Harry K wrote:
On Dec 15, 9:14 pm, Harry K wrote:
On Dec 15, 8:28 pm, Mike Paulsen wrote:





Steve B wrote:
I saw once where they took lengths of rounds, full cuts of tree trunk, and
stacked them 8' x 8' x 4' to equal 128 cubic feet. They then split the
wood, and had a lot more than a cord.
I saw an ad that a man was selling cords of wood for $140, and rounds for
$100, but not specifying the quantity on the rounds. If it is a cord of
rounds, I can split it with my splitter, and I would estimate that I could
get nearly two cords out of that. For $100 vs. $140, that would be a good
deal.
Does anyone know what the conversion factor would be? Cord for cord, at $40
cheaper, the rounds are a better deal.
Steve
What is a cord?
A cord has a specific legal definition in Minnesota:
• One cord is 128 cubic feet in four foot lengths.
• If the wood is sawed, a cord is 110 cubic feet when
ranked, or 160 cubic feet when thrown loosely into a
truck.
• If the wood is sawed and split, a cord is 120 cubic feet
when ranked, and 175 cubic feet when thrown loosely
into a truck. (Minnesota Statutes, Section 239.33)- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
NOw that is an oddity I hadn't heard of. Makes sense though as ti
allows for the 'volume will grow after splitting' fact.

Harry K- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Ooops...misread it. No, it does not make sense, the buyer would be
getting hosed on the split wood. If the uncut cord is 128 ft cubed
(and that is correct), the split wood will take up more, not less,
space.

Harry K

How much more?

128 cuft
4' lengths: 1 cord
sawed: 1.16 cords
sawed and split: 1.07 cords

One way that could make sense is if you take into account the shrinkage
which occurs during drying. (If they assume sawed and split is also
dry.) I don't know if it overcomes the volume increase incurred by
splitting, but it very well might.

I didn't find any rationale for the law, but the statue also contains this:

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=239.33
"If a measurement is made by weight, the term "cord" or any other term
used to describe freshly cut wood shall be based on 79 cubic feet of
solid wood content per cord."

I don't think they consider the bark to be solid wood, since they also say:
'the term "cord" shall mean 128 cubic feet of wood, bark, and air, if
cut in four-foot lengths'

I assume they (or some other agency (like the DNR or Forest Service) has
the empirical data to support the legal definitions.