Substance Deleted.
After you have your rope over the load, you can tie a Span Loop. Reach your hand through the Span Loop to grab a bight of rope and pull it through the Span Loop and hook it over your truck’s bed hook, assuming it has one.
You now have a pulley simulator than can be tensioned and tied off on the bight.
To continue to the next set of hooks without pulling your first trucker’s hitch loose, start with a Pile Hitch on the next hook back. Alternately, you could just not tie off the first trucker’s hitch and rely on the next set to maintain tension on the first set.
Personally, I’d usually wait until the last hook before employing a pulley simulation system.
The tension on the next (final?) set is acting like a person pulling tension on the first set. So the tension on the first set isn’t really applied until the last set is applied.
In other words, what would have been the fixed end of the last set is connected to what would have been the rope “end” of the first set.
Again, none of this “one pulls the other” setup is strictly required.
If we have them all connected, we’d leave trucker #3 only with negligible tightness, put the rope under hook set #4, go over the load (which would likely require throwing slack), and set up pulley simulator #4.
As you can guess, by the time you get to trucker #5, you’d want to be sure the Span Loop you tie is very high, as it will have to take in rope not only for itself but for the other four. Such a large number in communicating series may require too much line take-up (and walking around to distribute tension) for practical use. Non-communicating or isolated trucker’s hitches on the bight may be preferable.
Yes, as per my first reply mentioning the Pile Hitch being the starter for each new trucker’s hitch (on the fixed, “pulleyless” side).
How much slack is left between each set would be left to the judgment of the tyer.
Why do this when the Bell Ringer is perfectly acceptable? Why aren’t you satisfied with the variety of Bell Ringers that produce excellent results? Your extreme knot testing isn’t practical for everyday use…not even close.
I’m just shocked at the title for starters, “infinite” rope application just seems odd. I love knots, ropework and the like just as much as the next knot head, but I like being practical about it too. An infinite rope application seems goofy, most people utilize the correct amount of cord to make the job go smooth and tie knots to the best of our abilities.
Just a bizarre idea…I need to see a video of you tying five or six Trucker’s hitches using an infinite amount of rope…BTW, you can’t make a Span Loop with out making a Bell Ringer. Ha ha.
The Bell Ringer’s Knot is hardly “perfectly acceptable”. It’s more like barely tolerated in certain conditions by certain people.
It’s highly unstable. Even a momentary loss of tension due to load shifting or jolting can easily cause it to fail. Sometimes it’ll fail in what may seem like good conditions. Considering how much it’s used for tying down objects that may kill if left to tumble down the highway, it’s high time promote better alternatives.
Roo, did you see this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6V3xH7nA3aA
It’s a bit more complicated than what I’d prefer.
Probably the most secure way to tie the Bell Ringer besides diff_lock’s Butterfly version is running the Bight through the Constrictor Knot or ABOK 1244. I would venture to guess if tested, they would behave very similar to the Butterfly version. The two versions I mentioned aren’t nearly as complicated as the Butterfly version, actually quite easy for a knot master, just a little bit fiddly.
I’m not done with the Bell Ringer, there’s other ways to tie it and secure it, I’ll have to give it a look.
Roo, you’re not correct with your statements regarding the Bell Ringer either, it’s been used world wide for over a century with GREAT results. A pulley system can make most knots collapse in today’s modern cordage, knots like the Bowline and Double Bowline slip on these systems. Do people just discard them and never use them again? When you see these knots fail or slip, they’re doing so at extreme conditions, good luck finding a system that’s extreme proof, it doesn’t exist. The average person that’s hauling a couch, table, dresser, you name it, could use many knot systems that you and Knot4U deem sucky with fine results. BTW, if a trucker who’s hauling heavy commercial loads is using even today’s modern straps, if his load shifts in a fairly extreme fashion, it’s adios…not sure what you’re looking for in a Trucker’s Hitch system…there’s no fool proof methods. It’s one of the chief reasons they quit using rope back in the 70’s and went to modern straps that are rated at various weight caps.
From another thread you said:
The only Bell Ringer I wouldn’t use is ABOK 172, that one scares me.
As far as I recall, ABOK 172 is the Bell Ringer’s Knot. So which is it? Is it GREAT or scary?
LOL, ABOK 172 is scary as hell in modern rope but to your amazement, it actually functioned very well in rope of yesteryear. The beefed up Bell Ringer knots are excellent trucker hitches, whether it’s ABOK 173(dressed my way it’s an excellent knot and that hasn’t been tested), Lee Bundy’s method is very secure and I’d have no problems using them in most working situations.
What’s funny is you and Knot4U will quit using them because of the video showing them slipping in some small, slippery, cordage. Those test results aren’t conclusive, that’s what you guys seem to not understand. The bowline, The King of Knots, slips in modern cordage under EXTREME conditions as do many GREAT knots, but we don’t quit using them because of these extreme cases that are just that, rare and extreme. It’s quite practical to use the bowline in most situations, certainly not in a life or death situation but most others it is. So the issue I have is the idea that “practicality” doesn’t matter to you guys. It’d be better for you all to sell your cordage or burn it, forget every knot you know and start buying chains, straps and other devices if your wanting to flirt with maintaining that extreme ideas and concepts that have taken over your idea of what constitutes a good or bad knot.
Get some industrial chains as tie downs next time you move a couch or dresser across town…rope may not work!
I’ve seen problems with the Bell Ringer’s Knot in natural fiber rope as well, and it is far more unstable than the bowline.
What's funny is you and Knot4U will quit using them because of the video showing them slipping in some small, slippery, cordage.Nope. My concerns are based on extensive first hand observations in various rope types and sizes. I'll let the conversation return to the original topic which is handled quite easily with the far more stable Span Loop.
But doesn’t Roo’s remark apply generally, to anything
that forms an eye to be used qua pulley sheave --to wit:
[Roo]Reach your hand through the Span Loop to grab a bight
[of] rope and pull it through the [eye] and hook it over your
truck’s bed hook, assuming it has one. ?! This method applies
generally, with whatever mid-line eyeknot one favors.
I think that you have in mind the tying in which you
have already hooked the line and would like a solution
to now forming the trucker’s hitch eye/sheave AND
including the line through it --a trick you presented in one
case in the long thread, I believe. And this solution
should prove to be a bit faster --presuming that the
knotting part isn’t difficult-- as it spares pulling anything
through the eye, that eye formation incorporating the
hauling part.
A separate problem you might consider is where one
has an eye vice hook --so you will have to pull a bight
through this, and then do the clever knotting.
Now, a plausibly practical circumstance in which your
“infinite-rope” problem has some merit is where indeed
(and perhaps this is just what you meant in the OP)
you’ve a long rope and so care to toss only a big bight
over the truck’s cargo and on the flip side put in two
trucker’s hitches --of course, lacking access to the end.
This seems not at all implausible --and so intriguing that many
PracticalKnotters will be jumping up from their keyboards
immediately to go start casting long bights in the night!!
–dl*
I assure you that I had no thunder to steal. Pulling a bight through a midline loop is a procedure that’s quite a bit older than me. 
No, you wouldn’t : tossing 50’ of rope --which is of
course excessive-- would be a PITA (and tossing an
“infinite” rope would be too hard!); rather, you’d
guesstimate your needed amount, toss the bight,
then run you still-on-tossing-side line under a hook
to the next hook and toss over a 2nd bight enough
for bindings #3 & 4 (long bed of hay bales). (One
might be able to “guesstimate” pretty well by looking
beneath the truck bed to see what amount of line
is lying on the ground; then one could tie off the
tossing-side with clove hitch and run the line
to the next hooks & toss.)
Now, I’ve seen lobster boats where they bind down
stacked pots, but do so one-line-per, I think, no need
for the complications of a single line, which entails
dependence and inflexibility. (Hmmm, I might have
photos of such securing.)
–dl*
I wasn’t following the other thread. It was becoming too long and messy.
Back to this infinite-rope probem, which seems to be veering
too far afield from practicality (were one to really be using
a long line, likely one would engineer the system to have
several short hauling lines to put in the tightening parts,
with e.g. Prusik hitches of a sort (one end the hauling
end, the other tied into the eye-sheave) --kinda like the
use of short stout bits of rope for the eyes, as introduced
by Knot4U elsewhere).
The question’s answer “if a hook” indicates tying off the
non-tightening side, but that’s an easier problem than
tying off --to a ring(!)-- the tensioning side, which is
also a bight! (For the former, I’d think that a turn +
half-hitch + slip-knot would suffice, for quickness
and material efficiency; or a fully doubled-line two
half-hitches (clove noose)).)
One would need to bring the bight up through the ring
and then use some eye-formation that encompasses
the bight AND the infinite end --building a theoretical
4:1 system (which will actually be maybe 1.7:1). With
luck and some care, one should get the versatackle
locking of the bight part atop the hauled infinitEnd,
and that should make it easier to tie off. (Note that
any slackening from tying off will have to be distributed
over the 4 parts below the sheave-eye, so will be much
mitigated in overall loosening effect --another plus.)
Conceivably, one would simply run the end (still
a bight tossed from over the load) to the next ring
and tie it off there. One could bring a bight through
the next ring and then form a bight in the going-away
line to tie a sheet bend to the bight tip.