Bob,
 
Not being a math major (I had to drop CAL I because I couldn't understand it),  
it looks like you are using a cone to measure the volume as the "gold 
standard" and then using the new ENTPTS2 to get the measurements that are often 
taken, height and circumfence, to match it.  If this is the case, then would 
this work also for trees like palms or any other tree in which there is a trunk 
without branches for say 50 or so feet then a relatively flat crown(umbrella 
shaped)? How about the classic hardwood shaped tree (golf ball on a tee)?
 
BTW, I am not going to be able to make it to the ENTS gathering in Oct. as it 
is too close to my projected closing.  Sorry, I wish I could've made it.  Maybe 
the next one.
 
Beth
 
"Information is moving--you know, nightly news is one way, of course, but it's 
also moving through the blogosphere and through the Internets."
Washington DC, May 2, 2007 George W. Bush

--- On Wed, 9/24/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [ENTS] Sneak preview
To: [email protected]
Date: Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 9:25 AM




ENTS,
 
    Folks, it is time to reconsider our two ENTS methods of ranking the size of 
trees: ENTSPTS and TDI. The TDI system is sound. No modifications needed there, 
but ENTSPTS is ailing, the reason being that the number of points awarded does 
not track well enough with increases in trunk volume . The following table 
compares the effect of tree size increases using the old way of calculating 
ENTSPTS ( height x circumference) , a proposed new way of calculating ENTSPTS ( 
[height x Circumference ^2]/100), and an abbreviated version of the champion 
tree formula ( 12 x circumference + height).
 















   Height
    Circ
 VOL-CONE
ratio
  ENTSPTS
  ratio
  ENTSPTS2
   ratio
       Champ      Tree Pts
   ratio

50
8
84.8
 
400
 
32
 
146
 

50
12
190.8
   2.3
600
   1.5
72
    2.3
194
    1.3

50
16
339.2
   4.0
800
   2.0
128
    4.0
242
    1.7

100
8
169.6
   2.0
800
   2.0
64
    2.0
196
    1.3

100
12
381.6
   4.5
1200
   3.0
144
    4.5
244
    1.7

100
16
678.4
   8.0
1600
   4.0
256
    8.0
292
    2.0

150
8
254.4
   3.0
1200
   3.0
96
    3.0
246
    1.7

150
12
572.4
   6.8
1800
   4.5
216
    6.8
294
    2.0

150
16
1017.6
  12.0
2400
   6.0
384
   12.0
342
    2.3
 
       Looking at the table, we see that the ratio of the volume of the largest 
tree to the volume of the smallest is 12 to 1. The ratio of ENTSPTS of the 
largest tree to the smallest is 6 to 1. The ratio of modified ENTSPTS of the 
largest to the smallest tree is 12 to 1 (just what we want), and the ratio 
of modified champion tree points of the largest to smallest tree is 2.3 to 1. 
The change in modified ENTSPTS tracks perfectly with conical volume. Each ratio 
in the above table is the current entry divided by the first entry in the 
respective column, not the preceding entry in the column. The purpose of the 
ratio columns is to show how points track with changes in volume as measured by 
a form such as the cone or paraboloid. 
      The reason I chose a scaling factor of 100 for modified ENTSPTS is to 
bring the point total more in line with numbers that come from the champion 
tree formula. Additionally, it is computationally simple. I leave out 
hypothetical crown spread in the table. However, were we to include realistic 
crownspreads for the size trees indicated by height and circumference, the 
ratio of the points of the largest tree to the smallest would increase slightly 
- perhaps 2.5 to 1.
     I've discussed the new system of ENTSPTS with Ed off list. Ed is solidly 
behind it. Ed also mentioned that John Eichholz had once before pointed out the 
value of C^2 versus C as the factor dealing with circumference. I mentioned the 
proposed new method briefly to Will in a recent phone conversation and told him 
I'd shortly present some analysis. The above table is the first step in that 
direction. 
     Thoughts anyone?
Bob
 




      
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Eastern Native Tree Society http://www.nativetreesociety.org

You are subscribed to the Google Groups "ENTSTrees" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to