# Questions: Pulling Trees Over With Pulleys



## StihlRockin' (Apr 16, 2009)

This doesn't have to be isolated to just whole trees, but for me, mainly tree tops.

I use a two separate pulley system to pull tops of trees over when the climber is ready to go. The mechanical advantage is nice; especially when there's only one guy pulling or just to make the pulling easier.

Instead of describing how I do it, I drew a simple picture to save time. You can see it below:






What I would like to know is, *How can I hook up a 3rd pulley to get more of a mechanical advantage?*

I was thinking of adding a 3rd pulley on the tree and instead of leaving off where you see the rope ending, it will be looped in the 3rd pulley. Now I like this system. It gives just about all the power I need for most jobs. If I need much more power, I got my ways. LOL! Also, I know about other pulley systems made just for this job, but I'd like to stick with more along the lines of what I do & ask here.*(Thanks!)*

Can you please describe or *show a picture* of how you do it using a 3rd pulley? If you do it with 2 pulleys, but a different way, I'd appreciate a look at that too.

Thanks for y'alls help!

*StihlRockin'*


----------



## Wolfking42084 (Apr 16, 2009)

Why not make the 1st pulley which is around the trunk of the tree and double pulley. Then the line comes out from the top of the tree you're cutting, runs through the first half of the double, up on the rope to a single pulley which is held by a ascender or prusik like you have drawn, and then back down to the other half of the first pulley. Thats how my groundies always do it. It works fantastic. We very rarely use any machines to pull with. The way I described, or tried to anyway, is wonderful and you can pull some heavy loads with a couple guys


----------



## Ghillie (Apr 16, 2009)

If you only attach a 3rd pulley to the tree (or a double sheave pulley on the tree) it is still a 3:1 mech adv.

If you use double sheave pulleys in both locations you have shown, and run the rope through both sheaves, you can obtain 5:1.

I have a feeling you have another pulley and wonder what you can do with it.

You would have to piggyback the third pulley onto the tow line you show in the diagram. Prussik it onto the tow line, anchor one end of a second rope to the tree, run it through the third pulley and you now have another tow line.

EDIT: This is a compound sytem and makes it 6:1 but is harder to manage and takes a lot of tending.


----------



## eljefe (Apr 16, 2009)

*Re: two pulleys*

Hi, Wolfking is right, a double pulley or 2 blocks on the anchor point. I pulled a heavy leaner a couple of weeks ago, working alone. I took what you show in the drawing as the bitter end of the rope, the tail, and anchored it to a porta wrap. Then I hooked a 5:1 fiddle block set from the portawrap to the point below the second pulley- the one you have attached mid line- to the rope with another prussic. This gave me a 10:1 MA. And with prussics I can readjust the point of pull of the fiddle block (my fiddle block only has 50 feet of rope on it). Pull up as much as you can with the fiddle, lock off the bull rope on the porta wrap and reset the point of pull on the fiddle block and go again. 
Also, I would use a prussic for anchoring, not a butterfly. A butterfly, when heavily loaded is going to take some time to pick apart, the prussic will fall open when unloaded. And can be moved, if necessary, much more easily. By the way, nice drawing. Eljefe


----------



## Ghillie (Apr 16, 2009)

Another pulley on the anchor point only redirects, it does not increase mechanical advantage. 

Or am I reading too hastily and missing someone's point?


----------



## Ghillie (Apr 16, 2009)

eljefe said:


> Hi, Wolfking is right, a double pulley or 2 blocks on the anchor point. I pulled a heavy leaner a couple of weeks ago, working alone. I took what you show in the drawing as the bitter end of the rope, the tail, and anchored it to a porta wrap. Then I hooked a 5:1 fiddle block set from the portawrap to the point below the second pulley- the one you have attached mid line- to the rope with another prussic. This gave me a 10:1 MA. And with prussics I can readjust the point of pull of the fiddle block (my fiddle block only has 50 feet of rope on it). Pull up as much as you can with the fiddle, lock off the bull rope on the porta wrap and reset the point of pull on the fiddle block and go again.
> Also, I would use a prussic for anchoring, not a butterfly. A butterfly, when heavily loaded is going to take some time to pick apart, the prussic will fall open when unloaded. And can be moved, if necessary, much more easily. By the way, nice drawing. Eljefe



If you piggybacked a 5:1 onto a "z-rig" like is drawn, you have 15:1.


----------



## Ghillie (Apr 16, 2009)

Look at figure C or D on page 9 of this Document


----------



## treemandan (Apr 16, 2009)

The thing about 3 pulleys in this case is , well, uhh, it kinda puts you under the thing you are pulling. Any odd number of pulleys will, I think.
Double pulleys are good but just adding another whole single pulley system is fine as well. Its good to back up the system with prusiick( whole lot of good that will do) but never used a friction hitch to secure a pulley directly to the working line. I don't think that is a good idea.I would use I knot no doubt.


----------



## pdqdl (Apr 16, 2009)

Put a double pulley at the base of the tree, and a double pulley at your mid-line pulley. Instead of a theoretical 2:1, you will have a theoretical 4:1.

If you need more travel, rig a pulley at the tree being pulled. Tie the midline pulley to the tail of the main line, leaving the rest of the ropes rigged as shown in your figure, and now you have much more travel with a 4:1 advantage.

3:1 advantage? Tie one pulley at the the load (tree being pulled), and one pulley at the base of your anchor-point. Tie the bull rope to the top of the tree being pulled, through the anchor pulley, back through the pulley at the loaded end, then put your groundmen on the loose end. This method will have the most pulling travel possible, but will take 3 times as much rope. It is also the very strongest system, since the rope is tripled for the entire distance, and there are 3 anchor points and the standing end to carry the load.

Myself, I would just get a rope come-along, set a single line, and have about 1000lbs of pull with around a 7:1 mechanical advantage. Nat as fast to pull line with, but better mechanical advantage, and simpler for a groundman to install. It also uses a lot less rope, with the ability to pull the entire distance.


----------



## Blakesmaster (Apr 16, 2009)

Why shouldn't you attach a pulley midline w/ a friction hitch, Dman? I do it all the time. I atually had to set up the exact system pictured on Saturday but instead of pulling it with my hands I hooked up the ranger. Yeah, it was a BIG tree.


----------



## StihlRockin' (Apr 16, 2009)

I'll make this post quick because I have to go, but I do really appreciate the tips, feedback and help I've received.

After visualizing the 3rd pulley idea I had, I did figure to use correctly as a mechanical advantage, I would need to pull around the 3rd pulley in the direction of the tree being pulled on.... like some have explained. That's not for me. LOL!



pdqdl said:


> Put a double pulley at the base of the tree, and a double pulley at your mid-line pulley. Instead of a theoretical 2:1, you will have a theoretical 4:1.



That's what I was thinking.

Thanks for the help guys. I'll be back!

*StihlRockin'*


----------



## masiman (Apr 16, 2009)

pdqdl said:


> ...
> Myself, I would just get a rope come-along, set a single line, and have about 1000lbs of pull with around a 7:1 mechanical advantage. Nat as fast to pull line with, but better mechanical advantage, and simpler for a groundman to install. It also uses a lot less rope, with the ability to pull the entire distance.



Additionally, it is a little cheaper than all the blocks and no risk of damage like any blocks that might be in the fall zone. Depending on the tree you can set the line from the ground. If you get into attaching blocks to the load, you'll probably need to climb.


----------



## Ghillie (Apr 16, 2009)

You already have a 3:1 in the drawing.

Commonly called a z-rig.

You will have a 5:1 if you put a double pulley midline and at the anchor.

Measure the distance your tow line moves compared to your load line.


----------



## pdqdl (Apr 16, 2009)

Ghillie, I don't often make mistakes like this, but I stand corrected. 

Yep. that's 3:1, and my suggestions would have made it 5:1

I was not considering the rope from the mid-line pulley to the tree to be a loaded leg of the pulling system. Upon a closer read (or thought?) I realized that was a single pulley attached to the anchor tree, hence 3:1.

[When I hook that up to a tree, we don't use pulleys. Just knots & ropes. The friction going around the tree soaks up any mechanical advantage on the first leg. Oops.]


----------



## Ghillie (Apr 16, 2009)

pdqdl said:


> Ghillie, I don't often make mistakes like this, but I stand corrected.
> 
> Yep. that's 3:1, and my suggestions would have made it 5:1
> 
> ...



LOL... No problem. There are so many different configurations that it can get confusing.

I haven't read through the document I posted the link to yet, but what I have read of it seems pretty good at explaining mech advantage. It is on my list of things to do.


----------



## pdqdl (Apr 17, 2009)

The silly thing about all these pulleys is the time you loose setting it up. Shucks, all the pulleys and the extra rope probably cost more than the rope come-along.

http://www.baileysonline.com/itemdetail.asp?item=21700&catID=

If that doesn't do the job, you can always put it on a pulley and double up.


----------



## pdqdl (Apr 17, 2009)

*This costs more, but what nice results!*

I have one of these for pulling loads. We use a Shindaiwa 488 powerhead.

It gets used more often for moving logs out of tight quarters or up a hill than it does for pulling a tree over. This will easily shag a 500 lb log up a hill at almost walking speed. I used ours two days ago to pull three dead japanese yews. [No digging! ]

http://www.baileysonline.com/itemdetail.asp?item=49470&catID=


----------



## BlackenedTimber (Apr 17, 2009)

I use two double-sheave pulleys and two Maasdaam 2-ton hoists with prusiks on the working (thats what we call it...? the end your pulling/applying force to) end of the line. use one hoist to apply force and the other to hold the line while readjusting for the next pull, alternating hoists. Killer mechanical advantage and simple to use. Pulled over several 150 ft leaners no problem. didnt have to worry about the ranger slipping (yup, I got one too...) The hoists are 40 bucks each at any Home Depot with a lifetime warranty and the prusiks might run ya 20 bucks each, or make them yourself. Cheap and effective.


----------



## masiman (Apr 18, 2009)

BlackenedTimber said:


> I use two double-sheave pulleys and two Maasdaam 2-ton hoists with prusiks on the working (thats what we call it...? the end your pulling/applying force to) end of the line. use one hoist to apply force and the other to hold the line while readjusting for the next pull, alternating hoists. Killer mechanical advantage and simple to use. Pulled over several 150 ft leaners no problem. didnt have to worry about the ranger slipping (yup, I got one too...) The hoists are 40 bucks each at any Home Depot with a lifetime warranty and the prusiks might run ya 20 bucks each, or make them yourself. Cheap and effective.



I'd like to see a pic of that setup if you can get one.


----------



## BlackenedTimber (Apr 19, 2009)

I am gonna havta look around and see if I can find a pic of that setup. I have been out of the industry for about 3 years now, only climbing recreationally and doing the occasional side job for a friend or relative. Nowadays I build wind farms and power transmission lines. I miss tree work though. Alot. :greenchainsaw:


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Apr 19, 2009)

With just ading 1 pulley, i'd anchor seperataely (though probably to same anchor) and place that 2:1 next pulley on the end of the 3:1 zrif, for 6x, if the distance can be traded equitably for the increased power. 

Also, then by pulling that 6x rig by it's tail, and reaching inside of the zrig, and pulling the line as it came out of the anchor pulley, you could make it a 7xEffort + 6xBodyWeight. For, the equal and oppsoite of your effort pull, would pull agaqin 1x on load. Now the Z needs to be long, and the 2x inset inside of it, so that pull on tail is before anchor, to then pull on line of Z coming out of anchor, as equal opposite force we are tapping. This closes the system, that otherwise affords the leaking out of this promised equal and opposite force, that we now fold back to pull on target. This is the 4th pulley 'position'/use IMLH

Placing that extra pulley on any static anchor to pull, rather than on a dynamic load pull position, will not increase p[ower on target, just be an anchor redirect.


----------



## bonker81 (Apr 19, 2009)

I haven't heard anyone mention this yet so I'll be the safety guy in the room for a minute. You can rig so that you can have enough MA to pick your truck with your own strength...doesn't mean you should. Be mind full of the capacities of your equipment and calculate your line tensions before getting crazy with some of these high MA apparati. When you crunch the numbers you may find that the line tensions are greater than the capacity of the line even though in theory you can move that 5k lbs. load by hand. I would encourage everyone to get a copy of "Bob's Rigging and Crane Handbook" by Pellow Engineering Services, Inc. It is inexpensive and indispensable. My background is heavy construction where we deal with extremely heavy picks and all kinds of MA achieved through blocks and rigging (heaviest pick I've been a part of to date is 1,000 ton). The book is cheap and so is the hour it takes to crunch the numbers. Riggers aren't.


----------



## southsoundtree (Apr 19, 2009)

*Maasdam Rope Puller*

I, too, like this continuous rope puller. It works best with three strand, but arbor plex works sufficiently. My friend has a dedicated piece of three strand with a hook spliced on the end. He can hook his rigging rope to that and only set it up once. There is a good rope bend radius when the rigging rope is put through the puller (about a 3" "sheave"). One person can operate, and knowing the MA of the machine, a person can estimate the force reasonable. 

Not for high speed pulls. 
When I need to have fast pull, I'll tension the line, then lean on the rope perpendicular to the rope. This increases the tension dramatically (its like if two people are in a tug of war, pulling horizontally and opposite to one another, and you sit on the rope, forcing it perpendicular to their two forces. A lot of force on the two anchor points. 
A person must be careful of being in line with the tensioned line, though, and this is probably one of its biggest drawbacks.


----------



## Ghillie (Apr 19, 2009)

TheTreeSpyder said:


> With just ading 1 pulley, i'd anchor seperataely (though probably to same anchor) and place that 2:1 next pulley on the end of the 3:1 zrif, for 6x, if the distance can be traded equitably for the increased power.
> 
> Also, then by pulling that 6x rig by it's tail, and reaching inside of the zrig, and pulling the line as it came out of the anchor pulley, you could make it a 7xEffort + 6xBodyWeight. For, the equal and oppsoite of your effort pull, would pull agaqin 1x on load. Now the Z needs to be long, and the 2x inset inside of it, so that pull on tail is before anchor, to then pull on line of Z coming out of anchor, as equal opposite force we are tapping. This closes the system, that otherwise affords the leaking out of this promised equal and opposite force, that we now fold back to pull on target. This is the 4th pulley 'position'/use IMLH
> 
> Placing that extra pulley on any static anchor to pull, rather than on a dynamic load pull position, will not increase p[ower on target, just be an anchor redirect.



:agree2: +1



Ghillie said:


> Look at figure C or D on page 9 of this Document



Take the time to look at this document, at least at page nine. Figure D is (I believe) what TreeSpyder is referring to.



.


----------



## Bermie (Apr 19, 2009)

I use friction hitches both mid line AND at the anchor tree. 
The advantage of a friction hitch to attach the mid line pulley is that if you pull it all the way to the anchor tree, you can let go, the hitch at the anchor tree holds the line (and the what you are pulling) without loss of any tension, then you can push the mid line pulley back out, set the hitch and pull again.
With a butterfly or a comealong, if you misjudge how much distance you need to complete your pull, its difficult to reset without losing the tree!


----------



## Ghillie (Apr 19, 2009)

Bermie said:


> I use friction hitches both mid line AND at the anchor tree.
> The advantage of a friction hitch to attach the mid line pulley is that if you pull it all the way to the anchor tree, you can let go, the hitch at the anchor tree holds the line (and the what you are pulling) without loss of any tension, then you can push the mid line pulley back out, set the hitch and pull again.
> With a butterfly or a comealong, if you misjudge how much distance you need to complete your pull, its difficult to reset without losing the tree!



You still use the distel for that chore?


----------



## outofmytree (Apr 20, 2009)

Ghillie said:


> Look at figure C or D on page 9 of this Document



Great read, thanks Ghillie.

After all that thinking, I need a beer.


----------



## Bermie (Apr 20, 2009)

Ghillie said:


> You still use the distel for that chore?



Yes I do...


----------



## eljefe (Apr 21, 2009)

*Re: Ghillie 15:1*

If you piggybacked a 5:1 onto a "z-rig" like is drawn, you have 15:1

Ghillie, you are right. My bad. 15:1 it is. No wonder that leaner came so easy. Eljefe


----------



## Ghillie (Apr 21, 2009)

eljefe said:


> If you piggybacked a 5:1 onto a "z-rig" like is drawn, you have 15:1
> 
> Ghillie, you are right. My bad. 15:1 it is. No wonder that leaner came so easy. Eljefe



LOL, I was just on a roll that day.

Bermie, thanks for the distel suggestion in an earlier thread, I will be trying that out soon! I just started using the distel in my climbing and I really like it.


----------



## pdqdl (Apr 21, 2009)

*I'm afraid I don't understand the interest...*

Why are you guys so interested in getting all these gigantic power factors with pulleys?

If you need that much force to pull a tree over, then it must be leaning way over to one side. If that's the case, then you will likely run out of rope (or pulley travel) before you get it pulled to where you need it. 15:1 power factor needs 15 times the rope for any distance to pull. Move a load 5 feet, you need 75' of rope to do it with! That is why Bermie is recommending the friction hitch as a mid-line attachment: you can re-set it as often as you need to, which will be _very_ often.

If you are just attaching low (less travel of load) to avoid the work of setting the rope higher, then you are loosing time and working too hard. It's easier (and more reliable) to just set the rope higher in the tree.

If you just need more force because you are working without bigger machines, you will spend less on one good rope winch than you will on the 4 pulleys and all the extra rope you will need to equal it's pulling strength. Need more than 1000lbs of pull? Rig a single pulley high in the tree and fix one end of the rope to the rope winch. Functionally, this is almost as easy as a single line pull, and now you are pulling with 2000lbs of force for the whole distance back to the tree.

So...what am I not seeing?


----------



## treemandan (Apr 21, 2009)

pdqdl said:


> Ghillie, I don't often make mistakes like this, but I stand corrected.
> 
> Yep. that's 3:1, and my suggestions would have made it 5:1
> 
> ...



Yeah I was getting confused. Its an odd ratio when an even number of pulleys are used. You count the rope, not the pulley.


----------



## treemandan (Apr 21, 2009)

Blakesmaster said:


> Why shouldn't you attach a pulley midline w/ a friction hitch, Dman? I do it all the time. I atually had to set up the exact system pictured on Saturday but instead of pulling it with my hands I hooked up the ranger. Yeah, it was a BIG tree.



It could slip a knot can't. Just a Ranger? We did that with the top -kick. Once I strapped the back of the toyota to another truck and when pulling the yota came off the ground. The front tires were about 6 inches off the ground, bounced a little when she came back down. We were using the winch on the yota which is way overated for the truck, its common for me to tie a winch truck down.


----------



## Slvrmple72 (Apr 21, 2009)

pdqdl said:


> Why are you guys so interested in getting all these gigantic power factors with pulleys?
> 
> If you need that much force to pull a tree over, then it must be leaning way over to one side. If that's the case, then you will likely run out of rope (or pulley travel) before you get it pulled to where you need it. 15:1 power factor needs 15 times the rope for any distance to pull. Move a load 5 feet, you need 75' of rope to do it with! That is why Bermie is recommending the friction hitch as a mid-line attachment: you can re-set it as often as you need to, which will be _very_ often.
> 
> ...



Maybe they want to make a tree catapult 

Speaking of winches I like that Honda powered portable unit. That winch, some blocks, and about 300' of 1/2" Stablebraid should cover just about anything!


----------



## treemandan (Apr 21, 2009)

*power is good, more power is better*

even if you don't use it, it should be there, ready to use if needed.

I was up this one tree, 5 guys on the ground, 2 were the owners of the company. They all grabbed the rope and the boss said cut it. I asked my usually line of questions which included " Are you sure". He said he was and he was a smart man. I knew he was wrong but I wanted to play anyway.
I notched it, and started my backcut which I knew would close on the saw and it did. It was headed back toward the wires and cars on the road all stopped watching us at the red light. I looked at the 5 guys straining real hard, tied off my 20 and came down.
I had to set up the Massdam myself, everybody else was pretty busy, kinda all tied up you know? I couldn't resist walking over to the boss and sticking my finger in his ribs. I mean, what was he gonna do huh? Nothing, he just took it.
So we tied it to the massdam and Jamie cranked it over all by his little self.


A pull system should always have way more strenth than needed, bombproof. You just can't be so giddy to use it right off the bat.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Apr 22, 2009)

If you just place/piggyback a 3xRig on the end of a 5xRig you have 15x. If you inset the 3xRig, so that it pulls on tail of 5xRig with it's 3xPosition, but then also the 2xPosition of the 3xRig(usually put on anchor) pulls again on the 5x, you can get 21xEffort + 15xBodyWeight (of BodyWeight used as input into the system). i think we must all ways and always break it down to device weight and device power (even of yourself) as separate considerations in these things, for the static weight will have 1 pull/push, whereas produced power of same device will have it's force and it's equal/opposite. If you inset your effort(s) inside of the 3xRig that in turn is inset inside the 5xRig, you get 32xEffort + 21xBodyWeight. That 32x comes from the series of insetting/stacked multipliers, the 21x not as much, as it carries lower multipliers, and the originating pull(s) have the Bodyweight + Effort + equal/oppsoite of Effort... All you have to do is place the 3xRig to pull at potent points, in opposite directions on the 5xRig. MTL: Ancient Ship Rig, shows an ol'example.

Usually, we just look at placing a pulley on 1 of 3 positions:
2:1-On the load to give 2xPower, that requires 2xDistance input.
1:1-On the Anchor position as a 1:1 redirect, no alteration in power or distance, just change in direction.
1:2-Or, on the effort input, for .5xPower, but at double speed.

So, an anchor position is usually looked at as no power gain. But, because of the promise of the equal and opposite reaction/force; we can use the change in direction of the anchored pulley to capture the equal and opposite (direction) force, and align it back around to pull on load, for 2x power from an anchor position. Because this takes an open system, and makes it a closed one, so it conserves more of the forces, and folds them to target, rather than terminating their flow at anchor.

Also, insetting a system (or effort as above) inside of another system (so that it pulls 2x on that system) can give more multiplier; like in a Spanish Burton etc.

Another reason to place a lot of force on tree, is that the hinge strength is set by the force on the hinge at first folding. So, if we increase this force at the point of first folding, we can get a stronger hinge for better steering and softer felling. Notice, that if the tree will then fold on it's own the rest of the way Naturally, pulls added after first folding event, would only serve to hasten fall/ for a harder fall. A softer fall can mean less ground damage, spring poles etc. But, do remember that you give up distance, stretch, forces to friction etc. So, at some point this is just a theoretical discussion; which too is important, just to extend the limits of what you can do, to give more immediate survey of workable strategies.

So, with a 5xRig alone, we can get 8xEffort + 5xBodyWeight, with this 2ndHand/underhand technique. But, we don't all ways have to; so we can pull faster at 5xEffort as far as we can, but then drop gear to 8xEffort(but slower pulling/ more distance to input per output) by using equal and opposite pull of free hand pulling on system too, to finish; so this can be a transmission of sorts. Also, a prussick, can be tended; this will allow a pull to be placed on system, then held automatically by system to take break/conserve forces, set up for impact, leverage with perpendicular force(higher multiplier) etc.

These theories can also get your truck unstuck, help to tie down, bind etc. We probably won't take them as far there, but just immediately know more fully how to immediately, and sometimes seemingly magically maximize, by calling up these forces correctly, for as Sir Francis Bacon gave us..........


----------



## Ghillie (Apr 22, 2009)

Excellent post Treespyder!!

You had me lost for awhile untill I saw the drawing. I am cursed with attention deficict diso....... WAS THAT A SQUIRREL!???!? 

That is going in my reference archives. I thought I was knot crazy untill I started reading some of your stuff.


----------



## md_tree_dood (Apr 22, 2009)

Bermie said:


> I use friction hitches both mid line AND at the anchor tree.
> The advantage of a friction hitch to attach the mid line pulley is that if you pull it all the way to the anchor tree, you can let go, the hitch at the anchor tree holds the line (and the what you are pulling) without loss of any tension, then you can push the mid line pulley back out, set the hitch and pull again.
> With a butterfly or a comealong, if you misjudge how much distance you need to complete your pull, its difficult to reset without losing the tree!




Use a friction hitch at the mid point, using the pulley and the steel biner just like your climbing system but use a port-a-wrap as a termination and you can tie and lock off to that while you run your hitch out. This assumes that you're using one line for the pulley system and have the hitch tied to your pulling line.


----------



## outofmytree (May 5, 2009)

TheTreeSpyder said:


> If you just place/piggyback a 3xRig on the end of a 5xRig you have 15x. If you inset the 3xRig, so that it pulls on tail of 5xRig with it's 3xPosition, but then also the 2xPosition of the 3xRig(usually put on anchor) pulls again on the 5x, you can get 21xEffort + 15xBodyWeight (of BodyWeight used as input into the system). i think we must all ways and always break it down to device weight and device power (even of yourself) as separate considerations in these things, for the static weight will have 1 pull/push, whereas produced power of same device will have it's force and it's equal/opposite. If you inset your effort(s) inside of the 3xRig that in turn is inset inside the 5xRig, you get 32xEffort + 21xBodyWeight. That 32x comes from the series of insetting/stacked multipliers, the 21x not as much, as it carries lower multipliers, and the originating pull(s) have the Bodyweight + Effort + equal/oppsoite of Effort... All you have to do is place the 3xRig to pull at potent points, in opposite directions on the 5xRig. MTL: Ancient Ship Rig, shows an ol'example.
> 
> Usually, we just look at placing a pulley on 1 of 3 positions:
> 2:1-On the load to give 2xPower, that requires 2xDistance input.
> ...




Owww. Brain hurts...:newbie:


----------



## NCTREE (May 5, 2009)

StihlRockin' said:


> This doesn't have to be isolated to just whole trees, but for me, mainly tree tops.
> 
> I use a two separate pulley system to pull tops of trees over when the climber is ready to go. The mechanical advantage is nice; especially when there's only one guy pulling or just to make the pulling easier.
> 
> ...



The best way is with 2 double pulleys or 5to1. I actually hook everything up and when finished using it, unhook the prusik from the tag line and take the slack out leaving it intact. I throw it in a rope bag so it's quick and easy to hook back up. Much more efficient than a come-along.


----------



## StihlRockin' (May 5, 2009)

NCTREE,

I should have replied to all if I didn't already, but I finally did figure to go with the 2 double-pulley system as you're mentioning.

Thanks ALL!

*StihlRockin'*


----------



## asthesun (May 5, 2009)

instead of having 2 double pulleys, one at anchor point and one midline, this is what i usually do if i need to pull by hand, i.e. equipment wont reach it


----------



## StihlRockin' (May 5, 2009)

asthesun,

LOL! Nice sketch!

I thought of something similar too and was thinking of doing that when the 3-pulley idea I had... had me pulling TOWARDS the tree/top being pulled over, so then I thought of the 4th pulley.

Currently I use the 2-pulley method and I'm getting some good leverage there. Next week I'm getting 2 double pulleys... along with some other toys!

*StihlRockin'*


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (May 5, 2009)

This is nice. The original zRig 3:1 should be discernible. If all red rings are pulleys, we have a 9:1. If the lowest red ring(at base of tree) is an anchor, it is 6:1 (a 2:1 piggybacked on a 3:1 for a 6:1). The difference is the flow of force would stop at the anchor for 6:1, but it continues and is 'conserved' in a more 'closed'/ less leakage system with the last ring as a pulley, so the 1x that would normally just pull on the anchor races around and pulls on the 3:1/zRig 1x as the pulley closest to hand pull is pulling on the 3:1/zRig 2x. See at what points the fores multiply,a nd at what points they are additive, how more 'closed' has less 'leakage'.

If we lean hard into the 9:1 configuration with all body weight on pull rope as hard as possible, we have 9xBodyweight factor. But, if we then reach down and pull on ground handle/ stump whatever we have 9xBodyWegiht + 9xEffort. But, if we pull on length of line coming out of lowest red ring/pulley, we add 3xEffort more, to finish(simply by 'closing the circuit' more, like when we jumped from 6:1 to 9:1). We can impact with bodyweight or effort easier, as the other value holds things at bay.

Or we can place a prussick on any leg of line pulling out of a pulley, so guys can take break, let it hold to impact suddenly (with both effort and bodyweight factors, instead of just one or the other like in previous paragraph), wait for perfect facing etc. Also, so the legs of tensioned line are locked, and you can leverage their resistance to bend by sideways force for highest returns. Pulling out of the pulley closest to hand pull is best in 9:1 configuration, because of less tension on the prussick to hold more confidentally. But, because you lose the leg of line to the pulley that you pull on (prussick goes on opposite side of pulley), the prussick load is 1/8 load (instead of the 1/9th load that hand hold gets). So, whole system can stretch, and lose some bits of tension/'juice'.

Some fine points, but the same man on the same job leading the same crew, making these little , pivotal differences, can really make the difference in power and fatigue etc. Like getting a new Porty, you have to look for uses, to get good and quick deploymeant, to best know when and at what costs to draw them out.


----------



## asthesun (May 5, 2009)

TheTreeSpyder said:


> This is nice. The original zRig 3:1 should be discernible. If all red rings are pulleys, we have a 9:1. If the lowest red ring(at base of tree) is an anchor, it is 6:1 (a 2:1 piggybacked on a 3:1 for a 6:1). The difference is the flow of force would stop at the anchor for 6:1, but it continues and is 'conserved' in a more 'closed'/ less leakage system with the last ring as a pulley, so the 1x that would normally just pull on the anchor races around and pulls on the 3:1/zRig 1x as the pulley closest to hand pull is pulling on the 3:1/zRig 2x. See at what points the fores multiply,a nd at what points they are additive, how more 'closed' has less 'leakage'.
> 
> If we lean hard into the 9:1 configuration with all body weight on pull rope as hard as possible, we have 9xBodyweight factor. But, if we then reach down and pull on ground handle/ stump whatever we have 9xBodyWegiht + 9xEffort. But, if we pull on length of line coming out of lowest red ring/pulley, we add 3xEffort more, to finish(simply by 'closing the circuit' more, like when we jumped from 6:1 to 9:1). We can impact with bodyweight or effort easier, as the other value holds things at bay.
> 
> ...



thx, i had a good buzz going, but now my brain hurts. the second ring by the tree is an anchor. all the rings can be either rings, knots w/e you like. in any case, if i was unsure if i had enough pull, i'd get equipment

edit=wait no i guess the second red ring is a pulley, that is anchored lol idk


----------



## StihlRockin' (May 5, 2009)

TheTreeSpyder said:


> This is nice. The original zRig 3:1 should be discernible. If all red rings are pulleys, we have a 9:1. If the lowest red ring(at base of tree) is an anchor, it is 6:1 (a 2:1 piggybacked on a 3:1 for a 6:1). The difference is the flow of force would stop at the anchor for 6:1, but it continues and is 'conserved' in a more 'closed'/ less leakage system with the last ring as a pulley, so the 1x that would normally just pull on the anchor races around and pulls on the 3:1/zRig 1x as the pulley closest to hand pull is pulling on the 3:1/zRig 2x. See at what points the fores multiply,a nd at what points they are additive, how more 'closed' has less 'leakage'.
> 
> If we lean hard into the 9:1 configuration with all body weight on pull rope as hard as possible, we have 9xBodyweight factor. But, if we then reach down and pull on ground handle/ stump whatever we have 9xBodyWegiht + 9xEffort. But, if we pull on length of line coming out of lowest red ring/pulley, we add 3xEffort more, to finish(simply by 'closing the circuit' more, like when we jumped from 6:1 to 9:1). We can impact with bodyweight or effort easier, as the other value holds things at bay.
> 
> ...



Wow! That's.... uhh... hmm? Quite interesting. ??

I'm going to go now. My head is throbbing a bit.

*StihlRockin'*


----------

