Ash drop

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand what you're not getting. If you have constructive criticism or reasoning beyond a video of a guy cutting deep notches on a spar I'd like to hear it.
I've linked a site with a diagram of a notch to show you that since a tree is round, setting your notch at 80% will maximize the amount sapwood in your hinge. I'm not saying that this is the only reason for setting a notch at 80%, just an advantage.
http://web.extension.illinois.edu/forest...afety/hinge.pdf

[/ QUOTE ]

That's right you don't understand.. you haven't been around long enough to understand the interpersonal dynamics..


AND it's a stretch at best to say that diagram in "tim's tips" shows maximizing sapwood in the hinge.. Further there is no evidence to my knowledge showing that sapwood makes better hinge wood. In fact I've heard a well supported argument to the exact opposite, which I believe. Where did you get that idea?

Where did you learn any of this stuff?

And how come no one else has a word to say about the why of the 1/3-80% rule...
 
[ QUOTE ]
I will admit I did put too much force on the pull line but as far as I can see that was the only fault. This whole thing with the notches is alittle much considering I wasn't trying to pop it over a fence or something.

[/ QUOTE ]

"THE ONLY FAULT"... that's pretty glib.. perhaps you don't understand just how dangerous and unnecessary your "little" fault is ! It'll take your head off...
 
[ QUOTE ]
Just talking with a friend which is teaching in Ontario here and he is saying the 80/20 is cutting standard now.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK.. we all know its the"standard".. next time you talk to him ask him why???
 
tonight I finally read this thread.

A lot of the bandwidth is nothing but grade school pi$$ing matches. My [notch] is bigger than yours...but mine is wider...pffffffft!

Can the crabbing guys. There are lots of different versions of The Truth. If we're going to advance ourselves why not share YOUR version of The Truth instead of holding it back and daring someone else to tell you?

Watching vids is sure not like being there. How can anyone know all of the variables? It might seem to you, in the comfort of your house at a keyboard, to know what you would do...pfffft! Sidewalk engineering and Monday Morning Quarterbacking.

If there is some reason for making face cuts wider, deeper, thinner or whatever...spill the beans! Someone may have a job to do tomorrow where your special knowledge may help.

I'm so amazed at how much I learned from Marv, who learned on his own, and then me, working in isolation for a lot of years. A conference or workshop sure..but here...The Communication Age and what does it boil down too? Same old guy talk...It's all about size...pffft!

So...all ye of great knowledge!!! WHAT IS THE REASON FOR NOTCH DEPTH?!?!?

If you know and don't share you;re a Taker.

Shigo said over and over that the only knew thing that he discovered and shared was how the branch collar works and separates the limb from the trunk. All of the rest was discovered before...but he still shared what he re-learned so that we could be better arborists.
 
Daniel...take the time and let something positive comeout of yourself. Why do you constantly act like such an adolescent?

YOu're the one who's wasted the most typing on this thread, and many others, spewing about how much you know but never lower yourself to share. And YOU claim to be a teacher...pfffft!

You'd not going to share because you're so full of BS and arrogance. Go back to You Tube where you don't get challenged to put up or shut up.
 
The 80% guideline is certainly a good place to start....and in the typical arborist type workplace where pull lines and crown reductions are always an option then plenty good reason to stick with that i.e. whether you believe in the whole added sapwood strength or not, at least there’s less chance of hitting a degraded or hollow core; more room for wedges on skinny ones; easier to sight when you stand directly in front of the tree and thus allows a greater margin to adjust the notch if you initially sighted it wrong; will propel a tree slightly further forward than a deep notch....might be good or bad depending; undermining is not always desirable either, especially on a leaner.

Arborist type work is just so much more controlled than working in the woods....should I say there are many more control measures and contingencies can be applied and still be it within the payed time on site. Pro-fallers face a whole different set and problems and time constraints....Dan I dont think it’s really fair to compare arborist best industry practice with loggers, as the respective environments and objectives are so different.

Personally I’ll go anywhere between one – two thirds, depending on the task. If I were teaching someone I’d definitely say stick to a quarter – a third for the reasons stated earlier, and probably more that I’ve long since forgotten.
 
Tom,
maybe hard for you to understand.. I AM pointing out the elephant in the living room.. I think it's a better service to the greater good than just coming out with the reasoning..

You are the most well read arborist I know of, and apparently you haven't ever read a decent explanation of the reason for this rule... (If anyone knows please site it!)

99+% of the pro arborists in the USA have no clue.. And the vast majority of people that teach arboriculture don't know. I'd bet money that Sharon Lily and David Gerstenberger have no clue and I'd be surprise if anyone at asplund or davey could tell us.. It'd be fun to see if any of those judges running in with their rulers could tell you why..

This industry is totally in the dark.. the overwhelming majority don't have a clue about the reasons.. they just fall trees the way they were told (and most of them, at least around here, pretty much suck at it)..

So here's a rule about how to cut a notch, which is arguably the most fundamental skill in our business, and virtually no one understands the reasons for it. And no one ever much questions it..

THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES...

Total denial.. no one including you, and everyone else (except reg) on this thread will admit it.. So there you all are, in a box, in the dark, clueless and in denial, pretending you're on the beach, and telling me to put some lotion on. That I should follow the rule you don't understand, and wow do you all get worked up when someone doesn't..

As long as you and everyone else wants to stay in denial about the major problems in this industry (and this is just one of many), there is no fixing it.. So unless someone has the balls to call it like it is, you all will stay stuck in your box.. Its not fun, but I do it becasue it NEEDS to be done...

So are you happy with Reg's explanation? does it make sense? do you get it now? Do you understand when and why to follow the rule and when and why to break it?

ANYBODY????

Do you now agree with my statement that "the 1/3 or 80% rule is for rookies"?

and FYI Reg, one of my pet peeves is how the arb industry is constantly trying to imitate loggers. They may look a lot alike, but they are far different games. Where did you ever get the idea I was comparing arborist best industry practice with loggers?
 
[ QUOTE ]


99+% of the pro arborists in the USA have no clue..

[/ QUOTE ]


80% of the time, when people use percentages, they have no idea what they are talking about.

Daniel, I never trust a man with a ponytail. 75% of men with ponytails are lawyers and painters. That's a fact.

100% of the time, the videos you produce make me lol.

Keep it sloppy, Dadio.

SZ
 
Nice SZ! Flip the numbers Danny boy, then would they make sense? of course not, no wood at the back, then side weight or other factors could result in a wrong outcome. The 20 is there for a corrective purpose, if things need to be adjusted then you have room to move. Cut alittle more here type of thing.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Nice SZ! Flip the numbers Danny boy, then would they make sense? of course not, no wood at the back, then side weight or other factors could result in a wrong outcome. The 20 is there for a corrective purpose, if things need to be adjusted then you have room to move. Cut alittle more here type of thing.

[/ QUOTE ]
Please don't act like you know what you're talking about Ricky... Here's your quote from AS..."Pulled it with the GRCS and the bar started to get pinched when I started the top cut of the notch. Just hoped that I could get through the back cut so it would follow the path the righteousness"

So you had so much pre-tension on that pull line that the bar got pinched when you made your notch, and you didn't have the force on the pull line reduced before starting the back cut.. the ash (which splits and BBChairs easily) split down the trunk, during the back cut, but you managed to finish the back cut before it barber chaired...

AND YOU CALLED THAT "THE ONLY FAULT".. You are so clueless ... you don't realize how clueless you are.. A perfect example of the state of ignorance AND DENIAL!!! in the industry..
 
So what are you wanting Daniel? Someone to waste a bunch of time and money to prove the 80% notch because your not satisfied with the lack of evidence.

Maybe most people get it. It's just you that doesn't. Could be a personal problem.
 
Maybe Dan is right? Maybe there may be no scientific data to back up this rule of thumb we talk about. Maybe that's why it's a RULE OF THUMB and not a RULE. I believe that over the thousands of years man has been cutting trees, that certain things "just worked" better than others. These were passed down from one generation to the other and it continued to work. Every "rule" has an exception, and knowing when and when not to break this "rule" is a matter of personal knowledge and experience.

I use the 80% - not because it's law or it's "right" but because it works. Guess what, I'm not as perfect as Dan (but who is?) - I've made bad face cuts, bypassed the undercut and left a dutchmen to deal with, been off with my angles, and found decay I didn't expect. BUT - I had enough tree left to correct these issues with the face cut - had I made deep face right away, it can be a whole different story.

AND - YES, every tree and every situation is different, I get that!
 
[ QUOTE ]


and FYI Reg, one of my pet peeves is how the arb industry is constantly trying to imitate loggers. They may look a lot alike, but they are far different games. Where did you ever get the idea I was comparing arborist best industry practice with loggers?

[/ QUOTE ]

I hadn't actually noticed that, arbs trying to imitate loggers, quite the opposite in fact....such is the passion for the climbing aspect of arborist type work. Take TB for instance....very few topics and seemingly little interest in falling techniques. Probably because the urban environment and pricing structure just doesn't demand much more than the 20% guideline.

Yes I do get the feeling you compare the two standards....whether you realise it or not that is how it comes across in your posts.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Your face cuts look a little too deep.

[/ QUOTE ]

Too deep for what???


Kinda funny cause my first thought was "nice deep face cuts... this guy knows what he's doing"

The 1/3 ... 80% rule is for rookies.. Everyone spouts it but no one knows why.. If you are going to criticize or "critique" a cut, you should know the why.. its amazing how that teaching has become gospel truth in the industry while so few people really understand the why of it..

there are a lot of good reasons to make deeper or shallower face cuts.. Apparently Ricky understands that..

Here's another video from someone else that understands it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfLwcUDCN...iOVlAFWW9BEOqxC

I'd like hear you tell Graeme McMahon that his face cuts are "too deep"...

[/ QUOTE ]

Well Daniel, I'm afraid it's you my friend looking like a green novice rookie here, unfortunately.

As only a rookie would fail to appreciate that Graeme was making such deep face cuts in that tree because the top had been taken out of it, and he was simply chunking down sections with very little leverage acting on them. I assure you he would never go that deep on a face cut felling a tree with it's top intact.

Even with 30 years of experience under my belt, I learned a tremendous amount of very valuable knowledge from working with veteran loggers in Lake Arrowhead and the Big Bear Lakes area after the 07 fires. Guys like Matt Miller and Tom Craven really wowed me with their knowledge of being able to fell trees exactly where they wanted them without any pull lines, even trees leaning away from where they they fell them, quite consistently.

As Reg stated, the danger of going too deep on a face cut when felling a whole tree, is underming the tree's support, this creates even more tension in the wood where your felling cut is made, increasing the likelihood of a barberchair, and potential disaster. What I'm descibing to you is born out by the cracks in the wood on the finish cut side of the stump. Had Ricky been a bit slower on his finish cut, dull saw, hitting a nail, rock, etc, he would have had a barber chair caught on film.

I have nothing but the highest respect for pro loggers, and sincrely wish I'd had more time to absorb the wealth of knowledge they possess.

I envy Reg's close proximity to them these days, and have no doubt he'll learn alot from them.

jomoco
 
I have trouble giving loggers too much respect. All the loggers I met on the west coast were cokeanuts, junkies or alcoholics. What I saw wasn't pretty. They could hardly keep themselves alive out of camp. I don't doubt there's as many sober, intellegent ones out there supporting their family with hard work but I only met a couple of them. I met hundreds of trainwrecks though. I was working at a treatment centre for trainwrecks at the time.

We did lots of chainsaw work there and the one thing I learned by watching these veteran loggers handle a saw was slow and steady with a sharp saw gets the job done. Other than that I just learned that I didn't want to be a logger. Party on.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I have trouble giving loggers too much respect. All the loggers I met on the west coast were cokeanuts, junkies or alcoholics. What I saw wasn't pretty. They could hardly keep themselves alive out of camp. I don't doubt there's as many sober, intellegent ones out there supporting their family with hard work but I only met a couple of them. I met hundreds of trainwrecks though. I was working at a treatment centre for trainwrecks at the time.

We did lots of chainsaw work there and the one thing I learned by watching these veteran loggers handle a saw was slow and steady with a sharp saw gets the job done. Other than that I just learned that I didn't want to be a logger. Party on.

[/ QUOTE ]

I topped out a maple up against a building a little while back. We had a faller working with us that day on his week out of camp.

As I was getting set-up for the next climb I said 'Gavin, can you just knock that spar over'....

The spar had to fall parallel with the building to miss the canopy of another tree....so no margin for error and we certainly couldn't afford a bad bounce. I just wanted to see how Gavin would approach it....personally I'd have piled up some brush to dampen the inpact to prevent any movement when it landed.

Instead of that, Gavin made his standard humboldt but then cut out an off-set snipe from the diaganol. So while the spar fell true to miss the canopy of the adjacent tree, when the face closed the snipe sent it into a spin and upon landing it took 1 complete roll away from the building.

Probably the coolest trick I've seen in a while.

I didn't ask him about it just in case the resulting offset snipe was accidental
grin.gif
....I'd sooner believe he meant it that way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom