Author Topic: Ashley knot security tester  (Read 10807 times)

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4075
Re: Ashley knot security tester
« Reply #15 on: September 18, 2015, 06:45:52 PM »
Practical knots are practical things, so the criteria by which we judge them should be practical, and reasonable, and not far-fetched or even imaginary. The Zeppelin bend is a most secure bend - and we should not care too much if the keys inside Dan Lehman s pocket become separated after 35 years - I do not know if the locks, the doors and the house which they open are still there by this time.   
Apparently you missed what I wrote and picked only
the seemingly lauditory report of a particular tied knot
--with minimal tails frayed open into stopper-like blooms.
Let me help you out, with repetition --a key to learning:

Quote
I have various small cords attached to my keys cord
and I find that most knots work loose in my pocket,
with a notable exception being the zeppelin-knotted
ends of a small binding cord (a hollow braid of nylon),
where the tails are minimally short and *blossomed*
so that they cannot be pushed and also serve to some
degree qua stoppers --that end-2-end knot has been
tied for years, even decade(s)?! !!  (But another such
knot tied in ends of 3/16" solid braid nylon cord on this
collection of stuff in my pocket was pretty quickly too
loose![
/b]  (Moderately tightened grapevine bends have
loosened, also.)

--dl*
====

xarax

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2781
Re: Ashley knot security tester
« Reply #16 on: September 19, 2015, 02:13:51 AM »
   THAT is how one can make you reply to a post, even if this reply is not on-topic : Write something about what y o u had said, not about the topic ! :)
   Let me help you out, by noticing that you, or your "report" :), were NOT the main points of my previous posts.
   The main points were that :
   1. < The Gleipnir and > " the adjustable loops I had tied are meant to remain in one piece ONLY if they are loaded, otherwise they are self-un-adjusted and self-released, of course... :))"
   2.   "The Zeppelin bend is a most secure bend  "- and one reason for this is that when we pull its ends it shrinks, but it does not "swallow" its tails.
   3.   "There are great knots which are "holding together" only with the help of the friction generated by some tensioned, due to the load itself, segments of their nubs, not by any pre-tensioned segments, due to the pull of the ends of their nubs by the knot tyer ( during a post-dressing, pre-tensioning phase, as it happens in the case of the "tight hitches" )."
   4.   Regarding the claim about the supposed/imagined "insecurity" of the knots which "do not fall apart the moment you jiggle the rope with no load"(sic), I had mentioned the Gleipnir and the bowline - and I had also noticed that :
   5.  " I deliberately have not referred to the Blackwall hitch, because I do not know if it can even be considered as a "knot", if/when/while it is not loaded."

    THOSE were my main points ! I have not seen a n y comment on them, but I am accustomed to that... Now, I only want to suggest you need not care so much about my joke ( although I had noticed that many people in this Forum are not "perceiving" what I think is a joke, as a joke... ) :
    " and we should not care too much if the keys inside Dan Lehman s pocket become separated after 35 years - I do not know if the locks, the doors and the house which they open will still be there by this time."   

   One thing is certain : I will never find out if they will be there by this time, or not - I do not plan to live so much. :)
« Last Edit: September 19, 2015, 02:17:20 AM by xarax »
This is not a knot.

Mobius

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 338
Re: Ashley knot security tester
« Reply #17 on: September 19, 2015, 03:57:39 AM »
   THAT is how one can make you reply to a post, even if this reply is not on-topic : Write something about what y o u had said, not about the topic ! :)
   Let me help you out, by noticing that you, or your "report" :), were NOT the main points of my previous posts.
   The main points were that :
   1. < The Gleipnir and > " the adjustable loops I had tied are meant to remain in one piece ONLY if they are loaded, otherwise they are self-un-adjusted and self-released, of course... :))"
   2.   "The Zeppelin bend is a most secure bend  "- and one reason for this is that when we pull its ends it shrinks, but it does not "swallow" its tails.
   3.   "There are great knots which are "holding together" only with the help of the friction generated by some tensioned, due to the load itself, segments of their nubs, not by any pre-tensioned segments, due to the pull of the ends of their nubs by the knot tyer ( during a post-dressing, pre-tensioning phase, as it happens in the case of the "tight hitches" )."
   4.   Regarding the claim about the supposed/imagined "insecurity" of the knots which "do not fall apart the moment you jiggle the rope with no load"(sic), I had mentioned the Gleipnir and the bowline - and I had also noticed that :
   5.  " I deliberately have not referred to the Blackwall hitch, because I do not know if it can even be considered as a "knot", if/when/while it is not loaded."

    THOSE were my main points ! I have not seen a n y comment on them, but I am accustomed to that... Now, I only want to suggest you need not care so much about my joke ( although I had noticed that many people in this Forum are not "perceiving" what I think is a joke, as a joke... ) :
    " and we should not care too much if the keys inside Dan Lehman s pocket become separated after 35 years - I do not know if the locks, the doors and the house which they open will still be there by this time."   

   One thing is certain : I will never find out if they will be there by this time, or not - I do not plan to live so much. :)

Who would of thought that anyone would have to argue the case that one of the basic knot expectations is that it doesn't fall apart easily?

The issue of the bowline and slack security is covered in my previous post. Presenting a new bowline, or bowlinesque loop on this forum that could not survive my simple 'jiggle' test and have that knot well received would be highly unlikely. As for the 'jiggle' test, it applies to bends and loops, as was clearly stated originally. That xarax chooses to try and denigrate the 'jiggle' idea because it does not apply to a Gleipner or Blackwall HITCH is more about stirring than about logic.

As for adjustable loops: If it is to be designated a loop then I expect it to hold together without load. A common expectation one would think. Knot tyers here search for excellence, not mediocre, fall apart knots. This is a very simple concept and one that many here would agree with. Adjustable loops can accomplish this, the 'HFP Slippery 8' is possibly the most well known of them. This knot and many of the adjustable loops proposed by Alan Lee as well do not fall apart with a 'jiggle' and work well.

Now enter the 'theoretical' world of a xarax adjustable loop: I did not find a single one that did not fall apart! To put it bluntly, they are useless as loops. If xarax wants to resume them them as hitches then some of them may have some interest. Unfortunately, xarax's penchant for fall apart loops extends past those he calls adjustable. The much touted (by xarax) Pretzel 'Eskimo' Loop 'jiggles' to a straight line rope after a few seconds. Not only that, if you do go to the trouble of loading it, it collapses very quickly! I have shown this previously when I trialled the HFP and Pretzel loop in another post.

Slack security is important. If you make what you think is a new loop then 'jiggling' the rope of your newly snugged loop to see it stays together is a pretty good first step in seeing whether that knot deserves more of your attention, or not.

Edit: I am not a big fan of adjustable loops generally, but the one I used below on my test rig has proved itself valuable. When setting up a simple pulley system with my rig I wanted to have the dimensions between load and anchor as efficient as I could. As a 'temporary' measure I used the depicted adjustable loop. It might be new, however whatever the case, you can be sure it does not fall apart when left unloaded. It passed my 'jiggle' test easily. The knot is so good that it has become a permanent fixture on my test rig and when I use the pulley it gets loaded and unloaded between 0kg and 300kg regularly. It holds like a charm and the 'U' shape tail becomes almost a 'L' under heavy load.

Cheers,

mobius.

« Last Edit: September 19, 2015, 07:38:58 AM by mobius »

Mobius

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 338
Re: Ashley knot security tester
« Reply #18 on: September 20, 2015, 08:35:54 AM »
   As I had expected, and perhaps following the plan, even "before the rooster crows", it was my post which was deleted by the Moderators, and not mobius s.
   Justice ( the Lady with the double-edge sword..) ! Fairness ! "I" am the one who "hides" behind smileys :  mobius does not hide behind any-thing... :) :) :)

xarax, is right about one thing: I do not hide behind anything. I stand by my words.

I have waded through xarax's last vitriol (now deleted) and found nothing I have not seen before: More insults, condescension an accusation of lying and a complete lack of a sensible argument. xarax revels in belittling others and their knots, however taking criticism about his knots is clearly something he is incapable of handling in anything close to a reasonable manner.

I re-trialled xarax's Pretzel Loop in climbing rope. The image shown below is taken under load (about 300kg). The knot started collapsing around 100kg and was continuing to collapse. That a) the knot cannot even survive a simple 'jiggle' test and b) collapses under load is more than enough for me to dismiss this knot.

Cheers,

mobius

Edit: Forgot the image. Poorly focused I am sorry and the reason it doesn't look like a Pretzel loop is nothing more than an indication of how badly it collapsed.
« Last Edit: September 22, 2015, 11:44:02 AM by mobius »

Ruby

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 174
Re: Ashley knot security tester
« Reply #19 on: September 20, 2015, 11:13:45 AM »
Quote
As a 'temporary' measure I used the depicted adjustable loop. It might be new ...

sorry but what's this new knot, any details?

Mobius

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 338
Re: Ashley knot security tester
« Reply #20 on: September 21, 2015, 07:19:37 AM »
Quote
As a 'temporary' measure I used the depicted adjustable loop. It might be new ...

sorry but what's this new knot, any details?

It may well not be new, so I never made much mention of it before . The idea of it is so simple I figured someone must have talked about it before even though I went looking for it a couple of months ago. Anyway, it works on the same principle as the HFP Slippery 8 knot and may be no better (or worse). The reason I liked it enough to tie it for a practical application was that you just tie a strangle/transom knot and tuck the end in a 'U' shape, not much thinking involved for me  :) . A very simple loop in my opinion, as long as you have a good way of tying a Strangle/Transom to start with.

Note that the end just passes through the transom nub looking (and staying) straight. The knot relies on the strangle living up to it's reputation, which it seems to do.

Cheers,

mobius.

edit: changed I to It, which makes far better sense

« Last Edit: September 22, 2015, 10:13:54 AM by mobius »

Ruby

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 174
Re: Ashley knot security tester
« Reply #21 on: September 21, 2015, 09:26:56 AM »
 a strangle/transom knot, so it's a double overhand knot? really easy , thank you

Mobius

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 338
Re: Ashley knot security tester
« Reply #22 on: September 21, 2015, 11:07:25 AM »
Yes, a Double Overhand knot. I have not really tested it: I tied it, it held, it has stayed tied on my rig doing what was supposed to be a temporary job :)

Cheers,

mobius

Sweeney

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 975
Re: Ashley knot security tester
« Reply #23 on: September 22, 2015, 09:17:20 AM »
The Bowstring Knot is even simpler and holds extremely well as long as the load is in a straight line. http://www.survivalworld.com/knots/bowstring-knot.html#.VgEOaflVikp

Ruby

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 174
Re: Ashley knot security tester
« Reply #24 on: September 22, 2015, 11:33:26 AM »
ok saw this honda in ashley's book ABoK #151  #227 #1024 #1127

an overhand plus a stopper which is still an overhand。that's still double overhand?

Mobius

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 338
Re: Ashley knot security tester
« Reply #25 on: September 22, 2015, 12:15:28 PM »
ok saw this honda in ashley's book ABoK #151  #227 #1024 #1127

an overhand plus a stopper which is still an overhand。that's still double overhand?

No, I don't think so. Just because it has two overhands in it does not make it a 'double overhand', as described by Ashley. However, the Double Overhand, Constrictor, Strangle and Transom are very similar knots (arguably the same thing, particularly the last three as discussed here: http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=5258.msg34460#msg34460 )

Cheers,

mobius
« Last Edit: September 22, 2015, 01:17:46 PM by mobius »

Sweeney

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 975
Re: Ashley knot security tester
« Reply #26 on: September 23, 2015, 05:43:05 PM »
ok saw this honda in ashley's book ABoK #151  #227 #1024 #1127

an overhand plus a stopper which is still an overhand。that's still double overhand?

The Honda is a Bowstring knot with an added stopper - an adaptation for use when making a lariat and only used otherwise if there is a danger of the tail coming adrift.

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4075
Re: Ashley knot security tester
« Reply #27 on: September 24, 2015, 05:03:15 PM »
Yes, a Double Overhand knot.  I have not really tested it:
I tied it, it held, it has stayed tied on my rig doing what was supposed to be a temporary job :)
Austrian knot wizard Heinz Prohaska long ago advocated
this but with the (topological) dbl. overhand formed as
the anchor bend which better nips the tail.  He was
hoping to find a rockclimber's tie-in knot that could
endure incomplete tying, as happened to world-class
climber Lynn Hill (starting to tie in by reeving the rope
through her harness, then being distracted by another's
question/talk, and climbing w/o realizing she'd no knot;
she tragically realized this when leaning back to be
lowered, and fell (and survived)!).


--dl*
====

knotsaver

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 281
Re: Ashley knot security tester
« Reply #28 on: September 25, 2015, 11:34:31 AM »

It may well not be new, so I never made much mention of it before .

It looks like the mirror version of this one shown here:
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3315.msg19887#msg19887

Mobius

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 338
Re: Ashley knot security tester
« Reply #29 on: September 25, 2015, 03:16:25 PM »

It may well not be new, so I never made much mention of it before .

It looks like the mirror version of this one shown here:
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3315.msg19887#msg19887

Thanks for looking.

It's not B and I have spent some time looking at A and rearranging the loops. I don't think my rig version is either knot. However, I did find a flipped version of A that seems to work quite well (better snugging than the A version, which doesn't sit well for me).  I will take a picture tomorrow hopefully.

Cheers,

mobius