Published in the June 2007 Australia’s Mining Monthly
Firstly, researchers set out to determine exactly what end users valued most in their drive technologies. Not surprisingly, reliability and performance rated highly.
According to the respondents, the top five choice criteria when choosing a drive were, in order of importance: reliability, performance, safety, durability and lifetime cost. Reliability – mentioned by 94% as a top five choice – and performance (87%) were the standout criteria used when choosing the type of drive used in a given application.
Safety, and to some extent lifetime cost, seemed less important to the OEMs than to the end users and consultants. Otherwise the priorities are remarkably similar.
However, the main criteria that determined the type of drive a user chose was the drive technology – hydraulic or electromechanical.
The Hagglunds product differs from the MagnaDrive product (see page 107) in that the Hagglunds drive consists of an electric motor, gearbox and the fluid coupling – that is, the whole drive system. ]
The MagnaDrive product consists of the coupling alone (rather than a complete drive system), and uses magnetic induction to generate variable speeds.
MagnaDrive managing director Mark Drayton told Australia’s Mining Monthly that the Hagglunds product was therefore not a direct competitor with MagnaDrive.
“You would not put a MagnaDrive where you’re using a Hagglunds,” Drayton said. “People who are going to look at MagnaDrive are [those] currently using an electric motor and gearbox, and [who] want to replace their fluid coupling. To put a Hagglunds in is a much bigger project.”
Hagglunds said according to the respondents in the survey, the hydraulic drive was the superior technology on the first four of the five main choice criteria. Especially on reliability, performance and durability there is a considerable margin between the two technologies.
On the fifth most important choice criterion – lifetime cost – 14% of the respondents see the electromechanical drive as the superior technology compared to the 10% who see the hydraulic drive as superior.
Respondents said hydraulic drives were untouchable when it came to high torque, low speed applications, and the electromechanical drive was nearly as effective for low torque, high speed applications.
In between is a grey area but the respondents seem to favour electromechanical drives for high speed applications.
Hagglunds managing director David Bradford said: “To our knowledge this is the largest drive survey ever carried out in Australia. It gives valuable insight into the thoughts of our key stakeholders – and is food for thought for anyone involved with drives.”
