# Tapered Hinge Revisited



## chris_girard (Aug 19, 2004)

I just received my new Forest Applications Newsletter by GOL instructor Tim Ard and he had an article on why not to use the tapered hinge in your felling plan.

Before I quote what he said I just wanted to let you guys know that my background is in logging and tree climbing. I have gone through my state logger certification for directional felling and all the instructors who are seasoned loggers no longer teach or use the tapered hinge for side leaning trees. Instead they are all using and teaching Tim Ard's method of offsetting your "gunning" sight to compensate for the amount of side lean.

The following is quoted from the article. "Some operators try to steer the tree by holding the hinge or leaving the hinge a bit thicker on the tension side of the stump and thinner on the compression side. Some do this as the tree is falling. This is not a recommended technique. There have been many injuries and deaths related to staying too close to the stump of the tree when it's falling."

"There is an important issue to remember when using a tapered hinge technique. Unless you do remove a portion of the end of the hinge with the taper, and even sometimes with that, if the hinge material supports the weight of the tree and stays attached during the fall, a tapered hinge still steers to the notched position. Steering to the notch direction is really what your desiring to do isn't it? So why taper the hinge? There is really not an explainable reason. It's a guess as to how much wood material to add or subtract to taper the hinge."

"A nice straight hinge is a great deal more predictable, if aimed correctly, than guessing how much to taper and or standing right besides a falling tree."

How many of you guys have used the offset "gunning" technique and what do you think?


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Aug 19, 2004)

i've tried it, and i like more of the art of the machine working correctly and delivering correctly into the square of the face; rather than a failure point in between lean pull and gunned face.

But, the whole balance thing across the axis with tapered hinge countering lean is a physics/philosophy (proper Ph)thing for me personally.

Or, something like that,
:alien:


----------



## chris_girard (Aug 19, 2004)

Spyder I do understand what you're getting at. It depends on which method you are more comfortable with too.

I also want to tell you that your web site is great! Keep up the great work.


----------



## MasterBlaster (Aug 19, 2004)

> _Originally posted by chris_girard _
> *I also want to tell you that your web site is great! Keep up the great work. *



For sure. I bet it only gets better!


----------



## NeTree (Aug 19, 2004)

Tapered hinges do work well, when properly done. Properly, you shouldn't be making it any thinner on the compression side than you normally would with a straight hinge; but rather leaving more holding material on the compression side. 

The tapered hinge is alot more predictable than the "adjusted gunn" technique.

It's all moot; if there's any question as to whether it will fall where needed, a rope should be set.

As arborists, we rarely have the luxury of working out in the timber where it's not nearly as critical for it to fall dead-on.

By the way, I've done more than my share of logging too.

Funny you bring this up though... kinda shows my point about tapered hinges being nothing new, eh?


----------



## glens (Aug 20, 2004)

> _Originally posted by chris_girard_ [quoting an article]
> *"... try to steer the tree ... as the tree is falling. This is not a recommended technique. There have been many injuries and deaths related to staying too close to the stump of the tree when it's falling."*


No duh.&nbsp; Trying to steer a tree like that <i>while it's falling</i> is what they're really arguing against, and I agree with disrecommending <i>that</i> practice.&nbsp; I don't think it's proper to be bad-mouthing a well-(pre-)formed tapered hinge; especially in this manner.



> *"... if the hinge material supports the weight of the tree and stays attached during the fall, a tapered hinge still steers to the notched position."*


No duh.&nbsp; Who ever said the tree shouldn't go to the notched direction with a tapered hinge and, more importantly, who's suggesting to try otherwise?&nbsp; Another straw-man aspect of the argument.



> *"Steering to the notch direction is really what your desiring to do isn't it? So why taper the hinge? There is really not an explainable reason."*


They didn't ask me!&nbsp; The answer to the first question is "yes" and the answer to the second is "so the fall to the gun will assuredly happen".



> *"It's a guess as to how much wood material to add or subtract to taper the hinge."*


No duh.&nbsp; Who said it wasn't?



> *"A nice straight hinge is a great deal more predictable, if aimed correctly, than guessing how much to taper and or standing right besides a falling tree."*


So instead of guessing how much extra material to leave in the tension side of the hinge they're advocating guessing how far away from the gun the straight-hinged fell will fall?&nbsp; Excuse me, but I'd much rather guess a little too much hinge material than guess how much English to put on a gun!&nbsp; I prefer having my trees fall to the gun, not away from it.&nbsp; Any time a tree falls off the gun I consider it an error.

I hear them advocating guessing how much error to introduce to the gun and can't hardly believe my ears.&nbsp; I can only hope what's been reported is the result of bad editing on the part of the periodical administration.

Glen


----------



## ORclimber (Aug 20, 2004)

> _Originally posted by netree _
> *
> The tapered hinge is alot more predictable than the "adjusted gunn" technique.
> *


 
How 'bout them apples.


----------



## NeTree (Aug 20, 2004)

Tell ya what...


Take a stick and try to use the adjusted gunn technique to hit the stick.

Now, take someone using a tapered hinge and try to do the same.

See who wins.

Murphy4Trees has alot of pics that'll predict the winner in that contest.


----------



## murphy4trees (Aug 20, 2004)

> I can only hope what's been reported is the result of bad editing on the part of the periodical administration.



NOPE... aparently that article got the conversation heated up in other circles as well....
The editors at TCI said Tim wrote an letter something to the effect that what I wrote was dangerous.... 
Then Ken Palmer said something to me at TCi about these German scientists, fiberologists or something, swearing that the tapered hinge makes no difference.... Actually we had a good conversation on the subject and I told him how my experiences in the field and studying wood bow making, had formed my thoughts as they evolved from Dent and Spidy. And Ken Palmer did rightly point out that the mulberry pictures were actually bad hinges... they didn't hold... just ripped out... It was a mistake to use them... So I heard him and I think he heard me.

I AM glad to see so much discussion of the matter.... Maybe NE and Wiley could email Ard about how they've been using the tapered hinge since they were three  ..... he might come around then....  

Actualkly the best thing is for everyone to try it in the field themselves... I think the place where it is most easily observed as a superior method is when swinging light horizontal limbs sideways.....

As Butch said "Let's get it on"


----------



## ORclimber (Aug 20, 2004)

> _Originally posted by chris_girard _
> *
> "A nice straight hinge is a great deal more predictable, if aimed correctly, than guessing how much to taper and or standing right besides a falling tree."
> 
> How many of you guys have used the offset "gunning" technique and what do you think? *



Uh... since using a tapered hinge to precision while strapped into a spar ain't nothing but a thang. Guiding a tree over using a tapered hinge with both feet on the ground is a walk in the park.


----------



## NeTree (Aug 20, 2004)

> _Originally posted by murphy4trees _
> *Maybe NE and Wiley could email Ard about how they've been using the tapered hinge since they were three  ..... he might come around then....
> 
> *



Age 10, actually.  

Hey, of course it's dangerous; otherwise, they wouldn't call in the pros, would they? LOL


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Aug 20, 2004)

i'm sure Tim Ard has had good exposure to a tapered hinge as i beleive he hangs with Mike Oxman for one thing. 

Oxman seemed hip to the tapered hinge; but i think if i understood right wanted to make it on an incline to get the tree to build force and go suddenly(?).

Turn the hinges on the side in the tree to test them at not their most massive pulls, but most leveraged for size, as mah'man OR notes.. Take that experience back to the ground and fold in....


----------



## murphy4trees (Aug 20, 2004)

I actually got a call from OXman at TCI... he said it was a rare article in that it actually imparted something of value to the working arborist...

I really don;t understand how a person of Ard's experience could consider the adjusted gun superior to the tapered hinge


----------



## NeTree (Aug 20, 2004)

Neither can I; but I do know this: Just because those guys are famous, doesn't mean they're the best- they just get better publicity.

It defies common sense, I tell ya. 

I'll take my chances on getting the tree spot-on every time with my pull-ropes and various hinges before I'll give my insurance company a heart attack with a guesswork-gunn.

It's like wiping before you crap... it just doesn't make any sense.


----------



## Stumper (Aug 20, 2004)

We get used to what has worked for us-even if it isn't the easiest or best technique to impart to others. Keeping an open mind is wise but most of us have watched someone implement a technique that is new to us and then turned around and repeated our old techniques because we are familiar and comfortable with them.


----------



## NeTree (Aug 20, 2004)

True.

But repetition breeds familiarity. There's a first time for everything, isn't there?

I remember struggling to tie my first bowline, somewhere around age 6 or 7. I just smile and laugh when guys who aren't good at know tying see me do it comment on it while I'm chatting with them and not even looking at what my hands are doing- especially when I do it one-handed.


----------



## rumination (Aug 20, 2004)

Do I understand the offset gun technique to mean that you would aim your notch further away from the lean than you actually want the tree to fall?


----------



## NeTree (Aug 20, 2004)

Basically, yes. You "adjust" your gun further than your intended landing zone, knowing the hinge won't really carry it there, in an estimated guess as to when the hinge will tear off early and land the tree where you REALLY want it... more or less.

Fine out in the backwoods, but that's an awful lot of guesswork around someone's house.

Remember, right EVERY time!


Let's use Murphy's other thread as an example:

Forget for now whether it really hit where he was aiming for, let's just pretend he really was 40" off on a 70' stick.

Could you achieve that kind of accuracy with the adjusted gun? Not f-ing likely, but even a blind squirrel finds an acorn now and then. 

Realistically, you could get within 8 or 9 feet. In the woods, that's an inconvenience. In the residential areas we work in, that's you buying someone a new {insert expensive immovable object here}.


----------



## rumination (Aug 20, 2004)

ummm...yeah, I think I'll stick with the tapered hinge. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.


----------



## rborist1 (Aug 20, 2004)

:Eye:


----------



## rumination (Aug 20, 2004)

And why wouldn't I?


----------



## MasterBlaster (Aug 20, 2004)

Excellent post, Leon!


----------



## Oxman (Aug 25, 2004)

Please ignore those posts signed with my name, but made by someone else. I was hoping they would have been deleted by now. It's better to talk to folks, rather than have them talk about me. So, here goes.

Regarding the tapered hinge, I am a believer, yet the hinge is a 3-D affair. I prefer an open face, either conventional or Humboldt style, gunned directly at the target. 

The higher the backcut, the taller & stronger the hinge, because it contains more holding wood. Dent addresses this variable height adjustment of the backcut, and it was posted on the ????????.COM thread, but the TCI magazine article did not. In the forest, raising or lowering the backcut by tilting the saw is as important as the thickness of the taper. 

The integral combination of tilted backcut & tapered hinge can be applied in myriad ways to the art of falling trees. The goal is to steer the direction of the falling tree towards a clear spot on the ground, regardless of which way it is leaning.

By raising the kerf almost to the top of the face on the thick side of the taper, holding time is prolonged. This tilt is extended down almost to the floor of the face on the opposite side, towards the lean, to remove wood by making the hinge shorter. This reduces holding power on the side where none is needed, since the tree is already leaning that direction. 

This process allows the faller to get the tree to go in a larger angle of deflection away from where it wants to go. One of Tree Spyders' wonderful diagrams would go a long way to spread the word about this method of magical anti-gravity control.

Arboreally Yours,
www.treedr.net 

Ox (really!)


----------



## Toddppm (Aug 25, 2004)

When using the tapered hinge with a pull line, do you always pull in-line with the notch also?
I've done it with an exagerated pull , farther to the side than needed knowing it will break earlier. Definately not exact but it works or am I just lucky?


----------



## NeTree (Aug 25, 2004)

oxman, slanted backcuts are for homeowners and other amateurs.

Real pros don't use them, for very specific reasons:


http://www.arboristsite.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=16149&perpage=40&pagenumber=1


----------



## Gypo Logger (Aug 25, 2004)

When dealing with larger trees that weigh over 4 tons lets say, I don't think the tree pays much heed with regards to altering it's natural lay, even if we try to influence it with tapered hinges etc.
Just as chain is only as strong as it's weekest link, holdingwood creates little directional influence once the tree is commited to it's intended direction of fall if ENOUGH holdingwood is removed and the undercut was well placed.
Much like driving a tank thru a front door, the doorhinges will have little or no influence over how the doors are crashed. How's that for an analogy?
I think 95% of the problems that wouldbe fallers have, is that they don't stay with the tree long enough as it begins it's fall and that their saws are not sharp or powerful enough except for the smaller trees. Through fear and inexperience they tend to cut and run, only to look back on a tree that hasn't even begun to make an approach, let alone a final decent.
John


----------



## ORclimber (Aug 25, 2004)

> _Originally posted by netree _
> *oxman, slanted backcuts are for homeowners and other amateurs.
> 
> Real pros don't use them, for very specific reasons:
> *



Think he was refering to leaving taller hinge fiber on one side of the hinge than other. 3D tapered hinge.


----------



## NeTree (Aug 25, 2004)

Gypo, it's all moot. Either you can stick the landing zone, or you can't. All this talk is mostly over-analysis anyways- albeit alot of fun...


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Aug 25, 2004)

i think a conventional etc. hinge tries to compensate for sidelean; a tapered hinge just makes it easier for it to do so.

The sidelean will stretch the opposite fiber in hinge harder, making that fiber pull harder in response; in a L controls the R cross formation; becuase the leveraged distance of control is greater to the cross axis of the lean. And the lean is the power behind the whole motion.

When the faces close, the compression in face unloads it's oppositer (the hinge), and so corrective hinge pull response stops, further force and tear off happens. But, even in this stage (faces closing) there is adjsutment to sidelean, by the heavier side hitting harder, so pushing to center harder.

i think a heavier tree, properly faced, has more weight/more Nature force, so is more apt to self correct. As, a larger aquarium has more water, so more Nature; and is more self correcting/balancing.

Thee Oxman, welcome back; i've emailed ya to see if we are on same page; or just what you see here.

Todd, i have a diagram for that here somewhere... In short, i think if the hinge is sound, you pull to target, and leverage your action through the hinge multiplier. Pulling to offset lean, takes that force off hinge, so hinge doesn't help. i look at it as a linear, direct effort against the lean, or an arched path of your effort, through the hinge, then to the lean illustratively; but really the higne has it's own leverage multiplier beyond the ratio of distances that ya speak of in leveraged arc (that ol'Oxman might be trying to increase?)

Dr. Erik.............what about the lessons learned and taken 'in tree' to address hinge help at the most leveraged angle of gravity pull against target-horizontal? i ain't so sure, you can find such correction naturally compensating at that angle; then these 'angles' help as ya take every bit ya can (as i'm sure ya know)

Do they have half aliens?
:alien:


----------



## NeTree (Aug 25, 2004)

> _Originally posted by ORclimber _
> *Think he was refering to leaving taller hinge fiber on one side of the hinge than other. 3D tapered hinge. *




Maybe, but what's the point? See my above post.


----------



## NeTree (Aug 25, 2004)

Kenny, where do you get your terminology?


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Aug 25, 2004)

Which ones?

Usually steal from some source; guess back to the drawing bored!


----------



## Gypo Logger (Aug 25, 2004)

In the previous video, if it didn't take to long to download, you will note that only 6 seconds transpired from the time I withdrew my saw from the tree and the time that the limb hit the stump, but in actual time 6 seconds is a long time and you can escape at least 50 feet away with a saw and 75 without.
It's a given that debris will fly, so we must be prepared, but most problems arise from trying to commit a tree with too much holding wood and to slow of a saw.
John


----------



## ORclimber (Aug 25, 2004)

> _Originally posted by netree _
> *Maybe, but what's the point? See my above post. *



The quest to be better Sum of us are hardwired to overanylize. Still mulling over the trees are not steel idea.


----------



## Oxman (Aug 25, 2004)

Hi Ken, et al,

Thanks for your thoughtful messages. I was glad that you put so much effort into the drawings and commentary on the boards and your website. I must confess that I switch into skim mode when reading run-on sentences and 100 word paragraphs. I don't have very good powers of concentration. Sorry if I did not comprehend the complex ideas you so generously took the time to prepare.

Please don't think I am criticizing. The attacks made by some on the boards are rather rude, when we are actually just trying to explain ourselves, which we have a right to do. 

I wish I could draw a view of one of these cuts. This is a drawing by an Aussie on Arboristsite, I think. http://www.arboristsite.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=187889 It shows the floor of the face tilted, either on purpose, or as a result of drawing skills. It does get the idea across, so thanks for posting, Mate. Imagine the tree in this example is leaning to the left. Lets disregard the boring steps in this case. (Please disregard my boring language, also.)

The effect of tilting the face here is the same as tilting the backcut in my description. The net result of each face is more holding wood below the backcut. The hinge is taller (stronger) on the holding side, and shorter (weaker) on the compression side. It takes almost zero effort or time to put the saw into this modified kerf. Much less work than a wedge or a tagline or bored tunnel.

To make a comparison, think of the type of keylock carabiner with the cutout that latches over a wide part of the gate. An example is the Petzl Spirit, which I believe is a licensed feature. I ran into biner mfr. Denny Moorhouse at a TCI Expo a few years ago. His company is named ISC (International Safety Corporation). He also founded and is part owner of DMM (Denny Moorhouse Mountaineering), in Wales.

Denny designed a biner that is a mirror image of the original keylock style biner. The shape of the cutout in the nose of the ISA biner is the same as the shape of the gate in the keylock biner. This allows ISC to market a version of patented technology that accomplishes a strong structure, but in relief. 

This relief is what is accomplished by tilting the facecut instead of the backcut. It's the same thing, actually. Wow, that was a long explanation for using that drawing as an example! That's ok, though. 

Dug that falling video, bigtime!


----------



## NeTree (Aug 25, 2004)

Right... TOO much holding wood, meaning most of the force you're applying is simply going into bending the hinge. I rarely make a hinge over an inch; it's just not required. Too thick, and you're simply pounding wedges for nought.


----------



## Oxman (Aug 25, 2004)

Some folks can cross their fingers and hope for a wing & a prayer.

Wing & a Prayer movie.


----------



## Gypo Logger (Aug 25, 2004)

Hi Erik, I think we are getting down to the nitty gritty of the mechanics of falling and all the variables that will accomplish the same end result.
To sum it up, I think the hingewood does the initial talking in conjuction with a well placed undercut, but within seconds gravity does the talking and exerts far more force than anything else.
This is why a thinner hinge is best as it will compensate for other errors, such as unintentional dutchmen or cuts that don't meet. Falling is a race against gravity, so a very fast saw will eleviate most errors as will an understanding of the relative strength of the fibre of various species. Softwoods are much more forgiving in some ways due to their relative lightness.
Thick hinges create barberchairs, especially when combined with cuts that don't meet.
At some point I think we need to define what the meaning is of "cuts that don't meet".
A super fast saw is our best defence.
John


----------



## murphy4trees (Aug 30, 2004)

I just got back from a long wekend in Ca. visiting family. I am glad to see that Michael Oxman has joined the conversation and have his input. He's been cutting trees for around 35 years and rubs elbows with a bunch of west coast logger types... So I respect his opinion and feedback.
It meant a lot to me when he told me by phone that he was surprised by the tapered hinge article in TCI mag, as it has become extrememly rare for these magazine articles to contain much substance with practical application and value.
Thanks Michael..


So here is the latest info on the tapered hinge controvery. I just got an email from one of the editors at TCI..
See my response and his mail below:

Don,
I AM glad to see the conversation continuing on the "tapred hinge controversy".
Apparently the article has stirred up quite a bit of debate on the subject. I understand that Tim Ard published a piece in his newsletter to specifiaclly discourage the use of the tapered hinge and herald the benefits of the adjusted gun technique...
Also I had a brief conversation with Ken Palmer of Arbormaster Trainings where he questioned the effectiveness of the tapered hinge and talked about some German scientists he is working with. 
So I have designed some experiments to show the relative strength of tension and compression woods which I intend to complete in September.

I too was asked about the center plunge on the cover pic, in Pittsburg, and would love an opportunity to reply with additional photos of the tree, hinge, fall etc....

I was planning on writing my next article on climbing techniques to avoid any additional controversy, yet welcome the opportunity to take this conversation to the next level.

You wrote "Lee was curious why you stopped the hinge as short as half the width of the tree. Again, briefly, could you explain that for him?" What exactly is that question referring to? I think that may be refering to the 6" maple lead, in one of the photos in the body of the article. 

Let's talk by phone soon.I just got back from a long weekend retreat in California, so I'll take a couple of days to catch up on work. In the mean time I'll put some ideas on paper.

I think the controversy sirred up by the original article is a great opportunity for our industry. I appreciate TCI as the best forum for this conversation. And I have 100% confidence in the effectiveness of the tapered hinge as I use it in the field regularly.

thank you for your service,
Daniel Murphy

In a message dated 8/25/2004 4:07:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes:


Dan,

Our staff arborist, Lee Gilman, would like you to answer two questions re: your tapered hinge story.

1. Several people at the ISA show apparently asked him to explain the saw-through on the cover photo. I know you and I had talked about it, but can you provide me a brief explanation of why you used that? I may want to print it as Lee thinks it needs to be explained.

2. Also, Lee was curious why you stopped the hinge as short as half the width of the tree. Again, briefly, could you explain that for him?



ps: I just rec'd the note from Michael Oxman.


Thanks,
Don Staruk 
Managing editor 
Tree Care Industry magazine 
[email protected] 
Ph: 603-314-5380 
Fax: 603-314-5386 
Tree Care Industry Association
"The Voice of the Tree Care Industry"
www.treecareindustry.org 
3 Perimeter Rd, Unit 1 
Manchester, NH 03103


----------



## NeTree (Aug 30, 2004)

Article notwithstanding (we've already discussed that issue), the fact is I trust a tapered hinge (the way I make them) a whole lot more than "guessing" how much to adjust the gun.

Don't you?


----------



## glens (Aug 30, 2004)

I'm not wanting to derail this thread, but will somebody please explain to me the virtue of placing a reply before (above) the replied-to content?&nbsp; This is not the first time this has occurred here.&nbsp; It's so unintuitive to use that way; you must stutter-step backwards through the whole thing to read it in order.&nbsp; It doesn't flow, is needlessly difficult, and doesn't make any sense at all to me...

Glen


----------



## NeTree (Aug 30, 2004)

Glen,

Mean you do what?


----------



## Nickrosis (Aug 30, 2004)

Maybe computer people are just wired differently, but I would've liked to see an introductory, "I received this letter" followed by the letter followed by, "I responded with" followed by the response. Just a formatting thing...

Edit: I don't want to write another off-topic reply, but I think glen mentioned something in the way that he does. It didn't seem overly harsh or finger pointing to me. .02


----------



## murphy4trees (Aug 30, 2004)

Glen,
I AM feeling angry at your reply:
"I'm not wanting to derail this thread, but will somebody please explain to me the virtue of placing a reply before (above) the replied-to content? This is not the first time this has occurred here. It's so unintuitive to use that way; you must stutter-step backwards through the whole thing to read it in order. It doesn't flow, is needlessly difficult, and doesn't make any sense at all to me...

Glen"

I was trying to take the conversation to the next level on a subject that can make a huge difference and maybe save a few lives down the road...
And once again you bring the conversation to "WHAT'S CONVENIENT FOR GLEN!"

This world is not set up for your benefit or convenience... asking to resize pics is acceptable given the time and energy it takes you to download.... Yet was it really necessary to make the above point...
We're not in grade school anymore... The world isn't always perfect.... DEAL WITH IT!

IMJ your above post is a bunch of whining... Needless and useless...
I'd appreciate it if you PMed or emailed me or others with any such requests you have in the future rather than needlessly derail a thread.

my judgements... my anger... I own them.... Now I get to look at the part of me that likes the world to operate at my convenince... which I have projected onto you.... It's there... so thank you for the mirror...


----------



## glens (Aug 30, 2004)

Mike, "messages, emails, and other computer messages are all layed out like that"?&nbsp; That is emphatically incorrect.&nbsp; There's only one company I know which suggests the backward-nested layout is a good idea, and they're also responsible for the other questionable process you touch on.

Dan, I'm sorry I angered you.&nbsp; Please accept my apology.&nbsp; It's not a matter of "what's convenient for [only] Glen".&nbsp; Even Nick concurred.&nbsp; When I present information, I usually attempt to not make the recipient of that information have to work too hard (hard at all, really) to assimilate it.&nbsp; I might make them think a little, but I don't want to inconvenience them by the presentation.&nbsp; That was the thrust of my point.&nbsp; If you receive a reply to an (recent) email, maybe you don't need to be reminded what you'd written.&nbsp; With what you presented here today, either I read the reply first (entirely out of context) and then the original (and then refresh my memory by looking through the reply again), or I "simply" hunt for the start of the original, read through it, then hunt for the start of the reply and read <i>it</i>.&nbsp; How do you do it with a backwards series of communication with which you must get entirely up to speed?&nbsp; When you're presenting such, you should do it in a polite and convenient way, by formatting it sensibly and sequentially.

My complaint about the size of the images is only partly based on my ability to steep a cup of tea while they're in transit.&nbsp; I'd preach the same thing even were I on broadband.&nbsp; It's a "being polite" issue.&nbsp; Polite to the viewers, whomever they may be, and equally to the site sponsor, who must provide storage space for the data, and pay for the bandwidth to serve it.

I'm happy you're concerned about others' safety and are taking steps to promote it.

Glen


----------



## murphy4trees (Aug 31, 2004)

*latest reply to TCI*

Here is the latest letter to TCI..

In a message dated 8/25/2004 4:07:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes:


1. Several people at the ISA show apparently asked him to explain the saw-through on the cover photo. I know you and I had talked about it, but can you provide me a brief explanation of why you used that? I may want to print it as Lee thinks it needs to be explained.


Don and Lee,
The short answer is that the center plunge was made to remove overall fiber from the hinge, making it easier to pull over a backleaner. 

Removing fiber from the center of the hinge allows the hinge to be thicker on its sides, which is considered by many, including me, to be beneficial. The corners of the hinge offer the most resistance against twisting and therefore hinge failure. Also one school of thought suggests that removing heartwood is beneficial, because heartwood has less flexibility than sapwood, which makes sense though I have not seen any science to support that thinking. 

Center plunge is often used by loggers to prevent fiber pull, which can result in loss of value to the log, and can be used to allow room to set a wedge in smaller diameter trees. The technique has also been taught by Arbormaster to be used on back leaners, for the reasons described above. There is however some debate in the arborist community about the benefits of the center plunge on back leaners as some believe a thinner hinge has more flexibility and therefore greater ability to hold the tree in the intended falling path before breaking. 

You may also have noticed that the center plunge is off-center. In this case, the tree had a slight side lean towards a house in addition to a significant back lean. The plunge was made on the compressed side of the hinge in order to leave as much fiber as possible on the tensioned side of the hinge, for reasons described in detail in the article. This left only a small tab of holding wood on the compressed side of the hinge, which was all that was required to prevent twisting and hinge failure. 

I have complete photos of the entire removal of this twin lead red oak. The first lead had a head lean and the second a back lean. Each was about 24" dbh and 85' high. Perhaps I could write a short article about this job and call it "Anatomy of a Removal". In this case the drops landed perfectly, one directly on top of the other, which makes for some fairly impressive photos.


----------



## murphy4trees (Sep 2, 2004)

here's the link to Tim Ard's full piece...


http://www.forestapps.com/news/Page5.gif


----------



## chris_girard (Sep 2, 2004)

I also wanted to mention that Jerry Beranek in his Fundamentals book talks about the same type of gun compensation as Tim Ard does. Look on page 322 under SIDE LEANERS.


----------



## Toddppm (Oct 27, 2004)

I don't have Dent's book, what was written that is wrong about the Tapered hinge?
The way I had been taught was to leave a wider taper on the opposite side of the direction you were aiming 

How about in this link to one of Tim Ards lessons http://www.forestapps.com/tips/hinge/hinge.htm

In it he says"It should also be noted that the fibers of the hinge tend to break from the back. As the tree falls, fibers along the back of the hinge will break first. After the tree reaches a certain point in its fall, only the fibers at the front of the hinge are left to finish steering the tree. Therefore, making a hinge thin on one side will not accomplish any steering function. "

Isn't that saying that a tapered hinge is not effective? Did he change his tune?
Read up on a few other threads on tapered hinge, alot of different opinions some talking about the notch doesn't even matter, the back cut does the steering


----------



## a_lopa (Oct 28, 2004)

more efective than any taper


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Oct 28, 2004)

Aussie, Oxman tried to explain/present that 'keyhole"(?) strategy. What is your take on it?

Tod, i think if the fibers broke, they did so pulling. The farther from the compressed part of the hinge, the more leveraged that pull was. i think taking the tapered hinge into the tree for horizontal sweeps (more leveraged angle of test than felling) gives different feel and proof for tapered hinge power.


----------



## a_lopa (Oct 28, 2004)

dropped 5 bluegums slight oposing wind this arvo using that method(i put a rope on last one),check out the ones in the background a guy has a skidder with a big saw going around


----------



## a_lopa (Oct 29, 2004)

any more info you can go to my site and buy the cd- rom,or call my 1900 trees ph no


----------



## a_lopa (Oct 31, 2004)

for you erik lifetime guarantee


----------



## a_lopa (Oct 31, 2004)

hey you got to buy to find out,i offered mike the cd rom from tree u for christmas LOL....


----------

