Author Topic: NOOB - I invented... now what?  (Read 71223 times)

alpineer

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 507
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #15 on: August 25, 2009, 04:35:45 AM »
Gleipnir,

I think Dan's 'meow' is worse than his 'scratch', but, as a precaution it's still a good thing to have a thick hide!  ;D
« Last Edit: August 29, 2009, 11:59:34 AM by alpineer »

[Inkanyezi] gone

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 340
    • Pro three strand splice
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #16 on: August 25, 2009, 06:19:56 AM »
I don't think it's fruitful to quibble over trivial matters as mechanical advantage and waste of material in this thread. There's always another opinion, and I put forth the trucker's only to point out that for some applications, the new knot might not be the preferred one, due to tradition or due to the relative simplicity of the latter.

My usual method of tightening a constrictor is to pull with two marlingspikes either if they are very close to each other, with both hands, or, when impractical to pull with both hands, hammering the marlingspikes apart with quick jerks. That method works also with this knot. When tightening a constrictor very hard, until the twine breaks, it will often break outside the knot. When tying around a hard object that is not compressed, it is the elasticity of the tying material that maintains tension; there's no difference if we compare with the floating version. Therefore it is more likely to hold well if it is formed around a large bundle, as the amount of rope governs its elongation by elasticity.

The most important factor that I see for any knot is its usefulness. When a knot is complicated or difficult to make, usefulness may be hampered by its complexity, particularly if it is not often used, so it will also be difficult to remember. This knot is easily remembered, and I can see real world usage for it. From this first sighting, it is added to the rather few knots that I see as really useful, as it indeed solves a problem of binding over anything that would not hold a constrictor, clove hitch or other binding knot that relies on the convex shape of the bound object. Wherever a constrictor might be considered, but there is a gap where you want the nip, it is useful. I haven't tried it for connecting two objects at right angles yet, but I can see that there is a possibility that it might be superior to the constrictor for a cross.

And the open question of course is whether this actually is the first sighting or not.
All images and text of mine published on the IGKT site is licensed according to a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3947
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #17 on: August 25, 2009, 08:05:05 AM »
You have spent most of your time discussing the Truckers Hitch,
and applying my Floating Constrictor knot in a situation I had not even described as an application.
...
I am willing to discuss the mechanical advantage of the Truckers Hitch in the thread ...
Goodness, you began by saying you had a thick skin, but it seems like
it's something else that's "thick"!  I addressed the points of your query,
in all cases, plainly enough.

First up, I'm unaware of this structure having been published.  (But it's a big
and old world, and maybe somewhere ... -- just as somewhere, many places,
others are unaware of what we are doing here, and previously, in private.)
**I** have played with this knot and the like, a little, in recent years.

Here's another twist on the structure, tying in the bight (which, yes, will
not suit many tasks):  form a Clove Hitch but spread flat and such
that the crossing part is generally perpendicular to the ends; take one
side/loop and rotate it around 360deg back into position -- thereby
putting in this "floating" nipping loop in the crossing part, and sort
of crossing the ends 'a la Constrictor.  This structure inverts the central
loop (it points down into bound area rather than up away from it).
It's a quick method of making a similar binding structure for cases in
which the binding material can be put around some (likely known)
collection of objects -- set of stakes or paddles, e.g..

But to your motivation ...
I.p., I am well aware of the binding task you have in mind -- to wit:
"The basic problem I faced was tying together (and compressing) bundles
of sticks and branches for trash pickup."

To which my suggestion above is that a knotted structure that requires
both ends to be drawn out (and esp. at 4:1 compression) will be material
inefficient.  Did you miss this?
As for the Trucker's Hitch (which you persist in not understanding),
that actually is quite adaptable to just the circumstance you face:
 
  • at one end, make a small eye (Overhand will do, or some other Oh-based one)
  • lay cord where debris is to be collected & bound; place stuff over cord
  • bring other end up, and whatever midline eye (even Slip-Knot) in it
  • and reeve Versatackle-like from eye to eye -- it might self-lock thus

This method & structure can be tweaked to be TIB (tied in the bight) by
using a Slip-knot bight to span sheaves, the OH base being then the sheave
itself (vs. its bight, as w/Trucker's H.), and by tying the eyeknot of the
first step last (this being the ONE *end* available, the rest of the material
--binding twine, say-- yet in a spool/ball/whathaveyou).  Tie to the slip-eye
AND end part, and the back'n'forth now goes one reeving further than with
the Truckers, which gets you a potential in-the-sheave nip good at least
for holding long enough to tie off a freshly cut 2nd end.

Quote
Also I assume that you were able to understand the words I used even if they offended your sensibilities.
My understanding is evident, not any offence.  (In fact, the bit about "bitter"
is more aimed towards other(s).)

Quote
Neither the Clove nor the Truckers will serve in the situation the Floating Constrictor was designed to solve.
Actually, they can.  I explained the adaptation of the latter, above.
As for the Clove, one can draw it up and while holding the tension put in
an Overhand of the ends such that they can be tightened down to lock
'a la Reef knot against the crossing part of the Clove.  Which structure
was shown mistakenly by Verrill in 1917(?) as his interpretation of Bowling's
or one of Bowling's echoers' verbal description of the Constrictor!  Try it.
But it, too, leaves one drawing out both ends, with one to chop or toss
along with the trash, if working with some ball of twine (although for light
stuff one could walk the knotted part around until one end was short).
 -- in some cases, anyway (though not so completely generally, binding across
pure space), such as a cluster of 3/4" ropes with cord (just tried).

Quote
But by all means tell me how the Sheepshank is no good either because it doesn't hold a a 1 inch piece of PVC.
Now you're tossing out non sequiturs.  Slow down!
Pipe or no pipe, that was a check of the nipping loop's grip,
and as I stated, I found it wanting.  Will you fare better with less
object surface?  -- yes, likely so, but the PVC is slick and should see force
making it to the nipping loop; I didn't see enough to give me great
confidence in the structure, that's all I said.
As for the Sheepshank, I continue to puzzle over its supposed duties;
many books now present it even admitting it has no use.  (Some years
back there was a debate over that here which went sour, missing some
obvious points.)

Quote
You ridicule the application of high force.
No, not at all; rather, I point to it as a necessary aspect to overcome
friction, that's all -- friction of the material against the object, and of
the material against itself, which will ultimately enable the self-locking.

--dl*
====
« Last Edit: August 25, 2009, 05:04:52 PM by Dan_Lehman »

DerekSmith

  • IGKT Member
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1521
  • Knot Botherer
    • ALbion Alliance
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #18 on: August 25, 2009, 11:16:00 AM »
Oh dear, you have gone and riled the guard dog !!  Please step away and stop annoying him, the barking only upsets the neighbours.  Next time you come, please make sure to bring a tasty treat and he might just grow to like you.  He really is a sweetie, but does love to eat the Newbies.

Now to your knot  ----   WOW  WOW and treble WOW 

No I have not seen it before, but Dan is our expert on this, and I think you have your answer, he doesn't seem to have come across it before either.

The name -- sorry, way off the mark --  there is nothing Constrictoresque about this baby at all, more a 'floating monoshank', seriously though, a name is important and will influence how well it catches on.  Without doubt, I will use it and will teach it, but it needs a catchy name - 'Grabber' or 'Load Lock' - but it's your knot so you choose, just please don't associate it with the Constrictor with which its only similarity is the two load wraps.

You clearly have been working with this beauty for some time and understand it well, even down to what loops work and which ones don't (by the way, it is really really easy to tie 'in line', I will explain if you are interested).  I started playing about with it in completely the wrong way, by tying it 'on' something, constricteresque style, and of course it didn't work and was a very poor fastening.  Then by accident, I held the two loops on my fingers with 'The Beast' suspended in free air and Bingo - it worked.  It has a strange action and it took me a while to understand exactly how (why) it works, and I have to say this mechanism is novel. I haven't seen this mode of functionality before.  Most knots rely on compression within the knot to generate the lock, but this beastie relies on elasticity of either the load or the binding to create the lock.  Pull up on the 'ends' (you have got us all twitchy now as to just what to call them !!) and the structure rotates and unlocks, allowing cord to flow through the eye.  Then when tension on the ends is released, the elasticity in the lines or the load rotates the 'eye' and it locks - the greater the load, the greater the lock - Pull, unlock tighten, release, lock.

This is an absolute gem.  Ultra simple to tie - two wraps, twist, feed through the ends and tighten, or make inline and pass over the load.  Easy to remember.  Easy to untie, and so far, I can't find any way for it to spill or degenerate into something dysfunctional.

This really should be published in KM, and for my money you should be in line for some form of recognition from the Guild for bringing this little beauty to light.  I am interested in how you 'found' / 'created' it.  Would you be interested in sharing the details with us?  Are you a member of the IGKT and would you be interested in creating an article for KM?  But first of all - what about a proper name for it please.

Derek

[Inkanyezi] gone

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 340
    • Pro three strand splice
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #19 on: August 25, 2009, 12:49:53 PM »
I used the knot today for gluing a chair that came apart. It works wonderfully!
All images and text of mine published on the IGKT site is licensed according to a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/

alpineer

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 507
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #20 on: August 25, 2009, 04:24:39 PM »
I kind of like ShepherdShank or RoundShank as a name for this binding knot.

alpineer

alpineer

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 507
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #21 on: August 25, 2009, 04:57:57 PM »
Or,

If found you have reasonable claim as your original intellectual property, and would have your name included in the knot's name, then DahmShank.

roo

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1855
    • The Notable Knot Index
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #22 on: August 25, 2009, 05:08:45 PM »
Gleipnir,

I'm not sure how to go about evaluating what you have.  So I'll just ask a question about your "open air" binder:

When or why would I use the mechanism you show instead of a Versatackle, for example?

http://notableknotindex.webs.com/Versatackle.html
If you wish to add a troll to your ignore list, click "Profile" then "Buddies/Ignore List".


Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3947
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #23 on: August 25, 2009, 05:26:59 PM »
Why sully the structure with a name reminiscent of something generally regarded
as useless -- viz., the Sheepshank?

"OneGoodTurn" or --as it's a nipping turn-- "TurNip" come to my mind.

A problem though is that names seemingly descriptive can soon be fount to
be as apt for some other, similar structure.  E.g., I've used the roundturn for
a tensioner envisioned for use in lobster pots, to hold the entry-cone netting
(or opener ring in such netting) tautly in place; either term could apply to
that, as well (though not so well in the "ONE...", as there is more than the
turn to it).

I still find the dble-turn version secure if not more so, btw -- just tried in
3/4" soft-laid PP around the back of a desk chair.  And it still takes some
good hauling to deliver tension/force to the nipping loop(s), so using this
around hard edges (lumber) will be difficult or take some working.  I should
think that Inkanyezi would have tickled this problem with the size of his
cordage around the chair, though perhaps the hard smoothness of that
facilitated force transfer.

Roo asks "When would I use ... vs Versatackle?"
I think that Inkanyezi's application shows one case:  the TurNip is simpler,
and the tensioning is evenly distributed to each end.  But, yes, other
mechanisms can work.
(In the V. one will have tension on the haul end plus tension on the
immediate continuation of that putting that combined tension into
the side going away (if pulling leftwards to tighten, the right side will
feel the rough double the hauling force, during tightening (when
the free haul-end bears tension).  -- bit of an imbalance.)

--dl*
====

roo

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1855
    • The Notable Knot Index
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #24 on: August 25, 2009, 05:37:42 PM »
-- bit of an imbalance.)

So I sometimes find my other hand grabbing the other half of the Versatacle.  It usually suffices, especially as the load increases and friction starts putting the brakes on things.

If one wanted, two on-the-bight loops could be used so that a free end of rope is available on both the right and left side to balance the Versatackle.
If you wish to add a troll to your ignore list, click "Profile" then "Buddies/Ignore List".


[Inkanyezi] gone

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 340
    • Pro three strand splice
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #25 on: August 25, 2009, 06:25:48 PM »
I tensioned from both sides, with levarage with the marlingspikes. I didn't appreciate that there was much friction from the turns over the back of the chair, but there was some slippage when the knot set itself. Maybe two turns might help that. I made the knot in the bight and passed it over the back of the chair. I strapped the chair in two more places, but I couldn't pass it over there, so I used Spanish windlasses. However, it seems as this knot works quite as well, and it might perhaps be combined with a Spanish windlass on the parts that go behind the chair if more tension is needed.

I think a clever invention regarding the way of tying might be next to come, preferrably with double turns. I give my kudos to the discoverer of this knot.
All images and text of mine published on the IGKT site is licensed according to a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/

[Inkanyezi] gone

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 340
    • Pro three strand splice
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #26 on: August 25, 2009, 06:45:01 PM »
Gleipnir might perhaps be a good name for the knot, although it would be nice to attribute it to the name of the discoverer/inventor. The Vikings had names for everything, and in the tale about Fenrir, Gleipnir is the fetter with which they bound the wolf so that he could not escape.
« Last Edit: August 27, 2009, 05:47:03 PM by Inkanyezi »
All images and text of mine published on the IGKT site is licensed according to a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/

[Inkanyezi] gone

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 340
    • Pro three strand splice
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #27 on: August 25, 2009, 11:50:33 PM »
Out of curiosity, I tried it with double turns and a Spanish windlass on the two parts behind, and I tensioned it as much as I dared; tensioning more might break something. When I hammer somewhat on it it gives out a high pitched "ping". The cord makes a slight impression into the wood. There is absolutely no slip.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2009, 12:00:47 AM by Inkanyezi »
All images and text of mine published on the IGKT site is licensed according to a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3947
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #28 on: August 26, 2009, 03:40:43 AM »
Out of curiosity, I tried it with double turns and a Spanish windlass on the two parts behind, and I tensioned it as much as I dared; tensioning more might break something. When I hammer somewhat on it it gives out a high pitched "ping". The cord makes a slight impression into the wood. There is absolutely no slip.
Which is as G. claimed; now, he also claimed that if those TWO turns were
a single double turn (interesting wording, that, eh!), it would lack grip.
This is contrary my experience.

--dl*
====

[Inkanyezi] gone

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 340
    • Pro three strand splice
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #29 on: August 26, 2009, 07:34:27 AM »
I tried with two turns, but then the double turn is like drawing the ends through a pipe, it won't twist back under tension, as the double turns provide leverage, and friction in the remaining elbow will decrease the nip of the turns. It becomes more difficult to set, and the nip seems poorer. I was able to set the knot, but it is more difficult. I'd say that doubling the turn does not improve the knot. However two or more spaced turns increase grip, although they also increase resistance to tensioning.
All images and text of mine published on the IGKT site is licensed according to a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/