Overview of a Logmaker / Crew Value Recovery Audit
One of our services is to complete a Logmaker / Crew Value Recovery Audits (LVR). In order to take a snap shot of the LVR performance of a log-bucker, a comparison needs to be made between the log-buckers application of a cutting strategy and the optimal application of the same cutting strategy over felled and delimbed stems. In order to derive a log value recovery result in terms of recovered dollars or recovered value percentage, prices need to be applied to each individual grade and length.
In some cases forest managers and wood-flow planner’s still use priority listings as a means of signaling to the log-bucker which grades to priority cut. However for computerized tools to calculate the true value of individual trees and forest stands, prices per log grade and length are required.
The most accurate way to derive the optimal solution based on grade price per unit volume is to use log-bucking optimization tools. Interpine Forestry Ltd using log-bucking optimization calipers to calculate the optimal value of stems and subsequent log-bucker performance.
Understanding the Terminology Used in the Audit Process
The following list is a glossary of terms used during the audit process. It will help you understand what each of the terms is for and why it is used.
This is based on the auditor’s description of the stem and is produced by the Timbertech (TT) – log bucking algorithm. Each stem can be assessed with a maximum of a 20-minute time period if required. The cutplan used is identical to that of the logmaker. Factors such as quality, length, diameter, sweep and sawing cost are used to evaluate the “best” solution.
This is referred to as the logmaker solution, and it details the grade out-turn produced by the logmaker. Length and grade is recorded by the auditor as the auditor returns to the butt. All volumes and diameters are taken from the stem description given by the TT auditor tool. Log lengths and diameters are also checked with manual tape and calliper if they are found to be conflicting or borderline.
This details the grade out-turn that would be produced due to the need to re-grade defect (reject) logs made by the logmaker. The logger tool will simulate optimal re-cut scenarios based on priority in the cutplan. The effect on the stem value will be dependent on the potential options for products to re-cut. This re-cut scenario can also have an indicative cost applied, this is referred to as the Remanufacturing Cost and when applied will effect the overall LVR%. The auditor default will run this remanufacturing cost at $0.00, therefore not affecting the LVR % and only reflecting grading errors in the Defect Error %. If this is the case the LVR % reflects only log placement value loss.
Logmaker errors (grade errors) are, quality attributes, length, diameter and sweep measurements that conflict with set specifications, from the logs actually produced from the audit ed stems. These are shown in the summary sheet and also effect the corrected solution value due to regrade (as above, this will depend on the type of defect and the cutplan). The target for logmakers to maximise specifications and ensure a low level of log quality issues is 4% maximum reject.
LVR – Log Value Recovery
This is taken as a percentage of the corrected logmaker stem value and the auditor stem value. This takes into account any re-grade that potentially would have occurred due to defects found (and effects of remanufacturing cost if applied). General targets for LVR are different dependent on the type of operation being carried out (mechanical / manual / cutplan complexity). When comparing results across many operations it is important to consider the complexity of decisions having to be made by the operators. For more information interpreting the results give us a call at Interpine.
Crew Processing Apprasial
The ability for crews to present the stems to the logmaker will always benefit logmaking decisions.Logmakers should at all times be able to see 2/3 of the stem and hence a % of stems where this is possible is given. Excessive waste, handling of slovens and felling errors prior to logmaking is also commented on.
The cutplan is commented on extensively with reference to alterations, cutplans being up to date, number on the skid and wether or not there are missed opportunities on the skid. Eg. Large sections of internode and there is no internode grades being cut.