Tim Ard sideLean strategy.

theTreeSpyder

TreeHouser
Joined
Feb 12, 2016
Messages
691
Tho both Tim Ard's and my view of sideLean handling exaggerate Natural ballast effect
>>to deliver to a balance of forces between sideLean and it's ballastings
To me, his delivers to where the facing fails to
>>vs. More normal that I think I see from others and own understanding
>>of delivering to where facing faces/ optimally performs to/allows.

From: forestapps.com/tips/tips.htm. >> Side Lean Tips:
"....For example, a tree with 5 feet of right side lean should be aimed at least 5 feet to the left of the intended target. For example, our tree with 5 feet of right side lean must be aimed 5 feet to the left of the intended target."
.
Seems to have own filling, as I believe rfWoody was one; and I have so long over-correctively and politely avoided calling it out, as i can see some logic, still has haunted me over a decade.
.
Does anyone over steer the face like this as ballast, rather than adjust pull (perhaps push) within faced target?
 
Maybe I'm misunderstanding your question/link, but it doesn't appear he's so much swinging the tree as allowing room for the top. If the desired falling direction is 12:00 to get between trees or whatever, you may have to aim at 10:00 to get it to fit.

If it is for swinging a tree, a straight correction in every situation doesn't seem right to me, even if it would work sometimes.
 
Success in steering side leaner's relies more on long time experience in the field and gut feeling that any science and mathematics can ever prove. But an elementary knowledge of both are equally important in our full understanding of how to manage a side leaner. The ways and means which you could write a book about.
In your case, it would have to "Another" book... :)

While Ard an others (arbormaster) use the adjusted gun as their first go-to method, I prefer the tapered hinge as the first go-to. If it looks like there is too much side-lean that the tapered hinge won't hold a tree to the lay, then I'll add the adjusted gun. This dead spruce had so much side lean that, even with a doubled pull line on a skid loader with a compensation pull (pulling a little left on a tree that leans right) the tree sat sideways on the bar before I tripped the back strap. So I had to trip the backstrap with another saw. In all these years that was a first.

She made the lay perfectly, which was a little surprising, given all the factors involved. I think this lay was a great example of what Jerry is saying. A lot of factors involved. Too many for math, so a man must rely on experience and feel, and in this case a little luck!

Good timing as this job was 2 days ago.

 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #5
lxskllr that makes more sense to me thank you, but still question some of this.
.
i do also remember from reading as much as i could from Tim Ard's methods he doesn't go with Tapered Hinge, reapportioning of tension fibers to 'off-side' from lean, while keeping the same forward resistance/ time at which the beast 'breathes'/ forward fold starts.
With the same forward pull force, will fold at same forward resistance; of just less than forward pull.
Then the side Lean control control, is within the hinge pattern until close/tearoff.

.
While i do believe that there is a gut feeling for some points of this;
i also believe that you can't win by directly going against the mechanix;
and that availing yourself/hinge to the mechanix can help,
especially if use to exemplify/exaggerate ballasting against side lean.
With strong side lean, if make rectangular/common/strip hinge, within the hinge fiber stretches can sift out a triangular/tapered shape
>>Cutting a Tapered Hinge, just puts more fiber where the tree wants to pull from as tries to serve forward to face/perpendicular to hinge.
As tree will also close HARDER on side lean side of face, Step Dutchman can exemplify this from front compression,
>>as Tapered Hinge does from rear tension; tho ANY Dutchman is a much more volatile choice.
.
i think, there is an over-ruling mechanical logic that is exemplified in tree length, weight, height
>>along with the rigidity of it's mass and facing, AND flexibility in tensioned hinge fibers
but these lessons go way beyond trees, so lessons can be brought from other things,
as well as shared to.
 
Last edited:
From: forestapps.com/tips/tips.htm. >> Side Lean Tips:
"....For example, a tree with 5 feet of right side lean should be aimed at least 5 feet to the left of the intended target. For example, our tree with 5 feet of right side lean must be aimed 5 feet to the left of the intended target."

I didn't check the website, but the way I remember he used to teach it was to take multiply the side lean by 1.5 and aim that much farther off the lay.
Of course, the real answer is "it all depends"
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #7
Used to have more info there could find. I remember anti Tapered Hinge, generic strip only.
To me, need to steer CoG and shape carries around it, in CoG is all weight of rigid yet weightless shape model try to show.
.
Plotting by shape is guessing weight balance follows, and then not height of CoG, to me.
He did sell some kind of trig tool expanding on rake trick for judging heights at other than 45 degree of equal cos/sin angle(therefore standing at fall sighting on 45 degree angle to top from base rake trick simulates)
.
Pull or wedge FORWARD force portion, can thicken hinge enough to give enough Tapered Hinge force pattern /tension stretches within larger hinge now made, to have then enough high leveraged tension fibers on off side to ballast against sideLean.
.
Tapered Hinge just minimizes to this form of actual fiber usage in most leveraged positions against sideLean.
>>Forward resistance by comparison is minimal, across minimal axis /minimal leverage of hinge
>>vs. major axis hinge to sideLean, giving major leveraged distance of hinge
So can do same work under lower/safer tensions w/more fibers in extreme leverage positions
>>or more at same tension w/reapportionment etc.
Especially as goes forward and still direct inline positions against now forward sideLean.
.
Similarly , under truck bed can have horizontal plate connecting I-beams and tying in hitch.
>>Harsh pull on ball hitch would give Vshaped stretch mark pattern from front corner extremes of plate to hitch at some overloading point.
>>as is longest distance thru plate and most inline anchor point at that extreme to linear hitch pull.
But if take same amount of metal etc., and reapportion metal to stretch mark pattern / as beams
>> tows MUCH more before deformation.
.
For truck /dual beam frame, not hinge/'single beam'
May need single cross member across to each 'corner' /beam connection to frame
>>for side force/greater with shorter (giving less inline to pull) beams to hitch point
 
Last edited:
This is a great thread and I have a lot that I want to add to it, but I just have to find time to write!

Reminds me of some of the old ones over on TreeBuzz, with "our" Australian buddy Ekka. Was that his name?
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #11
To me, a Tapered Hinge in right proportions makes sideLean deliver across fold line of hinge as a successful mechanic, more squarely, graceful;
Than the Adjusted Gun, that tries to oversteer, but fails to that target and ends up between lean and false target.
.
i guess for extra oomf i went towards Dutch instead, then for more: freeing anti-swing compression patch on lean side a/n.
Partially because preferred solutions could prove in felling, rigging and bucking to same maths for cross-comparatives and verifications.
.
i did try working with the Adjusted Gun a few times,
but just the thought that was going for the failed to, rather than fold squarely to target wasn't fer me, even as a bluff!




Accounting for all 3 dimensions:
As a telephone pole stands it is a 1 Dimensional support math; flow of gravity force thru squarely inline 'conducting device'(pole).
Folding on a lean AXIS (forward or backward) is more of a 2Dimensional support/control math to me.
While folding against a sideLean carries to more of a full 3Dimensional support/control math.
>>dimension(s) of support/control is best equal to or better than the dimension(s) of loading quite simply, for 'square mechanix'.
In falling, the vertical, single dimension part of load is as if a storage battery of unleveraged force(weight w/o distance multiplier)
>>that then during fall reduces as feeds into other dimension(s) that then get the leveraged multiplier of CoG distance across from pivot(compressed part of hinge).
.
Always visualizing force bands of compressions, neutrals, tensions fibers aligned squarely 90degree/perpendicular to lean;
just as fold line of front hinge/face is aligned squarely 90degree/perpendicular to target i think is best.
Hinge type, position, facing does NOTHING to alter the 90degree DIRECTION of loading forces of compressions, neutrals, tensions fiber bands.
The hinge just cuts across the pre-existing (compression, neutrals, tensions per lean) fibers to just choose what types of fibers are allowed
>>thus Tapered Hinge doesn't give magic, it just doesn't take away as much magic that is already fighting lean before starting/all thru tree life!
Too 'happy w/saw' can remove most critical supporting fibers from existing support pattern
>>If front 'fold line' of hinge as a pivot is in same position ratio to CoG length/angle then all hinges fold at same strength.
>>it is the side to side controls at folding that are adjustable, that Tapered seeks to maximize against.
w/o backlean, we simply want to allow forward fold to where we want to go, and ballast out the sideLean pull to where we don't.
Then let the forward portion simply pull home the now balanced load!



.
 
When you said:

"Hinge type, position, facing does NOTHING to alter the 90degree DIRECTION of loading forces of compressions, neutrals, tensions fiber bands.
The hinge just cuts across the pre-existing (compression, neutrals, tensions per lean) fibers to just choose what types of fibers are allowed

>>thus Tapered Hinge doesn't give magic, it just doesn't take away as much magic that is already fighting lean before starting/all thru tree life!"

I understand that to mean this is more like calculus than geometry or even trig, in taking into account those infinite 'bands of compressions, neutrals, tensions' that you speak of which follow the path defined by the natural tendency, and it strikes me that those bands are just a differential expression of forces like the infinite points along the 3D complex compound curves of a modern car's sleek lines (Jaguar comes to mind, eh Burnham?) yet, the 'gut feeling' of a longtime faller is that understanding that we don't add 'magic' that counters the natural tendency, but rather a knowledgeable approach 'preserves' that magic. If approached with just a 'geometry' mindset, one risks missing the subtleties and undercutting the 'magic' which a full calculus can provide.
 
Back
Top