For those familiar with Zeppelin Loop & Zeppelin Bend

[enhaut]

This may be described as the loop "corresponding" to the reverse Zeppelin bend

Funny how people see things
The loop that I showed IS a Zeppelin Bend  made with the two ends of the same rope
I have simply pulled one of the two tag ends (when Zep is completed) transforming it in a Standing Part.
It will never be use as a real loop, considering its time consuming modus operandi.

[enhaut]

Ok that's what reverse means!
Now show me an exploded version of the knot you tied at reply #29 in the post on figure 8 bends that you refered.
I will be able to judge by myself if it's really a "reversed" version of mine at #28.

[xarax]

   What is an "exploded" knot ? It is not a loose knot, that is for sure !  A loose knot is something rather vague, resembling the parent compact knot, and a tying diagram of it : it may be useful, but it is not geometrically accurate.
  What is "exploded" in the "exploded knot" is the "empty" space, the "openings", in between the "filled" with material space - and that "explosion" is meant to be accurately proportional throughout the volume of the knot.
   Now, it turns out that the "exploded", regarding the "empty" space, knot, is equivalent to the "imploded", regarding the "filled" space, knot : In other words, if we can imagine a compact / tight knot, where, miraculously, the diameter of the rope shrinks to the same degree along the whole rope length, we get  a corresponding "imploded" knot, regarding the size of the rope - which is equivalent to a properly "exploded" knot. 

   I usually provide "front" and "rear" pictures of the knots, but when a knot is "side symmetric" ( as the Zeppelin bend ) I do not see any reason for this. However, my pictures are usually quite sharp, so one can easily follow the paths of the lines, and re-tie the knot. In case you can not discern those paths, please ask, and I will provide a picture of a "loose" knot, which may be of some help, as soon as possible.
   
    I had commented on this fig.8 Zeppelin knot/bend, and had shown two pictures of its loose form, at :
    http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4090.msg27751#msg27751
    http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4090.msg30245#msg30245

[enhaut]

So you prefer loose form? Your choice, for my part I will go with the mass and stay with "exploded", anyway.
Thanks for the pictures, I have tied them both.
Here I present the "exploded" version of the fig 8 bend I presented at reply #28.
Characteristics;
Each eye (4 total) encircle two diameter of rope.
The two standing ends are embraced together two times, once by their own fig 8 then by the other.
It is very nice!!!
For now It is not in my view any reverse form of a fig 8 bend shown in this forum....
I sorry for the author of this thread if we digress a little.
The second image shows an exploded view, a term adopted by all illustrators in the WORLD

[roo]

I sorry for the author of this thread if we digress a little.

Quite a bit more than a little.  I guess everyone has forgotten how to start a new thread.

[Seaworthy]

This evening I logged on for the first time since the response to my last post was posted.

Sorry if my post was considered off topic. I could not find a more appropriate spot to show how the Zepp bend was performing under high load underwater (it hardly warranted starting a new thread) and I thought members may be interested.

Anyway, squarely back on topic now. Reading through these recent posts and remembering how one of the overhands jams in an Alpine Butterfly loop when load is applied to the loop and one standing end, I was not convinced the Zepp loop could be untied as stated.

So I tied a Zepp loop (by the way, nonsense that it is difficult to tie) and tested in out on my winch (Lewmar 55, five turns around before being winched a maximum amount).

Photos will follow in a moment.

[Seaworthy]

This is the loop I tied.

The line was 10 mm double braided polyester (not new).

[Seaworthy]

This is the how it looked after load was applied.

[Seaworthy]

Trying to untie it, one throat opened up easily.
The other side where load was applied to what is essentially the tail in the Zepp bend was jammed tight. The overhand had clamped down and even a marlin spike had no impact.

This is exactly what occurs with an Alpine Butterfly loop when load is applied to the loop. I have never heard of the AB loop referred to as 'not a real Alpine Butterfly', despite its inability to be untied after moderately high load is applied, so I see no reason why this the term 'not real' should be applied to the Zeppelin loop. The bend and loop just perform differently due to load in the latter essentially being applied to the tail in the former.

By the way, the Bowline and Bowline on the Bight untie easily under similar load. I have found though that the Bowline can jam in stiff line if the knot is not dressed well and high load is applied suddenly.

[roo]

Trying to untie it, one throat opened up easily.
The other side where load was applied to what is essentially the tail in the Zepp bend was jammed tight. The overhand had clamped down and even a marlin spike had no impact.

While this isn't exactly on topic of which of the two tying methods you prefer, this had come up in another thread, and it seemed that a tyer only had problems untying the Zeppelin Loop when they grossly exceeded the safe working load for the line.  You should have no issues with untying if the safe working load for the line is heeded.

[xarax]

I have never heard of the AB loop referred to as 'not a real Alpine Butterfly'... so I see no reason why this the term 'not real' should be applied to the Zeppelin loop. The bend and loop just perform differently due to load in the latter essentially being applied to the tail in the former.

   The Alpine Butterfly is just one of the dozens of dozens bends based on two interlocked overhand knots, where the first curve of the one is "hooked" within the first curve of the other. The Hunter s bend is the most "similar" to the Zeppelin bend, which has this property ( "similar", so to speak, of course ! ). Do you know many bends like the Zeppelin bend, where this does NOT happen ? Where the first curves are parallel to each other, and they are only connected / remain adjacent to each other by the presence of the penetrating Tail Ends ? If yes, please, show them to us ! 
   In the case of the corresponding loops, in those many cases this property does not change ( the first curves which were "hooked" within each other in the bend, remain "hooked" in the loop ), so there is no need to point out any major difference in the mechanism of the two knots. However, in the case of the Zeppelin bend, and the fake, so-called "Zeppelin loop", the unique property of the parent, genuine Zeppelin-like knot disappears, and that is what I am trying to tell. If you Google and read again all the posts where the term "fake, so-called Zeppelin loop" is written, you may understand this.
   The Zeppelin bend, and the more genuine Zeppelin-like loops shown at (1), are rope-made hinges : Just pull out the tail(s)/pins, and see what happens ! Do the same with the fake, so-called Zeppelin loop, and then try to understand where was the rocket science in this !

1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4095

[xarax]

  The other side where load was applied to what is essentially the tail in the Zepp bend was jammed tight. The overhand had clamped down and even a marlin spike had no impact.

   Welcome to the difficulty of untiability of all the loops where an overhand knot ( or, for that matter, a fig.8 knot as well ) has been tied on the Standing Part before-the-eye. It is not only they are not PET ( which is veery important for the sailor, for example, as a PET knot can be untied in one step, without any relic of the knot remaining tangled on the line of the released loop ), it is that their first / main overhand knot clinces very tightly around itself.
   I have seen that, under heavy loading, an overhand or fig.8 knot can be too tight, even when it is tied on the continuation of the returning eye leg, after (post)-the-eye.
   There is a name for the knots which are PET, AND their nipping structure does not "close" around itself as tightly as an overhand or fig.8 knot : BOWLINES ! 
   

[Seaworthy]

Trying to untie it, one throat opened up easily.
The other side where load was applied to what is essentially the tail in the Zepp bend was jammed tight. The overhand had clamped down and even a marlin spike had no impact.

While this isn't exactly on topic of which of the two tying methods you prefer, this had come up in another thread, and it seemed that a tyer only had problems untying the Zeppelin Loop when they grossly exceeded the safe working load for the line.  You should have no issues with untying if the safe working load for the line is heeded.

The safe working load of the line was possibly exceeded. I had no load cell attached to measure this. The safe working load is considered only 1/5 of the line's breaking strength. For the 10mm double braided polyester (Dacron) I used, this is merely 750 lbs.

Regardless, after similar load using the same type of line, the bowline and bowline on the bight can be untied easily, as can the Zeppelin Bend.

Roo, the strength of the Zeppelin loop may well be greater than the bowline (this needs testing), but it definitely performs less well when it comes to ability to be untied. And the Zeppelin loop performs very differently to the Zeppelin bend in this regard.

[roo]

Roo, the strength of the Zeppelin loop may well be greater than the bowline (this needs testing),

In rope, strength really isn't much a concern.  The Zeppelin Loop's improved security and stability over a standard bowline is mostly what draws attention. 

Since none of the recent discussions apply directly to this thread's topic, new thread creation for further discussion is warranted.

[Dan_Lehman]

Trying to untie it, one throat opened up easily.
The other side where load was applied to what is essentially the tail in the Zepp bend was jammed tight. The overhand had clamped down and even a marlin spike had no impact.

I have discovered a version in which one makes
an encircling/twist with the tail on its final tuck
and then pulls the tail straight to impart the twist
to the eye leg of this SPart-side overhand; I will
hope that this version helps, though it might be
that one needs care in dressing/positioning ... .
Also, I wonder if the dressing of the common
zeppelin loop can affect its vulnerability to jam;
I suspect that there are better, not-so-good ways
(again, which require some care in tying, which
we'd prefer not to need).

I see no reason why this the term 'not real' should be applied to the Zeppelin loop.
The bend and loop just perform differently due to load in the latter essentially being applied to the tail in the former.

Xarax is a purist on z. mechanics and denies
membership into his exalted realm of z. knots
if certain criteria aren't met.
BUT please note that you have here just pointed
to two knots that differ in end-2-end & eye-knot
relations : e.g., were one to begin with the
"straight bend" (butterfly) and form an eyeknot
be the same recipe as done for most knots, you
would NOT get the famous knot --NB!  (The eye knot
loads both tails of the end-2-end, not just
one and both SParts.)

I have found though that the Bowline can jam in stiff line if the knot is not dressed well and high load is applied suddenly.

PLEASE EXPLAIN!!!
I would like to see a photo of the jammed form.
Except if the tied-in-stiff-rope (and thus not set
in snug enough form) capsizes, I cannot see how
one can get jamming.  Is it a question of stretch
that so diminished the SPart to slide out through
(typically not binding) collar so that relaxation
gives a *swollen* SPart now not able to return
into the knot?  I've seen this sort of behavior,
but still think that the knot can be loosened.


Re "safe working load", this is at best a sort of casual
indication of conditions : i.e., diameter & other factors
should have more influence on jamming/etc., and not
how strong (and thus the SWLoad) the rope is.  --just
to note the indirect relation of this datum.


Thanks,
--dl*
====