INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL

Volume1,No 4,2011
Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation
RESEARCHARTICLE

ISSN 09764259

UsingtheFMEAmethodtoOptimizefuelconsumptioninTillageby
MoldboardPlow
NamdariM.,RafieeSh.,JafariA
DepartmentofAgriculturalMachineryEngineering,FacultyofAgriculturalEngineeringand
Technology,UniversityofTehran,Karaj,Iran
majidnamdari@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
Tillageistheoneofgreatestenergyconsumersinagriculture.Thisstudyaimedtoreducefuel
consumption in moldboard plowing using the failure mode and effects (FMEA) method.
FMEA is a new methodology to analyze potential reliability problems in the development
cycleoftheproject,makingiteasiertotakeactionstoovercomesuchissues,thusenhancing
the reliability through design or process. FMEA is used to identify actions to mitigate the
analyzedpotentialfailuremodesandtheireffectontheoperations.ApplicationofFMEAin
thisstudyrevealedthatplowingspeed,soilmoisturecontentandplowingdeptharethemost
important factors in tillage fuel consumption, with 640, 480 and 420 RPN respectively. A
splitfactorial design was conducted to examine the validity of the FMEA results.
Experimentaldataconfirmedtheseresults,showingthatplowingdepth,soilmoisturecontent
andplowingspeedsignificantlyinfluencedfuelconsumption.Afterimplementingtheresults
suggested by the FMEA, fuel consumption decreased by 16.40%. Therefore work in
conditionswithappropriatesoilmoisture,plowingdepthandplowingspeedcandecreasefuel
consumptionandenvironmentalimpactissuesintillage.
Keywords: Reformprocess,Riskprioritynumber,Tillageconditions,Environmentalimpact.

1Introduction
Mechanized cropproduction requires significantamounts of energy. However, as much as
85%of the extracted energy that goes into these processes is wasted. Therefore, reducing
energy waste and increasing energy efficiency is crucial for dealing with the energy crisis.
(Saghafi,2003).Ontheotherhandglobalwarmingresultingfromgreenhousegasemissions
(especially CO2) of agricultural origin has been deemed one of the most important current
environmental impact issues. In case of arable land crop production, release and uptake of
CO2 emissions is largely the result of burning fossil fuels. Therefore, in designing
environmentfriendlyagriculturalsystems,fuelsavingprotocolscanbeakeytoolinreducing
CO2 emissionsinfueldependentcroppingsystems(Kogaetal.,2003).
Seedbed preparation operations, especially primary tillage, are among the greatest energy
consumers in crop production: about 60% of total mechanical energy used in mechanized
agriculture is used in tillage and seedbed preparation (Kabiri & Zarean, 2002). The
moldboardplowisthemostcommonprimarytillageimplementandthelargestconsumerof
energy inagriculture(Filipovicetal.,2006).Becausethemechanizationdegreeoftillage is
high,appropriatemanagementanduseofmodernmanagementtechniquescanbesavedfuel
consumptionintillageoperation.

734

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL
Volume1,No 4,2011
Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation
RESEARCHARTICLE

ISSN 09764259

Recently new techniques such as quality management, value engineering, lean production,
SixSigmaandFailureModeandEffectAnalysis(FMEA)havebeenusedtoreducewaste,
increase productivity and improve quality in different production processes (Saghaei &
Habibi, 2008). A Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) is a procedure for analysis of
potentialfailuremodeswithinasystemfortheclassificationbyseverityordeterminationof
the failure's effect upon the system. It is the process whereby organizations methodically
address the risks attached to their activities with the goal of achieving sustained benefit
withineachactivityandacrosstheportfolioofallactivities(Ebrahimipouretal.,2010).This
methodology is widely used in the manufacturing industries such as automotive, aerospace,
and electronics industries to identify, prioritize, and eliminate known potential failures,
problems,anderrorsfromsystemsunderdesignbeforetheproductisreleased.Failurecauses
areanyerrorsordefectsinprocess,design,oritemespeciallyonesthataffectthecustomer,
and can be potential or actual (Rhee & Ishii, 2003). In FMEA failure is defined as any
undesirable outcome such as production loss, injury or even an accident, and customer is
defined as someone or something that receive products or services (Ehrlich, 2002
Ebrahimipouretal.,2010).
The FMEA methodology was developed and implemented for the first time in 1949 by
United States Army (Scipioni et al., 2002). In 1950s the increasing attention paid to safety
andtheneedtopreventpredictableaccidentsinaerospaceindustryledtothedevelopmentof
the FMEA methodology. Later, it was introduced as key tool for increasing safety in
chemical processes (Dabiri et al., 2009). Gradually, thanks to its characteristics of strength
and validity, its application field extended first to automotive industry, then to general
manufacturing (Scipioni et al., 2002). Because FMEA is a proactive method that increases
profitability, its use has quickly spread into all branches of sciences and into various
industries such as manufacturing, banking, human resources and health care. Application
FMEAhelpsmanagersandengineerstoidentify the failuremodes,theircausesandcorrect
themduringthestagesofdesignandproduction(Ebrahimipouretal.,2010).
ManystudieshavebeenconductedontheuseofFMEAintheindustrialandservicesectors
(Ebrahimipouretal.,2010Huetal.,2009Korayem&Iravani,2008Scipionietal.,2002
Thiveletal.,2008),butbecauseitsapplicationintheagriculturesectorisrelativelyrecent,no
studies examining this application have been published. Scipioni et al. (2002) used this
methodology as a tool to assure products quality, and as a mean to improve operational
performance of the production cycle in a food company. All the work done permits to
increasecompanyknowledgeandcontrolcapacityonprocessesandproducts.
Basedontherapidgrowthintheuseofthismethodindifferentsciences,andonitsobvious
advantages (such as its resultoriented and coherent structure), it is likely that it will be
increasinglyappliedtoproblemsolvinginagriculture,especiallyagriculturalmechanization
(Dabirietal.,2009).
The aim of the present paper was to implement FMEA for the firsttime in the agricultural
sector specifically,touse FMEA in optimizing fuel consumption in tillage operations.The
study has attempted to present an effective model for solving the problem of irregular fuel
consumptionbycombiningagriculturalmethodswithnewmanagementpractices.

735

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL
Volume1,No 4,2011
Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation
RESEARCHARTICLE

ISSN 09764259

2.MaterialsandMethod
ThestudywasconductedonafarmbelongingtotheUniversityofTehraninKaraj,Iran.The
process for conducting an FMEA is summarized as: describe product or process, define
functions, identify potential failure modes, describe effects of failures, determine causes,
direction methods or current controls, calculate risks, take action and assess results
(Ebrahimipour et al., 2010). This task cannot be achieved on an individual basis because
FMEA is a team function (Scipioni et al., 2002). In the analyzed case, an FMEA team
includingexpertsintillageandenergyusewasformed,andparticipantsweretrainedinusing
FMEA.TheaimsofthisprojectweredefinedasoptimizingfuelconsumptionbytheFMEA
infarmofUniversityofTehran.Thenextstepwastoestimatetheseverityofwasteinfuel
consumptioninthestudyfarm,a1000m2 area(Site1)wereselectednexttolandsthatwere
plowingfornextyear.Thesoilwasofloamytextureandconsistedof26%clay,35%siltand
39%sand.Thissitewasdividedtofourplotsof550m2 andtillagewasdonewithoutany
treatment, and according to conditions and plowing methods commonly used on the study
farm. Soil and plowing conditions such as soil moisture, soil type, previous crop residues,
plowingdepth,plowingspeed,tractorandmoldboardplowspecificationsandenvironmental
conditionsweremeasured.Fuelconsumptionasadependentvariablewascalculatedineach
ofthestudiedplotsusingthefulltankmethodwithanaccuracyof1mm(RNAM,1995).A
second1000m2 area(Site2)nexttoSite1wasputasideforalaterstep.
The most important aspectof FMEA is theevaluation of the risk level ofpotential failures
identifiedforeverysubsystemorcomponent.Theglobalvalueofthedamagecausedonthe
function or on the surroundings by every failure is indicated with the risk priority number
(RPN). This number (from 1 to 1000) is an index obtained from the multiplication of risk
parametersbyfollowingfunction(Stagliano,2004):

RPN =D O S

(1)

where RPN is risk priority number D is probability that the failure mode will be detected
and/orcorrectedbytheapplicablecontrolsinstalledontheproductionlinesormeasurement
systems(Detection)Oisrelativeprobabilitythatthefailurewilloccur(Occurrence)andSis
severity of the worst potential resulting outcome due to the failure in terms of safety and
system functionality (Severity).Thereisno standard for the choice ofscale prioritizing but
generally FMEA team prefers prioritizing of 1 to 10, because it provides ease of
interpretation, and, at the same time, accuracy and precision (Dabiri et al., 2009). Team
membersbrainstormedandprioritizedpotentialcausesoffailure,andrecommendedactions
for each cause. Brainstorming is a group creativity technique designed to generate a large
number of ideas for the solution of a problem in short timeframe (Stagliano, 2004). These
causes and recommendations were recorded on purposedesigned FMEA forms, based on
teammember'scommentsandtheaimofthestudy(Dabirietal.,2009&Stagliano,2004).
There are many parameters affecting tractor fuel consumptionin tillage operations, such as
typeandstructureofsoil,climate,relative humidity,tractortype(twoorfourwheeldrive),
tractorsize,andthetractorimplementrelationship(Fathollahzadehetal.,2009).Foridentify
allpotentialfactorscausinganoveralleffect,usedcauseandeffectdiagram,alsosometimes
calledthefishbonediagram.Usingacauseandeffectdiagramforcestheteamtoconsiderthe
complexity of the problem and to take an objective look at all the contributing factors. It
helpstheteamtodetermineboththeprimaryandthesecondarycausesofaproblemandis
736

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL
Volume1,No 4,2011
Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation
RESEARCHARTICLE

ISSN 09764259

helpful for organizing the ideas generated from a brainstorming session (Ehrlich, 2002).
There are various categories for cause and effect diagram (Windsor, 2005) but in this case
studyusedtypicalcategoryshowninFigure1.

Figure1:CauseandEffectDiagramforFuelConsumptionwaste
The relationship between factors with the highest risk priority number (RPN) and fuel
consumption was assessed using a splitfactorial experimental design performed on a third
site(Site3)nexttotheothertwosites.
In experimental design eight treatments (soil moisture, ploghing depth and ploghing speed
each of them in two levels) were established in a randomized, completeblockdesign with
three replications. The effects of three independent factors soil moisture at10% and15%
dryweightbasisplowingdepthat20cmand25cmandplowingspeedat3and5.5kmh1
onfuelconsumption(thedependentvariable)wereinvestigated.Thelevelsoffactorsinthis
study were commonly used by farmers and represent actual working conditions. In the
experimental designtwo soilmoisture contents were main plots andvarious compounds of
plowing depthspeed in factorial scheme were subplots. A mounted moldboard plow (3
bottomswitha35cmworkingwidth)wasusedforprimarytillageinthisstudy.Moldboard
plow were pulled by a John Deere 3140 model tractor with 100 hp power. Experimental
design was done in 24 plots with 7.533 m in site (3). Fuel consumption in each plot was
measured by fulltank method and data were entered into Excels spreadsheet. SAS 9.2
softwarewasusedtostatisticalanalysis(SASInstitute,2009).
Inthelaststep,afteridentifyingproblems,testingtheeffectsofeachfactoronwasteoffuel
and choosing the best solution, is to reform the process under examination and remove or
reduce the risks contributing to failure. In this study, the improvements suggested by
applying FMEA to the results for Site 1 were used on Site 2, and fuel consumption was
measured in the same. A ttest was used to compare fuel consumption before and after
applicationofFMEAtoprimarytillage.

737

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL
Volume1,No 4,2011
Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation
RESEARCHARTICLE

ISSN 09764259

3.ResultsandDiscussion
Investigationofplowingmethodscommonlyusedonthestudyfarmindicatedthattillagewas
generallydoneinsoilmoistureof10%,aplowingdepthof25cmandaplowingspeedof3
kmh1,andthataveragefuelconsumptionfortheseparameterswas30.6lha1.Wepredicted
thatwecouldreducefuelconsumptionusingFMEA.
Afterscoringthefactorsusingbrainstorming,eachwasassignedanRPNrelativetoitseffect
onfuelconsumption.Slowspeedofplowing,highplowdepthandlowsoilmoisturecontent
werethemostimportantfactorsonfuelconsumptionthatreceivedRPNsof640,480and420
respectively.Table1showsthemostimportantpotentialcausesoffailurewiththeirRPNand
recommended action. The results clearly indicate that efforts toreduce fuel consumptionin
tillage should concentrate on changes in plowing speed, soil moisture content and plowing
depth.
Table1:MostImportantPotentialCausesofFailurewithTheirRPNandRecommended
Action
Potentialcausesoffailure
Slowspeedofplowing
Lowsoilmoisturecontent
Deepplowing

RPN Recommendedactions
640 Increasingplowingspeedandusingupgears
Plowing in suitable moisture, efforts to start
480 operation in appropriate time and before soil
moisturebeingoutofsuitablelimit
Reduce plowing depth so that tillage quality
420
doesnotdecrease

Based on these results, previous studies (Fathollahzadeh et al. 2009 Kheiralla et al., 2004
Moitzi et al., 2006 Wail Ullah & Kofoed, 1987), and current farm conditions, the team
membersproposedthattillageideallybedoneinconditionsof15%soilmoisture(dryweight
basis), a plowing depth of20 cm and a plowing speed of 5.5 kmh1. These conditions will
alsoimprovetillagequalityandwillprepareagoodseedbed(Kabiri&Zarean,2002Solhjou
et al., 2002). Table (2) presented the results of variance analysis for fuel consumption in
splitfactorialexperimentdesign.
Table2:VarianceAnalysisofFuelConsumptionin SplitFactorialExperimentDesign

Source

df

MeanSquare

Moisture(M)
Depth(D)
Speed(S)
MD
MS
DS
MDS

1
1
1
1
1
1
1

7490.67
11970.57
4873.50
384.00
1093.50
48.17
468.17

MeanSquare
Error
113.291

1137.62

Fratio
66.12**
10.52***
4.28*
0.34
0.96
0.04
0.41

*Significantat10%levelofprobability.

738

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL
Volume1,No 4,2011
Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation
RESEARCHARTICLE

ISSN 09764259

**Significantat5%levelofprobability.
***Significantat1%levelofprobability.

AsTable2shows,thereissignificantdifferenceforfuelconsumptionfordifferentlevelsof
soil moisture, plowing depth and plowing speed at 5%, 1% and 10% levels of probability
respectively. Increasing soil moisture from 10% to 15% results in a statistically very
significant reduction in fuel consumption. Reducing plowing depth from 25 cm to 20 cm
results in a reduction fuel consumption that is significant at the 1% level of probability.
Increasing plowing speed from 3 kmh1 to 5.5 kmh1 also reduces fuel consumption by a
statisticallysignificantamount.
These result is consistent with results of Kheiralla et al. (2004),Matthes et al. (1988) Wail
Ullah & Kofoed (1987) that have stated there was inverse relationship between fuel
consumption and plowing speed also with result of Fathollahzadeh et al. (2010),
Fathollahzadeh et al. (2009), Moitzi, et al. (2006) SoltaniGhalehjoghi & Loghavi (2007)
andWail Ullah &Kofoed(1987)thathavestatedfuelconsumptionreducewithdecreasing
plowingdepth.
Afterprovinginfluenceofidentifiedfactorsonfuelconsumptionandverifyingtheidentified
solutions,thefinalstepwastoapplytherecommendedchangestotheentirestudyfarm.The
fuel consumption for Site 2 was measuredresults indicated that average fuel consumption
was 5.02 Lha1 less than the average for Site 1 (before the application of FMEAbased
changes). ttests showed a significant difference in fuel consumption at the 1% level of
probabilitybeforeandafterapplicationFMEA(Figure2).Figure(2)obviouslyshowsthatin
all plots after the implementation of the FMEAbased recommendations, fuel consumption
fell, supporting the theory that applying FMEA can influence the optimization of fuel
consumptionfortillage.

Figure2: FuelConsumptionBeforeandAfterImplementationofFMEABased
Recommendations
Applying FMEA methodology saved16.40%of the fuel used for tillage on the study farm.
Observationsalsorevealedthattillageinthechangedconditionsimprovedtillagequality,as
measuredby clod mean weight diameter and soil inversion. Considering the importance of
energyandnecessitytooptimizationit,thisamountsavinginenergyisgreatsuccessfuland
willhaveimprovedenergyuseefficiencyinagriculturalproductandalsoreducedcosts.

739

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL
Volume1,No 4,2011
Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation
RESEARCHARTICLE

ISSN 09764259

ResultsofthisstudyshowedthatFMEAmethodologycanbeeffectivelyusedinagricultural
management,especiallyinanalyzingagriculturalmechanization,inthesamewayithasbeen
usedintheindustryandservicessectors.
4.Conclusion
Implementing FMEA and using its tools helped identify and prioritize causes of fuel
wastage in tillage, and also helped the researchers determine, confirm and reform
potentialcausesoffailure,reducingfuelwastageintillageoperations.
Inthecasestudy,FMEArevealedthatunsuitableplowingdepth,incorrectplowingspeed
andinappropriatesoilmoisturewerethemainpotentialcausesoffailure,withRPNsof
640,480and420respectively.
UsingFMEAtoimprovethesefactorsandchanginghowtillageisdonecandecreasefuel
consumptionby16.40%intillageoperations.
UseofFMEAishighlyrecommendedforimproving processinagriculture.
5.References
1. Dabiri, Gh., Ghadiri Sani, M., Vadaye Kheiri, H. (2009). Failure Mode andEffect
Analysis(FMEA)(inFarsi),IndusrialResearch&TrainingCenterofIran, pp 335.
2. Ebrahimipour,V.,Rezaie,K.,Shokravi,S.(2010).Anontologyapproachtosupport
FMEAstudies,ExpertSystemswithApplications,37,pp671677.
3. Ehrlich, B.H. (2002). Transactional Six Sigma and Lean Servicing: Leveraging
ManufacturingConceptstoAchieveWorldClassService,St.LuciePress,100271.
4. Fathollahzadeh,H.,Mobli,H.,Tabatabaie,S.M.H.(2009).Effectofploughingdepth
onaverageandinstantaneoustractorfuelconsumptionwiththreesharediscplough,
InternationalAgrophysics,23,pp399402.
5. Fathollahzadeh, H., Mobli, H., Rajabipour, A., Minaee, S., Jafari, A., Tabatabaie,
S.M.H.(2010).AverageandinstantaneousfuelconsumptionofIranianconventional
tractor with moldboardplow in tillage, ARPNJournal of Engineering and Applied
Sciences,Vol5,Issue2,pp3035.
6. Filipovic, D., Kosutic, S., Gospodaric, Z., Zimmer, R., Banaj, D. (2006). The
possibilities of fuelsavings and the reductionofCO2 emissionsin the soil tillage in
Croatia,AgricultureEcosystemsandEnvironment,115,pp290294.
7. Hu, A.H.,Hsu,Ch.,Kuo,T.,Wu,W.(2009).Riskevaluationofgreencomponents
tohazardoussubstanceusingFMEAandFAHP,ExpertSystemswithApplications,
36,pp 71427147.

740

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL
Volume1,No 4,2011
Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation
RESEARCHARTICLE

ISSN 09764259

8. Kabiri, K.,Zarean,S.(2002). Evaluationofdraftrequirementandsoil inversionof

moldboardplowatdifferentlevelsofspeedandplowingdepth(inFarsi),Journalof
AgriculturalScienceandNaturalRecourses,9(2),pp129138.
9. Kheiralla,A.F.,Yahya, A.,Zohadie,M.,Ishak,W.(2004).Modelingofpowerand
energy requirements for tillage implements operating in Serdang sandy clay loam,
Malaysia,SoilandTillageResearch,78,pp2134.
10. Koga,N.,Tsuruta,H.,Tsuji,H.,Nakanoa,H.(2003).FuelconsumptionderivedCO2
emissions under conventional and reduced tillage cropping systems in northern
Japan,AgricultureEcosystemsandEnvironment,99,pp213219.
11. Korayem, M.H., Iravani, A. (2008).Improvement of 3P and6R mechanical robots
reliability and quality applying FMEA and QFD approaches, Robotics and
ComputerIntegratedManufacturing,24,pp427487.
12. Matthes, R.K.,Watson,W.F.,Savelle,I.W.,Sirois,D.L. (1988).Effectofloadand
speedonfuelconsumptionofarubbertiredskidder,Trans.ASAE,31(1),pp3739.
13. Mehta, M.L., Misra, S.K., Verma, S.R., Sharma, V.K. (2005). Testing and
EvaluationofAgriculturalMachinery.DayaPublishingHouse,200380.
14. Moitzi, G.,Weingartmann, H., Boxberger,J.(2006). Effects of tillage systems and
wheel slip on fuel consumption, In: The 3th International Scientific Conference on
EnergyEfficiencyandAgriculturalEngineering,Rousse,Bulgaria,17.
15. Rhee, S.J., Ishii, K. (2003). Using cost based FMEA to enhance reliability and
serviceability,AdvancedEngineeringInformatics,17,pp179188.
16. RNAM. (1995). RNAM test codes & procedures for farm machinery. Technical
series No.13. Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific Regional
NetworkforAgriculturalMachinery,467.
17. Saghafi, M. (2003). Renewable Energies (in Farsi), University of Tehran
publication,1482.
18. Saghaei,A.,Habibi,A.(2008).InfluenceofsixsigmainIran(inFarsi),Journalof
IranManagementScience,3(9),pp151171.
19. SAS,(2009).SAS/STAT9.2usersguide,SASPublishing,180p.
20. Scipioni, A., Saccarola, G., Centazzo, A., Arena, F. (2002). FMEA methodology
design, implementation and integration with HACCP system in a food company,
FoodControl,13,pp495501.
21. Solhjou,A.,Loghavi,M.,Ahmadi,H.,Ruzbeh,M.(2002).Effectofplowingdepth
andsoilmoisturecontentonmeanweightdiameterandreducedsecondarytillage(in
Farsi),JournalofAgriculturalEngineeringResearch,6(2),pp112.

741

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL
Volume1,No 4,2011
Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation
RESEARCHARTICLE

ISSN 09764259

22. Soltani Ghalehjoghi, A.R., Loghavi, M. (2007). The effects of axle load and draft
force on tractive efficiency and fuel consumption of two high performance tractors
duringplowingwithasemimounted4bottommoldboardplow(inFarsi),Journal
ofScienceandTechnologyofAgricultureandNaturalResources,40,pp125135.
23. Stagliano, A.A. (2004). Six sigma advanced tools pocket guide, McGrawHill,
200p.
24. Thivel, P., Bultel, Y., Delpech, F. (2008). Risk analysis of a biomass combustion
processusingMOSARandFMEAmethods,JournalofHazardousMaterials,151,pp
221231.
25. Wail Ullah, M., Kofoed, S.S. (1987). Performance study of a two wheel tractor,
A.M.A., 18(40),pp1922.
26. Windsor, S.E. (2005). Transactional six sigma for green belts: maximizing service
andmanufacturingprocesses,QualityPress,139p.

742