Fliegl universal spreader KDS 270 muck control

*  In line with the DLG assessment scale that has been effective from May 2020 (distribution across rows): CoV > 15 % to ≤ 20 % = “¡”; CoV > 10 % to ≤ 15 % = “+”; CoV ≤ 10 % = “+ +”
**  In line with the DLG assessment scale that has been effective from May 2020 (distribution along rows): CoV > 15 % to ≤ 25 % = “¡”; CoV > 10 % to ≤ 15 % = “+”; CoV ≤ 10 % = “+ +”
***  In line with the DLG assessment scale that has been effective from May 2020 (dilation within the tolerance zone): > 45 % = “¡”; > 55 % = “+”; > 75 % = “+ +”

In May 2020, the DLG test commission on fertilisers and spreaders laid down revised and stricter standards for assessing the test results for this type of machinery. The revised standards reflect the technical progress that has been made in this field. These new standards supersede the previous standards applied by DLG in all its tests and in all DLG Test Reports prior to May 2020.

Description and technical data

The Fliegl KDS 270 muck control is a universal spreader that has a chain-and-slat floor and two spreading discs. The main specifications of the tested spreader are listed below:

The test method is based on the DLG test frame-work ‘Organic fertiliser spreaders’ and the DIN EN 13080 standard ‘Manure Spreaders – Environmental Protection Requirements and Test Methods’.

The distribution across rows is measured with the help of 50cm x 50cm x 10cm dishes placed on the test course next to each other across the direction of travel. Then the tractor spreader combination travels down the test course, spreading the product. In the next step, the material collected in the dishes is weighed and related to the total area spread to determine the spread pattern without taking into account the overlaps. The quality of distribution is expressed by the coefficient of variation (CoV).

This reflects the accuracy of spreading the material across the rows, taking into account the rate of overlaps as the machine matches up with the pre­vious pass. The CoV curve shows the point at which the accepted CoV threshold is undercut and also the range of the optimum work widths (smallest possible CoV).

The distribution along rows is assessed by measuring the mass flow. This is done by continuously measuring the axle and tongue loads on the stationary machine while this is being emptied. These measurements are used to compute the following parameters: typical spreading rate during unloading, dilation within the tolerance zone (percentage of unloading time during which the spreading rate is within the accepted tolerance range), the optimum overlap at match-up and the CoV at optimum overlapping levels.

The smaller the CoV the larger is the tolerance zone and the better the quality of distribution.

The test

The test was carried out in June 2020 at the company-owned test stand on the Fliegl Agrartechnik premises in Mühldorf, Germany. Prior to the test, the weighing systems were calibrated by an accredited partner lab (InfraServ Gendorf Technik GmbH, Burgkirchen) and the test stands were inspected for compliance with existing standards by DLG. Figures 2 shows the test facility for measuring the distribution across rows where dishes are placed on weighing cells. Figure 3 shows the weigh bridge which measures the changes in mass flow during the unloading process.

Table 2 lists the properties of the products applied.

The tractor used in the test was a John Deere 6190 R. The spreader was filled by a telescopic materials handler.

Setting up the spreader

The spreading rate on the Fliegl KDS 270 muck control is controlled by the speed of the chain-and-slat floor, the opening of the slurry gate and the tractor speed. The feed rate of the floor is set steplessly between 0.5 m and 6 m per minute. The chain-and-slat floor is driven hydraulically. A slurry gate controls the gap between the loading space and the spreading system.

The degree to which the gate is opened is also controlled steplessly from the operator terminal. The current opening is indicated on a scale from 0 to 16 on the front of the spreader (Figure 5).

Table 2: Properties of the materials spread in the DLG test

All spreading elements on the Fliegl KDS 270 muck control are pto powered (max. 1,000 rpm). Two spreading discs spread the material across the direction of travel. Each disc has two adjustable vanes. Each of these has three holes that control three different spreading angles.

The spreading angle is set manually by undoing an M12 nut on each vane. The manual specifies the proper settings for various materials. The point where the material drops on the discs is set with the help of a so-called spreading plate. This plate is adjusted with the help of two perforated plates on both sides of the spreader at the rear (Figure 6).

The manual also specifies the base settings for individual materials and various application rates. Due to great variations in the material properties, users are recommended to first trial a specific setting in an initial test run and then fine tune the settings as necessary.

Distribution across and along rows spreading cattle manure

To apply muck at a rate of 10 t/ha, the feed rate of the floor was set to 23 %. Tractor speed was 7.1 km/h. The testers had to do one initial run to optimise the settings in order to achieve the optimum coefficient of variation (CoV) of less than 20 % for the 18 m work width.

Graph 7 shows the spread pattern for cattle manure spread at a rate of 10 t/ha – without overlaps after two runs and with overlaps.

The graph in figure 8 shows the relationship between the coefficient of variation and the work width for cattle manure spread at a rate of 10 t/ha. The CoV curve shows that the CoV is 14.5 % when the work width is set to 18 m. This percentage scores a good (+). Only when the work width increases to 19 m does the CoV exceed the 20 % line.

To apply muck at a rate of 30 t/ha, the testers set the feed rate of the floor to 29 % while the tractor’s forward speed was 3.7 km/h. In the first run during which the work width was set to 18m, the CoV on the quality of distribution was smaller than 20 %.

The graph in figure 9 shows the relationship between the coefficient of variation and the work width for cattle manure spread at a rate of 30 t/ha. The CoV curve shows that the maximum CoV is 14.7 % when the work width is 18 m or less. This percentage scores a good (+). Only when the work width increases to 19 m does the CoV exceed the 20 % line.

Assessing the quality of distribution of muck along rows, the computed coefficients of variation at both rates were 11.9 % at 10 t/ha (good (+) and 16.7 % at 30 t/ha (passed, o). The dilation within the tolerance zone was 75.9 % (very good (++) when spreading muck at 10 t/ha and 62.5 % (good (+) when spreading muck at 30 t/ha.

Figure 10 shows the results for distributing muck along rows at a rate of 10 t/ha.

Distribution across and along rows spreading compost

To apply compost at a rate of 5 t/ha, the feed rate of the floor was set to 41 % while forward speed was 10.3 km/h. In the first run at a work width of 10m, the CoV on the quality of distribution was less than 20 %. Graph 11 shows the spread pattern of compost at a rate of 5 t/ha – without overlaps after two runs and with overlaps.
The graph in figure 12 shows the relationship between the coefficient of variation and the work width in compost spread at a rate of 5 t/ha. The CoV curve shows that the maximum CoV is 13.9 % when the work width is 10 m or less. This result scores a good (+). The CoV increases beyond the 20 % mark only when work width exceeds 12m.

To apply compost at a rate of 25 t/ha, the feed rate was set to 39 % while forward speed was 5.6 km/h. The testers had to do one initial run to optimise the settings in order to achieve the optimum coefficient of variation (CoV) of less than 20 % for the 14 m work width.

The graph in figure 13 shows the relationship between the coefficient of variation and the work width for compost spread at a rate of 25 t/ha. The CoV curve shows that the CoV is 14.4 % when the work width is set to 14m. This percentage scores a good (+). Only when the work width reaches 15 m does the CoV exceed the 20 % line.

Assessing the quality of distribution of compost along rows, the computed coefficients of variation for both rates were 8.3 % at 5 t/ha (very good (++) and 10.8 % at 25 t/ha (good (+). The dilation within the tolerance zone for 5 t/ha compost was 92.4 % (very good (++) and for 25 t/ha compost 87.4 % (very good (++).
Figure 14 shows the results for distributing compost along rows at a rate of 25 t/ha.

Distribution across and along rows spreading poultry manure

To apply poultry litter at a rate of 2.7 t/ha, the feed rate of the floor was set to 29 % while forward speed was 12.1 km/h. The testers had to do one initial run to optimise the settings in order to achieve the optimum coefficient of variation (CoV) of less than 20 % for 12 m and 22 m work widths. Graph 15 shows the spread pattern without overlaps (distribution measured after three runs) and the spread pattern of poultry litter with overlaps at a rate of 2.7 t/ha.

The graph in figure 16 shows the relationship between the coefficient of variation and the work width for poultry litter spread at a rate of 2.7 t/ha. The CoV curve shows that the CoV is 8.9 % when the work width is 12 m. This percentage scores a very good (++). At a 22 m work width, the CoV is 19.3 % which scores a passed (). However, the CoV exceeds the 20 % line at work widths of 9 m and between 15 m and 21 m.

Assessing the quality of distribution of poultry manure along rows, the computed coefficient of variation at a rate of 2.7 tha was 8.4 % (very good (++). The dilation within the tolerance zone was 91.2 % (very good (++).

Figure 17 shows the results for distributing poultry litter along rows at a rate of 2.7 t/ha.

Distribution across and along rows spreading digestate

To apply digestate at a rate of 5 t/ha, the feed rate of the floor was set the 35 % while the forward speed was 5.6 km/h. The testers had to do one initial run
to optimise the settings in order to achieve the optimum coefficient of variation (CoV) of less than 20 % for the 16 m work width. Graph 18 shows the spread pattern without overlaps after two runs and the spread pattern with overlaps for digestate spread at a rate of 5 t/ha.

The graph in figure 19 shows the relationship between the coefficient of variation and the work width for digestate spread at a rate of 5 t/ha. The CoV curve shows that the CoV is 7.9 % when the work width is set to 16 m. This CoV percentage scores a very good (++). However, the CoV exceeds the 20 % line when work widths range between 10 m and 14 m and also at widths larger than 18 m.

To apply digestate at a rate of 30 t/ha, the feed rate of the floor was set to 50 % while the forward speed was 3.2 km/h. In the first run during which the work width was set to 20m, the CoV on quality of distribution was smaller than 20 %, which marks the best quality of distribution.

The graph in figure 20 shows the relationship between the coefficient of variation and the work width for digestate spread at a rate of 30 t/ha. The CoV curve shows that the CoV is 14.7 % when the work width is set to 20m. This percentage scores a good (+). However, the CoV exceeds the 20 % line when work widths range between 12 m and 18 m and also at work widths larger than 21 m.

Assessing the quality of distribution of digestate along rows, the computed coefficients of variation for both rates were 13.3 % at 5 t/ha (good (+) and 14.1 % at 30 t/ha (good (+). The dilation within the tolerance zone was 83.2 % (very good (++) when spreading digestate at a rate of 5 t/ha and 69.7 % (good (+) when spreading at a rate of 30 t/ha.

Figure 21 shows the results for distributing digestate along rows at a rate of 5 t/ha.