Marcus B-T

Attached is a worked example of how TTMS is used after a VTA inspection. THis one is fairly straight forward will dig out a more complex one. A worked example of the TTMS system.pdf

Attached is a summary of three other papers I am working on/submitting to other journals that will take some time to see the light of day. It explains the whole process of how to use TI results but it s not a refereed paper. You can use the same methodology for VTA data. The summary only relates to basal dysfunction but I have the same model for branch unions and other attributes. There is a list of refs for the boundary layer method of analysis it well established in many fields including Forestry. overview of methodology.pdf

My two papers will be in Vol 33(1) of the Arboricultural Journal. If you don't subscribe then you can contact them for reprints. The full volume should be out in a few months. Regards Marcus

The way in which data can be used as an input into risk assessments is the subject of a separate paper though it is touched upon in one of the paper I submitted. It was also the subject of the paper presented in Turin. It intergrates into the VTA based risk assessment methodologies, this was deliberate to avoid a mismatch of methods. To summarise, you need to have some baseline data just as you do with VTA, i.e. what are expected values for the amount of functional wood under certain growing conditions. You can then compare your trees to the expected values to see if they are significantly different from the rest of the population. At which point you know that you have reached the point at which the balance between functional and non-functional wood is different, you can at this point look at the population and examine the limits to height and canopy density for example in the poulation and in comparison to expected values, and in this way you can keep separating out the trees until you have the rare cases that are highly significant and are most likely to fail (but still not destined to fail) you may still be able to correct the form of the tree to bring it in-line with the rest of the population (remedial work) or you may not (fell). This is exactly the same process that is followed in VTA. It is also a highly robust statistical methodology. However, this is still only a step in the process and there are other reasons for carrying out work to trees and these have to be considered as well and also the likelihood of failure analysis is still largely led by target not failure.

The first version of TTMS was created in 2005 and was then tested on real trees with some very adventurous local authorities. There have been minor tweeks along the way and we hve added some pests to the system as well. I cannot say when the publications will be out but will try to get an answer from the journal. I understand that the popular press have 'got hold of the system' but there must be some common sense here. There are always going to be differences between what is science and what is in the press. It is difficult for me to respond though without specific examples of 'the claims'. I am happy to answer questions though. In terms of what's in the box, this is a difficult one since the code is confidential. It would be a bit like asking the developers of PICUS or perhaps Microsoft to hand over their code? It would mean that cloning and potentialy misuse of the technology. However the science behind the workings is an easy one and is the subject of the publications, I think this is fair. Within TTMS BASIC there is a graphing option so you can actually see some of the outputs from the model without being able to see the code so you get an idea of what is happening without the confidential stuff of the actual mechanism. One of the other problems with this is that Thermydamics is a big subject area and although the workings of it are established it considers many factors and I know of many chemists and physists that struggle with it. This is not to belittle anyone it is just to say it is one of those subjects that you sort of get or don't. If you do get it you find it fairly straight forward, if you don't then it is a struggle. I always had the same problem with particle theory, I just didn't get it and so always struggled with it. If you want to borrow a copy of Monteith and Unsworth I would be happy to loan it Tony

I think this is the first time I have been asked on this form to give a list of publications though I may have missed other postings. The ones I listed are the most relevent ones. The pdf Tony has posted is a technical summary and not a formal publication for peer review. The ones submitted for peer review are much more in-depth but you will just have to wait for the arb journal ot come out. I can't ever remember using the terms leeches or witch craft or anything like that. Where on earth did you get that one from? In terms of how the publications relate to the application of thermal imging. All the references relate to the relationship between intrenal wood thermal properties and surface temperature. Thermal imaging cameras are just big expensive thermometers that measure surface temperture. So the fact that thermal imaging is not in the title is neither here nor there but since this is covered in the publications I have submitted then wait and see. Please don't pre-judge them though when you haven't seen them; unless you are one of the referees in which case you probably shouldn't be expressing your opinions on them here anyhow. In terms of the quality of the references posted for Tony they are all by scientists of the highest calibre. Atkins is astounding as a physical chemist and his book is in every university chemistry department in the world. Monteith (just google Penman-Monteith equation) Unworth (look up porometer on google). Or google either of them wth plant physiology. In terms of the technology, all technology is based on mathematical models even VTA. The process is: literature/primary invetigation; develop model; test model; re-jig model; etc. Our model is under constant testing by its users on a daily basis as are all good models

Andy the acknolwledgement is in their reports to clients, their summing up assessments and in their use of the information. I have a publication accepted by the arb journal that goes through this and which will be published soon. Also there is the paper I presented in Turin. Tony these will make good bed-time reading to start with Atkins P and de Paula J (2006) ‘Atkins’ Physical Chemistry-8th Edition. Oxford University Press. Catena A and Catena G (2007) Overview of thermal imaging for tree assessment. Arboric Journal 31. Herrington LP (1969). On temperature and heat flow in tree stems. Yale Univ. Sch. For. Bull. 73. Hunt JF, Gu H and Lebow PK (2008) Theoretical thermal conductivity equation for uniform density wood cells. Wood and Fiber Science, 40(2): 167 – 180 Monteith, JL and Unsworth, MH (2007) Principles of Environmental Physics-Third Edition. Academic Press, London. Potter BE and Andresen JA (2002) A finite-difference model of temperatures and heat flow within a tree stem. Can. J. For. Res. 32: 548–555.

Jim Clark has already used in part the methodology for assessing liklihood from population data that I presented to the ISA in Turin. Julian Forbes Laird and some of his associates has used TI as a part of THREATS. Many licensed QTRA users use TI as well, the list goes on. Seems to me a great number of people are using it and the number is growing.

Sorry the pedant joke was aimed at Andrew. Andy I agree that in many cases there is only a need for a VTA at what ever price but there are also situations where more information is needed. one of the first paying TI jobs I did was at a park in the South West where 200 trees had been condemned or recommended by a well respected consultant who I know well and also respect. When I turned up the first thing I noticed was that nearly all the trees had very similar symptoms and while there were a number of trees with fruiting bodies etc I was suspicious. So I got the camera out and spent a day and a half collecting the data. It become apparent that all the trees were partly drought stressed and taking up water from deep in the soil to combat this (there is a particular temperature signature for this which is quite rare in the UK). This was not the cause of the visual symptoms alone. The site was close to the sea and the trees were taking up brackish water. This was stressing them and the fungi were all saprophytic. Result was 200 hundred trees recommended for work became 6 for invasive inspection and in the end I think 2 were taken down. Now to be fair to the original consultant would have needed a crystal ball to work it out. I have a list of plant physiology qualifications and publications as long as your arm and I would not have worked it out without the right kit. Then there was the Beach Road West incident in Somerset, where a tree suddenly fell down in a light wind. We surveyed and found a tree that looked no different to the others visually but had ahrdly any heat going in to it from the ground. The tree was drilled by the tree officer and he didn't find the decay because it was right at the very base, luckily he drilled lower down where I recomeded and he found that 90% of the base and roots had gone. The reason we were asked to look at the trees was they had all had a VTA assessment but there was concern that another failure would be catastrophic in terms of public relations. The tree we found was the only on outside a house (Sod's law). I could go on but the point is that yes VTA, quick and cheap, but it has limits and what is the next stage of investigation? With young trees probably nothing. When dealing with older trees you just can't drill, probe, and aerial inspectlarge numbers it will tend to lead to corrective work or cost a fortune and niether may be appropriate. There is some realy good data on this by a German (think his surname is Frick). There was a comment earlier about well respected accomplished arbs. If you want to see well respected arb consultants arguing put the in front of a veteran or ancient tree and ask them what they would do. I am regularly asked by respected consultants to provide thermal imaging surveys (or point them in the direction of a licensee) of veteran or ancient trees, they find the information invaluable, particularly when dealing with M. giganteus; K. deusta or even Ganoderma sp

I have looked at my original posting and fail to see how I have missrepresented VTA. However, even K. M. would tell you that VTA is only a starting point and trees identified by thier attributes may need closer inspection. The point though is this if you have a population and a sub population has a defect and within that population those defects are known to cause a disproportionate number of failures then you have something significant. However if most members of another population have the same defect and there is no history of failures or disproportionate number of failures associated with them then the attribute is insignificant. This is indisputable and what the use of VTA or any other methodology should seek to determine. VTA is a methodology thats seeks to identify those attributes that may be significant. It does not on its own determine the significance since that will be down to many factors and variables not just the presence of a visual attribute.

Refering back to the quotes in Dr Catena's work. There are some points. One is that the publication is at least three years out of date and I know that Giorgio's work has moved on from this. Secondly Dr Catena does not have the same scientific background as me and uses the technology in a slightly different way in that his readings are relative not absolute as my system is. But since I have published this it's probably best if you read it. In terms of invividual trees it is hard to comment without all the supporting data but the temperature differences could be quite small so a cooler patch may be insignificant. Also drying of wood will affect the thermal properties of wood quite dramatically, so although the visable amount of decay may be small there may be dry wood that is distiguished as a cooler patch. In terms of a usable system the National Trust for Scotland have used it for three years now and have their own trained person. Blenhiem have used it remarkably well as have many others for about the same period of time. Again if you want to understand this more read the publications when they come out. Having demonstrated it to many local authorities the key things are track record, cost and credibility. Track record is good in terms of virtually no failures, and those that happened where predictable, but on the other side hundreds of condemed trees still standing and doing well. Price realy depends on what you compare it with and what you are dealing with. We used it as part of a complete package and to fit into other peoples existing systems, we have a number of QTRA users and THREATS users amoungst the clients and licensees. The lack of up-to-date publications has been an issue on this last point, but this has now been addressed. We are seeing a large number of repeat orders now and an every increasing number of users. New technology takes time to bed in but now people have seen others use it with sucess it is becoming easier and the price of training and software is comming down as a result. When I first strarted using the cameras they cost £900 a week to rent and cost £25,000 now similar spec cameras are available for around £400 a week and cost around £11,000. In terms of showing people the obvious in demonstartions there are two things with this. Firstly in terms of getting a message across, an obvious example is often a good starting point. Secondly these things are sometimes forced upon us by the organisers, i.e they choose the trees they want us to look at. I personally like the challenging trees. Te ones that look absolutely fine but are rotten as hell. Luckily they are not very common but they are out there; or better still the big old trees covered in fungi that have been given the thumbs down but actually are fine. In terms of science, there are always going to be differences of oppinion in our industry simply because some see it as art and othres as science. I came from a hort/ag background originally so I have a strong science basis to my thinking and arguments but I still have time for the arts opinions. After all a great deal of what arbs provide is artistic and pleasing to both the eye and spirit. However, if we are going to look at risk and likelihood of failure, this has to be based on strong fundamental science, and because of this bias an opinion should only come into it when absolutely necessary.

There are a number of points here that are valid and should always be investigated fully before any product is launched. Regarding the science behind how thermal imaging works and what it demonstartes this has been well established for around 40 years. The first publications on the relationships between surface temperature and the internal heat conduction and heat capacity were around the 1920's. More recently I have submitted a number of publications on both the science of how it works and its application, as has Giorgio Catena. And there are lots of other more recent applications of thermal imaging in forestry. The university of Melbourne runs courses on its use with wood pests for example. In terms of the overall system developed, it is not actualy a probability of failure system but what it can do is feed information into probability of failure methodologies for risk assessment but it can also feed into classification systems like Metheny and Clark or THREATS. With all tools there is a need for the data provided to be consistent woth the methodologies used to assess the trees. VTA is essentially a methodology based on comparative statistics. You look at the tree and identify those variables, factors or attributes that are different form the population as a whole. Once these are identified there can be a need for further investigation, with thermal imaging the system uses the same methododlogy. The data from the thermal images is compared to what is considered normal for a tree population and is compared statistically. When it is proven that it is statistically significantly different from the rest of the population it is considered for further investigation, at this stage it is usually an invasive methodology. This separation of trees into classifications according to thier condition is just waht is achieved by THREATS and by VTA. Comaprison with actual failures gives the benchmark for the relationship between the progression of the dysfunction detremined by the thermal image and the likelihood of failure. This can also be cross-referenced by comparisons between different populations such as sheltered woodland populations, exposed populations or urban populations. This can be achieved because you can sample so many trees. This has been submitted and accepted for publiction. Incedently data from VTA should be treated in the same way. It should be collated and analysed to find out where the differences are and how individuals that fail are different from the rest of the population. If this isn't done then there is no scientific validity to any assumptions made about the hypothetical correlations between individual defects and the likelihhood to fail. Also accepted for publication is the protocol that you can monitor changes in the thermal properties of wood to monitor recovery and decline. This can also be used to audit VTA methodologies. This allows in part quantification of the reduction in likelihood of failure brought about by an increased frequency of inspection. This cannot be done accurately by VTA alone but it means that ultimately you get an inspection regime that fits the required outcome rather than prophalactic inspection for the sake of it or restricted inspection because there is no justification for the increased expense. This is not to mention targeted inspection regimes and amny otherthings that can be introduced with TI As for the idea that it is a tool that we don't need, as long as there are trees being needlessly removed we need a tool that will give us more information about the internal workings of trees. A great deal has been made about the non-invasive nature of thermal imaging, but it is also the kind of information given that is important. The conductivity and capacitance of wood are optimal when the wood fibre is intact and the cells are well hydrated. As water is removed and the fibres degraded, the thermal properties are reduced. This means that changes in the thermal reactivity of wood give us information about where cells are well hydrated and well organisd and intact. The thermal patterns tell how these are connected up the tree. I have made good use of this information in terms of work carried out on veteran beech trees. By being able to see where the wood has near optimal properties, the trees have been pruned and the regrowth has been excelent. Just writing this up for publication at the moment. The best bit is that in many cases the trees could be 'left to their own devices' without any worry about them failing, many with K. deusta as a purely saprophytic growth, others with superficial growths of M. giganteous. Many with Ganoderma sp. This is quite important since I am convinced that many older beech trees go into a kind of transient veteran stage caused by drought from which they recover. The problem is that work is then carried out that accelerates the decline of the trees, where as if they had been left to recover then they would have done so and the only work would be the occasional removal of dead wood.

How time flies, training in thermal imaging will be available Bristol 28th-30th September and Nottigham 23rd-25th November. We have linked up with Andrew Cowan to offer training in both the tree health assessment and the bat and bird tracking simultaneously. details from myself or andrew [email protected] or [email protected] Regards Marcus

IF you follow this link you will see AC explain Themal Imaging to the BBC. BBC NEWS | UK | England | Cameras used to find danger trees Regards Marcus

I'm still smiling that's for sure:001_smile:

Basically Bryn did the thermal imaging off his own bat, and the powers that be were unconvinced by thermal imaging. It seems if you give a tree a good pull and it is still standing then thats alright. It's a bit like the old ducking stool I guess.

Bryn Andrews Has informed me that the Lucolm Oak at Crewkerne that was due to be felled has been saved. Bryn (one of our licensees) took some thermal images and on the basis of this information a tree pulling was urdertaken. The two pieces of information concured and so the local council reversed their decision to allow the tree to be felled. Well done to Bryn, Neville Fay, Andrew Cowan and others who all contributed to the argument. I just hope sods law doesn't apply and the thing falls down, still I can blame Neville for pulling it:001_smile:. I have a big smile on my face today. Is there anyone who still doubts the technology?

Hang on, I know I studied this over 20 years ago but at the time I was told that the beetles infect the trees wit the fungus when they feed in the upper canopy as they move around to mate. I was also told they are pretty lazy things so they don't like to go too low but use wind streams to travel and also don't like hilly areas or areas that are very windy. This is why there are natural geographical boundaries. Could be rubbish since it was 20 years ago

Hi I'm not sure how many US people log on to this site but anyhow I am giving a seminar on thermal imaging at the Botanic Gardens in New York 16th to 19th June contact me [email protected] f or details. cheers Marcus B-T

We have a two day training course in Nottingham in thermal imaging that leads to becoming a licensed user of our thermal imaging technology to use thermal imaging to study the balance between health and decay in trees. Cost £750 plus VAT. There is just one place left. Call to discuss 07870 280235 Marcus Bellett-Travers

We still have that one place left if anyone wants to be trained in thermal imaging and become a licensed user. Regards Marcus

We have a single place left for the thermal imaging training course next Monday and Tuesday in Nottingham. Price £750 plus VAT. This is our last training course until November. contact me on 07870 280235 [email protected]

We have two places left on the thermal imaging course 27th-28th April in Central Nottingham. contact [email protected] 07870280235 for details

My dear amigos, it can be either the bacteria or the fungus that causes the canker but from the description I wonder if something else actually killed the tree?

As promised here is an updated pdf of Thermal Imaging of Trees. Doesn't have everything so I wil have to do a version 2 at some point. Enjoy Marcus