Effect of Cup Size, Seed Characteristics and Angular Speed on the Performance of an Automatic Potato Planter under Laboratory Conditions

Year 2017, Volume: 23 Issue: 3, 317 - 327, 01.09.2017

Mustafa Gökalp Boydaş

https://doi.org/10.15832/ankutbd.447634

Cited By: 4

Abstract

The seed metering mechanism is the most important unit of potato planters. Accuracy of row plant spacing depends on the ability of the seed metering mechanism. The ability of the seed metering mechanism is directly associated with the constructive and operational variables of the planter. This study was conducted to evaluate the effects of different cups sizes (C1<C2<C3), different seed sizes (25 to 45 and 45 to 65 mm), different shapes (oblong and spherical), and angular speeds (0.9, 2.04 and 3.18 rad s-1) on the seed metering mechanism in a full automatic potato planter. The cup, angular speed, seed size and shape have an important role on the efficiency of the seed metering mechanism. The seed spacing uniformity was determined including doubles and skips. The coefficient of variation (CV%) was used to determine the seed spacing uniformity. The values of CV% for cups were 29.24, 23.76 and 26.11% for C1, C2 and C3, respectively. C3 has the highest percent value of doubles and the lowest percent value of skips. The seed spacing uniformity of oblong potato seeds was better than that of spherical potato seeds. The percent value of doubles increased and percent value of skips decreased for oblong potato seeds, opposite to the spherical potato seeds. The seed size of 45-65 mm gave a better seed spacing uniformity than the other seed size. It was observed that the seed size of 25-45 mm had higher percent value of doubles. The seed spacing uniformity tended to increase as the angular speed reduced. The CV% values of angular speed were 22.83, 24.90 and 31.39% for 0.9, 2.04, 3.18 rad s-1, respectively. As the angular speed increased, percent value of doubles decreased and percent value of skips increased. 

Keywords

Seed metering mechanism; Seed spacing uniformity; Laser measurement system; Doubles; Skips

References

• Al-Gaadi K A & Marey S A (2011). Effect of forward speed and tuber characteristics on tuber spacing uniformity for a cup-belt potato planter. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research 8(4): 753-758
• Altuntas E (2005). The effects of some operational parameters on potato planter’s performance. Agricultural Mechanization in Asia, Africa, and Latin America 36(2): 71-74
• Altuntas E, Taşer Ö F & Tekelioğlu O (2004). Determination of the effects of the tuber size and different vibration positions of the planting unit on seed tuber distribution pattern with a full automatic potato planter. Tarim Bilimleri Dergisi-Journal of Agricultural Sciences 10(1): 104-110
• Buitenwerf H, Hoogmoed W B, Lerink P & Müller J (2006). Assessment of the behavior of potatoes in a cup-belt planter. Biosystems Engineering 95(1): 35-41
• Bussan A J, Mitchell P D, Copas M E & Drilias M J (2007). Evaluation of the effect of density on potato yield and tuber size distribution. Crop Sciences Society of America 47: 2462-2472
• Boydas M G & Uygan F (2012). Influence of seed physical properties and speed on the external mechanical damage index and in-row spacing uniformity in an automatic potato planter. Tarim Bilimleri DergisiJournal of Agricultural Sciences 18(2): 126-136
• Creamer N G, Crozier C R & Cubeta M A (1999). Influence of seed piece spacing and population on yield, internal quality, and economic performance of Atlantic, Superior, and Snowden potato varieties in Eastern North Carolina. American Journal of Potato Research 76: 257-261
• Cross V S & Ohms R E (1967). Better potato stands. Idaho Agricultural Extension Bulletin: No:486, Idaho, Moscow. Available at http://digital.lib.uidaho. edu/cdm/compoundobject/collection/ui_ep/id/19763/ rec/834 (Accessed date: 10 May 2015)
• Culpin C (1992). Farm Machinery. 12th Edition, Blackwell Scientific Publication, Oxford Entz M H & LaCroix L J (1984). The effect of in-row spacing and seed type on the yield and quality of a potato cultivar. American Potato Journal 61: 93-105
• FAO (2015). FAOSTAT. Rome, Italy: United Nations FAO. Available at http://faostat.fao.org/site/567/ DesktopDefault.aspx?PageID=567#ancor (Accessed date: 16 May 2015)
• Getachew T, Belew D & Tulu S (2012). Yield and growth parameters of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) as influenced by intra row spacing and time of earthing up: in Boneya Degem district, Central Highlands of Ethiopia. International Journals of Agricultural Research 7(5): 255-265
• Güllüoglu L & Arioglu H (2009). Effects of seed size and in-row spacing on growth and yield of early potato in a Mediterranean-type environment in Turkey. African Journal of Agricultural Research 4(5): 535-541
• James W C, Lawrence C H & Shih C S (1973). Yield losses due to missing plants in potato crops. American Potato Journal 50: 345-352
• James W C, Bradley R H E, Smith C S & Wong S T (1975). Misses in potato crops in New Brunswick in 1973; Their extent, distribution and cause. American Potato Journal 52(3): 83-87
• Khairy M F (1997). Performance evaluation of potato planter in sandy soil. Misr Journal of Agricultural Engineering 14(1): 119-129
• Klassen J (1974). Potato planter speeds-how do they affect stand and production. In: Proceedings of the 13th Annual Washington State Potato Conference and Trade Fair, 29-31 January, Moses Lake, Washington, USA, pp. 71-74
• Klassen J (1975). Planter performance study. In: Proceedings of the 14th Annual Washington State Potato Conference and Trade Fair, 4-6 February, Moses Lake, Washington, USA, pp. 43-47
• Love S L & Thompson-Johns A (1999). Seed piece spacing influences yield, tuber size distribution, stem and tuber density, and net returns of three processing potato cultivars. HortScience 34: 629-633
• Mathworks (2011). Matlab version 2011b. Mathworks Company McPhee J E, Beattie B M, Corkrey R & Fennell J F M (1996). Spacing uniformity-yield effects and in-field measurement. American Potato Journal 73: 167-171
• Misener G C (1979). Relative performance of cup and pick type potato planters. Canadian Agricultural Engineering 21(2): 131-134
• Misener G C (1982). Potato planters-uniformity of spacing. Transactions of the ASAE 25(6): 1504-1505 Mohsenin N N (1986). Physical Properties of Plant and Animal Materials. Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, New York. NY
• Pavek M J & Thornton R E (2003). Poor planter performance: What’s it costing the average Washington potato grower? In: Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Washington State Potato Conference and Trade Fair, 4-6 February, Moses Lake, Washington, USA, pp. 13-21
• Potato (2015). The potato of cultivation. http://www. fao.org/potato-2008/en/potato/index.html (Accessed date: 02 February 2015)
• Rex B L, Russell W A & Wolfe H R (1987). The effect of spacing of seed pieces on yield, quality and economic value for processing of shepody potatoes in Manitoba. American Potato Journal 64: 177-189
• Rupp J N & Thornton R E (1992). Seed placement and plant stand-is it worth worrying about? Proceedings of the 31st Annual Washington State Potato Conference and Trade Fair, 4-6 February, Moses Lake, Washington, USA. pp. 167-181
• Schotzko R T, Hyde G M & Thornton R E (1983). The dollars and cents of the 1982 potato seed size and spacing survey. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Washington State Potato Conference and Trade Fair, 1-3 February, Moses Lake, Washington, USA, pp. 23-29
• Seyedbagheri M (2006). On-farm evaluation of potato planter performance. Available at https://www. researchgate.net/publication/241015552_ON_ FARM_EVALUATION_OF_POTATO_PLANTER_ PERFORMANCE (Accessed date: 17 May 2015)
• Sieczka J B, Ewing E E & Markwardt E D (1986). Potato planter performance and effects of non-uniform spacing. American Potato Journal 63: 25-37
• Steele D D, Bon T A & Moos J A (2010). Capstone design experiences in the development of a two-row plot scale potato planter. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 26(1): 173-182
• Taheri S & Shamabadi Z (2013). Effect of planting date and plant density on potato yield, approach energy efficiency. International Journal of Agriculture and Crop Sciences 5(7): 747-754
• Thornton R E, Schotzko T & Hyde G (1983). Some other factors in obtaining good plant stands. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Washington State Potato Conference and Trade Fair, 1-3 February, Moses Lake, Washington, USA, pp. 93-101
• Zoraki M & Acar A I (2000). Optimum design of cup shape used in full automatic potato planter. Tarim Bilimleri Dergisi-Journal of Agricultural Sciences 6(4): 135-140