# Anyone set a tree down slowly with a rigging line and porta-wrap?



## TreeandLand (Aug 28, 2011)

I need to remove a big white pine, but the homeowner is extra picky about her lawn. This tree is big enough to pound a big trench into it. I will rig the top and some other chunks of wood down, but I am considering felling the last 30 feet with it tied off to a nearby tree. The rigging line would pass through a high block on the second tree and then down to a porta-wrap. I'm thinking: let the tree tip for about five feet, then slow it down, feeding rope into the porta-wrap from a safe distance. The house is far enough away that there is no risk of property damage if it goes wrong. Does anyone use a method like this now and then?


----------



## DangerTree (Aug 28, 2011)

TreeandLand said:


> I need to remove a big white pine, but the homeowner is extra picky about her lawn. This tree is big enough to pound a big trench into it. I will rig the top and some other chunks of wood down, but I am considering felling the last 30 feet with it tied off to a nearby tree. The rigging line would pass through a high block on the second tree and then down to a porta-wrap. I'm thinking: let the tree tip for about five feet, then slow it down, feeding rope into the porta-wrap from a safe distance. The house is far enough away that there is no risk of property damage if it goes wrong. Does anyone use a method like this now and then?


 
Yes I do this all the time. With a twist. My wife lowered a 100' fir tree with a 7/8" bull rope tied in using a timber hitch. The rope was snaked through a couple trees for friction (no device was used) as the lowering speed is so slow that rope burn is not really an issue on the trees. I also tied in a 1/2" tag line for additional control. Any device large enough to allow a 3/4" or larger bull rope through will work. I use a rescue 8 quite a bit and that works very good. Just remember that all parts of the system must be brutally overkill including the anchor. You may also tie back the spar (anchor tree) to increase it's loading factor. Good luck be safe.


----------



## TreeandLand (Aug 28, 2011)

DangerTree said:


> Yes I do this all the time. With a twist. My wife lowered a 100' fir tree with a 7/8" bull rope tied in using a timber hitch. The rope was snaked through a couple trees for friction (no device was used) as the lowering speed is so slow that rope burn is not really an issue on the trees. I also tied in a 1/2" tag line for additional control. Any device large enough to allow a 3/4" or larger bull rope through will work. I use a rescue 8 quite a bit and that works very good. Just remember that all parts of the system must be brutally overkill including the anchor. You may also tie back the spar (anchor tree) to increase it's loading factor. Good luck be safe.


 
Thanks for the advice, DT. If I want to lower a 40 foot tree, does the block in the anchor tree need to be at 40 feet, or could it be lower and still do the job? Another question: does the anchor tree need to be in line with the felling direction, or can it be off set at a 45 degree angle or more? I would think this would put more stress on the hinge.


----------



## keh10 (Aug 28, 2011)

I've done this a few times before with good results. I would definitely avoid having the lowering rope at an angle to the hinge. I feel like that would put a lot of stress on the hinge and could lead to the hinge failing. Good luck and be safe!


----------



## DangerTree (Aug 28, 2011)

TreeandLand said:


> Thanks for the advice, DT. If I want to lower a 40 foot tree, does the block in the anchor tree need to be at 40 feet, or could it be lower and still do the job? Another question: does the anchor tree need to be in line with the felling direction, or can it be off set at a 45 degree angle or more? I would think this would put more stress on the hinge.


 
I don't know the exact physics behind the forces applied this is why overkill is important. But having done this many many times I can say No you do not need to be that high up with the bull block in fact lower is gooder. I try to be 75% of the height of the tree being felled that way you don't need to pay out so much rope. Also you will be lower down the spar tree and thus in fatter wood.
And no you can tie off the bottom of the tree being cut so that it may pivot which ever way you want. Be sure your tag line is more than strong enough to handle the needed force and note the change in stress applied to the spar tree. With proper rigging you should be able to wrestle damn near anything to the ground. Think of raising and lowering the pole in a big top tent that the circus uses it's not much different.


----------



## DangerTree (Aug 28, 2011)

DangerTree said:


> I don't know the exact physics behind the forces applied this is why overkill is important. But having done this many many times I can say No you do not need to be that high up with the bull block in fact lower is gooder. I try to be 75% of the height of the tree being felled that way you don't need to pay out so much rope. Also you will be lower down the spar tree and thus in fatter wood.
> And no you can tie off the bottom of the tree being cut so that it may pivot which ever way you want. Be sure your tag line is more than strong enough to handle the needed force and note the change in stress applied to the spar tree. With proper rigging you should be able to wrestle damn near anything to the ground. Think of raising and lowering the pole in a big top tent that the circus uses it's not much different.


 
Oh as a side note please remember the weakest link thing. Not all devices are rated to support large loads know the limit stay well within it such as Porta wraps and figure eights. This is why more often than not I deflect to using simple wraps around trees. If you have more than one tree near by you can S the rope thereby making the wraps not so tight and not crossing over itself. Then if you find there is to much friction you simply walk a wrap out of a tree.


----------



## Slvrmple72 (Aug 28, 2011)

In close quarters to targets it is a good idea to tie the butt to the stump or an adjacent tree to keep it from shifting into anything like the side of a house. Gives yu more wiggle room too with your choice of lowering tree.


----------



## ClimbMIT (Aug 29, 2011)

DangerTree said:


> Oh as a side note please remember the weakest link thing. Not all devices are rated to support large loads know the limit stay well within it such as Porta wraps and figure eights. This is why more often than not I deflect to using simple wraps around trees. If you have more than one tree near by you can S the rope thereby making the wraps not so tight and not crossing over itself. Then if you find there is to much friction you simply walk a wrap out of a tree.


 
I will have to try that next time i am in a tight spot.


----------



## treefaller25 (Sep 6, 2011)

TreeandLand said:


> I need to remove a big white pine, but the homeowner is extra picky about her lawn. This tree is big enough to pound a big trench into it. I will rig the top and some other chunks of wood down, but I am considering felling the last 30 feet with it tied off to a nearby tree. The rigging line would pass through a high block on the second tree and then down to a porta-wrap. I'm thinking: let the tree tip for about five feet, then slow it down, feeding rope into the porta-wrap from a safe distance. The house is far enough away that there is no risk of property damage if it goes wrong. Does anyone use a method like this now and then?


Try some percsion felling and putting tractor tires in the LZ.


----------



## TimberJack_7 (Sep 6, 2011)

I hang a tree from time to time. It is a very effective technique when you need to land something in a postage stamp sized area. I hung two 50ft. elms out of a monster oak while working at a golf course/condo community this summer. They were fully leafed out, pretty bushy elms, probably 12 inches or so in diameter at the base. Used a natural crotch in the oak, a port-a-wrap at the base of the oak, and a 1/2inch bull line for each tree. It worked out well.


What are the dimensions of the tree you are wanting to lower?


----------



## troythetreeman (Sep 6, 2011)

you could also bring in a crane or limb it and use the limbs as bedding and block it down, get them to land flat and youll be fine
"super picky" customers arent always worth working for tho, they can have unreasonable expectations and be impossible to make happy
just bid it high and take your time, if she goes with the cheapest guy call it a blessing and move on


----------



## 48"BAR PINCHER (Sep 7, 2011)

TreeandLand said:


> I need to remove a big white pine, but the homeowner is extra picky about her lawn. This tree is big enough to pound a big trench into it. I will rig the top and some other chunks of wood down, but I am considering felling the last 30 feet with it tied off to a nearby tree. The rigging line would pass through a high block on the second tree and then down to a porta-wrap. I'm thinking: let the tree tip for about five feet, then slow it down, feeding rope into the porta-wrap from a safe distance. The house is far enough away that there is no risk of property damage if it goes wrong. Does anyone use a method like this now and then?


 
I've done it a few times and it worked good. I've seen vids of Mark Chisolm do something similar with a GRCS but with a twist. He tensioned it, cut it off at the butt and it hung there, backed a tractor 3PTH under the butt and tied it fast, then drove the tracotor away to the chipper while the Grcs lowered the top. When the whole thing was on the ground, the rope on the GRCS was untied and moved into the next tree in line to go. The application was widening a powerline ROW with limited room to fell. Super slick, safe and efficient.


----------



## TreeandLand (Sep 10, 2011)

TimberJack_7 said:


> I hang a tree from time to time. It is a very effective technique when you need to land something in a postage stamp sized area. I hung two 50ft. elms out of a monster oak while working at a golf course/condo community this summer. They were fully leafed out, pretty bushy elms, probably 12 inches or so in diameter at the base. Used a natural crotch in the oak, a port-a-wrap at the base of the oak, and a 1/2inch bull line for each tree. It worked out well.
> 
> 
> What are the dimensions of the tree you are wanting to lower?



The dimensions of the pine in question are 30" at the butt, by 70 feet tall. It stands in a group with two smaller pines that also need to go, so if I decide not to "hang" the big tree, I might use it as an anchor for doing that with the other two trees. Your method on those two elms sounds like it was a good way to go. I think that if you lower the trees slowly you are not putting much stress on the rigging line because there is no shock load. I think the weakest link would be the sling holding the block, because it's getting the force of two legs of rope...the working end and the standing end going to the porta-wrap.


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Sep 10, 2011)

DangerTree said:


> Oh as a side note please remember the weakest link thing. Not all devices are rated to support large loads know the limit stay well within it such as Porta wraps and figure eights. This is why more often than not I deflect to using simple wraps around trees. If you have more than one tree near by you can S the rope thereby making the wraps not so tight and not crossing over itself. Then if you find there is to much friction you simply walk a wrap out of a tree.


 
A very long rope, block on the tree to be felled and use a double whipped tackle to reduce the loading on the rigging line.

Cur the hinge fat, so it goes over slowly...


----------



## millbilly (Sep 11, 2011)

I just posted a question like this a month ago and it went in the wrong direction. I did a weight estimate and the pine log will weight is over 9000 pounds. I used 20 inches for the small end. 
Log Weight Calculator at WOODWEB 

If you use a 3/4 bull rope with a tensil stength of 20,000 and a working load rate of 4000 I would assume your taking a chance, and doing that would destroy the integrity of a $300.00 rope


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Sep 11, 2011)

millbilly said:


> I just posted a question like this a month ago and it went in the wrong direction. I did a weight estimate and the pine log will weight is over 9000 pounds. I used 20 inches for the small end.
> Log Weight Calculator at WOODWEB
> 
> If you use a 3/4 bull rope with a tensil stength of 20,000 and a working load rate of 4000 I would assume your taking a chance, and doing that would destroy the integrity of a $300.00 rope


 
If you keep the hinge on, and can let it down slow, then you should still be ok


----------



## Garden Of Eden (Sep 11, 2011)

John Paul Sanborn said:


> If you keep the hinge on, and can let it down slow, then you should still be ok


 
I just did the physics on this, I was bored waiting for the wife to get ready. lol Story of my life. 

Assuming all the numbers on the tree are correct, the maximum weight on the stump at any given time through out the fall will be 6363.63 pounds. Leaving 2636 lbs on the line. Your rope should be more than enough, however, I caution against shock loading it. The numbers get nasty real fast, hence the craters you wish to avoid. 

Good luck, stay safe.

Jeff


----------



## AT sawyer (Sep 11, 2011)

....and of course you're going to make a nice wide open-face cut that will allow the tree to hinge completely over, yes?


----------



## beastmaster (Sep 11, 2011)

I have often thought about trying this but worried the tree could swing or pivot out of control if it came off the stump to soon or if the rope wasn't aligned with the direction the tree was being lowered. I think I would want to lower it using two ropes, one on each side(like a V)so it would be stabilized in the center. That being said, Iv'e seen whole trees laid down with a crane before. 
I would want a high attachment maybe to a pulley then down to a lowering device.
Like I said I have often thought about doing this, and maybe I'm over thinking it, but in the end it never seems worth the time and risk.I'm not so old I'm not willing to learn new tricks, keep us informed on how it works out. Good lluck. Beastmaster


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Sep 12, 2011)

beastmaster said:


> I think I would want to lower it using two ropes, one on each side(like a V)so it would be stabilized in the center.


 
A call this a control, or swing line, you use one to keep the tree from going in an undesired direction, with a swing line you tension it, maybe crank in on it, and cut out part of the hinge. Like a Dutchman with an insurance policy.

Say you need the initial fall to clear canopy, then swing to the right to avoid bushes. I've done this with three ropes, one to pull, one to pay out and one for swing. You need a crew that is skilled and works together, lack of coordination can pooch it up in a hurry. Last time i tried it a rookie was on a critical rope. I told him to hold the line till it cleared canopy, then let it out and back out of the area  

He panicked as it was coming down, held onto the rope, this caused a shock load to the rigging point, broke out deadwood, part of the top came down on him (still holding the line he was to pay out) and part went into the in-ground pool it was supposed to miss. The crew chief had wanted to be on the GRCS thinking that part would be too difficult for the youngster to work out....


----------



## oscar4883 (Sep 12, 2011)

Sometimes I will use a shorty and butt-tie the stem to the stump if I am worried about the hinge breaking before the tree gets down.


----------



## Pelorus (Sep 12, 2011)

Isn't the SWL on a portawrap 2000lbs?
And the weight you are lowering a heck of a lot more than that?


----------



## tree MDS (Sep 12, 2011)

Pelorus said:


> Isn't the SWL on a portawrap 2000lbs?
> And the weight you are lowering a heck of a lot more than that?



Yes, but SWL is for p u s s y s sometimes... especially if you're not shock loading your rigging!

Gotta know what you're doing... the only way I learned what ropes/trees, etc. can handle, was by pushing the limits in my my younger, more immortal feeling days.. really not sure how the newer school is supposed to go about it.. kinda the same I imagine.. just with more BS to wade through along he way. lol.

Glad I lived through it, and am fortunate to have found a happy medium these days.. I guess that's what having experience comes down to.

best of luck!


----------



## flushcut (Sep 12, 2011)

Is it possible to build a large bomb pad and fall the tree on that after it has been limbed up?


----------



## Pelorus (Sep 12, 2011)

I agreee with some (but not all, lol) of what you are saying, MDS.
I have occasional nightmares as reminders of testing immorality and SWL's!

One example was a two week stint in a hospital 5 years ago from a preventable act of stupidity that really should have killed me or at least ended my career. Got myself catapulted out of an old Asplund while using it to crane a log into the back of the truck, (that hank of old bluestreak failed at somewhat less than 8100 lb) and landed on my back very, very close to the exhaust stack. But I digress. My son was a good lad, and folded up the boom and lifted the outriggers BEFORE making the 911 call. Told the cops, medics, doctors that I had simply slipped and fallen off the roof of the truck. 

With at least some of the newer portawraps (Sherrill's stainless one being an example) being produced in China, I think ignoring SWLs and pushing things to their limits may yield unforgiving and maybe lethal consequences far in excess of the deductible on your commercial business insurance policy.


----------



## flushcut (Sep 12, 2011)

Pelorus said:


> I agreee with some (but not all, lol) of what you are saying, MDS.
> I have occasional nightmares as reminders of testing immorality and SWL's!
> 
> One example was a two week stint in a hospital 5 years ago from a preventable act of stupidity that really should have killed me or at least ended my career. Got myself catapulted out of an old Asplund while using it to crane a log into the back of the truck, (that hank of old bluestreak failed at somewhat less than 8100 lb) and landed on my back very, very close to the exhaust stack. But I digress. My son was a good lad, and folded up the boom and lifted the outriggers BEFORE making the 911 call. Told the cops, medics, doctors that I had simply slipped and fallen off the roof of the truck.
> ...


 I didn't know they had load handling capability.


----------



## Pelorus (Sep 12, 2011)

They don't. You know this, I know this, and so does everybody else here.
But I can't tell you how many times I "got away" with using a 1972 Asplundh (on an '86 International S-1900) to "crane" logs into the back of the truck.

Incidently, the summer after my human cannonball act, I sold that truck to a competitor (with FULL disclosure - plus we used to work together a fair bit, and still help each other out on jobs once in awhile), and he is still operating it. 
As the third owner (original one was the City of Barrie, Ontario) it will probably kill him someday.


----------



## millbilly (Sep 12, 2011)

Pelorus said:


> They don't. You know this, I know this, and so does everybody else here.
> But I can't tell you how many times I "got away" with using a 1972 Asplundh (on an '86 International S-1900) to "crane" logs into the back of the truck.
> 
> Incidently, the summer after my human cannonball act, I sold that truck to a competitor (with FULL disclosure - plus we used to work together a fair bit, and still help each other out on jobs once in awhile), and he is still operating it.
> As the third owner (original one was the City of Barrie, Ontario) it will probably kill him someday.


 
Are you saying , you were in the bucket, loading logs tied to the boom? The rope you were using to lift the logs broke, and and it shot you out of the bucket?


----------



## Pelorus (Sep 12, 2011)

Guilty.
tree job was basically done - brush had been chipped, all that was left to do was get the damn logs in the truck and go home.
We were tired, hot, thirsty as hell, and I didn't bother putting saddle back on or tying in to boom.
Could have run the controls from the ground, but it was easier to see what was going on from the bucket.
The rest of the story = pain. T12, L1&2 & pelvis fractures, and good gash in head. happened in mid-July; was climbing again by early October, but Holy Cow, did that accident ever smarten me up. Made me seriously consider getting into another line of work. 

Also guilty in the past of using that poor truck to hoist up roof trusses on houses on several occaisions, and in one memorable act of blatant stupidity, to help an electrical contractor buddy to lift two hydro poles into holes at a private campground. 

I have seen my buddy (who bought the truck from me) use his F-550 and a portawrap with 3/4" stablebraid to lift hung up trees, and frankly it scares the heck out of me. I think it is a accident just waiting to happen - if that portawrap lets go, whatever is in it's path is going to get demolished.


----------



## flushcut (Sep 13, 2011)

Ya know they say that the SWL of a porty is 2g's so the breaking is maybe 20g's using the X10 safety factor, but what is it really? Does anybody know?


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Sep 14, 2011)

My big problem with SWL, no one talks about tensile. Een with ropes they talk about ABS, or average breaking strength. Minimum breaking strength should be know by the user.

FWIW, I've heard at shows that hardwear uses a 5:1 or 4:1 ratio, the 10:1 is a rule of thumb for shock loading tree rope.


----------



## flushcut (Sep 15, 2011)

John Paul Sanborn said:


> My big problem with SWL, no one talks about tensile. Een with ropes they talk about ABS, or average breaking strength. Minimum breaking strength should be know by the user.
> 
> FWIW, I've heard at shows that hardwear uses a 5:1 or 4:1 ratio, the 10:1 is a rule of thumb for shock loading tree rope.


 
Ok so that being said 10g's at 5:1 for the porty which I think is a little conservative for the large one but it is a starting point. I would have to agree with you JPS minimum breaking strength should be the standard instead of the ABS.


----------



## TimberJack_7 (Sep 15, 2011)

TreeandLand said:


> The dimensions of the pine in question are 30" at the butt, by 70 feet tall. It stands in a group with two smaller pines that also need to go, so if I decide not to "hang" the big tree, I might use it as an anchor for doing that with the other two trees. Your method on those two elms sounds like it was a good way to go. I think that if you lower the trees slowly you are not putting much stress on the rigging line because there is no shock load. I think the weakest link would be the sling holding the block, because it's getting the force of two legs of rope...the working end and the standing end going to the porta-wrap.


 
Yeah the key to hanging those trees was to not shockload the rope. All I did was make a low cut, a few inches off the ground, ok, maybe more like 8 - 10 inches off the ground. Enough to let the rope stretch but not have the load of the entire tree on it, also keeping the tree upright in the process and allowing the butt to come into contact with the ground. I used a cant hook to get the tree to come off the stump. After that you just cut the tree log in 36 - 48in sections and limb it as your ground guy lowers it nice and easy. As long as your lowering system holds up (know your equipment limits) you will have control of it, but take care not to walk directly underneath a hung tree for any reason.

It sounds like it might be a good idea to hang the two smaller pines from the large one as you have suggested. Once that is done, why not just block the what is left of the big pine out?

PS - When using a block for hanging a tree, beware the "triangle of death". There was an ABC employee killed out this way several years ago. Someone had set a block up in a tree to use a rope and a truck to pull some logs out of a steep downhill dropoff. Well, the block was at the point of the triangle, and the truck was pulling a log up the hill. Between the position of the truck and the position of the log, both working ends of the rope were at about a 45 degree angle, basically forming a perfect triangle. Well unfortunately, IIRC correctly, the log got hung up but the guy driving the truck kept pulling. As a result, the sling securing the block in the tree broke and sent the block rocketing down right through an employees hard hat and killing him instantly and injuring the guy that was right next to him too.


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Sep 15, 2011)

flushcut said:


> Ok so that being said 10g's at 5:1 for the porty which I think is a little conservative for the large one but it is a starting point. I would have to agree with you JPS minimum breaking strength should be the standard instead of the ABS.


 
Their argument is that MBS could be outlier data, well throw the anomolies out and tell me what the bottom of the curve is. Statistically significant low end of the curve? ahh screw it, MBS I', sticking to it


----------



## flushcut (Sep 16, 2011)

John Paul Sanborn said:


> Their argument is that MBS could be outlier data, well throw the anomolies out and tell me what the bottom of the curve is. Statistically significant low end of the curve? ahh screw it, MBS I', sticking to it


 
:agree2:


----------

