Influence of saw chain type and wood species on the kickback angle of a chainsaw

• Autorzy: Kaliniewicz Z. , Maleszewski Ł. , Krzysiak Z.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Wood processing operations, in particular debarking, can pose a significant hazard for the chainsaw operator when performed without due caution. The most common hazards with potentially fatal consequences include kickback which occurs when the chainsaw’s guide bar is violently thrown backwards towards the operator. The aim of this study was to determine the influence of wood species and different saw chain brands on the kickback angle of a chainsaw. The kickback angle of a combustion chainsaw was analyzed in a self-designed test stand with the use of a digital level gauge accurate to 0.1°. Four differently priced saw chain brands, including two standard chains and two chains with anti-kickback features, were evaluated. Kickback was analyzed on five wood species (pine, spruce, birch, alder and oak) at three engine speeds (50%, 75% and 100% of maximum rotational speed). Kickback was significantly determined by wood species and saw chain type, and it was less influenced by the rotational speed of the chainsaw engine. The average kickback angle was largest in alder and smallest in spruce. The analyzed parameter was not always reduced by saw chains with anti-kickback features. In some cases, low-priced saw chains with anti-kickback features offer less protection than more expensive standard chains. Chainsaw buyers should decide whether it is worthwhile to compromise on safety in exchange for a lower price.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

chainsaw; kickback; saw chain; wood; correlation

• Wydawca: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warmińsko-Mazurskiego w Olsztynie
• Czasopismo: Technical Sciences / University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn
• Rocznik: 2018
• Tom: nr 21(4)
• Strony: 323--334
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 20 poz., rys., tab., wykr.

Twórcy

autor

Kaliniewicz Z.

• Katedra Maszyn Roboczych i Metodologii Badań, Uniwersytet Warmińsko-Mazurski w Olsztynie, ul. Oczapowskiego 11/B112, 10-719 Olsztyn

autor

Maleszewski Ł.

• Department of Heavy-Duty Machines and Research Methodology1 University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn

autor

Krzysiak Z.

• Department of Mechanical Engineering and Automation University of Life Sciences in Lublin

Bibliografia

• ARNOLD D., PARMIGIANI J.P. 2015. A study of chainsaw kickback. Forest Products Journal, 65(5-6): 232-238. http://dx.doi.org/10.13073/FPJ-D-14-00096
• BOWERS S., RIPPY R. 2009. Safe and effective use of chain saws for woodland owners. The Woodland Workbook EC, 1124: 1-17. 10
• DĄBROWSKI A. 2004. Design solutions for portable chain saws, which increase the safety of their operation. Bezpieczeństwo Pracy: nauka i praktyka, 12: 11-14 (article in Polish with an abstract in English).
• DĄBROWSKI A. 2009. Portable chain saws – protection of the operator against contact with a moving tool. Bezpieczeństwo Pracy: nauka i praktyka, 1: 16-19 (article in Polish with an abstract in English).
• DĄBROWSKI A. 2012. Reducing kickback of portable combustion chain saws and related injury risks: laboratory tests and deductions. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 18(3): 399-417. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2012.11076943
• DĄBROWSKI A. 2015. Kickback risk of portable chainsaws while cutting wood of different properties: laboratory tests and deductions. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 21(4): 512-523. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2015.1095547
• KALJUN J., DOLŠAK B. 2012. Ergonomic design recommendations based on an actual chainsaw design. South African Journal of Industrial Engineering, 23(2): 215-229.
• KOEHLER S.A., LUCKASEVIC T.M., ROZIN L., SHAKIR A., LADHAM S., OMALU B., DOMINICK J., WECHT C. 2004. Death by chainsaw: fatal kickback injuries to the neck. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 49(2): 345-50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1520/JFS2003276
• MACIAK A. 2009. Pilarka, jaka jest, każdy wie? (17) Hamulec bezpieczeństwa. Drwal, 6: 36- 38 (in Polish).
• MACIAK A. 2011. Analiza rynku łańcuchowych pilarek spalinowych w Polsce. Technika Rolnicza Ogrodnicza Leśna, 5: 2-4 (in Polish).
• MALINOWSKA-BOROWSKA J., SOCHOLIK V., HARAZIN B. 2012. The health condition of forest workers exposed to noise and vibration produced by chain saws. Medycyna Pracy, 63(1): 19-29 (article in Polish with an abstract in English).
• ISO 9518:1998. Forestry machinery – portable chain-saws – kickback test. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.
• PN-ISO 6535:1999. Pilarki łańcuchowe przenośne – Badanie hamulca piły łańcuchowej. Polski Komitet Normalizacyjny, Warszawa, Polska.
• RABIEJ M. 2012. Statystyka z programem Statistica. Ed. Helion, Gliwice (in Polish).
• ROBB W., COCKING J. 2014. Review of European chainsaw fatalities, accidents and trends. Arboricultural Journal, 36(2): 103-126. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03071375.2014.913944 11
• TOMCZAK A., JELONEK T., GRZYWIŃSKI W. 2012. Pozyskiwanie drewna pilarką. Ed. G & P Oficyna Wydawnicza, Poznań (in Polish).
• WIĘSIK J. 2001. Zagrożenia przy użytkowaniu przenośnych pilarek łańcuchowych do drewna – analiza zjawiska odbicia, sposoby eliminowania lub ograniczania jego skutków. W: Bezpieczeństwo użytkowania przenośnych pilarek łańcuchowych do drewna. Ed. Centralny Instytut Ochrony Pracy, Warszawa (in Polish).
• WÓJCIK K. 2012. By pilarka była bezpieczna. Nowa Gazeta Leśna, 11: 44-47 (in Polish).
• WÓJCIK K. 2013. Jak ograniczyć niebezpieczne odbicia pilarki? Nowa Gazeta Leśna, 7: 44-47 (in Polish).
• WÓJCIK K. 2017. Hamulec piły łańcuchowej. Bezpieczne zatrzymanie. Nowa Gazeta Leśna, 6: 78-82 (in Polish)