SOME VERY IMPORTANT CLARIFICATION ABOUT ENLARGEMENT
PROCESS à la Schaake
ignored by most knottyers.
When knottyer are speaking of 'enlarging a THK', say a 3L 4B
enlarged to a 7L 10B
going on the RIGHT side of HP1 ( Spart vector ) in a METHOD I or
(so-called TYPE I) say " I made AN
enlargement" " which is
readily understood but is
of language and logic.
IN FACT the knottyer's unique enlargement is for SCHAAKE TWO SUCCESSIVE
ENLARGEMENTS OF THE SAME METHOD.
When "pushing" the 3L 4B THK to a 7L 10B THK (a COLUMN AND
Regular Knot) the first enlargement pushed the 3L 4B THK to
a 5L 7B REGULAR
KNOT as far as the cordage route or shadow
is concerned and it is a 5L 7B Neither
COLumn NOR Row coded
You need to get again a THK and this will be done by the
Pray, realise, very clearly and sharply that when you say xL yB
you are SPEAKING
OF A CORDAGE ROUTE AND NOT OF A
IS VERY IMPORTANT because one may conceive of ENLARGING WITH
THE CODING and ENLARGING WITH A CHANGE OF CODING,
say from THK to GAUCHO Knot.
This xl yB ( GDC=1) MAY BE ANY OF THE REGULAR KNOT .
Only by adding a particular coding on a 'generic' cordage route' will
you get a particular knot.
Distinguish ENLARGING A CORDAGE ROUTE
and ENLARGING A PARTICULAR KNOT ( route + coding )
ENLARGEMENT / LAYING
Knottyers are obsessed with THE KNOT but they completely forget that a
knot is a
cordage route AND
When reading Schaake you will do well to keep this topic in mind
because it bears
on the formulas than Schaake gives for Column-coded Regular knots such
( Spanish Ring) , Head-Hunter, Fan....
If when Schaake write about two successive enlargement of the same type
understand two of the abusive and illogical name used by knot tyers.
THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT POINT THAT, ONCE AGAIN, HALL
MUDDLED WHEN HE
EXPLAINED SCHAAKE's ENLARGEMENTS JUST AS
MUDDLED THE BIGHT ALGORITHM.
Here is what I found yesterday
Illustration of the point made just above : HOW
TO USE THE ENLARGEMENT
PROCESSES ON A THK TO MAKE IT EVOLVE TO A SPANISH RING KNOT or
minimalist GAUCHO Knot.
a 3L 11 B THK
and apply to it two successive (see topic just above
) TYPE II
ENLARGEMENT processes (what knottyer mistakenly consider
to be ONLY ONE
ENLARGEMENT) to GET THE7L 25B CORDAGE ROUTE and
make sure that
you DO NOT use the same crossings that you would use for making a
apply a CODING THAT
WILL YIELD A MINIMAL GAUCHO knot or SPANISH
a 3L 13B THK
and TYPE I
processes you will get a 7L 31B Spanish
Ring Knot if you are careful to put in the correct code.
To distinguish THIS from
an ENLARGEMENT which KEEPS THE SAME CODING
will enlarging the cordage route I prefer to call that EVOLUTION as the
coding MUTATE while the cordage route is made larger.
2011 June 21st
Making a better job than ASHLEY did on some of his knots.
SOME KNOTS DIAGRAMS AND REBUILDING THEM ABoK#2216
; #2217 ; #2218
(1391) ; #2222 ; #2232
SHOULD HAVE BEEN DRAWN (imo) IN THE FIRST PLACE :
AS CYLINDRICAL DIAGRAMS
RELATED TO THE TOPIC (MAY 17th) JUST BEFORE THE ONE ABOVE
Relating exploring made late July-early August
What you need
to understand, I stress again is that it is essential not
Enlargement of a knot and Enlargement of the Cordage Route (the
any crossing specified in its type).
not be forgotten either is that the number of crossing in a row (
horizontal tool) is given by (Nb PARTS - 1).
It follows that a THK with an ODD number of
PARTS has an EVEN number of crossings in a Row and can therefore be
considered as a minimalist
In this case
I cannot truly say that there has been a MUTATION but rather
A THK with an
even number of PARTS would be a minimalist 1-PASS HEAD-HUNTER knot.
an enlarged cordage route, expanded from
9L 8B to 25L 22B it is possible,
for example, to
make GAUCHO 2-PASS 3-PASS 4-PASS-PASS 6, 8-PASS
this is when starting with being completely free of our crossings,
the enlargement there were crossings in the THK and must live
with them and try and accommodate the style of coding with the empty
crossings places on the route while taking in account the existing
this case there is only one viable possibility : the 3-PASS.
are formulas to find which can predict the possible
I have not found them yet ;-)
The nomber of columns (horizontal tool) of crossings hence of crossings
on a row is dependent on the number of PARTS.
The number of Rows of crossings is dependent ont the number of BIGHTs (
So for a COLUMN CODED we need to 'tweak' the PARTS and for a ROW CODED
we need to 'tweak' the BIGHTs.