: “4”": «m: 'r 5.1.! g... {311. 3 11; A 7,4 "8 3.4. i L 8:. O .4. \ s‘ .—.l .' 11-35515 This is to certify that the theeis entitled "The Adeptetion of the Combine to the Harvesting of Navy Beans" presented by Andrew J. Asher has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for 11.8. degree in Agricultural Engineering Major (professor 1).“, Ember 27, 1951 0-169 Hf" T’T—TT‘T'” r n ' ' fi— ~ I . . ’1 ELJ_\.__'L _'_4_'._ 4 - _ - Lg:— E—QF'T" .- I l'llfillllllv lllfllllllelll‘lllllll lllllftfllt,ll\ THE ADAPTATION OF THE COMBINE TO THE HARVESTING OF NAVY BEANS A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the school of Graduate Studies Michigan State College In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in Agricultural Engineering by Andrew J. Asher November 1951 iii ABSTRACT A previous survey indicated that the farmers of Michigan suffered large losses in the harvesting of navy beans because of adverse weather conditions. Two projects were undertaken by Michigan State College to alleviate this condition. One project is plant breeding, which is being conducted by the Farm Creps Department. The Agri-l cultural Engineering Department is working on the mechan- ical aspects of the harvesting problem. This thesis treats some of the mechanical difficul- ties involved in the cutterubar mechanism. Several devices were tested to improve the hay intake into the combine. The result of these tests indicated that the Hume reel and the flat type guard are the most advantageous from the operator's viewpoint of visibility, rock damage, and ease of operation. November 27, 1951 74/?7g7w Major ProfessonV iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to express his sincere thanks to Professor H. F. McColly, under whose inspiration, constant supervision, and unfailing interest this investigation was undertaken and to whom the results are herewith dedi- cated. He is also greatly indebted to Dr. E. E. Down for his kind guidance and valuable help insofar as the botany of navy beans is concerned. TABLE OF CONTENTS 9 9 O . 9 O 9 O 9 O 0 CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION. . . . . , , , . II. PICK. . . . . . . . . . . . . III. TYPES OF BEANS GROWN IN MICHIGAN. IV. SURVEY'OF LITERATURE. . 9 , 9 V. PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS. . . . . Experimental Werk 1950. . . . . Bush Bean Variety Trials. Michigan State College Agricultural Engineering Plots . . . . . . . . VI. SUMMARY OF OPERATING PROCEDURE 1951 . Bush Bean Variety Trials. . . . . Michigan State College Experimental VII. OUTLINE OF TESTS PERFORMED. . VIII. PICTURE SECTION . . . . . . . IX. COLLECTED DATA AND FIGURES. . X. EVALUATION OF DATA. . . . . . XI. SMVIARY 9 e e e e e e e e e e BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX A. APPENDIX B. MECHANISM . . . . . . MATHEMATICS OF OFFSET SLIDER CRANK. RECOMMENDATIONS ON COMBINE ADJUSTMENT 10 10 10 11 14 14 17 20 22 26 36 39 41 42 45 PICTURE 1. 2. 5. 4. 5. 6. 7. vi LIST OF PICTURES PAGE Professor H. F. McColly Demonstrating the Method of Pick Determination to George . French and Dr. W. M. Carleton. . . . . . 22 .A Large Converted Thresher with Pick-up. ,Attachment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 The Bean Puller in Operation in Experi-, mental Plots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 AA Tractorbmounted Windrower. . . . . . . . 24 The Gleaner Combinewith Pick-711p . Attachment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Rear View of Gleaner Combine . . . . . . . 25 Massey-Harris Combine with Standard R691 and. CanVaB Wipers e e e e e e e e e 25 TABLE I, II, III. IV. V. FIGURE 1. 2. 3. 4. LIST OF TABLES vii . PAGE Production of Dry Beans in Michigan in_1949 . . Yield and Production of Dry Bean8,.Nov. 1,.1950 Bean Combining Data . . . . . . , . . . . . . . Data for Moisture Determination . . , . . , . . Data for Comparlflon 5388138 0 e e e e e e e e e 0 LIST OF FIGURES Analysis of Methods and Incurred Losses for Distance 8 Feet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . variations in Moisture Content_During Har-. vest Period for Navy Beans. . . . . . . 9 . 9 A.Pr0posed Cutter-bar Attachment. . . . . . . . Flat Type Guard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 28 29 30 31 PAGE 52 35 35 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION A problem exists in Michigan of harvesting navy beans because weather conditions at harvest time may not be favor- able. The harvest may begin in August and extend into the later part of October. The actual time of harvest depends on the weather. The navy bean in Michigan is one of the principal cash creps. Moisture content of the air after the beans have ma- tured is a very critical matter. Even if the relative hu- midity of the air is as low as 82 per cent, the conditions are such that mold formation of the newly matured beans is favored. Higher humidity will damage the crOp to a point that harvesting will not be profitable. If the beans are not mature at the time this condition exists, they will not be affected. The resistance of the growing plant will thwart the molding. For this reason some plots are affect- ed, and others are not. Even the soil type in a given field will vary enough to prevent even maturity and un— even damage will be the result. Since these were the pre- vailing conditions during the harvesting period of the year 1950, the amount of loss was a direct function of maturity. -The usual method of harvesting includes, in order,~é pulling, windrowing, and combining with the use of the pick- up attachment on the combine. These operations require the use of the tractor, a special bean puller, a hay windrower, or a special bean windrower, and a combine with the pickfup attachment. This_type of equipment is used quite extensiv- ely on the average size farm., Farmers who engage in farming on a larger scale may use the self-prepelled bean thresher. This is_a machine _ converted from a simple thresher to a unit which will_oper~ ate in the field and will feed directly from the windrcw. This machine has two cylinders for the threshing of the‘. beans. The initial cylinder operates at a low speed (200 to 250 rpm) and the second cylinder operates at a higher speed (600 to 750 rpm). The second cylinder removes the beans which have escaped the initial threshing. This type of machine reduces cracking and.splitting of the bean toga minimum. It has a very large capacity. The disadvantages are the weight and the high initial cost of the machine. One other method which has been tried with a variable degree of success is the stacking method. This involves the use of the mechanical stacker. This method employs the stacker in the operation from the windrow. The straw and pods are picked up, molded into a cylindrical shape, and deposited upon the ground. They are left to cure. Later they are threshed by a stationary thresher. This method requires a considerable amount of labor. A.more_primitive variation of this method is the stack- ing by hand. This requires the most labor with respect to the total Ways of harvesting. Sometimes the farmer may H bring_the stacks to the barn and then thresh in the winter. This method gives the most insurance for an adequate return from the crOp, but is the most costly. Tests on the feasibility of baling the hay and then threshing proved unsuccessful.‘ The losses were high and i the additional costs did not warrant the questionable ad: vantage of handling ease. One_problem encountered was se- curing bales of the desired weight. Light bales fell apart easily, while heavier bales were difficult to handle by one person. CHAPTER II PICK Pick beans are beans which are unfit for human con- sumption for reasons of discoloration, weather damage, mold, or diseases. These beans are removed_by means of the elec- tric eye, a device which automatically rejects the beans defective in color. The cost of this operation is depend- ent upon the quality of beans which are removed.~ The p _ current fee charged for the removal of pick beans is 30.15 per pound._ When the price of beans is $7.00 per hundred.. pounds, the maximum pick which a farmer can afford to have before he starts paying the elevator to accept his crop is 46.6 per cent. Or, in other words, he must sell beans of such a quality that they contain_no more than 46.6 pounds of pick in a hundred pounds of grain. However, he cannot afford to harvest_a crop which has a pick of this amount. He must include the cost of harvesting in his calculations, and thereby arrive at a decision. In some cases he would save money by leaving the crop in the field. CHAPTER III TYPES OF BEANS GROWN IN MICHIGAN .Two general types of beans are grown in Michigan.g One_bush type, the Michelite, stands fairly wellgand.pro-fl duces runners. The vine type which existed earlier before the introduction of the bush type is called the Robust.” It is one which grows rather profusely on the tap of the soil, and it presents a very difficult problem in harvest- ing. IMachines which gather closeto the surface of the soil will pick up rocks and the damage to the machine can be very high. Parts susceptible to ”rock damage are the pick-up attachment, cylinder, and the concave. Low, ground clinging’pods are subject to damage if not_harvested early. Moist conditions which will not allow harvest is very con- ducive to bean discolorment. Plant breeding work by Dr. E. E. Down indicates that a new variety may be available in the next few years., This , variety was Obtained by xeray treatment of Michelite beans. The treated seed was grown and strains were selected. These strains were then crossed back to Michelite which was not treated. This crossing was for_the purpose of giving hybrid vigor, early maturity, and high yielding quality. The strains were then selected again for the absence of runners, height of pod, and disease resistance. Since all of these factors must be considered, the work of developing a new variety takes a long time. CHAPTER IV SURVEY’OFILITERATURE In Michigan the navy bean has been a crop which has received little attention by research men. Early work done in 1918 consisted of a report1 urging farmers to make early selection of seed to insure adequate supplies of good seed. Ayleworthz published some results in 19:55 pertaining to the economics of bean.production. These results were summarized as follows: a) Grow the beans only on soil and in areas suited to their production. b) Rotate the crops so that a green manure crop can be plowed under. . c) Apply manure at a reasonable rate, covering as many acres as possible. , Use seed of the Robust variety. Seed the beans the first part of June. Make better use of labor by eliminating small fields and'by the thorough preparation of the soil prior to seeding. HOD Of this summary (d) does not apply since today better varieties are being developed. Ten years later Brown:5 presented some data concerning the bean production and gross farm income. He stated that the yield was so low on some isolated farms and in some localities the farmers would have saved.money if they had not grown the crop. He also noted that the major factor affecting gross income per acre was the yield. His analogy was: 'Fanmers who have the greatest advantage in the pro- duction of beans find that crop more profitable than grow- ing feed crops even under rather unfavorable bean prices.‘ Brown summarized the most important factors affecting_ the gross income per acre as beinggyield, time of marketing, quality of crop, and variety grown. McDow‘ found in a study of defoliation that the two chemicals, dinitro-ortho—secondaryebutyl and.pentavchloro- phenol, were satisfactory. Onga field basis he found that drying of the stalk was accelerated when defoliating agents were used. Samples of the beans exposed to the chemicals were analyzed. The content of the bean defoliating chemi- cals absorbed by the beans through the pods was negligible and not harmful to human beings. Bainer and Winters5 conducted a series of tests with a combine using rubber rollers in California. They were able to thrash very fragile beans without damage. Since they use two rollers, the cost of the machine is higher. However, the use of rubber rollers or rubber bars in combines has not been accepted on a wide basis in Michigan. Pettigrove6 emphasized cultural practices which are essential to bean.production., He cited the fact that early plowing under of a green.manure crap increases yield. He noted that planting in the early part_of June was essential for crop maturity. Adequate cultivation without root pruning should secure weed control and improve plant growth. Poor drainage has an extensive effect upon the quality of bean production. Maturity and disease resistance are dependent upon.the quality of drainage. Kennedy? summarized the desired characteristics_of the navy bean for the use of the plant breeder. They are as follows: a A.bean that will produce a uniformly high yield. b A.bean whiter and smoother in appearance than the present variety. _ c) A.bean that will mature evenly to facilitate mechanical harvesting. d) A.bean that will produce bush type bean vines to carry the pods off the ground to prevent water damage and facilitate mechanical harvesting. e ,A been that will resist disease. . f A.bean that will mature earlier to allow planting a cover crop for winter protection. g) A.bean larger in size and more uniform in size and contour. h) A.bean that will cook easier and quicker. CHAPTER V’ PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS Experimental Work 1950 Bush.bean variety trials. Dr. E. E. Down and Dr. Axel Anderson of the Farm Craps Department had an experimental plot on the waiter Reinhold farm at Gera, Michigan. The Age ricultural Engineering Department cooperated with Farm Crops in the harvesting'process. Bader Brothers, John Deere deal- ers at Reese, Michigan, furnished a combine and an operator for this work. Universal Sales at Saginaw provided a.Hume reel which was attached to the combine. Initially, the plots were visited on August 28 and the plants were found to be defoliated and ready for harvest. The decision was made to_combine directly with this equip- ment after Labor Day. However, on September 3 it started raining and the weather was too wet until September 15. Arrangements were made to combhne the navy bean plots the following week. On September 26 arrangements were completed and.the harvest was started. ,Combining was started first on the bush type beans, using high lift guards, the Hume reel, and the John Deere pull type combine. In order to increase the effectiveness of the Hume reel, the high lift guards were removed and the reel was adjusted. This allowed the Hume ll reel to be placed very close to the ground and the cutting sickle. The table was set as_low as possible to harvest the low hanging pods. The stubble was found by measurement to be one inch in height. This meant, then, that the losses due to shattering of low formed pods was decreased. However, some threshing was noticed, which was caused by the recipro- cating action of the sickle in shearing the stalk. It was believed that these losses were low, and would be comparable to losses sustained by the common method of pulling, windrowb ing, and combining from the windrow. As pointed out by the agronomists, the reason this method was good was because of the increased plant height and the standability of this, variety. Weather losses due to pick, determined by taking random counts from the grain tank, were very small. This concluded work in the Saginaw area for 1950. Michigan State College gggiculturgl Engineering Plots. The work on the combining of the experimental plots was de- layed by extremely bad weather, including rain and non-drying overcast days, until October 6. Early predictions of a total loss delayed harvest until it was found that there was a possi- bility of realizing a little value from the crap. These early reports were based on general weather conditions and damage in the navy bean area of thetthumb. Since weather condition at maturity is the critical factor, these late maturing plots were not affected so adversely. 12 On October 4 a Gleaner combine was obtained on a lease arrangement between the Agricultural Engineering Department and the Farm Bureau Services, Lansing; Michigan._ On October, 6 some beans were pulled and windrowed. Before harvest could begin the weather changed adversely. These beans were then lost because of spoilage in the windrow. However, in these first attempts the spiral auger intake from the table sheared three bolts on the driving sprocket when a small rock.lodged in the auger. This rock was kicked into the windrow by the windrowing process. This was repaired. During the next day pulling and windrowing was done. On October 20 the same three bolts sheared, and the overhauling operation was re- peated. This is a definite weak spot in the Gleaner combine, since there was no appreciative elegging or heavy feeding at this time. Another day was lost due to these repairs. In the week of October 22 rain prevented harvesting. work was resumed on October 25 and completed the following day. A total yield of 4630 pounds was placed in the Farmers Elevator Company, Laming, Michigan. These beans which were harvested had a pick of approximately 30 per cent and were valued at $2.50 to $5.00 per hundred pounds. Later they were sampled at the elevator, and the pick was estimated at 40 per cent. The price at this rate of pick was given at $1.00 per hundred pounds. 15 About twenty bushels were turned over to Professor'J. S. Boyd for drying experiments. The initial moisture content was fairly low, i.e. 15 per cent. The beans were then out of the critical moisture area. Samples of these beans were cooked by cooperators. Some of these beans were treated with ozone and checked against naturally dried beans. Since this project is still in progress, definite results cannot ‘be given. However, information regarding this project can be Obtained from Professor Boyd. CHAPTER VI SULMARY OF OPERATING PROCEDURE 1951 Bush Bean Variety Trials In view of the fact that the Gleaner combine used the preceding year did not have as many adjustments available as desired in this type of experimental work, it was decided that a different machine was needed. A study was made to determine the requirements of a machine which could be used in conjunction with other projects. The requirements were: 1. A self-propelled machine for work areas in which a tractor may not be easily procured. 2. A machine with many adjustments available inde- pendent of each other. 5. A machine which can be transported easily to different parts of the state. 4. A unit serviceable by well located dealers for parts, etc. 5. A machine capable of harvesting many small grain craps commonly grown on the farms of Michigan. Considering the preceding requirements carefully, it was finally decided that a self-prepelled Massey-Harris seven foot clipper combine would fulfill the need closely. Arrangements were then made with L. VI. Garver, Product and Field Research Engineer, Racine, Wisconsin and R. R. Pascal, 15 District Manager, Jackson, Michigan to lease a combine on the ten per_cent basis to the Department of.Agricultura1 Engineering.- This combine arrived on August 22, 1951. The set-up, was accomplished by assembling the table, reel attachment, and straw spreader. This preliminary work was completed during the first week of September. Bean.harvesting was pronounced ready in the Saginaw area by Dr. E. E. Down of Farm Crops Department. The COMP bine was then loaded on a trailer and transported to the Henry Hetzner and Sons' farm at Saginaw, Michigan where the experimental plots were located. A Hume reel was placed on the combine in place of the standard reel which came as standard equipment with the machine. The bush type navy beans in the experimental plots were very similar in appearance to the soy beans grown in the Middle Western States. The most notable difference is the lack of height, which is natural for a short season crap. The vine-type Michelite beans were also grown in these plots., .Harvesting was started on September 5 in the Saginaw area.. The initial adjustment was to decrease the cylinder speed. This adjustment was needed because the beans were cracking excessively._ After the cylinder speed adjustment was made cracking decreased somewhat. However, it was 16 decided that the combine had too many concave bars in the concave, and they were removed later. In order to continue Operation on this day the speed of the entire combine was reduced by throttle adjustment. This decreased the speed of the straw rack and shakers, which caused some clogging on the part of the straw racks. With these measures taken, the combining preceded with Emir Khan taking efficiency tests and loss counts. The beans had good quality and very low’pick. The later part of the first week of September was un- favorable for harvest because of heavy rains. However, on September 12 the weather was again favorable and the hare vesting of the test plots was completed by the once-over method. The beans and bean straw contained more moisture and it was noted that fewer losses occurred at this time at the cutter bar. The previous speed (450 rpm) for the cy- linder was used and found to be satisfactory for efficient harvesting. A comparison might be noted here. Using the once-over method for harvesting, one man was required to Operate the combine for two hours. .Another method of pulling, windrow~ ing, hauling to the barn, etc. was in progress in a nearby field. Approximately the same acreage was harvested by combine as by the other method which employed seven men. 17 Michigan State College Experimental Plots On October 3 the harvesting of the Michelite variety of navy beans on the experimental farms was begun. The primary purpose of these trials was to establish the best method of harvesting navy beans directly. Some difficulty was encountered in the harvest, since there was no weed seed eliminator on the combine. The content of weeds in- creased the moisture content to the point that it was ne- cessary to clean the beans in order to insure safe storage. An A. T. Ferrell cleaner was used for this purpose on the following day. One difficulty that was noticed in combining the plot was ridges. Ridges were evident in the plots due to seed bed preparation and cultivation practices. Ridges are bad because the uneven ground causes the table to tilt in such a manner that one row may be harvested and the second and third row are more or less missed because one must not allow the table to operate below the level of the ground. If this happens then there is damage to the combine due to the wearing effect of dirt. Also, the grain that is deliv~ ered to the grain tank is of poor qualitybecause the com— bine is incapable of separating all the fine dirt from the grain. 18 Another difficulty which is generally encountered on Michigan farms is stones. In this method by raising the table, using the mechanical lift, stones may be avoided. With the use of the Hume reel they may be sighted quickly. Nevertheless, some of the crop is lost in raising the table. The best solution is using a field relatively free from stones. In the Operations, the generalcomments must include the discussion on pick and the number of cracks. Since the condition of the field was soft, due to recent rains, the straw was tough. The beans, being in standing pOsition, were drier than the stalks and low clinging pods. The pick was low in the beans harvested, while the low formed.pods were beginning to show damage from weathering effects. The cracks were few for the toughness in the stalks prevented easy threshing and shattering that comes with extremely dry beans. ' On October 5 three rows were pulled by hand in order to compare direct harvesting with the pulling, windrowing, com- bining'method. These were damaged considerably by rain be- for harvest could be effected. This shows the effects of the unpredictable Michigan weather at harvest time. _ The next week the weather turned favorable for harvest- ing. More beans were pulled, and the work was completed on October 11. The regular reel was used during these tests. 19 Canvas stripping was added to the regular reel to decrease the grain losses at the cutter bar. However, this gave the added difficulty of sweeping up the stones, as well as the shattered beans._ Visibility was reduced very much. Stones clearly visible in using the Hume reel were_not visible at all with the regular reel and canvas stripping. The diffi- culty of Operating increased appreciably, for rocks will cause tremendous damage to the cylinder and concave. Much the same conditions existed this week as was dis- cussed under the report for the week of October 1. Perhaps a greater amount of pick in the lower formed pods occurred. This is not significant insofar as direct combining is con- cerned, and can be neglected. Other special equipment and tests are discussed in the analysis of data. CHAPTER VII OUTLINE OF TESTS PERFORMED In order to evaluate the work on navy bean harvesting several tests were devised which would give an indication on recommended practices to be followed. It was thought that perhaps the material the farmer already might have on the farm could be used in improvising a good system on the forced feeding of the combine table. Hence the regular six bat reel was used. In conjunction with this reel can- vas stripping was attached. This canvas stripping was used to see if better cleaning of the sickle bar could be ob- tained. The Hume reel was also used as an attachment which could be purchased, replacing the regular reel. This spec- ial reel had a mechanism which gave a lifting action to the crop. To secure lifting action spring steel times, which are pivoted on the extremities of the reel, are used. The accen- tuating mechanism acts on the cam principle, giving a lift- ing action when the tines are in contact with the plants. When the tines have passed the sickle, and are above the table, the cam action allows the plants to drop to the can- vas intake of the combine. ,21 To alleviate the problem of excess threshing at the cutter bar, several guards were ground down so that the top portion with respect to the sickle was removed. This type of guard has been used in the harvest of cow peas and lima beans. They have been used on these crOps, and are at- tached to the mowing machine. Checks were made, using these special guards, against the standard guards used on the combine for general grain crOp harvesting. CHAPTER VIII PICTURE SECTION Picture No. 1 Professor H. F. McColly Demonstrating the Method of Pick Determination to George French and Dr. W. M. Carleton. a. C -.O. a. s O o no ‘ .’ ‘s 1 - I I F _ . ' r s O. 'i J a . ' I 0 u .. . I. . s" ‘0 .. {.4 ‘ : :( '8 'r '- . . 'rr . ‘- . ' ‘ . .' ' I ‘ , . - g a. .‘ '3‘-’ o ' 3 st . ' f: . ' a.— c ‘ A - ‘ {"00 s s Q o ' - . .~ - r ‘0'... c'. . - ." .O- as 1"s (:‘n. 25 Picture No. 2 A.Large Converted Thresher with Pickrup Attachment. VH~2> I“) .13187. . Mm Picture No. 3 The Bean Puller in Operation in Experimental Plots. «9 . l 4 o . a Q 0 n. _ xx. i. . on. at s ..\’ a .. ...o.. . (‘0 0‘ . .‘l‘ .¢“ I . .. ‘ .‘. U. " .\. e a . I‘W‘, . x. 0‘ a .- .- ‘6 . . O. . .. I .U s . ... a n . ‘a \ \ . . . ‘n .- u. a An. I I“ . o 24 Picture No. 4 ,A Tractor-mounted Windrower. Picture No. 5 The Cleaner Combine with Pickbup Attachment. \- f C 9‘" .0 \.. 'W. 'I Q . s. .- IS. I to P’ . a . .ni. . u .- O . . I O . I s a I. . n. a a. I o. O a. I CC. I I I . . . c I Q I vb" ~ 0 . O Os" t s‘-t 0‘ n.‘ Picture No. 6 Rear View of Gleaner Combine. 9k“. :1 JPN. ‘i Picture No. 7 Massey-Harris Combine with Standard Reel and Canvas Wipers. 25 0' '3'. w u ' scan H d- l .' " - ‘ cut 0'“ In CHAPTER I)! COLLECTED DATA AND FIGURES TABLE I PRODUCTION OF DR! BEANS IN MICHIGAN IN 1949 27 fi— County . ,Acreagc Yield Total .- Harvested per Acre Producticn Bushels Bushels Tuscola 69,000 22.0 1,518,000 Huron 100,500 15.0 1,508,000 Saginaw 55,000 20.0 1,260,000 Sanilac 59,000 19.0 1,121,000 Gratiot 51,400 25.0 722,000 Stats 519,000 19.2 9,950,000 TABLE II YIELD AND PRODUCTION OF DH! BEANS, NOVEMBER 1, 1950 28 fir Average 1949 1950 1959-—-1948 cwt. cwt. cwt. Yield per acre ,Michigan 8.22 11.50 8.00 Michigan‘total 4,405,000 5,968,000 5,696,000 U.S. total 17,567,000 21,554,000 16,419,000 29 TABLE III BEAN COMBINING DATA Michigan State College Experimental Plots (Collected.by.£mir,Khan) 1950 Gleaner Combine and Pickrup Attachment .— r Test Length Yield from Threshing Shatter Total Per. Feet Combine Loss Loss Loss Cent Loss 1 108 11.85 1.90 0.57 2.27 16.0 2 85 8.66 1.54 0.55 1.67 16.1 3 88 5.72 .06 0.17 1.03 21.7 30 TABLE IV DATA FOR MOISTURE DETERMINATION Date Gross Net Moisture Moisture Grams Grams Lost Content Grams Per Cent 1951 . Sept. 25 Straw 62 40 4 10, Beans - 49 __6_ 12 . 2 Total S5 19 . 5 Sept. 28 Straw 55 51 6 19.3 Beans - 82 8 9.8 Total IIS" 1': T2,: Oct . 5 Straw 90 68 s 11;? Total 186 54 18.0 Oct. 9 Straw 74 52 6 11.5 Beans - 5 5 7.7 Total I??? 11' """"‘9.5 Oct. 11 Straw 56 34 5 14.7 Beans g g 8.9 Total 79 9 11.4 51 TABLE V DATA FOR COMPARISON TESTS Date Method Distance Shatter Pick in Loss Shatter Loss Oct. 4, 1951 Hume Reel 8 Feet 18 Grams 42% Flat Guards Oct. 4, 1951 Hume Reel Standard Guards 8 Feet 21 Grams 56% Oct. 9, 1951 Hume Reel 8 Feet 25 Grams 7.7% . Flat Guards Oct. 9, 1951 Hume Reel Standard Guards 8 Feet 51 Grams 51% Oct. 11, 1951 Standard Flat Guards Canvas Wipers 8 Feet 19 Grams 18% Oct. 11, 1951 Standard Reel Standard Guards 8 Feet 50 Grams 10% 1 - n .‘ I I s L~ J ...,l . I .H—/ q. J . ‘ . I x f I. I f I ‘f J A _. _-___‘—. ~ - __..- —. ‘\ {w (gum . 'Hfifigi;‘w “~ 4327',’ fer-2. a '.‘.« - " 1 . ...,-,- .-__ __ _ , .~ .. v-.r -y,‘ ._. ., .L, n:._. .. -. , i I "- K~W‘ n._.... A.-- . _ . _. . - .- 4 .~- -~ ~' a. u- . a." . s «a. on": a I'z-E‘WJ: .4. o . . . '3 .-..--. . .-- —- i?.£f‘~ - ‘L‘g'; a.» . s . “3-. ~ ~' : ‘ s; «7;- - ,3” ,3; .M‘hj ”Pr-U pet'QL‘Tf'J r' y‘-'.. _._.§ .n ' rev- v _. _ ' H s ’ . ' - . \n. . .1. — _-- . .1- .-__. . .-.. -w ._.. —“— ’ - _ . - -- _ pawn; F-w: a». r ,- d—‘I— -. .- .=.. ‘ """ ”‘1'": ' 99-9 ".91". . w "~ ‘4‘. y...-.. u- Mm-_ Wane-v a); m SLAL. .~ ‘2‘. 1'! Va; ~:=_.“ W . 7 ' ‘ «— - -__..._ 2.- 1.: r ._._.- ..r ’1' ' T. .'. -. -- I ‘ .w- .1“: 5 -.-\g.._ .1‘. . ‘ - - n . .p «L. ‘9’ ‘ 9' 4 a a.» '"I fidvv - . .rO‘r.- .‘ t. ..-a-.- -a-.--‘.-.-__- ~ u.-. .‘J'IT 113" —. :, ’4‘. I"- 0.-.: a}. in $.10)” . - A ”Ann. _ .. - TWM.‘-gfimm 52 ,_ . 1 .. I 1 57190 saw; 53 MI A/“i / h. / 5%; // Z "1,0 ’. ,4! .— Figure 2. ( VT/a/Z’ Cox-v 2‘5/2 f / F3." any/j 55 ‘\ \ rx 5) h “ 6.x c; 1..-. ...a .- .....-._._.-.. _ m- _ ~.___._ __"_,_ Ifmw ___ J 5 *— ""m , fj7‘7vwr7’ 7 .7”) L14...1"/’._+_/_:4/¢/./-A/A/: - ‘11sz Tc/rr/ H WA?” /> ’m *4: 52:1” fi/y/ f/7‘J’V % 1.1.1 *7 8457/13 W/; ”14/ ///1 // ::/://:;Z l k 7‘7‘//' I ffiaw/L p éésvw 6;; '/Z 6:21 7ch / — ffn/a 3 - fl’V/u VZ; /4l/J//_/ 7074/ ’ U .1 3/ / 0. May "///fl/J / [1.371 [I a} 5.7/27? / My 401 drift/'Jx///./ 4/ Jag/(442W 54 Figure 5 \ 5s Star K§%KU\\\VV \QMHOGKQKQ\ T 55 Figure 4. ~—-.d ”/r‘ \Lfi F——— r— .— f/qu.-- 29/05.-- ‘ Guard . (far/C //'/2. =' //'/z CHAPTER X EVALUATION OF DATA The use of the Hume reel proved to be very satisfac- tory under all conditions. The lifting action of the tines provided the necessary straightening and lifting of the plants before they were cut off and after they passed the cutter bar. Also, with the use of this type reel, visibil- ity of the Operator was not impaired. Rocks could be seen and avoided quite easily. The standard reel without canvas wipers did not do the Job. The beans were chipped and re-cut, so they were usu- ally lost as the sickle continued to cut and thresh the pods. The standard reel with canvas wipers did a good Job of forc- ing the crop into the machine. However, they also caused rocks to be easily pitched into the machine. Operator visi- bility was reduced. It was difficult to maintain cutting level and also avoid the rock hazard. The losses noted in the chart are not much different for_the Hume reel than for the standard reel with canvas wipers. Although the condi- tions of the weather weresimilar, it must be said that the crop yield could affect these results, giving no signifi- cant difference. 57 Considering the use of the cut-off guards, one can say_ that they prevented some of the threshing at the cutter bar. The action of the sickle upon the plant can be compared to the spike tooth cylinder of the older threshing machine. This spike tooth system was used for threshing. Here it is evident, on a small scale, in the threshing of the pods. Removing the tOp portion of the guard allows the action to become pure shearing. The results indicated in the tests which were run note the decided difference in the cutter bar losses. It can be said that this is a definite result, and that the cut-off guard, or a guard of the cow pea type, can be used to a very good advantage in this type of harvest. One more comparison was made in the field with the comparison of direct combining to that of the three stage method. It was found that although the losses incurred for direct harvesting were high under adverse conditions, the grain in the tank was low in pick content. The three stage method may run a larger amount of lower quality beans through the combine. With this lower quality product high pick will be incurred. Therefore the total crOp value will be lower, since the cost of pick removed must be paid by the value of the good quality beans left after the picking Operation is completed. This, then, Justifies the use of direct harvesting during the course of adverse weather on the Michelite variety, the vine—type bean. 58 It is easily Justified on the‘bushrtype bean similar to soy beans since it is so like that crOp in harvesting tech- nique. Inasmuch as this mutated bean is not available for the general farmer, then this method cannot be used on as wide a scale at this time, except under adverse weather conditions. CHAPTER XI SUMMARY The results of the development work on the methods for combining navy beans can be summarized as follows: 1. 2. 5. 4. On bushrtype beans the direct harvesting'method is ' the best since it minimizes weather risk, reduces labor cost, and the losses at the cutterrbar are similar to losses incurred in pulling, windrowing, and combining. On the vine-type bean the best method to be used under good weather_conditions is the pulling, windr rowing, and combining method. Under adverse weather conditions the direct combin- ing method may be used to an advantage on vine-type beans because the losses incurred are beans which, would ordinarily be pick, since they are in contact with the soil and.mold readily, or are subjected to weather damage. HOwever, some losses occur;‘but this method will give a farmer some return on his investment. The Hume reel was found to be the best attachment for the combine in forcing the feeding of the hay to the machine. 5. 6. 40 The use of the flat guards was found to be advanta- geous since the threshing losses at the cutter-bar were reduced. The results indicate that_grain losses were the least using the regular reel and the canvas wipers. However, considering the rock damage, Operator vis- ibility, and ease of operation, it must be con- cluded that this method involves a much greater risk to machine damage and crop loss than the method using the Hume reel. BIBLIOGRAPHY 1 J. F. Cox. Select Seed Beans in Fall. Michigan A i- cultural Exp3FIEEHU—SUEEIOH—QHEFUETIY Bulletin, 1 1) (August, 1918): Pp. 29. 2 P. F. Aylesworth. Cost of Producin Michi an Be s'i ' 195 . Michigan riculturEI Experiment Station Quarterly letin, 15 (4) 1953): Pp. 231-234. 3 L. H. Brown. Income from Field Beans. Michigan Agri- cultural Experiment Station Quarterly Bulletin, 25 (4) 4 J. D. McDow. Stud of Chemical Defoliation i Har- vestin of White Pea B s. UnpuinsEed THesis, (1950) PB. 69. 5 Roy Bainer and J. S. Winters. Results of t sts of Rubber Roller Seed Bean Thresher. AgricEIturaI Engineer- ing JournEI, {June 1958): Pp. 251-252. 6 . . {ettigrove. Bean Harvestin Probl ms, Michigan Bean EulTet n (September‘mr'e :V‘a—‘i— 9. 7 T. P. Kennedy. Be Imp vement Ob e tiv s. Michigan Bean Bulletin, (June 1948 : Pp. 8. APPENDIX A ANALYSIS OF THE OFFSET SLIDER CRANK MECHANISM Insofar as farm machinery is concerned there are a number of examples of the slider crank mechanism as it is used for the transformation of rotary motion to recipro- cating motion. The mowing machine is a classic illustra- tion of this concept. The use of this type of mechanism may be found in some types of combines. In the design of machinery it is well to have an_idea of the velocity and acceleration at the different positions of the crank pin so that the calculations of the forces and the inherent stresses may be made. By using the Pythagorem theorem an expression may be Obtained involving the disf placement of the slider, the constants of the machine, and the angle of displacement of the crank pin with respect to the horizontal. By taking the first and second time deriva- tives of the displacement of the slider one can obtain ex- pressions for the velocity and the acceleration respectively. Terms used in this analysis are: R - Crank pin radius. L - Connecting rod length. 9 - Angle of displacement with respect to the horizontal. 45 h - Offset distance of the slider with respect to the crank. 1 ~ Minimum.distance of the slider with respect to the crank measured along the horizontal. Note: In following through the mechanics of solution a consistent system of units should be used to get answers in the same units as desired. 44 k3hc~t~a€dk . ..m. Next Wemuwaxtfieoaom Kaeaodig J.OWrNN. tktmkxfi cam NO e3 mam a a. ~\.®R+Ot\bxtm .. O :aoeawt * ND. OaOfix h sax...\-.1\..au .. k “FOSS Q u&-Oe8m\\m- OSHNQN + Nmmaeucfim-\& 4 “N NNOQOO\.-.N +\\ + KOSHATT. QN u an “4.1%.---n. at». Hull! , x Irv SH.\QOVOO\I\ \\N\O.\ O\.wO\\K. \ “.58ng «\O .x O C\XORCV\O§\ 45 APPENDIXIB RECOMMENDATIONS ON COMBINE ADJUSTMENT Itemized below are some common troubles and suggested remedies in the combine harvesting of navy beans: C. Trouble Loss of grain over the charter Excessive tailings Cracking grain Slugging of the cylinder Loss of grain over the straw racks 1. 2; 3. 19 2; :5. Suggested Regedz Open the lips or the - chaffer _ f Raise the charter extension Reduce the air blast~ , Reduce the openings in the charter and charter ex- tension . ' Increase the air blast Increase the concave clear- ance Reduce the cylinder speed Increase the concave clear- ance _ Use smaller concave bars The weed cleaner attachment should be removed _, Increase ground speed to provide uniform intake of unthreshed grain Do not Operate when the vines are too high in moisture content Reduce ground speed _ Uneven windrows caused by bunching or the windrower. Reduce speed of windrower Adjust the straw retarding flap or mechanism Open the concave grates Check levelness or the com- bine with respect to the hitch , . ‘ I ‘ “‘1 - '| J, ' l \i 1 - .’ I I. _ "I D r' ~ ' ‘ l I A‘ \u ‘ ‘ 1 I - R ‘ L. ' . x ‘\ ‘ . . . I J . ~_- ' x t. ‘ . l I .» . I I .1 . ‘ I ‘ . l :‘ K , . , ‘ l ‘ l u ' . . .1 l \ ‘ ‘ . | \~ ’ . - I ‘ I \ I 4 ‘ l . 4 l' i z I ‘ I . I ' . l — I l ' . I ’ ' ' k . . v ‘ I I " \" A o I . u ' I ‘T .v IA'. .. \ W ‘ , ~~ - / . I I . \ Y 1 , . \ \ . ‘ . v ”‘1 - N 1 f. :\ ‘ . . b" - ~' I , ’- '. " .‘ \ ' t ‘ I A . I"- f o l ‘ - ' \I k: - ‘ h. '- . C ' k '4’. . - _. I Q Ic‘r- - D 4 II" " p1, ‘ )1 A ' ’ 1?; ’91‘"£' . ' ‘ .‘v o» 't.‘ ,4 ‘_ .4, v'du ' (I‘le‘,> H“. . k, . «‘ -, - .‘ 1 ‘\ ;_‘ -LL MICHIGAN STATE UNWERSITY LIB | llll I ll IIIIIIIIWITI'ES 193 03082 4555 1 3