@ DerekSmith
Hi tsik_lestat,
I see now that I have tied a different knot to the one I have posted.
I had assumed you had passed the loop bight through the center of the two loops, but you did not... you passed the bight loop over, under, over, under - forming a stunningly stable construction. I am even more impressed by this knot than I was by the one I thought you were tying.
I am intrigued - how did you invent it?
Derek
The EHL1 end of line eye knot, was the first instance i had tied, when i was fiddling with crossing knot nipping structures, about a year and a half ago. Then, it was delivered directly to Xarax, and after some evaluation/discussion we had, it found its way to publicity, gaining almost instantly, the green light for posting.
I have feautured its versatility, by gradually tying and presenting, most of its corresponding equivalent profiles. Indeed, it is a very stable construction that resists to jamming, and all one has to do, is to press sequentially the two collars to release the pressure and untie the knot.
I guess, i won't be able to get it over with some other potential equivalent invention
.
@Siriuso
Hi tsik_lestat
I think you have got the best midline loop. The EHL is better than Alpine Buttterfly Knot, for it is more secure and non jamming.
The tying method is the same as ABOK#1142 Jar Sling Knot. With a different dressing, EHL is using the Sling's handle as the EHL loop, where as the ABK is using its center nub to hold object.
Happy Knotting
yChan
it certainly is a good knot, but let us not forget that the alpine butterfly has intensively been tested and used in the field, without reported failures so far. The OP's structure features no such background, but i guess, time will tell if it will gain more attention. The omens are promising
.
Trully, the EHL functions more effectively when eye loaded, using whatever profile, with no jamming issues. Believe it or not, i had not seen its relation to the jug knot in the first place.
I understand you have your own TIB method of tying this knot. Feel free to post it, for further evaluation, it would be much appreciated.
@Agent_smith
Hello tsik_lestat,
I see that you breathed new life into this thread at reply #6 .
Looking specifically at your double eye Bowline presentation - just clarifying if this a claim of originality? I presume yes?
Its definitely an improvement over other double eye Bowlines that employ a communicating segment to enable adjustment of the size of the eyes.
As with #1087 Spanish Bowline, the communicating segment is the collar.
In your presentation, it is more efficient because it is indeed EEL.
In comparison, the Spanish Bowline is not suitable for 'EEL' loading profiles.
The outgoing eye legs from each eye are adjacent, rather than splayed as with #1087.
As with any knot, with practice, should be fairly easy to tie from memory.
I haven't read all of your other posts in detail but, are you also suggesting that this Bowline is bi-axially loadable (ie through loadable from SPart-to-SPart)?
Note: You are likely aware that there is a known vulnerability with #1080 Bowline on-a-bight when used for anchor systems.
I have not fully investigated if your presentation has a similar vulnerability...
Link: https://ukcaving.com/board/index.php?topic=14602.0
Its an amusing video with not a lot of scientific rigor....but, you can see the vulnerability the presenter is trying to warn of.
You might say, that there was some sort of refreshment, by planting this double tangle into the thread. i don't think that it has been tied before, but you never know. The fixed eye segments of the knot, are certainly an improvement, compared to the communicating portuguese-like double eye anchor systems.
It has some complexity when tied in the end method, but practice usually improves knotting skills for anyone willing to go for it, as you correctly point out.
I do not recommend it for biaxial loading. Why bother, when there is always the flexibility of forming a powerfull midline geometrical profile, with a configuration of an opposite two end direction, that can be bi-axially or tri-axially loaded?
Thanks for sharing this video, i had no time to study it, but i shall do it later on. I wouldn't have thought to use a bowline on a bight, for an anchor system, plus i have never tested the OP's double loop for such vulnerabilities.
I guess we know the drill, perform intensive tests before using any knot.
I provide some visual reviveness injection, with some midline stuff, analyzed in this thread, in better quality i hope
. The knots are in a loose form, and their eye segments, have been kept purposely small, in order to demonstrate all the nub details (overs and unders).