Author Topic: NOOB - I invented... now what?  (Read 71039 times)

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3944
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #90 on: March 12, 2010, 05:41:34 PM »
Okay, that's one bit of feed-back.  Thank you Roo. Let's have some more from other people.

The thread has considerable information it it, already.

On the name, I think of it as "the Gleipnir ", happily.  I don't mind
that pronunciations will differ; they do on most things (a local radio traffic
announcer or a cycling friend of mine say "bay-ack" for "back" or "cray-ash"
for "crash" and so on; or the peculiarities of those New Englanders or NYCity;
and sugary Southern states sweet "thank-eee-yew" still tickles my memory
heard in a fast-food joint between manager & waitress (each to other)
somewhere in Carolina?).  It is certainly a unique/distinctive name to my
American ear.  --and it carries less of a personal sense then would "Dahlm
Twist" or some such.
(My once-suggested "turNip" I favor being the name of the turn so
used to make a nip, seen in many manifestations, no particular "knot".)

On the working & supposed MA:  I think that there is none -- rather, as
I stated, it's a "Paul Bunyan (giant) knot", requiring over-exertions for
what is ultimately delivered, but working to lock & hold the gain.  But
you will have differing effect in different circumstances.  Just consider
that all that frictional gripping that must be done to lock the tensioned
ends pulled through it must be resisting their tensioning pulls as well
(with some caveat about differences in frictional effect on moving
parts, which I won't pretend to understand (one can quote CLDay's
famous remark about friction)).  But I have found much LESS favor
in the structure than has Inkanyezi, surprisingly.  Just yesterday, out
"in the wild" and using a 3mm kernmantle old bit to bind a newly
harvested coil of rope to another one already dangling from my
belt, I thought to try the Gleipnir :  it was impossble to get
much tightening to the turNip; it worked okay, but far from the
glowing reports Inkanyezi brings.  So, YMMV.

(One could try to test this with weights & pulleys (for redirection).
And, given your insistence on not trusting things voiced in the
thread on a knot mystery, I'd think that before you devoted an
iota of PR to this novelty you would insist on giving it a full testing
yourself, to better understand it.  Please take a shot at this, using
both slick (metal) objects and then something less so -- bit tough
to think of working out how to assess binding tension around a box,
though (essentially, around 4 cardboard corners).)

This thread contains a couple of similar structures that employ
a turNip and which might better tighten, in some instances.
I'm playing around with one now where the turNip feeds its
end through a bight to pull back through the turNip, and so
in limited spacing (typically) to have that apparent 2:1 pull
on a bight, the anchoring end of which (the pulling line, i.e.)
is the turNip and so worked tighter.  This structure should do
well on convex surfaces, with lessened space to delivering
tension to the turNip.

--dl*
====

SpitfireTriple

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 75
  • Seek Truth
The boy who cried Gleipnir
« Reply #91 on: March 13, 2010, 07:12:47 PM »
The thread has considerable information it it, already.
I'm not trying to re-open the discussion about the knot.  I'm trying to summarise where we are right now, and achieve consensus on how we / the IGKT should move forward with this knot after 4 months of doing nothing.  I am asking for people to come together on this.

On the name, I think of it as "the Gleipnir ", happily.  
Fine, that's one more vote for Gleipnir. I still feel Mr Dahm should have the final say, but given that he chose Gleipnir as his name here, I wouldn't be at all surprised if he concurred.  But that's for him to say.

And, given your insistence on not trusting things voiced in the thread on a knot mystery, I'd think that before you devoted an iota of PR to this novelty you would insist on giving it a full testing yourself, to better understand it.
We are being sidetracked here, but for anyone interested, Name this mystery knot:
I will say, however, that if that knot is ever used to bear weight, and if the people of the climbing wall have no idea what it is, then they are failing in their duty to keep the wall safe.

Except that maybe someone does or did know what it was, and having been used many times, it has proven itself -- it hasn't come untied.  So, the others at the shop preserve it for continued (safe) use.

--dl*
====

I responded
I considered that argument then rejected it.  So too would any court.

Would you, Dan, risk your life, or allow a grandchild's life to be risked, on a knot that "Rumor has it that an employee (and knot enthusiast) tied it long ago and currently remains a mystery to all."

Damn sure I wouldn't.


Meanwhile though, no-one is suggesting the Gleipnir/~ is ever used in a life-critical situation.  The Gleipnir is a simple knot for bundling firewood etc.  Not for climbing the North Face of the Eiger.  As Mr Dahm made clear in his posts when he described the knot as a "floating constructor": The basic problem I faced was tying together (and compressing) bundles of sticks and branches for trash pickup.

I wonder in what you've tied this, for in some hardware-store common solid-braid nylon (3/16" or about) around a 1" diameter PVC pipe, the locking grip just isn't there -- it's easy to push apart the turns opposite the knotted section and see it loosen.  
This is the sort of test to which a hitch or conventional constrictor could rightly be put.  But Mr Dahm never presented his knot as a hitch or conventional constrictor.  As he made clear in his posts when he described the knot as a "floating constructor": The basic problem I faced was tying together (and compressing) bundles of sticks and branches for trash pickup.

It is good to have a voice of caution, especially when discussing something as potentially life-critical as knotting.  But when that voice of caution is negative about everything and anything, people eventually stop listening.  

Roo probably made a valid point though:
It is presently holding together my bundles of hedge clippings etc. awaiting the garbage truck.

Be careful.  If the garbage guy grabs certain parts of the twine, it will cause the bundle to fall apart.  Finishing with a tuck or two of the ends would help
As I note, if for some unforeseen reason, the legs are unevenly loaded such that the adjustable side sees even a little more load, the thing slips.  I've alluded to the issue before in this thread, but I get the feeling that people won't be aware of this issue and won't take steps to guard against it.  People don't like to read the fine print.

Dan/ Going back to  your testing suggestion:  I had already tested the Gleipnir.  If I hadn't, I wouldn't be posting all this.  I tested it weeks ago when I first read about it.  But I did not test it on a piece of solid pipe, constrictor-style.  I understood that that was not what it was for.  I tested it on a bundle of lengths of planking in my garage.  It did well.  I recognise I am not an expert, and have no authority to speak with authority(!), but when I tested the knot on the application it was designed for, it worked.  I'll freely concede my "test" doesn't prove that the knot will always work on its application.  But other types of test on applications for which the Gleipnir was never designed are irrelevant.  And should not be allowed to cloud the issue.

Please take a shot at this, using both slick (metal) objects and then something less so -- bit tough to think of working out how to assess binding tension around a box, though (essentially, around 4 cardboard corners).)
No.  The Gleipnir was not designed for tying around slick metal objects, nor was it designed for tying round boxes.  It was designed for tying round bundles.  As Mr Dahm made clear from the start. The basic problem I faced was tying together (and compressing) bundles of sticks and branches for trash pickup. (That's the 3rd time I've quoted Mr Dahm, should be enough)

I find it difficult to understand, Dan, why you persist in trying to undermine the Gleipnir.  And, for that matter, other innovations presented by people on this forum.   No doubt you would also criticise a motorcycle for being a poor choice of family vehicle, or a helicopter for being relatively slow compared to an aeroplane.  Edit:  Mr Dahm got here before me:
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.  This would be like saying a cat is no good because it doesn't bark.

Dan/ You also ripped apart Mr Dahm's understanding of Mechanical Advantage. Even though he humbly admitted up front that he was no mathematician/engineer. But you didn't explain to him how and why he was wrong:  He arrived at his (incorrect) 4:1 ratio because he was erroneously thinking of the Gleipnir's "TurNip"* as the top tackle of a pulley system, but with the bundle-of-sticks "load" replaced by a hypothetical load attached to a hypothetical twin-wheel block sitting at the bottom of two loops of rope.  In doing so he mentally applied an invalid test to a knot which was never designed as a block-and-tackle. It was designed for bundling, and given that the rope wraps only twice around the bundle, the MA is actually only 2:1.   But your pointing out his mistake on that matter should not be allowed to detract from the value of the Gleipnir when used for what it was created for - tying up bundles.

*I welcome and embrace, Dan, your offer of your word, "TurNip", which you originally put forward as a candidate name for the Gleipnir, as the word we could use for the ...err .. TurNip when it appears in the Gleipnir or indeed in any other knot.

Finally, Dan, I notice you seem to claim that you invented the Gleipnir knot some time ago.
**I** have played with this knot and the like, a little, in recent years.
Perhaps I should not be surprised. After all, when in my first post on this forum (not this thread) I presented a new method for tying a loop knot, your response was to state that it was "obvious".  I wonder how many other novel knots and novel methods are stored in your brain that you have not yet deigned to share with us. A cynic might suspect that you will not reveal these gems until someone else first announces them.

But I am allowing you, Dan, to sidetrack me into a discussion of things that are not the issue here.  

The issue is, how are we going to take this (Gleipnir) knot forward?
« Last Edit: March 14, 2010, 03:40:01 PM by SpitfireTriple »

squarerigger

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 729
  • IGKTPAB Immediate Past President
    • The Knot Guy
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #92 on: March 14, 2010, 04:28:29 AM »
Hi Spitfire,

You asked where do we go from here?  I think that next step should be for Gleipnir to submit his knot to the Knotting Matters Journal of the IGKT.  Is he a member I wonder?  If not, are you a member and, again, if not, will a member submit on his/your behalf?  I think it has had more than a fair share of discussion and there seems to be no positive or negative concluding remark that has not been discounted or nay-sayed or accepted.  Maybe it should just be submitted to the scrutiny of the IGKT members for their say-so and then see what happens - maybe it will be pronounced as a new knot and receive the publicity it deserves/warrants and maybe not.  Won't know until it is tried, will we?   8)

Lindsey Philpott
Editor, Knotting Matters
AKA  squarerigger

SpitfireTriple

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 75
  • Seek Truth
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #93 on: March 14, 2010, 12:48:49 PM »
I agree that the next (or maybe the next-but-one*) step should be for gleipnir to submit the knot to the IGKT

*First, though, we need to encourage him to do so.  Which is why I offered to email him to encourage him to do just that - and to formally name the knot.   I'm still happy to do that.

As far as I am aware, Gleipnir is not a member of the IGKT.  I do not know the rules, but it would seem strange to me were the IGKT to refuse to consider a new knot simply because the person submitting it was not a member.  I am not a member either, but if this really was an issue I am confident that someone who is a member here would raise the matter in whatever way the IGKT committee requires.

But first, we need to contact Gleipnir to encourage him to come forward after a too-long lapse.

I agree with your philosophy, Lindsay, we won't know how this will pan out until and unless we try.  I'm simply offering to do my bit to get things moving along.

knot4u

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1076
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #94 on: December 21, 2010, 10:46:56 PM »
3 in Series:

http://picasaweb.google.com/ardahm/Knots#5373402358843674962

I'm not sure if it's been mentioned, but that knot seems to be tied incorrectly compared to what I think is intended.  Specifically, the third half hitch appears to be tied wrongly.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2010, 10:47:39 PM by knot4u »

[Inkanyezi] gone

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 340
    • Pro three strand splice
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #95 on: December 21, 2010, 11:31:38 PM »
3 in Series:

http://picasaweb.google.com/ardahm/Knots#5373402358843674962

I'm not sure if it's been mentioned, but that knot seems to be tied incorrectly compared to what I think is intended.  Specifically, the third half hitch appears to be tied wrongly.

I don't think so. Gleipnir wanted to convey that the twists can be done any direction, and that in case of several twists, they should not touch each other, but lie somewhat apart. When you tie it in slippery twine, it might be necessary to make more than one twist (TurNip). So far, I never needed three.
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/

knot4u

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1076
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #96 on: December 21, 2010, 11:49:18 PM »
3 in Series:

http://picasaweb.google.com/ardahm/Knots#5373402358843674962

I'm not sure if it's been mentioned, but that knot seems to be tied incorrectly compared to what I think is intended.  Specifically, the third half hitch appears to be tied wrongly.

I don't think so. Gleipnir wanted to convey that the twists can be done any direction, and that in case of several twists, they should not touch each other, but lie somewhat apart.

Interesting, is that also the idea for Gleipnir with two turns in the middle?  I have found that a Gleipnir with two turns that touch is fantastic security, nearly jamming.
« Last Edit: January 19, 2011, 05:40:06 PM by knot4u »

DerekSmith

  • IGKT Member
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1521
  • Knot Botherer
    • ALbion Alliance
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #97 on: December 22, 2010, 04:01:22 PM »
@Spitfire Tripple,

Did Mr. Dahm ever reply?

Derek

SpitfireTriple

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 75
  • Seek Truth
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #98 on: January 14, 2011, 11:14:38 PM »
Yes he did.  PM sent.

Hrungnir

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 169
Re: "Like frost in warm sunshine"
« Reply #99 on: January 18, 2011, 08:42:39 PM »
2.  And would the knot really be of any use tying up a giant wolf?!  I know this sounds silly, but if the knot isn't suited for such a purpose, we have to ask whether we should be using the name Gleipnir. Okay, okay, I'm splitting hairs.

Considering how strong the wolf were, it is doubtful that the wolf was hitched to an object. Gleipnir (the thread) was the only thing which could hold the wolf, and the object the wolf would have been hitched to, would have to be just as strong.

A drawing on wikipedia suggests binding the legs of the wolf in pairs together. I'm sure this could be the gleipnir knot :)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/75/John_Bauer-Tyr_and_Fenrir.jpg

[Inkanyezi] gone

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 340
    • Pro three strand splice
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #100 on: January 18, 2011, 11:26:23 PM »
As questions have been raised about the security of the knot, as well as the power advantage in tensioning, I think there is no reason for fear that it should fail. I have used it extensively since first knowing it, and it has not failed at any time. For security, at first I also tied with another string and a trucker's hitch, to make sure that my load would not get away, and occasionally I still do. I also have a habit of making a half hitch with each end around the legs of the knot, but it's more to spend the material and to make sure that any snagging of an end would not open the knot.

I also found a simple and convenient way to tie it under load, by simply half-hitching the first end around the centre of the middle bight, then following it in the opposite direction with the other end, whereupon I spill the so formed doubled half hitch into the TurrNip in the centre bight of the knot. Moslty when I tie down a load on the bicycle rack, I use the knot in the form of two splayed loops, and I regard it as still the same knot when tied in that way. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=2262.0

And indeed the John Bauer aquarel shows the wolf tied up with bindings. I think Gleipnir is a good name for this knot.
« Last Edit: January 18, 2011, 11:31:13 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/

Hrungnir

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 169
Re: "Like frost in warm sunshine"
« Reply #101 on: January 19, 2011, 07:45:34 PM »
2.  And would the knot really be of any use tying up a giant wolf?!  I know this sounds silly, but if the knot isn't suited for such a purpose, we have to ask whether we should be using the name Gleipnir. Okay, okay, I'm splitting hairs.

Considering how strong the wolf were, it is doubtful that the wolf was hitched to an object. Gleipnir (the thread) was the only thing which could hold the wolf, and the object the wolf would have been hitched to, would have to be just as strong.

A drawing on wikipedia suggests binding the legs of the wolf in pairs together. I'm sure this could be the gleipnir knot :)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/75/John_Bauer-Tyr_and_Fenrir.jpg

And indeed the John Bauer aquarel shows the wolf tied up with bindings. I think Gleipnir is a good name for this knot.


Just some text from the Prose Edda, Gylfaginning chapter 34:

Everyone refused to place their hand in Fenrir's mouth until T?r put out his right hand and placed it into the wolf's jaws. When Fenrir kicked, Gleipnir caught tightly, and the more Fenrir struggled, the stronger the band grew. At this, everyone laughed, except T?r, who there lost his right hand. When the gods knew that Fenrir was fully bound, they took a cord called Gelgja hanging from Gleipnir, inserted the cord through a large stone slab called Gj?ll, and the gods fastened the stone slab deep into the ground. After, the gods took a great rock called Thviti, and thrust it even further into the ground as an anchoring peg.


This confirms the aquarel by John Bauer. The wolf was tied with a binder. They didn't make an anchor before they were convinced the wolf was tightly bound.
« Last Edit: January 19, 2011, 08:00:19 PM by Hrungnir »

knot4u

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1076
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #102 on: January 19, 2011, 07:50:28 PM »
I've been experimenting with this Gleipnir for awhile now.  Overall, it's pretty good.  The best part is that it looks cool.  However, for performance, I still prefer a few other knots instead.  For example, where a Gleipnir is appropriate, I feel more comfortable with a Backhand Hitch plus Two Half Hitches.  Another one I like better than the Gleipnir is Two Half Hitches Plus a Half Hitch Lock.  (I really wish there was a shorter way of saying that!).

Hrungnir

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 169
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #103 on: January 19, 2011, 08:29:00 PM »
I've been experimenting with this Gleipnir for awhile now.  Overall, it's pretty good.  The best part is that it looks cool.  However, for performance, I still prefer a few other knots instead.  For example, where a Gleipnir is appropriate, I feel more comfortable with a Backhand Hitch plus Two Half Hitches.  Another one I like better than the Gleipnir is Two Half Hitches Plus a Half Hitch Lock.  (I really wish there was a shorter way of saying that!).

When I'm tying a Gleipnir, I'm always tying the Round Turn Gleipnir documented by Xarax. It uses just a little bit more rope than the original and isn't much harder to tie. I haven't tried the Backhand Hitch plus Two Half Hitches, but in most situations the Round Turn Gleipnir outperforms both Two Half Hitches Plus a Half Hitch Lock and Buntline Hitch Plus a Half Hitch Lock. I would compare the strength of the binder with Double Constrictor, but it uses less rope.

I use the Buntline/Half Hitch Plus a Half Hitch Lock when I don't have a lot of rope, or when a simple and fast knot to tie is more important than binding strength :)

knot4u

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1076
Re: NOOB - I invented... now what?
« Reply #104 on: January 19, 2011, 09:48:57 PM »
I've been experimenting with this Gleipnir for awhile now.  Overall, it's pretty good.  The best part is that it looks cool.  However, for performance, I still prefer a few other knots instead.  For example, where a Gleipnir is appropriate, I feel more comfortable with a Backhand Hitch plus Two Half Hitches.  Another one I like better than the Gleipnir is Two Half Hitches Plus a Half Hitch Lock.  (I really wish there was a shorter way of saying that!).

When I'm tying a Gleipnir, I'm always tying the Round Turn Gleipnir documented by Xarax. It uses just a little bit more rope than the original and isn't much harder to tie. I haven't tried the Backhand Hitch plus Two Half Hitches, but in most situations the Round Turn Gleipnir outperforms both Two Half Hitches Plus a Half Hitch Lock and Buntline Hitch Plus a Half Hitch Lock. I would compare the strength of the binder with Double Constrictor, but it uses less rope.

I use the Buntline/Half Hitch Plus a Half Hitch Lock when I don't have a lot of rope, or when a simple and fast knot to tie is more important than binding strength :)

OK...my experience is different than yours.
« Last Edit: January 19, 2011, 10:06:46 PM by knot4u »