Operational performance of the mechanized and semi-mechanized potato harvest
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2011 |
Outros Autores: | , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Engenharia Agrícola |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-69162011000400020 |
Resumo: | Potato is an important crop plant throughout the world. Harvesting is a fundamental step in its production system. Maybe, it is the most complex and expensive operation. Thus, the objective of this work was to compare the cost of the mechanized and semi-mechanized harvest, the operational capacity and the production losses during the potato harvest process. The work was accomplished in a commercial farming, cultivated under pivot system, in the municipal district of Perdizes - MG, Brazil. A completely randomized design with two treatments was used: mechanized and semi-mechanized harvest. The mechanized harvest used a self-propelled harvester. In the semi-automated harvest, a digger mounted on tractor was used and the potato was manually harvested. It was concluded that the cost of mechanized harvest was 49.03% lower than the cost of semi-mechanized harvest. On average, the harvester had a work for 23 workers in manual harvest. Mechanized harvest showed losses of 2.35% of potato yield, while the semi-mechanized harvest showed losses of 6.32%. |
id |
SBEA-1_f2f5ebb3463127e38adb635da55fa9c0 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S0100-69162011000400020 |
network_acronym_str |
SBEA-1 |
network_name_str |
Engenharia Agrícola |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Operational performance of the mechanized and semi-mechanized potato harvestmechanical harvestfield efficiencyoperational costSolanum tuberosumPotato is an important crop plant throughout the world. Harvesting is a fundamental step in its production system. Maybe, it is the most complex and expensive operation. Thus, the objective of this work was to compare the cost of the mechanized and semi-mechanized harvest, the operational capacity and the production losses during the potato harvest process. The work was accomplished in a commercial farming, cultivated under pivot system, in the municipal district of Perdizes - MG, Brazil. A completely randomized design with two treatments was used: mechanized and semi-mechanized harvest. The mechanized harvest used a self-propelled harvester. In the semi-automated harvest, a digger mounted on tractor was used and the potato was manually harvested. It was concluded that the cost of mechanized harvest was 49.03% lower than the cost of semi-mechanized harvest. On average, the harvester had a work for 23 workers in manual harvest. Mechanized harvest showed losses of 2.35% of potato yield, while the semi-mechanized harvest showed losses of 6.32%.Associação Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola2011-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-69162011000400020Engenharia Agrícola v.31 n.4 2011reponame:Engenharia Agrícolainstname:Associação Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola (SBEA)instacron:SBEA10.1590/S0100-69162011000400020info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessCunha,João P. A. R. daMartins,Daniel H.Cunha,Walter G. daeng2011-09-22T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0100-69162011000400020Revistahttp://www.engenhariaagricola.org.br/ORGhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phprevistasbea@sbea.org.br||sbea@sbea.org.br1809-44300100-6916opendoar:2011-09-22T00:00Engenharia Agrícola - Associação Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola (SBEA)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Operational performance of the mechanized and semi-mechanized potato harvest |
title |
Operational performance of the mechanized and semi-mechanized potato harvest |
spellingShingle |
Operational performance of the mechanized and semi-mechanized potato harvest Cunha,João P. A. R. da mechanical harvest field efficiency operational cost Solanum tuberosum |
title_short |
Operational performance of the mechanized and semi-mechanized potato harvest |
title_full |
Operational performance of the mechanized and semi-mechanized potato harvest |
title_fullStr |
Operational performance of the mechanized and semi-mechanized potato harvest |
title_full_unstemmed |
Operational performance of the mechanized and semi-mechanized potato harvest |
title_sort |
Operational performance of the mechanized and semi-mechanized potato harvest |
author |
Cunha,João P. A. R. da |
author_facet |
Cunha,João P. A. R. da Martins,Daniel H. Cunha,Walter G. da |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Martins,Daniel H. Cunha,Walter G. da |
author2_role |
author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Cunha,João P. A. R. da Martins,Daniel H. Cunha,Walter G. da |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
mechanical harvest field efficiency operational cost Solanum tuberosum |
topic |
mechanical harvest field efficiency operational cost Solanum tuberosum |
description |
Potato is an important crop plant throughout the world. Harvesting is a fundamental step in its production system. Maybe, it is the most complex and expensive operation. Thus, the objective of this work was to compare the cost of the mechanized and semi-mechanized harvest, the operational capacity and the production losses during the potato harvest process. The work was accomplished in a commercial farming, cultivated under pivot system, in the municipal district of Perdizes - MG, Brazil. A completely randomized design with two treatments was used: mechanized and semi-mechanized harvest. The mechanized harvest used a self-propelled harvester. In the semi-automated harvest, a digger mounted on tractor was used and the potato was manually harvested. It was concluded that the cost of mechanized harvest was 49.03% lower than the cost of semi-mechanized harvest. On average, the harvester had a work for 23 workers in manual harvest. Mechanized harvest showed losses of 2.35% of potato yield, while the semi-mechanized harvest showed losses of 6.32%. |
publishDate |
2011 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2011-01-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-69162011000400020 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-69162011000400020 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/S0100-69162011000400020 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Associação Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Associação Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Engenharia Agrícola v.31 n.4 2011 reponame:Engenharia Agrícola instname:Associação Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola (SBEA) instacron:SBEA |
instname_str |
Associação Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola (SBEA) |
instacron_str |
SBEA |
institution |
SBEA |
reponame_str |
Engenharia Agrícola |
collection |
Engenharia Agrícola |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Engenharia Agrícola - Associação Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola (SBEA) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
revistasbea@sbea.org.br||sbea@sbea.org.br |
_version_ |
1752126270608506880 |