DETERMINATION OF SOME PHYSICAL AND MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF POTATO TUBERS RELATED TO DESIGN OF SORTING, CLEANING AND GRADING MACHINE | ||||
| Misr Journal of Agricultural Engineering | ||||
| Article 15, Volume 34, Issue 3, July 2017, Page 1375-1388 PDF (791.04 K) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/mjae.2017.97478 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Author | ||||
| Yossry B. Abd Elhay | ||||
| Assist. Prof., Agric. Eng. Dept., Fac. of Agric., Cairo Univ., Giza, Egypt. | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Due to the lack of information about the physical and mechanical properties of potato in Egypt which are very important to understand the behavior of the product during the post harvesting operations such as harvesting, transporting, sorting, grading, packaging and storage processes and also, it is necessary in processing operations such as cooling, drying and all heat and mass transfer processes .The main objective of this work to study the physical and mechanical properties of potato to form an important database for three of the most popular cultivars (Astrix, Diamont and Santana) in Egypt . These properties include: dimensions, mass , volume, , true density, sphericity, geometric diameter, arithmetic diameter, friction angle and rolling angles with different surfaces such as rubber, galvanized steel sheet, Iron sheet and aluminum in order to determine the best post-harvest options. Mean values of length, width, thickness, mass, volume, true density, sphericity, geometric diameter, and arithmetic diameter were74.99 mm, 47.79 mm, 38.65 mm, 96.35 g, 72525.128 mm3, 1.176 g/cm3, 69 %, 51.74mm and 53.81mm , respectively for potato tubers “variety of Astrix”. Meanwhile were 64.79 mm, 45.12 mm, 39.81 mm, 78.41 g, 60935.148 mm3, 1.149 g/cm3, 75.35 %, 48.22 mm and 49.91 mm, respectively for potato tubers “variety of Diamont”. And for variety of Santana were 98.78 mm, 58.19 mm, 44.14 mm, 167.21 g, 132845.954 mm3, 1.193 g/cm3, 64.10 %, 63.31 mm and 67.04 mm, respectively. The maximum friction angle of 28.6, 22.2 and 30.4 degree and rolling angle of 24.8, 20.2 and 27.4 degrees were obtained with rubber surface. While, the minimum friction angle of 16.3, 14.0 and 18.7 degree and rolling angle of 14.0, 13.3 and 15.5 degree were obtained with aluminum surface for Astrix, Diamont and Santana potato varieties, respectively. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| physical properties; mechanical properties; potato tubers- friction angle- rolling angle; sphericity | ||||
| References | ||||
|
Ahangarnezhad, N. (2009). Design and Fabrication of Bagging Mechanism for Potato Picking Machine.M.sc Thesis University of Tehran, Iran.
Anonymous, A. (2010). Annual Report. Tuber Crops Research Centre, BARI, Joydebpur, Gazipur.202p.
ASAE Standards (1998). S368.2. Compression Test of Food Materials of Convex Shape (44th ed.). American Society for Agricultural Engineering, St. Joseph, Michigan.
Bentini M.; Caprara C. and Martelli R. (2006). Harvesting Damage to Potato Tubers by Analysis of Impacts Recorded with an Instrumented Sphere. Biosystems Engineering, Postharvest Technology, 94 (1), 75-85.
Buyanov, A. I. and B. A. Voronyuk (1985).Physical and mechanical properties of plant, Fertilizers and soils.Amerind Pub. Co., PVT., LTD., New Delhi, India.753 P.
El-Raie; A.E.E.; N. A. Hendawy and A.Z. Taib, (1996); Study of physical and engineering properties for some agricultural products.Misr. J. Ag. Eng., 13 (1) : 211-226.
Elghobashy, H.; I. Yehia and Y. A. Shaaban (2014). Development 0f the potato tuber cutting prototype. Misr J. Ag. Eng., 31(4): 1395 – 1412.
Esref, I. and Halil, U. (2007). Moisture dependent Physical Properties of White Speckled Red Kidney Bean Grains. Journal of Food Engineering, 82: 209-216.
FAO Statistical Yearbook (2013). Area harvested and production of starchy roots and tubers.
Gorji A.; Rajabipour A. and Mobli H. (2010). Post Harvest Physical and Nutritional Properties of Two Apple Varieties .Journal of Agricultural Science. 2( 3): 1-8.
Meisami-asl E.; Rafiee S., Keyhani A. and Tabatabaeefar A.(2009). Some physical properties of apple cv. ‘Golab’.The CIGR E journal .Vol. XI.
Razavi S.M.A.; Emadzadeh B.; Rafe A. and Mohammad Amini A. (2007) . The physical properties of pistachio nut and its kernel as a function of moisture content and variety: Part I. Geometrical properties. Journal of Food Engineering. 81: 209-217.
Safa M. and Khazaei J. (2003). Determining and modeling some physical properties of pomegranate fruits of Saveh area related to peeling and packaging. In: International Congress on Information Technology in Agriculture, Food and Environment, Izmir, Turkey, 7-10 October. pp. 331-337.
Sahin S. and GülümSumnu S. (2006). Physical properties of foods. Springer publisher
Sessiz A.; Esgici R. and Kizil S. (2007).Moisture-dependent physical properties of caper (Capparis ssp.) fruit. Journal of Food Engineering.79: 1426- 1431.
Tabatabaeefar A. (2002). Size and shape of potato tubers. International Agrophysics. 16: 301-305.
Waziri, A. N. and J. P. Mittal, (1983). Design related physical properties of selected agricultural products. Agric. Mech. in Asia. Africa. Latin America. Vol. 14 (1):59 – 62.
Wilhelm L.; Dwayne R.; Suter A.; Gerald H. (2004). Physical properties of food materials. St. Joseph, Michigan: ASAE. 23-52. | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 318 PDF Download: 578 |
||||
