terminology
View previous topic | View next topic >
Post new topic Reply to topic
M.A.I.L. Forum Index -> Weaves Discussion
   
Author Message

Joined: March 11, 2010
Posts: 88
Submissions: 4
Location: NOLA

Reply with quote
Posted on Mon Oct 30, 2017 4:49 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

mithrilweaver wrote:
StudioCastile wrote:
My point with e5 wasn't that any particular ring is more stressed than others, rather, the stress is not evenly applied to the ring itself. It's a minor point though and overall, yes those weaves still apply stress rather evenly over the whole of the weave. I'll take your point about Japanese weaves, I agree.

I disagree with using the Persian family name as an example though. Much like Euro, some of these family terms are very old and certainly predate maillers as a modern group attempting to codify and explain what we do. A better example is the Spiral family of weaves which did not have a name until recently, and when we gave it one, we used a descriptive word.

I also am not so sure that weaves, where all ring interactions are the same, are necessarily stronger, or rather the corollary, I don't know that having differences in the weave from ring to ring makes it weak. For instance, is Byzantine weaker than 4 in 2 simple chain? I doubt it.

As I said, denoting a weave as having an even stress distribution may be important, but it is not simple to determine conclusively.

About the only thing I can say would be conclusively true in all cases is multiring size weaves are not going to fit in this group. They will always distribute stress differently over their different ring sizes. That said, I don't need a new term to search for those. I can ask the M.A.I.L. Weave Library search for an AR and check off "single ring size only" to find such weaves.


i ran the search like you suggested. i picked 3.0ar with +-.3 variance. i clicked off single size ring weaves. i got some good weaves, but most were crappy. i even got one that was 13.1 ideal ar. without the _ in 1 check off, you're just never going to get quality weaves on that search. but if you like it and it works for you, then by all means stick by it. most of the people i talk to and not happy with the search here.


The 13.1 is obviously a code bug. It picked up the 3 in 13. which is bad. Very Happy
What weaves that are actually IN the library did it not return but would have met your specification?

I don't think the problem is so much the search, its the impulse every newbie mailler has to submit a weave everytime they make a mess they can't identify. Ooops, got the stack the wrong way? New weave! accidentally made one side left handed? New weave! Every few weeks there is a picture of some variation of Alligatorback where they did some small thing different and the first thing they want to know is if it's in the weave library yet.

Our resources here are curated, but its volunteer work and its been running a very long time with changes in policy and leadership.

So yeah, if the point is to have quality weaves in the library, instead of having to tag weaves with a new term, we could just chuck the sub-par weaves out of the library.

Or you can make a new one, this isn't exactly the most modern site. A fresh start with only the weaves and other resources pulled that meet some standard might be a good idea.

Joined: March 26, 2002
Posts: 1711
Submissions: 313
Location: Chainmailland, Chainmailia

Reply with quote
Posted on Thu Nov 16, 2017 6:40 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Let’s compile a list of prime weaves.

Sheets:
European 4 in 1
European 8 in 2
European 6 in 1
European 12 in 2
European 8 in 1
European 10 in 1
European 12 in 1

Half Persian 3 Sheet 6 in 1
Half Persian 5 Sheet 10 in 1
Half Persian 4 Unbalanced Sheet 8 in 1
Half Persian 5 Unbalanced 4:1 Sheet 10 in 1
Half Persian 6 Unbalanced 4:2 Sheet 12 in 1

Three Quarters Persian Sheet 6 in 1
Three Quarters Persian Sheet 8 in 1 Unbalanced
Three Quarters Persian Sheet 10 in 1
Three Quarters Persian Sheet 10 in 1 Unbalanced
Three Quarters Persian Sheet 12 in 1 Unbalanced

Persian 4 in 1 Sheet

Ones I’m not sure about include:
Hp crossover sheets
Brejão Flowers
Moorish Rose

Trinitymaille
Josue Sheet

non-standard European and Persian sheets.
Can anyone confirm these?

Dimensional:
Japanese 4 in 1 Cube
Japanese 8 in 2 Cube

Chain:
2 in 1 Chain
Box Chain
Box Chain 6 in 1
Roundmaille
Inverted Round

Full Persian 6 in 1
Full Persian 8 in 1
Full Persian 8 in 1 Unbalanced (Full Persian Gobi Chain)
Full Persian 10 in 1
Full Persian 10 in 1 Unbalanced
Full Persian 12 in 1 Unbalanced

Hilt Chain 6 in 1
Hilt Chain 8 in 1
Hilt Chain 8 in 1 Unbalanced

Half Persian 3 in 1
Half Persian 5 in 1
Half Persian 7 in 1
Half Persian 3 in 1 Symmetrical (Half Persian Symmetrical 3 in 1 Chain)
Half Persian 5 in 1 Symmetrical
Half Persian 7 in 1 Symmetrical
Half Persian 4 in 1
Double Half Persian 4 in 1
Half Persian 6 in 1
Half Persian 8 in 1
Half Persian 10 in 1
Half Persian 4 in 1 Unbalanced
Half Persian 5 in 1 Unbalanced 4:1
Half Persian 6 in 1 Unbalanced (4:2)

Spiral 4 in 1
Spiral 8 in 2
Spiral 6 in 1
Spiral 8 in 1
Jens Pind Linkage
Mobius Chain

There are more I’m sure. Let’s make a full list.


Tell a mailler what ring sizes to use and they'll weave for a day. Teach them AR and they'll weave forever.
Chainmailbasket.com (2016-02-10) 203 + 17

Joined: March 26, 2002
Posts: 1711
Submissions: 313
Location: Chainmailland, Chainmailia

Reply with quote
Posted on Thu Nov 16, 2017 6:51 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Interestingly enough, while HP3-1 is prime, it’s double and layered version (Double Half Persian 3 in 1) isn’t , while Double Half Persian 4 in 1 is. But Triple Half Persian 4 in 1 is not prime because the middle rings don’t interact the same way as the outside ones. This might be a grey area.


Tell a mailler what ring sizes to use and they'll weave for a day. Teach them AR and they'll weave forever.
Chainmailbasket.com (2016-02-10) 203 + 17

Joined: October 22, 2010
Posts: 621
Submissions: 378
Location: Yucaipa, CA

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Nov 17, 2017 2:21 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

it's really awesome that you made a list, but prime is does not have anything to do with connection type. it's simply _ in 1 and all the same ring size weaves. if you want to further narrow down the rules and add same connection type, then i would call it something else.



Joined: October 22, 2010
Posts: 621
Submissions: 378
Location: Yucaipa, CA

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Nov 17, 2017 2:26 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

the reason i did not include connection type in the rules for prime is because of the grey areas. too many grey areas with connection types. _ in 1 is a solid mathematical rule that cannot be subjective. all one size ring is a pretty solid rule too. it can be subjective in that some people might use all one ring size on a weave and others may not. but i think 99% of people do agree on one size rings for weaves because the weaves almost always look better one way or another.



Joined: February 15, 2002
Posts: 382
Submissions: 10

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Nov 17, 2017 7:01 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

I believe CMB is looking for clarification on the stress perspective of "prime".

For example, Trinity has two connections on one side and one connection on the other. Because of this, the stresses throughout the ring are imbalanced. However, each ring in the weave is imbalanced in the same way. If you want stresses to be equal throughout the ring, so that there are not specific areas of the ring that are more prone to break, then Trinity is not "prime". If you merely want the maximum stress of any one ring to be equal to the maximum stress of any other ring in the weave (assuming an infinite weave), then Trinity is "prime".


IGP (Irregular Grid Painter) Links:
Home | FAQ | Downloads

Joined: October 22, 2010
Posts: 621
Submissions: 378
Location: Yucaipa, CA

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Nov 17, 2017 11:32 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

i think it's splitting hairs to analyse the imbalance of stresses on a _ in 1 weave. i'm not fully convinced that there are imbalances, but if there are some imbalances on _ in 1 weaves, they are considerably smaller than a weave that is not _ in 1. on the whole, the stresses are way more equal on a _ in 1 weave when compared to a non _ in 1 weave. do we agree on that?



Joined: March 26, 2002
Posts: 1711
Submissions: 313
Location: Chainmailland, Chainmailia

Reply with quote
Posted on Mon Nov 20, 2017 7:07 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

What Zlosk said. I wasn’t sure how much importance is put on individual ring stress.

I think the list is an awesome idea too. I’m all for the addition of prime to the glossary and as a searchable weave tag. If and when this happens we’ll need to know what all weaves to tag. Well we all know things don’t usually happen overnight here at M.A.I.L., so also this thread would serve as that resource until this comes into fruition.

I included doubled weaves in my list but those don’t apply if one of the criterion is that in order for a weave to be prime, it has to be _in 1. I also wonder if that disqualifies things like double half persian 3 in 1 since even though it’s not straightforwardly doubled, due to it’s layering, it’s an “in 2” weave. Am I splitting hairs here?

Do we agree that the items on the list are prime (pending a decision on _ in 2+ stuff)? I only listed ones I’ve made. The rest is up to everyone else. Like I’m pretty sure most JPL progressions are as well as the HP Crossover sheets. What else?


Tell a mailler what ring sizes to use and they'll weave for a day. Teach them AR and they'll weave forever.
Chainmailbasket.com (2016-02-10) 203 + 17

Joined: October 22, 2010
Posts: 621
Submissions: 378
Location: Yucaipa, CA

Reply with quote
Posted on Mon Nov 20, 2017 7:44 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

doubling or kinging a weave is not prime, but it's base weave is. so, spiral 4 in 1 is prime, but the double version 8 in 2 is not.

half persian double is prime - 6 in 1. is displays no actual doubled rings.



Joined: October 22, 2010
Posts: 621
Submissions: 378
Location: Yucaipa, CA

Reply with quote
Posted on Mon Nov 20, 2017 7:44 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

josue is not prime - not _ in 1.



Joined: October 22, 2010
Posts: 621
Submissions: 378
Location: Yucaipa, CA

Reply with quote
Posted on Mon Nov 20, 2017 7:45 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

trinity mail is 3 in 1 - prime
brejo flowers is 4 in 1 - prime
moorish rose is 9 in 1 - prime



Joined: October 22, 2010
Posts: 621
Submissions: 378
Location: Yucaipa, CA

Reply with quote
Posted on Mon Nov 20, 2017 7:47 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

japanese 8 in 2 cube - not prime
japaniese 4 in 1 cube - prime



Joined: October 22, 2010
Posts: 621
Submissions: 378
Location: Yucaipa, CA

Reply with quote
Posted on Mon Nov 20, 2017 7:48 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

european 12 in 2 - not prime



Joined: October 22, 2010
Posts: 621
Submissions: 378
Location: Yucaipa, CA

Reply with quote
Posted on Mon Nov 20, 2017 7:48 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

all the rest a good i think.



Joined: March 11, 2010
Posts: 88
Submissions: 4
Location: NOLA

Reply with quote
Posted on Tue Nov 21, 2017 7:21 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

The three quarter persian weaves should be left out. While they may meet your requirement of single size N in 1, the stress over a sheet is ridiculously uneven. Consider the sort of stress across the grain of the weave vs with it.

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Page 2 of 3. Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Wed Nov 22, 2017 10:44 am
M.A.I.L. Forum Index -> Weaves Discussion
Display posts from previous: