International Guild of Knot Tyers Forum

General => Practical Knots => Topic started by: KnotLikely on February 29, 2020, 05:00:24 AM

Title: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: KnotLikely on February 29, 2020, 05:00:24 AM
*************please see reply #8 for my (currently) finished version***************


-----An attempt to classify and label all stable and secure bowline variations, finishes and locks-----

-----will someone please tell me how to escape the  8) back into ( 8 )s, please?-----

Please help me note what you find to be stable, inherently secure or TIB.  Please note any mistakes (this is only 4 days, edited and re-edited, often at 3am)   Please add your own knots or knots that I have missed (still a work in progress on my end).  Please comment on my system and discuss changes that could lead to its viability as a replacement for the necessity of perfectly opened, dressed, uncrossed, front and back pictures.

I'm personally interested only in climbing harness tie-in relevant bowlines, at this time.  Part of this is my fascination with the knot.  Part of this is me having realized how little information I could find on the practically infinite structures and variations and finishes that are possible.  Part of this is that I'm sick of tying figure 8 follow throughs and even more sick of attempting to untie them after any fall.  This is my attempt at making sense and categorizing the pictures that I have found in this forum.  This is my attempt to find the perfect tie-in knot.

All of my discussion of bowlines will begin with Spart in the left hand with the working end coming toward me.  Spart shall be threaded from bottom to top through both loops of a standard climbing harness and the working end will begin all knots to the right side of the Spart.  My right hand will twist to create the nipping loops in the Spart.  A "top twist" (Z chirality)(right handed loop)(right hand thumb moving up)(loop formed on the right side of Spart) will create a loop where the Spart goes out the bottom and the working end, going into the harness, will come out the top.  A "bottom twist" (right hand thumb moving down) will create a loop where the Spart goes away from me on the bottom side of the loop.  When multiple nipping loops are created, they will be created and named from closest to me to farthest from me.  All working ends shall begin by going through the bottom of the nipping loop, around the Spart, and returning through the nipping loop from the top (notwithstanding Lee's Link "Bowline").

Given these rules that I have set for myself (to ease discussion with minimal pictures) and (created for consistency in tying bowlines in life saving applications), no bowline can be created from beginning with a single bottom twist.  (I'll save that twist for learning to fly by way of incorrectly tied double dragon.  I joke.)

For discussion of the nipping loops after initial creation, in cases where multiple nipping loops were created, the first nipping loop shall be the loop that cinches first (closest to running Spart).  **This may be the reverse of the order given in the creation of the nipping loops.**  The specific knot being discussed should already be defined.  Calling the loop that grabs first and the hardest the "first" just seems to make sense to me, as does creating them closest to me first and moving away.  After 5 days of tying bowlines, now being able to tie my knot with my eyes closed 100x perfectly, I won't be able to change this without finding a way to reset my brain.

Edit: apparently I also called the "first nipping loop" the "primary" loop.

-------------------------------------------------------------
1. Nipping Loops:
-------------------------------------------------------------

The variations that I have found, so far, starting from the beginning of tying the knot (working end fed through harness) are:

(1)-Simple bowline - top twist
(2)-Double bowline - top twist, top twist placed under
(3)-Water bowline - top twist, top twist placed on top (clove hitch)
(4)-"Locking" Spart - top twist, bottom twist placed under
(5)-"Locking" Ongoing - bottom twist, top twist placed under
(6)-(Water bowline left handed?) - bottom twist, bottom twist placed under
(7)-Girth hitch bowline 1 - top twist, bottom twist folded up (main nipping loop from Spart is nearest the collar/top/Spart)
(8)-Girth hitch bowline 2 - bottom twist, top twist folded down (main nipping loop is on the bottom.  I prefer this as it grabs the tail more securely)
(9)-unnamed - double top twist, top twist placed on top. (adds a girth hitch like switchback)
(10)-unnamed bight 1 - Top twist, draw bight through from Spart

All other variations of nipping loops (that I have found) devolve into topologically similar knots or devolve into a failed knot.  (Bottom twist, top twist placed on top, tied into a regular bowline devolves into a top twist cowboy bowline, for instance.)

Note: 7 and 8 may be turned in either direction, changing which loop has the first nipping loop on the bottom.  The Mirrored Girth Hitch Bowline, for instance, turns the loops opposite of how I had turned them until I found that knot.  I was unable to recreate the knot until I understood this.  Girth hitch bowlines can have the working end fed from either the bottom or the top when creating the collar or Lee's Link.  I believe this gives them an extra layer of safety concerning tying into a life saving harness.  It is simply one less step to be able to mess up.

-------------------------------------------------------------
2. Working end individual moves:
-------------------------------------------------------------

There are five possible zones around the outside of the knot nub.  Left side(ongoing)(V), between the eye-legs(W), right side(returning)(X), inside collar left of Spart(Y), inside collar right of Spart(Z)

(a) - Up through nipping loop
(b) - Down through nipping loop
(c) - Behind Spart from right to left
(d) - Behind Spart from left to right
(g) - Around back of ongoing eye-leg (up V)
(h) - Around front of ongoing eye-leg (down V)
(i) - Up between eye-legs (up W)
(j) - Down between eye-legs (down W)
(k) - Around back of returning eye-leg (up X)
(l) - Around front of returning eye-leg (down X)
(m) - Up through collar left of Spart (up Y)
(n) - Up through collar right of Spart (up Z)
(o) - Down through collar left of Spart (down Y)
(p) - Down through the collar right of Spart (down Z)
(q) - Follow Spart through all loops/collar
(r) - draw across face of nipping loop from V-X or X-V
(s) - up through only primary nipping loop
(t) - up through only secondary nipping loop
(u) - down through only primary nipping loop
(v) - down through only secondary nipping loop

Note: please let me know if you can find any more first principle working end moves that I have missed.  Some are currently unused, mostly because I REALLY need sleep and my fingers are getting sore.  In my previous iteration of this document, I had parts 2. and 3. switched, with the current 2. being extended finishes made of multiple moves and the current 3. being the basic knots.  This lead to an easier, but limited, naming system.  EBDB could be named 2Ae instead of 2acbgb, but I actually ran out of lower case letters because of all the variations.  Listing the individual moves leads to more complicated knot descriptors, but at least the descriptors do not grow impossibly high in number.  I'm hoping this method is still legible.

-------------------------------------------------------------
3. Knots, variations (and various late night delirious notes):
-------------------------------------------------------------

All knots begin with harness feed.  All knots are PET.  I don't care about TIB for my purposes, but I would like to make note for the community and possibly my future tying endeavors.  I prefer Panic Clip Safe to the working end running with the Spart.  If these knots are your favorites, please double check my work!

-Bowline-                             1acb
-Cowboy bowline-               1adb
-Lee's Link 1-                      1hacb
-Lee's Link 2-                      1hadb
-EBDB-                                 2acbgb
-EBSB-                                 1acbgbkjq
-Monkey butterfly-               2adbgrlabn (optional, draw collar down and back, then (b) through bottom of nipping loops for full monkey effect)(my absurd creation, I believe)
-Scott's lock-                        1acbibn
-Monsoon bowline-              3acbivj
-Mirrored Girth Hitch-           8acbha(m)or(n) (m or n.  no idea.  I'm drunk) (girth hitch flipped bottom up, not top down, so that switchback faces you on the left side instead of facing away)
-My tie-in-                            8adbgb (final turn of working end through nipping loops wraps the switchback of the girth hitch.  It doesn't matter which way it is turned. If it is on the right, use a cowboy bowline to leave the working end near the switchback.  If it is on the left, use a normal bowline.)
-Edward's Bowline-             (10)acbca (or it's acbda.  I have no idea.  I think it doesn't matter.  double collars is the finish.)
-DCDB-                                2acb(ca on the reverse side)or(da on the reverse side) (I truly have no idea which is which.  It doesn't seem to matter once dressed.)

My tie-in is probably named as EBGHB2?

Monkey butterfly bowline is absurd.  I made it because I love symmetry and it's funny.  If you absolutely hate stopper knots and want to attempt to pull a train with another train, this is the knot for you.

DCDB - Double Collar Double Bowline - (2acbca)  The collars may intertwine or not.  If collars are intertwined, Spart shall bind between them when heavily loaded.  Nipping loops may be spread at (W) to release bind.  Probably still as bindable as a fig. 8 followthrough.  If collars are not intertwined, Spart may be released by bending outside collar, feeding Spart, bending inner collar and feeding Spart.  This releases bound nipping loops.  A beautiful and simple locking finish!

EBDB variations:

-2acbgb does not lock as firmly as 2adbgb.  With 2adbgb, the tail is more firmly secured and the locking loop around the back seems to cinch the nub slightly better.

-4(acb)or(adb)gb can lock the Spart to first nipping loop fairly hard.  Need to test knot release after fall.

-5(acb)or(adb)gb releases easily as Spart to nipping loops is only bound by the final turn of the tail into the nipping loops.

! -3acbgb the tail returning between the eye loops(W) allows the binding of the tail into the nipping loops to slightly secure the two nipping loops together and aids in securing the final tail nip.  This can be modified even further by not going behind the ongoing eye-leg, and instead simply coming up the bottom front of the nub between the two eye-legs before performing (ib) in place of (gb).  This can be secured Even further by returning the final tail to the left of itself, separating it from both eye-legs and maintaining more pressure on the tail.

-3adbgb has the first nipping loop on the top instead of the bottom and does not secure tail as well.  Tail coming from the far side of the knot for the final bind does not aid the second nipping loop in binding the tail.  Nipping loops separate.

-6acbgb is bombproof, especially after a fall.  It binds as hard as a figure 8 followthrough.  Spart to first nipping loop is fully secured by the pinching of the two nipping loops and is stable in that position.

-6adbgb as with 3adb, the tail ending outside the eye-legs(X) prevents the locking together of the nipping loops when (g) is made.  Unlike 3adb, the first nipping loop is on the bottom so this helps prevent binding while allowing the tail to remain secure.

-7acbgb cinches the switchback of the clove hitch very nicely.  Except for 7acbgb, (7)and(8)(acb)and(adb)ib feel more secure than (7)and(8)(acb)and(adb)gb variants.  All eight break apart cleanly due to the clove hitch and being able to be released at both collar and nipping loop.

-It should also be noted that from (adb), there are two ways for the tail to achieve (gb).  It can run in front of or behind the returning eye-leg (as it goes through the nipping loops to form the collar).  For separation of the returning eye-leg and the tail, having the tail perform (ib) from (W) seems to be preferable in most knots (sometimes more compact).

-In the (gb) locking method, the final feed of the tail through the nipping loops can self separate the tail from the returning leg.  This topology can not transform into any other within the nipping loop.  If a cinch knot is going to be employed, this ensures that even if the knot goes totally loose, the returning leg and the tail are unable to feed through together past the abutted dividing line.  The most secure End Bound Water Bowline is (3acb) with an (ib) finish.  The final wrap of the tail, proceeding over the front face of the nub and continuing down the front of the two nipping loops binds the two nipping loops together at the point where they are usually able to diverge.  The tail is able to come out the left side of itself, separating the final tail piece from both the ongoing eye-leg and the returning eye-leg.  The tail can be cinched with a half fisherman to either eye-leg, preventing the knot from unraveling at all, even when fully loosened.  This probably doesn't matter as I believe the knot is both stable and secure, already, in any final (ib) form through the nipping loops.

-(8adbib) with the tail separated from the returning eye-leg seems to be an incredible structure.  The collar remains easily broken after heavy loading.  The vertical wrap of the girth hitch remains easily broken after heavy loading, unlike the (gb) lock which works to bind it.  The tail lock lightly binds the ongoing eye-leg, preventing loosening of the knot.  A cinch knot can be added to either eye-leg and is locked in place, with no movement allowed, by a contacting separating line.  It binds the nipping loops together slightly better than (8adbgb) but sacrifices some of the binding of the ongoing eye-leg, allowing the secondary nipping loop to loosen more than (8adbgb), but also allowing easier disassembly after multiple falls.

-I believe Harry Butlers Yosemite Bowline to be unstable.  I'm attempting to find or recreate the picture that I took after cyclical loading. (I think it was HBYB. Can't be positive, yet.  4am problems.)

-There are 4 possible zones inside the nipping loop, with two modifiers.  The working end, passing through the nipping loop may relate to other lines by in front, behind, left, right, over, under.  These definitions will need some work and vary slightly depending on the lines running through the nipping loop, but all stable and secure knots (for climbing purposes) should be able to work well in any position.  A knot that requires passing through the nipping loop at a specific position to be stable or secure is not suited to situations where lives are at risk.  Nipping loop feed placements will be ignored for now.

-Scott's weave-         WHY?

PET - post eye tiable (does not require a knot to be tied before entering harness loops)
TIB - tiable in the bight (not relevant to initial, single pitch tie-in)
PCS - panic clip safe (Spart runs cleanly and alone out the top of the nub)

-------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Bowlines:
-------------------------------------------------------------

-Double Dragon-         Bottom Twist, (acajaaaaaahhhhh!)  I need another base move descriptor.

Did I make a new knot?!  A beautiful knot?  Is it TIB?  I have no idea how to check that.  It isn't a bowline.  It is either not stable, not secure, or both.  Girth hitch strangle.  Make a girth hitch on Spart(7)or(8), wrap 3 strangle wraps around girth hitch bend.  There are 3 placements for strangle loops.  Needs investigation.  One strangle seems on par with a single bowline in stability, maybe better.  Is not secure without finding a lock to add.

Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: Keystoner on February 29, 2020, 01:38:14 PM
I personally see no practicality to this convoluted alphabetized naming/tying system. It's a solution in search of a problem.
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: KnotLikely on February 29, 2020, 04:41:14 PM
I personally see no practicality to this convoluted alphabetized naming/tying system. It's a solution in search of a problem.

Without this system or 40 pictures, how would you propose we discuss the different strengths and weaknesses of the three ways to perform the "EB" step of the EBDB upon the Z under Z nipping loops, the S under Z nipping loops and cowboy version of each.

How can we figure out if the (4) and (5) variants of the EBDB are more secure EB in the cowboy form with the lock around the returning leg side or in the original form with (gb) or (ig)?

4 days ago, I couldn't tie a bowline.  2 days ago, I had every bowline I could find a picture of translated into a pattern that could be written down.  Over 3 hours, I memorized every bowline I had seen because of being able to write down a pattern and get perfect repeats.  Now, I see a ton of variations that offer minor changes that have seemingly never been mentioned, before.

It is the little things, like (ki) or (li) to ensure that someone who has never tied your knot, before, gets the tail of the 1adb onto the correct side of the returning leg before making a novel move as with (kirVX).

Reading this and following a simple pattern of moves should allow you to recreate my tie in knot and discuss the downside of its variation, without a single picture.
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: Keystoner on February 29, 2020, 05:15:32 PM
without a single picture.

That's the goal here? Why? I suppose you'd like to eliminate video as well so the only option is yours?

Bottom Twist, (acajaaaaaahhhhh!)
You're kidding, right? Dude, you ran out of letters.  ::)
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: KnotLikely on February 29, 2020, 06:29:59 PM
Reading through the posts in this forum, I constantly see people asking for clarification of a knot, even after pictures.  I see people saying they aren't sure if they recreated the knot correctly, even after pictures.

The goal is to be able to easily reproduce Lee's Link Bowline with 1hacb instead of the 15 minutes it took me to work through the pictures and figure out exactly what was done, and to be sure that it was right, attempting to match what I see on the back side with what I saw on the front.  Saying 1hacb, there is no question of the moves necessary to tie it right, the very first time.  Having rules for beginning a bowline tie-in laid out, ensure that everyone is creating the same knot with no questions.  That is the goal.  Sometimes pictures are unclear, and I'm sure not making a video for each of 20 different variations of the EB()B with their standard and cowboy versions.
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: KnotLikely on February 29, 2020, 07:13:35 PM
Here is another goal.  Add in an explanation of Spart, ongoing eye-leg and returning eye-leg, print this out and have my wife, who has never before tied a knot, be able to make an end bound cowboy left hand water bowline.

Why?  Because I needed this when I started tying knots a few days ago.

I think this started when I realized that Lee's Link was simply performing an "end bound" move before forming the collar on a simple bowline.  That is a far easier thing to say (and unmistakable when properly defined) than attempting to divine that concept from a picture.

Someone being able to say just do an (ah) before making a standard (acb), just like you do an (h) after you do a (2acb) would have saved me a bit of a headache.

Found a mistake to fix: 1ahacb is Lee's Link, not 1hacb
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: agent_smith on March 01, 2020, 03:51:13 AM
Hello KnotLikely,

I admire your enthusiasm and we need more people trying to push the envelope out further - to expand our collective knowledge about knots.

I need to point out some things for you:

1. You should obtain a copy of Harry Asher's book; "The Alternative Knot Book".
On page 55, he introduces his 'new' system of knot tying notation.
He starts by applying the system to the #1425A Riggers bend.

2. I would point out that Dan Lehman and others from the IGKT have also tried to devise a notation system for tying knots.
I don't know the link for the thread topic and I don't know what its current status is...other than to say that nobody has expanded on that system or posted any new information for quite some time. Maybe I can suggest that it died a slow death...?

3. Clifford Ashley didn't seem to have a notional concept of loop chirality... but in fairness to him, it was circa 1944 so the state-of-the-art was ahead of its time but in 2020, we have advanced our collective understanding considerably, and the need for stricter (and clearer) definitions has become apparent... For instance, Ashley illustrates all of his 'Bowlines' with Z chirality nipping loop. S chirality 'Bowlines' are simply ignored?

4. yChan has made a huge effort to catalogue an encyclopedic volume of 'end-to-end joining knots' - but, I note with interest that nobody is responding or attempting to advance his work. It seems to exist within its own 'bubble' and nobody has advanced upon it.

...

And now you are also attempting to introduce a 'new' notation system.
Is your system going to be more successful that those who went before you?

For many years, Dan Lehman has advised that "words can work" - and I have no wish to argue against his views or his vision.
There are those who argue strongly for clear photos/illustrations.

I personally sit on the photography side of the fence.

The English language is complex - and words conjure up images in the human brain - and interpretations can vary from one person to the next.

...

Some quick feedback:
Quote
A "top twist" (Z chirality)(right handed loop)(right hand thumb moving up)(loop formed on the right side of Spart) will create a loop where the Spart goes out the bottom and the working end, going into the harness, will come out the top.
Here you stumble..
Forget about the notion of a 'top twist' - its irrelevant.
There is no 'top', or 'bottom'.
A loop with Z chirality remains Z regardless of its orientation.
For example, a right hand glove is always a right hand glove no matter which way you orient it.

Quote
When multiple nipping loops are created, they will be created and named from closest to me to farthest from me.  All working ends shall begin by going through the bottom of the nipping loop, around the Spart, and returning through the nipping loop from the top (notwithstanding Lee's Link "Bowline").
This can only have meaning to you personally.
The concept of 'closest to me' and 'farthest from me' is arbitrary - but in your case, your body is the reference frame. You are attempting to provide a reference frame - from which your notation is meaningful.

In Lees link Bowline, the 'collar' performs a U turn at the crossing point of the loop (and note that loop could in fact be S or Z chirality - both being equally valid).
In a simple #1010 Bowline, the collar performs a U turn around the SPart (standing part).
In both cases, the collar actually goes around the SPart...a condition of all 'Bowlines'.
Note that in 'anti-Bowlines', the collar performs a U turn around the ongoing eye leg.

All 'anti-Bowlines' have a nipping loop - which can be S or Z chirality.
And all 'Bowlines' (virtual or primary) have a nipping loop. The nipping loop is a fundamental component of all 'Bowlines'.
I believe that most 'Bowlines' will have an 'anti' version - although I have not tested this theory (so its just a theory).
I can confirm that there is an 'anti' version of the following 'Bowlines'... #1010, EBSB, Yosemite Bowline, #1074, Scotts locked Bowline, and #1080.

I devised the term 'virtual Bowline' in attempt to describe those eye knots which fulfill all of the requirement for the title of 'Bowline' but, fall short on a structural technicality.
Primary 'Bowlines' all have a single or double helical nipping loop that it 'TIB' and loaded at both ends.
'Bowlines' based on a #206 Crossing hitch or a #559 Marlinspike hitch are 'virtual Bowlines' - because their nipping structure isn't based on a helical loop.
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: KnotLikely on March 01, 2020, 05:41:48 AM
<Snip>
In Lees link Bowline, the 'collar' performs a U turn at the crossing point of the loop (and note that loop could in fact be S or Z chirality - both being equally valid).
In a simple #1010 Bowline, the collar performs a U turn around the SPart (standing part).
In both cases, the collar actually goes around the SPart...a condition of all 'Bowlines'.
<Snip>

That's what I'm looking for!  Editing, now, to address some of these issues.  Thanks!

Do non-helical nipping loops inherently prevent a knot from being TIB or is that dependent upon the rest of the knot?  (note, I am only currently concerned with finding the merits and failings of possible harness tie-in knots, hence all references being able to be me.  It is the only relevant reference.)

I read, I believe you or Dan, telling someone that recently the naming of the Spart has been limited to only belong to parts of the line that are fully loaded (Spart and first nipping loop. (and possibly the (ag) loop in Lee's link?)

I would argue that, as we already have the name "nipping loop" or "primary nipping loop," if there are two, extending the name Spart to include that already named structure would serve no purpose but to offer more confusion.  Keeping them separated allows no confusion about what a turn around the Spart is referring to.

"All working ends shall **begin** by going through the bottom of the nipping loop, around the Spart,"

It was the first bowline that I had come across that did not begin in the manner that I had described.

This writing began as a way for me to remember the hundreds of knots that I was tying, but also as a step by step process laid out, as I taught it to myself (5 days ago).  I originally intended this to begin with 1. a clear label of all things common to every bowline, 2. instructions on how to consistently make them (of which Lee's Link was the first to violate, hence the notation, there), 3. a definition of all loops, all moves and then all functional knots.  I have begun paring it down to not include anything but the knot notation and required concepts, already.  Back to the editing, I go.
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: KnotLikely on March 01, 2020, 06:44:34 AM
Will someone PLEASE tell me how to revert the  8) to proper ( 8 )s?

Fixed a few mistakes.  Edited out some nonsense and descriptions for non tyers.  Some perspective must exist unless you can figure out language that somehow excludes it.  The knot forms in front of me.  "The ongoing leg" or (V) are used in place of "left" as much as possible.

agent_smith, what do you think of the EBGHB+Y?  I'm fairly sure it is impossible to seize that knot through loading.  Is it TIB?  (I can hold the tail tight to the Spart and attempt to untie it to figure that out, correct?)



-----A system of documenting all functional bowlines-----

This is also my attempt to find the perfect tie-in knot.

All of my discussion of bowlines will begin with Spart in the left hand with the working end threaded from bottom to top through both loops of a standard climbing harness and the working end laying to the right of the Spart.  When multiple nipping loops are created, they will be created and named beginning from the harness and working away down the Spart.



-----------------------------------------------------------------
1. Nipping Loops:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

The variations that I have found, so far, starting from the beginning of tying the knot (working end fed through harness) are:

(1)-Simple bowline - Z
(2)-Double bowline - Z, Z placed under
(3)-Water bowline - Z, Z placed on top (clove hitch)
(4)-"Locking" Spart - Z, S placed under
(5)-"Locking" Ongoing - S, Z placed under
(6)-(Water bowline left handed?) - S, S placed under
(7)-Girth hitch bowline 1 - Z, S (S is folded up) (switchback outside curve faces away) (primary nipping loop is on top)
(8)-Girth hitch bowline 2 - S, Z (Z is folded down) (switchback outside curve faces away) (primary nipping loop is on bottom)
(9)-unnamed - double Z, Z placed on top. (adds a girth hitch like switchback)
(10)-unnamed bight 1 - Z, draw bight through from Spart
(11)-Girth hitch bowline 3 - Z, S (Z is folded up) (switchback outside curve faces you) (primary nipping loop is on bottom)
(12)-Girth hitch bowline 4 - S, Z (S is folded down) (switchback outside curve faces you) (primary nipping loop is on top)

All other variations of nipping loops (that I have found) devolve into topologically similar knots or devolve into a failed knot.  (S, Z placed on top, tied into a regular bowline devolves into a cowboy bowline. S, alone, cannot form a bowline.)

Note: 7 and 8 may be turned in either direction, creating 11 and 12, also switching which has the primary nipping loop on the bottom.  The Mirrored Girth Hitch Bowline, for instance, turns the loops opposite of how I had turned them until I found that knot.  I was unable to recreate the knot until I understood this.  Girth hitch bowlines can have the working end fed from either the top or the bottom.  I believe this gives them an extra layer of safety as it is harder to create a failed knot.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
2. Working end individual moves:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

There are five possible zones around the outside of the knot nub.  Left side(ongoing)(V), between the eye-legs(W), right side(returning)(X), inside collar left of Spart(Y), inside collar right of Spart(Z)

(a) - Up through nipping loop
(b) - Down through nipping loop
(c) - Behind Spart from right to left
(d) - Behind Spart from left to right
(g) - Around back of ongoing eye-leg (up V)
(h) - Around front of ongoing eye-leg (down V)
(i) - Up between eye-legs (up W)
(j) - Down between eye-legs (down W)
(k) - Around back of returning eye-leg (up X)
(l) - Around front of returning eye-leg (down X)
(m) - Up through collar left of Spart (up Y)
(n) - Up through collar right of Spart (up Z)
(o) - Down through collar left of Spart (down Y)
(p) - Down through the collar right of Spart (down Z)
(q) - Follow Spart through all loops/collar
(r) - draw across front face of nub loop from V-X or X-V
(s) - up through only primary nipping loop
(t) - up through only secondary nipping loop
(u) - down through only primary nipping loop
(v) - down through only secondary nipping loop
(w) - under loop formed by move (r)
(x) - over loop formed by move (r)

(xb is equivalent to ib, but wb is not equivalent to jb.  Due to the nature of the moves, w and x are required)
(In almost all cases, h, i and l are very similar when returning immediately to the nipping loops.  They can serve the purpose of properly positioning the last run through the nipping loops.)

-----------------------------------------------------------------
3. Knots and Variations:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

All knots begin with harness feed.  All knots are PET.  I don't care about TIB for my purposes, but I would like to make note for the community and possibly my future tying endeavors.  I prefer Panic Clip Safe to the working end running with the Spart.  If these knots are your favorites, please double check my work!

-Bowline-         1acb
-Cowboy bowline-      1adb
-Lee's Link 1-         1agacb  (I have not revisited all the posted pictures of variations on LL.  I may have these names wrong.)
-Lee's Link 2-         1agadb
-EBDB-            2acbgb
-EBSB-            1acbgbkjq
-Monkey butterfly-      2adbgrlabn (optional, draw collar down and back, then (a) through bottom of nipping loops for full monkey fist effect
-Scott's Lock-         1acbibn
-Scott's Lock non-rolling-   1acbgjkibn (before the lock, go around the back of ongoing, down between legs, then around back of returning)
-Monsoon bowline-      3acbivj
-Mirrored Girth Hitch-      12acbha (girth hitch flipped bottom up, not top down, so that switchback faces you on the left side instead of facing away)
-Edward's Bowline-      (10)acbca (or it's acbda.  I have no idea.  I think it doesn't matter.  double collars is the finish.)
-DCDB-            2acb(ca on the reverse side)or(da on the reverse side) (I truly have no idea which is which.  It doesn't seem to matter once dressed.)
-EB locking spart LL      4agacblb
-EBDLL            2agacblb
-My tie-in, EBGHB-      8acbgb
-EBGHB + Y         8acbgbq

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Various late night, often delirious, notes (feel free to ignore)
-----------------------------------------------------------------

EBLSLL - Spart is bound between nipping loops.  The (lb) mirrors the (ag) link on the right side.  The (l) move forces the tail to the right side of the (ag) link, crossing in front of it.  As the tail side of the collar is crossed over the returning leg, it is bound between both ends of the link and the tail by the final (b) move, further securing the tail.  The nipping loops contain 4 rope diameters.

EBDLL - Beautifully symmetrical.  4 lines inside the nipping loops.  Not easy to untie after loading.


DCDB - Double Collar Double Bowline - (2acbca)  The collars may intertwine or not.  If collars are intertwined, Spart shall bind between them when heavily loaded.  Nipping loops may be spread at (W) to release bind.  Probably still as bindable as a fig. 8 followthrough.  If collars are not intertwined, Spart may be released by bending outside collar, feeding Spart, bending inner collar and feeding Spart.  This releases bound nipping loops.  A beautiful and simple locking finish!


EBDB variations:

-2acbgb does not lock as firmly as 2adbgb.  With 2adbgb, the tail is more firmly secured and the locking loop around the back seems to cinch the nub slightly better.

-4(acb)or(adb)gb can lock the Spart to first nipping loop fairly hard.  Need to test knot release after fall.

-5(acb)or(adb)gb releases easily as Spart to nipping loops is only bound by the final turn of the tail into the nipping loops.

! -3acbgb the tail returning between the eye loops(W) allows the binding of the tail into the nipping loops to slightly secure the two nipping loops together and aids in securing the final tail nip.  This can be modified even further by not going behind the ongoing eye-leg, and instead simply coming up the bottom front of the nub between the two eye-legs before performing (ib) instead of (gb).  This can be secured Even further by returning the final tail to the left of itself, separating it from both eye-legs.

-3adbgb has the first nipping loop on the top instead of the bottom and does not secure tail as well.  Tail coming from the far side of the knot for the final bind does not aid the second nipping loop in binding the tail.  Nipping loops separate.

-6acbgb is bombproof, especially after a fall.  It binds as hard as a figure 8 followthrough.  Spart to first nipping loop is fully secured by the pinching of the two nipping loops and is stable in that position.

-6adbgb as with 3adb, the tail ending outside the eye-legs(X) prevents the locking together of the nipping loops when (g) is made.  Unlike 3adb, the first nipping loop is on the bottom so this helps prevent binding while allowing the tail to remain secure.

-7acbgb cinches the switchback of the clove hitch very nicely.  Except for 7acbgb, (7)and(8)(acb)and(adb)ib feel more secure than (7)and(8)(acb)and(adb)gb variants.  All eight break apart cleanly due to the clove hitch and being able to be released at both collar and nipping loop.

-It should also be noted that from (adb), there are two ways for the tail to achieve (gb).  It can run in front of or behind the returning eye-leg (as it goes through the nipping loops to form the collar).  For separation from the returning eye-leg and the tail, having the tail perform (ib) from (k) seems to be preferable in most knots (sometimes more compact).

-In the (gb) locking method, the final feed of the tail through the nipping loops can separate the tail from the returning leg using another line running through the nipping loops.  This topology can not transform into any other within the nipping loop.  If a cinch knot is going to be employed, this method ensures that even if the knot goes totally loose, the returning leg and the tail are unable to feed through together past the abutted dividing line.  The most secure End Bound Water Bowline is (3acb) with an (ib) finish.  The final wrap of the tail, proceeding over the front face of the nub and continuing down the front of the two nipping loops binds the two nipping loops together at the point where they are usually able to diverge.  The tail is able to come out the left side of itself, separating the final tail piece from both the ongoing eye-leg and the returning eye-leg.  The tail can be cinched with a half fisherman to either eye-leg, preventing the knot from unraveling at all, even when fully loosened.  This probably doesn't matter as I believe the knot is both stable and secure, already, in any final (ib) and possibly (gb) form through the nipping loops.

-(8adbib) with the tail separated from the returning eye-leg seems to be an incredible structure.  The collar remains easily broken after heavy loading.  The switchback of the girth hitch remains easily broken after heavy loading, unlike the (gb) lock which works to bind it.  The tail lock lightly binds the ongoing eye-leg, preventing loosening of the knot.  A cinch knot can be added to either eye-leg and is locked in place, with no movement allowed, by a contacting separating line.  It binds the nipping loops together slightly better than (8adbgb) but sacrifices some of the binding of the ongoing eye-leg, allowing the secondary nipping loop to loosen more than (8adbgb), but also allowing easier disassembly after multiple falls.

-I believe Harry Butlers Yosemite Bowline to be unstable.  I'm attempting to find or recreate the picture that I took after cyclical loading and light shaking. (I think it was HBYB. Can't be positive, yet.  4am problems.)

-There are 4 possible zones inside the nipping loop, with two modifiers.  The working end, passing through the nipping loop may relate to other lines by in front, behind, left, right, over, under.  These definitions will need some work and vary slightly depending on the lines running through the nipping loop, but all stable and secure knots (for climbing purposes) should be able to work well in any position.  A knot that requires passing through the nipping loop at a specific position to be stable or secure is not suited to situations where lives are at risk.  Nipping loop feed placements will be ignored for now.  Lee's link suffers from this problem.


PET - post eye tiable (does not require a knot to be tied before entering harness loops)
TIB - tiable in the bight (not relevant to initial, single pitch tie-in)
PCS - panic clip safe (Spart runs cleanly and alone out the top of the nub)
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: agent_smith on March 02, 2020, 01:55:07 AM
KnotLikely,

Again - your enthusiasm and motivation is appreciated.
However, in my view, this notation system and the whole concept you are attempting to evolve is not going to work.

I have tried to point out that your notation system may only have meaning and relevance within your own reference frame. I'm not entirely sure if you understand what a 'reference frame' is?

Your notional concept of 'up', 'down', 'left' and 'right' is fundamentally flawed.

I will post some images later when I am back in front of a desktop (PC) computer (currently using tiny laptop with tiny LCD screen).

Harry Asher also fell foul of this - he tried to introduce a notation system but again - it only has meaning within a very specific reference frame (ie its a conditional notation system).

Quick point: A 'loop' has no 'up/down' or 'left/right' aspect.
All you can say is that a loop is S or Z chirality.
You can rotate it, you can flip it over, but its chirality does not change.

When tying a simple #1010 Bowline (Z chirality):
You can hold the rope in your left hand or your right hand. You can flip it one way or the other. You can rotate it in any number of degrees...

If you really want to develop a valid notation system, I suggest that you begin with a #1010 Bowline (Z) and try to write your notation so it is valid in any reference frame. In other words, the notation system should be valid regardless of which hand I hold the rope in and regardless of which way I rotate or flip it.
Also, a #1010 Bowline can be tied with S chirality - and it is equally valid.
Note that Ashley only appears to consider 'Bowlines' with Z chirality...S chirality Bowlines are either rare or non-existent in his famous book (not withstanding the Spanish Bowline).

...

I also strongly disagree with your comment that Harry Butlers Yosemite Bowline is not secure/stable.
It belongs to a class of eye knots which are inherently secure and suitable for life critical applications.

I would also reiterate that Scott's locked Bowline is brilliantly simple - and its is inherently secure.
I am jealous of Scott in that I wish I had discovered it.
To this day, I still don't know what flash of brilliance or inspiration led him to make such a discovery!
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: SS369 on March 02, 2020, 06:40:48 PM

I would also reiterate that Scott's locked Bowline is brilliantly simple - and its is inherently secure.
I am jealous of Scott in that I wish I had discovered it.
To this day, I still don't know what flash of brilliance or inspiration led him to make such a discovery!

Thanks Mark.

Please don't be jealous, I believe you would have come up with it too. You've just been too busy with what you do.

The "flash of inspiration/brilliance", lol, came to me as I was relaxing after a hard work day as I lay on the floor to give my back some relief.
I took my BlueWater 2 six foot sample that I like to tie my thoughts on and was contemplating the one main failing of the #1010 bowline - ring load failure. The thread on locking the bowline simply was on my mind.

I figured if I placed the tail through the nipping ring it would inhibit the failure movement and it did. <<<For Knotlikely """-Scott's weave-         WHY?"""
But, I did not like the tail sticking out as it did. So, I continued to rove it upward through the collar to get it out of that position. (I do like tying decorative knots too.  ;)  )

For me, it has proven to be a winner in every regard. Simple to tie, easy enough to inspect personally and for others once familiar, easy to untie and in climbing rope, as secure as I could want. Must be because it is my tie in loop and I have tested it every way this lay-climber can.

Heck, it even stays tied in aircraft cable.
Others may feel more complexity is needed or desired. That is theirs to decide.

To me, part of the Zen of climbing is the anticipation, preparations, the setting up, the knotwork, the actual climbing/abseiling back down and packing out.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Good day All.

Tying from visual offerings works best for me personally. To learn a way of notating first, memorizing, recalling and then tying is fairly complicated and won't serve me in the field very well.
Seeing a well photographed, exploded knot usually will do the trick. A few photos of the tying sequence can be helpful.
Words can work, but it has to translate well for anyone.

SS
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: KnotLikely on March 02, 2020, 10:24:35 PM
agent_smith:

Yes, I understand what a reference frame is.  ???  Shall I simply replace the language "up" with "as directly as possible away from both eye loop legs, on the Spart side of the collar"?  Why do we need to be increasingly verbose when every person tying into a harness will be just as satisfied with themselves as the reference frame as with no reference frame?  Given that the language to understand the tying of the knot becomes so convoluted, I would argue that most people would prefer "up."

I could go ahead and make those changes to the individual moves, but the more precisely I define them, the more long winded it will become.  Will anyone bother to even read through the whole thing if it quadruples in size?  In its current state, I'm guessing that you, having both the list of nipping loops and the list of individual moves visible on your screen, would easily be able to tie an 8acbgb and get it correct, the first time, without pictures.  Have you tried?  And on that note, what do you think of my current tie in?

I would also like to point out that your brain is able to make sense of knot pictures only because you set your own frame of reference every time you describe to yourself what you are seeing.  "Wait, did the working end go in front of that line or behind it?"  "make sure the collar returns through the nipping loop to the left side of lee's link."

-----

Yes, of course the entire knot can be mirrored to S chirality and the ongoing eye-leg will switch sides.  We can reverse every left/right aspect of what I have written and it will be identical to what you see in the mirror.  This is what was nice about having the "right thumb moving up, top twist" language.  A left handed person is able to perform the identical moves, substituting only the instructions "right" and "left" with each other to tie-in with the same knot.  I am not doubling all non-reference-frame language to describe the mirror of every single knot.  That is unnecessary.  If you can tie an 8adbgb, you can tie its mirror.

-----

As for Harry Buttler's, shake the knot until the collar and Spart tail wrap switch places.  (I had to recreate this manually to figure out what had happened when I shook and banged it.)  After that switch, the wrap around the returning eye-leg is able to switch places with its counterpart, as well.  The resulting knot is not secure.  Loose eye legs enable these movements (belay slack and a dyno, for instance).  It shares topology with this non-secure setup, (1acpjnz), that, before completing the collar, goes down through the right side of the collar (p), loops around the returning leg and goes through the eye loop from the front (j), goes back up through the right side of the collar (n) and finally returns through the nipping loop and the loop around the returning eye-leg (z).

I could take some pictures, but you could also switch the places of two loops that are able to switch without crossing, and switch two more loops that are able to switch without crossing.  It shares topology with a knot that is not safe for harness tie-in.

-----

As for Scott's lock, it is the beautiful thing that started this little obsession of mine with bowlines.  At least in the two dynamic climbing rope chunks that I am tying with, the knot tends to loosen up, mostly, I believe, due to the tail making the turn around the single strand of the nipping loop and its general proclivity to stay fairly loose.  Vigorous shaking of the fully dressed and previously loaded knot allows at least a few inches of the tail to pull back through.  An inch is too much to make me feel safe for the next 20 years.  (edit, just took a small and somewhat safe whipper on it at the gym with it dressed barely snug, not tight.  It lost less than a quarter inch of tail and It took a hefty beating to get some slack back in the nub.  I think I'd still tie a cinch knot backup.)

I chose my current tie in knot because, once dressed, at least in my two ropes and all the ropes at my gym, it allows absolutely no tail movement when I try pushing, pulling, beating and shaking it.  I also get nowhere attempting to load only the eye, though I haven't created a hydraulic setup, yet. (I got the car jack, today, that I believe will work.)  The collar and the girth hitch switchback also ensure that the knot will never seize so hard that two quick snaps of those loops won't instantly release it.


SS369:

Quote
I figured if I placed the tail through the nipping ring it would inhibit the failure movement and it did. <<<For Knotlikely """-Scott's weave-         WHY?"""
But, I did not like the tail sticking out as it did. So, I continued to rove it upward through the collar to get it out of that position. (I do like tying decorative knots too.  ;)  ))
For me, it has proven to be a winner in every regard. Simple to tie, easy enough to inspect personally and for others once familiar, easy to untie and in climbing rope, as secure as I could want. Must be because it is my tie in loop and I have tested it every way this lay-climber can.
Heck, it even stays tied in aircraft cable.
Others may feel more complexity is needed or desired. That is theirs to decide.

I saw the picture of Scott's Weave (it feels strange referring to it as such when I'm talking to Scott!) as a stand alone modified collar.  Do you use Scott's Weave as a finish to Scott's Lock, or alone?  Do you tie a cinch knot to the returning eye leg?  If you routinely tie in with exclusively Scott's Weave, then you are a braver (or crazier) man than I.

Before I made my Girth Hitch Locked Bowline, I had considered (Scott's Lock finished with Scott's Weave) and (Scott's Weave finished with Scott's Lock and an Spart trace) and (Scott's Weave finished with the EBDB lock finish (as my tie-in has)).  All 3 of those seem incredibly stable, especially compared to a simple Scott's Lock or Scott's Weave.

My inability to tie the weave, or finish Scott's lock at the eye-legs, quickly and without looking may have been the determining factor in choosing the Girth Hitch Locked Bowline.
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: SS369 on March 02, 2020, 10:57:27 PM
Good day Knotlikely.

I feel strange talking to a screen name, but that's ok.

My comment on your quote/comment to you was in partial error. When you wrote in post 1, "Scott's weave - Why?" I mistakenly thought you were referring to my simple lock for the bowline offering and were asking Why (bother)?

No, I don't use the composite eye knot that includes the woven collar. I feel it is unnecessary for my tie in and it was just an exploration to see if it indeed reduce the strain on the breaking location of a bowline. I looked pretty good although it didn't prove out.

I use the "Scott's simple lock for the Bowline" as I have offered it, as is.
I just snug it up very firmly, (Leave it be Dan) as I would most any knot. I have never been able to shake it loose. I even dragged it behind my truck to see if it would loosen (most violent slack shaking I could think of).  Intact.
And certainly have never lost any tail length nor sleep worrying about it.

I weigh 175 lbs., have taken substantial falls tied in with it, have used it to haul loads, e.i. lift trusses (much heavier than me) to the tops of buildings while the knot invariably rubbed the walls on the way up, pulled trucks out of mud, lowered large tree branches and many other uses. Never a hint of failure.

I am not selling it and whomever uses it, or any knot, especially in life critical situations, should feel supremely confident in their choice(s).
Mark Gommers, who is a respected rope using professional in his field, has at least some confidence in it. It is from professionals that I take notes from. Their livelihoods and sometimes their lives depend on their knowledge. Then I test it for myself and decide where or if it fits.

That said, I'm very glad that you've embark on this journey and that I have played a tiny role in lighting the fuse. ;-))

I'm done being off topic now...

Scott
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: KnotLikely on March 02, 2020, 11:46:56 PM
 :D
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: Dan_Lehman on March 03, 2020, 12:34:27 AM
-----will someone please tell me how to escape the  8) back into ( 8 )s, please?-----
There is supposedly something one can  switch OFF,
but I don't recall what and IMO it seemed giving up
capability for too little.  So, I've used a '.' to thwart
the getting-a-facial out of using '8' sometimes.

Quote
I'm personally interested only in climbing harness tie-in relevant bowlines,
at this time.  Part of this is my fascination with the knot.  Part of this is me having
realized how little information I could find on the practically infinite structures and
variations and finishes that are possible.  Part of this is that I'm sick of tying
figure 8 follow throughs and even more sick of attempting to untie them after any fall.

One way to have your 8 and eat it too,
is the Lehman8 --to wit:
(see Reply #9 at https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3133.0 (https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3133.0)
I designed this eye knot expressly to have whatever the
magic was that made the fig.8 so strong AND the ease
of untying (via a collar) of the bowline --sorta succeeded.
Here's one informal report:
Quote
I loaded both the Zeppelin Loop and the Lehman8 to slightly greater than 50% MBS
 (~100kg in my stiff 3mm braid).
 Both knots did not noticeable slip and were easily untied after this high load.
> Spart

Rather, that's 'SPart' or even 'S.Part' !   ;)
--my hybrid merging of terms where I think
that strictly speaking, by definition & use,
"standing part" is ontologically limited to
the tying phase, and not necessarily
what becomes the fully loaded part of a knot
(i.p., where in using a reasonably short length
one can tie something *backwards* more
effectively than the *usual* way).
And I wanted it to mean that part that DOES
get the heavy load (of end-2-end joints & hitches,
of the 1-vs-2parts part of eye knots).


Quote
in the left hand with the working end coming toward me.
Spart shall be threaded from bottom to top through both loops
of a standard climbing harness and the working end will begin
all knots to the right side of the Spart.  My right hand will twist
to create the nipping loops in the Spart.  A "top twist" (Z chirality)
(right handed loop)(right hand thumb moving up)(loop formed on
the right side of Spart) will create a loop where the Spart goes
out the bottom and the working end, going into the harness,
will come out the top.  A "bottom twist" (right hand thumb moving down)
will create a loop where the Spart goes away from me on the
bottom side of the loop.  When multiple nipping loops
are created, they will be created and named from closest to me
to farthest from me.  All working ends shall begin by going through
the bottom of the nipping loop, around the Spart, and returning through
the nipping loop from the top (notwithstanding Lee's Link "Bowline").
[reddened stmnt referred to below]

I'm afraid you've lost me with the above.
A common reference to loops can be a compass
rose or a clock (or degreed circle with 0/360 at
the top/N/12:00), though you seem to imply that
your eye will fall in a vertical plane perpendicular
to you (so to have lower/upper eye legs per the
harness tie-in points which are vertically arrayed).

IMO, all bowlines ("BWLs") should be presented
such that the SPart crosses on TOP --in a plane
perpendicular to viewing-- of the nipping loop
that it forms; historically, it has been just the
opposite --and opposite to this for the similar
sheet bend(!!)--, and this IMO contributes much
to confusion in understanding this knot.
(Agent_Smith's BWL paper calls my favored view
"the detail view", and uses it too seldom, but at
least puts it out there vs. parroting fully the
historical nonsense.)

As for "chirality" --an expensive substitute for "handedness"
 ;D --, IIRC Agent_Smith's reading of this disagrees with my
own.  (E.g., looking at an eye-going-up image on a page,
and the SPart going around anti-clockwise and crossing
OVER ..., I call that a right-handed loop.  But do note
that while at this *start* of the loop it's going indeed
as a Z helix, unlike that it comes around behind/below
itself, and of course a helix would continue turning up
and away!?)


Quote
For discussion of the nipping loops after initial creation, in cases where multiple nipping loops were created, the first nipping loop shall be the loop that cinches first (closest to running Spart).  **This may be the reverse of the order given in the creation of the nipping loops.**  The specific knot being discussed should already be defined.  Calling the loop that grabs first and the hardest the "first" just seems to make sense to me, as does creating them closest to me first and moving away.

Your red statements immediately & farther above IMO
contradict each other.  I side with this latter one, in the
spirit of its being what first gets the 100% force into it.
Though do note that a BWL can be "cast" in with a tail
to the SPart after some other tying occurs (and then
one might reeve the tail through this other knot for
security).

--dl*
====
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: Dan_Lehman on March 03, 2020, 12:42:09 AM
I'm slowly yielding to a sort of *strategic* plan for
life-critical-secure eye knots where one adopts one
or both of these general plans:
1) the tail has a complex finish --nothing simple,
irrespective of the clamping/gripping prowess
of the SPart's part.
(E.g., my favored locktight is designed to deliver
strangle-like tight-secure binding to an eye knot
(but enable easy untying), and the returning eye leg
does but a simple --non-"complex"-- in-collar-out
finish as for the BWL.
Whereas Scott's lock and others have the tail
make a meandering back'n'forth.)

2) there is a 2nd eye formed, after the first returning
eye leg has some *involvement* (maybe simple) in
the knot.  (DAV e.g. recommends using the BoaBight.)
Should the knot start to come untied, there would be
this last-formed eye-leg material flapping about to
warn the user!  (Similarly if one tied off the tail with
a strangle knot.)

It's a sort of guard against the "who knows how ..."
threat of mysterious loosening, in which a simply
made tail might >whoooosh< out of a knot on a fall?!


--dl*
====
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: agent_smith on March 03, 2020, 06:24:15 AM
Although this now drifting off-topic...
See attached image for explanation of chirality.
Also see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helix

The word chirality is derived from the Greek χειρ (kheir), "hand," a familiar chiral object.

...

With regard to the notation system as proposed by the original poster...
I have seen several attempts to come up with knot notation systems and all have either crashed and burned or died a slow death.
I think Harry Asher was possibly the first to try this... refer to his book: 'The Alternative Knot Book'.
All proposed systems appear to be conditional and based on a reference frame that might only have meaning to the individual who proposed it.
All notation systems rely on language - which can be problematic.

Its amazing to see the power of a clear, high quality photo :)

Be that as it may, am interested to see how this one plays out... and whether it too will die a slow death as those that went before.

EDIT NOTE:
I recommend interested readers have a look at the PACI protocols at this link:
Link: http://www.paci.com.au/guides.php (scroll down to the section titled 'Learning Support Materials')

All content is arrange in alphabetical order.
Look at 'chirality', 'Bend', and 'Knots'.

This document sort of represents my own personal doctoral thesis on all things related to activities at height.
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: KnotLikely on March 03, 2020, 06:42:44 AM
-----will someone please tell me how to escape the  8) back into ( 8 )s, please?-----
There is supposedly something one can  switch OFF,
but I don't recall what and IMO it seemed giving up
capability for too little.  So, I've used a '.' to thwart
the getting-a-facial out of using '8' sometimes.


Ugh.  The working copy of my main text (of which you are, here, referencing the first draft, 4 days after I first tied a bowline) is a text document on my computer.  Considering the formatting issues, it is best read when copied and pasted into a simple .txt document.  I'll not be keeping two separate copies.  I was hoping something like a simple / could cover it.  Meh.  Minor issue, considering what I'm working with.

Please use the last posted draft for discussion of my knot "naming" (though I try to re-order things as little as possible to prevent having to "re-name" each knot).

Quote
Quote
I'm personally interested only in climbing harness tie-in relevant bowlines,
at this time.  Part of this is my fascination with the knot.  Part of this is me having
realized how little information I could find on the practically infinite structures and
variations and finishes that are possible.  Part of this is that I'm sick of tying
figure 8 follow throughs and even more sick of attempting to untie them after any fall.
One way to have your 8 and eat it too,
is the Lehman8 --to wit:
(see Reply #9 at https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3133.0 (https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3133.0)
I designed this eye knot expressly to have whatever the
magic was that made the fig.8 so strong AND the ease
of untying (via a collar) of the bowline --sorta succeeded.
Here's one informal report:
Quote
I loaded both the Zeppelin Loop and the Lehman8 to slightly greater than 50% MBS
 (~100kg in my stiff 3mm braid).
 Both knots did not noticeable slip and were easily untied after this high load.

...and this is why I began writing this paper of mine.  I have no clue how that knot is tied from the picture!  There are 4 lines exiting the nub; (Up), (Right), (Down Left Side), (Down Right Side).  My best guess is that it is a bowline with the S.Part in the Up position, the ongoing eye-leg in the Right position, the returning eye-leg in the DLS position and the tail in the DRS position.  This makes it a double bowline with the working end, post collar, returning only through the secondary nipping loop and then performing an "end bound" behind the ongoing leg with the tail following the returning eye-leg toward the harness.   This would be 2acvjmz (and also 2acvjmb as they are identical from that position).  Does the other side of that knot show the return of the collar through the nipping loops exiting after the secondary nipping loop and forming a Z loop around the ongoing eye-leg before returning through both nipping loops?

My 2acvjmz appears identical to yours from the one picture that I have, but seems to be lacking the tail security that is offered by the EBDB's (2acbgb) returning of the collar through both nipping loops.  Also, if I have the knot correct, the return of your tail binding returns through the collar, as well, before entering the nipping loops.

Quote
> Spart

Rather, that's 'SPart' or even 'S.Part' !   ;)
--my hybrid merging of terms where I think
that strictly speaking, by definition & use,
"standing part" is ontologically limited to
the tying phase, and not necessarily
what becomes the fully loaded part of a knot
(i.p., where in using a reasonably short length
one can tie something *backwards* more
effectively than the *usual* way).
And I wanted it to mean that part that DOES
get the heavy load (of end-2-end joints & hitches,
of the 1-vs-2parts part of eye knots).

I refer to the S.Part as the belayer's line up to the point where it is forced to curve as it becomes the primary nipping loop.  As far as I can tell, this is the definition.


Quote
Quote
in the left hand with the working end coming toward me.
Spart shall be threaded from bottom to top through both loops
of a standard climbing harness and the working end will begin
all knots to the right side of the Spart.  My right hand will twist
to create the nipping loops in the Spart.  A "top twist" (Z chirality)
(right handed loop)(right hand thumb moving up)(loop formed on
the right side of Spart) will create a loop where the Spart goes
out the bottom and the working end, going into the harness,
will come out the top.  A "bottom twist" (right hand thumb moving down)
will create a loop where the Spart goes away from me on the
bottom side of the loop.  When multiple nipping loops
are created, they will be created and named from closest to me
to farthest from me.  All working ends shall begin by going through
the bottom of the nipping loop, around the Spart, and returning through
the nipping loop from the top (notwithstanding Lee's Link "Bowline").

Quote
[reddened stmnt referred to below]

Quote
I'm afraid you've lost me with the above.
A common reference to loops can be a compass
rose or a clock (or degreed circle with 0/360 at
the top/N/12:00), though you seem to imply that
your eye will fall in a vertical plane perpendicular
to you (so to have lower/upper eye legs per the
harness tie-in points which are vertically arrayed).

If I have a rope starting at me and moving away and I form a Z loop in it that lays to the right of the rope, the S.Part will exit the loop from the bottom side at 9 o'clock.   The portion of rope that comes to me will "exit that loop" from the top side at 9 o'clock and head toward me.

Quote
IMO, all bowlines ("BWLs") should be presented
such that the SPart crosses on TOP --in a plane
perpendicular to viewing-- of the nipping loop
that it forms; historically, it has been just the
opposite --and opposite to this for the similar
sheet bend(!!)--, and this IMO contributes much
to confusion in understanding this knot.
(Agent_Smith's BWL paper calls my favored view
"the detail view", and uses it too seldom, but at
least puts it out there vs. parroting fully the
historical nonsense.)

I agree.  This is half of the form that all my knots are viewed from.  The other half is that the eye should be at the bottom as this is the reference point of a climber tying in to their harness.  While using their right hand to form the initial Z loop in the S.Part, the Spart travels in front/on top of the collar.  The one photo of your Lehman8 appears to be flipped over both vertically and horizontally, to me.

Quote
As for "chirality" --an expensive substitute for "handedness"
 ;D --, IIRC Agent_Smith's reading of this disagrees with my
own.  (E.g., looking at an eye-going-up image on a page,
and the SPart going around anti-clockwise and crossing
OVER ..., I call that a right-handed loop.  But do note
that while at this *start* of the loop it's going indeed
as a Z helix, unlike that it comes around behind/below
itself, and of course a helix would continue turning up
and away!?)

Yes.  Right handed and Z chirality are the same thing.


Quote
Quote
For discussion of the nipping loops after initial creation, in cases where multiple nipping loops were created, the first nipping loop shall be the loop that cinches first (closest to running Spart).  **This may be the reverse of the order given in the creation of the nipping loops.**  The specific knot being discussed should already be defined.  Calling the loop that grabs first and the hardest the "first" just seems to make sense to me, as does creating them closest to me first and moving away.

Quote
Your red statements immediately & farther above IMO
contradict each other.  I side with this latter one, in the
spirit of its being what first gets the 100% force into it.
Though do note that a BWL can be "cast" in with a tail
to the SPart after some other tying occurs (and then
one might reeve the tail through this other knot for
security).

--dl*
====

They do contradict each other, as previously noted in green.  I have left "first nipping loop" as the one created closest to my harness and "second nipping loop" as the one created next, moving further from me on the S.Part.  I have already changed the references to "the nipping loop that engages first" to "primary nipping loop" and removed that paragraph to avoid confusion.
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: Dan_Lehman on March 03, 2020, 11:19:26 PM
Although this now drifting off-topic...
See attached image for explanation of chirality.
Also see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helix

... which misses the point to be made : that the turNip
(central nipping loop) of your traditional BWL is NOT a
simple "helix" --it begins as such but then turns back
upon itself (which would be a helix with negative angle!).
And this has the practical effect on esp. laid cordage.
What you show on your PACI BWL doc. p.8, e.g.,
is a LEFT-handed BWL per common rope-assessing
& knot-assessing procedures : the SPart going away
from the viewer (into the nipping turn) bends leftwards;
but then it bends so much as to deny a helical continuation
that way, coming back under itself.  (And is maybe one more
thing better presented by showing the BWL from the front
and not the so-wrongheaded-&-parroted traditional view!)  >:(
That is the issue with the "loop" of a BWL.

Quote
It's amazing to see the power of a clear, high quality photo :)
Or so I thought, 'til the OP looked at mine of the Lehman8
and saw novel things in it other than I intended --but, ah,
such seeing is one more way to find *new* knots (a good
one, too)!!

--dl*
====
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: Dan_Lehman on March 03, 2020, 11:47:16 PM
One way to have your 8 and eat it too,
is the Lehman8 --to wit:
(see Reply #9 at https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3133.0 (https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3133.0)
I designed this eye knot expressly to have whatever the
magic was that made the fig.8 so strong AND the ease
of untying (via a collar) of the bowline --sorta succeeded.
Here's one informal report:
Quote
I loaded both the Zeppelin Loop and the Lehman8 to slightly greater than 50% MBS
 (~100kg in my stiff 3mm braid).
 Both knots did not noticeable slip and were easily untied after this high load.

...and this is why I began writing this paper of mine.
I have no clue how that knot is tied from the picture!
There are 4 lines exiting the nub [:]
 (Up), (Right), (Down Left Side), (Down Right Side).
My best guess is that it is a bowline with the S.Part in the Up position,
the ongoing eye-leg in the Right position,
the returning eye-leg in the DLS position
and the tail in the DRS position.
This makes it a double bowline with the working end,
post collar, returning only through the secondary nipping loop
and then performing an "end bound" behind the ongoing leg
with the tail following the returning eye-leg toward the harness.
Well, the image is defensibly ambiguous, though
that's quite a swing for the outgoing eye leg(!).
But the context was of using a fig.8 base which
is amply clear in the adjacent knot's orange rope.

So, Up is SPart, Right is tail, DLS is outgoing eye leg,
and then I --basing judgement on one assertion of
stronger version of F8 being with *exterior* strand
loaded (and inferring that this resulted from its bearing
into the twin/interior strand and off-loading force over
a fair distance gradually)--
sought to put in such a part for the SPart to bear into,
and that you see means that the DRS is the returning
eye leg reaching in to turn towards viewer adjacent
to the (and so supporting the) SPart,
then wrapping around (and making an overhand
in more of a stopper orientation) the eye legs for a
squeeze and out (into Right field).  (Set by tightening
this overhand so to give good slack-security AND
to have a solid lump for that SPart to bear against.

But, again, doing some imagining of other ways that
knotted tangle might be connected ... can sometimes
yield a nice surprise!  (E.g., I discovered a nice mid-line
BWL this way : cut off returning eye leg to leave now
a new tail and connect to old tail.)


> Spart

Quote
I refer to the S.Part as the belayer's line up to the point
where it is forced to curve as it becomes the primary nipping loop.
 As far as I can tell, this is the definition.
Hmmm, I'd say you've gone indefinitely long,
in that my "SPart" is of the knot, not of the
great wide world beyond, and indeed of the
knot
and not of things YET TO BE & BECOMING
a knot(!) --more the traditional sense.
And I've mused about a regard of SPart to be
up to the point where force is so low that it
could  be damaged w/o much consequence
--but isn't that a problematic criterion!



--dl*
====
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: Dan_Lehman on March 04, 2020, 12:08:35 AM
IMO, all bowlines ("BWLs") should be presented
such that the SPart crosses on TOP --in a plane
perpendicular to viewing-- of the nipping loop
that it forms; historically, it has been just the
opposite --and opposite to this for the similar
sheet bend(!!)--, and this IMO contributes much
to confusion in understanding this knot.
(Agent_Smith's BWL paper calls my favored view
"the detail view", and uses it too seldom, but at
least puts it out there vs. parroting fully the
historical nonsense.)

I agree.  This is half of the form that all my knots are viewed from.
The other half is that the eye should be at the bottom
as this is the reference point of a climber tying in to their harness.
While using their right hand to form the initial Z loop in the S.Part,
the Spart travels in front/on top of the collar.
The one photo of your Lehman8 appears to be flipped over
both vertically and horizontally, to me.
In making a BWL in tying in, the right-handed climber
working as you describe re tail in right hand
should reach out UNDER the SPart from the right
and back OVER it from left (in a fluid motion)
and down & up-rightwards to cast into the SPart
a right-handed loop (which Agent_Smith would
call "lefthanded/S", but see other post's response
to that --that we don't have here a real helix but
a loop, where from either end into it the line only
begins to helically curve but continues in a sort
of *negative* angle.  (I want my right-handed
knots to match at the point of initial turning my
like-handed rope!)).
AND so --contrary to the trad. way of making this
casting-in operation going the opposite direction--,
the SPart will rest upon the now-revealed
outgoing eye leg (and no 3rd hand is needed!).


My photo'd Lehman8 makes a left-handed turn
of the SPart into the 8, and has the initial/main
crossing of SPart at its U-turning reach going
OVER (nevermind the less significant passage
through the collar.  Ditto for the BWL, as noted.
Just as the sheet bend is primarily presented!
(There is a little variance here, but only little.)

((Ha!!  Here's quite some variance --looks to be
my locktight but it comes merely as adornment
sans explanation, and all else of the page/site
is pure basic BWL.
https://gravitec.com/fall-protection-rescue-knots/bowline-2/ (https://gravitec.com/fall-protection-rescue-knots/bowline-2/)
))

Quote
Yes.  Right handed and Z chirality are the same thing.
That I've got; it's the bit about assessing the
quality --by whatever name-- that's the issue.


--dl*
====
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: KnotLikely on March 07, 2020, 06:21:57 AM
My climbing tie-in.  End Bound Girth Hitch Bowline.  8acbgb.

https://imgur.com/a/7xF8w1q

This knot must be released by snapping the collar, drawing in some standing line and then snapping the switchback.  It cannot bind like a figure 8 follow through.

You can mess this knot up in almost every way possible and it stays secure.

Make the girth hitch wrong and it simply forms into one of the other 3 ways to position a girth hitch
-sz, switchback faces away is my preferred, and pictured
-sz, switchback faces me places the primary nipping loop closest to the S.Part and allows the ongoing eye-leg to slightly separate the nipping loops.  The EB move helps to stabilize them.  A link before the collar does even better.
-zs, switchback faces away also has the S.Part, primary nipping loop on top.  Needs the End Bound to help stabilize
-zs, switchback faces me produces a stable knot

If you insert the working end into the nipping loops from the wrong side, you have just switched the way the switchback faces and the order of the nipping loops.

Even if you absolutely fail to properly make a collar, and instead make a loop around the nipping loops, the switchback forms a collar, of sorts, and you have done a sort of double end bound.  This failed collar results in the "link" from Lee's Link Bowline followed by the "end bound" from the EBDB (these are basically the same thing).  Even with no collar, both of the resulting knots appear to be stable and secure as long as one of these loops incorporates the ongoing eye-leg.

The security of the knot does not seem to be affected by line positions through the nipping loops.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that it seems impossible to tie my EBGHB wrongly enough to kill myself.  Can anyone produce an insecure variation from this nipping loop form?
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: SS369 on March 08, 2020, 06:45:11 PM
Hi Knotlikely.

Sticking to the original post I have this to add.

One of the most comprehensive websites on knotting is Peter Suber's  "Knots of the Web. > http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/knotlink.htm (http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/knotlink.htm)  It is no longer updated since 2004...

That offered, here is an additional link (on topic) to his page on knot notation. > http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/knotting/notate.htm (http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/knotting/notate.htm)

This subject has been iterated numerous times with most "I'd like/need pictures" comments.

Thank you for your work.

SS

Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: KnotLikely on March 10, 2020, 01:11:30 AM
Oh, my god.  I saw that notation system, like... 9 years ago!  I looked and looked for hours for some notation system so I could organize and replicate and compare the bowlines that I was beginning to tie.  I didn't find it and started writing one, myself, specifically for bowline tie-ins from the climber's perspective.  I know that agent_smith mentioned that systems had been attempted, before, but he didn't provide any links.

I still prefer my system, being more concise and with a quick cheat-sheet, over something better defined, but much harder to memorize or notate a new knot with.

Thanks, again.

p.s.  Any thoughts on the tie-in I chose?  Can you find a way to make a tying mistake that makes it unsafe?

Hi Knotlikely.

Sticking to the original post I have this to add.

One of the most comprehensive websites on knotting is Peter Suber's  "Knots of the Web. > http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/knotlink.htm (http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/knotlink.htm)  It is no longer updated since 2004...

That offered, here is an additional link (on topic) to his page on knot notation. > http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/knotting/notate.htm (http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/knotting/notate.htm)

This subject has been iterated numerous times with most "I'd like/need pictures" comments.

Thank you for your work.

SS
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: SS369 on March 10, 2020, 03:55:45 AM
Knotlikely,

if you like it, feel safe with its use, then by all means enjoy.

I tied it a few times and found I had to fiddle with it to make it satisfactory, to me, and it made me think of if and when my hands are tired or cold or even gloves on how would it go. Personally, for me, I don't think the added complexity adds much if anything for my own use.

Be safe.

SS
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: tsik_lestat on March 10, 2020, 08:59:17 PM
Hi, KnotLikely and thanks for this distinctive bowline variation. I believe you are the first knotter, to my best of knowledge, who introduces an end bound finish in a girth hitch-like nipping structure and it appears that you have accomplished your design goal of developing a stable, well-secured knot for your application.

Should i add some remarks, just for clarification purposes.....

My climbing tie-in.  End Bound Girth Hitch Bowline.  8acbgb.

1) With respect to your knot depiction and provided that i have followed your tying sequence properly, it appears that you have rather formed a type of a pretzel/reversed girth hitch bowline with an end bound enhancement.

If you insert the working end into the nipping loops from the wrong side, you have just switched the way the switchback faces and the order of the nipping loops.

2) Still, if you wish to end up with a girth hitch bowline, you might insert the WE down through this particular nipping structure you show, continuing then with your additional end bound link maneuver in order to complete the knot.

3) In my view, there are eight potential variations of pretzel/girth hitch bowlines, depending on the four potential girth hitch formations (as you correctly point out), and the way of insertion of the WE up or down through the nipping loops.

Personally, for me, I don't think the added complexity adds much if anything for my own use.

4) I would not argue about the added complexity, which i find rather reasonable, but i would draw attention to the powerfull constriction of a pretzel nipping structure and how this type of nip in conjuction with the end bound link would feed back negatively, into the jam resistance of the knot.

5) I am not into notation/coding systems a lot, but i admire your will to create order out of knotting chaos :). Having said that,  although i am a supporter of the consensus that an image equals to thousand words, i believe your notation system might work and reward us with new offerings.

Can anyone produce an insecure variation from this nipping loop form?

I would not know anything about insecure variations, but i would certainly like to contribute with some  decent knot structures, presented in the following links, for comparison and further study/evaluation, closely related to your creation.

https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4306.msg26837#msg26837 (https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4306.msg26837#msg26837)

https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3994.msg23760#msg23760 (https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3994.msg23760#msg23760)

Would a choice of an Ampersand-like finish  be another path for the WE that leads to Tibness in both pretzel/girth hitch knot structures? ;)
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: Dan_Lehman on March 10, 2020, 10:50:31 PM
My climbing tie-in.  End Bound Girth Hitch Bowline.  8acbgb.

https://imgur.com/a/7xF8w1q

This knot must be released by snapping the collar, drawing in some standing line and then snapping the switchback.  It cannot bind like a figure 8 follow through.
Yet to play with THIS version, in some prior fiddling
with what I think Agent_Smith/Xarax MIGHT deny
*bowline*ality --because the initial SPart turn comes
back on the eyeside of itself opposite to that of a
bowline-- found that it could jam at least to the
point of being a PITA to loosen.  But your falling upon
it has found it pliable enough?

At the point of your 5th image, the returning eye leg
should --per remark above-- be going through from
the opposite side (i.e., down through the girth's
nipping loops), which puts it on track to become
the mirrored bowline.

Your knot has so many strands *stuffed* into it
that it's likely to stay tied even rather loose,
which is my design for the mirrored bowline
--as opposed to the "end-bound" ones which
were expected to be set tight and hold that set
(and which in one particularly difficult cord did NOT!).
.:.  Definitely the tail is taking a *complex* finish,
not to come undone very easily!


--dl*
====
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: KnotLikely on March 11, 2020, 05:22:42 AM
Yet to play with THIS version, ... found that it could jam at least to the
point of being a PITA to loosen.  But your falling upon
it has found it pliable enough?

Absolutely.  As soon as I bend back the collar, the Spart is able to be pulled through.  As soon as I bend back the switchback (only possible once the Spart is quite loose through the collar), even the tiny bit possible when it is held in place by a misplaced tail of the EB through the nipping loops, the primary nipping loop releases enough to allow the ongoing eye leg, the tail and the secondary nipping loop to practically fall apart.  I haven't tried pulling a stump with a tractor, yet, or anything, but I've taken 4 good whippers in a row and it has released as easily as when I'm sitting in front of my computer beating the knot into my head by tying it, again and again.  I've needed a carabiner to release a figure 8 follow-through after a single whipper.

Hi, KnotLikely and thanks for this distinctive bowline variation. I believe you are the first knotter, to my best of knowledge, who introduces an end bound finish in a girth hitch-like nipping structure and it appears that you have accomplished your design goal of developing a stable, well-secured knot for your application.

:)

Quote
1) With respect to your knot depiction and provided that i have followed your tying sequence properly, it appears that you have rather formed a type of a pretzel/reversed girth hitch bowline with an end bound enhancement.

If properly ~~tied~~ (set, not tied.  Once all 4 lines have been tugged on, it dresses itself), the cross exists only directly at the switchback, never revealing any pretzel formation.  I'd be happy with End Bound Reverse Girth Hitch Bowline; EBRGHB.  My, the name is getting long.

Quote
2) Still, if you wish to end up with a girth hitch bowline

I do not.  From my limited testing, I believe that tension on both the S.Part and the ongoing eye-leg being able to separate the nipping loops leads to instability and a less secure tie-in.  When using a proper girth hitch, I would always advocate for a Lee's Link move before the collar is formed in order to attempt to combat the spreading of the nipping loops.

I'd also advocate the added complexity, if only for the beauty!  https://i.imgur.com/eF7Bzas.jpg
(proper girth hitch switchback pointed away on left side, lee's link, regular bowline, EB ...dressing and setting the EB pulls the collar off the link)

Quote
3) In my view, there are eight potential variations of pretzel/girth hitch bowlines, depending on the four potential girth hitch formations (as you correctly point out), and the way of insertion of the WE up or down through the nipping loops.

In my harness tie-in knotting system, I have chosen to ignore all mirror image knots as they are simply an upside down or mirror version of a currently described knot, not something novel.  Inserting through the nipping loops from the other side creates a mirrored version with the primary nipping loop switched.  That "same" knot can be created by simply switching the SZ to ZS and/or by switching which way the switchback is facing.

Quote
Personally, for me, I don't think the added complexity adds much if anything for my own use.

4) I would not argue about the added complexity, which i find rather reasonable, but i would draw attention to the powerful constriction of a pretzel nipping structure and how would this type of nip in conjunction with the end bound link might feed back negatively, into the jam resistance of the knot.

If you are saying that the reverse girth hitch may increase the jamming of the knot, I've found the reverse to be true.  The switchback keeps surprising me at how easily it allows the knot to be released while maintaining the structure when not purposefully pulled apart.  Also, the primary nipping loop binds the secondary nipping loop at the switchback, helping to hold its tension, but also allowing the second breaking step to allow an easy release.

https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4306.msg26837#msg26837 (https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4306.msg26837#msg26837)

https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3994.msg23760#msg23760 (https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3994.msg23760#msg23760)

I have had both those tabs open in Firefox since the day before I posted, along with probably 20 others. :P 

Quote
Would a choice of an Ampersand-like finish  be another path for the WE that leads to Tibness in both pretzel/girth hitch knot structures? ;)

Never mind, I found it.
~~I know that one of those 20 tabs has a reference to the Ampersand finish buried on page 15 or 16.  Care to share a link with me, here, so I don't have to go searching for an hour?~~

A "half ampersand" finish that only incorporates the secondary nipping loop is stable and is TIB.  A "full ampersand" finish that incorporates both nipping loops is not TIB and the knot sets itself in such a way that the secondary nipping loop never engages.  It locks itself into a loose position and the knot is much harder to undo after loading.

If the ampersand finish didn't require such precise weaving to be tied correctly (I'll never be able to repeat that 100 times, perfectly, with my eyes closed) I might consider it as a possible (bonus TIB) replacement for my EBRGHB.

As I weave the tail through different places, I find myself coming to the conclusion that as long as the tail returns through some part of the nipping loops (and often even just the switchback) of a reverse girth hitch and it doesn't undo a previous line through the nipping loops, it is likely stable.  A half ampersand from both the front and the back of the ongoing eye-leg gives a stable knot.  A version of the ampersand from the returning eye-leg side, running through the switchback, or not running through the switchback are also secure.  The half-ampersand around the returning eye-leg is also TIB.  Most of these also work with the cowboy bowline (left hand bowline) as well.

If the knot doesn't fall apart in my hands when I dress and set it, it seems to produce a secure knot as long as I perform any sort of finish with the tail.  Very few moves seem to not work in conjunction with the RGHB to secure the tail.  Basically, just don't reverse my last move.
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: Dan_Lehman on March 12, 2020, 01:12:08 AM
Yet to play with THIS version, ... found that it could jam at least to the
point of being a PITA to loosen.  But your falling upon
it has found it pliable enough?

Absolutely.
Yes, quite.  I must've been thinking of versions
using a similarly *cross*-loaded  clove h. start.

Quote
Personally, for me, I don't think the added complexity adds much if anything for my own use.
I'm afraid I come down on this being overly *involved*
for what is otherwise available for less complexity;
and I still like variations of the mirrored bwl for their
loose-but-no-looser aspects,
BUT for which I'd love to see tests of low-to-moderate
(well, one relevant to actual usage) repeated falls upon
so to assess any chafing issues (of the non-jamming,
loose-knot-remaining, knot, which must be so as a result
of significant rope movement/tightening in each fall).


--dl*
====
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: tsik_lestat on March 12, 2020, 01:45:45 AM
Quote
Care to share a link with me, here, so I don't have to go searching for an hour?~~

There is no other link with such a reference allied with your previous creation that i could point you to, except for my own implementation of a pseudo ampersand pretzel bowline structure, shown in the attached images.

The nipping structure slightly diverges from yours and demands a Z loop lying on top of an S loop this time, with a down through insertion of the working end for a pretzel bowline structure formation.

I guess, i could hold the Ampersand (&) tucking at the Fontus level, but beyond tibness, i need this three strand squeezing effect to take place and firmly clamp the tail. It appears to be a stable and secure variation, but still in experimental phase.
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: agent_smith on April 26, 2020, 12:01:33 PM
per KnotLikely:
Quote
Scott's Lock just scared the crap out of me.  I was playing around with snags on the wall and I caught the collar (try sticking your thumb through the returning leg side).  My knot was suddenly 3 feet away from me and out of reach, with a hoop of eye legs big enough to crawl through.

I'm calling this bogus (sorry - but I'm being honest).

In order for this anomaly to even stand a snow balls chance in hell - there would have to be a carefully choreographed sequence of events - to the extent that it is deliberately induced.

I'm going to make an absolute declaration that Scotts locked Bowline is 100% fit for purpose and inherently secure.
Note: This is when using EN892 conforming rope.

EDIT NOTE: Ropes or cordage other than EN892 might have unpredictable loading characteristics...eg dyneema, fishing line or random local hardware el cheapo cord.
But, in EN892 rope - Scotts locked bowline is certainly fit for purpose.
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: agent_smith on April 27, 2020, 01:45:43 AM
Quote
I'm surprised that this comes as a surprise to you.
I'm not surprised even in the slightest...because your test results are yielding a false positive which itself is conditional upon unrealistic parameters.

This is all going off-topic.... so I created a new topic thread.
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: KnotLikely on May 19, 2020, 03:23:38 AM
1accbjnb
https://imgur.com/a/eVf4T2o

Does this have a name, yet?  I'd call it the wrapped collar lock, maybe?

I'm really liking it in the double bowline, 2accbjnb.  It looks very easy to partner check, as well as all the usual, circumferential load, stable, secure without a backup knot.

Have the collar make an extra turn around the S-Part.  Working end goes back up through that loop from the back side and comes back down through the nipping loops.

Six hard bends, back and forth, of the two nipping loops and the two collars, seems to work it loose after heavy loading.

--------------------

I experimented with having the wrap of the collar run under itself, instead of over.  It tightens both wraps of the collar with one less tug of the working end, but it also loosens a lot easier.

--------------------

...experimenting with the girth hitch forms of nipping loops, as always, and with collaring the eye-legs...

When forming the nipping loops as done in the mirrored bowline, 12acbha, Girth hitch, closest loop loaded first (so they tend to pull apart), and with the switchback facing you, and making this lock in left hand (cowboy) form bowline, you form 12addbjnb.  The primary nipping loop circles 4 lines, one of the 4 being itself before it forms the switchback of the girth hitch.  This is the first knot that I have found where the switchback is absolutely unloaded.  Judging by the tension on the knot parts, the primary turn of the collar seems to be absorbing some of this force upon loading, via the returning eye-leg (of course!).  The cowboy girth hitch version of this lock pinches the nipping loop between [itself] and the [returning eye-leg to primary collar], preventing loading of what should be the break point bend of a girth hitch bowline.  This knot stays in place well, but releases easily.

The cowboy (left hand) version of this knot locks the ongoing eye-leg extremely hard in both single and double versions of a bowline.  The girth hitch adds nothing to this outside tail bowline knot.  The switchback of a girth hitch gets in the way of the lock if pointed away.  If pointed toward you, it adds unneeded complexity and does absorb some of the force while bending around one rope width.

Collaring the ongoing eye-leg (accidentally?) instead of the S-Part results in a stable and secure knot, when using either girth hitch or reverse girth hitch with the switchback pointed toward you.  This is not surprising, as circumferential loading is not an issue and this move simply switches the positions of the S-Part and the ongoing eye-leg in the knot structure.  This structure is bulky but remains very compact against the harness loops.  It adds 1.5 inches.  This is tiny, compared to a retraced 8 and most other knots, though this knot takes up much more vertical area.  The tail and the switchback form backup collars, though they remain unused as the S-Part pulls in a direct line to the harness loops.
Title: Re: Attempt to label and recreate bowline variations without pics. New knot too?
Post by: tsik_lestat on May 21, 2020, 01:19:53 AM
Hi KnotLikely

I believe i have tied the structure of the first image before, but without the lust tucking, where the WE is being fed through the nipping loop for a third time, shown in the second instance of your snapshot series.

Frankly, i would not be amenable to trading off the tibness (first photo), with a third rope diameter into the nip (second photo), but that is a subjective concept, that falls under my fancy for TIB knots.

The collar segment of your structure, after its first insertion up through the nip, follows this scheme.... first wrap around SP, then collar and back down through the nip, and finally back through the two wraps, parallel to SP.

It might also function properly with a variation like this...... first collar then wrap around SP, tracking down afterwards the rest of WE's maneuvers, mentioned previously.

Both, distinctive cases, as retucked TIB 1010 bowline variants, where their collar components, rather take the form of a hitch, in contrast with a U bight structure, braced to SP, an exclusive characteristic found in conventional bowlines.

Nice offering, but it needs testing to confirm its jam resistance, due to its complexity in the collar structure level, let alone if you switch the simple helical nipping loop, with a more intricate form, like girth hitch, or pretzel, or even double coil.