Author Topic: How should we name those loose hitches / nooses ?  (Read 11182 times)

X1

  • Inactive
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1200
How should we name those loose hitches / nooses ?
« on: June 26, 2013, 02:30:28 PM »
   Many "snug" hitches we use to tie around a pole, can also be tied around a main line, and become "loose" hitches, as Ashley calls them - i.e., adjustable (along their location on the main line, and their gripping power) hitches, or nooses.
   Nowadays I use to tie the "Buntline Extinguisher", as I whimsically call a "8"-shaped "loose hitch" based on the Constrictor. ( See the second attached picture ). It is as simple to tie as the Buntline hitch ( same number of tucks ), more easy to inspect ( because of its symmetry ), and its gripping power on the penetrating line can be controlled and adjusted more easily, according to the friction characteristics of the material(s) and the loading circumstances. As we pull the tail, the surrounding hitch induces some curvature on the main line that penetrates it - the stronger the pull, the more curved the main line becomes, so its slippage throughout the surrounding hitch is restricted even more.
   The Constrictor-like form of the surrounding hitch ( well, almost Constrictor-like - because the orientation of the two free ends is not perpendicular to the axis of the pole, as in the Constrictor...) means that it is TIB - so, if the main line is pulled out of it, it becomes unknotted - no "relic" knot left on the returning leg. I believe that this is very convenient, and makes the "Buntline Extinguisher" as versatile, as a knot, as the Buntline. Most other "loose" hitches and nooses are not TIB in this sense.
    Another "8"-shaped TIB hitch, that can be tied around the main line to form a "loose" hitch, is shown in the first attached picture. It can also induce some beneficial local curvature on the part of the mail line that penetrates it - however, according to my experience on the slippery materials I use, its gripping power on the main line varies less "smoothly", and it is not as easily controlled by the force we pull the tail, as the gripping power of the "Buntline Extinguisher"
   Of course, we are knot tyers, and the knot tyers are collectors  :) , just as crazy as all collectors are ! So, I could nt keep this specimen without labelling it somehow - but I can not find a proper, more or less descriptive name - and I also want to find a proper name for the "Buntline Extinguisher", because I do not like that it sounds too "anti"-Buntline !  Nobody can deny the quality of the Buntline hitch, even in its most simple form, when it is not slipped, so I do not wish to offer more excuses for the deliberately harsh criticism I already suffer !  :)
   Names for those two "loose" hitches, please !     
   

SS369

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1788
Re: How should we name those loose hitches / nooses ?
« Reply #1 on: June 28, 2013, 02:27:06 AM »
Figure 1: Figure eight noose.

Figure 2: Symmetric sheet noose.

SS
« Last Edit: June 29, 2013, 02:14:49 PM by SS369 »

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3719
Re: How should we name those loose hitches / nooses ?
« Reply #2 on: June 29, 2013, 06:28:31 AM »
Figure 1: Figure eight noose.

Except that (a) there's at least one or two other such
nooses deserving this name already (in CLD's AKS e.g.),
and (b) this one isn't --a fig.8.

But is it as good as a buntline hitch or even a gnat?!


 ;D

X1

  • Inactive
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1200
Re: How should we name those loose hitches / nooses ?
« Reply #3 on: June 29, 2013, 12:07:09 PM »
But is it as good as a buntline hitch or even a gnat?!
   Frankly, I would nt bother to compare it to the Gnat hitch, because I know of a much simpler and better tight hitch, which is a true "Gnat extinguisher", indeed.  :)  The "simplest hitch" presented before (1) the Gnat hitch, but not advertised as roothlesly !  :) 
   No, I believe it is not as good as the Buntline hitch - and can not be slipped as the Buntline hitch - but it can be tied so easily, following such a simple, shape-"8" tracing pattern, that it makes it interesting. However, I have not tried it in less slick and stiff materials than the kernmantle climbing ropes I use - I do not know what the outcome of a comparison to the Buntline hitch would be, if both are tied on more "compressible', flexible and rough ropes.
   I, too, do not believe that we should use the "fig.8" moniker, because it denotes the generic topology of the fig.8 stopper ( ABoK#520), and the Figure 1 eyeknot ( the nub of the hitch ), is topologically equivalent to the unknot ( i.e., it is TIB - if the main line is pulled out of it, it becomes unknotted - no "relic" knot left on the returning leg ).

1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3288.msg19765#msg19765
« Last Edit: June 29, 2013, 12:57:09 PM by X1 »

SS369

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1788
Re: How should we name those loose hitches / nooses ?
« Reply #4 on: June 29, 2013, 02:13:55 PM »
Figure 1: Figure eight noose.

Except that (a) there's at least one or two other such
nooses deserving this name already (in CLD's AKS e.g.),
and (b) this one isn't --a fig.8.

But is it as good as a buntline hitch or even a gnat?!


 ;D

OK, my offer for Figure 1 is shot down in flames.
Any suggestions from you Dan?

SS

SS369

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1788
Re: How should we name those loose hitches / nooses ?
« Reply #5 on: June 29, 2013, 02:18:23 PM »
- and can not be slipped as the Buntline hitch -

What am I missing? Plainly it can be slipped since the tail is readily available and could possibly lead to easier untying.

SS

X1

  • Inactive
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1200
Re: How should we name those loose hitches / nooses ?
« Reply #6 on: June 29, 2013, 03:04:42 PM »
- and can not be slipped as the Buntline hitch -
   What am I missing? Plainly it can be slipped since the tail is readily available and could possibly lead to easier untying.

   Good question !  :)  I know that most knot tyers think of the "slipped" variations of knots as just convenient ways to facilitate the untying of them, or the release, with one pull, of knots that may be still under tension.
   However, those "slipped" "variations" are different knots, in three ways. Firstly, a slipped "variation" of a knot can sometimes be TIB, while its non-slipped parent knot may be not. That means that those two knots may be topologically different, i.e., as different, as knots, as they can be !  :)  Topology is the most important characteristic of the mathematical knots, and I do not see why it should be of secondary importance in the filed of ideal or even "real", physical knots.
   Secondly, the "added" new segment, the extension of the previous tail, changes the geometry of the knot, by its mere presence, by the bulk of its material that forces the segments of the parent knot to re-arrange themselves, follow different paths inside the knot s nub, be loaded differently, change the distribution of tensile and sheer forces within the whole knot ,etc. So, they are important not only topologically, but geometrically as well.
  Now, last but not least : The extension of the tail which is used in the "slipped" "variation" can function in a new way, as a new "obstacle" that would block the slippage of other segments, and contribute to the overall stability of the knot. That is exactly what the extension of the tail that retraces its last part does in the case of the Buntline hitch ! It transforms it in an entirely new, different knot, more complex, but also much more effective. The inserted segment meets the penetrating main line at a right angle, at a fourth point, so we can say that it is added on top of the other three obstacles that this main line has to overcome, in order to slip through the nub of the hitch. So, according to my understanding, the "slipped Buntline" hitch is a different knot, that, roughly speaking, is about four thirds as efficient as the Buntline hitch - 33% more ! ( In the Buntline hitch, the main line is blocked, by an "obstacle" placed at a right angle to it in three points, the two collars and the initial tail, in the "slipped Buntline" it is blocked in four ).
   I do not see how this can be achieved in the case of a "Slipped Figure 1" - that is why I said that the Figure 1 knot can not be compared to the Buntline hitch, regarding their "slipped" variations.
« Last Edit: June 29, 2013, 03:10:06 PM by X1 »

SS369

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1788
Re: How should we name those loose hitches / nooses ?
« Reply #7 on: June 29, 2013, 03:42:44 PM »
So, the naming request aside, for the moment.

Figure 1 (unslipped) seems to be possibly more of a secure hitch than the Buntline hitch. With the encircling part of the tail against the hitched-to object, it being pressed upon and forced into the vee shaped area of the loop's return, it will act as a wedge and force itself into the rope. The rest of the tail then adding icing to the cake by further tangling.
I don't see that same effect in the normal Buntline hitch, at least not as efficiently.

Yes, I can see your point about it the slipped version of Figure 1 being a different knot, although it is a slipped version still. Whether or not it makes untying after sufficient loading easier, well a test or three might determine that.

So we're back to the naming of it/them.

Serpent noose? ;-)))

SS


X1

  • Inactive
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1200
Re: How should we name those loose hitches / nooses ?
« Reply #8 on: June 29, 2013, 04:16:29 PM »
    Serpent noose? ;-)))
   
   Serpent noose sounds like a fine sneaky name to me !  :) 
   Knotting, a branch of herpeto-culture:)

   ( Herpetoculture is the keeping of live reptiles and amphibians in captivity, whether as a hobby or as a commercial breeding operation. "Herps" is an informal term that refers to both reptiles and amphibians. It is undertaken by people of all ages and from all walks of life, including, but not limited to career herpetologists, professional reptile or amphibian breeders, and casual hobbyists. It is considered by many to be different from pet keeping in that a few of its practitioners consider theirs animals as "pets"; most herpetoculturists do not give names to their animals, and most do not bond in the same way as pet keepers bond with their cats and dogs. However, some amateur herpetoculturists do treat their animals as pets and interact with them accordingly.)
   Well, knot tyers do give names to their pets, and they do bond with them - perhaps because they do not bond so well to each other... :)

   a test or three might determine that.
 
   Five:)  The Buntline hitch, the slipped Buntline hitch, the Buntline Extinguisher, The Serpent noose, and, of course, the Gnat hitch !  :)
 
« Last Edit: June 29, 2013, 04:25:25 PM by X1 »

SS369

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1788
Re: How should we name those loose hitches / nooses ?
« Reply #9 on: June 29, 2013, 11:27:16 PM »
 Knotting, a branch of herpeto-culture !  :)

Sub-branch:Ophiology, specializing in serpents.

So you've approved a name for Figure 1? Serpent noose.

Figure 2 ? Any offerings?
It reminded me of the symmetric sheet bend.

Yes, test away. What rope will be used? ;-))

SS

X1

  • Inactive
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1200
Re: How should we name those loose hitches / nooses ?
« Reply #10 on: June 30, 2013, 12:18:41 AM »
   Serpent noose, Constrictor hitch, Boa hitch... A lot if specimen !  :)
   I had also though of calling the "Buntline Extinguisher" as "Constrictor noose" , but I was reluctant to do so, because of the different orientation / inclination of the ends on the two knots : we are accustomed with the ends of the Constrictor be at right angles relatively to the axis of the penetrating pole. Now with the "Serpent noose" crawling next to it, I begin to consider the "Constrictor noose" moniker again...What do you think ?
   A "loose" hitch, where the one part, the main line, is a straight line, can not be similar to any symmetric bend, where both parts are convoluted - even as minimally convoluted as in the Symmetric Sheet bend / Desmond Mandeville s "Tumbling Thief Bend " (1)

1.  http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3716.msg27342#msg27342

   Yes, test away. What rope will be used? ;-))
   Perhaps the proper question would be : Who will test them ?  :)
 

SS369

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1788
Re: How should we name those loose hitches / nooses ?
« Reply #11 on: June 30, 2013, 12:36:18 AM »
Constrictor noose, well I don't think it qualifies exactly. The locking strand in the C. knot rides over the crossing and its pressure does the work "locking". Not so with this noose, to my eyes at least.

And there really is no reason to continue with serpentine names.
I'll tie it a few more times and see what it feels like.

I would test them. IF, I had a test criteria that was agreed upon by enough members. I would totally dislike running a series of tests only to read what I have read here before.

I have been, tentatively, offered the use of a test facility at a rope manufacturer. I would have access to use the drop gantry, the load cell and certain amount of materials.

SS

Figure 2: Overpass noose.
« Last Edit: June 30, 2013, 12:45:56 AM by SS369 »

X1

  • Inactive
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1200
Re: How should we name those loose hitches / nooses ?
« Reply #12 on: June 30, 2013, 03:48:14 AM »
  The locking strand in the C. knot rides over the crossing and its pressure does the work "locking". Not so with this noose, to my eyes at least.
.. it is a Constrictor, differently dressed, which hides its nature.
  The locking of the ends in the Constrictor is achieved by the riding turn, that is true, but the tight squeezing of the penetrating pole is due to the shrinking of the two round turns, when their rope length is consumed by the pulling of those ends. That happens with the noose, too, where the role of the two round turns is played by the two collars. I was surprized that this most simple and "adjustable" - regarding its place on the main line AND its gripping power on it - noose was nt known ( ? ), and I am also surprised that we can not relate it with a known "knot image"... Perhaps because all snakes look very similar to me  :) , I can not see much difference with the nipping structure of the Constrictor bowline (1).( See the attached pictures ).

1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3150.msg18864#msg18864

X1

  • Inactive
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1200
Re: How should we name those loose hitches / nooses ?
« Reply #13 on: June 30, 2013, 11:59:32 AM »
  The "Constrictor noose" moniker has another advantage : It may be considered as the corresponding noose to the Constrictor bowline, in just the same way the "reversed" Constrictor noose can be considered as the corresponding noose to the "reversed" Constrictor bowline ( See (1), and the attached picture ). It is convenient to have all those members of the ophidia clade safely locked in neighbouring jars, the one next to the other !  :)
 
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3020.msg21738#msg21738
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ophidia
3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clade

X1

  • Inactive
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1200
Re: How should we name those loose hitches / nooses ?
« Reply #14 on: June 30, 2013, 01:05:44 PM »
   I would test them. IF, I had a test criteria that was agreed upon by enough members.
   I have been, tentatively, offered the use of a test facility at a rope manufacturer. I would have access to use the drop gantry, the load cell and certain amount of materials.
   I can not speak but on behalf of one, and one member only, who has a very limited experience with proper laboratory testing facilities - and this had happened very looong ago : This member suggests :
   1. Limit the test to the "loose" hitches / nooses that become unknotted, the moment the main line is pulled out of the nub of the hitch. This is a good starting point, and limits the number of the hitches / nooses we have to test to just a few specimen.
   2. Test those hitches in their simplest form, which does not involve a round turn.
   3. Test those hitches when they are tied around poles of different diameters. As the most important geometrical factor is the angle between the legs of the hitch, instead of altering the diameter of the pole, use two pulleys, and adjust this angle in, say, 30 degree increments : 0 (parallel legs), 30, and 60 degrees. Also, test those hitches when they are in contact with the pole, i.e. their legs are spread almost 180 degrees. This multiplies the number of cases by 4, but I can not see how we could possibly avoid this complication...
   4. Test those hitches after they have been dressed properly, and pre-tightened to the same degree : The force with which we pull the free leg of such a hitch determines the more or less compact form it will have during the final loading. I believe this is an important adjustable parameter, so the hitches should be tested only after they have been pre-tightened by increments of, say, 2,5 kg : 2,5 kg, 5 kg, 7.5 kg, 10 kg. This multiplies, again, the required numbed of tests, but one can not ignore the fact that the behaviour of those hitches depends upon the form they already have before their final loading.
   5. Test those hitches when they are tied on the most slippery materials. I would also suggest cords or ropes that retain their round shape, because, if they can be flattened too easily, their particular local deformations would affect the final results in a very uncontrolled way.
   What should be tested ? First, the maximum force before the nub of the hitch / noose starts slipping on the main line, away from the point it was located during its pre-tightening, and moves towards the surface of the pole ( or away from it, in the single case when the hitch is pre-tightened as close to the surface of the pole as possible, i.e., when the initial angle between the two legs is almost 180 degrees.). Second, the amount of force before the nub of the hitch / noose starts consuming its tail. Third, the maximum force before the hitch / noose will be untied altogether, and the standing end of the main line will be totally free to move away from the pole.
   
   
« Last Edit: June 30, 2013, 02:45:59 PM by X1 »