Cant (peavey ,pevy) handle repairs
- Thread starter 560Dennis
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
Those are cant hooks. A peavey has a pike on the tip and, usually, no cleat to keep the main shaft from slipping on the log's surface.
https://peaveymfg.com/collections/cant-hook/products/cant-hook-handle-30-to-66
Or you can make one. Based on what I can get my hands on in the woods around here, my first choice for material would be ash, followed by red oak.
Or you can make one. Based on what I can get my hands on in the woods around here, my first choice for material would be ash, followed by red oak.
560Dennis
ArboristSite Member
All my ash are dead here on my house place , I feel longer levers and cheaper to buy
If you are making your own, then you presumably get to pick your own wood.
Hickory & locust are stronger and more durable than ash or oak.
https://www.wood-database.com/worlds-strongest-woods/
Cant hook or peavey requires a harder modulus of rupture. Banging on the shaft isn't a big problem, so hardness and other measures of strength are not as important.
Osage Orange would be excellent also, but perhaps tricky to find a straight enough section of heartwood.
Hickory & locust are stronger and more durable than ash or oak.
https://www.wood-database.com/worlds-strongest-woods/
This page has a sort-able list of all the woods. Click on the column for Modulus of rupture, and then pick your favorite wood for a strong lever like a peavey.
Cant hook or peavey requires a harder modulus of rupture. Banging on the shaft isn't a big problem, so hardness and other measures of strength are not as important.
Osage Orange would be excellent also, but perhaps tricky to find a straight enough section of heartwood.
Found this:
Statistically speaking, only about two thirds of those reading this will be from the United States or Canada, so my apologies to the remaining third for which this entry will seem out of place. You may have noticed that all the previous top positions have belonged to tropical hardwoods, so my goal with this category is to list a temperate species that readers might be familiar with—perhaps even in tree form. For this title, many hickory species hover near the top, but it is pignut hickory that statistically comes out the winner with a strength index of 47.5.
It’s true that there are other North American species with higher values, such as black ironwood or Texas ebony, but these species only occur at the very southernmost tips of the United States, with their natural distributions being centered in much hotter climates—hardly what I would consider temperate-zone species. But many hickories (including pignut) are found firmly in the midst of the eastern United States, and even have a sprinkling of distribution northward into Canada as well. In these areas, hickory has a reputation as being one of the toughest woods around, and it’s well founded.
Honorable mention: It’s hard to believe that hickory beats out so many other worthy competitors found in America, but when multiple facets of wood strength are considered, pignut hickory tops even respectable hardwoods such as osage orange, black locust, hornbeam and hop-hornbeam. But when temperate European species are throw into the mix, the title goes to the freakishly strong iron birch (Betula schmidtii), with a strength index of 65.7. But its MOR index is an astounding, must-be-a-typo value of 89.6! (Another runner-up mention goes to Cornelian cherry (Cornus mas), reputed by Europeans in the ancient world to be one of the absolute strongest woods around, there’s unfortunately no studies or reputable data available on this wood to verify the claim
47.5—The World’s Strongest Wood (you might have in your backyard)
Pignut hickory (Carya glabra)Statistically speaking, only about two thirds of those reading this will be from the United States or Canada, so my apologies to the remaining third for which this entry will seem out of place. You may have noticed that all the previous top positions have belonged to tropical hardwoods, so my goal with this category is to list a temperate species that readers might be familiar with—perhaps even in tree form. For this title, many hickory species hover near the top, but it is pignut hickory that statistically comes out the winner with a strength index of 47.5.
It’s true that there are other North American species with higher values, such as black ironwood or Texas ebony, but these species only occur at the very southernmost tips of the United States, with their natural distributions being centered in much hotter climates—hardly what I would consider temperate-zone species. But many hickories (including pignut) are found firmly in the midst of the eastern United States, and even have a sprinkling of distribution northward into Canada as well. In these areas, hickory has a reputation as being one of the toughest woods around, and it’s well founded.
Honorable mention: It’s hard to believe that hickory beats out so many other worthy competitors found in America, but when multiple facets of wood strength are considered, pignut hickory tops even respectable hardwoods such as osage orange, black locust, hornbeam and hop-hornbeam. But when temperate European species are throw into the mix, the title goes to the freakishly strong iron birch (Betula schmidtii), with a strength index of 65.7. But its MOR index is an astounding, must-be-a-typo value of 89.6! (Another runner-up mention goes to Cornelian cherry (Cornus mas), reputed by Europeans in the ancient world to be one of the absolute strongest woods around, there’s unfortunately no studies or reputable data available on this wood to verify the claim
That table is very useful. Using the numbers from the table and dimensions off my 48" peavey a white ash handle would break with a 440# force applied to the end of the handle. You can estimate the force (in pounds) for other woods by multiplying the MOR number in the table by 11.9.
I'd be willing to bet Peavey Mfg uses ash. I drive by their mill outside Bangor occasionally and you can see the logs stacked outside. The only native woods I can think of that would be at all suitable, available economically, and in quantity are white ash, red oak, white oak, and sugar maple. And the last 2 are likely to be more expensive and offer no advantage over ash.
Obviously what makes sense will vary with what's available locally and the tools available to do the work.
560Dennis
ArboristSite Member
Please don’t make a special trip.
I have got a take a better look at the one broken one . It appears to have 3 x3 (not round ) end so a cant shaft will not work ,it appears .
they may an old Sears or Montgomery wards ?
Could be
Shovel or post hole digger handles at your local ACE or farm and ranch store.
I'm not sure how you are using the webpage to estimate the absolute strength of any of the numbers. The table on that page is composed entirely of relative values. Each scale is essentially a zero to one hundred range.
Now if you look up the actual MOR of any given wood, I think that could be used. For example, green ash has a Modulus of Rupture at 14,100 lbf/in2 (97.2 MPa)
"You can calculate the modulus of rupture, "sigma," using the equation σr = 3Fx/yz2 for the load force F and size dimensions in three directions, x, y and z, of the material. In this case, the load is the external force put on the material of interest. The load force is applied to the center of a beam of the material elevated slightly above ground. From this experimental setup, known as the center point loading test, you can observe the deformation of the material in response to stress applied to it."
Now that is going to get exceedingly complex for calculating backwards from a known MOR value and applying it to the round (and tapered) handle of a cant hook. If fact, that looks to me like a downright daunting task to resolve.
Even if you solve the math, your final calculation will be wrong. Each piece of wood will be different, and how perfectly the grain of your sample lines up with the torque applied will be an almost incalculable variable.
The MOR for Pintobortri (the 100% reference point) is given in the article above the table.
It's a very simple calculation. As long as the cross section at all points along the shaft is stout* enough to resist the bending moment at a given point the handle will not break. The maximum bending moment in the wood occurs at the point where it enters the metal socket near the hook. The handle (on my Peavey anyway) swells a bit for a ways above that point before it starts to taper again, so it's pretty obvious the highest stresses in the wood are at the mouth of the socket.
*What I'm calling "stoutness" here is more properly the section modulus of the handle's (beam's) cross section. It's easily calculated for a circular cross section.
Calculating the deflection of a tapered beam (handle) is more difficult, but not terribly so.
Of course, wood is a variable material, but presumably for such a purpose you'd select stock with a straight grain and avoid obvious defects. And I'm using numbers from the table you supplied. I checked in the USDA's "Wood Handbook - Wood as an Engineering Material" and the MOR for white ash in your table falls in the middle of the range given in the Handbook.
When you get around to building one, I'd love to see your actual calculations. That MOS formula doesn't lend itself well to round or oval cross sections. Nor the stress applied in anything but the center of the distance "h".
You can also look at Beaver-Tooth Handle Company.
https://beaver-tooth.com/
https://beaver-tooth.com/
I did not read all of this but once you make your own handle you will be more careful when you go to apply a load to the handle or cant hook and also be inclined to not let others use your wooden handled tools.
Also when selecting the wood for the handle I choose to cut the wood for such when the sap is down. It dries out with less likely to crack or rot. (check the farmers almanac about such) It has lots of good old school type tips.
For lots of shovels, rakes and similar type tools I use EMT (electrical metallic Tubing) which is the galvanized thin walled version of electrical conduit and the 3/4 and one inch sizes are great for lots of garden tools. You can either just use self tapping sheet metal screws to braze the handles to the tools. The 3/4 inch size also good for round point type shovels.
The rigid galvanized conduit or pipe is usually too heavy and not required.
Also when selecting the wood for the handle I choose to cut the wood for such when the sap is down. It dries out with less likely to crack or rot. (check the farmers almanac about such) It has lots of good old school type tips.
For lots of shovels, rakes and similar type tools I use EMT (electrical metallic Tubing) which is the galvanized thin walled version of electrical conduit and the 3/4 and one inch sizes are great for lots of garden tools. You can either just use self tapping sheet metal screws to braze the handles to the tools. The 3/4 inch size also good for round point type shovels.
The rigid galvanized conduit or pipe is usually too heavy and not required.
Building one? I only replied to the OP with a potential source for a handle and options for making one himself.
Right, but again, you introduced that formula and diagram, I assumed, as an example of how MOR is determined. Was my assumption wrong?
The MOR is not dependent on the cross section or the loading, but is an inherent property of the material. Its usefulness is the fact that once you know it you can apply it to other sections and loading conditions.
The formula equivalent to the one you gave for a simply supported rectangular beam, modified to calculate the stress in a cantilevered beam with round cross section, is:
σ = Pd / (πD³/32) = 32Pd/πD³
where:
σ = max fiber stress of the section (MOR = 13970 psi for ash)
P = applied point load (force applied by the user to the end of the handle)
d = distance from P to the section being examined (38" in the case of my 48" Peavey)
D = the diameter of that section (Ø2-5/16 for the Peavey)
and the intermediate steps:
Pd = bending moment in a cantilevered beam (M)
πD³/32 = section modulus of a circular section (S)
σ = M / S
To find the max P, rearrange to:
P = (σ πD³/32) / d
For my 48" Peavey and an ash handle:
P = (13970 lb/in² * π * (2.31in)³ / 32) / 38in = 445lb
OK?
benz66
Used to sell firewood for $5 a face cord, deliverd
I would just buy one from House Handle. They even had a handle for my ancient square eye adze. I looked for 20 years for that handle. househandle.com They have 5 choices for can't handles.
When making your own handle, All of the math above can be irrelevant if you ignore the grain of the wood you choose. Of the people I have Known Archie Hunter Made Bows and would start out by hand splitting a log into quarters or what he considered a good size. That let him know the grain pattern. Next lay out the wood so the edge grain is at 90 degrees to the load .. the rest is up to the craftsman. For the record your hooks are sharpened right but getting short/blunt and won't bite into a heavy bark log and so you see the mushroomed hook from hammering it into the log.
Your cant hooks are a nice piece Of history. I would be Tempted to make them a wall hanger and not let the "TRUTH" get in the way of a Well Fabricated YARN/STORY about them. Then find a good used one if possible.
Your cant hooks are a nice piece Of history. I would be Tempted to make them a wall hanger and not let the "TRUTH" get in the way of a Well Fabricated YARN/STORY about them. Then find a good used one if possible.
First off, the one on the right does not seem to need a new handle. Disassemble and de-rust the head, paint it. Sand the handle, and oil it with the finish of your choice (BLO, or whatever).
I would then measure the head ID of the cant dog on the left, and actually call Peavey. There are people there! You can talk to them!
They will probably sell you an ash handle which will need some fitting.
If you want to make a handle, use whatever stout wood is available locally. This is not rocket surgery. If you break it...try some other wood next time. Ash, oak, hickory, sugar maple, and even the tough softwoods would be fine (e.g., black spruce).
Roy
That looks pretty convincing to me, except... That handle isn't likely to be a perfectly round cross section. I don't think I have ever seen one that wasn't an oval.
Then there is the taper. The math that we have been considering makes no compensation for the taper, so the lever lenghts should almost certainly not be considered to be the full length of your presumed 38". I think the length applied to the formula should be set at whatever point the load is greatest, relative to the strength of the wood distally located. Obviously, you cannot use the greater diameter of where the peavey hook is attached and the total length where the diameter is certainly smaller than your 2.3 inches. That would truly be a robust (but heavy!) peavey.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
Scrounging Firewood (and other stuff)- Latest: MechanicMatt
-
-
-
-
Want to Sell Husqvarna 338XPT, low compression, nice condition otherwise. 85$ plus shipping- Latest: singinwoodwackr
-
-
-
