[f_armer]

I am curious as to what number you are all running in the grain loss monitors.
Are they accurate enough between machines to set them all the same, running multiple combines, or does each machine have to have its own cal, depending on grain loss.
I realize this might be a hard question because of all different crops and conditions.
I have a 2005 9760sts, im not sure if the 70 series have the same sensitivity or not.
example I have been combing red lentils, grain loss monitor set on the middle seed size, I have my cal number right at 50, seems about right for my conditions.
for durum wheat I will have it around 45, but that is going from memory, it may be different this year.
raining right now, i guess im bored.

 

[phantom970]

Usually 40 for everything except canola. Might take it down to 30 then. Been told iam abit tight on grain loss tho and should increase the number and get things going faster !!

 

[Don Boles]

Monitors have greatly evolved!

raining right now, i guess im bored.

No kidding.
On the other hand, it's kind of an interesting poll.

I'm old enough to remember when aftermarket grain loss monitors first came out, the sophistication the units offer today is mind numbing by comparison.

 

[hondaman]

I really wish the loss monitors were tied in to ground speed, as slowing down and getting a lower reading on monitor does not necessarily mean less loss/distance travelled. I might have half the amount of seeds hitting sensors /second, but if I cut my ground speed in half to get to that point actual loss would still be the same. Maybe some machines do take speed into consideration, but CNH does not.

 

[gopherchoker]

S sieries we run forty as max and down to as little as 13 for canola.

 

[hondaman]

S sieries we run forty as max and down to as little as 13 for canola.

I don't run John Deere, so help me out. Which will show a higher loss reading? A setting of 10 or 90

 

[gopherchoker]

Higher is less sensitive thus hides losses. General rule used to be if it is set at 50 it takes 50 hits over a certain period to = one bar on the bar graph.

 

[the geeze]

No kidding.
On the other hand, it's kind of an interesting poll.

I'm old enough to remember when aftermarket grain loss monitors first came out, the sophistication the units offer today is mind numbing by comparison.

Come on Don weren't those Smith Roles units ahead of their time lol calibration was easy tapped the sensors with a pen to see if the needle moved

 

[Don Boles]

Higher is less sensitive thus hides losses.

Dumb.
At least Claas is higher reads higher. Linearly.

 

[rod]

My question to all on this matter is: how do you know what "cal number" or that "position in the funnel", really means?
What does it mean insofar as actual grain loss in weight, or percentage of yield or, & inclusive of, harvester efficiency?
If you go dead slow, you may or may not, have very little loss - but at what cost in harvester efficiency?
If you go faster, you may or may not, have more loss - but a much greater harvester efficiency?
There is always a trade-off between maximising harvester efficiency (reducing cost per weight of harvested grain) & the amount of grain loss.
No harvester looses no grain!
So the question is: how do you really measure the grain loss & harvester efficiency at the same time?

 

[Highmarker]

So many variables that the number really doesn't mean much. Moisture of the grain and straw and temp changes things daily. We tend to run the meter right in the middle do the green zone and the cal number around 25 but I check out the back regularly and the combiners push the cal button at the same time as I take the sample.

 

[rod]

As I understand it moisture of the grain, straw or temp has zero effect..... They simply count the number of kernels going out the back and translate that into a moving bar graph. ... I also don't see how speed has any effect. .... Case funnels with just a couple of readings that change so quick it's kinda hard to sometimes know what's going on precisely. I'm I thinning this through clearly that speed and crop conditions don't affect this, or am I overlooking something?

I also didn't think speed was somehow compensated for the loss -basically it's taps on the pad it counts, no matter what speed - I would have thought. But I've been wrong before.
Great if NH - Case would place a spot where you could adjust the registry number of each pad. One pad on one rotor always reads higher than the other on my CR. There's no difference in loss or any setup difference between each side, so it has to be a slight difference in the pad.

 

[regency]

Just curious....Do any of you get much for readings from your shoe pads? I am on our third sts and all three have never shown much more than one or two bars. Have went so far as maximizing the sensitivity for them. Had the mechanic out once working on the machine and I was complaining about this. We set the machine to throw everything over the shoe and it never did show on the monitor. Tests and tapping on the pads indicated they were working. Mechanic talked to Deere and was told that the sts's dont loose any grain out the cleaning system. We both had a good chuckle over that.

 

[hondaman]

Why again would you want it to be speed compensated? How would that help or be more accurate? It's showing you a bu/ac loss based on the settings your provide it, how would speed give you more accurate loss counting? Not sure I follow.

Interesting discussion.

It does not give you a bu/ac loss if it is not tied into ground speed. As an example you are going 4mph and your monitor is in the middle of the green and you check the ground and you are satisfied. Now you speed up 25% to 5mph your monitor turns red and you think you are throwing more over when in fact you might not be, remember you are now allowed 25% more kernels/sec. to be activating your pads before your /acre loss actually goes up. No different than a sprayer with automatic rate control, you speed up the gallons/minute increase, but the gallons/acre stay the same.

 

[lanwickum]

It always seemed tied to speed to me. Maybe wrong, never looked into it. As hondaman stated. It has to be tied to speed to be relevant. That is why even an old dickey john monitor had a speed sensor on it.

 

[Don Boles]

Not sure?

I don't think any loss monitors are ground speed indexed are they?
Not telling, asking.
I'm with Rod on this, not indexing to ground speed would be as dumb as not indexing reel speed to ground speed either.

No harvester looses no grain!
So the question is: how do you really measure the grain loss & harvester efficiency at the same time?

Speak for your own harvester!
I think very few measure grain loss and harvester efficiency Rod, it's a straight % loss at best.

 

[rod]

Speak for your own harvester!
I think very few measure grain loss and harvester efficiency Rod, it's a straight % loss at best.

And I think you would be quite correct in that statement. However, I would think all operators should strive to achieve the maximum harvest efficiency from their combine whilst accounting for the losses.
Maximising combine harvester efficiency is about reducing the cost of harvesting that grain - less (harvest) cost per tonne, whilst accounting for grain loss. I would think this would be the goal. No need to lecture anyone on that.
So how do most operators determine that?
And since you cheekily asked me to "speak for your own" - here goes.
Below are two pics from the just recent rice harvest from my machine. First is the loss tray with what looks like to be a fair amount of grain loss.
Next is a shot from "Harvestcalc" app actually giving the hard numbers.
There are other reports from Harvestcalc that give much more info in determining the most productive & cost efficient rate of harvest whilst accounting for losses.
Since this thread started out about the cal number of peoples loss monitors, you can use this real data from Harvestcalc to make sense & meaning out of those "sensitivity" numbers. In this instance depicted, the number 40 on the sensitivity scale in my CR sieve loss monitor, in rice, equates to 87 grains of sieve loss. It also means, 70.23kg/ha loss. 0.54% loss, & $21.07/ha loss.
Another report give you a cost per tonne, tonne per hour & cost per hectare. Most importantly, these figures take into account the loss.
Just interesting how people determine their loss amount & harvester efficiency without the use of some tools to actually measure it.

 

[hondaman]

fj it sounds like you know the right people with jd, so please quiz them on whether the loss monitor in the S series is indexed to ground speed. The New Holland guys tell me mine is not.

 

[GoGetter]

The JD grain loss monitors have all been indexed for speed, ever since they
were introduced with the Harvestrack monitor in the 9000 series.

 

[Headmech]

heres one for you fellas so ponder
There are two rotor loss sensors i Case IH flagship combines .The results that show up on your grain monitor is an average of the two inputs given to the computer.So how do we get a more precise idea of whats happening in there when we make adjustments from the cab.
Well on diag screen you bring up the sensors and look at the diferent voltages they are producing. This will tell you what side of the rotor has more loss and for me if thats always consistantly more on one side well dont you reckon changing your pinch point could start to even that out.
What do you think??.

Also if you have your machine set for max capacity and you have calibrated your loss monitors after doing your kill stall tests and the like surely the only thing that is going to hike your loss monitors is a change in field conditions. For me they just tell you something has changed and if it continues you have to react by adjusting your machine and or recalibrate your loss monitors by doing those tests stall etc again.

Let me know what you think

Steve