Author Topic: Ranking of worst knots  (Read 2403 times)

Knutern

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 110
Re: Ranking of worst knots
« Reply #15 on: May 13, 2018, 10:09:10 PM »
My candidate is tying two ropes together by making a single overhand stopper knot where those two ropes is parallelled. Just go to any store and see what knot is used - that one.

That is actually probably the knot one will use if not learned how to tie any other kind of knots.
I'm aiming for knots that is secure, AND that is easy to untie.

SS369

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1769
Re: Ranking of worst knots
« Reply #16 on: May 15, 2018, 12:17:21 AM »
My candidate is tying two ropes together by making a single overhand stopper knot where those two ropes is parallelled. Just go to any store and see what knot is used - that one.

That is actually probably the knot one will use if not learned how to tie any other kind of knots.

Hmm, if I am not misinterpreting what you are saying, (overhand bend), that knot is what I and others have used for a climbing rope bend for many years. I don't think it is so bad... ;)

SS


Z

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 59
Re: Ranking of worst knots
« Reply #17 on: May 15, 2018, 01:24:51 AM »
My candidate is tying two ropes together by making a single overhand stopper knot where those two ropes is parallelled. Just go to any store and see what knot is used - that one.

That is actually probably the knot one will use if not learned how to tie any other kind of knots.

A pic or link is needed. I can think of 3 different bends that might fit your description.
If you're reading this, it's too late.

KC

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 185
    • latest project
Re: Ranking of worst knots
« Reply #18 on: May 15, 2018, 01:24:41 PM »
Taut-line is the basic starter friction hitch for many; especially most olds-cool tree climbers.
.
But, we don't use it piggybacked on to a host line; in a system only offering a mono-support leg.
.
We terminate the end of a line to carabiner to connect to saddle; and leave a long bitter end.
The Standing Part serves up and over a support branch, and then back to climber.
Then, with the long bitter end/tail on climber side, tie Taut Line to control side of line, and give stopper after Taut line.
Should place stopper at end of control line so Taut Line can't come off line
.
The mechanic is totally changed when shared support; now when move Taut Line to allow more rope in loaded part of system
the load switches over to the 'solid' leg of support, unloading the Taut Line to slide easily-er.
Also, the line 'below' Taut Line is unloaded/fat; in relation to the loaded/skinny part of line, offering shelf too i think.
.
i don't have my ABoK with me ; but believe the Taut line is pictured as a tree climber uses.
Materials and these mechanism make the difference i think; also i think best if support is frictional, not pulley.
.
Another mechanic hidden here is can grab control leg of line and pull self up and have 2/1 (+friction) over own self.
Watching descent, can clearly see 2 legs of support to climber, feeding from 1 leg of free line under climber.
100# climber places 50# on each leg to him/her; and then only has to pull another 50 to control side to lift 100#..
>>in descent once again favor frictional / not pulley support, so less friction/heat in Taut Line especially on long descents, spiriting down nicely!
.
edit: to #1856 style usage of Tautline concept as a Rolling Hitch, i can see some problems; especially in slicker lines compared to Natural fiber.  1 less turn and not the same mechanical force flow thru rope architecture.
ABoK lessons 480/1/2:
Shows Taut Line usage as i've known it and so many tree climbers start this way i have noted it as taught line
>>especially in slicker lines of today, would say to have stopper after Taut line so can't pull out especially in the clove-ish continuous direction form 480 (as opposed to the cow-ish reverse turns of 481), and another on the end of line as a stop to the slide so you don't run off the track/ nylon highway!
Ascending is a 2 handed operation holding Taut Line and pulling out more 'bitter end' ; unless place small pulley or carabiner under Taut Line ; so just pull 'tail' /bitter end and device acts as 'knot tender' to serve friction hitch higher 1 handed.
i always prefered a DBY with long bitter end that becomes friction hitch to control side of the folded S-Part. 
Other call-outs:
479: Timber Hitch nip carries to HH best nip zone properly close to peak of the 'radian' of pull equal and opposite to the Standing Part pull.
478 the great friction power of RT in lowering (but don't stand under the load!) i think in force line terms is a 'triple radian'
>>2 radian make circle; and see 1 as a combined direction of pull to it's equal/opposite opposing twin radian's combined pull direction
>>in a straight line load concept single point is equal/opposite support of load pull
>>radian simply to me a 'cap' the centers of which form best seating/best nip zone as the circle's curved answer to an equal/opposite support of loading pull
Also, friction reduction of pull can be seen as the amount of frictional path,but this is nominal compared to the more geometric friction reduction of 2+ radian 'lines' as each other's equal/opposite etc. similar lowering thru Dbl.RT /5radians can sieze VERY easily unless HEAVY load.
>>All in all the greatest friction to control lowering the loads doesn't so much come from the diameter of support branch as an increasable friction path distance,but rather the amount of turns/radians as opposing/competing force lines in this imagery.



straight from the book:  "The Tree Surgeon
478. There is unsuspected virtue in a few turns of line.
A single ROUND TURN on a branch will allow a man to lower several times his own weight.
The device is much simpler to manipulate than a tackle but, of course, will not serve for hoisting.
479. The TIMBER HITCH unties readily and is one of the most practical of hitches for slinging cylindrical objects.
480, 481. These are tree surgeon's variations of the MAGNUS HITCH (~1734)' They work on the same principle as the CAMEL HITCH (~215) and the steeplejack's SAFETy-BELT HITCH ('/1.452). All five knots may be slid up and down with the hand, but they remain firm under a pull on the standing part."
.
i purposefully call these ABoK lesson # to myself ; named knot itself is just an example of the mechanics the lesson presents.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2018, 12:11:22 PM by KC »
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.~

Knutern

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 110
Re: Ranking of worst knots
« Reply #19 on: May 15, 2018, 09:39:26 PM »
I'm aiming for knots that is secure, AND that is easy to untie.

Z

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 59
Re: Ranking of worst knots
« Reply #20 on: May 15, 2018, 10:42:58 PM »
I was thinking about the first one mentioned on this page:
http://www.bigfootmountainguides.com/2013/06/saturday-night-live-clinic-recap-knots.html

I also used to think that was a terrible knot. However, that knot has important use in rock climbing because it is "flat". This means the bend is less likely to get caught on a rock or other obstruction as it is dragged along.
If you're reading this, it's too late.

SS369

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1769
Re: Ranking of worst knots
« Reply #21 on: May 15, 2018, 11:41:19 PM »
I was thinking about the first one mentioned on this page:
http://www.bigfootmountainguides.com/2013/06/saturday-night-live-clinic-recap-knots.html

Hi Knutern.

The ABoK #1410 offset rope joining knot has been much debated. There are many threads that either sing its praises or knock it down. It is a good knot and has a history in rock climbing, etc. Set snug and diligently, it performs as needed with the bonus attribute that it may clear obstacles that other joining knots may not.
As for "flat", well I don't see much flatness to it. Looks rather round to me.
I wouldn't put too much currency in some of the know names.

SS

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3643
Re: Ranking of worst knots
« Reply #22 on: May 16, 2018, 12:34:39 AM »
I was thinking about the first one mentioned on this page:
http://www.bigfootmountainguides.com/2013/06/saturday-night-live-clinic-recap-knots.html
I also used to think that was a terrible knot.
Me too.
Quote
However, that knot has important use in rock climbing because it is "flat".
Make that ("flat") "offset" --the knot is offset from
the axis of tension, and can bounce out of the way
of being snagged on surface bumps.  (Ergo, it's
the "offset water knot.")

And there are ways to improve upon it,
the simplest and likely most *accommodating*
(of tyer imperfections) is repeating the knot
smack against a first-tied one (which 2nd knot
can be tied either behind or before the 1st!)
--what I call "an EDK-backed EDK" for quick
understanding (in climbing circles, i.e.).

Agent_Smith has put much work into exploring
such abseil-rope-joining knots, and one can find
a URLink to his paper elsewhere on this site.
He offers a simple improvement, too.


--dl*
====
« Last Edit: May 16, 2018, 10:54:47 PM by Dan_Lehman »

Z

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 59
Re: Ranking of worst knots
« Reply #23 on: May 16, 2018, 02:18:01 AM »
The flatness of the EDK is where the two ropes meet and slide flat over a surface, thereby decreasingly the chance of getting snagged on a rock, branch, or whatever. Thus, climbers call the knot flat.
If you're reading this, it's too late.

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3643
Re: Ranking of worst knots
« Reply #24 on: May 16, 2018, 11:50:42 PM »
The flatness of the EDK is where the two ropes meet and slide flat over a surface, thereby decreasingly the chance of getting snagged on a rock, branch, or whatever. Thus, climbers call the knot flat.
Or they call it "flat" because someone started calling
them that and ... (like Brits using "larksfoot" vice "larkshead",
traceable to a book by Bill March).  Still, the knot isn't flat.

IMO, "offset" is a far better, apt adjective.

(-;

Harold Kahl

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 69
Re: Ranking of worst knots
« Reply #25 on: July 02, 2018, 03:28:59 AM »
I nominate the butterfly bend and Hunter's bend. Not that they are that bad, but I can't think of any situation where they would be preferred over the zeppelin bend, which has better resistance to jamming.

I recently used the tautline hitch to hang a clothesline. It worked great because the line was not too slick and it didn't need to hold much tension.
« Last Edit: July 02, 2018, 03:33:35 AM by Harold Kahl »

agent_smith

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 895
Re: Ranking of worst knots
« Reply #26 on: July 02, 2018, 12:01:47 PM »
With all due respect to original poster, I think this thread is rather pointless.

In my view, all knots have their place - context is what matters.

Obviously, if the wrong knot is chosen for a particular application, disappointment may result.

And in response to Harold's post;
Phil D Smith's Riggers bend (aka #1425A Hunters bend) is a beautiful symmetric structure that can be tied from the #1053 derived Butterfly bend by a simple reversal of one SPart.

Yes, Phil D Smith's Riggers bend is vulnerable to jamming, and this may be a desirable property in some applications. Also, it can help us to understand why the Zeppelin bend is jam resistant (eg one consists of inter-linked loops while the other consists of superposed loops).

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3643
Re: Ranking of worst knots
« Reply #27 on: July 02, 2018, 11:43:47 PM »
I nominate the butterfly bend and Hunter's bend.
Not that they are that bad, but I can't think of any situation
where they would be preferred over the zeppelin bend,
which has better resistance to jamming.
As Agent_Smith notes, jamming might be wanted.
If one were able to have a comprehensive survey
of Knots In The Wild (i.e., what actually is used!),
the aforementioned knots would likely combine for
hardly even a negligible tally.

As for SmitHunter's bend, that need not be all so
vulnerable to jamming, if one just crosses the tails a
certain way when tying it.  That THIS preferable version
wasn't what got initially & then repeatedly promulgated
is unfortunate.

The butterfly bend strikes me as an unwanted
compromise on quality over Ashley's bends #1452
& 1408
, as well as having vastly more *publicity*
than is warranted, while e.g. fine knots such as #1425
in addition to the other two are ignored.

Still, consider e.g. cavers & rockclimbers & canyoneers :
they use the offset overhand /EDK to join abseil ropes
because of its offset profile for easy rope movement
over a surface; the grapevine for forming round slings
because of its high strength & security in doing that;
and ... what other end-2-end circumstances/knots?
Their ropes aren't breaking or coming untied ... ,
so why change?  (The taming of HMPE cordage is
now one thing that the old knots don't so well do;
but that material is not necessary.)


As for "all knots have their place", that makes sense
IMO only if one includes Heinz Prohaska's "the waste
basket" as an option.  E.g., I've now illustrated (freed
tied-up play rope by recording the knots on paper)
over 500 (yes, five HUNDRED) *new* knots since
just fall of 2016.  SOME few of those are likely worth
knowing, most are just records in knot-space of places
I've been.  (And in my case, most are eye knots.)
Do I --or anyone-- need 200+ eye knots (and I've
done a few times more than this tally, pre-2016)?
Can we even argue that some even small "place"
needs each?  I doubt it.


--dl*
====

Z

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 59
Re: Ranking of worst knots
« Reply #28 on: July 05, 2018, 10:23:48 AM »
People explaining why they hate certain knots is perhaps more useful than people expressing their love for certain knots. That is the point of this thread. Well done, original poster.
If you're reading this, it's too late.

agent_smith

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 895
Re: Ranking of worst knots
« Reply #29 on: July 10, 2018, 03:33:24 AM »
Quote
People explaining why they hate certain knots is perhaps more useful than people expressing their love for certain knots. That is the point of this thread. Well done, original poster.
???

A hatred of a knot and explaining the source of hatred actually reveals a failing of human application/understanding.
A knot doesn't know that it 'exists' or what domain/category it belongs to. It has no feelings or consciousness.
A knot doesn't know if it is 'good' or 'bad'...only a human can form that concept.

A knot is just a type of tool created by a human. All tools have their purpose...even if it is purely for decoration, art or to study a particular structure. Evan Dan Lehman's 'Lehman 8' has a purpose - maybe not the waste basket but perhaps as a means to study response to load and jam resistance? Although Xarax might think the Lehman 8 belongs in the waste basket :)

The concepts of 'hatred' and 'love' are simply opposite viewpoints.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2018, 08:08:13 AM by agent_smith »