DIGITALNA ARHIVA ŠUMARSKOG LISTA
prilagoðeno pretraživanje po punom tekstu



ŠUMARSKI LIST 9-10/2017 str. 33     <-- 33 -->        PDF

it varies based on production time, production system and tools that are used (Murphy and Acuna 2016). The optimum method should be determined for cost optimization of debarking which is mostly preferred process in the extraction of coniferous species. Thereby, volume loss during debarking stages will be prevented and operational problems during log process will be eliminated.
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
ZAKLJUÈAK I PRIJEDLOZI
In this study, debarking activities using a chainsaw mounted debarking tool and axe were investigated by means of productivity. In a stand where chainsaw mounted debarking tool was preferred for the debarking activity, it was found that average total debarking cycle time was 1.30 min/timber while average bark thickness was 1.40 cm. In other stand where an axe was used for the debarking studies, average total debarking cycle time was determined as 6.91 min/timber while the average bark thickness was 3.05 cm. According to the results, as the bark thickness increases, debarking time increases correspondingly.
The hourly average productivity of debarking using a chainsaw mounted debarking tool and an axe were 3.36 m3/hour and 0.64 m3/hour, respectively. As a result, hourly productivity was five times higher when using a chainsaw mounted debarking tool compared to axe.
It was determined that productivity was higher in low volume class, when the debarking activities were carried out by using chainsaw mounted debarking tool. On the other hand, the productivity was much higher in high volume class when the debarking was carried out by using an axe. Thus, in order to use the chainsaw mounted debarking tool efficiently, maximum bark thickness should not be exceeded (i.e. 2.5 cm) and axe should be preferred otherwise.
The results showed that total time was directly proportional to diameter and bark thickness in both of the methods. Increase in timber and length caused the workers to spend more time in debarking activities. It was determined that in both methods, debarking took more time compared to other working stages.
Using a chainsaw mounted debarking tool in debarking activity can be considered as a good alternative when compared to an axe, as it takes less time and does not need much worker power. In fact, it would be inevitable to use chainsaw mounted debarking tool especially when the debarking activity of the timbers is considered to be completed in a short time due to the risk of the bark beetles.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ZAHVALA
I would like to thank Dr. Sercan GÜLCİ and other reviewers for their pre-publication review and comments on this paper.
REFERENCES
LITERATURA
Acar, H.H., A.E. Akay, S. Gümüº, 2015: Mechanization in forestry, Karadeniz Technical University, Faculty of Forestry, Trabzon, 240 p.
Akay, A.E., J. Sessions, H. Serin, M. Pak, N. Yenilmez, 2010: Applying optimum bucking method in producing Taurus Fir (Abies cilicica) logs in Mediterranean Region of Turkey. Baltic Forestry 16(2):273-279.
Carus, S., 2002: Comparison of some volume formulas regarding the stem, segments and fractions of the stem. Süleyman Demirel University Faculty of Forestry Journal (1):101-114.
Çoban, C., 1975: An economic comparison of the new harvesting method on bark and unbarked long softwood logs with todays Turkish harvesting practice. Publications of the Turkish Forestry Research Institute, Technical Bulletin Serial 97 p.
Eker, M.; H.H. Acar, 2004: A review on the log wizard using in terms of forest workmanship. X. Ergonomic Congress, 08-10 October 2004, Bursa.
Eker, M., H.H. Acar, 2006: Operational planning method for timber harvesting. Süleyman Demirel University Faculty of Forestry Journal, 2:128-140.
Eker, M.; H.H. Acar, H.O. Çoban, 2011: Time study and productivity analysis of chainsaw mounted log debarker in southern pine forests of Turkey. African Journal of Agricultural Research 6(10):2146-2156.