SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Tarım Makinaları Bilimi Dergisi / 2017 / Cilt: 13 - Sayı: 3

Determining the Field Performance and Cost Analysis of Walk Behind Type Semi-Automatic Hand Feed Vegetable Transplanter

Erdem AYKAS
Ramazan Cengiz AKDENİZ
Fırat KÖMEKÇİ
Ceren KÖMEKÇİ
Pages
149–154
Publication Date
2017-12-26
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In addition to field capacity of WBM, TMM and CP, total cost analysis of WBM, TMM and CP were comparatively given with fuel consumption of WBM and TMM.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study was carried out to determine field performance of walk behind type semi-automatic hand feed vegetable transplanter with one row.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Plant spacing, depth of planting and holding force to soil of tomato and pepper seedlings planted with WBM, TMM and CP were measured and take-root rates of these seedlings were calculated.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In addition to field capacity of WBM, TMM and CP, total cost analysis of WBM, TMM and CP were comparatively given with fuel consumption of WBM and TMM.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Walk behind type planter

Özet

This study was carried out to determine field performance of walk behind type semi-automatic hand feed vegetable transplanter with one row. Experiments were conducted in region of Menderes, Bayındır, Torbalı and Çeşme in İzmir. During the experiments, walk behind type semi-automatic hand feed vegetable transplanter with one row (WBM) was compared with tractor mounted semi-automatic hand feed transplanter with three-row (TMM) and hand planting (CP) widely used in the regions aforementioned above. Plant spacing, depth of planting and holding force to soil of tomato and pepper seedlings planted with WBM, TMM and CP were measured and take-root rates of these seedlings were calculated. In addition to field capacity of WBM, TMM and CP, total cost analysis of WBM, TMM and CP were comparatively given with fuel consumption of WBM and TMM.

🔖

Cite This Article

AYKAS, E., AKDENİZ, R. C., KÖMEKÇİ, F., KÖMEKÇİ, C. (2017). Determining the Field Performance and Cost Analysis of Walk Behind Type Semi-Automatic Hand Feed Vegetable Transplanter. Tarım Makinaları Bilimi Dergisi, Cilt: 13 - Sayı: 3, 149–154. https://ajindex.com/articles/260509

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (7)

  1. Anonymous. (2006).
  2. Tarım Makinaları Deney, İlke ve Metodları. Türkiye Gıda Tarım ve Hayvancılık Bakanlığı. ASAE D497.7. (2011). Agricultural Machinery Management Data. St. Joseph: American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers. ASAE EP496.3. (2006 (R2011)). Agricultural Machinery Management. St. Joseph: American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers. Gökçebay, B. (1986). Tarım Makinaları I. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Yayınları.
  3. Kavitha, R., & Duriasamy, V. M. (2007). Development and Evaluation of Semi Automatic Vegetable Transplanter for Plug Seedlings. Bangkok, Thailand: Proceedings of the International Agricultural Engineering Conference. Kumar, D., & Tripathi, A. (2016). Performance Evaluation of Tractor Operated Two-Row Vegetable Transplanter. IOSR Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Science, 9(1), 1-5.
  4. Orel, O., & Acar, A. İ. (2012). Fide Dikiminde Düzgün Şekilli Yuva Açabilecek bir Mekanizmanın Tasarımı. Tarım Makinaları Bilimi Dergisi, 8 (1), 61-68.
  5. Önal, İ. (2017).
  6. Ekim, Bakım, Gübreleme Makinaları. İzmir: Ege Üniversitesi Yayınları no:490 611 p. Tsuga, K. (2000). Development of Fully Automatic Vegetable Transplanter. JARQ, Japan Agricultural Research Quarterly, 34(1), 21-28.
  7. Ülger, P., Güzel, E., Kayışoğlu, B., Eker, B., Akdemir, B., Pınar, Y., & Bayhan, Y. (1996). Tarım Makinaları İlkeleri. İstanbul: Trakya Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi.