@ United States 

Department of 

Agriculture 

Forest Service 

Northeastern Forest 

Experiment Station 

Research Paper 

NE-574 

Making Black Cherry Blanks 

from System 6 

Hugh W. Reynolds 

Bruce G. Hansen 
The Authors 

Hugh W. Reynolds received a B.S. degree in electrical engineering 

from the University of Minnesota in 1950. For the past 20 years he has been 

engaged in research on the utilization of low-grade hardwoods at the Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, Princeton, West Virginia. 

Bruce G. Hansen, economist, received a B.S. degree in economics 

from Concord College at Athens, West Virginia, in 1968, and an M.B.A. 

degree from Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in 1978. 

Manuscript received for publication 16 May 1985. 

Abstract 

Low-grade, small-diameter black cherry (Prunus serotina) timber was 

used to make System 6 cants. Cherry from the Allegheny National Forest 

(Ludlow, PA), west-central Pennsylvania (Glen Hope, PA), north-central 

Pennsylvania (Dushore, PA), western Maryland (Oakland, MD), and the 

Monongahela National Forest (Middle Mountain, WV) was used. The cants 

were resawed to 414 boards, the boards dried, and blanks were made at the 

Princeton Laboratory's System 6 pilot plant. By varying the rough mill 

procedures, differences in board quality and cutting bill requirements were 

accommodated keeping yields high. The cherry from the Pennsylvania and 

Maryland sites gave similar yields, while the West Virginia cherry gave 5 

percent higher yields. Gum streak was not a problem. Pennsylvania and 

Maryland cherry gave a 39.0 percent return, and West Virginia cherry gave a 

50.3 percent return on a $2.2 million 10-year investment. 
Black cherry is a highly sought after furniture 

wood. We undertook a series of studies to determine if 

it was not only possible but also economically feasible 

to use small-diameter, low-grade cherry available from 

timber harvesting and from silvicultural thinnings in 

Pennsylvania, Maryland, and West Virginia as raw 

material for System 6 to make high-quality cherry 

blanks. The blanks would be used as a substitute for 

high-quality cherry lumber in the furniture industry. 

These studies had three purposes: 

0 To sample small-diameter, low-grade cherry as 

System 6 bolts taken from Pennsylvania, Maryland, 

and West Virginia. 

0 To demonstrate the flexibility of System 6 in 

converting the cherry from the different sites to 

varying quantities of blanks. 

0 To indicate the economic potential for System 6 

mills using cherry from the various sites. 

System 6 is used to convert small-diameter, lowgrade hardwood timber to standard-size blanks. The 

blanks are used to make the rough dimension parts 

required for each piece of furniture. This approach to 

small timber conversion is explained by Reynolds and 

Gatchell (1979). The technology of System 6 is also 

covered by Reynolds and Gatchell (1982). Blanks are 

panels of defect-free wood that are edge glued to 

standard widths as developed by Araman and others 

(1982). The design of System 6 mills is covered by 

Reynolds and Hansen (1984). The economics of System 

6 mills is covered by Hansen and Reynolds (1984). We 

assume that the reader has a working knowledge of 

System 6 and blanks. 

Procedures 

In this paper, we cover research on small-diameter, 

low-grade cherry from five sites. The small timber was 

made to bolts, the bolts were sawed to two cants per 

bolt, and the cants were brought to the System 6 pilot 

plant for conversion to 414 C1F (clear-one-face) blanks. 

The procedures to convert the timber to blanks are 

covered in this section. The processing yields per site 

are covered in the Results section. 

Sawmills in the five areas had purchased srnalldiameter cherry timber that was too small to saw to 

lumber profitably. This is the timber that must be 

removed to permit the better trees to grow. The timber 

was bucked to 6-foot bolt lengths and sawed to two 

round-edge cants per bolt. Cants were either 3-1/4 or 4 

inches thick. The cants were then brought to the 

Forestry Sciences Laboratory at Princeton, West Virginia, for processing to blanks using System 6. 

The cants from each site were processed separately. The cants were resawed to 414 boards with an 

actual thickness of 1-3116 inches. A board was saved if 

it had at least one 1-112- by 15-inch C1F cutting in it. 

The boards were immediately sticker stacked in 4-footwide by 4-foot-high packages using 112-inch-thick 

stickers on 2-foot centers. 

The packages of green boards were put into a predryer for about 21 days lowering the MC (moisture 

content) to 20 percent. Kiln drying, to bring the final 

MC to 6 percent, lasted 7 days. Equalizing and conditioning were done during this kiln schedule. 

The dried boards were graded using the National 

Hardwood Lumber Association grade rules for standard 

hardwood lumber. Board width and length distribution 

requirements per grade were dropped, but all other 

criteria were kept. Because of the small size of the 

System 6 boards, No. 1 Common is the highest possible grade. No boards were rejected. All boards not 

meeting or exceeding the No. 3A Common grade were 

tallied as "below grade." Gum streak, when found, was 

not considered a defect as cherry is graded by standard rules. 

The kiln-dried boards were hit-and-miss planed to 

1.000 inch thickness. The boards were then gang crosscut to 1, 2, or 3 pieces per board depending on board 

quality. The pieces without a 1-112- by 15-inch cutting 

were discarded. The good ones were ripped to 1-112, 2, 

2-112, 3, or 3-112 inch widths depending on defect location. The pieces were end trimmed to the longest blank 

length possible. Any remaining edge defects, as in 25 

percent of the pieces leaving the end-trim step when 

the mill is operated well, were ripped out in the last 

step. The defect-free pieces were edge glued to 26- 

inch-width panels in each length. Planing to 718 of an 

inch completed the process. 

In System 6 processing, choices are made in gang 

crosscutting to permit optimal efficiencies in making 

the required number of blanks in the standard lengths. 

These choices are called "GCL's" for gang crosscut 

lengths. The CIF blank lengths used were 72,60,50, 

45, 38, 33, 29, 25, 21, 18, and 15 inches. A research 

paper (Reynolds 1984) has been written explaining GCL 

choices. There is no one GCL that will make blanks in 

all 11 lengths efficiently. 
The best black cherry timber is said to grow in 

northwestern Pennsylvania. We sampled this area's 

small-diameter, low-grade cherry timber by getting 222 

cants from the Allegheny National Forest at Ludlow, 

Pennsylvania. We also sampled similar sized Pennsylvania cherry timber by getting 210 cants from the westcentral part of the state at Glen Hope and 152 cants 

from the north-central part of the state at Dushore. 

In addition, we sampled the small-diameter cherry 

timber available to western Maryland sawmillers by getting 170 cants from Oakland, Maryland, and 182 cherry 

cants from the Monongahela National Forest in eastcentral West Virginia at Middle Mountain. The five cant 

samples were of similar size and were large enough to 

determine variations in quality between sites. 

The distribution by grade of all dried boards from 

each site is given in Table 1. The grade distributions of 

the boards from all three Pennsylvania sites and the 

Maryland site are very much alike. However, the West 

Virginia site shows better quality. Experience has 

shown that small-diameter, low-grade hardwood timber 

that yields 50 percent or less below-grade dried boards 

is of high enough quality to be used in System 6. The 

timber from all sites met this criteria; that from West 

Virginia exceeded this criteria by a wide margin. 

The kiln-dried boards were cut up to CIF pieces. 

We studied six ways to make 414 C1F pieces. Each way 

to cut up boards to pieces is called a GCL. To select a 

GCL, the first thing to do is to determine which of the 

standard blank lengths will be in greatest demand. 

These target lengths are used to set the saw spacings 

on the gang crosscut saw. The length choices per GCL 

are limited to three. Boards can be end trimmed to 

make one long piece or two medium pieces or three 

short pieces. 

Table 1.-Board grade distribution 

(In percent of board feet) 

Below 

Site 1C 2C 3AC grade Total 

Ludlow, PA 1 23 29 47 100 

Glen Hope, PA 3 18 23 56 100 

Dushore, PA 3 23 24 50 100 

Oakland, MD 2 24 24 50 100 

M. Mountain,, WV 11 33 23 33 100 

However, the GCL's can be made more flexible by 

changing the sorting criteria used to determine which 

boards will be gang crosscut to 1, 2, or 3 pieces. The 

longer the sort criteria, the fewer boards will be 

selected. For instance, if the criteria used to select 

boards to be end trimmed to one piece per board were 

set at 72 inches, few boards would qualify. If this criteria were reduced to 50 inches, then more boards 

would be selected. 

The six GCL target lengths, saw spacings, and 

sort criteria are outlined in Table 2. The GCL's affect 

operation of the gang crosscut saw only. All other 

rough-mill operations proceed the same way regardless 

of GCL being used. 

There were only two different gang saw spacings 

used-1 set for GCL's 1, 3, and 5 and one set for 

GCL's 2, 4, and 6. By altering the decision rules as to 

which saws will be used, we forced more or fewer 

boards to be gang crosscut to one piece (the "long" 

boards) or forced more or fewer boards to be gang 

crosscut to two pieces (the "half" boards). All boards 

not meeting the "long" or "half" criteria were gang 

crosscut to three pieces. The exception to this threepiece gang crosscutting was GCL 2 where all boards 

except the "long" boards were gang crosscut to two 

pieces. 

Table 2. GCL's tested 

Target 

GCL lengths Sort criteria Saw spacing 

Inches Inches 

1 72,45,25,21 Long: 1 112 x 72 

Half: 1 112 x 45 

2 72,38,33 Long: 1 112 x 72 

Half: All other boards 

3 72,45,25,21 Long: 1 112 x 50 

Half: 1 112 x 29 

4 72,38,33,21, Long: None 

18 Half: 1 112 x 29 

5 45,25,21 Long: None 

Half: 1 112 x 29 

6 38,33,21,18 Long: None 

Half: 1 112 x 29 

1-2,25 inch 

2-3,22 inch 

3-4,25 inch 

1-2,38 inch 

2-4,39 inch 

3 not used 

1-2,25 inch 

2-3,22 inch 

3-4,25 inch 

1-2,33 inch 

2-3,18 inch 

3-4,21 inch 

1-2,25 inch 

2-3,22 inch 

3-4,25 inch 

1-2,33 inch 

2-3,18 inch 

3-4,25 inch 
I 

The results by GCL are in the form of blank quantity per blank length for each board grade and width. 

I There are four grades of boards in System 6: No. 1 

Common, No. 2 Common, No. 3A Common, and below 

grade. There are two board widths: 3-114 and 4 inches 

since only 3-114- and 4-inch cant thicknesses are sawed 

I from the bolt. There are 11 standard blank lengths 

I when 414, clear quality blanks are made from 6-foot 

boards. For each GCL, there is a one-row, eight-column 

matrix generated giving the total blank yields per board 

grade and width. The 1 by 8 total yield matrices for 

each of the six GCL's are shown in Table 3. There is 

another matrix of 11 rows and 8 columns generated 

that gives the yield by blank length for each board I grade and width. These two matrices constitute a yield 

table that can be used repeatedly. The 11 by 8 matrices 

are not reproduced in this report for purposes of 

I brevity. 

1 By multiplying the yield per grade and width (Table 

3) as a decimal by the gradelwidth distribution (Table 4) 

from the five sites, the yield in square feet of blanks 

per grade and width of board by site is found. In 414 

boards, the board footage and square footage are the 

same. Adding up the square feet yield per board grade 

and width will give the total yield. The 30 total yield 

values (5 sites times 6 GCL's per site) are shown in 

Table 5. I 

In comparing blank yield values among the various 

sites (Table,5), it is apparent that yields from four 

sites-Ludlow, Pennsylvania; Glen Hope, Pennsylvania; 

Dushore, Pennsylvania; and Oakland, Maryland-are 

very similar, while the yields from the Middle Mountain, 

West Virginia, site are higher. Comparing the yield 

values from Middle Mountain with the other four sites, 

by GCL's, the Middle Mountain yields range from 2.3 to 

Table 3.-Yield values for each GCL per board grade and width 

(In square feet of blanks/100 board feet of boards) 

1C 2C 3AC Below grade 

Grade 

width 3" 4" 3" 4" 3" 4" 3" 4" 

Table 4.-Board grade and width distribution 

(In board feet) 

1 C 2C 3AC Below grade 

Site 

3" 4" 3" 4" 3" 4" 3" 4" Total 

Ludlow, PA 10 2 110 118 180 110 300 170 1000 

Glen Hope, PA 27 4 118 59 168 67 401 155 1000 

Dushore, PA 10 22 79 147 110 134 225 273 1000 

Oakland, MD 10 10 150 90 170 70 350 150 1000 

M. Mountain, WV 30 80 130 200 110 120 190 140 1000 

Table 5.-Total 414 C1 F blank yield values for five cherry sites using 

six GCL's 

(In percent of board feet) 

Site GCL-1 GCL-2 GCL-3 GCL-4 GCL-5 GCL-6 

Ludlow, PA 44.3 44.0 46.1 48.2 48.0 51.9 

Glen Hope, PA 43.8 42.5 44.2 46.4 46.3 50.6 

Dushore, PA 45.8 43.8 46.3 49.1 47.6 51.3 

Oakland, MD 43.9 43.7 45.6 47.5 47.7 51.6 

M. Mountain, WV 48.1 48.7 51.4 53.5 53.4 56.4 
7.2 percent higher with an average of 5.3 percent 

higher. Comparing the Ludlow, Pennsylvania, site 

yields, by GCL's, with the other three similar 

sites-Glenn Hope, Pennsylvania; Dushore, Pennsylvania; and Oakland, Maryland-the Ludlow yields range 

from 2.1 percent higher to 1.5 percent lower with an 

average of only 0.6 percent higher. But the C1F blank 

yields are all uniformly good with one site giving 

approximately 5 percent higher yields. 

Values for total yield are valid in a market sense, 

only if all blanks can be used no matter how many are 

made in each length. For instance, one site could have 

most of the blanks in short lengths while another site 

could have long and short blanks even though they 

show an identicat total yield value. In the processing 

control section, we will consider the effect that market 

demand for specific lengths has on total yield. 

Production Control 

System 6 rough-mill production runs are preplanned. Three sets of data are needed for the production planning: 

Board-Grade Data: The timber coming from each 

site or from each cant supplier must be tested to determine the distribution of boards in each grade and 

width. The data in Table 4 illustrate the board-grade 

data requirement. All timber or cants coming from 

the same site or supplier will have a similar 

gradelwidth distribution as that found by test. We 

have shown how these data are obtained. 

e GCL Yield Data: These yield data are found when a 

GCL is tested. In effect, these data are a yield table 

for that GCL. The yield data will be valid for all 

boards graded by the standard hardwood grading 

rules. We have shown how these data are obtained. 

Blank Requirements: The quantity of blanks in each 

length to be made during the production run. 

We know the total industr-' demand for blanks by 

length (Araman et al. 1982) for furniture and cabinets. 

But blanks must be made for individual orders or 

groups of orders and not for annual demands. In running a furniture or cabinet factory, cutting bills giving 

the quantity of rough parts by size are made for each 

production run. The blank maker will be required to 

supply the blanks necessary for each parts cutting bill. 

Thus, blank demands, by quantity per length, will vary 

and the blank maker will make up his own blank cutting bills. Program BLANKS (Araman 1983) is used to 

determine blank cutting bills and has been programmed for use on the microcomputer (Reynolds and 

Araman, 1986). 

For this paper, we have set up a wide range of 

blank cutting bills going from one extreme-no long 

blanks required-to the other extreme-40 percent 

long blanks required. The nine cutting bills are outlined 

in Table 6. Long blanks are the limiting factor in the 

yield per cutting bill as long blanks can be trimmed to 

make shorter blanks but an excess of shorter blanks 

must be considered waste. 

Table 6.-Cutting bills 

(In percent of surface area per length class) 

Cutting bill number 

Length 

class 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 

Long (72-50) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 

Medium (49-32) 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 

Short (31 -21) 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 

Salvagea (20 or less) 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 

Total 

a May be less than, but no more than the requirements given. 
Discussion 

Now we have cherry from five sites, six ways to 

cut up the boards (GCL's), and nine cutting bills. A 

rough-mill production run using cherry from any one of 

the five sites to make blanks needed for any cutting 

bill is preplanned. Linear programming (LP) was used 

to determine the minimum number of boards needed 

for each cutting bill fromeach site (Reynolds 1984). 

These minimal solutions-how many board feet are to 

be cut up per GCL for each cutting bill using cherry 

from each site-are shbwn in the Appendix. 

As a preplanning example, consider using the 

Ludlow, Pennsylvania, cherry to make the blanks 

required by System 6. Tabte 13, Appendix, shows that 

75'percent of all boards should be cut up using GCL1; 

25 percent of all boards should be cut up by GCL4. The 

LP program output would show that for 10,000 square 

feet of blanks production, 22,075 board feet of boards 

would have to be used. Table 5 shows Ludlow, Pennsylvania, yields are 44.3 percent for GCLl and 48.2 

percent for GCL4. The total yield would be 45.3 percent 

(44.3 x .75 + 48.2 x .25 = 45.3). Using'GCL1, 16,556 

board feet of boards would be cut up. Using GCL 4, 

5,519 board feet of boards would be cut up. 

The results of the LP solutions are shown in Table 

7. They were very good for cutting bills that required 

no more than 15 percent long blanks; that is, cutting 

bills 1 through 4 for Ludlow, Pennsylvania, and the 

other three similar sites. The Middle Mountain, West 

Virginia, site was very good for cutting bills that 

required no more than 30 percent long blanks; that is, 

cutting bills 1 through 7. Yields over 45 percent were 

considered very good. 

As demand for long blanks increased, two things 

were apparent from the LP solutions: (1) more medium 

and short blanks were made than were needed; and (2) 

more salvage blanks were made than were permitted. 

Although they were good blanks, they were considered 

extra. Tables 8 and 9 show the percent yield considered extra in these categories. 

When all the yields from Tables 7, 8 and 9 are 

added per site and cutting bill, a strange thing is 

apparent. The total yields shown in Table 10 are very 

consistent regardless of the cutting bill requirements. 

From this, we deduce that the six GCL's used permit 

sufficient flexibility within the System 6 rough mill to 

Table 7.-Blank yields per cutting bill from each site 

(In percent of board feet) 

Cutting bill 

Site 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 

Ludlow, PA 44.8 45.5 46.0 46.8 35.8 38.7 33.4 29.5 26.2 

Glen Hope, PA 43.7 45.0 45.4 45.2 34.2 36.6 31.6 27.7 24.6 

Dushore, PA 44.6 45.2 45.5 46.4 37.4 40.2 34.4 30.4 27.0 

Oakland, MD 44.7 45.4 45.9 46.4 36.1 33.7 30.8 28.3 26.5 

M.Mountain,WV 51.8 52.3 52.7 53.1 53.2 49.9 43.4 38.7 34.4 

Table 8.-Medium and short blank yields per cutting bill 

and site in excess of requirements 

(In percent of board feet) 

Cutting billa 

Site 

5 6 7 8 9 

Ludlow, PA 2.0 5.0 7.5 9.5 11.4 

Glen Hope, PA 3.2 6.5 9.2 11.3 13.0 

Dushore, PA 1.3 4.5 7.2 9.2 11.3 

Oakland, MD 1.6 4.5 7.0 9.3 11.1 

M. Mountain, WV 0.0 2.0 4.8 7.5 9.9 

a No excess of requirements for cutting bills 1-4. 
get consistently encouraging yields. In other words, 

changing the cutting bill does not lower yield, it just 

means that extra blanks are made at that time. 

The LP solution gives the board quantity to be cut 

up using each GCL. The rough mill is run and the 

blanks are made until all the boards to be cut have 

been used. Then the longer blanks in excess of 

requirements are trimmed to meet the shortages in 

shorter blanks. Board cutup and blank trim are considered within the LP run. The amount of longer blank 

trimming per cutting bill is shown in Table 11 for each 

site. 

The figures in Table 11, per cutting bill, are 

remarkably consistent. The quantity of longer blanks 

trimmed to fulfill the shorter blank requirements is 

similar for each cutting bill, though the Middle Mountain site cherry board grade distribution is different 

from that of the other four sites. The LP technique is 

able to make compensation for the various input board 

grade differences from each site. 

The differences in board qualities from each site 

can be compensated for through the judicious balancing of the quantities of boards to be cut up using each 

GCL. However, these compensations have a limit. 

When demand for long blanks exceeds 15 percent 

(cutting bills 5 through 9), yields in required blanks 

drop though total yield of blanks in all lengths remains 

high. 

Table 9.-Salvage blank yields per cutting bill and site in excess of 

permitted quantities 

(In percent of board feet) 

Cutting billa 

Site 

5 6 7 8 9 

Ludlow, PA 8.4 2.5 4.6 6.6 8.0 

Glen Hope, PA 7.8 1.6 3.8 5.7 7.0 

Dushore, PA 8.6 2.5 5.0 7.1 8.4 

Oakland, MU 8.3 2.2 4.4 6.2 7.7 

M. Mountain, WV 0.0 0.7 3.6 5.8 9.7 

a No excess of permitted quantities for cutting bills 1-4. 

Table 10.-Total yield of blanks per cutting bill and site 

(In percent of board feet) 

Cutting bill 

Site 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 

Ludlow, PA 44.8 45.5 46.0 46.8 46.2 46.2 45.5 45.6 45.6 

Glen Hope, PA 43.7 45.0 45.4 45.2 45.2 44.7 44.6 44.7 44.6 

Dushore, PA 44.6 45.2 45.5 46.4 47.3 47.2 46.6 46.7 46.7 

Oakland, MD 44.7 45.4 45.9 46.4 46.0 40.4 42.2 43.8 45.3 

M. Mountain, WV 51.8 52.3 52.7 53.1 53.2 52.6 51.8 52.0 54.0 

Table I I .-Trimming of longer blanks to fulfill shorter blank requirements 

(In percent of square feet of blank requirements) 

Cutting bill 

Site 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 

Ludlow, PA 35.8 26.5 17.9 8.2 6.4 3.0 2.5 4.9 4.0 

Glen Hope, PA 33.7 23.8 15.4 7.2 4.5 3.3 3.6 4.6 5.7 

Dushore, PA 36.8 27.4 18.8 9.8 7.6 3.7 4.5 4.7 3.7 

Oakland, MD 35.0 24.3 14.9 8.8 4.8 3.4 2.6 3.4 2.6 

M. Mountain, WV 36.9 26.0 16.0 9.5 5.4 7.3 7.2 6.5 6.9 
Economics ,' 

A new System 6 mill requires an initial capital 

investment of roughly $2 million plus $200,000 of working capital. We will consider a 16 Mbf (thousand board 

feet) per shift input mill (Hansen and Reynolds 1984) 

with a 15-percent increase in machinery prices from 

mid-1981. We believe that a successful blanks business would require at least a 20-percent IRR (internal 

rate of return) after taxes. 

Sawmillers can buy small-diameter, low-grade 

cherry logs and bolts at $100 per Mbf international 114- 

inch scale, no scaling deductions used. This is equivalent to $45 per cord. Experience with small sawmillers 

has shown that sawing bolts to cants at $50 per Mbf is 

profitable. A thousand board feet of bolts equals 1,000 

board feet of cants as cants are the only products 

made and no overrun is considered. At $30 per Mbf for 

hauling, the f.0.b. (free on board) System 6 plant cant 

price is $180 per Mbf. The System 6 mill manager will 

be assured of a cant supply at this price. 

Roug h-dimension parts are conventionally made 

by purchasing No. 1 Common or Better lumber, kiln 

drying the lumber, then rough milling it to parts. There 

are no parts pricing reports, though there are hardwood 

lumber price reports. In 1984, Appalachian black 

cherry, 414 thickness, No. 1 Common grade, had a $600 

Mbf average price. We feel that this green lumber price 

will dictate a $2.50 per square foot average selling 

price for 414 cherry rough-dimension parts. We allowed 

a 12-percent discount for converting blanks to parts 

and arrived at the $2.20 per square foot average price 

for 414 C1 F blanks. 

When cherry from the three Pennsylvania sites and 

the Maryland site is used to meet the normal demand 

for blanks, the average yield would be 45 percent. If all 

the blanks produced were sold at the average price of 

$2.20 per square foot, the rate of return would be 

approximately 39 percent. The operating costs, 

revenues, and investments are shown in Table 12. 

When cherry from the West Virginia site is used, the 

yield averages 53 percent, and the rate of return is 

about 50 percent. 

Table 12.-Annual operating costs and revenues 

(CIF blanks from all sites except Middle Moutain and all blanks sold) 

Item Year 1 * Years 2-10 

Costs: Variable 

Cants 180lMbf x 16 Mbflshift x 240 shiftslyear $ 346,000 $ 691,000 

Labor 45 men @ $6.601hr + 2 men @ $1 llhr $638,000 

Supplies 57,000 

Utilities 76,000 

Total: Other Variable Costs $771,000 $ 386,000 $ 771,000 

Sales costs (5% sales) 95,000 190,000 

Costs: Fixed 

Management and administrative 85,000 

Insurance 48,000 

Mai'ntenance 160,000 

Total: Fixed Costs $293,000 $ 293,000 $ 293,000 

Costs: Total $1,120,000 $1,945,000 

(51 % of 

sales) 

Revenues: 

CIF blanks at 45% yield and $2.201sq ft 

3,840,000 bd ft cants x 0.45 = 1,728,000 

Sq ft blanks x 2.20 = 3,802,000 $1,901,000 $3,802,000 

*During the first year, only half the annual production will be made. 

Capital Investment: Land 

Machinery 

Kilns and boilers 

Buildings 

Working capital 

Total $2,200,000 
Literature Cited 

The demand for long blanks is an important 

production problem. When long blanks are limited to 

the normal 15 percent of total output, the production 

controls can function efficiently with wood from all 

sites and return on investments will be very good. 

When the Middle Mountain cherry is used, long-blank 

production can be allowed to rise to 25 percent of total 

output without negatively affecting return on investment. 

When long-blank requirements rise above 15 

percent (25 percent for Middle Mountain cherry), yields 

in required blanks decrease and income may fall. One 

way to possibly alleviate this problem is to increase 

prices for the long blanks raising income to the 

required level. A companion paper has been written to 

study this problem in detail (Reynolds and Hansen, 

1986). We found that by chipping some of the poorest 

boards, buying additional cants to keep the production 

level constant, and selling the extra short blanks at 

reduced prices, the surcharge for long blanks could be 

kept low. For cutting bill 9 (40 percent long blanks), the 

surcharge needed was only 18 percent over normal 

blank price. When blank customers are willing to pay 

substantial surcharges for long blanks, opportunities 

for additional profits rise. 

Conclusions 

Opportuni'ies are available for foresters, sawmillers, dimension plants, furniture makers, and 

kitchen cabinet companies by utilizing the smalldiameter cherry. Small-diameter bolts from cherry thinning and first commercial cuts prescribed under the 

best silvicultural practices can be utilized profitably. 

Sawmillers can make System 6 cants for profitable sale 

rather than sawing and trying to sell the No. 2 Common and poorer lumber. Dimension plants, using 

System 6 technology, can buy cants and make blanks 

and earn competitive returns. Furniture and kitchen 

cabinet companies can buy blanks, or make them 

themselves, for the manufacture of fine solid cherry 

offerings. The opportunity for using cherry to make 

informal furniture is very intriguing. 

After we had completed our cherry studies, we 

contacted furniture companies in Pennsylvania and 

North Carolina and asked them for cutting bills for 

some of their furniture. Using the blanks we had made, 

we made rough-dimension parts that they included in 

regular production runs. In all instances, the parts we 

furnished were equal in quality and acceptability to 

their own parts. Consequently, we do not hesitate to 

recommend the use of small-diameter, low-grade 

cherry with System 6 to make blanks for furniture and 

kitchen cabinet products. 

Araman, Philip A. BLANKS: A computer program for 

analyzing furniture rough-part needs in standard-size 

blanks. Res. Pap. NE-521. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern 

Forest Experiment Station; 1983, 8 p. 

Araman, Philip A.; Gatchell, Charles J.; Reynolds, Hugh 

W. Meeting the solid wood needs of the furniture 

and cabinet industries: standard-size hardwood 

blanks. Res. Pap. NE-494. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern 

Forest Experiment Station; 1982. 27 p. 

Hansen, Bruce G.; Reynolds, Hugh W. System 6 alternatives: an economic analysis. Res. Pap. NE-551. 

Broomail, PA: US. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station; 

1984. 14 p. 

Reynolds, Hugh W. System 6: rough-mill operating 

manual. Res. Pap. NE-542. Broomall, PA: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station; 1984. 27 p. 

Reynolds, Hugh W.; Araman, Philip A. Program 

BLANKS on the IBM-PC. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-107. 

Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station; 

1986, 36 p, 

Reynolds, Hugh W.; Gatchell, Charles J. Marketing lowgrade hardwoods for furniture stock-a new 

approach. Res. Pap. NE-444. Broomall, PA: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station; 1979. 7 p. 

Reynolds, Hugh W.; Gatchell, Charles J. New tech. 

nology for low-grade hardwood utilization: System 6. 

Res. Pap. NE-504. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest 

Experiment Station; 1982. 8 p. 

Reynolds, Hugh W.; Hansen, Bruce G. A sample plant 

design for System 6. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-87. 

Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station; 

1984, 8 p. 

Reynolds, Hugh W.; Hansen, Bruce G. System 6: Pric. 

ing strategy for long blanks. Res. Pap. NE-573. 

Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station; 

1986,14 p. 
APPENDIX 

Table 13.-Minimal board input solutions for Ludlow, 

Pennsylvania, cherry 

(Percent input board feet to be cut up by each GCL) 

GCL 

Cutting 

bill 1 2 3 4 5 6 Total 

Table 14.-Minimal board input solutions for Glen 

Hope, Pennsylvania, cherry 

(Percent input board feet to be cut up by each GCL) - - - - -- - 

GCL 

Cutting 

bill 1 2 3 4 5 6 Total 

Table 15.-Minimal board input solutions for Dushore, 

Pennsylvania, cherry 

(Percent input board feet to be cut up by each GCL) 

GCL 

Cutting 

bill 1 2 3 4 5 6 Total 
Table 16.-Minimal board input solutions for Oakland, 

Maryland, cherry 

(Percent input board feet to be cut up by each GCL) 

GCL 

Cutting 

bill 1 2 3 4 5 6 Total 

1 72 0 0 28 0 0 100 

2 65 0 0 35 0 0 100 

3 52 0 0 36 12 0 100 

4 22 0 26 21 29 2 100 

5 0 12 49 0 39 0 100 

6 0 17 29 0 54 0 100 

7 5 15 0 9 71 0 100 

8 12 35 0 53 0 0 100 

9 0 22 0 5 73 0 100 

Table 17.-Minimal board input solutions for Middle, 

Mountain, West Virginia, cherry 

(Percent input board feet to be cut up by each GCL) 

GCL 

Cutting 

bill 1 2 3 4 

1 0 0 49 7 

2 0 0 49 12 

3 0 0 53 13 

4 0 0 72 5 

5 0 0 80 3 

6 0 0 75 0 

7 0 0 22 10 

8 0 0 0 16 

9 0 0 0 15, 

Total 

-- 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 
Reynolds, Hugh W.; Hansen, Bruce G. Making black cherry 

blanks from System 6. Res. Pap. NE-574. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station; 

1986. 10 p. 

Low-grade, small-diameter black cherry (Prunus serotina) timber was 

used to make System 6 cants. Cherry from the Allegheny National Forest 

(Ludlow, PA), west-central Pennsylvania (Glen Hope, PA), north-central 

Pennsylvania (Dushore, PA), western Maryland (Oakland, MD), and the 

Monongahela National Forest (Middle Mountain; WV) was used. The cants 

were resawed to-414 boards, the boards dried, and blanks were made at the 

Princeton Laboratory's System 6 pilot plant. By varying the rough mill 

procedures, differences in board quality and cutting bill requirements were 

accommodated keeping yields high. The cherry from the Pennsylvania and 

Maryland sites gave similar yields, while the West Virginia cherry gave 5 

percent higher yields. Gum streak was not a problem. Pennsylvania and 

Maryland cherry gave a 39.0 percent return, and West Virginia cherry gave a 

50.3 percent return on a $2.2 million 10-year investment. 

ODC 836.1; 847.112 

Keywords: Low-grade utilization, hardwood dimension. 
Headquarters of the Northeastern Forest Experiment Station are in 

Broomall, Pa. Field laboratories are maintained at: 

Amherst, Massachusetts, in cooperation with the University of 

Massachusetts. 

Berea, Kentucky, in cooperation with Berea College. 

Burlington, Vermont, in cooperation with the University of 

Vermont. 

Delaware, Ohio. 

Durham, New Hampshire, in cooperation with the University of 

New Hampshire. 

0 Hamden, Connecticut, in cooperation with Yale University. 

Morgantown, West Virginia, in cooperation with West Virginia 

University, Morgantown. 

Orono, Maine, in cooperation with the University of Maine, 

Orono. 

0 Parsons, West Virginia. 

Princeton, West Virginia. 

0 Syracuse, New York, in cooperation with the State University of 

New York College of Environmental Sciences and Forestry at 

Syracuse University, Syracuse. 

University Park, Pennsylvania, in cooperation with the 

Pennsylvania State University. 

Warren, Pennsylvania. 

*U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1986- 605-026; 20039 

.c).