The estimation of single tree and complete stand information is one of the central tasks of forest inventory. In recent years, automatic algorithms have been successfully developed for the detection and measurement of trees with laser scanning technology. Nevertheless, most of the forest inventories are nowadays carried out with manual tree measurements using traditional instruments. This is due to the high investment costs for modern laser scanner equipment and, in particular, the time-consuming and incomplete nature of data acquisition with stationary terrestrial laser scanners. Traditionally, forest inventory data are collected through manual surveys with calipers or tapes. Practically, this is both labor and time-consuming. In 2020, Apple implemented a Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) sensor in the new Apple iPad Pro (4th Gen) and iPhone Pro 12. Since then, access to LiDAR-generated 3D point clouds has become possible with consumer-level devices. In this study, an Apple iPad Pro was tested to produce 3D point clouds, and its performance was compared with a personal laser scanning (PLS) approach to estimate individual tree parameters in different forest types and structures. Reference data were obtained by traditional measurements on 21 circular forest inventory sample plots with a 7 m radius. The tree mapping with the iPad showed a detection rate of 97.3% compared to 99.5% with the PLS scans for trees with a lower diameter at a breast height (dbh) threshold of 10 cm. The root mean square error (RMSE) of the best dbh measurement out of five different dbh modeling approaches was 3.13 cm with the iPad and 1.59 cm with PLS. The data acquisition time with the iPad was approximately 7.51 min per sample plot; this is twice as long as that with PLS but 2.5 times shorter than that with traditional forest inventory equipment. In conclusion, the proposed forest inventory with the iPad is generally feasible and achieves accurate and precise stem counts and dbh measurements with efficient labor effort compared to traditional approaches. Along with future technological developments, it is expected that other consumer-level handheld devices with integrated laser scanners will also be developed beyond the iPad, which will serve as an accurate and cost-efficient alternative solution to the approved but relatively expensive TLS and PLS systems. Such a development would be mandatory to broadly establish digital technology and fully automated routines in forest inventory practice. Finally, high-level progress is generally expected for the broader scientific community in forest ecosystem monitoring, as the collection of highly precise 3D point cloud data is no longer hindered by financial burdens.
The utilization of terrestrial laser scanning (TLS) data for forest inventory purposes has increasingly gained recognition in the past two decades. Volume estimates from TLS data are usually derived from the integral of cross-section area estimates along the stem axis. The purpose of this study was to compare the performance of circle, ellipse, and spline fits applied to cross-section area modeling, and to evaluate the influence of different modeling parameters on the cross-section area estimation. For this purpose, 20 trees were scanned with FARO Focus3D X330 and afterward felled to collect stem disks at different heights. The contours of the disks were digitized under in vitro laboratory conditions to provide reference data for the evaluation of the in situ TLS-based cross-section modeling. The results showed that the spline model fit achieved the most precise and accurate estimate of the cross-section area when compared to the reference cross-section area (RMSD (Root Mean Square Deviation) and bias of only 3.66% and 0.17%, respectively) and was able to exactly represent the shape of the stem disk (ratio between intersection and union of modeled and reference cross-section area of 88.69%). In comparison, contour fits with ellipses and circles yielded higher RMSD (5.28% and 10.08%, respectively) and bias (1.96% and 3.27%, respectively). The circle fit proved to be especially robust with respect to varying parameter settings, but provided exact estimates only for regular-shaped stem disks, such as those from the upper parts of the stem. Spline-based models of the cross-section at breast height were further used to examine the influence of caliper orientation on the volume estimation. Simulated caliper measures of the DBH showed an RMSD of 3.99% and a bias of 1.73% when compared to the reference DBH, which was calculated via the reference cross-section area, resulting in biased estimates of basal area and volume. DBH estimates obtained by simulated cross-calipering showed statistically significant deviations from the reference. The findings cast doubt on the customary utilization of manually calipered diameters as reference data when evaluating the accuracy of TLS data, as TLS-based estimates have reached an accuracy level surpassing traditional caliper measures.
Cross-cutting of a tree into a set of assortments (»bucking pattern«) presents a large potential for optimizing the volume and value recovery; therefore, bucking pattern optimization has been studied extensively in the past. However, it has not seen widespread adoption in chainsaw bucking, where time consuming and costly manual measurement of input parameters is required for taper curve estimation. The present study investigated an alternative approach, where taper curves are fit based on terrestrial laser scanning data (TLS), and how deviations from observed taper curves (REF) affect the result of bucking pattern optimization. In addition, performance of TLS was compared to a traditional, segmental taper curve estimation approach (APP) and an experienced chainsaw operator’s solution (CHA).A mature Norway Spruce stand was surveyed by stationary terrestrial laser scanning. In TLS, taper curves were fit by a mixed-effects B-spline regression approach to stem diameters extracted from 3D point cloud data. A network analysis technique algorithm was used for bucking pattern optimization during harvesting. Stem diameter profiles and the chainsaw operator’s bucking pattern were obtained by manual measurement. The former was used for post-operation fit of REF taper curves by the same approach as in TLS. APP taper curves were fit based on part of the data. For 35 trees, TLS and APP taper curves were compared to REF on tree, trunk and crown section level. REF and APP bucking patterns were optimized with the same algorithm as in TLS. For 30 trees, TLS, APP and CHA bucking patterns were compared to REF on operation and tree level.Taper curves were estimated with high accuracy and precision (underestimated by 0.2 cm on average (SD=1.5 cm); RMSE=1.5 cm) in TLS and the fit outperformed APP. Volume and value recovery were marginally higher in TLS (0.6%; 0.9%) than in REF on operation level, while substantial differences were observed for APP (–6.1%; –4.1%). Except for cumulated nominal length, no significant differences were observed between TLS and REF on tree level, while APP result was inferior throughout. Volume and value recovery in CHA was significantly higher (2.1%; 2.4%), but mainly due to a small disadvantage of the optimization algorithm.The investigated approach based on terrestrial laser scanning data proved to provide highly accurate and precise estimations of the taper curves. Therefore, it can be considered a further step towards increased accuracy, precision and efficiency of bucking pattern optimization in chainsaw bucking.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.