Straw Walker Shaker Element Circular Rotation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing straw walker assemblies in combine harvesters face limitations in grain separation due to mechanical actions that either disturb crop flow or incur additional drive costs, with previous solutions like comb-like elements and pivoting shaking elements showing limited effectiveness.

Innovation Solution

The design of a straw walker assembly with a shaker element that performs a complete circular movement around an axis of rotation, connected to adjacent shakers via rotatable links, allowing for more extensive interaction with the straw mat and improved separation by ensuring all areas of the shaking element engage with the straw mat during rotation.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If comb-like elements are attached between adjacent shakers and driven by separate crankshafts, then grain separation is improved, but device complexity and drive costs increase

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvegrain separationVSAvoiddrive system complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent combines the drive systems by connecting the shaking element to two adjacent shakers that share a common crankshaft, eliminating the need for separate crankshafts for each comb-like element. This merging of drive systems reduces device complexity while maintaining the grain separation function.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Solution Approach 2:

The shaking element serves multiple functions: it acts as a comb-like separator between shakers and is simultaneously driven by the existing shaker mechanism without requiring additional drive components. This multi-functionality reduces overall system complexity.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

2Productivity

If pivoting shaking elements are used between shakers, then mechanical loosening action is provided, but crop flow is disturbed

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvestraw mat looseningVSAvoidcrop flow disturbance

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSObject-generated harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

Instead of using pivoting elements that protrude into the crop flow path, the patent employs shaking elements that rotate in place between the shakers. This inverted approach provides mechanical loosening action while avoiding interference with the natural crop flow direction.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #13The other way round (Inversion)

Solution Approach 2:

The shaking element performs dynamic rotational movement rather than static pivoting, allowing it to effectively loosen the straw mat through circular motion while maintaining a compact profile that does not obstruct crop flow during its rotation cycle.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

3Productivity

If shaking elements perform only pivoting movement, then mechanical action is limited, but structural simplicity is maintained

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvestraw mat intervention effectivenessVSAvoidmovement mechanism complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements dynamic rotational movement of the shaking element through rotatable connections, transforming the limited pivoting motion into comprehensive circular movement. This enhances the mechanical action on the straw mat while the rotatable connection mechanism remains relatively simple in structure.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The shaking element transitions from two-dimensional pivoting motion to three-dimensional circular rotation, allowing all areas of the shaking element to engage with the straw mat during rotation. This dimensional change significantly improves intervention effectiveness without proportionally increasing structural complexity.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

This configuration enhances grain separation by increasing the number of interventions in the straw mat per rotation, effectively loosening the straw without disturbing crop flow and reducing drive costs.

Implementation Method 1

The shakers therefore perform a movement along a circular path and periodically throw the straw mat upwards

Methodology Applied

Scientific EffectCentrifugal force: Centrifugal Force

Implementation Method 2

the shakers therefore perform a movement along a circular path and periodically throw the straw mat upwards

Methodology Applied

Scientific EffectGravity: Gravitation

Implementation Method 3

the shaking element also performs a circular movement. Since all areas of the circumference of the shaking element successively engage with the straw mat

Methodology Applied

Scientific EffectImpact force: Impact Force

Data Source

PatentEP3666060B1Straw walker structure for a combine harvester

Publication Date: 2021.10.20 DEERE & CO

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3

AI summary

A straw walker assembly (32) for a combine harvester (10) comprises a number of laterally arranged walkers (66, 68, 70, 72, 74, 76), a drive for phase-shifted drive of the walkers (66, 68, 70, 72, 74, 76) and a shaking element (86, 88, 90, 92, 94) arranged between two adjacent walkers (66, 68, 70, 72, 74, 76), which is in drive connection with the two adjacent walkers (66, 68, 70, 72, 74, 76) by means of a rotatable connection, wherein the rotatable connections set the shaking element (86, 88, 90, 92, 94) into a rotational movement.