agg221

Good idea Steve - hopefully this will develop into a really useful thread. A few thoughts based on roof-related things I spent a long time digging around for and mulling over when building my extension roof: In a building without a ridge beam, the rafters force the walls outwards. In a building with a ridge beam, the rafters pivot about the beam and hence pull the walls inwards. This allows you to choose which way round you want to put the braces and any tie straps required by building control which you want to hide. Joints should take out no more than 1/3 of the section of a rafter. The housed bird's mouth is the best joint I can find for fitting rafters to wall plates. The bird's mouth transfers lateral thrust to the wall, but in itself is prone to starting to split from the internal corner of the cut, due to the vertical load. If you house the foot of the rafter into the wall plate, the heel of the rafter carries the vertical load, which means it doesn't split. Construction with a ridge beam is less common, so I ended up having to work out my rafter connections at the top. The step lap rafter seat proved to be a very good joint to fit rafters onto a ridge beam, as it resists any lateral or sliding movement and provides a good pivoting socket. The whole roof would have held together without any fixings - I put some pegs in for security and resisting wind loading but in reality it would probably have been fine without them. I worked out my joints by drawing the two sections, intersecting to the depth I wanted, full scale on a piece of paper (pretty much everything will fit on a sheet of A4). Where I needed to remove material, I split the difference between how much came out of the beam and how much from the rafter (assuming it didn't take more than 1/3 out of the rafter). I then took a thin piece of white plastic (about 2mm thick) and cut it to look like a carpenter's square and laid it on the paper with the internal corner lined up with the line of the beam. Wherever cut lines intersected with the square, I marked the positions off. I could then transfer the square to the beam and mark straight off onto it, with no measuring needed. I made a similar template for the rafter cuts. These saved me hours in measuring and trimming, and everything fitted first time (with a bit of shaving). Alec

That's very interesting. I have never used softwood structurally but obviously I have encountered it in conventional buildings and your corner posts end up being much heavier section than I would have guessed. Looks good though. Alec

A quick look on Rightmove finds paddocks within 30 miles of Southampton ranging from £10,000 to £38,000 per acre asking price (smaller lots are always more per acre). A quick look on woods4sale.co.uk finds prices for three woodland parcels, each just under 3 acres, ranging from £15,000 to £28,000 per acre. I wouldn't say there is a lot in it. You will probably see a decrease in value for the first 10-15yrs while it's just a scrubby mass but once the canopy starts to form and looks like a 'proper' wood I would guess the value will return. There are a reasonable number of people who want a small wood to potter about in, just as there are people who want to keep horses. Alec

3 to 4ft diameter is rather on the large side for most mobile mills. I had a 3ft x 20ft butt through one once but the owner refused to ever take the mill to site again after that! There is a lot of timber in 12 trees that size which is why selling them as sawlogs may be the easier option than trying to stack it all and then move it on. There is some regional variation in prices but I would have thought £6/Hoppus ft would be fair to everyone. If you are lucky and there is demand at the moment you may get offered a little more, or if you just want them gone £4/Hoppus ft should see them cleared easily. Big J will be more up to speed with current price trends than I am (he was considering a load from Devon earlier in the week, so you never know he might even want these - be a good test for the new mill!). Alec

That looks like some nice quality stuff and probably enough in total to interest a sawmill. May be worth ringing round the local ones. Alec

I use an Alaskan. Both the Logosol mill and the Turbosaw have their pros and cons (and their fans and those who dislike them!) but a lot depends on how much money you want to spend, how much time you want to spend milling, what you want to make and what sort of timber you want to access. I won't comment on the other two mill types mentioned, or any of the other options you could go for but the pros of the Alaskan are that it is low cost and compact so it doesn't take much storage space, will use a saw powerhead you may already have and is not limited in length or throat so you can set up to mill pretty much any size tree into any product (obviously limitations depending on what you buy and what saw powerhead you have, but you can choose what you need). The really big win though is that ultimately I can stick everything for a day's milling in a car, then in a wheelbarrow and walk to the tree, even through a house carrying it, and come out with planks. I don't think any of the other options give that true level of flexibility. Using it all day is certainly tiring and I wouldn't want to do it full time, but I certainly don't dread getting it out! It would probably be less tiring if I got round to fitting the winch. In a day, running with an 076, I get through about 10l of fuel and 2.5l of oil which I don't regard as too bad compared with the depreciation value of a more expensive mill. Whether it is the best solution for you will depend a lot on your own answers to the above points. Alec

The best way to truly quarter saw is to use a combination of an Alaskan and a mini-mill (you will be needing these anyway to make beams efficiently). Saw into quarters and then take sections off each face in turn. For what you are trying to do, you can afford to take three or so boards full width out of the middle (split the log in half up the middle or minus half a board thickness with the first cut). If you take what's left and mill into slabs which will make sections the other way (ie if you want 6" deep joists take a 6" slab) and then cut these out the other way. A Makita 4" depth cut electric saw is useful. You can cut the wide boards down into the right widths and the 4" deep sections out this way with much less waste. Make sure it comes with a fence. They are fairly cheap on Ebay as they are too heavy for general use. Personally I wouldn't cut down the existing posts - check with your engineer as there will be some sections which are under less loading and they should do this nicely. In future though I would be inclined to use logs just about the right size to get the beam out of the square of the heartwood. One thing to consider is aesthetics. For example, my rafters only need to be 4"x2" but they are exposed and I preferred the appearance of 3" width as it looks more solid. Alec

12 decent sized butts is beginning to look like there may be a load. Worth having a measure up (diameter and length) and getting a few photos up. This should enable an opinion on value. Also worth commenting on whether you could get them roadside for pick-up. Alec

Peter, as we discussed an interesting piece of work. I'm not sure that it is valid to draw fit lines on the plots in this fashion - if you think about the data, it is measured on a scale where 5 = full leaf, so the y scale cannot exceed this value. As such, once full leaf is consistently achieved before the date of the photograph you will hit a line of consistent 5 from then on. Allowing for differences in perception, you may actually hit a peak line slightly below this and the London data looks like this could have already occurred. Thinking about the counterpart plot which would show a consistent level of leaf development against date, this could show a linear trend. As such, your plot should ultimately consist of two lines with a knee. If software fitting was used it will try to create a single line of best fit, meaning that if you have already reached the knee, as could be the case for London, the trend line will be incorrect. This doesn't detract from the value of the work though, which is still very interesting. I don't have any equivalent series of photographs to add, but I believe The Essex Field Club recorded leafing out dates for elms for a very extended period. I'm not sure if they are still doing so (and if not, when they stopped - elm has not died out in this area) but Mark Hanson should know. Butterfly Conservation may also have continued the trend data as they track it with regard to the White Letter Hairstreak. This would at least corroborate the findings. Alec

The sapwood has fairly well gone on those - not a bad thing (probably a good thing) but suggests they were standing dead for a while? The ends shown in the photo look a good size and suitable for milling. The question is what would you do with it if you milled it? If you have a use for milled timber then it is well worth doing - makes good long-lasting gateposts if nothing else but you may have other uses for it. If so, it will save you a lot to get this milled rather than buy in timber. It will be longer lasting than treated softwood so if you have a think back about what timber you have bought over the past few years and get it milled in those sections, then stick it in an open fronted barn with stickers to dry it will be ready when you want it. If you have no foreseeable use for it and no immediate outlet to sell it to you will end up putting money into it and then make yourself a headache to recover it. If you have a use for firewood then under these circumstances this is a better use for it. If you don't want it, someone may pop up on this thread and offer to buy the butts from you - if you can do a good deal (e.g. you have no shortage of firewood from smaller stuff) then this would work out for everyone. If you get people suggesting you should mill it but they don't want to buy it then this won't help you. As for milling routes - the three options are get in a bandmill - a particularly good idea if you can get all the lengths back to hard standing and lift them with a teleporter. It is likely to be a day or two, depending on the size. Alternatively if you have some time and want to do it yourself you could buy an Alaskan, particularly if you want larger sections and have a suitable powerhead already. This is more wasteful and slower but doesn't need any full size trees moved. With a suitable set-up you can also use it to make full length beams which would cost a lot to buy. The job will pay for the kit and some if you have a use for the timber. Third option is to get someone in with an Alaskan. This will work best if you don't feel confident about what you are doing but want to then consider carrying on with your own kit. One of the Alaskan options is the best bet if you want longer lengths than a mobile bandsaw can handle, the main trunks are too wide to go through the throat of a bandsaw mill or you can't move the full length sections back. There are several people on here who have portable mills of either type - if you put up a location you should get some feedback on who is nearby. Alec

Do they want you to do the work under their name, or on their behalf in your own name? If the latter I can't see any risk to you from them doing a bad job as you will not be directly associated for future jobs - if they pass them to you then the customer is already happy to have the recommendation, if you are quoting a job in your own right then the names are not linked. Alec

Unless you are short on material, I wouldn't try to make a beam from this one. It will make a great selection of soleplates, joists, rafters etc. Soleplates are a particularly good use as they don't need to be boxed heart and do benefit from being cut from bigger timber as you can get them closer to quartersawn which makes them less prone to curling up and subsequently rolling (the original ones on our house have crept out due to this over the past 500yrs). Alec

Hello Olivia, I should start by mentioning that I am not the expert here, and would defer to pretty much any of the people who have already commented on your question (and David may be able to comment on this immediately) but if the tree in the foreground in the photograph showing the house, or the one I think I can see to the left of shot are also yours then I would be inclined to have these looked at too. If other trees in the area have recently been removed due to Meripilus then it suggests a common factor which the remaining trees may also have been exposed to. If it is spreading through root grafting then these are certainly within range. Although they are not showing fruiting bodies (yet) this does not necessarily mean they are not affected. Catching it early would give more options. A consultant should be able to pick up on the visible signs. Even if unaffected, keeping the surviving trees healthy would be a good idea to reduce the risk of problems later. The one in the foreground in particular may well have a lot of compaction in the soil around it. There are quick ways to fix this using tools such as airspades, but unless it is urgent a much lower tech approach is to get the worms to do it. They love the glue in corrugated cardboard so if you spread a couple of layers on the ground around the tree, out as far as you can allowing for roads etc, then spread a bark or woodchip mulch on top, the worms will drag the cardboard down, breaking up the compaction and aerating the soil in the process. Alec

I use chainsaw wellies - my use is milling so I tend to walk out to a tree with a load of heavy gear and then not move much, which is why I use wellies and chaps. I had a pair of Stihl wellies bought in about 1998 which lasted around 15yrs of fairly regular use, being comfortable enough for everyday. That said, my other footwear at the time was steel toecapped boots so I was pretty used to it. When they eventually cracked around the toe I bought a pair of the current model which were a lot more rigid and hence far less comfortable. I use them but do look forward to taking them off again. Alec

Core through the centre, which is called boxed heart. However, consult with your engineer before you start milling. Not much point in making 8"x8" if he then tells you it needs to be 9"x9". Also, if you tell him it will be boxed heart then he will use this in his calculations. However, for thinner sections such as joists, rafters etc. which tend to be deeper than wide, quarter-sawn will be less prone to move. Alec

Taking the weeds out to the radius of the crown and giving it a nice layer of mulch wouldn't do any harm - it will reduce competition for water and help growth. Alec

From the photos, the crown does look a lot more open than the average walnut, with rather long, thin branches. It also looks like it has been crown lifted which means that what is left still has quite a lot of leverage. In my inexpert opinion it could probably take a bit of reduction as the branches look thin and spindly, assuming suitable points can be found to reduce to. This would reduce wind resistance and make it more stable, but really you need someone to take a look as photos don't always give the full story. Alec

It has generally been a good year for walnuts (not sure if you are in the UK but assuming so) so I wouldn't worry about the crop specifically as a sign of imminent collapse of the tree. Pictures will help a lot with understanding the size and shape, but in general yes you can retain a lot of trees if you want to by reducing the wind resistance a bit (having the top taken down a little - not necessarily a lot, but you need someone better qualified than me to comment on how much). If it is still young than walnuts can benefit from re-staking. They are however quite sensitive to being pruned at the wrong time of year as they either bleed heavily or die back so care is needed. Alec

Thanks for the heads-up. I would have set the digibox to record it if I knew how to. I will have to wait for my wife.... Alec

Do you use Aspen? If so, you can just leave it in the tank anyway - no need to run it empty or dry even if you are not going to use the saw again for a while. Alec

For the tree in France I think you are going to have to be very lucky to find a solution other than buying yourself a chainsaw mill. Your reasons for favouring a swing mill are all valid, however your original post suggests that you are not speaking from personal experience of chainsaw mills. As such, you may find that in practices the relative down sides are not as big as you are perceiving them to be. A suggestion. Hire someone with an Alaskan for a day in London and work with them. You will then have a sense of how to use one to produce the type of timber you are looking for in the most efficient fashion possible (chainsaw mills don't just do wide boards), and an idea of what kit you would need and how hard it really is. I can do Greenwich easily enough if it helps. Alec

Hi Andy, At this point I would plan for the worst and hope for the best. Shoots dying back is not a good sign, but it's getting too late in the year for it to re-grow again so I would just wait and see whether or not it leafs out in spring (from above the graft - no point keeping shoots from the bit below as you will just end up with a standard wych elm which will get to a certain size, get infected and die from DED). To be aware of when considering cuttings: it is possible, if very challenging, to get elms to root. I have been propagating local trees for disease resistance trials (such as the one in my avatar) and success rates are low. If you want to do it, I suggest using hardwood cuttings of one year old shoots (ie your fresh growth) and treating with hormone rooting powder. You need to take them in late Jan/early Feb, plunge them in a 50:50 vermiculite: perlite mix and place the pot outside against a north facing wall whilst applying bottom heat, to get the roots growing before the shoots. However, if you get one to take, bear in mind that the tree is naturally weeping (which is why it is grafted) so running it up to the height you want before it branches is slow, fiddly and tricky, involving a lot of tying in to a cane and checking ties regularly. The good news is though that, if it does die and you want another one, there is no specific reason why you shouldn't buy another grafted tree the same as the factors which are affecting this one do not appear to be inherent. If you do, it would be a good idea to do as treeseer suggests and keep the base clear. Alec

One big issue is spares availability. A machine which you rely on becomes obsolete when neither the OEM nor reasonable aftermarket parts are manufactured. Two of the longest running arb-related products I can think of against this criterion are the Stihl 090 and the Series 2 Land Rover - the latter still being repairable if you want to (and can afford the fuel bills!) at up to 57 years old. Another factor is compliance with current safety requirements - I suspect there are a good many heavy old saws, without AV systems or chainbrakes, still sat on people's shelves in full working order. Alec

Andrew - All good points on grading, where your experience is significantly greater than mine. My engineer inspected my logs before milling and satisfied himself of the quality of my material. He also took the view that I was going to live there and it would be my problem if I didn't do it properly! I am an engineer, although not civil, so I work to the same general approach - I tend to err very much on the side of caution with tolerancing as I know I don't have the experience to know how far out of tolerance I can go (my blockwork is +/-1mm across 3.6m x 3.6m x 4m height). I took the same approach with my structural timber - it was milled for the job and would all pass visual grading at the next class up. Structural timbers were specified to a dimension for the calculations but most of them are installed oversize (e.g. rafters needed to be 4" x 2" for structural calcs but are 4" x 3" for aesthetics). I discussed this with my engineer who took it into account for weight allowances, but it gives me yet more leeway. Beams were milled boxed-heart to get maximum strength but calcs assumed they are not. I pre-slit the biggest beam which needs a flitch plate installing so that the slit widened rather than getting additional cracking as is inevitable in the drying of a boxed-heart beam. The excess gap will be filled with a wedge, bolted through alongside the flitch plate. Specs are also available in building regs for non-structural timbers such as battens, but given that this applies to softwood with the consistency of cheese rather than cleft oak or chestnut heartwood I must admit I took a slightly more lax approach to the specification here on things like the odd waney edge Every step was agreed with my engineer. I agree that smaller timbers are often suited to construction - for boxed heart there isn't much advantage in having an oversize log as the outer parts are so far from quartersawn that they will cup badly so tend to go to waste. However, I think there might be a skewed view from this forum which is much more at the speciality end of milling and furniture construction than production of standard joinery softwood and Ikea style furniture where a lot of small softwood is used. Breaking down a log for construction timbers other than beams, I would tend to take say an oak butt with 18" of heartwood and mill two 3" slabs out of the centre to lose the pith and get a near quartersawn 6" joist out of each side of each slab (4 in total), then mill a 4" slab from each half which would get split the other way to get two near quartersawn rafters out of each. My log would therefore yield 4 joists and 4 rafters. Slightly bigger (20") and I would take a third set of joists out of the middle, slightly smaller (16") and I would take a joist and a rafter out of each of the two centre slabs. You always need more rafters than joists so I sometimes took a 4" slab from near the centre and ripped it into 3off 4"x4", then split them into pairs, changing the direction of the cut to keep them near quartered. All the remaining bits would then get ripped down at 2" or 1" depending on location. I would get some poor grade 4"x2" (flat sawn or waney corners) for stud walling but mostly 2"x1". I also needed a number of counter-battens for warm roof construction. These were made from the cleanest, straightest lengths as 2" x 1.25". All the small ripping down was done using a circular saw with a guide fence to keep the kerf narrow. I used a slightly different cutting sequence to you when making a single boxed-heart beam from a log - most of the time went on the set up and first cut, then I took a second cut at the required depth for the beam. That gave me a slab which I could edge. I didn't even have a mini-mill at the time so did this by rolling up it up by 90deg and using a spirit level on the side to get it vertical, propped using offcuts, and then levelling the rail horizontally. With a mini-mill I would just edge it before rolling. This sequence reduces the amount of rolling and means you are rolling a lighter section. You are also rolling/sliding the slab off the bottom section which means it drops a bit, making it easier as gravity is on your side. I could probably process 3 15"-18" butts in lengths of around 15' average in a day but would still want an 066 or similar for this. Alec

Wasn't aimed at anyone, but I have seen some interesting efforts at sharpening milling chain and was guilty myself before I got the grinder Alec