Use, Utilization, Productivity and Fuel Consumption of Purpose-Built and Excavator-Based Harvesters and Processors in Italy

Magagnotti, Natascia; Pari, Luigi; Spinelli, Raffaele

doi:10.3390/f8120485

Cited by 16 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the other hand, per-hour consumption is still in the 20 l h −1 range, which is substantially higher than reported for purpose-built harvesters [37]. A possible explanation may come from the different operational conditions explored by different studies: the current study covers plantation forests, while previous comparison studies were conducted in natural forests [17], characterized by a relatively difficult work environment where purpose-built harvesters can get all the benefit from their superior agility. In those forests, purpose-built harvesters offer a substantial productivity margin over excavator-based harvesters, and that clearly shows when it comes to calculating fuel consumption per m 3 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 68%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Decreasing the Fuel Consumption and CO2 Emissions of Excavator-Based Harvesters with a Machine Control System

Spinelli

Moura

2019

Forests

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Compared with purpose-built units, excavator-based harvesters offer many advantages, but they also face one main limitation: a much higher fuel consumption, which also results in higher CO2 emission levels. The fuel efficiency of excavator-based harvesters can be increased by a better interface between the excavator and the harvester head. This study aimed to determine the performance of a new adaptation kit, specifically designed to improve the communication between these two components. The new kit offers real-time adjustment between the power demand of the harvester head and the power output of the excavator, which should help reducing fuel consumption while stabilizing hydraulic fluid temperature. The test was conducted on 53 excavator-based harvesters purchased and managed by a large Brazilian company. Time use, fuel consumption and production were monitored continuously for one full month, before and after installation of the kit. Overall, the study covered 40,000 h of work, during which the harvesters cut, processed, and debarked 4.5 million trees, or 650,000 m3 of wood, under bark. Fuel consumption amounted to 900,000 liters. After installing the adaptation kit, productivity increased 6%, while fuel consumption per hour decreased 3.5%. Fuel consumption and CO2 emissions per product unit decreased 10%, as an average. The effect of random variability typical of an observational study prevented formulating an accurate figure for the amount of fuel that can be saved by installing the adaptation kit. Yet, one may confidently state that, in most cases, installing the kit results in a reduction of fuel use, and that such reduction is most often in the range from −10 to −20% on a per m3 basis.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 68%

“…The main disadvantage of excavator-based harvesters is a much higher fuel consumption than incurred by their purpose-built equivalents [17]. The latter incorporate a sophisticated machine control system that is capable of adjusting engine output to harvester power demand in real-time.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decreasing the Fuel Consumption and CO2 Emissions of Excavator-Based Harvesters with a Machine Control System

Spinelli

Moura

2019

Forests

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Holzleitner et al (2011) conducted a long-term machine data follow-up in Austria and presented the fuel consumption of harvesters between 10.2 and 24.3 l PMH 15 −1 , and an average of 15.6 l PMH 15 −1 and 0.095 l per hour and kilowatt of engine power. Magagnotti et al (2017) showed a median fuel consumption of 9.8 l PMH −1 or 0.7 l m −3 , based on annual records for purposebuilt harvesters in Italy. Based on a recent long-term follow-up study in Finland, Kärhä et al (2020) reported an hourly fuel consumption of 16.0 lh −1 for harvesting operations in final felling.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The value and production of high-value products have since been in more focus (Brown et al 2020). Purpose-built cut-to-length (CTL) harvesters have developed over the years and have high productivity, utilisation, and fuel efficiency compared to excavator-based machines in comparable operations (Magagnotti et al 2017). Various approaches have been taken to improve the performance of individual machines (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cutting duration and performance parameters of a harvester’s sawing unit under real working conditions

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Amongst all the working elements of single grip harvesters, the working elements of felling and processing play an important role within the cut-to-length (CTL) harvester’s working phases. This includes the felling cutting and cross-cutting of stems within the felling and processing operation. The detailed investigation of such individual machine activities may help to analyse and improve the performance of forest machines. The objective of this study was to investigate the cutting duration and other performance parameters, including the fuel consumption, of a CTL harvester’s sawing unit under real working conditions. Detailed information on the felling cutting and cross-cutting performance was collected at short intervals using CAN bus data of two single grip harvesters in final felling from two different sites in Eastern Finland. As a result, models for effective time consumption in the work phase of cutting as a function of stem size were developed, both for felling cutting and cross-cutting. Felling cutting and cross-cutting durations were somewhat identical until the cutting diameters of 400–450 mm, depending on the site. Thereafter, the cutting time difference increased and was higher in felling cutting. At the site with large diameters of 550–650 mm, the difference varied between 15% and 28%, between the comparisons of formulae. In addition, other performance parameters, including the respective fuel consumption of this working phase, were part of the study. The study revealed a higher hourly based fuel consumption for the entire guide bar movement time compared to the pure cutting time in cross-cutting with stem diameters below 400 mm. Detailed knowledge of the performance of the sawing unit’s activities might help the planning process of future studies, as well as support the future development of efficient and intelligent machinery.

show abstract

“…In relation to the productivity of the operation, several other studies with harvester report that this is influenced by several factors, being the main the characteristics of the machine, operator experience, shape and size of the trees, length and number of assortments produced (MALINOVSKI et al, 2006;SPINELLI et al, 2010;HIESL;BENJAMIN, 2013;MAGAGNOTTI et al, 2017).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Individual Tree Volume on Operational Performance of Harvester Processor

Rodrigues

Lopes

Pereira

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The need to obtain multi-products from the forest makes the wood processing an important step in the timber harvest, being necessary, then, to understand the influence of the stand characteristics on the operational performance of the machines. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of the individual tree volume on the operational performance of the harvester forest processor in Pinus taeda L. stands, in order to assist in planning operations and reducing production costs. The analyzes were carried out by means of a time and motion study, determining the time consumed in the phases of the operational cycle, mechanical availability, operational efficiency, productivity, and production costs in three stands with different individual mean volumes (IMV): I (1.21 m3 tree-1); II (1.34 m3 tree-1) and III (1.61 m3 tree-1). In a completely randomized design, the averages of the variables were compared, as well as models for estimating productivity and production costs were fitted according to individual tree volume. The results showed that the processing element consumed a significant part of the total operational cycle time, with 46, 53 and 64% in treatments I, II and III, respectively, with an average operational efficiency of 56% in all treatments. Productivity increase and reduction of production costs were observed in the order of 43 and 30%, respectively, with the increase in IMV from 1.21 to 1.61 m3 tree-1. Such behavior can be represented by the third degree polynomial, which demonstrated the operational limit of 1.5 m3 tree-1 for the harvester forest processor.

show abstract

Use, Utilization, Productivity and Fuel Consumption of Purpose-Built and Excavator-Based Harvesters and Processors in Italy

Cited by 16 publications

References 19 publications

Decreasing the Fuel Consumption and CO2 Emissions of Excavator-Based Harvesters with a Machine Control System

Decreasing the Fuel Consumption and CO2 Emissions of Excavator-Based Harvesters with a Machine Control System

Cutting duration and performance parameters of a harvester’s sawing unit under real working conditions

Effect of Individual Tree Volume on Operational Performance of Harvester Processor

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About