Özet:

In this study, it is aimed to compare eight different volume formulas used in volumizing logs. For this purpose, the results obtained from Midface (Huber), Mean Surfaces at Ends (Smalian), Newton-Riecke, Mean Diameters at the Ends, Hossfeld, Bruce, Patterson-Doruska and Centroid formulas were compared. In the scope of the study, 115 logs each 3-meters (m) long, cut from three different tree species (Calabrian pine (Pinus brutia), Black pine (P. nigra) and Cedar (Cedrus libani)), were used. First, the diameters of the logs were measured at 0.5 m intervals, then each section volume was found using the Smalian formula and the total log volume was obtained. Then, log volumes calculated with 8 different formulas were compared with the volume values found closest to the truth. As a result of the study, the error values of Huber, Newton-Riecke and Mean Diameters at the Ends formulas were found to be indistinguishable from zero (p>0.05) for each tree species. In addition, it was determined that the Centroid formula for volumizing black pine logs and Smalian formula for volumizing cedar logs were also non-zero (p>0.05), and they are usable. Among these formulas, the most suitable formulas that minimize the volumizing error and error values are respectively (mean error, mean absolute error percentage and total error percentage), Newton-Riecke (0.441, 0.608 and 0.111) for calabrian pine logs, Centroid (-0.444, 0.901 and -0.141) for black pine logs, and the average diameters of the ends for cedar logs (-0.104, 0.811 and -0.038).

Anahtar Kelimeler: