v.89, n.2, p.

141 148, 2014

Revista de Agricultura

LOSSES IN THE PEANUT MECHANICAL DIGGING AS A FUNCTION OF THE

DIGGER SHAKER ROTATION
Rafael Scabello Bertonha1, Rouverson Pereira da Silva2, Carlos Eduardo Angeli Furlani3, Fabio
Alexandre Cavichioli4
1

Universidade Estadual Paulista "Jlio de Mesquita Filho" E-mails: rsbertonha@agronomo.eng.br, rouverson@fcav.unesp.br,

furlani@fcav.unesp.br, cavichioli2003@hotmail.com

ABSTRACT
The aim of this work was to evaluate the losses in peanut digging as a function of different
rotations of the digger shaker inverter. The visible, invisible and total losses were higher with the
increasing of the digger shaker rotation.
Keywords: Arachis hypogaea, agricultural machines, peanut losses

PERDAS NO ARRANQUIO MECANIZADO DE AMENDOIM EM FUNO DA

ROTAO DA ESTEIRA DO ARRANCADOR-INVERTEDOR
RESUMO
Objetivou-se neste trabalho avaliar as perdas no arranquio de amendoim em funo de
diferentes rotaes da esteira do arrancador-invertedor. As perdas visveis, invisveis e totais foram
maiores conforme o aumento da rotao da esteira do arrancador-invertedor.
Palavras-chave: Arachis hypogaea, mquinas agrcolas, perdas de amendoim

INTRODUCTION

harvesting of peanuts being dependent of the

flowering period, i.e., the permanence time in

The mechanized digging peanut has

the soil and the water content of the soil.

high loss, mainly due to the weakening of the

LAMB et al. (2004) estimated average

stalk at the advanced stage of maturity or

losses in the digging about 8-40% (on later

when the soil is very dry and compacted

harvest), while ROWLAND et al. (2006)

(ROBERSON, 2009). INCE & GUZEL

found losses of up to 50%. BEHERA et al.

(2003) have shown that gynophores breaking

(2008) compared the performance of manual

resistance (GBR) is an important factor to

and mechanized digging of peanut, and found

describe the digging losses and combine

23% of total losses in the mechanical digging

141

LOSSES IN THE PEANUT MECHANICAL DIGGING AS A FUNCTION OF THE DIGGER SHAKER

ROTATION

conducted with soil water content of 8%.

according to Keppen as humid tropical

JORGE et al. (2008), studying the operation

climate (Aw) with rainy summer and dry

of mechanized digging, verified that the

winter. The soil is classified as Eutropherric

speed of digging did not affect the occurrence

Red Latosol (ANDRIOLI & CENTURION,

of visible, invisible and totals losses;

1999) and presents 510 g kg-1 of clay, 290 g

however, according to the authors, it was

kg-1 of silt and 100 g kg-1 of sand.

possibly influenced by the high coefficient of

One used seeds of peanut (IAC

variation. They further argued that the high

Runner 886 cultivar) with spacing of 0.90 m

values of losses found might have occurred as

between rows, with 16 seeds m-1. Before

a consequence of density and water content of

seeding, one performed the conventional

the soil.

tillage to get a good seeding. After sowing,

The design optimization of peanut

one

performed

seven

applications

of

digging may result in greater operational

herbicides and fungicides, and the digging

efficiency,

to

was done 132 days after seeding (DAS), using

determining losses at harvest to maintain this

a digger 2x1 (two lines x one windrow),

efficiency (PADMANATHAN et al., 2006,

pulled by a tractor with 80.9 kW of power at

BUTTS et al., 2009).

38.3 Hz on the engine.

but

still,

it

is

crucial

Therefore, the aim of this study was to

The design was randomized block

evaluate the losses in peanut mechanized due

with four treatments and five replications.

to the shaking conveyer rotation of digger.

The treatments were established by four

rotations of the digger shaker, defined from

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The experiment was conducted in the

the manufacturer's recommendations, to work

with the tractor rotation of 5.8 Hz at PTO,

FEPE Fazenda de Ensino Pesquisa e

considering also the rotation suitable for use

Extenso at UNESP So Paulo State

PTO (9.0 Hz). It was also used two

University, in Jaboticabal, So Paulo State,

Brazil. The geographical

area of the

experiment is located by the coordinates of

latitude 2115 South and longitude 4818
West, with an average elevation of 570 meters
and slope about 4%. The climate is classified
142

intermediate PTO speeds (6.9 and 7.8 Hz)

resulting in rotation of the shaking conveyer
of 1.7, 1.8, 2.1 and 2.4 Hz, measured by a
digital tachometer of contact. At the time of
measurement, it was found on the panel of the

v.89, n.2, p. 141 148, 2014

Revista de Agricultura

tractor engine rotations of 20.0, 23.3, 26.7 and

1.80 m) across the windrow, collecting

30.8 Hz.

manually visible losses (pods and grains

To evaluate the maturation, it was

found on the surface) and invisible losses

used the Hull scrape method (WILLIAMS &

localized at a depth of 0.15 m. The definition

DREXLER,

of

of the width of the frame corresponds to the

scraping of the pods exocarp, exposing the

working width of the digger. After collecting

color of the mesocarp, considering as ripe the

the pods were put in paper bags, identified,

pods that were part of black, brown and

and then sent to the laboratory where they

orange class. For this evaluation 100 pods in

were washed to remove the soil attached to

each plot were collected at random.

the exocarp.

1981),

which

consists

The water content of the pods (WCP),

The pod mass determination was done

calculated on a wet basis, was obtained

on a digital scale with a precision of 0.01 g.

collecting 50 pods per plot, collecting after

Then the pods were put in an electric dryer, at

the passage of the digger. The samples for

105 3 C for 24 hours. After the drying, the

determination of water content of the soil

mass of the dry pods was determined,

(WCS), at the time of the digging, were

obtaining the values of the losses which were

collected using an auger of Dutch type in

corrected to 8% of water content. The values

the layers of 0.0-0.10 and 0.10-0.20 m, being

of loss were calculated in percentage relative

accommodated in aluminum containers and

to the gross productivity, referring to the total

taken to the laboratory, where it was

amount of peanut produced in a determined

maintaining about 24 hours at 105 C. The

area, considering therefore the potential crop

water content of the soil was calculated on dry

yield. To determine the gross productivity, it

basis.

was carried out to the manual digging of all

The losses in the digging were

peanut plants contained within the frame (2

classified as visible (VLD), invisible (ILD)

m2), collecting and weighing all the pods as

and total (TLD). The total losses correspond

well those that were over and under the soil to

to the sum of the visible and invisible losses.

a depth of 0.15 m. The gross productivity was

To collect the losses, the peanut windrow

also corrected to 8% of water content.

formed after of the passage of the digger was

For the statistical analysis, it was

carefully removed by putting up a metallic

determined the descriptive analysis (VIEIRA

frame at this site approximately 2 m2 (1.11 x

et al., 2002) to permit a visualization of the

143

LOSSES IN THE PEANUT MECHANICAL DIGGING AS A FUNCTION OF THE DIGGER SHAKER

ROTATION

general behavior of the data, determining

With respect to losses in the digging it

measures of central tendency (arithmetic

was not observed effect of rotations,

mean and median), dispersion (standard

however, it may be noted that the variables

deviation and coefficient of variation),

VLD and ILD (Figure 1) and TLD (Figure 2),

skewness and kurtosis. It was conducted to

when increased the rotation of the digger,

the Anderson-Darling test to verify the

there was a gradual increase in the variability

normality of the data, and when necessary, it

of losses. The justification of this, when

was performed to the standardization by the

increased the rotation of the tractor, it also

transformation, using the Minitab 16

increased the speed of the set, changing

program.

consequently the material flow in the shaker,

increasing the variability of losses, as may be

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

seen mainly in the invisible losses (ILD Figure 1). The higher rotation of the

The average yield 1,745.4 kg ha-1, was

mechanized set (30.8 Hz), affected the

below the average of the last five seasons of

variability of loss, probably due to the knife

the country (2007/08 to 2011/12) which was

passing quickly through the plants, causing

approximately 2,996 kg ha-1 (CONAB,

the disruption of the gynophore, staying the

2012a, 2012b).

30

35

25

30
25

20

14.7

15

ILD (%)

VLD (%)

fruits below the soil surface.

16.7

11.6

10 8.8
5

22.2

20
15 13.6
10
5
0

0
20.0

23.3

26.7

30.8

20.0

23.3
26.7
Rotation (Hz)

Rotation (Hz)

Variable
VLD
ILD

16.3

14.5

Mean
(%)
13.0
16.7

Median (%)
12.0
18.2

(%)
8.35
9.4

30.8

CV (%)

Ck

Cs

AD

32.14
35.27

28.0
34.2

1.86
-0.31

1.33
0.13

0.041
0.861

N
N

: standard deviation; R: range; CV: coefficient of variation; Ck: coefficient of kurtosis; Cs: coefficient of skewness;
AD: Anderson-Darling test; D: Distribution (A: asymmetric or N: normal)

Figure 1. Graphics of means for visible (VLD) and invisible (ILD) losses in the mechanical digging
and their respective statistical values.
144

v.89, n.2, p. 141 148, 2014

Revista de Agricultura

60

TLD (%)

50

38.9

40
30
20

22.5

26.1

31.0

10
0
20.0

Variable
TLD

Mean
(%)
29.6

Median
(%)
31.7

(%)
16.5

23.3
26.7
Rotation (Hz)

R
60.92

CV
(%)
31.4

30.8

Ck

Cs

AD

-0.28

0.36

0.668

: standard deviation; R: range; CV: coefficient of variation; Ck: coefficient of kurtosis; Cs: coefficient of skewness;
AD: Anderson-Darling test; D: Distribution (A: asymmetric or N: normal)

Figure 2. Graphic of means for total losses (TLD) in the mechanical digging and their respective
statistical values.
One can be observed (Figure 1) that

this type of evaluation as peanut losses, this

for values of mean and median both are close

coefficient is normal to present very high due

to each other. The VLD variable showed

to the instability of the natural environment

kurtosis and skewness coefficients away from

(soil and plant). Analyzing the average of

zero, however, applied the transformation,

WCS (Figure 3), note that it is by SANTOS

confirming then the normality of the data, i.e.,

et al. (2010) which was of 18 to 20%,

indicators factors of normality. Another

considering as recommended, should be

variable that also required transformation had

noted the importance of the ideal time for

been WCP, but this did not show as normal,

digging, because this being outside the

presenting

after

recommended, the soil can interfere, directly,

transforming the data. The other variables

between the knives of the digger and the

showed coefficient of kurtosis and skewness

peanut pods. It was verified that the WCP

close to zero, consequently their distributions

(Figure 3), showed far of recommended by

were normal. It may be noted that only the

SEGATO & PENARIOL (2007) (35-45%),

variable WCS (Figure 3) shows low range.

except at higher rotation that showed the

The coefficient of variation of the variables

water content of the pods within the

presented medium to very high, however, for

recommended.

asymmetry,

even

145

17

80

16

70

15

13.8

14

14.3

13.5

WCP (%)

WCS (%)

LOSSES IN THE PEANUT MECHANICAL DIGGING AS A FUNCTION OF THE DIGGER SHAKER

ROTATION

13 12.9
12

60
50

51.9

54.6

51.7

42.7

40
30

11
10

20
20.0

23.3
26.7
Rotation (Hz)

30.8

20.0

Variable

Mean
(%)

Median
(%)

(%)

WCS

13.6

13.8

1.5

6.80

11.2

WCP

50.2

51.9

12.3

56.08

24.4

CV
(%)

Ck
0.8
5
1.88

23.3
26.7
Rotation (Hz)

30.8

Cs

AD

-0.02
-0.18

0.480
0.005

: standard deviation; R: range; CV: coefficient of variation; Ck: coefficient of kurtosis; Cs: coefficient of skewness;
AD: Anderson-Darling test; D: Distribution (A: asymmetric or N: normal)

Figure 3. Graphics of means for water content of soil (TLD) and water content of pods in the
mechanical digging and their respective statistical values.
Making a calculation of economy
between the highest and lowest rotation, it
may be obtained 16.4% more production,
working with lowest rotation. Calculating in
bags (25 kg), the farmer may earn 11.45 bags
ha-1 over in the peanut yield. It is likely that
with the lowest speed, it can save in the fuel
consumption.

REFERENCES
ANDRIOLI,

I.;

CENTURION,

J.

F.

Levantamento detalhado dos solos da

Faculdade

de

Cincias

Agrrias

Veterinrias de Jaboticabal. In: Congresso

Brasileiro de Cincia do Solo, 27, 1999,
Braslia.

Proceedings...

Braslia:

Sociedade Brasileira de Cincia do Solo,

CD-ROM. p.1-4, 1999.

CONCLUSIONS
The visible, invisible and total losses
were higher with the increasing of the digger
shaker rotation. The total losses presented
high values due to the soil and pod conditions.

BEHERA,

B.

K.;

BEHERA,

D.;

MOHAPATRA, A. K.; SWAIN, S.;

GOEL, A. K. Performance evaluation of a
bullock

drawn

groundnut

digger.

Environment and Ecology, Kalyani,

v.26, n.3a, p.1226-1229, 2008.
BUTTS, C. L; SORENSEN, R. B.; NUTI, R.
C.; LAMB, M. C.; FAIRCLOTH, W. H.

146

v.89, n.2, p. 141 148, 2014

Revista de Agricultura

Performance of equipment for in-field

shelling

of

peanut

for

biodiesel

LAMB,

M.

C.;

MASTERS,

M.

H;

ROWLAND, D.; SORENSEN, R. B.;

production. Transactions of the ASABE,

ZHU,

H.,

BLANKENSHIP,

P.

D.;

St. Joseph, v.52, p.1461-1469, 2009.

BUTTS, C. L. Impact of sprinkler

CONAB - National Supply Company.

irrigation amount and rotation on peanut

Historical series on the seasons 2007/08

yield. Peanut Science, Tifton, v.31, p.108-

to

113, 2004.

2011/12.

Available

at:

<http://www.conab.gov.br/conteudos.php

PADMANATHAN, P. K.; KATHIRVEL, K.;

?a=1252&t=2>. Access in: Aug. 11, 2013

MANIAN, R.; DURAISAMY, V. M.

CONAB - National Supply Company. 9th

Design, development and evaluation of

Survey

(June/2012)

Crop

2011/12

Grain.

tractor

operated

groundnut

combine

Available

harvester. Journal of Applied Sciences

at:<http://www.conab.gov.br/OlalaCMS/u

Research, Am, v.12, n.2, p.1338-1341,

ploads/arquivos/12_06_12_16_15_32_bol

2006.

etim_portugues_junho_2012.pdf>. Access
in: Aug. 11, 2013.

curing peanuts. In: JORDAN, D. L.;

INCE, A.; GUZEL E. Effects of gynophore

breaking

resistance

mechanized
International
Harvesting

on

losses

BRANDENBURG, R. L.; BROWN, A.

in

B.; BULLEN, S. G.; ROBERSON, G. T. ;

In:

SHEW, B.; SPEARS, J.F. 2010. Peanut

on

Crop

information. North Carolina Coop. Ext.

Processing,

2003,

Ser. Series AG-331. p.131-148, 2009.

peanut

harvesting.

Conference
and

ROBERSON, G. T. Planting, harvesting and

Louisville, Kentucky. Proceedings St.

Joseph: ASABE. p. 1103, 2003.

ROWLAND, D. L.; SORENSEN, R. B.;

BUTTS, C. L.; FAIRCLOTH, W. H.

JORGE, A. C.; MAHL, D.; ALMEIDA, T. F.;

Determination of maturity and degree day

SERON, C. C.; MORAES, M. B. Losses

indices and their success in predicting

in mechanized digging of peanut in

peanut maturity. Peanut Science, Tifton,

function of speed and spacing of openers.

v.33, n.2, p.125-136, 2006.

In: Peanut Crop Meeting, 5, 2008.

SANTOS, E. P.; SILVA, R. P.; FURLANI, C.

Jaboticabal. Proceedings Jaboticabal:

E. A.; BERTONHA, R. S.; MEDEIROS,

FUNEP, CD-ROM, p.1-4, 2008.

R. S. 2010. Losses in mechanical

harvesting of peanuts. In: Latin-American
147

LOSSES IN THE PEANUT MECHANICAL DIGGING AS A FUNCTION OF THE DIGGER SHAKER

ROTATION

and Caribbean Congress of Agricultural

Engineering,

9,

2010.

Vitria.

Proceedings, Jaboticabal: SBEA. CDROM, p.1-4, 2010.

SEGATO, S. V.; PENARIOL, A. L. A cultura
do amendoim em reas de reforma de
canavial.

In:

FERNANDES,

SEGATO,
C.;

PINTO,

S.
A.

V.;
S.

Expanso e Renovao de Canavial.

Piracicaba: Editora CP 2, p.85-116, 2007.
VIEIRA, S. R.; MILLETE, J.; TOPP, G. C.;
REYNOLDS, W. D. Handbook for
geoestatistical analysis of variability in
soil and climate data. In: ALVAREZ V. V.
H.; SCHAEFER, C. E. G. R.; BARROS,
N. F.; MELLO, J. W. V.; COSTA, L. M.
(Ed.) Tpicos em cincia do solo. Viosa:
Sociedade Brasileira de Cincia do Solo,
v.2, p.1-45, 2002.
WILLIAMS, E. J.; DREXLER, J. S. A nondestructive method for determining peanut
pod maturity. Peanut Science, Tifton, v.8,
n.2, p.134-141, 1981.

Recebido em: 13/2/2014

Aceito para publicao em: 18/08/2014

148