New Wood Rack

  • Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.

    We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.

    We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Gasass

Member
Mar 3, 2013
99
South Jersey
I'm thinking about building a new wood rack to hold around 2 cords of wood. Space is somewhat limited in the yard, so I want to maximize the amount of wood the rack can hold.

Common sense tells me single rows of splits dry the quickest, however, I'd like to build this rack 48" deep. With the splits being 16" long, how will the drying time of the middle row of splits be affected?
 
Her is a picture of one of mine. They are 4 wide x 5 tall x 16 long, I have 4 of them , 1 20 foot long and 1 that is 8 foot long. I need to build 4-5 more . Mine are all treated with metal roof.
 

Attachments

  • rack1a.JPG
    rack1a.JPG
    67.6 KB · Views: 271
  • Like
Reactions: albert1029
I'm thinking about building a new wood rack to hold around 2 cords of wood. Space is somewhat limited in the yard, so I want to maximize the amount of wood the rack can hold.

Common sense tells me single rows of splits dry the quickest, however, I'd like to build this rack 48" deep. With the splits being 16" long, how will the drying time of the middle row of splits be affected?

Maybe sometimes common sense doesn't work?
Christmas-2008b.JPG Wood-2009c.JPG

Notice the difference between the two pictures. No, not the snow, but see how they are stacked. Most of the time we stack as in the second picture; that is, 3 rows together stacked at 4 1/2' high. Now it would seem that if the center rows did not dry the same as the outside rows, then after a time that center row would be higher than the outside rows. We generally find that it is common for the stacks to shrink down to 4' in height by the time we top cover. The wood is usually stacked by early April and top covered about this time of the year. Yet, we have no problems with those center rows drying.

In the first picture. I think we at one time had 21 rows stacked right against each other with no space in between. We had no problems drying the wood and I might add that in this particular spot, the wood got very little sunshine. In the second picture, the far rows got lots of sunshine but the rows on the right got very little sun. Yet, all the wood stays at the same level.


Having said this, I would add that if I had to dry wood the fastest, I would no doubt stack a maximum of 4' high and stack in single rows with at least 3' between the rows. For sure I would stack in the windiest spot I could find on the place. Also make sure the wood does not touch the ground. On covering the wood, that depends somewhat upon your climate. As stated, we don't until this time of the year but some areas just get so much rain that it pays to top cover a bit earlier.


One more thought is that you mentioned space. Stacking as in the second picture, 3 rows 8' long and if they are 16" length logs, that one block of 3 rows gets you a cord of wood. And of you stack like that second picture, there is no additional costs involved. We cut saplings in the woods. Lay two of them down and stack on top of them. Crib the ends and do it neatly. If you need practice with this, then tend to have the cribbed ends slanting toward the rest of the pile rather than slanting outward as that could cause the stack to fall over. Do it right and it won't fall over and you don't have to buy anything. Your cost is enough just getting the wood so why add to it if you don't have to?
 
  • Like
Reactions: albert1029
Maybe sometimes common sense doesn't work?
View attachment 119173 View attachment 119174

Notice the difference between the two pictures. No, not the snow, but see how they are stacked. Most of the time we stack as in the second picture; that is, 3 rows together stacked at 4 1/2' high. Now it would seem that if the center rows did not dry the same as the outside rows, then after a time that center row would be higher than the outside rows. We generally find that it is common for the stacks to shrink down to 4' in height by the time we top cover. The wood is usually stacked by early April and top covered about this time of the year. Yet, we have no problems with those center rows drying.

In the first picture. I think we at one time had 21 rows stacked right against each other with no space in between. We had no problems drying the wood and I might add that in this particular spot, the wood got very little sunshine. In the second picture, the far rows got lots of sunshine but the rows on the right got very little sun. Yet, all the wood stays at the same level.


Having said this, I would add that if I had to dry wood the fastest, I would no doubt stack a maximum of 4' high and stack in single rows with at least 3' between the rows. For sure I would stack in the windiest spot I could find on the place. Also make sure the wood does not touch the ground. On covering the wood, that depends somewhat upon your climate. As stated, we don't until this time of the year but some areas just get so much rain that it pays to top cover a bit earlier.


One more thought is that you mentioned space. Stacking as in the second picture, 3 rows 8' long and if they are 16" length logs, that one block of 3 rows gets you a cord of wood. And of you stack like that second picture, there is no additional costs involved. We cut saplings in the woods. Lay two of them down and stack on top of them. Crib the ends and do it neatly. If you need practice with this, then tend to have the cribbed ends slanting toward the rest of the pile rather than slanting outward as that could cause the stack to fall over. Do it right and it won't fall over and you don't have to buy anything. Your cost is enough just getting the wood so why add to it if you don't have to?

Good to know I wont have any drying issues with the center stacks.

I have single rows now with cribbed ends. I find as I burn wood and then want to replace it, the unseasoned wood tends to get mixed with the seasoned. Not to mention, I have about 5 rows scattered throughout the yard... not the most appealing thing to look at.

After building the new wood rack, I'll be able to consolidate most of the single row stacks into one. Also,the new rack will be 16' long and have dividers every 4' so I can keep the green wood separate from the seasoned.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Backwoods Savage
Don't forget BWS is drying Ash. Oak takes at least two years in single rows in my yard, in the sun.
 
Don't forget BWS is drying Ash. Oak takes at least two years in single rows in my yard, in the sun.

Don't forget that BWS is also drying oak. But oak takes 3 years here. Sun not needed but can help. Wind is the bigger key.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paulywalnut
I go three rows deep and about 5' high with my stacks. Ash, Black Locust, or Red Oak, in three years the middle is plenty dry. Being on only 1/4 acre, single rows is not an option if I want to keep three years worth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Backwoods Savage
Oak or Ash. Let them season 3 years. It makes a big difference the way they burn.
Some people don't have the room to let wood season 3 years. Two is the best I can do for oak. Maple, ash, cherry, etc will get 1 yr or a couple months more
 
Some people don't have the room to let wood season 3 years. Two is the best I can do for oak. Maple, ash, cherry, etc will get 1 yr or a couple months more

I keep 13 cords on a 1/4 acre lot. It is basically a stack just over 4' deep, by about 5' tall and about 100' long with a couple breaks in it. Makes a decent wall along the property line. It can be done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Backwoods Savage
Flatbed I am like you my lot is about the size of yours and we have right now over 20 cord. If you haven't got the room to go out or wider, you can always go up higher.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Backwoods Savage
20 cords on 1/4 acre! That is impressive. I didn't think anybody in Illinois, and not in Chicago, lived on only 1/4 acre.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Backwoods Savage
Status
Not open for further replies.