Determining the effect of tree size, bark-wood bond strength and tree form on the productivity of an excavator-based harvester in<i>Acacia mearnsii</i>in the KwaZulu-Natal forestry region of South Africa

Ramantswana, Muedanyi; McEwan, Andrew; Pauw, Jeanette

doi:10.2989/20702620.2012.722823

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…First of all, it offers the evidence that mechanized felling, processing, and harvesting are viable options for coppice stands. This is quite important, considering that the viability of mechanized felling, processing, and harvesting in coppice stands is still the object of much debate (Ramantswana et al 2012). The study also shows that different work procedures are sensitive to different factors.…”

Section: Felling Processing and Harvestingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Techniques and productivity of coppice harvesting operations in Europe: a meta-analysis of available data

Spinelli

Cacot²,

Mihelič

et al. 2016

Annals of Forest Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

& Key message Coppice harvesting technology is evolving toward increased mechanization and larger more efficient equipment. Nevertheless, cheap and versatile general-purpose machines (excavators and farm tractors) still represent the backbone of coppice mechanization, which is consistent with the rural character of coppice economy. & Context Operating within the scope of COST Action FP1301 "Eurocoppice", the authors conducted a survey of coppice harvesting studies produced in Europe from 1970 to present. The survey focused on traditional coppice stands and excluded industrial short-rotation coppice, established with willow, poplar, eucalyptus, or other fast-growing species. & Aims The goals of this study were to calculate productivity benchmarks for coppice harvesting operations and to gauge the progress achieved over the past 40-plus years. & Methods Data from existing studies (published and unpublished) were collected through a harmonized questionnaire and gathered into a single master database. Statistical analysis was used to estimate productivity models and determine possible differences between methods, work conditions, and time periods. & Results Six productivity models were estimated for the main harvesting steps and technologies. Productivity varied with a number of factors and notably with removal (m 3 ha −1). The analysis disclosed a clear trend toward increased mechanization and higher productivity. & Conclusion Coppice harvesting is being mechanized, but the mechanization deployed in coppice stands is adapted to the specific conditions offeredbythesestands.Light,cheap,andversatile machines are generally preferred to heavy industrial equipment.

show abstract

Section: Felling Processing and Harvestingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Techniques and productivity of coppice harvesting operations in Europe: a meta-analysis of available data

Spinelli

Cacot²,

Mihelič

et al. 2016

Annals of Forest Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In recent decades, mechanised forest harvesting systems have been widely adopted, primarily to reduce harvest costs and improve worker safety. Time-and-motion studies of mechanical harvesting operations have been undertaken to better understand the effect of harvesting systems (Visser and Spinelli 2012), machine type and configuration (Ghaffariyan et al 2012), machine-operator training, behaviour and experience (Ovaskainen et al 2004), terrain (Visser and Spinelli 2012;Visser et al 2009), and stand and tree characteristics Ramantswana et al 2012;Ramantswana et al 2013;Spinelli et al 2002) on harvest productivity. In the short term, knowledge gained from such studies can be used to optimise machines, operator behaviour and harvesting systems but, in the longer term, may be used guide decisions relating to the procurement and sale of land, silvicultural practices, rotation length and tree breeding (Schäfer and Ponce 2007;Whittock et al 2004) Many stand and individual-tree characteristics that potentially affect harvest productivity are known to be under genetic control in commercially-grown tree species (Hamilton and Potts 2008;Potts et al 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genetic control of Eucalyptus globulus harvest traits

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The cost of harvesting short-rotation plantation eucalypts can be in excess of AU$2500·ha−1. Despite this high cost, the extent to which harvesting productivity is affected by tree genetics is not well understood. We address this issue in a study of two 10-year-old genetic field trials of Eucalyptus globulus Labill. in Australia. Standing-tree traits analysed were survival, diameter at breast height, basal area, and stem straightness and forking. Harvest traits analysed were volume, time, and productivity. Genetic group and within-group genetic variation (additive and dominance), stand-level family variation, phenotypic and genetic correlations, and the effects of inbreeding were estimated for these traits. The different scenarios studied showed that plantation harvest productivity was affected by tree genetics to some degree but was mainly affected through positive covariation with stem diameter. Harvest productivity is thus unlikely to have been adversely affected by past selection. Although no significant additive or dominance genetic variation in stem forking or straightness was detected, weak phenotypic correlations were consistent with harvest productivity being higher in straighter trees with no forking. High inbreeding depression was evident for growth and survival; however, in open-pollinated progeny, this resulted in only a slight reduction in harvest productivity (5.5%) compared with out-crossed progeny.

show abstract

“…In addition to operator influence, this can most likely be attributed to the harvester in Swath IV working with the highest average tree volumes out of any of the swaths (Table 1) which has a strong influence on productivity (Kärhä Productivity (m 3 PMH -1 ) summary statistics by swath. et al 2004, Alam et al 2012, Ramantswana et al 2012, Visser & Spinelli 2012.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of two methods of data collection for modelling productivity of harvesters: manual time study and follow-up study using on-board-computer stem records

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Determining the effect of tree size, bark-wood bond strength and tree form on the productivity of an excavator-based harvester inAcacia mearnsiiin the KwaZulu-Natal forestry region of South Africa

Cited by 9 publications

References 5 publications

Techniques and productivity of coppice harvesting operations in Europe: a meta-analysis of available data

Techniques and productivity of coppice harvesting operations in Europe: a meta-analysis of available data

Genetic control of Eucalyptus globulus harvest traits

A comparison of two methods of data collection for modelling productivity of harvesters: manual time study and follow-up study using on-board-computer stem records

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About