Comparative study of the Risutec Automatic Plant Container (APC) and Bracke planting devices

Abstract

Comparative study of the Risutec Automatic Plant Container (APC) and Bracke planting devicesLaine T., Saarinen V.-M. (2014). Comparative study of the Risutec Automatic Plant Container (APC) and Bracke planting devices. Silva Fennica vol. 48 no. 3 article id 1161. 16 p. Highlights• As currently designed, the prototype Risutec APC fitted with an automatic feeding system offers no significant advantage over the Bracke planting device in terms of planting productivity or quality.• Cost estimates suggest that an idealized automated feeding system could increase productivity and decrease unit costs. AbstractThe productivity of mechanized planting could be increased by minimizing the time spent manually reloading seedling cassettes. This study compared the work-time distribution, productivity and quality of the prototype Risutec APC fitted with an automatic feeding system and the commonly-used and manually-loaded Bracke P11.a. An approach of comparative time study was employed that compared performance of two operators using both machines in four sites where slash and stumps had been removed. Operating costs were estimated and compared for these two machines and an idealized machine with automatic feeding system (referred as AUT). AUT was assumed to be similar to the Bracke planting machine with the only difference being in automatic feeding. Productivity of the Risutec APC (196 seedlings per productive work hour [pl PWh 0 -1 ]) was lower than that of Bracke (244 pl PWh 0 -1 ), making the unit cost 35.7% higher. A large portion (17.6%) of the productive work time of Risutec APC was interrupted by malfunctions, so it cannot be considered robust and reliable yet. Quality of the planting work was reasonable for both machines. The results suggest that an idealized AUT could increase planting capacity (hectares per year [ha yr -1 ]) by 15.4% and lower the unit cost (Euro per seedling [€ pl -1 ]) by 4.7% compared to today's machines. The importance of an automated feeding system increases with planting efficiency because relatively more time is spent reloading seedlings. Proper automatic feeding system could offer a cost-effective solution and could enhance productivity, but the Risutec APC has yet to meet the technical and economic standards required to be competitive.

Cost analysis of seedling supply systems adapted for mechanized tree planting: a case study from southern Sweden

“…Today's excavator-based planting machines generally cost less than 100 Euro h -1 (cf. Ersson et al 2014;Laine and Saarinen 2014;Guerra et al 2019), although the highly productive, forwarder-based Silva Nova planting machine of the 1990s had a much higher hourly cost than that (Hallonborg et al 1995). Machine-specific seedling packaging can't be dismissed entirely though, because it's likely that future tree planting machines' hourly cost will become equally expensive (because of continuous advancement like today's Plantmax prototype, or productivity enhancing innovations like e.g.…”

“…This seedling supply concept showed promise; however, it also showed to be too expensive for today's planting machines (Ersson 2014). Ersson et al (2014) and Laine and Saarinen (2014) studied seedling feeding systems for crane-mounted planting devices (Bracke Planter and Risutec) that did not require machine-specific seedling packaging. These innovative feeding systems (seedling carousels), however, suffered from low mechanical availability and were subsequently cost-inefficient.…”

Resource Allocation, Pit Quality, and Early Survival of Seedlings Following Two Motor-Manual Pit-Drilling Options

“…Assuming a full planting operation, the numbers presented above probably would have reached more than half a minute per planted tree, a fact that still remains open to research. Studies on manual planting, on the other hand, have shown results in the range of 6 [6] to 19-26 [5] seconds spent to plant a tree, while for mechanized planting one could expect values in the range of 15-18 s per tree [4]. However, the performance of both manual and mechanized planting operations depends largely on the operational conditions, tools, and technology used.…”

Autoplant—Autonomous Site Preparation and Tree Planting for a Sustainable Bioeconomy

“…An onboard storage of 1500 seedlings was seen as reasonable to fit on the available terrain vehicle platform, but a single Hiko-tray was used for the integration tests (Figure 7). Automatic seedling transfer from the storage to the planting device is important for increasing the productivity of mechanized planting [34,35] but is challenging due to the sensitivity of the seedlings.…”