as noted : sure grip & quick tying & easy
untying & decent strength ... --are sometimes-#1010
qualities sought in derivatives. And the left-handed bwl.
and "carrick loop" bwl. #1033 deliver these, both with
more resistance to capsizing, IMO.
But can one write a definition that ensures such qualities
in qualifying knots? --or doesn't get bogged down in the
reality of materials & forces ... ?!
Probably not, but maybe the effort to form such a group
at least gives a reasonable set of things to offer for those
wanting such qualities, neverminding that the set should
be seen as stocked with much else.
--dl*
====
It seems to me that this is starting to go in a circle - picking knots to define the group. Not particularly useful as a tool to project characteristics, or propose 'missing' combinations.
Also, depending on how you draw #1033 up, its most stable form (drawing up the SP and its opposite corner loop leg) is a Carrick input component, stabilised by a turNip between a loop leg and the WE (i.e. the SP does not feed the turNip, which is only loaded one side...). This would fail just about all the proposed characteristics of a member of the Bowline Set.
This just shows some bias of familiarity/unfamiliarity :
the
bowline --our seed exemplar, here-- can also be cast
as a "carrick component"'d knot --just
SS369 it as you suggest
for #1033. Yes, loading works against even such hard-set
tying, and the "carrick component" thus realized is reversed
in orientation (S.Part has in one what "ongoing eye leg" has
in the other, of this "carrick component"), but still, it's all there.
(To see this in the
bowline, you might try setting by pulling
ongoing eye leg vs. tail --yeah, hardly normal, I know.
But I suggest this because doing the same --same parts,
but more naturally positioned for such opposition--
with #1033 will set things quite nicely
for a *bowline*--which I only just realized in considering this post!
(Hmm, well, one can go too far in this setting; doing it with
some moderation, though, has the effect of drawing down
the (half-)collar around the S.Part, and cannot fold the
ongoing eye leg into the "carrick component" position
--but going too far will do that to the S.Part!)
)
In short, one must realize that the
bowline (#1010) has
this quite-UNsnugged "collar" bight, as we call it. And
that is so ingrained in us that we might be overlooking
the oddity of it, as we elsewhere want to snug things
up into "most stable" forms, and so on.
As for determining the group by some "*seed*" knot,
or working the other direction --of having a group in
mind after collecting desired fruit--, it gets back to one
of the fundamental questions, about the whole point
of such classification; about how one wants "to speak
of ... things", and so on.
I'm at least happy enough to let ideas develop in an
iterative manner of proposition, seeing what follows,
and tailoring refinements based on desire. In that I
surmise that we are building a sort of *tool* and not
mining Trvth.
But we should already realize at this point that the
vagaries of setting and geometry changes via that
and forces upon various materials makes cataloging
knots by geometrically determined/defined components
a challenge, to say the least. I've suggested "appearances"
in hopes that some canonical point of assessing these can
lead to some reasonable classification, even admitting that
in practice, significant changes can occur --the "loop" can
be opened into a "helix" or folded into a "carrick comp."
and so on. I don't think we can do much about that
other than recognize it.
Btw, re snugging up the
bowline et al or not ::
I have various small cords tied to my keys ring
(in theory for occasional knot fiddling or use; in practice,
I don't like to mess with these and have other bits of
cordage for use), and the main one --of small binding
cord (hollow braid nylon)-- is joined with a
zeppelin
bend,
for decades(!!). The small (3/16"?) solid-braid
nylon ("hardware store") cords have had moderately
well-set
grapevine bends loosen, and most recently it
was an
offset 9-Oh that has now twice/thrice loosened.
So, I thought about how IMO the
mirrored bowline--that "Janus'd" variation with a
larkshead base--
although not set tight (not "SS369'd") nevertheless seems
resistant to loosening much, and so I tied a corresponding
twin bowlines bend --one with each tail reeved through
both
turNips. Seems darned loose, yet no looser than tied;
now to see how long it so endures ... .
--dl*
====
ps : no "20-30inches" of snow, YET; but my world is whitened.