AI Isn't sure either.
There seems to be some debate and confusion about whether a cord of unsplit wood (rounds) or a cord of split wood yields more actual wood volume. Here's a summary of the arguments:
Less air space: Unsplit rounds, when stacked, naturally minimize the air gaps between them because of their round shape, according to one source.
Splitting introduces voids: When rounds are split, it introduces more air space when the pieces are stacked, potentially leading to a larger overall volume for the same amount of actual wood, says one contributor.
- Tighter stacking: Some argue that split wood, particularly when stacked carefully, can be packed more tightly than rounds, reducing the air spaces and potentially resulting in more actual wood per cord.
- Less bark: Splitting exposes more wood and reduces the amount of bark, which has a lower density than the inner wood, potentially contributing to a denser and more fuel-efficient stack
Practical experience: Some users note that when they split a stack of rounds, the resulting volume of split wood ends up being smaller than the original stack.
Conclusion
The debate highlights the difficulty in precisely measuring the actual wood content in a cord, especially with varying shapes and stacking techniques. While a cord is a standard volume measurement, the amount of
solid wood within that volume can vary depending on whether it's split or unsplit and how tightly it's stacked.
