Hi guys, I am new to forum but have lurked for a long while.
I have had a fascination with bends for many years, I find them intriguing. I discovered the Zeppelin bend and used it for a long while before I came across it in a book.
I have another bend I discovered and use a lot for general use, I was wondering if any of you recognize it and can put a name to it. It is just a number of turns locked together symmetrically, there is no actual knot in it. see what you recon, thanks.
Regards Rusty.
I’ll have to get back to you on this one, but there is something about this that seems familiar.
Have you noticed that there is more than one stable form of this? Try pulling on the free ends only to reveal the inverse of this knot. Keep things fairly loose. This inverse knot looks familiar, too, by the way. Next, let go of the free ends and again pull on the normal standing parts, and you can get a more globe-shaped knot.
Opening up the knot form, without regard to the ends, I see a structure that closely resembles this:
I do not know the name of it, and, of course, after a few twists, there are a number of places produced for the final tucking of the ends leading to a lot of variations. One of the simplest bends produced in this fashion is the Grass Bend (an alternative setting of the What Knot, a.k.a. Grief Knot). The knot you show might be considered a “relative” (in a knot theory sense) to the Grass Bend. By this I mean that if one removes the initial “constrictor”-like twist of the standing parts after they have entered the knot, your tying appears to reduce to a Grass Bend. FWIW
Thanks Fellows,
It is similar to a what I know as a surgeons bend, but with the free ends tucked under the loop at each end, so I suspect it might be considered a variant, though I dont tie it in the same manner as I would construct a surgeons bend.
I use it quiet often as I feel its a bit like my bend (Rusty Bend) lol. It does set well and can be broken easily after being loaded, I find it settles nicely when loaded quickly when loose, it seems best in smaller line as it can get bulky in line over an inch in diameter. It looks good with string or twine. I dont use it in life threatening situations but use it when camping or lashing etc, though I have come to trust it. It is a bit fiddly to tie, I use both hands and some tricky finger movement, but once learned it is quite simple.
Sorry if I put this in the wrong forum.
All your feed back is appreciated, you guys are very knowledgeable, hence i was a bit hesitant in making a post and feeling the fool, so thanks for your kind replies.
Rusty
Roo, yes I did post it here as I was a bit scared to throw it out there as a practical bend, mainly because it is unknown to me and it is not the easiest to make up. As regards to stability it seems best when loaded from the standing parts.
SS, they do look similar.
DDK, I checked the grass knot out, interesting, I would say a surgeons knot is similar. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Surgeon's_knot.jpg
Then you might endeavor to buy this book, from DownUnder,
in your neck o’ the woods : Symmetric Bends: How to Join Two Lengths of Cord
by Roger Miles. Seems there’s one on e-Bay now, and the Amazon
Marketplace can sometimes help.
I’m not sure whether Roger has this one, though.
I discovered the Zeppelin bend and used it for a long while before I came across it in a book.
That makes you at least the 4th (after Rosendahl, or wherever
he got it from if not his own devices)! What led you to them
–that & this?
I was wondering if any of you recognize it and can put a name to it.
My note of record for this is dated 1979-09-13,
and it was a sort of reduction of other twisted-SParts
knots I was fiddling. Subsequently, I think it was Dr.
Mick(?) (“M” figures in his name, I think --poor recall)
who also discovered it for himself and published a
short note about it in Knotting Matters , in, hmmm,
some few years later, circa 1988. And there’s a like knot
with one crossing reversed, which I discovered in 1978-11,
but thought less of, though now I’m not sure about my
preference. (My design goal was to have the SParts
twist against each other, and have some sheet-bend-like
collar nipping of the tail for easy untying.)
Thanks Dan,
Re: discovering the Zeppelin Bend, it was by accident, I was trying to tie a Hunters Bend that my Dad had shown me and I had forgotten it, after some time of fiddling I came up with the Zeppelin! sorry no genius here, I am sure I am not #4!. Though I do tie it differently from the d on q method, I start with an over hand knot in my left hand and thread the other free end through the the over hand knot, this method makes it easy to make it in to a loop too.
I do find it relaxing to sit with some line and just fiddle, thus the, dare I call it the “Rusty Bend”. I also like to try and make stopper knots, nooses and loops based on the geometry of various bends, ie; Hunter’s and Zeppelin’s.
Thanks Dan for the reference to your notes, I would love to see any reference to this bend if you ever come across it again.
Okay, I’m off on recalling “M”, and right in my unstated recall of
something like “Riemann” but this bit of rope geometry wasn’t
from the brilliant mathematician but Jack Reinmann (USA-Ohio)
and published in km43:22-3 as a "Symmetric Hawser Bend"
–referring to Ashley’s #1450, which is asymmetric. (1993,
summer --KM, i.e.)
Roo suggested loading the knot in reverse (i.e., by its tails);
that yields Ashley’s #1451, with some capsizing.
And so we can see that Ashley was “all around” this knot,
but missed it (it’s an esp. easy-to-fiddle revision to #1450).
Incidentally, the companion knot is where the line upon
making its U-turn is tucked beneath itself instead of
crossing over itself.
As for discovering a “new” knot by accident, hey, that counts!
I once mused what in my experience seemed a surefire method
for such discovery : invent some complex knot, and then each
time you tried to tie it (from recall), you’d likely go astray and
come up with something (else) new!
And for me, also, I tie interlocked-overhands knots by first
forming one overhand and then reeving the appropriate
end (only one, if an eyeknot) into it as per which of the
knots –#1425, 1452, 1408, Rosendahl’s, and others–
I want. I also got to Rosendahl’s by revising SmitHunter’s.
Well, all the candidates I vaguely had in mind were just superficially similar to this bend. Several knots look much like either the long or globular form. I echo Dan’s thought that this could be in the Symmetric Bends book. I thought I saw the globe-form of the knot on the cover (see Amazon.com), but upon closer inspection, it looks slightly different.
One distinctive feature of your bend that I notice is that the working ends do not exit through the outer collars of the bend as they do in the Surgeon, Vice Versa or Reever Knots/Bends.
I will look around for an ABOK and the Symmetric Bends book! may be the library even.
It would be nice to find it, though I do enjoy it mystery.
Have any of you made it up? I did test it on a capstan at work, it did break at the bend, it did not seem to slip or capsize, though it all happen very quickly. I find it works nicely with line of different diameters too.
I did some quick tests of it in various line types. It seems to be a little less secure than a Double Carrick Bend, which I consider to be of average security. Although it’s an admittedly exotic test, I found that the bend would roll and slither in bungee.
After extreme strain, I found that sometimes I’d have to take a little more time than I’d like getting it apart.
One concern I have it that the bend is subject to being mis-tied.
It’s not bad, but I don’t think it’s going to be a stand-out bend, either. Its decorative features are nice.
It’s not bad, but I don’t think it’s going to be a stand-out bend, either. Its decorative features are nice.
[/quote]
(having trouble quoting)
That is a fair summation, In 2011 I would not presume to come up with a stand out bend. It is horses for courses, it just a bit of fun for me, I use it in non crytical places just to be different, and leave my mark.
I am a marine engineer and work in the towage industry, so I see a lot line work. The Bowline and the Sheet bend being the most common seafarer knots with various hitches, Rolling and Clove. I use a slipped sheet bend all the time for connecting a messenger, the crew on deck instantly recognize it and can slip it with ease. A Bowline is the only loop used in large tow line if the eye has broken, as it can be undone in 80mm 12 strand with a mallet after it has been loaded ( if any other loop was used you would be cursed by others). I once worked with some climbers in cargo tanks on a oil tanker, they mainly used figure 8 and 9 in various forms, they would never consider a lowly Bowline or Sheet bend. Though they were impressed with the double Zeppelin, and made me show them how to tie it.
Roo I checked out the Double Carrick Bend, I am not sure how it differs from a standard Carrick bend?
Sorry for rambling, I just enjoy rope work, my wife thinks there is something wrong with me!
I’ve seen rambling. You don’t ramble. Rope work is just a challenging puzzle, and people like challenging puzzles. Besides, how many puzzles can actually get serious work done like knots do?
Anyway, as you may have guessed, the Double Carrick is also commonly called the Full Carrick or Carrick. I just mention the term to differentiate the True Carrick Bend from the lesser one-off “Carricks” or Single Carricks that have popped up from time to time. As it seems to be a minor problem now, I could probably omit that emphasis with little risk.
Roo and Dan, I was re-reading your responses and dressed and set my bend as you both had mentioned by loading the free ends. This produced a whole new look which I am fond with, proud parent! I had never thought to finish it in this fashion, Thank you both. I am even more interested now to sight Ashley’s #1451 & #1450.
Or one might guess that it denotes an extended lattice form
then capsized in the same manner, which produces a block
of entanglement at least entertaining to someone exploring
knots; it’s likely what Hensel&Gretel describe for so much of
their make-believe world, “of no practical value.”
But recently I discovered another contender for this “double”
attribute, in which the end, in the lattice form of tying, makes
a 2nd pass of sorts, and yields the usual knot more fittingly
given a double collar w/some extra material filling out the knot.
It might actually have slight practical value. (-- and not be but
one more marking of ink on Dan’s Quick-Record Sketches )
I just mention the term to differentiate the True [i]Carrick Bend[/i] from the lesser one-off "Carricks" or Single Carricks that have popped up from time to time.
Hmmmm, I tend to equate C. with just the commonly shown
good one; broadening this narrow view might be necessary for
digging out the history, though!
More update: the Symmetric Hawser Bend presented by Jack Riemann
as his “#1” version matches your discovery, and his “#2” is the other
version, in which the tails are tucked immediately after making
the u-turn. This 2nd version is presented in R.E.Miles’s book as
“A18”. Owen Nuttall also discovered it, in 1985.
I tried to follow your description of taking a second pass (w.ends following their s.parts back through the bend so as to “double” the carrick) and ended up with a bend comprised of two cow hitches. Quite interesting, I think, to see that the full carrick is a cow hitch bend with its two ends untucked. Thanks.
It all depends on just how you follow back, there are several ways to go astray. The cow hitch extension is logical, as the Carrick Bend comprises two backhanded hitches, each of them nipping the other one. However, different orientations of the hitches are possible, only one of them, with rotational symmetry, being the “true” and IMHO only Carrick Bend.
I envisioned something else from the description. If you take one of the ends and turn it back around its own standing part, and then follow it back through the nip, you get two collars and a doubling similar to the second turn that can be done in a Rosendahl’s or Butterfly to get more fill for a smaller cord joined to a larger, The two collars are from opposite sides, and the resulting extra backhand provides ample friction for the end not to slip out if there is a large difference in size of the two ends. I frind it impractical and clumsy if the ends are equal size, as it is rather cumbersome to open up again, and for different sizes the Rosendahl is more elegant and easier to make. To double the Carrick Bend in this way, you first collapse it, then turn the end back once around its own SP and follow through the nip.
I also noticed that of the four possible orientations of cow hitch bends, two of these have rotational symmetry and only one of these leads to the full carrick.
)