Rob, this is mostly your fault :)
The Meanderthal Shawl continues apace and one of the things that makes it interesting is changing the lace patterns (such as they are for this fairly rudimentary piece). The problem there lies with the stitch count. You’re working along, having a good time, turning out lace (fishscale, for example) which is worked on a multiple of 8 + 1 stitches. Eventually you reach a point where the quantity of Fishscale lace is good and sufficient and you want to change to another pattern.
Does it also need to be a multiple of 8 + 1?
I’m not a mathematician but I like knitting math :) And I been thinking about this for several days now in conjunction with looking at The Knitting Fool site. Not only does it have over 1500 stitch patterns to play with, it also has a way to sort them by multiples! Now you’re talkin’!
So you tell it to sort and up comes a long list of multiples, starting with the simplest and moving on to the quite extensive. Click on the multiple you’re interested in, and a list of corresponding stitch patterns pops up, any one of which you can click on to go to the stitch pattern itself.
But back to the original question. Does the new pattern have to be a multiple of 8 + 1 (since that’s what you were working originally…)?
Yes and no. A multiple of 4 + 1 would work too since 8 is a multiple of 4 and the +1 is only tacked on the end in either case. If you have an even number of pattern repeats, you could go with a multiple of 16 + 1 as well since 16 is a multiple of 8. Also, any stitch pattern requiring simply an odd number of stitches would work.
Oh man - this is heady stuff - who knows where it might lead?
Okay, so I went as far as I wanted with the Fishscale lace…
Fishscale lace - Multiple of 8 + 1
Row 1: K1, *yo, k2, sl-k2tog-psso, k2, yo, k1; repeat from *
Row 2: Purl
Row 3: K2, *yo, k1, sl-k2tog-psso, k1, yo, k3; repeat from *, end k2.
Row 4: Purl
Row 5: K3, *yo, sl-k2tog-psso, yo, k5; repeat from *, end k3.
Row 6: Purl
...and changed over to Razor Shell lace…
Razor Shell Lace - Multiple of 8 + 1
Row 1: K1, *yo, k2, sl-k2tog-psso, k2, yo, k1; repeat from *
Row 2: Purl
See that k2 before and after the sl-k2tog-psso? It doesn’t have to be a K2. It could be a k1 or k23 - it all depends on what you need. Also, the sl-k2tog-psso could be changed to a ssk immediately followed by a k2tog so that your decreases remain the same, but your stitch count is now odd (9 stitches) instead of even (8 stitches). Also notice that the Razor Shell is simply a repeat of the first two rows of the Fishscale :)
I’ll be spending a lot more time thinking about this and playing with the possibilities. In fact, I believe I’ll be ordering some lace weight yarn to dye and play with in the not too distant future :)
Man - who knew math could be this much fun and why didn’t my highschool algebra teacher know about knitting?
No trackbacks yet.
It seems to me that if the number of stitches in the pattern divides into the number of stitches OTN plus one left over, it should work. So some stitches with multiples of any even number—4,6,,8,10,12 etc ... as long as there’s only one stitch left over. And if it ends up being short a stitch, well, this is lace. Who is going to notice if you increase a stitch or two somewhere.
I know, you needed more options!
Thanks for the link to the Knitting Fool. It sure is a wealth of information. I have been catching up on your blog. You sure have been one busy lady.
Amaryllis - You’re absolutely right, of course! If you’ve got 48 stitches OTN (+1) you’re next stitch pattern could just as easily be a multiple of 6 as well as 8 (or 2, 3, 4, etc…). What I’d worry about is how well a 6 stitch pattern would flow from an 8 stitch pattern. On the other hand, there are probably ways to work that out - even if all that means is working a few rows of stockinette or garter (or something) to provide a visual divider between the two.
Maureen - The Knitting Fool is a great resource and I am grateful for all the hard work that’s been put into the site.
I guess I have been busy - having fun, though :)
Meanderthal Shawl? LOL I love that name!
Opal - Since the piece was pretty random, in the make-it-up-as-you-go-along fashion, it did seem appropriate :)
i was always ‘that odd child who really liked math’ and now i find it positively delightful to see how others suddenly discover its place in the real world- of course i managed to grow up into ‘that odd person who *still* is consumed by numbers’ and find myself thinking about intervals, numerical relationships, and deciding to calculate the height of the tree across the street- this tends to make me the object of much amusement on the part of my children (most of them still consider math to be ‘idiot’s delight’- except for boomer who inherited my fixation)-
it is lucky for those of us who knit that you have found such a good use for your mathematical musings- practical! thanks for pointing out that knitting math can be easy and fun too-
now i really must go and try to calculate the population of that ant-hill i see in the front yard!
stay happy-
Barb - I sure didn’t start out that way; it wasn’t until I was long out of school that I found out math was not only not as difficult as I thought but actually useful - even (oh breathe it softly) fun!
Intervals - and that goes with music too :) Patterns, lowest common divisors and primes. Myeia says I get this look on my face when my head’s buzzing with numbers - vacuous, I should imagine!
