Productivity Analysis of Roadside Loading with a Truck-Mounted Hydraulic Crane Using a Regression Tree Model

Year 2025, Volume: 11 Issue: 2, 106 - 114, 25.12.2025

Yılmaz Türk , Abdullah Emin Akay , Tunahan Çınar

https://doi.org/10.33904/ejfe.1584795

Abstract

Timber loading operations play a crucial role in the seamless execution of forest production activities. In this study, the productivity of the truck-mounted hydraulic crane, which used for loading timbers, was analyzed using the time study method. Additionally, the loader's productivity was statistically evaluated according to affecting factors. The study was conducted in the production activities carried out within the boundaries of the Kayadibi Forest Enterprise Chief of the Arhavi Forest Enterprise Directorate in Artvin province of Türkiye. According to the study results, the average productivity of loading operations with the truck-mounted hydraulic crane was found to be 34.28 m3/hour. It was determined that the most time-consuming phase in a loading cycle was placing the timbers and releasing the timbers onto the logging truck (32.86%), and the approaching time to the timber was the least time-consuming phase (11.39%). Additionally, the delay time was found to account for 24.76% of the total cycle time. According to the correlation test results, there was a strong, positive, and significant relationship (p < 0.001) at the 99% confidence level between productivity and both product diameter and volume. The regression tree model yielded an R² value of 0.7, with the volume variable contributing the most (99%) as an independent factor.

Keywords

Modified truck , mechanized loading , productivity , regression tree model , Türkiye

Ethical Statement

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals.

References

• Akay, A.E., Bilici, E., Taş. İ., Fındık, H.E. 2020. Productivity analysis of front-end loader in timber harvesting. Eur. J. Forest Eng. 6(1): 7-13.
• Akay, A.E. 2005. Using farm tractors in small-scale forest harvesting operations. Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 1(2): 196-199.
• Arcego, H., Robert, R.C.G., Brown, R.O. 2019. Effect of log length on forestry loading and unloading. Floresta e Ambiente 26(2): e20170269. DOI 10.1590/2179-8087.026917
• Bishara, A.J., Hittner, J.B. 2012. Testing the significance of a correlation with nonnormal data: comparison of Pearson, Spearman, transformation, and resampling approaches. Psychological Methods 17(3): 399.
• Carus, S. 2002. Comparison of some volume formulas regarding the stem. segments and fractions of the stem. Suleyman Demirel University Faculty of Forestry Journa,l Seri A. (1): 101-114.
• Cawley, G.C., Talbot, N.L.C. 2010. On Over-fitting in Model Selection and Subsequent Selection Bias in Performance Evaluation. Journal of Machine Learning Research. 11: 2079-2107.
• Chen, A., Zhang, X., Zhou, Z. 2020. Machine learning: Accelerating materials development for energy storage and conversion. InfoMat, 2(3): 553-576.
• Chicco, D., Warrens, M. J., Jurman, G. 2021. The coefficient of determination R-squared is more informative than SMAPE, MAE, MAPE, MSE and RMSE in regression analysis evaluation. PeerJ Computer Science, 7, e623.
• Chok, N.S. 2010. Pearson's versus Spearman's and Kendall's correlation coefficients for continuous data. MSc thesis, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. 43 p.
• Conway, S. 1982. Logging practices: principles of timber harvesting systems. Miller Freeman Publications, San Francisco. 432 pp.
• Coşkun, K., Eroğlu, H., Özkaya, M.S., Çetiner, K., Bilgin, F. 2010. Evaluation of timber raw material production activities in terms of mechanisation by the Artvin Regional Forestry Directorate. III National Black Sea Forestry Congress. 20-22 May. Volume II. 587-597.
• De Winter, J.C., Gosling, S.D., Potter, J. 2016. Comparing the Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficients across distributions and sample sizes: A tutorial using simulations and empirical data. Psychological Methods 21(3), 273.
• Dingsen, C. 2024. Regression and Machine Learning for Education Sciences Using R. Taylor & Francis. 376 p. Dykstra, D.P., Heinrich, R. 1996. FAO Model Code of Forest Harvesting Practice. FAO Publications. Rome.
• Erdaş. O. 1986. Wood raw material production. System selection in the extraction and transportation stages. Journal of the Faculty of Forestry, Karadeniz Technical University. 9(1-2): 91-113.
• Erdaş. O. 1997. Forest Roads. Volume I. Karadeniz Technical University Faculty of Forestry Publications. 187. 25. Trabzon.
• Erdaş, O., Acar, H. H., Eker, M. 2014. Forest Product Transport Techniques. Karadeniz Technical University. Faculty of Forestry. Publication No: 233/39. Trabzon.
• FAO. 1982. Basic Technology in Forest Operations. FAO Forest Paper. Rome.
• GDF. 2020. General Directorate of Forestry. Forest Asset of Turkey 2020. ogm.gov.tr/tr/ormanlarimiz-sitesi/TurkiyeOrmanVarligi/Yayinlar/2020%20T%C3%BCrkiye%20Orman%20Varl%C4%B1%C4%9F%C4%B1.pdf (Access date: 05.06.2020).
• Ghaffariyan, M.R., Acuna, M., Kellogg, L. 2012. Productivity of roadside processing system in Western Australia. Silva Balcanica 13(1): 49-60.
• Ghaffariyan, M.R. 2021. Predicting productivity of timber loading operations: a literature review. Silva Balcanica 22(2): 81-90. https://doi.org/10.3897/silva balcanica.22e69240
• Javadpour, A. 2006. Productivity and cost analysis of skidding and loading in designed and roadside landing. Master thesis. Guilan University. Sowmeh Sara. 85 p.
• Karaman, A. 1991. Investigating time, productivity, and cost of Liebher 902 during loading and piling of logs in forest depots. Msc Thesis, Trabzon. 103 p.
• Karunasingha, D.S.K. 2022. Root mean square error or mean absolute error? Use their ratio as well. Information Sciences 585, 609-629.
• Kewilaa. B., Tehupeiory. A. 2015. Effects of working time and the volume and weight of timber on productivity of Log Loader Caterpillar Type 966F and WL 980C. Wood Research Journal 6(1): 8-13.
• King, R.D., Orhobor, O.I., Taylor, C.C. 2021. Cross-validation is safe to use. Nature Machine Intelligence 3(4): 276-276.
• Kohavi, R. 1995. A study of cross-validation and bootstrap for accuracy estimation and model selection. Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 2(12): 1137-1143.
• Kovácsová, P., Antalová, M. 2010. Precision forestry - definition and technologies. Journal of Forestry Society of Croatia, 134(11-12): 603-611.
• Mirkala, S.R.M., Naghdi, R. 2017. Time consumption and production cost of log loading in the Hyrcanian forest using front-end loader. Silva Balcanica, 18(1): 63-74.
• Öztürk, T., Akay, A.E. 2007. Modifying farm tractors for forest harvesting operations. Bottlenecks, Solutions, and Priorities in the Context of Functions of Forest Resources, 17-19 October. İstanbul. pp. 1111-1120.
• Spinelli, R., Baldini, S. 1992. Productivity and cost analysis of logging arch used with farm tractor in Mediterranean forest skidding operations. Invest. Agrar., Sist. Recur. For. 1(2): 211-221.
• SPO, 2007. State Planning Organization. Ninth Five-Year Development Plan Forestry Special Expert Commission Report. Ankara.
• Tolunay, D. 2018. Is industrial afforestation the solution to meet the demand for wood raw material? Bulletin of Istanbul Branch of Chamber of Forest Engineers. August-September-October. pp. 37-45.