Body language of trees..

[john87]

Hi All,

 

Thinking of getting a copy of this book. Anyone got one?? What you all think??

 

john..

[Steve Bullman]

8 hours ago, john87 said:

Hi All,

 

Thinking of getting a copy of this book. Anyone got one?? What you all think??

 

john..

Yes, it’s a must have

[john87]

2 hours ago, Steve Bullman said:

Yes, it’s a must have

Thanks Steve, I know very little about trees, [big bushy things] so i thought i might learn some more. I already have one Claus Mattheck book, the "stupsi explains the tree" one, i i learnt a lot from that.. So ii was hoping that i would learn lots more from the body language of trees one..

 

john..

[Steve Bullman]

Depends what you are wanting to learn. If it’s general tree biology etc then it’s not the best book for you 

[john87]

41 minutes ago, Steve Bullman said:

Depends what you are wanting to learn. If it’s general tree biology etc then it’s not the best book for you 

I was just hoping to learn more about the assessment of the condition of trees, bits that may be structurally unsound or other damage or faults and things to look out for, especially before you go climbing the things stuff like that..

 

john..

[JSN]

Hi John - if you haven’t got them already, the AA technical guides are a good resource which include pre climbing tree checks. 

 

Arboricultural Association - Book Shop

TREES.ORG.UK

---

A source of publications, guidance notes...

 

Otherwise this is, (was?), the bible for hazard trees.

 

Principles Of Tree Hazard Assessment And Management from Summerfield Books

WWW.SUMMERFIELDBOOKS.COM

---

Buy Principles Of Tree Hazard Assessment And...

 

Body language is a key text for tree managers, but not sure it’s what you’re after.

 

Jim

[john87]

1 hour ago, JSN said:

Hi John - if you haven’t got them already, the AA technical guides are a good resource which include pre climbing tree checks. 

 

Arboricultural Association - Book Shop

TREES.ORG.UK

---

A source of publications, guidance notes...

 

Otherwise this is, (was?), the bible for hazard trees.

 

Principles Of Tree Hazard Assessment And Management from Summerfield Books

WWW.SUMMERFIELDBOOKS.COM

---

Buy Principles Of Tree Hazard Assessment And...

 

Body language is a key text for tree managers, but not sure it’s what you’re after.

 

Jim

Thank you very much for helping!!!

 

john..

[daltontrees]

22 hours ago, john87 said:

Thank you very much for helping!!!

 

john..

I think the main purpose of 'Body Language.." is prediction of failure (either breakage or windthrow) by predominantly visual cues. But the back section has a good grounding in VTA (Visual Tree Assessment) in the field. I think for anyone wanting a starting point for assessing trees for risk before climbing it's maybe a bit limited, since trees generally fail in the conditions you wouldn't want to be climbing them in or are really really obviously goosed, but it could still be relevant to detecting defects that might determine for example whether or not to shockload during rigging or to expect conventional hinge strength when doing felling cuts. 

It's a lovely book anyway. A lite intro to biomechanics. The source of the occasionally maligned 'Axiom of Uniform Stress'. The source of the myth of the 0.3 t/R ratio. The launch of terms like the 'Chinese moustache' (bet we're not allowed to say that any more), 'hazard beam', 'minimal lever arm', 'shell buckling' and more. Who wouldn't want a copy? 

[AHPP]

1 hour ago, daltontrees said:

I think the main purpose of 'Body Language.." is prediction of failure (either breakage or windthrow) by predominantly visual cues. But the back section has a good grounding in VTA (Visual Tree Assessment) in the field. I think for anyone wanting a starting point for assessing trees for risk before climbing it's maybe a bit limited, since trees generally fail in the conditions you wouldn't want to be climbing them in or are really really obviously goosed, but it could still be relevant to detecting defects that might determine for example whether or not to shockload during rigging or to expect conventional hinge strength when doing felling cuts. 

It's a lovely book anyway. A lite intro to biomechanics. The source of the occasionally maligned 'Axiom of Uniform Stress'. The source of the myth of the 0.3 t/R ratio. The launch of terms like the 'Chinese moustache' (bet we're not allowed to say that any more), 'hazard beam', 'minimal lever arm', 'shell buckling' and more. Who wouldn't want a copy? 

Where do you stand on the axiom of uniform stress? I'm a believer but only in an informal, not academically rigorous way. Rob Rainford on here explained it very nicely once, particularly multilateral dependence, and it made sense and fitted with my general view of nature, that man plans and god laughs.

[daltontrees]

15 hours ago, AHPP said:

Where do you stand on the axiom of uniform stress? I'm a believer but only in an informal, not academically rigorous way. Rob Rainford on here explained it very nicely once, particularly multilateral dependence, and it made sense and fitted with my general view of nature, that man plans and god laughs.

I just re-read 'Body Language... about the Axiom, and interestingly it does not claim tha tthe Axiom applies to trees. It says that it is effectively axiomatic that trees are self-optimising, putting on neither too much nor too little strength innhteir every part. That I accept, subject to the proviso (as the book also says) that trees cannot lose excess material that later isn't needed, and can thus have excess material too. I think that the axiom of uniform stress is a good thought experiment, a good way of helping to understand the biomechanics of trees. But it can't be stated of trees. Nor does the book say it can.

 

As such, the rather overblown and self-congratulatory article by Duncan Slater et al a few years ago in the Journal needn't have bothered trying to debunk it. Like taking candy from babies, it systmatically cited and showed numerous examples of how trees do not carry stress uniformly. Yes, it hought. And...?

 

It remains, as far as I am concerned, a useful teaching tool that forces thought about why trees are the way they are. But it might be more useful to write of the principle of uniform stress and the axiom of self-optimisation. Axiom is a brave word in any debate, though. Someone will always say that the axiom is not self-evident. That's OK, because they are part of scientific and mathematical reasoning and should be disposable or testable to destruction.