J. agric. Engng Res.

(1974) 19, 147-165

An Investigation of the Potential for Improvement of

Tractor Draught Controls
M. J. DWYER;D. A. CROLLA;G. PEARSON*

Previous work has shown the inadequacy of tractor draught controls particularly when
working at higher speed. An experimental implement control unit on which several parameters
could be varied was built and experiments were carried out in a number of different field condi-
tions to investigate the effect of varying the parameters with an artificial sinusoidal draught
variation input. A computer model was devised to predict performance and the results are
compared with experimental measurements. Agreement is satisfactory and the results are
used to suggest how performance may be improved without inducing instability.

1. Introduction
Much discussion has taken place as to what criteria should be used to assess the performance
of draught controls and this has been reviewed by Cowell and Len I who also showed the inability
of commercial systems to maintain ploughing depth within the widest limits likely to be accept-
able. They concluded that, on agronomic grounds, ploughing depth should ideally not vary by
more than ± 10 ~ , but that infrequent excursions outside this would be acceptable provided the
plough did not come completely out of the ground, excessive subsoil was not brought up or the
depth did not exceed the width of the furrow. A recent survey undertaken by the N.I.A.E. in
connection with the feasibility of automatic tractor operation 2 has confirmed that most operators
attempt to keep depth variations within these limits. Standard deviations of depth were typically
0.4 in at mean depths of 8 in, which means that depth was held to -k l0 %oover approximately 95 0~o ~
of the area.
The inability of commercial draught controls to achieve the performance required by operators
was also shown by this survey. Eighteen out of thirty-one operators who were observed while
ploughing were making regular adjustments to the draught control lever. Many of these adjust-
ments were made to prevent the draught control responding to changes in soil resistance and
thereby causing unacceptable depth variations. However, some were also made to prevent the
tractor stalling indicating that the draught control was not maintaining satisfactorily consistent
draught. When the operator was asked not to make manual adjustments it was found that the
standard deviation of depth was typically doubled to 0.8 in and in many fields up to 20 ~ of the
ploughed area contained subsoil where ploughing had been too deep or unburied vegetation
where ploughing has been too shallow. This was not normally acceptable to the farmer, although
there is no agronomic evidence to suggest that it would be likely to result in significantly depressed
yields.
Alternative criteria for assessing draught control performance may be derived by considering
the effect on tractor performance rather than quality of ploughing. When ploughing, the aim
should be to obtain the highest possible rate of work in terms of acres ploughed per hour which is
closely related to the maximum tractor horsepower. Although ballast and plough width can be
adjusted to obtain maximum efficiency at the mean draught, variations in draught will reduce
efficiency. Therefore, the more accurately the draught can be controlled the more efficiently the
tractor will work. In particular, the draught control must prevent the wheel-slip increasing so
much that the tractor stalls, or, at the other extreme, it must prevent the implement coming out
of the ground. The more closely the draught can be controlled within these limits the more
efficiently the tractor will operate and the more quickly work can be completed. This is perhaps a
more straightforward and practical criterion by which to assess draught controls than are those
* Tractor and Cultivation Department, N.I.A.E., Wrest Park, Silsoe, Beds.
147
148 TRACTOR DRAUGHT CONTROLS

LIST OF SYMBOLS

A maximum depth of plough, in PULL pull exerted by tractor, lb f

B constant in rate of entry R rear wheel radius, in
equation, in- ~ RF front wheel radius, in
DB dead-band, lb f ROLIF rate of lift, in/s
DYIDT rate of change of input to plough ROLOW rate of lowering, in/s
due to wheel, in/s ROT rear wheel rotation, tad
D Y I N D T rate of change of actual input to RRC rolling resistance coefficient
plough, in/s RRF front wheel rolling resistance
D Y T D T rate of change of control RRR rear wheel rolling resistance
movement to plough, in/s SETH horizontal force set-point, lb f
ECC eccentricity of the tractor wheel, SETV vertical force set-point, lb f
in SIGNAL final error signal, lb f
EFFCY transmission efficiency SLIP tractor wheel slip
ENAC engine acceleration, rad/s 2 T time, s
ENSP engine speed, rad/s TE engine torque available, lb f ft
ENSPO governed engine speed, rad/s TORQ engine torque required, Ib f ft
G gravitational constant, 32.2 ft/s 2 V forward speed, ft/s
GR gear ratio VDIFF error signal from vertical
HDIFF error signal from horizontal channel, lb f
force, lb f VERF vertical force on plough, lb f
HORF horizontal force, lb f VERFD vertical force on plough due to
IE inertia of engine, lb ft 2 its depth, lb f
IQE total inertia of tractor referred to W tractor wheelbase, in
engine flywheel, lb ft 2 WHSP tractor rear wheel speed, rad/s
IWF inertia of front wheel, lb ft ~ WR weight of rear wheels, lb f
IWR inertia of rear wheel, lb ft ~ WT tractor weight, lb f
L distance from front wheel to X forward movement, in
plough C. of G., in Y vertical movement of plough in
L1 distance from front wheel to ground, in
tractor C. of G., in YI input to plough due to tractor
L2 distance from rear wheel to wheel, in
tractor C. of G., in YIN actual input to plough, in
MAXTQ maximum torque available from Y0 plough depth, in
engine at given speed, lb ft YT plough movement due to control,
N gain of vertical channel in
NSSP no slip speed, ft/s YW vertical movement of tractor
PLWT weight of plough, lb f wheel, in

based on agronomic considerations. In this paper, therefore, the results o f experiments carried
out with an experimental draught control are assessed in terms of the amplitude o f the draught
variation resulting from a sinusoidal draught variation input.

2. Experimental procedure and equipment

The experiments were carried out on farmland close to the N.I.A.E. using a two-wheel drive
70 p.t.o, hp tractor fitted with an experimental draught control ~ and a three-furrow m o u n t e d
plough. The experimental draught control used a strain-gauged three-point linkage d y n a m o -
meter ~ to sense the forces between the tractor and plough and a rotary potentiometer to sense the
position o f the lift shaft. Electrical signals proportional to horizontal force, vertical force and lift
shaft position were fed to an electronic control box where they could be individually selected and
M. J. I)WYER" D. A. CROLLA; G. PEARSON 149

mixed in any proportion and where the required value of each could be set. The combined error
output from this control box was fed to an electro-hydraulic valve which controlled the flow of oil
from the tractor's external hydraulic supply to and from a pair of lift rams which lifted or lowered
the plough.
By selecting the input from the lift shaft only, position control could be obtained with the
implement locked in position relative to the tractor and the valve only operating to make up any
leakage of oil from the rams. Selecting the input from the horizontal component of draught
produced a pure draught sensing control as proposed by Coweil s and selecting a combination of
inputs from the horizontal and vertical components of draught simulated a top or lower-link
sensing control. In the experiments described here the sensitivity to vertical force was made twice
that to horizontal force, simulating a typical top-link sensing control. This ratio was chosen
because on a typical plough the line of action of the vertical soil forces lies approximately twice as
far behind the cross-shaft as the line of the horizontal component of draught lies below the cross-
shaft. Therefore, the change in top-link force for a given change in vertical soil force is twice as
large as for the same change in horizontal component of draught.

TABLE I
Field conditions

Mean Specific soil Maximum Plough

Field draught force resistance at depth, factor,
Surface
no. at 9 ht depth 9 in depth A B
(lb) (/b/in s ) (in) (in J)

1 Rotary cultivated after brussels

sprouts 2150 5"7 11'0 0-04 I
Stubble 2350 6"2 11"5 0.039
Rotary cultivated stubble 2270 6"0 11"4 0.039
Rotary cultivated after brocoli 1920 5"1 11'5 0.039
Rotary cultivated after cabbages 2140 5'7 9"9 0-045

The experimental draught control was originally provided with a fourth input from a wheel
running on the ground and pivoted under the back axle of the tractor. This was intended to
provide an input proportional to the angle of pitch of the tractor and it was hoped to investigate
the feasibility of using this as a means of controlling implement depth. It was found, however,
that the wheel was more sensitive to short wavelength ground irregularities which it encountered
itself rather than to the longer wavelength irregularities which caused changes of tractor pitch.
Although it may be possible to overcome the difficulty by suitable damping, this input was not
used in the present work.
The electro-hydraulic valve originally fitted in the experimental draught control was a propor-
tional valve providing a rate of flow proportional to the current received. It had a very small
dead-band and its maximum flow capacity was greater than the maximum flow available from the
tractor. Altering the sensitivity to a particular input on the control box had the effect of altering
the rate of lift per unit change in sensed force.
Unfortunately, the proportional valve proved to be too sensitive to contamination of the oil
supply and it was necessary to replace it with an on-off solenoid valve. Altering the sensitivity
to a particular input on the control box then altered the width of the dead-band. Maximum rate
of lift was separately adjustable by a throttle valve. Thus, the effect of the following variables
were investigated in the experiments described here: (a) control mode, i.e. pure draught sensing or
simulated top-link sensing, (b) width of dead-band, (c) rate of lift, (d) forward speed.
Measurements were made in the five fields described in Table I. They were all light soils
because it was necessary to accommodate a wide depth variation without causing tractor stall.
150 TRACTOR DRAU(;ItT CON tROLl,

The efficiency of control was determined by imposing a sinusoidal draught disturbance and
recording on an oscillograph the resulting variation in draught, measured on the three-point
linkage dynamometer. The input draught disturbance was produced by setting the tractor driving
wheels eccentric by 2 in so that when the tractor was driven forward the implement depth varied
sinusoidally with an amplitude of approximately 3.5 in. The two driving wheels were kept in
phase during measurements by engaging the differential lock. This technique, which had been
used previously, 6 simulated the implement depth disturbance which occurs when the rear wheels
of a tractor encounter a ground surface irregularity. Its main advantage is that it provides a
simple means of producing a repeatable input disturbance in any field. Its disadvantages are that
it requires extra engine power to lift the tractor at the same point in each cycle and it produces a
small cyclic variation in forward speed.

x/

3000

2000 /
/
/"
/×/
/

/
/
//.

/
J
,/
/

/
o
T=
x/¸
o
c',, I000

Top link length 26 ~ in - - - - - -

26 { i n
27 ~in ----
0
1500

__ ~-44~- X
g ioo0 -- ~ - . ~.----.~\
o
o

500

1 I I I I I
2 4 6 8 I© 12
Depth (m)
Fig. 1. Variation of draught and vertical force with depth

3. Theoretical analysis
The input disturbance produced by the eccentricity of the rear tractor wheels resulted in a
displacement of the plough equal to
L
ECC sin W H S P . T.
M. J. DWYER' D. A. C R O L L A ; G. P E A R S O N 151

The engine speed and hence axle speed was assumed to be constant so that the forward speed
without wheel-slip varied as a sine function,
NSSP : WHSP ( R + E C C sin W H S P . T).
The selected input to the control from the three possible inputs or their combination was
compared with the desired value previously selected. If the error exceeded the dead-band the
valve opened to lift or lower the plough. The rate of lift was determined by the design of the
tractor hydraulics but the rate of lowering depended on the soil forces and the linkage geometry.
Soil forces were resolved into horizontal (draught) and vertical components, both of which
were related to depth as shown in Fig. 1. Three relationships are shown corresponding to different
angles of plough pitch, varied by altering the length of the top link. The greater the angle of the
plough to the horizontal the larger were both the horizontal and vertical components of draught.
The vertical force shown in Fig. 1 is that produced when the plough moves through the ground
at a constant depth. If the plough rises or falls relative to the ground an additional vertical force
dy 7
is produced which has been shown to be approximately equal to HORF-d-~ Once the two
curves relating soil force to depth have been established other plough/soil interactions can be
calculated. The most important of these is the rate of entry of the plough into the soil, since this
normally determines the rate of lowering of the plough when the draught control responds to a
"lower" signal.
The rate of entry of the plough is a function of three factors, the draught force, the vertical
force, and a factor which is governed by the geometry of the plough. This factor varies with the
attitude of the plough but in the present work the angle was assumed to remain constant from the
point at which the plough entered the ground to its maximum depth. The plough factor can be
changed, by altering the top link setting.
From field measurements it was found that the curve for the rate of entry could be described
by the equation
Y ~ A(I - e - a x)

The constant A is the maximum depth, which may be calculated from the soil force/depth
relationships and the linkage geometry. A computer program has been written for this calculation.
To evaluate the constant B the above equation must be differentiated and rearranged.

dY
__ AB e-aX
dX
1 Y
substituting for X -- B log ( 1 - - ~ - )

d___Y:= A B e - B { - 1/B log (l-- Y/A)}

dX
A B (I- Y/A)
: B (A-- Y)
which gives thc rate of lowering in terms of depth. W h e n Y = 0, i.e.when thc plough is about to
cntcr the ground, thcre are 2 factors which affect its rate of entry, the vcrtical force and the
inclination of the plough to thc ground. The draught force is initiallyzero and, for the firstshort
distance after entry it will be very small compared with the vcrticalforce. Since the vertical forcc
on the plough is its own weight only this factor remains constant and the only factor which
influences the initialrate of entry is thc inclination of the plough to the ground. This varies with
152 TRACTOR I)RAUGHT ('ON]R()I.S

16
(a)

12

I I I I I I

16
(b)

M eosured
------ Predicfed

I I [ I I [

12
(c)

I I
0 2O 4O 60I ]
80 IO0 p/02 I
140
Disfnnce (in)
Fig. 2. Rates of plough entry. (a) 3 mile~h, (b) 4 mile~h, (c) 5 mile/h

the top link setting but field measurements were made with different top link settings so that a
value could be established for the initial rate of entry at any of these settings;
i.e. when Y -- 0
dY
-- AB.
dX
The value for the initial rate of entry was equated to AB and since A was already known B could
be calculated.
An example of the graphs obtained for the rates of entry of the plough is shown in Fig. 2. The
measured values were obtained by recording the draught force as the plough was allowed to drop
into the ground with the linkage unrestrained. As the relationship between draught force and
depth was already known the curves obtained at different speeds could be plotted against distance
M. J. D W Y E R ' D. A. C R O L L A ; G. P E A R S O N 153

along the ground on the horizontal axis. Three identical curves were obtained confirming the
assumption that the plough would enter the ground at the same rate relative to the ground
independent of the forward speed.
Knowing the equations governing the control of the implement, its effect on the tractor per-
formance can be studied. Considering firstly the engine, the acceleration is given by
d ENSP TE--TORQ
dT IQE
The total inertia of the tractor must be considered since the engine cannot change speed without
the rear wheels and hence the whole tractor changing speed. Therefore considering the total
energy of the system.

leE - WT(V)2+ 21wR ~'_ENSPI2 -i 21WF I WV- ~ _ I E E N S P 2

,oi., , > I Q ]
Linkage
movement
+
Wheel rotationI Rate of linkage
movement <
No slip I

Engine L ~ I True I k:~

I To!q.eI l Traction ~ J L ~ S t e a d y state

I coefficient ~-..T I ,.verticalforce I <
< I ~ Dynamic I IRateof change
*c IverhcalforceI < of depth
Fig. 3. Block diagram illustrating computer simulation

The engine torque is obtained from the torque speed curve for the engine at the appropriate
governor setting. It was assumed that the time taken to change from one speed to another was
entirely a function of the acceleration and the engine inertia and was not dependent on the
dynamics of the governor.
The torque required to pull the tractor may be calculated from the tractive effort required at the
rear wheels
(RRF+RRR+HORF) × R
TORQ = GR x EFFCY
The engine speed is obtained by integrating the acceleration
I TE - T O R Q
ENSP ~ IQE dT

with the initial condition of a known engine speed at T .... 0 since the governor will be set to a
certain speed as the tractor moves off.
154 T R A C T O R D R A U G H 1- C O N / ROLS

TABLE 11
Measured draught variations

Dea~band Rate o f Speed Draught variation hz fieM uo.

Mode
(~) lift(m/s) (mile~h) 1 2 3 4 5 Mean

Pure draught 400 10-8 3 590 550 580 320 610 530
sensing 4 660 560 770 620 700 660
5 660 1070 890 660 930 840

800 10'8 3 900 960 750 1160 920 940

4 980 1210 930 960 930 1000
5 980 1200 1240 1200 1070 1140

1200 10"8 3 920 1210 1170 1450 940 1140

4 1160 1260 1400 920 1060 1160
5 1090 1170 1650 1410 1340 1330

400 7"2 3 1140 1550 1530 870 700 1160

4 1030 1400 2350 1200 930 1380
5 1080 2100 1490 1230 970 1370

400 3"6 3 1060 1860 1240 1110 760 1210

4 1080 2190 1660 1140 980 1410
5 1230 2260 Stall 1250 1120 1470

Simulated 800 10"8 3 400 910 820 Unstable 320 610

top link 4 560 930 820 Unstable 320 660
sensing 5 400 1700 1020 Unstable 420 890

1200 10'8 3 430 920 1080 540 450 680

4 400 1350 820 700 690 790
5 490 1210 1320 870 430 860

1600 10"8 3 650 1130 1060 560 600 800

4 600 1170 1260 680 630 870
5 540 1740 1730 870 810 1140

800 7'2 3 1930 750 1560 640 1220

4 2240 1220 1710 660 1460
5 2340 1950 2020 760 1770

800 3'6 3 2440 2120 2150 560 1820

4 2740 1920 1770 730 1790
5 2760 2250 Stall 860 1960

Mean 1120 1390 1310 890 780

T o c a l c u l a t e t h e f o r w a r d s p e e d o f t h e t r a c t o r , t h e slip o f t h e r e a r w h e e l s m u s t b e f o u n d f r o m
t h e e m p i r i c a l r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n slip a n d t r a c t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t a p p r o p r i a t e t o t h e field, w h e r e
traction coefficient equals

D r a w b a r pull
Weight on rear wheels"

T h e s t a t i c w e i g h t o n t h e r e a r w h e e l s is i n c r e a s e d b y t h e v e r t i c a l soil f o r c e w h i c h is a s s u m e d t o b e
p o s i t i v e d o w n w a r d s a n d r e d u c e d b y t h e h o r i z o n t a l soil f o r c e w h i c h is a s s u m e d t o a c t a t a d i s t a n c e
M. J. I ) W Y E R ; D. A. C R O L L A ; G. P E A R S O N 155

equal to half the ploughing depth below the tractor tyre-soil contact patch, due to one wheel
being in the furrow. Therefore, the traction coefficient equals
HORF

1
The theoretical forward speed without slip can be calculated from the engine speed
ENSP × R
GR
and the forward speed with slip is equal to the theoretical forward speed without slip ~<(1-slip).
As the tractor wheels were mounted eccentrically in the present work the input depended on the
rotation of the rear wheels. Knowing the engine speed the wheel speed equals
ENSP
WHSP -- - -
GR
and by integrating this the wheel rotation is obtained
['ENSP
rotation = j ~ . dT

using the initial condition that rotation = 0 at T -- 0.

The overall block diagram is shown in Fig. 3 and details of the computer program are given in
the Appendix. This program does not include the effect of engine speed on rate of lift or of delays
but these omissions do not affect the results significantly.

4. Results
The measured draught variations in each field with each setting of the experimental draught
control and at three different speeds are shown in Table II. The blanks in field 5 were due to a
failure in the equipment. In field 3 the tractor engine stalled at 5 mile/h with the slowest rate of
lift. In field 4 measurements could not be made with simulated top link sensing with an 800 lb
dead-band and 10.8 in/s rate of lift due to instability producing a high frequency draught
oscillation.
The results for all fields were similar. The three lighter fields 1, 4 and 5 produced the lowest
draught variations and the two slightly heavier fields 2 and 3 produced slightly higher variations.
When results for all fields were averaged to reduce the experimental scatter, the general trends
were clear. In almost all cases the draught variation increased with speed but was reduced by a
reduction in dead-band or an increase in rate of lift.
The minimum dead-band chosen for each mode was limited by instability. The dead-band
shown for simulated top link sensing was that on the horizontal draught force channel. The
corresponding dead-band on the vertical force channel was always half that on the horizontal.
Comparison of the two modes at the same horizontal draught force dead-band shows that
simulated top link sensing gave better control than pure draught sensing. However, pure draught
sensing was more stable and enabled a smaller dead-band to be used. Comparison at the mini-
mum dead-band possible in each mode gave similar control.
Theoretical predictions of the draught variations in each field are shown in Figs 4-9, together
with the measured results. Fig. 4 shows the relationship between draught variation and speed for
the pure draught sensing mode of control. Separate theoretical lines are shown for each field
although there is very little difference between them. The experimental points are average values
for the 800 and 1200 lb dead-bands at the maximum rate of lift. There was no obvious difference
156 TRACTOR I)RAUGHT CONI'ROLS

1600

i
1400 !
1200

I000
x
,S
o 800 --
C
.,Predicted
X ,Measured
~
0
600
E3

400

200

I _ _ I
3 4
Speed (mile/h)

Fig. 4. Increase of draught variation with speed in pure draught sensing mode

1600

1400

1200
0
......~J
/
/ . J
f
j
/ / /
/ j , /
/
f
t0

I000
g 8
~ 800
o

2 6OO
0 ~x

400
Predicted fields 1,4and 5
X Measured fields 1,4and5
. . . . Predicted fields 2 and 5
200
o Measured fields 2 and 3

0 I I
"5 4 5
Speed(mile/h)
Fig. 5. lncrease of draught variation with speed in simulated top link sensing mode
M. J. D W Y E R ; D. A. C R O L L A ; G. P E A R S O N 157

between experimental results obtained in different fields and, therefore, as with the theoretical
lines, no attempt has been made to distinguish between individual fields. The results should be
considered as a band of replicate measurements. The trend of the experimental results is as
predicted and although there is some scatter due to random errors, the agreement between the
experimental results and theoretical prediction is sufficient to suggest that the assumptions which
have been made were generally valid.
Fig. 5 shows similar relationships for the simulated top link sensing mode of control. This mode
was more sensitive to differences between fields. The two heavier fields 2 and 3, were similar to
each other and resulted in larger draught variations than the three lighter fields. This was
correctly predicted by the theoretical analysis and, although the experimental scatter was wider
with this mode of control, the agreement between the experimental results and theoretical
predictions was again satisfactory.

1600

1400 x

1200

I000

g
80<
>
z-
60(
o
x
I23
,Predicted
X ,Meosured
400

200

I I I I I [ I
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
D~dbond (Ib)
Fig. 6. bwrease in draught variation with dead-band in pure draught sensing mode

All the results in Figs 4 and 5 are for 800 and 1200 lb dead-bands, therefore, comparison
between the two figures shows that, for the same dead-band, a lower draught variation was
predicted for the simulated top link sensing mode than for the pure draught sensing mode in
fields l, 4 and 5 and a similar draught variation in fields 2 and 3. This was supported by the
experimental results.
Figs 6 and 7 show the relationship between draught variation and dead-band for the two modes
averaged over the three speeds. For the pure draught sensing mode (Fig. 6) there was again very
little difference between fields and no attempt has been made to distinguish either between
theoretical lines or experimental results for individual fields. Satisfactory agreement was obtained
between experimental results and theoretical predictions. Draught variations were larger than
the corresponding dead-band except when the dead-band was increased to 1200 lb, when control
was virtually non-existent. This shows that when the draught went outside the dead-band the
158 TRACTOR DRAUGHT CONIROI.S

resulting rate of lift or rate of plough penetration produced by the control was insufficient to
compensate fully for the rate of change of draught.
With simulated top link sensing (Fig. 7) predicted draught variations in fields 2 and 3 were again
different from fields 1, 4 and 5 and this was supported by the experimental results. However,
agreement between experimental results and theoretical prediction was worse than for the pure
draught sensing mode. Although it was satisfactory for small dead-bands the theory over-
estimated the rate of increase of draught variation with dead-band. In fields 1,4 and 5 draught
variations were less than the corresponding dead-band. This was possible with simulated top-link
sensing because as soon as the plough began to go deeper or shallower a vertical soil force was
sensed and a correction was made before the draught had gone outside the dead-band. It is this
ability to sense vertical force, which is proportional to rate of change of depth rather than depth
itself which makes conventional sensing more sensitive than pure draught sensing with the same
dead-band.

1600
.,4

1400

//
1200 o / / // / o

I000

g
8OO

600
o
¢-,,
× ×
400
x
Predicted fields 1,4 and 5
X Measured fields 1,4and 5
200
____ Predicted fields 2 and 3
o Measured fields 2 and 3

o 1 I I I I I I
200 400 600 800 I000 1200 1400 1600
Deadband (Ib)
Fig. 7. Increase in draught variation with dead-band in simulated top link sensing mode

Figs 8 and 9 show the relationship between draught variations and rate of lift averaged over
three speeds. At lower rates of lift a difference between fields 2 and 3 and fields 1, 4 and 5 was
predicted in the pure draught sensing mode (Fig. 8), as well as in the simulated top link sensing
mode (Fig. 9) and this was supported by the experimental results. Agreement between experi-
mental results and theoretical predictions was adequate for the pure draught sensing mode and
for the simulated top link sensing mode in fields 2 and 3. However, in field 4 the rate of increase
in draught variation with reduction in rate of lift was over-estimated by the theory and the
experimental results in field 1 at the two lower rates of lift were far too high. No results were
available in field 5.
The theory predicted that the tractor engine would stall at 5 mile/h with the maximum dead-
band and the minimum rate of lift in both modes in fields 2 and 3. This was supported by the
M. J . DWYER" D. A. CROLLA; G. PEARSON 159

experimental results in field 3 but not in field 2. Experimental points have not been plotted in Figs
8 and 9 for the minimum rate of lift in field 3.

5. Stability
Figs 6-9 show that the performance of a draught control can be improved by reducing the
dead-band and by increasing the rate of lift. With the control used in this work the rate of lift
was limited to 10.8 in/s by the size of the hydraulic components but the dead-band could be
reduced almost to zero. However, as stated previously, the minimum dead-band was limited in
practice to that at which the control remained stable. The performance of commercial controls is
also limited in this way.

2400
\ "\
\\
2200 \ \
o \ \\ ,,
2000 \ \
\ \
18OO k\ \\ o
\b,
1600
\ \
\\ \
1400
g
B
1200
>

T=
2 IO00
CZ1

800

600 ×

--Predicted fields 1,4ond 5

400 x Measuredfields 1,4and5
Predicted fields2 and 5
0 Measured fields 2 and 3
200

0 I 1
4 8 L2
Rate of tiff ( i n / s )
Fig. 8. Decrease in draught variation with rate o f lift in pure draught sensing mode

The cause of instability is most easily understood when considering operation in position
control, i.e. when the hydraulic valve was controlled by an input from the linkage position. In
this mode the dead-band was expressed as a movement of the linkage. If a new linkage position
was selected on the set-point control, the valve opened and the linkage was moved towards the
position corresponding to the new set-point. When it was again within the dead-band the sensor
on the linkage transmitted a signal to close the valve. However, there was inevitably some delay
before the valve closed. With the experimental control used in this work the delay time was
0-05 s. The delay times of commercial controls are generally between 0.05 and 0.15 s. I f the rate
of linkage movement was fast enough and the dead-band was small enough the linkage passed
right through the dead-band during the delay time. The valve was then actuated in the opposite
160 TRACTOR DRAUGHT(ONJ ROLS
direction and the process was repeated indefinitely with the linkage oscillating up and down with a
periodic time between one and two times the delay. Therefore, in the position mode, control was
unstable if
dead-band<delay x rate of lift
and with a delay of 0.05 s and a rate of lift of I0.8 in/s, the theoretical minimum dead-band was
0-5 in. In practice the minimum was found to be 1 in probably because of the linkage being
unrestrained in the upward direction and, therefore, able to bounce upwards during sudden
reversals of movement.

2600

2400

2200 x
0
2000

1800 \\\ o
\\
1600

.~ 1400
4--
._a
>a 1200 o

,~ iooo

8OO

600 I
x Predicfed fields 1,5
4and~ x
400 x Measured fields 1,4and5
------ Predicted fields 2and 5
o Measured fields 2 and 5
200 ~

I I L
4 8 12
Rate of hff (m/s)
Fig. 9. Decrease in draught variation with rate o f lift in simulated top link sensing mode

In the pure draught sensing mode, where dead-band is expressed as force, stability depended on
the rate of increase of draught with depth as well as on delay, dead-band and rate of lift. Control
was unstable if
dead-band<delay × rate of lift × rate of increase of draught with depth.
The rate of increase of draught with depth was non-linear but a linear approximation was made
for small depth variations about the mean and this was found to vary from 260 lb/in in field 1
to 450 lb/in in field 2. Thus, with a delay of 0.05 s and a rate of lift of 10.8 in/s, the estimated
minimum dead-band was 150 lb in field l and 270 lb in field 2. It was found from experience that
M..1. DWYER; D. A. C R O L L A ; G. P E A R S O N 161

a dead-band of approximately 400 lb was the smallest practical value for continuous work in a
reasonable range of field conditions. This had to be higher than the theoretical value to allow for
random variations in soil resistance.
Stability in the simulated top-link sensing mode depended on vertical force rather than draught
force. Since vertical force depended on the rate of movement of the plough rather than on depth
it changed instantaneously as soon as the valve opened. Previous work ~ has shown that vertical
movement of a plough in the soil produces a vertical soil force approximately equal to
draught force × rate of vertical movement
forward speed
The vertical force produced was reversed as soon as the direction of movement was reversed
and always tended to induce movement in the opposite direction. The criterion for stability in
this mode was, therefore, independent of the delay and control was unstable if
2 × draught force × rate of vertical movement
vertical force dead-band<
forward speed
Assuming that the rate of vertical movement was the maximum, i.e. 10.8 in/s, and that draught
force was the mean draught, the predicted minimum vertical force dead-band varied from 524 lb
at 5 mile/h in field 5 to 1070 lb at 3 mile/h in fields 7 and 8. In practice the minimum vertical
force dead-band was found by experience to be 400 lb and it is assumed that this smaller value
was possible because the maximum rate of lift of 10-8 in/s was not achieved instantaneously and,
therefore, a lower value would have been more appropriate in the calculations.

6. Conclusions
The work has shown that, for artificial sinusoidal inputs, the performance of the experimental
control could be adequately predicted in different modes and with different dead-bands and rates
of lift. Agreement between experimental and theoretical results was closer in the pure draught
sensing mode than in the simulated top-link sensing mode because of the added difficulty of
predicting the vertical soil forces. However, despite the scatter in the results, it was possible to
predict the trends in the relationships between draught variation and forward speed, dead-band
and rate of lift. No clear differences in performance between pure draught sensing and simulated
top-link sensing were found. With the same dead-band and rate of lift in each mode simulated
top-link sensing allowed less draught variation than did pure draught sensing in three out of five
fields and in the other two fields the variation was similar in both modes. However, pure draught
sensing was more stable and, therefore, allowed a smaller dead-band to be used. With the smallest
stable dead-band in each mode draught variations were similar.
Figs 4 and 5 show how draught variations are likely to increase at speeds above 5 mile/h unless
control parameters are improved. Figs 6-9 show how control can be improved by reducing dead-
band and increasing rate of lift. However, the scope for improving control in these ways are
limited by stability and possible driver discomfort. Instability was defined as the hunting which
occurs when the rate of lift is sufficient to allow the sensed parameter to pass through the dead-
band during the delay time. With position or pure draught sensing control this means that the
delay time must be reduced before performance can be improved. With conventional top or
lower-link sensing, however, which are sensitive to vertical soil forces, reducing the delay time will
not help because vertical soil force is proportional to rate of lift and is, therefore, produced as
soon as the implement begins to move vertically in the soil. Thus, the only effect of delay time on
a top or lower-link sensing control is to determine the frequency of hunting but not the minimum
dead-band or maximum rate of lift. These are determined by the draught force and the forward
speed only. The lower the draught force and the higher the forward speed the easier it is to
maintain stability and, therefore, the smaller the dead-band and the higher the rate of lift which
162 TRACTOR I)RAUGtt'I CONTROLS

can be used. However, the benefits of a higher forward speed cannot easily be obtained. It would
not be practical to design a control which was only stable at high forward speeds since one could
not guarantee that it would always be possible to work at a sufficiently high speed and even if one
could it would still be necessary to pass through the lower speeds at which control would be
unstable.
Even if instability is avoided there is still a possibility that reducing dead-band and increasing
rate of lift to improve control may lead to driver discomfort due to frequent and rapid corrections.
This could be partially overcome by adopting a proportional control valve in place of the on-off
valve used in this work. However, the more precise the control which is required and the higher
the forward speed the higher must be the vertical accelerations of the implement. The only
solution, therefore, appears to be to isolate the driver from the impacts caused by these sudden
accelerations. Fortunately, this is already happening by means of suspended seats and ultimately
it is expected that suspended cabs or vehicle suspensions will be adopted, although satisfactory
implement control with a vehicle suspension may be difficult to achieve unless the implement is
hitched to the unsprung parts.
The implications of this work for the design of future implement controls are that performance
must be improved if the present standard of control is to be maintained at higher forward speeds.
Pure draught sensing does not appear to be better than top or lower link sensing controls with the
same dead-band and rate of lift, but, if delay time can be reduced, it does provide scope for
reducing dead-band and increasing rate of lift without encountering instability problems.
The performance of top or lower-link sensing controls may be maintained at higher speeds by
increasing rate of lift but this will lead to instability at lower speeds. A possible solution is to
design a control with rate of lift proportional to forward speed, which could be achieved by
driving the hydraulic pump at a speed proportional to forward speed rather than engine speed.
Some means of lifting the implement with the tractor stationary would be required so that it
would be necessary either to design the hydraulic pump drive so that it ran at constant speed
below a certain forward speed or that it changed to constant speed when position control was
selected in preference to draught control. Consideration is being given to such a control for a
higher powered tractor designed for working at higher forward speed.
Another modification which would be beneficial in obtaining better performance without
instability would be to design the control so that the dead-band was variable and proportional to
draught force. This is probably not possible with hydro-mechanical controls but might be possible
with an electro-hydraulic control as used in this work. Experience indicates that a rate of lift
equal to 1/6 of the forward speed and a dead-band equal to 1/3 of the draught force should be
satisfactory in maintaining the present standard of control at higher speeds without producing
instability.
The work described here was restricted to a fully mounted mouldboard plough on light soil
with an artificial sinusoidal draught disturbance input. Further work is being carried out on a
wider variety of soils with cultivators and a semi-mounted mouldboard plough as well as the fully
mounted plough and using naturally occurring random draught variation inputs. The computer
simulation is being adapted to predict the performance of the experimental control with random
inputs over the same range of variable parameters as in the work described here.

REFERENCES

1 Cowell, P. A.; Len, S. C. Field performance of tractor draught control systems. J. agric. Engng Res.,
1967 12 (3) 205
2 Dwyer, M. J.; Rogie, D. A survey of control requirements and unscheduled stops during tillage operations,
part H: ploughs, cultivators and rotary cultivators 1971-72. N.I.A.E. Departmental note DN/CT/
272/1261, 1972
3 Harries, G. O. An electro-hydraulic servo for investigating methods of controlling the working depth of a
tractor-mounted implement. N.I.A.E. Departmental note DN/CT/084/1410, 1971
M. J. DWYER; D, A. CROLLA; G. PEARSON 163

4 Scholtz, D. C. A three-point linkage dynamometer for restrained linkages. J. agric. Engng Res., 1966 I 1
(1) 33
s Cowell, P. A. Automatic control of tractor mounted implements. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., 1969-70 184
part 3Q
6 Dwyer, M. J. The dynanfic performance of tractor-implement combinations. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng.,
1969-70 184 part 3Q
7 Dwyer, M. J. The effect of draught control response on the performance of agricultural tractors. J. agric.
Engng Res., 1969 14 (4) 295

Appendix
Computer model
The input statements for the Continuous System Modelling Programme (CSMP) are shown
below. The three relationships that must be read in to the function generating section are:
(a) F U N C T I O N H D C - - H o r i z o n t a l or draught force/depth.
(b) F U N C T I O N VDC--Vertical force/depth.
(c) F U N C T I O N SLIPUL--Slip/traction coefficient.
These are the three relationships which describe the field. The other function required is the
torque/speed curve for the tractor engine.
The constants A and B are also required and they are obtained from a FORTRAN program.
The input parameters necessary for this program are the H D C and VDC functions and details of
the linkage geometry.

5OOO

Horizonfol
force 2500
(Ib)

2O0O

Verficol
force 500 __/L
1000 i - ~
/
I 0 0 ~ -
Engine
forque
(Ib ff)

5O
ForwOrd
speed
(in/s)

Slip(%)

I
0 2 4 6 8
Time (s)

Fig. 10. Example of results of computer simulation

164 TRACTOR DRAUGHT CONTROLS

H a v i n g inserted in the C S M P program information to specify the field, the following

parameters of the control can be set:
ROLIF rate of lift
DB dead-band
S E T H , SETV horizontal and vertical set-points
GR gear ratio
ENSPO governed engine speed
N the ratio of horizontal a n d vertical force sensing
ECC the tractor wheel eccentricity
D1, D2 the delay time for lowering/lifting
The results from the s i m u l a t i o n runs are available either printed or print-plotted against time
a n d a typical set of results is shown in Fig. 10. A n y of the variables used in the m a i n p r o g r a m m e
can be plotted b u t these five give the best overall picture of tractor performance. The oscillations
of horizontal force after 5 s in Fig. 10 are due to rapid operation of the control valve.
A t the time of this work a delay f u n c t i o n was not available to the authors and, therefore,
instability could not be investigated on the c o m p u t e r model. It will, however, be included in
future work.

CSMP I N P U T LISTING
TITLE T R A C T O R - I M P L E M E N T DYNAMICS D . A . CROLLA N.I.A.E.
TITLE F O R D 5000 FIELD 8 GREENFIELD
CONSTANT ECC : 2.0, L = 136.0, W 82.0, L1 : 50.0, L2 32-0, R : 27.5, PLWT -- 1200
CONSTANT RRC -- 0.1, ENSPO -- 209-0, WT = 8570.0, EFFCY -- 0.95, G = 32.2
CONSTANT IE ~ 0.83, I W R 142-0, IWF -- 6.6, R F -- 11-5
P A R A M E T E R A = ll.4, B -- 0.039, R O L I F = --12-0
P A R A M E T E R DB = 1000.0, N --- 2.0, SETH 2620.0, SETV 1320-0, G R 99.0
INITIAL
D DB/2.0
DYNAMIC
YW : ECC*COS(ROT)
YI : YW*L/W
DY1DT : DERIV(0-0, YI)
C2 ~- C I * D E L T + Y I
NSSP - ENSP*(R+YW)/(GR*I20)
-

WHSP ENSP/GR - -

ROT : INTGRL(0'0, WHSP)

MAXTQ ~ A F G E N (TORQSP, ENSP)
ENSP I N T G R L (ENSPO, ENAC)
- -

PULL : H O R F + R R C * O N T ÷ V E R F )
TORQ : PULL*(R+YW)/(GR*EFFCY*I2-0)
ENAC : FCNSW (BI, B2, A3, B4)
Bl = ENSP--ENSPO
B4 = -TORQ/TQE
B2 = (MAXTQ-TORQ)/IQE
YO - Y I N ÷ Y T
VERFD A F G E N (VDC, Y0)
VERF = VERFD--(HORF*DYINDT)/(SPEED*I2.0)
W R -- (LI*WT÷VERF*L)/W
HORF A F G E N (HDC, Y0)
TCOEF HORF/WR - -

SLIP A F G E N (SLIPUL, TC)

M. J. I)WYER; D. A. C R O L L A ; G. PEARSON 165

TC DELAY(I,0"025, T C O E F )
SPEED -= N S S P * ( I ' 0 - - S L I P )
R O L O W X -- B * ( A - - Y I - - Y T ) * S P E E D * 1 2 ' 0
CI ROLOWX--DYIDT
YIN -- I N S W ( C I , C2, YI)
D Y I N D T - - D E R I V (0"0, YIN)
SIGNAL HDIFF ÷(VDIFF*N)
SIGDEL D E L A Y (lif0, 0"01, S I G N A L )
H D I F F :- H O R F - - S E T H
VDIFF - SETV--VERF
A1 DEADSP (--D,D, SIGNAL)
DI : D E L A Y (10, 0"01, A I )
D2 ~: D E L A Y (75, 0'075, A I )
YT INTGR.L (7-0, D Y T D T )
DYTDT F C N S W (A1, A2, 0'0, A4)
A2 I N S W (D1, R O L O W , 0'0)
A4 : ~ F C N S W (D2, 0'0, 0"0, R O L I F )
R O L O W ~ B*(A--Y0)*SPEED*I2"0
MV2 - ( W T ÷ P L W T ) * S P E E D * S P E E D / ( G * E N S P * E N S P )
RIWF 2"0*IWF*SPEED*SPEED* 144"0/((RF*EN SP) **2)
IQE , M V 2 + I E + ( 2 - 0 * I W R * G R ) ÷ R I W F
FUNCTION H D C ~ (0"0, 0"0), (8'0, 2000'0), (9"0, 2280"0) 1 . . .
(10'0, 2620"0), 10"5, 2880"0), (11"0, 3350"0), (11'2, 4500"0)
FUNCTION VDC ~ (0"0, 1200"0), (2'0, 1340"0), (4"0, 1440"0)1...
(6"0, 1500"0), (8"0, 1500"0), (9'0, 1430"0) . . . .
(10"0, 1320"0), (11"0, 1150"0), (12"0, 750"0)
FUNCTION S L I P U L - (0'0, 0"0), (0"1, 0'025), (0"2, 0"05) . . . .
(0"3, 0"08), (0"4, 0-12), (0"5, 0"17), (0"6, 0"23) . . . .
(0"7, 0'32), (0"8, 0'47), (0"85, 0-64), (0"9, I'0)
FUNCTION T O R Q S P -- (50"0, 177-5), (75"0, 186"0), (100"0, 190'7) . . . .
(125"0, 192"0), (150"0, 190"7), (175'0, 186.5) . . . .
(200"0, 177'0), (225"0, 167"5)
METHOD RKSFX
TIMER FINT1M : 7"5, D E L T = 0"001, P R D E L = 0"01, O U T D E L = 0'1
FINISH SLIP 1"0, ENSP = 50'0
PRINT AI, DI, D2, S I G N A L , S I G D E L , T C O E F , TC, D Y T D T
PRTPLT H O R F , VERF, T O R Q , SPEED, SLIP
END
STOP
***EXECUTION PHASE S T A R T E D O N 12/07/72 01:01:51