A Demonstration Project in New York and Virginia: Retrofitting Cost-Effective Roll-over Protective Structures (CROPS) on Tractors
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

All these words:

For very narrow results

This exact word or phrase:

When looking for a specific result

Any of these words:

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

None of these words:

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields

Language:

Dates

Publication Date Range:

to

Document Data

Title:

Document Type:

Library

Collection:

Series:

People

Author:

Help
Clear All

Add terms to the query box

Query box

Help
Clear All
i

A Demonstration Project in New York and Virginia: Retrofitting Cost-Effective Roll-over Protective Structures (CROPS) on Tractors

Filetype[PDF-197.19 KB]


  • English

  • Details:

    • Alternative Title:
      J Agric Saf Health
    • Description:
      The NIOSH cost-effective roll-over protective structure (CROPS) demonstration project sought to determine whether three prototype roll-over protective structures (ROPS) designed to be retrofitted on Ford 8N, Ford 3000, Ford 4000, and Massey Ferguson 135 tractors could be installed in the field and whether they would be acceptable by the intended end users (farmers). There were a total of 50 CROPS. demonstrators (25 in New York and 25 in Virginia), with 45 observers attending the New York CROPS demonstrations and 36 observers attending the Virginia CROPS demonstrations, for a total of 70 participants in New York and 61 in Virginia. The oldest retrofitted tractors were 77 to 62 years old, while the newest retrofitted tractors were 40 to 37 years old. The most frequently retrofitted tractor in the CROPS demonstration project was a Ford 3000 series tractor (n = 19; 38%), followed by Ford 4000 (n = 11; 22%), Massey Ferguson 135 (n = 11; 22%), and Ford 8N (n = 9; 18%). A major issue of CROPS retrofitting was the rear wheel fenders. The effort involved in disassembling the fenders (removing the old bolts was often faster by cutting them with a torch), modifying the fender mounting brackets, and then reinstalling the fenders with the CROPS generally required the most time. In addition, various other semi-permanent equipment attachments, such as front-end loaders, required additional time and effort to fit with the CROPS. Demonstrators were asked to rank the reasons why they had not retrofitted their tractors with ROPS until they had enrolled in the CROPS demonstration program. ROPS "cost too much" was ranked as the primary reason for participants in both states (80% for New York and 88% for Virginia). The second highest ranked reasons were "ROPS wasn't available" for Virginia (80%) and "hassle to find ROPS" for New York (69%). The third highest ranked reasons were "not enough time to find ROPS" for New York (67%) and "hassle to find ROPS" for Virginia (79%). All demonstrators and observers indicated that they were glad to have participated in the CROPS project.
    • Pubmed ID:
      26373215
    • Pubmed Central ID:
      PMC4573469
    • Document Type:
    • Collection(s):
    • Main Document Checksum:
    • File Type:

    Supporting Files

    More +

    You May Also Like

    Checkout today's featured content at stacks.cdc.gov