Primitive Archer
Main Discussion Area => English Warbow => Topic started by: TheDukesArchers on March 14, 2014, 09:04:03 pm
-
Now spring is here I need to chop some yew for seasoning. Where should I search and what laws do I need to be aware of?
-
No need to wait till spring. You can cut wood (any wood, not just yew) all year round.
Since you're from the United Kingdom: search for yew on private properties, gardens or graveyards and ask the legal owner permission to cut a branch/trunk.
-
You may find this post useful.
http://bowyersdiary.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/applying-to-cut-yew-and-general-progress.html (http://bowyersdiary.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/applying-to-cut-yew-and-general-progress.html)
One of the big problems is finding the land owner.
Check out local tree surgeons etc to see if they are cuting Yew.
First find a tree with a stave in it!
Del
-
I'm cutting in spring as the sap is running more freely, therefore the bark is easier to peel. My plan is to a good few staves and then seal them with glue, so I hope to be working with them next summer.
-
You're thinking of white woods. You don't want to remove the bark from yew staves until right up to the moment you start using them. Cut them down (at any time in the year) and leave the bark on while sealing the ends. Shove them out of sight and mind for a year, reduce down to rough bow dimensions taking the bark off carefully and then put them away again for another good few months.
-
+1 on what WillS said.
Leave the bark on, it protects the delcate sapwwod and prevents it drying too quick.
Half or quarter the log, seal the ends. Leave 9 months, then reduce a bit, work 'em after a year.
If you have nice thin sapwood you can even tiller 'em with the cambium intact and let it pop off.. it scares the heck out of you but gives a pristine back.
Del
-
Well I'll get to finding some decent yew and get it seaoned? Is there a good guide to making self longbows out of yew or meane woods? I understand it is very different to making laminates.
-
A yew bow will ultimately 'just' be a selfbow. A yew bow is no different from any other stave that will make a selfbow, as far as the process goes. You just have to design the bow for the specified wood species, and the workability of the wood will be different from some other woods. But in principle, the process of making a yew bow is the same as for every other selfbow from a stave.
If you have no idea how to start, get yourself a different (cheaper and more common) wood stave first. A perfect yew stave is not the best candidate for a 'first stave bow'.
-
Well I'll get to finding some decent yew and get it seaoned? Is there a good guide to making self longbows out of yew or meane woods? I understand it is very different to making laminates.
Google bowyers diary.
I show everything I do from cutting the yew to putting on the nocks including the mistakes, tricks and fixes!. There are Hazel bows and Elm warbow various types of bow. The search engine on the blog works well too. Delsbows is my website with loads of pics and info too. The information is all there... you just gotta read it. I'm not going to repeat it all here as there is about 4years worth of diary for you to read!
Del
-
Thanks for the replies. I'll start with ash or elm for the first few bows, and then when my yes is ready I'll hopefully be able to make some nice longbows.
-
Limestone and rivers.
Walking a long way, being very persistant and knowing how to abseil have helped me.
Where in the country are you from?
-
+1 on what WillS said.
Leave the bark on, it protects the delcate sapwwod and prevents it drying too quick.
Half or quarter the log, seal the ends. Leave 9 months, then reduce a bit, work 'em after a year.
If you have nice thin sapwood you can even tiller 'em with the cambium intact and let it pop off.. it scares the heck out of you but gives a pristine back.
Del
I'm entering this conversation a bit late .. but just wanted to make the point that if you are splitting logs when the wood is fresh (much more difficult to split when the log is seasoned) it is better to remove the bark otherwise the heartwood will dry very rapidly in comparison to the sapwood which will season much more slowly if the ends are sealed and the bark is on which can lead to checking (or worse) in the heartwood. By the way, its the inner bark (phloem) that pops off during tillering rather than the cambium which is very resilient and never comes off in my experience.
-
+1 on what WillS said.
Leave the bark on, it protects the delcate sapwwod and prevents it drying too quick.
Half or quarter the log, seal the ends. Leave 9 months, then reduce a bit, work 'em after a year.
If you have nice thin sapwood you can even tiller 'em with the cambium intact and let it pop off.. it scares the heck out of you but gives a pristine back.
Del
I'm entering this conversation a bit late .. but just wanted to make the point that if you are splitting logs when the wood is fresh (much more difficult to split when the log is seasoned) it is better to remove the bark otherwise the heartwood will dry very rapidly in comparison to the sapwood which will season much more slowly if the ends are sealed and the bark is on which can lead to checking (or worse) in the heartwood. By the way, its the inner bark (phloem) that pops off during tillering rather than the cambium which is very resilient and never comes off in my experience.
Maybe you are from a drier climate than the UK, but your post doesn't match my experience.
Maybe I'm misnaming the cambium... but here's a link with a pic' of how I find it cracks off. You can see the outer redish bark has been removed.
http://bowyersdiary.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/dealing-with-dip.html (http://bowyersdiary.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/dealing-with-dip.html)
Del
-
Hi Del
No I'm not from a drier climate , I'm from rainy old England too:). How wet or dry the climate is shouldn't make any difference in this regard.
I had a look at your pic and the piece that has popped off does look like the inner bark (phloem) layer, not the cambium. I can see the cambium layer beneath where the inner bark has come off on the pic. It's the very thin tough layer that's normally a yellowish/ sometimes light brown colour just before in the sapwood. The inner bark on a seasoned log will dry and crack off once the outer bark is removed but the cambium will remain intact. I have attached (I hope) a diagram showing the bark layers (and inner wood layers) to illustrate.
Cheers
Iain
-
Nope, there was nothing clearly visible between the stuff that popped off and the pristine sapwood beneath it, I've used this technique a few times now and IMO it's the best way to get a perfect clean back.
I've just looked up the two terms and maybe the term Cambium has been misused and it's the Phloem... but whatever the name the effect is the same.
In the regions where it doesn't pop off there is sometimes a V thin layer, with a pinkish brown tinge which becomes more obvious with time/weathering. Maybe this is the actual Cambium, but in that case when the thicker Phloem pops off it is generally bringing the cambium with it.
I have to agree we should be exact in our description else there is a danger of spreading missinformation (which will follow us like a plague if the Paul Simon lyrics are correct ;) http://www.paulsimon.com/us/music/paul-simon/peace-river (http://www.paulsimon.com/us/music/paul-simon/peace-river))
I shall look further into it.
Just seen your document and I think it may be wrong, and it is at best incomplete! I shall read further.
Ha, just found this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phloem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phloem) it refers (in the numbered illustration to the right) to the 'bast' which interestingly is what they say is visible on some of the Mary Rose bows.
I fear we are in danger of getting bogged down by exactitude, when we both mean the fibrous inner layers between bark and sapwood.
The article says it is the Phloem which carries the nutrients (not the sapwood which your doc states), and that is what I had always believed.
After all the sapwood isn't wet and slippery, it's the layer just above it...
DAMN!
Here's an article about sugar Maple that says the sap does flow in the sapwood! http://maple.dnr.cornell.edu/produc/sapflow.htm (http://maple.dnr.cornell.edu/produc/sapflow.htm)
It appears even the academics can't agree. Or maybe I'm scan reading and missing the detail.
I shall simply call it the inner bark in future.
Think I've had enough for now... ::)
Del
-
The cambium is a very thin un-barky looking layer, on your pic I can see inner bark along the bow back with a bit missing in the area of the dip, and I can see what looks like the yellowish cambium layer remaining on the dip? But hey its not always so easy interpreting a photo! I have made a lot of yew selfbows and I always keep the cambium on as it, in my opinion, makes for a stronger bow as the sapwood remains unaffected, and it also protects the sapwood from future damage (like a natural integral backing). I have never known it to come off during tillering or during subsequent use of the bow, but I have had pieces of inner bark in and around knots that I hadn't removed pop off during tillering as you describe. I do remove the bark (inner and outer) early on in the process and leave the cambium on during seasoning.
The cambium is a very durable layer as illustrated by the fact that the majority of the MR bows had the cambium on, after tillering and then after another 400 years under water!!
:)
-
Hi, have a look at this attachment which shows the cambium quite well. I have been working with wood for many years and cambium has always been this term used for the thin layer just above the sapwood. If you scroll to the bottom of the last link you gave there is a pic of someone removing the inner bark (I have attached), and the cambium can be seen beneath.
The references I have read in relation to MR bows have all used the term 'cambium' rather than 'bast' to describe the layer remaining on those bow backs, but different names can sometimes be used to describe the same thing.
I do think its important to get terms right and avoid misinformation as you say, as there is already far to much of that around the subject of yew warbows already haha!
Iain
-
(...)
The article says it is the Phloem which carries the nutrients (not the sapwood which your doc states), and that is what I had always believed.
After all the sapwood isn't wet and slippery, it's the layer just above it...
DAMN!
Here's an article about sugar Maple that says the sap does flow in the sapwood! http://maple.dnr.cornell.edu/produc/sapflow.htm (http://maple.dnr.cornell.edu/produc/sapflow.htm)
It appears even the academics can't agree. Or maybe I'm scan reading and missing the detail.
Sapwood transports water from the roots up the tree, to the leaves where it will evaporate.
Phloem transports nutrients (dissolved in water) produced by the leaves from the leaves to the growing tissues that require nutrients, such as buds, root meristems and cambium.
-
(...)
The article says it is the Phloem which carries the nutrients (not the sapwood which your doc states), and that is what I had always believed.
After all the sapwood isn't wet and slippery, it's the layer just above it...
DAMN!
Here's an article about sugar Maple that says the sap does flow in the sapwood! http://maple.dnr.cornell.edu/produc/sapflow.htm (http://maple.dnr.cornell.edu/produc/sapflow.htm)
It appears even the academics can't agree. Or maybe I'm scan reading and missing the detail.
Sapwood transports water from the roots up the tree, to the leaves where it will evaporate.
Phloem transports nutrients (dissolved in water) produced by the leaves from the leaves to the growing tissues that require nutrients, such as buds, root meristems and cambium.
With reference to Dels comment above, the document I attached (to show the position of cambium on a tree) actually said the following in relation to Sapwood - "Sapwood is the tree's pipeline for water moving up to the leaves. Sapwood is new wood. As newer rings of sapwood are laid down, inner cells lose their vitality and turn to heartwood". It does not say that the sapwood carries nutrients! Iain
-
I think you're confusing the oxidation on the last layer of sapwood as "cambium". When you peel bark, the cambium comes off with it.
-
No, I have been working with wood for a long time. .no confusion, the thin layer between the sapwood and the bark is the cambium! Have a look at the pics that I uploaded above, they both show the cambium layer, as does the document I attached to an earlier message.
See Science Dictionary definition below:-
cambium (kām'bē-əm) Pronunciation Key
Plural cambiums or cambia
A cylindrical layer of tissue in the stems and roots of many seed-bearing plants, consisting of cells that divide rapidly to form new layers of tissue. Cambium is a kind of meristem and is most active in woody plants, where it lies between the bark and wood of the stem.
-
So what happens as the tree actually lays down that yearly growth ring? Look at the end profile of the log and look at each growth ring. If you work down a single growth ring perfectly, is there cambium on that layer as well?
Your photo above also shows "dry rot" which doesn't actually exist. ;)
-
The cambium is a layer between the inner bark and the first growth ring. If you season a log with the bark on then the cambium comes off with the bark when you remove it, and you are probably not aware of it (which is what I think is causing the confusion here as almost everyone makes their bows from seasoned staves with the bark on. However, if you peel off the bark on a freshly cut log then the cambium stays behind (as shown in the pic above). There is only one layer of cambium so if you remove a growth ring there will be not be any cambium, no.
I unploaded the photo to show the the position of the cambium on a log, the 'dry rot', which is a term that is still commonly used, even though it tends to be called 'brown rot' today, is not relevant to the point I'm making about cambium.
The majority of the MR bows have the cambium on, demonstrating that the bark was removed prior to seasoning, which makes complete sense as in those days they did not have bench saws to cut up timber as we do today, so logs were split by hand, and it is much harder to split season logs so they would have ben split when fresh.
-
Not sure why you think it only comes off when seasoned versus when it is freshly peeled. Clearly it is not an attached layer.
It may be parted somewhat when a log is freshly peeled but the majority of it is going to be on the inside of the bark rather than the outside of the actual wood.
I have many freshly peeled elm logs and I can assure you that there is nothing but wood on the outside when the sap is running.
If the sap is not running the cambium is stuck about the same as tape but it still comes off down to the wood.
-
I didn't say that it 'only comes off when seasoned versus when it is freshly peeled' ..I said that if you peel the bark off a freshly cut log then the cambium is left behind, whereas if you fully season a log with the bark on then it is virtually impossible to removed the bark without removing the cambium as well, (you certainly wont leave the cambium fully intact). That is my experience having done both methods ! I think that's enough said on the subject. Cheesrs :)
-
I'm just not sure why you think it's going to be left behind on a freshly peeled log.
-
Because it IS left behind on a freshly peeled log, I do it that way all the time, have done for years and that's what happens !
-
Since the cambium is actually a single layer of stem cells it seems unlikely that you can actually see if it's there or not.
-
I'm not sure why you think the MR bows have cambium on them. Most were worked down slightly, to use the harder outer layer of a sapwood growth ring. A couple had super tight thin sapwood and the bark was simply removed, in which case SOME tiny traces of inner bark can be seen, but certainly not on the majority.
Here are some pics I took last time I went. If you can see any cambium/inner bark, point it out in these pics because I must also be mistaken on what "cambium" is.
(http://i1202.photobucket.com/albums/bb363/Will_Sherman/Mary%20Rose%20Museum%202013/Bows/IMAG0323_zpscf78b508.jpg) (http://s1202.photobucket.com/user/Will_Sherman/media/Mary%20Rose%20Museum%202013/Bows/IMAG0323_zpscf78b508.jpg.html)
(http://i1202.photobucket.com/albums/bb363/Will_Sherman/Mary%20Rose%20Museum%202013/Bows/IMAG0322_zps18d33ab4.jpg) (http://s1202.photobucket.com/user/Will_Sherman/media/Mary%20Rose%20Museum%202013/Bows/IMAG0322_zps18d33ab4.jpg.html)
(http://i1202.photobucket.com/albums/bb363/Will_Sherman/Mary%20Rose%20Museum%202013/Bows/IMAG0314_zpsa697dec4.jpg) (http://s1202.photobucket.com/user/Will_Sherman/media/Mary%20Rose%20Museum%202013/Bows/IMAG0314_zpsa697dec4.jpg.html)
(http://i1202.photobucket.com/albums/bb363/Will_Sherman/Mary%20Rose%20Museum%202013/Bows/IMAG0312_zps9be9cf52.jpg) (http://s1202.photobucket.com/user/Will_Sherman/media/Mary%20Rose%20Museum%202013/Bows/IMAG0312_zps9be9cf52.jpg.html)
(http://i1202.photobucket.com/albums/bb363/Will_Sherman/Mary%20Rose%20Museum%202013/Bows/IMAG0310_zps687d9d3f.jpg) (http://s1202.photobucket.com/user/Will_Sherman/media/Mary%20Rose%20Museum%202013/Bows/IMAG0310_zps687d9d3f.jpg.html)
When compared to this for example, which is a Pacific yew warbow I built recently and left most of the inner bark in place (or is this cambium?)
(http://i1202.photobucket.com/albums/bb363/Will_Sherman/Pacfic%20Yew%20Warbow%20120%20at%2032/cmbim_zps4e818a86.jpg) (http://s1202.photobucket.com/user/Will_Sherman/media/Pacfic%20Yew%20Warbow%20120%20at%2032/cmbim_zps4e818a86.jpg.html)
-
It states in the work done on the MR bows (by Hardy I believe) that there are traces of cambium on the back of some of the bows.
Your picture of your Pacific Yew warbow is typical of a bow that hasn't had any the sap wood taken down to reduce it's thickness and....
a) Hasn't been meticulously cleaned up. No criticism is implied as I believe that's exactly what they are talking about on the MR and many of my bows show the same, unless I am being obsessive in prettying them up.
or
b) Hasn't been tillered with the 'underbark' left on to allow it to pop off in one piece, which gives a virtually perfect surface.
I think the main problem with this thread is twofold... one the naming of the layer above the sapwood, as the Hardy MR reference refers to both bast and cambium and I take it the mean the stuff visible in your pic (which in my experience is homogeneous with the thicker corky layer which pops off). It doesn't really matter what we call it in terms of seasoning wood and making bows as long as we understand what we mean.
The other problem is the different experiences with Yew. It is up to the reader who's opinion and advice they take.
As always I only ever offer my first hand experience, and I have no problem with people ignoring it or preferring the experience of others.
I shall in future use a generic rather than specific name for the corky fibrous underbark stuff that pops off.
Del
BTW... nice looking back :)
-
Yeah it's tricky. Personally I've always called anything that isn't obviously "bark" or "sapwood" cambium. Whether that's fibrous stuff, or pickable bits of softer stuff makes no difference to me. That's clearly not scientifically correct, but I'm not sure quite why it would matter. As you say, as long as we and whoever we're talking to understands, that's all that really counts.
-
It states in the work done on the MR bows (by Hardy I believe) that there are traces of cambium on the back of some of the bows.
Your picture of your Pacific Yew warbow is typical of a bow that hasn't had any the sap wood taken down to reduce it's thickness and....
a) Hasn't been meticulously cleaned up. No criticism is implied as I believe that's exactly what they are talking about on the MR and many of my bows show the same, unless I am being obsessive in prettying them up.
or
b) Hasn't been tillered with the 'underbark' left on to allow it to pop off in one piece, which gives a virtually perfect surface.
I think the main problem with this thread is twofold... one the naming of the layer above the sapwood, as the Hardy MR reference refers to both bast and cambium and I take it the mean the stuff visible in your pic (which in my experience is homogeneous with the thicker corky layer which pops off). It doesn't really matter what we call it in terms of seasoning wood and making bows as long as we understand what we mean.
The other problem is the different experiences with Yew. It is up to the reader who's opinion and advice they take.
As always I only ever offer my first hand experience, and I have no problem with people ignoring it or preferring the experience of others.
I shall in future use a generic rather than specific name for the corky fibrous underbark stuff that pops off.
Del
BTW... nice looking back :)
[/quote
That might be a little bit of cambium and inner bark left behind on your bow there. It is vey hard to tell from those pics of MR bows if the cambium is on them or not, for a start the pics are quite yellowy orange so similar to the colour of cambium. And after 400 years in the sea I think the colour has merged somewhat! I have uploaded some pics of some of my bows, the cambium is quite obvious :)
-
And other one :)
-
That's the cambium. And left on gives protection to the sapwood and, in my opinion, makes for a stronger bow:)
-
When are you cutting that wood?
-
Well whatever it is, you won't see that much of it on any MR bows, or indeed on any of the replications of those bows. You might find "traces" in dips and around knots, but to leave an entire layer on is extreme. All it really does is show that the rings haven't been reduced. The whole point of the sapwood is to protect the bow from breaking. If you're adding more stuff on top of the protective sapwood to protect the sapwood, you might as well then sinew over the top, to protect the protective layer protecting the protective sapwood...
-
I'm not 'adding' anything. . I'm not removing / retaining the existing very thin and durable cambium layer and also not undermining the strength and integrity of the bow by removing some of the sapwood! t
-
Could you respond to my question as to when you are cutting the wood?
-
Sorry missed that one, in the late autumn /winter/early spring. How about you?
-
Whenever the tree is not actually growing. When was the one cut that is shown in the picture?
-
There are three bows in the pictures, but sometime during the period I mentioned. I get some wood from tree surgeon contacts and that can be cut anytime of year, depending when they are asked to do the work.
-
And how thick do you think that "layer" is?
-
If you mean the cambium .. I've just measured a bit with my digital calipers iv just scrapped off an off cut and its 0.25 of a mm .
-
So you're choosing to leave a piece of the inner bark on the bow, despite the fact that it's pretty ugly and has no historical bearing when it comes to what we know about warbows because it's protective - at 0.25 of a mm? Seems a bit odd. Not trying to gripe or cause an argument (there are easily enough of those surrounding warbows in particular so apologies in advance if I'm coming across abrupt!) it just seems really odd.
It reminds me of a thread a while ago that was on the EWBS forum. Somebody had found a guy trying to sell his longbows on eBay and he did what you do - left the "cambium" (or whatever it's called) on the back, saying that most of the MR bows had it. The general consensus amongst the warbow guys (and we're talking the really top talented bowyers such as Joe Gibbs et al) was that it was totally pointless. None of the MR bows have it (unless you count bits left in dips etc) and most of them said that they'd much rather have a bow with the thinnest possible sapwood that had been chased and reduced to a single ring so the bow itself performed faster, as compared to leaving a soggy strip of something just to show that the sapwood hadn't been worked down at all.
In fact (and this is second-hand information so take it or leave it - I don't have anywhere near enough experience to say whether it's true or not) I've been told by at least two bowyers who I really look up to at the highest degree that the best thing you can do with yew sapwood that doesn't need to be thinned per se is reduce it down to the first yellowish layer, rather than the brighter white stuff.
At 0.25 mm it's probably not doing a thing for strength, but it's more likely just a preference thing, and if you prefer that weird brown stuff covering what would be a stunning white back then that's your call ;)
I still think however, that trying to differentiate terms between bast, cambium etc is a bit over the top. Bowyers will know what you mean if you say cambium - I think to most people who make bows, you have the bark, then the cambium, then the sapwood. It doesn't NEED to be more complicated than that, otherwise we might as well start using latin names for everything and being all elitist when somebody asks us how to treat rot in heartwood and telling them that rot doesn't exist, and the area they're referring to is actually xylem.
-
If you mean the cambium .. I've just measured a bit with my digital calipers iv just scrapped off an off cut and its 0.25 of a mm .
That's what I don't get. You say it comes off when the bark is dried in place and popped off later , but why would it not just come off later if the bark is removed when the stave is green?
I'm looking at the part where you have rounded the back near the horn nock and the color on the back looks like nothing more than oxidized sap rather than an actual layer of material.
-
It's not inner bark, its cambium .. and there is nothing complicated or elitist about that, its just a simple fact!
And I haven't said the cambium added any strength , I said that it protected the sapwood , which it does. And that having it on the bow shows the sapwood has not been worked down, which it does. And that, in my opinion can make for a more intact and resilient bow, but hey that is just my opinion and this is (I thought) a open arena for people to share opinions and ideas on bow making? Maybe not judging by your and some other reactions?
Clearly, some people are not open to new ideas, or up for hearing anything that doesn't fit with their way of doing things, which is there prerogative I guess!
Hey ho !
-
No no, I don't think anybody is saying you're doing anything "wrong". I'm certainly not. I'm a complete novice, so don't have the experience to say whether it's right or wrong so I'm just curious. It seems odd to me, as I thought the whole beauty of a yew selfbow was the caramel heartwood and cream sapwood. The sapwood (as far as I understand) is the protective layer, so it seems needless to protect the protective layer, if that makes sense?
Forums like this are excellent and invaluable for learning new things, and learning new ways of doing things. I'm fascinated by the idea of leaving this stuff (I won't go there) on the back, so to find out that it's just fractions of a mm thick surprised me. That's not to say it hasn't got a purpose, I've just never seen it done before. I'm sorry if my comments came across as dismissive. They weren't meant to be.
There's absolutely no reason why new techniques and theories can't be shared and explored. Nobody has all the answers!
-
You have actually said twice that it makes a stronger bow which means added strength, no?
I still think you are just looking at the equivalent of "dried tree blood" and not an actual layer of material with much if any structure to it.
Remember that at times when the tree is growing you are going to catch the cambium in the middle of producing cells which are at a greater stage of differentiation.
I really suspect that that is all we are looking at here.
-
Mmm dried tree blood.