Club-Bend, Rosenwind-Bend, crossed Club-Bend, crossed Rosenwind-Bend

[Dan_Lehman]

First of all, when I tied Zeppelin or Hunter's bend, I tied it starting with one already done overhand knot and not following the pictures and procedures in various books. So I learned to see the pattern, which is the special conjunction of the two overhand knots.
And then I started to tie as much as possible variations in similar way, and I found that more variations are possible. To achieve only symmetric knots, was not the challenge. I would not speak of falsely tied Hunters Bend and so on.

I, too, prefer to begin with one end tied into an overhand knot
and then reeve the other end into it, however desired.  Some
of the alternative tying methods I think are "too clever by half"
and give a false sense of ease : perhaps, after the carefully
arranged beginning, the ending does come easily --but that
does require doing all the careful preliminary arrangement
(during which time nothing is stably formed, unlike
having an overhand component awaiting the complement!).

Also, these presentations of tying the knot have omitted the
exact specification of how the knot should/can be dressed,
resulting in some noise about #1452 jamming and so on,
which can be seen to result from dressing it in different ways
--as can a butterfly knot be differently dressed, AND,
qua eyeknot, differently loaded!

I was curious about results and I tested the Club Bend and the Rosenwind Bend practically tying the bends for lifting loads with crane. I can say therefore, the knots are working. Under strain these knots show good behaviour. They locked well, they keep in shape, they didn?t slip and they could be easily untied.

!! Bravo!  What sort of rope and loads ... ?  (And how did
you come to have such license for adventure with a crane
and loads(!) ?)

... more symmetric than Zeppelin or Hunters bend.
This knot has identically running working and playing ends,
but under strain this knot appears not to lock enough.

Is that one presented in your above-referenced material?
(I confess to not understanding how things would be more
symmetric --which to my mind is more a yes/no state.)

There is a thread on this forum entitled "Ashley's Bend #1452
and Its Ilk" which begins a presentation & discussion of these
sorts of interlocked ("conjugated") overhands end-2-end knots.
Cf. igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1446.0
  [ Btw, Search for this --even for mere 'ilk'-- did NOT find it!? ]
Among the knots presented there is a variation on "SmitHunter's" bend
which I find preferable to the famous one (an old acquaintance).


--dl*
====

[Luca]

Four versions,why you say"at least 8 different loops"?,and,
why you says"Because the crossed Rosenwind bend is "unsymmetrical",
related to this?

With the asymmetric end-2-end knot (a class of knot with
2 pieces of knotted material and so 4 *ends* exiting it),
one has 4 ends, each of which is a candidate to be
the SPart of an eye knot;
for each such SPart, the one eye leg is determined by
the other end of the SPart's part; but there are TWO
ends to be candidate's for the re-entry of this part to
close the eye : 4 x 2 = 8.

Thanks Dan!Apologizes Edmund!

In substance it is this kind of reverse "in part", that escaped me,
like the difference between common/Eskimo bowline;
sometimes my brain misfires (well, maybe more than sometimes ..),
perhaps I said "loop", but I thought "bend",
(EDIT.I see now that the speech "bend / loop" has nothing to do,
this "partial inversion" can also be done with the bend ..)
but it not occurred to me even after,so..no excuse!
Anyway, now is clear to me.

                                                                         Thanks.

[Edmund Berndt]

Hi,
Sorry ist is many days ago,

Here are the 8 possible loops of the asymmetric twisted interlocked overhand knot.

[X1]

   Hi Edmunt,

   It is very useful you present those knots with pictures taken from both sides. May I suggest that it would be even more convenient for us if you could present them one by one, and label the pictures accordingly. Also, you can post bigger pictures here. If you download the (free) GIMP program :
http://www.gimp.org/
you can "open" a picture, and "export" it as .jpeg in a file just a little bit smaller than the allowed maximum of 100 KB - by selecting "Show preview in image window", un-selecting "Use quality settings from the origial picture", and then moving the pointer of the "Quality" towards the left.

[Edmund Berndt]

In theese pictures You can see the Rosenwindbend normal and twisted (or crossed).  The twist is only working in one direktion. In the above 2 pictures you can see the 8 "different" loops just always from the same side.  Of course, if you start with the 1st overhand knot the other way round You will perform the 8 mirror images too.

The same action could be done with the Clubbend as shown in 1st posting. Because the Clubbend is more symmetric there are only 4 different loops possible and so on.

[Luca]

Hello Edmund,welcome back!

Your pictures are very clarifying for me, thanks! So, considering the standard version of the knot + the other two crossed-tails versions,I can get as many as 24 different loops!

                                                                                                          Bye!

[X1]

   Edmunt and Luca.
   Dear friends, read other people s posts, either you like them or not !  Do not lose your time, there are so many unknown things to search for...
   The first knot is the Matk s B bend, which I had mentioned in my first post. (See the 2 attached picture.) The second knot is one of the two X versions of it, where the tails are crossed ( X = crossed ) before they leave the knot s nub. ( See the 4 attached pictures of the next post).
    All the possble bends that can be generated by retucking one of the eight different Reef family of knot s "bases" through the central opening have been described, and pictures of theim have been posted at the cited posts. ( And they are not 24, Luca... )

[X1]

   Having said that, I do not mean that we know anything about those bends, other than they exist !  We have to test them, and see if they are safe, if they jam easily, and how strong they are... Much work fro the future knot tyers !

[X1]

  Crossing the tails of the Mark s A bend in a similar way, we get the bends shown at the attached pictures.

[Edmund Berndt]

Hi,
I dont want to bother You. I noticed allready Marks bens. They are the same.  Please be not angry.

In 2005 in the Logbook of the UYCAs i wrote an article about Zeppelins Bend, Hunter's Bend, Captn's bend an so on. In this article I tried to describe the common construction features of these knots. So I created the term conjugierte supramanual nodi. Of course with twinkling eyes - Latin looks more scientific 
Afterwards I got contact with Mr Hoefnagl in Holland. He posted it on his homepage. The Club Bend was not described because I realised it lateron after print.
At home I had to look up Ashley's book and a few other books about knots. But in none of them are explantions of knots belonging to the same family. E.g. bowline ans sheet bend have the same knot which is constructed only by an eye and a bight. And as You say in your term the interlocked overhandknots are an construction of two overhand knots.
The twisting (crossing germ. kreuzen) is the next logical step. http://home.tiscali.nl/knotsandknottying/downloads/Conjugierte%20supramanuale%20Nodi.pdf

This year I write again about Rosenwindstek and the title will be "Knots against Alzheimer's disease"
I show that there is the possibility to tie 8 different loops and this should be a good training for memory and spatial perception when learing it by heart.
All diagonal interlocked overhand bends could be twisted, some of them only working in one direktion, some of them in two directions. Ashley Nr. 1425 is if You look at the knot a twisted Hunter's bend, but load changed.

About Mark s B X1 bend: is it possible to upload a picture in an open view?

[X1]

About Mark s B X1 bend: is it possible to upload a picture in an open view?

   Unfotunately, those are the only pictures I still have... - because, with all those bends around, some housekeeping is nessesary  , so I keep only a few, small pictures of each one.
   The two tails can penetrate the central opening being parallel to each other, or they can cross each other, the one going "over" and the other "under". In the later case, if the tail of the left link goes, say, "over" the tail of the right link, we have the one Mark s X bend - if it goes "under", we have the other.
    I would prefer the two Hunter s X bends, or the Shakehands I / Shakehands II bends - , or the basic Shakehands -X bend, shown at the attached pictures. I do not see what this peculiar "one-sideness" of the Mark s bends has to offer.

[Luca]

Hi X1,

Let's say that the speech that I made is about an area more "circumstantiated"with respect of the area of your speech in the thread you cited:a speech regarding only about the tucking of the tails,parallel, but in the opposite direction,like an Hunter's, through the"vesica piscis"visible in the"Reef family base A1a"pic,or the"A2":

http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3204.msg19380#msg19380

How many are the loops that can be obtained from the various possible combinations of fusion of the "tails" and the "standing parts"of the nub of the bend that arose, between them: 1)without crossing the tails+2) crossing them  in a way +3) crossing them in the other way?In agreement with the images posted by Edmund, which show the 8 combinations of the "tucked A1" with the same way crossed tails, due to the asymmetry of the knot nub pointed out ​​by Edmund,it seems to me 8 +8 +8 for A1 and 8 +8 +8 for A2.

                                                                                                                      Bye!

[X1]

  When I started to re-tuck the 8 possible different Reef family of knots "bases" through their central openings, I thought that I was going to tie 8 different bends. Noope !  They were only 7 ! ( Marks s A, Mark s B, Alpine Butterfly, ABoK#1408, Hunter s, Ashley s, Shakehands -X ). The reason for it was the symmetry of A1b and A2b bases... which generated the same knot, the Alpine Butterfly bend. So, since that time, I am very cautious about calculating the number of bends, in vacuo ! Show me the bends !  I hope that, by now, you have found a camera somewhere...

[Edmund Berndt]

Hi Xi!
I always start just with one complete eye knot. In summary there are 8 interlocked overhand knots possible.
3 of them are T-shape. These are Captn's Bend, Alpine Butterfly Bend and Ashley's 502. The remaining 5 Knots are Zeppelin Bend (e.g. Rosendahl's Bend) Hunter's Bend, Rosenwind Bend, Clubbend, and the 5th is called by me Decor (ger. Zier) bend. In the link:
http://home.tiscali.nl/knotsandknottying/downloads/Conjugierte%20supramanuale%20Nodi.pdf
I named the Rosenwind Bend "B verdrehter Zeppelin bzw. Hunter" in that paper. The Club Bend I didn't mention at that time. The "F Zierknoten" is the most symmetric bend, more symmetric then Zeppelin Bend. You can't even distinguish between the loose and the fixed ends. It is possible to transform the knot when it is not pulled tight. On the the first view it seems to be not the same knot when changing (not twisting) the ends.  Under strain it is not really certain that the knot will hold. The shape isn't stable. I think that this knot regarding to its symmentric shape is known. Twisting of course make this knot obviously save .

A Zeppelin Stek
B verdrehter Zeppelin bzw. Hunter
C verdrehter Ashley 501
D Ashley 501
E offener Schmetterlingsknoten
F Zierknoten
G Captain?s Bend
H Hunter?s Bend

[X1]

I always start just with one complete eye knot. In summary there are 8 interlocked overhand knots possible.

   I do not understand this : what do you mean by a " complete eye knot " ?  If you start with a complete / completed (?) eye knot, you can not do anything else to finish, can you ? 
   Now, if one adds the Zeppelin bend, yes, there are 8 knots in my scheme, too. However, I start from an inomplete / unfinished eyeknot, one of the 8 possible Reef knot bases - two interlinked first turns. So, the Zeppelin bend can not be included in my scheme, because it does not incorporate two interlinked first turns. It is a very different type of knot, which I have described as a "rope-made hinge". Its difference with all the other 7  bends is evident, to my eyes. However, I know that, in knots, difference lies in the eyes of anybody who does not sees similarity. I have to admit that, although in all other things in the Universe I see many similarities, in knots I see many differences !    And this Zeppelin bend is MUCH different than the other bends - so it was natural to me to believe that the absence of the Zeppelin bend of my scheme, is a good sign it is something significant, and that it does not lie only in the eye of the beholder.
   It would be useful if you present those knots one by one, as you did for the two of them ( The Mark s B, bend and the one of the two Mark s X B bends). If you do this, I will try to see if they are each one of them is any one of the well known knots that were generated in my scheme, or not. ( It is interesting that the first bend that is generated, is not the common Shakehands bend, but the Shakehands -X bend - the common SHakehands bend is produced if we cross the bends of this basic Shakehands -X bend ). If you insist of using unknown to knot tyers, for knots known to knot tyers, I am afraid that you will have even less success than the author - who tries to do the exact opposite  .

1. The three variations of the Shakehands bend
    http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3278