Curing and splitting wood for burning

Having had some trees pruned I now have a pile of logs. Cut to length but will need splitting before I can burn them in the grate. I have Holly and Willow wood.

Question is do I split them now or wait until they've cured and then split them? I'm expecting to have to leave them about 2 years to cure unsplit, would it speed the process if I split them now?

On a related note, I've looked at local and national hire shop web sites but can't immediately locate a log splitter. I don't expect to have any more tree logs coming my way for a good few years so hiring seems to make more sense then spending something like £200 for a splitter (I know you can do it by hand and I also know that there are splitters for as little as £150). I'm in "South Somerset" (between Yeovil/Frome/Wells/Street/Glastonbury/Radstock and, at a push, Bristol, Bath, Dorchester, Weymouth.).

Reply to
Graham Harrison
Loading thread data ...

"Graham Harrison" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@bt.com...

Perhaps ask a local Tree surgeon to assist, they might have even more logs if you ask and suggest there is beer involved ;-)

Reply to
RW

In article , "Graham Harrison" writes: |> Having had some trees pruned I now have a pile of logs. Cut to length but |> will need splitting before I can burn them in the grate. I have Holly and |> Willow wood.

Don't bother with the willow - it's trash. It won't keep going until completely dry, and then it burns to nothing in next to no time.

|> Question is do I split them now or wait until they've cured and then split |> them? I'm expecting to have to leave them about 2 years to cure unsplit, |> would it speed the process if I split them now?

Up to you and yes, respectively.

|> On a related note, I've looked at local and national hire shop web sites but |> can't immediately locate a log splitter. I don't expect to have any more |> tree logs coming my way for a good few years so hiring seems to make more |> sense then spending something like £200 for a splitter (I know you can do it |> by hand and I also know that there are splitters for as little as £150).

How many tons of wood you you have? You can split wood with a couple of hand axes, but buying a couple of wedges and a maul or club hammer will probably cost you less than hiring a functional mechanical device. Anything that works is likely to be large and heavy.

Regards, Nick Maclaren.

Reply to
Nick Maclaren

s:

Splitting logs by hand is very hard work. If the OP has=20 tons then this is just not an option. We heat our house=20 with a log burning stove and the logs arrive pre-split from=20 the farmer. He has some sort of hydraulic splitter=20 attachment for the back of his tractor. However, a few slip=20 though that are too big to get on the fire and splitting by=20 hand can be extremely difficult, particularly if there are=20 any knots in the wood.

While it is desirable to let the wood cure for two years it=20 is not essential depending on the type of wood. We ran out=20 of logs and the local farmer cut down a tree and brought us=20 the logs. I'm not sure what type of wood it is (possibly=20 oak) but we are burning it already (no choice) two weeks=20 after cutting! They key seems to be to have a very hot fire=20 initially, then it burns well. So while the fire is at full=20 heat the next log is put on the fire so it can be drying=20 ready to burn. This probably isn't the most efficient use=20 of the wood however, as some of the heat is being wasted=20 evaporating the moisture out of the logs.

--=20 David in Normandy

Reply to
David in Normandy

In article , David in Normandy writes: |> |> Splitting logs by hand is very hard work. If the OP has |> tons then this is just not an option.

Not usually, it isn't, though it can be. With a suitable wood (e.g. holly) that is fairly free of major knots, one stroke of an axe is all that is needed. You don't have to do it all at once, and it doesn't take long to do a hundredweight.

Some woods and ones with major knots are a different matter, but I have heard that they are beyond an el cheapo mechanical splitter, too. Surprise, surprise ....

|> We heat our house |> with a log burning stove and the logs arrive pre-split from |> the farmer. He has some sort of hydraulic splitter |> attachment for the back of his tractor.

Those work, on almost all woods. But I doubt the OP is likely to hire one.

|> I'm not sure what type of wood it is (possibly oak) ...

Oak is one of the harder ones to split. Not as bad as yew, though.

Regards, Nick Maclaren.

Reply to
Nick Maclaren

Hum, if you have a lot to do yes but otherwise it's just a decent bit of= physical effort. Ah I forgot "physical effort" is something the modern westerner thinks of as going to fridge for another beer to wash down the= ir microwaved TV dinner...

Use of a proper maul or splitting axe (approx =A315 from a shed) will be= a lot better than a hand axe, felling axe or wedges and lump hammer. If th= e OP has large diameter logs (>10" or so) then a bomb or grenade could be =

useful but stuff small should fall apart under a maul without trouble.

Burning "wet" logs, I'd keep an eye on the tar/soot levels in the flue.

Reply to
Dave Liquorice

I've got a heavy axe to split over-wide logs. Some split easily as you say, but it is still hard work. I wouldn't want to do more than a few at a time. Not good for arthritic joints :-( Definitely a job for muscular young men.

Wood with knots can be a nightmare. Some "split" logs that arrive are still joined via fat knots. Such pieces are virtually unusable.

A few logs also arrive too long to fit the stove. If the wood is fresh I can just use a bowsaw, or if the wood is seasoned and hard it is a job for the chainsaw. I tried chainsawing some really old oak beams and they were so hard the chainsaw struggled. The wood was smoking hot! Had to resharpen the teeth afterwards.

Ah the joys of a wood burning stove. No fuss or mess with a gas boiler. Just set the thermostat and job done. No messing about stacking logs, bringing them in everyday and stacking them next to the stove, then the ongoing task of starting the fire, topping it up and emptying ashes. That said, watching the real fire often beats watching television. Something satisfying about watching the flames licking around the wood and consuming it. The occasional highlight too when the wood bangs, spits or sparks.

There is a saying in France that you get warmed three times with wood. The first time cutting it, the second time stacking it and the third time burning it. How true.

Reply to
David in Normandy

The holly will be fine in a year - it's quite oily and is excellent firewood. I normally split when I'm about to bring it into the house. Willow isn't great as Nick has already said and will take a while to dry. Our local machinery rep loaned me various hydraulic log splitters for the odd weekend here and there 'til he finally got the message that I was never going to buy one. The wood I could split in a weekend didn't last long (wood is our sole heating and hotwater supply in a damp draughty barn of a 4 bedroomed house) and I didn't want to spend whole weekends splitting - oh and depending on the machine you still have to lift the logs onto the machine. So I find it more convenient to split as required using a proper log splitting maul - if two or three blows don't do it then it's put aside to do with the chainsaw later.

Reply to
Rod

As others have said, just find somewhere to get rid of the willow - it is just about the worst wood for a fire there is. Holly I don't know about but I can't imagine you've got that much as holly trees are that much smaller than willows, etc.

I'm going now to play the age game in that I used axe and splitters until I retired and at that point I bought a hydraulic machine. So if you are well off retiral age, then go and be a man and do it by hand !! Having said that the productivity, and lack of exhaustion (!), using a machine does seriously make it the desirable option.

Rob

Reply to
robgraham

"Graham Harrison" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@bt.com...

Manufactum have a lovely one. Google.

Mary

Reply to
Mary Fisher

...

We haven't had any problem with yew - although we don't burn it. It's far too valuable in other forms :-)

Mary

Reply to
Mary Fisher

In article , David in Normandy writes: |> |> I've got a heavy axe to split over-wide logs. Some split |> easily as you say, but it is still hard work. I wouldn't |> want to do more than a few at a time. Not good for |> arthritic joints :-( |> Definitely a job for muscular young men.

Hmm. I am past 60, and DEFINITELY not muscular in the arms! But I don't have arthritis (only tennis elbow).

|> Wood with knots can be a nightmare. Some "split" logs that |> arrive are still joined via fat knots. Such pieces are |> virtually unusable.

Agreed.

Regards, Nick Maclaren.

Reply to
Nick Maclaren

I'm only in my 40's but have little bits of bone growing in various places where they shouldn't. Some unfortunately into major nerves in my neck and also into my spinal cord. Thankfully it went into remission before my date for surgery came up so operation on hold. The surgery itself carries a risk of paralysis or death, so I'm hoping it stays permanently in remission. I just have to take care not to jar or inflame the vertebrae. Swinging an axe is something I do with care and moderation!

Reply to
David in Normandy

Don't burn it, turn it! Get a lathe and start making things.

Reply to
Skipweasel

But very satisfying. When Dutch Elm disease was rampant I did several /large/ elm trees. It took almost a whole summer holiday but boy was I fit at the end. Shoulders like Charles Atlas.

Reply to
Skipweasel

Elm's a complete sod. Once you've the knack it's still a complete sod.

Reply to
Skipweasel

Some questions for you and/or Rod, since you both use only wood. Can you tell me how much wood you use in a year --preferably not in cords, since I've no idea what a cord is. How many logs of what size per day, for example, and how many days per year? Or a figure in hundredweights. Does your stove run any radiators (I assume it heats water)? Can you pack the stove and let it burn slowly for a long period, or is it a case of feeding a log at a time?

The main reasons for asking are that I'm wondering about going over to wood as the base fuel for heating, (some)cooking, and hot water, and wondering about the feasibility, economic and otherwise.

Does anyone know what area of coppiced woodland it would take to be fuel self-sufficient?

Brian Mitchell

Reply to
brian mitchell

In article , David in Normandy writes: |> |> I'm only in my 40's but have little bits of bone growing in |> various places where they shouldn't. Some unfortunately |> into major nerves in my neck and also into my spinal cord. |> Thankfully it went into remission before my date for |> surgery came up so operation on hold. The surgery itself |> carries a risk of paralysis or death, so I'm hoping it |> stays permanently in remission. I just have to take care |> not to jar or inflame the vertebrae. Swinging an axe is |> something I do with care and moderation!

Oh, gosh. With that problem, you are quite right.

Regards, Nick Maclaren.

Reply to
Nick Maclaren

That's OK we've no idea what your house's heat loss is!

Log at a time is probably better for a number of reasons but if you must fill it then it's best to run it flat out and hot until there are only coals left, which can be left to idle. The main thing is to avoid smouldering, which is when the char slowly burns and pyrolyses the adjacent wood, the volatiles from this pass up the flue without burning, effectively wasting chemical heat but also fouling the flue.

It depends on the stocking, traditional coppice isn't particularly productive but if it has accrued a few decades of growth you may be starting with 100 tonnes/ha, at which stage there will be no annual increment. In cycle traditional coppice can yield about 10m^3/ha/annum depending how far down the tree you measure.

One m^3 of solid wood will contain about 400kg of dry hardwood like beech or oak but will fill a box twice as large when randomly thrown in. Fresh felled it will also contain about 400kg of water. Softwood will have as low as 300kg of wood and more water.

This 2m^3 stack of logged beech wood seasoned under cover may dry to

30% mc (wet wood basis) in one long summer season at which point its lower heating value will be around 1800kWhr(t), which would be worth about 45 quid at current gas prices if you neglect the inconvenience. Except the gas boiler will recover 90+% of the heat into the house, a very good wood burner may reach 75%.

AJH

Reply to
AJH

I love the signature and approve of the sentiment above.

I'm a 65-year-old who has heated with wood for almost 30 years now.

A cord, in Michigan, is 4'x4'x8', cut and stacked. However, since stoves and grates are always smaller than 4' wide, wood is usually cut to lengths of 16" to 18" or so. We call these "face cords", and they measure

4'x8'x16"-18". Here, the term "cord" refers to the "face cord". My Hardy Outdoor Wood Furnace takes a log 16" in diameter, 31" long, much to large and heavy to load into the furnace safely.

We try to cut for our purposes 24" and split everything down to "wife-size" pieces.

I live in a 40 acre Northern Hardwood Forest and burn everything, from Sugar Maple, American Beech, White Ash, to Basswood, Hoppes Hornbeam, local Hybrid Poplar, anything I can get my hands on. I think 10 acres would easily be a large enough stand if properly managed to glean firewood to support a home on a continuing basis.

I NEVER burn a piece of wood that will some day become a saw log or has any other marginal use (ash poles for pruning hooks, for example, or Black Cherry and Black Walnut that can be trimmed up and used in a wood shop), but I do burn all larger brush that can't be used or turned on the lathe. By brush I mean branches large enough to be worth my time. All other "brush" goes into my 30-year-old brush piles, a haven for many species of wildlife living in my woods.

I rely mostly on windfalls, and am permitted to cut in my neighbor's woods, which are extensive, so I've left my little paradise largely untouched over all these years.

I find the species are different in some ways. Maple should always be split immediately after felling the tree. If you let it sit for a while it will go "punk" as we say, rotten, or solidify into a brick-like mass that defies the sharpest of saws and prove nearly impossible to split by hand. White Ash, however, splits easily wet or dry. I attempt to split everything I cut immediately and stack it so the air and sun will dry it. More surface area the quicker it dries. I don't even cover my very large wood pile. The sun and wind dry it even through rains and snows.

I've seen charts that list the heat and weight of various woods and quality as firewood. Please Google for that, as it is informative as to species.

I split everything I need to with a 6-pound sledge hammer and heavy iron wedges, and I also occasionally use a 7-pound splitting wedge. Anything that resists the first attempt is put aside and cut into smaller pieces by chainsaw.

Perhaps it's just my belief, but swinging those mauls and hammers are the very best exercise imaginable. It opens up your shoulders and back, spine, hips, and legs. There's not a muscle in the body that isn't benefited by splitting wood.

Have at it.

Willow is junk. Don't burn any conifer, anything that stays green all winter, as they are full of pitch and you'll have a chimney fire. Burn only dry wood, hardwood, and you'll get the best heat for the pound or dollar. Some species (White Ash) actually seem to burn hotter and longer green and uncured than others (Maple and Beech). Of course, if the wood is green, it is wet, and you lose a lot of heat burning that water off before you benefit from the wood itself. Burning green wood is also a danger for chimney fires.

Safety first.

Good splitting to you.

I know this is a gardening group, and hope this is not off-topic.

Reply to
williams

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.