Influence of Soil on the Traction Performance of a 65 kW MFWD Tractor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the influence of the mechanical behaviour of the soil surface on the traction performance and the fuel consumption of an agricultural tractor, both in qualitative and in quantitative terms, in order to increase the consciousness about the major role of the soil mechanical response in the optimisation of the energy aspects involved in the traction developed by a tractor and promote the development of new strategies to reduce costs of tillage management and improve agricultural sustainability. The traction performance of a 65 kW MFWD tractor at tyre pressures of 60 and 160 kPa was compared on four Swiss agricultural soils: a clay with corn stubbles, a clay loam with wheat stubbles, a silty loam and a loamy sand both with corn stubbles. Tests performed with a bevameter pointed out noticeable differences in the mechanical behaviour of the soils. According to such differences, the drawbar pull on the four soils was significantly disparate with differences in maximal values of about 16% at a tyre pressure of 60 kPa and up to 37% at a tyre pressure of 160 kPa. Simulations with a semi-empirical tractor-soil interaction model also showed dissimilarities in traction coefficient, motion resistance, and traction efficiency. Measurements of the fuel consumption pointed out the presence of a narrow slip range where the specific fuel consumption SFC is minimised. This range doesn’t vary significantly among the considered soils as well as with the tyre pressure and doesn’t differ very much from the range where the power delivery efficiency is maximised. The SFC differed for almost 20% among the considered soils at a tyre pressure of 60 kPa and for ca. 10% at a tyre pressure of 160 kPa. The increase in tyre pressure from 60 to 160 kPa produced an increment in SFC up to 16%. The results of this study clearly pointed out how the traction performance is a characteristic of the tractor-soil system and not of the tractor only, therefore, a proper knowledge of the soil mechanical behaviour should aid in developing strategies oriented towards reducing fossil fuel consumption.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".