Fig 1.
The electrohydraulic system driving the vibrating conveyor belt of the peanut digger-inverter: a) electric circuit; B) electrohydraulic circuit.
(1) Manifold*; (2) Hydraulic filter; (3) Check valve; (4) Pressure regulating valve (5) Proportional flow control valve; (6) Directional valve; (7) Pressure gauge; (8) Hydraulic motor. *Manifold is a set of valves mounted in a single block.
Fig 2.
Schematics of the peanut digger-inverter.
Knives cut the roots of plants to a depth of up to 15 cm. The plants are directed to the digger-shaker vibrating conveyor belt, then pass through inverting rollers that reverse the plants (leaving roots up and leaves down).
Table 1.
Vibratory conveyor belt data used to dimension the hydraulic motor.
Fig 3.
Schematics of the operation of the electrohydraulic system used in the test (a), and electrohydraulic circuit for simulating different rotations (b).
(1 and 2): 4/3 way directional valve 5, 6, 7, 8; (3 and 4): 4/2 way directional valve; (9): Hydraulic motor and (10): Flow Regulating Valve.
Table 2.
Results obtained with the hydraulic system bench test in simulation software.
Fig 4.
Estimated visible losses versus the rotation of the vibrating conveyor belt for the velocities 3.5 and 5 km h-1.
The equation of adjustment of each interaction is shown below Fig 4, when this was significative by the F test (p<0.05). The speed 4.2 km h-1 did not obtain significant adjustment (ns).
Fig 5.
Windrow height versus rotation of the vibrating conveyor belt for the velocities 3.5 e 5.0 km-1.
The equation of adjustment of each interaction is shown below Fig 5, when this was significative by the F test (**p<0.05). The speed 4.2 km h-1 did not obtain significant adjustment (ns).
Fig 6.
Windrow width versus conveyor belt rotation after the passage of the mechanized set at the velocities.
The equation of adjustment of each interaction is shown below Fig 6, when this was significative by the F test (**p<0.05). The speed 4.2 km h-1 did not obtain significant adjustment (ns).