Department of Forest Harvesting, Faculty of Forestry and Wood Sciences, Czech University of Life Science Prague, Kamycka 129, Praha 6 - Suchdol 165 21, Czech Republic
Bibliografia
1. Duszyński Ł, Walczyk J. 2009 Utilization of the mht-182hvt mountain harvester and its effect on the forest soil and stand. EJPAU 12(2), #13 Available Online: http://www.ejpau.media.pl/volume12/issue2/art-13.html
2. Dvorak, J. 2009. Sestaveni vykonovych norem pro harvestory a vyvażeci traktory podle vykonovych trid stroju a vyrobnich podminek [Establihment of the performance standard for harvesters and forwarders according to power classes of machines and production conditions]. Praha: CZU v Praze, 28 [in Czech].
3. Dvorak, J. et al. 2008. Influence of Human Factor on Time of Work Stages of Harvesters and Crane-equipped Forwarders. Journal of Forest Science, vol. 54, no. 1, 24-30.
4. Dvorak, J., Karnet, P. 2007. Preliminary technical time standards for harvesters working in premature and mature stands. Electronic journal of polish agricultural universities, Akademii Rolniczej in Wroclaw, vol. 10, no. 1.
5. Erler, J. 2000. Forstechnik [Forest Machinery]. Stuttgart: 246
6. Forbrig, A. 2001. Zur technischen Arbeitsproduktivität von Kranvollernter [At harvester technical productivity]. Forstechnische Information, c. 5, 22-25 [in German].
7. Glöde, D., Sikström, U 2001. Two felling methods in final cutting of shelterwood, single-grip harwester produktivity and damage to the regeneration. Silva Fennica, 35 (1), 71-83.
8. Glöde, D. 1999. Single- and double-trip harvesters - productivity measurments in final cutting of shelterwood. Journal of Forest Engineering, vol. 10, no. 2, 63-74.
9. Jirousek, R. et al. 2007. Productivity and costs of the mechanized cut-to-length wood harvesting system in clear-felling operations. Journal of Forest Science, vol. 53, no. 10, 476-482.
10. Kärhä, K., Rönkkö, E. 2004. Productivity and Cutting Costs of Thinning Harvesters. Journal of Forest Engineering, vol. 15, no. 2, 43-56.
11. Lukac L. 2005. Viacoperacne stroje v lesnom hospodarstve [Multi-operational maschines in forestry]. TU vo Zvolene, 134 [in Slovak].
12. Moskalik, T. 2004. Influence of Cutting Form on the Harvester Productivity and Costs. In: International Symposium Mechanisierung der Waldarbeit, 37. Grunden - Vienna. Wien, BOKU: 112-118.
13. MZe 2009. Zprava o stavu lesa a lesniho hospodarstvi Ceske republiky v roce 2008 [The report on forest conditions in the Czech Republic in 2008]. Praha: Mze CR, 128 [in Czech].
14. Nurminen T., Korpunen H., Uusitalo J. 2006. Time Consumtion Analysis of the Mechanized Cut-to-length Harvesting System. Silva Fennica, vol. 40, no. 2, 335-363.
15. Purfürst, F., Erler, J. 2006. The precision of produktivity models for the harvester - do we forget the human factor? In: Precision Forestry in Plantations, Semi-Natural and Natural Forests. Proceedings of the International Precision Forestry Symposium. Stellenbosch University, South Africa, 5-10 March 2006, 465-475.
16. Steponavicius D. , Zinkevicius R. 2010. The study of the logging methods prevailed in lithuania and other countries of central europe, EJPAU 13(1), #01. Available Online: http://www.ejpau.media.pl/volume13/issue1/art-01.html
17. Ulrich , R. et al. (2002). Poużiti harvestorove technologie v probirkach. [Harvester technics using in thinning], Brno: MZLU v Brne, 85 [in Czech].
18. Valenta, J., Neruda, J. 2003. Analysis of the Production Rate of Harvester Technologies in Logging Operations, Brno, In: Fortechenvi Brno. MZLU v Brne: 1-8.
19. Vyhlaska c. 84/1996 Ministerstva zemedelstvi Ceske republiky z roku 1996 [Decree No. 84/1996 Ministery of Agriculture of the Czech Republic] [in Czech].
20. Zychowicz W. 2005. Efficiency of exploitation of the vehicle that can be used alternatively as a forwarder of clam bunk skidder. Zeszyty Naukowe Akademii Rolniczej, no. 419, 291-298.