Modular Conveying Rotor for Harvesters

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Harvesting machines with rigid conveyor rotors are heavy, difficult to handle, and inflexible for adapting to different crop requirements, while alternative designs with controlled conveying tines are complex and costly.

Innovation Solution

Conveying tines are grouped and attached to radial crossbeams, which are connected to a slim, potentially divided drive shaft via holding brackets, allowing for easy reconfiguration and lighter construction without compromising conveying efficiency.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Weight of moving object

If conveying tines are welded directly to the drive shaft drum shell, then the rotor structure is simple and stable, but the rotor becomes heavy and difficult to handle

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverotor weightVSAvoidrotor structure complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Weight of moving objectVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The rotor is divided into separate components: the drive shaft, crossbeams, and conveying tines. The crossbeams are detachably connected to the drive shaft, and the conveying tines are attached to the crossbeams, allowing the rotor to be assembled from modular parts rather than being a monolithic heavy structure.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The heavy drum shell is removed from the design. Instead of welding tines directly to a large drum shell, the invention extracts the essential function and implements it through lighter crossbeams attached to the drive shaft, eliminating the need for the heavy drum shell structure.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

2Strength

If a large drum shell is used to weld conveying tines, then the rotor is stable and strong, but the rotor becomes heavy and complex

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverotor strengthVSAvoidrotor weight
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSWeight of moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The rotor structure is segmented into the drive shaft, crossbeams, and conveying tines. The crossbeams provide the necessary structural support and strength without requiring a large drum shell, achieving strength through distributed support rather than mass.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The rotor uses a composite construction combining the drive shaft, crossbeams, and conveying tines as separate but integrated components. This composite approach allows each component to be optimized for its specific function while reducing overall weight compared to a solid drum shell design.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #40Composite materials

3Adaptability or versatility

If conveying tines are rigidly fastened to the drive shaft, then the rotor is stable and reliable, but it cannot be easily adapted to different crop requirements

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveadaptability to different crop typesVSAvoidrotor stability
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The conveying tines are attached to crossbeams that are detachably connected to the drive shaft, creating modular units. This segmentation allows different configurations of crossbeams and tines to be assembled or disassembled to suit different crop requirements while maintaining stable operation during use.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The rotor transitions from a static, fixed configuration to a dynamic, reconfigurable system. The detachable connections allow the rotor to be adapted to different agricultural needs by reassembling with different tine configurations, while maintaining operational stability during each specific configuration's use.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

4Adaptability or versatility

If multiple rotor configurations are maintained for different crops, then adaptability is improved, but device complexity and storage requirements increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecrop requirement adaptabilityVSAvoidnumber of rotor configurations
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

By segmenting the rotor into detachable crossbeam and tine units, the system allows reconfiguration of the same basic components for different crops rather than requiring entirely different rotor designs. This reduces the number of distinct configurations needed while maintaining adaptability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The crossbeams and conveying tines are designed as universal components that can be assembled in different configurations to handle various crop types. A single set of basic components serves multiple functions across different agricultural applications, eliminating the need for multiple specialized rotor designs.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Data Source

PatentEP3912457B1Conveying rotor for conveying crops and harvesting machine with such a conveying rotor
Publication Date: 2023.07.05 ALOIS POETTINGER MASCHFAB
  • EP3912457B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3912457B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3912457B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

The invention relates to a conveying rotor for conveying harvested crops, with a rotatably mounted drive shaft (6) and a plurality of conveying tines (5) which are non-rotatably connected to the drive shaft (6), wherein the conveying tines (5) are attached in groups to crossbeams (8) which are arranged radially spaced from the drive shaft and are attached to retaining blocks (7) which project circumferentially from the drive shaft (6) and are non-rotatably connected to the drive shaft (6).