real tree work

Status
Not open for further replies.
Note changes

What was done about the codom split?

How many cables were installed in the canopy?

Were the cables installed before any bolting?

My procedure for supporting codom splits...or, actually, anytime bolts are used...is to go high and set temp rigging with ratchets comealongs to brace the canopy until later pull the split together.
next, come down into the larger diameter branches and pull the canopy together. Goal is to mate the cracked surfaces. Not always possible.

Many times two or more through bolts are used and none parallel to any others. Crisscross diameters. The bolts/threaded rod are installed using at least two washers against the trunk...then a nut....then two washers and second nut. Snug up on both sides.

Many times I'd install a rod just above the V part of the union as a static brace. Same double nutting. Then, back up top to add cable bracing in the canopy.

After the cracks are secured is the time I'd do any required crown reduction work. I can't even recall a tree that didn't get some reduction with the exception of conifers. Occasionally conifers weren't reduced.
 
Last edited:
Tom Dunlap said:
What was done about the codom split?

How many cables were installed in the canopy?

Were the cables installed before any bolting?

My procedure for supporting codom splits...or, actually, anytime bolts are used...is to go high and set temp rigging with ratchets to pull the split together. Goal is to mate the cracked surfaces. Not always possible.

Many times two or more through bolts are used and none parallel to any others. They criss-cross diameters. The bolts/threaded rod are installed using at least two washers against the trunk...then a nut....then two washers and second nut. Snug up on both sides.

Many times I'd install a rod just above the V part of the union as a static brace. Same double nutting. Then, back up top to add cable bracing in the canopy.

After the cracks are secured is the time I'd do any required crown reduction work. I can't even recall a tree that didn't get some reduction with the exception of conifers. Occasionally conifers weren't reduced.
Click to expand...
Pretty much sums up how I do it as well.
I’ll sub a come a long for ratchet straps..
But yes almost always will brace a split union after pulling the tops together. Often in stages even. Pull a little, turn the nuts, pull a little turn the nuts.
For the cable placement depending if using eye bolts or Ammon eye nuts, or the rigguy system I’ll pull a little more past what I want it for some working slack.

For conifers I’ll consider reducing one stem, or lateral reduction pruning too.
 
Please provide the links to the scientific studies used to create those recommendations...

Specifically, any science that shows:
1) any advantage to "mating the cracked surfaces"
2) any advantage to crisscrossing thru rods
3) any advantage to installing rod(s) above the union
 
Post #7

Daniel,

Are you taking this personally?

You are joking, right? Asking anyone to provide research and articles? You are joking...???

You do as you want.

My comment is just a quick overview of how I solved issues like you had. Where are you coming from about demanding anything about 'recommendations'.

If you are asking how I came up with my solutions I'm not going to be able to present the answers that I think you asked for. Framing questions like you did...as "gotcha' questions is a bit over the top.

Marv taught me the foundational part of the work in the early '70s.

The next bits came from attending industry presentations and asking questions.

Next bit was to be invited to be on the review panel for the A300 Cabling and Bracing Best Practices.

Some time later I was asked to write the chapter on Cabling and bracing for the US Forest Service manual, Urban Tree Risk Management, NA-TP03-03. See page 147 and more.



I'll see if I can find the link. If I can't find the link I think I still have a few copies of the publication on CD. I'll autograph one and send it to you.

Like I said...my way of doing things.

During my plus 50 year career I had one tree failure involving cabling. I 10" side sprout from a 36" basswood was cabled to the main tree. Storms, with tornados hit Minneapolis and the side sprout was twsited off. No house or property damage. The cable held and left the sidesprout ripped off like a celery stalk. The cable did what it was supposed to do. It had been installed for 6 years.
 
Last edited:
Is that really too much to ask?
For one shred of scientific research that supports your recommendations...
You must be an expert if they recruited you to write service manuals...
so then if there is no science to support your recommendations, you must have some other means to access this knowledge...
perhaps personal experience, logic, or just repeating what you had been told...

do you care to share any of that with us Tom?
explain the "why" of these:
1) any advantage to "mating the cracked surfaces"
2) any advantage to crisscrossing thru rods
3) any advantage to installing rod(s) above the union

One could only hope that an expert that has written manuals on the subject would have a better explanation than..." it's just my way of doing things"...

perhaps you could start by explaining the actual purpose of the thru rods. What are they intended to do? and how is that better achieved by your recommendations...

Is that a conversation worth having? Or should we stick to cat rescues on this thread?

This isn't intended to be directed at you in a pejorative way Tom. It's more a critique of the entire industry, especially those that teach and cling to orthodoxies without understanding the "why". The fact that there is a gross lack of science to support industry standards is not confined to the subject of cabling and bracing. Many industry practices are based on false assumptions and a long history of "stuck in the box" thinking.
 
Tom this is from the USFS manual you linked... I copied and pasted, but had to clean up the grammar due to the change in format..

Cabling and Bracing Defined:

Cabling and bracing is the practice of adding a support system to a tree to reduce the stress on weak branch unions. Many trees have acute, V-shaped branch unions that form included bark. Included bark acts as a wedge that weakens and separates branch unions that join at too sharp an angle. A similar situation occurs when two equal-sized stems form off the main bole of a tree after the loss of the main leader. The bark of the two stems push against each other and the two leaders do not have a strong connection to the main bole(Fig 5.11). As the tree grows, these structural defects can lead to the failure of one of the two stems. Adding properly installed cabling and bracing will reduce the strain on the branch union, and extend the life of the tree.

Cabling and bracing can also be used to correct trees with poor architecture. Typically, as trees grow, the trunks and limbs taper toward the ends. This tapering reduces the strain on the higher and outer limbs in the tree. If limbs and trunks do not taper, a large amount of leverage acts on the point of attachment where the branch meets the stem, which can lead to failure. Improper pruning can also place strain on branch unions. The inner branches of some trees have been removed because of the mistaken belief that such hyper-thinning eliminates the possibility of wind failure. Actually, by removing these inner branches, the tree will put on more length and less bulk in its limbs. This leads to the condition referred to as “lion’s tailing.” Because the limbs are long and thin, but still maintain a full complement of foliage, the limbs will whip severely and possibly fail, instead of swaying naturally.

There are many considerations that must be addressed before a cabling and bracing system is installed in a tree. The tree may have a high value in a particular landscape, or it might be a historic or unique specimen. Before investing in a cabling and bracing system, the cost of installation and future maintenance must be balanced against the risk of failure and possible loss of aesthetic value during the tree’s extended life. Carefully assess the tree to determine if it is a reasonable candidate for investment in cabling and bracing. Consider the whole tree during this assessment. The roots must be strong enough to support the tree. If there is decay in the main trunk or branches, factor that information into the decision to remove or save the tree. If the tree has cracked already, the arborist must know how well the tree species in question is able to compartmentalize decay. Some trees can isolate decay better than others. The outcome of a decision to apply a cabling and bracing procedure to a white oak(Quercus alba) may be completely different than if the tree in question is a basswood.

Remember that cabling and bracing do not repair a tree. Cabling will add a level of security and risk reduction and can help to affect the direction of failure if a branch should fail. When designed properly and installed by a trained arborist, proper use of cabling and bracing will extend the life of a tree and reduce the risk to an acceptable level. If the decision is made to use cabling and bracing to extend the life of a tree, it must be understood that such treatments are temporary. Give consideration to planting a young tree or trees to be used as replacements if the cabled and braced tree is removed.

Some trees will benefit from having weight removed from the branches before the installation of cabling and bracing hardware. Therefore, do all necessary pruning before the tree is cabled. Remember, removing major lateral limbs creates large wounds that can lead to extensive decay on the main bole of the tree. If weight reduction is determined to be necessary, a slight crown reduction by using proper thinning cuts in the crown is the safest course of action. The possible harm from over-pruning a tree to remove a significant amount of weight must also be recognized. Most trees will need only routine pruning to remove dead limbs and other material in accordance with accepted pruning standards as discussed in Chapter 4. Inspection Schedule.

Once a tree has been cabled and braced it is necessary to inspect the tree on a routine schedule. The size, age, site, and risk potential of the tree will determine the inspection schedule. However, no cabling or bracing installation should ever go more than two years without inspection, and annual inspections are a good idea. Some inspections can be done from the ground. Binoculars can be used to make a more thorough inspection of the tree without having to climb it, or use an aerial lift to inspect the crown. As time passes, it will be necessary to have an arborist inspect the anchor points and any changes in the tree’s growth from within the tree.

There may come a time when a new cabling and bracing system will be necessary. Again, this assessment will need to be done by an experienced arborist following the same procedures as in the first installation. As the tree grows taller, the time will come when a new system should be added, higher in the tree. Do not remove the old, lower system before the new system is completed. Do not attempt to remove old hardware embedded in the tree. That will unacceptably damage the tree. Cut such hardware flush and leave it in place.

Liabilities. Cabling and bracing is a practice that, when properly applied, can extend the life of a tree. In addition, cabling and bracing can reduce the potential for failure to an acceptable level. Once a tree comes under an arborist’s care, the arborist is obligated to follow accepted trade practices. During the inspection, the arborist may determine that the removal of part of the tree is a better option than cabling and bracing. Care must be exercised in this case since the removal of large portions of the tree can lead to conditions that could lead to tree failure. If the risk of failure is too high, then removal of the tree may be the best option.

Since cabling and bracing have a long history of use and is an accepted, standard practices, the concern for additional liability should be little different than if the tree were being pruned. However, the correction of defects by cabling and bracing requires additional inspection and maintenance that must be performed regularly to ensure the integrity of the procedure. Failure to perform regular inspections, and to correct any problems that may arise, may indicate negligence. Choosing not to install a cabling and bracing system because of a fear of liability is not a good decision. The best procedure is to follow a plan that reduces the risk of failure to an acceptable level.
 
Last edited:
There is a lot I would have written differently in the above copy as well as the rest of the "manual".

The manual mentions 7 potential defects in trees:
Decayed wood
CracksRoot problems
Weak branch unions
Cankers
Poor tree architecture
Dead trees, tops, or branches

in the poor architecture, there is only a brief mention of large over-reaching horizontal limbs:

High risk of failure:
Tree with excessive lean (greater than 40-degree angle).•
Leaning tree has a crack in stem.•
Leaning tree has canker or decay on the lower stem.•
Leaning tree has a horizontal crack on the upper side of the lean or buckling bark and wood on the lower side.
High risk of failure:•
Branch has a sharp bend or twist.•
Large, horizontal branch with several vertical branches on it.
 
Criss-crossing thru rods makes sense to anyone who understands the principles of physics. If all the rods are installed parallel, they essentially create a single axis which all the forces of the tree act upon. This leads to an increased potential for the tree to split along that axis, or for the rods to fail. Installing them criss-cross largely negates the potential for the tree to build up any large amount of force that would act upon any single axis. If you lay one 2x6 board on top of another and nail them together, putting the nails in a straight line right up the middle, that is a much weaker connection than if you offset the nails from each other along the length of the board. This is nothing fancy that needs the backing of scientific studies, this is just physics and experience combining to drive methodology. We also know that most trees have forces at work in multiple planes at the same time so a single axis doesn't always address that adequately.
On another note, taking a dump in your kitchen sink is also thinking outside the box, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea.
 
Njdelaney said:
Criss-crossing thru rods makes sense to anyone who understands the principles of physics. If all the rods are installed parallel, they essentially create a single axis which all the forces of the tree act upon. This leads to an increased potential for the tree to split along that axis, or for the rods to fail. Installing them criss-cross largely negates the potential for the tree to build up any large amount of force that would act upon any single axis. If you lay one 2x6 board on top of another and nail them together, putting the nails in a straight line right up the middle, that is a much weaker connection than if you offset the nails from each other along the length of the board. This is nothing fancy that needs the backing of scientific studies, this is just physics and experience combining to drive methodology. We also know that most trees have forces at work in multiple planes at the same time so a single axis doesn't always address that adequately.
Click to expand...
While I would tend to agree with that thinking, it bears pointing out that you are just guessing... Often that's all we can do in this business because we simply have no information with which to make a deduction. That's the point I'm trying to make here... there is very little reliable science that backs up much of what is taught in pruning practices or cabling and bracing. There are a lot of teachings that are based on false assumptions and standard practices which have been getting it wrong for decades.

I've been doing tree work for more than 40 years and I've only ever seen thru bolts fail one time. that's not a lot of experience to run with. So in this example, you and Tom could be right.. perhaps crisscrossing the bolts makes the stem stronger.. But on the other hand, maybe having the bolts in alignment is actually stronger, and then again maybe it doesn't make a difference. Anyone that claims they know is full of it. We are all just guessing here. That's the point. Stop putting these teachings on a pedestal and start questioning industry standards.
 
the forces acting on bolts in a tree are much different than the forces acting on nails in lumber...

perhaps the crisscross pattern puts all the force on one of the bolts at a time or acts in a way that they pry against each other.

Whereas keeping them in alignment would make them much stronger in that they would both need to break at the same time.

I also question the teaching of bolting above the union... is it really necessary.. that's going to be, higher and wider.. thus more work. There is no science to back that recommendation up, so who has the experience or knowledge to support that one?

anyone here want to take a crack at it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

New threads New posts

Kask Stihl NORTHEASTERN Arborists Wesspur TreeStuff.com Teufelberger Westminster X-Rigging Teufelberger
Back
Top Bottom