Seed Drill 2_2.pdf

“STUDIES ON MANUALLY OPERATED MULTI-CROP PLANTER FOR DIFFERENT SEEDS” THESIS Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award of the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY In Farm Machinery and Power Engineering By Kalay Khan

2017 VAUGH SCHOOL OF AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

SAM HIGGINBOTTOM UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE, TECHNOLOGY & SCIENCES ALLAHABAD-211007 (U.P). INDIA.

CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINAL WORK

This is to certify that the study conducted by Kalay khan, ID No. 12PHFMP207, during 2012-2015 reported in the present thesis was under my guidance and supervision. The results reported by him are genuine and the candidate himself has written the script of thesis. His thesis entitled “Studies on Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter for Different Seeds” is therefore, being forwarded for acceptance in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Farm Machinery and Power Engineering, Vaugh School of Agricultural Engineering and Technology, Sam Higginbottom Institute of Agriculture, Technology & Sciences (Deemed-To-BeUniversity) Allahabad-211007 (U.P). India.

Dr. S.C.Moses (Advisor) (Associate Professor) Department of Farm Machinery and Power Engineering Sam Higginbottom Institute of Agriculture, Technology & Sciences (Deemed-To-BeUniversity) Allahabad-211007 (U.P). India.

SELF ATTESTATION This is to certify that I have personally worked on the research entitled “Studies on Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter for Different Seeds”. The data mentioned in the thesis have been generated during the work and genuine. Data / Information which have been collected or borrowed from outside agencies or some other report have been duly acknowledged in the thesis. It is also certified that no fact or information regarding this work has been concealed.

Date: Place: Allahabad

(Kalay Khan)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT First and foremost I pay my heartfelt thanks to the GREAT ALMIGHTY whose blessings provided me the vigorous passion, uninterrupted strength and indispensable patience needed to begin my research work and complete it successfully. With utmost indebtedness and unbound gratitude I would like to express my deep respect to my advisor Dr. S C. Moses, for his esteemed guidance, constructive criticism and incessant encouragement throughout the research work. I wish to express my sincere thanks to Dr. Rana Noor Aalam, my co-advisor and research engineer in department of farm machinery and power engineering for his regular & valuable help and cooperation during the research work. It is beyond my means and capacity to put in words my sincere gratitude to Prof. Dr. Ashok Tripathi, head, Dept. of Farm Machinery and Power Engg. For his valuable suggestions during my research work and also for provided me the necessary facilities for the completion of this research work. These are elated moments to portray solemn words of gratitude to Prof. Dr. Anshuka Srivastava Professor & Head, Department of Mechanical Engineering and member of my advisory committee. He devoted his sheer attention and time to make this work materialist and flawless. This is ecstatic moments to reveal my solemn thought in words to confirm my gratitude to my role model, Prof.( Dr). Rajendra B.Lal, vice chancellor, Sam Higginbottom Institute of Agriculture, Technology and Science, Allahabad, without whose blessings and sheer attention this dream would not have become real. I want to express my sincere thanks to all the authorities of the University who directly or indirectly helped for the completion of this research work. I remember with love and affection, the cooperation that I received from all my friends Ashok Kumar, Avdash Kumar, Devesh Kumar and Surendra Pal, Manish Kumar, Asish Kerketta and all non teaching members of Vaugh School of Agricultural Engg & Technology. I had with them many fruitful discussion which helped me a lot, and above all, the optimism they bore with me in regard to my work drove me to translate my dreams into reality. I pay my deep and heartiest regards and love to my dear mother and father who always encouraged and supported me and always showed me the brightest side of the life. It is the result of their upbringing that I am able to reach this height

Place: Allahabad Date:

(Kalay Khan)

ABSTRACTS

Manual method of seed planting, results in low seed placement, spacing efficiencies and serious back ache for the farmer which limits the size of field that can be planted. The cost price of imported planters has gone beyond the purchasing power of most of our farmers. Peasant farmers can do much to increase food production especially grains, if drudgery can be reduced or totally removed from their planting operations. To achieve the best performance from a manually operated multi-crop planter, the above limits are to be optimized by proper design and selection of the components required on the machine to suit the needs of crops. Till now no suitable manually operated multi-crop planter has been developed to planting different seed. If crops are cultivated manually this is time consuming, labor intensive and costly. A low cost manually operated multi-crop planter was designed and developed which reduces these drudgery problems such as missing rate, damage percentage, longer distance of dropped seed, skidding percentage etc. The physical properties of (Maize - COH-3, Pigeon Pea – BAHAR, Okra (Kashi Pragti) and Red gram (APK-1)seeds were studied at different moisture content. The length, width, thickness and geometric diameter of maize, pigeon pea, okra and red gram were increased as increase in moisture content. Based on the above study various components of the planter were designed and fabricated in the department of farm machinery and power engineering, SHUATS, Allahabad. The manually operated multi-crop planter was designed in such a way less force required to operate, minimum skidding percentage, minimum damage and missing of seeds, suitable in both sandy and clay soil, The manually operated multi-crop planter consists of two wheels, a seed hopper, wheel type seed metering device, a seed tube, row marker, furrow opener, furrow closer and adjustable handle. Power is transmitted from the drive wheel to the metering device through chain and sprockets. The diameter of seed metering wheel was 10.01 cm and number of cells on periphery of seed metering wheel was found to be 11, 09, 14 and 14 for Maize, Pigeon Pea, Okra and Red gram respectively. Volume of seed hopper was 11118.92 cm3.The numbers of teeth in small sprocket and large sprocket was 18 and 48 respectively. The planter was calibrated in the workshop of the department of farm machinery and power engineering. Seed rates of Maize, Pigeon Pea and Okra during calibration of manually operated multi-crop planter in lab were found 20.56, 10.40, 6.32, 25.77 kg/ha without missing respectively. Percentages of damaged

seeds of Maize, Pigeon Pea, Okra and red gram during damage test of manually operated multi-crop planter in lab were found to be 2.60, 2.20, 2 and 2.2 % respectively. Percentage of the germination of metered seed of Maize, Pigeon Pea Okra, and Red gram were 87, 85.6, 84.4 and 84.8% respectively. Seed to seed distance of Maize, Pigeon Pea, Okra and Red gram was found 25.72, 31.98, 20.86 and 22 cm respectively. Missing rate percentage of Maize, Pigeon Pea, Okra and Red gram was found to be 3.5, 3.03, 1.6 and 2.8 % respectively. Angle of handle in sandy loam soil and clay soil were found 36.090 and 34.330 respectively. Pushing force in sandy loam soil and clay soil at a depth of 3 cm were 13.3 kg and 14.8 kg respectively and the average draft force in sandy loam soil and clay soil was observed 105.42N and 119.88 N respectively. Percentage of skid was 5.69% in sandy loam soil and 4.24% in clay soil and observed that wheel skidding percentage was more in sandy loam soil compare to clay soil due to poor traction. Hill to hill spacing of maize, pigeon pea and okra in sandy loam soil 23.98, 29.08, 18.76 cm respectively and in clay soil were found 24.06, 29.14, 19.40 cm. Missing hills percentage of maize, pigeon pea and okra in sandy loam soil was 16, 17.57 and 17.2 % respectively. Missing hills percentage of maize, pigeon pea and okra in clay soil were found 18.34, 18.78 and 18 % respectively. Plant populations of maize in sandy loam soil and clay soil were 56000 and 54400 respectively. Plant populations of pigeon pea in sandy loam soil and clay soil were 30452 and 29978 respectively. Plant populations of okra in sandy loam soil and clay soil were 92000 and 91112 respectively. Field efficiency was found maximum 89.83 %. Hill to hill spacing was good in sandy loam soil compare to clay soil and found that seed to seed distance, missing percentage, damage percentage increased with increase speed of the planter. Operational cost of the manually operated multi-crop planter was found Rs. 422.97 per hectare. Overall performance of the manually operated multi-crop planter was found quite satisfactory. The machine might be acceptable because it is easy to operate, simple in design and mechanism, light in weight, requires less labor and cost of planting and can also be used for planting different seeds.

KALAY KHAN Id.No 12PHFMP207)

LIST OF CONTENT CHAPTER

PARTICULARS

PAGE NO.



LIST OF TABLES

i-iii



LIST OF FIGURES

iv-ix



LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

x

i.

INTRODUCTION

1-6

ii.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

7-43

iii.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

44-90

iv.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

91-154

v.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

155-159

BIBLIOGRAPHY

160-168

APPENDIX

1-41

LIST OF TABLES

PAGE NO.

TABLE

TITLE

NO.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10 11 12

13

14 15

(APPENDIX )

Various physical properties of maize seed (COH-3) at 10 % moisture content Various physical properties of pigeon pea (BAHAR) at 10 % moisture content Various physical properties of okra seed (KASHI PARGATI) at 10 % moisture content Various physical properties of red gram seed (COH-3) at 10 % moisture content Germination Test (%) of Different Types of Pre-metered Seeds. Calibration of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter for Maize Seeds Calibration of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter for Pigeon Pea Seeds Calibration of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter for Okra Seeds Calibration of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter for Red gram Seeds Mechanically Damaged Seeds (%) of Different Types of Crop due to manually operated Multi-crop Planter Germination Test (%) of Different Types of Metered Seeds. Test of Distance (cm) of Dropped Seeds of Different Crop on Grease layer by Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter Test of Missing Rate (%) of Different Crop Seeds due to Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter Determination of Pushing Force (kg), Draft (N) and Drawbar Power (hp, watts) in Different Types of Soils. Skidding of Ground Drive Wheel (%) of Manually Operated

1

2

3

4

5

5

6

6

7

8 8 9

9

10 11

Multi-Crop Planter in Different Soil. 16 Test 17 of

18

19

Test of Hill Populations (%) of Different Crops and Different Soil in the field by Manually Operated Multi - Crop Planter Test of Missing Hills (%) of Different Crops and Different Soil in the field by Manually Operated Multi - Crop Planter Test of Hill Populations (%) of Different Crops and Different Soil in the field by Manually Operated Multi - Crop Planter Test Result of Effective Field Capacity (ha/hr) of Different Crops in the field by Manually Operated Multi - Crop Planter

11

12

13

14

Test Result of Field Efficiency (%) of Different Crops in the 20

field by Manually Operated Multi - Crop Planter

15

Anova for Germination Test (%) of Different Types of Pre5 (a)

10 (a)

11(a) 12 (a)

metered Seeds

5

Anova for Mechanically Damaged Seeds (%) of Different Types of Crop due to manually operated Multi-crop Planter Anova for Germination Test (%) of Different Types of Metered Seeds Anova for Germination Test (%) of Different Types of Metered Seeds

13 (a)

Anova for Test of Missing Rate (%) of Different Crop Seeds due to Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter

8

8

9

9

Anova for Determination of Pushing Force (kg), Draft (N) 14 (a)

and Drawbar Power (hp, watts) in Sandy Loam Soil.

10

Anova for Determination of Pushing Force (kg), Draft (N) 14 (b)

and Drawbar Power (hp, watts) in Clay Soil.

Skidding 15 (a)of Ground Drive Wheel (%) of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter in Different Soil

11

11

Anova for Test of Distance of hill to hill in row (cm) of

16 (a)

Different Crops in Sandy loam Soil in the field by Manually

12

Operated Multi- Crop Planter Anova for Test of Distance of hill to hill in row (cm) of

16 (b)

Different Crops in Clay Soil Operated Multi- Crop Planter

in the field by Manually

12

Anova for Test of Missing Hills (%) of Different Crops in 17(a)

Sandy loam Soil in the field by Manually Operated Multi -

13

Crop Planter Anova for Test of Missing Hills (%) of Different Crops in 17 (b)

Clay Soil in the field by Manually Operated Multi - Crop

13

Planter

18 (a)

Anova for Test of Hill Populations (%) of Different Crops in Sandy loam Soil in the field by Manually Operated Multi Crop Planter

14

Anova for Test of Hill Populations (%) of Different Crops in 18 (b)

Clay Soil in the field by Manually Operated Multi - Crop

14

Planter Anova for Test Result of Effective Field Capacity (ha/hr) of 19 (a)

Different Crops in the field by Manually Operated Multi -

14

Crop Planter 20 (a)

21

Anova forTest Result of Field Efficiency (%) of Different Crops in the field by Manually Operated Multi - Crop Planter

Fabrication Cost of the Developed Manually Operated MultiCrop Planter

15

16

Operational cost of manually operated multi crop planter and 22

3.1

hand application

Machines and Tools used for development of the planter (Material and Methods)

16

45

LIST OF FIGURES FIG.NO

TITLE

. 3.1

3.2 3.3 3.4

3.5

3.6

3.7

An Isometric View of Seed Metering Wheel and Seed Metering House of Manually Operated Multi-crop Planter Flow Diagram of Power Transmission System of a Manually Operated Multi-crop Planter Flow Chart of Design of Manually Operated Multi-crop Planter An Isometric View of Adjustable Handle and Frame of Manually Operated Multi-crop Planter A photographic view of fabrication of Seed Metering wheel used Lathe machine in FMP Laboratory A Fabricated View of Drive Wheel of Manually Operated MultiCrop Planter A fabricated View of Power Transmission System of a Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter

PAGE NO. 59

62 66 68

70

72

73

An Isometric View of Drive Wheel, Large Sprocket, Adjustable 3.8

Furrow Opener and Seed Metering Wheel Shaft of Manually

75

Operated Multi-crop Planter 3.9 3.10 3.11 3.12 3.13 3.14

4.1

4.2 4.3

An Isometric View of a Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter. A Isometric View of a Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter

A Front View of a Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter A fabricated View of Different Seed metering wheels for a Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter Field Test of a Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter Adjusting Row to Row Distance by Row Marker of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter in the Field Variation of Germinated of Pre -metered Seeds of Maize in seed germinator Variation of Germinated of Pre -metered Seeds of Pigeon Pea in seed germinator Variation of Germinated of Pre -metered Seeds of Okra in seed

75 76 77 78 85 86

96

97 98

Germinator 4.4

4.5

4.6

4.7

4.8

4.9

4.10

4.11

4.12

4.13

4.14

4.15

4.16

4.17 4.18

Variation of Germinated of Pre -metered Seeds of Red gram in seed Germinator Calibration Seed rate of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter of Maize Calibration Seed rate of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter of Pigeon Pea Calibration Seed rate of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter of Okra Calibration Seed rate of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter of Red gram Mechanically Damaged Seed Percentage of Maize due to the Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter Mechanically Damaged Seed Percentage of Pigeon Pea due to the Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter Mechanically Damaged Seed Percentage of Okra due to the Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter Mechanically Damaged Seed Percentage of Red gram due to the Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter Variation of Seed germination percentage of Metered Seeds of Maize Variation of Seed germination percentage of Metered Seeds of Pigeon Pea Variation of Seed germination percentage of Metered Seeds of Okra Variation of Seed germination percentage of Metered Seeds of Red gram Variation of Seed to Seed Distance of Dropped Seeds of Maize on Grease Layer Variation of Seed to Seed Distance of Dropped Seeds of Pigeon

99

101

102

103

104

106

107

108

109

111

112

113

114

116 117

Pea on Grease Layer

4.19

4.20

4.21

4.22

4.23

4.24

Variation of Seed to Seed Distance of Dropped Seeds of Okra on Grease Layer Variation of Seed to Seed Distance of Dropped Seeds of Red gram on Grease Layer Graphical Representation of Test of Missing Rate (%) of Maize Seeds due to Planter during Laboratory Test Graphical Representation of Test of Missing Rate (%) of Pigeon Pea Seeds due to Planter during Laboratory Test Graphical Representation of Test of Missing Rate (%) of Okra Seeds due to Planter during Laboratory Test Graphical Representation of Test of Missing Rate (%) of Red gram Seeds due to Planter during Laboratory Test

118

119

120

122

123

124

4.25

Variation of Drawbar Power in Sandy loam soil

126

4.26

Variation of Drawbar Power in Clay soil

126

4.27

Skidding Percentage of Drive Wheel of Manually Operated Planter in Different Soil.

127

Graphical Representation of Average Distance of Hill to Hill of 4.28

Maize for Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter in Sandy loam

129

soil Graphical Representation of Average Distance of Hill to Hill of 4.29

Pigeon Pea for Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter in Sandy

130

loam soil Graphical Representation of Average Distance of Hill to Hill of 4.30

Okra for Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter in Sandy loam

131

soil 4.31

Graphical Representation of Average Distance of Hill to Hill of

132

Maize for Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter in Clay soil

4.32

4.33

4.34

4.35

4.36

4.37

4.38

4.39

4.40

4.41

4.42

4.43 4.44

Graphical Representation of Average Distance of Hill to Hill of Pigeon Pea for Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter in Clay soil Graphical Representation of Average Distance of Hill to Hill of Okra for Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter in Clay soil Graphical Representation of Average Missing Hill in Maize for Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter in Sandy loam soil Graphical Representation of Average Missing Hill in Pigeon Pea for Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter in Sandy loam soil Graphical Representation of Average Missing Hill in Okra for Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter in Sandy loam soil Graphical Representation of Average Missing Hill in Maize for Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter in Clay soil Graphical Representation of Average Missing Hill in Pigeon Pea for Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter in Clay soil Graphical Representation of Average Missing Hill in Okra for Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter in Clay soil Graphical Representation of Percentage of Hill Populations of Maize Crop in Sandy Loam Soil. Graphical Representation of Percentage of Hill Populations of Maize Crop in Clay Soil. Graphical Representation of Percentage of Hill Populations of Pigeon Pea Crop in Sandy Loam Soil. Graphical Representation of Percentage of Hill Populations of Pigeon Pea Crop in Clay Soil. Graphical Representation of Percentage of Hill Populations of

133

134

136

137

138

139

140

141

143

143

144

145 146

Okra Crop in Sandy Loam Soil.

4.45

4.46

4.47

4.48

4.49

4.50

4.51

4.52

4.53

Graphical Representation of Percentage of Hill Populations of Okra Crop in Clay Soil. Graphical Representation of Test of Effective Field Capacity for Maize by Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter Graphical Representation of Test of Effective Field Capacity for Pigeon Pea by Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter Graphical Representation of Test of Effective Field Capacity for Okra by Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter Graphical Representation of Field Efficiency of Manually Operated Multi - Crop Planter for Maize Sowing. Graphical Representation of Field Efficiency of Manually Operated Multi - Crop Planter for Pigeon Pea Sowing. Graphical Representation of Field Efficiency of Manually Operated Multi - Crop Planter for Okra Sowing. Graphical Representation of Average Field Efficiency of Manually Operated Multi - Crop Planter for different crop seed sowing Cost of operation by hand planting and the manually operated multi crop planter

146

147

148

149

151

151

152

153

154

ABBREVIATION &

And

% ºC Agric ASAE CIAE cm Cm3 dia et. al etc. Engg. Fig. g kg h ha hp i.e. ICAR IS ISAE kN kPa kW m m2 m3 m.c. min mm No rpm Sr mm/s Res.

Percentage Degree Celsius Agricultural American Society of Agricultural Engineers Central Institute of Agricultural Engineering Centimeter Cubic centimeter Diameter Etlii and others Et-cetra Engineering Figure Gram Kilogram Hour Hectare Horse power That is Indian Council of Agricultural Research Indian Standards Indian Society of Agricultural Engineering Kilo Newton Kilo pascal kilowatt Meter Square meter Cubic meter Moisture content Minute Milimeter Number Revolution per minute Serial Milimeter per second Research

INTRODUCTION Traditional method of sowing is not suitable for growing the crop. The result is very low production. There are many faults such as not proper seed rate, fertilizer rate, seed spacing, problem in inter cultivation and consume more time. Agricultural mechanization is the application of machinery, technology and increased power to agriculture, largely as a means to enhance the productivity of human labour and often to achieve results well beyond the capacity of human labour. There are three sources of farm power utilized for these tools, machines and equipment, manual and animal draft, and motorized power. Mechanization also includes irrigation system, food processing and related technologies and equipment. Sowing is one of the important agricultural operations for raising crops. Proper application of fertilizer at proper location has also a good effect on crop growth and yield and seed rate, proper placement of seed fertilizer and row spacing are also necessary. The main reason for increase in yield is the uniform and controlled application of fertilizer with respect to seed in a concentrated bond at about 50 mm below and 50 mm away from the seed. The machine combines there function is seed drill or planter. The basic difference between seed drill and planter is that a seed drill sows seeds at specified rate and at the proper depth and in rows. It cannot deposit the seeds in hills nor in check rows, where as a planter can deposit seeds at a specified rate in hills and rows spaced to permit inter row cultivation and also function as a seed drill if required, several studies have shown that the use of planter increase the yield by 15 to 25% and may increase up to 40% depending upon the crop variety. Increase in yield is due to uniform and controlled drilling of fertilizer with respect to seed in a concentrated band. Fertilizer is placed about 5 cm below and 5 cm away from the seed which provides good environment for root development (Nirala, 2011). Most of our farmers especially in the rural areas and small scale farmers use matchet or sticks to sow different seeds. This matchet or sticks is used to open the soil as the farmer drops the required numbers of seed (often times more than they require numbers are dropped) and then covers them up. This method of planting is labourintensive and can benefit considerably from simple mechanization (Bamiro et al., 1986). The traditional planting method is tedious, causing fatigue and backache due to the longer hours required for careful hand metering of seeds if crowding or bunching is to

be avoided according to Bamgboye and Mofolasayo (2006). The importance of machine in agricultural operations in the world today should never be underestimated, be it manually operated or powered (Sam and Okokon, 2013). One of the major problems confronting the peasant farmers in India is in the area of planting seeds because of the limited economy they can put up and most of them cannot afford the money to procure or hire sophisticated machinery that can be used for their planting Cultivation of okra is done mostly during the rainy season. Seeds are sown in rows of about 90 to120cm apart and plants are spaced about 45cm apart within rows. Seeds may be soaked for 24 hours to soften the hard seed coat and induce better germination (Dessai et al., 1997). Okra can be harvested fresh and included in meals or cut in pieces, dried and stored for consumption during offseason periods. Sowing okra by hand increases production cost as extra man-hours is required for thinning operation as excessive seed is inevitably sown per hill. Moreover, the traditional planting method is tedious, causing fatigue and backache due to the longer hours required for careful hand metering of seeds if crowding or bunching is to be avoided. Preliminary evaluation showed important improvement in the planting operation with reduction in human effort, more accurate stands and high field capacity. To attain optimum planting condition for productivity, Pradhan et al.,(1997) developed a power tiller-operated groundnut planter cum fertilizer drill with an actual field capacity of 0.160 ha/h. As our population continues to increase, it is necessary that we must produce more food, but this can only be achieved through some level of mechanization. Manual method of seed planting, results in low seed placement, spacing efficiencies and serious back ache for the farmer which limits the size of field that can be planted. However, planting machine or planter that is normally required to produce more food is beyond the buying capacity of small holder farmers. A developing country like India is expected to continue to rely more on hand tools for the foreseeable future for cultivation. The use of hand tools for land cultivation is still predominant in India because draft animals and tractors require resources that many Indian farmers do not have easy access to. The need for agricultural mechanization in India must therefore be assessed with a deeper understanding of the small holder farmer’s activities and what values farm power generated for them (Hiroyuki and Sheu, 2010)

Farm mechanization is the use of mechanical wheels or systems to replace human muscle in all forms and at any level of sophistication in agricultural production, processing storage and so on in order to reduce tedium and drudgery, improve timeliness and efficiency of various farm operations, bring more land under cultivation, preserve the quality of agricultural produce, provide better rural living condition and markedly advance the economic growth of the rural sector (Anazodo, 1986;Onwualu et al., 2006). Farm mechanization helps in effective utilization of inputs to increase the productivity of land and labour. Besides it helps in reducing the drudgery in farm operations. The early agricultural mechanization in India was greatly influenced by the technological development in England. Irrigation pumps, tillage equipment, chaff cutters, tractors and threshers were gradually introduced for farm mechanization. The high yielding varieties with assured irrigation and higher rate of application of fertilizers gave higher returns that enabled farmers to adopt mechanization inputs, especially after Green revolution in 1960s. Under intensive cropping, timeliness of operations is one of the most important factors which can only be achieved if appropriate use of agricultural machines is advocated. Manual method of seed planting, results in low seed placement, spacing efficiencies and serious back ache for the farmer which limits the size of field that can be planted. To achieve the best performance from a seed planter, the above limits are to be optimized by proper design and selection of the components required on the machine to suit the needs of crops. A seed planter is simply a wheel or tool used to sow seeds. In small scale landscaping and gardening, manually operated seed planters can be used, while in large farm cultivations, the planter can be a massive wheel usually attached to the back of a tractor. Seed planters depend on both human and machine effort for its operation. Preparation of seed bed is a specialized task which requires skill, time energy and labour in addition to different soil manipulating implements. The first seed cum fertilizer drills was small enough to be drawn by a single animal but the availability of source and, later, gasoline tractors shows the development of larger and more efficient drills that allowed farmers to seed even larger tracts in a single day. Recent improvements to drills permit seed-drilling without prior tilling. Main objectives taken in the research are to conduct a testing of animal drawn MPT seed cum fertilizer drill for direct seeded paddy and study

comparative performance evaluation of MPT seed cum fertilizer drill and conventional Seed cum fertilizer drill. The planting operation is one of the most important cultural practices associated with crop production. Increases in crop yield, cropping reliability, cropping frequency and crop returns all depend on the uniform and timely establishment of optimum plant populations. There are two broad areas in optimizing plant establishment. First, plant breeders, seed growers and seed merchants have a responsibility to provide quality seed. Second, farm managers must be aware of the agronomic requirements for optimum plant establishment and be able to interpret this information in a meaningful way so as to assist with the selection, setting and management of all farm machinery, especially planters. These small holder farmers still continue to plant manually, the result of which is low productivity of the crops. It is therefore necessary to develop a low cost planter that will reduce tedium and drudgery and enable small holder farmer to produce more foods and also environmental friendly. Designed which operated manually and also it have capability for multi-crops planting operation then many problems of the poor farmers have solved. A manually operated single row planter is capable of delivering seeds precisely in a straight line with uniform depth in the furrow, and with uniform spacing between the seeds. The work demonstrates the application of engineering techniques to reduce human labour specifically in the garden, that is cheap, easily affordable, easy to maintain and less laborious to use. The planter will go a long way in making farming more attractive and increasing agricultural output. All parts of the planter were fabricated from mild steel material, except for the metering mechanism which was made from good quality wood (mahogany) and the seed funnel and tube, which were made from rubber material. The seed metering mechanism used for this work was the wooden roller type with cells on its periphery. For this design, the drive shaft directly controls the seed metering mechanism which eliminates completely attachments such as pulleys, layer systems, and gears thereby eliminating complexities which increase cost, and increasing efficiency at a highly reduced cost. (Hossain, 2013)

Justification India is a populated country, so it requires more food grains which results required more productivity in the agriculture sector. Farm mechanization helps in effective utilization of

inputs to increase the productivity of land and labour. Besides it helps in reducing the drudgery in farm operations. Many farm machineries have introduced in the field of agriculture in recent years but these are not affordable by poor farmers. So manually operated and low cost machines should be introduced which have capability as tractor operated and easily operated by low intensity human. It should perform Two or more seeds planted in the same place it reduces yield potential due to intra-specific interference. Hence if manually operated multi crop planter manufactured then it must have following features: •

Plant spacing is generally too large during traditional planting, which reduces the potential yield, so in manually operated planter have different metering wheel for sowing different crops seed and maintain the seed spacing in row according to actual distance of crop.

•

Seed metering wheel has low cost and it’s beneficial for small and marginal farmers, they can easily purchase it.

•

Easy to operate both male and female can be operated.

•

Row marker is available in planter for maintains to row spacing according to crop.

•

Easy to change of seed metering wheel from outside using by bolt.

•

Handle can adjust according to operator height.

•

Adjustable furrow opener also provides that is control depth of sowing of seed according to crops.

•

Parking stand is also provides for suitable to stand of the planter at the time of rest.

•

Slippage percentage is less because lugs also provides on front wheel of planter.

Keeping in view the above facts, the present study has been proposed with the following objectives: •

To determine the various physical properties of selected crop seeds (Maize, Pigeon Pea, Okra and Red Gram)

•

To design and develop a manually operated multi-crop planter for sowing different seeds.

•

To design and develop various seed metering wheel for sowing maize, pigeon pea, okra and red gram seeds

•

To evaluate the performance of the developed planter for sowing maize, pigeon pea, okra and red gram seeds.

• To estimate cost analysis and payback period of developed planter.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE “The review of literature is considered an important aspect of research work at it help to understand specific problems and draw hypothesis. Keeping in the view, literature connected with the problem in hand has been reviewed books, Journal, dissertation, and research project/survey. 2.1 Physical properties of different seeds The physical properties of seeds are essential in the design and development of specific planting machine components. Seed metering devices, which are moving or stationary members have indents, i.e. holes or cells and the metering performance highly dependent on the compatibility between cells/holes and seeds size and shape. Hence, knowledge of the shapes and sizes of seeds, in terms of seed length, seed width and seed thickness, and mean diameter and sphericity, are essential in the design of metering devices and sizing of cell.

Chukwu and Akande (2007) presented the development of an apparatus for measuring the angle of repose of granular materials. The basic types of angle of repose, the methods of measuring angle of repose of solid, were discussed. The effect of the physical properties of the granular materials on the measured angle of repose to design and construction of bins, hoppers and other storage facilities such as silos were briefly discussed. The angles of repose of twenty different agricultural materials were determined using the developed apparatus. Having tested the developed apparatus with twenty different agricultural materials and comparing the results with the standard from 0

0

literature, a difference of ± 0.96 to ± 9 was noticed. In conclusion, the developed apparatus can be used to determine the angle of repose of selected grains, which have application in the design of bins, hoppers and other storage structures. Maize BülentCoskun M.et al. (2005) study on physical properties of sweet corn seed were determined as a function of moisturecontent in the range of 11.54319.74% dry basis (d.b.). The average length, width and thickness were 10.56 mm, 7.91 mm and 3.45 mm, at a moisture content of 11.54% d.b.respectively. In the moisture range from 11.54% to

19.74% d.b., studies on rewetted sweet corn seed showed that the thousand seed mass increased from 131.2 to 145.5 g, the projected area from 59.72 to 75.57 mm2, the sphericity from 0.615 to 0.635, the true density from 1133.8 to 1225.5 kg m-3, the porosity from 57.48% to 61.30% and the terminal velocityfrom 5.56 to 5.79 m s-1. The bulk density decreased from 482.1 to 474.3 kg m-3 with anincrease in the moisture content range of 11.54319.74% d.b. The static coefficient of frictionof sweet corn seed increased the linearly against surfaces of four structural materials,namely, rubber (0.40230.494), aluminum (0.32130.441), stainless steel (0.26730.401) andgalvanized iron (0.36430.477) as the moisture content increased from 11.54% to 19.74% d.b.

Babie.L.J. et al. (2012) study was to acquire data on thephysical properties and compression loading behavior of seed ofsix corn hybrid varieties. The mean values of length, width, thickness,geometric diameter, surface area, porosity, single kernel mass, sphericity, bulk and true density, 1 000 kernels mass and coefficientof friction were studied at single level of corn seed moisture content. The calculated secant modulus of elasticity during compressiveloading for dent corn was 0.995 times that of the semiflinttype; there were no significant differences in the value of this mechanicalproperty between semi-flint and dent corn varieties. Thelinear model showed a decreasing tendency of secant modulus ofelasticity for all hybrids as the moisture content of seeds increased. Pigeon pea Waheedet al. (2006)investigated the effect of salinity on germination, growth, yield, ionic balance and solute composition of pigeon pea (cajanuscajan(l.) millsp). Salt tolerance of Pigeon pea (Cajanuscajan(L.) Millsp) was determined at three growthstages since it has already been observed by a number of workers that degree of salt tolerance ofdifferent crops varies with their ontogeny. Therefore, salt tolerance of three accessions, LocalArhar, ICPL-151 and ICPL-850014 of pigeon pea was assessed at germination, seedling and adultstage.It was clearly evident from this study that there was no positive correlation between thetolerance at the early growth stages and at the adult stage of pigeon pea, since no clear difference insalt tolerance of three accessions was observed at the germination and the seedling stage, whereasaccessions differed considerably at the adult stage.Although increasing salt concentrations adversely affected the growth of all three accessions,ICPL-151 excelled the other two accessions in fresh and dry biomass, yield and yield componentswhen tested at the adult stage. The tolerant accession, ICPL-

151 accumulated significantly lowershoot and root Na+ and shoot Cl-. By contrast it was higher in shoot and root K+, K/ Na ratios Kversus Na selectivity, soluble sugars, root starch, free amino acids and proline compared with theother two accessions.The better performance of ICPL-151 under saline conditions seems apparently due toaccumulation of less Na+ and more K+ and K/Na ratio and higher concentration of proline, freeamino acids and soluble sugars than the other two accessions. However, relatively greateraccumulation of organic osmotica was probably not enough to decrease the osmotic potential of thetolerant accession. Sangani V.P. and Davara P.R. (2013) study onimportant physical properties of pigeon pea grains(BDN-2) were determined at five different moisture content levels of 10, 20,30, 40 and 50% dry basis (d.b.). With an increase of moisture content from 10 to 50% (d.b.), theaverage value of triaxial dimensions of pigeon pea such aslength, width and thickness increased from 6.04 to 6.45, 5.40 to 5.72 and 4.61to 4.79 mm, respectively. The bulk density and true density decreased from0.865 to 0.777 g/cm3 and 1.346 to 1.295 g/cm3, respectively, while the porosityand angle of repose increased from 35.84 to 40% and 30.01 to 39.45°,respectively as the moisture content increased from 10 to 50% (d.b.).Thevalues of static coefficient of friction against galvanized, plywood and glasssurface were found to be 0.46 to 0.68, 0.53 to 0.69 and 0.46 to 0.75, respectively.

Obi Francis Okeyet al. (2014)studyon effects of different moisture contents of 10, 15, 20 and 25% (wb) on the physical properties ofpigeon pea (CajanuscajanL.) grown in Nigeria were investigated. The axial dimensions, mean diameters,sphericity, surface area, porosity, true and bulk density, angle of repose and the coefficient of friction of pigeon pea were determined using standard methods. The physical properties of pigeon pea grains were significantlydependent on the moisture content with high correlation coefficients (p<0.05). The average length, width,thickness, arithmetic and geometric mean diameters, surface area, volume, thousand grain mass and angles ofrepose increased as the moisture content increased from 10% to 25%. Whereas the bulk density, true densityand the porosity were found to decrease from 685.16 to 640.55 kg/m, 1361.11 3 to 755.56 kg/m3 and 43.40% to13.55% respectively as the moisture content increased from 10% to 25%. The static coefficient of friction ofpigeon pea increased linearly over the three material surfaces – plywood, aluminum and galvanized sheet – withincreasing moisture content. The aluminum surface had the lowest static coefficient of friction whereas theplywood gave the highest value at all moisture content levels.

Khanbarad S.C. et al (2014) study on physical and mechanical properties of pigeon peagrains are necessary for the design of equipments to handle, transport,process and store the crop. The moisture content of pigeon pea is differentat the harvest than at milling or storage; thus affecting different physicaland mechanical properties of the pigeon pea. The physical properties ofpigeon pea i.e. length, width, thickness, bulk density, particle density,porosity, surface area, volume, angle of repose and hardness have beenevaluated as a function of grain moisture content varying from 6.2 to 30.2% (wb). The length, width, thickness, grain surface area, volume and angleof repose increased non-linearly from 5.37 to 6.24 mm, 4.97 to 5.67 mm,4.06 to 4.60 mm, 33.73 to 45.22 mm2, 322.68 to 556.07 mm3, and 22.7° to50.45°, respectively, while bulk density, particle density, hardness andsphericity decreased nonlinearly from 1032.49 to 835.35 kg/m3, 1398.09 to1242.85 kg/m3, 484.22 to 10.27 N and 0.89 to 0.87, respectively whenmoisture content was increased from 6 to 30 % (wb).

Okra Mohammadiet al. (2012) investigated the effects of seed hardness breaking techniques onokra (abelmoschusesculentus l.) germination. The occurrence of hardness of seed and the low percentage of seed germination are majorchallenges when growing okra. This study was conducted to determine the effects of scarificationmethods in relation to time of harvest and plant parts on germination behavior of okra cultivars. The study was carried out at Agricultural faculty of Razi University in2009. The experimental design was randomized complete block with a factorial arrangement with threereplications. Four cultivars of okra namely, Boiatloy, Beloudo, Clemsson and Pleas and two treatmentsof 50, 75 and 100oC hot water for 0-1-3 and 5 min., and dry heat of 50, 75 and 100oC for 0, 6, 12 and24 hours were studied. Results showed that hot water at temperature of 75 oC for 5 min was effective inbroken of okra seedhardness, although by increasing temperature and duration of soaking, thepercentage of germination reduced. Hot water at temperature of 100 oC for duration of 1 min increasedpercentage of germination than control, but by increasing duration of soaking the germination wasreduced. Dry heat treatment at temperature of 100 0C for 24 h resulted in higher percentage ofgermination (63.8 %) compared with other dry heat treatments. Effect of hot water treatment was moreon seeds that harvest from the last harvesting time; In this case effect of dry heat treatment was more.Effect of hot water was more on varieties of Boiatloy and Beloudo that had more seed hardness,although dry heat was more effective on germination of varieties of

Clemsson and Pleas that had lessseed hardness. Effect of hot water treatment was more on seeds from the middle part of plant; in thiscase dry heat treatment did not caused a noticeable difference between plant parts. The result ofpresent study showed that percentage of seed hardness between different cultivars of okra wasdifferent. Therefore, it seems that seed hardness has to broken before planting, and in this caseimplementation of treatment of hot water at temperature of 75 0C for 5 min can be useful. Hazbavi (2013)study of physical and mechanical properties of mature okra (Hibiscus esculentusL.) seeds from Ahvaz in Iran was evaluated. The physical and mechanical properties were evaluated at four moisture content levels of 7.1, 10, 15 and 20% dry basis (d.b). In this moisture range, seed length, width, thickness, geometric diameter, mass of 1000 seeds increased from 5.096 to 5.677 mm, 4.476 to 4.878 mm, 4.239 to 4.608 mm, 4.585 to 5.035 mm and 56.615 to 65.779 g, respectively. The angle of repose, volume, surface area and sphericity increased from 21.2 to 24.3°, 5.367 to 6.396 mm3, 66.18 to 79.64 mm2 and 90.07 to 0.92, respectively. The true density, bulk density and porosity decreased from 1096.34 to 1002.16 kg/m3, 627.4 to 576.2 kg/m3 and 41.1 to 38.01%, respectively. The rupture force and coefficient of static friction on aluminum, rubber, plywood, iron and galvanized iron sheets increased with increasing moisture content. Red Gram Jayan and kumar (2004)found physical properties red gram seeds namely, length, breadth, surface area, roundness, equivalent diameter, sphericity, seed weight, true density, angle of repose and coefficient of restitution of maize, red gram and cotton seeds were evaluated as design parameters for a planter. Thickness and cell diameters of the seed metering discs were designed in reference to the maximum breadth and length of seeds. Both roundness and sphericity affect seed flow through the various components of the planter. Roundness of maize, red gram, and cotton were 1.14 ± 0.14, 1.15 ± 0.10, and 1.26 ± 0.10 respectively, while sphericity of these seeds in the natural rest position were 0.621 ± 0.065, 0.750 ± 0.016, 0.550 ± 0.016 respectively. To ensure free flow of seeds, the slope of the seed hopper was, therefore, fixed at 30o, which is modestly higher than the average angle of repose of seeds. In addition, the inner surfaces of the seed transfer cup was imbedded with 3 mm thick rubber sheet as its coefficient of restitution was lower than mild steel sheet of same thickness. 2.2 Design of different crops planter

Klocke (1979) described the building of two experimentalplanters, one using a smooth coulter and the other a rippleedgedcoulter. Both types of coulters were followed by hoeopeners. The performance of the drills was satisfactory aslong as the seed was placed into adequate soil moisture. Gard and McKibben (1973) reported work on a planter consistingof a ripple coulter, runner opener and an angledcoulter to close the seed furrow.A very popular method (especially in the United Kingdom) was the used of triple-disks, in which one disk cuts throughthe residue and makes a slot in the soil and a double Vshapeddisk follow after, widening the slot and feeding inthe seed. These drills are suitable for most soil conditions. Allen et al. (1975) used a fluted coulter in combinationwith a double-disk on a conservation planter. The coultercut residue and loosened a zone of soil about 6 cm (2.36 in) wide and 7.5 cm (2.95 in) deep. Morrison (1978) developed an experimental conservationtillage planter which consisted of a rolling coulter and adouble-disk opener which were combined by locating the trailing portion of a smooth rolling coulter between thedisks of the double-disk opener. A simple boot between thedouble-disk directed seed into the furrow from an overheadhopper. The experimental planter included desirable featuresfor soil penetration, furrow-closure, independent flotation,row tracking, and compactness of design. Buchele (1979) developed a rotary tiller slot planterwith rotary blades mounted on either side of a split-tubechisel furrow opener. The rotary blades cleared plant residuefrom the chisel and tilled the soil in the seed zone. Erbach (1978) developed furrow openers with poweredcoulters for planting without previous tillage. One used ahoe furrow opener, and as plant residue slid on top of theopener, the residue was sheared by a powered serrated coulter.Others used a powered serrated coulter driven in a directionopposite to that of travel to open a slot ahead of runner ordouble disk furrow openers. The coulters were run in reversedirection to prevent plant residue from being pulled intothe seed zone. Suderman and Clark (1981) reported the design, constructionand testing of a mulch under planter. This mulch planterattached to the sweep units of under cutter plows. The airblown crop seed was placed at the planting depth via a deliverytube that was pulled

along beneath the soil. Thefront end of the tube was hinged at its attachment point to provide vertical and horizontal rotation. The press wheelssupported the rear end of the tube and thus provided thefunction of depth control as well as soil firming. An InternationalModel 500 Cyclo system was used for the metering anddelivering of the seed to the placement tubes. Test resultsshowed that the planter deposited the seeds at an averagedepth of 8.89 cm (3.5 in), spaced 11.3 cm (4.4 in), withpercent emergence of 83% fifteen days after planting. Tompkins and Bledsoe (1979) evaluated vibratory bladeswith lift angles of 25 and 45 degrees from the horizontal,vibrational amplitudes of 6 and 15 mm, and frequencies of 10,20 and 30 Hz. They found that a blade with a rounded uppersurface, a lift angle of 25 degrees, and an amplitude of 6 mmworked well at 4.6 km/hr and that its lowest power requirementwas at 25 Hz. When compared with a fluted coulter opener,the vibratory opener required greater energy input (exceptwhere ballast was added to the coulter), caused moresoil break-up and greater decrease in soil bulk density, andresulted in improved plant stands. The vibratory system investigatedhad no effects on the metering function of theplanter as revealed by the plant spacing. The vibratory tooldirectly penetrated the soil to desired operating depth forall combinations of frequency, amplitude and blade shape. Pitts (1978) described a zero-tillage planter developedby brothers Jerrell and Leo Harden of Banks, Alabama. The zero-tillage planter was called a "super seeder". A spike toothed,slot-filler wheel was unique to the Hardens' planter.In tandem, the wheel followed the spring-loaded coulterand sub-soiler shank to fill the slot cut by the subsoiler,thus preventing seeds from dropping down too far into thesoil. Equipment for incorporating herbicides and fertilizersin the slot or on the surface and a conventional plantingunit followed the wheel. Morrison and Abrams (1978) concluded that: (1) Subsoilers, chisels, and powered tillers had high powerrequirements; (2) Subsoilers and chisels did not operate well on soilswith stones or roots; (3) Fluted coulters did not readily penetrate hard drysoils; (4) Non-rolling components may accumulate surface residue; (5) Subsoilers. chisels, and ridging disks deposited soiland upturned weed seed on top of surface mulch ; and

(6) Few planting machines were equipped to track the pathof the leading component on curved rows. Ul'yanov and Ivzhenko (1968) reported the use of air toforce seeds into the soil (openerless drilling). An experimental wheel was developed to shoot seeds into the soil.They found that seeds penetrating the soil with an averagespeed of 95 m/sec had a relative emergence of 91%, but penetration at 60 m/sec had 100% emergence. This researchalso showed that if the end of the tube was situated immediatelyat the surface of the soil or at a depth in the soil(H = i 1 cm), the grain penetrated under the action of naturalinertia forces and the force of the following air stream.However, if the distance from the end of the tube of thedistributing apparatus to the surface of the soil exceeded10 cm (H > 10 cm), then the grains penetrated only under theaction of the natural (gravitational) forces. Huang and Tayaputch (1973) reported work on a fluid injectorspot and furrow opener. The wheel consisted of watertank, water pump (TEEL model IP740), accumulator (34.29 cmlong and 20.32 cm in diameter), pipes and hoses, and solenoidvalve which controlled the injection period. The water waspumped to the accumulator and to the valve to reach theinitial water pressure of 2.76 MPa for each injection andthen the pump was stopped during the injection. The valvewas activated for each injection by a cam driven by a variablespeed drive. The speed was adjusted to provide the injectionperiods of 0.07, 0.14, 0.50 and 1.00 sec assumingthat no delay occurred in the solenoid valve. The injectionheight was considered to be the most important factor in controllingthe depth and shape of the opening. However, forthe injection heights in the range of 7.62 cm to 10.16 cm(3.0 in to 4.0 in), the depth and shape of the opening remained about the same. Jafari and Fomstrom (1972) reported work done on apunch-planter for sugar beets. The planter consisted of awheel with several cones on the surface, and a centrifugalmetering mechanism. The cones punched conical holes on therow for each individual seed at the desired spacing, and themetering wheel metered single seeds behind the wheel intothese holes which were made in the soil. The wheel and themetering wheel were timed with a chain. To compensate forthe planter's forward speed, a round plate was used to throwthe seeds backwards with approximately the same speed as theforward speed of the planter. They reported that 97.6%,96.3% and 94.0% seed placement in the holes were achieved at4.83 km/h, 6.44 km/h and 8.05 km/h (3 mph, 4 mph, and 5 mph),respectively. The seeds were dropped from a height of 5.08cm to 7.6 cm (2 in to 3 in) above the ground.

Ns'c-.Tiian (1977) described a punch planter. His approachwas to punch holes in the ground with cones located on awheel. The cones had spring-loaded gates which were activatedwhen a lever came in contact with the ground. The seedmetering wheel was located within the wheel. A seed wasmetered by the metering wheel and placed in the punchingcone. As the wheel rotated forward, the gate was opened bya lever and the seed dropped in the hole. There was no reporton the performance of this planter. Srivastava and Anibal (1981) described a punch planterconsisting of basically four parts; namely, the punch wheel,the seed plate, the retainer ring and the outer cover. Theseed plate was integrally mounted inside the punch wheel.The retainer ring fitted around the seed plate and blockedthe seed holes that were radially located in the lip of theseed plate. The outer cover fitted against the seed plateand had opening for the blower and seed tube. The seed plateand the outer cover formed a compartment which contained theseeds. As the wheel rotated, the seed plate rotated with it(while the outer cover remained stationary). The air pressureand the centrifugal force caused the seeds to escapethrough the seed holes in the plate. The retainer ring, however,blocked the seed holes and prevented them from escaping.The hollow cones that were located on the punch wheelwere in line with the holes in the seed plate. The seed holein the seed plate and the seed passage in the cones wereseparated only by the thin retainer ring. As the wheel rotated,the seeds that were retained in the holes were transferredinto the hollow cones in an area where there was noretainer ring. The gap in the retainer ring was timed withthe hole punching operation in such a way that the seed wastransferred into the cone as the punch was moving upwardsafter punching a hole. Because of the wide variations inbean seed sizes and small bean seeds were crushed.plastic balls of uniform size were used for tests. Laboratorytests revealed 98%, 93% and 75% seed cell fill at 1.61km/h, 3.22 km/h and 4.83 km/h (1 mph, 2 mph, and 3 mph)planter velocity, respectively. Heinemann et al. (1973) designed a slotted wheel witha punch fitted in each slot. Internal gear mechanism causedthe punch to move in and out of the slots to perform punchingoperation. A hopper attached to the wheel containedseed coated with magnetic substance. As the wheel rotated,the punch picked up a coated seed and then punched it in thesoil. Wilkins et al. (1979) designed and built a punchplanter for lettuce seeds based on the principle

describedby

Heinemann

et

al.

(1973).

The

planter

consisted

to

magneticpunches, punch wheel, seed hopper and seed pick-upwheel. The seeds were

singulated by the notches around thecircumference of the seed wheel. Each notch picked up aseed as it passed through the seed hopper. Cylindrical magneticpunches 12.7 mm (% in) in diameter were attached tothe punch wheel which was mounted adjacent to the seedwheel on the drive shaft. The punches constantly remainedvertical or perpendicular to the soil surface by means of aneccentric disk. As the punches passed the seedcarryingnotches, seed was magnetically transferred to the bottom ofthe punches. Seeds were attracted to magnets because they were coated with a compound containing iron oxide (Fe2O3)or magnetite. The seeds were carried on the bottom of thepunches and pressed into the soil. The strength of the soilsurrounding the imbedded seeds was relied on to overcome themagnetic attraction between the punches and seeds and thereforethe seeds remained firmly pressed into the bottom of theholes when the punches retracted. The punch planter wasset to plant seeds (25/32 in) deep. At a travel speedof 1.6 km/h (1 mph), over 94% of the punched holes had a seedin each of them with no doubles. The punch planting systemresulted in a shorter time interval between planting andseedling emergence. The time from planting to 70% seedlingemergence was 4.5 days as compared with 7.5 days for a conventionalplanter system. Wijewardene (1978) described a hand-pushed rolling injectionplanter. This planter comprised a series of injectionpoints around the periphery of a wheel, each point havingits own (gravity-activated) closing and (ground-activated)opening mechanism. A simple metering wheel transferredseed from the hopper into each point as it descendedinto the soil. This wheel in conjunction with a controlleddroplet sprayer enabled traditional Nigerian farmers to increasetheir cultivated areas from the usual % hectare (usingtraditional tools) to 4 or 5 hectares (9.88 or 12.36 acres).The planter attained a planting speed of 3 "hills" per second. At a spacing of 25 cm (10 in) within the row, thisspeed corresponded to 2.74 km/h (1.70 mph). Huard Machinery Company (1981) reported on a side openingpunch planter for planting in tilled soil that iscovered with plastic sheets. The plastic sheet is used toconserve soil heat. Dawelbeit (1981) reported on a point-injector for liquidfertilizer application. The main components of the wheel were a rotary valve, a hollow-tined wheel, a rotating union,and a high pressure low-volume piston pump. Test resultsshowed that volume of liquid discharged per injection wasindependent of travel speed. This wheel could be used

forfertilizer application any time before or during the growingseason of crops grown in conservation tillage systems. Oje (1981) reported a granular fertilizer injector.The injector was based on the same principle as the previouslydescribed IITA rolling injector planter. The wheel distributed discrete quantities of fertilizer at an averagedepth of 7.00 cm (2 3/4 in). Singh (1984) designed and developed a two-row tractor drawn ridge planter for winter maize. The inclined plate metering mechanism was mounted on a commonly used three bottom ridge. The planter was tested in laboratory as well as in the field. Laboratory tests showed that 50 seeds could be delivered in a strip of 10 m maintaining recommended seed-to-seed spacing of 20 cm. However, the results varied in the field test. Adekoya and Buchele (1987)designeda precision punch planter for use in tilled and untilled soils. A rolling punch planter with a cam-actuated opening mechanism was developed to plant maize (and other similarly sized grains) in tilled and untilled soils. Field tests showed that satisfactory planting of the seeds was achieved in an untilled field with up to 75% residue cover (at about 5500 kg/ha). The within-the-row spacing of the punched holes and the depth of planting of the seeds were independent of the travel speed. The percentage of the punched holes containing a single seed decreased as the travel speed increased. Nielsen (1995) designed and evaluated the performance of three row seed cum fertilizer drill. It is a standardized animal drawn seed cum fertiliser drillwhich is suitable for crops like wheat, gram, sorghum,soybean, lentil, pea, sunflower, safflower etc. It issimple, light in weight, and compact in construction fordrilling fertiliser and seeds simultaneously especiallydesigned black soil under rain fed condition. It has twogauge wheels, which are useful for maintaining thedepth of operation and also for ease in transportation.Box section frame having many holes helps in adjustingthe row to row spacing at the desired value. Separateknobs are provided for the seed and fertiliser metering to adjust the rate of application. Thefluted roller metering mechanism fitted in the unit gets the drive from ground drive wheel of300mm diameter through chain and sprocket. The shoe type furrow openers with noncloggingboot place the seed at desired depth. It is used to drill seeds and fertiliser simultaneously in two rows. Nafziger (1996) designed and evaluated the performance of a paddy drum seeder. The seeder consisted of a seed drum, main shaft,ground wheel, floats, and handle. Joining

smallerends of frustum of cones makes the seed drum.Nine numbers of seed metering holes of 10 mmdiameter are provided along the circumference ofthe drum at both the ends for a row-to-row IIspacing of 200 mm. Flat spikes 12 mm wide and25 mmlong were joined to ground wheel parallel toits axis of rotation. The slopes of the cone facilitate the free flow of seeds towards themetering holes. Two floats were provided on either side to prevent restrict the sinkage and tofacilitate easy pulling of the seeder. Paddy drum seeder was used for sowing pre-germinated paddy seeds directly on puddled fields. Lara-Lopez (1996) developed a single-row direct planter for maize. The planter may be attached to a walking or riding type two-wheel tractor. The planter performance was in accordance with the recommended plant populations for maize. Kumar (1998) designed and evaluated the performance of a single furrow seed drill cum mp plough. The MP plough cum seed drill is commonly found in the Jabalpur region of Madhya Pradesh. Almost all the parts of the plough,namely,the body, handle body, and tier bars and hitch assemblymade of mild steel sheets and flat sections. Only the share is madeof old leaf spring steel. The share is forged to a screwdriver pointshape with tang. The share is held to the triangular body of theplough with the help of U -clamp. The share after becoming dullcould be sharpened or replaced. The sowing attachment consists of afunnel attached to the tie bar of the plough, a steel pipe embeddedinthe body and both connected by a flexible pipe. With the sowingattachment the plough is used for sowing of seeds. The furrow is created by share and ploughbody. It could sow one row at a time and the rate of application of seeds was depended on theskill of the operator. Since the drill does not have a separate hopper, seeds have to be carriedseparatelyin a bag slung on the shoulder or the back of the operator. Molinet al. (1998) designed and evaluated the performance of a punch planter for no-till systems. A punch planter for corn was designed, prototyped, and evaluated for no-till conditions using a commercialseed metering unit. The seed meter was evaluated for seed spacing performance at the vertical position with 2.5 kPa ofvacuum, as specified by the manufacturer, and at a 22° incline with 4.0 kPa of vacuum. The prototype punch planter wasevaluated at a 22° incline with 4.0 kPa of vacuum. Only small changes occurred in the seed meter performance whenspeed varied from 1 to 3 m/s. The precision of seed spacing decreased approximately 6.0% when compared with the seedmeter results. Field tests were conducted with several residue covers for testing the residue effect at a speed of 2.0 m/s. Nosignificant difference was observed in the planter performance. The

multiples index (more than one seed in one space)increased up to 5.0% when compared to laboratory results. Emergence may have been affected by environmentalconditions, but the precision during field tests was better than in the laboratory tests. Anonymous (1999) designed and evaluate the performance ofa small manually operated single row seed cum fertilizer drill. This was a small manually operated single row seed cum fertilizer drill in which fluted roller meteringmechanism was provided. A ground wheel was provided to drive the metering rollers. Seed and fertilizer are stored in a small hopper and a longbeam was provided by which the implement couldbe pulled by one operator. Another worker guidesthe machine. Due to the provision of fluted rollers,it was suited for drilling soybean maize, pigeon pea,sorghum, green gram, Bengal gram, wheat etc.Shoe type furrow openers were provided for easy operation. It was suitable for drilling seeds of soybean, wheat etc along with fertilizer. Kocher et al. (2000)designed, fabricated and evaluated the performance of a low cost animal drawn lightweight seed cum fertilizer planter. This was a lightweight seed cum fertilizer suitable foroperation with animals of lower body weight. It consisted of a hopper with partitions for seeds and fertilizer. Fluted rollers were used for metering. Use ofmild steel strips for the frame and the ground wheelhave helped reduce the cost of the unit. Shoe typefurrow openers are provided for drilling two rows.Common bicycle chain and sprockets are used fortransmitting motion to the metering unit form the ground wheel. It was suitable for drillingseeds of soybean, maize, pigeon pea, sorghum, Bengal gram, wheat, sunflower, safflower,mustard etc. It was suitable for simultaneous drilling of seeds and fertilizer in two rows. Olaoye and Bolufawi (2001) designed, fabricated and evaluated the performance of a multipurpose row planting machine. This machine had been specially designed foroperation with a power tiller of 8-10 hp to drill seedand fertilizer in 6 rows. It was provided with depthcontrol gauge wheels and a ground wheel for operatingthe metering mechanism. Some of its majorcomponents are the main frame, seed and fertilizerboxes, metering mechanism, transport wheel, furrowopeners, hitch system etc. It was s

2.1 Planting of different crops

Heinemann et al. (1973)studied experimental machines for auto dibble planting. Author stated that physically weak seedlings such as carrot, lettuce, onion, and beet may fail to emerge because of premature soil drying, accumulation of salts in the shallow seedbeds, or from not being able to break through even weak soil crusts. To insure adequate stands of these crops, excess seed is often planted which later requires time-consuming and expensive thinning. Precision planting methods that eliminate hand labor and thinning are needed. Any such method must insure a consistently high emergence of seedlings under the variety of microclimate and soil conditions which are encountered from year to year during the planting period. This type of planting would have a number of important advantages for small seeded row crops. A uniform, precisely spaced seedling emergence would be more nearly assured than for any cultural practice currently used. For example, if the weather was unseasonably warm, the field could be irrigated from corrugates during germination without danger of subsequent soil crusting over the seedlings. The holes would be stable even with moderate rain showers. Seedlings would be less subject to injury by the accumulation of salt at the surface. It might also be possible to apply higher herbicide rates to the soil above the seed for even better weed control than is presently available. The accumulation of salt in the convex portion of the seed row might also help reduce weed germination. Glenn and Ynard (1974) studied the effects of genotype, planting pattern, and plant density on plant-to-plant variability and grain yield of corn. Three experiments were conducted near Guelph in 1971 and 1972 with the objectives of studying (1) the effect of planting pattern, plant density, and genotype on plant-·to-plant variability in corn (Zea mays L.), and (2) the effect of this variability on grain yield. All three studies entailed detailed measurements of the height of individual plants at various times during vegetative development, and of per plant grain yields. Frequency distributions of individual plant height and grain yield were normal; a coefficient of variability was used to characterize the variation within each treatment. In the first experiment, plant density was found to have a significant effect on plant-to-plant variability in grain yield; row spacing did not affect variation among individuals in either plant height or yield. The second experiment involved study of five double-cross hybrids, five single-cross hybrids, and the 10 possible 50:50 mixtures of the single-cross hybrids. Single-cross hybrids were more uniform and higher yielding than their double-cross counterparts. Mixtures did not vary in yield or variability from the mean of their pure-stand components. In the third experiment, corn was over-planted and differentially thinned in early July (when plants

were approximately 60 cm tall) to produce two treatments: uniformly and non-uniformly thinned. Uniformly thinned plots were higher yielding, particularly at a high plant density (103,000 plants/ha). The results lend support to the hypothesis that variability per se can have a significant effect on the grain yield of corn. Reduced variability may represent a partial explanation of the generally higher yield of elite single-cross hybrids over their double-cross counterparts. Mock and Erbach (1977) reported that the average soiltemperature decreased as the amount of plant residue above ornear the seed zone increased. This temperature reduction resultedfrom increased shading and moistness of the soil andfrom increased reflectance of solar radiation. The planterindirectly affected soil temperatures by soil disturbance andby manipulation of plant residue. Even though soil temperaturehad little effect on the action of a planter, it had alarge effect on plant growth. Singh (1984) designed and developed a two-row tractor drawn ridge planter for winter maize. The inclined plate metering mechanism was mounted on a commonly used three bottom ridge. The planter was tested in laboratory as well as in the field. Laboratory tests showed that 50 seeds could be delivered in a strip of 10 m maintaining recommended seed-to-seed spacing of 20 cm. However, the results varied in the field test. Morrison (1986) developed farm machinery for no-tillage agriculture. Author stated that No-tillage crop establishment involves one pass of a planting machine. That machine may do several things in addition to depositing seed in the soil, including cutting residue, clearing a path, and applying fertilizers, insecticides, and herbicides. Performances of these machines have been closely linked to successes and failures of attempts at notillage cropping Conventional tillage philosophy says that residues must be completely buried so that a broadcast field surface can be tilled until the desired surface layer soil structure is produced for a seedbed. Weed control by mechanical cultivation is compatible with conventional residue management and seedbed preparation. In contrast with conventional tillage, no-tillage philosophy says that residues must be kept on the soil surface year-around to conserve soil moisture and to protect soil from erosion. (At this point, we should admit that few farmers are going to make any change in production practices if there are not economic incentives; items such as "erosion control," reduced "groundwater pollution, " and minimum "offsite impacts" are laudable environmental protection goals, but they will only be pursued if the practices which achieve them are also sensible, practical, manageable, and profitable). Therefore, the objective for

development of farm machinery for no-tillage is to make available machines for the maintenance of surface residues while establishing crops, applying fertilizers, and controlling insects and weeds. Lara-Lopez (1996) developed a single-row direct planter for maize. The planter may be attached to a walking or riding type two-wheel tractor. The planter performance was in accordance with the recommended plant populations for maize. Pradhanet al. (1997) developed a power tiller operated groundnut planter-cum-fertilizer drill. The actual field capacity of the planter was 0.16 ha/hr with field efficiency closes to 81%. The planter saved Rs. 237 per ha over manual dropping of seed behind the plough.The maize planters available in the market are imported, designed to operate in large farms, expensive and not suited to local conditions. Therefore, the use of big maize planter under Bangladesh conditions is not economically feasible. A low cost maize seeder is able to remove all this constraints and suitable for maize establishment in Bangladesh. Karrfalt (1999)studied the processes of the testing of seeds. Seed testing was the cornerstone of all other seed technologies. It was the means by which we measure the viability and all the physical factors that regulate the use and maintenance of seeds. Everything that was done with seeds should have some test information to guide the work and ensure high quality. Seed tests tell if a crop of seeds was worth collecting, if handling procedures are correct, and how many potential seedlings are available for regeneration. The earliest form of seed analysis, the cut test, was still often used today. Before seeds are collected in the field, some seeds are cut open with a knife or razor blade to see if their internal tissues are fully developed and undamaged. This analysis was made more accurate in some cases by the use of a hand lens. It was also used for simple analysis during extraction and cleaning, or after germination to determine if the ungerminated seeds have deteriorated or remained dormant. Although the cut test was often very good at producing some information quickly, it was limited in the amount of information it can supply and it lacks accuracy compared to more sophisticated procedures. Therefore, it should never be taken as a substitute for a formal laboratory analysis. Brown et al. (2002)designed and development of a high-speed dibber drill for improved crop establishment. Author stated that field sowing was cheaper than transplanting, but the emergence was often erratic. One practical solution to this problem may be to achieve better control of the soil physical environment in the seed zone by an appropriate drilling

technique. For example, the use of dibbers to place the seeds in intimate contact with the soil will help ensure optimal use of available soil moisture. Also, by covering each seed with a small quantity of material other than soil, the emerging seedlings may be protected against adverse changes in soil conditions.This hypothesis was first tested with a lowspeed fixed spacing drill. When used to sow crisp lettuce this drill gave significant improvements in emergence compared with a conventional coulter drill. These improvements were greatest in the absence of irrigation when an average 77% of the dibbed seeds, covered with a mixture of peak and vermiculite, emerged compared with 36% for the coulter drill. These results led to the development of the second drill described in this paper, which offers both high-speed operation, up to 2 m/s, and variable spacing of successive seeds within the row. Despite achieving improvements in emergence in crisp lettuce, comparable with those recorded with the low-speed drill, initial experiments with a brassica showed that the coulter drill performed very much better (80% emergence compared with 57% for the dibber drill). Later experiments, following modification to the drill to reduce the consolidation of the soil around the seeds, eliminated the depression in emergence. However, further work is required to realize improvements in emergence of brassica comparable with those recorded with lettuce and other crops. Wohab (2003) developed a minimum tillage planter with effective field capacity of 0.1 ha/hr. The planter saved 35% time and 27% cost when compared to traditional methods. In a related study, maize seeder was found to have no detrimental effect on yield using a multi-seeder or a single row seeder (Roth, et al., 2001) and an air seeder (Roth, et al., 2002). Ahmmedet al. (2004) reported that using well-designed planter attachments to power tillers (two-wheel tractors) more area could be brought under maize, wheat, pulses and oil seeds cultivation. ICAR (2004)presented its annual report on the agricultural engineering and technology in farm implements and machinery. This report explained different types of machineries used in different sectors of the agriculture and also explained the best utilization of them. In this report had given a Manually-operated single-row garlic planter which was useful for our research. According to report of ICAR a manually-operated, single-row garlic planter has beendeveloped at the PAU, Ludhiana. This is simple in design andweighs only 12.0 kg. In this machine, planting mechanism isattached over existing design of the PAU

wheel

hand-hoe,which

is

used

for

interculture

operation,

and

is

alreadycommercialized. The machine with a hopper capacity of about3.0 kg is operated by 2 persons. One person pulls machinefrom front through a rope attached to hook on the

machineand the other steers machine by holding it from the handle.Machine is also provided with markers for maintaining specificrow-to-row distance. Plant-to-plant spacing can be varied byvarying number of spoons on the periphery of the verticalplate. It can plant 0.3-0.4 ha/day with the help of 3 persons.The approximate cost of this machine is Rs 1,000 and this canbe recovered from only 0.4 hectare. Labour requirement forsowing garlic with machine is only 83.0 man-hr/ha incomparison to 520 man-hr/hr by the traditional method. Alsocost of sowing with machine is Rs 858/ha in comparison to Rs5,200/ha with the traditional method. Bamgboye and Mofolasayo (2006) tested a manually operated two row okra planter developed from locally available materials. The planter had a field capacity of 0.36 ha/h with a field efficiency close to 72%. The laboratory tests gave better spacing results than under field tests due to clogging of seeds and germination failure. Cortez, et al., (2007) found that the influence of factors related to sowing can produce changes in the behavior of the maize. The experiment was carried out in FCAV-UNESP, Jaboticabal (Sao Paulo, Brazil), in the Testing Track of the Laboratorio de Maquinas and Mecanizacao Agricola of the DER. The experimental design used was a completely randomized one with a factorial scheme of 4x3, being four vertical loads (62.7, 160.7, 258.7 and 356.7 N) and three sowing depths (3, 5 and 7 cm) with three repetitions. The analyzed parameters were: soil deformation, mobilized area, depth of final sowing and plant height. This result showed that the increase in the applied vertical loads on the soil in the sowing produced deformation in the soil, with high determination coefficient. The sowing depth affected the mobilized area. The depth of 5 cm affected the final height of plants. The highest crop height was observed in the 5 cm sowing depth. Trots, et al., (2008) were conducted in Russia in an experimental field on common medium-depth heavy loamy chernozem with 7.8% humus content using spring wheat as a fore crop. Crops were grown according to the locally accepted method of silage crop production. Seeds of maize and fodder mallow were sown into the same wide rows (70 cm). Annual sweet clover was sown with a standard seeder after maize sowing. Interrow cultivation was carried out twice during the summer season. Higher yield of green fodder and well balanced digestible protein were obtained in crop mixtures. Pereira, et al., (2008) the forward speed of the seeder and three silage corn hybrids. They factors in were arranged in completely randomized design in the factorial array 3x2, being the factors the hybrids (BM 2202; BM 3061 and BRS 3003) and two forward speeds of the seeder (6.0 and 8.0 km h-1), with three repetitions. Despite the operational

consumption has not been changed by the speed of sowing, speed of displacement did not influence the number of days for emergency, initial stand and productivity. BARI developed a power tiller operated inclined plate planter (IPP) in 2002. This is a multi crop planter for maize, wheat, soybean, and groundnut and pulses available for a cost of US$ 200. The detail design of the planter is given by Ahmmedet al. (2004). The planter was evaluated in three locations for planting and earthing up of maize in two seasons in 2005 with the aims to test its performance and study the profitability of using the planter. Bicudo, et al.(2009) conducted research treatments consisted of two hybrids of maize (DKB747 e CO32) cultivated in no-tillage system (SPD) and five rates of fertilizer 08-1

28-16 (100, 200, 300, 400 e 500 kg ha ). The randomized block design 8 was used, with subdivided plots and four replications. The maize was sowed using seeder pneumatic of mechanics traction, with four individual lines, spaced of 0.45 m During maize flowering period, morphologic components were evaluated; the harvest occurred on 150 days after the sowing. The result showed that the hybrid of maize DKB747 has greater efficiency, than the hybrid of maize CO32. Goncalves, et al., (2010) carried out to evaluate the influence of the combination of displacement speed and the load applied by the compacting wheel of a seeder-fertilizer machine on the emergence of the seedlings and initial development of the maize crop in the no-till system. The study was done with the use of three 10 displacement speeds of the seeder machine (1.11, 1.67 and 2.22 m s-1) in combination with four loads applied by the compacting wheels (119.26, 131.11, 257 and 339 N). The load of 339N caused a lower seed deposition depth than the load of 131.11. The maximum flattening of soil layer on the seed occurred with the load of 339N, due to the pressure exerted by the compressing wheels. There was no interaction between the factors, as well as no significant difference between the evaluated speeds. The load applied by the compressing wheels and the displacement speeds used for seeding had no influence on emergence and initial establishment of the maize crop Liu-Jia, et al., (2010) studied on the effects of maize seed grading on precise sowing quality. Maize seeds were divided into four levels according to the shape and size. Tests on pneumatic and vacuum precise seeder were carried out to investigate the 9 effects on sowing quality such as up to standard reseeding and miss-seeding etc. The experiment results indicated that the pneumatic seeder is more adaptable to the seed size and shape

variation. Maize seed grading obviously affects the qualified index and reseeding index, but affects miss-seeding index and coefficient of variation little on condition that all the indexes reach the sowing quality requirements. The qualified index of round seeds was 96%, which was higher than flat seeds with the qualified index were 87.4%. There was great distinction between them. The sowing quality of vacuum seeder was not so good whether the seed graded or not, and has not significant influence on the whole indexes of it. The experiment also shows that pneumatic seeder has better performance than the vacuum seeder. Korwaret al. (2012)studied a mechanized sowing of major rainfed crops using precisionplanter cum herbicide applicator. According to the author rainfed agriculture is practised in more than 60% cultivable land, it is very important to use the suitable farm implementfor efficient use of inputs like seeds, fertilizers and herbicides, etc. apart from meeting the timeliness in sowing.Rainfed lands have undulating terrain, two way slopes and soil heterogeneity, due to which, conventional seed drillsoften fail to give satisfactory germination. Costly inputs, especially seeds and fertilizers are becoming major inhibitivefactor in using the conventional seed drills for sowing. To overcome this, trials were conducted using Precision plantercum herbicide applicator for Castor, Ground nut, Maize, Pigeon pea and sorghum crops to achieve precision sowing alongwith fertilizer and herbicide application. The narrow slit furrow opening of the precision Planter helped in conserving themoisture during the sowing operation. Proper placement of seed and fertilizer in optimum zone increased the germination.Pre-emergence herbicide applied during sowing reduced weed intensity significantly. Individually operated tynes withseparate seed boxes helped in achieving the high precision in sowing operation even in undulating and two-way slopelands. Overall, the mechanized sowing operation with precision planter saved the seed input by 24% and fertilizer by 30%when compared to the farmer’s practice. Most of the rainfed soils have undulating terrain and have two ways slopes. Use of the precision planter is advantageous asit adjusts according to the slope of the land. By this, the removal of top soil and nutrient loss is reduced, which normallyoccurs during leveling. As there was no negative effect of simultaneous herbicide application during sowing, the precisionplanter cum herbicide applicator can be effectively used in the rainfed regions.

uitable for sowingseeds of wheat, soybean, Bengal gram, sorghum etc in clay and heavy soil. Doergeet al. (2002) designed and evaluate the performance of manual garlic multicrop planter. This was a hand wheel hoe, used for inter-culture operation onwhich planting mechanism is mounted. The planting mechanism consisted of a vertical plate with spoons, and received drive motion from the ground wheel through chainand sprockets. For operation of the planter, a person pulls it from rope attached to the hook and other person steers the machine by holding it by the handle. Upon pulling the planterforward, ground wheel .starts rotating transmitting motion to the vertical plate fitted with spoons in the hopper. The hopper was filled with seeds or garlic cloves. As the vertical platerotates, the spoons pick up the bulb/seed, which was discharged,in the small hopper connectedto the furrow opener througha tube. The seed was then droppedin the furrow created by the furrow opener. It was provided with markers for maintaining therow-to-row spacing. Varying the number of spoons on vertical plate can vary plant spacing.Plantings poons for other crops like peas, sunflower, cotton, okra (bhindi), maize, and soybean werealso available. This planter was used for sowing of garlic, maize, moong, peas, groundnut etc. Garlic planters werelabour saving equipment and require 90 man-hoursto plant one hectare. Alwis (2004) proposed the design and development of a row seeder for gingelly, kurakkan and meneri. A manually operated seeder was designed and developed for small seeded crops such as Gingelly,Kurakkan, and Meneri, after testing the first proto-type seeder and implementing necessarymodifications. The developed seeder has a frame, wheel, metering mechanism, hopper, seed tube,handle and marker. Laboratory andfield experiments were conducted to evaluate the performanceof the seeder. A comparative performance of the new raw seeding technique incorporated in thedesigned seeder was compared with traditional hand broadcasting method. Weight of 1000 seeds,hardness, moisture content, germination and bulk density of seeds were measured in the Laboratory.Seed delivery rate, rate of damage seed caused by metering mechanism, pattern of seed deposit inthefield, working capacity, delivery rate in the field, travel reduction (slippage), depth of seeding and ratio of established plants to seeds sown were considered as criteria for evaluation of thedesigned seeder.The delivery rates observed in the laboratory for gingellykurakkan and meneri were 5.8 kg/ha, 5.9 Kg/ha and 7.2 kg/ha respectively. The damage seed percentage of the designed machine for Gingelly,

Kurakkan, and Meneri were 9.7, 7.5 and 3.4, respectively. The effective working capacity of the seeder was 0.66 ha/day, which was significantly higher to that of broadcasting. It showed thatbroadcasting was 5 times costlier than machine seeding. On the basis of above results, the designseeder could be recommended for successful row seeding of small seed crops. Singh et al. (2005)designed and evaluated the performance of two row bullock drawn mustard planter. The seed drill consists of tubular steel section frame onwhich other components were mounted. The seed box was ofmild steel and the metering mechanism uses aluminum fluted rollers for the fertilizer and a rotor with cells on theperiphery for the seeds. The furrow openers were of shoetype and were made of clay carbon steel hardened andtempered for opening the furrow. The ground wheelprovided the power needed for operating the seedmetering mechanism and a pair of idler wheels on eitherside help in proper adjustment of depth of seed placement. It also served to transport the drill on the farm roads.A lever mechanism was also provided forraising and lowering the ground wheel on turns. Some of the other components were the seed pipes,steel beam and the power transmission system. A single/ pair of bullocks draw theseed drill. The row spacing of the seed drill can be adjusted as per the requirement of the cropto be sown. Bamgboye and Mofolasayo (2006) tested a manually operated two row okra planter developed from locally available materials. The planter had a field capacity of 0.36 ha/h with a field efficiency close to 72%. The laboratory tests gave better spacing results than under field tests due to clogging of seeds and germination failure. Murray et al. (2006) classified and described the types, attributes and functional requirements of the different planters and its components. This book attempted to describe and definedthe terminology for all components of the wide range of plantingequipment seen by the authors over many years experience, primarily in Australia, but also in China, theUnited States and Europe. It also included a small number of units known only from reports in theliterature. It attempted compatibility where possible with existing, related ‘standard’ information, such asthat provided in the various standard documents by ASAE (2005).This was the first attempt at such a comprehensive approach to a serious problem, and every effort hasbeen made to cover all known equipment variations. Inevitably, there will be some omissions. Theauthors welcome information on units that cannot be categorized or described using the system so thatappropriate updates or additions can be made.In this book, the agronomic

requirements for plant establishment are reviewed and their implications forplanter selection and management noted. On the basis of this information, the functional requirementsof a complete planting machine are listed, with elaboration of the soilengaging, depth control, seedmetering and seed delivery components. The types of wheels used to accomplish these functionalrequirements are then described and their relative attributes for crop establishment discussed.Throughout the book, the emphasis is on planter components for crop rather than pasture production. Vanderlipet al. (2007) designed and evaluate the performance of animal drawn mustard planter. It was an animal drawn implemented suitable for sowing rapeseedmustard, wheat and pearl- millet. This implement used a rotorwith cells on its periphery to meter the small seeds. Powerfrom the ground wheel was transmitted by the chain and sprocketmechanism to the bottom of the hopper to activate the rotor. Ithad three bottoms and the row to row spacing can be easilyadjusted for different crops. One additional idler helps inkeeping the implement level and for depth control. It saves 50per cent labour and operating time and 51 per cent on cost ofoperation and also results in 15-20 per cent increase in yieldcompared to conventional method of sowing behind countryplough. Staggenborget al. (2008) proposed the design and development of birsa animal drawn seed drill. It was a bullock drawn implement suitable for sowing paddy, ragi,wheat, linseed, gram, safflower and other small sized seeds. In thismachine, seeds are dropped by a rubber agitator and slit hole while the fertilizer was dropped manually using the funnel provided for thatpurpose. Only the ground wheel drives the agitator for the seeds anda small ridger type furrow opener was used to reduce the draft on theanimal. It saves 56 per cent labour and operating time and 25 percent on cost of operation compared to conventional method ofsowing behind country plough. It also results in 14 to 27 percentincrease in yield comparedto sowing by conventional method. Ismail and Hanify (2009) constructed and tested the seed-punch planter. Author described the specification of requirements and the functionality, of a new mechanism of punch planter system based on small smart machines. The idea of this system was put the seed in soil by punched holes in the soil and drops seeds. The machine was constricted and tested in Mansoura university workshop. The aim of this work was to manufacture and constructed the investigated planter, studies the effect of oscillating tube mechanism on the seeds distribution and to determine the factors that realizes the best operation condition. The data were statistically analyzed to determine the effect of the oscillating

tube radii and the traveling speed of punch planter under two different of the connecting rod length (150, and 180 mm) on performance indices, namely mean seed spacing, miss index, multiples index, and quality of feed index, precisions in spacing and the amount of seed rate. The optimum parameters were found at punch planter speed of 0.6 m/s and oscillating tube radius of 12cm and connecting tube rod of 180mm. Pandey et al. (2009) proposed the design and development of an animal drawn three row seed drill. The seed drill consists of tubular steel section frameon which various components were mounted. Theseed box is of mild steel and the meteringmechanism uses aluminium fluted rollers. Thefurrow openers are of shoe type and are made of clay carbon steel hardened and tempered foropening the furrow. The ground wheel provides thepower needed for operating the seed meteringmechanism and a pair of idler wheels on either sidehelp in proper adjustment of depth of seed placement. It also serves to transport the drill onthe farm roads.A lever mechanism was also provided for raising and lowering the ground wheel on turns. Some of the other components are the seed pipes, steel beam and the powertransmission system. A pair of bullocks can easily draws the implement. The row spacing ofthe seed drill could be adjusted as per the requirement of the crop beings own. Swallow et al. (2010)proposed the design and development of ananimal drawn tool frame for seeding. It was an attachment made for the bullock drawnCIAE multipurpose tool frame. The seedingattachment was suitable for sowing wheat, gram,pea, soybean, sorghum and pigeon pea. It canapply granular fertilizers like urea, DAP andGrowmore. The hopper has compartments forfertiliser and seed and the ground wheel was afloating type thus enabling uniform seedplacement even when the soil surface was notproperly levelled. Separate side wheels allow accurate adjustment of the seed drill attachmentand are also useful for transportation. It saves 73 per cent labour and operating time and 55per cent on cost of operation compared to conventional method of sowing behind countryplough or seeding by broadcasting. It also results in 10 to 18 per cent increase in yieldcompared to sowing by conventional method. The seeding attachment was suitable for sowing wheat, gram, pea, soybean, sorghum andpigeon pea. It can apply granular fertilizers like urea, DAP and Growmore. Adisa and Braide (2012) proposed the design and development of template row planter. According to the author the basic requirements for small scale cropping machines are, they should be suitable for small farms, simple in design and technology and versatile for

use in different farm operations. A manually operated template row planter was designed and developed to improve planting efficiency and reduce drudgery involved in manual planting method. Also it increased seed planting, seed/fertilizer placement accuracies and it was made of durable and cheap material affordable for the small scale peasant farmers. The operating, adjusting and maintaining principles were made simple for effective handling by unskilled operators (farmers). The planting rate of the template row planter was found to be 0.20ha/h. Template seed filling efficiency was found to be 88% and draft requirement was found to be 85N at average speed of 2.16km/h. Template row planter was found to weigh less than 9kg, while the draft required to push the template row planter was found to be 85N. Average template seed filling efficiency of the planter was found to be 88%. The cost of planter production in 2009 was fifteen thousand five hundred Naira only (N15,500). The template row planter was able to plant on both ridged and flat seed bed at average field capacity of 0.2ha/h (effective planting rate) which was quite adequate for small scale farming. Islam et al. (2012)proposed the design, fabrication and testing ofthe versatile multi-crop planter for establishing sprouted direct-seeded rice. The soaked rice seeds were kept in jute bags at ambient air temperate for incubation. Before sowing, seeds were removed from the jute bag and air dried in the shade for two hours. The length of plumule and radicle was measured from 15 randomly selected rice seeds in each treatment. Slide callipers were used to measure the length of plumule and radicle from their junction with the rice seed. Land preparation, seed sowing and application of recommended basal fertilizers were done simultaneously by using VMP in a single pass strip tillage operation. Seeds were sown in dry land followed by application of irrigation. A fluted-type seed meter with eight flutes was used in the VMP. In each treatment, rice seed samples were collected from the seed dispensing tube into polythene bags to measure the damage in whole rice seeds, plumule, and radicle. The clearance between flute and concave of seed meter was adjusted to maintain the actual seed rate as well as minimize the damage of whole seed, radicle and plumule. The spacing between rows was 20 cm. Soil samples were collected randomly from 0-7.5 cm and 7.5-15 cm depth. Core sampler was used to measure the bulk density and moisture content. Rice grain yield was recorded from each pre-selected 10 m2 area per plot and adjusted to moisture content of 14 %. Data were analysed by using MSTAT-C software. Means were compared by the least significant difference (LSD) test.

Olajide and Manuwa (2014) proposed the design, fabrication and testing of a low-cost row-crop planter for peasant farmers. Author explained the need to produce more food continues to increase in Nigeria like other places around the world.The cost price of imported planters has gone beyond the purchasing power of most of our farmers.Peasant farmers can do much to increase food production especially grains, if drudgery can bereduced or totally removed from their planting operations. The main objective of this study is todesign, fabricate and evaluate the performance of a low-cost grain planter capable of planting threetypes of grains- maize, soybean and cowpea.. The components of the machine are hopper, seedplates, furrow opener, and soil coverer. The laboratory investigation comprised the determination ofweight of seed discharged from the hopper, percentage damage of seeds, and average inter-rowspacing of seeds. The field tests included the determination of effective field capacity, average depthof placement of seeds in the furrows, and spacing of seeds within row. A percentage seed damage of2.58% was obtained with spacing of 50.2 cm with average depth of 4.28 cm. The machine can beeasily adjusted and maneuvered in the field to suit the technical knowhow of small holder farmer. Itwas also able to adequately meet the need of various height of operator. The planter had an averagefield capacity of 0.36 ha/hr and efficiency of 71%. It was recommended that only properly cleansedseeds be used with this planter. The total cost of the planter is twenty nine thousand nine hundredand eighty six naira (N29, 986.00) equivalent to about 185 U.S Dollar 2.4 Performance Evaluation of Different Crops Planter Pradhanet al. (1997) developed a power tiller operated groundnut planter-cum-fertilizer drill. The actual field capacity of the planter was 0.16 ha/hr with field efficiency closes to 81%. The planter saved Rs. 237 per ha over manual dropping of seed behind the plough. Staggenborget al. (2004)studied effect of planter speed and seed firmson corn stand establishment.Author stated that proper planter adjustment and operation play an important role in uniform stand establishment for corn. Atwo−year study was conducted to assess the impact of planter speed and a seed−firming wheel on corn stand establishmentand grain yield. A planter equipped with a vacuum metering system and commercial seed firming wheels was used in thisstudy. Corn was seeded in a randomized complete block experiment at three speeds at two locations in Kansas (USA). Plantstand was counted at regular intervals after the first plant emerged to determine emergence rate. Plant spacing within eachtreatment was measured after complete emergence. Mean plant

spacing, standard deviation in spacing, and four spacingindices (miss, multiple, quality of feed, and precision) were calculated to evaluate the plant spacing data. The miss andmultiple indices indicate the number of skips and doubles. Planter performance as measured by these indices and standarddeviation in plant spacing decreased as planter speed increased. The seed firmer reduced plant spacing standard deviationsat a rate equivalent to the standard deviation increase observed when planter speed increased approximately 1.6 km/h(1 mph). Corn yield was reduced as planter speed increased at one location, but not the others. This response was the resultof lower plant densities at the higher planter speeds, suggesting that one of the goals of the planting process should be toestablish adequate plant densities. The seed firmer had no impact on corn yield. Aikinset al. (2010)evaluated the performance of 30 jab planters randomly selected from a total of 68. These jab planters had been manufactured by a local Ghanaian manufacturer. The objective of the study was to evaluate the performance of jab planters for maize (Zea mays, L.) seed and inorganic fertilizer delivery. Five high yielding local maize varieties including Okomasa, Obaatanpa, Abeleehi, Dorke-SR, and Dodziwere used in 2004. In 2005, four different inorganic fertilizers: NPK 15-15-15, NPK 19-19-19, NPK 20-20-20 and Ammonium Sulphate were used. The experiments were arranged in a completely randomized design. For each of the 30 jab planters, there were 10 replications (jabs) to determine the number of seeds and the quantity of fertilizer delivered. A level of significance of 0.05 was used for all the tests. The results showed significant differences in maize seed and fertilizer delivery rates between jab planters. The poor seed and fertilizer metering of the jab planters showed that there was no control of quality in the manufacture of the metering unit of the jab planters. The study draws attention to the need to consider quality control in the manufacturing of the metering unit of planters and fertilizer application equipment. Rangapara and Pandya (2014) studied the performance evaluation of manually operated single row cotton planter. Author explained that Cotton plays a major role in Indian economy and offers employment for more than 60 million people. Theyield of cotton in Gujarat state about 758 lakh bales. In Gujarat the sowing of cotton is labour intensive as its platingrequires 12-15 hr/ha. The single row cotton planter was tested and calibrated in laboratory as well as in field as perIndian Standard Test Code No. 6316:1993. The field evaluation of manually operated cotton planter was done bypulling the cotton planter in which, speed of planter was 1.62 km/h, actual operating time in 4.53

minute wasrequired to cover area of 0.01 ha with actual field capacity of 0.132 ha/hr and field efficiency was 79.52%. Thepercentage damage in cotton seed is 1.236% more by planter compared to conventionally manual dibbling. Theaverage time requirement by manually operated cotton planter was 7.57 hr/ha while manually sowing around 11.12hr/ha. The average seed rate in manual cotton planter was 3.031 kg/ha. The cost of planting cotton by manuallymethod is approximately 209 Rs/ha, where as the cost by this machine is 168 Rs/ha. The tests were conducted in laboratory andfield at Farm Machinery

and

Power

Department,College

of

Agricultural

Engineering

and

Technology,Junagadh Agricultural University Campus. Efficiencyof the manually operated cotton planter was moreeffective as compare to manual dibbling as theeffective field capacity of planter was 0.132 ha/hr,the field efficiency of planter was 79.52 %, the costof sowing of cotton by this machine was 22.05 Rs./hrand 168 Rs./ha The average power required wasranged from 0.050 hp to 0.055 hp. The cost of planting cotton by manually method is 209 Rs/ha,where as the cost by this machine is 168 Rs/ha. Ramesh et al. (2014) proposed a weed dynamics and productivity of maize-wheat cropping system as influenced by tillage/planting techniques. Author explained that A field experiment consisting of 16 treatment combinations of four tillage andplanting methods viz. i) zero tillage, ii) seeding with multi-crop planter, iii) seeding withmanual seed drill and iv) seeding after conventional tillage, each in maize and wheat wasconducted at Palampur during kharif 2009 to rabi 2010-11. Weed flora in maize crop wasmainly composed of Ageratum conyzoides (57 and 70%, at 60 and 90 DAS, respectively),Polygonumalatum (19 and 10%, respectively) and Commelinabenghalensis (7

and

6%,respectively),

Echinochloacolona

Link,

Panicumdichotomiflorum,

Eleusineindica,Digitariasanguinalis and Cyperus spp. were the other weeds as a whole constituted 17 and14%, respectively. Manual seed drill in kharif remaining at par with multi-crop planterresulted in significantly lower count of conyzoides and other weeds as compared to zerotillage (204.5 m-2) at 60 DAS. Similarly, manual seed drill in rabi remaining at par withconventional tillage gave significantly lower count of aconyzoides as compared to zerotillage and multi-crop planter. Zero tillage in kharif resulted in significantly highest alatumdry weight (4.58 g m-2) at 90 DAS. Weed flora in wheat was composed of Vicia sativa (38 and 39% during 2009-10 and 2010-11, respectively), Loliumtemulentum

(25

and

30%),AvenaludovicianaDurieu

(25

and

15%),

Anagallisarvensis (8 and 15%) and Phalarisminor Retz. (4 and 8%) at 90 DAS. Zero tillage in kharif produced significantly higher populations of minor (8.2 m-2) over

manual seed drill and conventional seeding. Zero tillagein rabi resulted in significantly highest count of sativa (61.2 m-2) and arvensis (29.8 m-2)over other treatments. Since weed competitive stress was taken care from time to time, maizegreen cob and stover yield; and wheat grain and straw yield were comparable under thetreatments. Conventional tillage in kharif and rabi resulted in higher employment (165.3 and170.4 mandays, respectively) over other treatments.

2.5 Manually operated different crops planter Molinet al. (2008) designed and evaluated of a punch planter for no-till systems. Author described that a punch planter for corn was designed, prototyped, and evaluated for notill conditions using a commercial seed metering unit. The seed meter was evaluated for seed spacing performance at the vertical position with 2.5 kPa of vacuum, as specified by the manufacturer, and at a 22° incline with 4.0 kPa of vacuum. The prototype punch planter was evaluated at a 22° incline with 4.0 kPa of vacuum. Only small changes occurred in the seed meter performance when speed varied from 1 to 3 m/s. The precision of seed spacing decreased approximately 6.0% when compared with the seed meter results. Field tests were conducted with several residue covers for testing the residue effect at a speed of 2.0 m/s. No significant difference was observed in the planter performance. The multiples index (more than one seed in one space) increased up to 5.0% when compared to laboratory results. Emergence may have been affected by environmental conditions, but the precision during field tests was better than in the laboratory tests. The seed meter was tested in the laboratory over agreased layer and at speeds of 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0 m/s at theconditions stated by the manufacturer. Four differentcriteria were used for evaluating the seed distribution;multiples index, quality of feed index, miss index, andprecision. The seed meter resulted in no significant changesin performance, except a small increase in the miss index.The same seed meter was then positioned at aninclination of 22° with the vertical axis, and the vacuumlevel increased. These results were almost the same, exceptthat the resulting multiples index was higher, probably dueto the higher vacuum. A significant improvement inprecision was observed when increasing the speed from1.0 m/s to 2.0 m/s.The seed meter was synchronized with the punches. Nosignificant difference was observed in any of the criteriaused for evaluating the seed spacing distribution. Thereduction in the quality of feed index was between 1.6%and 4.4% for 2.0 m/s and 1.0 m/s, respectively. Theprecision indexes were between 17.4% and 18.7%compared to between 11.7% and 12.3% when tested withonly

the seed meter. The precision decreased (precisionindex increased) due to an interaction between the seedsand punch walls. Bashiriet al. (2013)designed, constructed and tested for performance of a prototype simple hand planter. Author told that the growth of a new crop starts with the planting of a seed or transplanting of seed lings. The placement of seed in the soil is done in many ways. Traditionally, this is done by the use of cutlasses, hoes, and matches etc. With the advancement in science and technology, different machines have been developed for planting and many other agricultural production activities.This has revolutionized agricultural production leading to large hectarage being planted within a short period of time. It was designed to plant two seeds of Maize (Zeamays) per drop. It is a simple machine made mainly of wood with few metal components. Some properties of maize seeds such as size and angle of repose which were used to design the seed cell and hopper respectively were determined locally. After the construction, test results showed that the planter has a metering efficiency and accuracy of 96% and 58% respectively. It has a field capacity of 0.5ha/hr as against 22hr per hectare if one person is to work. Ikechukwuet al. (2014) designed and fabricated a single row maize planter for garden use. Author focused on the design and fabrication of a manually operated single row maize planter capable of delivering seeds precisely in a straight line with uniform depth in the furrow, and with uniform spacing between the seeds. The work demonstrates the application of engineering techniques to reduce human labour specifically in the garden. The results obtained from the trial tests showed that the planter functioned properly as expected with a planting capacity of 0.0486 hectare/hr. Visual inspection of the seeds released from the planter’s metering mechanism showed no visible signs of damage to the seeds.The planter would go a long way in making farming more attractive and increasing agricultural output. All parts of the planter were fabricated from mild steel material, except for the metering mechanism which was made from good quality wood (mahogany) and the seed funnel and tube, which were made from rubber material. The seed metering mechanism used for this work was the wooden roller type with cells on its periphery. For this design, the drive shaft directly controls the seed metering mechanism which eliminates completely attachments such as pulleys, layer systems, and gears thereby eliminating complexities which increase cost, and increasing efficiency at a highly reduced cost. The results obtained from the trial tests showed that the planter functioned properly as expected with a planting capacity of 0.0486 hectare/hr. Visual

inspection of the seeds that were released from the planter’s metering mechanism showed no visible signs of damage to the seeds. Odumaet al. (2014) developed and evaluated a manually operated cowpea precision planter for performance by laboratory and field investigations. The laboratory test was conducted to investigate the rate of seed discharge, uniformity of intra-row seed spacing and seed damage during operation, while the field test examined the field efficiency, field capacity, planting depth and average seed spacing within the row. An average weight of 4.62g of seeds was discharged during the test, at the planting space varying from 48.4cm to 49.6cm obtained from the field and laboratory test respectively. The planter effectively metred out two seeds per discharge at average planting depth of 2.22cm with minimum seed damage of 2.34% during operation. The planter could be maneuvered or adjusted to metre more seeds at more or less planting depths depending on the choice of the farmer. With good care/maintenance, the planter would relief the difficulties encountered by the rural farmers in cowpea production. It has a field efficiency of 71.71% and operates at a field capacity of 0.260 ha/hr with an average planting depth and spacing of 2.22cm and 49.6cm respectively. The planter metres an average of two seeds per discharge with minimal or no damage of the seeds and can be adjusted to metre more seeds per discharge according to the choice of the famer. Kyada and Patel (2014) designed, fabricated and tested manually operated seed planter machine. Author described that the basic requirements for small scale cropping machines were, they should be suitable for small farms, simplein design and technology and versatile for use in different farm operations. A manually operated template rowplanter was designed and developed to improve planting efficiency and reduce drudgery involved in manualplanting method. Seed planting is also possible for different size of seed at variable depth and space betweentwo seed. Also it increased seed planting, seed/fertilizer placement accuracies and it was made of durable andcheap material affordable for the small scale peasant farmers. The operating, adjusting and maintainingprinciples were made simple for effective handling by unskilled operators (farmers). Thismanual seed planter machine has considerablepotential to greatly increase productivity. Othercountries of the world where the two wheel tractorswere the main traction unit in farming. The main task now was to promote this technology and have available tofarmers at an affordable price. The manual SeedPlanter machine could be readily made from localcomponents in workshops. The only specializeditems required

were the seed meters plunger which could be sourced at an inexpensive price from localpromoter and plunger is easily manufactured. Byusing of this machine, achievement of flexibility ofdistance and depth variation for different seedplantation was possible. Olajide and Manuwa (2014) designed, fabricated and tested of a low-cost row-crop planter for peasant farmers. Author explained that the need to produce more food continues to increase in Nigeria like other places around the world.The cost price of imported planters has gone beyond the purchasing power of most of our farmers.Peasant farmers can do much to increase food production especially grains, if drudgery can bereduced or totally removed from their planting operations. The main objective of this study is todesign, fabricate and evaluate the performance of a low-cost grain planter capable of planting threetypes of grains- maize, soybean and cowpea.. The components of the machine are hopper, seedplates, furrow opener, and soil coverer. The laboratory investigation comprised the determination ofweight of seed discharged from the hopper, percentage damage of seeds, and average inter-rowspacing of seeds. The field tests included the determination of effective field capacity, average depthof placement of seeds in the furrows, and spacing of seeds within row. A percentage seed damage of2.58% was obtained with spacing of 50.2 cm with average depth of 4.28 cm. The machine can beeasily adjusted and maneuvered in the field to suit the technical knowhow of small holder farmer. Itwas also able to adequately meet the need of various height of operator. The planter had an averagefield capacity of 0.36 ha/hr and efficiency of 71%. It was recommended that only properly cleansedseeds be used with this planter. The total cost of the planter is twenty nine thousand nine hundredand eighty six naira (N29, 986.00) equivalent to about 185 U.S Dollar. Awuluet al. (2014)designed and developed amanually operated seed broadcaster. Author told that sowing small seeds was operated manually by small-scale farmers which normally results in poor distribution of the planted seeds. In a bid to solve the problems associated with manual seed broadcasting, an affordable manually operated seed broadcaster has been designed and constructed. The seed broadcaster was made from locally available materials comprising supporting frame, a hopper, bevel gears, bearings, spreading disc, seed opening (shut-off lid), shaft, manual rotating handle and a layer for fastening to the body. The field performance of this wheel was evaluated by testing it on paddy, guinea corn, and soya bean seeds. The capacity of the wheelwas 7068.6cm3. The wheel has a net weight of 6.25kg. Breakage efficiency increases with the decrease in size

of seeds broadcasted while discharge efficiency increased with increase in the size of seeds broadcasted. Broken efficiency of the wheel was 2.7%, 8.3% and 10% for soya bean, paddy and guinea corn respectively while discharge efficiency was 91.7%, 92% and 97.5% for paddy, guinea corn and soya bean respectively. This wheel provided leverage in lifting the agricultural productivity in the area of quick broadcasting.

2.6 Seeding Rate and Plant Populations Seeding rate or planting rate refers to the number of seeds planted per hectare to attain a certain plant population. Plant population refers to the number of plants per hectare established after planting. The difference between the seeding rate and the plant population is called the mortality rate. Mortality rates differ significantly and depend on planter type, planter adjustment, planting depth and speed, seedbed conditions, soil type and drainage, seeding rate, planting date, and row spacing. Seed quality and germination rates, weather, pathogens, and insects will also influence plant population (Bangarwaetal., 1988). In practice, the needs of the individual plants have to be balanced against the requirement to maximize crop yield (Wollinet al., 1987). The optimum plant population per hectare can be calculated from recommended plant spacing (row spacing and distance between plants) for a given crops, as follows:- m2 Plant Populations =

2.7Seed Metering Devices Ikechukwuet al., (2014) Metering mechanism is the heart of planting machine and its function is to distribute seeds uniformly at the desired application rates and controls seed spacing in a row. Proper selection and/or design of the metering device is an essential element for satisfactory performance of the seed planter. Murray et al., (2006)A large range of seed metering devices exist, but most can be classified as either ‘mass flow’ or ‘precision’ depending primarily on their principle of operation and the resulting planting pattern. Mass flow meters attempt to meter a consistent volume of seed per unit of time to give average seed spacing equal to the

desired spacing, i.e. a drill planting pattern. Unlike mass flow seed meters, precision type seed meters attempt to select single seeds from the seed lot and deliver them at a preset time interval. Several types of metering devices are used for precision planters; most can be broadly classified as ‘plate’, ‘belt’, ‘disc’, ‘drum’ or ‘finger’ types. Classification largely depends on the design and/or shape of the principle moving element that enables seed singulation. Plate type metering device can be horizontal, vertical or inclined (Afify, 2009). Crops usually planted using precision seed metering devices include most horticultural crops and maize, sorghum, sunflower and beans. Typically, precision seed metering systems are used on what are generally referred to as ‘row crop’ planters (Adisa, 2012). Hence, the selection of metering devices solely depend on the type of crop and method or pattern or manner of planting and the purpose for which the crop is grown (Murray et al., 2006).

Bainer (1947) suggested that the diameter of the cells/holes be 4 mm larger than the maximum diameter of the seed. Akyurt and Taub (1966) recommended that 10% increase in the diameter of the cell to the largest seed diameter. With regard to the depth of the cell, as measured to the bottom center of the drill hole, all agreed that it should be equal to the maximum diameter of the seed so that the seed would completely be enveloped inside the cell.

2.8Furrow Openers A furrow opener cuts a furrow and allows the seeds or seedlings to be deposited before being partially covered by soil. The types of furrow openers used vary with soil and operating conditions. (Chaudhuri, 2001). The opener may incorporate or enclose a portion of the seed delivery system and the seed boot that facilitates seed placement in the furrow. Furrow openers may be: runners; shovel; winged or shoes openers Furrow opener must maintain the seed furrow at uniform and proper depth in a variety of soil conditions (Reddy, 1982). A furrow opener modifies conditions of seedbed. The aim of furrow opener design and selection must be to ensure desired modifications, rather than impair conditions for emergence (Murray et al., 2006). The design of furrow openers is basically concentrated on their optimum rake angle. Studies made by Chaudhuri (2001) indicated that the optimum rake angle of furrow openers, for least draught requirement, should between 25o and 30o

2.9 Seed Covering Devices Shaabanet al., (2009)Seed covering devices are designed to promote soil flow back into the furrow to cover the seed after placement and/or firming. It play an important role in promoting and stabilizing conditions conducive to rapid seed germination and influencing seed emergence and establishment through the manipulation of the depth of soil cover over the seed 2.10 Seed Delivery Tubes Ibrahim et al., (2008) Seed delivery tube includes those devices that convey the seed from the meter to the device that deposits the seed on the soil surface or in the furrow. Improper design of seed tubes leads to unsteady flow of seeds, and result in irregular seed spacing along the row. Seed delivery tube should be smooth, narrow, straight, and short. However, its outlet should be close enough to the furrow bottom and the friction between seed and tube wall should be minimized. Shaabanet al., (2009) selection of the delivery tube is important because the tube should translate seed metering accuracy of the uniformity in the time interval between individual seeds metered to placement accuracy and the uniformity of seed spacing along the furrow or row. To achieve this, the typical operational requirements of the delivery tube should be rigid and have smooth interior surface

MATERIALS AND METHODS This chapter deals with the description of various materials and methods used to accomplish the research work done to attain the desired objectives of the study entitled “studies on manually operated multi-crop planter for different seeds’’ The experimental studies were carried out at the Department of Farm Machinery and Power Engineering, Vaugh School of Agricultural Engineering and Technology, Sam Higginbottom Institute of Agriculture, Technology and Sciences, (Deemed to-be University) Allahabad. The study was conducted with a view to obtain different crop seeds and planter parameters suitable for the development of the manually operated planter. The methodologies were used for the development and performance evaluation of the manually operated planter has been discussed under the following heads: 3.1 Machine and tools used for development of planter. 3.2Collection of seeds. 3.3 Evaluation of the various physical properties of maize, pigeon pea,okra and red gram seeds relevant to design a manually operated multi-crop planter. 3.4 Design and development a manually operatedmulti-crop planter for sowing different seeds 3.5 Design and develop various seed metering wheel for sowing different crops 3.6 Evaluation of performance of developed manually operated multi-crop planter. 3.7 Estimate cost analysis ofdeveloped planter.

3.1. Machines and tools used for the development of the planter The machines and tools used for the development of the manually operated multi-crop planter are described below: Table 3.1: Machines and Tools used for development of the planter S.No. 1

Machine/Tool name Stellram hard coredrills machine

Purpose Hole/Cell making

2

Lathe machine

Threading/Cutting/Finishing/ Shaping/Machining.

3

Grinding machine

Grinding/Cutting tool

4

Cutting blade

Cut flat bar

5

Manual Facing Lathe Machine

Making ground wheel

6

Round file

Smooth rough edges

7

Electric welding machine

Welding

8

Steel scale

Measurement of linear distance

9

Steel tape

Measurement of linear distance

10

Vernier calipers

Measurement of outer and inner diameter

11

Centre punch

Hole Marking

12

Choke

Marking

13

Hammer

Used to strike an object

14

Chisel

Cutting

15

Scissors

Cutting sheet metal

16

Vice

Clamping or holding

17

Spanner

Tighten nut and bolt

18

Screw driver

Tighten screw

19

Hand grinder

Grinding metal sheet

20

Flat file

Smooth rough edges

21

Grease Layer

Laboratory test

22

Seed germinator

Seed germination test

3.1.2.1Drill Machine A drilling machine was used for drilling holes in various types of seed metering wheel and metal.

3.1.2.2Lathe Machine A lathe is a machine which rotates the work piece on its axis to perform various operations such as cutting, sanding, knurling, drilling, or deformation, facing, turning, with tools that are applied to the work piece to create an object which has symmetry about an axis of rotation. 3.1.2.3Grinding Machine A grinding machine was used an abrasive wheel as a cutting tool to shape or change the dimensions of a hard material. The types of materials that need grinding are usually metallic items such as tools and rods. These machines generally work by reducing the material through abrasion. Generally, the grain of the abrasive wheel chips away at the material, changing its shape or dimension. 3.1.2.4 Round File A round file is a wood or metalworking hand tool of cylindrical cross section it was used to remove small amounts of material from a work piece. Round files typically consist of a long tapered body and a pointed square tang at one end for attaching a handle. The body of the file is cut with a series of parallel ridges which remove material from the work piece when the file is drawn across it. These files was used to remove material from the inside surfaces of cylindrical work pieces or to cut half round grooves. Round files are available in a large selection of sizes and tooth pitches to suit a variety of applications and materials. 3.1.2.5Electric welding machine Welding machine performs the function of creating an arc which may be due to electric short or gas to melt a puddle of molten metal on to the other clay where joining is to take place. The most common welder in industrial use is the arc welder. This type of electric machine uses a stick electrode to conduct the electricity to the work piece and melts at the same time to fill in the gaps. A wire feed machine uses a roll of wire that feeds through a tube to the work pieces to be joined together. The operator presses a button on a hand held torch and the wire feeds into the blue arc and fills in the gap between the two pieces of metal. A TIG welder or Tungsten Inert Gas machine uses a tungsten tip that creates the high temperature needed to weld aluminum together. Along with the arc, an inert gas such as argon is fed into the TIG welding puddle of metal to remove any impurities from the surrounding environment. 3.1.2.6Steel scale

Scales of measurement refer to ways in which variables/numbers are defined and categorized. Each scale of measurement has certain properties which in turn determine the

appropriateness

for

use

of

certain

statistical

analyses.

The

four scales of measurement are nominal, ordinal, interval, and ratio 3.1.2.7Tape A tape measure or measuring tape is a flexible ruler. It consists of a ribbon of cloth, plastic, fiber glass, or metal strip with linear-measurement markings. It is a common measuring tool. Its design allows for a measure of great length to be easily carried in pocket or toolkit and permits one to measure around curves or corners. Today it is ubiquitous, even appearing in miniature form as a keychain fob, or novelty item. Surveyors use tape measures in lengths of over 100 m (300+ ft). 3.1.2.8Vernier Caliper The Vernier Caliper is a precision instrument which was used to measure internal and external distances extremely accurately. The example shown below is a manual caliper. Measurements are interpreted from the scale by the user. 3.1.2.9Centre punch A center punch is a tool, usually made of metal, that was created to aid a carpenter with drilling holes. An individual uses a center punch to make a small impression in the piece of wood, plastic, or metal he or she intends to drill a hole into. The mark the punch makes not only helps the person know where to place the end of the drill bit, it also helps to guide the bit, keeping it from slipping out of place.

3.1.2.10Hammer A hand tool consisting of a handle with a head of metal or other heavy rigid material that is attached at a right angle, used for striking or pounding. 3.1.2.11Chisel Chisel is a tool with a characteristically shaped cutting edge (such that wood chisels have lent part of their name to a particular grind) of blade on its end, for carving or cutting a hard material such as wood, stone, or metal by hand, struck with a mallet, or mechanical power. 3.1.2.12Scissors They consist of a pair of metal blades pivoted so that the sharpened edges slide against each other when the handles (bows) opposite to the pivot are closed. Scissors are used for cutting various thin materials, such as paper, cardboard, metal foil, thin plastic, cloth, rope, and wire.

3.1.2.13Vise bench A bench vice is a vice that is attached to a bench. When people say vice they are almost always talking about a bench vice. It is a wheel for firmly holding an object that someone is working on. It consists of two flat jaws--one fixed and the other movable--that can be brought together with a screw mechanism 3.1.2.14Spanner A wrench (also called a spanner) is a tool used to provide grip and mechanical advantage in

applying torque to

turn

objects—usually

rotary fasteners,

such

as nuts and bolts—or keep them from turning 3.1.2.15Screw driver Screwdriver was used for turn screw with slotted heads.

3.1.2.16Hand grinder An angle grinder is a hand held power-tool originally intended to grind metal. The most common use is to grind welds and smooth cut metal surfaces. Fitted with a variety of implements, the angle grinder can be used to cut tile, pavers and can remove paint and rust.

3.2 Collection of Crop Varieties The certified crop varieties maize (COH-3), pigeon pea (BAHAR) okra (Kashipragati)andred gram (APK-1) were collected from the alopibagh market which is mostly growing in Allahabad region. The crop seeds were collected from different shopkeeper so as to obtain maximum variation in the size of seeds; as a result the developed planter may be used for sowing a wide variety of seeds.

3.3 Evaluation of the Various Physical Properties of Maize, Pigeon Pea, Okra and Red Gram Seeds Relevant to Design a Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter. The following properties of Maize, Pigeon pea Okra and Red gram seeds were identified and evaluated for the design of a manually operated multi crop planter: i.

Size

ii.

Shape

iii.

Volume, bulk density and true density

iv.

Porosity

v.

Angle of repose

vi.

Coefficient of static friction

vii.

Thousand seed weight

3.3.1 Size The size of the seed was specified by length, width and thickness. The axial and lateral dimension of the seeds was measured by using vernier caliper (least count 0.01). Twenty seeds were selected randomly for the dimension. 3.3.2 Shape This parameter of seed was relevant to design of seed metering wheel and hopper. The shape of the seed was expressed in term of roundness and sphericity. Roundness: A seed was selected randomly and its dimension was taken by using image analysis method in natural rest position. The area of smallest circumscribing circle was calculated by taking the largest axial dimension of seed at natural rest position as the diameter of circle. The percent roundness was calculated as follow: Rp =

(3.1)

where, Rp = percent roundness Ap = projected area, mm2 Ac = area of smallest circumscribing circle, mm2 The procedure was repeated for twenty seeds of each crop seeds were selected randomly. The mean was taken was the characteristic value of roundness. Sphericity: The sphericity is a measure of shape character compared to a sphere of the same volume. Assuming that volume of solid is equal to the volume of tri-axial ellipsoid with intercepts a, b, c and that the diameter of circumscribed sphere is a largest intercepts of the ellipsoid, the degree of sphericity was calculated as follows (Mohsenin,1986): DS =

(3.2)

where, DS = degree of sphericity a = largest intercept, mm b = largest intercept normal to a, mm c = largest intercept normal to a and b, mm The procedure was repeated for twenty seeds of each crop seeds were selected randomly. The mean was taken was the characteristic value of sphericity. 3.3.3 Bulk density

A wooden box with inside dimension of 10

cm was used for the measurement

of bulk density of each crop seeds. The box was filled with seeds without compaction and then weighed. The bulk density was calculated as follow: BD =

(3.3)

where, BD = bulk density, g/cm3 W = weight of seeds, g V = volume of wooden box, cm3 The procedure was repeated five times and the average bulk density of the seed was calculated. 3.3.4Volume and true density Toluene displacement method was used to determine the volume and true density of each crop seed. A sample of 100 seeds was weighed. The sample was immersed in a jar containing toluene displaced by the sample was recorded, thus volume of single seed was calculated. True density was calculated as the ratio of weight of the sample to its volume. Five set of observation were taken separately for volume and true density of seed. True density =

(3.4)

3.3.5 Porosity The porosity of the each crop seed was calculated using the following expression: Per cent porosity = (1

(3.5)

where, BD = bulk density, g/cm3 TD = true density, Bulk and true density values obtained from previous experiments were used to calculate the per cent porosity of the seed. 3.3.6 Angle of repose The angle of repose of the grains of each crop seeds was used for designing the hopper of planter. A box having circular platform fitted inside was filled with different grains. The circular platform was surrounded by a metal funnel leading to a discharge hole. The extra grains surrounding the platform were removed through discharge hole leaving a free standing cone of pigeon pea grains on the circular platform. A stainless steel scale was used to measure the height of cone and angle of repose was calculated by the following formula:

Φ = tan-( )

(3.6)

where, Φ = angle of repose, degrees h = height of cone, cm d = diameter of cone, cm. Five observations were taken and the mean value of angle of repose was calculated for each crop seeds. 3.3.7 Coefficient of static friction The coefficient of static friction of each crop seed was measured by using inclined plane method on mild steel surface. The seed was kept separately on a horizontal surface and the slope was increased gradually. The angle at which the materials started to slip was recorded. The coefficient of static friction was calculated by using the following formula: Coefficient of static friction = tan Φ

(3.7)

where, Φ = angle of static friction, degrees. Five replications were done for each crop seed and mean value of Φ for seed was calculated separately. 3.3.8 Thousand seed weight One thousand seed weight of each crop seed was weighing on a digital weighing balance.

3.4Design and Development of a Manually Operated Planter for Sowing Different Seeds Function of Planter  To open the furrow  To meter the seed  To deposit the seed in the furrow  To cover the seeds and compact the soil over it. 3.4.1. Design Considerations The design of manually operated multi-crop planter based on the following considerations.  The ease of fabrication of component parts.  The safety of the operator  The operation of the machine should be simple for small scale or rural farmers.

 The materials available locally were used in the fabrication of the all components.  Availability and cost of the materials for construction.  Easy to operate both male and female can be operated. 3.4.1.1 Power developed by the operator of machine Power of useful work done by an average human on the drive machine is given by (Campbell, 1990) (3.8)

where, t = operation time in minutes. Now, on average a human can work on the field 2-4 hour’s continuous. So power developed by the operator is 0.13 – 0.16 hp. Now if we take working time four hours then the power developed by a human is HP = 0.35-0.092×log 240 = 0.35-0.092×1.60 = 0.13hp. Now we know that developed power by a chain drive is:

(3.9) The operating speed of the machine is 2.5 km/h (0.7 m/s). 0.13 = = 13.92 kgf. 3.4.1.2Speed of ground wheel (Nw), rpm

= 22.11 r.p.m. 3.4.1.3 Torque on ground wheel (Tw), N.m (Sharma and Mukesh, 2010) (3.11) where, Kw= coefficient of rolling resistance (0.3 for the metallic wheel) Wt= active weight of the machine (20 Kg) and Rw is the radius of ground

wheel (16.5 cm). = 0.3×20×0.16 = 0.96 kg-m (3.12)

= 0.0306 hp. 3.4.1.4 Determination of maximum bending moment on the shaft We know that the power is transfer to the machine by the chain drive system so for the measurement of the bending moment of the shaft or machine was measured by the theorem of the chain drive system(Sharma and Mukesh, 2010). So load on the chain or chain load (Q) is: (3.13) where, Kl= coefficient of chain (1.15 for the mild steel) Pt= push force of the chain. = 1.15×13.92 = 16.008 kgf Now angleof

chain drive is working at an φ (350) with the horizontal. Therefore

equivalent chain load on the machine was calculated

(3.14) = 16.008×sin 35 = 9.18 Now Maximum bending moment on the shaft given by the chain drive system )(3.15) Assume that overhung of wheel = 15 cm and so that the Overhung of sprocket = 5 cm.

Total weight of machine was 20 kg. So weight on one wheel is 10 kg. Mb = (10×0.15) + (9.18×0.05) = 1.5459kgf Hence; Equivalent bending moment =

(3.16)

where

= = 1.83 kg-m 3.4.1.5 Determination of rolling resistance of wheel (Rr) (Sharma and Mukesh, 2010). Rr= co-efficient of rolling resistance × weight on drive wheel = 0.3×10 = 3 Allowable shear stress = (

in shaft is 5.01 kg/cm2 (3.16)

So from the equation the diameter of the shaft of the machine was calculated by following equation: (3.17) where, d = diameter of shaft in cm. d3=(16/3.14)(1/5.01)×1830=1861.2 d=12.3mm 3.4.1.6.Design of the size of the planter For the design of the planter, first of all we design the number of furrow opener for the sowing of the seeds. So

Number of furrow opener in the planter (Z) =

(3.18)

1= dr = 13.92 kgf

Working width of the Planter (3.19)

For Maize W = 1×60 =60 cm For Pigeon pea W = 1×90 =90 cm For okra W = 1×45 =45 cm

3.4.1.7.Design of seed hopper(Sharma and Mukesh, 2010).

Volume of seed

(3.20)

(3.21)

Now from the structure of seed hopper Vb = Va + Vc

(3.22)

Va = a×b×l cm3

(3.23)

= 22.2×22.2×15 = 7392.6 cm3 h2 = = 103.63 mm or 10.36 cm Vc = (22.2×22.2×10.36) - (1/2×60×10.36×22.2) = 5105-1380 = 3723 cm3 Vb = Va + Vc = 7392.6 +3725.8 = 11118.92 cm3 3.4.1.8 Design of seed metering wheel Metering wheel is the most important part of the manually operated planter. The seed rate and seed spacing was adjusted by metering wheel. The metering wheel should have sufficient holes to fall optimum seeds without any overlapping of seed in the soil . At the time of design of the seed metering wheel the first most important thing is that how many cells is required for correct seed spacing. Now the second thing is that what would be the diameter of the seed metering wheel. So the diameter of the seed metering wheel was calculated by following equation (Sharma and Mukesh, 2010)

Figure 3.1 An Isometric View of Seed Metering Wheel and Seed Metering House of Manually Operated Multi-crop Planter. (All dimensions in millimeter)

(3.24) where, Dm = diameter of seed metering wheel, cm Vr=Peripheral velocity of seed metering wheel in m/min Nr = rpm of seed metering wheel.

Peripheral length of drive wheel = 2πr = 2×3.14×.165 =1.0362m Forward speed of the planter was varying 2.5 to 2.80 km/hr Forward speed of the planter was taken under study = 2.5 km/hr Speed of small sprocket (rpm) = =

Speed of large sprocket (rpm) = Speed of small sprocket × drive ratio = 40.21 × 0.375 = 15.08 rpm. So minimum speed for seed breakage 0.2892 km/h Diameter of seed metering wheel =

=

= 0.101 m = 10.1cm

3.4.1.9Power transmission system of manually operated planter The planter was operated manually to make it cost effective. Power is transmitted from the transported wheel to the seed metering wheel through pintle chain. Flow diagram of the power transmission system is shown in Figure 3.1 and the photographic view of the power transmission is shown in Fig. Since a power (HP) transmitted in manual seed planter is very low. So, for the amplification of the power for desired power requirement of seed metering wheel, we apply a chain sprocket system which have two chain sprockets (small sprocket have 18 teeth and large sprockets have 48 teeth). The chain length is calculated by the following equation(Sharma and Mukesh, 2010). (3.25)

Where, m = number of chain links C =centre to centre distance between two sprocket mm, P = is the chain pitch, mm Z1 and Z2 are the number of teeth in the driver sprocket and driven sprocket respectively.

= 137 links Length of the Chain (mm) Lc = m × p where, Lc = chain length, mm m = number of chain links p = chain pitch, mm

(3.26)

Lc = 137 × 10 = 1370 mm or 1.370 m

Adjustable handle

Push force

Main Drive wheel

Ball Bearing

Small sprocket

Pintle Chain

Large sprocket

Shaft

Seed metering device

Figure 3.2Flow Diagram of Power Transmission System of a Manually Operated Multi-crop Planter 3.4.1.10 Design of handle of the planter The adjustable handles of the planter was designed to be adjustable for the different height of person male/female which can adjust according to own height which reduced drudgery. The adjustable handle helps the operator to push the planter at the time of operation (Sharma and Mukesh, 2010). The materials was used for adjustable handle was a combination of two mild steel flat bar fastened to the frame and mild steel circular pipe. Length of the handle is calculated based on average standing elbow height of female operator. So, the average standing elbow height of women workers is the 100cm.Distance

of wheel centre from the operator (for operator height of 95-105 cm) in operating condition is the 115 cm. therefore angle of inclination. So, the angle of inclination (θ h) with the horizontal is

(3.27)

where, a1= height of centre of wheel to the elbow, cm a2= horizontal distance between the normal to the centre of wheel and normal =

to the elbow line,cm = 0.77

Tan-1 = 0.77 37.60 (It varies 34 to 370 because handle is adjustable) 3.4.1.11 Design of the furrow opener Considering lower push/pull available and easy operation of the planter is selected for the planter. The furrow opener includes:  Selection of standard (tyne)  Furrow opening portion For the selection of standard (tyne) the draft force on furrow opener is F kgf/tyne and acting at a height of h/3 from the bottom of the furrow opener where the h is a total length of furrow opener and tyne. Distance of draft application on furrow opener tyne, a = h/3

(3.28)

= 225/3 = 75 mm Moment arm length= (h-a)

(3.29)

= 225-75 = 150 (3.30)

Bending moment (B.M.) in tyne = D (h-a) = 63× (150) = 9450 Therefore maximum bending moment (Mb) in tyne= B.M. ×F.O.S.

(3.31)

where, F.O.S.= factor of safety = 2 = 9450×2 = 18900kg-mm (3.32) where, Zt = section modulus of tyne Mb = maximum bending moment of tyne M.S. flat tyne is used in planter (fb = 56 N/mm2 for mild steel) Zt=

= 337.5 (For rectangular section) = (1/6) ×125×322 = 21333.33

3.4.1.12 Determination of Planter Capacity The capacity of the planter may be determined in terms of the area of land covered per time during planting or the number of seeds planted per time of planting. The capacity of the planter in terms of the area of land covered per time may be obtained from the following expression (Ikechukwu. Ibukun B. et al., (2014) (3.33) where, CPA = Capacity of planter in hectare/time

3.4.1.13 Time required cultivate a hectare of land

The time required to cultivate of one hectare of land is therefore obtain from following equation (Ikechukwu. Ibukun B. et al., (2014) Time required =1/CPA

(3.35)

3.4.1.14 Number of days required to plant on a hectare of land Assuming 8hrs is used per day for planting, the number of days required to plant on 1 hectare of land is obtained as follows(Ikechukwu. Ibukun B. et al., (2014). Number of days required =time required to cultivate of one hectare of land (hrs) /no. of hours worked per day.

(3.36)

Frame

Drive wheel

Chain drive system

without lugs Metering house

Seedmetering shaft

Seed Hopper

Furrow opener Furrow closer Handle e Stand Multi crop planter

Figure 3.3 Flow Chart of Design of Manually Operated Multi-crop Planter. 3.4.2Fabrication of the Manually Operated Multi-crop Planter 1. Frame. 2. Adjustable handle. 3. Seed hopper. 4. Seed metering wheel shaft.

5. Seed metering wheel 6. Seed metering wheel house. 7. Adjustable furrow opener. 8. Adjustable furrow closer. 9. Adjustable row marker. 10. Front wheel. 11. Rear wheel. 12. Lugs. 13. Small sprocket. 14. Large sprocket. 15. Seed tube. 16. Pintle chain. 17. Ball bearing. 18. Idler sprocket. 19. Parking stand. 3.4.2.1 Frame The frame of manually operated multi crop planter was designed in skeletal structure. Where all the other components of planterwere mounted. The two design factors were considered in the determination of the material required for the frame and strength. In this work, mild steel flat bar 844mm length and 119mm width and 5mm thickness were used to give require rigidity. 3.4.2.2 Handle The handle of manually operated multi crop planter was designed adjustable for the different height of person male or female which can adjust according to own height which reduced drudgery. The adjustable handle helps the operator to push the planter at the time of operation. The materials was used for adjustable handle was a combination of two mild steel flat bar each of 895 mm long fastened to the frame and mild steel circular pipe with 20mm diameter.

Figure

3.4. An Isometric View of Adjustable Handle and Frame of Manually Operated Multi-crop Planter. (All dimensions in Millimeter)

3.4.2.3 Seed Hopper The amount of seed contained depends upon the size of the seed hopper. The shape of hopper was designedat the top. The volume of seed hopper was 11118.92 cm3.The height bottoms to top of seed hopper were 270 mm and 223 mm square at the top. To obtain free flow of seeds, the slope of the hopper was fixed at 320, which is modestly higher than the average angle of repose of the seeds. The material was used for the design 2.5 mm thick mild steel metal sheet for low cost, light weight and longer life. 3.4.2.4 Seed Metering Wheel Shaft It rotates the seed metering wheel and have ball bearing at the both end of the shaft. The length and diameter of seed metering wheel of shaft was 207 mm and 12.2 mm respectively. The material was used for the design mild steel. 3.4.2.5 Seed Metering Wheel Metering mechanism is the heart of sowingmachine and its function is to distribute seeds uniformly at the desired application rates. The material used for fabricate of seed metering wheel nylon with cells on its periphery. The number of cells onperiphery of seed metering wheel was depends on seedspacing. The cell size of seed metering wheel was depend on size, shape and diameter of seeds. Three separate seed metering wheel

was designed for maize, Pigeon Pea and Okra. The diameter of seed metering wheel was 102 mm and number of cell on its periphery was 11, 09 and 14 for Maize, Pigeon Pea and Okra respectively.

Figure 3.5Aphotographic view of fabrication of Seed Metering wheel used Lathe machine in FMP Laboratory 3.4.2.6 Seed Metering WheelHouse The shape of seed metering wheel house was cylindrical where seed metering wheel rotates with the help of seed metering wheel shaft. The length and diameter of seed metering wheel house was 118 mm and 109 mm respectively. It was well smooth to inside so seed metering wheel easily rotate. metering wheel house was used cast iron. 3.4.2.7 Furrow Opener

The material used for design of seed

The furrow opener of manually operated multi crop planterwas designed adjustable varies to suit the soil conditions of particular region.The depth of sowing of various seeds control by the adjustable furrow opener.Shoe type furrow opener was designed. Adjustable furrow opener permits planting at each variety’s ideal ground depth. These types of furrow openers was used for forming narrow slit under heavy soils for placement of seeds at desired depths. The material used for the design was 60 mm x 5mm mild steel flat bar. 3.4.2.8 Furrow Closer The shoe type furrow closer of manually operated multi crop planterwas designed adjustable. It was designed to allow for proper covering and compaction of the soil over the seeds in the furrows. The materialused for the design was 60mm x 5mm mild steel flat bar. 3.4.2.9 Row Marker The row markerof manually operated multi crop planterwas designed adjustable. The function of the adjustable row marker in the manually operated multi crop planter help to the operator maintains a more accurate or constant row spacing. Constant crop row spacing will make for simpler and more effective cultivation especially when cultivating between rows. Before planting of any type crop, consideration should be given to the subsequent cultivation operation. It was made of mild steel flat bar with many slot. 3.4.2.10 Front and Rear wheel Two wheels were designed of manually operated planter. The front wheel was designed with lugs on its periphery which improve the better traction and reduced slippage at the time of planting. The rear wheel was also designed without lugs on its periphery. The small sprocket was attached to front wheel axle and large attached to seed metering wheel shaft. When a human push the planter, wheel was rotates and transfer the power small sprocket to large sprocket with the help of chain, in such a way seed metering wheel rotate, seed was singulated into the cell and dropped into the planting shoe/ground opener with the help of seed discharge tube that deposits the seed in the soil. They are circular in shape containing periphery width 75 mm which reduce side thrust of the manually operated planter. The plastic spokes are arranged in such a way that it braced the wheels circular circumference and also gives it necessary radial support. The diameter of both wheel of manually operated planter was 330 mmand material used for the design was plastic and 3.5 mm thick metal sheet.

Figure 3.6A Fabricated View of Drive Wheel of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter 3.4.3.11

Wheel lugs

The wheel lugs was designed rectangular in shape. The function of lugs on front wheel in manually operated planter to increase the traction and reduced wheel slippage at the time of operation. The length, width, thickness and number of lugs were 84, 28, 5 mm and 12 respectively. The material used for the design was mild steel flat bar. 3.4.3.12

Chain Sprocket

The small sprocket was fixed on front wheel axle. Which transfer the power, drive wheel to large sprocket which was attached seed metering wheel shaft with the help of pintle chain. Power transmission was done by the gear sprocket and pintle chain. The number of teeth in small sprocket and large sprocket was 18 and 48 respectively.

Figure 3.7.A fabricated View of Power Transmission System of a Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter 3.4.3.13

Seed Tube

The seed tube was made of rubber hose pipe 30mm diameter and 300mm long. One end of the seed tube connected to lower pipe of seed metering house and other end connected furrow opener. Seeds picked from the hoppers pass through the upper hole at the slide of the castellated metering mechanism to the lower hole into the discharge tube which deposits the seeds at desired uniform spacing into the opened furrow.

3.4.3.14 Chain For transfer the power from drive wheel to seed metering wheel shaft, pintle chain was used for heavy duty, slow speed work in any exposed atmosphere. It made of malleable links, held together by suitable pins. The number of links in pintle chain was 137.

3.4.3.15 Ball Bearing Two ball bearings were fixed at the end of seed metering wheel shaft, which rotates the seed metering wheel. It consist one or more row of hardened steel ball held in a cage. The balls roll between inner and outer races. The balls are separated and held in position by a retainer. It may carry radial load, thrust load, as well as radial and thrust load combined. The contact surface between the ball and shaft is small hence friction was very less. 3.4.3.16 Idler Sprocket

Idler sprockets should not rotate at greater speeds than are allowable for drive sprockets of the same size. They should be mounted in contact with the “slack” span of chain, whenever possible. Mount them on the outside of the chain when the arc of chain wrap on the smaller sprocket would otherwise be less than 120°. It is advisable that idler sprockets have at least three teeth in mesh with the chain. Inside mounted idlers usually account for quieter operation, especially if centers are short and speed is moderately high. An adjustable idler sprocket was used to: • Obtain proper chain tension when neither driving nor driven shaft is adjustable. • Guide chain around an obstruction. • Prevent whipping action in the slack span of chain transmitting an uneven load. • Bring about greater chain wrap around a small sprocket, particularly if it is the lower sprocket in a vertical drive. • Take up slack chain caused by normal chain wear. • Provide for reversed direction of rotation of a sprocket in contact with the outside of the chain.

3.4.3.18 Stand When a farmer completed the work in the field or he tired, that time parking stand is necessary for stand the planter at particular place for taking rest. The materialused for the design of stand was mild steel solid rod with 250 mm in length and 10 mm diameter.

Figure 3.8 An Isometric View of Drive Wheel, Large Sprocket, Adjustable Furrow Opener and Seed Metering Wheel Shaft of Manually Operated Multicrop Planter. (All dimensions in Millimeter)

Figure 3.9 An Isometric View of a Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter.

Figure 3.10. AnIsometric View of a Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter

Figure 3.11 A Front View of a Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter

3.5 Design and Development of Various Seed Metering Wheel for Sowing Different Crops Small scale farmers were used dibbler, matchet or sticks to sow different seeds. This dibbler, matchet or sticks is used to open the soil as the farmer drops the required numbers of seed and then covers them up that means efficiency was low. Metering mechanism is the heart of sowing machine and its function distribute seeds uniformly at the desired application rates [Sowing and planting equipment]. In planters it also controls seed spacing in a row. A seed planter may be required to drop the seed at rates varying across wide range [Sowing and planting equipment]. The proper design of the seed metering wheel is an essential element for satisfactory performance of the planter. In present study three separate seed metering wheel was designed for maize, pigeon and okra. Seed metering wheels were made by nylon materials with cell on its periphery. The size and number of cells on the seed metering wheel depends on the shape, size and diameter of seed and actual plant spacing. The seed metering wheel was fabricated in the laboratory of farm machinery and power engineering department, SHIATS, Allahabad. 3.5.1 Design of Seed Metering Wheels of Maize, Pigeon Pea Okra and Red Gram Seeds The proper design of the seed metering wheelsis the most important thing is that how many cells would be develop for desired seed spacing.

Figure 3.12 A fabricated View of Different Seed metering wheels for a Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter So the diameter of the seed metering wheel was calculated by following equation (Sharma and Mukesh, 2010)

(3.37) where, Dm = diameter of seed metering wheel, cm Vr = Peripheral velocity of seed metering wheel in m/min Nr = rpm of seed metering wheel. Peripheral length of seed metering wheel = 2πr = 2×3.14×.165 =1.0362m Forward speed of the planter = 2.5 km/h Speed of small sprocket (rpm) = =

Speed of large sprocket (rpm) = Speed of small sprocket × drive ratio = 40.21 × 0.375 = 15.08 rpm. So minimum speed for seed breakage 0.2892 km/h Diameter of seed metering wheel =

=

= 0.101 m = 10.1cm

3.5.2 Number of cells in seed metering wheel

To increase or decrease plant spacing changedby the number of cells on periphery of seed meteringwheel and drive ratio. The numbers of cells on seed metering wheel was calculated by following equation (IKECHUKWU. Ibukun B. et al., (2014)

No of cells in seed metering wheel

(3.38)

For maize Seeds No of cells in seed metering wheel

= 11 For pigeon pea Seeds No of cells in seed metering wheel

= 09 For Okra Seeds No of cells in seed metering wheel

= 14 For Red Gram Seeds No of cells in seed metering wheel

= 14

3.6 Evaluation of Performance of Developed Manually Operated MultiCrop Planter. The developed manually operated multi crop planter was evaluated for its performance in both lab and fieldin the department of Farm Machinery and Power Engineering (FMPE), SHIATS, Allahabad. The test was conducted on the basis of following parameters: 1. Laboratory test. 2. Field test. Laboratory test. 1. Calibration of manually operated planter 2. Seed germination test 3. Mechanically damaged seed due to the manually operated planter 4. Uniformity of spacing 5. Missing rate Field test Independent variables 1. Types of Crop Seed A. C1 – Maize (COH-3) B. C2 – Pigeon Pea (BAHAR) C. C3 – Okra (KashiPragati) D. C4 – Red Gram (APK-1) – Only Laboratory test 2. Types of soil A. S1 – Sandy loam soil B. S2 – Clay soil Dependent variables 1. Angle measurement 1. Draft 2. Drive wheel skidding 3. Hill to hill spacing 4. Hill populations 5. Missing hills 6. Field capacity 7. Field efficiency. 3.6.1 Laboratory test.

3.6.1.1 Calibration test The hopper of the manually operated planter was fully loaded with the seeds. The planter was suspended on a voice and turning the drive wheels rotates the metering wheel. A paint mark was made on the drive wheel to act as a reference point to count the number of revolutions when turned, and a bag was placed on the discharge tube to collect the seeds discharged. The drive wheels were rotated 50 times at low speed. A stop clock was used to measure the time taken to complete the revolutions. The seed in the bag were weighed on a balance and the procedure was repeated five times. Similar test was carried outfor each crop seed (Olajide and Manuwa, 2014). 3.6.1.2 Seed germination test Germination testing of seeds is considered as the most important quality test in evaluating the planting value of seed lot. The ability of seeds to produce normal seedling and plants later on is measured in terms of germination test. Testing of seeds under field conditions is normally unsatisfactory as the results cannot be reproduced withreliability. Laboratory methods then have been conceived wherein the externalfactors are controlled to give the most uniform,rapid and complete germination. Testing conditions in the laboratory have been standardized to enable the test resultsto be reproduced within limits as nearly as possible those determined by randomsample variations. Seed germination testwas done in seed germinator inthe laboratory of Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding SHIATS, Allahabad. Laboratory germination tests were normally conducted at different temperature for different seeds. Count out 100 seeds (including damaged ones) and sow in 10 rows of 10 seeds, the rows make it easier to count seedlings. Seeds should be sown at normal seeding depth of 2-3 cm in seed germinator. Place the seeds on top of the sand or soil and push them in with a piece of dowel or a pencil and cover with a little more sand. Counting Seedlings after 10 days when the majority of seedlings were up. Do not wait until the late ones emerge–these are the damaged, weak ones. Only normal seedlings were counted. Do not count badly diseased, discolored or distorted seedlings or, in the case of lupines, those missing a cotyledon. Remember, you want to know the total number of normal, vigorous, healthy seedlings.Similar test was carried outfor each crop seed. In this study countedonly normal seedlings and germination percentage calculated by following formula:

SG (%) =

Where, SG = seed germination percentage. GS = germinated seed in seed germinator. TS = total seed (Including damage seed).

3.6.1.3 Mechanically damaged seed due to the manually operated multi-crop planter The test for percentage seed damaged was done with the machine held in a similar position to that described above. The hopper of the manually operated multi-cropplanter was full loaded with seeds and rotates the drive wheel of planter at waking speed. The wheel was rotated 20 times in turns and the time taken to complete the revolution was recorded with the aid of stop clock. The seeds discharged from the seed tube were observed for any external damage.Similar test was carried outfor each crop seed (Odumaet all., 2014)

Seed damage per cent =

3.6.1.4. Uniformity of seed spacing in row To determine the uniformity of seed spacing (Seed to seed spacing in row) of manually operated multi-cropplanter, the planter was fully loaded with seed. A 10 m thin layerof grease layer was laid out on the plain ground and the machine was run at walking speed of approximately 2.5 km/hr. A measuring steel tape was used to measure the distance between seed to seed in the row. This process was repeated five times and measurement of distance between seed to seed was recorded. Similar test was carried outfor each crop seed. (Odumaet all., 2014)

3.6.1.5. Missing rate The accurate missing rate of seed measurement during operation in the field was not easy task, keen attention is needed while operating the manually operated planter in the field (laboratory testing grease layer). So, during operation operator and one observer counted the number of seeds missed to drop into the seed tube. Then determined the actual number of seeds drop in experimental area if no missing occurred. Then missing rate is determined by the following equation (Odumaet all., 2014). Percent missing rate = where,

N = number of seeds missing during pickup by metering wheel into seed tube M = number of seed dropped by the metering wheel if no missing occurred and not more than one seed per cell 3.6.1.6. Theoretical field capacity: Theoretical and effective field capacity of the maize seeder was determined by the following equation (Hossain, 2014) TFC = where, TFC = theoretical field capacity, ha/hr S = forward speed, km/hr W = width of coverage, m 3.6.2 Field test After proper checking for its satisfactory operation in the laboratory then the testing of planter is necessary in the field for its actual performance at a speed of 2.5 - 2.80 km/h. A prepared field takes by two pass of rotavator under a conventional tillage system to obtain a fairly flat field.The length and width of the testing field were10 10

m for pigeon pea and 10

for okra.

Figure 3.13 Field Test of a Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter

m used for maize,

Figure 3.14Adjusting Row to Row Distance by Row Marker of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter in the Field. 3.6.2.1. Angle measurement The height and horizontal length of pulling and pushing handle were measured by a tape for measuring the pulling or pushing angle. By measuring the height and width of a triangle, angle of pull or push easily determined using the following formula (Sharma and Mukesh, 2010)

Pushing angle,

= tan-1

3.6.2.2 Draft The draft requirement of different working component of the planter was studied in order to determined power losses. The planter was run on a well prepared uniform seedbed under optimum soil condition. It is the horizontal component of the pull, parallel to the line of motion. Thedraft was calculated by the following equation.(J.Sahay, 2004) D = P cos where, D = draft, kg P = pull, kg Angle between line of pull and horizontal 3.6.2.3 Drawbar Power

Drawbar power is a measure of the pulling power of the implements or how much horse power would it take to pull the particular machine. It was calculated by following equation (J.Sahay, 2004)

Dbp(hp) = where, D = draft in N S = working speed in m/s 3.6.2.4. Operating speed The speed of the planter is important role for better performance during operation. If the speed is more than to recommended speed, its more damage seeds and affect seed to seed distance in the row but in other way if speed is less, efficiency of planter automatically reduce. So for better performance normal walking was good. The actual speed in the field was measured by two mark made in the field at a distance of 10 m. One person stood a first mark with a stop watch when the planter was started for the operation the stop watch was switched on and the time was noted to cover 10 m distance. Five observations were taken and speed was calculated on the basis average time taken to 10 meter distance. The speed was varying 2.4 -2.8 km/hr. The average speed was 2.5 km/hr at the time of planting operation. 3.6.2.4. Drive wheel skidding A skid is a loss of traction from the planter wheels, which can cause it to move uncontrollably.When the planter was operated in both soil of prepared seedbed then two flags 10 m apart where erected on the field to mark the test path. A piece of cloth tie on the wheel was made to facilitate and counting the number of revolution to cover the distance between two flag. The planter allow to run and counted the wheel revolution to cover 10 m distance without load and in the next run the number of revolution of wheel counted to cover the same distance with load. Several run of each test were made and data was recorded. The drive wheel skidding was calculated by following equation (Nirala, 2011) Drive wheel skidding = where, A = number of r.p.m. of wheel without load B = number of r.p.m. of wheel with load 3.6.2.5 Hill to hill spacing

Hill to hill spacing was measured after 15 days of sowing. The distance was measured with the help of measuring tape between two consecutive hills.Similar test was carried outfor each crop. 3.6.2.6 Hills Populations To ensure adequate plant stand in research plots, a higher seed rate is used at sowing and excess plants are later removed to maintain the required plant population. It is therefore necessary to know the spacing between plants within the row and also the number of plants to be maintained in a given length of row. The hill populations was calculated by following formula ((Hossain, 2014) Hill Populations/ha = 3.6.2.6. Number of seed per hill Five rows were selected randomly from each plot after 15 days of sowing and number of the plant per hill was counted. The mean of five hills represent the average number of seed survived per hill.Similar test was carried outfor each crop. 3.6.2.7. Missing hills Observations for missing hills were taken after twenty days of planting operation. The total number of missing hill was counted separately for one row in a 10 m distance. These observations were repeated five times for each crop seed. Similar test was carried outfor each crop seed. The total percentage of missing hills was calculated by following method (Hossain,2014) Missing hill % = 3.6.2.8. Theoretical field capacity The Theoretical field capacity was determined by considering the width of coverage of planter and its average operating speed. Similar test was carried outfor each crop.Theoretical field capacity was calculated by following formula (Hossain,2014) Theoretical field capacity = where, W = width of operation, m S = speed of operation, km/hr 3.6.2.9 Effective field capacity (Hossain, 2014) Ceff=

where, A = Field coverage, ha T = Actual time of operation, hr 3.6.2.10 Field efficiency Field efficiency represents the ratio of effective field capacity to theoretical field capacity and was expressed as percentage. The field capacity was calculated by following formula (J.Sahay, 2004) Field efficiency % =

3.7 Estimate cost analysis of developed manually operated multi crop planter. The cost of manually operated planter was calculated based on the amount of materials used and the estimated cost incurred in the fabrication of the manually operated planter. The total cost of the manually operated planter was determined base on fixed and variable cost. The cost of operation obtained was compared with the convectional practice of manual planting of seeds. The following variables were considered in determining the cost of operation of the manually operated planter 1. Fixed cost A. Depreciation B. Interest C. Insurance and taxes D. Shelter 2. Variable cost A. Electricity charges B. Labour charges C. Repair and maintenance charges The total cost of operation was determined as sum of the fixed cost and variable cost.

3.8Design of experiments The data was analyzed statistically by analysis of variance CRD and RBD 5 % level of significance.

RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS This chapter deals with the result obtained during the experiments of the research work. The physical parameters of maize, pigeon pea and okra seed were studied. Various experiments were conducted to obtain optimum design values of the different parameters for the development of a manually operated multi crop planter. Based on the above study a manually operated multi crop planter was designed, fabricated and tested for its performance under the following heads. 4.1.Physical characteristics of maize, pigeon pea, okra and red gram seeds relevant to design of manually operated multi-crop planter. 4.2.Seed germination test of pre- metered seeds of maize, pigeon pea, okra and red gram. 4.3.Laboratory test. 4.3.1. Calibration of manually operated multi- crop planter. 4.3.2. Mechanically damaged seeds due to the manually operated multi- cropplanter. 4.3.3. Seed germination testof metered seeds. 4.3.4. Uniformity of spacing. 4.3.5. Missing rate. 4.4Field test 4.4.1.Angle and draft force measurement in different soil. 4.4.2.Evaluation of drive wheel skidding of developed manually operated multicropplanter. 4.4.3. Evaluation of hill to hill spacingof different crops in different soil. 4.4.4.Evaluation of missing hills of different crops in different soil. 4.4.5.Evaluation of hill populations of different crops in different soil by manually operated multi- crop planter.

4.4.6Evaluation of field capacity of developedmanually operated multi crop planter for different crops 4.4.7.Evaluation of field efficiency of developed manually operated multi crop planter for different crops 4.5. Cost economics ofdeveloped manually operated multi-crop planter.

4.1 Observation of Physical Propertiesof Different Seeds Physical properties of the seedsviz. Size, shape, bulk and true density, seed volume, porosity and true density, angle of repose and coefficient of static friction were determined. The size and shape of the seed was considered to relevant to the design of cell size on its periphery of metering wheel and seed hopper. The slope of the hopper was selected on the basis of angle of repose of the seed. 4.1.1 Size 4.1.1.1 Maize seeds The data obtained on size of seed of maize presented in appendix table-1. The average length, width, thickness and geometric mean diameter of the maize seed were 11.04,

9.21, 3.52 and 9.15 respectively. The coefficient of variation (%) of length, width, thickness and geometric mean diameter of the maize seed were 11.41, 15.35, 11.97 and 8.30 respectively. The maximum length of the seed was 12 mm and minimum was 9.90 mm, maximum width of the seed was 10.15 mm and minimum was 7.85 mm, maximum thickness of the seed was 3.90 mm and minimum 3.10 mm, maximum geometric mean diameter of seed was 9.80 mm and minimum was 7.90 mm. 4.1.1.2 Pigeon pea seeds The data obtained on size of seed of pigeon pea has been presented in appendix table-2. The average length, width, thickness and geometric mean diameter of the pigeon pea seed were 5.91, 5.01, 4.49 and 5.18 respectively. The maximum length of the seed was 6.90 mm and minimum was 4.99 mm, maximum width of the seed was 5.40 mm and minimum was 4.52 mm, maximum thickness of the seed was 4.57 mm and minimum was 4.10 mm, maximum geometric mean diameter of seed was 5.45 mm and minimum was 4.98 mm. The coefficient of variation (%) of length, width, thickness and geometric mean diameter of the pigeon seed were 6.78, 15.23, 18.28 and 23.91 respectively. 4.1.1.3 Okra seeds The data obtained on size of seed of okra has been presented in appendix table 3. The average length, width, thickness and geometric mean diameter of the okra seed were 5.67, 4.56, 4.46 and 4.53 respectively. The maximum length of the seed was 6.02 mm and minimum was 5.11 mm, maximum width of the seed was 4.90 mm and minimum was 4.20 mm, maximum thickness of the seed was 4.83 mm and minimum was 4.02 mm, maximum geometric mean diameter of seed was 4.93mm and minimum was 4.22 mm. The coefficient of variation (%) of length, width, thickness and geometric mean diameter of the okra seed were 12.82, 17.01, 15.7 and 11.7 respectively. 4.1.1.4 Red gram seeds The data obtained on size of seed of red gram has been presented in appendix table 4. The average length, width and equivalent diameter of the red gram seeds were 7.55, 6.20and 6.89 respectively. The coefficient of variation (%) of length, width and equivalent diameter of the red gram seed were 11.39, 9.66 and 10.85 respectively. 4.1.2 Shape The shape was determined on the basis of sphericity of the seed. The data obtained has been presented in appendix table (1-4). Sphericity of the maize, pigeon pea, okra and red gram seeds ranged from 0.60 to 0.65, 0.79 to 0.91, 0.90 to 0.95 and 0.770respectively. The coefficient of variation (%) of maize, pigeon pea, okra and red gram seeds were .60, 17.20, 181and 32.12 respectively.

4.1.3 Bulk density and true density The average bulk density and true density of the maize, pigeon pea and okra seed were 0.478g/cm3, 1.11 g/cm3, 0.85 g/cm3 and 1.34g/cm3, 0.61 g/cm3and 1.08g/cm3respectively. The maximum bulk density and true density of the maize seed were 0.487g/cm3 and 1.14g/cm3 respectively.And the minimum bulk density and true density of the maize seed were 0.467g/cm3 and 1.08g/cm3respectively. The maximum bulk density and true density of the pigeon pea seed were 0.89g/cm3 and 1.37/cm3 respectively. And the minimum bulk density and true density of the maize seed were 0.83g/cm3 and 1.31g/cm3respectively. The maximum bulk density and true density of the okra seed were 0.63g/cm3 and 1.15/cm3 respectively. And the minimum bulk density and true density of the maize seed were 0.60g/cm3 and 1.037g/cm3respectively.

4.1.4 Angle of repose and coefficient of friction The data obtained on angle of repose and coefficients of static friction have been presented in appendix table 1-4. The angle of repose and coefficient of static friction were measured as maturity. The average value for angle of repose of maize, pigeon pea, okra and red gram seed was 22.59, 29.70, 22.59 and 28.48±3degree. The average coefficient of static friction of maize, pigeon pea and okra seed was 0.68, 0.46 and 0.39̊̊ respectively. The angle of repose and coefficients of static friction for seed was used in the design of seed hopper. The slope of the hopper was kept higher than angle of repose for easy flow of the seed. Similarly, the angle of seed hopper pan was maintained higher than angle of static of friction for easy flow of the seed. 4.1.5 Thousand seed mass The seed weight affects seed flow from seed metering wheel to the dibber, and in turn, influences the design of seed hopper. The average weight of 1000 seeds of maize, pigeon pea, okra and red gramwere 158g, 97.38g, 60.34g and 101.12±0.060respectively. The maximum weight of 1000 seeds of maize, pigeon pea and okra was 161g, 101g and 60.80grespectively.The minimum weight of 1000 seeds of maize, pigeon pea, okraand red gram was 155g, 93.4, 59.90g and 110g respectively. The coefficient of variation (%) of maize, pigeon pea, okra and red gram seeds were 155.55, 32.63, 186 and 64.75 respectively. 4.2 Seed Germination Test of Pre - Metered Seeds of Maize (C1), Pigeon pea (C2), Okra (C3) and Red gram (C4)

All the seeds did not germinate due to partially damage, fully damage and many diseases reasons. It was therefore necessary to know the germination percentage of the every seeds variety to determine the seed rate in the field conditions. Seed germinator was used for the determination of the percentage of seed germination. For this purpose hundred seeds of each crop were randomly selected and kept in seed germinator for 12 days, and after 12 days was counted the germinated seeds and found that the germinated seed was germination percentage of seeds. From the Anova appendix table 5(a) It’s was observed that germination percentage of seeds C1>C2 > C3>C4. It was significant at 5 % level.

4.2.1 Germination test of premetered seeds ofmaize The germination test of pre metered seeds of maize revealed that the average percentage of the germination of the maize seeds was 89.6% while the minimum germination percentage in one sample was found 87 % and maximum germination percentage in one sample was found 92%. The results of the pre metered germination test of five samples have been presented in appendixtable 5and variations of germination percentage have been presented in figure 4.1. The reduction in the germination percentage was due topartially damage, fully damage many diseases andimmatureness of maize seeds as well as damaged seeds.

Figure 4.1: Variation of Germinatedof Pre -Metered Seeds ofMaizein Seed Germinator

4.2.2 Germination test ofpremetered seeds of pigeon pea. From the observation, the average percentage of germinated seeds of the pigeon pea was 87.8% while the minimum germination percentage in one sample was found 86% and maximum germination percentage in one sample was found 90%. The results of the pre metered seeds germination test of five samples have been presented in appendix table 5 and variations of germination percentage have been presented in figure 4.2.The average percentage of germinated seeds of the pigeon pea was less as compared to maize. The reduction in the germination percentage was due to partially damage, fully damage many diseases and immatureness of pigeon pea seeds as well as damaged seeds.

Figure 4.2: Variation of Germinatedof Pre -Metered Seeds ofPigeon Pea in Seed Germinator

4.2.3 Germination test of premetered seeds ofokra For germination test of pre metered seeds of okra that the average percentage of the germinatedseeds of okra was 86.4% while the minimum germination percentage in one sample was found85% and maximum germination percentage in one sample was found 88%. The results of the pre metered seeds germination test of five samples have been presented in appendix table 5 and variation of germination percentage have been presented in figure 4.3.The reduction in the germination percentage was due to partially damage, fully damage many diseases

and immatureness of okra seeds as well as

damaged seeds.The average percentage of germinated seeds of the okra was less as compared to maize and pigeon pea.

Figure 4.3: Variation of Germinatedof Pre -Metered Seeds ofOkra in Seed Germinator

4.2.4 Germination test of premetered seeds ofred gram For germination test of pre metered seeds of red gram that the average percentage of the germinated seeds of okra was 85.2% while the minimum germination percentage in one sample was found 84% and maximum germination percentage in one sample was found 87%. The results of the pre metered seeds germination test of ten samples have been presented in appendix table 5 and variation of germination percentage have been presented in figure 4.4. The reduction in the germination percentage was due to the hard and immatureness of red gram seeds as well as damaged or partially damaged seeds.

Figure 4.4: Variation of Germinatedof Pre -metered Seeds ofred gram in seed Germinator

4.3 Laboratory Test of the Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter 4.3.1 Calibration of manually operated multi-crop planter The procedure of testing ofplanter or seed drill for correct amount of seed rate is called calibration of planter. It is necessary to calibrate the planter before putting it in actual use to find the desired seed rate. It has been done to get the predetermined seed rate of the planter.Laboratory calibrations of manually operated multi crop planter were conducted at full level of seed hopper in farm machinery power engineering laboratory, SHIATS. For developed seed metering wheel of each cropwere calibrated at full level of seed hopper. The calculation of calibration of manually operated planter has been described in appendix-5, 6, 7and 8.

4.3.1.1Calibration of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter for Maize Seeds. Calibration of the manually operated multi-crop planter for maize seeds have been done in the farm machinery and power engineering laboratory VSAET, SHIATS Allahabad;which have been presented in appendixtable 6 and found that the average missing of seeds was 3% during calibration test.Weight of seeds (g) dropped in 50 r.p.m. of ground wheelwere observed 61.72, 63.4, 65, 63.98 and 65.5 for replications 1,2,3,4 and 5 respectively. Theaverage amount of seeds (g) in fifty revolutions of drive wheel was63.92 g. After calibration it found that the amount of the seeds required for one hectare that means calibrated seed rate without missing seedswas 20.56 kg/h and with 3 % missing was 19.95 kg/h, it was less compared to broadcasting. It was similar to recommended seed rate of maize. Average area covered in 50 revolution of drive wheel was 0.003108 ha. Seed rate was depending on number of cells on periphery of seed metering wheel. Variations of seeds dropped (g) in 50 revolutions of drive wheel have been presented in figure 4.5.

Figure 4.5: CalibratedSeed rate of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter of Maize

4.3.1.2Calibration of manually operated multi-crop planter for pigeon pea seeds Same procedure of calibration of the manually operated multi-crop planter was reapted for pigeon pea seeds in the laboratory;observationshave been presented inappendix table 7 and found that there was 2% missing during calibrationtest. Weight (g) of seeds dropped in 50 r.p.m. of ground wheelwere observed 47.25, 49.5, 48.30, 47.52 and 48.54 for replications 1,2,3,4 and 5 respectively.The average amount of seeds in fifty revolutions of drive wheelwas calculated 48.22 g. Average area covered in 50 revolution of drive wheel was 0.004635ha. After the calibration it found that the amount of the seeds required for one hectare that means calibrated seed rate without missing seed was 10.40 kg and with 2 %missing seeds was 10.08 kg. It was similar recommended seed rate of pigeon pea.During Calibrationof planter,we found that there was less missing ofpigeon pea seeds ascompared to maize due to circular shape of seed because the shape and size of maize seeds was not circular.Pigeon pea grains were easily filled and dropped in cells of seed metering wheel.So missing percentage of

maize seeds was high during

calibration test of planter.

Figure 4.6: CalibratedSeed rate of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter of Pigeon Pea

4.3.1.3Calibration of laboratory test of manually operated multi-crop planter for okra seeds Same procedure of calibration of the manually operated multi-crop planter was reapted for okra seeds in farm machinery laboratory, all observation have been presented in appendix table 8 and weight (g) of droppedseeds in 50 r.p.m. of ground wheel were observed 14.85, 15.15, 14.35, 14.42 and 14.7 for replications 1,2,3,4 and 5 respectivelyand found that there was 2% of missing duringcalibration test. The average amount of seed in fifty revolutions of drive wheelwas observed 14.70 g. Average area covered in 50 revolution of drive wheel was 0.004635ha. After the calibration it found that the amount of the seeds required for one hectare without missing seedswas 6.32 kg and with 2 % missing seeds was 6.19 kg.During Calibration of planter, we found that there was less missing of pigeon pea and okra seeds as compared to maize due to circular shape of seed because the shape and size of maize seeds was not circular. Pigeon pea and okra grains were easily filled and dropped in cells of seed metering wheel.So missing percentage of

maize seeds was high as compared to pigeon pea and okra during

calibration test of planter. Variation of dropped seeds in 50 r.p.m. of ground wheel have been presented in figure 4.7

Figure 4.7: CalibratedSeed rate of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter of Okra.

4.3.1.4Calibration of laboratory test of manually operated multi-crop planter for red gram seeds Same procedure of calibration of the manually operated multi-crop planter was reapted for okra seeds in farm machinery laboratory, all observation have been presented in appendix table 09.Variation of dropped seeds in 50 r.p.m. of ground wheel have been presented in figure 4.7.Weight (g) of seeds dropped in 50 r.p.m. of ground wheel in five replications were 26.44, 27.3, 24.7, 26.5 and 27.5 for replications 1,2,3,4 and 5 respectively and found that there was 2.5% of missing during calibration test. The average amount of seed in fifty revolutions of drive wheel was observed 26.54 g. After the calibration it found that the amount of the seeds required for one hectare that means calibrated seed rate without missing seeds was 25.77 kg and with 2.5 % missing seeds was 25.12 kg. We observed there was less missing of pigeon pea and okra seeds as compared to maize and red gram due to circular shape of seed because the shape and size of maize and red gram seeds was not circular.

Figure 4.8: CalibraedSeed rate of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter of Red gram.

4.3.2 Mechanically Damaged Seed due to Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter Mechanically damaged seeds were observed during calibration of manually operated multi-crop planter in farm machinery and power engineering laboratory VSAET. The mechanically damaged seeds were defined in the injury to seeds, partially or completely by the seed metering wheel of planter due to variation of rotation of drive wheel. Therefore the experimental data from ANOVAs table 10 (a), it was non significant at 5 % level. The mechanically damaged seeds percentage was C1,>C2 and C3
damaged percentage were 3, 2, 4, 3 and 1 for replications 1,2,3,4 and 5 respectively, which have been presented in figure 4.9.The average percentage of the mechanically damaged seeds for maize was found 2.60%.Bamgboye and Mofolasayo (2006) developed a two row okra planterThe total average percentage of seed damaged by two row okra planter was 3.51% The first and the second hopper incurred seed damage rates of 4.40 and 2.62% respectively. Tsegaye (2015)found mean percent seed damaged for maize, haricot bean and sorghum seeds were found to be 1.51 (+-) 0.52%, 1.28 (+-) 0.34% and 1.95(+-) 0.40%, respectively.

Figure 4.9: Mechanically Damaged SeedPercentage of Maize due to the Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter

4.3.2.2Mechanically damaged seed ofpigeon pea (C2) due to manually operated multi-crop planter During laboratory test of the manually operated multi-crop planter for pigeon pea, it observed that some seeds were damaged due to the increasing speeds of the seed metering wheel, moisture and density of the seeds. The observations of the mechanically damaged seeds have been presented in appendix table 10. It has found that when 100 seeds were used for the testing of damage test. Variation of seed damaged percentage were 3, 2, 4, 3 and 1 for replications 1,2,3,4 and 5 respectively, which have been presented in figure 4.10. The average percentage of the mechanically damaged seeds for pigeon pea was found 2.20%.Olajideet al., (2014) foundpercentage of seed damaged was 2.58%. The hopper incurred seed damage rate of 12.9%. The observed low average value of percentage seed damage of 2.58% observed in this work is due to minimal clearance between the metering device (flute) and its housing and also due to low speed at which the planter wheels was rotated during the laboratory tests.

Figure 4.10: Mechanically Damaged Seed Percentage due to the Manually Operated Multi-Crop PlanterforPigeon pea.

4.3.2.3Mechanically damaged seedsof okra (C3)due to the manually operatedmulticrop planter During mechanically damaged seeds test of okrain laboratory of manually operated multi-crop planter, it was observed that some seeds were damaged due to the increasing speeds of the seed metering wheel, moisture and density of the seeds. The observations of the mechanically damaged seeds have been presented in the appendix table 10 and Variation of seed damaged percentage were 3, 2, 1, 3 and 1 for replications 1,2,3,4 and 5 respectively, which have been presented in figure 4.11.Hundred seeds were used for each replication.The average percentage of the mechanically damaged seeds for okra seed was found 2.00%. The damage is very low as compared toOduma, O. et. al(2014)average percentage of seed damage incurred during operation. It is observable from the table that the percentage average damage is 2.34%. Mechanically damaged seeds of okra and pigeon pea were less compared to maize because shape and size of seeds of maize was not round.

Figure 4.11: Mechanically Damaged Seed Percentage due to the Manually Operated Multi-Crop PlanterforOkra.

4.3.2.4Mechanically damaged seedsof red gram (C4) due to the manually operated multi-crop planter During damaged test of red gram seedswe observed that some seeds were damaged due to the increasing speeds of the seed metering wheel, moisture and density of the seeds. The observations of the mechanically damaged seeds have been presented in the appendix table 10 and Variation of seed damaged percentage were found 2, 2, 3, 3 and 1 for replications 1,2,3,4 and 5 respectively, which have been presented in figure 4.12. 100 seeds were used for the testing of the damaged seed. The average percentage of the mechanically damaged seeds for okra seed was found 2.00%. Mechanically damaged seeds of okra and pigeon pea were less compared to maize.A. Bamgboye and A. Mofolasayo (2006) foundseed damage of 3.51% observed in this work is probably due to the low speed at which the planter wheels were rotated during the laboratory tests.

Figure 4.12: Mechanically Damaged Seed Percentage due to the Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter forRed gram

4.3.3 Seed Germination Test ofMetered Seeds by Manually Operated Multi – Crop Planterduring LaboratoryTest All the seeds did not germinate due to breakage of partially or completely. It was therefore necessary to know the germination percentage of the meteredseeds to determine the seed rate in the field conditions. Seed germinator was used for the determination of the percentage of germinated seeds. For this purpose hundred metered seeds of each crop variety were randomly selected and kept in seed germinator at desired temperature and humidity for 15 days and after 15 days were counted the germinated seeds and found that the number of germinated seed was germination percentage of seeds.From the ANOVAs appendix table 11(a) It’s was observed that germination percentage of metered seeds C1>C2, C3
germinated seeds was found 86% and maximum germination percentage of germinated seeds in one sample was found 88%. The results of percentage of germinated metered seed havebeen presented in appendix table11.Rahman (2014)similarfound germination percentage varied from 88% to 96% for inclined plate seed metering device.

The

reduction in the germination percentage was due to the immatureness of maize seeds as well as damaged seeds.

Figure 4.13:Variation of Seed GerminationPercentage of Metered Seeds of Maize 4.3.3.2 Seed Germination Test ofMetered Seeds ofPigeon Pea (C2) From the observation, the average percentage of germinated seeds of the pigeon pea was 85.6% while the minimum germination percentage was found to be 85% and maximum germination percentage was found 86%. The results of germinated of metered seed of five samples have been presented in the appendix table 11and variation of germinated seed have been presented figure 4.14. The reduction in the germination percentage was due to the immatureness, partly damaged, completely damaged and other diseases of pigeon pea seeds.Rahman (2014)wascalculated the germination percentage varied from 86.21% to 94.44% for flute type seed metering device.

Figure 4.14:Seed germinationpercentage of Metered Seeds of Pigeon Pea. 4.3.3.3 Seed Germination Test ofMetered Seeds of Okra (C3) From the observation, the average percentage of germinated seeds of the okra was 84.4% while the minimum germination percentage was found 83% and maximum germination percentage in one sample was found 86%. The results of the metered seed germination percentage infive samples were found 86, 84, 84, 85 and 83 % for replication 1,2,3,4 and 5 respectively, which have been presented in the appendix table11 and variation of germinated seed have been presented figure 4.15. The reduction in the germination percentage was due to the immatureness of okra seeds as well as partly and fully damaged seeds. Rahman (2014) Germination percentages for inclined plate seed metering device were found as 92.59%, 96%, 88%, 92.31%, 92.59%, and 92.31%. For fluted type seed metering device, germination percentages were found as 86.21%, 86.36%, 91.30%, 88.46%, 89.47%, and 94.44%.

Figure 4.15:Seed GerminationPercentage of Metered Seeds of Okra 4.3.3.4 Seed Germination Test ofMetered Seeds of Red gram (C4) From the observation, the average percentage of germinated seeds of the okra was 84.8% while the minimum germination percentage was found 84% and maximum germination percentage in one sample was found 86%. The results of the metered seed germination percentage in five samples were found 86, 84, 84, 85 and 85 % for replication 1,2,3,4 and 5 respectively, which have been presented in the appendix table 11 and variation of germinated seed have been presented figure 4.16. The reduction in the germination percentage was due to the immatureness of okra seeds as well as partly and fully damaged seeds. Rahman (2014) Germination percentages for inclined plate seed metering device were found as 92.59%, 96%, 88%, 92.31%, 92.59%, and 92.31%. For fluted type seed metering device, germination percentages were found as 86.21%, 86.36%, 91.30%, 88.46%, 89.47%, and 94.44%.

Figure 4.16:Seed GerminationPercentage of Metered Seeds of Red gram

4.3.4 Uniformity of Seed Spacing byManually Operated Multi-Crop Planter in Laboratory

To determine the uniformity of seed spacing (Seed to seed spacing in row) of seed by manually operated multi- crop planter, planter hopper was fully loaded with seeds. A 10 m thin layerof grease was laid out on the plain ground and the planter run at walking speed of approximately 2.5 – 2.80 km/hr. A measuring steel tape was used to measurement of distance between seed to seed in row. This process was repeated five times and distance between seed to seed was measured. Similar test was carried outfor each crop seed. For this purpose theoretical distance of each variety has been calculated and then comparedits seed to seed distance in laboratory.From the appendix table 12 the average seed to seed pacing of C1, C2, C3 and C4 were 25.72, 31.98, 20.86 and 22 cm respectively. From the anova appendix table 12 (a), its difference was significance at 5 % level. 4.3.4.1 Uniformity of Seed Spacingby Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter for Maize (C1) The standard seed to seed distance of maize was 25cm and row to row distance was 60 cm it has taken from the review of literature. A 10 m long grease layer was used for test, when planter allowed to moving time was noted and a steel tape was used for measurement. We observed that the planter should haveto plant 40 seeds but due to missing of seeds it has been planted less.The planted seed by the planter were varying from 34 to 36 seeds and seed to seed distances were varying from 20cm to 44cm. From the figure, it is observed that the distance of dropped seed varies since the metering device was not uniformly rotated and changes in speed of the machine. Some of the seeds were trapped in between the seed hopper and the metering device due to its inclined face shape. The average distance of dropped seed was 26.94, 26.11, 26, 25.55 and 24 for observation 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 respectively.Whereas the recommended distance was 25 cm. The averaged seed to seed distance was found 25.72 cm. The observations of seed to seed distance have been presented in the appendix table 12 and the variations of the seed to seed distance for five replications have been presented in figure 4.17 (Hossain, 2014) found similar average distance of dropped seed was 23.15, 22.57, 22.26 and, 22.03 for observation 1, 2, 3, and, 4 respectively whereas the recommended distance was 20 cm.

Figure 4.17:Variation of Seed to Seed Distance of Dropped Seedsof Maizeon Grease Layer

4.3.4.2 Uniformity of SeedSpacing of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter for Pigeon Pea (C2) Distance of dropped seed in the test of manually operated multi-crop planter for pigeon peais presented in appendix table 12.The standard seed to seed distanceof pigeon pea was 30 cm and row to row distance was 90 cm. A 10 m long grease layer was used for test, when planter allowed to moving time was noted. After the planting a steel tape was used for measurement. We observed that the planter should have to plant33 seeds but due to missing of seeds it has been planted less. The planted seeds by the planter were varying from 29 to 32, and seed to seed distances were varying from 24cm to 59cm. The averaged seed to seed distance was found 31.98 cm which is similar to standard seed distance.

Variations of the seed to seed distance in five replications have been presented in figure. 4.18.

Figure 4.18:Variation of Seed to Seed Distance of Dropped Seedsof Pigeon peaon Grease Layer

4.3.4.3 Uniformity of SeedSpacingby Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter for Okra (C3) The standard seed to seed distance of okra was 20cmand row to row distance was 90 cm. A 10 m long grease layer was used for test, when planter allowed to moving time was noted. After the planting a steel tape was used for measurement. We observed that the planter should have to plant 50 seeds but due to missing seeds it planted less that was planted seed by the planter was varying from 44 to 48 seeds and seed to seed distances were varying from 17cm to 40cm. The averaged seed to seed distance was found as 20.86 cm which is similar to standard seed distance. The observations have been presented in appendix table 12 and the variations of the seed to seed distance in five replicationsis presentedin figure 4.19

Figure 4.19:Variation of Seed to Seed Distance of SeedsDropped of Okraon Grease Layer

4.3.4.4 Uniformity of SeedSpacing ofRed Gram (C4)by Manually Operated MultiCrop Planter The standard seed to seed distance of red gram was 20cm(Empowering Indian Food and Agriculture). A 10 m long grease layer was used for test, when planter allowed to moving time was noted. After the planting a steel tape was used for measurement. We observed that the planter should have to plant 50 seeds but due to missing seeds it planted less that was planted seed by the planter was varying from 45 to 46 seeds and seed to seed distances were varying from 17cm to 40cm. The averaged seed to seed distance was found as 22 cm which is similar to standard seed distance. Distance of dropped seed in the test of manually operated multi-crop planter for pigeon peais presented in appendix table 12 and the variations of the seed to seed distance in five replications is presented in figure 4.20

Figure 4.20:Variation of Seed to Seed Distance of Seeds Dropped of Red gram on Grease Layer

4.3.5 Missing Seed Percentagedue to Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter during Laboratory Test The accurate missing rate of seed measurement during operation in the field is not an easy task, keen attention is needed while operating the manually operated planter in the field (laboratory testing grease layer). So, during operation operator and one observer counted the number of seeds missed to drop into the seed tube. Then determined the actual number of seeds drop in experimental area if no missing occurred.The missing percentage of seed C1> C2and C3
Missing rate of the manually operated multi-crop planter for maize seeds is presented in the appendixtable 13.Figure 4.21 shows the variation of missing rate in five replications. The missing rate calculation is given in appendix-11. From the table, it was observed that the missing rate varies due to the changes in speed of the manually operated multi-crop planter. The missing rates werefound 0%, 2.5%, 7.5%, 5% and, 2.5% for observations 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 respectively. The average missing rate was 3.5%, which is less compared to (Tsegaye, 2015)the highestpercent seed miss index of 13.50, 14.35, and 9.92% were recorded with maize, haricotbean and sorghum seeds, respectively, at the planter forward speed of 7 km/hr, whereasthe lowest percent seed miss index of 5.23, 4.80 and 3.97% were obtained for maize,haricot bean and sorghum seeds, respectively, at the planter speed of 3 km/hr.(Chhinnan/ et. al, (1975) and Karayel and Ozmerzi, 2001)This clearlyindicated that forward speeds greater than 5 km/hr would result in percent miss index ofapproximately equal to ten and above which exceeds the acceptable level of percent missing.

Figure 4.21:Graphical Representation of Test of Missing Rate (%) of Maize Seedsdue to Planter during Laboratory Test

4.3.5.2Missing Rateof seedby Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter for Pigeon pea (C2) The observation of missing rate of the manually operated multi-crop planter for pigeon pea seeds is presented in the appendix table 13andfigure 4.22 shows variation of missing rate in five replications. The missing rate calculation is given in appendix-11. From the table, it was observed that the missing rate varies due to the changes in speed of seed metering. The missing rate was 3.03%, 6.06%, 3.03%, 0% and, 3.03% for observations 1, 2, 3, 4 and, 5 respectively. The average missing rate was 3.03%.(Hossain, 2014) observed that the missing rate varies due to the changes in speed of the machine. The missing rate was 14.92%, 11.94%, 13.43% and, 13.43% for observation 1, 2, 3 and, 4 respectively. The average missing rate was 13.43%.

Figure 4.22:Graphical Representation of Test of Missing Rate (%) of Pigeon peadue to Planter during Laboratory Test

4.3.5.3Missing Rateof seedby Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter for Okra (C3) Missing rate of the manually operated multi-crop planter for okra seeds is presented in the appendix table 13and figure 4.23 shows variation of missing rate in in five replications. The missing rate calculation is given in appendix-11. From the table, it was observed that the missing rate varies due to the changes in speed of the manually operated multi-crop planter. The missing rate was 0%, 4%, 0%, 2% and, 2% for observations 1, 2, 3, 4 and, 5 respectively. The average missing rate was 1.6%. We observed less missing percentage compared to maize, pigeon pea and red gram due to shape and size of seeds. (Tsegaye, 2015)the highestpercent seed miss index of 13.50, 14.35, and 9.92% were recorded with maize, haricotbean and sorghum seeds, respectively, at the planter forward speed of 7 km/hr, whereasthe lowest percent seed

miss index of 5.23, 4.80 and 3.97% were obtained for maize, haricot bean and sorghum seeds, respectively, at the planter speed of 3 km/hr.

Figure 4.23:Graphical Representation of Test of Missing Rate (%) of Okra Seeddue to Planter during Laboratory Test

4.3.5.4 Missing Rateof seedsby Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter for Red gram (C4) Missing rate of the manually operated multi-crop planter for red gram seeds is presented in the appendix table 13and figure 4.24 shows variation of missing rate in five replications. The missing rate calculation is given in appendix-11. From the table, it was observed that the missing rate varies due to the changes in speed of the manually operated multi-crop planter. The missing rates were found6%, 4%, 0%, 2% and, 2% for observations 1, 2, 3, 4 and, 5 respectively. The average missing rate was 2.8%. We observed less missing percentage compared to maize, pigeon pea and red gram due to shape and size of seeds. Missing rate was increased with increase speed.(Hossain, 2014) observed that the missing rate varies due to the changes in speed of the machine. The

missing rates were found 14.92%, 11.94%, 13.43% and, 13.43% for observation 1, 2, 3 and, 4 respectively. The average missing rate was 13.43%.

Figure 4.24:Graphical Representation of Test of Missing Rate (%) of Red gram Seeddue to Planter during Laboratory Test

4.4 Field Testof Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter The field test was done on agriculture farm in SHIATS, Allahabad. The length and width of testing fieldwas 10

m for maize, 10

m for pigeon pea and 10

for okra. 4.4.1 Angle Measurement and Draft Force for Different Soil Pushing force was measured by spring balance in both soils. Appendix table 29 and 30 shows amount of pushing force, draft and drawbar power of manually operated multicrop planter. The draft calculation is given in Appendix-12. Figure 4.25 and 4.26 show the variation of drawbar power in sandy loam soil and clay soil.After the measurement it was found that the average pushing force in sandy loam soil and clay soil at a depth of 3 cm were 13.3 kg and 14.8 kg respectively. Pushing angle in sandy loam soil and clay soil were 36.090and 34.330respectively.Averagedraft force for the sandy loam soil and clay soilwere observed 105.42N and 119.88N respectively.Themanually operated multi-crop planterrequired less power to pushin sandy loam soil compared to clay soil during

performance test.It was observed that 13.3 kg pushing force and 0.093 Dbhp. When the pushing angle was increased then the draft force automatically decreased. It was significant in both type of soil at 5 % level which is given in ANOVAs appendix table 14(a) and 14 (b).(Hossain, 2014) calculated similar 10 kg pushing force or 0.044 kW drawbar power for developed maize seeder and 8.5 kg pushing force or 0.037 kW drawbar power for modified maize seeder was observed during the performance test.

Figure 4.25:Variation of Drawbar Power in Sandy loam soil

Figure 4.26:Variation of Drawbar Power in Clay soil

4.4.2 Evaluation of Drive Wheel Skidding of theManually Operated MultiCropPlanter During the field testing observations, an important thing has been happened due to properties of the soil which was drive wheel skidding. Wheel skidding depends on properties of soil.A10m long ploughed field was taken for observations, theoretical9.65 revolutions of drive wheel of manually operated planter needs to cover 10m distance, but during field testactual average revolutions of drive wheel of manually operated planter was 9.10 for sandy loam soiland 9.24 for clay soil to covered 10m distance. Hence, the averaged skidding distance insandy loam soil and clay soilwas 0.56m and 0.42m and averaged percentage skid was 5.69% in sandy loam soil and 4.24% in clay soil. We observed that wheel skidding percentage was more in sandy loam soil compare to clay soil due to poor traction. The observations of the drive wheel skidding of manually operated planter with five replications have been presented in appendix table15 and it was non significant at 5 % level which is given in ANOVAs appendix table 15 (a). The variations of the percentage of the skid have been presented in figure 4.27

Figure 4.27:Skidding Percentage of Drive Wheel of Manually Operated Planter in Different Soil.

4.4.3 Hill to Hill Spacing ofDifferent Crops Seedlingin Different Soilby ManuallyOperated Multi-Crop Planter The distance of hill to hill spacing in the fieldwas measured by measuring tape after fifteen day of sowing for each crop that means when dropped seeds were germinated in the field.Appendix table 16 show hill to hill spacing in five replications for all crops. Figure 4.28 to 4.33shows the result of average distance of hill to hill. From the table, it was observed that the distance of hill to hill in field was varying due to change in forward speed, seed metering wheel was not uniformly rotated. Some of the seeds were trapped in metering wheel due to not circular shape of seeds this problem was affected hill spacing or hill to hill spacing. The average hill to hill spacing of C1, C2and C3 in sandy loam soil were 23.98, 29.08 and 18.76 cm which is given in appendix table 16 and it was non significant at 5 % level due to replications and due to sandy soil it was significant which is given in ANOVAs 16 (a) and ANOVAs 16 (b) show the non significant due to replications at 5 % level and due to clay soil it was significant. 4.4.3.1 Hill to Hill Spacing ofMaize (C1)in Sandy loam SoilbyManually OperatedMulti- CropPlanter

Appendix table 16 shows distance of hill to hill spacing of maize in the field of manually operated multi-crop planter. Figure 4.28 shows the result of distance of hill to hill in graphical representation. From table, it was observed that the average distance of hill to hill were24.94, 22.11, 24, 23.50 and 22 cm for observation 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 respectively whereas the recommended distance was 25 cm.It was similar to recommended distance. The planter should have to plant 40 seeds but due to missing hills and slipping of the drive wheel it planted less that was planted hill by the planter was varying from 36 to 38 seeds and hill to hill distances were varying from 20cm to 44cm.From the table, it was observed that the distance of hill to hill varies since the metering wheel was not uniformly rotated and changes in speed of the machine. Some of the seeds were trapped in between the seed hopper and the metering wheel due to its circular face shape. Dropped distance of maize seeds was more in laboratory due to wheel skidding, which was less as compared to field (Hossain, 2014) found similar average distance of dropped seed was 23.15, 22.57, 22.26 and, 22.03 for observation 1, 2, 3, and, 4 respectively whereas the recommended distance was 20 cm.

Figure 4.28:Graphical Representation of Average Distance of Hill to Hill of Maize for Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter in Sandy loam soil

4.4.3.2Hill to Hill Spacing ofPigeon pea (C2) in Sandy loam Soilby Manually OperatedMulti- CropPlanter

Distance of hill to hill spacing of pigeon pea in the field of manually operated multi-crop planter is presented in appendix table 16and figure 4.29 shows the result of average distance of hill to hill in five replication by graphical representation. From table, it was observed that the average distance of hill to hill were29.10, 29.70, 30.10, 29 and 27.50 cm for observations 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 respectively whereas the recommended distance was 30 cm. The average distance of dropped seeds of five replications was 29.08, which was similar to recommended distance. The planter should have to plant34 seeds but due to missing hills and slipping of the drive wheel it planted less that was planted hill by the planter was varying from 29 to 31 seeds and hill to hill distances were varying from 24cm to 59 cm.From the table, it was observed that the distance of hill to hill varies since the metering wheel was not uniformly rotated and changes in speed of the machine. Some of the seeds were trapped in between the seed hopper and the metering wheel due to its circular face shape.

Figure 4.29:Graphical Representation of Average Distance of Hill to Hill of Pigeon pea for Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter in Sandy loam soil

4.4.3.3Hill to Hill Spacing ofOkra (C3) in Sandy loam Soilby Manually OperatedMulti- CropPlanter

Distance of hill to hill spacing of okra in the field of manually operated multi-crop planter is presented in appendix table 16and figure 4.30 shows the result of average distance of hill to hill in five replications by graphical representation. From table, it was observed that the average distance of hill to hill was 19.10, 18.20, 18.30, 20.10 and 18.10 cm for observation 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 respectively whereas the recommended distance was 20 cm. The average distance of dropped seeds of five replications was 18.76, which was similar to recommended distance. The planter should have to plant 50 seeds but due to missing hills and slipping of the drive wheel it planted less that was planted hill by the planter was varying from 45 to 49 seeds and hill to hill distances were varying from 15cm to 40 cm. From the table, it was observed that the distance of hill to hill varies since the metering wheel was not uniformly rotated and changes in speed of the machine. Some of the seeds were trapped in between the seed hopper and the metering wheel due to its circular face shape.

Figure 4.30:Graphical Representation of Average Distance of Hill to Hill of Okra for Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter in Sandy loam soil

4.4.3.4Hill to Hill Spacing ofMaize (C1) in Clay Soilby Manually OperatedMultiCropPlanter Distance of hill to hill spacing of okra in the field of manually operated multi-crop planter is presented in appendix table 16and figure 4.31 shows the result of average distance of hill to hill in five replications by graphical representation. From table, it was observed that the average distance of hill to hill was 25.90, 23.10, 24.30, 23 and 24cm for observation 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 respectively. Whereas the recommended distance was 25 cm. The planter should have to plant 40 seeds but due to missing hills and slipping of the drive wheel it planted less that was planted hill by the planter was varying from 36 to 38 seeds and hill to hill distances were varying from 20cm to 44cm. From the table, it was observed that the distance of hill to hill varies since the metering wheel was not uniformly rotated and changes in speed of the machine. It observed that, Hill to hill spacing was good in sandy loam soil rather than clay soildue to finer pulverization. But in clay soil, clods size waslarge compare to sandy loam soil which disturbed the seed spacing in row. Some of the seeds were trapped in between the seed hopper and the metering wheel due to its circular face shape.

Figure 4.31:Graphical Representation of Average Distance of Hill to Hill of Maize for Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter in Clay soil

4.4.3.5Hill to Hill Spacing ofPigeon Pea (C2) in Clay Soilby Manually OperatedMultiCropPlanter Distance of hill to hill spacing of okra in the field of manually operated multi-crop planter is presented in appendix table 16and figure 4.32 shows the result of average distance of hill to hill in five replications by graphical representation. From table, it was observed that the average distance of hill to hill was 29.10, 29.50, 30.08, 28.8and 27.50 cm for observation 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 respectively. Average hill to hill spacing in five rows was 29.14 which are similar to recommended distance.Whereas the recommended distance was 30 cm. The planter should have to plant 34 seeds but due to missing hills and slipping of the drive wheel it planted less that was planted hill by the planter was varying from 29 to 31 seeds and hill to hill distances were varying from 24cm to 59 cm. From the table, it was observed that the distance of hill to hill varies since the metering wheel was not uniformly rotated and changes in speed of the machine. It observed that, Hill to hill spacing was good in sandy loam soil rather than clay soildue to finer pulverization. But in clay soil, clods size was large compare to sandy loam soil which disturbed the seed spacing in row. Some of the seeds were trapped in between the seed hopper and the metering wheel due to its circular face shape.

Figure 4.32:Graphical Representation of Average Distance of Hill to Hill of Pigeon pea for Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter in Clay soil. 4.5.3.6Hill to Hill Spacing ofOkra Crop (C3) in Clay soilby Manually OperatedMultiCropPlanter Appendix table 16 shows distance of hill to hill spacing of maize in the field of manually operated multi-crop planter. Figure 4.33 shows the result of distance of hill to hill in graphical representation. From the table, it was observed that the average distance of hill to hill was 20.10, 18.20, 19.30, 20.10 and 18.10 cm for observation 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 respectively. Average hill to hill spacing in five rows was 19.16 which are similar to recommended distance.Whereas the recommended distance was 20 cm. The planter should have to plant50 seeds but due to missing hills and slipping of the drive wheel it planted less that was planted hill by the planter was varying from 45 to 49 seeds and hill to hill distances were varying from 17cm to 38 cm. From the table, it was observed that the distance of hill to hill varies since the metering wheel was not uniformly rotated and changes in speed of the machine. It observed that, Hill to hill spacing was good in sandy loam soil rather than clay soildue to finer pulverization. But in clay soil, clods size was large compare to sandy loam soil which disturbed the seed spacing in row. Some of the seeds were trapped in between the seed hopper and the metering wheel due to its circular face shape.

Figure 4.33:Graphical Representation of Average Distance of Hill to Hill of Okra for Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter in Clay soil.

4.4.4 Evaluation of Missing Hills of the Different Seed CropsinDifferent Soilfor the Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter The accurate missing rate was measured after the germination of the seeds in the field. It includes damaged seeds and missing rate percentage. It was observed due to high speed of planter and unshaped of seed was high missing rate. Due to both factors, the seed could not be germinated so those hills have considered as missing. The missing hills of crop C1 C1and C2 in sandy loam soil and in clay soil it was C 3
observed that insufficient moisture content increase missing rate. Thirdly we observed that outer factor also affected on missing rate such as animals and birds.In all thereplications was highest missing rate in maize due to different shape of seeds in both soils. (Tsegaye, 2015)found highestpercentage of seed miss index of 13.50, 14.35, and 9.92% were recorded with maize, haricotbean and sorghum seeds, respectively, at the planter forward speed of 7 km/hr, whereasthe lowest percent seed miss index of 5.23, 4.80 and 3.97% were obtained for maize, haricot bean and sorghum seeds, respectively, at the planter speed of 3 km/hr.

Figure 4.34:Graphical Representation of Average MissingHill in Maize for Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter in Sandy loam soil. 4.4.4.2 Evaluation of Missing Hills of Pigeon pea (C2) inSandy loam soil by the Manually Operated Multi- Crop planter Missing hill percentage were observed after the germination of seeds, from the appendix table 17we observed for manually operated multi- crop planter, the average missing rateswere found 21.21, 15.15, 15.15, 21.21, and 15.15% for observation 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 respectively and the average missing rate in five observations was 17.57 %.Figure 4.35show the variations of average missing hills of pigeon pea.Firstly we observed that missing rate increase with increase forward speed of the manually operated planter. Secondly we observed that insufficient moisture content increase missing rate. Thirdly we observed that outer factor also affected on missing rate such as animals and birds. In all the replications wasless missing rate in pigeon pea due to circular shape of seeds in

both soils. Because circular seeds easily filled and easily release in seed metering wheel cell. Missing hills percentage was highest in the field compared to laboratory test because all the seed did not germinate due to damaged seed, improper moisture content.

Figure 4.35:Graphical Representation of Average MissingHill in Pigeon Pea for Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter in Sandy loam soil. 4.4.4.3 Evaluation of Missing Hills of Okra (C3) inSandy loam soil by the Manually Operated Multi- Crop planter Figure 4.36 shows variations of missing hills. Missing hill percentage were observed after the germination of seeds, from the appendix table 17 we observed for manually operated multi- crop planter, the average missing rate was 16, 18, 16, 18,

and 18 % for

observation 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 respectively and the average missing rate in five observations was 17.2 %. Firstly we observed that missing hills increase with increase forward speed of the manually operated planter and impurity of seeds. Secondly we observed that insufficient moisture content increase missing hills. Thirdly we observed that outer factor also affected of missing rate such as animals and birds. In all the replications wereless missing hills in okra compare to maize and pigeon pea due to circular shape of seeds in sandy and clay soil. Because circular seeds easily filled and easily release in seed metering wheel cell.

Figure 4.36:Graphical Representation of Average MissingHill in Okra for Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter in Sandy loam soil. 4.4.4.4 Evaluation of Missing Hills of the Maize (C1) CropinClay soil by the Manually Operated Multi-Crop planter. After the germination of seeds,Missing hillspercentage werecalculated. Observed data is given in appendix table 17.We observed for manually operated multi- crop planter, the average missing hills percentage were found 17.64, 21.21, 17.64, 14.28, and 21.21 % for observation 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 respectively and the average missing rate in five observations was 18.34 % which is represented in figure 4.37. Firstly we observed that missing rate increase with increase forward speed of the manually operated planter. Secondly we observed that insufficient moisture content increase missing rate. Thirdly we observed that outer factor also affected on missing rate such as animals and birds. It was observed that missing hills percentage was high in clay soil compare to sandy loam soil. In all the replications was highest missing rate in maize due to different shape of seeds compare to other seeds in both soils.(Hossain, 2014) observed that the missing rate varies due to the changes in speed of the machine. The missing rates were found 14.92%, 11.94%, 13.43% and, 13.43% for observation 1, 2, 3 and, 4 respectively. The average missing rate was 13.43%.

Figure 4.37:Graphical Representation of Average MissingHill in Maize for Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter in Clay soil. 4.4.4.5 Evaluation of Missing Hills of Pigeon Pea(C2) inClay soil by the Manually Operated Multi- Crop planter Similar method was used for calculatemissing hillspercentage of pigeon pea in the field. Observed data is given in appendix table 17. Weobserved for manually operated multicrop planter, the average missing hills percentage were found21.21, 18.18, 5.15, 21.21, and 18.18% for observation 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 respectively and the average missing rate in five observations was 18.78 % which has been presented in figure 4.38,firstly we observed that missing rate increase with increase forward speed of the manually operated planter. Secondly we observed that insufficient moisture content increase missing rate. Thirdly we observed that outer factor also affected on missing rate such as animals and birds. In all the replications we observedmore missing hills percentage in clay soil compare to sandy loam soil due to less germination and maximum damaged percentage of seeds.

Figure 4.38:Graphical Representation of Average MissingHill in Pigeon Pea for Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter in Clay soil. 4.4.4.6 Evaluation of Missing Hills of Okra (C3) inClay soil by the Manually Operated Multi- CropPlanter Figure 4.39 shows variations of missing hills percentage of okra in the field. Missing hill percentage was observed after the germination of seeds. Observed data is given in appendix table 17.Weobserved for manually operated multi- crop planter, the average missing rate was 16, 18, 16, 20, and 20% for observation 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 respectively and the average missing rate in five observations was 18 %.Firstly we observed that missing rate increase with increase forward speed of the manually operated planter. Secondly we observed that insufficient moisture content increase missing rate. Thirdly we observed that outer factor also affected on missing rate such as animals and birds. In all the replications we were observedhighest missing hillpercentage in okra field test in clay soil compare to sandy loam soil.

Figure 4.39:Graphical Representation of Average MissingHill in Okra for Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter in Clay soil.

4.4.5 Evaluation of Hill Populationsof Different Crops in Different soilforManually Operated Multi- Crop Planter After the observation of missing hills,we counted the number of germinated hills in each row in both soils.From the ANOVAs appendix table 18 (a) shows it was non significant at 5 % level in sandy loam soil and appendix table 18 (b) shows due to replication it was significant and due to clay it was non significant at 5 % level in clay soil. 4.4.5.1Hill Populations of Maize (C1) Crop by Manually Operated Multi Crop Planter in both soils

After the observation of the hill populations in the field for two soils it found that the hill populationsinsandy loam soil was good due to betterpulverization, which improved the germination of seeds. The standard hill populationsinsandy loam soil for the maize crop was 40 hills per row but average actual hills populations in one rowwas 33.6 hills and inclay soil only was 33.8 hills. The overall recommended hills populations according to plant to plant and row to row spacing in one hectare land for the maize crop in both soil sandy loam and claywas 66666.But in the fieldin both soil sandy loam soil and clay soilwas found less due to missing, damaged of seeds and weather parameter it were found 56000 and 54400 respectively. Hill populations observed more in sandy soil due to better germination compared to clay soil. The observed data havebeen presented in appendix table 18and the variation of the hills populationsin different soil has been shown in the figure 4.40 and 4.41. The calculation of hill populations of maize, pigeon pea and okra is given in appendix18,19 and 20. 90 88 86 % , n o it 84 al u 82 p o P ll 80 i H 78 76 1

2

3

4

5

Average

Number in Row

Figure 4.40:Graphical Representation of Percentage of HillPopulations of Maize Crop in Sandy Loam Soil.

Figure 4.41:Graphical Representation of Percentage of HillPopulations of Maize Crop in Clay soil.

4.4.5.2Hill Populations of Pigeon Pea (C2) Crop by Manually Operated Multi Crop Planter in both soils Figure 4.42 and 4.43 shows variation of the hills populations of pigeon pea in sandy loam soil and clay soil respectively. It shouldhave33 hills in every replication.But Actual average hills populationswas 27.2and 26.8 hills in sandy loam soiland clay soilrespectively. The overall theoretical hills populations according to plant to plant and row to row spacing in one hectare for the pigeon pea crop in both soils were found 37037 hills. But due to hills missing actual hills populations in one hectare in sandy loam soil and clay soil were 30452 and 29978 hills respectively. The observed data of the hills populationsis presented in appendix table 18.

Figure 4.42:Graphical Representation of Percentage of HillPopulations of Pigeon Pea Crop in Sandy Loam Soil.

Figure 4.43:Graphical Representation of Percentage of HillPopulations of Pigeon Pea Crop in Clay soil.

4.4.5.3 Hill Populations of Okra (C3) Crop by Manually Operated Multi Crop Planter Figure 4.44 and 4.45shows variation of the hills populations of okra in sandy loam soil and clay soil respectively. The recommended average hill populations of okra in both soils should have50 hills in every row. But Actual average hills populationswas 41.4 and 41 hills in sandy loam soil and clay soil respectively. The overall theoretical hills population according to plant to plant spacing and row to row spacing in one hectare in both soils was found 111111 hills. But due to hills missing actual hills populations in one hectare in sandy loam soil and clay soil were 92000 and 91112 hills respectively. Observed data have been presented in appendix table 18.

Figure 4.44:Graphical Representation of Percentage of HillPopulations of Okra Crop in Sandy Loam Soil.

Figure 4.45:Graphical Representation of Percentage of HillPopulations of Okra Crop in Clay soil.

4.4.6 Field Capacityof Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter The theoretical field capacity of the planter was defined as the area covered by the planter in unit time (hour). So for the measurement of the effective field capacity, the area covered by the planter in one row for a particular crop and in particular time has been calculated. Then measurement of the all area covered in one hour has been calculated. The average effective field capacity for C1, C2 and C3 were 0143, 0.217 and 0.111ha/hr. From the ANOVAs table 19 (a) due to replications and due to crops it was non significant and significant at 5 % level respectively. 4.4.6.1 Field Capacityof Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter for Maize (C1) The result of field capacity of the manually operated multi crop planter for maize have been presented in appendix table 19and figure 4.46 shows the test result of field capacity in graphical representation. The field capacity calculation is given in Appendix 21.From the table, we can see the effective field capacity was varieddue to forward speed of the planter. The effective field capacity is 0.148 ha/hr, 0.144 ha/hr, 0.135 ha/hr, 0.142 ha/hr and 0.148 ha/hr for observation 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 respectively. The average effective field capacity was 0.143 ha/hr. Also, the effective field capacity of the planter was 0.36 ha/hr. This value agreed with that reported by Bamgboye and Mofolasayo (2006) and has a

higher value than that of the manually operated seeding attachment of 0.28 ha/hr for an animal drawn cultivator developed by Kumar et al, (1986) and that of template row planter developed by Adisa and Braide (2012).

Figure 4.46: Graphical Representation of Test of Effective Field Capacity for Maize by Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter 4.4.6.2 Field Capacityof Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter for Pigeon pea (C2) The result of field capacity of the manually operated multi crop planter for pigeon pea have been presented in table appendix 19 and figure 4.47 shows the test result of field capacity in graphical representation. The calculation of field capacity is given in Appendix 22.From the table, we can see the effective field capacity was varieddue to forward speed of the planter. The effective field capacity is 0.231 ha/hr, 0.216 ha/hr, 0.202 ha/hr, 0.223 ha/hr and 0.216 ha/hr for observation 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 respectively. The average effective field capacity was 0.217 ha/hr. The effective field capacity of the manually operated multi crop planter for pigeon pea was found highest in compare to maize because width of coverage by planter for pigeon pea was more as compare to maize. Speed of the machine and width of coverage also affected to field capacity of the machine.

Figure 4.47: Graphical Representation of Test of Effective Field Capacity for Pigeon Peaby Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter

4.4.6.3 Field Capacityof Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter for Okra (C3) Figure 4.48 shows the test result of field capacity in graphical representation. Theobserved data of field capacity of the manually operated multi crop planter for pigeon pea have been presented in appendix table 19 and calculation of field capacity is given in Appendix 23.From the table, we can see the effective field capacity was varieddue to forward speed of the planter. The effective field capacity was 0.115 ha/hr, 0.108 ha/hr, 0.108 ha/hr, 0.111 ha/hr and 0.115 ha/hr for observation 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 respectively. The average effective field capacity was 0.11 ha/hr.

Figure 4.48: Graphical Representation of Test of Effective Field Capacity for Okraby Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter

4.4.7 Evaluation of Field Efficiency of Manually Operated Multi Crop Planter The field efficiency of the planter was depending on the effective field capacity of the planter and the theoretical field capacity. It candefine as the ratio of effective field capacity and the theoretical field capacity. The average field efficiency for C1, C2 and C3 were 86.38, 87.38 and 89.38 %. From the ANOVAs table 20 (a) due to replications and due to crops it was significant and non significant at 5 % level respectively. 4.4.7.1 Evaluation of Field Efficiency of Manually Operated Multi Crop Planter for Maize (C1) From the appendix table20 it was observed that theoretical field capacity of manually operated planter for maize sowing was 0.166 ha/hr and field efficiency were 89.15, 86.74, 81.32, 85.54 and 89.15 % for replications 1,2,3,4 and 5 respectively which have been

shown in figure 4.40. We observed that due to increase of speed of the planter and row to row distance so field efficiency,percentage of the damaged seed also increased and also affected on hill spacing. So we found that speed should be manageable for operation in

the field. It was approximately 2.5 – 2.8 km/hr in field. The average field efficiency for maize was 86.38%.

Figure 4.49: GraphicalRepresentation ofField Efficiency of Manually Operated Multi - Crop Planter for Maize Sowing.

4.4.7.2 Evaluation of Field Efficiency of Manually Operated Multi Crop Planter for Pigeon Pea (C2) Sowing It is observed from the table 20 the theoretical field capacity of manually operated planter for pigeon pea was 0.249 ha/hr and field efficiency were 92.77, 86.74, 81.12, 89.55 and 86.74 %for replications 1,2,3,4 and 5 respectively. We observed that due to increase of

speed and width of coverage of the planter field efficiency also increased,percentage of the damaged seed also increased and also affected on hill spacing. So we found that a low speed was best for sowing operation in the field. The variation of effective field capacityof manually operated planter for pigeon pea has been shown figure 4.50.The average field efficiency for pigeon pea sowingwasfound87.38%. Field efficiency was highest for pigeon pea as compare to maize.

Figure 4.50:Graphical Representation ofField Efficiency of Manually Operated Multi - Crop Planter for Pigeon Pea Sowing.

4.4.7.3 Evaluation of Field Efficiency of Manually Operated Multi Crop Planter for Okra (C3) Sowing It is observed from the appendix table 20 the theoretical field capacity of manually operated planter for okra was 0.124 ha/hr and field efficiency were 92.74, 87.09, 87.09, 89.51and 92.74 % for replications 1,2,3,4 and 5 respectively. We observed that due to

increase of speed of the planter and row to row distance so field efficiency,percentage of the damaged seed also increased and also affected on hill spacing. So we found that a low speed was best for sowing operation in the field. The variation of effective field capacityof manually operated planter for pigeon pea has been shown figure 4.51. The average field efficiency for pigeon pea sowing was found 89.83%. The field efficiency was found highest for okra and pigeon pea and lowest for maize due to width of coverage and forward speed of the planter.

Figure 4.51Graphical Representation of Effective Field Capacity of Manually Operated Multi - Crop Planter for Pigeon Pea Sowing.

Figure 4.52: GraphicalRepresentation ofAverage Field Efficiency of Manually Operated Multi - Crop Planter for different crop seed sowing. 4.5Cost Analysis of the Developed Manually Operated Multi Crop Planter Cost Comparison with Manual Application The manufacturing cost of the developed manually operated multi crop planter was Rs. 4680. The annual cost of the manually operated multi crop planter was Rs. 422.97 per

hectare,whereas the manual planting cost is Rs. 5500/ha which is given in appendix table 54Thus, the manually operated multi crop plantercan save about 94% planting cost for crops cultivation. The cost of operation by hand planting and by the manually operated multi crop planteris presented in figure 4.53. The cost calculation is given below appendix table 21.

Figure 4.53: Cost of operation by hand planting and the manually operated multi crop planter

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Broadcasting method of sowing seed is a time, high seed rate and labour consuming process. The most disadvantage of broadcasting method is that seed requirement is more, crop stand is not uniform, result in gappy germination and defective wherever the adequate moisture is not present in the soil and spacing is not maintained with row to row and plant to plant, hence inter-culturing is difficult. The present study was undertaken with a view to develop a manually operated multi-crop planter. The manually operated multi-crop planter was designed base on physical properties of maize, pigeon pea okra and red gram seeds. These properties were determined for the development of the planter. The developed planter was evaluated for its performance. The manually operated multicrop planter was operated in two types of soil for three crops approximately at speed of 2.5- 2.80 km/hr. The performance was based on the lab test and field test. From the result, optimal value of study variables were recommended for manually operated multicrop planter. The economics of manually operated multi-crop planter was also calculated. Base on the result obtained from the above study following conclusions were drawn: 1. The average length, width, thickness and geometric mean diameter of the maize seed were 11.04, 9.21, 3.52 and 9.15 respectively. 2. The average length, width, thickness and geometric mean diameter of the pigeon pea seed were 5.91, 5.01, 4.49 and 5.18 respectively. 3. The average length, width, thickness and geometric mean diameter of the okra seed were 5.67, 4.56, 4.46 and 4.53 respectively. 4. The shape was determined on the basis of sphericity of the seed. The sphericity of the maize, pigeon pea and okra seed were found to be ranged from 0.60 to 0.65, 0.79 to 0.91 and 0.90 to 0.95 respectively. 5. The average bulk density and true density of the maize, pigeon pea and okra seed were 0.478 and 1.11 g/cm3, 0.85 and 1.34, 0.61 and 1.08 respectively. 6. The average value for angle of repose of maize, pigeon pea and okra seed were 22.59, 29.70 and 22.59 degree. The average coefficient of static friction of maize, pigeon pea and okra seed were 0.68, 0.46 and 0.39 respectively.

7. The average weight of 1000 seeds of maize, pigeon pea and okra was 158g, 97.38g and 60.34g respectively. 8. The diameter of seed metering wheel was 10.01 cm. 9. The number of cells on periphery of seed metering wheel was found to be 11, 09, and 14 for Maize, Pigeon Pea, and Okra respectively. 10. Speed of ground wheel was 22.11 r.p.m. 11. Torque on ground wheel was 0.96 kg-m 12. The maximum bending moment on wheel shaft was 1.83 kg-m 13. The rolling resistance of wheel was 3. 14. Working width of manually operated planter for maize, pigeon pea and okra was 60, 90, 45 cm. 15. Volume of seed hopper was 11118.92 cm3 16. Peripheral length of drive wheel was 1.0362m 17. The number of teeth in small sprocket and large sprocket was 18 and 48 respectively. 18. The number of links in chain was 137. 19. The length of chain was 1.370 m. 20. The average percentage of the germination of pre-metered seed of Maize, Pigeon Pea and Okra were 89.6, 87.8 and 86.4 %. 21. The average calibrated seed rates of Maize, Pigeon Pea and Okra during calibration of manually operated multi-crop planter in lab were found 20.56, 10.40 and 6.32 kg/h without missing respectively. 22. The average percentages of damaged seeds of Maize, Pigeon Pea and Okra during damage test of manually operated multi-crop planter in lab were found to be 2.60, 2.20 and 2 % respectively out of 100.

23. The average percentage of the germination of metered seed of Maize, Pigeon Pea and Okra were 87, 85.6 and 84.4 %. 24. The averaged seed to seed distance of Maize, Pigeon Pea and Okra was found 25.72, 31.98 and 20.86 cm respectively. 25. The average missing rate percentage of Maize, Pigeon Pea and Okra was found to be 3.5, 3.03, and 1.6 % respectively. 26. Pushing angle of handle in sandy loam soil and clay soil were found 36.090 and 34.330 respectively. 27. The average pushing force in sandy loam soil and clay soil at a depth of 3 cm were 13.3 kg and 14.8 kg respectively. 28. The average draft force in sandy loam soil and clay soil was observed 105.42N and 119.88 N respectively. 29. The average drawbar power in sandy loam soil and clay soil was observed 0.093 and 0.11 hp. 30. The averaged percentage of skid was 5.69% in sandy loam soil and 4.24% in clay soil and observed that wheel skidding percentage was more in sandy loam soil compare to clay soil due to poor traction. 31. The average hill to hill spacing of maize in sandy loam soil was 23.98 cm. 32. The average hill to hill spacing of pigeon pea in sandy loam soil was 29.08cm. 33. The average hill to hill spacing of okra in sandy loam soil was 18.76 cm. 34. The average hill to hill spacing of maize in clay soil was 24.06 cm. 35. The average hill to hill spacing of pigeon pea in clay soil was 29.14 cm. 36. The average hill to hill spacing of okra in clay soil was 19.40 cm. 37. The average missing hills percentage of maize, pigeon pea and okra in sandy loam soil was 16, 17.57 and 17.2 % respectively. 38. The average missing hills percentage of maize, pigeon pea and okra in clay soil was 18.34, 18.78 and 18 % respectively. 39. The Plant populations of maize in sandy loam soil and clay soil were 56000 and 54400 respectively. 40. The Plant populations of pigeon pea in sandy loam soil and clay soil were 30452 and 29978 respectively.

41. The Plant populations of okra in sandy loam soil and clay soil were 92000 and 91112 respectively. 42. The average effective field capacity for maize, pigeon pea and okra was 0.143, 0.217, 0.111 ha/hr. 43. The average field efficiency for maize was 86.38, 87.38, and 89.83 %. 44. The manufacturing cost of the developed manually operated multi crop planter was Rs. 4680. 45. The annual cost of the manually operated multi crop planter was Rs. 422.97 per hectare 46. Manual planting cost was Rs. 5500/ha 47. The manually operated multi crop planter can save about 94% planting cost for crops cultivation.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CONCLUSIONS The development of manually operated multi crop planter was so simple that it was very easy to fabricate with locally available materials. Its operation was very easy and it required very less power to push. Therefore, one person (male or female) can operate it. The fabrication cost of the manually operated multi crop planter was low. The cost of the developed manually operated multi crop planter was approximately Rs. 4680. This is within the buying capacity of the farmers of India. So, the overall performance of low cost manually operated multi crop planter was satisfactory. A good progress of the work has been made successfully. Therefore, the low cost manually operated multi crop planter may be accepted for demonstration and use.

RECOMMENDATIONS Following are the recommendations for operation of the low cost maize seeder below:

1. The machine should operate at normal working speed (2.5- 2.80 km/hr), because too fast causing splitting the seed and slow walking decrease field capacity of the machine 2. Calibration of the seed metering device should be done accurately to get right seed rate and seed spacing

BIBILOGRAPHY Adekoya, Buchel(1987) Developed A Cam Activated Precision Punch Planter”, Transnational Journal of Science1987 Adisa, A.F. and Braide, F.G. (2012). Design and Development of Template Row Planter, Transnational Journal of Science and Technology August 2012 edition; vol. 2(11):747 – 52. Afify, M.K., 2009. Development of a seed drill feeding device to suit planting in hills. Misr Journal of Agricultural Engineering, 26(1): 561-579. Ahmmed, S., Roy, K.C., Amin, M.N., Wohab, M.A. and Matin, M.A. (2004). Design and development of a power tiller operated inclined plate multi-crop planter. Journal of the Institutions of Engineers Bangladesh, Agril. Engg. Division; 31(1): 89-96. Aikins

S. H. M.

Bart-Plange.A and Opoku-Baffour, S. (2010)

Performance

evaluation of jab planters for maize planting and inorganic fertilizer application. ARPN Journal of Agricultural and Biological Science, VOL. 5, NO. 1, JANUARY 2010 Akinsanmi, O. (1975). Certificate Agricultural Science Longman Group Ltd. Ibadan. Pp:44-50 Allen, R. R., Mustek, J. T., Wood, F. 0., and Dusek, D. A. (1975) No-till seeding of irrigated sorghum double cropped after wheat. Trans. ASAE 18(6):1109-1113.

Alwis P.l.A.G.(2004) Design and development of a row seeder for gigelly, kurakkan and Meneri, Proceeding of the second academic sessions-2004 Anazodo U.G.N. (1986). Agricultural Mechanization as a catalyst for Rural Development.Agricultural Mechanization in Asia, Africa and Latin America (AMA); 17(3)12-18. Awulu, J. O., Audu. J., Nuhu G. (2014) Development and Evaluation of Manually Operated

Seed

Broadcaster,

Journal

of

Agricultural

Biotechnology May 2014, Vol. 2 Iss. 2, PP. 13-19

Engineering

and

Babiæ LJ., M. Radojèin, I. Pavkov1, M. Babiæ, J. Turan, M. Zoranoviæ, and S. Stanišiæ (2012) Physical properties and compression loading behavior of corn seed. Int. Agrophys., 2013, 27, 119-126

Baiber, R., (1947) Precision planting equipment. Journal of Agricultural Engineering, 28 (2): 49-54. Bamgboye, A. and Mofolasayo, A. (2006) Performance Evaluation of a Two-Row Okra Planter”. Agricultural Engineering International: the CIGR journal Manuscripts PM 06662; Vol. viii. Bamiro, O.A, Nurudeen, A. and Akuru, I.O. (1986) Introductory Technology for schools and colleges. Evans Brothers (Nigeria publishers) limited; Pp: 227-233. Bangarwa, A.S., Kairon, M.S. and Singh, K.P., (1988) Effect of plant density, level and proportion of nitrogen fertilizer on growth, yield and yield components of winter maize. Haryana Agric. Univ. Ind. J. Agri. Sci., 58(11): 854-856.

Barnett, J., Pickens, B., Karrfalt, R. (1999) Improving longleaf pine seedling establishment in the nursery by reducing seedcoat microorganisms. In: Haywood J.D. editor. Proceedings of the tenth biennial sothern silvicultural research conference. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-30. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station: 339-343

Bashiri I.M., Ode D.A, and. Ogwuche E. U., (2013) Development of a hand planter, JORIND 11(2) December, 2013. ISSN 1596-8303. Bicudo, S.J., Cruz, S.C.S., Pereira, F.R., Da, S., Brachtvogel, E.L. and Madalena, J.A. (2009) Fertilization levels in maize cultivated on "safrinha" conditions. Caatinga; 22(2): 23-30. Brown, F. R. (2002) Dibber seed drill: Design and experimental results. International Conference on Agricultural Engineering, Book of Abstracts, AG ENG 88 Paris, Paper No. 88-118:301-302. Antony, France: CEMAGREF.

Buchele, W. F. (1979) Is moldboard plowing a recreational activity? Paper No. MC 79303. ASAE, St. Joseph, Michigan.

Bülent Coskun M., brahim Yalçın, and Cengiz Özarslan (2005) Physical properties of sweet corn seed (Zea mays saccharata Sturt.) NFI, Turkey.

Chaudhuri, D., (2001) Performance evaluation of various types of furrow openers on seed drills. A review Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research, 79(2): 125– 137. Chhinnan, M.S. Young, J.H. and Rohrbach, R.P., (1975). Accuracy of seed spacing in peanut planting. Transactions of the ASAE, 18(1):828-831.

Chukwu Ogbonnaya and Akande Fatai Bukola (2007) Development of an Apparatus for Measuring Angle of Repose of Granular Materials, AU J.T. 11(1): 62-66 (Jul. 2007) Cortez, J.W., Alves, P.J., Furlani, C.E.A., Grotta, D.C.C., Silva, R.P. and Da, S. (2007) Depths of sowing of the corn and applied loads in the press whell of seeder. Revista-Brasileira-de-Ciencias-Agrarias; 2(2): 156-160. Dawelbeit, Mamoun. (1981) Design and development of a point-injector for liquid fertilizers. Paper No. 81-1010. Summer Meeting of the ASAE, Orlando, Florida. Dessai, B. B., Kotecha, P.M. and Salunke, D.K. (1997) Seeds Handbook: Biology, Production, Processing and Storage; Pp: 376 – 387. Doerge, T.A.,Hall, T. (2000)The value of planter calibration using the metermax system. Crop insight, Vol. 10 No 23, Dupont Pioneer Erbach, D. C. (1978) Residue cutting furrow opener for no-tillage planting. Paper No, 78-1014. ASAE, St. Joseph, Michigan. Efresh, Empowering Indian Food and Agriculture, Red Gram (Cajanus Cajan) Seed Production.

Gard, L. E., and McKibben, G. E. (1973) No-till" crop production providing a most promising conservation measure. Outlook on Agriculture 7(4): 149-154.

Glenn, F. B., and T. B. Daynard (1974) Effects of genotype,planting pattern, and plant density on plant-to-plant variability and grain yield of corn. Canadian J. Plant Sci. 54:323-30. Goncalves, W.S., Fernande, H.,C., Araujo, F., Pinto, F., De, A. and De, C. (2010) Initial establishment of maize crop under no-till system: influence of operational speed and the pressure applied by compacting wheels. Engenharia-na-Agricultura; 18(1): 20-29. Hazbavi (2013) Moisture dependent physico-mechanical properties of Iranian okra (Ablemoschus esculentus L.) seed. African Journal of Biotechnology, Vol.12 (42),pp 6098-6106, 2013. Heinemann Jr., W. H., J. W. Cary, and A. E. Dilworth (1973) Experimental machines for autodibble planting. Transactions ofthe ASAE 16(4):656-659.

Heinemann, W. H., Jr., Gary, J. W., and Dilworth, A. E. (1973) Experimental machine for autodibble planting. Trans. ASAE 16(4):656-659. Hiroyuki, T. and Sheu, S. (2010) Agricultural Mechanization and the Smallholder in Nigeria. Nigeria Strategy Support Program No 22. Hossain (2014) Development and evaluation of low cost seeder for maize establishment, MS Thesis, Department of Farm Power and Machinery Bangladesh Agricultural University Mymensingh. Huang, B. K., and Tayaputch, V. (1973) Design and analysis of a fluid injector spot and furrow opener. Trans. ASAE 16(3)-.414-419

Huard Machinery Company. (1981) 'Technishe Information. Aussaat durch Plastikfolie. Folien-Maissâgerât. ICAR (2004) Annual report of Agricultural Engineering and Technology in farm implements and machinery. Ikechukwu, I. B. et. al (2014) Design and Fabrication of a Single Row Maize Planter for Garden Use” J. of Advancement in Engineering and Technology Voume1/Issue2 ISSN; 2348-2931.

Islam AKMS, Haque ME, Hossain MM, Saleque MA, Bell RW (2010) Water and fuel saving technologies: Unpuddled bed and strip tillage for wet season rice cultivation in Bangladesh, In: Gilkes RJ, Nattaporn Prakongkep (Eds.). Division Symposium 3.2 Nutrient best management practices, Proceedings of 19th World Congress of Soil Science. Soil Solutions for a Changing World, Brisbane, Australia, 1-6 August 2010. International Union of Soil Science, Wageningen. The Netherlands. pp. 169-172. Ismail ZE, Hanify EI., EH. (2009) Construction and testing the seed punch planter. Miser J. Ag. Engg., volume 26 issue 1 pp 597-607 Jafari, J. V., and Fornstrom, K, J, (1972) A precision punch planter for sugar beets. Trans. ASAE 15(3):569-571, Jayan, P.R. and kumar, V.J.F. (2004) Planter design in relation to the physical properties of seeds” Journal of Tropical Agriculture; 42 (1-2): 69-71. Khanbarad S.C. N.D. Joshi, D. Mohapatra, R.F. Sutar and D.C. Joshi (2014) Effect of Moisture Content on Some Selected Physical Properties of Pigeon Pea (Cajanus cajan) Journal of Grain Processing and Storage | January-June, 2014, Vol 1, Issue 1, Pages 06-12 Klocke, N. L. (1979) No-till drills for fall seeding small grains. ASAE Paper No. 791023. Joint Meeting of the ASAE and CSAE, Winnipeg, Canada Kumar,K., Naaresh, N.K.

and Ojha, T.P. (1986) Design, construction and

performance of a manuallyoperated seeding attachment for an animal drawn cultivator’’ Agricultural Mechanization in Asia, Africa and Latin America; 17(2):35- 38 Kyada, A.R. and Patel, D.B. (2014) Design and development of manually operated seed planter machine’, 5th International & 26th All India Manufacturing Technology, Design and Research Conference (AIMTDR 2014) December 12th–14th, 2014, IIT Guwahati, Assam, India; 591-597. Lara, L.A., Guillen, S.J. and Perez, S.L. (1996) Development of a direct planter for corn and faba beans. Agricultural Mechanization in Asia, Africa and Latin America; 27 (2): 25-28.

Liu, J., Cui, T., Zhang, D.X., Yang, L., Gao, N. and Wang, B. (2010) Effects of maize seed grading on sowing quality by pneumatic precision seed-metering device. Transactions-of-the-

Chinese-Society-of-Agricultural-Engineering;

26(9):109-

113. Mock, J.J and D.C.Erbach (1977) Influence of conservation tillage environments on growth and productivity of corn. Agron.J. 69:337-340

Moken (2002 )Mechanized sowing of major rainfed crops using precision planter cum herbicide applicator: a case study Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture (ICAR), Hyderabad–500059. Proceedings of AIPA 2012, INDIA

Molin, J. P., and V. D’Agostini. (1996, 2008) Development of a rolling punch planter for stony soil conditions. Agric. Mech. Asia, Africa and Latin America 27(3):1719.

Morrison Jr., J. E., and R. R. Allen (1987) Planter and drill requirements for soil with surface residues. Paper presented at the Southern Region No-tillage Conf. on Conservation Tillage, Misc-Pub-MP-Agri-Exp-Stn (1636): 44-58. College Station,Tex.: The Station.

Morrison, John E., Jr., and Abrams, C. F. (1978) Conservation- tillage opener for planters and Seed drills. Internat. J. Agric. Engg.; 4(1) 185-197

Murray, J.R., Tulburg, J.N. and Basnet B.B., (2006) Planters and their components: types, attributes, functional reqirements, classification and description. Australian Centre for international Agricultural Research (ACIAR) Monograph No. 121. Nirala, S.K. (2011) Performance evaluation of bullock drawn multi crop inclined plate planter. Internat. J. Agric. Engg.; 4(2) 193-199. Oduma, O. et. al (2014) Development and Performance Evaluation of a manually operated Cowpea Precision Planter, International Journal of Engineering and Technology; 4(12): 693-699.

Oje, Olukayode. (1981) Design and development of an injector for placing granularfertilizer.Unpublished M.S. Thesis. Library, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa Okey Francis Obi, Chinenye C. Anyadike and Charles Obinna Onyeke (2014) Moisture-Dependent Physical Properties of Pigeon Pea Grown in Nigeria. World Applied Sciences Journal 31 (8): 1396-1405, 2014 Olajide, O. G. and Manuwa, S. I. (2014) Design, Fabrication and Testing of a Low-cost Row-Crop Planter for Peasant Farmers, Proceedings of the International Soil Tillage Research Organisation (ISTRO) Nigeria Symposium, Akure; Pp;94-100. Pereira, D.M., Furlani, C.E.A., Silva, R.P., Lopes, D., Toledo, A. and de, A. (2008) Maize hybrids for silage x speed in the displacement of a seeder drill. Central theme technology for all sharing the knowledge for development Proceedings of the International Conference of Agricultural-Engineering, XXXVII Brazilian Congress-of-Agricultural Engineering, International Livestock Environment Symposium ILES VIII Iguassu Falls City, Brazil, 31st August to 4th September unpaginated. Pradhan, S. C., Mahapatra, M., Samal, P.K. and Behera, B.K. (1997) Development of power tiller –operated groundnut planter cum-“fertilizer drill”.Agricultural Mechanization in Asia, Africa and Latin America; 28(4): 25 – 28. Pradhan, S.C., Mahapatra, M., Samal, P.K. and Bahera, B.K. (1997) Development of power tiller operated groundnut planter cum-fertilizer drill. Agricultural Mechanization in Asia, Africa and Latin America; 28 (4): 25-28. Ramesh, Rana S.S.and Suresh Kumar (2014)Weed dynamics and productivity of maize-wheat cropping system as influenced by tillage/planting techniques International Journal of Science, Environment and Technology, Vol. 3, No 3, 2014, 1059 – 1070

Reddy, R.S., (1982) Development of an onion-set planter based on design criteria of plant transplanters. Unpublished MSc Thesis in Agricultural Engineering. Texas Technology.University, USA.

Sahay, J. (2004) Element of Agricultural Engineering, Standards Publishers Distributors, New Delhi, Third Edition. Sangani V.P. and Davara P.R. (2013) Moisture dependent physical properties of pigeon pea grains Int. J. Postharvest Technology and Innovation, Vol. 3, No. 1, 2013

Shaaban, U.A., Afify, M.T., Hassan, G. E. and El-Haddad, Z.A., (2009) Development of a vacuum precision seeder prototype for onion seeds. Misr Journal of Agricultural Engineering, 26(4): 1751-1775. Sharma and Mukesh (2010) A text book of “Farm machinery Design Principles and Problems”,Jain Brothers, New Delhi, Second edition. Singh , R.C, Singh, G., Sarswat, D.C., (2005) Optimization of design and operational parameters of a pneumatic seed metering devicefor planting cotton seeds. Bio system Engineering, 94(4): 429-438 Singh, S. (1984) Design, development and evaluation of tractor drawn ridger planter for winter maize. Biennial Report, Department of Farm Power and Machinery, PAU, Ludhiana, India; pp: 21-27. Srivastava, A. K., and Anibal, M, E. (1981) A punch planter for conservation tillage. Paper No. 811020. Summer Meeting of the ASAE, Orlando, Florida. Staggenborg, S.A., Taylor, R.K. and Maddux, L.D. (2004) Effect of planter speed and seed firmers on corn stand establishment. Appl. Eng. Agric. 20: 573-580. Suderman, D., and Clark, S. J. (1981) The KSU mulch under-planter--Development and testing. Paper No. 81-1509. ASAE Winter Meeting, Chicago, Illinois

Swallow, B. M., Sang, J. K., Nyabenge, M., Bundotich, D. K., Duraiappah, A. K., & Yatich, T. B. (2009) Tradeoffs, synergies and traps among ecosystem services in the Lake Victoria basin of East Africa. Environmental Science & Policy, 12, 504–519 Tiian Ns.C. (1970) A punch planter for conservation farming,retrospective thesis and dissertation paper 7901

Tompkins, F. D. and Bledsoe, B. L. (1979) Vibratory furrow opening tool for minimum tillage planters. Trans. ASAE 22(3):498-503.Pitts, N. E. 1978. New design for no-till planter. Soil Cons. 43(9):9-ll. transplanters. Trans. ASAE 21(5):843-847 Trots, V.B. (2008) Maize grown for silage in mixtures with high protein content crops. Kormoproizvodstvo; (7): 18 -20. Ul'yanov, A. F,, and Ivzhenko, S. A. (1968) The problem of planting seeds in soil without an opener. Agric. Mech. (collected works) 10:329-338. Transi, by W. R. Gill, National Tillage Machinery Laboratory, Auburn, Alabama. Vanderlip, R.L., Okonkwo, J.C. and Schaffer, J.A. (1988) Corn response to precision of within-row plant spacing. Appl. Agric. Res. 3: 116-119. Wijewardene, Ray. (1978) Systems and energy in tropical farming. Paper No. 78-1511. Winter Meeting of the ASAE, Chicago, Illinois

Wilkins, D. E., Adrian, P. A., and Conley, W. S. (1979) Punch planting of vegetable seeds, a progress report. Trans. ASAE 22(4):746-749. Wohab, M.A. (2003) Design and development of a power tiller operated minimum tillage seeder. MS thesis. Department of Farm Power and Machinery, Bangladesh Agricultural University, Mymensingh, Bangladesh. Wollin, A.S., McPhee, J.E., Robotham, B.G. and P.A. Walsh (1987) A review of engineering aspects of crop establishment. In: I.M. Wood, W.H. Hazard and F.R. From (Editors), Crop Establishment Problems in Queensland: Recognition, Research and Resolutions. Occas. Publ. No. 34, Australian Institute of Agricultural Science, Brisbane, Qld., 42–61. Jayan P.R. and Kumar V.J.F. (2004) Planter design in relation to the physical properties of seeds. Journal of Tropical Agriculture 42 (1-2): 69-71, 2004 Rahman MD. Lutfar (2014) Performance evaluation of an inclined plate seed metering device for maize planting under zero till drill, A Thesis Master of science (M.S) Bangladesh Agricultural University Mymensingh.

Appendix1 Table: 1. Various physical properties of maize (COH-3) seed at 10 % moisture content. Particular Number of observations Size R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 Mean CV (%) Length, mm 10.10 12 9.90 11.50 11.70 11.04 11.41 width, mm 9.90 7.85 8.79 10.15 9.40 9.21 15.35 Thickness, mm 3.10 3.40 3.90 3.55 3.65 3.52 11.97 Geometric mean dia, mm 8.65 9.70 9.80 7.90 9.70 9.15 8.30 Shape Sphericity 0.60 0.65 0.62 0.63 0.61 0.62 .6007 B.D. and true density Moisture content, per 10 10 10 10 10 10 cent Bulk density, g/cm3 0.486 0.475 0.487 0.467 0.478 0.478 Thousand seed mass, g 155 160 157 159 161 158 155.55 True density, g/cm3 1.08 1.12 1.10 1.15 1.14 1.11 Angle of repose, degree 21 22.30 23.10 20.45 21.10 22.59 Coefficient of friction, 0.69 0.66 0.67 0.70 0.68 0.68 Galvanised sheet

APPENDIX 2 Table: 2 Various physical properties of Pigeon pea (BAHAR) seed at 10 % moisture content Particular Number of observations Size R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 Mean Length, mm width, mm Thickness, mm Geometric mean dia, mm Shape Sphericity B.D. and true density Moisture content, per cent

5.10 4.52 4.70 5.10

6.34 5.20 4.10 5.00

4.99 5.40 4.68 5.45

6.90 4.98 4.57 5.37

6.22 4.95 4.44 4.98

5.91 5.01 4.49 5.18

CV (%) 6.78 15.23 18.28 23.91

0.89

0.85

0.79

0.90

0.91

0.86

17.20

10

10

10

10

10

-

10

Bulk density, g/cm3 Thousand seed mass, g True density, g/cm3 Angle of repose, degree Coefficient of friction, Galvanised sheet

0.89 101 1.35 29 0.49

0.85 99.60 1.37 29.10 0.44

0.86 96.5 1.31 30.44 0.47

0.83 93.4 1.32 31.60 0.48

0.84 96.4 1.35 28.40 0.45

0.85 97.38 1.34 29.70 0.46

APPENDIX 3 Table.3 Various physical properties of Okra (Kashi pragati) seed at 10 % moisture content Particular Number of observations Size R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 Mean Length, mm width, mm Thickness, mm Geometric mean dia, mm Shape Sphericity, % B.D. and true density Moisture content, per cent Bulk density, g/cm3 Thousand seed mass, g True density, g/cm3 Angle of repose, degree Coefficient of friction, Galvanised steel sheet

32.63 -

6.02 4.90 4.02 4.38

5.60 4.20 4.40 4.93

5.80 4.40 4.59 4.33

5.85 4.60 4.48 4.22

5.11 4.70 4.83 4.83

5.67 4.56 4.46 4.53

CV (%) 12.82 17.01 15.17 11.7

90.85

90.95

90.92

90.89

90.91

90.90

181

10 0.605 60.80 1.037 21 0.399

10 0.630 59.90 1.100 22.30 0.410

10 0.615 60.44 1.150 23.10 0.401

10 0.601 60.33 1.069 20.45 0.392

10 0.620 60.27 1.067 21.10 0.393

10 0.614 60.34 1.084 22.59 0.399

186 -

APPENDIX 4 Table.4 Various physical properties of Red gram (APK-1) seed at 10 % moisture content. Particular R1 Length l, mm Width w, mm Roundness, mm Sphericity, % Projected area, mm2 Equivalent mean diameter, mm Thousand seed weight, g Angle of repose, degree

R2

Number of observations R3 R4 R5

Mean

6.9 6.9 1

7.8 5.50 1.1

8.4 6.2 1.2

7.65 7.4 0.9

7 5 1.3

7.55 6.20 1.10

CV (%) 11.39 9.96 11.85

0.77 34.1

0.80 34.5

0.75 36.5

0.56 34.98

0.99 35.10

0.770 35.10

32.12 -

6.89

6.40

6.95

7.7

6.5

6.89

10.85

101.12

105.3

102.5

103.2

101.5

101.12

64.75

29.1

28.5

28.9

28.3

28.6

28.48

-

Table 5. Germination Test (%) of Different Types of Pre-metered Seeds. Types of Replications Crops seeds R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 88 90 87 91 92 C1 88 86 87 90 88 C2 88 85 87 85 86 C3 87 85 84 86 84 C4

Average 89.6 87.8 86.4 85.2

Table 5 (a) Anova for Germination Test (%) of Different Types of Pre-metered Seeds Source of variation Due To Treat. Due To Error TOTAL

DF

S.S.

M.S.S.

F.(cal.)

3.00

55.60

18.53

5.62

12.00 19.00

39.60 95.20

3.30 5.01

F. tab (5%) (0.05)

RESULT

3.49

S

*Significant at 5 % level and cd value is 2.50 Table 6. Calibration of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter for Maize Seeds. S.N.

Hopper level

Weight of seeds dropped in 50 r.p.m. of ground wheel, g

1

61.72

2

63.4

3

Full

65

4

63.98

5

65.5

Average weight of seeds dropped in 50 r.p.m. of ground wheel, g

Area covered in 50 revolutions of ground wheel (ha)

Theoretically seed rate (kg/ha)

Seed rate (kg/ha) with 3 % missing of seeds.

63.92

0.003108

20.56

19.95

Table 7 Calibration of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter for Pigeon Pea Seeds. S.N.

Hopper level

Weight of seeds dropped in 50 r.p.m. of ground wheel, g

1

47.25

2

49.5

3

Full

48.30

4

47.52

5

48.54

Average Area covered in weight of 50 revolutions seeds of ground wheel dropped in (ha) 50 r.p.m. of ground wheel, g

48.22

0.004635

Theoretically seed rate kg/ha

Seed rate (Kg/ha) with 3 % missing of seeds.

10.40

10.08

Table 8 Calibration of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter for Okra Seeds S.N.

Hopper level

Weight of seeds dropped in 50 r.p.m. of ground wheel, g

1

14.85

2

15.15

3

Full

14.35

4

14.42

5

14.7

Average Area covered in weight of 50 revolutions seeds of ground wheel dropped in (ha) 50 r.p.m. of ground wheel, g

14.70

0.0023175

Theoretically seed rate (kg/ha)

Seed rate (kg/ha) with 2 % missing of seeds.

6.32

6.19

Table 9 Calibration of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter for Red gram Seeds S.N.

Hopper level

Weight of seeds dropped in 50 r.p.m. of ground wheel, g

1

26.44

2

27.3

3

Full

24.7

4

26.5

5

27.5

Average Area covered in weight of 50 revolutions seeds of ground wheel dropped in (ha) 50 r.p.m. of ground wheel, g

26.54

0.00103

Theoretically seed rate (kg/ha)

Seed rate (kg/ha) with 2.5 % missing of seeds.

25.77

25.12

Table 10 Mechanically Damaged Seeds (%) of Different Types of Crop due to manually operated Multi-crop Planter Types of Crops seeds C1 C2 C3 C4

R1 3 3 3 2

R2 2 2 2 2

Replications R3 4 3 2 3 1 3 3 3

R4

R5

Average 2.60 2.20 2 2.2

1 1 1 1

Table 10(a) Anova for Mechanically Damaged Seeds (%) of Different Types of Crop due to manually operated Multi-crop Planter Source of variation Due To Treat. Due To Error TOTAL

DF

S.S.

M.S.S.

3.00

0.95

0.32

12.00 19.00

14.80 15.75

1.23 0.83

F.(cal.)

F. tab (5%) (0.05)

0.26

3.49

RESULT

NS

*Non Significant at 5 % level and cd value is 1.53 Table 11Germination Test (%) of Different Types of Metered Seeds. Types of Replications Crops seeds R1 R2 R3 R4 86 86 84 88 C1 86 85 86 85 C2 86 84 84 85 C3 86 84 84 85 C4

R5 85 86 83 85

Average 85.8 85.6 84.4 84.8

Table 11(a) Anova for Germination Test (%) of Different Types of Metered Seeds Source of variation Due To Treat. Due To Error TOTAL

DF

S.S.

M.S.S.

3.00

6.55

2.18

12.00 19.00

18.00 24.55

1.50 1.29

F.(cal.)

F. tab (5%) (0.05)

1.46

3.49

RESULT

NS

*Non Significant at 5 % level and cd value is 1.69

Table 12 Test of Distance (cm) of Dropped Seeds of Different Crop on Grease layer by Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter

Types of Crops

R1

R2

Replications R3

R4

R5

Average

seeds C1 C2 C3 C4

26.94 33.27 21.40 22

26.11 32.18 20.80 23

26 32.06 20.30 20.3

25.55 31.90 21.10 21.5

24 30.5 20.70 23.2

25.72 31.98 20.86 22

Table 12(a) Anova for Test of Distance (cm) of Dropped Seeds of Different Crop on Grease layer by Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter Source of variation

DF

Due To Treat. Due To Error TOTAL

S.S.

M.S.S.

3.00

376.64

125.55

12.00 19.00

14.89 391.52

1.24 20.61

F.(cal.)

F. tab (5%) (0.05)

101.21

3.49

RESULT

S

*Significant at 5 % level and cd value is 1.53 Table 13 Test of Missing Rate (%) of Different Crop Seeds due to Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter Types of Crops seeds C1 C2 C3 C4

R1 0 3.03 0 6

R2 2.5 6.06 4 4

Replications R3 7.5 5 3.03 0 0 2 0 2

R4

R5 2.5 3.03 2 2

Average 3.50 3.03 1.6 2.8

Table 13 (a) Anova for Test of Missing Rate (%) of Different Crop Seeds due to Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter Source of variation Due To Treat. Due To Error TOTAL

DF

S.S.

M.S.S.

3.00

9.82

3.27

12.00 19.00

82.86 92.69

6.91 4.88

F.(cal.)

F. tab (5%) (0.05)

0.47

3.49

RESULT

NS

*Non Significant at 5 % level and cd value is 3.62

Table 14 Determination of Pushing Force (kg), Draft (N) and Drawbar Power (hp, watts) in Different Types of Soils. Types of Soils R1 Sandy Loam Soil Pushing 13

R2 14

Replications R3 13

13.5

R4

R5 13

Average 13.3

Force (kg) Draft force (N) Drawbar power (hp) Dbp in (watts) Clay Soil Pushing Force (kg) Draft force (N) Drawbar power (hp) Dbp in (watts)

103.05

110.98

103.05

107.01

103.05 105.42

0.096

0.104

.096

0.074

.096

0.093

72.13

77.68

72.13

74.9

72.13

73.79

15

14

14

16

15

14.8

129.6

121.51 119.88

0.12

0.11

90.72

85.057 83.91

121.51

113.41

0.11

0.10

85.057

113.41

0.10

79.38

79.38

0.108

Table 14(a) Anova for Determination of Pushing Force (kg), Draft (N) and Drawbar Power (hp, watts) in Sandy Loam Soil. Source of variation

DF

Due to Rep.. Due To Treat Due To Error

S.S.

M.S.S.

F.(cal.)

F. tab (5%)

4

41.92853

10.48213

3.72202

3.26 S

3

37311.81

12437.27

4416.255

3.49 S

RESULT

12 33.79498 2.816248 19 37387.54 1967.765 TOTAL *Significant at 5 % level and cd value is 2.58

Table 14(b) Anova for Determination of Pushing Force (kg), Draft (N) and Drawbar Power (hp, watts) in Clay Soil. Source of variation Due to Rep.. Due To Treat

DF

S.S.

M.S.S.

F.(cal.)

F. tab (5%)

4

152.8459

38.21149

3.712353

3.26 S

3

48377.54

16125.85

1566.671

3.49 S

RESULT

Due To Error

12 123.5168 10.29306 19 48653.9 2560.732 TOTAL *Significant at 5 % level and cd value is 4.94 Table 15: Skidding of Ground Drive Wheel (%) of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter in Different Soil. Types of Soil R1 Sandy Loam Soil 3.62 2.59 Clay Soil

Replications R3 R4 4.66 6.73 3.62 4.66

R2 5.69 4.66

R5 7.77 5.69

Average 5.71 4.24

Table 15(a) Skidding of Ground Drive Wheel (%) of Manually Operated MultiCrop Planter in Different Soil Source of variation

DF

Due to Rep.. Due To Treat Due To Error

S.S.

M.S.S.

F.(cal.)

F. tab (5%)

RESULT

4

15.66474

3.916185

0.745053

6.39 NS

1

5.25625

5.25625

32.29151

7.71 S

4 0.65110 0.16277 9 21.57209 2.396899 TOTAL *Due to Rep. is Non Significant and due to Treat.is Significant at 5 % level and cd value is 0.708 Table 16 Test of Distance of hill to hill in row (cm) of Different Crops and Different Soil in the field by Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter

Types of Soil and R1 Crop Sandy Loam Soil 24.94 C1 29.10 C2 19.10 C3 Clay Soil 25.90 C1 29.1 C2 20.10 C3

R2

Replications R3

R4

R5

Average

22 29.70 18.20

24 30.10 18.30

23.50 29 20.10

23 27.50 18.10

23.98 29.08 18.76

23.10 29.5 18.20

24.30 30.8 19.30

23 28.8 20.10

24 27.5 18.10

24.06 29.14 19.16

Table 16 (a) Anova for Test of Distance of hill to hill in row (cm) of Different Crops in Sandy loam Soil in the field by Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter Source of variation Due to Rep.. Due To Sandy Soil Due To Error

DF

S.S.

M.S.S.

F.(cal.)

2

5.177227

2.588613

0.038798

4

266.8781

66.71952

82.8087

8

6.445653

0.805707

F. tab (5%)

RESULT

4.46 NS 3.84 S

14 278.501 19.89293 *Due to Rep. is Non Significant and due to Sandy Soil .is Significant at 5 % level and TOTAL

cd value is 1.69 Table 16 (b) Anova for Test of Distance of hill to hill in row (cm) of Different Crops in Clay Soil in the field by Manually Operated Multi- Crop Planter Source of variation

DF

Due to Rep.. Due To Clay Soil Due To Error

S.S.

M.S.S.

F.(cal.)

F. tab (5%)

RESULT

2

7.310667

3.655333

0.058714

4.46 NS

4

249.028

62.257

64.63783

3.84 S

8 7.705333 0.963167 14 264.044 18.86029 TOTAL *Due to Rep. is Non Significant and due to Sandy Soil .is Significant at 5 % level and cd value is 1.84 Table 17 Test of Missing Hills (%) of Different Crops and Different Soil in the field by Manually Operated Multi - Crop Planter Types of Replications Soil and R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 Average Crop Sandy Loam Soil 15 17.5 20 15 12.5 16 C1 21.21 15.15 15.15 21.21 15.15 17.57 C2 16 18 16 20 20 18 C3 Clay Soil 17.64 21.21 17.64 14.28 21.21 18.34 C1 21.21 18.18 15.15 21.21 18.18 18.78 C2 16 18 16 20 20 18 C3

Table 17 (a) Anova for Test of Missing Hills (%) of Different Crops in Sandy loam Soil in the field by Manually Operated Multi - Crop Planter Source of variation Due to Rep.. Due To Sandy Soil Due To Error TOTAL

DF

S.S.

M.S.S.

F.(cal.)

F. tab (5%)

RESULT

2

12.77611

6.388053

2.302363

4.46 NS

4

11.09825

2.774563

0.278179

3.84 NS

8 14

79.79221 103.6666

9.974027 7.404755

*Non Significant at 5 % level and cd value is 5.94

Table 17 (b) Anova for Test of Missing Hills (%) of Different Crops in Clay Soil in the field by Manually Operated Multi - Crop Planter Source of variation

DF

Due to Rep.. Due To Clay Soil Due To Error TOTAL

S.S.

M.S.S.

F.(cal.)

2

21.21509

10.60755

27.47144

4

1.54452

0.38613

0.05677

8 14

54.41315 77.17276

6.801643 5.51234

F. tab (5%)

RESULT

4.46 S 3.84 NS

*Due to Rep. is Significant and Due to Clay Soil is Non Significant at 5 % level and cd value is 4.91 Table 18 Test of Hill Populations (%) of Different Crops and Different Soil in the field by Manually Operated Multi - Crop Planter Types of Replications Soil and R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 Average Crop Sandy Loam Soil 85 82.5 80 85 87.5 84 C1 78.29 84.85 84.85 78.29 81.82 82.22 C2 84 82 84 82 82 82.8 C3 Clay Soil 82.36 78.79 82.36 85.72 78.80 81.60 C1 78.29 81.82 84.5 78.30 81.82 80.94 C2 84 82 84 80 80 82 C3

Table 18(a) Anova for Test of Hill Populations (%) of Different Crops in Sandy loam Soil in the field by Manually Operated Multi - Crop Planter Source of variation

DF

Due to Rep.. Due To Sandy Soil Due To Error TOTAL

S.S.

M.S.S.

F.(cal.)

F. tab (5%)

RESULT

2

6.844533

3.422267

0.966651

4.46 NS

4

14.16133

3.540333

0.385138

3.84 NS

8 14

73.53907 94.54493

9.192383 6.75321

*Non Significant at 5 % level and cd value is 5.70 Table 18(b) Anova for Test of Hill Populations (%) of Different Crops in Clay Soil in the field by Manually Operated Multi - Crop Planter Source of variation Due to Rep.. Due To Clay

DF

S.S.

2 4

19.77183 2.836253

M.S.S.

9.885913 0.709063

F.(cal.)

13.94221 0.097285

F. tab (5%)

RESULT

4.46 S 3.84 NS

Soil Due To Error

8 14

TOTAL

58.30801 80.91609

7.288502 5.779721

*Due to Rep. is Significant Due to Clay Soil is Non Significant at 5 % level and cd value is 5.08 Table 19 Test Result of Effective Field Capacity (ha/hr) of Different Crops in the field by Manually Operated Multi - Crop Planter Types of Replications Crops R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 Average 0.148 00.144 0.135 0.142 0.148 0.143 C1 0.231 0.216 0.202 0.223 0.216 0.217 C2 0.115 0.108 0.108 0.111 0.115 0.111 C3 Table 19(a) Anova for Test Result of Effective Field Capacity (ha/hr) of Different Crops in the field by Manually Operated Multi - Crop Planter Source of variation

DF

Due to Rep.. Due to Crops Due To Error TOTAL

S.S.

M.S.S.

F.(cal.)

F. tab (5%)

RESULT

2

0.000431

0.000216

0.029047

4.46 NS

4

0.02968

0.00742

311.5479

3.84 S

8 14

0.000191 0.030302

2.38E-05 0.002164

*Due to Rep. is Non Significant and Due to Crop is Significant at 5 % level and cd value is 0.0091

Table 20 Test Result of Field Efficiency (%) of Different Crops in the Manually Operated Multi - Crop Planter Types of Replications Crops R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 89.15 86.74 81.32 85.54 89.15 C1 92.77 86.74 81.12 89.55 86.74 C2 92.74 87.09 87.09 89.51 92.74 C3

field by

Average 86.38 87.38 89.83

Table 20(a) Anova forTest Result of Field Efficiency (%) of Different Crops in the field by Manually Operated Multi - Crop Planter Source of variation Due to Rep.. Due to Crops Due To Error TOTAL

DF

S.S.

M.S.S.

F.(cal.)

F. tab (5%)

RESULT

2

118.5901

59.29505

7.513377

4.46 S

4

31.56772

7.89193

2.175888

3.84 NS

8 14

29.01595 179.1738

3.626993 12.79813

*Due to Rep. is Significant and Due to Crop is Non Significant at 5 % level and cd value is 3.58

Table 21: Fabrication Cost of the Developed Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter Serial no.

Fabrication materials

Quantity, pcs

Lump-sum cost, (Rs.)

1

MS Flat bar

12 kg (Rs.45/kg)

540

2

Seed hopper

1

540

3

Seed metering wheel (wheel

3 (200/wheel)

600

type) 4

Seed tube

1

25

5

Wheels

2

1240

6

G.I pipe

2 kg (50/kg)

100

7

Ball bearing

2

120

8

Sprockets

3

360

9

Pintel chain

1

200

10

Nut bolts

20

60

11

Parking stand

1

100

Fabrication cost

3900

Extra Charge (20% of total cost)

780

Total Cost

4680

Table 22 Operational cost of manually operated multi crop planter and hand application

S. No.

Method of planting

Operational cost (Rs./ha)

1

Hand application

5500

2

Manually operated multi crop planter

422.97

On the basis of results, the economic analysis was carried out with the following assumptions Assumptions: I. Average annual use II. Life of the planter III. Salvage value

= 300 hours = 5 year = 10 % of initial cost

A. Fixed Cost Cost of manually operated multi crop = Rs. 4680.0 planter Deprecation/year = Rs. 842.4 Interest on investment/h @ 10% per annum

= Rs. 468.00 Tax and insurance and shelter charges/h (@ 2% of initial cost per annum) = Rs. 93.60 = 842+468+93.6 = 1101.75 Fixed cost of manually operated multi = Rs. 1403.6 crop planter/year Total fixed cost/year

B. Operating Cost Labor cost = Rs. 50/hr × 300 hr Maintenance cost Total cost /yr

Rs. 15000 Rs. 93.6 Fixed cost + Operating Cost = 1403+15093 = Rs. 16496

Effective field capacity = 0.13ha/h Hectare covered per Year = 0.13 × 300 =39 ha.

Operational cost/ha = 16496/39= Rs. 422.97/ha. Total profit if crops was planted by manually operated planter= Rs. 3600/ha So total income in one year= 3600×39 = Rs.140400 Total profit = 140400-16248=Rs.124152/year Payback period= 3900/124152 = 0.0314 year = 11.46 days.

LABORATORY TESTING APPENDIX 4

Seed Germination Calculation of Pre- Metered Seed for Manually Operated MultiCrop Planter Location: Farm Machinery and Power Engineering Laboratory, VSAET, SHIATS, Allahabad. For Maize: Germinated seed = 89.6 Total seeds taken = 100 Seed Germination (%) = 89.6 % For Pigeon Pea: Germinated seed = 87.8 Total seeds taken = 100 87.8 % For Okra: Germinated seed = 86.4 Total seeds taken = 100 86.4 % For Red Gram: Germinated seed = 85.2 Total seeds taken = 100 85.2 %

APPENDIX – 5

Calibration Calculation of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter Location: Farm Machinery and Power Engineering Laboratory, VSAET For Maize: Diameter of drive wheel = 0.33m Radius of drive wheel = 0.33/2=0.165m

Size of the Planter (W) = NO NO = number of furrow opener S = distance between furrow opener Recommended row to row distance for maize = 60 cm W = 1×0.60 = 0.60m Distance covered in one revolution of drive wheel = π×D = 3.14×0.33 = 1.036m Area covered in 50 revolution of drive wheel = 50× π×D×W = 50×1.036×0.60 = 31.08m2 =0.003108 ha Amount of seed collected in 50 revolution of drive wheel when dropped only one seed from one cell = 63.926g = 0.06392 kg Seed rate/ha = = = 20.56 kg/ha With 3 % missing = 20.56-20.56

= 19.95 kg/ha

APPENDIX – 6

Calibration Calculation of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter Location: Farm Machinery and Power Engineering Laboratory, VSAET For Pigeon Pea: Diameter of drive wheel = 0.33m Radius of drive wheel = 0.33/2=0.165m Size of the Planter (W) = NO NO = number of furrow opener S = distance between furrow opener Recommended row to row distance for maize = 90 cm W = 1×0.90 = 0.90m Distance covered in one revolution of drive wheel = π×D = 3.14×0.33 = 1.036m Area covered in 50 revolution of drive wheel = 50× π×D×W = 50×1.036×0.90 = 46.35m2 =0.004635 ha Amount of seed collected in 50 revolution of drive wheel when dropped only one seed from one cell = 48.22g = 0.04822 kg Seed rate = = = 10.40 kg/ha With 2 % missing = 10.40 -10.40

= 10.08 kg/ha

APPENDIX – 7

Calibration Calculation of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter Location: Farm Machinery and Power Engineering Laboratory, VSAET For Okra: Diameter of drive wheel = 0.33m Radius of drive wheel = 0.33/2=0.165m Size of the Planter (W) = NO NO = number of furrow opener S = distance between furrow opener Recommended row to row distance for maize = 45 cm W = 1×0.45 = 0.45m Distance covered in one revolution of drive wheel = π×D = 3.14×0.33 = 1.036m Area covered in 50 revolution of drive wheel = 50× π×D×W = 50×1.036×0.45 = 23.175m2 =0.0023175 ha Amount of seed collected in 50 revolution of drive wheel when dropped only one seed from one cell = 31.916g = 0.01470 kg Seed rate = = = 6.32 kg/ha With 2 % missing = 6.22 -6.22

= 6.19 kg/ha

APPENDIX – 8

Calibration Calculation of Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter Location: Farm Machinery and Power Engineering Laboratory, VSAET For Red Gram: Diameter of drive wheel = 0.33m Radius of drive wheel = 0.33/2=0.165m Size of the Planter (W) = NO NO = number of furrow opener S = distance between furrow opener Recommended row to row distance for maize = 20 cm W = 1×0.30 = 0.20m Distance covered in one revolution of drive wheel = π×D = 3.14×0.33 = 1.036m Area covered in 50 revolution of drive wheel = 50× π×D×W = 50×1.036×0.20 = 10.3m2 =0.00103 ha

Amount of seed collected in 50 revolution of drive wheel when dropped only one seed from one cell = 26.54g = 0.02644 kg Seed rate = = = 25.77 kg/ha With 2.5 % missing = 25.77 - 25.77

= 25.12 kg/ha

APPENDIX – 9

Calculation of mechanically damaged seed due to the manually operated multi-crop planter Location: Farm Machinery and Power Engineering Laboratory, VSAET For Maize: Total seeds taken = 100 Number of Average damaged seeds = 2.60 Seed damage per cent = = 2.60% For Pigeon Pea: Total seeds taken = 100 Number of Average damaged seeds = 2.20 Seed damage per cent = = 2.20% For Okra: Total seeds taken = 100 Number of Average damaged seeds = 2.00 Seed damage per cent = = 2.00% For Red gram: Total seeds taken = 100 Number of Average damaged seeds = 2.00 Seed damage per cent =

= 2.2%

APPENDIX – 10

Seed Germination Calculation of Metered Seed for Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter Location: Farm Machinery and Power Engineering Laboratory, VSAET For Maize: Total seeds taken = 100 Germinated seed = 87 Seed Germination (%) = 87 % For Pigeon Pea: Total seeds taken = 100 Germinated seed = 85.6 85.6 % For Okra: Total seeds taken = 100 Germinated seed = 84.4 84.4 % For Red Gram: Total seeds taken = 100 Germinated seed = 84.8 84.8 %

APPENDIX – 11

Missing Rate Calculation for Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter Location: Farm Machinery and Power Engineering Laboratory, VSAET For Maize: Length of grease belt = 10 m Standard distance to drop seed = 25cm Average number of actual seed dropped (theoretical) =40 Average number of actual seed dropped = 38.6 % missing rate = =

3.5 %

For Pigeon Pea: Standard distance to drop seed = 30cm Average number of actual seed dropped (theoretical) =33 Average number of actual seed dropped = 32 % missing rate =

=

3.03 %

For Pigeon Pea: Standard distance to drop seed = 20cm Average number of actual seed dropped (theoretical) =50 Average number of actual seed dropped = 49.2 % missing rate =

=

1.6 %

FIELD TEST

APPENDIX – 12

Angle Measurement and Draft Force Calculation in Different Soil for Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter For Sandy loam Soil Draft=P cosθ Draft= mg cosθ Pushing angle, = tan-1 tan-1 = 36.09 Pushing force = 13kg Draft= mg cosθ = 13.3×9.81×cos 36.09= 105.43 N Dbp(kw) = Dbp =

= 0.073 kw = 73.79 watt = 0.098hp.

For Clay Soil tan-1 = 34.33 Push force of the machine = 14.8kg. Draft= mg cosθ = 14.8×9.81×cos 34.33 = 119.89 N Dbp(kw) = Speed of planter = 2.5km/h Dbp =

= 0.083 kW = 83.92 watt = 0.10 hp.

APPENDIX –13

Calculation for speed of operation of the Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter

Distance travelled by manually operated multi-crop planter = 10 m = 10/1000 = 0.01km Time taken by manually operated multi-crop planter = 14.5 sec. = = 0.00402 hr Speed of operation

=

= = 2.48 km/hr

APPENDIX –14 Calculation of Drive Wheel Skidding for the Manually Operated Multi-Crop

Planter For Sandy Loam Soil:

10 m distance traveled by manually operated multi-crop planter in 9.65 revolutions Distance covered from 9.1 revolution = 9.1×π × D

=9.1×3.14×0.33 = 9.429 m Skid distance = Distance traveled - Actual distance =10-9.429 = 0.57 m Skidding % = = 5.71%

APPENDIX –15 Calculation of Drive Wheel Skidding for the Manually Operated Multi-Crop

Planter in Different Soil For Clay Soil:

10 m distance traveled by manually operated multi-crop planter in 9.65 revolutions Distance covered from 9.24 revolution = 9.24×π × D

=9.24×3.14×0.33 = 9.574 m Skid distance = Distance traveled - Actual distance =10-9.574 = 0.42 m

Skidding % = = 4.26%

APPENDIX –16 Calculation of Missing Hills for the Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter in

Sandy Loam Soil Location: Agriculture Farm, SHIATS, Allahabad For Maize: Length of field = 10 m Width of field = 3 m Row to row distance = 60 cm Standard distance of drop seed = 25cm Average number of actual hills (theoretical) =40 Average number of actual hills = 33.6 % missing rate =

=

16 %

For Pigeon Pea: Length of field = 10 m Width of field = 4.5 m Row to row distance = 90 cm Standard distance of drop seed = 30cm Average number of actual hills (theoretical) =33 Average number of actual hills = 27.2 % missing rate =

=

17.57 %

For Okra: Length of field = 10 m Width of field = 2.25 m Row to row distance = 45 cm Standard distance of drop seed = 20cm Average number of actual hills (theoretical) =50 Average number of actual hills = 41.4 % missing rate =

=

17.2%

APPENDIX –17 Calculation of Missing Hills for the Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter in Clay

Soil Location: Agriculture Farm, SHIATS, Allahabad For Maize: Length of field = 10 m

Width of field = 3 m Row to row distance = 60 cm Standard distance of drop seed = 25cm Average number of actual hills (theoretical) =40 Average number of actual hills = 33.8 % missing rate =

=

18.34 %

For Pigeon Pea: Length of field = 10 m Width of field = 4.5 m Row to row distance = 90 cm Standard distance of drop seed = 30cm Average number of actual hills (theoretical) =33 Average number of actual hills = 26.8 % missing rate =

=

18.78 %

For Okra: Length of field = 10 m Width of field = 2.25 m Row to row distance = 45 cm Standard distance of drop seed = 20cm Average number of actual hills (theoretical) =50 Average number of actual hills = 45 % missing rate =

=

18 %

APPENDIX –18

Calculation of Hill Populations of Different Crops in Different Soil for Manually Operated Multi-Crop Planter Hills Populations of Maize in Sandy loam Soil: Theoretical Plant Population/ha =

= = 66666 Actual Plant Population with 16 % missing = 66666-66666×

= 66666-10666 = 56000/ha Hills Populations of Maize in Clay Soil: Actual Plant Population with 18.40 % missing = 66666-66666×

= 66666-12266 = 54400/ha

APPENDIX –19

Hills Populations of Pigeon Pea in Sandy loam Soil: Theoretical Plant Population/ha =

= = 37037 Actual Plant Population/ha with 17.78% missing = 37037-37037×

= 37037-6585 = 30452/ha Hills Populations of Pigeon Pea in Clay Soil: Actual Plant Population/ha with 19.06 % missing = 37037-37037×

= 37037-7059 = 29978/ha

APPENDIX –20

Hills Populations of Okra in Sandy loam Soil: Theoretical Plant Population/ha =

= = 1, 11,111 Actual Plant Population/ha with 17.2 % missing = 1, 11,111-1, 11,111×

= 1, 11,111-19111 = 92000 /ha Hills Populations of Okra in Clay Soil: Actual Plant Population/ha with 18 % missing = 1, 11,111-1, 11,111×

= 1, 11,111-19999 = 91112/ha

APPENDIX –21

Field Capacity Calculation of the manually operated multi – crop planter for maize Length of Row =1000 cm or 10m Row width= 60 cm Row area = (1000 × 60) = 60000 cm2 8

=

2

[1 ha =10 cm ]

= 0.0006 ha For Observation 1 Time taken to operate =14.5 sec or 0.0040 hours Effective field capacity =

= 0.148ha/hr

Field Efficiency Calculation of the manually operated multi – crop planter for maize Length of the field, L =10m = 0.01 km Time to cover the row, t = 13 sec = 0.0036 hr Forward speed, S = =

= 2.77 km/hr

Width of coverage, w = 0.60 m Theoretical Field Capacity = =

= 0.166 ha/hr

Field efficiency = =

= 89.15%

APPENDIX –22 Field Capacity Calculation of the manually operated multi – crop planter for pigeon pea. Length of row =1000 cm or 10m

Row width= 90 cm Row area = (1000 × 90) = 90000 cm2 2

[1 ha =108 cm ]

=

= 0.0009 ha For Observation 1 Time taken to operate =14 sec or 0.0040 hours Effective field capacity =

= 0.231 ha/h

Field Efficiency Calculation of the manually operated multi – crop planter for pigeon pea Length of the field, L =10m Time to cover the row, t = 13 sec Forward speed, S = = = 2.77 km/h Width of coverage, w = 0.90 m Theoretical Field Capacity = = = 0.249 ha/h Field efficiency = = = 92.77%

APPENDIX –23 Field Capacity Calculation of the manually operated multi – crop planter for okra. Length of row =1000 cm or 10m Row width= 45 cm Row area = (1000 × 45) = 45000 cm2 =

8

2

[1 ha =10 cm ]

= 0.00045 ha For Observation 1 Time taken to operate =14 sec or 0.0040 hours Effective field capacity = = 0.115 ha/hr Field Efficiency Calculation of the manually operated multi – crop planter for okra Length of the field, L =10m Time to cover the row, t = 13 sec

Forward speed, S = =

= 2.77km/hr

Width of coverage, w = 0.45 m Theoretical Field Capacity = = = 0.124 ha/hr Field efficiency = = 92.74%