CONTROL IN SEED METERING DEVICE FOR

SOWING EQUIPMENT

By

ADEL KHAZAL DABOUL

B. Sc. Agric. Sc. (Agric. Mechanization), Basrah University, Iraq, 1995
M. Sc. Agric. Sc. (Agric. Mechanization), Basrah University, Iraq, 1998

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment

of

the requirements for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
in

Agricultural Science
(Agricultural Mechanization)

Department of Agricultural Engineering

Faculty of Agriculture
Ain Shams University

2011
 Approval Sheet

CONTROL IN SEED METERING DEVICE FOR

SOWING EQUIPMENT

By

ADEL KHAZAL DABOUL

B. Sc. Agric. Sc. (Agric. Mechanization), Basrah University, Iraq, 1995
M. Sc. Agric. Sc. (Agric. Mechanization), Basrah University, Iraq, 1998

This thesis for Ph.D. degree has been approved by:

Dr. ………………………………….

Dr. ………………………………….

Dr. …………………………………..

Dr. Mohamed Nabil El - Awady …………………………………..

Prof. Emeritus of Agricultural Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture,

Ain Shams University (Principal Supervisor)

Date of Examination: / / 2011

 CONTROL IN SEED METERING DEVICE FOR
SOWING EQUIPMENT

By

ADEL KHAZAL DABOUL

B. Sc. Agric. Sc. (Agric. Mechanization), Basrah University, Iraq, 1995
M. Sc. Agric. Sc. (Agric. Mechanization), Basrah University, Iraq, 1998

Under the supervision of:

Dr. Mohamed Nabil El - Awady

Prof. Emeritus of Agricultural Engineering, Department of Agricultural
Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture, Ain Shams University (Principal
Supervisor)

Dr. Metwally Abbas Hamada

Associate Prof. of Agronomy, Department of Agronomy, Faculty of
Agriculture, Ain Shams University

Dr. Mahmoud Zaky El - Attar

Literature of Agricultural Engineering, Department of Agricultural
Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture, Ain Shams University
 ABSTRACT

Adel Khazal Daboul: Control in Seed Metering Device for Sowing

Equipment. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis, Department of Agricultural
Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture, Ain Shams University, 2011.

A construction and performance seed mechanism for seed metering

device that is based on the Vibrational motion as a source of metering seeds
has been done. It is adapted for using to minimize the seed damage and optimize
of seed rate and seed distribution.
An eccentric weight motor was used as a source of vibration for the
metering device, the objective to use this metering device is to avoid direct
contact between the device and the seeds, the metering seed device was tested
on the soil bin. Seven vibrational motions were used (13.76, 22.71, 35.56, 44.2,
86.2, 112.8 and 125.8 peak) and three seed level heights (4.5, 3 and 1.5 cm) and
sixteen opining gates ratio ranged from 1 : 1 to 1.75 : 1.75, for two varieties of
Corn kernel (Corn 10 and Corn 162) and two varieties of Broad bean (Giza 716
and Sakha 2).
The results showed that for material surfaces The lowest values of static
coefficient of friction were on galvanized iron followed by mild – steel, and the
highest on plywood, and for the painted surfaces The lowest values of static
coefficient of friction were on Oven - baked enamel paint followed by untreated
(mild steel), then the Mutt paint and the highest on polish paint.
The results showed that the desired number of seed / hill for the
mentioned crops could be obtained from feed rate settings for each variety
individually. The results also showed that the vibrational motion T5 (86.2 peak)
and the seed level height Hl3 (1.5 cm) had the comprehensible treatment for all
the measurements.
 Analysis of the performance tests of the vibrational seed mechanism (seed
/ hill, seed damage,, seed germination and seed emergence) showed good
results. The vibrational motion seed mechanism attained the desired amount of
seed / hill from a wide range of combination treatments, the maximum value of
seed damage was (0.676 %) for Sakha 2, while the minimum value of seed
damage was (0.34 %) for Corn 10. The change in vibrational motion of the seed
feed mechanism had a direct impact on seed discharge.

Keywords:
Seed Metering Device, Vibrational Motion, Sowing Equipment, Planting
Equipment. Seed Feed Mechanizim.
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

My first and foremost thanks go to ALLAH for his blessings.

The work that presented in this thesis could not have been completed
without the help of several people that I wish, here, to acknowledge.

I would like to express my deep appreciation and gratitude to Prof. Dr.

Mohamed N. Awady for suggesting the topic of study, his kindly supervision
and fatherly encouragement throughout this work. I am grateful for his valuable
discussions, suggestions and helpful criticism, which helped me to finalize this
work.

My deep appreciation also goes to Dr. Metwally A. Hamada for his

continuous encouragement, his confidence in me and his advice which were
fundamental to the realization of this work. I am really thankful for his trust in
me, his interest and for all the fruitful discussions throughout the different stages
of the work.

I would like to express my recognition and give a special

acknowledgement to Dr. Mahmoud Z. El - Attar who has been very generous
of his time throughout the different stages of this work. I say a big thank for him
for his encouragement, for proof reading this thesis and for taking time from his
busy schedule to make my work a realization Words cannot express the value of
what he has done for me and once again, thank him very much.

I am grateful to all staff of Agricultural Engineering Department, Ain

Shams University, for their valuable help and their encouragement.

Finally, my sincere thanks and appreciation to all those kind people: my

parents, my sisters, my wife, my children for their encouragement and
support.
 CONTENTS

Subject Page
List of tables iii
List of figures iv
List of abbreviations vi
I- INTRODUCTION 1
II- REVIEW OF LITERATURE 3
2-1- Physical and mechanical properties of seeds 3
2-1-1- Size and shape 3
2-1-2- Angle of repose 5
2-1-3- Static coefficient of friction 9
2-1-4- Dynamic coefficient of friction 12
2-1-5- Flow of seeds or grains through an orifice 14
2-2- Methods of sowing and mathematical treatment of 17
distribution
2-2-1- Methods of sowing 17
2-2-2- Mathematical treatment of seed distribution 21
2-3- Design factors for sowing seeds 22
2-3-1- Seed box 22
2-3-2- Feeding mechanism 25
2-3-3- The performance of feeding mechanism 37
2-3-3-1- Feeding rate 37
2-3-3-2 Effect of feeding – shaft speed (ratio of 41
rotation)
2-3-3-3 Effect of agitation 42
2-3-3-4 Effect of gate opening 43
2-3-3-5 Effect of seed size 43
2-3-4- Seed damage 44
 ii

2-3-5- Seed distribution 46

2-3-6- Effect of feeding device 49
2-3-7- Effect of seed tubes 51
2-4- Seed distribution performance of seed tubes 53
III- MATERIALS AND METHODS 55
3-1- Materials 55
3-1-1- the designed test soil bin 55
3-1-2- The seed box 57
3-1-3- The feeding device 58
3-2- Instrumentations 59
3-2-1- Speedometer 59
3-2-2- Vibration meter 60
3-2-3- Balance and dry oven 61
3-2-4- Graduated cylinder and stop watch 61
3-2-5- Digital caliper 61
3-2-6- Instrument for measuring coefficient of friction 62
and repose angle
3-2-7- Seeds used in the investigation 64
3-3- Methods of measurements 64
3-3-1- Seed discharge 64
3-3-2- Feeder speed (Vibrational motion) 64
3-3-3- Gate height and width 65
3-3-4- Seed damage, germination and emergence 66
3-3-5- Longitudinal (seed distribution) 67
3-3-6- Measuring the static coefficient of friction 67
IV- RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 68
4-1- The 3- Major dimensions 68
4-2- Weight and Volume of 1000 Seed, Bulk and Real 71
 iii

density
4-3- Angle of Repose and Static Coefficient of Friction 73
4-4- Vibrational motion Effect on static coefficient of 78
friction

4-5- Seed Rate / min 83

4- 5-1- Effect of opening gate on seed rate / min 83
4-5-1-1- Effect of Gate width Wg on seed rate / min 84
4-5-1-2- Effect of Gate height Hg on seed rate / min 84
4- 5- 2- Effect of Seed level height on seed rate / min 85
4- 5- 3- Effect of Seed varieties on seed rate / min 86
4- 5- 4- Effect of Vibrational motion on seed rate / min 87
4- 6- Seed / hill 88
4-6-1- Effect of opening gate on seed / hill 88
4- 6-1-1- Effect of Gate width Wg on seed / hill 89
4-6-1-2- Effect of Gate height Hg on seed / hill 90
4-6-2- Effect of Seed level height on seed / hill 91
4-6-3- Effect of Seed varieties on seed / hill 91
4-6-4- Effect of Vibrational motion on seed / hill 92
4-7- Seed Longitudinal (cm) 94
4-7-1- Effect of open gate on seed longitudinal 96
(cm)
4-7-1-1- Effect of Gate width Wg on seed longitudinal 96
(cm)
4-7-1-2- Effect of Gate height Hg on seed longitudinal 97
(cm)
4-7-3- Effect of Seed varieties on seed longitudinal (cm) 98
4-7- 4- Effect of Vibrational motion on seed longitudinal 99
(cm)
 iv

4-8- Seed damage (%) 102

4-8-1- Effect of opening gate on seed damage (%) 102
4-8-1-1- Effect of Gate width Wg on seed damage 103
(%)
4-8-1-2- Effect of Gate height Hg on seed damage 104
(%)
4-8-2- Effect of Seed level height on seed damage (%) 105
4-8-3- Effect of Seed varieties on seed damage (%) 105
4-8-4- Effect of Vibrational motion on seed damage (%) 106
4-9- Seed germination (%) 109
4-9-1- Effect of open gate on seed germination (%) 109
4-6-1-1- Effect of Gate width Wg on seed germination 110
(%)
4-9-1-2- Effect of Gate height Hg on seed germination 110
(%)
4-9-2- Effect of Seed level height on seed germination 111
(%)
4-9- 3- Effect of Seed varieties on seed germination (%) 112
4-9-4- Effect of Vibrational motion on seed germination 113
(%)
4-10- Seed Emergence (day) 116
4-10-1- Effect of opening gate on Seed Emergence (day) 116
4-10-1-1- Effect of Gate width Wg on seed emergence 117
(day)
4-10-1-2- Effect of Gate height Hg on seed emergence 118
(day)
4-10-2- Effect of Seed level height on seed emergence 118
(day)
 v

4-10-3- Effect of Seed varieties on seed emergence (day) 119

4-10-4- Effect of Vibrational motion on seed emergence 120
(day)
V- SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 124
VI- REFERENCES 134
VII- APPENDIX 143
ARABIC SUMMARY
 vi

LIST OF TABLES

Table
Subject Page
NO.
Angle of repose of seeds for pilling and empting, (RNAM,
1 6
1991).
Oberved and predicted flow rates of granular materials
2 16
through horizontal circular orifice. (Mohsenin, 1986)
3 Size of graded corn seeds. 37
4 Code of the (Wg Hg) and Area of the gate for Corn10 143
5 Code of the (Wg Hg) and Area of the gate for Corn162 144
Code of the A (Wg Hg) and Area of the gate for Broad
6 145
bean Giza 716.
Code of the (Wg Hg) and Area of the gate for Broad bean
7 146
Sakha2
8 The treatments, voltage, rpm correlated with the peak. 64
9 The variables affecting the seed discharge. 65
The 3 - Major dimensions of two Corn kernel seed
10 68
varieties.
The 3 - Major dimensions of two Broad bean seed
11 70
varieties
The weight, volume, real and bulk density of 1000 seed's
12 72
for Corn kernel seed varieties.
The Weights, volume, real and bulk density of 1000 seed's
13 73
for Broad bean seed varieties.
Treatments that gave the suitable number of seed / hill for
14 94
the combination for Corn kernel and Broad bean varieties.
Effect of Opening gate on seed longitudinal (cm) for mean
15 95
treatments
 vii

Effect of Mean change in width Wg of gate on seed

16 96
longitudinal (cm) for mean treatments.

Effect of Mean change in height Hg of gate on seed

17 97
longitudinal (cm) for mean treatments.
Effect of Seed level height on seed longitudinal (cm) for
18 98
mean treatments.
Effect of Seed varieties on seed longitudinal (cm) for
19 98
mean treatments.
Effect of Vibrational motion on seed longitudinal (cm) for
20 99
mean treatments.
Treatments of Max. and Min. values of seed longitudinal
21 100
(cm) for combination for Corn kernel varieties.
Treatments of Max. and Min. values of seed longitudinal
22 101
(cm) for combination for Broad bean varieties.
Treatments of Max. and Min. values of visible seed
23 108
damage (%) for combination for Broad bean varieties.
Treatments of Max. and Min. values of visible seed
24 108
damage (%) for combination for Corn kernel varieties.
Treatments of Max. and Min. value of germination (%) for
25 114
combination for Corn kernel varieties.
Treatments of Max. and Min. value of germination (%) for
26 115
combination for Broad bean varieties.
Treatments of Max. and Min. values of emergence (day)
27 121
for combination for Corn kernel varieties.
Treatments of Max. and Min. values of emergence (day)
28 122
for combination for Broad bean varieties.
 viii

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Subject Page
No.
1 Tracing of shape and designation of three intercepts for
seeds and grains obtained by photographic enlarger. 4
(Mohsenin, 1986)
Angle of repose and angle of flow at various moisture
2 7
content. (RNAM, 1991).
3 Type of flow as affected by hopper slope-angle and
8
friction angle of slid with hopper. (RNAM 1991)
Various types of surface profiles for row-crop planting.
4 18
(Kepner et al, 1978)
5 Methods of sowing and planting (all dimensions in cm).
19
(Klenin et al., 1985)
Distance (a) between nearest seeds and "P" for drilling,
6 22
R=inter row width. (Speelman, 1975)
Forms of the cross section of grain hoppers. (Bosoi et al.
7 24
1987)
8 Construction of the manual planter 26
Type of metering device used in seed drill. (RNAM,
9 30
1991)
(a)Stud-type roller metering mechanism. (RNAM, 1991)
30
10 (b)Rotating orifice-type metering device in IRRI seeders
31
suitable for paddy. (RNAM, 1991)
11 Sliding orifice plate metering device used in multi-crop
32
seeders. (RNAM, 1991)
12 Exploded of a foam pad and throat-type metering device
33
(RNAM, 1991)
 ix

13 Centrifugal-type rotary funnel metering device.

34
(RNAM, 1991)
14 Position of seeds relative to the cells. (Klenin et al.
35
1985)
15 Release and import velocities. (Wilson, 1980). 38
Seeds delivery circular mechanism (wheel type).
16 38
(Wilson, 1980)
17 View of picker-wheel s. (Widemann et al., 1979) 42
18 Sketch of contemplated test-rig (Awady et al., 1998a) 49
19 Anew scaling-reordering system aided by personal
51
computer. (Ozsert and Kara, 1992)
20 The photograph of the Soil bin. 55
21 The power transmission system in the soil bin. 56
22 The photograph of the seed box. 57
23 The photograph of the opening gates. 59
24 The photograph of the Speedometer used in the study. 60
25 The photograph of the Vibrometer used in the study. 60
26 The measuring device used to measure the static
62
coefficient of friction.
27 The photograph of the tested Surfaces sheets. 63
28 The 3-Major dimensions of Corn 10 and Corn 162 seeds
69
(cm).
29 The 3-Major Dimensions of Giza 716 and Sakha 2 seeds
70
(cm).
30 Static coefficient friction for material surfaces (corn
74
kernel varieties).
31 Static coefficient friction for painted surfaces (corn
75
kernel varieties).
 x

32 Static coefficient of friction for material surfaces (broad

76
bean varieties).
33 Static coefficient of friction for painted surfaces (broad
78
bean varieties).
34 Effect of vibrational motion on static coefficient of
80
friction for material surfaces.
35 Effect of vibrational motion on static coefficient of
82
friction for painted surfaces.
36 Effect of Opening gate on seed rate / min for mean
83
treatments.
37 Effect of Gate width dimension on seed rate / min for
84
mean treatments
38 Effect of Gate height dimension on seed rate / min for
85
mean treatments.
39 Effect of Seed level height on seed rate / min for mean
86
treatments.
40 Effect of Seed varieties on seed rate / min for mean
87
treatments.
41 Effect of Vibrational motion on seed rate / min for
88
mean treatments.

42 Effect of Opening gate on seed / hill for mean

89
treatments.
43 Effect of Gate width dimension on seed / hill for mean
90
treatments.
44 Effect of Gate height dimension on seed / hill for mean
90
treatments.
45 Effect of Seed level height on seed / hill for mean
91
treatments.
 xi

46 Effect of Seed varieties on seed / hill for mean

92
treatments.
47 Effect of Vibrational motion on seed / hill for mean
93
treatments.
48 Effect of Opening gate on seed damage (%) for mean
103
treatments.

49 Effect of Gate width dimension on seed damage (%) for

104
mean treatments.
50 Effect of Gate height dimension on seed damage (%) for
104
mean treatments.
51 Effect of Seed level height on seed damage (%) for
105
mean treatments.

52 Effect of Seed varieties on seed damage (%) for mean

106
treatments.

53 Effect of Vibrational motion on seed damage (%) for

107
mean treatments.
54 Effect of Opening gate on seed germination % for
109
mean treatments.

55 Effect of Gate width dimension on seed germination

110
(%) for mean treatments.

56 Effect of Gate height dimension on seed germination for

111
mean treatments.
57 Effect of Seed level height on seed germination (%)
112
for mean treatments.

58 Effect of Seed varieties on seed germination (%) for

113
mean treatments.
 xii

59 Effect of Vibrational motion on seed germination (%)

114
for mean treatments.
60 Effect of Opening gate on seed emergence (day) for
116
mean treatments.

61 Effect of Gate width dimension on seed emergence

117
(day) for mean treatments.

62 Effect of Gate height dimension on seed emergence

118
(day) for mean treatments.
63 Effect of Seed level height on seed emergence (day) for
119
mean treatments.
64 Effect of Seed varieties on seed emergence (day) for
120
mean treatments.
65 Effect of Vibrational motion on seed emergence (day)
121
for mean treatments.
 xiii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Page
Abbreviation Definition
No.
_ Average number of plants at a
X 48
standard unit area
 Repose angle 6
Distance between nearest neighbor
a 21
seeds
Area Area of opening gate 145
B Diameter of orifice 13
CV Coefficient of variation 97
d Day of count 69
D Diameter of cone 6
Diameter of assumed spherical
ds 13
particles
d1 Average major diameter 14
d2 Average minor diameter 14
F Number of seeds in cell 43
F(a) Frequency of seed spacing 21
frec Feeder speed 67
g Gravitational acceleration 67
H No. of seed appeared at each count 69
h Height of cone 6
Ht Thickness of grain 3
Hg Height of opening gate 60,67,70
Hl Seed level height 65,67
Hz Hertz 13
K The shape index 3
 xiv

L Length of grain 2
Lg Run length 23
Ls Average length of seeds 71
On Ratio of opening gate 145
P Bulk density 13
q Discharge seeds (weight / time) 67
QH Seed rate 23
qH1 Volume weight 24
R Inter row width 21
S Emergence (day) 68
SD Standard deviation 97
Seed distribution efficiency seeding
Se 50
device
SFC Static friction coefficient 9
Tn Vibrational motion 65
Ts Average thickness of seeds 60,67
V Final velocity of seed due to fall 54
V0 Initial velocity of the seed 53
W Width of grain 2
W.b% Wet balance 10
Wg width of opening gate 60,67
Ws Average width of seeds 67
β Sowing width 23
The coefficient of fullness of
ηc 24
hopper
The reciprocal of expected average
λ 21
sowing distance
μ Coefficient of friction 10
 xv

ρ Specific density of seeds 67

Φ Flow rate 13
 I. INTRODUCTION

The sowing process is considered one of the most important agricultural

operations. The art of placing seeds in the soil is to obtain high germination ratio
and healthy plants to achieve highest yield. Abd_ Alla, et. al (1995). But it still
depends on the manual effect, especially in small holdings. Governments has
been aware to the high benefit of mechanizing planting aimed to saving seed
rate, less time, power requirement, and plant uniformity.

The Basic objectives of sowing operation is to put the seed and fertilizer in the
ground at desired depth, seed to seed spacing, cover the seed with soil and
provide proper compaction over the seed, and the recommended row to row
spacing.

Using planting equipment in the right way lead's in increasing the production,
because of the great advantages we get from planting by planter's and allowing
further mechanization.

The Basic difference in the design of these planter's mainly is in the type of seed
mechanism and furrow opener's, Moreover, Metering mechanism is the heart of
sowing machine and it’s function is to distribute seed's uniformly at the desired
application rates. In planter's it also controls seed spacing in a row and should
not cause damage to the seed's while in operation, Therefore, it is essential to
select the machine with a metering unit and furrow opener suitable for the crop
and soil condition's.
Most seed damage in horizontal plate or vertical – rotor metering unit is caused
by the cutoff device. Damage can be minimized by making the cutoff device
flexible or by employing designs where no cutoff device is needed (Kepner et al.
1978).
 2

El-Shal (1987) reported that using the mechanical metering mechanisms cause
seed damage due to the friction forces between the mechanical parts and the
seeds. He added that the pneumatic metering mechanisms may deal gently with
the seeds and no damage during planting can occur.

The main aim of the proposed research can be concluded by:

1. Determining the physical properties of the seeds under study.
2. Studying the effect of different Surface materials on static coefficient of
friction.
3. Studying the effect of different surface painting on static coefficient of
friction.
4. Studying the effect of vibrational motion on static coefficient of friction.
5. Designing, manufacturing and testing a vibrational motion seed metering
mechanism (as a seed metering device) attached with the seed hopper to
avoid mechanical damage.
6. And determine some characters such as:
Seed rate per min., Seeds per hill, Percentage of damaged seed's,
Longitudinal of distributed seed, germination ratio, speed of germination
(emergence),
 II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2-1- Physical and mechanical properties of seeds:

Harmond. et al. (1965) mentioned that to increase seed production
with good scientists are studying physical, mechanical, chemical and botanical
properties of seed from an engineering standpoint. These properties can be
exploited as a guide in designing equipment and methods for such operations
concerning seed production as planting, harvesting, processing and testing
particular cleaning and storing machines.
The study of physical characteristics of seeds can provide to database
information with a very important data of specific new varieties which help by
different ways in designing, handling, storage and milling systems such data can
be used in clarifying and understanding the behavior of seeds under mechanical
stresses like rupture stress, compression strength …….etc. Mohsenin (1986).

2-1-1- Size and shape:

Mohsenin (1984) mentioned that physical properties of the materials such
as shape, size, volume and surface area are important in many problems
associated with design or developing a specific machine, analysis of the material
behavior during handling process and stress distribution.
RNAM (1991) mentioned that the knowledge of the physical
characteristics of seeds i.e. size, shape and bulk density is essential in the design
of seed drill box or a hopper. The flow of materials is determined by the angle of
repose, coefficient of friction between the seeds and hopper, the hopper shape,
size of orifice, moisture content, etc.
Mohsenin (1986) and Sitkei (1986) were able to determine the shape of
seeds by measuring its length, width and height. To measure dimension
accurately a photographic enlarger was used. The enlarged shapes are shown in
Fig. (1). Seeds have different shapes and flow of seed affected by length of
 -4-

major axis. Other factors considered in determining seed size, were the weight
of a seed, volume, specific gravity, moisture content and number of seeds per
gram weight.

Fig. (1): Tracing of shape and designation of three intercepts for seeds and
grains obtained by photographic enlarger. (Mohsenin, 1986)

Abd Alla et al. (1995) mentioned that grain shape (Index - K) was
calculated using the measured values of principal dimensions of grain sample
and was used to describe shape of different studied crop varies using the
following equation.

Index  K  L / (W  H ) …………. (2-1)

Where:
L = Length of grain (mm).
W = Width of grain (mm).
H = thickness of grain (mm).
At the shape index – K > 1.5 the grain is considered oblong but at shapes index
– K ≤ 1.5 the grain is considered spherical.
 -5-

Basnal et al. (1989) found that the difference in seeding rate from various
spouts is considered to be due to the physical properties of the seeds only.
El - Raie (1987) studied that some physical characteristics such as shape,
size, volume, average diameter, percent of sphericity, area of frontal and
transverse surfaces for the varieties of dry shelled corn. He proposed some
empirical equations for various dry shelled corn shapes to express the relation
between the three principal dimensions of a seed. Another set of suggested
equation can be used to predict with reasonable accuracy the above properties of
the seed from a measurement of any of these three dimensions. These properties
may help engineers in designing a specific machine and its operation or in the
analysis of the behavior of the product in handling of the material.

2-1-2- Angle of repose:

Chakraverty (1972) reported that the angle of repose is defined as the
angle between the base of the seed cone and the slope of the cone formed on a
free vertical fall of the grain mass to a horizontal plane. The angle of repose of
wheat ranged from 23 – 28°, barley 28 – 40° and rice 30° - 45°, He also
mentioned that the coefficient of friction between granular materials is equal to
the tangent of the angle of the internal friction from material and it depends on
grain shape, the surface and grain moisture content.
Awady (1979) stated that the static and kinetic coefficients of friction of
agricultural materials are usually determined to serve a particular application.
The usual method include tilting of an inclined plane or moving of a given
surface against the material, The angle of repose for grain to grain is determined
by using a paper cylinder full of grain mounted on a tilting drafting table. The
table top is tilted until the grain begins to move down the inclined surface. The
angle of the inclined grain surface is then measured as the angle of repose for
particular sample.
Waziti and Mittal (1983) stated that the angle of repose is an angle with
 -6-

the horizontal at which the material will stand when piled. The size contact
surface and orientation of product material influence the angle of repose of a
placed material.
Mohsenin (1986) mentioned that there are two repose angles:
1. Static repose angle: friction angle between the granular materials when
layers of same grain slip on each other.
2. Dynamic repose angle: that is taken for every situation of mass movement
like seed flow as they are stored and from orifices, the repose angle
increases with the increase of moisture content
Chakraverty (1987) reported that the angle of repose and the frictional
properties of grain play an important role in selection of design features of
hoppers, chutes, dryers, storage bins and other equipment for grain flow.
RNAM (1991) mentioned that the angle of repose of seeds or grains is
affected by the moisture content and is different when seeds are simply piled in
the hopper or when the hopper is being emptied. The angle of repose of seeds
for pilling and emptying are in table (1).
Table. (1): Angle of repose of seeds for pilling and empting, (RNAM, 1991).

The angle of repose is smaller for piling than for emptying the seeds. The
variation of angle of repose and angle of flow for seeds at different moisture
content levels are shown in Fig. (2).
 -7-

Fig. (2): Angle of repose and angle of flow at various moisture content.
(RNAM, 1991).

For grains with 8% moisture content values of angle of repose are low
indicating that when seeds are dry they have better flow characteristics than
when wet, Furthermore, the flow grains through hoppers are of two types :
Funnel flow or mass flow. In funnel flow the material from the central zone of
the bin flows and a funnel – shaped depression ids formed in the bin. The
material in contact with the hopper wall stationary. In mass flow, the entire mass
of grain flows downward in the bin. The type of flow depends on the angle of
friction of material with the wall and the hopper bottom slope Fig. (3).
 -8-

Fig. (3): Type of flow as affected by hopper slope-angle and friction angle of
slid with hopper. (RNAM, 1991).

Kaleem et al. (1993) mentioned that the angle of repose is very important
in determining the inclination angle of the machine hopper tank.
Soliman (1994) studied the effect of moisture content on angle of repose
of paddy rice. He mentioned that the dynamic angle of repose is one of the
physical properties needed for the design of material handling system and
storage facilities for rice and rice products.
Amin (2003) he reported that the angle of repose () was measured and
the following equation used to calculate the repose angle:
  tan -1 2h D .......... .........( 2 - 2)
Where:
h = height of cone (cm).
D = Diameter of cone (cm).
The determination of repose angle: letting wheat fall from a 20 cm height it
forms a heap. Through its height and diameter of base. The angle of repose ()
 -9-

was measured according to the following equation:

  tan -1 2h d .......... .........( 2 - 3)
Where :
h = height of the cone (cm).
d = diameter of the cone (cm).
Zaalouk (2008) he added that the dynamic angle of the repose is one of
the physical properties needed for the design of material handling systems and
storage facilities for wheat. The dynamic angle of repose is the angle formed by
a granular material with the horizontal as it comes and rest from sliding and
rolling upon itself in an unconsolidated or losses form.

2-1-3- Static coefficient of friction:

Stewart et al. (1969) stated that both dynamic and static friction
coefficient are important parameters in the design of storage structures and
handling equipment for granular material. It increased with increasing moisture
content of grain.
Kappuswamy and Wratten (1970) it is known that the coefficient of
friction depends not only on the materials in the contact but also the condition of
the materials. It has been determined experimentally and reported that dynamic
coefficient of friction is less than static value.
Mohsenin (1970) stated that the need of knowledge of the coefficient of
friction of agricultural products on various surface has long been recognized by
many researchers of agricultural machinery. Frictional characteristics are very
important in the proper design of agricultural product handling equipment
limited on static and dynamic (kinetic) coefficient of friction of agricultural
products have been available for many years. The method used by many
investigators to determine static and dynamic – coefficient of friction of
agricultural materials have usually been designed to suit the particular
conditions of materials, and he added the there is an argent need for determining
 - 01 -

the friction coefficient and repose angle of some cereal crops on various surfaces
frictional characteristics are very important in determination the proper design of
conveying, grading and forage chopping machinery.
Awady (1979) noticed that the static and kinetic coefficient of friction
of agricultural materials and the repose angle for grain on grain were important
to determine the angle of inclined grain surface, he added that the friction
coefficient (f) which is the angle between a tilted plane and the horizontal plane
which the crop over = comes the static friction and begins to slide down the
surface of the tilted plane as it is tilted slowly and gradually.
Lawton (1980) determined the coefficient of friction of 7 materials
used in the construction of agricultural silo walls for wheat and barley at
different levels of moisture content. Tests were carried out by rotating angular
plates on grain surface. He reported that friction coefficient increased with
increasing moisture content.
Mohsenin (1986) concluded that friction is the result of shearing and
deforming asperities, adhesion and cohesion friction of agricultural products
against machine parts is one of the main causes of mechanical injuries to fruits
and vegetables during handling knowledge of the friction coefficient is also
important in the design of machines and equipment and in storage structures. He
concluded investigations over the years on various agricultural products have
added the knowledge of friction properties.
Yehia et al. (2004) the static friction coefficient in terms of the repose
angle was examined by using the digital apparatus that was designed and
fabricated at Kafr El - Sheikh Governorate rice mechanization center (R.M.C)
Agric. Eng. Res. Institute (R.Eng.Res.Int.). It was used to measure the friction
angle on material surface and angle of repose with diameter (14 × 31.5) cm
(width × length) the static friction coefficient (SFC) for seed and kernel was
calculated by using the following formula:
SFC = tan  ………… (2 - 4)
 - 00 -

Where
SFC = static friction coefficient.
 = repose angle, degree.
Abu - Shieshaa et al. (2007) they mentioned that static coefficient of
friction of seeds was 0.24, 0.23, and 0.34 for galvanized metal, stainless steel
and plywood. Physical and mechanical properties for seed considered to be
necessary to design the separating, hulling and handling equipment and other
processing techniques.
Soliman et al. (2007) the static coefficient of friction was found to be
maximum on all surfaces (plywood, galvanized steel and mild steel) at high
moisture 30.26 than 9.88 (w.b %), It can be detected that the surface material
caused a significant effect on static coefficient of friction for the two corn
kernels varieties (white dent corn single hybrid 10 and yellow dent corn single
hybrid 155). The static coefficient was higher 0.5803, 0.5083, and 0.4801 for the
surface mild steel, galvanized steel and plywood respectively, at white dent corn
kernels S.H 10 and 0.5326, 0.4731, and 0.4428 for the three surfaces
respectively for the yellow dent corn kernels S.H 155 at the same moisture
content. The tested procedures started by leveling the apparatus wooden base. A
thin layer of one kernel thick was placed on the tested surface fastened to a
tilting plate. The pulley wheel was then wound slowly and smoothly until at
least 75 % of the kernels slide down the surface and then the tilted angle
between the tested surface and horizontal () was measured.
Zaalouk (2008) determination of friction between the material and wheat
grain is expected to be depending on material type only since wheat grain skins
is very smooth, the angle of friction is the angle between a tilted plane and the
horizontal plane at which a wheat grain over comes the static friction and begins
to slide down the surface of the tilted plane as it is tilted slowly and gradually. It
was determined according to the following equation:
μ = tan  ………………….. (2 - 5)
 - 01 -

Zaalouk and Zabady (2008) summarized their results in

1. The angle of repose of three wheat varieties with moisture content was
linear with positive slope within the range of moisture content under
study.
2. The static coefficient of friction generally increased as moisture content
of varieties increased.
3. Among the surface materials, rubber showed the highest static
coefficient of friction for each varieties galvanized metal, plywood and
plastic showed the lowest values.
4. Moisture of the samples was more influential on the static coefficient of
friction than surface materials tested.

2-1-4- Dynamic coefficient of friction:

Hao and Britton (1994) stated that the vibratory seed cleaner is
considered as one in efficient apparatus to achieve clean and graded small seeds
of higher quality. When the vibratory apparatus is operated, the vibrant action
makes the high quality seeds to scalp and drop through screen opening, but
larger materials are carried over the screen into a separate spout. When high
quality seeds ride over screen openings, the smaller particles drop through. To
achieve the efficient cleaning and grading processes it is necessary to minimize
the seed losses and lower the energy requirements. Information which would
define the parameters of the efficient separation and grading maybe of
considerable value of designers and operators to setup any new design , the
existing machines and achieve the higher performance of vibratory apparatus.
Amin (2003) studied some engineering parameters affecting cleaning
and separating efficiency such as type of motion (vibrating or rotary speed), cell
shape (rectangular, square and circle), position of rectangular cell (parallel or
perpendicular with speed direction), sieve inclination and sieving time were
 - 01 -

considered for each machines type (vibratory and rotary machines).

El_ Gayar (2005) she recommended to use the vibratory apparatus as an
effective method to clean and grade flax seeds due to the higher productivity,
lower energy requirements and higher seed quality. There was a positive relation
between the apparatus productivity and the vibration frequency (30, 60, 90, 120
and 150) Hz for cleaning and grading vibratory apparatus the higher vibratory
apparatus productivity of 4.45 Kg/h was reached at seed moisture content 7.19
% and vibration frequency of 150 Hz. While the lower vibratory apparatus
productivity of 1.97 Kg/h was recorded at seed moisture content of 20.64% and
vibration frequency of 30 Hz. The vibration frequency in the unit time increased
resulting in higher vibration force which increased the seeds kinetic energy.
Hence more seeds quantity passed through the hole openings especially at the
lower seed moisture content levels. The multiple regression and correlation
analysis shows the relation between the vibratory apparatus productivity (Y), the
seed moisture content (X1) and the vibration frequency (X2) is represented as
follows:
Y = - 0.11 X1 + 0.008 X2 + 4.15 ………… (2 - 6)
R2 = 0.99
And it was clear that required specific energy increased with the vibration
frequency. From the previous results one can say that the higher energy
requirements is due to grater impact force and friction force between seeds them
selves that were accompanied with the higher seed moisture and increased
vibration frequency due to the higher friction force between seeds, leading to
higher specific energy requirements.
The multiple regression and correlation analysis shows that the relation between
the energy requirements (Y) seed moisture content (X1) and the vibration
frequency (X2) is represented as follows:
Y = 0.25 X1 + 0.02 X2 + 2.12 ………… (2 - 7)
R2 = 0.97
 - 04 -

It is clear that the vibration frequency affected positively Cs (clean less degree
of seeds recovered the production) this observation is attributed to the increased
seeds , cohesion due to the higher vibration frequency which leads to the higher
seeds kinetic energy that allows more impurities amount to separate from the
seeds. The vibration frequency is directly proportional to the apparatus
productivity, the energy requirements and seed quality.
Gomma et al. (2006) stated that grading includes two basic processes,
the first one is storing the product for removing undesirable and rotten material,
such a process runs in most cases manually and by dint of trained workers. The
second process is storing out the product into categories in term of distinctive
features such like shape, size, weight or maturity degree such a process runs
either manually or mechanically yet, the whole process of grading runs
mechanically if is preferred, since manual grading is less efficiency and more
costly by some source of vibration methods.
Fouda (2008) he made an engineering study on the performance of
paddy and rice separator using a vibration apparatus to minimize both crack and
energy and maximize performance efficiency.

2-1-5- Flow of seeds or grains through an orifice:

Deming and Mehring (1929) by application dimensional analysis,
studying the flow of solid particles through funnels and reported that when the
coefficient of internal friction (assumed equal to the angle of repose, φ) and the
cone included angle,  were kept constant the flow rate was described as
Φ = 100B2.5 ρ / f (d / B,, φ ) ………….(2 - 8)
Where
Φ = flow rate in g / min.
B = diameter of orifice in mm.
Ρ = bulk density in g / cm3.
d = average diameter of assumed spherical particles in mm and,
 - 05 -

f (d / B, , φ ) = [ tan φ [ 34.6 + ( 67.4 + 444 Sin  / 2 ) × ( D / B +

0.130 + 0.16 / tan φ ) ]] ……………….. (2 - 9)
As

 - 
D  0.8 d d
5 5
………….. (2 - 10)
d 
2 1
4 4
2 d1
-

Where:
d2 = average major diameter mm. and
d1 = average minor diameter mm
However, when d2 / d1 < 2, the arithmetic average of d1 and d2 could be
used to calculate flow rate equation (10) is valid for flow of particles through
funnels with angle ranging from 20 to 110 assuming no cohesion among the
particles.
Beverloo et al. (1961) developed the equation for flow through orifices
as:
Φ = 35 ρ g0.5 (B – 1.4 d) 2.5 ……………………..(2 - 11)
Where:
Φ = flow rate in g / min.
B = diameter of orifice in cm.
Ρ = bulk density in g / cm3.
d = average screen size of particles in cm
g = gravitational acceleration = 9.81 cm / Sec2.
Calculated flow rates of various seeds showed an average variation of 5
% from the observed or measured values. For example, consider a soybean seed
with an orifice diameter of 40 mm, seed diameter size of 6.6 mm and density of
0.75 g / cm3. The value of Φ is given by:
Φ = 35 × 0.75 × 9810.5 (4 – 1.4 × 0.66)2.5
= 822.17 × (3.076)2.5
= 13.643 g/min
 - 06 -

The observed value is 13.690 g/min

Table (2) shows the flow rates of granular materials through horizontal orifices
in containers based on equation (2 - 10) and (2 - 11). The values for lead shots
and marbles are given because their regular shapes and size indicate how close
the calculated and observed flow values are when using the developed
equations.
Table. (2): Observed and predicted flow rates of granular materials through
horizontal circular orifice. ( Mohsenin, 1986)

El_ Sayed (1994) on his study on corn planter with a inclined plate 3 mm
thickness using different cell diameter for each plate (16, 18, and 20 mm)
increased seed rate with cell diameter increase that was for content for the seeds
cause it increase in size, the content for the seed was 1.9, 3, and 4.4 seed / cell
for the diameter 16, 18, and 20 mm respectively and he found that cell full
percent increased as the size of the cell increased, the full percentage was 125,
 - 07 -

138 and 163 % for the mentioned diameter of cells respectively.

Daboul (1998) stated that the increase of cell size from 1.39 to 2.47
mm2 increased seeds per hill 14.5, 24, 25.5, and 35 % for the four forward
speeds 0.15, 0.22, 0.31, and 0.49 m/sec respectively.

2-2- Methods of sowing and mathematical treatment of distribution:

2-2-1- Methods of sowing:
Bates (1930) stated that the first reported use of an airplane for seeding
was in (1929), when it became necessary to replant some California fields that
had already been flooded. At the present time most of the rice planted in
California, as well as considerable area in the other states, is presoaked and
broadcasted on to either flooded or dry fields by airplane. Other crops such as
wheat, barley and pasture grasses have been seeded by to a limited extent.
Aircraft are particularly valuable for residing hilly range lands or burned over
areas.
Richey et al. (1961) mentioned that many different methods are used to
meter seeds for planting depending on the characteristics of seed and the spacing
desired.
Culpin (1976) mentioned that the type of deed mechanism most
widely used for maize in many parts of the world where the crop has been in the
regular cultivation for many years is a horizontal plate feed with notches of a
shape and size designed to receive a single maize kernel lying flat. The rotating
plate lies at the bottom of the cylindrical hopper.
Kepner et al. (1978) mentioned that planting might be done on the flat
surface of the field in furrows, or on beds, as illustrated in
Fig. (4). Furrow planting (or lister planting) is widely practiced under
semiarid conditions for row crops such as corn, cotton and grain sorghum
because this system places the seed down into moist soil and protects the young
plants from wind and blowing soil. Bed planting is often practiced in high –
 - 08 -

rainfall areas to improve where natural moisture conditions are favorable. A

variation of furrow planting provides a flat plateau perhaps 7.5 cm (3 in) high
and 25 cm (10 in) wide in the furrow. The advantage mentioned above for
furrow planting are retained, and the small furrows beside the plateau keep
water from standing on the row or washing soil into the row if a heavy rain
occurs.

Fig.(4) : Various types of surface profiles for row-crop planting. (Kepner et al,
1978)

Ab_ El_Ees (1985) showed that the method of seed drilling is very
effective as well due to its effect on uniformity of depth and spacing it is well
known that mechanical seed drilling leads to more uniform spacing and sowing
depth resulting in higher yield than traditional hand method of sowing of deed
mechanism.
Klenin et al. (1985) indicated that the common methods used for
sowing crops are as follows:
Broadcasting, dibbling, seed dropping behind the plough, drilling, hill
dropping, check _ rowing and transplanting Fig. (5).
 - 09 -

Fig. (5) : Methods of sowing and planting (all dimensions in cm).

a- row sowing; b- dibbling; c- narrow row sowing; d- wide row
sowing; e- strip sowing; f- single grain sowing; g- hill- drop sowing; h-
square hill-drop sowing; I-random sowing, (Klenin et al., 1985)

They showed that broadcasting is scattering seeds on field surface, soon

after broadcasting, they are covered by manipulating the soil and planking it
over. Such crops are given interculturing operations only by hand tools. A
slightly higher rate of seeding is obtained this method Fig. (5-i).
Dibbling: method means placing two or more seeds in holes made in the soil
either by hand tools or by some implement. Dibbling of seed is only done for
small plots and it is generally used for vegetables crops. Wheat crop gives a
quite encouraging yield by dibbling, the seed rate is reduced with one fifth or
more Fig. (5-b).
Seeding behind the plough: in the furrow Fig. (5-c) is used for large seeds like
maize and peas, this method is also successfully used for wheat and barely since
 - 11 -

the depth of seeding is comparatively small. It is generally observed that seed

rate is increased and the moisture content of the soil is kept slightly high.
They pointed that Drilling means dropping the seeds in the furrow through
seed tubes. Some of the mechanically operated seed drills give a very high
accuracy in metering the number of rows planted at a time, proper depth,
spacing and the amount of sown seeds, and the covered area per day are higher
than the other methods. For seed drilling, the disadvantage is only mechanical
seed drill that damage the seed is likely to get clogged during operation Fig. (5-
a).
In the hill dropping method, the seeds are dropped at a fixed spacing, not in a
continuous stream. The distance between the plants in a row is constant, while
the distance between rows is not necessarily the same as that between the plants
in a row Fig. (5-g)
Check rowing is the method in which the space between the rows is the same as
that between the plants Fig. (5-h).
Transplanting of seedling is commonly done for paddy vegetable crops and
flower plants.
Band sowing, Fig. (5-e) may be considered as an intermediate between drilling
and broadcasting. Band sowing has advantages as far as it concerns the seed
distribution pattern in the horizontal plane. It increases the mean values of the
distance between nearest neighbor seed and decrease the standard deviation as
well as the coefficient of variation for band sowing depending on the transverse
distribution pattern of the seeds the band width, and expected value of the
distance between the seeds.
El - Shafy (1986) found that using seed drilling for sowing onion seed
gave high production than other sowing (methods manual seed broadcasting,
manual sowing in rows, self propelled machine and planter).
Minimum tillage planting systems: These are: strip tillage, the "no – tillage"
system which ids actually narrow strip tillage, lister planting, till – and – plant
 - 10 -

combinations following plowing or other primary tillage, and planting in wheel

track immediately after plowing. These systems are sometime employed with
crops such as corn, soybeans, and sorghum.
Bed planting is common for certain types of row crops in irrigated areas. With
closely spaced row crops such as sugar beets, lettuce and certain other vegetable
crops two or more rows are sometimes planted close together and a single bed
Fig. (4).
Daboul (1998) mentioned on his study about planting corn and cotton
on a ridge (on the side of a furrow) to avoid salt, that appears as a line on it, and
could kill the seedling as the plant grow.

2-2-2- Mathematical treatment of seed distribution:

Heeg (1967) studied the horizontal distribution pattern for sowing
seeds and their techniques. It appeared that placing the seed in an equilateral
triangle connection provides the best horizontal distribution pattern with respect
to the value of distance between nearest neighbor seeds and its variation. This
means that, depending on the cereal variety (as seed quantity per hectare and
1000 kernels weight determine the theoretical mean area per seed) inter row
width and target seed spacing in the row are to be realized.
Speelman (1975) found that in the seed drilling, for each seed the
nearest seed around it fell on the circumference of a circle, where the seed itself
is the center Fig. (6). He obtained an equation to calculate the radius.
 - 11 -

Fig. (6): Distance (a) between nearest seeds and "P" for drilling, R=inter row
width. (Speelman, 1975)

The density functions:

 
f a   2  4ak  1 a 2  KR 
2



 0.5 exp  -  2  4ak  1 a 2 - KR 
2
 ......... 2 - 12


Where:
F (a) = Frequency of seed spacing %.
λ = the reciprocal of expected average sowing distance (cm) in the row.
R = Inter – row width, and
a = the distance between nearest neighbor seeds is defined by the radius of the
circle.

2-3- Design factors for sowing seeds:

2-3-1- Seed box:
Stone and Gulvin (1977) mentioned that the seed box may be made of
steel. The zinc- cold, copper-bearing, bondrized, or painted steel hopper is found
on most modern drills. It provides greater strength, greater durability and is warp
less sag less, and rustles. It has about 70 percent greater capacity than wooden
 - 11 -

hopper.
Deere (1981) indicated that the seed box generally has a capacity from
one to nearly three bushels per foot (0.31 m3 per meter) of drilling width.
Awady and El-Said (1985) reported developed a simple seed planter
whose hopper is built from iron sheeting with 45° sloping bottom.
Klenin et al. (1985) said that seed boxes, barrels and hoppers not only
serve as spaces to store seed material but set up a flow of the seed materials
through the feed hole to the planting device. The shape of the orifice and the
height to which the seed box is filled has practically not effect on the quantity
and flow rate of seeds. The flow of seeds through thin walled orifice is more
uniform that through thick walled orifices. For this, orifices in seed boxes with
wooden bottoms are made conical (shape edge). In seed drills these boxes are
usually rectangular at the top and trapezoidal at the bottom. The slope of the side
walls is so selected that seed flow is not hampered. The holes provided at the
bottom of the box are usually circular in shape and are connected to the tubes of
the seed drill.
Bosoi et al. (1987) added that hoppers must have an optimum capacity
and must feed seeds uniformly and continuously to the seeds metering
mechanism independent of the direction of motion of the sowing unit. In
practice, the following forms of grain hopper cross section are found:
trapezoidal Fig. (7-a) almost hexahedral Fig. (7-b) and combined hoppers are
made from wood with metallic sides or are completely metallic with wooden
bottoms.
 - 14 -

Fig. (7): Forms of the cross section of grain hoppers. (Bosoi et al. 1987)

Those most widely used are hoppers of the trapezoidal and combined
forms. The front and back of the grain hoppers are set at on angle to the base
equal to the angle of friction "φ" of the sowing material with the covering
surface (wood, metal). The volume (m3) of the hopper is determined per hectare
for crop with a high seed rate but low weight (mass of one liter in Kg).
Vc = Lg QH B / 104 ηc qH1 ……………….. (2 - 13)
Where:
Lg = run length, m.
QH = seed rate, Kg / ha.
B = sowing width, m.
ηc = the coefficient of fullness of the hopper, equal to 0.9.
qH1 = volume weight Kg.
Hopper length is given by.
Lg= a(nc + 1) …………………….(2 - 14)
Where
a = row width, m.
 - 15 -

nc = number of boots.
The cross sectional area or the hopper is determined by
Fc = Vc / Lg …………………….(2 - 15)
The neck width  and height H of the hopper depend on the volume, length,
form of cross section and suitability of servicing it is common practice to take 
= 250 – 300 mm.
The bottom width B‫ ״‬is determined on the basis of the cross sectional area of
the output opining. The output opining usually has a circular cross section.
According to the experimental data, it optimum area, securing continuous seed
feeding is Fo = 20cm2. The, the radius of the opening is ro = 25.4 mm. For
reliable fixation of metering mechanisms to the hopper bottom, allowance must
be made for bottom width of 20 mm on each side of the opening. Thus
B‫ = ״‬do + 2 × 20 mm.
Accordingly, for thick wooden bottom the output opening should not be
cylindrical, but conical with the widening downward. Sees hopper must be
equipped with are breakers for sowing slow running seeds to avoid formation of
canopies.
Grain hoppers for sowing machines for inter – tilled crops are metallic and have
cylindrical hoppers. The numbers of openers is equal to the number of metering
mechanisms. The total volume of hopper is determined by the next formula. The
volume of one hopper is given by
Vb = Vc / n ………………… (2 - 16)
Where
n = the number of hoppers.

2-3-2- Feeding mechanism:

Lovegrove (1968) mentioned that the function of the seed dispensing
mechanism is to transfer seed from the hopper into opener tubes at a pre- set rate
synchronized with the ground speed of the drill. The mechanism is driven by the
 - 16 -

land wheeled of the drill through a train of drives employing either gears, chains
or both. The sowing rate must be accurately adjustable in spite of the widely
differing sizes of the seeds commonly sown. This problem account for the many
different types of seed – dispensing metering mechanisms available.
Awady (1970) developed a manual cotton planter adapted to a pipe
holder, Fig. (8). this holder server as strong for the seeds, as well as a pole that
reaches easily to the ground. Attached to the top of the pipe holder is a funnel
for filling with seeds, and a handle for holding the machine. A rod can be swung
both ways to help in estimating the right distance spacing.

Fig. (8): Construction of the manual planter

1- Pipe holder 2- Funnel 3- Handle 4- Scale spacer
5- Metering chamber 6- Depth stopper 7- Spring 8-
Inspection opening

RNAM (1991) mentioned that some devices, Fig. (9) Which meter seeds
on bulk (Volume) basis are:
1. Stationary orifice or hole with agitators metering device: stationary
 - 17 -

orifice with agitator type, is used in low cost machines. The orifice plate
has large number of holes from 2 to 15 mm diameter. Holes size on the
plate is selected according to the size of seed and required seed rate, in
some designs adjustable orifices are provided to control the seed rate. The
size of orifice is controlled by either of the following processes.
(i) Sliding plate and a disc with notched agitator.
(ii) Ribbed rubber roller Fig. (9-b) or.
(iii) Cylindrical brush type rotor Fig. (9-c).

The unit gives satisfactory performance over a wide range of crops. The seed
rate is mostly controlled by the size of the orifice and the achieved seed
distribution has a high coefficient of variation caused by gravity and vibration
due to rough ground conditions.
Vertical roller with cells: Fig. (9-a) Cells on the vertical roller are located at
the periphery. Their sizes range from 2-15 mm diameters to accommodate,
small, medium and large sized seeds. Their roller is slid a long its length to vary
the desired cell size. A few seeds are picked up in each cell from the hopper and
then dropped into the seed tube, instead of having a single roller of different – v
belt cells. Separate rollers are used for different crops. In some designs, the
seeds from the main hopper flow into a smaller hopper so that constant level is
maintained in the secondary hopper to achieve a uniform rate, which vary with
the speed of rotors.
2. Fluted roller: Fig. (9-d) this is widely used in seed drills it is capable of
handing various crops, like wheat, chickpea, mung bean, pigeon, pea soybean
and sorghum. Fluted rollers can be manufactured from different materials like
cast iron, aluminum, and plastic. Seeding rate is adjusted by varying the exposed
length of flutes, which are in contact with seed, and by increasing or decreasing
the speed of rollers.Generally variation in seeding rate achieved by adjusting the
exposed length of flutes in the seed cup with the aid of calibrate sliding lever for
 - 18 -

accurate movement of the fluted roller, a screw – type sliding arrangement is

used in many design. For different size of seeds, an adjustable spring – loaded
baffle plate is provided. When fully opened it helps in emptying the seed from
the seed cup. The fluted roller is a sample, low cost, trouble – free device
suitable for bulk metering even for granulated fertilizers. It is used for metering
sensitive seeds by rotating it in the reserve direction in which case seed contact
against the baffle plate Fig. (9-d).
 - 19 -

Fig.(9) : Type of metering device used in seed drill. (RNAM, 1991)

 - 11 -

An improved design of the fluted roller has spiral – shaped fluted roller which
distributes the seeds more evenly compared with the straight fluted rollers.
3. Stud – type rollers: Fig. (9-e) stud – type rollers are widely used on
European – designed drills because they can handle a wide variety of seeds and
fertilizers. In this type of metering unit Fig. (9-e). The seed drills are fitted with
multi – speed gearbox or variator to easily set the speed at required application
rate.
4. Rotating drum with orifice – type: Fig. (10-a) the rotating drum with
orifice consists of a horizontally positioned (cylinder axis) cylindrical drum with
rows of closely spaced holes punched along the periphery of the drum, the eight
– row drum – type manually operated seeder was reported tube a simple, low –
cost and easy fabricates machine Fig. (10-b). It was also reported to be
economically viable for planning paddy seeds in uplands and wet soils in small
scale farms. Seeding rate varies depending on the size of holes on the drum and
on quantity of seeds in the hopper.

Fig. (10- a) Stud-type roller metering mechanism. (RNAM, 1991)

 - 10 -

Fig. (10-b): Rotating orifice-type metering device in IRRI seeders suitable for
paddy. (RNAM, 1991)

5. Sliding orifice – type: Fig. (11), the unit consists of a plate with orifice
which oscillates below a seed hopper. A seed falls when it matches the orifice
on the base of the hopper and then enters the inlet end of the seed delivery tube.
A brush – type knock – off device is provided to keep the orifice clean. For
dropping different sizes of seeds, metering plates with varying sizes of orifices
are provided. The frequency of oscillation determines the seed rate. The orifice
place oscillates by means of a rotor arm mounted on the axle of the ground drive
 - 11 -

wheels.

Fig. (11): Sliding orifice plate metering device used in multi-crop seeders.
(RNAM, 1991)

6. Foam pad – type metering device: Fig. (12) A special throat – shaped
cavity located at one side of a square – based seed hopper which is covered with
a foam rubber pad. The pad is kept flush with the throat on the side of the
hopper and seeds are slowly delivered by the rotation of the pad through the
throat at the inlet end of the seed tube. Seed movement is controlled by the
friction between the pad surface and the seed various. Seed rates are achieved by
varying the speed of the rotating pad. The unit can meter all types of seeds and
fertilizer. It is a low – cost device with uniform seed delivery rate.
 - 11 -

Fig. (12): Exploded of a foam pad and throat-type metering device (RNAM,
1991)

7. Centrifugal – type rotating cup metering device: Fig. (13) the working
principle of the type of metering device is as follows:
Seeds from the cylindrical hopper are dropped through a series of openings into
a conical metal casing, revolving inside the outer cone is frustum (270 mm
diameter) or a cone shaped rotor (45 mm diameter) with curved blades. The
height of the cone is 150 mm. the angle directing the line of path of seeds is
40°.through the opening, at the bottom the rotor seeds can get inside the cone. A
curved finger – shaped agitator placed opposite the inlet opening forces the flow
of seeds into the funnel, the air blast produced by the rotor blades is directed
upwards and carries away the dust and fine particles. The size of the feeding slat
can be altered controlled by turning the hand – operated diaphragm. The seeds
enter the feed tubes through obliquely running openings and tubes. Individual
seed tube can be close by means of shutters. Seeds that miss the opening fall
back into the outer conical base and are fed again into the rotor. There is also an
opening on the outer cone for emptying the remaining seeds from the funnel.
 - 14 -

The inter – row variations were found to be within ±5 %. This metering system
has been used in machines with large operating widths.

Fig. (13): Centrifugal-type rotary funnel metering device. (RNAM, 1991)

Design of disk – feeder cell:

Kenin et al. (1985) showed that approach of cells of the disk is three
phased:
i) Approach of seeds to the cells.
ii) Entry of seeds and
iii) Their packing in the cell.
When the disk rotates, frictional forces act on the adjacent seeds due to these
forces a certain layer of the seeds is set on motion with a velocity "U s" which is
less than the circular velocity "U" at the center of the cells on the disk.
At some position the seeds begin to fall into the cells Fig. (14a), seeds may fall
at different times, if the height of the seed layer in the hopper is not great, seeds
 - 15 -

fall when center of gravity of the seeds is at the edge of the cell. If, for the same
conditions the seed layer height is great, which is common for disk feed seed
drills vertical (pressure) force (Ph) and friction force (fph) act on the seeds in
addition to gravitational force "G" under these conditions, as shown in Fig,
(14b), the second phase begins only after the center of gravity of the seeds
moves by some distance "d" with respect to the edge of the cell. It has been
established that for sugar beet seedlings "d" varies from 0.35 L to 0.45 L where
"L" is the length of the seed. Seeds fall into the cell, the seeds falling into the
cells are acted upon by the pressure of the overlying seed layers. Their influence
on the fall of the seeds into the cells may be considered by multiplying the

gravitational force "દG" by a coefficient "દ > 1".

Fig. (14) : Position of seeds relative to the cells:

a-for single grains; b-with a thick overlying seed bed; c-during falling of seed
into the cell. (Klenin et al. 1985)

If the seed is symmetrical in shape and air resistance is neglected, then the
motion of the center of the seed may be considered to be that of force fall of a

body of weight "દG" with an initial velocity "U" Fig.(14c) .

The following equation represents the displacement of the seeds along the "X
 - 16 -

and Z" axes.

X1 = Us × t ……………..(2 - 17)

Z = 9.8 × દ× t2 / 2 …….... (2 - 18)

Where "t" is the time of fall (sec).

Seeds may fall into a cell when the center of the gravity of the seed lies below or
at the level of the disk surface this accurse when Z > a/2.
Where "a" is the thickness of the seeds (mm).
Substituting Z ≥ a/2 in (14) the following is obtained

t ≥ √a / 9.8 × દ ……………(2 - 19)

During this time, the center of the call turns through some angle traversing the
path.
S = Ut …………………… (2 - 20)
Where the "U" is the tangential velocity of the center of the cell as shown in
Fig.(14c), the seed settles in the cell when
X1 ≥ S – L + δ + 1/2
Substituting X and S in the equations (2 - 17) and (2 - 20) results in the
following:
U  Us  [(L  1 / 2   ) / A / 9.8  ] .......... ....(2 - 21)

If feed units fitted with disks of horizontal axis of rotation, the seeds – fall into
the cells begin when the disk rotates through some angle with respect to the
horizontal line. It has been observed that this angle lies between 50 to 60°.
It follows from inequality (6) that for the seeds falling into the cells to tangential
velocity of the seed center must decrease with larger values of "and I" shorter
length "L" of the cells in the disk and smaller velocity "U" of the seeds.
At speed of 9 Km/h, the center of the cell in the drill used for sowing corn and
sugar beet attains velocity of 0.73 m/sec and 0.43 m/sec, respectively.
Packing of seeds in the cells: for high quality sowing, each cell should be
 - 17 -

packed with a single seed such that it is not ejected by the plat. Seed packing is
greatly affected by relationship between the cell size and the seed thickness. The
ratio has an optimal value which is achieves by earlier grading of the corns, for
instance are grading into six fractions Table (3) , sugar beet, seed drills sow
seeds in two grades of size 3.5 to 4.5 mm and 4.5 to 5.5 mm.
Table (3): Size of graded corn seeds.
No. Grades Dimension, mm
Width Thickness
0 Large flat 9 – 10.5 (11) 3.75 – 5.5
1 Medium flat 8–9 3.75 – 5.25
1 Thin flat 7–8 3.75 – 5
4 Small flat 6.5 – 7 3.75 – 4.75
5 Large round 8 – 10.5 (11) 3.75 – 7
6 Medium round 6.5 – 8 4.75 – 7

2-3-3- The performance of feeding mechanism:

The feeding mechanism of seeds should be capable of providing the desired
seeding rate with a minimum of seed damage.

2-3-3-1- Feeding rate:

Feeding rate will be affected by the following factors:
Ground – wheel speed (forward speed):
Wilson (1980) derived equations related to errors in seed release from
the feed delivery mechanism to seed spacing distribution in the furrow. Factors
taken into account in these equations include the height of release, the radius of
the cell – wheel mechanism or angle of belt – in belt – type mechanisms, and the
relative velocities of the seed at release point. His experimental model predicts
to optimum release point for a cell wheel mechanism and experimental results
 - 18 -

are described which support this prediction. The factor with the most
outstanding effect is the ratio between forward speed of machine and the speed
of release points on the metering mechanism. When this ratio is unity, the
release errors will have a minimal effect upon spacing distribution seeds and
impact velocity which is shown in Fig. (15) and Fig. (16).

Fig. (15): Release and import velocities. (Wilson, 1980)

Fig. (16): Seeds delivery circular mechanism (wheel type).

(Wilson, 1980)
 - 19 -

The horizontal velocity of the seed at the moment of release is give by:
UH = V – vCos θ ………………… (2 - 22)
The vertical velocity is given by:
Uv = - vSin θ ………………….. (2 - 23)
The relation for impact angle and impact velocity is the form:


  tan 1 V 2 sin   2 g H  r1  cos  / V  v cos 
And
V1  2 g H  r1  cos   V 2  V 2  2Vv cos .......... .....2  24

Where
UH = Horizontal velocity of seed at the moment of release.
Uv = Vertical velocity of seed at moment of release.
VR = Velocity of seed at the point of release.
VH1 = Horizontal velocity component of the seed at impact.
VV1 = Vertical velocity component of the seed at impact.
V1 = Velocity of seed at the point of impact.
v = Peripheral speed of metering mechanism.
H = Height of the target release pint above the ground.
r = Radius of circular mechanism.
α = Angle of impact of the seeds at the ground.
θ = Angle subtended between "A and B" at the center of the circular mechanism.
A = Target point of release on metering mechanism.
B = Point of release on metering mechanism.
C = Point upon the soil surface vertically bellow "A".
D = Horizontal distance traveled by the seed during its flight.
g = Ground acceleration.
He concluded these points:

1. The peripheral velocity of the release mechanism should be equal and

 - 41 -

BDC opposite in direction, to the forward speed of the seed sowing machine.
This condition were result in a minimum placement error, an optimum impact
angle and minimum impact velocity for a given release height.
2. The height of the release point has a very little effect on placement error
and impact angle for a given release error but if impact velocity is to be kept as
low as possible the mechanism should be kept as close to the ground as in
practicable. The will in turn, release the magnitude of variations occurring
during flight that a wheel radius of between "70" and "100" mm would be the
optimum.
3. When release error occurs, a reduction in radius of the release mechanism
causes increased impact angle. This study suggests:
4. The optimum release point for a circular mechanism is dependent upon
the forward speed of the mechanism. At a reasonable sowing speed about "2 - 3"
m/s the optimum point would be "20" before BDC.
Bahnasawy (1992) found that the grain yield decreased with increasing
forward speed, where, the highest yield of grain was recorded at 3 Km/h speed.
Meanwhile, the lowest yield was recorded at 8 Km/h. these results may be due
that increase in velocity causes disturbance in speed – depth and seed spacing,
slip percent increases with speed, and affects plant population and grain yield.
Taib (1997) stated using a mechanical method of sowing sugar – beet in
newly reclaimed lands that:
1. Seed emergency percent and plant population decrease by increasing
forward speed.
2. It reduces the amount of used seed to 33%.
3. Reduces the cost of energy required for planting to 58%.
4. It reduces the time taken for planting for about 48%.
Karayel and Ozmerzi (2001) stated that variability in the seed precision
vacuum seeder increased with increasing forward speed. They revealed that
forward speed of 1 m/sec consistently produced a better seed pattern than 1.5
 - 40 -

and 2 m/sec for precision sowing of melon and cucumber seeds.

Gommaa (2003) noticed that, the planting forward speed had a
significant effect on the field capacity as the greatest value of field capacity of
about 3.68 fed/h was obtained under 8.0 Km/h. forward speed for mechanical
planter, while it was 3.52 fed/h. at the previous planting forward speed in case of
pneumatic planter. Also the results showed that, the planting forward speed had
an inverse effect on field efficiency. He also added that, pneumatic planter gave
the highest values of germination ratio of 90.7% at forward speed 3.16 Km/h.
meanwhile, the lowest values of total seed losses compared with mechanical
planter which gave germination ratio of 85.72% at planting forward speed of
3.16 Km/h and these were remarked under the different levels of planting
forward speed.
Morad et al. (2010) showed that there are inversely relationship
between machine forward speed and emergence ratio. Increasing forward speed
from 2.5 to 3.88 Km/h deceased emergence ratios from 92 to 88.2% and from 89
to 83.7%. under 20 and 30 cm distance between plants in row respectively, the
decrease in emergence ratio by increasing forward dispersion under high speeds
resulting in low emergence ratio.

2-3-3-2 Effect of feeding – shaft speed (ratio of rotation):

Widemann et al. (1979) found that picker wheels patterned after the
"Nesbit" 12- tooth picker were constructed in width of 6.4, 12.7, 25.4, 50.8 and
101.6 mm. and tested speeds of 25 to 200 rpm.
Exceptionally height seeding rates were obtained with the wide picker
wheels in the semicircular seed box. It was noted, however, that the 12.7 mm
picker wheel developed similar seeding rates to the 6.4 mm picker wheel at
approximately one-half the speed. The 12.7 mm picker wheel was selected for
further evaluation since it was felt that the slower speed would reduce chances
of seed bridging around the picker wheel. The view of picker wheel is shown in
 - 41 -

Fig. (17).
A 12.7 mm wide picker – wheel with eight teeth and similar design was
compared to the aforementioned 12.7 mm wide picker – wheel at speeds of 10
and 30 rpm and 100, 75, 50, and 25 percent of full seed box capacity. The 12-
tooth picker wheel with 50 percent more teeth than the 8-tooth picker wheel
increased the seeding rate by an average of only 3 percent. The 8-tooth picker
wheel was selected for the seeder.

Fig. (17): View of picker-wheel s. (Widemann et al., 1979)

Hussin (1988) and Choudhary (1988) and Bansal et al. (1989)

showed that the length of feeding-wheel mechanism it speed, and transmission
ratio have positive effects on the sowing rates.

2-3-3-3 Effect of agitation:

Awady and El-Said (1985) found that, in their seed drill with screw
feeder, agitation improved uniformity of feeding rates of wheat grains and
increased by the order of 10%. Agitation essentially reduced the ratio of missing
feed.
 - 41 -

2-3-3-4 Effect of gate opening:

Hussin (1988) and Yehia (1993) stated that the seed discharge increases
as the gate opening increased.

2-3-3-5 Effect of seed size:

Hussain et al. (1979) concluded that difficulty was experienced in
connection with measuring devise because there was no guarantee, that each cell
would grasp and release exactly two or three seeds of jute at a time. The
uncertainty arose because of such factors as:
1. The shape of seeds was not uniform.
2. Cell filling was not uniform, and
3. The shape of the cell was not accurate.
The actual seeding rate of the machine was lower than the standard rate. This
might be due to the following facts:
1. Unloading of seeds from cell was not uniform.
2. Seed to seed spacing in the furrow was higher than that of standard
spacing (which was 2 inch) but the designed seed to seed spacing was 2.125
inch.
Bansal et al. (1989) found that there was small variation on quantities of
seed delivered at different spouts. However, none of the five spouts gave a high
or low seeding regularly. Thus, the differences in the seeding rate from various
spouts are considered to be due to the physical properties of the seeds only.
Awady and Ghoniem (1985) found that the relationship between fullness
(number of seeds in the cell "F") and diameter of cell "d" for studied cotton
planter was as follows:
F = 0.33d – 4 ………………. (2 - 25)
Awady et al. (1996) found the relation between number of seeds per hill
(n) feeding are (a), and seed type for their designed planter as follows:
 - 44 -

n = n1 × a(1 - Csk) ……………(2 - 26)

Where
n1 = 3.18, 1.2, 0.85 and 0.73 for soybean, peas, corn and haricot beans.
a = feed opening, cm2.
C = constant = 0.027,
k = constant 0.555, and
s = feeding – wheel speed, rpm.

2-3-4- Seed damage:

Smith (1963) mentioned that the main damage for seeds comes from the
cut off device when the seeds come under it and the suitable size if the cell seeds
for the seeds causes seed damage, and to avoid this damage it is necessary to
grade the seed to the suitable size with the cells specially fro corn.
Shaibon (1971) showed that, generally there was no significant effect of
feeding shaft speed on the seed damage for all values of the length of the fluted
wheel exposed.
F.M.O (1975) mentioned that edge drop plate is less damage than flat
drop plate and than hill drop plate and they mentioned that the damage in seeds
will be greater when using horizontal plate than the inclined plate cause of using
a cut off devise in horizontal type and it doesn't use it in the inclined one.
Kepener et al. (1978) most seed damage in horizontal plate or vertical
rotor metering units is caused by the cut off device. Damage can be minimized
by making the cut off device flexible or by employing designs where no cut off
is needed.
Nave and Paulsan (1979) stated that decreasing moisture level for seeds
from 15% to 7% increased seed damage, and the big size of "Beeson Soybean"
is more sensitive to mechanic damage in the feeding mechanism than the small
size seeds.
Kumar et al. (1986) found that the seed drop (Kg/h) was observed as
 - 45 -

149, 114, 76, and 36 at full, 3/4, half, and 1/4 exposed roller lengths,
respectively, with an average breakage percentage of 1.81. The breakage of seed
was due to small clearance between the cover plate and the fluted ruler.
Basnal et al. (1989) they mentioned that there was no damage in seeds
when they used positive – feed mechanism when the distance of the con cave
plate was 5 mm and rotation ratio was 0.81, 1, 1.39 and 1.69 foe Barely seeds.
But the wheat seeds were damaged for the same distance and same rotation ratio
cause of the difference of seed size.
Yehia (1993) and Awady et al. (1997) concluded that the wooden fluted
– wheel gave highest germination percentage comparing the plastic and
aluminum fluted – wheels.
Awady et al. (1998a and b) mentioned that the visible seed damage
increased by increasing feeder speed, due to increasing the momentum changes.
The impact force increases by acceleration resulting in visible seed – damage.
Also, they found the regression equation relating to "π" product of the soybean,
chick pea, fodder beet, and sugarbeet seeds as follow:

q  g 3 5 h5 2
0.577  0.0047v g 12 12
h 
 0.0877d h  0.183L h  0.27 tan   0.635tan  ......... 2  27

q = discharge of one cell, Kg/sec.

ρ = specific density of seeds, Kg/m3.
g = ground acceleration, m/sec2.
h = cell depth, m.
d = cell diameter, m.
L = average of major length of seeds, m.
v = feeder speed, m/s.
φ = angle of external friction between seeds and hopper walls, and.
θ = angle of repose (internal friction) of seeds.
They added that the visible damage of the tested seeds increased and
 - 46 -

germination decreased as the feeder speed increased for all cell – diameters and
depths. That is due to increasing the acceleration. The impact force (mass ×
acceleration) increased by increasing the acceleration that cases visible seed –
damage and decreases germination.
Daboul (1998) mentioned that he found two kinds of losses in seeds
during planting: loss happened between the feed device and the seed tube, and
the second was the cracked seeds during the movement of the feeding device.
He found a linear recreation correlation between the forward speed and the
damaged seeds, increasing forward speed from 0.59 to 0.68 m/sec increased the
seed damage 100% and the total loss of the seeds was 161.3%.

2-3-5- Seed distribution:

Abo - Sbe (1956) mentioned that the correct passion in putting the seeds,
increase the yield about 10% and decreases seed rate 50%.
Bernacki et al. (1972) reported that the researchers have made attempts
to determine longitudinal uniformity under laboratory conditions. They
consolidated soil rows by coating with melted paraffin after sowing. Then they
cooled the paraffin and separated the coagulated strips with seeds to make
longitudinal sections of the soil fragments. This practice provides to be very
convenient. The isotropic method using gamma rays to screen the soil does not
also clear indication of the cylindrical dispersion of seeds in the soil. The proper
method is by determining the longitudinal irregularity of seed deposition in open
furrows that can be achieved by using sufficiently moist stand. Since this
method does not take into account the operation of furrow openers and due to
sliding of furrow slopes, its accuracy is always questionable. The method is
useful in the assessment of the operational properties of different types of
seeders.
Kiavani et al. (1985) developed an apparatus for measuring seed
placement in 3 dimensions to asses the accuracy of seed placement by direct
 - 47 -

drilling machine. In this method, samples are taken after drilling and transferred
to a glass house for have germination. After germination of seeds, each piece of
sample was placed in the 3 – dimension, measuring apparatus. Germination
seedling indicated the position of seeds in the soil and the soil is carefully
scrapped away until the seed is located A mobile pointer seed was then moved
to locate the position of seeds in horizontal and vertical planes.
Korayem (1986) reported the performance of mounted (CK HK - 6) corn
planter. He found that increasing cell speed reduced cell fill and increasing seed
spacing along the row.
Senapati et al. (1988) stated that uniform placement of seeds along the
line is an important factor which affects the crop growth and
thus the yield. Therefore the design of metering device is one of the most
important aspects of seed drills.
Coates (1992) mentioned that uniformity of plant distribution was
measured after 16 days at two directions from luteral to longitudinal by using
wooden frame (80 × 80 cm) divided in two directions at equal distance (5 × 5
cm).
The deviation of plant from average number of plant at standard are was
estimated according to the following equation:

C.V  n _ 100 .......... ..2 - 28

X
Where
C.V = coefficient of variation in the longitudinal and lateral direction for
average number of plants at a standard unit of area.
_

X = average number of plants at a standard unit area.

n = standard deviation.
 - 48 -

 _

  x - x 2 
n    .......... .......... .( 2  29)
n 1
X = Summation of the number of plants on the longitudinal or lateral
direction.
_ 2

X = Summation of the square number of plants on the longitudinal or lateral

direction. The C.V under 10% is considered excellent and with the value under
20% is generally considered acceptable for most field applications as reported.
Awady et al. (1998a) designed test rig. It was designed specifically for
this work and was constructed at a machine shop in Sharkea Gov. the view of
the test rig is shown in Fig. (18).
The main rig parts are as follows: frame, contemplated flat – belt seed
receptacle and rolles, variable – speed feeder and flat – belt, electric motor, four
– link structure to support seed box, feeder gate, housing, feeder shaft and
sliding gate with rube. It used to measuring seed placement and number of seeds
per hill. They added that the uniformity of seeds in rows depends on the
performance of metering device. Therefore the proper design of a metering
device and seed tube is an essential element for satisfactory performance of a
seed machine.
 - 49 -

Fig. (18): Sketch of contemplated test-rig (Awady et al., 1998a)

Panning et al. (2000) demonstrated that the seed space are important
for crops such as sugar – beet, because seed space uniformity is significant
factor affecting production costs and total yield although there are many planters
having deferent seed metering devices and are not capable of operating at high
travel speed in the same time.

2-3-6- Effect of feeding device:

Amin (1983) studied the machine cause of seed scattering in transverse
direction for drilled seeds on rows. For wheat 97% of the seeds have been
placed in rows of 5.0 cm width, and for broad been 95.8% of seeds were placed
in rows of 6.0 cm width around the center line of rows.
Abo – EL - Ees (1985) showed that the method of seed drilling is very
effective on uniformity of depth and spacing, resulting in higher yield. However,
the statistical analysis for the mechanical seed drilling gave a significantly
 - 51 -

higher yield than the traditional hand method of sowing.

Abo – EL - Ees (1986) stated that the emergence and stand pattern for
cotton is more uniform at higher forward speed. The yield is, therefore, greater
at higher forward speed i.e. at higher rate of performance. In other words, the
seed drill should be operated at the highest practical forward speed in order to
cut the costs and increase the yield.
Hussin (1988) reviewed two machines causing a very small seed
scattering in transverse direction for the drilled seeds on rows. At forward
speeds of 3.945, 5.818, 7.578 Km/h , 88.8, 72.1, 63.2% of the wheat seedlings
scattered in 2 cm respectively of seed scattering in drilling.
Senapati et al. (1988) stated the uniform placement of seed along the
line is one of the important factors which affect the crop growth and thus the
yield. Uniform placement of seeds by the seed drills depend on their metering
device, therefore, the design of metering device is on of the most important
aspects of seed drills, to quantify how the seeds are placed in the soil along line,
the following equation was used:

Se  100 1 - y  .......... ......... 2 - 30

 d
Where
Se = seed distribution efficiency seeding device (also called the uniformity
coefficient of metering device of the seed drill).
y = average numerical deviation of number of plants per meter length of row
from average number of plants per run.
d = standard number of plants per meter length of row.
Ozsert and Kara (1992) studied the longitudinal seed distribution
patterns of some delivery mechanisms made in Turkey (the hozier system fluted
– wheel, the oblique fluted wheel, and internal double – run seed deliver
mechanisms) where determined by the new scaling – recording system aided by
personal computer (PC) as shown in Fig. (19).
 - 50 -

Fig. (19): Anew scaling-reordering system aided by personal computer. (Ozsert

and Kara, 1992)

Heege (1993) concluded that improving seed distribution over an area

with small grains, rape, and field beans results in yield increases. The
exponential seed sequence at the tube outlet with the bulk metering may make it
possible in the future to sense and compute the number of seeds even if some
seeds succeed without clearance in the falling direction, thus. Automatic control
of the number of seeds per unit area instead of adjusting the seed rate in
kilogram per hectare seems attainable.
Habib (1994) found that his design corn – planer works satisfactorily at
low traveling speed of 1.2 Km/h. the best combination ratio is 1.2 Km/h and 1.2
to 1. This gives a mean seeding distance of 21 to 25 cm with about 2 percent
damaged seeds.

2-3-7- Effect of seed tubes:

Klenin et al. (1985) said that the motion of seeds through the drill
tubes is governed by the lows of free fall of a body. However, the motion of a
seeds is affected by its aerodynamic properties, friction, and impact on the wall
of the drill tube, design feature, and dimensions of the tubes. It is difficult to
 - 51 -

consider all these parameters. Hence, for practical purposes by that of a free
body with influence of other factors being accounted for by an overall
coefficient.
The differential equation for the motion of a seed may therefore be written as:

m  d 2 z d2 t  G .......... .......... 2 - 31

Integrating, the following relation is obtained.
m  dz dt  Gt  C .......... .......... 2 - 32
Where "C" is the constant of integration, equal to the vertical component "Uv"
of the velocity with which the seed seedling is delivered by the feed (picker)
unit.
Substituting C = Uv, the following relation is obtained
dz dt  gt  Uv .......... ......... 2 - 33
(Where G / m = g)
Integration again:

Z  gt2 2  Uvt .......... .......... .(2 - 34)

If "Z" is equated to "Hd" the length of the drill tubes, the duration for which the
seed is in residence with the tube is:

t   Uv  u 2v  2Hd g g .......... ........(2 - 35)

For feed units of seed drills Uv = 0.
To consider the rest of the factors affecting the motion of seed, let us assume
that.
tm = ut …………..(2 - 36)
Where "tm" is the time required for the motion of seed through the drill tube.
This accounts for the factors affecting the free fall of the see,
"u" is a coefficient which varies from 1.05 to 1.15 for drill tubes during sowing
of grain and 1.30 – 1.45 for furrow opener of square – row hill – drop seed
drills.
 - 51 -

Drills tubes influence the uniformity of seed distribution both, along and across
the rows in that the irregular distribution of seeds from the feed unit is partially
mitigated.
However, when the drill tubes are in instates factory condition (bent, pinched or
with surface necessary to take good care of the tubes and maintain them in
proper operating condition).

2-4- Seed distribution performance of seed tubes:

Goekcebay (1986) reported that the seed distribution evenness depends
on the constructional properties and materials of seed tubes, and the physical
properties of seeds. In the application, the vertical angle of the seed tube must
not be bigger than 15°.
Bosoi et al. (1987) mentioned than A.N. semen's experiments establish
that the main mass of seeds (about 67 – 80%) exist in the free fall state during
motion in the drill tube,
Accordingly, practical calculation should be based on these conditions,
while the allowance for the effect of factor hindering free fall (aerodynamic
properties of grains, collisions with the drill tube wall, friction and others) is
made by a certain coefficient µ, that is, the time of grain motion in the drill tube
is given by:

td  ut .......... ......2  37

Where
t = the time of grain motion in the drill tube during free fall
u = a constant with value of 1.05 – 1.15 for corn planter drill tubes and 1.3 –
1.45 for row – crop planter drill tubes. Increase the falling height of seeds
increases their scattering and the non – uniformity of intervals between seeds in
the frill row. Accordingly, when designing sowing machines, the throwing point
of seeds should be as near as possible to the furrow bottom the angle of
 - 54 -

inclination of the machines tube to the vertical should not exceed "25" degree.
RNAM (1991) mentioned that the time of fall of seed through a tube is
affected by the size and by striking and bouncing of seeds against the wall of the
seed tube. When designing a seed drill, the seed tube should be kept vertical or
its inclination from the vertical should be smaller than 20°. A tube size of 25
mm in diameter can accommodate a majority of seed types. The velocity of seed
at the end of tube should be low to minimize bouncing and rolling of seeds in
the furrow.
The velocity of a seed falling freely from a height "h" is given by:

V 2  V02  2g  h .......... ......... 2 - 38

Where
V = final velocity of seed due to fall, m/sec.
V0 = initial velocity of the seed, m/sec.
g = gravitational acceleration, 9.81 m/sec2.

If V0 = 0 then, time of fall of seed, t  h 2g  .

0.5

The actual time of fall of a seed slightly more than the calculated value by the
above equation because of air resistance. In the flow through tube it varies by 5
– 15 % from the theoretical values. The time of fall of seed through seed tube
depends upon the mass density of seed and its projected area normal to the
motion, if the air drag is to be taken into consideration.
 III. MATERIALS AND METHODS

3-1- Materials:
3-1-1- the designed test soil bin:
The test soil bin was designed specifically for such works like this and
was constructed at the workshop of the Department of Agricultural
Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture, Ain Shams University, Shoubra El-
Kheima, Cairo, Egypt (Latitude 30° 02′ N, Longitude 31° 21′ E). The view of
the tested soil bin is photographed in Fig. (20).

Fig. (20): The photograph of the Soil bin.

The main soil bin parts are as follows:

Frame: the frame was made of fiberglass (cylindrical section) (160 × 55

cm) width × depth. The frame was carried on an iron frame stand of (50 cm)
height, with a shaft in the center to hold the tested mechanism. All parts are
connected to the iron frame. An electronic motor of 0.3 hp (0.225 kW) was
mounted on the center under the bin base, it was fulled to its half with soil.
 65

Rotated shaft: the drive from the electric motor is transmitted to a

central shaft of "70 cm" length through a pulleys and V – belt drive system and
the feed drive was mounted to the end of the shaft.
Three ranges of rotating speeds can be obtained by a simple innovated design of
transmission system as shown in Fig. (21), this mechanism consists of electric
motor, gear box, pulley system, and inverse pulley system. The motion is
transmitted to the first pulley system through a gear box and then to the second
pulley system that is fixed to the rotating shaft.
Speeds can be changed through the first and second pulley systems.

Fig.(21): The power transmission system in the soil bin.

Electric motor: Electric motor of 0.3 hp (0.225 kW) and 58 rpm was
hinged on a base support. The motor was fitted to the side on the base by a
screw, the motor and its base is attached to the gear box through a pulley.
 65

3-1-2- The seed box:

A galvanized plate of 15 cm width, 30 cm length and 0.2 cm thickness was used
to make a cylindrical seed box or hopper, it was mounted to the rotating arm as
shown in Fig. (22), the distance between the seed box and the soil in the soil bin
can be changed by using a screw adjustment.

Fig.(22): The photograph of the seed box.

The seed hopper was built from galvanized steel sheet "2 mm" thick, cylindrical
shape 15 cm diameter, 30 cm height, with a inclined wall with a angle of 15° for
the treated surfaces, before the bottom of the hopper that will provide three
heights 1.5, 3, and 4.5 cm, the wall has a slot for sliding gate leading to the tube,
with one opening. A vibration (apparatus)
Feeding mechanism consists of an electric motor (12v D.C) with Eccentric
weight to make the vibrational motion. The upper part was fixed under the
bottom of the hopper.
 65

One opening shape (rectangular) with dimensions of (1, 1.25, 1.50, 1.75%) of
the main dimension of the tested seeds for the width, height shape, was tested
for the affect on grain seed discharge – rate and damage at different feeder
speeds (Vibrational motion that was supported from the rotation of the motor) ,
the gate openings are shown in Fig . (23).

Corn 10 Corn 162

Giza 716
Sakha 2

Fig.(23) The photograph of the opening gates.

3-1-3- The feeding device:

An electronic motor (12v D.V) was fixed under the bottom of the cylindrical
hopper. An eccentric weight (125 gm) was fixed to the motors shaft to make the
vibration motion in the base of the hopper that will make a rotating motion in
the layer seeds, the seeds will be discharged from the gate at the wall of the
hopper, and then dropped in to the seed tube.
 65

The designed and tested gate – height were as follows:

Hg1 = 1.00 × Ts avg. (where Ts avg. = average Thickness of the seed)
Hg2 = 1.25 × Ts avg.
Hg3 = 1.50 × Ts avg. and
Hg4 = 1.75 × Ts avg.

The designed and tested gate – width were as follows:

Wg1 = 1.00 × Ws avg. (where Ws avg. = average width of the seed)
Wg2 = 1.25 × Ws avg.
Wg3 = 1.50 × Ws avg. and
Wg4 = 1.75 × Ws avg.
The tested gate – shape was rectangle. The treatments of the tested gates for
each seeds variety are mentioned in the table (4, 5,6and 7) in the Appendix.
Three materials for the sliding plate (plywood, galvanized steel, and mild steel)
and four painting types were tested (untreated, polished paint, mutt paint, and
oven – baked enamel paint) on the effect on seed rate, visible and invisible seed
damage at different feeder speed and gate - opening.

Eccentric motor: An Eccentric weight was fixed to the (12v D.V) motor
to make a vibrational motion at the bottom of the seed hopper.

Sliding gate and the tube: the dimension of the seed tube can be changed
by changing a tube (fitted with the housing of feeding mechanism).

Seed tube: the following tube was used with "U" section (1.5 cm width,
2. cm height for corn seeds) and (2.50 cm width, 2.25 heights for broad bean
seeds) with a fixed length and angle.
 56

3-2- Instrumentations:
3-2-1- Speedometer:
Speedometer shown in Fig. (24) Was used to measure the feeder
mechanism "rpm" with two ranges available:
1st range (rpm) direct reading.
2nd range (rad/sec) direct reading.

Fig.(24): The photograph of the Speedometer used in the study.

3-2-2- Vibration meter:

Vibrometer in Fig. (25) Was used to measure the vibration on the tilted
plate, with two ranges available:
1st range (Peak).
2nd range (rsm).
 56

Fig. (25): The photograph of the Vibrometer used in the study.

3-2-3- Balance and dry oven:

The seeds were weighted using a sensitive electronic balance METTLER-
AE200 with maximum capacity 200 g and accuracy 0.02g. The weight of each
test was repeated ten replicates. (Karababa, 2005)
An oven was used to dry the samples at 75 C° till the weight was constant.

3-2-4- Graduated cylinder and stop watch:

Graduated cylinder of one liter with an accuracy of 10 cm3 was used to
measure the bulk and specific density of seeds. A stop watch was used to
estimate the time requirement of different operations.

3-2-5- Digital caliper:

Dimensions of seeds were determined considering the three axes XX –
YY and ZZ. A digital caliper YATO model No.YT203 reading is up to 15 cm.
its accuracy is 0.05 mm.
 56

3-2-6- Instrument for measuring coefficient of friction and repose angle:

Lifting unit: motor, 5 rpm.
Source of power: Electricity, 220 V, AC.
Mass instrument: 350 gm.
Instrument system: Optical.
Accuracy: 1, deg.
The measuring device Fig. (26) Was designed and fabricated in the work
shop of Agric., Eng., Dept., Ain Shams Univ.,
It was used to measure the angle for each of the of the studied seeds with the
metal sheet surface each tested sheet has a dimension 20 × 10 cm as shown in
Fig. (27).

Fig.(26): The measuring device used to measure the static coefficient of

friction.
 56

Plywood Galvanized Mild steel

F
ig.(27)
: The
photo
graph
of the
tested
Surfac

Mutt paint Polish paint Oven-backed

enamel paint
 56

es sheets.

3-2-7- Seeds used in the investigation:

In the experiments corn hybrid 10, corn hybrids 162, broad bean (Giza
716), broad bean (Sakha 2) were used.

3-3- Methods of measurements:

Methods were carried out to find the factors affecting feed rate, seed
damage, and longitudinal seed distribution. These factors are:
1) Feeding mechanism:
a) Feeder speed (Vibrational motion) (Tn).
b) Seed level height in the hopper (Hl).
2) Gate opening: dimensions (width × height) (Wg × Hg).
All treatments were replicated ten times to give more reliable averages.

3-3-1- Seed discharge:

All crops were tested by the soil bin with different feeder speeds
(Vibrational motion), gate – openings, the discharged seeds were collected in
plastic bags during certain duration.
3-3-2- Feeder speed (Vibrational motion):
It is obvious that the seed discharge rate is proportional to the feeder
speed which is illustrated in table (8). Some experiments were carried out by
using the soil bin to determine the effect of feeder speed on sowing rate, seed
damage, germination, and longitudinal seed distribution.
Table (8): The treatments, voltage, rpm correlated with the peak.

Peak mm
Volt
Treatment RPM Oven-
D.C
untreated Polish Mutt backed Galvanized* plywood
T1 1.5 256.4 22.48 9 24 19.23 13.76 6
T2 3 365.4 34.11 13.11 29 28.48 22.71 10.1
T3 4.5 453 42.6 28.82 41.3 66.1 35.56 22.5
 56

T4 6 586.3 50.5 37.8 60 81.8 44.2 30.75

T5 7.5 729.6 79.2 42.01 66.23 87 86.2 35.2
T6 9 836.1 90.8 46.6 94.1 95 112.8 39.7
T7 12 1130.4 111.7 50.3 125 95.4 125.8 43.4
* metal used in the investigation.
3-3-3- Gate height and width:
The tested gate heights were as following:
Hg1 = 1.00 × Ts avg. (where Ts avg. = average Thickness of the seed)
Hg2 = 1.25 × Ts avg.
Hg3 = 1.50 × Ts avg. and
Hg4 = 1.75 × Ts avg.

The tested gate – width were as follows:

Wg1 = 1.00 × Ws avg. (where Ws avg. = average width of the seed)
Wg2 = 1.25 × Ws avg.
Wg3 = 1.50 × Ws avg. and
Wg4 = 1.75 × Ws avg.

The gate height and width of corn kernel varieties (corn10 and corn 162), and
broad bean varieties (Giza 716 and Sakha 2) were illustrated in table (4, 5, 6 and
7) in the appendix.
The variables affected the seed discharge table (9) were combined in to
dimensionless group according to Khumi (1978) and Awady (1995).

Table (9): The variables affecting the seed discharge.

No. Variables Symbol Dimension
1 Discharge seeds (weight / time) q M L T -3
2 Average Thickness of seeds Ts L
3 Average width of seeds Ws L
4 Specific density of seeds ρ M L-3
 55

5 Gate height Hg L
6 Gate width Wg L
7 Feeder speed frec L T -1
8 Gravitational acceleration g L T -2
9 Seed level height Hl L

The resulting dimensionless functional relation is:

q / ρ × g 3/2 × Ws 5/2 = f (frec/g 1/2 h 1/2, Ts/Ws, Wg/Ws, Hg/Ws, Hl/Ws)
q = ρ × g 3/2 × Ws 5/2 f(frec/g 1/2 h 1/2, Ts/Ws, Wg/Ws, Hg/Ws, Hl/Ws).

3-3-4- Seed damage, germination and emergence:

In the previously – mentioned factors, the damaged seeds were sorted
manually and weighed. The percentage seed – damage were calculated, related
to the seed discharge. Two hundred seeds of the corn kernel varieties (corn 10
and corn 162) and broad bean varieties (Giza 716 and Sakha 2) seeds were
germinated to give the real germination ratio before passing through the feeding
device. The actual germination ratio of seeds after passing through the feeder
was calculated by the following equations (Yehia, 1993)
 Actual germination percent = germination percent of unused seeds
– (visible seed – damage, % + invisible seed – damage, %).
 Visible seed – damage, % = (weight of damage seed / total weight
of seed) × 100.
 Invisible seed – damage, % = (No. of shoots / total weight of seed)
×100.
Germination tests were performed on samples of studied varieties seeds in order
to study the effect of feeder speed, gate height, and width, on the invisible seed
damage and germination.
The germination test was simultaneously done for all treatments, where they
were provided with necessary water for germination. There was no control on
 55

temperature during these experiments. The main objective of germination test

was only to detect the loss in seed germination if any, due to the passage of
seeds through the feeding mechanism.
The plant shoots and roots were weighted before and after drying after fifteen
days from planting as well as emergence speed (day) was counted according to
Cristidis and Harrison, (1955).

H 1 d1  H 2 d 2  .......  H i di
S .......... ...... 3 - 1
H 1  H 2  .........  H i

Where:
S = emergence (day).
H = No. of seed appeared at each count.
d = day of count

3-3-5- Longitudinal (seed distribution):

For each feeder speed, the seeds received on 1 round of the soil bin (220
cm length) were counted to determine the longitudinal seed or distribution. The
soil bin was used to evaluate the seeding distribution performance of previously
– mentioned factors.

3-3-6- Measuring the static coefficient of friction:

The test procedures started by leveling the apparatus that was fabricated
in the workshop of Agri., Eng., Dept., Ain Shams Univ., for this aim
photographic in Fig. (26), it consists of inclined aluminum frame (10 × 20) cm
with a wooden base, the frame was tilted by an A.C electrical motor 5 rpm, the
motor was attached with a lift arm, wound the frame slowly and smoothly by a
constant speed, and when the seeds began to slide down the motor is shut off
for the friction measurements.
 IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Firstly physical characteristics of the two Corn kernel and Broad bean varieties
under study were conducted in the laboratory of physical properties at Agriculture
Engineering Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Ain Shams University.

4- 1- The 3- Major dimensions:

An average of ten replicates the 3-major dimensions of two corn kernels
varieties are shown in table (10) and Fig.(28) :
Table (10): The 3- Major dimensions of two Corn kernel seed varieties.
Length Width Thickness
Seed's
(cm) (cm) (cm)
Corn 10 0.904 0.866 0.543
Corn 162 0.964 0.774 0.499

Corn 10 Dimensions

Length Width Thickness

35
30
Frequency %

25
20
15
10
5
0
0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 1. 1.
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 00 10
-0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -1 -1
.3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 .0 .1
9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9

Dimensions (cm)
s
 - 96 -

Corn 162 Dimensions

Length Width Thickness

60
50
Frequency %
40
30
20
10
0
0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

1.

1.
30

40

50

60

70

80

90

00

10
-0

-0

-0

-0

-0

-0

-0

-1

-1
.3

.4

.5

.6

.7

.8

.9

.0

.1
9

9
Dimension (cm)

Fig (28): The 3-Major dimensions of Corn 10 and Corn 162 seeds (cm).

The measurements of length (Ls), width (Ws) and thickness (Ts) in (cm) of
hundred grains randomly selected from each variety were conducted, the Corn
10 gave the highest value in each of the width and thickness of the seed giving
(0.866, 0.543 cm) respectively comparing with Corn 162 that gave a lowest
values of the width and thickness (0.774, 0.499 cm) respectively.
The highest frequency for the length of the seed (30%) was at (1 cm) and for the
width (33%) at (0.87 cm) and for the thickness was (33%) at (0.75).
The Corn 162 gave the highest value of seed length comparing with the Corn 10
(0.964, 0.904 cm) respectively. The highest frequency for the length of the seeds
(45%) was at (0.98 cm) and for the width (47%) at (0.84 cm) and for the
thickness was (50%) at (0.80 cm).
These differences in the 3-major dimensions gave an indicator that there will be
big differences in the other measured physical characteristics, dimensions are
important to design the cleaning, sizing and grading machines.
Main dimensions of grain are considered in selecting, designing the suitable size
of the screen perforations and determination the proper method for grading and
separation
 - 07 -

An average of ten replicates the 3-major dimensions of two broad bean varieties
are shown in Table (11) and Fig. (29):

Table (11): The 3 - Major dimensions of two Broad bean seed varieties
Length Width Thickness
Seed's
(cm) (cm) (cm)
Giza716 1.727 1.293 0.617
Sakha 2 1.696 1.216 0.582

Giza 716 Dimensions

Length Width Thickness

70
Frequency %

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.

0.

0.

0.

1.

1.

1.

1.

1.

2.
40

50

60

70

00

20

40

60

80

00
-0

-0

-0

-0

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-2
.4

.5

.6

.7

.1

.3

.5

.7

.9

.1
9

9
Dimensions (cm)

Sakha 2 Dimensions

Length Width Thickness

70
Frequency %

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 2
45 .50 .55 .60 .65 .70 .90 .10 .30 .50 .70 .90 .10
-0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -2 -2
.4 . . . . . .0 . . . . . .
9 54 59 64 69 74 9 29 49 69 89 09 29
Dimension (cm)

Fig (29): The 3-Major Dimensions of Giza 716 and Sakha 2 seeds (cm).

The measurements of length (Ls), width (Ws) and thickness (Ts) in (cm) of
hundred grains randomly selected from each variety were conducted, the Giza
716 gave the highest value in all of the Length, width and thickness of the seed
 - 07 -

giving (1.727, 1.293, 0.617 cm) respectively comparing with Sakha 2 that gave a
lowest values of the length, width and thickness (1.696, 1.216, 0.582 cm)
respectively.
For Giza 716 the highest frequency for the length of the seed (50%) was at (1.7
cm) and for the width (52%) at (1.2 cm) and for the thickness was (57 %) at
(0.58).
For Sakha 2 the highest frequency for the length of the seeds (52%) was at (1.5
cm) and for the width (52%) at (1.00 cm) and for the thickness was (56%) at
(0.52 cm).
These differences in the 3-major dimensions gave an indicator that there will be
big differences in the other measured physical characteristics, dimensions are
important to design the Sowing, cleaning, sizing and grading machines.
Main dimensions of grain are considered in selecting, designing the suitable size
of the screen perforations and determination the proper method for grading and
separation.

4-2- Weight and Volume of 1000 Seed, Bulk and Real density:
The measurements of weight and volume of one thousand grains of
different corn kernel, broad bean varieties under study and real and bulk density
were conducted in ten replicates.
The table (12) shows the other physical characteristics for the weight, volume,
bulk and real density, it shows that the Corn 10 gave the highest values for all
the mentioned characteristics which could be due to its highest width and
thickness.
Weight and volume of one thousand kernels are major considerations in
designing containers, silos and hoppers. Estimating the mass of seed is
necessary to assess the required mass of seed for planting a limited area and
number of seed in each hole.
 - 07 -

Bulk and real density are major considerations in designing the sowing,
converting, drying, aeration and storage systems. Bulk density is also considered
for determination of paging capacity, designing seed hopper dimensions in seed
planters and cleaning and grading equipment.

Table (12): The weight, volume, real and bulk density of 1000 seed's for Corn
kernel seed varieties.
Weight Volume Real density Bulk density
Seed's
(gm) (cm3) (gm/cm3) (gm/cm3)
Corn 10 282.3 364.16 1.34 0.775
Corn 162 250.4 337.99 1.28 0.741

The table (13) shows the other physical characteristics for the weight, volume,
bulk and real density, it shows that the Giza 716 gave the highest values for all
the mentioned characteristics which could due to its highest 3-major dimensions.
Weight and volume of one thousand seeds are major considerations in designing
containers, silos and hoppers. Estimating the mass of seed is necessary to assess
the required mass of seed for planting a limited area and number of seed in each
hole.
Bulk and real density are major considerations in designing the sowing,
converting, drying, aeration and storage systems. Bulk density is also considered
for determination of paging capacity, designing seed hopper dimensions in seed
planters and cleaning and grading equipment.
 - 07 -

Table (13): The Weights, volume, real and bulk density of 1000 seed's for
Broad bean seed varieties.
Weight Volume Real density Bulk density
Seed's
(gm) (cm3) (gm/cm3) (gm/cm3)
Giza716 935 1424.5 0.653 1.13
Sakha 2 878.8 1358.7 0.632 1.12

4- 3- Angle of Repose and Static Coefficient of Friction:

Angle of repose and coefficient of friction are important in designing equipment

for solid flow and storage structures. The coefficient of friction between seed
and wall is an important parameter in the prediction of seed pressure on walls
(Gumble & Maina, 1990).
Dynamic angle of repose for corn kernel of the investigated varieties was 32.6°,
28.8° for the two varieties respectively.
The corn 10 gave the highest repose angle than corn 162, It may be due to its
highest physical characteristics, It is clear that angle of repose of grain was
decreased as the dimensions of grain increased especially when the surface of
grain becomes more smooth. The previous data can be utilized to assess the
optimum side's inclination of seed hopper in planting machines, silos and
storage containers to allow an easily sliding.
Coefficient of friction is the tangent of dynamic angle of repose. The static
coefficient of friction for corn kernel of the investigated varieties on the selected
materials surfaces including plywood, galvanized and mild - steel as shown in
Fig (30).
 - 07 -

Static coefficient friction for the surfaces

Corn hybrid 10. Corn hybrid 162

Static coefficient of 0.7 0.624

0.572 0.549 0.586
0.6 0.531
0.459
0.5
friction

0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
galvanized mild plywood

Material surfaces

Fig. (30): Static coefficient friction for material surfaces (corn kernel varieties).

The lowest values of static coefficient of friction were on galvanized iron

followed by mild – steel, and the highest on plywood, (0.531, 0.459– 0.572,
0.549 – 0.624, 0.586) for the two varieties respectively. This may be due to the
smoother and more polished surface of galvanized metal than the other tested
surfaces. It is recommended to use this material in the structure of seed hopper
in planters, silos and storage containers.
Similar results were found by other researchers (Helmy 1995) for some
Egyptian wheat varieties, (Lawton 1980) for wheat and barley grains, (Amin et
al 2004) for lentil seeds, (Ozarsland 2002) for cotton seeds and (Karababa
Ersan 2005) for popcorn kernels.
Coefficient of friction is the tangent of dynamic angle of repose. The static
Coefficient of Friction for corn kernel of the investigated varieties on the
selected painted surfaces including untreated (mild steel), Polish paint, Mutt
paint and Oven – baked enamel processed paint as shown in Fig (31).
 - 07 -

Static Coefficient of friction for painted

scurfaces

Corn 10. Corn 162

Static coefficient of friction 0.9 0.82
0.8 0.72 0.72 0.71
0.7
0.57 0.55
0.6
0.48 0.5
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Polished Mutt Untreated (mild Oven baked
steel) enamel
Painted surfaces

Fig. (31): Static coefficient friction for painted surfaces (corn kernel varieties).

The lowest values of static coefficient of friction for the painted surfaces were
on Oven - baked enamel paint followed by untreated (mild steel), then the Mutt
paint and the highest on polish paint, (0.48, 0.5 – 0.531, 0.459 - 0.72, 0.71 -
0.828, 0.72) for the two varieties respectively.
The reason for the increased friction coefficient at the different painted
treatment may be owing to that the surface of the material becomes stickier
when using unprocessed paint offering a cohesive force between the contact
surface and the seeds and this is greater in the polish paint than the Mutt and
Oven - baked enamel. The Oven - baked enamel paint is lowest in static
coefficient friction that is may be owing to smoother and more polished
surface for the Oven - baked enamel paint than the other paints used, and may
be also owing to the adhesion between the seed and the painted surfaces
(polish and Mutt paint surface). It is recommended to use this type of painted
surface in the structure of seed hopper in planters, silos and storage containers.
 - 09 -

Dynamic angle of repose for broad bean of the investigated varieties was 34.7°,
30.4° for the two varieties Giza 716 and Sakha 2 respectively.
The Giza 716 gave the highest repose angle than Sakha 2, it may be due to its
highest physical characteristics. It is clear that angle of repose of grain was
decreased as the dimensions of grain increased especially when the surface of
grain becomes more smooth. The previous data can be utilized to assess the
optimum side's inclination of seed hopper in planting machines, silos and
storage containers to allow an easily sliding.
Coefficient of friction is the tangent of dynamic angle of repose. The static
coefficient of friction for broad bean of the investigated varieties on the selected
materials surfaces including plywood, galvanized and mild - steel as shown in
Fig (32).

Sratic coefficient friction for the surfaces

Giza 716 Sakha 2

0.8 0.759
Static coefficient of friction

0.669
0.7
0.558 0.563 0.536
0.6
0.479
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
galvanized mild plyw ood
Material surfaces

Fig. (32): Static coefficient of friction for material surfaces (broad bean
varieties).

The lowest values of static coefficient of friction were on galvanized iron

followed by mild – steel, and the highest on plywood, (0.558, 0.479– 0.563,
0.536 – 0.759, 0.669) for the two varieties respectively. This may be due to the
smoother and more polished surface of galvanized metal than the other tested
 - 00 -

surfaces. It is recommended to use this material in the structure of seed hopper

in planters, silos and storage containers.
Similar results were found by other researchers (Helmy 1995) for some
Egyptian wheat varieties, (Lawton 1980) for wheat and barley grains, (Amin et
al 2004) for lentil seeds, (Ozarsland 2002) for cotton seeds and (Karababa
Ersan 2005) for popcorn kernels.
The static coefficient of friction for broad bean of the investigated varieties
on the selected painted surfaces including untreated (mild steel), polish paint,
Mutt paint and Oven - baked enamel paint as shown in Fig (33).
The lowest values of static coefficient of friction for the painted surfaces were
on Oven - baked enamel paint followed by untreated (mild steel), then the Mutt
paint and the highest on polish paint, (0.447, 0.43 – 0.563, 0.536 - 0.729, 0.71 -
0.761, 0.75) for the two varieties Giza 716 and Sakha 2 respectively.
The reason for the increased friction coefficient at the different painted
treatment may be owing to that the surface of the material becomes stickier
when using paint offering a cohesive force between the contact surface and the
seeds and this is greater in the polish paint than the Mutt and Oven - baked
enamel. The Oven - baked enamel paint is lowest in static coefficient friction
that is may be owing to smoother and more polished surface for the Oven -
baked enamel paint than the other paints used, and may be also owing to the
adhesion between the seed and the painted surfaces (polish and Mutt paint
surface).
 - 07 -

Static Coefficient of friction for painted

scurfaces

Giza 716 Sakha 2

0.8 0.761 0.75

Static Coefficient of friction 0.729 0.71
0.7
0.5630.536
0.6
0.5 0.447 0.43
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
polished Mutt Untreated Oven baked
enamel
Painted surfaces

Fig. (33): Static coefficient of friction for painted surfaces (broad bean
varieties).

It is recommended to use this type of painted surface in the structure of seed

hopper in planters, silos and storage containers.

4-4- Vibrational motion Effect on static coefficient of friction

The coefficient of friction between seed and wall is an important parameter in
the prediction of seed pressure on walls (Gumble & Maina, 1990).
Coefficient of friction is the tangent of dynamic angle of repose. The static
coefficient of friction for corn kernel and broad bean of the investigated varieties
on the selected materials surfaces including plywood, galvanized and mild –
steel with out and with vibration as shown in Fig (34).
The effect of vibrational motion for all treatments in the investigation was in
decreasing the static coefficient friction
Vibrational motion could extend the seeds by a value of (x) it makes it oscillate
(move back and forth) between its original position and its displaced position,
 - 06 -

this could make the seeds bounce, that gives less contact area between the seeds
and the surface, decreasing the static coefficient of friction.
The decrease in the static coefficient of friction using the vibrational motion
effect could be also due to the term of conservation of energy, vibrational
motion in the seeds, makes it transfer its potential energy (mgh) to kinetic
energy (mv2/2), acquiring the seeds

Comparing Static Coefficient of friction for

plywood surface with out and with vibration

w ith out Vib. w ith Vib.

0.759
0.8 0.679 0.669
Static coefficient of

0.624 0.584
0.6 0.531 0.507
0.461
friction

0.4

0.2

0
Giza 716 Sakha 2 Corn 10 Corn 162.
Seed varieties

Comparing Static Coefficient of friction for mild -

steel surface with out and with vibration

w ith out Vib. w ith Vib

0.7
0.563 0.572 0.558
Static Coefficient of

0.6 0.536
0.483 0.493
0.5 0.399 0.395
friction

0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Giza 716 Sakha 2 Corn 10 Corn 162
Seed varieties
 - 77 -

Comparing Static Coefficient of friction for

Galvanized steel with out and with vibration

w ith out Vib w ith Vib

0.6 0.55 0.5310.519

0.475 0.479
Static Coefficient of

0.5 0.460.454

0.4 0.347
friction

0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Giza 716 Sakha 2 Corn 10 Corn 162
Seed varieties

Fig (34): Effect of vibrational motion on static coefficient of friction for

material surfaces.

Velocity it increases its movement acceleration decreasing the static coefficient

of friction.
For all material surfaces the vibrational motion decreased the static coefficient
of friction and the highest decrease was at the mild – steel surface followed by
Galvanized (20.59 %, 17.375 %) respectively, the lowest decrease was at the
plywood surface (11.139 %). This may be due to the smoother and more
polished surface of galvanized metal than the other tested surfaces.
For the seed varieties, the Sakha 2 gave the highest decrease followed by Corn
10 then Corn 162 (13.5, 8.4, and 8.3 %) respectively, the lowest decreased was
for Giza 716 (7.8 %), which could be due to its highest physical
characteristics.
. The static coefficient of friction for corn kernel and broad bean of the
investigated varieties on the selected painted surfaces including Polish, Mutt and
Oven - baked enamel surfaces with out and with vibrational motion as shown in
Fig (35).
 - 77 -

The effect of vibrational motion for all treatments in the investigation was in
decreasing the static coefficient friction
The Vibrational motion could extend the seeds by a value of (x) it makes it
oscillate (move back and forth) between its original position and its displaced
position, this could make the seeds bounce that gives less contact area between
the seeds and the surface decreasing the static coefficient of friction.

Comparing Static Coefficient of friction for

Poilsh paint surface with out and with vibration

w ith out Vib. w ith Vib

1
0.828
Static Coefficient of

0.761 0.75 0.72

0.8
0.564 0.556 0.54
friction

0.6 0.476

0.4

0.2

0
Giza 716 Sakha 2 Corn 10 Corn 162
Seed varieties

Comparing Static Coefficient of friction for Mutt

paint surface with out and with vibration

w ith out Vib. w ith Vib

0.729
Static Coefficient of friction

0.8 0.71 0.72 0.71

0.7
0.542 0.549 0.563
0.6 0.513
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Giza 716 Sakha 2 Corn 10 Corn 162
Seed varieties

.
 - 77 -

Comparing Static Coefficient of friction for

Oven- baked enamel paint surface with out
and with vibration
w ith out Vib. w ith Vib

0.6 0.5
0.48
0.447
Static Coeficient of

0.5 0.43 0.403 0.405

0.4 0.314 0.312
friction

0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Giza 716 Sakha 2 Corn 10 Corn 162
Seed varietiey

Fig (35): Effect of vibrational motion on static coefficient of friction for

painted surfaces.

The decrease in the static coefficient of friction using the vibrational motion
effect could be also due to the term of conservation of energy, vibration motion
in the seeds, makes it transfer its potential energy (mgh) to kinetic energy
(mv2/2), acquiring the seeds Velocity it increases its movement acceleration
decreasing the static coefficient of friction.
For all painted surfaces the vibrational motion decreased the static coefficient
of friction and the highest decrease was at the Polish paint surface followed by
Mutt then Oven - baked enamel (23, 17.55, 12.35 %) respectively, the lowest
decrease was at the mild – steel surface (11.47 %).
For the seed varieties, the corn 10 gave the highest decrease followed by Sakha
2 then Giza 716 (19, 18.1, and 17.2 %) respectively, the lowest decreased was
for Corn 162 (16.2 %), which could be due to its highest physical
characteristics.
 - 77 -

4-5- Seed Rate / min

4- 5- 1- Effect of opening gate on seed rate / min
The effect of opening gate on seed rate / min is shown in the fig (36), it shows
different effects, because the effect of opening gate comes from a combination
of two main dimension factors: the width Wg and the height Hg of the opening
gate, the highest Seed rate / min value came from the opening gate 012 (86.488
seed/min) that gave the ratio of opening gate (Wg Hg) ( 1.5 : 1.75 ), followed
by the opening gate 07 (59.209 seed/min) that gave the ratio of opening gate
(Wg Hg) (1.25 : 1.5).

Comparing Seed Rate / min for mean treatments

100
90
80
Seed Rate / min

70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
O1 O2 O3 O4 O5 O6 O7 O8 O9 O10 O11 O12 O13 O14 O15 O16

Opening gate

Fig. (36): Effect of Opening gate on seed rate / min for mean treatments.

The lowest Seed rate / min was from the treatment 05 (1.455 seed/min) that gave
the ratio of (Wg Hg) (1.25: 1), that shows the suitable size for the seeds.
 - 77 -

4-5-1-1- Effect of Gate width Wg on seed rate / min

The effect of width Wg dimension of the gate on the seed / min is shown in fig
(37),
It illustrated that increase in width from (1 to 1.5) ratio increases the seed rate /
min from 3.98 to 44.38 seed / min, and after that ratio at 1.75 the value
decreased

Comparing seed rate / min for mean treatments

2
50 y = -11.505x + 64.34x - 50.736
2
R = 0.9151 44.38
Seed rate / min

40

30
26.28
20 20.66

10
3.98
0
1 1.25 1.5 1.75
Mean change in width (Wg) of gate (ratio)

Fig. (37): Effect of Gate width dimension on seed rate / min for mean
treatments.

20.66 seed/ min, which could be due to the blocking (jam) of the seeds in the
gate, this behavior could be shown in many seed metering devices.

4- 5- 1- 2- Effect of Gate height Hg on seed rate / min

The effect of gate height Hg dimension on seed rate / min is shown in fig (38).
 - 77 -

Comparing seed rate / min for mean treatments

50 y = 3.933e0.6202x
R2 = 0.8636
Seed rate / min

40 38.63 39.08

30

20

10 10.13
7.73
0
1 1.25 1.5 1.75
Mean change in hight (Hg) of gate (ratio)

Fig. (38): Effect of Gate height dimension on seed rate / min for mean
treatments.

It shows that increasing gate height dimension ratio from (1 to 1.75) increased
the seed rate / min from 7.73 to 39.08 seed / min, that increase may be due to
that the seeds are formed and moves in layers and those layers are more effected
to the gate height than the gate width.

4- 5- 2- Effect of Seed level height on seed rate / min

The effect of seed level height on seed rate / min is shown in fig (39), it shows
that decreasing seed level height from 4.5 to 1.5 cm increases the seed rate / min
from 6.61 to 42.9 seed/min with a linier regression that could be due to the
effect of increasing weight on the plate of bottom of the hopper, which leads to
increase the damping effect on the plate, that will decreases the vibrational
motion of the seeds, which leads to decrease the discharge of the seeds through
the gate.
 - 79 -

Comparing Seed Rate / min for mean treatments

50 y = 18.19x - 12.715
2
R = 0.9885 42.99
Seed rate / min

40

30

20 21.40

10
6.61
0
4.5 3 1.5
Seed level height (cm)

Fig (39): Effect of Seed level height on seed rate / min for mean treatments.

The highest value of seed rate/ min was from Hl3 (1.5 cm) (42.99 seed / min),
followed by Hl2 (3 cm) (21.40 seed/ min) the lowest value was from Hl1 (4.5
cm) (6.61).

4- 5- 3- Effect of Seed varieties on seed rate / min

The effect of seed varieties on seed rate / min is shown in fig (40), for the Corn
kernel varieties, the highest value of seed rate / min was from Corn 10 (40.87
seed / min) comparing with Corn 162 which gave (37.80 seed / min) that may be
due to its highest dimensions, and physical properties.
 - 70 -

Comparing Seed Rate / min for mean treatments

45 40.87
37.80
40
Seed rate / min

35
30
25
20
15 8.41
10 7.58
5
0
Corn 10 Corn 162 Giza 716 Sakha 2

Corn Kernel Broad bean

Seed varieties

Fig. (40): Effect of Seed varieties on seed rate / min for mean treatments.

for the broad bean varieties, the Giza716 gave the highest value (8.41 seed /
min) comparing with Sakha 2 variety which gave the lowest value (7.58 seed/
min), that may be due to its highest dimensions, and its highest physical
properties.

4- 5- 4- Effect of Vibrational motion on seed rate / min

The effect of vibrational motion on seed rate / min is shown in fig (41), it shows
that increasing the vibrational motion increases the seed rate / min till it comes
to the maximum value at T5 (729.6 rpm, 86.2 peak) (48.402 seed / min) that
could be due to the harmonic motion of the seeds in the hopper, increasing the
vibrational motion more than T5 decreases the seed rate / min that may be due to
that the motion of the seeds changes from harmonic to turbulence motion
between the seeds that may be affected due to its increase in kinetic energy.
 - 77 -

Comparing Seed Rate / min for mean treatments

3 2
60 y = -0.8648x + 6.6557x - 1.5599x - 6.3521
2
R = 0.9374
50
Seed rate / min

48.40
40 38.96
30 28.71 30.35
20
14.74
10
4.34
0 0.17
13.76 22.71 35.56 44.2 86.2 112.8 125.80
Peak

Fig (41): Effect of Vibrational motion on seed rate / min for mean treatments.

The highest value for seed rate / min was from treatment T5 (729.6 rpm, 86.2
peak) (48.40 seed / min), followed by T4 (586.3 rpm, 44.2 peak) (38.96 seed /
min).
The lowest seed rate / min were from T1 (256.4 rpm, 23.76 peaks) (0.17 seed /
min).
For the combination of all the treatments above that gave the highest value for
both Corn kernel varieties (Corn 10, and Corn 162) was T5 / 07 / Hl3, (367, 341,
341.6 seed / min) respectively, and for the both Broad Bean varieties (Giza 716,
and Sakha 2) was T5 / 011 / Hl2, (158, 150.2 seed / min) respectively.

4- 6- Seed / hill
4-6-1- Effect of opening gate on seed / hill
The effect of opening gate on seed / hill is shown in the fig (42), it shows
different effects, because the effect of opening gate comes from a combination
of two main dimension : the width Wg and the height Hg of the opening gate,
the highest Seed / hill value came from the opening gate 012 (16.03 seed/hill)
that gave the ratio of opening gate (Wg Hg) ( 1.5 : 1.75 ), followed by the
 - 76 -

opening gate 011 (11.10 seed/hill) that gave the ratio of opening gate (Wg Hg)
(1.5 : 1.5).

Comparing Seed / hill for mean treatments

18
16
14
Seed / hill

12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
O O O O O O O O O O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1

Opening gate

Fig. (42): Effect of Opening gate on seed / hill for mean treatments.

The lowest Seed / hill was from the treatment O5 (0.30 seed/hill) that gave the
ratio of (Wg Hg) (1.25: 1).
The gates that gave the recommended number of seeds per hill (3 – 4 seed/hill)
was O6, 09, O10, and O14 which gave the ratio of opening gate (Wg Hg)
(1.25:1.25), (1.5:1), (1.5:1.25), and (1.75:1.5) for the opening gates respectively.

4- 6-1-1- Effect of Gate width Wg on seed / hill

The effect of width Wg dimension of the gate on the seed / hill is shown in fig
(43),
It illustrated that increase in width from 1 to 1.5 ratio increases the seed / hill
from 0.77 to 8.18 seed / hill, and after that ratio at 1.75: n the value decreased
 - 67 -

Comparing seed / hill for mean treatments

2
10 y = -2.0723x + 11.611x - 9.1566
2
R = 0.8935
8 8.18
Seed / hill

6
4.62
4 3.75
2
0.77
0
1 1.25 1.5 1.75
Mean change in width (Wg) of gate (ratio)

Fig. (43): Effect of Gate width dimension on seed / hill for mean treatments.

3.75 seed/ hill that could be due to the blocking (jam) of the seeds in the g ate,
this behavior could be shown in many seed metering devices.

4-6-1-2- Effect of Gate height Hg on seed / hill

The effect of gate height Hg dimension on seed / hill is shown in fig (44).

Comparing seed / hill for mean treatments

0.6367x
10 y = 0.6786e
2
R = 0.8721
8
7.24
Seed / hill

6.96
6

2 1.80
1.36
0
1 1.25 1.5 1.75
Mean change in hight (Hg) of gate (ratio)

Fig. (44): Effect of Gate height dimension on seed / hill for mean treatments.
 - 67 -

It shows that increasing gate height dimension ratio from 1 to 1.75 increased the
seed / hill from 1.36 to 7.24 seed / hill, that increase may be due to that the seeds
are formed and moves in layers and those layers are more effected to the gate
height than the gate width, it gave the similar behavior of the seed rate / min.

4-6-2- Effect of Seed level height on seed / hill

The effect of seed level height on seed / hill is shown in fig (45), it shows that
decreasing seed level height from 4.5 to 1.5 cm increases the seed / hill from
1.22 to 7.86 seed/hill, with a linier regression, that could be due to the effect of
increasing the discharge of the seeds through the gate.

Comparing Seed / hill for mean treatments

9 y = 3.3229x - 2.2909
2
8 R = 0.9908 7.86
7
Seed / hill

6
5
4 3.99
3
2
1 1.22
0
4.5 3 1.5
Seed level height (cm)

Fig. (45): Effect of Seed level height on seed / hill for mean treatments.

The highest value of seed / hill was from Hl3 (1.5 cm) (7.86 seed / hill),
followed by Hl2 (3 cm) (3.99 seed/ min) the lowest value was from Hl1 (4.5
cm) (1.22).
The suitable number of seed / hill was at the level Hl2 (3cm) (3.99) seed / hill.

4-6-3- Effect of Seed varieties on seed / hill

The effect of seed varieties on seed / hill is shown in fig (46)
 - 67 -

It illustrated for the Corn kernel varieties, the highest value of seed / hill was
from Corn 10 (6.81 seed / hill) comparing with Corn 162 which gave (6.30 seed
/ hill) that may be due to its highest dimensions, and physical properties, and
also for its highest seed discharge per min.
For the broad bean varieties, the Giza716 gave the highest value (2.21 seed /
hill) comparing with Sakha 2 variety which gave the lowest value (2.10 seed/
hill), that may be due to its highest seed discharge and may be also for its
highest dimensions, and its highest physical properties.

Comparing Seed / hill for mean treatments

8 6.81
7 6.30
Seed / hill

6
5
4
3 2.21 2.10
2
1
0
Corn 10 Corn 162 Giza 716 Sakha 2

Corn Kernel Broad bean

Seed varieties

Fig. (46): Effect of Seed varieties on seed / hill for mean treatments.

4-6-4- Effect of Vibrational motion on seed / hill

The effect of vibrational motion on seed / hill is shown in fig (47)
it illustrated that increasing the vibrational motion increases the seed / hill till it
comes to the maximum value at T5 (729.6 rpm, 86.2 peak) (11.29 seed / hill)
that could be due to its highest seed distribution / min, increasing the vibrational
motion more than T5 decreases the seed / hill that may be also due to the seed
distribution
 - 67 -

Comparing Seed / hill for mean treatments

3 2
12 y = -0.2367x + 2.0447x - 2.6836x + 0.5784
2 11.29
R = 0.8256
10
Seed / hill

8
7.29
6

4 4.17 4.09

2 1.71
1.01
0 0.03
13.76 22.71 35.56 44.2 86.2 112.8 125.8
Peak

Fig. (47): Effect of Vibrational motion on seed / hill for mean treatments.

The highest value for seed / hill was from treatment T5 (729.6 rpm, 86.2 peak)
(11.29 seed / hill), followed by T4 (586.3 rpm, 44.2 peak) (7.29 seed / hill).
The lowest value of seed / hill was from T1 (256.4 rpm, 23.76 peaks) (0.03 seed
/ hill), the suitable number of seed / hill came from the treatments T3 (453 rpm,
35.56 peak) and T6 (836.1 rpm, 112.8 peak) that gave (4.17 and 4.09 seed / hill)
respectively
For the combination of all the treatments above that gave the suitable number (3
– 4) seed/ hill for both Corn kernel varieties (Corn 10, and Corn 162), and for
the both Broad Bean varieties (Giza 716, and Sakha 2) is illustrated in table (14)
respectively.
 - 67 -

Table (14): Treatments that gave the suitable number of seed / hill for the
combination for Corn kernel and Broad bean varieties.
Corn kernel varieties Broad bean varieties
Corn 10 Corn 162 Giza 716 Sakha 2
T5/O3/Hl2 T4/O6/Hl2 T4/O4/Hl2 T5/O3/Hl3
T3/O3/Hl3 T4/O6/Hl3 T5/O6/Hl2 T4/O4/Hl2
T4/O6/Hl2 T6/O6/Hl3 T4/O7/Hl2 T5/O6/Hl2
T4/O6/Hl3 T4/O7/Hl1 T6/O8/Hl3 T4/O7/Hl2
T6/O6/Hl3 T6/O8/Hl2 T5/O9/Hl3 T6/O8/Hl3
T7/O11/Hl2 T3/O10/Hl2 T4/O11/Hl1 T5/O9/Hl3
T7/O12/Hl2 T7/O11/Hl3 T6/O12/Hl1 T4/O11/Hl1
T4/O13/Hl1 T7/012/Hl2 T4/O13/Hl2 T7/O11/Hl3
T3/O14/Hl2 T4/O13/Hl1 T5/O13/Hl2 T6/O12/Hl1
T7/O14/Hl3 T3/O14/Hl2 T5/O13/Hl3 T5/O13/Hl2
T4/O15/Hl2 T2/O14/Hl3 T4/O14/Hl2 T5/O13/Hl3
T4/O15/Hl1 T4/O16/Hl1 T4/O14/Hl2
T7/O15/Hl3 T4/O16/Hl1
T4/O6/Hl3

4-7- Seed Longitudinal (cm)

4-7-1- Effect of open gate on seed longitudinal (cm)

The effect of opening gate on seed longitudinal (cm) is shown in the table (15).
It illustrated different effects, because the effect of opening gate comes from a
combination of two main dimensions: width Wg and height Hg of the opening
gate,
The highest Seed longitudinal value came from the opening gate 05 (151.49 cm)
that gave the ratio of opening gate (Wg Hg) (1.25: 1), with SD (7.51) and CV
 - 67 -

(0.05 %) it was the same treatment that gave the lowest seed rate/min, followed
by the opening gates 02 (134.96 cm) that gave the ratio of opening gate (Wg Hg)
(1:1.25), with SD (104.54) and CV (0.77 %).
Table (15): Effect of Opening gate on seed longitudinal (cm) for mean
treatments.
Opening Seed longitudinal (cm)
SD* CV**
gate Max. Min. Average
O1 160.4 0.0 46.75 76.81 1.64
O2 217.9 22.9 134.96 104.52 0.77
O3 137.5 20.3 92.01 56.42 0.61
O4 146.2 28.0 59.70 57.70 0.97
O5 162.7 147..1 151.49 7.51 0.05
O6 36.7 18.6 27.84 9.82 0.35
O7 33.8 1.9 17 17.40 1.02
O8 25.1 3.3 13.33 11.59 0.87
O9 112.1 6.4 58.48 59.85 1.02
O10 100.4 7.5 54.06 53.47 0.99
O11 6.9 2.5 4.66 2.35 0.51
O12 5.8 1.6 3.66 2.33 0.64
O13 81.9 11.9 46.38 39.28 0.85
O14 87.2 9.8 47.89 43.63 0.91
O15 25.7 3.7 14.49 12.35 0.85
016 15.9 5.3 10.51 5.78 0.55
*SD: Standard deviation.
**CV: Coefficient of variation
The lowest value of seed longitudinal (cm) was from the treatment O12, (3.66
cm) that gave the ratio of opening gate (Wg Hg) (1.5:1.75),with SD (2.33) and
 - 69 -

CV (0.64 %) which was the same gates that gave the highest seed discharge per
min, seed damage and seed emergence (day).

4-7-1-1- Effect of Gate width Wg on seed longitudinal (cm)

The effect of width dimension Wg of the gate on seed longitudinal (cm) is
shown in table (16).
Table (16): Effect of Mean change in width Wg of gate on seed longitudinal
(cm) for mean treatments.
Change Seed longitudinal (cm)
SD* CV**
in Wg Max. Min. Average
1 86.85 41.73 63.84 26.94 0.42
1.25 36.90 4.52 21.65 19.61 0.91
1.5 11.89 3.04 7.40 4.90 0.66
1.75 31.86 6.29 18.46 13.91 0.75
*SD: Standard deviation.
**CV: Coefficient of variation.
It illustrated that increasing in width ratio from (1: n) to (1.5: n) decreased the
seed longitudinal (cm) from (63.84 to 7.40) cm, increasing width ratio more than
(1.5: n) increases seed longitudinal, for ratio (1.75: n) was (18.46) cm with a SD
(13.91) and CV (0.75 %), the effect was due to that increasing seed rate / min
decreased seed longitudinal.

4-7-1-2- Effect of Gate height Hg on seed longitudinal (cm)

The effect of gate height dimension Hg on seed longitudinal (cm) is shown in
table (17).
 - 60 -

Table (17): Effect of Mean change in height Hg of gate on seed longitudinal

(cm) for mean treatments.
Change Seed longitudinal (cm)
SD* CV**
in Hg Max. Min. Average
1 128.55 15.83 71.66 64.24 0.90
1.25 83.91 12.00 46.07 38.80 0.80
1.5 18.05 3.00 10.58 8.24 0.78
1.75 12.88 2.91 8.24 5.12 0.62
*SD: Standard deviation.
**CV: Coefficient of variation.

It illustrated that increasing in gate height dimension ratio from (n : 1) to (n :

1.75) decreases seed longitudinal (cm) from (71.66 to 8.24) cm, that decrease
was due to the increase of seed rate / min, the SD and CV ranged from (64.24,
0.90 %) to (5.12, 0.62 %) respectively.

4-7-2- Effect of Seed level height on seed longitudinal (cm)

The effect of seed level height on seed longitudinal (cm) is shown in table (18),
It illustrated that decreasing seed level height from Hl3 (4.5 cm) to Hl1 (1.5 cm)
decreases seed longitudinal from 5.04 to11.69 cm with SD and CV from (34.04,
0.68 %) to (10.41, 0.89 %) respectively, that was affected by the increase of
seed rate / min.
The highest value of seed longitudinal was from Hl1 (4.5 cm) (50.4) with SD
(7.56) and CV (0.76 %).
The lowest value was from Hl1 (1.5 cm) (11.69) with SD (25.22) and CV (0.63).
 - 67 -

Table (18): Effect of Seed level height on seed longitudinal (cm) for mean
treatments.
Level Seed longitudinal (cm)
height SD* CV**
Max. Min. Average
(cm)
4.5 83.778 20.389 50.40 34.04 0.68
3 22.117 6.526 14.16 8.56 0.60
1.5 23.504 2.816 11.69 10.41 0.89
*SD: Standard deviation.
**CV: Coefficient of variation.

4-7-3- Effect of Seed varieties on seed longitudinal (cm)

The effect of seed varieties on seed longitudinal (cm) is shown in table. (19).
It illustrated that for the Corn kernel varieties the highest seed longitudinal (cm)
was from Corn 162 (10.60 cm) with SD and CV (8.04, 0.66 %) respectively,
that may due to its lowest seed rate / min., comparing with Corn 10 which gave
(9.91 cm) with SD and CV (7.56, and 0.76 %) respectively, that may due to its
highest seed rate / min.

Table (19): Effect of Seed varieties on seed longitudinal (cm) for mean
treatments.
Seed Seed longitudinal (cm)
SD* CV**
varieties Max. Min. Average
Corn 10 160.4 1.6 31.207 51.05 1.64
Corn162 162.7 1.7 31.875 51.05 1.60
Giza716 147.1 0.0 51.710 49.86 0.96
Sakha 2 217.9 0.0 66.647 62.77 0.94
*SD: Standard deviation.
**CV: Coefficient of variation.
 - 66 -

For Broad bean varieties the table (19) illustrated that Sakha 2 gave the highest
longitudinal value (41.10 cm) with SD and CV (25.23, and 0.61 %) respectively,
that may be due to its lowest seed rate / min.
While Giza 716 gave the lowest value of seed longitudinal (40.07 cm) with SD
and CV (30.25, and 0.75 %) respectively, that may be due to its highest seed rate
/ min.

4-7- 4- Effect of Vibrational motion on seed longitudinal (cm)

The effect of vibrational motion on seed longitudinal (cm) is shown in table
(20).
It illustrated that increasing vibrational motion from T1 (265.4 rpm, 13.76 peak)
to T3 (453 rpm, 35.56 peak) increases the seed longitudinal from 0.00 cm to
16.78 cm further increase in vibrational motion decreases seed longitudinal till it
reach T5 (726.6 rpm, 86.2 peak) (6.73 cm) with SD and CV (4.52 and 0.67 %)
respectively, more increase in vibrational motion increases seed longitudinal,
that was affected by seed rate / min.
Table (20): Effect of Vibrational motion on seed longitudinal (cm) for mean
treatments.
Vibrational Seed longitudinal (cm)
SD* CV**
motion Max. Min. Average
13.76 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
22.71 28.052 0.0 13.25 15.36 1.16
35.56 29.162 4.038 16.78 14.24 0.85
44.2 17.204 3.272 10.24 7.92 0.77
86.2 11.791 2.824 6.37 4.52 0.67
112.8 21.283 4.381 12.33 9.18 0.74
125.8 70.362 7.828 39.34 35.74 0.91
*SD: Standard deviation.
**CV: Coefficient of variation.
 - 777 -

The highest longitudinal value was from T7 (1130.4 rpm, 125.8 peak) (39.34
cm) with SD and CV (35.74 and 0.91 %) respectively.
For the combination of all the treatments above that gave the maximum and
minimum values for both: Corn kernel, and Broad bean varieties are shown in
table (21 and 22).
Table (21): Treatments of Max. and Min. values of seed longitudinal (cm) for
combination for Corn kernel varieties.
Corn kernel varieties
Corn 10 Corn 162
Max. Min. Max. Min.
T4/O1/Hl3 All T1/Hl1 T4/O2/Hl1 All T1/Hl1
T4/O3Hl1 All T2/Hl1 T6/O2/Hl1 All T2/Hl1
T6/O3/Hl1 All T7/Hl1 T6/O10/Hl1 All T7/Hl1
T6/O10/Hl1 T3/O10/Hl1 T3/O11/Hl1 All T1/Hl2
T6/O11/Hl1 T3/O11/Hl1 T2/O13/Hl1 All T5/Hl2
T1/O13/Hl1 All T1/Hl2 T3/O13/Hl1 All T2/Hl2
T3/O13/Hl1 All T2/Hl2 T6/O3/Hl2 T7/O3/Hl2
T2/O13/Hl2 All T7/Hl1 T7/O4/Hl2
T4/O12/Hl2 T7/O5/Hl2
T5/O12/Hl2 T7/O5/Hl3
T5/O7/Hl2 All T1/Hl3
All T1/Hl3 All T2/Hl3
All T2/Hl3 T7/O13/Hl3
All T7/Hl3 T7/O14/Hl3
T4/O15/Hl3
T5/O15/Hl3
T6/O15/Hl3
 - 777 -

Table (22): Treatments of Max. and Min. values of seed longitudinal (cm) for
combination for Broad bean varieties.
Broad bean varieties
Giza 716 Sakha 2
Max. Min. Max. Min.
T6/O7/Hl1 All O1/Hl1 T3/O7/Hl1 All O1/Hl1
T7/O11/Hl1 All O2/Hl2 T4/O14/Hl1 All O2/Hl1
T4/O14/Hl1 All O3/Hl3 T4/O15/Hl1 All O3/Hl1
T4/O15/Hl1 All O5/Hl1 T7/O11/HI1 All O5/Hl1
T3/O16/Hl1 All O13/Hl1 T4/O5/HI2 All O13/Hl1
T3/O15/Hl2 All T1/Hl1 T4/O9/HI2 All O14/Hl1
T4/O5/Hl2 All T2/Hl1 T6/O9/HI2 All O15/Hl1
T7/O6/Hl2 All T7/Hl1 T6/O15/HI2 All O16/Hl1
T3/O15/Hl3 All T1/Hl2 T7/O6/HI2 All T1/Hl1
T4/O5/Hl3 All T2/Hl2 T2/O15/HI3 All T2/Hl1
T7/O6/Hl3 All T7/Hl2 T3/O6/HI3 All T7/Hl1
All O1/Hl2 T3/O10/HI3 All O1/Hl2
All O2/Hl2 T6/O13/HI2 All O2/Hl2
All O3/Hl2 T7/O8/HI3 All O3/Hl2
T6/O5/Hl2 All T1/Hl2
T6/O6/Hl2 All T2/Hl2
All T1/Hl3 All T7/Hl2
All T2/Hl3 T6/O5/HI2
All T7/Hl3 T6/O16/Hl3
T3/O1/Hl3 T6/O5/Hl1
T3/O3/Hl3 T6/O7/Hl1
T3/O5/Hl3 All T1/Hl3
 - 777 -

T3/O13/Hl3 All T2/Hl3

All T7/Hl3
T6/O13/Hl3
T3/O1/Hl3
T3/O5/Hl3
T3/O13/Hl3

4-8- Seed damage (%)

4-8-1- Effect of opening gate on seed damage (%)

The effect of opening gate on seed damage (%) is shown in the fig (48), it
shows different effects, because the effect of opening gate comes from a
combination of two main dimension : the width Wg and the height Hg of the
opening gate, the highest Seed damage(%) value came from the opening
gate 012 (0.499 % ) that gave the ratio of opening gate (Wg Hg) ( 1.5 : 1.75
), it was the same treatment that gave the highest seed distribution per min.
followed by the opening gate O1, O6, 07, O11, and O14 that gave (0.497 %
) which gave the ratio of opening gate (Wg Hg) (1 : 1), (1.25 : 1.25), (1.25 :
1.5), (1.5 : 1.5), and (1.75 : 1.25) for the opening gates respectively.
 - 777 -

Compering Seed Damage (%) for mean treatments

seed damage (%) 0.500

0.499
0.498
0.497
0.496
0.495
0.494
0.493
0.492
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
O O O O O O O O O O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1

Opening gate

Fig. (48): Effect of Opening gate on seed damage (%) for mean treatments.

The lowest Seed damage (%) was from the opening gates 04, O15, and O16
(0.495 %) that gave the ratio of (Wg Hg) (1: 1.75), (1.75 : 1.5), and (1.75 :
1.75)for the opening gates respectively, both O4, and O15 was the same gates
that gave the lowest seed emergence (day).
All seed damage was lower than 0.5%.

4-8-1-1- Effect of Gate width Wg on seed damage (%)

The effect of width dimension Wg of the gate on the damage (%) is shown in fig
(49).
It illustrated that increasing in width ratio from 1 to 1.5 increases the seed
damage (%) from (0.496 to 0.497) %, increasing width ratio more than
1.5 decreases seed damage, for ratio 1.75 was (0.496) %.
The effect or change in width ratio on seed damage was similar to the effect
found on seed distribution / min and seed emergence (day).
All seed damage was lower than (0.5%)
 - 777 -

Compering Seed Damage (%) for mean treatments

2
y = -0.0006x + 0.0029x + 0.4935
0.498 2
R = 0.8447 0.497
seed damage (%)

0.497
0.497
0.497
0.496 0.496
0.496 0.496
0.495

0.495
1 1.25 1.5 1.75

Mean change in width (Wg) for gate (ratio)

Fig. (49): Effect of Gate width dimension on seed damage (%) for mean
treatments.
4-8-1-2- Effect of Gate height Hg on seed damage (%)
The effect of gate height dimension Hg on seed damage (%) is shown in fig
(50).

Comparing Seed Damage (%) for mean treatments

0.497 2
y = -0.0002x + 0.0007x + 0.4958
0.497
seed damage (%)

0.497 2
R = 0.8363
0.496
0.496 0.496
0.496
0.496
0.496
0.496
0.496
0.495
1 1.25 1.5 1.75

Mean change in height (Hg) for gate (ratio)

Fig. (50): Effect of Gate height dimension on seed damage (%) for mean
treatments.
It illustrated that increasing in height dimension ratio from 1 to 1.5 ratio
increases visible seed damage from 0.496 to 0.497 %increasing height ratio
more than that decreases visible seed damage to 0.496 % The effect of change
 - 777 -

in height ratio on seed damage was similar to the effect found on seed
emergence (day).
All the values were lower than 0.5%.

4-8-2- Effect of Seed level height on seed damage (%)

The effect of seed level height on seed damage (%) is shown in fig (51),
It illustrated that decreasing seed level height to Hl2 (3 cm) increases seed
damage.

Comparing Seed Damage (%) for mean treatments

y = -0.0006x 2 + 0.0023x + 0.4945

0.497 R2 = 1
0.497
0.497
seed damage (%)

0.496

0.496 0.496
0.496
0.496

0.496

0.496
4.5 3 1.5
Seed level height (cm)

Fig. (51): Effect of Seed level height on seed damage (%) for mean treatments.

(0.496 %), that may due to less damping in this level and may also be due to
its highest seed rate / min and its highest seed germination (94.13 %), further
decrease in seed level height decreases seed damage, but all seed damage
values were lower than 0.5 %.

4-8-3- Effect of Seed varieties on seed damage (%)

The effect of seed varieties on seed damage (%) is shown in fig. (52).
It illustrated that for the Corn kernel varieties the highest seed damage (%) was
from Corn 162 (0.37 %) that may due to its lowest: seed
 - 779 -

Dimensions, physical properties.

While Corn 10 gave the lowest emergence (0.34 %) that may be due to its
highest: seed dimensions, physical properties.

Comparing Seed Damage (%) for mean treatments

0.67
0.7 0.61
seed damage (%)

0.6
0.5
0.37
0.4 0.34
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Corn 10 Corn 162 Giza 716 Sakha 2

Corn Kernel Broad bean

Seed varieties

Fig. (52): Effect of Seed varieties on seed damage (%) for mean treatments.

All seed damage was around 0.3 %.

For Broad bean varieties the fig (52), illustrated that Sakha 2 gave the highest
seed damage value (0.67 %) that may be due to its lowest: seed dimensions,
physical proprieties.
While Giza 716 gave the lowest value of seed damage (0.61 %), that may be due
to it's highest: seed dimensions, physical proprieties.
All values were around 0.6 %.
The effect of seed varieties on seed damage was similar to the effect found on
seed emergence (day).

4-8-4- Effect of Vibrational motion on seed damage (%)

The effect of vibrational motion on seed emergence (%) is shown in fig (53).
It illustrated that increasing vibrational motion decreases the seed damage (%)
till it reaches the minimum value at T5 (729.6 rpm, 86.2 peak) (0.47%) followed
 - 770 -

by T4 (586.3 rpm, 44.2 peak) (0.48%), increasing vibrational motion more than
T5 Increases the seed damage, which may be due that increasing vibrational
motion, could cause turbulence motion between seeds causing more damage
between them, may lead to delaying the time needed for germination (increasing
emergence).
The effect of vibrational motion on seed damage was similar to the effect found
on seed emergence (day).

Comparing Seed Damage (%) for mean treatments

3 2
y = 0.0007x - 0.0046x - 0.0022x + 0.5188
0.53 2
R = 0.8927
0.52
seed damage (%)

0.51 0.52
0.51
0.50
0.50 0.50 0.50
0.49
0.48
0.48
0.47 0.47

0.46
0.45
13.76 22.71 35.56 44.2 86.2 112.8 125.8

Peak

Fig. (53): Effect of Vibrational motion on seed damage (%) for mean
treatments.
The highest value of seed damage was from T7 (1130.4 rpm, 125.8 peak) (0.52
%).
For the combination of all the treatments above that gave the maximum and
minimum values for both: Corn kernel, and Broad bean varieties are shown in
tables (23 and 24).
 - 777 -

Table (23): Treatments of Max. and Min. values of visible seed damage (%) for
combination for Broad bean varieties.
Broad bean varieties
Giza 716 Sakha 2
Max. Min. Max. Min.
T7/O12/Hl2 All T5/Hl1 All T1/Hl1 All T5/Hl1
All T5/Hl2 T2/O11/Hl1 T4/O4/Hl1
All T5/Hl3 T6/O2/Hl1 T5/O4/Hl2
T6/O13/Hl2 T4/O9/Hl2
All T7/Hl1 All T4/Hl3
All T1/Hl2 All T5/Hl3
All T7/Hl2
All T1/Hl3
All T7/Hl3

Table (24): Treatments of Max. and Min. values of visible seed damage (%) for
combination for Corn kernel varieties.
Corn kernel varieties
Corn 10 Corn 162
Max. Min. Max. Min.
All T1/Hl1 T4/O15/Hl3 T1/O1/Hl1 T3/O9/Hl1
All T7/Hl1 T5/O9/Hl3 T1/O6/Hl1 T4/O2/Hl1
All T1/Hl2 T1/O8/Hl1 T4/O16/Hl1
All T7/Hl2 T1/O12/Hl1 T5/O9/Hl1
All T1/Hl3 T1/O13/Hl1 All T5/Hl2
All T7/Hl3 T2/O7/Hl1 T4/O16/Hl2
T2/O12/Hl1
T6/O6/Hl1
 - 776 -

T6/O12/Hl1
All T7/Hl1
All T1/Hl2
T2/O6/Hl2
All T7/Hl2
All T1/Hl3
T2/O10/Hl3
T7/O14/Hl3
T6/O8/Hl3
All T7/Hl3

4-9- Seed germination (%)

4-9-1- Effect of opening gate on seed germination (%)

The effect of opening gate on seed germination (%) is shown in the fig (54).
It illustrated different effects, because the effect of opening gate comes from a
combination of two main dimension factors: the width Wg and the height Hg of
the opening gate, the highest Seed germination value came from the opening
gate 09 (94.188 %) that gave the ratio of opening gate (Wg Hg) (1.5: 1),

Comparing germination (%) for mean treatments

94.20
Seed germination (%)

94.16

94.12

94.08

94.04

94.00
O1 O2 O3 O4 O5 O6 O7 O8 O9 O10 O11 O12 O13 O14 O15 O16

Opening gate

Fig. (54): Effect of Opening gate on seed germination % for mean treatments.
 - 777 -

Followed by the opening gate 016 (94.179 %) that gave the ratio of opening
gate (Wg Hg) (1.75: 1.75).
The lowest Seed germination was from the treatment 011 (94.012 %) that gave
the ratio of (Wg Hg) (1.5: 1.5), all the values were around 94.10 %.

4-9-1-1- Effect of Gate width Wg on seed germination (%)

The effect of width Wg dimension of the gate on the seed germination (%) is
shown in fig (55).
It shows increasing in width ratio increases the germination (%), the highest
value was from the highest ratio taken in the investigation 1.75 ratio (94.15 %),
the lowest value of germination was at the lowest taken in the investigation 1
ratio (94.10 %).
All the seed germination was around 94.10 %.

Comparing seed germinatin (%) for mean treatment

94.16 y = 0.0101x 2 - 0.0344x + 94.124

94.15 R2 = 0.9997 94.15
Seed germination (%)

94.14
94.13
94.12
94.11 94.11
94.10 94.10
94.10
94.09
94.08
94.07
94.06
1 1.25 1.5 1.75
Mean change in width (Wg) of gate ratio

Fig. (55): Effect of Gate width dimension on seed germination (%) for mean
treatments.

4-9-1-2- Effect of Gate height Hg on seed germination (%)

The effect of gate height Hg dimension on seed germination (%) is shown in fig
(56).
 - 777 -

It illustrated that increasing in height dimension ratio from 1 to 1.5 ratio

decreases seed germination from 94.13 % to 94.08 %, but increasing height
dimension ratio more than 1.5 ratio increases the seed germination

Comparing Seed germination (%) for mean treatments

94.14 y = 0.0213x 2 - 0.1079x + 94.221

Seed germination (%)

94.13 94.13
R2 = 0.8968
94.12

94.10 94.10

94.08 94.08

94.06

94.04
1 1.25 1.5 1.75
Mean change in height (Hg) for gate (ratio)

Fig (56): Effect of Gate height dimension on seed germination for mean
treatments.
For 1.75 ratio 94.13 % that may be due to its highest primary seed germination
(%).
All seed germination was around 94.10 %.

4-9-2- Effect of Seed level height on seed germination (%)

The effect of seed level height on seed germination (%) is shown in fig (57),
It illustrated that decreasing seed height level from Hl1 (4.5 cm) to Hl3 (1.5 cm)
increases the seed germination form 94.10 to 94.13 % , That may be due to its
less damage in seeds which could be affected by the less damping effect when
the seed level height is low 1.5 cm and may
 - 777 -

Comparing germination (%) for mean treatments

y = 0.0123x + 94.089
94.14
Seed germination (%)
2
R = 0.8825
94.13 94.13
94.12

94.11 94.11
94.10
94.10

94.09
94.08
4.5 3 1.5

Seed level height (cm)

Fig. (57): Effect of Seed level height on seed germination (%) for mean
treatments.
Be due to its highest seed rate / min.
All germination values were around 94.10%.

4-9- 3- Effect of Seed varieties on seed germination (%)

The effect of seed varieties on seed germination (%) is shown in fig. (58).
It illustrated that for the Corn kernel varieties the highest seed germination (%)
was from Corn 10 (96.82 %) while the difference between its primary
germination was (0.398 %), comparing with Corn 162 which gave (90.26 %)
which had a highest difference between its primary germination (1.24 %), that
may be due to its highest dimensions, physical properties, and for its highest
primary germination (97.20, 91.40 %) for the two varieties Corn 10 and Corn
162 respectively.
For broad bean varieties the Fig. (58), illustrated that Giza 716 gave the highest
value (93.86 %) which the difference between its primary germination was
(0.519 %) while Sakha 2 variety gave the lowest value (95.52 %) this had a
highest difference
 - 777 -

Comparing germination (%) for mean treatments

96.82
97.0
Germination (%)

96.0 95.52
95.0 93.86
94.0
93.0
92.0
91.0 90.26
90.0
Corn 10 Corn 162 Giza 716 Sakha 2

Corn Kernel Broad bean

Seed varieties

Fig. (58): Effect of Seed varieties on seed germination (%) for mean
treatments.

Between the differences in its primary germination was (1.179 %), which may
be due to its highest: dimensions, physical properties, and primary germination
(96.06, 95.11%) for the two varieties Giza 716 and Sakha 2 respectively.

4-9-4- Effect of Vibrational motion on seed germination (%)

The effect of vibrational motion on seed germination (%) is shown in fig (59).
It illustrated that increasing vibrational motion increases the seed germination
(%) till it reaches the maximum value at T5 (726.6 rpm, 86.2 peak) (95.24%)
followed by T4 (586.3 rpm, 44.2 peak) (94.62 %), increasing vibrational motion
more than T5 Decreases the seed germination, which may be due that increasing
vibrational motion, could cause turbulence motion between seeds causing more
damage between them.
 - 777 -

Comparing germination (%) for mean treatments

Seed germination (%) 95.5 y = -0.0485x3 + 0.4313x2 - 0.6924x + 93.693
2
R = 0.9437 95.24
95.0

94.5
94.62
94.34
94.13
94.0
93.68
93.5 93.40
93.38
93.0
13.76 22.71 35.56 44.2 86.2 112.8 125.8
Peak

Fig. (59): Effect of Vibrational motion on seed germination (%) for mean
treatments.

The lowest germination was from T1 (256.4 rpm, 13.76 peak) (94.62 %).
For the combination of all the treatments above that gave the highest value for
both Corn kernel varieties and both Broad bean varieties is shown in the table
(25 and 26).

Table (25): Treatments of Max. and Min. value of germination (%) for
combination for Corn kernel varieties.
Corn kernel varieties
Corn 10 Corn 162
Max. Min. Max. Min.
T3/O8/Hl1 All T1/Hl1 T5/O1/Hl1 All T1/Hl1
All T4/Hl1 All T2/Hl1 T5/O4/Hl1 All T2/Hl1
All T5/Hl1 T3/O2/Hl1 T5/O5/Hl1 All T7/Hl1
T6/O8/Hl1 T3/O6/Hl1 T5/O12/Hl1 All T1/Hl2
T6/O13/Hl1 T3/O10/Hl1 T5/O9/Hl2 All T2/Hl2
T6/O16/Hl1 T3/O11/Hl1 T5/O14/Hl2 All T1/Hl3
 - 777 -

T4/O1/Hl2 All T7/Hl1 T5/O2/Hl3 All T2/Hl3

T4/O5/Hl2 All T1/Hl2 T5/O4/Hl3 All T7/Hl3
T4/O9/Hl2 All T2/Hl1
T4/O10/Hl2 All T7/Hl2
T4/O13/Hl2 All T1/Hl3
T4/O14/Hl2 AllT2/Hl3
T4/O16/Hl2 T3/O1/Hl3
All T5/Hl2 T3/O6/Hl3
T4/O3/Hl3 T3/O14/Hl3
T4/O4/Hl3 All T7/Hl3
T4/O7/Hl3
T4/O8/Hl3
T4/O11/Hl3
T4/O12/Hl3
T4/O16/Hl3

Table (26): Treatments of Max. and Min. value of germination (%) for
combination for Broad bean varieties.
Broad bean varieties
Giza 716 Sakha 2
Max. Min. Max. Min.
T4/O3/Hl1 T7/O13/Hl1 T4/O6/Hl1 T2/O3/Hl1
T4/O10/Hl1 T1/O15/Hl2 T4/O13/Hl1
All T5/Hl1 T2/O16/Hl2 T4/O16/Hl1
T4/O16/Hl2 T2/O15/Hl2 All T5/Hl1
All T5/Hl2 T2/O16/Hl2 T4/O4/Hl2
T4/O3/Hl3 T4/O16/Hl2
 - 779 -

T4/O10/Hl3 All T5/Hl2

All T5/Hl3 T2/O1/Hl3
T4/O2/Hl3
T4/O9/Hl3
All T5/Hl3

4-10- Seed Emergence (day)

4-10-1- Effect of opening gate on Seed Emergence (day)
The effect of opening gate on seed emergence (day) is shown in the fig (60).
It illustrated different effects, because the effect of opening gate comes from a
combination of two main dimensions: width Wg and height Hg of the opening
gate.

Compering seed emergene (day) for mean treatments

Seed emergence (day)

6.06
6.05
6.04
6.03
6.02
6.01
6.00
5.99
5.98
O1 O2 O3 O4 O5 O6 O7 O8 O9 O10 O11 O12 O13 O14 O15 O16

Opening gate

Fig. (60): Effect of Opening gate on seed emergence (day) for mean
treatments.

the highest Seed emergence value came from the opening gate 012 (6.05 day)
that gave the ratio of opening gate (Wg Hg) (1.5: 1.75), it was the same
treatment that gave the highest seed rate/min and seed visible damage (%),
 - 770 -

followed by the opening gates 06, 07, 011, and 014 (6.03 day) that gave the ratio
of opening gate (Wg Hg) (1.5:1.5), (1.75:1.25), (1.25:1.5),and (1.25:1.25) for
the opening gates respectively.
The lowest value of seed emergence (day) was from the treatments O4, O15,
(6.00) that gave the ratio of opening gate (1:1.75), (1.75:1.5), and (1.75:1.75) for
the opening gates respectively, which was the same gates that gave the lowest
visible seed damage(%).

4-10-1-1- Effect of Gate width Wg on seed emergence (day)

The effect of width dimension Wg of the gate on the emergence (day) is shown
in fig (61).
It illustrated that increasing in width ratio from ratio 1 to 1.5 increases the seed
emergence (day) from (6.02 to 6.03) day, increasing width ratio more than 1.5
decreases seed emergence, for ratio 1.75 was (6.01) days.

Compering Seed emergence (day) for mean treatments

6.04 y = -0.007x 2 + 0.0346x + 5.9875

Seed emergence (day)

R2 = 0.9239
6.03 6.031
6.026
6.02

6.013
6.01 6.016

6
1 1.25 1.5 1.75

Mean change in width (Wg) for gate (ratio)

Fig. (61): Effect of Gate width dimension on seed emergence (day) for mean
treatments.
The effect of change in width ratio on seed emergence gave the similar effect for
the seed rate / min and the visible seed damage (%)
All seed emergence was around 6 days.
 - 777 -

4-10-1-2- Effect of Gate height Hg on seed emergence (day)

The effect of gate height dimension Hg on seed emergence (day) is shown in fig
(62).
It illustrated that increasing in height dimension ratio from ratio 1 to 1.25
increases seed emergence (day) from (6.02 to 6.03) day, increasing height ratio
more than that decreases emergence to 6.02 day, The effect or change in height
ratio on seed emergence was similar to the effect found on seed damage (%).

Comparing Seedemergence (day) for mean treatments

6.030 y = -0.002x 2 + 0.008x + 6.0165

Seed emergence (day)

R2 = 0.878
6.026
6.025

6.020 6.022
6.021
6.017
6.015

6.010
1 1.25 1.5 1.75

Mean change in height (Hg) for gate (ratio)

Fig. (62): Effect of Gate height dimension on seed emergence (day) for mean
treatments.
All the values were around 6 days.

4-10-2- Effect of Seed level height on seed emergence (day)

The effect of seed level height on seed emergence (day) is shown in fig (63),
 - 776 -

Comparing seed emergence (day) for mean treatments

y = -0.0065x 2 + 0.0275x + 5.997
Seed emergence (day) 6.03
R2 = 1
6.026
6.025

6.021
6.02
6.018
6.015

6.01
4.5 3 1.5
Seed level height (cm)

Fig. (63): Effect of Seed level height on seed emergence (day) for mean
treatments.

It illustrated that decreasing seed level height to Hl2 (3 cm) increases seed
emergence (6.03 day), decreasing seed level height to Hl3 (1.5 cm) decreases
seed emergence to (6.02 day), that may due to less seed damage effect on seeds
at the lowest seed level height (1.5 cm) causing less damage in seeds that affect
in less days needed to germinate in seeds and may also be due to its highest seed
rate / min and its highest seed germination (94.13 %), but all emergence values
were around 6 days.

4-10-3- Effect of Seed varieties on seed emergence (day)

The effect of seed varieties on seed emergence (day) is shown in fig. (64).
It illustrated that for the Corn kernel varieties the highest seed emergence (day)
was from Corn 162 (5.06 day) that may due to its lowest: seed dimensions,
physical properties, and its lower primary germination.
While Corn 10 gave the lowest emergence (5.10 day) that may be due to its
highest: seed dimensions, physical properties, and its highest primary
germination.
 - 777 -

Comparing seed emergence (day) for mean treatments

Seed emergence (day)

7.32
7.5
7
6.5 6.06
6 5.60
5.5 5.10
5
4.5
4
Corn 10 Corn 162 Giza 716 Sakha 2

Corn Kernel Broad bean

Seed varieties

Fig. (64): Effect of Seed varieties on seed emergence (day) for mean
treatments.

For Broad bean varieties the fig (64) illustrated that Sakha 2 gave the highest
emergence value (7.32 day) that may be due to its lowest: seed dimensions,
physical proprieties, and also for its lowest primary germination.
While Giza 716 gave the lowest value of seed emergence (6.06 day) that may be
due to it's highest: seed dimensions, physical proprieties, and also for its highest
primary germination.

4-10-4- Effect of Vibrational motion on seed emergence (day)

The effect of vibrational motion on seed germination (day) is shown in fig (65).
It illustrated that increasing vibrational motion decreases the seed emergence
(day) till it reaches the minimum value at T5 (726.6 rpm, 86.2 peak) (5.72 day)
followed by T4 (586.3 rpm, 44.2 peak) (5.85 day), increasing vibrational motion
more than T5
 - 777 -

Comparing seed emergence (day) for mean treatments

2
6.4 y = 0.0452x - 0.3669x + 6.5943
Seed emergence (day) 6.3 6.24 R2 = 0.8667
6.27
6.2
6.1 6.03
6.0 6.01
6.03
5.9
5.8 5.78
5.85
5.7
5.6
5.5
13.76 22.71 35.56 44.2 86.2 112.8 125.8
Peak

Fig. (65): Effect of Vibrational motion on seed emergence (day) for mean
treatments.

Increases the seed emergence, which may be due that increasing vibrational
motion, could cause turbulence motion between seeds causing more damage
between them delaying the time needed for germination (increasing emergence .

The highest germination was from T7 (1130.4 rpm, 125.8 peak) (6.27 day).
For the combination of all the treatments above that gave the maximum and
minimum values for both: Corn kernel, and Broad bean varieties are shown in
table (27 and 28).

Table (27): Treatments of Max. and Min. values of emergence (day) for
combination for Corn kernel varieties.
Corn kernel varieties
Corn 10 Corn 162
Max. Min. Max. Min.
All T1/H1 T5/O14/H3 T1/O1/H1 T4/O2/H1
All T7/H1 T1/O5/H1 T5/O4/H1
 - 777 -

All T1/H2 T1/O6/H1 T3/O9/H1

All T7/H2 T1/O7/H1 T4/O16/H1
All T1/H3 T1/O8/H1 T5/O16/H1
T2/O6/H3 T1/O12/H1 T5/O1/H2
All T7/H3 T1/O13/H1 T2/O2/H2
T1/O14/H1 T5/O3/H2
T2/O6/H1 T5/O5/H2
T2/O7/H1 T5/O8/H2
T2/O12/H1 T5/O9/H2
T2/O14/H1 T5/O11/H2
T6/O6/H1 T5/O11/H2
T6/O12/H1 T4/O10/H2
T6/O14/H1 T4/O11/H2
All T7/H1 T4/O16/H2
All T1/H2
All T7/H2
All T1/H3
All T7/H3
T6/O8/H3

Table (28): Treatments of Max. and Min. values of emergence (day) for
combination for Broad bean varieties.
Broad bean varieties
Giza 716 Sakha 2
Max. Min. Max. Min.
T7/O12/H2 All T5/H1 All T1/H1 All T5/H1
All T5/H2 All T7//H1 T4/O4/H1
All T5/H3 T2/O11/H1 All T5/H2
 - 777 -

T4/O13/H3 All T1/H2 T4/O4/H2

T4/O15/H3 All T7/H2 T4/O9/H2
All T1/H3 All T5/H3
All T7/H3 T4/O2/H3
T6/O2/H1 T4/O4/H3
T6/O13/H1 T4/O6/H3
T4/O9/H3
T4/O13/H3
T4/O14/H3
T4/O15/H3
 V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

The main results in this study can be summarized in the following

points:

5. 1. The 3- Major dimensions:

Corn 10 gave the highest value in each of the width and thickness of the seed
giving (0.866, 0.543 cm) respectively comparing with Corn 162 that gave a
lowest values of the width and thickness (0.774, 0.499 cm) respectively, Corn
162 gave the highest value of seed length comparing with the Corn 10 (0.964,
0.904 cm) respectively, Giza 716 gave the highest value in all of the Length,
width and thickness of the seed giving (1.727, 1.293, 0.617 cm) respectively
comparing with Sakha 2 that gave a lowest values of the length, width and
thickness (1.696, 1.216, 0.582 cm) respectively.

5. 2. Weight and Volume of 1000 Kernel , Bulk and Real density:

Corn 10 gave the highest values for all the mentioned characteristics which
could be due to its highest width and thickness, Giza 716 gave the highest
values for all the mentioned characteristics.

5. 3. Angle of Repose and Static Coefficient of Friction:

 Dynamic angle of repose for corn kernel of the investigated varieties
was 32.6°, 28.8° for the two varieties Corn 10 and Corn 162 respectively,
 The lowest values of static coefficient of friction were on galvanized
iron followed by mild – steel, and the highest on plywood, (0.531, 0.459–
0.572, 0.549 – 0.624, 0.586) for the two varieties Corn 10 and Corn 162
respectively.
 The lowest values of static coefficient of friction for the painted
surfaces were on Oven - baked enamel paint followed by untreated (mild
 521

steel), then the Mutt paint and the highest on polish paint, (0.48, 0.5 – 0.531,
0.459 - 0.72, 0.71 - 0.828, 0.72) for the two varieties Corn 10 and Corn 162
respectively.
 The angle of repose for broad bean of the investigated varieties was
34.7°, 30.4° for the two varieties Giza 716 and Sakha 2 respectively.
 The lowest values of static coefficient of friction were on galvanized
iron followed by mild – steel, and the highest on plywood, (0.558, 0.479–
0.563, 0.536 – 0.759, 0.669) for the two varieties Giza 716 and Sakha 2
respectively.
 The lowest values of static coefficient of friction for the painted
surfaces were on Oven - baked enamel paint followed by untreated (mild
steel), then the Mutt paint and the highest on polish paint, (0.447, 0.43 –
0.563, 0.536 - 0.729, 0.71 - 0.761, 0.75) for the two varieties Giza 716 and
Sakha 2 respectively.
5. 4. Vibrational motion Effect on static coefficient of friction

 The effect of vibrational motion for all treatments in the investigation

was in decreasing the static coefficient friction.
 For all material surfaces the vibration decreased the static coefficient
of friction and the highest decrease was at the mild – steel surface followed
by Galvanize (20.59 %, 17.375 %) respectively, the lowest decrease was at
the plywood surface (11.139 %).
 For all painted surfaces the vibration motion decreased the static
coefficient of friction and the highest decrease was at the Polish paint
surface followed by Mutt then Oven - baked enamel (23, 17.55, 12.35 %)
respectively, the lowest decrease was at the mild – steel surface (11.47 %).
 521

5. 5. Seed Rate / min

 The highest Seed rate / min value came from the opening gate O12
(86.488 seed/min), the lowest Seed rate / min was from the treatment O5
(1.455 seed/min).
 Increase in width dimension ratio from 1 to 1.5 increases the seed rate /
min, and after that ratio at 1.75 the value decreased.
 Increasing gate height dimension ratio from 1to 1.75 increased the seed
rate / min from 7.726 to 39.080 seed / min.
 Decreasing seed level height from 4.5 to 1.5 cm increases the seed rate
/ min from (6.61 to 42.9) seed/min.
 For the Corn kernel varieties, the highest value of seed rate / min was
from Corn 10 (40.873 seed / min) comparing with Corn 162 which gave
(37.801 seed / min), for the broad bean varieties, the Giza716 gave the
highest value (8.407 seed / min) comparing with Sakha 2 variety which gave
the lowest value (7.582 seed/ min).
 Increasing the vibrational motion increases the seed rate / min till it
comes to the maximum value at T5 (48.402 seed / min), increasing the
vibrational motion more than T5 decreases the seed rate / min,
 The combination of all the treatments above that gave the maximum
and minimum values for both: Corn kernel and Broad bean varieties were
obtained.

5. 6. Seed / hill
 The highest Seed / hill value came from the opening gate O12 (16.03
seed/hill), the lowest Seed / hill was from the treatment O5 (0.30 seed/hill),
The gates that gave the recommended number of seeds per hill (3 – 4
seed/hill) was O6, 09, O10, and O14 which gave the ratio of opening gate
 521

(Wg Hg) (1.25:1.25), (1.5:1), (1.5:1.25), and (1.75:1.5) for the opening gates
respectively.
 Increase in width dimension ratio from 1 to 1.5 increases the seed / hill
from 0.77 to 8.18 seed / hill, and after that ratio at 1.75 the value decreased
3.75 seed/ hill.
 Increasing gate height dimension ratio from 1 to 1.75 increased the
seed / hill from 1.35 to 7.24 seed / hill.
 Decreasing seed level height from 4.5 to 1.5 cm increases the seed /
hill from (1.21 to 7.86) seed/hill, The suitable number of seed / hill was at
the level Hl2 (3cm) (3.98) seed / hill.
 For the Corn kernel varieties, the highest value of seed / hill was
from Corn 10 (6.81 seed / hill) comparing with Corn 162 which gave (6.30
seed / hill), for the broad bean varieties, the Giza716 gave the highest value
(2.208 seed / hill) comparing with Sakha 2 variety which gave the lowest
value (2.102 seed/ hill).
 Increasing the vibrational motion increases the seed / hill till it comes
to the maximum value at T5 (11.292 seed / hill), increasing the vibrational
motion more than T5 decreases the seed / hill, The suitable number of seed /
hill came from the treatments T3 and T6 (4.171 and 4.090 seed / hill)
respectively.
 The combination of all the treatments above that gave the suitable
number (3 – 4) seed/ hill for both Corn kernel varieties (Corn 10, and Corn
162), and for the both Broad Bean varieties (Giza 716, and Sakha 2) were
also illustrated.

5. 7. Seed Longitudinal (cm)

 The highest Seed longitudinal value came from the opening gate O5
(151.49 cm) that gave the ratio of opening gate (Wg Hg) (1.25: 1), with SD
(7.51) and CV (0.05 %), the lowest value of seed longitudinal (cm) was
 521

from the treatment O12, (3.66 cm) that gave the ratio of opening gate (Wg
Hg) (1.5:1.75),with SD (2.33) and CV (0.64 %).
 Increasing in width dimension ratio from 1 to 1.5 decreased the seed
longitudinal (cm) from (63.84 to 7.40) cm, increasing width ratio more than
1.5 increases seed longitudinal, for ratio 1.75 was 18.46 cm with a SD
(13.91) and CV (0.75 %).
 Increasing in gate height dimension ratio from 1 to 1.75 decreases seed
longitudinal (cm) from (71.66 to 8.24) cm, that decrease was due to the
increase of seed rate / min, the SD and CV ranged from (64.24, 0.90 %) to
(5.12, 0.62 %) respectively.
 Decreasing seed level height from Hl3 (4.5 cm) to Hl1 (1.5 cm)
decreases seed longitudinal from 5.04 to11.69 cm with SD and CV from
(34.04, 0.68 %) to (10.41, 0.89 %) respectively.
 For the Corn kernel varieties the highest seed longitudinal (cm) was
from Corn 162 (10.60 cm) with SD and CV (8.04, 0.66 %) respectively,
comparing with Corn 10 which gave (9.91 cm) with SD and CV (7.56, and
0.76 %) respectively, for Broad bean varieties the Sakha 2 gave the highest
longitudinal value (41.10 cm) with SD and CV (25.23, and 0.61 %)
respectively, While Giza 716 gave the lowest value of seed longitudinal
(40.07 cm) with SD and CV (30.25, and 0.75 %) respectively.
 Increasing vibrational motion from T1 to T3 increases the seed
longitudinal from 0.00 cm to 16.78 cm further increase in vibrational motion
decreases seed longitudinal till it reach T5 (6.73 cm) with SD and CV (4.52
and 0.67 %) respectively, more increase in vibrational motion increases seed
longitudinal.
 The combination of all the treatments above that gave the maximum
and minimum values for both: Corn kernel and Broad bean varieties were
obtained.
 521

5. 8. Seed damage (%)

 The highest Seed damage (%) value came from the opening gate O12
(0.499 %), the lowest Seed damage (%) was from the opening gates O4, O15,
and O16 (0.495 %).
 Increasing in width dimension ratio from 1 to 1.5 increases the seed
damage (%) from (0.496 to 0.497) %, increasing width ratio more than 1.5
decreases seed damage, for ratio 1.75 was (0.496 %).
 Increasing in height dimension ratio from 1 to 1.25 increases seed
damage (%) from (0.496 to 0.497) day, increasing height ratio more than that
decreases seed damage to 0.496 %.
 Decreasing seed level height to Hl2 (3 cm) increases seed damage
(0.496 %), further decrease in seed level height decreases seed damage,
 For the Corn kernel varieties the highest seed damage (%) was from
Corn 162 (0.37 %), While Corn 10 gave the lowest emergence (0.34 %), For
Broad bean varieties the Sakha 2 gave the highest seed damage value (0.67
%), while Giza 716 gave the lowest value of seed damage (0.61 %).
 Increasing vibrational motion decreases the seed damage (%) till it
reaches the minimum value at T5 (0.47%), increasing vibrational motion
more than T5 Increases the seed damage.
 The combination of all the treatments above that gave the maximum
and minimum values for both: Corn kernel and Broad bean varieties were
obtained.

5. 9. Seed germination (%)

 The highest Seed germination value came from the opening gate O9
(94.188 %), the lowest Seed germination was from the treatment O11 (94.012
%).
 531

 Increasing in width ratio increases the germination (%), the highest

value was from the highest ratio taken in the investigation 1.75 (94.15 %), the
lowest value of germination was at the lowest taken in the investigation 1
(94.10 %).
 Increasing in height dimension ratio from 1 to 1.5 decreases seed
germination from 94.13 % to 94.08 %, but increasing height dimension ratio
more than 1.5 increases the seed germination for 1.75, 94.13 %.
 Decreasing seed height level from Hl1 (4.5 cm) to Hl3 (1.5 cm)
increases the seed germination form 94.10 to 94.13 %.
 For the Corn kernel varieties the highest seed germination (%) was from
Corn 10 (96.82 %) while the difference between its primary germination was
(0.398 %), comparing with Corn 162 which gave (90.26 %) which had a
highest difference between its primary germination (1.24 %).
 For Broad bean varieties the Giza 716 gave the highest value (93.86
%) which the difference between its primary germination was (0.519 %)
while Sakha 2 variety gave the lowest value (95.52 %) this had a highest
difference between the differences in its primary germination was (1.179 %).
 Increasing vibrational motion increases the seed germination (%) till it
reaches the maximum value at T5 (95.24%), increasing vibrational motion
more than T5 decreases the seed germination, The lowest germination was
from T1 (94.62 %).
 The combination of all the treatments above that gave the maximum
and minimum values for both Corn kernel varieties and both Broad bean
varieties were obtained.
4. 10. Seed Emergence (day)
 The highest Seed emergence value came from the opening gate O12
(6.05 day), the lowest value of seed emergence (day) was from the treatments
O4, O15, (6.00).
 535

 Increasing in width ratio from 1 to 1.5 increases the seed emergence

(day) from (6.02 to 6.03) day, increasing width ratio more than 1.5 decreases
seed emergence.
 Increasing in height dimension ratio from 1 to 1.25 increases seed
emergence (day) from (6.02 to 6.03) day, increasing height ratio more than
that decreases emergence to 6.02 day.
 Decreasing seed level height to Hl2 (3 cm) increases seed emergence
(6.03 day), decreasing seed level height to Hl3 (1.5 cm) decreases seed
emergence to (6.02 day).
 For the Corn kernel varieties the highest seed emergence (day) was
from Corn 162 (5.06 day), while Corn 10 gave the lowest emergence (5.10
day), For Broad bean varieties the Sakha 2 gave the highest emergence value
(7.32 day), while Giza 716 gave the lowest value of seed emergence (6.06
day).
 Increasing vibrational motion decreases the seed emergence (day) till it
reaches the minimum value at ( T5 ) 5.72 day, increasing vibrational motion
more than T5 increases the seed emergence, The highest germination was
from T7 (6.27 day).
 For the combination of all the treatments above that gave the
maximum and minimum values for both: Corn kernel and Broad bean
varieties were obtain,

The conclusions of this study are as follows:

1. The lowest values of static coefficient of friction for the painted

surfaces were on Oven - baked enamel paint followed by untreated
(mild steel), then the Mutt paint and the highest on polish paint, for all
the seed varieties mentioned in the study.
2. The effect of vibrational motion for all treatments in the investigation
 532

was in decreasing the static coefficient friction, the highest decrease

was at the Polish paint surface (23 %), and the lowest decrease was at
the mild – steel surface (11.47 %).
3. The suitable number of seed / hill comes from a wide range of
combination treatments that indicates a high accuracy of the metering
device.
4. The seed damage (%) was lower than 0.5 % for all the treatments in
the study.
5. The difference between primary and actual germination was not more
than 1.24%.
6. Emergence days needed for germination was (5.06 and 5.10 day) for
corn 10 and corn 162 respectively, and (7.32 and 6.06 day) for Sakha 2
and Giza 716 respectively.

RECOMMENDATIONS
 It is recommended to use the galvanized iron or mild steel in
manufacturing of seed hopper used in planting machines, silos and storage
containers with sides inclination of 40○ to allow an easily sliding.

 It is recommended to use the Oven - baked enamel paint for painted

surface in the structure of seed hopper in planters, silos and storage
containers with side's inclination of 30○ to allow an easily sliding.

 The recommended feed rate settings which gave the minimum value
of: seed damage and seed emergence and the maximum of germination for
the suitable number of seed / hill is as following:
 533

Vibrational Opening
Seed level
Seed varieties motion gate ratio
height (cm)
RPM Peak (Wg Hg)
Corn 10 729.6 86.2 1.75 : 1.5 1.5
Corn 729.6 86.2 1.5 :1 3
Corn
kernel 729.6 86.2 1 : 1.25 1.5
162
729.6 86.2 1 : 1.75 1.5
729.6 86.2 1.25 : 1.25 3
Giza 729.6 86.2 1.75 : 1 3
716 729.6 86.2 1.5 : 1 1.5
729.6 86.2 1.75 : 1 1.5
Broad
729.6 86.2 1.25 : 1.25 3
bean
729.6 86.2 1.75 : 1 3
Sakha 2 729.6 86.2 1 : 1.5 1.5
729.6 86.2 1.5 : 1 1.5
729.6 86.2 1.75 : 1 1.5

 It is recommended to develop the mechanism of seeding to obtain the

optimal number of seeds at higher forward speeds to increase the mechanism
productivity.

 It is recommended to study the validity of the seeding mechanism for

seeding other crops like: peanut, sorghum, peas and beans.
 VI. REFERENCES

Abd Alla H. S., Randwan S. M., and El- Hanafy E. H., (1995), Effect of
some physical properties of rice grain on milling quality, Misr J. Ag.
Eng., 12(1): 143 – 155.

Abo – Sabe A. H., (1956), Possibility of using the farm machines in Egyptian
agriculture. Lucture No. 9 Alex. Univ. C. F. Omar A. Hazza. A
characteristics of a corn planter design assembled to chisel plow, Misr J.
Ag. Eng., 15(1):159 – 173.
Abo EL – Ees N. A., (1985), The effect of seed bed preparation and method of
planting on wheat yield, Misr J. Ag. Eng., 2(4):131 – 136.
Abo EL – Ees N. A., (1986), Seed drill trials in cotton planting, Misr J. Ag.
Eng., 3(2):38 – 48.

Abu – Shieshaa R., Kholief R., and EL – Meseery A. A., (2007), A study of
some physical and mechanical properties of seed Melon seed, Misr J.
Ag. Eng., 24(3):575 – 592.

Amin E. E. A., (1983), Developing and planting machine for Egyptian farm,
MSc. Thesis Mansoura Univ., :60 – 119.

Amin E. E. A., (2003), Effect of some physical and mechanical properties on

grading efficiency, Misr J. Ag. Eng., ( ):451 – 470.

Awady M. N., (1970), A manual cotton planter of a new design, Ain Shams
University, fac. Ag. Res., 68:1 – 70.

Awady M. N., (1979), Process engineering of agricultural material, in Arabic,

Text. Col. Ag. A. Shams U.,: 39.
 531

Awady M. N., (1995), Computer and data analysis, Txtbkmenos, Col. Ag., Ain
Shams U.:30 – 35.

Awady M. N., and EL – Said S. A., (1985), Design factors for simple grain –
dirll feeding mechanism, Misr J. Ag. Eng., 2(2):33 – 49.

Awady M. N., and Ghoniem Y. E., (1985), Design charactistiy of a push – type
maize planter, Misr J. Ag. Eng., 2(1):38 – 49.
Awady M. N., EL – Kabany A. G., and Yehia I., (1998b), Construction
details of seed – drill components, Misr J. Ag. Eng., 6 th Conference of
Misr Society of Ag. Eng., 15(4):137 – 152.
Awady M. N., EL Saharigi A. F., and EL – Sayed I. Y., (1997), Design and
operating of a seed drill attached to a power tiller (II. Field experiments),
Misr J. Ag. Eng., 5th Conference of Misr Society of Ag. Eng. Fac. Of Ag.
Zagazige Uni., 9/9/1996:35 – 54.
Awady M. N., Hendawy A. N., EL Kabany A. G., and AL Najjar F. M.,
(1996), Development of farm machinery attachable to the power unit for
medium and small – scale Agriculture, Misr J. Ag. Eng., 13(2):297 – 308.
Awady M. N., Yehia I., and EL – Kabany A. G., (1998a), Planter – Feeders
evaluated using a devised testing rig, Misr J. Ag. Eng., 15(4):26 – 44.

Bahnasawy A. H., (1992), Effect of machine parameters pertinent to planting

effectiveness of some crops, MSc. Th. U. of zagazic at Moshtohor: 44 –
86.

Bansal R. K., EL-Gharras O., and Hamilton J. H., (1989), A roller type
positive feed mechanism, J. Agr. Eng. Res., 43:23 – 31.

Bates E. N., (1930), California rice land seeded by air plane, Ag. Eng., 11:69 -
70.
 531

Bernacki H. Haman J., and Kanofojski Cz., (1972), Agricultural machine

theory and construction. Vol. 1, Published USDA and National Science
Foundation, Washington by the Scientific Publications foreign
cooperation center of the central Institute of Scientific, Technocal and
Economic information, Warsaw, Poland.

Beverloo W. A., Leniger H. A., and De Velde J., (1961), The flow of granular
solids through orifices, Chemical Eng.Sc., 15:260 – 269.

Bosoi E. S., Verniaev O. V., Smirnov I. I., and Sultan – Shakh E. G.,
(1987), Agricultural machines, theory construction and calculations Vol.
1, Oxionian Press Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi, :237 – 275.

Chakraverty A., (1987), Post harvest technology of cereals pulses and oil seed
(revised edition), Oxford and IBH Pub. Co. PTV. Ltd. New Delhi,
Bombay, Cellculta.

Chakravery, A., (1972), Post – Harvest Technology of Cereals, Co. Pvt. Ltd.
New Delhi, Bombay, Calcutta, India..
Choudhary M. A., (1988), A new Multi – crop inveried - T seeder for upland
crop establishment, AMA, 19(3):37 – 42.
Coates W., (1992), Performance evaluation of a pendulum spreader, Trans,
ASAE.8(3):285 – 288.
Cristidis B. G., and Harrison G. J., (1955), Cotton growing problems,
McGraw – Hill Book Co. Inc. N. Y. :56 – 75.

Culpin C., (1976), Farm Machinery, 9th Ed., Crosby lockwood staples,
London.:95 – 98.

Daboul A. K., (1998), Design and test a cotton planter and fertilizer on furrow
ridge, M.Sc., Thesis, College of Ag. Basra U. Iraq.
 531

Deer J., (1981), Fundamentals of machine operation, Deer Comp. Moline,

111:100 – 122.

Deming S., Mehring K., (1929), The gravitation flow fertilizers and other
comminuted solids, Industrial and engineering chemistry, 21(7):661 –
665.

El – Gayar S. M., (2005), Flax seeds cleaning and grading using vibratory
apparatus, Misr J. Ag. Eng., 22(3):923 – 942.

El – Sayed A. S., (1994), Some characteristics of seed drill suitable for

planting, Misr J. Ag. Eng., 11(4):917 – 928.

El – Shafy M. W., (1986), Mechanization of Onion and pulps production,

Report (in Arabic) Ag. Eng. Resr. Inst.,:30 – 40.

EL – Shal M. S., (1987), A study on the usability of pneumatic planter under

Egyptian prevailing condition, Egypt J. App., 2(2):511 – 520.
EL – Shal M. S., (1987), A study on the usability of pneumatic planter under
Egyptian prevailing condition, Egypt J. App., 2(2):511 – 520.

El-Raie A. E. S., (1987), Properties of shelled corn related to mechanical

separation, Misr J. Ag. Eng., 4(1): 36 – 51.

F.M.O., (1975), Fundamentals of machine operation, Deere and Company,

Illinois, USA.

Fouda T. Z., (2008), Engineering studies on the performance of paddy and

rice separator, Misr J. Ag. Eng., 26(2):935 – 952.

Geokcebay B., (1986), Farm machinery, Ankara U. Ziaart Fac. Yayinlari,

Ankara Turkey :979.
 531

Gomaa S. M., Sorourr H. M. H., kamell O. M., and Ghazy, (2006),

Utilization of electronic circuits to operate and grading prototype
machine for some fruits and vegetable on weight base, Misr J. Ag. Eng.,
23(1):192 – 216.

Gomma S. M., (2003), Performance evaluation of pneumatic and mechanical

planters for cowpeas planting, Misr J. Ag. Eng., 20(4):945 – 979.
Habib Y. A., (1994), Design of a two corn planter using scrap parts of Egyptian
conditions, MSc. Th. Ag. Eng. South Dakota state U., :33 – 53.

Hao D. Q., and Britton M. G., (1994), Effect of vibration on loads in a

corrugated model grain bin, Canadian Ag. Eng., 36(1):29 - 35.

Harmond J. E., Brandenbay N. R., and Jensen L. A., (1965), Physical

properties of seeds, Trans. ASAE., 8(1): 30 - 30.

Heeg H. J., (1967). Equidistant spacing, drilling and broad casting of grain
with special reference to the spatial seed distribution (in German), KTL.-
Berchte Uber Landtechink, No. 112, Frank furt, Germany.

Heeg H. J., (1993), Seeding methods performance for cereals, rape, and beans,
ASAE., 36(3):653 – 661.
Hussain D., Hussain M., Gafar A., and Uddin Z., (1979), Design and
construction of multi – row seed drill for jute cultivation, AMA spring :33
– 36.
Hussin M. H., (1988), Effictency of some drill machines, MSc. Th. Fac. Of Ag.
Tanta Univ., :36 – 95.

Kaleem F. H., Ismail Z. E., and Abdel – Hakim G. R., (1993), Factors
affecting grain cleaning efficiency part 1: Grain straw mixture and
characteristics, Misr J. Ag. Eng. 10(2): 369 – 382.
 531

Kapner R. A., Bainer R., and Barger E. L., (1978), Principles of farm
machinery, 3rd Ed. Avi. Pub. Co. West post, Conn. USA.:227 – 230

Karababa Ersan., (2005), Physical properties of popcorn kernel, Journal of

food Engineering, www.elsevier.corn/locate/jfoodeng. 1 - 8.

Karayel D., Ozmerzi A., (2001), Effect of forward speed and seed spacing
uniformity on a precision vacuum metering unit for melon and cucumber
seeds, Journal of Faculty of Agriculture, 14(2):63 – 67.

Khurmi R. S., (1978), A text book of hydraulics, fluid mechanics, Chand

Company LTD, New Delhi :787 – 807.
Kiavani N., I., Gibbs R. N., and Horrell R. F., (1985), Seed placement
measuring technique for direct drilling machine – a note, New Zealand
Journal of experimental Ag. Vol. 31:191 – 194.

Klenin N. I., Popor I. F., and Sakum V. A., (1985), Agricultural machines,
Amerind Pub. Co. N. Y. :129 – 153, 186 – 189.

Korayam A. Y., (1986), A study of some factors affecting the accuracy of corn
planters, Alex. J. Ag. Res., 31(2):27 – 46.
Kumar K., Naresh N. K., and Ojha T. P., (1986), Design construction and
performance of a manually operated seeding attachment for an animal –
drawn cultivator, AMA., 17(2):35 – 38.

Kuppuswamy M., and Wratten F. T., (1970), Static and dynamic coefficients
of friction of rough rice on sheet metal, Presented at the meeting of the
ASAE, Arkansas, April 1970.

Lawton P. J., (1980), Coefficient of friction between cereal grain and various
silo wall materials, J. Ag. Eng. Res., 25:75 – 86.
 541

Lovegrove H. T., (1968), Crop production equipment, Hutchinson Tech. 1 st

Ed. Pub. 126:209 – 235.

Mohsenin N. N., (1970), Physical properties of plant and animal marerials,

Gordan and Beach Sc. Pub. N. Y.: 734.

Mohsenin N. N., (1984), Physical properties of plant and animal marerials,

Gordan and Beach Sc. Pub. N. Y.: 71 – 72.

Mohsenin N. N., (1986), Physical properties of plant and animal marerials,

Gordan and Beach Sc. Pub. N. Y.: 51 – 55.

Morad M. M., Afifi M., Hekal H. M., and Abd – EL Aty E. E., (2010),
Development of a planting machine used under Sub – surface irrigation
system, Misr J. Ag. Eng., 27(4):945 – 979.
Nave W. R., and Paulsen M. R., (1979), Soybean seed quality as affected by
planter, Trans., ASEA., 22(6):1475 – 1479.
Ozsert I., and Kara M., (1992), The longitudinal seed distribution of some
delivery mechanisms in Turkey, Univ. of Ag. Prague, Fac. of Ag. Eng.,
Turkey.
Panning J. W., Kocher M. F., Smith J. A., and Kachman S. D., (2000),
Laboratory and field testing of seed spacing uniformity Sugar beet plant,
Applied Eng. In. Ag. 6(5):7 – 13.
Richey C. B., Jacobson P., and Hall C. W., (1961), Agricultural Engineering,
handbook, McGraw – Hill Book Co. N. Y.,:172 – 186.
RNAM (Regional Network for Agricultural Machinery), (1991), Agricultural
machinery design and data handbook, seeders and planters, Economic and
Social Commission for Asia and the pacific: 23 – 71.
Senapati P. C., Mohaparta P. K., and Satputhy D., (1988), Field performance
of seeding drill in rainfed situation in Orissa, India J. Ag. Eng., 19(1):35
– 38.
 545

Shibon M. A. A., (1971), A study of the factors affecting feed rate and seed
damage in the fluted type seed drills, MSc. Th. Alex. U. :51 – 126.

Sitkei G., (1986), Mechanics of agricultural materials, Elsevier Sc. Pub. N. Y.:
11 - 31.

Smith A. E., (1963), Farm machinery and equipment, 5th Ed., McGrow – Hill
book company, London, England.

Soliman N. S., (1994), Effect of moisture content on angle of repose of paddy

rice and its products, Misr J. Ag. Eng., 11(1):163 – 173.

Soliman N. S., Mohamed A. F., and Abd El Maksoud A., (2007), Physical
characteristics of corn kernels, Misr J. Ag. Eng., 24(4):1003 – 1022.

Speelman L., (1975), The seed distribution in band sowing of cereals, J. Ag.
Eng., 20(5):25 – 37.

Stewart B. R., Hassain Q. A., and Kunze O. R., (1969), Friction Coefficient
of Sorghum grain on steel, Teflon and concrete surface, Trans of the
ASAE, 12(4):415 - 418.

Stone A. A., and Gulvin H. E., (1977), Machines for power farming, 3rd Ed.
John Willey and N. Y., :291 – 331.

Taieb A. E. Z., (1997), Comparative study on manual and mechanical sugar –

beet planting in the newly reclaimed lands, Misr J. Ag. Eng., 15(1):159 –
173.

Waziti A. N., and Mittal J. P., (1983), Design related physical properties of
selected agricultural products, AMA., 14 (1):56 – 61.
 541

Widemann H. T., Brock J. H., Fisher C. E., and Cross B. T., (1979), Seed
metering and placement devices for rangeland seeder, Trans. Of the
ASAE., 22(5):972 – 977.
Wilson J. M., (1980), The effect release errors and the release point on the
design of precision seed drills, J. Ag. Eng. Res., 25:407 – 419.
Yehua I., (1993), Design of a seed drill attached to a power tiller, MSc. Th. Fac.
Of Ag. Ain Shams U. :57 – 140.
Zaalouk A. K., (2008), Effect of moisture content on angle of repose and
Friction Coefficient of Wheat grain, Misr J. Ag. Eng., 26(1):418 – 427.

Zaalouk A. K., and Zabady F. I., (2008), Effect of moisture content on angle
of repose and friction coefficient of wheat grain, Misr J. Ag. Eng.,
26(1):418 – 427.
 VII. APPENDIX
Table (4): Code of the (Wg Hg) and Area of the gate for Corn 10

( Wg Hg ) Wg Hg Area
Code
ratio (cm) (cm) (cm2)
A(1 1) 01 1:1 1 0.866 0.543 0.47
A(1 2) 02 1 : 1.25 0.8 0.866 0.678 0.58
A(1 3) 03 1 : 1.5 0.66 0.866 0.814 0.7
A(1 4) 04 1 : 1.75 0.57 0.866 0.950 0.82
A(2 1) 05 1.25 : 1 1.25 1.082 0.543 85.0
A(2 2) 06 1.25 : 1.25 1 1.082 0.678 0.73
A(2 3) 07 1.25 : 1.5 0.833 1.082 0.814 0.88
A(2 4 ) 08 1.25 :1.75 0.714 1.082 0.950 2581
A(3 1) 09 1.5 : 1 1.5 251 0.543 8508.
A(3 2) 010 1.5 : 1.25 1.2 251 0.678 8500
A(3 3) 011 1.5 : 1.5 1 251 0.814 258.
A(3 4) 012 1.5 : 1.75 0.857 251 0.950 2511
A(4 1) 013 1.75 : 1 1.75 25. 0.543 8502
A(4 2) 014 1.75 : 1.25 1.4 25. 0.678 2582
A(4 3) 015 1.75 : 1.5 1.167 25. 0.814 2511
A(4 4) 016 1.75 : 1.75 1 25. 0.950 25..
 2..

Table (5): Code of the (Wg Hg) and Area of the gate for Corn 162.

( Wg Hg ) Wg Hg Area
Code
ratio (cm) (cm) (cm2)
A(1 1) 01 1:1 1 8500. 85.00 8510
A(1 2) 02 1 : 1.25 0.8 8500. 85611. 85.0
A(1 3) 03 1 : 1.5 0.66 8500. 850.0 85.0
A(1 4) 04 1 : 1.75 0.57 8500. 8500 8560
A(2 1) 05 1.25 : 1 1.25 0.967 85.00 85.0
A(2 2) 06 1.25 : 1.25 1 0.967 85611 8568
A(2 3) 07 1.25 : 1.5 0.833 0.967 850.0 8501
A(2 4 ) 08 1.25 :1.75 0.714 0.967 8500 850.
A(3 1) 09 1.5 : 1 1.5 1.161 85.00 85.0
A(3 2) 010 1.5 : 1.25 1.2 1.161 85611 8501
A(3 3) 011 1.5 : 1.5 1 1.161 850.0 8506
A(3 4) 012 1.5 : 1.75 0.857 1.161 8500 2582
A(4 1) 013 1.75 : 1 1.75 1.354 85.00 8560
A(4 2) 014 1.75 : 1.25 1.4 1.354 85611 850.
A(4 3) 015 1.75 : 1.5 1.167 1.354 850.0 2582
A(4 4) 016 1.75 : 1.75 1 1.354 8500 2520
 2..

Table (6): Code of the A (Wg Hg) and Area of the gate for Broad bean Giza
716.

( Wg Hg ) Wg Hg Area
Code
ratio (cm) (cm) (cm2)
A(1 1) 01 1:1 1 1.29 0.617 0.79
A(1 2) 02 1 : 1.25 0.8 1.29 0.77 0.99
A(1 3) 03 1 : 1.5 0.66 1.29 0.92 1.18
A(1 4) 04 1 : 1.75 0.57 1.29 1.079 1.39
A(2 1) 05 1.25 : 1 1.25 1.61 0.617 0.99
A(2 2) 06 1.25 : 1.25 1 1.61 0.77 1.23
A(2 3) 07 1.25 : 1.5 0.833 1.61 0.92 1.48
A(2 4 ) 08 1.25 :1.75 0.714 1.61 1.079 1.73
A(3 1) 09 1.5 : 1 1.5 1.93 0.617 1.19
A(3 2) 010 1.5 : 1.25 1.2 2501 0.77 1.48
A(3 3) 011 1.5 : 1.5 1 2501 0.92 1.79
A(3 4) 012 1.5 : 1.75 0.857 2501 1.079 2.08
A(4 1) 013 1.75 : 1 1.75 1511 0.617 1.375
A(4 2) 014 1.75 : 1.25 1.4 1511 0.77 1.71
A(4 3) 015 1.75 : 1.5 1.167 1511 0.92 2.05
A(4 4) 016 1.75 : 1.75 1 1511 1.079 2.40
 2.6

Table (7): Code of the (Wg Hg) and Area of the gate for Broad bean
Sakha2.

( Wg Hg ) Wg Hg Area
Code
ratio (cm) (cm) (cm2)
A(1 1) 01 1:1 1 2512 0.582 0.70
A(1 2) 02 1 : 1.25 0.8 2512 0.727 0.87
A(1 3) 03 1 : 1.5 0.66 2512 0.873 1.05
A(1 4) 04 1 : 1.75 0.57 2512 1.01 1.22
A(2 1) 05 1.25 : 1 1.25 1.52 0.58 0.88
A(2 2) 06 1.25 : 1.25 1 1.52 0.727 1.10
A(2 3) 07 1.25 : 1.5 0.833 1.52 0.873 1.33
A(2 4 ) 08 1.25 :1.75 0.714 1.52 1.01 1.53
A(3 1) 09 1.5 : 1 1.5 1.82 0.58 1.05
A(3 2) 010 1.5 : 1.25 1.2 1.82 0.727 1.32
A(3 3) 011 1.5 : 1.5 1 1.82 0.872 1.58
A(3 4) 012 1.5 : 1.75 0.857 1.82 1.01 1.83
A(4 1) 013 1.75 : 1 1.75 2.12 0.58 1.22
A(4 2) 014 1.75 : 1.25 1.4 2.12 0.727 1.54
A(4 3) 015 1.75 : 1.5 1.167 2.12 0.87 1.84
A(4 4) 016 1.75 : 1.75 1 2.12 1.01 2.14
 ‫الملخص العربي‬

‫مددللبنل‬
‫لل‬ ‫لللل ل ل للل‬
‫ددالبذاالددانذلللددلللل ليددةلللللللب ة‬
‫بلددللبذامةؤددملل لللنل ل لللل ل ل ل لل لل ل‬
‫لبذاعاددللذال لل ل لللل ل لل‬
‫للددللبذعالمددةلل لللل ل ل ل للل‬
‫للل لل ل لللل ل لل‬
‫يعددالبذاددمب‬
‫ل للللل‬
‫للل ل‬
‫خرى‪.‬ل‬
‫للل ل ل ل‬
‫لبذاالةحللفالحةذللتوفرلبذظرنفلبذاالئاللب‬
‫لللللل ل لل ل للل لل للل للل لل لللل ل ل ل لللل ل لل ل‬
‫خفةضعةلفالنحا‬
‫بلل للل ل لللل لل ل‬
‫لل لذ لقممل‬
‫للللللللل‬ ‫لكاصا‬
‫للل ل للابلل لل ل ل‬
‫لللىلب‬
‫لللل لل‬
‫لبذاعللاا‬
‫لقمملبذامنل لللل ل‬
‫للللللللللللل‬
‫لبذمللذ‬
‫لللل للللل‬
‫تصامملنتصنمعلنبخ اة‬
‫للل ل ل لللل لل للل لل لل‬
‫بسلل‬
‫للللل لل ل‬
‫تضانتلبذا‬
‫ل ل لل‬
‫يعلبذامنل ‪.‬لل ل‬
‫لنتول لل لللللل‬
‫للللللل لل لل‬
‫للعاللبذامب‬
‫لللللل ل لل‬
‫لنذاية‬
‫لبةذامنل لل لل‬
‫لبذضلرل للللللل‬
‫للللللل لللل‬
‫للللل لللذمللذ قلم‬
‫عالتللل م لب‬
‫‪,‬لبسلل ل لل‬
‫بذامنل للللل‬
‫لللل‬
‫لقمملنذذكل‬
‫لل‬ ‫لللللللللل للل‬
‫لفالبذمللبذ‬
‫للمركلكعربةئالكاصرلذالل للابلل للل للللل‬
‫للىللمول لل ل ل ل لل ل ل لللل لل ل ل ل للل‬
‫للللل لل لل ل ل‬
‫لركاية‬
‫لل ل ل ل ل‬
‫نللربوطل‬
‫لبسلل لعال لللنل ل لل ل لل ل‬
‫اريدةللل‬
‫ذمدللللخللل ل‬
‫للل لل ل لل‬
‫لللللبخلللارل لب‬
‫صةلمملبذالةبقلل‪,‬ل‬
‫لللللل لل لللللل لللل‬
‫لكاةللعاوللبللبةذ‬
‫لقمملنبذامنل لل ل للل ل ل ل ل للل‬
‫لللللللللل للللل‬
‫اللسلبذااةشرلبمللبذمللبذ‬
‫للللل ل ل لللل للل ل لللل للللل‬
‫جنبلبذ‬
‫ذلل لل‬
‫‪21.7‬لل‪,‬ل‬
‫‪...7‬لل‪,‬ل لل ل ل‬
‫‪75.51‬لل‪,‬ل لل ل ل‬
‫‪77.36‬لل‪,‬ل ل لل ل ل‬
‫‪67.31‬لل‪,‬ل ل لل ل ل‬
‫ذال ل دلددابلل بلل لللل ل لل ل ل‬
‫للللل ل‬
‫خاببلسدللدداعللللقدددممل‬
‫بل ‪Soil bin‬لللبأسدددلل للللل‬
‫ىللل ل‬
‫نللدددل ل‬
‫لل‬
‫)لنل ل لل‬
‫سدتل‬ ‫‪6.5‬ل‪ cm‬لل ل‬
‫‪7‬للل‪,‬ل لل ل‬
‫‪..5‬للل‪,‬ل ل‬
‫لل للللبذمدةلل لالل ل لل ل‬
‫لبذامنل للللبسدف‬
‫لللل لللللل‬
‫لل ل تفة‬
‫للل ل‬
‫ثالثل للالللوية‬
‫‪,.‬لنل ل لل‬
‫‪675.2‬ل‪peak‬ل)للل ل‬
‫‪667.2‬لل‪,‬ل لل ل ل ل‬
‫لل ل ل ل‬
‫جملل‬
‫لل‬ ‫لل لللل ل لل‬
‫للللل للل ذ‬
‫ذصنفملللللبمنل لبذم‬
‫‪6.35‬لل لللل لل ل لللل‬
‫‪:‬ل ل لل ل‬
‫‪6.35‬ل لل‬
‫بذىل ل لل ل‬
‫‪6:6‬للل لل‬
‫لتربنحتلبملللل لل ل‬
‫لتلقمملبذامنل للل لل ل ل لللل‬
‫الاللللذفللمةلل لللللللللللل‬
‫لشرلل لل ل‬
‫ل ل لل‬
‫)‪ .‬ل‬
‫‪ 7‬لل‬
‫نسخةل ل‬
‫‪361‬ل ل ل للل‬
‫حجةلل ليللل ل ل ل‬
‫لللل ل‬
‫بذفول)ل‬
‫بذاةقالءللللللل ل‬
‫بمنل للللللل ل‬
‫)لنؤنفمللللللل‬
‫‪ 617‬لل ل لللل لل ل ل‬
‫جملللل ل ل ل‬
‫للل لللل ل لل‬
‫‪61‬لنلذ‬
‫لل‬
‫لةيأتال‪ -:‬ل‬
‫للللللللةئجلل للللل للل‬
‫بظعر لبذن‬
‫نقالل ل ل ل‬
‫لللل‬
‫للنأقلعدةل‬
‫للل‬ ‫لفللكةنللعلبذخشبليلمهلبذمايالبذاطةنل للل لللل‬
‫سطحلبذاخلللل لل لل لل ل لللل ل ل للللل لللل للللللل ل لل‬
‫للل ل ل ل لللل ل‬
‫ةتمكاللعلب‬
‫كةكلبسللللل ل لل ل‬
‫بنلأللىللعةلل للللبحلل لل للل‬
‫‪6‬ل‪ .‬ل للل لل لل ل لل‬
‫ل‬
‫ةتمكالللعلبذطل ل لللللل لل للل ل لللل ل ل لللل ل ل للللل ل لل‬
‫الءلفقالكدةنلللدعلبذطدالءلبذاللدعلليلمدهل‬ ‫كةكلبسللللل ل للل ل لللل‬
‫لعلبذمايالبذاجلفل‪,‬بلةلأللىللعةلل للللبحلل لل للل‬
‫ل لللل للللللل ل للل للل لللل لل لل ل لل‬
‫للل‪.‬ل ل‬
‫لحربلل ية‬
‫نأقلعةللعلبذالطحلذيلبذطالءلبذاعةلل لل ل‬
‫لللل لللل للل ل لللل ل ل للل لللل ل ل لللل ل لل‬
‫بذمايالبذاطةنل )‬
‫بذطالءلبذاطفالثملغمرلبذاعةلل ل للل للللللل ل لل‬
‫لل ل ل لللل ل لل للللل لل لللل ل لل‬
‫لبذمايدالبذاجلفدللل‬
‫لنلبذصدوبلعللدلللدةللللللل لل للللل ل لل ل‬
‫لنبذالدةيلوبلل لل لللل ل لل ل لل ل لل‬
‫يقلبذادمنل لل للل لللل‬
‫للللل لللل لل‬
‫بنلؤنة‬
‫لل لل لل‬
‫صنمعللل ا‬
‫لللل للل‬
‫بسللب‬
‫للللل لل ل‬
‫توؤالبذا‬
‫لل ل‬
‫الداحلبدةلللال ل ل‬
‫لل‬ ‫لللل ل ل لل‬
‫‪.‬ل ل ل لدللذ‬
‫‪1‬ل‬‫للل ل‬
‫لل ل ةل‬
‫ةلبابنيدللقدا‬
‫كةكعادلللل لل ل ل لل‬
‫خفةضللعةلدل للللأحلل لل ل ل‬
‫لللل للل لل ل لل‬
‫بالالابلأ‬
‫يلمللبذمايالبذاطةنل للل ل لل‬
‫للل لللل للللللل ل لل‬
‫بطدالءللعةلدل ل‬
‫لل‬ ‫لنلبذصدوبلعلللل ل ل لل ل لل‬
‫لنبذالدةيلوبلل لل لللل ل لل ل‬
‫يقلبذادمنل لل للل لللل‬
‫للللل لللل لل‬
‫بنلؤنة‬
‫لل لل لل‬
‫بطالءل ا‬
‫توؤاللل ل ل ل‬
‫كاةلل ل ل لل‬
‫لبالعوذللل‪,‬ل ل لل‬
‫بذامنل للل ل ل لل‬
‫لللل‬
‫تمتل‬
‫لل‬ ‫لبذادللدمنل لل ل‬
‫داحلبددةلللال ل لللل‬
‫للللالدل ل لل‬
‫‪71‬ل ل ل دلدللذ‬
‫للل ل ل‬
‫لل ل ةل‬
‫دللقددا‬
‫دهلبابنيدل لل‬
‫كةكدل للل لل ل‬
‫دةضللعةلدل للللأحلل لل‬
‫خفدلل لل ل لل‬
‫لللل ل‬
‫بالالدللدابلأ‬
‫حربلل ليددةللللل ل‬
‫ل‬
‫بسللبالعوذل‪.‬لل ل‬
‫للل لل ل للل ل ل لل‬
‫بذا‬
‫خفدةضل‬
‫لل‬ ‫لللل ل لل‬
‫نكدةنلبللدىلب‬
‫ةتمكالذلادمنل لل ل لل للل لل‬
‫للل لسدللللل ل لللل لل‬
‫كدةكلب‬
‫للل لحلل لل‬
‫لللللعةلل لب‬
‫لللللل لل ل لل ل لل‬
‫ىلبذىلتقلم‬
‫لللل لللل‬
‫للل ل للابلل لب‬
‫عاةللب‬
‫بنلبسلل ل لل‬
‫‪7‬ل‪ .‬ل للل‬
‫ل‬
‫‪71.32‬للل‪,‬ل‬
‫بذاجلفدلدللللل ل لل ل ل‬
‫دملبذماي دللاللل ل لل‬
‫دالبذاطدللدةنل لللثدللللل لل‬
‫بذمايدللللل ل‬
‫دطحللدلدعللللل لل‬
‫داللذلالدل ل لل‬
‫ةتمكالبةذنالدلل لللل‬
‫للل لسدللللل ل لللللل‬
‫للل لحللكدللدةكلب‬
‫ذاعةلدل لب‬
‫ل ل لل‬
‫‪66.67‬ل‬
‫للل ل لل ل ل‬
‫ةتمكالكدةنلذلخشدبل‬
‫للل لسدللللل ل لل لل لللل ل ل‬
‫كدةكلب‬
‫للل لحلل لل‬
‫لباعةلدل لب‬
‫خفةضدةلللل ل لل‬
‫لللللل للل‬
‫وبذا‪,‬لنلبقلعدةللب‬
‫للللل للل للل للللل‬
‫)لللىلبذ‬
‫‪ %‬لل لل‬
‫‪63.73‬ل ل‬
‫ل لل ل ل‬
‫لدعليلمدللبذالدطحلبذاطفدالثدملبذاعةلدل ل‬
‫لل‬ ‫للل ل ل لللل ل لللل ل ل لللل ل ل ل لل للللل ل لل‬
‫خفدةضللندالبذالدطحلب‬
‫لللل ل لل لل ل للللل ل ل‬
‫سطحلبذطالءلفكةنلبللدىلب‬
‫للل ل ل ل لللل ل ل للل لل للل لل‬
‫)‪,‬للبلةل‬
‫‪ %‬للللل‬
‫ل‬
‫دددةكللل‬
‫للل لحللكد لل‬
‫لباعةلددددل لب‬
‫خفةضددددةلللل ل لل‬
‫للللل للل‬
‫دددوبذال‪,‬لنبقلعددددةلب‬
‫لللل د ل للل لللل لللل‬
‫)لللد لدددىلبذ‬
‫‪%‬ل لل ل‬
‫‪ 67.75‬ل‬
‫‪63.55‬للل‪,‬ل ل لل ل ل‬
‫‪77‬للل‪,‬ل ل لل ل ل‬
‫حربلل ليددددةللللًل ل ل ل‬
‫ل‬
‫)‪ .‬ل‬
‫‪ %‬لل‬
‫‪66..3‬ل ل‬
‫ةتمكالكةنللنالبذمايالبذاطةنل لللل ل لل ل ل‬
‫بل لسللللل ل لل لل لل لللللل للللللل ل لل‬
 ‫‪7‬‬

‫للعدللدالل‬
‫لل‬ ‫دللضددالل لل ل‬
‫دمكول لللللدل لل‬
‫لبذادلل ل‬
‫ذلامةؤددملل لللل‬
‫لجلبذجدلدول للللل ل لل‬
‫دللبذادللدمنل لللللل‬
‫بذانةسدلدبللللدل لللل‬
‫لللللل للل‬
‫دىلبذعددا ل‬
‫لل لللل‬
‫دوللللد‬
‫دللبذمصدل ل لل‬
‫ياكدل لللل ل‬
‫‪7‬ل‪ .‬ل ل‬
‫ل‬
‫لبذاطلدومللدلل‬
‫لل‬ ‫لللللل ل لل ل لل ل‬
‫يلللبذعدا‬
‫للل ل للابلل لل للللل‬
‫لقمملذنلبذمركللب‬
‫بذمللبذلللللللل لللل ل ل ل‬
‫حمثلبلطتلللل للل‬
‫لؤنفلللىلحاىلللل‪,‬ل لل للل ل ل لل‬
‫غميللذكل لل لل لل لل لل لل‬
‫بذللل للل للل‬
‫لللل‬
‫لبذاعةلالل )‪.‬‬
‫تابخل لللل ل لل ل‬
‫لللبذاعةلالل للللللل‬
‫للللخاللللاىلنبسعلل ل لللل ل لل ل‬
‫بةذجول للل ل لل ل ل لل لل لل لل ل‬
‫لفاللللل ل‬
‫بذامنل للل‬
‫لللل‬
‫)لبلطدلدىل‬
‫لل‬ ‫‪6.5‬ل‪ cm‬للل ل‬
‫لبذادللدمنل للل‪Hl3‬ل ل لل ل‬
‫للل للتفددةلل لللل‬
‫)لنلال دلل لوىلب‬
‫‪27.1‬ل‪ peak‬لل ل ل‬
‫للل ل للابلل ليدلدلللل ‪T5‬ل ل لل ل ل‬
‫بنلبذمركدلدللب‬
‫‪.‬ل‪ .‬للل لللل ل ل‬
‫ل‬
‫نسل‪.‬لل ل‬
‫لل ل ل ل‬
‫لبذاا‬
‫للل لللل‬
‫غلبلبذصفة‬
‫لللل للبلللل ل لل لللل‬
‫لل ل لللل قة‬
‫للعا‬
‫دانل ل‬
‫لل‬ ‫للل لنبدل ل‬
‫لللللللاددةلل ل‬
‫دةذجول ل‪,‬لب‬
‫جلبدللل ل‬
‫للبذادللدمنل للل‬
‫لل لللل‬
‫للل لللبددةلل ل للابلل لللل للعددا‬
‫دللبذاددمب‬
‫بءلبذمدل لللل‬
‫للللل لللل‬
‫دةئجلللبخللاددةلل لب‬
‫درلتملم دل للل دللل‬
‫بظعدل للل لل‬
‫‪5‬ل‪ .‬ل ل‬
‫ل‬
‫للللل ل‬
‫لللللللةئجللل ما ‪.‬‬
‫بذامنل )ل‬
‫لللل‬
‫لبذادةقالءل‬
‫لل‬ ‫ذامنل لللل للل ل‬
‫‪%‬لللل‬
‫‪1.131‬ل ل‬
‫للل ل للابلل لليلللل ل ل لل ل‬
‫لقمملذيلبذمركللب‬
‫للللللللللل لللل ل ل ل‬
‫لبأذمللبذ‬
‫لبةذامنل لللللل‬
‫تلبذقماللبذعظاىلذلضرل للللللل‬
‫‪1‬ل‪ .‬كةللل لللللل ل لللل ل ل ل لللل ل‬
‫ل‬
‫لبذعجدللدملل‬
‫لل‬ ‫لل للللل ل‬
‫‪%‬للذلددم‬
‫‪ 1.7.‬ل‬
‫للل للذمدلدلللل ل لل ل‬
‫لللللادللدمنل للللللمجدلدللب‬
‫دغرىلذلضدلدرل لبةذ‬
‫دللبذصدل ل ل لللل‬
‫‪,‬لنبذقمادل لللل‬
‫‪7‬للل للللل‬
‫للل ل‬
‫دول)لؤدللدنفللسدلدخةل‬
‫لللبذفدل ل للل‬
‫‪61‬ل‪ .‬ل‬
‫ؤنفل ل ل‬
‫لل لل‬
‫ذاللعاللتلقمملبذامنل ‪.‬لل ل‬
‫للللللل لل ل لل لللللللللللل‬
‫ذمللنبةذ ة‬
‫بءلب للل لل‬
‫للللل للل‬
‫لقمملتأثمرللاةشرلللىلب‬
‫لللللللللللللل لل للل ل لل لل‬
‫لبذمللبذ‬
‫للل للابلل للللل‬
‫غمرلب‬
‫كةنلذلل لل‬
‫‪3‬ل‪ .‬لل لل‬
‫ل‬
‫ل‬
 ‫التحكم في تلقيم البذور في آالت الزراعة‬

‫رسالة مقدمة من‬

‫عادل خزعل دعبول‬

‫بكالوريوس علوم زراعية (ميكنة زراعية)‪ ,‬جامعة البصرة ‪ ,‬العراق ‪5991 ,‬‬
‫ماجستير علوم زراعية (ميكنة زراعية)‪ ,‬جامعة البصرة ‪ ,‬العراق ‪5991 ,‬‬

‫للحصول على‬

‫درجة الدكتوراه في العلوم الزراعية‬

‫(ميكنة زراعية)‬

‫قسم الهندسة الزراعية‬

‫كلية الزراعة‬
‫جامعة عين شمس‬

‫‪2011‬‬
 ‫صفحة الموافقة على الرسالة‬

‫التحكم في تلقيم البذور في آالت الزراعة‬

‫رسالة مقدمة من‬

‫عادل خزعل دعبول‬

‫بكالوريوس علوم زراعية (ميكنة زراعية)‪ ,‬جامعة البصرة ‪ ,‬العراق ‪5991 ,‬‬
‫ماجستير علوم زراعية (ميكنة زراعية)‪ ,‬جامعة البصرة ‪ ,‬العراق ‪,‬‬
‫‪5991‬‬

‫للحصول على‬
‫درجة الدكتوراه في العلوم الزراعية‬
‫(ميكنة زراعية)‬

‫وقد تم مناقشة الرسالة والموافقة عليها‬

‫اللجنة‪:‬‬

‫‪................................................‬‬ ‫د‪.‬‬

‫‪................................................‬‬ ‫د‪.‬‬

‫‪................................................‬‬ ‫د‪ .‬متولي عباس حمادة‬

‫أستاذ المحاصيل المساعد‪ ،‬كلية الزراعة‪ ،‬جامعة عين شمس‬
‫‪...............................................‬‬ ‫د‪ .‬محمد نبيل العوضي‬
‫أستاذ الهندسة الزراعية المتفرغ‪ ،‬كلية الزراعة‪ ،‬جامعة عين شمس‬

‫تاريخ المناقشة‪2011 / / :‬‬

 ‫جامعة عين شمس‬
‫كلية الزراعة‬
‫رسالة دكتوراه‬
‫‪ :‬عادل خزعل دعبول‬ ‫اسم الطالب‬
‫‪ :‬التحكم في تلقيم البذور في آالت الزراعة‬ ‫عنوان الرسالة‬
‫‪ :‬دكتوراه في العلوم الزراعية (ميكنة زراعية)‬ ‫اسم الدرجة‬

‫لجنة اإلشراف‪:‬‬
‫د‪ .‬محمد نبيل العوضي‬
‫أستاذ الهندسة الزراعية المتفرغ‪ ،‬قسم الهندسة الزراعية‪ ,‬كلية الزراعة‪ ،‬جامعة‬
‫عين شمس (المشرف الرئيسي)‬

‫د‪ .‬متولي عباس حمادة‬

‫أستاذ المحاصيل المساعد‪ ،‬قسم المحاصيل ‪ ،‬كلية الزراعة‪ ،‬جامعة عين شمس‬

‫د‪ .‬محمود زكي العطار‬

‫مدرس الهندسة الزراعية المساعد‪ ،‬قسم الهندسة الزراعية‪ ،‬كلية الزراعة‪ ،‬جامعة‬
‫عين شمس‬

‫تاريخ البحث‪2007 /2/12 :‬‬

‫الدراسات العليا‬
‫أجيزت الرسالة‬ ‫ختم اإلجازة‬
‫‪/‬‬ ‫بتاريخ‬
‫‪201/‬‬
 ‫موافقة مجلس‬ ‫موافقة مجلس الكلية‬
‫الجامعة‬
‫‪201 / /‬‬ ‫‪201 / /‬‬