Tips/techniques for reducing the "kick"/push-back of a top from the trunk it's being cut-from?(minimizing the sway of the standing trunk)
- Thread starter eyehearttrees
- Start date
Seth McPherson
New member
- Location
- Cincinnati
Even one limb makes a big difference, I’ve found
TheTreeSpyder
Branched out member
- Location
- Florida>>> USA
Lower stabilizing weight, but that the top doesn't hit, at least too high/leveraged up; against rigid horizontal.
.
My take:
Weight, speed of top as force inputs.
Cosine and Sine for how those inputs are asserted as motion carries/angle changes against support column of trunk.
Cosine down the trunk receiver, sine across.
Higher the cut, the smaller the top, but greater lever left for side forces to push against sole ground connection.
.
If kerf face small top to hop,
>>can't build too much speed
>>very inline close, very little side force, no kickback. Mostly vertical force ported down stem column properly.
.
Wider face allows more speed and angle.
In ticks on the clock starting from high noon vertical top
>> first tic (second/minute) gives ~10% of weight x speed squared as side force to top of support lever.
>>2nd tic gives ~20% of weight x now increased speed squared as side force etc.
The speed squared is increasing exponentially.
The ~10% per click is slightly receding after 5 tics so that 7.5 tics is really ~71% not 75% @ 45 degrees but otherwise very accurate to 100ths.
.
A tic is 6degrees, 360 degrees ÷ 60 tics = 6 degrees per tic on clock.
Earlier release gives softer angle of percentage of total force expressed across AND less compounding speed multiplier into that percentage.
E=MC squared, M is the static, C is the dynamic value.
.
On smaller top forces to high point, have been able to drop back body weight hard back just as top pulls forward hardest, then throw bod forward hard into cut after release and first twang backward, using bodyweight as dampening ballast against the errant motion to quiet stem some. Especially when also catching top. Can do opposite of same motions at same time of making twang worse, not better.
.
Mostly face and trim sides, maybe slant to rear, to minimize final release time, speed allowed and angle of close as the raw initial inputs to the (d)effect w/clean quick release soon as direction away is committed. To straight down and rear of top can brush by area. Cut may start slow, but soon as alive, starts to 'breathe' into motion speed thru to minimize compounding and push across percentage.
.
If take hammer at end of handle and simply press on a scale have less leverage down showing on scale, than when choked up on handle (shows greater on scale). But we all know the more extended position of less leverage in motion, speed squared compounding gives more impact than the more leverage/less speed gear position of choked up on handle. That is the speed compounding, hammer effect. If 2 matching trucks head on, matching speed, but weld metal to double weight of one, it will walk thru the lighter. But if lighter is moving @2x speed, will even more so plow the heavier. Speed is the greatest compounding, therefore greatest force expression rawly. Catching top different somewhat.
.
Humboldt receiving face slant less abrupt, more slide on close. i tried to race against close unless hard slap to hop, then that is more vertical, than across.
.
2 can look like doing same steps but subtle changes in timing and orchestration can change the whole symphony.
.
My take:
Weight, speed of top as force inputs.
Cosine and Sine for how those inputs are asserted as motion carries/angle changes against support column of trunk.
Cosine down the trunk receiver, sine across.
Higher the cut, the smaller the top, but greater lever left for side forces to push against sole ground connection.
.
If kerf face small top to hop,
>>can't build too much speed
>>very inline close, very little side force, no kickback. Mostly vertical force ported down stem column properly.
.
Wider face allows more speed and angle.
In ticks on the clock starting from high noon vertical top
>> first tic (second/minute) gives ~10% of weight x speed squared as side force to top of support lever.
>>2nd tic gives ~20% of weight x now increased speed squared as side force etc.
The speed squared is increasing exponentially.
The ~10% per click is slightly receding after 5 tics so that 7.5 tics is really ~71% not 75% @ 45 degrees but otherwise very accurate to 100ths.
.
A tic is 6degrees, 360 degrees ÷ 60 tics = 6 degrees per tic on clock.
Earlier release gives softer angle of percentage of total force expressed across AND less compounding speed multiplier into that percentage.
E=MC squared, M is the static, C is the dynamic value.
.
On smaller top forces to high point, have been able to drop back body weight hard back just as top pulls forward hardest, then throw bod forward hard into cut after release and first twang backward, using bodyweight as dampening ballast against the errant motion to quiet stem some. Especially when also catching top. Can do opposite of same motions at same time of making twang worse, not better.
.
Mostly face and trim sides, maybe slant to rear, to minimize final release time, speed allowed and angle of close as the raw initial inputs to the (d)effect w/clean quick release soon as direction away is committed. To straight down and rear of top can brush by area. Cut may start slow, but soon as alive, starts to 'breathe' into motion speed thru to minimize compounding and push across percentage.
.
If take hammer at end of handle and simply press on a scale have less leverage down showing on scale, than when choked up on handle (shows greater on scale). But we all know the more extended position of less leverage in motion, speed squared compounding gives more impact than the more leverage/less speed gear position of choked up on handle. That is the speed compounding, hammer effect. If 2 matching trucks head on, matching speed, but weld metal to double weight of one, it will walk thru the lighter. But if lighter is moving @2x speed, will even more so plow the heavier. Speed is the greatest compounding, therefore greatest force expression rawly. Catching top different somewhat.
.
Humboldt receiving face slant less abrupt, more slide on close. i tried to race against close unless hard slap to hop, then that is more vertical, than across.
.
2 can look like doing same steps but subtle changes in timing and orchestration can change the whole symphony.
Last edited:
