Wednesday, 16 November 2016

Modeling lumber yield of white spruce in Alberta, Canada: a comparative approach

Published Date
Volume 21, Issue 6pp 271–279

Original Article
DOI: 10.1007/s10310-016-0544-3

Cite this article as: 
Li, C., Huang, S., Barclay, H. et al. J For Res (2016) 21: 271. doi:10.1007/s10310-016-0544-3

Author
  • Chao Li
  • Shongming Huang
  • Hugh Barclay
  • Derek Sidders
Abstract

Estimation of lumber yield from a forest inventory is important in determining the optimal utilization of available regional wood supply. In this study, we review existing approaches of lumber yield estimation, including knowledge-based empirical board-foot log rules used in the United States and some regions of Canada, survey-based wood conversion factors, and optimization technology-based computer simulations. Lumber yields estimated from different approaches are then compared using six datasets from a white spruce commercial thinning experiment in Alberta, Canada. Our results indicated that (1) estimated lumber yield can be significantly different when different methods are employed; (2) board-foot log rules often underestimate lumber yield; (3) wood conversion factors represent regional average of lumber yield as a constant and thus are unsuitable for forest inventory-based lumber yield estimation; and (4) optimization technology-based computer simulations can provide the best estimate of lumber yield for a given forest inventory as long as the mill conditions and lumber dimensions from market demand are specified. Forestry investment in applying computer simulation methods should be encouraged in sawmill operations to improve lumber yield and enhance environmental protection, because, for a given amount of lumber, improving lumber yield means reduced demand for harvest operations.

References

  1. Avery TE, Burkhart HE (1994) Forest measurements, 4th edn. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Barbour RJ, Parry DL, Punches J, Forsman J, Boss R (2003) AUTOSAW simulations of lumber recovery for small-diameter Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine from southwestern Oregon. The PNW-RN-543 of USDA For Serv Res Note, p 14
  3. Bédard P (2001) Guidelines to better match resource characteristics, conversion technology, and products. Project Report 2427. Forintek Canada Corp., Pointe-Claire, Que
  4. Briggs D (1994) Forest products measurements and conversion factors with special emphasis on the U.S. Pacific Northwest. College of Forest Resources, University of Washington. Seattle, Wash
  5. British Columbia Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations (2011) Major primary timber processing facilities in British Columbia 2009. Available from https://www.for.gov.bc.ca/ftp/het/external/!publish/web/mill%20list/Public%20Report%202009.pdf. Accessed 23 Nov 2015
  6. Brown WH (1988) The conversion and seasoning of wood: a guide to principles and practice. Linden, FresnoGoogle Scholar
  7. Clark JF (1906) The measurement of sawlogs. For Quart 4(2):79–93Google Scholar
  8. Davis LS, Johnson KN, Bettinger P, Howard TE (2001) Forest management to sustain ecological, economic, and social values, 4th edn. Waveland, Long GroveGoogle Scholar
  9. Doyle E (1825) The improved reckoner for timber, planks, boards, saw-logs, wages, board, and interest. Hoyt & Porter, RochesterGoogle Scholar
  10. FAO (2010) Forest product conversion factors for the UNECE region. ECE/TIM/DP/49. Geneva Timber and Forest Discussion Paper 49. Timber Section, Geneva
  11. FPInnovations (2014) Optitek (version 10) User’s manual. Internal report
  12. Freese F (1974) A collection of log rules. USDA For Serv Gen Tech Rep FPL-01
  13. Funck JW, Zeng Y (1999) SAW3D: a real shape log breakdown model. In: Szymani R (ed) Scanning technology and process optimization advances in the wood industry, Wood Technology Book Division. Miller Freeman, San Francisco, pp 104–109Google Scholar
  14. Grosenbaugh LR (1952) Short cuts for cruisers and scalers. Occasional Pap. 126, S. Forest Exp. Sta., Forest Service, New Orleans, LA, p 24
  15. Keegan CE III, Morgan TA, Blatner KA, Daniels JM (2010) Trends in lumber processing in the western United States. Part II: overrun and lumber recovery factors. For Prod J 60(2):140–143Google Scholar
  16. Kozak A (1988) A variable-exponent taper equation. Can J For Res 18(11):1363–1368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lewis DW (1985) Sawmill simulation and the best opening face system: a user’s guide. USDA For Serv Gen Tech Rep FPL-48
  18. Li C, Barclay H, Hans H, Sidders D (2015) Estimation of log volumes: a comparative study. Can For Serv Info Rep FI-X-011
  19. Liu C, Zhang SY (2005) Models for predicting product recovery using selected tree characteristics of black spruce. Can J For Res 35:930–937CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Liu C, Jiang ZH, Zhang SY (2006) Tree-level models for predicting lumber volume recovery of black spruce using selected tree characteristics. For Sci 52(6):694–703Google Scholar
  21. Liu C, Zhang SY, Ruel JC, Cloutier A, Rycabel T (2007) Development of lumber volume recovery correction models for stem deformations of natural black spruce trees. Scand J For Res 22(5):415–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mendoza G, Sprouse W, Araman PA, Luppold WG (1991) CEASAW: a user-friendly computer environment analysis for the sawmill owner. A paper presented at the 1991 Symposium on Systems Analysis in Forest Resources, Charleston, S.C., 3–7 March 1991
  23. Mitchell PH, Wiedenbeck J, Ammerman B (2005) Rough mill improvement guide for managers and supervisors. USDA For Serv Gen Tech Rep NE-329
  24. Murphy G (2011). Value recovery: optimizing revenues from what you have grown. Presentation at the Intensive Silviculture of Planted Douglas-fir-Forests: Opportunities for Increased Productivity. High quality continuing education workshops and conferences for the professional forester: Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, Northern California and British Columbia. Portland, Oregon
  25. Occeña LG, Tanchoco JMA (1988) Computer graphics simulation of hardwood log sawing. For Prod J 38(10):72–76Google Scholar
  26. Pepke EK, Kroon MJ (1981) Rough mill operator’s guide to better cutting practices. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Area, State and Private Forestry, NA-TP-4, p 25
  27. Sessions J, Garland J, Olsen E (1989) Testing computer-aided bucking at the stump. J For 87(4):43–45Google Scholar
  28. Sidders D, Keddy T (2007) Commercial thinning options to maximize volume recovery, growth and sustainability in pure white spruce stands: 5-year project status report. Nat Resour Can, Can For Serv, Edmonton, AB. Report to Vanderwell Contractors (1971) Ltd
  29. Todoroki CL (1990) AUTOSAW system for sawing simulation. NZ J For Sci 20(3):332–348Google Scholar
  30. Tong QJ, Zhang SY, Thompson M (2005) Evaluation of growth response, stand value and financial return for precommercially thinned jack pine stands in northwestern Ontario. For Ecol Manage 209:225–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Twaddle AA, Goulding CJ (1989) Improving profitability by optimizing log-making. NZ J. For 34(1):17–23Google Scholar
  32. Wenger KF (ed) (1984) Forestry handbook, 2nd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. Zhang SY, Tong QJ (2005) Modeling simulated product recovery in relation to tree characteristics in jack pine using sawing simulator Optitek. Ann For Sci 62(3):219–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar

For further details log on website :
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10310-016-0540-7

No comments:

Post a Comment