Comparative analysis of the methods of agro-ecological assessment of machine-tractor units in Ukraine and EU countries
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31734/agroengineering2024.28.209Keywords:
agro-ecology, tractors, tillage, soil compaction, moisture and air contentAbstract
The article focuses on a comparative analysis of the approaches, methods, and regulatory frameworks for agro-ecological assessment of machine-tractor units (MTU) in Ukraine (the Eastern School) and EU countries (the Western School, specifically using Germany as an example). There are significant differences related to the increasing use of heavy tractors classified between 3 and 6, which raises urgent concerns about soil compaction and degradation in agricultural lands. This situation highlights the necessity for the development of a national framework in Ukraine that aligns with EU standards. One major issue identified is the ambiguity surrounding the use of specific wheel pressure as the sole regulatory indicator for the agro-ecological assessment of MTUs. Additionally, there is a lack of a national regulatory framework for the rapid assessment of the physical and mechanical properties of various soils, such as the use of penetrometers that align with EU practices. Other factors that need consideration include the varying sizes of front and rear axle wheels and the compaction caused by the rear axle during travel on a single track.
The article proposes harmonizing the national regulatory framework with EU practices through the adoption of relevant ISO standards as the national standard (DSTU). Furthermore, it offers suggestions for improving the agro-ecological assessment of MTUs by considering the sequence of wheel passage for front and rear axles, the different sizes of front and rear tires, and the effects of mounted and trailed implements.
The need for ongoing development and enhancement of methods for studying and evaluating soil compaction is emphasized, particularly during the sequential passage of wheels from the front and rear axles. This includes assessing the impact of mounted and trailed implements on load redistribution along the axles, analyzing how wheel size variations affect compaction, and monitoring the frequency of wheel passage.
References
Ageikin, Ya. S. (1981). Prokhodimost avtomobiley. Moskva: Mashinostroenie, 230.
Babkov, V. F., Birulia, A. K., Sidenko, V. M. (1959). Prokhodimost kolesnykh mashin po gruntam. Moskva: Avtotransizdat, 326.
Biletskyi, V. R. (2000). Pereushchilnennia hruntu rushiiamy mobilnoi silskohospodarskoi tekhniky. Zhytomyr: DAAU. 43.
Chamen, W. C. T. et al. (2003). Prevention strategies for field traffic-induced subsoil compaction: a review. Part.2: Equipment and field practices. Soil Till. Resume, 47, 161-174.
Czeratzki, W. (1972). Die Ansprueche der Pflanzen an den physikalischen Bodenzustand. Landbauforschung Voelkenrode, 22 (1), 29-36.
DSTU 4428:2005. (2005). Tekhnika silskohospodarska mobilna. Metody vyznachennia dii khodovykh system na hrunt. Kyiv: Derzhspozhyvstandart.
DSTU 4521:2006. (2006). Tekhnika silskohospodarska mobilna. Normy dii khodovykh system na hrunt. Kyiv: Derzhspozhyvstandart.
DSTU 4977:2008. (2008). Tekhnika silskohospodarska mobilna. Metody vyznachennia maksymalnoho napruzhennia v hrunti pid diieiu khodovykh system. Kyiv: Derzhspozhyvstandart.
EOSDA Crop Monitoring. URL: https:// eos.com /uk/blog/volohist-gruntu
Frielinghaus, D., Petelkau, H., Seidel, K. (2001). Schadverdichtungen in Ackerboeden – Entstehung, Folgen, Gegenmassnahmen. 14. Wissen. Fachtagung Landwirtschaftliche Fakultaet der Universitaet Bonn. Dezember, 88.
Froehlich, O. K. (1934). Druckverteilung im Baugrunde. Springer Verlag. Wien, 178.
Hitrov, E. G., Hahina, A. M., Grigorev, I. V., Grigoreva, O. I., Nikiforova, A. I. (2016). Raschet tyigovo- stsepnykh svoistv kolesnykh lesnykh mashin s ispolzovaniem WES – metoda. Lesotehnicheskiy zhurnal, 3, 2, 196–202.
Hrubel, M. H., Krainyk, L. V. (2023). Prokhidnist viiskovykh avtomobiliv. Monohrafiia. Kyiv: Profesional, 182.
ISO 22476-1:2012. (2012). Geotechnical investignation and testing. Fiekd testing. Part 1: Electrical cone and piezocone penetration test.
Ivanyshyn, V. V., Rud, A. V., Moshenko, I. O. (2017). Vyznachennia pereushchilnennia hruntiv u hospodarstvakh zakhidnoi chastyny lisostepu Ukrainy. Podilskyi visnyk: silske hospodarstvo, tekhnika, ekonomika, 27, 146-158.
Kashbulganov, R. A., Panasiuk, A. N., Lipkan, V. A. (2019). Metodika vybora energeticheskikh sredstv v tehnologiiakh rastenievodstva po ekologicheskim, energeticheskim i ekonomicheskim kriteriiam. Tekhnologii i tekhnicheskie srestva mekhanizirovannogo proizvodstva produktsii rastenievodstva i
zhivotnovodstva, 2, 159-148.
Ksenevich, I. P., Skotnikov, V. A., Liasko, M. I. (1985). Khodovaia chast – pochva – urozhay. Moskva: Ahropromizdat, 304.
Kutsenko, O. M., Pysarenko, V. M. (1995). Ahroekolohiia. Kyiv: Urozhai. 254.
LFG – malohabarytnyi vymiriuvach shchilnosti hruntu – HLR. URL: https: // industry.hlr.ua / bulding-materials-testing/ control-rfzestva-story-place/lfg.
Marusiak, M., Neruda, J. (2018). Dynamic soil pressures Caused by travelling forest machines. Croat. Journal Forest. Engineering, 39, 233-245.
Medvediev, V. V. (2012). Ekolohizatsiia v konstruiuvanni ta ekspluatatsii zemlerobskykh mashynno-traktornykh ahrehativ. Visnyk ahrarnoi nauky, 10, 39-45.
Nadykto, V. T. Velychko, O. V. (2015). Prohnoz rozvytku enerhonasychenosti silskohospodarskykh traktoriv. Mekhanizatsiia ta elektryfikatsiia silskoho hospodarstva, 1, 146-151.
Petelkau, H., Seidel, H. (1982). Rompreeibilitaet von Bodenproben unterschiedlicher Substrate bei stufenweiser uniaxialer Belastung in Abhaengigkeit vom Wassergehalt. Bodenkunde, 26 (6), 389-393.
Rebrov, O. Yu. (2018). Rozpodil dopustymoho tysku na hrunt khodovykh system kolisnykh traktoriv za terytoriieiu Ukrainy. Visnyk NTU “KhPI”. Seriia “Matematychne modeliuvannia v tekhnitsi ta tekhnolohiiakh”, 27, 110-116.
Rebrov, O. Yu. (2021). Naukove obgruntuvannia pidvyshchennia efektyvnosti kolisnykh rushiiv silskohospodarskykh traktoriv na enerhoiemnykh tekhnolohichnykh operatsiiakh obrobitku hruntu. . Dyssert. Dr. Techn. Nauk. Kharkiv, NTU “KhPI”, 423.
Rebrov, O. Yu., Kalchenko, B. I., Makarov, V. A., Yakunin, M. S., Buchko, I. H., Rebrova, O. M., Artiushenko, O. V., Lelnenko, O. M. (2022). Otsinochnyi analiz dii na hrunt khodovykh system kolisnykh silskohospodarskykh traktoriv. Visnyk NTU “KhPI”. Seriia Avtomobile- ta traktorobuduvannia, 1, 36–43.
Saarlahti, M. (2002). Soil interaction model. Univercity of Helsinki, Departament of forest resource management, QLK5-1999-00991, 86.
Saarlahti, M., Antilla, T. (1999). Rut depth model for timber transport on moraine soils. Procedings of the 13 ISVTS Conference. Munich: Germany. , September 1999, Munich: Germany, 29-37.
Soehne, W. (1951). Das mechanische Verhalten des Ackerbodens bei Belastungen, unter rollenden Raedern sowie bei der Bodenbearbeitung. Grundlagen der Landtechnik, 1 (1), 87-94
Soehne, W. (1952). Die Verformbarkeit des Ackerbodens. Grundlagen der Landtechnik, 2 (3), 51-59.
Soehne, W. (1953). Druckverteilung im Boden und Bodenveformung unter Schlepperreifen. Grundlagen der Landtechnik, 2 (5), 44-52.
Sommer, C. (1986). Bodenschonende und Bodenschuetzende Pflanzenproduktion – dargestellt an Beispielen der Bodenbearbeitung. Landtechnik, 41(9), 236-243.
Tiijink, F. G. J., van der Linden, J. P. (2000). Engineering approaches to prevent subsoil compaction in cropping systems with sugar beet. Advances in Geoecology, 32, 432-452
Tijink, F. G. J., Spoor, G. (2004). Technische Leitlinien zur Vorbeugung von Bodenschadverdichtung. Zuckerindustrie,129/ 9, 647-652.
Tsyitovich, N. A. (1963). Mekhanika gruntov. Moskva: Gosstroyizdat, 311.
VDI-Richtlinie 6101. (2007). Maschineneinsatz unter Beruecksichtigung der Befahrbarkeit landwirtschaftlich genutzter Boeden. VDI Verlag. Duesseldorf.
Wong, Y. J. (2010). Terramechanics and off road vehicle engineering. Secоnd Ed. Butterworth. London, 482.
Zezetko, N. I. (2014). Ekspluatatsionnaia i konstruktivnaia massy proektiruemogo kolesnogo traktora 4K4. Vestnik Belorussko-Rossiyskogo universiteta, 2 (43), 26-36.
