Practical? Loops.

Practical Knots
41

loopsapalooza

42

though having never tied a net in my life,
i wonder if this bend can be used to tie a net in-bight

43

Thanks Knutern, I will get the Gimp software and learn how to use it.
About fig.9 and fig.8, adjustable loops need to test it then can tell who have the advantage.
I am glad you asked this question, and I took a look at my loops, and I found my loop
IMG_1021.JPG is exactly Scott’s fig 9 adjustable loop. All the time I didn’t pay attention.
I thought I had started with an overhand knot, and it was an overhand base adjustable loop.

44

Where had this “Hitched-Tail Eye Knot” (my terms) come from?
It’s something I’ve recently discovered --and maybe somewhere
a little less recently (so much for my jumbled slips of illustrations)–
in response to km160:10 (in which so many good things were missed
for a lousy, dubious “bowline”!).
I was about to note that the image given is not quite
right, but thought to try orienting it that way, …
and it works; my dressing/orientation has the outgoing
eye leg more near the RELeg, and the knot body thus
turns such that the RELeg collar would --for this image–
be more atop the S.Part’s nipping turn. (Perhaps in some
materials one will get pretty much the same thing; in others,
there will be some influence from dressing & setting. !?)

Also I found Scout's fig.9 adjustable loop very good too. This picture is taking by Xarax.
Ah, that takes me way back --80s, I think, or 90s. I saw it as appealingly gradually bending the S.Part. I'd prefer today using a "Symmetric Fig.9" base (cf. Ashley #521? for SF9 state --presented there qua stopper).

How “adjustable” (or is it when, re adjustment?)
these knots are depends on loading and … . I have found
them helpful when I stress-test some knot with my crummy
5:1 pulley :: as with that ratio --nevermind if I’m getting
the mechanical advantage, I DO make the haul-line travel!–,
my foot often reached the ground without putting my full
weight on the structure, and I need to “re-load”; using such
a THEKnot can let me draw tighter the specimen after I’ve
reset the pulley, and have another go.
(BTW, the Anchor Bend in orig. & re-dress forms can work
pretty well at this --it’s a baby ProhGrip/Blake’s knot.)

Re knots illustration, I’ve come around to some few
conventions ::

  1. I try to draw the knot in a realistic way but with
    clarity as to its structure.

  2. I’ll ID each visible segment, and indicate the
    flow of the material with the S.Part as the start.

  3. Which clarity can come by some annotations to
    compensate for visual ambiguity, writing something
    like “part 4_5 goes UNDER all” (where one here is
    describing the back side of a knot to the viewer).
    ((sometimes the ambiguity begets . . . a NEW knot ! :-))

  4. I put the S.Part in one color, running out into the
    Outgoing Eye Leg (well, for EKs) PAST the eye’s apex
    and then break the line drawing into a (newly) 2-dot
    indication of indefinite length --graphical ellipsis–,
    and continue the Returning Eye Leg in a new color.
    Which might finish it,
    of in some cases where I see a knot as being one thing
    (say, a basic BWL) AND THEN extending into the full
    knot being presented (#1010 with an end-bound wrap, e.g.)
    I might use a 3rd color for that.

With not-so-small images in parallel lines,
I can use 0.05 - 0.5 pens to make the ID and
arrow’d flow indicator IN the parallel-line-bounded
space; otherwise, I might have a point line from
the spot out to the ID beside the knot, put into a
circle, which will point to show flow.
(And have at times cursed myself for the lack of such
clarity in images that then, in ambiguity, are giving
me more “new” knots than I want! :-).

(Even in perspicuous cases, the parts-IDing gives
a handle for discussion --i.e., IDs for the parts.
I might “illustrate” a version of the just sketched knot
verbally (“swap REL & Tail” (e.g., #1010 => #1034.5);
“reverse the Xing of parts 8 & 3”.)

–dl*

45

Ok, I did a little test by myself just for curiosity, no serious testing. I had two shoe laces laying around - one very soft (wool maybe) and then a slightly stiffer one with a round profile (that one I included in the images).
Disclaimer: My English is somewhat limited so some of the descriptional wording may be not quite correct in terms of actually/obviously intended meaning, you may arrest me on that.

So I was thinking - how to test such a loop? My initial idea of comparison was: 1 If both loops are being loaded equally then which loop will fail first when load is only applied to the part that goes to the end?

So I made a simple setup - a shoe lace with a figure9-adjustable and a figure8-adjustable on opposite ends. Then I applied load (just with my hand, this is by no means any serious test) trying my best to balance the bights load. I did this with two different type of shoe laces, and got the same result:

  • The figure9 is harder to untie.
  • The figure9 fails first - when both loops are loaded so so that all load on the bight part that goes to the (working ?) end
  • The part of the figure8 loop that lock (near working end) - has a much sharper bend after being loaded

The limitation of the test is it doesn’t say how much more pull force it takes for the figure8-adjustable-loop to fail, and neither how the loops behaves on other types of rope - i.e. proper rope.

Question - have a look at the attached image “adjustable-figure8_figure9_standingEndBending.jpg” where I highlighted the part of the rope that is being locked (sharper bend on figure8). Does it exist a name for this part or function on a bowline ?