Agricultural engineering programs as related to employment requirements: 430 - 440 FARM MACHINERY AND POWER AN AUGER TINE INTER FURROW CROP CULTIVATOR. H. A. Abdel Mawla1 , A. M. El-Lithy2, E. M. Arif3 and N. S. M. Ali4 ABSTRACT The main aim of this research was to develop and test an implement for inter furrow cultivation. The unit is supposed to uproot and kill weeds at the early stage of the crop growth along the furrow sides and avoid crop seedlings damage. The unit also should open furrows to facilitate easy irrigation. The cultivator was fabricated and tested in the Faculty of Agriculture, Al-Azhar University, Assiut. The preliminary experiments show that the prototype of the cultivator was heavy and required high power to move. The unit was modified to improve power transmission. The main power shaft was developed to a telescopic shaft to permit adjusting the machine cultivation width according to furrow width. The ratio of the auger tine tip linear speed to the forward speed (λ) is considered one of the important parameters of testing the unit. The value of λ2 = 4.14 showed the most efficient adjustment. The most efficient results also were achieved at cultivation depth 6 cm. the performance of the prototype equipped with ridger was improved because the ridger opens the furrow better for irrigation. The well fabricated prototype may cultivate 0.15 to 0.22 fed/h at 75 % cultivator efficiency. INTRDODUCTION echanical weed control is the main operation used for weed control. The operation reduces the drudgery involved with manual hoeing. Mechanical method requires both accurate transverse and longitudinal positional control to avoid crop damage. So far, commercial automated mechanical methods are not spread for operation in the inter-row area (Melander et al., 2005). A few research projects, however, have identified prospective technologies that would allow highly selective mechanical weed control within crop rows M 1 Prof. and head of Ag. Eng. Dep., Fac. of Ag., AL-Azhar U. Assiut. Assoc. Prof., Ag. Eng. Dep., Fac. of Ag., AL-Azhar U. Assiut. 3 Prof., Ag. Eng., Ag. Res. Cen., Ag. Eng. Res. Institute. 4 Demonstrator, Ag. Eng. Dep., Fac. of Ag., AL-Azhar U. Assiut. 2 The 18th. Annual Conference of the Misr Soc. of Ag. Eng., 26-27 October, 2011 - 430 - FARM MACHINERY AND POWER (Awady, 1986; Wisserodt et al, 1999; Åstrand and Baerveldt, 2002; Blasco et al, 2002; O'Dogherty et al, 2007; Tillett et al, 2008). Traditional weed control methods such as hand hoes and donkey pulled cultivators have still good weeding efficiency but not recommended to be used because of their high cost, more labor consuming and more human effort done. So, the developed cultivator must have many advantages such as being suitable for the small-scale farmers, solve the problems of common cultivators, suitable for weeding operation in most types of crops and in addition to simple construction. Awady (1986) designed and tested a power rotary cultivator. He indicated that the big power and 4rotor arrangement are suitable for orchard cultivation, while the small power and 2- rotor arrangement are suitable for inter-row cultivation. The forward speed decreases with depth. The forward speed varied between 0.65 and 0.31 km/h for depths between 5 and 13 cm. The specific time consumption per feddan ranged between 13 to 26 h/fed depending on the depth of cultivation. Hofmann (1993) indicated that mechanical weed control may be widely used in the near future, in spite of some serious disadvantages. One of the most serious disadvantages is the low driving speed required for good steering along the plant rows. Simmone and Maguire (2004) indicated that the term ‘cycloid hoe’ refers to the combination of the circular movement of eight vertically directed tines and the linear movement of the implement in the direction of driving, leading to a cycloid tine trajectory covering both the intra- and inter-row areas. Melander et al. (2005) indicated that the selective intra-row weeding operation by hoeing requires both accurate transverse and longitudinal positional control to avoid crop damage. Abdel-Maksoud (2008) developed a self propelled harvesting machine to be used as tiller inter-rows in maize field, determine the optimum parameters affecting on the performance of the developed machine, and compare the developed machine with the traditional weeding methods. MATERIAL AND METHODS Cultivator description. The hand steering cultivator frame was provided with a single rubber wheel. The soil working tines represented in the two augers were The 18th. Annual Conference of the Misr Soc. of Ag. Eng., 26-27 October, 2011 - 431 - FARM MACHINERY AND POWER attached to the back of the frame. The auger tines were suspended to the frame are inclined in position of both sides of the frame. The soil agitation mechanism was powered by 5.5 horsepower gasoline engine. A worm type gearbox was used to provide output speed reduction ratio 1:33. An adjustable height furrow opener is bolted at the end of the frame to reform the furrow after agitation. The cultivator drawings are shown in Figures (1) and (2). Cultivator components. The detailed descriptions of the essential parts of the cultivator are shown in Figure (1). The main components of the cultivator include: 1. Frame. The trapezoidal shaped frame of dimensions 600 mm width base, 250 mm narrow base and 700 mm width fabricated to fit the requirements of fixing the engine, attaching the ground wheel and bolting the bearings on which the drive system was positioned. The frame design considered the suitable size of the machine in relation to the power unit used, the hand steering by the labor and maneuvers insides one furrow. 2. Power unit. The cultivator was powered by 5.5 horsepower gasoline engine at 3600 rpm. A gearbox reduces the speed by 1/33 was used to transmit power to the ground wheel of the unit. 3. Power transmission. The power is transmitted from the engine to the gearbox and the hoeing mechanism through a v-belt and sprockets. A pair of bevel gears is connected with the main power transmission shaft. These two bevel gears transmit the motion to the auger by universal joints with a different angle. 4. Cultivation auger tine size. The performance of the cultivator was tested under three different sizes of cultivation auger tines that were fabricated and tested: Small size D1 = 3 cm tine width, mid size D2 = 4 cm tine width and large size D3 = 6 cm tine width. Figure (2) shows the auger tine size. The 18th. Annual Conference of the Misr Soc. of Ag. Eng., 26-27 October, 2011 - 432 - FARM MACHINERY AND POWER Fig. (1) Isometric of the designed cultivator. Fig. (2) The cultivator drawing and cultivation auger tine size. 6. Ridger. The two wings of the ridger were attached to the beam with hinges at the front ends of each wing. The backsides of the furrow opener wings were attached to each other with a horizontally adjustable beam to allow adjusting the width of ridge operation. The 18th. Annual Conference of the Misr Soc. of Ag. Eng., 26-27 October, 2011 - 433 - FARM MACHINERY AND POWER 7. Wheel and frame support axle. One pneumatic wheel was positioned in the middle of the cultivator to carry the frame and other parts of the cultivator. The size of wheel is 4.00 - 8. Methods. Testes were run to evaluate the performance of the cultivation unit with and without the furrow opener. The performance of the cultivator was tested in the field at the existing soil moisture content. The soil moisture content was determined and recorded. The cultivator was tested under three speed ratio values 5.95, 4.14 and 2.97. Auger tine tip linear speed m / s Speed ratio (λ) Forword speed m / s (1) Soil collapse. Standard sieves were used for mechanical analysis of soil after cultivation to determine soil agitation. Samples were collected after cultivation at surface levels of soil (cultivation zones). (2) Weed removal efficiency. Figure (3) shows the way to record the weeds density before and after cultivation, and to facilitate determine weed removal efficiency. The furrow was divided to samples each of 1 m along the furrow. The weed numbers were recorded on the field notes counted and classified according to variety. The same job was repeated after cultivation and weed removal efficiency was computed: initial Weed removed W.R.E. Initial weed found   (3) Injured plants percentage. Injured plants percentage was counted from some rows for certain distance immediately after cultivation by using the following equation: J1  J 2 D × 100 where: initial found before cultivation J1 D = The percentage of injured plants (%). The total number of plants within an adjusted distance before J1 = cultivation operation.  J2 = The total number of injured plants within the same adjustment. The 18th. Annual Conference of the Misr Soc. of Ag. Eng., 26-27 October, 2011 - 434 - FARM MACHINERY AND POWER Fig. (3) Method of determining weed removal efficiency. (a) Weed density distribution before cultivation. (b) Furrow profile and cultivation zones. (4) Cultivator productivity. Cultivator performance was estimated in terms of weed removal efficiency, injured seedlings percentage, soil collapse, machine productivity and costs were compared to labor methods. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION (1) Soil agitation. Preliminary experiments conducted to test the machine included 3 auger tines of three sizes. The length and pitch of the auger tine was fixed while the auger lip height was variable. Auger tines of lip height 3, 4 and 6 cm were tested. Actually, the cultivation depth was close to the lip height. Observation of the cultivated furrows showed that, in case of the 3 cm auger tine, the cultivation depth was shallow and many weeds were left without uprooting. The performance of the 4 cm lip tine was not considerably improved compared to the previous one. The 18th. Annual Conference of the Misr Soc. of Ag. Eng., 26-27 October, 2011 - 435 - FARM MACHINERY AND POWER Accordingly, it was decided to use larger auger tine. The 6 cm lip height auger tine slowed more improved performance of the cultivator from the point of view of soil agitation as well as weed uprooting. The rest of the experiments were completed using the 6 cm lip height auger tine. Figure (4) shows the soil mechanical analysis of the cultivated soil which was done directly after cultivation. About 30% by weight of the soil sample was of cloud sizes little more than 2.5 mm and over 60% of the soil sample weight was of clod sizes less than 1.25 mm. 40 35 Wight percent %. 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 > 2.5 >2 > 1.25 > 0.8 > 0.63 > 0.425 > 0.125 < 0.125 Diameter of clods, mm. Fig. (4) Soil mechanical analysis of the cultivated soil. (2) Weed removal efficiency. Table (1) shows the weed removal efficiency data as recorded when operating the machine to cultivate corn crop at the experimental farm of the university. The machine, provided with a 6 cm lip auger tine, was operated at 160 rpm and 0.34 m/s. The data of five trails were calculated and recorded in the Table (2). The initial number and type of weeds were counted and recorded before cultivation. A distribution map was drown to permit estimation of the cultivation tine behavior and capability of weed removing. After cultivation, the weeds left behind without uprooting or killing was also counted and their positions were localized. Weed control efficiency was then computed according to the equation mentioned methods. As shown in the table, weeds were not uniformly grown on the furrow. Some samples of 1m long included as much as199 weeds of different The 18th. Annual Conference of the Misr Soc. of Ag. Eng., 26-27 October, 2011 - 436 - FARM MACHINERY AND POWER varieties. Some other samples of 1m long also included only 62 weeds. Where after cultivation, 60 weeds were left in the high weed density sample (199) with weed removal efficiency about 68%. In case of the weed sample 62 weed/m before cultivation only 11 weed were still not uprooted after cultivation, which represented 83% weeding efficiency. Weeding efficiency seems to depend more on the type of the weed itself. The deep root weeds and these of hard thin stalks largely resist uprooting. It was observed that Premade grass and Half grass resist uprooting because of the deep root and the high tensile strength of the stem. (3) Percentage injured seedlings. The criteria of the cultivator design were to determine the dimension the auger tine to cover the area on both sides of the furrow. The auger tine length, diameter and auger inclination were precisely measured and adjusted to minimize crop seedling damage and to maximize the cultivated area. Due to the variation of the crop seedlings size, orientation and centralization upon the furrow top, some seedlings may obstruct the end of the shaft that provides the auger tine with power. Several accidents of seedling damage could be avoided if a well trained labor operated the machine. It was also observed that when increasing the speed relation of the auger tine the percent damage may slightly be increased due to the more exhaust of the labor and may have less control on the cultivator steering. Percentage injured also may vary according to the crop variety where some crop seedlings may be more fragile than the other. Percentage injured was always less than 1.2% for Corn seedlings and may rarely exceed 1.0% in case of Cabbage seedlings. Fig. (5) Weeds density distribution after and before cultivation. The 18th. Annual Conference of the Misr Soc. of Ag. Eng., 26-27 October, 2011 - 437 - FARM MACHINERY AND POWER Table (1) Number of weeds and weed removal efficiency at cultivation zones. Furrow portion rank Average W.R.E Cultivation 1 2 3 4 5 Zones. (%) B. A. B. A. B. A. B. A. B. A. B. A. Upper 33 10 12 7 53 27 28 7 22 4 30 11 63.3 right side Lower 27 2 32 1 49 5 34 2 25 0 33 2 94 right side Furrow 0 0 6 0 8 1 5 0 0 0 4 0 100 bottom Lower left 5 0 35 2 38 3 14 0 3 0 19 1 95 side Upper left 13 1 9 5 51 26 16 4 12 7 20 9 55 side Total 78 13 94 15 199 60 97 13 62 11 106 23 78.3 Table (2) Number and variety of weeds not removed after cultivation. Furrow portion rank Variety weeds 1 2 3 4 5 Rough cyperus 2 0 12 0 0 Halfa grass 1 2 4 1 0 Purslane 5 5 25 5 3 Lasser bind 0 0 4 0 0 weed Bermuda grass 4 6 18 7 8 (3) Cultivator productivity and costs. The cultivator tested within this research is an experimental unit fabricated to prove the success of the idea and to prove that single wheel hand steering cultivator to cultivate the furrow planted crop. The cultivator was modified to secure continuous operation with reasonable exhaust of the labor. Actually, the machine showed productivity higher than a single laborer. The unit is considered promising for modification to duplicate the unit productivity and to reduce the labor exhaust. Further research work is required to modify the unit for higher productivity and reliability. The machine performance may be largely improved with minimum effort and modifications. The 18th. Annual Conference of the Misr Soc. of Ag. Eng., 26-27 October, 2011 - 438 - FARM MACHINERY AND POWER CONCLUSION A compact size single wheel cultivator was designed and tested to be capable of cultivating between the crops planted on furrows. The most important goal was to make the unit move inside the furrow and cultivate both furrow sides, which means agitating soil to suitable depth and kill weeds. The unit was provided with two auger tines mounted parallel to the furrow sides. Preliminary experiments were run to determine the possible front speed of the unit and the ratio of auger tine linear speed to front speed to achieve maximum soil agitation and weed removal. The test results of soil mechanical analysis shows that about 60% of the soil sample (by weight) clod size was less than 1.25 mm diameter. Weed removal efficiency ranged from 70% to 83% depending on the type of weeds. Damage to crop seedlings ranged from 0.5 to 1.5%. A further study to modify the unit for higher weed removal efficiency and lower labor exhaust is required. REFERENCES Abdel-Maksoud, Y. S. A. (2008). Development of a mechanical weeding system inter-rows in Egyptian field. Zagazig J. Agric. Res., Vol. 35 No. (1)2008. Awady, M. N. (1986). Mechanization of soil cultivation appropriate to Egyptian Agriculture. 1st Tec. Rep. Misr J. Ag. Eng., 3(2): 27-37. Blasco, J., Aleixos, N., Roger, J. M., Rabatel, G. and MoltóE, (2002). Robotic weed control using machine vision. Biosys. Eng, 83: 149157. Hofmann, U. (1993). Green cover crop management and mechanical weeding in viticulture. Communication of the 4th I. Conf. I.F.O.A.M.- Non chemical weed control. Dijon: 375-378. Melander, B., Rasmussen, G. and Barberi, P. (2005). Integration physical and cultural methods of weed control: examples from Euro. Res. Weed Sc., 53: 369-381. Melander, B., Rasmussen, G. and Barberi, P. (2005). Integration physical and cultural methods of weed control: examples from Euro. Res. Weed Sc., 53: 369-381. The 18th. Annual Conference of the Misr Soc. of Ag. Eng., 26-27 October, 2011 - 439 - ‫‪FARM MACHINERY AND POWER‬‬ ‫‪O'Dogherty M. J., Godwin, R. J., Dedousis, A. P., Brighton, J. L. and‬‬ ‫‪Tillett, N. D. (2007). A mathematical model of the kinematics of a‬‬ ‫‪rotating disc for inter and intra-row hoeing. Biosys. Eng., 96: 169‬‬‫‪179.‬‬ ‫‪Simmons C. H. and Maguire, D. E. (2004). Manual of Engineering‬‬ ‫‪Drawing – to British and International Standards (2nd. Ed.)..‬‬ ‫‪Elsevier Newnes, Burlington.: 298 pp.‬‬ ‫‪Tillett, N. D., Hague, T. Grundy, A. C. and Dedousis, A. P. (2008).‬‬ ‫‪Mechanical within-row weed control for transplanted crops using‬‬ ‫‪computer vision. Biosys. Eng., 99: 171-178.‬‬ ‫‪Wisserodt, E., Grimm, J., Kemper, M., Kielhorn, A., Klein-Hartlage‬‬ ‫‪H., Nardmann, M., Naescher, J. and Trautz, D. (1999).‬‬ ‫‪Gesteuerte Hacke zur Beikrautregulierung innerhalb der Reihe von.‬‬ ‫‪Pflanzenkulturen. [controlled Hoe for weeding within Crop Rows].‬‬ ‫‪Tagung Landtechnik 1999/VDI-MEG. VDI-Verlag, Düsseldorf,‬‬ ‫‪Germany.: 155-160.‬‬ ‫الوخلص العربي‬ ‫عساقة بيي خطىط الوحاصيل رات أسلحة بريوية‪.‬‬ ‫‪2‬‬ ‫ا‪.‬د‪ /‬حسي عبذ الرازق عبذ الوىلي‪ , 1‬د‪ /‬أحوذ هاهر الليثي‬ ‫‪4‬‬ ‫ا‪.‬د‪ /‬األهيي هحوذ عارف‪ , 3‬م‪ً/‬بيل شعباى هحوىد علي‬ ‫صيعت وجربتت ودت ىيعسيت اخلتو خىنصيصتاو خىنسةوعتي عيتط لهتف ب ت إيجتيا وستايي‬ ‫مانيىاناتتي ىيجصتتي ت ال هتتط خىي ييتتي ىيمتتيان طىتتي يننتتو عتتو ريق تتي خالستتيايي عتتو خىستتوشد و ت‬ ‫وضعت بعض خىنعتييار خىن نتي ىيمتنال يتل خآلىتي ومتيه متو مهن تي مه نتفه مي تاهي خىصجتل‬ ‫بصاث يصرك اخلو لط وخد د ومه سين خألسيصي ت ة ي متو مصترك بيروىتط صتاار ى تنيه‬ ‫خىصمفه عيط ة ميهاي إلثية خىيربي وإزخىي خىصشيئشد مي ي نتفه ميسىتي بتيىرمل متو دني تي‬ ‫عيتط عجيتتي ودات د ومتتنىل نتتفه مستتيصي ي ميئيتتي متتا يتتفخزل جتتيىلط خىإتتط وإمنيىاتتي ضتتله ي‬ ‫ومي ي نفه مفجه بيىعيمو وس يي خىصرمتي عيتط تفه خىإتط ىييناتس بيىقت ة عيتط خىنيتيوة هتط‬ ‫ى ييي خىإط وخى وةخه مو لط ىينجيوة ىته اوه خإلضترخة بيىيلي تي د و ت نتت جربتي خآلىتي هتط‬ ‫مصمتفىط خىتتنة وخىنرىت د ومظ تتر خىييتيئن مه خألستتيصي خىلريناتي يمتتت برثتية خىيربتتي ب ةجتتي‬ ‫جا داث ميىت ‪ %06‬مو دجل خىق او خىيي جي م و مو ‪.1‬د‪ 5‬سلد مني بايتت خىييتيئن مه مستي‬ ‫إزخىي خىصشيئش رخودت مو ‪ %06‬إىط ‪ %38‬دس ىتف خىصشتيئشد و رخودتت ىستلي خى ترة‬ ‫ىيلي ي خىنصمفه مو ‪1‬د‪ %6‬إىط ‪1‬د‪ %5‬دس ظرو خىيجربيد‬ ‫‪ -1‬استار ورئيس قسن الهٌذسة السراعية – كلية السراعة جاهعة األزهر فرع اسيىط‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -2‬استار هساعذ الهٌذسة السراعية – كلية السراعة جاهعة األزهر فرع اسيىط‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -3‬استار الهٌذسة السراعية _ هعهذ بحىث الهٌذسة السراعية _ هصر‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -4‬هعيذ بقسن قسن الهٌذسة السراعية – كلية السراعة جاهعة األزهر فرع اسيىط‪.‬‬ ‫‪- 440 -‬‬ ‫‪The 18th. Annual Conference of the Misr Soc. of Ag. Eng., 26-27 October, 2011‬‬