Field Performance of the Disk Harrow, Power Harrow and Rotary Tiller at Different Soil Moisture Contents on a Clay Loam Soil in Mazandaran

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

• M. Rajabi Vandechali ¹
• A. Hemmat ²
• A. Ghanbari Malidarreh ¹

¹ Islamic Azad University of Jouybar

² Isfahan University of Technology

https://doi.org/10.22067/jam.v5i1.28070

Abstract

About 60% of the mechanical energy consumed in mechanized agriculture is used for tillage operations and seedbed preparation. On the other hand, unsuitable tillage system resulted in soil degradation, affecting soil physical properties and destroying soil structure. The objective of this research was to compare the effects of three types of secondary tillage machines on soil physical properties and their field performances. An experiment was conducted in a wheat farm in Jouybar area of Mazandaran as split plots based on randomized complete block design with three replications. The main independent variable (plot) was soil moisture with three levels (23.6-25, 22.2-23.6 and 20.8-22.2 percent based on dry weight) and the subplot was three types of machine (two-disk perpendicular passing harrow, Power harrow and Rotary tiller). The measured parameters included: clod mean weight diameter, soil bulk density, specific fuel consumption, machine efficiency and machine capacity. The effects of treatments and their interactions on the specific fuel consumption, machine efficiency and machine capacity and also the effects of treatments on bulk density were significant (P

Keywords

• energy
• Soil physical propertie
• Secondary tillage machinery
• Soil Moisture
• Specific fuel consumption

20.1001.1.22286829.1394.5.1.7.8

References

1. Ahmadi, H., and K. Mollazade. 2009. Effect of plowing depth and soil moisture content on reduced secondary tillage. Agricultural Engineering International: The CIGR EJournal. Manuscript MES 1195, Vol. XI.

2. Akef, M., and I. Bagheri. 1999. Soil management and effects of agricultural machines on soil physical properties. Guilan University Press, Rasht, Guilan. (In Farsi).

3. Arvidsson, J., and E. Bolenius. 2006. Effects of soil water content during primary tillage – laser measurements of soil surface changes. Soil and Tillage Research 90: 222-229.

4. ASAE Standard. 2005. Terminology and Definitions for Agricultural Tillage Implements. ASAE. S.414.1.

5. Baghban Kheibari, M., H. R. Ghassemzadeh, S. Abdollahpour, A. Mahdinia, and M. Valizadeh. 2008. Comparison of effects of power harrow and tandem disk harrow performance on dry soils of Khorasan region. The 5th National Conference on Agricultural Machinery Engineering and Mechanization. Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran. (In Farsi).

6. Berntsen, R., and B. Berre. 2002. Soil fragmentation and the efficiency of tillage implements. Soil and Tillage Research 64: 137-147.

7. Chang, C., and C. W. Lindwall. 1990. Comparison of the effect of long term tillage and crop rotation on physical properties of a soil. Canadian Agriculture Engineering 32: 53-55.

8. Gouran Oreymi, M., and A. R. Keyhani. 2010. Effects of tractor velocity and soil moisture content on drive wheel slippage of tractor. The 6th National Conference on Agricultural Machinery Engineering and Mechanization. College of Agriculture and Natural Resources of University Of Tehran, Karaj, Iran. (In Farsi).

9. Hemmat, A., and A. Asadi Khashoei. 1995. Fuel requirements and machine capacity for tillage and planting operations on a clay loam soil in Isfahan. Iran Agricultural Research 14 (2): 175-201.

10. Jacobs, C. O., and W. R. Harrel. 1983. Agricultural power and machinery. McGraw Hill Book Co. New York.

11. Javadi, A., and A. Hajiahmad. 2006. Effect of a new combined implement for reducing secondary tillage operation. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology 8 (6): 724-727.

12. Loghavi, M., and S. Behnam. 1998. Effects of soil moisture and tillage depth on disk plow performance of a clay loam soil. Water and Soil Science (Journal of Science and Technology of Agriculture and Natural Resources) 2 (4): 105-117. (In Farsi).

13. Masoumi, A. A., A. Hemmat, and M. Rajabi. 2008. Effects of share rake angle and frequency of vibration on performance of vibrating sugarbeet lifter. Water and Soil Science (Journal of Science and Technology of Agriculture and Natural Resources) 12 (44): 233-244. (In Farsi).

14. Nasr, H. M., and F. Selles. 1995. Seedling emergence as influenced by aggregate size, bulk density and penetration resistance of the seedbed. Soil and Tillage Research 34: 61-67.

15. Ozpinar, S., and A. Cay. 2006. Effects of different tillage systems on the quality and crop productivity of a clay-loam soil in semi-arid north-western Turkey. Soil and Tillage Research 88 (1-2): 95-106.

16. Reshad sedghi, A., and M. Loghavi. 2009. The effect of soil moisture content (in primary tillage) and travel speed during disking operation on performance of disk harrow as a secondary tillage tool. Iranian Journal of Biosystems Engineering (Iranian Journal of Agricultural Sciences) 40(2): 131-138.

17. Rouzbeh, M., M. Almasi, and A. Hemmat. 2002. Evaluation and comparison of energy requirements in different tillage methods for corn production. Journal of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources 9 (1): 117-128. (In Farsi).

18. Shir Esmailie, GH. H., and M. Heidari Soltanabad. 2009. Effect of tillage systems and seeding rates on machinery parameters and grain yield in rapeseed (Brassicanapus L.). Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences 11 (3): 223-236. (In Farsi).

19. Yaseen, H., Al. Tahan, H. M. Hassan and I. A. Hammadi. 1992. Effects of plowing depth using different plow type on some physical properties of soil. Agricultural Mechanization in Asia, Africa and Latin America 23 (4): 21-24.