rigging and falling three large tulip trees

Basically everything Daniel says on this topic is correct IMO.

I went to the same type of rigging class given by Mark C about 2 yrs ago and that was where I had my eyes opened to balance point rigging. It's easier on the crew and the equipment. Less shockloading and easier to handle pieces as they come down more or less parralel to the ground.

Butt hitching has its place, but after you've seen Mark do a TD, and had a chance to practice it yourself, it is definetly not the preferred way to do it, IMO. There is very little movement of the pcs. after they are cut...sometimes they look like a feather coming down, swinging gently back and forth, staying basically horizontal.

And Daniel's analogy of handling a heavy piece by hand in the bucket is spot on...you grab it at the balance point to make it easier to handle, not near the butt.

If you guys want to make a case that Mark C doesn't really know great ways to TD trees, well that's gonna be a tough sell.

I will say that spinner log looked really bad swinging near the climber, but any big cut has to be let down right away or it will try to attack the climber, no matter where it is tied.
 
You guys remind me of Axman and his balanced picks thread using his remote knuckle boom crane.

I can't see the benefits in terms of time or safety though, windows, walls, high power lines, they are all dangerously allergic to helicoptering wide load related contact, particularly off a stationary block set above you in the tree.

I must be real dense I gues, but it still strikes me as unnecessarily dangerous in any control sense, more like fat and unpredictable around serious targets. Just think of how predictable it would be around targets in the wind, even a mild one.

I'd love to watch a vid of this "advanced" technique in use around any serious nearby targets.

Give me a link guys, I'm eager to learn this new style of strategic rigging and it's benefits.

jomoco
 
I don't have a link. But Mark C does alot of seminars all over the country as far as I know. Try to go to one, he's a great guy and dope on TDs.

Or if you can get some guys together and a good tree to beat up on, he'll probably come to you.
 
[ QUOTE ]
You guys remind me of Axman and his balanced picks thread using his remote knuckle boom crane.



I'd love to watch a vid of this "advanced" technique in use around any serious nearby targets.

Give me a link guys, I'm eager to learn this new style of strategic rigging and it's benefits.

jomoco

[/ QUOTE ]

If you don't know now , than your never gonna know . Give it up . Keep doing it the way your doing it , it's not rocket science .
 
But I'm willing to learn, I just need a link demonstrating it's superiority around high value target avoidance.

I watched Daniels edited video and was not impressed in terms of total control regardless of the target's nature. But it was done smoothly and relatively confidently in my opinion.

I just don't see any superior control factor or ease of handling gains above or below.

Strategic removals and wide rotating loads are contradicting terms in many circumstances that every climber eventually faces.

If this technique is only applicable to certain ideal situations on certain jobs, then that needs to be said up front, not as an add on.

What happens when a novice tries this technique around high power lines with very bad results guys?

jomoco
 
The next strategic crane or Hobb's removal I get you can be sure I'll demonstrate how to control my picks with a single tie off loadpoint either tip tied or butt hitched.

The only time I need multiple ropes on a limb or log is to walk it sideways to a designated LZ far away from the loads origination point in a horizontal sense, from multiple lowering points in the tree/trees.

I do have an interesting bunch of fair sized euc removals coming up that I intend to speedline most the brush and wood off of into one central LZ on all 6 of them. It's a 3 day job. Should be able to get some good speedlining zippity dooh dah footage from both perspectives, high and low.

Matching Reg's superb video productions is a goal I hope to reach any leapyear now!

jomoco
 
Who is this novice guy ? Jo , for real it's ok . You don't have to turn every thread back to you and your EUC's . Throw that Blair Euc saddle in the trash and join the real world . You tie a lead at the top , the bottom , the top and the bottom but you can't tie them in the middle ? Grow up and learn to play with others. Get a notebook . Homework is coming . on a thread derail Jomo note , why is Vick an Eagle ?
 
You guys may think it's advanced and cool to teach novice climbers to tie loads off in the middle when lowering branches and logs, I just don't agree with you despite all the fancy jargon.

I envision toothless casualties, ambulances, and power line repair crews.

I think using any midpoint tie puts the climber at too much unnecessary risk of injury if the rope man gets sloppy.

Risking injury just to deliver a horizontal load to your groundmen is really quite laughable, assuming it makes it to the ground without getting hung up of course!

jomoco
 
Hey Jomoco..
I'd bet dollars to donuts that Riggs had a few beers in him when he wrote that last post... SO don't take it too personally... getting defensive isn't going to help you learn anything.. And if you pissed him off, know that you pissed off one of the most highly experienced arborists in the world... He's a contract climber/bucket operator that gets called in to do the hairiest jobs that no one else wants to touch, taking monster trees down in rich people's backyards, 12 hours a day, 6 days a week, for close to 30 years...

No one ever mentioned training novice climbers to use this technique..Where did you get that idea? I did mention "new arborist training videos" in the credits... Those have yet to be published. This video is a documentary. And even if it were a training video, why can't it be for highly experienced arborists?

Also I have a GRCS and asked Pat if he wanted to use it, which he said he didn't.. SO I thought it that tree was a good candidate for the GRCS, and it would have come in handy on a few cuts, but wasn't necessary. GRCS takes a bit more time to set up, break down, crank up etc... I deferred to the climber there, though I'd have preferred to used it.

No one mentioned that piece where the tips hung up in the little sassafrass. We were able to pull it up enough by hand with 4 groundmen, enough to get it to swing away. It certainly would have been easier to crank it up with the machine. I did shoot another video of the GRCS in action.. Cranking up this dead oak top, tip tied from the bucket, right over a smaller maple and the house. The piece moved really slowly and the camera work was kinda shaky, so its tough to tell exactly what happens. I'll have to take a closer look and see if we can use it.

And Cory, I love that term "balance point rigging". That is the first I'd heard it used, though the concept was discussed in much detail back in the old days at AS.. Where did the phrase come from? Used it twice today, on two different jobs, for control in moving the pieces on the ground. I think that warrants its own thread.

As does the one "helicopter cut" that everyone seems to be so bent out of shape about.. There is a story behind that.
 
I get what your saying and when I have time and room try this technique out some day. Working in the city a piece moving like that is really risky for me but I can see it working in certain situations.

It definitely is a valid concept and has is uses. I'll let you know how it goes.
grin.gif


I do appreciate the video. I don't have the time or effort to put something like that together. Oh and the money too.
 
Thanks for emailing me about this Daniel; guess i don't get out much anymore.. i prefer not quiet balance point / cg hitch point. i mostly want a determined, calculable dip on far end. As far as a straight line efficiency; there is the same amount of work for the machine to do; only here we are taking less straightline, but still binding all that travel into target achievemeant; so no loss; just strategic trade.. i've liked this so much, that i'd place a Round turn around the support redirect, and have another line to sweat that open to leverage pretension, then use this strategy for even more pretension. Lots more graceful movemeant/ ballet from load moving lightly around, responding slowly and buffered. Even the head fall after tearoff is buffered by a now integrated ballast..

i think of stretching wood fibre in hinge, as similar to stretching rope fiber; each creates tension,that can give support and steering, with the tension force. If you pretighten enough, you can get a lower impact to rope fiber when you hand off load to it. We can easily do this especially in lighter work, lower friction redirect as support and/or leveraged pretension device (GRCS etc.).

If we pretension what we can, then slowly lay over load on hinge, load has less drop at tearoff. Then it is up to rope tension for rest. But, also, the further the hitchpoint is from the hinge (hinge as pivot), the more distance that hitched rope will get stretched. So, pretension by hand or device becomes pretension 1 and by this action on the hinge becomes the finishing pretensioning. So, there is more line tension at tearoff (and also before that can help with steering load). For, in this scenario/imagery model; the distance from the hinge to the FIRST hitching (preceding marl etc.) becomes a lever, that the cg of the load can tighten the line thru. Note, this won't work as well with a narrow facing; for that can limit travel on hinge. Now see less drop distance at tearoff, and more line tension; both, helping to limit impacting on the rope systems and it's support/anchors. So, think of the hinge as a 2nd (dispensable) hitchpoint, to steer and support load. Also, notice, in the pre-pre tensioning the less friction at support redirect, the more we can pretension. But, when we are in final pretension using hinge, more friction at support redirect, isolates less rope that gets the same stretching for pretensioning, thus, gives more tension. Also, With less support/ redirect friction we can take more impact/ have more rubberband to handle it. But, if support is closer to the load, and has high friction; impact has more impact, but if worked right with these methods, is less likely. For the short (by length and isolation by friction buffer) can get super tight, to give more support and steering, for less / almost Zer0 impacting. So, support/redirect friction can be very important to figuring out what kind of strategy to use.

MTL:Self Tightening Rig

This, tightening the line tension automatically before tearoff if load moves away from the support, can work so well, you can orchestrate it to pull very hard sideways (to pull off from over obstacle/roof etc.); by going the wrong way/ long way around(giving more leveraged distance to pretighten). Also,if head were to become hung, or that is the way you found it to start, more towards balance point/ cg gives length on butt end, that weight can be added too or impacted (at leveraged distance multiplier from hitchpoint) to help lift head out of lock. If limb is horizontal pointing at center of clock; and support rig is at 2; we can tip to 5 and steer over and pretighten too. But, we can pretighten the line harder, to pull harder sideways, by moving the load more away from support, rather than towards it (horizontally). We can, rig to support at 2, but, begin to hinge down towards 7 o'clock; then rope tightens more (because you aren't just moving farther away from support on axisY only, but also hitch[point on load moves farther away from support on axisX now too. Under the right conditions, this can give a very hard pull straight across from 7 to 5; all on a tight rope and hinge as the 2 support points.

Then, as before, when we have used the hinge point like it was another rope, as a rope as long as possible, and smoothly handed over the load to the rigging rope, we then can cut thru the short fiber 'rope'/hinge, and proceed as usual. But, we are playing with power, we want to all ways and always to instantly provide the equal and opposite workable force of the tension support in the rope-the relief of tension! If the rope pulls up, over, back towards climber etc. tooo hard, being able to releive tension sum, can be as important as providing tension/support etc.

MTL: Rock Around The Clock Strategy

A few more things a hitchpoint closer to CG gives, is more ballast to the head whent he pivot does switch from the hinge to the line (pivot determined by which device is most loaded, then rest of mehcnix of length and nagle from that pivot point. Also, more clearance underneath by virtue of some of the length you've taken is above hitchpoint, it isn't all below hitchpoint. This extra clearance, along with lower impacting (that gives less drop) can help to ballet out even more magic.

Even having a rope angle to pull back into hinge can help, but can be dangerous to climber if something goes wrong. So, goes with the Goldilox principal as all things with power; has the 2 equal and opposites, but 3 power positions: not enough, just right and way tooo much!
 
Balance point- probably that is what Mark C called it.

I remember he said he liked to keep limbs on the rope at the same angle they were growing in the tree, so not always tied at the horizontal balance point, but the original-limb-angle balance point.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Balance point- probably that is what Mark C called it.

I remember he said he liked to keep limbs on the rope at the same angle they were growing in the tree, so not always tied at the horizontal balance point, but the original-limb-angle balance point.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds like a good reason to use spider leg balancers.
Does this take too long to be productive?
I know its extra hassle for the ground crew to untie.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Balance point- probably that is what Mark C called it.

I remember he said he liked to keep limbs on the rope at the same angle they were growing in the tree, so not always tied at the horizontal balance point, but the original-limb-angle balance point.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now that sounds more like something Mark C. would recommend. Not tying at the horizontal balance point. Too much limb movement.
 

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom