Performance Evaluation of New Rotary Blades and Roller Cutter of Versatile Multi-Crop Planter on Residue Management
Abdullah Al Musabbir1, Md Abedur Rahman2*, Naveed Anjum2, 3 and Mustajab Ali4,5
1Department of Farm Power and Machinery, Bangladesh Agricultural University, Mymensingh 2202, Bangladesh; 2Graduate School of Science and Engineering, Saitama University, Saitama 338-8570, Japan; 3Department of Civil Engineering, Khwaja Fareed University of Engineering and Information Technology, Rahim Yar Khan 64200, Pakistan; 4Department of Civil Engineering, Mirpur University of Science and Technology, Mirpur AJK 10250, Pakistan; 5Department of Civil Engineering, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8656, Japan.
*Correspondence | Md Abedur rahman, Graduate School of Science and Engineering, Saitama University, 255 Shimo-Okubo, Sakura-Ku, Saitama-Shi, Saitama 338-8570, Japan; Email: shobuj059@gmail.com
Figure 1:
(A) VMP with blades (B) Roller cutter during trials.
Figure 2:
Engineering (2D) view of roller cutter; (A) Front view, (B) side view and (C) cross sectional view of A-A section, and (D) photographic view of roller cutter.
Figure 4:
Cutting angle of time and changes of α with increasing of θ.
Figure 5:
Engineering view of new rotary blade with measurement of tip angle is 45°
Figure 6:
Rotary Blade B (A) Tip angle left, and (B) Tip angle right.
Figure 7:
Blade Arrangement of planter (A) ST mode, (B) ZT mode.
Figure 10:
Time loss by both types of blades in ST system (A) anchored straw (B) loose straw.
Figure 11:
Rate of fuel consumption in different tillage methods.
Figure 12:
Strips made by (A) Blade A, and (B) Blade B.
Figure 3:
Rotary Blade A (A) Tip angle left, and (B) Tip angle right.
Figure 8:
Effective Field Capacity by two types of blades (A) anchored straw (B) loose straw.
Figure 9:
Straw accumulations by two types of blades (A) anchored straw (B) loose straw.