Author Topic: How many bowlines are there?  (Read 2594 times)

Celo_11

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 22
How many bowlines are there?
« on: June 20, 2017, 11:39:12 PM »
Currently into bowlines and thought I'd do a survey to get a better idea of the true number of versions out there. I've come across a heap so far and keep finding more.

Here's a list of the ones I've found so far, in no particular order. Please post any that I've missed and I'll add them. Curious to see how many we end up with.

1. Standard
2. Left hand
3. Running
4. Eskimo
5. Yosemite (actually a finish that can be applied to many bowlines so may not count as a version?)
6. On a bight
7. Double on a bight
8. With a bight
9. Tie knot  (made in standing part and working end as a finish to another knot)
10 Water  (both half hitches together to form a clove hitch as the nipping loop)
11 Water - Ashley's ( second half hitch is pulled down closer to the working end)
12 Round turn  (round turn as nipping loop)
13 Portuguese
14 Splayed Portuguese
15 Spanish
16 French
17 Japanese  (Decorative only but still a bowline)
18 Light tackle loop  (Ashley's P187 #1016. Standard bowline but using different part for loop)

roo

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1801
    • The Notable Knot Index
Re: How many bowlines are there?
« Reply #1 on: June 21, 2017, 12:00:13 AM »
This has come up before here:

http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=2897.msg19677#msg19677

With a partial list of "bowlines" here:

http://www.morethanknots.com/bowline/bowline_list.html

Here's another bowline variant:  http://notableknotindex.webs.com/monsoonbowline.html

I don't know that it matters much, though.  Once you have a list, what do you do with it?
If you wish to add a troll to your ignore list, click "Profile" then "Buddies/Ignore List".


Celo_11

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 22
Re: How many bowlines are there?
« Reply #2 on: June 21, 2017, 01:14:11 AM »
Sry, my bad. Didn't search well enough before posting.

Curiosity driven more than anything else. No real reason otherwise.

Thanks for those links, I'll go have a look at that.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2017, 01:14:48 AM by Celo_11 »

agent_smith

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1025
Re: How many bowlines are there?
« Reply #3 on: June 25, 2017, 03:47:06 PM »
Curious as to why roo did not mention the paper 'Analysis of Bowlines' at this site: http://www.paci.com.au/knots.php

Granted that the paper is not purely a 'head count' of all Bowlines per se.... but, it nevertheless is a good resource that explores many different types of Bowlines and their fundamental structure.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, I'm sure he had specific and valid reasons for not mentioning that paper.

roo

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1801
    • The Notable Knot Index
Re: How many bowlines are there?
« Reply #4 on: June 25, 2017, 10:18:37 PM »
Curious as to why roo did not mention the paper 'Analysis of Bowlines' at this site: http://www.paci.com.au/knots.php

Granted that the paper is not purely a 'head count' of all Bowlines per se.... but, it nevertheless is a good resource that explores many different types of Bowlines and their fundamental structure.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, I'm sure he had specific and valid reasons for not mentioning that paper.
The other link and thread had more leads.  I'm sure there are lots of other bowlines on the web, but I don't feel like tracking everything down.  This forum alone has a dizzying array of bowlines from the trivial, horrible and pointless to the interesting to everything in between.

 Besides it's YOUR paper.  You can mention it if you need to.   Sheesh.   ::)

This is a knot forum.  Talk about knots, not other posters and their hidden, mysterious motivations.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2017, 10:29:46 PM by roo »
If you wish to add a troll to your ignore list, click "Profile" then "Buddies/Ignore List".


agent_smith

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1025
Re: How many bowlines are there?
« Reply #5 on: June 26, 2017, 03:13:54 PM »
Quote
I don't know that it matters much, though.  Once you have a list, what do you do with it?

Quote
Curiosity driven more than anything else. No real reason otherwise.

Celo_11.... keep up the good work, keep exploring because its the little things that count most. Data mining and number crunching might seem like looking for a needle in a haystack but persistence always beats resistance.

I am keen to learn of anything new on the Bowline front should you happen upon anything interesting.
One thing is for sure, there are lots of Bowlines.
Xarax was delving deeply into TIB bowlines for a while, and so were a few others (eg Alan Lee).
Things get tricky when the nipping loop deviates from the standard form seem in #1010 (single closed helix). For example the knot created by Mike Karash had a 'nipping structure' based on a crossing hitch/munter hitch. Note that I used the term 'nipping structure' instead of the more specific 'nipping loop'.

Mark G

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3789
Re: How many bowlines are there?
« Reply #6 on: June 26, 2017, 10:05:15 PM »
Currently into bowlines and thought I'd do a survey to get a better idea of the true number of versions out there.
...
What's *true* firstly about whether some knot IS *a bowline* ?!

What is the point/purpose of your search?

In short, there are infinite --or at least some large number well
shy of infinity but way past your tolerance/time/interest...-- such
knots.  But in seeking to define things, one needs to have some
point in doing so.  "True" suggests that you believe the qualifying
aspects belong to some *real* world vs. in the minds of those
asking; I'll suggest that it's the latter.

One can search with a textual guide and thereby learn what knots
others have so-named "bowline".  In this forum, we sought to establish
some constructional aspect to what a *bowline* should be, and then
to build upon that.  It's a really tricky matter, though, for our key
component --"the central nipping loop"-- is a thing that can
change shape per material & force!  <gasp, then sigh>

I happen to be in a process of setting out such eye knots as have
been seen in rockclimbing, along with some variations NOT seen
(which ought to have been), and so on.

Cheers,
--dl*
====

sgrandpre

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10
Re: How many bowlines are there?
« Reply #7 on: October 06, 2017, 10:28:57 PM »
There's also a knot called the Somerville Bowline, but it's a misnomer - the knot is not actually a form of a Bowline.  I suspect the name is derived from the French Bowline, since it is similar in application and tying method.

KC

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 217
    • latest project
Re: How many bowlines are there?
« Reply #8 on: October 08, 2017, 08:19:18 PM »
How many do we need?
Rope-n-Saw Life
"Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed" -Sir Francis Bacon
We now return you to the safety of normal thinking peoples.
~ Please excuse the interruption; thanx -the mgmt.~

preventec47

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 22
Re: How many bowlines are there?
« Reply #9 on: May 28, 2018, 01:06:25 AM »
I only need or want one if it can serve all purposes when a loop is needed at the end
of a line.    I want to select the best all purpose strongest, easy to tie and most
importantly easiest to untie when I want it to untie and not ever untie when I dont
want it to.    SO FAR I have selected the "WaterBowline" as the single best
Bowline to meet all my end of the line needs.    I sometimes add the Yosemite finish
if I have too much dangling rope ...    The reason is from what I have read the WaterBowline
is less likely to come apart accidentally, and it is easier to untie from what  I have found.



« Last Edit: May 28, 2018, 02:12:20 PM by preventec47 »

agent_smith

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1025
Re: How many bowlines are there?
« Reply #10 on: June 02, 2018, 04:02:03 AM »
per preventec47...
Quote
SO FAR I have selected the "WaterBowline" as the single best
Bowline
to meet all my end of the line needs.

This comment reminds me of the importance of context and application.

In this instance, preventec47 has not identified his/her context to support the use of #1012 (Water Bowline).

In the context of human life support, security and stability are crucial factors (not strength, or ease of untying). In the context of applications that are mission critical (ie human life support, for example climbing) #1012 Water Bowline offers only a marginal security gain as compared with the common #1010 Bowline - which in summary means it is unsafe for this application. This marginal gain is provided by the addition of a second nipping loop (Ashley depicts these nipping loops spread apart whereas some authors show them combined to form a clove hitch).

In my opinion, tangible security gains can only be provided by additional tail maneuvers.

Examples of tail maneuvers that provide significant security gains include:
[ ] Scott's locked Bowline
[ ] EBSB Bowline
[ ] Lees link Bowline (per Xarax modification of the Lee Zep Bowline)

So it depends on what your context and application is. In mission critical human life support applications, the #1012 Water Bowline would be a poor choice that could have fatal consequences.

In sailing/yachting applications, a #1012 Water Bowline might be more relevant.

One also needs to consider the material which is used to tie the knot - in climbing applications, EN892 certified dynamic rope is used. Other classes of people might use completely different materials - such as fishing line. Knots behave differently in different cord materials.

per preventec47...
Quote
I want to select the best all purpose strongest, easy to tie and most
importantly easiest to untie

And here; 'all purpose' needs to be qualified.
Does that remark include mission critical applications where a knot is used for human life support (eg climbing/mountaineering)?
Or is it in non life critical applications - such as hoisting or unfurling a sail on a yacht? Or securing a dinghy to a jetty? If the dinghy drifted away, presumably it is a financial loss but not necessarily an instantaneous loss of human life?

In terms of strength - usually this concept is over-rated. Even in climbing applications where a person could take huge falls with a sudden impact force to a critical tie-in knot - strength is irrelevant. There is no force that a single person can generate that will reach the MBS yield point of a knot. Even the worst possible knot will not break. A knot is more likely to jam solid than break - which presents an inconvenience to the user.

And we should point out that #1410 (Offset over hand bend) - arguably a knot with one of the lowest MBS yield points - is still perfectly fine for abseiling.

Rahere

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: How many bowlines are there? - More on the Somerville
« Reply #11 on: June 24, 2018, 11:57:56 AM »
Replying to the earlier point on the Somerville, firstly a minor administrative bobble, that the top-page search engine didn't return the entry, secondly, that I've just discovered it's widespread adoption throughout the Shibari community, because it merges a cuff with a bowline and will not turn over.

The current general method of tying is illustrated here.

I'm half wondering whether it actually rates as the founding member of a new class of knot. Previously, shibari used a turned-over version of a reef knot, wrapped around the cuff: the Somerville then mated the loop of a bowline with it. The reason for this is because the bight is often used as a pulley (OK, hush, it's their necks - sometimes literally, I was taught it by an professional aerialist, the closest you'll get to a button-boy these days, so I'm fairly certain she knows her stuff), and so the knot is subject to forces in all directions on both standing and running ends from any and all angles, often amplified, which is to me the definition of a turn-over waiting to happen. Turn-overs on human limbs can be disastrous (in fact, no sooner taught than it was being used as a neck sling!), as they either fall apart (slightly better) or tighten (which can be dangerous).

It's a very recent (around 2009): some of the earlier thinking is here, explaining its development. The use of the terms "single" and "double" columns are generalisations: a single column can be the torso, or a limb, a double column connects two of them, for example, disabling the subject by securing their arms, crossed, behind the back.

And as ever, in such delicate matters, a formal reminder is necessary: the activity must be sensible, sane, and consenting, and the rigger must have medical shears close to hand to release the subject without question if they use an emergency code of their predeclared choice (they usually use 6mm dia hemp, and a test is to trim the end of the rope, which precludes stoppers: in preparing the rope, wrap the point of cut with 2" gaffer tape, which is so strongly glued it'll neither roll not unstick, and cut it in half). Also, specialist medical training in the path of the nerves is essential, as some run very close to the more obvious binding points: this emphasises the value of such bindings, which secure without constriction. Generally, the use of knots is abhored as unnecessary: most ties use friction and tension, however one knot is essential at the ends of each line. Perhaps the most widely-used knot is the lark's head, used at the midway bight of the extension blight just above thumb-knots in the tail of the existing line, to extend it: shibari lines are almost always doubled at the midway point.

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3789
Re: How many bowlines are there? - More on the Somerville
« Reply #12 on: June 25, 2018, 11:06:48 PM »
The current general method of tying is illustrated
here.

I'm half wondering whether it actually rates as the founding member of a new class of knot
... where (above site) the assertion is made that
"The Somerville Bowline was devised by Topologist.
There have been a lot of methods posted on how to tie this knot due
to its instant popularity in the rope scene."

Perhaps the particular 2-eye knot was devised by X,
but the base of that of bringing the tail in through
the central nipping loop (which IMO makes it part
of the greater *bowline* family --of the "anti-bowline"
side of that), is known from well prior this derivation,
and has been shown in an image (attributed to Samson
Rope] in a book on cordage, and found by me in some
commercial-fishing gear and --in a different version--
in a mooring line.

The shown knot differs --dangerously, for general applications
at least-- from the referenced French/Portuguese bowlines
in NOT reeving the eyes all through the central nipping loop,
but instead on capturing them with the reeved collar (only)!
BOO!


--dl*
====