Pulling Strategy

[Stumper]

Assuming that all ropes are rigged at the same height, notched the same,and identical tension on the rope is applied to identical trees there isn't any appreciable difference-the leverage pulling the tree into the notch will be the same. The rigging illustrated in fig D. does reduce the danger of fracture of the spar (due to neutral plane shifting ala cable-backed bows in archery), however if the rope is simply passed over a limb or through a crotch there is a possibility(albeit slight) of fracturing the limb due to the downward pressure generated. As far as a flipping action is concerned ,it sounds reasonable BUT remember that every ounce of "lifting" pressure is couteracted exactly by the downward pressure generated at your upper 'redirect'. In actuality it is a wash.
If there seems to be a possibility that the tree will break up when subjected to the pressure you deem necessary the D cofiguration offers a little security if rigged properly (tied off above then strung down the back). Practically speaking I usually use A. Since I frequently pull non-single leader trees I sometimes run another line from stem to stem so that a fracture won't eliminate control.

Geofore, I am in my right mind and I choose to work alone-but there are jobs which I will not attempt alone.

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

Hmmmmmmmmm, okay, next view..........

In D) The final tie off could help bind/fortify a fracture whereby a running bowline, rather than clove could be constricting right over the fracture, binding it per force applied through this machine of rope.

Also, If D) was a metal pole, with a pulley at the top, the final pull would be lifting up, but............................. the redirect point's downward pressure would be ?............2x pull (with vertical lines) when, there is no movement in base?

So the pressure on top would be of tree might = 2xPull - friction -whatever for indirect pull? And the final termi-nation/hithchpoint (clove, runningB.), would be pulling up, but the hinge itself, would be tring to convert that somewhat to forward, as the line went up the tree's spine, pushing it forward at all points with the tense line, from zero leverage on up? Still not sure of all werking elusive proper-tease, as they continuosly dance before me, and i try to name them. i seek this so i can sight them out and see them in other things; assembling and compounding their forces to usher gravity powered motion through our machines manipulating these giants of the earth!

As i lace a self-torquing rig deal i mentioned, applying this in the air it uses the same placements and lacing, seeming to have and use the same properties. While, watching it's motion for clues; i seem to witness that the length from the redirect 'curve' to the hitchpoint on the limb itself matters, for i seem to get more 'action' if it is longer, so suspect that holds here also.

That is about it, there is a lil'more; it all has kept me awake some, trying to unlock it's secrets.

 

[Stumper]

Treespyder, You are right about the multipying factor downward a the redirect point. My statement about the pressures couteracting exactly was technically inaccurate -- A.due to friction and B. in this scenario because we are rigging on the subject tree. In affect we are compressing the spar longitudally. This may account for perceptions of flipping etc. since we have stored energy in the wood that is later released causing reactions which may or may not be significant/perceptible.
You have an interesting post going. I suspect that most of us have a decent knowledge of "applied" physics from our work experience but a limited knowledge of the science and associated terminology.

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

Well, a while back ol Joe, gave me the words of forced vectors and triangles to research, but; all the greek is like another language............ And i feel fairly comfy with math! i thought!

But, in the end, i think it was about what i thought, only sorting here and some of others reflections bring me back to that tracing under the belly and back, or likewise to the side and under, will put 2/1(minus)friction(minus)indirect angle of pull error.

Whereby it is a 2/1 maximum, if the control line pulls and fights friction going around load to hitchpoint some of that 2/1 is lost per that friction, do tho this innefficiency.

Then, only a direct inline pull can be maximum, so the wider the angle of the bend aover top, the less direct the pull, so even more eficiency is subtracted from the 2/1. So lacing up the back spine over the top, and down a sloped face in front (for more acute angle, so more direct/inline power possible) might be maximum.

Now the thing about the length from the hitchpoint to the bend in the riggingline over the load, having determining characteristics- i'm still crunching that, trying to visualize angles having effect in there somehow too.

But all this can apply to the 2 self torquing setups, and maximizing pull for bringing tree into face with thicker hinge, or in rigging too. It would have that anyway, if it was the same size and weight, only at more of a cocked angle, that gravity would be pulling on it more directly, instead of this rig. With that thicker hinge i can bring more down safer, within the realms of space measured by the 'stik-trik'. Sometimes i'll set a rig in tree and have guys throwline the end of the load, for most leveraged pull, so it folds the hinge with more fiber to usher it threw prescribed arc of hinge. Like forcing the hinge to be stronger by doing this, then using that strength.

 

[Lumberjack]

According to my physics teacher both C and D would give you the most leverage. Appon further thought I relized that if the rope slips out of the notch, on D you would lose all leverage whereas on C the rope would come down to the knot and stop, keeping most of your leverage. My teach also pointed out that A would be the simplist way, and if the pic is to scale, you would only lose around 9% of your leverage, not your pulling power. To answer the poll C is the most secure and powerfull, but if you moved A up to the top (without it comming off) it would save time and permit almost all the power of C, losing only around 2.5-5% of your max leverage, while saving time not having to cut your notch and run the rope through it.

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

i think that coming over the top does 2 things definitively:
A) Grabs most leveraged position of lever at farthest possible end.
B) Breaks some of the direct pressure over the top, taking load off of weakened area leading to knot, making it more secure.

On slipping, i dog in pretty good for everything, leading half hitch stop wrap comes above pulling line and repeats (clove) then 2 half hitches. This gets dogged into natural or made (mini humboldt) imperfection resisting the upward pull. All half hitches are oversteered beyond wher they go, then pounced on in 2/1 formation to set into place. Rear, leg is sweated in hard as line is pulled. Sometimes top of log might even accidentally get a mini groove in it to trace line over the top of (stuff with moss first if pine!) Or might be braced with krab. Or huge, positive natural fork.

Where are the pulls and pushes in the change of position C and D? At that change,where is everything in consideration to C.o.B.?
i oculd use a physiccs teacher to sort and bounce osme of this off.....

Thanx.

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

i always 2/1 lock down my half hitches (bend backwards over them selves and impact with whatever massive body weight/distance ya can habitually) and set up against branch, swell, imperfection or cut that locks agianst the direction of pull forming a positive mechanical stop. In these over the hill configurations, the main stress/ shocking on the hitching is releived anyway going over the top methinks. Also, i'll clove (alternatively 1/2 hitch running bowline, or choked sling; always looking for 2 grab system); always with the first turn coming above the line, to lock it against the upward pull, then again, then 2 1/2 hitches, bury the tail under main line pull. So most secured point of line is further trapped under mainline tension as a knotting strategy all over the place, and meticulous impacting, leverageng, sweating in.....

i think there is something going on here, that i have witnessed time and again with the "Over the Hill" type lacing.

Dropping the pull point below the C.o.B., while spreading out the 2 compounding forces created by line under tension (push at top, pull at knot) to draw the C.o.B. forward. i think these could be relevant aspects. Anway it works for me!

 

[DDM]

Spidy, i just want to know what software your drawing diagrams with.

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

Microsoft Paint, it's on your computer.

Here's an improvment on Spyder's Lacing:

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

MS Paint(price is right.....), windows freebie for all the pix and drawings. Prolly need to go with something with text box editing though.

i think that one different thing here, on this 'Over the Hill' lacing for felling is in the way that it is being looked at. i am not looking at that lacing to achieve pulling the tree down, that would be laced to just the front, perhaps just slightly over the top.

Right or wrong, to me i see that farther down lacing as trying to flip the log (even if it can't), so this is where i see like this tourque. Just as a line laced through pulleys to make a 5x1 pull on a load, when pulled with 100#, can load successive places with that line tension wherever that power flows, till it is dead ended, i see the unrestricted force in the line flowing. Even a loaded line just rebounding off of successive pulley redirects (as traced through a winding tunnel to bring pulling power from end to the other) can place load on whatever it touches before restriction of first choking half hitch, i see the extra leg of line stretching that leveraged length as delivering power to more points than to just a straight pull forward.

i see the line coming over the top (compressing into hinge), pushing forward at the top (in the direction you want to go, from highest leverage point), pushing forward (and bracing/steadying)all the way down the back spine of the tree, to finally pull at the first choking half hitch. i think even in a half hitch running bowline configuration, you can plot most of the pull ending at the half hitch, still some trace bracing etc. extending to the running bowline. Like electric force running down line, lighting anything it touches.

So, what if the request of this rope machine, is as any other, to pull that first choking half hitch to you? What if arching it around something takes a longer route to do that? And that asks something stiff to arc?

The amount of line force lost in the curve over the top is due to friction, not a subtraction of power used up, but still it is reflected at that point at 2 different angles and carries down the line (left over from friction) to place pull at first choking half hitch (in addition to any other non cancelling push pulls it gave enroute). So i kinda see more working towards target. Some of the power loss tracing down the line can be handled very well with good'ole sweatin'in hard (a'la Brion Toss). IN fact any leveraged line pull gotten from sweatin in across the friction buffer over the top, would now use that friction to stay between the top and first choking half hitch. Especially as steady tension was kept on pull line. This would render more pull to first choking half hitch. Placing that pull further down would take more leverage to invoke spin?

Complimenting directional pulls and pushes are asking the tree to arc? So that the first choking half hitch is pulled to you? Then i think spreading the compounding pull up bottom/push down top positions, would give more spin power? So take further leveraged command of the end (bottom or top) they (forces) are trying to move? Even if we stop as tree fells, and just look at are line to pull it down, What is the line thinking it has to do? Relieve tension by pulling first choking half hitch to source of pull? i don't think that soft fibers recognize push as an output of themselves, if they happen to do it, there is no loss, only relief as they reach for the end of their job (first choking half hitch)?

 

[Stumper]

Mike, You forgot to draw the line coming up through the floorboard where it is held with one hand while backing away from the stump.

Ken, We have had many good exchanges about felling techniques and how hinges work. I'm convinced that your understanding in that field is pretty advanced beyond the norm. On this "over the hill" lacing I just can't see it. One of the things you've mentioned -the rope as an energy storage device has merit. A longer length of rope lets you store more energy. Going to the tip top of a spar gets you all the leverage you can grab so that is a plus compared to a lower anchor. Since the spar can flex under load, some energy storage in the spar takes place but I have difficulty seeing how that would be greater in a fishpole lacing compared to a top anchor. As far as multiplying factors due to bends in the rope- not much can happen due to friction- then add in the fact that all the rigging is taking place on the spar itself and it comes out to a wash. I know that you and Brian like this technique and I have no doubt that it works well but I suspect that its greater efficacy is really just a matter of your expectations. There is a real tendency even among honest observers to see what we are expecting to see. You mention spinning possibilities when a back branch is traced . You are soooo right about that. Occassionally that can be useful but it introduces a lot of extra forces on the hinge so I usually try to avoid such rigs. I'm not trying to rain hard on your parade but I don't think that science supports you on this one.:angel:

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

Originally posted by Stumper
Since the spar can flex under load, some energy storage in the spar takes place but I have difficulty seeing how that would be greater in a fishpole lacing compared to a top anchor.

If friction free top at bend, then as much power transfered down to first choking half hitch as started. If, we fly over head and pull up at 1000#, (that could be the same pull up at base with forward 1000#pull laced over friction free top) and log is standing on end vertically, freely; it will flip, top will come down, bottom up. The farther from the C.o.B. the pull comes from, the more leveraged the spin; @ C.o.B. hanging balance; above C.o.B. no flip as Goldilocks's 3 choices here.

Pulling @ 1000#forward/down only (running bowline to front of tree no over the hill positioning) on free standing vertical telephone pole will pull top down/ bottom up too/ more dramatically with more leveraged positiong from C.o.B.

Both of these actions invoke bottom up/ top down direction; if truck pull and 'copter lift where slammed on to compound (geometric rather than arithmetic gain?) each other at the same time would logically be more force than either seperately to flip pole; especially if they leveraged off each other to the same directional end. The motion is not linear, but spinning IMLHO by the mechancial command of the lacing that you have given.

In fact the inneficient 2/1 (open angle of lines of pull reduction in 2/1 potential even before introducing friction back in to puzzle) can give more force at top than original pull, while still continuing down to other end and pulling again to twist/flip in the same direction. So, more than original force at top, and help in leveraged spin?

Jacking freewheeling tire up on truck: pull down on top lug nut, pull down on top lug nut and up on bottom lug nut, down on top of tire and up on lower lug nut, down on top of tire and up on bottom of tire? Each spins tire, each with different affect by leveraging and angling of pulls and their realtionship to each other? Even rooted in the ground and can't move, same forces, even if impossible task to spin tire, same forces are exerted? In fact,if you had a chance to break the friction of the weight of truck on tire off jack, you would want to grab and power from the outside of the tires, not lugs for best chance (without wrench on lugs).

Hinge pressure at first movement sets hinge strength, attatching our free standing telephone pole to the ground and trying to flip with 'copter and truck (or laced line pressures) still tries to flip/move C.o.B. forward (from gravity pull at flip) placing more tourqued pressure on hinge at movement making stronger hinge? Even though connected to hinge and impossible task force is built to pick up at first choking half hitch, while simultaneously pushing down on top? The closer to the end that pick up at first choking half hitch, the more power to exert picking up at that end can be delivered?

All the rope knows is it pulls, if it pushes something out of the way without friction, it kinda doesn't erode the transmision of power, and pushes whatever out of it's way to do it's job of pulling with least strain automatically? Sometimes building forces to work for or against us?

Orrrrrr something like that......

i think!

:alien:

 

[Stumper]

I'm not convinced-I'd like to agree with you but I still think that the fishpole lacing is a static system. every bit of "UP" is counteracted by down pressure. You may induce bend in the spar and store energy there that will be released upon felling the tree but you aren't getting any lift. Grab a real fish pole and try it with the line tied to the tiptop and compare to when you have the line threaded through the guides. There is no difference in force "flipping" it out of your hand. The guides do help distribute pressure evenly along the rod and thus help prevent breakage-if you only run the line through the tiptop and then down to the butt you can overload the tip if the departure angle of the line gets too acute. IF you hung a pulley on your helicopter, or on another tree you could generate some butt wrenching lift but with the rope bending on the spar or on a pulley tied to the spar you either get no change (the tag line would need to run straight out from the tree 90* to the trace section-I've done that working on mountain slopes but you probably don't do it often in Florida) or you generate more downward pressure than lift. It can't help make it fall but if the spar is slinky enough to bend a good bit you can get more violent tearoff and some funky gyrations as the tree topples. Come on somebody prove me wrong so I can apologize to Spydy.:angel:

 

[murphy4trees]

I AM with Stumper on this one.... Both in that I recognize Spidy's thinking ahead of the pack in hinge mechanics and other areas. And in that I don't see any mechanical advantage or added pulling power in the lacing technique.... I do however think its a great technique due to its easy application. Good to have in your bag of tricks both in felling and rigging limbs....

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

As this is on the far reaches, every mind that has chimed in here has made me look again. Especially as ye 2 that seemed to see how to leverage hinge with me. Then to use that leverage to carry the off balance lean to side of fall, so that all/more of the force of lean forward and line pull farward can be used to force stronger hinge (as work of direction to face was handled my hinge, and these 2 forces where more freed up to help force stronger hinge forward).

Just as learning over time from everyone here, and then have someone expand the view you try to lend is really what it is all about; along with the helping, comradre.

All along, i've been assuming that the idea of applying horizontal (to correct lean) tourque/spin pressure was more seen than the same bend vertical. i also hope that many see this as possibly a strategy to take the highest leveraged point easily, offer it more bracing than a straight pull line too, offering even more realistic choices of pull ing points. i don't think that is disputed, non-slipping hitch, strength and security at bend, and i beleive this technique has enough merit to give ya more in many occassions, totally apart from the rest of what happens with the pressures on the final leg as it goes over the top, and if any appreciable help is gained from that part of it. In short there is enough good reasons to use this technique i think, even if ya don't buy the last 'leg' of the 'arguement'.

A telephone pole laying flat on the ground to be dragged by a truck will react different to differnt lacings? Wherever the line of force goes till first choking half hitch, force is transmitted, and contact points of that force have to be accounted for? The line will pull to the first choking half hitch, in considerately pushing something out of it's way if it has to? Even the load itself, if so laced, like pulling telephone pole (dragging it as it lays flat on the ground) in over the hill type lacing will be different than straight pull from top? 'Long legged over the hill ' lacing would spin telephone pole more than short legged? Short legged might not really give appreacible spin, just best leverage for turn?

Something is making my spyder sense tingle, that something is different with the different lacing somehow, even if just smoother, better braced from tigh line down spine pushing forward and pull coming from different point, somehow seems to make a difference......

So, even i have questions, where are wee at here fellers?:Eye:

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

Though this is from a few years ago, i still think this is another multiplier for some situations. It simply takes the present line force, and applys it to the target differently;running the objjective of maximizing any helpful multipliers that i can chain together to help to task.

My latest explanations of how this more arching pull on the spar or anything can help leverage are :

8th post in Stacking Wedges

Pulling Directions on a Fall

i think the application easily gives more securing and problem solving leveraging. i have then turned the effect sideways. very easy to place on limbs, throw out to a better leveragd crotch, boomerang or drops back to you (steel carabiner in eye); mount in front of cut. Need loaded tourque? Bend it around from over far side around and under tie to close to support side. After tear off it will "unroll" dropping some, unless there is a branch or carabiner stop, that let the pressure flow before, bot doesn't let it unroll after tearoff. The breadth of the hinge across is the leverage that doesn't allow unroll/twist before tearoff; if you want to flip off roof etc. in one move, take hinge down to a small circle, then no leveraged length to fight twist. In using a longer hinge the twist is trapped and the force goes to turn, but is all automatic in the rig, once set.

Set, msut be tight, as to capture all movement, and use it for immediate, intense leveraging, wasting nothing.

Because this rig is a multiplier, tightly set, to start, rather than trying to press available gravity force towards target inititially; i wish to run that force throuhg the multiplier of this leveraging. So i bluff like i am aiming down, cutting down, loading the line in this leveragaed position purposefull, knowing it ain't putting up with it, there is no way this branch is going down! The leveraged response is to multply the force that i was going to send towards target, then pull with that multiplied force to target!

i really think that if a simple twsit or easier placement of a line that comes out better, ya would want to know about it!

Orrrrrrrrrrr something like that!
:alien: :alien:

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

In a leveraging machine, without play , that would lose the force, send it unfocused etc.; the long way, the arc condneces force to a smaller area of more power. There is only so much power/movement available, don't waist a drop, multiply what ya can and set it back against the target that caused/powered it. Then, the control forces are self adjusting,as the load sets them itself.

Same arguemeants for rigging torqued limbs, pressing down with load on a leveraged line that has no play; knowing that the force will be multiplied, then the multiplied force will pull to real target.

The arching, takes more distance to arrive at the same point; so it takes whatever leveraged/multiplied force handed to it and adds it's multiplier i think.

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

 

[The Best GM]

OOOOHHHH yAAAA treeclimber165 .

Thats a pageright out of my book. A great rope man letting them fly , running bowline, thats THE
STUFF BRO. MY father is the same way. Not much wood, climb her anyway. Unless some one else feels like paying the bills. We all no the answer to that one. A and d look fine. Running bowline low, running bowline high up.

 

[rahtreelimbs]

Originally posted by The Best GM
OOOOHHHH yAAAA treeclimber165 .

Thats a pageright out of my book. A great rope man letting them fly , running bowline, thats THE
STUFF BRO. MY father is the same way. Not much wood, climb her anyway. Unless some one else feels like paying the bills. We all no the answer to that one. A and d look fine. Running bowline low, running bowline high up.

What???

 

[The Best GM]

Cant anybody see those letters all side by side that form a name and identify the person that i was talking to.