I know there are plenty of sawyers among us that will find this post interesting.
I visited this old mill (about 30 minutes from me) last weekend during their annual "Back to the Past" celebration. Scribner's Mill is on the Crooked River, the largest tributary of Sebago Lake here in Cumberland County, Maine.
The mill ran from 1847 until 1962. And in 1977, a large ice flow practically tore the mill apart and sent much of it downriver. But today, a group is in the process of getting things rebuilt and restored, including the sash saw.
The dam that created the millpond and head for waterpower was forcibly breached by the state's wildlife agency in 1972. This was done because Sebago Lake is a world-class salmon fishery: it holds the WORLD RECORD for biggest Landlocked Salmon, which was caught in 1907 and weighed 22 lbs 8 ounces.
The group "Scribner's Mill Preservation, Inc" has filed an application w/ the state of Maine to restore the dam WITH fish passage so that the mill can again be water powered. It is a battleground at the moment, pitting fishermen/environmentalists against the historical groups that want the mill, which is one of only 2 in the country (Virginia?) to have a water powered sash saw that operated well into the 20th century.
google "Scribner's Mill" for more info on this historic site.
There was some timber framing going on when I visited... but the big attraction was the mill, which was churning out wooden barrels from authentic 19th century equipment. Instead of waterpower, the machines were powered by an old tractor's flywheel and a large belt over the weekend.
I snapped a bunch of pics:
How this for cribbing?
The Mill is right over a channel alongside the main river
Original Haul-in-Wheel to bring in logs
They were doing barrel-making demonstrations
A unique saw shaped like a barrel cut the arc-shaped staves
the teeth on the one-piece, round "blade"
Inside the mill. Some old frame rot... square pegs?
Just a really unique place... I wish them well in their dam efforts. I have put my canoe in here many times over the years for a ten-mile trip downriver... Like I said earlier, they say the mill is one of just two remaining sash-saw operations in the U.S. The blade traveled about 18" and went about 120 strokes-per-minute. Wow.
Work on restoring the sash is in its early stages. I am planning on volunteering as they are looking for folks.
Could someone please tell me the best way to tell between sash and band sawn marks?
I'm getting conflicting information. One guy tells me band sawn marks look smoother and are closely spaced. Sash are rough, wide-spaced. Makes sense. A sash is more aggressive. But that's not what this book shows... scroll down and you can see the different pics that are in the book.
I agree that the photos of saw marks in the barn guide book are confusing. There may be cases where you cannot tell the difference. One piece of evidence which sometimes can be seen is a small jog in the saw marks from when an up-and-down saw lurched forward or backward while cutting; I do not believe this happens with band-sawn material. That is all I can add.
Jim
The closer you look the more you see. "Heavy timber framing is not a lost art" Fred Hodgson, 1909
I will try to get you a pic of some sash sawn timbers in my old barn. I have a couple, but they aren't too visible. A modern band sawn timber has a much finer cut than a sash sawn timber, but I don't know about an old band saw. Does anyone know if there were any big bandsaws in New England when some of these old barns may have been built? I don't know when bands became popular, but I thought they were, initially, a west coast thing.
Is a sash mill the same as a "muley"? I've heard Richard Casselman (aka Northern Hewer) use that term for the up and down sawmill he restored at Upper Canada Village. CB.
-- Clark Bremer Minneapolis Proud Member of the TFG
wow... ask and ye shall receive. thanks for the comments everyone.
Housewright:
Yeah, that makes sense that an irregularity in the pattern could indicate sash sawn. I've also heard that a bent tooth in a band saw can produce irregularities too.
I guess it's just tough to tell between the two.
Dave:
some pictures would be helpful. That book I linked to earlier said New England had early Bandsaws but the steel technology made them problamatic. Maybe they weren't so common?
Daiku:
I think a Muley saw is diffferent than a sash. From what I just read, a muley is a really thick, stiff blade... it goes up and down like a sash, but needs no supporting frame (sash) to hold it from twisting, etc. check out the first couple paragraphs here: http://www.wrenscottage.com/gvm/craft/trippsaw.php
What say you Jim Rogers? You must have some advice on how to tell band from sash?
Hi Don, I have asked this muley/sash saw mark question too. The link helps to explain. A modern portable bandsaw leaves a smoother cut than the old up and down saws. It's saw pattern is regular but can vary with the feed rate. Tooth set is key to how fine the cut is, if there is a tooth off it takes only one to leave a consistent drag mark for every revolution of the band. It wouldn't be irregular unless the operator was irregular and even than it would be a gradual change. I run my mill at a slower rate and on a 12" wide board there is a 1" space between the drag marks. On narrow stock you can push it to 2"+. I am wondering it the up and down saws have an angle to the drag mark, place a square on the board and see if it is true of off. I am going to check my band cut stuff.
Here in Machias there was a large 10" or 12" wide band saw in operation through the early 1900's. Search " from stump to ship" I will with more time, got to run. Tim
I believe the sash saw at Old Sturbridge Village movies at a 90 degree angle to the log, but the teeth have a little "lead" so they each do a little bit of the work.
Interesting discovery this evening. In the Visser book, there is a picture of a sash sawn board. This looks just like the boards I am calling sash/up and down milled. There is also a picture of what he is referring to as band sawn, with a much more pronounced saw mark. I beg to differ. I saw a two foot long board that started out looking like the sash sawn, and gradually progressed to looking like the picture he is calling bandsawn. These boards were salvaged from an early 1800's barn. I'll have to ask again, but I believe Jack Sobon dated the older half around 1820.
Bob might be the one to ask, he was a regular poster here (bandwith issues I think) and runs Taylor Mill. I used to take the kids down regularly ( when they were small and we lived in that part of the State ) to watch it run. Something worth the seeing !
I guess it's tough to tell between the two: band and sash. My guess is it would be damn near impossible to tell between sash and muley... they're basically the same saw with a few distinct differences in their operation.
Will, thanks for the links. Hatch Mill is great. As is that little video at the bottom.
Tim: I would be interested in that stuff you have on the ships, etc. All the straight saw marks I've ever seen have been 90-degrees.
A guy at the old mill I visited was saying that the spacing between the marks is how you can tell between sash and band sawn. Band marks are closer together... but it sounds like there were probably many variations of both types of saws: feed rate and tpi and strokes/revolutions per minute, etc.
So who really could say?? A fast sash could likely produce stuff that probably looked the same as a slow band...
Sorry for coming in late to comment but I just noticed this topic.
I have extensive experience in regards to muley sawn, versus band sawn marks as far as true restoration practices are concerned.
Looking directly at the face of a Muley sawn board or plank, you will notice that the tooth marks are not at a true right angle to the sawing plane.
There is a reason for this--the Muley blade which is approx 72" in length is purposely leading ahead at the Upper end by approx. 1/2". This lead is needed because the blade as it comes upwards on its journey lifts clear of the cut and gives room for the log to move ahead which is happening simotaneously with the motion of the blade.
When you look at the face of a band sawn board it is almost unanimously at a right angle and has a finer cut due to the fine teeth. The muley blade has teeth 2" in length and at 2.25" spacings.
As noted above the log passing through a band mill at high speed will create a similar tooth pattern maybe 2" apart, whereas the muley mill the similar marks will be only 1/2" apart, this would be one stroke of the blade, and the log cannot advance anymore than the blade is advanced or purposely leaned at the upper end.
I don't knopw if any of this makes any sense but I hope so.
Bandsawn lumber is the next best thing that can be used in place of muley sawn lumber for many restorations, at UCV we were lucky to have approx 20000 bd feet of pine lumber sawn each year that is dedicated to restoration work there.
I have seen original muley sawn lumber that was sawn in mills that advanced their blades more than 1/2" at the upper end, the saw left tooth marks that were 3/4" in spacings.
Better late than never espec. when it's helpful. I'll have to ask folks at that sash mill if the blade is usually 90 degrees or not. I assumed sash saws were 90 deg. But the way you speak of advancing the log in muley, which is also done in sash, has me wondering.
The early water powered Sash saw mills predated the muley mills, which was a later refinement of vertical blade sawing technology.
Muley blades were manufactured from saw steel that was thick enough (about 5\16" by 12" in width) that the requirement for a sash was done away with.
I believe you will find out that the sash saw mill's blade and associated guides had to have the same lead on the upper end of the sawing apparatus as the muley mill's blade and associated guides needed to accomodate the forward motion of the log on the up stroke of the sawing motion.
Please get back to us with an answer from the sawyers that you are associated with I am interested in what they might have to say on the subject.
I will ask them about saw blade angle. I'm going to be there this weekend in fact.
Angle would be an easy way to tell the difference between band and sash/muley sawn boards.
That's interesting that you say the muley saws were newer innovations from sash. From my reading on the subject, a more efficient method was what the industry always strived for. A fat blade on a muley would waste alot of log. But perhaps it was more reliable than its thinner sash cousin...less breakage, downtime, etc.
One book talks about band being preferred over sash because of the waste issue. Though sash blades was thinner than muley, it wasn't as thin as band...
Great pictures and sight I must get to. As Will noted I run Taylor Mill, a water powered up and down sawmill in Derry NH. I run it ever 2nd and 4th Sat 10:00- 3:00 Memorial Day to Oct. Plenty of water this year! My experience is with this mill only. The marks were very pronounced when I started working at the mill, the set was achieved using a lever set. I notice large variations in the steel when setting the teeth so I made a large saw spider (gage). It now cuts with a smoothness similar to a modern band saw....however the spacing of the marks is much wider. Also most of the mills return the carriage with the blade running so there is another set of marks at a different spacing overlaying the cut marks. As part of our interpretation here at the mill we can point to, hewn timbers, vertically sawn timbers, circular sawn timbers and boards and modern band saw. There were some mentions about the slight angle of the blade, I have this one set about a 1/4 inch forward at the top to lessen the drag on the blade as it goes up....however the 1/4 advance of the carriage only occurs on the down stroke. I believe they may have swedged the teeth on earlier saws, thus creating a different look to the blade marks. If anyone has a spare blade 6'5" blade for a mill I would be happy to do some research and share it at a conference.
So, my take is there isn't a big enough difference between the sash and muley saws, are they more aptly called vertically sawn? I am always mixing my dates up and it would be great if someone would post the dates sash and muley saws first arrived, circ. saw and large band saws as well. I have seen the dates before, just need a reminder, it will sink in. Tim
My guess is the time periods that these different saw types were in use overlapped each other to quite an extent, making it all the more frustrating to try to date stuff. I mean, the mill I visited that is undergoing restoration, actually operated regularly as a sash mill until 1962!
That's unheard of from what I understand. Not 1862, but 1962! It began cutting in the late 1840s.
This book (I love this book!) gives a good overview of types/dates, but the pictures might be misleading.
For New England, it says:
Sash: pre-1850 Bandsawn: later 19th century Circular sawn: mid to late 19th century
I'd like to see what you have going on down there too. I can take you to this mill If you'd like.
The sash is not operating. In fact, they are in the very early stages of putting it back together. You could likely give them some advice.
I was there this past weekend and asked about the blade angle. You said yours is canted ahead 1/4 inch... Is this something you came up with as you refined things or was it standard practice for a sash saw? The guy I spoke to said their mill's blade was 90 degrees to the log... but I didn't get to speak to the "real deal." One guy worked there as a young man and is related to the man that actually ran it years ago. He's the one I need to ask to be sure.
I would just like to correct you, the Muley saw mill's blade that we operate is canted ahead on the top end by 1\2" not 1\4" as you mention. This is important if you are really working thye mill at any speed at all. If you are really pushing things ahead then you need to advance the top of the blade by 3\4" of an inch or more, by 1\2" is the usual amount of advance.
there are other adjustments that are critical, for instance the blade will need to be toed slightly away from the cutting line to account for the thrust against it during the cutting process. The thrust will bring it back into line and it will cut straight. Without the knowledge of proper adjustment it would be very difficult to cut straight, and know when the blade is wandering from poor adjustments or teeth that are dull on one or both sides.
Please re-read up thread a bit... page 2. I was actually responding to Bob Spoerl's post. It was he who mentioned the 1/4 inch cant that he uses on his saw:
There were some mentions about the slight angle of the blade, I have this one set about a 1/4 inch forward at the top to lessen the drag on the blade as it goes up....however the 1/4 advance of the carriage only occurs on the down stroke.
At any rate, I finally spoke to a seasoned sawyer who actually worked at the sash mill I began this thread with. I asked him about blade angle. He says the sash was straight up and down, 90 degrees to the log/carriage.
I mentioned about another sash operator (Bob) using the 1/4 inch cant/ angle at the blade's top, to which he thought that was the operator's own particular situation. On most of the sash saws that he knew, the blade was always straight up and down.
This guy is a seasoned sawyer in his mid-seventies who has worked in the industry and has an amazing collection of old 19th century lumber making machinery. He knows his baloney, if you know what I mean. He's been thoroughly interviewed by some folks who are writing a book about the old mill.
That bit about the muley being set off to counter thrust is interesting. All this old saw stuff is pretty interesting... as far as telling between sash/muley and band sawn lumber goes, it looks like you just can't be sure.
I'd like to be present for an experiment where each type could be cut, inspected and then labled... maybe that way we could know how to tell between them. If anyone knows of such a facility (with all or two types: sash, muley and band, please let me know!)
My understanding... up and downs....1700- 1860s muley ......1850-1860s Circular .....1860- now Band saw .....? replacing circular
However seeing as there are little private mills of all sorts don't rely heavily on the saw marks to date a building. Our mill has hewn posts, some vertical sawn main beams, some circular sawn timbers and roof deck (all built in 1950s)
I think one of the main differences with the muley was that the saw was outside the carriage, so the boards could be cut of and the carriage reset to cut the next one off, ....our up and down has to be reset for each cut manually. Circular was MUCH faster...thus replaced up and down style Band saws have a smaller kerf (less waste) and can be run faster thus replacing circular.
I just went to the Patten Lumberman's Museum in Patten, Maine, whichdoes not have a vertical saw, but they do have an excellent collection of tools, equipment, buildings, and information. http://www.lumbermensmuseum.org/
One thing I got out of the visit was a free handout with a chronology of lumbering in Maine, some of which I will write below. I am going to stray a little from the topic, but not too far:
1634 First water powered Sawmill in Maine 1802 Planer pantent applied for 1814 circular saw patented but not in general use [My understanding is the circular saw was invented in 1777 in England though there could have been a paralell invention by the Shakers in America.] 1820 the first steam powered mill in Bath, Maine 1850 circular saw put into common use, gang saw introduced [this seems late to me] 1846 There were 1500 sawmills in Maine. 1858 Joseph Peavey invented the Peavy Cantdog, an improvement over the swing dingle or swinging bitch as it was sometimes called [a bitch is a log dog with tines rotated 90 degrees from each other] 1890-1900 cross cut saws were introduced for cutting down as well as cutting up. They had been patented in 1861 by Canadian Jerome Dietrich. 1976 Last log drive in Maine on the Kennebec River
I will add that part of the sawmill legacy is still with us in that there are still deposits of sawdust on river bottoms such as the Damariscotta River.
There have been an estimated 160 tide mills of all sorts along Maine's coast and a few wind mills such as in Port Clyde.
Something to keep in mind is that the circular saw needed more power (more water) so they were not an option everywere. Also, smaller circular saws were used to resaw flitches, deals, etc. even in mills with vertical saws so look for old lumber with the narrow dimension circular sawn and the wide dimension vertically sawn.
Jim
The closer you look the more you see. "Heavy timber framing is not a lost art" Fred Hodgson, 1909
Ken, you should be able to download a pdf of any of the public domain Google books. If your browser behaves like mine, click the link to the book, the window is split into two panes, the body of the book on the left and an information pane on the right, at the top of information pane is a link to download the book. Viewing of the book should be much easier from a download than from a website with continuing page calls.
Hi everyone: great topic sure generating alot of interest and information.
As I read all the posts I truly believe that no one answer is correct for any one situation or area of North america.
One has to realize that technology did not travel fast in those years, the old millwrights resisted change the same as today in many areas of our society.
I rtemeber quite well growing up in Ontario Canada, where tractors and horses for quite anumber of years operated side by side, usually until a new generation came along or strict regulations created an immediate need for change.
From what I have found out in my research was that circular saws were invented in England around 1800 that corresponds quite well with the information above.
What was a big factor was the power required to drive them and keep them up to a minimum operating speed under load. Large water turbines of upwards of 40 to 50 hp were in operation and could drive them but was not always available in a country setting, at least here in (most) of rural Ontario.
Along came the portable Steam engine which created the power supply in the country setting, now all that was needed was a person with the money and drive to put this all to work.
Around my area in the 1867 census one steam powered saw mill was in operation. With this information, and the fact that hundreds of single blade mills were still in operation in the same area and would continue to cut for many more years, made dating historic structures alittle easier.
Remember that muley mills or sash mills could cut no longer than 20 foot logs this governed by the length of the saw frames, and the length of the sawmill building itself. The blade was usually installed in the centre of the sawmill meaning that the whole log if it was 20 feet in legth would rest on a saw frame of about 24 feet beginning its journey by the blade. It also had to travel completely by the blade so it needed at least 24 feet on the opposite side.
In our mill the saw frame would actually advance through an opening in the wall for a short distance to complete the cut, and be suspended in open air.
It was this period that sawn, hewn, and circular sawn lumber could be present in the same structure, around here that could have happened after 1867, but not before.
Long top plates continued to be hewn until late 1800's (around here), and then gradually the long hewn plates gave away to short timbers scarfed together.
Ken, I hope Roger answered your question. I like the search feature in Google books when I am looking for a specific word, but I read books from the downloaded pdf on my computer.
NH, I have seen 36' sawn beams. A house I salvaged had common purlins hewn on the visible sides with the top surface vertically sawn. After the purlins were off of the building I noticed two of them were bookmatched...Someone had hewn a 5"x7" then it was slit down the middle and used as full length common purlins. There must have been a few mills which could cut 40', though as you say, long sills and plates were often hewn, even when every other piece of lumber in the building was sawn.
Jim
The closer you look the more you see. "Heavy timber framing is not a lost art" Fred Hodgson, 1909
Those dates and link to the book are wonderful, Jim. Google Books is a dream. I have been by the Patten museum many times on my way to Baxter State Park, but never stopped in because of the main focus of camping, etc. What are the hours/ season of the museum? I'm headed that way next month. (I could not get the museum's link to load).
As you know, Patten is in the "North Woods," an area that was late in settling when compared to other areas of Maine/ New England. This may explain the lack of a sash mill as they were early-mid 1800s (again, in New England). And as NH points out, we have to keep in mind the Patten info (and all else) is regional (usually New England).
I also am guessing that while Maine's North Woods saw heavy lumbering, it did not see a great deal of "sawing." As you mentioned, the last log drive was in the mid-1970s (in Maine). I have in-laws in Aroostook County and have spent a lot of time in the North Woods. I also have read a lot about the Allagash logging camps. It's my take that much of the timber was floated out of there to be sawn in Bangor, Waterville, etc. Not a lot of folks lived in the north woods, thus sawmills were in little demand. Did you know that a major lake's (Chamberlain's?)outlet was re-routed by the lumber Barons of the day to flow south so it could link up w/ the Penobscot river and thus get more north woods logs to Bangor?
That's interesting about circular sawn lumber that was re-sawn vertically. I'll have to keep an eye out for that... as is the hewn and then sawn purlins you have seen.
this is what I was responding to about circular sawn stuff that was re-sawn vertically (or vice-versa). Perhaps I misunderstood:
Originally Posted By: Housewright
Hi
Something to keep in mind is that the circular saw needed more power (more water) so they were not an option everywere. Also, smaller circular saws were used to resaw flitches, deals, etc. even in mills with vertical saws so look for old lumber with the narrow dimension circular sawn and the wide dimension vertically sawn.
Jim
thanks for the Patten link. It loaded this time. And Leonard's Mills looks neat. A 1790-era mill. They must have an up-and-down saw there! Let us know what you find...
Sorry if I was not clear. What I ment is small circular saws were used to resaw 3" vertically sawn "deals" into 3x4 or 3x5s, and to edge boards or planks and cut lath. I am not aware of circular sawn material being resawn vertically but I can imagine a vertical gang saw where a board goes in one side and lath comes out the other: just a thought.
Jim
The closer you look the more you see. "Heavy timber framing is not a lost art" Fred Hodgson, 1909
I guess this topic is a bit of a no winner, the whole group of us live in very different locals with very different early histories and cultures.
there is no doubt that small circular saws were working in many parts of North America prior to them appearing in others, and no doubt that sawn timber appeared earlier in some areas than others, just due to the constant flow of "new" technology
So with this in mind I would say we are all right in some of the arguments and statements that have been made, but one has to be careful not to stress that one example applies to the whole area of the country because it is not like that.
In the sept 01 post of "housewright" pertaining to the long purlin that was hewn and then taken to a vertical mill and sawn in half, in my opinion would not have happened, for starters why not saw out the purlins in the first place if such a mill could have accomodated such long timber, not to mention just what kind of wagon would have been able to move such a long log.
I have no doubt that it was sawn through the centre but for sure it was sawn right at the site of the barn raising with a whip or better known as a pit saw.
You all put up come very good points and arguments, and I am sure that everyone looking in, will learn from the information contained in all your posts, I for one enjoy reading and sharing my views
I think that you may well be correct about sawing of long purlins on site. Our own little 2 bay granary has a pair of 23 foot long single piece oak purlins that have first been hewn out square and then halved by sawing. If this was done on a sawmill then the bed track would need to be going on 50 feet long to allow passage of the whole log length through a fixed blade so for long logs it probably makes much more sense to keep the log position fixed and then move the saw down through the length of the log.
To move a up and down saw head down the log would be difficult, so that should rule that option out. I see no reason not to have a long track for such milling techniques. I have no proof via evidence of long track up and down sawing ( the actual remains or photos), but what we do have is long, up and down, sawn stock. The debate here is if it was one of the two types of up and down sawing and band sawn. When it comes to whip sawn stock that is much easier to distinguish due to the erratic saw marks.
Today you can go out and buy a small portable band mill with a standard track length of 20' or 24'. I did, and it didn't take long for me to realize I needed a longer track, I now have 74' and the saw moves not the log. I see the past very much the same, most mills kept the standard 20' track system, they needed 40+, 20' on either end of the head. Where is the limit? Why did they stop at 20'? Someone must of said "lets put 40' on either end of the head". Tim
FWIW, in one local roof system from the early 1850's there are purlin plate and straining beam timbers around 20' long that were hewn on 2 adjacent faces and up and down sawn on the other 2 faces. In fact in these roof trusses, the only timbers not showing that were the 40' bottom chords which were hewn and the small section braces and common rafters which were completely sawn.
I can only guess they hewed them square first in order for them to fit on the sawmill -- the quarter sections were around 7 3/4" square, so they were hewing something like 16x16 timbers to resaw for this roof system. I can imagine that the saw may not have had much more capacity than 16". Any comment??
I agree with Tim that it is fairly easy to distinguish between up and down sawn and pit sawn.
Band technology didn't appear in this area until the mid 20th century. For some reason I thought it was only widely used in the really big Pacific northwest mills in the last decades of the 19th century.
Where is the limit---good question, and why the limit
Well for starters as I mentioned previously moving (saw)logs longer than 20 feet would have been quite a chore in the mid 1800s so that is one impediment, I do realize that longer logs were moved but other methods were used such as hewing right in the forest and then skidding to the site
Muley mills could cut fairly large timber upwards of 36 inches some slightly larger.
The vertical blades always remained stationary in the early mills with the logs passing by the blade note Oliver Evans early works on mills.
the log frame that supports the timber during sawing was stretched to 20 feet to accomodate long logs, anything longer created a problem during the sawing process due to the wip of the timber on the down stroke of the saw, even at 20 feet at times one needed to support the log near the centre during the final 3 or 4 cuts to take out the deflection which gradually increases as the saw log devreases in cross section.
I hope you enjoy this exchange of ideas as much as I do
As for long length logs, I have recovered river logs locally that were 36'. I am sure there are more. They were cut with an axe on the butts. I hauled them, a mixture of lengths, home on a 16' trailer, the 36' stick dragged on the road the whole way and was flattened on the tip. It now resides in my mill building as part of a 60' top plate.
I have never seen a up and down saw in full production. Only at a reduced speed at Kings Landing in New Brunswick, CA. I should visit Leonards Mills in Old Town, I have never been.
It is a great exchange, I want to know where these long sawn members come from and how. Tim
I also visited Kings Landing in NB, it is an early true Sash (frame) Saw but the kicker here is that it is powered by an overshot water wheel which as most probably realizes turns at a very low RPM maybe 6 RPM at top speed.
What entranced me at the time was the vibration that runs through the mill framing when the saw is in motion. This was mainly due to the gearing that was necessary to bring up the end speed to 40 or 50 revolutions which would be a slow sawing speed or just above a slow idle.
This type of equipment to work properly needs momentum, and horsepower is generated conversely with the momentum and spinning of the large mill parts. In Grist milling the spinning of the grinding stones act as flywheels, and in woolen mills actual heavy castflywheels were installed to create a steady flow of power and to help the machinery pass by difficult milling sequences.
I came away from the mill at King's landing wishing that the staff there would speed up the equipment to a proper running speed and then shut down for a brief period. Their slow operating speed created an extreme strain on the gearing and no doubt unnecessary wear on the pinion gears that were in the gear train sequences.
Our mill at UCV is powered by a small barrel wheel that produces about 7 horsepower maximum from about 2000 gallons of water usage per minute at near full open operating speed which is about 100 RPM. here are no gears employed, each revolution of the barrel wheel creates one stroke of the saw blade. This mill technology is explained quite well in Oliver Evans treatise on Milling (early 1800,s).
One thing that I am sure of is your home base being in Maine no doubt had access to new technology, larger mills, longer blades, and no doubt circular saws much earlier that we did in this part of the world, we did catchup in that regard.
I really would have to examine these timbers very closely, and then if in fact the saw marks appear to have been made with a Muley saw blade be it free standing or Sash type delve into the local early census records to see what mills were in the region at that time.
I hope this helps you out somewhat, but as you see like a mystery novel more clues are necessary to try and solve the questions at hand
NH, the odd thing about the Machias area is I don't see any old frames sawn via circular saw. I think they switched right to the large band. By the time they switched most building was going to balloon framing. I haven't had the time to check into it in any detail. I have commented on the high number of tidal mills along the coast, there is evidence of them on many coastal streams right at the tide line. They moved them as the timber was depleted. Have you seen the Stump to Ship video? Tim
I am certain the saw marks on the hewn/sawn purlin I mentioned previously were mill sawn. I do not blame anyone for questioning the unusual.
I will pay more attention to the length of sawn timbers I see. I know the circular saw at the water-powered mill on Sanborn pond in New Nampshire can cut 40 feet, but not comfortably: the log would need to be perfectly centered on the carrage which would likely add time to the sawing process. Also, the sawyer commented on how much harder getting a 40 foot log out of the pond as compared to even a 36 foot log.
The book "Early Loggers and the Sawmill" has several photos of large logs being hewn into cants where they fell. The explination is that more timber could be fitted into the hold of a ship if it was squared. One of the photos is of four "choppers" standing on a log "prepairing the tree for the hewers". The choppers had it hewn pretty smooth with there felling axes.
Another reason to hew logs square is they were also floated in "cribs" or assemblies of rafts to a distant destination by a steam tug boat. The raftsmen lived on the raft during shipment, including cooking over a fire built on a sand pile on top of the timbers.
The reason is not so clear for the purlins I mentioned since they probably were not shipped too far or floated in a raft. There were very wayney which I know are not too hard to hew poles just taking off a few inches of wood. This house was located right next to a sawmill.
Jim
The closer you look the more you see. "Heavy timber framing is not a lost art" Fred Hodgson, 1909
You sound like a very knowledgeable and reasonable man, and I think that we are getting closer to solving your long purlins which were sawn through the centre.
As I said before we are located in very different locals with very different beginnings.
I just talked recently with a chap that demolished a house very close to Kingston Ontario, and we discussed this long sawn timber p;roblem that we are dealing with. This chap is also very knowledgeable, and during our conversation he commented to me that he had seen 36 foot joists that were absolutely sawn with a muley saw mill. He says that there were facilities near shipbuilding centres that did have mills with vertical blades that were especially set up to cut the long timbers and planks that shipbuilding required--Kingston was one of those areas herein Canada.
I believe that Maine is also associated with shipbuilding correct me if I am wrong.
Ship building all along the coast of Maine, your belief is true.
Here in Machias the first mill was built in 1763, it produced 1,600,000 board feet in its first year. It was a "double saw". My question is what makes a double saw? Two saws sort of like a gang? The mill burned in 1787, rebuilt and named the Phenix. There was multiple saws located on the river in the same location, one was a gang saw. A fire destroyed them all in 1891, along with millions of feet of inventory. I believe that is when they may of switched to the large band saw which lasted till 1920, seen in From Stump to Ship. Tim
I reviewed the thread and may of missed the dates, but I did not find any comments on the date of development of the band saw. I believe there must be a distinction between sash sawn and band sawn. I have included two photos, the first one is of stock I cut on my small 1-1/4" band saw. The second from a older structure, perhaps 1850's or maybe newer. They are both 18" wide, for comparative reasons. The saw marks are not square to the board and both about 3/8"-1/2" apart meaning the feed rates could have been the same. Or the band turned at a different rate and it just appears to be the same. Could the older board have been sash sawn? The lines show square and the drag of a tooth. Anyone have simular photos of sash sawn stock, 18" or so wide? Tim [img]http://[IMG]http://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q393/timber500/100_1758.jpg[/img][/img] [img]http://[IMG]http://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q393/timber500/100_1757.jpg[/img][/img]
good photos--- isn't modern technology great when used properly!
To my trained eye it isn't hard to pick out the bite of the Muley's 2" teeth in the second example. You can even see the scratches of the teeth as the saw was moved upward to the top of the stroke
Also as you examine the marks on the second example it is the same tooth that is creating the etching in the board`s surface.
If both of these board were placed beside one another it really wouldn`t be hard to date them
The tooth etching on Muley sawn boards increase as the speed of sawing increases, putting more pressure on the direct line of cut, causing some vibration.
I would say that the rate of cut of this muley sawn board was approaching the maximum rate of 3 eights to 1 half inch per stroke.
At 90 revolution per minute the sawing rate would have been about 4 feet per minute or 3 minutes per 12 foot board.
before I leave tonight I would like to comment on the output of the 1764 mill it seems ot be alittle high even for a gang saw (2) blades
from my experience we cut 20000 bd ft in 4 months (1) blade, this is not running at full production speed so-- if we say double that plus add another 5 months that gives you about 80000 bd ft double that again for another saw and that gives you 160000 bd ft --foodfor thought.
I would like to comment on your Sept 10 entry especially in regards to the "First mill" that put out 1,600,000 bd ft in 1 year of sawing.
Our mill an authentic 1864 reconstruction with 1 blade and running for 5 months total production was 25000 bd ft.
Now if you calculate in that it probably was running slower than in the 1800's lets say we double that to 50000 bd ft.
Now they ran the mill approx 10 months then so we double that again to 100000 bd ft
now we add another blade and we double that again to 200000 bd ft
If they ran the mill 24 hrs a day we could multiply that by 3 or 600,000 bd ft
They could have been sawing already squared timber saving the squaring up process which would increase production damatically, and sawing timber long in length and in cross section (lets say no less tan 12" square) I think that we would be approaching their output
In retrospect I believe that a 2 blade Muley mill in good shape and all machinery in new condition--new blades, good head of water, a 20 foot saw frame, 3 shifts of men, would give it a run for their money, 12" or preferrably larger--18" to 24" already squared timber would put you to that production but it would be a monumental effort no doubt
NH, I picked this info up while on a tour of Machias, I will visit with the tour guide to get the facts straight. I thought the numbers were high too, but she was confident of them. The mills set up in the early 1900's were abandoned, there was even an electrical company, they were sold. The new owner carted all the info, documentation and history to unknown locations. The local historical society is left with very little hard evidence, some but not a lot. Tim
NH's experience w/ old sawing production is a good reference. But as far as board feet goes, who's to say what that mill Tim refered to actually sawed. It could have been beams and planks in addition to "boarding."
As we know, a 1 x 12 board 16 feet long is 16 bf. But an 8 x 8 beam that same length comprises 56 bf (over 3 times the bf but w/ much less sawing)... So you produce more bf w/ less passes when sawing beams and planks.
Just something to consider in estimating.
And I think Tim's commitment to advancing the craft is pretty strong, too.
I was just thinking, 1,600,000 board feet is a lot of wood. The double saw had to saw 50 of those 8x8's each day. Did the cold have any effect on how the mills operated could they of run in the winter? NH, did you comment on the winter? If they had shut down for water reasons they may have taken to hewing and once the water was back on those cants could of been sawn. Part of the hewn/sawn stock question.
I just looked for a picture of the Bad Little Falls but couldn't find one. I will take a new one. Still wanting ask the question to the right person in town on the large Number of BF. Tim
OK, so the world now knows math is not my strong suit. thanks alot, Tim!
But you reinforce my point. There's much more board feet in timber than in boards, so mills could saw alot of bf in a hurry that way.
As far as winter goes, the sash mill I recently visited (at the top of this thread) ran year-round.... They used an "undershot" wheel. Not a large diameter wheel like a gristmill, but a long and small diameter wheel (like 16 inches). The water flowed under the wheel.
The entire thing stayed submerged and thus ice-free. The folks there said if you wanted alot of power you just built a longer wheel.
So some of these old mills could run regardless of season
Well this thread is really generating alot of good comraderie comments (english wasn't my best subject back when I went to SS#10)
All water turbines worked below water level but around here during the coldest part of the year ice flows would jam the trash gates and usually curtail operations at least sporatically if not indefinitely for a period of 2 to 3 months.
Just remember that water wheels even though they are submerged would send the power transmission upwards or sideways through a pressure gland, and it would be at these spots that freezing problems would develop big time.
I sort of take to task the undershot waterwheel that is submerged. I have had the opportunity to study extensively waterwheels of all different varieties, and undershot wheels had to be situated above the level of the tailraces for them to operate. This also goes for overshot wheels and breast wheels, . Turbines had to be submerged but to work operate properly they were contained in a pressure or open box, and also had to be above the level of the tailrace. The later models had venturie tubes of various lengths to deliver the spent water in a controlled manner down to the tailrace, in doing so the weight of the falling water created a pull on the wheel increasing the horsepower.
The 16" "undershot wheel" reference I believe refers to the width of the buckets on the undershot wheel, someone correct me if I am wrong
For sure if the mill was sawing timber stock it would kick up the stats considerably, and could have been part of the equation.
I had some logs soaking in a river near my house, I would use my pulp loader to pick them out. I had to bust them out of 6" of ice one December. My guess is they shut down. Don, the mill mentioned at the start ran in the winter. Would the send logs out on the ice, how did they get the logs to the mill.
As time progressed the tree were located further and further from the mill. The river was the highway for the logs. No logs were moving during the winter. The men were all out cutting as well. Season work. How about the Summer and low water?
Actually, the mill here ran much longer than what we think of as the typical 19th-century mill, which relied on the river as a highway. You may remember it sawed its last board in 1962--via sash saw no less! 1962! We can't frame this mill in a "traditional mode."
They had an extensive network of buildings to store raw and finished wood. An old picture shows logs stacked in row upon row on land. In the early days they pulled them in from the river and millpond, but as the years ticked into the 20th century, they must have had logs delivered by truck.
I don't know all the particulars of course, but the fact this mill ran so late into the modern day is practicaly unheard of. And it's a testament to its effeciency.
Also, it likely ran so long because its operator lived a long life. He was cutting (or at least overseeing) things here in his early 90s!
NH, you raise good points about free-ups on the apparatus linking the submerged wheel to the gearworks/pulleys above...I would guess that must have been an issue... but the folks here were quite proud to state that what helped this mill run so long into the 20th century was the fact it could run uninterupped in winter (keeping it profitable, etc).
How they competed, stayed viable against the modern mills is a mystery indeed.
In regards to the freezing problem, I suspect that in some mills that were in a situation where there steady production meant big bucks, they were ingenious enough to create an area surrounding the water wheel that could be heated in cold weather.
In our grist mill the owner at that time had the foresight to create gearing that accepted the power from a steam engine, this meant that he could operate continuously during the winter and dry months of the year.
Our Muley mill also kept running well into the 1900's but had modernized somewhat by the 50's.
Each situation is different and it was the operators that had the foresight to try something different stayed to the forefront.
My father always said " Nothing ventured, Nothing gained"
This photo will go a bit of topic. At the same time cover three items. First, the yellow with red roof building, it has a jetty. 2nd, the falls is Machias Falls or Bad Little Falls, showing high water in the spring. There was four mill at one time in this section of the river. The water in the base of the picture is tidal water. The ships would come right up to this point and load. And 3rd, I believe it is a waste to not be harnessing this source of power in some way. Tim [img]http://[IMG]http://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q393/timber500/100_0896.jpg[/img][/img]
What year is the jettied building. I agree there must be a way to harness the energy of moving water without undesireable consequences. I haave seen small scale hydroelectric which operate using water piped through a 1.5" ABS plastic pipe. This does not take much water from the river.
There was just a letter in the paper about how the Scribner's Mills dam should not be allowed because the authentic, historic milling of lumber is less significant than the salmon and river health. "Are there ways to have it both ways"?
I almost bought an old grist mill to use as a shop but one of the rules in the shoreland protection zoning along Maine waterways is that if a building within the zone suffers a loss of more than half of it's value it cannot be repaired. The way I see it, mill buildings in Maine are doomed, except the rules would likely be unenforced with enough political support.
Have I mentioned that there were an estimated 160 tide mills on the Coast of Maine and thousands of other mills?
Jim
The closer you look the more you see. "Heavy timber framing is not a lost art" Fred Hodgson, 1909
There was just a letter in the paper about how the Scribner's Mills dam should not be allowed because the authentic, historic milling of lumber is less significant than the salmon and river health. "Are there ways to have it both ways"?
Jim
Hey Jim:
Where did you see the article on Scribner's? They actually can have it both ways... the dam application that the mill folks submitted to DEP has FISH PASSAGE written into it... a "fish ladder," and it is very slightly pitched-- easy for the fish to use. Hopefully this detail made it into the article.
Sebago Lake is probably one of the toughest watersheds to get a dam on in Maine. The Crooked River, where this mill sits, is the largest tributary feeding Sebago Lake. Of course, it's all about the Salmon...but the introduction of lake trout by Maine's own IF&W decades ago has done more to harm Sebago salmon than anything. It turns out, togue are much better at eating what the Salmon need to prey upon.
I hope folks can see that regional mills can be a big part of the whole "Buy Local" buzz these days... in some way.
I now have to check the thread pitch on my bits, solidify 1,600,000 board feet of lumber and date a jettied building. Just a reminder or I will forget. Tim
You mentioned that Schreibner's mill was one of two sash saws in US. There are many more than that. Check out the links at the Ledyard Sawmill (in CT) site at
You will also find a detailed description of the operating water powered Ledyard Up and Down sawmill with videos and technical details, links to 19th century books on up and down sawmills, and other information.
Hello, I am new to this forum, and am looking for some help identifying a part we found at the site of an old up-down sawmill from the period 1860-1880. It has a wider tooth like part, and grouved around 2 sides, plus there is a half round notch which makes it look like it fits into a larger device. We have speculated that it might be a part of the log sled? I have tried the file manager to attach three pictures. Hope it works.
If there is a more appropriate place to ask my question I would appreciate any tips you might have to offer.
Well I just run across your thread and the pictures of your artifact, this is my take------
It looks very much like an insertable tooth in a large saw blade, no doubt used by some later machinery at the saw mill site
To my knowledge the early vertical blades of the 1860 period did not have insertable teeth, but having said that one never knows for sure
The v--grooves no doubt held the tooth in place, and if damaged could be quickly replaced moving the production of the mill ahead as soon as possible
Replacable teeth in modern blades, are usually circular shaped and rotated into their seat using grooves similar to what I see on this artifact using the force of the cutting action to keep them secure and in position
I suspect it is an early try at the use of replacable teeth in an early blade, not a band blade but a flat blade which may have been quite long and heavy used uniquely for very large logs in that area
I hope this helps it is my best guess
Richard Casselman The Northern Hewer
Oh yes--- before I leave, I did enjoy reading the early posts about saw marks which started this thread, and my name mentioned in connection with their identification---- well I had no problem identifying their difference because we sawed 20000 bd ft yearly at Upper Canada Village using an authentic water powered Muley saw MIll that used one vertical blade, this I did for 27 years, and this is the telltale marks--The blade is canted ahead at the upper end, the reason being to clear the cut on the up stroke,clear the saw dust, and let the log move ahead before the down cut
This lead to a unmistaken forward markings of the sawing action, also the teeth on the blade itself are 2" long and spaced at 2.25" intervals, leaving a fairly rough cut compared to a band saw's smoother cut and exactly vertical markings.
water powered mills did have and did use sash saws with tensioned blades of thinner and finer steel, but here in this part of north America (Ontario Canada)the Mulley blade predominated.
I know a sash saw mill operated in New Brunswick at King's Landing, that was powered by a slow rotating water wheel, the speed increased with gearing that vibrated the mill structure as it strained against the forces generated by the cutting
It sure has been great talking to you and once again
