Thermal imaging its here to stay

[BatiArb]

Gotcha, but the bit that gets us going round in circles is the bit where the client says, "so is this tree safe then?"

 

I was under the impression that TI was being sold as a product which could give a probabilistic figure as to a tree's likelihood of failure.

 

 

 

The point is that the accuracy of the data capture with thermal imaging, which provides information about the current physiological condition of the tree, can be used in statistical analysis of populations. This allows the calculation of a probability of failure within that population.

 

The point is with this is that it is possible to gather large amounts of data very quickly and inform far more holistic decisions that are based on accurate information about the tree in relation to its local population.

 

The probability of failure scoring that is provided with a thermal image assessment is based on the use of a computer model within the TTMS software used to calibrate the images (see below). This information can be used in other statistically analytical systems as well. It all comes down to the availability of data to analyse.

 

Thermal imaging allows the capture of information about tree populations that has never before been practical let alone affordable. In the right conditions we can survey up to 100 trees a day, capturing thermograms of each tree that will enable an assessment of its physiological function from roots up into the branches.

 

What other tool on the market can offer you this.....?

 

 

Gotcha, but the bit that gets us going round in circles is the bit where the client says, "so is this tree safe then?"

 

If you are saying that this is not the case, and that the assessment is based on the judgement of the surveyor, then what is wrong with a simple VTA.

 

 

 

Visual Tree Assessment has two significant limitations. Firstly it is based on observations of the trees historic reactive growth process, because the arborists uses knowledge of how the tree grows and responds to structural weaknesses over time. Some VTA symptoms will take decades to develop as the tree slowly reacts to a particular structural situation or the presence of decay. Therefore VTA is an assessment of a historic process, and does not necessarily tell you anything about what the trees current condition is.

 

For example a VTA symptom such as an area of wound wood or reactive growth that has formed a bulge may now be dead wood, dried out or even decayed. The arborists is not likely to be able to say one way or the other, and this is really the second issue with VTA it is down to the inspectors personal opinion and experience. The inspecting arborist has to place a significance on the observations made, and then determine a conclusion without any supporting evidence.

 

The use of thermal imaging provide the inspector with an ability to determine what parts of the tree are still functional. Using heat as the tool it is possible to use the infrared camera to observe the water presence and movement within the tree. This provides the supporting evidence to demonstrate that the reactive growth associated with VTA symptoms is still functional. This is done simply by using the camera as a tool to observe heat movement within the tree.

 

The camera technology allows the capture of a fully radiometric digital thermogram, which includes all the temperature information that the infrared censing hardware can absorb. For example our camera is sensitive to a temperature range between -40 to +120 degrees Celsius. The infrared software that comes with the camera allows you to adjust the colour application to different temperature ranges and differentials. This is what create the colour image that we see. For trees the image temperature span (distance between upper and lower temperatures) tends to be no more than 2-3 degrees Celsius. The level (position of the set span on the sensitivity range e.g. -40 to +120 degrees Celsius) will vary depending on the time of image capture and the temperature ranges of the day.

 

The analytical capabilities of the radiometric thermograms means that it is possible to use this temperature data in a number of ways. This is where the post image capture processing comes in. We use TTMS (Tree Thermal Matrix System) software. This enables the comparison of the temperature data captured on the day with a computer model that predicts what the tree's thermal signature should look like (i.e. what its temperature should be) if it is in optimal condition.

 

The simple software calculation uses temperature data from the site and metoffice weather data to work out the temperature curve for the day of image capture. The product of the calculation is an upper and lower temperature range that allows the thermograms to be adjusted. The processed thermal image then provides a visual illustration of where the tree's thermal signature is.

 

If a tree is healthy then the processed thermogram will be very close if not identical to the actual temperature readings on the tree at the time of image capture. However, if the tree is not responding well to the temperature changes on a day to day basis it will be a degree or so cooler than the optimal. Such trees do not have sufficient functional wood to allow them to react to the daily temperature changes.

 

If a tree cannot respond to daily temperature fluctuations it is in poor health and also unable to grow reactively to the presence of growth stresses such as wounding, decay, drought, pruning or root disturbance. This then allows the arborist to make informed decisions about the trees management.

 

If significant areas of dysfunction are found, such as cavities or decay, it is then possible to work out whether the tree can respond to the challenge of living with these weaknesses or not.

 

 

What other tool on the market can offer you this.....?

 

 

Gotcha, but the bit that gets us going round in circles is the bit where the client says, "so is this tree safe then?"

 

For example, in your photo above, what difference to the practical management of the tree did the photo

?

 

 

In the image I posted earlier, this was of a drought stressed tree and there were some specific issues that had significantly contributed towards this. Not least the fact that roots had been left exposed following an investigation to determine damage to the adjacent wall. This in combination with the demand for water in the spring leaf growth period meant that the tree was suffering. The concentration of cooling associated with this presents a very symptomatic image and a recommendation to re-assess the tree when the wholes had been filled back in and the tree had benefited from a period of rain or been watered.

 

Seasonal or periodic drought stress is something that trees have to cope with on a regular basis, but it does expose them to the progress of decay fungi within their trunk and central root system. Where decay fungi are present (in 99.9% of mature trees) the period of drought stress provides them with a new food source that they can capitalise on. The fungi will take advantage of this opportunity.

 

In such situations one of the recommendations to the client is to water the tree, and reduce the amount of time it is exposed to drought stress. This will then limit the progress of decay.

 

 

 

What other tool on the market can offer you this.....?

 

 

 

 

Welcome to the future........

 

 

This is a new language in true tree care.

[Amelanchier]

Welcome to the future........

 

 

[Marcus B-T]

I just had a look at "video wars" on wikipedia and actually TI is th VHS not the betamax.

 

The reason VHS became popular was that there was a wider a cheaper variety of machines available to record and play the data (just so with thermal imaging), because of this the consumer was not tied into one manufacturer or supplier (also true of thermal imaging). I think Tony needs to change his image. Actually I think TI is a DVDr player? It has flexibility and produces a high quality output.

[Marcus B-T]

On a more serious note, the majority of tree failures involve the root plate or large branches. Failures around the basal area are less common, probably because the tree is more able to adapt to changes in this region.

[Yorkshireman]

Theres an obvious issue that has not really been seen here either

 

Professional indemnity & Public Liability insurance , as seen by the insurance industry & later perhaps a court

 

, a Ti camera is a factory calibrated device that has known parameters & ain Marcus's system a % of accuracy based on an ever expanding study group of trees

 

The survey images, both thermal & normal are recorded & retained + the data like wise

 

I as a simple human I aren’t

no matter how good we think we are FACTs are just that & an opinion based on experience & knowledge are not easily defined ,so from the underwriters point of view which seems more tangible ?

 

theefore if the insurance industry get behind this htere is also the potential increase due to public liability which is held by tens of thousands of estate . land owners authoritys

utilities etc etc

 

So to lenghten the call for TI due to the underwritter making a provision requirement by utilising a defensible quick , reliable & documented tree management assessment system that easily works along sode other existing methods

 

Debate ............

Edited June 29, 2010 by Yorkshireman

[BatiArb]

There's an obvious issue that has not really been seen here either.

 

I as a simple human, I aren’t, no matter how good we think we are FACTs are just that & an opinion based on experience & knowledge is not easily defined, so from the underwriters point of view which seems more tangible ?

 

.

 

 

The point I would like to pick out here is that when an arborist is using thermal imaging data is it FACTUAL. The data captured by the camera is a true representation of the trees temperature. There is not interpretation to be done here.

 

There is no need to try and work out what the colours mean. The thermogram is comprised of colours that are used as a visual aid and are applied to factual temperature readings taken from the surface of the tree at the point of image capture.

 

The experienced tree thermographer is translating this temperature data. We are learning a new visual language here and a new way of looking at trees, not to mention the world around us.

 

This is a fascinating area of science.

 

Believe me when you get hold of a thermal imaging camera you will be using it to look at everything. The dogs in the office are the first, but then it progresses to the computer key pad, heat loss from your house, your children's cold symptoms and in my case your unborn child.......

 

 

 

theefore if the insurance industry get behind this htere is also the potential increase due to public liability which is held by tens of thousands of estate . land owners authoritys

utilities etc etc

.

 

 

WHEN the insurance industry gets behind it........

 

IT IS ONLY A MATTER OF TIME.

[Amelanchier]

I think Tony needs to change his image.

 

Well I have been told I do look a bit scruffy from time to time...

 

 

no matter how good we think we are FACTs are just that & an opinion based on experience & knowledge are not easily defined ,so from the underwriters point of view which seems more tangible ?

The point I would like to pick out here is that when an arborist is using thermal imaging data is it FACTUAL. The data captured by the camera is a true representation of the trees temperature. There is not interpretation to be done here.

 

You can't be implying that a data capture device is infallible? Or that data translation is infallible? Junk in = Junk out. The image is a snapshot of the trees functionality for a given moment in time, all sampling methods have caveats. I'd be interested to know what yours are?

 

I suspect you both mean that your recommendations based on TI/TTMS are more auditable as the basic data collected in the field can transparently presented as supporting evidence - and that this strengthens the recommendations? I'm not sure this is a unique approach.

 

In terms of insurance, two things come to mind;

Firstly the insurers are gambling on an individuals likelihood of being wrong. The use of TI/TTMS is unlikely to reduce that likelihood despite accuracy claims given that it is a supplementary system (i.e., it informs other systems).

Secondly, in the light of the NTSG draft and their renewed focus on the 'reasonably prudent landowner' mantra it would seem that there is an increasing desire within the wider tree owning population for a considerably lighter touch. Now this might well be a USP for TI/TTMS but it might also be surplus to insurance requirements and therefore tricky to market.

 

How do you get TI/TTMS out of its niche? I think part of the PR war might be to avoid overstating its abilities and to clarify the language. This is not the future, it will not revolutionise arboriculture, the people who don't use it are not living in the dark ages, there is no new language - this is a handy tool which can help tree guys assess trees and decide what to do with them.

 

If it is here to stay then fair enough if not then we'll chuck it in the shed with the other glimpses of "the future" that promised so much, Sinclair C5, the Minidisc, the Amstrad email phone and yes, the Betamax.

 

Thankfully we'lll still have room for the IPad.

[Xerxses]

 

And with the european council setting a current value of 1.3 million euros on a one kilometer stretch of avenued trees.

 

the value attached to trees is about to change, we are entering a new age of awareness, and with heavy penalties for polution in the EU states trees will become increasingly important in mitigating our industrial outputs.

 

The next ten years are going to radicaly change our business, and i would suggest all who have a vested interest in the economy of trees to get on board alternatives NOW.

 

or find yourselfs way behind and in the dark ages, with little marketable resource!

 

Sorry! I dont want to derail, but can you elaborate or give me more info about this?

[Marcus B-T]

Well I have been told I do look a bit scruffy from time to time...

 

 

 

 

 

You can't be implying that a data capture device is infallible? Or that data translation is infallible? Junk in = Junk out. The image is a snapshot of the trees functionality for a given moment in time, all sampling methods have caveats. I'd be interested to know what yours are?

 

This point is very important. There are 'short term' changes in the amount of functional wood caused by prolonged drought but this is short term in the context of a tree, which is still a year or so. The equilibriums that are set up and analysed by the system take time to come about and so a measurement at any given time is a good represention of the status of the tree during a prolonged period. There are of course limitations as to when you can take measurements. They must be during the day for example and most of the caveats realte to this. This is also why training is a good idea. There has been a great deal of emphasis on the colours in the past. These are just a representation of temperature, it is the temperature data that is important. No system is infallible but a good sytem has checks and cross checks so that you know when it is close to fallibility. There are loads in TTMS. Also the system is constantly reviewed updated and improved, not because it is a bad system but because I am a cautious person who has worked in science for over 20 years and so knows that this is a requirement of ALL systems. So if anyone trys to sell you anything the first question you should ask is how often is it reviewed and improved upon. The more this is done, the better the product (just look at the iphone/ipad what are we on version 4?).

 

I suspect you both mean that your recommendations based on TI/TTMS are more auditable as the basic data collected in the field can transparently presented as supporting evidence - and that this strengthens the recommendations? I'm not sure this is a unique approach.

 

In terms of insurance, two things come to mind;

Firstly the insurers are gambling on an individuals likelihood of being wrong. The use of TI/TTMS is unlikely to reduce that likelihood despite accuracy claims given that it is a supplementary system (i.e., it informs other systems).

Secondly, in the light of the NTSG draft and their renewed focus on the 'reasonably prudent landowner' mantra it would seem that there is an increasing desire within the wider tree owning population for a considerably lighter touch. Now this might well be a USP for TI/TTMS but it might also be surplus to insurance requirements and therefore tricky to market.

 

I don't know about this not my area of expertise but interesting.

 

How do you get TI/TTMS out of its niche? I think part of the PR war might be to avoid overstating its abilities and to clarify the language. This is not the future, it will not revolutionise arboriculture, the people who don't use it are not living in the dark ages, there is no new language - this is a handy tool which can help tree guys assess trees and decide what to do with them.

 

The dark ages bit is a little strong, but there are good analagies with the agriculture sector that we can draw upon. About 15 years ago I work as part of a group looking at precision agriculture, the aim was to target the area of crop that needed the fertiliser and chemicals not the whole crop. It was not popular with farmers, equipment was expensive and the system was slow. Isn't this what we want to do with our trees? Target the ones that genuinely need the management and not just get the chainsaw out because it has a visual symptom. Again 10 yaers ago the equipment was expensive and the software slow. Now this has all changed. Not Sinclair C5, the Minidisc, the Amstrad email phone and yes, the Betamax.

Precision Arboriculture!!

 

If it is here to stay then fair enough if not then we'll chuck it in the shed with the other glimpses of "the future" that promised so much, Sinclair C5, the Minidisc, the Amstrad email phone and yes, the Betamax.

 

Thankfully we'lll still have room for the IPad.

IPad or Net Book? Discuss:biggrin:

[Marcus B-T]

sorry about the mix of text in my last response don't know what happened if it is not clear which s my text I will re-do it