Author Topic: Janus Bowline or an equivalent secure bowline for climbing/rescue purposes  (Read 121425 times)

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3719
Re: Janus Bowline or an equivalent secure bowline for climbing/rescue purposes
« Reply #135 on: November 13, 2009, 07:09:41 AM »
...  Nor have the mid-line dropper eyes been formed as you show, but rather with a bight wrapping several times and being tucked once,
  resembling a ends-on-same-side Blood knot w/ends fused.

   I have tied hundreds of trolling lines exactly with this method, thousands of traces on them...and they have been used on millions by fishermen all over the world.

So, the snood attachments that you have made have been just like
what you've presented:  the not-like-a-dropper-loop bight re-tucking
sucks in an inserted end to make the end wrap multiple times, while
the main line transforms to a simple loop?!

I have seen the Blood-knot-like dropper EYE knots, most recently ones
with twisted eyes.  These eyes are what are attached to by the snood
or whatever.

Quote
And one knot that can be tied with a 10 mm rope with the help of the quick bowline method, might be more difficult, or indeed impossible, to tie with a 12.5 mm rope...So this knot is NOT "a lousy knot" or "an oddball bowline", or one should not judge it so after a superficial view as a lousy knot if he does not try it repeatedly on specific materials, situations, instances, sizes, etc, as we must do with all knots. Of course, anybody can judge anything as he likes, as words cost so little...

"Oddball" comes pretty objectively:  just look around and see what
is out there for comparison -- or take a vote, the democratic way:
All those who've seen such a knot please raise you hand!    ::)

And I think I can judge well enough the "lousy"ness of it from the
play I've made with it in a few ropes.  -- especially the kernmantle ones
of this thread.

Quote
About what one can find on the literature, I think that most of the instruments and practices
of professional jobs are not adequately described in books, and that is true for all jobs, useful on not so useful.

Hmmm, perhaps.  I noted previously that I've not seen what I call
the "Reverse Groundline Hitch" in literature.  But then I've not found
literature for commercial fishing.  Where application areas have their
own "knots" books, things I think can be better (mind you, publishers
can so characterize books that really don't live up to the promise),
as, e.g., one will often have anglers or climbers writing about, respectively,
angling or climbing knots.  (One can however loose a good broad
view of knotting, in this case.)

Quote
An experienced professional climber would lough to tears if one that has learned climbing from books was to teach him climbing lessons. The same is true for fishermen, for sailors, and many other activities that their instruments and practices  are not exsustively, or even adequately, documented in books.

And yet there are books written by those w/skill & knowledge, and there are
practitioners who have voids in the same.  Some combination is best.  But
I'm always annoyed when I see climbers on the Net advising questioners
to seek personal guidance vs. Net advice, as one can find so many personal
guides not all so good (as is often enough reported on the Net), and some
of those making Net advice are exactly such guides!  With the Net, one at
least can get a batch of advice, sometimes with critique & commentary on
each other.

Quote
It would be interesting if, trying to discover "knots in the Wild " we could do a systematic search into the wildness of old books and illustrated dictionaries of the past. May be there we can find techniques and tools that are now forgotten. The study of History of Knots has a bright future !

Here I think you've lost the trail:  as we can know at least that there
are some terrible mistakes in old books (copied from other books and
still copied to this day) -- a bad mark on the authorship, so what can
be trusted?  So, how to search history for the old uses?  -- some combination
of cataloguing what is in texts, being amply skeptical and critical of it, and
examination as much as possible of what historical items w/knotting have
been preserved, and matching them against literature.
But, at least, nevermind history, get out TODAY and document,
not making the mistakes of omission of the past.  Again, my lament at
IGKTers gathered at supposed knot-using sites but looking inside and
in museums but not at the knotting on-going at the docks.

(E.g.:  Even Ashley goes awry, with his supposed shown-by-Ohrvall
heaving-line bend #1463; but O. didn't say this, though what he DID
write was in Swedish, not Ashley's language (though it was Svennson's,
yet he too claimed it as a messenger-line bend!?); and Ohrvall himself,
trying to present a musical-string hitch to an eye, had a botched image
(one bad crossing).  -- a lot of history in literature to be ignored, alas.)

And thanks in advance for the knot-tying video; that should be much help.

--dl*
====
« Last Edit: May 28, 2011, 11:44:54 PM by Dan_Lehman »

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3719
Re: Janus Bowline or an equivalent secure bowline for climbing/rescue purposes
« Reply #136 on: November 15, 2009, 07:51:52 AM »
Those photos win for artistry, but lose on clarity -- as to what strands
are loaded, which the end.  As in the eye-knot case it is just one strand
that is unloaded, it's easiest to point out that one (well, for the dropper
case it is one strand that is assuredly unloaded, no matter).

What is the cordage we're seeing here -- looks like a kernmantle but I'll
guess it's marine double braid, then, and supple/flexible.  The sharp turns
around one diameter are where the typical kernmantle ropes will have
problems (some of the Janus bowlines have such but not with much
need for tightness/closeness in the turn).

I have found the setting of these Xarax bowlines to be awkward -- that
it takes some deliberate manipulation to form the bowlinesque knot
vs. something where the would-be nipping central loop is shaped quite
wide & narrow --oval-- with the end wraps within.

--dl*
====

ps:  My conception of "bowline" is somewhat three-layered:
most generally, it is all eye knots that have a central nipping "loop"
that feeds into the eye (as one leg); then it is the half of this big
set that has the end entering the loop from the same side that
the S.Part's flow into it lies on (as in the commong bowline),
and the subset with entry from the other side (other direction)
is of "anti-bowlines"; and then in particular it's what we commonly
call "a bowline" (either of two main ones).  I figured if folks are
going to go about counting "bowlines" then we should define
what that is and do so better than simply saying "whatever knot
has 'bowline' in its name".

But at times the central, essential loop will deform into
something else --a spiral, or as we can see here, a crossing
knot
-- , and I see that as changing the game, but as pointing
to a really fuzzy boundary, though I think a reasonable boundary.

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3719
Re: Janus Bowline or an equivalent secure bowline for climbing/rescue purposes
« Reply #137 on: November 15, 2009, 09:12:19 PM »
What is the cordage we're seeing here -- looks like a kernmantle but I'll guess it's marine double braid, then, and supple/flexible.
  Wrong guess. Read my words  :),

Oh, actually read the answer !!   ::)  Well, looks like my looks-like
guessing is better than my reading.
It looks like esp. the white-ish rope shows the stiffness resistance
to snugness.  And I think that the more roundish turning of this
version will see more opening than 1-diameter turns:  in that if
the rounded turns surround just 2 diameters --which make a poor
approximation of a round object to bind-- they will not so
well lock; but in some orientations the 1-diameter turns make for
a like-scissors-legs working where the rope wants to spring apart
rather than expand a circle, and just the presence of some wrap's
restraint of this then serves to keep the knot as tightly set as
it was.  -- at least, this seems to be a difference exposed when I
tried the End-Bound Dbl. Bowline (EBDB) in some slick soft-laid
3mm? polypropylene:  even set firmly (in anger that it had dared
to loosen initially, ah, the nerve of it!) , after a brief holding the
end's wrap and the double-turn of the loop just relaxed all at
once.  In contrast, a Janus was not so snug-tight on setting,
but this springy material with the sharper 1-dia. turns wanted
to open like scissor legs and simply couldn't, so pretty much
stayed in loose-but-workable state, not further loosening.
-- all of this pretty informal & limited in scope, but still IMO
worth considering.

Here's another variation, described in reference to your orange
rope's version:  after the end enters the loop and then turns
around the opposite eye leg, and re-enters the loop, have it
cross OVER itself, and then go up to make a Bowline-like
collar turn around the S.Part, and exit through the center
of the nipping loop (and between its two passes there --the
exit is center of everything, thus).  This looks pretty good,
and the revised crossing of itself I think gives better S.Part
curvature on loading, and a bit of give/spring, the re-entry
& final exit parts padding the S.Part from the end-side eye
leg (which will be firmer, having half the tension in it).
 
Quote
My conception of "bowline" is somewhat three-layered:
...
 then it is the half of this big set that has the end entering the loop from the same side [ Xarax's emphasis ]

The end entering into the loop from the same side as in the common bowline,
is simply and plainly too restrictive a requirement ! As a bowline I think we have to
count any end-of-line loop, where we have one or more nipping loops, that encircle the rope strands, bight(s) or single strands, that go through it(them). What we must not characterize as bowlines, are end-of-line-loops that have overhand or double eight knots tied on them before the bights and the single rope strands pass through the nipping loop(s).
   As of what exactly shape the nipping loop can have, I think that its function, and not its actual shape, ( more two dimensional, circular, or more three dimensional,  spiral ) that offers to the bowline its "king of knots" status. If we have ore or more loops that, as they are more and more tensioned by the loading of the knot itself, are obstacles in the natural effort of the tail to escape from the knot, then we have bowline nipping loops.

Hmmm, I think that you've missed my point of "3-layered":  that I use
"bowline" in different ways (for want of better terms, at the moment).
I.p., I do use "b." less restrictively --that is the first layer-- , by which
"anti-bowline" in a sense is implying the 2nd-layer "b.", but could be
paired with a "pro-bowline" term (say) as the subsets to "bowline"
set.

But consider what I see as essential:  the nipping loop that feeds
into the eye -- that thus nips by active force in both directions
(unlike e.g. a Sheet bend where this corresponding loop is held at
one end, loaded from the other).  When the bowline variants such
as the Eskimo (and one Ashley calls "Carrick") pull the S.Part-side
eye leg back around the loop and transform the essential "loop"
into a Crossing-knot form, you have significantly (IMO) now at
turn over the S.Part intervening to the path to the eye leg,
and enough of a changed mechanics to warrant it being considered
NOT in the "bowline" set.  Mind, though, that between the paradigms
in this conception are the half-way situations, which beg to mess
up the distinction -- a sort of thing I try to avoid in some other
conceptions (i.e., where I choose to regard pure apparent
structure over observed behavior).

--dl*
====

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3719
Re: Janus Bowline or an equivalent secure bowline for climbing/rescue purposes
« Reply #138 on: November 16, 2009, 09:13:54 PM »
Here's another variation...
 

Thank you very much.  I myself have already tried many similar versions,
but I have too say that I find the main advantage, I dare to say the only advantage,
of those oddbowlines is their quick tying method. Without it, I would simply
prefer a Janus bowline, or a double eight loop [ prefer:  "Fig.8 eye knot" ] !

Except that I find the supposed quick-tying method to be anything
but quick:  I will post two photos of one of the above knots tied in
11mm dynamic rope, which will show a form that comes from capsizing
the with-end-just-poked-through-bight state, and then a 2nd form got
only by some manual dressing and significant manipulation of the
capsized state -- not very quickly.  And even with this much work,
the result, in this rope, is unsatisfying.  Moreover, I don't find this
Xarax capsized-complex-SlipKnot method to be so good in figuring
out placement of the knot and consumption of the end; perhaps
that comes with much practice, but it seems to me that one must
have a fairly substantial length of end poked through in order to
ensure that end remains after the capsizing (I had one capsizing
that went *pooph* and the end was out -- must load only the
other eye leg vs. S.Part!).

For the most part, quick tying is not a critical aspect in the
intended applications -- not super quick, as though having just
grounded a resisting half-tonnage of livestock keen to get upright,
say.  The tying will often come with deliberate, attentive effort,
even to be checked by a partner (though one can debate the
efficacy/need of this safety step -- sure would've helped Lynn
Hill when she neglected to tie anything (intended to tie
a bowline, she wrote).  In some SAR group use, I could see
that the tyer might work with ample end and put on a Strangle
back-up, 2 B sure -- all done pretty quickly, and expected to
endure who-knows-what sort of knock-about abuse in use.

And, for the "sport climber", who might be "working a problem"
and so tying in anticipation of taking repeated short falls, which
will jam a Fig.8 eye knot somewhat, the Mirrored Bowlines might
add to the security some resilience for keeping the knot unjammed,
un-hard-set into a position (or easily relaxed by hand); to this,
though, we will want to check effects of chafing where the unjammed
parts move against others!


--dl*
====

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3719
Re: Janus Bowline or an equivalent secure bowline for climbing/rescue purposes
« Reply #139 on: November 21, 2009, 01:15:18 AM »
Except that I find the supposed quick-tying method to be anything
but quick:  I will post two photos of one of the above knots tied in
11mm dynamic rope, which will show a form that comes from capsizing
the with-end-just-poked-through-bight state, and then a 2nd form got
only by some manual dressing and significant manipulation of the
capsized state -- not very quickly.  And even with this much work,
the result, in this rope, is unsatisfying. 
...
--dl*
====

Here are the promised photos.

In the first, I show the result I get when attempting Xarax's quick-tie,
poke-in-tail-and-capsize method -- the capsizing results in an incomplete
(i.e., not transformed enough) result.
Then, the second photo shows the knot after manual dressing into the
desired form -- it shows how resistant the firm rope is to holding closed
the 2-diameter turns.

--dl*
====

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3719
Re: Janus Bowline or an equivalent secure bowline for climbing/rescue purposes
« Reply #140 on: November 21, 2009, 07:37:32 PM »
  Now, from your nice pictures I understand that you are a competent photographer too,
 that your famous "worn" 11mm rope is a fine rope, ...

Sometimes competent:  had I considered it, for this 24mm(equivalent) macro
shot I'd have set f-stop at at least 4.0; it is wide open, 2.0!  -- where usually
at macro distance one can see limited Depth-of-Field focus from this small-lens!?
-- yet this is so sharp throughout!?  funny ...

Quote
but also that you tied the two wrong knots, the knots I only mentioned once in passing,
 and not the knots I am talking about and I have shown in my posts.

And this is plain as day ('cept to you?!) wrong; take some care in reply!  The tied
knot is EXACTLY one of your poke-end-through-Xarax'd-double-slipped structure
results, as I stated.  It is from (orange rope) post #154, 2nd image, Eskimo
not "Myrtle".  AND, geeesh, you can see this plainly in my 2nd, dressed
knot-image in regard to what you then post in reply (esp. in close-up, 2nd pic)!!
Your wife is quite right about your "losing it", but maybe "it" can be merely glasses?!
Please, no more photos:  L :o K at the extant ones again (& again, if need be)!

--dl*
====
ps:  I was hoping to stay a while with 888 posts but nOnElse had corrected this
error, so, alas, ... .


Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3719
Re: Janus Bowline or an equivalent secure bowline for climbing/rescue purposes
« Reply #141 on: November 23, 2009, 06:02:09 PM »
  Thank you very much, Inkanyezi, DerekSmith, roo, Dan Lehman,

   I am a firm believer in the "less is more" and the KISS principles, and... so I took the liberty to delete all the confusing-rather-than-clarifying material, except from the bare essential and relevant to the original question.

Wow, I look and there are two fewer pages all of a sudden!  -- and my reference
to post #154 suddenly looks prescient rather than descriptive.  Not to mention
the change to redness.

None of which though changes the fact that the knot I posted above (and will
not delete) is exactly as stated (barring now absent referent), and at this point
matches the knot just posted as being the desirable one of the four versions.
I do hope that others see this.  In my old 11mm, the knot did not capsize
into form, and manually dressed still resists turns around 2 diameters; Xarax's
rope behaves better, but doesn't sway my opinion that the knot is much less
desirable than others.

(And Alpineer is still missing from all this recent discussion!)

--dl*
====

alpineer

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 480
Re: Janus Bowline or an equivalent secure bowline for climbing/rescue purposes
« Reply #142 on: November 24, 2009, 08:46:55 AM »
 
[/quote]
(And Alpineer is still missing from all this recent discussion!)

--dl*
====
[/quote]

Hey Dan,

Computer problems(again), and car poblems(again), at the same time(AGAIN), have caused me some STILL ongoing distraction. I've been quietly "watching and listening" though and do hope to post very soon. And I've prepared myself by re-reading this thread from it's inception more or less entirely, eyes/brain having suffered an occasional glazing over in the process. Till then :)  
« Last Edit: November 24, 2009, 09:54:07 AM by alpineer »

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3719
Re: Janus Bowline or an equivalent secure bowline for climbing/rescue purposes
« Reply #143 on: November 25, 2009, 05:00:29 AM »
And I've prepared myself by re-reading this thread from it's inception more or less entirely  

More-or-less entirety is all we have, now.
Read quickly & take notes -- now you see it, now you don't !

 :D


alpineer

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 480
Re: Janus Bowline or an equivalent secure bowline for climbing/rescue purposes
« Reply #144 on: December 09, 2009, 04:56:40 PM »

However, if you want a Bwl. that is secure and STRONG, then I am working on a structure that will make your eyes water.  Now, I am not saying it will be through laughter or crying in horror, but the brute should definitely get a response from you.

Derek

Hey Derek,
Any updates, please and thank you. :)
So Derek, where is this brute. I think we've been waiting long enough. Or have I missed it.  My apologies if so, and could you point me to it.
Thanx,
alpineer

alpineer

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 480
Re: Janus Bowline or an equivalent secure bowline for climbing/rescue purposes
« Reply #145 on: December 19, 2009, 06:13:22 PM »
Such a long(and exiting) thread! Two specific interests brought me to the IGKT; new "user friendly" methods( I have 8 or more) for tying the Alpine Butterfly Eyeknot in all it's torqued variations, and, apropos to this thread, a safe and secure alternative (to the Rethreaded Figure Eight) tie-in knot that does not involve pre-tying the rope before reeving it through a harness.

Exiting as this thread has been, it's showing signs of stagnation waiting for agent smith to publish any testing results re security.
I would like to offer up one more candidate for inclusion in agent smith's Bowlines article. But first, I must voice my appreciation for the determined and protracted effort agent smith has made in the creation of his article. I can only imagine the distractions which conspired to keep him from this task.
For the EBSB variant in Frames 28 & 29, it should be the EBCB(End Bound Cowboy Bowline), which combines the Half Hitch(nipping loop) with a Figure 8 (AFTER the rope is reeved through the harness). I've also called it the "Cowboy 8".
The EBCB's end binding AND nipping loop contain 3 rope diameters.


 
   
« Last Edit: July 08, 2011, 08:05:27 AM by alpineer »

alpineer

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 480
Re: Janus Bowline or an equivalent secure bowline for climbing/rescue purposes
« Reply #146 on: December 20, 2009, 09:21:18 PM »
In my preceding post, photos #1 & #2 show the knot drawn up and opposing views. Photos #3 & #4 show the knot opened up for easier viewing of overs/unders.

alpineer
« Last Edit: December 21, 2009, 06:50:54 AM by alpineer »

Transminator

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 144
Eskimo Bowline simply is a name for a knot; we can leave the discussion of anthropology somewhere else. No matter who ties it, it is an eskimo bowline, which evidently may be tied in four different ways, The Tugboat Bowline, Flying Bowline or Angler's Loop ABoK #1017, also is just a name for a knot, which tells those that knows it by such a name which knot we're talking about. Whether it was ever used on a tugboat or by an angler is irrelevant. In verbal communication, it helps to have common ground in nomenclature.

I'm sorry to say that from there, I lost you completely, I don't have the slightest idea of what constitutes a dropper loop, and I cannot decipher the meaning of "form a loop and twist it around the overlap" once or twice or in what sense.

That's why pictures often are so helpful. Ashley designed his great book around pictures, as they indeed sometimes say more than a thousand words. Words without pictures often cannot be reliably interpreted. So much verbosity, so little information conveyed.

It should also (firsthand)  be considered, that all these variations violate an important prerequisite; namely ease of remembering and tying correctly without risk of erroneously introducing a fatal error. It's the KISS principle that we must adhere to. If we are to teach a knot to which we will trust lives, our own and other's, then it is important not only that the intended knot is secure, but also that we indeed tie the correct one and do not mistie it, forming some other contraption that may not be secure.  

What we are looking for is not a smorgosbord of knots that may be formed out of a simple start, but one simple knot that may be securely tied every time, and that will serve the purpose under demanding conditions, including flogging, ring loading and extreme load. The Janus Bowline http://i3.tinypic.com/wjwh1t.jpg may be an answer to this, and my preferred knot would be the Wave Loop, which is built upon the Carrick Bend pattern http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=434.msg3568#msg3568. Testing should be undertaken with both of those. It should also be considered that mistying the Wave Loop is possible, making the first turn in the standing part (as in the bowline) instead of in the leg of the eye, making another form of the Carrick, a different knot, which also has to be tested. Possibly both will be secure and strong. If so, one may consider teaching this second way, as its resemblance with the start of the bowline will make it easier to memorize. This latter variation might also be drawn up by ring-loading, making another different knot which will also have to be tested in the same way. This last one is probably the easiest to tie in a consistent way.

Did nobody notice the obvious differences in Dan's version of the Janus bowline, which Inkanyezi then repeated and the versions out there in the web?

See the pictures below.
DL's version does not match the one in the PDF file and the picture posted in the caving forum that was copied from a magazine. The one from the PDF and the one from the magazin are identical and therefore I think this is the correct version as intended by Heinz Prohaska.
http://postimage.org/image/7fe1q48g4/



knot4u

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1076
As if that wasn't enough, the wild and crazy guy Dan also has a Cowboy Janus Bowline.  It's for when you're herding cattle in the great wide open.

http://www.paci.com.au/downloads_public/knots/02_Bowlines.pdf

See Figures 32 and 33.

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3719
Did nobody notice the obvious differences in Dan's version of the Janus bowline, which Inkanyezi then repeated and the versions out there in the web?

See the pictures below.
DL's version does not match the one in the PDF file and the picture posted in the caving forum that was copied from a magazine. The one from the PDF and the one from the magazin are identical and therefore I think this is the correct version as intended by Heinz Prohaska.
http://postimage.org/image/7fe1q48g4/

"obvious differences" to my mind stands in contrast to, e.g.,
"simple difference" --in each of quantity & quality.  Perhaps
you can explain?

Quote
DL's version does not match the one in the PDF file and the picture posted in the caving forum that was copied from a magazine. The one from the PDF and the one from the magazine are identical and therefore I think this is the correct version as intended by Heinz Prohaska.
http://postimage.org/image/7fe1q48g4/

Why do you need a match of Heinz's image to judge his intent
--isn't his own article (in Nylon Highway, ca. 1990) sufficient?!

As for "correct", we can note that "Janus" was my coinage,
which points to the knot being able to be seen as having
two identical faces ("identical" goes beyond "Janus", though)
--"same coming as going"--; it suits many versions.
Heinz's knot does not match that suggested decades earlier
by Wright & Magowan (as recently presented in post#22 of
the "Mid-Span Bends" thread); does that have any effect on "correct"?

And re "quantity", I see only a difference in the orientation of
the tail bight legs --one simple difference.

 - - - - - - - -

Quote
... also has a Cowboy Janus Bowline ...

Which finish might be done in reverse --is an extension
to the Eskimo Bowline, which also looks good.
Which means that one can *succeed* in making an eyeknot
by bringing the tail through the nipping loop from either
side, and then collaring both an eye-leg & SPart, appropriately!

--dl*
====
« Last Edit: May 28, 2011, 11:53:17 PM by Dan_Lehman »