Advertisement

Trees

, Volume 32, Issue 4, pp 985–1000 | Cite as

The effect of simulated trunk splits, pruning, and cabling on sways of quercus rubra L.

  • Brian Kane
Original Article
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Biomechanics

Abstract

Key message

Cabling co-dominant stems at different heights and tensions altered neither frequency nor damping ratio, but the location and proportion of pruned crown mass significantly influenced both frequency and damping ratio.

Abstract

Amenity trees provide many benefits, but can damage property and injure persons. Arboricultural treatments like pruning and cabling intend to reduce the likelihood of tree failure, but the effect of such treatments on tree sways is not well known. We measured the sway response (frequency and damping ratio) of seven Quercus rubra L. before and after consecutive arboricultural treatments, including the addition a climber swaying freely or secured rigidly to the tree. We also quantified crown architecture and tree mass. Cabling two co-dominant stems did not influence sway response, but pruning increased frequency and decreased damping ratio. The effect of pruning depended on the proportion and location of pruned crown mass. Adding a climber predictably affected frequency and damping ratio in accordance with physical principles. This work adds novel insights to the understanding of tree sways, since previous studies have been limited by single trees, pruning types, or pruning severities.

Keywords

Pruning Cabling Frequency Damping ratio 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work would not have been possible without diligent data collection by A. Ahlquist, T. Aronson, T. Beals, D. Burcham, N. Eicholtz, J. Esiason, A. Grove, N. Morrell, M. Palaschak, S. Schunk, J. Sidman, A. Wilkie, S. Zolondick, and Dr. Noel Watkins, and was partially supported by a Summer Scholars grant through the University of Massachusetts Center for Agriculture, Food, and the Environment.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Anonymous (2013) American National Standard for tree care operations—tree, shrub, and other woody plant management—standard practices (supplemental support systems). Tree Care Industry Association, LondonderryGoogle Scholar
  2. Baker CJ (1995) The development of a theoretical model for the windthrow of plants. J Theor Biol 175:355–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baker CJ (1997) Measurements of the natural frequencies of trees. J Exp Bot 48:1125–1132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ciftci C, Brena SF, Kane B, Arwade SR (2013) The effect of crown architecture on dynamic amplification factor of an open-grown sugar maple (Acer saccharum L.). Trees 27:1175–1189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ciftci C, Arwade SR, Kane B, Brena SF (2014a) Analysis of the probability of failure for open-grown trees during wind storms. Probab Eng Mech 37:41–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ciftci C, Kane B, Brena SF, Arwade SR (2014b) Loss in moment capacity of tree stems induced by decay. Trees 28:517–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ferrini F, Van Den Bosch CCK, Fini A (2017) Routledge handbook of urban forestry. Taylor & Francis, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  8. Fournier M, Dlouha J, Jaouen G, Almeras T (2013) Integrative biomechanics for tree ecology: beyond wood density and strength. J Exp Bot 64:4793–4815CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Gilman EF, Grabosky JC, Jones S, Harchick C (2008a) Effects of pruning dose and type on trunk movement in Tropical storm winds. Arbor Urb For 34:13–19Google Scholar
  10. Gilman EF, Masters F, Grabosky JC (2008b) Pruning affects tree movement in hurricane force wind. Arbor Urb For 34:20–28Google Scholar
  11. Gilman EF, Miesbauer JW, Masters F (2015) Structural pruning effects on stem and trunk strain in wind. Arbor Urb For 41:3–10Google Scholar
  12. James KR (2014) A study of branch dynamics on an open-grown tree. Arbor Urb For 40:125–134Google Scholar
  13. Kane B, Autio WA (2014) Installing cables did not affect annual radial increment in co-dominant stems of red oaks. Urb For Urb Green 13:443–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kane B, James KR (2011) Dynamic properties of open-grown deciduous trees. Can J For Res 41:321–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kane B, Smiley ET (2006) Drag coefficients and crown area estimation of red maple. Can J For Res 36:1951–1958CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kane B, Pavlis M, Harris JR, Seiler JR (2008) Crown reconfiguration and trunk stress in deciduous trees. Can J For Res 38:1275–1289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kane B, Modarres-Sadeghi Y, James KR, Reiland M (2014) Effects of crown structure on the sway characteristics of large decurrent trees. Trees 28:151–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. MacFarlane DW, Kane B (2017) Neighbour effects on tree architecture: functional trade-offs balancing crown competitiveness with wind resistance. Funct Ecol.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.12865 Google Scholar
  19. McMahon TA, Kronauer RE (1976) Tree structures: deducing the principle of mechanical design. J Theor Biol 59:443–466CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Miesbauer JW, Gilman EF, Giurcanu M (2014) Effects of tree crown structure on dynamic properties of Acer rubrum L. ‘Florida Flame’. Arbor Urb For 40:218–229Google Scholar
  21. Milne R (1991) Dynamics of swaying of Picea sitchensis. Tree Physiol 9:383–399CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Moore JR, Maguire DA (2004) Natural sway frequencies and damping ratios of trees: concepts, review and synthesis of previous studies. Trees 18:195–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Moore JR, Maguire DA (2005) Natural sway frequencies and damping ratios of trees: influence of crown structure. Trees 19:363–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mortimer MJ, Kane B (2004) Hazard tree liability in the United States: uncertain risks for owners and professionals. Urb For Urb Green 2:159–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pavlis M, Kane B, Harris JR, Seiler JR (2008) The effects of pruning on drag and bending moments of shade trees. Arbor Urb For 34:207–215Google Scholar
  26. Reiland M, Kane B, Modarres-Sadeghi Y, Ryan HDP (2015) The effect of cables and leaves on the dynamic properties of red oak (Quercus rubra) with co-dominant stems. Urb For Urb Green 14:844–850CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Schmidlin TW (2009) Human fatalities from wind-related tree failures in the United States, 1995–2007. Nat Hazards 50:13–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sellier D, Fourcaud T (2005) A mechanical analysis of the relationship between free oscillations of Pinus pinaster Ait. saplings and their aerial architecture. J Exp Bot 56:1563–1573CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Sellier D, Fourcaud T (2009) Crown structure and wood properties: influence on tree sway and response to high winds. Am J Bot 96:885–896CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Smiley ET, Kane B (2006) The effects of pruning type on wind loading of Acer rubrum. J Arboric 32:33–40Google Scholar
  31. Smiley ET, Matheny NP, Lilly S (2011) Tree risk assessment. International Society of Arboriculture, ChampaignGoogle Scholar
  32. Spatz HC, Brüchert F, Pfisterer J (2007) Multiple resonance damping or how do trees escape dangerously large oscillations? Am J Bot 94:1603–1611CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Sugden MJ (1962) Tree sway period—a possible new parameter for crown classification and stand competition. For Chron 38:336–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Theckes B, De Langre E, Boutillon X (2011) Damping by branching: a bioinspiration from trees. Bioinsp Biomim 6:046010CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Environmental ConservationUniversity of Massachusetts-AmherstAmherstUSA

Personalised recommendations