2011 Volume 42 Issue 3 Pages 83-91
Calculation Method I shows deviation from the results of the GIS simulation presented in Part 2. Therefore, we developed a method to improve the accuracy and checked it using GIS simulation. In calculation Method I-2, the shortest route length (SRL) was set to be as long as 1.2 times the straight distance (SD). The fastest route length (FRL) was set to be as long as 1.3 times SD. The calculated results of Method I-2 showed deviation. Based on results of the GIS simulation, they were more than 27% under the condition of collecting 50, 100, 200 kt of straw. Therefore, Method I-2 was found to be impractical. In calculation Method II-2, to adapt the calculation to the uneven distribution of the field in the area, we divided the area into concentric circles. Then we calculated the average distances from all doughnut-type areas to the facility used as a stockyard for straw and summed them up to determine the average distance travelled within area. Furthermore, SRL was set to be as long as 1.2 times the distance. FRL was set to be as long as 1.3 times the distance. Calculated results obtained using Method II-2 showed a small deviation based on results of the GIS simulation. The amount of fuel and trucks based on Method II-2 was able to support at least 98% of the planned collection of straw in the simulation of collecting 50, 100, 200 kt of straw. Method II-2 can be adopted for any area. However, we have not examined whether the value of the ratio of route length to straight distance, α=1.2 (SRL), α=1.3 (FRL), is a general value or not. Furthermore, the SRL was not compared with the real route length adopted by truck drivers.
