## 3 Results and Discussion
### Harvesting--Step 1 (Shredding) and 2 (Baling)
For this reason, the material consumption was not influenced by yield (high or low). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Machine Setting**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Yield**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Hourly Consumption, 1 h\({}^{-1}\)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Area Consumption, 1 ha\({}^{-1}\)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Material Consumption, 1 t\({}^{-1}\)**} \\ \cline{3-11}  & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Step 1**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Step 2**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Step 1**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Step 2**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Step 1**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Step 2**} \\ \hline SM1 & high & 18 & & 17.5 & b & 15.3 & b & 24.7 & b & 0.51 & b & 0.95 & b \\ SM2 & high & 20 & n.s & 19 & b & 11.4 & a & 23.4 & b & 0.38 & a & 0.9 & b \\ SM1 & low & 21 & & 13 & a & 17.9 & b & 16 & a & 0.64 & b & 0.67 & a \\ SM2 & low & 22 & & 12 & a & 12.3 & a & 12.6 & a & 0.45 & a & 0.53 & a \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Fuel consumption for shredding (step 1) and baling (step 2). Figure 4: Baling phase of the high yield treatment (T1 and T2). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Parameter**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**T1**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**T2**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**T3**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**T4**} \\ \cline{2-9}  & **Value** & **\%** & **Value** & **\%** & **Value** & **\%** & **Value** & **\%** \\ \hline _Effective time (TE)_, s_ & 127 & 58.26 & 302 & 78.85 & 288 & 75.2 & 140 & 68.63 \\ _Accessory time (TA)_, s_ & 91 & 41.74 & 81 & 21.15 & 95 & 24.8 & 64 & 31.37 \\ _Turing time (TAV)_, s_ & 25 & 11.47 & 21 & 5.48 & 23 & 6.01 & 22 & 10.78 \\ _Maintenance time_ & 66 & & 60 & & 72 & & 42 & \\ _(TAS)_, s_ & 218 & 100 & 383 & 100 & 383 & 100 & 204 & 100 \\ _Effective Speed_, km h\({}^{-1}\) & 5.81 & & 4.89 & & 5.13 & & 6.55 & \\ _Operating Speed_, km & 3.39 & & 3.85 & & 3.85 & & 4.5 & \\ _Effective field capacity_, & & 0.71 & & 0.81 & & 0.81 & & 0.95 & \\ _Material capacity_, t h\({}^{-1}\) & 18.5 & & 21.05 & & 19.46 & & 22.76 & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Time and performance characteristics for step 2 (baling). The consumption per unit of area between the two speeds is significantly reduced exceeding 25%. This seems to be an aspect of particular importance if the same homogeneity of shredding is used. The Nobili WS 320 BIO was used for the management of herbaceous plant biomass. The rotor of this device operated at all working widths with a good shredding efficiency, even though a small component exceeding 50 cm remained. This did not cause problems during the baling phase. The presence of larger particles can also increase the stability of the biomass, reducing the risk of harmful fermentation at moisture levels \(>\)15%. The chopped biomass was well spread over the entire working front, although there was often a tendency toward central accumulation, leaving the side edges slightly empty. Although this aspect may limit the efficiency of solar radiation, especially during the biomass drying step, it can simplify the subsequent loading operation by allowing baling pick-up where the operator can be used for machine driving. During baling (Table 4), the area consumption showed significant reductions from T1 and T2 to T3 and T4. This is difficult to explain because the harvesting differences were rather contained. Similar considerations can be made regarding the consumption per unit of harvesting, where the consumption per ton of yield in the T1 was twice as much as that of T4. The lower power output was probably caused by the higher yield and the increased consumption per unit of harvested product in comparison to the lower yield treatments. The average total fuel consumption for _Arundo donax_ harvest in the two steps was 1.251 t\({}^{-1}\), (0.501 t\({}^{-1}\) shredding and 0.761 t\({}^{-1}\) baling). This is interesting and favorable for the energy aspect of mechanical harvest.