Dealing with logs that are too big.

[Helvetica]

Cross cutting a half inch off a log is a job for a crosscut saw, no? I don't see why Jacob gets the vitriol when he's just stating that the answer is extremely simple and being over thought.

 

[Jacob]

Mod edit: - Jacob please take you trolling and sarcastic efforts elsewhere.

You appear to have no concept of the annoying little problems encountered by the OP or any practical advice that would help with the majority of instances that occur when handling large logs for turning. CHJ

I'm not trolling I'm pointing out that the easiest way to shorten a log is to saw a bit off, as other posters have also pointed out.
He has a chain saw. The only problem is to hold or support the log, which may require a bit of thought, depending on what kit he has.

 

[CHJ]

When a long Log is bigger diameter than this:-

Or longer if stood on end.

It is not an easy task to achieve this down a one or two metre length by hand:-

So that you can then pass it under the upper arm with enough clearance to split, cut to lengths and cut circular Blanks:-

If at all possible I do as above, using a sledge if necessary or get help handling it, rarely is the first 10-15 mm of a log diameter of any use so it's of no loss doing the above even if you want to take a few mm off the length.

Edit:- which is invariably the case with any I cut up as I usually leave a minimum of about 1/3 over length for storage to reduce the end split risk.

If I get a Slice, the usual way that a helpful tree surgeon cuts them that won't be recoverable as above:-

I cut through with chainsaw, split with wedges or a combination of both.
(couldn't find a sample to 'photo)

 

[Random Orbital Bob]

Today I took a trip back to the site where I got the Laburnum yesterday as the tree surgeon had left a nice mid section of oak butt for me. I ripped it in two on site to make it capable of handling into the car boot and came home. The reason I'm putting this in here is that I now do all my heavy processing with the chainsaw before I get anywhere near the bandsaw. I've experimented with different ways to cut up large logs and I always come back to the safety of doing it outside with a chainsaw being the best...for support...for managing the mess etc. I use a straight edge to mark rip lines along the trunk and both cross grain exposed ends. I use a forestry blue crayon to mark the wood and then rip to those lines in whatever thickness I need. That way you process the hard cuts before it ever gets to the bandsaw. As long as the log is on its side ie axis running with the chainsaw ripping is straight forward. Caveat is you must have a sharp blade but then you always should and I'm meticulous about mine. A common error is to be tempted to have the log standing on end (because its easy) and then cut down into the end grain to produce slabs. This is nigh on impossible in tough hardwoods like oak because of the nature of end grain. The on its side method works really well. To stop the log rolling I just wedge it with offcuts I make on site.

Here's a couple pics to show the resultant slabs of circa 2.5 - 3" thick oak. You can easily see how its now a doddle to cut either bowl blanks using a circle scribed on the timber or further rip into long spindle blanks. The timber is totally safe to even freehand on the bandsaw as it has no curvy edges to slip about. These slabs are about 2 foot long by 15" wide so pretty chunky. I leave the bark on and end seal then straight away. If I were going as far as the bandsaw I would cut using a Tuffsaw 3/8" sabre blade (fabulous by the way) and then end seal the blank. At this stage you have what is ostensibly as good as a commercially available blank except the drying of course and they are a little rougher. But I don't mind about the roughness because once its mounted on the lathe its two passes with a skew or a bowl gouge to turn it true.

I suspect a lot of people shy away from rip cuts with a chainsaw but really it's not difficult or time consuming as long as its done right.

 

[woodfarmer]

Today I took a trip back to the site where I got the Laburnum yesterday as the tree surgeon had left a nice mid section of oak butt for me. I ripped it in two on site to make it capable of handling into the car boot and came home. The reason I'm putting this in here is that I now do all my heavy processing with the chainsaw before I get anywhere near the bandsaw. I've experimented with different ways to cut up large logs and I always come back to the safety of doing it outside with a chainsaw being the best...for support...for managing the mess etc. I use a straight edge to mark rip lines along the trunk and both cross grain exposed ends. I use a forestry blue crayon to mark the wood and then rip to those lines in whatever thickness I need. That way you process the hard cuts before it ever gets to the bandsaw. As long as the log is on its side ie axis running with the chainsaw ripping is straight forward. Caveat is you must have a sharp blade but then you always should and I'm meticulous about mine. A common error is to be tempted to have the log standing on end (because its easy) and then cut down into the end grain to produce slabs. This is nigh on impossible in tough hardwoods like oak because of the nature of end grain. The on its side method works really well. To stop the log rolling I just wedge it with offcuts I make on site.

Here's a couple pics to show the resultant slabs of circa 2.5 - 3" thick oak. You can easily see how its now a doddle to cut either bowl blanks using a circle scribed on the timber or further rip into long spindle blanks. The timber is totally safe to even freehand on the bandsaw as it has no curvy edges to slip about. These slabs are about 2 foot long by 15" wide so pretty chunky. I leave the bark on and end seal then straight away. If I were going as far as the bandsaw I would cut using a Tuffsaw 3/8" sabre blade (fabulous by the way) and then end seal the blank. At this stage you have what is ostensibly as good as a commercially available blank except the drying of course and they are a little rougher. But I don't mind about the roughness because once its mounted on the lathe its two passes with a skew or a bowl gouge to turn it true.

I suspect a lot of people shy away from rip cuts with a chainsaw but really it's not difficult or time consuming as long as its done right.

Not having a bandsaw it is pretty much what I do, usually on a saw horse if possible. rip cutting does tend to clog the saw though.

I like to have "interesting bits with knots etc, those can be more "entertaining" to cut

 

[Random Orbital Bob]

haha...yeah I'm the same Woody. The more crotch or knot or root the more I like it. Can play havoc with the saw

I always used to sharpen my chainsaw with a hand file and I still do when out in the field. But about a year ago I bought a cheap chainsaw grinder and it has revolutionised both the speed and quality of my saw sharpening. It also saves a packet on any sharpening service you may have foolishly once used (not me....a friend of course)

 

[Rhossydd]

3 pages on how to cut the end off a log ?

That happens when people fail to read the information in the OP and subsequent posts, then post irrelevant information or just troll.

I said:
"The tree surgeon has already done his best to chop it down to sizes for burning or chopping into smaller lumps."

"Buying a bigger band saw or chain sawing further aren't options"

"It's just the annoyance of trimming half an inch or so off the, end grain"

"Ever tried to chain saw off half an inch from an irregular surface ?"

Anyone reading this ought to have realised that I'm discussing the sort of lump of firewood timber that's big and irregular enough to be difficult to hold easily, but also too small to fit into the sort of saw benches that are used for cutting firewood in the first place. Basically a really awkward size and shape that doesn't make conversion into a workable shape and size in any way easy.

Thanks to Duncanh for his insight on using the Arbortech. I didn't think I'd be alone in having thought of this as a potential solution for my problem. I'll keep an eye open for any special deals on these as I think one might be a useful tool to have to hand for really awkward jobs like this, but the safety issues of using one on, less than ideally secured, timber do concern me.

CHJ's illustrations of dealing with small diameter logs on the bandsaw are interesting and a strategy I've used myself before, but not really that relevant in my particular case as the sections of timber come from a 4-5ft diameter trunk. With that sort of radius curve there's not enough clearance to get the edge near the blade.

Now I've got back from a short holiday I've had time to consider some further options;
For the first troublesome lump I've liberated an extra half an inch of capacity in the bandsaw, by rotating the blade guide blocks by 90 degrees and removing the top blade guard. That's allowed me to get some edges squared up and see what quality of wood is hiding under the muck. It seems highly variable, soft, wet and with some rot (spalting) at one end, but solid, dry and nice at the other.
When I go back to get some more lumps, I'll be very considered with what I choose.

 

[Jacob]

It's all very well accusing people of trolling but you still haven't explained why you can't just saw or hack off the half inch too much: "the best thickness is half an inch thicker than your band saw can handle". You mutter on about 4 to 5 ft diameter but without being clear about what exactly is the problem.
It sounds like it's down to holding the pieces while you saw or hack off the excess. It shouldn't be difficult to improvise a holding system, whatever the shape of your blanks.
You just have to think a bit for yourself instead of making vague requests for help with an unspecified problem, and being rude about the replies.

 

[Paul.J]

Rhoss are you saying you have 4-5 foot dia logs that are cut by the tree surgeon 6-1/2" thick,and you want to take these logs down to 6" thick so you can cut the rest of the log up on your bandsaw,which only has a cutting depth of 6" or 6-1/2" now you have moved the guides :?: :?:
Any chance of some piccys so we can see what you have :?:
If the slabs are that size you really are better off using the chainsaw on them and cutting them into smaller more manageable sizes to round off on the BS.
I can't see why you are trying to keep the logs full size as your lathe doesn't take that size,or have i got it all wrong :?
Any idea what the wood is,might not not be worth the trouble :?: :?:

 

[Rhossydd]

.. are you saying you have 4-5 foot dia logs that are cut by the tree surgeon 6-1/2" thick,and you want to take these logs down to 6" thick so you can cut the rest of the log up on your bandsaw,which only has a cutting depth of 6" or 6-1/2" now you have moved the guides

That's pretty much what I've said;
"The tree surgeon has already done his best to chop it down to sizes for burning or chopping into smaller lumps."
From that you should realise that I'm not talking about 5ft diameter bits, but basically firewood sized bits.

Any chance of some piccys so we can see what you have :?:

No, the first lump I was given has been taken down to size now. I've been promised anything I like from a big pile and now I've a much better idea of how to choose the next bits.

I can't see why you are trying to keep the logs full size as your lathe doesn't take that size,or have i got it all wrong :?

My lathe can handle pretty large diameter blanks that are reasonably in balance, but not the sort of huge out of balance bits that are shown by woodfarmer earlier in the thread. I just want to keep as much wood as possible to work with, so it needs to arrive at the lathe with some chance of being workable.

Any idea what the wood is,might not not be worth the trouble :?: :?:

As I said previously it's Walnut.
If you've brought any lately from a merchant you'd know why I'm keen to use as much of the free supply as I possibly can, with as little waste as possible.


I'd assumed that most amateur turners would have had a go at using timber from this sort of source and have strategies to work with it.
If you read my OP I was just canvassing other people's approach to this to see if there's some clever ways of dealing with this problem I hadn't heard of before, eg the Arbortech. The end result seems to be that people just hack away with axes, bow saws and chain saws.

 

[Jacob]

...... The end result seems to be that people just hack away with axes, bow saws and chain saws.

That's it!!
But there might have been another way - no harm in asking the question. :roll:

PS not so much "just hack away" though - more "just carefully cut to the required size".

 

[dickm]

4 to 5 FEET diameter???? That's one h*** of a log. What size chainsaw was used originally to fell it? Even with a monster Stihl pulling a 30" bar, it would only just be feasible.

 

[Rhossydd]

What size chainsaw was used originally to fell it?

It just fell over one afternoon, no chainsaw needed.
Our neighbours were sitting down to Sunday lunch, went out to the kitchen to get something and it fallen over. They didn't even hear it come down.

A fair bit of rot in the centre of the base, hence the odd shapes to deal with. The tree surgeon told them it was impossible to get the trunk parts out of their garden to mill for timber, so cut it up in the garden for firewood. A crying shame as there's some lovely looking wood in rather too small to use bits

 

[CHJ]

....... A crying shame as there's some lovely looking wood in rather too small to use bits

That's not scenario a I subscribe to.

 

[procell]

Chas you have just given me something to work towards. If I can get only half way to being that good I will be very proud.

 

[Grahamshed]

Me to. Do you do craft fairs or similar with these Chas ?

 

[Rhossydd]

....... A crying shame as there's some lovely looking wood in rather too small to use bits

That's not scenario a I subscribe to.

Me neither, hence trying everything possible to maximise what I can get hold of.

But how wonderful it would have been to have been involved early enough to prevent the wholesale wrecking of what could have been some quality timber of a good size to make something substantial. Instead it looks like the biggest bits I can get out of the pile will have a maximum dimension of 6inches instead of maybe 6 feet or more.

 

[CHJ]

.... Do you do craft fairs or similar with these Chas ?

Not as such, a Local Christmas charity event the last couple of years that's all.

 

[bellringer]

4 to 5 FEET diameter???? That's one h*** of a log. What size chainsaw was used originally to fell it? Even with a monster Stihl pulling a 30" bar, it would only just be feasible.

it would be fine with a stihl pulling a 72" bar

 

[bellringer]

What size chainsaw was used originally to fell it?

The tree surgeon told them it was impossible to get the trunk parts out of their garden to mill for timber, so cut it up in the garden for firewood. A crying shame as there's some lovely looking wood in rather too small to use bits

well the tree surgeon should have thought of a chain sawmill