Thermal Imaging Camera's

[Arborist Sites]

blimey, this tool has got some anti action!

 

I cant say too much due to having not had the chance to try it yet, but even so, i think its a bit unfair to dismiss the technique due to personal differences.

 

since when could anyone see in the heat differentials? forgive me but i cant see how anyone can claim to see what this camera sees, certainly not without considerable invasive proceedures?

 

Is it the camera or the seller you have problems with? at the moment it seems the latter for some?

 

I wasnt claiming i could see what this camera can, why would i want to ? nobody in the real world will pay the large inspection fees associated with it when they can get large scale tree surveys for £2 per tree that will adequately give them the information they need...!

 

What i was trying to say was why on earth would anybody spend all that money on something when all you need is a set of eyes which are free and a £5 hammer to identify most hazards.

 

Plus take in all the feedback from others on different forums and course attendies, well i think that should answer it.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

all technology is expensive in the begining, picus still is too?

 

Resitograph is invasive, and evidance that its fine holes promote barrier penetration (schwarze)

 

So other than cost, what possible negatives can there be?

 

weather including sun heat spots have been accounted for

it asseses the whole tree in one go, it is non invasive, can detect bats and other mammalian life in residance, can see bark inclusions, the list is pretty long for its posatives, aside from the angst Ive witnessed against it, maybe some of the service supplied in connection with it, but other than those "people" issues I havent heard anything that says that it is less effective or inferior technologicaly speaking to any of the current tools avaliable?

[Bundle 2]

"Resitograph is invasive, and evidance that its fine holes promote barrier penetration (schwarze)"

The fact that the less discreet methods ,resulting in a more obviously invasive and damaging appearance (ie bloody great holes in the tree ) is likely to promote less of an infection court is well documented....

I remain to be convinced of the need to expend time, effort and resource on unknown, unproven technology ( as an industry) when the rewards are less than clear....

Technology can be great. It can also be a PITA...

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

The Strange Affair of Sam Corngrass

 

 

I dont think im getting the full picture of this strange affair, but im getting a wee bit of it.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

"Resitograph is invasive, and evidance that its fine holes promote barrier penetration (schwarze)"

The fact that the less discreet methods ,resulting in a more obviously invasive and damaging appearance (ie bloody great holes in the tree ) is likely to promote less of an infection court is well documented....

I remain to be convinced of the need to expend time, effort and resource on unknown, unproven technology ( as an industry) when the rewards are less than clear....

Technology can be great. It can also be a PITA...

 

Technology can only advance via financial input, be that via paying consumers like us "investing" in it by taking it up or via some disgustingly rich dude spending a decade bringing it to full and complete readiness and provability. the latter i am certain is not avaliable to the purveyors of the technology, unless they had a lottery win or married Miss Hilton!

 

How many trees did it take to prove the picus? etc

 

I am sorry if there is something I am missing here, but I still havent seen anyone give a good reason other than price to dismiss it?

 

you say isnt proven, but its being proven as it gets used and there is enough trees assesd now to be adequate enough to satisfy even you tough nuts surely? is 7000 destructive assesment plus 20000 others not sufficient proof?

 

how much time would it take you to build a layered image via the picus that could compete with the full frame view of TI?

[Amelanchier]

...how much time would it take you to build a layered image via the picus that could compete with the full frame view of TI?

 

It's a false comparison really though, as the PICUS examines relative sound values to ascertain damage / decay whereas the Thermogadget is supposed to show the degree of function / dysfunctional tissue. The two aren't necessarily related.

 

I'm not sold on it's application to trees. Aside from all the other issues mentioned above, I wonder how an appropriate testing methodology for the equipment / method can be established when the people using the thermo images are well versed in VTA?!?

 

Surely (don't call me Surely) to remove the unconcious assessment of defects / deformations / symptoms / etc within the interpretation of the images, non-arbs should be interpreting the images?!

 

Otherwise its a bit like seeing jesus / elvis in potatoes / toast.

 

(Just trying to get lots of slash/marks in really, sorry )

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

It's a false comparison really though, as the PICUS examines relative sound values to ascertain damage / decay whereas the Thermogadget is supposed to show the degree of function / dysfunctional tissue. The two aren't necessarily related.

 

I'm not sold on it's application to trees. Aside from all the other issues mentioned above, I wonder how an appropriate testing methodology for the equipment / method can be established when the people using the thermo images are well versed in VTA?!?

 

Surely (don't call me Surely) to remove the unconcious assessment of defects / deformations / symptoms / etc within the interpretation of the images, non-arbs should be interpreting the images?!

 

Otherwise its a bit like seeing jesus / elvis in potatoes / toast.

 

(Just trying to get lots of slash/marks in really, sorry )

 

I would have thought that the picus format was a fair relation? does it not show as does the ti dysfunctional and therfore non dysfunctional tissue? sound wood as aposed to non sound? altered as apposed to non altered wood.

 

so your well versed on VTA, but what of the soft rot phenomina? say you have a tree infected with ustulina, but no fruiting bodies ort external symptoms, like deadwood pockets in the root forks of a beech. What then? are you going to drill it on the off chance? or because there is no VTA symptom will you tick the Done box and move on?

 

The TI camera will quickly pick these things up, wouldnt you want to see that defect?

[Arborist Sites]

I would have thought that the picus format was a fair relation? does it not show as does the ti dysfunctional and therfore non dysfunctional tissue? sound wood as aposed to non sound? altered as apposed to non altered wood.

 

so your well versed on VTA, but what of the soft rot phenomina? say you have a tree infected with ustulina, but no fruiting bodies ort external symptoms, like deadwood pockets in the root forks of a beech. What then? are you going to drill it on the off chance? or because there is no VTA symptom will you tick the Done box and move on?

 

The TI camera will quickly pick these things up, wouldnt you want to see that defect?

 

 

In the UK tree safety is limited and will always see the minimum amounts spent on it to provide evidence that trees are being managed, anything that costs more than £3 ish per tree is unviable and therfore makes thermal imaging commercially unviable and IMO a waste of time.

 

We may get a picus done on average once every three months, a resistograph three times a month.

 

I still and will always say that for 99.9% of trees all you need is a set of eyes, VTA knowledge and maybe a nylon hammer.

[Arborist Sites]

 

The TI camera will quickly pick these things up, wouldnt you want to see that defect?

 

Yes it may be lovely but in the real world not financially viable at the moment and probably never will be, i cant even see LA's using it and have been involved in debates with LA's.

 

Most dont even have enough money to buy adequate PPE and upto date equipment for there arborists.

[Amelanchier]

...but what of the soft rot phenomina? say you have a tree infected with ustulina, but no fruiting bodies ort external symptoms, like deadwood pockets in the root forks of a beech. What then? are you going to drill it on the off chance? or because there is no VTA symptom will you tick the Done box and move on?

 

The TI camera will quickly pick these things up, wouldnt you want to see that defect?

 

*Cough* Kretzschmaria

 

Indeed, you would walk right by. We have to seperate reasonable management of trees from perfect management of trees. If there are no symptoms of defects, it's a waste of time to be checking for them - next tree please I haven't got all day.

 

The TI camera won't tell you that you have soft rot decay with no external symptoms, it might tell you that the outer wood of the tree has a different heat signature to a similar tree (on the side of the tree you take the picture!), it would be up to you to determine the cause of that result. Much in the same way that a PICUS image might give similar results for a crack or a cavity, we have to interpret the data.

 

Incidentally, you probably wouldn't drill to test for soft rot as Schwarze has shown that the PICUS can detect extensive establish decay in its normal mode and the early stages of incipient decay using a comparison of the indivdual velocities (if the sound is quicker one way between two point than the reverse).