International Guild of Knot Tyers Forum

General => Chit Chat => Topic started by: alanleeknots on December 18, 2016, 08:54:08 AM

Title: Useful PET TIB knots
Post by: alanleeknots on December 18, 2016, 08:54:08 AM
Hi All,
        These four loops below are useful versatile PET TIB knots, very well secure, can hander heavy load, quiet easy to tie and easy to
         untie after heavy load also quiet easy to inspect.    ( Of cause no knots can compare to the simplest normal bowline )

        For PET tie method, the first three loops, just tie a bowline and then tuck the rest of the tail in, is easy to do.
        The fourth loop may need little more work to do, I think for average knot tyers  shouldn't have any problem at all.
         (DO NOT UNDER ESTIMATE WHAT AVERAGE KNOT TYERs CAN DO).

        For TIB tie method, all four knots here can be tie in one continuous motion, If you tie it this way, just like when you first learn
        how to ride a bicycle, after a couple week learning and when everything under controls, you are good at it, The muscle memory
        already kick in, is all good for the rest of you life, In the future, one a while just practice little more, you will never forget how
        to tie these knots.
        I am no here to persuade you to use these knots, just here to share my experience and though, may be what ever I wrote
        here make no sense to you.  but I can tell you, all my one handed knots and one continuous motion knots,
        when ever I want to tie it, I don't have to think how to tie it,  my hand will do it for me.

        If any one know or have this kind of PET TIB knot, please bring it here, I want to learn more.
        Sorry for my broken English.   谢谢 alanlee
Title: Re: Useful PET TIB knots
Post by: jarnos on January 08, 2021, 02:22:17 PM
This is a regular bowline modified so that a bight is used for tying the collars. That is both post-eye-tiable (PET) and tiable-in-a-bight (TIB). If you tie your more complicated knots similarly using a bight, the knots become rather bulky, but probably more secure than a the knot in this photo.
Title: Re: Useful PET TIB knots
Post by: jarnos on January 08, 2021, 03:16:28 PM
Hi, Alan

What is your favorite of the knots, and have you compared their properties such as security when shaken and ease of untying after heavy load when tied with a bight?
Title: Re: Useful PET TIB knots
Post by: Dan_Lehman on January 09, 2021, 02:37:05 AM
This is a regular bowline modified so that a bight is used for tying the final collar
...
 the knots become rather bulky, but probably more secure than a the knot in this photo.
And this NSUE (noue' sans ultiliser les extremities (to let non-English
relieve "TIB" of duties  ;)  ))  bowline
can make a bulky, yes, but robust mid-line eye knot,
by casting a half-hitch or clove around the eyes.
That yields fore & aft nipping turns of 4 diameters,
is non-jamming, and ... might be just the simple
thing to put in, for some hard-pull(s) job.

WAY less trim than a inline fig.8, right!

--dl*
====
Title: Re: Useful PET TIB knots
Post by: jarnos on January 09, 2021, 03:49:36 PM
WAY less trim than a inline fig.8, right!

Right, besides inline fig.8 is not PET, so you could not tie that loop in a closed ring.

P.S. I replaced my photo above to showcase truly TIB bowline.
Title: Re: Useful PET TIB knots
Post by: agent_smith on January 09, 2021, 04:20:38 PM
#1074 Bowline with a bight is an interesting eye knot.
It is (like all 'Bowlines') uni axially loadable... however, it is also bi axially loadable (ie can be through loaded SPart to SPart).

I had previously posted  that it is capable of replacing the #1053 Butterfly as a mid rope tie-in knot for a 3rd climber (to make a party of 3 all tied into one rope).

Title: Re: Useful PET TIB knots
Post by: Keystoner on January 09, 2021, 04:57:50 PM
Interesting thread. Alan started it over 4 years ago and now it finally gets a response and grows legs.
Title: Re: Useful PET TIB knots
Post by: jarnos on January 09, 2021, 07:10:30 PM
#1074 Bowline with a bight is an interesting eye knot.
It is (like all 'Bowlines') uni axially loadable... however, it is also bi axially loadable (ie can be through loaded SPart to SPart).

I had previously posted  that it is capable of replacing the #1053 Butterfly as a mid rope tie-in knot for a 3rd climber (to make a party of 3 all tied into one rope).

Ashley presents #1074 as a double loop knot, and you can use that as such, if you don't have to tie the both loops around something. (Ashley presents a knot with same name, #1882,  as a single loop knot, uses other loop of the knot than I in the photo, and dresses the knot differently. It is not a PET knot.)

I don't quite understand where does word SPart come from, but It is good, if a mid-line loop can keep its size even when loaded only from both ends of rope.
Title: Re: Useful PET TIB knots
Post by: SS369 on January 09, 2021, 07:21:53 PM
Hello Jarno.

Spart equals (S)tanding Part, just a shortened way of typing/saying that.

SS
Title: Re: Useful PET TIB knots
Post by: agent_smith on January 10, 2021, 02:41:41 AM
per jarnos:
Quote
Ashley presents #1074 as a double loop knot, and you can use that as such, if you don't have to tie the both loops around something.
Ashley does illustrate #1074 as double "eye" Bowline - with the 'eye' and the 'bight' set to equal lengths (that is, there is the actual 'eye' and then there is the 'bight'...the bight is drawn through the nipping loop until it matches the length of the eye). In a sense, the 'bight' is acting a composite 'tail'.

Couple of very important points that need to be made clear:

All written and posted in good faith...

1. Ashley published his book in 1944. Its now 2021 (happy new year!).
So that's almost 80 years ago.
At the time Ashley published his book ('ABoK') he did not conceptualise that #1074 could be employed in mountaineering/climbing applications. He only appeared to conceptualise sailing/yachting applications. We can see this with other knots/hitches presented in his book. For example, #206 Crossing hitch is very useful for belaying a climber - and indeed, its use is mandatory teaching in many climbing training organisations. And #1763 (Prusik hitch) was not conceptualised as being useful to climbers, rescue technicians or tree surgeons (despite Kark Prusik having already published his 'Prusik hitch' several years before Ashley).

Ashley appears to have understood that #1074 is not 100% stable and secure - but, when arranged in a 'load balancing' configuration (with load shared between the 'eye' and the 'bight' via an attachment) - it is secure and stable.

What does this all mean?
It means that Ashley is not the definitive (or final arbiter) for knots and knot applications. Merely because Ashley has published some commentary does not by itself limit or constrain other possibilities.

Quote
Ashley presents a knot with same name, #1882,  as a single loop knot, uses other loop of the knot than I in the photo, and dresses the knot differently. It is not a PET knot.
2).  In #1882, it is the same knot - just applied in a different way. The knot is shown 'upside down' relative to illustration #1074. And all load is now attached to the bight, instead of the eye.

I am unclear why you think #1882 (ie #1074) is not 'PET' (Post Eye Tiable?
By definition, it is still a 'PET' knot.
The depicted application shown at illustration #1882 does not alter/disturb its status as a 'PET' knot.

I would also point out that in the term 'PET', the letter 'E' refers to an eye (not a loop).
Think of an eye bolt - its not called a loop bolt (its an eye bolt).
Same goes for eye splice - its not referred to as a loop splice,

We would need to alter the term 'PET' to be 'PLT' (ie Post Loop Tiable).

...

With regard to Alan Lee's original post - I very much like Lee's link Bowline.
Although it can be 'fiddly' when employed as a tie-in knot for rock climbing, like all knots, once mastered, it presents no issues to those who are prepared to invest a little time mastering the techniques..and its TIB which is nice. It is also interesting from the standpoint that all rope paths turn around 2 rope diameters within the knot core (ie no sharp bends).

I am warming to the 'Triple bowline' - as presented in Robert Chisnall's variation - and have been undertaking many field trials. In my view, it is superior to #1080 Bowline on a bight (as a tie-in knot for rock climbing).
It has 4 rope diameters inside the nipping loop and is 'TIB' (however, it is not bi-axially loadable as per #1074).
Title: Re: Useful PET TIB knots
Post by: jarnos on January 11, 2021, 12:54:29 PM

2).  In #1882, it is the same knot - just applied in a different way. The knot is shown 'upside down' relative to illustration #1074. And all load is now attached to the bight, instead of the eye.

I don't think so. A double loop knot is different than a single loop knot. Besides, the bight is threaded to the other side of the "eye" in these two knots.

Quote
I am unclear why you think #1882 (ie #1074) is not 'PET' (Post Eye Tiable?
By definition, it is still a 'PET' knot.
The depicted application shown at illustration #1882 does not alter/disturb its status as a 'PET' knot.

I would also point out that in the term 'PET', the letter 'E' refers to an eye (not a loop).
Think of an eye bolt - its not called a loop bolt (its an eye bolt).
Same goes for eye splice - its not referred to as a loop splice,

We would need to alter the term 'PET' to be 'PLT' (ie Post Loop Tiable).

What definition do you mean?
In my book the eye in post-eye-tiable does not refer to the loop of the knot, but to the object that is eye, ring, toroid, you name it, through which the loop is tied to. End of https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=5254.msg34405#msg34405 (https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=5254.msg34405#msg34405) gives some definitions for the terms.

Quote
With regard to Alan Lee's original post - I very much like Lee's link Bowline.
Although it can be 'fiddly' when employed as a tie-in knot for rock climbing, like all knots, once mastered, it presents no issues to those who are prepared to invest a little time mastering the techniques..and its TIB which is nice. It is also interesting from the standpoint that all rope paths turn around 2 rope diameters within the knot core (ie no sharp bends).

I think that knot is not easy to untie - see https://youtu.be/V-VXt_AXeps?t=240 (https://youtu.be/V-VXt_AXeps?t=240) - and it is rather complicated when tied as PET&TIB knot.
Title: Re: Useful PET TIB knots
Post by: jarnos on January 11, 2021, 07:13:43 PM
Hi All,
        These four loops below are useful versatile PET TIB knots, very well secure, can hander heavy load, quiet easy to tie and easy to
         untie after heavy load also quiet easy to inspect.    ( Of cause no knots can compare to the simplest normal bowline )

So the knots you present have a PET way of tying and a TIB way of tying, but they do not have a PET TIB way of tying as such, right? One could need a knot that can be tied applying both of the requirements simultaneously. That said, any PET way of tying a knot could be modified to be also TIB by tying the knot with a bight, so it is a kind of trivial thing.
Title: Re: Useful PET TIB knots
Post by: jarnos on January 11, 2021, 07:40:11 PM

And this NSUE (noue' sans ultiliser les extremities (to let non-English
relieve "TIB" of duties  ;)  )) 

Oh, pardon my French. I am a native Finnish speaker, but I am not aware of any common Finnish term for the property, but it could be SIP (sidottavissa ilman p?it?).

Quote
bowline can make a bulky, yes, but robust mid-line eye knot,
by casting a half-hitch or clove around the eyes.
That yields fore & aft nipping turns of 4 diameters,
is non-jamming, and ... might be just the simple
thing to put in, for some hard-pull(s) job.

I am not quite sure what you mean by "by casting a half-hitch or clove around the eyes".

Here is one way to secure a bowline. The left knot is a PET TIB bowline tied with a bight and with a security threading. The right one is the equivalent without using a bight for which there is a PET method, but not a TIB method, I am afraid. As for the left one, I made it to be loaded mainly from the (big PET) loop and from the part going down, but I think it can be loaded from the tail bight and from the part going up, too, though the knot will become harder to untie. Actually, I think it could be loaded from any of combinations of the two to four parts.

Title: Re: Useful PET TIB knots
Post by: agent_smith on January 12, 2021, 12:06:42 AM
Hello jarnos!

I would like to clear up some potential confusion regarding #1074 Bowline with a bight nd other concepts...

I am posting this info in good faith - and I hope that you will receive it as such :)

In point form for clarity:

1. #1074 and #1882 are the same knot species - that is, they are both a Bowline with a bight.

2. #1074 Bowline with a bight is a single eye knot. it isn't a double eye knot.
There is an 'eye' and there is a 'bight'.
The bight' is a 'tail'.

3. The concept of 'PET' refers to a property of a knot.
That property means the knot core structure is created after the eye has been formed (hence the word 'post').
For example, #1047 F8 is not PET.
But #1010 simple Bowline is PET.

The presence of a ring, a post, a tree, or a harness isn't a necessary ingredient of the definition of 'PET'.
Its simply whether it is possible to form an eye without any pre-existing structure in the line - and once the eye is formed (and sized) - the knot core structure can then be tied.

This PET property then enables a knot to be employed in various tasks - eg to tie the rope around a tree or a large boulder - by simply passing the rope around/through that object, and then forming the final knot core structure.

I do not need to add tree, ring, eye bolt, harness, or boulder (ie an object) to the term 'PET' - because the term can be understood without qualifying what the object is.
Title: Re: Useful PET TIB knots
Post by: jarnos on January 12, 2021, 02:30:27 AM
1. #1074 and #1882 are the same knot species - that is, they are both a Bowline with a bight.

2. #1074 Bowline with a bight is a single eye knot. it isn't a double eye knot.
There is an 'eye' and there is a 'bight'.
The bight' is a 'tail'.

Come on. #1074 is presented in CHAPTER 12: DOUBLE- AND MULTIPLE-LOOP KNOTS. In the description of the knot Ashley tells: "The loops should be of equal length for otherwise the wear on them will be uneven." Apparently what Ashley calls loops is what you call an eye and a bight. Anyway, in that knot both loops can be loaded. In #1882 there is only one loop to load.
Title: Re: Useful PET TIB knots
Post by: agent_smith on January 12, 2021, 03:55:39 AM
Hello jarnos,
Again - and in good faith...

This is drifting w-i-d-e from Alan Lees original topic.

And we are entering a discussion which challenges your notional understanding of knot terminology and knot structure.
Because my definitions may not accord with your understanding, it therefore may cause some anxiety or discontent (which is a perfectly normal response).

However, at risk of derailing Alan's thread topic, I will make the following points:
1. #1074 and #1882 are the same knot.
2. In #1882, the eye has been collapsed/shrunk (I believe Xarax was likely the first to experiment with shrinking/collapsing an eye several years ago - eg he collapsed/shrunk the eye of #1080).
3. Note that the term 'PET' refers to an 'eye'. Otherwise, you would need to re-state the term as 'PLT' (post loop tiable). If you use therm 'PET' - it infers that you agree to (and understand) what the letter 'E' represents (an 'eye'). There is a distinct difference between a loop and an eye. A loop can have chirality (eg S or Z chirality). However, an 'eye' has no chirality.
If you are uncomfortable with the letter 'E' - this means you need to change it to 'L' - and this implies you prefer the term 'PLT'?
4. The use of the term eye (instead of loop) has caused anxiety in some IGKT members - and indeed, in some individuals, outrage. Why is this so? Why do some knot tyers become outraged when new terms or new concepts are introduced? The likely answer comes down to 'change'. Some people cannot cope with change - and the very notional concept of change induces fear and anxiety, which leads to outrage/anger. It could also be that Clifford Ashley is revered and considered to be infallible. To disagree with Ashley is equivalent to abandoning or ignoring centuries of tradition - and any person who dares to do so is inviting ridicule/hatred.
5. Ashley did not have a notional concept of chirality - that is, he did not present detailed information about the fact that a 'loop' can have either 'S' or 'Z' chirality - and all of his 'Bowlines' are illustrated with 'Z' chirality (not one is presented with 'S' chirality). All knots have a mirror inverse version - which is equally valid (ie tie your favorite knot - and then hold it adjacent to  plane mirror - and you will see a mirror inverse version).

With specific regard to #1074 Bowline with a bight:
1. It is a single eye knot (not a double eye knot)
2. The 'eye' is formed (and sized) - and then the knot core is tied.
3. The 'bight' is actually a tail.
4. The 'bight' cannot be fed through a ring (only the 'eye' can be fed through a ring).

With specific regard to the definition of a PET knot:
1. The 'eye' can be formed and sized first - without any pre-existing knot - and then the knot core is tied (hence the term 'post')
2. The 'eye' can be also formed around many different types of objects (eg a tree, a boulder, a post, a stump, a concrete pillar, etc) - but it is not necessary to add a tree or a boulder or such an object to qualify the definition... But, (see next point).
3. By default, all 'PET' knots enable the 'eye' to be fed through a ring.
4. Not all 'TIB' (Tiable In the Bight) knots are also 'PET'. For example, #1047 F8 is 'TIB' but it isn't 'PET'.
5. A knot that is both 'PET' and 'TIB' is desirable... and another desirable quality is 'EEL' (either end loadable).
6. With regard to #1074 Bowline with a bight, the 'bight' component can't be fed through a ring, because it isn't an 'eye'.

...

Lees link Bowline:
I respectfully disagree with your comment that Lees link Bowline is hard to untie.
In Alan Lees video, the knot was loaded right up to its MBS yield point.
In other words, the knot was maximally loaded.
Alan was able to untie his knot - even after maximal loading (its not as if he took 4 hours and used a hammer to loosen it).
I personally find this knot easy to tie.
As with learning any new knot, you need to invest time to reach mastery.
I recall learning to drive a manual car - I found it hard to take my foot off the accelerator, push the clutch in, stay on my side of the road and not stall the engine or crunch the gears. I certainly couldn't hold a conversation while I was learning to do this.
Now - after many years of driving cars, I can change gears without difficulty and hold a conversation at the same time...

EDIT: Image added
Title: Re: Useful PET TIB knots
Post by: jarnos on January 12, 2021, 04:42:16 PM
Hello agent_smith,

I suggest that we continue discussion about PET at https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=6935.0 (https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=6935.0).
I don't know where you get that a loop can have chirality, but I guess you could try to explain that in another topic, if relevant. I read about many terms at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_knot_terminology (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_knot_terminology).

Perhaps discussing about EEL qualities of the knots fits in this topic.
Title: Re: Useful PET TIB knots
Post by: jarnos on January 12, 2021, 04:58:48 PM
As for the original post, interesting thing about the blue knot ("Scott's locked bowline by Xarax") and the red knot (Ampersand bowline) is that they are interchangeable even when connected to an object, but the working part and standing part switch roles. See Alan's video:
Title: Re: Useful PET TIB knots
Post by: jarnos on January 13, 2021, 01:47:40 PM
With specific regard to #1074 Bowline with a bight:
1. It is a single eye knot (not a double eye knot)
2. The 'eye' is formed (and sized) - and then the knot core is tied.
3. The 'bight' is actually a tail.
4. The 'bight' cannot be fed through a ring (only the 'eye' can be fed through a ring).

It seems I did the impossible, then :P