ARTICLE IN PRESS

Biosystems Engineering (2007) 96 (2), 181191

doi:10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2006.10.016
PMPower and Machinery

Design Calculations on Roll-over Protective Structures for Agricultural Tractors

J. Mangado; J.I. Arana; C. Jaren; S. Arazuri; P. Arnal
Dpto de Proyectos e Ingenier a Rural, Universidad Publica de Navarra, Campus Arrosad a, 31006 Navarra, Spain;
e-mail of corresponding author: ignacio.arana@unavarra.es
(Received 21 December 2005; accepted in revised form 25 October 2006; published online 18 December 2006)

The majority of fatal accidents involve a roll-over of a tractor without a protective structure (ROPS). On July
18th, 1997 a royal Spanish decree was signed to force the installation of a safety cab in all tractors. However,
both in Spain and the other European Union (EU) countries, there is still a high number of tractors without an
adequate structure to protect the driver from a roll-over. Directive 2003/37/EEC establishes that tractors over
800 kg weight have to be homologated by CODE 4. A protective structure that is cheap, easy to build and
adaptable to any tractor model lacking ROPS was designed and a model has been developed to evaluate the
ROPS according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) code (CODE 4).
The model calculates the maximum forces during the tests and the maximum moments in the critical section of
the ROPS beams and the attachment moments; and is able to determine the needed steel section of the
structure tube, the minimum height of the beams to make rigid the lower part of the structure, and the
number, quality and shank diameter of the attachment screws of the ROPS. Owing to the complexity of the
calculations a computer program ESTREMA was developed A designed, calculated and manufactured
ROPS, mounted on a Massey Ferguson 178 tractor, was able to pass the homologation tests without failing on
any of the acceptance conditions, which means that the calculation method worked correctly.
r 2006 IAgrE. All rights reserved
Published by Elsevier Ltd

1. Introduction
Accidents which involve a roll-over are often fatal for
the worker operating the tractor. Tractor roll-overs are
the leading cause of work-related death in USA, where
only about 70% of tractors sold were equipped with
roll-over protective structures (ROPSs) (Freeman, 1999)
Each year, about 250 people are killed in tractor
accidents in USA (NIOSH, 2004), constituting more
than one-third of all production agriculture-related
fatalities (Murphy & Yoder, 1998). The majority of
fatal accidents involved tractors without protective
structures (Arana et al., 2002). Myers and Pana-Cryan
(2000) compared three strategies to prevent injuries
incurred as a result of tractor overturns. The strategies
were do nothing, install ROPS, and replace tractor.
They concluded that the preferred strategy in terms of
cost-effectiveness was to install ROPS on tractors for
which ROPSs were available. A ROPS in combination
with a seat belt can prevent nearly all tractor overturn1537-5110/$32.00

related fatalities and serious injures (CDC, 1993).

A ROPS is a sturdy frame which is attached to a
tractor or built into the tractor cab to limit the risk of
injury for the driver in the case of a turn-over (Fabbri &
Ward, 2002).
Since the 1970s numerous researchers studied the
dynamic behaviour of the tractor during an overturn
and the energy absorbed in the impact of the ROPS
depending on the type of overturning, whether it is a
bank accident or on a uniform slope, the type of soil,
ROPS strengths and, moreover, the tractor mass.
Chisholm (1979) developed a mathematical model to
describe the dynamic behaviour of a tractor during
different types of overturns and a computer program,
based on this model, to simulate the overturning and
impact behaviour of a tractor with safety frame.
On July 18th, 1997 a royal Spanish decree was signed
to force the installation of a safety cab in all tractors.
However, both in Spain and the other European Union
(EU) countries there is still a high number of tractors
181

r 2006 IAgrE. All rights reserved

Published by Elsevier Ltd

ARTICLE IN PRESS
182

J. MANGADO ET AL.

Notation
A
a
a1

B
BH
b
bHP
bs
CscrewA
CscrewJ

DmaxS
DmaxL
d
dh
diL
diS
dn
dna
EIL1
EIS
FboltL
FC1
Fc1
FmaxL
FmaxS
FscrewS
f

H
h2
hB
hE
hF

section of each beam, m2

distance between screws measured along the
trumpet, m
distance between the axle of the ROPS joining
to trumpet and the vertical plane that includes
the nearest couple of screws, m
frame width on the top, m.
frame length on the top, m
frame width in the lower part of the ROPS, m
length of the horizontal beam, m
distance between screw couples located at
both sides of the trumpet, m
maximum admissible stress in screws in
attachment to trumpet, MPa
maximum admissible stress in screws joining
the upper part to the lower part of the
structure, MPa
maximum admissible deection of the protective structure during the side test, m
maximum admissible deection of the structure in the longitudinal test, m
thickness of the structure beams, m
distance between critical section and the
application line of the crushing force, m
minimum diameter needed in the nucleon of
each screw in the longitudinal test, m
minimum diameter needed in the nucleon of
each screw in the side test, m
maximum value between diL and diS, m
screw diameter in the attachment between the
upper and lower parts of the structure, m
required absorbed energy in the longitudinal
test, J
required absorbed energy in the loading side,
J
force in all screws in the longitudinal test, N
applied force during the crushing test, N
half of the crushing force, N
maximum force registered during the longitudinal test, N
maximum force registered during the side test, N
force on each screw, N
uency, quotient between the area under the
force-deformation curve and the product of
maximum force and maximum deformation,
with a value around 07
structure height, m
height of the lower part of the structure, m
height of the ROPS, m
braced lengths of the ROPS, in the section E,
m
braced lengths of the ROPS, in the section F,
m

hP
I
i
Ip
k1
k2
L
M
MAS
MboltL
MboltS
Mbolt
MEL
MES
MFL
MFS
MmaxE
MmaxF
MR
npl
SJ

Sbolt
VS
W
WN
Xsrp

Zsrp
z

l
sy
sFC
sscrew

height of the horizontal beam, m

moment of inertia of the steel section, m4
radius of gyration, m
warping constant
reduction coefcient used in the upper part of
the structure because of fenders
reduction coefcient used in the lower part of
the structure because of fenders
length of the beam, m
tractor mass, kg
attachment moment, during loading from the
side test, N m
moment in the bolt during the longitudinal
test, N m
moment in the bolt during the loading from
the side test, N m
higher value between MboltL and, MboltS, N m
maximum moment in the longitudinal test, in
critical section E, N m
maximum moment in the side test, in critical
section E, N m
maximum moments in the longitudinal test, in
critical section F, N m
maximum moment in the side test, in critical
section F, N m
maximum moments in critical section E, N m
maximum moments in critical section F, N m
resisting moment of the steel section of the
beam, N m
shape factor
total needed screws section in the junction
between the upper and lower parts of the
ROPS, m2
total needed screws section in the attachment
to the trumpet, m2
vertical force, during loading from the side
test, N
section modulus, m3
structure width on top, m
horizontal distance between the seat reference
point and the vertical plane including rear
axle, m
vertical distance between the seat reference
point and the horizontal plane, m
couple screw number in each bolt
relation between the moments of inertia of the
upper and lateral beams
slenderness ratio
yield stress, MPa
maximum stress during crushing test, MPa
screw yield stress, MPa

ARTICLE IN PRESS
ROLL-OVER STRUCTURES FOR AGRICULTURAL TRACTORS

without an adequate structure to protect the driver from

an overturn or roll-over (Arana et al., 2002). Tractors
having at least two axles for pneumatic tyred wheels or
having track instead of wheels and with an unballasted
tractor mass not less than 800 kg must be homologated
by using OECD standard code (CODE 4), which
determines the methodology and specications of the
static test.
The objectives of this work were: to design a
protective structure cheap, easy to build and adaptable
to any tractor model built without a commercial roll
over protective structure, in order to absorb the
calculated energy required in CODE 4 tests without
impinging upon the clearance zone during the tests and
to develop a calculation method for roll over protective
structures on tractors to overcome the homologation
test sequence, described in CODE 4.

2. Material and methods

Tractors registered before 1980 were studied, using
the database of the Government of Navarre (Spain) to
obtain the following information: trade mark, model,
age, engine power, dimensions, weight, and registration
zones. Some 3536 tractors made before 1980 are
working in Navarre. Although there are 61 different
trademarks, the Table 1 shows that the Massey
Ferguson 178 is one of the most common tractors
without ROPS.
Table 1
The most frequent old tractors models without a roll-over
protective structure in Navarra (Spain) (Registry of the
Agriculture, Livestock and Food Department, Pamplona, Spain)
Make
Ebro
Ebro
Ebro
John Deere
Massey Ferguson
John Deere
Ford
Ebro
Fordson
Massey Ferguson
Ford
David Brown
John Deere
Massey Ferguson
Ebro
John Deere
Massey Ferguson
Ford
Massey Ferguson
Ebro

Model

No.

Super 55
160
160 D
2135
65
2035
5000 Y
Agr cola
Major
165-Ebro
6600
990 Selematic
3135
178-Ebro
470
1635
275-ST
5000
147-Ebro
Super 52

150
117
113
90
71
60
58
56
48
39
38
36
36
35
34
32
32
31
31
30

183

The only rigid point common to all tractors, the rear

axle tube, determines the structure design for the roll
over protective structure. In the initial roll over
protective structure design, the structure is attached to
the rear axle tube, it is open in a V shape, and makes a
parallelogram that wraps around the driver safety zone
(Ponce de Leon et al., 2005). The protective structure
has to absorb the energy, specied under CODE 4
without impinging upon the driver clearance zone
during any part of the longitudinal loading test and
the loading from the side test. The protective structure
has to remain intact for 5 s, without impinging upon the
driver clearance zone, the charge specied under CODE
4, on both cruising tests dened by CODE 4. Oversize is
as prejudicial as undersize, because it can increase the
forces and strains in the joints between elements (Arana
et al., 2004).
The three-dimensional (3D) protective structure
design, constructing planes and nite elements simulation of strains and deformations were obtained using
CADAM Catia V.5R7 program. A protective tubular
structure attachable to the rear axles of any tractor was
designed, built in steel of 420 MPa of a particular
resistance (A-42b). The hollow steel section can be
square or circular. This structure is attached to the rear
axle and to the fender in tractors with fenders. In order
to make a more rigid protective structure and to reduce
the value of the maximum moments, it is possible to
include in the structure a horizontal beam to join the
two beams in V at a chosen height.
It is necessary to calculate the minimum steel section
of the structure tube to absorb the roll-over energy, xed
by CODE 4, which is a function of the tractor mass,
without impinging upon the clearance zone dened by
CODE 4. An admissible maximum deformation for each
static test was allowed to impede the structure to
impinge on the clearance zone. From the value of the
admissible maximum deformation and from the experimental force-deformation curve, the maximum force
and development of the moments on the referred beam
are calculated as statically indeterminate systems.
A small reinforcement of the structure on the lower
part was also admitted in calculation due to the fender.
When calculating screws and anges, an admissible
resistance from 60% of the limit of uency was
employed to enlarge the security. The complexity of
the calculations necessitated the development of a
computer program (ESTREMA) to calculate easily
and quickly the designed ROPS. Other researchers, as
Sahay and Tewari (2004) have developed computer
programs to design tractors.
To validate the calculation method, the designed
protective structure was calculated to be mounted on a
Massey Ferguson 178 Tractor with the following

ARTICLE IN PRESS
184

J. MANGADO ET AL.

characteristics: an unballasted mass of tractor of

2700 kg; a total tractor mass, including cab and driver,
of 3000 kg; and a track length of 223 m.

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Design of protective structure
A ROPS, as shown in Fig. 2, was designed. It consists
of a tubular structure attachable to the rear axle of any
tractor, built in steel of 420 MPa of a particular
resistance (A-42b). The hollow steel section is square
and the structure is attached to the rear axle and fender.
The ROPS is formed by two longitudinal arches
attached to the rear axletrumpetby means of two
iron plates joined by anchorage screws; two transverse
beams, a frontal and rear one; two longitudinal beams,
one on the upper part of the structure, joining the
transverse beams; two longitudinal beams in the lower
part of the structure, at a chosen height, joining the
parts of the arches in V. These reach the attachment
point on the trumpet, in order to increase rigidity of the
protective structure and to reduce the value of the
maximum moments; and metallic braces in all angles
and joinings of the structure to the fender. The ROPS is
welded to a steel plate on the trumpet and is attached to
another similar plate below the trumpet, by screws. The
relative position between screws and ROPS joining to
the rear axle and the distance between screws and this
point determine the section in the screws required.
3.2. Calculation method for the protective structure
Once the design was established, a method to
calculate the ROPS was developed for commonly
available wheeled tractors over 800 kg. These tractors
are regulated by the European Guideline 79/022. The
structure calculation method is based on the OECD
standard code of static test (CODE 4), the structure
design, and the tractor measurements and mass. It
allowed the determination of the tractor structure to
theoretically endure the sequence of tests described in
CODE 4.
3.2.1. Test sequence
The test sequence included a longitudinal loading test,
a rst crushing test, a loading from the side test and a
second crushing test.
In the longitudinal loading test, the load was applied
as is specied in CODE 4 and was stopped when the
energy absorbed by the protective structure was equal to
or greater than the required energy input, established by

CODE 4 as
E IL1 14M

(1)

where EIL1 is the required absorbed energy, expressed in

J; and M is the tractor mass in kg. For a 3000 kg tractor,
the absorbed energy is 42 kJ.
The rst crushing test was carried out on the rear part
of the roll over protection structure, the same end used
for the longitudinal loading. The crushing force applied
was
F C1 20M

(2)

where FC1 is the applied force in N. For the 3000 kg

tractor, this produces a crushing force of 60 kN.
This force was maintained for 5 s after cessation of
any visually detectable movement of the protective
structure.
The loading from the side test was stopped when the
energy absorbed by the protective structure was equal to
or greater than the required energy, established by
CODE 4 as
E IS 175M

(3)

where EIS is the require absorbed energy, expressed in J.

The applied energy was greater than in the longitudinal loading test.
The second crushing test consisted of an impact
similar to that of the rst test.
3.2.2. Acceptance conditions
The ROPS must full all acceptance conditions
specied under CODE 4. It is necessary to calculate
the minimum steel section of the frame ensuring that
deformation produced during the tests is not so high
that the structure impinges upon the clearance zone.
Therefore, there are maximum admissible deformations
for each test.
3.2.3. Maximum deflections
Maximum deections will be expressed in m, although
seat reference point (SRP) position, clearance zone
measurements and deections are expressed in mm in
CODE 4.
(1) Longitudinal loading test
The frame cannot go through the vertical plane
including straight line I1I2 (Fig. 1) placed at 00225 m
behind the seat reference point and 0810 m over it. The
maximum admissible deection of the structure at the
load application point and in line with it, DmaxL in m, is
DmaxL

X srp  d=2  00225

H
Z srp 081

(4)

where: Xsrp is the horizontal distance in m between the

SRP position and the vertical plane including the rear
part of the structure; Zsrp is the vertical distance in m

ARTICLE IN PRESS
185

ROLL-OVER STRUCTURES FOR AGRICULTURAL TRACTORS

I1
I0
I2

between the SRP and the horizontal plane that includes

the rear axle; d is the thickness of the structure beams;
and H is the structure height in m, over the rear axle.
(2) Loading from the side test
The frame can not go through the vertical plane
located at 0.1 m from the vertical reference plane of the
tractor (Fig. 3). The maximum admissible deection is:
WN d
  01
2
2
where WN is the top structure width in m.
DmaxS

(5)

3.2.4. Maximum forces registered during the tests

The ROPS has to absorb the required energy EIL1
or EIS, and the maximum force needed to raise
these energies depends on the maximum admissible
deformations.
Longitudinal loading test
F maxL
Seat reference point
Fig. 1. Clearance zone (OECD, 2005); I0I2, nodes

E IL1
fDmaxL

(6)

E IS
fDmaxS

(7)

Loading from the side test

F maxS

500
100

min

900

600

Load

250

Fig. 2. Isometric view of the roll-over protective structure

250

Fig. 3. Clearance zone in the load from the side test, defined in
CODE 4; all dimensions in mm (OECD, 2005)

ARTICLE IN PRESS
186

J. MANGADO ET AL.

where: FmaxL and FmaxS are the maximum forces

registered during the longitudinal and side tests,
respectively, in N; and f is the uency.
3.2.5. Maximum moments produced in the protective
structure
Maximum forces produce maximum moments in
critical sections of the ROPS, just below the brace in
the upper part and just over the brace in the lower part,
as shown in Figs 4 and 5.
Longitudinal loading test (Fig. 4)

F maxL
3hB  hP bHP
M FL
hB  hP
2
6hB  hP bHP

hB  hP hF
8

B
hF
F

hB

M EL

F maxL
3hB  hP bHP
hB  hP
2
6hB  hP bHP

hE

(9)

where: MFL and MEL are the maximum moments during

the longitudinal test in critical points F and E of the
ROPS, expressed in N m; hB is the height of the ROPS in
m; hP is the height of the horizontal beam in m; and e is
the relation between the moments of inertia of the upper
and lateral beams and as both beams have the same
BH

b
Fig. 5. Rear view of the ROPS: B, frame width on the top; b,
frame width in the lower part of the ROPS; hF, length of the
strengthened part of the ROPS up to section F; hB, height of the
ROPS; hE, length of the strengthened part of the ROPS up to
section E

section; the value of e in 1. The length of the horizontal

beam bHP is given by

hF
F

bHP

BHP

h2

hB

E
hE

Fig. 4. Lateral view of the ROPS, critical points: BH, frame

length of the top; hF, length of the strengthened part of the
ROPS up to section F; BHP, frame length on the lower beam; hb,
height of the ROPS; h2, height of the lower part of the structure;
hp, height of the horizontal beam; hE, length of the strengthened
part of the ROPS up to section E

hP BH
h2

(10)

where: BH is the top frame length in m; and h, is the

height of the lower part of the structure in m.
When the SRP is near to the trumpet, the ROPS has
to be built with symmetry regarding the vertical central
axis, and both beams with the same slope.
Loading from the side test (Fig. 5)


F maxS
3hB b
M FS
hB 
 hB hF
(11)
6hB b
2
M ES

hp



F maxS
3hB b
hB 
 hE
6hB b
2

(12)

F maxS
3hB b
hB
6hB b
2

(13)

M AS

V S F maxS 

hB
3hB

b 6hB b

(14)

where: MFS and MES are the maximum moments during

loading from the side test, in critical points F and E of
the ROPS, in N m; MAS is the attachment moment in
N m during loading in the side test; VS is the vertical

ARTICLE IN PRESS
187

ROLL-OVER STRUCTURES FOR AGRICULTURAL TRACTORS

forces in N during loading in the side test; b is the frame

width in the lower part of the ROPS, expressed in m;
and hF and hE are the braced lengths of the ROPS,
expressed in m.

Table 2
Different parameters of the most common hollow square steel
sections
Hollow square sections
Side, mm

3.2.6. Fender resistance

If the ROPS is attached to the fender by means of a
brace it is possible to include in the calculation a
resistance factor due to fender resistance. The moments
that the ROPS has to resist in the lower and in the upper
parts are reduced by two coefcients k1 and k2,
respectively. When the ROPS is not attached to the
lower part of the fender, the values of k1 and k2 are both
1; but when the ROPS is attached to the lower part of
the fender by means of a brace, the values for k1 and k2
are 133 and 118, respectively. In the case of ROPS
attached to the lower part of the fender by means of a
brace, the maximum moments in the upper and lower
ROPS critical sections MmaxF and MmaxE are given by:
the maximum value between MFL/k2 and MFS/k2; and
the maximum value between MEL/k1 and MES/k1.
3.2.7. Calculation of the minimum steel section of the
beams
The maximum moment to be resisted by the structure
beams is half the maximum value between MmaxF and
MmaxE because this moment is always resisted by means
of two equal beams. When the upper and the lower part
of the ROPS are manufactured using different steel
section beams, each section has to be calculated using its
corresponding maximum moment MmaxF for the upper
part and MmaxE for the lower part.
The resisting moment of a steel section in plastic state
is
M R npl syW

(15)

where: MR is the resisting moment in N m of the steel

section of the beam; npl is the shape factor; W is the
section modulus in m3; sy is the yield stress (260 MPa for
commercial steel A-42b).
Using Eqn (15), the program calculates the minimum
value for W that makes:
MR4maximum value between MmaxF and MmaxE
The various values of W for the different commercial
steel sections were calculated and registered in a table.
The software chose the section that had a value of W
immediately greater than the calculated needed value.
The program also selected another two prole sections
with the next two values of W, as second and third
options, but only if those W values were more than
150% of the rst option W value. Tables 2 and 3 show
the values for W of the most used steel sections for
manufacturing ROPS.

40
45
50
55
60
60
70
70
80
80
80
90
90
90
100
100
100
120
120
120
140
140
140
160
160
160
170
170
170

Shape factor

Thickness

W, cm3

4
4
4
4
4
5
4
5
4
5
6
4
5
6
4
5
6
4
5
6
5
6
8
5
6
8
5
6
8

526
707
915
115
141
162
201
234
272
32
36
354
419
476
446
531
607
662
796
918
111
129
161
149
173
218
169
198
249

12398
12270
12167
12083
12013
12206
11903
12068
11820
11965
12109
11756
11884
12013
11705
11820
11936
11629
11724
11820
11656
11738
11903
11605
11677
11820
11584
11651
11786

W, section modulus.

3.2.8. Crushing test checking

Compression. The crushing force FC1 in N is specied
in CODE 4 as has been reported. This force has to be
resisted by means of two equal beams. Thus, each beam
must resist a half of this force.
The acceptance condition of the beam, in compression, is that the maximum stress during the crushing
tests sFC does not reach 260 MPa:
sFC

F C1 I p
A

(16)

where, Ip is the warping constant, which is calculated

using tables, depending on the slenderness ratio l:
l

L
i

(17)

and where, L is the length of the beam in m and i the

radius of gyration in m:
r
I
i
(18)
A

ARTICLE IN PRESS
188

J. MANGADO ET AL.

Table 3
Different parameters of the most used solid square steel section
Solid square sections
Side, mm
20
22
25
28
30
32
36
40
45
50

the crushing tests sFC in the critical section does not

raise 260 MPa

Shape factor

W, cm

sFC

133
177
26
366
45
546
778
106
151
209

15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15

W, section modulus.

Critical section

F C1 d h
15W

(19)

sFC o260 MPa

where a coefcient of 15 was used due to the resistance
of the other part of the ROPS.
Program calculates dh in m by means of this equation
and hP by means of trigonometric calculation.
3.2.9. Attachment to trumpet screws calculation
The method also calculates number, quality and
section of the screws, which attach the ROPS to the
tractor trumpet. It computes the needed screw section to
overcome the longitudinal and the loading from the side
tests, and the fender needed screw.
Longitudinal test. The moment in the bolt during the
longitudinal test MboltL in N m is
hB
(20)
2
The needed resistance in all screws FboltL in N is
M boltL F maxL

dh

F boltL
hp

M boltL
bs

(21)

and the minimum screw shank diameter diL in m is

s
4M boltL
d iL
(22)
zapC screwA

Fig. 6. Rigid lower part of the structure. hp, height of the

horizontal beam; dh, distance between critical section and the
application line of the crushing force

where I is the moment of inertia in m4 of the steel

section, and A is the beam section in m2.
The program calculates the maximum stress during
the crushing tests sFC and checks that the value is lower
than the yield stress sy 260 MPa:
Maximum moments during crushing test. The maximum moment is in the critical section where the ROPS
looses its rigidity. Figure 6 shows this critical section just
over the triangle made by the two inclined beams and
the horizontal beam, braced and attached to the fender.
This triangle was considered rigid all through the
calculation. The method calculates the minimum height
hP, measured from the trumpet, that makes the distance
between the critical section and the application line of
the crushing force dh in m short enough. The crushing
force produces a moment in the critical section low
enough to be resisted by the selected steel section. The
acceptance condition was the maximum stress during

where, CscrewA is 06 sscrew in MPa as is shown in Table 4;

a is the distance in m between screws measured along the
trumpet; bs is the distance in m between screw couples
located at both sides of the trumpet; and z is the number
of couples of screws in each bolt.
Loading from the side test. In this case, it is necessary
to know the way of positioning screws: either at the
outer side of the structure or at both sides of the ROPS
joining the axle to the trumpet.
The moment in the bolt during the loading from the
side test MboltS in N m is
For screws at both sides of the joint:
M boltS M AS V S a1

(23)

Table 4
Screw classication and yield stress according to Spanish norm
UNE 17-108-81
Yield stress
Class

(sscrew), Mpa

56
88
109

300
640
940

ARTICLE IN PRESS
ROLL-OVER STRUCTURES FOR AGRICULTURAL TRACTORS

structure SJ in m is

For if screws in the outer side:

M boltS


a
M AS V S a1
2

(24)

where a1 is the distance in m between the axle of the

ROPS joining the trumpet and the vertical plane that
includes the nearest couple of screws.
The force needed on each screw is FscrewS in N:
F screwS

M bolt
za

(25)

And the screw shank diameter needed is diS in m

s
4M bolt
d iS
(26)
zapC screwA
where Mbolt in the higher value between MboltL and
MboltS in N m.
From the maximum calculated values for diL and diS,
the program chooses the nominal diameter corresponding to the value immediately greater than that for the
shank diameter on Table 5.
3.2.10. Attachment between parts of the protective
structure
The attachment of the upper and lower parts of the
ROPS is approximately in the middle of the ROPS and
the produced moments are half of the ones in attachment to trumpet. Thus, the needed resistance of screws is
only 34 of the needed resistance in screws attaching the
ROPS to the trumpet.
The total section of the screws Sbolt in m2 needed in
the attachment to trumpet is
 2
dn
Sbolt 2p
z
(27)
2
where, dn is the maximum value in m between diL and
diS.
The total section of the screws required for the
attachment between the upper and lower parts of the
Table 5
Correspondence between nominal and shank diameters of
commercial screws
Nominal diameter
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M

8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22

189

Shank diameter, m
00065
00078
000973
00114
00134
001475
001675
001875

SJ

3S bolt C screwJ
4C screwA

(28)

where, CscrewJ is the maximum admissible stress in MPa

in the screws joining the upper part to the lower part of
the structure.
And the needed shank diameter dna in m is
r
SJ
(29)
d na 2
zp
In order to avoid the complexity of the calculations, a
computer program ESTREMA was developed. This
program needs several data to calculate the structure,
mainly: tractor mass, vertical and horizontal distance
from seat reference point to trumpet axle, trumpet
section, horizontal distance between the ROPS lower
points and screws, which attach it to the trumpet, fender
height, distance between fenders and screw number and
quality. Relative position between screws and ROPS
joining to the rear axle and the distance from screws to
this point determine the calculation of the needed
section in screws. Thus, it is necessary to ll one of the
following options in the referred form: screws at both
sides of the ROPS joining the axle to the trumpet, or
screws at the outer side of the ROPS. Using these data,
the program calculates the energy absorbed in the test,
the beam lengths of the structure and the moments
produced in the test. Moreover, it searches in normalised steel section tables, the minimum steel section of a
hollow square to, theoretically, resist the test. The
program also calculates the measurementssectionof
the anchorage screws that attach the structure to the
trumpet, and the construction details, checking if the
resulted section resists the CODE 4 crushing test.
The calculation of anchorage of the structure on the
tractor trumpet is as important as the structure
calculation because if anchorage collapses, the structure
could impinge upon the clearance zone. The theoretical
moment in crushing test in the joining between the
trumpet and structure is usually really high; that is
because a horizontal beam was included in the
protective structure to make the lower part of the
structure rigid. The program calculates the minimum
height of this rigid steel beam.
ESTREMA is applicable to agricultural tractors
having at least, two axles for pneumatic tyres wheels or
having tracks instead of wheels, and with an unballasted
mass not less than 800 kg, and a minimum track width
of the rear-wheels generally greater than 115 m.
The program shows, as the calculated structure, a
form with the square or circular section of the steel
prole needed, the measurements of the structure and
the anchorage, made of steel plates and screws, different

ARTICLE IN PRESS
190

J. MANGADO ET AL.

views of the structure, braces and joining points and

several specications to built it. It requires relatively
little operator training. In Appendix A, a ROPS for a
Massey Ferguson 178 Tractor model was calculated,
manufactured, mounted and tested.

4. Conclusions
A protective structure cheap, easy to build and
adaptable to any tractor model lacking a roll-over
protective structure (ROPS) was designed and a
calculation method for this structures to overcome the
homologation test sequence described in CODE 4 was
developed. The calculation method is able to determine
the needed steel section of the structure tube, the
minimum height of the beams to make rigid the lower
part of the structure, and the number, quality and shank
diameter of the attachment screws of the ROPS. A
computer program, named ESTREMA, was developed
to facilitate the calculus. A designed, calculated and
manufactured ROPS was able to pass the homologation
tests without failing on any of the acceptance conditions, which means that the calculation method works
correctly.

References
Arana J I; Mangado J; Hualde A; Jaren C; Perez de Larraya C;
Arazuri S; Arnal P (2002). Tractors without protective
structures in Navarre (Spain): actual situation and problems. EurAgEng Abstract 02-PM-059, AgEng02,
pp 110111, Budapest, Hungary
Arana J I; Mangado J; Hualde A; Jaren C; Perez de Larraya C;
Arazuri S; Arnal P (2004). Program ESTREMA for the
calculation of a roll-over protective structure for agricultural
tractors before 1978. EurAgEng Abstract 197, AgEng04,
pp 412413, Leuven, Belgium, ISBN 90/76019-258
CDC (1993). Public health focus: effectiveness of roll-over
protective structures for preventing injuries associated with
agricultural tractors. Centers for Disease Control &
Prevention; Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report,
42(3), 5759
Chisholm C J (1979). A mathematical model of tractor
overturning and impact behaviour. Journal of Agricultural
Engineering Research, 24, 375394
Fabbri A; Ward S (2002). Validation of a nite element
program for the design of roll-over protective framed
structures (ROPS) for agricultural tractors. Biosystems
Engineering, 81(3), 287296
Freeman S A (1999). Potential impact of a ROPS retrot policy
in Central Iowa. Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health,
5(1)
Murphy J D; Yoder A M (1998). Census of fatal occupational
injury in the agriculture forestry and shing industry.
Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health, Special Issue,
1, 5556

Myers L; Pana-Cryan R (2000). Prevention effectiness of

rollover protective structurespart III: economic analysis.
Journal of Safety and Health, 6(1), 5770
NIOSH (2004). National Agricultural Tractor Safety Initiative. National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health,
Washington, DC, USA
OECD (2005). Standard Codes for The Ofcial Testing of
Protective Structures Mounted on Agricultural and Forestry
Tractors. OECD, Paris
Ponce de Leon J L; Jaren C; Mangado J; Arana J I; Arnal P;
Arazuri S. Design, calculation, construction and tests of a
roll-over protection structure (ROPS) for old tractors using
the Estrema computer program. OECD Annual Tractor
Meeting, Par s 2225 February 2005
Sahay C S; Tewari V K (2004). Computer simulation of tractor
single-point drawbar performance. Biosystems Engineering,
88(4), 419428

Appendix A
A.1. Design and calculation of a protective structure for a
Massey Ferguson 178 tractor model
To calculate the protective structure for a Massey Ferguson
178, one of the most common tractors without a protective
structure in Navarre, the program requested different data,
whose values for this model were as follows.

Mass, including cab and driver 3000 kg

Distance from seat rear plane to 0130 m
rear axle vertical plane
Seat reference point height
0570 m
Distance between fenders
0900 m
Fender height
0900 m
Trumpet section
0170 m
Distance from structure axle to 0070 m
screws
Transversal distance between
0180 m
screw axles
Longitudinal distance between 0175 m
screw axles
Screw class
109, yield
stress 540 MPa
Number of screws at any side 2
of the steel plate

After introducing the data, the program calculated the

required structure was a hollow steel prole section of 0050 m
width and 0004 m thick, and four screws M-14 (shank
diameter of 00114 m).
The program showed a nal report including front, side and
top views of the structure, structure measurements, and details
of the braces, attachment of the structure to the tractor
trumpet, the situation of the seat reference point in relation to
the protective structure and the rear tractor axle.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
ROLL-OVER STRUCTURES FOR AGRICULTURAL TRACTORS

191

A.2. Validation of the protective structure mounted on a

Massey Ferguson 178
Once the designed ROPS was manufactured, according to
the indications of ESTREMA program, and installed on a
Massey Ferguson 178, the tractor was moved to the Mechanisation Agricultural Station (MAS) in order to perform the
same sequence of tests described before. Tests carried out using
a hydraulic cylinder that pushes the structure, were the static
tests. The MAS is the only authorised station in Spain for
testing ROPS according to OECD codes, and is located in
Madrid.
During the longitudinal loading test a deformation of
0185 m was found and the safety zone, placed farther than
05 m, was not reached. In loading from the side test the
deformation reached 0213 m with an applied energy of 5437 J.
Although the deformation was greater, it still did not impinge
upon the clearance zone. In the two crushing tests the structure
was set up just correcting the movement a bit from the
previous tests. The applied force at the end of the test, when
the required energy absorption was met, was higher than 08
Fmax, the maximum force applied during the horizontal tests.
Therefore, the designed ROPS complied all acceptance
conditions established in CODE 4. Figure 7 shows the ROPS
after the test sequence and without impinging upon the
clearance zone.
The ROPS succeeded in the authorised tests without
compromising the security zone. In theory, in case of tractor
roll-over, driver security is guaranteed by the designed
structure. The calculating method was able to determine the
minimum section and measurements of the ROPS beams to
ensure the ROPS could pass the homologation tests without
failing in any of the acceptance conditions. This method can be
used to design ROPS for new tractor models, able to pass the
homologation tests.

Fig. 7. Tractor with (ROPS) and clearance zone, after

sequence test

The author has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate.