Stepped back cut

i think the stepped/rise to back cut is anti-slide back mechanic
>>i only forsake if really need to hit Apex of facecuts better (is better but don't need it all the time), then only when some 'humboldt'/drop face for about same mechanic,
>>generally only forsake step if need be on felling.
More likely to go for apex in tree; throwing across, where limb falling way from you anyway!
.
beastmaster said:
...
If you inspect the holding wood you'll see how much was actually hinge wood. It'll be tore off flat. The ripped parts sticking up was of no use holding or directing the tree. ...
Click to expand...
.
We looking at same thang?....
.
My model (PURE THEORY )is that the preserved hinge area contains 3 fiber types:
1)compressed fibers towards the lean/center of gravity of spar as most loaded pivot
>>meeting point between spar as load and stretched fibers, so taken on both of their loadings
2)Stretched/torn fibers that are opposite the compressed fibers
>>the actual control thru sweep on hinge, tension pull leverage + spar motion=spar force
3)betwixt the shifting gradient from tension to stretched fibers
>>seems only logical some that are in a neverlands of neither!
>>becomes mostly the leveraged distance between compression pivot and tension hold
.
Pivot mechanic of compressed fibers towards spar center of gravity is the fixed part.
center of gravity movement trying to control w/tension part(also a moving part)
.
Tree folds forward when not enough tension leverage to hold it up on the forward angle;
>>of tensioned fibers and inline distance across narrow part of hinge as leverage multiplier
BUT tree steers (side to side) on cross axis leverage distance from tension hold to compression pivot
>>from tension part, because tension fibers opposite lean simply pull harder
>>On opposing backfield from lean during sweep on hinge/pulling offside lean to center
On face slap, the lean side hits harder, so tosses/steers offside to center
.
Thus, i would only wedge or line pull to forward face/not against side lean
>>don't fight sidelean, force more tension fibers by false loading forward, to then let them fight side lean(during whole travel on hinge by leveraged multiplier, vs. fight direct against side lean with rope or wedge direction and and temp. lighten nominally, comes back when no force on wedge or rope, correction is not imbued into fibers that are carrying tree!)
taper hinge fat backfield on side opposite sidelean, so folds forward with whatever fibers takes, then has more fibers in that patch against side lean.
>>i think wedge or line against side lean, temp offloads sidelean during pull, not full travel on hinge
>>but wedge/line pull forward, force more fibers overall, thus more usable fibers in tension control array of hinge before tearoff
.
Simply, if lean doesn't pull generically across narrow part of hinge;
>>don't make generic strip hinge to manage side pulls/skew strategy to suit!
>> as side lean side to side is different, then so make hinge different to manage
>>allow population of fibers in most leveraged against sidelean area(opposite rear)
work rear tension fields in hinge A/B separate side, not generic across
.
Specializing face slap more risky, but can A/B differentiate /not generic both same
by raising sidelean side or dropping the other / ante side
>>so sidelean side hits earlier/harder and tosses across face toward center gunning
>>Called side dutchman, combined w/Taper hinge i think we say swing dutchman
>>Don't refer to in felling so much hear(dutching), but model works and can prove more safely in bucking and aerial rigging usage
Dutch via simple bypass of face cuts is effective if:
A)horizontal cut across fiber most bypasses the more vertical cut to give mechanical stop command best
>>conversely if vertical cut bypasses close is across flex axis of fiber, not up the roman column of it's strength; thus don't get the push back response.
B)Dutch is on 1 SIDE, offering other side as path of least resistance/relief
>>dutch across full face is full face stop command, most internal sudden pressure, most likely to BC(barber chair)
.
.
sorry about length, but that in nut shell is whole model as i see it/ ALL THEORY ;
1 project is to try to animate view.
But that is how important the pulled fibers are i think , and why on the front of Dent's book HIGH peaked fibers on 1 side; almost as they and the sawyer are saluting each other over proudly over a tough hard steer, (judging by fiber pull to control sidelean), old pic/price
dents_book.jpg

.
 
Last edited:
I'll have to read that info a couple times to break it down and digest it thanks. The ax / 45 notch historical explanation was one of the pieces of info I was missing. I knew once the notch closed the hinge popped and it's an uncontrolled freefall. I think 45 and wider is where this force is negated. So the 70+ degree solved the back slide and the step is some added security. Would it be safe to say the step is redundant unless the falling tree has the possibility of being hung up. A good practice when needed but not nessesary where the tree has nothing to tangle in and level makes hinge thickness more obvious to the eye. Hard to put all the variety of techniques and reasons most learn from experience into a two day course and they picked the simplest safest.
 
It nearly as experienced as a lot of you, but, I've seen straight trees with seemingly stronger hinges than you'd thing they'd need or have for falling purposes, go over slow, then stall out for lack of a better term, and the weight of the tree pushing back down into the hinge (say tree has went over 15 degrees from "90"), breaks the hinge and in turn, wants to slide down the same axis as the trunk is, which in turn, pushes the butt backwards.

A couple examples of this that I can think of were Liriodendron and liquidambar.

The first which pops the hinge pretty early in the fall, the second which can be a crap shoot as to how the grain and wood act on any given cut within the same tree.
 
The step might never even come into play on the cut... the tree may never barberchair... the trunk may always land right where you wanted it... the girl in the cheap motel room might not have been the one that stole your credit card.... life's a gamble. Cut 'em anyway you want, in the end I doubt if there's any felling cut that is going to replace the currently most popular one. I think there are good reasons for that, is all I'm saying. I try lots of different cuts, both felling and in the tree. I believe the stepped backcut stops rearward travel of the trunk more often than we think, and I know I've watched the butt end leap right over the stump and end up 3 feet behind it when I didn't use a stepped backcut. My feeling is that it might not always help, but it probably never hurts, either. I still use that old, standard approach as my first choice... then, when I look the situation and the tree over good, I modify my plans accordingly. But, I always start there... and end up there, too, unless there are compelling reasons to use a different approach.
 
I don't worry too much about the butt landing three feet behind because I'm not there anymore but it seems really rare. Usually the tree waits for a pull and I'm long gone. Don't resort to the wedges much and even then it's usually easy to get somewhere safe. Good to think about I'll be paying closer attention again. The work was getting routine, gotta stay fresh and interested that's why I'm back buzzin'.
 
Last edited:
Very nature of the Humbolt puts trunk wood (the horizontal face cut) against the stump wood (the sloped face cut) shortly after the tree starts over, also stopping rearward movement of the trunk. You didn't miss anything, we did. But, again, it's back to the real point.. you are going to be better off if the cut you use has some mechanism for stopping that big lunge backwards that can occur. Of course, we're not talking about backleaners on sloped ground and all the cases where you have to adjust cutting techniques and methods of pulling the tree in the felling direction... because those always involve some rethinking. And I really am only trying to make a case for the "go to" cut we use most of the time, myself. I'm a big fan of experimenting, but I like to keep some perspective. Most of the time, when I think there must be a better way, my solutions either aren't any better or they just end up being an overly complicated solution. Love a plungecut technique with a trigger. Not worth a damn trying to pull it off on a little tree, or a great big one that isn't leaning enough to justify the extra work, though.

@JD3000 is right, though... I tend to think of it as a standard felling cut, and it does a good job of stopping the rearward movement, so didn't think to mention it.

Love the discourse, though. Thinking about how something gets to be "the usual way" of doing things helps keep me from ignoring those reasons when I try something else. I think most people like to run this stuff through their head, and BuzzBoredShitless... er... BuzzBoard... is a great place to hash out the nitty gritty of it all.

Or, maybe, we just need more beer and dancing girls in this joint.
 
I follow Pat Karlsson on Instagram because he's a clinician in using the humbolt/drop face cut, time after time, to pop tops. I've watched him do it over and over again. Anyone can do it like Pat, but he's like a machine. It's kind of boring. But, I really appreciate watching his consistency, so to me it is very interesting. He sets a standard for me to achieve. Every time he posts, I look closely to see how similar the new video is to the ones before.
 
To step or not to step, that is the question. I think JeffGu summed it up well. Know the situation, know the wood fibers, make sound decisions based on sound reasoning.

What has not veen mentioned it that a level with the apex backcut gives the maximum amount of hinge length. The higher the step, the shorter the hinge length. Another thing to consider.

Tony
 
Here is a little diagram.

Hope it makes sense.


As you move the Back Cut up the wood available to form the front of the hinge decreases.

Tony
 
Last edited:
i think change in front fibers would be change in where compressed pivot of hinge is; some to face slaps.
But would have same rear fibers, that steers from for most of the tour/radius on hinge?
 
TheTreeSpyder said:
i think change in front fibers would be change in where compressed pivot of hinge is; some to face slaps.
But would have same rear fibers, that steers from for most of the tour/radius on hinge?
Click to expand...

Again I agree generally. The fibers that bend and the tree pivots on are very thin through the majority of the fall. Stepping shortens the hinge length, perhaps tragicly depending an how high.

In effect drasticly high backcuts become the difference between a piano hinge and a single, centered strap hinge.

Tony
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom