# Yield in split firewood from a stack of rounds?



## Adkjake (Oct 26, 2011)

The earlier post on why stack rounds got me thinking, does anyone know of a back of the napkin formula to figure out 
what a given amount of rounds will yield when split and stacked? Thinned out some trees on the property and ended up with a
face cord of rounds (4ftx8ftx16in) after bucking the downed trees. Rounds are a mix of 8 to 12 inch diameter. 

When I split them (mostly in halves) and stack, will I have more, less or about the same as the face cord of rounds?


----------



## Constrictor (Oct 26, 2011)

what is a face cord?


----------



## sblat (Oct 26, 2011)

A face cord is roughly 1/3 of a cord.  That is how most wood is sold here where I live in MI.  Dimensions 4'x8'x16".  I have a similar situation at my house.  Been cutting at a friends farm and have a row of 12-18 inch rounds 30' long and 5' high.


----------



## Woody Stover (Oct 26, 2011)

The yield would probably vary depending on split size, but it'll stack out to more volume than the rounds, that much I know.


----------



## fahmahbob (Oct 26, 2011)

I'd swear someone on this forum (probably BK but I'm not sure) did an experiment in miniature that addressed this very question. I can't seem to find it with the search feature, though. And for the life of me I can't remember the outcome.


----------



## ISeeDeadBTUs (Oct 26, 2011)

It's obligatory. Every year we MUST have this debate about how a cord is measured and whether a cord split is the same as a cord unsplit.

A cord is a cord. Some people {sellers} just stack them more loosely than others{buyers}.

Debate away ;-P


----------



## Danno77 (Oct 26, 2011)

fahmahbob said:
			
		

> I'd swear someone on this forum (probably BK but I'm not sure) did an experiment in miniature that addressed this very question. I can't seem to find it with the search feature, though. And for the life of me I can't remember the outcome.


Yes, someone did with little tiny dowel rods or something.

I also did one with a couple of giant rounds and I think I came up with "add 10% more volume" getting you close...


----------



## Danno77 (Oct 26, 2011)

Oh yeah, then don't forget to subtract 3-5% after it shrinks from seasoning!


----------



## onetracker (Oct 26, 2011)

Adkjake said:
			
		

> The earlier post on why stack rounds got me thinking, does anyone know of a back of the napkin formula to figure out
> what a given amount of rounds will yield when split and stacked? Thinned out some trees on the property and ended up with a
> face cord of rounds (4ftx8ftx16in) after bucking the downed trees. Rounds are a mix of 8 to 12 inch diameter.
> 
> When I split them (mostly in halves) and stack, will I have more, less or about the same as the face cord of rounds?



you'll have more volume.

i'll see if i can't find the post...maybe it was over on the arborist site.
simply:

take a round that fits nicely in, say, a 5 gallon bucket 
split it down a few times.
try to put it back in the bucket
see what happens

that's why one of my local wood sellers, who sells by the truckload, ALWAYS splits his rounds at least in 1/4's.


----------



## basswidow (Oct 26, 2011)

Yeah -  I would think after splitting it would be just the same amount.


----------



## Kenster (Oct 26, 2011)

sblattert said:
			
		

> A face cord is roughly 1/3 of a cord.  That is how most wood is sold here where I live in MI.  Dimensions 4'x8'x16".  I have a similar situation at my house.  Been cutting at a friends farm and have a row of 12-18 inch rounds 30' long and 5' high.



I suspect Constrictor was being a bit facetious when he asked "what is a face cord."   Many of us prefer not to acknowledge the existence of this bogus measurement, preferring to speak only in terms of cords and fractions thereof.   Honestly, any member of this forum should know better than to use any unit of measurement other than a 'cord.'


----------



## Kenster (Oct 26, 2011)

basswidow said:
			
		

> Yeah -  I would think after splitting it would be just the same amount.



It would be the same volume and weight of wood (not allowing for chips and other waste) but a cord is not really a measurement of wood.  It's a measurement of space: 128 cubic feet.
How you fill that space depends on the size of the split and how tightly you can pack it.


----------



## Constrictor (Oct 26, 2011)

Constrictor said:
			
		

> what is a face cord?


I dont understand the facecord bit. Its kind of like buying wood by the board foot. a board foot is 12"x12"x1" thick if you want a board thats 12"x12"x1.5" thick thats gonna be 1.5 board feet. so no one asks for a "face board foot" of lumber, it doesnt make sense because the thickness of the wood determines how many board feet a 12"x12" board is. I cut all my wood 24" long so a "face cord" would be 1/2 cord.


----------



## bogydave (Oct 26, 2011)

Like Ken said;
You'll have the same amount of wood, just a little more total air space between the pieces. IMO
Some say rounds take more space than splits. I've not found that true for my wood.
A cord is roughly considered to be 85 to 90 cubic feet of wood with no air space, 128 cubic feet of space needed when stacked.
How much more air space? It depends on how well/tight you stack it. 
I rarely have good straight grained wood so the amount of space I need to stack the splits VS the rounds is more than if I had good straight splits.
How many times you split it adds to the space needed.
If you are just splitting in 1/2, I don't think the space needed will grow much, but I think it will grow. 
But I'v never really tested my theory & think the straightness of the wood grain would be a big variable.

Maybe you could do a test, make a 4' X4' square from some 2X2s, fill it tight with rounds, then split it & see if it fits back into the square.


----------



## SolarAndWood (Oct 27, 2011)

Consider a perfectly circular and straight 4' round, 4' in diameter.  Volume of the round is 2 x 3.14 X 2 X 4 or 50.24 cu ft.  Commonly accepted volume of actual wood in half a cord is 40-45 cu ft.


----------



## cptoneleg (Oct 27, 2011)

Adkjake said:
			
		

> The earlier post on why stack rounds got me thinking, does anyone know of a back of the napkin formula to figure out
> what a given amount of rounds will yield when split and stacked? Thinned out some trees on the property and ended up with a
> face cord of rounds (4ftx8ftx16in) after bucking the downed trees. Rounds are a mix of 8 to 12 inch diameter.
> 
> When I split them (mostly in halves) and stack, will I have more, less or about the same as the face cord of rounds?





Why don't you split them and tell us, and try using the firewwod calculator


----------



## nate379 (Oct 27, 2011)

When I bought wood this year most of it was in rounds and stacked.  The one deal I bought it measured out to 5 cords in the round.  I bought it as being 4 cords.  After I had split everything I was just under 4 cords.


----------



## Kenster (Oct 27, 2011)

NATE379 said:
			
		

> When I bought wood this year most of it was in rounds and stacked.  The one deal I bought it measured out to 5 cords in the round.  I bought it as being 4 cords.  After I had split everything I was just under 4 cords.



Surprising that the wood measured out 20% LESS
split than in the round.  How would one explain that?


----------



## nate379 (Oct 27, 2011)

I'm not sure why that would suprise you?  In the round takes much more room to stack then it does if it's split.


----------



## bogydave (Oct 27, 2011)

NATE379 said:
			
		

> measured out to 5 cords in the round.  I bought it as being 4 cords.  After I had split everything I was just under 4 cords.


Typical wood sellers.
They know magic: 
Paid for 4 cords, got 5 cords, ended up with less than 4 cords.
The guy is good.
lots of hollow logs/rounds?


----------



## nate379 (Oct 27, 2011)

Huh?

The guy had 5 cords in the round when I (ME) measured it.

We both agreed that corded in the round would not be the same as corded when it's split.  I estimated it would be 4 cords when all split and he agreed that sounded about right.  Some of the rounds where quite large...2.5ft across plus. (never seen birch that big before!).

After I got it all split I ended up with a bit under 4 cords.  Something like 3.8 or 3.9 cords.




			
				bogydave said:
			
		

> NATE379 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Kenster (Oct 27, 2011)

That makes absolutely no sense. As per most of the posts in this and similar threads,  space required to stack wood increases when it is split, not decreases. 
You can't split a round in half, put it back together, and tell us it will now occupy less space in the stack. 

I think this is an example of a rare event when a buyer actually pulled one over on a wood vendor.


----------



## MasterMech (Oct 27, 2011)

Kenster said:
			
		

> NATE379 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Less airspace with well stacked splits?

All that garbage/kindling you get from splitting? 4 cords can leave quite a mess but I doubt you'd get a cords worth!  :gulp:


----------



## nate379 (Oct 27, 2011)

How can a stack of rounds take less room than those same rounds split and stacked?

There is all sorts of air space in the stack of rounds, more so with larger rounds.

When those rounds are split and stacked there is much less air space between teh pieces.

I didn't pull anything over on anyone.  I paid for 4 cords of wood and ended up with just under 4 cords.... If anything he got the better deal.


edit: Now that I think of it there was some of that that I threw into the punky/ungly bin for campfires so it was in the end probably right at 4 cords.

edit:
Also maybe wood is sold different elsewhere but all the wood I have bought the cords where measured after it was all bucked, split and stacked.  I was just trying to point out that a "cord" stacked in rounds would probably end up being more like .75-.8 cords once split


----------



## dave360up (Oct 27, 2011)

I recently split a face cord of red maple rounds that was stacked between two trees.  These were approximately 11"-15" diameter rounds, and I generally quartered the smaller ones and split the larger ones into 6 or 8 pieces.  There is no question that  the split wood took up less volume than the unsplit rounds.  
The volume of the gaps between the rounds themselves, the trees on either side, and the logs on the ground they were stacked on was greater than the volume of the gaps between the stacked split wood pieces and these same straight-sided "container walls".


----------



## Waulie (Oct 27, 2011)

It makes total sense to me that stack rounds take up more space the splits.  There's more air space created when circles are placed next to each other.  Triangles, squares, and rectangles tend to fit quite nicely together.


----------



## bogydave (Oct 27, 2011)

Again the magical dilemma is debated. "More or less volume from rounds to splits???"
Mine grow but maybe it's how I stack the rounds, I don't have huge amounts of air space, but I mix sizes it the stack so less voids. &
how I stack the splits.  My rounds vary from 4" to 18" diameter. 
Plus few (if any) of mine are straight grained so when spit & stacked it grows in area.
Split everything or at least crack the 4 & 5 incher's to help the birch dry well. I don't have many (if any) "perfect" triangles to stack,
(& squares to stack?? what is that? You must have big straight grained rounds, sweet.), & many/most of mine have big splinters hanging on &/or knots sticking out.
but  I want good air circulation thru the rows anyway. 
I'd love to have some good big straight grained logs to split & stack to see if the less room theory works for me.
Stacking splits, I think air space is good. 
If left outside to season, I stack it all bark up to help it shed water, when in the wood shed bark down to dry better (if than even works).
Either way I have the same amount of wood I hauled home, it just dries better/faster when spit. My splits take up more room than the rounds.
As long as I stack the same way, I get a reasonably good idea of my wood usage. It just may not compare well with others.
 If I stacked better, maybe i could say I use 4-1/2 cords per season, Last year I used 5-1/2 cords stacked my way.
but I'm still gonna have 6 cords ready to go (stacked my way, which is "in no way perfect", just my way).


----------



## fireview2788 (Oct 27, 2011)

A few weeks ago I posted about getting a load of silver maple.  Someone, I can't remember who, said I had 2/3 cord of rounds.  I split it last Saturday and ended up with........2/3 of c/s/s.


f v


----------



## Waulie (Oct 27, 2011)

> (& squares to stack?? what is that? You must have big straight grained rounds, sweet.)



Well, not _perfect_ squares, but pretty close.  Granted, I've recently been splitting mostly ash.  Anything over 14 inches, I split at least two of the edges off, then split the middle in half.  This leaves two roughly 5X5 to 7X7 inch "squares" off each round.  These do stack pretty darn nice.  :cheese: 

I'm sure it depends on the wood, stacking habits, and size of the rounds.  As the rounds get smaller, I bet stacked size gets closer to splits.


----------



## Gary_602z (Oct 27, 2011)

Maybe we should buy wood like corn! 3 factors weight,type of wood and moisture content. Pull out a chart and calculator and voila! :lol:  If you guys need you can borrow my wifes bathroom scales,0-400 in under 2 seconds  

Gary


----------



## Battenkiller (Oct 27, 2011)

If the rounds are neatly stacked there is very little space between them.  Alternating stacked layers of perfect cylinders take up about 85% of the space they occupy.  No way that will be less when it is split and stacked since, since even the best stack job only yields about 90 cu.ft. of solid wood per cord. 


Of course, logs are a different story since any twists or bends will stop the logs from nesting properly.


----------



## Waulie (Oct 27, 2011)

> Alternating stacked layers of perfect cylinders take up about 85% of the space they occupy



And, as soon as you try to stack even "perfect" cylinders of varying sizes, that percentage drops dramatically.  Add to that, logs are not usually anywhere close to cylinders, and I stick by them taking more space than spilts, especially when talking about large rounds.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Oct 27, 2011)

I don't agree with many of the theories given. All I know is that I have measured the rounds which I stack up all winter, then I split and stack the split wood. Seems I always end up pretty much what I had measured before the splitting began. And yes, by fall, I end up with a lot less because of shrinkage as the wood dries.


----------



## SolarAndWood (Oct 27, 2011)

Battenkiller said:
			
		

> No way that will be less when it is split and stacked since, since even the best stack job only yields about 90 cu.ft. of solid wood per cord.



Yep, and 6 16" 4' diameter rounds are over 100 cu ft of solid wood every time even without filling any of the air space in the corners.


----------

