Efficiency of Different Machine Layouts for Chain Flail Delimbing, Debarking and Chipping

Andrew McEwan; Michal Brink; Raffaele Spinelli

doi:10.3390/f10020126

Back

Efficiency of Different Machine Layouts for Chain Flail Delimbing, Debarking and Chipping

Journal article

Open access

Peer reviewed

Efficiency of Different Machine Layouts for Chain Flail Delimbing, Debarking and Chipping

Andrew McEwan, Michal Brink and Raffaele Spinelli

Forests, Vol.10(2), 126

2019

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/f10020126

Files and links (2)

pdf

PDF - Published Version (Open Access)2.51 MBDownload View

Published VersionPDF - Published Version (Open Access)CC BY V4.0, Open Access

url

https://doi.org/10.3390/f10020126View

Published Version

Abstract

logging

harvesting

productivity

plantation

pulpwood

Based on data collected from seven commercial harvesting operations in Western Australia, the study developed a productivity model for chain flail delimber-debarker-chippers (CFDDCs) used in blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus Labill.) plantations. The tests covered 45 h and 3395 cycles, and were conducted using time-study techniques. Despite the observational character of the study and the dampening effect of multi-tree processing, the study yielded a viable prediction model for estimating CFDDC productivity as a function of mean tree size, tree form, bark-wood bond strength (BWBS), and machine type. Productivity increased with mean tree size on a logarithmic scale, and was lower for poorly formed trees and high BWBS. Under equal conditions, a separate delimber-debarker and a chipper were 10% to 20% less productive than the integrated delimber-debarker-chipper. Productivity estimates were consistent with those reported in published case studies of CFDDCs used in planted Eucalyptus. Neither this study nor any of the previous ones could offer a reliable estimate of long-term machine utilization, which would be an ideal subject for future research.

Details

Title: Efficiency of Different Machine Layouts for Chain Flail Delimbing, Debarking and Chipping
Authors: Andrew McEwan (Author) - Nelson Mandela University, South Africa
Michal Brink (Author) - University of Pretoria, South Africa
Raffaele Spinelli (Author) - University of the Sunshine Coast
Publication details: Forests, Vol.10(2), 126
Publisher: MDPI AG
Date published: 2019
DOI: 10.3390/f10020126
ISSN: 1999-4907
Copyright note: Copyright © 2019 The Authors. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).
Organisation Unit: University of the Sunshine Coast, Queensland; Forest Industries Research Centre; Forest Research Institute
Language: English
Record Identifier: 99450710902621
Output Type: Journal article

Metrics

9 File views/ downloads

416 Record Views

15 Times Cited - Web of Science

InCites Highlights

These are selected metrics from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool, related to this output

Collaboration types: Domestic collaboration; International collaboration
Web Of Science research areas: Forestry

UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

This output has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:

Source: InCites