Author Topic: lost in bowline  (Read 12349 times)

Luca

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 375
Re: lost in bowline
« Reply #15 on: May 18, 2013, 02:15:58 AM »
Hi Ruby,

this Lee s lock bowline looks like Lehman8 Dan's figure 8 , almost same structure

? ? ? No relation whatsoever ! It is a bowline-like / post-eye-tiable eyeknot, while Lehmans s fig.8 is not.

+1 X1!
Because yes,almost same structure,but almost.Very similar indeed:more than once you have proven to be a very good observer of knots, but the subtleties that you notice (the "almost") ,can lead to major consequences for the structure(essence!)+functioning of a knot. Taking the example of your pic "leeanddan1" ,if you cut the eye of the loop on the left, and then" join" the left leg of this initial eye to the tail ,you get a loop apparently very similar to that on the right, but this operation alone will not be enough to get a loop that will  be a Bowline as the loop on the right(but in fact you did not say that!Is superfluous what I write to you?), mainly because it will be a loop that always requires a knot that is executed (in this case a Figure of Eight) before it is formed his eye:this, apart from the fact that the construction of the knot's nub is very similar,is sufficient to exclude the loop on the left, also modified as described, from the family of bowlines(but this is not the only discriminating  that one needs to define a loop as a bowline(or bowline-like(not to mention the anti-bowlines!). 

                                                                                                                       Bye!
« Last Edit: May 18, 2013, 02:29:46 AM by Luca »

X1

  • Inactive
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1200
Re: lost in bowline
« Reply #16 on: May 18, 2013, 08:49:35 AM »
... just a bowline plus a Strangle knot.
...a little bulky

  If you do what you say, i.e. tie a complete common bowline and then add a strangle knot, then yes, it becomes a little bulky. However, I do not believe one should go as far as this...You have only to tie the bowline s nipping loop, and then tie a strangle-knot like collar within it, as shown in my pictures. ( I do not know what is the knot you have tied, but it is not the one I had shown...)
   We can replace the Strangle knot with a fig.8 knot, as in Luca s bowline, or in (1) and (2). We can even replace the "closed" nipping loop, with an "open" helical nipping coil, and tie a "helical loop" - around a Constrictor (3), or a Strangle (4), a fig. 8,(5), a fig. 9 (6), a double overhand (7), you name it !  :) We can enclose our locking collar structure into/within a helical nipping structure of one, two or even more nipping turns, depending on the material and the application. ( See the first two attached pictures ). Or else, we can replace the single nipping loop with a double nipping loop, and enter into the realm of the "double / double"  bowlines ( double nipping loop / double collar ), as, for example, in (8 ), (9) and (10). (See the last two attached pictures )

   If you are not lost by now, you would not be lost from now on, I can assure you !  :)

1.  http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=19.msg26660#msg26660
2.  http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=19.msg26677#msg26677
3.  http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3020.msg21688#msg21688
4.  http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4300.msg26785#msg26785
5.
6.   http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3020.msg22085#msg22085
7.   http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3020.msg22086#msg22086
8.   http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4308.msg26877#msg26877
9.   http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4300.msg26926#msg26926
10. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4300.msg26944#msg26944
« Last Edit: May 18, 2013, 08:59:22 AM by X1 »

X1

  • Inactive
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1200
Re: lost in bowline
« Reply #17 on: May 18, 2013, 02:47:23 PM »
...double nipping makes it longer, not bulkier.

  Correct. However, if by "bulk" we also mean "voluminous", as we often do, we can also say that the "double nipping" makes it "bulkier".

...seeing your 10 URLs, I feel lost again ... :)

   My intention was the exact opposite ! When you will tie those knots a number of times ( a number which depends on the individual. I am very slow learning a new-to-me knot, and that is why I need to repeat it a dozen of times before I am able to get the "feeling" of it... So, if one needs about one minute for each knot, he will need about 15 minutes to tie each knot 12 times, so, for those 10 bowline-like knots, he will need 150 minutes = 2 1/2 hours to tie them all, the time he would have spent to watch a dumb movie... :)), you will discover that they are but simple implementations of a few only knotting in principles. Once these principles are understood and applied, the particular knots can be derived almost automatically. I refer to those posts/URL s/blah blah s only because they may contain some additional clarifying thoughts - but you can always just tie the knots shown there, and ignore the chattering about them ! I had spent much more time searching for, tying and trying those knots, and then taking pictures of them, so I think 2 1/2 hours is a bargain !  :)
   There are people that, although they tie knots, they do not understand that they should understand them - or, even worse, they do not understand that they do not understand ! So, they think that the knots I tie are but "random" tangles, and that, in order to learn them, they should do what they are used to do all the time : parrot a particular series of moves, to produce a "useful" final object, a knot they do not bother to question why it is tied like this and not in any different way. They are not knot tyers, they are just knot users. Parroting 10 more knots, on top of many other ones, is a hard task, indeed. However, learning, applying and understanding the few knotting principles that had generated those knots in the first place, reveals that, in fact, one can not be lost in the Knotland - and that all those dozens of knots, Urls about knots, blah blah about knots, and knot tyers tying and talking about knots, "are only a pack of cards, after all". So, "Begin at the beginning, and go on till you come to the end: then stop.:)   
« Last Edit: May 18, 2013, 02:50:07 PM by X1 »