Which came 1st -APS or the Rotary Separator? - The Combine Forum
Register Home Forum Active Topics Gallery Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 10-09-2010, 12:07 AM   #1 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
kirschenman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,404
Default Which came 1st -APS or the Rotary Separator?

After spending some time running a CX840, and having a demo 580R 2 years ago, I ask the question -who skirted whose patents?

It seems that the APS (Lexion) /rotary separator (NH) are almost identical in design, just different in placement. Does anyone know when the APS came in the Lexions? I assume that the TX was the 1st NH to employ a rotary separator.


If you were comparing walker to walker, where is the best location for the extra cylinder? Lexion likes APS to condition the crop mat before the threshing cylinder and get an initial thresh on easy crops, but NH likes the RS in order to get 50 to 80% separated before the walkers.

No fighting, and no talk of the rotary Lexions.
__________________
Increase in Marketing > Increase in Yield > Increase in Land Base

Diverse crop rotation, increased residue retention and minimized tillage will increase yield and crop health more than anything we can spray or spread at litres or pounds per acre.

http://andgronomy.blogspot.ca/
kirschenman is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 10-09-2010, 12:17 AM   #2 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
kirschenman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,404
Default

Update -CX brochure says 1st rotary separator was on the NH 1550 in Europe in 1973.
__________________
Increase in Marketing > Increase in Yield > Increase in Land Base

Diverse crop rotation, increased residue retention and minimized tillage will increase yield and crop health more than anything we can spray or spread at litres or pounds per acre.

http://andgronomy.blogspot.ca/
kirschenman is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 10-09-2010, 12:36 AM   #3 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,188
Default

After running tx's for I don't know how many years and cx's for seven years the aps is in the way better spot. It ability to smooth out the crop flow before it hits the main treshing cyclinder makes it much easier to run the machine at capacity without the engine load bouncing all over the place. In canola is where it really makes the biggest difference in lumpy swaths and in wads there is just no comparison. I'm sure some of it has to do with the hydraulic pressure breakaway on the concave but the aps still makes a bigger difference. I don't think the rotary seperator is a bad idea I just think the cx would be better off with it up front as well. The other good part about the aps is that is runs slower than the main treshing cylinder, therefore making crop acceleration a lot more gentle than from going straight from the feeder house into the main threshing cylinder which is why we are able to run way higher cylinder speeds with our lexions and still not crack canola. Which of course the cx's are well know for, although not as bad as the tx's. The only thing that makes my opinion a little bit off is that of course we have rotors behind so I can't comment on what system puts more grain over the walkers. A combine specialist from claas told me that the claas rotaries save a lot more grain than the claas walkers. So take that for what it's worth. I can say for sure that the claas system is a lot better and smoother at taking the crop in.
mbfarmer is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 10-09-2010, 12:52 AM   #4 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
kirschenman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,404
Default

I was picking up swathed cereals that had rain on them this afternoon and I really noticed the fluctuating engine load in that. Probably would be different with something with more than 290hp, but still it was very noticeable. I didn't remember that when running the 580R in swaths. Maybe an APS in front with a rotary separator behind would make a wicked walker machine. Don't let Deere read that though, they might have to copy it!
__________________
Increase in Marketing > Increase in Yield > Increase in Land Base

Diverse crop rotation, increased residue retention and minimized tillage will increase yield and crop health more than anything we can spray or spread at litres or pounds per acre.

http://andgronomy.blogspot.ca/
kirschenman is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 10-10-2010, 12:51 AM   #5 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,188
Default

I agree with your thinking. If losses out the back is an issue maybe another cylinder would help. I don't think it would be any worse with less hp but picking up a swath will make it worse than straight cutting with a smooth feeding draper head. I bet having a draper head alone would give you a greater increase in capacity in a cx than it would in a lexion.
mbfarmer is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply


Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the The Combine Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:34 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0