weird question -rounds vs c/s

[gerry100]

Splits can stack tighter and will get more wood in a pickup bed.

But-

Weight may be the limiter in a 1/2 ton - a heaping load of closely packed wet splits may be too much.

Rounds were easier to unload for me - I could stand in the bed and roll them off , many just using my feet.

 

[clemsonfor]

I've seen it demonstrated (can't remember where) that a cord of rounds contains more "actual Wood" than a cord of splits, so I would wager that stacking it in 8' lengths and cutting and splitting it when you get home would result in more than a cord when you restack.

Ehouse

Problem around here is most of the wood i cut i cant lift an 8ft piece of oak!

 

[Adios Pantalones]

From a course on hydrology - if you filled a large room with bowling balls and filled another with BBs both would have the same volume of air between the balls. In other words it doesn't matter the size of the sphere, so long as they are the same size they will take up the same volume.

We're not hauling spheres. They change geometry when split, so the packing density, hexagonal closest packing or face centered cubic models don't necessarily apply.

Yes we are. In a way. What does are round look like from end on? Round. The example could stand as is.

did you pass geometry class??

Doesn't appear so, but more to the point, the BB or bowling ball examples only work when the spheres are exactly the same size.
Since this is far from the case with either rounds or splits, the analogy is entirely useless to the current discussion.

Ooh! now we can expand to face centered cubic/body centered cubic analogy that doesn't apply!

 

[SolarAndWood]

I'm curious. You guys that argue that splits stack tighter than rounds, is your argument that somehow splitting makes the splits more regular than rounds? I have a hard time seeing how you benefit by splitting a round? Isn't the tightest you can stack it the way it was before you split it? Don't mean to be a smart ass, but I can tuck some smaller stuff around the round while the splits from the round come pretty close to filling the squared off volume of the round. A 4' diameter round has the same wood in it as a master executed stack in the same squared off volume but still has the corners available for more wood. Doesn't really matter to me either way as everything I get I have to grab as quick as possible and get out, but I am curious what the rationale is. Maybe with the smaller stuff you are better splitting it to make it stack tighter because of irregularities that don't matter as much as the round gets bigger?

 

[Whitepine2]

if i go into the woods to get my firewood can i fit more wood in the pickup bed with rounds or is it better to split on site? ballpark if i have a 4x4x8 bed and put round in there would it be more than a cord?

also is there a way to calculate the # of cords of wood when it's in log form? i looked and couln't find a caulator online.

thanks!

Yes I think there is a way,meney decades ago when I sold saw logs the sawer had a device much like a very large caliper one would measure the dimator at the small end of the log and use the caliper at the center,he would read the figures and tell how much wood was in the log. I would guess this workes like the rule used to tell how many board feet are in a plank by measuring the lenth and thickness then read the scale and multiply by the lenth thuss giving the board feet in any one board.

 

[lobsta1]

If you clik on the link from a posting of mine in April 2010, you will see stacked rounds. Once it was all split & stacked away, it took up a heck of a lot less space.
Al

https://www.hearth.com/talk/threads/55413/

 

[bogydave]

I'd like to see a round that just barely fits in a 5 gallon bucket, be split into 4 pieces & go back in the bucket.
( Not noodled, split )
I get more wood volume if brought home in the rounds than split. . I get more wood home in a shorter time too .
Assuming they are stacked in the trailer(truck) not just thrown in.
The wood I get is not perfect straight grain so maybe other's wood splits fit back together perfectly.

This topic has been argued here for years