Combines CHIS would be good for future farmers

[Rockpicker]

So what you want to happen is the header attachment be standarized so you can go from a JD 635 to a Honeybee draper with out changing anything for example. Is that correctIJ That up front attachment would be more of a midwest thing. I can't see anybody trying to drop a 60ft air drill on the front of a combine. And I can't imagine the combines we have now with a sprayer attachment bombing through my fields when it would be heavy, maybe less fuel efficient, and certainly less nimble them my JD 4720. BTW, JD did offer a sprayer attachment for the 95 and 105 back in the 60s that went on the front. If you started doing all that, then I think a CVT tranny on a combine would be in order.

 

[greenstrat]

I know you are trying to sell your patent, but give it a rest. I for one have no problem fabricating an adaptor plate of my own if I wanted to mix colors. If I didn't I would buy one from Harvey Bish. What you are advocating is making everyone pay for all the combines sold here to have your widget on the front of them. I can't afford it. sorry.. gs

 

[FarmBuddy]

Greenstat, I am not trying to sell any patent to any body. I did the initial patent work to establish the concept and public disclosure dates. I then released the concept and idea to the public and majors via ASABE paper 055008. Frankly have nothing to gain from this improvement other than the satisfaction of making a difference and helping farmers. If we just get an improvement and standardization in the way headers sit and are secured on transport trailers then this work will be worth it. That alone should not cause any competitive advantages or disadvantages to anyone, and would be a safety improvement and convenience to all farmers and dealers and the motorist on public roads. There are many different ways to create a ClAD header. I admire your willingness to build your own adapter, but why continue to put up with this inconvenience when life could be made so much simplier. As I said on the CIH page, there are already standards that make it convenient to attach implements to various tractors 3 point hitch and PTOs. Also SAE standards exist so that any semi tractor can hook onto any semi trailer via the 5th wheel hitch. SkidSteer attachment interface has been standardized recently. That standard basically creates a standard picture frame and pin retention, similar to our CHIS proposal for combines. All of these type of standards improve safety and convenience, while also giving farmers more purchasing options and improving competition. Doing the same for Combine Header Interface Standards (CHIS) just makes good sense. It does seem like it may be the John Deere people who fight this to the bitter end, similar to the way they opposed the ISO hydraulic connector standards back in the 1980s. So be it, eventually they also got on board with the rest of the industry. I may be wrong again, but if there were any one brand of header that could benefit from the Centerline Drive it would be the current JD Hydra-Flex. Granted, the JD knife drive (based on Schmaucher design) has been improved over the old wobble box, but driving a 35 sickle from one end just is not as reliable as it needs to be.

 

[FarmBuddy]

Rockpicker, thanks for the good points. First of all, we would likely have different categories of CHIS interface similar to Tractor 3 point hitch Cat 1, 2, 3, 4 . This would keep header weight and size matched to the various class of combines. Unfortunately, frankly today, there is nothing keeping a person from using a Bish adapter to put these various mis match header sizes on a combine. Many people have not had the opportunity to use a power unit with the planter up front, but your day is coming. life is so much easier with auto guidance and looking forward and down at the seeding units or spray boom. The geometry with the cab and GPS receiver and drive wheels is also better when they have the same physical relation as the harvesting header. Regarding the sprayer aspect, the XBR2 had a lighter foot print on tracks, plus the weight was significantly dropped by backing away from the header, feederhouse, and entire bi-rotor thresher mechanism. That just leaves the cab, frame, engine, powertrain for the sprayer and graintank for the bulk seeder. It was a little hard to imagine if you did not see the process or porototypes first hand. JD must have been impressed when they saw this back in 1995, or they would not have purchased the technology and 17 patents. I don't think we ever advocated pushing a 60 foot air seeder, but we could have easily pushed a more affordable 30 foot air seeder faster, running on controlled traffic lanes, running all night with GPS and running 8 hours non stop with autoguidance and the 400 bushel bulk seed hopper _ aka graintank. We'll get there sooner than you think, I just hope we get the CHIS standard adopted to make it more convenient for farmers when this VPS arrangement arrives. If a spray attachment was available for the 95 or 105, I'd like to see more information on it. It would have been ahead of its time, and materials. Spraying was not as routine then, as it is today with RR crops. It may be time to revisit this concept. I've often seen times when JD tried some new things during the early cutting edge days, had problems with the materials or support products, gave up on it, then never revisited the concept, as they say "we tried that twenty years ago and it did not work". Just look how well the STS works now that it has a FAST feed roller, tri-stream flow and tines on the separator. It's a whole new rotor concept. Imagine how much better it could be with the concave turning on the outside. We'll see sooner or later.

 

[FarmBuddy]

Rockpicker, You are correct, that would be an objective, ie being able to switch from a JD 635 to a Honeybee without having to deal with a variety of kits or adapters. The up front attachment will take a while to fall into place, but is feasible, more so now with no till and round-up ready crops. Heavy tillage tends to be a fuel wasting thing of the past. So you are also correct in stating that a CVT in a combine to make it a Versatile Power System will also be a key factor in the success of this project. That same basic VPS could become the base unit for the bulk hauler _ self propelled drone grain cart of the future.

 

[greenstrat]

if you knew me you would not lump me into the category of "john deere people". Thats ok tho.. better than something else. I have a couple of different head trailers now, and each can hold and safely tie down to any head of any color today.. how is your widget going to change thisIJ SimplerIJ How is it simpler when I can hook up my head anytime I want nowIJ I have no problem at all. Can you tell me how it is saferIJ I can't really see that but maybe.. If all the companies who build stuff had to do this it will cost money to me and anyone else who has to convert to another different head plate. I can see no benefit for this except to the patent holder. If you have nothing to gain from this you wouldn't have started this whole thing..rightIJ Explain how this is not true, please. I will listen. y'all have a great day over in red land..cheers! gs

 

[Old_Pokey]

Well, I tell ya FarmBuddy, I'm just a poor ol' dirt farmer. I like to listen to an educated man once in the while if he can speak english, but, your post and the page you link to that requires a membership to even view,...well, that pretty much sounds like a poly tishun blowin it out his britches try'n to get my vote. See I speak english and sometimes a little spanish if I need to. I never lern'd the ISO, or the ASE, or the interface etc., etc. languages. They all just sound like someone trying to pull the wool over my eyes. no wut I meenIJ Now, if you'd be so kind as to give me either a patent number or two so I can see what you're trying to sell, or maybe a link to a picture or even jus splain'n a few "facts" about the hows and whys instead of the theories about the shoulds and coulds, I'd sure apreciate it. Thanks.

 

[greenstrat]

You know, I think us musicians just have too much common sense. gs

 

[FarmBuddy]

Safer: The position of jackstands _ skid shoes is not consistent on current headers. Functional Aspect n1 (Shipping _ transport) of the proposal would create some standard lateral width and position of the pads that saddle or craddle the headers on transport trailers . Included would be a recommended tie down point to keep flex heads and grain tables from tilting back off the header trailers. Too many people currently damage reels, augers, and knifes or cut straps that are routed over the top of headers. Fuctional Area 8 - Centerline auger and knife drive would replace the long shafts running out to the ends of headers, and related end chains and belts that can create an exposure hazzard. Endsheets would have few or no moving parts, which currently are subject to damage from ground contact, graincarts and fence rows. This is the last and least significant improvement but could be worth further consideration if there is an industry wide reevaluation of how larger headers are most effeciently driven in the future.

 

[FarmBuddy]

We via Agri-Technology lP included the basic concept of the Centerline Drive in the XBR2 Bi-rotor combine development in 1993. A drive method and principles are shown in patent 5,497,605, Header and Feeder for a Grain Combine issued 19 March 1996. That version and patent was sold to John Deere along with the other 16 patents back in 1995. The lower drive shaft configuration is feasible, but not as convenient or easy to hook up as more recent technology, such as a single driveshaft above the feederhouse. I hope this helps you understand the basic proposal of Centerline Header drive better. The Modular Threshing System associated with VPS is shown in a related Bi-Rotor patent 5,499,948.