Experimental tests on seed-bed preparation by means of three rotary harrows (with tools rotating on a vertical axe) and three rotary hoes (with tools rotating on an horizontal axe) were performed during 1996 on a loam soil at the Experimental Center for Agro-Environment Research “E.Avanzi” of the University of Pisa (Italy). Both the mechanical and operative performances (working time and capacity, fuel consumption, power requirement, etc.) and the quality of work (clod size distribution and soil roughness) were evaluated. The results emphasized that there were no relevant differences between the operative performances of the two typologies of machines tested. Thus specific power (usable power per meter of working width and centimeter of working depth) both of rotary harrows and rotary hoes was always of the same order. In contrast seed-bed quality was notably different. Use of rotary hoes led to a high degree of soil crumbling, which was also homogeneous throughout the tilled layer, while rotary harrows resulted in a lower degree of soil crumbling, with a distribution of larger diameter clods in the shallowest layer. As a consequence, soil roughness was decidedly higher after harrowing. Therefore, given the absence of significant differences between the operative performances of the two typologies of pto powered operative machines, choice of implement can be based on desired seed-bed quality, in order to obtain either pronounced soil crumbling and leveling (rotary hoe) or greater “protection” of tilled soil from crusting and erosion (rotary harrow).
Seedbed preparation with power take-off powered implements: comparison between rotary hoes and rotary harrows
PERUZZI, ANDREA;RAFFAELLI, MICHELE;GINANNI, MARCO;FONTANELLI, MARCO
2009-01-01
Abstract
Experimental tests on seed-bed preparation by means of three rotary harrows (with tools rotating on a vertical axe) and three rotary hoes (with tools rotating on an horizontal axe) were performed during 1996 on a loam soil at the Experimental Center for Agro-Environment Research “E.Avanzi” of the University of Pisa (Italy). Both the mechanical and operative performances (working time and capacity, fuel consumption, power requirement, etc.) and the quality of work (clod size distribution and soil roughness) were evaluated. The results emphasized that there were no relevant differences between the operative performances of the two typologies of machines tested. Thus specific power (usable power per meter of working width and centimeter of working depth) both of rotary harrows and rotary hoes was always of the same order. In contrast seed-bed quality was notably different. Use of rotary hoes led to a high degree of soil crumbling, which was also homogeneous throughout the tilled layer, while rotary harrows resulted in a lower degree of soil crumbling, with a distribution of larger diameter clods in the shallowest layer. As a consequence, soil roughness was decidedly higher after harrowing. Therefore, given the absence of significant differences between the operative performances of the two typologies of pto powered operative machines, choice of implement can be based on desired seed-bed quality, in order to obtain either pronounced soil crumbling and leveling (rotary hoe) or greater “protection” of tilled soil from crusting and erosion (rotary harrow).I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
