Double Yosemite Bowline

[turks head 54]

Greetings All from the Arctic Circle,
              I have either rediscovered this knot or discovered it. It is called the Double Yosemite
Bowline. It is essentially a double bowline with a Yosemite finish. I find it very easy to untie.
For how to tie it may be found here
http://www.geocities.com/testube44/TheKnotTyerofBannerCreek.html
under the link The Double Yosemite Bowline
This document has been removed from my webpage

I wish to know
How strong this knot is.
I lack to proper equipment to test it

TH54

[Dan_Lehman]

Greetings All from the Arctic Circle,

Wow, good show!  --and here's to hoping it returns to being arctic (and not warmingly other).

  I have either rediscovered this knot or discovered it.

At your age you shouldn't be suffering such confusion!  Or, if you mean "first of any mind",
then try http://www.mytreelessons.com/user/DBY%20Layout%20smaller.gif
to remove that doubt.  But such a knot is pretty well knowable by formula, by a simple
combination of known components (e.g., one can Yosemite all sorts of bowlines
--whoopee).
Here's a better(-looking) knot:  take that end the opposite way (to wrap...) from the
Yosemite direction, around both legs of the eye, and tuck it back down through
the center of the knot (through those "double" turns of the SPart).  That puts a third
diameter in the central crush zone, enlarging the curve of the SPart, and seems to
me thus to have a better rationale for bumping strengths in various materials.

It is called the Double Yosemite Bowline.

Nomenclature rules would prefer to re-order that to YDB--Ying the DB.

I wish to know  How strong this knot is.

Still asking this question as though strength is a characteristic of a knot schema?
Hasn't that notion been battered enough to generate a better thinking, by now, here?!
Crain Connally is big on the YoBowl as being strong, but I simply don't see how/why,
and haven't seen data to help support this contention.  And, usually, test data comes
with such scant explanation of testing & knot geometry as to leave one guessing.

--dl*
====

[turks head 54]

Wow, good show!  --and here's to hoping it returns to being arctic (and not warmingly other).

I have to agree with you there. It is 80 degrees Fahrenheit and we have lots of mosquitoes.
I was eaten alive be mosquitoes while cleaning outside. And while running across a homemade bridge
I put a monster splinter in my foot. Yes, I go barefoot outside when it is warm.
 
I should have known better than to think that it was new. Something as simple as this knot.
As for knot strength I should have been more specific. I suppose I could assume that this knot
is easy to tie and that it is stronger and more secure than the ordinary Yosemite Bowline. I could
also assume that it would lower the strength of the rope to 75% of it's old strength and that
it wouldn't really be very secure is stiff slippery line. But assumptions are less safe than hard facts
and data, so I think I'll continue to use tried and trusted knots for my climbing activites (Even
though untying a tightened Figure of Eight is a nightmare.)

TH54

[Dan_Lehman]

As for knot strength I should have been more specific. I suppose I could assume that this knot
is easy to tie and that it is stronger and more secure than the ordinary Yosemite Bowline. I could
also assume that it would lower the strength of the rope to 75% of it's old strength...

Among all the things one might guess, why these?  Where'd that "75%" come from?

But assumptions are less safe than hard facts and data, so I think I'll continue to use
tried and trusted knots for my climbing activites (Even though untying a tightened Figure of
Eight is a nightmare.)

More non sequiturs.  Where do you have hard facts & data, for anything?
As for "tried & trusted", how does the Bwl not fit in there?

I pointed you to a nice Bwl extension above, which I suggest you excercise your hands
with vs. the keyboard; it makes more sense than the YoBowl.  --as do some other Bwl
variants that have been presented on this forum more than once.  Why are you not using
them?!

--dl*
====

[turks head 54]

         I got the 75% from Geofrey Budworth's book
The Ultimate Encyclopedia of Knots and Ropework
"Double Bowline
With the reinforced nip, this knot is stronger (70 to 75 per cent) and more
secure than the common bowline."

       For me I  prefer something other than the ordinary bowline for my
climbing activites because climbing rope is thick and some types are slightly
springy. I guess what makes me veer away from the bowline is so many times
I've tied a bowline in slightly springy cord only to have it untie(Fortunately no
lives were on the line that untied)

Th54.

       

[Dan_Lehman]

         I got the 75% from Geofrey Budworth's book
The Ultimate Encyclopedia of Knots and Ropework
"Double Bowline
With the reinforced nip, this knot is stronger (70 to 75 per cent) and more
secure than the common bowline."

And you BELIEVED it?!  Have you not been paying attention to this forum?
(You could've gotten from a Maria Costantino book her pseudo plaigirism from
the above which comes out as "... is 70% stronger than the bowline" !!
--mathematically impossible, but also in print, with the other nonsense.

For me I  prefer something other than the ordinary bowline for my
climbing activites because climbing rope is thick and some types are slightly
springy. I guess what makes me veer away from the bowline is so many times
I've tied a bowline in slightly springy cord only to have it untie

Bingo!  But why haven't you gone to the Bwl extensions presented here, which
do a much better job of securing than the YoBowl--the End-Bound Dbl. Bwl,
e.g., is quite secure for climbing ropes; or the Lehman8, or Locktight (II) loop.
Or, again, what I verbally sketched above (something akin to that Janus Bwl
promoted by Wright&Magowan & later Prohaska).  Or ... .  (The Water Bwl as
Budworth has cast it (with a Clove H. base rather than those HHitch turns being
spaced apart), esp. with an extra end wrap and tuck back up through the Clove
(adding a 3rd diameter there).)