# How much sag is acceptable in a sawmill beam??



## KiwiBro (Jan 17, 2015)

Setting up over first log I noticed the portable sawmill I bought has close to 10mm sag when carriage is mid span. Beam is 5.6m long.

Manufacturer says that's acceptable. I say it ain't right. What do you guys think?


----------



## chads (Jan 17, 2015)

I would think it needs a jack or blocks in the middle to hold it up.
I don't think it should be off that much.
Cha d


----------



## KiwiBro (Jan 17, 2015)

It's a turbo warrior swing blade with 16 HP engine. Here's their site for reference

http://turbosawmill.com/weekendwarrior/

So you will see it is just one beam and not really much opportunity to support mid span.

I am OK with a few mm. I expected there'd be some sag but this much seems wrong. Just trying to gauge if I am being unrealistic or if people in the industry think there's a fault or flaw in the mill beam and this much sag is too much. Of the few people I have asked so far, nobody thinks this much sag is OK, but I need to ask more people to be sure.

I put a stringline on it and took a video but nowhere near a good enough internet connection to upload yet.


----------



## chads (Jan 17, 2015)

I would turn it over and see how much its off then.
If you can jump on it a bit and bend it the 10mm. I would put some blocks up to stop it from going too much till you get a feel for it. It may not be straight when your doing it but when you turn it back over you would be flat.
Chad


----------



## lfnh (Jan 18, 2015)

with a grain of salt, this mightgive a rough idea.
https://www.easycalculation.com/engineering/mechanical/deflection-hollow-rectangular-beams.php


----------



## KiwiBro (Jan 18, 2015)

Managed to upload a video:



Am I being unreasonable in thinking it's not right?


----------



## Rudolf73 (Jan 18, 2015)

I also think 10mm is quite a bit of sag for that standard length beam. Maybe 4mm absolute max sag considering its just a single beam supported only at the ends. 
From memory the new 4-stroke models have a larger steel beam to support the heavier engines. I also remember reading somewhere that they are considerably stronger than the "chainsaw mill" alloy beams and should therefore provide less sag. 

Jake may have to do you a good deal on a new steel beam, that would help for sure.


----------



## mesupra (Jan 18, 2015)

I think it comes down to the product, with a 10mm sag is it still producing near perfect wood? If yes run it. If no fix it.


----------



## BobL (Jan 18, 2015)

lfnh said:


> with a grain of salt, this mightgive a rough idea.
> https://www.easycalculation.com/engineering/mechanical/deflection-hollow-rectangular-beams.php



Let's at least run this simulation.
We need the 
- type of material, 
- cross sectional dimensions of the beam, including the thickness. and 
- total weight on the beam. 
It sounds to me that 10 mm is about right.


----------



## 4x4American (Jan 18, 2015)

Saw some wood, see how the lumber comes out. You might try posting same thread in the forestry forum, lot more sawmill boys talk over there.


----------



## Sawyer Rob (Jan 18, 2015)

Yup, try it and measure the lumber. If the lumber runs out too much, I'd NOT be happy... If the lumber is acceptable, then who cares how it looks!!

SR


----------



## Woody912 (Jan 18, 2015)

KiwiBro said:


> Setting up over first log I noticed the portable sawmill I bought has close to 10mm sag when carriage is mid span. Beam is 5.6m long.
> 
> Manufacturer says that's acceptable. I say it ain't right. What do you guys think?



Will it sag that much when it is actually in the cut? Would think the kerf might tend to support it


----------



## IanB22 (Jan 18, 2015)

I think 10mm over 16ft is to much. That being said, if the unit is second hand, and you are getting what you want from the blade, it wouldn't be a problem for me. Must run a few cuts to see how much the sag really is.


394xp w/ 33" & 42" Bars - Full Comp Full Chisel - 36" Granberg Alaskan Mill 
455 Rancher w/ 20" Bar - Semi Chisel
Husqvarna Forestry Helmet & Full Wrap Chaps


----------



## M.R. (Jan 18, 2015)

Other than sawing your own crown into the lumber, I'm guessing as my slow Internet connection wouldn't download the vid. ...That you'll have to use a reduced feed rate to keep the bounce under control when coming back in the vertical mode.


----------



## KiwiBro (Jan 18, 2015)

Having traded emails and phone calls with turbo, he was adament close to 10mm sag is acceptable and wouldn't be a problem in use and I should go ahead and start cutting. So I did that log in the video and yes it does translate into the wood. Fine if flat sawing off the top quarter of log because the tension helps straighten the board, but that works against me on the bottom side of the log. I Cut a 6x6 and had about 4mm of curve over 2.6m. Could cut oversized but on rigid posts where people are wanting to leave rough sawn I'm stuffed.

I've a heap of logs to cut full length but this sag is going to mean cutting way oversized.

Yes, there's bounce on the vert cuts unless I go real slow. Also on the horizontal cuts. If trying to hoz cut say 6" I tried 2 passes of 3". The first is very bouncy because the blade anti chatter/bounce device doesn't extend out far enough. The second pass is much better.

I too have concerns about the beam not handling the weight and quizzed Jake hard but pre sale Jake was quite adament it would be fine and I relied on their years of experience and assurances. I later learned they went to the steel and longer beam because of problems but I have been told multiple times it's not the weight of the 16hp manual option like mine but the larger engine with all the automation gear was too much for the Ali beam. Somehow after my experience I don't agree.

Right now, I'm just trying to figure out if I'm being unreasonable expecting less beam sag and being unhappy about this. 

I tried ratchet strap and mid cam on bottom side of beam to see if I could get enough tension to bring it up some but no real difference. Needs more tension than I can sort out on site in middle of nowhere.


----------



## Sawyer Rob (Jan 18, 2015)

I remember going to a show and a guy was milling with a swinger... It started hopping and you could see it in the lumber. He put a roller of some kind ahead of the blade that supported the motor/blade weight and got it to stop... I wish I could remember more, but it was a lot of shows ago...

A mill has to be pretty accurate for me, or I'm NOT a happy camper! So, I completely understand your frustration!

Like yesterday, I milled out some "stickers",







If my mill couldn't keep decent accuracy, how could you get decent stickers like this without planning them, or resawing them on a tablesaw??






There's a few 7/8" x 2", but almost all of them are 7/8" by 7/8" and I expect them to be within 1/32"...(I'll pull out the wider ones later, and use them in the garden for stakes)

I hope you find a solution to your problem!

SR


----------



## kimosawboy (Jan 18, 2015)

I think you are right in being concerned with that much sag...If you bought this new (recently) you might consider taking it back for a swap or for them to fix.
If you have had this for awhile, you might try getting a hold of some welders/machinists that have alot of experience under there belt, to ask them if they can heat treat the sag out of the beam. I have zero experience with aluminum but with Steel it is straight forward and I would suspect in capable hands aluminum would be the same.
Good Luck
G Vavra


----------



## KiwiBro (Jan 18, 2015)

Woody912 said:


> Will it sag that much when it is actually in the cut? Would think the kerf might tend to support it


I don't think it sags as much in the cut, but it still does. That it doesn't sag as much might mean the blade is doing more work and subject to more heat than a straight beam blade would. I don't know if that will become an issue or not. I'd rather not have to find out.

I guess the bandsaw guys can crow about their thinner kerf being much thinner while mine is probably bigger than advertised.


----------



## BobL (Jan 18, 2015)

kimosawboy said:


> I think you are right in being concerned with that much sag...If you bought this new (recently) you might consider taking it back for a swap or for them to fix.
> If you have had this for awhile, you might try getting a hold of some welders/machinists that have alot of experience under there belt, to ask them if they can heat treat the sag out of the beam. I have zero experience with aluminum but with Steel it is straight forward and I would suspect in capable hands aluminum would be the same.


I don't think his beam is bent. The beam is probably straight but sags under its own weight (they all do that) and more so when the weight of a power head is added. To maintain a straight beam over that length would need the bean to be made with a bend in it to be able to take the power head weight into account - not so easy to do. 



> I tried ratchet strap and mid cam on bottom side of beam to see if I could get enough tension to bring it up some but no real difference. Needs more tension than I can sort out on site in middle of nowhere.


You will need many 10's of tons of tension to remove that degree of sag over that length. As a guide, the amount of tension needed to reduce the ~3/8" sag in the middle of a 60" bar to 1/16", is around 13 tons.


----------



## Turbosawmill001 (Jan 19, 2015)

Hi Guys,

Jake Peterson here. I have advised that he should send the beam back to us where we can crown it slightly so that it settles straight if it's an issue.

Noting that the beam may be sagging 7mm but the reality is the ends where the saw pivots is not relevant. So the actual sag that may be relevant in the timber is only about 2-3mm.

I have spoken to other sawmill merchants today and they have agreed that it would be very hard to find a piece of timber that is within 5mm tolerance over 4m length.

I also advised that we do have larger steel beams available. 7.2m long with 2.5mm deflection. Although this moves away from the super light weight beam idea. The 16hp is very close to the limits but completely ok in terms of the quality of timber it produces.

I've used this saw and know that it cuts dimensionally accurate timber.

The mill was sold at a very good price. The galv. Beam option is still very available if it's needed.

I will do a very good price on the heavy duty beam if out of preference needed.

Cheers


----------



## 4x4American (Jan 19, 2015)

That's quite a bit of sag. Although, being that you measure in millipeters is throwing me off!


----------



## Sawyer Rob (Jan 20, 2015)

The OP is worried about the sag from his string... I say it's the lumber that I'd be worried about!

We need to see some lumber off that mill and a tape measure on it to see what it's doing...

"If" MY BSM had a little over 3/16" (5mm) run out over 13', (4meters) I'd be making some small adjustments to get it back to under 1/32"...

To some people 5mm is a lot, to others it isn't... The OP needs to make that decision and if it bothers him, send the beam back to be crowned...

Personally, I'd send it back to be crowned AND also buy a new longer steel one to have at home for better quality lumber and for longer logs...

SR


----------



## Boon (Jan 20, 2015)

Is that a 20L? drum sitting on there- that's 20kg added, perhaps if you do not want to up grade to the larger steel beam as Jake suggested maybe try halving the water volume.

In reality weight for strength does not equate.

If it were me for my personal use which it sounds like you are using the mill for and little transport is needed then I'd bite the bullet and go for gal & save the ally beam for occasions where light weight is needed and put less water in the drum. Still it sounds like you have done alright for your self getting the mill at a good price and they are willing to help you out with the problem at a good price. Last week was wishing I could get one of these.

Would be interested to know what you decide


----------



## KiwiBro (Feb 7, 2015)

Boon said:


> If it were me for my personal use which it sounds like you are using the mill for and little transport is needed then I'd bite the bullet and go for gal & save the ally beam for occasions where light weight is needed and put less water in the drum. Still it sounds like you have done alright for your self getting the mill at a good price and they are willing to help you out with the problem at a good price. Last week was wishing I could get one of these.
> 
> Would be interested to know what you decide



That train of thought is understandable. However, the only reason I'd agree to a discounted steel beam is to hope to get more than I paid for it in resale value because there is very little chance I would ever use it. Portability is crucial to my needs, hence why I bought a sawmill with a beam that I was told had been beefed up and was solid but which I could still carry myself. The steel beam is way too heavy and a mill with one was not what I originally bought for a reason - it wasn't wanted/needed.

The sawmill is simply, I believe, unfit for purpose.

Further, the use is primarily commercial (but of course I had hoped milling with this Turbo would be enjoyable). I need to produce lumber and provide a service I can be proud of that does not undermine what I'm trying to achieve or my reputation.

Turbo's proposed solutions are to crown the beam and/or cut the main beam into sections, adding joiners that stiffen the beam. Based on my experience with both the beam and the joiners, neither of these are acceptable solutions, because the first does not address the fundamental, unacceptable softness of this beam, and the second has proven in use to not only be a PITA but inaccurate at best.

Crowning the beam may allow it to settle straight-ish when carriage load comes on, but Turbo have yet to advise how doing so can counter what I feel is atrocious horizontal bounce it displays in a number of scenarios. It is in this respect and in my opinion like a wet noodle.

Adding joiners might be seen as a worthwhile solution by those without the benefit of real-world use or my experiences with such joiners but I can tell you guys the joiners are not something I can accept, even though I know from real world use that it does stiffen the beam somewhat. A set was sold to me with the extension. Do people know there are something close to 47 parts to the joiners I have and even though Jake now advises they have dropped some of those parts, there are still 24 allen key bolts to hold the join together? Having spent the extra time to ensure all bolts are well located and tight whenever setting up over a log (one set was bad enough but now I am expected to use two?) the joint will not only creep apart during the day but the joiners and joint need to be built extremely accurately or the two parts of the beam will not align correctly and there will be a noticeable wind across the joint that is not only heard and felt in extra blade stress as it transitions from one beam section to the other, but can be bad enough to induce ledges in the cut bad enough the cut surface needs to be skimmed every drop to get rid of these.

I guess there could be an argument made that in expecting a solution that is practically equivalent to what I originally paid for but never received, that I am being unreasonable. This argument is especially understandable from those with no experience with these mills, who have not seen the videos I have taken of some of these issues or who don't know me well enough to know I shoot straight. To that end I have proposed to Turbo to put this before an independent arbitrator and agree to be bound by their findings. That proposal was not accepted.

Despite me having and registering concerns about this beam prior to use and having been told by Turbo to use it and that it will be fine in use, and despite not accepting the solutions proposed, and despite Turbo not being willing to refund my money or even apologise for a sad litany of what I consider faults or design errors or worse, some of which I feel render the product unsafe, Turbo has rejected the offer of binding arbitration.

Interestingly, and for those in the know, quite revealingly, Turbo have publicly stated they have potential buyers for this mill if I want to sell it, but when pressed they will not reveal those buyers to me, nor pass my details onto them, nor just refund me and then on-sell to these buyers. Instead they expect not only have my money but for me to, at my own time and expense, send this mill to them so that they will then have both my money and the mill, and in respect of the negotiations with these alleged buyers, they want to "do the talking".

In my opinion this didn't need to be the drama it has turned into. One which has costed me horrendous amounts of time and lost revenue/opportunity at the worst possible point of the year. If they had just admitted the beam is unfit for purpose (when it' is shown to have about 18mm of sag when using the 1.4m extension that was sold with it, and this translates to about 12-14mm in the wood on shallow cuts at least, how could any reasonable person consider this anything but unfit for purpose), apologised for the inconvenience and for any misrepresentation (expressed, implied, perceived or otherwise), have the design and engineering nous to come up with a solution that doesn't leave me worse off than what I thought I was buying, or just took this mill back and on-sold it themselves, then I'd be back milling, either with their mill or with a Lucas or Peterson by now (Mahoe is not only out of my budget but I suspect not as portable as I need, although they make very awesome mills and there is not a single Mahoe mill owner I have met or corresponded with who is unhappy with their purchase).

I do like to keep my money in NZ and buy NZ made, but Peterson have not responded to my recent email(granted, not couched as a sale enquiry), Mahoe are out of my budget despite being the top mill in the non-stationary NZ made mills here, in my opinion, and Warren Lucas has been so incredibly helpful without me dangling a single carrot in front of him (and the local NZ Lucas rep- Arnold also very helpful), that I would consider a Lucas without hesitation now. To be honest, I have been blown away with the amount of time and help Warren Lucas has been willing to provide and if this reflects the level of after sales service, I have no doubt at all I would be looked after very well by Lucas after the sale.

But I have to resolve this Turbo issue first, to decide what happens next.


----------



## Sawyer Rob (Feb 7, 2015)

I'm STILL waiting to see the lumber off that mill, with a ruler on it in different places, to see just how much of a complaint you really have...

SR


----------



## KiwiBro (Feb 7, 2015)

Sawyer Rob said:


> I'm STILL waiting to see the lumber off that mill, with a ruler on it in different places, to see just how much of a complaint you really have...
> 
> SR


beam and cut sag:


horizontal deflection (beam is narrower than high, and profile is such that vertical deflection translates into horizontal deflection also and visa versa):


----------



## KiwiBro (Feb 8, 2015)

Apart from the occasions where the side shifting wanders and needs a tightening or I screw up and haven't set it properly, I don't experience incidences of run-off or poorly dimensioned lumber and the mill makes mostly acceptably parallel cuts. This has never been disputed. That said, I've only milled 5 logs and can't see me milling many more. 

Equally, I have advised in the first video I published, that I got what I thought was a great deal on the mill package. However, I was never told the mill was discounted because it was experimental/transitional or anything other than fit for purpose, rather a recent big export order creating economies of scale and the fact I had been waiting a while were behind the discounted offer. 

The issues are that even in completely un-tensioned wood, this thing is cutting bowed and crooked lumber, is incapable of cutting a straight line, and can bounce unacceptably when doing even a 3" horizontal cut. I'm of the belief the beam is just too soft and can't handle the loads to within acceptable tolerances. 

While anyone can come up with a scenario where the tension in the wood might be opposite the cut vertical and horizontal deflections, thus this soft beam and the deflections could be passed off as actually beneficial in that specific scenario, what happens for the rest of the tensioned log? Surely it's not a great leap of logic to realise that starting from a reasonably straight cutting capability is the best and only acceptable outcome that will give the miller the best opportunity of staying within grading rules and producing lumber or providing a service they can be proud of.

I don't buy, and neither should anybody else, the argument that an approximate 14mm cut sag is within grading rules thus acceptable. Should anyone have so much of their grading allowances (over half of the allowance I work to in, for example, 4x1 hardwood decking lumber) in a 5m log consumed by the sawmill even before considering and trying to work around log tension, effectively halving what's left to accommodate tension? To my mind this is ludicrous. 

Who wants to spend over half their deflection allowances even before their mill blade touches a log? 
Who wants to produce lower grades, downgrade or reject lumber from tensioned wood that would otherwise be acceptable or higher grades if only the mill could cut a straightish line? 
Who wants to have to double pass even a 3" cut to avoid beam bounce?
Who wants to set up rails at each end to seat and shift the mill on in those situations where the log is actually within the maximum cut dimensions of the mill but and for no other reason, they have to keep the opening horizontal cuts on each drop to 2" deep to avoid the beam bouncing around (and because of the beam design, the bounce is both horizontal and vertical, adding more load/stress to a blade already dealing with a deflecting beam)?

I've experienced all this and more and, along with the beam sag and horizontal deflection, these are unacceptable consequences of a beam that is just too soft to handle the loads in my opinion. I haven't spoken to a single person who considers this acceptable other than the manufacturer. I would not have bought this mill, at any price, if I knew such things would be possible. 

Most of us are all too familiar with the trade-offs and concessions we make often to compromise because of various factors, including budget constraints. But these material facts of beam bounce, deflection and general softness were never disclosed pre purchase when I feel they reasonably ought to have been. In fact, I was told the beam was beefed up from their chainsaw powerhead beams and was solid. I would not have bought this mill and committed to a season (that is now in tatters) of harvesting and milling sawlogs otherwise.

I'm not trying to get a champaign mill on a beer budget. I'd be happy with a beer. But, equally, if nobody can explain to me how what has been proposed as a solution thus far is significantly more than trying to make a silk purse from a sows ear, then I cannot accept it and have explained why, seemingly to no avail.


----------



## Sawyer Rob (Feb 8, 2015)

I'm going to comment on all of your post combined. I'll just apologize up front if you don't like my comments...

I would NOT be happy with that much run out with ANY mill...

I would NOT have bought that mill without trying it... PEROID!

When something is a GREAT deal, there's ALWAYS a reason why and when it's MY money on the line, I make it my mission to know why...

I think you have some "shared blame" here, and your best option is to have the beam worked on and chalk it up to a learning experience...

SR


----------



## KiwiBro (Feb 8, 2015)

Sawyer Rob said:


> I'm going to comment on all of your post combined. I'll just apologize up front if you don't like my comments...
> 
> I would NOT be happy with that much run out with ANY mill...
> 
> ...


No need to apologise, I understand where you are coming from. Absolutely, I should have demanded to try the mill before loading it on the truck. Basically, I should not have trusted the manufacturer, should have undertaken greater diligence and not relied on the one year warranty as a back-stop. I relied on the decades of sawmill experience and the fact they had just demoed the mill at a trade show and had already been set-up and run by them as sufficient enough to ensure such issues like this would be unlikely. I was wrong in that regard.

I really do lament the old days when someone so advised of problems by a customer would be horrified and embarrassed and move heaven and earth to make it right. I think this is one of the reasons I am so impressed with Lucas sawmills - the service I have received lately even as a non-customer reminds me of the good old days.

I also have a good milling mate in Aus' who has a few stories to tell of how Mahoe backed their mills enough to allow him in another country no less to take delivery and set up and prove the mill before paying for it. He is someone who has been there, done that, and is happy with Mahoe. I should have asked more advice from him and acted upon the advice I did get, but that's another regret about all this to add to the others.


----------



## golddredgergold (Feb 9, 2015)

Still at it here ehh kiwi? The other forum locked the thread due to your persistant complaing after you have been offered several solutions by the manufacture to take care of you for FREE! Yet here you are still whining that it won't cut. Just plain blows my mind when I read your post now. Stop whining and take the mill back to Jakes. He will arch the beam and add inner channels to make it more suited to your demands. Or get the heftier beam and be done with it. Problem solved or best yet take the whole thing back and let him sell it for you. No as a business owner myself I would NOT pass another customers info along to you so you can make the sell. He will handle it for you there for offering warranty and support for the new customer properly. No involvement needed by you. Load the mill up make the 8 hour drive and get it over with... You are getting nowhere by making videos and posting them online. Who cares and as a matter of fact like said on the other forum I am myself more convinced than ever that when I buy my next swing mill it will be a warrior. Just for the simple fact I have watched you try to drag them through the dirt and they have held true, offered solutions for you and have never blown up or said one bad thing about you. That is pretty solid manufacture considering the situation. If you are so stoked on a Lucas or Mahoe then why did you stop and buy a worrior? Please do not spend anytime to respond to me. It is not needed. All that is needed is for you to take the mill back and let Jake sell it for you and give your money back when it sells. Then you can go buy another mill and try to pile drive that ones issues into the ground till they have had enough of you. Nothing is perfect. I agreed with you on the sag when this all started but now I do think you are just a bit and with "all do respect" Nuts! No offence..... just my opinion......


----------



## KiwiBro (Feb 9, 2015)

golddredgergold said:


> No offence.....


 None taken. But I'd welcome the opportunity to discuss a few of your points if you could suspend character assassinations long enough to objectively address reason and fact in an intelligent manner. Do you want to try, or are you more of the spray and walk away type?


----------



## golddredgergold (Feb 9, 2015)

Your time will be better spent loading the mill up and making the drive to solve your issues with it then to worry about me here on the other side of the planet. Good luck and I truly hope the drive is safe one and your mill is sold fast so you can get on with your lumber business.


----------



## KiwiBro (Feb 9, 2015)

golddredgergold said:


> making the drive to solve your issues


 Having detailed why the proposed solutions don't address the underlying issue or solve all of the symptoms thereof, will you put your money where your mouth is and reimburse me my time and money if I'm proven right, or at the very least detail why you think the solutions will work and upon what basis you form such an opinion?

I ask because it's bloody easy to wallow in ignorance and leap to unsubstantiated judgements when it's not your time or money that's being farked with.


----------



## golddredgergold (Feb 9, 2015)

Sorry I will not fund Your trip or issues. Nice try. I do know if in your situation I would be standing at the door with my mill ready to be given the "fix" promised and then asking to be shown a demo run right there at the shop so that any issues can be addressed on site and resolved. 8 hour drive and two days or so and hotel room to get my mill back running perfect? Hell yes in a heartbeat. What will it cost for the entire trip? $500 if I eat steak along the way including hotel gas ect.? Yes because when I am in peak season cutting lumber to the tune of $400 to $500 per day I would want my mill running and the issue solved NOW! 2 to 3 day loss and $500 cash to fix a $10,000+ sawmill that will get hundreds in cash coming back into my pocket soon as I return home? Where is the problem? You...... as far as I can see. Get the mill fixed running, repaired sold whatever and get back to sawing! You say you are losing revenue? Then what's the hang up? If the jobs are waiting then get to Jakes have him show you face to face with your mill setup at his shop. Then if you and him decide right there it has issues and it cannot be solved now you can request a refund or a plan to solve your problem. But at least go get the free help already offered and make sure you are happy with the fix before you leave the shop after you see it cut a log right in front of you. Complaining here is NOT going to fix your machine. Driving to the manfacture for the fix and demo to address your mills issues and come to some sort of agreement with the manufacture while there will FIX your problem. Sorry no you cannot manipulate me to buy your trip for you mill to get solved. I am sharper than that. My grandpa was a bunch like you letting a dime hold up a dollar. Not sure how that translates to NZ dollar but stop letting pocket change hold up thousands!


Your thread here is doing no good for anyone. It is not positive nor productive in anyway and you are hell bent on keeping this topic in every ones face. Not good for the forum or it,s readers. So I will not be feeding the fire and responding to you Any further as it really does not matter to me weather you ever get to saw or not. But I no longer wish to see your topic on my favorite forums. So I will report this thread in hopes it gets locked down as it did elsewhere on the net.


----------



## KiwiBro (Feb 9, 2015)

When asked to substantiate your opinion and why you consider such proposed solutions will resolve the issues, you do nothing of the sort. Neither are you willing to put your own money on the line while demanding I spend mine and my time chasing solutions you yourself are unwilling to substantiate. Have you even thought about the proposed solutions critically? Sorry, but I'm fresh out of blind faith, having spent it assuming there would be no such issues in the first place. It is entirely reasonable to scrutinise how the proposed solutions will actually solve the problems. If you think otherwise, then we'll have to agree to disagree.

Having the benefit of experience with this mill now, I cannot see how what has been proposed will work, have asked and not had any serious replies from anyone, including the manufacturer, detailing how it will work. A straight, soft beam will still bounce wont it, and given the shape of this beam that bounce ends up in both horizontal and vertical planes even if the primary load the beam clearly cannot adequately resist starts in one plane. When asked how the crowning will solve the bounce, the manufacturer suggested I should double pass everything over 2" deep to avoid the bounce or buy the larger, heavier, longer steel beam, despite knowing exactly why the latter is not acceptable and materially different to what I was sold. When shown how much this beam bounces on even just a 3" cut, a milling mate recently commented "**** what the fuk. Thats crazy, defintly not acceptable." Yet, the manufacturer considers having to double pass a 3" horizontal cut to avoid bounce is acceptable.

Thus far, there has been virtually nil substantiation of the proposed solutions and you've demonstrated no such scrutiny that would give weight to your opinion either. Instead, I am expected to blindly accept, not scrutinise, and basically conduct myself in the very same sheeple manner that SR has already claimed (not without some justification I might add) helped get me into this mess in the first place. Seems I'm damned if I do and damned if I don't.

*editing to add* while I disagree with invoking the moderator card, I admire you at least had the gonads to admit you are the reporting type. Not many squealers value that level of transparency.


----------



## Boon (Feb 9, 2015)

is that true? stopped at other forums

intelligence........ used to harm,
no amount of help or advice will make a difference no matter who it is from

-BLOCKED-


----------



## KiwiBro (Feb 9, 2015)

Boon said:


> no amount of help or advice will make a difference no matter who it is from


Incorrect. Thanks to everyone who has made a genuine effort to help. By not accepting such help, please don't think I am ungrateful, merely that I reserve the right to question such help to better asses whether it will lead to a good outcome. If such questioning offends anyone offering help then I apologise but please note such questioning needs to happen lest I make the same mistakes as last time - blindly accepting, assuming things would go OK and I'd be looked after if not.

How will the crowning solve the bounce problems? No amount of 'help' has explained that rather critical issue, yet.
How will the joiners ensure a properly aligned joint? No amount of 'help' has explained that either, yet.
How am I to cart, carry and set up a steel beam (that costs more and materially differs from what I agreed to purchase), over a log, by myself? No amount of 'help' has explained that, yet.

Help that solves the problems without leaving me substantially worse off is most welcome indeed. If the problems can't be solved, then help via refund is welcome also. If a refund is out of the question, then help putting me in contact with all these alleged buyers so I can sell this mill with a clear conscience would be welcome also.

Holding the gun of an unacceptable product, one that I feel is unfit for purpose, against my temple and telling me to accept proposed solutions without detailing how they will actually solve all the problems, is a rather peculiar form of 'help'. The manufacturer has been asked repeatedly how the crowned beam will adequately resist the bounce created by even a 3" cut. Posters here have been asked also. Nobody has 'helped' explain that.

Further, nobody I have asked has said they would be happy with a beam that can't handle a 3" cut without significant bounce.

My season of milling is shot. I've come to accept that. What should have been a profitable and highly enjoyable season of milling is nothing but a nightmare and what really grates is not only having to let people down like this but then turn around and jump through so many hoops and fight for a reasonable way out of the nightmare. If the farmers have not sold up by next season (many are trying to sell up) and are not so annoyed with me to not to ever deal with me again, then I'll have a shot at milling next Summer, if I can find a reasonable way out of this nightmare in the interim.


----------



## Sawyer Rob (Feb 9, 2015)

Quit whining! lol lol

Take the mill to the mfg, and have the beam worked on, then try it right there on site...

After trying it, IF you aren't happy with the cut, leave the mill there and have them sell it...

There is NO perfect outcome, and even though I don't agree with them selling it with that much run out in the first place, that IS the best of your options, at least of what's been posted here...

Remember, no one held a gun to your head and made you buy it in the first place...

SR


----------



## Turbosawmill (Feb 10, 2015)

Hi All,

This mill has been demonstrated at the National Fieldays show at Mystery Creek and used at our factory (it was tested thoroughly). Yes the extension obviously is at its limit. But having looked at the video footage provided by Kiwi I note that the beam join has a significant opening at the bottom of the join. This leads me to believe that either the join is not screwed up tight or simply installed without consideration. I expect a lot of that 18mm is coming from the join.

I advised Kiwi that I have a number of buyers keen to buy this mill, all he has to do is return it. *I advised him that we will record actual deflection from our end and take further footage sawing a hardwood log (we would obviously upload it and share our discovery prior on selling).* Also note that the logs Kiwi is sawing is macrocarpa (a very soft and easy timber to saw). So I am curious as to what has gone so wrong at his end. I also note his mention of it being unsafe. Of all the videos Kiwi has taken I have not seen the saw fitted with the recommended safety guards installed at all (this is concerning).

So in order to provide a balanced argument please find video footage of Kiwi's *actual* mill being used (I am the operator). His mill is very light and is perfectly suited to the alloy standard beam length. The extension of course will add further sag (at this point a potential buyer should start considering the heavy duty beam when purchasing, if this will be an issue for them).


Kiwi notes horizontal bounce. Well we provided with his mill this nifty gadget which *completely* removes horizontal bounce. Works 100%. We actually tested it in the hardest timber we could find locally (I'm not aware of any other mill with this kind of device). This is the 8" Warrior sawing dry gum cutting full depth horizontal 6" in one pass. I expect a couple hours training may have helped considerably in this case. This beam did not have the extra side plate attached either (found on Kiwi's).


Cheers.
Jake.


----------



## KiwiBro (Feb 10, 2015)

Turbosawmill said:


> Yes the extension obviously is at its limit.


 LOL. I feel the beam itself is beyond acceptable limits and the extension just turns it into a horror story. There are other turbo users who have said that 6mm is at their acceptable limits yet that beam without extensions has way more than that. But we'll never agree on what is considered acceptable. Which is why I offered to be bound by an independent arbitrators decision but you weren't keen. If they found against me, I'll suck it up, apologise, and move on.


Turbosawmill said:


> I note that the beam join has a significant opening at the bottom of the join. This leads me to believe that either the join is not screwed up tight or simply installed without consideration.


 You think I would post a video of such a critical matter and not ensure everything was screwed up tight? You think I enjoy milling curves just to piss you off? Ridiculous. The fact is, the joiners have 24 allen key bolts that have to be individually located to even screw up tight and there is next to nil wriggle room to correct poorly aligned joiners (who made and set up the individually numbered joiners-hint it wasn't me), and despite bolts being tight, the joins creep over the day. Are you starting to understand yet why I don't see how adding even more of these joiners in some last ditch effort to stiffen the beam is going to be anything but yet another failure? If it were not for my experience with the joiners you did supply, I'd think it might be the best of the proposed solutions, because I do know the joiners stiffen the beam at that point.


Turbosawmill said:


> I advised Kiwi that I have a number of buyers keen to buy this mill, all he has to do is return it.


 I'm awaiting more detail on a legal opinion I received today that seems to suggest that even if you sell it on behalf I am in no way able to avoid my legal obligations under at least one but possibly two different pieces of legislation. It seems, but I have yet to have this clarified, I will be bound by whatever representations you make to these buyers - in short, the buck won't stop with you. You have my money, will then also have the mill and control over the representations with me legally implicated if the buyer feels shafted in any way. After all this, you seriously expect me to be exposed like that? As already suggested and which you have rejected, the cleaner way is you buy this back so my obligations end right there. I'll even take less than the deal of the century pricing you feel this ungrateful sod received and you can make money on it and we can all put this behind us. If you want to sell it to whoever and make whatever claims and representations you feel appropriate then it will be nothing to do with me. If this mill is such a bargain, and you have buyers, what stands in your way of just buying it back and selling it on, or passing my details onto the buyers so they can contact me so they can buy from me and I'll have a degree of control over the representations made to the buyer that I will be legally on the hook for?


Turbosawmill said:


> Also note that the logs Kiwi is sawing is macrocarpa (a very soft and easy timber to saw). So I am curious as to what has gone so wrong at his end.


 What are we to think of a sawmill manufacturer who having posted comments on some of the the very youtube videos showing E.saligna logs, fails to notice the difference between mac and gum? And who also fails to consider the mac logs, practically devoid of bark, may not have been felled the day before milling? Or are prospective buyers of Turbo mills to be warned not to mill anything but green mac?


Turbosawmill said:


> I also note his mention of it being unsafe. Of all the videos Kiwi has taken I have not seen the saw fitted with the recommended safety guards installed at all (this is concerning).


 Try setting up string lines, getting good shots of the beam deflection under the carriage while the guards are on. I have taken even more of my time to pull stuff off to give better views of the problem areas. I also find it absolutely astonishing that even though your very own manual mentions wearing gloves you are not using them in the very video you just posted? Can you see how pathetic such petty point scoring assertions, masquerading as deep concern for my well-being can get yet?


Turbosawmill said:


> Kiwi notes horizontal bounce. Well we provided with his mill this nifty gadget which *completely* removes horizontal bounce. Works 100%.


Just how anyone could read this and still not hold the view something just ain't right beats me. There are two scenarios when horizontal bounce is an issue. I've mentioned them in previous posts but unless I'm mistaken you have not addressed those and then go on to claim bounce is completely removed and works 100%? Please address the scenarios I mentioned in previous posts where unacceptable bounce is observed, which is when the anti-vibe device on the blade cannot be used? The anti-vibe/bounce device works well, when it can be applied. But it's very existence points to a beam too soft to resist the loads by itself, which simply adds weight to my assertions the bounce is unacceptable when the device cannot be used. I have only milled 5 logs with this mill. Two of them were within the max cut dimensions of the mill but needed rails to get the opening cuts on many of the drops down to just a few inches deep to avoid bounce. Only one of those two logs actually got the rails. The first of these two I persevered with the bounce, which convinced me to use rails on the second, even if not needed for anything other than to keep the bounce down. A third log needed rails because it was simply too big otherwise. Try cutting 3x2 where the 3" is horizontal. It's crazy to expect people to have to double pass the 3" cut simply to overcome the bounce coming from a beam that simply, in my opinion is not up to the job and which crowning hasn't got a snowball's chance in hell of fixing.

I'm out of time but if there are any points I've missed I'll attempt to address them in the next few days.


----------



## betterbuilt (Feb 10, 2015)

Turbo. So my only question is why haven't you just said, bring it back we'll refund your money. It's that simple. He's not happy and drawing this out isn't helping anyone.


----------



## steve easy (Feb 10, 2015)

So if turbo stands behind the product why is not them that makes the drive to kiwibros site? to offer solutions, advice or give him a refund, load the mill up and cut the ties, given its only "pocket change" as one member suggests. Be cheap customer relations.
Thumbs up to AS for allowing the thread to continue here, information good or bad about a product is helpfull to any potential customers.


----------



## Turbosawmill (Feb 10, 2015)

I've offered to correct the beam. He just needs to send it back. If he wants a stronger beam we have one. He needs to spend the extra money and purchase one. If he wants it sold return it.

That's as far as I'm willing to go in this case.

Why? Kiwi has done everything possible to paint my company in the most negative terms on the net. Before attempting to work with us. Sure I believe it's fine as it is, never said I wouldn't sort it to his expectations though.

I could buy it back from him but really don't have an inclination to do that based his behaviour.

If he had come to us and chose to be open to solutions my support would be 100%

I have recieved nothing but negativity since he took the mill away.


----------



## golddredgergold (Feb 10, 2015)

Problem is you guys are not getting all the info here about this topic that was already started by kiwi on the forestry forum and was locked down for good reason. 

Kiwi has had the mill for some time now. Months and has gone past the window for asking for a return in my book. Now remember I have nothing to do with warrior sawmills in any way but I hate people crapping on business on the net due to they think they will gain something some how. I been on the bizz side of this myself before. Here is the good part. Kiwi is leaning all over a solid case of slander. Keep up the good work so when you go to court warrior can bring his counter suite and your threads and he will win as I did. You have dug a very deep hole kiwi.

Kiwi you are amazing bud. You have an answer for everything. Long drawn out with lots of big words. Just a genius. I am surprised you had to buy a mill when you have the knowledge you do you could have designed and built your own? Hell I am a simple weak minded pesant and I built my band mill.

Ok I am done now so kiwi go ahead and make a 500 word post responding to me. I will look forward to it. More of your time wasted rather than outside sawing. If it where not raining cats and dogs now that is where I would be rather than repling to this rubbish.


----------



## Jim Timber (Feb 10, 2015)

Sounds like Turbo's made the effort commensurate to the deal Kiwi made for the saw. 5mm on rough sawn doesn't seem like that much to me. It's not bandmill straight, but it's also not bandmill portable (there's no equal from a BSM to the turbosaw's portability and wood handled - only other swing blades or CSM's), or BSM slow.

Comes down to either tweak it to be closer or sell it and be done. At some point the bitching is just bitching and not getting you anywhere. I can see both sides and while I'd probably be equally displeased by the dip. Might even have had a nasty email about it too, but this has dragged out for weeks and you're both backing into corners, which resolves nothing.


----------



## KiwiBro (Feb 10, 2015)

Jim Timber said:


> Sounds like Turbo's made the effort commensurate to the deal Kiwi made for the saw. 5mm on rough sawn doesn't seem like that much to me. It's not bandmill straight, but it's also not bandmill portable (there's no equal from a BSM to the turbosaw's portability and wood handled - only other swing blades or CSM's), or BSM slow.
> 
> Comes down to either tweak it to be closer or sell it and be done. At some point the bitching is just bitching and not getting you anywhere. I can see both sides and while I'd probably be equally displeased by the dip. Might even have had a nasty email about it too, but this has dragged out for weeks and you're both backing into corners, which resolves nothing.


Heaps of good sense in that post Jim.
- Happy with trying the beam crowning to resolve the sag issues. Don't expect perfection.
- Unhappy with the bounce issues, symptomatic, I feel, of a beam that is just too soft and should never have been sold. Who'd buy a manual mill if they had to double pass 3" cuts and set up rails just to avoid bounce?
- Unhappy with myself for trusting and assuming rather than insisting upon real-world use of everything on the mill before parting with my $.

You are right, if Turbo won't refund, even with my offer to accept less $, then I either spend $ trying to sort this myself or sell the mill on and buy something else. The latter option I explored yesterday, which required another round of needlessly fractious emails with Turbo just trying to figure out what I can say about what they will be prepared to offer if by some outlandish stroke of poor luck there is another closed-minded, unreasonable buyer like me who themselves finds these issues unacceptable. Having finally reached some accord on that point with Turbo, I wrote up a draft for-sale listing for our major online sales site here in NZ called Trademe and am awaiting advice as to whether or not such an attempt to sell the mill like this will be wise in respect of my legal obligations around such things as representations, fitness for purpose, etc.

Quite apart from legal obligations, it's a bloody lousy feeling to feel shafted in a equipment purchase, and I'm not the type to do that to anyone else so I need to be sure my conscience is clear also. It's a tricky line to tread.

I should hear back today if I can cover myself legally while also exercising what I feel is a moral obligation I have to ensure buyers can make fully informed choices. Having read around the law on this a wee bit yesterday, I'm not hopeful I can escape liability in such a sale. For example, even if I put "as is where is" in the listing and had the buyer sign saying they accept such a term, it can still come back to bite me. The case law showed a car dealer did that on a cheapie, high mileage car sale, the buyer signed, the motor blew up a few months later (spat a con rod through the sump), and the dealer still had to not only refund but pay the buyers costs.

Like I said in a previous post, I've written off milling this Summer, and for my own mental state and after the advice of a good friend, I have taken a few days off to sort this crap out and look seriously at all my options before returning to work. Peak season and I'm tapping on my keyboard, calling lawyers who charge by the minute, researching stuff online, instead of burning dinosaurs and looking after customers who have been waiting for me since the end of last Summer.


----------



## Jim Timber (Feb 10, 2015)

Turbo - if you're experiencing springing of the alloy beams, perhapse you could try filling the center with rigid foam? (like Great Stuff sold here in the states)

Aluminum has flex Kiwi. Aircraft wings flap long before they ever hold the weight of the plane. It's the nature of our physical world. Best way to dampen vibration is weight - you already said weight is an issue. No free lunch! But maybe Turbo's willing to let you be guinnea pig on a foam core beam. I think it might surprise you both.


----------



## KiwiBro (Feb 10, 2015)

Turbo tried this and reported it didn't make enough of a difference to take it any further.


----------



## Jim Timber (Feb 10, 2015)

How many types of foam did they try? There's dozens of durometers of two-part foams. Single part might not be stiff enough.

Foam has been used in lieu of wood to core downhill skis and snowboards for 25yrs. Certainly not because it's heavier or less rigid.


----------



## Turbosawmill (Feb 11, 2015)

Hi Jim,

Thanks for your very constructive input. I had been meaning to test the foam theory for some time and finally did it last week.

We used a Sika 2 pot solution which filled and expanded very well.

My findings... It reduced deflection around .5mm however we did notice that it wasn't as springy as the standard beam. We are sending this foam filled beam to Australia - we will see how it reacts in Aus timber.

Mill bounce is evident on even the big mills such as our Gladiator (which has a giant beam 450mm x 450mm). Our big mill removes most it for most scenarios but will still get it in very hard timber sawing deep cuts. It's just something sawyers must deal with in one way or another. That's why there are devices available which offer solutions. Such as the options we provided to Kiwi which prevent both horizontal and vertical bounce independently. 

If you do a little search on YouTube you will find bounce on almost every other swingblade depending on the timber being sawn. You'll see guys sitting on tracks and others just ignoring it.

It's pretty annoying to have this bounce so we've provided solutions.


----------



## Jim Timber (Feb 11, 2015)

Something else to consider is prepreg carbon fiber formed with an air bladder to the inside walls of the beams. Probably won't do much for bounce, but could help a bunch with sag. Add foam in that and you might have something with enough benefit to justify the cost.

I'm not sure how expensive your extrusion lots are at the foundry, but adding internal ribbing would be something else to explore. You could probably modify your current die without needing to machine a new one.

Up here they'll run as little as $2k as a minimum extrusion.

Going to a higher silicon content in the alloy is another option yet, but weldability (post weld strength in particular) goes to crap with higher silicon, so if you need weldments it needs re-aging (which is another set of costs).

Some stuff to chew on anyway.


----------



## Turbosawmill (Feb 11, 2015)

Thanks all makes since. Our target market is a low cost portable sawmill so the Carbon fibre scenerio puts a hefty price on a beam. Certainly if someone is willing to pay 5k just for the beam we will be happy to build it for them lol.

One of the main issues is our 6" model chainsaw mills sell for around $6500 the area of usable beam is limited. I have had done numerous FEAs on the beam design and currently it has a number of webs internally. Weight to strength is pretty good. We limited the beam weight to under 40kg in full length.

But moving up to the steel beam seemed to really solve all the issues. We have around 8 mill carriages currently sitting on a 7.2m beam at the factory and our deflection remains around 2-3mm. So this new beam with an 8" mill is going to be pretty impressive.


----------



## Jim Timber (Feb 11, 2015)

Prepreg's not that expensive, but I'm basing that off our pricing/availability. Other places might not be as reasonable.

At any rate, at the end of the day we're still only rough sawing lumber, and surface finish is generally inversely proportional to rate of feed regardless of material being cut (wood, metal, or otherwise). You either accept it rough or need to slow down.


----------



## Peterson Miller (Feb 11, 2015)

Maybe I am a "one in a million" case, but I have noticed very minimal (if any) bounce on my WPF Peterson mill, or any sag in the rails for that matter. Its just not there. I have watched pretty much every video Peterson have done on youtube and again, cant notice any bounce or sag either. Mind you, they have got track levelers and supports which probably eliminate the whole problem before it even happens...


----------



## Turbosawmill (Feb 12, 2015)

Hi there Peterson Miller, Yes the WPF is a nice sturdy sawmill design (one of the more sturdy swingblades, the ground based tracks gives some nice advantages including extendable lengths). That's my sisters product lol.

Having said that I demonstrated these mills along the Australian coast from show to show and know for a fact I had to take wide iron bark cuts horizontally in 2 passes. Again its relative to the timber your sawing. Hence Petersons do offer an anti-bounce device, as do the others - in fact on some of the manufacturers videos you can actually see bounce just as the saw exits off the anti-bounce roller. So its real and out there lol.

As I understand it Kiwibro is sending his beam back to get crowned and also moving forward with the heavy duty beam. I'm keen to see if his story has the ability to be turned around.


----------



## steve easy (Feb 12, 2015)

Turbosawmill said:


> As I understand it Kiwibro is sending his beam back to get crowned and also moving forward with the heavy duty beam. I'm keen to see if his story has the ability to be turned around.


Im sure it can, or could have been done before it was dragged out here. Good on you Turbo.


----------



## Peterson Miller (Feb 12, 2015)

Turbosawmill said:


> Hi there Peterson Miller, Yes the WPF is a nice sturdy sawmill design (one of the more sturdy swingblades, the ground based tracks gives some nice advantages including extendable lengths). That's my sisters product lol.
> 
> Having said that I demonstrated these mills along the Australian coast from show to show and know for a fact I had to take wide iron bark cuts horizontally in 2 passes. Again its relative to the timber your sawing. Hence Petersons do offer an anti-bounce device, as do the others - in fact on some of the manufacturers videos you can actually see bounce just as the saw exits off the anti-bounce roller. So its real and out there lol.
> 
> As I understand it Kiwibro is sending his beam back to get crowned and also moving forward with the heavy duty beam. I'm keen to see if his story has the ability to be turned around.



Ah really, ha small world aye? hehe 

Yeah my WPF doesnt have an anti bounce, I think I have seen it on the ATS model... I agree if you are cutting very hard wood like iron bark, then yes, it would be less stress on the blade and machine to take two bites. But on softwood like macrocarpa, pine etc? You should be able to do FULL cuts. And I don't mean a full 6 inch cut on an 8 inch machine, I mean a full 8 inch cut on an 8 inch machine. In fact I even saw a video the other week, on one of their mills cutting Jarrah wood which is an extremely hard Australian wood. I havent seen much about this mill, but apparently has been around for a couple years. Its the smallest one they make. Have a look. 

 

I do have one question turbo: When there is sag in the beam on your mills, and you have to get the blade running true horizontally, where on the log do you base the measurement off? Because if its higher at the ends than it is in the middle (because of the sag), then your blade will constantly be wanting to dive or climb depending on how its adjusted, not so much on the 1 inch cuts, but definitely on the bigger cuts . That's how you lose tension in the blade.. as well as getting very weird sized boards. I would be interested to know how long the blades last on your machines as there must be so much force and friction on them from the sag on the mill. So are you going to be crowning all your beams now? And how much do you crown each beam, because you offer different engine sizes and different weights, different unit sizes (8 or 10"), different torque ratings, you would have to crown each beam on an individual basis because every one of the mills would be different I would think... 

I notice on your website, you also have a gladiator with a 16m beam. I would assume you have crowned this because of the length and weight of the huge engine. Have you got any recent videos of it cutting a long log, doing full 12 inch cuts in one pass? 

Sorry, that's more than one question! lol, it just got me thinking and now I am quite curious... Always liked a 12 inch mill, so the gladiator might be an option in the future as long as it doesn't have these issues. 

Cheers


----------



## Turbosawmill (Feb 13, 2015)

Peterson miller. Your looking a little to deep into a problem that's not there. Unless your string lining every setup with your WPF your going to have the very same issue that you've raised. I am guessing your not running a string line every setup against each track before running the saw. You'll probably be surprised at how much side bow may be evident on your main runner track (the one with single grooves).

It is after all timber. Fundamental requirement is equal thickness and accurate dimensioning. Simple.

Obviously excessive sag is a problem when you start noticing performance drop or blade heating but you'll be surprised to know that the beam would literally need to be an extreme banana before that would happen. Where as a bandsaw has a super fine and narrow blade, any dip would deviate the angle of the blade. Where as a circle mill would resist the dip.

Beam saws are very good at keeping the blade true while in the log - in fact much better than wide carriage/twin rail systems as the blade is kept straight on the single beam. There is no tendency to twist the saw as you push or pull. So I would expect a blade to last much longer on a beam saw (that's if we are splitting hairs). 

Lots of hidden dynamics are happening when a saw moves through a log such as chain stretch from one end to the other or from side to side. A tensioned log may actually bow as you saw. So there is no magic formula with crown etc. a circular saw is very forgiving. We try and get our beam as straight as we can that's it.

FYI you'll notice that little JP sawing it's 6" in two passes ;-). That's a sweet advantage of having a swingblade sawmill.

Macrocarpa is easy cutting,
I agree a full 6" shouldn't be a problem for most higher priced mills. Not so sure on a full 10" though (if that's the model you have). Maybe you can show us one 

No running against the collar either lol.

Cheers.
Jake


----------



## Turbosawmill (Feb 13, 2015)

Missed your other questions... No we do not provide a crown typically. However if you choose you can crown our Gladiator beams at the centre just by adding washers at the join. The new 4-stroke heavy duty is also crown-able, as with our alloy beams. But we don't do this standard as its not needed. The nice thing with our saws is you can adjust the blade from the beam, so you don't really need to read the cut. Just measure from the beam to the front and back of your blade - very simple.

We are building a batch of mills right now (all with the heavy duty beams) so will get some footage of our 4-stroke units milling some hardwood to show off its resilience - I don't want people being confused between the superlight beam to our heavy duty standard kit (part of the package with our new larger GX690 4-stroke units).

https://www.facebook.com/1507538959...448217633466/1592446997633588/?type=1&theater

Gladiator sawing 12" wide horizontal cuts in one pass (around two weeks ago)...


Standard 4-stroke beam (3mm Pre-galv. lasered steel)...
http://turbosawmill.com/products/copy-of-8-cut-18hp-briggs-warrior-auto-sawmill

Our smaller 8" Warrior sawing Douglas Fur, full depth 8" vertical cut with light weight beam (around 14 minutes into it)...


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Feb 15, 2015)

What is that extra side plate you had on Kiwi's mill? Is that a standard item or something you had put on extra?

Ian


----------



## Turbosawmill (Feb 15, 2015)

Hi Ian,

That's a stiffener that's attached to our standard alloy beam for all 8" model chainsaw mills. With the 6" model the blade pivots up into that area so it can not be fitted.


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Feb 15, 2015)

Ah, ok. Good looking mill.


----------



## Peterson Miller (Feb 16, 2015)

Turbosawmill. But that's the thing, I don't need a string line as the sag issue just isnt there. Period. This is because there are center supports and levelers down the track all pegged in (as well as minimizing the side to side movement. Especially with the hi/lo setup). Whereas your beam only has the end support and nothing in the middle, so there will always be sag. So I take it you dont try to obtain a criss-cross pattern on the log with the blade, instead you adjust the blade to the beam (which would be fine if it was completely straight and had no sag). My concern for kiwibro (and I may be wrong here), is that if I was to adjust my blade out 10mm (as per kiwibros beam), my mill would be cutting very inefficiently and cause blade issues. Would you not agree? 

So if theres "no magic formula" as to how much you crown a beam, how do you know if you are crowning it the right amount? Is it just guess work? But then you go on to say "we just try to get it as straight as we can". But wasn't kiwibros beam straight until you put the engine and cutting unit on? 

You also say in your last post, that "if you choose you can crown our Gladiator beams at the centre just by adding washers at the join". I thought you were the expert, why should you leave it up to the customer to try and band-aid the sag issue, instead of fixing it initially? It seems a bit absurd to me that you knowingly sell the mills with sag in the beam, letting your customers be the guinea pigs to see if they notice the issues and then fix it or up-sell them on a stronger "heavy duty" beam. 

Maybe I am a bit over the top here, but Chris at Petersons (who trained me) always told me to make sure the tracks are straight and level, read the log and the marks on it to ensure blade adjustments are correct and then you know everything is sweet. If the mill gets hard to push, or the blade heats up, or the blade makes a "shing" noise when it exits the log, the first thing i do is check the log to make sure its stable and hasnt moved and check to make sure the levelers or track skids arent sinking (sometimes happens due to soggy ground).


----------



## rwthom279 (Feb 16, 2015)

IMO, *Peterson Miller *has summed it up very well. There are a few of us with swing mills that have discussed this issue/thread "behind the scenes" and also have the same feelings. I'm unsure how many reading/contributing to this thread actually have experience operating a swinger, but I'll say this... It is a different animal all-together when compared to using a CSM or bandmill. Different technology and MUCH different sawing techniques to produce good lumber. BUT, one thing I feel is paramount with any sawmill... the track, ladder, frame, beam(s) etc. *must be straight* to produce straight lumber... PERIOD. Best example that comes to mind is using a 20ft 2"x4" for a ridge beam and hanging rafters from it... 

Getting straight and true lumber is a challenge in itself. With the downward sag of Kiwi's beam and the log raising upwards due to internal stress within the log, I just cannot see how a sawyer wouldn't get stomach ulcers trying to figure out how to compensate to get lumber that is within an "acceptable tolerance".  Even with add'l skim cuts, in an attempt to get the face flat again, compensating for that much beam sag would be near, if not, impossible. Might get close sawing 1x's, but 2x's and thicker just release to much stress in the log. The farther down you go, the worse the stress gets.

How would Kiwi be able to resaw material for himself or a customer?? IMHO, that ain't gonna happen in any capacity.

I do hope that Kiwi gets a mill that performs as one would expect... and it appears that is the direction things are now going.


----------



## Turbosawmill (Feb 16, 2015)

Peterson Miller said:


> Turbosawmill. But that's the thing, I don't need a string line as the sag issue just isnt there. Period. This is because there are center supports and levelers down the track all pegged in (as well as minimizing the side to side movement. Especially with the hi/lo setup). Whereas your beam only has the end support and nothing in the middle, so there will always be sag. So I take it you dont try to obtain a criss-cross pattern on the log with the blade, instead you adjust the blade to the beam (which would be fine if it was completely straight and had no sag). My concern for kiwibro (and I may be wrong here), is that if I was to adjust my blade out 10mm (as per kiwibros beam), my mill would be cutting very inefficiently and cause blade issues. Would you not agree?
> 
> So if theres "no magic formula" as to how much you crown a beam, how do you know if you are crowning it the right amount? Is it just guess work? But then you go on to say "we just try to get it as straight as we can". But wasn't kiwibros beam straight until you put the engine and cutting unit on?
> 
> ...



Simply put... when you measure from the beam and adjust to the blade. You get criss-cross.

Regarding the straightness scenario... I have expressed my opinions and arguments thoroughly on the forums. Kiwibro's mill has a light weight beam. It cuts perfect timber even with that sag. No blade problems, no lack of criss-cross. If you the customer feels that the sag is too much, you have the ability to counter it.

You are incorrect with your assessment. The blade simply is not out 10mm. A blade out 10mm would dive into your log and stop cutting. This is what your trying to portray. A blade out .5mm will dive into the log too.

The blade is running true to the beam. So if your trying to understand what the blade is doing with a 'hypothetical' excessive sag scenario here it is...

As both sides of the blade are equal to the beam, the carriage raises and lowers (equally) as it moves through the log. A banana beam would mean you lose a little hp as it saws having a slightly wider kerf (its a consistent transition from one end to the other). Timber will still be straight and equal, you'll still get criss-cross. Even with Kiwi's 'more than normal' sag the amount of sag he's talking will not have any noticeable effect. All my arguments and points still stand as previous.

Your training regarding setting up your mill, likely is more about getting your tracks parallel. I also am quite aware that your tracks need to be propped up over 8m to remove 'major' sag. Why don't you put a stringline on your single groove side track and let us know what you get (as you normally setup the mill). Side bow is the same result as sag.

Beam saws/elevated twin tracks work. I can certainly understand the perception of an issue without understanding it.

Hope this helps.

PS
Who would have thought that such a wide carriage frame would still pull straight through the cut. Well its proven to do so over so many years.


----------



## Turbosawmill (Feb 16, 2015)

Just had to point out a couple of things.

First of all nothing is straight (its not possible).

A 20ft 4x2 that's straight-ish ?? Unheard of. Timber bends either under its own weight or due to growth tension. The longer the length the more its going to sag. Timber is placed and nailed true.

I think this argument will have trouble being summed up so easy.


----------



## Peterson Miller (Feb 16, 2015)

Turbosawmill said:


> You are incorrect with your assessment. The blade simply is not out 10mm. A blade out 10mm would dive into your log and stop cutting. This is what your trying to portray. A blade out .5mm will dive into the log too.


I beg to differ. If your blade is running true to your beam, and your beam is not straight, then how can your blade run true to cut accurate boards??? This is pure logic. Agree? 



Turbosawmill said:


> As both sides of the blade are equal to the beam, the carriage raises and lowers (equally) as it moves through the log. A banana beam would mean you lose a little hp as it saws having a slightly wider kerf (its a consistent transition from one end to the other). Timber will still be straight and equal, you'll still get criss-cross. Even with Kiwi's 'more than normal' sag the amount of sag he's talking will not have any noticeable effect. All my arguments and points still stand as previous.


So kiwi will never cut straight lumber, he will always cut lumber as per Figure A in the picture below: 


So if you don't eliminate the sag in your tracks/beam, then you will always be cutting boards as per figure A. But then we have the tension of the log as well, so if you are still getting the curved boards and you KNOW your tracks/beam isn't sagging, then it has to be the tension in the log. Nobody can get around this, so then you can compensate for it. Trust me, I have spent a lot of time talking with Chris at length about this. So to say "I can certainly understand the perception of an issue without understanding it", is like saying that "you don't know what you are talking about, so just believe what I say" LOL. 



Turbosawmill said:


> So if your trying to understand what the blade is doing with a 'hypothetical' excessive sag scenario here it is


There isn't a "hypothetical" excessive sag scenario, there is sag!!! LOL Your timber will not be straight and equal, as the blade will pull down if there is sag and then rise up again once you go past the middle of the beam and are getting to the end t-frame. As per the picture above. Then when you add the extension on to the beam, its only going to get worse. 

Yes I agree that my tracks sag over the 8m length. But that is exactly why there are track levelers put in place to ELIMINATE that problem. So that point is invalid. Its like saying that "oh you are going to get wet when driving in the rain if you have your window down". You put the window up, you eliminate the problem lol 

I also agree that this debate will have trouble being summed up so easy. But hey, that's what forums are for


----------



## Turbosawmill (Feb 16, 2015)

Hey Peterson Miller good diagrams. Your really taking the time out to show us your perspective.

Your points in order...

1) I'm a little confused regarding the diagram and text... bow = sag in tracks (what about all the other variables?) 
2) .001 is closer to logic 10mm is just flat out incorrect.
3) Hypothetical is a scenario that your beam is so bowed that it actually makes a difference.
4) You are incorrect. The timber will remain true (both by dimension and width) along the full length.
5) Its only a problem if you make it a problem.

What I don't understand is how a carriage being around 2m wide is able to maintain a true and uniform cut all the way down a 6m log. Surely it all depends on where and how you pull it right??

All mills have weakness one way or another. I have listed why I think Kiwi's mill is fine as it is. I believe I have made a strong and valid argument.

However...
I have offered to correct the sag regardless of my opinion.

Noting...
Our standard heavy duty beam has 2.5mm deflection with the carriage mounted at the centre over a 7.2m span. That's with our largest Warrior motor and model.
Our super light weight beam has 3mm deflection over its full standard length with 8" carriage mounted at its centre.

If that's not bearable you have two options.
1) Buy some other ground based mill and meticulously string line the rails.
2) Ask to get it crowned at our factory.

This debate really sounds like its turned into 'who makes the better sawmill'. If your interested in who makes a better mill or which has more advantage give me a call. I'll provide you with what I believe to be true and you can weigh up against what you've heard from the others. No use trying to skew facts here as its on record. Yes that's the great thing about these forums.

Jake.


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Feb 16, 2015)

If the boards in figure A are stickered and weighted or strapped, won't they cure out straight?


----------



## Peterson Miller (Feb 16, 2015)

If you say your light weight beam has 3mm deflection and kiwis mill has 10mm as per the videos he posted, I would say that is out of spec from the manufacture, so it is a problem. So when you say "its only a problem if you make it a problem", if something is out of spec, then it is a problem, isnt it? But thumbs up to you for offering to fix it. 

I am sure you understand quite well, about how a 2m wide carriage can maintain a true and uniform cut all the way down the log. You obviously use the pull handle located on the center unit. You have, after all, worked for Petersons and have done shows for them in Australia as per a previous comment of yours. Your sarcasm amuses me. 

FYI I have never used a string line. Never had sag, so never needed to. But if it makes you feel better, I will do it for you sometime. 

I guess if you can put hand on heart and say you have never had anyone return their mill because of beam issues or inaccurate boards, I say well done. Because anyone with an ounce of logic would surely see this as a problem. 

Well I can see this is going to keep going around in circles, maybe we should agree to disagree? I think this whole thread reinforces the fact that before buying any sawmill (or anything else of significant investment), you need to run one for yourself and put it through its paces. Because watching a bunch of videos on youtube simply doesnt cut it. In fact Petersons offered to put me in contact with a bunch of Peterson sawmill owners to talk to them, talk about being totally transparent and honest... 

I don't think its turning into a "who makes a better sawmill" debate. I invite any other swingblade manufactures to get on here and share their opinion about rail/beam sag not making a difference when it comes to accurate boards. Any Lucas owners out there??


----------



## Peterson Miller (Feb 16, 2015)

Haywire Haywood said:


> If the boards in figure A are stickered and weighted or strapped, won't they cure out straight?



The boards in the picture are bowing out sideways when laying the 6 inch wide surface on the ground. If they bow up at the ends with the 6 inch surface on the ground, then yes weighted and strapped would help. Clear as mud?


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Feb 16, 2015)

Ah, just sticker them standing upright then. LOL


----------



## rwthom279 (Feb 16, 2015)

Turbosawmill said:


> Just had to point out a couple of things.
> 
> First of all nothing is straight (its not possible).
> 
> ...



Turbo,

The point of using a 2x4 as an example you confirmed with your own reply. If it already has a sag/deflection under it's own weight, then adding more weight will only compound the problem.
Yes, timber is placed and nailed true... so is what is Kiwibro to do then??
So yes, in a sense, it can be summed up so easy.

As for a straight 20ft 2x4, or "straight-ish" as you put it. Yes, it can be accomplished and I've done it many times, but with the bandmill. Perfect.. no. When checked with a stringline, All were less than an 1/8" crook over 20'4" length, some showed no deviation (perfect??) Yes, it took extra time/extra cuts to balance the tension, but it is not "_unheard of"._

Yes, forums are a great way to discuss and share information. But to keep on point, I don't think Peterson Miller is trying to turn this into a comparison of brands. I believe he is trying to enlighten/educate all who read this thread. He has went the extra mile to illustrate the effects of what the original topic was all about. I imagine he came about this by his own experience and felt compelled to back up what he stated in a previous post.

Disclosure: This post was not to be taken as aggressive or to "smear" any names. Read it however you may, take it however you want.




Haywire Haywood said:


> If the boards in figure A are stickered and weighted or strapped, won't they cure out straight?



Yes, it is possible. But its lumber... sometimes it has a mind of it's own.


----------



## rwthom279 (Feb 16, 2015)

Peterson Miller said:


> Any Lucas owners out there??


----------



## Turbosawmill (Feb 16, 2015)

No offence taken at all. I'm just here to state facts from my point of view. Take them as you will.

Peterson Miller - I need to clarify (the lightweight beam deflection of 3mm was measured against our 8" chainsaw mill). Kiwi's mill was new territory for us as we moved up to the 4-stroke, hence the ultimate move to Galv. steel.

Nope no one has come back to me yet other than Kiwi. For a lot of people a small amount of deflection is not a problem, obviously for others it is. Not the end of the world, its sortable.

I will always correct false statements such as...
The blade being out by 10mm or that we have blade life issues. Not true.

I've already asked on the other forums for results from other (single beam/twin high track) saws showing likely sag over a 6m span. No one has come back to me. If there are defined standards out there in the industry I would be happy to work within them.

Jake.


----------

