Date: 30th March, 2012 TITLE: EQUIPMENT EFFICIENCY FIELD AND MATERIAL CAPACITY AIM: TO DETERMINE THE EFFICIENCY

Y OF MACHINE INTRODUCTION Tools, implements and powered machinery are essential and major inputs to agriculture. The term mechanization is generally used as an overall description of the application of these inputs (Clarke, 2000). The level, appropriate choice and subsequent proper use of mechanized inputs into agriculture has a direct and significant effect on achievable levels of land productivity, labour productivity, the profitability of farming, the sustainability, the environmental and, on the quality of life of people engaged in agriculture. The efficiency of tractors and machines applied in agriculture in usually estimated as integrated value including the indices of their intensive and extensive use. The application intensity of tractors and machines is characterized by their working capacity per unit of time but its extensive by the length of the consumed time in a season (year). However, in order to obtain more objective estimation data for the used tractor aggregates, their performance should be evaluated by optimal parameters: their working width and their speed. One of the ways how to rise labour efficiently, to cut fuel consumption and the production cost as well as to improve the ecological situation is to improve the tractor loading and aggregation patterns. Only those aggregates should be used for soil tillage and other works which ensures its performance with minimum fuel consumption and costs. This can be achieved by aggregates completed with efficient up to date tractors and tillage machines that are suitable for local conditions and have optimal parameters. This efficiency that we are talking about is of different dimensions and these dimensions are the theoretical field capacity, actual field capacity, material field capacity) but in this project the focus is on the theoretical and actual field capacity. PROCEDURE The procedure was in two sections since the project focused on theoretical and the actual field capacity. For the theoretical field capacity, the implement was mounted unto the tractor and the implements used were plough and harrow. First the plough was mounted unto the tractor and the operator was the one who operator the tractor. When the tractor was about to start the operation, a stop watch was set to 0.00second. when the tractor started to perform the tillage operation, a ranging pole was used to mark the starting point of the implement and the stop watch too was started at the same time. When the operator stopped at the end of the field, the stop watch too was stopped and the time was recorded. The end point of the implement was indicated by another ranging pole and the distant between the two ranging was measured using tape measure. The width of the implements cut on the ground was measured too and the distances were recorded. This process was repeated three times for both plough and harrow when determining the theoretical field capacity.

For the actual field capacity, the same procedure was employed but this time around, the stop watch was not stop when the operator reached the other end the field and the implement was not raised rather the operator turned the tractor and continued the tillage operation until he reached the point from which he started from before the stop watch was stop. And this process too was repeated for all the two implements that were used during the determination of the actual field capacity of the tractor. The operation was done within the same distance that was measured in the first process but double the first measurement.

TABLE OF RESULTS IMPLEMENTS PLOUGH PLOUGH PLOUGH HARROW HARROW HARROW PLOUGH PLOUGH PLOUGH HARROW HARROW HARROW DATA FOR THEORETICAL FIELD CAPACITY TIME (S) WIDTH OF DISTANCE IMPLEMENT (m) COVERED (m) 59.7 1.3 98 57.0 1.4 98 55.4 1.35 98 40.2 1.8 98 38.2 1.5 98 39.8 1.4 98 DATA FOR ACTUAL FIELD CAPACITY 135.7 3.05 196 365.7 3.10 196 134.6 2.50 196 98.9 3.50 196 88.5 3.20 196 97.4 3.30 196

CALCULATION FROM THE TABLE

FOR PLOUGH
THEORETICAL FIELD CAPACITY FIRST OPERATION Theoretical field capacity (CT) = Speed = Distance = 98m but in kilometer is Time = 59.7 seconds but in hour is Therefore speed = = 5.765km/hr = 0.098km = 0.017hr

Width = 1.3m but in centimeter is 1.3x100 = 130cm Therefore, theoretical field capacity = SECOND OPERATION Theoretical field capacity (CT) = Speed = Distance = 98m but in kilometer is Time = 57.0 seconds but in hour is Therefore speed = = 6.125km/hr = 0.098km = 0.016hr = 0.75ha/hr

Width = 1.4m but in centimeter is 1.4 x 100 = 140cm Therefore, theoretical field capacity = = 0.86ha/hr

THIRD OPERATION Theoretical field capacity (CT) = Speed = Distance = 98m but in kilometer is Time = 55.7 seconds but in hour is Therefore speed = = 6.533km/hr = 0.098km = 0.015hr

Width = 1.35m but in centimeter is 1.35 x 100 = 135cm Therefore, theoretical field capacity = The average theoretical field capacity = = 0.88ha/hr = 0.83ha/hr

ACTUAL FIELD CAPACITY

FIRST OPERATION The actual field capacity is the effective field capacity (CE) = Speed = Distance =196m but in kilometer is

= 0.196km = 0.038hr

Time = 135.7seconds but in hour is

Therefore speed = = 5.158km/hr

Width = 3.05m but in centimeter is 3.05 x 100 = 305cm Efficiency = 80% (0.8) since the efficiency for tillage operation is in the range 70% - 90% Effective field capacity =

= 1.26ha/hr

SECOND OPERATION
The actual field capacity is the effective field capacity (CE) = Speed = Distance =196m but in kilometer is

= 0.196km = 0.102hr

Time = 365.7seconds but in hour is

Therefore speed = = 1.922km/hr

Width = 3.10m but in centimeter is 3.10 x 100 = 310cm Efficiency = 80% (0.8) since the efficiency for tillage operation is in the range 70% - 90% Effective field capacity =

= 0.48ha/hr

THIRD OPERATION
The actual field capacity is the effective field capacity (CE) = Speed = Distance =196m but in kilometer is

= 0.196km = 0.037hr

Time = 134.6seconds but in hour is

Therefore speed = = 5.297km/hr

Width = 2.50m but in centimeter is 2.50 x 100 = 250cm Efficiency = 80% (0.8) since the efficiency for tillage operation is in the range 70% - 90% Effective field capacity =

= 1.06ha/hr

Therefore, the average actual field capacity =

= 0.93ha/hr

HARROW
THEORETICAL FIELD CAPACITY
FIRST OPERATION Theoretical field capacity (CT) = Speed = Distance = 98m but in kilometer is Time = 40.2 seconds but in hour is Therefore speed = = 8.909km/hr = 0.098km = 0.011hr

Width = 1.8m but in centimeter is 1.8x100 = 180cm Therefore, theoretical field capacity = SECOND OPERATION Theoretical field capacity (CT) = Speed = Distance = 98m but in kilometer is Time = 38.2 seconds but in hour is Therefore speed = = 9.800km/hr = 0.098km = 0.010hr = 1.60ha/hr

Width = 1.5m but in centimeter is 1.5 x 100 = 150cm Therefore, theoretical field capacity = = 1.47ha/hr

THIRD OPERATION Theoretical field capacity (CT) = Speed = Distance = 98m but in kilometer is Time = 39.8 seconds but in hour is Therefore speed = = 8.909km/hr = 0.098km = 0.011hr

Width = 1.40m but in centimeter is 1.40 x 100 = 140cm Therefore, theoretical field capacity = The average theoretical field capacity = = 1.25ha/hr = 1.44ha/hr

ACTUAL FIELD CAPACITY

FIRST OPERATION The actual field capacity is the effective field capacity (CE) = Speed = Distance =196m but in kilometer is

= 0.196km = 0.027hr

Time = 98.9seconds but in hour is

Therefore speed = = 7.259km/hr

Width = 3.50m but in centimeter is 3.50 x 100 = 350cm Efficiency = 80% (0.8) since the efficiency for tillage operation is in the range 70% - 90% Effective field capacity =

= 2.03ha/hr

SECOND OPERATION
The actual field capacity is the effective field capacity (CE) = Speed = Distance =196m but in kilometer is

= 0.196km = 0.025hr

Time = 88.5seconds but in hour is

Therefore speed = = 7.840km/hr

Width = 3.20m but in centimeter is 3.20 x 100 = 320cm Efficiency = 80% (0.8) since the efficiency for tillage operation is in the range 70% - 90% Effective field capacity =

= 2.00ha/hr

THIRD OPERATION
The actual field capacity is the effective field capacity (CE) = Speed = Distance =196m but in kilometer is

= 0.196km = 0.026hr

Time = 94.4seconds but in hour is

Therefore speed = = 7.538km/hr

Width = 3.30m but in centimeter is 3.30 x 100 = 330cm Efficiency = 80% (0.8) since the efficiency for tillage operation is in the range 70% - 90% Effective field capacity =

= 1.99ha/hr

Therefore, the average actual field capacity =

= 2.01ha/hr

DISCUSSION
From the table of results and the calculations, when the first implement which was plough was used during the theoretical field capacity, the time that was used to cover 98m were 59.7, 57.0 and 55.0seconds for the operation three times and the width of the implement cut were 1.3, 1.4 and 1.35m respectively to the time used. When the actual field capacity was to be determined, much time was used as compared to the determination of the theoretical field capacity. This is because the stop watch was not stopped when the tractor operator was turning the tractor to start a new tillage operation with the same implement. The time used were 135.7seconds, 365.7seconds( this time was used because when the tillage operation was in progress, one the linking point of the implement detaches from the hitching point to the tractor and the operator had to stop and fixed the problem. When he was hitching the implement to the tractor, the stop watch was not stop because the practical aimed at determining the actual field capacity) and 134.6seconds. the respective implement width cut were 3.05m, 3.10m and 2.50m and the distant covered was 196m. since this aspect of the practical is to determine the actual field capacity which is the same as effective field capacity, the efficiency that was used in the calculation was 80% since the efficiency of tractor for tillage operation is in the range of 75 90%. In the case of harrow, the same procedure was taken. For the theoretical field capacity, the time used to cover the 98m distant were 40.2seconds, 38.2seconds and 39.8seconds when the operation was repeated for three consecutive times. The implements widths for the harrow when it caught the soil were 1.8m, 1.5m and 1.4m with respect to the time of the three operation periods. When the harrow was used to determine the actual field capacity of the tractor, the distant the tractor covered was double the distant in the determination of the theoretical field capacity and for that matter the time used was higher than the time in the first process. These are the time used; 98.9seconds, 88.5seconds and 97.4seconds and respective implement widths were 3.50m, 3.20m and 3.30m.

CONCLUSION
It can be concluded from the calculations that the theoretical field capacity of the tractor when the plough was used is 0.83ha/hr and actual field capacity is 0.93ha/hr this result was reached due to the inefficiency on the side of the operator. For the harrow, the theoretical field capacity was 1.44ha/hr and the actual field capacity was1.98ha/hr. As compared to the plough, it could be seen that the tractor had more theoretical and actual field capacity when harrow was used for the tillage operation. The efficiency used in both cases was 80% since the range for tillage operation is 75% - 90%.

REFERENCES

Brixius, W. W. 1987. Traction prediction equations for bias-ply tires. ASAE Paper No. 871622. St. Joseph, Mich.: ASAE. Brixius, W. W., and R. D. Wismer. 1978. The role of slip in traction. ASAE Paper No. 781538. St. Joseph, Mich.: ASAE. Corcoran, P. T., and D. S. Gove. 1985. Understanding the mechanics of track traction. In Proc. Int'l Conference on Soil Dynamics, 4: 664-678. 17-19 June. Auburn, Ala.: Auburn University, Office of Continuing Education. Dwyer, M. J. 1984. The tractive performance of wheeled vehicles. J. Terramechanics 21(1): 19-34. Gee-Clough, D., M. McAllister, and G. Pearson. 1982. Ballasting wheeled tractors to achieve maximum power output in frictional-cohesive soils. J. Agric. Eng. Res. 27(1): 1-19. Jones, D., and R. D. Grisso. 1992. Golden section search as an optimization tool for spreadsheets. Computers and Electronics in Agric. 7(4): 323-335. Perumpral, J. V. 1987. Cone penetrometer applications A review. Trans. ASAE 30(4): 939-944. Shell, L. R., F. M. Zoz, and R. L. Turner. 1997. Field performance of rubber belt and MFWD tractors in Texas soils. In Belt and Tire Traction in Agricultural Vehicles, 65-73. SAE SP1291. Warrendale, Pa.: Society of Automotive Engineers. Turner, R. J., L. R. Shell, and F. M. Zoz. 1997. Field performance of rubber belt and MFWD tractors in southern Alberta soils. In Belt and Tire Traction in Agricultural Vehicles, 75-85. SAE SP-1291.