<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf8"?>
 <!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "http://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.0/JATS-journalpublishing1.dtd"> <article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.0" xml:lang="en">
  <front>
    <journal-meta>
      <journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">JAR</journal-id>
      <journal-title-group>
        <journal-title>Journal of Agronomy Research</journal-title>
      </journal-title-group>
      <issn pub-type="epub">2639-3166</issn>
      <publisher>
        <publisher-name>Open Access Pub</publisher-name>
        <publisher-loc>United States</publisher-loc>
      </publisher>
    </journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.14302/issn.2639-3166.jar-21-3872</article-id>
      <article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">JAR-21-3872</article-id>
      <article-categories>
        <subj-group>
          <subject>research-article</subject>
        </subj-group>
      </article-categories>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Developed and Field Performance Evaluation of a Combined                         Cultivator</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <name>
            <surname>Mohamed</surname>
            <given-names>Hassan Dahab</given-names>
          </name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="idm1849558684">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <name>
            <surname>Abdalla</surname>
            <given-names>N. O. Kheiry</given-names>
          </name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="idm1849572484">2</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="idm1849573324">*</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <name>
            <surname>Mohamed</surname>
            <given-names>Hamid Numan</given-names>
          </name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="idm1849558684">1</xref>
        </contrib>
      </contrib-group>
      <aff id="idm1849558684">
        <label>1</label>
        <addr-line>Department of Agric Eng. – College of Agriculture- University of Khartoum.</addr-line>
      </aff>
      <aff id="idm1849572484">
        <label>2</label>
        <addr-line>Departments of Agric Eng.– College of Agricultural Studies- Sudan University of Science and Technology </addr-line>
      </aff>
      <aff id="idm1849573324">
        <label>*</label>
        <addr-line>Corresponding author</addr-line>
      </aff>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="editor">
          <name>
            <surname>Giorgio</surname>
            <given-names>Masoero</given-names>
          </name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="idm1849401988">1</xref>
        </contrib>
      </contrib-group>
      <aff id="idm1849401988">
        <label>1</label>
        <addr-line>Italy.</addr-line>
      </aff>
      <author-notes>
        <corresp>
    
    Abdalla N. O. Kheiry, <addr-line>Departments of Agricultural Engineering, Colleges of Agricultural </addr-line><addr-line>Studies,Sudan</addr-line><addr-line> University of Science and Technology</addr-line><email>abdallakheiry@gmail.com</email></corresp>
        <fn fn-type="conflict" id="idm1842856716">
          <p>The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.</p>
        </fn>
      </author-notes>
      <pub-date pub-type="epub" iso-8601-date="2021-10-22">
        <day>22</day>
        <month>10</month>
        <year>2021</year>
      </pub-date>
      <volume>4</volume>
      <issue>2</issue>
      <fpage>12</fpage>
      <lpage>19</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received">
          <day>16</day>
          <month>06</month>
          <year>2021</year>
        </date>
        <date date-type="accepted">
          <day>15</day>
          <month>10</month>
          <year>2021</year>
        </date>
        <date date-type="online">
          <day>22</day>
          <month>10</month>
          <year>2021</year>
        </date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>© </copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2021</copyright-year>
        <copyright-holder>Mohamed Hassan Dahab, et al.</copyright-holder>
        <license xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple">
          <license-p>This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.</license-p>
        </license>
      </permissions>
      <self-uri xlink:href="http://openaccesspub.org/jar/article/1712">This article is available from http://openaccesspub.org/jar/article/1712</self-uri>
      <abstract>
        <p>Sugar cane production requires a number of operations to be carried out in the field through number of implements and machines. Therefore, time consuming and required large amount of            energy. A combined field cultivator was designed in Kenana agricultural implements factory (KAIF) to carry out at one time multi operations (cultivation, furrow-reforming and Fertilizer placement). This is to increase field productivity,              reduce farm power and lower operation time and cost. The combined implement was evaluated in                Kenana cultivation fields and compared with three individual implements, rigid tine cultivator,                            furrow-reformer and fertilizer applicator. The                 measured parameters were drawbar pull, power          requirements, field capacity, fuel consumption and total time in the field. The results showed highly                    significant differences at 1% level between the                    different implements for the field capacity, fuel                   consumption and significant differences at 5% for the drawbar pull. A power requirement in (kW) for the combined cultivator was 77% of those individual           implements. Total time per feddan to accomplish the required operations by the combined cultivator was 57% of that required by the individual implements. Fuel consumption was reduced to 57% when                       combined implement was used compared to that               consumed by individual implements. It was                           concluded that the combined cultivator was effective in increasing field productivity and reducing power and cost of operation.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>Sugar cane</kwd>
        <kwd>cultivation</kwd>
        <kwd>furrow-reforming and Fertilizer placement</kwd>
        <kwd>field productivity Italy</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
      <counts>
        <fig-count count="0"/>
        <table-count count="6"/>
        <page-count count="8"/>
      </counts>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="idm1849408468" sec-type="intro">
      <title>Introduction</title>
      <p>Farm machinery management deals with the optimization of the equipment used for agricultural                    production. It is concerned with efficient selection,                    operation, maintenance, and replacement of machinery. Farm machinery selection is a fundamental in achieving the concept of sustainable agriculture, which becomes a global issue in agricultural sector development<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842903948">1</xref> .Proper management and selection of implement contributes greatly in reducing cost and difficulties in field operations, maximizes production and also protects the environment against pollution.</p>
      <p>Sugar industry in Sudan, started in the sixties and reached its present size in the eighties. Sugar industry has a significant contribution to the national income and the economy of the country. Sugar cane in Sudan is now grown in the central clay plains and the expansion in this region depends in the suitable soil, availability of                       irrigation water and machinery. The production of sugar cane involves many operations from planting to                               harvesting. It is produced either by planting stalks of cane or by ratoon. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842902220">2</xref> considered the following operations as common practices in sugar cane field; uprooting,by chisel, disc or shape ploughs, harrowing, with discs or tines to form a suitable seedbed. Then leveling and furrows made by furrowing bodies for planting seed cane. For planting, cane is usually placed in furrows and covered with soil. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842970692">3</xref>                         recommended planting depth of 8 cm in sandy soils and found that depth was not so important in heavy cracking clay soils. To maximize cane yields, the distance between cane rows should be the smallest which allows cultivation with modern equipment<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842909860">4</xref>. Where the plant is about three months old, soil should be transferred from the inter-rows to the planting rows so that the plant gets better anchorage and resistance to lodging. This also helps prevent water logging at the base of stalks and improves irrigation efficiency, besides, the practice is necessary for mechanized harvesting operations<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842977460">5</xref>.</p>
      <p>The concept of combined implement was found to be of great importance to carry out more than one                       operation at the same time and to conserve energy and time and to save labour cost. Some pioneer studies were carried out to combine tillage implements with planting machines as a minimum tillage combined systems<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1843010724">6</xref><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842756980">7</xref><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842764036">8</xref> found that combining tillage tools in two types of soils            resulted in saving about 44-55% of the cost and 50-55% of the time. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842749332">9</xref> described a combined chisel-planter as a minimum tillage implement, for reducing erosion. The minimum tillage system was developed by combining through successive practical in the area (a chisel plow, fertilizers applicator and seed drill with double disc                   furrow openers). It was classified as tillage – planting               machine. The interest for minimum tillage or no tillage methods of seeding involve saving time and energy. He also concluded that the chisel –planter used 70% less fuel, and 49% less time per acre than conventional system. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842747172">10</xref> stated that the combination of a rotary tiller and                   pneumatic seeder was found to be suitable for one-pass plow-seeding operation as a minimum tillage system for fuel and time saving. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1843010724">6</xref> stated that the ridger- planter as  one pass operating machine, the conventional mechanical system of planting (separate ridger and planter) was  nearly double that of combined ridger-planter and field capacity of the combination was approximately double that of the mechanical system and twelve times the               manual, which allows times saving and expansion of the cultivable area.</p>
      <p>Carried out an experiment to study the                     performance of a primary and secondary tillage                          implements combined into one machine and was                    evaluated in the field and compared with the individual implements, chisel and ridger for unit draft, power,                  slippage, fuel consumption and time.<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842744940">11</xref> The results showed that the combined implement reduced the unit draft by 26% compared to the individual implements work                  together. The power requirements and the total times were reduced by 49% and 47% respectively by the                combined implement. </p>
      <p>The main objective of the present study was to develop and evaluate a combined machine formed from three implements, rigid tine cultivator, furrow reformer and fertilizer applicator to increase field productively,        reduce farm power and lower operational costs and time. Therefore, the specific objectives are: To evaluate the field performance of the combined machine compared to the individual implements. The parameters investigated and measured were field capacity and efficiency, fuel                          consumption and power requirement.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="idm1849406308" sec-type="materials">
      <title>Materials and Methods</title>
      <p>The experiment was carried out at Kenana cane fields (heavy clay soil). The soil is 15% sand, 22% silt, 63% clay (Kenana research department). Kenana Latitude is 13°8'16"N   and Long 33°0'31"E.</p>
      <p>An experimental plot consalmaisting of four               treatments and three replicates was laid out in                                randomized complete block design (RCBD). The                         treatments consisted of four implements</p>
      <p>Two Massey Ferguson tractors (MF440) were used for the experimental measurements. The                          specifications of the tractors are given in <xref ref-type="table" rid="idm1843132188">table 1</xref>.</p>
      <table-wrap id="idm1843132188">
        <label>Table 1.</label>
        <caption>
          <title> Specification of tractors used on               experiments (MF 440) </title>
        </caption>
        <table rules="all" frame="box">
          <tbody>
            <tr>
              <th>
                <bold>Item</bold>
              </th>
              <td>
                <bold>Description</bold>
              </td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td>Model</td>
              <td>Perkins</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td>No. of cylinders</td>
              <td>7</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td>HP</td>
              <td>82(61.6KW)</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td>Rev/m</td>
              <td>2200</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td>Injection</td>
              <td>Direct</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td>Capacity</td>
              <td>1.4 lit</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td>Aspiration</td>
              <td>Natural</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td>Steering</td>
              <td>Hydrostatic</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td>Max. engine torque</td>
              <td>288NM</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td>Weight</td>
              <td>2665kg</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td>Length</td>
              <td>3.98m</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td>Width</td>
              <td>2.06m</td>
            </tr>
          </tbody>
        </table>
      </table-wrap>
      <p>The implements used in this study were rigid tine cultivator, furrow                      reformer, fertilizer applicator and the combined field                   cultivator which developed as a two row cultivator. The specifications of these implements are shown in <xref ref-type="table" rid="idm1843107092">table 2</xref>. The size of the plots was 100 m×3 m. The plots were                    separated by 3 m wide buffer strips and there was 6 m gap between 2 plots for the tractor. Other equipment such as Chain- bolts- stop watch- paper sheets- tape meter                    (50m) - steel rods- steel container (4 gallons) - measuring cylinder (1 lit.) and dynamometer (50_300 KN) were also used.</p>
      <table-wrap id="idm1843107092">
        <label>Table 2.</label>
        <caption>
          <title> Specifications of Implements</title>
        </caption>
        <table rules="all" frame="box">
          <tbody>
            <tr>
              <th>
                <bold>Parameter</bold>
              </th>
              <td colspan="3">
                <bold>Specifications</bold>
              </td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <th/>
              <td>
                <bold>Fertilizer applicator</bold>
              </td>
              <td>
                <bold>Ridger</bold>
              </td>
              <td>
                <bold>Rigid </bold>
                <bold>tyne</bold>
              </td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td>Type</td>
              <td>Tractor mounted</td>
              <td>Tractor mounted</td>
              <td>Tractor mounted</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td>Lifting</td>
              <td>By Tractor hydraulic</td>
              <td>By Tractor hydraulic</td>
              <td>By Tractor hydraulic</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td>Height</td>
              <td>1550 mm</td>
              <td>365mm</td>
              <td>800mm</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td>Length</td>
              <td>1110mm</td>
              <td>980mm</td>
              <td>1200</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td>Width</td>
              <td>2480mm</td>
              <td>1000mm</td>
              <td>1800mm</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td>Components</td>
              <td>Mild steel frame, hoppers(4), transmission system.</td>
              <td>Two wings v shape frame, cutting edges</td>
              <td>Eight shanks, two raw u shape frame.</td>
            </tr>
          </tbody>
        </table>
      </table-wrap>
      <p>The cultivator consists of six rigid tynes, equipped with replaceable chisel points, staggered on a rugged tool bar in twos, for each furrow there were three tynes, two in the front row, and third in the second row, at the center of the two front tynes. The front tynes were to loosen the sides of the furrows and to provide grooves for placement of fertilizers. The center tynes were to loosen the middle of the furrows to provide more loose soil for coverage of fertilizers and reshaping of the ridges and furrows. The fertilizer applicator consists of fertilizer hoper, metering devices, and delivery tubes. There were two main hopers one for each row. Capacities of the compartment were 300kg of fertilizer.</p>
      <p>The metering devices were tractor-PTO driven mechanism specially designed for the machine. Fertilizer displacement (flow) was controllable through the setting of the drive linkages. Delivery tubes attached to the outlets of the metering devices and clamped to the backs of the front times. The furrowing unit was a set of two                           moldboards, in addition to ridge and furrow reformation, furrowers were to cover fertilizer.</p>
      <p>The combined field cultivator was developed as a two row cultivator, tractor mounted machine. It was                    designed to comprise functional components of a chisel cultivator, furrower and a fertilizer applicator. (The                  specifications of this machine is shown in <xref ref-type="table" rid="idm1843053620">table 3</xref></p>
      <table-wrap id="idm1843053620">
        <label>Table 3.</label>
        <caption>
          <title> Specification of combined Field cultivator </title>
        </caption>
        <table rules="all" frame="box">
          <tbody>
            <tr>
              <th>
                <bold>Parameter</bold>
              </th>
              <td>
                <bold>Specification</bold>
              </td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td>Type</td>
              <td>Mounted two raw</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td>Lifting</td>
              <td>By tractor hydraulic</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td>Overall height</td>
              <td>1460mm</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td>Length</td>
              <td>1665mm</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td>Width</td>
              <td>2480mm</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td>Hoper capacity</td>
              <td>400kg of Fertilizer</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td>Components </td>
              <td>Fertilizer applicator Rigid tine Ridger </td>
            </tr>
          </tbody>
        </table>
      </table-wrap>
    </sec>
    <sec id="idm1849336476">
      <title>Measurements</title>
      <sec id="idm1849336404">
        <title>Field Capacity and Efficiency Measurements</title>
        <p>The time lost in the field such as turning, adjustment and change of gear was recorded and time used for real work also recorded. The theoretical, effective field capacity and field efficiency were calculated as follows</p>
        <fig id="idm1843019340">
          <graphic xlink:href="images/image1.png" mime-subtype="png"/>
        </fig>
        <fig id="idm1843018260">
          <graphic xlink:href="images/image2.png" mime-subtype="png"/>
        </fig>
        <fig id="idm1843032228">
          <graphic xlink:href="images/image3.png" mime-subtype="png"/>
        </fig>
        <fig id="idm1843033380">
          <graphic xlink:href="images/image4.png" mime-subtype="png"/>
        </fig>
      </sec>
      <sec id="idm1849333236">
        <title>Fuel Consumption Measurement</title>
        <p>For measuring the fuel consumption of tractor, the fuel tank was filled up to neck of the fuel tank before and after the planting operation in each plot. The amount of refilling measured after the test was the fuel               consumption for planting operation in each plot and it was expressed as liter per hour and calculated as follows: </p>
        <fig id="idm1843005972">
          <graphic xlink:href="images/image5.png" mime-subtype="png"/>
        </fig>
        <fig id="idm1843006116">
          <graphic xlink:href="images/image6.png" mime-subtype="png"/>
        </fig>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="idm1849331436">
      <title>Measurements</title>
      <sec id="idm1849331796">
        <title>Draw Bar pull (Draft) Measurement</title>
        <p>
          <italic>Measurement of Each Implement Draw Bar Pull (Draft) was Done as Follows</italic>
        </p>
        <p>The auxiliary tractor (MF) and the tested tractor (MF) were linked together through the dynamometer using steel chain.</p>
        <p>The auxiliary tractor was first used to pull the tested tractor alone.</p>
        <p>The reading of the dynamometer was recorded </p>
        <p> The tested tractor then loaded with the implement                  operated at constant depth controlled with manual                   hydraulic lever of the tractor</p>
        <p>The reading was repeated and taken the average</p>
        <p>Implement draft was calculated as follows</p>
        <fig id="idm1843003524">
          <graphic xlink:href="images/image7.png" mime-subtype="png"/>
        </fig>
      </sec>
      <sec id="idm1849330428">
        <title>Draw Bar Power Calculation</title>
        <p>The power exerted by the tractor on the                    implement was calculated using the following equation:</p>
        <fig id="idm1843002732">
          <graphic xlink:href="images/image8.png" mime-subtype="png"/>
        </fig>
        <p>Dbp = Draw bar power (KW)</p>
        <p>D     = Implement draft (KN)</p>
        <p>S      = Forward speed (Km/hr)</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="idm1849326396">
        <title>Field Capacity and Efficiency Measurements</title>
        <p>The time lost in the field such as turning,                    adjustment and change of gear was recorded and time used for real work also recorded. The theoretical, effective field capacity and field efficiency were calculated as follows</p>
        <fig id="idm1843000572">
          <graphic xlink:href="images/image9.png" mime-subtype="png"/>
        </fig>
        <fig id="idm1843000644">
          <graphic xlink:href="images/image10.png" mime-subtype="png"/>
        </fig>
        <fig id="idm1842997980">
          <graphic xlink:href="images/image11.png" mime-subtype="png"/>
        </fig>
        <fig id="idm1842996900">
          <graphic xlink:href="images/image12.png" mime-subtype="png"/>
        </fig>
      </sec>
      <sec id="idm1849324956">
        <title>Fuel Consumption Measurement</title>
        <p>For measuring the fuel consumption of tractor, the fuel tank was filled up to neck of the fuel tank before and after the planting operation in each plot. The amount of refilling measured after the test was the fuel                         consumption for planting operation in each plot and it was expressed as liter per hour and calculated as follows</p>
        <fig id="idm1842997476">
          <graphic xlink:href="images/image13.png" mime-subtype="png"/>
        </fig>
        <fig id="idm1842995604">
          <graphic xlink:href="images/image14.png" mime-subtype="png"/>
        </fig>
      </sec>
      <sec id="idm1849325820">
        <title>Draft &amp;Power Requirements</title>
        <p><xref ref-type="table" rid="idm1842994452">Table 4</xref> shows a summary for performance of the individual implements and combined machine in the experimental fields. It is clear that the combined                     implement recorded less value of unit draft (3.02 KN/m), than Ridger (5.3 KN/m) and Rigid tine (4.5 KN/m), but the Fertilizer applicator recorded the lowest value of unit draft (0.17 KN/m).</p>
        <table-wrap id="idm1842994452">
          <label>Table 4.</label>
          <caption>
            <title> Average field capacity, fuel consumption, draw bar pull, draw bar power                        requirement and unit draft </title>
          </caption>
          <table rules="all" frame="box">
            <tbody>
              <tr>
                <td>Implement</td>
                <td>FC(Fad/hr)</td>
                <td>Fuel C (lit/Fed)</td>
                <td>Draw bar pull (KN)</td>
                <td>D b power (KW)</td>
                <td>U d (KN/m)</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Combined</td>
                <td>2.57</td>
                <td>2.41</td>
                <td>7.51</td>
                <td>12.51</td>
                <td>3.02</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Ridger</td>
                <td>2.54</td>
                <td>2.05</td>
                <td>3.40</td>
                <td>5.6</td>
                <td>5.3</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Fertilizer App.</td>
                <td>8.43</td>
                <td>0.45</td>
                <td>0.50</td>
                <td>0.83</td>
                <td>0.17</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Rigid tine</td>
                <td>2.5</td>
                <td>1.75</td>
                <td>5.90</td>
                <td>9.8</td>
                <td>4.5</td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
          <table-wrap-foot>
            <fn id="idm1849307676">
              <label/>
              <p>FC = Field Capacity, Fuel C = Fuel Consumption, D b = Draw Bar, U d = Unit Draft </p>
            </fn>
          </table-wrap-foot>
        </table-wrap>
        <p> </p>
        <p><xref ref-type="table" rid="idm1842994452">Table 4</xref> also shows that the combined machine recorded (12.51 KW) power requirement which is higher than that of ridger, fertilizer applicator and rigid tine                 together which recorded (5.6 KW+ 0.80 kW+ 9.8                  KW= 16.2 kW). The higher power required the combined                    implement compared to the individual implements may be due to higher draft force exerted by the combined                   implement. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842741060">12</xref> reported that draw bar power was                        increased as implement draft increased.</p>
        <p>Adding the power required for ridger, rigid tine and fertilizer applicator all together and comparing them with power required by the combined implement showed that the power required was less by 3.7 KW, this saved about (23%) of power when using combined implement. This is in line with Paterno, (1994)<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1843010724">6</xref>. </p>
        <p>Statistical analysis shows significant differences between treatments at 5% level, (<xref ref-type="table" rid="idm1842954644">Table 5</xref>). shows the power requirement for combined machine and the other three implements.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="idm1849305732">
        <title><italic>Fuel </italic>Consumption</title>
        <p>From <xref ref-type="table" rid="idm1842994452">table 4</xref>, it is clear that the fuel                                consumption of the three individual implements when added together and compared with fuel consumption of the combined machine which carry out the three                       operations in one bath, it appear that the combined                    machine save about (57%) of fuel, which is above the rate mentioned<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842747172">10</xref>. </p>
        <p>Statistical analysis shows highly significant                      differences between treatments at 1% level (<xref ref-type="table" rid="idm1842954644">Table 5</xref>) </p>
        <table-wrap id="idm1842954644">
          <label>Table 5.</label>
          <caption>
            <title> Anova Table for different parameters </title>
          </caption>
          <table rules="all" frame="box">
            <tbody>
              <tr>
                <td>Parameters</td>
                <td colspan="3">F value</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td/>
                <td>f-cal.</td>
                <td colspan="2">F-tab.</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td/>
                <td> </td>
                <td>5%</td>
                <td>1%</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Field capacity</td>
                <td>**44.5</td>
                <td>8.62</td>
                <td>26.5</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Fuel consumption</td>
                <td>**1584</td>
                <td>8.62</td>
                <td>26.5</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Drawbar pull</td>
                <td>*15.9</td>
                <td>8.62</td>
                <td>26.5</td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
        </table-wrap>
      </sec>
      <sec id="idm1849280692">
        <title>Field Capacity</title>
        <p>Field capacity (fed/h) shown in <xref ref-type="table" rid="idm1842994452">table 4</xref>, it                  appear that the combined machine operates (2.57 fed/h), while the ridger, fertilizer applicator and rigid tyne                     operate (2.54, 8.43, 2.5 fed/h) respectively. So the                        combined machine in one path did the three operations done by the three implements and almost in the same time. </p>
        <p>Statistical analysis shows highly significant                     differences between treatments at 1% level, (<xref ref-type="table" rid="idm1842954644">Table 5</xref>). shows fieldcapacity for the combined machine and the three individual implements. <xref ref-type="table" rid="idm1842937220">Table 6</xref></p>
        <table-wrap id="idm1842937220">
          <label>Table 6.</label>
          <caption>
            <title> Total time of different Implements </title>
          </caption>
          <table rules="all" frame="box">
            <tbody>
              <tr>
                <th>
                  <bold>Implement</bold>
                </th>
                <td>
                  <bold>Total time (h/feddan)</bold>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Combined machine</td>
                <td>0.39</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Ridger</td>
                <td>0.40</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Fertilizer applicator</td>
                <td>0.11</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Rigid tyne</td>
                <td>0.40</td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
        </table-wrap>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="idm1849290412" sec-type="conclusions">
      <title>Conclusions</title>
      <sec id="idm1849291348">
        <title>The Following Conclusion may be Drawn from the Present Study</title>
        <p>The combined machine compared with individual implements (ridger, fertilizer app., rigid tine) was found reduced the power required by (23%), total time by (57%), fuel consumption by (57%) and operate the same area done by the three implements together in the same period of time.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ridm1842903948">
        <label>1.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="book">
          <name>
            <surname>Hunt</surname>
            <given-names>D</given-names>
          </name>
          <date>
            <year>1995</year>
          </date>
          <chapter-title>Farm power and Machinery Management 9th ed.IowaStateUniversity, Press</chapter-title>
          <publisher-loc>Ames, Iowa 50014, USA</publisher-loc>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842902220">
        <label>2.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Black</surname>
            <given-names>Burn</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Sugar Cane – Tropical Agriculture series, Longman Inc</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>1984</year>
          </date>
          <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842970692">
        <label>3.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Lonslale</surname>
            <given-names>John</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Planting Depth and Seed Material for Establishing of Sugar Cane. Sao Paulo</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>1977</year>
          </date>
          <publisher-loc>Brazil</publisher-loc>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842909860">
        <label>4.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>J</surname>
            <given-names>E Irvine</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>G</surname>
            <given-names>T Benda</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Sugar cane spacing. Proceeding of XVII Congress</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>1980</year>
          </date>
          <publisher-loc>Manila, Philippines</publisher-loc>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842977460">
        <label>5.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Mago</surname>
            <given-names/>
          </name>
          <article-title>Journal of the school of the land. Effects of earthing up on efficiency of sugar cane irrigation, American Sugarcane Seminar</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>1983</year>
          </date>
          <fpage>185</fpage>
          <lpage>197</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1843010724">
        <label>6.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>C</surname>
            <given-names>B Paterno</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>The multi-crop seeder</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>1994</year>
          </date>
          <source>Journal of Agricultural Mechanization in Asia, Africa and Latin America</source>
          <volume>25</volume>
          <issue>3</issue>
          <fpage>14</fpage>
          <lpage>22</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842756980">
        <label>7.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal"><name><surname>Abdalla</surname><given-names>Y A</given-names></name><article-title>Development and evaluation of a combined ridger-planter implement</article-title><date><year>2000</year></date>
M.Sc. thesis
<institution>Faculty of Agriculture, University of Khartoum, Sudan</institution></mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842764036">
        <label>8.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Kailappan</surname>
            <given-names>R</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>N</surname>
            <given-names>C Vijayaraghavan</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>K</surname>
            <given-names>P Swaminathan</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Muthan</surname>
            <given-names>G</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Performance evaluation of the combination of tillage tools under field condition</article-title>
          <source>Journal of Agricultural Mechanization in Asia, Africa and Latin America</source>
          <volume>32</volume>
          <issue>4</issue>
          <fpage>9</fpage>
          <lpage>12</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842749332">
        <label>9.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Peterson</surname>
            <given-names>M</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>The Chisel – Planter Minimum Tillage System</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>1983</year>
          </date>
          <source>Transaction of ASAE</source>
          <volume>26</volume>
          <issue>6</issue>
          <fpage>1412</fpage>
          <lpage>1416</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842747172">
        <label>10.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Sheruddin</surname>
            <given-names>B</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Combination of rotary tiller and pneumatic seeder. Agricultural mechanization in Asia</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>1981</year>
          </date>
          <source>Africa and Latin America</source>
          <volume>12</volume>
          <issue>4</issue>
          <fpage>13</fpage>
          <lpage>15</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842744940">
        <label>11.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>M</surname>
            <given-names>H Dahab</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>H</surname>
            <given-names>I Mohamed</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>H</surname>
            <given-names>R Elramlawi</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>A combined chisel- ridger implement for economizing power under heavy clay soils</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2007</year>
          </date>
          <source>Journal of Science and Technology (SUST)</source>
          <volume>8</volume>
          <issue>1</issue>
          <fpage>162</fpage>
          <lpage>172</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842741060">
        <label>12.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Belal</surname>
            <given-names>M M</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>M</surname>
            <given-names>H Dahab</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Effect of Soil Condition on a two-wheel drive tractor performance, using three types of tillage implements</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>1997</year>
          </date>
          <source>University of Khartoum, Journal of Agricultural Science</source>
          <volume>5</volume>
          <issue>2</issue>
          <fpage>1</fpage>
          <lpage>22</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>
