AA Conference 2010 - an overview

[Paul Barton]

See above post from AA teccie. I think the articles are only available to conference delegates.

[arb culture]

Thanks Tony, a really good summary.

 

The case law is really interesting (yes I know I'm very sad) and raises quite a lot of questions about tree valuation.

 

Scott Cullen has made some interesting points on UKTC about this case - I don't have the link, but it's easy to find in the archives.

[BatiArb]

I need a life. Meanwhile;

Giorgio Catena presented an overview of the application of Thermal Imaging to arboriculture; indicating its role within tree management and definitively defending its application. Using a number of case studies, he maintained that no specialist software is needed to interpret the images and vociferously distanced his method from that presented within well known UK proprietary systems (who he reminded us - were not representing thermal imaging at the conference). As he noted, he is not a salesman! This should be food for thought given Giorgio’s familiarity with the technology and standing within the international thermal imaging community. (Giorgio, if I have any of that wrong I’m sure you will let me know! )

 

I agree that no specialist software is required to extract and translate the pure temperature data from a thermogram of a tree. The key is to understanding what you are looking at and how the colours are applied to the thermogram to allow you to translate the temperature data in a way that makes any sense of the information when it comes to identifying areas of function and dysfunction within the tree.

 

The Tree Thermography methodology that Giorgio has developed is the starting point for any Thermal Tree Assessment and he is without doubt the founder of the use of Thermal Imaging on trees.

 

The software modeling that we use enables us to extend the benefits of thermal imaging to allow the temperature data within the thermograms to be used to calculate other factors that make the complete Thermal Tree Assessment a very effective tree management tool, that can inform:

 

• pruning decisions on timeing and volume of green foliage removal
  
• management of drought stressed trees (identifying drought in the first place and then ofering a tool to monitor the affects)
  
• the control of vascular diseases such as Bleeding cankers, etc
  
• the calculation of functional wall thinkness and percentage dysfunction (note this is not just decay)
  
• the calculation of water presure to determine timing of sap rise and fall (also related to timing of pruning)
  
• obvervations of the trees reactive ability to tolerate or respond to the presence of disease or decay (also the ability to respond to or tolerate pruning)
  
• and much much more
   
  

 

 

 

Dear Tony,

thank you for your summary. I would only like to add a short comment. Rather than reminding people that the companies that present TI in the UK were not representing TI at the conference, I was surprised of their absence. It is true that I am not a salesman, I do not sell apparatuses and I haven’t filled my website with prices and costs for my services, but if someone wants to follow a course (as the two Australian Arborists) or do a refresher, I have no difficulty to oblige, against payment, of course.

 

Giorgio,

 

Yes, as per our recent e-mail exchange, it was disappointing not to see you while you were in the UK. However, my work commitment just did not allow the time, let alone the expense of attending the conference. I really do not think the AA conference offerers anything close to value for money, and when you add the travel and lodgings to the cost of a day (if the interesting stuff is on one day) then there are far far better events held throughout the year which provide much much better content and represent real value (Not least of these are the seminars run by TEP:thumbup:)......

 

 

 

 

.

[Bundle 2]

See above post from AA teccie. I think the articles are only available to conference delegates.

 

Mmm....

[Paul Barton]

Hey, it wasn't my idea!

[Bundle 2]

No..I know. Thats fine. I didnt want to get into an AA bashing tho' it's of course their own business what they chose to do with material that is of interest to the industry at large. I think it's a shame that it is unavailable.

Tony's summary will do and my thanks to him for posting BTW . It is not unappreciated!

[BatiArb]

if someone wants to follow a course (as the two Australian Arborists) or do a refresher, I have no difficulty to oblige, against payment, of course.

 

 

Giorgio,

 

That's great as I have been corresponding with a number of arborists in Australia and I am now a regular contributor to the Australian ArborAge magazine, which has included articles on thermal imaging.

 

Perhaps when you have trained them in Tree Thermography we can offer them the opportunity to use the software to extend the capabilities and enable them to undertake a full Thermal Tree Assessment.

[TTHman]

Andrew,

Just a few comments. I don’t want to start any controversy. I don’t understand what you say in your first paragraph. To be precise, my method was first called Thermography (Thermography-aided tree assessment) now Treethermography (TTH), not Tree Thermography.

 

Let me tell you that some of the factors your software modeling can inform on were not only known to me and colleagues some 10 years ago, but one was even mentioned in the late 1960s in an American publication describing a helicopter-flown application of Thermography to trees.

That’s why, unfortunately, I do not understand the potential of your “specialist software” and I do not use it (nor do I feel the need to), but the few articles that you’ve published have not cleared my mind.

 

I’ve passed on your contact details to the two Australian Arborists that attended my course, however when they collected information on UK-base Thermography they were not terribly impressed by what they found, that’s why they decided to attend my course.

[BatiArb]

Just a few comments. I don’t want to start any controversy. I don’t understand what you say in your first paragraph. To be precise, my method was first called Thermography (Thermography-aided tree assessment) now Treethermography (TTH), not Tree Thermography.

 

Sorry Giorgio I was not intending to make direct reference to you methodology, simply referring to the process of using thermal imaging in that way. As your initial description indicates it is Thermography-aided tree assessment. I was avoiding using your branded TreeThermography by choosing a more generic 'Tree Thermography'.

 

No intention on being picky or pedantic about this, just wanted to clear it up....

 

 

 

 

 

Let me tell you that some of the factors your software modeling can inform on were not only known to me and colleagues some 10 years ago, but one was even mentioned in the late 1960s in an American publication describing a helicopter-flown application of Thermography to trees.

That’s why, unfortunately, I do not understand the potential of your “specialist software” and I do not use it (nor do I feel the need to), but the few articles that you’ve published have not cleared my mind.

 

 

 

Now you have me confused.... what has the helicopter-flown application got to do with using computer modelling of thermal imaging data to allow a physiological assessment of trees that offers the ability for us to observe and understand their capacity for reactive growth?

 

 

.

 

Anyway this thread is flying somewhat off topic. I will contact you directly to discuss further.

 

Best Wishes

 

 

Andrew

 

 

 

.

[TTHman]

I've registered Treethermography not to avoid people using it but to state that I have introduced it. TTH is not registered.