[mstacy]

Thanks for the links and information everyone. Any idea how many years it takes to produce seed starting from seed or seedling?

[mstacy]

@Miles Jenness 29623 wrote:

Hi folks,
onto rollers or a heavy duty trailer with a dolly. As to the second question, it is hard to know for sure how much it weighs without a crane, but my estimate is 10-15 tons. Like I said, the building will be rolling, so the friction shouldn’t be too high, but there is a slight up hill on the stretch of 2A we have to travel. I was thinking along the lines of 3 or 4 teams,

Miles this sounds like a fantastic project. I don’t have ANY personal experience moving houses period, let alone with draft animials. But I suspect that it’s going to take a whole lot more than 4 teams to move this thing 1.2 miles. Geoff and Mitch already highlighted some of the paramount safety issues (stopping, steering, controlling the load).

Over that kind of distance I can’t imagine you’re going to get more than 400 pounds (horizontal pulling force) per team (estimate based on 2hp * 550ft*lb/s/hp * 1s/3ft = 370 pounds). A fact of life is that draft efficiency drops as the number of animals in the hitch increases so you’re not really going to get a full 370 pounds per team.

Don’t underestimate the friction either. Unless you’ve got fantastic rollers and smooth ground. The other question to ask is “could I pull this load at a walking pace with an 8hp tractor?” If the answer is “yes” then you’re probably good to go with four teams. This might be a good test to perform before the teams arrive. A really stout winch could perform the same test.

You might consider some form of mechanical advantage (block & tackle, windlass, etc) to multiply your draft force. The animals will have to walk further … but they stand a better chance of being able to walk.

A friend’s aunt wrote a book about moving a covered bridge with draft animals in Massachussetts with draft animals (within the last couple decades). She took great photos of the animals and all the rigging (windlass in series with block and tackle).

My steers and I are looking forward to hearing about your adventure.

Regards,

Matt
W. Topsham, VT

[mstacy]

… @mitchmaine 29557 wrote:

you could put an idler pulley on the belts for the clutch mech. and tighten it with a foot pedal. a deadman, so if you had to jump off the machine for something the mower would just stop on its own.

That deadman clutch is a brilliant idea! If that feature had been designed into the original McCormick Deering and other mowers there would probably be far fewer folks counting with their toes.

[mstacy]

@Ridge 29507 wrote:

I&J uses a 13 hp Honda engine to power there mower. I don’t think that 3 hp would handle the mower. I have the I&J and have heard the engine labor a little even with 13hp. It is set-up with a gearbox and then a powershaft to the mower. Works great.

Ridge,

The I&J Precision Cutting Sickle Mower advertisement on the web (http://www.farmingwithhorses.com/horse-drawn-haying-equipment) claims “Low torque requirement can now be ground driven”. Is this the same mower that you have?

Something just doesn’t add up here. If a 13hp engine is struggling to run the cutter bar then one of two things is going on:
Not enough speed reduction (motor running way below the rpm at which it makes 13hp) or
Two flesh & blood horses wouldn’t stand a chance at powering this cutter without an engine

Does the engine run pretty fast or is it lugging along near idle? Is there a lot of friction in the cutter bar or can you turn this thing freely by hand like with a well maintained ground driven unit?

Regards,

Matt

[mstacy]

@jac 29505 wrote:

.. A couple of reductions with drive belts might be enough to reduce it to 600rpm ???..
John

Belts are probably the simplest and least expensive way to get the speed reduction. A belt tensioner might even do double duty as a clutch like on a roto-tiller or other yard/garden implements.

Regards,

Matt

[mstacy]

@jac 29491 wrote:

So… how much HP do you recon it takes to power a cutter bar of 6 or 7 ft.. thanks in advance people.. John

John, in my opinion the biggest challenge is that you are going to need at least 3.3:1 gear reduction (preferably more like 5:1) between the engine and the cutter bar. The cutter bar wants to run at about 600rpm. Small gasoline engines (Briggs & Stratton, Honda, etc) typically operate from 2000 to 3000rpm (or slightly higher). The engine won’t run at 600 rpm (and would produce very little power at that speed anyway). Conversely the cutter bar would self destruct at even 2000rpm.

Maximum power (rated value) on these types of engines is typically somewhere around 3000rpm. At lower rpm power output will also be less. A good catalog will specify what rpm the rated power is measured at. A really good catalog will provide torque and power curves (versus rpm), but that’s rare.

I recon that 2hp has been sufficient to power the cutter bar and overcome the rolling resistance of mower wheels in the grass, bar in the grass, and friction in all the other drive train components (bearings, gears, etc) for a couple generations before us. Otherwise we wouldn’t have all these wonderful MD9 mowers to fuss with. James Watt was kind enough to work out the definition of the “horse power” sometime in the 1700s or early 1800s as a way to rate his steam engines that people could intuit. I.E. how many horses can this machine replace? One horsepower is defined as 550 foot pounds per second based on his observations and calculations. But bear in mind that this value is averaged over time. A horse can certainly pull much more for short periods of time. A gasoline engine will not have that ability (unless it has a really big flywheel). Over the course of a day no horse is going to average much more than 550 foot pounds per second. That’s my story and I’m sticking to it until someone demonstrates otherwise … without resorting to steroids.

In this application the engine only has to drive the cutter bar (and the gearbox unfortunately). The horses are still employed to pull everything else (rolling resistance of the wheels, wheel bearings, draft of the cutter bar itself). So I think you’re probably going to need at least a 3hp (at 3000rpm) engine and a 5:1 gearbox. Theoretically two hp would suffice … but it would be prudent to keep a little in your back pocket for gearbox inefficiency and momentary load surges (wiry grass, meadow muffins, etc).

Good luck with this. I suspect that the motor will be the easy part. Finding/adapting a suitable gearbox may prove challenging and expensive. I look forward to seeing what you come up with.

Kind Regards,

Matt Stacy
W. Topsham, VT
USA

[mstacy]

@jason glick 26169 wrote:

three towns here in maine just passed this ordinance

http://localfoodlocalrules.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/localfoodlocalrules-ordinance-template.pdf

and i think we’ll probably have a special town meeting this spring and vote it in here in montville to help keep the ball rolling. the implications… a statement and a step towards putting responsibility back in the hands of the consumer.

Jason thanks for posting. Has this ordinance been implemented yet? What kind of response have you had from external government authorities?

It’s an intriguing concept. I’m not a lawyer but it looks like a lot of thought and expertise went into that document, particularly the clause about severability.

Let us know how this thing develops.

Regards,

Matt

[mstacy]

@Simple Living 26218 wrote:

… Did anyone notice how thin the yoke was, and would that cause an issue with all of the pressure being applied to such a small area? And the second thing I noticed was the very fine detailed carving and relief work done to the yoke. Do you think that would had been removed in an effort to lighten the yoke for both the farmer and the oxen?

Gordon

I suspect that the relief work is a combination of lightening & decoration. Personally I think a lot can be done to lighten draft implements.

This winter I aquired a professionally made yoke, which I absolutely love. The craftsmanship is fantastic. But I was shocked by the weight. It weighs an honest 50 pounds without bows (8 inch). This is compared to the crude featherweight popple (aspen) yoke (6″) that I started my team on. How strong (and heavy)does a yoke or any draft implement really need to be? In the workaday world no individual draft animal is going exert more than 1 horsepower (550 ft*lb/s) for any significant duration of time. Assuming that the animal is walking at 5 feet per second that’s only 110 pounds (neglecting any vertical force component … which isn’t doing any mechanical work anyway) per animal. I’m am extremely confident that a 2 x 4 stood on edge can easily withstand 220 pounds over a 3 foot span. Layed flat might be asking for trouble though. Of course those same animals can apply far more force for a short duration (competition pulling for example).

Bearing area is a signifcant factor as you pointed out. Comfort of the animals is vitally important.

I suspect that the dimensions of traditional yokes (including our stout New England models) have much more to do with availible materials, forming methods, and ergonomics (neck seats, drop, etc) than strength.

And what about the stout chain we typically use for logging or pulling implements? Seems like overkill. How many folks have ever broken a logging chain with draft animals? Do they really need to be that heavy?

The McCormick Deering mower is another one. The “tongue weight” on mine is approximate 50 pounds, measured 10 feet ahead of the axle. In my opinion that is a poorly balanced machine (500 ft*lb moment). Not only are the animals forced to bear this (and the farmer forced to wrestle with it for hitching) but that tongue weight reduces the weight that is availible for machine traction to drive the cutter. If the machine were perfectly balanced (zero tongue weight) you would design it to be just heavy enough to provide enough traction to drive the cutter (or other implement if we think of it more universally as a ground-drive PTO). So the machine is heavier than it needs to be. This again comes back to our foundation of horsepower and speed. 2hp at 5ft/s equates to about 220 pounds. So approximately 500 pounds of vehicle weight will provide sufficient traction for a 2hp implement (assuming a coefficient of friction = 0.5). Anything above and beyond that, including tongue weight is just that much more to tire out my two little buddies (Stanley & Earl). There isn’t much room for waste when you’re only starting with 2hp.

Regards,

Matt

[mstacy]

The Morse’s run a XC ski center as part of there operation too. My wife and I skied there once this winter.

Matt

[mstacy]

I enjoyed the day immensely. It was great to see everyone there. Thanks for having us over Bob and Karen.

Matt Stacy
West Topsham, VT

[mstacy]

We often lose sight of the fact that we are basically dealing with a 2hp tractor yet many draft implements tend to be rather crude (heavy sledges, rough wheels & bearings, etc). We don’t have much power to waste on friction or heavy implements. Ideally draft implements would have more in common with bicycles (thin wall tube construction) than tractor implements.

Much of the equipment displayed in this thread is truly fantastic. Light weight and strong. From the photos I’ll wager that the 6 wheeled wagons are more efficient (payload as a percentage of total load) than the 8 wheel setups. All the hardware (wheels, tires, etc) seems to be the same size and the load is biased toward the rear set of wheels.

Ideally all the wheels would be evenly weighted.

Thanks for all the great photos and comments in this thread.

Regards,

Matt

[mstacy]

One can only wonder what George Washington Hayduke would make of all this.

[mstacy]

Carl,

I was moved by your article in SFJ. Judging by the breadth and passion of responses in this thread I am not alone. I had not considered that mobile slaughter units could potentially threaten other on-farm slaughter options, but you raise a very valid point.

I strongly support the concept of contractual consent between buyer and farmer. It embodies the “glass walled slaughter house” concept that Joel Salatin espouses. It is similar to raw milk sales in Vermont. However where the consumer and producer are blind to one another I see state/federal inspection as very appropriate.

From my perspective the food safety regulations are rife with inconsistencies, contradicitions, and vaguaries. In my opinion the “itinerant custom slaughterer” provision (Vermont statute Title 6, Chapter 204, 6 VSA 3306, F) is open to intepretation. If an license-exempt individual can slaughter my customer’s animal can I not legally slaughter the animal myself? How many people get sick from consuming home processed game animals? How many illnesses can be attributed to uninspected poultry in Vermont. I suspect the numbers are relatively small.

There is also the question of what we charge for. Suppose that I sell a pig to my neighbor for a fixed price and then at a later date help him process the animal. Have I violated any laws?

I am oposed to needless transportation of live animals to slaughter facilities. If I raise an animal I feel obligated to see it through to the end.

Regards,

Matt

[mstacy]

Miles,

We have to cross a bridge over a small river (upper Waits) to reach our woodlot. My off steer frequently balks there. They are much worse heading into the woods than coming back with a load.

I usually halter the off steer for those occasions when he needs a bit of persuasion.

This behavior started rather suddenly when they were about a year old. They had already crossed the bridge at least a hundred times before that.

Matt
Topsham, VT

[mstacy]

@OldKat 22017 wrote:

… He said the furnaces that they used to create this stuff essentially burned year round, with the smoke being a form of mosquito and fly control around their villages.

Whoa. Hold the horses folks. Step back and look at the big picture for a second. Wood is carbon and volatile compounds. When you heat the wood (whether in an open fire, woodstove, furnace, charcoal kiln, etc) those components are separated from one another. The carbon and the volatile compounds are both very combustible.

Those amazon furnaces that you describe are charcoal kilns. Start a fire in a mud beehive, seal up most of the air inlets so it will smolder. The idea is to let in just enough air to burn just enough of the carbon and/or volatiles to drive the process (separating the volatiles from the carbon). If we did this in a fancy modern appliance we’d call it “pyrolysis”. The volatiles spew into the atmosphere as unburned fuel with horrible environmental consequences.

Waste 100% of the fuel value in the wood,
dump 50% of that fuel into the atmoshere unburned
… and yet here we are touting the ecological benefits of this practice. Hmmm?

The only way to make this work is to plumb the flue gas to an appliance, and burn it for some USEFUL purpose (powering a sawmill, generating electricity, domestic heating, boiling maple sap, heating water for a dairy, desalinating water, etc). I guarantee you that the amazonian charcoal kilns did none of these … though I don’t doubt their efficacy for mosquito control

Imagine if all the standed offshore oil wells (serviced by tanker rather than pipeline) dumped all the associated natural gas rather than flaring (burning) it off. Flaring is wasteful, but dumping is just plain negligent.

You’ve all heard the hubub about cow farts (a.k.a. methane .a.k.a natural gas). The situation is directly analogous. Methane (unburned fuel) is an incredibly effective greenhouse gas. Far worse than burning to release it’s energy content and its carbon content. Of course it would be even better if we did something useful with the heat of combustion. The bottom line is ‘Don’t dump unburned hydrocarbons’ into the atmosphere (or the water, but that’s a different discussion altogether).

I have a hard time accepting that charcoal production by “traditional” means is ecologically beneficial.

We can bias the process to either consume or produce charcoal but it is critically important to combust the gaseous fuel product as completely as possible.

Regards,

Matt

[Author]

Posts