Ups and Downs...

[pantheraba]

No way I would have tried to negative rig pieces like that...Reg could/would but it ain't in my repertoire.

Vertical speedline definitely produces a beaten zone.

 

[SeanKroll]

Gary, if you can stick two wedges (maybe on cords) farther away from you than the COG of the piece (55-60% through the cut, when you get to the far side of the cut, you won't be bound, and the kerf will open on the far side upon completing the cut to make getting your saw out easy. You will have two wedges in place as sliders. Maybe less strain, and ability to push off larger pieces, especially if you don't have to tear the strap of wood and bark.

The DK slider idea is a good one. I think maybe it was August who found some slider-type material. A piece of teflon or plastic cutting board, maybe. I haven't tried a 3/8" hardwood dowel. Always meant to try, but I 'magic-cut' big pieces more often than push them.

 

[pantheraba]

Two wedges sounds like a great idea. I seldom do big wood like that so I am all ears about making it easier. I sloped the cut hoping to make it easier...more slope would have been betterister.

 

[SeanKroll]

Does that make sense enough, or would a drawing help?

Smarter not harder.

 

[pantheraba]

Sounds like for a level cut you can use two wedges at near 9:00 and 3:00 to keep kerf open so saw can exit cut at 12:00...with cut starting at 6:00. It would also provide a balance/rocking point to more easily manipulate the log....and maybe make pushing the log off the spar easier.

Or use a deeply sloping cut that encourages the log to tip over and tear the last fibers as it releases.

Or cut lower fibers first (release cut) and then make long sloping cut towards the release cut so that it slides off without tearing or having to be pushed. Is that the "magic cut"?

 

[SeanKroll]

Ya, Gary, if you start at 6, insert wedges past 9 and 3. Exit at 12, both hands on saw, not shockloading your arm with a saw swinging away, possibly with the engine running, chainbrake disengaged.

When you get to the far side, the piece will tilt back, over the wedges, resting at 6:00.
FWIW,
A third wedge can replace a hatchet/ ax as a pounder, if you need to make the wedges tight, maybe on heavy and squishy cottonwood, for example.
By the time the wedges fall out while pushing forward, the work-piece will be somewhat balanced near the lip or already over the lip. Then, it won't take much effort to tilt over.



Gord demonstrated the Magic-Cut way back, on TB. It basically a face-cut that undercuts the COG of the piece, with a full width dutchman, and a lower, horizontal release cut. No Hinge.

AKA Sniped, Snap-cut. The snipe will give you directional control on a vertical spar. The snipe will give you some directional control if you have lean to the work...if its leaning to 12:00, you can steer to 11:00 or 1:00, +/-.


No need to make a proper face-cut and fight a hinge IF the lean is working with you. Counter-productive, actually, IMO.

When I'm working a vertical spar down, I'll layout the logs side by side, so that I don't bounce one of the other, when I have a dropzone that will take the beating, one way or the other. My groundie(s) stay away from the area, doing work elsewhere. I stay focused. No pull ropes or coordination. Logs are laid out ezpz for the loader, or to roll with peaveys, or just leave in place.



I think people overthink the Magic-cut, honestly.

Remember Jerry's story about the Coos Bay cut, listening to the technique being relayed over many a beer, but sorta in disbelief...NO HINGE!! Simple cut, easy to execute by comparison, and functioning in a different way that a directional-felling cut. You don't use a hammer when you need a screw-driver.



Been burning the candle at both ends. Trying to chill out this weekend. I'll try to make a picture-heavy thread. I couldn't do this work if not for all the techniques that I've cherry-picked. Said it before, I come up with almost none of this. I just put other people's tricks in the bag, and try to use them precisely. Saves sooo much work.






Now, back to your regular programming.

 

[SeanKroll]

Hills change logistics, and impact from machines, capabilities of machines, for sure.
You being the climber touching the tree have perspectives lost to video.


Just for discussion, my perspective, cottonwood is questionable, sometimes very questionable with hidden defects that are easily grown over, I'd just try to avoid heavy rigging to the stem that's my life-support, if reasonable, and especially with questionable trees. There is a good bit of shock-loading with negative-blocking those size pieces. Quick deflection, which May be more severe than blowing in strong wind, dunno.

I don't care if a piece helicopters around swinging across the gap (makes for a good show, if safe). I mid-tie, and tip them off sideways, faced at 4:00 or 10:00, no pull rope, more gradually loading the top-side rigging, and protecting somewhat from barberchair/ splitting-forces (when I've done this swinging 12'+ marketable pulp logs between three adjacent cottonwoods, I cut right above/ close above crotches, acting as an interruption to straight-grain). As you get down the stem, and pieces are thicker, your line angle is better.

Sometimes, it's all in the timing with a confident roper, being able make a plan with the climber to anticipate the action and direction of travel of the piece, landing it on the uphill swing. Some hills, that doesn't do squat.




'nother cup of joe down the hatch...haha...happy weekend, everybody.




Oh ya, the lanyard and rope in the area of rigged pieces falling, spooks me. A guy here in WA, on TB, said a heavy mistletoe'd piece fell and snagged on the eye on his flipline. Didn't feel good, and it was a short fall before snagging.

 

[rfwoody]

... I'll try to make a picture-heavy thread....

Hope you get a chance to do this, Sean!

 

[TreeMuggs]

I actually hadn't considered the vertical speed line before in a situation like that. The arm I was on in this video was at least 30 degrees from vertical. But yes, a vertical speed line would have worked for that wood. My problem with the technique is the hardware on the piece (whether it's a biner, shackle, or whatever) slamming into the hardware at the base, where the rope is tensioned. Is there a more elegant solution for a vertical speedline than having 2 pieces of steel slam into each other? Thanks.

 

[Sep]

Yes, just thread a single ring, x ring sling to speedline rope. Then tie off the other end to piece to be chunked. I have always had enough slack in the system for the piece to hit the ground, and slow down the sling, before the sling could hit the lowering device.

 

[Jomo]

Vertical speedlines are great, but demand close attention to how well gripped each piece is prior to experiencing the weightlessness of descent to ground, and only then being truly choked and reined in.

I found myself usin duct tape to keep my cloves n timber hitches nice n snug all the way to the ground.

All it takes is one piece of escaped n runaway trunk to make you look real bad.

Nice n snug all the way down!

Jomo

 

[Mick!]

Funny really me suggesting it as I have never used it!

I have used my climbing line tied to the log to reduce the swing if it’s going towards the target.

That of course is naughty but nothing stopping the climber using old climbing line as a tag line to slow the swing into the main stem, using a wrap around the remaining butt for friction.

 

[TreeMuggs]

On second thought, no, a vertical speedline would not have worked in this scenario, at least not any better than negative rigging. I was using multiple rings to spread the load over the entire leader, which was on a good lean, fishing pole style. With a vertical speedline I would just have a rope going from the cut to the base. That initial shock load of the wood slamming into the rope would put a crazy tension on the end of the leader. I think fishing pole was better in this situation. Just my opinion...

 

[TreeMuggs]

I do still like the vertical speedline though...

 

[pantheraba]

 

[Jomo]

Vertical speedlines are essentially pile drivers at the base of the tree.

It's somewhat silly to use anything not indestructible at the base anchor. I prefer a base redirect usin a one inch clevis for the mainline, with just clevis anchor line slack to get 3-4 feet away from the base.

You can feel each piece impacting the root crown 80 feet up the trunk, with enough force to sever big roots.

It's a great way to deal with trunk wood big enough to max out your bull lines negative rigging every piece.

But that pile driver action's a real hole digger IME.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MPgJ5dI78-M

Jomo

 

[Tree09]

Disclaimer, i don't do trees full time....

I use the vertical speedline all the time rather than blocking down. Wayyyyyy easier on ropes, and faster too because you can take huge pieces compared to catching them. I use a portawrap, 90 degrees or so from the notch. I simply use a shackle for the running part. With the anchor point to the side, the piece comes down and lands right at the base not hitting any rigging device. I have the ground guy put at most 3 wraps on it, and then leave the rope laying on the ground. That way the piece pulls what it needs to, and will come to an easy stop without overloading the line (because locking it off creates a skyline type force). The nice thing about it is that the piece usually lands on it's head due to the friction coming down, and simply falls over. You can seriously drop a car and contain it, because you are holding back only a fraction of the force compared to catching it. I usually leave a bed of logs for it to land on too, so ground damage is really minimal for the forces involved.

I understand the fishing pole trick is handy on a curving stem, and on codoms it can pull the trunks together reducing the risk of splitting out and adding some extra energy absorption, but on a straight stem i don't see the point. Just because you route the line through more points does not necessarily mean you are somehow spreading the load, force vectors are still force vectors. Rings add friction, so using them as a block will reduce the force that the rigging point and friction device see, but the end of the rope still sees the force. Rope strength in a rigging system is subject to bend radius, amount of rope in the system, and amount of friction. Rings are worse by all 3 accounts. To the tree worker, everything is happening softer and easier than blocks. I bet if the end of the rope could talk it would tell a different story.

That being said i likely would have blocked down there too, and excellent work as always man