Small logs for small wood burners.

[arboriculturist]

It needs a bit of empirical evidence but:

 

assuming all the logs are cut to about the same size and there are few smaller logs which will fit in the gaps between the larger logs ( look at aggregate theory especially in things like the size distribution of sand in lime mortar)

 

Start with 2 logs 80" long now, ignoring kerf, cut it in half is there any way you can stack it so that it occupies less space than the original log. Do this for one log in 10 bits and the other in 8. Even if you try and reassemble the log the cut suraces will always mean you take more space.

 

The ultimate test is to chip a solid log, the chips occupy about 2.8 times the solid log, normal cut and split logs occupy about twice the solid volume.

 

That's interesting.

 

So using this theory are you suggesting that a customer gets less weight in a m3 of 8" logs than a m3 of 12" logs? (I know we don't sell by weight, so perhaps I should say less volume of solid wood)

 

I can see you have a solid understanding of timber volumes - would you be able to give percentages for 8", 10" and 12" logs?

 

The small the logs the more labour etc. etc. is a given of course.

[Woodworks]

Going to get some scales so should be able to get a categoric answer to which is heaviest soon.

[fonzy]

I would say that 1m3 of sand weighs more than 1m3 of 3" crushed rock. I've always though that you get more wood in a 1m3 box if the logs are smaller as they sit neater.

 

I cut majority of mine at 280mm, sold out of hard wood at 300mm. Most of my customers are using modern large door woodburners though.

[openspaceman]

That's interesting.

 

So using this theory are you suggesting that a customer gets less weight in a m3 of 8" logs than a m3 of 12" logs? (I know we don't sell by weight, so perhaps I should say less volume of solid wood)

 

I can see you have a solid understanding of timber volumes - would you be able to give percentages for 8", 10" and 12" logs?

 

 

Basically yes but I cannot put numbers to your other question, in essence smaller logs have more "edge effects" as do smaller containers.

 

As I said this does depend on the size assortment being similar.

 

To illustrate this a bit; consider a sample of woodchip which has sizes assortment ranging from 4% of <1mm to 96% <32mm.

 

Screen out the <1mm sizes but the volume of the remaining >1mm remains the same because the fines you have screened out fited in the spaces between the larger particles.

[Logsnstuff]

If I'm cutting for 10" nets then anything short gets thrown in a bag for this kind of request.