Adaptabilities of different harvesters to peanut plants after cutting stalks
Adaptabilities of different harvesters to peanut plants after cutting stalks
复制标题
不同收获机对花生植株割秆后的适应性
DOI：
10.25165/j.ijabe.20221502.6515
复制
发表时间：
2022-03-01
影响因子：
2.4
通讯作者：
Hu, Zhichao
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Chen, Youqing;Wang, Gongpu;Hu, Zhichao
目前，没有专门适用于收割割茎后的花生的收割机。特别是，到目前为止，还没有关于收割割茎后的花生的方法的报道。因此，为了在收获覆膜花生时利用花生茎作为饲料，并提高产业效益，本文提出了一种三段式收割方法。针对三段式收割方法，在挖掘前先切割花生茎，剩余的花生植株较矮，从而提高了花生果荚与茎的比例。为了研究现有收割机在收割割茎后的花生时的适应性，使用了三种花生收割机——自走式捡拾联合收割机、牵引式捡拾联合收割机和花生摘果机，对收割完整花生植株和割茎后的花生植株进行了对比试验。以损失率、破损率和含杂率作为评价指标。这三种收割机的损失率分别为14.64%、16.44%和1.33%；破损率分别为21.28%、21.92%和20.00%，含杂率分别为4.60%、8.76%和9.06%。方差分析表明，割茎对三种收割机的作业质量有显著影响（p < 0.05）。就损失率而言，结果显示：两种花生联合收割机无法适应收割割茎后的花生植株。从破损率来看，三种收割机对收割割茎后的花生植株有较好的适应性；然而，基于含杂率，三种收割机无法适应收割割茎后的花生植株。两种联合收割机的损失主要由掉落和漏摘造成，损失之和分别占两种收割机总损失的99.87%和97.99%；这表明联合收割机的滚筒捡拾装置无法适应收割割茎后的花生。三种收割机的破损率大幅降低，表明三种收割机的果荚采摘装置适合收割割茎后的花生；三种收割机的含杂率大幅增加，表明三种收割机的果荚采摘和清理装置不适合收割割茎后的花生。为了提高收割机的适应性，建议对捡拾弹性齿的速度、相邻弹性齿的横向间距、果荚采摘装置的凹筛孔尺寸、清理装置的结构和运动参数进行优化。本研究结果为开发和改进适用于收割割茎后的花生的花生收割机提供了参考。
: At present, there are no harvesters specifically adapted to process peanuts after cutting stalks. In particular, methods for harvesting peanuts after cutting stalks have not been reported thus far. Therefore, to utilize peanut stalks as feed when harvesting plastic-film-grown peanuts, and to improve industry benefits, a three-stage harvesting method is proposed herein. In view of the three-stage harvesting method, the peanut stalks are cut before digging, with the remaining peanut plants being shorter, thereby increasing the peanut pod-stalk ratio. To investigate the adaptabilities of existing harvesters in harvesting peanuts after cutting stalks, three types of peanut harvesters—the self-propelled pick-up combine harvester, trailed pick-up combine harvester, and peanut picker were used to conduct a comparative test on harvesting intact peanut plants and plants after cutting stalks. The loss, breakage and impurity rates were used as evaluation indicators. The loss rates of these three harvesters were 14.64%, 16.44% and 1.33%; the breakage rates were 21.28%, 21.92% and 20.00%, and impurity rates were 4.60%, 8.76% and 9.06%. Analysis of variance showed that cutting stalks had a significant impact on the work qualities of the three harvesters ( p < 0.05). With regard to the loss rate, results revealed that: the two peanut combine harvesters could not be adapted to harvest peanut plants after cutting stalks. The three harvesters had good adaptability to harvest peanut plants after cutting stalks, considering the breakage rate; however, based on the impurity rate, the three harvesters could not be adapted to harvest peanut plants after cutting stalks. The losses of the two combine harvesters consisted mainly of dropped and missed picking, with the sum of the losses accounting for 99.87% and 97.99% of the total losses of the two harvesters, respectively; this suggests that the drum pickup of the combine harvesters could not adapt to harvesting the peanut after cutting stalks. The breakage rates of the three harvesters were considerably reduced, suggesting that the pod picking devices of the three harvesters were suitable for harvesting the peanut after cutting stalks; the impurity rates of the three harvesters were considerably increased, indicating that the pod picking and cleaning devices of the three harvesters were not suitable for harvesting peanut after cutting stalks. To improve the adaptabilities of the harvesters, it is suggested that the speed of pickup elastic tooth, lateral spacing between adjacent elastic teeth, concave screen hole size of pod picking device, the structure and motion parameters of cleaning device should be optimized. The results of this study provide a reference for the development and improvement of peanut harvesters suitable for harvesting peanuts after the cutting of stalks. Adaptabilities of different harvesters to peanut plants after cutting stalks.