Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
RICHARD L. ECHOLS, B . S .
A THESIS
IN
AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING
Submitted to the Graduate Faculty
of Texas Tech University in
Partial Fulfillment of
the Requirements for
the Degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
IN
AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING
Approved
Accepted
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
-11-
CONTENTS
/ PAGE
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii
LIST OF TABLES v
LIST OF FIGURES vi
1. INTRODUCTION 1
Statement of the Problem 2
Objectives ..• 2
II. LITERATURE REVlEl'/ 4
Related Work 4
Brush Pvelated Research • 7
III, PROCEDURAL PLAN 10
Static Test Procedure e. 11
Dynamic Test Procedure ..•.,• H
Instrumentation ..,,.. 12
Theory of Operation .,,.,, 12
IV. ANALYSIS OF DATA AND FINDINGS .... 17
Feed Speeds 19
Log Diameter, Blade Tip Speed,
and Blade Sharpness 28
Applications of Results 43
111-
V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 47
Summary • 47
Conelusions .•...•..,..,••.,,••• 50
Recommendations for Further Study 51
REFERENCES 52
APPENDICES
Appendix I •••,,,• , •.•••.•••• 53
Appendix II ...•••••• 57
-iv-
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE PAGE
1. Energy ratios 20-22
2. Total energy, energy per area, and
energy per diameter .•,,,••••,,. 25-27
3. Energy ratio for diameter ratio for
a given blade tip speed ••,.,,•••• 33
4. Summary of dynamic test data obtained
after data reduction and analysis ...... 40
5. Summary of static test data obtained
after data reduction and analysis ...... 41
«v-
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE PAGE
1. Dynamic cutting test apparatus 13
2. Belt driven carriage table 13
3. Counterweight and blade ...,., , 14
4. Rotating shaft torque transducer ,.,. 14
5. Energy ratios at equal blade tip speeds
but different feed speeds 24
6. Blade tip speeds vs. total energy 29
7. Blade tip speeds vs. energy per square
inch of cross-sectional area ,.,..., 30
8. Blade tip speed vs. energy per inch
of diameter ••.••,., •• •«.•• 32
9. Diameter ratios vs. energy ratios for
sharp blade dynamic tests 35
10. Diameter ratios vs. energy ratios for
dull blade dynamic tests 36
11. Blade tip speed vs. slope for dynamic
sharp blade tests .•••,•••• 37
12. Blade tip speed vs. slope for the
dynamic dull blade tests 38
13. Relationship between energy, diameter,
and speed for sharp and dull blades 42
-vi-
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Objectives
The objectives of this study were to determine the
energy requirements for cutting mesquite under various
conditions. More specific objectives were as follows:
1, To determine the energy requirements of a
blade for a relatively static cutting
condition. This requires the determination
of the energy required to cut restrained
mesquite logs with a slov; speed blade.
-3-
2. To determine the energy requirem.ents of a
blade for a relatively dynamic cutting
condition. That is, a blade traveling at a
speed equivalent to blade tip speeds of a
field machine,
3. To determine the energy requirements of a
dull blade for breaking or crushing mesquite
at both high and low speeds.
The information obtained will be analyzed on a
comparative basis and utilized to more accurately
define optimum conditions and requirements for shredding
mesquite.
CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEIV
PROCEDURAL PLAN
^1
-17-
-18-
Feed Speeds
The ratio of the energy requirements for cutting
equal size logs at equal blade tip speeds but at
different speed rates were calculated and tabulated
to determine if feed speed is a significant factor
affecting the total energy requirements. These ratios,
which are summarized for all log diameters in Table 1
indicate a slight increase in energy requirement as the
diameter of the log increases, but the average value
of this increase for the 2 inch to 4 inch log is only
8.237o, For the 2 inch to 6 inch log the increase is
8,58%, and for the 4 inch to 6 inch log the increase
is only 0,3%, Thus, this indicates that the energy
level was slightly lower for the 2 MPH feed speed but
that there is essentially no difference between 4 and
6 MPH. The relationship involved is shown graphically
-20-
Blade
Speed ^l-k Average
(Ft./min.) ^2^<" ^3^^
Table 1. (continued)
Blade
Speed A1* ^2* ^3''^ Average
(Ft./min.)
Table 1. (continued)
Blade
Speed ^IVc Average
^2''f ^3^>
(Ft./min.)
Overall %
Increase 8,23% 8,58% 0,3%
- 23-
V) 01 (0
60 bO <xO
0 O 0
r-t r-4 r-1
U ^ U
(D 0) 0
4J 4J +J
0 0) 0
oj B e E
td cd CO
fi n-« •H
TJ TJ ft CQ
^ ^,
-o o •H ^
-P 0
•* •• ^ o 0
CVJ CO <J- o
H-
^sl
0 PH
1 1 1 'd CQ
cd
y^ O <
r-{ 'd
rO 0
0
rH «H
Cd
o 0 •P
o a" C
o
ro, 0 0
-P 0
cd
CM
CO •H
o 'd
O OJT^
O P>
^ cd
o
OJ ?H rQ
!>i CQ
bD ' d
^ 0
0 0
P^ ft
H CQ
o
o
o i
LA
0
U
bD
•H
O
o o o o o
o o o o
o o o o
OJ H
-25-
u
0
*j
0
e
<d
'TA td ^
•d 0 • ''-N
S-< w •
u -< ^ c
0 •H
^ ^ T H
ft >> 1 1
60 • •
CM CJN r^ CO vD < f
CM vD O r^ < t C3N CM o r ^ o i n c o or^ oooo in
CM <^ vo CO cjN o
>^ U P cr tn r H 1—1 CM CM CO CO CM vD 00 CM C^; vD
r H r H I-H t—I I-H CM
60 0 ^A to p »H »-H f-H CM CM CM
u C ^ to
0
Dynamic Te
c w
0
c
«d
cd
0 >^
(^ 60/^ 0
td J-) • xi <j- cjN i n t-H 0 0 C7N CM CMON < f CMn o c o r^ vD <?• CM
0 to td 0 0 CM r^ vD 0 0 CO vo inco r^inin o <i- I-H i n 00 00
u C ^ rH CO m vD 00 O CM 0 0 f-H CO CO JD 0 0 i n 00 rH CM CO i n
0 W rH CQ rH rH CM CM CM CM
ft J
1-4 • ft
>^ td P }-<
60 P En td
U O^-^ ^
0 H r>0
c
0
60
u o omo o o o o m o o o
oo in oo o
0 •l-J <t t-t i n vc ro rH
c •d e <t rH in VO CO I—I in CM CO i n CM ON < f r H i n VD CO I—I
0 0"^ i n CM CO i n CM C3N r^ c j v o CM < t i n i n CM CO i n CM cjN
0 • r^ C3N o CM < M n r>. ON o c^j < M n
ft p
cd
O
H
CM
td C CM CO
0
f-l
td
H
-26-
r H CO CO VO CO < t 1—I r ^ CM CM CO CO C M m CO O CM CM
00 CO CO m r H r > . < t v o CJN CM < t r > . o rH CO m vD r>.
CO <}• <t- m vO vD CM CM CM CO CO CO CM CM CM CM CM CM
m CM CM r^ o r^ o r ^ c o CO o CO r > . o v o m m <t
CJN VO CO < t < f r H o CO r^ r*. vD CO CO o CM <^ CJN m
I-H CO m r ^ CJN r H r^ COO CM <)- vD m r ^ ON r H C M < t
1-H f-H f-H r H f-H CM t-H rH CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CO CO CO
td P :3
p
o
H
o o m o o o o o m o o o
o omo oo < t r H m VO CO r H vJ- f-H m vO CO r H
0 <t rH m VD CO rH m CM CO m CM CJN m CM 00 m CM CN
^J m CM 03 m CM CJN r ^ CJN o CM < f m r ^ CJN o CM < f m
0 0^^ r>. CJN o c M <t m
•f-» 0 •
P ftp
G
O
O
CNI
td c CM CO
td
H
-27-
m CM CO r-^ CO CM vD m CO CO m
r^ r^ < t vD o CO ON r-. v^m r^
CM CM CM CO oo CO tHCMCO
m m m
CM
td C o m o CMm r^ o omr^ o
• • • • • • • • • • •
0 I-H f-H r H CM
r-l r H r H CM CM CM CM CO
td
H
-28-
O
O
O
^
o
o
\
o^.
OJ
H
\
O
O
O
\ ,>
o
r-l
0
•H >^
O B hD
O \
-p u
0
o
CO CM fi
*^—' 0
P rH
w
^
Cd
-P
o P^ o
o m p
o
kD
peed vs
CQ
•P
u 0u u0
0
to
P 0
CQ -p -p +^ (0 T) 0
0 0 0 0 0 <xi TJ
EH H r-l cd O CQ
0 s s s
0 f d cd cd cd CQ r-< O
O f d cd T-i T-i -H O CQ ft
o
ti;
i>i H PH a fi S CO (fi Q
n rH cd ' H -r-l
^ ^
TH
* n
PCOOJ K^cJ- PQ
o
1 o
1 xo<i o
OJ I
1
* * >
» «« 0
o % •H
X X X o pq
o a o o o
o o o o
o o o o
OJ H
( s q i - M ) iCSjceua IB^OJJ
-30-
O
O
\ 4O
^
V
Cd
0
^1
\ cd
0 rH
0 Cd
. 0 fi
0
\ K
h^ •H
P
0
\ 0
CQ
0 1
0 CQ
0 CQ
\ -C\J 0
V u
0
\
<H
0
0 ^
\ 0 0
O-N fi
•H
\
• c'T+H
^
0
\
s fH
\ EH td
Pq :=i
\ V ' &
CQ
\
oO W« PH
0
cw
COPH ft
V CO
?>:.
H bD
FH
<aj 0
0-^ fl
opq 0
tO
VD CQ
>
'd
0 0
J-i ^^ M 0
•d 0 0 0 0
PH
td TJ P p P CQ
f-4 0 0 0 0 CQ
td -P 0
CQ r-4 g B
CQ td e
td td 0
CQ 0 ft
^ •H
ft •H •rl •H •P
U r-l TJ •d -d -P
td r-4 O
jd S s •a> 0
^3 •H
to Q CM CO <^ 'd
-P Cd
1
1 Cd H
-p 0 pq
1 X O ^ 02 0
1 0
OJ 1
[N
0
lil Q
19 U
g)
•H
0 pq
o O O o O O
o
»D
O
Lf\
O
^
oKA O
OJ
O
V-
o
0
0 -d
'd cd
cd
H
,0
PH
H U 0
H cd
,00
1^ f^
P CO 0
dia met
vD
rH
000
\
inch
000
^
OJ
fl
H 0
ft
0 fi
0 -H
nergy
0 e
0 p
rH Pq
0
P CQ
0 H >
0 H
0 PH
CO CO
0
spe
P^
0 P
(3) 0 <
•d 0 u J^ $-1 0 Hi
td •d 0 0 0 ft
iJ
CQ <^ pq •H
t-i td P p -P
CQ r-l 0 0 0 p
CQ
CQ g
e tde 0
Blade
. 4000
ft td td -P
5-i r-i •rl •rl •rl
td r-l Ti TJ 33
^ w
«* «^ O
Xi :i •H
CO CM CO <}•
-P
1
1 Cd
>« 0 4 -P
0 1
1 CO 0 CXD
0 0
CVJ
^ ^ " ^ P3
bD
® e •H
PR
JL.^.m.
0 0 0 0 0 0 o
0 0 0 0 0 0
OJ 0 00 <X) ^ OJ o
rH H
Diameter Ratio
Speed 2.00 1,50 1.33 1.00
(Ft./min.)
harp Blade
7540 3,91 2,24 1.74 1.00
9210 3,48 2,18 1.59 1.00
10855 3,14 1.98 1.58 1.00
12560 2,62 1.60 1.64 1.00
14230 2,19 1.52 1.43 1.00
15910 2,08 1.50 1.39 1.00
Dull Blade
Ej/E2 = (dj/d2)^
where, K is the slope of the line or effectively
the exponent to which the diameter must be raised to
result in a collapse of the data. The slope or K-
values shown directly in Figures 9 and 10 range from
0.70 to 1.97. Each value is for a given blade tip speed
with the larger values corresponding to the slower
speeds.
Plots of K-values versus blade tip speed are shown
in Figures 11 and 12. An excellent linear relationship
is shown and the equations for K were found to be as
follows:
Sharp Blade: kg = 2.840 - 0.000113 S
Dull Blade: kj^ = 1.420 - 0.000045 S
where, S is blade tip speed in feet per minute and
k and kp. are exponents to be used for collapsing the
data. In other words, the following plots should
result in a single relationship for the sharp blade
and another for the dull blade.
Sharp Blade: E/d^s Vs. Speed
Dull Blade: E/d^D Vs. Speed
-35-
K values
4 ^
K
3 . E-^/E^ = (d-^/d^)
where K is slope
c\j
of the line
a 2 -
H u
EH I
< I i
C5
P4
Pxl
CVJ K values
r-i
1.08
CO
O
0.99
H 0.95
0.85
0.77
cr> 0.70
p:;
H E^/E^ = ( d j / d ^ ) K
where K is slope
of the line
ft
Cd
u
o ^
o CQ
o
KD
or the dynamic
14000
2000
rH
min
0
O \ ft
O •
T? O -p r^
o
0 pq CQ
0 or-^ N—^
ft CQ
to P >
O
o
^ ft O w
CO w
PM
^
0
•
•r^
p o
CO CO 0
OJ ft
0 CQ CQ
Xi P*
+ cd
CO rH o ft
•H 0
CQ
K> Jd o
r-i o
KD
P> P>
r-\ to 0 0
•H
a TZi ^
Cd cd
o to
o• o rH rH
pq ,o
I 0 o
o
li u0 1
1
CQ Xi rH
1^ 15 H
O
Figure
200
00 *D C\J o
o• •
^
* t o
OJ H iH r-^
o
(:^) OiMawodxa «io aaoas
-38-
H
rH
o 0
o ^d
o
KD
H
mic
O cd
O fl
73 O t>5
0 ^ T:^
0 H
ft 0
oj to
O -P
ft O
•H O U
P CVJ
rH o
«H
0
CO TI ^ 0
td O H ft
O S O
O >^ rH
O o EH CQ
O to o
rH pq
O •H '""^ CQ
>
I C/5 O P
o pq 'd
H 0
It
0
o
00 P4 0
'd u CO ft
0 CQ CQ
X ft P>
CQ
o •H 0
o P P
o
VD
0 0
-d^
Cd cd
O rH H
O pq rO
O
^
1
OJ
rH
o 0
o U
o
Figu
OJ
o
(X) VD CVJ
C\J
•
o• • •
^
• •
H
r-{
o
(0
•H
(0 vD vO vO 0 0 r ^ CM r H CM m <}• Cy» CO
60 ^ c> m CM o <i- o
>s >W -d
m vo CO <f o r^
r-^
•-< CM CO < t VO m vo r^ o rH CM
<d
td
td
TJ
td -d
m <1- r>. m C7N CM c o m vo 00 CM 00 0
C3N m CM t-H CO r H
c W I TJ «-H CMCO <t- vO
vo r>* o vo CO o
m VD 00 CTk r H CO
0
o X r H t-H
ft
to
o
p
o
c ft
•rl
I C» VD CM VO CO CM t ^ o CO m r H <i- p
•d r>. C7N CO r H <J- CM <^ O vD CM CJN VO
0 ^ • • • « « • • • • • • • 0
u TJ
s blad
m f - ( C3M^. m < t - d - < t CO CO CM CM
td
p
td
TJ
to r^ f-H cjN C3N <j" CO to 0 0 O \ vD m vO C7N
u 4:i w I ' d P CJv vO CM CO CO CfN p r H CM < t CA m T-\
p
to
0 u to rH CM CM < t m to m vo r^ 00 f-H
rH r-i
CM U
P 0 0 0
<w
td
a H H >
I O m VD vO CMCO u c o o 00 <1-C0 vD
O '^
-d CO M c^ i-< CO r^ CO rH •H C M O r^ m c o r H
0 •rl
g MH
c td CO r ^ m < t CO CO td CO CO CM CM CM CsJ O
•rl f! C
td >^ N P
P Q Q O
X r*«. CM T H r H 1 ^ CM VD r H CM r H f-H r^ r-{
•d 0 (TV m CM CM VO o 0 VD CO o r ^ < t o ft
o O TJ f-< CMCO •^t vD •d m vD 00 Crv r H CO
td td td r-\ T—i
p •rl rH rH •H c
td I cq cq
•d CM r>> VD m CO CO vo f H O r H O O CM Xl
ft O < t O vD CO O rH r H O CJV CO t ^ VD 0
p U rH
to td CO CO CO CM CM CM :3 CM CM r H r-« r H f-H •Hc
0 X
n obta
Q
p
o
g 'd
td
a
0
0
e o omo OO oo m oo o
<}• r H m VO CO r H •rl
o
ft < f I-H m VD Ol rH
>^ m CM o o m CM c^ mcM oom CM CJN p
-d CO p r^ cjv o c M < ^ m r>. cjv o CM <j- m td
om equ
t-H r H r H r H
pq
<4H
r H t-\
O »-H
<!- o
y-^ P
0 o r-. C3N vD (3v <t m 00 cjN CO m r ^ o rH
f-H g rH v> CTv r^ vO CO r H o O C3N C3N CO t ^ r>» td
X O Oi o
1-\
td $-1
pq ^
H
-41-
Sharp Blade
1,0 480 75 2,786 1,00 75,0
1,5 1120 412 2,713 3.00 137.3''«v
Dull Blade
tests.
*'^ This value is unusually high and, therefore, was
not included in the subsequent analysis.
-42-
o
o Ti
0 3 o
VD fi
' r-\ cd nd
0
-fi
PH-H
a 0 cd
o p> p
o
4- 0 rO
f-\ B O
cd CQ
• H CQ p>
Ti (D r-i
o Tzf :ii
o -cd CQ
oVJ
C {>:,rH 0
H bDX fH
^-^
fH
^ 0 rH -P
O H f l rH CQ
O 0 f5 0
O s
\ ' d -P
O EH fi
H pq <D Ti fH
v_^ 0 fl O
15 Cd
O p p CQ
O p^ 0 ft-H
O ^ ^ PH CQ
00 PH cd >,
CO ftrCj rH
•H CQ cd
-^ fl
O CQ PH cd
O fi o
O^ X
o
VD •H bD
cd 0 o
O rH 0 PH
\ O 0 ftrd
O O ft; CQ p
r-i ^
\
CO
1
\
r-\
o
\ o 0
oVJ
Figur
<f--*r~
* ^
o o a o o o o o o o o o o o
o o o o o o o o o o o o o
^f^ OJ H O CJN CX) !>- VD LTv 4- K^ OJ H
H r-\ rH rH
(p) / a
-43-
Application of Results
Summary
The maximum size log cut with the static tests was
-47-
-48-
•49-
Conclusions
-52-
APPENDIX I
tilIII
-53-
-54-
Wiring Symbols
HI—-»
M
P
k..xj
!bfl«RN«nMP«
LJjTti<»wmTfnMiPl
•At,^W-\,,A
vw<g)-* S
K^
Ti
0
P
fi
o
o
CD
<
i-H
P
a
M
III
APPENDIX II
Results of Tests
-57-
-58-
Sharp Blade
Sharp Blade
Sharp Blade
Dull Blade
7540 2
4 995 1099 1361 1150
6 1152 1308 1256 1240
9210 2 1414 1623 1361 1465
4 1257 1152 1361 1260
6 1204 1518 1361 1360
10855 2 1675 1518 1623 1575
4 1414 1414 1518 1450
6 1571 1518 1623 1570
12560 2 1780 1623 1832 1740
4 1728 1518 1623 1620
6 1728 1990 1832 1880
14230 2 1885 1832 1937 1880
4 1675 1780 1885 1780
6 2251 2042 2147 2160
15910 2 1990 2199 1990 1940
4 1990 2042 2147 2050
6 2356 2408 2251 2360
-62-
Dull Blade
7540 z Ml wm
Dull Blade
Sharp> Blade
Dull Blade