i have wrong here then?
Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: X1 on November 05, 2012, 12:10:11 PM
   I believe that this bend is similar / identical to one of those :

   http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4076.0

P.S. 2012-14-11
I was wrong, because I was talking about another knot, where the one link is an overhand knot - I could not distinguish the paths of the white rope at the series of the pictures. See :

http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4116.msg24851#msg24851
Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: djh860 on November 05, 2012, 02:10:43 PM
I also tried that one but it felt like it would roll so I moved on to the one I posted.

   I believe that this bend is similar / identical to one of those :

   http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4076.0
Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: X1 on November 05, 2012, 03:42:54 PM
that one
Which one ? There are more than one presented and discussed there.

it felt like it would roll

Could you, please, be a little more specific ? What do you mean by "roll" ? Which part of which knot would roll, relatively to which other part ?

  It would be nice if you tie the knot with cords of two different colours, so the path of the line of each link within the knot is clearly visible. ( The shining white lines in your pictures are not very helpful in this, and they are out of focus . Also, at the pictures of tightened knot, one can not see which are the standing ends and which are the tails - the tails are too long , they end out of the frame ). You could also post the version which you think that would not be stable, so we can see the two knots side by side and compare them.
Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: djh860 on November 14, 2012, 02:17:36 PM
Hi all,
I took new pictures.  I hope this helps.  All comments are welcome.  Thank you.
The short ends should be on the same side
(http://i831.photobucket.com/albums/zz240/killoyz/IMG_3525.jpg)
Put the right hand bend through the left hand bend
(http://i831.photobucket.com/albums/zz240/killoyz/IMG_3526.jpg)
Take the sharp end of the left side rope down under around the standing line of the left bend and then through the right side bend.
(http://i831.photobucket.com/albums/zz240/killoyz/IMG_3527.jpg)
Take the sharp end of the right hand line and push it up and through the right hand bend
(http://i831.photobucket.com/albums/zz240/killoyz/IMG_3528.jpg)
Tighten knot
(http://i831.photobucket.com/albums/zz240/killoyz/IMG_3529.jpg)
(http://i831.photobucket.com/albums/zz240/killoyz/IMG_3530.jpg)
back side
(http://i831.photobucket.com/albums/zz240/killoyz/IMG_3531.jpg)
(http://i831.photobucket.com/albums/zz240/killoyz/IMG_3532.jpg)
Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: X1 on November 14, 2012, 04:29:18 PM
   Hi, djh860, and thank you for the new pictures.

   Congratulations, djh860. This in a pretty, most interesting knot - and also it teaches us some valuable lessons about knots, in general.

   This bend is not an Easy bend (1), of course, because both links are topologically equivalent to the unknot ( i.e., none is an overhand knot ). You can transform the Easy Bend shown at (1) -and at the third attached picture - into the one you show here, by passing the working end of the black/right link over the standing end of the same link ( and not under, as you do at this bend ). However, I argue that it has no relation with an Easy bend whatsoever - as it often happens with simple things, even one little change does change everything.
   So, this bend is even simpler than an Easy bend - and, I dare to say without having tested it, at least as secure as an Easy bend. Why ? Because it utilises a locking mechanism we have seen it works perfectly in the case of the Zeppelin bend - that of the tails being loaded and secured in place, like pivots in a rope-made hinge, by perpendicularily acting forces ( sheer forces ). I would go as far as to argue that this bend is, in fact, a simplified Zeppelin bend, just one step more complex than the Symmetric Sheet bend ( or, just one step less simple than the SSB ). Moreover, it is very stable, even when it is not loaded, while the SSB is obviously not. So, it is much more "practical" than the SSB. Easy to tie, to dress, and very secure, what else would one have wished for a bend ?
   The only shortcoming I see is the lack of symmetry. I suppose that, probably, the one link would be much weaker than the other, just as it might happen with the Sheet bend. It lacks the symmetry of the Zeppelin bend and of the SS bend, but this does not mean it is not pretty. It is, because it is a most simple illustration of a rope-made hinge - and a hinge is a pretty thing. independently of the material it is made of !  :)
   
   ( You have replaced the white rope with a black one, where the self-crossings can be distinguished even less... at least by people with less acute vision than the one they used to have during the last century, like me. So, if I was/am talking about another knot than the one you show, you now know why ! :) But if you keep inventing such pretty knots, I guess you can use any colour you wish !
    An advice : when you wish to show the back side of a knot, it is better to rotate it around its axis, so the left link remains at the left side of the frame, and the right link remains at the right side. I believe that this way the human brain understands more easily and quickly that the apparently "two" things are, in fact, one and the same thing - because we are accustomed at paying attention to bilateral, "face" symmetry. I think that most people will understand a 90 degrees rotation around the horizontal axis, than around the vertical axis. )

1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4076.0
Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: X1 on November 14, 2012, 05:46:23 PM
   See the attached pictures, for the end-of-line bowline-like (PET) loop knot, based upon this asymmetric, yet pretty bend.
Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: djh860 on November 14, 2012, 06:39:09 PM
It certainly is not a lapp bend with and extra tuck nor is it a sheet bend.  Please tie it.

A. Firstly, in the knotting world, these "bends" are called bites.

B. This is to avoid confusion with bends, which are knots used to tie two ropes together.

C. Secondly, this knot you made is a sheet bend,
but with a finishing tuck on one rope and the other loaded by what is typically the tail.

Wrong on A & B, which I suggest you look up in ABOK.
Wrong on C until reaching the qualification, then right on.

So, this is what has been called a "Lapp knot" but with the
extension of making an extra tuck with the tail of the bight side.
.:.  Interesting!


--dl*
====
Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: X1 on November 14, 2012, 10:38:05 PM
   Another, slightly different variation of the same bend. The locking mechanism of the pair of tails is the same - and the general aspect does not differ much. I do not know which one is tied more easily than the other. There are many initial configurations one can use to set up and dress those bends, other than the one shown previously.
Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: Luca on November 15, 2012, 12:09:28 AM
Hi djh860,

The (interesting) bend that you show us, is(in shape) an "anti-Lapp knot(/bend)" with an extra tuck:

http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1955.msg13654#msg13654

(for someone who does not know the knot, the description given by kd8eeh is not so bad).
The Lapp(Sami?)knot(knot,not bend!),I do not think it has been conceived as a bend in origin, but rather as something similar to a hitch (IMO), here an example of what appears to be a slipped Lapp knot used in a similar way as if it were a Becket Hitch (seems good!) :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eJjE6uR9Q0&feature=channel&list (it can be interesting to watch the other videos in the channel by the same author).
the Easy bend is a "regular"Lapp knot(or bend etc.etc..)with a similar extra tuck:this extra tuck may be useful for preventing annoying (or tragic) mistakes when one decide to use the Lapp knot as a bend.

                                                                                                    Bye!
Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: Dan_Lehman on November 15, 2012, 01:39:28 AM
It certainly is not a lapp bend with and extra tuck nor is it a sheet bend.  Please tie it.

I did.  It is a wrong-side Lapp bend ... then --reddish rope
(of your later photos) crossing over around the black SPart
instead of its tail, as is the "right-side" Lapp bend (and
then the tuck of the bight's tail).

Cute little knot by whatever name.

--dl*
====
Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: X1 on November 15, 2012, 05:40:41 AM
"anti-Lapp knot(/bend)" with an extra tuck:

a wrong-side Lapp bend
(and then the tuck of the bight's tail).

   There is a number of OTHER knots that can also be considered as Lapp or anti-Lapp or wrong-side Lapp knots, with an extra tuck ! This description means nothing. In such a scale, in such a simple knot, one extra tuck is too many.
   Moreover, this description is wrong ! Because it does not reveal - rather, it hides - the fact that the mechanism which locks the pair of tails in place is completely different in this knot, from any Lapp-ish knot...
   I understand  that most people, when confronted with something new, and unknown thing, tend to baptize it with the name of something similarily-looking old, and nown thing, however different that might be. It is an easy, sometimes convenient, but not always useful tendancy.
  However, if this happens to simple things, it is also dangerous... It might lead to great mis-understandings. Because any small change to a simple configuration is capable to create a totally new situation. In other terms, it is most probable that a new thing will emerge. People in knotting do the same mistake over and over again - and Ashley himself was not immune of this : he related the bowline with the Sheet bend, and people keep reproducing the same mistake 70 years now !
   This knot is much more related to the Zeppelin bend, and to the SSB, than to any Lapp knot, with or without a tuck. I hope that this Lapp mask/burga will not stick on its pretty face !  :)
Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: djh860 on November 15, 2012, 01:47:28 PM
It was suggested to me that this should be called a hitch bend.  Since my last name is Hoban how about the Hoban hitch bend. What do you think of that name?
Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: djh860 on November 15, 2012, 02:04:01 PM
I don't think you can tie a Lapp bend and then convert it into this knot.

It certainly is not a lapp bend with and extra tuck nor is it a sheet bend.  Please tie it.

I did.  It is a wrong-side Lapp bend ... then --reddish rope
(of your later photos) crossing over around the black SPart
instead of its tail, as is the "right-side" Lapp bend (and
then the tuck of the bight's tail).

Cute little knot by whatever name.

--dl*
====
Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: X1 on November 15, 2012, 03:00:48 PM
   Hoban Hitch bend.
   Hitch - Hitch bend.
 *H* - Hitch bend. ( the one link works as a *H* shaped rope segment )
   Hi I bend ( the first words of the title of this thread, the second link works as an *I* rope segment  )   
   HH bend or HI bend... Perfect !  :)
 
   I cast my vote for HH bend or HI bend.
Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: Luca on November 15, 2012, 06:12:54 PM
Hi X1,

   There is a number of OTHER knots that can also be considered as Lapp or anti-Lapp or wrong-side Lapp knots, with an extra tuck ! This description means nothing. In such a scale, in such a simple knot, one extra tuck is too many.
   Moreover, this description is wrong ! Because it does not reveal - rather, it hides - the fact that the mechanism which locks the pair of tails in place is completely different in this knot, from any Lapp-ish knot...

O.K.!

Because any small change to a simple configuration is capable to create a totally new situation. In other terms, it is most probable that a new thing will emerge.

I agree!

"anti-Lapp knot(/bend)" with an extra tuck:

The Luca who wrote this,I,personally,do not know;by the way, is not that I am totally disagree with what he writes, but personally I recognize myself better in the Luca that wrote this one:

The (interesting) bend that you show us, is(in shape) an "anti-Lapp knot(/bend)" with an extra tuck

Mind you, this also is not a big deal, but I recognize it better, because it contains some words like "(interesting) bend" (with the meaning of true bend, true end to end junction knot), and like "is (in shape) an "(in the sense (perhaps too implicit?) of" in shape, but not in function/mechanism ").

                                                                                                  Bye!

                                                                                                                   Luca






Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: X1 on November 16, 2012, 02:47:57 AM
I recognize myself better in the Luca that wrote this one:
The (interesting) bend that you show us, is(in shape) an "anti-Lapp knot(/bend)" with an extra tuck

I stand corrected.
However, I argue that we should not judge knots only by the things that can be seen ( the shape ), but also by the things that can not ( the distribution of forces ). Moreover, in such simple shapes, there is no point to say that something is something else, with an extra tuck - exactly as we can not say that a square is a triangle with an extra side, or number 2 is number 1 with an extra 1... :)
Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: Dan_Lehman on November 16, 2012, 06:21:06 PM
It was suggested to me that this should be called a hitch bend.

That was an unwise suggestion.  There's no good reason
to cast this as a hitch --unlike there is for the sheet bend
& Lapp bend
(in their simple forms : one part *knots* around
a simple *hitched-to* form of a bight).  (Going much beyond
acceptance of a bight as an *object* to be hitched to by seeing
all manner of structure being also vulnerable to such conception
begs the question of making the point at all!)

Quote
Since my last name is Hoban how about the "Hoban hitch bend".
What do you think of that name?

For now, "Hoban's bend" suits me.
(And please understand what I've said about the Lapp bend
---orientation of the bight (loading the other side from what
is loaded in the Lapp bend, then making a tuck of the bight's
tail.  This should not be a point of contention at this time!))


--dl*
====
Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: X1 on November 16, 2012, 07:45:53 PM
one part *knots* around a simple *hitched-to* form of a bight

  That is exactly what I see !  :) One part, the most convoluted one, "knotted " around a simple "hitching-to-something" form of a bight (around the less convoluted part). Or, one part, the less convoluted one, a "hitching-to-something" form of a bight, "knotted" within the other, more convoluted part.
  At the pictures I had shown ( provided we are talking about the same knot... ;)), the right-side, white-rope part is the less convoluted part, a form of a half hitch. The left-side, red-rope part is the more convoluted part, a form of an overhand-knot-looking shape, able to "knot" around the "hitching-to" it form of a half hitch.
  Of course, if one does not wish to see something, for whatever reason, he does not see it (and vice versa...)  :)
"The mind sees and the mind hears. The rest is blind and deaf."
Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: X1 on November 19, 2012, 07:48:43 PM
   Two more variations on the same theme. A Pretzel-like link, and a single hitch ( ABoK#49) attached on it, around its belly/spine, so that the two tails constitute a rope-made pivot.
   As it happens with the Sheet bend(s), we cannot predict which variation will be proved to be less slippery and more robust - we need detailed experiments, over a broad range of loading patterns and materials.
   
Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: X1 on November 21, 2012, 08:58:26 PM
   A friend of mine has drawn my attention to the fact that the family of bends presented in this thread are, in a general sense, similar to a marlinspike hitch. ( I had not thought of this correlation, but now it has been pointed out to me, I think that it reveals some common elements indeed - in the aspect as well as in the mechanics - of those bends and the marlinspike hitch, that are worth exploring father).
   I have not been able to figure out a simple(-er) initial configuration of a loose knot that would be easy to remember and set up, in order to tie those bends. I am not satisfied with the original tying method, because it starts from a more or less ordered, balanced configuration of the two links, yet the final result is obviously a very asymmetric knot. Somewhere at the course of the tying procedure, the two links are folded quite differently, but tying the bend(s) this way we can not follow thei individual course of each one of them. ( It reminds me the "miracoulous" folding of some knots to their completely differently-looking capsized forms.) I would prefer a tying method that would retain the general final aspect of the knot, be it symmetric or asymmetric, right from the start of the tightening of the loose knot, to the end, to the compact knot.
  So, I am asking this question here : Are those bends "similar" to a marlinspike hitch ? In what sense ? If yes, does this similarity help us to remember how to tie or to tie those bends, and/or to explain their mechanism ?
Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: X1 on March 03, 2013, 06:53:18 PM
  Those four variations of the H bend ( Hoban s bend, or Hitch bend ) come in two pairs. Let us call them A1, A2 and B1, B2. Each member of each pair is topologically equivalent to the other, and can be transformed into the other by a simple re-arrangement of the tails into the knot s nub. To indicate this fact, I decided to change the provisional labels I have used, in this way : A ( previous)=> A1 ( present ), D => A2, B => B1, C => B2. See the attached pictures, for the new labels. At the "1" pair, because of the particular location of the two tails into the knot s nub, the tail of each link is pushed against the tail of the other link. So, at the "1" pair, the "white" tail of the less convoluted hitch component ( the "white" rope ) is "first" pulled by its own standing part, and "then" it is pushed onto the "orange" tail - and, finally, it is secured by the friction forces generated along its mutual contact area with this "orange" tail -, while at the "2" pair the "orange" tail is the one which is "first" pulled by the "white" standing part, and "then" it pushes the "white" tail ( which, finally, by this sequence of pulling and pushing, it is squeezed in between the two legs of the "orange" standing part s first curve, on the one hand, and the straight segment of its own "white" standing part, on the other). The way the tails are secured resembles the Double Harness bend, in the first case, and the Angler s loop, at the second. 
Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: X1 on March 03, 2013, 06:54:43 PM
   The B1 and B2 variations of the H bend.
Title: Re: Hi I "invented" this knot yesterday
Post by: X1 on May 31, 2013, 02:44:53 PM
   The way the tails are secured in the H bend is, in fact, not very different from the way the tail is secured in the Angler s loop. This can lead us to "connect the dots", to connect the tail of the one link to the standing end of the other - in the same not-so-clever way any bend can be "transformed" into a loop. However, the bends where the links are topologically equivalent to the unknot ( and not to the overhand knot, the fig.8 knot, etc.), generate, by this ad hoc transformation, post-eye-tiable ( bowline-like ) loops, which are more useful and, regarding some applications, safer knots, too. ( After the release of the loop, there is no 'relic" of the previous knot s nub that remains tied on the standing part, and can become a source of a safety problem, if it is caught somewhere ). So, we can turn the H bend(s) presented in this thread into post-eye-tiable loop(s), and see what happens.
   Of course, the original simplicity of the parent bend is always lost, and the knot becomes another animal - not only because its shape is changed, but because its loading is very different. When we look at a knot, we can not, unfortunately, see deep enough, watch the the tensile forces running through the tangled segments of the rope. That has been a cause of confusion, and many knot tyers do not understand how different are two superficially "similar" knots, that "look" the "same" - the common bowline and the Sheet bend, for example... :)
   Regarding the general mechanism and the particular way the tail is secured, the H loop based on the A2 variation of the H bend reminds me the Fontus bowline, presented some time ago at (1) ( See the third attached picture).

 1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4116.msg26738#msg26738