# New set of unistrut rails



## betterbuilt (Jul 6, 2010)

Finally found time to put together a new set of rails. I doubled up the unistrut and used all-thread. I was surprised at how strong they are. They barely flex under my weight. The only thing was the weight. I guess it is what it is. I only made them 10 feet long because I had four pieces that size. 














The rails performed exactly like you guys said they would. I did however use them on the second cut like you guys said to and was really impressed at how accurate they kept the cuts. I normally have some place where the saw rises or falls a little and that compounds through the following cuts. I'm a believer in the rails now. I plan on using them for all my cuts now. sure keeps everything straight. 


All was going well then I tried them on a Crotch log and ran into some problems. I need to add some brackets for odd ball logs. Any Ideas? I forgot to take pictures. the heat was staring to take its toll on me by then.
I started out the day running ripping chain. In the third cut I hit a electrical staple. The funny thing was I got the log from a electrician. Any how, it gave me the opportunity to try a chain I modified to be like granbergs chain. I found the tread on here a while back. Thanks every one. I really like the modded chain. My saw was happy also. the rpms seemed to stay at a good level also. 

this guy laid down about 40 feet from me and didn't seem to mind the noise I was making. 






All was going well then I tried them on a Crotch log and ran into some problems. I need to add some brackets for odd ball logs. Any Ideas? I forgot to take pictures. the heat was staring to take its toll on me by then.


----------



## mtngun (Jul 6, 2010)

Funny how deer don't seem to mind chainsaws. I've had them stroll through the area while I was milling.

Those rails ought to be plenty sturdy. Glad it's your back lifting them and not mine.


----------



## betterbuilt (Jul 6, 2010)

mtngun said:


> Glad it's your back lifting them and not mine.



Can't say I moved them to far. The logs are in my yard, about 2 feet off the drive way.


----------



## BobL (Jul 6, 2010)

Rails look good BB but I agree with mtngun - they must be very heavy - I dread having to move my rails when the full 40 ft of rail is being used.

I presume the object marked with an X in teh picture is a piece of wood screwed into the ends of the log and the rails sit on these? 




If so a more reusable alternative is a piece of angle iron that bolts onto the bottom of the unistrut channel.
Like this;




The angle has a number fo threaded holes in it that enable me to used pointy ended 5/16" bolts that bite into the ends of the logs. The top side of the angle is slotted so that it cane adjust to different rail widths.



[/IMG]

I would also suggest bringing the two rails closer together so that A gets moved close to B so that the rail get more support from the log.



betterbuilt said:


> All was going well then I tried them on a Crotch log and ran into some problems. I need to add some brackets for odd ball logs. Any Ideas? I forgot to take pictures. the heat was staring to take its toll on me by then.



I use what I call an adjustable standoff for uneven or wierd shaped logs. 




I have two of these standoffs so I can use them on both ends if I have to.
Using one standoff required backing out the mill through the cut.
Using two standoffs is trick and requires help to get the mill onto the rails.


----------



## betterbuilt (Jul 6, 2010)

Okay here is the log I had questions about. I made the first cut without any problems But I know there is a better way to start it. I ended up adding a shim to one side and drilling a hole in my rail to screw it down. 












Any help would be great.


----------



## huskyhank (Jul 6, 2010)

You might re-cut the end of the log a bit and use a 2x8 or 10 or 12 instead of a 2x4 for your cross/end piece. Make several end boards in different "rises" for doing this.


----------



## BobL (Jul 6, 2010)

betterbuilt said:


> Okay here is the log I had questions about. I made the first cut without any problems But I know there is a better way to start it. I ended up adding a shim to one side and drilling a hole in my rail to screw it down.



I rarely bother to mill uneven crotches - the chances of later using an uneven piece are small so I usually approximately even up the two branches and then use a standoff. It does not have to be dead square as the angle iron cross pieces can easily handle up to a 45º angle


----------



## betterbuilt (Jul 6, 2010)

BobL said:


> I presume the object marked with an X in the picture is a piece of wood screwed into the ends of the log and the rails sit on these?



The object you marked X is actually a short piece of unistrut. used a piece of steel to make a washer so I could slide the strut in and out. The angle sounds better, I'll have work on that. How did you cut the slot in the in your angle? 


I like the stand off bracket. That would have worked for one side, but the shorter side would have been tricky.


----------



## betterbuilt (Jul 6, 2010)

BobL said:


> I rarely bother to mill uneven crotches - the chances of later using an uneven piece are small so I usually approximately even up the two branches and then use a standoff. It does not have to be dead square as the angle iron cross pieces can easily handle up to a 45º angle



I build furniture with them like they are. I call it urban renewal. I let the tree guys make the choices and I mill them like I get them. I try not to cut anything till its in the shop. Not cutting things give me more options if a crack forms. Speaking of cracks, let me tell you that first log exploded over night. I think they cracked it when they felled it. 





huskyhank said:


> You might re-cut the end of the log a bit and use a 2x8 or 10 or 12 instead of a 2x4 for your cross/end piece. Make several end boards in different "rises" for doing this.



That would have worked also. I should add a few pieces to my field kit. You guys are an endless wealth of knowledge. Thanks


----------



## betterbuilt (Jul 7, 2010)

BobL said:


> Rails look good BB but I agree with mtngun - they must be very heavy - I dread having to move my rails when the full 40 ft of rail is being used.







I was looking at your picture and your strut looks a lot heavier than the stuff I have. Mine is labeled Galv-Krom and grainger has it weighing 16lbs per ten feet. That seems high. I'm gonna weigh it later today. I picked up some angle today and gonna start drilling it later today.


----------



## betterbuilt (Jul 7, 2010)

my rails are 57lbs with the all-thread and all the bolts.


----------



## betterbuilt (Jul 7, 2010)

I picked up a few spring nuts similar to these to bolt the angle on.


----------



## BobL (Jul 7, 2010)

betterbuilt said:


> Mine is labeled Galv-Krom and grainger it at weighing 16lbs per ten feet
> .
> .
> .
> my rails are 57lbs with the all-thread and all the bolts.



This does not add up = 40 ft x 16 lb per 10 feet = 64 lbs.

Mine are 76 lbs for 40 ft - not counting the all-thread, angle and all the bolts. so add at least 10 lbs for those making it ~85 Lbs all up. When I use 2 x 10 ft lengths they weigh about 45 lbs.


----------



## betterbuilt (Jul 8, 2010)

BobL said:


> This does not add up = 40 ft x 16 lb per 10 feet = 64 lbs.



I realize it didn't add up. The 16 lbs was a shipping weight I got from the internet. It was including packaging and whatever they ship it with. I put the rail on the scale and it was 57lbs total. I like it for its portability. I still plan on looking for an aluminum extrusion to make something longer with.


----------



## betterbuilt (Jul 14, 2010)

I don't really want to start a thread just to ask a simple question. 


I started milling a 45 inch Norway spruce and my chain isn't cutting like it does in hardwood. I've never done any softwood yet so any help would be great. I'm running a modified ripping chain like granberg sells. I know the chain was sharp because I stopped cutting the spruce and started cutting a dirty White Oak with out sharpening it about the same size and it flew through it. I have the teeth set to 10 degrees and the rakers were at .040.


----------



## BobL (Jul 14, 2010)

betterbuilt said:


> I don't really want to start a thread just to ask a simple question.
> 
> 
> I started milling a 45 inch Norway spruce and my chain isn't cutting like it does in hardwood. I've never done any softwood yet so any help would be great. I'm running a modified ripping chain like granberg sells. I know the chain was sharp because I stopped cutting the spruce and started cutting a dirty White Oak with out sharpening it about the same size and it flew through it. I have the teeth set to 10 degrees and the rakers were at .040.



Was it a 45" wide hardwood?

Granberg is slow period but especially in big logs - remember 2 out of 3 cutters can't clear chips like regular cutters.


----------



## betterbuilt (Jul 14, 2010)

It was a 45 inch soft wood and it cut slower than one our hardest hardwoods.

So your saying just go back to ripping chain. 
What would I set the rakers at? I thought .040 was pretty aggressive at least in hard woods.


----------



## huskyhank (Jul 14, 2010)

I think its not clearing chips as Bob wrote. You might try regular cross cutting chain or even skip tooth chain to see if that helps.

Is there a lot of chips and dust in the kerf? Can you stop the saw and slide it back or in and out of the cut? If you feel it binding when you do that its caused by chips and dust that have not been carried out of the kerf. It just wads up slowing and binding the chain.


----------



## betterbuilt (Jul 14, 2010)

huskyhank said:


> I think its not clearing chips as Bob wrote. You might try regular cross cutting chain or even skip tooth chain to see if that helps.
> 
> Is there a lot of chips and dust in the kerf? Can you stop the saw and slide it back or in and out of the cut? If you feel it binding when you do that its caused by chips and dust that have not been carried out of the kerf. It just wads up slowing and binding the chain.



It seem to cut a little better if I rocked the saw. I bet it was clearing the saw dust when I was rocking it. It never really felt like it was binding. I think your right. I'll switch chain and see if that helps. 

You would know I thought it was gonna be an easy log. I should know better. Thanks.


----------



## BobL (Jul 14, 2010)

betterbuilt said:


> It was a 45 inch soft wood and it cut slower than one our hardest hardwoods.



My first question still stands - how wide was the hardwood you tried to cut? 

Unless you are talking osage orange or similar, in terms of hardness, few of your hardwoods are that different to softwoods and so log width (rather than wood hardness) will determine chip clearance and overall cutting speed.



> So your saying just go back to ripping chain.
> What would I set the rakers at? I thought .040 was pretty aggressive at least in hard woods.



It could be you rakers are a touch too aggressive for softwoods, but OK in hardwoods. The depth the cutter penetrates is dependent on the raker depth and profile, and the hardness of the wood. In softwoods a pointy raker can push its way into the wood further than the hardwood and creates a higher cutting angle (not cutter angle - See FOP sticky in the CS forum for definition of "cutting angle") than in a hardwood. Generally this does not matter because a softwood is softer and the saw just tears the wood out of the bigger bite - but if your rakers are borderline too deep, and there are too many of them this could make a lot of difference.

Rakers should never be a fixed depth, they should be a certain proportion of the gullet width - this is called progressive raker setting. 

Measure your gullet width and then use a raker depth that is a fixed proportion of that. Most new chain is set for a gullet / raker ratio of 10/1, eg gullet is 0.25" so raker should be 1/10th of that or 0.025".

There is nothing magic about 10/1, some find that 7/1 works, others find 12/1 works. If you read that FOP sticky you will see I don't even bother about the ratio but work in degrees of cutting angle, 10:1 is about a 6º cutting angle. I use a 6 to 7º ratio as measured with a Digital Angle finder. 

You can achieve some of this using a progressive raker guide like a Carlton FileOplate (FOP). FOPs set a cutting angle of around 45º which is a touch too shallow for my liking.


----------



## betterbuilt (Jul 15, 2010)

BobL said:


> My first question still stands - how wide was the hardwood you tried to cut?
> 
> Unless you are talking osage orange or similar, in terms of hardness, few of your hardwoods are that different to softwoods and so log width (rather than wood hardness) will determine chip clearance and overall cutting speed.



I didn't actually measure it but I would say it was in the 40 inch range. I'm not sure of how white oak and Osage orange compare, but I don't think it really matters like you said it's the width that matters and they were close. I was was just trying to figure out why I couldn't cut pine without resorting to rocking the saw. 





BobL said:


> It could be you rakers are a touch too aggressive for softwoods, but OK in hardwoods. The depth the cutter penetrates is dependent on the raker depth and profile, and the hardness of the wood. In softwoods a pointy raker can push its way into the wood further than the hardwood and creates a higher cutting angle (not cutter angle - See FOP sticky in the CS forum for definition of "cutting angle") than in a hardwood. Generally this does not matter because a softwood is softer and the saw just tears the wood out of the bigger bite - but if your rakers are borderline too deep, and there are too many of them this could make a lot of difference.
> 
> Rakers should never be a fixed depth, they should be a certain proportion of the gullet width - this is called progressive raker setting.
> 
> ...



I'm gonna check the sticky out. I'm not sure I'm totally under standing what your saying. 

I checked the sticky out and I'm starting to realize I have a lot to learn about sharpening a chain. I'm gonna see if I can put all that info into action. Thanks BobL


----------



## BobL (Jul 15, 2010)

betterbuilt said:


> I didn't actually measure it but I would say it was in the 40 inch range. I'm not sure of how white oak and Osage orange compare, but I don't think it really matters like you said it's the width that matters and they were close. I was was just trying to figure out why I couldn't cut pine without resorting to rocking the saw.



OK, if the Oak was also the same width then it's most likely a raker depth issue. 




> I'm gonna check the sticky out. I'm not sure I'm totally under standing what your saying.
> 
> I checked the sticky out and I'm starting to realize I have a lot to learn about sharpening a chain. I'm gonna see if I can put all that info into action. Thanks BobL



No worries.

How are you measuring the raker depth? If you want a bit more of a diagnosis of your chain, post a flat side on closeup of a cutter or two.


----------



## betterbuilt (Jul 15, 2010)

BobL said:


> How are you measuring the raker depth? If you want a bit more of a diagnosis of your chain, post a flat side on closeup of a cutter or two.



I had been measuring my rakers with a feeler gauge and a straight edge sitting on the tip of the cutters. I see now I need digital angle finder. I'll take a picture later tonite. 

I tried a newer ripping chain on the spruce and it still wasn't feeding very well. I have a ripping chain I set the rakers to .035. I'm not sure of the angle of cut but I didn't want to go to far. I'll probably try it tomorrow.


----------



## BobL (Jul 15, 2010)

betterbuilt said:


> I had been measuring my rakers with a feeler gauge and a straight edge sitting on the tip of the cutters. I see now I need digital angle finder. I'll take a picture later tonite.
> 
> I tried a newer ripping chain on the spruce and it still wasn't feeding very well. I have a ripping chain I set the rakers to .035. I'm not sure of the angle of cut but I didn't want to go to far. I'll probably try it tomorrow.



You can still do it with feeler gauges, but then you need a set of vernier calipers to measure the gullet width. A DAF gets around both. I don't measure my cutting angles every time I file the rakers, especially in the field, I generally give teh rakers a swipe or two every 3-4 touch ups and then reset them with a DAF when I remove the chain to flip the bar.

If the chain is near new and you are using 0.040" rakers then that is equivalent to a cutting angle of 9º - in softwood on a 45" cut you would need an 090 to do that.

Remind me what cc saw you are running?


----------



## betterbuilt (Jul 15, 2010)

BobL said:


> You can still do it with feeler gauges, but then you need a set of vernier calipers to measure the gullet width. A DAF gets around both. I don't measure my cutting angles every time I file the rakers, especially in the field, I generally give teh rakers a swipe or two every 3-4 touch ups and then reset them with a DAF when I remove the chain to flip the bar.
> 
> If the chain is near new and you are using 0.040" rakers then that is equivalent to a cutting angle of 9º - in softwood on a 45" cut you would need an 090 to do that.
> 
> Remind me what cc saw you are running?




You need to make a glossary for all these anagrams and tech words. I just spent 10 mins trying to figure out what a DAF is. I know now. Digital Angle FInder (DAF) I'll have add that to my list of tools to buy. Do you have a picture of what a gullet is? 

Well just so you remember I was running .040 on a chain I modified to be like granbergs Chain. I'm running a 066. I rarely find it to be under powered. I was cutting a 36 inch Walnut today and It was throwing nice long chips. It actually looked like I was noodling.


----------



## betterbuilt (Jul 18, 2010)

BobL said:


> How are you measuring the raker depth? If you want a bit more of a diagnosis of your chain, post a flat side on closeup of a cutter or two.




I finally finished that log. It's kinda funny because I did three other logs in the same time it took me to slab that one. I messed around with about eight different chains and never got it to feed its self. So here's my pictures BobL. 

This isn't what I normally use its what I thought you guy were saying to do. The rakers look like they are at different heights in the one picture I assure you I've never spent so much time sharpening a chain as I have this week.
I normally use ripping chain with the rakers at .025
This one is a 3/8 .063 ripping chain at 10 degrees with the rakers at factory so less than .025 . 





This one is a 3/8 .063 ripping chain at 10 degrees with the rakers at about .034





They both cut when leaned into, but stopped cutting when I backed off. Any help would be great.

I'm sure I read about it once or twice but how did you say you cleaned your chain? I thought You said soapy water.


----------



## mtngun (Jul 18, 2010)

Judging by the scrapes and scratches on the bottom of your Alaskan, you could benefit from some UHMW on the Alaskan, to reduce friction. Without it, you'll have to push on the mill no matter how perfect the chain cuts.





Dunno what to tell you about the rakers. I'm still looking for the perfect raker setting method myself.

When you hear BobL talking about his mill self-feeding, and see that picture of him sitting in a chair while the mill operates itself, remember that his homemade CSM weighs about 70 pounds. Put that heavy sucker on a slope, with UHMW on the rails, and gravity will do a lot of the work. Not so much on a 30 pound Granberg CSM, especially with aluminum rails grinding on unistrut.


----------



## betterbuilt (Jul 18, 2010)

mtngun said:


> Judging by the scrapes and scratches on the bottom of your Alaskan, you could benefit from some UHMW on the Alaskan, to reduce friction. Without it, you'll have to push on the mill no matter how perfect the chain cuts.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The scratches are only since I started to Use those rails. I can't say I notice those scratches til you pointed them out. I'm gonna wax the the rails for now. I'll keep my eyes open for UHMW but I can't say I would know where to get it. Mine sure seems like it weights 50 lbs.

Sorry to hear about your saw problems.


----------



## mtngun (Jul 18, 2010)

betterbuilt said:


> I'll keep my eyes open for UHMW but I can't say I would know where to get it.
> 
> Sorry to hear about your saw problems.



I got mine at McMaster-Carr, item #7701T411. 

Looks like my saws will survive.


----------



## betterbuilt (Jul 18, 2010)

mtngun said:


> I got mine at McMaster-Carr, item #7701T411.
> 
> Looks like my saws will survive.



You made that almost to easy. Thanks


----------



## BobL (Jul 19, 2010)

Firstly your raker depths are creating a cutting angle of ~6 º which are fine for most wood except I would file the rakers a little more pointed with less flat top. Too much flat top will effectively reduce your cutting angle.

Your cutters seem to have at least two related problems. The first one is the file you are using is too small and not being filed at the correct height which results in the cutter top plate not being filed at all leaving a lot of cutting edge glint. If you push the saw hard enough these cutters will still cut in your soft type woods but you are overloading the saw unnecessarily.

In the picture it is clear the file is too small and set way to low in the cutters The rhs cutter top plate edge looks quite mangled.





In this one you can clearly see the glint and the file size again is too small.





Now look at a correctly filed cutter and note how the file protrudes above the cutter and the side of the file. Only when it protrudes slightly above the cutter will a file create a glint free cutting edge.





The amount of protrusion above the cutter can vary from 0 to 20% and determines the hook. 
If you need help holding a file at the correct height consider using an oregon file guide like in this video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWwLEuY5Iao

I hope this helps.
Cheers


----------



## betterbuilt (Jul 19, 2010)

To be quite honest those chains haven't been hand filed yet. I used the grinder to modify them and to try the way Will Malloff says he grinds them in his book. 

The hand filing thing aside I thought you would say I had too much under cut on the teeth. I'm still trying to figure out where the saw dust gets stuck. I guess that was my main reason for asking for help. I've seen the guys that run hot saws actually undermine the tooth to make more room for chips. I'm not gonna try that. 

I was running may saw in short bursts to see just where the dust was getting caught. It seemed to me That it just tucked into the tooth. I have regular access to pine cut offs from and it would be nice to fly through them. 

What do you use to clean your chains with?

Thanks for the help so far. and any help to follow.


----------



## BobL (Jul 19, 2010)

betterbuilt said:


> To be quite honest those chains haven't been hand filed yet. I used the grinder to modify them and to try the way Will Malloff says he grinds them in his book.
> 
> The hand filing thing aside I thought you would say I had too much under cut on the teeth. I'm still trying to figure out where the saw dust gets stuck. I guess that was my main reason for asking for help. I've seen the guys that run hot saws actually undermine the tooth to make more room for chips. I'm not gonna try that.



Yep you do have way too much undercut but more significantly you have no cutter edge. This means the cutter tears rather than cuts fibres, torn fibres are going get jammed more easily in the gullet. Stuff like pine will as you say jam more under the teeth and reduce the cutting
It doesn't matter whether you are hand filing or grinding the grinder or file must make a fresh surface on the cutter top plate edge and remove all glint. 

To self feed the chain does not need a lot of hook. Look at how little how hook I use on this cutter.





What do you use to clean your chains with?[/QUOTE]
I soak them in water with a dollop of Simple Green for about an hour. Then I use a scrubbing brush to scrub off any remaining resin. after rinsing off the detergent I squirt some CRC on the chain and hang it to dry.


----------



## betterbuilt (Jul 19, 2010)

I guess I'm reading into it too far. I had been hand filing and wasn't having any problems in hard wood. The spruce just made me think there must be a better way to file this chain to make it cut pine. It's kinda funny because since I started checking with a caliper and using the feeler gauge I've been cutting faster in hardwood but slower in that spruce. 

Anyhow thanks for the help. I'll definitely have to get a DAF ( Digital Angle Finder) and see how that works.


----------



## BobL (Jul 19, 2010)

betterbuilt said:


> I guess I'm reading into it too far. I had been hand filing and wasn't having any problems in hard wood. The spruce just made me think there must be a better way to file this chain to make it cut pine. It's kinda funny because since I started checking with a caliper and using the feeler gauge I've been cutting faster in hardwood but slower in that spruce.
> 
> Anyhow thanks for the help. I'll definitely have to get a DAF ( Digital Angle Finder) and see how that works.



You can always start with a File-o-plate, it's a lot cheaper and will get the cutters back to reasonable shape.


----------



## betterbuilt (Jul 19, 2010)

BobL said:


> You can always start with a File-o-plate, it's a lot cheaper and will get the cutters back to reasonable shape.



I'll keep my eyes open for one. I always try to get thing from the local guys first before I go to the computer. I have a husqvarna one but I'm not sure its the same.


----------



## BobL (Jul 19, 2010)

betterbuilt said:


> I'll keep my eyes open for one. I always try to get thing from the local guys first before I go to the computer. I have a husqvarna one but I'm not sure its the same.



The Husky one will do the same thing.


----------



## betterbuilt (Jul 19, 2010)

BobL said:


> The Husky one will do the same thing.



I'll add it to my kit. Thanks bobL


----------



## BobL (Dec 7, 2010)

betterbuilt said:


> The object you marked X is actually a short piece of unistrut. used a piece of steel to make a washer so I could slide the strut in and out. The angle sounds better, I'll have work on that. How did you cut the slot in the in your angle?



I just reread this and realised I never answered your question.

The sides of the 3/8" wide slot (L) were ripped using a thin kerf cutting wheel in a small wood working table saw and the I drilled a 3/8" hole at the end of the slot. Then I welded a short steel strap (S) across the open end of the slot.


----------



## betterbuilt (Dec 7, 2010)

I started to make those pieces of Angle and I never finished them. I tried to cut the kerf with a thin angle grinder blade, but it caught and ripped the wheel right off the grinder. I figured I'd come back to it when I could do it a little safer.


----------



## betterbuilt (Dec 7, 2010)

What kind of blade would you use in a table saw?


----------



## BobL (Dec 7, 2010)

betterbuilt said:


> What kind of blade would you use in a table saw?



The thin kerf ones (1mm thick). The table saw arbor needs to come pretty close to the bottom of the table otherwise not enough cutting wheel comes through.


----------

