rig guy wirestops

[treevet]

Do support systems fail due to bolt failure?

never seen one but have seen plenty due to cable failure

what is your point?

see above reply

o and read p 145 is the phrasing that absolute? cambial dieback that i see is not due to drilling but to large branch removal

.

You need to put on the specs.....look at the illustration above the related written information...

all three wounds are drill hole wounds with the drill bit included in the illustration on all 3 pictures.

Nothing mentioned about "large branch removal" maybe you are in the wrong book

 

[D Mc]

Anyone have a comment on the flexible aspect of the cable where it leaves the stem?

Static systems, by their very nature, if required, need to be "static". The systems I have examined that have lasted the longest have been so. Systems that have failed prematurely, not taking into account improper installation or materials, have been highly mobile.

I feel that if a tree requires the strength and stability of a static system that it is worth running extra cables or braces to keep independent system movement at a minimum. If this is not possible, other options should be investigated. I feel this would hold true with Rigguy and conventional systems.

Dave

 

[treevet]

Static systems, by their very nature, if required, need to be "static". The systems I have examined that have lasted the longest have been so. Systems that have failed prematurely, not taking into account improper installation or materials, have been highly mobile.

I feel that if a tree requires the strength and stability of a static system that it is worth running extra cables or braces to keep independent system movement at a minimum. If this is not possible, other options should be investigated. I feel this would hold true with Rigguy and conventional systems.

Dave

That all is true Dave but with swirling winds that are the norm in storms around here you just have to observe to see that unwanted movement occurs. IMO in the best scenario, the "boxed in" system,....the limbs/leads have the opportunity to be forced INWARD against the lean and system although this is the only opportunity they have. I have watched this happen many times.

My point is if a stable bolt fitted or forced very tightly into the drill hole is NOT going to move under any circumstances. This is better than the FLEXIBLE cable leaving the drill hole and not even tight inside the hole.

This will damage the hole opposite the termination hole.

I have no vendetta against rigguy, just like to look at all angles as I install a lot of cables.

Sometimes "old school" got to be old school by being the right way and around for countless years.

 

[Tree Machine]

Unrelated to this but relevant to this thread is that time of wounding is of importance.....

wounds......from drilling......

My apologies. When I read "unrelated to this" it threw me off. Unrelated indicated you were talking about wounding "unrelated .... but relevant to this thread" which to me meant 'wounding unrelated to this', like wounding from something other than what we're talking about.

So I asked what you're talking about. I retract the apology.

Good science doesn't assume. Thank you for clarifying.

 

[Tree Machine]

This is better than the FLEXIBLE cable leaving the drill hole and not even tight inside the hole.

Where do you get this hogwash? This is truly an assumption. Please explain, then I'll gladly refute it with pictures and a couple sentences. "the FLEXIBLE cable leaving the drill hole and not even tight inside the hole." is an assumption, as it can't be anything else. Have you actually DONE a thru-cable installation?

 

[treevet]

I think the bigger question is will the cable last long enough to do the job for the length of time required for the application. If both the cable and the bolt outlast the tree then your question is a moot point....unless you have plans to re-use the bolt. Wonder what the life span of .

I think the biggest questions are, 1. Is the termination good enough 2. What is the best hardware to go into the hole that is unable to be inspected. 3. Which system causes less injury to the tree.

In the event of failure the concern is "throw" of the segment supported and that would make it a worse situation than if it had never been cabled in the first place. This all could be mitigated by mandated documentation of installations and strict researched data on life span of cables under ALL circumstances done independently and published in ANSI. This would take very sophisticated research and installation observation but part of our evolution I would hope.

 

[treevet]

Where do you get this hogwash? This is truly an assumption. Please explain, then I'll gladly refute it with pictures and a couple sentences. "the FLEXIBLE cable leaving the drill hole and not even tight inside the hole." is an assumption, as it can't be anything else. Have you actually DONE a thru-cable installation?

Cable is flexible and bolts are not. Even you can follow that. Where is the assumption? When a branch is blowing around with a section of flexible cable exiting the hole opposite the termination hole it will bend sideways over the exit hole if the branch goes sideways and the hole would be the pivot point. A bolt will not.

I have not done a thru cable and at the moment do not intend to do one. I am not that lazy and don't fall for gimmicks.

 

[treeseer]

When a branch is blowing around with a section of flexible cable exiting the hole opposite the termination hole it will bend sideways over the exit hole if the branch goes sideways and the hole would be the pivot point.

This is what youi ASS U ME hut I have doen several installations wioth TM and he always has design and tension right enough so moviment ios minimal and bending does not jappen.

I have not done a thru cable and at the moment do not intend to do one. I am not that lazy and don't fall for gimmicks.

This is :censored: tlaming and you are wasting a lot of time with this fatwah. go ahead an bolt and splice to cable; we do not attack your method at all but havimg zero experience is the very definition of ignorance sp you are firing blanks right now please put down the gun.

re research, there is an ongoing study at UMass by dennis ryan et al so go ask him ok?

 

[treevet]

This is what youi ASS U ME hut I have doen several installations wioth TM and he always has design and tension right enough so moviment ios minimal and bending does not jappen.

Hope you aren't planning on driving the car right now.

This is :censored: tlaming and you are wasting a lot of time with this fatwah. go ahead an bolt and splice to cable; we do not attack your method at all but havimg zero experience is the very definition of ignorance sp you are firing blanks right now please put down the gun.

Just discussing a process, pretty much the heart and soul of any forum. You gave up specifically attacking my contentions either because you were not successful or because you have had too many drinks as I have read you mention before and illustrated in the grammar and content of your post. Conduct unbecoming a BCMA (or person for that matter).

re research, there is an ongoing study at UMass by dennis ryan et al so go ask him ok?

Put it out there boy.

 

[treeseer]

no no drinks, just no glasses.

this has gone from firing blanks to firing blanks with a nasty spin. :spam:

ain't my job to hand you someone else's research on a platter. :welcome:

 

[Tree Machine]

Sometimes "old school" got to be Oldschool by being the right way and around for countless years.

Old school used to be flush-cutting pruning cuts. Old school used spikes on pruning climbs. Old school used to be painting black tar on wounds. Old school used to be filling cavities with concrete. My grandpa was old school, said there was nothing wrong with digging a hole and draining used motor oil into it.

I'm not going to knock thru-bolts and washers and thimbles because I use that system and keep that hardware in stock. However, to advance arboriculture we need to adopt and test new methods and new gear, otherwise we never advance and improve.

Treevet is bashing a system on presumptive assertions, like the cable will corrode more quickly in the tree, the cable is loose and will shift within the tree, the cable will cause damage to wall 4, the cable will fatigue at the point where it comes out of the tree.... did I miss any? Because these are all important points to look at. As a growing body of informal field trials with the wedge and taper system(s) the good, the bad and the ugly should be more or less consistent across the board. Time will be certain to tell.

 

[treevet]

Old school used to be flush-cutting pruning cuts. Old school used spikes on pruning climbs. Old school used to be painting black tar on wounds. Old school used to be filling cavities with concrete. My grandpa was old school, said there was nothing wrong with digging a hole and draining used motor oil into it.

Silly and melodramatic analogy. Lots of old school practices still used and you have just listed injurious practices when it is apparent old school cabling is not more injurious than this new, unaccepted practice and likely less.

WTF does your old grandfather being ecologically insensitive have to do with favoring the status quo with a new untested treatment? :monkey:

I'm not going to knock thru-bolts and washers and thimbles because I use that system and keep that hardware in stock. However, to advance arboriculture we need to adopt and test new methods and new gear, otherwise we never advance and improve.

You save a few minutes and a few calories exerted here. This ain't finding a cure for DED. There is absolutely nothing more beneficial to this system over the old ways.

If there is let's hear them. I have given numerous reasons why it is less beneficial and you both have given up contesting them and began personal attacks on me, a sure sign you don't know what you are talking about.

Treevet is bashing a system on presumptive assertions, like the cable will corrode more quickly in the tree, the cable is loose and will shift within the tree, the cable will cause damage to wall 4, the cable will fatigue at the point where it comes out of the tree.... did I miss any? Because these are all important points to look at. As a growing body of informal field trials with the wedge and taper system(s) the good, the bad and the ugly should be more or less consistent across the board. Time will be certain to tell.

I am not "bashing" this system (another personal attack). When a PhD puts out a new piece of work, it is the OBLIGATION of his/her colleagues to tear apart and contest this research or group of opinions (sometimes based on assumptions and conjecture) to the point where if it stands on it's own, it becomes a published piece of work. There should be no resentment in this process, it is common procedure.

ANSI has glaringly chosen not to acknowledge this system and numerous points I have brought up and others have should, in itself, be reason for pause. I would NOT use this system. Tree machine and Treeseer are advocates. Amongst all the negatives brought up "IN COMPARISON" to the standard OLD SCHOOL systems ACCEPTED by ANSI my biggest misgivings would probably be, in order of importance...:

1. Termination in comparison to current standard.

2. Hidden aspect of the cable inside the stem that is where cables usually fail with time (cable as compared to solid hardware) that is unable to be inspected and replaced. As we all know we often need to replace cables and the reason is most often observed significant deterioration of the cable. The current cabling method ACCEPTED BY ANSI permits inspection of the entire aspect of cable and the hidden part of the system (bolts), most outside of Clark and Meilleur would agree, will last longer than a cable hidden from inspection.

Keyword in the last sentence is "inspection".

 

[Tree Machine]

OK, how do you inspect this?

Or this?

 

[Tree Machine]

And to be frank, I don't think I've been attacking you. Maybe I called you out on the cable slipping through the hole argument and asked if you're coming to these conclusions based on fact or your overwhelming bias.

Other than that I think you're a strong contributor and as argumentative as this all may seem, it will eventually get the suggestive, crap, assumptive information off the table and replaced with something more solid.

 

[treevet]

argumentative as this all may seem, it will eventually get the suggestive, crap, assumptive information off the table and replaced with something more solid.

I don't see that happening on this thread. There needs to be independent testing with published data and that probably takes more time and work than someone is ready to devote.

 

[treevet]

OK, how do you inspect this?

Or this?

Picture one is obviously substandard work.

Number two appears to be near time for replacement, probably 7 or eight years old, if it is found that cable delaminates/corrodes more quickly in the hole than in the open air. Only scientific research will determine that and, again, time and patience are part of it prior to dissecting the live tree section.

I generally replace or augment with another cable when the hardware (bolt) is buried. Like I have said in the past, I once asked a cable mfctr. what the life expectancy of my cable was and he said probably about 7 or 8 years. I do not have anything else to go with so I go with that.

 

[Tree Machine]

Picture one is obviously substandard work.

Regardless, that cable had not failed. The grown over part can not be inspected and should be subject to the same type of fatigue (swirling winds) you suggested earlier. It is clearly an ANSI approved method of cabling, other than the installer did not choose to cut off the excess end and just bent it back around, and he should have begun his spiral wrap a turn sooner.


This image shows another grown over splice, where it has been suggested that the portion within the tree may corrode/delaminate faster and where suggested fatigue due to tree movement occurs. Two strikes against it, yet the cable failed in a place other than where it would seem more likely to fail. Here's the picture of one of the two failed cables in this tree.

 

[Tree Machine]

Here's a closeup, something I noticed while up there, is that where the grown over cable exits the wood, the galvanization appears more 'intact' just coming out, and the loss of zinc coating on the cable seems more pronounced out in the open air.

I propose the question, then; could the protected, closed-off environment within the tree act as protection against the natural processes of oxidation?

This flies in the face of what Treevet is suggesting, however this could be equally as plausible. Look at the picture.

 

[treevet]

This image shows another grown over splice, where it has been suggested that the portion within the tree may corrode/delaminate faster and where suggested fatigue due to tree movement occurs. Two strikes against it, yet the cable failed in a place other than where it would seem more likely to fail. Here's the picture of one of the two failed cables in this tree.

I know you have good intentions and you THINK you are giving scientific evidence by comparisons but it is not. By the look of the picture the cable was put in way too low and is supporting much too large wood and you as usual are making inaccurate assumptions. This cable appears to have broken from too much load or shock load beyond it's capacity. This renders any of the discussion about cable deterioration moot.

When do you decide to replace a cable Clark?

 

[treevet]

Here's a closeup, something I noticed while up there, is that where the grown over cable exits the wood, the galvanization appears more 'intact' just coming out, and the loss of zinc coating on the cable seems more pronounced out in the open air.

I propose the question, then; could the protected, closed-off environment within the tree act as protection against the natural processes of oxidation?

This flies in the face of what Treevet is suggesting, however this could be equally as plausible. Look at the picture.

Hogwash, ....it appears to me that dirt and dust washed down with rainfall over the nearby cable aspect has coated the cable there. That part of the cable is not, nor has it ever been inside the tree.