Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and

Retrospective Theses and Dissertations

Dissertations

1981

Determination of the design and operating

parameters of rotary cleaning sieves for combines
Kamil Elnaeem Elamin
Iowa State University

Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd

Part of the Agriculture Commons, Bioresource and Agricultural Engineering Commons, and the
Mechanical Engineering Commons

Recommended Citation
Elamin, Kamil Elnaeem, "Determination of the design and operating parameters of rotary cleaning sieves for combines" (1981).
Retrospective Theses and Dissertations. 14463.
https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd/14463

This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital
Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Retrospective Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital
Repository. For more information, please contact digirep@iastate.edu.
 Determination of the design and operating parameters

of rotary cleaning sieves for combines

by

Kamil Elnaeem Elamin

A Thesis Submitted to the

Graduate Faculty in Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the Degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

Major: Agricultural Engineering

Signatures have been redacted for privacy

V
Iowa State University
Ames, Iowa

1981
 11

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION 1

OBJECTIVES 4

LITERATURE REVIEW 5

Threshing ^
Separation ^
Pneumatic Separation 9
Rotary Separator

THE THEORY OF THE ROTARY SIEVES 14

ROTARY SIEVES DESCRIPTION 19

PROCEDURE 22

Experimental Design 24
DISCUSSION 51

The Analysis of Variance 52

Total fines (Table 9) 52
Clean com total (Table 10) 53
Losses with cobs (Table 11) 53
Other losses (Table 12) 53
El (Table 13) 53
E2 (Table 14) 54
Time for sieving (Table IS) 54
CONCLUSIONS

SUMMARY 70

SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH 72

BIBLIOGRAPHY 73

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 75

APPENDIX A: RECORDED DATA FOR THE EFFECT OF SLOPE OF AXIS,

FEEDING RATE. AND CYLINDER SPEED OF THE ROTARY
SIEVE TEST 76
 Ill

Page

APPENDIX B: SAS PROGRAM FOR ANALYZING THE DATA FOR THE

EFFECT OF SLOPE OF AXIS, FEEDING RATE, AND
CYLINDER SPEED OF THE ROTARY SIEVE TEST 82
 INTRODUCTION

Since the grain harvesting combines literally feed the world,

research should be conducted to improve the efficiency of the basic

five functions of the machine: (1) cutting, [2) feeding, (3) thresh

ing, (4) separating, and (5) cleaning.

Some of these basic functions of the combine which have undergone

recent technical advances are row crop header by John-Deere Company,

cutting mechanism (Kwick Cutter) by White Equipment Company, and axial

flow threshing cylinders by New Holland, International Harvester,

Allis-Chalmers, and White Farm Equipment Company.

The cleaning function has undergone little recent improvement by

research workers and manufacturers. Current problems of the cleaning

system encountered when harvesting flat areas are the lack of capacity
of the sieve and the tendency to clog when wet or green material is be

ing harvested.

When harvesting hilly area, one problem in addition to the above is

that flat sieves are sensitive to the slope; it becomes inefficient when

operating on a slope. The grain collects on the downhill side of the

sieve when the combine is moving across the slope and tends to collect

on the front of the sieve when the combine is going down slope and flows

rapidly out of the rear of the combine when going up slope. The quality
of cleaning is reduced, and separating losses increase.

Many companies have built hillside combines that level the lateral
axis of a combine when moving across the slope. Some harvesters also

level in the longitudinal directions.

 The 1979-1980 senior design class designed and tested a slope

insensitive rotary sieve for the combine cleaning function. The fol
lowing modifications were made on this rotary sieve by the author.

(1) The rotary sieve was driven with a variable speed drive.

This consisted of an electric motor with a reduction gear box and dif

ferent sizes of sheaves for varying the speed.

(2) A six compartment collection box was constructed with in

clined bottom and vertical sliding doors under the rotary sieve. The

box had two compartments for fines, two compartments for clean grain,
and two compartments for larger material (the cobs and grain losses).

The separating sequence started from the feeding port of the rotary
sieve.

(3) A plexiglas top cover was constructed for the rotary sieve with

five compartments which match the first five material collecting compart
ments of the bottom box. The walls between the compartments prevented mix

ing of the separated grain from the material other than grain (m.o.g.)
after it left the rotary sieve. The plexiglas permitted visual inspec

tion of the separating function.

(4) For the slope change, two fixed height angle bars were used
for each level of the axis slope instead of using the telescopic section

of the frame stand.

(5) The feeding port was rebuilt to reduce feedback losses when
tested at negative angles.

The rotary sieve was tested with the following design and operating

parameters: (1) slope of axis, (2) feeding rate, (3) cylinder speed.
 And finally a proposal for a new design which will fit the cur
rent axial flow cylinder combines was presented.
 OBJECTIVES

(1) To develop the rotary sieve constructed by the 1979-1980 senior

design class.

(2) To determine the design and operating parameters of the rotary

sieve under the following variable factors: (a) slope of axis,

(b) feeding rate, and (c) cylinder speed.

(3) To make recommendations concerning its use and for further

research.
 LITERATURE REVIEW

Threshing

Huynh et al. (1977) reported that threshing and separation were

controlled by three phenomena: (1) the detachment of kernels from the
heads, (2) the penetration of the loose kernels through the straw mat,

and (3) the subsequent separation of the kernels through the concave

grate. They indicated that these phenomena were recognized as random

events and each was described by the probabilistic distribution func

tion characterized by a hazard function having a constant rate.

Threshing and separation could be achieved by one of the following

systems:

(1) The action of the conventional tangential flow threshing

cylinder-concave mechanism of the current John Deere and Massey-Ferguson
combines, and early models of Allis-Chalmers, International Harvester,

New Holland and White Equipment combines.

(2) Axial flow threshing cylinder. A lot of research work has

been done on the axial flow threshing mechanism. Because of their

advantages compared to the conventional tangential flow combines,

axial flow combines have recently been introduced into the consumer

market by New Holland, International Harvester, White Equipment, and

Allis-Chalmers companies. The advantages are (1) high capacity,
(2) high efficiency of threshing and separation, (3) less grain damage,
(4) smaller size, and (5) less vibration.
 (3) Lalor and Buchele (1963) designed, constructed and tested an

axial flow threshing cone. They found that the threshing efficiency of
wheat was above 99 percent at all rotor speeds and concluded that if
the separation efficiency of the cone could be increased to the level
of the threshing efficiency, the straw walker and sieve of the combine
could be eliminated.

(4) Centrifugal threshing was studied by Hamdy et al. (1967) and

Lamp and Buchele (1960). They built centrifugal threshers and reported
that vertical rotors were capable of subjecting material sliding inside
the mechanism to centrifugal force sufficient to thresh the particles.

But they also found that the structural strength and vibration prob

lems of the sieve arising from the inherent unbalance in a continuous

flow machine were critical and set a limit on the development of the

centrifugal threshers. More investigation of centrifugal threshing

was recommended.

Separation

Cooper (1966) reported that separating apparatus of the conven

tional modern combine was developed more than a century ago and used
in stationary threshing machines and grain cleaners. He found similar

features incorporated into the combines of the early 1930s. German

and Lee (1969), Lee and Minfield (1969), Rumble and Lee (1970) and

Simpson (1966) concluded that the efficiency of the separation process

of an adjustable sieve was affected by a number of factors, including

total feed rate (in.e.g. and grain mixture) and the ratio of the m.o.g.

to grain. The total feed rate into the combine was determined by the
crop yield, the width of the header, and the speed of travel. They also
found that the ratio of m.o.g. to grain delivered to the sieves of the

combine was largely determined by the kind of crop and moisture content

of m.o.g. They also showed that the separation capacity of the adjust
able sieve increased significantly when processing low m.o.g. to the

grain ratio material. They also reported that much of the m.o.g. Chull,
leaves and shattered straw) was easily moved by air and that the

removal of that portion of the mixture before it reached the sieve

enhanced the separating capacity of the sieve.

Saij Paul et al, (1976) reported that the final bulk density of
the crop material was significantly affected by the initial bulk
density and the centrifugal acceleration.

Fairbank et al. (1979) concluded that straw walker and the shoe losses

were a minor part of ttotal losses under normal conditions. They showed
that only grain moisture content had a significant effect on sieve,
straw walker, cylinder and header, and the total losses.

Lien et al. (1976) reported that separating and cleaning losses

were functions of forward travel speed, plant population, and yield.

They found that losses were greater when the combine was operating at
speeds higher than 4.8 km/hr in a population of approximately 62,000
plants per hectare.

Simpson (1966) reported that shoe losses increased exponentially

with an increase in front-to-rear sieve positive slope or an increase

in fan opening for a combine feed at normal rate. He found that the
losses also decreased with an increase in chaffer sieve opening. He
showed that the percentage of foreign material in the clean grain in

creased exponentially with a decrease in the front-to-rear positive

slope. He reported that the shoe losses could be fitted to an

exponential function of longitudinal shoe slope. He also reported

that the percentage of foreign material in the clean grain increased

with either a decrease in the air blast or an increase in chaffer sieve

opening for all shoes tested. Saij Paul et al. (1977) concluded that
a centrifugal separator was sensitive to frictional properties of the
screen surface, feeding section, and the kind of crop material as shown

by the discontinuous motion of the crop. They reported that an analysis

of high speed photography showed that the crop motion through the

centrifugal separator was discontinuous and that the grain escaped

through the perforations in a random fashion.

Claar and Porterfield (1974) concluded that the rotary straw

walkers successfully accelerated and stretched the mat of threshed

material to permit the grain to separate from the straw under laboratory

conditions. They found that the most significant design factors affect

ing the grain losses were cylinder speed and concave screen area. The

feed rate and the number of times the straw was reused in laboratory

tests affected grain losses to a lesser extent.

Nyborg et al. (1968) concluded that shoe losses data could be

fitted by an exponential function of both feed rate and grain to straw

ratio.

Morgan and Constantin (1976) found that a laboratory seed separation

grader, designed to sort cereal grains successfully, sorted peas and soybeans
 Pneumatic Separation

Uhl (1966) reported that a pneumatic separator separated non-grain

material from soybeans when the straw length was six inches and under.

He also found that approximately 80, 94, and 98 percent of oats, wheat,

and rye straw can be removed without grain losses. He found that even

when the straw length was reduced to two inches, complete separation

of the straw from the wheat and rye was possible.

Rumble and Lee (1970) reported that combine researchers have

directed an air stream over the upper sieve of the combine shoe to

reduce the volume of material to be sifted by the upper sieve. They

classified the parameters under study:

(1) Velocity of air introduced over the upper sieve;

(2) Velocity at which the material was introduced into the air stream

above the upper sieve; and

(3) The dispersion of the mat of the material as it entered the region
above the upper sieve.

They concluded that:

(1) The grain losses were at a minimum when separation occurred by pure
aerodynamic action;

(2) The setting of entrance parameters was not critical when the

material input velocity was sufficient to give a stream of

materials which could be dispersed by the air introduced over

the sieve; and

(3) The setting of the parameters affecting penetration of the grain

through the sieve had a significant effect on grain losses.

 10

Uhl (1966) studied the pneumatic separations of grain, straw and chaff
mixture during free fall under gravitational force and found that

chaff-like material was easily removed pneumatically from the grain.

He reported that wheat, rye, and soybean chaff-like materials were com
pletely removed at air velocity of 3.048 m/sec.

Reed and Bigsby (1978) reported that the fitting of an aspirator

to a combine in front of the adjustable sieve separating section in

creased separating capacity by removing a major portion of the m.o.g.;

the amount removed depended on the crop, condition of the crop, and

the feed rate. They reported that in wheat the m.o.g. removed ranged
from 60 to 90 percent, but in other crops the amount removed varied
from 54 to 89 percent. They found that the amount of grain lost through
the aspirator or with the m.o.g. can be maintained at an acceptable low
level by adjusting the air flow for the crop harvested. The amount

lost in this way while harvesting could be kept below 0.2 percent.

They found that there was a tendency for the percentage losses to in
crease at low feed rate but generally it remained constant over a wide
range of feed rate. They reported that the adjustable sieve capacity
was more than doubled by the use of the aspirator; in addition, the amount

of the grain and m.o.g. passing over the lower sieve was substantially
reduced. Cooper (1966) reported that the amount of material removed
by the aerodynamic means in a conventional combine was much less than
that removed in the laboratory studies. He also pointed out that in

wheat there was a greater difference between the terminal velocities

of the wheat kernels and the wheat straw than the case with oats and
 11

barley. This makes wheat easier to aerodynamically separate than other

grains.

Goncharou and Grabel*Kavska (1968) (as reviewed by Park (1974))

described a centrifugal pneumatic separator for grain which was fol
lowed by a vertical rotating screen separator. They found that the
system had the following significant advantages over the conventional
equipment: (1) high capacity per unit area of the screen, (2) high
separation efficiency, (3) easy feeding, and (4) small floor area
needed.

Rotary Separator

Park (1974) reported that there were important advantages in using

vertical, rotating screen separator instead of flat-screen separators.
The advantages include high capacity, insensitivity to slope, compact
ness, and the ability to separate seeds from trashy materials. Sucher
and Pfost (1964) reported that screen type, the screen-hole, shape, size,
and the feeding rate significantly affected grader efficiency except
where the screen-size by feed rate interaction predominated.
Brown et al. (1950) (as reviewed by Sucher and Pfost (1964)) stated
that the capacity of cylindrical screens increased with increased speed
up to a point where blinding occurs due to the crowding through the
screen. They reported that increasing rotational speed to its critical
value resulted in material being carried around the cylinder without
cascading over its surface. They found that the critical speed may be
computed by equating the force of gravity to the centrifugal force.
 12

2mv^
mg = —

where m = mass
2
g = acceleration due to gravity (32,2 ft/sec )

V velocity of particle (ft/sec)

D = diameter (ft).

They reported that the effectiveness of screens was based on both re

covery of the product of the desired material in the feed and the
exclusion or rejection from the product of the undesirable material in

the feed.

Grinkou et al. (1958) (as reviewed by Park (1974)) reported that

when a separator, which had an inclined cylindrical screen, was vibrated

axially, it had a higher capacity than a comparable flat-screen sepa

rator. Park and Harmond (1966) reported that the advantages of the

vertical rotating screen separator were (1) higher capacity per unit

area of screen, (2) simple feeding, (3) uniform seed layer on the

screen, (4) effective screen cleaning, (5) insensitive to slope, and

(6) less floor space required. The disadvantages were (1) changing the
screen, (2) adjustment, and (3) mechanical stresses.

Goncharou and Remeslo (1970) (as reviewed by Park (1974)) described

a grain cleaning system in which grain went first through a vibrating

centrifugal pneumatic separator and then through a cylindrical cleaner.

Goncharou (1962) (as reviewed by Park (1974)) reported a study of the

most effective shape of the surface of a centrifugal vibrating screen.

He found that a vertical cylindrical screen was better than the

 13

parabolic vertical or conical horizontal screen. He used a four-

section cylindrical screen, each section of which was vibrated inde
pendently and established optimum kinematic parameters for the
separators.

Vasilenko and Goncharou (1963) C^-s reviewed by Park (1974))

reported a comprehensive study of vertical rotating screen separators

of a novel design. They indicated that the separator was rotated by
a sheave and vibrated by a crank below the screen. They analyzed the
kinematic relationships and the experimentally determined operating
curves. They found the capacity (at a given efficiency) per unit
area of the screen to be three to five times that of a flat screen.

Brubaker and Pos (1965) stated that the static coefficient of

friction increased with the increase of moisture content of the

material being tested except on teflon where surface moisture acted

as a lubricant overcoming the greater frictional resistance normally
affected by the grain. Goncharou and Grabel*Kovska (1968) (as reviewed
by Park (1974)) described experiments with various types of screen
cleaning devices. They found cylindrical brushes rotated by screen
friction to be most efficient, and screening efficiency was greatly

increased by brushes.
 14

THE THEORY OF THE ROTARY SIEVES

Cz-Kana£ojski and Karwowski (1976) explained the theory of rotary

sieve. The forces involved in the material movement in the rotary

sieve are:

(a) Gravitational force:

mg

where m = mass of material

g = gravitational acceleration.

(b) Centrifugal force:

2
mrco

where m ^ mass of material

r = radius of the sieve

UJ = angular velocity.

(c) Frictional force:

T = yN

where T = frictional force

y = coefficient of friction

N = normal force (see Figure 1).

The assumptions are (1) ^ smooth cylinder surface, and (2) the x and y
axes are revolving together with the cylinder (Figure 1).
For grain equilibrium in this mwaent of time is

mrw^ - N + mg cos tot = 0 . (i)

Frictional force is
 15

wt « ANGLE OF GRAIN LIFTING

Figure 1. Forces acting on the grain situated on the internal surface

of a rotary sieve
 16

T = yN = mg sin wt . C2)

From equation 1,
2
N = m(rco + g cos ut) . (3a)

2
rco
Let k = (kinematic factor of motion)
s

N = mg (k + cos wt) '(Sb)

y = tan (p = coefficient of friction, (4)

where (J> = angle of grain friction against cylinder surface. When the

value of N and y are substituted in equation 2, we obtain the expres

sion, assuming that the grain moves together with the rotary motion of
the cylinder (relative speed of grain = 0). When sliding occurs, the

right side is greater than the left side of the equation.

tan (p mgCk + cos u)t) ? mg sin wt ,{5a)

sin (j>
(k + cos wt) ^ sin cot
cos

, ^ . sin wt cos 6
k + cos cat ^ mr-T
sin q)
. sin tot cos 6 .
k = :—T ^ - cos a)t
sin (t>
But

sin(a)t - <^) = sin tot cos - cos tot sin .

If we divided by sin (J)

sin (ait - ^ sin (Dt cos (j) _

sin (|> sin

ic > -1;) <5b)

sin <J)

k sin <J) > sin (tot - (J))

denoting the limit angle of grain lifting by

 17

= uJtj
sinCa^^ - (J)) = k sin
- (J) = arc sin k sin (j)

= (J> + arc sin k sin (J)

From this it follows that the greater k and the greater the limit

angle of lifting.

Since sinCa^ - (fj) 5 1, then k sin <(> 5 1.

The highest value of k is as follows:

2 2
sin c|) 4 cos 4> 1 +
max sin 4* • 2 <p-
sin

when k - k . Then,
max

sin(a = 1
1 max

Hence

*^1 max 2^

To achieve actual sorting function, it is necessary that the grains

which slide over the internal cylinder surface should be carried up the
side of the sieve (centrifugal force and gravity oppose the fric-

tional effect), and then at the critical angle, the grain begins

to cascade down the side of the rotating screen to the bottom of the

screen. It is still under the influence of gravity. The tumbling

grain hits other grain that is being rotated under the influence of the
centrifugal force and they all slowly roll across the holes in the screen
and eventually fall through the screen.

Under the influence of gravity and centrifugal force, the critical

 18

revolutions per minute is the niimber above which the centrifugal force
would cause the grain to adhere to the revolving screen and not fall
due to gravity. The grain and sieve would rotate together and the
cleaning function would cease.

'—
rpm n =
TT ^

v..2
„£_-30
..2 30
ro)
.
30
TT g>rITT
T

where n = number of revolutions per minute

k = kinematic factor of motion

g = acceleration due to gravity

r = radius of the cylinder

0) = angular velocity.
 19

ROTARY SIEVES DESCRIPTION

There were three design alternatives for construction of the rotary

sieve for the current combines by the 1979-1980 AE senior class. The

third alternative was selected as the most suitable of the three alterna

tives for further design and analysis.

Cl) Multiple layer screen:

This concept would employ two or more concentric rotary cleaning

drums. The inside drum will have a screen size that will take out

only very large particles; each succeeding concentric screen would take
out progressively smaller particles until the material reached the

outer-most final screen which would only allow the finest particles to

pass through. Each drum could be equipped with auger flighting to con

vey material through the drum at an even rate at any reasonable slope

of the longitudinal axis. But this design has some disadvantages:

(a) difficulty in changing screens for different crops and varying field

conditions; Ct>) no suitable way for one person to change the screen

easily and quickly; (c) more expensive; and (d) difficult to clean.

(2) Adjustable screen openings:

To solve the problem of different screen size requirements for

different crops, an adjustable screen was suggested. It would consist
of two closely fitted screens, each of which had diamond shaped perfor

ations. One of the drums would slide relative to the other. As the

drums were moved relative to each other, the diamond shaped holes would

change size, keeping the diamond shape unchanged.

 20

Although with this arrangement the screens would never have to

be replaced with screens of other sizes for different crops, the dis

advantages seemed to outweigh the advantages, which are (1) the adjust

able screen does not have a very high percentage of open area to the

total area specially compared to wire mesh, and (2) the closely toler-

anced drums would rust together or become filled with dirt and bind.

C3) Gradient screen:

The material is introduced to a center rotary drum (12 inches in

diameter) which has the large uniform mesh opening through the length

of the drum. This allows grain and some smaller foreign material to

fall through the sieve onto the outer screen. The material that doesn^t

fall through is discharged at the rear end of the drum.

The outer drum screen diameter (23 inch diameter) is a gradient

mesh screen that provides for the separation of grain and foreign

material by size. The gradient screen is a single layer screen but

consists of a sieve with sections composed of different size meshes, the

smallest mesh section was at the front end and the largest at the rear

end. This allows cracked grain and other fines to fall through the fine

screen while keeping the whole grain and m.o.g. inside and moving longi

tudinally along the axis of the rotating screen.

As the material is moved towards the rear, the mesh opening gradu

ally becomes larger and larger. Clean grain eventually falls through

the screen and is elevated to the grain tank. Any grain and material

that falls through the largest mesh at the rear of the drum is elevated

by the return auger to the threshing unit for rethreshing. Dividers

 21

placed below the cleaner are adjustable for different crops. The

placement of the dividers determines where the fines, clean grain

and returns are caught.

Interior auger flighting was introduced in both drums to orderly

move grain and other material lengthwise through the drum as the drum

rotated.
 22

PROCEDURE

The rotary sieve was tested with material similar to that which

would pass through the concave of an axial flow cylinder. The sieves

of the conventional combine were removed to provide the product.

To fulfill the objectives of the research, the rotary sieve was

tested with the following variables:

(13 The axial slope:

(a) +10 angle which gives the field condition when the combine is

moving up a slope;

(b) Zero angle to represent the combine is in a level field;

(c) -10 and -5 angle, giving the field situation when the com

bine is moving down a slope.

The slope was changed, first by using the telescopic section of

the frame stand but later two fixed angle bars heights for changing

the slope were used. The last one was more practical and was easier
t o use.

(2) The feeding rate:

Before starting the test for the feeding rate, a six compartment

collection box with inclined bottom and sliding doors was constructed

and installed under the rotary sieve. The box had two sections for the

fines, two sections for the clean grain, and the last two sections were

for larger materials, cobs and lost grain.

Because the interior diameter of the feed port in the end of the

drum was very large, grain spilled out of the hole at large negative
angles. A new end plate with an interior diameter of 5 inches (it had
 23

been 10 inches) was fabricated and bolted in place. A triangular trough

was inserted in the hole. Grain and cobs mixture was fed by hand from

a bushel basket into the feed trough. The feeding rates were 50, 75,

and 100 pounds per minute (Ib/min).

The following manual feeding system was used: 25 pounds of grain-

cobs mixture was caught in a bushel basket. This mixture was fed and
the feed time measured with a stopwatch. The worker adjusted the rate

of the pouring mixture to accomplish the following feed rates: 30

seconds for 50 Ib/min, 20 seconds for 75 Ib/min, and 15 seconds for

100 Ib/min.

The problem was to supply power to drive the rotaryA^ieve at a con

stant rate and a method for changing the cylinder speed to the different

levels. The first alternative used was a 1/2" diameter electric vari

able speed drill and electric speed control, but when we started feed
ing the rotary sieve at low speed (18 rpm), the drill became hot and
started to smoke.

The second alternative was a bigger size electric drill [1" diame

ter) with electric speed control, but the speed was not uniform.

The third and final alternative was 1/4 horsepower (HP) motor

with a gear reduction box and the shaft speed was reduced to 18 rpm.
The cylinder speeds were 13.5, 24, 54, and 72 rpm.

Different sheave combinations were used to provide the different

levels of cylinder speed, as shown in Table 1.

When the initial test was made, the grain and broken cobs scattered

over the floor due to the centrifugal force. A cover was fabricated
 24

Table 1. Rotary sieve rpm using different combinations of sheaves

Motor shaft Rotary sieve Rotary

sheave shaft sheave sieve
diameter diameter rpm

18x6
6" diameter 8" diameter 13.i
8

18x6
6" diameter 4.S" diameter 24
4.5

18x6
6" diameter 2" diameter 54
2

18x8
8" diameter 2" diameter 72
2

from plexiglas for the top of the rotary sieve. It was divided into

five partitions which matched the first five partitions of the collector

The plexiglas permitted observation of the rotary separation process.

Experimental Design

The experimental design selection was a factorial design.

A. The number of the variable factors were three:

(1) Axis slope X

(2) Feeding rate Y

(3) Cylinder speed Z .

B. There were three levels for each factor, as shown in Table 2.

Each level has three replicates: A, B, and C. The total number

3
of levels, 3 = 27 levels. The total number of replicates =
3
3 X 3 = 81 replicates.
Figure 2. The rotary sieve was set at -10 degrees

I
,., 1 11 . ...

Figure 3. The sheave combinations were 6" diameter in the motor

shaft and 2" diameter in the rotary sieve shaft with
a v-belt connecting the sheaves ;
26
Figure 4. The plexiglas cover to the top of the rotary sieve

Figure 5. A can was put on the scale and the scale was adjusted
to zero
82
Figure 6. The rpm was checked with the tachometer

Figure 7. The material was completely sieved

 .Vt"'
• iSv
If
o
lO
f
• I
 31

Table 2. Four levels of the slope of axis, three levels of feeding

rate, and four levels of cylinder speed of the factorial
experiment

Slope of Feeding Cylinder

Level
axis^ rate^ speed^

1 10 50 13.5^
0 75 24
2

100 54
3

-10 0 72
4

^Slope of axis was in degrees (xJV

^Feeding rate was in Ib/min Cy^-
^Cylinder speed was in rpm Cz)^^
'^These two factors were added after the factorial experiment was
conducted.

The experiments were conducted randomly, with the sequence shown

in Table 3. There were 27 combinations of the three factors, three
levels for each factor, and three replicates for each combination.
Experiment 1:

X3Y3Z2

1. Axis slope = -10 degrees

2. Feeding rate = 100 Ib/min

3. Cylinder speed = 54 rpm.

The rotary sieve was set at -10 degrees (Figure 2). The sheave com
binations were 6" diameter on the motor shaft and 2" diameter on the
 32

Table 3. The factorial experimental design for the slope axis, feed
ing rate, and cylinder speed

(1) X3Y3Z2 (10) V1Z3 (19) X^Y2Z3

(2) X3Y2Z3 (11) X1Y2Z2 (20) X2Y2Z3

(3) X2Y2Z2 (12) XiY^Zi (21) XJY3ZJ

(13)
Vl^2 (22) XjYjZ^
C5) XjYjZ^ (14) X^Y^Zi (23) X^Y3Z3
(6) X^Y3Z2 (15) XiY^Z^ (24) X3Y2Z2
(7) X2Y3Z3 (16)
V2^1 C25) X^YjZ^
(8) X^YjZj (17) ='2Yi^3 (26) X^Y^Zj^
(9) XjY^Z3 (18)
^2^322 (27) XjYjZ^

rotary sieve shaft with a v~belt connecting the sheaves for the power

transmission (Figure 3}. The top cover of plexiglas was placed on the

top of the rotary sieve with its compartments matching the screen mesh

gradient and the collector compartment (Figure 4). The vertical slid

ing doors of the collector were tightly closed after the compartments

were cleaned. A can was put on the scale and the scale was adjusted

to zero (Figure 5). Twenty-five pounds of mixture was collected in the

bushel basket. The rotary sieve drive motor was started, and the rpm

was checked with the tachometer (Figure 6). The stopwatch started the

moment feeding was started and adjustments in feed rate by hand were made

to complete the feeding of the mixture in 15 seconds. The feed rate

was then 100 Ib/min. The rotation of rotary sieve continued until the
 33

material was completely sieved and the time was recorded when all grain
had dropped through the sieve (Figure 7). The motor was stopped and
the material (fines) in compartment one, broken kernels and immature

kernels in compartment two, clean kernels in compartments three and

four, were weighed and recorded separately. The material in compart

ments five and six (the mixture of kernels and cobs) were combined, and

then the kernels were separated from the cobs and each material was

weighed and recorded separately.

When separating at -10 degrees and a speed of 72 rpm, some of the

material at all feeding rates adhered to the surface of the sieve

(centrifugal force) and started revolving with the sieve (the rotating
rpm was approaching the critical rpm). To overcome this problem, the
slope of axis was reduced from -10 degrees to -5 degrees and tests were
randomly conducted for the different levels of the feeding rate and
cylinder speeds, as shown in Table 4. Slope of the axis of level 3
was -5 degrees. The results are shown in Appendix A.

Table 4. The factorial experimental design for a slope of axis,

feeding rate and cylinder speed

CD Vi^2 hhh Wi
C2) (5) X4Y2Z3 C8)
t3) X4Y3Z3 (6) X4Y3Z2 (9) X^Y^Z^
 34

Because the behavior of the curve was not knovm at cylinder speeds

lower than 24 rpm, tests were randomly conducted for the different
levels of the slope of axis and feeding rate with cylinder speed of
13.5 rpm, as shown in Table S. Cylinder speed of level 1 was 13.5
rpm. Results are shown in Appendix A.

Table 5. The factorial experimental design for slope of axis^, feeding

rate^ and a cylinder speed

ci) C5) '^2^1^4 (9) ^1^224

C2) (6) XjYiZ, (10)
^4^1^4
C3) (7) X2Y3Z4 (11) ^4^324
V3^4
(12)
(4)
^^3^224 (8) ''l^3^4 ^2^4
Table 6. Calculated data for the effect of slope of axis, feeding rate, and cylinder speed of a
rotary sieve test

^ • rr, ^ 1 Total Losses (lb) Time for

Slope Feed-
r, 5 Cylin- Total Total sieving
Job Variable of ine, der fine With others c e 25 lb
corn
axis rate speed^ (lb) cobs (lb) 2 (sec)
Clb)

(1) Mean -10 100 54 6.33 51.67 1.00 36.00 5.00 0.58 0.98 176.00
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.58 6.66 0.00 7.00 1.00 0.08 0.00 35.12
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.12 12.89 0.00 19.44 20.00 15.31 0.238 19.88

(2) Mean 0 75 54 0.83 62.75 2.50 3.92 5.00 0.91 0.96 48.00
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.14 0.86 1.15 0.52 0.87 0.01 0.02 1.73
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.32 1.38 45.83 13.29 17.32 1.11 1.78 3.61

19.33 6.50 0.77 1.00 188.33

(3) Mean -10 100 24 9.17 65.00 0.00 tn
10.21 1.50 0.12 0.00 20.21
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.47 8.89 0,00
52.83 23.08 14.97 0.00 10.73
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 26.91 13,67 0.00
1.17 5.67 0.73 0.74 59.33
(4) Mean 10 100 54 3.83 65.67 23.67
1.04 2.89 0.05 0.04 4.04
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.29 2.08 4.04
89.21 50.94 6,81 6.57 6.81
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.53 3.17 17.08
2.17 8.33 0.76 0.78 38.00
(5) Mean 0 100 72 2.17 68.00 19.33
1.04 1.15 0.02 0.02 2.65
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.04 1.73 2,52
48.04 13.86 2.25 2.84 6.96
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 48.04 2.55 13.02

Slope of axis was in degrees.

bpeeding rate was in Ib/min.
^Cylinder speed was in rpm.
= (Total clean corn)/(Total clean corn + losses with cobs + other losses).
= (Total clean corn)/(Total clean corn + losses with cobs).
Table 6. (Continued)

Losses Clb) Time for

Total
Slope Feed- Cylin- Total ^^g^n sieving
Variable of ing der fine With cobs
Job com Others 25 lb
axis rate speed (lb) cobs (lb) (sec)
(lb)

0.00 5.33 5.00 0.94 1.00 56.33

(6) Mean 0 100 24 1.00 89.33
0.00 4.50 3.00 0.93 1.00 53.00
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 O.SO 3.79
0.00 19.52 40.00 1.35 0,00 7.39
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00 4.24
23.00 1.00 2.50 0.48 0.49 33.33
(7) Mean 10 50 72 0.83 22.50 2.89
0.50 0.50 0.87 0.01 0.01
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.00
2.17 50.00 34.64 1.88 1.10 8.66
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.64 0.00
16.75 4.00 4.33 0.70 0.74 46.67
(8) Mean 10 75 54 1.75 48.00 04
1.80 0.80 0.01 0.02 4.04 ON
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.00 1.56
9.32 45.07 18.5S 1.32 2.44 8.66
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.29 0.00
0.00 10,50 3.50 0.75 1.00 242,00
(9) Mean -10 50 24 4.67 31.33 217.50
0.00 6.00 0.50 0.14 0.00
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.S8 5.01
0.00 57.14 14.29 18.24 0.00 10.86
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0,00 0.00 12.37 15.98
0.00 10.50 5.50 0.75 1.00 242.00
(10) Mean -10 SO 24 4.67 31.33 0.14 0.00 26.50
0.00 6.00 O.SO
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.58 5.01
0.00 57.14 14.29 18.24 0.00 10.86
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.37 15.98
0.00 1.17 2.00 0.97 1.00 50.00
(11) Mean 0 50 24 1.50 45.17 0.00 3.06
0.00 0.76 0.00 0.02
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 1.04 6,03
0.00 65.47 0.00 1.71 0.00
Coeff. of var. C^) 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.33 2.30
2.42 3.33 1.75 0.92 0.96 46.67
(12) Mean 10 75 24 1.25 66.25 0.02 0.00 1.53
0.14 1.53 0.86
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.43 1.15 3.27
5.97 45.83 49.49 2.28 0.21
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.64 1.73
Table 6. (Continued)

Losses (lb) Time for

Total
Slope Feed- Cylin- Total ^^ean sieving
Job Variable of ing der fine With cobs
corn Others 25 lb
axis rate speed (lb) cobs (lb) (sec)
(lb)

24 5. 83 44.42 2.25 19.67 2.83 0.67 0.95 216.67

(13) Mean -10 75
0. 29 1.01 0.75 0.76 0.76 0.01 0.02 20.82
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 4. 95 2.28 33.33 3.88 26.96 2.00 1.59 9.61
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00

32.33 13.83 l.o7 1.33 0.68 0.70 35.00

(14) Mean 0 50 72 1. 33
0.29 0.76 1.15 0.58 0.01 0.01 5.00
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. 29
5.52 98.97 43.30 0.82 1.73 14.29
Coeff, of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 21. 65 , 0.89

81.33 10.67 2.58 3.67 0.86 0.88 55.00

(15) Mean 0 100 54 1. 75
1.53 2.31 2.10 2.52 0.04 0.02 5.00
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. 25
1.88 21.65 81.16 68.64 4.22 2.73 9.10
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 14. 29

34.25 33.25 2.00 3.75 0.49 0.51 32.00

(16) Mean 10 75 72 1.,75
0.,25 1.56 1.56 1.00 0,75 0.03 0,02 0.75
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00
4.70 50,00 20.00 5.97 4.56 13.62
Coeff. of var. (%} 0.00 0,00 0.00 14.,29 4.56

20.25 0.75 2.25 0.70 0.71 44.33

(17) Mean 0 75 72 2,.50 49.25
0.43 0.75 1.30 0.75 0.03 0.01 5.03
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,.43
0.88 3.70 173.21 33.33 2.37 1.11 11,35
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 17,.32

87.67 3.00 4.58 2.00 0.92 0.97 48,00

(18) Mean 10 100 24 2 .75
0.58 1.00 1.38 1.00 0.02 0.01 2.00
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.25
33.33 30.04 50.00 1.76 1.12 41.67
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.09 0.66

29.17 12.33 2.08 5.67 0.67 0.70 50.00

(19) Mean 10 50 54 0.92
2.93 1.23 0.29 0.04 0.06 2.00
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.52 1.26
4.31 23.76 59.20 5.09 5.52 8.48 4.00
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 56.77
Table 6. CContinued)

Losses (lb) Time for

Slope Feed- Cylin- Total Total
sieving
Job Variable of ing der fine With cobs
Others 25 lb
axis rate speed (lb) cobs (lb)
(sec)

(20) Mean 10 100 72 1.00 46.33 45.33 1. 67 5.67 0.50 0.51 25.00
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.58 2.08 0. 58 1.15 0.01 0.01 0.00
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.25 4.59 34. 64 20.38 2.50 2.89 0.00

-10 73 54 5.25 36.50 0.00 28. 00 5.25 0.56 1.00 196.67

(21) Mean
0.00 0.00 1.30 8.36 0.00 6. 81 2.60 0.12 0.00 7.64
Standard deviation 0.00
0.00 0.00 24.74 22.91 0.00 24. 31 49.49 20.87 0.00 3.88
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00

50 54 1.58 40.50 3.50 1.,58 2.83 0.89 0.92 47.00

(22) Mean 0
0.,52 0.29 0.00 0.01 2.00 00
Standard deviation 0.00 D.OO 0.00 0.38 0.50 0.50
0.00 0.00 0.00 24.12 1.24 14.29 32.,87 10.19 0.207 1.20 4.26
Coeff. of var. (%)

1.00 70.00 0.00 0..75 3.25 0.99 1.00 58.33

(23) Mean 0 75 24
0.90 0.87 0.00 1,.09 2.17 0.02 0.00 2.89
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00
90.14 1.24 0.00 145,.30 66.62 1.52 0.00 4.95
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00

54 2.17 38.50 4.83 0,.50 4.17 0.88 0.89 68.33

(25) Mean - 5 50
0.29 0.87 0.29 0,.87 0.29 0.02 0.01 1.53
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00
13.32 2.25 5.97 173 .21 6.93 2.64 0.82 2.24
Coeff. of var, (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00

_ 0.90 69.67
5 75 54 2.58 58.,17 6. 25 4.00 4.17 0.85
(26) Mean
0.38 1.,53 0. 50 1.15 1.04 0.21 0.01 2.52
Standard deviation 0.,00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 14.78 2,,63 8.,00 28.64 24.98 2.42 0.88 3.61
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.,00

72 6.33 68,.50 12.,83 9.17 3.17 0.76 0.84 83.67

(27) Mean 5 100
0.00 0.58 1,.80 1.,04 2.57 1.04 0.02 0.01 7.57
Standard deviation 0..00 0.00
0.00 9.12 2..63 8,.11 27.99 32.87 2.53 0.93 9.05
Coeff. of var. (%) 0..00 0.00
Table 6. (Continued)

Losses (lb) Time for

, ^ . rr, Total Total
Slope Feed- Cylin- Total sieving
With cobs
Job Variable of ing der fine Others 25 lb
corn
axis rate speed (lb) cobs (lb) (sec)
(lb)

64.83 1.67 3.00 3.00 0.93 0.97 75.00

(28) Mean - 5 75 24 2.50 0.00 3.00
0.38 0.29 0.50 0.75 0.00
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50
0.59 17.32 16.67 25.00 0.45 0.44 4.00
Coeff. of var. (%) 0,00 0.00 0.00 20.00
51.17 9.00 5.33 4.00 0.78 0.85 98.33
(29) Mean - 5 75 72 5.33 0.01 2.89
0.76 0.50 0.76 0.50 0.01
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.04 2.936
1.49 5.56 14.32 12.50 0.99 1.05
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 19.52
80.67 5.00 5.00 6.33 0,89 0.94 72.67
(30) Mean - 5 100 54 3.00 04
1.00 2.65 2.52 0.02 0.01 2.52 (A
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 4.16
5.16 20.00 52.92 39.74 2.70 0.89 3.46
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.33
79.75 3.17 6.92 6.58 0.89 0,96 80.00
(31) Mean - 5 100 24 3.58 0.14 0.01 0.01 2.00
0.25 0.76 0.63
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.38
0.31 24.12 9.10 2.19 0.614 0.922 2.50
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.66
34.33 6.83 2.83 2.50 0.78 0.83 101.67
(32) Mean - 5 50 72 3.50 0.50 0.01 0.01 10.41
0.29 0.76 0.29
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 10.24
0.84 11.18 10.19 20,00 1.42 1.97
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.29
1.50 0.67 1.83 0.95 0.97 70.00
44.17
(33) Mean - 5 50 24 1.83 0.29 0.58 0.01 0,01 2.00
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.58 0.50
33.33 43.30 31.49 0.69 1.136 2.86
1.31
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.75
0.00 1.08 3.42 0.98 1.00 92,33
68.50
(34) Mean 0 75 13.5 2.00 0.80 0.58 0.01 0.00 7.09
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.90 0.00
0.00 74.182 16.90 1.17 0.00 7.68
1.32
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.00
Table 6. (Continued)

Losses (lb) Time for

Slope Feed- Cylin- Total Total
sieving
With cobs
Job Variable of ing der fine c o r n Others 25 lb
axis rate speed (lb) (lb) cobs (lb) (sec)

(35) Mean -10 50 13.5 1.00 32.50 0.00 14.17 2.33 0.70 1.00 552.83
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.43 1.80 0.00 1.38 0.76 0.03 0.00 10.42
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.30 5.55 0.00 9.72 32.73 4.35 0.00 1.89

(36) Mean -10 100 13.5 3.83 64.33 0.00 27.83 4.00 0.70 1.00 383.00
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.63 2.52 0.00 2.16 1.00 0.02 0.00 65.78
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.41 3.91 0.00 7.74 25.00 3.52 0.00 17.18

(37) Mean -10 75 13.5 1.92 45.50 0.00 23.33 4.25 0.66 1.00 534.67 o

Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.29 1.73 0.00 1.67 3.75 0.63 1.00 469.00
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.06 3.81 0.00 7.134 10.19 3.71 0.00 11.13

(38) Mean 0 50 13.5 1.67 45.33 0.00 0.67 2.33 0.99 1.00 98.17
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.58 0.00 0.52 0.29 0.01 0.00 5.00
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 22.91 1.27 0.00 78.06 12.37 1.14 0.00 5.10

(39) Mean 10 50 13.5 1.33 45.33 0.83 1.17 1.67 0.96 0.98 57.00
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14 1.16 0.29 0.14 0.76 0.01 0.01 2.65
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.83 2.55 34.64 12.37 45.83 0.63 0.65 4.64

(40) Mean 0 100 13.5 1.92 86.92 1.42 1.42 8.67 0.97 0.98 93.17
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14 1.13 2.45 0.52 0.58 0.02 0.03 8.00
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.53 1.30 173.21 36.74 6.66 2.39 2.77 8.59

(41) Mean 10 100 13.5 2.92 90.67 2.00 1.08 3.33 0.97 0.98 47.00
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.58 0.00 0.88 0.58 0,01 0.00 7.21
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.95 0.64 0.00 81.04 17.32 0.96 0.01 15.34
Table 6. (Continued)

Losses (lb) Time for

Slope Feed- Cylin- Total Total sieving
of ing der With cobs 25 lb
Job Variable fine c o r n Others
axis rate speed (lb) (lb) cobs (lb) (sec)

1.92 3.00 0.95 0.98 53.67

,;42) Mean 10 75 13.5 2.33 66.25 1.50 0.01 0.00 3.21
0.80 0.75
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.58 1.15 0.00 25.00 1.23 0.04 5.99
41.93
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 24.74 1.73 0.00
8.33 3.00 0.81 1.00 228.33
(43) Mean - 5 50 13.5 3.17 35.50 0.00 0.88 0.00 0.02 0.00 28.54
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.52 0.87 0.00 0.00 2.38 0.00 12.50
10.54
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.43 2.44 0.00
20.25 8.00 0.77 1.00 193.67
(44) Mean - 5 100 13.5 3.42 68.33 0.00 2.41 1.00 0.03 0.00 13.01
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.18 2.08 0.00 12.50 3.41 0.00 6.72
11.91
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.58 3.05 0.00
13.83 5.25 0.79 1.00 201.00
(45) Mean - 5 75 13.5 3.42 52.50 0.00 0.63 0.75 0.01 0.00 18.73
Standard deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.23 0.00 0.00 14.29 0.95 0.00 9.32
4.55
Coeff. of var. (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 36.09 0.00 0.00
 42

Table 7. Total and the percentage of the three components of dirty corn
used for testing the rotary sieve

Total Total Total

fines com cobs
(lb) (lb) (lb)

Total 367.25 9233.00 532.75

Percentage 3.62 91.12 5.26

Table ii. Correlation coefficients of the independent variables and the important dependent
variables

Clean grain Clt>) Losses (lb) Time for

Slope Feed- Cylin sieving
der With
Variable of ingb Others 25 lb
. a cobs
axis rate speed (1) (2) (sec)

-0.07 0.45 0.49 -0.64 -0.63

Slope of axis^ 1.00 0.00 0.00

0.40 0.16 0.23 -0.06

Feeding rate^ 1.00 0.00 0.66

0.64 0.70 -0.17 -0.41

Cylinder speed 1.00 -0.60

-0.12 -0.47 0.05 0.01

1.00
Clean grain -0.42 -0.57
1.00 0.62
(lb) (2)
1.00 -0.33 -0.34 04
With cobs
Losses
1.00 0.68
(lb) Others
1.00
Time for sieving
25 lb (sec)

^Slope of axis was in degrees

'^Feeding rate was in Ib/min.
^Cylinder speed was in rpm.
Table 9. Analysis of variance for the influence of slope of axis, feeding rate, and cylinder
speed on the fines total (lb)

F-value Proba-
Source DF' SS' bility>F
calculated

44 429.09 21.58 0.0001

Model
3 187.33 138.19 0.0001
Slope of axis
2 56.90 62.96 0.0001
Feeding rate
3 5.73 4.22 0.0078
Cylinder speed
6 29.27 10.80 0.0001
Slope of axis*feeding rate
8 126.02 34.86 0.0001
Slope of axis*cylinder speed
6 7.30 2.69 0.0189
Feeding rate*cylinder speed
16 16.55 2.29 0.0073
Slope of axis*feeding rate*cylinder speed
4^
Error 90

Corrected total 134

^F = Degrees of freedom.
SS = Sum of squares.
Table 10. Analysis of variance for the influence of slope of axis, feeding rate, and cylinder
speed on the total clean com (lb)

F-value Proba-
Source DF SS
calculated bility>F

Model 44 45808.91 150.12 0.0001

Slope of axis 3 4868.24 233.99 0.0001

2 29921.63 2157.23 0.0001
Feeding rate
3 4761.76 228.87 0.0001
Cylinder speed
6 340.18 8.18 0.0001
Slope of axis*feeding rate
8 5269.39 94.98 0.0001
Slope of axis*cylinder speed
6 182.49 4.39 0.0006
Feeding rate*cylinder speed
16 465.23 4.19 0.0001
Slope of axis*feeding rate*cylinder speed tn

Error 90 624.17
Corrected total 134 46433.08

DF = Degrees of freedom,
'SS = Sum of squares.
Table 11. Analysis of variance for the influence of slope of axis, feeding rate, and cylinder
speed on losses with cobs (lb)

F-value Proba-
Source DF' SS'
calculated bility>F

Model 44 12956.23 218.64 0.0001

Slope of axis 3 3130.54 774.83 0.0001

Feeding rate 2 340.11 126.77 0.0001

Cylinder speed 3 7508.50 1858.41 0.0001
Slope of axis*feeding rate 6 244.09 30.21 0.0001

Slope of axis*cylinder speed 8 1096.98 101.82 0.0001

Feeding rate*cylinder speed 6 392.72 48.60 0.0001

16 243.29 11.29 0.0001
Slope of axis*feeding rate*cylinder speed

Error 90 121.21
Corrected total 134 13077.44

^F = Degrees of freedom.
SS = Sum of squares.
Table 12. Analysis of variance for the influence of slope of axis, feeding rate, and cylinder
speed on other losses (lb)

F-value Proba-
Source DF^ SS^ calculated bility>F

44 10537.80 36.22 0.0001

Model
3 7900.13 398.21 0.0001
Slope of axis
2 625.86 47.32 0.0001
Feeding rate
3 849.38 42.81 0.0001
Cylinder speed
528.09 13.26 0.0001
Slope of axis*feeding rate 6
464.35 8.78 0.0001
Slope of axis*cylinder speed 5
52.39 1.32 0.2563
Feeding rate*cylinder speed 6
16 119.61 1.13 0.3403
Slope of axis*feeding rate*cylinder speed
Error 90 595.17
Corrected factor 134 11132.97

^DF = Degrees of freedom.

SS = Sum of squares.
Table 13. Analysis of variance for influence of slope of axis, feeding rate, and cylinder
speed on Ej

F-value Proba-
Source DF^ SS^ calculated bility>F

44 2.89 42.68 0.0001

Model
3 0.88 190.95 0.0001
Slope of axis
2 0.00 0.55 0.5766
Feeding rate
3 0.98 212.42 0.0001
Cylinder speed
6 0.02 2.15 0.0553
Slope of axis*feeding rate
8 0.97 78.86 0.0001
Slope of axis*cylinder speed
6 0.01 0.89 0.5069
Feeding rate*cylinder speed
16 0.03 1.09 0,3777
Slope of axis*feeding rate*cylinder speed 00

Error 90
Corrected total 134

^F = Degrees of freedom.
SS = Sum of squares.
Table 14. Analysis of variance for influence of slope of axis, feeding rate, and cylinder
speed on

F-value Proba-
Source DF' SS*
calculated bility>F

44 2.64 271.78 0.0001

Model
3 0.67 1012.77 0.0001
Slope of axis
2 0.00 4.59 0.0126
Feeding rate
3 1.72 2596.66 0.0001
Cylinder speed
6 0.00 1.52 0.1800
Slope of axis*feeding rate
8 0.22 121.87 0.0001
Slope of axis*cylinder speed
6 0.01 6.32 0.0001
Feeding rate*cylinder speed
16 0.02 6.17 0.0001
Slope of axis*feeding rate*cylinder speed 4^
vo

Error 90 0.02
Corrected total 134 2.66

DF = Degrees of freedom.
'SS = Sum of squares.
Table 15. Analysis of variance for the influence of slope of axis, feeding rate, and cylinder
speed on time for sieving sec/25 lb
F-value Proba-
Source DF® SS^ calculated bility>F

44 1879339.99 150.02 0.0001

Model
3 1179656.67 1381.13 0.0001
Slope of axis 0.0001
2 7954.00 13.97
Feeding rate 544.09 0.0001
3 464698.60
Cylinder speed 0.0001
6 24103,07 14.11
Slope of axis*feeding rate 76.44 0.0001
8 174107.56
Slope of axis*cylinder speed 7.46 0.0001
6 12735,15
Feeding rate*cylinder speed tn
16084.95 3.53 0.0001 O
16
Slope of axis*feeding rate*cylinder speed
90 25623.67
Error
134 1904963.66
Corrected factor

^F = Degrees of freedom.
^SS = Sum of squares.
 51

• DISCUSSION

The composition of the material, which was collected from the com

bine by removing the conventional sieves (assumed to be similar to that

discharged from a rotary cylinder combine), is given in Table 7. This

table shows the different ratios of fines, grain, and the broken cobs.

The correlation coefficient between the independent variables

(slope of axis, feeding rate, and cylinder speed) and the dependent

variables (clean grain (1) which\was caught in compartment three, clean

grain (2) which caught in compartment four, losses with cobs which

were kernels caught in compartments five and six, other losses which

were due to manual feeding and the back feeding of the machine, and

the time for sieving, sec/25 lb) are given in Table 8. It was observed

that the correlation between the independent variables and the dependent

variable was as follows:

1. Slope of axis;

a. Clean grain (1) - there was very weak negative correlation.

b. Clean grain (2) - there was weak positive correlation.

c. Losses with cobs - there was weak positive correlation.

d. Other losses - there was strong negative correlation.

Time for sieving, sec/25 lb - strong negative correlation.

2. Feeding rate:

a. Clean grain (1) - there was strong positive correlation.

b. Clean grain (2) - there was weak positive correlation.

c. Losses with cobs - there was weak positive correlation.

 52

d. Other losses - there was weak positive correlation.

e. Times for sieving, sec/25 lb - there was very weak negative

correlation.

3. Cylinder speed:

a. Clean grain (1) - there was strong negative correlation.

b. Clean grain (2) - there was strong positive correlation.

c. Losses with cobs - there was strong positive correlation.

Other losses - there was weak negative correlation.

e. Time for sieving, sec/25 lb - there was weak negative correla

tion.

The Analysis of Variance

The influence of the independent variables (slope of axis, feeding

rate, cylinder speed, and their interactions) on the dependent variables

„ 1 P 2
Ctotal fines, total clean com, losses with cobs, other losses, * ^2 *

and time for sieving) was tested by the following hypothesis: no influ

ence on the dependent variables by the independent variables.

Total fines (Table 9)

The hypothesis was rejected for all the independent variables and

their interactions, except for the interaction of the feeding rate with

the cylinder speed where the hypothesis could not be rejected. Therefore,

= (Total clean grain)/(total clean grain + losses with cobs +

other losses).
2
E2 = (Total clean grain)/(total clean grain + losses with cobs).
 53

all the independent variables and their interactions have a significant

influence on the total fines except the interaction of the feeding rate
with the cylinder speed.

Clean com total (Table 10)

The hypothesis was rejected for all the independent variables and
their interactions. Therefore,, the independent variables and their
interactions have a significant influence on the total clean com.

Losses with cobs (Table 11)

The hypothesis was rejected for all the independent variables and
their interactions. Therefore, the independent variables and their
interaction have a significant influence on the losses with cobs.

Other losses (Table 12)

The hypothesis was rejected for all the independent variables and
their interactions except for the interaction of the feeding with the
cylinder speed and the interaction of the three independent variable
where the hypothesis could not be rejected. Therefore, the independent
variables and their interactions have a significant influence on the
other losses with the exception of the interaction of the feeding rate
with cylinder speed and the interaction of the three independent variables

E;L^ (Table 13)

The hypothesis was rejected for the slope of axis, cylinder speed,
and the interaction of the slope of axis with the cylinder speed, but
= (Total clean grain)/(total clean grain + losses with cobs +
other losses).
 54

the hypothesis could not be rejected for the feeding rate and the rest

of the independent variables interactions. Therefore, the significant

influence on was caused by the slope of axis, cylinder speed and the

interaction of the slope of axis with the cylinder speed.

£2^ (Table 14)

The hypothesis was rejected for all the independent variables and

their interactions except for the feeding rate and the interaction of

the slope of axis with the feeding rate where the hypothesis could not

be rejected. Therefore, the independent variables and their interac

tions have a significant influence on E2 with the exception of the feed

ing rate and the interaction of the slope of axis with the feeding rate.

Time for sieving (Table 15)

The hypothesis was rejected for all the independent variables and

their interactions. Therefore, all the independent variables and their

interactions have a significant influence on the time for sieving.

The relationship between sieving efficiency and the feeding rate

(50 Ib/min, 75 Ib/min, and 100 Ib/min) for the rotary sieve at four

levels of slope of axis (10 degrees, 0 degrees, -S degrees, and -10

degrees) and four levels of cylinder speed (13.5 rpm, 24 rpm, 54 rpm,

and 72 rpm) are presented in Figures 8, 9, 10 and 11. The graphs show

the losses of the rotary sieve due to the sieving action plus other

losses caused by (1) manual feeding, and (2) the feeding back of the

^£2 = (total clean grain)/(total clean grain + losses with cobs).

 55

SLOPE OF AXIS = 10 DEGREES

(a) FOR THE TOTAL LOSSES
tfl
< 0.8
(b) FOR THE LOSSES WITH COBS

o
C£.

>-
o

(b)
C5 ••13.5 rpra o——013.5 rpm
24 rpm D——a 24 rpra
0.6 •A 54 rpra A——A 54 rpm
to -• 72 rpra O -O 72 rpm

—6
6—

0.4

FEEDING RATE (Ib/min)

Figure 8. Relationship of sieving efficiency and feeding rate for

the rotary sieve at slope of axis of +10 degrees and four
levels of cylinder speed
 56

SLOPE OF AXIS DEGREES

FOR THE TOTAL LOSSES

FOR THE LOSSES WITH COBS

to

(a) (b)
-•13.5 rpm o ol3.5 rpm
-• 24 rpm D -O 24 rpm
-A 54 rpm ^ 54 rpm
-• 72 rpm O——C 72 rpm

0.4
50 75 100

FEEDING RATE (Ib/mln)

Figure 9 Relationship of sieving efficiency and feeding "te for

the rotary sieve at slope of axis of 0 degrees and four
levels of cylinder speed
 57

SLOPE OF AXIS = -5 DEGREES

(a) FOR THE TOTAL LOSSES
0.6
(b) FOR THE LOSSES WITH COBS
in

(a) (b)
••13.5 rpm o——013.5 rpm
•m 24 rpm D——-• 24 rpm
•A 54 rpm A—^ 54 rpm
72 rpm O——O 72 rpm

0.4
75 100
50
FEEDING RATE (Ib/tnln)
Figure 10. Relationship of sieving efficiency and feeding rate for
the rotary sieve at slope of axis of -S degrees and four
levels of cylinder speed
 58

1.01

SLOPE OF AXIS » -10 DEGREES

(a) FOR THE TOTAL LOSSES
(b) FOR THE LOSSES WITH COBS
C2
< 0.8

o
OL

O.

>-
C->

C9

0.6
t/>

(a) (b)

••13.5 rpiD —013.5 rpm

-• 24 rpm 24 rpm
•A 54 rpm 54 rpm

0.4
50 75 100
FEEDING RATE (Ib/min)

Figure 11. Relationship of sieving efficiency and feeding rate for

the rotary sieve at slope of axis of -10 degrees and
three levels of cylinder speed
 59

ui
C3
«c

>-
o

cs

SLOPE OF AXIS « 10 DEGREES

UJ
U) FOR THE TOTAL LOSSES
00
(b) FOR THE LOSSES WITH COBS

50 lb/min O -o 50 lb/rain
75 Ib/mln • • 75 lb/min
100 lb/m1n A -A 100 lb/min

0.4
13.5 24 54 72
CYLINDER SPEED (rpm)

Figure 12. Relationship of sieving efficiency and cylinder speed for

the rotary sieve at slope of axis of 10 degrees and three
levels of feeding rate
 60

^ 0.8
o
cc

>•
o

SLOPE OF AXIS = 0 DEGREES

(a) FOR THE TOTAL LOSSES
<JS
(b) FOR THE LOSSES WITH COBS

S 0-6
i/^
(a) (b)

50 lb/min o — —o 50 lb/min
•m 75 lb/min D a 75 lb/min
-A 100 Ib/fuln A 100 lb/nj1n

0.4
13.5 24 54 72
CYLINDER SPEED (rpm)

Figure 13. Relationship of sieving efficiency and the cylinder speed

for the rotary sieve at slope of axis of 0 degrees and
three levels of feeding rate
 61

CD
<
L_

o
C£

>-
o

o
SLOPE OF AXIS «= -5 DEGREES
(a) FOR THE TOTAL LOSSES
(J3 (b) FOR THE LOSSES WITH COBS

(/)

"• 50 lb/min o o 50 lb/mln

« 75 lb/mln • • 75 lb/mln
A 100 lb/»in A ^ 100 lb/min

0.4
.13.5 24 54
CYLINDER SPEED (rpm)
Figure 14 Relationship of sieving efficiency and the cylinder speed
for the rotary sieve at slope of axis of -5 degrees and
three levels of feeding rate
 62

UJ
O
<
0.8

o
Q£
Ul
a.

>•
o

C9
Z

0.6

SLOPE OF AXIS » -10 DEGREES

(a) FOR THE TOTAL LOSSES
(b) FOR THE LOSSES WITH COBS

(a) (b)
♦ 50 lb/min o- o 50 Ib/min
« 75 lb/min • • 75 Tb/min
A 100 1b/mi n 100 Ib/min

11
0.4 L
13.5 24 54 72
CYLINDER SPEED (rpm)

Figure 15. Relationship of sieving efficiency and the cylinder speed

for the rotary sieve at slope of axis of -10 degrees and
three levels of feeding rate
 63

1.0 -

C9
0.8 —

o
ce.

>-
o

uu

cs

FEEDING RATE = 50 lb/min

«/> (a) FOR THE TOTAL LOSSES
(b) FOR THE LOSSES WITH COBS

• 13.5 rpm o——013.5 rpjD

24 rpm •——a 24 rpm
A 54 rpm A A 54 rpm
• 72 rpm O -O 72 rpm

0 -5
SLOPE OF AXIS (degree)

Figure 16. Relationship of sieving efficiency and the slope of axis

at feeding rate of 50 Ib/min and four levels of cylinder
speed
 64

FEEDING RATE 75 lb/m1n

(a) FOR THE TOTAL LOSSES
(b) FOR THE LOSSES WITH COBS

•♦13.5 rpm o——-o 13.5 rpm

24 rpra D D 24 rpm
54 rpm ^ 54 rpm
72 rpm 72 rpm

0.4 1
10 -5 -10
SLOPE OF AXIS (DEGREE]

Figure 17. Relationship of sieving efficiency and the slope of axis

at feeding rate of 75 Ib/min and four levels of cylinder
speed
 65

< 0.8

FEEDING RATE 100 Ib/min

(a) FOR THE TOTAL LOSSES
b FOR THE LOSSES WITH COBS

(b)
■♦13,5 rpm o——-0 13.5 rpm
24 rpm o—-a 24 rpm
A 54 rpm 54 rpm
72 rpm 0-—O 72 rpm

-10
SLOPE OF AXIS (DEGREE)

Figure 18. Relationship of sieving efficiency and the slope of axis

at feeding rate of 100 Ib/min and four levels of cylinder
speed
 66

material at the negative slope of axis. But these losses should not

be considered against the sieving efficiency of the machine. The

consideration should be only for the material which was actually

sieved by the machine (curve with dotted lines).

It was observed that the sieving efficiency was almost constant

in the three levels of the feeding rate (50 Ib/min, 75 Ib/min, and

100 lb/min3 which indicated that the highest feeding rate (100 Ib/min)

was still below the maximum capacity of the rotary sieve.

The relationship between sieving efficiency and cylinder speed

(13.5 rpm, 24 rpm, 54 rpm, and 72 rpm) for the rotary sieve at four

levels slope of axis (10 degrees, 0 degrees, -5 degrees, and -10 de

grees) and three levels of feeding rate (50 Ib/min, 75 Ib/min, 100

Ib/min) are presented in Figures 12, 13, 14 and 15. It was observed

that the lower the cylinder speeds, the higher the sieving efficiency.

This means that the kernels lifted angle was small and the forward

movement of the kernel was slow, and these factors combined to increase

the changes for the kernels to pass through the rotary screen opening.

In the case of the higher cylinder speed, the lifting angle was higher

and forward movement of the kernels was faster. Because of this, the

length of the clean corn screen compartment was not long enough to give

the kernels time enough to fall through the screen openings. Some

kernels ended up in the losses compartment, which decreased the sieving

efficiency. The efficiency of the rotary sieve could be increased at

higher rpm by:

(a) Increasing the length of the clean corn screen compartment to

 67

give a better chance for the kernels to pass through the screen
opening.

(b) Increasing the diameter of the rotary sieve.

This will decrease the lifting angle and increase the chances for the
kernels to pass through the screen openings.

The relationships between sieving efficiency and slope of axis

(10 degrees, 0 degrees. -5 degrees, and -10 degrees) for the rotary
sieve at three levels of feeding rate (50 Ib/min, 75 Ib/min, 100 Ib/min)
and four levels of the cylinder speed (13.5 rpm, 24 rpm, 54 rpm, and
72 rpm) are presented in Figures 16, 17, and 18.
It was observed that 100 percent sieving efficiency could be
achieved at negative slope of axis (-5 degrees and -10 degrees) and
slightly less at the positive angle. The reason for this is because
there is more time for the material (grain and m.o.g.) to pass through
the clean com compartment at negative slope than for positive slope.
This gave the kernels a better chance to pass through the sieve screen
openings.

The time for sieving 25 lb was very high for the negative slope of
axis compared to the positive and level slope of axis (Table 6). The
reason for this is that the lip of the interior auger flight was not
high enough to auger the material uniformly forward. The top of the
bed of material was nearly level with the top of the lip when the
material was rotated upward. The material flowed over the edge of the
lip under the force of the negative slope and did not move out of the
sieve. The lip height of the interior auger flight should be increased
 68

to reduce the time for sieving; the capacity of the rotary sieve per

unit time will also be increased.

 69

CONCLUSIONS

Based on a statistical analysis of the data shown in the tables

and graphs for the 23" diameter rotary sieve tests, the following con
clusions were extracted from this research conducted on the rotary

sieve.

(1) The capacity of the rotary sieve as tested was more than 100 Ib/min.
However, the maximum quantity of grain fed in any test was 25 lbs.

(2) The sieving efficiency decreased with an increase in the cylinder

speed.

(3) The major factor limiting capacity was the sieve size (length and
diameter).

(4) The maximum efficiency was obtained at the negative slope of axis.
(5) The capacity of the rotary sieve decreased as the negative slope

increased. It was observed that height of the interior auger

flight should be increased to prevent back feeding.

(6) Sieving efficiencies of 100 percent achieved for some combinations

of sieve axial slope, feeding rate, and cylinder speed.

(7) There was no relation between the feeding rate and sieving time
for the 25 lb grain samples tested.

(8) These laboratory tests indicated that the rotary sieve could be
successfully adapted in the axial flow combine to overcome the

sensitivity of the cleaning section to the side slopes.

 70

SUMMARY

The rotary sieve is needed on the current combine to overcome

the problems encountered while harvesting hilly areas. The 1979-1980
senior design class designed and tested a slope insensitive rotary
sieve for performing the combine clean function. The author continued
the rotary sieve development and testing program to determine the
design and operating parameters of the rotary sieve under the follow
ing variable factors: (1) slope of axis, (2) feeding rate, and
(3) cylinder speed.

The development was in the area of the collector system, slope of

axis change, feeding area, the rotary sieve rpm, and the covering of
the rotary sieve.

The tests were completely randomized factorial design with four

levels of the slope of axis (10 degrees, 0 degrees, -5 degrees, and
-10 degrees), three levels of feeding rate (50 Ib/min, 75 Ib/min, and
100 Ib/min) and four levels of cylinder speed (13.5 rpm, 24 rpm, 54
rpm, and 72 rpm). Problems were encountered while testing the negative
slope of axis (-10 degrees) and the highest cylinder speed (72 rpm)
at the three levels of feeding rate (50 Ib/min, 75 Ib/min, and 100
Ib/min). The fourth level of the slope of axis (-5 degrees) was intro
duced and the test conducted for all the combination of the three

levels of the feeding rate and the four levels of cylinder speed to
gain data that could not be collected at -10 degrees.
The cylinder speed efficiency for rpm less than 24 rpm level was
indefinite. A fourth level (13.5 rpm) was introduced and tested for
 71

the four levels of slope of axis and the three levels of the feeding
rate.

The following results were obtained concerning the rotary sieve.

The highest feeding rate (100 Ib/min) was below the maximum
capacity of the rotary. For the cylinder speed, the sieving efficiency
decreased with the increase of the cylinder speed, and that was due

to the short length or the small diameter of the rotary sieve. The
negative slope of axis has the highest efficiency. The time for siev
ing was found very long in the negative slope of axis compared to the
levelled and positive slope of axis; the reason for this was because
of the short height of the interior auger flight Up.
 72

SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

(1) For the existing prototype rotary sieve:

(a) Auger feed the rotary sieve;

(b) Increase the length of the clean grain sieving compartments;

(c) Increase the height of the interior auger flight;

(d) Replace the broken grain and the fine material screen with

12/64 screen;

(e) The clean grain compartment screen should be replaced with

screen closer to the grain size to reduce accumulation of

cobs particles in the clean grain compartment; and

(f) Check the use of grain grader sieve.

(2) Size the rotary screen for existing rotary threshing cylinders.
(3) Design construct and test rotary screen for the axial flow thresh

ing cylinders.
 73

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bilanski, M. K., and S. P. Donge. 1967. Transportation of wheat grain

along combine shoe. Amer. Soc. Agric. Eng. Paper No. 67-159.

Brubaker, J. E., and J. Pos. 1965. Determining static coefficient of

friction of grain on structural surface. Trans. Amer. Soc. Agric.
Eng. 8Cl};53-55.

Claar, P. W. II, and J. G. Porterfield. 1974. Rotary straw walker

performance. Trans. Amer. Soc. Agric. Eng. 17(5):830-832.

Cooper, G. F. 1966. Combine shaker shoe performance. Amer. Soc.

Agric. Eng. Paper No. 66-607.

Cz-Kanafojski, and T. Karwowski. 1976. Agricultural machine. Theory

and construction. Crop Harvesting Machine 2:388-343.

Fairbank, G. E,, W. H. Johnson, M. D. Schrock, and S. Nath. 1979.

Grain sorghum harvesting losses study. Trans. Amer. Soc. Agric.
Eng. 22C2):246-256.

German, R. P., and J. H. A. Lee. 1969. Grain separation on an oscil

lating sieve as affected by air volume and frequency. Trans.
Amer. Soc. Agric. Eng. 12(6);883-884.

Hamdy, M. Y., R. E. Stewart, and W. F. Johnson. 1967. Theoretical

analysis of centrifugal threshing and separation. Trans. Amer.
Soc. Agric. Eng. 10(I);87-90.

Huynh, V. M., T. P. Powel, and J. N. Siddall. 1977. Threshing and

separating process, a mathematical model. Amer. Soc. Agric.
Eng. Paper No. 77-1556.

Lalor, W. F., and W. F. Buchele. 1963. The theory of threshing cone

design. Agric. Eng. Res. J. 8(l);35-40.

Lalor, W. F., and W. F. Buchele. 1963. Designing and testing of a

threshing cone. Trans. Amer. Soc. Agric. Eng. 6(2):73-76.

Lamp, B. J., and W. F. Buchele. 1960. Centrifugal threshing of small

grain. Trans. Amer. Soc. Agric. Eng. 3(2):24-28.

Lee, J. H. A., and R. G. Minfield. 1969. Influence of oscillating

frequency on separation of wheat on a sieve in air stream. Trans.
Amer. Soc. Agric. Eng. 12(6):886-888.
 74

Lien, R. M.. C. G. Haugh, M. J. Silver, and R. B. Ashman. 1976. Machine

losses in field harvesting popcorn. Trans. Amer. Soc. Agric. Eng.
19(5):827-829.

Morgan, A. H., and M. J. Constantin. 1976. A laboratory seed separa

tion grader. Trans. Amer. Soc. Agric. Eng. 19(3);461-464.
Nyborg, E. 0., H. F. Mcolly, and R. T. Hinkle. 1968. Grain combine
loss characteristics. Amer. Soc. Agric. Eng. Paper No. 68-609.
Park, J. K. 1974. Vertical rotating screens for separating seeds
from trashy materials. Trans. Amer. Soc. Agric. Eng. 17(4):606-
610, 613.

Park, J. K. , and J. E. Harmond. 1966. Vertical rotating screen

separator compared with a flat screen separator. Amer. Soc.
Agric, Eng. Paper No. 66-614.

Reed, W. B., and F. W. Bigsby. 1978. A cleaning system aspirator for

combine. The International Grain and Forage Harvesting Conference
Proceedings. 192-195.

Rumble. D. W., and J. H. A. Lee. 1970. Aerodynamic separation in a

combine shoe. Trans. Amer. Soc. Agric. Eng. 13(1):6-8.

Saij Paul, K. K., S. G. Huber, L. 0. Drew, and C. D. Jones. 1976.

Combine separation and cleaning device concept. Trans. Amer.
Soc. Agric. Eng. 19(6):1025-1028, 1033.
Saij Paul, K. K., L. 0. Drew, S. G. Huber, C. D. Jones, and W. L.
Poller. 1977. Testing the concept of an integral separator and
cleaner unit for a combine. Trans. Amer. Soc. Agric. Eng. 20(2).
243-247.

Simpson, J. B. 1966. Effect of front-rear slope on the combine shoe

performance. Trans. Amer. Soc. Agric. Eng. 9(i):l-3, 5.
Sucher, R. W., and H. B. Pfost. 1964. Cylinder grader performance in
relation to com cleaning problems. Trans, Amer. Soc. Agric. Eng.
7(3):300-304.

Uhl, J. B. 1966. Pneumatic separation of grain and straw mixture.

Trans. Amer, Soc. Agric. Eng. 9(2);244-246.
 75

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author wishes to express his deep gratitude and appreciation

to the following persons who contributed in many ways to my research

project and the program of study:

My professor. Dr. W. F. Buchele, for his unlimited support,

encouragement, counseling, valuable suggestions, and deep interest in

the research project.

Dr. S. J. Marley for his unlimited help, valuable suggestions,

encouragement, and serving as a member of the graduate committee.

Dr. P. N. Hinz for his valuable suggestions and for serving as

a member of the graduate committee.

Allis Chalmers Corporation for awarding me the scholarship, with

special thanks to Mr. David Scott, Paul A. Lee, and Bruce G. Merten.

Sugar Corporation for supporting my family through my study.

H. H. Mesenbrink, R. Fish, and R. Van De Pol for their suggestions

and workshop help.

My fellow graduate students, M. Dawelbeit, M. Elamin, A. Bedri,

and A. Babeir, for their help and suggestions.

Mrs. Carolyn Taylor for excellent typing.

I am indebted to my parents, brothers, sisters, uncles, and aunt

for their unlimited support, encouragement, and blessings.

To my wife Thorya and my son Mohammed El Fatih I owe special thanks

for their patience, continuous support, and encouragement.

 76

APPENDIX A: RECORDED DATA FOR THE EFFECT OF SLOPE OF

AXIS, FEEDING RATE, AND CYLINDER SPEED OF

THE ROTARY SIEVE TEST

 Time
Fines Clean grain Losses (lb)
Slope Feed- Cylin- for
Cobs
(lb) (W With sieve
Job of ing der ^ Others (lb)
(2) cobs sec/
axis rate speed (1) (2) (1)
25 lb

1.00 28.00 5.00 140

54 0.00 7.00 50.00 9.00
1 -10 100
8.00 1.00 41.00 6.00 180
100 54 0.00 6.00 38.00
1 -10 210
6.00 1.00 39.00 4.00
100 54 0.00 6.00 44.00
1 -10 50
17.25 3.75 3.50 4.50
75 54 0.00 1.00 45.00
2 0 47
15.00 2.25 3.75 6.00
75 54 0.00 0.75 47.25
2 0 4.50 47
51.00 12.75 1.50 4.50
2 0 75 54 0.00 0.75
0.00 12.00 8.00 170
0.00 12,00 58.00 10.00
3 -10 100 24
0.00 15.00 5.00 185
0.00 8.00 60.00 12.00
3 -10 100 24
0.00 31.00 6.50 210
24 0.00 7.50 44.00 11.00
3 -10 100 60
22.00 19.00 0.00 9.00
100 54 0.00 4.00 46.00
4 + 10 4.00 55
41.00 23.00 26.00 2.00
4 + 10 100 54 1.00 3.00
26.00 1.50 4.00 63
54 0.50 3.00 42.00 23.00
4 + 10 100 39
27.00 17.00 2.50 9.00
72 1.00 1.50 42.00
5 0 100 9.00 40
38.00 28.00 19.00 3.00
0 100 72 0.50 2.50
5 7.00 35
40.00 29.00 22.00 1.00
5 0 100 72 0.00 1.00
0.00 6.50 7.00 55
0.00 1.50 76-00 9.00
6 0 100 24
0.00 4.50 5.00 61
0.00 0.50 76.00 15.00
6 0 100 24 53
14.00 0.00 5.00 3.00
100 24 0.00 1.00 78.00
6 0 2.00 30
10.50 12.00 23.00 1.50
+10 50 72 0.00 0.50
7 1.00 2.00 35
1.00 10.50 12.00 23.50
7 + 10 50 72 0.00
0.50 3.50 35
1.00 10.50 12.00 22.50
7 + 10 50 72 0.00
15.00 6.00 4.00 43
0.00 1.50 33.75 14.25
8 + 10 75 54 51
17.25 18.00 3.50 3.75
54 0.00 1.75 30.75
8 +10 75 5.25 46
31.50 16.50 17.25 2.50
+10 75 54 0.00 2.00
8

^Slope of axis was in degrees

^Feeding rate was in Ib/min.
^Cylinder speed was in rpm.
 Time
Fines Clean grain Losses (lb) _ , for
Slope Feed Cylin
(lb) (lb) With
Job of ing der Others
(1) (2) cobs ^nbi
^ sec/
axis rate speed CD (2)
25 lb

8.50 2.00 0.50 1.50 45

50 24 0.00 0.50 37.00
9 + 10 50
36.50 8.00 2.00 1.00 2.00
9 +10 50 24 0.00 0.50
2.00 1.50 2.00 48
24 0.00 0.50 35.50 8.50
9 + 10 50
0.00 4.50 4.00 240
24 0.00 5.00 31.00 5.50
10 -10 50
0.00 10.50 3.50 270
24 0.00 5.00 26.50 4.50
10 -10 50 217.5
3.50 0.00 16.50 3.00
SO 24 0.00 4.00 23.00
10 -10 54
6.50 0.00 2.00 2.00
50 24 0.00 2.00 37.50
11 0 50
7.50 0.00 1,00 2.00
50 24 0.00 1.50 38.00
11 0 48
8.00 0.00 0.50 2.00
50 24 0.00 1.00 38.00 oa
11 0 47
12.00 2.50 5.00 0.75
75 24 0.00 1.50 53.25
12 + 10 2.25 45
55.50 12.00 2.50 2.00
12 + 10 75 24 0.00 0.75
2.25 3.00 2.25 48
0.00 1.50 54.75 11.25
12 +10 75 24
1.50 19.50 3.00 210
0.00 6.00 37.50 7.50
13 -10 75 24
2.25 20.50 3.50 240
0.00 5.50 35.25 8.00
13 -10 75 24 200
9.00 3.00 19.00 2.00
75 24 0.00 6.00 36.00
13 -10 1.00 40
18.50 14.00 13.00 2.50
0 50 72 0.00 1.00
14 0.50 2.00 35
1.50 18.00 14.00 14.00
14 0 50 72 0.00
14.50 0.50 1.00 30
0.00 1.50 18.00 14.50
14 0 50 72 55
25.00 8.00 1.50 6.00
100 54 0.00 1.50 58.00
15 0 1.00 50
52.00 28.00 12.00 5.00
0 100 54 0.00 2.00
15 1.25 4.00 60
1.75 54.00 27.00 12.00
15 0 100 54 0.00
34.50 3.00 3.00 30
0.00 1.50 15.75 17.25
16 + 10 75 72
31.50 1.00 4.50 29
0.00 2,00 18.00 18.00
16 +10 75 72 37
18.00 33.75 2.00 3.75
72 0.00 1.75 15.75
16 + 10 75 49
21.00 19.50 0.00 3.00
72 0.00 3.00 28.50
17 0 75 1.50 45
27.75 21.00 20.25 2.25
0 75 72 0.00 2.25
17 0.00 2.25 39
27.75 21.75 21.00
0 75 72 0.00 2.25
17
 Time
Slope Feed Cylin Fines Clean grain Losses (lb)
for
(lb) (lb) With Cobs
Job of ing der Others sieve
axis rate speed (2) (1) (2) cobs (lb)
(1) sec/
25 lb

3.00 72.00 16.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 46

18 + 10 100 24 0.00
2.50 72.00 16.00 2.00 5.50 2.00 50
18 +10 100 24 0.00
72.00 15.00 4.00 5.25 1.00 48
18 + 10 100 24 0.00 2.75
1.50 18.50 12.00 9.00 3.50 5.50 50
19 + 10 50 54 0.00
17.50 10.50 14.50 1.50 5.50 48
19 +10 50 54 0.00 0.50
0.75 18.50 10.50 13.50 1.25 6.00 52
19 + 10 50 54 0.00
1.00 22.00 24.00 47.00 1.00 5.00 25
20 + 10 100 72 0.00
1.00 23.00 24.00 43.00 2.00 7.00 25
20 +10 100 72 0.00
22.00 24.00 46.00 2.00 5.00 25 -sj
20 + 10 100 72 0.00 1.00
vo
6.75 34.50 8.25 0.00 21.75 3.75 190
21 -10 75 54 0.00
18.75 8.25 0.00 35.25 8.25 195
21 -10 75 54 0.00 4.50
36.00 3.75 0.00 27.00 3.75 205
21 -10 75 54 0.00 4.50
11.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 47
22 0 50 54 0.00 1.50 29.50
30.00 11.00 3.50 1.75 2.50 45
22 0 50 54 0.00 1.25
12.50 4.00 1.00 3.00 49
22 0 50 54 0.00 2.00 27.50
58.50 10.50 0.00 0.25 4.50 60
23 0 75 24 0.00 1.25
58.50 12.00 0.00 0.00 4.50 60
23 0 75 24 0.00 0.00
59.25 11.25 0.00 2.00 0.75 55
23 0 75 24 0.00 1.75
25.00 4.50 0.50 18.00 3.00 190
24 -10 50 54 0.00 3.50
4.00 0.50 20.50 3.00 185
24 -10 50 54 0.00 3.00 19.00
3.00 0.50 19.50 2.00 175
24 -10 50 54 0.00 3.00 22.00
13.00 5.00 0.00 4.00 67
25 - 5 50 54 0.00 2.00 26.00
12.50 5.00 1,50 4.50 68
25 - 5 50 54 0.00 2.00 25.00
26.50 12.50 4.50 0.00 4.00 70
25 - 5 50 54 0.00 2.50
40.00 18.50 6.75 3.75 3.00 67
26 - 5 75 54 0.00 3.00
39.00 17.50 6.25 5.25 4.50 70
26 - 5 75 54 0.00 2.50
17.50 5.75 3.00 5.00 72
26 - 5 75 54 0.00 2.25 42.00
 Time
Fines Clean grain
Slope Feed Cylin Losses (lb) for
(lb) (lb)
Job of ing der With Cobs sieve
, Others
axis rate speed (1) (2) (1) (2) cobs (lb) sec/
25/lb

27 - 5 100 72 0.00 7.00 44.00 26.00 14.00 7.00 2.00 75

27 - 5 100 72 0.00 6.00 42.00 24.50 12.00 12.00 3.50 87
27 - 5 100 72 0.00 6.00 46.00 23.00 12.50 8.50 4.00 89
28 - 5 75 24 0.00 3.00 60.00 5.25 1.50 3.00 2.25 78
28 - 5 75 24 0.00 2.00 58.50 6.25 2.00 2.50 3.75 72
28 - 5 75 24 0.00 2.50 59.00 5.50 1.50 3.50 3.00 75
29 - 5 75 72 0.00 4.50 31.50 19.50 9.00 6.00 4.50 95
29 - 5 75 72 0,00 5.00 32.00 20.00 8.50 5.50 4.00 100
29 - 5 75 72 0.00 6.50 30.00 20.50 9.50 4.50 3.50 100
00
30 - 5 100 54 0.00 3.00 61.00 15.00 4.00 8.00 9.00 70 o

30 - 5 100 54 0.00 4.00 61.00 21.00 5.00 3.00 6.00 73

30 - 5 100 54 0.00 2.00 60.00 24.00 6.00 4.00 4.00 75
31 - 5 100 24 0.00 4.00 74.00 6.00 2.50 7.00 6.50 78
31 - 5 100 24 0.00 3.25 72.50 7.00 3.00 7.50 6.75 80
31 - 5 100 24 0.00 3.50 73.25 6.50 4.00 6.25 6.50 82
32 - 5 50 72 0.00 3.00 21.00 13.50 7.00 3.00 2.50 90

32 - 5 50 72 0.00 4.00 21.00 13.00 7.50 2.50 2.00 110

32 - 5 50 72 0.00 3.50 22.00 12.50 6.00 3.00 3,00 105

33 - 5 50 24 0.00 2.00 41.00 3,50 1.00 1.00 1.50 72
33 - 5 50 24 0.00 2.00 40.00 4.50 1.50 0.50 1.50 70

33 - 5 50 24 0.00 1.50 38.00 5.50 2,00 0.50 2.50 68

34 0 75 13. 5 0.75 1.25 65.00 4.50 0.00 0.75 2.75 100

34 0 75 13. 5 1.00 1.50 66.00 2.25 0.00 0.50 3.75 86

34 0 75 13. 5 0.75 0.75 66.25 1.50 0.00 2.00 3.75 91

35 -10 50 13. 5 0,25 0.50 30,00 1.00 0.00 15.75 2.50 562

35 -10 50 13.,5 0.25 0.50 33.50 1.00 0.00 13.25 1.50 541.5
35 -10 50 13,,5 0.50 1.00 31.00 1.00 0.00 13.50 3.00 555
 Time
Fines Clean grain
Slope Feed Cylin Losses (lb) for
(lb) (lb)
Job of ing der Cobs sieve
Others
axis rate speed CD (2) (1) (2) cobs (lb) sec/
25 lb

36 -10 100 13.5 1.50 3.00 65.00 2.00 0.00 25.50 3.00 314

36 -10 100 13.5 1.75 2.00 62.00 2.00 0.00 28.25 4.00 390

36 -10 100 13.5 1.25 2.00 60.00 2.00 0,00 29.75 5.00 445
37 -10 75 13.5 1.00 0.75 45.00 1,50 0.00 22.25 4.50 550
37 -10 75 13.5 1.00 0.75 42.00 1.50 0.00 25.25 4.50 469
37 -10 75 13.5 0.75 1.50 45.00 1.50 0.00 22.50 3.75 585
38 0 50 13.5 0.25 1.00 44.00 1.00 0.00 1.25 2.50 103
38 0 50 13.5 0.25 1.50 43.00 3.00 0.00 0.25 2.00 93

38 0 50 13.5 0.50 1.50 42.00 3.00 0.00 0.50 2.50 98.5

39 + 10 50 13.5 0.25 1.00 34.00 10.00 1.00 1.25 2.50 55

39 + 10 50 13.5 0.00 1.50 34.00 12.00 1.00 1.00 1.50 56 00

39 +10 50 13.5 0.25 1.00 37.00 9.00 0.50 1.25 1.00 60

40 0 100 13.5 1.00 1.00 83.00 4,00 0.00 2.00 9.00 101

0 13.5 0.75 1.00 85.00 3.00 0.00 1.25 9.00 93.5

40 100
13.5 1.00 1.00 83.75 2.00 4.25 1.00 8.00 85
40 0 100
41 13.5 1.00 2.00 65,00 26.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 55
+ 10 100
2.00 65.00 25.00 2.00 0.25 4.00 45
41 + 10 100 13.5 0.75
1.00 2.00 65.00 25.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 41
41 + 10 100 13.5
42 75 13.5 0.50 1.50 51.00 16.50 1,50 1.00 3.00 50
+ 10
75 13.5 0.75 2.25 51.75 14.25 1.50 2.25 2.25 56
42 + 10
13.5 0.50 1.50 48.75 16.50 1.50 2.50 3.75 55
42 + 10 75
13.5 0.25 2.50 33.50 1.50 0.00 9.25 3.00 250
43 - 5 50
0.00 3.00 35.50 1.00 0.00 7.50 3,00 239
4-3 - 5 50 13.5
0.25 3,50 34.00 1.00 0.00 8.25 3.00 196
43 - 5 50 13.5
0.75 4.00 68.00 1.00 0.00 19.25 7.00 207
44 - 5 100 13.5
2.00 68.00 2.00 0.00 18.50 9,00 181
44 - 5 100 13.5 0.50
2.00 64.00 2.00 0.00 23.00 8.00 193
44 - 5 100 13.5 1.00
0.25 3.75 51.75 0.75 0.00 13,25 5.25 216
45 - 5 75 13.5
0.50 3.75 51.75 0.75 0.00 13.75 4.50 180
45 - 5 75 13.5
1.50 51.00 1.50 0.00 14,50 6.00 207
45 - 5 75 13.5 0.50
 82

APPENDIX B: SAS PROGRAM FOR ANALYZING THE DATA FOR THE EFFECT

OF SLOPE OF AXIS, FEEDING RATE, AND CYLINDER SPEED

OF THE ROTARY SIEVE TEST

 83

DATA KAMIL;

INPUT JOB Slope of axis Feeding rate Cylinder speed

Fine (1) Fine (2) Clean grain (1) Clean grain

Losses with cobs Other losses Lime for sieving sec/25 lbs;

(Clean grain (1) + clean grain (2))

1 ~ (Clean grain (1) + clean grain (2) + losses with cobs and other losses]

BY JOB;

(Clean grain (1) clean grain(2))

^2 " (Clean grain (1) + clean grain (2) + losses with cobs)

BY JOB;

Y = Fine (1) + Fine (2);

X = Clean grain (1) + Clean grain (2);

CARDS.

PROC MEANS; BY JOB;

PROC PRINT;

PROC CORR;

VAR Slope of axis Feeding rate Cylinder speed

Clean grain (1) Clean grain (2) Losses with cobs

Other losses Time for sieving sec/25 lb

PROC ANOVA;

CLASSES Slope of axis Feeding rate Cylinder speed;

MODEL Total fines « slope of axis Feeding rate

Cylinder speed Slope of axis * Feeding rate

 84

Slope of axis * cylinder speed Feeding rate * cylinder speed

Slope of axis * feeding rate * cylinder speed;
PROC ANOVA;

CLASSES Slope of axis Feeding rate Cylinder speed;

MODEL Total clean grain = slope of axis Feeding rate Cylinder
speed Slope of axis * feeding rate Slope of axis * cylinder
speed Feeding rate • cylinder speed Slope of axis *
feeding rate * cylinder speed;

PROC ANOVA;

CLASSES Slope of axis Feeding rate Cylinder speed;

MODEL Losses with cobs = slope of axis Feeding rate Cylinder
speed Slope of axis * feeding rate Slope of axis * cylinder
speed Feeding rate * cylinder speed Slope of axis *
feeding rate * cylinder speed;

PROC ANOVA;

CLASSES Slope of axis Feeding rate Cylinder speed;

MODEL Other losses = slope of axis Feeding rate Cylinder
speed Slope of axis * feeding rate Slope of axis * cylinder
speed Feeding rate * cylinder speed Slope of axis *
feeding rate * cylinder speed;

PROC ANOVA;

CLASSES Slope of axis Feeding rate Cylinder speed;

MODEL = Slope of axis Feeding rate Cylinder speed;
Slope of axis * feeding rate Slope of axis * feeding rate
Feeding rate * cylinder speed Slope of axis * feeding
 85

rate * cylinder speed;

PROC ANOVA;

CLASSES Slope of axis Feeding rate Cylinder speed;

MODEL ^2 = Slope of axis Feeding rate Cylinder speed

Slope of axis * feeding rate Slope of axis * cylinder
speed Feeding rate * cylinder speed Slope of axis *

feeding rate * cylinder speed;

PROC ANOVA;

CLASSES Slope of axis Feeding rate Cylinder speed;

MODEL Time for sieving sec/25 lb = slope of axis Feeding rate

Cylinder speed Slope of axis * feeding rate Slope of

axis * cylinder speed Feeding rate * cylinder speed

Slope of axis * feeding rate * cylinder speed