Been trying to find a simple but effective knot to make a loop (say about 6"dia) in “dental floss (tape variety)”.
Have tried all the usual suspects:- surgeons, overhand, double overhand, sheet bend, double sheet bend, figure eight, fishermans, etc. but no success yet. They all slip under strain.
Any suggestions (do try them first)?
ABOK #1021 worked for me.
Make a slip knot (pulling on the end undoes the knot).
Take the end and tie a half hitch around the loop just next to the knot.
Done.
http://www.igkt.net/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=news;action=display;num=1126738621
has a discussion of ABOK #1021
Hi Jim C,
Floss can be slippery stuff. I think I am a little confused so I’ll ask you to help me a bit. Some of the knots you have tried are bends. None seem to be loop knots, or I may have missundersood… again… one thing I am very good at. ???
Merickson offered a loop knot.. and your original post mentioned a loop… but I don’t think you intend a loop, as at the end of a line.. bowline sort of structure.. nor ABOK #1021, which is a loop knot and works just fine in waxed floss.
Help me and maybe I can help you. Are you bending two ends of slippery floss to form a grommet or continous loop? Are you putting a loop at the end of a line?
So if Merickson read you correctly you are off and running.. If I read you correctly then there are many fine bends that will never slip, but I need to know if that is where you are searching. Also if I am correct in that you are looking for a bend… what books do you have.. or I should say do you have ABOK or any of G.Budworth’s most excellent books. This is because since ABOK some knots for slippery stuff have come on board.. and GB has illustrated them most wonderfully… Good luck. Is it a bend or a loop?
As a guiderule, I would say try the knots used in monofilament fishingline.
I do not understand what you need the knot for, but if bulkyness is no problem the books on fishing knots may help you out.
Willeke
http://www.layhands.com/Knots/Knots_Bends.htm show both the Ashley’s Bend (ABOK #1542) and the Zepplin (Rosendahl) Bend. I used these to form a circle by bending the ends: worked for me (no slip before breaking).
http://www.texasgulfcoastfishing.com/perfection_loop.htm shows the Perfection Loop. It formed a nice loop, in the end of a length of dental floss, that didn’t slip.
By the way, the dental floss I used was waxed. I wonder if non-waxed floss would give different results.
Cheers - Brian.
Not sure I understand all the implications of the first post but : Hope I am not “too much” outside subject.
If practical question on how to hold dental floss : this is, though I suppose every one “do it like that”, how I proceeded the last 40 years ( works even with skin humid or slightly soapy ).
I feel always easier to “read” a knot in pic, diagram, drawing than with words that I always feel awkwards and with often the “vector” missing in my understanding.
For the pic it is hemp of about 0,6 mm in diameter ( did not want to good dental floss of which I realized I need to buy some more as I will be soon on “shortage” and it is easier to see)
Had the devil of a time to take pic with both hands being the “model” ! pencil in mouth, camera behind a magnyfying glass, and …)
If theorical question for “slippery material”
When I want to play and experiment how “slippy” a structure is :
I use 3 strands nylon about 3/32 or 2.5mm, ( this size make it is still easy to see what is happening )
and apply either liquid silicon lubricant or WD40 ( smelly, for long time is the WD40 and I prefer silicon, though WD40 insert itself more readily everywhere in the knot).
If it does not slip with that coating I count it as “not highly likely to slip with a non “greasy” rope”.
( of course these substances surely alter the rope but just for testing “slippiness” it is not an adverse effec to take in linet)
Hi
This is what I found
26 different dental flosses, made from silk, polyamide (Nylon) or Teflon, were analyzed with respect to their surface structure and their cross-section. Principally, two different types of manufacturing could be distinguished. The dental flosses either consisted of a large number of individual fibers, or a single, falted membrane. Even flosses that were manufactured in the same manner revealed considerable differences.
in http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=8235532&dopt=Abstract
that is important in dental hygien as well as in knot to know that if comparing is to be made. It is not sure that the same “behavoiur” is to be expected with a wide range of “material”
I only knew befor that : silk, polyethylene, polytetrafluoroethylene, nylon, tefon, and the old, old one : sinew fibers
some are mono filament some are multi-filaments, (braid), some ar so rigid hat they are used “needlelike” (superfloss)
there are thin, medium, thick
There are waxed and not-waxed
so : dental floss can be many things, stating in which one you are making your experiment ( knots only) could be quite important to comparison of “opinions” and “interpretations of results”
Sorry I was out of the loop overnight (that happens when you live down under).
Sorry to cause confusion with terminology. KnudeNoggin is right on the money. What I’m looking for is an easy (as in simple and convienient) way to create a “circle” of the stuff to facilitate the use for which it is designed (no more ‘cut-off-circulation’ from multiple frapping turns around index fingers).
Obviously be nice to have a solution that doesn’t need jewellers tools and eye glass.
I suspect a tripple fisherman’s bend would do it but not exactly something that can be tied with eyes half shut in a semi dark bathroom with pink queue at door.
Thanks for suggestions folks.
Sorry I was out of the loop overnight (that happens when you live down under).Sorry to cause confusion with terminology. KnudeNoggin is right on the money. What I’m looking for is an easy (as in simple and convienient) way to create a “circle” of the stuff to facilitate the use for which it is designed (no more ‘cut-off-circulation’ from multiple frapping turns around index fingers).
Obviously be nice to have a solution that doesn’t need jewellers tools and eye glass.
…
Ah, I see what you’re doing. You can buy flossing tools to spare your fingers, although since I’ve never tried them, I can’t say how easy or effective they are.
Maybe you can find some tough flexible tubing to protect your fingers. ;D
Now that would be a solution but not really an answer Roo.
Have tried several of the suggestions and, so for, the Zepplin bend seems to work best, and not to complex either. Thanks Brian.
Regards
JimC
Now that would be a solution but not really an answer Roo.Have tried several of the suggestions and, so for, the Zepplin bend seems to work best, and not to complex either. Thanks Brian.
Regards
JimC
You must not be using Glide. Glide floss is coated with teflon and so a Zeppelin Bend or just about any other well-known knot just slithers out.
Next time you are floss shopping, pick some up for some great knotting frustration if not for flossing. 
You are right Roo. That was short lived success. Tried another waxier, slipperier brand and zepplin bend doesn’t hold in it.
Blood knot holds for awhile but seems the waxxy ribbon stuff will slip out of just about anything.
Back to ABOK.
You are right Roo. That was short lived success. Tried another waxier, slipperier brand and zepplin bend ...=>"Rosendahl's Bend": it's not just for zeppelin's, ya know. So, how about making a 2nd finishing tuck w/each end?
Blood knot holds for awhile but seems the waxxy ribbon stuff will slip out of just about anything.Here, again, how many tucks are you using in the Blood? And how much force are you putting on the knot?! The stated need of a practical one (not for test machine), and Gliding to my bathroom cabinet I find that although indeed that thin tape is eel-ishly slick, several of the recommended knots seem to hold --maybe until being pulled REALLY hard, but at a force that worries me about just breaking the stuff, anyway. Just make a 2nd tuck to the Blood, then. One could [i]off-load[/i] the knot a little by making a round turn on one digit with the knot on the interior, half-way point of this turn. But, again, what's been tried above seems adequate [i]to the flossing task[/i].
Back to ABOK.Why there? --Ashley's not familiar with this stuff (or much of synthetics)! One will need to do exploratory knotting with an eye to using perhaps a few well-nipped tucks. Perhaps just make an [i]Offset Overhand (Thumb) Bend[/i] after tying the Blood knot (i.e., tie an Overhand loopknot such that the Blood is centered in the eye, and snug up the Overhand to this): the OOB might slip & roll once, but it shouldn't be able to roll ([i]flype[/i]) AROUND the Blood, nor deliver sufficient force to slip through the Blood.
You are right Roo. That was short lived success. Tried another waxier, slipperier brand and zepplin bend doesn't hold in it.Blood knot holds for awhile but seems the waxxy ribbon stuff will slip out of just about anything.
Back to ABOK.
Here’s another approach that’s very fast to tie:
Are you familiar with the Stevedore Knot?
http://www.troop7.org/Knots/Stevedore.html
OK, now imagine you tie a Stevedore with the two ends of the floss twinned together, pointing in the same direction. Oh, and also use a lot more twists.
So you take both ends together, pointing in the same direction, take a bight from them with your index finger and spin, spin, spin, until you’re satisfied, and tuck the free ends through the bight loop.
It should take all of two seconds.
(My apologies if this was described by someone else without me realizing it. Sometimes describing knots with words is tough).
Results obviously relative to floss quality. What works on one doesn’t work on other.
Have tried between 4-8 tucks on Blood. More tucks increased effectiveness but still collapsed relatively readily on the ‘slippery’ one. Adding overhand stoppers pretty much solves the problem and works well. Getting a bit complex for purpose though.
Ashley may not be up-to-date on synthetics but I’ve not seen too many knots in synthetics that are not in ABOK.
Thanks Roo, best solution (I.e. as in most convienient) seems to be putting an overhand stopper on doubled ends then Stevedore knot behind stopper. Putting overhand stopper initially helps to keep everything together too.
Thanks folks
The “Rosendahl or Zepplin Bend” worked in the Johnson & Johnson Reach (waxed) Floss but not in the Colgate Total (waxed) Coated Dental Floss that I bought today.
The “Spider Hitch Knot”, http://www.sdhookandline.com/knots/spiderhitch.html , worked in the Colgate Total (waxed) Coated Dental Floss. Instead of using a thumb, I found a piece of plastic straw worked just fine, required less thread and helped keep the strands parallel. With the suggested 5 wraps, the floss circle consistantly broke before the knot slipped; with 4 wraps, sometimes it slipped and sometimes it broke.
I must see if I can find some of this “Glide” next time I visit the pharmacy. Will a Glide owner try the “Spider Hitch Knot” and see if it works?
Cheers - Brian.
Ps. To give credit were credit is due: I found the “Spider Hitch” looking at “How to Split Leaders” when I was browsing for ideas in Geoff Wilson’s “Complete Book of Fishing Knots & Rigs”. I like his work - BG.
Colgate “Total” is the slipperiest one I have at the moment and the one that is proving the greatest challenge. Maybe something to do with the cross section too.
Tried the spiderhitch with some success but, after experimenting with different approaches thought, isn’t spiderhitch essentially same as stevedore except that the turns are made with the wend and not by twisting the loop. Final result looks pretty much topographically same construct.
JimC asked, " … isn’t spiderhitch essentially same as stevedore … ?"
With the discussion in the other thread “Tentative Defining of Knot”, I would like to tread softly in this reply. 
As you know, the stevedore is a stopper knot of two turns while the spiderhitch is a loop knot of five turns. As a result, if I heard or read others using the words, I would say that they are obviously totally different knots.
I think the challenge is to decide what we mean by the adverb essentially.
First Approach
If we replace the doubled strand, in the spiderhitch, with a single strand and remove one turn at a time, we end up with an Overhand knot. Using Nick Wilde’s term “deliberate complication” from his definition of a knot in the “Tentative Defining of Knot” thread, we could say that the spiderhitch is a deliberate complication of the Overhand Knot.
If we remove one turn in the stevedore’s knot (defined by the site to which Roo linked (see footnote)) we end up with a Figure-of-Eight. We could say the stevedore is a deliberate complication of the Figure-of-Eight.
As a result, since they are deliberate complications of different knots, I would say that the spiderhitch and the stevedore are essentially different knots.
Second Approach
If again we replace the doubled with a single strand in the spiderhitch and remove half-turns this time, we end up with a different form of the stevedore knot. If we think of a knot as tied, dressed and set, then the “half-turn reduced” spiderhitch and the stevedore can be seen as tied the same, dressed differently and set. For me, the same knot dressed differently is a different knot and the spiderhitch and stevedore are essentially different knots. However, if you think two knots tied the same but dressed differently are the same knot, then the spiderhitch and the stevedore are essentially the same.
As I said at the beginning, I think the challenge is to carefully define what procedure is used to determine the meaning of the phrase “essentially the same”.
Cheers - Brian.
Footnote: If you are using the links posted by Roo and myself to tie the knots, it will be less confusing if the stevedore is tied by going “clockwise” down the standing part rather “counter clockwise” as shown here: http://www.troop7.org/Knots/Stevedore.html .
Thanks Brian,
You have confirmed my suspicion. What your saying then is that a Stevedore IS essentially the same (I.e. in the topological sense) as a Spiderhitch.
So; If I start a Stevedore - No! If I start a Figure_Eight - No! If I start an Overhand knot with a double strand and make one extra turn I have a Figure_Eight knot of double strand. If I add two extra turns (in total that is - not in addition to) then I have a Stevedore of double strand. If I add five turns of the loop then I have a Spiderhitch!
Makes you think doesn’t it, what about the poor cousins? What are we going to call the constructs with three and four turns - Do they not count?
Note: I don’t mind being accused of deliberate simplification.
Question: Which way should I tie my Stevedore if I’m using “S” laid rope?
JimC said, “You have confirmed my suspicion. What your saying then is that a Stevedore IS essentially the same (I.e. in the topological sense) as a Spiderhitch.”
Ahhh … in a topological sense. If you join the ends of the “Spider Hitch Knot” ( http://www.sdhookandline.com/knots/spiderhitch.html ), it quite easily can be “untied” to become a simple circle of cord. This is called a Null Knot.
If by “Stevedore’s Knot” you mean the knot shown here, http://www.troop7.org/Knots/Stevedore.html , and if you join the ends, you can not “untangle” it. It is non-Null. The “Spider Hitch Knot” and the “Stevedore’s Knot” are not topologically equivalent.
If by “Stevedore’s Knot” you mean a loop knot tied with a bight that has the shape of the “Stevedore’s Knot”, it is called (by some) a Figure-of-Ten loop. If you join the ends of the Figure-of-Ten loop, it can easily be “untied” to become a simple circle of cord. It is a Null Knot.
The “Spider Hitch Knot” and the “Figure-of-Ten” loop are topologically equivalent to each other. In fact, they are topologically equivalent to all knots that can be tied in or with a bight. They are all Null Knots.
Nice chatting with you, Brian.