With regard to using an offset F8 bend (ie #1411 tied in its offset form),
there really hasn't been any peer reviewed testing to determine precisely
which geometries provide stability and security.
We have ample empirical evidence that shows the offset F8 to be unreliable.
However, it may indeed be possible to arrive at a particular geometry
[that] is stable and secure up to a reasonable load threshold.
Don't have their URL on hand, but there is some FRENCH
cavers(?) site who recommend the
offset Fig.8 ends jointover the infamous
EDK / offset water knot, and show test
results that speak to its (slight) favor --both knots showing
proper behavior (which is staying tied, not holding trucks)
through reasonable loadings.
IMO, the situation points to the lack of specificity in
knotting :: knot books give half-assed presentations,
and users are all over the place; "dress & set" might
be uttered, but almost never with exactly what that
means!
(And this indeterminateness will make others' test
reports of little use --you won't know what
exactlywas tested! The specification needs to precede ... .
E.g., in the case at hand --
offset fig.8 & water knot--,
the setting (tightening) of the knot should be done
by pulling hard on the SParts TOGETHER with the
knot held qua *stopper* in resistance; and done
iteratively (perhaps one iteration, though) with
reversing the orientation to set the tails tight,
which means tightening their choke around
the SParts --which have NOT BEEN PULLED
APART YET :: key point!!!
THEN, the knot takes a tightened state that
resists being pried apart.
IN CONTRAST to setting by "pulling on all ends"
aimlessly, which sees tails opposing SParts and
the choking turns sorta snug BUT the tails not
hauled down as loading will do, and so the
initial loading tends to open the choke more
than were the tails hauled in by SParts' pull
as described above --a pull that doesn't open
the choke.
Possibly, as you've done in some instances via photography
& text (and the calibrated-forces loading to be shown),
you could shown a pulled-by-tails-vs.SParts setting
and pulled by SParts vs. held-knot setting (perhaps
even sans a following pull on tails IN THAT STATE**),
AND THEN
the resulting knots upon receiving, say, 100# force!?
.:. My belief is that there will be a noticeable difference
in the choking parts' size/radius --and vulnerabilty
to flyping.
[**When loading SParts-adjacent vs. nub, one will
fold over the tails, and probably incur some bit of
slack in them that some iterative setting of the
tails --careful to keep their folded-over state--
will remove.
]
--dl*
====
