See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/258630905

DEVELOPMENT OF A PORTABLE BONE CRUSHING AND GRINDING MACHINE FOR

SMALL AND MEDIUM SCALE INDUSTRY

Article · January 2008

CITATION READS
1 1,048

1 author:

Adekunle Adebayo
University of Ilorin
36 PUBLICATIONS   133 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Energy Recovery View project

Pelletizing Fish Meal Machine View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Adekunle Adebayo on 25 July 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 A.S. Adekunle USEP: Joumal of Research information in Civil Engineering, Vo!.5, No.1, 2008

DEVELOPMENT OF A PORTABLE BONE CRUSHING

AND GRINDING MACHINE FOR SMALL AND MEDIUM
SCALE INDUSTRY
A.S, Adckunle
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and
Technology, University ofllorin, P.M.B.ISIS, llorin, Kwara State, igeria.
E-mail: adekunlebayo@yahoo.com

Abstract
A portable bone crushing/grinding machine for both small and medium scale
industrial use was designed, constructed and tested. In the designing and material
selection, consideration was given to the noise/vibration produced by the machine
members. Better crushing rate was achieved by employing flat- shaped hammers as
against the commonly used round shaped hammers. The machine consist of two
sections namely the crushing and grinding section; the crushing section comprises
of crushing hammers(tlat-shaped), shaft, pulleys, bearings, rotating plates and rods
while the grinding section is comprised of hopper, discs, conveyor shaft, pulley
and nut screw, Other parts ofthe machine are the 3hp electric motor, the discharge
outlets, the conveying/diverging plate and vee-belt. The results of operation
performance revealed that 96,3 percent of the bone fed into the machine was
crushed and 98 percent grounded in a single operation. The use of a 3hp single
phase electric motor produced a better output than a Shp electric motor. There was
also a reduced level of noise and vibration, high efficiency (96.3%) and simplicity
of operation.

Keywords:
Bone, Crushing, Grinding, Hammers, Machine, Noise, Operation

1. Introduction
Animal bones are a living tissue, and in the past had been considered to be wastes
which had to find its final de tination in the bins. However, enormous uses of
bones have been discovered, The matured bones, according to Segun (1995) can
reshape themselves to some degree in response to the forces placed upon them and
this ability does not diminish with age. Animal bone in its raw form is useless and
has to pass through series of processing routes such as slight burning for at least 6
hours as reported by I3rennam and Butter (197S), in order to reduce the percentage
of water content present in it and leave it in a pure calcium state before it can be
 A.S. Adekunlc USEP: Journal of Research information in Civil Engineering. Vo1.5, 0.1,2008

used for manufacturing purposes. Well crushed and ground bones which require "'-
the service of an efficient bone crushing machine can be used not only as a major
constituent of poultry feeds, but also in the production of adhesive glue, ceramics,
powdery tooth paste, dish and breakable house-hold plates as indicated by
Brennarn (1975).

According to John et at (200 I), the crushing machine commonly used by large
industries are very noisy and made of round crushing hammers which are
susceptible to breakage because of the rigidity of the hammers. Such machines
require much space for installation and are too expensive for the small and _
medium scale entrepreneur to purchase. To overcome these problems, attempt had
been made by Oladehinde (1994) and Akinola etal (1998) to develop small size
crushers but the problem associated with their crusher were found to be as follows:
(i) collision of the hammers, (ii)large clearance between the hammers and the
sieve, (iii) round geometry hammers, (iv) absence of stopper in the crusher, (v)
- unequal distribution of the plate rod and (vi) low crushing efficiency (below 47
%). Thus the present work does not lay claim on the invention of crushing
machine, rather, it is aimed at improving on the previous design and making it
more accessible to both small and medium scale entrepreneur.

, Considering the abundance and industrial potential of bone products, an improved

crushing/grinding machine needs to be developed for small and medium scale
system. This will reduce bone wastage at rural and urban levels; also it will create
job opportunities and thus acting as a source of income. Therefore, the objective of
the present work was to design, construct and evaluate a simple, compact, highly
efficient and easily operated bone crushing/grinding machine using a 3hp electric
motor.

2. Materials and Method

2.1 Machine Description
The machine which was designed to be compact is made up of a crushing section,
grinding section, hopper, discharge outlets, an electric motor and a seating support
(Fig I ).The crushing section consists ofhammers (flat-shaped), rods carrying the
hammers, pulleys, rotating plate, crushing shaft, sieve and housing cover. This
housing cover is fabricated from fiberglass and particleboard, which are noise-
absorbent materials thus reducing the noise level of the machine to a bearable
level. The grinding section is comprised of hopper, discs, conveyor shaft, and nut
screw. Other parts of the machine are the converging/diverging plate and vee-belts.
To achieve a better crushing rate flat-shaped hammers that can swing sideways

2
J
 A.S. Adekunle USEP: Journal or Research information in Civil Engineering. VoI.S. No.1. 2008

while moving were employed as against the rigid welded round shaped hammers ,.
normally used. The hammers which are in rectangular form and 32 mrn apart from
each other are made from a 110 mm x 50 mm x 5 mm mild steel bar and each
having a hole of 8mm radius drilled on them for proper positioning on the rods
(Fig I). Each rod carrying the hammers is also made of mild steel of diameter 16
mm and 417 mm in length, while the rotating plate that carries the rods is made 0 f
ungalvanised metal sheet of about 3 rnm in thickness.

The sieve which allows the crushed bone to pass into the grinder is made from a
540 mm x 460 mrn x 3 mm ungalvanised mild steel sheet and has mesh sizes of4
mm diameter arranged in line on it and each mesh sizes is 1.5 rnrn apart and the
clearance between the sieve and the hammers is 2.5 mm. The crushing shaft is
made of mild steel of 515 mm in length and 35 mm diameter; and in order to
reduce the noise and vibration produced by the hammers when in operation, the
housing cover of this section is made of un galvan iscd mild steel sheet lined with
fiberglass and particle board. The grinding section is made up of grinding discs,
flange, pulleys, conveyor shaft, nut screw, hopper and discharge outlet. The two
grinding discs of diameter 40 mm each were made of cast iron due to its
toughness, corrosive and wear resistance; while the flange is made fi·om a mild
steel material. The conveyor screw shaft is also made of mild steel with actual
dimension been 560 mm in length and 25 mm diameter; however, the throat
portion was increased to a diameter of 35 mm by rolling it with 5 mm
ungalvanised plate in order to ensure that the conveyor screw drive all particle
(crushed bone) in the section into the grinding discs for proper grinding. Also
pulleys made of mild steel with diameters 250 111m and 180 mm were employed in
the crushing and grinding section respectively with each having a groove angle of
34° Other parts like the hopper, discharge outlet and body cover were all made of
3 mm thick ungalvanised metal sheet.

The entire machine unit is supported by a stand of 10 I0 mm x 640 mm x 260 mm

dimension and is made from a 50 rnrn x50 mm angle iron (Fig 1). The support
stand also houses the 3hp electric motor that powered the machine; the power from
the electric motor is then transmitted via a vee belt to the shaft of the crushing and
grinding section.

..,
.J
•
AS. Adekunle USEP: Journal of Research information in Civil Engineering, VoL5, No.1, 2008

Al

-- - -;F:=::::t:o-~·_o:Q=<-==",,== ~"""""'-r
~,"~~ ~35-...,....
if -. j
" .
c=[JH" Ht-;;-4, tc-:.+· HI--!+-c-lf+-+

61.

Fig. 1. Orthographic views of a flat hammer bone crushing/grinding machine.

All dimensions are in mm. Al - crushing section; L Hammers; 2. Rods; 3.

Rotating plate; 4. Crushing shaft; 5. Grinding shaft; 6. Sieve; 7. Crushing outlet; 8.,
Grinding outlet; 9. 3hp motor .

2.2 Design Computations

In order to develop the various reiations necessary for the present design, these
assumptions are made:
(i) The ratio of the tension in the slack side of the belt to the tension in the
tight side 1:3
- AS. Adekunle USEP: Journal of Research information in Civil Engineering, VoI.5, No. 1,2008

"(ii) . The loadingof theshafts are considered to be gradual.

(iii) The noise emanating from the machine is considered to be from a point
source
(iv) The force from the izod impact machine equals the force to be provided
by the crushing hammers.

The rotational motion of the hammers is considered to have both centripetal and
centrifugal force and an average force F , required to crush some femur (hardest
part of animal bone) were obtained using Izod impact testing machine.
The angular speed of the hamm-er is calculated using the equations analysed by
Nash (1977) which is as follows:
The impact force required for crushing,
-------F-=-mL-o/ =-pVLo/ - (1)---
The volume of crushing hammer
(V) = t(Lb _m-2) (2)
Where, p = density of mild steel material, L = length of crushing hammers, 0)=
angular velocity of the hammers, V = volume of crushing hammer, r = radius of
drilled hole on the-hammers, b= breath of each hammer, t= thickness of the
hammer.

With F =66.3N, P = 7850kg/m3, L =0. 11m, Jr=3.142, r=0.008m b =0.05m

and t=0.005m, the angular speed of the hammer 0), is 53.8 rad/s.

Since the hammers rotate at an angular speed of the shaft, this implies that the
angular speed of the hammer equals the angular speed of the attached pulley.
Thus, according to Berezovsky and Chernilevsky (1998) the rev/min of the pulley
attached to the crushing shaft N[ and the electric motor torque (T ) is given by
equation 3 and 4 respectively as:
600)
revlmin (3)
2Jr
and electric motor torque
P
T=~ (4)
0) 27iN2
where N2 = Rev/min of motor shaft

-----------~
 x tt~i

A.S. Adekunle USEP; Journal of Research information in Civil Engineering, Vo1.5, No.1, 2008

~ith (j)= 53.8 rad/s, 1C= 3.142, N2= 1450 rev/min

calculated as 514 rev/min and T as 14.8Nm
,
!
J
The diameter of the pulley on the crusher shaft Dl is calculated using equations
'I as given by Allen and Alfred (1998)
.! D =N2D2
1 N1
From the standard table given by Berezovsky and Chernilevsky (1998) fOf$-
minimum permissible pulley diameter for a known torq-;;-eof 14.8Nm, D2 taken as:-
90 mm; with N, as 514 rev/min and N2 as 145'0 rev/min, D, is calculated ~ ":
254 mm; thus from the standard table Dl = 250 mm.

The solid crusher shaft diameter ( d, ) with key way and grinding shaft diameter,
(d2) with no key way, all with little or no axial loading is obtained using t~el
American Society of Mechanical Engineering (AS ME) code equation given by
Khurmi and Gupta (2004) as

d12 3 16 ~ (KbMb)
=- 2
+ (K(M() 2
(6) .
, :nS
1"
Where S = torsional shear moment, Kb = shock and fatigue factor applied to

bending moment, K( = shock and fatigue factor applied to torsional moment,~Ji

Mb = maximum bending moment, M( = maximum torsional moment.

For gradual loading on a rotating shaft as given by Berezovsky (1998), Kb = 1.5 .\

and K, = 1.0. S = 40 MN/m 2
for commercial steel, this value is reduced by

25% for shaft with key- ways, thus real value of S = 30MN/m2• With .lvIb as '"

23.68Nm, M(
. -
as 40.94Nm and using a safety factor of 1.7 and 1.0 in the crushing .:
~
and grinding section respectively, and by substituting this values in equation 6
gives d, = 35 mm . ~

Similarly, with S= 40MN/m2, Mb= 0.23Nm, M,= 3.23Nm, 7[= 3.142 and or

6
 --f:.:""Ai - -
__. A.S. Adekunle USEP; Journal of Research information in Civil Engineering, vei.s, No.1, 2008

factor of safety as LO d2 is calculated as 16 mm .

=:. ~ -: .=-The minimum and maximum center distance ( Cmin, C max ) between two pulleys
on the machine are determined according to equation 7and 8 given by Gary
(1984), Khurmi and Gupta (2004) as follows: _
Cmin = O.SS(D, + D2)+ h (7)
and,
Cmax = 2(Dl + D2) (8)
while, the length of belt required is obtained from equation 9 as given by Tyler and
---=- -Hicks (1972) .. - - -- - ----

. L = 2C + 7l" [D, + D2 J+ (D, + D2 Y (9)

2 4C
-------- - -- -
where h = D, = pulley diameter on crusher shaft. With Dl = 250
belt thickness,

mm, D2 = 90 mm, h = 8 mm, Cmin is calculated as 195 mm and Cmax as 680

mm. Thus, with center distance ( C ) fixed as 210 mm and substituting in equation
9, L is evaluated as 1030 mm .
....---.---
The Vee belt drive connection adopted is as a result of its simplicity, high tension
ratio utilization and higher loading permissible variation before slip occurs;

The angle oflap ( f:)) ofthe belt on the pulley is estimated from equation 10 given
by Khurmi and Gupta (2004) as:

f:) = ~[1800 - 2sin -I (D, - D2 )] rad (10)

180 2C
Substituting the values of D1, D2 and C as given above in equation 9, the
estimated value of f:) is 2.62 rad.

_ According to John and Stephens (1972);-the tension acting on the tight and slack
side ofthe belt is determined using equation 11; while power transmitted by belt is
obtained from equation 12

(11)

, t1.
..
. I
, _I

::::
 A.S. Adekunle USE?: Journal of Research information in Civil Engineering, Yol.5, No.1, 2008_'l

Where, 1; = Tension on tight side, T2 = Tension on slack side, m = mass per unit
length of belt, v = belt ve~o~ity, f1 = coefficient of friction between belt and"
-pulley, -Ij/ ~ groove angle for vee- belt.
Power transmitted by belt drive is
P = (1; -T2)v
and, Velocity of belt
(v) = r2OJ=27rN2r2 (13)
Where, OJ= angular velocity of the motor (rad/s)
With N2 = 1450 rev/min, r2 = 0.045 m, Jr= 3.142; v is obtained as ?84 rnI~
- - -- -- - -:::

Using the standard belt table given by Berezovsky and Chernilevsky (1998), and-
having type A belt selected for this design, m = 0.105 kg/m v = 6.84 rnIs P =-~
2250 W = 0.4 B= 2.62 rad IJ(..=34°. Substituting these values in equation 11-

and 12 respectively and solving simultaneously gives 1; as 342 Nand T2 as

14.2 N.

i For maximum reduction in the noise output of the machine, the ratio of the=

I thickness, t ofthe noise absorbing materials used to the natural frequency A ~Qf"'
the pad must be i:4 as-gi"venby Ant<lily(1992)- - -- -~ - -
t
A
1
4
>.

(14) .

With A = 15 Hz, then t "" 4 mm for each pad.

2.3 Construction Process

The construction works were carried out in the Central Engineering Workshop, ~
Faculty of Engineering and Technology, University ofIIorin. The following parts
were fabricated: shafts, crushing hammers, rods, pulleys, sieve, hopper, body
cover and support frame. The manufacturing procedures employed for the
fabrication ofthe machine include marking, cutting, machining, shaping, turning,
welding and painting. The procedures are to get the correct dimensions and
required shapes of the machine shown in fig. 2. The machine was assembled after
its various components were fabricated and evaluated for crushing performance
and grinding performance. The details of the production cost are as shown in
Table 1.

8
 A.S. Adekunle USEP: Journal of Research information in Civil Engineering, VoI.S, No.1, 2008

Fig 2: A view of the crushing/grinding machine

q
 A.S. Adekunle USE?: Journal of Research infonnation in Civil Engineering, Vol.5, No.1, 2008 .~

Table 1: Details of Production Cost

SIN MA TEJUAUDESCRTPTION UNIT QTY TOTAL -;
PlUCE(=N=) PRICE _ i
(=N=)

r
1
2
3
Mild steel sheet
& 1.2mm thick)

50mmx50mm angle iron bar

plate

25rrunx25mm angle iron bar

(3mm

1900
900
3
1
5,700
900
f.

l
2-1.-

i,

I
\
4 Electrodes (30-60mild steel) 15 160sticks 2,400~
5 3hp electric motor, 1440 rev/min 12,000 12,0001
6 Mild steel rod (700 x ¢25 ) 950 2 1,900 ~t
-f
7 Mild steel bar(!400mrn x 50mm x ~.o.Q- 2,400 -,;l_
___ 5mm)_ -----
---- -- ------ ~
i 8 Pulley 400 4 1,600 ;~
9 Belts 190 2 380 ;~
l
10 Flange ( ¢ 250mm) 250 250
-""
_3
11 Grinding plate (cast iron) --500 2 500
12 Galvanized pipc(600mrn x 300 3 900
¢ 16mITl) ••

13 Belts and nuts 10 24 240

14 Paint 600 2 1,200
15 Fibre glass and particle board 1,500 4 6,000
16 Miscellaneous 3,000 3,000
TOTAL 50,070

2.4 Performance Evaluation

Crushing performance: This was done to determine the amount inpercent of bone •
crushed. Two sets of different mass of bones of 10, 15,20,25, and 30kg were
weighed into various bags; the first set of weighed bones were fed into the i
machine in succession at a uniform feeding rate. By operating the machine with a
3hp single phase electric motor of 1440 rev/min, the bones were made to pass
through the crushing stage only by closing the gate leading to the grinding section

10

---------------
 A.S. Adekunle USEP: Journal of Research information in Civil Engineering, Vol.S, No.1, 2008

and the crushed bones collected at the upper outlet. The time taken for the
- crushing operation to be completed for each weighed bone were noted using an
electronic stop watch and the mass of uncrushed bone in the crushing section at
every stage were also recorded.

Grinding performance: The second set of weighed bones were also fed into the
machine in succession at a uniform feeding rate but they were made to pass
through the grinding section by opening the gate that connect the crushing section
to the grinding section, The total time taking for the crushing and grinding
operation to be completed for each weighed bone were recorded and visual
observation of the texture of the powdered bone collected at the lower outlet was
noted, also the mass of the ungrounded bone in the grinding section is also
determined,
-----
___ However-in other to ascertain the t)ehavior o'fthe ;;a-;-hine when a higher power of
electric motor is used, the whole experiment described above was repeated using a
5hp single phase electric motor of 1580 rev/min to operate the machine.
Machine efficiency estimation can be effected by using the relation for amount of:
(i) bone crushed (ii) bone grounded .

(a) Crushing Efficiency:

hi E,rr;' () TotalMassofbonefed-TotalMassofuncnlshedbone XID"'"

Crus lng ":IJlclency 7Jc' = v/o
Total Mass of bone fed

Thus for the Crushing machine, using 3hp electric motor

EjjicienCY(Tlc) 1001~~·75.,;( 100 =96.3%

And for 5hp electric motor,

. 100-6.62
Efficiency (TIc) = X 100=93.4%
100

(b) Grinding Efficiency:

Grtn. diIng Eflici () Total Mass of bone fed - Tolal Mass of ungrounded bone vI 000/
"Jlclency T/a = A /0
Total Mass of bone fed

With the 3hp electric motor, 170 96.3-1.9 XIOO%=98%

96.3

11
 A.S. Adekunle USEP: Journal of Research information in Civil Engineering, Vol.5, No.1, 2008

While for Shp electric motor, n: 93.4 -3.1 X 100%=96.7%

93.4
Similarly, the crushing and grinding rate were obtained using the expression:

(c) Crushing Rate:

hi Total mass of bone crushed ••I
Crus mg rate '7min
Total crushing time

with the 3hp electric motor, Crushingrate=~ =4.71 kg/

!:
I
. --. - - -
21.22
100 - _.
and, for 5hp electric motor, Crushine rate = __

(d)
-

Grinding Rate:
b 33.85
= 2.95 %
1
7n"n
--
nun

. d' Total mass of bone grund I~I

- G I'm mg rate Ym;n-- -- --------.-
. Total grinding time
Thus, for 3hp electric motor, Grinding rate = 96.3 = 18.88 kg/.
. 5.10~-
Whi Ie for 5hp electric motor, Grinding rate = 93.4 = 11.87 kg/
7.87 7m,"

3. 'Resultsand Discussion'
The results obtained during testing are as shown in Tables 2 and 3. The analysis of
the results shows that at every stage of crushing; the crushing rate for 3hp electric
motor was faster than 5hp electric motor and this was so because the machine is
not designed for 5hp electric motor, also a steady and effective operation at a low
speed may have caused this. However, as the mass of the bone to be crushed
increases, the crushing time increases for both electric motors and this occasioned
the similarity in the crushing pattern as shown in Fig 3.

In the combined operation of crushing and grinding the process is similar for the
two electric motors used (Fig 4) but the time taken by 3hp motor to complete its
j
operation is almost three-quarters of the time spent using 5hp electric motor. By -,
employing sieve analysis method, the product of ground bones obtained using the !
specified motor designed for was-finer in texture when compared with whaf';vas-1
obtained in 5hp motor. This was so because the speed of the latter was too high for 1
the efficient running of the machine, and at high speed; the resident time for
crushing and grinding operation is reduced, hence, these operations may neither be
completed nor efficient.
 AS. Adckunle USE?: Journal of Research information in Civil Engineering, Vo1.5. No.1, 2008

Table 2. Variation of crushing time, crushing and grinding time with different
weights of animal bone using 3hp electric motor
Mass of Crushing Crushing and Mass of un crushed bone
bone (kg) time (min) grinding time (min) (kg)
10.00 2.00 3.00 O. 75
15.00 3.37 4.48 0.68

20.00 3.68 4.67 O. 73

25.00 5.17 6.30 0.77

30.00 7.00 7.87 O. 82

Table 3. Variation of crushing time, crushing and grinding time with different
weights' of animal bone using 5hp electric motor.
Mass of Crushing Crushing and Mass of un crushed bone
bone (kg) time (min) grinding time (min) (kg)
10.00 3.43 3.75 l. 12
~~15.00 - -4.40 4.82-- 1. 26
20.00 5.22 5.82 1. 37
F
~ 25.00 8.80 9.28 l. 39

~ 30.00 12.00 12.58 I. 48

13
 ~~ usa: Journal of Research information in Civil Engineering, Vo1.5, No.1, 2008

~----------~----~----~----~----~--~
10 15 25 35
Nass of Sone (kg)

-~
n;:.:; .:: C esaing Rates of Animal Bones Using 3hp and 5hp electric motors. ~

/ 1~(Jh!)rn:xor)!
i-<!ih;lrr¢lOfI!

t
--'
oJ
f'

'0 is 35
Iot,u, of Bor.4 tKoI

Figure t: Crushing and Grinding Rates of Animal Bones Using 3hp and
~~iD electric motors,
 A.S. Adekunle USEP: Journal of Research information in Civil Engineering, Yol.5, No.1, 2

Moreo.ver, the tim~ differen~e ~etween the crushing oper~tion and the comb.i~
operation of crushing and grinding was found to be 43 see In the 3hp and 30 seC~
the 5hp .as shown in fig 5 and 6 respectively and this confirms that the speed ofth.
latter was too high for the efficient running of the machine. In addition, the feedin'
rate was found to be consistent for the larger part of the testing period and the
noise level for 3hp motor was found to be 69dB which is within the range ofWhi
human ear can cope with i.e 70dB as specified by ANSI (1983), while for 5hp
motor the noise/vibration level is 100dB which is higher than the previous electric
motor.
..

- - \._--
t

oL- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ __ ~
o 10 15 20 25 30 35
Mau 0: Bone (~I

Figure 5: Grinding Rate of Animal Bones Using a 3hp electric motor !

..{
In the 3hp electric motors, the mass of uncrushed bone decreases as the mass of"1
the bone to be crushed increases (Table 2) while in the 5hp electric motor the mass
of un crushed bone increases as the mass ofthe bone to be crushed increases (Table
3). On the whole the crushing efficiency and the crushing rate using 3hp and 5hp
electric motor is found to be 96.3 percent (%) and 93.4 Percent (%) ; while the
crushing rate is 4.71 kYmin and 2.95 k%in respectively. Similarly the grinding-,
efficiency and the grinding rate using the 3hp and 5hp electric motor are found to
be 98 percent (%) and 96.7 percent (%) while the grinding rate is 18.88 k%in and
kg/ .
11.87 I'min respectively.

15
 A.S. Adekunle USEP: Journal of Research information in Civil Engineering, Vol.S, No.1, 2008

"
12

10

"I.
" .
E

oL- ~ __ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
o 10 20 25 3S

Mus 01 9c", I~}

Figure6: Grinding Rate of Animal Bones Using a 5hp electric motor

4. Conclusion
A portable bone crushing and grinding machine that can be used by small and
medium scale industry was developed from the available locai materials at a cost
of fifty thousand and seventy naira only C=N=50,070). The measured
noise/vibration level was 69dB which is within the decibel limit of human comfort
for hearing. The final product of ground bone compares favorably in terms of
quality with that of the product used by the large industry and is therefore, readily
acceptable. The machine performed better when operated with a 3hp motor than a
5hp motor. The crushing rate and grinding rate ofthe machine was 4.71kglmin and
18.88kglmin respectively with a 3hp motor as against 2.95kglmin and 11.87kglmin
for a 5hp motor. On the whole, the crushing and the grinding efficiency of the
machine were 96.3 percent ·C%) a~d 28 percent (%) for 3hp motor. A bone
crushing/grinding machine plant based on this technology can provide employment
for two - three persons and at the same time provide good quality powdered bone
at reduced cost for poultry feeds processing industry.
 -A.S. Adekunle USEP: Journal of Research information in Civil Engineering, Vol.S, No.1, 2008

-=0..5. Acknowledgement
:-.~ - -

The author appreciates the assistance rendered by Osinjolu, A.A, Akanrnu, A and
~~ Solihu, A.A during the process of construction and testing of the machine.

6. References
Allen, S.H. and Alfred R.H. (1998), Machine Design, Schaum's Outlines Series.
McGraw-Hili Co. lnc, USA
-~ American National Standards Institute (1983), Specification for Sound Level
Meters, sr, 4, New York, NY 10018, pp5-9
Antony, B. (1992), Handbook of Noise and Vibration Control, 6th edn. Elsevier
>- __ Science Publishers Ltd, UK -- ---- -
Berezovsky, Y.U., Chernilevsky.D. and Petrov, M. (1998), Machine Design 1"
edn. Mir Publishers Moscow
Brennam, J.G. and Butter, J.R. (1975), Food Engineering Operation, 2nd edn.
Applied Science Publishers, London
1__ ~Gary, K., Lster, T. and Paul, C. (1984), Design of Agricultural Machinery. John
Willey and Sons Inc, London
John, E.K. and Foreman, P.K. (2001), Sound analysis and noise control. John
Wiley and Sons, London .
John, H. and Stephens, R.C~ (1972), Mechanics of Machines, 2nd edn. Arnold
Publishers, London
Khurmi, R.S. and Gupta, J.K. (2004), Theory of Machines. Eurasia Publishing
Ltd, India
Nash, W.A. (1977), Theory and Problems of Strength of Materials, Schaum's
Outlines Series. McGraw-Hili Book Co, New York
Segun, O. (1995), Anatomy and Physiology of Tropical Livestock, 4th edn.
Spectrum Publishing Co. Ltd, Ibadan ------
Tyler, G. and Hicks, P .E. (1972), Standard Handbook of Engineering Calculations
McGraw-Hill Inc, London

17

View publication stats