fallen a tree where u want it..

[Mountainman]

I dropped a BIG hardwood, about 4 feet at the stump with a lot of limbs a few years ago in Iowa. Before I finished the back cut, I set two large hydraulic jacks in place to the rear of the back cut. They weren't Silveys, but they did the job.

I try to make my undercuts such that just before the tree hits the ground, the undercut closes up and pops the tree apart at the hinge. Might not be the best way to go for grade lumber, but it works great for firewood.

 

[glens]

This thread certainly is a mess.  Tony, are you now trying for the Instigator position?

Hey Lumberjack, you took too much of a shortcut with your math.&nbsp; I agree that bit about "tie the rope to your neck and pull vs. throw the rope over your shoulder, tie it to your ankles and then pull; which way has more leverage?" is pure bunk.&nbsp; MasterBlaster, you <i>perceive</i> that there's greater leverage against your body the second way because when the rope is pulled you're resisting the force trying to compress your body, thus making your body rigid and more like a tree than something full of flexible joints all along it's height.&nbsp; I don't believe a tree will perceive such difference.&nbsp; Stand as tall, straight, and stiff as you possibly can (or better, tie yourself top-to-bottom to a 5' cant hook or similar) for both methods and report back to us.

I covered this some time ago but don't care to perform a search to point you to it, so here it basically is again (based on Carl's previous example):

Rope fastened to tree (or simply passed over same point and tied at bottom -- no difference) at 75'; 230_lb pull on the rope; rope angle 45&deg;.&nbsp; Your 230_lb pull is along the direction of the hypotenuse of a triangle.&nbsp; To determine the resultant sideways component of the pull you must find the length of the side of the triangle corresponding to the sideways direction.&nbsp; In this case, square 230, divide it by two, then take the square root of that.&nbsp; 230 &times; 230 = 52900.&nbsp; Half that is 26450.&nbsp; The square root of that is 163.&nbsp; The sideways component of force at 75' is 163_lb, thus (as 163 &times 75) 12225_ft-lb.&nbsp; (the angle doesn't need to be 45&deg; but the example is easier that way)

Plug that into Carl's previous example for 6 &times; 12225_ft-lb = 73350_ft-lb instead of "103500 pounds of leverage".

The tree will not actively try to stand straighter/taller if you fasten your rope down near the cut, but it will be easier to retrieve your rope if you do so.&nbsp; Apart from maybe a slip knot getting snagged on the way up, that will be the only savings with the tied-low method.

As for the other point mentioned in this thread regarding the slanted back cut (Tony and others) try this some time:&nbsp; take a small leaner, place a well-formed notch straight away from the lean, then make the back cut dead level and try to wedge it over.&nbsp; You'll likely find that the result is almost exactly the same as for a vertical stem with a downward-slanting back cut, and that the bottom-rear-most part of the back cut will break away by virtue of a split along the length of the stem and your back cut will close entirely at best.&nbsp; At worst the hinge will fail and the tree will fall uncontrolled to the wrong direction.&nbsp; You should always make your back cut level when the tree is vertical, but a better rule of thumb is always make it 90&deg; to the direction of the stem at the cut.&nbsp; That way, when you wedge or jack it, you'll be pressing straight "down" the grain and not in a direction that will readily separate it instead.

I rarely do, but If I use a tag line, it's usually not to pull the tree over, but to help ensure it <i>doesn't</i> go a certain direction.&nbsp; I fear too much leverage too soon can cause a barber-chair, and it's too easy to over-pull.

Glen

 

[Lumberjack]

I tried to leave out the trig, I thought it would confuess them even more. However on that note, the longer the rope is (shallower angle) , the more horizonal pull I have on the tree, but that is trig.

On the pass through and tie low, it is easier (for me at least) to pull through and tie low because the limbs would impede the running bowline to run all the way back up, which is what you said I think.

I think that it is easy to regulate the amount of force pulling over the tree, eliminating the chance for barberchairing ect. I cut the notch, then have the rope tightened to make the tree neutural (I normally can eye it) then I make my backcut to the hinge, then I tell whoever is running the rope to send it on over.


Carl

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

Originally posted by glens
Apart from maybe a slip knot getting snagged on the way up, that will be the only savings with the tied-low method.

The only reason to use this method is because there is no need to isolate the crotch with the rope. If there area bunch of branches, it can be very hard to get the running knot up to the crotch.
Think about throwing a rope through a spruce. You're way ahead tracing the back side of the tree and tieing it low.
One time I did that and as we pulled, the rope started slipping over the branches, one by one, until we were just pulling from 8 feet high. I was looking pretty stupid that day. Speaking of looking stupid, looks like MB is wrong again, dang, even a blind pig gets an apple once in a while.

 

[MasterBlaster]

 

[Gypo Logger]

Cabling also works rather nicely when your truck is stuck. Simply tie a rope, cable etc. to the frame, then choke a good size tree about 12 ft. above ground level. Then, with a well placed notch and backcut that has an anti- kickback step- dump the tree with the cable very, very slack. It almost works like doing a brake stand in the McDonalds drive thru.
If the trees are not sizeable enough, then just hook up several smallish stems as though like dominoes for the additional leverage required to extricate the pickup. If this method is used correctly, you wont block the trail ahead of you, but the limbs, boughs, chunkwood etc. will give additional traction and may even serve as a means of fording small creeks, swamps and rivulets.
Remember- 4x4's are for getting you out, not getting you in.
John

 

[tony marks]

dang it looks like it,, dont it glen..
well im proud o this big post .. even if
i did get a swift kick from ever treeman from florida to ontario...
kinda reminds me of my mammas whippings a little bit.. nah never been nothin quite like that... her hickory made the lickings from bullys an such,, i got in scraps with ,,seem like love taps..
every body take time to have a good christmas,,and remember the cause for the day.. im outa here tony

 

[max2cam]

Gosh, I go out and split some of that nice jack pine and come back to find this thread increased in volume and in tone.

So anyway, without resorting to invective or Einsteinian physics (which I wouldn't understand anyway) I will pose a question:

Don't I get the same PRACTICAL results cranking on a heavy-duty come-along and strong chains set at 8 feet as a 200 lb "groundie" pulling on a rope set at 80 feet gets?

Leverage is nice, I won't deny that. And yes, there are really great ropes available I'm sure. But I don't see how one guy (me) can both cut and pull on a rope at the same time. But my friend "Come-a-long Bob" allows me to do that. And where I'm working you couln't get a truck down there if you wanted to. And who's going to climb that 80 ft. up in the tree anyway? Not me!

In other words, I'm not saying that I'm right and you rope guys at 80 ft. are wrong. Maybe I am wrong doing it this way as some have claimed, but the rope at 80 ft. system is not practical in my circumstances. So while the brute force come-along and chains method at 8 ft. is perhaps not the ideal best way, it does allow one man working in the deep woods to drop trees where he wants them to go -- mostly.

As some others have stated, a lot also depends on your notch cut. Initially, I put good force on the tree -- until the come-a-long groans -- then I make a healthy notch cut. The tree slowly gives in the desired direction as you start making the back cut. That takes pressure off the chains and allows you to tighten some more. By alternating between increasing the back cut and re-tightening the come-along, the tree is slowly convinced it has to go where I'm telling it to go. It may be brute force, but it is a subtle, step-by-step, incremental application of brute force so as not to overload the chains or come-along. Of course there is a point of too much lean combined with too big a tree to make this work, but I have not encountered that yet.

That said, I will be VERY glad when that big milling pine is down. Hopefully my sauna will not get smashed and I won't get killed or injured. I appreciate this forum and I am NOT claiming to be a know-it-all because the danger is always there and I am totally self-taught anyway. Perhaps I have developed practices that would horrify the experts, but so far at least they have worked for me (knock on wood) and have allowed me to work in my modestly sized, but nicely timbered piece of semi-wilderness.

Fantasy Mil-Surp Gunshop: Great Selection, Great Prices!
http://www.atthecreation.com/

 

[Newfie]

"Perhaps I have developed practices that would horrify the experts, but so far at least they have worked for me "



With that sort of logic I guess I shouldn't have smartened up and given up drinking and driving when I was in college. After all, I never hurt anyone or myself so why not keep doing it? hey if it works what's the big deal.

I've said it before, It's what you don't know that you don't know that's gonna kill you.

A throw line will easily get you a leverage point higher than 8 feet off the ground. try it you'll like it. Alternantively, if you are doing cutting in the woods where nothing but other trees can get broken, use that a place to practice putting proper notches,backcuts and wedges to use. Read Dent's book for a start and you'll begin to see the light.

Stay Safe

 

[Bradley]

Normally, if I'm falling trees alone where there are some types of hazards to be avoided, I'll set a rope as high in the tree as I can get it with a running bowline. I'll set a pulley at the base of a tree inline with the one I'm cutting in the direction I want it to fall. I'll run the rope through that change of direction pulley back to a tree or other anchor near the base of the tree I'm cutting. Then I'll set up my mechanical advantage system. I usually use a Z-rig exclusively. It works great, 3:1, is fast to set up and easy to reset. If I find I need more power I can pig on a 2:1 on the tail of the Z for 6:1. After this is done I'll slightly tension the rig, then make my face cut. I'll gun the face using the sights on the saw or sticks, etc. When I'm satisfied with the face, I'll start my backcut and drive in a wedge or two especially if there is any back lean. When I have the backcut made I'll then reach over and tension the rope more if the tree hasn't started to fall already. Like others have said before, the rope is only to get the fall started and after the first movement of the tree the rope slack anyway. I have done the come-along and chain method years ago before I knew any better and had disastrous results twice. One resulted in a smashed shed ( no real loss, but still bad) and the other resulted in me and another friend having to dive out of the way when the hinge blew out and sent the tree sideways, that chain was hooked at 10'. I later realized how much pressure the hinge had on it from the come-along at 10' on a back leaner. I have pulled over many other more severe backleaners with a rope and Z-rig using very little effort and alot more safety.

 

[Mountainman]

I first heard about cabling a tree when stuck from a J. B. Hunt driver. He swears it works. In fact, he likes to practice in order to improve his technique. But he does it a little different. Instead of tying off to the frame, he goes for the outer end of the bumper for better leverage. He says that way the vector is dynamic instead of static.

Kids, don't try this at home.

 

[Ryan Willock]

Putting a skidder or dozer on it is pretty effective as well, just spur up it to about 20' and then I put my 30,000lbs winch to it and tug it over All joking aside unless you have an area that you can practice in where there is NO chance of screwing something important up then I wouldn't even consider it!!

 

[turnkey4099]

Originally posted by Bradley
When I'm satisfied with the face, I'll start my backcut and drive in a wedge or two especially if there is any back lean. When I have the backcut made I'll then reach over and tension the rope more if the tree hasn't started to fall already. Like others have said before, the rope is only to get the fall started and after the first movement of the tree the rope slack anyway.

Aye, there's the rub when working by oneself (I have to). I had one to remove leaning somewhat over my house. I cabled as high as possible (about 20 ft), tied off to a comealong 50 ft away, took all I could get with comealong then hung 4 5 gal buckets of water off the middle of the cable. Thus it continued a very firm pull after the tree started to fall. I have also done the same (still am) trying to straighten a black walnut that is leaning downwind. Cable high to anchor and 1 bucket in middle to maintain tension.

Harry K

 

[zero]

timber falling

tony- with out any disrespect timber falling is a profession.to learn your craft,first read doug dents book"professional timber falling a procedural approach" cheap from baileys ,alot of good stuff on this site ,a few good books out on rigging,get out in the open and try what you learn--- cut ,cut ,cut (plumb the lean,clear your escape route,gun the face cut and make the back cut.) a long high safety line 5/8 or 3/4 how ever set is a good idea in case of a sudden wind shift even used by loggers around water,roads, inmature trees of value. when clear cutting a strip you may fall 50 or so trees of differant size in a day 6 days a week you learn your craft fast!!!:blob6: :blob6: :blob6: happy holidays ZERO when i grow up i still want to be me

 

[tony marks]

zero ,u rite..thing is im like a lot o local country folk.. just learned their ways and figured out the rest. .[.not that the jobs done]..
ive learned more on arborsite about the way pros do it [chainsaw work ,i mean] than i knew before,, in 30 yrs of
mostly felling and some climbing work..
that alone is testimony to the fact ,,
ive learned to look at new ideas..
but thanks for the caution..
its nearbout to late to matter tho.
i aint been in a tree in 2 months..

 

[rahtreelimbs]

Vector, Trig.

 

[max2cam]

Red Pine Down

The red pine I was talking about is down safely. It dropped exactly where I wanted it to go using a come-along and chains set at 8 feet. Got it to fall away from the sauna and in a gap between two other trees. It measured 75 feet long and the kid counted 96 growth rings. Really nice straight milling log. The kid took some pictures. I was glad when that baby was down.

I also let him run the chainsaw for the first time. Age 12. He ain't mine, but I already taught him to ride and shoot. Why not chainsaw too?

Reading these newer posts, the idea of bringing a ladder along and putting the chain up a few feet higher is certainly a practical and good idea and I will try that on the larger milling stuff. Most of my cutting, however, is smaller fuelwood trees or balsam poles. The nice big red pine I mostly let grow and will never cut except for a few milling logs from trees that die of natural causes or culls that are blocking my solar panels.

Don't get me wrong. I have learned a great deal of valuable information on this site and this thread is a good example. How do you know there are better ways unless somebody tells you? I've never been seriously hurt in the woods in over 25 years of cutting and don't want to spoil that record now. It's very much like riding a motorcycle. The danger is great and always present.

Merry Christmas to all Ye Woodcutters!

Guns, legends, Harleys
http://www.atthecreation.com/

 

[Tom Dunlap]

Have you read "Rebuilding the Indian", by Fred Haefele?

A story about a guy who rebuilds a basket case Indian bike. He pays for the journey by doing tree work. On his journey, it isn't just the bike that gets built. A good read.

Tom

 

[Bradley]

Tom, that's a good read. Isn't Fred an arborist in Montana if I remember correctly?

 

[max2cam]

Originally posted by Tom Dunlap
Have you read "Rebuilding the Indian", by Fred Haefele?

A story about a guy who rebuilds a basket case Indian bike. He pays for the journey by doing tree work. On his journey, it isn't just the bike that gets built. A good read.

Tom

No, I have not read that book but it sounds like a good one.

Rebuilding old motorcycles is fun. Trouble is, now-a-days they are so high priced you'd think they were made out of 24 caret gold. In the good old days they were just old junk.

Got red pine limbed yesterday and cut off 3 eight foot logs and got them up off the ground for milling via a canthook. This baby will make nice clean boards and will be the first time to put the "refurbed" Solo 690 to hard use. The logs start at about 22" in diameter and then taper down.

The Echo CS-510 that I used to take it down, limb, and cut up performed flawlessly. You couldn't ask for a nicer saw.