Author Topic: Interlocking knots  (Read 41090 times)

SS369

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1797
Re: Interlocking knots
« Reply #60 on: January 28, 2011, 03:46:39 AM »
Hello SaltyCracker,
Thanks for posting.

This knot isn't, in my opinion, an interlocking one in the same vein that the others in this thread are. The fisherman's knot (many names for this one) doesn't interweave the main structure of each half.

Look into the double version of this knot for an even more secure bend. I am sure you will enjoy it more.

SS

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3748
Re: Interlocking knots
« Reply #61 on: January 28, 2011, 05:21:24 AM »
Hello SaltyCracker,  Thanks for posting.
This knot isn't, in my opinion, an interlocking one in the same vein that the others in this thread are.
 The fisherman's knot (many names for this one) ...

Hey, Scott, as remarked elsewhere, you're mis-seeing this knot
(or having similar trouble w/download as I have --maybe it's my
connection).  NB: "#1031" (also 1048).

(And I call the Grapevine-bend type of knots "pull-together",
yes, not "interlocked", nor "trace" (Ring/Flemish, e.g.).)

 ;)

SaltyCracker

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 70
Re: Interlocking knots
« Reply #62 on: January 28, 2011, 09:56:13 AM »
See the "... Sheet Bend Alternative" topic for additional info on the knot.

http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=2792.msg16580#msg16580

As always be sure a knot is suitable for the purpose and tied properly before using. (And don't be wrong about being sure. Remember Statistics is the method by which mistakes are made with confidence... I think that's from Heinlein the sci-fi writer, may have been Piers Anthony... knot sure.)
« Last Edit: January 28, 2011, 10:20:20 AM by SaltyCracker »

xarax

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2781
Re: Interlocking knots
« Reply #63 on: January 28, 2011, 01:08:23 PM »
   Thank you SaltyCracker,
  
   Very nice bend ! I have to say that, although I have tried dozens of "interlocked" knots, I have missed this one ! So, who knows how many other are there, still waiting for us to discover / re-discover them ? I do hope that we will have an exhaustive list of all practical knots ( and bends ) some-when in the near future, because they are many, that is true, but they are not infinite !  :)ker
   I would not describe this bend as an "interlocked knots" bend, made by two overhand bends, but that is only a matter of semantics or personal prejudices...May be the two linked overhand bends here can be described as "inter-woven"/inter-knitted" together...
   This bend is not so compact, but this has its advantages : Its structure is transparent, so the knot is easily inspected. The "second" nipping loop of the overand knot remains untightened sometimes, so the bend needs some adittional dressing by pulling the tails, too.

P.S. SaltyCracker calls his bend "ABoK#1031 bend". See: 
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=2804.0
« Last Edit: February 01, 2011, 11:13:58 AM by xarax »
This is not a knot.

SS369

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1797
Re: Interlocking knots
« Reply #64 on: January 28, 2011, 03:07:31 PM »
Oooops, my bad.......eyes.
I indeed mis-saw the knot, please excuse.

Walks away semi-hangdog.
;-)

SS

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3748
Re: Interlocking knots
« Reply #65 on: January 28, 2011, 07:49:09 PM »
I would not describe this bend as an "interlocked knots" bend, made by two overhand bends
...May be the two linked overhand bends here can be described as "inter-woven"/inter-knitted" together...

Boy, this is splitting hairs --and I don't see any basis for your
distinction.  The subject knot DOES interlock overhands, and
more so than Rosenthal's, which is usually considered in this set.
1452, 1453, 1408, 1425, 1425a, RZ, Shakehands(1031 Rev'd),
...)  (The F88 knot(s) w/"8"-oriented overhands might be going
a bit farther afield?)
Here, the SParts interlock (unlike the RZ), and the collars contain
the opposite tail which is nipped by the interlocked SParts;
what further can be asked of it to qualify ... ?!

Quote
This bend is not so compact,  ...
 The "second" nipping loop of the overand knot remains untightened ...

Yes, but do remember that Shakehand is just this knot loaded
in reverse --and is #18 at the Layhands site.  That knot will be
more nicely shaped on setting/loaded, and easily untied.

Both, qua eyeknots, are TIB (Tiable In Bight).

--dl*
====

SaltyCracker

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 70
Re: Interlocking knots
« Reply #66 on: January 29, 2011, 05:38:36 PM »
From the sheet bend alternative topic...


... If anything the knot in replies 11 & 12 is similar to, but not the same, as Harry Asher's Shake Hands, as shown in Budworth "Encyclopedia" book. It also resembles Vice Versa. It isn't a complicated knot to tie but certainly less straight-forward than some of the others in this topic. It is very obscure in that the only place I've ever seen it is as a loop knot in ABoK #1031 and, tied in the bight, #1048. And, I've never seen anyone else use it as a bend...


In regard to the #1031/#1048 based knot previously posted, I've been experimenting with Asher's shake hands and believe that it is the same knot... I'll start another topic on this knot rather than it being a distraction here... so maybe I have seen it used... just didn't recognize it!


xarax

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2781
Re: Interlocking knots
« Reply #67 on: January 30, 2011, 01:53:29 AM »
   It was never so easy for me to dress the true lovers bend/ MWalker two strand bend quickly and correctly...( perhaps because, due to its maximum symmetry and simplicity, this knot is very sensitive to the initial loose form we have to set and tighten, in order to tie the knot in its correct final form.) So, when it comes to the doubled (re-tucked) version of it, (1)-(2), my difficulties are doubled ! To tie this beautifull compact bend correctly, I had to tie first the single true lovers/MWalker 2strand knot, then to loosen it and re-tucked it, and then to tighten it again...So, sometimes, I prefer to start from another, easier and quicker to set loose knot, which, when tightened, leads to a similar, but not so round and not so pretty bend. See the attached pictures of this not-so-compact form, and compare it with the original bend, at replies #18 and #25 (and my pictures of it, at reply #26).

1) http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1919.msg16314#msg16314
2) http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1919.msg16373#msg16373 
This is not a knot.

SS369

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1797
Re: Interlocking knots
« Reply #68 on: January 30, 2011, 03:15:40 AM »
Hello Xarax,

Although the knot you've shown has the same half parts, it is not the same knot as previously shown by me. The arrangement of those halves can make all the difference. There are quite a few knots that can be dressed other than the way it has been shown here and there. The dressing and orientation can take a fantastic knot and make it not so and vice versa.

I am fairly sure that there are others who have to tie a knot simply and then double or re-tuck it to make it happen for them. Just look at the myriad of ways people approach the tying of the bowline, zeppelin, butterfly, etc.
Take the re-tucked Zeppelin. It is finicky till you've rolled, pushed, pulled till it is tight. Before that the re-tucks can come out and the whole thing will be a loose mess till it results in the plain old Zeppelin(maybe).

Dressing is so important that we've just got to take the time to do it properly
or we'd better pick another knot altogether.

In decorative knotting the Mathew Walker knot was The most difficult knot to date for me to get dressed correctly. It was harder than even the single lead 7px6b pineapple knot! But, practice makes sort of perfect.

I believe that I prefer the earlier orientation of the interlocked re-tucked overhands (2strand MW bend) to the latest. As for which is the most secure, easiest to untie? I'll leave that till I can do more tests for myself.

Have you tried to jam it? Maybe some smaller cord will help you get a "feel" for it.

SS
« Last Edit: January 30, 2011, 03:17:53 AM by SS369 »

xarax

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2781
Re: Interlocking knots
« Reply #69 on: January 30, 2011, 11:18:59 AM »
   Thank you SS369,

...Although [this] knot...has the same half parts, it is not the same knot as previously shown by me.

  No, it is not. It is topologically identical and geometrically similar, but it is not the same !  (It is much uglier...and I have called it SS369 B, if you don't mind...Could you propose another name, please ? Because you are the father of this knot, too, like it or not ! :)). Its only advantage, for me, is that it is easier and quicker, (again : for me...), to dress it correctly.
   I find it amusing that knots that are different, even topologically, they can be named as variations of the same knot nevertheless , because they look quite the same, ( the Zeppelin and the Zeppelin X, for example) - while others, like those two bends of yours,  should probably be named differently, despite their similarities !
 
  Dressing is so important that we've just got to take the time to do it properly[/b] or we'd better pick another knot altogether.

 Me, personally, I am more interested in the strength characteristics of those two knots, than their decorative aspects. I can see the HUGE difference in their aesthetic qualities, believe me. But I am more interested in the fact that those two bends are great bends for stiff ropes, because their standing parts follow very gentle curves in their path inside the knot s nub. So, If I want a stiff rope bend, and I do not want to waste many more moments of the few left in my life, I would probably tie the SS369 B. I do not know "another knot to pick", better than this !  :)
 
 In decorative knotting the Matthew Walker knot was The most difficult knot to date for me to get dressed correctly... But, practice makes sort of perfect.

   Thank you !  :) I thought that it only was something in my brain that was jammed, because I have not read anybody else having the difficulties I encounter to dress even the single / un-tucked  MWalker 2strand knot correctly...I only tie a few knots, and much fewer decorative ones, for less than two years now, so my practice" is still in its infancy, alongside my "theory" !  :)
   I do not wish to test knots outside a properly equipped laboratory, so I am always reluctant to report my superficial results...I guess that both knots are very secure as bends, regardless their jamming or not properties.  
« Last Edit: January 30, 2011, 11:20:49 AM by xarax »
This is not a knot.

SS369

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1797
Re: Interlocking knots
« Reply #70 on: January 30, 2011, 03:04:05 PM »
Hi Xarax,

I dare not name the knot. And somewhere it probably has a name or number.
Yes, I do think there should be a method of nomenclature for knots that have undergone a modification, but are basically the same as the parent knot. But, if the major evolution is a re-tuck or being slipped, then I say add that as a descriptive portion to the original's name.

Dressing is so important to the security and performance of a knot that it could indeed loose strength if this is not addressed.

I think I'd be correct in stating that many others have had the challenge of dressing the MW knot and it is technique following that wins here.

Testing knots other than in a controlled environment is one part of the game, but there is the "practical" side of knot use and tying that can give you/us lots of insight(s) (for yourself personally) that if done correctly will teach of good and bad properties.
So unless someone has access to a test cell and does volunteer, we will have to do what we can and share our "tests, insights and findings".

Most of life is a theory anyway. (-.-)

SS

xarax

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2781
Re: Interlocking knots
« Reply #71 on: January 30, 2011, 04:38:25 PM »
   OK father, I will serve as a godfather !  :)
   Let this new-born knot be named...re-tucked Hunter s X bend (!).
   Because that is exactly what it is... :) We take the Hunter s bend. We cross ( cross : X ) the tails before they exit the knot s nub ( just as we do in the case of Zeppelin bend, to get the Zeppelin X bend). We re-tuck this Hunter s X bend. We get your not-so-good-looking, second variation of the re-tucked true lovers bend/MWalker 2strands bend !
   It had not crossed my mind to re-tuck this crossed-tails Hunter s bend  !  :) (which, in its compact form, is identical to the true lovers / MWalker 2strands bend ).
« Last Edit: January 31, 2011, 03:00:28 PM by xarax »
This is not a knot.

xarax

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2781
re-tucked Hunter s bend ( compact )
« Reply #72 on: January 30, 2011, 06:57:28 PM »
   Now that we have tied the re-tucked Hunter s X bend, we shouldn t leave the original Hunter s bend un-tucked, should we ?  :) See the attached pictures for a nice, compact version of it.  
« Last Edit: January 30, 2011, 10:22:09 PM by xarax »
This is not a knot.

xarax

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2781
re-tucked Hunter s bend ( compact )
« Reply #73 on: January 30, 2011, 07:50:50 PM »
   If, in the re-tucked Hunter s bend, we cross the already re-tucked tails before they exit the knot s nub, we get a slightly different knot. The oblique tails, adjacent to the oblique helical turns of the coils, form an aesthetically pleasing whole. See the attached pictures.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2011, 10:21:36 PM by xarax »
This is not a knot.

xarax

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2781
not-compact re-tucked Hunter s bend ( long, A )
« Reply #74 on: January 30, 2011, 10:29:07 PM »
   There are two very similar ways to re-tuck the Hunter s bend, in a "long", non-compact version. ( I have labeled them "A" and "B". See the pictures in this post, for the first of them, and in the next one, for the second. The differences are obvious. )
This is not a knot.