This document summarizes field testing of a locally designed inter-furrow cultivator prototype. The cultivator was tested on corn and cabbage crops. Key findings include: 1) The optimum performance was at a forward speed of 0.34 m/s and auger rotation speed of 160 rpm. This provided better soil agitation and weed uprooting than other tested speeds. 2) Soil analysis after cultivation showed about 70-75% of soil was clods under 2.5mm in size, indicating effective soil pulverization. 3) Using a ridger behind the augers helped reshape furrows to facilitate uniform irrigation. 4) The theoretical field capacity was 0.

1. 1
FIELD TEST OF A LOCALLY DESIGNED INTER
FURROW CULTIVATOR PROTOTYPE.
H. A. Abdel Mawla1
and N. S. Ali Elkaoud2
comabil2002@yahoo.eng_n:mail-E
ABSTRACT
The main aim of this research was to evaluate and test the hand
steering cultivator for inter furrow cultivation. The hand machine frame
was provided with a single rubber wheel. The soil working tines
represented in the two augers attached to the back of the frame. The auger
tines mounted to the frame was inclined in position of both sides of the
frame. The cultivation unit is supposed to uproot and kill weeds at the
early stage of the crop growth along the furrow sides with minimum crop
seedlings damage. The cultivation unit also should agitate soil surface and
form of the furrows to facilitate easy irrigation. The cultivator was tested
in the Faculty of Agriculture, Al-Azhar University, Assiut. The
experiments show that using small size auger tines may not mean lower
labor effort exerted for pushing. The direction of cultivation tine rotation
generates forces directed forward in the direction of motion. Therefore,
lower labor fatigue may occur when using auger tines of larger size
(suitable for cultivation) and more capable engine to drive it. Possible
forward speed for the labor to maintain continuous operation was
0.34 m/s for the labor of average health. This particular forward speed
was recorded corresponding to 160 rpm of the cultivation auger tine. The
6 cm lip height auger tine slowed efficient performance of the cultivator
from the point of view of soil agitation as well as weed uprooting. Using a
ridger efficiently opens the furrow to enable uniform irrigation. The auger
tine mechanism was also designed to provide the possibility of changing
operation width to match the working conditions of different crops. The
theoretical field was capacity 0.21 and 0.29 fed/h. Actual field capacity of
0.17 and 0.22 fed/h were obtained. Operation efficiency was 80.1 and
75 % for Corn and Cabbage, respectively.
INTRDODUCTION
Mechanical weeding is a very important for increasing crop production.
Weeds directly reduce crops yield because of competing the plants in
respect of space, water and nutrients. Weeds harbor diseases and pests,
increase the cost of production and lower the quantity and quality of crop
1
Prof. and head of Ag. Eng. Dep., Fac. of Ag., AL-Azhar U. Assiut.
2
Assistant lecturer, Ag. Eng. Dep., Fac. of Ag., AL-Azhar U. Assiut.

2. 2
production. Soil cultivation is very important because to control weed
which may save a yield loss of up to 40% (Awady, 1986). Traditional
weed control methods, such as hand hoes and donkey pulled cultivators,
have still good weeding efficiency but not recommended to be used
because of it is high cost, more labor consuming and more human effort
done. So, the developed cultivator must have many advantages such as
being suitable for the small-scale farmers, solve the problems of common
cultivators, suitable for weeding operation in most types of crops and in
addition to simple construction. (Abdel Mawla et al., 2011). Between
63% and 83% of the area between crop rows can be hoed when
implement toolbars with attached hoeing units are equipped with accurate
and active transverse position control to guide hoeing parallel to crop
rows (Van Zuydam, 1999, Tillett et al., 2002, Griepentrog et al.,
2007). Abdel-Maksoud (2008) developed a self propelled harvesting
machine to be used as tiller inter-rows in maize field, determine the
optimum parameters affecting on the performance of the developed
machine, and compare the developed machine with the traditional
weeding methods. Salim et al., (2011) constructed and performance a
new sugar beet cultivator is an important production operation that assists
in soil loosening weeding between rows and ridge forming.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
(1) Cultivated crops.
The cultivator was tested in the field to cultivate field crop: corn and used
to cultivate vegetable crop: cabbage. The crops were planted on furrows
of inter-row spacing 70 and 100 cm respectively.
(2) Mechanical analysis of the test field soil.
Soil samples were collected from the experimental field at different soil
depths and mechanical analysis was carried out in Soil and Water
Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Al-azhar University-Assiut. The
average of the obtained data to distribution and soil textural class are
shown in the Table (1).
Table (1): Mechanical analysis of the experimental soil
Cultivated crops
particle size distribution, %
Texture
Real
density,
g/cm3Sand Silt Clay

3. 3
Corn 89.3 1.7 9 Sand loam 2.6
Cabbage 36.5 26.5 37.6 Clay loam 2.6
(3) Description of the hand steering cultivator.
The hand steering cultivator frame was provided with a single rubber
wheel. The soil agitation mechanism was powered by 5.5 horsepower
gasoline engine. The frame was fabricated to fit the requirements of
fixing the engine. The trapezoidal shaped frame of certain dimensions
also achieves the compatibility of the machine size to the agricultural
practices. The frame design is considered the suitable size of the machine
in relation to the power unit used, the hand steering by the labor and
maneuvers inside one furrow. To facilitate increasing the capability of the
machine for cultivating crops of wide range of furrow width's and depths,
the cultivation mechanism connected to the main power transmission
shaft with smart connection. An adjustable height furrow opener is bolted
at the end of the frame to reform the furrow after agitation. A photograph
of the cultivator is shown in Figure (1).
Fig. (1): The hand steering cultivator for inter furrow cultivation.
(4) Cultivation unit.
The cultivation unit consists of two augers, one on the right side and the
other on the left side inclined according to the angle of the furrow side
tilt. The maximum width of the main power transmission shaft was 120
cm. and the minimum width was 90 cm. The two augers were inclined
with constant angle ɵ = 360 at the position of bevel gear connection. A

4. 4
universal joint was connected between the end of each auger and the
bevel gear shaft to allow cultivation width valuation. The cultivation unit
drawings are shown in Figure (2).
Fig. (2): Components of the cultivation unit.
(5) power transmission.
The power is transmitted from the engine to the gearbox through a v-belt
and from the gearbox to the main power transmission shaft through pair
of sprockets. A pair of bevel gears is connected with the main power
transmission shaft. These two bevel gears transmit the motion to the auger
by universal joints with a different angle as illustrated in Figure (3).
Fig. (3): Power transmissions from the engine to the cultivation unit.
(6) furrow opener.

5. 5
The beam was fabricated from rectangular cross section steel 30 × 30
mm. Holes were drilled on the beam to allow furrow depth adjustments.
A photograph and engineering drawing of the designed ridger are shown
in Figure (4).
Fig. (4): A photograph and engineering drawing of the designed ridger.
Methods.
To evaluate performance and test the cultivator under the previous range
of variable and actual field conditions of weed control between row crops.
(1) Cultivation depth variation.
The 6 cm lip height auger tine slowed more improved performance of the
cultivator from the point of view of soil agitation as well as weed
uprooting. The rest of the experiments were completed using the 6 cm lip
height auger tine.
(2) Kinematic index (λ).
λ
V
nr..2
 where:
λ = Kinematic index, n = auger's different rotation speeds (rps), r = radius
of auger's rotation (m) and V= Forward speed (m/s). The cultivation unit
was tested under three kinematic index values as shown in the Table (2) at
three auger's different rotation speeds 230 rpm, 160 rpm and 115 rpm.
Table (2): Kinematics index (λ) at radius of auger's rotation (r = 8.4 cm)
Kinematic
index (λ)
The different auger's
linear speeds (N)
(m/s)
The averages of wheel's
linear speeds (v).
(m/s)
Speed
ratio

6. 6
λ1 2.0232
0.34
5.95
λ2 1.4074 4.14
λ3 1.0116 2.97
(3) Furrow profile.
The furrow profile was drawn before and after cultivation. The cross
section was drawn by using a straight wood piece marked every 5cm and
a water level was used to adjust the longitudinal line at the furrow bottom.
Average readings were computed to draw furrow profile. Furrow profile
replicates were taken ten times for each experiment.
(4) Soil pulverization.
Standard sieves were used for mechanical analysis of soil after cultivation
to determine soil agitation. Samples were collected after cultivation at
surface level of soil (cultivation zones). The sieves apparatus was used to
measure the clod size distribution. It consists of seven sieves (2.5, 2, 1.25,
0.8, 0.63, o.425 and 0.125 mm).
(5) Theoretical field capacity.
The theoretical field capacity was determined using the following
equation:
T.F.C.
2.4
SW 
 where:
T.F.C. = The theoretical field capacity (fed/h).
W = The theoretical width (m).
S = Average forward speed (km/h).
(6) Actual field capacity.
The actual field capacity was determined using the following equation:
A.F.C. = 1/T where A.F.C.= The actual field capacity (fed/h), T = Actual
time (min).
(7) Field efficiency.
The Field efficiency was determined using the following equation:
ηf
...
...
CFT
CFA
 × 100 where:
A.F.C. = The actual field capacity (fed/h).
T.F.C. = The theoretical field capacity (fed/h).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
(1) Performance of the cultivation unit.

7. 7
Possible forward speed for the laborer to maintain continuous operation
was 0.34 m/s regardless of the differences of laborer health. This may
mean that at this particular forward speed, corresponding to 160 rpm of
the cultivation auger tine. The 6 cm lip height auger tine slowed more
improved performance of the cultivator from the point of view of soil
agitation as well as weed uprooting. Using a ridger efficiently opens the
furrow to enable a uniform irrigation and provide the possibility of
changing size to suit the working conditions of different crops.
(2) Safety margin width.
The theoretical safety margin widths for cultivated crops are 5 and 10 for
corn and cabbage respectively. The values of the actual safety margin
width are 10.6 and 19.1, for corn, and cabbage respectively.
(3) Soil agitation.
The specifications of the experimental soil are shown in the Table (3).
Samples were collected after the cultivation.
Table (3): Main specifications of the experimental soil.
Cultivated
crops
the existing soil
moisture content %
bulk density
g/cm3
real density
g/cm3
Porosity
%
Corn 14.8 1.55 2.6 40.4
Cabbage 19.3 1.15 2.6 55.8
Figure (5) shows the soil mechanical analysis of the cultivated soil which
was done directly after the first cultivation for corn crop. About 55% by
weight of the soil sample was of cloud sizes less than 2.5 mm at rotation
speeds 115 rpm (λ3), About 70% by weight of the soil sample was of
cloud sizes less than 2.5 mm at rotation speeds 160 rpm (λ2) and about
75% by weight of the soil sample was of cloud sizes less than 2.5 mm at
rotation speeds 230 rpm (λ1).

8. 8
First cultivation for corn crop
at soil moisture content 14.8 %
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
> 2.5 > 2 > 1.25 > 0.8 > 0.63 > 0.425 > 0.125 < 0.125
Diameter of clods, mm
Weightpercent%.
ʎ1 = 5.95
ʎ2 = 4.14
ʎ3 = 2.97
Fig. (5): Mechanical analysis of the cultivated soil.
Figure (6) shows the soil mechanical analysis of the cultivated soil which
was done directly after the first cultivation for cabbage crop. About 45%
by weight of the soil sample was of cloud sizes less than 2.5 mm at
rotation speeds 115 rpm (λ3), About 55% by weight of the soil sample
was of cloud sizes less than 2.5 mm at rotation speeds 160 rpm (λ2) and
about 60% by weight of the soil sample was of cloud sizes less than 2.5
mm at rotation speeds 230 rpm (λ1).

9. 9
First cultivation for cabbage crop
at soil moisture content 19.3 %
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
> 2.5 > 2 > 1.25 > 0.8 > 0.63 > 0.425 > 0.125 < 0.125
Diameter of clods, mm
Weightpercent%.
ʎ1 = 5.95
ʎ2 = 4.14
ʎ3 = 2.97
Fig. (6): Mechanical analysis of the cultivated soil.
The results explained that the increase the percentage of soil agitation in
general for cabbage crop. This may be due to difference in the percentage
of moisture content.
(4) Furrow profile.
Shape of furrow profile was drawn before and after cultivation to observe
the effect of using a cultivation unit on shape of furrow profile at the
existing soil moisture contents 14.8 and 19.3 % for corn and cabbage
respectively. Figures (7) and (8) illustrate the effect of using the
cultivation unit on shape of furrow profile for corn and cabbage,
respectively. Figures (7) and (8) indicated that importance of using ridger
that was mounted behind the augers in reshaping the furrow profile and
efficiently open the furrow to enable a uniform irrigation.M. C. = 25.8 %.
-8
-4
0
4
8
12
16
20
24
28
32
-35 -30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Furrow profile After cultivation

10. 10
Fig. (7): Effect of cultivation on furrow profile for corn crop.M.C. = 18.8 %.
-8
-4
0
4
8
12
16
20
24
28
-50 -45 -40 -35 -30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Furrow profile After cultivation
Fig. (8): Effect of cultivation on furrow profile for cabbage crop.
(5) Cultivator productivity.
The cultivation unit was tested in the field to cultivate several crops. The
experiments included cultivating field crops such as corn planted on
furrow width 70 cm and it was also used to cultivate vegetable crops such
as cabbage of furrow width 100 cm. All experiments were done at
possible forward speed for the labor to maintain continuous operation
0.34 m/s using auger tines of 6 cm. blade depth and λ2 = 4.14 as a ratio of
forward speed to the linear speed of the auger tine tip. Field performance
of the cultivator is shown in Table (4). It includes the effect of time lost in
the field due to adjusting the width of cultivation unit, the turns at the end
of the furrow and refilling the fuel tank.
Table (4): Field performance of the cultivator.
Crops
Oper. time
h/fed.
Lost time
h/fed.
Field capacity
fed/h
Eff.
(%)
Theor. Actual
Corn 5 1 0.2 0.167 82
Cabbage 3.5 1 0.29 0.22 76
CONCLUSION
The main purpose of this research is to develop and test an implement for
inter-row hoeing of some crops planted on furrows. The obtained results
can be concluded as follows:
1- The optimum kinematic index λ2 (λ2=4.14 which were 160 rpm auger's
rotation speeds on 0.34 m/s forward speed) increases soil agitation
consequently the quality of weeding efficiency was improved.

11. 11
3- Using the cultivation unit consists of two augers with ridger was
superior to used the cultivation unit consists of two augers alone. The
ridger that was mounted behind the augers reshapes the furrow profile
and efficiently opens the furrow to enable a uniform irrigation.
4- Theoretical field capacity 0.21 and 0.29 fed/h for Corn and Cabbage
respectively was achieved within the cultivation unit width.
5- The actual field capacity 0.17 and 0.22 fed/h for Corn and Cabbage
respectively.
6- The efficiency of the cultivator for Corn and Cabbage are 80.1 and 75
% respectively.
REFERENCES
Abdel-Maksoud, Y. S. A. (2008). Development of a mechanical weeding
system inter-rows in Egyptian field. Zagazig J. Agric. Res., Vol. 35
No. (1)2008.
Awady, M. N. (1986). Mechanization of soil cultivation appropriate to
Egyptian Agriculture. 1st
Tec. Rep. Misr J. Ag. Eng., 3(2): 27-37.
Blasco, J., Aleixos, N., Roger, J. M., Rabatel, G. and MoltóE, (2002).
Robotic weed control using machine vision. Biosys. Eng, 83: 149-
157.
Melander, B., Rasmussen, G. and Barberi, P. (2005). Integration
physical and cultural methods of weed control: examples from Euro.
Res. Weed Sc., 53: 369-381.
Melander, B., Rasmussen, G. and Barberi, P. (2005). Integration
physical and cultural methods of weed control: examples from Euro.
Res. Weed Sc., 53: 369-381.
O'Dogherty M. J., Godwin, R. J., Dedousis, A. P., Brighton, J. L. and
Tillett, N. D. (2007). A mathematical model of the kinematics of a
rotating disc for inter and intra-row hoeing. Biosys. Eng., 96: 169-
179.
Simmons C. H. and Maguire, D. E. (2004). Manual of Engineering
Drawing – to British and International Standards (2nd
. Ed.).. Elsevier
Newnes, Burlington.: 298 pp.
Tillett, N. D., Hague, T. Grundy, A. C. and Dedousis, A. P. (2008).
Mechanical within-row weed control for transplanted crops using
computer vision. Biosys. Eng., 99: 171-178.

12. 12
Wisserodt, E., Grimm, J., Kemper, M., Kielhorn, A., Klein-Hartlage
H., Nardmann, M., Naescher, J. and Trautz, D. (1999).
Gesteuerte Hacke zur Beikrautregulierung innerhalb der Reihe von.
Pflanzenkulturen. [controlled Hoe for weeding within Crop Rows].
Tagung Landtechnik 1999/VDI-MEG. VDI-Verlag, Düsseldorf,
Germany.: 155-160.
‫العربي‬ ‫المخلص‬
‫اإل‬‫تخبار‬‫محلير‬ ‫مصمم‬ ‫أولى‬ ‫لنموزج‬ ‫الحقلى‬‫لل‬‫بين‬ ‫عسيق‬‫ا‬‫لخطوط‬.
‫ا‬‫الوول‬ ‫ػبد‬ ‫الساشق‬ ‫ػبد‬ ‫حعي‬ /‫.د‬‫ى‬1
/‫م‬‫ػل‬ ‫هحوود‬ ‫شؼباى‬ ‫ًبٍل‬‫ى‬2
‫الوحزدة‬ ‫حخوٍزص‬ ‫خطوط‬ ً‫ػل‬ ‫الوٌصزػت‬ ‫للوحاصٍل‬ ‫الحشائش‬ ‫لوماوهت‬ ‫ػصٌك‬ ‫وحدة‬ ‫إخخباز‬ ‫إلى‬ ‫البحذ‬
‫العزوق‬ ً‫وز‬ ‫هخزواوسة‬ ‫هحلٍزت‬ ‫خاهزاث‬ ‫هزي‬ ‫حصزٌغ‬ ‫و‬ ‫طزوط‬ ‫ال‬ ‫داخزل‬ ‫ػوللزا‬ ‫هزي‬ ‫لخعزلل‬ ‫الحجن‬ ‫بصغس‬
‫زلٍل‬‫ز‬‫لخع‬ ‫زظ‬ ‫ال‬ ‫زد‬‫ز‬‫حول‬ ‫وخزرلت‬ ‫الوصزوػزت‬ ‫زاث‬‫ز‬‫للٌباح‬ ‫ازسز‬ ‫زل‬‫ز‬‫برل‬ ‫الحشزائش‬ ‫إشالزت‬ ‫زى‬‫ز‬‫ػل‬ ‫حؼوزل‬ .ً‫الوحلز‬
‫السي‬ ٍ‫هٍا‬ ‫جسٌاى‬‫زس‬ ‫اِش‬ ‫جاهؼزت‬ ‫الصزاػزت‬ ‫لةلٍزت‬ ‫الوجزاوزة‬ ‫بزالحموا‬ ‫البحزذ‬ ‫هواوع‬ ‫اإلخخباز‬ ‫حن‬ .
:ً ‫ػلٍلا‬ ‫الوخحصل‬ ‫الٌخائج‬ ‫ن‬ ‫أ‬ ‫وخاًج‬ ‫الةسًب‬ ‫و‬ ‫الرزة‬ ‫هحاصٍل‬ ‫هغ‬ ‫برظٍوط‬
1-‫حمدم‬ ‫ظسػت‬ ‫هخوظظ‬ ‫ػٌد‬ ‫ػالٍت‬ ‫بةفاءة‬ ‫اَلت‬ ‫حؼول‬0.34‫دوزاًٍت‬ ‫ظسػت‬ ‫هغ‬ ‫م/د‬160‫لفت/دلٍمزت‬
.‫الشةل‬ ‫البسٌوٍت‬ ‫الؼصٌك‬ ‫ِظلحت‬
2-‫ػصٌك‬ ‫ػوك‬ ‫ذاث‬ ‫ػصٌك‬ ‫بسٌواحاى‬ ‫دام‬ ‫اظخ‬ ‫ػٌد‬ ‫الؼصٌك‬ ‫لةفاءة‬ ‫ًعبت‬ ً‫أػل‬ ‫اَلت‬ ‫ححمك‬6.‫ظن‬
3-.‫للُلت‬ ‫أوضل‬ ‫آداء‬ ‫ٌحمك‬ ‫البسٌوخٍي‬ ‫خلف‬ ‫الفجاج‬ ‫دام‬ ‫اظخ‬
4-‫لُلت‬ ‫الٌظسي‬ ‫اَداء‬ ‫هؼدا‬0.21‫و‬0.29.‫الخسحٍب‬ ً‫ػل‬ ‫والةسًب‬ ‫الرزة‬ ‫لوحاصٍل‬ ‫وداى/ظاػت‬
5-‫لُلت‬ ً‫الفؼل‬ ‫اَداء‬ ‫هؼدا‬0.170.22.‫الخسحٍب‬ ً‫ػل‬ ‫والةسًب‬ ‫الرزة‬ ‫لوحاصٍل‬ ‫وداى/ظاػت‬
6-‫اَلت‬ ‫خفاءة‬80.1‫و‬75.‫الخسحٍب‬ ً‫ػل‬ ‫والةسًب‬ ‫الرزة‬ ‫لوحاصٍل‬ %
‫ـــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ‬‫ـــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ‬
1-‫الصزاػٍت‬ ‫اللٌدظت‬ ‫لعن‬ ‫وزئٍط‬ ‫اظخاذ‬–‫س‬ ‫اِش‬ ‫جاهؼت‬ ‫الصزاػت‬ ‫خلٍت‬.‫اظٍوط‬ ‫وسع‬
2-‫ب‬ ‫هعاػد‬ ‫هدزض‬‫الصزاػٍت‬ ‫اللٌدظت‬ ‫معن‬–.‫اظٍوط‬ ‫وسع‬ ‫س‬ ‫اِش‬ ‫جاهؼت‬ ‫الصزاػت‬ ‫خلٍت‬