Author Topic: A bowline variant: I have been using to tie into climbing ropes, comments pls!  (Read 8170 times)

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3711
Re: A bowline variant: I have been using to tie into climbing ropes, comments pl
« Reply #15 on: September 03, 2015, 10:09:11 PM »
The simplest way to prevent the Water Bowline's nipping loops
from separating, in the event of a leader fall,
is to feed the tail directly back through the collar alongside the standing part
1) That sought be prevented is a new goal, IMO!
2) The supposed solution is bogus --no way is a simple tuck
through the collar (that not so tight part (even SS369'd!  ;D ))
going to hold it against forces well below those of a leader
fall; it might resist loosening, but ... .

I will again remind readers that the water bowline comes with
some less-than-reliable/-supportable legend of some sort of
benefits, and was shown in many books with the two turNips
well separated --not at all resembling a clove hitch, i.p., which
appeared, to my awareness, only relatively recently!?

For slack-security, the newer orientation (clove hitch-like) makes
sense; whether the other one had a real history or just some
imagined one remains a topic for investigation.


--dl*
====

alpineer

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 480
alpineer
Thanks - I am sure you're right...

Don't be sure I am right. It's a simple matter to test and observe, and prove or disprove, for yourself - and that's my point.

although I can't see how to form that knot with the third strand passing though the nipping loops...

Really?! First of all, I said nothing of passing the tail thru the nipping loops. What I'm suggesting is this... Do not create a second lower collar, but take the tail and push it directly up thru the collar. Do not pass the tail thru either of the nipping loops.
The first configuration you tested for separation of the nipping loops was the standard Water Bowline (i.e. no tail enhancement).
The second configuration to test for separation is that which I have suggested to you.
The third configuration you should test is similar to the second, but with the tail passed directly up thru the first/upper nipping loop. Do not pass the tail thru the lower nipping loop.

Please test these tail variations and report your findings.

As you have noted, TIBness is a non-issue for your application.

 
 
« Last Edit: September 09, 2015, 03:50:36 PM by alpineer »

alpineer

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 480
So, just as a quick poll, does the "green bowline"/bag o' knitting get any votes as a valid knot?!

You've been using the knot for 15 yrs. You are qualified more than any to validate it. As for myself, I do not care for the extra complexity which comes with the addition of a second nipping loop when combined with a double collar enhanced Bowline.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2015, 09:59:15 PM by alpineer »

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3711
Re: A bowline variant: I have been using to tie into climbing ropes, comments pl
« Reply #18 on: September 10, 2015, 06:43:46 AM »
So, just as a quick poll, does the "green bowline"/bag o' knitting get any votes as a valid knot?!
As for myself, I do not care for the extra complexity
which comes with the addition of a second nipping loop
when combined with a double collar enhanced Bowline.
Extra complexity?!  --to just forming a larkshead
(or a "larksfoot" if your mate is British!) and then doing
that "double collar"-ing ? =>mirrored bowline.
I don't be sure you're right!

(Now, if you tied a tickleclump with a fleashank through
it, you'd enhance your complexion, and be worthy of an
entire chapter (or chapstick) in Hansel & Gretel's Encylo-
peedia of Nuts & Fancy Hopeworks!   ;D  )

 ;)

alpineer

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 480
Re: A bowline variant: I have been using to tie into climbing ropes, comments pl
« Reply #19 on: September 11, 2015, 02:33:33 AM »
(Now, if you tied a tickleclump with a fleashank through
it, you'd enhance your complexion, and be worthy of an
entire chapter (or chapstick) in Hansel & Gretel's Encylo-
peedia of Nuts & Fancy Hopeworks!   ;D  )

;)

 ;D ;D ;D. I like.

In the case of mirror-collared bowlines two nipping loops carry no practical advantage over a single loop for the O.P.'s intended use, IMO. Any extra complexity must be justified by some advantage gained with little or no concomitant disadvantage(s). This is the art of designing a knot for use in material of a particular nature and for a particular application.

 
« Last Edit: September 11, 2015, 02:26:30 PM by alpineer »

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3711
Re: A bowline variant: I have been using to tie into climbing ropes, comments pl
« Reply #20 on: September 15, 2015, 06:30:45 AM »
In the case of mirror-collared bowlines two nipping loops carry no practical advantage over a single loop for the O.P.'s intended use, IMO. Any extra complexity must be justified by some advantage gained with little or no concomitant disadvantage(s). This is the art of designing a knot for use in material of a particular nature and for a particular application.
I quite disagree : the dual turNips make the loosening
feed of ends more difficult --the "crossing part" of the
clove/larkshead(cow) doesn't contribute (being between
the potentially loosing loops), whereas the single loop
has flow from both ends and can thus quickly loosen.
(Similarly, the "round turn / double" bowline has at least
TWO turns to consume the feed in of material and mitigate
loosening thus; but the *knotted* bases above I think do
rather well in this.  They double the contact of rope to rope
for some securing, movement-resisting friction.

--dl*
====

DubDom

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 13
I find it really makes quite a considerable difference with low friction sheathed climbing ropes to have that extra turn. All of the complications make for a bulkier knot, but I think it makes for a much more reassuring connection to the rope.

Dom

p.s bear with me I am keen to do a test and take some pictures of a 'green' bowline, water bowline and I'll try and do the same with a mirrored bowline - it may take a while before I manage to do this but, I will have a go!

DubDom

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 13
Hi Folks

I have only just gotten round to responding with a rather un-scientific test.
I had a chance to take some lead falls in the gym.
Here is my usual knot after a very long fall on an indoor wall:-

DubDom

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 13
....and here's a straightforward water bowline after the same force:

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3711
I had a chance to take some lead falls in the gym.
Here is my usual knot after a very long fall on an indoor wall:-
Thanks for returning w/some further insights!

While I might yet prefer the mirrored bowline to the like
knot that you have presented (the difference being that
of a cow vs. clove base structure), I admit to being
confused just now in seeing the latter in your photo of the
former --which I'll accept as proof of ample similarity,
which I think carries beyond looks into performance.

I'll note that your image of the fallen-upon knot shows
well enough my point of why the knot works well :
... [T]he dual turNips make the loosening
feed of ends more difficult --the "crossing part" of the
clove/larkshead(cow) doesn't contribute (being between
the potentially loosing loops), whereas the single loop
has flow from both ends and can thus quickly loosen.


You might try this : rather than completing that "Janus"
2nd collaring (of the eye leg), simply draw the tail
back over the crossing point of the extra turNip and
tuck back --2dia in extra, 3 still in initial.  This might
give some added slack security?

--dl*
====
« Last Edit: December 15, 2015, 10:59:59 PM by Dan_Lehman »

DubDom

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 13
Thanks for your comments Dan. I take your point about the alternative, although I like the way that the janus adds another length to the rope running up through the middle of the clove hitch component of the knot and at the same time it lies reasonably flat. I find that the janus finish prevents the knot distorting under certain "cross loads", which I find reassuring if I choose to belay off the bight at a hanging stance. I also tend to find that the choice to run the knot in the way that you are describing makes the knot a little bit more "lumpy" and perhaps harder to check quickly and visually prior to "take off", so to speak, although that could be habit on my behalf - I'm used to the look of my "green bowline"!
D