Best maul?

[JUDGE1162]

bytehoven

I read some where might have been here, about people mixing used motor oil with sand in a 5 gallon pal and sticking your axes, muals, etc in the sand oil mix when not in use, this serves two uses, first the sand removes and rust and the oil protects it from rusting.

As it helping you split, I really don't see that happening

 

[NWnewguy]

Current splitting lineup

I am currently using a 8lb maul with a pretty good taper that I got at a farm sale for a couple of bucks. It does a pretty good job on most rounds. It seems like the older mauls had a better geometry than most of the ones you can buy today. My other splitter is a Stihl brand splitting axe that weighs 4.4lbs and does really good on rounds of 9" in diameter or less, bigger than that and I don't even try. I really don't like hitting the same piece of wood more than once.

 

[JamesJems]

Yup...Gransfors is a joy in the hand

... does anyone have any experience with the splitting maul from Gransfors?

Yup. Although not their heaviest maul. I use their large splitting axe. There's a photo of it on my avatar.

I swear by it. 3.5 lbs of the finest Swedish steel. How can a 3.5 lb axe do the work of a larger maul? Because I can swing it much, much faster. And since Force=Mass x Acceleration, in the long and short run, I win.

I own this Gransfors and 2 other Wetterlings. Finest tools I own.

 

[JUDGE1162]

Everyone quotes the whole

Force = Mass x Acceleration, but do you really think that you can swing an 8 pound mual twice as fast as a 16 pound mual? I doubt it!!!

Yes there are tade offs but in most case you will deliver more force with a bigger mual the next question is can you keep doing it, yes a bigger mual tend to wear you out faster.

In in the case of a moster mual at 20 pounds or 24 pound just drop the mual and the dead fall (just gravity) will cause it to go fast enough to beat out an 8 pound mual as you would need to swing the 8 pounder 3 times faster then the 24 pound moster.

 

[zemmo]

Everyone quotes the whole

Force = Mass x Acceleration, but do you really think that you can swing an 8 pound mual twice as fast as a 16 pound mual? I doubt it!!!

Yes there are tade offs but in most case you will deliver more force with a bigger mual the next question is can you keep doing it, yes a bigger mual tend to wear you out faster.

In in the case of a moster mual at 20 pounds or 24 pound just drop the mual and the dead fall (just gravity) will cause it to go fast enough to beat out an 8 pound mual as you would need to swing the 8 pounder 3 times faster then the 24 pound moster.

I think momentum is more to the point than force, in such a discussion. And outside of a gravitational field, I think one probably could swing a 4 lb maul twice as fast as an 8 lb maul. But since gravity alone is accelerating an object at 32 ft/sec/squared, the heavier maul benefits more from gravity. Of course the operator does more work to get the heavier maul up in the air so gravity can act on it, which is why using a heavy wedge is more tiring. I was just splitting again today, and for the tough rounds, I repeatedly find myself going for the 12 lber.

 

[JamesJems]

All is not as it seems...

Zemmo, all is not as it seems.

Objects of any size have a terminal velocity of 32ft/sec/squared. Yes, we all know that. but there's no way a light maul or a heavy maul can go that fast with gravity on it's own. Not from a swing height of say, 8 feet (your height plus length of the handle).

What I'm trying to say is that gravity alone doesn't yet kick in in all it's glory...several more feet of movement are required to reach that magic number. Which means we have a rather complex physical equation dealing with momentum, inertia...changing velocity...it gets ugly pretty quickly.

A more useful equation might be measuring the Kinetic Energy stored in the axe head at the moment it hits the round.

KE=Mass/2 x square of the velocity (V-squared). Now this equation yeilds some surprising results when you think about the differences you can swing a heavy object as opposed to a light one.

We might all be surprised to discover that we can swing a light axe not just twice as fast as a 10-16 lb maul, but, with proper technique, probably more like three times as fast....and this part is crucial to shortening the task of getting through x-amount of rounds in an hour: you can swing a light splitting axe far more frequently to make it do more work.

That's the crucial part. I just finished splitting some 16-18 inch Fir Rounds. After the initial split is done, I can split each half into burnable chunks at a rate that far exceeds a heavier maul. With this question on my mind, I was hitting split-halves at the rate of about 1.5 hits per second. (full swing obviously not needed with clear fir).

You know that delightful wham-wham-wham we all get when we use the right tool on clear, knot free wood? The kind of work that makes us smile? yeah...that kind of feeling.

Couldn't do it with a monster/heavyweight maul. Consequently, I can do more work faster. And that's what we're all after, right?

 

[zemmo]

Zemmo, all is not as it seems.

Objects of any size have a terminal velocity of 32ft/sec/squared. Yes, we all know that. but there's no way a light maul or a heavy maul can go that fast with gravity on it's own. Not from a swing height of say, 8 feet (your height plus length of the handle).

What I'm trying to say is that gravity alone doesn't yet kick in in all it's glory...several more feet of movement are required to reach that magic number. Which means we have a rather complex physical equation dealing with momentum, inertia...changing velocity...it gets ugly pretty quickly.

A more useful equation might be measuring the Kinetic Energy stored in the axe head at the moment it hits the round.

KE=Mass/2 x square of the velocity (V-squared). Now this equation yeilds some surprising results when you think about the differences you can swing a heavy object as opposed to a light one.

We might all be surprised to discover that we can swing a light axe not just twice as fast as a 10-16 lb maul, but, with proper technique, probably more like three times as fast....and this part is crucial to shortening the task of getting through x-amount of rounds in an hour: you can swing a light splitting axe far more frequently to make it do more work.

That's the crucial part. I just finished splitting some 16-18 inch Fir Rounds. After the initial split is done, I can split each half into burnable chunks at a rate that far exceeds a heavier maul. With this question on my mind, I was hitting split-halves at the rate of about 1.5 hits per second. (full swing obviously not needed with clear fir).

You know that delightful wham-wham-wham we all get when we use the right tool on clear, knot free wood? The kind of work that makes us smile? yeah...that kind of feeling.

Couldn't do it with a monster/heavyweight maul. Consequently, I can do more work faster. And that's what we're all after, right?

I was thinking about the kinetic energy equation after my last post, and the formula you mention. I'm just not sure that it's applicable. It's been nearly a geologic age since I studied physics, and I'd love to hear the take of a real physicist.

But I don't believe that the KE formula predicts penetration (which is what we are talking about, the penetration of the head of a maul into a block of wood. In firearm ballistics muzzle energy is calculated by the KE equation, thus one can have a very light, very fast bullet with the same muzzle energy as a slow heavy bullet. A 300 gr. bullet at 1500 fps, versus a 40 grain bullet at 3500 fps. Just guessing that these examples would yield a similar muzzle energy, they should be close enough for an example.

BUT, the penetration of these rounds in any medium, will not be identical. Given the same shape, the heavier, slower bullet will penetrate much deeper. Inertia (the tendency of an object in motion to remain in motion), is dependent on momentum, not kinetic energy.

About the actual speed one can swing a light maul compared to a heavy maul, I don't even have a guess, and no accurate way to measure.

The easier the splitting the less the heavy maul is needed, and since it stays as heavy as ever (heavier than needed for easier splitting), I agree with you that easy splitting is easier and faster with a lighter tool. Wet birch at 40 below is the easiest I've ever seen, you just wave a maul at the round, you don't even have to hit it. EXTREMELY satisfying

The twisted oak I was splitting today made me smile, but grimly, as sweat poured onto my safety glasses. But hey, outdoors on a beautiful NM winter day, it's a hell of a lot better than being in Cleveland--or in an office.

If you know any real physics nerds, I'd love their take. Good splitting, no quitting...

PS Objects don't have a velocity of 32 ft per second per second, they have an ACCELERATION of those values. Terminal velocity depends on a number of variables, shape, density, duration of fall, etc.

 

[hoss]

I recieved my helko heavy splitting axe about 3 weeks ago. I have had the chance to split 3-3.5 cords of mixed red oak, white oak and honey locust. I also own a monster maul and have to say, I definatley prefer the helko. It is amazing the power that is packed in the 5lb. head on this thing. I could be wrong but the curved handle actually DOES feel like it generates a more powerful swing. I am about 6'2" and weigh about 260lb. so lifting the monster maul is not a factor, I just think the helko splits better. For what it's worth.:biggrinbounce2:

 

[SRT-Tech]

I have a question regarding the surface of the axe, maul or wedges.

Does anyone treat their blade surfaces to keep them slippery so they split better?

I have a couple of wedges that have rusted up pretty good and I need to sand them down. I wondered if treating the surface with spray silicone or (?), might not only keep them from rusting up again, but also help through tougher wood?

yes, i use Bostich Top Cote on the splitting instruments (and chainbar/chain too)

works very well.

 

[musch]

yes, i use Bostich Top Cote on the splitting instruments (and chainbar/chain too)

works very well.

I use mine almost daily, and never see any rust on it.

don't leave it outdoors either.

 

[SRT-Tech]

its not a rust issue, the topcote prevents sticking. flies thru the wood a hell of a lot faster than untreated.

my tools are also brought inside the apt every day and the handles are wiped down with tung oil daily.

 

[JUDGE1162]

I was thinking about the kinetic energy equation after my last post, and the formula you mention. I'm just not sure that it's applicable. It's been nearly a geologic age since I studied physics, and I'd love to hear the take of a real physicist.

But I don't believe that the KE formula predicts penetration (which is what we are talking about, the penetration of the head of a maul into a block of wood. In firearm ballistics muzzle energy is calculated by the KE equation, thus one can have a very light, very fast bullet with the same muzzle energy as a slow heavy bullet. A 300 gr. bullet at 1500 fps, versus a 40 grain bullet at 3500 fps. Just guessing that these examples would yield a similar muzzle energy, they should be close enough for an example.

BUT, the penetration of these rounds in any medium, will not be identical. Given the same shape, the heavier, slower bullet will penetrate much deeper. Inertia (the tendency of an object in motion to remain in motion), is dependent on momentum, not kinetic energy.

About the actual speed one can swing a light maul compared to a heavy maul, I don't even have a guess, and no accurate way to measure.

If you know any real physics nerds, I'd love their take. Good splitting, no quitting...

PS Objects don't have a velocity of 32 ft per second per second, they have an ACCELERATION of those values. Terminal velocity depends on a number of variables, shape, density, duration of fall, etc.

While I am not a physicist, I am an engineer. I see you point with the KE, however I am not sure if it applies to splitting wood as much as force, think about it when you buy a mechanical wood splitter do you buy it for its KE value or the force (tons) it applies to the wood. It is really force we are talking about here and if you are interested in KE and momentum then you can see that a heavier object at a much slower speed has a much higher KE then a small object at a very high speed. The basic example a ping pong ball going 300 mph or a 5 pound rock going 30 mph which rather you get hit by they have the same KE, but I rather take my chance with the ping pong ball.

And JamesJems, you can not swing an 8 lbs ax twice as fast as a 16 pound ax and there is no way you can swing an 8 pound ax 3 times as fast as a 16 pound ax. I get your point about the object not reaching terminal velocity of 32ft/sec/squared but gravity is working on both object and both objects will reach about the same speed due to gravity. Which in this case let say is 1/4 of the terminal velocity. In general, a speed of 50% of terminal velocity is reached after only about 3 seconds, while it takes 8 seconds to reach 90%, 15 seconds to reach 99% and so on. In general on earth under normal non-vacuum condition terminal velocity is around 120 mph or 175 feet per second so let say our ax/maul is moving at 1/4 of this or 40 ft/second or 30 mph due to gravity alone and both ax/mauls are moving at the same speed.

Now think about it how fast can you real swing your ax from the top of the swing to the time it takes to hit the wood, low long does it take, 1/2 a second,1/4 a second? Basically if you can swing an 8 pound ax in 1/4 a second does it really take you a full ½ a second to swing a 16 pound ax or could you swing a 4 pound ax in 1/8 of a second NO it is not psychically possible. This is why a 20 pound monster maul works, because even if you in part no effort to the swing just basically drop it (let gravity alone do all the work) it does not take 2.5 times longer for the maul to fall compared to how fast you can swing a lighter ax. So even if you have a quick swing and it takes 1/4 a second to swing an 8 pound ax, it does not take 0.625 of a second for the 20 pound maul to drop. Just try it for you self lift an object over you head and drop it, it takes less than ½ a second for it to hit the ground. Just for the record according to timber sports it takes a little more than ¼ of a second to swing an ax on average which mean even if you do put any effort in your swing you are imparting almost as much force with a 16 pound ax as you do full force swing with a 8 pound ax.

JamesJems bring up another issue how much force do you need for 10 inch round, yes a 16 pounder is a bit of over kill, and there are two parts of a swing the first part the lift, which is much quicker and easier with a smaller ax then with a monster ax and that your cycle time is faster even if your swing speed is about the same and with smaller wood you can split faster and with less effort with a small ax then with a big one, but if you split bigger wood like I do (16 in tend to be the minimum tree size and 20 inch or larger is common) more force is need and you can split much faster with a bigger ax.

 

[JamesJems]

messy variables

and I'd love to hear the take of a real physicist.

Yeah...me too. I wonder if we could recruit someone...

But I don't believe that the KE formula predicts penetration

Neither do I. I was thinking about this last night while doing dishes. God...there's just so many variables. Type of wood, condition of wood, temperature of wood, slickness/friction of axe,...there's just so many.

In firearm ballistics muzzle energy is calculated by the KE equation, thus one can have a very light, very fast bullet with the same muzzle energy as a slow heavy bullet.

yep. that's what I was thinking about too.

BUT, the penetration of these rounds in any medium, will not be identical. Given the same shape, the heavier, slower bullet will penetrate much deeper. Inertia (the tendency of an object in motion to remain in motion), is dependent on momentum, not kinetic energy.

Yep. I agree.

Wet birch at 40 below is the easiest I've ever seen, you just wave a maul at the round, you don't even have to hit it.

Thankfully, I don't get -40 F here in the PNW...just rain. Lot's of it. There's so damn much rain here, our island it sinking!

 

[zemmo]

Yuck, I'll take 40 below over tons of liquid water anyday.

 

[habanero]

Can we all stop saying 32 ft/sec^2 is a velocity? It is the acceleration of gravity, not terminal velocity. Terminal velocity has to be calculated, and is based more or less on the resistance to movement of an object moving through a medium (or more specifically where the force of that resistance balances the force applied through acceleration). In our case, it is dependent almost exclusively on the wind resistance of the maul head moving through air. All objects do fall at the same rate in a vacuum, but not in the real world.

Sorry, I don't mean to offend anybody-it's just the misuse of scientific terms is at the top of my list of pet-peeves. And no, I'm not a physicist, but I am a chemist.

 

[zemmo]

Can we all stop saying 32 ft/sec^2 is a velocity? It is the acceleration of gravity, not terminal velocity. Terminal velocity has to be calculated, and is based more or less on the resistance to movement of an object moving through a medium (or more specifically where the force of that resistance balances the force applied through acceleration). In our case, it is dependent almost exclusively on the wind resistance of the maul head moving through air. All objects do fall at the same rate in a vacuum, but not in the real world.

Sorry, I don't mean to offend anybody-it's just the misuse of scientific terms is at the top of my list of pet-peeves. And no, I'm not a physicist, but I am a chemist.

I agree. The first step to clear thinking is to call different things by different names. You missed this fragment of my earlier post:

"PS Objects don't have a velocity of 32 ft per second per second, they have an ACCELERATION of those values. Terminal velocity depends on a number of variables, shape, density, duration of fall, etc."

 

[habanero]

I agree. The first step to clear thinking is to call different things by different names. You missed this fragment of my earlier post:

"PS Objects don't have a velocity of 32 ft per second per second, they have an ACCELERATION of those values. Terminal velocity depends on a number of variables, shape, density, duration of fall, etc."

Sorry, I did indeed miss that fragment. Didn't mean to be redundant.

 

[zemmo]

Sorry, I did indeed miss that fragment. Didn't mean to be redundant.

No worries. What's your take on momentum vs KE in a maul head?

 

[habanero]

No worries. What's your take on momentum vs KE in a maul head?

My take is that it is an extremely complex system that is almost impossible to sort out by theoretical calculations alone (at least without a good dose of computer modeling).

I think emperical testing would be a way to get a better picture. One could conceivably build a test rig to test various designs-which would actually not be terribly difficult. Everything from a controlled drop to a rotary actuator could be used to replicate a maul strike. Then it is just a matter of applying the rig with a few different maul heads to actually see what happens.

But, there're lots of problems with such an empirical test. To try to keep the post to a moderate length, I won't go into detail. Consistent wood, environmental conditions, maul head condition (new, used, shiny, painted, etc.), and wood type come to mind as the three biggest sources of error-but there are dozens more. The best that could ever be hoped for would be to say a certain head works best under certain, perhaps limited, sets of conditions.

I believe maul choice comes down to a matter of personal preference-which is why there are all the different types of mauls still in use. If it were easy to decide which was better (assuming one has a clear advantage over another), that one would dominate the market. I personally own a couple 6 pounders, an 8 pounder, and a 13 pounder. I probably do 95% of my splitting with the 13 pounder, and use the 6 pounder for kindling work and when wifey thinks she wants to try splitting a bit.

 

[zemmo]

My take is that it is an extremely complex system that is almost impossible to sort out by theoretical calculations alone (at least without a good dose of computer modeling).

I think emperical testing would be a way to get a better picture. One could conceivably build a test rig to test various designs-which would actually not be terribly difficult. Everything from a controlled drop to a rotary actuator could be used to replicate a maul strike. Then it is just a matter of applying the rig with a few different maul heads to actually see what happens.

But, there're lots of problems with such an empirical test. To try to keep the post to a moderate length, I won't go into detail. Consistent wood, environmental conditions, maul head condition (new, used, shiny, painted, etc.), and wood type come to mind as the three biggest sources of error-but there are dozens more. The best that could ever be hoped for would be to say a certain head works best under certain, perhaps limited, sets of conditions.

I believe maul choice comes down to a matter of personal preference-which is why there are all the different types of mauls still in use. If it were easy to decide which was better (assuming one has a clear advantage over another), that one would dominate the market. I personally own a couple 6 pounders, an 8 pounder, and a 13 pounder. I probably do 95% of my splitting with the 13 pounder, and use the 6 pounder for kindling work and when wifey thinks she wants to try splitting a bit.

Good post, and I agree completely.