ABSTRACT
A simplified comparative test procedure was developed and adopted to produce information to help farmers and other researchers in the selection and optimisation of tractors. Two different makes of farm tractors, MF 285 and New Holland TT 75 were compared in 96 field performance tests and 24 test conditions on the Indaloke series, sandy loam soil of the research fields of National Cereal Research Institute (NCRI), Badeggi, Niger State Nigeria. The criteria for the choice of the two test tractors were: traction system, age since purchased and put to use, Power Range (40 – 60 kW) and availability. The performance criteria used were fuel efficiency (kW.h/l) and power delivery efficiency (DBP/PTO ratio). Four categorical variables were used in the comparison, these were tractor make (MF 285 vs New Holland TT 75), soil condition (untilled vs tilled), working depth (7 cm, 10 cm and 15 cm), and no-load engine speed (rated vs reduced engine speed). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to determine the statistical significance of the difference between the tractors operating in different settings and field conditions. Results indicate that NH TT 75 tractor exhibited higher field speeds in all test conditions when compared with the MF 285. With all test conditions combined, MF 285 tractor exhibited 21.3 % fuel advantage over NH TT 75 tractor. But when the two tractors were set at rated no-load engine speeds and operated at a working depth of 10 cm, NH TT 75 tractor demonstrated higher power delivery efficiency (0.297) as against MF 285 tractor (0.262).When the performances of the two tractors were combined, they indicated higher fuel efficiency (18.3 % difference) and power delivery efficiency (5.2 % difference) in tilled soil condition as compared to the untilled. MF 285 tractor indicated improvement in both fuel and power delivery efficiencies on a specific working condition when adjusted from rated no-load engine speed to the reduced no-load engine speed, while NH TT 75 tractor indicated no difference. Combining the working conditions, both tractors exhibited optimal performance when throttles are set at the reduced (1800 rpm) no-load engine speeds and operated at 15 cm working depth. Therefore, it was deduced that MF 285 tractor is best suitable to the study area from the standpoint of economy compared to the New Holland TT 75. However, when the timeliness of tillage operation is at stake, NH TT 75 tractor appeared to be the best choice owing to its higher field speed over MF 285.
CHAPTER ONE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Study
The invention of tractors by the turn of the 20th century revolutionized agriculture. Sooner than thought, farm tractor took its key position as a prime mover in the Engine Power Technology (EPT). EPT is the highest and most modern level of agricultural mechanization technology (Oni, 2004). Tractors took over almost all manual work, which take a lot of time and energy of farmers.
Tractor is a vehicle specifically designed to deliver a high tractive effort (or torque) at slow speeds for the purposes of hauling a trailer or machinery used in agriculture or construction. Most commonly, the term is used to describe the distinctive farm vehicle. Agricultural implements may be towed behind or mounted on the tractor, and the tractor may also provide a source of power if the implement is mechanized. Another common use of the term “tractor unit”, describes the power unit of a semi-trailer truck. The word tractor was taken from Latin, being the agent noun of trahere “to pull” (Mifflin, 2000). The first recorded use of the word meaning “an engine or vehicle for pulling wagons or ploughs” occurred in 1901, displacing the earlier term traction engine.
In view of ecological, sociological and agronomical variations, it will be logical to say that: for any nation to have successful agricultural industries, it must begin with viable manufacture of agricultural machineries and equipments. It was in recognition of this fact that various nations of the world took bold steps based on indigenous engineering initiatives to research, design and manufacture wide range of tractors and implements suitable to their terrain.
On the issue of Africa and Nigeria in particular, despite the ‘AG25’ Initiative and other past attempts on the mechanization and tractorization of Nigerian agriculture using adequate indigenous technology, we still depended on mass importation of tractors. They either come as finished products or are assembled in one of the plants in Nigeria; this is indicated in the report of Odigboh and Onwualu (1994). Most of these tractors come from a wide range of manufacturers from different parts of the world with little or no idea of our peculiar terrain; and are imported without due consultation of our agricultural engineers.
There had been two tractor assembly plants established in Nigeria in the 1970s. These were the Nigeria Trucks Manufacturers (NTM), assemblers of Fiat tractors as well as Fiat trucks, situated at Kano; and the Steyr Nigeria Ltd., assemblers of Steyr tractors and Steyr trucks situated at Bauchi. It is rather disheartening that both companies have folded up or seized to perform the functions for which they were established. Even while in operation both companies were complementing their tractors with imported implements and equipment, a situation that did not make for the completeness of the marketability of their products (Oni, 2005). In recent years, at least three more tractor assembly plants were established in the country. By 2009, Parco Gateway Integrated Tractor Assembly Plant, assemblers of Sonalika Agricultural tractors situated at Abeokuta was established. By 2008, Affcot Nigeria Plc tractor assembly plant located at Enugu was established. In 2005 tractor assembly plant of Mahindra and Mahindra Limited was established in Nigeria and situated at Ibadan. But we are still looking forward to see that the establishment of these tractor assembly plants being able to move the Nigerian agriculture to the next level.
The ‘AG 25’ Initiative
In the past 5 years, the federal government has laid solid foundation in the transformation of agriculture and rural development sub-sector towards attainment of massive food production and food security in the country. In 2001, during Obasanjo regime, it stamped into law a new agricultural policy to further drive home it’s commitment to it course
This recent support to the sector triggered Rogers Stephens, 60 years old United Kingdom based agricultural engineer to visit the nation. Rogers was in this country 26 years ago when he was appointed project manager for the large-scale farm mechanization project the nation was embarking on. This time he came showing indigenous agricultural machinery called The AG 25 Multi purpose tractor which is seen as the first indigenous based tractor for Nigeria. According to him, the AG 25 tractors are specifically built for Nigerian farms. It is a pioneer model in a new generation of multi-role tractors, a concept that was pioneered in UK by Trantor’s high-speed tractor which he was closely involved in. Therefore, his expectation is that he would earn the federal government support to enable him set up an ultra-modern manufacturing facility capable of producing more of this indigenous machinery.
With the wise saying: “if we can think enough what we have will be enough”, and taking into account our crop, soil and socioeconomic conditions, we can explore modern experimental procedures and analysis, to evolve a comparative test techniques with the sole aim of selecting from the expanding spectrum of tractor makes and models imported into the country as to which is best suitable to our terrain.
Tractors in use in Nigeria and Other OPEC Countries
As reported by Makanjuola et al. (1991), in Haque (2000), initially with the oil boom of 1974/75, the growth of tractor population in Nigeria was very fast. From less than 1000 tractors by 1971/72, it increased to over 7500 tractors by 1974/75. After this, the growth has been very slow. This can be observed from the figures of 1980, 1985, 1990, and 1996 which were 8600, 10300, 11500 and 11900 (FAO, 1998). The slow growth rate can be linked to the general neglect of agricultural sector in preference to oil sector after the oil boom. However, judging from the available data on the tractor use in other oil producing countries, it could be seen that the problem is peculiar only for Nigeria.
Among the OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries) countries, Iran had the highest number of 367,207 tractors in the year 2011 followed by Algeria (93,000 tractors), Indonesia (70,000 units) and others (Table 1.1). Nigeria had only 30,000 tractors. Only one OPEC country, Iran had more than one hundred thousand tractors. However, in terms of level of mechanization, Nigeria’s situation is the worst among all the OPEC countries. In 2011, Nigeria had 1,012 hectares per tractor, while countries like Kuwait, Libya and Venezuela had 56, 53 and 54 hectares per tractor respectively.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
Recent tractor innovations and introduction have provided farmers with numerous options on the makes and models of wheeled and tracked (or belted) tractors. There is continuing need for independent information about the performances of such options. To facilitate the choice of optimum option suitable for a particular terrain, researchers have come up with different comparative test procedures that were designed to produce information to help the farmers and policy makers in the selection and optimization of appropriate tractors as well as traction systems.
However, it is estimated that there are about 10,000 tractors all over the country with over 50 percent of them malfunctioned (Kalu, 2010). The indiscriminate importation of tractors into the country and their eventual breakdowns, however, could be directly linked to several militating factors which include:
i. Lack of classified data and information on the suitability, adaptability and performance of commercially available agricultural tractors as related to the types and conditions of soil and crops.
ii. Inadequate research programs and extension services.
iii. Absence of incentives for indigenous design and manufacture of agricultural equipment.
iv. Inadequate repair and maintenance facilities.
These and several other factors are as a result of long time neglect of the agricultural sector following the discovery of oil in the country during late 40s, and these are what prompted us to focus on this study.
1.3 Aim and Objectives
The aim of this study is to compare the field performances of two different makes of two- wheel drive (4×2) farm tractors.
In order to achieve the stated aim, the following specific objectives are paramount:
1. To determine an on-farm performance for the two tractor makes which could help the farmers and farm managers lower operating cost by ensuring tractors are set and operated optimally for their tillage operations.
2. To determine the effects of operating conditions on each tractor. The criteria for performance comparison are:
i. Fuel Efficiency, kW.h/l
ii. Power Delivery Efficiency, DBP/PTO power ratio
1.4 Justification of the Study
The study is aimed at conducting comparative field performance tests which would generate information useful for farmers and agricultural ministries in selecting among the two common makes of two-wheel drive (4 x 2) farm tractors, from the stand point of economy and farm power needs.
1.5 Scope / Limitation of the Study
The scope of this research work is limited only to the performance evaluation and analysis of two different makes of two-wheel drive tractors in untilled and tilled soil conditions. The two tractors (MF285 and New Holland TT 75) were tested over similar ranges of loads and speeds.
This material content is developed to serve as a GUIDE for students to conduct academic research
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF FIELD PERFORMANCES OF TWO DIFFERENT FARM TRACTORS
Project 4Topics Support Team Are Always (24/7) Online To Help You With Your Project
Chat Us on WhatsApp » 09132600555
DO YOU NEED CLARIFICATION? CALL OUR HELP DESK:
09132600555 (Country Code: +234)
YOU CAN REACH OUR SUPPORT TEAM VIA MAIL: [email protected]
09132600555 (Country Code: +234)