Terrestrial vs. UAV-Based Remote Measurements in Log Volume Estimation

Abstract

This study compared oak butt-log volume estimations gained through terrestrial measurements in the forest stand with a remote approach using an unmanned aerial system (UAS) and photogrammetric post-processing. Terrestrial measurements were conducted in the lowland part of Croatia after a completed motor–manual final felling of a 140-year-old even-aged oak stand. Butt-logs’ volumes were estimated with four methods: the sectioning method and Huber’s, Smailan’s and Riecke–Newton’s methods. Measuring diameters and lengths and estimating volumes remotely were based on orthophotos using four different software: ArcGIS, QGIS, AutoCAD and Pix4D. Riecke–Newton’s method for volume estimation had the smallest relative bias of +1.74%, while for Huber’s method it was −8.07% and with Smailan’s method it was +21.23%. Log volume estimations gained remotely via ArcGIS and QGIS were, in the case of Huber’s method, at +3.63% relative bias, and in the case of Riecke–Newton’s method at +1.39% relative bias. Volume estimation using the sectioning method resulted in a total of 51.334 m3 for the whole sample, while the sectioning method performed with the help of AutoCAD resulted in 55.151 m3, i.e., +7.43% relative bias. Volume estimation of thirty oak butt-logs given by Pix4D software (version 4.8.4) resulted in +9.34% relative bias (56.134 m3). Comparing terrestrial measurements and the volume estimations based on them to those gained remotely showed a very high correlation in all cases. This study showed that using a UAS for log volume estimation surveys has the potential for broader use, especially after final felling in even-aged forests where the remaining trees in the stand would not block photogrammetric analysis.

Keywords

• butt-log volume
• logs’ diameter
• logs’ length
• volume estimation methods