weeder

1.  Prepared By :
 Solanki Dilip (05-0270-
2014)
 Jadav Kishan (05-0248-
Development of Battery Operated Weeder
Guided By :
Dr. Pankaj Gupta
HOD (SWCE Deptt.)

2. Development of Battery Operated Weeder
TITLE

3. INTRODUCTION
 India is a vast country having agriculture sector as the
backbone of its economy. India has total land acquisition of
about 329 Mha out of which 166 Mha (Sahay, 2008) of land is
under cultivation.
 Weeds are unwanted and undesired plant which grow among
the field crop. It interfere and compete with main crop for
their existence which causing serious yield loos by share in
land, water, nutrients, sun light, and available Co2 for main
crop.
 Weeds causes about 45% yield loss in the crop which is as
compared to other factor.

4. 20%
30%
45%
5%
Annual yield loss in percentage of total production due to
various factor
Diseases
Insects
Weed
Other factors
(Source: Mungale (2007)

5. Weed is unwanted plant which is
reduce productivity in farm.
Weeder is equipment which is used
for removing the weed
Generally four types for controlling
the weed
 Chemical Method
 Cultural Method
 Thermal
 Mechanical Method
1) Hand operated weeder
2) Power operated:
(a) Animal power weeder
(b) Mechanical power

6. Types of Mechanical Methods
By Hand pull or Hand Tool

7. Types of Mechanical Methods
By Hand pull or Hand Tool
By Animal operated
equipment

8. Types of Mechanical Methods
By Hand pull or Hand Tool
By Animal operated
equipment
By Tractor operated
equipment

9. Types of Mechanical Methods
By Hand pull or Hand Tool
By Animal operated
equipment
By Tractor operated
equipment
By Self propell

10. Justification
The weeding operation consumes 25% of the labour for crop
cultivation. Annual cost of weeding by traditional method comes
to Rs. 1000/ha out of total cost of cultivation Rs.5000/ha for an
agricultural crop (Tajuddin et al, 2005). There are various
methods of weed control.
Weed removing by hand is more efficient but it’s required more
time and costly method
By animal removing method is also costly and now a day
animal population is decreasing .
Power operated weeder is more efficient but it’s high initial
cost and higher weight and large turning radius which in compact
the soil and damage the standing crops. so not suitable for small
and marginal farmer.
So we developed battery operated weeder for small and
marginal farmer.

11. Reasons For Choosing This Type
There are a lot of reasons as to why a consumer
should choose a cordless battery powered weeder.
However, only the main reasons for this choice are
going to be mentioned below.
Mobility

12. Reasons For Choosing This Type
There are a lot of reasons as to why a consumer
should choose a cordless battery powered weeder.
However, only the main reasons for this choice are
going to be mentioned below.
Mobility
Easy to Use

13. There are a lot of reasons as to why a consumer
should choose a cordless battery powered weeder.
However, only the main reasons for this choice are
going to be mentioned below.
Mobility
Easy to Use
Quiet
Reasons For Choosing This Type

14. Reasons For Choosing This Type
There are a lot of reasons as to why a consumer
should choose a cordless battery powered weeder.
However, only the main reasons for this choice are
going to be mentioned below.
Mobility
Easy to Use
Quiet
Environment

15. There are a lot of reasons as to why a consumer
should choose a cordless battery powered weeder.
However, only the main reasons for this choice are
going to be mentioned below.
Mobility
Easy to Use
Quiet
Environment
Cost Effective
Reasons For Choosing This Type

16. Battery operated Weeder
Low cost Used for
Small farmer
Low noise
Environment
friendly

17.  OBJECTIVE
 Design and fabrication of battery operated weeder
 Performance and evolution of developed weeder

18. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Author Result
Behera et al.
(2008)
Developed a manual operated
weeder for dry land crops
The highest performance
index of 3689.74was obtained
with developed weeder at 11.63
per cent moisture content.
Field capacity of 0.0285 ha/h
Lowest plant damage (2.46 to
7.96%)
lower energy consumption
rate (8.34 to 40.05 kJ/min)

19. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Author Result
Bhavin et al. (2016)
Developed manual
operated Weeder
Work up to 4.0 cm depth
Field capacity of 0.0285
ha/h
Weeding efficiency was
obtained (i.e. up to 80.42%).
Draft requirement was 34.4
kg for 20 cm width of the
weeder.

20. MATERIALS
AND
METHODS

21. Design Considerations :
 To develop the battery operated weeder
following design considerations were kept in
mind:
◦ Suitable for small and medium size land holding.
◦ Light weight and sturdy in design.
◦ Trouble free and easy to operate.
◦ Able to weeding in paddy crop, maize crop & other
crop.
◦ Higher efficiency than the traditional method.
◦ Less initial & operating cost.

22. 3D view of battery operated weeder

23. Different Components and Unit :
1.Battery :
 12 V sealed lead acid battery
having nominal capacity of 12 AH.
 The size for the battery was
15x10x10 cm with a weight of 3.5
kg.
 The battery may be used up to
3.5-4 hrs. Continuously after
complete charging.

24. Different Components and Unit :
1.Battery :
2.DC Motor :
 12 V permanent dc motor, speed of
3600 rpm.
 The electrical current supplied to
the motor by the battery with the
help of wires and an on/off switch
to rotates the shaft.

25. Different Components and Unit :
1.Battery :
2.DC Motor :
3.Weed cutting unit
Hoe A
It was made from 5mm iron site
of triangle which Dimension
length 9.5mm and Width 9mm.

26. Different Components and Unit :
1.Battery :
2.DC Motor :
3.Weed cutting unit
Hoe A
Hoe B
Dimension length 10.5mm and
Width 9mm. It is slightly angle
30º between half of blade

27. Different Components and Unit :
1.Battery :
2.DC Motor :
3.Weed cutting unit
Hoe A
Hoe B
Hoe C
Dimension length 7.5mm and
Width 9mm. It is slightly angle
40º after 2.5cm of start hoe.

28. Different Components and Unit :
1.Battery :
2.DC Motor :
3.Weed cutting unit
Hoe A
Hoe B
Hoe C
Hoe D
which Dimension length 7.5mm
and Width 9mm. It is slightly
angle 25º after 2.5cm of start
hoe.

29. Different Components and Unit :
1.Battery :
2.DC Motor :
3.Weed cutting unit
Hoe A
Hoe B
Hoe C
Hoe D
Hoe E
Dimension lenth 7.5mm and
Width 9mm. It is slightly angle
40º after 2.5cm of start hoe.

30. Different Components and Unit :
1.Battery :
2.DC Motor :
3.Weed cutting unit
4. Circular motion to
hoeing action conversation
unit
Hoeing action is important to
required in battery operated
weeder to removing weed.
In Part A there are three depth
adjustment for connecting Part C
and depth is 5 cm, 7 cm and 9 cm.

31. Different Components and Unit :
1.Battery :
2.DC Motor :
3.Weed cutting unit
4. Circular motion to hoeing action
conversation unit
5.Wheel Adjustment Unit
Wheel is help to maintain to
working depth. wheel height is
adjust by wheel adjustment unit.
It’ help to comfort work for any
height of farmer.

32. Different Components and Unit :
1.Battery :
2.DC Motor :
3.Weed cutting unit
4. Circular motion to hoeing action
conversation unit
5.Wheel Adjustment Unit
6. Battery stand adjustment
unit.
Battery stand adjustment unit
required for adjustment of position
of battery.
Because the when wheel
position is change by wheel
adjustment unit after that battery
much required to change because
of centre of gravity will change.

33. Different Components and Unit :
7. Power transmission unit
Or Gear Box
Power transmission unit is
required for radius the rpm
because DC moter produce
3000rpm and in this weeding
machine required only 50rpm for
better working.

34. Different Components and Unit :
7. Power transmission unit Or Gear
Box
8 Machine controller
ON/OFF switch unit
Machine controller ON/OFF switch
unit is used for control currant
supply battery to the motor. It is
control by single switch.

35. Different Components and Unit :
7. Power transmission unit Or Gear
Box
8 Machine controller ON/OFF
switch unit
9 Electric Currant
transmission unit
In this Unit the power supply is
done to apply currant battery to
motor by controller switch.

36. Different Components and Unit :
7. Power transmission unit Or Gear
Box
8 Machine controller ON/OFF
switch unit
9 Electric Currant transmission unit
10. Frame
Frame is used for connecting all
unit on the frame. Dimension of
frame is handle dimension length
is 50 cm and main frame
dimension is 150 cm. which is
made in G.I. hollow pipe.

37. Photo of battery operated weeder

38. DC
motor
Cutting
Hoe
Circular motion to hoeing
action conversation unit
Handle
Battery
Wheel
 Total weight : 9.5 kg
 The estimated cost of
the developed harvester
was Rs. 3995
Battery stand
adjustment unit Parameters Value
Overall dimensions ,(cm)
Length 108
Width 38
Height 103
Wight (kg) 6.4
Diameter of wheel (cm) 22
No.of weeding tynes 2
Working width(cm) 18

39. Performance evaluation of weeder:
Crop Name Maize Crop
Location of field C.A.E.T. and M.M.R.S ,Godhra
Plant variety HQPM-1
Field details :
Type of operation :
Forward motion
Compared with developed different hoes

40. Material & method
Developed weeder arrangement by push force
Treatments, replications and design of experiments
adopted in this study were as follows.
 T1A=Hoe A
 T1B= Hoe B
 T1C=Hoe C
 T1D= Hoe D
 T1E=Hoe E

41. Layout of field :
 Maize field

42.  Field performance
 Soil moisture Content
 Bulk Density
 Depth of weeding
 Width of weeding
 Field capacity
 Draft of the weeder
 Weeding efficiency
 Power requirement
 Plant damage
 Performance index
 Cost economics

43. Soil moisture Content
MC(%) =
Where,
w1 = initial weight of soil sample, g
w2 = borne dry weight of soil sample, g

44. Bulk Density
Bulk density (g/cm3) =
=
Where,
M = borne dry weight of soil sample, g
D = diameter of cylindrical core sampler,
cm
L = length of cylindrical core sampler, cm

45. Measurement of the depth

46. Measurement of the width

47. Filed capacity
 Theoretical filed capacity
Theoretical filed capacity (ha/hr) =
Where,
w = width of cut (m)
s =speed of operation (in kmph)
 Effective filed capacity
Effective filed capacity (ha/hr) =
Where,
w = width of cut (m)
l = length of strip (in km)
t = time taken (in hour)

48.  Filed efficiency
Filed efficiency (in %) =
 Draft of the Weeder
P = W × DW × Rs
Where,
P = Draft of the weeder (kg)
W = Width of cut (cm)
DW = Depth of cut (cm)
Rs = Soil resistance (kg/cm2)
×100

49.  Weeding Efficiency
e =
Where,
e = Weeding efficiency (%)
W1 = number of weeds before weeding
W2 = number of weeds after weeding
 Power Requirement
Power input (hp) =

50.  Plant Damage
Percentage plant damage =
Where,
q= Number of plant damaged in 10 m row
length after weeding
p= Number of total plant in 10 m row
length before weeding

51.  Performance Index
PI =
Where,
PI = Performance index
a = Field capacity of weeder (ha/ h)
e = Weeding efficiency (%)
r = Percent plant damage
P= Power requirement (hp)

52. Cost of Operation
Fixed costs
Interest
Depreciation
Where
D = depreciation cost per year,
P = purchase price of the machine,
S =salvage value of the machine, and (10
percent of the purchase price.)
L = useful life of the machine in years
x
I=
Where
I = Interest on machine per year,
i= Rate of interest per year (%)

53. Variable Cost
Electricity charges
Electricity
charge/h =
Repair and Maintenance
The repair and maintenance cost of the developed
machine was estimated 8 % of the cost of developed machine.
Wages and Labor Charges
One labor was required to operate the machine.
The cost of labor was estimated taking the prevailing rate of
Rs. 250/day working of 8 hours.
Cost of Operation=Fixed costs+ Variable Cost

54. Instruments Used :
Tachometer Measuring
tape
Digital weighing
balance
Digital vernier
caliper
Hot air oven
dryer

55. Material & method
Developed weeder arrangement by push force
Treatments, replications and design of experiments
adopted in this study were as follows.
 T1A=Hoe A
 T1B= Hoe B
 T1C=Hoe C
 T1D= Hoe D
 T1E=Hoe E

56. View of the Experimental kankanpur farm

57. RESULTS
AND
DISCUSSION

58. Sr. No.
Weight of Wet
Soil(gm)
Weight of
dry
soil(gm)
Moisture
content (%) Average
1 200.56 153.65 23.39
23.48
2 211.15 157.18 25.56
3 206.65 154.35 25.31
4 191.37 153.78 19.64
Soil moisture Content

59. Bulk Density
Sr. No.
Weight of
Wet
Soil(gm)
Weight of
dry soil(gm)
Volume of Core
Sampler(cc)
Bulk Density
(g/cc)
Average
(g/cc)
1 170.56 153.65 100 1.53
1.5425
2 170.65 154.35 100 1.54
3 171.37 153.78 100 1.53

60. Direction Treatment TFC, ha/h EFC, ha/h
Field
Efficincy(%)
Forword Motion (T1)
T1A 0.5538 0.4202 75.86%
T1B 0.5063 0.3817 75.39%
T1C 0.4662 0.3497 75.00%
T1D 0.5538 0.4237 76.51%
T1E 0.5184 0.3937 75.95%
Avg. 0.5197 0.3938 75.74%
Field capacity

61. performance index
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000
Hoe A
Hoe B
Hoe C
Hoe D
Hoe E
Reverse Motion
(T2)
Forward Motion
(T1)

62. plant damage
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35
Hoe A
Hoe B
Hoe C
Hoe D
Hoe E
Reverse Motion (T2)
Forword Motion (T1)

63. draft of weeder
0 5 10 15 20
Hoe A
Hoe B
Hoe C
Hoe D
Hoe E
Draft of weeder (kg)
Draft of weeder (kg)

64. power requirement
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02
Hoe A
Hoe B
Hoe C
Hoe D
Hoe E
Power requirement (hp)

65. Operating cost Treatment(T)
Fixed cost (Rs/h) 2.86
Variable cost (Rs/h) 32.68
Total cost (Rs/h) 35.5
Total cost (Rs/ha) 88.87
Cost economics

66. Result of filed performance
Treatment
s
Speed
(m/s)
T.F.C
(ha/hr)
E.F.C
(ha/hr)
Filed
efficiency
(%)
Weeding
efficiency
(%)
Plant
dama
ge
Draft
(kgf)
Power
requir
ement
(hp)
Perform
ance
Index
T1A 0.086 0.55 0.42 0.76 81.02 16 6.9 0.007
5689.78
T1B 0.125 0.51 0.38 0.75 50.38 12 9.9 0.011
5654.51
T1C 0.074 0.47 0.35 0.75 52.92 12 5.25 0.005
5625.16
T1D 0.081 0.55 0.42 0.77 50.38 15 16.2 0.016
5737.99
T1E 0.077 0.52 0.39 0.76 82.30 18 17.1 0.016
5695.90

67. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
 To increase the productivity per unit area of small land holding of
farmers and considering their economic condition. It is quite necessary
to have suitable agricultural implements by which farmers can use
them and also allow custom hiring with regard to this, an attempt was
made to develop a weeder for vegetable and crop and assess functional
suitability and weeding efficiency.
 Test was conducted considering various parameters such as speed of
operation, weeding efficiency, field efficiency, plant damage and
performance index.
 Treatment T1 (developed weeder) with higher weeding efficiency (75.22 to
81.94%), lowest plant damage (4.55 to 10.61%) and higher performance
index (927.12 to 1514.35).
 Here do not use any fuel and power. Hence maintain cost as very less.
 It was faster than the traditional method of removing weed.
 It cannot work where there was stone or any obstacle.

68.  Possible future improvements to the design could include possibility to
reduce power requirement to push the machine with engine which can
make it to perform better for large scale crop production.
Scope of future

69. Referanc
e
 Goel, A.K., D, Behera, B.K. Behera, S.K. Mohanty, and S.K.
Nanda.(2008) " Development and Ergonomic Evaluation of
Manually Operated Weeder for Dry Land Crops." Agricultural
Engineering International: the CIGRE journal. x .
 Ram Bhavin, ., . M.S. Khaidiwar, . Shailendra kumar, and . B.P.
Solanki.(2016) "Performance evaluation of manual operated single
row weeder for groundnut crop." Engineering and Techonology in
india. 7, no. 1 : 45-52.
 Silas O., . Nkakini, and . Abu Husseni. (2015)" Development and
Evaluation of Wheeled Long-Handle Weeder." The West Indian
Journal of Engineering 37,37-44.
 Mr. Mahesh Gavali, ., and . Mr. Satish Kulkarni. "Development of
rotary weeder blades by Finite Element Method.(2014)"
International Journal of Scientific Research Engineering &
Technology (IJSRET). 3, no. 6.
 S.P Singh, ., . M. K. Singh, and . R.C. Solanki. "Design and
development of four wheel weeder for wide-row crops.(2016)"
Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 86, no. 1 : 42–9.