1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172 
Management matters
Page 96
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
continued ment is classified as manual, mechanized or "latent movement" (when lifting, loading and conveyance are associated with technological processes and are specific operations of a particular piece of equipment).
The movement frequency factor defines the essential number of movements of an unpacked unit of weight of a finished product during the production process. The flow diagram of the material shows the path followed by the material and the location of successive stages in movement. The quantity, volume and nature of the commodity transported, direction and length of haul, specific productivity, and designation of objects in the path of the movement can be recorded in diagrammatic or tabular form.
Movement classification
Materials movement may be classified into loading operations and transport operations, the latter showing the direction of movement. There will be many on-farm movements of materials both within farm buildings and on the farm itself. The movements of commodities from the farm and to the farm suggest the classification of movement of materials in terms of the nature of the commodities moved The ECE study suggests under this heading such items as grain, coarse fodder and silage, root crops and tubers, farmyard manure, mineral fertilizers, liquid (chemical products, fuels and lubricants), fruit and vegetables and other materials (including livestock, machines and building materials).
Another classification of materials movement is in terms of the type of basic machinery and equipment employed Thus, transport may be by means of tractors and yarious types of trailer equipped with additional devices for facilitating loading and unloading operations. Basically, lorries and semi-trailers are used for the same purposes as farm-used trailers. Other transport facilities—the study refers mainly to Europe —include various types of cart, rail, and cable-cars. Where the movement of materials using mechanical handling devices is horizontal, vertical or inclined this should be tabulated.
The Hungarian delegation suggested that output in respect of materials movement in the transport and loading activity should be defined in specific units. Equally, the material-moving capacity of individual items of equipment and the utilization factor should be expressed.
This detailed analytical method is followed throughout the ECE study. They suggest the importance of the rate of materials movement in terms of speed and time—whether this involves a lorry on a public highway, a tractor on a farm road or the rate of hoist by a grab-loader in metres per second. They have even worked out movement frequency factors for farms equipped with efficient loading, unloading and transport equipment in terms of grain, coarse fodder and root crops and tubers.
Agricultural hauliers in Britain will not be surprised to learn that in Europe immobili zation due to waiting, turn-round and move ment of vehicles, together with other stoppages, accounted for between 30 and 40 per cent of total working time of vehicles serv ing granaries on the Continent. The matching of the load capacity of vehicles serving the granary to its capacity (30 an hour in one study) is suggested. Perhaps this is rather too theoretical an approach to be practical in British agriculture, though it is difficult to fault the logic.
Certainly, one cannot object to the plea that plant used in agricultural enterprises to move mineral fertilizers should conform in type to the technical equipment used by the manufacturer—loading platform, power trucks, compressed air loading heads, etc. It was also interesting to note that "where mineral fertilizers are transported and stored in containers, the technological process can be simply related to the spreading machines by transloading the containers on to them in the course of field work". The use of container methods for loading and transporting fruit cuts working time by 30-35 percent.
The degree of mechanization in agriculture in relation to the loading and off-load ing of vehicles is only about 15 per cent even in advanced countries like Britain. Agricultural hauliers here, I suspect, would endorse the conclusions of the ECE team in lamenting the lack of "rational loading machines: a considerable amount of manual labour is still employed to carry out loading operations".
Another interesting point is that the ratio of trailers to lorries in Europe averages 2:3 but technical developments in train are, like ly to reduce this ratio to 1:1 during the next decade. As progress towards this ratio de pends upon the creation of more good quality farm road networks British trailer makers interested in exports would be well advised to cultivate their market intelligence, with particular reference to possible government subsidies for farm roads.
The increase in articulation foreseen by the ECE team will not go unchallenged.
was interested to hear of the ambitious development plans of the Finnish Autolava OY company from Mr. Michael Green wood, managing director of Multilift Ltd. (of Broughton, Harmer Hill, Shrewsbury) who is introducing the Multilift and Multiloader demountable body system here. Now used in 13 countries in Europe, the system is well proved and offers the possibility of really intensive use of prime movers.
The Multilift system is available in three standard sizes for loads of 8, 12 and 16 tons and it is claimed that the 8-ton unit fitted to a 12-ton g.v.w. chassis adds only 15cwt to the chassis weight, allowing a legal payload of 7.3 tons. Payload with the 12-ton unit chassis weight is approximately 9.2 tons— the 16-ton equipment on a six-wheeled chassis is suitable for 20ft ISO containers.
With this equipment the loading and unloading sequence takes no more than three minutes, only the driver being employed. With the Multilift sub-frame fitted one vehicle can be used to haul almost any type of body the working arrangement of Multilift Ltd. with the Salop Trailer Company Ltd. of Shrewsbury, seems particularly happy, and this company—blessed with a highly competent design team—is building a variety of bodies for Multilift customers.
Of course, demountable bodies can be used for many operations. Mr. Greenwood and his general sales manager, Mr. Norman Eden, were bursting with ideas for utilization in many fields. They are making progress with municipalities—one I heard of is using no fewer than 16 bodies with one Multilift-equipped vehicle—and see scope for its use not only in agriculture, but for plant hire work, scrap collection, building materials, civil engineering, timber and forestry, public services and—not least— for hauling ISO containers.
Multilift Ltd. is selling a bulk loading concept—the receptiveness of some industries contrasts greatly with the conservatism of others. Such firms are agents of the revolution that is making road transport and its many ancillary operations efficient. I hope before long the RTITB's MOTEC at High Ercall will be training thousands of drivers to use swop and demountable body systems, side by side with modern rigid and artic vehicles. The market for all transport equipment is wide open. One must hand it to a small Finnish company with 200 employees who are helping to change transport operations in 13 countries— including Britain.