Final Thesis PDF

Major Project: Phase-II Report
on
“DEVELOPMENT OF COST-EFFECTIVE
TRACTOR IMPLANT FOR POTATO
HARVESTER”
18MPD41
Submitted by
PRAVEEN T. S.
1RV19MPD25
Under the Guidance

of
Dr. G. R. RAJKUMAR
ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR
DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
RV COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING®
BENGALURU - 560059
ent for the award of degree
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment for The Award of Degree
of
MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY
in
PRODUCT DESIGN AND MANUFACTURING
2020-2021
RV COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING®,
(Autonomous Institution Affiliated to Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belagavi)

Bengaluru– 560059
CERTIFICATE
Certified that the project work titled “Development of Cost-Effective Tractor Implant for Potato
Harvester” carried out by Praveen T S, USN: 1RV19MPD25, a bonafide student, submitted in
partial fulfilment for the award of Master of Technology in Product Design and Manufacturing of
RV College of Engineering®, Bengaluru, affiliated to Visvesvaraya Technological University,
Belagavi, during the year 2019-20. It is certified that all corrections/suggestions indicated for internal
assessment have been incorporated in the report deposited in the departmental library. The project
report has been approved as it satisfies the academic requirement in respect of project work prescribed
for the said degree.
Dr. Rajkumar.G. R Dr. Krishna M Dr. K. N. Subramanya

Associate Professor Head of Department, Principal,
Department of Mech. Engg. Department of Mech. Engg. RVCE, Bengaluru–59
RVCE, Bengaluru –59 RVCE, Bengaluru–59
Name of the Examiners Signature with Date
1.____________________ __________________
2.____________________ __________________
RV COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING®,
(Autonomous Institution Affiliated to Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belagavi)
DEPARTMENT OF MECAHNICAL ENGINEERING

Bengaluru– 560059
DECLARATION
I, Praveen T S, student of fourth semester M. Tech in Product Design and Manufacturing,

Department of Mechanical Engineering, RV College of Engineering®, Bengaluru declare that the
project titled “Development of Cost-Effective Tractor Implant for Potato Harvester”, has been
carried out by me. It has been submitted in partial fulfilment for the award of degree in Master of
Technology in Product Design and Manufacturing, of RV College of Engineering®, Bengaluru,
affiliated to Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belagavi, during the academic year 2019-20.
The matter embodied in this report has not been submitted to any other university or institution for
the award of any other degree or diploma.
Date of Submission: Signature of the Student
Student Name:
USN: 1RV19MPD25
Department of Mechanical Engineering
RV College of Engineering®,
Bengaluru-560059
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Any achievement, be it scholastic or otherwise does not depend solely on the individual
efforts but on the guidance, encouragement and cooperation of intellectuals, elders and
friends. Several personalities, in their own capacities have helped me in carrying out this
project work. I would like to take this opportunity to thank them all.
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my guide, Dr. Rajkumar.G. R, Professor,

Department of Mechanical Engineering, RV COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, Bengaluru for
her valuable guidance, expert review and his encouragement in choosing this domain and his
constant support throughout the project.
I would also like to express my sincere gratitude to Dr. M. Krishna, Head of the Department,
Mechanical Engineering, RV COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, Bengaluru for his valuable
suggestions, support and regular source of encouragement and assistance throughout this
project.
I would also like to thank Dr. K. N. Subramanya, Principal, RV COLLEGE OF

ENGINEERING, Bengaluru, for his moral support towards completing my project work.
Lastly, I would like to thank my peers, team mates and family members who gave me their
valuable suggestions in the improvement of my project.
Praveen T S
M.Tech in Product design and Manufacturing
Department of Mechanical Engineering
RV College of Engineering
Bengaluru-59
i
ABSTRACT
In 2020 the market value for the global agricultural harvester market stood for the value
around 28.8 billion USD and is expected to reach up to 38.7 billion USD by the year 2026.
But currently available implants are high maintenance oriented which require skilled
operators for operation and costs more for harvesting small fields. In this context, many
research works focused on developing the potato harvesters for large fields, but only a few of
them have focused to developing low-cost tractor implants for small fields of 3-5 acres of land
with collector. The objective of the work is to design and develop a cost-effective tractor
implant for harvesting potatoes.
Various techniques and methods were studied and three different concepts were developed
and concept evaluation was performed. Materials selection for the components was done
along with the design of machine components by referring Design data handbook. Loading
conditions on the frame was determined. Modelling of the harvester was performed in
Unigraphics software, analysis was done in Ansys workbench to determine the total
deformation and stresses acting on the harvester under static and transient condition. Natural
frequency of the harvester was determined by modal analysis and frequency response graphs
were plotted by carrying out the harmonic response. Prototype of tractor implant potato
harvested has been developed.
The calculations of load acting resulted in 2200N and 650N on the vibrating frame and digger
blades respectively. Force required to dig the soil was obtained as 1300N. Mechanical design
resulted with the shaft diameter of 25.4mm, diameters of the bevel gears is 72mm and 144mm
with the surface hardness of 500BHN and number of teeth on pinion and gear are 12 and 24
respectively. Design of chain drive resulted with chain length of 3733.8mm and pitch 25.4mm
with the sprocket diameter of 219mm. From finite element analysis, the directional
deformation for static structural condition obtained to be 2.87mm and maximum stress acting
on the material is 35.11MPa. In dynamic loading condition for a time period of 10 seconds,
the maximum deformation was obtained as 5.450mm, maximum stress acting on the material
is 104.74MPa. Modal and Harmonic response was performed and for the modal frequency of
24.792 Hz the corresponding amplitude is 0.14726mm. The outcome of the project was
development of cost-effective tractor implant prototype for harvesting potatoes. In this
direction further work can be extended to harvest more than two rows there by reducing the
time of harvest and harvesting cost.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgement………………………………………………………………………………. i
Abstract ………………………………………………………………………………………… ii
Table of Contents ……………………………………………………………………………..... iii
List of Figures…………………………………………………………………………………… vii
List of Tables……………………………………………………………………………………. ix
Chapter 1
Introduction…………………………………………………………………………….. 1
1.1 Market survey and society relevance…...………………………………………. 1
1.2 Brief note on potato harvester….………………………………………………. 2
1.3 Literature Survey………………………………………………………………... 3
1.4 Research Gap…………………………………………………...……………….. 12
1.5 Main objectives of the project……………………………………………........... 12
1.6 Organization of the report…………..……………………………………........... 13
Chapter 2
Theory and Concepts …………………………...…………………………………….. 14
2.1 Digging of Soil………….……………………………………………………… 14
2.2 Soil separation by slider crank mechanism……………………………………. 14
2.3 Handling of tubers through conveyor………………………………………….. 15
2.4 Chain drive for power transmission……………………………………………. 15
2.5 Harvesting and yield……………………………………………………………. 16
Chapter 3
Project Methodology………………………………………...…………………………. 17
3.1 Problem Definition………………………………………………………………. 17
3.2 Methodology…..…………………………………………………………………. 17
iii
3.3 Flow chart of project methodology ………………….…………………………. 19
Chapter 4
Concept development and cost estimation…………………………………………… 20
4.1 Concept creation…..……………………………………………………………. 20
4.1.1 Concept 1………………………………………………………………. 20
4.1.2 Concept 2………………………………………………………………. 21
4.1.3 Concept 3………………………………………………………………. 22
4.2 Concept Evaluation……………………………………………………………. 23
4.3 Material Selection……………………………………………………………... 23
4.3.1 Mild Steel………………………………………………………………. 23
4.3.2 EN8 …………………………………………………………….………. 24
4.3.3 Polyurethane……………………………………………………………. 24
4.4 Material Properties…………………………………………………………….. 24
4.5 Cost-Estimation………………………………………………………………... 25
4.5.1 Material Cost…………………………………………………………... 25
4.5.2 Labour Cost……………………………………………………………... 26
4.5.3 Overhead Cost…………………………………………………………. 26
4.5.4 Total Cost………………………………………………………………. 27
4.5.5 Harvesting cost by traditional method…………………………………. 27
4.5.6 Running cost of the harvester………………………………………….. 27
4.6 Currently available potato harvesters………………………………………….. 28
Chapter 5
Design of machine components………………………………………………………. 29
5.1 Calculating the loading condition on the frame……………………………….. 29
5.2 Calculating the loading condition on the blade………………………………… 29
5.3 Force required to Dig the soil…….……………………………………………. 29
5.4 Design of Bevel gear…………………………………………………………… 30
iv
5.5 Design of shaft………………………………..………………………………… 34
5.6 Design of Chain Drive………………………..………………………………… 34
5.7 Design of Frame……..………………………..………………………………… 36
Chapter 6
Modelling and Finite Element analysis…………………………………………….… 39
6.1 Modelling of Components………………………………………………………. 39
6.1.1 Complete assembly of the harvester……………………..…………...… 39
6.1.2 Orthographic View of the Model……………………………………….. 40
6.1.3 Modelling of Frame ……………………………………………………. 41
6.1.4 Modelling of Digger Blades …………………………………………….. 42
6.1.5 Modelling of Chain Drive Mechanism………………………………….. 43
6.1.6 Modelling of Shaft………………………………………………………. 45
6.1.7 Modelling of Bevel Gear……………………….………………………. 45
6.2 Finite Element Analysis………………………………………………………… 45
6.2.1 Material Selection……………………………………………………….. 46
6.2.2 Meshing and Boundary Conditions……………………………………… 46
6.2.3 Static Structural Analysis………………………………………………... 47
6.2.4 Transient Analysis ………………………………………………………. 49
6.2.5 Modal Analysis…………………………………………………………... 51
6.2.6 Harmonic Response……………………………………………………… 54
Chapter 7
Components Used and Fabrication of Prototype….….………………………………. 56
7.1 Components used for Prototype ……..………………..………………………… 56
7.1.1 Digger Blades…………………………………………………………… 56
7.1.2 Shaft…….………………………………………………………………. 56
7.1.3 Frame……………………………………………………………………. 57
7.1.4 Bevel gear. ……………………………………………………………… 58
v
7.1.5 Gear Motor…. …………………………………………………………… 58
7.1.6 Wheels…………………………………………………………………… 59
7.1.7 Power Transmission system……………………………….……………. 59
7.1.8 Conveyor System….……………………………………………………. 60
7.1.9 Collector………………………………………………………………… 60
7.2 Prototype Fabrication…………………………………………………………… 61
Chapter 8
Results and Discussion…………………………………………………………………. 62
8.1 Results and Discussion…………………………………………………………… 62
8.2 Break even analysis……………………………………………………………. 63
Chapter 9
Conclusion and Future scope…………………………………………………………… 66
9.1 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………… 66
9.2 Future Scope………………………………………………………………………. 66
REFERENCE…………………………………………………………………………….. 67
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Fig No. Figure Name Page No.
1.1 Agricultural Machinery Market in India 1
1.2 Automized Potato Harvester 2
1.3 Well Grown Potatoes 3
2.1 Slider Crank Mechanism 14
2.2 Conveyor for Handling Potatoes 14
3.1 Project Methodology Flowchart 19
4.1 Concept 1 20
4.2 Concept 2 21
4.3 Concept 3 22
5.1 Force Acting on the Blade 29
5.2 Resolution of Forces 30
5.3 Design of Frame 36
6.1 Assembly of the Tactor Implant for Potato Harvester 39
6.2 Orthographic View of the Harvester 40
6.3 Modelling of Frame 41
6.4 Drafting of the Frame 41
6.5 Solid Model of Digger Blade 42
6.6 Drafting of the Digger Blade 42
6.7 Modelling of Chain Drive 43
6.8 Solid Model and Drafting of Inner Link 43
6.9 Solid Model and Drafting of Outer Link 43
6.10 Solid Model and Drafting of Pin 44
6.11 Solid Model and Drafting of Sprocket 44
6.12 Solid Model and Drafting of Shaft 45
6.13 Solid Model and Drafting of Bevel Gear 45

6.14 Meshing 46
6.15 Boundary Conditions 47
6.16 Total Deformation (Structural) 47
6.17 Equivalent Stress (Structural) 48
6.18 Total Deformation (Transient) 49
6.19 Equivalent Stress (Transient) 50
6.20 Mode Shape 1 51
6.26 Frequency Response in x-axis 54
6.27 Frequency Response in y-axis 55
6.28 Frequency Response in z-axis 55
7.1 Digger Blades 56
7.2 Shaft 56
7.3 PVC Pipe (1-inch) and Hacksaw Blade 57
7.4 Assembled Frame 57
7.5 Bevel Gear 58
7.6 Gear Motor 58
7.7 Wheel 59
7.8 Power Transmision System 59
7.9 Conveyor System 60
7.10 Collector 60
7.11 Prototype of Tractor Implant Potato Harvester 61
8.1 Break Even Chart 65
viii
LIST OF TABLES
Tab No. Table Name Page No.
4.1 Pugh-Matrix 23
4.2 Material Properties 25
4.3 Costing 28
4.4 Currently Available Tractor Implants for Harvesting Potatoes 28
6.1 Properties of EN8 Material 46
6.2 Directional Deformation Under Static Load 48
6.3 Equivalent Stress Under Static Load 48
6.4 Deformation for Transient Load 49
6.5 Equivalent Stress for Transient Load 50
6.6 Modal Frequency 51
8.1 Analysis Results 62
ix
Development of Cost-Effective Tractor Implant for Potato Harvester
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Market Survey and society relevance
The increased production growth rate of potatoes throughout the world has led to the growth of
the global market for potato harvester. The rising demand in the organic food throughout the
world has led to the demand for the harvesters in the last few years. This has made the trend to
improve the farming technologies with improving farm income along with the demand for
growing organic food products. Asia Pacific and African countries have been developing the
potato harvesters their increase in mechanized farming techniques has also led to the demand for
potato harvesters.
Fig 1.1: Agricultural machinery market in India [1]
From Fig 1.1 Technavio has been monitoring the agricultural machinery market in India for past
seven years and the market is poised to grow by USD 3.73 billion during 2020-2024, progressing
at a CAGR of more than 8% during the forecast period. Major potato harvesting countries like
India and China are still practising traditional methods for harvesting potatoes. However, rising
awareness on the developing technologies and the rising income for farmers in investing on
advanced technologies and automized harvesters in order to improve the yield of their farms. The
Department of Mechanical Engineering, RVCE 2020-21 Page 1

growth of the potatoes is gradually increasing 320 million metric tons to 370 million metric tons,
more than seventeen million metric tons of potatoes are being harvested throughout the world.
1.2 Brief note on potato harvester
Fig 1.2: Automized potato harvester [2]

From Fig 1.2 shows tractor implant potato harvester is an attachment to the tractor which draws
the power from the tractor in order to remove the potatoes from the soil, the digger blades help to
dig the potato along with the soil mixture with stones and clods then transfer it to the vibrating or
the separating platform where the clods, soil, and tiny stones gets separated from the gaps
provided in between the two rods on the vibrating platform. The left-out potatoes are carried
through the L-shaped conveyer (L-shape helps the potatoes to move in upward direction) and
transport it to the collector.
The potatoes are cultivated from past 350 years in our country, as potatoes provide the energy to
human diet in low cost and they are nutrient dense complex carbohydrates. The Vitamin C
present in the potatoes can value up to 30% of our daily value, the potato skin mainly contains
the potassium content in it, and the medium sized potato contain 110 calories with 2 grams of

fibres which helps the body to maintain a good diet. Potatoes are grown under diverse agro-
climatic conditions.
Fig 1.3: Well-grown potatoes [3]
From Fig 1.3 represents the well grown potato tubers which can be grown in any type of soil
which contain good drainage, aeriation, and rich in organic matter unlike saline and alkaline
soils, usually most of them are grown in loose sandy loam soil or the loamy soil. The ideal soil
pH level to grow potatoes is around 6 to 6.5 somewhat acidic, but they can withstand the soil pH
as low as 5.
1.3 Literature Survey

Anita Ierna et al., [4] Here the author has conducted the research on the variation in the nitrate
content present in the potatoes based on the influence of the harvest date, considering mid early,
mid late and late climatic conditions the potatoes are being planted and harvested on 90,105 and
120 days after the plantation. The nitrate content in the potato tubers was determined by the ISE
(Ion Selective Electrode) method. Nitrate contents in the potato tubers significantly decreased in
winter–spring crop, whereas they increased in summer–autumn crop in the three varieties, but to
the greatest extent in the case of late Mondial variety. Regardless of variety and harvest time, the
content of nitrate in tubers was within the guidelines proposed by some European countries. M.
Bentini, C. Caprara et al., [5] In this paper the authors have mainly focused on the harvesting
damage to the potato tubers by Analysis of Impacts recorded with an Instrumented Sphere. When
harvested in the wet soil the intensity of the impacts reduces at the higher forward speed and this
is more evident in the first zones of the harvester where the soil is eliminated and there is less

external and internal damage to the tubers at the higher forward speed of the harvester. In the dry
soil the intensity of the impacts is greater than those recorded in wet soil conditions the number
of impacts in the first two zones of the harvester is higher than the number recorded in wet soil.
Andre Baritelle et al., [6] In this paper the study is mainly on the classification system for impact
related defects in potato tubers, the tubers of relatively uniform mass are dropped on stem end
from a uniform, precisely controlled height of 300mm and dropped onto a flat, rigid, easily
repeatable surface (smooth concrete floor or steel anvil).In order to reduce the bruising on the
tubers the velocity should be controlled by reducing the speed, height of drop and conveyers are
provided as full as possible. Roger C. Brook et al., [7] Here the impact testing is carried on the
potato harvesting equipment’s, based on the study different potato harvester chain links were
tested along with that 28 different samples with 7 different configurations were evaluated using
MSU-USDA Instrumented Sphere. By considering the average peak acceleration and velocity
change, airheads undergo more impacts, then comes the primary chain, it also effects the rear
cross along with the side elevator, the least impacts were on the roller tables. W.S. Kang et al.,
[8] Development of the vibratory potato digger for small farms is main objective of this paper, in
order to run the harvester, the power transmission to the mechanism is by the two wheeled with
hand steered 7.35kW tractor. The vibrating blades was improving with increasing frequency and
reducing amplitude, increase in the frequency assisted the good flow and separation of soil in to
the harvester, the during the harvesting period the wastage and unrecovered potatoes ranged from
1.25% to 8.35%. Kalverkamp [9] US Patent, A potato harvester has been developed with the
lifting device made of hydraulics for lifting the solid ridges where in the lifting device is
provided with the digging tool along with the shears, for each lifting device there is at least one
support element. The wheels from the guide unit controls the digging shares and acts on a soil
ridge to be lifted as an intake aid. The Belt drive is used to run the conveyer on which the
potatoes are harvested, the digger blades and the rotating disk can be varied (vertically) with the
help of hydraulic system provided at the top. This vertical movement helps to control the depth
of the harvesting.
F. R. Wright [10] US Patent, the invention relates more specifically to a potato harvester and
cleaner in the nature of a wheeled vehicle. It is embodied in a wheeled implement that is adapted
to receive the harvested crop from the digger blades, and it is power operated for stripping the

vines and Soil from the potatoes, and provided with the necessary equipment whereby the
potatoes may be graded and sorted by hand, and finally the potatoes may be deposited in sacks.
The power is transmitted from the motor (M) placed at the frontend. W. D. Jones [11] US Patent,
in this paper, harvesting machine is designed for harvesting sweet potatoes providing an
arrangement for, severing the major part of the vines of the potato at the ground and preventing
the severed vines from entering the harvesting machine. Harvester has two parallel rows of
potatoes removed simultaneously by separate digging scoops and separate conveyors for the two
strips of soil containing the potatoes, and a common conveyor between the two soil conveyors.
The harvester is provided with two platforms on opposite sides of the common potato conveyor
where operators may stand and remove the remaining wines from the potatoes and transfer them
to the common conveyor. R. R. Raney [12] US Patent, this paper relates to the development of
the potato harvester, where the potatoes are harvested from the aggregator along with the
removal of the haulm. The frame is provided with the intermediate axle member with wheels,
digger and shaker chain type conveyer is carried by the frame which is extended upwardly in rear
direction, then the potatoes are collected in to the gunny bags separately with the help of the
conveyers. L. R. M Robert [13] US Patent, this work focusses on development of potato
harvester and in particularly an apparatus for removing potato-vines from the conveyor of a
potato harvester. Initially bulk load of potatoes is dug from the field along with the soil mixture,
they are separated by an elevator chain type conveyer on which they are passed, dirt and small
stones pass through the openings provided on the elevator chain and fall to the ground. They
have provided with the improved mounting for divining of the potato harvester. F. D. Gray [14]
US Patent, Potatoes and stones picked up by a potato digger are deposited on an inclined portion
of a conveyor. The conveyor, after elevating the potatoes and stones levels out and travels in a
substantially horizontal plane. Above the horizontal portion of the conveyor a rotating brush is
mounted at an incline to the direction of travel thereby guiding the potatoes raised by the inclined
conveyor to one side of the horizontal conveyor, and stones on the other side. The brush was
designed to sweep the potatoes laterally of the conveyor but to permit the stones mixed with the
potatoes to pass under neath. The power transmitted from one conveyer to another with the help
of belt drives and the bevel gears connected at the end of the shaft.
Q. Zeng et al., [15] In this paper the author has developed dual sensor horizontal penetrometer
for the measurement of water content in the soil and its strength, sensor with a 4-ring Wenner-

array was incorporated. In order to overcome the cross-modulation of signals from water content
and EC sensors, two filters with specific pass-bands were connected in each circuitry. Results
from the laboratory and field test the sensor can measure soil water content, EC and penetration
force simultaneously. Pengfei Liu et al., [16] the design optimization of hydraulic cleaning
system for potato harvester is done, to achieve the timely control of solenoid valve the author
have incorporated the new servo-valve-controlled hydraulic motor speed-changing system, using
the fuzzy FMECA method to analyse cleaning device of the hydraulic system, it is concluded
that that the more scientific and accurate evaluation, in order to find out the weak links of the
hydraulic system. Abdalla N.O. Kheiry et al., [17] the study is mainly focused on the effect of
operation variables of harvester with the double chain conveyer on machine performance and
crop handling, from the analysis the increase in the forward speed resulted in effective field
capacity along with the fuel consumption and the slippage of the wheels were also low, when the
depth of digging was increased the slippage of the wheel was more.
D.O. Caldiz et al., [18] this paper mainly focused on the survey of the potato production with the
yield constraints, from the survey it is seen that from the use of high-quality seed, improved
fertilizers and irrigation techniques for past 20years has led to increase in the productivity and
quality with better control of pests. B. Hanquet et al., [19] the variability of the soil is measured
with the help of soil strength sensor, from field analysis the correlation between cone penetration
and horizontal force at the depth of 25cm was r = 0.95 and for the soil moisture and the
horizontal for at the depth of 30cm was r = -0.95. Gert Kootstra et al., [20] study of the selective
harvesting robotics in the production of potato is mainly focused here, the study is done in three
different environment conditions i.e., in green house, orchard and open field. In order to continue
with the selective harvesting robotics, they mainly need to have the perception, good harvesting
tool and operation, the operation speed in the green house is faster due to the simpler situation
but in the orchard and open field it is bit slower. Md. Akhir et al., [21] this project mainly
focused on the sweet potato digger here the designing of the machine components and
fabrication is the first step and in second they have tested the prototype digging device in the bris
soil condition, for the designing of the digger blades they have designed three different types of
blades they are flat, V shaped and Hoe type, from the testing results they came to know that V
shaped blades for the rake angle of 30 degrees the machine efficiency was 93 percent.

P. Azizi et al., [22] development of the rotary blade digger machine for harvesting potatoes, the
diameters of the rotary blades are 76cm with length of 10cm assigned by the author, the helix
bars of 2.6cm in distance with each other having a diameter of 9mm, from the actual field work it
was known that advanced speed of 1.5-3Km/h and rotational speed input of 20-25rpm has the
minimum damage to the harvested potatoes with less than 4 percent. T. Niyamapa et al., [23] the
study is focused on the distribution of force and pressure under the influence of vibratory tilling
tool, an octagonal ring transducer is used to measure the force and pressure sensors are used to
measure soil pressure on the blade. When the tool was operated at certain frequency and
amplitude the results showed that the force decreased with increase in the oscillating frequency.
The peak normal pressure increased with increase in oscillating frequency. Shengshi Xie et al.,
[24] the experimentation is conducted on swing separated sieve adopted on potato harvester
machine, the experiment was conducted with help of the 4SW-170 potato digger it was observed
that the potato soil mixture intake was good when the forward speed of the machine was
increased, with the crank speed of 230 rpm and sieve inclination of 21.1 degree the harvest rate
was able to reach 99.48 percent with the forward speed of 2Km/h. Prof. Ph.D. Eng. Hevko R.B et
al.,[25] here the study is about the development and investigation of the operation processes in
potato harvesters and small root crops. a new way of cleaning potatoes and root crops from soil
mixture, which reduces the intensity of the effect of operating elements on potatoes and root
crops as they are passed away from a digger, has been suggested. The machine operating rate
was determined to be 1.3m/s and conveyer intake speed of 1.2m/s with the slope angle for
conveyer was maintained at 15 degree.
R. Joe Brodell [26] the study is mainly focused on the design of the crank rocker mechanism for
unit time ratio, here the minimum transmission angle is used to develop the planar crank rocker
mechanism for better quality motion transmission angle is recommended to be greater than 30
degrees, for higher speeds greater angle is recommended. F. Y. Chen [27] here an analytical
method is incorporated for synthesizing four-bar crank rocker mechanism, with the offset slider-
crank mechanism as a special case, for coordinating the prescribed input and output link extreme
positions. Solutions to the equations of constraint are derived for different cases. Among a large
number of the available solutions, an optimal design is governed by a given parameter which is
determined based on a design criterion. E. Martinez et al., [28] design of four-bar linkage
mechanism is carried out in this paper, with the help of simulation the mechanical links were

understood and by changing the lengths of the links the author observed the different
configurations in the mechanism, the simulation was carried in GeoGebra Software. Tsiafis et
al., [29] the study is on the design and development of the spiral bevel gear with the help of the
CNC milling machine, the designing features of the bevel gear was shown with the ISO
standards, traditional method was used for cutting the gear blanks using five axis CNC
machining centre for spiral bevel gear cutting. Fisher et al., US Patent [30] study focused on the
method for manufacturing of the bevel gears, initially the gear blank is chosen then forming gear
teeth on the gearhead by simultaneously cutting gear tooth lands to form an unfinished bevel
gear member using face hobbing process, and machining at least one selected surface of the
bevel gear member using the top lands thus forming a finished product. Guodong Zhai et al., [31]
to solve the flexible transmission an optimization model was designed in Microsoft excel and
Excel solver is used to obtain the optimal results, comparing the results with the traditional
design results, the optimum design volume of parts and total transmission system is reduced to
15.38 and 15.95 percent.
Troedsson et al., [32] here the study is focused on the determination of the dynamic load
distribution on a chain drive mechanism, from the results it is found that the static models don’t
provide sufficient results and in dynamic loading the roller position varies with respect to the
dynamic behaviour, due to the variations from the dynamic loading the tension forces on the
tight span are affected more than the slack span. Sheng-Peng Zhang et al., [33] determination of
the efficiency for the roller chain power transmission system based on the damping forces and
the sliding friction losses, with the help of Coulombs law the frictional losses were calculated,
the efficiency for the chain driven power transmission was theoretically calculated and ranged
from 86-93 percent depending on the driving conditions, after conducting the tests efficiency was
compared with the theoretical results and they varied with the difference range of 0.23-3.77
percent. Ibrahim Issa Mohamed Issa et al., [34] the study is focused on the design, analysis and
performance evaluation of potato harvester, the experimentation was studied with three different
forward speed and the digger angle, the maximum field efficiency of 91 % was obtained at the
forward speed of 2.5 km/h and the conveyer speed of 4 km/h. The damage on the yield decreased
as there was increase in the digger angle, the highest total damage percentage was seen at the
digger angle of 17 degrees, the working resistance on the digger blades was 572 N and the
maximum deformation under the loading conditions were also negligible. Dessye Belay [35]

here in this paper the author have made a review on the design, construction and performance
evaluation of potato harvester, from the review optimum angle maintained for tubers lifting
conveyor is from 10-20 degrees, the rake angle for high harvesting is recommended to be around
15-25 degrees, the harvester machine speed 2.5-6.5km/h with the optimum digging depth of 12
to 22cm, the ratio of the speed of the conveyor to the ground speed should be at 1:1.5 for the
smooth flow of the tubers without damage.
W. S. Kang et al., [36] development of the vibratory two row potato digger, it was found that
bruises on the potatoes increased as the frequency and amplitude increased but increase in the
travel speed decreased the damage to the tubers, draft forces decreased as frequency increased
but increased as travel speed increased. Change in amplitude levels had no effect on the
blackspot defect whereas the travel speed and frequency had the major role on blackspot defect
on the tubers. Finally concluded that travel speed of harvester is the major factor affecting the
dependent variables. Samy M. Younis et al.,[37] major focus is on development of potato digger,
a vibrating device operates the digger blades and it is attached with the beam holder, cam,
follower and transmission system where the potatoes are dug from the ground and passed on the
vibrating conveyor, the developed digger is compared with standard product and it was known
that the current harvester can operate at 110 hp instead of 140 hp tractor there by reducing the
harvesting cost by 28.5%, from the modification it was said that machine field capacity was
increased by 8.3%.
Narender et al., [38] performance analysis of the root crop digger in sandy loam soil, four
performance parameters were considered for the study and three different forward speeds with
different blade angles were considered, from the testing results it was concluded that decrease in
the cost for harvesting the potatoes compared to the manual harvesting is 51%, the digging
efficiency for harvesting carrots was 100 percent. To attain the good digging efficiency the
digging speed of 2.2km/h with blade angle of 23 degrees was recommended. Mahmood Reza
Salar et al., [39] the study is on the draft force requirements for the dual bent blade subsurface
tillage implement, the structural properties of two bent leg having rake angles of 7.5 and 15
degrees along with the 10 and 20 degree bent angle, these drafts were compared in the soil
having different moisture contents of 0.7 and 0.9 of plastic limit, it was found that the specific
draft was increasing with increased bent angle.

Alexei Siberev et al., [40] to study the force action of the harvester acting on the potato tubers,
initially the soil moisture and the soil hardness is been noted, the electronic tuber log software
which provides the tuber damage data having similar density and dimension to those of standard
potatoes, here three different harvesters were compared and found that the minimum values
obtained for Bolka harvester was 6.5N and for AVR-Spirit-6200 harvester was 21N. Sastry S.
Jayanty [41] study of black spot bruise in potato tubers, it is usually seen in the potato tubers due
to the impact damage during the harvest time, it is very difficult to detect as the skin of the
potatoes are not damaged from outside, from the study the blackspot is developed after 24 to 48
hours of the impact to the tubers, the grower has to compromise between low bruising and high
specific gravity to achieve the best economic return. Mohamed H. Dahab et al., [42] the study
relates to the size and cost of the farm machinery management system, here a decision-making
tool was developed using the computer system to manage large scale schemes, the developed
system was able to calculate the sizes, fixed and variables cost of the farm machinery and tactors,
the obtained results showed that the system was capable to compute machinery and farm
operations costs correctly.
Mehmet Topakci et al., [43] development of the horizontal penetrometer to measure the soil
resistance, based on the global positioning system data acquisition software was used, a
horizontal penetrometer was designed to obtain more data which was assembled to the tractor
and field experiment was conducted, from the results the soil resistance values of 0.2 MPa and 3
MPa were obtained as minimum and maximum values, respectively. K. A. J. Al-Jubourir [44]
development of farm mechanization for harvesting potato tubers, experiments were conducted
with respect to non-inversive deep tillage on potatoes and resulted in 10-15% extra yield can be
obtained with deep tillage. Also, deep tillage saves potato crop to some extent from water
logging and drought conditions. It is carried out up to 12-14 inches before planting in dry fields
and various types of harvesting potatoes were studied. Tapan Kumar Khura et al., [45] to study
the development of the tractor drawn onion harvester, the sections of the harvester are digging,
conveying and separation unit, six different digging blades were evaluated, the minimum mean
draft of 625.6N was observed for inverted V- shaped blade. With the obtained design value, the
harvester is operated and resulted in digging efficiency of 97.7%, separation index 79.1 and draft
10.78 KN.

Aude Gallardo-Carrera et al., [46] study is mainly focused on the effects of seabed structure and
the water content at sowing on soil surface crushing under rainfall, Seedbed sensitivity to
crusting was also estimated in the laboratory by stability tests on aggregates. A fully developed
structural crust required 13, 22, 27 mm cumulated rainfall respectively for seedbeds with
proportions of clods over 2 cm, and the mean penetrometer resistance increased continuously
with cumulated rainfall and was much lower for wet crusts.
Pietro Santamaria [47] study of nitrate content in potatoes, along with the potatoes various other
vegetables were studied and a report on the acceptable daily intake of nitrate content in the form
to food, limits of maximum nitrate content levels in vegetables are listed, the data also provide
the potential long term health risks of nitrate levels which are encountered in the human diet.
Anita Ierna et al., [48] to study the growth response of the potato tubers in moderate water deficit
environmental condition, potatoes are commonly planted in the autumn-early winter and
harvested in the spring. At this time the crop experiences low temperature and periodic soil water
deficit which may modify the physiological responses, and consequently the growth
characteristics of the plant. Psychological analysis was carried out on the fields to know the
moderate water deficit on photosynthesis production. Form the study it was said that cultivar
Side-lined is recommended in areas with limited water supply, while Sputa should be more
favoured in areas with a better water supply. D. B. Tiwari et al., [49] field survey on the potato
tuber moth, protecting plants from the disease and quality of the seeds are the two major factors
influencing the production, Late blight and PTM is the major disease found in the investigated
region and appropriate measures need to developed for the control of the pests. Ping Zhao et al.,
[50] development of a tuber root model based on the physical properties, three early maturing
potato variants were chosen for the development of the model, their topological and geometric
structures were analysed to determine the model parameters. Field data analysis and
measurement was performed, based on the data 3D visualization model was created in MATLAB
and accuracy of the model was checked, the relative root mean square error occurred with a
minimum of 6.81 % and maximum of 15.32%. these results can be used to explore the relation
between the soil-tuber-root aggregates and the digging components.

1.4 Research gap

From the literature review it has been observed that most of the authors have concentrated
mainly on harvesting potatoes by considering various factors like time required for harvesting,
separating weeds from the tubers and separation of stones from the harvested potatoes. The
conveyers are used to transport the potatoes to the gunny bags or the collecting system and for
the separation of the potatoes from soil. These machines are available to harvest in largescale for
around 15 to 25 acres and the harvesting cost of the machine is high. In order to harvest potatoes
in small fields (3 to 5 acres) these machines are not suitable as the cost of the harvesting is high,
this has led us to develop a low-cost tractor implant potato harvester which can be easily
affordable by all the farmers.
1.5 Main objectives of the project

➢ Design of tractor implant for potato harvester
➢ Performing Finite Element analysis for the harvester
➢ Prototype development of tractor implant for potato harvester
1.6 Organization of the report

CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION presents a brief introduction about harvesting potatoes and
market study on the agricultural machinery growth.
CHAPTER 2 – THEORY AND CONCEPTS deals with the various techniques and methods
implemented in developing the potato harvester.
CHAPTER 3 – PROJECT METHODOLOGY describes the methodology adopted to attain

the defined objectives.
CHAPTER 4 – CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT AND COST ESTIMATION presents in detail

of different concepts and estimation of the cost for the selected concept.
CHAPTER 5 – DESIGN OF MACHINE COMPONENTS various machine components was

designed for the finalized concept.
CHAPTER 6 – MODELLING AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS presents the modelling

of each component, pre-processing and post- processing steps involved in the analysis.

CHAPTER 7 –PROTOTYPE DEVELOPMENT presents the development of the prototype

and components used.
CHAPTER 8 – RESULT AND DISCUSSION presents the comparison of the present work
with the elsewhere studies and results obtained from the Finite element analysis.
CHAPTER 9 – CONCLUSION AND FUTURE SCOPE presents conclusion of the project

work along with the future work which can be carried out.

CHAPTER 2
THEORY AND CONCEPTS

2.1 Digging of Soil
The initial step in digging of soil is the selection of the proper digger blades which help in
development of the shear forces so that the soil and potato mixture are removed from the ground
and with the help of the guide plates, the mixture is transported directly in to the vibrating frame.
The tool for the digging process always experiences the large amount of resistive force offered
by the soil (or excavation force to cut the soil) while digging. Due to the forward movement of
the harvester and continuous application of the force on the soil, tends to extract the soil from the
ground.
2.2 Soil separation by slider crank mechanism

From Fig 2.1 represents slider-crank mechanism, arrangement of mechanical parts designed to
convert straight-line motion to rotary motion, as in a reciprocating piston engine, or to convert
rotary motion to straight-line motion, as in a reciprocating piston pump. In this project slider
crank mechanism is used to transmit the power available from the PTO of the tractor to the
vibrating frame, the reciprocating motion of the vibrating frame helps to separate the soil from
the potatoes. The separated soil gets filtered through the gaps provided on the vibrating frame,
the potatoes are left behind on the vibrating frame, which are pushed towards the end of the
frame due to the continues intake of the soil mixture.
Fig 2.1 Slider crank mechanism [51]

2.3 Handling of tubers through Conveyor
Fig2.2: Conveyor for handling potatoes [52]

The Fig 2.2 shows the conveyor system, A belt conveyor system consists of two or
more pulleys based on the requirements with a closed loop of carrying medium, the conveyor
belt that rotates about them. Here one end of the pulley is powered by the mechanism, moving
the belt and the material in the upward direction. The powered pulley acts as a drive pulley and
the other unpowered pulley known as idler pulley.
2.4 Chain drive for power transmission
Fig 2.3: Chain drive for power transmission [53]

Above Fig 2.3 shows the Chain drive, where it is a way of transmitting mechanical power from
one place to another. It is often used to convey power to the wheels of a vehicle. Most often, the
power is conveyed by a roller chain, known as the drive chain or transmission chain, passing
over a sprocket gear, with the teeth of the gear meshing with the holes in the links of the chain.
The gear is turned, and this pulls the chain putting mechanical force into the system. In the

current project the chain drive is used to transmit the power from the PTO of the tractor to run
the conveyor belt.
2.5 Harvesting and Yield

The harvesting time for the potato growth is one of the important factors, where the tubers
continue to grow until the vines die. The final product is ready for harvesting within 75-120 days
of planting, by considering the soil type, area and the variety sown. In the hilly regions, crop is
harvested when the soil is not very wet. The crops in monsoon season have a poor quality and
develop various types of rots. When the leaves turn to yellow brown it indicates the crop is ready
to harvest. At this stage, the tops are cut at the ground level. Tubers are dug from the ground by
ploughing after 8-10 days. Then they are hand-picked and stored under the shade. Manual
harvesting is very labor intensive, causes lots of damage to the potatoes and time-consuming
process. Various low-cost tractor drawn potato digger have been developed at the CPRI, which
exposes 80% of the tubers and covering 1-3 ha of area per day. The harvested tubers are surface
dried and kept in heaps for 10-15 days in shade to cure the skin. The potatoes should not be
directly exposed to the sunlight as they become green. The yield varies from variety to variety.
However, the average yield of the early-maturing varieties is about 20t/ha and that of the late
varieties about 30t/ha.

CHAPTER 3
PROJECT METHODOLOGY
3.1 Problem Definition

From the literature it is evident that most of the authors are focused on developing potato
harvester machine, which is integrated with the advanced technologies where the soil mixture is
dragged to large moving chain type conveyers, and designed separate units for removal of stones
which requires high maintenance and skilled workers for operating the harvester. The cost of
harvesting is high when these machines are used for harvesting small fields of 3-5 acres of land.
Hence it is very important to develop a cost-effective tractor implant for harvesting potatoes
along with the collector.
3.2 Methodology
The Fig 3.1 describes the methodology followed for completing the project work, and various
tools which were employed at various stages of project. This project aims to develop low-cost
tractor implant potato harvester, initially the literature study is carried out, gaining knowledge
from those papers’ further modification in the objectives and the problem statement is made and
finalized. This is followed by the collection of data on the potato harvesting field from which the
potato harvester has been designed and analysed. Development of concepts for the given
objective is carried out, here three tractor implant concepts were evaluated by considering
various parameters like ease of operation, cost, time required for harvesting, collector, labour
requirement and maintenance. The concepts are ranked and finalized; further development of the
concept is carried out.
Material selection for different components have been done and cost estimation for the different
components have been carried out by considering the size of the different components, the
estimated cost for the potato harvester of Rs 19162/- has obtained. Design of the mechanical
components for the potato harvester is done, design data handbook for the reference various
components like bevel gear, pulley, chain drive and shaft are designed. After designing of the
components, the modelling is carried out in the Unigraphics Modelling software (NX 11.0), each
component is modelled and then they are assembled together forming the tractor implant potato
harvester. FEM analysis is carried on the digger blade and the frame, first the static structural and

transient analysis is carried out for the calculated loading conditions with fixed support,
obtaining the deformation and the stress in the material. Second the modal analysis has been
done by considering the deformation behaviour to determine the number of mode shapes and
their frequency, six different mode shapes are been generated from that first mode shape has
been selected by comparing the deformation behaviour of structural and six different mode
shape, the obtained result is natural frequency and deformation of the frame. At last harmonic
analysis is carried out to determine the deformation for particular natural frequency.

3.3 Flowchart of project methodology
Literature Survey
Different power transition mechanisms

are studied
Development of Concepts and

Evaluating
Material Selection and Cost Estimation
Design of machine components and

modelling in NX software
Performing FEM analysis in Ansys

workbench
If the
design is No
safe?
Yes
Development of Prototype
Fig 3.1 Project methodology flowchart

CHAPTER 4
CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT AND COST ESTIMATION
4.1 Concept Creation
4.1.1 Concept 1
Fig 4.1: Concept 1
In concept 1, the Fig 4.1 represents the tractor implant for potato harvester is created where the
power is drawn from the PTO (Power take-off point) of the tractor, and it transmits the power to
the rotary wheel mechanism which is connected to the vibrating frame ,same power from the
PTO is used to run the chain drive with the help of bevel gears and the other end of the chain
drive runs the rollers of the conveyer ,the blade dimensions are taken from the reference paper,
when the soil and potato mixture enters the frame inlet the vibrating frame helps us to remove
the soil and soil lumps from potatoes and passes it to the lifting conveyer ,where the L-shaped
frame is provided to hold and carry the potatoes to the collector here we can harvest 2 rows of
potatoes at a time, the vibrating frame is created in such a way that it loses only the soil but not
potatoes i.e. the gap maintained between the frame is lesser than the minimum size of the
potatoes.

4.1.2 Concept 2
Fig 4.2: Concept 2
power is drawn from the PTO (Power take-off point) of the tractor, and it transmits the power to
the cam which is connected to the vibrating frame which vibrates the frame to lose the soil in
between the frames (the mechanism here converts the rotary motion to translatory), the frame is
attached with the flat blade kept at an angle so that it digs the soil and potato mixture and
transmits it to the vibrating frame, where the soil and soil lumps gets removed completely and
the potatoes are left behind, the workers collect the potatoes by handpicking, here the hole setup
is carried by the tractor, comparing it with the concept one it can harvest one row of potatoes at a
time, the speed of the vibrating frame can be varied by controlling the speed of the PTO of the
tractor.

4.1.3 Concept 3
Fig 4.3: Concept 3
power is transmitted from the PTO (Power take-off point) of the tractor, the flat blade is used to
dig the potato soil mixture from the ground then it is transmitted to the conveyer where it is run
by the gear box arrangement, the power is taken from the PTO and transmitted to the shaft with
the help of bevel gear at the other end the pulley is connected which transmits the power to the
conveyer, it carries the mixture to the rotary frame it is design in the cylindrical shape which
rotates in clockwise direction that helps the soil mixture get separated from the potatoes as it
made up of fine mesh like structure and the gap in the mesh is maintained in such a way that only
soil gets removed and it is held on the rotating shaft which is run by connecting it to the
universal joint that connects the gear box, there is crescent shaped arrangement is made in the
rotating setup to transfer the potatoes to the output side and they will be collected by the workers
by handpicking.

4.2 Concept Evaluation

Concept generation and evaluation is carried out to check the product can perform all the major
functions, with the help of the Pugh matrix the above three concepts were evaluated by
considering the various factors in to account. From the decision matrix it was known that
Concept 1 has the highest rank and is selected for designing.
Table 4.1 Pugh Matrix
Criteria Base Line Concept 1 Concept 2 Concept 3
Ease of Operation 10 7 8 6
Cost 10 8 10 7
Time required for harvesting 10 10 8 8
Collector 10 10 0 0
Labour requirement 10 9 7 7
Maintenance 10 8 10 7
Totals 60 52 43 35
Rank 1 2 3
• Ease of operation: A design is always said to be easily operated only when there are
fewer moving parts and simple design. The ease of operation for concept 2, the operation
runs smoothly as it has fewer moving parts, coming for the concept 3 and 1, the power
transmission system is part where it needs to be monitored regularly if there is any
blockage in rotating setup then the soil mixture goes on collecting in the system and gets
heavy any the problem occurs hence it is rated less when compared second concepts.
• Cost: By considering the mechanisms, materials and operation for the above concepts,
the cost of concept 2 is less compared to other two concepts, as there are more moving
parts and material cost involved in concept 1 and 3 are high.
• Time required for harvesting: here the concept 2 and concept 3 harvests one row of
potato at a time where as the concept 1 harvests two rows of potato at a time. From it is
said that concept 1 is feasible for harvesting to reduce harvest time.
• Collector: there is no collector for the concept 2 and concept 3 as a result the concept 1 is
rated high, which reduces the human efforts and labor charges for collecting the potatoes.

• Labour requirement: For concept 1 only two labours are required, for concept 2 and 3
more than 2 labours are required, in order to collect the potatoes minimum two labours
are required and hence the concept 1 is rated high compared to other two concepts.
• Maintenance: as concept 2 is focuses on removal of potatoes and are left out in to the
fields having low maintenance with fewer moving parts. Where as in concept 1 regular
check-up of the vibrating frame is required and for concept 3 the power transmission and
the rotating setup need to checked regularly in order to avoid the over filling of the soil
mixture as a result concept 3 has been rated least.
From concept evaluation, we can conclude that concept one holds the major advantages and
is finalized for further design and development.
4.3 Material selection

4.3.1 Mild steel
• Shaft: Shaft material is selected as mild steel (Iron containing a small percentage of
carbon, strong and tough but not readily tempered). It is also known as plain-carbon steel
which have high yield strength and is most common steel available in the market with
lesser cost. It provides the material properties that widely acceptable for many
applications, where large cross-sections are used to minimize deflection, failure by yield
is not a risk.
• Chain and sprocket: Mild steel is selected for manufacturing of chain and sprocket as
the cost of the material is less with high load carrying capacity. It provides the material
properties that widely acceptable for many applications.
4.3.2 EN8 steel
• Bevel gear: The material selected for bevel and spur gear is EN8 material. EN8 material
is unalloyed medium carbon steel having a better property than the mild steel. It is heat
treated to provide a good surface hardness and moderate wear resistance by flame or
induction hardening processes. From the automotive to wide general application, EN8 is
popular steel in industry.
• Frame and Digger blade: The material selected for frame is EN8 material. EN8 material
is unalloyed medium carbon steel having a better property than the mild steel. From the
automotive to wide general application, EN8 is popular steel in industry.

4.3.3 Polyurethane
• Conveyer: L-shaped conveyers are used to handle the materials from lower end to the
upper end, the polyurethane material is used to make the bed of the conveyer. L shaped
supports are attached on the conveyer.
4.4 Material Properties

The below table 4.2 represents the properties of the materials used for the development of the
components.
Table 4.2 Material Properties
Mild steel EN8
Density: 7.87 g/cc Density: 7.85 g/cm3
Tensile strength, Ultimate: 440 MPa Tensile strength ultimate: 660 MPa
Tensile strength, Yield: 370 MPa Tensile strength, Yield: 510 MPa
Modulus of Elasticity: 205 GPa Modulus of Elasticity: 190 GPa
Hardness, Brinell: 128 Poisson’s ratio: 0.27-0.3
Poisson's ratio: 0.29 Shear Modulus: 84 GPa
Shear Modulus: 80 GPa Compressive strength, Yield: 385 MPa
4.5 Cost Estimation

The cost is estimated by considering the actual amount of material required for the development
of the model and actual dimensions are taken for the complete frame, by considering the cost of
the material per kilogram from the India Mart website the costing is made, along with the
material cost, labour cost and miscellaneous charges are been added.
4.5.1 Material Cost
Mild steel hollow square tube of size 40x40x5mm costs Rs 45/kg [54]
Density of mild steel is 7850 kg/m3
To find total cost
Length of the frame required in total = 20m
Calculating area of the cross-section we get 0.0007m2
Volume of the cross-section = 0.0007x20 = 0.014m3

Mass = Density x Vol =7850x0.014 = 110kg

Cost = 110x45 = 4,950 = 5,000 Rs
Mild steel solid circular round bar of diameter 25mm costs Rs 35/kg [54]
Density of mild steel is 7850 kg/m3
To find total cost
Length of the frame required in total = 3.5m
Calculating area of the cross-section we get 0.000491m2
Volume of the cross-section = 0.000491x3.5 = 0.001718m3
Mass = Density x Vol =7850x0.01718 = 13.5kg
Cost = 13.5x45 = 472.15 = 500 Rs
EN8 material (Medium Carbon Steel) gear blank for spur gear of Diameter 80mm and 160mm
with width 50mm costs Rs 55/kg [54]
Density is 7850 kg/m3
To find total cost
Area of the blank
A1 = 0.7854 x D2 = 0.7854 x 0.082 = 0.006284 m2
A2 = 0.7854 x D2 = 0.7854 x 0.162 = 0.12568 m2
Volume of the blank
V = (0.006284 x 0.03) + (0.12568 x0.03) = 0.001146 m3
Mass = Density x Volume = 7850 x 0.001146 =9 kg
Cost = 9 x 55 = 500 Rs
Mild steel roller chain sprocket of diameter 220mm costs Rs 100/NOS [54]
Hence, No of Sprockets are 4
Cost = 4 x 100 = 400/-
Mild steel roller chain of pitch 25.4mm costs Rs 150/Feet [54]

Hence, total length of the chain is 3.5m

Cost = 3.5 x 450 = 1,575/-
Total material cost = 5,000+500+500+400+2,000
= 8,400/-
4.5.2 Labor cost

Cost relates to the work carried out by the skilled labors in performing the various tasks as
followed are drilling, welding, cost of weld rods and finishing = Rs.5,000/-
4.5.3 Overhead charges

The overhead charges are added to the manufacturing cost, if there is any extra material needed
or some redoing’s in the working process if they are not done properly.
Manufacturing Cost = Material Cost + Labor cost
= 8,400 + 5,000
= Rs 13,400 /-
Overhead Charges = 30 % of the manufacturing cost
= Rs 4020 /-
4.5.4 Total cost

Total cost = Material Cost + Labor cost + Overhead Charges
= 8400 + 5000 + 4020
= Rs. 17420/-
Total cost for this project = Rs. 17420/-
The estimated project cost was 19,162 Rs, by considering the miscellaneous cost of 10% for the
total actual cost.
4.5.5 Harvesting Cost by Traditional method

Number of labors required for harvesting potatoes in 2-acre of land = 8 labors
Daily wages for each labor = Rs 350
Time taken to complete the harvest of 2-acre land = 6 days
Total Cost for harvesting two acres of land = 8*350*6 = Rs 16,800
4.5.6 Running Cost of the Harvester

Consumption of fuel by tractor = 13.0 hp-hrs/gal = 7.69 gal/hr

7.69 gal/ hr = 29.109 Liter/hr

When tractor run at 6hp, consumption of the fuel per hour = 14.5 Liter/ hr
Tractor is run for 8hr per day for harvesting 2-acres of land = 8*14.5 = 116 Liters
Cost of 116 Liter of Diesel (1 Liter = 94.93Rs) = 116*94.93 = Rs 10,949.24
Cost of labor to the harvester per day =Rs 700
Total Running cost of the harvester to harvest two acres of land = 10,950+500 = 11,450
Table 4.3: Costing [54]

PARAMETERS COST (RS)
Material Cost 8,400
Labor Cost 5,000
Overhead Charges 4,020
Miscellaneous 1,742
Total Cost 19,162
4.6 Currently available potato harvesters

The below listed table represents some of the currently available tractor implants for harvesting
potatoes, the cost have been listed as per the reference from the India Mart website [55]
Table4.4: Currently available tractor implants for harvesting potatoes [55]
POTATO HARVESTERS COST (Rs)
Amar Potato Digger Tractor Model PTO, Model: APD-555 84,000/-
DKE Potato Digger, Capacity: 2 Row, DKE-2R 2,50,000/-
Big Potato Digger, For Agriculture, Bharat Steel Works 85,000/-
New Super Potato Harvester, Capacity: 400 Kg 75,000/-

CHAPTER 5
DESIGN OF MACHINE COMPONENTS

Design of machine components are performed based on the design data handbook (K.
Mahadevan) here the components designed are Bevel gear, shaft, Chain and Sprocket, loading
conditions for the harvester. The power required for the calculation are referred from the tractor
specifications.
5.1 Calculating the loading condition on the vibrating frame

Potatoes are grown best in loose, well drained loam soil having the density of 1.33g/cm3
Mass acting on the frame m = density * Volume
= 1.33*(80*20*100)
= 212800gm = 212.8kg
Assuming the load acting on the frame is 220kg = 2200N
5.2 Calculating the loading condition on the blade

Taking the same density value = 1.33g/cm3
Mass acting on the blade m = density * Volume
= 1.33*(80*20*30)
= 63840gm = 63.84kg
Assuming the load acting on the blade is 65kg = 650N
5.3 Force required to dig the soil
μN
Ɵ
F
Fig 5.1: Force acting on the blade

From Fig 5.1 shows the forces acting on the digger blade, from the loading condition the force
(F) acting on the frame is 650 N and N is the normal force (N) is acting opposite to the weight of

the soil and μ N id the resistive force acting against the flow of the soil mixture. Angle of the
blade is Ɵ = 60 degree.
μN N
F
Fig 5.2: Resolution of forces
From Lami’s theorem,
F μN N
= = (Eqn 5.1)
sin Ɵ sin Ɵ sin Ɵ
F = N/ sin (90+ Ɵ)
= 650/ sin (150)
F = 1300N
5.4 Design of Bevel Gear

P = 6HP = 4.45 kW,
n1 = 270 RPM,
n2 = 270 RPM,
Material =EN8 (hardening by 400̊c) (Turning, milling and tempering at 400̊c)
Yield / Design stress σ𝑑1= σ𝑑2 = 280 Mpa
n1
(Gear ratio) i = = 1.00, For i = 1 from DHB
n2
Minimum number of Teeth on pinion = Z1 = Z2 = 20
Shaft are perpendicular to each other therefore
∑=90̊
𝜃 = 90̊,
𝛿1 = 45˚, 𝛿2 = 45˚,
α = 20̊ FDI, Intermittent or 3h per day, Medium shocks
𝐶𝑠 = 1.25 (correction factor)
Pitch angle of pinion

1
δ1 = tan−1 ( ) = 45°
i
Pitch angle of Gear
δ2 = tan−1 (i) = 45°
Formative number of Teeth in a straight teeth bevel pinion
𝑍v1 = 𝑍1 / cosδ1 = 20 / cos45 = 28.3
𝑍v2 = 𝑍2 / cosδ2 = 20 / cos45 = 28.3
Lewis form factor for 20̊ FDI
y = 0.154 - 0.912/ 𝑍𝑣
𝑦1 = 0.154 - 0.912/ 28.3 = 0.122
𝑦2 = 0.154 - 0.912/ 28.3 = 0.122
Both the material is same, let's consider pinion is Weaker
P
a) Tangential tooth load (Ft) = (Eqn 5.2)
V∗Cs
P
Tangential tooth load of Weaker member (Ft1) =
V∗Cs
𝐹𝑡1 = 4.5*1000*1.25*60*1000 / 3.142*m*20*270
= 19670.7/ 𝑚 .........→(i)
b) Tangential tooth load from Lewis’s equation
R−b
𝐹𝑡 = 𝜎0 *Cv*𝑏*𝜋*𝑦*𝑚 *( ) (Eqn 5.3)
R
m
cone distance (𝑅) = * (√𝑍²1 + √𝑍²2 ) (Eqn 5.4)
2
= 𝑚/ 2 * √20² + 20²
= 14.142𝑚
For face width 𝑅/4< 𝑏 <𝑅/3
𝑅 /3 = 14.142𝑚/3 = 4.714m
The face width of the bevel gear is generally taken as 10m or 𝑅 /3
whichever is smaller.
As 𝑅/ 3 = 4.714 < 10𝑚,
take face width b = 4.714m
14.142m−4.714m
𝐹𝑡1 = 280*1.25*4.714𝑚*𝜋*0.122𝑚*( )
14.142m
=421.63*𝑚²*Cv..........→ (ii)

Equating eqn 1and eqn 2

19670.7/m = 421.63*m2*Cv
m3Cv = 46.654………. (iii)
Mean pitch line velocity of weaker member(pinion)
Vm = 3.142*d1*n1/60*1000
= 0.2827 m
Trail 1 for module (assume m = 5)
Vm = 0.2827*5
= 1.69668
Velocity factor
3.05
Cv = = 0.6426
(3.05+Vm)
From equation (iii)

m3Cv = 53*0.6426 = 80.33
80.33 > 46.654
Hence suitable module m = 5
σall = 280N/mm2
Ft1
σind = R−b (Eqn 5.5)
b∗ π ∗Y1∗m∗( )
R
= 130.63 N/mm2
Therefore m = 5 and Vm = 0.2827*m = 1.4135m/s
Hence induced stress is less than allowable stress, and the design is safe hence
Yield stress
FOS = (Eqn 5.6)
Working stress
FOS = 280/130.63 = 2.1

Checking for Dynamic load
According to Buckingham’s equation
21V(Ft+bc)
Dynamic load, Fd = Ft + [ ] (Eqn 5.7)
21V(√Ft+bc)
Vm = 1.4135 from DHB = 2m/s

For V = 2 for steel and steel error =0.088
C = 915.6 (Dynamic factor)

Substituting we get,
Fd = 9246.2 N
Checking wear load
According to Buckingham's equation neglecting deflection and wear load
d1bQK
Fw = (Eqn 5.8)
cos δ1
2Z1
Q= =1
(Z1+Z2)
d1bQK
> Fd (Eqn 5.9)
cos δ1
Fd∗cos δ1
K = = 2.77 = 3(from DHB)
d1bQ
Hence,
Surface hardness for pinion = 450BHN
Surface hardness for gear = 450BHN
The efficiency of bevel gear is 96%
Pitch Diameter of pinion
Dp = m*Z1 = 5*20 = 100mm
Dg = m*Z2 = 5*20 = 100mm
The pitch circle diameter for pinion and gear is obtained as 100mm and 100mm, the surface
harness for pinion and gear is 450BHN.
Bevel gear specification based on design:
Diameter of pinion : 100mm
Diameter of gear : 100mm
Module : 5mm
Width : 24mm
Teeth on Pinion and Gear: 20 and 20
Induced stress : 73.408 N/mm2

5.5 Design of Shaft

Power = 6HP = 4.45 kW
Speed N = 270rpm
Torque = P*60/2*3.142*N = 158.2
T = 158.2Nm
Assuming one degree twist per meter length of shaft
Ɵ 584T
= (Eqn 5.10)
L Gd4
1 = 584*158.235/280*109
d = 0.02359m = 2.36cm from DHB Std diameter is 2.54cm (1 inch)
Therefore, d = 1inch
When shaft subjected to twisting movement,
T = Ʈ*(3.142/16) *d4 (Eqn 5.11)
Ʈ= 61.31 MPa = 61.13N/mm2
The diameter of the shaft is obtained as 2.36cm from standard available shafts 1 inch shaft is
finalized.
5.6 Design of Chain Drive

n1= 270 rpm
n2= 270 rpm
P = 4.45 kW
n1
Transmission ratio i= =1
n2
Hence for ratio (1-2)
Number of teeth on small sprocket = 30-27
Let’s consider, Z1=27, Z2 =27;
Ks (service factor)
Operating condition (light to medium shock or vibrating load)
Intermittent few hours /day Ks = 0.90-1.4=1.3
K1 Minimum center distance Coefficient (K1=1)
Calculating pitch,
60.67 2/3
where P<10*[ ] (Eqn 5.12)
n1

where n1…………. rev/sec

n1= 270 rpm
n1 = 270/60 = 4.5 rev/sec
60.67 2/3
P = 10[ ]
24.5
P < 856.64mm
From std table we select
P = 25.40
Chain Number = 208B
Measuring load = 127.5N
Breaking load = 17.85KN
Pitch circle diameter of sprocket
P
D1 = = 219mm
sin(180/Z1)
P
D2 = = 219mm
sin(180/Z2)
P∗Z∗N
V= (Eqn 5.13)
1000
= 25.4*27*270/1000 = 3.086m/s
Tangential Force
P
Ft = 1000*
v
= 1000*4.45/3.0861 = 1441.94N
The allowable working load per strand
Fu
Fw = (Eqn 5.14)
(FS)∗Ks
= 17.85*103/7.6*1.3
= 1806.6 N
Number of strands
Ft
J = (Eqn 5.15)
Fw
= 1441.94 / 1806.6
= 0.8
Therefore, number of strands are 1

Length of chain
L=Ln*p
Ln = 2(c/p) +(Z1+Z2/2) +(Z2-Z1/2п)2 (p/a)
= 2 (1520/25.4) +0.5(27+27) +0
Ln = 146.7 = 147 links
L =147 x 25.4 = 3733.8mm
The design for chain drive is calculated and the design is safe. The results obtained from
calculating chain drive are like, the number of teeth on both the sprockets are Z = 27, the pitch
obtained is P = 25.4mm, the number of strands is J = 2, the pitch circle diameter of sprocket is D
= 219mm, the length of chain is L = 3733.8mm.
5.7 Design of frame
Fig 5.3: Design of Frame

In Fig 5.3 the self-weight of the machine components and the load acting on the frame represents
the applied loads on the frame.
Reaction Forces
Sum of forces = 0
RA+RB = 150+2200+150...................(i)
Summation of momentum about point A = 0
RB*1560 – 150*1305 – 2200*370 – 150*50 = 0
RB = 652.08 N......................(ii)
By substituting (ii) in (i) we get,
RA = 1847.91 N
Shear force
SFB = -652.08 N
SFC = -652.08 + 150 = -502.08 N
SFD = -652.08 + 150 + 2200 = 1697.92 N
SFE = -652.08 + 150 + 2200 + 150 = 1847.92 N
SFA = 0
Bending moment
BMB = 0
BMC = 652.08 * 255 = 166.280 N-m
BMD = 652.08 * 1190 – 150 * 935 = 635.725 N-m
BME = 652.08 * 1510 – 150 * 1255 – 2200 * 320 = 92.391 N-m
BMA = 652.08 * 1560 – 150 * 1305 – 2200 * 370 – 150 * 50 = - 00.52 N-m
The maximum bending moment obtained is M = 635.725 N-m
We know that from Bending moment equation
M
σd = (Eqn 5.16)
Z
Z = FOS*m / σy; σy = Yield stress of EN8 material i.e., 385 MPa
Now calculating the section modulus required for proposed design
B4 – b4
Z= (Eqn 5.17)
6B
Assuming the square hallow section 40*40*5

B = 40 mm
b = 30 mm
t = 5 mm
z = 7291.66................(i)
m
Zd = FOS* (Eqn 5.18)
σy
= 3*652.08*1000/385
Zd = 5081.14................(ii)
By taking ratio of (i) and (ii) we get,
= 7291.66 / 5081.14
= 1: 1.43
The ratio indicates that only 0.43 times the extra material is present by considering this cross-
section. Hence this section is considered for design of frame.

CHAPTER 6
MODELLING AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS

The modelling is carried out in Unigraphics Software (NX 11), the designed components are
modelled and assembled to form a single component in order to get the clear picture how the
harvesting device actually works.
6.1 Modelling of components

The following parts deals with the individual modelling of each component with the detailed
drafting.
6.1.1 Assembly and working principle of the harvester
Fig 6.1 Assembly of the tactor implant for potato harvester
The potatoes stem is initially chopped off before the harvesting is started. Here from the above
Fig 6.1, we can see the digger blades which are assembled to the frame which the helps to dig the
soil from the ground along with the potatoes, this process works when the frame is coupled to the
tractor and connecting the 6-spline tractor PTO to the implant, which transmits the power from
the tractor to the implant to run the mechanism, when the tractor moves in forward direction the
soil mixture along with the potatoes are carried on to the vibrating platform, where the vibrating
mechanism is caused by the cam which one end is connected to the rotating disc and the other

end connected to the vibrating frame, as the rotary disk helps to oscillate the frame in forward
and backward direction the disk is given with the offset of 20mm, when the frame vibrates with
that offset the soil and the clods get filtered from the gaps provided in between the vibrating
frame, the left over potatoes are then transmitted to the rarer side of the frame, from there the
potatoes are carried by the conveyer provided at an angle, the conveyer is run by transmitting the
power from the main shaft to the secondary shaft through the bevel gears, the other end of the
shaft if connected with the chain drive mechanism which runs the conveyer, the conveyer is
provided with the L-shaped links which helps the potatoes to move to the collector provided at
the rear end of the frame ,the collector capacity is 100kg once it gets filled then it can be
transported to gunny bags.
6.1.2 Orthographic View of the model
Fig 6.2: Orthogarphic view of the harvester

6.1.3 Modelling of Frame
Fig 6.3: Solid model of the frame
The above Fig 6.3 represents the modelling of the frame in the NX modelling software with the
cross-section of the material used for the frame is 40x40x5 and the rods used for the vibrating
frame is of 10mm diameter.
Fig 6.4: drafting of the frame

The width of the frame is 800 mm
Length of the frame is 1560mm
Cross Section of the Frame 40x40x5mm
Diameter of the rod used in vibrating frame 10mm
6.1.4 Modelling of Digger Blade
Fig 6.5: Solid model of the Digger Blade
The above Fig 6.5 represents the modelling of the digger blades, dimensions for design is
referred from paper [21] “Design and Development of a Sweet Potato Digging Device” , the
length of the blade 304mm and the angle of inclination is 60 degree.
Fig 6.6 Drafting of the Digger Blade[18]

6.1.5 Modelling of Chain drive
Fig 6.7 Modelling of Chain drive

From the Fig 6.7 represents the chain drive mechanism which consists number of components
like, inner and outer chain link, pin and sprocket. The modelling of these components is been
carried out.
Fig 6.8 Solid model and drafting of inner link

From Fig 6.8 shows the inner link for chain number 208A has been selected from the table based
on the calculations. The dimensions are like, the width between inner link is b = 8mm, the length
of the link is 31.4mm and diameter of the liknk is d = 4mm. The model is done.
Fig 6.9 Solid model and drafting of outer link

From Fig 6.9 shows the outer link for the chain number 208A has been selected from the table
based on the calculations. The dimensions are like, the width between outer link is
b = 14.7mm, the length of the link is 31.4mm and diameter of the liknk is d = 4mm. The model is
done.
Fig 6.10 Solid model and drafting of pin

From Fig 6.10 shows the drafting pin for the chain number 208A has been selected from the
table based on the calculations. The dimensions are like, the diameter of pin d = 4mm, the
diameter of roller D = 8mm, the length of the pin L = 21.3mm. The model is done.
Fig 6.11 Solid model and drafting of sprocket

From Fig 6.11 shows modelling of sprocket has been carried out by considering the results from
the design calculation of bevel gear. The dimensions are like, the diameter of sprocket is d =
219mm, the number of teeth is Z = 27 and the pitch is P = 25.40mm. The model is done.

6.1.6 Modelling of Shaft
Fig 6.12 Solid model and drafting of shaft

From Fig 6.12 represents the modelling of shaft has been carried out by considering the results
from the design calculation of bevel gear. The dimensions are like, the diameter of shaft is d =
2.54cm.
6.1.7 Modelling of Bevel gear
Fig 6.13 Solid model and drafting of shaft

From the Fig 6.13 represents the drafting of the bevel gear; from the design calculations the pitch
diameter gear is 100mm with module 5 and pitch diameter of the pinion is 100mm.
6.2 Finite Element Analysis

Structural analysis is carried out to determine the maximum stress and deformation on the
component. Transient analysis is carried out in order to check the deformation and the maximum
stress when the loading conditions are warried consciously when the harvester is in working.
Here time period of 10 seconds with time step of 1 second is considered for the transient loading.

6.2.1 Material Selection

The material for the digger blades and the frame is EN8 medium carbon steel, the properties are
provided in table 6.11, the properties are added to the list of materials tables in the ANSYS
software, this material has good tensile strength and compressive strength when compared to the
mils steel.
Table 6.1: Material properties for EN8 Steel
PROPERTIES VALUE
Density 7850kg/m³
Modulus of elasticity 190GPa
Poisonous ratio 0.27-0.3
Tensile strength yield 510MPa
Tensile strength ultimate 660MPa
Compressive strength yield 385MPa
6.2.2 Meshing and Boundary Conditions
Fig 6.14: Meshing
Mesh Statistics
The Fig 6.14 represents mesh statistics where the meshing is caried out the model where it
discretizes the model into finite number of elements and solves each element, then it will merge
to obtain final result. The tetrahedral element having four nodes is used for meshing, this element

method better suits for complex geometric modal than any other element methods. The number
of nodes created are 17625 and the number of elements is 35156. The element sizing was set to
adaptive fine type, as the size of the element decreases, it improves the quality of mesh and
output of the result.
6.2.3 Static Structural Analysis
Fig 6.15: Boundry Conditions
Boundary Conditions
Fixed supports at the wheels
Load acting on the blade = 650N (negative Y-axis)
Load acting on the Frame = 2200N (negative Z-axis)
Load on the collector region = 1000N (negative Z-axis)
Fig 6.16: Total Deformation (Structural)

Directional deformation (Static)

Table 6.2: Directional deformation under static load
Time(s) Minimum(mm) Maximum(mm)

1 0 2.8739
From Fig 6.16 the maximum deformation obtained when the full loading condition are applied is
2.8739mm, and the minimum deformation is 0mm.
Fig 6.17: Equivalent stress (Structural)
Equivalent Von-mises Stress (static)

Table 6.3: Equivalent stress under static load
Time(s) Minimum (MPa) Maximum (MPa)

1 0.00056 35.117
From Fig 6.17 the obtained maximum stress acting on the material in static loading condition is
35.117MPa and the minimum stress is 0.00056MPa. The obtained stresses are within the
allowable stresses of the material. Hence, the design is safe.

6.2.4 Transient Analysis
Fig 6.18: Total Deformation (Transient)
Directional deformation for time period of 10 seconds (Transient)

Table 6.4: Deformation for transient load
Time(s) Minimum(mm) Maximum(mm)

1 0 0.54525
2 0 1.0912
3 0 1.6357
4 0 2.1817
5 0 2.7259
6 0 3.2717
7 0 3.8158
8 0 4.3613
9 0 4.9052
10 0 5.4504
From Fig 6.18 the maximum deformation obtained when the full load is acting on the frame is
5.4504mm, and the minimum deformation is 0.54525mm. The time period considered for the
transient analysis is 10 seconds with time step of 1 second.

Fig 6.19: Equivalent Stress (Transient)
Equivalent Von-mises Stress for time period of 10 seconds (Transient)
Table 6.5: Equivalent stress transient load
Time(s) Minimum (MPa) Maximum (MPa)

1 9.0948e-006 10.439
2 1.8297e-005 20.898
3 2.7431e-005 31.342
4 3.675e-005 41.82
5 4.5954e-005 52.275
6 5.5366e-005 62.767
7 6.466e-005 73.237
8 7.4154e-005 83.741
9 8.3546e-005 94.226
10 9.3119e-005 104.74
From Fig 6.19 the maximum stress obtained when the full load is acting on the frame is 9.3119e-
005 MPa, and the minimum stress is 104.74 MPa. The time period considered for the transient
analysis is 10 seconds with time step of 1 second. The obtained stresses are within the allowable
stresses of the material. Hence, the design is safe.

6.2.5 Modal Analysis

Here the modal analysis is carried out to determine the vibration characteristics of the tractor
implant potato harvester (mode shapes and natural frequencies), they show the movement of the
different parts of structure when subjected under dynamic loading.
Modal analysis is carried out on the frame, after applying the boundary condition we have
obtained 6 different mode shapes and frequencies. Mode Shape 1 matches the deformation under
the given loading conditions hence the corresponding frequency is considered for the harmonic
response.
Table 6.6: Modal Frequencies
Mode Frequency (Hz)

1 24.792
2 29.671
3 34.009
4 74.079
5 79.706
6 82.268
Fig 6.20 Mode shape 1



From Fig 6.20 to 6.25 represents the mode shapes and the natural frequencies, mode shape 1
resembles the deformation similar to the applied loading condition, the corresponding frequency
and the deformation is 24.792Hz and 9.81mm, the deformation are in the negative y axis and
negative z axis. This frequency is considered to be the natural frequency of the structural
component and the data is further taken for harmonic response. The working frequency for the
harvester is 4.5Hz. Hence, the implant is safe.
6.2.6 Harmonic Response
Fig 6.26 Frequency Response in x-direction

Fig 6.27 Frequency Response in y-direction
Fig 6.28 Frequency Response in z-direction
From the Fig 6.26, 6.27 and 6.28 the loads are applied on the vibrating part of the frame and the
maximum load acting on the frame is considered along with the modal frequency of 24.792 Hz.
Here we can see how the frequency response varies the deformation on the frame as the
frequency gradually reaches the frequency of the mode shape. From the above graphs we can see
that with working frequency of 4.5Hz the deformation is less than 1mm. Hence the design is safe
to run with the given data.

CHAPTER 7
COMPONENTS USED AND FABRICATION OF PROTOTYPE

7.1 Components used for prototype
7.1.1 Digger Blades
Fig 7.1 Digger Blade

The above Fig 7.2 shows the prototype model of the digger blade, the aluminum sheet has been
cut with the help of circular saw stock as per required dimension and shape which resembles the
digger blades and are tightened with the screw to the main frame. The digger blades are
separately cut into 6 blanks with width of 110 mm, The tip of the blades is V-shaped with angle
120˚, which helps the blades to penetrate the soil easily.
7.1.2 Shaft
Fig 7.2 Shaft

From the above Fig 7.2 represents the shaft, which are cut to the lengths of 300mm and 600mm
with the help of hacksaw balde having 10mm thickness. Here, 300mm shaft is used for the
transmision of power from PTO of the tractor to the vibrating frame and the conveyor. 600mm
shaft is used as the roller for the conveyor system, which draws power through the chain drive.
7.1.3 Frame Development
Fig 7.3 PVC pipes (1-inch) and Hacksaw cutter
From Fig 7.3 indicates the PVC pipe material used for the development of frame. Here in this
project the prototype model consists of main frame i.e., outer frame and vibrating frame i.e.,
inner frame which is supported by the main frame. For the development of main frame, the pipe
is cut with the help of hacksaw blade as per the required dimensions that is 90mm, 60mm,
15mm, 40mm and 50mm. The vibrating frame requires 40mm and 10mm length of pipes.
Further, they are assembled with the help of T and L- shaped pipe fittings as shown in Fig 7.4.
Fig 7.4 Assembled Frame

7.1.4 Bevel Gear
Fig 7.5 Bevel Gear

The Fig 7.5 represents bevel gears, used for the transmission of the power which is directly
available from the PTO of the tractor to the vibrating mechanism. The bevel gears used here
have 23Teeth Straight Bevel Gear ID 10mm Round designed with 1.25M-23T-10-28.75 model
structure. It denotes 1.25 pitch module, 23 teeth, 10 mm inner diameter, and 28.75 mm pitch
circle diameter. A bevel gear is shaped like a right circular cone with most of its tip cut off.
7.1.5 Gear Motor
Fig 7.6 Gear motor

From the Fig 7.6 shows the Gear Motor 12V with 200-1000 RPM has been used in the prototype
to demonstrate the actual working principle. To run the model smoothly the rpm has been
reduced to 250. In this prototype 2 gear motors are used run the bevel gear and the conveyor
respectively.

7.1.7 Wheels
Fig 7.7 Wheel

The wheels are mobility source for the potato harvester. The wheels selected is made up of
plastic and rubber material with grip over the wheels to give the harvester more stability. The
wheels used in this project is as shown in above Fig 7.6. Two wheels are used to support the rear
end of the harvester along with smooth movement of the harvester.
7.1.8 Power Transmission System
Fig 7.8 Power Transmission System

Power transmission system is used to run the vibrating frame and the conveyor system, as shown
in Fig 7.7. the bevel gears are positioned on the shaft perpendicularly and supported with the
clamps, where the free end of the shaft is connected to the wooden rotary wheel having an offset
of 20 mm which connects the link to the inner frame. A gear motor is used to power the

mechanism, as the bevel gear rotates then rotary wheel rotates along with the bevel gear, which
intern reciprocates the inner frame.
7.1.9 Conveyor System
Fig 7.9 Conveyor system

The above Fig 7.8 shows the rubber belt of 40mm width with four in numbers are used as the
conveyor belt for the transportation of the potatoes to the collector. The shaft of 10mm thick is
used as the rollers, which is connected to the gear motor. With the help of card board the setup is
made to indicate the material handling system on the conveyor. This completely forms the
conveyor system.
7.1.10 Collector
Fig 7.10 Collector

From Fig 7.9 represents the potato collector, as the potatoes gets separated from the soil, they are
pushed towards the conveyor due to the continuous back pressure of the soil. The potatoes enter
the conveyor system which are carried along the conveyor belt and finally drops into the
collector.

7.2 Prototype Fabrication
Fig 7.11 Prototype of tractor implant potato harvester
The above Fig 7.10 gives the complete view of prototype for harvesting potato, the wooden card
board is used to hold the power transmission mechanism which has been fastened with the screw,
whereas the frame is made up of PVC Pipe material where the required lengths are cut with the
help of hacksaw blade and assembled with L and T joints. To transmit the power bevel gears are
used and wooden rotary wheel to convert the rotary motion to translatory motion. Rubber
conveyer belt of 40 mm width are assembled to show exact resemblance of conveyor system,
10mm thick metal rods are used as rollers which are coupled to the gear motor. Aluminum sheet
is used to design the digger blades and cut to the exact shape with the help of portable electric
saw cutter, and they are fastened with screws to the main frame. This complete assembly shows
the prototype of the tractor implant for harvesting potatoes.

CHAPTER 8
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

8.1 Results and discussion
Performing the structural and transient analysis on the working model (complete body frame and
digger blades) we came to know the total deformation of the frame and what are the stresses
acting in the frame and in transient with the time period of 10 seconds and step time of 1 second,
the deformation and stresses are noted down. From the Modal and Harmonic response, we
obtained the six different mode shapes and natural frequencies out of which mode shape 1
resembles the actual deformation to the given loading condition and in the harmonic response,
we can see the frequency response of the structural component varies with respect to the
amplitude.
Table 8.1: Analysis results
Analysis Results
Static Structural Maximum deformation = 2.8739mm

Minimum deformation = 0mm
Maximum stress = 35.117 MPa
Minimum stress = 0.00056 MPa
Transient Maximum deformation = 5.4504mm
Minimum deformation = 0mm
Maximum stress = 104.77 MPa
Minimum stress = 9.311e-5 MPa
Modal Analysis Natural frequency – 24.792Hz

Deformation – 9.8123mm
Harmonic Response Working frequency – 4.5 Hz

Deformation – 2.2015e-3mm
Structural Analysis: The maximum total deformation undergone by the frame when the load is
applied is 2.8739mm and the maximum stresses on the material is 35.117 MPa, the stresses are

within the allowable stresses of the material and the design is safe. The minimum stress on the
frame is 0.0005MPa.
Transient Analysis: The maximum total deformation of the when the load is gradually varying
for time period of 10 seconds with the time step of 1 second is 5.4504mm, the maximum stresses
under the same time period and step function is 104.74 MPa, which is lesser than the allowable
stresses of the material and the design is safe to handle the applied loads
Modal and Harmonic Response: From the modal analysis we have obtained 6 different mode
shapes with 6 different frequencies out of which mode shape 1 has the deformation similar to the
structural deformation with the natural frequency of 24.792Hz and the corresponding
deformation is 9.8123mm, the working frequency of the material is 4.5Hz and the corresponding
deformation is 2.2015e-3mm. Hence it good to operate the machine less than the modal
frequency.
8.2 Break even analysis
Break-even analysis was performed to determine the quantity of the product must be sold, in
order to cover fixed and variable cost. Fixed costs, often known as overhead costs, are expenses
that are incurred on a regular basis. These expenses are directly connected to the degree of
output, but not the amount of production, and they occur after the choice to start an economic
activity has been made. Interest, taxes, wages, rent, depreciation expenses, labor costs, energy
costs, and other fixed expenditures include. These prices are set regardless of the amount of time
it takes to complete the project.
Fixed Cost = F = Rs 17,420.
Total variable cost (TVC) is those that rise or fall in direct proportion to the volume of output.
These expenses include the cost of raw materials, packaging, gasoline, and other production
related expenses. Eqn. 8.1 was used to calculate the total variable cost.
TVC = Q ∗ Vc (Eqn 8.1)
Where, Q = Quantity produced in kg

The variable cost per unit is calculated by taking the ratio of cost incurred to produce the potato
in unit acre and yield obtained per unit acre.
Cost per acre

Vc =
Yield per acre
Vc = 100000/10526.3
Vc = 9.5 Rs/kg
Total cost (TC) is the sum of fixed cost and the total variable cost and is calculated using Eqn.
8.2. Total revenue cost (TRC) is the measure of cash inflow and it shows the revenue earned by
selling the product and is calculated from Eqn. 8.3. At breakeven point, the total cost is equal to
total revenue cost.
TC = F + TVC (Eqn 8.2)
TRC = Revenue cost per unit ∗ Q
TRC = P ∗ Q (Eqn 8.3)
The revenue cost per unit calculated by taking the ratio of gross income per unit acer of potato
sold and yield obtained per unit acre using Eqn 8.4
Gross income per acre

P= (Eqn 8.4)
Yield per acre
P = 150000/10526.3
P = 14.2 Rs/kg
At breakeven point, TC = TRC
F + TVC = P * QBEP
Breakeven sales volume is the quantity of product that must be produced and sold in order to pay
total production expenses. Eqn. 8.5 was used to calculate the breakeven volume.
QBEP = F / (P-Vc) (Eqn 8.5)

QBEP = 17420/ (14.2-9.5)
QBEP = 3706 kg
The amount of revenue at which a company generates a zero-profit is referred to as break even
sales. This sales number encloses a company’s core fixed expenditures as well as any variable
expenses connected with sales. Eqn 8.6 was used to calculate the breakeven sales.
Break even sales = CBEP = P x QBEP (Eqn 8.6)
CBEP = 14.2*3706
CBEP = 52625.2 Rs
Fig. 8.1 Break even chart
From the above Fig 8.1 The break-even point, is the point at which total fixed and variable
expenses equal total revenues. A firm does not make a profit or loss at the breakeven point. As a
result, the breakeven point is often known as the “No profit” or “No loss” threshold. The firm
has to produce about 3,706kg of potatoes to account to 52,625 Rs, where there is neither profit
nor loss. But beyond this point, the production is in profit and the area between the total revenue
cost beyond this point is the profit earned.

CHAPTER 9
CONCLUSION AND FUTURE SCOPE

9.1 Conclusion
• Based on the structural and transient analysis the total deformation is very less and the
induced stresses on the frame are within the allowable stresses of the material. Hence the
design is safe.
• Modal analysis resulted in the natural frequency which is higher than the operating
frequency of the material which indicates the design is safe.
• From the harmonic analysis the frequency response was obtained, on the application of
maximum load with the operating frequency the deformation was 2.2015e-3mm which
indicates the harvester can withstand the load with operating frequency.
• The costing of the harvester was obtained as Rs 19,162 by considering the material cost,
labour cost and the overhead charges.
• Total cost incurred in harvesting two acres of land by traditional method was Rs 16,800
and the running cost of the harvester to harvest two acres of land was obtained to be
Rs11,450 which is lesser than the traditional method of harvesting.
• Working prototype has been developed for tractor implant potato harvester.
• Return of investment on the harvester can be obtained only when the farmer harvest
3,706 kg of potatoes worth Rs 52,625, by considering the net profit of 10%.
9.2 Future Scope

• The current model can be extended to harvest more than two rows at time there by
reducing the time of harvest. This model is suitable to harvest 3 to 5 acres of land.
• By varying the size of the vibrating frame (gap between the rods) the same model can be
used to harvest the sweet potatoes and onions. The speed of the vibrating frame can be
controlled by varying the power of the PTO available at the tractor output.

REFERENCE
[1] Agricultural Machinery Market in India 2020-2024 Evolving Opportunities with AGCO -
Technavio.
[2] Self-Propelled Sieving Harvester from Dewulf (Two rows harvester) R3060.
[3] Healthy grown solanum tubers : Harvest to Table (Plant Prepare Preserve).
[4] Anita Ierna, “Influence of harvest date on nitrate contents of three potato varieties for off-
season production”, Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, Vol.22 (Issue.6) (2009);
pp. 551-555.
[5] M. Bentini, C. Caprara and R. Martelli, “Harvesting Damage to Potato Tubers by

Analysis of Impacts recorded with an Instrumented Sphere”, Biosystems Engineering,
Vol.94 (Issue.1) (2006); pp. 75-85.
[6] Andre Baritelle, Gary Hyde, Robert E. Thornton and Rick Bajema, “A Classification
System for Impact-Related Defects in Potato Tubers”, American Journal of Potato
Research, Vol.77 (Issue.3) (2000); pp. 143-148.
[7] Roger C. Brook, “Impact Testing of Potato Harvesting Equipment”, American Potato
Journal, Vol.70 (Issue.1) (1993); pp. 243-256.
[8] W. S. Kang and J. L. Halderson, “Development of a Vibratory Potato Digger for Small
Farms”, American Potato Journal, Vol.68 (Issue.1) (1991); pp. 557-568.
[9] Kalver Kamp, “Potato Harvester”, United States Patent; Serial No. 779,932, (2011);
[10] Frank R. Wright, “Potato Harvester and Cleaner”, United States Patent; Serial No.
707,614, (1951);
[11] Jones Vivian Duff, “Potato Harvesting Machine”, United States Patent; Serial No.
636,162, (1950);
[12] R. R. Raney, “Potato Harvester and Separator”, United States Patent; Serial No. 323,535,
(1955);

[13] Leon R. Mcrobert, “Roller-type separating means for a potato harvester”, United States
Patent; Serial No. 159,697, (1961);
[14] Gray franklin Daniel and Snyder Edward Groff, “Device for separating potatoes from
stones”, United States Patent, Serial No. 186,352, (1950);
[15] Q. Zeng, Y. Sung, P. Schulze Lammers, D. Ma, J. Lin and H. Hueging, “Improvement of
a dual-sensor horizontal penetrometer by incorporating an EC sensor”, Computers and
Electronics in Agriculture, Vol.64 (Issue.2) (2008); pp. 333-337.
[16] Pengfei Liu, Zigang Liu, Chenghui Pei, Long Yang, Shaoyong Zhang and Mingze Duan,
“Design Optimization and Reliability Analysis of Hydraulic Cleaning System for Potato
Harvester” International Conference on Quality, Reliability, Risk, Maintenance, and
Safety Engineering, (2019);
[17] Abdalla N. O. Kheiry, Amgad Elssr, A. E. Rahman, M. Mohamed, E. A. Omar and

Huixia Dong, “Effect of Operation Variables of Potato Digger with Double Chain
Conveyors on Crop Handling and Machine Performance”, International Journal of
Environmental and Research, Vol.4 (Issue.6) (2018); pp. 87-101.
[18] D. O. Caldiz and P. C. Struik, “Survey of potato production and possible yield constraints
in Argentina”, Potato Research, Vol,42 (Issue.1) (1999); pp. 51-71.
[19] B. Hanquet, D. Sirjacobs, M. F. Destain and M. Frankinet, “Analysis of Soil Variability

Measured with a Soil Strength Sensor”, Precision Agriculture, Vol.5 (Issue.3) (2004); pp.
227–246.
[20] Gert Kootstra, Xin Wang, Pieter M. Blok, Jochem Hemming and Eldert Van Henten,
“Selective Harvesting Robotics: Current Research, Trends, and Future Directions”,
Current Robotics Reports, Vol.2 (Issue.1) (2020); pp. 95-104.
[21] Md. H. Akhir, D. Ahamed, I. H. Rukunudin, S. Shamsuddin and A. Yahya, “Design and
Development of a Sweet Potato Digging Device”, Pertanika Journal of Science and
Technology, Vol.22 (Issue.1) (2014); pp. 43-53.

[22] P. Azizi, N. Sakenian Dehkordi and R. Farhadi, “Design, Construction and Evaluation of
Potato Digger with Rotary Blade”, Cercetari Agronomice in Moldova, Vol.47 (Issue.3)
(2014); pp. 5-13.
[23] T. Niyamapa and V. M. Salokhe, “Force and pressure distribution under vibratory tillage
tool”, Journal of Terramechanics, Vol.37 (Issue.3) (2000); pp. 139-150.
[24] Shengshi Xie, Chunguang Wang and weigang Deng, “Experiment of a Swing Separating
Sieve on a Potato Digger”, Engenharia Agricola, Vol.39 (Issue.4) (2019); pp. 548-554.
[25] Prof. Ph.D. Eng. Hevko, Prof. Ph.D. Eng. Tkachenko, Prof. Ph.D. Eng. Synii and Prof.
Ph.D. Eng. Flonts, “Development of Design and Investigation of Operation Processes of
Small-Scale Root Crop and Potato Harvesters”, INMATEH - Agricultural Engineering,
Vol.49 (Issue.2) (2016);
[26] R. Joe Brodell, Asstist. Prof. A. H. Soni, “Design of the Crank-Rocker Mechanism with
Unit Time Ratio”, Journal of Mechanisms, Vol.5 (Issue.1) (2005); pp. 1-4.
[27] F. Y. Chen, “An Analytical Method for Synthesizing the Four-Bar Crank-Rocker
Mechanism”, Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering, Vol.91(Issue.1) (1969);
pp. 45-54.
[28] E. Martinez, C. Romero, M. V. Carbonell and M. Florez, “On the Geometry and Design
of Four Bar Linkage Mechanisms”, Conference paper: 4th International Conference on
Education and New Learning Technologies (2012); pp. 6275-6279.
[29] Tsiafis, P. Mamouri and S. Kompogiannis, “Design and manufacturing of spiral bevel
gears using CNC milling machines”, IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and
Engineering, (2018); No - 567.
[30] James Fisher and Trevor Mckenny, “Method for Manufacturing Bevel Gears”, United
States Patent, US 0198808A1, (2005);
[31] Guodong Zhai, Zihihao Liang and Mingyang Li, “Study on the Optimization Model of a
Flexible Transmission”, Hindawi - Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Vol.20
(Issue.4) (2019); pp. 1-12.

[32] Troedsson, L.Vedmar, “A method to determine the dynamic load distribution in a chain
drive”, Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science, Vol.215 (Issue.5) (2001); pp. 569-
579.
[33] Sheng Peng Zhang and Tae Oh Tak, “Efficiency Estimation of Roller Chain Power
Transmission System”, MDPI-Applied sciences, Vol.10(Issue.1) (2020);
[34] Ibrahim Issa Mohamed Issa, Zhaoguo Zhang, Wael El-Kolaly, Xi Yang and Haiyi Wang,
“Design, ANSYS analysis and performance evaluation of potato digger harvester”,
International Agricultural Engineering Journal, Vol-29 (issue.1) (2020); pp. 60-73.
[35] Dessye Belay, “Design, Construction and Performance Evaluation of Potato Harvesters:
A Review”, International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology, Vol.8
(Issue.4) (2021); pp. 2747-2771.
[36] W. S. Kang, J. L. Halderson, “A Vibratory, Two-Row, Potato Digger”, Applied

Engineering in Agriculture, Vol.7 (Issue.6) (1991); pp.683-687.
[37] Samy M. Younis, Mohamed I. Ghonimy and Tarek H. Mohamed, “Development of a

Potato Digger”, Farm Machinery and Power, Vol.23 (Issue.2) (2006); pp. 292-313.
[38] Narender, Vijaya Rani, Anil Kumar, S. Mukesh and Ajith Singh “Performance
Evaluation of Tractor Operated Root-crop Digger for Sandy Loam Soils of Haryana”,
Journal of Agricultural Engineering, Vol.53 (Issue.1) (2016); pp.9-15.
[39] Mahmood Reza Salar, Ali Esehaghbeygi, Abbas Hemmat and Hoda Kargarpour, “Draft
force requirements of a dual bent blade subsurface tillage implement”, CIGR Journal,
Vol.19 (Issue.1) (2017); pp. 74-80.
[40] Alexei Siberev, Alexandr Aksenov, Alexie Dorokhov and Andrei Ponomarev,
“Comparative study of the force action of harvester work tools on potato tubers”, Czech
Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Vol.65 (Issue.1) (2019); pp. 85-90.
[41] Sastry S. Jayanty, “Blackspot Bruise in Potatoes”, Colorado State University, Fact Sheet
5.621, (2015);

[42] Mohamed H. Dahab, Abdalla N. O. Kheiry, Yuan Lliwei, Ali Musa Mohamed and Hu
Jiandong, “Farm Machinery Size and Cost Management System in The Rain Fed Sector
of Gedarif Area”, Global Scientific Journals, Vol.6 (Issue.10) (2018); pp. 92-106.
[43] Mehmet Topakci, Ilker Unal, Murad Canakci, Huseyin Kursat Celik and Davut Karayel,
“Design of a Horizontal Penetrometer for Measuring On-the-Go Soil Resistance”,
Sensors - MDPI, Vol.10 (Issue.10) (2010); pp. 9337-9348.
[44] K. A. J. Al-Jubourir and Paul B. McNulty, “Potato Damage and Losses as Influenced by
Vibratory Digging”, International Journal of Agricultural Research, Vol.22 (Issue.1)
(1983); pp. 243-253.
[45] Tapan Kumar Khura, Indra Mani and A. P. Srivatsava, “Design and development of
tractor-drawn onion (Allium cepa) harvester”, Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences,
Vol.81 (Issue.6) (2011); pp. 28-32.
[46] Aude Gallardo Carrera, Joel Leonard, Yves Duval and Carolyne Durr, “Effects of
seedbed structure and water content at sowing on the development of soil surface crusting
under rainfall”, Soil and Tillage Research, Vol.95 (Issue.1-2) (2007); pp. 207-217.
[47] Pietro Santamaria, “Review: Nitrate in vegetables: toxicity, content, intake and EC
regulation”, Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, Vol.86 (Issue.1) (2006); pp.
10-17.
[48] Anita Ierna and Giovanni Mauromicale, “Physiological and growth response to moderate
water deficit of off-season potatoes in a Mediterranean environment”, Agricultural Water
Management, Vol.82 (Issue.1-2) (2006); pp. 193-209.
[49] D. B. Tiwari, Resham Bahadur Thapa, S. M. Shersha and Samudra Lal. Joshi, “Field
Survey and Monitoring of Potato Tuber Moth”, Journal of the Institute Agriculture and
Animal Science, Vol.27 (Issue.1) (2006); pp. 157-160.
[50] Ping Zhao, Yue Tian, Yongkui Li, Guofa Xu, Subo Tian and Zichen Huang, “Potato
(Solanum tuberosum L.) Tuber-Root Modelling Method Based on Physical Properties”,
PLoS One, Vol.15 (Issue.9) (2020);

[51] Slider-Crank Mechanism for Demonstration and Experimentation, Theory of Machines

(Online).
[52] The GTB-600 inclined cleated belt conveyor is ideal for carrying small parts to a higher
elevation along the production line, Bevel Gear Maintenance, (Online).
[53] Chain Drives: Types, Application, Advantages, and Disadvantages written by Saswata
Baksi in Theory of machines, (Online).
[54] Cost of the materials are considered from the Indian mart website, Indian Manufacturers
Suppliers and Exporters, (Online).
[55] Popular potato harvesters currently available in the market, India MART, (Online).



Final Thesis PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Final Thesis PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Final Thesis PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is the project report about?

What is the project report about?

What are the objectives of the project?

What are the objectives of the project?

Major Project: Phase-II Report

Under the Guidance

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

Dr. Rajkumar.G. R Dr. Krishna M Dr. K. N. Subramanya

Name of the Examiners Signature with Date

DEPARTMENT OF MECAHNICAL ENGINEERING

I, Praveen T S, student of fourth semester M. Tech in Product Design and Manufacturing,

Date of Submission: Signature of the Student

Department of Mechanical Engineering

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my guide, Dr. Rajkumar.G. R, Professor,

I would also like to thank Dr. K. N. Subramanya, Principal, RV COLLEGE OF

Table of Contents ……………………………………………………………………………..... iii

List of Figures…………………………………………………………………………………… vii

1.1 Market survey and society relevance…...………………………………………. 1

1.2 Brief note on potato harvester….………………………………………………. 2

1.3 Literature Survey………………………………………………………………... 3

1.4 Research Gap…………………………………………………...……………….. 12

1.5 Main objectives of the project……………………………………………........... 12

1.6 Organization of the report…………..……………………………………........... 13

2.1 Digging of Soil………….……………………………………………………… 14

2.2 Soil separation by slider crank mechanism……………………………………. 14

2.3 Handling of tubers through conveyor………………………………………….. 15

2.4 Chain drive for power transmission……………………………………………. 15

2.5 Harvesting and yield……………………………………………………………. 16

3.1 Problem Definition………………………………………………………………. 17

4.1 Concept creation…..……………………………………………………………. 20

4.1.1 Concept 1………………………………………………………………. 20

4.1.2 Concept 2………………………………………………………………. 21

4.1.3 Concept 3………………………………………………………………. 22

4.2 Concept Evaluation……………………………………………………………. 23

4.3 Material Selection……………………………………………………………... 23

4.3.1 Mild Steel………………………………………………………………. 23

4.3.2 EN8 …………………………………………………………….………. 24

4.4 Material Properties…………………………………………………………….. 24

4.5.1 Material Cost…………………………………………………………... 25

4.5.2 Labour Cost……………………………………………………………... 26

4.5.3 Overhead Cost…………………………………………………………. 26

4.5.4 Total Cost………………………………………………………………. 27

4.5.5 Harvesting cost by traditional method…………………………………. 27

4.5.6 Running cost of the harvester………………………………………….. 27

4.6 Currently available potato harvesters………………………………………….. 28

5.1 Calculating the loading condition on the frame……………………………….. 29

5.2 Calculating the loading condition on the blade………………………………… 29

5.3 Force required to Dig the soil…….……………………………………………. 29

5.4 Design of Bevel gear…………………………………………………………… 30

5.6 Design of Chain Drive………………………..………………………………… 34

5.7 Design of Frame……..………………………..………………………………… 36

6.1 Modelling of Components………………………………………………………. 39

6.1.1 Complete assembly of the harvester……………………..…………...… 39

6.1.2 Orthographic View of the Model……………………………………….. 40

6.1.3 Modelling of Frame ……………………………………………………. 41

6.1.4 Modelling of Digger Blades …………………………………………….. 42

6.1.5 Modelling of Chain Drive Mechanism………………………………….. 43

6.1.6 Modelling of Shaft………………………………………………………. 45

6.1.7 Modelling of Bevel Gear……………………….………………………. 45

6.2 Finite Element Analysis………………………………………………………… 45