Winter, Christmas, next year's fuel

Winter has been kinder, this year at least, than previous years. We had a touch of snoww, a brief and passionate flurry, with the winds scrapring the hill clean and driving the snow hard into the corners of things, where it stuck for a few days.

We salted the drive to uncrack the ice, so the indefatiguable Nissan Micra could make it's intrepid and unfailing way out and over the hill at the bottom of the drive. Across thje valley the far mountains were snowcapped, and wrapped in mist and drifts of snow falling in thick cotton columns from the grey sky.

We're north facing here, and ringed with trees, so, our frost pocket freezes faster than nost, and the cold weather settles in the bowl of the land.

But it cleared quickly, and Christmas, such as it is, was saved. The family made their way down to us for the annual feedfest, and the house was frantically cleaned in preparation. Of such brief and intrepid manias are later life neuroses formed.

I took the opportunity to get out into the milder weather of late - it's been over ten degrees most days to take a little practice on my one man sawhorse.

It's worked out well, the prototype, and has speeded up the work by a factor of 4 or so. I'm cutting 8 to ten logs, to the perfect size, in the time it took me to cut two. And I'm cutting the hole log with ease. It's going to become a compund staple, and it cost nothing. Which is about 100 euro less than most of the manufactured options. And, I think, due to the multi log load, more efficient, and versatile.

But, while it's still fresh in my mind, here's a run down of pros, cons, and lessons learned, for the next iteration. I doubt if this one will last beyond cutting up next years wood, so, the permanent tool should be built next year.

• Pros. It's lightweight, so, reasonably portable by hand, and very portable by car. I'd consider making a ligher weight one for forest use in the alder I'll be cutting - those plantations are small, with thin tall trees, and cutting in situ makes sense as they are right beside roads.
• It works well with one person. Which is the main design brief. There's a gap beneath the holding platform that's fairly easy to thread a rathcet strap through, though it could be easier, and, when cinched in place and stuck in the ground, the logs are stable. Recinching is necessary usually oncfe only - this is a function of logs settling, rather than a design issue, and the rathchet makes it quick work.
• Thedesign is capable of handling multiple logs of differing lengths and radiuses.
• It's made from scrap bolts and wood.
• Recessed bolts are strong, and unlikely to be a sparking or chain damage concern.
• Cross base means it can be stabilised with logs underneath. the two beam design gives good stability when resting on logs.
• Wooden construction is chainsaw safe.
• Access to both log ends is clear and easy.
• Cutting the last cuts between the uprights is easy ( though the rathcet strap must be checked on boith sides, and tightened, before this cut is made, or bye bye ratchet.
• Pinching has not been an issue.
• Using a sacrifice log at the bottom protects the structure well.
• I'm guessing that the rathcet strps are likely to be hard wearing, weather and conditions ressistant, and easy to see if they are suffering wear and tear, something mot so easy to see with bungee cords. Also, while working well, and in good condition, they provide a far more stable, secure, and knock resistant restraint than bungees ( which can degrade rapidly, don;t respond well to th weather and conditions, and can be knocked partially or completely out by rough handling) Furthermore, bungees require multiple holding pints to provide the versatility required, which often means metal screws or nails.

Cons to this design

• The uprights are already tapering out, partially due to loading heavy logs high up, but partially due to thinness, and lack of bracing at the top. Possible answers, use thicker timber, and make a top brace ( even from fabric or old busted ratchets), and brace hoirizontally with lumber - possible here to make the struts taller than the load by far so logs can still be fed in with ease, while providing reinforcement. Or use branches/ riven logs which can be easily, cheaply, and quickly be replaced into mortices/drilled holes. The stronger preesure treated scrawpwwod route is probably the way to go.
• Cut logs can tumble forward or back, possibly hitting the blade top, or your boots. Wear strong boots, and only cut log diameters where the blade tip protudes far out. Not an issue with this design.
• The rathchet strap visibility issue could be cut out if the uoprights were placed so a cut in the middle wasn;t necessary - measure the stove width, and then measure ed's stove width as a guide for smaller, and make uprights whore external width measures less tha one, or both. Also, the length of the straps can mean the fabric flutters in the wind - not ideal with  16000 rpm blade.
• onsider a flat footed tripod system that would worll well in the concrete yrd for the permanent one, and a flat footed tripod for the portable. ouls make stability good, aid longevity ( not being submerged) and would work well in my woodshed setup - no moving timber to and from the orchard.
• Next time buy bolts and washers. The lumber can be scrap, but the right sized bolts and washers will make repair, replacement and retouching quicker, and longevity better.
•  The rathchet strap, because it is so long, trails on the ground out from the horse. Could become a trip hazard in a log strewn area. Clear the work area after each batch, and track down or customise to a shorter strap.
• The whole sntructure, because of the height, weight of the logs, and the leg structure (pointed stakes that stick in the mud) can be top heavy, and lean over.
• The tapering uprights mean there might be a tendency to load larger, heavier logs towards the top, tapering the uprights further, and adding to the instability.

For the home based one, I'd sacrifice light weight for strength of construction, so I'll need to plan for two. I might also consider trying out a riving/cleaving brake design, which would be multi-purpose, and even cheaper ( greenwood), as well as light (the tripod versions could work well in the forest). I should build the riving brake soon, and test it, so I can make an informed decision about this before I need to replace the current solution. I do feel that the multiple log load aspect of the horse is the way to go. still, trialling will tell..