Cant (peavey ,pevy) handle repairs

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
One more thought for the OP.

What do you plan to use those for? You know that cant dogs are designed to flip cants in saw mills, right? Some might be OK for rolling logs...but, many of them are not really ideal for that.
 
One more thought for the OP.

What do you plan to use those for? You know that cant dogs are designed to flip cants in saw mills, right? Some might be OK for rolling logs...but, many of them are not really ideal for that.
We always called 'em "Can't hooks" We never had peeveys. A cant hook could snag a log by the end and slide it on the skids/deck one way or the other as well as roll logs. after 30 or 40 years you know what you can do with one.
 
I made a few handles in the day and PDQDL mentioned where the hook bracket fastens .. Give a thought to making the handle a bit more Diameter just below that clamping collar. Like a pick axe handle and head. the ?Bulge? (dawg Knot) will stop the collar from sliding down. There is a magic spot for Where the hook meets the heel.
If you PM me a ph. #I can send you a pic (or 3 or 4) of a 36" one I bought new in 1977 from A L Boggs in Southern Missourri. You would be more than welcome to repost it for others to see.
 
Problabably wouldn't work as a replacement for handle in this scenario, but I used a 5' piece of 1" black pipe for a handle on my peavey. If I were trying to replace those handles, I'd walk through the woods and find my suitable replacement there.
 
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.
Mine is round, the handles Peavey makes are round, the OP's broken handle is round, and the Beaver Tooth handles referenced above are round.
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.
I don't understand what you're saying here. The bending moment in the wood (Pd in my formulas) is maximum at the mouth of the socket. The OD increases for a couple inches above that before the taper begins. It is possible the stress in the handle is greater at at some point along the taper than at the mouth of the socket, but I doubt it, and haven't bothered to check. Peavey et-al have had 100+ years to figure out what works. If you want the handle dimensions I'll post them and you can run the numbers. The dimensions plus the formulae above are all you need.
 
My only point here is that you can apply engineering standards only so far, but if there are variables that haven't been accounted for, your engineering solution isn't going to be accurate. You might acquire enough of an estimate, however, to state that your peavey handle is more than strong enough to prevent any man from breaking it.

Now if you were engineering a peavey for the minimum weight handle for a 180lb man that can apply no more than 150lbs of lift, then you would need to start working up some pretty sophisticated math to accommodate that tapered handle. Otherwise, just overbuild it, and count on it lasting.

You can bet good money that the originator of those tools never spent a moment doing any math to figure out how thick to make the handles.
1701831001666.jpeg

"...So he jumped up, as the story goes, went back to his blacksmith shop and directed his son Daniel to make a clasp with lips, then make holes in the lips to put a bolt through on which to hang a dog (or hook) and toe rings below the clasp to the bottom of the handle. Finally, a pick was driven into the end of the handle. The tool was turned over to River Driver William Hale who pronounced it a great success."​

Yes, you are right! There seems to be no oval shape on these tool's handles.
 
Want to use to finish cut for fire sod length 12 in ,turn log and finish cut through
sorry ,iPad slow down tying ,not sure where I’m at , very confusing ,please bare with me
 
My only point here is that you can apply engineering standards only so far, but if there are variables that haven't been accounted for, your engineering solution isn't going to be accurate. You might acquire enough of an estimate, however, to state that your peavey handle is more than strong enough to prevent any man from breaking it.
Sure, that's what engineering is all about -- having the experience and judgment to recognize what to disregard and knowing when to stop over-analyzing.

Now if you were engineering a peavey for the minimum weight handle for a 180lb man that can apply no more than 150lbs of lift, then you would need to start working up some pretty sophisticated math to accommodate that tapered handle. Otherwise, just overbuild it, and count on it lasting.
Strawman. This is the first mention of minimizing weight. But as I said in previous posts, the math is not at all that difficult. If minimizing weight is the goal, rearrange the formula I provided previously to solve for diameter (D) and plug in several evenly spaced values of d (the moment (lever) arm length). Plot the D vs. d and you have the an approximation of the minimum weight taper. You can get as close as you like to the ideal by increasing the number of points. Doesn't require anything beyond 9th grade algebra.

If you want an exact solution, you need 12th grade differential calculus. Still not difficult.

You can bet good money that the originator of those tools never spent a moment doing any math to figure out how thick to make the handles.
Almost certainly true for the earliest versions, but I wouldn't be so confident that someone didn't run the numbers before they were produced in quantity. Bangor was not some sleepy backwater full of clever but uneducated rubes at the time we're discussing. There was lots of manufacturing supporting the lumber mills. Steam engines; water power, sawmill, logging and textile machinery; automobiles; machine tools; and ships were all manufactured in the area. I'm sure there was someone capable of replicating the calculations I spent a half hour on.

The Maine State College of Agriculture and the Mechanic Arts (now the University of Maine) was 5 miles up the Penobscot from downtown Bangor.

"By 1860, Bangor was the world's largest lumber port, with 150 sawmills operating along the river. The city shipped over 150 million boardfeet of lumber a year, much of it in Bangor-built and Bangor-owned ships. In the year 1860, 3,300 lumbering ships passed by the docks." (Wikipedia)
 
I made a few handles in the day and PDQDL mentioned where the hook bracket fastens .. Give a thought to making the handle a bit more Diameter just below that clamping collar. Like a pick axe handle and head. the ?Bulge? (dawg Knot) will stop the collar from sliding down. There is a magic spot for Where the hook meets the heel.
If you PM me a ph. #I can send you a pic (or 3 or 4) of a 36" one I bought new in 1977 from A L Boggs in Southern Missourri. You would be more than welcome to repost it for others to see.

Done!
IMG_1527.jpgIMG_1526.jpgIMG_1525.jpgIMG_1517.jpg

Well now! As we can see, there are at least some cant hooks that come with a two-piece construction.
 

Attachments

  • FLKMIV_Label.pdf
    110.7 KB · Views: 0
Back
Top