Colheita semimecanizada de eucalipto em áreas declivosas

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Brinate, Igor Batista
Data de Publicação: 2016
Tipo de documento: Dissertação
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo (riUfes)
Texto Completo: http://repositorio.ufes.br/handle/10/7686
Resumo: Worldwide, there is a growing demand of wood, which leads to an increase in planted areas. The mechanization has maximized the performance of forestry activities, but not all areas are liable to mechanization. The high slope of the land makes the machine traffic in the stands impossible, forcing producers to adopt manual methods and semi-mechanized methods. The aim of this study was to analyze, technically, two semi-mechanized forest harvesting techniques in hilly areas. Specifically, technically analyzes up to semi-mechanizes harvesting sloping areas extracted by manual tipping (traditional techniqye) and dragger winch (dragger winch’s technique), under conditions of high slope, without relief variation, called normal condition, and in areas with concave relief (caves), called critical areas. It was accomplished a time and motion study, calculating the productivity, operational efficiency and mechanical availability. The study of the traditional technique was carried out in the operational areas of forest harvesting belonging to farmers in partnership with a forestry company, located in the mountain central and south region of the state of Espírito Santo, while the study of dragger winch’s technique was conducted on a leased farm by the same company, belonging to the Paraíba Valley region, in the state of São Paulo. Four teams were evaluated in the traditional technique and six teams in dragger winch’s technique. The results for the operational steps were compared by the Student’s t test at 5 % probability. According to the time and motion study results, the extraction activity is the most uptime demand, and, because of the complexity of the critical areas, they stand out demanding more time than in normal conditions. The yield obtained in cutting at dragger winch’s technique stands out for being less stressful and more productive with 55.48 m³.HE-1 in normal condition and 49.53 m³.HE-1 in critical areas, compared to 10.12 m³.HE-1 and 5.48 m³.HE-1 in traditional technique. The manual tipping under normal conditions stood out presenting better productivity, with 6.88 m³.HE-1 , and the worst productivity in critical areas, with 1.2 m³. HE-1 . Yields of dragging obtained soft variation in productivity between the conditions, with 1.98 m³. HE-1 in normal condition and 2.28 m³.HE-1 in critical areas.The mechanical availability showed lower values in critical areas (84.17 %) due to increased wear of equipment. It follows that under normal conditions it is more feasible to use the semi-mechanized cutting extracted by manual overturning (traditional technique), but in terms of critical areas and roadless areas on the bottom, the semi-mechanized cutting extracted by winch (dragger winch) is the most qualified.
id UFES_28254edba387bd8f8c97169d52cb9124
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.ufes.br:10/7686
network_acronym_str UFES
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo (riUfes)
repository_id_str 2108
spelling Binoti, Mayra Luiza Marques da SilvaFiedler, Nilton CésarBrinate, Igor BatistaAmaral, José Francisco Teixeira doMendonça, Adriano Ribeiro de2018-08-01T22:35:54Z2018-08-012018-08-01T22:35:54Z2016-02-29Worldwide, there is a growing demand of wood, which leads to an increase in planted areas. The mechanization has maximized the performance of forestry activities, but not all areas are liable to mechanization. The high slope of the land makes the machine traffic in the stands impossible, forcing producers to adopt manual methods and semi-mechanized methods. The aim of this study was to analyze, technically, two semi-mechanized forest harvesting techniques in hilly areas. Specifically, technically analyzes up to semi-mechanizes harvesting sloping areas extracted by manual tipping (traditional techniqye) and dragger winch (dragger winch’s technique), under conditions of high slope, without relief variation, called normal condition, and in areas with concave relief (caves), called critical areas. It was accomplished a time and motion study, calculating the productivity, operational efficiency and mechanical availability. The study of the traditional technique was carried out in the operational areas of forest harvesting belonging to farmers in partnership with a forestry company, located in the mountain central and south region of the state of Espírito Santo, while the study of dragger winch’s technique was conducted on a leased farm by the same company, belonging to the Paraíba Valley region, in the state of São Paulo. Four teams were evaluated in the traditional technique and six teams in dragger winch’s technique. The results for the operational steps were compared by the Student’s t test at 5 % probability. According to the time and motion study results, the extraction activity is the most uptime demand, and, because of the complexity of the critical areas, they stand out demanding more time than in normal conditions. The yield obtained in cutting at dragger winch’s technique stands out for being less stressful and more productive with 55.48 m³.HE-1 in normal condition and 49.53 m³.HE-1 in critical areas, compared to 10.12 m³.HE-1 and 5.48 m³.HE-1 in traditional technique. The manual tipping under normal conditions stood out presenting better productivity, with 6.88 m³.HE-1 , and the worst productivity in critical areas, with 1.2 m³. HE-1 . Yields of dragging obtained soft variation in productivity between the conditions, with 1.98 m³. HE-1 in normal condition and 2.28 m³.HE-1 in critical areas.The mechanical availability showed lower values in critical areas (84.17 %) due to increased wear of equipment. It follows that under normal conditions it is more feasible to use the semi-mechanized cutting extracted by manual overturning (traditional technique), but in terms of critical areas and roadless areas on the bottom, the semi-mechanized cutting extracted by winch (dragger winch) is the most qualified.Há no mundo uma demanda crescente por madeira, que leva a uma tendência de aumento das áreas plantadas. A mecanização tem maximizado o rendimentodas atividades florestais, porém nem todas as áreas são passíveis de mecanização. A elevada declividade do terreno torna inviável o tráfego de máquinas nos talhões, fazendo com que os produtores adotem métodos manuais e semimecanizados. Objetivou-se neste estudoanalisar tecnicamente duas técnicas de colheita florestal semimecanizada em áreas declivosas. Especificamente, analisou-se tecnicamente a colheita semimecanizada em áreas declivosas extraído por tombamento manual (técnica tradicional) e por guincho arrastador (técnica do guincho de arraste), em condições de elevada declividade, sem variação no relevo, denominadas condição normal e em áreas com relevo côncavo (grotas), denominadasáreas críticas. Foi realizado estudo de tempos e movimentos, calculado a produtividade, eficiência operacional e a disponibilidade mecânica. O estudo da técnica tradicional foi realizado nas áreas operacionais de colheita florestal pertencente a produtores rurais fomentados de uma empresa florestal, localizadas na região central serrana e sul do estado do Espírito Santo, enquanto o estudo da técnica do guincho de arrastefoi realizado em uma fazenda arrendada pela mesma empresa, na região do Vale do Paraíba no estado de São Paulo. Foram avaliados quatro equipes na técnica tradicional e seis equipes na técnica do guincho de arraste. Os resultados referentes às fases operacionais foram comparados pelo teste t de student ao nível de 5% de probabilidade. De acordo com os resultados do estudo de tempos e movimentos, a atividade de extração é a que mais demanda tempo operacional, e, devido à complexidade das áreas críticas, elas se destacam demandando mais tempo que em condições normais. A produtividade obtida no corte na técnica do guincho de arraste se destaca por ser menos desgastante e mais produtiva com 55,48 m³.HE-1 em condição normal e 49,53 m³.HE-1 em áreas críticas, em comparação aos 10,12 m³.HE-1 e 5,48 m³.HE-1 da técnica tradicional. O tombamento manual em condições normais se destacou apresentando melhor produtividade, com 6,68 m³.HE-1, e a pior produtividade em áreas críticas, com 1,2 m³.HE-1. As produtividades do arraste apresentaram pequena variação de produtividade entre as condições, com 1,98 m³.HE-1 em condição normal e 2,28 m³.HE-1 em áreas críticas. A disponibilidade mecânica apresentou valores inferiores em áreas críticas (84,17%), devido ao maior desgaste dos equipamentos. Conclui-se que em condições normais é mais viável utilizar o corte semimecanizado extraído por tombamento manual (técnica tradicional), porém, em condições de áreas críticas e sem estradas na parte inferior, o corte semimecanizado extraído por guincho (guincho de arraste) é o mais indicado.TextBRINATE, Igor Batista. Colheita semimecanizada de eucalipto em áreas declivosas. 2016. Dissertação (Mestrado em Ciências Florestais) - Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Florestais, Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo, Centro de Ciências Agrárias e Engenharias, Jerônimo Monteiro, 2016.http://repositorio.ufes.br/handle/10/7686porUniversidade Federal do Espírito SantoMestrado em Ciências FlorestaisPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Ciências FlorestaisUFESBRCentro de Ciências Agrárias e EngenhariasTechnical and forestry operationsForest managementTécnicas e operações florestaisEucaliptoManejo florestalRecursos Florestais e Engenharia Florestal630Colheita semimecanizada de eucalipto em áreas declivosasSemi-mechanized forest harvesting eucalyptus in_x000D_ sloped areasinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesisinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo (riUfes)instname:Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo (UFES)instacron:UFESORIGINALIgorBatistaBrinate-2016-trabalho.pdfapplication/pdf1079793http://repositorio.ufes.br/bitstreams/1cbdca07-7142-4f4a-8174-ccb3f86430bf/download96c2febe3521a7b1f5108ae89b94bd4fMD5110/76862024-06-21 15:46:24.526oai:repositorio.ufes.br:10/7686http://repositorio.ufes.brRepositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.ufes.br/oai/requestopendoar:21082024-07-11T14:36:06.091069Repositório Institucional da Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo (riUfes) - Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo (UFES)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Colheita semimecanizada de eucalipto em áreas declivosas
dc.title.alternative.none.fl_str_mv Semi-mechanized forest harvesting eucalyptus in_x000D_ sloped areas
title Colheita semimecanizada de eucalipto em áreas declivosas
spellingShingle Colheita semimecanizada de eucalipto em áreas declivosas
Brinate, Igor Batista
Technical and forestry operations
Forest management
Técnicas e operações florestais
Recursos Florestais e Engenharia Florestal
Eucalipto
Manejo florestal
630
title_short Colheita semimecanizada de eucalipto em áreas declivosas
title_full Colheita semimecanizada de eucalipto em áreas declivosas
title_fullStr Colheita semimecanizada de eucalipto em áreas declivosas
title_full_unstemmed Colheita semimecanizada de eucalipto em áreas declivosas
title_sort Colheita semimecanizada de eucalipto em áreas declivosas
author Brinate, Igor Batista
author_facet Brinate, Igor Batista
author_role author
dc.contributor.advisor-co1.fl_str_mv Binoti, Mayra Luiza Marques da Silva
dc.contributor.advisor1.fl_str_mv Fiedler, Nilton César
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Brinate, Igor Batista
dc.contributor.referee1.fl_str_mv Amaral, José Francisco Teixeira do
dc.contributor.referee2.fl_str_mv Mendonça, Adriano Ribeiro de
contributor_str_mv Binoti, Mayra Luiza Marques da Silva
Fiedler, Nilton César
Amaral, José Francisco Teixeira do
Mendonça, Adriano Ribeiro de
dc.subject.eng.fl_str_mv Technical and forestry operations
Forest management
topic Technical and forestry operations
Forest management
Técnicas e operações florestais
Recursos Florestais e Engenharia Florestal
Eucalipto
Manejo florestal
630
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Técnicas e operações florestais
dc.subject.cnpq.fl_str_mv Recursos Florestais e Engenharia Florestal
dc.subject.br-rjbn.none.fl_str_mv Eucalipto
dc.subject.br-rjfgvb.none.fl_str_mv Manejo florestal
dc.subject.udc.none.fl_str_mv 630
description Worldwide, there is a growing demand of wood, which leads to an increase in planted areas. The mechanization has maximized the performance of forestry activities, but not all areas are liable to mechanization. The high slope of the land makes the machine traffic in the stands impossible, forcing producers to adopt manual methods and semi-mechanized methods. The aim of this study was to analyze, technically, two semi-mechanized forest harvesting techniques in hilly areas. Specifically, technically analyzes up to semi-mechanizes harvesting sloping areas extracted by manual tipping (traditional techniqye) and dragger winch (dragger winch’s technique), under conditions of high slope, without relief variation, called normal condition, and in areas with concave relief (caves), called critical areas. It was accomplished a time and motion study, calculating the productivity, operational efficiency and mechanical availability. The study of the traditional technique was carried out in the operational areas of forest harvesting belonging to farmers in partnership with a forestry company, located in the mountain central and south region of the state of Espírito Santo, while the study of dragger winch’s technique was conducted on a leased farm by the same company, belonging to the Paraíba Valley region, in the state of São Paulo. Four teams were evaluated in the traditional technique and six teams in dragger winch’s technique. The results for the operational steps were compared by the Student’s t test at 5 % probability. According to the time and motion study results, the extraction activity is the most uptime demand, and, because of the complexity of the critical areas, they stand out demanding more time than in normal conditions. The yield obtained in cutting at dragger winch’s technique stands out for being less stressful and more productive with 55.48 m³.HE-1 in normal condition and 49.53 m³.HE-1 in critical areas, compared to 10.12 m³.HE-1 and 5.48 m³.HE-1 in traditional technique. The manual tipping under normal conditions stood out presenting better productivity, with 6.88 m³.HE-1 , and the worst productivity in critical areas, with 1.2 m³. HE-1 . Yields of dragging obtained soft variation in productivity between the conditions, with 1.98 m³. HE-1 in normal condition and 2.28 m³.HE-1 in critical areas.The mechanical availability showed lower values in critical areas (84.17 %) due to increased wear of equipment. It follows that under normal conditions it is more feasible to use the semi-mechanized cutting extracted by manual overturning (traditional technique), but in terms of critical areas and roadless areas on the bottom, the semi-mechanized cutting extracted by winch (dragger winch) is the most qualified.
publishDate 2016
dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv 2016-02-29
dc.date.accessioned.fl_str_mv 2018-08-01T22:35:54Z
dc.date.available.fl_str_mv 2018-08-01
2018-08-01T22:35:54Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesis
format masterThesis
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.citation.fl_str_mv BRINATE, Igor Batista. Colheita semimecanizada de eucalipto em áreas declivosas. 2016. Dissertação (Mestrado em Ciências Florestais) - Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Florestais, Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo, Centro de Ciências Agrárias e Engenharias, Jerônimo Monteiro, 2016.
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://repositorio.ufes.br/handle/10/7686
identifier_str_mv BRINATE, Igor Batista. Colheita semimecanizada de eucalipto em áreas declivosas. 2016. Dissertação (Mestrado em Ciências Florestais) - Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Florestais, Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo, Centro de Ciências Agrárias e Engenharias, Jerônimo Monteiro, 2016.
url http://repositorio.ufes.br/handle/10/7686
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv Text
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo
Mestrado em Ciências Florestais
dc.publisher.program.fl_str_mv Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Florestais
dc.publisher.initials.fl_str_mv UFES
dc.publisher.country.fl_str_mv BR
dc.publisher.department.fl_str_mv Centro de Ciências Agrárias e Engenharias
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo
Mestrado em Ciências Florestais
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Institucional da Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo (riUfes)
instname:Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo (UFES)
instacron:UFES
instname_str Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo (UFES)
instacron_str UFES
institution UFES
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo (riUfes)
collection Repositório Institucional da Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo (riUfes)
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv http://repositorio.ufes.br/bitstreams/1cbdca07-7142-4f4a-8174-ccb3f86430bf/download
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv 96c2febe3521a7b1f5108ae89b94bd4f
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv MD5
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo (riUfes) - Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo (UFES)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1813022617612845056