Optimal Bucking Software

[OregonSawyer]

Just thumbed through the OSU BUCK booklet today. They're readily available at the University. My personal opinion is that there is far too much to gain when bucking for grade that often times you would be wasting time punching data into a handheld. [This is coming from a math/engineering nerd, but also a sawyer]

 

[madhatte]

The computer on most mechanical harvesters around here have software to read each log, the tree can be run thru once to read it, then a second time to buck it

^^

This

A bucker running a saw don' need no steenking programms

A harvester? Might just. I can see how to integrate a regression based on top and bottom diameters to maximize scaled volume. It might not work, but I can see how to do it.

 

[Gologit]

The computer on most mechanical harvesters around here have software to read each log, the tree can be run thru once to read it, then a second time to buck it

If you are an independent logger balancing market decisions is a big part of making money, but if you are under contract to a mill, most of the product will go to their mill, although sometimes not, depending on markets. sometimes fewer decisions means more product on the landing, which is money in the pocket.

Mileage will vary:hmm3grin2orange:

Same with a stroker delimber or a dangle head processor on the landing...one pass to delimb, one pass to buck...or sometimes just one pass for both. Sort and deck or hand off to the loading shovel in as few moves as possible.

Every time you handle a log it costs you money. Every time you handle one unnecessarily or take time you really don't need to be taking, you're throwing money away.

 

[zkurtb]

If you are an independent logger balancing market decisions is a big part of making money …

I can see where the OP's idea would have merit. It might useful in multi species harvest where the grade/sort was really complicated.

A bit more background on the motivation behind the idea. It may not apply to all markets, or all operations, but useful to the smaller independent not tied to a mill. Here in north Idaho we have nine or so species of merchantable conifer. Each mill has different prices, and within each mill’s price sheet there are differences by species and log length. Couple that to the length/volume parameters of the scaling system and it can get involved quickly. The example analysis I posted earlier is just a glimmer.

Well, the software here doesn't take sample diameters, but predicts the length and diameters on each theoretical points by modeling. Variables are tree species and diameter of the first log.

Good points. The software could incorporate local taper values and bark thickness by species. And it could probably predict the total length to minimum SED given the taper values and DBH. Then all that would need to be entered for a bole is species and DBH. Should take about 2 minutes. The result would not take into account defects, thus would have to be evaluated and modified by an experienced eye.

Maybe some rainy day…

 

[slowp]

You also need to factor in the sale administrator when working on Forest Service ground. If you are longbutting sound logs to get a better log for better pay, you'll hear about it.

The logger is in between two powerful entities....the USFS and the Mill. We've actually scaled up longbutts and had the purchaser pay for the volume left on the ground. Back in the olden days, we even had the logger go back and yard up all the longbutts and scaled them.

When old growth was being logged, the butt log was bucked to a 40 foot + trim length. It wasn't the length that would be manufactured into boards, it was the longest acceptable length that the contract allowed and when scaled, the mill got a lot of free wood. That meant a lot when they were paying $600/mbf stumpage.

 

[madhatte]

Hrmm. I'll occasionally mark a biggun knowing the short-butt will be left so that I can meet CWD requirements. It's all in the planning.

 

[slowp]

Hrmm. I'll occasionally mark a biggun knowing the short-butt will be left so that I can meet CWD requirements. It's all in the planning.

I beg to differ, it's all in the contract....planners seem to forget when it comes time to put the contract together, or they try to put things in it that are not allowed. :msp_rolleyes:

Longbutting = badness contractually.

Now, since it is a bad thing to do whilst logging, contractors are hired after the sale is closed, to dump trees on the ground for that. The standard is a minimum of 10 feet in length, and I'm thinking 10 inches on the small end, when it was put in the contract to leave a couple per acre.

 

[Samlock]

A bit more background on the motivation behind the idea. It may not apply to all markets, or all operations, but useful to the smaller independent not tied to a mill. Here in north Idaho we have nine or so species of merchantable conifer. Each mill has different prices, and within each mill’s price sheet there are differences by species and log length. Couple that to the length/volume parameters of the scaling system and it can get involved quickly. The example analysis I posted earlier is just a glimmer.

You're bucking in the brush and simultaneously deciding which mill you're about to sell the logs?

Optimizing is always a big issue here. Usually there's 2-6 potential buyers for the logs. They all have different log lengths and pricelists too. The thing is you need to make the sale before cutting, so you have to decide which bucking scheme would fit best the stand(s) in speak. I haven't found any better way to pick the most favorable sales than eyeballing the stand. And being open for the possible corrupt.... er... other factors.

 

[madhatte]

Longbutting = badness contractually.

Oh, I got that, for sure. I'm more interested in 4' of 36" than 20' of 4".

 

[ShaneLogs]

I have some bucking hardware.

I love me a Muc!

 

[Gologit]

I love me a Muc!

Sssssshhhhhh! The grownups are talking.

 

[hammerlogging]

http://cnre.vt.edu/ifo/valuerecoveryhylton.pdf

I have seen this applied at a logger training program (SFI renewal....). About 10 loggers lost to the system, about 3 beat it, in terms of value recovery. It is a good training tool, unrealistic for daily use, but good for educational purposes.

 

[StihlKiwi]

http://cnre.vt.edu/ifo/valuerecoveryhylton.pdf

I have seen this applied at a logger training program (SFI renewal....). About 10 loggers lost to the system, about 3 beat it, in terms of value recovery. It is a good training tool, unrealistic for daily use, but good for educational purposes.

Thats an interesting read, a 30-50% decrease in value recovery from suboptimal bucking is huge.

It seems like postioning logs accurately to within and inch or two on one of those bucking saws with a grapple would be quite difficult. Were the loggers you mentioned at the training program doing it this way, or with a tape and a saw?

 

[StihlKiwi]

You also need to factor in the sale administrator when working on Forest Service ground. If you are longbutting sound logs to get a better log for better pay, you'll hear about it.

By this do you mean trimming the butt to get a straighter/less tapered log?

 

[hammerlogging]

Thats a good point- at the class we were on foot and using tapes, not sitting 10' up and using a sawbuck as is the usual landing set-up. the better loggers will get off their machine to evaluate higher value stems, mark, then get back on the loader. The value recovery loss from having well trained and intelligent merchandising has got to be huge As Gologit said, maybe more so here in the eastern hardwoods with (perhaps) more variables to consider in value recovery. And then their is the scale vs. grade issue- if the logger is getting paid by volume but the mill who hired them wants maximum value recovery, these can compete when making merchandising choices.

 

[Gologit]

Thats a good point- at the class we were on foot and using tapes, not sitting 10' up and using a sawbuck as is the usual landing set-up. the better loggers will get off their machine to evaluate higher value stems, mark, then get back on the loader. The value recovery loss from having well trained and intelligent merchandising has got to be huge As Gologit said, maybe more so here in the eastern hardwoods with (perhaps) more variables to consider in value recovery. And then their is the scale vs. grade issue- if the logger is getting paid by volume but the mill who hired them wants maximum value recovery, these can compete when making merchandising choices.

Right. You guys back there have a lot more complicated scale/grade/sort issue than I do. I'll quit grumbling when the mill changes the specs twice a week.


Naaahhhhh....I'll still grumble. Just not as much.

 

[slowp]

By this do you mean trimming the butt to get a straighter/less tapered log?

Yes--whacking it off. Often it is acceptable to do, but sometimes fallers get carried away. They'll longbutt to cut defect out, but again, sometimes they do more than they should. There is a little bit of a problem with processors overdoing it now.

 

[Oldtimer]

Had a Forester tell me I was getting better value out of lesser quality Oak than his other crew.
I was cutting 18" firewood off the butts to improve the grade, they were not trimming and were cutting the longest logs possible- not much veneer to be found that way.
Here in the eastern US, you make your money (with hardwood) on the landing by knowing what the frack you are doing. You have to know what grade it is going to be after you make the cut..
I make my decision while the tree stands. You get the best look at it that way. I look for the defects and remember them on the landing. The only time I don't cut hardwood for grade is when I will waste more than 2' "good wood" of a tree. A 12' "Select" sawlog is worth the same money as a 10' #2 veneer. So I do not waste the wood....that 2' makes me and the landowner more money as a log than as firewood or pulp.
Pine is sold to the mills as a straight through price, so I cut pine for maximum scale. I watch the log taper very closely. Diameter is the first priority, then grade- keeping in mind that a 12' sawlog pays more than a 16' pallet log.

 

[OlympicYJ]

Slowp is right longbutting is a problem with the processors. That was one of the things I would look for when doing log quality. Longbutting in the past with larger diameter wood was a viable option... still can be with big timber, but not with small. To explain a little more, longbutting the ends for defect such as stump pull, buttrot, or butt swell is very common especially when logging big wood. With your smaller plantation wood the defect isn't there so the guys that logged in bigwood see that butt swell and want to whack it off. Well in small wood the amount of swell doesn't require longbutting it or at least to the degree the processor ops have been. Such as taking 2ft when 3in was enough. Little differences like that. The biggest log quality issue is that the processor ops don't check the measurements enough. I.e. getting off the machine and taping the logs to make sure they are cutting true. Should be done at least once a day twice is better. The outfit that I've seen that had the best measurement quality the ops were checking every 2 to 3 hours, including the owner when he was running processor.

Too add to this a forester friend of my uncles was having his property logged. He told the logger to make 36's I believe, and the logger made 40's instead. So he went back with a chainsaw and cut them all to the length he originally specd and made way more money with those shorter logs because of the better scale. Food for thought lol

 

[Oldtimer]

I am currently researching, as best I can, fixed head harvester/processor heads.
You guys out west have used them for years, though more likely they were dangle heads.
What make has the best power / measuring system / reliability?

I am leaning towards the fixed heads because they offer tree control, a big consideration for my intended uses. The 4 I keep coming back to (All I can find, really!) are the Quadco 5660, Logmax 6000, Fabtek 4 roller, and Rolly-II. Which of these do you guys think is the best option for a 50/50mix of soft and hardwoods?