Author Topic: A practical, end of line, design topology of 1053 butterfly(single loop,Spanish)  (Read 608 times)

tsik_lestat

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 222
At first, it was tied as a bowline, following on with the structure demonstrated here, Link : https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=6622.msg45964#msg45964.

When it caught Xarax's attention, it surely felt his magic touch, taking the final and more compact geometrical form of enhanced 1051, as shown in the first two images (for the bowline mentioned previously, just cross the two ends to get a more entangled form).

My first reaction was like, " Ok, let's put the bowline aside for now, and focus on this elevated beauty".

What i surprisingly discovered later, was its  topological equivalence with Mobius butterfly's dressing, as well as with the other, end of line (or midline), butterfly profiles by extension.

The Mobius `tresse` is not depicted, but it can be easily revealed by pulling the collar, collapsing the eye at the same time and vice versa (first image).

Question 1 Since this is not a beauty contest, is this a more practical, end of line design approach, which may outplace the more conventional but more prone to jamming, end termination butterfly profiles?

From my point of view, it certainly doesn't lack of stabillity security and compactness, being also rather easy to tie and inspect, with half of butterfly's complexity and a more pliable nub. One butterfly's overhand has been overridden from the nipping system, while the other one has been pushed to the last stages of the collar structure level, where less tension is expected.

Well, as a drawback, butterfly's pseudo symmetry is being lost, along with the EEL ability, (this justifies the first and second depiction, which discriminates the two ends, as i wouldn't be confident to load it from the tail end), but we end up with a very elegant but a bit bulky knot.

Question 2  Has anyone tied it before, and can we really override the other "not so harmful" butterfly's overhand, and recover also the EEL quality?

Here comes the best part of this thread .....

Knotsaver, is authorised as of now, to answer positively to that question, because he developed three years ago, a very stable and powerful Spanish bowline variation, (third, fourth image), so by definition he has tied all single loop, shrunk, derivative states too.

Verily, starting from the first image structure, one may gradually pull the collar and its link/myrtle continuation, to create the second eye of the final, butterfly equivalent, double spanish twisted EEL topology, with this smart transformation.

It appears, that the butterfly's transfomation sequence, has been enhanced with two additional, decent knots, and what a great transformation video would have made, if only would have caught Mr. Lee's attention.

Edit note ....  Thanks to knotsaver again, who has located an older appearence of an all but similar, portuguesse like variation, as far back as in 2016, developed by Alan Lee (second image, Lee's double knot V2)

Link : https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=5694.msg38738#msg38738
« Last Edit: March 30, 2021, 06:27:19 AM by tsik_lestat »
Going knots

tsik_lestat

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 222
The other, single loop shrunk, derivative, spanish state is formed by collapsing the other Spanish eye. The rightmost end, is designated to be the SPart (first image).

You get a more conventional butterfly scheme py pulling the collar, while pulling the other line (first image), you get a spanish tresse with parallel lines within the nub (third, fourth image), appropriate for anchor systems.
Going knots

tsik_lestat

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 222
I couldn't possibly ignore the analog, false butterfly, profile states, giving it some extra credit, where credit's due and restore its reputation.

It might be good to form the bowline in this case, by adding a second rope diameter into the nipping loop, enhancing its friction.

The result is a multiple state, polymorphic versatile knot.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2021, 09:15:37 PM by tsik_lestat »
Going knots

tsik_lestat

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 222
A false butterfly based bowline mentioned previously, has been attached, in order to add more friction/stability by adding a second rope diameter in the nipping loop, along with the spanish  bowline structure, derived from the same previous false butterfly profiles.
Going knots

tsik_lestat

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 222
A combination of double and spanish bowline techniques at the opening post's knot (enhanced 1051 collar butterfly
), for a triple eyeknot bowline derivative, with efficient rope usage.
Going knots

tsik_lestat

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 222
It would be interesting to deviate a little from the thread's main theme, and investigate how some of the previous, end of line knot structures, reshape their nubs to form the corresponding inline profiles.

For a start, i describe a TIB tying method for a midline derivative of the first structure (enhanced 1051 collared butterfly).

1. Form a twisted crossing knot (first image).

2. Flip the crossing knot's bight under the main line (second image`Note the resemblance with butterfly's tying method, which includes just a flipped crossing knot`).

3. Pass the bight, under the small loop, over the crossing area, under the continuation of the rightmost Spart (second image).

4. Complete knots in a loose form in third,fourth image.

It appears that the crossing area, firmly secures the eye, and it also appears that one TL profile (loading the knot from simple Spart and the eye), is a quite stable loading option, with the less possible deformation.

However, whatever loading profile is chosen, it usually involves eye tension, hence the overhand is directly activated and possiblly affects the jam resistance.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2021, 07:25:18 PM by tsik_lestat »
Going knots

agent_smith

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1297
Thanks tsik_lestat,
Your presentation at reply #5 will distort under heavy 'BTL' loading profile (biaxial through loading).

Eye loading appears to be okay in one axial direction but, not so good in the opposite axial direction.
It has similarity to the 'Cask' knot - which also distorts under heavy loading.

The #1053 Butterfly does not suffer from this type of distortion in a 'BTL' loading profile - because both SParts turn around the central eye legs.
In your latest presentation, the SParts don't arc around the eye legs - the load pathway is quite unbalanced.

EDIT NOTE:
Can you try to perform a load test on your latest presentation?
You don't need a load cell...you could try body weight (bounce your body weight on the knot) - or, if you can - use mechanical advantage to generate more force.
« Last Edit: May 05, 2021, 01:42:18 AM by agent_smith »

tsik_lestat

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 222
Thanks agent_smith for giving it a try, we almost have the same point of view for this structure, although i do not make out any similarity with the cask knot (more symmetry - no overhands).

I'm always on the hunt for the ultimate structure, but a compact and tidy knot scheme, does not always correspond functionally to the perfect knot. Midlines are generally tough to design, because most of its components engage in the loading process.

I need to ask about the practicality of the BTL profile, besides the isolation of a damaged rope section and how it can be tested (i mean, one has to tie eyeknots to anchor both SParts, which brings on more rope strength attenuation).

With respect to load testing, i usually work with small diameter, low MBS, `el cheapo` ropes, with body weight or mechanichal advantage, in order to approximate "the heavy loading" and get a picture about the knot's response (see where the knot goes), but i haven't performed any testing to these structures yet.

However, even if it features some good aspects, this is not the only inline structure, associated with my initial, end of line presentation.

Verily, performing some nub transformations which i find hard to capture, one may alternate between first image's end of line and inline configurations.

Note, that in this case, i'm confident to claim that these are genuine equivalent knots, because they do not involve eye manipulation.

I believe, this time SParts do arc around both eyelegs for a more balanced load pathway, plus the overhand, takes the form of a crossing knot +nipping turn, which is a better option for the jamming profile.

Nonetheless, besides its better BTL profile, the crossing area appears to multiply the friction, so it needs testing to confirm its jam resistance.

TIB tying method is on its way.......
Going knots