Log length == Split Cord

Very tough to estimate unless you see before (log lengths) and after (stacked rows of splits). I got a grapple this year and I thought I would get far more than I ended up with...don't get me wrong, it's still the cheapest way aside from scrounging/free wood. Too many variables...how long the logs are, how thick...eyeballing only gets better with experience.

yeah, its real tough, basically have to estimate and even a person delivering the wood is really estimating..Basically they figure out per truck..How many cords per truck and then fill it with logs of pretty much the same length..a typical 5500 series dump truck style will carry about 2 full cord of logs.

Does the truck driver know the weight of the load? If so you may be able to come up with a ballpark estimate assuming green wood is 3,500 - 4,000# per cord.

I would find it rare for a driver to hit some scales prior to delivering but hey, you never know

Probably not, but I know that I have a pretty good idea how much my truck can handle and when I'm getting close. Have to think a guy that does it for a living has a better instinct for it than me. Maybe I'm naive, but with all the talk about structuarly defective bridges I hope that truck drivers know how much they weigh and whether they should or should not cross a bridge.
Having said that, I realize truckers are paid by the trip and want to do as many trips per day as they can without agonizing over details.

yeah, I would imagine that they have a pretty good idea..

Ok so heres a similar question. Perhaps should be a second post but kinda fits here,
If I had a stack of log length wood 4x4x8 and cut it up to 16" rounds and split it would I have a cord or would it get smaller or grow?

I think generally speaking the smaller the size of the item the more compact it becomes. Think grains of sand versus beach balls. So as you process wood from logs to rounds to splits, at each step of the way you are going to occupy less space. So 2,000# of 8' logs will occupy less volume than 2,000# of 16" split wood.

nshif said:

Ok so heres a similar question. Perhaps should be a second post but kinda fits here,
If I had a stack of log length wood 4x4x8 and cut it up to 16" rounds and split it would I have a cord or would it get smaller or grow?

Click to expand...

Great question. Unlike Sean, I think it would grow since it no longer fits as snuggly. However, that's just my thought. This spring I pulled up about 4 "cords" of mostly lying dead that I cut in 4' and 8' lengths and stacked them just as you described and covered the tops with tarps to at least stop them from getting wet and maybe to even dry more. I now need to process them so I'll find out what I do get.

SeanD said:

I think generally speaking the smaller the size of the item the more compact it becomes. Think grains of sand versus beach balls. So as you process wood from logs to rounds to splits, at each step of the way you are going to occupy less space. So 2,000# of 8' logs will occupy less volume than 2,000# of 16" split wood.

Click to expand...

Actually, if both the beach balls and the sand grains are the same shape, then they pack to an identical density. The beach balls seem less dense because of the larger contiguous gaps, but all those little gaps between the grains add up. (Think how much water you can pour into dry sand without it expanding.) With wood, you are typically going from irregular logs that don't pack terribly well to much more uniform splits with a variety of complementary shapes, so I think you will be able to pack the splits more efficiently.

I'm going with the majority (so far). 16" splits have less fiber per cord than 16', some crooked, some straight, some big, some small. The cordage will grow as you split it smaller.

If you have a 4x4x8 pile of log lengths and process them, you will loose some volume just from converting some of the wood to sawdust and splitting chips. It will likely pack tighter after processing as well. All else being equal, large diameter logs will produce more volume of splits, a small diameter log will tend to stay about the same or shrink in volume.

In terms of truck size, the standard tree service truck around here (a straight truck with stake sides and a crane on the back) is supposedly good for 4-6 cords depending on how the logs pack. If you find the Hearth Party thread, I have a couple pictures of a truckload that I had delivered - I'm guessing about three cords out of the half truck load. but it will also give you an idea of the size of the truck.

Gooserider

In my experience, the number of cords of processed wood should be roughly equal to the volume of log lengths. I used to buy tri-axle loads of logs that scaled 7.5 cords per load. I always got at least 7 cords of split wood out of the deal, usually a bit more. While it's true that you lose some volume in the form of sawdust, odds and ends, etc., a round split into 6 pieces and stacked is going to take up more volume than the unsplit round would have.

The truck driver knows exactly how much wood his truck holds. Whether he's sharing that with you is another question. But the math is pretty simple, so you can get a pretty good estimate just by measuring the load up on the truck.

I read (in a wood book) years ago that the smaller around (or split) the wood is, the more wood you get in a cord. It said that the larger the log, the larger the air gap between the wood...the smaller the log, the smaller the air gap. Guess this can be debated over and over, just stating what I read.

Stickburner

Eric Johnson said:

IWhile it's true that you lose some volume in the form of sawdust, odds and ends, etc., a round split into 6 pieces and stacked is going to take up more volume than the unsplit round would have.

Click to expand...

Ultimately this discussion points out the main weakness of the definition of a cord, because we can both be right given the right circumstances. If you start with a stack of large and irregular/crooked unsplit logs that don't pack so tightly, and you cut and split them uniformly and your OCD takes over when you stack the splits, then you may "lose" some cordage. If you start with nicely packed uniform, straight poles and stack the splits somewhat less carefully, then you may well "gain" cordage.

Given that it pretty much requires a swimming pool to measure true wood volume directly, though, I guess we'll have to stick with cords.