4x4American
Got Sawdust?
That's quite a bit of sag. Although, being that you measure in millipeters is throwing me off!
How much sag is acceptable in a sawmill beam??
- Thread starter KiwiBro
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
Sawyer Rob
Addicted to ArboristSite
The OP is worried about the sag from his string... I say it's the lumber that I'd be worried about!
We need to see some lumber off that mill and a tape measure on it to see what it's doing...
"If" MY BSM had a little over 3/16" (5mm) run out over 13', (4meters) I'd be making some small adjustments to get it back to under 1/32"...
To some people 5mm is a lot, to others it isn't... The OP needs to make that decision and if it bothers him, send the beam back to be crowned...
Personally, I'd send it back to be crowned AND also buy a new longer steel one to have at home for better quality lumber and for longer logs...
SR
We need to see some lumber off that mill and a tape measure on it to see what it's doing...
"If" MY BSM had a little over 3/16" (5mm) run out over 13', (4meters) I'd be making some small adjustments to get it back to under 1/32"...
To some people 5mm is a lot, to others it isn't... The OP needs to make that decision and if it bothers him, send the beam back to be crowned...
Personally, I'd send it back to be crowned AND also buy a new longer steel one to have at home for better quality lumber and for longer logs...
SR
Boon
Addicted to ArboristSite
Is that a 20L? drum sitting on there- that's 20kg added, perhaps if you do not want to up grade to the larger steel beam as Jake suggested maybe try halving the water volume.
In reality weight for strength does not equate.
If it were me for my personal use which it sounds like you are using the mill for and little transport is needed then I'd bite the bullet and go for gal & save the ally beam for occasions where light weight is needed and put less water in the drum. Still it sounds like you have done alright for your self getting the mill at a good price and they are willing to help you out with the problem at a good price. Last week was wishing I could get one of these.
Would be interested to know what you decide
In reality weight for strength does not equate.
If it were me for my personal use which it sounds like you are using the mill for and little transport is needed then I'd bite the bullet and go for gal & save the ally beam for occasions where light weight is needed and put less water in the drum. Still it sounds like you have done alright for your self getting the mill at a good price and they are willing to help you out with the problem at a good price. Last week was wishing I could get one of these.
Would be interested to know what you decide
KiwiBro
Mill 'em, nails be damned.
If it were me for my personal use which it sounds like you are using the mill for and little transport is needed then I'd bite the bullet and go for gal & save the ally beam for occasions where light weight is needed and put less water in the drum. Still it sounds like you have done alright for your self getting the mill at a good price and they are willing to help you out with the problem at a good price. Last week was wishing I could get one of these.
Would be interested to know what you decide
That train of thought is understandable. However, the only reason I'd agree to a discounted steel beam is to hope to get more than I paid for it in resale value because there is very little chance I would ever use it. Portability is crucial to my needs, hence why I bought a sawmill with a beam that I was told had been beefed up and was solid but which I could still carry myself. The steel beam is way too heavy and a mill with one was not what I originally bought for a reason - it wasn't wanted/needed.
The sawmill is simply, I believe, unfit for purpose.
Further, the use is primarily commercial (but of course I had hoped milling with this Turbo would be enjoyable). I need to produce lumber and provide a service I can be proud of that does not undermine what I'm trying to achieve or my reputation.
Turbo's proposed solutions are to crown the beam and/or cut the main beam into sections, adding joiners that stiffen the beam. Based on my experience with both the beam and the joiners, neither of these are acceptable solutions, because the first does not address the fundamental, unacceptable softness of this beam, and the second has proven in use to not only be a PITA but inaccurate at best.
Crowning the beam may allow it to settle straight-ish when carriage load comes on, but Turbo have yet to advise how doing so can counter what I feel is atrocious horizontal bounce it displays in a number of scenarios. It is in this respect and in my opinion like a wet noodle.
Adding joiners might be seen as a worthwhile solution by those without the benefit of real-world use or my experiences with such joiners but I can tell you guys the joiners are not something I can accept, even though I know from real world use that it does stiffen the beam somewhat. A set was sold to me with the extension. Do people know there are something close to 47 parts to the joiners I have and even though Jake now advises they have dropped some of those parts, there are still 24 allen key bolts to hold the join together? Having spent the extra time to ensure all bolts are well located and tight whenever setting up over a log (one set was bad enough but now I am expected to use two?) the joint will not only creep apart during the day but the joiners and joint need to be built extremely accurately or the two parts of the beam will not align correctly and there will be a noticeable wind across the joint that is not only heard and felt in extra blade stress as it transitions from one beam section to the other, but can be bad enough to induce ledges in the cut bad enough the cut surface needs to be skimmed every drop to get rid of these.
I guess there could be an argument made that in expecting a solution that is practically equivalent to what I originally paid for but never received, that I am being unreasonable. This argument is especially understandable from those with no experience with these mills, who have not seen the videos I have taken of some of these issues or who don't know me well enough to know I shoot straight. To that end I have proposed to Turbo to put this before an independent arbitrator and agree to be bound by their findings. That proposal was not accepted.
Despite me having and registering concerns about this beam prior to use and having been told by Turbo to use it and that it will be fine in use, and despite not accepting the solutions proposed, and despite Turbo not being willing to refund my money or even apologise for a sad litany of what I consider faults or design errors or worse, some of which I feel render the product unsafe, Turbo has rejected the offer of binding arbitration.
Interestingly, and for those in the know, quite revealingly, Turbo have publicly stated they have potential buyers for this mill if I want to sell it, but when pressed they will not reveal those buyers to me, nor pass my details onto them, nor just refund me and then on-sell to these buyers. Instead they expect not only have my money but for me to, at my own time and expense, send this mill to them so that they will then have both my money and the mill, and in respect of the negotiations with these alleged buyers, they want to "do the talking".
In my opinion this didn't need to be the drama it has turned into. One which has costed me horrendous amounts of time and lost revenue/opportunity at the worst possible point of the year. If they had just admitted the beam is unfit for purpose (when it' is shown to have about 18mm of sag when using the 1.4m extension that was sold with it, and this translates to about 12-14mm in the wood on shallow cuts at least, how could any reasonable person consider this anything but unfit for purpose), apologised for the inconvenience and for any misrepresentation (expressed, implied, perceived or otherwise), have the design and engineering nous to come up with a solution that doesn't leave me worse off than what I thought I was buying, or just took this mill back and on-sold it themselves, then I'd be back milling, either with their mill or with a Lucas or Peterson by now (Mahoe is not only out of my budget but I suspect not as portable as I need, although they make very awesome mills and there is not a single Mahoe mill owner I have met or corresponded with who is unhappy with their purchase).
I do like to keep my money in NZ and buy NZ made, but Peterson have not responded to my recent email(granted, not couched as a sale enquiry), Mahoe are out of my budget despite being the top mill in the non-stationary NZ made mills here, in my opinion, and Warren Lucas has been so incredibly helpful without me dangling a single carrot in front of him (and the local NZ Lucas rep- Arnold also very helpful), that I would consider a Lucas without hesitation now. To be honest, I have been blown away with the amount of time and help Warren Lucas has been willing to provide and if this reflects the level of after sales service, I have no doubt at all I would be looked after very well by Lucas after the sale.
But I have to resolve this Turbo issue first, to decide what happens next.
Sawyer Rob
Addicted to ArboristSite
I'm STILL waiting to see the lumber off that mill, with a ruler on it in different places, to see just how much of a complaint you really have...
SR
SR
KiwiBro
Mill 'em, nails be damned.
beam and cut sag:
horizontal deflection (beam is narrower than high, and profile is such that vertical deflection translates into horizontal deflection also and visa versa):
KiwiBro
Mill 'em, nails be damned.
Apart from the occasions where the side shifting wanders and needs a tightening or I screw up and haven't set it properly, I don't experience incidences of run-off or poorly dimensioned lumber and the mill makes mostly acceptably parallel cuts. This has never been disputed. That said, I've only milled 5 logs and can't see me milling many more.
Equally, I have advised in the first video I published, that I got what I thought was a great deal on the mill package. However, I was never told the mill was discounted because it was experimental/transitional or anything other than fit for purpose, rather a recent big export order creating economies of scale and the fact I had been waiting a while were behind the discounted offer.
The issues are that even in completely un-tensioned wood, this thing is cutting bowed and crooked lumber, is incapable of cutting a straight line, and can bounce unacceptably when doing even a 3" horizontal cut. I'm of the belief the beam is just too soft and can't handle the loads to within acceptable tolerances.
While anyone can come up with a scenario where the tension in the wood might be opposite the cut vertical and horizontal deflections, thus this soft beam and the deflections could be passed off as actually beneficial in that specific scenario, what happens for the rest of the tensioned log? Surely it's not a great leap of logic to realise that starting from a reasonably straight cutting capability is the best and only acceptable outcome that will give the miller the best opportunity of staying within grading rules and producing lumber or providing a service they can be proud of.
I don't buy, and neither should anybody else, the argument that an approximate 14mm cut sag is within grading rules thus acceptable. Should anyone have so much of their grading allowances (over half of the allowance I work to in, for example, 4x1 hardwood decking lumber) in a 5m log consumed by the sawmill even before considering and trying to work around log tension, effectively halving what's left to accommodate tension? To my mind this is ludicrous.
Who wants to spend over half their deflection allowances even before their mill blade touches a log?
Who wants to produce lower grades, downgrade or reject lumber from tensioned wood that would otherwise be acceptable or higher grades if only the mill could cut a straightish line?
Who wants to have to double pass even a 3" cut to avoid beam bounce?
Who wants to set up rails at each end to seat and shift the mill on in those situations where the log is actually within the maximum cut dimensions of the mill but and for no other reason, they have to keep the opening horizontal cuts on each drop to 2" deep to avoid the beam bouncing around (and because of the beam design, the bounce is both horizontal and vertical, adding more load/stress to a blade already dealing with a deflecting beam)?
I've experienced all this and more and, along with the beam sag and horizontal deflection, these are unacceptable consequences of a beam that is just too soft to handle the loads in my opinion. I haven't spoken to a single person who considers this acceptable other than the manufacturer. I would not have bought this mill, at any price, if I knew such things would be possible.
Most of us are all too familiar with the trade-offs and concessions we make often to compromise because of various factors, including budget constraints. But these material facts of beam bounce, deflection and general softness were never disclosed pre purchase when I feel they reasonably ought to have been. In fact, I was told the beam was beefed up from their chainsaw powerhead beams and was solid. I would not have bought this mill and committed to a season (that is now in tatters) of harvesting and milling sawlogs otherwise.
I'm not trying to get a champaign mill on a beer budget. I'd be happy with a beer. But, equally, if nobody can explain to me how what has been proposed as a solution thus far is significantly more than trying to make a silk purse from a sows ear, then I cannot accept it and have explained why, seemingly to no avail.
Equally, I have advised in the first video I published, that I got what I thought was a great deal on the mill package. However, I was never told the mill was discounted because it was experimental/transitional or anything other than fit for purpose, rather a recent big export order creating economies of scale and the fact I had been waiting a while were behind the discounted offer.
The issues are that even in completely un-tensioned wood, this thing is cutting bowed and crooked lumber, is incapable of cutting a straight line, and can bounce unacceptably when doing even a 3" horizontal cut. I'm of the belief the beam is just too soft and can't handle the loads to within acceptable tolerances.
While anyone can come up with a scenario where the tension in the wood might be opposite the cut vertical and horizontal deflections, thus this soft beam and the deflections could be passed off as actually beneficial in that specific scenario, what happens for the rest of the tensioned log? Surely it's not a great leap of logic to realise that starting from a reasonably straight cutting capability is the best and only acceptable outcome that will give the miller the best opportunity of staying within grading rules and producing lumber or providing a service they can be proud of.
I don't buy, and neither should anybody else, the argument that an approximate 14mm cut sag is within grading rules thus acceptable. Should anyone have so much of their grading allowances (over half of the allowance I work to in, for example, 4x1 hardwood decking lumber) in a 5m log consumed by the sawmill even before considering and trying to work around log tension, effectively halving what's left to accommodate tension? To my mind this is ludicrous.
Who wants to spend over half their deflection allowances even before their mill blade touches a log?
Who wants to produce lower grades, downgrade or reject lumber from tensioned wood that would otherwise be acceptable or higher grades if only the mill could cut a straightish line?
Who wants to have to double pass even a 3" cut to avoid beam bounce?
Who wants to set up rails at each end to seat and shift the mill on in those situations where the log is actually within the maximum cut dimensions of the mill but and for no other reason, they have to keep the opening horizontal cuts on each drop to 2" deep to avoid the beam bouncing around (and because of the beam design, the bounce is both horizontal and vertical, adding more load/stress to a blade already dealing with a deflecting beam)?
I've experienced all this and more and, along with the beam sag and horizontal deflection, these are unacceptable consequences of a beam that is just too soft to handle the loads in my opinion. I haven't spoken to a single person who considers this acceptable other than the manufacturer. I would not have bought this mill, at any price, if I knew such things would be possible.
Most of us are all too familiar with the trade-offs and concessions we make often to compromise because of various factors, including budget constraints. But these material facts of beam bounce, deflection and general softness were never disclosed pre purchase when I feel they reasonably ought to have been. In fact, I was told the beam was beefed up from their chainsaw powerhead beams and was solid. I would not have bought this mill and committed to a season (that is now in tatters) of harvesting and milling sawlogs otherwise.
I'm not trying to get a champaign mill on a beer budget. I'd be happy with a beer. But, equally, if nobody can explain to me how what has been proposed as a solution thus far is significantly more than trying to make a silk purse from a sows ear, then I cannot accept it and have explained why, seemingly to no avail.
Sawyer Rob
Addicted to ArboristSite
I'm going to comment on all of your post combined. I'll just apologize up front if you don't like my comments...
I would NOT be happy with that much run out with ANY mill...
I would NOT have bought that mill without trying it... PEROID!
When something is a GREAT deal, there's ALWAYS a reason why and when it's MY money on the line, I make it my mission to know why...
I think you have some "shared blame" here, and your best option is to have the beam worked on and chalk it up to a learning experience...
SR
I would NOT be happy with that much run out with ANY mill...
I would NOT have bought that mill without trying it... PEROID!
When something is a GREAT deal, there's ALWAYS a reason why and when it's MY money on the line, I make it my mission to know why...
I think you have some "shared blame" here, and your best option is to have the beam worked on and chalk it up to a learning experience...
SR
KiwiBro
Mill 'em, nails be damned.
No need to apologise, I understand where you are coming from. Absolutely, I should have demanded to try the mill before loading it on the truck. Basically, I should not have trusted the manufacturer, should have undertaken greater diligence and not relied on the one year warranty as a back-stop. I relied on the decades of sawmill experience and the fact they had just demoed the mill at a trade show and had already been set-up and run by them as sufficient enough to ensure such issues like this would be unlikely. I was wrong in that regard.
I really do lament the old days when someone so advised of problems by a customer would be horrified and embarrassed and move heaven and earth to make it right. I think this is one of the reasons I am so impressed with Lucas sawmills - the service I have received lately even as a non-customer reminds me of the good old days.
I also have a good milling mate in Aus' who has a few stories to tell of how Mahoe backed their mills enough to allow him in another country no less to take delivery and set up and prove the mill before paying for it. He is someone who has been there, done that, and is happy with Mahoe. I should have asked more advice from him and acted upon the advice I did get, but that's another regret about all this to add to the others.
golddredgergold
ArboristSite Operative
Still at it here ehh kiwi? The other forum locked the thread due to your persistant complaing after you have been offered several solutions by the manufacture to take care of you for FREE! Yet here you are still whining that it won't cut. Just plain blows my mind when I read your post now. Stop whining and take the mill back to Jakes. He will arch the beam and add inner channels to make it more suited to your demands. Or get the heftier beam and be done with it. Problem solved or best yet take the whole thing back and let him sell it for you. No as a business owner myself I would NOT pass another customers info along to you so you can make the sell. He will handle it for you there for offering warranty and support for the new customer properly. No involvement needed by you. Load the mill up make the 8 hour drive and get it over with... You are getting nowhere by making videos and posting them online. Who cares and as a matter of fact like said on the other forum I am myself more convinced than ever that when I buy my next swing mill it will be a warrior. Just for the simple fact I have watched you try to drag them through the dirt and they have held true, offered solutions for you and have never blown up or said one bad thing about you. That is pretty solid manufacture considering the situation. If you are so stoked on a Lucas or Mahoe then why did you stop and buy a worrior? Please do not spend anytime to respond to me. It is not needed. All that is needed is for you to take the mill back and let Jake sell it for you and give your money back when it sells. Then you can go buy another mill and try to pile drive that ones issues into the ground till they have had enough of you. Nothing is perfect. I agreed with you on the sag when this all started but now I do think you are just a bit and with "all do respect" Nuts! No offence..... just my opinion......
KiwiBro
Mill 'em, nails be damned.
None taken. But I'd welcome the opportunity to discuss a few of your points if you could suspend character assassinations long enough to objectively address reason and fact in an intelligent manner. Do you want to try, or are you more of the spray and walk away type?
golddredgergold
ArboristSite Operative
Your time will be better spent loading the mill up and making the drive to solve your issues with it then to worry about me here on the other side of the planet. Good luck and I truly hope the drive is safe one and your mill is sold fast so you can get on with your lumber business.
KiwiBro
Mill 'em, nails be damned.
Having detailed why the proposed solutions don't address the underlying issue or solve all of the symptoms thereof, will you put your money where your mouth is and reimburse me my time and money if I'm proven right, or at the very least detail why you think the solutions will work and upon what basis you form such an opinion?
I ask because it's bloody easy to wallow in ignorance and leap to unsubstantiated judgements when it's not your time or money that's being farked with.
golddredgergold
ArboristSite Operative
Sorry I will not fund Your trip or issues. Nice try. I do know if in your situation I would be standing at the door with my mill ready to be given the "fix" promised and then asking to be shown a demo run right there at the shop so that any issues can be addressed on site and resolved. 8 hour drive and two days or so and hotel room to get my mill back running perfect? Hell yes in a heartbeat. What will it cost for the entire trip? $500 if I eat steak along the way including hotel gas ect.? Yes because when I am in peak season cutting lumber to the tune of $400 to $500 per day I would want my mill running and the issue solved NOW! 2 to 3 day loss and $500 cash to fix a $10,000+ sawmill that will get hundreds in cash coming back into my pocket soon as I return home? Where is the problem? You...... as far as I can see. Get the mill fixed running, repaired sold whatever and get back to sawing! You say you are losing revenue? Then what's the hang up? If the jobs are waiting then get to Jakes have him show you face to face with your mill setup at his shop. Then if you and him decide right there it has issues and it cannot be solved now you can request a refund or a plan to solve your problem. But at least go get the free help already offered and make sure you are happy with the fix before you leave the shop after you see it cut a log right in front of you. Complaining here is NOT going to fix your machine. Driving to the manfacture for the fix and demo to address your mills issues and come to some sort of agreement with the manufacture while there will FIX your problem. Sorry no you cannot manipulate me to buy your trip for you mill to get solved. I am sharper than that. My grandpa was a bunch like you letting a dime hold up a dollar. Not sure how that translates to NZ dollar but stop letting pocket change hold up thousands!
Your thread here is doing no good for anyone. It is not positive nor productive in anyway and you are hell bent on keeping this topic in every ones face. Not good for the forum or it,s readers. So I will not be feeding the fire and responding to you Any further as it really does not matter to me weather you ever get to saw or not. But I no longer wish to see your topic on my favorite forums. So I will report this thread in hopes it gets locked down as it did elsewhere on the net.
Your thread here is doing no good for anyone. It is not positive nor productive in anyway and you are hell bent on keeping this topic in every ones face. Not good for the forum or it,s readers. So I will not be feeding the fire and responding to you Any further as it really does not matter to me weather you ever get to saw or not. But I no longer wish to see your topic on my favorite forums. So I will report this thread in hopes it gets locked down as it did elsewhere on the net.
KiwiBro
Mill 'em, nails be damned.
When asked to substantiate your opinion and why you consider such proposed solutions will resolve the issues, you do nothing of the sort. Neither are you willing to put your own money on the line while demanding I spend mine and my time chasing solutions you yourself are unwilling to substantiate. Have you even thought about the proposed solutions critically? Sorry, but I'm fresh out of blind faith, having spent it assuming there would be no such issues in the first place. It is entirely reasonable to scrutinise how the proposed solutions will actually solve the problems. If you think otherwise, then we'll have to agree to disagree.
Having the benefit of experience with this mill now, I cannot see how what has been proposed will work, have asked and not had any serious replies from anyone, including the manufacturer, detailing how it will work. A straight, soft beam will still bounce wont it, and given the shape of this beam that bounce ends up in both horizontal and vertical planes even if the primary load the beam clearly cannot adequately resist starts in one plane. When asked how the crowning will solve the bounce, the manufacturer suggested I should double pass everything over 2" deep to avoid the bounce or buy the larger, heavier, longer steel beam, despite knowing exactly why the latter is not acceptable and materially different to what I was sold. When shown how much this beam bounces on even just a 3" cut, a milling mate recently commented "**** what the fuk. Thats crazy, defintly not acceptable." Yet, the manufacturer considers having to double pass a 3" horizontal cut to avoid bounce is acceptable.
Thus far, there has been virtually nil substantiation of the proposed solutions and you've demonstrated no such scrutiny that would give weight to your opinion either. Instead, I am expected to blindly accept, not scrutinise, and basically conduct myself in the very same sheeple manner that SR has already claimed (not without some justification I might add) helped get me into this mess in the first place. Seems I'm damned if I do and damned if I don't.
*editing to add* while I disagree with invoking the moderator card, I admire you at least had the gonads to admit you are the reporting type. Not many squealers value that level of transparency.
Having the benefit of experience with this mill now, I cannot see how what has been proposed will work, have asked and not had any serious replies from anyone, including the manufacturer, detailing how it will work. A straight, soft beam will still bounce wont it, and given the shape of this beam that bounce ends up in both horizontal and vertical planes even if the primary load the beam clearly cannot adequately resist starts in one plane. When asked how the crowning will solve the bounce, the manufacturer suggested I should double pass everything over 2" deep to avoid the bounce or buy the larger, heavier, longer steel beam, despite knowing exactly why the latter is not acceptable and materially different to what I was sold. When shown how much this beam bounces on even just a 3" cut, a milling mate recently commented "**** what the fuk. Thats crazy, defintly not acceptable." Yet, the manufacturer considers having to double pass a 3" horizontal cut to avoid bounce is acceptable.
Thus far, there has been virtually nil substantiation of the proposed solutions and you've demonstrated no such scrutiny that would give weight to your opinion either. Instead, I am expected to blindly accept, not scrutinise, and basically conduct myself in the very same sheeple manner that SR has already claimed (not without some justification I might add) helped get me into this mess in the first place. Seems I'm damned if I do and damned if I don't.
*editing to add* while I disagree with invoking the moderator card, I admire you at least had the gonads to admit you are the reporting type. Not many squealers value that level of transparency.
Boon
Addicted to ArboristSite
is that true? stopped at other forums
intelligence........ used to harm,
no amount of help or advice will make a difference no matter who it is from
-BLOCKED-
intelligence........ used to harm,
no amount of help or advice will make a difference no matter who it is from
-BLOCKED-
KiwiBro
Mill 'em, nails be damned.
Incorrect. Thanks to everyone who has made a genuine effort to help. By not accepting such help, please don't think I am ungrateful, merely that I reserve the right to question such help to better asses whether it will lead to a good outcome. If such questioning offends anyone offering help then I apologise but please note such questioning needs to happen lest I make the same mistakes as last time - blindly accepting, assuming things would go OK and I'd be looked after if not.
How will the crowning solve the bounce problems? No amount of 'help' has explained that rather critical issue, yet.
How will the joiners ensure a properly aligned joint? No amount of 'help' has explained that either, yet.
How am I to cart, carry and set up a steel beam (that costs more and materially differs from what I agreed to purchase), over a log, by myself? No amount of 'help' has explained that, yet.
Help that solves the problems without leaving me substantially worse off is most welcome indeed. If the problems can't be solved, then help via refund is welcome also. If a refund is out of the question, then help putting me in contact with all these alleged buyers so I can sell this mill with a clear conscience would be welcome also.
Holding the gun of an unacceptable product, one that I feel is unfit for purpose, against my temple and telling me to accept proposed solutions without detailing how they will actually solve all the problems, is a rather peculiar form of 'help'. The manufacturer has been asked repeatedly how the crowned beam will adequately resist the bounce created by even a 3" cut. Posters here have been asked also. Nobody has 'helped' explain that.
Further, nobody I have asked has said they would be happy with a beam that can't handle a 3" cut without significant bounce.
My season of milling is shot. I've come to accept that. What should have been a profitable and highly enjoyable season of milling is nothing but a nightmare and what really grates is not only having to let people down like this but then turn around and jump through so many hoops and fight for a reasonable way out of the nightmare. If the farmers have not sold up by next season (many are trying to sell up) and are not so annoyed with me to not to ever deal with me again, then I'll have a shot at milling next Summer, if I can find a reasonable way out of this nightmare in the interim.
Sawyer Rob
Addicted to ArboristSite
Quit whining! lol lol
Take the mill to the mfg, and have the beam worked on, then try it right there on site...
After trying it, IF you aren't happy with the cut, leave the mill there and have them sell it...
There is NO perfect outcome, and even though I don't agree with them selling it with that much run out in the first place, that IS the best of your options, at least of what's been posted here...
Remember, no one held a gun to your head and made you buy it in the first place...
SR
Take the mill to the mfg, and have the beam worked on, then try it right there on site...
After trying it, IF you aren't happy with the cut, leave the mill there and have them sell it...
There is NO perfect outcome, and even though I don't agree with them selling it with that much run out in the first place, that IS the best of your options, at least of what's been posted here...
Remember, no one held a gun to your head and made you buy it in the first place...
SR
Turbosawmill
Innovative swing blade sawmills.
Hi All,
This mill has been demonstrated at the National Fieldays show at Mystery Creek and used at our factory (it was tested thoroughly). Yes the extension obviously is at its limit. But having looked at the video footage provided by Kiwi I note that the beam join has a significant opening at the bottom of the join. This leads me to believe that either the join is not screwed up tight or simply installed without consideration. I expect a lot of that 18mm is coming from the join.
I advised Kiwi that I have a number of buyers keen to buy this mill, all he has to do is return it. I advised him that we will record actual deflection from our end and take further footage sawing a hardwood log (we would obviously upload it and share our discovery prior on selling). Also note that the logs Kiwi is sawing is macrocarpa (a very soft and easy timber to saw). So I am curious as to what has gone so wrong at his end. I also note his mention of it being unsafe. Of all the videos Kiwi has taken I have not seen the saw fitted with the recommended safety guards installed at all (this is concerning).
So in order to provide a balanced argument please find video footage of Kiwi's actual mill being used (I am the operator). His mill is very light and is perfectly suited to the alloy standard beam length. The extension of course will add further sag (at this point a potential buyer should start considering the heavy duty beam when purchasing, if this will be an issue for them).
Kiwi notes horizontal bounce. Well we provided with his mill this nifty gadget which completely removes horizontal bounce. Works 100%. We actually tested it in the hardest timber we could find locally (I'm not aware of any other mill with this kind of device). This is the 8" Warrior sawing dry gum cutting full depth horizontal 6" in one pass. I expect a couple hours training may have helped considerably in this case. This beam did not have the extra side plate attached either (found on Kiwi's).
Cheers.
Jake.
This mill has been demonstrated at the National Fieldays show at Mystery Creek and used at our factory (it was tested thoroughly). Yes the extension obviously is at its limit. But having looked at the video footage provided by Kiwi I note that the beam join has a significant opening at the bottom of the join. This leads me to believe that either the join is not screwed up tight or simply installed without consideration. I expect a lot of that 18mm is coming from the join.
I advised Kiwi that I have a number of buyers keen to buy this mill, all he has to do is return it. I advised him that we will record actual deflection from our end and take further footage sawing a hardwood log (we would obviously upload it and share our discovery prior on selling). Also note that the logs Kiwi is sawing is macrocarpa (a very soft and easy timber to saw). So I am curious as to what has gone so wrong at his end. I also note his mention of it being unsafe. Of all the videos Kiwi has taken I have not seen the saw fitted with the recommended safety guards installed at all (this is concerning).
So in order to provide a balanced argument please find video footage of Kiwi's actual mill being used (I am the operator). His mill is very light and is perfectly suited to the alloy standard beam length. The extension of course will add further sag (at this point a potential buyer should start considering the heavy duty beam when purchasing, if this will be an issue for them).
Kiwi notes horizontal bounce. Well we provided with his mill this nifty gadget which completely removes horizontal bounce. Works 100%. We actually tested it in the hardest timber we could find locally (I'm not aware of any other mill with this kind of device). This is the 8" Warrior sawing dry gum cutting full depth horizontal 6" in one pass. I expect a couple hours training may have helped considerably in this case. This beam did not have the extra side plate attached either (found on Kiwi's).
Cheers.
Jake.
KiwiBro
Mill 'em, nails be damned.
LOL. I feel the beam itself is beyond acceptable limits and the extension just turns it into a horror story. There are other turbo users who have said that 6mm is at their acceptable limits yet that beam without extensions has way more than that. But we'll never agree on what is considered acceptable. Which is why I offered to be bound by an independent arbitrators decision but you weren't keen. If they found against me, I'll suck it up, apologise, and move on.
You think I would post a video of such a critical matter and not ensure everything was screwed up tight? You think I enjoy milling curves just to piss you off? Ridiculous. The fact is, the joiners have 24 allen key bolts that have to be individually located to even screw up tight and there is next to nil wriggle room to correct poorly aligned joiners (who made and set up the individually numbered joiners-hint it wasn't me), and despite bolts being tight, the joins creep over the day. Are you starting to understand yet why I don't see how adding even more of these joiners in some last ditch effort to stiffen the beam is going to be anything but yet another failure? If it were not for my experience with the joiners you did supply, I'd think it might be the best of the proposed solutions, because I do know the joiners stiffen the beam at that point.
I'm awaiting more detail on a legal opinion I received today that seems to suggest that even if you sell it on behalf I am in no way able to avoid my legal obligations under at least one but possibly two different pieces of legislation. It seems, but I have yet to have this clarified, I will be bound by whatever representations you make to these buyers - in short, the buck won't stop with you. You have my money, will then also have the mill and control over the representations with me legally implicated if the buyer feels shafted in any way. After all this, you seriously expect me to be exposed like that? As already suggested and which you have rejected, the cleaner way is you buy this back so my obligations end right there. I'll even take less than the deal of the century pricing you feel this ungrateful sod received and you can make money on it and we can all put this behind us. If you want to sell it to whoever and make whatever claims and representations you feel appropriate then it will be nothing to do with me. If this mill is such a bargain, and you have buyers, what stands in your way of just buying it back and selling it on, or passing my details onto the buyers so they can contact me so they can buy from me and I'll have a degree of control over the representations made to the buyer that I will be legally on the hook for?
What are we to think of a sawmill manufacturer who having posted comments on some of the the very youtube videos showing E.saligna logs, fails to notice the difference between mac and gum? And who also fails to consider the mac logs, practically devoid of bark, may not have been felled the day before milling? Or are prospective buyers of Turbo mills to be warned not to mill anything but green mac?
Try setting up string lines, getting good shots of the beam deflection under the carriage while the guards are on. I have taken even more of my time to pull stuff off to give better views of the problem areas. I also find it absolutely astonishing that even though your very own manual mentions wearing gloves you are not using them in the very video you just posted? Can you see how pathetic such petty point scoring assertions, masquerading as deep concern for my well-being can get yet?
Just how anyone could read this and still not hold the view something just ain't right beats me. There are two scenarios when horizontal bounce is an issue. I've mentioned them in previous posts but unless I'm mistaken you have not addressed those and then go on to claim bounce is completely removed and works 100%? Please address the scenarios I mentioned in previous posts where unacceptable bounce is observed, which is when the anti-vibe device on the blade cannot be used? The anti-vibe/bounce device works well, when it can be applied. But it's very existence points to a beam too soft to resist the loads by itself, which simply adds weight to my assertions the bounce is unacceptable when the device cannot be used. I have only milled 5 logs with this mill. Two of them were within the max cut dimensions of the mill but needed rails to get the opening cuts on many of the drops down to just a few inches deep to avoid bounce. Only one of those two logs actually got the rails. The first of these two I persevered with the bounce, which convinced me to use rails on the second, even if not needed for anything other than to keep the bounce down. A third log needed rails because it was simply too big otherwise. Try cutting 3x2 where the 3" is horizontal. It's crazy to expect people to have to double pass the 3" cut simply to overcome the bounce coming from a beam that simply, in my opinion is not up to the job and which crowning hasn't got a snowball's chance in hell of fixing.
I'm out of time but if there are any points I've missed I'll attempt to address them in the next few days.
