Low impact forestry services in Devon and the South West

[Mike Hill]

How many Ton are you pilling in a day?

Those sticks look difficult to make decent tonnage with.

[Big J]

15 minutes ago, Mike Hill said:

How many Ton are you pilling in a day?

Those sticks look difficult to make decent tonnage with.

With the machine in the video? That's not me, just a Youtube video. 

 

On first thinnings, you'll do a tree every 3-4 minutes (processing time per tree once the stem is in the head is less than 45 seconds), with a cutter knocking them over ahead of you. Assuming 0.2 tonnes per tree, you'll do 3-4 tonnes an hour. The great thing is (and this theory, as I've not yet found large enough sites to test it) that your cutter and machine operator can swop over every couple of hours. Much less tiring than hand processing, no stacking and on rack thinning with selective removal from the matrix, it should be able to do a lorry load a day. 

[ESS]

14 minutes ago, Big J said:

With the machine in the video? That's not me, just a Youtube video. 

 

On first thinnings, you'll do a tree every 3-4 minutes (processing time per tree once the stem is in the head is less than 45 seconds), with a cutter knocking them over ahead of you. Assuming 0.2 tonnes per tree, you'll do 3-4 tonnes an hour. The great thing is (and this theory, as I've not yet found large enough sites to test it) that your cutter and machine operator can swop over every couple of hours. Much less tiring than hand processing, no stacking and on rack thinning with selective removal from the matrix, it should be able to do a lorry load a day. 

Would it not be difficult to turn trees in racks to process them, particularly where they need to be felled head on ?

[Big J]

1 hour ago, ESS said:

Would it not be difficult to turn trees in racks to process them, particularly where they need to be felled head on ?

You just level the rack from one end to the other, starting with the last one you felled. When pulling trees from the matrix, you don't need to get them on the deck as the winch pulls them out to the head. The stroke processing head can handle some fairly large branches too.

[ESS]

Just now, Big J said:

You just level the rack from one end to the other, starting with the last one you felled. When pulling trees from the matrix, you don't need to get them on the deck as the winch pulls them out to the head. The stroke processing head can handle some fairly large branches too.

 

Just now, Big J said:

You just level the rack from one end to the other, starting with the last one you felled. When pulling trees from the matrix, you don't need to get them on the deck as the winch pulls them out to the head. The stroke processing head can handle some fairly large branches too.

Yes, but surely you have to process across the bed, in which case the trees will be to turn.How do you turn say a 25 foot tree in a single rack to align it with the head ? 

[Big J]

5 minutes ago, ESS said:

 

Yes, but surely you have to process across the bed, in which case the trees will be to turn.How do you turn say a 25 foot tree in a single rack to align it with the head ? 

The machine works in conjunction with my mini forwarder (Logbullet, weighs 2t, carries a little less) so I don't need to turn the tree. I can pick up the logs from where ever they land. 90 degrees to the rack is fine. 

[ESS]

Just now, Big J said:

The machine works in conjunction with my mini forwarder (Logbullet, weighs 2t, carries a little less) so I don't need to turn the tree. I can pick up the logs from where ever they land. 90 degrees to the rack is fine. 

Hmmm, not sure you understand where I am coming from,...if you look at the video the trees are presented to the processing head at 90 degrees, ish . In a felled rack the trees will be facing the machine head on either tip first or butt first, it doesn't appear to have the reach to pick trees up in front of itself , and even if it did you would be processing straight back at the operator short of turning the trees before processing.

[Big J]

7 minutes ago, ESS said:

Hmmm, not sure you understand where I am coming from,...if you look at the video the trees are presented to the processing head at 90 degrees, ish . In a felled rack the trees will be facing the machine head on either tip first or butt first, it doesn't appear to have the reach to pick trees up in front of itself , and even if it did you would be processing straight back at the operator short of turning the trees before processing.

Ah, I see, apologies. The machine is incredibly manoeuvrable, and it's only 1.45m wide, so can slip between trees in the next rack as required and can easily turn within a rack. You'd process however many trees are required to fill the forwarder to one point, then move on. That way, the forwarder only has to stop once for each load.  

[ESS]

1 minute ago, Big J said:

Ah, I see, apologies. The machine is incredibly manoeuvrable, and it's only 1.45m wide, so can slip between trees in the next rack as required and can easily turn within a rack. You'd process however many trees are required to fill the forwarder to one point, then move on. That way, the forwarder only has to stop once for each load.  

 

1 minute ago, Big J said:

Ah, I see, apologies. The machine is incredibly manoeuvrable, and it's only 1.45m wide, so can slip between trees in the next rack as required and can easily turn within a rack. You'd process however many trees are required to fill the forwarder to one point, then move on. That way, the forwarder only has to stop once for each load.  

Sorry, but you are not understanding me,you would still have to have the butt end of the tree at 90 degrees ish to the machine to process them. How can you achieve that ?In a single rack thinnings the felled tree is going to land with the butt roughly in the centre. I don't see how you can then process that tree off the side of the rack with that machine, to do that the tree needs to be turned within the rack. If you imagine a harvester in a thinnings rack the trees are felled into the matrix, then processed across the bed, so no turning of trees, whereas in handcut line thinnings the trees are cut down the rack so the need to turn them ?

[MattyF]

Sorry, but you are not understanding me,you would still have to have the butt end of the tree at 90 degrees ish to the machine to process them. How can you achieve that ?In a single rack thinnings the felled tree is going to land with the butt roughly in the centre. I don't see how you can then process that tree off the side of the rack with that machine, to do that the tree needs to be turned within the rack. If you imagine a harvester in a thinnings rack the trees are felled into the matrix, then processed across the bed, so no turning of trees, whereas in handcut line thinnings the trees are cut down the rack so the need to turn them ?

You would fell them back in to the rack or hang them up and just winch them butt first to the machine as in the video ?