IJSTR

International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research

IJSTR@Facebook IJSTR@Twitter IJSTR@Linkedin
Home About Us Scope Editorial Board Blog/Latest News Contact Us
CALL FOR PAPERS
AUTHORS
DOWNLOADS
CONTACT
QR CODE
IJSTR-QR Code

IJSTR >> Volume 7 - Issue 11, November 2018 Edition



International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research  
International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research

Website: http://www.ijstr.org

ISSN 2277-8616



Effect Of The Engine Capacity Improvement Upon The Log Skidding Productivity Under The Monocable System At PT. Ratah Timber Company, Kalimantan Timur, Indonesia

[Full Text]

 

AUTHOR(S)

Ruspita Sihombing, Martin Surya Putra, Ani Fatmawati, Samen Lolongan, Hidayat Hidayat

 

KEYWORDS

East Borneo, skidding machine, engine capacity, Kalimantan Timur, bulldozer, log harvesting.

 

ABSTRACT

Log Harvesting technology using a monocable winch machine was proved to have reduced the production costs and reduced environmental damages compared withthe use of a bulldozer, and contributes to the fact of being harder to get the natural-forest woods confronted by longer routes and tougher topographical rain forest through swampy areas to get bigger logs nowadays. To skid a bigger diameter or volume of logs requires a much a bigger machine. The main purpose of this research was to find out about the influence of engine capacity improvement from 20HP to 26 HP upon log harvest skidding. Application in log skidding using the 20HP engine generated 7,08 m3/h-1hm productivity, while that of the 26HP generated a 8,52 m3/h-1hm productivity. This shows that the productivity improvement from the 20HP to 26HP engines was 20,33%. However, thet-test, shows that the engine improvement from 20HP to 26HP in terms of log skidding productivity at PT Ratah Timber incorporated did have a significant effect.

 

REFERENCES

[1] Bertault JG, Sist P. 1997. An experimental comparison of different harvesting intensities with reduced-impact and conventional logging in East Kalimantan, Indonesia. Forest EcolManag 94: 209-218.

[2] Brown NC. 1958. Logging The Principles and Methods of Timber Harvesting in the United States and Canada.New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc.

[3] Edwards DP, Tobias JA, Shei l D, Meijaard E, Laurance WF. 2014. Maintainin ecosystem function and services in logged tropical forests. Trends EcolEvol 29:511-520.

[4] Elias. 2002. Book 1 Reduced Impact Logging. Bogor: IPB Press.

[5] Escobar FV, García GAR. 2013. Small and simple technology cable system for logging, Medellín, Colombia.

[6] FAO. 2010. Global forest resources assessment 2010. Progress towards sustainable forest management. FAO Forest Paper 163. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.

[7] Fredericksen TS, Pariona W. 2002. Effect of skidder disturbance on commercial tree regeneration in logging gaps in a Bolivian tropical forest. Forest EcolManag 171:223-230.

[8] Healey JR, Price C, Tay J. 2000. The cost of carbon retention by reduced impact logging. Forest EcolManag 139, 237-255.

[9] Hertianti E. 2005. A Study on log Skidding with the Monocable System at Sungai Linuq Compound, Tabang Sub-District, KutaiKartanegara District, Post Graduate Thesis. Samarinda: Post Graduate Study, MulawarmanUniversit

[10] John JS, Barreto P, Uhl C. 1996. Logging damage during planned and unplanned logging operations in the eastern Amazone. Forest EcolManag 89:59-77

[11] Liah Y. 2012. Comparison of impact skidding with mono-cable winch with bulldozer to damage of residual stand. [Thesis]. Mulawarman University, Samarinda. [Indonesian].

[12] Meijaard E, Sheil D, Nasi R, Augeri D, Rosenbaum B, Iskandar D, Setyawati T, Lammertink MJ, Rachmatika I, Wong A, Soehartono T, Stanley S, O'Brien T. 2005. Life after logging: reconciling wildlife conservation and production forestry in Indonesian Borneo. CIFOR, WCS and UNESCO, Bogor, Indonesia.

[13] Muhdi. 2008. The impact of timber harvesting with reduced impact logging systems to the soil compaction in West Kalimantan. Kalimantan For J 13(1): 42-45.

[14] Pinard MA, Putz FE. 1996. Retaining forest biomass by reducing logging damage. Biotropica 28:278-295.

[15] Pinard MA, Barker MG, Tay J. 2000a. Soil disturbance and post-logging forest recovery on bulldozer paths in Sabah, Malaysia. Forest EcolManag 130:213-225.

[16] Pinard MA, Putz FE, Tay J. 2000b. Lessons learned from the implementation of reduced impact logging in hilly terrain in Sabah, Malaysia. Intl Forest Rev 2(1): 33-39.

[17] Ruslim Y, Hinrichs A, Sulistioadi B. 2000. Study on implementation ofMreduced impact tractor logging. SFMP Document No. 01a.

[18] Ruslim Y. 2011. Implementing reduced impact logging with mono-cable winch. J Trop ForManag XVII (3): 103-110.

[19] Sanyoto. 1976. Analysis on Work Timeline, A Thesis: Bogor: Institute of Agriculture.

[20] Sari, D.R. 2013. Study on Productivity and Skidding Cost Analysis under the Monocable Machine at Belayan Timber Logging Concession, Laham Sub-District, Kutai Barat Disrict, an Unpublished Thesis, Samarinda: Mulawarman University.