Simplified log cabin build idea

I have a weird idea for a way to build a log cabin.  Take the logs and run them through a bandsaw mill to take opposing slabs off of them.  Make them all either 10", 12" or 14" thick (depending on your log sizes).

Build the walls by laying the logs on top of each other (like normal).  Use natural chinking between the logs, only since you cut flats on them, they have a fair bit of flat surface area to sandwich the chinking.  Do whatever corner connections you want.

This seems like a simple way to build a log cabin that gives you a broad chink area for less air infiltration.   One downside is you're limited to the length of the sawmill.  

One possible downside is that the logs may twist between when they're cut and when you build the cabin?  I'm very curious if that would be likely.  I'm thinking, for my area, red pines would be the ideal species.

Thoughts?

Hi Mike;
While you are cutting two sides of your logs, go ahead and cut a third side smoothly as well.
Log cabins are great until you try to put things tight to the wall...
Also, rounded natural logs on the inside, make for fine dust collectors...

I feel as though flatness will invite moisture issues more readily. For the same reason when you notch a log you put the notch on the bottom of the log being applied, rather than the top of the in place log, so that water doesn't pool in the notch.

I got a book with everything made of logs that I want to build. For simplicity, I would tackle the first project in the book below, Laplander's Hut. These are all Swedish designs. I currently have a log home obsession and still no logs or land to experiment with. I cannot get enough of them right now.

Though, even just a modification or two depending on needs, to the flat sided logs as you've mentioned, would greatly improve their function.

Great point Thomas!

Thanks Jeff, rainwater is one consideration.  Having overhangs that are plenty big should help with that.  Both to keep rain off the side of the cabin and to keep splash up from hitting the lower logs.

@Jeff Steez - Could you give us the title and author of the book you quoted from? It looks interesting...

Mike Haasl wrote:

Build the walls by laying the logs on top of each other (like normal).  Use natural chinking between the logs, only since you cut flats on them, they have a fair bit of flat surface area to sandwich the chinking.  

A company on Vancouver Isl uses a chain saw (don't know if it's some sort of special one) and cuts a wedge out of the upper log and fills it with insulation (I think they were using artificial stuff). They didn't alter the lower log, but left it round. As you say, 2 round logs make for difficulty getting insulation to stay put very well. However Jeff Steez's point of not wanting moisture to pool also makes sense to me.

By using a chain saw, they weren't limited to mill capacity. Mind you, my neighbor's mill can do 16 ft which would be a decent "simplified" cabin.

Certainly, people have done what you're proposing - this picture even suggests they've joined logs together, which would circumvent the mill length issue:

Note that the "groove" is in the bottom of the upper log, and the "spline" is in the top of the log - this next picture shows that more clearly:

Source

I like your idea, Mike.  If I wanted another log cabin, I would try it your way.

But when I put all that effort into getting logs onto our mill bed, I'm definitely going to cut squared lumber.  And once I have that wonderful array of lumber, I'm definitely building post and beam structures, as that best plays to the strengths of large-dimension wood.  Form = function.

But of course if you have a vision for slabbing two sides and building with logs, then I hope you will have at it and let us know how it goes.  Form = function is a nice practical guide, but the fun is in the inspiration and process.  

Follow your instincts and enjoy!

Hi, Jay! Looking at the logs used in our home, they are cut & grooved exactly like the ones in your diagram. It looks like the longest ones they used are only 8 - 10ft, but are butted up like masonry, so the exterior walls are about 30-35ft, on the short side, (not sure, on the long side - maybe 90, including the garage?). So, just like any other home, you're not limited by the length of the logs.

I DEFINITELY prefer the squared interior sides, too. I have a friend in Arkansas who loved her new-to-her log home, when she bought it, back in '98, but became very frustrated, when putting up shelves, pictures, etc on the round interior walls, and the rounded top sides collect dust & air-born cooking grease, horribly, especially on her back-country gravel & dirt roads.

This book is what my dreams are made of.

From Log to Log House
Sven-Gunnar Håkansson

Published in 2003 Hardcover, ISBN 9781894572729

So about logs cut flat for the chinking... seems to me if you can cut them so they lie at a little angle, any water that gets in will run back out. It's not getting wet that's an issue, it's staying wet.

My Uncle built a log home like as was described here, but sawn on three sides and not two. Most manufactured log homes have a groove, or series of grooves milled into their logs so that when they fit together, it stops drafts from getting through. Since my Uncle only had a bandsaw for a sawmill, that option was out. After the first winter he went on the inside, cut 2x2'a, nailed them to the inside of the log home, put 2 inch Styrofoam insulation between the studs and finished the wall with v-match pine. It was just too cold otherwise.

I know it would seem a sawmill make a flat cut, but that is not the case. A lot of forces are at play, and a lot of different densities play into the cut. Cut a log with some knots and the sawblade deflects rising and falling. Or the weight of the log compresses the frame of the sawmill so that as a cut is made, you end up with a deeper cut in the middle of the log than the ends. It is just impossible to make a flat cut with a sawmill, that is why all commercial wood is put through a planer, at least on one side.

I am not saying a person should be deterred from building like as was mentioned, my Uncle made it work, it just seemed silly to me to have log walls and still have insulation and pine boarded walls on the inside. If a person is going to do that, why not just frame the walls conventionally, and then put log siding on the outside (2 inches thick) and then pine on the inside? No drafts, R-19, standard thickness walls for standard windows, wiring that is easier to do, no settling, additions can be added at a later date that is easier to do, etc,

One style of log home construction method that was not mentioned though was the Maine Style Log Home where the logs are arranged vertically. It was done so that shorter logs could be utilized, and the settling of the logs was not so much of an issue.

Mike: in Alaska at a weekend show I saw a log cabin built out of 2 flat 4x3x8 garden timbers.  They built it butt and pass an put a 3inchx1/4" close cell foam strip between the log layers.  I think it was a floor pading for a floating engineered floor system.  Made a neat little garden shed / ticket booth.  I remember doing the math and it was about 70% the cost of stick and plywood shed $, and self standing, no floor on the asphalt parking lot. Tom

Thomas Michael wrote:Mike: in Alaska at a weekend show I saw a log cabin built out of 2 flat 4x3x8 garden timbers.  They built it butt and pass an put a 3inchx1/4" close cell foam strip between the log layers.  I think it was a floor pading for a floating engineered floor system.  Made a neat little garden shed / ticket booth.  I remember doing the math and it was about 70% the cost of stick and plywood shed $, and self standing, no floor on the asphalt parking lot. Tom

Is that "2" a typo?

If butt and pass is what it sounds like, did they have anything securing the logs to the ones above and below them besides weight? Jenga?!?

Rez Zircon wrote:So about logs cut flat for the chinking... seems to me if you can cut them so they lie at a little angle, any water that gets in will run back out. It's not getting wet that's an issue, it's staying wet.

I think if they are cut to drain water out, the weight of the wall will be trying to pull the building apart?

Steve Zoma wrote:If a person is going to do that, why not just frame the walls conventionally, and then put log siding on the outside (2 inches thick) and then pine on the inside? No drafts, R-19, standard thickness walls for standard windows, wiring that is easier to do, no settling, additions can be added at a later date that is easier to do, etc,

You mean if a person is going to use styrofoam like your uncle? I think mikes idea is based on the premise of using as many local/natural materials as practical.

Coydon Wallham wrote:

Thomas Michael wrote:Mike: in Alaska at a weekend show I saw a log cabin built out of 2 flat 4x3x8 garden timbers.

Is that "2" a typo?

If butt and pass is what it sounds like, did they have anything securing the logs to the ones above and below them besides weight? Jenga?!?

Not a typo top and bottom flat as Mike described in the first post.

"But n pass" is a simplified way of building a log cabin.  The "pass" means the length of the log does not matter you can cut them latter.  Basically build the first layer of logs square level supported etc. Then set the first 2nd layer log on any side, the next log butt against 1st let length past 1st layer next log butt n pass again.  It makes a weak and drafty corner but it is fast and easy.  You cut the pass parts to even lengths, after the wall is done.  

The layers are staked together with long steel nails(rebar).   At least 3 layers long.  Tom

Coydon Wallham wrote:You mean if a person is going to use styrofoam like your uncle? I think mikes idea is based on the premise of using as many local/natural materials as practical.

Generally with Permiculture stuff, the more natural derivatives to toxic building materials are well known, so when a non Permie family member builds something with standard materials, it is just understood that a Permie person would replace them with the more natural material choices they have available to them. In other words I was explaining how the log cabin design was a failure, not the building material choices itself.

The design seemed good, but it did not take into account stopping drafts. Mass only goes so far to retain heat. Reducing all drafts is the other aspect of the equation often missed.

Well, I stumbled on this thread looking for a review or discussion of Hakansson's "From Log to Log House".  "This book is what my dreams are made of" sounds like a ringing endorsement!  I have a used copy of Robert Chambers's "Revised Log Construction Manual" coming (Swedish cope or full scribe method), and just picked up a used Veritas Transfer Scribe at a good price, but Hakansson seems to be an alternate perspective.  I'm also considering tracking down a copy of "Stav og Laft" by Bugge as another point of view.

Building a cabin with flatted logs (top and bottom), with some form of chinking sandwiched between as the walls are assembled - sphagnum moss from the surrounding forest, tarred oakum from the local shipyard, old socks (really! - it was apparently quite common in Norway) - was historically a pretty standard method of construction, to the best of my knowledge.  To help prevent twisting, courses of logs were pegged together through vertical bored (augered) holes at intervals down the lengths of the walls.  Avoiding logs with a lot of twist (or, even worse, left hand twist) in the first place helps, too.  Actually, I suspect if you had an entire structure worth of left hand twist logs, it wouldn't matter so much, but mix-n-match is potentially a bad combo with the twists working against each other, and since most logs are somewhere between straight (minimal twist) and right hand twist (for whatever reason, the chirality is preferentially right handed), avoiding left twist logs can help prevent tortured walls and drafty buildings.

Enduring Scandinavian structures were also commonly built with Scotch pine logs which had dried down on the stump.  Ring bark the tree, either just below the crown (seems to have been preferred, even if more difficult - shinnying up 30 meters or so without the benefit of modern safety gear would be a bit perilous) or girdle at the base of the tree, and let it die on the stump, or skin off bark with a long-handled spud blade, either in strips or patches up the length of the stem.  The intent of both approaches is to turn the entire stem into resinous "fat wood", so that it is completely saturated with hardened pine pitch.  It could require up to 3 years to do the process properly so that the log was ready to harvest.

I'm pretty sure Hermann Phleps has a photo or two showing what happens when a left twist log is used in a structure composed of mostly right twist logs, in his book "The Craft of Log Building" (published in German as "Der Blockbau").  I'll see if I can scan and add to this post, on edit.

Here are a couple of videos showing structures built of 2-flatted logs:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNTfLGt59qo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMyXyHpnQAE

Hewing, as in the first video, would be the historic method, but since Finnish Playground has a band mill, he takes that shortcut in the second video and 4-sides his logs from the outset.  Hewing the exterior (and interior, too) flat with a hewing or broad axe after the walls are erected will "close the grain" and - especially with resinous wood - help to make the logs more moisture resistant.  The sawn exterior surface in the second video's logs will be "open" and will permit more moisture to creep into the logs walls.  Planing, adzing or hewing after milling would, I think, help close the grain, and might be a reasonable compromise between expediency and quality.

Okay, that book does look interesting, but there is one very big omission in the project Jeff showed (unless it's mentioned somewhere I couldn't see). A roof like that would traditionally always have a few layers of overlapping sheets of birch bark below the sod layer, as a water barrier. Without this, the roof will leak badly, and rot quickly.

The birch bark is waterproof and pretty much never rots, but doesn't handle UV light very well. So, the sod provides insulation and protects the birch bark from light, while the birch bark stops the inhabitants from getting wet...

Eino Kenttä wrote:Okay, that book does look interesting, but there is one very big omission in the project Jeff showed (unless it's mentioned somewhere I couldn't see). A roof like that would traditionally always have a few layers of overlapping sheets of birch bark below the sod layer, as a water barrier. Without this, the roof will leak badly, and rot quickly.

The birch bark is waterproof and pretty much never rots, but doesn't handle UV light very well. So, the sod provides insulation and protects the birch bark from light, while the birch bark stops the inhabitants from getting wet...

Have you seen that topic described in any other books or websites?

Here is one example. The description in English is very brief, and the video is narrated in Norwegian, but you'll get the basic idea. Lemme see if I can find something more detailed in English...

Actually, the Wikipedia article on sod roofs is quite good. This website doesn't go into any detail, but has some nice pictures of Norwegian and Icelandic turf roofs.  You can find more if you google turf roof and birch bark.

Thomas Michael wrote:

Coydon Wallham wrote:

Thomas Michael wrote:Mike: in Alaska at a weekend show I saw a log cabin built out of 2 flat 4x3x8 garden timbers.

Is that "2" a typo?

If butt and pass is what it sounds like, did they have anything securing the logs to the ones above and below them besides weight? Jenga?!?

Not a typo top and bottom flat as Mike described in the first post.

Yes, now I see that "2 flat" is a description of the two surfaces being milled flat on all of the logs. At first it read like they built a cabin out of two timbers that were flat...

Coydon Wallham wrote:Have you seen that topic described in any other books or websites?

Coydon -

The aforementioned volume "The Craft of Log Building" by Hermann Phleps has a decent description of this approach, among other roofing systems (e.g. thatching [of various styles and materials], board roofs [both horizontal and vertical], shingles [both lapped and edge grooved; nailed, pole weighted, and stone weighted]).  This book was originally written/published in German in the early 1940s as "Der Blockbau".  The author was an architecture professor who documented all manner of historic construction techniques still extant - in this volume, log construction, but in other works, timber framing, stave churches, blacksmithing and the use of decorative color in architecture.  I am on the hunt for a reasonably priced copy of his timber framing book ("Allemannische Holzbaukunst" - roughly, "German Timber Framing").  If I spot his book on stave churches at a good price, I won't hesitate to jump on that, too.  These latter two are only available in the original German, but his illustrations and photos are gold, in any language.

There are other sources, too.  Gothenburg University has what appears to be a very active architecture program, with students writing theses documenting their attempts at replicating or repairing historic structures or architectural details using period tools and techniques, etc.  I know I've seen some roofing details in publications on their web archive, as well.  These are mostly in Swedish, though some have an English synopsis, and some have text both in Swedish and English.  I'll try to track down a relevant example and link it here.

And, I'll try to remember to take my copy of "The Craft of Log Building" in to work to use the flatbed scanner there to scan a few relevant pages.  I really cannot recommend this book highly enough if you are interested in the historical and traditional Old World antecedents to New World log buildings.

Kevin

Coydon -

Here's one example publication, written by Goran Andersson, on the Gothenburg University publications archive:
https://gupea.ub.gu.se/bitstream/handle/2077/41561/gupea_2077_41561_2.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y
Page 62 begins the section titled "Tak" - ceilings/roofs.  No, I don't really read Swedish.  Google Translate can be your friend, and a bit of German (or, possibly, English of Chaucer's vintage) may help, also.

At least some of the roofs shown in the drawings in this chapter appear to use bark ("Näver") as a waterproof layer beneath whatever the outer weather surface might be - sod, boards, etc.

I think I can find more publications detailing bark lined roofs on this archive, but it's a bit laborious for me because, as I mentioned, I don't "do" Swedish.  Despite my last name.

I originally started poking around on this archive because I stumbled across a couple of student papers detailing attempts at timber framing using the ancient "piquer a plomb" method commonly seen in "French scribe" - full size scribed layout on a lofting floor.  This method doesn't require much in way of computational mathematics or being able to repeatedly measure offsets to a known scale (i.e. a tape measure or rule), but can largely be done with dividers, chalk line, square and plumb bob.  The framing members also can be "as straight as a dog's hind leg" and it hardly matters - in fact curved/crooked/bent timbers can add visual interest and "rustic" flair.  This is far removed from the "mill rule" or "square rule" timber framing most commonly discussed in American timber framing references.

Kevin

Coydon -

As promised, here is a PDF of excerpted materials on log twist and doweling or mortising to provide additional stability to log walls and counteract the effects of twist, as well as some information on birch bark lined sod roofs.  Please overlook my low-quality scanning efforts.

Kevin

Regarding 2-sided logs and OP Mike Haasl's initial post, here is a series of 3 videos from ProjectHighlander's YT channel, showing his method of kerfing logs to fit each other with a chainsaw - a sort of in-place 2-siding, if you will.  Conceptually, this kerfing is not unlike the fine tuning you might see done to a long scarf joint with a hand saw in a timber framing project.

He makes full-scribe log cabins professionally (some examples of his usual standard of work can be seen on his YT channel), and he readily admits that this is a much rougher standard of construction, but it would be quick, and adequate for some structures (his example building is a sauna made from recycled logs, but as a first cabin on north country land, just to get something up before winter arrives, it might be acceptable - in my neck of the woods, Scandinavian homesteaders often lived in [or more to the point, out of] the sauna the first winter or two, until the house was built - or for an outbuilding [cow shed, chicken coop, tool shed/shop]).







As long as the spacer shim thicknesses are reasonably good approximations of the saw kerf width, and the saw isn't "cocked" in the cut too much, it seems like this could work pretty well.

I thought it said a lot that he wasn't so high and mighty about the superiority of full scribe that he was unable to countenance any other method of log construction - "horses for courses".

I first found this fellow's channel by way of his videos on masonry heaters.  But, one thing leads to another...

Kevin Olson wrote:Actually, I suspect if you had an entire structure worth of left hand twist logs, it wouldn't matter so much, but mix-n-match is potentially a bad combo with the twists working against each other, and since most logs are somewhere between straight (minimal twist) and right hand twist (for whatever reason, the chirality is preferentially right handed), avoiding left twist logs can help prevent tortured walls and drafty buildings.

Having only just recently received my copy, I can report that Robert Chambers, in his "Log Construction Manual" book, asserts that all needle leafed (coniferous) young trees have left hand twist, but that most gradually acquire a right hand twist as they get older.  He also asserts that this is genetically determined (nature, not nurture).  Those trees which do not change "handedness", and remain left hand twist later in life, are much weaker in bending, per Chambers.  He also claims that the lower trunk of a tree may have right hand twist, and the upper portion (crown) left hand twist, due to the younger age of the crown.  He also says that left hand twist logs will twist more as they dry to equilibrium moisture content, whereas right hand twist logs will be more stable (presumably due to the inner and outer twists counteracting each other - also why the bending strength would be improved, I suppose).

This article on his website goes into considerably deeper detail than the book:
https://www.logbuilding.org/SpiralGrain.LBN63.pdf

I have no basis for refuting these claims.  I suppose one could try to carefully peel off growth rings of a right hand twist tree, one layer at a time like peeling back layers of an onion, to test whether Chambers is correct.  Given how meticulously detailed he is about other aspects of full scribe log building in this book (some of which would apply to other styles of log building, as well), I am inclined to take his word for it.  His chapter on sill logs is alone probably worth the price of admission.  Lots of his points have obviously been won by bitter experience.  It'll take me a while to work through and understand this book.

Anyway, my earlier conjecture regarding using all left hand twist logs should be taken under advisement!

Kevin Olson wrote:
Having only just recently received my copy, I can report that Robert Chambers, in his "Log Construction Manual" book, asserts that all needle leafed (coniferous) young trees have left hand twist, but that most gradually acquire a right hand twist as they get older.  He also asserts that this is genetically determined (nature, not nurture).  Those trees which do not change "handedness", and remain left hand twist later in life, are much weaker in bending, per Chambers.  He also claims that the lower trunk of a tree may have right hand twist, and the upper portion (crown) left hand twist, due to the younger age of the crown.  He also says that left hand twist logs will twist more as they dry to equilibrium moisture content, whereas right hand twist logs will be more stable (presumably due to the inner and outer twists counteracting each other - also why the bending strength would be improved, I suppose).

Does he explain the environmental conditions that cause this "twisting"? I'm thinking of something like sunflowers following the sun's track, but that wouldn't seem to make sense for a tree. Any idea if trees raised in plantation settings would be more or less likely to develop those characteristics?

Coydon Wallham wrote:
Does he explain the environmental conditions that cause this "twisting"? I'm thinking of something like sunflowers following the sun's track, but that wouldn't seem to make sense for a tree. Any idea if trees raised in plantation settings would be more or less likely to develop those characteristics?

I just read the linked article- some speculation about Coriolis effect but no solid answer.

I do have Dire Straits "Twisting by the Pool" stuck in my head now, thank you very much...

Coydon -

Coydon Wallham wrote:I just read the linked article- some speculation about Coriolis effect but no solid answer.

I do have Dire Straits "Twisting by the Pool" stuck in my head now, thank you very much...

Yeah, I would have hypothesized the same - since Coriolis forces drive the direction of rotation of storms (counterclockwise in the Northern Hemisphere mid-latitudes), the predominant shift in wind direction might "wind up" trees in that direction.  But, that would be a SWAG, and Chambers claims it's entirely genetic.  Maybe I'll track down some of his references on this topic, eventually.  For now, I'll take his word for it.

I wonder if any of our mid-latitude Southern Hemisphere correspondents have any insight into the behavior of coniferous trees at the antipodes?

Curiously, Chambers says that the ASTM specs for lumber twist allowables make no distinction between left and right hand twists, even though he claims there is a difference in bending strength between the two.  Maybe this is just a conservative shortcut on the part of the standards makers.

Kevin

Coydon Wallham wrote:Have you seen that topic described in any other books or websites?

Here's another reference which shows a birch bark lined roof eave detail (and other construction details, too):
https://nylaatelier.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/2015-01-19_memoire-finale.pdf
Go to page 26 of the PDF (numbered page 51 of the original document), and page 35 (69) for a closer look.

This is in French.  I am still digesting it (slowly - my French is pretty rough these days).

Mike Haasl wrote:I have a weird idea for a way to build a log cabin.  Take the logs and run them through a bandsaw mill to take opposing slabs off of them.  Make them all either 10", 12" or 14" thick (depending on your log sizes).

Build the walls by laying the logs on top of each other (like normal).  Use natural chinking between the logs, only since you cut flats on them, they have a fair bit of flat surface area to sandwich the chinking.  Do whatever corner connections you want.

This seems like a simple way to build a log cabin that gives you a broad chink area for less air infiltration.   One downside is you're limited to the length of the sawmill.  

One possible downside is that the logs may twist between when they're cut and when you build the cabin?  I'm very curious if that would be likely.  I'm thinking, for my area, red pines would be the ideal species.

Thoughts?

Going back to the original concept, what would be the easiest way to get longer logs with two flats? Mike mentions the limit of the length with a portable mill. I thought an Alaskan style mill might be workable for this, but shopping around they seem to max out about the same as portable bandsaw mills, well under 20'. Can they be hacked to work longer logs, or would this be a matter of hand hewing or 'freehand' chainsawing? I'm not sure if the 'spacer' method from the ProjectHighlander videos works on long logs, I'm only through the first video there...

I'm guessing for longer logs you'd be better off cutting them into two shorter ones.  The butt end could be made into a thicker wall log.  I've seen log buildings before where they subdivide long lengths with cross walls to avoid needing really long logs.  Or for this very reason.  Alternately you could splice two logs together with a scarf or spline joint of some sort.

Mike Haasl wrote:Alternately you could splice two logs together with a scarf or spline joint of some sort.

The Bearded Carpenter has a 2-part series (part of a longer cabin build series) showing how he splices two lengths, which is simpler than using a timber framing grade "bolt of lightning" scarf, stopped and wedged.

Part 1:

Part2:


Though he's using a big circ saw to rough the splice joint, an aggressively toothed hand saw (maybe 5 points/4 teeth per inch), well sharpened and set, should be pretty quick, too.  I have one which is 5ppi which I got for $8 that I need to clean up, sharpen and set.  It has a cast pot metal handle.  The word on the street is that these metal handled saws were used underground when setting stulls in the mines, but I haven't been able to verify that.  Last fall, I was using a Stanley "Jack" induction hardened saw, but that was all 2X dimensioned lumber, so no deep kerfs.

I believe this is also the cabin build where he shows a stiff leg derrick type of crane for lifting logs to the top of the walls, which he had on the floor inside the pen, and which he could move around from wall to wall, as needed.  That required building a floor deck on the joists pretty early on in the build sequence.

It seems to me that with some careful shimming of the two log lengths (maybe with plastic felling wedges or hardwood gluts), it should be possible to use the Project Highlander method with this Bearded Carpenter splice.  This joint won't take much bending load, so it seems to me that you'd need to make vertical adjustments carefully.

The other option would be, as Mike suggested, burying the lengthwise joint in a vertical post, or in a cross wall (even if the wall is short stub, as you might do with the one notch long Lincoln Logs).  I think Hermann Phleps shows burying the splice in a cross wall, but I'll have to check later.  I have an early meeting with customers over the water (they're already 5 or 6 hours ahead of us), so I need to get my day under way.  I'll take the book with me to work, and if I can spot the relevant picture or two, I'll scan it with the flat bed scanner and post it later.  James Mitchell shows the post method (which is the bread and butter of his short log construction method).  I can probably find a good picture or drawing of that, as well - standard post and beam or Red River Frame construction, really.

Coydon Wallham wrote:I thought an Alaskan style mill might be workable for this, but shopping around they seem to max out about the same as portable bandsaw mills, well under 20'. Can they be hacked to work longer logs, or would this be a matter of hand hewing or 'freehand' chainsawing? I'm not sure if the 'spacer' method from the ProjectHighlander videos works on long logs, I'm only through the first video there...

Will Malloff's "Chainsaw Lumbermaking" shows a method of using lag screws to set a datum plane for the (homemade) guide rail.  The rail can be repositioned along the length of the log, from one set of lag screws to the next.  Once the initial cut is made, the cut becomes the guide for the saw carriage.

I think I have a low res scan of this arrangement, but I'll have to dig in the trove.  That might obviate any need to splice logs, assuming you have long enough logs to start with.

Malloff designed his lumbermaking setup to be portable in a small boat, to run out to offshore islands on the West Coast of Canada.

Here are a couple of scans from Phleps and Mitchell, showing methods of using shorter logs.

Phleps shows multiple splices, but #10 is akin to what has been suggested, placing the splice at a cross wall.

The illustration from Mitchell (mine is the 1984 edition) just shows the bog standard post and beam setup - bread and butter for him.

I did find the scan of Malloff's setup for long milling, but I'll need to do some monkeying around to clip it down to the relevant material, since there is more than that in the scan.  However, just the long milling method seems like a small enough chunk to constitute "fair use", at least in my jurisdiction.

Coydon -

Here are the excerpts from Malloff's "Chainsaw Lumbermaking" which most directly pertains to the minimal equipment needed for long milling by his method, the setup, and milling box heart timber (which is pretty much the same as two-siding cabin logs).

Hope this helps.  The whole book is worth a read, if you can track down a copy.

Kevin