Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
1964
Recommended Citation
Larson, Lawrence William, "Predicting draft forces using model moldboard plows in agricultural soils " (1964). Retrospective Theses and
Dissertations. 3863.
https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd/3863
This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University
Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Retrospective Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University
Digital Repository. For more information, please contact digirep@iastate.edu.
This dissertation has been 65-€619
microfilmed exactly as received
^7
ApprovedÎ
Heads of Ma rtments
1964
PIEASS NOTE:
Figure pages are not original copy.
'They tend to "curl". Filmed in the-
best way possible.
University Microfilms, Inc.
il
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION 1
OBJECTIVES 4
WORK OF OTHER INVESTIGATORS 5
EXPERIMENTAL WORK 9
Model Analysis 9
Equipment l4
Measurement of Forces 26
Design. Construction, and Setting of Plows 32
Description of Soils 43
Measurement of Soil Physical Properties 46
. Testing Procedures 59
ANALYSIS OP RESULTS 65
Conversion cf Graphical Data 65
Calculation of Dimensionless Values 69
Development of a Functional Relationship 72
Prediction Factor vs. Distortion Factors 87
SUMMARY 96
CONCLUSIONS 99
SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH 100
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 105
Hi
Page
APPENDICES 106
Appendix A. Soil Data 10?
Appendix B. Experimental Data 111
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
1. Overall view of equipment from drive end l6
2. Overall view of. equipment from soil fitting end l6
3. Changing soil bins, using a fork-lift truck 18
4. Carriage with soil bin removed 18
5. Soil fitting equipment, with controls for
all elements, including carriage drive 20
6. Rototiller in position for soil working 20
7. Power unit to move carriage for test runs, with
positive-infinitely-variable transmission
couples to four-speed automotive transmission 23
8. Power unit for slow-speed soil fitting
operations 23
Page
19. Soil sampling for determination of moisture
content and volume weight Zj-9
20» Torsion device with shear head attached 51
Page
36. Graph showing exponential correlation
between the values of rrc suad the slopes of
the vs. rrg regression lines 80
37. Graph showing relationship between and the
ratio r^ 81
38. Comparison of experimental and calculated
regression lines for TT-. VS. HO for tests in
Ida silt loam 83
LIST OF TABLES
Page
1. Values used in generating logarithmic spiral
curves for moldboard plow templates 34
Page
INTRODUCTION
OBJECTIVES
EXPERIMENTAL WOEK
Model Analysis
where E draft . F
2 "1
R
TT-, = —Ô the draft rr term
-nv
wD'
T.T
_
^ • . • • . the speed TT term
gp '
SD
1/2
V, since g^ = g
_ C
-V = Y
Vm ^ "D
4;
BO -
= 6U O
Vm
Equipment
fpm, for soil fitting. Controls for this drive motor were
located at the station where all other controls were
located for operating the soil fitting equipment. This
slow-speed drive was disconnected at the final driveshaft,
passed under the toolbar, and when the carriage was returned
to its starting position. Reversing of this drive was
accomplished only by shifting the transmission to reverse
gear, thereby preventing return of the carriage at high
speed.
which was energized at the same time the drive motor was
started. At line pressure of 90 psi, the accelerating
force was of the order of 1,500 lb., minus friction losses
in the piston and the cable system. The piston was equip
ped with cup leathers to transmit force in either direction,
valve.'
Measurement of Forces
VERTICAL
FORCE
Fig, 9, Line sketch of tool mounting bar
Fig. 10, Oscillograph equipment.used for recording
strains in load-measuring devices
II = a b = ta
this indicates that a vertical differential
section of the moldboard parallel with the
lands!de should have the formula
»• puO^
#
Pig. 13i' Logarithmic spiral curves used in forming moldboard plow surfaces
36
only parameter that was adjusted for scaling was the co
all curves. This meant that the angle between the curve
tangent and a radius line from the origin was ^5° at all
points.
P
-'lUo
[p^ + (&)']
^
du)
p = a e
^ = n a e""
du)
2 _2 _2nwl
= a
J
Without carrying this further, it can be seen that the
rolled mild steel, from which the mill scale had been
removed while still flat. Approximate side contours were
surface. Then the soil bin was moved away, and the dyna
mometer and plow lowered the required distance.
Description of Soils
99195
99.9
999
99
99
98
95
90
y 80
S 70
60
> 50
^ 40
3 30
5
R 20
0.5
02
Q05
aoi
0001 OJOOS AOI 0J05 0.1 as 1.0 2J0 5.0
PARTICLE SIZE
m m.
The Ida silt loam, Colo clay loam, and Luton silty clay
results.
47
equation
Q -
8 2nr3
Sg = C + Sn tan cp
I -
01 I I I I I
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
NORMAL STRESS,
PSI
= A + tan
Testing Procedures
I 2 M 1 b
60
NORMAL STRESS
PSI
which, reading from the left, means: Ida silt loam soil,
replicate b.
tween soil types and moisture levels. Since the soil would
push out near the ends of the bin, the useable draft data
was normally limited to about six feet in the center of
the bin length.
at all times that test operations were not being carried out.
Fig, 28. Screeding operation after tilling, to
level soil surface prior to rolling
ANALYSIS OF EESULTS
Table 13 of Appendix A.
Draft forces on the plows and speed of plowing were
also recorded initially on oscillograph tapes, as shown in
Fig. 32. Draft and speed records for run with 3"
model molaboard plow
89
69
cate one foot movement of the soil bin, and applying the
required constants. This was checked against a trace by
pen No. 2 which recorded the output from a direct current
80
IDA SILT LOAM
16% MOISTURE
70
60
50
40
30
20 §
PLOW
0 2 3 4 5 6
7f2
"1 = +
^2 ^2
_ C A
^3 - WD , "5 "^
I = 0.230
C J
All
2" plow 3" plow 4" plow sizes
Run c tan 0
A c tan 0
c tan 0
A
tan M
series wD wD wD wD wD wD
I 1 24.408 0.504 0.0778 15.821 0.430 0.0532 14.547 0.336 0.0397 0.688
I 2 24.773 0.453 -0.2077 20.512 0.354 -0.1384 14.951 0.525 -0.0994 0.701
I 3 25.754 0.505 0.3805 20.676 0.497 0.2608 18.417 0.358 0.2013 0.670
I 4 30.886 0.343 -0.0157 19.081 0.491 -0.0104 15.955 0.416 -0.0079 0.547
I 5 23.071 0.572 1.0214 16.040 0.554 0.6761 17.976 0.248 0.4979 0.517
I 6 17.812 0.632 0.2034 19.761 0.436 0.1480 15.397 0.317 0.1115 0.432
C 1 42.505 0.445 -0.5868 29.178 0.502 -0.4235 23.546 0.340 -0.3228 0.448
C 2 44.681 0.478 1.8103 32.606 0.455 1.2519 25.560 0.350 0.9318 0.721
C 3 48.500 0.406 3.4679 37.418 0.373 2.5399 30.143 0.268 1.8705 0.607
C 4 37.568 0.573 2.0440 33.597 0.324 1.3609 24.206 0.332 1.0524 0.684
L 1 38.952 0.407 -0.1347 29.093 0.354 -0.0905 21.759 0.241 -0.0688 0.523
L 2 38.266 0.352 2.7212 28.145 0.397 1.8715 21.518 0.247 1.3201 0.516
L 3 46.605 0.503 0.6874 38.586 0.353 0.4715 28.579 0.312 0.3528 0.623
L 4 44.105 0.465 4.6863 33.834 0.350 3.0972 24.709 0.348 2.4154 0.457
L5 56.682 0.489 1.1217 36.889 0.473 0.6820 27.236 0.454 0.5151 0.573
N 1 18.606 0.594 -0.0422 14.736 0.488 -0.0268 13.543 0.365 -0.0204 0.428
N 2 19.077 0.442 -0.1412 15.459 0.418 -0.0945 12.151 0.404 -0.0708 0.403
N 3 14.828 0.397 0.9834 11.456 0.480 0.6365 9.788 0.470 0.4755 0.415
Table 8, Data used in developing equations for predicted values of Intercept,
I , and slope, s
P ir
Run s
series "3 le :c
N 3 L 9.788 9.177 7,130 1,287 0.821 0.803 1.022
N 3 M 11.456 13.453 8,947 1.504 1.483 1.003 1,479
N 2 L 12.151 7.474 9.660 0.774 1.225 1.084 1.158
N 1 L 13.543 7.942 11,385 0.698 1.064 1.253 0.849
I 1 L 14.547 10.785 12,650 0.853 0.973 1.380 0.705
N 1 M 14.736 14.160 12,926 1.097 1.004 1.408 0.713
N 3 0 14.828 25.691 13.110 1.959 2.658 1.426 1.864
I 2 L 14.951 16.451 13.225 1.244
I 6 L 15.397 10.418 13.800 0.755 2.072 1.496 1.385
N 2 M 15.459 14.889 13.823 1.077
I 1 M 15.821 17.989 14.375 1.251 1.747 1.544 1.128
I 4 L 15.955 12.649 14.582 0.868 1.012 1.560 0.646
I 5 M l6.040 16.132 14.720 1.096 2.463 1.584 1.555
I 6 S 17.812 —• — 1.889 1.834 1.030
I 5 L 17.976 13:930 17.480 0.797
I 3 L 18,417 10.200 18.009 0.506 1.344 1.901 0.707
N 1 S 18.606 24.525 18.400 1.333 2.665 1.946 1.369
N 2 S 19.077 21.236 19.090 1.112 8.524 2.024 1.741
L 4 M 19.081 21.805 19.205 1.135 1.578 2.028 0.778
I 6 M 19,761 18.551 20.010 0.927 2.4l6 2.112 1.144
I 2 M 20.512 19.642 21.390 0.918 1.225 2.225 0.551
I 3 M 20.676 19.814 21.505 0.921 1.287 2.253 0.571
L 2 L 21.518 23.482 23.000 1.021 2.150 2.376 0.905
L 1 L 21.759 15.590 23.230 0.671 2.216 2.411 0.919
I 5 S 23.071 39.041 25.300 1.543 2.668 2.622 1.018
C 1 L 23.546 13.193 26.381 0.500 1.667 2.682 0.622
C 4L 24.206 36.385 27.255 1.335
I 1 S 24.408 33.097 27.600 1.199 3.4^5 2.816 1.216
L 4L 24.709 24.743 28.280 0.875 5.427 2.869 1.892
I 2 S 24.773 41.951 28.290 1.483 2.234 2.879 0.776
Table 8. (Continued)
Run
series "3 Ic ^1 ^2
L 5 S 56.682 M M M M M
10.770 9.082 1.186
Note: Missing data were deleted , where It appeared that gross experimental error
had occurred.
76
1.0
-n3
00
0.5
Ol—^ J I _| L I L
0 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
tTj
diT^
S = 0.0352
q
dïï^
r^ = 0.818 + 0.609
100
lU
z 0
_J 0/
10
z
0
OT
0
0
c
/
(/} 0'/
0 n./
UJ
0: 5
0 Qy f 0
UJ
(T c 3
C
CM OoO
h n ^§oî
erf 0 ^)
>
k 3
/Orp.
li. 1.0 f
0 /
lU
a.
gas
V)
OT
0.1
10 50 100
1.5 O
O .
o o o
% oO
2 1.0 O O
o 00
H
05
rg = 0.818 + 0.609
T// L
03 0.4 0.5 0.6
Pig. 37» Graph showing relationship between rrj^ and the ratio r^
82
= Ip + Gp ^2
graphs of Figs. 38, 39> 40, and 4l. Each of these graphs
is for the medium size plow operating in the respective
80r
IDA SILT LOAM
RUN SERIES I I M
70
60
EXPERIMENTAL
TTj = 17989 + 1.747 TTg
50 CALCULATED
TT, = 15.439 + 1.673 TT.
30
20
P—
80r
COLO CLAY LOAM
RUN SERIES CI M
70
60
50
40
30
20
EXPERIMENTAL
TT, = 22.312 + 2.179 TTg
CALCULATED
TT, = 42.518 + 4.058 TTg
loam
85
80
LUTON SILTY CLAY
RUN SERIES L I M
70
SO-
SO
30
20
EXPERIMENTAL
TT, = 30.472 + 3.428 TTg
CALCULATED
TT, = 34.263 + 3.712 TTg
80r
NORFOLK SANDY LOAM
RUN SERIES N I M
70-
60-
EXPERI MENTAL
50 TT, = 14.160 + 1.004 TTg
CALCULATED
TT, 40- IT, = 15.033 4 1.590 TTg
30
20-
10-
TTc
^ "3m
"im (a + b + (e + f TTj[|.)|^g(aTT^)^J
relationship to
88
^ il
~ "3 T^3. ) TTg
h = d
S =
a
h = 1.371
h = d = 1,5
From this,
within the range 1 < TTg < 5. These values of rrg would
correspond to speeds of about 4 to 9 mph for a full-size
1^"' plow.
The tendency of the experimental value of ô to change
and to be distorted.
Table 9« Comparison of experimental and calculated values of the prediction
factor 6
L 2 S 0.352 38.266
L 4M 0.350 33.834 1.131 0.55'* 0.594 0.628 0.830
L I S 0.407 38.952
N 2 L o.4o4 12.151 3.206 0.101 0.112 0.121 0.174
N 2 S 0.442 19.077
I 6 M 0.436 19.761 0.965 0.847 0.811 0.788 1.055
L 5 M 0.473 36.889
0 2 8 0.478 44.681 0.826 1.233 1.149 1.088 1.332
N 1 M 0.488 14.736
L 5 S 0.489 56.682 0.260 4.426 5.163 5.746 7.460
L 3 S 0.503 46.605
C 1 M 0.502 29.178 1.597 0.278 0.282 0.286 0.495
I 5 M 0.554 l6.o4o
I 2 L 0.525 14.951 1.073 0.889 0.710 0.593 0.950
91
"2 ~ ^2m
B ^4 =
a e
b ^f
a = 0.978 - 0.183 p
Table 10, Calculation of. prediction factor Ô and distortion factor 3 for paired
data sets
"1
Run no TTc; H/- IT2=1 "2=3 ^2=5 "4
series ^ o
"1
Run _ „ TTi,
series 3 ^5 & ^2=3
1.6
1.2
0.4-
VA—L-
0 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4
Pig. 4-2. Graph of the apparent empirical relationship between the prediction
factor 6, and the distortion factor p
95
The number of usable data was limited, and did not permit
for the adhesion TT term, and between ô and e for the co
efficient of friction TT term. Results were not meaning
ful, presumably due to the dominating effects of small
differences between the cohesion and angle of shearing
resistance TT terms for the usable data sets.
96
SUMMARY
where
"2 = go
.
TTij = tan tp
relating tt^ and rrg for known values of rr^ and These
h = d = 1,5
98
Ô =
CONCLUSIONS
6 =
strength property.
3. Test results indicate that the selection of apparent
cohesion and the tangent of the angle of shearing resistance
as pertinent soil strength properties was valid. It was
not possible, with the available data, to ascertain the
specific effects of apparent adhesion and the coefficient
of soil to metal friction. Laboratory and field experiences
indicate, however, that these properties should be con
LITERATURE CITED
1. Bockhop, G. ¥. Similitude in investigations of tillage
implements. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Ames, Iowa.
Library, Iowa State University of Science and Tech
nology. 1957.•
2.' Buckingham, E. On physically similar systems; illus
trations of the use of dimensional equations.
Physical Review Series 2, 345-376. 1914.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
APPENDICES
107
= A + tan ji
A = adhesion, in psi
Run Percent
Series A tan (i moisture
Sg = C + tan cp
C = cohesion, in psi
0 0 CO
C 1 L5 a 436 71.2 4.920 22.093
b 446 68.4 5.148 21.225
c 447 66.6 5.171 20.666
Table 15. (Continued)
Moisture Volume Plow Shear Average „2 „
Run content weight size Speed failures draft —?
no. fo (lb/ft3) (in) (fpm) per foot (lb) ° wD
^f " + CgV + c_
16
IDA SILT LOAM
18.4 % MOISTURE
14
o
£
12
a:
Ui
a. 0 - 2 " PLOW
o - 3" PLOW
i ,0 A- 4" PLOW
S
cr
< 8
UJ
s
0 8
(T
1
3
Z
0 _L J
100 200 300 400 500 600
V
fpm
Fig. 43. Shear failures per foot vs. speed of plowing
for one soil condition
167
^f ^ + c V + c
Moisture 0
Soil level c^xlO° CgZlO C3