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 
Changes In Vehicle Capacities
Page 90
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
By A. G. DAVIES, FAPHI,MIPC
WITHOUT doubt the main sales market now is for compression-type vehicles, the bodies for the bulk of which are manufactured by about five companies. There are two noticeable factors in the refuse-collectionvehicle field—namely, the sharp decline in sales of the side-loading vehicle (which occurred several years ago) and the even sharper decline currently in the sales of the up-ending-type vehicle. The more rapid decline in the construction and sale of this latter type, especially when without any form of compression, is the result of the more rapid change in the character of refuse which has occurred over the past few years. The tip-ending vehicle is rather heavy and cumbersome for the amount of refuse which it is capable of carrying, and is unlikely to return to favour.
Reverting to the compression-type vehicles mentioned, it is probably true to say that two companies hold between them about 75 per cent of the total sales in this country.
These statements are felt to be a reasonably accurate assessment of the general situation. Nevertheless, a substantial number of lighter-type vehicles have been sold on the British market, and the main sales for these are held by the smaller companies.
Popular demand is currently fulfilled by a vehicle accepting 50 Cu. yd. of refuse in about 19 to 20 Cu. ft. of air space. But in view of the anticipated increase in traffic density, it is questionable whether the obstruction formed by vehicles of this size and upwards will continue to be tolerated.
The objective is to achieve the position whereby body capacity is equal to the task of carrying the whole of the collected refuse by one crew in one session of working—that is, either the whole of the morning or the afternoon. This economic situation is not confined to refuse collection vehicles; it applies equally to motor buses, commercial trucks and vans, and in this regard we in the cleansing services are merely keeping pace with a situation faced in other spheres in so far as economic circumstances are concerned.
It is now possible to produce a vehicle slightly -longer, wider and higher, and already some companies are turning their minds towards the problem of packing 75 cu. yd. of refuse into a body. This,
of course, necessitates increased pressures; the limit has probably already been reached with the present materials of body construction, and greater strength bodywork will be a necessary ancillary to any new developments in this direction. Of the extra two-ton carrying capacity of the type of vehicle envisaged, it may well be necessary to sacrifice 15 cwt. or so of this in bodyweight; however, this may well be regarded as preferable to development of refusecollection vehicles on three-axle chassis.
B32 Although there is a sustained interest in larger-capacity vehicles, it is unlikely that the market for slightly lower capacity and more manoeuvrable vehicles will disappear. It is interesting to note that at the recent Public Works Exhibition the Seddon company found a marked interest in their proposals for a commercial vehicle in the lighter-capacity range.
There is the possibility of increased frequency of collection which has the advantage from the loaders' point of view, and the demand in the future could be for a smaller vehicle which would reduce traffic congestion. There is evidence to support the view that the loss in actual load achieved is not directly proportional to the reduction in body capacity, and there would be obvious advantages in terms of manoeuvrability with the smaller vehicle.
Future trends, therefore, lie somewhere between the ability to provide increased load capacity, subject to no limitation imposed by transport regulations generally, and the inevitable position that in many of the more congested areas, as for example some of our northern cities with an abundance of narrow alleyways, vehicles beyond the present increased dimensions will not find favour.
Changing Analysis of Refuse
Changes in refuse density have for long exercised the minds of the refuse-vehicle manufacturer and must continue to do so. It must be assumed that the continuing trend of lower density refuse will increase the demands for some positive form of compression.
If development in terms of increased reduction in volume is to continue, and compression devices are used, there is a limit to the compression stresses which can be absorbed within an economic bodyweight. Reference has already been made to this and the alternatives must be changes in the form of compression or in body construction.
Reference must also be made to the need for handling bulky items, such as cardboard cartons, metal drums, furniture and the like. Some manufacturers have already recognized this need, and the Haller company of Germany, Kronenberg of the United States and Glover. Webb and Liversidge Ltd. of England. have already announced designs to overcome this problem.
The Price Factor Bodyweight and capital cost are both important, and a careful balance is necessary between the use of relatively expensive non-ferrous alloys and steel.
In England we tend to demand purchase at the lowest possible price and accept certain lowering of standards as a result. We certainly appear to fix a "ceiling" to the price that we are prepared to pay. In Germany, Holland. and Switzerland, in particular, a specification is provided, to which the vehicle is built, and, within reason, the purchase price is met.
In this country a continuous-loadingtype vehicle, packing into the interior some 50 cu. yd. of refuse, is likely to meet with sales resistance if priced much over £4,250.
Within certain restricted limits it should be possible to account to the potential customer for the additional cost of a vehicle showing advantages over comparable vehicles in relation to such factors as load carrying, freedom from expensive maintenance and so on.
It is possible to accord undue prominence to initial outlay. Spread over a life of seven to ten years, a price difference of a few hundred pounds may easily be offset by quite a small daily saving in time and labour. The proportion of costs of vehicle operation represented by the effect of initial outlay through interest and depreciation is small compared with wages of the driver. As the wage bill is by far the largest item, the obvious conclusion is that the greatest savings are to be made by getting the job done as quickly as possible.
Chassis Influence It may well he thought that the introduction of larger commercial chassis to take advantage of the new transport regulations_ will compel the introduction of larger refuse collection bodies. This is not inevitable, however, as it seems clear that most of the commercial chassis manufacturers intend to maintain sales of current chassis to meet a definite demand which still clearly exists.