Tree Cabling| Bracing| Dynamic| Static

Ekka · 5th September 2008, 06:11 AM

Documents on how to brace and cable trees

TrevMcRev · 5th September 2008, 06:38 AM

I'd like to know why in the first doc, fig 2 c, Hub & Spoke should only be used when no other method can be???

Some reasoning or justification from an engineering point of view would be nice.

Apart from the cable manufacturers recommending the other methods because they use heaps more product...

treeseer · 5th September 2008, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TrevMcRev

I'd like to know why in the first doc, fig 2 c, Hub & Spoke should only be used when no other method can be?.

Trev it may be that if there are an even # of trunks it is better to have separate cables because there is not a chance the hub will fail. re amt of mtl i don't see a big dif.

The UT pub just nutshells the bmp's. It is a bit dated but still generally accurate--the standards and bmp's and the harris book have been updated since. smiley's paper was key in getting higher bracing--good research effectively used.

TrevMcRev · 6th September 2008, 12:17 AM

Yeah with steel cable its probably not significant in materials cost, but with cobra it is.

I've used cobra on a central ring system (hub & spoke) with no real concern about ring failure, you can use rated crane lifting rings.

I forget the specs on this one, but several ton i think.

It's been in about 4 years now.

treeseer · 6th September 2008, 04:21 AM

looks like an effective system, something the ANSI committee should review. no matter if you're in australia you can send it to them.

Ekka · 6th September 2008, 04:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TrevMcRev

I'd like to know why in the first doc, fig 2 c, Hub & Spoke should only be used when no other method can be???

Some reasoning or justification from an engineering point of view would be nice.

Will get to logical answer at bottom.

Quote:

Originally Posted by treeseer

Trev it may be that if there are an even # of trunks it is better to have separate cables because there is not a chance the hub will fail. re amt of mtl i don't see a big dif.

Nope, missed the point. Competency Not Achieved.

Quote:

Originally Posted by treeseer

looks like an effective system, something the ANSI committee should review. no matter if you're in australia you can send it to them.

Before you do anything the point is in C the stems can move in direction of arrow shown which cannot happen with D.

treeseer · 6th September 2008, 05:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ekka

Nope, missed the point. Competency Not Achieved.

OK your reason may be better. I shall study harder, sensei.

5th September 2008, 06:38 AM	#2 (permalink)
TrevMcRev Sponsor Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Posts: 973	Re: Tree Cabling\| Bracing\| Dynamic\| Static I'd like to know why in the first doc, fig 2 c, Hub & Spoke should only be used when no other method can be??? Some reasoning or justification from an engineering point of view would be nice. Apart from the cable manufacturers recommending the other methods because they use heaps more product... __________________ Total Tree Care - Melbourne Arborist Reports & Consulting,Tree Pruning & Removal www.treegear.com.au - Australia's Best Value Arborist Supplies

6th September 2008, 04:21 AM	#5 (permalink)
treeseer Over mature heritage tree Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: SE USA Posts: 889	Re: Tree Cabling\| Bracing\| Dynamic\| Static looks like an effective system, something the ANSI committee should review. no matter if you're in australia you can send it to them. __________________ Guy Meilleur \| Forensic Arborist \| Better Tree Care

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode