Hey, there's a brain in there, trust me, well, somewhere
Technical removal!! Let's talk
- Thread starter rbtree
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
Guess the maple was just a sprig, huh? compared to this monster
coming out of hibernation?
Gee, think those'll hold 'er together?
Kneejerk Bombas
ArboristSite King
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2001
- Messages
- 36,971
- Reaction score
- 9,983
Nice photos, thanks.
The shot with the branch hanging off the speedline, really shows the side loading you put on a <I>very</I> hollow tree, with two men in it. IMO, this work should not have been done without guys from tree to ground, at least one, and maybe two or three.
On a tree like this, I would compare guys, to tying in, in terms of safety.
I have mentioned the use of guys in a few threads now, including the speedline thread. The speedline is where you <I>really</I> need the support, as well as when working on trees with structural problems, in this case you have both.
Every climber decides the amount of risk he or she is willing to take, in this case you far exceeded the risk I would have taken.
The shot with the branch hanging off the speedline, really shows the side loading you put on a <I>very</I> hollow tree, with two men in it. IMO, this work should not have been done without guys from tree to ground, at least one, and maybe two or three.
On a tree like this, I would compare guys, to tying in, in terms of safety.
I have mentioned the use of guys in a few threads now, including the speedline thread. The speedline is where you <I>really</I> need the support, as well as when working on trees with structural problems, in this case you have both.
Every climber decides the amount of risk he or she is willing to take, in this case you far exceeded the risk I would have taken.
Hey mike,
I rather agree. However, a few points. Yes, with some more complicated rigging, we could have guyed it back. And wish we had.
But, frankly, it was the large laterals we were worrying about. These we had guyed to each other, not all that securely due to the angles, I feared. We did a lot of lowering directly off them, and needed to stop the branches fairly quickly, and then let some of the speedline bight be pulled out, thus raising the branches to clear the landscape. And that all went well.
The speedline was anchored below those laterals, in the bad central leader, which was also used to lower 4-6 foot sections of the big secondary leader. True, it was a weak trunk, but the side loads were minimal comparable to its strength, I think. Remember, those branches were not huge, or heavy, like some huge spreading southern oaks, for example. It was close to 20 inches where the line was tied, I think. I don't remember feeling any appreciable stress or movement when Tom was doing his rigging. A rough idea of side load: 250-500 lb branches, 1500-3500 load at anchor. (variable based on bight in speedline, and angle to ground). I would guess that that tree would have withstood a non shock sideload of close to 30000 pounds. Remember, until the speedline is straight, loads aren't fully felt. The effect become more like DWT, the closer the anchors, and more the bight.
Scott Baker was there for a while, I will ask him what he thinks, and Dan Kraus. Scott explained the fractometer, and how reaction wood has amazing strength.
However, the arborist report estimates the strength of the tree at 0.28 on a scale of 1.0. The threshold for decison for removal is 0.3, at least for the company that did the report.
I rather agree. However, a few points. Yes, with some more complicated rigging, we could have guyed it back. And wish we had.
But, frankly, it was the large laterals we were worrying about. These we had guyed to each other, not all that securely due to the angles, I feared. We did a lot of lowering directly off them, and needed to stop the branches fairly quickly, and then let some of the speedline bight be pulled out, thus raising the branches to clear the landscape. And that all went well.
The speedline was anchored below those laterals, in the bad central leader, which was also used to lower 4-6 foot sections of the big secondary leader. True, it was a weak trunk, but the side loads were minimal comparable to its strength, I think. Remember, those branches were not huge, or heavy, like some huge spreading southern oaks, for example. It was close to 20 inches where the line was tied, I think. I don't remember feeling any appreciable stress or movement when Tom was doing his rigging. A rough idea of side load: 250-500 lb branches, 1500-3500 load at anchor. (variable based on bight in speedline, and angle to ground). I would guess that that tree would have withstood a non shock sideload of close to 30000 pounds. Remember, until the speedline is straight, loads aren't fully felt. The effect become more like DWT, the closer the anchors, and more the bight.
Scott Baker was there for a while, I will ask him what he thinks, and Dan Kraus. Scott explained the fractometer, and how reaction wood has amazing strength.
However, the arborist report estimates the strength of the tree at 0.28 on a scale of 1.0. The threshold for decison for removal is 0.3, at least for the company that did the report.
Mike, just talked to Scott. He knows more about tree dynamics, loads, physics than most of us peons. Plus he was there. And has 25 years of hands on experience, he's not just a consultant. He agrees with me and everyone else there that there was little need for anchors. The side loads placed on that trunk by winds on the canopy were many times greater than anything we did. Plus, the load kept getting less with every branch cut.
Kneejerk Bombas
ArboristSite King
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2001
- Messages
- 36,971
- Reaction score
- 9,983
I wonder what it would take for Scott to say guys would be recommended.
Mabe instead of 90% decayed trunkwood, it would need to be 99%.
Predicting the strength of a tree with decay, fractures, and holes, is not what I would call an exact science.
Would Scott put his son or daughter in that tree and pull sideways with 29,000Lbs? He did say it would hold 30,000lbs. How about 20,000lbs? 10,000lbs? 6,000? That would be 5 to 1 safety factor. How about 3500? 0? Think about it.
A guy is the simplest rigging there is. Done it 100's of times, take 5 minutes, and one or two ropes.
Mabe instead of 90% decayed trunkwood, it would need to be 99%.
Predicting the strength of a tree with decay, fractures, and holes, is not what I would call an exact science.
Would Scott put his son or daughter in that tree and pull sideways with 29,000Lbs? He did say it would hold 30,000lbs. How about 20,000lbs? 10,000lbs? 6,000? That would be 5 to 1 safety factor. How about 3500? 0? Think about it.
A guy is the simplest rigging there is. Done it 100's of times, take 5 minutes, and one or two ropes.
Easters over , I don't have to be nice anymore . On a scale of 1 -10 (1 being easy) I place that tree , according to your pictures and threads a "4" . That wasn't from the hip , it was combat stance . Cedar picture is cool , but out of context . All them ropes , oh what a tangle web we weave ....
Riggs, it wasn't that hard, you're right, just in a tough spot, bad weather didnt help, etc. With a longer boom to get the wood out easier, and perfect efficiency, no picture taking, etc, maybe we could have done it in 65 manhours (all prep work included)--but I doubt it. 75 for sure.
you must have a heck of a lot of huge, extremely tough or hazardous trees in philly to rate this a 4. It was a 8-10 in my book- personal experience only, of course.
you must have a heck of a lot of huge, extremely tough or hazardous trees in philly to rate this a 4. It was a 8-10 in my book- personal experience only, of course.
Roger: thanks for sharing the pictures and commentaries. It has been very entertaining. It's nice to see others work, like you've shown through a progression from beginning to end. It does get 1 to think about alternative approaches to rigging this specific tree at any point during the removal.
Joe
Joe
Once again i have tried to capture stuff like this in pix and movies; it never looks as big or difficult as it was, hard to show scale of things etc.. i think we all need to take this into consideration; and also respect the effort, and all it has wrought hear!
And as far as this web, or web of lines............ you don't expect a spy-der to complain do ya?
It is like being a control freak i guess, ushering such power and size gracefully into a specific spot.................. can breathlessly make you smile inside to orchestrate that correctly!
At least that is how it is with this passionate addict!
And as far as this web, or web of lines............ you don't expect a spy-der to complain do ya?
It is like being a control freak i guess, ushering such power and size gracefully into a specific spot.................. can breathlessly make you smile inside to orchestrate that correctly!
At least that is how it is with this passionate addict!
Another behemoth today!!
Well, today's maple dwarfs the last one. Over 4.5 feet dbh, two houses close, carport right underneath, stream on one side. Full spreading canopy. It has some decay, but it's structure appears sound and should present no extraordinary difficulties. Speedlining will work. No guying necessary, likely, MM.
And we can get my new crane guy in with his 90 foot of reach. The guy with the $205 minimum for two hours on site, travel included!!!! Dinner and drinks on me, Mike!!! A specialty wood buyer is coming to see if there is any value, crossing my fingers. He pays up to $5 a board foot for the best figured wood!! Anything will help, as it is another too low price. Competitive bids were way too low, but the job is being half paid for by a friend. He's an ex coworker, and is donating his labor. Plus, there are three alders for $800-1000 that will be a breeze.
Another great photo opportunity, plus DK is shooting video again.
I'm not sure if we'll have any digital cameras available, but will shoot lots of film, and am getting a film scanner soon. So be patient. Forecast is for increasing clouds and showers, hope not for today, as it is clear as a bell right now!!
Well, today's maple dwarfs the last one. Over 4.5 feet dbh, two houses close, carport right underneath, stream on one side. Full spreading canopy. It has some decay, but it's structure appears sound and should present no extraordinary difficulties. Speedlining will work. No guying necessary, likely, MM.
And we can get my new crane guy in with his 90 foot of reach. The guy with the $205 minimum for two hours on site, travel included!!!! Dinner and drinks on me, Mike!!! A specialty wood buyer is coming to see if there is any value, crossing my fingers. He pays up to $5 a board foot for the best figured wood!! Anything will help, as it is another too low price. Competitive bids were way too low, but the job is being half paid for by a friend. He's an ex coworker, and is donating his labor. Plus, there are three alders for $800-1000 that will be a breeze.
Another great photo opportunity, plus DK is shooting video again.
I'm not sure if we'll have any digital cameras available, but will shoot lots of film, and am getting a film scanner soon. So be patient. Forecast is for increasing clouds and showers, hope not for today, as it is clear as a bell right now!!
Thanks, Dave and Marilyne!
for getting me the last of the photos!!
Here's the speedline sequence I shot from next to Tom. Note you can actually see all the way across Puget Sound. It didn't start snowing for a nother 1-2 hours, but was darn cold and breezy. Well, do you you see a glove on Tom's hand? No, what a stud, eh?!! A Vermont hardman for sure. Meanwhile I'm fumbling with the camera, freezing to death. i think I would have felt warmer if he had had gloves on!!
Now, 16 days later, we start an even bigger tree. But now it is sunny, high yesterday of over 65 degrees, oh yeah!! Calling for clouds and rain, not happening yet!!
for getting me the last of the photos!!
Here's the speedline sequence I shot from next to Tom. Note you can actually see all the way across Puget Sound. It didn't start snowing for a nother 1-2 hours, but was darn cold and breezy. Well, do you you see a glove on Tom's hand? No, what a stud, eh?!! A Vermont hardman for sure. Meanwhile I'm fumbling with the camera, freezing to death. i think I would have felt warmer if he had had gloves on!!
Now, 16 days later, we start an even bigger tree. But now it is sunny, high yesterday of over 65 degrees, oh yeah!! Calling for clouds and rain, not happening yet!!
Oops, fist pic:
ZIPzip.....
Looks like i should stayed a retired "pro" photog, taking pics of my hand and all!!!!!!!
Aw, heck, blame it on the cold and wind..... :
Aw, heck, blame it on the cold and wind.....
:
Another behemoth
Well big for residential Puget Sound anyhow:
4.5 feet dbh, 5.5 feet at the ground. I couldn't figure out Dave's idiot proof (but not me) digital camera during the tree wreck, but got some film, plus Dan Kraus shot video again. Still shopping for a film scanner....
This tree also was hollow, and had some central top breakout, resultant large secondary leader size, but was a pretty straightforward removal. The quarters were close, but everything went real smooth. Appx manhours to get it down to the size shown were 25. We also did 3 alders the same day, plus I shot a bunch of pics. I did 3 more alders Saturday, and with the appx 4-5 hours for the craning, we'll be at about 45. 12 of those provided by Jerry, who got me the job, so there's no cost there. I had dropped the price $200 for his help. Job is at $2800 minus appx $350 in crane and trucking. Plus the alder logs should bring about $200 at the mill. So that is around $80 per manhour, a far cry from our take on the first tree! As well, we produced over twice the chips from this job. What a difference site layout and tree structure can make!!
Well big for residential Puget Sound anyhow:
4.5 feet dbh, 5.5 feet at the ground. I couldn't figure out Dave's idiot proof (but not me) digital camera during the tree wreck, but got some film, plus Dan Kraus shot video again. Still shopping for a film scanner....
This tree also was hollow, and had some central top breakout, resultant large secondary leader size, but was a pretty straightforward removal. The quarters were close, but everything went real smooth. Appx manhours to get it down to the size shown were 25. We also did 3 alders the same day, plus I shot a bunch of pics. I did 3 more alders Saturday, and with the appx 4-5 hours for the craning, we'll be at about 45. 12 of those provided by Jerry, who got me the job, so there's no cost there. I had dropped the price $200 for his help. Job is at $2800 minus appx $350 in crane and trucking. Plus the alder logs should bring about $200 at the mill. So that is around $80 per manhour, a far cry from our take on the first tree! As well, we produced over twice the chips from this job. What a difference site layout and tree structure can make!!
Last edited:
Coon's nest is out of sight in 20 inch hollow center of trunk:
forgot pic, see 2 posts down
forgot pic, see 2 posts down
Last edited:
Here coony, nice boy, easy now!!
Similar threads
