iDRY Vacuum Kilns

Sponsors:

Sawmills & Wood Processors--Truths and Myths

Started by Chansey, January 04, 2011, 09:59:29 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Chansey

Hi All,
Interesting day--log mill was taking delivery of a 2010 Wood Processor manufactured by one of our forum sponsors.  Unit was used but low -low hours and in like new condition.  Unit arrived late today about an hour before dark.  Requested that the unit be setup and operated.

The unit was advertised as having a 20" log capacity and up to 2.5 cords per hour.  While unloading the coneyor, the delivery/salesperson dropped the conveyor and bent the feed trough and bent two of the all-thread adjusters on the belt.  Also bent the axle on the conveyor.  After some pounding and bending, the belt tension was finally set again and ready to operate.  We had set up logs for the trial; 17", 18", 19" and 20".  Loaded all on the live deck with the smallest log first.  Here's what resulted.........

The 17" log hung up on the feed conveyor sides--log diameter issue-pushed the log by hand (actual size was 16" at the feed end)

The 17" log had a knot on one side and would not clear the log clamp

The  log was rotated by hand to clear

Hydraulic chainsaw cleared the log surface by 1/2"

The 4-way wedge split the log into 4 massive pieces.  Did not re-introduce the split pieces back into the splitter.  Wanted to see production.

The second cut went fine and fell into the splitter (pushed by hand).  The splitter was activated....nothing happened...stalled.  Tried to split the block again...same result.  Examuined the log contact with the wedge--the height of the log was above the tip of the wedge and was hitting the top plate of the wedge (non-splitting component).  Removed the block and measured the distance from the top of the wedge to the botton of the splitter slide deck---16".... hmmmm.  The log diameter at the wedge was 17".  Where does the advertised 20" diameter log size come into play??

The owner of the sawmill said , "I can't use this, all of my logs are like the one's on the deck".  The salesman said he had never cut logs that big. Tried to talk his way around the issue.  By now it was dark and I departed.

Questions for the forum:
Is it common for sawmill and wood processor manufacturers to mis-state capacity?

If the unit is field tested before being offered to consumers, wouldn't a max capacity log be used in a trial?

Can someone recommend a mid-range processor that lives up to the hype??  Asking price on the unit noted was $30,000.

What else do we need to look out for in the future??


ATLGA

""""Is it common for sawmill and wood processor manufacturers to mis-state capacity?""""

Where to start on this one.. I would say that for my team we have not been able to reproduce the results our mill maker advertises.  I think most of those ratings are best case scenario with a super start operator. ..
America First.

Chansey

Geez,
I beg your pardon...super star has nothing to do with the situation.

If the feed conveyor can't move the log into the cut position, it has nothing to do with the operator.  It is simply that the feed trough has too small of an opening to accept a 17" log that the machine is rated to accept a 20" log.  What about the log not clearing the log clamp.  Even after cutting through the knot portion, the log diameter was only 18".  To me, this means that the log clap clearance was meant to be only for a 16" log at a maximum.  The operator has nothing to do with the splitter not being able to split the log.  Not mentioned earlier, the log was rotated 4 times and 4 times it failed to split a 17" log.

Pray tell,  what fault the operator has in all this. ???

The mill owner accepted the splitter after an additional $2000 discount on the purchase price.  New issue with the unit, if there is any, I mean any movement of the log during the cutting cycle, the chain bogs down or stops cutting.  Very time consuming to back off and restart several times.  Could cut faster with the good ole Stihl.

Modifications will need to be made;
The wedge design is VERY faulty
The hydraulic circuit to the chainsaw will have to be reviewed
The fixed angle on the conveyor is too steep--cut material rolls back down to the trough
This post is not meant to be derogatory, just simply stating facts.  Even though the machine is produced by a manufacturer, it doesn't mean that it functions as promised.

cowtipper

Quote from: Chansey on January 06, 2011, 01:10:08 AM
Geez,
I beg your pardon...super star has nothing to do with the situation.

If the feed conveyor can't move the log into the cut position, it has nothing to do with the operator.  It is simply that the feed trough has too small of an opening to accept a 17" log that the machine is rated to accept a 20" log.  What about the log not clearing the log clamp.  Even after cutting through the knot portion, the log diameter was only 18".  To me, this means that the log clap clearance was meant to be only for a 16" log at a maximum.  The operator has nothing to do with the splitter not being able to split the log.  Not mentioned earlier, the log was rotated 4 times and 4 times it failed to split a 17" log.

Pray tell,  what fault the operator has in all this. ???

The mill owner accepted the splitter after an additional $2000 discount on the purchase price.  New issue with the unit, if there is any, I mean any movement of the log during the cutting cycle, the chain bogs down or stops cutting.  Very time consuming to back off and restart several times.  Could cut faster with the good ole Stihl.

Modifications will need to be made;
The wedge design is VERY faulty
The hydraulic circuit to the chainsaw will have to be reviewed
The fixed angle on the conveyor is too steep--cut material rolls back down to the trough
This post is not meant to be derogatory, just simply stating facts.  Even though the machine is produced by a manufacturer, it doesn't mean that it functions as promised.


I think what ATLGA was saying is to get the production numbers the manufactures states is that "there" operator has to be the super star, and "They" know all the ends and outs. Not the other way around.  Not sure if this is a good example... they say it only takes 10 mins to get up and running, but what they leave out to get it up and running in 10 min you have to do it a 1,000 times before you get to the 10 min mark.

Thats how I rad ALTGA comments, could be wrong but that what I read.

ATLGA

Cowtipper,
I read me right.

Chansey,
I hope the vendor gets you squared away.
America First.

AvT

I recently bought a firewood processor and bandmill.  They havn't mistated the capacities and production rates, however I will say that the firewood processor would not process the maximum size very efficiently. To process the maximum size the log better be perfictly straight and no part of it  can protrude outside that diameter, not enven and eighth of and inch.  As for production rate the manufacturer maximum rate could be achieved with perfect size logs and lots of helpers for bucking logs and loading the deck.  I was fortunate because the sales reps I had made it quite clear what the limitations of the machines are and they were quite knowlegable about the stuff they were selling.  I was surprised they were so forthcoming with the limitaqtions of the machines.  From what I have learned one can assume the production rates stated can be cut in half and the capacities should be dropped by 25% in the real world.  I would be interested to hear from other members here if my assumptions are accurate  because my experience is quite limited
Wannabe sawyer, Cord King M1820 firewood processor Palax KS35 Ergo firewood Processor, 5403 John Deere, Bunch of other farm equipment,   LT70 Remote Woodmizer.  All good things but the best things in life are free.. If you don't believe me.. hold your breath for 2 minutes

Buck

I am intersted in knowing more about your machine and to tell you about mine without bashing anyone on open forum.  If you want, I will pm you. I will say that I am loyal to Woodmizer when it comes to sawmills.
Respect is earned. Honesty is appreciated. Trust is gained. Loyalty is returned.

Live....like someone left the gate open

ATLGA

Quote from: AvT on January 06, 2011, 11:56:58 AM
I recently bought a firewood processor and bandmill.  They havn't mistated the capacities and production rates, however I will say that the firewood processor would not process the maximum size very efficiently. To process the maximum size the log better be perfictly straight and no part of it  can protrude outside that diameter, not enven and eighth of and inch.  As for production rate the manufacturer maximum rate could be achieved with perfect size logs and lots of helpers for bucking logs and loading the deck.  I was fortunate because the sales reps I had made it quite clear what the limitations of the machines are and they were quite knowlegable about the stuff they were selling.  I was surprised they were so forthcoming with the limitaqtions of the machines.  From what I have learned one can assume the production rates stated can be cut in half and the capacities should be dropped by 25% in the real world.  I would be interested to hear from other members here if my assumptions are accurate  because my experience is quite limited


AVT that sounds about right sir.  :P
America First.

Ron Wenrich

When we bought a new mill, we had to make engineering readjustments.  We did that to improve what was adequate for most operations, but not up to my standards.  We've rebuilt the hydraulics, improved welds and some general engineering shortfalls.

We also had problems with a processor that needed the hydraulics reworked.  Fortunately, we have a crack hydraulics engineer that used to work for DeBeers in the mining end. 

Never under estimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

r.man

I do wonder if the designers or final designers of these products actually use the products themselves. I talked a number of times to a fellow who bought a fairly small wood processor from a national manufacturer. Overall he is happy with how the machine works but he needed to change some fairly basic things. One of the things he did was grind off sharp edges and corners. One in particular was right where the operator regularly reaches across and he opened up his arm within the first week. That sort of thing should not happen.
Life is too short or my list is too long, not sure which. Dec 2014

Chansey

I believe that one of the industry "myths" is that because a well known manufacturer puts a unit on the market that it is the latest and greatest and that  it has been field tested and will operate and perform as the sales/marketing group says it will.

The intent  of this thread was not to bash any processor or company.  It was ment to bring about awarness to what "new" buyers  or individuals just getting into the industry need to be aware of and what to look out for when purchasing a processor or similar equipment.

I agree that some of the "basics" in operation and fabrication are overlooked on a regular basis.  From my past experience, designers seldom have field experience and design primarily for function. I have been fortunate to hold upper level management positions where I could provide design input with an eye towards operator safety, operational maintenance, repair and overhaul.

Another issue came up to day.  Wanted to make a chain change.  Seemed simple enough.  Two bolts holding the hydraulic motor and bar with a chain adjustment screw.  Off it came--easily.  Now to install the new chain.  You have to loop the chain around the motor and let it hang.  Since the bolts run through the motor bolt holes, blade holes and then the mounting plate, you almost need 3 hands to try and align everything.  Now comes the fun part, install the chain on the blade.  You can't have both bolts in place.  More juggling and a few  ## !!! *** choice words.  The fix was to install stud bolts into the mounting plate.  Now there are no moving parts.  Just place the chain on the bar and slide it on to the studs. Next place the motor onto the studs and tighten the nuts slightly and adjust the chain, finish tightening the nuts.

Who knows why the factory couldn't figure out this simple fix.

r.man

I would use the word fix if the motor no longer had to be removed to change a chain. Sounds like you have improved matters but without a major redesign and reno you will be taking off that motor a lot of times in the life of the machine. I will say this for the machine that I saw, you didn't have to remove a motor to change the chain.
Life is too short or my list is too long, not sure which. Dec 2014

Chansey

Totally agree with your comment.  The motor should have been mounted on the far side.  We were running a large wood order and knew we would be changing chains again--several times in fact.  It did take the time to change a chain from 20 min to 5 min !!!!!

When things slow down perhaps we can make a week or two of time and permanently do all of the FIXES that are required.  

I have fabricated a new 6-way wedge to install on the machine.  I'll post some photos of it tomorrow.  The 4-way it currently has is totally unacceptable--more than 50% of the splits need to be split again.  One of the major issues is that all of the raise/lower cylinder movement is UPWARD---EXACTLY WHERE YOU DON'T WANT IT.  The unit can not accept larger logs in order to be able to use the function   The only thing it is good for is a single pass split on an 8" log--we don't have any that small.

Ron Wenrich

One thing I have learned is that equipment manufacturers are in the business to sell equipment, not saw wood or whatever its supposedly designed for.  To that end, they put equipment out there that has been designed for the initial installation, not continued service. 

To give an example, oil filters on many cars have always been put in a position that are hard or next to impossible for the backyard mechanic to change.  Simple engineering could change that, but it adds expense to cars.  Short term gains for the manufacturer, but long term headaches for the consumer.

The other thing is the quality of material used.  The engineering may be sound, but the off the shelf part quality is low.  When we put in our Canadian mill, it had Czech bearings.  They weren't very good and quickly deteriorated.  I said to the president of the company that they used subpar parts to create a profit.  He agreed, but didn't replace any parts. 

Our replacement parts have ended up being all American.  It isn't from a patriotic standpoint that we come to that decision.  It is all economics.  American roller chain is superior, as is American bearings.  We pay more money, but save due to extended life of the product.  Less downtime, less expense in repairs, and usually less expense in parts in the long run.   
Never under estimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

Thank You Sponsors!