Author Topic: New hitch?  (Read 24670 times)

xarax

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2781
Re: New hitch?
« Reply #30 on: February 29, 2012, 12:43:00 AM »
I certainly don't want to burden this "Practical Knots" forum with tangential or inappropriate topics

Come on ! We are DELIGHTED with your contribution ! I was trying to say that the "material matters" here a lot, much more than any other material we know. So we should consider those knots as altogether different from the knots we are used to tie , and do not attempt to impose solutions we already have for the common material, to problems generated in the world of a lengthwise elastic, AND tubular, AND sticky AND slippery material  :) - but nobody can deny the practical nature of this knotting !

I intend to do some more testing with the knots proposed, and report back.

   Please, do it ! When we listen about tests, this is music to our ears !
 It would be great if you could possibly repeat any test you perform a reasonable number of times, so that the results can have a greater "statistical" significance.
« Last Edit: February 29, 2012, 12:43:47 AM by xarax »
This is not a knot.

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4013
Re: New hitch?
« Reply #31 on: February 29, 2012, 07:33:59 AM »
   Thanks, SS369, but all I see here is a nice brown front cover...The link does not work in my computer... Is there anywhere else I can see those figures/pictures, or they are top-secret ?  :)
Here is a picture of the Ossel Hitch http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ossel_hitch
//

The picture of an Ossel knot is wrong ... the final tuck goes ...

Thank goodness someone has their eyes open and brain engaged!
Thank you, Barry!

This entire "O. knot / O. hitch" nonsense really irks me:
they are both hitches which are of course knots ,
and I'm skeptical that any of the parroting authors has
a solid basis for writing "ossel".  IIRC, Geoffrey didn't find
good beginnings for it, but dug into some old languge for
a notion of why ... .

More to the point of the OP, the ossel hitch is ill-suited
for other than like-sized/-diameter objects, as it needs close
fitting to nip the tail; relatively larger objects will result
in there being too much space where the tail is nipped.
The OP's revision makes a full turn, so addresses this
aspect; unfortunately, what is lost, still, is the neat sort
of opposed-bights nipping that gives the Ossel such
staying-tied security.

To offer noose hitches and an eyeknot as alternatives strikes
me as missing the point of having the knot resist lateral
loads.  This aspect could be addressed by putting on some
few round turns and then finishing with the noose-hitch
or even eyeknot.

One might try to employ the opposed-bights nipping by forming
the tail into a small timber hitch structure (dogging the
tail back around itself to form a small eye),
then wrap the line around the object once or more (and
over the tail, for added security,
then bring the line through the eye to reverse the direction
of wrapping, for one/two wraps, forming opposed bights at
this change of direction,
and finally work the SPart out through the opposed bights.
This will take some working to set --probably more so, with
surgical tubing, as you'll want to put in some tension--,
but then it should nip, grip, and hold-tight pretty well.


The idea of setting some good stopper to make a line
that then becomes secure with other hitches is also
good --and simple!  Or, as Knot4U suggests, making
a sling that then works surely w/simple knots.

Btw, have you tried the anchor bend , putting in
a 2nd tucked finish, and maybe an extra turn around
the object, for gripping?!  I'd think that that would
do pretty well.

--dl*
====

postscript:

Nice thing about Wikipedia is Editing --to wit:

Quote
The ossel hitch is a knot used to attach a rope or line to an object.
It was originally used on Scottish gill nets to tie small line to larger
rope that supported the net. Ossel is actually the Scottish word for
"gill net" and for the line attaching the net to the float rope.[1][2]
I rather doubted this.
Quote
Rather, the Ossel hitch works only on objects that are approximately
the same diameter as the line, as the tail must be nipped under the
initial turn, which if made on a larger object will have a gap between
line and object. To what extent the true history of this knot can be
learned is a matter of speculation; knots books are notoriously bad
at accuracy! Examination of such "snood"/"gangion" hitches in
commercial fishing in the present day will show that it is typical to tuck
the hitching line (the snood) through the lay of the object line --which,
yes, implies that braided lines aren't used here. In such cases, various
simple hitches --e.g., the clove hitch, the ground line hitch-- can be used,
with the tucked tail providing security of the knot against both loosening
and shifting position along the line. (E.g., in some areas, lobster fishing
is done with long ground lines to which numerous lobster pots are
connected via approximately 10'-long snoods. It is possible that the
ground line will at times be hauled up from different ends, so hitches
might need to endure pulls from either direction. A ground line (sometimes
referred to as a "trawl") might be a mile (!) long --impressive mountains
of cordage when piled up on the dock or the deck of the trawler!

xarax

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2781
Re: New hitch?
« Reply #32 on: February 29, 2012, 04:00:15 PM »
One might try to employ the opposed-bights nipping by forming the tail into a small timber hitch structure (dogging the tail back around itself to form a small eye), then wrap the line around the object once or more (and over the tail, for added security, then bring the line through the eye to reverse the direction of wrapping, for one/two wraps, forming opposed bights at this change of direction, and finally work the SPart out through the opposed bights. This will take some working to set --probably more so, with surgical tubing, as you'll want to put in some tension--, but then it should nip, grip, and hold-tight pretty well.

Interesting suggestion - and it would probably be also helpful, if it was accompanied ( at least...) with a photo - you know, the thing that was invented the other day, at 1826...(1)
Most of the cell phones have cameras nowadays, one does not really need to save money and buy a new Nikon.

1.  http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3020.msg21738#msg21738


This is not a knot.

roo

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1868
    • The Notable Knot Index
Re: New hitch?
« Reply #33 on: February 29, 2012, 04:14:43 PM »
In that case, I would jam a sling in the tubing for the patient, and then show them how to tie a Cow Hitch (or maybe even a Bull) around an anchor. The Cow Hitch would not jam for this application. I mention this because I often find myself overlooking simpler, more elegant solutions. Again, your applications are probably different (?).
I was considering this until he mentioned the issue of some hitches stretching away from the bar and allowing lengthwise rolling.  Perhaps a .... Klemheist would help reduce this tendency.

This approach would obviously halve the elasticity of the system, though.
If a simplified Klemheist works and prevents that lengthwise rolling/twisting problem, the elasticity of the system could be maintained by doing something similar to a Klemheist by first tying a permanent small loop, and then proceed to coil around the object as required and tuck the tubing through that permanent loop.

It'd be similar to what is sometimes called a tensionless hitch.
If you wish to add a troll to your ignore list, click "Profile" then "Buddies/Ignore List".


richardpeterson

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 20
Re: New hitch?
« Reply #34 on: February 29, 2012, 07:04:17 PM »
Thanks for the great input, Dan!

what is lost, still, is the neat sort
of opposed-bights nipping that gives the Ossel such
staying-tied security.

I'm a newbie, so please correct me if I'm wrong here. My intent is to contribute ideas, not ego.

I played with this, and I really don't think much is lost with the round turn in the proposed hitch. When I think of an opposing bight nip, I think of something like Ashley's bend, with that beautiful structure in the middle where both bights are fully loaded and form one of the best nips of any knot. The Ossel has a similar looking structure, but here one bight is active and one is passive. The active bight (the turn around the standing part) forms a good nip on the standing part and (more importantly, I think) nips the tail underneath. The bight formed by the tail just before it exits doesn't seem to nip much at all, to me.

To demonstrate this, form an ossel hitch and haul the tail up just a bit, away from the standing part, enough to straighten it out so it doesn't really form a bight. See if the nip is any less secure on the standing part or the tail. Without testing, all I have to go on is my imagination of the forces on the line, and how good it looks and feels when I give it a good tug. But it really doesn't seem like the opposing bight in the tail end is doing much.

I think the final nip on the tail is what makes either knot secure, which is evidenced by the fact that the Ossel won't hold fast on a larger object because that nip is compromised.

But I do I think the nip on the proposed hitch may be weaker than the Ossel's nip, and here's how:

If you form a Munter hitch, you essentially have an Ossel with just the first nip - the turn around the standing part. Clearly this is a good nip, or the Munter wouldn't work. You can make a modified Munter analogous to my proposed hitch by adding a round turn. This added turn slightly decreases the tight nip of the Munter, and my intuition tells me this would lessen the effectiveness of the nip. I imagine you can test a Munter by putting a weight on the standing end, and seeing how much weight is needed on the tail to keep everything from slipping. I bet that just slightly more weight is needed on the tail to make the modified Munter with the round turn work.

That might not be the case, but if it is, then my proposed hitch (the Ossel with the round turn) may have a bit more force pulling the tail out from under the final nip than a plain Ossel.

Of course, this is all conjecture, and may not matter one bit in the security of the actual knots tied in some real line.



Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4013
Re: New hitch?
« Reply #35 on: February 29, 2012, 08:02:45 PM »
what is lost, still, is the neat sort
of opposed-bights nipping that gives the Ossel such
staying-tied security.

I'm a newbie, so please correct me if I'm wrong here. My intent is to contribute ideas, not ego.

I played with this, and I really don't think much is lost with the round turn in the proposed hitch.
...
The bight formed by the tail just before it exits doesn't seem to nip much at all, to me.

Bingo!  --in that the loss comes mostly from any
relatively larger-diameter object rather than from
the different structure (the added turn).  But look
at the basic ossel hitch tied around a small-dia.
object, and you'll see how that turn around the SPart
is opposed by the "L" turn&tuck of the tail --that's
what I'm pointing to.  And, so, I have played around
with making the "L" sharper ("U"), and so on, and
to get the nipping effected independent of hitched
object!

Now, sparing another camera-click and special offload/upload,
at the moment,
I think words will suffice to my suggestion of effecting an
object-indepent opposed-bights nipping structure above.

We'll work on a horizontally disposed object/cylinder,
from left to right.

With the tail, form a small eye, in a timber hitch manner,
turning the tail back over then tucked back under itself
(first crossing being *over* ensures the the nipped crossing
falls back more surely against the object!); this small eye
resided above (visually to our horizontal cylinder) & against
the cyclinder, dogged tail extending rightwards at the back.

Now, line flowing Top-Back-Down-Front-Up-..., as we've begun,
make a wrap (moving rightwards) around the cylinder and
cross over (further trapping/nipping) the tail; maybe "one good
turn deserves another? (YMMV on needed *grip* vs. lateral load);
and now on subsequent wrap,
as we bring SPart
(ah, yes, I assume a relatively short hitching line, and am tying
the knot *backwards*, so to speak --end->outwards! (which
shows a problem with the term "working end", as I'm working
with the SPart-to-be, in another sense --of what has 100% load))
...
around from back, up ... now INTO our small eye,
and U-turn back (forming, thus, our opposing bight to the eye's)
and wrap Down-Back-Up...
with a little reach RIGHTwards, making subsequent wraps (just
1 or 2) from right-to-left --we're aiming to bring the working
end (SPart) out through/between the opposed-bights.
These right-to-left wraps will be ones with greatest, SPart-delivered
tension, so it's worth having a couple, if grip is needed (i.e., I think
these will pay greater gripping dividends than those put in from
the small eye; some bit of *working* can help, but naturally the
load will feed these last-formed wraps).
...
and, as indicated, wrap back leftwards as desired and bring the
SPart-end out between the opposed bights (which itself implies
that one cannot tie the knot with much tension, as one must
have looseness in order to make this exit tuck).

Now, one can try building tension (pre-stretching the rather
frictive elastic tubing) by working the left half (here) of small
eye & follow-on wraps tight, hauling out that turn through
the eye (SPart now in place) to tension wraps, then pulling
back sharply to pull into small eye; then it's a matter of
working the right half's wraps tight, with final pull on the
SPart, which should be well nipped, now.

IN SOME USUAL CORDAGE (not surgical tubing, which I suspect
is frictive, and of course highly elastic), less "working" will be
needed, and more will occur naturally via loading.

Btw, for a fun time of exploration, which might lead to some
workable solution, as well, try loading the ossel hitch
in reverse --pull the tail!  You'll see the new-tail
get nipped against the loaded end (new SPart); you might
endeavor to secure the tail in a way that fully forms an
opposing bight to this; add wraps at appropriate points
if lateral grip needs bolstering.


--dl*
====

xarax

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2781
Re: New hitch?
« Reply #36 on: February 29, 2012, 08:43:16 PM »
"Now, sparing another camera-click and special offload/upload, at the moment"
but not giving a dam about other people, who should try to decipher the tangle of words, and follow the mental picture as it is revealed, step by step...

Object-indepent opposed-bights nipping structure :

I have played around with making the "L" sharper ("U"), and so on, and to get the nipping effected independent of hitched object!

We'll work on a horizontally disposed object/cylinder, from left to right.

With the tail, form a small eye, in a timber hitch manner,
turning the tail back over then tucked back under itself
(first crossing being *over* ensures the the nipped crossing falls back more surely against the object!);
 this small eye resided above (visually to our horizontal cylinder) & against the cyclinder, dogged tail extending rightwards at the back.

Now, line flowing Top-Back-Down-Front-Up-...,
 as we've begun, make a wrap (moving rightwards) around the cylinder and cross over (further trapping/nipping) the tail;
 maybe "one good turn deserves another? (YMMV on needed *grip* vs. lateral load);
and now on subsequent wrap, as we bring SPart
(ah, yes, I assume a relatively short hitching line, and am tying the knot *backwards*, so to speak --end->outwards! (
which shows a problem with the term "working end", as I'm working with the SPart-to-be, in another sense --of what has 100% load))
...
around from back, up ...
now INTO our small eye, and U-turn back (forming, thus, our opposing bight to the eye's)
and wrap Down-Back-Up...
with a little reach RIGHTwards, making subsequent wraps (just 1 or 2) from right-to-left --
we're aiming to bring the working end (SPart) out through/between the opposed-bights.
These right-to-left wraps will be ones with greatest, SPart-delivered tension, so it's worth having a couple, if grip is needed
(i.e., I think these will pay greater gripping dividends than those put in from the small eye; some bit of *working* can help, but naturally the load will feed these last-formed wraps).
...
and, as indicated, wrap back leftwards as desired and bring the SPart-end out between the opposed bights
(which itself implies that one cannot tie the knot with much tension, as one must have looseness in order to make this exit tuck).

Now, one can try building tension (pre-stretching the rather frictive elastic tubing) by working the left half (here) of small eye & follow-on wraps tight, hauling out that turn through the eye (SPart now in place) to tension wraps,
then pulling back sharply to pull into small eye;
then it's a matter of working the right half's wraps tight, with final pull on the SPart, which should be well nipped, now.

Gentlemen, we saved one camera click and one upload/download keybord key push...for the moment. And see what we have gained !  :)

This is not a knot.

richardpeterson

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 20
Re: New hitch?
« Reply #37 on: February 29, 2012, 09:56:01 PM »


With the tail, form a small eye, in a timber hitch manner,
turning the tail back over then tucked back under itself

I'm not sure where you're starting from here. Are you talking about appending this entire structure to the end of the fist hitch? Starting with that knot, and then taking the tail from that knot, and wrapping it around itself, timber-hitch style?

Quote

(first crossing being *over* ensures the the nipped crossing
falls back more surely against the object!); this small eye
resided above (visually to our horizontal cylinder) & against
the cyclinder, dogged tail extending rightwards at the back.

I don't think I'm following the description, as the way I'm doing it, passing over just collapses into passing under, but winding the opposite direction.

Quote
Now, line flowing Top-Back-Down-Front-Up-..., as we've begun,
make a wrap (moving rightwards) around the cylinder and
cross over (further trapping/nipping) the tail; maybe "one good
turn deserves another? (YMMV on needed *grip* vs. lateral load);
and now on subsequent wrap,
as we bring SPart
(ah, yes, I assume a relatively short hitching line, and am tying
the knot *backwards*, so to speak --end->outwards! (which
shows a problem with the term "working end", as I'm working
with the SPart-to-be, in another sense --of what has 100% load))
...
around from back, up ... now INTO our small eye,
and U-turn back (forming, thus, our opposing bight to the eye's)
and wrap Down-Back-Up...
with a little reach RIGHTwards, making subsequent wraps (just
1 or 2) from right-to-left --we're aiming to bring the working
end (SPart) out through/between the opposed-bights.
These right-to-left wraps will be ones with greatest, SPart-delivered
tension, so it's worth having a couple, if grip is needed (i.e., I think
these will pay greater gripping dividends than those put in from
the small eye; some bit of *working* can help, but naturally the
load will feed these last-formed wraps).
...
and, as indicated, wrap back leftwards as desired and bring the
SPart-end out between the opposed bights (which itself implies
that one cannot tie the knot with much tension, as one must
have looseness in order to make this exit tuck).

Now, one can try building tension (pre-stretching the rather
frictive elastic tubing) by working the left half (here) of small
eye & follow-on wraps tight, hauling out that turn through
the eye (SPart now in place) to tension wraps, then pulling
back sharply to pull into small eye; then it's a matter of
working the right half's wraps tight, with final pull on the
SPart, which should be well nipped, now.


Dan - I'd love to know what kind of complication you've devised, but I'm not good enough at following descriptions yet to reproduce what you're describing. I'd love to see a picture of some kind if you were inclined to take or draw one.

Thanks for all the thought and input.

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4013
Re: New hitch?
« Reply #38 on: March 01, 2012, 04:53:18 AM »
With the tail, form a small eye, in a timber hitch manner,
turning the tail back over then tucked back under itself

I'm not sure where you're starting from here.

I'm starting --at the beginning, with the cylinder
disposed as described, horizontally, and working from just
at the top side of it, rightwards in progression.
[See bottommost prg., I think for maybe the quickest *purchase*
into what I'm describing.]

Quote
Quote
(first crossing being *over* ensures the the nipped crossing
falls back more surely against the object!); this small eye
resided above (visually to our horizontal cylinder) & against
the cyclinder, dogged tail extending rightwards at the back.

I don't think I'm fllowing the description, as the way I'm doing it, passing over just collapses into passing under, but winding the opposite direction.
This was a parenthesis about how I formed this small
eye (and how I begin the dogging of the tail for a
timber hitch : by crossing on the away side from
the object, you have no nip yet, and so that crossing-back
will come on the next crossing, which is nearer the object.
Again, this is just a remark about details.  (If one were to
view this small loop from *above*, the tail would have
turned anti-clockwise and crossed Over, then dogged
back Under --here being the first/only nip.  The tail
is now pointing rightwards, and thus we'll be able to
take a wrap atop it for further securing.)

Quote
Quote
Now, line flowing Top-Back-Down-Front-Up-..., as we've begun,
make a wrap (moving rightwards) around the cylinder and
cross over (further trapping/nipping) the tail; ...
Dan - I'd love to know what kind of complication you've devised,
but I'm not good enough at following descriptions yet ...

I can't buy this.  It is a simple matter of wrapping a line
around a cylinder.  I've specified direction --from the top
go back (away from viewer), down, towards viewer at
bottom, and up: this is obviously one direction of wrapping
--and moving rightwards.
And, so, coming back around on the right of the small eye,
one can wrap over its tail, in making a 2nd wrap.

At which point, for brevity, bring the SPart end THROUGH
the eye, and then turn (180deg) back down (as a Munter
turns in going around the SPart, say), and wrap now in
the reverse direction.
AND, let's reverse both the wrapping-around and the
progression : so, reach a little removed to the right,
and bring wraps now LEFTwards, coming back to
the center (think of the wraps of a Prusik hitch
working towards the center SParts exit).

After 1-2(-3?) wraps --a matter of needed grip--,
you bring the SPart end out through the opposed
bights of the small-eye & turn through it.

And you'll need to work surgical tubing into tightness.

SEEN IN REVERSE (for illustration purposes),
you would traverse the path of a Prusik hitch,
until making the crossing collar, where, once
to the center point of the ONE SPart you've
been following --your path into the knot, into one *half*-,
you'd turn down and wrap in reverse orientation to the
cylinder and away from center (so, continue leftwards,
if doing right half),
to finish by tying that small timber-hitch loop around
the SPart --and having a deuce of a time getting its
tail tucked under wraps.  But this was for illustration.


At the most basic level --fewest wraps--,
I'm describing, NEARLY, the so-called "Killig hitch",

except that IT takes a cow hitch tail and dogs it
around itself, WITHOUT that end turning around
the SPart (and so forming the nicely nipping opposed-bights
structure).  The wraps specified above are for giving
lateral grip, and should be seen as easily added as
desired.


--dl*
====

richardpeterson

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 20
Re: New hitch?
« Reply #39 on: March 02, 2012, 05:00:32 AM »

Dan -

I think I see where you're going now. I hadn't been working both sides back toward the center until you mentioned the prusik.


So do you mean like the attached image?





xarax

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2781
Re: New hitch?
« Reply #40 on: March 02, 2012, 09:03:56 AM »
   I can only hope that this knot can be somehow improved , and will be improved in the future, by you or by Dan Lehman... if that is what he had in mind. To my mind, this thing is more of a "tangle", than a neat hitch, like the fine, beautiful one Dan Lehman himself devised sometime ago (1). So, I would be happy to be left with the memory of that hitch/binder as THE Dan Lehman hitch/binder, and not with this last one...(that I could not have remembered, ever if I had wished to...).
   Speaking of the shown hitch, I understand why the things that we can not show, we should speak about ! ( I am paraphrasing Wittgenstein here... :)). In the end of the day, it is not so bad a hitch - but we have dozens of hitches...Coming from a "Oriental" country, I would say that it is "bon pour l orient" :). If you wish a hitch with interlinked/crossed or parallel opposed bights, see (2) and (3).

1)  http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1451.0
2)  http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3104.msg18513#msg18513
3)  http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3104.msg18514#msg18514
« Last Edit: March 02, 2012, 09:11:45 AM by xarax »
This is not a knot.

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4013
Re: New hitch?
« Reply #41 on: March 02, 2012, 06:54:20 PM »
Dan -
I think I see where you're going now. I hadn't been working both sides
back toward the center until you mentioned the prusik.
So do you mean like the attached image?

Excellent, and shown w/enough space to see parts.

(I didn't want to seem hard w/words, but really believe
that language should suffice in many cases; here, to
beget an accompanying image.  Of course, words can
mislead, but in back'n'forth Q/A, things can be worked out.)

The key elements : the opposed-bights for a stay-tied lock;
the turns around the object for a grip-in-place effect.
That was the simple recipe, with allowance on varying
the number of turns (and on which half --I believe that
on the SPart's half they are more surely tensioned) per
conditions & desired effect (up to a point).

In the case of PT use of a surgical tubing, I suspect that
in-use forces might well do little to the hitch if it's well
tensioned in tying --and that means that the set hitch
will not be distorted and lose integrity, and so on.
I also think that this uncommon material demands
some special treatment in setting; less stretchy
materials could do more self-tightening of this knot.


To tension this, I'd try laying on the left-side wraps
with considerable tension, leaving the right-side wraps
to be worked tight, after completing the knot (bringing
out the SPart).  One will want to anticipate the effect
of pulling against the small eye --i.e., to plan for its
elasticity so tightened--, haul back on the opposing
bight (the U-turn through the eye), and then tediously
work tension around the wraps to pull out on the SPart,
which should be nipped to hold this tension (in theory  ;)  ).

Thanks,
--dl*
====

roo

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1868
    • The Notable Knot Index
Re: New hitch?
« Reply #42 on: March 02, 2012, 07:10:07 PM »

Dan -

I think I see where you're going now. I hadn't been working both sides back toward the center until you mentioned the prusik.


So do you mean like the attached image?
I somehow doubt this will be simple enough for the average patient to apply at home on their own.
If you wish to add a troll to your ignore list, click "Profile" then "Buddies/Ignore List".


xarax

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2781
Re: New hitch?
« Reply #43 on: March 02, 2012, 07:26:21 PM »
I didn't want to seem hard w/words, but really believe that language should suffice in many cases; here, to beget an accompanying image.

Pictures - even one f...picture - would suffice in many more cases - and here, too !
"sparing another camera-click and special offload/upload" is not what helped people understand what you were talking about - if that is what you had wished, in the first place. Unless you think it is a necessary gymnastics, that new members should suffer...a baptism into the river of blah-blah that the new member is going to be immersed in, soon.

The key elements : the opposed-bights for a stay-tied lock; the turns around the object for a grip-in-place effect. That was the simple recipe

   Yes, indeed, the recipe was simple and correct.. but a cook should do more than follow a recipe!  :)
I will repeat it once more:  I hope that this thing can be improved, simplified, and turned into a neat hitch. Because now it is not, I am afraid. One will not die if he eats this all-into-the-plate food, but he would not appreciate the art of the cook either - and he will probably never return to this restaurant again. Gentlemen, turn this frog into a prince !  :)
   
 
« Last Edit: March 02, 2012, 07:28:20 PM by xarax »
This is not a knot.

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4013
Re: New hitch?
« Reply #44 on: March 02, 2012, 08:23:13 PM »
I somehow doubt this will be simple enough for the average patient to apply at home on their own.

+1.  And, as I look at it, I wonder at some improved
tying going the opposite *direction* --directly wrapping
SPart, making the collar, wrapping a bit AND THEN
making, with the tail, whatever finish will get one
some "opposed-bights" nipping (such as a turn through
the collar + stopper, or simple hitch).  This would be
easier to effect, as it requires no or little "working".

Anyway, the illustration serves at least to give some
substance to the elements I thought could work
--those nipping bights and wraps.  Practically, with
the particular material of surgical tubing, one can
do as well in result more simply in tying.

--dl*
====