Diesel Engine Modification to Operate on Biogas

J. Ortiz-Canavate, D . J. Hills, W. J. Chancellor

MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER
ASAE ASAE ASAE

percent and engine speed was decreased from 1800 to

ABSTRACT
1150 r/min upon engine conversion. Miles (1977)
A medium-sized conventional diesel engine was mod-
ified to operate in a dual-fuel mode with biogas. The
performance of the engine was studied under all possible
operated a Ford 4000 three cylinder diesel engine* on
dual-fuels, diesel and natural gas. He suggested advanc-
ing the timing of the injection to improve the perform-
operating conditions and compared with that of the same ance of the engine.
engine operating on diesel fuel alone.
The efficiency of the dual-fuel engine at medium speed OBJECTIVES
and high torque was as good as with diesel fuel only. At
higher speeds and lower torques the performance of the The object of this research was to modify a diesel
dual-fuel engine was inferior to that of the engine run- engine of a type commonly used on farms so that it would
ning on diesel fuel alone. operate as efficiently as possible on a mixture of biogas
and diesel fuel. A complete energy balance and perform-
INTRODUCTION ance curves over the whole range of operation of the
engine were to be developed to establish the conditions
Since diesel engines are more efficient and sturdier under which the engine could operate most efficiently
than spark ignition engines, they are frequently used on with biogas.
farms. With increasing fuel price and its uncertain
availability, however, there is a growing interest among EQUIPMENT AND PROCEDURE
farmers in using biogas to operate stationary diesel
engines for electricity production or water pump opera- Fuel
tion. Although a number of papers describe the use of A definable synthetic biogas, similar to that expected
biogas in internal combustion engines, most of them from a dairy manure digester, was used for all the tests.
relate to spark ignition engines (Friedberg, 1976; Natural gas from Pacific Gas and Electric Company was
Neyeloff and Gunkel, 1975; Smith, 1978; Williams et al., combined with compressed carbon dioxide to obtain
1976). Phillips (1980) has reported on the use of biogas in various compositions of synthetic gas. The composition
a 105 kW dual-fuel Detroit diesel engine for electricity of the natural gas was 94.5 percent methane, 2.4 percent
generation on a farm. His report was optimistic but he ethane, 2.7 percent nitrogen and traces of propane and
gave no efficiency data. carbon dioxide. Its density was 0.688 kg/m 3 and its
Persson et al. (1976) indicate that "the conversion of a specific gravity was 0.581 that of air at standard condi-
compression-ignition (diesel) engine from liquid fuel to tions. The lower and higher heating values were 33,800
biogas is more complicated than conversion of a spark- kJ/m 3 and 38,020 kJ/m 3 , respectively.
ignition engine. The fuel pump may have to be modified Number 2 diesel fuel was used as an ignitor of the
so that it will be capable of furnishing only the very small higher octane methane in the synthetic biogas. The diesel
exact amounts of liquid fuel required for a mixed biogas- fuel had a density of 0.854 kg/L at 15 °C and 0.847 kg/L
diesel operation. Energy conversion should, however, be at 27 °C. The higher heating value was 45,412 kJ/kg and
more efficient with a diesel engine than with a spark- the lower heating value was 42,400 kJ/kg. In all cases
ignition engine. As a fuel, biogas seems to be better engine efficiency was calculated using the lower heating
suited for low-speed diesel engines than for high-speed values for the gas as well as the diesel fuel. The carbon
engines. For engines that are properly modified and ad- dioxide was assumed to have no effect on the heating
justed, the heat-energy consumption when fueled with value of the natural gas with which it was mixed.
biogas is approximately equal to that when burning li-
quid fuels." Test Equipment
Maramba (1978) converted a 2 cylinder, 23 kW diesel A system was developed to fuel the diesel engine with
engine to operate in a dual-fuel mode, using 25 percent either the synthetic biogas or compressed biogas from a
diesel fuel and 75 percent biogas. Torque decreased 20 farm digester. However, because of difficulties in obtain-
ing large quantities of compressed digester gas, the
Article was submitted for publication in September 1980; reviewed definable synthetic gas was used for all the tests. Fig. 1
and approved for publication by the Power and Machinery Division of
ASAE in January 1981. ^
presents a schematic of the gas supply system. Natural
The authors are: J. ORTIZ-CANAVATE, Professor, Departmento gas, supplied from the University reticulation grid, pas-
Mecanizacion Agraria, Madrid, Spain; D. J. HILLS, Assistant Pro- sed through a gas flow meter (2) and then a surge tank
fessor and W. J. CHANCELLOR, Professor, Agricultural Engineering (3) where its temperature and pressure were measured.
Dept., University of California, Davis. The average pressure for natural gas was 175 mm of
Acknowledgments: We express our gratitude to J. Mehlschau for his
help in the design of some elements of the system, to D. A. Ometto and water column (1.7 kPa) above atmospheric pressure.
M. Ruiz for their help in taking data during some tests and to Pacific
Gas and Electric Company for supplying gas flow meters. •The same engine model as used in this research.

808 © 1981 American Society of Agricultural Engineers 0001 -2351 /81/2404-0808$02.00 TRANSACTIONS of the ASAE—1981
 i2
)K ' rih

To the engine
FIG. 1 Schematic diagram of equipment for the gas supply system
1. Gas valve 5. Tank for biogas 9. Balance
2. Gas flow meter 6. Carbon dioxide cylinder 10. Low pressure regulator
3. Surge tank for NG 7. High pressure regulator 11. Surge tank for fuel gas
4. Manometer 8. Surge tank for C0 2 or BG 12. Antireturn valve

Carbon dioxide was supplied from a pressurized cylinder The diesel engine used in the research was a Ford
(6) at high pressure and expanded through a high 4000, 3 cylinder, square type with a bore and a stroke of
pressure regulator (7) to the surge tank (8) and expanded 111.76 mm, a displacement of 3294 cm3 and a compres-
through a low pressure regulator (10) to the mixer tank sion ratio of 16.5:1. The engine could develop 40 kW of
(11). A balance (9) provided to measure the C0 2 con- power at 1900 r/min. If it is assumed that 20 percent of
sumption proved insufficiently accurate, so was not used. the energy input consisted of diesel fuel, the requirement
Carbon dioxide consumption was estimated as the dif- for biogas with 60 percent methane (lower heating value
ference between flow rate readings for the mixture of the = 21500 kJ/m3) was around 20 m 3 /h at full load condi-
two gases passing through one gas meter and for the tions.
natural gas passing through another gas flow meter. Fig. 2 presents a schematic diagram of the engine (1)
Calculations were based on ideal gas behavior. C0 2 con- attached to an electric eddy-current dynamometer (2) in
centration by volume varied between 30 and 50 percent order to provide and determine the load torque and con-
of the mixture, which concentration is comparable to trol the speed as measured by a tachometer (3). The
that commonly found in biogas. temperature of the exhaust gases, te, was determined by

FIG. 2 Schematic diagram of engine attached to dynamometer

1. Diesel engine 7. Shock-absorber 13. Valve for water into the tank
2. Dynamometer 8. Sharp edge orifice 14. Valve for water to the engine
3. Tachometer 9. Manometer 15. Water rotatmeter
4. Thermocouple 10. Air surge chamber 16. Thermometer for water to the engine
5. Gas carburetor 11. Secondary air valve 17. Thermometer for water out of the engine
6. Governor 12. Water tank

1981—TRANSACTIONS of the ASAE 809

a thermocouple connected to a potentiometer (4). An Im- usable, the total efficiency of the system (r/t) is:
pco DG 200-4 carburetor (5), especially designed for
digester-gas or biogas, was used to mix the gas and the Q3
Tit- [3]
air. The throttle valve of the carburetor was controlled to Qi + Q 2
maintain an established speed by means of an auxiliary
governor (6). Due to the unstable action of the governor The exhaust gases were analyzed for the percentage of
during initial tests, it was necessary to mount a shock- carbon monoxide and total hydrocarbons (in ppm) by an
absorber (7) to dampen rapid fluctuations in throttle infrared gas analyzer (Sun Exhaust Performance
valve opening. Analyzer Model EPA 75). The energy dissipated by these
Air entered the engine through a sharp-edged orifice gases was calculated considering the energy necessary to
(8) with a diameter of 50.8 mm and a coefficient of increase the temperature of the total gas mass (air +
discharge of 0.602. A manometer (9) was connected in biogas + diesel fuel) (m,) in kg/h from outside condi-
order to measure the pressure drop across the orifice and tions (ta) in °C to the temperature of the exhaust (te) in
thus the flow of air. The air passed through a surge °C. This energy is called the "sensible heat. ,, To
chamber (10) before coming into the carburetor. A calculate its value (q4) it is necessary to estimate the
secondary air duct with a valve (11) was provided to in- mean specific heat cpm of the gases, which in this case was
crease the air/fuel ratio to values leaner than those assumed to be 1.025 kJ/kg °C (the value for air with a
available with the carburetor alone when this was con- mean temperature of 220 °C).
sidered necessary. Since outside conditions in the test
laboratory changed very little during the test period X c^
mt(t - t )
X(tp-ta) + - -, k J / s . [4]
Q4
(temperatures ranged from 16 ° to 22 °C and the at- 3600 3512
mospheric pressure ranged from 97.9 kPa to 102 kPa)
the mean air density was approximately 1.18 kg/m 3 for Carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons are combustible
all tests. gases and have a latent heat (Q5) calculated as a function
of the masses of the CO (m co ) in kg/h and the hydrocar-
Testing Procedure bons (mHC) in kg/h that exit without being burned in the
A testing program was developed to determine the op- exhaust. The corresponding lower heating values are
timal operating conditions as indicated by engine effi- 10132 kJ/kg for the CO(HCO) and 49700 kJ/kg for the
ciency. The parameters maintained and their analytical hydrocarbons (HHC) of which methane was the main con-
interpretation are described in the paragraphs below. stituent.
The torque (M) in N-m and the speed (n) in r/min
m X
"HC X H
were measured using a dynamometer. Diesel fuel con- : co X H,C O H C , kJ/s. [5]
3600 3600
sumption (Q), in kg/h, for each test was established by
means of a stop watch used to measure the time required The difference between the energy input and the
to consume a fixed volume of fuel from a pipette. The energy output is usually referred to as "unaccounted-for
energy provided by the diesel fuel (Q t ) is 42400 C/3600, energy," most of which is considered to be lost radiation
kJ/s. energy. In this case gases burning after leaving the
The flow rate of synthetic biogas (VJ, in m 3 /h, was cylinder, but before reaching the exhaust gas analyzer,
measured by the gas flow meter (Singer Al-1,000). The caused this "unaccounted-for energy" value (Q6) to be
energy provided by the biogas (Q2) is 33800 W 3 6 0 0 , somewhat larger than could be attributed to radiation
kJ/s. The brake thermal efficiency or effective efficiency losses.
of the engine (rjj was obtained by the formula:
Q 6 = Qi + Q 2 - ( P + Q 3 +
Q4 +
Qs) [6]
[i]
Qi + Q 2
To determine the indicated thermal efficiency rj,, the
where P is the brake power. indicated torque of each cylinder of the engine was
As shown in Fig. 2, the heat taken from the engine by measured by noting the torque decrease upon discon-
the cooling water (Q3) was determined by measuring the necting the fuel injector line for each of the three
flow rate of water (A) in m 3 /h, entering the engine with a cylinders. This determination was made at three dif-
rotameter (15) and with two thermometers, that gave, ferent engine speeds when the injector pump was set for
the inlet temperature (tx) in °C (16) and the outlet full fuel delivery.
temperature (t2) in °C, (17), respectively. Friction torque was determined as the difference be-
tween indicated torque and brake torque:
Speed of t h e Friction
Q 3 = — ( — ) X c a ( k J / k g ° C ) X ( t 2 - t,) (°C)
3.6 s engine, r / m i n t o r q u e , N*m

4.19 1500 61.6

A(t2 - t j ) , kJ/s [2] 1800 65.3
3.6 2100 68.4

in which ca is the specific heat of water. The indicated power (P,) was obtained by multiplying
Use of the heat retained by the engine cooling water engine speed times the sum of brake torque of the engine
for digester heating was simulated by circulating the (M) and friction torque (M,):
water within a mixing tank of 200 L (12). Temperature of
the water in the tank was maintained at 50 °-60 °C. If 7r(M + M f ) n
[7]
p. = — £— , k W
the energy taken by the cooling water (W3) is considered 1
30000

810 TRANSACTIONS of the ASAE—1981

 -X ^ r ^ ~ =« ^ =
\ ^ ^^Z ^\!^34%r~"—

open

Ll2?3— "

FIG. 3 Mechanism to control the governor plate of injection pump. r ^-^

1. Injection pump housing L, -—TT'.T^^Z^
300°C^ ~~ ~ ~
2. Governor plate 30X3
3. Plunger
4. Solenoid
5. Turn buckle ?i%7 •

f - 1 , 1 1 1 . 1 .
1600
The mechanical efficiency r\m is given in equation [8]: n (r /min )

P M FIG. 4 Performance curves of the engine with diesel fuel.

[8]
P- M + Mf
in the biogas ranged within 30 to 50 percent, were
The indicated thermal efficiency r\t is given by equa-
selected for analytical study. The percent of total fuel
tion [9]:
energy supplied by diesel fuel ranged within 15 to 30 per-
^r [9] cent. For all the cases a computer program was used to
calculate an energy balance that included:
—power of the engine in kW
—diesel-fuel consumption in kg/h
An important modification was made in the distrib- —percent of energy delivered by diesel fuel
utor-type injection pump (CAV model DPA type) in —flow of biogas in m 3 /h
order to control the amount of diesel fuel entering the —percent of CH4 in biogas
engine in each test and also to avoid excessive reduction —percent of C0 2 in biogas
in the amount of diesel fuel entering as biogas was in- —flow rate of air in m 3 /h
troduced. Fig. 3 indicates a mechanism that held the
—volumetric efficiency
governor plate (2) in the desired position. An opening
—stoichiometric air in m 3 /h
was made in the injection pump housing (1) for a sliding
—air ratio
plunger (3). As biogas began to enter the engine
—heat energy provided by diesel fuel in kJ/s
previously running on diesel fuel alone, the engine in-
creased its speed and the governor acted to reduce the —heat energy provided by biogas in kJ/s
amount of diesel fuel. The amount of diesel fuel entering —heat energy absorbed by the cooling water in kJ/s
might then be inadequate to ignite the gas properly, —"unaccounted-for*' energy in kJ/s
causing backfire and irregular running of the engine. To —indicated power in kW
circumvent this difficulty, a solenoid (4) was connected —indicated thermal efficiency
via a turnbuckle (5) to a plunger, the end of which con- —effective or brake thermal efficiency
tacted the govenor plate to limit fuel delivery to a fixed —total efficiency.
minimum. By this means diesel fuel delivery was main- All these parameters were analyzed statistically using a
tained at rates which constituted between 15 and 30 per- computer program.t
cent of the total fuel energy delivered to the engine,
depending on the speed and torque desired. The mean RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
value of the percent of fuel energy from diesel fuel for all Fig. 4 shows the performance curves of the engine with
the tests was 20.3 percent. diesel fuel alone as a function of the speed (n) in r/min
In response to the suggestion of Miles (1977), timing and the torque (M) in N-m. The effective or brake ther-
was advanced to 23 deg BTDC instead of the normal ad- mal efficiency, which is the ratio of the brake power to
vance for this engine (19 deg BTDC). The position 30 deg the rate of delivery of energy from the fuel, instead of the
BTDC was also tested but it was very difficult to start the more commonly used specific fuel consumption,$ was
engine in this case, so the timing was maintained during chosen in order to enable comparisons between the two
all tests at 23 deg BTDC, which seemed to be more different fuel regimes. The air ratio, taken as the quotent
favorable than 19 deg BTDC with regard to avoidance of of the real air that goes to the engine and the
knocking and misfiring at low torque levels or at high stiochiometric air to burn all the fuel, was quite high as is
engine speeds. usual in diesel engines. Exhaust temperatures were also
After finishing the break-in of the engine, the typical for diesel engines with maximum values being ap-
crankcase oil and filter were changed and performance tAuthor is W. J. Dixon, 1979. BMDP-7D; "Description of groups
tests started with the diesel fuel only to establish a basis (strata) with histograms and analysis of variance" University of Califor-
for comparison. A total of 180 tests were then made with nia Press.
the synthetic biogas under the range of operating condi- ^Specific fuel consumption (g/kW-h) = 8490/Effective efficiency
tions that might occur in farm applications. (percent), for a lower heating value of 42400 kJ/kg for number 2 diesel
Of the 180 tests, only 130, in which the percent of C0 2 fuel.

1981—TRANSACTIONS of the ASAE 811

 tions not compatible with continuous operation of the
engine. These results suggest that the biogas burns more
slowly than the diesel fuel; therefore, at higher speeds the
gas doesn't have time to burn completely inside the
cylinder before the exhaust valve opens allowing the
biogas to burn in the exhaust manifold. This condition
was actually observed as the muffler began to emit very
high levels of radiated heat. At these speeds the max-
imum power developed by the dual-fuel engine was
higher (42.5 kW) than that obtained with diesel fuel only
(37.8 kW), but the values of the exhaust temperature, air
ratio and efficiency were not those which would permit
trouble-free engine operation for extended periods of
time.
At low torques (under 130 N-m) the efficiency of the
dual-fuel engine was much lower than that of the diesel
J • I . I . I 1 1 1 I
fuel engine, and it was noticed that the engine didn't run
1200 1400 1600
n (r/min )
1800 2000 2200
smoothly. These facts indicate that the biogas needs
some threshold level of torque and associated cylinder
FIG. 5 Performance curves of the dual fuel engine. temperature to ignite and burn satisfactorily within the
time available.
proximately 600 °C.
Fig. 5 shows comparable curves for the engine with Tables 1 and 2, respectively, show values of the per-
biogas. Statistical analysis was applied to obtain average formance parameters for the engine running with diesel
values for these curves. Variations in the engine fuel and with biogas. In the later case there may be some
parameters of speed and torque significantly affected ef- differences between tabular values and those shown in
ficiency, exhaust temperature and air ratio for all the 130 Fig. 5.
tests considered.
The efficiency of the dual fuel engine when operating CONCLUSIONS
at torque values between 160 and 190 N-m and speed Although the performance curves shown in Figs. 4 and
values between 1350 and 1550 r/min (power = 23 to 32 5 refer to a specific engine, the certain differences can be
kW) was equivalent to that of the engine operating on expected from one type of engine to another, the follow-
diesel fuel alone. Exhaust temperatures under these ing general conclusions can be derived:
operating conditions were also satisfactory (480 ° to 580 1 Dual-fuel diesel engines running with biogas per-
°C). The air ratio, although a little smaller than that for form best at medium speed (around 1300-1600 r/min)
diesel alone, was also acceptable (1.2:1 compared to and high torque. Under these conditions efficiency is
1.5:1). comparable to engines using diesel fuel only and exhaust
It should be noted that this range of operating condi- temperatures and air ratios are also favorable.
tions is quite small compared to the similar one with 2 At higher speeds the biogas doesn't react quickly
diesel fuel. The optimum efficiency for diesel fuel (above enough to burn completely inside the cylinder, a situa-
34 percent was applicable for a much broader torque tion resulting in lower efficiency and air-ratio values and
range between 125 and 185 N-m and a speed range from in higher exhaust temperatures (>600 °C) which are not
1200 to 2000 r/min (power 18 to 34 kW), with acceptable compatible with long engine life.
levels of air ratio (above 1.2:1) and exhaust temperature 3 At small loads (low torque) temperatures inside the
(below 550 °C). cylinder are not sufficiently high to ignite the biogas
At higher speeds the efficiency of the dual-fueled promptly when injection begins so that brake thermal ef-
engine decreased compared with the efficiency obtained ficiency is lower than that with diesel fuel only.
with diesel fuel alone. What is more important, the air 4 The results obtained when comparing a dual-fuel
ratio diminished below the stoichiometric value (1:1) and engine with a diesel engine depend greatly on the
the exhaust temperature increased above 650 °C, condi- operating conditions under which comparisons are
TABLE 1. SOME VALUES OF THE PERFORMANCE OF THE
ENGINE WITH DIESEL FUEL

Specific
fuel Brake Indicated
consump- thermal Exhaust thermal Total
Speed, Torque, Power, tion, efficiency,* Air tempera- efficiency, efficiency,
n (r/min) M (N-m) P(kW) g/kWh i?e (%) ratio ture, (°C) r?i (%) r?t (%)

1248 162 21.2 244.3 34.7 1.5:1 453 47.3 63.0

1349 80 11.4 264.8 32.0 2.9:1 265 56.0 68.5
1356 189 26.8 257.2 33.0 1.2:1 558 43.5 61.1
1551 90 14.7 277.3 30.6 2.4:1 315 51.8 65.6
1665 164 28.7 246.2 34.5 1.4:1 500 47.9 61.2
1719 173 22.3 251.1 33.8 1.9:1 396 46.4 63.8
1740 197 35.9 261.1 32.5 1.1:1 655 43.1 59.8
1863 194 37.8 263.5 32.2 1.1:1 675 43.1 57.7
1977 179 37.1 256.0 33.6 1.2:1 624 46.2 60.3
2094 75 16.4 295.1 28.8 2.5:1 340 55.1 60.2

•This value is called "efficiency" in Fig. 4.

812 TRANSACTIONS of the ASAE—1981

 TABLE 2. SOME VALUES OF THE PERFORMANCE OF THE
ENGINE WITH BIOGAS

Percent of
energy Brake Brake Indicated
from thermal thermal thermal Total
Speed, Torque, Power, diesel efficiency,* Air tempera- efficiency, efficiency,
n (r/min) (N-m) P(kW) fuel, (%) i?e (%) ratio ture, (°C) rii (%) i?t (%)
1312 53.4 7.3 19.3 13.2 1.7:1 353 40.8 35.4
1390 107 15.6 20.3 24.5 1.4:1 492 38.4 52.7
1492 178 28.1 16.3 35.0 1.3:1 526 47.1 60.2
1537 96 15.4 20.0 17.3 1.2:1 451 28.5 58.7
1600 205 34.6 15.5 32.3 1.03:1 615 42.2 58.3
1685 73 12.9 24.1 15.5 1.2:1 322 29.0 37.0
1800 116 21.8 17.4 19.0 1.05:1 530 29.7 37.5
1849 180 34.8 25.6 31.7 1.1:1 625 43.3 54.9
1892 215 42.5 20,3 28.9 0.82:1 655 37.8 49.3
1997 185 38.7 17.2 28.6 0.95:1 726 39.0 51.7

*This value is called "efficiency" in Fig. 5.

made. Thus it is necessary to specify test conditions when References

statements of comparative results are made. 1 Friedberg, J. 1976. Methane and propane as auto fuels. Alter-
5 The modifications of a conventional diesel engine native sources of energy 23:12-18.
to operate on the dual-fuel system using carbureted 2 Maramba, F. D. 1978. Biogas and waste recycling. Regal Pr.
Co., Manila. 230 pages.
biogas and injected diesel fuel as proposed in this paper, 3 Miles, J. A. 1977. Power unit modification to accommodate in-
require: terruptible flow of natural gas. TRANSACTIONS of the ASAE
(a) a carburetor for the mixing of biogas with air; 20(3):406-407.
(b) a mechanism to hold the governor plate of the 4 Neyeloff, S. and Gunkell, W. W. 1975. Methane-carbon dioxide
mixtures in an internal combustion engine, in: Energy, Agriculture and
injection pump in a desired minimum delivery Waste Management (Ed. W. J. Jewell) pp. 397-408, Ann Arbor Science
position; Publishing, Ann Arbor, MI 48106.
(c) a slight advance in injection timing. 5 Persson, S. P. E., H. D. Bartlett, A. E. Branding, and R. W.
However, each model of diesel engine would have to be Regan. 1979. Agricultural anaerobic digesters-design and operation.
modified in ways specifically suited to its construction. In Agr. Exp. Sta. Bulletin 827. Pennsylvania State University, University
Park.
any case, it seems advisable and more economical to 6 Phillips, J. 1980. Methane-powered farm has kilowatts to spare.
modify the available conventional diesel engines for Farm Journal Dairy Extra No. 2. February. 2 pages.
operation with biogas rather than to design special dual- 7 Smith, K. D., 1978. Operation of an anaerobic digester at the
fuel engines to operate with biogas and diesel fuel. Washington State dairy farm. Symposium Energy from Biomass and
Wastes. Washington, pg. 403-431.
8 Williams, D. W. et al. 1976. Utilization of biogas for farm pro-
duction energy. TRANSACTIONS of the ASAE 19(6): 1034-1040.

Substituting Information for Energy in Agriculture

(Continued from page 807)
10 Merriam, J. L. 1966. A management control concept for deter- 16 The University of Nebraska. 1965. Nebraska Tractor Tests Nos.
mining the economical depth and frequency of irrigation. TRANSAC- 879, 880, 915 and 916, Agricultural Experiment Station, Lincoln, NE.
TIONS of the ASAE 9(4):492-498. 17 Walker, P. N. and M. R. Smith. 1978. Machine logic re-
11 National Academy of Sciences. 1976. Crop and livestock quirements of an anthurium harvester. TRANSACTIONS of the ASAE
management (in Climate and Food), p. 79-105, Washington, DC. 21(6):1040-1044.
12 Puckett, H. B. and F. W. Andrew. 1976. From pressure swit- 18 Willcutt, M. H., J. D. Irwin and H. T. Nagle, Jr. 1978. Cotton
ches to computers, ASAE Paper No. 76-3007, ASAE, St. Joseph, MI gin operational efficiency measurement via a microprocessor controlled
49085. data acquisition unit. TRANSACTIONS of the ASAE 21(4):624-627.
13 Ricketts, C. J. and J. A. Weber. 1961. Tractor engine loading, 19 Young, R. E. and R. L. Schafer. 1976. Can automation improve
AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING 42(5):236-239, 250, May. traction? ASAE Paper No. 76-1521, ASAE, St. Joseph, MI. 12 p.,
14 Taylor, J. A. and R. L. Schafer. 1979. Personal communication (Also AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING 58(2):15-18, February
(June 13). National Tillage Machinery Laboratory, Auburn, AL. 1977).
15 Tribus, M. and E. C. Mclrvine. 1971. Energy and information. 20 Zander, J. 1970. Studies of combine harvester operation, Jour-
Scientific American. 224(3): 179-188. September. nal and Proceedings, Institution of Agricultural Engineers 25(l):30-36.

1981—TRANSACTIONS of the ASAE 813