Author Topic: Yet, another midline eyeknot  (Read 1726 times)

tsik_lestat

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 155
Yet, another midline eyeknot
« on: June 02, 2020, 02:45:36 PM »
I wasn't able to locate an Abok number for this structure, though it looks simple in its construction.

Besides a sharp turn at its right link, the two links are neatly interweaved, there are no overhands, plus it appears that it can handle multidirectional loading ( bi-axial, or tri-axial), with no observable jamming effects.

Maybe it resides somewhere in the forum archives?

It appears to me that Siriuso's Mocha crossing knot based, end of line, eyeknot, finds the way to Tibness, with an extra tuck, although here is depicted and tied in the middle of the rope.

Link:  https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=6320.0

I believe, i owe a TIB method of tying ...............
« Last Edit: June 03, 2020, 08:00:20 AM by tsik_lestat »
Going knots

siriuso

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 225
Re: Yet, another midline loopknot
« Reply #1 on: June 02, 2020, 08:08:07 PM »
Hi tsik_lestat

I tied it in this way.

yChan

tsik_lestat

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 155
Re: Yet, another midline eyeknot
« Reply #2 on: June 03, 2020, 04:12:55 PM »
Very nice Ychan, thanks a lot for your offering!

That's what i call a quick neat and tidy, TIB tying method! Though, i would draw attention at the last tucking, illustrated in your third image, as you have to be careful in order to achieve the desirable final dressing state, but your proper hand placement, subserves tying errors circumvention.

Although your images speak on their own, i believe i have to appose my own TIB method of tying, in a descriptive and illustrative way.

1. Form a crossing knot with a slightly twisted collar, as shown in first photo. The bight component of the crossing knot, will be the final eye, so it might be good in this phase, to adjust its size.

2. Form an S loop on the left link, that is, the one which is a direct continuation of crossing knot's bight component, and place it over the twisted crossing knot collar, overlaping it, as shown in second photo.

3. Pass the bight through this configuration, in the following order ~ over, under, under, over ~, as shown in third photo.

4. Dress and cinch the knot.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2020, 04:43:21 PM by tsik_lestat »
Going knots

agent_smith

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Yet, another midline eyeknot
« Reply #3 on: June 03, 2020, 11:19:26 PM »
These type of knot structures are interesting.
There is a simple elegance to the original offering from tsik_lestat in his other thread topic.
I think the toggle mechanism is interesting and opens new lines of experimentation and discovery.

Its hard to beat the original #1053 Butterfly for simplicity and effectiveness.
But, if simplicity can be retained (to an extent) - there is merit.
There is room in my Butterfly paper to include a toggled 'TLE' knot :)

tsik_lestat

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 155
Re: Yet, another midline eyeknot
« Reply #4 on: June 04, 2020, 05:15:25 PM »
Its hard to beat the original #1053 Butterfly for simplicity and effectiveness.
But, if simplicity can be retained (to an extent) - there is merit.

That's true, it's even hard to beat EHL, even though they share the same left link (with EHL 2 midline, not the one you are illustrating).

Generally, in my view, it might be hard to devise a midline eye knot, under the strict frame of characteristics that you had  correctly advanced for the midline concept. It rules out many prospective TIB knot structures.

Link :https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=6382.msg42997#msg42997

I think the toggle mechanism is interesting and opens new lines of experimentation and discovery

These "toggled tri-axially loadable midline eye knots" (love the term :)), might be one of the new lines of exploration as you correctly point out, adding stability, security and jam resistance in the equation.

Speaking of toggle mechanisms, here is Xarax's variation, which somehow, smooths out right link's sharpness of the previous knot, by transposing its two lines in the core nub, as shown in the next two images.

To be continued with a TIB tying method.................
« Last Edit: June 04, 2020, 05:19:42 PM by tsik_lestat »
Going knots

KC

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 290
    • latest project
Re: Yet, another midline eyeknot
« Reply #5 on: June 04, 2020, 10:44:36 PM »
With like B'fly as center node-deformity
i  look at SPart to SPart as 1 axis
>>of 2different line directions on that single axis.
.
Tri-axially loaded in vertical too?
Easier to see in horizontal with dip as tri-axial I think.
« Last Edit: June 04, 2020, 10:55:49 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.~

alpineer

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 507
Re: Yet, another midline eyeknot
« Reply #6 on: June 05, 2020, 05:52:09 AM »
With like B'fly as center node-deformity
i  look at SPart to SPart as 1 axis
>>of 2different line directions on that single axis.
.
Tri-axially loaded in vertical too?
Easier to see in horizontal with dip as tri-axial I think.
"radial" rather than "axial" is the more accurate term I think.

tsik_lestat

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 155
Re: Yet, another midline eyeknot
« Reply #7 on: June 05, 2020, 03:40:38 PM »
KC, i believe that with the term "tri-axial", we are refering to a state where load is applied to all three directions, that is, to all three endings of the midline knot (two ends/links and eye).

We might also refer to the feasibility of loading midline's eye, without observable jamming effects or radical geometry changes.

However, as Alpineer suggests, the term "radial", sounds more accurate, because if we load the eye of a midline eyeknot, its two ends can hardly remain collinear to one other, they will rather form an angle, therefore, the sense of perpendicularity to the horizontal axis of loading, ceases to exist.

Xarax had proposed an 120 degree versatile eyeknot, where its three endings are equally loaded, and this occurs if and only if they are forming an 120 degrees angle, one with the other.

Right after this equilibrium state, where the knot takes its final geometrical balanced state, there would be no drastic changes to its geometry, if the knot was to be reloaded again in a midline, or end of line configuration.
« Last Edit: June 05, 2020, 07:38:47 PM by tsik_lestat »
Going knots

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3947
Re: Yet, another midline eyeknot
« Reply #8 on: June 12, 2020, 10:09:20 PM »
However, as Alpineer suggests, the term "radial", sounds more accurate,
because if we load the eye of a midline eyeknot, its two ends can hardly remain collinear
to one other, they will rather form an angle, therefore, the sense of perpendicularity
to the horizontal axis of loading, ceases to exist.
"BI-axial" is the unwanted term, but as you note,
"tri-axial" is what one must get if all ends are loaded
(though one might quibble about insisting on the
*perfectly straight* end-2-end loading even where
there's a mere slight deflection).
Here, "radial" IMO is unhelpfully vague on number
of loading directions.  (to which net knots pose a
challenge on seeing any particular one, regarding
that precision implied above --they shift)


--dl*
====

KC

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 290
    • latest project
Re: Yet, another midline eyeknot
« Reply #9 on: June 13, 2020, 10:42:48 AM »
Sorry, i really knew what you meant,
but am trying to smooth the lingo we use to proper geometry terms(self included);
that cross into and re-verify in other things, and more tangibly.
Not to be word picky, but to focus on force flow and correct imagery of what we are dealing with.
>>to see most clearly what is going on, so consistently, even extending to other things all around as nothing unique.
So, prefer to see a full 'axle', not just a half axle(of 1 side) for axises(sorry, tree folk tend not to use formal plural axes in writing..)
>>so axle, implies balance side to side to me; from other lessons all around this.
.
Most all my references are to force loaded, not tying mode prescriptions.
On a force line/column , i look for 1 linear direction from a source point
>>like gravity loaded weight ball that could/has capacity to fall to ground (like a positive charge)
For axis, i look for the Equal & Opposite resistance against delivered squarely on that same line, but opposing direction to constitute axis
>>an opposing column against, a complete force set that may stop/control movement
>>whereby force line is 1 sided and must move
2 directions of lines , but opposing on single column/line. 
>>But this single axis AND dimension, are not (as) side force stable tho..
.
Tri-axial to me is more like tripod support or 3 x 120degree increments  of rope support holding lower weight ball very well to position
>>as can now take some side force in the now non-Single  dimension support>>very critical change to note.
Whereby , B'fly loaded straight thru Starts, with eye pull across is against the main force axis of SParts.
But, a rose is a rose by any other name all the same;
>>except when try to take our 'lingo' and match to all else/other fields and lose connection/continuity and understanding
>>AND perhaps be more inviting, as more consistent to those other disciplines as well to join in this party/study.
As so like, i see 2 dim support/more side force stable constitution in 3 arcs on host as opposed to 1/mono or 2/linear arc 1 dimensional support lendings of not so stable against sideForce.
.
We tend to think in simpler straight line models of non-sideForce, non-radial forces
But the big joke on us is that in linear force persisting in 1 direction,
>>and randomly choosing another of the other 359 degree directions as choice against initial loading direction
>>only gives 1 in 359 chance of no sideForce/radial implications! (.0027 chance /pretty poor odds!)
>>doubles to 1 in 180 .005555.. chance if moving away from load/ruling out towards load as not support(half of 1%'r rule)
So, say again, that purely line defines more as a unique non-side force/non-radial
>>more so than sideForce/radials define as nonLinear , for they just exclude the single, unique line from all else
>>as linear support that we imagine/see most easily is much less than a 1%'r, as so unique vs. all others!
So, always look for the sideForce, as the magician's other hand that can fool
>>if is unique instance of inline, still ref w/Zer0 placeholder, as circumstance is so unique
>>not to make Ancient's mistake of empty/null non-numbers as Zer0
>>no telling what else they would have come up with if found Zer0 2 millenniums earlier!!
.
To my models, even if not PHYSICALLY/viewable as pure inline against load as physical axis
>>in passive/responding control against active loading imposed
>>the cosine lends a VIRTUAL/invisible force line against load to complete axis of 'competition' squarely against each other load/support.
As the load requires to not further displace against any other space; other than present/existing position
.
Once again, some of this perhaps small quibble chatter/matter of alignment to each other more easily so pivotally close to home
>>can make own 'deals'/lingo on our island; but not so much to big sea of all else around to expand understanding
>>and be more inviting as common language to chance passer bys to draw them in/stay longer as inherently more relevance.
« Last Edit: June 13, 2020, 11:27:06 AM 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.~

agent_smith

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Yet, another midline eyeknot
« Reply #10 on: June 14, 2020, 02:07:15 PM »
I am quite interested in these toggled tri-axially loadable eye knots that are TIB.
I have found a 'simple' tying method (simple enough for me...) - and I have also explored some corresponding 'bends'.

The toggle mechanism is (as far as I am aware) a new line of development in TIB tri-axially loadable eye knots...(notwithstanding the toggle mechanism in the 'Anglers loop' which is not tri-axially loadable.

Definitely will make an appearance in my paper on the Butterfly eye knot.

siriuso

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 225
Re: Yet, another midline eyeknot
« Reply #11 on: June 14, 2020, 09:13:11 PM »
Mark,

I see that the corresponding bend is Bad Brother Bend.

yChan

tsik_lestat

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 155
Re: Yet, another midline eyeknot
« Reply #12 on: June 15, 2020, 12:30:25 AM »
I have found a 'simple' tying method (simple enough for me...) - and I have also explored some corresponding 'bends'.

Ychan's insight about your depicted corresponding bend's origin, is spot on.The appertaining eyeknot(s), is/are also quite interesting.

Link 1 : https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=6434.msg43694#msg43694

Link 2 : https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4090.msg31980#msg31980

Is there a chance, for your TIB tying method, to find its way to publicity, along with your other explored respective bends? Thanks!
Going knots

agent_smith

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Yet, another midline eyeknot
« Reply #13 on: June 15, 2020, 03:40:23 AM »
Quote
Mark,

I see that the corresponding bend is Bad Brother Bend.

yChan

?

Not sure why you felt it necessary to direct that piece of information to me personally?
I merely added it to my images because I intend to add it to my paper on the Zeppelin bend as an example of a toggled bend (it certainly was not a claim of originality) and because it was a derivative of the TIB TLE knot from tsik_lestat (note the use of the word 'derivative' and not 'corresponding').

In any case, it isn't the 'corresponding bend' - for that to be a true statement, the tails would have to exit on the same side (not opposite sides).

siriuso

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 225
Re: Yet, another midline eyeknot
« Reply #14 on: June 15, 2020, 11:19:18 AM »
Hi Mark,

Sorry for your concern. I did not know you are presenting a draft or something else. Though it is clear that it is not a corresponding knot to the loop knot, I think it is always best to have their names captioned or attached.

yChan
« Last Edit: June 15, 2020, 11:21:27 AM by siriuso »