|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|01-02-2012 05:46 PM|
looks like slip knot to me also. does have benefit of not binding/ easy to loosen as well as quick and easy to tie. will jam on a teardrop thimble and i've never seen a round one.
According to the U.S. Coast Guard in their Boat Crew Seamanship Manual common knots loose much of the line's strength. The following table is from the above manual.
Knots or Splice Percent of Line
Breaking Strength Lost Percent of Line,Breaking Strength Remaining
Square 46 54
Bowline 37 63
Two Bowlines (Eye in Eye) 43 57
Becket Bend 41 59
Double Becket Bend 41 59
Round Turn 30-35 65-70
Timber Hitch 30-35 65-70
Clove Hitch 40 60
Eye Splice 5-10 90-95
Short Splice 15 85
|01-02-2012 02:18 PM|
Corrected Duncan Loop:
I am trying to correct some improper illustrations found in many web-sites and several publications that show how to tie a fishing knot that is variously known as a Duncan Loop, Uni-Knot or Grinner.
In Geoff Wilson's “Complete Book of Fishing Knots & Rigs” the illustration of the “Duncan Loop” is shown improperly since the initial loop is formed on the standing line side of the hook eye.
This improper illustration of the Duncan loop is a non-slip loop and to my knowledge has no name, it may or may not have similar breaking strength as the Duncan loop depending on how it is set and what type of fishing line is used.
When the initial loop is formed in the tag end portion of the line after passing through the hook eye it can form a Duncan Loop if properly set.
In the same frame of the book, the illustration immediately below labeled “Uni-Knot” is a proper illustration of the Duncan Loop although the snugging and final setting are not shown. The Uni-Knot is a later renamed copy of the original Duncan Loop.
If pulled down and set properly the final configuration of the Duncan Loop, Uni-Knot or Grinner are all the same.
I believe that some of the confusion lies in the manner of which these knots are pulled down and set after the last wrap with the tag end is passed through the initial loop. In my knot and the Uni the tag end is pulled in the same direction as the standing line with sufficient force to allow the wraps to wind back over themselves to form a neat spiral over the standing and tag lines, like a nail knot tied back over on the line itself. If this is not done the knot will not fold over and therefore form knots that differ in their final configuration and strength.
I can help clarify some of the difficulties encountered when tying this knot in ropes and lines used for boating. Norman
|04-06-2011 05:37 PM|
I have a similar comic I use to illustrate the need for multiple comparison correction.
|04-06-2011 05:20 PM|
also: xkcd: Significant
|04-06-2011 04:31 PM|
OK, which is worse: "My battery's have a "capacity" of 170 amp's" or "The harbor isn't far, only about 3 knots from here" ????
|04-06-2011 04:19 PM|
Anyway if that sort of thing is like fingernails on chalkboards, try this one on for size: My battery's have a "capacity" of 170 amp's.
|04-06-2011 02:33 PM|
This is a mere minor detail to me..
Seeing that I've been splicing sense Norah was a cabin boy. I'll just go ahead and splice it. And if the line is solid single braid I will put a couple of seizings on it and not worry about minor details.
|04-06-2011 02:30 PM|
|04-06-2011 02:02 PM|
But, to start (since you ask):
- "Figures" 1, 2, and 3 are tables, not figures
- Standard Errors (in addition to Standard Deviations) should be given, as we are interested in a comparison of means
- Units should be SI, not American/English customary (however, engineers never seem to understand this)
- The Abstract is a disaster (don't get me started)
- The Equipment and Methods sections (essentially analogous to a "Materials and Methods" section of a standard format scientific paper) should be expanded with greater detail
- Figures (and Tables) are presented but not cited in the text
- Figure 8 is presented as if the different knots have some ordinal relationship, which they do not.
- Figures are inconsistent as to orientation (strength is scaled horizontally in Figs. 4 - 7 and vertically in Fig. 8)
- Fig. 7 is redundant, it simply repeats means presented in Figs. 4 - 6
- All of the figures present means, yet none have error bars (SD or SE)
- Differences in knot breaking strength, as it relates to material strength, are discussed (albeit briefly) without any tests of statistical significance
- And (one of my pet peeves), the word "data" is the plural of "datum". Therefore, "the data was" is grammatically somewhat akin to saying, "the cows was," (and sounds like fingernails on a chalkboard to Yours Truly)
As to the small sample size; it's actually probably OK for such a study. The variation about the mean here appear small enough that increasing the replication would probably not change the over-all results enough to worry about.
|04-06-2011 12:07 PM|
|This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|