# Mechanical gin pole



## John Paul Sanborn (Mar 21, 2002)

On that other board, I sakd if anyone has tried using a mechanical gin. I did it just before the thing went down hard.

I've used them in tower work before and have a light duty one for ham towers. Thought about it for low impact rigging but this one would not work.

Anyone employed such a gadget for for lowering or speedlines?


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 21, 2002)

You mean like my speedline raiser? http://www.arboristsite.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=19438


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Mar 21, 2002)

Yup, like it, but on a spar being rigged out.

They are used in tower (de)construction to rig each section to/from the one below it.

It would be a pain in the but to use, but you could block/speedline chunks off with little shock loading.

The way I see it is the initial curf for the back cut is made, the gin is secured to the spar, then the wedge is made and back cut finnished, tension the line and break the peice off for rigging.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 22, 2002)

I think the idea has merit.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 22, 2002)

A second version:


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Mar 22, 2002)

The second one is interesting! would definatly need sturdy construction!

Did you go out at all yesterday? I wimped out.

My first try at Corel PhotoScribble.

Juts gotta get the slack out of the speedline befor the final cut.


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Mar 22, 2002)

I think i would have fairleads on the pole below the ginpole trunk attachments too, not sure.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Mar 22, 2002)

On them gin poles; where does the climber safely stand? How do you bust the piece loose and lower it?


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 22, 2002)

Spyder,
These are just concepts. If you want fully tested prototypes and operational instructions, we are going to need a day or so to put it together.


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Mar 22, 2002)

Ken I sorta see it a s chunking out with a rigging line on. 

Say your in a place where you can't drop peices and it is for the slack blocking out. 

Another senario is the stem is so deteriorated you dont want the slam involved in blocking out.

Have the gin attached with trucker straps and you gaff is where the straps aren't.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 23, 2002)

TreeCo wrote:

"Some really neat concepts.......but if the jin pole rigging fails it looks like the climber is in a world of hurt. "


The tool would need to be designed as not to hit the climber, in the event of failure. The drawing of the pole I did should have the pole at more of an angle to allow lowering to the side of the spar. The climber would tie above the straps and if something failed it woud just drop away and below the climber. Remember, there is risk of failure in any rigging scenario. This tool could, perhaps, reduce that risk by limiting scock loads.


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Mar 23, 2002)

Yes as with any piece of a rigging system the tree needs to be the weakest component. (I will no longer use link in that phrase )

Now we need someone to play withthe concept, I don't see myself needeing it in the near future.


----------



## Frans (Mar 23, 2002)

*portable gin pole*

I can see an immediate use for a portable gin pole in pruning topped mont. pines where the tree has massive 3'-4' diam. limbs 50'-70' up. just strap on the pole w/ pulley and climb line at the top of it and it would allow the climber to have a great tie-in for pruning or takedown.
frans


----------



## rbtree (Mar 23, 2002)

A big problem with a mechanical gin pole is the required guy lines, at least three, and logistics and time involved in locating anchor points, natural or staked. Then, each line would have to be pretensioned, not an easy task to balance. Finding a job where you could get the price up high enough to cover all the time would be mighty rare and tough.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 23, 2002)

RB, 
Does it need guys?
Where? Add them to the drawing and let us see.


----------



## DDM (Mar 23, 2002)

Very interesting concept Im thinking it would be very time consuming to lower it to the next cut It would probably need to be made out of titanium to be strong and light . I bet the product liability would be outrageous.


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Mar 23, 2002)

Depends on the loads you are going to subject it too.

If you are going to be taking out relativly light peices with very little dynamic loading then it would not need to be anythin but tubular steel.

It being a ????? to install has been stated. the only real use I see is in high cost low impact removals where you can not block peices out any more and no alternative rigging points are available. Say right over a deck you cant pitch stuff over.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 23, 2002)

I kinda like the lowering device jpg. 

http://www.arboristsite.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=20375 

It could be made to swing slowly down, then lowered to the ground. The top piece becomes the bottom piece on the next chunk. So you would only have to connect the one part of the tool with two straps for each time you took a chunk.

If it did not slam down, but slowly came down it wouldn't need to be too strong maybe made from aluminum, with a couple of truckers straps. 

How's the hinge going to work, so it has friction towards the bottom but not much at the top of the swing?


----------



## rbtree (Mar 23, 2002)

Not to rain on the parade of fun tinker ideas, but......

I don't think either of these ideas has any hope of being practical. The load forces would be tremendous. A fixed mechanical gin pole, similar to high lead logging, HAS to have guying to withstand the incredible side loading. I can, however, visualize the success of a device to allow reaching branch ends of a topped tree. It would be safe for life support, but you wouldn't be able to lower off the same pole, unless it was ultra strong and guyed....and VERY securely strapped to the tree. And in such a real world scenario, (previously topped tree with huge side branching)it might be hard to find a straight area of trunk to lash it to.

Besides, realistically, in real world tree work, the need to lower wood is only occasionally needed. I dont know about you guys, but I usually find a safe alternative. For instance, In conifer removal, I try to get 30 foot logs for export, and 16 minimum. I've dropped huge trees across asphalt, right on top of sidewalks, and directly onto nice lawns, all with little or no damage. Plywood, tires, (up to 75, and sometimes laced together)bridges built out of wood, conifer brush piles are most of the tricks. Of course, cranes are better, if the job is safer and better done that way, and if access allows, but usually costlier......not always tho due to the labor saved.

Presently, though, we finish the huge maple Monday. See the "Technical removal" thread. We're employing just about every high tech trick on that one!! And I just sold a 30" dbh very brushy hemlock touching a house. We'll speedline the brush over the house, and likely the wood too, using our 31300 lb plasma line. The low branches will be mid tied, with speed line above, thus creating a bight. We'll lift them up and/or around with z pulleys, chain saw winch or chipper winch, and zip em right over the house. Piece of cake compared to the maple. For this technique, I want to control the amount of bite, so I install a few temp redirects on my way down to the lower branches. It is a bit tedious too, as some higher branches have to be cut to make room to lift others. A plus, is that the customer wants a habitat tree created, so we can leave it 8 -10 feet above the roof!! I think 5 hours will do it, and the price is $1250, not bad at all. Plus the chips stay, and the job is 6 blocks from the shop. We'll need two ground guys, plus another climber doing a bit of thinning on a large white pine, no gman needed, for another $300.


----------



## rbtree (Mar 23, 2002)

JPS, 

explain what you mean by very little dynamic loading.

The alternative, as I see it, is static loading, FAR worse for these proposed toys.

it would take an incredibly complex, strong hinge to handle the piece being dropped. It would have to be adjustable resistance for different weights of wood. It would need a cam (like some workout machine, Cybex, etc) to gradually increase the resistance as the piece flops over into gravity, and bring it to a stop before slamming into the end of its travel and breaking apart. Possibly a creative engineer could design one, for $50K or so!! Most parts would need to be a titanium alloy to lessen weight, but that would increase the materials cost several fold.

Any CAD guys out there??!!


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 24, 2002)

*Lowering device.*

Let's talk a little about the loads.

Just for example, I envision using this this on logs 6' long maybe 30" diameter, so we are talking around 1800 lb.s, right?

Say those straps are similar to the straps on a Hobbs or GRCS. Each of those is rated at over 20,000 lbs., so in fact they could be a lighter duty version, maybe 2000 lb.s SWL(5 to 1) each.

A couple folks recommend a titaninum alloy, I was thinking steel. It would be raised and attached in two seperate pieces so that makes the weight less of a factor. 

If the movement is slow, from top to bottom, the loads don't appear to get much greater than the log weight. What method to use to slow the movement as the log swings down, that's the question.

One thought I had, was using a disc brake on the axle of the device. You could even have a little remote control with a hand lever. 

You could set the brake, make the cut, put away your saw, and the piece would be held in place until the brake is realesed. Then as the piece is tipped over, variable brake pressure could control the decent.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 24, 2002)

Had to draw it.


----------



## Tom Dunlap (Mar 24, 2002)

Second try, Netscape crashed and I lost the first one...

I'm with Roger on this one. In order to have a high enough safety factor the unit would have to be very heavy duty which translates into big money. Guying of any gin pole is also mandatory. Calculate the leverage that is being generated.

Take a look at this site:

http://www.osha-slc.gov/SLTC/logging_advisor/manual/yarding/cableyardingsystem.html

That should be enough to get your creative juices going.

Other ideas:

Antennae sections, but they would have to be guyed out
Extension ladders, again guying is mandatory
Look on pages 206-7 of On Rope

many years ago a fellow invented a device exactly like what is being proposed here. The unit was pretty heavy and could only be used to tip over five inch leads. With that limitation it seemed to me that the hassle of hauling the rig into the tree and setting it up was negated. I have no clue how much it sold for. I do remember that there was an add and an article in AA for one month and then it disappeared.


Tom


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Mar 24, 2002)

I never guyed gin poses in antena rigging, but I never did huge construction.

If your goingg several feet and half a ton, then I could see the leverage being very great.

My concept is maybe 200# pieces for areas where you cannot drop anything. I've has it where I had to chunk out pieces I could hand down to a guy on a ladder. 

Dropping on plywood covered tires would not have worked. 20 x 20 backyards in old parts of the city where you would have to cut down trees by the driveway to get a bucket in, much less a crane. 

Maybe I would be better phrasing it ans no shock loading vise very little dynamic loading.

Anyways, just a thought.


----------



## rbtree (Mar 24, 2002)

*Tom, you da man!!!*

with the links!!!

Many thanks. Oxman has sent me that one, I think, for ideas for high lining our big maple. Don't think I saved it tho. We were thinking of fixing the speed line high in the opposite anchor tree, and attaching the branches via a fiddle block or prussic with pulley, then pulling a trigger line to let the branch down. The concept seemed too risky. besides we needed to lift most of the branches, so we rigged the line above them in the maple, thus creating a bite in the rope, which we pulled out, lifting the branch. Pretty basic. Just a lot of slacking required at the end to get the branch to ground.

Back in '72, pre tree work, I landed a job in the islands off Ketchican, with a gypo logger. They had two high lead operations going, one to yard the side to a landing, the other to yard them down a fixed skid road to the water. One day, while chasing (unhooking chokers) at the landing, I carelessly ran underneath while the lower donkey was operating. The haulback broke and went snaking down the hill, no more than 1 second after I was out of its path.

I reckon the operation was close to what that site calls the North Bend system- real spar trees, stumps for tail holds, etc. When it was time to move to another side, the new one was so steep, with such soft ground, that, in the process of the donkey yarding itself up the hill ( on big log skids), and then rigging the spar, almost all available stumps pulled out of the ground. They almost had to let the logs lay!!!!

I really liked the balloon logging rigging!!!

Rog


----------



## DDM (Mar 24, 2002)

Mike, you might want to think in terms of a Self contained Hydraulic cylinder on a slide as a braking device. If you are familiar with a self lowering vertical bandsaw thats the kind of cylinder im speeking of.If not it has a thumb screw 
to adjust the speed of the cylinder .you could add a slide so that it would slide down as the cyl contracts. What size Steel are you thinking of? C-chanel?


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 24, 2002)

Shock absorbers, excellent idea! They could engage just past the balancing point and supply friction right to the bottom.
C-channel seems logical to start. The gauge and size will depend on loads we are going to feed the tool.
I'm also encouraged by Tom's comment that a similar device may have already been tested and put into production, if even for a limited time. Failure of a production run is in no way indicative of product functionality.
I can see why, with such limited uses, it may never be a big money maker, it may still be worth investigating. Last time I spoke to Greg Good, he was still not to his break even point on his GRCS as I recall, and that tool is fantastic with all kinds of uses.
Anyway thanks Dave, keep the ideas comming, at least you're not a naysayer on this topic. John's goal of 200 pound capacity could be reached, I think, quite simply.


----------



## DDM (Mar 24, 2002)

200#? If you built it out of 4 X 1/4" C-Chanel and machined out a hinge out of O 1" barstock for the thru pin and 1-1/4 for the hinge and added 4 of those 
Straps the ones used to tie down loads on a flat bed because they are basically 
self contained structually the unit could handle 1000 + lbs without a shock factor.
Using a absorber of some sort cylinder ect. Now if you were to add a electric winch to the unit and a drop cord to a nearby vehicle you could lower it effortlesly.


----------



## DDM (Mar 24, 2002)

Actually This might envoke some interesting ideas Hmmmm with a few modifications 
http://www.northerntool.com/cgi-bin/ncommerce3/ProductDisplay?prrfnbr=7179&prmenbr=6970

No shock


----------



## Tom Dunlap (Mar 24, 2002)

Yesterday when I got "errored out" I had written about a hydraulic slave system.

By adding a porta power unit to the hinge mechanism you could scissor the chunk off the side. Think of the elbow of a grapple loader or some bucket trucks. 

I wouldn't be too encouraged by this other device years ago. Remember, the pieces that it was rated for were only a little larger than a climber could handle with bare hands and a snap cut at the base.

After all of this cyber engineering gets done, it would probably be easier to cut a bunch of cookies and lower them individually than to setup any contraption.

Go ahead and prove me wrong. Start the engineering and welding!

Tom


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 25, 2002)

Great ideas Dave, but I don't like the use of electricity so much because there shouldn't be to much lifting involved.

Our disscusion may be getting a little diluted because there are two types of devices being discussed back and forth, the folding device and the gin pole.

The pick up truck hoist looks like what I had envisioned for the gin pole, no guys, just strap the tool to the tree, attach a rope, and cut.

One modification I would make to the hoist is to remove the winch and pulley, and put a friction device here, say a port-a-wrap. This could reduce the load to the tool by 40%.

I do like the little hydralic jack, it could be used to take the slack out and actually lift.

Another feature is the ability to rotate. You could cut, lift, rotate, and lower.


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Mar 25, 2002)

With a rope running to the gorund the rotation may get in the way of the rope. maybe a limit of 45 degrees or something?

Instead of a component lift system, (though the bottle jack sounds great!) allowing it to be used with an exisiting winch device would suffice.

Myabe Greg would allow you the use of his machine shop?


----------



## DDM (Mar 25, 2002)

Mike, When you get ready to assemble something and need a few parts machined send me drawings i'll machine them for you.Hinge pins bushings ect.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 26, 2002)

Thanks dave, I may take you up on that.

Here's my latest drawing. I added a redirect(green), I though it might split the loads a little.

I also added a port-a-wrap type thing to replace the pulley.

What do you think of those changes?

The problems of making the device lighter, raising the device easily into place, and moving it down and reattaching quickly after each cut, need to be addressed.


----------



## Kevin (Mar 26, 2002)

Another consideration would be cutting through the tree with the chainsaw without running the chain into the base of the boom and if you`re cutting from only one side there`s a very good chance your bar will get pinched.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 26, 2002)

There is a bottle jack on the side for lifting the piece, off your saw if nescessary.


----------



## Kevin (Mar 26, 2002)

A couple of < shaped brackets against the tree might help.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Mar 26, 2002)

Am trying to stay with you all here; and the situation of use that you propose.

What about setting up a normal block that catches hinged load like we are used to. But, having oil dampened delivery; for folding into block system; adjustable from ground and releaseable from air. Perhaps, the crew would pull from line on top to fold into arraingment as you cut, like super hinge.

Just a stray thought!


----------



## DDM (Mar 26, 2002)

Mike, you could always put the 12 volt winch back on it then it could pull itself up in the tree. I'm thinking of adding a winch to my Frontend loader any thoughts on that?


----------



## DDM (Mar 26, 2002)

That picture of the hoist i posted i was also considering putting one of those on the back of my dumptruck to hoist up bigger wood on jobs too small to haul the loader to.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 26, 2002)

Here's a jpg from a friend, with his ideas:


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 26, 2002)

In the lift.jpg, the chain is bad, first 'cus it's too low on the tool, and second chain is hard to adjust and tighten, compared to straps. But the rest looks good.

To get the contraption up the tree, it woud be simple to hang a strap with a pulley and have the groundy pull it up and hold in in place while you(the climber) attach the straps.

We still need a quick way to move it down after each cut. 

Right now extruded aluminum is our top pick for building material, cheap, light, and strong, any comments?

Capacity goal is 750 Lbs.

Lower unit is about 2 feet long, boom approximately 5 feet tall.


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Mar 26, 2002)

I like the cleat idea, agree with chins being 
impractical.

The pivot hinge should go all the way to the botom. Sealed bearings on top and bottom?

A tie on point on the load arm for ground assist in moving it?


----------



## DDM (Mar 26, 2002)

I'd suggest using 6061 T-6 Aluminum for the strength and stress abilities.
You could add a friction device a little bit above center point of the lift arm, tie a loop around the tree release straps and lower the whole rig with the friction device.
Mike? what program are you using to draw the pictures?


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 26, 2002)

Dave, 
I'm using microsoft paint, then copy and pasting the image to a photo software program and saving them as jpg, just to save file size. For some reason paint doesn't save in jpg, just bmp.


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Mar 26, 2002)

See if there is an "export" function in MSPaint. you export to your hard drive and save as a 1:1 jpg image. I had the same problem with Corel


----------



## DDM (Mar 26, 2002)

Test

O Boy okay i figured it out Thanks mike!


----------



## chad (Mar 26, 2002)

chains would be easyer to slide down


----------



## chad (Mar 26, 2002)

using a wheel for a wedge to put more presure on the spike.


----------



## Kevin (Mar 26, 2002)

Anyone try a bungee similar to a fall arrest strap to absorb shock?


----------



## DDM (Mar 26, 2002)

Kevin the idea was a no shockNo swing Lowering device to be used under certain circumstances.


----------



## chad (Mar 26, 2002)

the bungee would take the shock, but it will still swing and could be dangerous.


----------



## chad (Mar 26, 2002)

I like mikes idea when the ground man controls the gin pole. Could be lifted with ground wench.


----------



## Tom Dunlap (Mar 26, 2002)

Chad wrote:

Could be lifted with ground wench.

wench or winch? I'm not sure...

Tom


----------



## rbtree (Mar 27, 2002)

How about a bench wench, or perhaps a round ground wench, or for good measure a square ground wench.

or we could ask gypologger if he will share Robin the house wench.........



........again


----------



## rbtree (Mar 27, 2002)

...from wence cometh the wench?????


Think we could wrench the wench......


......into position number 69??.......

REBel


......back to the padded cell.......


Man, my Walkerized 335 finished a cut before it started today.....


...Let's do the time warp again..

dowap diddy wapp......


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 27, 2002)

Not to dilute this interesting banter, but here is the simplest version I could think up of a gin pole, and I think the best for building a prototype to test.


----------



## Kevin (Mar 27, 2002)

Looks good Mike!

Weight and length will be a factor in getting it set up.
Telescoping square channel secured with a pin would shorten the length.
Once you have it secured in the tree you can pull the pin and extend it then drop the pin back in.
A lanyard to hold the device agianst the tree while you operate the cinch straps might be a consideration.
I think the port-a-wrap might be better left on the ground with the ground man just in case there`s a problem.


----------



## Reed (Mar 27, 2002)

Do you know how to file for a patent application?

I think you have something there.

Don't do what I did regarding a new concept - I got screwed by attorneys and a rogue scientist and a few investors on the oak wilt deal.

Build it.


Reed


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Mar 27, 2002)

I think the limited scope of use would not justify the cost of pattent application. With research and all that can be rather costly.

Hey Chad, where in the Heartland area are you? I've met two of you guys from Wauk. county and one works for Greg Good.


----------



## chad (Mar 27, 2002)

I work with mike.


----------



## chad (Mar 27, 2002)

This way would be strong and easy to lower. The top piece then becomes the lower piece.


----------



## chad (Mar 27, 2002)

I forgot to add the pic.


----------



## DDM (Mar 27, 2002)

Just call in a helicopter!


----------



## Tom Dunlap (Mar 27, 2002)

Since the'engineering' of this idea has taken place in a public forum with a lot of people adding ideas it might be a rather messy patent application. 

Lesser ideas have been grabbed and hustled to a patent and market in our trade. 

Tom


----------



## DDM (Mar 27, 2002)

yup remember the spook?


----------



## chad (Mar 27, 2002)

mike and I are not going to patent it.


----------



## DDM (Mar 27, 2002)

Yes Chad, But me and John might!


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 27, 2002)

I say if someone wants to patent it, take it. I just want to build it so I can have it when I need it.

It seems to me it would take some set-up time but it would end up being safer and less damaging to ropes and other gear because of less dynamic loading, and that should make it worth the extra effort to set it up.


----------



## DDM (Mar 27, 2002)

I Think you need to add the Jack back in to relieve the saw pinch.


----------



## DDM (Mar 27, 2002)

I just had another Idea, If you could mount it to a device similar to a Deer stand you could walk it up the tree get it in position then strap it on. when you got ready to move it down unstrap walk it down then restrap no heavy lifting required by the climber.

http://www.cabelas.com/cabelas/en/t...logCode=R9&parentId=cat20047&parentType=index


----------



## chad (Mar 27, 2002)

*ddm*

That would work if every tree is the same size. How will you fit a 2' square to fit around a 4' tree


----------



## DDM (Mar 27, 2002)

Chad, With a couple of extra pieces of angle iron bolted to the square to enlarge it to O
40' if you so desired.And Im not implying to Rig up a tree stand just use the concept.


----------



## Kevin (Mar 27, 2002)

... and then there`s always a sectional ground crane.


----------



## DDM (Mar 27, 2002)

Kevin, I think i'd prefer A balloon to raise the piece off.


----------



## FBerkel (Mar 27, 2002)

On the saw pinching problem: climber can simply carry a wedge; the bottle jack idea requires a hinge in the gin pole, which seems like an unnecessary week point.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 28, 2002)

Mr. Berkelhammer makes a valid point. An experienced arborist can make a cut witout getting his saw wedged, this is not a tool for the unexperienced. In fact removing the line tension might make breaking off the chunk of wood<I> <B>easier</B></I>.

Once the bottle jack was removed, there was no need for an elbow. Once the elbow was removed, there was no need for rotation. This allows for a straight, one piece design, which is simple and lighter than the first drawings.

My last drawing had a rotation point, but only to make the unit modular. It was my opinion that raising the device up the tree would be easier in sections, than all at once.

If you think about the weak points, the base of the boom will have the greatest loads then loads would slowly get lesser as you move up the boom. So ideally, the boom would be shaped like a fishing pole, wide at the base a tappering as you move up the boom.

I'm thinking square tubing boom, telescoping inside a square tube base. A few holes and a pin would make the boom length adjustable. By lowering the boom all the way, just before moving the device down for the next cut, would balence the device so it wouldn't be top heavy.

Comments?


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 28, 2002)

Actually this is better scale:


----------



## Kevin (Mar 28, 2002)

David,
If you put a bungee on that you might have something ... for the circus!


----------



## Graeme (Mar 28, 2002)

Might need a Ginpole , to put the Gin pole in position. 

Or, may be, the two Gin poles need to leapfrog down eitherside of the tree, as you block it down.


----------



## rbtree (Mar 28, 2002)

DDM:

great idea,

Been done before!!:

http://www.osha-slc.gov/SLTC/logging_advisor/manual/yarding/cableyardingsystem.html


----------



## rbtree (Mar 28, 2002)

You guys really have your creative juices flowing!!

How about some talk about real world practicality, besides about whether a workable unit could be developed.

I can see applications in a hazard, structurally unsound tree, where slam dunking wood into rigging can't be safely done, just like the technical maple we just finished. I can't see any other reason to employ the unit, due to the time involved in setup and moving it down.

On the maple, if we had had no safe drop zone, we would have had to make the customer sign a form releasing us from liability, in case of damage from free dropping the wood. 150 foot crane would have been the only other option, if it even could have been set up. 

Back to unit design, I can see it working practically only with upright, fairly smooth and straight trunks. Wood bulges, or off vertical wood would really complicate setup.

Just build a safe drop zone, and let em fly.......


----------



## Kevin (Mar 28, 2002)

Dave, 
If you plan on using a balloon you might as well have fun with it.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 28, 2002)

Keep in mind RB, that different locations have different challenges. The things you encounter in Seattle are very different than what I run into here, or TheTreeSpyder sees in Florida. 

I often run into trees that have been growing between the house and garage for years, decks built around trees, or elaborate landscaping in small yards. The top is easy, it's the chunking down the spar that sucks. Imagine a roof overhang, cut around a spar. It's not always about 75 tires and some sheets of plywood.

The raising of the tool should be simple. Some small cord and a pulley would do. This should also work to lower the device, after each cut. 

Bumps or roughness in the trunk should not be much of a problem, nor a slant in the spar.


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Mar 28, 2002)

I think you shoul fairlead the lowering line somewhere near the base. So that all the force is not at the top.


I think that after a leraning curve is mastered the thing would not be a big pain to install. Set a pully haul up the base strap it in while the gound is holding it. Run up the pole...


----------



## DDM (Mar 28, 2002)

Kevin, LMAO  

Mike, I like the Design Which I sometimes 
ignor the engineering Rule K.I.S.S
Which is of course Keep it simple stupid.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 29, 2002)

Here it is in use:


----------



## Kevin (Mar 29, 2002)

Mike,
Will the port a wrap swivel?


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Mar 29, 2002)

i think in the name of safety, simplicity and efficiency; i would throw in another double strapping mechanism, interchangeable, and make pole adjustble.

Where by you would set bottom pair of straps, low enoght that you could make 3 pulls with it before having to move it, lowering top extendable portion, pinning and go again. The extra pair of straps would be to stabilize top part of gin pole, right under first cut. Once first piece was down, release newest strap mechanism from pole (not log)contract pole, pin, then newest strap mechanism now pins in as load, draw up 'top set' that was on first load and set under cut, go again. The next time when you reloaded you wouldn't need to retrieve 3rd strap set, as you would have pole fully contracted.

In this way you wouldn't have to take main pole anchor off tree except every 3rd drop. Should be safer and quicker i would think. Maybe get 20' without totally resetting?

Still a lil'leary though!


----------



## rbtree (Mar 29, 2002)

Mike your last drawing raises a resistance issue. Any tension on the line would make it much harder to push off the piece sideways. No problem til weights increase. If what I'm invisioning is correct, all i can see is a normally routine process made difficult. Now if the pole had a t or preferably triangle shape, it might work, with a slot for pwrap at top of each top triangle apex. Go to work, you CAD designer wannabe, you!!!

Now the much more complicated design swing arm lift would work,but it too, same as my above idea, would apply lots of side stresses to the anchor points, which might tend to shift.


----------



## rbtree (Mar 29, 2002)

Hey mike, re your post a while back,

With real estate at a premium in the water and mountains bound Puget Sound region, we have many small lots, plus skads of affluent multi million $ homes, (many owned by now busted dot commers), as well as many steep sloped properties. We do have considerable spreading trees, and certainly many much larger than up your way.

I'm certainly enjoying this thread, and all the creativity and brainstorming, and hope to see some physical results someday. 

However, I still only see three possible practical uses, if a workable design could be produced:

1: when the room to drop a piece even two or three feet doesnt exist.
2: When wood structure doesnt allow lowering stresses.

3: When a tree has no top, and lots of long laterals with targets below. For that, you would need a tall gin, but only for lifeline. Light rigging might be ok, but guys would be needed, and the climber would have to safety in to the limbs, just what he is trying to avoid.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 29, 2002)

Kevin asked:

<I>"Will the port a wrap swivel?"</I>

Uhh, I guess. Does it matter? I was thinking I could just drop it in the top of the boom. When I was done, I could just lift it out and put it back in the tool box.

Rb mentioned:

<I>"We do have considerable spreading trees, and certainly many much larger than up your way. "</I>

Removal of spreading trees would not be enhanced by this tool, it's for spar removal. Spreading trees can be lowered off themselves. 

Large trees, like you have out west could be problematic, this tool is limited by it's size and strength. Can it handle a 500,000 pound Douglas Fir in one bite? Nope. 

Rb also noted:

<I>". Any tension on the line would make it much harder to push off the piece sideways."</I>

This tool is for guys who can handle a saw and a 500 pound hunk of wood, at least enough to cut through and push it off the spar. If this is too hard to do with this device, then it's too hard to do with a pulley(the old fashioned way).

Now to Spyder:

Draw me a picture, so I can critic you. 
If I get your post right you want a 20' gin pole????? Yikes!


----------



## rbtree (Mar 29, 2002)

Mike, are you thinking of cutting a long, say over 4 foot piece. if so, then you need to stop and think of how the overhead rigging line would make it difficult to control the piece. Whole different set of physics come into play, when you start putting even a slight backward or sideways resistance on the piece. Think it over, try it with a small model, maybe I'm missing something or overestimating the resisatance. That is why I suggested a triangle shaped device to allow more support till the piece is about off the stump.

Re trees with no top. I was back to the gin pole concept.

Cheers

Rog


----------



## FBerkel (Mar 30, 2002)

*Gin Poll*

Beefeater, Tanqueray, or Bombay? (Vote for one only)


----------



## FBerkel (Mar 30, 2002)

But, seriously, folks:

I've enjoyed the brainstorming. The debate on Mike's idea seems to center on how to get a large (big enough to make the whole thing worthwhile) piece off the spar without putting too much side load on the gin pole? Rb notes that too much side load causes the pole to loosen, potentially break. A round pole pivots, but would be even less secure against trunk. Square tube seats better, but can't pivot. 

What about some kind of extremely strong turntable (think of the base of a bucket truck), on the scale of the four inch square tube? Does such a thing exist? If the top section had a block instead of porta wrap, and lower down a lever arm sticking out at a right angle, climber could complete his cut (with the aid of a wedge) and (with tension supplied from below) grab the arm and pivot the piece off. Probably want to strap piece onto pivoting section, keep it from swinging out. each section has dogs to dig in to wood, trucker straps with binders to keep it from slipping.

I could see this thing coming in handy once in a while. Would have to be very conservative in estimating log weight--danger to climber is extreme.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Mar 31, 2002)

i was very backward about speaking up about 'tech. removal' so as not to be taken that way, until Rog. did openly himself; and then took comments very openly. Very impressive. One hell of a job in many respects!

Yes, 20' is a lil long! i'm not too sure about this pole anyway; and 20' is a lil unrealistic. But, 3 connection points of double straps that all interchange, isn't. The top set would be for the load, the next 2 sets would be to anchor the unit to tree, after a drop was made, the pole should be able to slide down. What was the middle set of straps become the load attatchment, what was the bottom set become the middle, the pole would just slide down and get pinned. Then what was the load strap gets sent back up and becomes the bottom set. In this way, once the thing was on the tree, you wouldn't have to totally detatch it and wrestle with it, just slide it down as the tree supported the unit, until you repinned it.

A#1 i'm not really hear to critique anyone; just brainstorm; and now bow out as you are obviously thinking of someone else..


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 31, 2002)

Spyder, I didn't mean I wanted to maliciously criticize you, I just meant a picture would help me understand your concept. I apologize if you misinterpreted the intention of my comments.

I also want to address the safty issue, again. If the boom is low, even lower than the top of the piece, and the climber is tied above the straps, help me understand where the danger is. Are we talking about the tool breaking and hitting the obstacles on the ground?

As far as pushing the log off the spar being hard, I don't know what to say. I guess if you tried to push it against the boom, it would stop, but if you pushed it just to the side of the boom, it would fall right over. If the rope was too tight just have the ground man give an inch or two of slack.

As for the turntable, it may be nice, and that's what was incorporated into the design with the round tube, but because the pole was now straight, I felt rotation was unnecessary.


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Mar 31, 2002)

Also keeping the variables down in the initial incarnation is a good thought too. Leave the improvements to the Mark II III and beyond. ( or would that be the Mike II )


----------



## Mike Cantolina (Dec 13, 2007)

Any progress made on this since '02?

How about some type of heavy duty fixe pulleys along the backside of the channel to run the rig line through? So you can lock the line in with clevis or biner?



Mike C


----------



## ropensaddle (Dec 13, 2007)

Man some of you have a lot of time to get wood down
must pay great in your area. I have thought of a hinge
since the eighties but would not be fast enough and 
would wear you out pulling it up. I have a few different
ideas but am thinking of patenting so wont mention
I have always considered a gin pole handy on a truck
for heavy lifting and winching I have an old f350 that
is set up with in and out pto winch and heavy flat bed
I want to affix a gin pole to it but want it adjustable
and am wandering if drill casing or schedule 80 pipe
would be strong enough to lift say four tons?


----------

