ARTICLE IN PRESS

BIOSYSTEMS ENGINEERING 97 (2007) 153– 161

Available at www.sciencedirect.com

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/issn/15375110

Research Paper: PM—Power and Machinery

Anchor mechanism to increase the operator clearance zone

on narrow-track wheeled agricultural tractors: Prototype
and first tests

H. Sillelia,, M.A. Dayıoğlua, A. Gültekinb, K. Ekmekc- ic, M.A. Yıldızb, E. Akayb, G. Saranlıb
a
Ankara University, Faculty of Agricultural, Department of Agricultural Machinery, 06130 Aydinlikevler, Ankara, Turkey
b
Turk Traktor and Ziraat Makineleri A.S. Guvercinyolu, 111-112, 06041 Gazi, Ankara, Turkey
c
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Directorate of Agricultural Equipment and Machinery Test Centre, P.O. Box 96, 06172 Yenimahalle,
Ankara, Turkey

art i cle info This paper introduces a new innovation for narrow-track orchard and vineyard tractors,
which enables roll-over protective structures (ROPS) heights, to be reduced whilst providing
Article history: a better protective mechanism and increasing the operator clearance zone in a lateral
Received 14 March 2006 direction. The history of the system and the first tests to compare the tractor with and
Accepted 16 February 2007 without anchor mechanism are presented. The system utilises an automatically deployable
Available online 7 May 2007 telescopic structure that releases pyrotechnic squibs to initiate the chemical reaction upon
trigger. The deployment of the anchors on the sides of the tractor and their latching by the
pins is completed before the tractor touches the ground. In laboratory tests, the two
anchors consistently deployed in less than 160 ms and latched securely. The system
behaviours were determined by means of simulations and field upset tests. The tests were
performed with a radio-controlled full-size tractor and video technology was used to
validate the deployment time and overturning speeds.
& 2007 IAgrE. All rights reserved. Published by Elsevier Ltd

1. Introduction moment of inertia, etc. The structure is usually designed to

1.1. General consideration and problem description
Agricultural tractors are mostly used as tow vehicles and on
uneven ground; such conditions increase the risk of injuries
and fatalities resulting from roll-over incidents (Springfeldt,
1996). The use of roll-over protective structures (ROPS) with
seat belts is seen as the best method of preventing fatalities in
tractor accidents (Powers et al., 2000). ROPS are designed
and tested taking into account, parameters such as tractor
mass, dimensions, height of the centre of gravity and
enable it to be folded or removed to facilitate manoeuvring,
thus avoiding the difficulty of entering rural buildings or
hitting the overhanging tree branches. However, in orchard
and vineyard tractors this flexibility can become hazardous
when the structure fails to be refitted by the operator, or is
incorrectly refitted (OECD, 2003). Powers et al. (2000) men-
tioned that most of the injuries and fatalities are believed to
occur due to misuse of the ROPS with adjustable heights and
presented their new innovation named as ‘‘AutoROPS’’, the
main aim of which, was to protect the drivers of tractors
when the protective structure is lowered or ineffective. The

Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: hsilleli@agri.ankara.edu.tr (H. Silleli), ayding@turktraktor.com.tr (A. Gültekin), kekmekci@tamtest.gov.tr
(K. Ekmekc-i).
1537-5110/$ - see front matter & 2007 IAgrE. All rights reserved. Published by Elsevier Ltd
doi:10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2007.02.016
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
154 BIOSYSTEMS ENGINEERING 97 (2007) 153 – 161

rear-mounted 2-post-ROPS was normally latched in its higher
position, but was not able to be lowered by the operator for
use in special operations. This new system allowed the ROPS
to stay lowered but it deployed vertically and locks auto-
matically if an overturn occurs.
The use of ROPS on farm tractors has been mandatory in
Turkey, since 2000. A total of 746 tractor accidents due to roll-
over, occurred in Turkey between 1990 and 2001. Only 18.36%
of those tractors involved in the accidents had a standard
cabin or ROPS. Fig. 1 shows the percentages of the degree of
injuries and fatalities in the 746 accidents. The fatality rate
was 10.16% in the ROPS-equipped tractor accidents while it
was 33.90% in tractors without a ROPS (Gölbas-ı, 2002).
The test rules and characteristics of agricultural tractors
have been defined in International Organisation for Standar-
disation (ISO), European Community (EC) and Organisation
for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Stan-
dards, Directives and Test Codes, respectively. For narrow-
track tractors, the track width cannot exceed 1150 mm (Molari
& Rondelli, 2004).
According to the European Economic Community directive
(EEC, 1987) and OECD Code 6 (OECD, 2005a), narrow-track
agricultural tractors have to pass a lateral stability and a non-
continuous rolling test. Non-continuous rolling tests can be
conducted experimentally with a real tractor or following a
theoretical calculation procedure based on a dynamic simula-
tion. When the dynamic simulation procedure in OECD Code
6 is examined ROPS height and width can be identified as two
of the most influential design parameters that can be easily
varied, preventing the continuous rolling of narrow-track
tractors, and increasing the clearance zone. However, ROPS
width cannot be increased too much because it can cause
problems during usage. For example, in 1960s, to limit the
overturning angle, 4-post-ROPS with permanent side wings
were developed in Britain. Although the rigid wings limited
the overturning angle, manoeuvrability was reduced limiting
the driving performance.
Silleli (2006) used ADAMS simulation program to prove the
anchor system effectiveness for the tested tractor. The author
applied the ADAMS simulation for determining the contin-
uous rolling behaviour of the tested tractor which passed the
preliminary test. The simulation proved that the ROPS height
could be shortened to 495 mm by using an anchor mechanism
for the related tractor.
The objective of this research was to design and develop an
automatically deployable anchor mechanism to more effec-
tively prevent continuous rolling during sideways rollover and
protect the driver from getting injured in case of an overturn.
The system should allow reduction of the ROPS height, while
providing a better protective mechanism and increasing the
clearance zone at lateral direction.
1.2. System description
Fig. 2 describes the components of mechanism and shows the
anchors which are set out towards each side of the ROPS in

50

40
Victim rate,%

30

20

10

0
Not effected Slight injuries Significant Partially paralysed Fatality
injuries and handicapped
Extent of driver injury
Fig. 1 – The extent of driver injury from accident on tractors: , tractor with a standard cabin or roll-over protective structure;
’, tractor without a standard cabin or roll-over protective structure.

Fig. 2 – Anchor mechanism mounted on the roll-over protective structure: (a) passive position of anchor system; (b) deployed
position of the anchor system in the event of an overturn (1) housing of the anchor mechanism; (2) anchors; (3) roll-over
protective structure; (4) driver; (5) ground.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
BIOSYSTEMS ENGINEERING
the event of an overturn (OECD, 2005b). The system has
two limbs (anchors) arranged to be deployed and locked by
use of pins upon reaching the widest position which also is
sized to guarantee support of the weight of the tractor in the
event of an overturn. The widened ROPS reduces the
probability of the bonnet touching to the ground, thereby
protecting the driver from the possibilities of injury. The
grade sensor attached to the tractor senses the instability of
the tractor. Once the instability decision is made, pyrotechnic
squibs, and chemical reactions cause the deployment of
the anchors.
1.3. Objectives of the system
The major objective of this research was to design and
develop an anchor mechanism which increases the protec-
tion efficiency of the ROPS for the tractor operators. Some
specific features of the anchor mechanism are to:
(1) prevent continuous rolling of a narrow-track tractor
during an overturn;
(2) increase the clearance zone between the ground and the
operator;
(3) increase the space between the tractor side surface and
the ground, and minimise the mechanical damage on the
tractor bonnet and the engine;
(4) reduce the ground impact energy by decreasing the roll
angle;
(5) provide a better tractor driving performance in the
orchard and vineyard field conditions, and
(6) enable tractor ROPS to be manufactured with lower
heights.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Simulation procedure
This research consists of simulations and field overturning
tests. The tractor roll-over test was conducted on a side
overturn bank and ramp. The surface angle that was created
in the solid model and field was suitable for ASAE J2194
(ASAE, 2002). The behaviour of the tractor with an anchor
mechanism is determined in these simulations and the tests.
In this research, a CNH TT 65D model two wheel drive
(2WD) narrow-track orchard and vineyard tractor was
selected. The tractor track width was less than 1150 mm
and there was no extra weight on the tractor during the tests.
After the tractor model was chosen, a three-dimensional
computer model was created by assembling the tractor
components in real sizes in Pro-Engineer Wildfire 2.0
environment. The kinematics and dynamic simulations of
the model tractor were conducted in MSC Software ADAMS
2005. The original material properties were assigned in the
solid model during computer simulations by using the
ADAMS material library. The joints used in the assembly of
three-dimensional model of the tractor were selected in such
a way so as to comply with the original ones used in the
97 (20 07) 15 3 – 161 155
tractor. For instance, engine-gear box was fitted as fix joint,
rim-axle as pin joint and anchor-ROPS as transient joint. The
dynamic behaviour of the tractor was simulated using
ADAMS Solver software according to the numerical solver
capabilities. The overlaying feature of the program allowed
the comparison of different simulations. The effects of the
changes in the model during simulations were observed
parametrically and visually.
In this study, the ADAMS simulations were performed for
tractors with and without anchor mechanism which were
overturned sideways from the tip of the bank while running
at 6 km/h speed. The turning angle, angular velocity and Seat
Reference Point (SRP) values were determined as a result of
these simulations.
ANSYS finite-element analyses software was used to
determine the behaviour of the system and the forces
affecting the anchor mechanism, and finally to optimize the
dimensions of the anchor. The simulations were conducted in
accordance with the side loading conditions specified in
OECD Code 6.
2.2. Test tractor and field upset test procedure
The selected tractor was equipped with a ROPS placed in front
of the operator. Another protective frame was placed at the
front of the tractor to minimise the possibility of occurrence
of any damage on the bonnet during field upset tests. The test
tractor was modified to be completely radio-controlled (R/C)
in order to be able to remotely start and stop the engine and
to control the fuel, brake, clutch and steering via DC electrical
actuators.
The behaviour of the tractor during roll-over was recorded
using two digital video cameras placed at different viewpoints
for determining the overturning duration and tractor speed.
The soil conditions (with a cone penetration resistance
X1030 kPa) on which the tests were conducted satisfied the
ASAE J2194 standard. The first field roll-over tests with rigid
anchor welded to the top of the current ROPS were conducted
to determine the behaviour of the tractors. Tests were carried
out for the tractor without the anchor mechanism to compare
performances of the two systems. The tractor used in field
tests is shown in Fig. 3. The specific dimensions and the
properties, which affect the roll-over dynamics of tractor are
shown in Table 1.
2.3. Deployment systems
Bauman and Wunsche (1990), critically reviewed the different
types of deployment systems. They were: spring-type deploy-
ing system, chemically deploying system and hydraulically
deploying system. Among these three systems, the chemi-
cally deploying system was considered to be the most
appropriate system for the so-called mechanism and tested
here.
The development of the chemical composition which is
used to activate the deployment system has been performed
in the laboratories of Pyrotechnic Factory of Mechanical and
Chemical Industry Corporation. The pressure tests of the
system were performed in a computer-controlled measure-
ment chamber.

156
Fig. 3 – The tractor used for field tests.
Table 1 – The specific dimensions and properties of test
tractor
Tractor parameters
Height of the centre of gravity, m
Horizontal distance between the centre of
gravity and front axle, m
Horizontal distance between the centre of
gravity and the rear axle, m
Height of front tyres under full axle load,
m ground and SRP was measured with anchor mechanism
Height of rear tyres under full axle load, m
Height of the point of impact, m
Horizontal distance between the centre of
gravity and the leading point of
intersection of the protective structure, m
Minimum outer width of the tractor, m
Width of the protective structure between
the right and left points of impact, m
Height of the engine bonnet, m
Width of the engine bonnet, m
Horizontal distance between the centre of
gravity and the front corner of the engine
bonnet, m
Height of the front-axle pivot point, m
Rear track width, m
Rear tyre width, m
Front axle swing angle from zero position
to end of travel, rad
Tractor mass used for calculation, t
Moment of inertia about the longitudinal
axis through the centre of gravity, kg m2
3. Results and discussion
3.1. The results for simulation
Fig. 4 shows the pictures taken from the ADAMS simulation of
the tractor with and without anchor mechanism during roll-
ARTICLE IN PRESS
BIOSYSTEMS ENGINEERING 97 (2007) 153 – 161
over while mounting bank at 6 km/h. A complete set of time-
histories for two cases showing overturning angle, angular
velocity and linear displacement of SRP are given in Fig. 5. In
simulation for the tractor with an anchor mechanism, the
instability angle was found as 50.11 and the tractor hit to the
ground at 79.41. During the simulation, the tractor overturned
totally by 29.21 in 920 ms. Subsequently, the angle at which
the ROPS hit the ground without anchor mechanism is found
as 88.21. In this case, total degree and time to roll-over was
measured as 38.01 and 1130 ms, respectively. The difference
between the two cases was found as 8.8 1 and 210 ms. This
difference was resulted from early contact of the anchor to
the ground compared to the ROPS without a anchor.
During the dynamic simulation of the tractor, angular
velocity was measured in three directions. For the tractor
with an anchor mechanism, the angular velocity due to
rotation at X-axis was made to reach its maximum value of
2.64 rad/s. The angular velocities at Y- and Z-axis were found
as 0.62 and 0.56 rad/s, respectively. This shows that the roll-
over involves insignificant yaw and pitch rotations.
For the system without an anchor mechanism, the angular
velocity due to rotation at X-axis was found to be 3.90 rad/s
and the velocities at Y- and Z-axis were found to be 2.45 and
Dimensions and 0.60 rad/s, respectively. The high angular velocity at Y-axis
properties indicates the yaw rotation at the end of the roll-over. When
the angular velocity results were compared, the angular
0.732
velocity at X-axis for the tractor with anchor system was
1.206
lower than the one without. A lower angular velocity was
0.734 found for the tractor with the anchor supporting the objective
of this research.
0.697 Under these roll-over conditions, the distance between the
1.255 567 mm and without anchor mechanism 416 mm. The overall
2.134
comparison of simulated results is satisfactory reflecting the
0.050
advantages of the anchor system, i.e. a decrease in turning
angle and angular velocity, and an increase in the clearance
1.428 zone for the driver.
0.734
3.2. The results for the chemically operated deploying
1.212
mechanism
0.538
1.489
The first studies on the anchor mechanism’s prototype were
conducted with spring operated deploying systems (Silleli,
0.465 2006). Although the deploying time was found satisfactorily,
1.068 the studies on this type of mechanical system were discon-
0.360 tinued due to the mechanical difficulties such as corrosion,
0.469
loss of spring flexibility and problems associated with the lock
2.100
and release pin mechanisms.
294.89 In chemically operated deploying system, a certain volume
of sodium azide (NaN3) and potassium nitrate (KNO3)
mixtures were formed and used in place of a spring, to
deploy the anchors. The mixtures reaction time and working
principle were similar to that used in airbag mechanisms in
automobiles. The rapid reaction speed of the electrically
agitated mixture creates enough energy to deploy and lock
the anchors. Pyrotechnic squibs initiate the chemical reaction
in the cylinder to provide the required force to deploy the
anchor. Fig. 6 shows the pressure test result obtained from
the anchor mechanism during the deploying test. In the
pressure test, the rising time of ignition for the pyrotechnic
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
BIOSYSTEMS ENGINEERING 97 (20 07) 15 3 – 161 157

Fig. 4 – Side overturning simulation with and without anchor mechanism: (a) tipping the bank; (b) overturned tractor with
anchor mechanism; (c) overturned tractor without anchor mechanism.

WITH ANCHOR WITHOUT ANCHOR

100
Overturning angle, deg

80

60

40

20

0
3.0

2.0
Angular velocity, rad s−1

1.0

0.0

−1.0

−2.0

−3.0

−4.0

1600
Linear displacement of SRP, mm

1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
Time, s Time, s

Fig. 5 – Simulation results for one overturn with and without anchor: , angular velocity at X- axis; , angular velocity
at Y- axis; , angular velocity at Z- axis.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
158 BIOSYSTEMS ENGINEERING
squib was 3.2 ms and the maximum initial pressure of the
anchor system was determined as 39 bar.
Since the anchor mechanism is attached to the available
ROPS on tractors, its width depends on the width of ROPS. The
theoretical width of an anchor can vary between 500 and
600 mm. The anchor mechanism attached to the test tractor
was manufactured to deploy 500 mm on each side of the
ROPS. Fig. 7 presents the picture sequence of the chemically
deploying anchor mechanism captured during a side overturn
on the test platform. The deployment time of this system was
measured to be 160 ms and the deployment speed was
calculated as 3.125 m/s (11.25 km/h). The obtained deploy-
ment time is short enough to fully open the anchor
mechanism, because Powers et al. (2000) explain that over-
turns occur within the first 0.75 s of the stability distortion.
50
40
Pressure, bar
30
20
10
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
Time, s
Fig. 6 – Chemical mixture and pyrotechnic squib pressure
test.
Fig. 7 – Deployment time of the anchor mechanism during an overturn test: (a) 0 ms; (b) 80 ms; (c) 160 ms.
Fig. 8 – Principle of release and lock mechanism of chemically operated deploying system: (a) cross-section of closed position
of the anchor ready to deploy; (b) cross-section of anchor mechanism after deploying; (1) housing of anchor mechanism; (2)
anchor; (3) cartridge; (4) latch pins; (5) safety pins.
97 (2007) 153 – 161
The principle of the chemically deploying system design
can be seen in Fig. 8. The system consists of a cartridge
nesting the chemical mixture and the pyrotechnic squib and
aluminium safety pins which prevent movement of the
anchor from its housing unnecessarily, and latch pins for
locking the anchor after deploying. The safety pins can be
sheared easily by ways of reaction while the latch pins have a
high strength to support of weight of tractor in the event of
turnover.
According to the FEM analysis, pin dimensions were
selected as 12 mm square shape. Fe 310C material was
selected for the anchor housing and its diameter was
determined as 72 mm with a thickness of 6 mm. The material
for the anchor was selected as Fe510D steel with a diameter of
48 mm.
3.3. Field upset test with anchor mechanism
The initial preliminary tests were conducted in the Turkish
Ministry of Agriculture’s Farm Machinery Test Centre labora-
tories according to OECD Code 6. The tractor sucessfully
passed a lateral stability test and a non-continuous rolling
test. In these laboratory tests, the moment of inertia and the
instability angle were determined to be 294.9 kg m2 and 451,
respectively.
Fig. 9 presents a picture sequence of the test tractor
equipped with the rigid anchor during a side overturn.
The velocity of the remotely controlled tractor was
6 km/h. The hill angle was built similar to ADAMS simulation
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
BIOSYSTEMS ENGINEERING 97 (20 07) 15 3 – 161 159

Fig. 9 – Field upset test with anchor mechanism: (a) instability position; (b) the lifting of the front wheel; (c) overturned tractor.

Fig. 10 – Field upset test without anchor mechanism: (a) instability position; (b) the lifting of the front wheel; (c) overturned
tractor.

with an angle of 451 to the ground. The form of the hill During the overturn, the right rear wheel lifted off from the
satisfied the SAE J2194 standard with an average penetration ground first, followed by the right front wheel. This was
resistance of 3540 kPa of the 10 soil samples taken from the because of the front-axle swing angle of the tractor and this
test field. fact was important for selecting the type of sensor. Once the
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
160 BIOSYSTEMS ENGINEERING
Fig. 11 – Comparison of overturning behaviour: (a) overturned tractor with an anchor mechanism; (b) overturned tractor
without anchor mechanism.
overturn had started, the times from the rear tyre and the
front tyre lifting off the slope to the ROPS first hitting the
ground were 1360 and 640 ms, respectively. The difference of
720 ms is thought to be sufficient time, because the deploy-
ment time of anchor was found to be 160 ms.
After the test, there was found to be no damage on the
tractor and the bonnet did not touch the ground. No visual
plastic deformation was observed on the ROPS. The anchor
penetrated 28 cm into the ground. Compared to the original
position, a 61 bending was found due to plastic deformation
and there was no crack or fracture on the anchor.
3.3. Field upset test without anchor mechanism
The overturning behaviour is shown in Fig. 10 as a sequence
of pictures captured during the overturn. The times for the
rear tyre and the front tyre coming off the slope to the ROPS
first hitting the ground were 1520 and 800 ms, respectively.
Even without an anchor, the current ROPS also prevented the
continuous rolling and produced enough clearance zone
required by OECD code 6.
3.4. Comparison of overturning behaviours between
existing ROPS and anchor mechanism
After the overturn tests, the amount of tractor surface area
touching the ground without an anchor mechanism was
higher than that with an anchor mechanism. Thus the anchor
mechanism successfully reduced the amount of tractor
surface area touching the ground, which emphasises that it
enlarged the zone of clearance. The comparison of the
overturned tractor with and without an anchor can be seen
in Fig. 11. The anchor mechanism also increased the distance
between the SRP and the ground. This distance was 63 cm
with an anchor and 41 cm without an anchor. The 22 cm
difference could significantly reduce the risk of operator
injuries and fatalities during an overturn. The times between
the front tyre lifting off from the ground to the anchor hitting
the ground were 640 ms for the anchored system and as
800 ms for the system without anchor. The difference was
equal to the deployment of the anchors.
In the ADAMS simulations, the times between the front tyre
lifting off from the ground to the anchor hitting the ground
97 (2007) 153 – 161
was 590 ms for the anchored system and 700 ms for the
system without anchor. Also the difference between SRP
values was determined as 151 mm.
4. Conclusions
A chemically deploying anchor mechanism has been de-
signed aimed to be used for narrow track orchard and
vineyard tractors. The efficiency of the mechanism was
tested with a rigid anchor attached to the tractor’s existing
ROPS. The test results showed that the anchor mechanism
increases the clearance zone, reduces the amount of tractor
surface area touching the ground and decreases the over-
turning time.
The values obtained from simulation results were con-
firmed by the field test results. The test data for the chemical
deployment system gave satisfactory results. The optimised
deployment time was measured to be 160 ms which is high
enough to cover the time required for the side overturning.
The lowest overturning time during the field test was
determined as 640 ms. This time is approximately four times
longer than the time required to chemically deploy and lock
the anchor mechanism.
As expected, in the ADAMS simulation results the angular
rotation around X-axis for the anchor system was found to be
less than that without an anchor. Furthermore, the over-
turning time for the anchor system was shorter than with the
ROPS without an anchor during the field upset test. This
resulted in less damage on the tractor and prevented the
bonnet touching the ground.
The system has been designed to increase the clearance
zone for side overturning cases. Other overturning events or
accidents are not considered in using the anchor mechanism.
It has an advantage only for side overturning conditions.
However, during the theoretical design stage of the anchor
mechanism, the clearance zone requirements for the rear and
forward overturning were considered in accordance with the
OECD Code 6.
The field upset tests conducted to determine the perfor-
mance of the anchor mechanism were the first field tests of
that type that have been performed in Turkey. The results and
experience obtained during these tests will provide useful
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
BIOSYSTEMS ENGINEERING
data for new developments and the database created will help
in the education of farmers.
The anchor system is still in the prototype stage; other tests
are planned and modifications will follow. The effects of the
operating conditions such as tractor speed and types of ground
as well as other parameters during an overturn will be
investigated further using field upset tests. In the meantime,
a sensor and control circuit will be developed to sense the roll-
over and activate the deploying mechanism automatically.
R E F E R E N C E S
ASAE J2194 (2002). Roll-Over Protective Structures (ROPS) for
Wheeled Agricultural Tractors. American Society of Agricul-
tural Engineers, St Joseph, MI, USA
Bauman K; Wunsche M (1990). The raisable roll-over bar of the
new Mercedes-Benz Roadster. SAE Paper, No. 901124, War-
rendale, PA, USA
EEC (1987). Directive 87/402/EEC, modified with Dir. EEC 89/681,
2000/22. European Economic Community, Strasbourg
Gölbas-ı M (2002). The determination of the reasons and expected
injury cost index of the occupational accidents resulted from
using equipment—machinery and tractors being used in
97 (20 07) 15 3 – 161 161
agriculture. PhD Thesis, Ankara University Graduate School of
Natural and Applied Sciences, Turkey, 260pp
Molari G; Rondelli V (2004). On the definition of narrow-track
wheeled agricultural tractors. Biosystem Engineering, 88(1),
75–80
OECD (2003). A new proposal for Roll-Over Protective Structures
(ROPS) ¼ Self deployable protective structures for agricultural
tractors. AGR/CA/T(2003)23. Organisation for Economic Co-
operation and Development, Paris, France
OECD Code 6 (2005a). Standard Code for the official testing of
front mounted roll-over protective structures on narrow-track
wheeled agricultural and forestry tractors. Organisation for
Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France
OECD (2005b). Tractor rollover simulation. AGR/CA/T/M/(2005)1.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development,
Paris, France
Powers J R; Harris J R; Etherton J R; Snyder K A; Ronaghi M;
Newbraugh B H (2000). Performance of an automatically
deployable ROPS on ASAE tests. Journal of Agricultural Safety
and Health, 7(1), 51–61
Silleli H (2006). The development of a system increasing the driver
safety and driving performance in front mounted roll-over
protective structures. Journal of Agricultural Machinery
Science, 2(1), 41–48
Springfeldt B (1996). Rollover of tractors-International experi-
ences. Safety Science, 24(2), 95–110