Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Associate Professor, AREEO

2 assistant professor, Khorasan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center.

Abstract

A considerable part of investment on producing potato are spent in  harvesting stage. This research was carried out in the form of factorial experiment with the base of randomized complete block design to compare the technical performance of potato harvesters in different planting methods. This research was conducted to find out the effects of planting methods (in two levels: using two-row and six-row planter machines), harvesting methods (in three levels: using combine harvester, two-row harvester, and combination of harvester and combine machines), and two levels of soil moisture content (11 and 15%) on efficiency, effective field capacity, fuel consumption, fuel and laborer energy consumption in harvesting process, and tuber losses. Results showed that the highest effective field capacity and efficiency (0.59 ha/h and 81.1%) was related to combination harvesting method. The lowest effective field capacity happened when two-row harvesting machine was used, while the lowest efficiency (65.49%) were observed when combine harvester was employed. The highest (3.38%) and lowest (0%) of products left on the field, were observed in combination method and two-row harvesting method respectively. Results showed that in all three methods, energy consumption increased when the moisture content increased from 11 to 15% ; results also indicated that the highest amount of energy consumption happened in harvesting of potato  by two-row harvesting machine and when soil moisture content was 15%.

Keywords

Akinbamowo, R. O., Ogunlowo, A. S. and Agbetoye, L. A. S. 2011. Development of a tractor-mounted cocoyam (Xanthosoma spp.) harvester. Aust. J. Agric. Eng. (AJAE).2(3): 82-89.

Anon. 2013. STAT Database for Agriculture. FAO (Food and Agricultural Organization). Available at: faostat.fao.org.

Arfa, G. K. 2007. The effect of harvesting operation on potato crop handling. Misr. J. Ag. Eng. 24(3):
492-503.

Asadi, A. 2013. Estimation of potato cultivation coasts in 2014. Available at: Iranpotato.Persianblog.ir.
(in Persian)

Borghaee, A., Shahidzadeh, M. and gharibiasl, S. 2004. Evaluation and technical and economical comparison of potato harvester in Ardabil. J. Agric. Sci. 10(1): 51-65. (in Persian)

Hemmat, A. and Taki, O. 2001. Investigation of mechanical damage of five types of potato harvesting machines in Faryadan area of Isfahan. Sci. Technol. Agric. Nat. Res. 5(2): 208-195. (in Persian)

Joao, P.A., Daniel, H., Martins, H. and Walter, G. 2011. Operational performance of the mechanized and semi-mechanized potato harvest. Eng. Agric. Jabotcabal. 31(4): 826-834.

Maksoud, A., Arnaout, M. A., Afify, M. K. and Abd EL-Razek, W. T. 2009. A study on mechanization some planting and harvesting systems for jerusalem artichoke crop. Misr. J. Ag. Eng. 26(1): 580-596.
 
 Moosazadeh, H., Mobli, H.and Zayghami, M. 2007. Determination of mechanical damage caused by potato harvesting machines and their comparison in Ardabil area. Iran. J. Agric. Sci. 38(1): 911-917. (in Persian)