User: Guest  Login
Original title:
Möglichkeiten des stufenlosen Fahrantriebes im Ackerschlepper
Author:
Bauereisen, Werner
Information about the author:
Bei Interesse an dieser Arbeit zur ausschließlich wissenschaftlichen Nutzung wenden Sie sich bitte an den Lehrstuhl
Home page of the author:
Lehrstuhl für Agrarsystemtechnik
Year:
1996
Document type:
Diplomarbeit
Institution:
Fakultät Wissenschaftszentrum Weihenstephan
University:
Technische Universität München
Place of Publication:
Freising-Weihenstephan
Advisor:
Dr. M. Demmel
Referee:
Prof. Dr. H. Auernhammer
Format:
Text
Language:
de
Subject group:
LAN Landbauwissenschaft
Controlled terms (agricultural engineering):
Traktor; Antriebs- und Anbausystem; Getriebe; Bauart; Bewertung
Abstract:
Zusammenfassend läßt sich sagen, daß der hydrostatische Schlepperantrieb aufgrund seines schlechten Wirkungsgrades keine Chance auf dem Ackerschleppermarkt haben wird, seine bisherige reine Nischenfunktion auszubauen und sich einen nennenswerten Marktanteil zu erobern. Dem Antrieb mit mechanischem Kettenwandler muß dagegen aufgrund seines hervorragenden Wirkungsgrades durchaus die Möglichkeit der Verbreitung in der landwirtschaftlichen Praxis zugesprochen werden. Leistungsverzweigte Getriebe b...     »
Translated abstract:
This article is about the different possibilities of variable tractor transmission. To start with, the transmission of the TT 350 VS MB from Horsch Maschinen GmbH, hydrostatic tractor transmission is explained. Additionally, the explanation of the transmission with infinitely variable chain drive is explained. The transmission of the "Munich Research Tractor" is used as an example for the use of this technology. In accordance with this, the possibility of the principal of "Leistungsverzweigung" for the use of a various tractor transmission will be introduced. As examples of the current usage: - HM-8-transmission by CLAAS, - S-Matic-transmission by Steyr-Daimler-Puch AG, - SVG-transmission by Zahnradfabrik Passau, - Vario-transmission by Xaver Fendt GmbH & Co. Optimal efficiency is the most important factor in assessing the various methods, because these constructions only have a chance on the market if they can reach the level of efficiency of the currently dominating full power shift transmissions. The hydrostatic transmission doesn't stand a chance on the market because its optimal efficiency is 20 % under the demand. On the other hand the 1 transmission with infinitely variable chain drive has the ability to become widely used because its efficiency is above the target by 4 %. It isn't possible to assess the different constructions with the principal of "Leistungsverzweigung”. The CLAAS solution is a very good way of using this principal, because it reaches the efficiency target apart from 3 small speed units. This is around 1 km/h. On the other hand the S-Matic-transmission cannot utilize the high expenditure and misses the target by far. An assessment of solutions by Fendt and ZF wasn't possible because the necessary efficiency tests hadn't been done or not yet published. The conclusion is that a competitive various tractor transmission by the principal of "Leistungsverzweigung" is producible, though expensive and difficult.
Source (agricultural engineering):
Lehrstuhl für Landtechnik / Archiv
WWW:
https://mediatum.ub.tum.de/?id=1449473
Date of submission:
21.10.1996
File size:
9345352 bytes
Pages:
111
Last change:
03.11.2018
 BibTeX