A harvester enables detailed roundwood data to be collected during harvesting operations by means of the measurement apparatus integrated into its felling head. These data can be used to improve the efficiency of wood procurement and also replace some of the field measurements, and thus provide both less costly and more detailed ground truth for remote sensing based forest inventories. However, the positional accuracy of harvester-collected tree data is not sufficient currently to match the accuracy per individual trees achieved with remote sensing data. The aim in the present study was to test the accuracy of various instruments utilizing global satellite navigation systems (GNSS) in motion under forest canopies of varying densities to enable us to get an understanding of the current state-of-the-art in GNSS-based positioning under forest canopies. Tests were conducted using several different combinations of GNSS and inertial measurement unit (IMU) mounted on an all-terrain vehicle (ATV) “simulating” a moving harvester. The positions of 224 trees along the driving route were measured using a total-station and real-time kinematic GPS. These trees were used as reference items. The position of the ATV was obtained using GNSS and IMU with an accuracy of 0.7 m (root mean squared error (RMSE) for 2D positions). For the single-frequency GNSS receivers, the RMSE of real-time 2D GNSS positions was 4.2–9.3 m. Based on these results, it seems that the accuracy of novel single-frequency GNSS devices is not so dependent on forest conditions, whereas the performance of the tested geodetic dual-frequency receiver is very sensitive to the visibility of the satellites. When post-processing can be applied, especially when combined with IMU data, the improvement in the accuracy of the dual-frequency receiver was significant.

Changes to stems caused by natural forces and timber harvesting constitute an essential input for many forestry-related applications and ecological studies, especially forestry inventories based on the use of permanent sample plots. Conventional field measurement is widely acknowledged as being time-consuming and labor-intensive. More automated and efficient alternatives or supportive methods are needed. Terrestrial laser scanning (TLS) has been demonstrated to be a promising method in forestry field inventories. Nevertheless, the applicability of TLS in recording changes in the structure of forest plots has not been studied in detail. This paper presents a fully automated method for detecting changes in forest structure over time using bi-temporal TLS data. The developed method was tested on five densely populated forest plots including 137 trees and 50 harvested trees in point clouds. The present study demonstrated that 90 percent of tree stem changes could be automatically located from single-scan TLS data. These changes accounted for 92 percent of the changed basal area. The results indicate that the processing of TLS data collected at different times to detect tree stem changes can be fully automated.

The objective was to investigate the error sources of the airborne laser scanning based individual tree detection (ITD), and its effects on forest management planning calculations. The investigated error sources were detection of trees (e_td), error in tree height prediction (e_h) and error in tree diameter prediction (e_d). The effects of errors were analyzed with Monte Carlo simulations. e_td was modeled empirically based on a tree’s relative size. A total of five different tree detection scenarios were tested. Effect of e_h was investigated using 5% and 0% and effect of e_d using 20%, 15%, 10%, 5%, 0% error levels, respectively. The research material comprised 15 forest stands located in Southern Finland. Measurements of 5,300 trees and their timber assortments were utilized as a starting point for the Monte Carlo simulated ITD inventories. ITD carried out for the same study area provided a starting point (Scenario 1) for e_td. In Scenario 1, 60.2% from stem number and 75.9% from total volume (V_total) were detected. When the only error source was e_td (tree detection varying from 75.9% to 100% of V_total), root mean square errors (RMSEs) in stand characteristics ranged between the scenarios from 32.4% to 0.6%, 29.0% to 0.5%, 7.8% to 0.2% and 5.4% to 0.1% in stand basal area (BA), V_total, mean height (Hg) and mean diameter (Dg), respectively. Saw wood volume RMSE varied from 25.1% to 0.2%, as pulp wood volume respective varied from 37.8% to 1.0% when errors stemmed only from e_td. The effect of e_d was most significant for V_total and BA and the decrease in RMSE was from 12.0% to 0.6% (BA) and from 10.9% to 0.5% (V_total) in the most accurate tree detection scenario when e_d varied from 20% to 0%. The effect of increased accuracy in tree height prediction was minor for all the stand characteristics. The results show that the most important error source in ITD is tree detection. At stand level, unbiased predictions for tree height and diameter are enough, given the present tree detection accuracy.

The aim of the study was to develop a new method to use tree stem information recorded by harvesters along operative logging in remote sensing-based prediction of forest inventory attributes in mature stands. The reference sample plots were formed from harvester data, using two different tree positions: harvester positions (XY_H) in global satellite navigation system and computationally improved harvester head positions (XY_HH). Study materials consisted of 158 mature Norway-spruce-dominated stands located in Southern Finland that were clear-cut during 2015–16. Tree attributes were derived from the stem dimensions recorded by the harvester. The forest inventory attributes were compiled for both stands and sample plots generated for stands for four different sample plot sizes (254, 509, 761, and 1018 m²). Prediction models between the harvester-based forest inventory attributes and remote sensing features of sample plots were developed. The stand-level predictions were obtained, and basal-area weighted mean diameter (D_g) and basal-area weighted mean height (H_g) were nearly constant for all model alternatives with relative root-mean-square errors (RMSE) roughly 10–11% and 6–8%, respectively, and minor biases. For basal area (G) and volume (V), using either of the position methods, resulted in roughly similar predictions at best, with approximately 25% relative RMSE and 15% bias. With XY_HH positions, the predictions of G and V were nearly independent of the sample plot size within 254–761 m². Therefore, the harvester-based data can be used as ground truth for remote sensing forest inventory methods. In predicting the forest inventory attributes, it is advisable to utilize harvester head positions (XY_HH) and a smallest plot size of 254 m². Instead, if only harvester positions (XY_H) are available, expanding the sample plot size to 761 m² reaches a similar accuracy to that obtained using XY_HH positions, as the larger sample plot moderates the uncertainties when determining the individual tree position.

Odometry during forest operations is demanding, involving limited field of vision (FOV), back-and-forth work cycle movements, and occasional close obstacles, which create problems for state-of-the-art systems. We propose a two-phase on-board process, where tree stem registration produces a sparse point cloud (PC) which is then used for simultaneous location and mapping (SLAM). A field test was carried out using a harvester with a laser scanner and a global navigation satellite system (GNSS) performing forest thinning over a 520 m strip route. Two SLAM methods are used: The proposed sparse SLAM (sSLAM) and a standard method, LeGO-LOAM (LLOAM). A generic SLAM post-processing method is presented, which improves the odometric accuracy with a small additional processing cost. The sSLAM method uses only tree stem centers, reducing the allocated memory to approximately 1% of the total PC size. Odometry and mapping comparisons between sSLAM and LLOAM are presented. Both methods show 85% agreement in registration within 15 m of the strip road and odometric accuracy of 0.5 m per 100 m. Accuracy is evaluated by comparing the harvester location derived through odometry to locations collected by a GNSS receiver mounted on the harvester.