Reconstructing the size of individual trees using log data from cut-to-length harvesters in Pinus radiata plantations: a case study in NSW, Australia

Abstract

With their widespread utilization, cut-to-length harvesters have become a major source of “big data” for forest management as they constantly capture, and provide a daily flow of, information on log production and assortment over large operational areas. Harvester data afford the calculation of the total log length between the stump and the last cut but not the total height of trees. They also contain the length and end diameters of individual logs but not always the diameter at breast height overbark (DBHOB) of harvested stems largely because of time lapse, operating and processing issues and other system deficiencies. Even when DBHOB is extracted from harvester data, errors and/or bias of the machine measurements due to the variation in the stump height of harvested stems from that specified for the harvester head prior to harvesting and diameter measurement errors may need to be corrected. This study developed (1) a system of equations for estimating DBHOB of trees from diameter overbark (DOB) measured by a harvester head at any height up to 3 m above ground level and (2) an equation to predict the total height of harvested stems in P. radiata plantations from harvester data. To generate the data required for this purpose, cut-to-length simulations of more than 3000 trees with detailed taper measurements were carried out in the computer using the cutting patterns extracted from the harvester data and stump height survey data from clearfall operations. The equation predicted total tree height from DBHOB, total log length and the small end diameter of the top log. Prediction accuracy for total tree height was evaluated both globally over the entire data space and locally within partitioned subspaces through benchmarking statistics. These statistics were better than that of the conventional height-diameter equations for P. radiata found in the literature, even when they incorporated stand age and the average height and diameter of dominant trees in the stand as predictors. So this equation when used with harvester data would outperform the conventional equations in tree height prediction. Tree and stand reconstructions of the harvested forest is the necessary first step to provide the essential link of harvester data to conventional inventory, remote sensing imagery and LiDAR data. The equations developed in this study will provide such a linkage for the most effective combined use of harvester data in predicting the attributes of individual trees, stands and forests, and product recovery for the management and planning of P. radiata plantations in New South Wales, Australia.

Keywords

Cut-to-length simulations / Harvesters / Big data / Diameter and height estimation

References

[1] Arlinger J, Nordström M, Möller JJ. StanForD 2010: modern communication with forest machines, 2012, Uppsala: Arbetsrapport 784, Skogforsk.

[2] Barth A, Holmgren J. Stem taper estimates based on airborne laser scanning and cut-to-length harvester measurements for pre-harvest planning. Int J For Eng, 2013, 24(3): 161-169.

[3] Barth A, Möller JJ, Wilhelmsson L, Arlinger J, Hedberg R, Söderman U. A Swedish case study on the prediction of detailed product recovery from individual stem profiles based on airborne laser scanning. Ann Sci, 2015, 72(1): 47-56.

[4] Baskerville GL. Use of logarithmic regression in the estimation of plant biomass. Can J For Res, 1972, 2(1): 49-53.

[5] Bi H. Trigonometric variable-form taper equation for Australian eucalypts. For Sci, 2000, 46(3): 397-409.

[6] Bi H, Long YS. Flexible taper equation for site-specific management of Pinus radiata in New South Wales Australia. For Ecol Manag, 2001, 148(1): 79-91.

[7] Bi H, Jurskis V, O’Gara J. Improving height prediction of regrowth eucalypts by incorporating the mean size of site trees in a modified Chapman-Richards equation. Australian For, 2000, 63(4): 257-266.

[8] Bi H, Fox JC, Li Y, Lei YC, Pang Y. Evaluation of nonlinear equations for predicting diameter from tree height. Can J For Res, 2012, 42(4): 789-806.

[9] Bylin CV (1982) Estimating dbh from stump diameter for 15 southern species. New Orleans, LA: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. Research Note SO − 286, p 3

[10] Corral-Rivas JJ, Barrio-Anta M, Aguirre-Calderón OA, Diéguez-Aranda U. Use of stump diameter to estimate diameter at breast height and tree volume for major pine species in El Salto, Durango (Mexico). Forestry, 2007, 80(1): 29-40.

[11] Dorado FC, Diéguez-Aranda U, Anta MB, Rodríguez MS, Gadow KV. A generalized height–diameter model including random components for radiata pine plantations in northwestern Spain. For Ecol Manag, 2006, 229(1): 202-213.

[12] Downham R, Gavran M (2017) Australian plantation statistics 2017 update. Australian Government Department of Agriculture and Water Resources. Available at agriculture.gov.au/abares/publications

[13] Flewelling JW, Pienaar LV. Multiplicative regression with lognormal errors. For Sci, 1981 27 2 281

[14] Flewelling JW, Raynes LM. Variable-shape stem-profile predictions for western hemlock. Part I. Predictions from DBH and total height. Can J For Res, 1993, 23(3): 520-536.

[15] Gerasimov Y, Seliverstov A, Syunev V. Industrial round-wood damage and operational efficiency losses associated with the maintenance of a single-grip harvester head model: a case study in Russia. Forests, 2012, 3(4): 864-880.

[16] Gerasimov Y, Sokolov A, Syunev V. Development trends and future prospects of cut-to-length machinery. Adv Mater Res, 2013, 705: 468-473.

[17] Heinimann HR (2001) Productivity of a cut-to-length harvester family—an analysis based on operation data. In: J. Wang, M. Wolford and J. McNeel (eds), Appalachian hardwoods: managing change, Proceeding of 24th Annual Meeting of the Council on Forest Engineering, July 15–19, Snowshoe, West Virginia, USA, pp 121–126

[18] Heinimann HR. Forest operations engineering and management–the ways behind and ahead of a scientific discipline. Croat J For Eng, 2007, 28(1): 107-121.

[19] Hellström T, Lärkeryd P, Nordfjell T, Ringdahl O. Autonomous forest vehicles: historic, envisioned, and state-of-the-art. Int J For Eng, 2009, 20(1): 31-38.

[20] Holmgren J, Barth A, Larsson H, Olsson H. Prediction of stem attributes by combining airborne laser scanning and measurements from harvesters. Silva Fennica, 2012, 46(2): 227-239.

[21] Holopainen M, Vastaranta M, Rasinmäki J, Kalliovirta J, Mäkinen A, Haapanen R, Melkas T, Yu X, Hyyppä J. Uncertainty in timber assortment estimates predicted from forest inventory data. Eur J For Res, 2010, 129(6): 1131-1142.

[22] Huang SM. Ecoregion-based individual tree height-diameter models for lodgepole pine in Alberta. West J Appl For, 1999, 14(4): 186-193.

[23] Huang SM, Titus SJ, Wiens DP. Comparison of non-linear height-diameter functions for major Alberta tree species. Can J Res, 1992, 22(9): 1297-1304.

[24] Huang SM, Yang Y, Wang Y. Amaro A, Reed D, Soares P. A critical look at procedures for validating growth and yield models. Modelling Forest Systems, 2003, Oxford: CABI Publishing 271 293

[25] Huyler NK, LeDoux CB (1999) Performance of a cut-to-length harvester in a single-tree and group selection cut. USDA Forestry Service, Northeastern Research Station, Research Paper NE–711, p 6

[26] Kiljunen N. Estimating dry mass of logging residues from final cuttings using a harvester data management system. Int J For Eng, 2002, 13(1): 17-25.

[27] Koenker R (2015) Quantreg: Quantile Regression. R package version 5.19. Available at: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=quantreg

[28] Koenker R. (2016). quantreg: quantile regression. R package version 5.27. Available at: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=quantreg

[29] Koenker R. Quantile regression: 40 years on. Annu Rev Econ, 2017, 9(1): 155-176.

[30] Kong JL, Ding XK, Liu JH, Yan L, Wang JL. New hybrid algorithms for estimating tree stem diameters at breast height using a two dimensional terrestrial laser scanner. Sensors, 2015, 15(7): 15661-15683.

[31] Koskela L, Nummi T, Wenzel S, Kivinen VP. On the analysis of cubic smoothing spline-based stem curve prediction for forest harvesters. Can J For Res, 2006, 36(11): 2909-2919.

[32] Lewis NB, Ferguson IS, Sutton WRJ, Donald DGM, Lisboa HB (1993) Management of radiata pine. Inkata Press Pty Ltd/Butterworth-Heinemann

[33] Malinen J, Kilpeläinen H, Piira T, Redsven V, Wall T, Nuutinen T. Comparing model-based approaches with bucking simulation-based approach in the prediction of timber assortment recovery. Forestry, 2007, 80(3): 309-321.

[34] Malinen J, Laitila J, Väätäinen K, Viitamäki K. Variation in age, annual usage and resale price of cut-to-length machinery in different regions of Europe. Int J For Eng, 2016, 27(2): 95-102.

[35] Maltamo M, Bollandsås OM, Vauhkonen J, Breidenbach J, Gobakken T, Næsset E. Comparing different methods for prediction of mean crown height in Norway spruce stands using airborne laser scanner data. Forestry, 2010, 83(3): 257-268.

[36] Mead DJ. Sustainable management of Pinus radiata plantations, 2013, Italy, Room: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

[37] Miettinen M, Kulovesi J, Kalmari J, Visala A. Howard A, Iagnemma K, Kelly A. New measurement concept for forest harvester head. Field and service robotics, 2010, Berlin: Springer 35 44

[38] Möller JJ, Wilhelmsson L, Arlinger J, Moberg L, Sondell J. Automatic characterization of wood properties by harvesters to improve customer orientated bucking and processing. Skogforsk. Arbetsrapport. Nr, 2003, 537: 64-76.

[39] Murphy G. Procedures for scanning radiata pine stem dimensions and quality on mechanised processors. Int J For Eng, 2003, 14(2): 11-21.

[40] Murphy G, Wilson I, Barr B. Developing methods for pre-harvest inventories which use a harvester as the sampling tool. Australian For, 2006, 69(1): 9-15.

[41] Murphy GE, Acuna MA, Dumbrell I. Tree value and log product yield determination in radiata pine (Pinus radiata) plantations in Australia: comparisons of terrestrial laser scanning with a forest inventory system and manual measurements. Can J For Res, 2010, 40(11): 2223-2233.

[42] Nash JE, Sutcliffe JV. River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I—A discussion of principles. J Hydrol, 1970, 10(3): 282-290.

[43] Nieuwenhuis M, Dooley T. The effect of calibration on the accuracy of harvester measurements. Int J For Eng, 2006, 17(2): 25-33.

[44] Nordfjell T, Björheden R, Thor M, Wästerlund I. Changes in technical performance, mechanical availability and prices of machines used in forest operations in Sweden from 1985 to 2010. Scand J For Res, 2010, 25(4): 382-389.

[45] Nummi T, Möttönen J. Estimation and prediction for low degree polynomial models under measurement errors with an application to forest harvesters. J Roy Stat Soc, 2004, 53(3): 495-505.

[46] Öhman M, Miettinen M, Kannas K, Jutila J, Visala A, Forsman P. Tree measurement and simultaneous localization and mapping system for forest harvesters. Field and service robotics, 2008, Berlin: Springer 369 378

[47] Olivera A, Visser R, Acuna M, Morgenroth J. Automatic GNSS-enabled harvester data collection as a tool to evaluate factors affecting harvester productivity in a Eucalyptus spp. harvesting operation in Uruguay. Int J For Eng, 2016, 27(1): 15-28.

[48] Palander T, Vesa L, Tokola T, Pihlaja P, Ovaskainen H. Modelling the stump biomass of stands for energy production using a harvester data management system. Biosys Eng, 2009, 102(1): 69-74.

[49] Peuhkurinen J, Maltamo M, Malinen J. Estimating species-specific diameter distributions and saw log recoveries of boreal forests from airborne laser scanning data and aerial photographs: a distribution-based approach. Silva Fennica, 2008, 42(4): 625-641.

[50] Pond NC, Froese RE. Evaluating published approaches for modelling diameter at breast height from stump dimensions. Forestry, 2014, 87(5): 683-696.

[51] Priddle J (2005) Computer-controlled optimisation in cut-to-length harvesting systems and associated data flows. Available at: https://gottsteintrust.org/reports/

[52] Rasinmäki J, Melkas T. A method for estimating tree composition and volume using harvester data. Scand J For Res, 2005, 20(1): 85-95.

[53] Sánchez CAL, Varela JG, Dorado FC, Alboreca AR, Soalleiro RR, González JGÁ, Rodríguez FS. A height-diameter model for Pinus radiata D. Don in Galicia (Northwest Spain). Ann For Sci, 2003, 60(3): 237-245.

[54] Sellén D (2016) Big data analytics for the forest industry: a proof-of-concept built on cloud technologies. M.Sc. Thesis, Mid Sweden University

[55] Siipilehto J, Lindeman H, Vastaranta M, Yu X, Uusitalo J (2016) Reliability of the predicted stand structure for clear-cut stands using optional methods: airborne laser scanning-based methods, smartphone-based forest inventory application Trestima and pre-harvest measurement tool EMO. Silva Fennica, 50(3), article ID 1568, Available at: https://dx.doi.org/10.14214/sf.1568

[56] Snowdon P. A ratio estimator for bias correction in logarithmic regressions. Can J For Res, 1991, 21(5): 720-724.

[57] Söderberg J (2015) A method for using harvester data in airborne laser prediction of forest variables in mature coniferous stands. M.SC Thesis: Swedish University of Agricultural Science, Uppsala, Sweden, p 31

[58] Spinelli R, Magagnotti N, Picchi G. Annual use, economic life and residual value of cut-to-length harvesting machines. J For Econ, 2011, 17(4): 378-387.

[59] Srivastava VK, Giles DE. Seemingly unrelated regression equations models: estimation and inference, 1987, Boca Raton: CRC Press 1256 1264

[60] Stendahl J, Dahlin B. Possibilities for harvester-based forest inventory in thinnings. Scand J For Res, 2002, 17(6): 548-555.

[61] Strandgard M, Walsh D (2012) Assessing measurement accuracy of harvester heads in Australian pine plantation operations. Cooperative Research Centre for Forestry Technical Report 225, p 15

[62] Strandgard M, Walsh D, Acuna M. Estimating harvester productivity in Pinus radiata plantations using StanForD stem files. Scand J For Res, 2013, 28(1): 73-80.

[63] Uusitalo J. Introduction to forest operations and technology, 2010, Hämeenlinna: JVP Forest Systems Oy.

[64] Vanclay JK. Future harvest: what might forest harvesting entail 25 years hence?. Scand J For Res, 2011, 26(2): 183-186.

[65] Varjo J (1995) Latvan hukkaosan pituusmallit männylle, kuuselle ja koivulle metsurimittausta varten. In: Puutavaran mittauksen kehittämistutkimuksia 1989–93 (Verkasalo E ed), Finnish Forest Research Institute, Research Papers 558, pp. 21–23 (in Finnish)

[66] Vesa L, Palander T. Modeling stump biomass of stands using harvester measurements for adaptive energy wood procurement systems. Energy, 2010, 35(9): 3717-3721.

[67] Wackerly DD, Mendenhall W, Scheaffer RL. Mathematical statistics with applications, 1996, Belmont: Duxbury Press 798

[68] Westfall JA. New models for predicting diameter at breast height from stump dimensions. North J Appl For, 2010, 27(1): 21-27.

[69] Westfall JA, McRoberts RE. An assessment of uncertainty in volume estimates for stands reconstructed from tree stump information. For: Int J For Res, 2017, 90(3): 404-412.

[70] Williams C, Ackerman P. Cost-productivity analysis of South African pine sawtimber mechanised cut-to-length harvesting. South For: J For Sci, 2016, 78(4): 267-274.

[71] Zellner A. An efficient method of estimating seemingly unrelated regressions and tests for aggregation bias. J Am Stat Assoc, 1962, 57(298): 348-368.

[72] Zhang YH, Li Y, Bi H. Converting diameter measurements of Pinus radiata taken at different breast heights. Australian For, 2015, 78(1): 1-5.