Next Mill

[gink595]

Auxiliary fuel and bar oil tanks for making long cuts without refueling. It would involve hoses with threads to screw into the filler holes on the saw.

But then there is always the possibility of a motorcycle engine...........

Now your talking! A 150 hp Yamaha motor turing 12K would be a slick setup!

 

[BIG JAKE]

I'd like to lose the depth adjustment clamps on my Grandberg in favor of a V-notch wheel so I could use allthread and knobs to dial the depth instead of fussing with one clamp at a time. Also a lever throttle possibly, exhaust redirect, and would be nice to be able to remove powerhead only. The V wheel/depth adj would really be nice though.
With the exhaust redirect, though, my concern is vibration and whether or not the muffler can can handle the extra weight outboard without cracking due to vibration. What did you build your pipe out of Bob?

 

[Rob D]

I know the 880 and other large saws are good powerheads but how about adapting a 4 stroke engine that had even more torque and power.

I know there is a similar adaption made for the Peterson and Lucas mills but I've heard the chain speed isn't really fast enough to get full use of those larger engines (this is going on what I've been told and not through experience).

Also some sort of wheel on a hard spring to run on the outside of rough logs - long runners can get stuck on nobs and knots.

Some sort of powered 12 volt winch system to pull the mill up the log for you (somehow easily anchored to the end of the log). But with it working in such a way as linked to the chain speed of the chainsaw i.e. as the chainsaw revs higher it pulls a little harder, if chainspeed drops it pulls slower, if the chainsaw bogs altogether then it stops pulling. This would also have to be operated from where you are next to the saw.

Or a stage further where you start the saw in the cut and then the whole system is automatic until the saw gets to the end! Now that would be something

 

[BobL]

I'd like to lose the depth adjustment clamps on my Grandberg in favor of a V-notch wheel so I could use allthread and knobs to dial the depth instead of fussing with one clamp at a time. Also a lever throttle possibly, exhaust redirect, and would be nice to be able to remove powerhead only. The V wheel/depth adj would really be nice though.
With the exhaust redirect, though, my concern is vibration and whether or not the muffler can can handle the extra weight outboard without cracking due to vibration. What did you build your pipe out of Bob?

I'm not quite sure what you mean by a V-notched wheel Jake?
All thread rods and cranks for cutting depth adjustment are easier to use than bolt only vertical locks especially when taking into account rails etc, but add weight. linking the inboard and outboard all thread height adjustment drivers has been discussed and becomes complicated if various length bars are used on a mill. It's definitely something to think about

Lever and other outboard throttles I think have been developed sufficiently by various members on this site. I still can't get over how intuitive and "right" the motor cycle on my 880 throttle feels, especially given that it rolls the opposite way to the MC but somehow it seems right because it's operated with the left hand.

I think exhaust redirects have a lot of room for development. The pipe on my 880 is just plain 1/8" wall thickness ally. It did develop a crack on it's first day out, almost certainly because I machined away most of the inside weld to fit some inserts and had to be taken back to BIL for a re-weld. It's been good for a year now,

 

[BobL]

I know the 880 and other large saws are good powerheads but how about adapting a 4 stroke engine that had even more torque and power.

Having seen the 4 stroke engines close up on Lucas mills this is very, very tempting. Apart from weight being a significant factor with these engines and I don't want to make a bulky rail mill at this time and at the end of the day it has to live on my very small (1/6 acre) suburban house block.

I know there is a similar adaption made for the Peterson and Lucas mills but I've heard the chain speed isn't really fast enough to get full use of those larger engines (this is going on what I've been told and not through experience).

The Lucas operators that are in the know use 404 and just drop their rakers to cutting angles of around 10º+ and just mow their way through big hard logs. The finish is surprisingly good given the amout of wood they remove in one chain pass.

Also some sort of wheel on a hard spring to run on the outside of rough logs - long runners can get stuck on nobs and knots.

I'm a big fan of log wheels and agree that log wheel development has some way to go. The use of springs adds weight but is definitely worth considering especially if the spring can replace part of the structure

Some sort of powered 12 volt winch system to pull the mill up the log for you (somehow easily anchored to the end of the log). But with it working in such a way as linked to the chain speed of the chainsaw i.e. as the chainsaw revs higher it pulls a little harder, if chainspeed drops it pulls slower, if the chainsaw bogs altogether then it stops pulling. This would also have to be operated from where you are next to the saw.

Or a stage further where you start the saw in the cut and then the whole system is automatic until the saw gets to the end! Now that would be something

I've tried using a hand winch and even thought a few times about adding a powered winch. I didn't like the hand winch because it took away too much of the feel of the saw/mill from the operator especially when things get a little tricky. Instead of doing more work with winches I decided to put my development efforts into chain sharpening and setting raker depths so the saw self feeds as much as possible, and simple equipment to lift logs onto slopes so minimal or no pushing is needed. One major limitation with the self feeding of a mill on a slope are to Carriage or logosol type mills where getting the logs up on a slope is not practical. All that aside a small auto winch with feedback like you describe sounds like it is worth exploring. Sitting back with a beer and an RC hand piece sounds like my kind of milling

 

[Rob D]

Having seen the 4 stroke engines close up on Lucas mills this is very, very tempting. Apart from weight being a significant factor with these engines and I don't want to make a bulky rail mill at this time and at the end of the day it has to live on my very small (1/6 acre) suburban house block.


The Lucas operators that are in the know use 404 and just drop their rakers to cutting angles of around 10º+ and just mow their way through big hard logs. The finish is surprisingly good given the amout of wood they remove in one chain pass.



I'm a big fan of log wheels and agree that log wheel development has some way to go. The use of springs adds weight but is definitely worth considering especially if the spring can replace part of the structure



I've tried using a hand winch and even thought a few times about adding a powered winch. I didn't like the hand winch because it took away too much of the feel of the saw/mill from the operator especially when things get a little tricky. Instead of doing more work with winches I decided to put my development efforts into chain sharpening and setting raker depths so the saw self feeds as much as possible, and simple equipment to lift logs onto slopes so minimal or no pushing is needed. One major limitation with the self feeding of a mill on a slope are to Carriage or logosol type mills where getting the logs up on a slope is not practical. All that aside a small auto winch with feedback like you describe sounds like it is worth exploring. Sitting back with a beer and an RC hand piece sounds like my kind of milling

That sounds like my idea of milling as well! Thinking along the lines of a portable system where the mill still rides on the top line of the log as usual but the winch does all the work and works with the saw ... no idea how it could be done though!

 

[BlueRider]

The last time I was out milling A guy came up and told me about a hydrolic chainsaw he has for cleaning up around a local creek, he even went and got it so he could show it to me. It has been in the back of my mind along ith a pic I once saw of an under water logger cutting down/up trees that were at the bottom of a man made lake. This seems like a more efficent way to take advantage of the HP and torque of a 4 stroke engine in a milling application. the motor and pump combo could be on wheels and placed away and down wind from the log. The actual saw is amazingly light weight. The one I saw had a 18" or 20 " bar and the bar weighd as much or more than the power head. I don't know if a hydrolic saw with enough power to handle a 60" bar exists but I have no doubt a mill could be made by useing an appropriate size hydrilic motor. I almost forgot that the saw I saw had quick relaese fitting on the hoses.

My second idea for you Bob is to come up with a way to hold the saw so it is not supported by the log but rather by a beam next to the log. This idea was sparked by a set up a friend of mine is working on for a custom made rock cuting/shaping saw/grinder. My frined found a set of thompson linear bearings that ride on a 6' long bar that is 3"x3" The thing is monserous and lools like it could handle a ton or more. Thompsone bearings are very expensing but they have no slop or play. If you bolt a saw to one it could become an interesting mill

 

[huskyhank]

snipped.....

I don't know if a hydrolic saw with enough power to handle a 60" bar exists but I have no doubt a mill could be made by unuing an appropriate size hydrilic motor. I almost forgot that the saw I saw had quick relaese fitting on the hoses which would make it even more portable.

I'm pretty sure the feller bunchers, delimbers and processors used in logging are all hydraulic. Imagine a six foot bar running 3/4 inch chain with massive power. It'll buck a big log in seconds. But we're getting into some pretty serious gear now.

 

[BobL]

The last time I was out milling A guy came up and told me about a hydrolic chainsaw he has for cleaning up around a local creek, he even went and got it so he could show it to me. It has been in the back of my mind along ith a pic I once saw of an under water logger cutting down/up trees that were at the bottom of a man made lake. This seems like a more efficent way to take advantage of the HP and torque of a 4 stroke engine in a milling application. the motor and pump combo could be on wheels and placed away and down wind from the log. The actual saw is amazingly light weight. The one I saw had a 18" or 20 " bar and the bar weighd as much or more than the power head. I don't know if a hydrolic saw with enough power to handle a 60" bar exists but I have no doubt a mill could be made by useing an appropriate size hydrilic motor. I almost forgot that the saw I saw had quick relaese fitting on the hoses.

After driving this thing around for a while (it's basically a 23 HP hydraulic pack on wheels) I thought about how it would fare driving a bar and chain.

They do come with solid wheels and could for example be placed on a concrete slab and rigged to drive alonside the log holding a hydraulically driven bar and chain. Unfortunately one can't exactly lay concrete alongside every log one wants to mill.

My second idea for you Bob is to come up with a way to hold the saw so it is not supported by the log but rather by a beam next to the log. This idea was sparked by a set up a friend of mine is working on for a custom made rock cuting/shaping saw/grinder. My frined found a set of thompson linear bearings that ride on a 6' long bar that is 3"x3" The thing is monserous and lools like it could handle a ton or more. Thompsone bearings are very expensing but they have no slop or play. If you bolt a saw to one it could become an interesting mill

This is basically a rail mill of which there are quite a few variants around. Railomatic had several designs that were quite portable and worked well for him.
Here's one of the few photos left on AS from when he was a regular poster in 2007.

My minimill that rides on T-section RHS beams can already operate in this fashion and is even strong and adjustable enough to hold an 880 in a horizontal orientation.

It would just be a matter of making an independent stand for the rail to get it working fully as a rail mill BUT it's not ideal for running on a slope so I haven't really pursued this mode of operation.

 

[tlbsg]

hmmm bob asking for ideas for chainsaw mill? maybe you have perfected it to the max why not look at your own dedicated slabber bigger 25 hp 4 stroke u say space may be a problem my dedicated slabber will fit on a 6 x 4 trailer and rails unbolted and on a rack on top of trailer takes up little space

 

[BobL]

hmmm bob asking for ideas for chainsaw mill? maybe you have perfected it to the max why not look at your own dedicated slabber bigger 25 hp 4 stroke u say space may be a problem my dedicated slabber will fit on a 6 x 4 trailer and rails unbolted and on a rack on top of trailer takes up little space

I honestly don't even have space for a trailer right now unless I leave it on the verge and in my neighborhood that is not a good idea.

 

[rayvil01]

Depth adjustment

The biggest pain for me with the stock Alaskan is the depth adjustment. The u-bolts work fine, but are a pain.

I keep thinking back to a little South Bend metal lathe I ran back in my Navy days. To adjust the tailstock position, there was a 90-degree camlock lever. To move the tailstock, throw the camlock open, adust the position, then throw it the 90-degrees to shut it. Took seconds. Something in that vein for depth adjustment would be awesome. It would take one on both posts. But, it'd be worth it.

Thanks for starting the thread.

Is your leg all healed up?

 

[BobL]

The biggest pain for me with the stock Alaskan is the depth adjustment. The u-bolts work fine, but are a pain.

Yeap - I agree, that's why I used camlocks on the BIL mill and have to say they work a treat but the way the cams lock the verticals on the BIL mill is a tad complex - read on . . . .

I keep thinking back to a little South Bend metal lathe I ran back in my Navy days. To adjust the tailstock position, there was a 90-degree camlock lever. To move the tailstock, throw the camlock open, adust the position, then throw it the 90-degrees to shut it. Took seconds. Something in that vein for depth adjustment would be awesome. It would take one on both posts. But, it'd be worth it.

Ah ha - this is exactly what I am planning, a simple off centre camlock very similar to those lathes. BTW I just scored one of those model A South Bend metal working lathes for free. I just need to convert it from 3 phase to single phase and find a space for it in my shed and I will be using it to turn the new cams!

Thanks for starting the thread.

Yeah I though it would liven up the discussion a bit.

Is your leg all healed up?

Yep leg is fine. We're off travelling in 3 weeks and just started a stair climbing routine to try and get some fitness up.

 

[Andrew96]

Bob...glad your leg is better. So hot down there you're doing some design thinking?
I'm thinking about working a trick nose to a bar. It would adjust chain tension via spring preload (showed up recently on a post), drive an oiler (avoid gravity feed) inject the oil right into the bar groove, still hold the end of the mill.

Also, Hooking an extra fuel and oil reservoir to the vent lines similar to the way you vacuum feed a baby generator for extended run times.

I find the setup for each pass kills the most time in a milling day.

 

[Daninvan]

I'm a big fan of log wheels and agree that log wheel development has some way to go. The use of springs adds weight but is definitely worth considering especially if the spring can replace part of the structure

Even skateboard wheels can sometimes get hung up on the bigger knobs/protrusions on a log. I find that because the mill is being pulled into the log so hard by the action of the chain's cutting, the wheels get stuck rather than rolling around anything but a modest size knob. It is then necessary to manhandle the mill a bit to get around these things, this often results in the mill 'diving' down the back the protrusion and bogging, which in turn usually results in a gouge on the surface of the slab.

So yeah, I vote for better log wheels! I wonder if it's a simple as a larger diameter wheel?

Dan

 

[BobL]

Even skateboard wheels can sometimes get hung up on the bigger knobs/protrusions on a log. I find that because the mill is being pulled into the log so hard by the action of the chain's cutting, the wheels get stuck rather than rolling around anything but a modest size knob. It is then necessary to manhandle the mill a bit to get around these things, this often results in the mill 'diving' down the back the protrusion and bogging, which in turn usually results in a gouge on the surface of the slab.

Yep - yep - yep

Unless I'm after a fully natural edge, protrusions are not that big of a problem as I just cut them off with a small saw as a part of the setup. Dips are more difficult to deal with because the wheels bog down inside them. This is where bigger wheels could help.

 

[huskyhank]

Yep - yep - yep

Unless I'm after a fully natural edge, protrusions are not that big of a problem as I just cut them off with a small saw as a part of the setup. Dips are more difficult to deal with because the wheels bog down inside them. This is where bigger wheels could help.

How about a rail on the side of the log to let the mill slide easier? A 2" X 1/2" piece of lumber is all you'd need.

 

[BobL]

How about a rail on the side of the log to let the mill slide easier? A 2" X 1/2" piece of lumber is all you'd need.

If a rail has to be screwed on/off the side log for every cut then I'd live with cutting off the protrusions and/or manhandling the mill in and out of the dips.

mill wheels can be arranged to run on regular log rails like this.

This has two potential problems
- it moves the line of mill reaction even further away from the bar which continually racks the mill and forces the mill rails to jam onto the log rails
- it places a lot of stress on the log rails requiring them to be very firmly fixed to the log. I have tried doing this and the mill/saw vibe has continually vibrated the log rails loose.

One possibility is to add a bracket onto the log rails such that the bracket (in red) sits up against the side of the log.

The wheels can then ride against this bracket and the log takes the reaction force of the mill/saw. This requires extra setup but would work.

One problem with any rail or bracket against the side of logs is that most logs I cut are just not regularly shaped enough to make it easy to do this. Many have branch union fanning ends or bends and making a bracket adaptable enough to cover even some of these possibilities will be quite difficult.

Here's a typical maneuver around a 50" wide fanning branch union. At some point there were no wheels riding on the log.

 

[Brmorgan]

Honestly I've never really had a hard time with the Alaskan digging into the side of the log for the top half - it's always once I'm cutting below center that the square edge of the depth post creates problems. It would be quite easy to build a jig to hang over the edge in this case because you could put your guide rail(s) right up against the inboard edge of the log.

 

[huskyhank]

I've found that tilting the guide so the saw side is lower helps a lot. The saw then has to pull itself up to the log and is not bearing against it so hard.

I'm not sure I'd ever bother to screw a plank to the side.
I don't have wheels and don't really want any.
I'm just brain storming.