UNIVERSITY OF
AGRICULTURE, FAISALABAD

FACULTY OF
AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

DEPARTMENT OF
FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

Synopsis for M.Sc. (Hons.) Agricultural
Engineering

 

TITLE: Design, construction and performance evaluation of a Hand Pulled
mechanical weeder (cone weeder) for paddy soil

 

Name
of the Student               :           Shahbaz Hussain

Registration
No.                      :           2012-ag-3770

Name
of the Supervisor          :           Engr.Azlan Zahid

 

ABSTRACT

UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE, FAISALABAD

Department of FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

Synopsis for M.Sc. (Hons.) 
Degree in Agricultural Engineering

 

Title: Design,
Development and performance evaluation
of a hand pulled mechanical weeder ( cono weeder) for paddy soil.

 

Date of Admission                :           September,
2016

Date of Initiation                   :           December,
2017

Probable Duration                 :           6
months

 

Supervisory Committee:

1. Dr. Anjum Munir                :            (Chairman)

2. Dr. Abdual Ghafoor            :            (Member)

3. Dr. Shakeel Anjum    :   
(Member)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER
I

INTRODUCTION

 

Pakistan is an agriculture country and it is the backbone of
national economy. It contributes a major role in providing food, supplying raw
materials,in making building structures, shelters and earning a foreign
exchange to employing a large portion of population (Afzal
and Ahmed.2009). Pakistan is one of the world’s largest producer and
suppliers of food and crops according to different source i.e sugar cane,
wheat, rice etc.Pakistan is famed for its “Basmati Rice” the country’s major
agriculture export product (Akram, 2009). Pakistan
is the 5th largest producer and 3rd largest exporter of
raw cotton in the world and provide livelihood more than 50 Billion people (Morris,1989).

Weeds are unwanted plants growing where they are not
required. In addition to the other biotic and abiotic constraints weeds exert a
significant effect on the potential yield of major crops (Siddiqui et al., 2010; Tanveer et al., 2015). Weeds
when interfering with the cropping system it reduces the plant growth by
reducing light, space, nutrients, Carbon dioxide (CO2) thus results
in less crop production and quality (Khan et al.,
2013). Weeds inflict about 20-30% of yield losses in different crops of
Pakistan (Hussain et al., 2007). In comparison
with global, average weed-caused crop yield in Pakistan is 11.5% but global
average is 9.5% (Rabbani et al., 2013). This
may loss a million dollar per annum (saeed et al.,
2010a).Weed can cause several damages to farming inputs, includes
decrease of crop yields, increase plant pest and diseases, increase in
irrigation cost and decrease in land value. Almost 50-70% reduction is due to
poor weed control. In Pakistan poor weed control leads to uninterrupted weed
growth, which causes a severe annual losses.

Management
of weeds is an important portion of production techniques as removal of weeds
is expensive and hard to attain (Olukunle and
Oguntunde, 2006). Manual, mechanical and chemical method are
commonly employed for the control of harmful and fast-growing weed species (Rabbani et al., 2013). However, increasing labor
shortages, high wages, mismanagement, weather condition, unavailability of
inputs available to farmer causes effective and timely management of weeds (Kholiq et al., 2011, 2013b). Another concern is that
when herbicides may provide to control the weed. Herbicide residuals can
pollute the crop products and also the soil, thus harmful for human and the
environment (Riaz et al., 2007). Several
non-chemical approaches, such as use of crop interference, diversity, hand
weeding and selective tillage operation were widely employed for weed control
in many cropping system before applying herbicides (Parish,
1990; and janke, 1990; Anderson, 2015). Weeds are removed by tools such
as blade and hoe requires high drudgery, time overwhelming and high labor.
Manual weeding requires a immense labor force and report for about 25% of the
total labor requirement which is usually 900-1200 man-hours/hectare (Nagg and Dutt 1979). Weeding and tillage is normally
done 15-20 days after sowing. The weed should controlled at their early stage.
Rice and Groundnut are very sensitive to weed as declared by (Goel, et al 2008). As a solution to these problems,
mechanical weeder was developed and designed (H.S.Srindhar.
2007). Utilization of hand tool technology is one of the major causes of
poverty in the  villages. Nganilwa et al. (2003) declare that a farmer only
using hand hoe for weeding. More than 3000 species of weed have been found all
over the world.The cost of weed management is large; however the opportunity
cost of weed management is higher. Rangasamy et al.
(1993) reported that one third of the total cost of cultivation is
expend on weeding.

The method employed to remove weeds on the farm includes
Burning, dehydration, manual and mechanical weeding. In developed countries
chemical weeding is more prominent than mechanical weeding. However, when the
machine having motor, it produces noise pollution and cause power loss thus
requires high maintenance. In other case, if the machine having engine to work,
then it consumes more fuel. The engine speed reducing the efficiency of weeds
and also heat is generated which effects the growing plants. The wider and
equal spacing between the plants allows easy operation of mechanical weeder, it
incorporates the weeds into the soil as a green manure.

Presently there are many different designs of mechanical
weeder, motorized weeders or power weeder. These weeders are cost effective.
Mostly used weeder that are affordable for the small farmers are manual weeder
i.e Cono weeder. While operating the weeder some weeds left near the plants, it
is removed manually. Mechanical weeding either by hand tool or mechanical
weeders are most efficient in dry land and wet land (Nagg
and Dutt 1979, Gite and Yadav, 1990, Gite and Yadav, 1985). Several
types of cutting blades are used for manually operated weeders.Mechanical weed
control system is not only uproots the weeds, it is also loosen the soil
surface to improve aeration and water holding capacity of the soil. Manual
weeding is the clean process but slightly slow
(Biswass, 1990).

Therefore, in
order to improve the productivity per unit area of small land holdings and
considering the financial condition of Pakistani farmers, it is vitally
necessary to have suitable agricultural equipment which farmers can use and
also allow for traditionally engaged. There is shortage of weeding machine in
Pakistan to eradicate the weeding problems which adversely effect the plant
growth and the water holding capacity of soil. There is less work on the design
and developing of weeder machine in Pakistan. In order to solve the problems of
weed, I have to design a simple mechanical hand push weeder which is very
suitable for all crops especially rice crops and it is very suitable for the
small farmers because it is less expensive and easily operated and it is also
reduce the cost of crop production and improve the crop yield to a great
extent. However, the efficiency of work in terms of area covered, mechanical
weeder is more efficient than manual weeding.

 

Objectives of the study

The overall objective of the study will be design, construct and test a
manually operated mechanical weeder with the traditional weeding method and to
supply best possibility for the crop to constitute itself after planting and
grow vigorously up to the time of harvesting.

1)       
To
Design and fabricate a manually operated weeder

2)       
To test
and evalute the prototype machine

3)       
To
compare the machine performance with the traditional weeding method

4)       
And to
judge the crop yield

 

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Weed management is one of the major problem in Pakistan.
Weed are the unwanted plants that grow everywhere or within the plants row that
reduces not only the growth of plants but also reduce the soil nutrients as
well as soil field capacity which adversely effect production efficiency. Manual
weeding is the traditional method, people also using this method today but it
is time consuming, more laborious and reduce cost production. Hence,
traditional method replaced by mechanical method introduce which is almost
working all over the world because it is advantageous than manual weeding. For this
purpose many weeder designs, my focus is on hand pulled manually operated mechanical
weeder because it is environment friendly and causes less noise pollution and
less expensive that every small scale farmers have to be afford. Some of the literature
review of the research papers given below:

Duta et al. (2005)
reported that hand weeding of rice twice at 21 and 40 DAS (days after sowing)
contributed to the highest weed control efficiency and increase grain and straw
yield of the rice crop.

Uphoff,  (2002) reported that mechanical hand
weeder pruned some of the upper roots and encourage the deeper root growth.

Randriamiharisoa, (2002)
noticed that mechanical weeding using rotating hoe with small toothed wheel
increase the soil pores so that microbes and roots could more easily gain
access to oxygen and also significantly increase the tiller production.

Binni et al. (2016).
Studied a complete survey on performance evaluation of different types of
weeder. Weeders are the unwanted plants growing between the crops row.
Traditional method to remove weeds are manually as well as bullock operated
equipment’s which causes damage of main crops. More than 33% of cost spend on
the weeding operation rather than cultivation. Several losses due to weeds.
Weeding control is done by: mechanical weeding, flaming, thermal weeding,
chemical control, biological control and by farming patterns. This review paper
carrying out the performance evaluation of different types of weeders i.e
manually operated and power operated which will help to minimize working labor,
time consuming and to reduce labor cost.

Smith et al. (2015). Studied
the recent automated weeding machines use cameras to notice plants, and a
computer to procedure the duplicate and compute which plants to preserve and
which to eliminate and then to stimulate kill mechanism. Two machines used in this
study included the Robovator, Frank Poulsen Engineering, Denmark and Steketee
IC Weeder, the Netherlands. They can cultivate the seedline and eliminating
weeds generally misused by traditional cultivation. The Robovator and Steketee.
Both machines use a split blade that ends in the seedline to remove undesirable
plants and unlocks round the wanted ‘keeper’ plants leaving a landmass of uncultured
soil. Both machines were initially considered for use in transplanted crops and
use a camera to sense the larger crop plants and control the opening and
closing of the knife-edges. In three of the assessments the machines were used subsequent
thinning of the lettuce. On average, there is a tendency that the robotic
weeders reduced the position of lettuce by 5.6%. This may be due to incidental harm
from the knives opening or closing at the wrong time. This type of impairment
can be managed by changes in the machine that affect the forcefulness of the
blades. Mechanical weeders eliminate 51.4% weed problems in the seedlines and
reduced follow up hand weeding by 37.1%. Weeds removed by mechanical techniques
has developed vastly over the last decades, and in these studies, mechanical
weeding machine run a useful level of weed control and to minimize amount of
time to removes all the weeds from lettuce production fields.

Mane Deshmukh Vijay et al., 2016
worked on the agricultural equipment that is for small scale farmers, this
equipment is known as weeder cycle. He studies the area of india where most of
the peoples are farmer and use maximum human power for fieldwork but now-a-days
availability of workers are less for field work so we must design rotor
adjustment cycle. Using inverter software to design weeder cycle and these
weeder cycle will eradicate the grass between crop rows. Therefore, less
workers required for complex work in less time and less time consuming.

          Mohammad Reza Alizadeh 2011. Studied the field
performance of four types of mechanical weeder i.e. single row conical weeder,
rotary weeder, two rows conical weeder and power weeder and then compare all
these weeders with the hand weeding method. Hashemi and Hybrid separately are
the local and improved rice varieties. He transplanted these two varieties and
result will exposed that among all the four weeders, power weeder has highest
weeding efficiency as compare to remaining weeders. When power weeder compare
with the hand weeding method, the efficiency of power weeder much greater than
hand weeding method. So, among the tested weeders, he suggested that power
weeder showed a proper performance in the field.

S. Madhusudhana et al., 2015.
Studied that controlling weed is one of the major problem that reduce the
farmer’s interest towards continuous cultivation. Severe shortage of labor,
decreasing cost per acre of cultivation and financial hindrance are some of the
key factors which reduce the farmers confidence towards continuing cultivation.
Hence, mechanical weeder is more suitable for weed removal to reduce labor
force. The aim of the work is to design and developed power weeder to provide
good opportunity for crops to vigorously up to the time of harvesting. Power weeder
is driven by petrol engine which rotates the blades to cut the weeds. This method
is faster and less laborious, less time consuming than traditional method. This
operation is very simple and easily operated by human.

 

M.G.Jadhav, Prof.J.K.Sawale 2016.
Suggest a model of manually operated multi-nozzle sprayer with mechanical
weeder rendering to crop which will give best result in less time. This paper appears
to design such a flexible sprayer and weeder because farmers use traditional ways
that is spray carry on knapsack and weeding is done by bulls, which becomes
time wasting and inflated. So, this problem is removed by multi-nozzle
pesticides sprayer and weeder machine.

        

          Olaoye, J. O. and T. A. Adekanye 2005,
studied that weed regulate is one of the most problematic task in agriculture
that relates with the agricultural production. Chemical method is very
prominent method to control weeds but it has some drawbacks i.e. it is adversely
affect the environment and dangerous for living habitats(insects) as well as
grazing animals. So, farmer consider mechanical method of weed control. Manual weeding
is laborious task. The use of mechanical weeder reduces labor force and reduce
weed removal cost. This will results increase in production. Therefore, rotary power
weeder developed. Results of performance evaluation showed that field capacity
and weeding efficiency of rotary weeder is more efficient than manual weeding
method.

J.K.Kouwenhoven 1996,
studied the potency of intra-row weed control by tactile dig, brushes and
weeder harrows in combination with a drill planting system and paper pots. Use
of tactile hoe and brushes were effective, it reduces the number of herbicides
about 10% needed to the plant used by full width spraying. This results high
costs and low capacity, but they may be quite profitable for organic farmers.
In case of weeder harrow, the capacity is high. Yield losses resulting from
increased soil concretion caused by mechanical weed control with a light
tractor in place of chemical weed control appear to be insignificant.

Sylvestre Gongotchame et al.,
2014 studied the suitability of six mechanical weedes in benin. Total
157 farmers including males and females tested the mechanical weeders, arranged
them in a sequence of preference and then compared it with the farmer’s own
weed management measures. Ring hoe arranged at the highest rank because 97%
farmers preferred the ring hoe by hand or traditional hoe. This method is
easily operated and highly efficient and it is preferred in relatively high
weed pressure. Straight-Spike weeder preferred in area where weed pressure is
less. Mechanical weeder can offer effective approach for weed management,
especially for small scale farmers which only focused on rice cultivation. And
different types of weeders introduced according to the water level and water
regimes.

J.Albertson et al., 2016. Studied the effects of mechanical
weed controls combined with herbicide treatment on the willow grown that is
sensitive to weed competition. This study compares that practice with two mechanicals
i.e. row crop cultivator (RC) and row crop cultivator with torsion weeder (RCT)
and two cultural treatments, cover crop (CC) and cut cover crop (CCC) to
control weeds. At harvesting time (RCT) treatment had produced 27% more plant
materials and animal waste used as fuel than the (RC) treatment. All the
treatment and cultivars combination gave a positive financial return thus this
study suggests that without using chemical sprays, it is possible to establish
a willow short rotation coppice plantation which is economically viable.

N.D.Tillet et al., 2007. Studied mechanical within-row weed
control for transplanted crops using computer vision. It is an efficient method
of removing weeds between the crop rows. Hand labor is quite laborious to
remove weeds within rows. A Computer Vision system determined the stage of
approaching plants and that information related to measured disc rotation to determine
the stage error between next plant and disc cut-out. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER III

MATERIAL AND METHODOLY

 

I am going to design manually
operated hand pull mechanical weeder

Research area: My research
area will be university of agriculture faisalabad

Duration of Research: my
research duration will be 6 months

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER IV

REFERENCES

Abbas, M.A., 2006. General
agriculture Emporium Publishers, Lahore, Pakistan.
Hafiz H.A, Arslan M.P, Saima
H.,2016. Weed management using crop competition in Pakistan, a review.
Lawson Smith, Nurseryman., A
mechanical means of Riding and pulling weeds Rayanier Incorporated
Glenville Nursery, Glenville,Ga.
Njoku, P.C.1996. The role of
Universities of Agriculture Appropriate man power Development for weed
management in Agriculture. Nigerian Journal of weed science. Vol.9,65.
Pullen, D.W.M and P.A. Cowell.
1997. An evaluation of the performance of mechanical weeding mechanism for
use in high speed inter-row weeding of arable crops, Journal of
Agricultural Engineering Research, 67: 27-34.
I.M.Binni
Richard Smith, Farm Advisor and
Tricia Love, Research Assistant. Sept, 2015. Evaluation of Mechanical
Weeders for Weed Removal and Crop Safety in Lettuce Production University
of California Cooperative Extension, Monterey County Richard
Mane Deshmukh Vijay, Bhoir
Nilesh, Ghade Tushar, Patange Anand. 
March, 2016. Design And Fabrication Of Agriculture Weeder. International
Journal Of Innovations In Engineering Research And Technology IJIERT
ISSN: 2394-3696 Volume 3, Issue3,
R. Yadav and S. Pund  “Development and Ergonomic Evaluation of
Manual Weeder”. Agricultural Engineering International: the CIGR Ejournal.
Manuscript PM 07 022. Vol. IX. October, 2007.
Mohammad Reza Alizadeh, 28
September, 2011. Field performance evaluation of mechanical weeders in the
paddy field. Department of Agricultural Engineering, the Rice Research
Institute of Iran (RRII) Vol. 6(25), pp. 5427-5434.
S. Madhusudhana, D. Kanakaraja,
A. Srinivas, M.FayazHussainBaig  February 2015 Development Of Double
Wheeled Multipurpose Weed Remover, International Journal of Engineering
Technology, Management and Applied Sciences  Volume 3 Issue 2.
M.G.Jadhav, Prof.J.K.Sawale
December, 2016. Design and Fabrication of Manually Operated Weeder with
Pesticides Sprayer, Department of Mechanical Engineering, MGM’s COE,
Nanded, Maharashtra, India. Volume: 03 Issue: 12.
Olaoye, J. O. and T. A. Adekanye
2005, Development and Evaluation of a rotary power weeder, Department of
Agricultural and Biosysytems Engineering, University of Ilorin.
J.K.Kouwenhoven, August, 1996.
Intra-row mechanical weed control-possibilities and problem. Wageningen
Agricultural University, Tillage laboratory, Diedenweg 20, 6703 GW
Wageningen, Netherlands.