2017
DOI: 10.3390/f8110442
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Optimum Slash Pile Size for Grinding Operations: Grapple Excavator and Horizontal Grinder Operations Model Based on a Sierra Nevada, California Survey

Abstract: Abstract:The processing of woody biomass waste piles for use as fuel instead of burning them was investigated. At each landing of slash pile location, a 132 kW grapple excavator was used to transfer the waste piles into a 522 kW horizontal grinder. Economies of scale could be expected when grinding a larger pile, although the efficiency of the loading operation might be diminished. Here, three piles were ground and the operations were time-studied: Small (20 m long × 15 m wide × 4 m high), Medium (30 × 24 × 4 … Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…64.80 AUD odt −1 : Base case or reference price value. This value is based on international references and personal communication [74,77] 50.40 AUD odt −1 : Low-price case according to a review case in Australia [12] 79.00 AUD odt −1 : High-price case according to a case example in the Green Triangle, Australia [69].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…64.80 AUD odt −1 : Base case or reference price value. This value is based on international references and personal communication [74,77] 50.40 AUD odt −1 : Low-price case according to a review case in Australia [12] 79.00 AUD odt −1 : High-price case according to a case example in the Green Triangle, Australia [69].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…With respect to the other parameters acquired from the time study, the time for installation and withdrawal, a, the time for felling a tree, f, the moving velocity of the felling head, v, and the maximum number of trees that could be held at a time, h, were set to be 270 s, 10 s, 0.57 m/s and 8, respectively, based on Table 3. The simulation model for calculating the cycle time of the harvesting operation was completed assuming that the machine's moving velocity, b, and the time for chipping, c, were 5 m/s and 10 s [27], respectively; thus, the productivity of harvesting could be calculated. Finally, the harvesting cost per BDT of small-diameter trees, HC(L, n) of Equation (2), was calculated by dividing the sum of the hourly costs of the two machines (listed in Tables 4 and 5 as 12,250 JPY/h (= 7173 JPY/h for the first machine plus 5077 JPY/h for the second machine), by the harvesting productivity, HP(L, n), calculated from Equation (1).…”
Section: Results Of the Harvesting Experimentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The second machine, equipped with a container, followed after the first one to receive the comminuted wood chips. Such a machine as the first one shown in Figure 2 has never been in operation in Japan; thus, a harvesting experiment (felling and accumulating) was conducted in this study while the data related to the chipping operation were referred to from the previous study by the authors of this paper [27]. Figure 3 contains a flow chart outlining one cycle of the harvesting operation that consists of the felling, accumulating and chipping processes.…”
Section: Assumed Simplified Model Forest and Harvesting Systemmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Feedstock concentration is known to have a very strong impact on forwarder productivity (Manner et al 2013). Similarly, pile size affects forwarding (Väätäinen et al 2006) and comminution (Yoshioka et al 2017) productivity alike. A logical conclusion is that the residue available on the experimental site was too little and too sparse for efficient chipping, especially if the machine took as long to re-position as the chipper truck used for the study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%