1978) test was carried out for the five log quality classes regarding the quality distribution of th e centerboards produced within the SPSB.
The detailed analysis of the relationship between the quality of sideboards and the quality of the corresponding pair of centerboards is given in Table 2.
Quality A centerboards yielded the greatest amount of quality A sideboards, quality B centerboards yielded mostly quality B sideboards, and so on with the exception of quality D.
centerboards and sideboards at individual log level) were calculated.
Secondly, quality grading of sideboards and centerboards was based on the optimal output mills would produce as well.
The findings concerning the poor agreement between the quality of the centerboards and that of the sawlogs (Table 4) when using the visual grading system are in line with earlier studies (Jappinen 2000, Gronlund 1995) conducted in Sweden.
In other words, one would expect that a certain relationship should exist between the quality grade of the sideboards and that of the centerboards coining from the same log.
For one thing, a possible application can be foreseen for a cant-sawing scenario (the most common in Sweden) where the quality of the centerboards is only determined in the raw sorting station after sawing the block in the second saw.
When it comes to lumber traceability, again, the focus is on following centerboards.
Thus, the overall purpose of this investigation was to compare sideboard quality to visible log quality and centerboard quality and to determine any relationship between them.
Further analysis of the centerboard to sideboard quality relationship was carried out through the use of the vSM simulator together with the SPSB data.
Moreover, it seems that this relationship is even stronger, especially for the centerboard pairs having the same quality for both components, i.
Separate graders did centerboard grading and sideboard grading.
The study revealed that the correlation between sideboard quality and centerboard quality was fairly high.