Thanks for your presentation yChan.
This structure is really the integration of two #206 Crossing hitches (aka Munter hitches).
The Crossing hitches are in Z/Z chirality.
...
You could also present this as S/S chirality.
When I took a first 'quick look' - I wasn't certain if the initial #206 Crossing hitch would hold its geometry under load.
But, it does maintain its geometry.
Its even stable when subjected to a
circumferential loading profile (ak 'ring' loading).
In fact, I found that applying a circumferential loading profile assisted with achieving a well defined compact dressing - with clearly defined #206 Crossing hitches.
Overall, this is a very nice creation.
Are you claiming this as an original creation?
...
Commentary:One thing we seem to disagree on is the use of the descriptor 'loop knot'.
The 'loop' which you refer to as actually an 'eye'.
Only a 'loop' can have chirality - an 'eye' does not.
A loop can be created in either S or Z chirality.
Both of the #206 Crossing hitches in this structure have a particular chirality - in this case - both Z.
This is actually an eye knot built from the integration of Z/Z Crossing hitches.
The concept of 'north' or 'south' is arbitrary in my view.
Related concepts about 'direction':Harry Asher presented what he referred to as an 'Eastern' Zeppelin bend (in his Alternative Knot Book). It could just as easily have been a 'Western' Zeppelin bend.
The concept of 'east' and 'west' is arbitrary.
Harry seemed to have missed the fact that a Zeppelin bend can be tied as S/Z or Z/S chirality - both are valid.
And the often chimed B/Q...6/9 tying methods are also arbitrary unless you have a fixed frame of reference (which is in fact a redundant concept).
All you need to understand is that a Zeppelin Bend is built from 2 superposed loops of
opposite chirality.
You can arbitrarily choose S or Z as your first loop. It doesn't matter whether you choose S or Z...as long as the other loop is
opposite chirality.
Anyhow, I thought I'd share these concepts with you - because I think 'north' and 'south' are arbitrary concepts...
EDIT NOTE:There is an interesting correspondence with an end-to-end joining knot.
If we compare your creation to the #1439 Carrick bend:
[ ] in a #1439 Carrick bend, the inter-linked #206 Crossing hitches have S/S chirality (per Ashley).
[ ] In your presentation (dubbed 'north loop knot'), the #206 Crossing hitches have Z/Z chirality
As far as I can see, your presentation is in fact an eye knot derived from #1439 Carrick bend (but with opposite chirality).
In 'ABoK' the #1439 Carrick bend is illustrated as being tied from 2 interwoven loops with S chirality (ie boths loops have S chirality).
The structure created is a
dressing state - since it is unstable and quickly capsizes on application of load.
The resultant stable state is formed from two #206 Crossing hitches both having S chirality.
Ashley does not show the Carrick bend in Z/Z chirality.
There is no apparent reason why #1439 Carrick bend could also be tied from 2 interwoven loops of Z chirality (ie both loops have Z chirality).
Interestingly, on 'animated knots', the Carrick bend is in fact shown with Z/Z chirality.
Link:
https://www.animatedknots.com/carrick-bend-knot 
