# Dent on Hinging



## TheTreeSpyder (Jul 14, 2002)

This is the type of model you might see in D. Douglas Dent's "Proffessional Timber Falling-a Procedural Approach".

Such mechanical, straight forward diagrams to repeatedly poor over, have helped me get a real feel for all this.

If it takes removing so much fiber across face to fold, it doesn't have to be even, it can be eliminated in such a fashion, as to leave diffrent combinations of fibre for diffrent applications.

The outside corners of the hinge, give the most leveraged pull to the opposite face, eliminating some of the fibres, under the side of off balance pull , or head lean to one side of hinge, leaving more fiber pulling with greater leverage from the opposite side . You would always fold into the face of the hinge, this manipulation of the positioning of the final fibre on folding is to even off balance of pull across the axis of the length of the hinge.

It is kinda like, if u cut the guy wire on a tent, it falls the opposite direction, it releases it to go that way, so as it is here too. So if head weight pulls to left, it isn't going to fall to the right against that weight of pull. So eliminating the fibre that keeps it from going right is ok, cuz it can't, seeing as the fibre that controls right hand drift is on the left (under the off balance head weight), it is okay to eliminate this fibre. Then that amount of fibre isn't lost, the log will folde at same amount of fibers holding, those fibres are now scheduled to be on the opposite side of hinge, the cross axis to head weight.

Exactly at the highest leveraged position to fight the off balance head lean on the opposite side or cross axis.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jul 14, 2002)

So then applied like this. So that, the greater fiber pulling right, balances out the headweight pulling left; therby delivering in balance point of forward vortex (gunning angles) fo hinge face evenly.

That hinge can Fall, Holde or inbetwixt those Fholde.

So you always eliminate fiber to fold to that gunned point, and use leveraged positioning of remaining holding wood at tear off to balance out any side to side pull by gravity on that angle.


The openness of the faces determines the amount of fholding sweep that is maximum, for when the 2 faces meet, the hinge machine must sieze or tearoff. So even this is a mechanical instruction.

So not crossing the face cuts is very important, for the inner most hinge will be the lead mechanical instruction and will close very early, because it is a narrow facecut.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jul 14, 2002)

In bucking the forces to be released are similar. Even practicing it you are releasing forces in wood fibre to your specification, you can learn alot about all other cuts, even here as you observe what you are doing and its effects with these guides.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jul 14, 2002)

So then i brought Dent's models into the tree, turned it sideways, like this.

Now, you still gun focal of hinge to best place, run a wide face for wide sweep, and schedule final holding fibre at tear off of the hinge, directly levearged against the offside pull of the hinge's axis (here it will always be pulling down, not to side, less confusing while learning!). It is all exactly the same but difrfent, the same principles in diffent clothes and arraingement. As i practice any one of felling, limbing or hinged rigs i learn about all as a category, not seperate events.

So, if you are trying to throw a horizontal limb sideways, the holding fibre will be at top of hinge, directly confronting gravity from pulling directly down as hinge ushers sideways. Sending it to 9:00 will probably make the hinge shear, as the machine fails to meet the request as it is asked for too much. But, sometimes sweeping to 7:00-8:30 is sufficient, an open path. Maybe to just hand it off to rig, or pivot on its own. That weight at the end and the length of branch become a useful mass and leverage for closing the hinge, thereby moving the head around.

In a torqued, 'flipping' rig, i've mentioned before, -i don't- eliminate the bottom of the hinge. For in that case, the limb wants to flip, the fiber at the bottom of the hinge is in most leveraged postion to keep it from flipping, so it is this lock betwixt the 2 forces that lock and cause it to torque around. Of course sometimes that flip will get it off the roof (that slopes and becomes more forgiving anyway), especially if the top is clear (it will face the roof on flipping) and the bottom is the problem (that in flipping will rotate up out of the way), then i will walk the fholding hinge cut down to a small bundle of fibre at top of hinge on a tight line; allowing (by taking bottom hinge fibre out, that has most leverage against flip)and commanding (by line placemeant), as the machine commands if that is good.

Sometimes,starting with a tight line and make it self tighten more as it sinks, so that it acts as a tight steel arm, that will not let the limb down any more, but commands that it arc around and not sink. If this is compatible to arcs of force desired by gravity and hinge, you can usher many things by compounding there values.


i think this stuff isn't understood enuff to be used and observed powerfully, it fascinates me, sometimes heard it laugh as it eluded me. i've tried to expalin it b4, hope thes pix help, and i think Dent's book should be required reading, i keep going back to mine! Dent in "Professional Timber Falling" opened my eyes to what was going on around me all the time, and empowered me by naming the basest components of their structure for me to recognize in various forms, determine what stood against me and how to minimize it, and what stood on my side, and how to maximize it to apply overwhelming force to positively control a motion. 




"Fascinating Captain!"



P.S.- i guess i will load that pic when circimstances allow, Hope this evolution of thought makes some of this clearer, and whets your appetite to witness these things.

JP's off on another secret govt. mission, ooooooooops


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jul 14, 2002)

Let's try again..........


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jul 16, 2002)

Here is one of a more actual model for field, taking all this 1 step further.

Same deal, 2 dimensions of space to consider, 1st the dimension that folds on the hinge and it's axis (axis would be N to S on a E to W long rib of hinging wood fibre across the face). So it folds directly on the flap of wood, that is it's axis. So you don't run in front or back of a hinge, though the back has some safety, with the kerf cut closing and siezing (hopefully) if tree goes backwards. So of the 2 directions on the axis, that makes the face the path of lest resistance. But directly back is in the kill too zone because it is on the axis that the hinge (the machine here) will deliver the load to(N to S).

Then the 2nd dimension is the cross axis or 90 deg. to the hinge's axis. (cross axis is E & W on E to W 2" row of hinge fibre. Weight pulling across the axis of the hinge (on the hinge's cross axis, E and W pulls in headweight) are thereby supported on the cross axis by the hinge material in the opposing corner of the pull.

So a W off balance headweight is pulled E by rope to balance pull to fold forward to N in balanced fashion. The line pull hopefully balances the head pull, by contacting at the appropriate leverage point per pull applied, to balance the offside lean of weight/leverage. Or you can have excessive fiber in hinge on E side too or in tandem with line pull. It's the same thing, pulling across the axis to balance the other side by the fibre of rope, or the fibre of wood.

Now, if it might brush something on the E on the way down, but you want the fall to stay a steady course, you would put holding fibre in E corner of hinge, to keep tree from being pushed W (fighting same effect as it being pulled W, with same strategy of fibre in E side of hinge, in most leveraged position on face to fight such a force to the opposite direction). In this way, the increased fibre would hold the tree to the E, as it brushed by the tree on E, laying it where you want it, instead of allowing the path to be pushed W.

Notice how the green in "Pre-final Cutting" extends outside of neat pie slice, how fibre to werking corner is maximized at fholde, while still maintaining a stable 'base'.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Jul 16, 2002)

Just for the record, I disagree with almost every concept discribed here.


----------



## DDM (Jul 16, 2002)




----------



## rbtree (Jul 17, 2002)

great work, ken..

I think it is time for you and me to find some woods and play with some swing and step dutchmans!!!

At the Clearwater Revival, I showed up one day late, but still came second in the felling contest. Missed the target by 11 inches. The tree (a 40 foot stick stuck in the ground), had a bend at the top that was a good 7 inches, and i didnt compensate for that enuf-or move the beer can closer in, dang!! Plus I held a bit too much wood on that side. 

Then, I got to run Dennis's racing chain on my Greffardized 3120, which is modified for work. i ran against the Rupley brothers with their full race saws in the "stock" appearing class. I was ony 15% slower, not bad for a first timer..It also was the first 3120 Dennis had built. Later, they let me run their piped 090, wow what a saw. Maybe 1.5 seconds in a 17 inch log, oh yeah..And watched the Predator pull a 1.2 second cut in a 30 inch log...!! 440 lb, over 300 hp, kind of heavy for trim jobs huh?!

Do a search for "Dennis". He builds "Greffardized" saws, top class work, for ~$200. I now have three. My 346XP-G is flat out unreal, it makes that 026 seem like a dog...which it is, actually....


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jul 17, 2002)

Thanx RB,

Mr. Mike- i've come up with some assembled observations before that we seemed always to play point-counterpoint on, in an open field. Things of reflections on understanding forces or whatever that in my experience seemed to hold true as i named them, but seemed to make no sense to others. But, these things are written down by a 'master' previously to me, and it has taken me years to absorb their simpicity. So, i must even more so stand my ground here, perhaps you should find the book, might be the best <$20 ya spend this year! And i beleive that goes for anyone that is serious about cutting! 

i've tried to refer to these princi-pals in diffrent weighs across 3 boards for a few now, kinda felt good to assemble and organize them all at once in my head. Especially carrying it all into the tree. Also perhaps to give a common base for understanding, and now have it printed teaching someone else from it, as i bounced it of y'all. Actually there questions propelled me on through some of it. i beleive these principals are true, mechanically correct defining models. Breaking down a series of commanding properties, into their smallest 'prime'(numberic refrence) and modular pieces to assemble. To make a machine that gives mechanical instructions to a tree falling, and not haphazardly. To know when a cut is a lil sloppy by these standards, and will make it anyway and -Why; and when it won't and Why.

Kinda steered from the dutchmans here, a lil more dangerous to reccomend (to say the least). By "mechanical analysis" (a super 'Dent' term that changed my whole outlook on cutting) i think basically the dutchmans work by the slamming forces in faces meeting an obstruction on 1 side of the hinge at close. So to me that calls for/assumes fast slamming action, without widemouth faces. i have been working these princi-pals to the other side of that. Besides, wouldn't be fair to give a way the whole book; its quite a work!


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Jul 17, 2002)

Ken, RB(I ask you because you agree with ken), and others,
look at my drawing and answer which you think is stronger in each of the six examples:


----------



## rbtree (Jul 17, 2002)

And your point is....?

Advanced felling techniques are performed for reasons, to overcome problems. Of course, a normal shaped hinge will be stronger in all of those scenarios, and can work if other procedures are performed, such as wedging and side pulling.

The use of hinge wood in triangle shape works well with head leaners, as option to plunge cutting. I like it because the tree doesn't fall all at once. Plunging is probably safer. I do both. 

And the use of holding wood works well in most situations, if you understand the tree's fiber characteristics, degree of lean, etc. 

I use both of the above quite often, moreso when working aloft and with branch wood.


----------



## rbtree (Jul 17, 2002)

Ken, 

I agree re Dutchman's. I've never tried them. I believe their use is considered "illegal" in forestry applications. But I'll sure try sometime if I have the appropriate tree(s).

Mike,

You also should read Beranek's book. I guarantee you will learn a few things, as you will from Dent. 

These two learned fellows dont talk much about the open face, or using plunge cuts to set up the hinge. I think both are good to know and apply, but not all the time as some are teaching, including Ard and Arbormaster. Especially with tall straight conifers or straight limbed sticks with nice clear grain. For instance, my tech. of using a deep, very closed face to control spin rate on long logs dropped from a height. Ken Palmer, who has never had the reason to do this, thinks I'll get bit someday using this method. not me. You have to be flexible, and I found Arbormaster training to be somewhat lacking in that area.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jul 17, 2002)

Mike, your pics are usually so good, but that one didn't download for me quite to a viewable point......

The more you depend on holding wood, the stronger, more flexible it must be, this wiil be species, lively, temp dependant as the machine of the hinge becomes more dependant on this item. Conversely, it also shows if you have a natural defect (deadwood spot etc.) how its effect can be evaluated in your hinge as you inspect the facecut previous to the finishing backcut.

i think in RB's example of reducing spin, that his coming back further undermines the vertical center of balance more than a shal-low cut, preloading it more for ejection. Then, the nar-row knotch gives the instruction to shear early, i imagine ya kinda race that closed like i was talking about b4, maybe coming off in time for the 1:30 train.

i know we aren't always going to agree, we all have proven that! i just kinda feel less room for argument here, sometimes i state my case, and back off beleiving the same thing still. i could be as wrong as Mike !!!!!! Know, really; um, this time i must say, i have more backing and experience than that of some of the other topics i might have backed of on; and raise my hand and step to the front and say so! 

My elm example was on the extreme, but addressed a topic i have been hitting on using that example, showing the possibil-i-tease that i might be the first to see. In actual practice, i may have peeled over some limbs with a sidewards/down cut, but leaving them hanging towards the house. Thereby reducing the leveraged pull on its connection, reducing its length and bringing it closer to the ground. If i got the 2 legs towards the house to hang and it was open away from the house (no hanging legs) i would nickel and dimme unnecessary weight out. Then i might have tried to ease that branch over and down, allowing the 2 legs to hit the ground first (on house side) , letting that push the rest of the limb away from the house then cut it free. then i would have a nice matt for dropping stuff. Now without standing there, can't tell, but not all my stuff goes to super rigging, but; i never try to escape from awareness to the whys by not thinking about gravity, leverage, flow, elasticity etc. It has taken a while to break things down into modular, logical, smallest pieces with specific properties to be assembled or reckoned with, even longer to be orderly enough to present it!

i really beleive these are mechanically clean models, invite any open conversation on this topic, that is why i posted,as well as collecting and sharing my thoughts, here and at home. i also beleive safety topics aside, this is about the most pervasive, important and least faced of non-biological topics of tree work. The hinge is a basic component of all these things, that should be understood specifically to really understand the whole picture. 

i agree with RB, i use most of this in the tree, i do more climbing then felling anyway. But, the book is about felling, it is safer and more prevalent to learn these princi-pals that way. But they are principals to be faced in all phases, not a seperate topic that can't be carried into the tree.


----------



## rbtree (Jul 17, 2002)

Ken,

roll your mouse around on the lower right quadrant of the pic, you will bring up an icon, clicking on it will enlarge the pic to a very readable state.....

goota go remove a fallen cherry from two yards, by myself as the crew is hurt, then do a mess of bids..

..the saw junkie


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jul 17, 2002)

okay Thanx RB....... Nice job MM....


A-2?

Any would fail/fold easier with a hinge/kerf cut to the face of the pull. If A-2 was pulled north, and only cut on west side, it would fail at the east/strongest corner last, unless there was another pull pulling NW that balanced the stronger fibre pull to E. Same specifically imagine-able in B2, D2

To me this all is a gravity powered machine, the head is the power input, the facecut a chock allowing 'roll forward' if removed, the backcut allows gravity to power the machine, the power of gravity pulling on the head goes through the length of the log to leverage that head's Maas on the hinge IMHO. 

Soooooooo, if there is 1 ton of headweight, 40' up from the backcut, that is 40Tons of pressure pulling on the backcut/hinge + momentum+leveraged weight of 40' spar. So, if that comes out to a measley 50 Tons in this med./small tree, and 20% of the head weight is off to the left, that is 10tons of force off balance that is real force, that must be reckoned with for a high rate of success, i think.

Any weigh, finding the secrets and basic principles here and being so fluent as to site them out and command them in all examples can truly benefirt all here i think.


----------



## murphy4trees (Jul 17, 2002)

It seems logical that a spar's spring is caused by force on the hinge, which is the only thing holding the foward momentum of the top to the spar. Accepting that, less force on the hinge would load the spring less. An extreme example would be after the face closes, all the force required to break the hinge loads the spring. 
So it makes sense that an the size of the notch, open faced vs narrow would only matter if the notch closed before all the fiber in the hinge was broken, although maybe there is somrthing in the model I have yet to see. 
So wouldn't it be better to use an open face notch? Maybe it's not neccessary if indeed you can cut all the fibre around 1 o'clock, but what is the advantage of a tight notch here?
As far as using a standard vs. humboldt, I prefer the humboldt if there is any chance of the top hanging up. Otherwise there may be a slight "slide off and down" advantage to the humbold, yet again the size and configuration of the notch seems to me to have less to do with the spring effect than the force needed to break the holding wood.
And again THANK YOU SPIDY


----------



## rbtree (Jul 17, 2002)

Hi Rob

The only reason for a closed face is to allow the log to pop out, thus slowing the spin rate. I usually use this for dropping 26-36 foot logs from 30-45 feet up. I want them to land nosed in at 10-30 degrees off flat. More is not good, as the log could flip over. Less is better, as it digs in less, doing less damage. Flat is not possible with most of the above combinations of length and height.

By the way, landing flat can break a log, especially if it is falling from way up there or is rather spindly.

Since your ZingIt was not put on a tramp steamer, it should be gettin there purty soon!!! Unless it was on a DC-3 with a feathered engine.....


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Jul 17, 2002)

This topic is too much to handle all at once.
I suggest we look at making felling cuts, a piece at a time. 
We all know notches have different angles of openness, from a kerf cut to an open face. The back cut can be straight in or all goofy, as spider showed. Some think the backcut should be plunge cut and made with a little holding wood at the back side, only to be released when one is ready to fell the tree. What drives the felling cuts though, is the hinge.
I am suggesting we talk about the hinge first. I'm suggesting we talk about the hinge, and only the hinge.

I say the best and strongest shape for a hinge is a rectangle, a wide thin rectangle. I am here to defend the position that a rectangular hinge is the strongest, and therefore the best hinge you can make. How about a round hinge? No, a rectangle is stronger, in every instance. A triangle? No. A Mickey Mouse with ears shaped hinge? No, a rectangle is stronger.

Let's not muddy the waters with talk about wind, dull saws, how much Forrest should charge to prune a tree, just talk about the best shape of a hinge.


----------



## Kevin (Jul 17, 2002)

Too many variables Mike, it`s like asking what`s the best way to drive a car?
What you describe is a basic hinge under perfect conditions.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jul 17, 2002)

i would kinda say that is how you measure strength, what portent of it you needed.

That funny made hinge provides more strength of pull to the off balance load in the opposing corner, more than that of a normal 'strip' that i imagine you mean when you say rectangle. So in fighting that load, it is strongest, for the fibre at tear off is scheduled at the most leveraged position to fight that sideways pull on the hinge.

But in there, there would be less fibres slightly, because the ones all piled in one corner, mean fibres more in back bending and flexing over other ones in front, so more resistant to flexing, so equivalent force pulling on them would leave less fibre in that hinge than a strip slightly. So in that sense, that application you would be right, so you can choose wichever hinge's proerties to suit your task.

i think that like 'forcing' a plant to have more shoots by challenging it, the way to get the strongest hinge is to force it to flex early, so tree comes forward with more fibre holding it. This can be from a rope, wedge etc. That will leave the most amount of controlling fibre, all with the same strength per.

One reason to use and be aware of all this in the tree, is to make things pull away from ya slightly, or go right between some branches, or lay into/pre-stretch a rig. Just realizing you can dial that hinge in for diffrent applications is a serious empowermeant.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Jul 17, 2002)

Kevin, support your statement, with a specific example, of how a different shaped hinge would be stronger and therefore better than a rectangle.

I hope you defend the Mickey Mouse hinge...


----------



## DDM (Jul 17, 2002)

Spyder? Are you putting these principles into application? I dont mean in an open field I'm speaking of on a customers property with a limit for error?


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Jul 17, 2002)

> That funny made hinge provides more strength of pull to the off balance load in the opposing corner, more than that of a normal 'strip'




No it does not. A rectangle is stronger. 
I think I can prove it too.


----------



## Kevin (Jul 17, 2002)

Swinging a tree, bore cutting the hinge to prevent splitting, those are just two very basic examples.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Jul 17, 2002)

What is swinging a tree?

I was afraid bore cutting a hinge, to preserve the ends of the log for the best lumber would come up( to muddy the waters), but that has nothing to do with the strongest hinge.


----------



## Kevin (Jul 17, 2002)

> I am suggesting we talk about the hinge first. I'm suggesting we talk about the



I was making reference to one portion of your question.

The strongest hinge would be no hinge at all.
The larger the hinge the stronger the hinge but why would you want to waste my time discussing that?

This is swinging a tree,  ...


----------



## DDM (Jul 17, 2002)

looks like a short speed line


----------



## Kevin (Jul 17, 2002)

I never thought I would have the opportunity to use that picture again!


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jul 17, 2002)

For years i have used these principles in every rigging, felling and limbing cut. Dent used them, only he was more logging valuable wood, so he did all this on the immense logging scale, and put it to that test. Every examination seems to flow with this line of logic he presents, so i rest easy with it.

Another hinge strength note would be, to place facecut right before center of tree some, where you would have the most length of strip across the face with least amount of rear fibres flexing over forward ones (making there flexing more reisistant) at tear off there by, taking fewer of them to finally fail/fold than if they didn't flex over each other as much in a longer strip.

There are also things about softer landings to be considered here. But i guess later! Each fibre has so much strength, and jsut like a specific hitchpoint in rigging, diffrent points of pull will yield diffrent properties.

Refrences to holding wood on one side of the hinge is spoken and warned of in ACRT, "Fund. of General Tree Work" (Beranek- from 7' diameter @150' up poster), and in Dent's book, that i think really discusses hinges mostly and more than any other.

This stuff really, really works, it is mechanically sound. Fibers of equal strength aligned to one side will pull more to that side, if they have to flex over their brothers in the front rows, they are even more torquing to their side.

My MM hinge (why would anyone with those initials refer to anything as Mickey Mouse in front of a sarc-ass-tick lil'MF'er like me i'll never no!!! ), is actually simple compared to some of the models in Dent's book! i really respect Mr. Mike for getting a handsaw he didn't beleive in to test, above and beyond the call, and very open minded. i use a handsaw for final release in air, really get some slow tips to the rig then, i try to capture in those few slower moments, what is going on, it all backs this stuff up. These things can be practiced/observed on 1-2" limbs on up with a hand saw for face and back cut, i think you'll find that triangle will pull to the side, sometimes balancing the pull of off balance end.


----------



## murphy4trees (Jul 17, 2002)

MM,
I appreciate the info on a triangular hinge being strong. Geometrically the triangle is probably the "strongest" form. And for the hinge to direct the fall well, is it necessary to cut the rear corner making the actual holding wood more "tetrahedronical"? 

Is the strongest hinge always the best? Answer "it all depends".
On what? On what you design the hinge to do. Which is...
Too much to mention here. 
I believe loggers now are taught to plunge cause it adds seconds to their escape, and prevents barber chairing. 
What if the tree is twice as wide as the bar?
What if there is no room for error in the lay?

RB,

We don't get paid much for wood out here. So not cracking the chunks is rarely an issue. Though getting them to land in the box often is and controlling tumble can help with that. I wonder if it would be possible to create a chart or formula with length of chunk, width of notch, and hieght of fall variables yielding amount of rotation?

Spidy,
Is wood preservation why you use a narrow notch when topping? I wouldn't expect you to be getting paid much for wood down in Fla.
And thanks again for the thought provoking info. I pulled out Dent's book and reread quite a bit with more blood flowing to my brain than usual. I Am going to think some more and do some experimentation in the field. Your passion to understang the workings of the machine we call a hinge is inspiring. Thanks

I really get turned on by using creativity and knowledge to get the tree on the ground faster, safer and eaqsier than the next guy. Notches and felling technique can play a big part in that. It takes confidence that can be aquired from that passion to understand and observation.

God Bless All,
Daniel


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jul 17, 2002)

Not sure strength of geometric arraingement is write on hear....... 

ummmm more to simple fiber count to one side pulling more where there is more of exact alike fibres, as sumnation of total pulls to any point.

and fibres placement (front to back) as a measure of its individual resistance (pull) in that position, all fibres being alike; rear ones flexing over the front ones stretch more. Or reaching across the axis! Hmmm like the front of the hinge is the pivot, anything out back from there moves across a greater diameter of sweep. So anyway, with same force against hinge's holding wood, there would be less fibre, pulling more for it has the same load pulling when it gives! When we make triangle hinge, there are more fibres to the rear. So more fibres are stronger, so strip is right, but, then; we have fewer fibres strategically placed that are working harder on a same task (in off balance head), so that could be greater per circumstance!

So MM would be right about it being stronger, we are just working them harder, by their place-meant. So if you have an off balance situation, do you always get the strongest guys, or the hardest working?:Monkey:


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Jul 17, 2002)

I said I was here to defend a position so...

Daniel wrote:
"Geometrically the triangle is probably the "strongest" form. "

Not for a hinge. A rectangle is strongest. If you want to steer the wood a different direction, change the angle the rectangle faces.

"Is the strongest hinge always the best? Answer "it all depends".
On what? On what you design the hinge to do. Which is..."

Steer the tree to the lay. So yes, strong is good. An exception may be saving the lumber from harm.

"I believe loggers now are taught to plunge cause it adds seconds to their escape, and prevents barber chairing. "

And several other things, but we are discussing hinge shapes, not backcuts.

"What if the tree is twice as wide as the bar?"

That does not change the physics of the hinge.

"What if there is no room for error in the lay?"

That's what we are discussing. What are you a logger?  

Spyder, I have to digest your post for a while.


----------



## murphy4trees (Jul 17, 2002)

Spidy,
You said " simple fiber count to one side pulling more ".
I always thought it was more than simple fiber count on one side changing the direction of fall. I thought it is the angle of the backcut, such that the direction of fall will tend to move towards a direction perpendicular to the line of holding wood along the rear of the hinge, thus perpendicular to the bar during a backcut. When line of front of holding wood and line of back of holding wood are not parrallel, there are opposing forces, each trying to make the hinge fold in a direction perpendicular to itself. It also makes sense that the holding wood on the back has a greater effect as it has to move more, yet that has not been my experince in the field.
So back to the question. Is it simply fiber count or does angle of backcut create the effect?
And what about my other question???
God Bless,
Daniel


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jul 18, 2002)

i think it is the arraingement of fibre while hinge is moving until the faces meet or something else gives that steers. That, is witnessable forensically as torn fibre arraingement on stump/ spar base mostly. When you look hard and have worked these principles hard, you can see the more stretched fibres in these positions when tested so when you check the stump after felling, while all is still fresh in your mind. You get a nice one, with that triangle of torn fibre ushering an off balance load, and you can see the fibres more stretched from the rear, and witness what they have done (workwise). i think the perpendicular image worx, because the most torqued fibre on the R hinge, resists being pulled straight out of the tree, and settles for forward or back, as rest of hinge is folding there. Whereby, the front hinge fibre is the pivot, as fibre moves back from that pivot, it gains more leverage, like anything else. The cross axis is the most 'obtuse' pull, tensing the opposite fibres more than any of the others. Just as in ropes, the tighter fibres are carrying the load, doing the work. We are forcing this in these placements; and giving them large enough numbers for the work. they must do.

The bar can be at almost any point at release, in hinge, just severing that last fibre to fail/fholde........ Now if ya hang around, you could probably use the moving force, adjust the hinge fibre even more, through the sweep, but that would be staying near the stump during all that, so , um ruled out, of course in the tree it has to fall away from ya if you are over it, so it is safer to do that!

i have oversteered a tree with the triangle on one side pulling the tree past the vortex, gunned point of the hinge/facecut. Dent in "Pro Timber Falling" said it was mechanically correct to lay the tree in the gunned sight, to cut your facecut to do that, then use the holding fibre to adjust for the head weight. So i have taken his word on laying it straight off the hinge, kinda makes more sense to set it square as i think about it. 

i think the fibres will want to be lazy and lay the tree where it requires the least flexing of the hinge fibres. If the tree pulls Left, the right hinge fibres are the most confronted, piling them up, give 'em the strength and torque for the load by their numbers and position being altered. There are more of them by count, flexing more by position. These are the only 2 ways to effect that steering (side strength), and this employs them. To multiply that effect, we pull the tree into the face earlier than it would naturally. So it starts to fold with more fibre in the hinge, accentuating those characteristics we speak of putting into the hinge. This also gives more control over speed, wider face uses all this through a wider sweep, wider part of the stump for the hinge gives a wider strip of hinge to play with and more higher leveraged positioning (farther from center) available for fighting the cross axis (which is name i think i put on it, as i tried to understand it).

Murph i think this answers your question: from skinny pines post- 

"Looking to minimze 'air ride' in the convertible by letting top fly away before 1:30 on the clock, sending the resultant kick back down the spar through strongest axis(every action will have an opposite and equal re-action), rather than letting it go further (2:00-3:00)and it pushing or pulling on spar horizontally, at its weakest axis. Looking to get a clean immediate tearoff/fly a-weigh on topping, a bending over and serving to line with least shock in rigging generally."

Rog, do you let the faces close in that topping cut? i visualized not, thereby assumed it was pairallel to this, being narrow->not closing->early release.

i think the strongest hinge has the widest strip, and is forced to work with more fibre (earlier). The one that works the hardest, is the one that is torquing the fibres most under load. The wider strip gives the most leveraged positioning for this, and undermines the tree's center of balance more too.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Jul 18, 2002)

I don't think anyone wants to argue that a rectangle is the strongest hinge shape. To steer a log, aim the face cut the direction you want to lay the log, compensate for lean.

Murphy wrote:
"When line of front of holding wood and line of back of holding wood are not parrallel, there are opposing forces, each trying to make the hinge fold in a direction perpendicular to itself. "

That's why a triangular hinge is weak. These two lines Murphy speaks of, being paralell, create a rectangle.

Why talk about triangle hinges?
The oh chit factor. Once a tree starts to fall, and you see it's not on target, you can release some holding wood on one side(create a triangle shaped hinge) as it's falling and get it to change direction. I can't imagine setting up a tree with a triangle hinge though.


----------



## rbtree (Jul 18, 2002)

Mike,

there are two different "triangle cuts" in your example.

B is used as an alternative to plunge cutting for head leaners, to eliminate barber chair. I use it a lot, especially in the tree when there is not room to properly set up a plunge cut.

C "triangle" shaped hinge can be used to turn the falling log, and the decision to use it can be made at the last minute to bring the fall into the desired lay. Say, for instance, with any tree, regardless of lean, if any, but to fine tune the fall. None of us is perfect every time, as well, the tree doesnt always go exactly where it is gunned.

I do agree with you, that a rectangular hinge can be used with pull and wedges to bring a tree into the desired lay, and is plenty strong. 

However, here is a real life example of working against lean.

At Arbormaster in Seattle 16 months ago, Rip Tompkins demonstated falling a severe side leaner with quite a bit of back lean. His plan was to do it with wedges only. He allowed us to set a pull line as a safety backup. He estimated the segments in the tree, which told him he would need to stack wedges, maybe three high, I dont remember for sure.

He gunned the tree to a spot about 2-4 feet right of where he expected it to fall, and opposite the lean. In other words, he did not expect the holding wood to hold on totally. I guessed that the tree would fall even further away from the gunned spot. It did. But he got it, with wedge use only. I was very impressed. I really don't remember whether he used more holding wood on one side or not. But he did use the plunge cut to set up a strap. Personally, I can not see using that technique for other than head leaners. I agree that it is is safer, as you can cut the strap and run. But, in presetting the hinge size, too small will result in the hinge wood not holding, too large means you have to finish it off after cutting the strap. The latter is what happened if I recall.

The tree had some decay, so the wood's holding power was diminished, as well, big leaf maple is not the strongest. In our area, the appx. order would be, weak to strong: cottonwood, alder, maple, hemlock, fir.

spyderman,

The hinge definitely closes early when I'm trying to control the spin rate of a log or a top with brush on. Quite effective at helping a (brush on) top land flat. Less and less effective as log size increases. Best used with straight grain, vertical wood, as I've said, and requires severing most of the hinge as the log is falling, so control is diminished. There will be more stem movement caused by the early closure, and the remote possibility of the piece coming back off the hinge. So, a humboldt and stepped up backcut is useful.

With wood under about 10 inches, the easiest method of controlling spin rate is to grab the butt and hold it back or push it down as it is breaking off the stump. Naturally, one must watch where his hands are placed, not in the closing face as I once did with a smaller log. i just caught a bit of flesh, but it didnt feel all that good.....!


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jul 18, 2002)

Along the way, i have made notches in 2" diameter vertical stuff etc. with chain or hand saw, sometimes with a 'triangle' hinge, then finished with a backcut with handsaw eliminating a lil fibre at a time, walking it to the point of failure/fold gently.

All this as i am pulling or pushing branch myself. This slow motion examination of these principles, as i form folding and pulling/pushing, has done nothing but bare these things out. Sometimes i pull from a sling thrown higher than i can reach, for better leverage. i have learned alot doing that. Perhaps i can offer that easy to obseve field test.........

Another assumption i have made Rog, is that 'spin' is meant as flipping end over end?

Mike, a rectangular hinge means a strip from side to side across the face? Not just any rectangle or square fibre in any posistion?


----------



## Kevin (Jul 18, 2002)

Mike, when a tree starts to fall *get the hell away from it*.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jul 18, 2002)

This shows the delivery of a tree to the balance of pulls.


----------



## murphy4trees (Jul 18, 2002)

Spidy,
Oh yeah.. skinny pines.. I got the threads all mixed up... exposure to pesticides in the early 80's and Lyme disease since has effected my nervous system. 
& Thanks for the good diagram.

'spin' is meant as flipping end over end?
I think tumble or tumble rotation is a more accurate term. Spin is what you do with wood on a lathe. These B boards are good for getting us to focus on the words we use in describing concepts and physics that happen in tree work. We've done this work and thought about this stuff for so long we have an almost innate sense of what is happening out there, but never had to put it into writing before. We are actually developing language. I Am working to get words as accurate, concise, and precise as possible, leaving no room for ambiguity or misunderstanding.. a real challenge.

Kev,
You must be a logger.
When you have to drop a tree between the fence and that nice azalea, you stay right behind it with saw in the back cut and steer it to the ground. It's a different game.

So the question here is when dealing with side lean do you use a rectangular hinge faced off center of the desired direction of fall to compensate for side lean or use the non-parallel ( what do the mathematicians call that?) hinge as per Spidy's diagram?
Which is stronger?
Which gives more accuracy?
Perhaps it depends on the type of wood fiber.
I've always used the former, which MM promotes, and I would like to field test the latter. Dent seems to promote the latter.
God Bless All,
Daniel


----------



## Kevin (Jul 18, 2002)

I have to rule on the side of safety when it comes to dropping trees.
You can turn a straight tree to some degree but trying to drop a leaner in a different direction other than the way it`s leaning is a bit of a dream without some other means tied into the equation.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jul 18, 2002)

This is one of my visualizations of this as i have been able to digest it over time. i have held it back, for safety considerations.

This system could build up severe forces as the tree falls, please take the "Do Not Do" warning seriously. 

Once again, the experimenting with placing face and back cut into small limbs and pulling them or pushing them over to fold, with no saw at that point gives me a very closeup, slowmotion view of all this, on a small safe scale.


----------



## rbtree (Jul 18, 2002)

spidey,

Do you have a slow or fast net connection? Anyhow, i'm getting video editing software isnstalled soon, and should be able to resize some clips to a sendable size. Got some of dropping 34-36 foot lengths

I dont want the log to flip end for end, that means a lot of travel. You'd need a big lz for that. When dropping a 26 or so foot piece from 60 plus feet up, it is really hard to control what it is going to do.

Once, knowing that, and trying to avoid breakage, I dropped a 76 foot fir log with branches on (not enough) from 80 feet up. It landed flat, which I figgered it wood, but broke. I still got 300-500 or so board feet out of it, plus 2200' from the 2 butt logs. The tree was about 185 feet tall. We got well over $2500 for the wood, and the tree probably took three hours to do. split the proceed with the customer, which included another 2500' or so in five tall skinny hemlock.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jul 18, 2002)

Rog. Beep-Beep, RoadRunner connection here!

Well, i had to ask on the spin deal, becuase at first that is what i thought you mihght be talking about, per the Beranek refrences, for he has a math lesson on that in"Fund. of Gen. Tree Work". We don't get anything for our wood and so i have never confronted that issue! In topping i go for safe landing and low kickback; yours makes an interesting twist in the methodology and my view of how this comes out.

Inter-arresting paradox in that hinge deal i think Mike. Less fibre is weaker, but can be scheduled to pull harder than a conventional hinge strip. For their will be less fibre in triangle, because of the extra torquing of farther back hinge fibre giving more resistance to pull. So at equal tearoff force of the 2 systems, less fibre->working harder->on the same load

If 2 30' apart lines are supporting a load 60' up evenly, if you slacken oneside, the load will steer to the other line with tensed fibre, that side is working harder even if the other rope is stronger. When you put too tight of a bight on a line, the inner fibres are slackened, and only the outside fibres are tensed and carrying the load, so it is weakened. 

So in the triangle hinge we position the fibres to tourque and pull more (back row tourquing and stretching over front) so they are pulling harder, then favour all that to one side.

If we put an equivalent amount of fibres in a 'rectangle hinge' as a 'triangle hinge'; which would be stronger? i guess i was waiting for someone else to ask/state that to your challenge.

If we can really understand all of the hinging, we will have one of the basic components of all that we do.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jul 19, 2002)

I'm with MM , we could jsut focus on hinging, kinda thought we was........

But then, perhaps move on to exam-i-nation, of other components of cutting, rigging; naming the powers that control them, so we can recognize and call them out from any practical application or 'word problem'.

A lot of these princi-pals would go for felling ang rigging jsut the same, with the same elements, tools and properties.

Some of these other topics would be: hitch point to the load, leading to balance of load, leading to length of lever between hitch and hinge, angle of line to overhead anchor, tightness off rigging line, gravity bending (speed line), splitting and extending anchor points etc. -IMHO.........

Then work on their combinations, to compound the maximized individual effect of each into a smooth ballet of ushering an awesome mass and leveraged limb, hinging lightly around from hazard area to clear zone with grace and power. Constructing a self working machine that is powered by you releasing weight into it to usher these things on its own self.


----------



## murphy4trees (Jul 20, 2002)

Spidy,
You see this work with the eyes of a poet.

I had a syncronistic experience this morning relating to the subject. I think that answering this ? about hinges requires a clear understanding of tension and compression wood.
I got a call this morning to clear a large downed branch blocking a commercial parking area. It was a 12" diameter oak limb. No wind, it just dropped, sometime before 7:30 AM. I've seen maples do that in midsummer but never oak. 
Forensics of the broken fibers showed a relatively small area of decay, maybe 15-20% of crossection of branch, that seemed to be well comparmentalized. I wouldn't normally expect that little bit of decay to cause the branch to fail without wind or ice. The key here is that decay was on the top half of the branch, tension wood. There was also a crack, caused by the brach failing, splitting the branch almost perfectly in half, top from bottom, lengthwise for 2-3' out from the break. And lastly the bottom half, which was 100% sound wood, was broken off about 6-12" in from break in the top half fibres, which showed the decay. 
What happened here is clear for those with an understanding of tension and compression wood.
What do you think happenned and how is it relevant to the question of which hinge to use with side leaners?
God Bless All,
Daniel


----------



## murphy4trees (Jul 21, 2002)

Ok you all had your chance.
The rest of the story follows.
I was examining the break and related crack after completing the cleanup and decided to save a 12” length of the broken limb. A man in a shirt and tie walked up and with enthusiastic curiosity asked “what happened here?”. I showed him the piece I was saving and the relatively small amount of decay, explaining that “I wouldn’t normally expect that to cause the branch to fail…but”. And before I could finish the thought, he said, “because it was on top”. He talked about studying engineering of steel I-beams and the principles of tension and compression taught there. So I began to think of a branch as a round I-beam and realized what happened.
The branch has tension wood and compression wood. The only thing which supports the branch weight is tension wood. When the decay in tension wood caused tension wood to fail, the tension wood went one way and the compression wood went another, causing the horizontal crack, splitting the top from the bottom for about 3’. The compression wood which had been the bottom half of the wood now had to carry the weight. It failed and broke at a different place about 12” away.
Think about cutting big tulip horizontal limbs. You can undercut them quite deep without failure. The bar will get pinched before you get to see just how far you can cut. I think if you can keep the bar free, you can cut 50%+ before failure because that is compression wood. It is not supporting weight. On the other hand, when top cutting without an undercut, it seems like the bar has just barely touched wood when BAM!!!, the branch lets go. TENSION WOOD IS ALL THAT HOLDS THE BRANCH UP.
So what does this all have to do with hinges?
On a side-leaner, the fibers on the side of lean in a hinge do nothing.. nada..zip.. to hold against the side lean. They are all compression. So leaving more tension wood on the far side of lean, in the hinge, will make it stronger in it’s ability to hold against a side lean. 
To me this is a huge revelation. I Am looking foward to field testing.
I Am thankful to Spidy and Dent for being instrumental in this revelation.
God Bless All,
Daniel Murphy


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jul 21, 2002)

i have read the opposite somehwere, stating that the compressed wood keeps it up... both have validity i guess, but mostly as background as to why to always use both!

i always express it to people that, they would rather have belly damage (under lean) rather than back damage (top of lean).

i see it as the top as the release side, where i would cut in to cut it down, and some of that work is already done! i believe the top of the parental joint is the most leveraged pull on the system, damage here is on a 'pressure point'.


----------



## o0_TreeMan_0o (Jul 21, 2002)

".....Jerry cautioned me about nicking the top of the limbs, where breaking a small amount of tension wood can cause large limbs to fail....." Ralph Stearns Dyer Redwood Climb


----------



## murphy4trees (Jul 21, 2002)

Spidy ,
you may be right about compression wood tending to "push" the wood up. Some experimentation is in order. 
And that does make me think, relative to hinges, that the removed compression wood from the side of hinge (towards lean) should be replaced with a shim or lightly driven wedge, to continue to keep pushing up against the lean and prevent the hinge wood from being pulled on by the tree, trying to sit down on the kerf. What do you think? Maybe the wedge should be driven hard to lift against the lean.
I know in making wood bows for archery, that if the bow's face's outer growth ring, which would be the "top" of the tension wood, is cut through or significantly damage, the bow is trashed. This further verifies the relative "strength" of the tension wood.
God Bless,
Daniel


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jul 21, 2002)

Not sure why you would do that,
i think one of the reasons to make knotch is to allow force to flow, to take out that 'chock' from the rolling force, 
so now we are to suspend that for what reason?


----------



## murphy4trees (Jul 21, 2002)

ok, I've got a side leaner, so knowing that the tension wood is much stronger than the compression wood in holding against the side lean, I remove wood from the compression side of hinge leaving the tension side a little beefier, wider, thus a little stronger angainst the side lean while providing the same resistance to folding into the face as a thinner hinge running the full length of the notch. 
So I have now removed some of the wood fibres on the compression side, leaving a kerf, or empty space. The side lean and wieght of tree are pushing into and want to close that kerf.
Remeber it was you who said the compression wood is "keeping it up". What is the effect on the hinge of loosing the compression wood? Does that create a side pull on hinge?
I Am suggesting that the wedge, when driven into hinge from the side, will do the job of the compression wood without adding to the resistance to hinge folding into notch. And maybe even by driving the wedge, again sideways so it runs in parallel to hinge without entering notch, I can create a force to lift against the side lean.
Love that concept... and is it correct?
God Bless,
Daniel


----------



## Kevin (Jul 21, 2002)

Are you guys trying to create what has already been established for generations?


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jul 21, 2002)

Hmmmmmm, yes that is one angle, but if it was pulling down the spread would come from the opposite axis of the pull(topside), that would be the first most noticeable movement at the top, from being pulled down, for it would be the point of most movement. Thereby the most leveraged point to stop such movment, would be the holding wood there.

i think in some ways what u are pushing towards could be a type of dutchman if used during the cut; whereby it could have a push up off this step as it swept. But i think you will find the most support at the first incidence of seperation of the pull- on the cross axis. Duthchman's are real dangerous, i think most of their lessons in them is what effect not to put into your cut as you assemble it,a nd how you might sloppily trip into something similar and the massive forces of the slamming faces as they hit a blocked side.

If the rot was just write as the holding wood on top was devastated totally, and the bottom so sound, i guess that might werk, not an expert, jsut a guy that has been able to turnit over in his head and hand a few weaks more


----------



## Kevin (Jul 21, 2002)

If I have a need to drop a tree exactly where I need it, a rope and guy(s) would be the order of the day.
Other than that, wedges will steer a falling tree but once that hinge is broken you ain`t going to stop it or steer it somewhere else without some added help.
To use a conventional or Humbolt on a leaning tree under stress without plunging the tree is a recipe for death, especially if you`re trying to steer the tree down to the ground by frantically hacking at it with your chainsaw while it`s falling.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jul 21, 2002)

This technique is very powerful, by placing fibre in the back row, stretching it to the front, immense forces and pulls are built up in this super strong fibre that we build from.

This pull when placed at the most leveraged positon, at the widest part of the stump, is a standard practice, in some arenas.

These same properties can be put into use in the tree, fighting a downward pull, as you fold across. Using the hinge to focus at the delivery point, and the holding wood untop to help fight gravity on the other side. Through a wide face, it can carry quite a percentage of a load through a high sweep, rope assisted. But it will be an extra butt support through that almost horizontal sweep, then if the green end is heavier, it will lift the butt end up as it ballasts the movement of the green end.

In case ya missed it in another part of this site, here is a passage from some of the 'propaganda' about this 1974 book:


Crown Zellerbach

"This book has been used for many years to train firewood cutters, loggers and personnel of various federal organizations (U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, Bonneville Power Administration, Western Area Power Administration, National Park Service, U.S. Department of Labor (OSHA) and numerous state departments of forestry. Professional Timber Falling is the most comprehensive text of its kind available. It covers the full range of topics from bars and chains to the physical forces affecting the tree. An in-depth analysis of such topics as, the holding wood, backcut, undercut, stump shot, side boring, notching, jacking are thoroughly discussed and vividly illustrated. Quite simply, Professional Timber Falling teaches all chain saw users how to make it home safely every night through the use of safe, efficient and proper work practices."


----------



## murphy4trees (Jul 21, 2002)

Kev,
The image brought to mind by your words " especially if you`re trying to steer the tree down to the ground by frantically hacking at it with your chainsaw while it`s falling." made me LOL. 
We've touched on a bunch of points on this thread and it's a bit challenging to keep them all straight. And we do nothing of the sort... though i might just speak for myself. 
Spidy isn't a tree surgeon.. he's not even an arborist.. he's a dancer.. a tree dancer using block, tackle and saw, sharing the stage with the standing people of the green nation.

And there is really nothing new here. We are sharing interpretations of Dent's book. That holds the wisdom of generations. I believe that if this technique works then somebody has already thought of it.

As far as plunging goes.... come to think of it..that may be the best way to set up this off-center hinge. 

So again I ask:
R U a logger.
I got some videos on loggong by int'l paper. Pretty decent.
Logging is a different game altogether than what we do in suburban tree service.
And there are plenty of transferable techniques... we just think differently though, very differently.
God Bless All,
Daniel


----------



## murphy4trees (Jul 21, 2002)

Spidy,
Nice diagram.
I was actually thinking of a hinge where the fibers at point of triangle (left end of hinge as per diagram) are cut altogether leaving a light blue area, (similar to one on opposite side of hinge made during precutting) to be filled with wedge. 
As long as the hinge is left in triangle all the way across notch there is enough compression wood to "hold up" side lean.
Do you think there are any advantages to cutting and wedging as above?
God Bless All,
Daniel


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jul 22, 2002)

Ummmmmm if the slamming faces used it as a step that closed faster than the other side, therby pushing to the other side. The tearoff would start from the left and go right, as the right still held on.

Perhaps.

But,it has been my experience, that the corner of fibre material you are violating is the most leveraged position of the hinge to leverage against the tree spinning on holding wood, and ending up at 2:00 rather than 12:00 on landing. The holding wood technique is that strong ! It can overpower very much weight, and can pull around that much sometimes. So, in some situations, a lil fibre anchoring that corner is very important for 'tying' down (with fibre) that corner to stabilize a straight lay, for according to 'thee book' you always want to lay the tree into squarely into the face of the hinge, and adjsut the holding wood across for the pulls accross the hinge.

Now i have totally violated that corner, with a lot of weight over there on the L. that kept the tree square, Butt, if the 'triangle ' has a lot of rear fibre (pulling hardest) scheduled at fold; it can still pull to far without that L. 'anchoring, squaring' corner of fibre. Whereby, a sleeker triangle, without as much rear fibre pulling hardest, wouldn't spin. i guess weighting these things out is a matter of experience, guess it is time to hit the field with it.


----------



## Kevin (Jul 22, 2002)

Daniel, I`m not a logger as you would imagine someone that makes a living from it but I have been cutting,skidding and milling logs for several years.
I`ve been instructed by a logger who does logging accident investigations.
Trees are unpredictable, you can cut a hunderd of them without incident, the hundred and first will rip your head off and spit in your neck and you won`t even see it!
Felling trees is one of the leading killers in industry and for good reason.
With a slightly thicker hinge and steady tension from a rope or cable you can usually drop the tree where you must, the notch will close perfectly and the tree won`t leave the stump... now that`s pretty!


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jul 22, 2002)

Yes, a thicker hinge gives more fibre, there by strength and numbers. Pulling the tree earlier than it would go itself, forcces it to be thicker.

A lot of times, even in logging, you can't just lay a tree down where it leans; but rather sideways to it. In fact, that would be a slower drop (something i haven't mentioned) for it is not feeding into gravity's pull directly, but fighting it, to the side. For, it only has so much force, any of that moving sideways, is not moving down, there fore is less than a direct hit. So even in rigging, if i use these principals, to swing a limb sideways into a rig, it doesn't sink as much, as the sidewards motion is not pressing down as hard on the line during the sweep, so less stretch, less drop!

The holding fiber, their posititoning across the face and fron to back, the stretch that imposes, is also mechanically correct.

i guess i'm used to being on the outer fringe in these things, i guess all of us in our own way with enough passion to be here, walks that fringe at some location, as we stretch and feel our way where not many look.

i've 'argued' hear previously; things of wheel spinning on axle, as a 2nd class lever, while a wheel and axle spinning as one is a first class lever; how making the tire bigger or axle smaller on a wheel barrel lends more Mechanical Advantage, pulleys as rolling levers, front gear set on 10speed as a 2nd class lever, but the rear set is 3rd class, but then broke the 3 classes into either 1st class lever (center pivot) or non 1st class etc. It took me almost 8mos. to convince others on ISA that a DdRT is a 2/1 if the climber lifts themself up by one line. i don't know everything, but ya might just let this one soak in a bit and play with it!

i use these things for every cut, each an informed decision, perhaps just to get a limb to pull from my side some more in the tree to be safer, hold the sweep of the limb against something that might push it off path, have more pull to one side as it drops straight-so has a tendency to roll/ rock one way than the other.

Every cut is a hinge, a decision to make or not a face cut, how fast the backcut, how the hinge releases, where the final pull is as it does etc. This scenario just brings you deeper into all that for a peek!

Even in a downed tree, i take out overhead 'widow makers', then other unnecesary stuff, leaving log, and support legs. i notch and backcut them, if the holding wood is cut in these shapes it still has these effects, as the hinge folds the leg. When lowering something that needs some length cut off, we notch it, backcut it (limb), scheduling the holding wood in the tiny hinge to do a certain task, then stand back and lower line, causing hinge to load,and fail/folde (as line slackens loading the hinged leg) as prescribed by the mechanical instruction it was given. Every phase.........


----------



## murphy4trees (Jul 22, 2002)

The only way to get 2:1 MA with a rope is to pull the rope twice the length the object moves.
If you have a 100' limb. DdRT requires a 200' rope over and down. By the time you've pulled yourself up to the limb, you've pulled 200' of rope to go 100'. That is 2:1. It's that simple.

If you are being pulled from the ground, when you reach the limb, there is still 100' of rope between you and the puller. Thus the puller had to only pull 100' of rope to move you 100'= 1:1 or no MA.
God Bless All,
Daniel


----------



## Joe (Jul 22, 2002)

> _Originally posted by TheTreeSpyder _
> 
> It took me almost 8mos. to convince others on ISA that a DdRT is a 2/1 if the climber lifts themself up by one line. i don't know everything, but ya might just let this one soak in a bit and play with it!
> 
> ...


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jul 22, 2002)

ooooooooo brutha Joeeee!

Y'all think i run the math around some! That i try to factor everything out..............; when in doubt, i ask Joe!
Hell, he even answers! and very well....

Well it was a while, and plain all the time (i think), though y'all had me humbly doubting myself a few times!; 
but ya know i never mean anything neg., just giving basis,
for breathing with these models some.........

"The only way to get 2:1 MA with a rope is to pull the rope twice the length the object moves.
If you have a 100' limb. DdRT requires a 200' rope over and down. By the time you've pulled yourself up to the limb, you've pulled 200' of rope to go 100'. That is 2:1. It's that simple."

-murph

Is write, because the only way to get 2x Power (MA=Mechanical Advantage), is to input 2xDistance in any machine. Input Force (lift,push,pull etc.)x Input Distance = Output Force (lift,push,pull etc.) x Output Distance. For anything, any screw, lever, ramp, gearbox, 10 speed etc. You don't get a raise in power for nothing, you have to give up distance for it. There are only 2 factors here, 1 goes up, the other comes down the same amount period. 

In a 3:1, you gain 3x power, but must pull 3x the rope. So, if you pull 50# for 15'; you can use a 3:1 to lift 150# for 5'. Each line on the load would pull your 50# of pull on the load for a total of 150#! But to lift it 1', you would have to pull 1' on each of the 3 lines to move the load up 1'. Notice 50# x 15' (input)= 750ftlbs. work units = 150# x 5'(output). That is the law of energy conservation, it will not be broken. Look for the input power /distance ratio and see how it is changed into work, it is all there.

If u turn a screw 10 inches of spiraling, and it is so finely threaded it goes in 1 inch it has 10x the tightening force you put into it(- friction), bigger screwdriver handle to smaller bit, even more travel of your hand, more power funneled into that smaller distance.

if you move a prybar 10 inches, and the output lifts 1 inch @10x your input force(-friction). For it is all exactly the same but diffrent!

4000# of tree top, 40 ' from hinge is 160,000'#s (foot pounds)of force on the hinge, before the weight of the log, or adjustment for speed!

So as the 100# climber climes a DdRT 20' up (s)he pulls 40' of line @ 50#pull and takes all that and funnels it into 20' of gain, the secret is, nothing is lost, even the theory of relativity has an equals sign in it, it all balances out, it is all accountable before we/me/you/us. In all things.

i think these things are very important in all tree werk, and are around everyone everyday; and that it is very powerful to learn them as a set of principals, not individual examples. For these things run thru all things, and there are too many examples!


----------



## murphy4trees (Jul 22, 2002)

In the early 80's I was improperly taught that a climber pulling himself up is not 2:1 because , the pulley has to be on the object being moved, otherwise it's just redirecting. 
Anotherway to think of it is like this.
You have a log on ground.. tie rope to self.. through pulley attached to log.. and back to self. pulling on rope yields 2:1 MA.
Now stand log up and instead of pulling it to you, pull yourself up it. It's the same 2:1
Has anyone ever heard of any studies on the friction factor in natural crotches? Too bad Peter is gone...
God Bless,
Daniel


----------



## murphy4trees (Jul 24, 2002)

Tree Brothers,
Daniel in feeling great joy, with a report on hinges as per above thread and Dent & Spidy's diagram.
I was working with some small and medium Tulip and maple limbs today, to see how much side swing I could get with the "triangular hinge". I consider this fairly brittle wood. Just playing with it mostly, though there was a cut or two over a hedge. I was thrilled to see the superior control these hinges provide. 
After pushing a nice size piece of tulip over by hand, a big smile from the ground support said it all without a word.
I Am looking foward to using this technique on bigger, stronger wood as well as felling. I see a new horizon.
God Bless All,
Daniel


----------



## murphy4trees (Aug 2, 2002)

Thanks to this site, this thread and those that have contributed. I was able to safely bomb several important pieces today using the beefy tension side or triangle hinge that Dent and Spidy promote.
This is a powerful new technique which today saved me the trouble of lowering several big pieces out of a dead and quite hollow ash. 
The wood up top was sound. The trunk was swaying quite a bit just from my wieght pulling up the rope. It probably would have held and I felt a lot safer with zero shock loads. I never would have tried hinging these pieces to swing away and safely bomb, if not for this thread. And it worked BEAUTIFULLY. It's all in the script.
God Bless All,
Daniel
PS Spidy I have found that for small wood, cutting all the way through the compression side, leaving the triangle hinge in the tension wood only, seems to work well. Those are preliminary results. I'll keep you posted
HEY.... DID WE LOOSE THE REST OF YOU???


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Aug 3, 2002)

yes have tried that in the branches.

The pix in Dent's book, show this man using his methodology in huge, massive trees, sometimes walking on those springboards to get over the root swell, printed in '74! So i have learned to use them confidentally. Even for a slight pull away from me in the tree, or maneuvering between the branches and down for clearer path in the air cuts. These principals are constantly running through my mind as i examine and plot what i'm doing.

But all this depends on the strength and flexability of the wood fibres, so please watch for decay etc. 

Also, realize how decay can disturb pockets of hinging fibre, inspect your face, cuz you might end up doing this tecqunique when you don't intend to, because some rot let go on one side and the other side held on, or how a sloppy cut can put these principals into play inadvertantly at the wrong time!!!!

Glad your gittin' a feel for it bud, it is very powerful, pervasive strategy.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Aug 3, 2002)

Yes you lost me.
At the start of this thread there were too many variables, so I suggested we talk just about hinge shape.
Then we agreed that a rectangle is strongest. That's where I lost you guys.
You say a rectangle is stronger but you can change the angle more with a triangle. Here's where I disagree. A weaker hinge can't do more work.
Triangle hinges have their place, but not as you guys are discribing, IMO.


----------



## murphy4trees (Aug 3, 2002)

Mike,
Thanks for your honesty. And though this technique "seems" to defy common sense at first, I Am telling you it works... really well.

So I appreciate your skepticism and SEEING IS BELIEVING. You just have to take to the field and try it. May I recommend starting with some light lower branches, hopefully that you can cut from the ground. Try hinging them over to swing to the side,with both types of hinge. See which one works better. And let us know your findings.
Looking foward to hearing back about it.
God Bless All,
Daniel


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Aug 3, 2002)

Well, IMAO..........

i think a rectangle or 'strip' hinge has the capacity for more strength, because there are more fibres present at fail/folde.

Either hinge can be stronger by forcing more fibre to be present by pulling over earlier than it would have naturally fell. Just as more brakeforce can be had, but doesn't prove itself till it is challenged, for it is a passive force, in that it doesn't push, pull, or lift on its own; only when these forces are exerted on it, then the brake force is shown.

But, fewer fibres doing the same work (strip vs. triangle) makes those fibres work harder, placing these harder working fibres at the most leveraged position, can give great pull across the axis (of stump center) to control the opposite side's lean; ushering an eneven balance into the face squarely, by balancing the offside pull as the fibres fight back. 

If you are hinging North, and have a northwest head balance, it isn't going East, so you can eliminate the fibres that keep it from going East, and put their numbers where the fibres keep it from going West. This will give some control just by shear numbers of fibres working. Scheduling these fibres to the back of the hinge, makes them stretch more; thereby they fight more, giving more pull to their side! Just like a tighter line pulls to it's side more, just fibre pulling!

i went over that book for years trying to figure out what the frickin'hell this guy was talking about; it is kinda an elusive concept at first. But it worx, and have put my own spin on the explanation, after bringing the principals into the air,and further observing it there; then distilling out and naming the common properties. For it can be practiced in felling, limbing and rigging.

Wide face cuts, that join squarely- not intersecting (cuts) can express this power to be witnessed over a wider range of motion.

Some of the trees in the book that are ushered to the ground with this methodology, look like they could be 6' in diameter at the hinge, for logging operations. Where they try not to hurt other trees, or the valuable lumber of the log with precise drops against diffent angles of pull. i beleive Mr. Dent is from a family of loggers, as well as a group of loggers from an age past; that had to use what was available for control of the largest living organisms to ever wander our earth. They only way to beat such odds; is to set the giant against itself sometimes, to flow with the nature of things. Kinda like martial arts for trees.

Is there really any gravity on Earth?
Or is the Earth such a zealous mother that she calls all back to her that she can?


----------



## murphy4trees (Aug 9, 2002)

MM,
I tried the triangle hinge again yesterday on a long silver maple branch. This is not a strong wood fiber for hinging. I couldn't believe the amout of side swing before the hinge failed... really impressive.
So have you tried it yet.. how about anyone else? If not what is getting in your way?
God Bless,
Daniel


----------



## rbtree (Aug 9, 2002)

Been using holding wood, triangle cuts for years, it certainly seems to help.....


----------



## murphy4trees (Aug 10, 2002)

RB and all,
Do you use the triangle hinge for climbing cuts as well as felling? Any wisdom to share on climbing cuts would be appreciated. 
Also do you remove some or all of the compression wood from hinges (leaving the triangle hinge primarily in the tension wood)?
That seems to work well on small stuff. I have yet to try it on anything big.
Thanks and God Bless,
Daniel


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Aug 10, 2002)

i use it on climbing all the time, wide part goes at top to fight gravity's downward pull; ushering over into hinge face. Cutting across steers it over, cutting down releases it to pull of gravity.

Must be carefull not to ask to much of this machine, as eliminating to much supportive fibre can make the machine shear (tear off before scheduled).

i couple this more supportive power with a wider sweep of open face, and a graduated self tightening action of the support line at the same time; all in concert with each other. Can be quite something to witness the whole orchestration of smooth ballet.

At a certain tightness per load, the line willnot let the load sink anymore so must arc around, as the arc keeps it at the same lenght of drop.

This is where i have been headed with this thread, pulling strategy(for hitch position), self tightening rig, self torquing rig, high friction and tight versus slack line sets; all in concert. Each adds something, that the others compound. It is the diffrence between something starting at 10:00 falling to 6:00 then ending up haning over the yard at 5:00; Or something starting at 10:00setting itself as it settles to 8:30, then the line is so tight the load can't sink anymore, so it drifts across the clock horizontally to 3:30 then settles at 5:00. That higher horizontal path clears more obstacles that are higher.


----------



## murphy4trees (Aug 24, 2002)

I've been cutting out hinge sections of felled trees and taking them home for study.
Earlier in this thread I asked if removing some or all of the compression side of a hinge would give better control by leaving more fiber on the tension side..and considerred side wedging in place of removed comp side of hinge..
Findings from above are that when felling 10-14" apple leads, against significant side lean.. using wedges.. the hinge with compression wood removed, did provide good hold against lean however removal of comp. wood allowed hinge to twist back.. thus throwing gun towards side lean. So more experiment is needed and for now I think on small wood it's OK to remove the comp wood.. and with anything that has enough force to twist hinge.. it's best to leave the hinge complete from side to side.
God Bless All,
Daniel


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Aug 24, 2002)

i like to leave some on side of lean in most leveraged position to fight twisting, perhaps take some hinge out across hinge, so more is needed on control corner of hinge (at crossaxis of support for head lean, making this a first class lever).

In the tree with self tourquing rig twisting the limb, you want to leave a rib of hinge across the face to fight twisting or flipping over (unless that is what you want it to do). if you jus leave on spot or 'cylinder' of holding wood on face, spar can twist on it. Leave another spot along the rib of hinge fibre, and it can take leverage against the twist. The farther the 2 points are apart (and their reachess), the more leverage that the hinge has against twisting. 

So, just as the opposite corner of hinge from head lean (pull)has greatest leverage of controlling that lean (wide part of triangle), ushering it into the face, the farther corner on hinge from that point, has greatest leverage against twisting on the wide part of the try-angle hinge fibre, esp. if it is about the only fibre left.

That is what i tried to illustrate with this pic. b4

This is another example of hinging that even if you don't use, you should try to understand a lil, so you don't accidentally cause these forces to werk at the wrong time, or watch someone else do 'em at the wrong time!

Partially what i taught myself the power of this hinging on was downed trees with limbs up in the air with some lean. i could triangle hinge'em this way and that where i wanted them, then practiced the triangle strategy on, bucking presurized, treapped limbs with it, then trunks without wedging (while down), then removals, then brought it up in the air. It is all exactly the same but diffrent! But i learned a lot and reinforced what i was reading with the limbs standing up on downed trees, and making them lay nicely, slowly, not tangled etc.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Sep 29, 2003)

This budget priced book is a real jewel!

It shows how to form hinges specifically to different tasks and positions in felling and bucking; that can be carried into the tree freefalling and rigging all the same.

Many times have i gone back to it, and it's diagrams!

:alien:


----------



## murphy4trees (Apr 2, 2004)

Apaprently Tim Ard doesn't know of or teach the tapered hinge..
See below



http://www.forestapps.com/tips/sidelean/sidelean.htm


----------



## Diver1 (Apr 3, 2004)

Im going to apoloagize for jumping in here but I see this tread and the one I started on block notch as some what related. When your cutting you hinge in a triangle how do you calculate how steep to make the angles (how big a triangle)? Or in other words how thick on one side and how little ont the other? The reason I ask is this. In Ard's book he gives a reasonable acurate method for determining how to compensate for side lean. As I see it the triangle hinge is trial and error, experience, or guess work as to how to make the hinge to compensate for diferent degrees of lean.

Straighten me out if im all wrong.


thanks


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Apr 3, 2004)

The formulae must be exact, the amount of support and steering different for different weights, leans, speeds; etc. Really it is beyond me, especially all of the adjustments on the fly (said the spyder). So, i just let Nature do it! 

The hinge pull and face pushes are passive, self adjusting forces; who's forces are set by the loads themselves. So, exactly, ya don't have to be exact, just allowing and maximizing at the right times, to allow things to work best, by some guesses i think, and lightly ushering your prey to target.

Realizing that any forces, can be set for or agianst you, and you have a say in that with your carving, that small changes can mean a lot from that command position. And that every force has an equal and opposite force that you can tap into, sometimes to balance the forces to your bidding instead of balancing to some other point. Nature is all about maintaining balance in all; by requiring it in every act.

Orrrrrr something like that!
:alien:


----------



## murphy4trees (Apr 3, 2004)

Good question....
One way to start to get a feel is to run the tip through til it juts about meets the notch on the thin side of the hinge... then bring the body of the saw around to remove wood from the beefy side, until the tree goes....
Beranek has a picture of the "uneven hinge" on page 299 of "fundamentals of general tree work".. That should give you some idea of a good tapered hinge..


----------



## Diver1 (Apr 3, 2004)

Thanks Spyder, and Daniel

for the explanation, spydie do you moon-light as a physics teacher  Your explanantions always take me a few reads to digest, but are on target.

Daniel; making the back cut as you have described is how I have allways done it when making a triangle hinge, but it is not always on the dime acurate thus the question about Ard's method.

thanks


----------



## a_lopa (Apr 3, 2004)

not that i do them that regularly, bore cut will leave a v shaped holding wood anyway


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Apr 3, 2004)

The tensioned fibers against sidelean will always be the triangular pattern IMLHO, even within a common shaped 'strip' of hinge evenly across the face; i think the pattern of stress within the more rectangular common, strip hinge, will be a triangular hinge pattern. i think that eliminating the fibers from the lean side to make a triangular hinge pattern, works because now the force of the lean, pull of the line, push of the wedge (added together) is not wasted on flexing over those eliminated fibers, that don't return support for what they have cost the forces of bending them. Then the culmination of lean push and pull forcing hinge fibers to bend will leave more bent fibers in the leveraged positions, for more support i think.

The thin side of the tapered/ triangle hinge still constitutes support, as the compressed pivot that the tree sits on. The fat side the most leveraged positions of support. Seeing as each fiber is about as strong as the next, and Nature takes the path of least resistance, the most leveraged fibers (those furthest from pivot) will carry most of the load, as easiet option, there fore most stretched as in * Hinge Forensics Thread  *. To take most advantage of the situation, the spread from pivot to leveraged fiber should be as long as possible, then as many fibers as possible in those positions i think.

In some harder sideleans, i try to be releasing fiber across as a chosen direction, rather than forward with saw. i cut the thin side of hinge first under the side lean, then perhaps end up in the same pattern working the fat side, but trying to get more of a drawing across direction of gradual re-lease, than forward. Direction of force is always so important, for their can be no force without it i think! Daniel's explanation was more clear as always, but both said, don't worry about it, Nature will take care of that part. Nature tries to take care of it anyway, even within other hinge patterns; i think this pattern (perhaps even center punched from face in right conditions) provides the greatest allowance for nature to do her thing, by working along with her.

Pic from TB.


----------



## wiley_p (Apr 4, 2004)

A Dutchman is any alteration of standard face/backcut/holdingwood the step dutchman is easy to use the other "standard dutchmans swing quartercut are best left to true proffesionals after being taught by extremely competent fallers. I used to fire guys for using dutcmans I.ve only worked with one guy who used and explained and pulled the drops off just like he called. that is Jim Justus out of Forks WA he's 100 times the faller I'll ever be. I rarely employ dutchmans. The fundamentals work 99 percent of the time. What with some of the half explained tactics taught at Arbormaster it worrrys me a little that people are talking about using swing dutchmans, I'm preety sure one would have difficulty finding enough diameter in a lot of areas to pull it off anywaY.


----------



## Gypo Logger (Apr 21, 2004)

99.9 % of Dutchmens are unintensional and serve no purpose when felling hardwoods. A Dutchman is nothing but a kerf acting as the notch.
A falling tree is much like a cupboard door on hinges- the mechanics are the same.
The ideal knotch suggests that the faller simply walks up to the tree, places the cuts in, walks away and the tree falls, but this isn't what happens. The faller should stay with the tree, sawing on it until the tree is totaly commited to it's direction of fall. In other words severing as much holding wood as possible while the tree is falling and can't change it's mind, much like in my video below of me dumping a 4" Red Oak.
John


----------



## rbtree (Apr 21, 2004)

Nice 4 inch oak John. 

Intentional Dutchmans are thoroughly covered in Dent's "Professional Timber Falling" Way outta my league.


----------



## Gypo Logger (Apr 21, 2004)

Hi Roger, softwoods are much lighter and forgiving than hardwoods and can be commited further away from their natural lean than hardwoods can. Dent wrote a very good book, but I doubt he felled many hardwoods. He described the intentional Dutchman for leaners, but there are more effective and faster ways of dealing with leaners- for hardwood anyway.
Check out this movie, note the tree set back on the bar for an instant, just one more reason a wedge should be used. Trees are very forgiving. LOL
John


----------



## murphy4trees (Apr 21, 2004)

That tree did not sit back... as it fell into the face the tip of the bar got pinched in the hinge fibers...

That said.. I must admit that I know very little about felling trees compared to a good logger...


----------



## Gypo Logger (Apr 21, 2004)

Hey Daniel, I think there was a better chance of your ponytail pinching that bar than the way you described. LOL
The tree actually leaned towards me slightly as it fell forward, but was released as the backcut opened up..
John


----------



## murphy4trees (Apr 22, 2004)

OK... my bad... but that still isn't sitting BACK is it????


----------



## a_lopa (Apr 22, 2004)

you guys are to used to falling softwoods try a half dead fungi riddled hardwood throw your theorys out the window,experience counts


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (May 1, 2004)

i think the softwoods can have more elastic actions in the fibers making a ot of differance too.

If the rot makes the faces unsound/crumble, then i guess a Dutchman would be useless. But dead or brittle wood without the elasticity for good strong hinging, might still be sound enough to use some Dutch Step.

This is dangerous territory, mostly i seek lessons for cutting in tree from experiments and discussions.

Usually, Each side of the hinge pulls against the other, until the faces close, then the faces push against each other towards the center. A Dutch strategy i think causes early closing push across the face, or sometimes on just one side.

i use Dutchmans all the time climbing; simple, powerfull help with no extra tools. Scaling down from the huge leverage and weights of a full speeding tree to a mere limb does a lot for safety; but doesn't alter the ratio of power of the strategy to target IMLHO.

Sometimes i use it bucking when i have top compression, no wedge right there and want to play/examine these workings more closely when the oppurtunity arises.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (May 2, 2004)

i think that the Dutchman quanity is an element of the formulae of any felling; a constant componenet. It is just always adjusted down to zero as Gypo says; unless by error. This adjustment is so critical, so powerful; it can work both some 'miracles' and disasters; especially wielding all of the power produced by maximum speed X max. leverage x maximum weight that a massive tree can exert at once in felling; then double that as it meets it's equal and opposite reaction pushing back in the other face (on stump side)!

i use the Dutch steps in branches, limbs etc. in the air and in bucking; it is power to balance off the forces we contend with, freely available, in a self adjusting unit; IMLHO.

i look at gravity as an input force, hinging pulls and face pushes as 2 seperate machines the input force goes thru; to arrive tree at target as an output of that work achieved. i think that both the hinging and face slapping are leverageble machines; that ususally happen seperately in self balancing components. Whereby each face throws the tree to the opposite side, to balance into the center of the face, if there is side lean, that side will hit harder, to throw harder, to push to center automatically. But, taking out the hinge pulls, and face slaps that serve towards the SideLean (the self balancing componenets of the motion); then hybriding the hinge and face to pull and push against lean, at the same time, the whole time (instead of seperately) with no face or hinge pulls countering is achievable.

i think these same things are witnessable/usable if invoked correctly in rigging, climbing, bucking, polesawing etc. A lot can be learned closeup safely i think with just a handsaw on a small limb and pulling on the knotch at different angles as you backcut at different angles. For the elements are the same to scale, and can be learned at any point to understand the same principals at different levels.

The topic of a step in the face is deemed unusable because it happens lots by accident, and has so much power, that warnings are cast as it enters the the upper loading ranges of felling. but, this high leveraging machine action can be used safely at other parallel levels that don't invoke as high forces.

Orrrrrrrrrr something like that......
:alien:


----------



## murphy4trees (May 18, 2004)

Here is a pic I was thinkning of publishing... what do you all think of it? I know there is at least one slight mistake, but the limb was maybe 8", so very forgiving.... I cut a lot of hinges that look like this these days... On smaller diameter stuff without a heavy side lean I'll take out up to half the hinge, leaving fibers only on the tensioned side of the hinge. 

I AM just wondering fi you all see any prblems with the cut?


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (May 18, 2004)

i think cut is fine, niced stretched fibers; but why not go across the full face of the hinge; why use half of the wrench handle /prybar against a larger load you just made?

These are things i've asked myself playing around like this, trying to get good habits, and always set for lower loading/greater support to have as great a SWL as possible and good habits etc. etc. in case on a stupid day i miss calculate lean, wind, rot, target etc. all at once cuz RB took me to a 3 day bachelor party; and i have the most forgiveness werkin fer my stupid butt!

So i try to tilt the ratio of support to load my way as a strategy/habit to have. Gotta go, though bro, but here is step 1 to these thougths.

Take Care, Thanx for puzzle!


----------



## murphy4trees (May 18, 2004)

> why not go across the full face of the hinge




I always go across the full face of the hinge when working big wood or heavy side leans... however with smaller wood and less side lean, I like the pictured hinge.... there is not enough force to twist the hinge, so why do I need the full length... No pull line on this cut as it had a front lean too... so I just start the backcut, cutting at the angle seen in the picture and keep cutting 'til the tree starts to move... works well

When chunking down large side leaning pieces in 2' lengths I've used a 2"x2" hinge at the highest edge of the wood, which hold securely and is still easily broken by hand with a rocking motion...


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (May 18, 2004)

i do'em like that too here and there, but mostly try to polish skills, run the drill etc.

So my comments were to the usual maximizing etc.; pushing the envelope; so from that point to every once in awhile catch a glimpse of something else working in the formulae, ya might not have noticed otherwise, develop feel etc.

Also; i would have a concern about a published pic that maybe someone allowed their hinge to be similar to; even if that wasn't the topic of giving the pic. So, on that level; i had that concern, that everything should be set for a more common maximum; just for that extra level of care/SWL to that blind situation on y/our part.

i'm sure that you know, that i know, that you know; what you are doing; and that is comletely not the point bro.

In the spirit/compulsion of understanding and commanding these forces at evolving deeper levels; i offer this in comment/exam-eye-nation of all off balance pulls/leans to target (most in my world);and why not delivering to target can take away from the larger forces that you and the ground face in the massive tree's concussion. Using the pic etc. as base to apply the model on at different angles. If you can confidantly put'em down softer, then ya can put more of em down with less concern of damage etc.

And how this all slides into climbing, bucking cuts; using and becomning more familiar with one procedure that covers all of the different scenarios as one act; that becopmes a faster, more repetitve familiar procedure then with any cut.

"Pro-cedural", "Causation" and "Mechanical Analasys" are 3 of my favorite 'Dent Terms'.

Peace,
:alien:


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (May 19, 2004)

Using modified version of Daniel's setup tapered hinge, to apply same theoretical model to up forces/reversed gravity pull applications of crane lifting, bucking top compressed logs also back rather than front leaner. Whereby the most severe pressure is reversed to be up rather than down, as the other models assume is force working hinging down with gravity.

Switching to test and explore, certify or alter, get different view etc. of model in same application at less thought of angles to test theory etc.

Once again i think that a point is made about using the passive forces of face and hinge to power the steering when possible. It takes extra force to steer, change direction; if that force isn't tapping off the lean itself; you must expend energy (wedge or rope) to do so, instead of trying to exhaust some of the lean's, you exhaust yourself. It is not all about being lazy, it is also reducing the fall force, by taking some of the lean's force i think!


----------

