US-based Allison has a large slice of the global market for automatic gearboxes in refuse collection vehicles. Now the company looks to convert operators of hooklifts, skip trucks and other units used on recycling duties to the virtues of automatic gearboxes.
We share a continually shrinking planet in travel and commercial terms, yet many of us are proud of our local or national traditions and either do not want, or would actively resist, change for its own sake. But in the commercial world, that’s not to say we can’t learn from other markets or sectors. Let’s consider the whole business of recycling and composting. Use whatever figures you like, but these sectors are set to double over the next few years as landfill space gets ever scarcer. We’re never likely, as a society, to recycle 100% of our waste. But recent statistics suggest that, without constraints on large multinational food and beverage producers, the volume of waste packaging looks set to continue in an upward spiral - despite moves by some countries to encourage deposit returnable bottles and other containers.
So it’s only right to assume that, if collections of recyclable materials are to form an increasingly large part of our waste collection operations, the vehicles used on such services must be at least as efficient as those currently used on current domestic and trade waste rounds (routes), rather than less so.
Have we lost our way?
And yet a review of the various bodies and handling systems designed to meet recycling needs tends to suggest otherwise. True, the market for recyclable materials handling systems is a much ‘younger’ market than that for normal compaction refuse collection vehicles (RCVs) - even if history shows us that ‘recycling’ and separating reusable resources such as newspaper and cardboard is hardly a new idea. Maybe the difference was that in the 1930s, 1950s or 1960s ‘recycling’ was desirable but optional, whereas today it’s increasingly essential.
The worrying fact today is that, though it’s easy enough to justify the cost of a high-specification, purpose-built RCV against a cheaper alternative, the actual utilization of some specialist recycling units is still very low. Couple this with sometimes poor payloads (a load of plastic bottles is unlikely to cause an overload) and it begs the question, has recycling efficiency already lost its way?
This is a worrying situation from the point of view of those specifying a vehicle. You could be sitting in an office anywhere from the US to China and picking out a compaction body and hopper for domestic or trade waste collection from the pages of an equipment buyer’s guide. You might have one or two problems regarding power take-off (PTO) provision if using locally-sourced chassis in some markets, but generally speaking, the end product would be pretty similar, and quite possibly from the same manufacturer, wherever you’re located on the planet.
Going back to national characteristics, generations of Americans have been happy to let the gearbox make up its own mind and do the ‘shifting’ automatically - rather unlike the Italians, say, who love to play with at least five gears in the latest sporty car. What’s the connection to the waste industry? Well, while most of the trucking industry around the globe has stayed with manual range-change and splitter gearboxes on long distance trucks, drivers of RCVs have had the benefit of selecting the drive button on their Allison World Series automatic gearboxes and concentrating on the traffic, where the loading crew is located, parked cars, playing children and the countless other distractions that make the job so demanding.
Time to think automatically?
Over the last two or three vehicle generations, the higher ‘first cost’ cost of specifying automatic gearboxes (not always of Allison manufacture, but this US-based company dominates the market) can be fully justified by offering reduced downtime, improved safety and less operator fatigue. And yet? Take a look at the vehicles specified for recycling or bulk waste hauling or on hooklift or demount body operations involving scrap, green waste or composting operations. The vehicles handling an increasing proportion of the overall waste mountains we all create don’t tend to feature the same high levels of specification. In fact, anything goes.
Is there a particular reason for this? Or is it because the ‘recycling vehicle’ fleet is still seen very much as a ‘less-than-essential add-on’ and is sometimes the responsibility of a totally different department? Clearly this situation cannot be allowed to continue.
Some very unsuitable body/chassis/cabs have come about in the name of ‘recycling’. Considering how recycling is already well on track to becoming a ‘front line’ service, it’s essential that vehicle specifications likewise get up to ‘front line’ standards.
Starting point
The starting point could be that all recyclable vehicle operations should draw on the best-practice aspects of current-generation RCVs. Indeed, many argue that the best vehicle for collecting all types of recyclable material is the very same RCV currently used to pick up mixed household and trade waste. After all, the basic design is well proven. It works well enough under most global conditions. Crews are familiar with its operation. And going back to utilization figures, when a normal compaction-type RCV isn’t being used to pick up recyclable materials, it can be used to pick up general waste. So if one unit goes down, substituting it for another basically standard machine should cause no problems. In most cases, the opposite doesn’t apply to specialist recyclable units.
And if that argument stands up? In most developed markets, that RCV will come with an automatic gearbox. This might add to the initial cost by as much as $10,000, but will more than justify itself by performing well over an extended period with little downtime.
Interestingly, there is another factor to consider. In the past, and certainly in the US market, there was a distinct difference between widespread auto box provision in lighter duty vans and light trucks, RCVs and trucks used for urban distribution against manual transmissions in heavy-duty line haul trucks. That position has now shifted since the widespread provision of what could best be called ‘semi-automatic clutch’ manual gearboxes.
As the electronics have become more intelligent, so the ability of these systems to make up- and down-shifts at just the right moment, without the driver having to take either a hand off the wheel or place a foot on the pedal, has grown considerably - to the point where most are, with the exception of a clutch pedal-induced initial take-off, almost entirely ‘fully automatic’ in use.
Semi-auto option?
With most European truck ranges now almost entirely made up of such ‘semi-auto’ transmissions, could such options enjoy success in the wider waste and recycling market? Especially as they are often only a little more expensive than standard manual shift gearboxes and almost entirely considerably cheaper than a full auto option.
Certainly, a semi-auto ‘intelligent shift’ gearbox is a better bet than a straight manual transmission for many operations. Semi-autos retain full engine braking (not possible on full auto boxes), which is a major safety advantage in hilly districts. But the semi-auto doesn’t have such a good record for on/off highway applications where the clutches and electronics are more likely to fail or cause loss of traction.
Perhaps none of these issues would warrant a detailed analysis were it not for the fact that there is clearly a major difference in the purchasing patterns between say conventional RCVs (99.9% fully automatic) and recycling vehicles, skip trucks, hooklifts and refuse bulkers - where the percentage of fully automatic trucks currently in service hardly registers on the dial.
This has been spotted by the biggest global manufacturer of fully automatic gearboxes, US-based Allison Transmission. Starting this month and being rolled out in Europe during 2007, Allison is busy asking European waste and recycling operators why they buy the transmission specifications that they do, and what it would take for them to consider buying a fully automatic truck? Clearly, high up the list is whether the customer’s chassis manufacturer of choice is prepared to build a chassis with a ‘third party’ component rather than their own manual or semi-auto options. Until very recently, the answer to that was often a resolute ‘no’. And to make matters worse for potential customers, the specialist custom truck brands have all but been wiped out by mergers and closures.
Change of policy?
But according to David Crowther, a UK-based waste industry specialist for Allison Transmission, there are firm signs of that policy changing. ‘Operators of semi-auto gear box trucks working on waste operations have experienced problems of overheating on multiple stop/start and off-highway operations, and drivers suddenly find the unit will shut down to protect itself. Being stuck on a landfill haul road as a result of not being able to shift quickly from forward to reverse without losing momentum can be bad enough, but the effects of losing drive entirely at a key moment doesn’t bear thinking about,’ he suggests.
The case of Scania is also worth noting if we were looking for a further example of the ‘softening’ of this policy from major, world-class truck chassis manufacturers. Thanks to a new production system and flexible team working methods, it is now much easier for large manufacturers like Scania to build widely different specifications on the same production line. As we highlighted in the last issue of Waste Management World, this, coupled with a ‘modular’ design approach, enables high-horsepower tractor units for central or southern European customers to be built on the same lines as a fully automatic gearbox, low cab truck for urban distribution, or waste collection duties in Sweden, the UK or other widely differing markets.
With one of the most successful semi-auto shifts (now standard on most heavy duty specification chassis), Scania might have been the last to wish to encourage customers to go for fully automatic Allison boxes. But Scania has engineered its cab dashboard panels to enable existing control stalks to take the auto box mode selector, thus doing away with the need to modify the cab interior. It sounds a small step, but it has major benefits.
The plan?
Allison Transmission is out to persuade users in the scrap, waste and recycling industry to switch to fully automatic trucks on safety, productivity and reliability grounds. It is already looking closely to see how its dealers and agents in the major European markets can identify suitable applications (starting in the US and Europe, but expanding from there).
‘There are a number of taboos that need addressing,’ suggests David Crowther. ‘First that fully auto trucks are worse off-highway than manual gearbox trucks.’ But probably the biggest issue will be over residual values. Where there is a resale value on a refuse collector, it would be true to say that an auto box specification will have a resale value while, in most markets, a manual gearbox machine will not. Currently the reverse is true when it comes to skip trucks, hooklifts and other units used on recycling, so there’s still a long way to go.
But does the argument stand up? Certainly a reduction in drive line abuse and failure, reduced driver fatigue and a reduction in repetitive strain injury cases are worth considering. The next phase is probably going involve Allison Transmission working with various truck chassis manufacturers to put suitable demonstration vehicles out into the market place.
I’d say that, at the very least, you should be prepared to be convinced.
Malcolm Bates is Transport Correspondent of Waste Management World.
e-mail: wmw@jxj.com
To comment on this article or to see related features from our archive, go to www.waste-management-world.com
