Lets get this party started...

[Lumberjack]

Originally posted by Husky288XP
Carl if you want to be an arborist then you better study, because you do not climb "sticks". You would climb excurrent trees or trees with strong apical dominance, resulting in upright trees with strong central leaders.

Will get you ready for the test one way or another.

I was going to say central leader, but ok. Thanks. Apical dominance sounds great, but it would confuse the heck out of the masses.

Pa-ta-to Pa-tat-o

I want to be ready fo the test tho.

 

[NeTree]

... and I call it a darn SPUD.

No worries, Carl.

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

Originally posted by TreeCo
Carl,

That looks like a nice log truck to me. I wish I had one.

Dan

So little rust on it, no one would beleive it is a log truck up here.

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

I say puh-TAY-tuh

 

[Lumberjack]

I aint got any pics yet, but monday or tuesday I have a removal of a rather small pine. It should be mighty fun. The tree is around 50 foot tall, and less than 2' DBH. Here is the fun parts. It has a rather pronounced lean, the top is 22' from the base. To add to the fun, there is a gazebo at the outside edge og the LZ. Also there is 5 or so dogwoods, 2 of which almost reach the top of the tree. There is no access to it, so it has to be climbed. The roots on the side opposing the lean are failing, and at least one has broke. Then at the base, there is a defect, which, IMO compromises strength.

My plan is to guy it with 3 ropes, 2 ways. The first, and primary will be a winch cable up about 2/3 of the way, or where the limbs start. I will use that to take the brunt of the load, and make the tree more balanced. With another rope (probably 5/8 double braid) I am gonna set it against the lean (it is a somewhat compound lean, where it leans in 2 directions to the stump) and tension it with MA.

That should stabalize the tree. Then I am gonna tie in at the top, and spike up it, limbing and lowering on the way up, fighting the limbs throught the other trees (no damage allowed). Then go to the very top (BTW that places around 5000 extra pounds of torque against the stump) and rope out the top piece (under 75 pounds hopefully). This is where I am gonna use the 3rd rope. I am gonna set it up at the same place as the false crotch, and pretenion it, so the shock is spread out and not as much down, with the lean.

If all goes well I figue that it will take around 3 hours to complete, after I get there. Luckly I aint got to clean it up. Real pretty place tho.

The reason for the steel cable as the main support is that I dont want or need the stretch of double braid, and dont want to get plasma just yet. I may back it up with a 3/4" double braid, but that shouldnt be neccessary.

The most rigging yet by far.

 

[MasterBlaster]

Maybe I'm oversimplifying the job; from your description I would just hold and toss/rope when needed.

Piece it out by hand.



Start from the bottom up, feel for any odd wiggle/movement in the trunk as I ascended. But guying it off wouldn't hurt, either.

 

[MasterBlaster]

Gotta post a pic, as long as the bump is bumping.

 

[Lumberjack]

Originally posted by MasterBlaster
Maybe I'm oversimplifying the job; from your description I would just hold and toss/rope when needed.

Piece it out by hand.



Start from the bottom up, feel for any odd wiggle/movement in the trunk as I ascended. But guying it off wouldn't hurt, either.

Prob with tossing is the dog woods under the tree, no damage allowed. I might not use the 3rd guy (with the false crotch). I am going to start bottom up.

I am going to guy it off the first 2 ways tho, the first to counter the huge lean (and failing/broken roots), and second to support the defect in the base. With my 230 pounds in the top of the tree, 22 feet from the base, that would add 5060 ft lbs of torque to the base (which is already failing). Any movement on my part (which would be required) could easily double that figure (2 g's aint hard to make). Then roping out the top, and blocking down would add some amount of shock load to the tree, leveraged with the lean. So worse case senario (realistic tho) I might be putting an additional 16,000 ft lbs of torque on the trees base. That would be formed from me makin 2 g's as the top is caught on the pulley with 300 lbs of force. I would put money on the tree failing with just my (dead) weight up there.

 

[xtremetrees]

yeah I agree with MB, dudeyou dont wanna blow up trees dog.

How do you know this:
"Then go to the very top (BTW that places around 5000 extra pounds of torque against the stump)"""

I've blown up trees once, figured tit was gonna happen and it was away from the house.(lucky day.)

Sounds like youd be ok with the first cable at 2/3 way up anmore than that further up too much dynamics going on to acurately judge the actual stress. your guessing and guessing aint good.

Your not ruling out everything that can go wrong sounds like your adding to what can. Not good.

Are you bored with trees? . Dont be blowing up trees dude.

I try not to push my luck because I enjoy this work and wanna do it till im 60 or beyong

Bytheway, I'm flying down south to help a friend cut some monsters over a house.. 40 pines. Try and take some pics of the job . Wont be posting for a few days.

 

[MasterBlaster]

Originally posted by xtremetrees


Bytheway, I'm flying down south to help a friend cut some monsters over a house.. 40 pines.

Down south, you say?

Thats a mighty big house to have 40 monster pines around it!
I know, I know...

 

[Lumberjack]

Originally posted by xtremetrees
yeah I agree with MB, dudeyou dont wanna blow up trees dog.

How do you know this:
"Then go to the very top (BTW that places around 5000 extra pounds of torque against the stump)"""

I've blown up trees once, figured tit was gonna happen and it was away from the house.(lucky day.)

Sounds like youd be ok with the first cable at 2/3 way up anmore than that further up too much dynamics going on to acurately judge the actual stress. your guessing and guessing aint good.

Your not ruling out everything that can go wrong sounds like your adding to what can. Not good.

Are you bored with trees? . Dont be blowing up trees dude.

What does "blowing up trees" mean?

I calc the the added stress by added weight x's distance from fulcrum. My weight (230) times feet (22') from fulcrum (stump) equals 5060 ft lbs of force. That is my dead weight with no moving, and no rigging forces.

I am ruling out every thing that can go wrong, thats is one reason for posting it here, to bounce ideas.

What else can go wrong (besides the obvious)

 

[Lumberjack]

Meant to add this pic...

It was a tree that the local guy (old school spikes only) said he couldnt do. This is the best pic I have of it. I inverted the colors so you could see the tree (arrow) better. It was curved like a bannana over the house. Took an hour to have everything down, and in the truck.

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

i think that some of the numbers are running into potential static leverage at the stump of length(height) x added weight. The degree of lean from the stump etc. that you placed bodyweight at, would determine how much of that potential leveraged load would be actually added IMLHO.

Then if that weght was kept to the backside of the lean, might even help. i've leaned back away from cuts into lean for this effect, sometimes dropping massive body weight back into lanyard, just as top is leaving or being caught. Also, maintain backweight (away from lean)till about last. A half dozen times or so, i rigged and caught stuff, to hang away from lean, to collect enough ballast for my real target cut.


Or something like that.........
:alien:

 

[xtremetrees]

I knew a climber once from the old ISA board. Back when spammers would spamm it with ads!

There was a man talked highly of and well respected for his degrees in Engineering and mathmatics of trees.

He is dead now, it was a lightening struck pine he was removing. Took all the limbs off and took a top. Started chunking down the spar and the tree failed below him.

They called him Pete he was a master engineer of trees.
He will be sorely missed.

Tree failure=blowing up trees

 

[rborist1]

:Eye:

 

[MasterBlaster]

Originally posted by xtremetrees
I knew a climber once from the old ISA board. Took all the limbs off and took a top. Started chunking down the spar and the tree failed below him.

Man, I've done that a hundred times, I hope it doesn't happen to me! By the time I've got it stripped to a snag it is solid as a transmission pole.

Freak stuff DOES happen... it sucks!

 

[Lumberjack]

Originally posted by rborist1
Carl,

Where is that PPE you said you were gonna get....................I can't see it youngin! Then again, maybe its the photo.

I aint in that pic, and that was before I had it anyways.


Here it is:

 

[MasterBlaster]

Yup, ya look all geared up, and everything!

 

[xtremetrees]

smoking pic!
Yeah I know MB Lightening struck sucks.

I did a dead forked tree once. Lucky thing I went left and not right . When I roped the left the right broke out and bombed the house. Blowed into such small pieces couldnt rake it off the roof had to blow it clean.

Home owner came out what was that..! I said that couldhave been me!

 

[Lumberjack]

Originally posted by TheTreeSpyder
i think that some of the numbers are running into potential static leverage at the stump of length(height) x added weight. The degree of lean from the stump etc. that you placed bodyweight at, would determine how much of that potential leveraged load would be actually added IMLHO.

Then if that weght was kept to the backside of the lean, might even help. i've leaned back away from cuts into lean for this effect, sometimes dropping massive body weight back into lanyard, just as top is leaving or being caught. Also, maintain backweight (away from lean)till about last. A half dozen times or so, i rigged and caught stuff, to hang away from lean, to collect enough ballast for my real target cut.


Or something like that.........
:alien:

I aint sure what the top part means. Just like in torque, the arm is 22' away from the center axis (fulcrum). My weight is 230 x's the arm of 22'. The angle doesn't matter, as long as the length of the arm stays the same length. Same as with a crane angle and length go together to make the arm, if the boom gets longer you can increase the angle, and have the same arm of leverage. As the trunk gets shorter, the leverage will decrease because the angle isn't changing.

As for throwing your weight, that would work for catching the shock load, but not for constant support. I havent thought of that, but it would offset the shock.

Butch, what do you mean? You have done it hundreds of times (throwing the top, or failures?), but hope it doesnt happen to you (failure, causing a fall)?