Design and development of four wheel weeder for wide-row crops

S P SINGH; M K SINGH; R C SOLANKI

doi:10.56093/ijas.v86i1.55196

Authors

S P SINGH ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012
M K SINGH ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012
R C SOLANKI ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v86i1.55196

Keywords:

Gender-friendly equipment, Manual-operated, Push-pull, Swinging handle, Vegetable crops, Weeder

Abstract

Single/twin wheel weeders have been developed for manual weeding in about 20 cm row spaced crops. These weeders are unable to provide uniform depth of cut and lateral stability. Presently marginal and small farmers in the country are inclined to grow cash crops. Manual weeders are not available for vegetables planted at row spacing of 30 to 50 cm. Keeping these facts in view, a weeder, employing two innovative techniques such as application of ‘Four- wheels’ and ‘Swinging handle’ was developed for wide row spaced crops. The slicing/cutting the weeds with best possible depth control were the main considerations for its design. Anthropometric data of men and women workers were taken into considerations for design of components of the weeder. Weight of equipment was kept below 10 kg as per the ergonomic requirement by adopting alternate fabrication material. Soil bin study on push force revealed the significant effect of compaction levels and handle angles on the performance of operator in terms of high force. The minimum field capacity of the weeder was 0.0206 ha/h with more than 95% weeding efficiency. The push force requirement per cm cutting width was lowest (6.34N) as compared to other mechanical weeders. The ergo-mech approach of design enabled operators to complete the weeding work timely with reduced drudgery and increased productivity as compared to conventional practice.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bernacki H, Haman J and Kanafoski C Z. 1985. Agricultural Machines, Theory and Construction. Central Institute for Scientific, Technical and Economic Information, Warsaw, Poland.

Behra B K and Swain S. 2005. Ergonomic evaluation and design modification of push-pull type weeders. Proceedings of International Ergonomics Conference, 10-12 December 2005, Guwahati, pp 1 066–77.

Bellinger P L. 1969. Man-machine compatibility. Agricultural Engineering 50: 17–9, 21.

Bhandari V B. 1994. Design of Machine Elements, pp 15-25. Tata McGraw Hill Publishing Company Limited, New Delhi. Biswas H S. 1984. Weed Control Technology, pp 17–33. ICAR- Central Institute of Agricultural Engineering (CIAE), Bhopal.

Campbell J P. 1990. Modeling the performance prediction problem in industrial and organizational psychology. Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 1 pp 687– 732. Dunnette M D and Hough L M (Eds.). Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto.

Gite L P and Yadav B G. 1989. Optimum handle height for a push pull type manually operated dryland weeder. Ergonomics 33: 1 487–94. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139008925348

Gite L P, Majumder J, Mehta C R and Khadatkar A. 2009. Anthropometric and Strength Data of Indian Agricultural Workers for Farm Equipment Design. CIAE, Bhopal.

Grandjean E. 1988. Fitting the Task to the Man,. 4th edition. Taylor & Francis, London.

Krutz Gary, Thompson Lester and Claar Paul. 1984. Design of Agricultural Machinery, pp 10. John Wiley and Sons, New York.

Michael A M and Ojha T P. 1987. Principles of Agricultural Engineering, pp 1, Vol. I. Jain Brothers, New Delhi .

Nag P K and Chatterjee S K. 1981. Physiological reactions of female workers in Indian agricultural work. Human Factors 23(5): 607–14 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/001872088102300510

Pandey M M, Majumdar K L, Singh Gyanendra and Singh Gajendra. 1997. Farm Machinery Research Digest. Tech. Bulletin No. CIAE/97/69, Central Institute of Agricultural Engineering, Bhopal, pp 156–75.

ICAR-IASRI. 2012. Agricultural Research Data Book. ICAR- IASRI, New Delhi.

Rogan A. 1992. Ergonomics constraints on crop production in the topics. Overseas Division Report OD/92/4, Robens’ Institute of Health and Safety and Silsoe Research Institute, UK.

Singh S P, Gite L P, Majumder J and Agarwal N. 2008. Aerobic capacity of Indian farm women using sub-maximal exercise technique on tread mill. Agricultural Engineering International: The CIGR E-Journal, X.

Singh S P, Singh S and Singh P. 2012. Ergonomics in developing hand operated maize dehusker–sheller for farm women. Applied Ergonomics 43: 792–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2011.11.014

Tewari V K, Dutta R K and Murthy A S R. 1993. Field performance of weeding blades of a manually operated push- pull weeder. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 55: 129–41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/jaer.1993.1038