PDA

View Full Version : hat pattern help needed! Ingrid? Anybody?


mornnen
08-09-2007, 08:22 AM
I'm knitting the "simple hat" from the simple hat and scarf set from cables untangled. I cast on 96 stitches for the large hat and have done the 4 or so inches of knit 2 purl 2 ribbing. Then there is the increase round. The directions say:
* K2, P2, [M1, knit into the front and back of the next stitch] two times, P2, Repeat from * around. 144 stitches.


Here is what I did. I knit 2, I purled 2, I knit twice into the first knit stitch and twice into the second knit stitch and then I purled two. However, I ended up with 120 stitches, not 144. What did I do wrong?

I did the math, and if you break the increase section into chunks of k2 p2 k2 p2, you have 8 stitches, a set of knits and set of purls, a set of knits and and set of purls. Divide what I cast on by 8 and you get 12. So I am increasing 2 stitches 12 times for a total of 24 increase stitches which when you add it to 96 is 120.:gah:

The reason I am worried about getting it right is that after the increase row you do a braided cable rib pattern and I am concerned that if I increase differently it will throw off the pattern. And I don't think the 144 is a typo, because it is mentioned when you start the decrease rounds.:wall:

Can anyone help me?:pray:

Mornnen

Susan P.
08-09-2007, 09:04 AM
mornen..largely take this with a grain of salt..but..just for the sake of perhaps helping (I may surprise myself). In that knit in front and back. There you are making an extra stitch..right? It says then to do that twice..so..you do it again on the next stitch perhaps? Isn't that making four stitches there and not two?? I was not sure whether to say this because you can knit in front and back of the same stitch as such and do it a load and you get a bobble LOL

Anyway, IF there were 4 there and not two..would that make the count correct?

suzeeq
08-09-2007, 10:33 AM
No, Susan, to just knit in front and back of a stitch only makes 1 extra stitch, so doing it twice makes 2 sts. If it were kfbf, that would get you 2 sts out of 1.

Maybe there should be a * after the first k2,p2, so you would do the row - k2, p2 *m1 twice, p2, repeat? Or would that be too many...?

Anyway, somehow you need to inc 48 sts altogether... maybe you could post the whole line, exactly as printed in the pattern and we could help you figure it out.

Susan P.
08-09-2007, 10:39 AM
No, I wasn't saying you make 4 stitches out of one. I was saying that you make an extra stitch out of one and so doing that again (to the next stitch also) equates 4 stitches. mornnen was counting 2 rather than 4 and that was the point I was raising. That's why I suggested seeing if counting an extra two all the way across would give her the right count. :shrug:

suzeeq
08-09-2007, 10:56 AM
Sorry, misunderstood what you posted, though the m1 twice isn't counted as 4 sts added because you use up 2 sts, so it's only an extra 2 stitches. I think she counted it right, because she's adding 2 sts per every 8, times 12 is still only 24 sts inc, not 48. That's what I get when I figure it out too.

Susan P.
08-09-2007, 11:15 AM
:) It's cool. In one section the 2 extra were not counted but they were in the final calculation and I agree that it comes to 120 thus your suggestion to offer the pattern exactly as it is, is important :) Misunderstanding on both sides.

mornnen
08-09-2007, 11:18 AM
I am so glad to have help on this. I've cast on 96 stitches, need to increase to 144.

The increase round line in its entirety reads like this: *K2 P2 [M1, knit into the front and back of next st] two times, P2. Repeat from * around -- 144 sts.

The cable pattern that begins after the increase round is based on 12 stitches. The first pattern row ks K2 P2, K2, slip 2 on cn, K2, K2 from cn, P2.

Thanks for your help!

Mornnen

Susan P.
08-09-2007, 11:19 AM
My brain is tired but NOW I know the point I was trying to make..and then I'll go to bed. I suspect an extra two stitches for each section have been lost in the pattern explanation as presented..because..if you DO add an extra two times 12 again (24) you DO get 144 (120 + 24 = 144)

Sorry..brain fog..mea culpa. Bedtime. :)

Susan P.
08-09-2007, 11:24 AM
Ok..so..is THIS the issue..we are forgetting the M1?

You make 1 then you are making an extra one by knitting the next stitch in front and then back. (so that is now two extra). You then make one and the knit the next stitch in front and in back.

This then gives you 4 stitches. You then have 96 divided by 8 which is 12. 12 multiplied by 4 equals 48. 96 and 48 equals 144.

Even if the way I explained how to achieve 4 there is wrong she obviously need to get four :)

Susan P.
08-09-2007, 11:26 AM
mornnen...does this make any better sense now? I initially was reading the M1 as the front and back action (so to speak) but I'm wondering if the pattern intends it to be separate somehow as clearly you need to get four stitches in that section. Come back sue as you're better at this than me :)

Susan P.
08-09-2007, 11:27 AM
And Ingrid will crack it in a sliced second LOL

debinoz
08-09-2007, 02:16 PM
[m1, kfb, m1, kfb]

suzeeq
08-09-2007, 02:27 PM
mornnen...does this make any better sense now? I initially was reading the M1 as the front and back action (so to speak) but I'm wondering if the pattern intends it to be separate somehow as clearly you need to get four stitches in that section. Come back sue as you're better at this than me :)

Oh that does make the number come out right. Do a M1, then kfb, M1, kfb instead of 2 kfb. Try it, it should work out and won't look too wonky.

mornnen
08-09-2007, 02:40 PM
oh, I see -- the M1 and kfb are two different things! I thought that the knit through the front and back loop was an explanation or elaboration on what M1 meant. Now I get it. Thank you!

suzeeq
08-09-2007, 02:49 PM
We all thought it was the same thing, at first too. Thanks Susan for figuring it out!

Susan P.
08-09-2007, 06:55 PM
Thanks suzeeq! Debinoz of course summarised it in professorial fashion :) but yes I *did* crack it and I am simply pleased cos it balances the doofess times :)

mornnen
08-09-2007, 09:07 PM
Way to go Susan!