Assessing the effects of site factors on the productivity of a feller buncher: a time and motion analysis

Abstract

We evaluated, for the first time in Turkey, the productivity of a feller buncher during clear-cut operations of two Brutian pine stands located in Canakkale, northwestern Turkey with different diameter classes and terrain conditions. In the first stand with 24.6 cm average DBH, the feller buncher cut full trees and moved them to roadside. In the second stand with 34.3 cm average DBH, the feller buncher cut trees in two stages due to their larger diameters and the relatively steep and rough terrain conditions of the site. The effects of specific stand features, DBH and tree height measurements were assessed through statistical analysis in relation to productivity. The results indicate that the average productivity for the first stand was about 118 m³ h⁻¹, while it was about 80 m³ h⁻¹ in the second stand. Even though tree diameter and volume were higher in the second stand, productivity decreased by 32.3% due to extra time spent on the two-stage cutting operation. The results revealed that harvesting operations should be planned carefully and the right equipment selected by accounting for different tree sizes, terrain conditions and machine specifications in order to better understand their effects on production.

Keywords

Timber harvesting / Feller buncher / Timber size / Productivity / Time and motion study

References

[1] Abbas D, Handler R, Hartsough B, Dykstra D, Lautala P, Hembroff L. A survey analysis of forest harvesting and transportation operations in Michigan. Croat J For Eng, 2014, 35(2): 179-192.

[2] Acuna M, Kellogg L. An evaluation of alternative cut-to-length harvesting technology for native forest thinning in Australia. Int J For Eng, 2009, 20(2): 17-25.

[3] Akay AE, Sessions J. Identifying the factors influencing the cost of mechanized harvesting equipment. J Sci Eng Kahramanmaras Sutcu Imam Univ, 2004, 7(2): 65-72.

[4] Eliasson L, Lageson H. Simulation study of a single-grip harvester in thinning from below and thinning from above. Scand J For Res, 1999, 14: 589-595.

[5] Ghaffariyan MR, Sessions J, Brown M. Machine productivity and residual harvesting residues associated with a cut-to-length harvest system in southern Tasmania. South For, 2012, 74(4): 229-235.

[6] Hiesl P (2013) Productivity standards for whole-tree and cut-to-length harvesting systems in Maine. MSci Thesis, The University of Main

[7] Kärhä K, Jouhiaho A, Mutikainen A, Mattila S. Mechanized energy wood harvesting from early thinnings. Int J For Eng, 2005, 16(1): 15-25.

[8] Li Y, Wang J, Miller G, McNeel J. Production economics of harvesting small diameter hardwood stands in central Appalachia. For Prod J, 2006, 56(3): 81-86.

[9] Nurminen T, Korpunen H, Uusitalo J. Time consumption analysis of mechanized cut-to-length harvesting systems. Silva Fenn, 2006, 40: 335-363.

[10] Ovaskainen H, Uusitalo J, Väätäinen K. Characteristics and significance of a harvester operator’s working technique in thinnings. Int J For Eng, 2004, 15: 67-77.

[11] Stampfer K (1999) Influence of terrain conditions and thinning regimes on the productivity of a track-based steep-slope harvester. In: Sessions J, Chung W (eds) Proceedings of the international mountain logging and 10th Pacific Northwest Skyline Symposium, 28 March–1 April, Corvallis, OR, USA

[12] Strandgard M, Mitchell R (2010) Benchmarking Feller-Buncher Productivity in Western Australian Blue Gum Plantations, CRC For Ind Bull 12

[13] Szewczyk G, Sowa JM, Grzebieniowski W, Kormanek M, Kulak D, Stańczykiewicz A. Sequencing of harvester work during standard cuttings and in areas with windbreaks. Silva Fenn, 2014, 48(4): 1159-1175.

[14] Visser R, Spinelli R. Determining the shape of the productivity function for mechanized felling and felling-processing. J For Res, 2012, 17: 397-402.

[15] Wang J, Long C, McNeel J. Production and cost analysis of a feller-buncher and grapple skidder in central Appalachian hardwood forests. For Prod J, 2004, 54: 159-167.