瑞典中部森林作业机队评估的建模方法比较

IF 2.1 3区 农林科学 Q2 FORESTRY International Journal of Forest Engineering Pub Date : 2022-08-02 DOI:10.1080/14942119.2022.2102346
R. Jonsson, M. Rönnqvist, P. Flisberg, Petrus Jönsson, O. Lindroos
{"title":"瑞典中部森林作业机队评估的建模方法比较","authors":"R. Jonsson, M. Rönnqvist, P. Flisberg, Petrus Jönsson, O. Lindroos","doi":"10.1080/14942119.2022.2102346","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT There are many factors to consider when deciding which technologies to use in forest operations and how to plan their use. One important factor is the overall cost when choosing between the established two-machine system (TMS) with a harvester and a forwarder, and a one-machine system with a harwarder in final fellings. Such considerations can be done with different model approaches, all of which have their strengths and weaknesses. The aim of this study was to analyze and compare the TMS and harwarder potential using a Detailed Optimization (DO) approach and an Aggregated Heuristic (AH) approach. The main differences are the aggregation of seasons, including machine system teams, and spatial considerations. The analyses were done for one full year of final fellings for a large forest company’s region in central Sweden, containing information necessary for calculating costs for logging, relocation between stands and traveling between the operator’s home bases and the stands. The approaches were tested for two scenarios; when only TMS were available, and when both TMS and harwarders were available. The main results were that the approaches coincided well in both potential to decrease total costs when harwarders where available, and distribution of TMS and harwarders. There were some differences in the results, which can be explained by differences in thecalculation approach. It was concluded that the DO approach is more suitable when detailed analyses are prioritized, and the AH approach is more suitable when a more approximate analysis will suffice or the available resources for making the analysis are more limited.","PeriodicalId":55998,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Forest Engineering","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of modeling approaches for evaluation of machine fleets in central Sweden forest operations\",\"authors\":\"R. Jonsson, M. Rönnqvist, P. Flisberg, Petrus Jönsson, O. Lindroos\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14942119.2022.2102346\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT There are many factors to consider when deciding which technologies to use in forest operations and how to plan their use. One important factor is the overall cost when choosing between the established two-machine system (TMS) with a harvester and a forwarder, and a one-machine system with a harwarder in final fellings. Such considerations can be done with different model approaches, all of which have their strengths and weaknesses. The aim of this study was to analyze and compare the TMS and harwarder potential using a Detailed Optimization (DO) approach and an Aggregated Heuristic (AH) approach. The main differences are the aggregation of seasons, including machine system teams, and spatial considerations. The analyses were done for one full year of final fellings for a large forest company’s region in central Sweden, containing information necessary for calculating costs for logging, relocation between stands and traveling between the operator’s home bases and the stands. The approaches were tested for two scenarios; when only TMS were available, and when both TMS and harwarders were available. The main results were that the approaches coincided well in both potential to decrease total costs when harwarders where available, and distribution of TMS and harwarders. There were some differences in the results, which can be explained by differences in thecalculation approach. It was concluded that the DO approach is more suitable when detailed analyses are prioritized, and the AH approach is more suitable when a more approximate analysis will suffice or the available resources for making the analysis are more limited.\",\"PeriodicalId\":55998,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Forest Engineering\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Forest Engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14942119.2022.2102346\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"FORESTRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Forest Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14942119.2022.2102346","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"FORESTRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

摘要在决定在森林经营中使用哪些技术以及如何规划其使用时,需要考虑许多因素。一个重要因素是在已建立的带有收割机和运输车的两台机器系统(TMS)和带有最终毛毯中的监护人的一台机器系统之间进行选择时的总成本。这些考虑可以通过不同的模型方法来完成,所有这些方法都有其优点和缺点。本研究的目的是使用详细优化(DO)方法和聚合启发式(AH)方法分析和比较TMS和督导员的潜力。主要的差异是季节的聚合,包括机器系统团队和空间考虑。这些分析是对瑞典中部一家大型林业公司所在地区一整年的最终砍伐进行的,其中包含计算伐木成本、林分间搬迁成本以及运营商总部与林分间旅行成本所需的信息。这些方法针对两种情况进行了测试;当只有TMS可用时,以及当TMS和狱警都可用时。主要结果是,当有监护人时,这两种方法在降低总成本的潜力以及TMS和监护人的分配方面都非常吻合。结果中存在一些差异,这可以用计算方法的差异来解释。得出的结论是,当详细分析被优先考虑时,DO方法更合适,而当更近似的分析足够或进行分析的可用资源更有限时,AH方法更合适。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison of modeling approaches for evaluation of machine fleets in central Sweden forest operations
ABSTRACT There are many factors to consider when deciding which technologies to use in forest operations and how to plan their use. One important factor is the overall cost when choosing between the established two-machine system (TMS) with a harvester and a forwarder, and a one-machine system with a harwarder in final fellings. Such considerations can be done with different model approaches, all of which have their strengths and weaknesses. The aim of this study was to analyze and compare the TMS and harwarder potential using a Detailed Optimization (DO) approach and an Aggregated Heuristic (AH) approach. The main differences are the aggregation of seasons, including machine system teams, and spatial considerations. The analyses were done for one full year of final fellings for a large forest company’s region in central Sweden, containing information necessary for calculating costs for logging, relocation between stands and traveling between the operator’s home bases and the stands. The approaches were tested for two scenarios; when only TMS were available, and when both TMS and harwarders were available. The main results were that the approaches coincided well in both potential to decrease total costs when harwarders where available, and distribution of TMS and harwarders. There were some differences in the results, which can be explained by differences in thecalculation approach. It was concluded that the DO approach is more suitable when detailed analyses are prioritized, and the AH approach is more suitable when a more approximate analysis will suffice or the available resources for making the analysis are more limited.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
21.10%
发文量
33
期刊最新文献
Productivity benchmarks for unguyed excavator-based tower yarders Novel approach for forest road maintenance using smartphone sensor data and deep learning methods Machine learning applications in forest and biomass supply chain management: a review Mechanical site preparation in South Africa: comparing the productivity of pitting machine operators under different site conditions Stem recovery and harvesting productivity of two different harvesting systems in final felling of Pinus patula
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1