Testing an Emergency Stop Concept

for Farm Machinery

W. C. Hammond, B. L. Tyson , F. W. Kay

MEMBER ASSOC. MEMBER ASSOC. MEMBER

INTRODUCTION TABLE 1. FARM DEATHS IN

RECENT YEARS*
ATIONAL Safety Council statistics clearly show
N farming in the U.S. to be among the most hazardous
of all professions. The accident rate continues to be high
Year
Machinery Total farm deaths
caused deaths from all accidents
in spite of new innovations and intensive safety 1974 377 1617
educational programs. Safety awareness—created 1975 476 1672
1976 372 1438
through educational programs—is important and has no 1977 327 1303
doubt saved many lives over the years, but this is not 1978 325 1346
1979 627 f 1276
enough.
To attack the problem only through education and * National Safety Council Data
awareness is simply not enough—the stakes are too high. 1*Change in definition to include falls
from Farm Machines and struck by
Innovation and engineering design must continue to Farm Machines (Previously struck
make farming and farm machines safer. ROPS and by objects).
shielding have shown us how effective engineering can
be. Farm machines have maimed untold numbers of
victims over the years and killed thousands. Emergency device capable of cutting off the engine air supply (Fig.
stop mechanisms on machines of various types have 1). The cable would normally attach to the tractor
demonstrated their effectiveness and likewise could have engine, run below the tractor operator platform, possibly
reduced the number and severity of many of these farm through the hitch pin and extend back over the PTO
accidents. shaft about 15 to 30 cm (6 to 12 in.) above the PTO,
Many farm machine accidents would no doubt be less encircle the feed grinder, and then be secured to the
costly in terms of loss of limbs, lives, and human grinder at the far end of the cable (Fig. 2). The cable can
suffering if a convenient means were at hand allowing the be supported in eyelets and extend under shields near
victim to shut off power instantly. The financial loss drive assemblies to allow access to machine components.
involved in these farm accidents is staggering, not to It can be mounted at various locations and elevations
mention the human misery to victims and families. Legal and should be bright in color for visibility.
implications can no longer be ignored when such
concepts exist. Accident data from the National Safety MODE OF OPERATION
Council in Table 1 shows from 300 to 400 deaths per year A quick coupling of the "lifeline" (with breakaway
in this country from non-transport accidents involving protection provided like a hydraulic hose) would allow a
farm machines. Obviously, the number of accidents small cable mounted on the feed grinder (or any other
which may claim a finger, hand, or arm is much greater. machine) to be hooked to the tractor. The cable would

OBJECTIVES
^^~~~ - u —
The objectives of this paper is to propose and
lifeline
document test results from the concept of a simple device —*-

9
-*£a^/
butterfly
to shut off power to farm machines from various
air inlet valve
locations. This concept allows one to shut off the fuel or
air supply to an engine from various locations by My)
applying tension on a small continuous cable or
"lifeline" which encompasses the hazardous points of a
towed implement or a self-propelled machine, including Fig. 1—Schematic of a simple air supply cutoff actuated by a small
the PTO shaft of a towed implement. This should be of cable attached at "a". The trip level pivots at "b" and butterfly valve
rotates at "c" from spring pressure at "d" (could be reset from
interest, first perhaps, on feed grinders or other operator's platform). Sealing flange "e".
machines which are operated in a stationary position and
where people normally work nearby.
Imagine, if you will, a farm tractor towing a feed
grinder powered by the tractor PTO. Now imagine a
small cable attached to the engine fuel cutoff or to a

Article was submitted for publication in October, 1984; reviewed and

approved for publication by the Power and Machinery Div. of ASAE in
May, 1985. Presented as ASAE Paper No. 84-5012.
The authors are: W. C. HAMMOND, Professor and Head, BOBBY
TYSON, Associate Professor, and F. W. KAY, Engineer, Extension Fig. 2—Cable extending from engine cutoff (tractor) over the PTO and
Engineering Dept., The University of Georgia, Athens. encircling machine allows engine kill from any point along cable.

Vol. l(l):June, 1985 13

require very little slack to allow for irregular ground TABLE 2. ENGINE KILL TIME FOR
DEERE 4020 DIESEL AT VARIOUS
terrain if it is attached to the top of the hitch pin which ENGINE SPEED
has no relative motion between vehicles.
Engine Air Fuel Difference,
Secured by eyelets, pressure applied transversely to the rpm shutoff shutoff seconds
cable would cause the cable to become tight, thus
shutting off fuel or air supply to the tractor engine.
780 1.74 2.10
Pressure could be applied to the cable as it extends over 1.63 1.97
the PTO shaft or at any point along the cable's length as 1.67 2.16
it encircles the machine. Pressure could be applied to the av. 1.68 av. 2.06 0.40
cable by any convenient means, such as by hand, foot or
1105 2.35 2.48
any part of the body. 2.32 2.70
The "lifeline" theoretically could be used to encircle 2.21 2J>4_
combines, haybalers, or any other farm machine. If the av. 2.29 av. 2.61 0.32
lifeline encircles tractors, for example, victims who start
1500 3.33 3.58
the engine with helper batteries while in gear would have 3.08 3.45
an out. In the case of a machine such as a round baler, 3.06 3.50
which opens up to discharge the bale, the cable could be av. 3.15 av. 3.51 0.36
partially protected by a flange or angle as the line
2105 4.17 4.44
extends across the back of the baler to prevent 3.96 4.53
discharging bale from pulling the cable tight and 4.01^ 4.61
shutting off power. The top part of the baler would be av. 4.05 av. 4.52 0.47
free to open and discharge bales without contacting the av. 0.39
"lifeline" which could also extend to the top part of the
baler if desirable. The cable should extend across the
baler pickup mechanism, always remaining above the TABLE 3. ENGINE KILL TIME FOR
hay moving into the header and yet be handy to a victim ALLIS CHALMERS W D GASOLINE AT
VARIOUS ENGINE RPM
who inadvertently becomes entrapped in the header, bale
chamber, PTO, or other machine parts. ENGINE KILL TIME (SECONDS)
Engine Air Ignition Difference,
An air cutoff device (Fig. 1) could be added to the rpm shutoff shutoff seconds
engine air-intake system and be effective in stopping
engines of all fuel types. No separate mechanism or 1400 3.4 3.6 0.2
1200 2.7 2.8 0.1
clutches would be needed to stop various components 890 2.2 2.4 0.2
such as the PTO since the PTO is connected to the 500 1.6 1.6 0
central power source of the vehicle itself. In fact, if a
victim became involved in the PTO shaft and the
"lifeline" were immediately above and parallel to the
shaft, tripping of the cutoff mechanism is automatic
from body pressure or clothing.
Nuisance tripping must be avoided by proper location
and shielding of the lifeline. A tension device may be
required to set a predetermined line tension before the
engine is killed (or a clutch deactivated to disconnect
power). This could be as simple as adding another spring
in Fig. 1 to pull in a direction opposite the lifeline.

PROCEDURE
To determine the effectiveness of such a system to kill
the engine of a typical farm tractor, some tests were
conducted using a John Deere 4020 Diesel and a W D
Allis Chalmers gasoline powered farm tractor. After Fig. 3—Air intake pipe turned for easy access. (Deere 4020 Diesel).
warming the engines, the engine kill time in seconds was
determined at various no-load engine speeds both for air
shutoff and fuel (diesel) and ignition (gasoline).
Four engine speeds were evaluated with three
observations per tests as in Table 2 for the 4020 diesel
and one observation per test on the Allis Chalmers
(Table 3). Engine RPM was determined using an
electronic strobe with throttle settings not altered
between test (same setting for both engine kill methods).
To allow evaluation of engine kill time with air shutoff,
the air intake pipe from the air cleaner was loosened and
turned outward for access as in Fig. 3 for the diesel
engine. The intake hose was removed at the carburetor
on the Allis Chalmers (Fig. 4). The air intake pipe Fig. 4—Air intake pipe open for access. (W D AUis-Chalmers
remained in this position for all tests. Gasoline).

14 APPLIED ENGINEERING in AGRICULTURE

 JOHN DEERE 4020 DIESEL
+ Air Cutoff
0 Fuel Cutoff
ENGINE SPEED IN RPM
•age of Three Tests
Fig. 5—Engine kill time vs. engine speed. (John Deere 4020 Diesel).
Air shut off was provided using a smooth piece of
plywood covered with a piece of rubber cut from an old
inner tube to make an effective seal.
The engine kill time in seconds (measured with an
electronic timer) for the air and fuel shut off at various
engine speeds is plotted in Fig. 5 for the diesel. The same
is shown in Fig. 6 comparing ignition and air shutoff for
the gasoline engine. The average of the three test values
shown in Table 2 at a given engine speed and engine
shutoff method was used to plot the values in Fig. 5.
Table 3 shows the results of one observation per test for
the W D Allis Chalmers gasoline engine using air and
ignition cutoff at various engine RPM.
The relationship shown in Figs. 5 and 6 are essentially
linear. The linear regression equation is shown in Figs. 5
and 6 for both engines and kill methods.
In order to test the effects of inertia on engine kill
times, two combines were selected. In both cases the
combine engines were allowed to warm to normal
operating temperatures. The headers and all threshing
parts were engaged and engine RPM set at the
recommended level for harvesting. Fuel to the engine was
then shut off and time required for all movement to stop
was recorded. Inertia, in fact, does have some effect on
engine kill time (Table 4).
The average stop time for a Ford 642 combine with a
15 ft wide grain table was 8.8 s and for the Massey
Ferguson 540 with a 13 ft wide grain table was 6.4 s.
Comparing this to the John Deere 4020 kill time with fuel
W D ALLIS-CHALMERS GASOLINE
+ Air Cutoff
o Ignition Cutoff
Y = 0.52 + 2.08 x/1000
700 900
ENGINE SPEED IN RPM
Fig. 6—Engine kill time vs. engine speed. (W D Allis-Chalmers
Gasoline).
Vol. l(l):June, 1985
TABLE 4. COMBINE ENGINE KILL TIME
Combine Replication no. Kill time, s
Ford 642 1 9.4
w/15 ft header 2 9.1
3 8.2
4 8.5
av. 8.8
Massey Ferguson 540 1 6.2
w/13 ft header 2 6.4
3 6.4
4 6-JL
av. 6.4
shutoff (4.5 s), it is approximately a 40 to 95% increase
in the time required for all parts to come to a complete
stop.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS
The John Deere 4020 diesel engine and the Allis W D
gasoline engine maximum kill time was less than 5 s
using either fuel ignition or air shutoff. At low diesel
engine speeds, the air shutoff provided almost 20%
faster engine kill than fuel cutoff. The difference
between ignition and air shutoff for the gasoline engine
was not as pronounced. At maximum engine speeds the
air shutoff provided almost 10% faster diesel engine kill
than fuel cutoff. The faster engine kill with air shutoff is
possibly due to the vacuum effect above the pistons
which makes the engine operate like an air compressor
working in reverse. Actually, the piston would have
decreased pressure on top during intake and some
pressure, of course, during the compression stroke, both
of which would retard rotation.
The relationship between engine kill time versus speed
is essentially a linear relationship for air or fuel cutoff.
This does not necessarily mean that the engine kill time
doubles if engine speed doubles. For example, using the
upper line of Fig. 5 shows an engine kill time of 2.1 s at
800 rpm and 3.6 s at 1600 rpm.
At maximum engine speeds, the two combines
checked resulted in stop times of 6.4 and 8.8 s. The
additional 1.9 to 4.3 s (compared to the 4020 J D at full
engine speed) is required to stop all the inertial energy
stored in the moving parts of the combines. Based on
data from the J D 4020, an air cutoff system on the
combine engine would result in possible reduced stop
times.
DICUSSION
Some safety professionals argue that adding such a
device to farm machines would encourage farmers to
approach machines without shutting off power. The
same argument was probably used years ago when
someone proposed adding shielding to PTO shafts. Why
add shielding when the driver is supposed to be on the
57 + 1.91 x/1000
tractor when the PTO shaft is operating? Did adding the
shielding invite the driver to approach the machine while
it was operating? In fact, shielding was a passive attempt
by safety engineers and manufacturers to protect the
operator in spite of himself. Man has the ability to
1100 protect himself for short periods of time, and this
concept is an attempt to stop the machine before his
limits are reached and he is totally consumed by the
machine. 09i
(continued on page 23)
15
diseases of snapbean with soil fungicides and metham sodium applied
through overhead irrigation. Report of Bean Imp. Coop, and Nat. Dry
Bean Council Res. Conf. p. 61-62. Gainesville, FL. Jan. 5-7.
40. Sumner, D. R., C. C. Dowler, A. W. Johnson, N. C. Glaze, S.
C. Phatak, R. B. Chalfant, and J. E. Epperson. 1983. Root diseases of
cucumber in an irrigated multiple-cropping system with pest
management. Plant Disease 67:1071-1075.
41. Threadgill, E. D. (ed.). 1980. Irrigated multiple-cropping
production systems: A progress report, 1977-1979. University of
Georgia, Coastal Plain Experiment Station, Tifton, GA.
42. Threadgill, E. D. 1981. Why chemigate? Proc. of National
Symposium on Chemigation, University of Georgia, Tifton, GA. pp.
1-6.
43. Threadgill, E. D. 1982. Chemigation: New way to get crops to
take their medicine. Ga. Agr. Rsch. 22(4): 16-17.
44. Wisconsin. 1979. Agriculture Admin. Code NR 112.15.
45. Yates, W. E. 1962. Spray pattern analysis and evaluation of
deposits from agricultural aircraft. TRANSACTIONS of the ASAE
5(l):49-53.
Emergency Stop Concept for Farm Machinery
(continued from page 15)
Shutting off the air supply is a simple way to provide
engine kill. Naturally aspirated engines can have air shut
off at any point in the air intake without harmful effects.
On the other hand, if air is shut off on the suction side of
a turbo-charged engine, some oil seal damage could
occur. For this reason, air shut off of a turbo unit should
possibly be downstream of the pressure side.
Carburetor equipped engines can best be starved for
air downstream from the carburetor to prevent flooding
although flooding is a minor problem.
Nuisance tripping from crops or brush is a factor to be
considered. This would require properly locating and
Vol. l(l):June, 1985
46. Young, J. R. 1980. Suppression of fall armyworm populations
by incorporating insecticides into irrigation water. Fla. Entomol.
73:447-450.
47. Young, J. R. (ed.). 1981. Proc. of National Symposium on
Chemigation, University of Georgia, Tifton, GA. 126 pp.
48. Young, J. R., T. C. Kiesling, and J. R. Stansell. 1981.
Insecticide application with sprinkler irrigation systems.
TRANSACTIONS of the ASAE 24(1): 121-123.
49. Young, J. R. and D. R. Sumner (ed.). 1982. Proc. of 2nd
National Symposium on Chemigation. University of Georgia, Tifton,
GA. 98 pp.
50. Young, J. R. and E. D. Threadgill (ed.). 1984. Irrigated
multiple-cropping production systems: A summary of progress, 1982.
University of Georgia, Coastal Plain Experiment Station, Tifton, GA.
94 pp.
51. Young, J. R. 1984. Personal communications. Insect Biology
Laboratory, Coastal Plain Experiment Station, Tifton, GA.
52. Young, J. R. and E. D. Threadgill. 1984. Unpublished data.
Coastal Plain Experiment Station, Tifton, GA.
shielding the cable and setting a minimum actuation
tension.
A first logical application of this concept would be on
stationary feed grinders, conveyors, etc. where people
must work near the operating machine.
References
1. Hammond, W. C , Bobby L. Tyson, and Furman W. Kay. 1983.
Emergency stop mechanism for farm machinery. ASAE Paper No.
SER 83-102, ASAE, St. Joseph, MI 49085.
2. Sevart, J. B. and Bradley Klausmeyer. 1982. Emergency stop
devices for a g r i c u l t u r a l machinery. A G R I C U L T U R A L
ENGINEERING 63(9):11-13 Steptember.
23