DIRE DAWA UNIVERSITY

INSTITUTION OF TECHINOLOGY

SCHOOL OF MECHANICAL AND INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING

Design and Manufacturing of Semi-Automated Potato

Harvesting Machine
A Thesis Submitted To School Of Mechanical And Industrial Engineering In Partial
Fulfilment Of The Requirement For The Degree Of Bachelor Of Science In Mechanical
Engineering

PREPARED BY:

1. KALANTENEH ALEMAYEHU…...........................DDU1001069
2. KALEAB TSEGAYE…………………………...…..DDU1001627
3. YAMLAK BELETE………………………………...DDU1001562

Advisor: - Hailemichael S. (MSc)

Jun14, 2022

Dire Dawa; Ethiopia

 Approval Sheet
A: Candidate
___________________ _____________________ _________________

____________________ _____________________ _________________

____________________ _____________________ _________________

Student Signature Date

B: Approved By
1. _________________ ___________________ ________________

Advisor Signature Date

2. ________________________ _________________ _______________

Program Chair Person Signature Date

3. _______________________ ________________ _______________

School Dean Signature Date

4. ______________________ ________________ ______________

Dean, Graduates Studies Signature Date

i
 Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the almightily God for giving us the courage to complete this project.
Next, we would like to extend our heart fully thanks to Mr. Hailemichael S. (MSc) our advisor
who helped us to bring out this project in a good manner with this precious suggestion and
comments. Lastly, our great fully tanks to all our friends and who involves directly or indirectly
in this design paper to make the project memorable and effective by giving necessary information
related to the paper.

ii
 Abstract

Potatoes are the agricultural commodities that have the potential to be developed in Ethiopia.
At harvest, the method used was very simple, just use the hoe. The farmers complaining for the
need so much work force for harvesting while the labour cost are getting increase, and the time
spend for harvesting process are too long. Even if there is a tool for foreign-made potato harvesters
are very expensive and not suited to the conditions of potato farming in Ethiopia. The machine
consist of the two main part, which are potatoes digger (scraper) to scrap potatoes from the soil,
potatoes elevator and separator (screener) used to separate potatoes from the soil. The acting forces
between soil and potatoes in the process of harvesting by vibration loads are complicated. This
project focusing on the design of the digger harvester parts. In order to study the effect of the
exciting forces for the dynamic characteristics of potato conveying and vibration separation
system, taking potatoes with soil on them and equivalent viscoelastic material as a whole, a
mechanic model was establish for the potato conveying and separation system considering the
sectional material forces between the potatoes, the soil and the shaker chain in the conveying,
separating, crushing and screening process, and then analysis of the model was conducted by
asymptotic method numerical integration.

iii
Table of Contents
APPROVAL SHEET ..................................................................................................................... I
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................ II
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................. III
LIST OF FIGURE ...................................................................................................................... VI
LIST OF TABLE ...................................................................................................................... VII
CHAPTER 1 .................................................................................................................................. 1
INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................... 1
1.1. BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION ........................................................................................ 1
1.2. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM ............................................................................................... 4
1.3. OBJECTIVE............................................................................................................................. 4
1.3.1. General objective ........................................................................................................................................4
1.3.2. Specific objective .........................................................................................................................................4
1.4. SCOPE AND LIMITATION ......................................................................................................... 4
1.5. SIGNIFICANCE ........................................................................................................................ 5
CHAPTER 2 .................................................................................................................................. 6
LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................................ 6
CHAPTER 3:- METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................... 11
3.1. CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT ..................................................................................................... 11
3.1.1. Customer needs .......................................................................................................................................11
3.1.2. Customer needs from market ............................................................................................................11
3.1.3. Concept generation ...........................................................................................................................11
3.1.4. Evaluation of concepts ......................................................................................................................13
3.1.5. Concept selection...............................................................................................................................14
CHAPTER 4 ................................................................................................................................ 15
EMBODIMENT AND DETAIL DESIGN................................................................................ 15
4.1. DEFINITION ..................................................................................................................... 15
4.2. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN ....................................................................................... 15
4.3. CONFIGURATION ............................................................................................................. 18
4.4. HOW TO SELECET TRACTOR ................................................................................... 18
4.5. DETERMINING HORSEPOWER ................................................................................ 19
4.6. SELECTION OF TRACTOR SIZE ............................................................................... 19
4.7. DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF DIGGER .................................................................................. 23
4.7.1. Geometric analysis of digger blade ...................................................................................................23
4.7.2. Force Analysis of digger ...........................................................................................................................26
4.7.3. Maximum slop and deflection developed on the digger ....................................................................31
4.7.4. Failure Analysis of digger .................................................................................................................33

iv
 4.7.5. Selection of screw (bolt) ....................................................................................................................34
4.8. DESIGN AND ANALYSIS ELEVATOR AND SEPARATOR....................................................... 35
4.8.1. Speed of separator (𝒗𝒔) ............................................................................................................................35
4.8.2. Geometric analysis of separator ...............................................................................................................37
4.8.3. Design of rod .....................................................................................................................................38
4.9. DESIGN OF CONVEYOR DRIVE SHAFT ................................................................................... 45
4.10. POWER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM ......................................................................................... 50
4.10.1 Universal joint .........................................................................................................................................50
4.11. DESIGN OF DIFFERENTIAL (BEVEL GEAR) ........................................................................... 56
4.12. CHAIN DRIVE ..................................................................................................................... 61
4.13. DESIGN AND SELECTION OF POWER TRANSMISSION SHAFT ................................................ 69
4.14. DESIGN OF FRAME ............................................................................................................. 74
4.15. DESIGN OF HOPPER ............................................................................................................ 78
4.16. DESIGN OF PISTON ............................................................................................................. 86
4.18. DESIGN OF THE PISTON ...................................................................................................... 88
4.19. DESIGN OF THE CYLINDER ................................................................................................. 88
4.20. DESIGN OF PIN ................................................................................................................... 93
4.21. DEIGN OF SHAFT ................................................................................................................ 94
4.22. DESIGN OF KEY .................................................................................................................. 97
CHAPTER 5 RESULT AND DISSCATION ......................................................................... 105
5.1. RESULT.............................................................................................................................. 105
5.2. DISCUSSION ....................................................................................................................... 106
5.3. CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................... 106
5.4. RECOMMENDATION ........................................................................................................... 107
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................... 110

v
List of figure
Figure 1:-Harvesting of potato using a garden fork ...................................................................................... 2
Figure 2:-Harvesting ware potato with an animal drawn digger ................................................................... 3
Figure 3:-Harvesting potato with tractor drawn digger ................................................................................. 4
Figure 4:-potato harvesting component ........................................................................................................ 6
Figure 5:- potato dimensions and weight measurement .............................................................................. 25
Figure 6:-bolt and nut geometer all in mm ................................................................................................. 34
Figure 7:-geometric analysis of separator ................................................................................................... 37

vi
List of table
Table 1:-evaluation of concept...................................................................................................... 14
Table 2: Draft and power requirements for tillage and seeding implements ................................ 20
Table 3:- PTO power multiplication factor for different soil ....................................................... 21
Table 4:-type’s tractor based on power ......................................................................................... 22
Table 5:- Average values for potato dimensions and weight measurement ................................. 24
Table 6:- result of digger geometric analysis ................................................................................ 26
Table 7:- result of force analysis ................................................................................................... 31

vii
 Chapter 1
Introduction
1.1. Background and justification

Agriculture plays a dynamic role in Ethiopian economy. So any development in the

productivity related task help to escalation Ethiopian farmer’s status and economy. Although agro
industry is accreted of lingering peace. The sole culprit for slogging in pace of accretion (in agro
industry) is dependency on customary approaches and equipment. In Ethiopian, harvesting is
usually performed manually or semi mechanized, and share responsibility for the high cost of
production. In the semi-mechanized harvesting, diggers are used, coupled to a tractor, which
degrade the furrows and expose the tubers. Later, the collection is done manually by men or young
women who also carry out a preliminary selection field. However, self-propelled harvesters have
been used in advanced countries for potato culture. The trend toward mechanization of the total
harvest is related to the availability and cost of man-power.. They are larger machines, which
require elongated rows to avoid man oeuvres and frequent loss of time, which reduce the
operational capability of the machine. The process of mechanized harvesting of potatoes can
represent a great advance for the producing regions, mainly to optimize the production process,
with increased production area, faster removal of tubers from the ground when free risk of attack
from pests and diseases, and stronger compliance with delivery dates of production. However, the
decision to invest invariably involves risks, which must be provided when one decide to invest in
certain equipment.

Potato in Ethiopia is considered both a cash and food crop in the limited production areas. It
has the ability to lift citizens out of poverty. Despite its potential, intensification levels remain very
low in the potato subsector, translating into a very low yield. Farmers increase production by
expanding the land used to grow potatoes, not by intensifying their activity. This results into poor
quality yields and thus losses in income at the household level. The causes of post-harvest losses
at storage include sugar buildup, decay, sprouting and greening. Harvesting methods being used
are manual harvesting (traditional harvesting) and mechanical harvesting. (Wasukira, A.;
Walimbwa, K.; Wobibi, S.; Owere, L.; Naziri, D.; Parker, M., 2017)

1
 Potato harvesting using hand hoes/sticks:-Hand hoe harvesting should not be used
because it will result into more damaged tubers, takes a lot of time and many tubers are left
underground. A better tool to use, if other options are too costly is, the garden fork which causes
less damage to tubers than the hand hoe. This approach should only be used initially for sections
with high bacterial wilt incidence to avoid mixing potentially diseased potato with healthy potato
at the end of harvesting exercise. These tubers should be packed separately and taken for
immediate consumption. (Wasukira, A.; Walimbwa, K.; Wobibi, S.; Owere, L.; Naziri, D.;
Parker, M., 2017)

Figure 1:-Harvesting of potato using a garden fork (Wasukira, A.; Walimbwa, K.; Wobibi, S.;
Owere, L.; Naziri, D.; Parker, M., 2017)

Potato harvesting using animal drawn digger:-The rationale for using oxen drawn tools
for cultivation and transportation is that it increases agricultural work output, reduces drudgery
and improves life in rural areas. Compared to other means of modem agricultural production,
animal traction is the one that a smallholder can think of eventually possessing. Potato producers
can use the animal drawn potato digger to harvest potatoes on large scale. These diggers are
pulled by a pair or two of oxen, driven through the field to expose the tubers on top of the ridges
for ease of picking. Less human labor than hand hoe harvesting is needed for this harvesting
method. The animal drawn digger is faster and results into less damage and also exposes more
of the tubers in a field. Locally a producer should use plough frames on the farm, modified by

2
removal of the mold board and replacing with a forked end. (Wasukira, A.; Walimbwa, K.;
Wobibi, S.; Owere, L.; Naziri, D.; Parker, M., 2017)

Figure 2:-Harvesting ware potato with an animal drawn digger (Wasukira, A.; Walimbwa, K.;
Wobibi, S.; Owere, L.; Naziri, D.; Parker, M., 2017)

Potato harvesting using tractor drawn digger:-The tractor drawn digger comes in a
variation of single or double rows. These are attached to the three point linkage of a small tractor
and then connected via a shaft to the digger set. The potato digger unit should be aligned along
the ridge and adjusted to cut at base of the ridge. The speed of the shaker should also be adjusted
via the tractor's power take-off (PTO) such that it gently shakes off the soil and delivers the
tubers on top of the ridge (Figure 3). The tractor should be aligned such that the tires run along
the furrow to avoid compression damage of the tubers. The tubers are then picked up by hand
and placed in a collection bin for transportation to the storage yard. This system is much faster,
more efficient and less damaging to the tubers compared to animal drawn digger. (Wasukira, A.;
Walimbwa, K.; Wobibi, S.; Owere, L.; Naziri, D.; Parker, M., 2017)

3
Figure 3:-Harvesting potato with tractor drawn digger (Wasukira, A.; Walimbwa, K.; Wobibi, S.;
Owere, L.; Naziri, D.; Parker, M., 2017)

1.2. Statement of the Problem

Most Ethiopian farmers or potato diggers use their hands and small dibber to harvest wide area
of farm. Actually there are different modern types of potato harvesting machines which can harvest
wide area of farm within few hours but due to their high cost and as they requires skilled operator
our farmers could not afford those lovely machines. All in all, harvesting with hands is a
heartbreaking operation in our country.

Disadvantage of harvesting with hand are

Consuming much time

Loosens the ability and motivation of diggers
Decreases quality of potato
Exposes to safety hazard for diggers

1.3. Objective

1.3.1. General objective

The main objective of this thesis is to design and manufacturing of semi-automated potato
harvesting machine.

1.3.2. Specific objective

The specific objective of this thesis is to design detail parts of semi-automated potato
harvesting machine, modify the existing semi-automated machine, make 3D model of the machine,
and fabricate the machine components (its assembly) and test the machine capacity and efficiency.

1.4. Scope and limitation

Our design contains detail design and analysis of semi-automated potato harvesting machine. In
doing the potato harvesting machine we are not design the tractor entire component but according
to power required for operation we only select the suitable tractor type.

Designing components of the semi-automated potato harvesting machine:

 Designing the frame structure & component of the machine

4
  The Load, force and stress analysis
 Testing components
 Manufacturing process
 Test the machine performance or efficiency in the filed / work shop

1.5. Significance

Our project mainly helps farmer by increasing productivity, reduce labor cost, reduce harvesting
time and to protect from unseasonably rain and insect. So, findings of this project will redound to
the benefit of our country farmer which have a great demand to get high product from farm work.
The project is concerning in adaptive design of the harvesting with some new improvement of
mechanism. So, it has great efficiency and the project is also significant to other students.

5
 Chapter 2
Literature review
Its deals with research work done in past by various investigation on the performance, the
mechanization of harvesting operation is essential to minimize the cost of harvesting, potato loss,
turnaround time, weather risk, and to increase benefit by appropriate technology. Potato harvesting
is the important part in agricultural mechanization; it is the process of collecting the mature potato
from the ground. Harvesting operation includes Dehaulming, digging, separating, gathering, and
stacking the potato. Harvesting methods being used traditional and mechanical harvesting. And
also deals about Product development generic design process steps for potato harvesting machine,
planning, concept development, system-level design, detail design, testing and refinement and
product ramp up, in this step it’s define the material properties according to the design.

Two wheel tractor mounted harvesting machine

Consists of digging blade, chain conveyor, protecting body, chain drive and two wheel
The digger was designed for harvesting potato crops by lifting the soil and potato from the
field with the help of a digging unit and subsequently transferring them onto a separating
unit where potatoes were separated from the soil through mechanical agitation. During
harvesting, the damage to the tuber should be minimum. The clean potatoes were finally
windrowed to the rear, which later were picked up manually. Digger must make the potato
damage in terms of lifting, scuffed and peeler tubers as low as possible. The potato should
be dug up from the field in such a way that the minimum volume of soil is removed without
causing any damage to the tuber (university, 2012).

Figure 4:-potato harvesting component (wael mohammed , june 2020)

6
The harvesting potato crop is a critical part of the entire potato production and marketing
operation. Crop yield and quality cannot be increased during harvest, but they can be
decreased, sometimes drastically. So harvesting operation is a highly important practice
that we should pay attention to, and the main purpose of it is harvesting potato on time with
minimum damage and cost. As the production of the potato crop is increasing, the design
and development of potato diggers have become an issue for many researchers nowadays.
Most Ethiopian farmers still using the method of traditional harvesting of potatoes by hoe,
spade, and other hand tools. The traditional potato harvesting method is not suitable in
terms of saving human power and time. Product and productivity are less and less. This
way of harvesting method of potato causes low yield production. The design and
development of potato diggers have become an issue of many researchers now in Ethiopia.
A machine separates potatoes from the soil. The vibration reaches relative separation speed
but causes less damage to the potato (Ganesh et al., 2019).
(Mohamed et al., 2019) Developed a Mini-tractor-driven Coleus digger. A mini power
tiller operated coleus harvester was field-tested and performance was evaluated. However,
it had several disadvantages associated with its construction. This was because it used a
rotary slasher, which created excessive vibration. This caused the tubers to scatter in the
field, which was inconvenient for the farmers to collect. In addition, it caused damage to
the coleus and thus yield was reduced. The digger consisted of a frame, share, finger
assembly, cam drive and connecting rods, and a drive unit. The width of operation and the
other size and shape of the components were determined. The field-testing of the digger
was conducted to find out the time of operation, fuel consumption, and harvesting capacity
with respect to operating speed and depth of operation. The results for different levels of
the parameters were analyzed. The performance of damage and field capacity were also
determined.
(Sukhwinder, 2006)Tested two-row mounted type and suitable for medium horsepower
(30- 40 hp) tractors, which are most popular among the farmers. Digger was field-tested in
moist as well as dry field conditions at different forward speeds of operation at two row
spacing of 610 mm 686 mm. Exposed and unexposed potatoes Lifting time and tuber
damage were lifted 7 manually and weighed. Collection recorded in two-meter long strips

7
time recorded at five places. Effect of forwarding speed: As evident exposure, percentage
of tubers in multipurpose digger improved with increase forward speed and was maximum
(84.5%) digger. This may be due to less clod formation crop, 610 mm row spacing) as
affected by the speed of operation resulting from high-speed impact in Forwarding speed
Exposure damage multipurpose digger. Under dry field conditions, the draft requirement
is more. At 4.5 km/h. This may be because of increased speed, rolling of tubers is
Performance in early crop enhanced due to severe shaking of ridge soil. Multipurpose
digger performed well in There was little effect of speed variation on early crop and
covered an area of 0.13 ha/h.2.1 Methods of potato harvesting.
A potato digger for harvesting potato was developed. It was recommended that the forward
speed was about 2.4 km/h and operating speed of 1.2 m/s would achieve the highest
undamaged with the lowest damage and buried potato. (Abdel Maksoud, Morad, &
Morghany, 2004)
The potato digger was developed and tested at four levels of forward speeds (0.9, 1.5, 1.9
and 3.2 km/h.), four levels of vibrating amplitudes (3, 5, 6 and 10 mm) and it was found
that the developed digger succeed to operate with the lower power tractors thus the
harvesting cost was reduced by 28.5% (Younis, Ghonimy, & Hussin, 2006)
A multi-purpose digger for harvesting potato was developed. It was tested at three levels
of forwarding speeds and three different tilt angles. From the obtained results, the proper
conditions to operate the developed digger were 22 cm harvesting depth, 2.6 km/h. forward
speed and 18º tilt angle for potato crop. (Ibrahim, Amin, & Farag, 2008)
Harvesting machinery should be able to uproot tubers and raise them on the soil surface
efficiently without damage. The potato harvester was linked to the rear-mounted device of
a tractor, and the power of the potato harvester was transferred by the conveyor driven shaft
of the tractor with the universal joint. (Zhang et al., 2011)
Developing and evaluation testing of agricultural machines becomes a big problem and
should be studied. It is because expanding in agricultural areas, the agricultural machines
become the main factor to increase agricultural production, mostly the agricultural
machines which tested in some country are not given the same results which obtained in
another country due to the local conditions (climate conditions, soil, fuel, oil, and workers),
and these conditions could influence the operation functions of those machines, so

8
developing, testing and evaluation of those machines again are very important under local
conditions. Harvesting is one of the most critical operations for potato and peanut
production. Root crops are grown below the surface of the ground, therefore they required
specially designed machines to dig and separate them from the soil. The subject of vibrating
diggers has drawn the attention of many kinds of researches. (Ibrahim, Amin, & Farag,
2008)
These spinners, using power take-off from the tractor to which it is attached, (Culpin,
Claude, 1981) are widely used due to their maneuverability and ruggedness in adverse soil
types. As the tractor on which the spinner is attached moves forward, a digging share runs
beneath the row of potatoes, loosening them and the soil encompassing them. Following
the loosening process, rotating forks, or tines, strike the row at right angles. Two off-center
wheels that are joined by a linkage to which the tines are attached enable the tines to push
the potatoes, distributing them sideways, enabling them to be picked up by hand.
The spinners that are available vary in type depending on the working conditions—
specifically, soil type. A spinner that can work effectively in light soil may not be suitable
for use in heavy, dense soil. Some spinners include a single depth wheel to determine the
depth at which all potatoes can be lifted, and others have no wheels at all. Certain spinners
are fitted with a screen to facilitate gathering by lessening the scattering of the potatoes.
Some of these implements consist of a main vertical spinner and an auxiliary spinner to
separate potatoes from haulm and soil. While trailed wheel-driven spinners are commonly
used, tractor-driven models are more popular. (Shippen, J.M. and Ellin, C.R. and Clover.,
1980)
Elevator diggers, available in one or two-row models, are employed in areas where soil is
not too dense or heavy. In wet, sticky soils, operators may opt to use a spinner. These
implements are advantageous in that they deposit potatoes completely exposed in a narrow
row, easing the task of hand pickers. Elevator diggers, all PTO driven and similar in
operation, are available in trailed, semi-mounted, or fully mounted models. Semi-mounted
diggers are the most popular; (Shippen, J.M. and Ellin, C.R. and Clover., 1980) they can
lift either one or two rows at a time. These diggers, attached to the linkage arms of a
tractor’s hydraulic system, consist of a digging share that cuts beneath the crop of potatoes.
In contrast to spinners, elevator diggers raise potatoes to the top of the machine by chain

9
webs. These chain webs consist of straight steel bars linked together with gaps to enable
soil and debris to be shaken with adjustable agitation and fall back onto the field. Operators
must ensure that agitation is minimal to avoid tuber bruising. (Culpin, Claude, 1981)
Potatoes, traveling over the rear of the digger, are then placed in a narrow row on the field.
(Younis et al. , (2006) ) Developed a potato digger by adding a new reciprocated device to
vibrate the blades. The modification was performed in one of the local workshops in Cairo.
Meanwhile, the field experiments were carried out in Nobaria city. The vibrating system
consists of three sub-systems; beam holder, vibrating device, and vibrating transmission
system. The vibrating device consists of three parts; reciprocating ruler, cam, and driving
arm. The cam transmits the motion to the reciprocating ruler by a driving arm (follower)
that was designed to produce the proper amplitudes.
(Liu et al. , 2009)Designed single-row potato harvester with some new features. For
example, it has an adjustable digger blade angle, flexible guiding supporting wheels of the
lifting chain that could move upward with the support of a cantilever plate.
(Zhang et al., 2014)Designed the vibrating potato digger. With a grid digging device and
an eccentric rocker vibrating digging mechanism, this machine could perform potato
digging and harvest in different profound adjustments with a screw-type blade.

Unique contribution
 Semi-automated
 Safe design
 Easy to use operate
 It has a hopper place
 Cheap and component availability

10
 Chapter 3:- Methodology
3.1. Concept development

3.1.1. Customer needs

 They need a machine which in a cheap price.

 Harvest in short time
 Easy to operate
 Easy to maintenance
 Long service life time
 Comfortable
 They need warranty as well as guaranty
 They need strong enough machine to operate its function for predefined time
 It should be suitable to environment condition

3.1.2. Customer needs from market

 Harvesting machines are too expensive. So, the farmer cannot buy the machine.
 Harvesting machine and their spare spear parts are mostly not available throughout our
country.
 Most machines are complicated to operate. So, they need skilled operator
 Difficult to maintain due to the absence of maintenance place

3.1.3. Concept generation

There are a number of solutions for a given problem because it is the time for technology and
innovation which makes our life better and simple. In order to formulate a strategy which is
suitable for our need, it is better to use some techniques such as physical and functional
decomposition with respect to product specification. This helps us to know the exact function of
any component in the entire system.

We have generated three alternatives for the given problem in order to achieve our objective which
have stated earlier. Those alternatives are listed below:-

11
Alternative (A) Semi-automated potatoes harvesting machine

- It is consists of two wheel tractor, which is manually operated, simple harvesting

component.
- As the tractor begins its journey, the digger picks up the already soil with the potatoes
and immediately separates the soil and the potatoes, dumping the with a conveyor and
taking the potatoes to the storage.

Limitation

- The operator gets tired since the machine operated manually.

- Not suitable for large area of farm.

Alternative (B) Combine potato harvesting machine

- It performs dehaulming and harvesting operation at once.

- Dehaulmer is assembled on the front part of the tractor and
the harvester is mounted at the rare of tractor.
- Storing hopper is located on the top of harvesting
component.
- The digger (digging blade) scoops up the potato and soil
with the help of guiding disc after dehaulming operation is
completed. The potato has isolated from the soil by separating
unit through chain conveyor followed by digger. Finally, the
potato delivered to hopper after passing some different
separating units.

Limitations

 It is much expensive due to complex mechanisms have used.

 It needs well skilled operator.
 It cannot be suited for small area of farm.
 It needs additional tractor to deliver the potato to the inventory stock.
 Since, it performs double operation, it consumes more power.

12
Alternative (C) Medium sized tractor mounted harvesting machine

 It is four wheel tractor mounted harvesting machine.

 Consists of digger and separating unit.
 Before performing harvesting operation the farm
should be dehaulmed.
 As the tractor moves, the digger starts scooping up
the mixture of soil and potato. Then, the potato
distinguishes from the soil using separating unit. Finally,
the isolated potato drops to the ground after passing through
chain conveyor.

Limitations

 It has no guide wheel, this lead the soil to be dispersed axially from the digging blade.
 It has no hopper, so the potato lies on the ground.
 Its toothed blade can be injured easily when it strikes by stone.

3.1.4. Evaluation of concepts

The procedure is, therefore, first setting criteria for each sub functions, then comparing the given
possible solutions for each sub functions with a reference based on the sated criteria finally
selecting the best alternative from the given based on their result. The following evaluation of
concept for harvesting machine was finalized by taking into consideration the customer needs:

13
Table 1:-evaluation of concept

Evaluation of concepts

Selection criteria A B C

Performance 0 0 +
Inexpensive - + +
Easy to operate + 0 0
Durability 0 0 +
Ergonomics 0 + +
Simple design + 0 0
Easy manufacturing + 0 -
Simple assembly + + -
Easy maintenance + 0 0
Pluses 5 3 4
Same 3 6 4
Minus 1 0 2
Net 4 3 2
Rank 1 2 3
Continue Yes No No

3.1.5. Concept selection

Now it is the time to select suitable concept from all we have listed depending on the criteria that
a product must fulfil to achieve specified goal. Based on the above tabular analysis we have select
alternative (A) which has much benefit than other on the basis of customer’s need. As you have
seen in the above table alternative (A) is easy to use and handle, affordable, it does not need special
operating skill as combined one and it is easy to maintain when it wore out. The concept selection
method in this section is built around the use of decision matrix for evaluating each concept for
potato harvesting machine with respect to a set of selection criteria.

14
 Chapter 4
EMBODIMENT AND DETAIL DESIGN
4.1. Definition
Embodiment design is that part of the design process in which, starting from the principle solution
or concept of a technical product, the design is developed in accordance with technical and
economic criteria and in the light of further information, to the point where subsequent detail
design can lead directly to production.

4.2. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN

Determining the arrangement of the physical elements of the design into groupings, called
modules to carry out its required functions. Begins to emerge in the conceptual design phase from
such things as diagrams of functions, rough sketches of concepts, and perhaps a proof -of -concept
model is selected to establish the best system for functional success once a design concept has
been chosen.

Working principle

General working principle

Potato harvesters are machines that harvest potatoes. They work by lifting the potatoes from
the bed using a share. Soil and crop are transferred onto a series of webs where the loose soil is
sieved out. The potatoes are moved towards the back of the harvester on to a separation unit and
then (on manned machines) to a picking table where people pick out the stones, clods, and haulms
(stems or stalks) by hand. The potatoes then go on to a side elevator and into a trailer or a potato
box.

Detail working principle

Potato cultivation, especially on large size farms, has got mechanized because; it was not
possible to handle the labor intensive operations like sowing and harvesting. Potato-digging
operation has been mechanized with the introduction of potato diggers. The machine may be
manually operated or power operated such as animal-drawn potato digger, tractor-drawn potato
digger, potato digger shaker and potato digger elevator. The potato digger elevator consists of a

15
shovel (digging blade), rod chain conveyor, differential and two wheels. When the tractor starts
moving and gives power to the differential through universal joint, the digger blade begins digging
and lifting the soil and potato mixture to the conveyor as it is mounted at an angle from the
horizontal. The conveyor starts rotating since it has derived by a shaft (which takes power from
the differential through chain drive and delivers to rod conveyor) and separate the potatoes from
the soil. The material is moved over the conveyor; the soil is loosened and removed. Agitating
sprocket (vibrating device), of this conveyor oscillates the rod chain and separates the soil. Finally
separated potatoes and some impurities delivered to the hopper and stored together till one full
cycle of harvesting completes. After completion of full cycle the hopper become filled and it turns
down to drop the soil and potatoes mixture at desired space using double acting cylinder, then
second round harvesting begins.

The concept of this thesis design is semi-automated. And it is simple and cheap, there are ten (10) parts in
this design. These are:-

1. Digger
2. Bearing
3. Piston
4. Sprocket
5. Chain in
6. Wheels
7. Bevel gear
8. Hopper
9. Shaft
10. Disc

Figure 5:-assembly drawing

16
Now it is time to determine the arrangement of the physical elements of the design into groupings,
called modules to carry out its required functions. . Let us devise our product into four basic
modules those are:-
Module one: - power transmission
It is used to transfer the power developed on the power generation to the power conversion
(actuators) by means of different transmission methods such as belt, gear, pulley, chain and shaft
and so on.
Module two: - digger

It is used to picks up the soil and potato mixture and delivers to the separating unit.
Module three: -separator

It is used to isolate the potatoes from the soil by using vibrating device and delivers to the stocker.

Module four: - stocker

It is used to store the potatoes temporarily (for the short period of time) instead of laying the potato
on the ground.

Digger

Figure 6:-four basic modules

Material (potatoes) flow

Figure 7:-Material (potatoes) flow

17
 4.3. Configuration

The design of special purpose parts and the selection of standard components, like pumps and
motors. In configuration design we establish the shape and general dimensions of components.
The term component is used in the generic sense to include special-purpose parts, standard parts,
and standard assemblies. Apart is a designed object that has no assembly operations in its
manufacture. A part is characterized by its geometric features such as holes, slots, walls, ribs,
projections, fillets, and chamfers.

4.4. HOW TO SELECET TRACTOR

Tractors can be divided into 3 categories: 2-wheel drive, front-wheel assist or unequal 4-wheel
drive, and equal 4-wheel drive tractors. Each one of these tractors has different tire configurations
and different ballast requirements (PE Sumner, EJ Williams, 2007).

Two-Wheel Drive Tractors (2WD) are most commonly used in dry or upland farming situations
and for transportation. They range in size from 5 HP - 200 HP and need 80% of the weight
distributed over the rear axle to maximize traction. The biggest advantages of this type of tractor
over other 4-wheel tractors are smaller turning circle, simplicity of design, fewer mechanical parts
and lower purchase price. However, a 2WD tractor does not work at all well in wet, hilly and
muddy conditions.

Front Wheel Assist (FWA) is commonly known as 4WD or unequal 4-wheel drive. It is the most
popular 4wheel tractor in many parts of the United States and worldwide. These tractors range in
size from 5 HP - 240 HP and are capable of delivering between 50-55% of the rated power at the
drawbar. Typically, between 75% and 85% of the rated engine HP is delivered to a rear PTO
(Power Take-Off) on any diesel tractor.

Equal Four-Wheel Drive (4WD) tractors have all four tires of equal size and range in size from 35
HP - 600 HP. This tractor type has the greatest power to weight ratio and can deliver between 55-
60% of power at the drawbar. It is challenging to man oeuvre and often the size and expense makes
these tractors impractical.

18
 4.5. DETERMINING HORSEPOWER

Horsepower (HP): -A measure of the rate with which work is done. By definition one horsepower
is the amount of energy required to move 33,000 pounds a distance of one foot in a time span of
one minute or likewise, to move 1 pound 33,000 feet in one minute. It is the measure of a machine's
ability to move a load.

Brake Horsepower: - The maximum power the engine can deliver without alterations. This figure
is particularly useful in sizing stationary engines.

Power-Take-Off-Horsepower (PTO): -The power as determined at the power-take-off shaft.

Draft (Drawbar) Horsepower: -The power transmitted by the tractor to the implement. The
Tractor Tests indicate that maximum drawbar horsepower will average approximately 85 percent
of the maximum PTO horsepower for most tractors.

4.6. SELECTION OF TRACTOR SIZE

Determine the criteria for Chisel Plough operation

Time: There are 35-40 days of calendar time allotted to this job. During this time span, 2
days (48 hours) are estimated to be available for field work.
Determine filed capacity (Q) =4.94 acres (PE Sumner, EJ Williams, 2007)
N.B 1hectar =2.47acres

𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐴𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑜𝐶𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟
=
𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟𝑜𝑓 𝑊𝑜𝑟𝑘𝐷𝑎𝑦𝑠𝑥𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒𝐻𝑟𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝐷𝑎𝑦

4.94𝑎𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑠
=
2𝐷𝑎𝑦𝑠𝑥8 𝐻𝑟𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝐷𝑎𝑦

= 0.30625𝑎𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑠/ℎ𝑟

Determine Width of Implement Needed (PE Sumner, EJ Williams, 2007)

NB 1ft = 0.3048m (1m =100cm)
10 ∗ 𝐴𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑠/ℎ𝑟
=
𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑜𝑓 𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛

19
 10 ∗ 0.30625 𝐴𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑠/ℎ𝑟
=
1.55(𝑚𝑝ℎ)
= 1.976𝑓𝑒𝑒𝑡
= 60.22𝑐𝑚
Where: - the Factor 10 is used to reflect theoretical capacity (1/8) of an implement 1-ft
wide, 1 mph, and to reflect 18 % field loss for overlap, turning loss, and other inefficiencies
of field work.

Table 2: Draft and power requirements for tillage and seeding implements

Implement Speed(mph) Draft(force/unit Draft(force/unit Draft (force/unit

depth) clay soil depth)loamy soil depth)sandy soil

Sub soiler
Narrow point 5 295 206 133
12 inch winged point 5 382 267 172
Moldboard plough 4.5 223 156 101

Chisel plough
2 inch straight point 5 115 98 75
3 inch shovel 5.5 139 118 91
Sweep plough
Primary tillage 5 136 116 89
Secondary tillage 5 90 76 58

Determine draft (soil resistance)

= 𝑊𝑖𝑑𝑡ℎ 𝑜𝑓 𝐼𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑥 𝐷𝑟𝑎𝑓𝑡 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝐹𝑜𝑜𝑡 ∗ 𝐷𝑒𝑝𝑡ℎ 𝑜𝑓 𝑂𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑖𝑛 𝐼𝑛𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑠
𝐷𝑠𝑟 = 𝑊 ∗ 𝑑 ∗ 𝐷

Where

Dsr - soil resistance

W- Width of Implement

d- Draft per Foot

D- Depth of Operation in Inches

20
 Lb
𝐷𝑠𝑟 = 60.22𝑐𝑚𝑥 25𝑐𝑚 𝑥118 in
feet
Lb
𝐷𝑠𝑟 = 1.9757feet 𝑥 9.84 inch ∗ 118 in
feet

𝐷𝑠𝑟 = 2294.0248𝐿𝑏

Determine drawbar 𝐻𝑝 required

2294.0248 𝑥 1.55
=
375

= 9.5 𝐻𝑝

Table 3:- PTO power multiplication factor for different soil

Soil condition Multiply drawbar HP by

Firm untilled soil 1.5
Previously tilled 1.8
Soft or sandy soil 2.1
Determine minimum PTO 𝐻𝑝

= 𝐷𝑟𝑎𝑤𝑏𝑎𝑟 𝐻𝑝 ∗ 1.8

= 9.5𝐻𝑝 ∗ 1.8
= 17.0675 𝐻𝑝

PTO power P=17.0675Hp

P= 12.73Kw

Find brake horse power

21
 68% 12.73
=
100% 𝑥

𝑃 = 18.721 𝐾𝑤

= 25.11 𝐻𝑝

Table 4:-type’s tractor based on power

Model Engine hp PTO hp Break out Speed (mph) Weight(lbs)

force(lbf)
A 20.1 17.5 1521 11.9 1566

B 23.4 19.5 1521 12.7 1632

C 23.3 19.5 1691 11.9 1786

D 29.6 27 1691 11.3 1896

E 29.6 27 1691 11.4 1874

F 33 23 3000 14-15 2755

G 29.6 27 1691 13.6 2447

We selected model F, One of the best 33-horsepower tractors in the industry. With 33.2
horsepower and a rated speed of 2,600, the four-cylinder diesel engine kicks out a displacement of
2.5. The battery is powered by way of a 50-amp alternator and the machine is fueled off a 9.5-
gallon tank. A hydrostatic transmission sports three ranges off a synchronic, twin-pedal, shuttle
type.

Maximum forward speed is 15 miles per hour, with a maximum reverse of 14 miles per hour, all
with a mechanical, wet, multi-disc braking system. The New Holland Boomer 40 offers a Category
1/ 3-point hitch with a lift capacity of 2,755 pounds and hydrostatic steering the electro-hydraulic-
engaged PTO horsepower comes in at 34/32 with rear speed at 540 RPM, mid-speed at 2,000. The

22
Big Blue machine measures 306 inches long, with a height to the top of the ROPS frame of 245
inches, and a 176-inch wheelbase. Total weight is 3,737 pounds

4.7. Design and analysis of digger

It’s a blade used to cut into the ground, free up the potatoes from the soil and elevate it to the
separator. So Design requirements for the digger: - Doing an absolute cutting to the soil layer that
contains potato tubers (2% loss is allowed)

- Feed as less as possible of clods and foliage

- Not damaging potato tubers

The passive blade digger

It is a flat plate fixed inclined from the horizontal. The digger’s angle of inclination (α) has to be
as less as possible, to avoid clods sliding and reduce draw resistance.

4.7.1. Geometric analysis of digger blade

On the other hand, the value of this angle associated with the height of rear of the digger (H),
and working length (𝑳𝒅).

d
Y
H

Figure 8:-Geometric analysis of digger blade

According to experiments, with increasing of α, the cleaning operation improve as well.

In most designs of potato harvesters the value of α has found to be (25 ͦ - 40 ͦ) at depth H of
(18cm– 25cm). (Ismail Alhajj Adam Alhaseen, August 2015)

𝐻
sinα =
𝐿𝐷

25𝑐𝑚
𝐿𝐷 =
sin40

23
 𝐿𝐷 = 39𝑐𝑚

Where:

𝛼 Is the angle of inclination from the horizontal

H Is the height of the rear of the digger (cm)

𝐿𝑑 Is the working length of digger (cm).

The smooth sliding of potato and clods on the digger blade depends on α and has to
satisfy the sliding condition:

𝛼 ≤ 90 − ∅
∅  50

Where ∅ is angle of friction between the soil and blade material

Since the cleaning operation of the digger blade depends on the density and shape of the
crop foliage, the blade is designed with an obtuse angle (𝛾) and its value has to be taken
where the foliage is sliding on sides, fasten the digging operation and reduces the losses
and overload of the crop and clods in front of the digger blade.
Theoretically the value of 𝛾 must satisfy the following:

𝛾 = 𝜋 − 2∅
𝛾 = 180 − 2(50) = 80

Where ∅ in this case the friction angle between crop foliage and blade material 𝛾usually taken
(80 ͦ − 100 ͦ) Average size of potato

Table 5:- Average values for potato dimensions and weight measurement
Statistics L(mm) W(mm) H(mm) Weight (kg)

minimum 66.5 48.2 40.1 0.082

Maximum 143.3 94.3 94.1 0.522

Medium 104.9 71.3 67.1 0.302

24
 Figure 9:- potato dimensions and weight measurement

Weight of potato in one plant

• Max number potato per plant is 8.

• Max weight of one potato is 0.522Kg.

Max weight of potato per plant

𝑊𝑝 = 𝑚𝑔 ∗ 𝑁𝑜 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑜
𝑊𝑝 = 0.522𝑘𝑔 ∗ 9.81 ∗ 8
𝑊𝑝 = 41𝑁

Volume of the soil in the digger (𝑉𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙)

𝑉 = 𝐴 ∗ 𝐻
𝑉 = 𝑊 ∗ 𝐿 ∗ 𝐻
𝑉 = 60.22𝑐𝑚 ∗ 39𝑐𝑚 ∗ 25𝑐𝑚

𝑉𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙 = 58714.5𝑐𝑚3

Average density of loam soil (𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑖) = 1.39 𝑔/𝑐𝑚3

Weight of soil on the digger (𝑊𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙)

𝑊𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙 = 𝑀𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙 ∗ 𝑔
𝑊𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙 = 𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙 ∗ 𝑉𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙 ∗ 𝑔
𝑊𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙 = 1.39 ∗ 58714.5 ∗ 9.81

25
 𝑊𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙 = 800.625𝑚𝑔/𝑠2

For more safety we applied safety factor 𝑠𝑦 =3

𝑊𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙 = 800.625 × 3 = 2401.95 𝑁

𝑊𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙 = 800.625 𝑁 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑏𝑙𝑎𝑑𝑒 𝑤𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑏𝑒
𝑊𝑡 = 𝑊𝑠 + 𝑊𝑝
𝑊𝑡 = 800.625𝑁 + 41𝑁
𝑊𝑡 = 841.625𝑁
Table 6:- result of digger geometric analysis

No Particular Specification
1 Height of digger (H) 25 cm
2 Working length of digger (𝐿𝑑) 39cm
3 Max weight of potato per plant 41N
4 Volume of soil in the digger 58714.5𝑐𝑚3
5 Weight of soil in the digger 800.625𝑁
6 Weight on the blade 841.625 N

4.7.2. Force Analysis of digger

Figure 10:-Force Analysis of digger

𝐷𝑦 = 𝐷𝑐𝑜𝑠 50

26
 = = 2294.0248𝐿𝑏 ∗ 𝑐𝑜𝑠 50
= 10.2 ∗ 𝑐𝑜𝑠 50
= 6.556𝐾𝑁

Where, D- drafting force

The ‘y’ component of draft force only develop bending moment on the blade (digger)

So, Total load acting on the blade will be

𝑊 = 𝑊𝑡 + 𝐷𝑦
𝑊 = 0.84𝐾𝑁 + 6.556𝐾𝑁

𝑊 = 7.396𝐾𝑁

This force is considered as uniformly distributed load on the blade. Assuming the blade as
cantilever beam.

Figure 11:-blade as cantilever beam

𝑊𝑇 = 𝑊1 + 𝑊2

Where W1- UDL (uniformly distributed load)

W2-UVL (uniformly varying load)

WT- Total load applied in digger

𝑊2 = 𝑊𝑇 + 𝑊1
𝑊1 = 7.396𝐾𝑁 − 1.02

𝑊1 = 6.376𝐾𝑁/𝑚

27
Determination of reaction force

Figure 12:-reaction force

W2L
𝐹𝑦 ↑ += 0; 𝑅𝑦 − 𝑊1𝐿 − =0
2

W2L
𝑅𝑦 = 𝑊1𝐿 +
2

(6.376 ∗ 0.39)
𝑅𝑦 = 1.02 ∗ 0.39 +
2

𝑅𝑦 = 0.4 + 1.243

𝑅𝑦 = 1.641 𝐾𝑁

Determination of shear force and bending moment Section one (0 < 𝑥 < 𝐿)

Determination of force
W𝑥 2
𝐹𝑦 ↑ += 0; 𝑅𝑦 − 𝑊1𝐿 − −𝑣 =0
2𝐿

28
 W𝑥 2
𝑣 = 𝑅𝑦 − 𝑊1𝐿 −
2𝐿
6.376 ∗ 𝑥 2
𝑣 = 1.641 − 1.02x −
2 ∗ 0.39
𝑉 = 1.641 − 1.02𝑥 − 8.175𝑥 2

𝑆ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒 𝑎𝑡 𝑋 = 0, 𝑉 = 1.641𝐾𝑁

𝑆ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒 𝑎𝑡 𝑥 = 𝐿 = 0.39 𝑚

6.376 ∗ 𝑥(0.39)2
𝑣 = 1.641 − 1.02(0.39) − ,V = 0
2 ∗ 0.39

Determination of moment

𝑥 𝑦𝑥 𝑥
+ 𝑀 = 0, 𝑀 = 𝑅𝑦 ∗ 𝑥 − 𝑊1𝑥 − ∗
2 2 3

𝑊1𝑥 2 𝑊2𝑥 2 𝑥
𝑀 = 𝑅𝑦 ∗ 𝑥 − − ∗
2 2𝑙 3

𝑊1𝑥 2 𝑊2𝑥 3
𝑀 = 𝑅𝑦 ∗ 𝑥 − −
2 6𝑙

Moment at x=0 𝑀=0

Moment at x=L=0.39m

𝑊1𝑥(0.39) 2 𝑊2𝑥(0.39) 3
𝑀 = 𝑅𝑦 ∗ (0.39) − −
2 6(0.39)

𝑀 = 0.803 − 0.078 − 0.22

𝑀 = 0.505𝐾𝑁𝑚

Shear force and bending moment diagram

29
𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 2.06 𝐾𝑁

𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 0.505 𝐾𝑁𝑚

Where: -

𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 – 𝑚𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑏𝑙𝑎𝑑𝑒

𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 – 𝑚𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑏𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑚𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡

In most potatoes (digger) harvesters the blade material used stainless steel and

𝑖𝑡 ℎ𝑎𝑠 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝜎𝑦 = 215 𝑀𝑝𝑎

To determine the thickness of digger blade t

Bending moment on digger blade M = Maximum bending moment

Since maximum bending moment is given.

𝜎𝑦 ∗ 𝑤 ∗ 𝑡 2
𝑀 =
6
6M
𝑡2 =
𝜎𝑦 ∗ 𝑤

6 ∗ 0.505 KNm
𝑡 = √
215 ∗ 𝑡106 ∗ 0.8

𝑡 = 5 𝑚𝑚

30
 Table 7:- result of force analysis

No particular Specification

1 Total load on the blade 7.396𝐾𝑁

2 𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 2.06KN

3 𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 0.505KNm

4 Material used stainless steel (𝜎𝑦) 215Mpa

5 Thickness of digger blade (t) 5mm

4.7.3. Maximum slop and deflection developed on the digger

Maximum slop +

𝐿
𝐸𝐼𝑑𝑦
𝜃 𝑚𝑎𝑥 = = ∫ 𝑀𝑑𝑥
𝑑𝑥 0

Since,

𝑊1 𝑥 2 𝑊2 𝑥 3
𝑀 = 𝑅𝑦 ∗ 𝑥 − −
2 6𝑙
𝐿
𝐸𝐼𝑑𝑦 𝑊1 𝑥 2 𝑊2 𝑥 3
𝜃 𝑚𝑎𝑥 = = ∫ (𝑅𝑦 ∗ 𝑥 − − )𝑑𝑥
𝑑𝑥 0 2 6𝑙

𝑅𝑦 ∗ 𝑥 2 𝑊1 𝑥 3 𝑊2 𝑥 4
= − −
2 6 24𝑙
2 3
𝑅𝑦 ∗ 𝐿 𝑊1 𝐿 𝑊2 𝐿4
= − −
2 6 24𝑙
1.641 ∗ (0.39)2 (1.02)(0.39)3 (6.37)(0.39)4
= − −
2 6 24(0.39)

𝑑𝑦 0.009
=
𝑑𝑥 𝐸𝐼
Where, 𝐸 − 𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑐 𝑚𝑜𝑑𝑢𝑙𝑒 = 193 𝐺𝑃𝑎

31
 Assuming a rectangular cross section

𝑏ℎ3
𝐼=
12
600 × 53
𝐼=
12
𝐼 = 6250mm4
4
𝐼 = 6.25 × 10−9 m

𝑑𝑦 0.009
=
𝑑𝑥 193 × 10 × 6.25 × 10−9
9

𝑑𝑦
= 6.25
𝑑𝑥
Maximum deflection
𝐿 𝐿
𝑑𝑦 𝑅𝑦 ∗ 𝑥 2 𝑊1 𝑥 3 𝑊2 𝑥 4
EIy = ∫ = ∫ − −
0 𝑑𝑥 0 2 6 24𝑙
3 4 5
𝑅𝑦𝑥 𝑊1 𝑥 𝑊2 𝑥
EIy = − −
4 24 120𝑙
1.641(0.39)3 1.02(0.39)4 6.37(0.39)5
EIy = − −
6 24 120(0.39)

EIy = 0.014
0.014
𝑦=
EI
0.014
𝑦=
193 × 109 × 6.25 ×× 10−9

𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 0.0000116

32
 4.7.4. Failure Analysis of digger

Considering axial load on the blade (𝐷𝑥), perpendicular area will be

𝐴 = 𝑊 ∗ 𝑡
𝐴 = 600𝑚𝑚 ∗ 5𝑚𝑚
𝐴 = 3000𝑚𝑚2

Dx 10.2 sin 50
σ1 = =
A 3000
σ1 = 2.6𝑚𝑚2

Consider bending moment to determine direct stress on a principal plane.

M
σ2 =
Z
𝑏ℎ2 600(390)2
But,𝑍 = = = 15.21 × 106 𝑚𝑚2
6 6

M 10.2 sin 50
σ2 = =
Z 15.21 × 106 𝑚𝑚2
𝑁
σ2 = 0.514 × 106
𝑚𝑚2
σ2 = 0.514𝑀𝑃𝑎

Shear stress will be

v 2.06 × 103 𝑁
τ = = = 0.687𝑀𝑃𝑎
A 5mm ∗ 600mm
Determining principal stresses (maximum)

- Maximum principal stress (𝜎𝑡1)

σ1 + σ2 1
σt1 = + √(σ1 − σ2)2 + 4τ2
2 2
2.6 + 0.1514 1
σt1 = + √(2.6 − 0.1514)2 + 4(0.687)2
2 2

33
 σt1 = 2.778𝑀𝑃𝑎

- Minimum principal stress (𝜎𝑡2)

σ1 + σ2 1
σt2 = − √(σ1 − σ2)2 + 4τ2
2 2
2.6 + 0.1514 1
σt2 = − √(2.6 − 0.1514)2 + 4(0.687)2
2 2
σt1 = −1.4023MPa

4.7.5. Selection of screw (bolt)

A screwed joint is mainly composed of two elements (a bolt & nut) .The screwed joints are widely
used where the machine parts are required to be readily connected without damage to the machine
or fastening. This may be for the purpose of holding or adjustment in assembly or service
inspection, repair or replacement, or it may be for manufacturing or assembly reasons. In the
specification standards for bolts, the strength is specified by stating ASTM minimum quantities,
the minimum proof strength, or minimum proof load, and the minimum tensile strength.

We have selection carbon steel C1020 as a material has yield strength 𝜎𝑦 = 𝜎𝑡 = 289 𝑀𝑝𝑎.
When a tensile load subjected to bolt from equation

𝜋
𝑃 = × 𝑑𝑐 2 × 𝜎𝑡
4

𝜋
2401.95N = × 𝑑𝑐 2 × 289
4

𝑑𝑐 = 3.256𝑚𝑚

Where 𝒅𝒄 is root or core diameter of the thread,

𝝈𝒕 is the permissible tensile stress for the bolt material.
But, the standard bolt size starts for M10 and we will takes
𝑑𝑐 = 𝑀10

Figure 13:-bolt and nut geometer all in mm

34
 4.8. Design and analysis Elevator and separator

Its function is receiving crops and clay from the blade and raises it to the top of the machine.
Meanwhile, shakes off the clods and dirt.

Separator design requirement is

Achieving highly efficient separation with minimum crop loss and damage.
Quality of the separator depends on feed rate of material received from the digger and
its properties.

4.8.1. Speed of separator (𝒗𝒔)

The efficiency of separator depends greatly on its speed. Increasing the speed increases the
separation and helps to flatten the soil layer over separator area. Nevertheless, shorten the residence
time of the soil on separator area and that reduces soil dropping through gaps.

The speed of first separator (in case of two stages) taken as (1.4- 1.8) 𝑉, Where 𝑉 is the forward
speed of the machine.

Due to this, we shall take mean factor, which is 1.6

𝑉𝑠 = 1.6 ∗ 𝑉

𝑉𝑠 = 1.6 ∗ 2.5𝑘𝑚/ℎ𝑟

𝑘𝑚
𝑉𝑠 = 14
ℎ𝑟

𝑉𝑠 = 1.1 𝑚/𝑠

Depend on separation and elevation requirement. Small values negatively affect machine
dimension and reduces the separation performance, and vice versa. However, great values could
causes accumulation of soil and tubers on separator surface.

- The top part of separator usually fixed at angle (20 ͦ- 22 ͦ).

35
Feed rate of potato tuber will be

𝐹𝑝 = 𝑌𝑝 ∗ 𝐵 ∗ 𝑉

= 11.1𝑘𝑔/𝑚2 ∗ 0.786𝑚 ∗ 2.5𝑘𝑚/ℎ𝑟

= 21.81 ∗ 103 𝑘𝑔/ℎ𝑟

= 21810𝑘𝑔/ℎ𝑟

= 6𝑘𝑔/𝑠𝑒𝑐

Feed rate of soil in separator is given by (F)

𝐹 =  ∗ 𝐵 ∗ 𝑍 ∗ 𝑉

Where

 - Density of soil

B - Width of soil layer

Z - Thickness soil layer

V- Speed of machine

𝐹 = 1.39𝑐𝑚 ∗ 78.6𝑐𝑚 ∗ 10𝑐𝑚 ∗ 2.5𝑘𝑚/ℎ𝑟

= 2554.5𝑔/𝑐𝑚 ∗ 𝑘𝑚/ℎ𝑟
= 2554.5𝑘𝑔/∗ 10ିଶ𝑚 ∗ 𝑚/ℎ𝑟
= 255450𝑘𝑔/ℎ𝑟
= 71𝑘𝑔/𝑠𝑒𝑐

36
4.8.2. Geometric analysis of separator

Figure 14:-geometric analysis of separator

𝑣𝑠 2
l=
g(fcosαs − sinαs)

Where:-

− 𝛼𝑠 – Angle of inclination of separator (200 – 220) is recommended

− 𝑣𝑠 – Speed of separator

− 𝑠𝑟 – Gap b/n rods

− 𝑑𝑟 – Rod diameter

− 𝑓- Coefficient of friction b/n soil and separator during elevator

𝑚
Since, 𝑣𝑠 = 1.1 𝑔 = 9.81𝑚/𝑠2 𝛼𝑠 = 200 𝑓 = 0.45
𝑠

𝑣𝑠 2
l=
g(fcosαs − sinαs)

37
 1.1
l=
9.81(0.45cos20 − sin20)

𝑙 = 1.5𝑚

4.8.3. Design of rod

Consider for rod design

- Total amount of soil scooped up by digger will exert a load on the rod.

- Maximum weight of potato

- Maximum weight of soil on the blade

- When there will be unexpected stone inside the soil.

Having a weight of 10% of total weight. Total weight will be

𝑤𝑡 = 𝑤1 + 𝑤𝑠

𝑤𝑡 = 1018.32𝐾𝑁 + 1018.32 ∗ 0.1

𝑤𝑡 = 1120.15𝑁/𝑚

When considering a single rod on the separator which is subjected to uniformly distributed load,
and it has supported at both ends.

F.B.D

Where

𝑊𝑡 − Total weight on the rod

𝐿 −Length of rod

38
 𝑊𝑡 ∗ 𝐿 = 1120.15𝑁/𝑚 ∗ 0.786𝑚 = 880.44 𝑁

𝑊𝑡 880.44
𝑅𝐴 = 𝑅𝐵 = = = 440.22
2 2
To determine reaction force by using

Section one (0 < 𝑥 < 0.393𝑚)

v
RA

𝑉+↑= 0; 𝑅𝐴 = 𝑣 = 440.22𝑁
𝑀+↑= 0; 𝑀 = 𝑅𝐴 ∗ 𝑥 = 440.22 ∗ 𝑥

At X= 0, M=0

X=0.392, M= 173Nm

Section two (0.393 <x <0.786)

Wt.

RA

𝐹𝑦+↑= 0; 𝑅𝐴 − 𝑊𝑡 − 𝑣 = 0
𝑣 = 𝑅𝐴 − 𝑊𝑡
𝑣 = 440.22 − 880.44
𝑣 = −440.22𝑁
𝑀+↑= 0; 𝑀 + 𝑊𝑡
(𝑥 − 0.393) − 𝑅𝐴 ∗ 𝑥 = 440.22 ∗ 𝑥
𝑀 = 440.22 ∗ 𝑥 − 880.44(𝑥 − 0.392)
𝑀 = 440.22 ∗ 𝑥 − 880.44𝑥 + 346

39
 𝑀 = 346 − 440.22𝑥

𝐴𝑡 𝑋 = 0.392, 𝑀 = 173𝑁𝑚

𝑋 = 0.786, 𝑀 = 0 39

Shear force and bending moment diagram

Selection of material for rod

𝜎𝑦 = 275𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 Yield stress

Maximum shear stress is given by

𝜏 𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 0.6 ∗ 𝜎𝑦

𝜏 𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 0.6 ∗ 275𝑁/𝑚𝑚2

𝜏 𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 165𝑁/𝑚𝑚2

Also, maximum shear stress can be calculated as

3 Vmax
τmax = ∗
2 𝐴

3 Vmax
A = ∗
2 τmax

40
 3 440.22N
A = ∗
2 165𝑁/𝑚𝑚2

𝐴 = 4𝑚𝑚2

𝜋
𝐴 = ∗ 𝑑4
4

4𝐴
d=√
π

𝑑 = 2.25𝑚𝑚

The above diameter is calculated at the yield point of material, in order to makes the component
safe we have take a factor of safety 4. Therefore diameter of rod becomes 10mm.

Design of vibration derive

Assumption

-recommended amplitude and frequency for potato harvesting machine are 25mm and 4hz
respectively

- The vibration device is assumed to be a cam profile which converts rotary motion into oscillatory
Analysis

F=hz

A=25mm

Angular velocity of cam is given

𝜔 = 2𝜋𝑓 = 2 ∗ 𝜋 ∗ 4ℎ𝑧 =25.13rad/sec

Period for one cycle is give

2∗ π
𝑇=
ω
2∗ π
𝑇= = 0.25𝑠𝑒𝑐
25.13

41
Maximum defection of conveyer due to vibration will be

𝑋 = 𝐴𝑠𝑖𝑛𝜔𝑡

= 25𝑚𝑚 𝑠𝑖𝑛 (25.13 ∗ 0.25)

= 2.7𝑚𝑚

Required length cam lab from the center

For vibration is given by

𝑣𝑝 1.1𝑚/𝑠
𝑟= = = 0.044𝑚 = 44𝑚𝑚
ω 25.13rad/sec

Where

V= speed of conveyer

𝜔 =angular acceleration of vibrating derive

Number of revolution for the cam shaft will be

60 ∗ ω
N =
2π

60 ∗ 25.13
N = = 240𝑟𝑝𝑚
2π

Tangential force which pushes the cam lobe is 1.14Kn

The torque developed on the cam shaft due to tangential force can be determined as

𝑇 = 𝐹 ∗ 𝑟

= 1.14𝐾𝑛 ∗ 0.044𝑚

= 313𝑁𝑚

42
Where

𝐹 −Tangential force

𝑟 −Length of cam lobe

Since the cam shaft is subjected to twisting moment only the diameter of shaft is given by

𝜋
𝑇= ∗ τ ∗ 𝑑3
16
Where

𝜏-allowable shear stress from the material Selecting stainless steel material having yield strength
of 215mpa

- Maximum shear strength will be

1 1
τy = σy = (215) = 107.5mpa
2 2

Allowable shear stress is given by

𝜏𝑦
τall =
𝑛

Where n- factory of safety take 3

107.5mpa
τall = = 35.8mpa
3

Therefor required diameter of cam shaft will be

16 ∗ T 16 ∗ 313M/M
𝑑3 = =
π ∗ τ π ∗ 35.8 ∗ 106 N/𝑚2

16 ∗ T 5008nm
𝑑3 = =
π ∗ τ 112.412 ∗ 106 N/𝑚2

= 44.55 ∗ 10−6 𝑚3

𝑑 = 0.0354𝑚 𝐷 = 35.4𝑚𝑚

43
Figure The stroke (conveyer lift) will be

35.4
𝑠 = 2.7mm + (44 − ) = 29𝑚𝑚
2

Construction of cam profile

Consideration

-a cam lift 29mm during 900 of cam rotation with simple harmonic motion it dwells for the next
300 during the next 600 𝑜𝑓 cam rotation the conveyer returned to its original position with simple
harmonic motion land dwells during the reaming 1800

Figure

The cam profile will be

Figure

We know angular velocity of cam

𝜔 = 25.13𝑟𝑎𝑑/𝑠𝑒

The maximum velocity of the conveyer during its ascent

πωs
Vo =
2θ

π ∗ 25.13rad/s ∗ 29mm
Vo =
2 ∗ 1.570

= 728.6𝑚𝑚/𝑠

= 0.73𝑚/𝑠

Maximum velocity of follower during its decent

πωs
Vr =
2θr

π ∗ 25.13rad/sec ∗ 29mm
Vr =
2 ∗ 1.05

44
 = 1.1𝑚/𝑠

-speed of conveyer without pushing cam Natural frequency of chain is

𝑘 g 0.4985
ωn = √ = √ = 𝑟𝑝𝑠
𝑚 δ √δ
Where 𝛿-is max deflection of chain which is 2.7mm
𝛿 = 𝑥 = 0.0027𝑚

= 0.4985/√0.0027𝑚 𝑟𝑝𝑠 = 9.6 𝑟. 𝑝. 𝑠

𝜔𝑛 = 60.32𝑟𝑎𝑑/𝑠𝑒𝑐

𝑆𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑒, 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒 𝑓𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑦 𝑖𝑠 25.13𝑟𝑎𝑑/𝑠𝑒𝑐

𝑊𝑓 = 25.13𝑟𝑎𝑑/𝑠𝑒𝑐

𝑊𝑛 = 60.32𝑟𝑎𝑑/𝑠𝑒𝑐

𝐴𝑠 𝑤𝑒 𝑠𝑒𝑒

𝑂𝑏𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑢𝑠𝑙𝑦 𝑊𝑓 < 𝑊𝑛

Therefor the conveyer is safe

4.9. Design of conveyor drive shaft

The material used for shafts should have the following properties:
1. It should have high strength.
2. It should have good machine ability.
3. It should have low notch sensitivity factor.
4. It should have good heat treatment properties.
5. It should have high wear resistant properties.

Depending on the above properties we have select for our design 304 stainless steel material.

Therefore the necessary torque transmitted by shaft is given by;

45
 𝜋
𝑇= × 𝜏 × 𝑑4
16

Where

𝜏= material shear stress

T= required torque
d = diameter of the shaft

 The material at the center is removed in the hollow shaft and spread at large radius
therefore; hollow shafts are stronger than solid shafts with the same weight.
 The stiffness of the hollow shaft is more than the same weight solid shaft.
 The strength of the hollow shaft is more than the same weight solid shaft.
 The natural frequency of the hollow shaft is higher than the solid shaft with the same
weight.
 Hollow shaft is costlier than the solid shaft.

The shaft what we have to design is hallow shaft.

𝜋 (𝑑𝑜 4 − 𝑑𝑖 4 )
𝑇= ×𝜏×
16 𝑑𝑜

Let assume 𝑑𝑖 = 0.7𝑑𝑜

𝜏 = 0.6 𝜎𝑦
𝜏 = 0.6 ∗ 215𝑀𝑝𝑎
𝜏 = 129𝑀𝑝𝑎
𝑇 = 702.6𝑁

𝜋 6
(𝑑𝑜 4 − (0.7𝑑0 )4 )
𝑇= × 129 ∗ 10 pa ×
16 𝑑𝑜

𝜋 6
(𝑑𝑜 4 − 0.24𝑑0 4 )
𝑇= × 129 ∗ 10 pa ×
16 𝑑𝑜

𝜋 6
(0.76𝑑𝑜 4 )
𝑇= × 129 ∗ 10 pa ×
16 𝑑𝑜

46
 𝜋
𝑇= × 129 ∗ 106 pa × 0.76𝑑𝑜 3
16
𝑇 × 16
𝑑𝑜 3 =
𝜋 × 129 × 106 pa × 0.76

3 702.6 × 16
𝑑𝑜 = √
𝜋 × 129 × 106 pa × 0.76

3 11240.89 × 10−6
𝑑𝑜 = √
𝜋 × 129 × 106 pa × 0.76

3
𝑑𝑜 = √36.52 × 10−6 𝑚3

𝑑𝑜 = 3.32 × 10−2 𝑚

𝑑𝑜 = 3.32𝑚𝑚 ≈ 35mm

𝑆𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑒

𝑑𝑖 = 0.7𝑑0
𝑑𝑖 = 0.7 ∗ 35𝑚𝑚
𝑑𝑖 = 25𝑚𝑚

Then the thickness of the shaft is calculated by;

1
𝑡 = (𝑑𝑜 − 𝑑𝑖 )
2
1
𝑡 = (35mm − 25mm)
2

𝑡 = 5mm

The twisting moment (T) may be obtained by using the following relation because our shaft is
subjected to twisting moment only. So

𝜋
𝑇= × 𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 (𝑑𝑜 − 𝑑𝑖 )
16

Where
𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 =torsional shear max

𝑑𝑜
⁄𝑑 Outer and inner diameter
𝑖

47
 𝜋
𝑇= × 𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 (𝑑𝑜 − 𝑑𝑖 )
16
𝑇 ∗ 16
𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 =
𝜋 ∗ 𝑑𝑜 3 (1 − 𝐾)4

𝑑𝑜
Where 𝐾 = ⁄𝑑 = 25𝑚𝑚⁄35𝑚𝑚
𝑖

16 ∗ 702.6 ∗ 10ଷNmm
𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 =
π ∗ (35mm2 )(1 − 0.7144 )

11241.6Nm
𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 =
π ∗ (35mm2 )(1 − 0.7144 )

11241.6Nm
𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 =
(13.462 ∗ 10−5 𝑚3 )(0.74)

11241.6Nm
𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 =
(9.962 ∗ 10−5 𝑚3 )

𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 1128.4 ∗ 105 𝑁⁄ 2

𝑚

𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 112.84 ∗ 106 𝑁⁄ 2

𝑚

The twisting moment due to the twisting shear stress is given by;

𝜋
𝑇= × 𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 (𝑑𝑜 3 − 𝑑𝑖 3 )
16
𝜋
𝑇= × 112.84 ∗ 106 (0.0353 − 0.0253 )
16
𝜋
𝑇= × 112.84 ∗ 106 (2.725 ∗ 10−5 𝑚3 )
16

𝑇 = 603.4𝑁𝑚

Depending on the torsional rigidity torsional deflection may obtain by using the torsional
equation;

𝑇 𝐺𝜃
=
𝐽 𝐿

Where

48
T= twisting moment
G= Modulus of rigidity for the shaft material (G=77Gpa)
J = polar moment of inertia 𝜃 = torsional deflection

𝑇𝐿
𝜃=
𝐽𝐺
𝜋 4
𝐽= 𝑑
32

For hallow shaft

𝜋
𝐽= (𝑑𝑜 4 − 𝑑𝑖 4 )
32

𝜋
𝐽= (35𝑚𝑚)4 − (25𝑚𝑚)4
32
𝜋
𝐽= (1500625𝑚𝑚4 − 390625𝑚𝑚4 )
32
𝜋
𝐽= (11100000𝑚𝑚4 )
32

𝐽 = 108974𝑚𝑚4

𝐽 = 0.108974 ∗ 10−6 𝑚4

603.4 ∗ 0.8𝑁𝑚2
𝜃= 2
0.108974 ∗ 10−6 ∗ 77 ∗ 109 𝑁𝑚 ⁄𝑚4

482.72𝑁𝑚2
𝜃= 2
7.8461 ∗ 103 𝑁𝑚 ⁄𝑚4

𝜃 = 0.0615°

49
 4.10. Power transmission system
4.10.1 Universal joint
It is complex and costly to manufacture. So, select suitable universal joint by considering PTO
power.
Our series category HP@540 RPM HP@1000RPM
1100 6 125 160
1200 2 25 40
1300 3 38 60
1400 5 90 120
1500 1 13 20

Domestic PTO series HP rating

PTO type Type 1 Type 2
Diameter 35 mm 45mm
Speed 540 RPM 1000RPM
Rotation cw cw

Cross and bearing kit

Quick disconnect
Bore diameter d= 35 mm, length L=103mm

Shaft and quick connecter assembly

Shaft length Ls= 610mm

Shaft with connecter length Lsc=910mm

50
Material selection

A wide range of metals and synthetics are used in the manufacture of universal joints,
although synthetics are generally suitable only high stress and force applications. Common
materials used include stainless steel, steel, naval brass and other similar alloys. We select
stainless steel.

Determine input shaft

𝐼𝑛𝑝𝑢𝑡 𝑠ℎ𝑎𝑓𝑡 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟 = 35𝑚𝑚

𝐼𝑛𝑝𝑢𝑡 𝑠ℎ𝑎𝑓𝑡 𝑃𝑇𝑂 𝑝𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 = 16.6 𝐾𝑤

𝐼𝑛𝑝𝑢𝑡 𝑠ℎ𝑎𝑓𝑡 𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑 = 540 𝑅𝑃𝑀

Input shaft torque

𝑃 ∗ 60
𝑇𝑖 =
2𝜋𝑁

𝑇𝑖 = 294𝑁𝑚𝑚

Angle of the driving shaft from the position where the pins of the driving shaft fork are in the
plane of the two shaft.

51
 61

21
sin 𝜃 =
61

21
𝜃 = sin−1
61

𝜃 = 20°

Shaft failure modes

Shaft may fail by

Excessive lateral deflection, which cause items such as gears to move laterally from
their proper location, resulting in incorrect meshing.
Torsional deflection, which destroy the precise angular relationship or timing between
sections of a mechanism.
Wear may take place on bearing surface.

52
 Design principle

The role of joint and drive shaft is to transmit torque shaft which are not in line. These
transmitted loads are limited by the capacity of the material used.

Design consideration for shaft

Design based on strength: design is carried out so that stress at any location of the shaft
should not exceed the material yield stress.
Design based on stiffness: the stress at any point on the shaft depends on the nature of
load acting it depend on the allowable deflection and twist of the shaft.

Maximum bending stress on the shaft

During joint operation bending moment occur in the connecting shaft as function of
operating misalignment angle and driving torque.

𝑀 = 𝑇𝑖 𝑡𝑎𝑛 𝜃

Where

𝑇𝑖 – 𝑖𝑛𝑝𝑢𝑡 𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑞𝑢𝑒

𝜃 − 𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑒 𝑏𝑒𝑡𝑤𝑒𝑒𝑛 𝑖𝑛𝑝𝑢𝑡 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑝𝑢𝑡 𝑠ℎ𝑎𝑓𝑡

Axial force

Gear spindles are design to accommodate angular misalignment and change in axial travel length
by having their hubs transverse.

2𝑇 ∗ 𝜇 ∗ cos 𝜃
𝐹𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑎𝑙 =
𝑃𝑑

Where

Pd- spleen pitch diameter

53
𝜇 Coefficient friction (0.02-0.045)

2(294) ∗ 0.03 ∗ cos 20

𝐹𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑎𝑙 =
0.035

𝐹𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑎𝑙 = 473𝑁

Stress due to bending

32𝑀
𝜎𝑏 =
𝜋𝑑3 (1 − 𝐾4)

𝑊ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒
𝑀 − 𝐵𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑚𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑎𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑡
𝑑 − 𝑂𝑢𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠ℎ𝑎𝑓𝑡
𝑘 − 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜 𝑜𝑓 𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟 𝑡𝑜 𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑠ℎ𝑎𝑓𝑡 (𝑘 = 0, 𝑏𝑒𝑐𝑎𝑢𝑠𝑒 𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑖𝑠 𝑧𝑒𝑟𝑜)
32 ∗ 107
𝜎𝑏 =
𝜋0.0353
𝜎𝑏 = 26.4MPa

Stress due to axial

4𝛼𝐹
𝜎𝑎 =
𝜋𝑑3 (1 − 𝐾 2 )
𝑊ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒
𝐹 − 𝐴𝑥𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒
𝛼 – 𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑛 𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒 (1.0 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑙𝑒)
4 ∗ 473
𝜎𝑎 =
𝜋0.0353

𝜎𝑎 = 14𝑀𝑝𝑎
Stress due to torsion
16𝑇
𝜏𝑥𝑥 =
𝜋𝑑3 (1 − 𝐾4)

Where T- torque on the shaft

16 ∗ 294
𝜏𝑥𝑥 =
𝜋0.0353

𝜏𝑥𝑥 = 35𝑀𝑝𝑎

54
Combined bending and axial stress

Both bending and axial stress are normal stresses. Hence the net normal stress is given by
next equation. The net normal stress can be either positive or negative. Normally, shear stress
due to torsion is only considered in a shaft and shear stress due to load on the shaft is
neglected. Maximum shear stress

𝜎 = 𝜎𝑏 + 𝜎𝑎

𝜎 = 25.4 + 14

𝜎 = 39.4𝑀𝑃𝑎

Design of shaft mostly uses maximum shear stress theory. It states that a shaft fail when the
maximum shear stress at a point exceeds the maximum allowable shear stress for shaft
material.

𝜎2
𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 = √ + 𝜏 2 𝑥𝑥
2

39.42
𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 = √ + 352
2

𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 40.2𝑀𝑝𝑎

Maximum allowable shear material is 105Mpa.so; the maximum shear stress is less than
maximum allowable stress.

Additional power loss by friction heat of roller bearing through the u- joint.

𝑇0 = 𝑇𝑖 ∗ cos 𝜃 2

𝑇0 = 294𝑁𝑚 ∗ cos 202

𝑇0 = 260𝑁𝑚

Where

𝑇𝑜 = 𝑇𝑜𝑟𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑜𝑢𝑡

55
 𝑇𝑖 = 𝑇𝑜𝑟𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑖𝑛

𝜃 = 𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑢 − 𝑗𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡

Based on the equation above equation 20 degree would only amount to a 12% loss, however if
begin approach 45 degrees you get a50% loss and 90 degree is a 100% loss.

4.11. Design of differential (bevel gear)

Assumptions

Velocity ratio is assumed to be one since we want to change only direction of motion.
The number of teeth on the gear is assumed to be 20 for proper operation of gear.

What we have

The torque on the pinion gear is 260 Nm.

Number of revolution on the pinion gear is 420 rpm.

Since the gears are meshed at right angles and as they have equal number of teeth, the pitch
angle is given by

𝑇𝑃
𝑃1 = tan−1 = 45° Where: Ө𝑝1 𝑎𝑛𝑑 Ө𝑝2 are pitch angle for pinion
𝑇𝑔

And larger gear respectively. 𝑇𝑝

and 𝑇𝑔 are number of teeth on
pinion and larger gear
respectively and they are equal
as the velocity ratio is 1
𝑃2 = 𝑃1 = 45°

Formative number of teeth on the pinion (𝑇𝑒𝑝) is given by

𝑇𝑒𝑝 = 𝑇𝑝 ∗ 𝑠𝑒𝑐 𝑝1

= 20 ∗ 𝑠𝑒𝑐 45

56
 𝑇𝑒𝑝 = 28.28

 Tooth form factor for pinion gear (𝑌𝑝) will be

0.912
𝑌𝑝 = 0.154 −
𝑇𝑒𝑝

0.912
= 0.154 −
28.28

= 0.1218

 The power on the pinion gear can be calculated as

𝑃 ∗ 60
𝑇=
2𝜋𝑁
17.75𝐾𝑊 ∗ 60
𝑇= = 260𝑁𝑚
2𝜋1458
2𝜋𝑁𝑇 2𝜋420𝑟𝑝𝑚 ∗ 260𝑁𝑚
𝑃= = = 11.44𝑘𝑤
60 60

 Tangential load on the pinion gear will be

2𝑇
𝑊𝑡 =
𝐷𝑃

𝐷𝑃 = 𝑚 ∗ 𝑇𝑃 Where: 𝑊𝑡 − 𝑖𝑠 𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑

𝑇 − 𝑖𝑠 𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑚𝑖𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑑

𝐷𝑝 − 𝑖𝑠 𝑝𝑖𝑡𝑐ℎ 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑔𝑒𝑎𝑟

𝑚 − 𝑖𝑠 𝑚𝑜𝑑𝑢𝑙𝑒

2𝑇
𝑊𝑡 =
𝐷𝑃

2(260𝑁𝑚)
𝑊𝑡 =
𝑚20
𝑁
𝑊𝑡 = 26
𝑚

57
We know that pitch line velocity on the pinion gear can be determined as

𝜋𝐷𝑃 𝑇𝑃 𝑁 𝜋. 𝑚. 𝑇𝑃. 𝑁
𝑉= =
60 60
𝜋𝑚20 ∗ 420𝑟𝑝𝑚
𝑉=
60

𝑉 = 440𝑚𝑚𝑚/𝑠

 Velocity factor (𝐶𝑣)

3 3
𝐶𝑉 = =
3 + 𝑉 3 + 440𝑚

 Length of pitch cone element

𝐷𝑃 𝑚. 𝑇𝑃 𝑚 ∗ 20
𝐿= = = = 11.75𝑚 𝑚𝑚
2 sin 𝑃2 2 sin 45 2 ∗ 0.8

 Face width of gear will be

𝐿 11.75𝑚
𝑏= = = 392𝑚 𝑚𝑚
3 3

 We know that tangential load on the gear is given by

𝐿−𝑏
𝑊𝑡 = (𝜎𝑂𝑃 ∗ 𝐶𝑉 )𝑏𝜋𝑚𝑌( )
𝐿
3 11.75𝑚 − 3.92𝑚
26𝑁/𝑚 = (100 ∗ ( )(3.92𝑚 ∗ 𝜋 ∗ 𝑚(0.1218)( )
3 + 440 11.75𝑚

300𝑚2
26𝑁/𝑚 = ( )
3 + 440𝑚

26𝑁 ∗ 3 + 26 ∗ 440𝑚 = 300𝑚3

78 + 11440𝑚 = 300𝑚3

300𝑚3 − 11440𝑚 − 78 = 0 ………………………….. Divide both sides by 78 to simplify

3.85𝑚3 − 146.15𝑚 − 1 = 0

58
 Now by using iterative method we can determine the value of “m”
Therefore m = 4.5, let us approximate to the standard value 5.
It is the time to determine overall specifications of bevel gear

 Face with of teeth

𝑏 = 3.92 ∗ 5 = 19.6𝑚𝑚

 Pitch diameter of gear

𝐷𝑃 = 𝑚 ∗ 𝑇𝑃 = 5 ∗ 20 = 100𝑚𝑚

 Peripheral (pitch line) velocity

𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚
𝑉 = 440𝑚 = 440 ∗ 5 = 2200 = 2.2 𝑚/𝑠
𝑠 𝑠

 Velocity factor

𝐶𝑣 = 3/(3 + 𝑉) = 3/(3 + 2.2) = 0.58

 Length of pitch cone element

11.75𝑚 𝑚𝑚 = 11.75 ∗ 5 = 58.75 𝑚𝑚
 Mean radius of the pinion

𝑏
(𝐿 − 2)𝐷𝑃 19.6 100
𝑅𝑚 = = (58.75 − )∗ = 41.65𝑚𝑚
2𝐿 2 2 ∗ 58.75
 We know that tangential force acting at the main radius
𝑇 260𝑁𝑚
𝑊𝑡 = = = 6242.5𝑁 = 6.24𝐾𝑁
𝑅𝑚 0.04165
 Axial force acting on the pinion shaft
𝑊𝑅𝐻 = 𝑊𝑡 ∗ 𝑡𝑎𝑛𝜙 ∗ 𝑠𝑖𝑛 𝑝1
𝑊𝑅𝐻 = 6242.5 𝑡𝑎𝑛20 ∗ 𝑠𝑖𝑛45 = 1606.6 𝑁
 And radial force acting on the pinion shaft

𝑊𝑅𝑉 = 𝑊𝑡 ∗ 𝑡𝑎𝑛𝜙 ∗ 𝑐𝑜𝑠 𝑝1

𝑊𝑅𝑉 = 6242.5 ∗ 𝑡𝑎𝑛20 ∗ 𝑐𝑜𝑠45 = 1606.6 𝑁

 Bending moment due to WRH and WRV on the pinion shaft

59
 𝑀1 = 𝑊𝑅𝑉 ∗ 𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟 ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑔 − 𝑊𝑅𝐻 ∗ 𝑅𝑚
𝑀1 = 1606.6 𝑁 ∗ 50 − 1606.6 𝑁 ∗ 41.65 = 13.4 𝐾𝑁𝑚𝑚
𝑀2 = 𝑊𝑡 ∗ 𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑔 = 1606.6 𝑁 ∗ 50𝑚𝑚 = 80.3 𝐾𝑁𝑚𝑚

Resultant bending moment

𝑀 = √𝑀1 + 𝑀2 = √(13400)2 + (80300)2

𝑀 = 81.4 𝐾𝑁𝑚𝑚

Since the shaft is subjected to twisting moment (T) and bending moment (M). Therefore the
equivalent twisting moment is.

𝑇𝑒 = √𝑀2 + 𝑇 2

𝑇𝑒 = √814002 + 260002 = 272.4𝐾𝑁𝑚𝑚

Finally, the diameter of pinion shaft can be determined as follows

𝜋
𝑇𝑒 = ∗ 𝜏(𝑑𝑝)3
16

𝜋
272.4𝐾𝑁𝑚𝑚 = ∗ 45𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 (𝑑𝑝)3
16

272.4𝐾𝑁𝑚𝑚 ∗ 16
(𝑑𝑝)3 = = 31.35𝑚𝑚
𝜋 ∗ 45

We must approximate to standard shaft size, so 𝑑𝑝 = 35 𝑚𝑚.

60
4.12. Chain drive

The chains are made up of number of rigid links which are hinged together by pin joints in
order to provide the necessary flexibility for wraping round the driving and driven wheels.

The chains are mostly used to transmit motion and power from one shaft to another, when the
centre distance between their shafts is short such as in bicycles, motor cycles, agricultural
machinery, conveyors, rolling mills, road rollers etc.

Used to deliver of power the gear box to drive shaft of Convey

Its constant of a chain and two (a small and large sprocket )

Assumption

The velocity ratio assumed to be 3 for proper operation.

The minimum number of teeth on the pinion sprocket is taking as 12 from journal.

What we have

 Power input is 90% of power of difference which mean 10% of power has last during
transmission in differential due to friction and heat.
 Number of revolution at the inlet of chain drive is 420rpm.
Mathematically,
𝑝 = 90%

61
 𝑃𝑎 = 0.9 ∗ 11.44𝑘𝑤
𝑃𝑎 = 10.3𝑘𝑤
The torque transmitted will be

𝑃 ∗ 60 10.3 ∗ 103 ∗ 60
𝑇= = = 234.2𝑁
2𝜋𝑁 2𝜋 ∗ 420

We have selected roller chain due to its high strength wear resistant due to present of roller &
bush

- Simple in construction

- Gives good service under severe condition

- Has a little noise

- Used when there is little lubrication

Based on the above qualities roller chain is better as compared to silent chain

In seat a note about number of teeth from word named by “material used for shaft

- T1=12 number of teeth on smaller sprocket assume velocity ratio to be three

Number of teeth on larger sprocket will be

𝑇1 𝑁2
𝑉. 𝑅 = =
𝑇2 𝑁1

𝑇2 = 𝑇1 ∗ 𝑉. 𝑅 = 3 ∗ 12

𝑇2 = 36

Number of revolutions for smaller sprocket will be

𝑁1
𝑉. 𝑅 =
𝑁2

𝑁1 = 𝑁2 ∗ 𝑉. 𝑅 = 3 ∗ 140

𝑁1 = 420𝑟𝑝𝑚

62
Determination of suitable chain type for the operation

This can be done using power and speed of deceived by the chain form table 17.20

P=13.8

N=420rpm

Appropriate chain type is ANSI80 type B which can deliver 22.9HP power and 500rpm

Specification of ANSI 80 chain

 𝑃𝑖𝑡𝑐ℎ 𝑝 = 19.05𝑚𝑚
 𝑊𝑖𝑑𝑡ℎ 𝑏 = 15.88𝑚𝑚
 𝑀𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑙𝑒 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝜎𝑇 = 55.6𝐾𝑊
 𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑤𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑤 = 25 𝑁/𝑚
 𝑅𝑜𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑟 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝐷𝑟 = 15.87𝑚𝑚
 Pitch circle diameter of smaller sprocket

𝑝 19.05
𝐷2 = =
180 180
sin 𝑡2 sin 36

63
 𝐷2 = 218.68𝑚𝑚

Outer diameter will be

For smaller sprocket

𝐷𝑜𝑠 = 𝐷1 + 0.8𝑑𝑟

= 73.6𝑚𝑚 + 0.8(15.87)𝑚𝑚

= 86.3𝑚𝑚

For larger sprocket

𝐷𝑜𝑙 = 𝐷2 + 0.8𝑑𝑟

= 218.6𝑚𝑚 + 0.8(15.87)𝑚𝑚

= 231.3𝑚𝑚

Length chain will be

𝐿 = 𝐾 ∗ 𝑃

Where

𝑇2 + 𝑇1 2𝑋 𝑇2 − 𝑇1 2
𝐾= + +( ) 𝑃/𝑋
2 𝑃 2𝜋

36 + 12 2 ∗ 150 36 − 12 2
𝐾= + +( ) 150/19.05
2 19.05 2𝜋

= 24 + 157.48 + 0.85

64
 = 181.66

There for length of chain will be

𝐿 = 𝐾𝑃 = 181.66 ∗ 19.05

= 3460.6𝑚𝑚

= 3.5𝑚

Teeth width of sprocket will be 𝑊 = 0.95𝑏

where 𝑝 > 12.7𝑚𝑚

- Average velocity of chain will be

𝜋𝐷1𝑁1 𝜋 ∗ 73.6𝑚𝑚 ∗ 420𝑟𝑝𝑚

𝑉= =
60 60
𝑉 = 1618.5𝑚𝑚/𝑠

𝑉 = 1.6𝑚/𝑠

Weight of the chain per meter length will be

- Average weight chain is 𝑊𝑎𝑟𝑔 = 25𝑁/𝑚

𝑊 = 𝑊𝑎𝑣𝑔 ∗ 𝐿

𝑊 = 25𝑁/𝑚 ∗ 3.5𝑚

𝑊 = 87.5𝑁

𝑊𝑏
Factor of safety for chain drive 𝐹. 𝑆 = 𝑤

Where

𝑊𝑏 = 𝑏𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑘𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ

𝑊 = 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑

65
 - The breaking strength of the chain is given by

For roller chain Wb = 106𝑃2 (N)

Where p: pitch in mm

= 106(19.05)2

= 38.5𝑘𝑁

 The total load on the driving side of the chain will be

𝑊 = 𝐹𝑡 + 𝐹𝑐 + 𝐹𝑠

𝑊ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒
𝐹𝑡 = 𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑟𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒
𝐹𝑐 = 𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑓𝑢𝑔𝑎𝑙 𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛
𝐹𝑠 = 𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑑𝑢𝑒 𝑡𝑜 𝑠𝑎𝑔𝑔𝑖𝑛𝑔
- Tangential driving force acting on the chain will be

𝐹𝑡 = 𝑃/𝑉

𝑊ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒
𝑝 − 𝑃𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑚𝑖𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑏𝑦 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑖𝑛
𝑉 − 𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑 𝑜𝑓 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑖𝑛

𝐹𝑡 = 𝑝/𝑣

10.3𝑘𝑤
𝐹𝑡 =
1.6𝑚/𝑠

= 6.44𝑘𝑁
- Centrifugal tension in the chain

𝐹𝑐 = 𝑚 ∗ 𝑣 2 (𝑛)

66
Where
m- Mass of chain per meter length

𝐹𝑐 = 2.55𝑘𝑔/𝑚 ∗ 1.6𝑚/𝑠2

𝐹𝑐 = 6.53𝑁

𝑓𝑠 = 𝑘𝑚𝑔 ∗ 𝑋

= k ∗ wavg ∗ x

= 6 ∗ 25 ∗ 1.5 = 225𝑁

Where

𝑊𝑎𝑟𝑔 − 𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑖𝑛 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ

𝑋 − 𝐶𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑒 𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒

𝐾 − 𝐴𝑟𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑘 = 6 𝑎𝑡 𝛼 < 40°

𝑘 = 1.5 𝑎𝑡 𝛼 < 40°

𝛼 = 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑖𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑖𝑛 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 ℎ𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑧𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑙

𝑊 = 𝐹𝑡 + 𝐹𝑐 + 𝐹𝑠
= 6.53𝑁 + 225𝑁 + 6.44𝐾𝑁
= 6.76𝐾𝑁

Therefore

𝑊𝑏
𝑓. 𝑠 =
𝑤

38.5𝑘𝑁
𝑓. 𝑠 =
6.75

Power transmitted by chain

𝑤𝑏 ∗ 𝑣
𝑃=
𝑛 ∗ 𝑘𝑠

67
𝑊ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑛 − 𝐹𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑎𝑓𝑒𝑡𝑦

𝑘𝑠 − 𝑆𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑐𝑒 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒

𝐾1 − 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟

= 1, 𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑

𝐾2 – 𝑙𝑢𝑏𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟

= 1, 𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑝 𝑙𝑢𝑏𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛

𝐾3 − 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟

= 1, 𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑖𝑡 𝑤𝑜𝑟𝑘𝑠 8 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑑𝑎𝑦

𝑘𝑠 = 𝐾1 ∗ 𝐾2 ∗ 𝐾3
𝑘𝑠 = 1 ∗ 1 ∗ 1
𝑘𝑠 = 1

38.5kw ∗ 1.6m/s
𝑃=
3.6 ∗ 1

𝑃 = 17.1kw

Since this power is greater than the power what we want to deliver (16.6 kw), it is suitable for
the operation. Bearing stress on the chain can be calculated

P ∗ ks
σb =
A ∗ v

Where: A- projected area of roller

𝐴 = 𝑑 ∗ 𝑏

d-diameter of roller b-width of roller

𝐴 = 𝑑 ∗ 𝑏
= 15.87𝑚𝑚 ∗ 15.88𝑚𝑚

=252𝑚𝑚2

68
 103 𝑁
10.3 ∗
σb = 𝑠 ∗1
252𝑚𝑚2 ∗ 1.6m/s

σb = 25.5N/𝑚𝑚2

4.13. Design and selection of power transmission shaft

The material used for the shaft should the following properties.

- It should have high strength

- It should have good mach inability
- It should have low notch sensitivity factor
- It should have good heat treatment property Depending on the above property of
material we have select the stainless steel 304.

𝑀𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑦: 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝜎𝑦 = 215𝑀𝑝𝑎

𝑈𝑙𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝜎𝑢𝑡 = 505 𝑀𝑝𝑎

𝑀𝑜𝑑𝑢𝑙𝑢𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑟𝑖𝑔𝑖𝑑𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝐺 = 77𝐺𝑃𝑎 𝑇𝑜𝑟𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑜𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠ℎ𝑎𝑓𝑡

𝑇 = 260𝑁𝑚 𝑆ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠  = 0.6 ∗ 𝜎𝑦

 = 0.6 ∗ 215𝑀𝑃𝑎
 = 129𝑀𝑃𝑎

Speed N= 420RPM To find the power we use the following formula.

2𝜋𝑁𝑇
𝑝=
60

2𝜋 ∗ 420 ∗ 260
𝑝=
60

𝑃 = 11.44𝐾𝑤

When the shaft subjected to bending moment

𝑀 𝜎𝑏
=
𝐼 𝑦

69
Where

𝑀 = 𝐵𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑚𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡

𝐼 = 𝑚𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑠 𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠ℎ𝑎𝑓𝑡

𝜎𝑏 = 𝑏𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠

𝑦 = 𝐷𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑛𝑢𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎 𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑠

To find the bending moment we should analysis the force;

↑ +𝛴𝐹𝑦 = 0, 𝑅𝐴 + 𝑅𝑌 – 6440𝑁 – 473𝑁 = 0

𝑅𝐴 + 𝑅𝑌 = 6913𝑁 … … … … … … … … … … … 1

𝛴𝑀𝑟𝑦 = 𝑅𝐴(0.4𝑚) + 6440𝑁(0.15𝑚)– 473𝑁 ∗ 0.65 = 0

𝑅𝐴(0.4𝑚) = −658.55𝑁

𝑅𝐴 = −1646.4𝑁( ↓ )𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑛𝑒𝑔𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 𝑖𝑠 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑑𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒.

−𝑅𝐴 + 𝑅𝑌 = 6913𝑁
𝑅𝑌 = 6913𝑁 + 1646.4𝑁
𝑅𝑌 = 8559𝑁

Section 1-1 (0<x<0.25)

70
↑ ∑ 𝐹𝑦𝑉 = 473𝑁 𝑎𝑡 𝑥 = 0,
𝑀𝑜 = 0, 𝐴𝑡 𝑥 = 0.25,

𝑀𝑜 + 473𝑋 = 0
𝑀𝑜 = 118.25𝑁 𝑆𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 2 − 2 (0.25 < 𝑥0.65𝑚)

↑ + ∑ 𝐹𝑦 , 𝑉 − 473𝑁 − 1646.4𝑁 = 0

𝑉 = 2119.4𝑁

∑ 𝑀𝑜 = 0, 𝑀𝑜 + 473(𝑥 + 0.25) + 1646.4𝑁𝑥 = 0

𝑀 = −2119.4𝑥 − 118.25 𝐴𝑡 𝑥 = 0.25,

𝑀 = −648.1𝑁𝑚 𝐴𝑡 𝑥 = 0.65,
𝑀 = −1495.86𝑁𝑚

71
∑ Mo = 0, 𝑀𝑜 + 473(𝑥 + 0.65) + 1646.4(𝑥 + 0.4) − 8559(𝑥) = 0
𝑀= 6440𝑥𝑁 − 966𝑁

At x=0.65m,
𝑀= 3220𝑁𝑚

At x=0.8m,
𝑀 = 4186𝑁𝑚

Shear force diagram;

Bending moment diagram;

72
To find diameter of the shaft subjected to combined twisting and bending moment;

𝜋
∗𝜏 ∗ 𝑑 3 = √𝑀 2 + 𝑇 2
16 𝑚𝑎𝑥

Where𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 = shear of material

𝜋
∗ 129 ∗ 106 ∗ 𝑑 3 = √41862 + 2602
16

√41862 + 2602
𝑑3 = 𝜋
6 3
16 ∗ 129 ∗ 10 ∗ 𝑑

3
67073.13m2
𝑑 =
405.06

3
𝑑 = √165.06 ∗ 10−6

𝑑 = 55𝑚𝑚

𝑀 𝜎𝑏
=
𝐼 𝑦

55
Since 𝑦 = = 27.5𝑚𝑚
2

𝜋
𝐼= ∗ 𝑑4
64

𝜋
𝐼= ∗ 55𝑚𝑚4
64

𝐼 = 448953𝑚𝑚4

73
 𝑀𝑌
𝜎𝑦 =
𝐼

44115 ∗ 27.5 ∗ 10−3

𝜎𝑏 =
448.953 ∗ 10−9

𝜎𝑏 = 256.4Mpa

According to the maximum shear stress theory shear maximum subjected to twisting and
bending moment is given by;

𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 1⁄2 √𝜎𝑏 2 + 4𝜏 2

𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 1⁄2 √(256.4Mpa)2 + 4(129Mpa)2

𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 126Mpa

Since the maximum shear stress is within limits, therefore the design is safe.

4.14. Design of frame

Assumption

The harvest mounted on the tractor using three part (spots), so the draft force will be
divided in to three the line of force fraction is assumed to be perfectly horizontal.
Soil resistance force acting on the blade will exert a force at the joint of blade and frame
and it is divided into two since the blade is plated at two spots.
Since the entire frame is symmetry, we have taken half part for easy analysis the stress on
the member of frame analyses under the concept of truss analysis joint method.

Graphical representation of frame will be

74
 Where D- is draft force
R-soil resistance
Ac- frame
AB-support one
BC-min support
what we have
Draft force which is equal to soil resistance since the analysis is assumed at equilibrium static
position.
𝐷 = 𝑅 = 13.327𝐾𝑁
The angle inclination of frame (member AC) is (𝜃) = 20°
Analysis

 Consideration the force only in the x-direction

AC cos 20o R/2 D/3

∑ 𝑓𝑥 = 0, 𝐷⁄ = 𝑅⁄ = 𝐴𝐶 cos 20
2 2

75
 13.33kN 13.33kN
= + 𝐴𝐶 cos 20
3 3

4.4𝑘𝑁 = 6.67𝐾𝑁 + 𝐴𝐶 𝑐𝑜𝑠 20°

𝐴𝐶 𝑐𝑜𝑠 20° = 4.4𝑘𝑁 − 6.67𝑘𝑁

2.27𝐾𝑁
𝐴𝐶 = 𝐴𝐶 𝑐𝑜𝑠 20° = −2.4𝐾𝑁 – 𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑣𝑒.the minus sign indicates the direction is wrong

 Considering of the forces along y – direction only

∑ 𝑓𝑦+= 0, 𝐷⁄ = 𝑅⁄ = 𝐴𝐶 cos 20
2 2

𝐴𝐵 − 𝐴𝐶 𝑠𝑖𝑛 20° = 0
𝐴𝐵 = 𝐴𝐶 𝑠𝑖𝑛 20°
= 2.4𝑘𝑁 𝑠𝑖𝑛 20°
= 0.82𝐾 𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑣𝑒

20 o

BC

Considering the force along X-direction only

∑ 𝑓𝑥 = 0, 𝐷⁄ = 𝐵𝐶 cos 20
3

4.4𝐾𝑁
𝐵𝐶 =
cos 20

𝐵𝐶 = 4.68KN – Compressive

Considering the force along y-direction only is not necessary

We have select a material which is suitable for frame and support selected material is ASTM
A36 steel

76
 𝜎𝑦 = 250𝑚𝑝𝑎
Let us assume the factor of safety in order to get allowable working stress to be three n=3.
𝜎𝑦 250𝑚𝑝𝑎
𝜎𝑎𝑙𝑙 = = = 80.3𝑚𝑝𝑎
𝑛 3

Determination of size for member AB

𝐹
𝜎𝑏𝑎𝑙𝑙 =
𝐴

where F=is compressive force

A= is cross sectional area of AB
t= thickness member
Take oration of width to thickness to be 3
b= width of member

0.82
𝐴= = 10.21𝑚𝑚2
80.3𝑁/𝑚𝑚2

𝐴 = 𝑏 ∗ 𝑡
𝑆𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑏 = 3𝑡
𝑏 ∗ 𝑡 = 10.21𝑚𝑚ଶ
3𝑡 2 = 10.21𝑚𝑚2
𝑡 = 1.8𝑚𝑚
𝑏 = 3𝑡 = 3 ∗ 1.8𝑚
= 5.53𝑚
𝐷𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑖𝑧𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑚𝑒𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 “𝐵𝐶”
𝐹𝑏𝑐 = 4.68𝐾𝑁
𝜎𝑦 = 250𝑚𝑝𝑎

n=5

𝐹 4680
𝐴= = = 03.6𝑚𝑚2𝐴 = 3𝑡 2 = 93.6𝑚𝑚2
𝜎𝑎𝑙𝑙 50𝑁/𝑚𝑚2

𝑡 = 5.6𝑚𝑚

77
 𝑏 = 3𝑡 = 3 ∗ 5.6
= 16.7𝑚𝑚
𝐷𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑖𝑧𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑚𝑒𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 “𝐴𝐶” 𝑈𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑒 𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑎𝑙𝑙
𝐹𝑎𝑐 = 2.4𝐾𝑁
𝜎𝑎𝑙𝑙 = 50𝑚𝑝𝑎

𝐹
Since 𝜎𝑎𝑙𝑙 = 𝐴

𝐹 2400𝑁
𝐴= = = 48𝑚𝑚2
𝜎𝑎𝑙𝑙 50𝑁/𝑚𝑚2

3𝑡 2 = 48𝑚𝑚2

𝑡 = 4𝑚𝑚 𝑏 = 12𝑚𝑚

4.15. Design of hopper

- Average weight of a single potato is taken as 0.082 Kg from journals.
- The average volume of a single potato also taken as 128, 5232.5 mm3.
- Maximum area of blade to hold the soil and potato mixture is 0.7m x 0.39m wide.
- The average number of tubers per plant is eight referring preexisting journals.

Analysis
Crop yield of potato per square meter will be

𝑁 ∗ 𝑊1
𝑌𝑃 =
𝐴

Where

N is number if potato per plant

W1 is average weight of a single potato
A is effective area of soil cut

8 ∗ 0.082 Kg
𝑌𝑃 =
0.7 ∗ 0.39 m2

𝑌𝑝 = 2.43 𝐾𝑔/𝑚2

78
Feed rate of potato yield is given by
𝑄𝑝 = 𝑌𝑝 ∗ 𝐵 ∗ 𝑉
Where

B is width of blade (soil layer)

V is speed of tractor

𝑄𝑝 = 2.43 ∗ 0.7 𝑚 ∗ 0.7𝑚/𝑠

𝑄𝑝 = 1.2 𝐾𝑔/𝑠

As we state at the beginning of the project we have assumed that the average amount of farm the
farmers
have is 1.2 hectare.
Let say the farm is square, the length of row will be

𝐿 = √12000𝑚2 = 110𝑚

Where 1.2 hectare = 12000m2

Number of potato feed rate will be

𝑄𝑃 1.2𝑘𝑔/𝑠 14.6tuber
𝑁𝑃 = = 𝑁𝑃 = = = 15tuber/second
𝑊1 0.082𝑘𝑔 second

Volume feed rate of potato is given by

𝑉𝑓 = 𝑉1 ∗ 𝑁𝑝
Where V1 is average volume of single potato

𝑉𝑓 = 1.3 𝑥 10−4 𝑚3 ∗ 15 𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑠/ 𝑠𝑒𝑐

𝑉𝑓 = 1.9 𝑥 10−4 𝑚3

The time required for the harvester for first cycle harvesting will be
𝑡 = 𝐿/𝑉 = (2 ∗ 𝑅)/𝑉 = (2 ∗ 110)/(0.7 𝑚/𝑠)
= 314.3 𝑠𝑒𝑐
where: L is total length of full cycle

79
 R is length of row
required volume of hopper for one full cycle of harvesting can be calculated as

𝑉 = 𝑉𝑓 ∗ 𝑡

𝑥 10−4 𝑚3
𝑣 = 1.9 ∗ 314.4𝑠
𝑠

𝑣 = 0.613 m3

Total load applied on the hopper will be

𝑊 = 𝑚 ∗ 𝑔 = 𝜌 ∗ 𝑣 ∗ 𝑔
Where𝜌 𝑖𝑠 density of potato
= 675 𝐾𝑔/𝑚3 ∗ 0.613 𝑚3 ∗ 9.81 𝑚/𝑠2
= 4059.13 𝑁
Geometric analysis

Area of hopper

𝐴 = 1⁄2 (𝑎 + 𝑏) ∗ ℎ

𝑉 =𝐴∗𝑊
𝑉𝑡 = 𝑉 ∗ 10% 𝑜𝑓 𝑉 in order to consider volume of impurities presented in the hopper
𝑉 = 0.613 𝑚3 + 0.1 ∗ 0.613 𝑚3
= 0.674 𝑚3

80
 0.674 m3
𝐴= = 0.84 m2
0.8𝑚

𝐴 = 1⁄2 (𝑎 + 𝑏) ∗ ℎ

0.84 m2 = 1⁄2 (𝑎 + 𝑏) ∗ 0.6m

(𝑎 + 𝑏) = 2 ∗ 0.84𝑚/0.6𝑚

(𝑎 + 𝑏) = 2.8 𝑚

Let say b = 1.5 a

(𝑎 + 1.5 𝑎) = 2.8 𝑚

𝑎 = 1.12 𝑚 𝐴𝑛𝑑 𝑏 = 1.5 (1.12) = 1.68 𝑚

Stress analysis
The weight of potato and some impurities applied on the base of hopper as uniformly distributed
load along the spam length
The load can be determined as
𝑊 = 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑜 + 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑖𝑚𝑝𝑢𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑒𝑠
Weight of impurities can be computed as
𝑊𝑖𝑚𝑝 = 𝑚 ∗ 𝑔 = 𝜌 ∗ 𝑣 ∗ 𝑔
We have assumed the impurities to be stone as whole because we can not know how much stone
and soil
will be there (in the hopper), so if we assumed the load by stone, it can be for both. Density of
stone is 1602 Kg/m3. We have already assumed volume of impurities to be 10% of volume of
potato.

𝑊𝑖𝑚𝑝 = 𝜌 ∗ 𝑣 ∗ 𝑔
= 1602 𝐾𝑔/𝑚3 𝑥 0.0613 𝑚3 𝑥 9.81 𝑚/𝑠2
= 963.4 𝑁
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑜𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 ℎ𝑜𝑝𝑝𝑒𝑟
𝑊𝑡 = 𝑊𝑖𝑚𝑝 ∗ 𝑊𝑝

81
 = 4059.13 𝑁 + 963.4 𝑁
= 5022.53 𝑁
The weight of potato and some impurities applied on the base of hopper as uniformly distributed
load along the spam length

The supports are roller because of the presence of bearing on the support

∑𝐹𝑌 = 0; 𝑅𝑎 + 𝑅𝑏 = 𝑊 = 4.016𝑁
Obliviously from preliminary knowledge
𝑅𝑎 = 𝑅𝑏 = 1⁄2 𝑤 = 1⁄2 4.016

= 2.008𝐾𝑁
Section (0≤x≤0.8)

82
 ∑𝑓𝑦 = 0, 𝑅𝑎 = 𝑊 + 𝑉

𝑉 = 𝑅𝑎 − 𝑊

= 2.008 − 5.02𝑥

𝐴𝑡 𝑋 = 0, 𝑉 = 2.008𝐾𝑁

𝐴𝑡 𝑋 = 0.8 𝑉 = 2.008 − 5.02(0.8) = −2.008𝑘𝑛

∑𝑀 = 0; 𝑀 = 𝑅𝑎𝑋 − 𝑊 𝑥/2 = 2.008𝑥 − (5.02𝑥^2)/2 = 2.008 − 2.51𝑥^2

𝐴𝑡 𝑥 = 0 𝑀 = 0
𝐴𝑡 𝑥 = 0.8𝑀 = 2.008(0.8) − 2.51(0.8)2 = 1.606 − 1.606 = 0

But at x= 1/2 the shear force will bevel=2.008-5.02(0.4)=0N

Shear force and bending moment diagram

83
Therefor Mmax =0.4Knm
Vmax = 2.008KN
since maximum bending moment is given by

Where

𝜎𝑦=yiled strength of material

W= width of hopper
Tt= thickness of hopper
𝛿 −shear stress and it can be calculated are

𝑣 2.008 ∗ 103 𝐾𝑁 2.008 ∗ 103 𝐾𝑁

𝛿= = =
𝐴 𝑏∗𝑡 0.8 ∗ 3.08 ∗ 10−3 𝑚

= 0.815 ∗ 106 𝑁/𝑚2

84
 2.39∗103 𝑛/𝑚2
There for 𝜎𝑡1 = + 1⁄2 √(2.39 ∗ 103 )2 + 4(0.815 ∗ 103 )2
2

= 1631.2 ∗ 103 𝑛/𝑚2

= 1.6𝑀𝑝𝑎

Minimum principal stress will be

𝜎1 1 1
𝛿𝑡2 = = = ⁄2 √(σ1)2 + 4(σ2)2
2 2

2.39 ∗ 103 𝑛/𝑚2 1

𝛿𝑡2 = − ⁄2 √(2.39 ∗ 103 )2 + 4(0.815 ∗ 103 )2
2

= 1.195 ∗ 103 − 1630 ∗ 103

= −1628.8 ∗ 103 n/𝑚2

= 1.628𝑀𝑝𝑎

Maximum shear stress

𝛿𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 1⁄2 √𝜎1 2 + 4𝛿 2 == 1.630 ∗ 103 n/𝑚2

According to max shear stress theory

Failure occurs when

∑ 𝑦𝑡
𝛿𝑚𝑎𝑥 = ⁄𝑓. 𝑠

Where 𝛿𝑦𝑡 − the material shear strength

𝜏𝑦𝑡 = 1⁄2 𝜎𝑦

𝜏𝑦𝑡 = 1⁄2 (315𝑚𝑝𝑎)

𝜏𝑦𝑡 = 157.5𝑚𝑝𝑎

There for

85
 𝜏𝑦𝑡 157.5
𝑓. 𝑠 = = = 96.6
𝛿𝑚𝑎𝑥 1.63

4.16. Design of piston

Double acting double ends hydraulic cylinders
- Double acting cylinders are normally designed such that pressure can be applied in either inlet
or outlet port, providing linear power in both directions.
- Furthermore, since the exposed areas in the cylinder are unequal during extract and retract
operations (forward and return stroke) there is a difference in operation speed and force.
- The double acting double ends hydraulic cylinder which is the subject of this research is not in
any sense different in principle of operation from every normal hydraulic cylinder but it produces
both fluid flow and pressure in both directions, and both ends of the piston can be connected to
the point of application where work is needed to be done.
Parts design consideration The following assumptions were taken into the consideration of the
design of the cylinder, piston, piston rod and seals in the hydraulic cylinder.
 Working fluid is mineral oil
 𝐴𝑣𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒𝑑 𝑃𝑎 = 200𝑏𝑎𝑟 = 200 ∗ 105 𝑝𝑎
 𝐴𝑡𝑚𝑜𝑠𝑝ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑐 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒 = 1.0135 ∗ 105 𝑝𝑎
 𝐶𝑦𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑝𝑢𝑡 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒 = 5.335𝐾𝑁 = 5335.5𝑁
 𝑆𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑘𝑒 𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ = 60𝑐𝑚 + 60𝑐𝑚 = 120𝑐𝑚 = 1.2 𝑚
 𝑀𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑐𝑦𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟 𝑐𝑎𝑙𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 304 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑙𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑒𝑙
 𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑙𝑒 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑖𝑠 = 505𝑚𝑃𝑎
 𝑌𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑖𝑠 = 215𝑚𝑃𝑎
 𝑌𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑔 𝑚𝑜𝑑𝑢𝑙𝑢𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝑖𝑠 = 193𝐺𝑃𝑎
 𝐹𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑎𝑓𝑒𝑡𝑦 = 3
 End fixing factor = K = 0.7 is chosen because of maintenance purpose, in a case of adjustment
i.e. in the case of increasing stroke length.
4.17. Design of piston rod
- The piston rod of a hydraulic cylinder is highly stressed, and therefore it should be able to resist
the bending, tensile and compressive forces that it may encounter during the operation without
buckling.
- In practice, the rod is more likely to fail by buckling under the compressive load than by

86
bending. In this case, the rod behaves like a column and is subjected to buckling.
- The rod diameter can be related to critical load. Therefore Euler’s formula in the equation
below for long column can be used to obtain the piston rod diameter.

π2∗ E ∗ I
𝑝=
L2 ∗ K 2
𝑊ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑃 = 𝐵𝑢𝑐𝑘𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 (𝑁)
𝐿 = 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑛 𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ (𝑚) = 120𝑐𝑚
𝐼 = 𝑚𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑎
𝐸 = 𝑦𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑔’𝑠 𝑚𝑜𝑑𝑢𝑙𝑢𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 = 193𝐺𝑝𝑎

𝐾 = 0.7 𝑃 = 5335.05 ∗ 3 = 16006.5𝑁 = 16𝐾𝑁

π 2 ∗ 193𝐺𝑝𝑎 ∗ I
16006.5N =
1.2𝑚 2 ∗ 0.7𝑚2
16006.5N ∗ 1.2𝑚 2 ∗ 0.7𝑚2
I=
π 2 ∗ 193𝐺𝑝𝑎

11290 ∗ 10 −9 𝑚4
I=
π 2 ∗ 193𝐺𝑝𝑎

𝐼 = 5.927 ∗ 10 −9 𝑚4

The moment of inertia and the maximum permissible stress to avoid buckling is dependent on
the type of
end fixing of the cylinder. The moment of inertia (I) can be found from the formula below

𝜋 ∗ 𝑑4
𝐼 =
64

−9 4
𝜋 ∗ 𝑑4
5.927 ∗ 10 𝑚 =
64

4
5.927 ∗ 10 −9 𝑚4 ∗ 64
𝑑 =
𝜋 ∗ 𝑑4
𝑑 = 2.86 ∗ 10−2 𝑚

d = 28.6mm ≈ 30mm

87
4.18. Design of the piston
It must be designed for ease of assembly and disassembly for maintenance purposes.
A study was done to find out if a solid piston can withstand the compressive force that a
piston rod is subjected to.
 The main failure point was the edges of the piston and kind of seals used at
tolerances between the piston and the cylinder wall.
 They all have minimum factor of safety of3.
 Let “A” be the full area of the piston and “a” be the cross sectional area of the
piston rod.

Since the design is a double acting double ended hydraulic cylinder, pressure is acts on both
sides of the rod,hence the area which the pressure is acting on is given by (A-a). The force
produced is given in the equation below.

𝐹 = 𝑃(𝐴 − 𝑎)

π𝐷2 π𝑑 2
(𝐴 − 𝑎) = −
4 4
𝐹 π(𝐷2 − 𝑑 2 )
=
𝑃 4
Where 𝐹 = 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒 = 16𝐾𝑁
𝑃 = 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒 = 200𝑏𝑎𝑟 = 200 ∗ 105 𝑝𝑎
𝐷 = 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑜𝑛
𝑑 = 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑟𝑜𝑑 = 0.03𝑚

2
4 ∗ 16 ∗ 103 𝑁
𝐷 = + 0.03𝑚2
200 ∗ 105 𝑝𝑎 ∗ π

𝐷 = 37.5𝑚𝑚 ≈ 40𝑚𝑚 (𝑆𝑒𝑎𝑙 𝑟𝑜𝑑 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟)

4.19. Design of the cylinder

𝐿𝑒𝑡 𝐷𝑜 = 𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑒 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑦𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟.
𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑙𝑒 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑙𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑒𝑙 304 = 505𝑀𝑝𝑎
𝐹𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑎𝑓𝑒𝑡𝑦 = 3
Determine the maximum working stress (𝜎m) is given as;

Tensile stress of material 505 ∗ 106 pa

𝜎𝑚 = = = 168.33pa
FOS 3
By applying lam’s equation to determine 𝐷𝑜

88
 2 𝐷2 (σ + P)
𝐷0 =
σ − P
0.042 (168.3 ∗ 106 pa ∗ + 200 ∗ 105 )
𝐷0 2 =
168.3 ∗ 106 pa − 200 ∗ 105

𝐷𝑜 = 45𝑚𝑚 ≈ 50𝑚𝑚

Cylinder Tube thickness

the tube thickness of a cylinder barrel is a very important factor in the design of a hydraulic
cylinder. The strength of the cylinder tube is proportional to its wall. If a cylinder is too thick or
too thin may pose serious safety and operational problems and hence the tube thickness of the
cylinder has to be carefully chosen. The wall thickness required for the cylinder can be
calculated from the formula;

Thickness

𝑂𝐷 − 𝐷
(t) =
2

50𝑚𝑚 − 40𝑚𝑚
(t) = = 5𝑚𝑚
2

Bursting stress
- To determine the bursting stress of the cylinder we need to apply lame’s equation for thick
cylinder because the ratio of inside diameter t/d is > 1/20.
- When a thick-walled tube or cylinder is subjected to internal and external pressures, hoop and
longitudinal stresses act on the wall.
- The bursting stress can be referred to as the amounts of hoop stress and longitudinal (axial)
stress that are produced in the wall of the cylinder when subjected to internal and external
pressures that may cause the material which the cylinder is made from to fail. This happens if the
hoops stress exceeds the tensile strength of the material.
In this design calculation, the hoop stress must be lower than a tensile strength of the material
which the cylinder is made from to ensure the safety of the cylinder and personnel during actual
operation. Material of the cylinder 304 stainless steel Tensile stress = 505 ∗ 106 𝑝𝑎. The hoop

89
stress (𝜎H) of a cylinder can be determined from the Barlow formula as shown in the equation
below.

𝑑0 2 + 𝑑𝑖 2
𝜎𝐻 = 𝑃
𝑑0 2 − 𝑑𝑖 2

𝑊ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑃 = 𝑜𝑖𝑙 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒 = 200 ∗ 105 𝑝𝑎

𝑑𝑜 = 𝑂𝑢𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑦𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟 = 50𝑚𝑚
𝑑𝑖 = 𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑦𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟 = 40𝑚𝑚

50𝑚𝑚2 + 40𝑚𝑚2
𝜎𝐻 = 200
50𝑚𝑚2 − 40𝑚𝑚2

𝜎𝐻 = 911.1 ∗ 105 𝑝𝑎

𝜎𝐻 = 91.11 ∗ 106 𝑝𝑎

Also the longitudinal stress is given by;

𝑃1 𝑅1 2 + 𝑃2 𝑅2 2
𝜎𝐿 =
𝑑2 2 − 𝑑1 2

Where𝑃
𝑃1 = 𝐼𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒 = 200 ∗ 105 𝑃𝑎
𝑃2 = 𝑒𝑥𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒 = 1.0135 ∗ 105 𝑃𝑎

𝑅1 = 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑢𝑠
𝑅2 = 𝑒𝑥𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑢𝑠

200 ∗ 105 𝑃𝑎 ∗ 20𝑚𝑚2 + 1.0135 ∗ 105 𝑃𝑎 ∗ 25𝑚𝑚2

𝜎𝐿 =
25𝑚𝑚2 − 20𝑚𝑚2

𝜎𝐿 = 352.74 ∗ 105 𝑃𝑎

𝜎𝐿 = 35.274 ∗ 106 𝑃𝑎

Therefore the hoop stress and longitudinal stresses are under limits. The design is safe.

90
General Material Information
Threaded fasteners are available in many materials, but carbon steel and steel alloys are the most
common.
Carbon steel bolts are good for general use. Stainless steel is a common allow that has improved
corrosion resistance and is good for use in outdoor applications.
Stainless steel bolts have an advantage over the coatings that will be discussed in Section 3.3;
Stainless steel bolts will not lose the corrosive resistance properties if scratched because the base
material is corrosion resistant.
Bolts are also commonly available in other materials such as nickel, titanium, aluminium, and
brass, bronze and plastic. These other materials may have specific advantages over common steel
bolts. Titanium, forexample, has excellent corrosion resistance to seawater.
Bolt selection First, identify the load case.
Determine the necessary clamping force in the joint.
Choose the smallest bolt diameter that can support the clamp load.

Choose an effective bolt securing method.

Decide on the most appropriate tightening method.

A bolt is a type of threaded hardware fastener that is used to position two work pieces in specific
relation to each other. Bolts come in several configurations for their application and specification
variances. Since the terms "bolt" and "screw" were in use before the advent of easily-produced
helix fasteners, they are often synonymous. However, several standards bodies have attempted to
differentiate the terms, with many concluding that it is not the devices which are different, but
how they are used.

91
 Material Metric class and marking Imperial grade and marking
Low or medium (no class) Grade 2
carbon steel

Medium carbon steel, Class 8.8 Grade 5

quenched &tempered

Medium carbon alloy Class 10.9 Grade 8

steel, quenched &
tempered

Alloy steel, quenched Class 12.9 (no grade)

and tempered

Stainless steel A-2 18-8

(markings vary) (markings vary)
Table 8:-bolt carbon grade
From the given table of the bolt class and grade we have chosen the grade 2 low or medium alloy
steel bolt type since it is the one in which it is fitted to the nut of the wheel and Grade 2 bolts (
A307) are a standard hardware grade steel. This is the least expensive and most common. They
have a tensile strength of 60,000PS (413.69Mpa). By the rule of unite conversion of 1 MPa =
145.04 psi.

92
4.20. Design of Pin

Since the pin is in double shear, the cross sectional area of under shearing will be;

𝜋
𝐴 = 2 ∗ 𝑑2
4

The shear strength of the pin will be;

𝜋 2
𝐴 = 2∗ 𝑑 ∗𝜏
4

Where P= the lead applied on the pin

D = diameter of pin 𝜏= shear strength of pin
Selecting a suitable material for the pin having a yield strength of 315Mpa
Shear strength will be;

1
𝜏= 𝜎
2 𝑦

1
𝜏= 315𝑀𝑝𝑎
2

𝜏 = 157.5𝑀𝑝𝑎

Allowable shear stress;

𝜏
𝜏𝑎𝑙𝑙 = … … … … … … … take factor of safety = 5
𝑛

1
𝜏𝑎𝑙𝑙 = 157.5𝑀𝑝𝑎
5

𝜏𝑎𝑙𝑙 = 31.5𝑀𝑝𝑎

93
Diameter of pin can be determined as;

𝑝 = 2 𝜋⁄4 ∗ 𝑑 2 ∗ 𝜏𝑎𝑙𝑙

5335N = 2 𝜋⁄4 ∗ 𝑑 ∗ 31.5

2

21340mm2
𝑑2 =
197.9

𝑑 = 10.4𝑚𝑚

4.21. Deign of shaft

When the shaft subjected to bending moment

𝑀 𝜎𝑏
=
𝐼 𝑌

𝑊ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒

𝑀 = 𝐵𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑚𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡

𝐼 = 𝑚𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑠 𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠ℎ𝑎𝑓𝑡

𝜎𝑏 = 𝑏𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠

𝑌 = 𝐷𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑛𝑢𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎 𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑠

To find the bending moment we should analysis the force;

𝛴𝑀𝑅𝑦 = 𝑅𝐴(0.4𝑚) + 6440𝑁(0.15𝑚)– 473𝑁 ∗ 0.65 = 0

𝑅𝐴(0.4𝑚) = −658.55𝑁
𝑅𝐴 = −1646.4𝑁 ( ) 𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑛𝑒𝑔𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 𝑖𝑠 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑑𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒.

94
−𝑅𝐴 + 𝑅𝑌 = 6913𝑁
𝑅𝑌 = 6913𝑁 + 1646.4𝑁
𝑅𝑌 = 8559𝑁

Section 1-1 (0<x<0.25)

V= 473N

𝑀𝑜 = 0, 𝑀𝑜 + 473𝑋 = 0 𝑎𝑡 𝑥 = 0, 𝑀𝑜 = 0

𝐴𝑡 𝑥 = 0.25, 𝑀𝑜 = 118.25𝑁

𝑆𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 2 − 2 (0.25 < 𝑥0.65𝑚)

𝑉 − 473𝑁 − 1646.4𝑁 = 0
𝑉 = 2119.4𝑁

𝑀𝑜 = 0, 𝑀𝑜 + 473(𝑥 + 0.25) + 1646.4𝑁𝑥 = 0

𝑀𝑜 = −2119.4𝑥 − 118.25

𝐴𝑡 𝑥 = 0.25, 𝑀𝑜 = −648.1𝑁𝑚

𝐴𝑡 𝑥 = 0.65, 𝑀𝑜 = −1495.86

95
Section 3-3 (0.65<x<0.8m)

8559 − 473 − 1664 − 𝑉 = 0

𝑉 = 6440𝑁
𝑀o= 0, 𝑀o + 473(𝑥 + 0.65) + 1646.4𝑁 (𝑥 + 0.4) − 8559(𝑥) = 0
𝑀o= 6440𝑥𝑁 − 966𝑁 At x=0.65m,

𝑀o= 3220𝑁𝑚

At x=0.8m, 𝑀o= 4186𝑁𝑚

Shear force diagram;

Bending moment diagram;

96
To find diameter of the shaft subjected to combined twisting and bending moment;

𝜋⁄ ∗ 𝜏 3 2 2
16 𝑚𝑎𝑥 ∗ 𝑑 = √𝑀 + 𝑇

Where 𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 = τ of material

𝜋⁄ ∗ 129 ∗ 106 ∗ 𝑑3 = √41862 + 2602

16

√41862 + 2602
𝑑3 = 𝜋
⁄16 ∗ 129 ∗ 106

𝑑3 = 55𝑚𝑚

𝑀 𝜎𝑏
=
𝐼 𝑌
55
𝑌= , 𝑌 = 27.5𝑚𝑚
2
𝐼 = 𝜋⁄16 ∗ 𝑑4 = 𝜋⁄16 ∗ 55𝑚𝑚4 = 448953𝑚𝑚4

𝑀𝑌 44115 ∗ 27.5 ∗ 10−3

𝜎𝑦 = = = 256.4Mpa
𝐼 448.953 ∗ 10−9

According to the maximum shear stress theory shear maximum subjected to twisting and
bending moment is given by;

𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 1⁄2 √𝜎𝑏 2 + 4𝜏 2

𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 1⁄2 √(256.4Mpa)2 + 4(129Mpa)2

𝜏_𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 126𝑀𝑝𝑎 Since the maximum shear stress is within limits, therefore the design is safe.

4.22. Design of key

A key is a piece of mild steel inserted between the shaft and hub or boss of the pulley to connect
these together in order to prevent relative motion between them. It is always inserted parallel to
the axis of the shaft. Keys are used as temporary fastenings and are subjected to considerable
crushing and shearing stresses. Types of Keys The following types of keys are important from
the subject point of view:

97
1. Sunk keys,

2. Saddle keys,

3. Tangent keys,

4. Round keys, and

5. Splines From the above key types we have select for our design sunk key rectangular type.

𝑑
Width of key, 𝑤 = and
4

Thickness of key

𝑡 = 2𝑤⁄𝑡 = 𝑑⁄3

d = Diameter of the shaft or diameter of the hole in the hub

Forces acting on a Sunk Key

When a key is used in transmitting torque from a shaft to a rotor or hub, the following two types
of forces act on the key:

Forces (F1) due to fit of the key in its keyway, as in a tight fitting straight key or in a
tapered key driven in place. These forces produce compressive stresses in the key
which are difficult to determine in magnitude.
Forces (F) due to the torque transmitted by the shaft. These forces produce shearing
and compressive (or crushing) stresses in the key.

98
 Fig: Forces acting on a sunk key

The threaded fasteners are available in many material, but carbon steel and alloys are the most
common. Depending on those we have select low carbon steel and also 304 stainless steel for
shaft and the material properties;

𝑌𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝜎𝑦 = 370 𝑀𝑝𝑎 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝜎𝑐𝑘 = 𝑐𝑟𝑢𝑠ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑘𝑒𝑦

𝐹𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑎𝑓𝑒𝑡𝑦 = 3 𝜎𝑦 = 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠

𝜎𝑦
Taking 𝜎𝑐𝑘 = ⁄𝐹𝑂𝑆 = 123.3𝑀𝑝𝑎𝐹𝑂𝑆 = 𝐹𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑎𝑓𝑒𝑡𝑦

Yield stress of 304 stainless steel (𝜎y) = 215𝑀𝑝𝑎 According to maximum shear stress theory for
the shaft;

𝜎𝑦 215M𝑝𝑎
𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 = =
2𝐹𝑂𝑆 2∗3

𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 35.83Mpa

Maximum shear (𝜏k) for key;

𝜎𝑦𝑡 370
𝜏𝑘 = = = 61.67𝑀𝑝𝑎
2 ∗ 𝐹𝑂𝑆 2 ∗ 3

We know that the maximum torque transmitted by the shaft and key;

𝑇 = 𝜋⁄16 ∗ 𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 ∗ 𝑑 3

𝑇 = 𝜋⁄16 ∗ 35.83 ∗ 55𝑚𝑚3

𝑇 = 1.1698 ∗ 106 𝑁𝑚𝑚

99
Therefore let us consider the failure of key due to shearing. We know hat the maximum torque
transmitted (T). Let us consider the failure of key due to shearing;

𝑇 = 𝑙 ∗ 𝑤 ∗ 𝑏𝑘 ∗ 𝑑⁄2

1.1698 ∗ 106 Nmm = 𝑙 ∗ 15𝑚𝑚 ∗ 61.67 𝑁⁄ ∗ 55𝑚𝑚⁄2

𝑚𝑚2

1.1698 ∗ 106 Nmm

𝑙=
15𝑚𝑚 ∗ 61.67 𝑁⁄ ∗ 55𝑚𝑚⁄2
𝑚𝑚2

𝑙 = 45.98𝑚𝑚 ≈ 46𝑚𝑚

Let us consider the failure of key due to crushing stress;

𝑇 = 𝑙 ∗ 𝑡⁄2 ∗ 𝜎𝑐𝑘 ∗ 𝑑⁄2

1.1698 ∗ 106 Nmm = 𝑙 ∗ 10/2 ∗ 123.3 ∗ 55𝑚𝑚⁄2

𝑙 = 1169888.8𝑁𝑚𝑚/16954𝑁

𝑙 = 69𝑚𝑚

For the safety of the design we have taking the larger of the two length values. Therefore 𝑙 =
69𝑚𝑚

100
Cost analysis
Cost analysis is a comparison of cost. Cost used to prepare financial statement is not the same
at those used to control operation. Cost may be may be controllable or non-controllable and
are subject to time period and are also we can analysis the cost of our design project depends
on the standard current cost by considering the mass and dimension of our material.

Component cost

No Material component Quantity Price in birr

1 Digger 1 1400 ETB

2 Bearing 15 3420 ETB

3 Piston 1 6000 ETB

4 Sprocket 6 1350 ETB

5 Chain in metre 8.1m 9441.1 ETB

6 Wheels 2 8200 ETB

7 Bevel gear 2 2118 ETB

8 Hopper 1 2534.4 ETB

9 Shaft 3m 1800 ETB

10 Disc 2 684 ETB

11 Raw material mass 10000 ETB

12 Utilities cost - 3000 ETB

13 Transportation cost car 1500 ETB

Then the total cost of the components is the addition of the above calculation finally;

Cost of components = 49647.5ETB

101
 Manufacturing cost

Components Time taken Price

Welding 8hr 1000 ETB
cutting 6hr 400 ETB
Drilling 1hr 100 ETB
Painting 1hr 1500 ETB
Assembling 5hr 2500ETB
Bending 1hr 300 ETB

The total manufacturing cost is the addition of the above = 5800ETB

Total cost
The total cost will be the sum of all the three costs. This is the component cost,
manufacturing cost, and design cost. Adding 15% tax and

Total cost equals to = (48147.5+5800) =55447.5 ETB + (55447.5 *15/100) =55447.5 + 8317.125

= 63764.625ETB

Manufacturing process

This states how our product can be produced in the workshop. In order to manufacture our
product different operations will carried out like welding, cutting, polishing, painting, facing,
turning and assembling

Manufacturing process are procedure that should be followed by manufacturer to produce

each single parts of the machine by different manufacturing production process.
Manufacturing process can be divided to two groups.

Process which are used for primary shaping the machine part.
Process which give final shape of the machine parts.

In this project finished components required to produce the machine that can be manufactured
by different manufacturing process like cutting, drilling, turning, grinding, bending and
welding of different sized bars and sheet metals.

102
 No. Parts to be manufactured Parts to be bought

1 Digger blade Universal joint

2 Supports Bevel gear

3 Frame Bearing

4 Hopper Chain and

sprocket

5 Shaft Bolt and nut

The main flow of operation

assembling

Buying

We have to buy all the requirement needed for the machine if there are available in the market.
Unless we should buy the row material then we will produce it. Since all the stated parts
available in the market we bought them based on specified specification.

Cutting

At this stage required size of components determining by using cutter optimizer application
from the entire bar of the raw material. The software can tell us the size should be cut from
one bar and the waste from it.

103
Jointing

It is the process of joining components permanently as well as temporarily. Some components

will be welded and the remaining will joined by bolt and nuts. All parts can be welded by arc
welded mechanism as recommendation and you can use other type as you can.

Testing

Now, you have to test the strength of structure by applying some load in order to assume
whether it can withstand the subjected load or not. If it with stand it will pass welding stage
and delivers to next stage unless it should back to re welding until the welding joint become
stronger.

Polishing

Once the product (component) structure pass testing stage the next step is making the
appearance of the components good by grinding welded part, eliminating sharp edges and by
removing rough surface. It’s about making fillets and chamfers on the required space

Assembly

Finally bringing whole parts together to get desired product;

Painting

The last stage is that to paint the machine to make it attractive. Just increasing our product’s
aesthetics value.

104
 CHAPTER 5
RESULT AND DISSCATION

5.1. Result

Component Length diameter Width Height Weight Thickness

Digger 39cm - 80cm 25cm 1018.32N 5mm

Bolt - 4.26mm - - - -

separator 1.5m - 80cm - - -

Rod 80cm 10mm - - - -

Driven Shaft/ 80mm 25di&35domm - - 5mm

for conveyor
drive shaft
Frame - - 16.7mm - - 5.6mm

Chain 3.4m - - - - -

Differential 11.75mm - 3.92mm - - -

Sprocket - 86.3&231mm - - - -

Drive shaft 55mm 80cm - - -

with bevel
gear
Piston 1.2m 40&50mm - - - 5mm

Conveyor 80mm -

Hopper 1.2m - 0.6m 0.6m 313N 3mm

105
Product specification

Size:-
 Length of the machine is 200cm
 Width of the machine is 80cm
 Height of the machine is 116.8cm
Field capacity 0.30625 𝑎𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑠/ℎ𝑟 =0.124 hectar/hr
Drawbar Hp required 9.5 Hp
Cost 63,000birr
Weight: - about 600 N
Product life: - fifty years
Life in service: - 12000 hours
5.2. Discussion
As we see in the above table necessary dimensions for the entire machine has been calculated
and stated briefly. Total width of the machine is equal to width of implement which is 80cm.
i.e. with same clearance of working width. The maximum harvesting width is 700mm which
explored from journals so our machine also designed for maximum width and at one travel it
harvest one row at a once. In addition to this the cost of our machine is relatively low from
other design so every farmer can afford it.

5.3. Conclusion
As we are students we have tried to investigate the problem subjected to our farmers that
make unable to get sufficient crop product even if they work hard on the basis of the way how
they harvest and to solve (minimize) difficulties or troubles using scientific methods. We are
extremely sure on our project in which it can satisfactorily meet customer’s requirement. Our
machine can harvest seven hector with in forty hours, it can work on every type of soil since
it has designed for harder soil (clay soil). Design factors for potato harvesters were physical
and mechanical properties of potato tuber, soil parameters, and machine-based factors. The
machine parameters, influencing the performance of the root crop harvester were the design
condition of the machine-related to forward speed, rake angle, blade geometry, operating
depth, conveyor oscillation amplitude, conveyor frequency, conveyor speed, and conveyor

106
 slope. Generally, from the above semi-automated potato harvesting machine, we conclude
that the performance of any harvesting machines is depend on each type of soil property,
whether condition and mechanical property of material used for the operation and the required
quality of final product and working environment of the machine. Basically, the harvesting
machines are need a serious design and manufacturing process because the improper
assembling and design cause of crop damage.in doing so the mechanization of harvesting
operation is essential to minimize the cost of harvesting, crop production cost, crop loss,
turnaround time, weather risk, and to increase benefit by appropriate technology. In order to
achieve the above goal, Tractor mounted potato harvesting machine is designed which are
support to the Farmers and it will reduce the cost of crop cutting and collecting in field and it
will achievable highest performance under the given constraints. Process automation has
increased the efficiency of harvesting processes. To sum up, we have designed 80cm wide
and 200cm long tractor mounted portable potato harvesting machine for local farmers with
relatively low cost of 63,000 Ethiopian birr.

5.4. Recommendation

We recommended that to the farmer our design targeted to increase the efficiency of farming
product using semi-automated harvesting machine gives multi service for agricultural
industry. And also, our design has different features; when the farmers want the tractor to
other service, they can disassemble the front harvesting equipment’s because of the equipment
are portable. By designing this machine that can have standard component and other special
purpose parts that could found and fixed if a machine were built in Manufacture Company
and further time was spent on design and testing. This was not accomplished due to
restrictions in time and material variable (shortage of resources includes standard machine
component) and lack of manufacturing workshop. Ideally, other designers would look at this
model and prototype determine a plan for the constructing of our design in manufacturing
company level. We would like to recommend everyone who is responsible for this section
(agricultural industries) to look at and give attention on our design due to its simplicity and
genuine application. In addition to this anyone who has modification idea can meet us and we
will work together for better solution.

107
108
109
References
Abdel Maksoud, Morad, & Morghany, 2004. (n.d.).

Culpin, Claude. (1981). Farm Machinery. Granada Publishing Limited.

Bulletin of Materials. Ganesh et al., 2019. (n.d.).

MM Ibrahim, E Amin, A Farag - Misr Journal of Agricultural …, 2008 - journals.ekb.eg

Ismail Alhajj Adam Alhaseen. (August 2015). Design of a one-row potato digger harvester.

M Liu, J Sun, Y Sun, C Bock… - Journal of micromechanics …, 2009 - iopscience.iop.org

PE Sumner, EJ Williams. (2007). What size farm tractor do I need. esploro.libs.uga.edu.

Shippen, J.M. and Ellin, C.R. and Clover, . (1980.). C.H. Basic Farm Machinery. . Pergamon
Press: .

Shippen, J.M. and Ellin, C.R. and Clover. (1980). C.H. Basic Farm Machinery. . , Pergamon
Press: .

university, w. (2012). design of tractor mounted potato harvesting machine.

wael mohammed . (june 2020). deign,ANALYS analysis and performance evaluation of potato
digger harvester. international agricaltural engineering.

Wasukira, A.; Walimbwa, K.; Wobibi, S.; Owere, L.; Naziri, D.; Parker, M. (2017). Ware potato
harvesting and storage techniques: guidelines for harvesting and storage management of
ware potato.

H Selim, K Alshare, EE Grandon, H Younis… - International journal of …, 2006 - emerald.com

X Zhang, G Yuan, J Niu, P Fu, W Ding - Journal of the Mechanical Behavior …, 2012 - Elsevier

110
-

111