Combines sunnybrook rotor

An enclosed cylinder would prevent untrashed cobs or grain heads from passing through the center of the cylinder and thus, could reduce losses,.... but filler plates should be able to accomplish the same thing. Sunnybrook seems to promote high inertia with the solid cylinders, which would be helpful if you have a feeding problem up front, and are slugging feeding the threshing system. Ideally, there should be smooth feeding and constant power input of 150 to 200 Hp into the threshing drive system. If you don't have this smooth feeding, you should be working to correct the header feed problems. Flywheels make sense on the plunger drive for a square baler, but this shouldn't have to be incorporated into a combine if it is cutting and feeding correctly. On the negative or drawback side, the solid (high inertia) cylinders create an added acceleration problem and drive line load during separator engagement. This can cause premature driveline or clutch engagement failures, especially if the driver engages the combine at high idle. This problem is even worse in small grains, where the rotor speeds are set higher. That'll really make the belts squeal. A solid cylinder is also heavier, but adding ballast is seldom a benefit on combines. There are usually better places to add weight to a combine than inside the cylinder. I'd put the added steel into the elevators and augers to get more benefit per pound. There may be some profile improvements and feeding improvements to the Sunnybrook, but I have not seen these yet. People often report improved combine performance after installing the solid cylinders, but just putting the new set of rasp bars on the old cylinder would have also giving them similar satisfaction. There is also probably some strength improvements, but if spider or bulkhead cracking is not a problem for you, there seems to be little advantage related to the added cost and weight of these solid _ enclosed threshing cylinders. My thoughts for the day.

if you get a rock or other foriegn object in the cylinder,. the regular cylinder gives some place to go,but with that enclosed type you might have quite a train wreck just my guess.

R62 owner in Arkansas replaced a gearbox annually for four years (rice, wheat, corn and beans). Two years with a Sunnybrook Gen II, more capacity, no troubles. Dealer was Brinkley Truck and Tractor in Brinkley, Arkansas. It isn't that our rotor weighs much more but rather that the mass distribution is different. I have a good friend who has earned his living servicing Gleaners for fifteen years and has installed almost 100 of our rotors. He claims the elimination of vibration by enclosing the rotor saves his customers a third of the avg. annual maintenance expense. I like your coy way of telling farmers (you call them people) they don't know what they're talking about, you must be a fellow engineer. I wouldn't bet too many rotary combines go back to open rotors designs with filler plates over the next 10 years. The best book on combines is "The Grain Harvesters". It's been out of print for some time but what a fantastic compilation of history. Happy New Year to everyone and all the best in 2002.

The book "The Grain Harvesters" is still available from ASAE. One of the book's authers, Graeme Quick, is now an Ag Engineering professor at Iowa State.

I don't know how much it costs but if the St JOhns rotor helps as much as the enclosed cylinders we put in our l2 and l3 about 3 years ago, it's probllby worth the investment.

Dealer did not say waht proublems he had heard of. No one in our area has a sunnybrook rotor so it's just all hearsay. Also a company rep was with him, that might have benn an influence.

John; thanks a bunch for the info. This book is great reading, my copy will be worn out before long. I like the observation they've made that farmer-inventors will continue to lead the way in harvester innovations. They don't give much credit to the big OEM's.

John; thanks a bunch for the info. This book is great reading, my copy will be worn out before long. I like the observation they've made that farmer-inventors will continue to lead the way in harvester innovations. They don't give much credit to the big OEM's.

Oddy, thanks for your added comments and verification of improved performance with the Sunnybrook rotors. I do think that elimination of vibration would be helpful and the enclosed drum helps control this. I still think that adding more mass or weight near the circumference helps feed slugs through, but could stress the drive lines. Perhaps the operator in Arkansas was trained on proper separator engagement after failing four gearcases or maybe AGCO finally got it beefed up properly.

Amen to that. As far as combine history goes, I could not find a more comprehensive text. I know both authors personally, and they agree as I do the book needs updating. They do cater to the big combine companies by devoting entire chapters to them, but likewise do cover the small guys and recognize the individuals who did the real work much of the time. I would like to see even some mention of the alternative harvesters that are not true combines, but can do the job of a combine in cereal grains.