4.2 Article

Customer adapted grading of Scots pine sawn timber using a multivariate method

Journal

SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF FOREST RESEARCH
Volume 30, Issue 1, Pages 87-97

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS AS
DOI: 10.1080/02827581.2014.968359

Keywords

partial least squares; appearance; wood; Pinus sylvestris L.; sawn timber

Categories

Funding

  1. Wood Centre North
  2. European Union (ERDF)
  3. country administrative boards of Norrbotten and Vasterbotten in Sweden

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To define new grading rules, or to customize the ones in use in a rule-based automatic grading (RBAG) system of boards, is a time-consuming job for a sawmill engineer. This has the effect that changes are rarely made. The objective of this study was to continue the development of a method that replaces the calibration of grading rule settings by a holistic-subjective automatic grading, using multivariate models. The objective was also to investigate if this approach can improve sawmill profitability and at the same time have a satisfied customer. For the study, 323 Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) boards were manually graded according to the preferences of an important customer. That is, a customer that regularly purchases significant volumes of sawn timber. This manual grading was seen as reference grading in this work. The same boards were also scanned and graded by a RBAG system, calibrated for the same customer. Multivariate models for prediction of board grade based on aggregated knot variables, obtained from the scanning, were calibrated using partial least squares regression. The results show that prediction of board grades by the multivariate models were more correct, with respect to the manual grading, than the grading by the RBAG system. The prediction of board grades based on multivariate models resulted in 76-87% of the boards graded correctly, according to the manual grading, while the corresponding number was 63% for the RBAG system.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available