Feldspar
Member
- Location
- Essex, Cambs and Suffolk
Put the swath width as the full header width.
S690i and 770 demo
- Thread starter Feldspar
- Start date
Put the swath width as the full header width.
Grain loss calculator
TGW (g) 53
No of grains found under hand 5
Yield (t/ha) 9
Hand length (cm) 18
Hand width (cm) 8
Swath width (m) 12.3
Header width (m) 12.3
Grain price (£/t) 150
Loss (t/ha) 0.18
Loss (kg/ha) 184.03
Loss (%) 2.04
Loss (£/ha) 23.00
seems a lot ?
TGW (g) 53
No of grains found under hand 5
Yield (t/ha) 9
Hand length (cm) 18
Hand width (cm) 8
Swath width (m) 12.3
Header width (m) 12.3
Grain price (£/t) 150
Loss (t/ha) 0.18
Loss (kg/ha) 184.03
Loss (%) 2.04
Loss (£/ha) 23.00
seems a lot ?
Feldspar
Member
- Location
- Essex, Cambs and Suffolk
Think about it this way: 5 grains under a hand is equivalent to 350 seeds / sq m which is a normal drilling rate obviously.
Daniel
Member
- Location
- Mildenhall, Suffolk
If you've got Dropbox put it in there, copy the link here and everyone can download it.
if you haven't let me know and I will host it in a DB shared file ?
Feldspar
Member
- Location
- Essex, Cambs and Suffolk
https://www.dropbox.com/s/w662tslv03ifl5j/Grain loss calculator.xlsx?dl=0
Let me know if this doesn't work. Also, please let me know if I've managed to inadvertently share all of my Dropbox files with the whole world!
Let me know if this doesn't work. Also, please let me know if I've managed to inadvertently share all of my Dropbox files with the whole world!
nothing important or interesting, just his password list,online bank details, last few years accounts and a few pictures of what I think must be an ex girlfriend
(that will get more people downloading it James !)
Honest john
Member
- Location
- Fenland
Feldspar
Member
- Location
- Essex, Cambs and Suffolk
As a slight aside to the already considerably off-topic diversion, this is an interesting paper which looks at systems which now take the form of Intellicruise and Cruise Pilot. Basically says cruise systems aren't worthwhile.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0021863482900932
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0021863482900932
Feldspar
Member
- Location
- Essex, Cambs and Suffolk
Also, useful paper on the effects of cutting at different stubble heights. @Brisel might be able to work out if it's cost effective to cut high and then sort the mess out afterwards!
http://world-food.net/download/journals/2010-issue_2/a32.pdf
Useful extract:
http://world-food.net/download/journals/2010-issue_2/a32.pdf
Useful extract:
Less straw flow is supplied into combine when the cut crop height is left greater than usual 100 mm stubble height. The results of tests fulfilled in Dresden Technical University in Germany show that when the wheat crop was cut below ears, the straw mass supplied into combine was approximately 50% less, thus combine capacity increased by 20% and fuel consumption decreased by 30%. In 2008 it was determined that when the wheat stubble height was increased up to 200 mm, the fuel consumption of combine New Holland (motor 220 kW) decreased by 4 l ha-1, and the straw cutting power consumption 32 minimized by 15 kW. In a previous study it was stated that increasing the stubble height by the increments of 10 mm, the combine capacity increased by 1.5-2.0% and the fuel consumption decreased by 1.5%
Also:
If the stubble height of wheat Ada were increased from 100 mm to 200 mm the less straw mass would be supplied into combine 29.5±1.1%, and if the stubble height increased to 300 mm the less straw mass would be supplied into combine 53.4±1.4% (Fig. 3). Its moisture content would be more than 1.6 times less than the average moisture content of the left stubble. The drier the crop, the less is this difference.
Last edited:
The single rotor in an axial flow is what I am familiar with which I presume is more like a CR than a Lexion as the rotor/s actually do the threshing.
Case training likened setting the rotor and concave to spin dryer where centrifugal force throws the water/grain out . I found this helpful in changing my perception on concave gap, wider is better it allows this to happen. The rotor accelerates and advances the straw rather than threshing as in a conventional drum concave.
The difference between a mangle where the water is squeezed out and the gap matters, to a dryer where spin speed and drum diametre count.
Output in axial flow terms does just seem to be all about horsepower. There are only two combines in the six model range, just different engines, and stronger drives, the rotor/concaves have hardly changed in 30years
Case training likened setting the rotor and concave to spin dryer where centrifugal force throws the water/grain out . I found this helpful in changing my perception on concave gap, wider is better it allows this to happen. The rotor accelerates and advances the straw rather than threshing as in a conventional drum concave.
The difference between a mangle where the water is squeezed out and the gap matters, to a dryer where spin speed and drum diametre count.
Output in axial flow terms does just seem to be all about horsepower. There are only two combines in the six model range, just different engines, and stronger drives, the rotor/concaves have hardly changed in 30years
Feldspar
Member
- Location
- Essex, Cambs and Suffolk
Nicely put.
I was thinking about @Clive and @T Hectares recommendations earlier. Clive seemed to say go with as slower rotor speed as is possible, whereas T Hectares said go with the rotor as close to flat out as possible. Given what you're saying with your spin dryer analogy, it would seem that you'd side with T Hectares. Maybe the difference of opinion is reflected in the differences in design between the hybrids and the true rotor designs with the former being part mangle and part spin dryer.
Feldspar
Member
- Location
- Essex, Cambs and Suffolk
So you spin the rotor up faster with a bigger engine, or it just has the torque to keep it spinning at the same speed when you're forcing more material through it than a smaller engined model?
How do you know when you've gone to far with the opening the concaves and spinning the rotor up strategy?
Feldspar
Member
- Location
- Essex, Cambs and Suffolk
Excellent way of putting it.
Now that we're direct drilling a lot more, another thing to throw into the mix when deciding how much losses to tolerate is soil conditions. If you can get on a field and combine it in dry soil conditions, that might make the difference between being able to zero till that field or having to cultivate / plough it. Even if the difference is some lost crop yield in the next year from compacted wheelings, that can still add up.
For example, this harvest so far has been excellent for harvest traffic damage. We've combined quite a lot of sensitive cropping blocks (i.e. ploughed last year and so soft and easily compacted which would ideally be zero tilled this autumn) in really dry conditions which has been very pleasing.
This compaction effect on the fields I think for us could have a much larger cost / benefit than a 1% or so of losses.
All I can say is I always run out of power, Hate chopping because it slows everything down and when power drops losses happen. Over the years gone from 180hp 2388 to 300hp 5088 today with same rotor and sieves and still want more Hp, 400± in 7088 exactly the same rotor and sieves and I bet drivers still want more hp.
Your combine is a proper rotary when it it running sweet you will want more power. Open the concaves to 25 go a lot faster leave swath check threshing close till just leaving chaff in tact. Then worry about carting it away, as fan and sieves will now only have clean grain to sort
Your combine is a proper rotary when it it running sweet you will want more power. Open the concaves to 25 go a lot faster leave swath check threshing close till just leaving chaff in tact. Then worry about carting it away, as fan and sieves will now only have clean grain to sort
- Location
- Berkshire
@homefarm nicely sums up how the rotarys work v hybrids which are essentially a conventional machine which have the walkers replaced by separating rotors.
In answer to your question, you know when you've gone too far with the opening up when separation and/or threshing deteriorates, again it's down to monitoring behind the combine and setting the monitors to what's seen on the ground and in the straw.
From what I remember your CR has the S3 "standard" rotors.
Twin pitch models are more aggressive and have more potential for output, but they have adjustable transport veins at the front of the rotor tubes which will increase / decrease the ammount of times the crop rotates around the rotor, the DFR added to this then accelerates crop into the rotors to fill the tube more, this set up would give a noticeable step up in output over your S3 and would be smoother too.
However the adjustable veins are another factor to analyse and set up and seeing as we are now on page 48 of this thread I feel they are best left alone until you have mastered setting up the S3
Seriously, it would be an interesting exercise for you try one against your 9090.
Colin
Member
- Location
- Perthshire
Wheat is the easiest thing to learn on although I would say rye might be even easier. We run a CR 9070, same width as yours but less HP. We scalp the stubble to get straw and in fit crops of wheat power is the limit. But basically it's all been said, push it on, keep it full and adjust from there. We rarely get full output from ours as winter barley with lots of awns is a bugger on the sieves. Oat straw is invariably damp which holds the grain in. Best day yet was 100 acres in one field putting 350t of wheat in the shed.
Feldspar
Member
- Location
- Essex, Cambs and Suffolk
@homefarm nicely sums up how the rotarys work v hybrids which are essentially a conventional machine which have the walkers replaced by separating rotors.
In answer to your question, you know when you've gone too far with the opening up when separation and/or threshing deteriorates, again it's down to monitoring behind the combine and setting the monitors to what's seen on the ground and in the straw.
From what I remember your CR has the S3 "standard" rotors.
Twin pitch models are more aggressive and have more potential for output, but they have adjustable transport veins at the front of the rotor tubes which will increase / decrease the ammount of times the crop rotates around the rotor, the DFR added to this then accelerates crop into the rotors to fill the tube more, this set up would give a noticeable step up in output over your S3 and would be smoother too.
However the adjustable veins are another factor to analyse and set up and seeing as we are now on page 48 of this thread I feel they are best left alone until you have mastered setting up the S3
Seriously, it would be an interesting exercise for you try one against your 9090.
Looking at your advice at the time, I see that I did tell you that we had the S3 rotors.
- Location
- Buckinghamshire
What size rotors is yours small or large