Talk:LifeTrac: Difference between revisions
AnOdlyFuture (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
(→Discussion moved from main page: new section) |
||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
I propose therefore that we adopt a more centralised hinge for the bucket so that its capacity is good both above and below the level of the wheels. Useful for digging and earthmoving. | I propose therefore that we adopt a more centralised hinge for the bucket so that its capacity is good both above and below the level of the wheels. Useful for digging and earthmoving. | ||
== Discussion moved from main page == | |||
The point is to work on the design of the machine, having already decided that the machine is a good idea. The following was moved from the page to the discussion section. In addition, you cannot, or should not mount a bucketloader and backhoe on a horse! Horses do not push or lift, they pull (as far as I know). | |||
==== Horses ==== | |||
In terms of biofuels conversion, horses may be far more efficient than tractors. In no-till or low-till permaculture farming with local fuel production, tractors might not make sense at all. | |||
http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2008/04/horses-agricult.html | |||
==== Response ==== | |||
One would have to do more careful, side-by-side analysis on the above. A horse, whether used or not, eats the equivalent biofuel crop for 1 gallon of liquid fuel every day. A tractor, on the other hand, eats zero gallons of fuel when it is not used. | |||
Revision as of 18:15, 20 June 2011
What application are you using to develop the hydraulics schematic?
On the Matter of Animals vs machines. Horse Performance, can be found in the Small Wars Manual of the US Marines. http://www.scribd.com/doc/8218892/Small-Wars-Manual-1940-Edition
Can perform 5 hours a day for a week, every succeeding week has continuously diminished performance. That is 25% body weight of the Animal for 5 hours. The animal has to eat about 2-3% their body weight in quality grains and sugars, and about 8-16 gallons of water.
Animals are also used seasonally, since they need time to heal.
Plow Horses, being the most efficient are not effective in Tropical Locations and Wet Farming Cereals.
Digging Capacity of Prototype II
From the picture, it looks as though the Prototype II capacity for digging below the level of the wheels (when fitted with a bucket) would be very shallow. This is due to the bucket supports being hinged at the top of the cab. Most tractors are hinged somewhere in the middle of their working travel with angled beams designed to get over their own front wheels. Bobcats on the other hand often have straight bucket supports but the hinge is high enough to clear the front wheels and the wheels are close enough together so as to not create a significant obstruction.
I propose therefore that we adopt a more centralised hinge for the bucket so that its capacity is good both above and below the level of the wheels. Useful for digging and earthmoving.
Discussion moved from main page
The point is to work on the design of the machine, having already decided that the machine is a good idea. The following was moved from the page to the discussion section. In addition, you cannot, or should not mount a bucketloader and backhoe on a horse! Horses do not push or lift, they pull (as far as I know).
Horses
In terms of biofuels conversion, horses may be far more efficient than tractors. In no-till or low-till permaculture farming with local fuel production, tractors might not make sense at all. http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2008/04/horses-agricult.html
Response
One would have to do more careful, side-by-side analysis on the above. A horse, whether used or not, eats the equivalent biofuel crop for 1 gallon of liquid fuel every day. A tractor, on the other hand, eats zero gallons of fuel when it is not used.