Abstract
The calculation Method I presented in Part 1 was based on the hypothesis that the transportation route length is equal to the straight-line distance from the fi eld to the facility, with its stock yard for straw. We examined Method I through comparison of results of Method I with results of GIS simulation, which can output the shortest route length (SRL) and the fastest route length (FRL).
Results show that SRL is 120 % of the straight distance; FRL is 125–135 % of the straight distance.
The value of the average straight distance (ASD) for transportation was found to be inadequate for the average length of the transportation route because the ASD was 85–115 % of SRL and 92–127 % of FRL for 50 kt of dry-straw collection. Other ASD values were 88–148 % of SRL and 94–163 % of FRL for 100 kt collection and 107–173 % of SRL and 118–188 % of FRL for the 200 kt collection.
The amounts of fuel and trucks obtained using Method I were suffifi cient to support 91.7–106.5 % of 50 kt planned amount of straw collection when adopting the shortest routes based on the GIS program or 86.9–103.4 % when adopting the fastest routes based on the GIS program.
Results show that ASD was shorter than SRL or FRL. The calculated results obtained using Method I tend to show smaller values for the necessary amounts of fuel and trucks.
