Wedge Stacking?

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
What I don't understand about the method in question is where the lift comes from. To drive a wedge into a horizontal bar-width bore, you will have to break fibers to get the wedge in. I guessing you bore close enough together that the wood breaks easily, but it seems like u'r fighting yourself. I'm not explaining it right, but if you walked up to a tree, bored in horizontally, and started pounding a wedge into the bore, I doubt you'd get very far
 
I was wondering when the jokes about my manhood or penis size would start. That experiment was your idea. I did mine with two real trees and a bunch of pictures. When i asked you for yours you said you didn't want to waste a broom stick. I never said bore cutting was dangerous. To me its just a waste of time and that means money. If you only carry one wedge than how do you stack them? I know you said you've never tried it, but why defend it so vehemently then? Wedge on wood has a lot more friction than wedge on wedge. You said so yourself. Breaking the wood out after isn't the issue either. Its just more time which means more money. You must be paid by the hour.
If you had done your test with a surveyor & an engineer I'd be inclined to believe your story, but without that you're only guessing where the lean was or the C of G was, with a well formed concentric sapling or pole it is easily determined & impossible to get a line if fall anywhere beyond 90' to the line of the lean only by cutting. I can see why the wedging method is being pushed & can see why it can work, you say the opposite without having done it either. It looks like we should both try it & report back.
Tanski
 
Pine will hold on and swing over 90 degrees. None of the gums I have dropped will allow much swing. At least not with my current bag of tricks. Biggish back leaning gums get the 10t wedge if I think the hinge will handle it.
 
Alright Bewildered, how is it any safer?

Take yer time.
If you had taken your time to read what I said, it's already been said & you don't have to go too far back to read it either. The reasons for why this method has been pushed by the trainers hasn't yet been explained, but I'd be saying that it is a safety aspect, which is front & foremost these days & the sacrifice of a little time to achieve it is the price industry has to pay to reduce accidents, workers comp payments & industry deaths. Our logging industry 30 years ago was full of hillbilly cutters killing themselves hand over fist, then they gradually changed the industrial laws, so that now if anybody is negligent in their duty of care they can be sued for millions in a common law court for negligence, that goes from the land owner up the chain to the owners of the mill, that's why they implement training programs to cover their arses, but they still want the job done cheaper every year which is a total contradiction & the only way around to make money is mechanisation, or the people doing the job will have to take shortcuts, from what I can see some are defending the later.
But back to the question, it's safer because the wedge has less chance of bouncing or skewing out of where it's being driven into, plastic on plastic only has 1/2 the resistance of bouncing out of the cut as one with timber friction on each face & the incline of the slope is double that of a single wedge which isn't working in the favour of stopping a wedge bouncing out. If wedges bounce out there is more chance of the hinge breaking when the tree sits back down with force, which leads to a Faller being caught by a tree going the wrong way with no escape route, not all fallers may back up their doubled up wedges to prevent this happening or had a few close calls to learn what to do from a near miss. Statistically 1 in 2 million minor incidents will cause a fatality in the building industry, forestry is probably twice as dangerous as that at least.
Thansk
 
If you had done your test with a surveyor & an engineer I'd be inclined to believe your story, but without that you're only guessing where the lean was or the C of G was, with a well formed concentric sapling or pole it is easily determined & impossible to get a line if fall anywhere beyond 90' to the line of the lean only by cutting. I can see why the wedging method is being pushed & can see why it can work, you say the opposite without having done it either. It looks like we should both try it & report back.
Tanski
Top weight plays a major role. Without it the stem would just sit there. I know from experience.

On the stacking- just because the govt thinks its safe and effective doesn't make it so.
 
Top weight plays a major role. Without it the stem would just sit there. I know from experience.

On the stacking- just because the govt thinks its safe and effective doesn't make it so.
Well that would be perpendicular with no lean then & C of G is not outside the basal area & the soft Dutchman cutting is knawing away the support from under it in the direction you want it to topple.
Ta
 
If you had taken your time to read what I said, it's already been said & you don't have to go too far back to read it either. The reasons for why this method has been pushed by the trainers hasn't yet been explained, but I'd be saying that it is a safety aspect, which is front & foremost these days & the sacrifice of a little time to achieve it is the price industry has to pay to reduce accidents, workers comp payments & industry deaths. Our logging industry 30 years ago was full of hillbilly cutters killing themselves hand over fist, then they gradually changed the industrial laws, so that now if anybody is negligent in their duty of care they can be sued for millions in a common law court for negligence, that goes from the land owner up the chain to the owners of the mill, that's why they implement training programs to cover their arses, but they still want the job done cheaper every year which is a total contradiction & the only way around to make money is mechanisation, or the people doing the job will have to take shortcuts, from what I can see some are defending the later.
But back to the question, it's safer because the wedge has less chance of bouncing or skewing out of where it's being driven into, plastic on plastic only has 1/2 the resistance of bouncing out of the cut as one with timber friction on each face & the incline of the slope is double that of a single wedge which isn't working in the favour of stopping a wedge bouncing out. If wedges bounce out there is more chance of the hinge breaking when the tree sits back down with force, which leads to a Faller being caught by a tree going the wrong way with no escape route, not all fallers may back up their doubled up wedges to prevent this happening or had a few close calls to learn what to do from a near miss. Statistically 1 in 2 million minor incidents will cause a fatality in the building industry, forestry is probably twice as dangerous as that at least.
Thansk

Because the government says makes it right?

Yes wedge on wedge has more likely hood to pop out, but it is manageable, both when backed up, and by using just a touch of dirt between wedges, simple easy method that doesn't waste time under a crippled back leaner.

Also I've never had the hold wood fail backwards, I've cut too much off yes, and I've had it fail sideways, but a wedge will hold it from going backwards if the cutter doesn't cut all the hold wood, and with back leaners i always leave more hold wood anyway, despite if it requires me to beat the wedges a little harder.

Only once have I had a tree sit back after lifting off the wedges, and it was being pulled by a cheap rope that broke, luckily the hold wood did its job. that and the kung foo wedge toss from 3 feet away that kept it from tipping all the way back. Now I tighten up a few wedges before pulling even with cable.

The point you seam to be missing is that boring under your back cut, only removes material you need to lift the tree, causing you to use more wedge, 3 cuts is equal to about one wedge in thickness, so now you have used three wedges where 2 could have done it, and probably broke one in the process. but since you can't drive them deep enough, now you have to add a forth... and where exactly is that going to go? ya just going to bore under those three wedges and stuff another one in there? I think not, in fact I know yer not cause I understand physics. meanwhile said tree is crippled hanging on to whatever hold wood is left, just waiting for the next strong breeze to send it wherever it wants to go.

To sum up, once you have the back cut started is the most dangerous time in falling timber, it can and will go at any time, there are no hard and fast rules that say 2" of hold wood is going to hold this 12000 pound stick in the air while I **** about whittling on the stump. So yes there is a chance that a plastic wedge will pop out, that is why you use at least 2 stacks, but at least you get the tree leaning the right direction as quickly as possible. In my book, and considering the type of logging I do is far more important then making sure some ass nine rule made up by some pencil pusher in an office is followed.

Also if you can't judge the lean of a tree be it crown weight, lean, limb, head, belly, whatever and you've been cutting for more then 3 weeks, hang it up before you get killed.
 
And how are you suppose to do something like that with almost ground level stumps or on steep ground standing on spring boards?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk
 
Because the government says makes it right?

Yes wedge on wedge has more likely hood to pop out, but it is manageable, both when backed up, and by using just a touch of dirt between wedges, simple easy method that doesn't waste time under a crippled back leaner.

Also I've never had the hold wood fail backwards, I've cut too much off yes, and I've had it fail sideways, but a wedge will hold it from going backwards if the cutter doesn't cut all the hold wood, and with back leaners i always leave more hold wood anyway, despite if it requires me to beat the wedges a little harder.

Only once have I had a tree sit back after lifting off the wedges, and it was being pulled by a cheap rope that broke, luckily the hold wood did its job. that and the kung foo wedge toss from 3 feet away that kept it from tipping all the way back. Now I tighten up a few wedges before pulling even with cable.

The point you seam to be missing is that boring under your back cut, only removes material you need to lift the tree, causing you to use more wedge, 3 cuts is equal to about one wedge in thickness, so now you have used three wedges where 2 could have done it, and probably broke one in the process. but since you can't drive them deep enough, now you have to add a forth... and where exactly is that going to go? ya just going to bore under those three wedges and stuff another one in there? I think not, in fact I know yer not cause I understand physics. meanwhile said tree is crippled hanging on to whatever hold wood is left, just waiting for the next strong breeze to send it wherever it wants to go.

To sum up, once you have the back cut started is the most dangerous time in falling timber, it can and will go at any time, there are no hard and fast rules that say 2" of hold wood is going to hold this 12000 pound stick in the air while I **** about whittling on the stump. So yes there is a chance that a plastic wedge will pop out, that is why you use at least 2 stacks, but at least you get the tree leaning the right direction as quickly as possible. In my book, and considering the type of logging I do is far more important then making sure some ass nine rule made up by some pencil pusher in an office is followed.

Also if you can't judge the lean of a tree be it crown weight, lean, limb, head, belly, whatever and you've been cutting for more then 3 weeks, hang it up before you get killed.
Yes those pesky governments, they like to bring in all sorts of silly rules for no reason, like having speed limits, aviation rules, building regulations, etc, etc etc, all to save a few lives, then they have the right to call you up to go & fight for your country so you can be killed on their terms, so nothing really makes sense.
At the bottom of the page there are other threads covering a lot of what has been said, for & against & the situations of where the method is best used.
Ta
 
Speed limits, make money, lots of money

Aviation rules so pilots can land in an orderly fashion and the planes don't fall out of the sky, and to make money

Building regulations are largely to give building inspectors a job, and engineers something to help pay off college. Oh and to make money

Wars make even more money, but not for the gubamint, for the folks that make bombs so the people that work for them can pay taxes, blow speed limits, crash airplanes, get building permits, and ultimately give everything back to the government so they can pay for the bombs they dropped.

Bureaucracy is bad, regulating how folks work is bureaucratic tyranny, its pointless and only pisses people off.

You still haven't answered how it makes things safer.
 
Well when I'm flying, driving or sitting in my house the last thing I'm worried about is whether the govt is making money, my family's safety comes well before that. One of civilisations oldest laws was to protect human life, it was made around 4,000 years ago by a King of Babylon to stop dodgy builders killing people in dodgy buildings that collapsed for no good reason, the penalty was death I believe & compensation to relatives, the King didn't make any money out of it. Anarchists & some daring entrepreneurs don't like laws & rules, so it's survival of the most ruthless in the end if it's open slather.
I thought I had answered the question fairly fully, but I'm sure I've missed a few minor points
Ta
 
Are they making you use the technique on every tree? That seems pretty ridiculous if they are...

I use the technique on trees with a heavy back lean and it works well. Usually the tree would also have a rope in it with a 5:1 on the other end.

The wood between wedges does break out and lift. I can't say that I have used it on a tree over 36" in diameter since I haven't cut anything bigger than that in a few years but it does work well on smaller trees. Wedge stacking on smaller diameter trees can be challenging with a heavy back lean and this is a great way to do it.
 
This is prolly a no-no, but on little back leaners I put in the back cut, bore a wedge depth/width pocket in the center of the back, start a wedge, put in an open face leaving generous holding wood, and wedge it over. Let's me get full wedge height without bottoming out
 

Latest posts

Back
Top