Development & evaluation of gender friendly rotary paddy weeder

1. Development & Evaluation of Gender
Friendly Rotary Paddy Weeder
AJAY VERMA
Principal Scientist & Principal Investigator- NAE
12 August , 2014
Department of Farm Machinery and Power Engineering,
Faculty of Agricultural Engineering,
Indira Gandhi Agricultural University, Raipur

2. Key is the healthy crop
establishment

3. Four main components
• Soil fertility management – FYM application
• Planting method
- transplanting young seedlings (8 to 12 days old)
along with seed and soil clump
- transplanting at wider spacing (25 X 25 cm)
• Weed control – regular weeding
• Water (irrigation) management - keep soil wet
without flooding

4. Quality and Energy Assessment of Puddling Method used
for Wetland Rice Cultivation
Different puddling implements in field operation

5. • The highest increase in bulk density and lowest percolation rate were found with
the tractor with rotavator.
• Percolation of water was reduced with rotary tilling implement.
• The total time required for preparation of puddle fields was lowest when a tractor
with cultivator was used.

6. Types of Markers

7. Manual random rice
transplanting
Manual row rice transplanting by rice transplanting frame

8. Bamboo marker

9. Incorporating green manure crop with bullock drawn disc harrow

10. Transplantation

11. Marking 25 x 25 cm grid in puddled field with three row marker

12. Lifting and transportation of seedlings to the field in metal sheets

13. Careful transplanting of 14 days old seedling at 25 x 25 cm grid singly

14. Manual random rice transplanting
Manual row rice transplanting by rice transplanting frame

15. Incorporating green manure crop with bullock drawn disc harrow

16. Transplantation

17. Marking 25 x 25 cm grid in puddled field with
three row marker

18. Lifting and transportation of seedlings to the field in metal sheets

19. Careful transplanting of 14 days old seedling at 25 x 25 cm grid singly

20. View of Field After Transplanting

21. Development of Gender Friendly Paddy Weeder
Force limits for standing posture
 Maximum push - 25 kgf
 Maximum pull - 20 kgf
 Female worker can exert comfortably only 70% of the maximum pushing or pulling
force exert by a male.
 For better muscular efficiency, the dynamic effort of a repetitive nature should not be
exceed 30% of the maximum pulling and pushing force.
 Design a paddy weeder such that the operator does not have to exert more than 5.25
kgf pushing or 4.5 kgf pulling force.
Anthropometric data of female farmer
 Weight (kg) - 43.6 kg
 Stature - 145.8 cm
 Forward arm reach length - 51.1 cm

22. Length of stroke – 50cm
Frequency of movement of weeder – 30
Design of handle

25. 1. Float
2. Rotor blade
3. Bush
4. Handle connecting bracket
5. Handle height adjusting lever
6. Rotor shaft
7. Main Frame

26. Paddy Weeder in Operation

27. Paddy weeder in operation & Training

28. View of Crop Standing in SRI

29. Gender Friendly Paddy Weeder
Particular Gender Friendly Paddy Weeder
Overall Length, mm 1520
Overall width, mm 500
Overall height, mm 950
Width of cut, mm 120
Actual field capacity, ha/h 0.0136
Field efficiency, % 82
Operational Cost, Rs/ha 956

31. Weeding Advantages in SRI
• Enhances the utilization of biomass
• Facilitates proper aeration in the soil
• Promotes healthy growth of the root system
• Provides earthling up effect facilitating plants
to produce new roots which help additional
nutrients uptake

32. Manufacturing process of Jigs & Fixtures For Gender-Friendly Paddy Weeder
Material
Marking
Cutting
Size Marking
Punching
Drilling
Heat Treatment
Welding
Painting
Ready for Market
 The jigs and fixtures to reduce time and
material cost were developed at FAE,
Workshop.
 The perfect jigs and fixtures can work
repeatability and interchangeability to produce
the same parts in production.
 Once the final prototype of the jig was ready, it
was thoroughly evaluated for the final design
objective i.e.
 Reducing the time involved in various
operations
 Accuracy in operations
 Reduction in wastage of material and
 Performance in the actual work conditions

33. Jigs and Fixtures already used for development of Paddy Weeder
Jigs and Fixtures developed for development of Paddy Weeder
Welding Fixture M S rod bending fixture
 The Jigs used for bending of
MS Flat. The flat bending by
the hand power, takes time and
also produce drudgery to
worker.
 After working for 15 minutes
(Approx 15 plates), Work rest
for 5 minutes.
Teeth Cutting Die Fixture for Bending MS Plate Fixture for Bending MS Plate

34. Bending fixture float
Bending fixture MS plate
Bending fixture MS plate
Operation Avg. Time consumed (minutes)
Traditional jigs Improved Jigs
Fabrication of individual paddy
weeder without using jigs and
fixtures
Total time taken
15 min.
Total time taken
10 min.
Cutting Fixture 5mm MS plate, 16
inch x1 , 8 inch x 2, 4 inch x 3, 5
inch x1
90 sec. 60 sec.
Cutting Fixture Float 40 sec. 12 sec.
Bending fixture 20 sec 60 sec.
Drill Mark Fixture (14 drill/ work-
piece)
60 sec 15 sec.
Welding Fixture (temporary +
Permanent)
70+ 150 sec 60 sec.
Marking before cutting 120 sec 180 sec.
Teeth cutting (marking + cutting) 180 sec 10 sec.
Pipe cutting 30 sec 30 sec.
Pipe drilling 30 sec 30 sec.
Nut and bolt tightening 30 sec 30 sec.
Heat treatment 60 sec 60 sec
Total Time Taken 9.45 min
Improved Jigs and
Fixtures
Time calculation with traditional and
Improved Jigs
Benefits: Better alignment, interchangeability & lower
production cost in comparison to fabrication without
use of Jigs and Fixtures

35. Comparison of manufacturing time required for development of paddy weeder
with traditional & improved jigs and fixture

36. Manufacturing process of teeths of Paddy Weeder

38. Cono weeder in operation
Gender friendly paddy weeder in operation

39. Cono Weeder and Gender Friendly Paddy Weeder

40. Gender Friendly Weeder in
Operation

41. Fig. 5 Stress stablization for gender friendly paddy weeder
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time (min)
Heartrate(Beats/min)
Transplanted
Row seeded

42. Observation Subjects Average
S1 S2 S3 S4
1. Depth of operation (mm) 25 28 28 25 26.5
2. Width of operation (mm) 120 120 120 120 120
3. Height of crop (mm) 262 262 262 262 262
4. Weed population (weeds/m2)
(a) Before test 356 320 328 392 349
(b) After test 68 71 46 69 64
5. Weeding efficiency (%) 81 78 86 82 82
6. Plant damaged Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil
7. Field capacity (ha/h) 0.0146 0.0134 0.0127 0.0137 0.0136
8. Field capacity (h/ha) 68.5 74.6 78.8 73 73.7
9. Working efficiency of human operator
(%)
62 63 60 62 62

43. Large Scale Production of Gender Friendly Paddy Weeder

44. Design and Development of Manually-Operated Check Row
Planter for Dry Seeding of Rice
Brief Description of Machine
 This is a type of row-crop planter which enables operator to perform hill
planting at definite spacing (in checks or squares). This facilitates
mechanical weed control and other operations.
 Separate seed hopper was provided in planter for each row.
 Seed hopper bottoms for row crops have rotating agitator feeding
mechanism that was rotate in small circular pipe. It have small opening
for passing the seeds.
 A small cell is attached below the every hopper where seeds were drop
at desired intervals.
 The full hill drop receives in the cell 2 or 3 seeds at a time.
 After receiving the seeds, the cell open and closed under a cut off
mechanism.
 Seeds usually drop on a ’valve’ and wait until the valve is tripped like a
trap door to drop the seed into the furrow or hill. Most planters can be
set to plant 2 to 3 seeds per hill.
 A wide range of spacing can be obtained by using metering roller and
star wheel which is fixed on side of the hopper and rotate with the help
of metering shaft.
 This star wheel performs the cut-off of seed by adjusting the numbers
of blade on star wheel to maintain the cut off operation by which plant
to plant distance is maintained.

46. Particulars Depth of sowing Average
Row1 (cm) Row 2 (cm)
Mean 2.42 2.4 2.41
SD 0.867 0.869 0.868
Range 2.3 – 3.2 2.2 – 3.3 2.25 – 3.25
CV 35.82 36.20 36.00
Particulars Seed distance, cm Average
Field 1 Field 2 Field 3
Mean 26.3 27.78 26.31 26.79
SD 4.90 6.32 5.75 5.65
CV% 18.63 27.75 21.85 22.74
Missing hill 1 2 1 1.33
Missing index % 5 10 5 6.66
Uniformity of placement of seed
Distance between seeds and Missing hill.
Particulars Seed drop/hill Average
R1 R2 R3
Total hill drop 20 20 20 20
No. of Multiple hill 3 2 3 2.66
Multiple index % 15 10 15 13.33
Multiple Index
Field No. Speed, (km/h) TFC, (ha/h) AFC (ha/h) ηe% Time req.,
h/ha
seed rate, kg/ha
A. 1.04 0.050 0.024 47.66 41.66 9.40
B. 0.98 0.048 0.023 47.40 43.47 10.12
C. 0.94 0.046 0.022 47.10 45.45 10.75
Avg. 0.97 0.048 0.023 47.38 43.52 10.09
Test result of Check row paddy planter

47. Method of planting EFC, (ha/h) Time req. (h/ha) Man- days required/ha Cost/ha
Check row paddy planter 0.023 43.47 5.44 653
Transplanting manually in SRI 0.0065 153.84 19.23 2307
Dry seeding manually 0.0054 185.18 23.14 2777
S. No. Method of paddy sowing Energy consumption MJ/ha
1. Dry seeding by Check row planter 97.65
2. Transplanting of nursery in SRI 301.52
3. Dry seeding paddy seeds by manually 362.83
Energy consumption for different method of paddy
sowing.
Comparison of different method of planting of
paddy
S No Particulars Amount
1 Cost of machine, Rs. 2370.00
2 Life of the machine (y) 10.00
3 Annual use (h) 240.00
5 Depreciation, Rs. 213.3
6 Interest, Rs. 182.49
Sum of (5 & 6) Fixed cost (Rs/Year) annul use is 240 h 396.19
A Fixed cost (Rs./h) 1.65
B Operational
1. Wage of 1 operator (Rs. 120/day*), Rs./h 15.00
C Variable cost
1. Repair and maintenance, Rs/h 0.987
Total of (A+B +C) Machinery cost, (Rs./h) 17.63
Cost of operation, Rs. /ha 767
Saving over manually transplanting, Rs./ha 1540
Saving over manual transplanting percentage 66.75
Saving over dry seeding manually, Rs/ha 2010
Saving over dry seeding manually, percentage 72.38
Calculation of cost work with Check row paddy
planter