Ashley shortchanges this knot by presenting it solely
as some sort of binder; the knot is an e2e Joint with
considerable value where the hitching end’s tail is
taken around a 2nd time through the U-fold so to
better nip the hitching-end’s S.Part.
–dl*
==== *
TYSM as always and all ways !
Still have mentally mapped to compare to Sheet Bend, then Dbl. Sheet Bend;
to then evolve to using Lapp as Bend , but recommend the Doubled Form.
So Dbl. Lapp, RT Lapp or ReLapp(s)?
It is 4am, but before i leave for weekend; wanted to see if we are on the same page for the works between the competing S.Parts please:
For me Lapp has been a real conceptual paradigm twist of the only way forward is to do exactly the opposite strategy been doing…
For my first introduction with Lapp was what not to do; this is not a Bend, kinda a false Sheet Bend in rigors of tree work, lifeline, overhead lifting, high loading etc.
Then to see as a Binding in ABoK, and respecting that, then for waist drawstring in swim, gym, leisure etc. wear. Especially with slip/quick release, and perhaps the doubled presence of the slip makes more sure to ‘dog’ the bight more possibly than the normal single Bitter End like a cotter key/pin.
To then see used as lighter duty Bend by some , trust level between the forewarned Square Knot as deadly errant Bend and the real deal of Sheet Bend(that i prefer as Double Sheet Bend in more critical loading and a lot of times Slipped).
To then once again embrace as a constant concept
ABoK Lesson#1732/pg.296: “There’s a lot of virtue in a Round Turn.”
upgrade to Lapp to make more worthy as a Bend; again as a Slipped form.
For to me, a Single/Simple Turn is a minimal sometimes get by in a lot of stuff, and for real work /trust prefer Round Turn(RT) as a ‘pro’ upgrade. As seen in DBY(Double Bowline w/Yosemite tie off), Dbl. Sheet Bend etc. Even seeing in this light: a Prusik with RT to each side as an upgrade from Girth/Cow as closed/open Prusik forms…
ty!
For my first introduction with Lapp was what not to do; this is not a Bend, kinda a false Sheet Bend in rigors of tree work, lifeline, overhead lifting, high loading etc.
Wrong form :: one repeats exactly the wrap of w.end
(2 B Tail) around the hitching (“its own”) S.Part and
ONE/near side of the U-fold --you wrap both legs of
U-fold, and that’s a damn-jamming version.
As for the basic Lapp, that too can be better/surer
secured, by dressing the turn-around U-fold leg
against the draw of the S.Part (hithing line) upon it
–dress it well moved against this draw, and set hard
by the 3 parts NOT drawing upon it,
so that when time comes for the hitching line’s S.Part
to deliver force to draw … the knot’s pretty resistant.
(But as you can imagine, 'tis well more sure to put
in that 2nd if not 3rd wrap-&-tuck.
(I’d not include a slip-bow tail, ‘cept if the U-fold
is of such larger material or stiffness that it otherwise
might not bite hard on a single hitching-line strand.
Tho’ in such a case, I work to find other securing to
the hitching line, tucking the tail out through initial
wraps.
Pulling apart the U-fold legs should be the forcible
untying method to prise out ENOUGH hitching S.Part
to enable further loosening.
–dl*
==== *
TY, so in trying to translate between our different internal languages; i think this might be it?:
I do note that this is easier to cinch up; than the doubled form i presented!
As far as form in previous post jamming, i did not take it that far seems as i favored slip and for higher loading went to Dbl. Sheet Bend slipped.
Will have to play with this, and can change drawing if not right., TY!
Oh, no. There is an “AND” which means TWO parts
get wrapped (but not all three) --I wrote :
one repeats exactly the wrap of w.end
(2 B Tail) around the hitching (“its own”) S.Part
AND ONE/near side of the U-fold
… which suggests that you used one of the various
mechanisms for finding “a new knot” : botching the
tying of a known knot! (works for me!)
(-;
Yeah, that looks about right --and I’m being lazy
and not extracting my play cords … and checking :
the problem is that your image is kinda wacky
vs. better geometry.
Look at this Wikipedia image
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/95/Lapp_bend_nonslip.png/250px-Lapp_bend_nonslip.png)
Best perspective IMO is to see hitching S.Part run
X-wise across the U-fold, turn down-around and
back down between U-fold legs … to finish.
I don’t fancy finishing with a slip-tuck, as the
proper knot is forcibly loosenable (pull U-fold
legs apart); and slip-tucks in hard-loaded knots
aren’t exactly all so slippy!
The Wikipedia page is woefully in need of upgrading,
which I might undertake some later time; as it is, it’s
the typical know-little-but-I-can-teach sort of hearsay.
)-:
From one dressing of the single/base Lapp Joint,
comes the Tail-Loaded BWL !
–dl*
==== *
i believe i have found your missing eX !
My main form (shown in previous posts) centers around binding form as Ashley showed, and slipped as he showed. The perspective is of looking down at waist drawstring, to be cinching bight with right hand. The rest maid to same format to show differences with no other changes.
Despite as ABoK shows the wiki link does show a more common view of today, and is easier to compare with Sheet Bend. Both have the locking/hitch side’s bight slipped over the the host’s bight. But the S.Part and Bitter End of each serve differently on either side of the common central position of the locking side bight slipped over and down the host side bight
I still lean towards a single Lapp as Binding per ABoK vs. Sheet for Bend as shown. Only trusting a Dbl.Lapp for some Bend utility (but even then go with Sheet Bend for real heavy usage or risk; favoring double and some even slipped).
I have just pasted these in hear, as still tweaking. Eventually usually make internet link on neocities or wiki as like.
!? You should play around with some properly
tied Multiple Lapp Bends; I think you’ll come to
prefer them to the Sheet Bend --though the latter
has its pluses for quick tying.
You might also put your Dble. Sheet into the
ABoK #488 orienatation --the S.Part wrapping
away from U-fold and then making the longer
reach back for the single tuck & nip.
A good point of the Multi-Lapp bend is that loosening
can --usually?-- come from pulling U-fold legs apart
to prise free some S.Part --one gets just a little before
the pulling-apart angle becomes unfavorable; but
given this inch, take the mile.
–dl*
====*
Must admit i haven’t pulled in parallels like that much, but rather in series at once; generally with HHs down a line.
i L-earn different things from the simplest of knot forms like Square lessons, Sheet Bend, Cat’s Paw etc.
Hear see that the Lapp is so beautifully simple coupling of bights, then pinned together by the frailest of it’s members (of least force rigidity).
A slip gives as if cotter key pin to pull to pop/explode instantly apart cleanly.
The power feed is always from the Standing Part(S.Part) into the inner workings of a knot microcosm for linears (Bends & Hitches). While the Bitter End(BE) is the non of the S.Part as Zero force. But, we characteristically watch and note many times by the BE’s placement as seemingly easier to watch; while inadvertently defining the S.Part’s.
i found this poking around, same knot, formed differently, but does show the adjustability and quick/pop release along with the gym/swim/leisure wear application. For me the slip is easier to form as i show AND a better grab to adjust the size.
There are some good things to say about some slip properties beyond just the namesake utility; if can stabilize. This here is pretty stable and deforms the linear force flow more for greater side value of Nip and Frictions i think. in more normal usages for Sheet Bend etc. i think typical ‘box car’ Nip by side the 2nd pass can help trestle some of the Nip off the main’ pass to normal BE. But a ‘cross legged’ X ends slip can give better Nip at some points, if can stabilize it; as give greater not longer deformity from linear.