Journals / Anadolu Orman Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2026 / Sayı: 12

Comparison of two different debarking techniques in wood production in terms of time and efficiency

Odun üretiminde iki farklı kabuk soyma tekniğinin zaman ve verim açısından karşılaştırılması

Tolga Öztürk(Istanbul University-Cerrahpaşa)0000-0002-3066-1788
Batin Mehmet Yer(İSTANBUL ÜNİVERSİTESİ-CERRAHPAŞA)0000-0001-9458-4067
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-06-16
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusions Based on the productivity values obtained, the chainsaw-mounted debarking attachment was found to be more practical, faster, and more economical, as it requires less debarking time and lower labor intensity.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Background and Aims In timber production operations in Türkiye, the debarking of coniferous trees is commonly carried out using tools such as axes, debarking knife, mobile debarking machines, and debarking attachments mounted on chainsaws.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Results The results of the study indicated that debarking productivity with an axe ranged between 2.48 and 6.38 m³ h⁻¹ depending on the diameter classes, whereas productivity obtained using the chainsaw-mounted debarking attachment ranged between 8.81 and 13.05 m³ h⁻¹.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusions Based on the productivity values obtained, the chainsaw-mounted debarking attachment was found to be more practical, faster, and more economical, as it requires less debarking time and lower labor intensity.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Kabuk soyma · verimlilik · balta

Abstract

Background and Aims In timber production operations in Türkiye, the debarking of coniferous trees is commonly carried out using tools such as axes, debarking knife, mobile debarking machines, and debarking attachments mounted on chainsaws. Debarking is an important step in wood production in terms of time consumption and productivity. Methods This study was conducted in the Oriental spruce forests located within the Kemerköprü Forest Enterprise Chiefdom in the Giresun region. Debarking operations were performed using two different methods: an axe and a debarking attachment mounted on a chainsaw. In the study, log diameters were classified into three diameter classes, and time and productivity values were determined for each diameter class and debarking technique. Results The results of the study indicated that debarking productivity with an axe ranged between 2.48 and 6.38 m³ h⁻¹ depending on the diameter classes, whereas productivity obtained using the chainsaw-mounted debarking attachment ranged between 8.81 and 13.05 m³ h⁻¹. Productivity achieved with the chainsaw attachment was 3.5 to 4.7 times higher than that obtained using the axe. Conclusions Based on the productivity values obtained, the chainsaw-mounted debarking attachment was found to be more practical, faster, and more economical, as it requires less debarking time and lower labor intensity.

Özet

Giriş ve Hedefler Türkiye’de odun üretim çalışmalarında ibreli ağaçların kabuklarının soyulması çalışmalarında balta, soyma bıçağı, motosoyar, mobil kabuk soyma makinesi, motorlu testereye mont edilen soyma aparatı gibi araçlarla yapılmaktadır. Odun üretiminde kabuk soyma çalışmaları zamansal ve verim bakımından önemli bir yer tutmaktadır. Yöntemler Bu çalışma Giresun bölgesindeki Kemerköprü Orman İşletme Şefliği içinde yer alan Doğu ladini ormanlarında kabuk soyma çalışmalarının balta ve motorlu testereye monte edilen soyma aparatı ile iki farklı şekilde yapılmıştır. Çalışmada tomruk çap sınıfları üç sınıfa ayrılmış, her çap sınıfına ve soyma tekniğine göre zaman ve verim değerleri bulunmuştur. Bulgular Çalışmanın sonucunda balta ile kabuk soyma verimleri çap sınıflarına göre 2,48 – 6,38 m3/sa, motorlu testereye monte edilen aparat ile yapılan soyma çalışmalarında ise verimin 8,81 – 13,05 m3/sa arasında olduğu bulunmuştur. Motorlu testere aparatı ile yapılan soyma çalışmalarındaki verim balta ile yapılan çalışmaya göre 3,5 – 4,7 kat daha yüksek çıkmıştır. Sonuçlar Bulunan verim değerlerine göre soyma süresinin az olması, iş gücünün yoğun olmaması nedeniyle motorlu testereye monte edilen aparatın daha kullanışlı, hızlı ve ekonomik olduğu sonucuna varılmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Öztürk, T., Yer, B. M. (2026). Comparison of two different debarking techniques in wood production in terms of time and efficiency. Anadolu Orman Araştırmaları Dergisi, Sayı: 12. https://doi.org/10.53516/ajfr.1908667

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (22)

  1. Carus S., 2002. Bazı hacim formüllerinin seksiyon, gövde ve bağıl uzunluklara göre kıyaslanması. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, A(1), 101-114. https://doi.org/10.18182/tjf.45542.
  2. Çağlar S., 2021. Work efficiency and physical workload during the manual debarking of Scotch pine trees. International Journal of Forest Engineering, 32(3), 246-255. https://doi.org/10.1080/14942119.2021.1927471.
  3. Eker, M., Çoban H.O., Acar, H.H., 2011. Time study and productivity analysis of chainsaw mounted log debarker in southern pine forests of Turkey. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 6(10), 2146-2156.
  4. Eker M, Öztürk E., 2022. Bazı kabuk soyma araçlarının verim ve kabuk soyma kalitesi açısından karşılaştırılması. Turkish Journal of Forestry, 23(4), 278-289. https://doi.org/10.18182/tjf.1168983.
  5. Eker, M., Çoban, O., Acar, H.H., 2025. Time efficiency and productivity of chainsaw attached debarking in southern pine stands of Turkey. Advances in Agriculture and Agricultural Sciences, 11(4), 1-11.
  6. Gavrilov, T.A., Stankevich, T.B., Anpilogova, O.A., Kalesnikov, G.N., Cheryaev, L.A., 2016. Debarking waste processing: a systematic review. Resources and Technology, 13(3), 71-77. https://doi.org/10.15393/j2.art.2016.3521.
  7. Gülci N, Akay AE, Erdaş O., 2017a. Productivity assessment of alternative timber debarking methods. Sumarski List, 141(9-10), 469-476. https://doi.org/10.31298/sl.141.9-10.3.
  8. Gülci, N., Gülci, S., Önen, H., 2017b. Assessment of bark debarking using axe. International Symposium on New Horizons in Forestry, 18-20 October 2017, Isparta, Türkiye.
  9. Gürtan H., 1969. Değişik Tipli Balta ve Kabuk Yontma Demirlerinin İş Verimleri. İç Anadolu Ormancılık Araştırma Enstitüsü, 38, Ankara.
  10. Kalaycı Ş., 2006. SPSS Uygulamalı Çok Değişkenli İstatistik Teknikleri, Asil Yayın Dağıtım, Ankara, 975-9091-14-3.
  11. Magagnotti, N., Nati, C., Pari, L., Spinelli, R., Visser, R., 2011. Assessing the cost of stump-site debarking in eucalypt plantations. Biosystems Engineering, 110, 443-449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2011.09.009.
  12. McEwan, A., Brink, M., Spinelli, R., 2019. Efficiency of different machine layouts for chain flail delimbing, debarking and chipping. Forests, 10, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3390/f10020126.
  13. Moore, G., McMahon, T., (1986). Bark/wood bond strength and its association with material and environmental variables. Wood and Fiber Science, 18, 526-536.
  14. Nemestothy, S., Grabner, M., 2021. Austrian logging: A historical account of the time of felling and debarking, and transportation practices. International Journal of Wood Culture, 1, 180-195. https:// 10.1163/27723194-20210005.
  15. OGM., 2024. Kemerköprü Orman İşletme Şefliği Amenajman Planı, Ankara.
  16. Özer Genç, Ç., Arıcak, B., 2022. Developing a harvest plan by considering the effects of skidding techniques on forest soil using a hybrid TOPSIS-entropy method. Forest Science, 68(3), 312-324. https://doi.org/10.1093/forsci/fxac010.
  17. Öztürk, T., Bilici, E., İnan, M., Yer, B.M., 2024. Examining the changes in the amounts of PM2.5, PM10 and CO2 in the environment in debarking operations. Šumarski list, 148(11–12), 555–564. https://doi.org/10.31298/sl.148.11-12.3.
  18. Parlak, S., Aykın, Ö., Gökdemir, F., 2024. Anadolu Karaçam (Pinus nigra Arn.)’ında iki farklı ekipmanla kabuk soyma zaman analizi. Ağaç ve Orman, 5(2), 64-71.
  19. Rukomojnikov, K., Alexagina, N., 2024. Mechanism for debarking logs when performing logging operations using a forest harvester. Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 74(3), 97-104. https://doi.org/10.2478/scjme-2024-0037.
  20. URL-1. https://www.husqvarna.com/tr/motorlu testereler/365/(Data accessed: 28.02.2026).
  21. URL-2. https://www.baseh.com/v/ (Data accessed: 28.02.2026).
  22. Yıldırım, M., 1987. Ormancılık işlerinde zaman etüdü değerlendirmesi. İ.Ü. Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, B37(3), 67-85.