What is the Advantage and Disadvantage of harvest rotary header

19 May.,2025

 

Viewing a thread - Shelbourne stripper head pros/cons - AgTalk Home

Claymore
Posted 7/1/ 18:57 (#)
Subject: Shelbourne stripper head pros/cons
What are the pros and cons of harvesting wheat with a stripper head? My farm is located in SWND, and I raise HRW, HRS and Durum. Yields range from 5 to 100 bu/A, with 25-50 bu yields most common. I follow HRW with corn or sunflower that is planted with a planter equipped with row cleaners, and HRW is seeded into HRS stubble with a single disk drill. How easy are stripper heads to operate and maintain? How reliable are they, and do parts wear out quickly? What are any drawbacks of seeding into 2'-3' tall stubble? Thanks for any info.


Hagen Brothers farms,Goodrich ND
I farm in central ND and harvested spring wheat and flax with a Shelbourne Reynolds CX72 (cereal header ,7.2 meter or 24 ft ). Have used the stripper since 98. The only repairs were to replace the stripper teeth and plates after seven harvests. About acres of wheat and flax per year. The stripper teeth / plates should have lasted longer, but I had never done a good job of leveling the header and adjusting the skid plates to keep the header at the optimum height. We got em in the rocks and dirt pretty often and really beat them up.
After replacing the stripper parts, I did a correct setup by the manual and see almost 0 wear or damage in two harvest seasons, they should last at least twice as long now. Last year we bought a second nearly identical IH combine that I ran with a JD 925 header with Crary air reel, so we were stripping and cutting in the same field. It made for some screwy looking fields with all the tall stripped and short cut straw, but gave me a golden opportunity to compare combine capacity with the two types of harvest systems, grain loss, volunteer grain / weed density in the fall and field dry down this wet spring. We have very good chaff / straw spreaders on both combines as everything is planted no till with JD 750 no till drills.

I ran the machine with the JD 925 head cutting grain while my brother used the stripper. First thing I noticed was that no matter how hard I pushed the combine, brother with the stripper was out harvesting me by a good 30% because he had almost no straw to grind with his combine. his chaff spreader had a good stream of material while the straw spreaders were doing almost nothing.
I did a seeds per SQFT check behind both combines many times and saw no more, usually less loss behind the stripper. This was verified by the amount of green in the field a month and a few rains after harvest.
Both stripper and cut stubbles caught snow to their full height last winter.
This spring, the stripper stubble dried as quick or quicker, than the cut stubble in spite of the increased snow catch in the stripper stubble, because their was no mat of cut straw to keep the ground shaded and wet.
We bought another Shelbourne stripper head this spring, so we will be running a pair of them this harvest.

The only con is that they are heavy and expensive new.

Edited by Jon Hagen 7/1/ 22:48


NC
here we raise SRW and back in say or so they first showed up. became a fad and probably where 30+ in the local area. still raise SRW in the area but today there are maybe less than 3 still running. they got such a bad rep for wasting wheat here that many at auction received no bids.

if you notice, draper heads are all the rave now and even the Big 3 OEM's are offering them and Deere has even developed their own i'm told? if the strippers had been a very successful tool, wouldn't the OEM's had made marketing deals with SR & sold them also. other than MF offering their take on the stripper i don't think that occurred?

one thing is for sure, a new MacDon 36ft Draper is an expensive tool but it is capable of harvesting how many different crops? the strippers where overly expensive when they first showed up versus a platform on a per foot basis? i can't imagine what a new SR stripper of any width cost today?

SW KS, near Dodge City
I love ours. Our farm will never be without them. The newer series CX/CVS are light years ahead of the original series that came out. We had both. Get a CVS if you can, if not the CX series is very good also. Only difference is that the CVS will adjust stripping rotor speed from the cab on the go. As to the loss, well, it all depends on the operator. Running a stripper head is different than running a straight head. If you run it right, there won't be any more loss than w/ a conventional. We have ours on an R62, and I think it gives us about 15-20% more capacity, at least. Cutting hailed on 55 bu wheat (head on the ground to get it all ) we were running 4.5-5 mph w/ a 32' head.

I'm a big proponent of them if you can't tell.I've typically responded on most stripper header questions like Jon has in the past, he give a very good run down on the pros/cons of the header. I've been from S. Arizona to Canada and from California to Deleware with stripper headers and my take is they have their place. Are they for everybody? Absolutley not. Are they for the farmer that wants to maximize his combine throughput, utilize the straw left for no-till/moisture conservation? Yes.

Now, if you are after ground speed only (one of the selling features in the PAST ) you need not apply unless you are running an older convetional combine. The rotary machines were typically pacing past the conventionals and they do not see the increase in speed that a conventional machine will see i.e. , , . Wear and tear on a machine will be less, fuel burned per acre will typically be less. On the stripper side the fingers as Jon pointed out are the main wearing item, the new stainless steel fingers have shown they wear better and have been standard since ~-. Will a bearing go out? Sure it's a machine, but I've yet to see even a rigid header or flex header have much less of an input/keep up price tag, sickles are not cheap any more nor are guards. In my country it's all about moisture conservation, newer planters and drills will most likely have no problems with the residue, if they do they need a coulter or the drill needs to be a single disk machine. Loss is spread more evenly and one can typically get a better kill on the volunteer, saving some guys 1-2 passes with chemical (that equals $$'s saved )!!

If you have questions, fire away I've backed these things for along time!


Hagen Brothers farms,Goodrich ND
You say you have run the very early (94 and earlier with the rubber belt )SR ? series Shelbourne headers ? I have heard that the SR ? series headers lost a lot more grain than the CX or newer CVS type. I have been told that the stripper headers got a bad reputation from these early heads. Your experience ?
Our first head is a 98 model CX with the old style plastic fingers and the latest one is a 95 model RX with the new stainless steel over plastic fingers. It seems like the new stainless steel over plastic type is getting to be standard.
They sure make a little combine act like a big dog :- )


Hagen Brothers farms,Goodrich ND
jde - 7/2/ 20:51

here we raise SRW and back in say or so they first showed up. became a fad and probably where 30+ in the local area. still raise SRW in the area but today there are maybe less than 3 still running. they got such a bad rep for wasting wheat here that many at auction received no bids.

if you notice, draper heads are all the rave now and even the Big 3 OEM's are offering them and Deere has even developed their own i'm told? if the strippers had been a very successful tool, wouldn't the OEM's had made marketing deals with SR & sold them also. other than MF offering their take on the stripper i don't think that occurred?

one thing is for sure, a new MacDon 36ft Draper is an expensive tool but it is capable of harvesting how many different crops? the strippers where overly expensive when they first showed up versus a platform on a per foot basis? i can't imagine what a new SR stripper of any width cost today?




JDE, are their any of the post 95 model Shelbourne headers running in your area, or are they the old alleged grain wasters built pre 95 with the rubber belt system ?

i suspect that stripper headers are not more popular because so many seeding systems other than disc openers have a hard time with plugging in tall stripper straw.
While searching for stripper headers last spring, most new ones appeared to be priced at about $- per foot.

Buy the way, for you, where is here ? Wondering where you grow SRW wheat ?

Western CO
The USDA-ARS station not far from me has documented approximately an additional 1.3-1.5" of available soil moisture by using a stripper head. In our area of low rainfall (~16" ) that makes a pretty big difference. We purchased a CX84 to run on a . This will be our first wheat harvest with it, we are about 10 days or so away from getting to try it. Jon and Phil if you have any suggestions on settings I'd be all ears -- my is good if you want to go that way.

W.C. Mo.
I have ran a stripper head and a platform side by side. When going back with notill DC soybeans or sunflowers, the shorter straw yeilded significantly higher yeilds of both sb and flowers which made no sense to me since I assumed the shaded ground would conserve more moisture. I finally talked to a university prof that explained to me in Nebr they had discovered the early shaded plants grew more rapidly thus becoming elongated and weaker,thus lower yeilding.


Hagen Brothers farms,Goodrich ND
Highplainsnotillr - 7/2/ 22:39

The USDA-ARS station not far from me has documented approximately an additional 1.3-1.5" of available soil moisture by using a stripper head. In our area of low rainfall (~16" ) that makes a pretty big difference. We purchased a CX84 to run on a . This will be our first wheat harvest with it, we are about 10 days or so away from getting to try it. Jon and Phil if you have any suggestions on settings I'd be all ears -- my is good if you want to go that way.




lots of good info on the Shelbourne site, setup for a specific combine, Maintenance , settings , etc.
http://www.shelbourne.com/harvesting/stripper-header

Remember to change the gear box oil every year and use only Mobil 1 full synthetic 75 / 90.

Run the header low enough so the stripping rotor can reach the lowest heads. Once you find the right header height, set the hood so the tip of the grain heads are about level with the top of the hood nose. This will bend the heads and tops of the stems forward far enough to present the "wall of straw" in front of the stripper rotor, so any seeds that fly forward are bounced back into the stripper rotor.
Bending the crop forward like that also causes the crop to spring back into the rotor in a way that the heads will be stripped off and thrown over the rotor into the table auger instead of out the front of the header. ( see drawings under "design history" to better understand this )

Lots of good info under "how to set up your combine." Stripper rotor speed, concave mods, etc.

For our little IH rotor machines ( ) in hard threshing spring wheat, we need to run 3 cover plates on the front of the LW concaves to keep the much smaller amount of crop material ( remember, no straw to add bulk to help thresh the grain ) on the concaves long enough to get a complete, white cap free thresh. we also need to run the rotor faster and concave much tighter than recommended for a conventional header.
Run as fast a you can, (ground speed ) the harder you push that header, the better stripping job and less grain will be lost. More so if the crop is thin.

We run spec rotors with Stewart Steel auger fronts for an AFX type rotor and use 12 Gordon threshing bars on the front of the rotor.
This gives us a rotor that will eat green peas or soybeans without much rumble, yet do a very good job of threshing tough threshing spring wheat.
We run Harvest brand, large wire concaves for all crops, just add or remove cover plates depending on seed size and how hard it is to thresh.
The Shelbourne site tells how to determine what stripping rotor speed is correct for your crop / conditions.

Edited by Jon Hagen 7/2/ 01:34




(rotor 4.JPG)



Attachments
----------------
rotor 4.JPG (95KB - 745 downloads)



Hagen Brothers farms,Goodrich ND
greasegun - 7/2/ 23:16

I have ran a stripper head and a platform side by side. When going back with notill DC soybeans or sunflowers, the shorter straw yeilded significantly higher yeilds of both sb and flowers which made no sense to me since I assumed the shaded ground would conserve more moisture. I finally talked to a university prof that explained to me in Nebr they had discovered the early shaded plants grew more rapidly thus becoming elongated and weaker,thus lower yeilding.




Interesting, and makes sense.
I have not seen that, probably due to the straw / stubble flattening ability of our seeding equipment.
we run 15 ft 750 drills on 7.5 inch rows with the separate placement (mid row bander option ) . what is called the double box drills.

This setup has 36 openers / gauge wheels on a 15 ft drill, so every bit of stubble is run over by a gauge wheel and flattened to the ground. we end up with straw ground cover that is all laid flat and does not shade the seedlings.
I never thought about it, but I suppose that helps.

Edited by Jon Hagen 7/2/ 01:30




(10 transport.JPG)



Attachments
----------------
10 transport.JPG (39KB - 638 downloads)



Colby, Kansas
I'm in agreement with everything Jon, Josh, and Phil have already said. To add a bit to Jon's discussion on selecting a head height, there are several reasons you don't want to go any lower than you have too, header loss can become an issue not only because the "wall" of wheat is missing but in varieties prone to shattering if you run the nose of the hood too low so that the heads are above it you actually force the wheat to do a double bend, it bends towards the combine when it first comes into contact then has to bend back around the nose of the hood, then rapidly snap back upright prior to hitting the rotor. I've seen the mechanics of this cause a great deal of shatter before the wheat ever gets to the rotor.

Most header loss comes from running excessive rotor speed and too slow of ground speed. Only run the rotor as fast as you need to, the head as low as you have too, then drive fast. When conditions are good the field should look almost a little shaggy behind. If you are removing the entire head then you are either running the rotor too fast, the head too low, or a combination of both.

In regards to the agronomic aspects, I have heard other stories about DC soybeans. One possible theory for the depressed yields is the effect the tall stubble has on branch and pod initiation which physiologically are influenced by light and the spectra (wavelengths ) present in that light. Tall stubble alters that. We have seen some interesting things with grain sorghum and are investigating the effect of tall stubble on tiller initiation.

With regard to row crops into stripped stubble, attached below is some recent work I've been involved with, some other data going back to is mentioned as well. I have similar data to this from multiple locations in western Kansas and SW Nebraska. In a nutshell, we pick up 5 bu/ac in corn going from short cut stubble to tall cut stubble, then another 5 bu. going from tall cut to stripped.

Based on what your trying to do with your rotation and your rainfall, etc. I think a stripper would be an excellent fit for your operation.

Good Luck,
Lucas

The attached article is taken from the Southwest Research-Extension Center Field Day Report of Progress #. The complete document can be found here.
http://www.oznet.ksu.edu/library/crpsl2/SRP.pdf



Edited by LHaag 7/2/ 02:34




Attachments
----------------
Field Day Stubble.pdf (117KB - downloads)
Lucas,

Is milo tillering suppressed (or increased ) in stripper-harvested stubble?

SW KS, near Dodge City
Those early heads were bad about losing grain. We hung a 20' on a TR70 in about that time fram. The problem was the transition where the stripping rotor dumped the grain on the belt that took it to the auger. Complicated setup that didn't work worth a hoot. Then we got the R62 & went back to straight cutting until I finally convinced Dad to go back to the stripper head. The CVS is light years ahead of that old SR series head. We have one of the early CVS heads, and we did have to replace the gearbox at the rotor, the housing had cracked. Not cheap, but even w/ the added expense I would still go w/ a stripper head over a straight head.

Edit: Yep, talk about adding capacity in a hurry. Putting that on that TR70 made it perform like an Titan II!!

Edited by pknoeber 7/2/ 08:31


SW KS, near Dodge City
Lucas covered it pretty well. I know in hailed-on wheat when you have to go down to get it all, if you run the hood high enough that the standing heads are just a little above the top, then you lose a lot of it out the front, mostly b/c you don't have the wall of wheat to seal against the hood, so in that case the hood had to run quite a bit lower.

Also, if you have some down wheat/broken over wheat that you're going down to get, it will still take a lot of material into the machine. I loaned ours out to a neighbor to try out. He was putting it on an R72 set up for a conventional head. His prior settings were Rotor 950 RPM, 3 filler plates, clearance at 5, top sieve just under 1/2". After putting the stripper head on, the rotor was set at 650-700, 3 plates, clearance at 1.5, top sieve about wide open, bottom sieve still tightened up. We were having problems overloading the shoe b/c the wheat was hailed on, had some weeds coming, and running low to get it all was just putting a tremendous amount of material on the shoe. When I shut it down to check, there was probably 12" of pretty heavy material on the top sieve. With a stripper it's pretty important to try to keep the wheat clean. That heavy green material plays havoc w/ shoe overloading.

Cambridge, southwestern Nebraska
Lucas,

Did you get my awhile back with my address?
Rained here last night. Just got started cutting wheat the last couple of days.

NC
easternNC/VA and the models where of both eras. a lot of the wheat straw but not all here is burnt off with fire as we usually have trouble with too much moisture than not enough. all single or double disc openers used here. here there is no advantage to stubble height but i will admit if you are going to plant into standing wheat stubble, behind the stripper gives better seed to soil contact than behind a platform or draper. normal years here see SRW range from 35-110bpa, common average today of say 70-80 farmwise.

when they first showed up, everyone was impressed with their speed and ability to start earlier be it harvest or start of the day. after a couple years that wore off and the reality of their losses became the issue. Ext Agents ran numerous loss checks on them & platforms and it was not unusual to see 2-5bpa losses behind them versus 1-2bpa off the platforms. their field reps replaced the rubber, they sped up & slowed down the rotor. needless to say, here they where a fad that came & went.


Colby, Kansas
Matt,

What we are seeing in some studies with sorghum is a quadratic response (not statistically significant, but a trend none-the-less ) to stubble height where the yields have been higher in the tall cut, and about equal in the short cut and stripped. When we break it down into yield components it appears that tillering MAY be reduced by the stripped stubble.

If you look at tables 2 and 4 in my attachment you'll see that in this past year the kernels per head yield component was affected by stubble height with the stripped having the highest down to short cut. Although it didn't test significant you can see that heads/plant played a role in getting us to the trend in grain yield we see, with tall cut having the highest heads/plant. The across years data (Table 4 ) shows something similar.

I want to stress that by no means do I think we have anything close to an answer here, I'm certainly not prepared to say that stripped stubble inhibits tillering, but its caught our eye and deserves some attention. If someone was concerned about this and had to have a recommendation this next year at planting time, mine would be to keep the stripper and plant your sorghum slightly thicker.

Regards,
Lucas


Edited by LHaag 7/2/ 10:13



Colby, Kansas
Sure did, sorry I didn't get replied to you. I haven't had a lot of computer time lately other than work related. I'm at home for harvest, we got 0.50 at the place and guessing more over south, havent got the numbers yet. Guess I should have stayed down at Tribune another day. They started on Tuesday here at home with some seed (AgriPro Art ). What we've done so far has been excellent.

Safe harvest,

Lucas


SW KS, near Dodge City
OK, what am I doing wrong w/ my wheat? My stripper stubble is all flat on the ground after winter. Or are you guys referring to double cropping?

Phil Knoeber:

On average, Dodge City will have more precip, higher humidity, and a shorter winter than at Tribune, KS, or Akron, CO. Therefore, your stripper stubble will be more likely to be flat by the following spring (more decomposition at the base of the wheat stem ). The only solution I know of is cover cropping, which probably sounds ludicrous to you, but might not be as crazy as you first think.LHaag
Posted 7/3/ 11:32 (# - in reply to #)
Subject: Re: Shelbourne stripper head pros/cons



Colby, Kansas
Phil,

I think Matt has a point with the moisture and weather in general, I know that even up here in the McCook area and around Scott City which gets around 3-4" more precip than Tribune there are huge differences in how the stubble stands both from year to year and between fields any given year. I think there are several things going on there, for awhile I thought there may be a variety component and although I think that's important it isn't the only thing affecting the straw standability. I think there may be some fertility issues intertwined as well. I have several producers in the Leoti area tell me that the stubble went down the worst in areas of the field that they knew were high in fertility.

Hopefully we can figure out how to improve the standability of the stubble as that's key to a lot of the benefits, particularly snow catch, as well as making planting much easier.

Hows wheat harvest progressing for you.

Regards,
Lucas
Claymore
Posted 7/3/ 13:31 (# - in reply to #)
Subject: Re: Shelbourne stripper head pros/cons
Is header loss a problem in drought damaged wheat that is thin and short? How about going through winter killed or drowned out patches? Also, how do they handle going through weedy patches, like kochia?Jon Hagen
Posted 7/4/ 01:20 (# - in reply to #)
Subject: Re: Shelbourne stripper head pros/cons



Hagen Brothers farms,Goodrich ND
Claymore - 7/4/ 12:31

Is header loss a problem in drought damaged wheat that is thin and short? How about going through winter killed or drowned out patches? Also, how do they handle going through weedy patches, like kochia?




You get little stripper header loss if you push the header as hard as possible. Have had good results in drought damaged stuff that yield as little as 15 bu /a.
Very short wheat is a danger to the stripper rotor if your fields have rocks.

Weeds like kochia go through pretty good, upright weeds will often have part of the leaves stripped off with most of the plant still standing in the field, so less weeds go in the combine than direct cut stuff.

Edited by Jon Hagen 7/4/ 01:22
BSchroeder
Posted 7/4/ 19:49 (# - in reply to #)
Subject: Re: Shelbourne stripper head pros/cons


Devils Lake, ND
LHaag - 7/3/ 11:32

I have several producers in the Leoti area tell me that the stubble went down the worst in areas of the field that they knew were high in fertility.



If it had plenty of nitrogen, the C:N ratio could very well be narrower, allowing faster decomposition.BSchroeder
Posted 7/4/ 19:51 (# - in reply to #)
Subject: Re: Shelbourne stripper head pros/cons


Devils Lake, ND
Assume the standing cover crop keeps the straw from blowing around?mhagny
Posted 7/6/ 05:49 (# - in reply to #)
Subject: Re: Shelbourne stripper head pros/cons

Combine harvester - Wikipedia

Machine that harvests grain crops For the novelty song, see The Combine Harvester.

The modern combine harvester, also called a combine, is a machine designed to harvest a variety of cultivated seeds. Combine harvesters are one of the most economically important labour-saving inventions, significantly reducing the fraction of the population engaged in agriculture.[1] Among the crops harvested with a combine are wheat, rice, oats, rye, barley, corn (maize), sorghum, millet, soybeans, flax (linseed), sunflowers and rapeseed (canola). The separated straw (consisting of stems and any remaining leaves with limited nutrients left in it) is then either chopped onto the field and ploughed back in, or laid out in rows, ready to be baled and used for bedding and cattle feed.

Please visit our website for more information on this topic.

The name of the machine is derived from the fact that the harvester combined multiple separate harvesting operations – reaping, threshing or winnowing and gathering – into a single process around the start of the 20th century.[2] A combine harvester still performs those operation principles. The machine can easily be divided into four parts, namely: the intake mechanism, the threshing and separation system, the cleaning system, and finally the grain handling and storage system. Electronic monitoring assists the operator by providing an overview of the machine's operation, and the field's yield.

In in Scotland, the inventor Reverend Patrick Bell designed a reaper machine, which used the scissors principle of plant cutting (a principle that is used to this day). The Bell machine was pushed by horses. A few Bell machines were available in the United States. In , in the United States, Hiram Moore built and patented the first combine harvester, which was capable of reaping, threshing and winnowing cereal grain. Early versions were pulled by horse, mule or ox teams.[3] In , Moore built a full-scale version with a length of 5.2 m (17 ft) and a cut width of 4.57 m (15 ft); by , over 20 ha (50 acres) of crops were harvested.[4] This combine harvester was pulled by 20 horses fully handled by farmhands. By , combine harvesters with a cutting, or swathe, width of several metres were used on American farms.[5]

A parallel development in Australia saw the development of the stripper based on the Gallic stripper, by John Ridley and others in South Australia by . The stripper only gathered the heads, leaving the stems in the field.[6] The stripper and later headers had the advantage of fewer moving parts and only collecting heads, requiring less power to operate. Refinements by Hugh Victor McKay produced a commercially successful combine harvester in , the Sunshine Header-Harvester.[7]

Combines, some of them quite large, were drawn by mule or horse teams and used a bullwheel to provide power. Later, steam power was used, and George Stockton Berry integrated the combine with a steam engine using straw to heat the boiler.[8] At the turn of the twentieth century, horse-drawn combines were starting to be used on the American plains and Idaho (often pulled by teams of twenty or more horses).

In , the Holt Manufacturing Company of California, US produced a self-propelled harvester.[9] In Australia in , the patented Sunshine Auto Header was one of the first center-feeding self-propelled harvesters.[10] In in Kansas, the Baldwin brothers and their Gleaner Manufacturing Company patented a self-propelled harvester that included several other modern improvements in grain handling.[11] Both the Gleaner and the Sunshine used Fordson engines; early Gleaners used the entire Fordson chassis and driveline as a platform. In , Alfredo Rotania of Argentina patented a self-propelled harvester.[12] International Harvester started making horse-pulled combines in . At the time, horse-powered binders and stand-alone threshing machines were more common. In the s, Case Corporation and John Deere made combines, introducing tractor-pulled harvesters with a second engine aboard the combine to power its workings. The world economic collapse in the s stopped farm equipment purchases, and for this reason, people largely retained the older method of harvesting. A few farms did invest and used Caterpillar tractors to move the outfits.

Tractor-drawn combines (also called pull-type combines) became common after World War II as many farms began to use tractors. An example was the All-Crop Harvester series. These combines used a shaker to separate the grain from the chaff and straw-walkers (grates with small teeth on an eccentric shaft) to eject the straw while retaining the grain. Early tractor-drawn combines were usually powered by a separate gasoline engine, while later models were PTO-powered, via a shaft transferring tractor engine power to operate the combine. These machines either put the harvested crop into bags that were then loaded onto a wagon or truck, or had a small bin that stored the grain until it was transferred via a chute.

In the U.S., Allis-Chalmers, Massey-Harris, International Harvester, Gleaner Manufacturing Company, John Deere, and Minneapolis Moline are past or present major combine producers. In , the Australian-born Thomas Carroll, working for Massey-Harris in Canada, perfected a self-propelled model and in , a lighter-weight model began to be marketed widely by the company.[13] Lyle Yost invented an auger that would lift grain out of a combine in , making unloading grain much easier and further from the combine.[14] In Claeys launched the first self-propelled combine harvester in Europe;[15] in , the European manufacturer Claas developed a self-propelled combine harvester named 'Hercules', it could harvest up to 5 tons of wheat a day.[7] This newer kind of combine is still in use and is powered by diesel or gasoline engines. Until the self-cleaning rotary screen was invented in the mid-s combine engines suffered from overheating as the chaff spewed out when harvesting small grains would clog radiators, blocking the airflow needed for cooling.

A significant advance in the design of combines was the rotary design. The grain is initially stripped from the stalk by passing along a helical rotor, instead of passing between rasp bars on the outside of a cylinder and a concave. Rotary combines were first introduced by Sperry-New Holland in .[16]

Around the s, on-board electronics were introduced to measure threshing efficiency. This new instrumentation allowed operators to get better grain yields by optimizing ground speed and other operating parameters.

The largest "class 10-plus" combines, which emerged in the early 's, have nearly 800 engine horsepower (600 kW)[17] and are fitted with headers up to 60 feet (18 m) wide.

Combines are equipped with removable headers that are designed for particular crops. The standard header, sometimes called a grain platform, is equipped with a reciprocating knife cutter bar, and features a revolving reel with metal teeth to cause the cut crop to fall into the auger once it is cut. A variation of the platform, a "flex" platform, is similar but has a cutter bar that can flex over contours and ridges to cut soybeans that have pods close to the ground. A flex head can cut soybeans as well as cereal crops, while a rigid platform is generally used only in cereal grains.

Some wheat headers, called "draper" headers, use a fabric or rubber apron instead of a cross auger. Draper headers allow faster feeding than cross augers, leading to higher throughputs due to lower power requirements. On many farms, platform headers are used to cut wheat, instead of separate wheat headers, so as to reduce overall costs.

Dummy heads or pick-up headers feature spring-tined pickups, usually attached to a heavy rubber belt. They are used for crops that have already been cut and placed in windrows or swaths. This is particularly useful in northern climates such as western Canada, where swathing kills weeds resulting in a faster dry down.

While a grain platform can be used for corn, a specialized corn head is ordinarily used instead. The corn head is equipped with snap rolls that strip the stalk and leaf away from the ear, so that only the ear (and husk) enter the throat. This improves efficiency dramatically since so much less material must go through the cylinder. The corn head can be recognized by the presence of points between each row.

Occasionally rowcrop heads are seen that function like a grain platform but have points between rows like a corn head. These are used to reduce the amount of weed seed picked up when harvesting small grains.

Self-propelled Gleaner combines could be fitted with special tracks instead of tires to assist in harvesting rice. These tracks can be made to fit other combines by adding adapter plates. Some combines, particularly the pull type, have tires with a deep diamond tread which prevents sinking in mud.

The cut crop is carried up the feeder throat (commonly called the "feederhouse"), by a chain and flight elevator, then fed into the threshing mechanism of the combine, consisting of a rotating threshing drum (commonly called the "cylinder"), to which grooved steel bars (rasp bars) are bolted. The rasp bars thresh or separate the grains and chaff from the straw through the action of the cylinder against the concave, a shaped "half drum", also fitted with steel bars and a meshed grill, through which grain, chaff and smaller debris may fall, whereas the straw, being too long, is carried through onto the straw walkers. This action is also allowed because grain is heavier than straw, which causes it to fall rather than "float" across from the cylinder/concave to the walkers. The drum speed is variably adjustable on most machines, whilst the distance between the drum and concave is finely adjustable fore, aft and together, to achieve optimum separation and output. Manually engaged disawning plates are usually fitted to the concave. These provide extra friction to remove the awns from barley crops. After the primary separation at the cylinder, the clean grain falls through the concave and to the shoe, which contains the chaffer and sieves. The shoe is common to both conventional combines and rotary combines.

Hillside leveling, in which a hydraulic system re-orients the combine, allows combines to harvest steep but fertile soil. Their primary advantage is increased threshing efficiency. Without leveling, grain and chaff slide to one side of the separator and come through the machine in a large ball rather than being separated, dumping large amounts of grain on the ground. By keeping the machinery level, the straw-walker is able to thresh more efficiently. Secondarily, leveling changes a combine's center of gravity relative to the hill and allows the combine to harvest along the contour of a hill without tipping, a danger on steeper slopes; it is not uncommon for combines to roll over on extremely steep hills. Hillside leveling can be very important in regions with steep hills, such as the Palouse region of the Pacific Northwest of the United States, where hillsides can have slopes as steep as 50%.

The first leveling technology was developed by Holt Co., a US company in California, in .[18] Modern leveling came into being with the invention and patent of a level sensitive mercury switch system invented by Raymond Alvah Hanson in .[19] A leveling system was also developed in Europe by the Italian combine manufacturer Laverda. Gleaner, IH/Case IH, John Deere, and others all have made combines with a hillside leveling system, and local machine shops have fabricated them as an aftermarket add-on. Newer leveling systems do not have as much tilt as the older ones, as modern combines use a rotary grain separator which makes leveling less critical.

Sidehill combines are very similar to hillside combines in that they level the combine to the ground so that the threshing can be efficiently conducted; however, they have some very distinct differences. Modern hillside combines level around 35% on average, while older machines were closer to 50%. Sidehill combines only level to 18%. They are sparsely used in the Palouse region. Rather, they are used on the gentle rolling slopes of the midwest. Sidehill combines are much more mass-produced than their hillside counterparts. The height of a sidehill machine is the same height as a level-land combine. Hillside combines have added steel that sets them up approximately 2–5 feet higher than a level-land combine and provide a smooth ride.

Another technology that is sometimes used on combines is a continuously variable transmission. This allows the ground speed of the machine to be varied while maintaining a constant engine and threshing speed. It is desirable to keep the threshing speed constant since the machine will typically have been adjusted to operate best at a certain speed.

Self-propelled combines started with standard manual transmissions that provided one speed based on input rpm. Deficiencies were noted and in the early s combines were equipped with what John Deere called the "Variable Speed Drive". This was simply a variable width sheave controlled by spring and hydraulic pressures. This sheave was attached to the input shaft of the transmission. A standard 4-speed manual transmission was still used in this drive system. The operator would select a gear, typically 3rd. An extra control was provided to the operator to allow him to speed up and slow down the machine within the limits provided by the variable speed drive system. By decreasing the width of the sheave on the input shaft of the transmission, the belt would ride higher in the groove. This slowed the rotating speed on the input shaft of the transmission, thus slowing the ground speed for that gear. A clutch was still provided to allow the operator to stop the machine and change transmission gears.

Later, as hydraulic technology improved, hydrostatic transmissions were introduced for use on swathers but later this technology was applied to combines as well. This drive retained the 4-speed manual transmission as before, but used a system of hydraulic pumps and motors to drive the input shaft of the transmission. The engine turns the hydraulic pump capable of pressures up to 4,000 psi (30 MPa). This pressure is then directed to the hydraulic motor that is connected to the input shaft of the transmission. The operator is provided with a lever in the cab that allows for the control of the hydraulic motor's ability to use the energy provided by the pump.

Xinwanda contains other products and information you need, so please check it out.

Most if not all modern combines are equipped with hydrostatic drives. These are larger versions of the same system used in consumer and commercial lawn mowers that most are familiar with today. In fact, it was the downsizing of the combine drive system that placed these drive systems into mowers and other machines.

Despite great advances in mechanics and computer control, the basic operation of the combine harvester has remained unchanged almost since it was invented.

Power requirements over the years have increased due to larger capacities and some processes such as rotary threshing and straw chopping take considerable power. This is sometimes supplied by a large tractor in a pull-type combine, or a large gasoline or diesel engine in a self-propelled type. A frequent problem is the presence of airborne chaff and straw, which can accumulate causing a fire hazard and to radiators which can become plugged. Most machines have addressed these problems with enclosed engine compartments and rotary centrifugal inlet screens which prevent chaff buildup.

First, the header, described above, cuts the crop and feeds it into the threshing cylinder. This consists of a series of horizontal rasp bars fixed across the path of the crop and in the shape of a quarter cylinder. Moving rasp bars or rub bars pull the crop through concaved grates that separate the grain and chaff from the straw. The grain heads fall through the fixed concaves. What happens next is dependent on the type of combine in question. In most modern combines, the grain is transported to the shoe by a set of 2, 3, or 4 (possibly more on the largest machines) augers, set parallel or semi-parallel to the rotor on axial mounted rotors and perpendicular on axial-flow combines.[20]

In older Gleaner machines, these augers were not present. Those combines are unique in that the cylinder and concave is set inside feederhouse instead of in the machine directly behind the feederhouse. Consequently, the material was moved by a "raddle chain" from underneath the concave to the walkers. The clean grain fell between the raddle and the walkers onto the shoe, while the straw, being longer and lighter, floated across onto the walkers to be expelled. On most other older machines, the cylinder was placed higher and farther back in the machine, and the grain moved to the shoe by falling down a "clean grain pan", and the straw "floated" across the concaves to the back of the walkers.

Since the Sperry-New Holland TR70 twin-rotor combine came out in , most manufacturers have combines with rotors in place of conventional cylinders. However, makers have now returned to the market with conventional models alongside their rotary line-up. A rotor is a long, longitudinally mounted rotating cylinder with plates similar to rub bars (except for in the above-mentioned Gleaner rotaries).

There are usually two sieves, one above the other. The sieves are basically metal frames that have many rows of "fingers" set reasonably close together. The angle of the fingers is adjustable, to change the clearance and thereby control the size of material passing through. The top is set with more clearance than the bottom to allow a gradual cleaning action. Setting the concave clearance, fan speed, and sieve size is critical to ensure that the crop is threshed properly, the grain is clean of debris, and all of the grain entering the machine reaches the grain tank or 'hopper'. (Observe, for example, that when travelling uphill the fan speed must be reduced to account for the shallower gradient of the sieves.)

Heavy material, e.g., unthreshed heads, fall off the front of the sieves and are returned to the concave for re-threshing.

The straw walkers are located above the sieves, and also have holes in them. Any grain remaining attached to the straw is shaken off and falls onto the top sieve.

When the straw reaches the end of the walkers it falls out the rear of the combine. It can then be baled for cattle bedding or spread by two rotating straw spreaders with rubber arms. Most modern combines are equipped with a straw spreader.

Rather than immediately falling out the rear of the combine at the end of the walkers, there are models of combine harvesters from Eastern Europe and Russia (e.g. Agromash Yenisei 1 HM, etc.) that have "straw catchers" at the end of the walkers, which temporarily hold the straw and then, once full, deposit it in a stack for easy gathering.

For some time, combine harvesters used the conventional design, which used a rotating cylinder at the front-end which knocked the seeds out of the heads, and then used the rest of the machine to separate the straw from the chaff, and the chaff from the grain. The TR70 from Sperry-New Holland was brought out in as the first rotary combine. Other manufacturers soon followed, International Harvester with their "Axial-Flow" in and Gleaner with their N6 in .

In the decades before the widespread adoption of the rotary combine in the late seventies, several inventors had pioneered designs which relied more on centrifugal force for grain separation and less on gravity alone. By the early eighties, most major manufacturers had settled on a "walkerless" design with much larger threshing cylinders to do most of the work. Advantages were faster grain harvesting and gentler treatment of fragile seeds, which were often cracked by the faster rotational speeds of conventional combine threshing cylinders.

It was the disadvantages of the rotary combine (increased power requirements and over-pulverization of the straw by-product) which prompted a resurgence of conventional combines in the late nineties. Perhaps overlooked but nonetheless true, when the large engines that powered the rotary machines were employed in conventional machines, the two types of machines delivered similar production capacities. Also, research was beginning to show that incorporating above-ground crop residue (straw) into the soil is less useful for rebuilding soil fertility than previously believed. This meant that working pulverized straw into the soil became more of a hindrance than a benefit. An increase in feedlot beef production also created a higher demand for straw as fodder. Conventional combines, which use straw walkers, preserve the quality of straw and allow it to be baled and removed from the field.

While the principles of basic threshing have changed little over the years, modern advancements in electronics and monitoring technology has continued to develop. Whereas older machines required the operator to rely on machine knowledge, frequent inspection and monitoring, and a keen ear to listen for subtle sound changes, newer machines have replaced many of those duties with instrumentation.

Early combine harvesters used simple magnetic pickups to monitor the rotation of critical shafts, providing a warning when the shaft’s speed deviated beyond preset limits. These magnetic sensors would send a signal to the operator or the onboard diagnostic system if the shaft rotation became irregular, potentially indicating mechanical issues. Over time, temperature sensors were integrated into combine harvesters to monitor bearing temperatures, helping to detect overheating caused by insufficient lubrication. Overheated bearings, if undetected, can lead to catastrophic failures, including combine fires, making the integration of these sensors crucial for both safety and performance.

In traditional harvesting methods, operators had to inspect the rear of the combine to check how much grain was being lost by the thresher and being discharged along with the chaff and straw. However, modern loss monitors have significantly improved this process. These monitors work by measuring the amount of grain being wasted through the discharge system using sensors that detect the presence of grain in the chaff and straw. The yield monitors often work like microphones, registering an electrical impulse when grains impact a plate. This signal is then converted into a loss measurement that can be displayed on a meter in the operator’s cab, showing the relative amount of grain loss in relation to the speed of the machine. This technology allows the operator to make real-time adjustments to minimize grain loss, improving overall efficiency.

Yield monitoring is increasingly critical in modern agriculture, especially with the integration of real-time data. This system measures the amount of grain harvested and calculates the yield per unit area (e.g., bushels per acre or tonnes per hectare). By utilizing sensors that measure the amount of grain passing through the combine, yield monitoring systems provide real-time data, allowing farmers to identify areas within the field that are more or less productive. These variations in yield can be addressed with variable crop inputs, such as fertilizers or irrigation, tailored to the specific needs of different areas of the field. Yield is typically determined by comparing the amount of grain harvested with the area covered, offering valuable insights into field performance and allowing for more precise agricultural practices.

Cameras placed at strategic points on the combine harvester are becoming increasingly common and help eliminate much of the guesswork for the operator. By providing real-time visual feedback on the machine’s operation, cameras assist in monitoring key areas such as the grain tank, augers, and chopper systems. This visibility allows the operator to make informed decisions about maintenance, crop flow, and overall machine performance, all while staying in the safety of the operator's cab. Cameras for blind spot monitoring are also commonly used to enhance safety, allowing operators to safely navigate around obstacles and work in tight spaces, reducing the likelihood of accidents.

The advent of GPS and GIS technologies has made it possible to create field maps, which can assist in navigation, and in the preparation of yield maps, which show which parts of the field are more productive.

While all combines aim to achieve the same result, each machine can be classified based on its general throughput based on the rated horsepower of the combine. Current combine classifications, as defined by Association of Equipment Manufacturers (AEM), are as follows (metric horsepower, which is approximately 735.5 watts, is used):

  • Class 5 - less than 280 HP
  • Class 6 - 280 HP - 360 HP
  • Class 7 - 360 HP - 500 HP
  • Class 8 - 500 HP - 600 HP
  • Class 9 - 600 HP - 680 HP
  • Class 10 - more than 680 HP

While this classification is current, the classes themselves have evolved over time. For instance, a class 7 combine in the year would have had 270 horsepower and been one of the largest machines available in the world at that time, but in the 21st century the same machine would be considered small. The Association of Equipment Manufacturers recognizes Class 10, which came into being in , as the largest combine class. However, there are combines with horsepower and threshing capacity that could argue for creating a new class.

Grain combine fires are responsible for millions of dollars of loss each year. Fires usually start near the engine where dust and dry crop debris accumulate.[21] Fires can also start when heat is introduced by bearings or gearboxes that have failed. From to , 695 major grain combine fires were reported to U.S. local fire departments.[22] Dragging chains to reduce static electricity was one method employed for preventing harvester fires, but it is not yet clear what if any role static electricity plays in causing harvester fires. The application of appropriate synthetic greases will reduce the friction experienced at crucial points (i.e., chains, sprockets and gear boxes) compared to petroleum based lubricants. Engines with synthetic lubricants will also remain significantly cooler during operation.[citation needed]

Obsolete or damaged combines can be converted into general utility tractors. This is possible if the relevant systems (cabin, drivetrain, controls and hydraulics) still work or can be repaired.[23][24] Conversions typically involve removing specialized components for threshing and processing crops; they can also include modifying the frame[24] and controls to better suit operation as a tractor (including lowering it closer to the ground). [23] Thresher drives can sometimes be repurposed as power take-offs.[24]

Are you interested in learning more about harvest rotary header? Contact us today to secure an expert consultation!

  • Agriculture and Agronomy portal
  • Agricultural machinery
  • Combine Demolition Derby
  • Custom harvesting
  • Gravity wagon
  • Grain bin
  • Grain hopper trailer
  • Museum of Scottish Country Life – Largest collection of combine harvesters in Europe.
  • Quick, Graeme R.; Wesley F. Buchele (). The Grain Harvesters. St. Joseph: American Society of Agricultural Engineers. ISBN 0--13-5.