THRASHING-MACHINE. 



THRASHING-MACHINE. 



We have introduced at length the descrip- | of 18 feet radius, we found might be taken on 



tion of this machine, or rather series of ma- 

 chines, as being the most complete of any that 

 have fallen within the range of our observa- 

 tion ; the most comprehensive in its design, 

 performing every operation, from receiving 

 the sheaf at the barn-door to depositing its grain 

 in a clean state weighed up in the sacks, and 

 excellent in the greater part of its detail, which 

 is carried out, both as regards ingenuity and 

 workmanship, in a style very superior to the 

 general character of agricultural machines. 



With regard to the moving power most ad- 

 vantageously connected with the thrashing- 

 machine, it may be observed, that where the 

 locality admits of the use of a water-wheel, 

 this power is most economical and easily ma- 

 naged ; but the advantage is limited to peculiar 

 situations. 



Where the quantity of work to be performed 

 is sufficient to repay the interest of outlay, 

 expense of wear and tear, &c., a steam-engine 

 would be most advantageously employed on 

 the farm. Of its economy, as compared with 

 either horse or manual labour, there need be 

 no question. But as few farms in England at 

 present have these appendages, the question 

 for consideration is narrowed to the compa- 

 rison between horses and manual labour. On 

 the authority of Dr. Gregory, the dynamic 

 power of a horse at a dead pull may be calcu- 

 lated in the main as equivalent to that of six 

 men, or to 420 Ibs., if exerted in a direct line ; 

 but the result of experiments made by Tred- 

 gold tend to prove that sustained effort at the 

 rate of three miles per hour must not be calcu- 

 lated at more than equivalent to 120 Ibs. drawn 

 over a pulley. This, taking six hours of labour 

 per diem as the utmost he would recommend, 

 would be the maximum of useful effect. Under 

 the circumstance of any deviation from a straight 

 line, this must be materially reduced ; and in 

 describing a circle of 18 feet radius, the cramp- 

 ed position of the horse will probably prevent 

 his power from being advantageously exerted 

 to the extent of much more than half. It will, 

 therefore, be seen that a very large proportion 

 of dynamic effort is wasted ; and this not only 

 arises from the constrained position of the 

 horse's movement, but from the friction of the 

 mill by means of which motion is communi- 

 cated to a machine. 



It is affirmed by Emerson that a man of or- 

 dinary strength, turning a roller by the handle, 

 can act for a whole day against a resistance 

 *qual to 30 Ibs. weight; and if he works 10 

 f hours a day, he will raise this weight through 

 3J feet in a second, or about 2 miles per hour. 



Animal power is, however, so varied by the 

 character of the exertion, that it is difficult to 

 arrive at a correct calculation. The late Ro- 

 bertson Buchanan ascertained that in the action 

 of working a pump, of turning a winch, of 

 ringing a bell, or rowing a boat, the dynamic 

 results were respectively as the numbers 100, 

 167, 227, and 249. See STRENGTH. 



Having caused a machine with beaters to be 

 constructed, worked by 4 men whose force 

 should be exerted as in the manner of rowing 

 a boat, the results, as compared with a ma- 

 chine requiring the force of 4 horses in a circle 

 1040 



an average as 5 to 12. It was thought the 

 continuous effort might be for an equal length 

 of time exerted by 6 men relieving each other 

 at intervals, as by the same number of horses 

 relieved in the same way. 



We have not yet had opportunity to repeat 

 the experiment; and we instance this only to 

 show that, although advantage may be on the 

 side of horse-labour for large quantities, ma- 

 ijual force is not so inapplicable to this object 

 as most writers have represented it to be ; and 

 we are of opinion that, on small farms, hand- 

 machines may with great advantage be used. 

 A simple and effective hand thrashing-machine, 

 which was exhibited at the Royal Agricultural 

 Society's meeting at Liverpool, obtained the 

 commendation of the judges (vide their re- 

 port). It is worked by 4 men, and the moving 

 power being obtained by means of a lever on 

 the one side, and by a crank handle on the 

 other, the men working it may relieve each 

 other by change of motion. It requires one 

 man to feed the machine, and the number of 

 hands necessary to bring the sheaves and re- 

 move the straw will depend upon the distance 

 it has to be conveyed. When the straw is 

 short, and the wheat of average yield and in 

 good condition, it will thrash at the rate of 12 

 to 16 bushels per hour. 



In England the cost of the thrashing-ma- 

 chines of former days varied considerably, and 

 their performances were very unequal. It may 

 not be uninteresting to compare them with those 

 of the present day. The following are ex- 

 tracted from the Agricultural Reports : 



Thrashinj per Df. 

 In the reports of Roxburgh and Sel-O , , .... 



kirk, in 1796, R. Uonglaf states that I M or 30 . bo118 . ' 



mills by water, or with 4 horses, fa 



would do great execution. 



In the report of Norfolk, in 1804, 

 Arthur Young gives an account of 

 maclrnes which belonged to the fol- 

 lowing parties: 



Droziers, Reedham, built by Wigfull, , r J}J' 





, Shibidham, built by Wigfull, 



") 



cost 200 guineas, worked by 6 per- >6t co. barley. 



sons, and 4, 5, or 6 horses. jSOco. peas. 



Whiting, Tring, built by Fordyce, ^ 24 co. wheat. 



from Scotland, cost 200/., worked S-55 co. barley. 



by 6 persons and 6 horses. _) 63 to 84 co. oati. 



Bevan, Riddlesworth, engineer from") 40 co. wheat. 



Leith, cost 100*., worked by 10 V40 co. barley. 



men and 8 horses. _)50co. oats. 



Coke, Holkham, cost 600/., worked ) r , 



by 12 men and 8 horses. J64. co. wheat. 



Reeves, Heverland, built by Assby,^30co. wheat. 



Blyboro', cost 100 guineas, worked >32 co. barley. 



with 2 or 3 horses. j 40 co. peas. 



Styleman, Smithsham, cost 300/., CO> w 

 worked by 10 persons an 



In the report of Kent, R. Boys, in") 

 1805, remarks on the only thrash- I 

 ing-mill then in Kent, which, by a I 04 __. . v u~ a 

 number of improvements, and after L 2' H"?"' 

 many alterations, he finds to an- 

 swer extremely well ; and he states 

 that it requires 4 horses and 12 men 

 to work it. 



In Sir John Sinclair's System of Hus- 

 bandry, published in 1812, we find 

 an account of R. Kerr's machine, 

 which, with 6 horses, 4 men, and 4 

 women, would thraah 



barley, 

 40 qrs. oats. 



50 bolls, or about 

 300 bushel* of 

 wheat. 



