Qualitative and Quantitative Features Evaluation of Two Methods of Sugarcane Harvesting (with aim of Energy and Sugar Production)

Journal Title: Journal of Agricultural Machinery - Year 2018, Vol 8, Issue 1

Abstract

Introduction Sugarcane is an important plant in the world that cultivate for the production of sugar and energy. For this purpose, evaluation of Sugarcane (SC) and Energycane (EC) methods is necessary. Energy is vital for economic and social development and the demand for it is rising. The international community look toward alternative to fossil fuels is the aim of using liquid fuel derived from agricultural resources. According to calculations, about 47% from renewable energy sources in Brazil comes from sugarcane so as, the country is known the second largest source of renewable energy. Sugarcane in Brazil provides about 17.5% of primary energy sources. Material such as bagasse and ethanol are derived from sugarcane that provide 4.2% and 11.2 % consumed energy, respectively . In developing countries, the use of this product increase in order to achieve self-sufficiency in the production of starch and sugar and thus independence in bioethanol production. Evaluation of energy consumption in manufacturing systems, show the measurement method of yield conversion to the amount of energy. Many of products of Sugarcane have ability to produce bioenergy. Many materials obtain from sugarcane such as, cellulosic ethanol, biofuels and other chemical materials. Hence, Energycane is introduced as a new method of sugarcane harvesting. But, one of the problems of this method is high cost and high energy consumption of harvester. So that the total cost of Energycane method is 38.4 percent of production total costs, whereas, this cost, in Sugarcane method is 5.32 percent of production total costs. In a study that was conducted by Matanker et al. (2014) with title “Power requirements and field performance in harvesting EC and SC”, the power requirements of some components of sugarcane harvester and its field capacity, in Sugarcane and Energycane methods were examined. The consumed power by basecutter, elevator and chopper was measured in terms of Mega grams per hour (Mg.h-1) Chopper energy consumption in Energycane method was 1.65 KJ more than Sugarcane method. The quantitative parameters including forward speed (km.h-1), field capacity (ha.h-1), the field performance (Mg.ha-1) and reed output (Mg.h-1) were also measured. Finally, statistical comparison was conducted between the two methods. The aim of this study is to provide Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) method using the calculated parameters by the Matanker et al. This method provides decision-making ability for a manager. Materials and Methods In this study, quantitative parameters including fuel consumption (Lit.ha-1), harvester power (kW), efficiency of engine torque (%), energy of used hydraulic oil in basecutter, chopper and elevator (Mj.Mg-1), forward speed (km.h-1), field capacity (ha.h-1), the field performance (Mg.ha-1) and reed output (Mg.h-1 ) and qualitative parameters including the mean of average diameter of the stem (mm), stem height (m), number of stems on the meter (m-1), the percentage of cut stems and intact, cut stems and partially damaged and strongly damaged stems. The average height of straw and the stubble (mm), average of bulk density (kg.m-3), the average of moisture content, average of dry matter (biomass), (Mg.ha-1) were measured. Data analysis was conducted with Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) method. Tables 1 and 2 in terms of qualitative and quantitative parameters for the two methods of A and B, to form of rij matrix and based on measured criteria (C) have arranged, respectively. Conclusion Choosing the appropriate method for sugarcane harvesting should be according to the purpose of harvesting. Energycane method has high energy consumption that it increases the operational costs. On the other hand, the quality of the obtained biomass from it is better, but Sugarcane method has high energy efficiency. But in terms of quality, the plant is not in good condition. For this reason, it is necessary, aim of harvesting and its type, be specified before crop planting.

Authors and Affiliations

K. Andekaeizadeh,M. J. Sheikhdavoodi,M. Byria,

Keywords

Related Articles

Laboratory Sensitivity Study of Two Cultivars of Strawberry (Fragaria x ananass) Fruit to Bruising

In the present research, susceptibility of two strawberry cultivars (Selva and Gavita) to bruising was studied. Individual fruits were subjected to impact and compressive forces. Impact forces were applied through droppi...

The Effect of Sample Size and Data Numbering on Precision of Calibration Model to predict Soil Properties

Introduction Precision agriculture (PA) is a technology that measures and manages within-field variability, such as physical and chemical properties of soil. The nondestructive and rapid VIS-NIR technology detected a sig...

Designing and Constructing an Active Boom Balancing System using a New Technique Variable Fulcrum Method and Comparing It with a Conventional Sprayer

Introduction According to reports on trends in the agricultural industry, demand for more precise and affordable machinery is rising and precision farming methods used by farmers are expanding. Damping vibration of the b...

Evaluation of the Energy Efficiency of a Solar Parabolic Collector Equipped with Phase Change Materials inside the Receiver Tube of a Desalination System

IntroductionWith increasing the world's population, the demand for supply water resources is also increasing. Nevertheless, climate change has severely impacted the accessibility of fresh water resources. Consequently, r...

Experimental Investigation of a Solar Greenhouse Heating System Equipped with a Parabolic Trough Solar Concentrator and a Double-Purpose Flat Plate Solar Collector

Introduction Greenhouses provide a suitable environment in which all the parameters required for growing the plants can be controlled throughout the year. Greenhouse heating is one of the most important issues in product...

Download PDF file
  • EP ID EP717881
  • DOI -
  • Views 33
  • Downloads 0

How To Cite

K. Andekaeizadeh, M. J. Sheikhdavoodi, M. Byria, (2018). Qualitative and Quantitative Features Evaluation of Two Methods of Sugarcane Harvesting (with aim of Energy and Sugar Production). Journal of Agricultural Machinery, 8(1), -. https://europub.co.uk./articles/-A-717881