Skip to main content

Full text of "Inorganic chemicals as aids in burning hardwood tree stumps"

See other formats


630.7 
I£6b 
no. 678 
cop.  8 


UNIVERSITY  OF 


AT  nn 

AT  URBANA-CHAMPAIQN 
AGRICULTURE 


CIRCU  UNIVERSITY  OF  JLLINOIS 

-      


CHEMICAK 

as  Aids  in 

BURNING  HARDWOOD 
TREE  STUMPS 


By  C.  S.  WALTERS  and  K.  R.  PETERSON 


Bulletin  678 


UNIVERSITY   OF   ILLINOIS    •    AGRICULTURAL    EXPERIMENT    STATION 


CONTENTS 

Previous  Studies  and  Reports 3 

Combustion  of  wood 3 

Fuelwood  burned  under  controlled  conditions 4 

Burning  proceeds  by  zones 4 

Chemicals  encourage  combustion 5 

History  of  chemical  stump  removers 6 

Preliminary  Tests  of  Chemicals 6 

Chemical  screening  tests 6 

Block  tests 8 

Field  Tests  —  Methods  and  Results 10 

Design  of  1 956  stump  tests 10 

Design  of  1 957  stump  tests 13 

Evaluation  of  burning  tests 13 

Amount  of  stump  destroyed 14 

Satisfactory-unsatisfactory  assay  of  burning  results 18 

What  is  a  satisfactory  result? 19 

Other  Tests  and  Analyses 20 

Relative  importance  of  compounds  in  promoting  combustion 20 

Spectrochemical  analyses  of  Formula  51,  with  and  without  surfactant.  .  .  .21 

Effect  of  surfactant  on  liquid  absorption 22 

Chemical  dosage  and  stump  size 23 

Summary  and  Conclusions 27 

Literature  Cited    .  28 


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

THE  AUTHORS  are  indebted  to  the  following  persons  for  serving  as  evaluators  in  the 
assay  of  stump-burning  results:  J.  S.  Ayars,  J.  D.  Bilbruck,  R.  H.  Brown,  W.  F.  Bulkley, 
R.  J.  Campana,  J.  C.  Carter,  F.  M.  Clark,  L.  B.  Culver,  T.  W.  Curtin,  G.  T.  Frampton, 
J.  C.  Gabbard,  J.  K.  Guiher,  E.  B.  Himelick,  J.  J.  Jokela,  V.  L.  Kretschmer,  R.  W. 
Lorenz,  R.  O.  Lyon,  R.  T.  Milner,  W.  D.  Murphy,  D.  H.  Percival,  R.  G.  Rennels,  J.  N. 
Spaeth,  and  J.  I.  Zerbe. 

Special  acknowledgment  is  due  to  R.  S.  Chamberlin,  Director  of  the  Division  of 
Campus  Development,  Physical  Plant  Department,  who  not  only  served  as  evaluator, 
but  also  arranged  for  the  loan  of  drilling  equipment  and  for  fencing  the  test  area. 

We  are  grateful  to  H.  W.  Norton  and  R.  D.  Self  for  suggestions  about  the 
statistical  analyses;  to  J.  S.  Machin,  Head  of  the  Section  of  Physical  Chemistry, 
Illinois  State  Geological  Survey,  for  advice  about  the  spectrochemical  analyses;  and 
to  Juanita  Witters,  who  made  the  analyses.  T.  W.  Curtin  and  H.  S.  Scholten  helped 
bore  the  hundreds  of  holes  required  in  the  stump  tests,  a  contribution  which  was 
deeply  appreciated. 


Urbano,   Illinois  November,  1961 

Publications  in  the  Bulletin   series   report  the  results  of  investigations 
made  or  sponsored  by  the  Experiment  Station 


\o3( 


INORGANIC  CHEMICALS  AS  AIDS  IN  BURNING 
HARDWOOD  TREE  STUMPS 

C.  S.  WALTERS  and  K.  R.  PETERSON1 

Ix  THE  PAST  10  YEARS  phloem  necrosis  and  Dutch  elm  disease  have 
killed  thousands  of  elm  trees  in  Illinois  and  other  states  east  of  the 
Great  Plains.  Thousands  more  probably  will  die  in  the  future,  since 
there  is  little  hope  that  the  two  diseases  can  be  controlled  with  the 
methods  currently  in  use.  Many  of  the  dead  trees  are  in  cities  and 
must  be  cut  promptly  to  reduce  the  physical  hazard,  thereby  leaving 
an  unsightly  stump. 

Tree  stumps  are  difficult  to  extract  from  the  ground  because 
Nature  designs  the  cantilever  system  to  resist  the  terrific  forces  that 
are  imposed  at  the  groundline  reaction  point.  Explosives  and  heavy 
equipment  cannot  be  used  to  remove  the  stumps  on  city  property,  and 
digging  them  out  is  too  costly  and  arduous.  Burning  stumps  has  been 
tried,  but  for  the  most  part  the  results  have  not  been  satisfactory  for 
the  homeowner. 

The  burning  process  is  not  a  direct  one,  but  involves  a  series  of 
interdependent  thermochemical  factors.  The  conditions  which  favor 
combustion  of  wood  rarely  are  present  in  the  environment  of  a  stump, 
and  they  are  impractical  for  the  homeowner  to  achieve. 

There  is  thus  a  great  need  for  a  practical  and  economical  way  of 
eradicating  tree  stumps  on  residential  property.  That  is  why  we  under- 
took our  investigation.  Our  principal  objective  was  to  test  a  limited 
number  of  chemicals  for  their  ability  to  promote  glowing  combustion 
of  stumpwood.  We  realix.ed  that  finding  the  most  effective  mixture 
of  chemicals  was  probably  a  matter  of  chance,  since  the  environment 
under  which  stumpwood  is  burned  is  highly  variable. 

Previous  Studies  and  Reports 

COMBUSTION   OF  WOOD 

The  literature  concerning  the  burning  of  wood  and  how  it  is  af- 
fected by  chemicals  impregnated  into  the  wood,  dates  back  more  than 
400  years  before  the  birth  of  Christ.  At  that  time  Herodotus  reported 
that  the  Egyptians  steeped  wood  in  alum  solution  to  make  it  resistant 

1  C.  S.  Walters,  Professor,  and  K.  R.  Peterson,  Assistant  Professor,  of  Wood 
Technology  and  Utilization. 


4  BULLETIN  No.  678  [November, 

to  fire  (I).1  Since  then,  hundreds  of  reports  have  been  written  on  the 
subject.  Most  of  them,  however,  have  dealt  with  measures  that  tend 
to  make  wood  resistant  to  burning  rather  than  with  those  that  make 
wood  burn. 

So  far  as  we  have  been  able  to  ascertain,  the  only  data  that  have 
been  published  on  controlled  stump-burning  tests  have  been  two  re- 
ports issued  by  the  University  of  Illinois  (10,  11).  Other  reports  about 
making  wood  burn  deal  almost  exclusively  with  fuelwood,  and  par- 
ticularly with  seasoned  wood. 

FUELWOOD  BURNED  UNDER  CONTROLLED  CONDITIONS 

According  to  Hawley  (3),  the  combustion  of  fuelwood  is  controlled 
by  the  size  and  distribution  of  the  pieces  of  wood,  by  the  air  supply, 
and  by  the  way  in  which  the  heat  of  combustion  is  dissipated  or  re- 
tained. When  wood  is  burned  in  the  fireplace,  the  air  supply  may  be 
regulated  by  the  damper  or  by  the  size  and  arrangement  of  the  sticks 
placed  in  open  piles.  The  dissipation  of  the  heat  is  controlled  by  the 
damper  and  the  walls  of  the  fireplace.  This  type  of  burning  involves 
an  exothermic  reaction  in  which  the  gases  and  vapors  produced  during 
pyrolysis  are  burned,  and  charcoal  is  formed.  The  charcoal  is  then 
burned  to  ash.  When  a  large  piece  of  wood  is  ignited,  it  burns  as  long 
as  the  necessary  heat  penetrates  from  the  outside  to  the  inside  of  the 
wood. 

Fuelwood  can  be  dried  and  burned  under  controlled  conditions.  It 
is  impractical  to  dry  tree  stumps  in  contact  with  soil,  however,  and  the 
conditions  required  for  combustion  of  stumpwood  are  difficult  for  the 
homeowner  to  control.2 

BURNING  PROCEEDS  BY  ZONES 

Browne  (1),  in  his  very  comprehensive  report,  discusses  the  differ- 
ences between  flaming  combustion  of  wood  and  glowing  combustion. 
When  wood  is  heated  in  air,  the  course  of  combustion  is  progressive, 
proceeding  through  several  stages  which  are  determined  by  temper- 
ature and  which  Browne  refers  to  as  zones.  In  Zone  A,  a  stage  with 
temperatures  below  200°  C,  pyrolysis  is  slow.  The  gases  produced  at 
this  stage  of  burning  are  not  ignited. 

Temperatures  in  Zone  B  range  from  about  200°  to  280°  C.,  a  state 
at  which  the  mixture  of  gases  produced  still  are  not  readily  ignitible. 

1  Numbers  in  parentheses  refer  to  literature  cited  on  page  28.  The  par- 
ticular reference  to  Herodotus  occurs  on  page  19  of  the  first  citation. 

1  A  method  for  burning  stumps  in  a  metal  "stove"  or  brick  enclosure  is  de- 
scribed in  Mimeo  F-261  (revised).  A  single  copy  is  free  from  the  Forestry 
Department,  219  Mum  ford  Hall,  Urbana,  Illinois. 


1961]  BURNING  HARDWOOD  TREE  STUMPS  5 

The  gases  start  burning,  however,  in  Zone  C  (280°  -—500°  C),  where 
they  evolve  as  a  result  of  secondary  pyrolysis  and  are  ignited  by  a  pilot 
flame  to  burn  outside  the  wood.  The  charcoal  that  has  formed  may  or 
may  not  burn,  depending  on  whether  a  supply  of  oxygen  is  available 
at  the  surface  of  the  wood  and  whether  enough  heat  penetrates  the 
layer  of  charcoal  to  advance  the  wood  underneath  to  an  exothermal 
point. 

In  Zone  D,  at  surface  temperatures  above  500°  C.,  the  layer  of 
charcoal  on  the  outside  of  the  wood  burns,  while  the  interior  of  the 
wood  still  may  be  at  various  stages  of  burning,  ranging  from  Zones 
A  to  D.  When  the  surface  temperature  rises  over  1,000°  C.,  the  char- 
coal (carbon)  is  consumed  at  the  surface  as  fast  as  Zones  A  to  C  pene- 
trate the  wood. 

CHEMICALS   ENCOURAGE   COMBUSTION 

As  already  pointed  out,  charcoal  needs  both  oxygen  and  heat 
to  glow.  It  is  reasonable  to  assume  that  an  adequate  supply  of  oxygen 
is  available  to  the  burning  stump.  Supplying  enough  heat  is  often 
more  of  a  problem.  Theories  of  glow  prevention  indicate  that  the 
presence  of  chemicals  may  improve  conduction  or  absorption  of  heat 
through  the  charcoal  and  wood.  They  may  also  lower  ignition  temper- 
atures in  the  various  zones  and  hasten  the  burning  of  carbon. 

Browne  points  out  that  the  net  heat  liberated  by  the  combustion  of 
wood  depends  on  the  ratio  of  carbon  monoxide  to  carbon  dioxide  in 
the  combustion  products.  Chemicals  impregnated  into  wood,  however, 
could  alter  the  ratio,  thereby  stimulating  or  retarding  glowing  com- 
bustion. It  appears  that  such  chemicals  could  have  a  catalytic  effect, 
inhibiting  the  formation  of  carbon  monoxide  and  promoting  the 
formation  of  carbon  dioxide,  or  of  carbon  dioxide  and  hydrogen.  In 
such  an  event,  combustion  would  be  encouraged. 

Although  burning  tree  stumps  may  be  a  totally  different  problem 
than  destroying  soot  in  heating  systems,  the  two  problems  become 
similar  in  nature  when  stumpwood  is  converted  to  charcoal,  since  both 
soot  and  charcoal  are  forms  of  carbon. 

Nicholls  and  Staples  (9)  concluded  that  the  action  of  soot-removing 
chemicals  is  restricted  to  metallic  salts  or  those  formed  by  burning 
metals.  The  action  of  the  chemicals  was  to  lower  the  temperature  at 
which  the  soot  burned. 

The  chlorides  sublime  at  relatively  low  temperatures,  and  in  the 
Xicholls-Staples  tests  were  particularly  effective  in  lowering  the  igni- 
tion temperature  of  soot.  Some  of  the  chlorides  set  free  chlorine  gas 


6  BULLETIN  No.  678  [November, 

when  burned,  and  the  chlorine  apparently  increased  the  ease  with 
which  the  soot  united  with  oxygen.  Chlorides  of  manganese,  iron,  and 
copper  were  particularly  effective  as  soot  burners.  Lead  salts,  particu- 
larly lead  iodide,  also  gave  good  results  in  burning  soot. 

Nicholls  and  Staples  concluded  that  oxygen  had  to  be  in  the  furnace 
gases  for  a  soot  remover  to  be  effective,  and  that  the  burning  process 
was  limited  to  that  of  oxidation.  They  further  concluded  that  the  use 
of  salts  high  in  oxygen,  for  example  dioxides  and  chlorates,  did  not 
increase  the  effectiveness  of  burning.  In  their  studies  the  fuel  ash 
apparently  was  an  effective  aid  in  burning  soot,  since  ashes  high  in 
alkalies  and  metals  were  found  to  act  as  soot  removers. 

HISTORY  OF  CHEMICAL  STUMP  REMOVERS 

One  of  the  earliest  known  reports  on  the  destruction  of  stumps 
with  chemicals  was  Coggins'  account  (2)  of  tests  in  which  sulphuric 
and  nitric  acids  were  used  in  varying  proportions  for  destroying 
stumps.  Coggins  concluded,  however,  that  sound  stumps  could  not  be 
destroyed  with  either  or  both  acids,  that  the  method  was  wasteful  of 
time,  and  that  handling  acid  was  dangerous. 

In  1939  Mrs.  A.  Henn  (4)  recommended  boring  a  vertical  hole 
1  inch  in  diameter  in  the  center  of  a  stump  and  placing  1  ounce  of 
potassium  nitrate  (saltpeter)  in  the  hole.  The  hole  was  then  to  be 
filled  with  water  and  sealed  with  a  wood  plug.  The  stump  allegedly 
burned,  "roots  and  all,"  following  ignition  6  or  8  months  after 
treatment. 

Howell  (5),  Jackson  (7),  Morriss  (8),  and  others  have  recom- 
mended modifications  of  Henn's  method.  Both  the  original  method 
and  some  modifications  were  tested  by  the  University  of  Illinois  Agri- 
cultural Experiment  Station  in  1949,  and  the  results  were  reported 
as  unsuccessful  (10). 

Since  1953,  approximately  400  water-soluble,  inorganic  compounds 
or  mixtures  of  them  have  been  laboratory-  or  field-tested  for  their 
ability  to  promote  glowing  combustion  of  wood.  This  report  presents 
the  methods  and  results  of  the  tests. 

Preliminary  Tests  of  Chemicals 

CHEMICAL  SCREENING  TESTS 

The  compounds  listed  at  the  top  of  page  7  were  chosen  from  hun- 
dreds of  chemicals  that  have  been  tested  by  the  U.  S.  Forest  Products 
Laboratory  (6)  as  fire  retardants,  because  they  showed  the  strongest 
tendency  to  promote  glowing  combustion  of  wood. 


1961}  BURNING  HARDWOOD  TRKK  Sir.Mi-s  7 

Cupric  chloride,  CuCU  Sodium  molybdatt-,  XajMoCX 

Ferric  chloride,  FeCl,  Lead  acetate,  Pb1OH(C3H3OJ)3 

Manganese  dichloridc,  MnCU  Cupric  sulfate,  CuSO, 

Sodium  dichromatc,  NajCrjOi  Chromium  trioxide,  CrO3 

A  5-percent  aqueous  solution  of  each  chemical  was  prepared.  Sev- 
eral drops  of  solution,  or  of  a  combination  of  solutions,  were  pipetted 
on  the  center  of  a  9-centimeter  disk  of  filter  paper,  and  the  paper  was 
dried  at  105°  C.  for  1  hour.  Each  disk  was  placed  on  an  asbestos-wire 
gauze  square  and  ignited.  The  flame  was  extinguished  as  soon  as  it 
ignited  the  treated  spot.  Results  of  the  burning  tests  were  judged  on 
the  ability  of  the  chemical  treatment  to  promote  glowing  combustion 
that  destroyed  the  treated  portion  of  the  paper  disk.  The  results  were 
rated  "good"  (a  vigorous  reaction  that  destroyed  the  entire  area), 
"fair,"  or  "poor."  Each  treatment  was  tested  in  triplicate  and  an 
"average"  rating  was  assigned  the  series  of  tests.  Table  1  lists  23 
formulations  that  received  the  "good"  rating. 

The  nine  formulas  that  appeared  to  give  the  best  results  were 
retested  in  quintuplicate.  In  these  tests  the  scoring  ranged  from  1 
(fair)  to  5  (excellent).  The  sum  of  the  five  numerical  ratings  was 

Table  1 .  —  Chemical  Composition  of  Formulas  Rated  "Good"  in  Paper- 
Disk  Assay  of  Their  Ability  to  Promote  Glowing  Combustion 

Percentage  (by  weight)  of  compound  in  formula 

Formula  PhOH 

FeCl3       CuCl,    Na2Cr207  /r  „  A\     MnCl2  Na2MoO4  CuSO4       CrO3 


C. 

75  0    25  0 

G.  .  .  . 

75  0 

25  0 

I  

50  0    50  0 

I 

50  0 

50  0 

K 

49  0 

49  0     20 

5 

6  3 

37  5 

56  2 

6 

18  8 

62  4 

18  8 

7  

.  .  33  0 

34  0 

33.0 

8  

62 

37  6 

56  2 

13  

.  .  25  0 

75  0 

18 

75  0 

25  0 

20 

6  2 

18  8 

56  2 

18  8 

21 

18  8 

56  2 

18  8 

6  2 

27...  . 

.  .  56  2 

6  2 

37  6 

28  

25  0 

75  0 

31 

25  0 

75  0 

36 

56  2 

31  3 

12  5 

43 

25  0 

75  0 

45... 

75  0 

25  0 

47 

50  0 

50  0 

48 

75  0 

25  0 

51 

18  8 

56  2 

12  5 

12  5 

69.. 

37.6 

56  2 

6.2 

BULLETIN  No.  678  [November, 

Table  2.  —  Rating  Indexes  and  Chemical  Composition  of  Nine 
Formulations  Rated  Best  in  Paper-Disk  Burning  Tests 


Formula 

Rating 
index" 

Percentage 

(by  weight) 

of  compound  in 

formula 

FeCl3 

CuCl2 

Na2Cr2O7 

PbOH 

(C2H302)3 

MnCl2     Na2 

MoO4 

51 

24 

18.75 
18.75 

62  'SO 
37.50 
37.50 
6.25 
56.25 

56 

,25 

12.50 
56.25 
31.25 

12. 
18. 
12. 

50 

20  

.  .     23 

6 
56 
18 
6 
6 
56 
18 

25 
25 
75 
25 
,25 
.25 
.75 

75 

36  

.  .     21 

is 

56 

^75 
25 

50 

6  

.  .     20 

5  

.  .      14 

8  

.  .      14 

56.25 
37.50 
18.75 

27  

10 

21 

9 

6. 
56. 

25 

69 

9 

37 

.50 

25           6.25 

*  Rating  based  on  five  burning  tests  scored  as  follows:  Excellent,  5;  very  good,  4; 
average,  3;  good,  2;  fair,  1. 

used  to  rank  each  formulation.    Table  2  shows  the  composition  and 
ratings  for  the  nine  formulations. 

BLOCK  TESTS 

One  hundred  eight  basswood  (Tilia  americana  L.)  blocks  1  inch 
square  and  4  inches  along  the  grain  were  used  to  test  two  compounds 
and  two  mixtures  of  compounds.  Each  chemical  was  tested  in  tripli- 
cate, using  three  dosage  levels  and  three  diffusion  periods. 

The  two  mixtures  and  two  compounds  selected  for  testing  were: 
Formula  5 1,1  Formula  K,  sodium  nitrate,  and  ammonium  nitrate. 
Formula  51  was  selected  because  of  its  high  rating  in  the  screening 
tests.  Formula  K  and  sodium  nitrate  were  included  because  they  had 
produced  good  results  in  field  tests,  even  though  they  had  not  appeared 
in  the  top  nine  formulations.  Ammonium  nitrate  was  included  because 
it  has  a  higher  solubility  rating  than  the  sodium  salt,  and  there  was 
reason  to  believe  that  it  would  yield  satisfactory  results. 

A  j^-inch  hole  1  inch  deep  was  bored  parallel  to  the  longitudinal 
axis  in  one  end  of  each  block.  The  blocks  were  brought  to  "green" 
condition  by  soaking  48  hours  in  distilled  water,  and  the  chemical  was 
placed  in  the  hole. 

The  dosages  were:  0.5  gram  (0.0011  pound)  per  cubic  inch  of 
block;  1.0  gram  (0.0022  pound)  per  cubic  inch;  and  none  (controls). 
The  "green"  blocks  were  placed  in  a  pan  containing  about  1/2  inch  of 
water  with  the  solid  end  in  the  water.  Thirty-six  blocks  were  removed 

1  Subsequently  manufactured  as  "Stumpfyre"  under  license  from  the  Uni- 
versity of  Illinois  Foundation,  U.  S.  Patent  No.  2,947,110. 


7967] 


BURNING  HARDWOOD  TREE  STUMPS 


o"2 

!!; 


x  c>o  —  x~> 
IA.  5  o>  x  t»  oo 


1XI/XO      "1  CN  O  »f  <*!")  f      CS*X 


£ 
o   >« 

_X>OCu-.  X'tX     1/5  m  «/5  O  O  "5  <S     l^CT-'C^-CM     \C  >r>  •*"*•  >r>  C  O*         O 

5    —       —  »«  (s!^«     t<5«       «  —  CJ       »• 

i 

U 

E. 

E -§= 

E"  "  E 

(£  i 

s 

C      ^•l^iA^fO^COC      OCO***^^Or^      *f<*/;oO"t'XCO      •t't^^'f^'i/^^^'t'O      fO 

r^^"^f*5f      O^OC* 

•ta    OOO^^T^O'O     *OXi/*t^C     •  *^      ^'OCp*5ClO'O'O      O'Of^'^^^O      Cf^fSOOoC^^'^-( 

fi  §f 

^1 

"S    Ps*t-">r^iOO**1C     t*»  !•*  ^  t**  »*  i/;  **)      P*I  C4  i/;  *f  f-»  X  "5     f^io^^fr^i^O1     *'O>OP^oC^*f*iOfs*O     "^ 
K^  —  CN«(S-*(N      (NfN  —  ~f5<N<N      ^t  (N  —  (N  —  —  (S      ~  ^  ~  f*J  <N  —  ^      f-)^  — —  (N  — CS  — <N      (N 

|| 
|l 

1 1  |i 

::::::E     ;;:;:: a     :;;;:: E     • c     25 

Ed 
I      Is5  -*22SS      w>-' 


10  BULLETIN  No.  678  [November. 

at  the  end  of  2  days,  air-dried,  and  burned.  Other  groups  were  burned 
after  5-day  and  8-day  diffusion  periods. 

Each  air-dried  block  was  ignited  with  a  Bunsen-burner  flame  ap- 
plied to  the  solid  end  for  5  minutes.  The  results  were  rated  "good," 
"fair,"  or  "poor,"  depending  upon  how  much  of  the  block  was  burned. 

The  results  of  the  paper-disk  and  wood-block  tests  were  used  to 
design  a  field  test. 

Field  Tests  —  Methods  and  Results 

DESIGN  OF  1956  STUMP  TESTS 

Twenty-four  American  elm  (Ulmus  americana  L.)  stumps,  ranging 
from  12  to  42  inches  in  diameter,  were  treated  and  burned  in  a  field 
test  of  the  two  mixtures  and  two  compounds  described  in  the  pre- 
vious section.  In  addition,  eight  untreated  stumps  were  included  in 
the  burning  tests  (Table  3). 

All  stumps  were  cut  as  close  to  the  ground  as  practical.  The 
"average"  diameter,1  perimeter,  and  cross-sectional  area  of  each 
stump  were  measured.  Perimeter  measurements  followed  the  outline 
of  the  flat  surface  of  the  root  extensions.  It  was  assumed  that  each 
stump  was  12  inches  deep,  including  the  inch  or  two  aboveground. 
Although  some  stumps  may  have  extended  deeper  than  this,  destruction 
of  the  top  12  inches  would  usually  constitute  satisfactory  results. 

Vertical  holes  2  inches  in  diameter  and  about  6  inches  deep  were 
bored  with  a  twist  drill  in  all  32  stumps  (Fig.  1).  The  holes  were 
spaced  4  inches  apart,  using  a  hardboard  template  to  locate  the  centers. 
The  holes  were  freed  of  chips  before  the  chemicals  were  placed  in 
them. 

Treatments  were  randomly  assigned  to  stumps.  Dosage  originally 
was  based  on  stump  diameter,  but  this  basis  was  abandoned  because 
of  the  inaccuracy  involved  in  determining  "average"  diameter  for 
stumps  with  irregular,  cross-sectional  shapes.  The  dosage  used  was 
about  1  gram  (0.0021  pound)  of  chemical  per  cubic  inch  of  wood 
contained  in  the  top  12  inches  of  the  stump. 

Chemical  mixtures  were  blended  in  a  large  feed-mixing  machine. 
The  total  chemical  for  each  stump  to  be  treated  was  weighed  and 
distributed  more  or  less  equally  among  the  holes  about  the  third  week 
of  June.  The  holes  were  then  filled  with  water.  All  stumps,  treated 
and  untreated,  were  covered  with  reflector  shields  (Fig.  2)  to  protect 
them  from  rain  during  the  diffusion  period. 

1  The  average  of  two  diameters,  one  measured  at  right  angles  to  the  other. 


1961} 


H. \KD\VI » >n  TKKK  S 


11 


Most  of  the  aboveground  portion  of  this  stump  was  removed  with  a  power 
saw.  Two-inch  holes  for  the  chemical  were  bored  to  a  depth  of  about  6 
inches.  Some  of  the  holes  were  not  close  enough  to  the  bark,  and  an  extra 
hole  or  two  in  some  areas  would  have  been  desirable.  (Fig.  1) 


This  reflector  shield  is  about  4  feet  square,  made  of  hardboard  and  framed 
with  pine  strips;  the  under  (reflecting)  side  is  covered  with  household-type 
aluminum  foil  fastened  with  pressure-sensitive  paper  tape.  The  supporting 
stakes  should  have  been  heavier.  The  shields  were  kept  as  close  to  the  stump 
as  practical,  as  shown  by  those  in  the  background.  (Fig.  2) 


12 


BULLETIN  No.  678 


[November, 


Dry  kindling  was  piled  on  each  stump  and  ignited.    A  liberal  amount  was 
used,  varying  with  the  cross-sectional  area  of  the  stump.  (Fig.  3) 


The  experiment  had  been  designed  to  test  2-week  and  4-week 
diffusion  periods.  Rainy  weather,  however,  made  burning  impractical 
at  the  end  of  2  weeks,  so  this  part  of  the  experiment  was  abandoned. 
After  4  weeks  the  weather  was  again  rainy.  In  addition,  the  holes  in 
the  treated  stumps  were  full  of  liquid,  while  those  in  the  untreated 
stumps  contained  little  if  any.  The  liquid  resulted  from  the  hydro- 
scopic  nature  of  the  chemical,  not  rain.  Attempts  to  remove  it  with 
wicks  of  paper  toweling  were  unsuccessful.  The  combination  of  the 
rainy  weather  and  the  liquid  in  the  treated  stumps  made  it  imprac- 
tical to  burn  the  stumps  after  the  4-week  diffusion  period,  so  this 
part  of  the  experiment  was  also  abandoned.  Finally,  most  of  the  liquid 
was  removed  with  a  battery  syringe  about  3  months  after  the  stumps 
were  treated. 

A  day  or  so  after  the  liquid  was  removed,  the  stumps  were  burned. 
First,  the  reflector  shields  were  removed,  then  a  liberal  amount  of 
kindling  was  piled  on  each  stump  and  ignited  (Fig.  3).  About  2  hours 
after  the  kindling  was  ignited,  it  had  burned  to  a  bed  of  coals,  and  the 
reflector  shields  were  replaced  over  the  stumps. 


1961]  BURNING  HARDWOOD  TRKK  STUMPS 

Table  4.  —  Size  and  Treatment  of  American  Elm  Stumps  With 
Formula  51,  and  Evaluation  of  J957  Burning  Tests 


13 


Stump 
No. 

Surface 
area 

No.  of 
holes 

Amount 
of 
chemical 

Volume 
Reflector    destroyed 
shield             by 
burning" 

Satis- 
factory- 
ratings 
awarded 

1.. 

Sq.  in. 
511 

16 

Pounds 
4  00 

Percent 
Yes               85 

Percent 
94 

8  

.      593 

21 

5.25 

93 

100 

12  

.       237 

9 

2.25 

78 

81 

14  

.      397 

12 

3.00 

88 

94 

19  

695 

14 

3.25 

66 

62 

Average  

.      487 

14 

83 

86 

5  . 

522 

15 

3.75 

No                94 

100 

7  

.      314 

11 

2.75 

42 

37 

10          

.      644 

16 

4.00 

93 

100 

13  

554 

13 

3.25 

94 

100 

20          

.      672 

25 

6.25 

47 

6 

Average.  .  .  . 
2               

.       541 
536 

16 
16 

None 

78 
Yes                16 

69 
0 

3 

415 

14 

37 

25 

11  

303 

10 

" 

11 

6 

16.. 

.       741 

21 

« 

89 

100 

17  

442 

12 

" 

29 

0 

Average.  .  .  . 

4.. 

.      487 
503 

15 
18 

None 

36 
No                25 

26 
0 

6  

.      467 

16 

19 

0 

9  

.      348 

12 

•  • 

30 

0 

15     

.      370 

13 

" 

31 

6 

18     

.    1,036 

29 

n 

36 

12 

Average.  .  .  . 

Average  all 
stumps.  .  . 

.      545 
.      515 

18 
16 

28 

4 

•  Average  for  each  estimated  percentage  of  original  volume.  Average  for  each  stump  is 
for  16  estimates.  Percentages  obtained  by  decoding  angular  transformation  of  data. 

DESIGN  OF  1957  STUMP  TESTS 

Treatment  in  1957  was  about  the  same  as  in  1956,  with  the  follow- 
ing exceptions:  Only  Formula  51  was  used,  and  the  test  was  designed 
to  show  the  effect  of  the  chemical  alone,  the  shields  alone,  and  the 
interacting  effect  of  the  two  together  (Table  4).  The  dosage  was  also 
smaller,  being  about  115  grams  (0.25  pound)  of  chemical  per  hole,  or 
0.27  gram  (.0006  pound)  per  cubic  inch  of  wood  in  the  top  12  inches 
of  the  stump.  Twenty  American  elm  stumps,  including  five  control 
stumps,  were  in  the  tests. 

EVALUATION  OF  BURNING  TESTS 

At  the  end  of  the  burning  period,  about  2  weeks,  the  ash  was 
removed  from  the  stump  remains  and  evaluators  were  asked  to  judge 
the  results  by  estimating  the  percentage  of  each  stump  destroyed.  Each 


14  BULLETIN  No.  678  [November, 

evaluator  also  indicated  whether  the  results  were  "satisfactory"  or 
"unsatisfactory,"  basing  his  decision  on  the  assumption  that  the  stump 
was  located  on  his  home  grounds. 

The  term  "stump"  was  identified  for  the  evaluators  as  ".  .  .  includ- 
ing the  wood  left  aboveground,  the  projection  of  the  cross-section  to 
a  depth  of  not  more  than  12  inches  below  ground,  and  the  side  roots 
to  a  depth  of  4  inches." 

In  1956  half  of  the  20  evaluators  were  "foresters"  and  half  were 
"homeowners."  Foresters  were  members  of  the  Forestry  Department. 
Homeowners  were  members  of  other  departments  of  the  University  or 
of  the  Botany  Department,  Illinois  State  Natural  History  Survey.  The 
classification  was  made  because  most  of  the  foresters  were  generally 
familiar  with  the  tests,  had  actually  removed  stumps  from  their  home 
grounds,  and  were  believed  to  be  more  familiar  with  the  root  structure 
of  trees.  The  authors  did  not  participate  in  the  evaluations. 

In  1957,  16  evaluators  judged  the  results  of  burning  tests.  The 
evaluators  were  not  classified  as  they  were  in  1956. 

The  percentages  of  wood  destroyed,  as  estimated  by  the  evaluators, 
and  their  ratings  of  "satisfactory"  or  "unsatisfactory"  were  used  as 
indexes  of  the  effectiveness  of  treatment.  Angular  transformations 
were  made  for  the  percentage  data  before  they  were  analyzed  by  an 
analysis  of  variance.  The  "satisfactory-unsatisfactory"  ratings  were 
coded  "1"  and  "0,"  respectively,  and  the  coded  data  were  analyzed  by 
an  analysis  of  variance. 

AMOUNT  OF  STUMP  DESTROYED 

1956  tests.  Table  5  shows  the  average  volume  of  stump  burned  in 
1956,  expressed  as  a  percentage  of  the  original  volume.  Table  6  is  an 
analysis  of  variance  for  angular  transformations  of  the  percentage 
data. 

In  percentage  of  wood  destroyed,  Formula  51  was  the  best  treat- 
ment. Average  percentage  for  Formula  51  was  83;  for  Formula  K, 
57;  for  sodium  nitrate,  53;  for  ammonium  nitrate,  41;  and  for  un- 
treated stumps,  37.  Standard  errors  for  the  averages  were  less  than 
1  percentage  point.  The  "treatments"  component  was  significant  at 
the  5-percent  level  of  confidence  (Table  6). 

Homeowners'  estimates  of  the  volume  destroyed  averaged  55  per- 
cent for  all  treatments;  foresters'  estimates,  53  percent.  The  difference 
between  these  means  was  not  significant,  as  shown  by  the  nonsignifi- 
cant variance  ratio  for  "Groups"  in  Table  6.  This  is  why  evaluators 
were  not  grouped  when  the  1957  tests  were  designed. 

The  percentages  for  stumps  within  a  treatment  varied  significantly. 


1961]  BURNING  HARDWOOD  TRKE  STIMI-S  15 

Table  5.  —  Average  Volume  of  Elm  Stumps  Burned,  as  an  Estimated 
Percentage  of  Original  Volume,  1 956  Tests 

Percentage  as  estimated  by — 


Homeowners 

Foresters 

Formula  51 

82 

84 

83 

Formula  K 

57 

58 

57 

Sodium  nitrate 

55 

50 

53 

Ammonium  nitrate 

44 

39 

41 

None  (controls)  

38 

35 

37 

Average  

55 

53 

*  Percentages  obtained  by  decoding  angular  transformations.    Final  averages  for  chemicals 
ba>ed   upon    120  observations;   final  average  for  controls  based  upon   160  observations. 


Table  6.  —  Analysis  of  Variance  for  Angular  Transformations  of  Data 
Concerning  Percentage  of  Stump  Destroyed  in  7956  Burning  Tests 


Source  of 
variation 

Degrees  of         Mean 
freedom          square 

Variance 
ratio  (F) 

Signifi- 
cance* 

Treatments  (T)  

4 

15,717 
217 
139 
4,001 
1,334 
2,208 
460 
91 
85 
62 

3 
3 
1 
64 
14 
24 
5 
1 
1 

9 

5 
5 
5 
7 
3 
1 
5 
4 

* 

NS 

NS 

* 

* 
* 
* 

NS 

Groups  (G)  

1 

TG  

4 

Stumps,  in  treatments  (S) 

27 

Individuals,  in  groups  (I) 

18 

Homeowners  

(9) 

Foresters  

(9) 

TI  

72 

GS  

27 

SI  (error)  

486 

Total  

639 

•  *,  significant  at  .05  level;  **,  significant  at  .01  level;  ***,  significant  at  .001  level; 
NS,  not  significant. 

Figure  4  shows  the  differences  in  opinions  expressed  by  the  various 
evaluators  when  they  examined  Stump  No.  1.  Evaluator  No.  7  esti- 
mated that  only  23  percent  of  the  stump's  original  volume  was  de- 
stroyed, whereas  Evaluator  No.  17  judged  that  the  entire  stump  was 
destroyed.  Evaluators  2,  3,  4,  and  14  all  estimated  that  80  percent  of 
the  stump  was  destroyed,  but  they  disagreed  as  to  whether  80  percent 
destruction  was  an  acceptable  result.  Although  Evaluator  No.  2 
thought  the  results  were  satisfactory,  the  other  three  rated  them 
unsatisfactory. 

In  the  analysis  of  variance,  individual  evaluators  within  a  group 
("I"  in  Table  6)  differed  significantly  in  their  opinions  as  to  the 
amount  of  wood  destroyed.  The  significance  was  at  the  0.001  level  of 
reliability.  When  the  whole  group  was  divided  into  "Foresters"  and 
"Homeowners,"  individuals  within  each  subgroup  differed  significantly 


16 


BULLKTIN  No.  678 


[Norember, 


1234567     89   10 
HOMEOWNERS 


II    12  13  14  15    16  17  18   19   20 
FORESTERS 


How  20  evaluators  judged  Stump  No.  1  as  to  percentage  destroyed  by  burn- 
ing and  as  to  whether  the  result  was  satisfactory  or  unsatisfactory.      (Fig.  4) 


at  the  same  level.  This  means  that  the  homeowners  disagreed  among 
themselves  as  to  the  amount  of  wood  in  each  stump  that  had  been 
destroyed  by  burning,  and  so  did  the  foresters.  However,  the  test  of 
significance  indicated  that  variation  was  greater  among  the  home- 
owners. These  results  could,  of  course,  have  been  reasonably  pre- 
dicted. One  would  expect  individuals  within  a  group  to  vary  in  their 
evaluations.  One  would  also  expect  the  variation  to  be  less  among  the 
foresters,  since  they  are  generally  more  experienced  in  estimating  the 
cubic  volume  of  geometric  forms  and  they  are  more  familiar  with 
the  underground  form  of  tree  stumps. 

The  only  interaction  of  factors  that  was  statistically  significant  was 
the  interaction  of  treatment  and  individuals  ("TI,"  Table  6).  That  is, 
the  estimates  of  individual  evaluators  varied  with  a  change  in  treat- 
ment. In  other  words,  the  evaluators  were  not  consistent  in  their 
evaluations  of  the  different  treatments.  No  bias  was  involved,  for  the 
evaluators  had  not  been  told  how  each  stump  was  treated.  The  incon- 
sistencies might  be  expected,  however,  from  the  wide  range  in  the 


1961]  BURNING  HARDWOOD  TREE  STUMPS  17 

burning  results.  It  was  much  easier  for  an  evaluator  to  estimate  the 
volume  of  wood  destroyed  as  the  percentage  approached  100,  complete 
destruction,  than  it  was  to  estimate  the  percentage  when  only  a  small 
portion  of  the  stump  had  been  burned.  Since  the  evaluators  had  not 
seen  each  stump  before  it  was  burned,  individual  concepts  of  the 
original  form  undoubtedly  contributed  to  the  variation  among  estimates. 

1957  tests.  Table  7  is  a  summary  of  the  results  of  the  1957  burn- 
ing tests.  The  average  percentage  of  volume  destroyed  by  burning 
was  80  for  elm  stumps  treated  with  Formula  51  and  only  32  for  stumps 
containing  no  chemical.  An  analysis  of  variance  (Table  8)  indicated 
that  the  effect  of  the  chemical  was  highly  significant. 

Reflecting  shields  were  used  because  they  were  believed  to  stimulate 
burning.  The  variance  ratio  in  Table  8,  however,  shows  that  the  effect 
of  shields  was  not  significant.  Although  the  reflecting  properties  of  the 
shields  apparently  did  not  aid  burning,  the  shields  did  protect  the 
smouldering  fire  from  rain,  and  they  made  the  burning  stump  less 
hazardous  to  children  and  animals  that  frequented  the  test  area. 

The  test  of  the  CS,  chemical  by  shield,  interaction  also  proved 
nonsignificant  (Table  8).  Thus,  it  appears  that  the  chemical  made  the 
real  contribution  to  the  burning  process. 


Table  7 .  —  Average  Volume  of  Elm  Stump  Destroyed 
as  Percent  of  Original  Volume,  7  957  Tests 

Percentage  destroyed 


i  rear,  mem 

Shield 

No  shield 

./Average 

Chemical  (Formula  51)  

83» 

78» 

80 

No  chemical  

36" 

28* 

32 

Average  

61 

54 

57 

•  Based  on   80  observations,  or  examinations  of   5    stumps   per   treatment   by    16   persons. 
Percentages  obtained  by  decoding  angular  transformations. 

Table  8.  —  Analysis  of  Variance  for  Angular  Transformations  of  Data 

Concerning  Percentage  of  Stump  Destroyed  in  7957  Burning  Tests 

(Treated  Stumps  Contained  Formula  51) 


Source  of 
variation 

Degrees  of 
freedom 

Mean 
square 

Variance 
ratio  (F) 

Signifi- 
cance* 

Chemical  (C) 

1 

1,111,090 

21.14 

*** 

Shield  (S) 

1 

20,995 

0.40 

NS 

CS  

1 

541 

0.01 

NS 

Error  

16 

52,555 

Total  

19 

significant  at  the  .001  level;  NS,  not  significant. 


18  BULLETIN  No.  678  [November, 

SATISFACTORY-UNSATISFACTORY  ASSAY  OF  BURNING  RESULTS 

1956  tests.  Table  9  shows  the  percentage  of  total  ratings  judged 
satisfactory  in  the  assay  of  the  1956  burning  results.  Table  10,  an 
analysis  of  variance  for  the  data,  shows  "Treatment"  was  a  very  highly 
significant  source  of  variation.  Seventy-one  percent  of  the  ratings 
awarded  to  the  results  obtained  with  Formula  51  were  classified  satis- 
factory (Table  9).  The  next  best  rating  was  given  the  sodium  nitrate 
treatment,  31  percent.  Only  15  percent  of  the  ratings  for  stumps 
burned  without  a  chemical  were  classified  as  satisfactory. 

Foresters  called  30  percent  of  the  ratings  satisfactory;  homeowners, 
28  percent  (Table  9).  This  difference  was  not  significant  (Table  10). 

The  GS,  group  by  stump,  interaction  was  very  highly  significant. 
This  means  that  the  groups  were  not  consistent  in  awarding  ratings  to 
the  different  stumps  within  a  treatment.  In  addition  the  TI,  treatment 

Table  9.  —  Percentage  of  Total  Ratings  Judged  Satisfactory, 
in  Assay  of  1956  Stump-Burning  Tests 

Percentage  judged  satisfactory  by — 


Homeowners 

Foresters 

Formula  51  

67 

75 

71 

Formula  K  

22 

25 

23 

Sodium  nitrate  

30 

32 

31 

Ammonium  nitrate 

13 

5 

9 

None  (controls) 

12 

17 

15 

Average  

28 

30 

•  Percentage   for  each  chemical  based  upon    120  observations;   average   for  controls  based 
ujion   160  observations. 


Table  10.  —  Analysis  of  Variance  for  Coded0  Ratings 

Awarded  in  Satisfactory-Unsatisfactory  Assay 

of  Stump-Burning  Results,  1 956  Data 


Source  of  variation 

Degrees  of 
freedom 

Mean 
square 

Variance          Signifi- 
ratio              canceb 

Treatment  (T)   .              ... 

4 

7.32 
0.08 
0.12 
1.78 
0.42 
0.36 
0.48 
0.92 
1.14 
0.02 

430  .  9                 *• 
4.5                N 
7.1                 N 
104.8 
24.8 
21.4 
28.3 
54.2 
67.2 

t* 

S 
S 

Groups  (G) 

1 

TG  

4 

Stumps,  in  treatments  (S).  .  .  . 
Individuals,  in  groups  (I).  .  .  . 

....       27 
18 

Homeowners  

(9) 

Foresters  

(9) 

TI  

72 

GS  

27 

SI  (error)  

486 

Total  

639 

•  Satisfactory  ratings  coded  "1";  unsatisfactory  ratings  coded  "0." 
b  ***,  significant  at  .001  level;  NS,  not  significant. 


1961}  BURNING  HARDWOOD  TRKK  STIMI-S  19 

by  individual,  interaction,  was  significant  at  the  0.001  level  of  prob- 
ability. This  means  that  the  individual  evaluators  were  not  consistent 
in  assaying  results  as  they  judged  the  various  treatfhents. 

1957  tests.  Table  11  shows  the  average  ratings  awarded  the  two 
variables  tested  in  the  1957  tests  —  chemical  and  shield.  Table  12  is 
an  analysis  of  variance  for  the  data.  Essentially  the  same  results  are 
shown  by  the  ratings  as  were  shown  in  Table  7  by  the  percentage  data, 
and  the  same  conclusions  are  drawn  from  the  data  and  their  analysis. 

WHAT  IS  A  SATISFACTORY  RESULT? 

The  results  discussed  in  previous  paragraphs  raise  the  question  as 
to  whether  there  was  a  minimum  amount  of  wood  that  had  to  be 
destroyed  for  results  to  be  judged  "satisfactory."  In  other  words,  was 
there  a  correlation  between  the  percentage  of  stumps  destroyed  and  tile- 
awarding  of  a  satisfactory  rating? 

Figure  5  shows  the  relationship  between  the  number  of  satisfactory 
and  unsatisfactory  ratings  awarded  1956  and  1957  tests  and  the 
volume  of  stump  destroyed.  Frequency  distributions  for  both  kinds  of 
ratings  are  shown  with  their  straight-line  equations.  As  one  would 
expect,  the  frequencies  for  the  unsatisfactory  ratings  were  highest 
when  the  results  were  poor  and  only  a  small  portion  of  the  stump  was 

Table   11.  —  Percentage  of  Total  Ratings  Judged  Satisfactory 
in  Assay  of  1957  Stump-Burning  Tests 

Percentage  judged  satisfactory 


Shield 

No  shield 

ttverage 

Chemical  

86» 

69" 

78 

No  chemical  

26a 

4" 

19 

Average  

59 

46 

Percentage  based  on   80  ratings;    16   individual   observations  of  each  of   5    stumps. 

Table  12.  —  Analysis  of  Variance  for  Coded"  Ratings 

Awarded  in  Satisfactory-Unsatisfactory  Assay 

of  Stump-Burning  Results,  1957  Data 


Source  of 
variation 

Degrees  of 
freedom 

Mean 
square 

Variance 
ratio  (F) 

Signifi- 
cance1' 

Chemical    . 

1 

500  0 

20  1 

*•* 

Shield  

1 

51.2 

2.1 

NS 

CxS  

1 

12  8 

05 

\S 

Error  

16 

24.9 

Total  

19 

•  Satisfactory  ratings  coded   "1";   unsatisfactory  ratings  coded   "0." 
b  ***,  significant  at  .001   level  of  probability;    NS,  not  significant. 


20  BULLETIN  No.  678  [November, 


90 


4    UNSATISFACTORY   RATING 
80  h 


|70 

*60 
& 

>.  50 

|  40 

S 
£30 

20 
10 


o    SATISFACTORY  RATING 


f       a"~1 


0  10  20  30  40  50  60  70  80  90  100 

VOLUME  OF  STUMP  DESTROYED,  PERCENT  OF  ORIGINAL  VOLUME 

Number  of  satisfactory  and  unsatisfactory  ratings  awarded  as  a  function  of 
the  volume  of  stump  destroyed,  1956  and  1957  data  combined.  (Fig.  5) 


destroyed.  The  reverse  was  true  for  the  satisfactory  ratings,  with 
frequencies  being  highest  when  results  were  good  and  large  portions 
of  the  stumps  were  destroyed. 

The  linear  regressions  for  the  two  sets  of  data  cross  at  about  62 
percent.  Thus,  it  appears  that  at  least  two-thirds  of  the  stump  had  to 
be  destroyed  before  most  of  the  e valuators  were  willing  to  rate  the 
results  as  satisfactory. 

Individuals,  of  course,  may  disagree  with  the  "average"  results,  as 
they  did  in  the  study.  For  example,  four  ratings  plotted  in  Figure  5 
classified  stumps  only  half  destroyed  as  "satisfactory,"  and  10  ratings 
classified  stumps  that  were  85  percent  destroyed  as  "unsatisfactory." 

Other  Tests  and  Analyses 

RELATIVE   IMPORTANCE  OF  COMPOUNDS   IN    PROMOTING  GLOWING  COMBUSTION 

Twenty-three  formulations  that  were  rated  "good"  in  the  paper- 
disk  assays  of  their  ability  to  cause  glowing  combustion  (Table  1)  were 
examined  to  see  whether  one  compound  was  superior  to  another  in  this 
property. 

Eight  compounds  were  used  in  the  23  mixtures  (Table  13).  Sodium 
dichromate  not  only  appeared  in  11  mixtures,  but  also  was  used  in 
greatest  quantity.  Next,  on  the  basis  of  quantity  used,  was  lead  acetate, 
which  appeared  in  10  mixtures.  Cupric  chloride  and  ferric  chloride 
were  also  used  in  10  mixtures,  but  in  smaller  quantities.  Formula  51 
contained  four  of  the  first  five  compounds  listed  in  Table  13. 


1961]  BURNING  HARDWOOD  TREE  STUMPS  21 

Table   13. —  Relative  Importance  of  Compounds  in  23  Formulations0 

Rated  "Good"  in  Paper-Disk  Assay  of  Ability 

to  Cause  Glowing  Combustion 


Compound 

Frequency  of 
appearance  in 
formulations 

Total  parts, 
by 
weight 

Percent 
of  total 
parts 

Percent  of 
Formula  51, 
by  weight 

Na.Cr.O7.. 

11 

551.8 

24.0 

56  2 

PbOH(CsH3Oo)s  

10 

437.5 

19  0 

12  5 

CuClj     

10 

362.5 

15  8 

18  8 

FeCU         

10 

301   7 

13  1 

MnCl.         

8 

256  2 

11   1 

12  5 

CuSO4         

4 

199  0 

8  7 

CrO,  

4 

127.0 

5.5 

NaMoO4 

3 

64  2 

2  8 

Total  

2,300.0 

100.0 

»  See  Table  1  for  components  in  formulations. 
SPECTROCHEMICAL  ANALYSES  OF  FORMULA  51,   WITH  AND  WITHOUT  SURFACTANT 

A  number  of  short-term  laboratory  experiments  were  made  to  learn 
more  about  the  components  in  Formula  51  that  diffused  into  the  wood. 

Two  6-gram  samples  of  "Stump fy re"  (a  commercial  product  with 
the  same  composition  as  Formula  51  )x  were  dried  to  constant  weight 
at  105°  C.  and  reweighed.  The  dried  samples  were  diluted  with  dis- 
tilled water  and  filtered.  The  resulting  precipitates  and  filtrates  were 
dried  to  constant  weight  and  weighed  again.  Weights  of  the  filtrates 
and  precipitates  were  expressed  as  percentages  of  the  oven-dried 
weights  of  the  samples.  Spectrographic  analyses  were  then  made  of 
the  filtrates  and  precipitates. 

A  third  6-gram  sample  of  the  commercial  mixture  was  dried  to 
constant  weight,  then  divided  into  two  subsamples  of  about  equal 
weight.  The  subsamples,  designated  "A"  and  "B,"  were  diluted  with 
hot  distilled  water.  To  Sample  B  we  added  1  milliliter  (0.9  gram)  of 
a  commercial  surfactant,2  to  determine  whether  it  would  improve  the 
liquid's  "wettability"  rating  and  its  flow  into  the  wood.  The  two  sub- 
samples  were  filtered  and  the  filtrates  and  precipitates  were  dried  to 
constant  weight  for  spectrographic  analysis. 

Results  from  only  the  third  6-gram  sample  are  presented  in  this 
report  (Table  14).  The  spectrographic  analyses  for  all  three  sets  of 
filtrates  and  precipitates  were  fairly  consistent  for  lead,  sodium,  and 
manganese.  Some  differences  occurred,  however,  in  the  analyses  for 
chromium  and  copper.  These  differences  were  attributed  to  sampling 

1  See  footnote  1,  page  8. 

'This  surface  active  agent  was  a  liquid  household  detergent,  containing  a 
mixture  of  the  ammonium  salt  of  a  modified  alkyl  sulfate  and  an  alkyl  cthanol 
amide. 


22  BULLETIN  No.  678 

Table  14.  —  Percenf  of  Metal  Present  in  Soluble  and  Insoluble  Portions 
of  Formula  51 ,  With  and  Without  a  Surfactant 

Percent  in  filtrate  Percent  in  precipitate 

Metal 


Surfactant        No  surfactant  Surfactant        No  surfactant 


Cr    . 

3-30(X  ) 

3-30(X-) 

3-30(X  +  ) 

3-30(X  +  ) 

Cu      . 

3-30(2X) 

3-30(2X-) 

Mn  

1-10(X  ) 

I-10(X  ) 

3-30(6X) 

3-30(5X) 

Na     .... 

3-30(2X) 

3-30(2X) 

Pb  

T* 

T* 

1-10 

1-10 

•  T  =  less  than  1   percent. 

error,  since  the  commercial  preparation  from  which  the  samples  were 
drawn  probably  was  not  a  homogeneous  one. 

Shown  in  Table  14  are  the  ranges  in  metal  content  of  the  nitrates 
and  precipitates  from  the  subsample  without  a  surfactant  and  from  the 
one  with  a  surfactant.  The  two  sets  of  nitrate  values  are  about  the 
same,  as  are  the  values  for  the  precipitates.  Adding  the  surfactant 
apparently  had  little  effect  on  the  movement  of  metal  ions. 

A  rough  quantitative  analysis  is  also  shown  for  each  cell  in  Table 
14.  For  example,  the  percent  of  manganese  in  the  insoluble  precipitates 
ranged  between  3  and  30  percent,  with  the  average  amounts  being 
about  5  or  6  times  (5X  and  6X)  the  average  amounts  in  the  nitrates. 

The  insoluble  precipitate  amounted  to  about  20  percent  of  the 
weight  of  an  undried  sample,  and  the  nitrate  about  60  percent.  The 
remaining  20  percent  probably  was  mostly  water,  although  chlorine 
in  the  form  of  hydrogen  chloride,  as  well  as  other  components,  may 
have  evaporated  during  the  drying  process. 

EFFECT  OF  SURFACTANT  ON  LIQUID  ABSORPTION 

As  described  above,  one  sample  of  Formula  51  was  divided  into 
two  subsamples  which  were  diluted  in  hot  water;  and  a  commercial 
surfactant  was  added  to  one  of  the  subsamples.  These  liquids  are 
referred  to  as  Liquid  A  (without  the  surfactant)  and  Liquid  B  (  with 
the  surfactant). 

Ten  wafers  of  basswood  about  2  inches  square  and  J4  inch  along 
the  grain  were  dried  to  constant  weight  at  105°  C.  Half  were  soaked 
for  30  seconds  in  Liquid  A  and  half,  in  Liquid  B.  Each  wafer  was 
weighed  before  and  after  soaking  and  again  after  it  was  returned  to 
oven-dry  condition.  Average  absorptions  were  determined  for  each 
group  of  wafers. 

The  surfactant  increased  the  rate  at  which  the  liquid  penetrated 
the  wood.  Average  absorption  of  Liquid  B  was  1.545  grams,  or  more 


1961]  BURNING  HARDWOOD  TREK  STUMPS  23 

Table  15.  —  Effect  of  Surface  Active  Agent  on  Absorption 
of  Liquid  Form  of  Formula  51   by  Wafers  of  Basswood 


Liquid" 

Average  weight  of  wafers  (gm.)b 

Average  absorption  (gm.)b 

Untreated, 
oven-dry 

Freshly 
treated 

Treated, 
oven-dry 

Liquid 

l)r> 
chemical 

A.  . 

5.552 

6.315 
7.230 

5  618 
5  .  805 

0.763(x) 
1.  545(2.  02x) 

0.066(y) 
0.  120(1.  82y) 

B  

5  .  685 

•  Liquid  A:  10  gm.  commercial  grade  of  Formula  51  and  100  ml.  water.  Liquid  B: 
same  as  A  plus  1  cc.  surfactant  (see  footnote  1,  page  21). 

b  Based  on  measurements  for  six  specimens  per  treatment. 

than  twice  that  of  Liquid  A  (Table  15).  When  absorption  was  cal- 
culated on  the  basis  of  dry  chemical,  retention  was  0.120  gram  —  again 
about  double  the  value  for  Liquid  A. 

CHEMICAL  DOSAGE  AND  STUMP  SIZE 

Dosage  in  laboratory  tests  on  small  blocks  ranged  from  0.5  to  1.0 
gram  (0.0011  pound  to  0.0022  pound)  per  cubic  inch  of  wood.  Average 
dosage  for  the  1956  stump  tests  was  1  gram  (0.0022  pound)  per  cubic 
inch  of  wood  in  the  top  12-inch  portion  of  the  stump;  and  for  the 
1957  treatment,  0.27  gram  (0.0006  pound)  per  cubic  inch.  The  results 
of  burning  indicated  that  these  amounts  were  adequate  for  Formula 
51.  The  question  arose,  however,  as  to  which  of  several  measurements 
should  be  used  as  the  independent  variable  in  correlating  stump  size 
with  chemical  dosage. 

Diameter,  perimeter,  top  area,  and  number  of  holes  bored  in  the 
stump  could  be  used  as  indexes  of  stump  size.  Of  these,  top  area 
appeared  to  be  the  most  satisfactory  index,  although  it  was  somewhat 
less  practical  to  measure  than  "average  diameter,"  which  required  two 
measurements  at  right  angles  to  each  other.  The  measurement  of 
diameter  was  not  always  precise  when  stumps  were  irregular  in  cross 
section  (Fig.  6),  and  we  did  not  knowr  whether  there  was  good  correla- 
tion between  average  diameter  and  the  cross-sectional  area  of  the  top 
for  all  stumps.  Dosage  was  therefore  based  on  top  area. 

Figure  7  shows  the  relationship  between  top  area  and  average 
diameter  (Table  3).  Figure  8  shows  stump  perimeter  in  relation  to 
average  diameter.  The  correlation  between  surface  area  and  average 
diameter  (r  =  0.917)  was  much  better  than  that  between  perimeter  and 
average  diameter  (r  =  0.761). 

The  equation  derived  for  calculating  the  surface  area  in  square 
inches  is  Y  =  39.3X  —  273,  with  Y  equaling  the  area  and  X,  the 


24 


BULLETIN  No.  678 


[November, 


The  irregular  pattern  of  many  American  elm  stumps  makes  it  difficult  to 
correlate  size  and  chemical  dosage.  The  stump  which  occupied  this  spot  was 
about  42  inches  across  at  its  widest  point.  (Fig-  6) 


1400 
1300 
1200 
1100 
1000 
900 

s800 

<    700 

E 

t    600 
P 

500 

400 
300 
200 
100 


Y-39.3X-273 
r  •  0.917 


I  I I I I I 


10 


15  20  25  30 

AVERAGE   DIAMETER,  INCHES 


35 


40 


Relationship  between  cross-sectional  area  of  stump  top  and  the  average  of 
two  diameter  measurements  made  at  right  angles  to  each  other.          (Fig.  7) 


1961] 


BURNING  HARDWOOD  TRKE  STUMPS 


25 


average  diameter.  Thus,  the  surface  area  of  a  stump  having  an  average 
diameter  of  20  inches  would  be  expressed  as  Y  ==  (39.3)  (20)  —  273, 
or  513  square  inches.  The  difference  between  this  value  and  the  area 
of  a  20-inch  circle  (314  inches)  is  due  to  the  irregular  pattern  of  the 
stump's  top  caused  by  the  root  swell. 

Figure  9  shows  the  relationship  between  the  number  of  holes  bored 
in  the  1956  and  1957  test-stumps  and  cross-sectional  area  of  the  stump 
top.  As  shown  in  Table  3,  the  number  of  holes  ranged  from  seven  for 
a  stump  12  inches  in  diameter  (156  inches  of  top  area)  to  59  for  a 
42-inch  stump  (1,248  square  inches  of  top  area).  We  believe  that  the 
minimum  number  of  holes  needed  for  effective  treatment  is  deter- 
mined by  the  equation,  Y  =  .042X  —  1.1,  in  which  Y  equals  the 
number  of  holes  and  X,  surface  area  in  square  inches. 

Figures  7,  9,  and  10  will  enable  one  to  determine  dosage  for  round 
or  irregularly  shaped  stumps.  If  a  stump  is  fairly  round,  average 
diameter  can  be  determined,  this  can  be  converted  to  cross-sectional 


25 


20 


K  15 


r  *  0.761 


10 


15  20  25  30 

AVERAGE    DIAMETER,  INCHES 


35 


40 


Relationship    between    stump    perimeter    and    average    diameter    of    stump 
top.  (Fig.  8) 


26 


BULLETIN  No.  678 


[November, 


59 

50 

s45 

§  40 

§- 

t  30 

a.  25 

jjao 

15 
10 
5 


Y  =  .042X  —  1.1 
r  =  .922 


I        I       I        I        I        I        I        I       I        I       I        I        I        I       I 


100        200         300        400 


500         600        700        800 
TOP  AREA,  SO.  IN. 


900        1000       1100        1200       BOO 


Relationship  between  cross-sectional  area  of  stump  top  and  number  of  holes 
bored,  1956  and  1957  data  combined.  (Fig.  9) 


20 


10 


I  I  I  I 


Y  =  0.6  +  .0102X 
r  =  .479 


I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I 


200 


400 


600  BOO  1000 

TOP  AREA  SO.  IN. 


1200 


1400 


1600 


Amount   of   Formula   51   applied   to   stumps   as   a   function   of   size    (cross- 
sectional  area  of  stump  top).  (Fig.  10) 


area  of  the  top  by  use  of  Figure  7,  and  correct  dosage  can  then  be 
determined  from  Table  10.  If  the  stump  is  irregularly  shaped,  holes 
can  be  bored  on  4-inch  centers,  the  surface  area  can  be  determined  by 
using  Figure  9,  and  the  amount  of  chemical  needed,  by  using  Figure  10. 


1961]  BURNING  HARDWOOD  TREE  STI MI-S  27 

Summary  and  Conclusions 

Stumps  that  remain  from  cutting  trees  are  difficult  to  remove  from 
residential  areas  because  explosives  or  heavy  machinery  cannot  he- 
used,  and  hand  methods  are  too  arduous  and  expensive.  There  is  a 
great  need  in  Illinois  and  elsewhere  for  a  practical  and  economical 
means  of  removing  the  stumps  of  disease-killed  elm  (Ulmiis  spp.) 
trees.  Commonly  recommended  methods  involving  the  use  of  potas- 
sium nitrate  (saltpeter)  to  promote  combustion  have  not  achieved 
satisfactory  results.  Other  compounds  known  to  cause  glowing  com- 
bustion of  wood  in  fire-retardant  studies  were  screened  for  use  in 
burning  tree  stumps. 

Eight  compounds,  as  well  as  over  400  combinations  of  them,  wen- 
tested  for  their  ability  to  promote  glowing  combustion  of  paper  disks. 
The  most  promising  combinations  were  further  tested  with  small 
blocks  or  wafers  of  wood.  Finally,  in  1956,  24  American  elm  (Ulmits 
amcricana  L.)  stumps  were  treated  either  with  ammonium  nitrate, 
sodium  nitrate,  Formula  K,  or  Formula  5 1.1  The  stumps  were  ignited 
about  3  months  after  treatment.  Eight  untreated  control  stumps  were 
included  in  the  burning  tests. 

Results  of  the  burning  tests  were  judged  by  20  evaluators,  who 
estimated  the  percentage  of  wood  destroyed  and  rated  each  test  a> 
"satisfactory"  or  "unsatisfactory."  Formula  51,  a  mixture  of  4.5  parts 
sodium  dichromate,  1.5  parts  cupric  chloride,  1  part  lead  acetate,  and 
1  part  manganese  dichloride,  gave  superior  results,  destroying,  on  the 
average,  83  percent  of  the  stump.  The  average  percentage  value  for 
Formula  K  was  57;  for  sodium  nitrate,  53;  for  ammonium  nitrate,  41; 
and  for  untreated  stumps,  37. 

In  1957.  a  second  series  of  experiments  with  20  American  elm 
stumps  tested  the  interacting  effect  of  Formula  51  and  reflecting  shields 
on  burning.  The  shields  had  an  insignificant  effect  on  burning  results, 
whereas  the  chemical  had  a  highly  significant  effect.  The  interacting 
effect  of  using  both  chemical  and  shields  was  not  significant.  In  these 
tests  the  average  percentage  of  stump  destroyed  was  80  for  stumps 
treated  with  Formula  51,  and  32  for  the  untreated  ones. 

Of  120  ratings  given  to  stumps  burned  after  treatment  with  For- 
mula 51  in  1956,  71  percent  were  classified  as  satisfactory.  The  next 
best  treatment  —  sodium  nitrate  —  was  considered  satisfactory  in  only 
31  percent  of  the  ratings.  In  1957,  78  percent  of  80  ratings  for  treated 
stumps  were  satisfactory,  whereas  only  19  percent  of  the  ratings  for 
stumps  burned  without  chemical  treatment  were  satisfactory. 

'Subsequently  named  Stumpfyre,  U.  S.  Patent  No.  2,947.110. 


28  BULLETIN  No.  678 

The  relationship  between  number  of  satisfactory  ratings  and 
amount  of  stump  destruction  showed  that  at  least  62  percent  of  a 
stump  had  to  be  destroyed  before  most  evaluators  were  willing  to  rate 
results  as  satisfactory. 

Twenty-three  of  the  best  chemical  formulations  were  examined  to 
see  whether  one  compound  was  more  important  than  another  in  pro- 
moting combustion.  Sodium  dichromate  appeared  most  frequently, 
followed  by  lead  acetate,  cupric  chloride,  ferric  chloride,  and  manga- 
nese dichloride.  Formula  51  contained  four  of  these  compounds. 

When  a  surfactant  was  added  to  an  aqueous  dilution  of  Formula 
51,  basswood  wafers  absorbed  2.02  times  as  much  liquid  and  1.82 
times  as  much  dry  chemical  as  wafers  treated  in  wafers  containing  no 
surfactant.  The  surfactant  also  increased  the  rate  at  which  the  liquid 
penetrated  the  wood. 

First-order  equations  were  calculated  for  several  relationships  con- 
cerning stump  size  (in  terms  of  cross-sectional  area  or  number  of  holes 
bored  on  4-inch  centers)  and  chemical  dosage. 

Literature  Cited 

1.  BROWNE,  F.  L.    Theories  of  the  combustion  of  wood  and  its  control. 

U.  S.  Forest  Prod.  Lab.  Rpt.  2136.    1958. 

2.  COGGINS,  H.  C.    Destroying  stumps  with  acid.    Agr.  Gaz.  N.  S.  Wales 

24  (11):967.    1913." 

3.  HAWLEY,  L.  F.    Combustion  of  wood.    Wood  Chemistry,  L.  E.  Wise, 

editor,  pp.  671-679.    Reinhold  Pub.  Corp.,  New  York,  N.  Y.    1944. 

4.  HENN,  A.    Stump  remover.    Prairie  Farmer  111   (26):11.    1939. 

5.  HOWELL,   H.   A.,   Arkansas   extension    forester,   in    a   letter   to    senior 

author  dated  September  23,  1947. 

6.  HUNT,  G.  M.,  TRUAX,  T.  R.,  and  HARRISON,  C.  A.   Experiments  in  fire- 

proofing   wood,   third   progress   report.    Amer.   Wood    Preservers' 
Assoc.  Proc.  28:71-93.    1932. 

7.  JACKSON,  W.   E.,  Kentucky  extension   forester,   in   a  letter   to   senior 

author  dated  July  29,  1947. 

8.  MORRISS,  R.  H.    Destroying  stumps  with  saltpeter.    U.  S.  Dept.  Agr. 

Forest  Serv.   Random  Forestry  Note,  p.  9.   May  27,  1947. 

9.  NICHOLLS,  P.,  and  STAPLES,  C.  W.   Removal  of  soot  from  furnaces  and 

flues  by  the  use  of  salts  or  compounds.   U.  S.  Dept.  Commerce  Bur. 
of  Mines  Bui.  369.    1932. 

10.  WALTERS,  C.   S.    The  value  of  chemicals   for  eradicating  stumps  by 

burning.   Arborists'  News  14  (4): 30-34.    1949. 

11.  -  — ,  Fox,  H.  W.,  and  KULP,  D.  A.   A  progress  report  on  the 

use  of  chemicals  in  destroying  hardwood  tree  stumps  by  burning. 
111.  Agr.  Exp.  Sta.  Note  No.  2.   1948. 

3500—11-61—74983 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS  URBANA 

Q.630.7IL6B  COOS 

BULLETIN   URBANA 
6781961 


30112019530424