Author Topic: Bowline transformations  (Read 14426 times)

knot4u

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1076
Re: Bowline transformations
« Reply #15 on: December 28, 2010, 05:46:20 PM »
We were into it when the tree felling was discussed; two round turns around the pile, a backhand turn, and then two half hitches is a method that is proven.

Two round turns doesn't solve the problem you presented in this thread:  a large diameter object.  According to you, that's one factor that causes capsizing due to the angles of the legs of the Bowline.  By using Two Round Turns, you'd still end up with the legs of the loop coming into the Bowline at a large angle, unless you made the Bowline huge relative to the object.

In contrast, a Bowline on a Cow makes it so that the legs of the Bowline come in at a small angle.  A Bowline on a Pile would have a similar effect.  These solutions tend to make the diameter of the object irrelevant.  The legs of the Bowline will tend to lay naturally at a small angle.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2010, 07:05:51 PM by knot4u »

[Inkanyezi] gone

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 340
    • Pro three strand splice
Re: Bowline transformations
« Reply #16 on: December 28, 2010, 07:15:07 PM »
We were into it when the tree felling was discussed; two round turns around the pile, a backhand turn, and then two half hitches is a method that is proven.

Two round turns doesn't solve the problem you presented in this thread:  a large diameter object.  According to you, that's one factor that causes capsizing due to the angles of the legs of the Bowline.  By using Two Round Turns, you'd still end up with the legs of the loop coming into the Bowline at a large angle, unless you made the Bowline huge relative to the object.

In contrast, a Bowline on a Cow makes it so that the legs of the Bowline come in at a small angle.  A Bowline on a Pile would have a similar effect.  These solutions tend to make the diameter of the object irrelevant.  The legs of the Bowline will tend to lay naturally at a small angle.

Oh, the suggestion is a totally different knot, not the Bowline, but a backhanded hitch. If a bowline-type is preferred, because you use it as a permanent eye that is dropped over the bollard, I think the Eskimo Bowline should be used. 
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: 4010
Re: Bowline transformations
« Reply #17 on: December 29, 2010, 07:50:25 AM »
The eskimo bowline is worth considering, as it stands up better to ring loading and does not capsize as the standard bowline. It is very easy to tie with the hand-twist method; not very different from the standard bowline.
 / /
If a bowline-type is preferred, because you use it as a permanent eye that is dropped over the bollard, I think the Eskimo Bowline should be used. 

Let us not forget that there is the **Janus Cowboy Bowline**,
which has as it 's first-pass base (i.e., what exists if the final tuck
isn't made or comes out) the so-called "Cowboy/Left-handed"
version, which is resistant to ring-loading (makind a Lapp
end-2-end joiner when so loaded).

And let's keep in mind that in all of these variations, there are
subtle differences in versions between orienting the three parts
passing through the turNip one way or another.

--dl*
====

[Inkanyezi] gone

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 340
    • Pro three strand splice
Re: Bowline transformations
« Reply #18 on: December 29, 2010, 11:06:29 AM »
The eskimo bowline is worth considering, as it stands up better to ring loading and does not capsize as the standard bowline. It is very easy to tie with the hand-twist method; not very different from the standard bowline.
 / /
If a bowline-type is preferred, because you use it as a permanent eye that is dropped over the bollard, I think the Eskimo Bowline should be used. 

Let us not forget that there is the **Janus Cowboy Bowline**,
which has as it 's first-pass base (i.e., what exists if the final tuck
isn't made or comes out) the so-called "Cowboy/Left-handed"
version, which is resistant to ring-loading (makind a Lapp
end-2-end joiner when so loaded).

And let's keep in mind that in all of these variations, there are
subtle differences in versions between orienting the three parts
passing through the turNip one way or another.

--dl*
====

When I do the bowline "cowboy style", and want to make another u-turn, it seems natural not to take it around the leg of the loop, but rather the standing part, which does not get the "Janus" double face, but two collars in tandem, one from each side of the standing part. Done that way, it absolutely resists capsizing, and it is easier to open than the Janus variations after load. It should be understood, without saying, that any knot should be well dressed when put to use. The images are for clarifying tying pattern.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2010, 11:23:35 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: 4010
Re: Bowline transformations
« Reply #19 on: December 29, 2010, 07:10:52 PM »
When I do the bowline "cowboy style", ...

(remarking that this is but a name sometimes used, just as
is "Dutch Naval b.", and has no substantiated indication of actual
use by the implied community)

Quote
... and want to make another u-turn, it seems natural not to take it around the leg of the [eye], but rather the standing part, which does not get the "Janus" double face, but two collars in tandem, one from each side of the standing part. Done that way, it absolutely resists capsizing, and it is easier to open than the Janus variations after load.

Well I disagree, at least or especially for the main users for whom
such an additional step & structure is necessary --viz., users of firm
(in cross section & flexibility) & smooth/slick kernmantle cordage
(rockclimbers, cavers, & SAR users).  Making this turn to put on another
collar takes a 1-diameter bend, and it does little to stem the loosening
of the central nipping loop --the "turNip"; whereas the turn around an
"eye" leg ("loop" long defined to be (among other things) exactly
what our "turNip" is) holds that exit from the turNip in close enough
generally to stem the feed of a slackened eye leg material into the
turNip.

And I guess the presence of this added collar does work to prevent
full capsizing, but otherwise, no :  for the original collar is oriented
in opposition to the tight_helix-working-to-become-open_helix, and
the opposite-oriented collar is thus sympathetic to that movement
(qua collar, but its legs do impeded the transformation).

But note that the collar of the "Janus" variant is a second one in
more or less direct opposition to the capsizing, resisting against
the transformation in holding the other leg of the turNip in the
same way as the basic collar does the SPart.  And, as setting the
around-the-eye-leg collar tight comes with less presumed strength
penalty (with none, i.e.), it can be done so with assurance against
loosening & capsizing (at least to some extent).  --but it is at this
point Knot4U's reminder about relatively wide/large-dia objects
within the eye must be heeded.

But also, the "cowboy" orientation in the basic knot is, alone,
effective in impeding capsizing, so far as I can tell; which leaves
the further collaring to impede loosening.

Quote
It should be understood, without saying, that any knot should be well dressed when put to use. The images are for clarifying tying pattern.

"Without saying" ...
what "well dressed" might be --that is the typical case!!

(Will one really "know it when one sees it"?!)

((I'm reminded of one of my co-worker's years ago,
after examining how various parts of my attire worked
together nicely, remarking "Who dressed you?!"
Apparently I was deemed not a likely candidate.))
 

;)

[Inkanyezi] gone

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 340
    • Pro three strand splice
Re: Bowline transformations
« Reply #20 on: December 30, 2010, 07:41:15 PM »
Quote
It should be understood, without saying, that any knot should be well dressed when put to use. The images are for clarifying tying pattern.

"Without saying" ...
what "well dressed" might be --that is the typical case!!

Yes, haven't we seen that before somewhere? My idea is that the two collars, the U-bights, should be drawn up tight. The turNip will take care of itself when it is loaded. The advantage of taking the two collars around the SP is that it is easily opened after heavy load, by first bending one of the collars to one side, give a little slack and bending the other to the other side. When the collar is on the leg of the loop, it is not so easy to get slack in the knot.

The first collar is tightened by pulling on the relevant loop leg, and the other  by pulling the end.
« Last Edit: December 30, 2010, 07:42:48 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/