ASSOSA UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
FINAL PROJECT IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT FOR THE
AWARD OF THE DEGREE BACHELOR SCIENCE IN
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
TITLE: DESIGN AND SIMULATION OF MANUALLY
OPERATED ONION PLANTING MACHINE
A THESIS SUBMITTED TO MECHANICAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE DEGREE OF
BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

ADVISOR: Mr.: SIRAJ M.

SUBMITTED BY: ID NO
1, OLIKSA ALEMAYEHU RU/2639/09
2, LEMI BIRA RU/2472/09
3, WAKTOLE DAMTE RU/2621/09
4, TURA FURGASA RU/2367/09

JULY 2021

ASSOSA ETHIOPIA

Page | i
 DECLARATION
We the undersigned, declare that the thesis comprises our own work. In
compliance with internationally accepted practices, we have acknowledged and
refereed all materials used in this work. We understand that non-adherence to the
principles of academic honesty and integrity, fabrication of any idea/data/fact/source
will constitute sufficient ground for disciplinary action by the University and can also
evoke penal action from the sources which have not been properly cited or
acknowledged.
Name of the student’s sign
1 Oliksa Alemayehu
Signature_____________
2, Lemi Bira
Signature______________
3, Waktole Damte
Signature______________
4, Tura Furgasa Signature_____________

This thesis has been submitted for examination with approval from advisors.

Advisor: Mr. Siraj M.

Signature: _________________
Date of submission: July 11, 2021

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all, we would like to express our thanks to the Almighty God for giving us the
strength and patience to perform a research project submitted in partial fulfillment of the

Page | ii
requirements for the bachelors of Science in Mechanical Engineering in interdisciplinary
studies.
Besides, we would like to thanks the Department of Mechanical Engineering staff;
especially, Mr. Siraj M. for their deep, reasonable, careful, objective, interesting,
attractive advice and mentor for their great idea of the thesis project we submitted as per
required from us for the partial fulfillment of the requirements for the bachelors of
Science in mechanical engineering. Finally, our heart full thanks go to our family for their
continued advice, mentor, and financial support.

ABSTRACT
This paper deals with the Design and Simulation of Manually Operated Onion Planting
Machine is initiated to be done by us to provide the poor farmers of Ethiopia with an
affordable, time saving, cost-minimizing, efficient, and environmentally friendly machine.
The project will be also reducing the labor force required in planting onion with the
traditional method (with hand), increase the yield of onion, quality of onion, save time

Page | iii
lost, and help to increase the income of farmers by the mechanization of the way of
farming.
This study was related to the development of an onion bulb planter. To fully achieve
our objective we will use the necessary mechanism, numerical mathematical analysis best
suited for this project to design each part of the machine. Finally, the part and assembly
drawings will be done by using AutoCAD software and the simulation with ANSYS
software.
So to overcome those problems we develop a machine that was used for onion
planting. A manually operated planter is designed and implemented to improve planting
efficiency and decrease manual planting methods.
Keywords: Onion planter, Design, Simulation, Analysis, Chain, Sprockets

LIST CONTENT
Contents
DECLARATION..............................................................................................................i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.............................................................................................ii

ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................iii

LIST CONTENT.............................................................................................................iv

SYMBOL AND NOMENCLATURE...........................................................................vii

Page | iv
ABBREVIATION.........................................................................................................viii

CHAPTER ONE...............................................................................................................1

INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................1

1.1 Background of the study.........................................................................................1

1.2. Problem statement.................................................................................................3

1.3. Objective of the study............................................................................................4

1.3.1 General Objective.............................................................................................4

1.3.2 Specific objective.............................................................................................4

1.4. Scope and limitation of the study..........................................................................4

1.5. Significance of the study.......................................................................................4

1.6. Methodologies.......................................................................................................5

CHAPTER TWO..............................................................................................................6

LITERATURE REVIEW.................................................................................................6

2.1. Working Principle................................................................................................11

CHAPTER THREE........................................................................................................11

DESIGN ANALYSIS.....................................................................................................11

3.1. Design specification.............................................................................................11

3.2. Material selection.................................................................................................11

3.3. Design of ground wheel.......................................................................................13

3.4. Design of power transfer chain and sprocket selection.......................................20

3.5. Design of cup.......................................................................................................25

3.6. Design of conveying chain and sprocket.............................................................27

3.7. Design of bucket..................................................................................................30

3.8. Design of frame...................................................................................................31

3.9. Design of shaft.....................................................................................................35

Page | v
 3.10. Selection of Bearing..........................................................................................38

3.11. Selection of Openers ploughs............................................................................40

3.12. Covering mechanism.........................................................................................42

CHAPTER FOUR..........................................................................................................43

RESULT AND DISCUSSION.......................................................................................43

4.1. Results..................................................................................................................43

4.3. Discussion............................................................................................................45

4.4. Simulation of frame with ANSYS.......................................................................45

CHAPTER FIVE............................................................................................................48

COST BREAKDOWNS.................................................................................................48

CHAPTER SIX..............................................................................................................49

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION.............................................................49

6.1. Conclusions..........................................................................................................49

6.2. Recommendations................................................................................................50

6.3. Future work..........................................................................................................51

REFERENCE.................................................................................................................52

APPENDIX....................................................................................................................54

Appendix A1: Part Drawings And Assembly.............................................................54

Page | vi
LIST FIGUR

Figure 2.1 Hand powered mechanical trans planter.........................................................6

Figure 2.2 Onion Planting Machines Tractor Operated...................................................8
Figure 2.3 Assembly.......................................................................................................11
Figure 3.1 FBD of the force analysis.............................................................................14
Figure 3.2 FBD of the handle and ground wheel...........................................................14
Figure 3.3 Power Transmission Chain and Sprocket.....................................................22
Figure 3.4 Conveying Sprocket......................................................................................27
Figure 3.5 Bucket...........................................................................................................30
Figure 3.6 Free Body Diagram of Frame.......................................................................32
Figure 3.7 Section 1-1...................................................................................................33
Figure 3.8 Section 2-2...................................................................................................33
Figure 3.9 Shear Force and Bending Diagram of Frame................................................34
Figure 3.10 Force Distribution on the Shaft..................................................................35
Figure 3.11 Section 1-1..................................................................................................36
Figure 3.12 Section 2-2..................................................................................................36
Figure 3.13 Shear Force and Bending Moment Diagram...............................................37
Figure 3.14 Radial ball bearing......................................................................................40
Figure 3.15 Plough type.................................................................................................41
Figure 4.1 Total deformation of frame...........................................................................46
Figure 4.3 Mesh..............................................................................................................46
Figure 4.4 Maximum shear stress...................................................................................47
Figure 4.5 Shear elastic stress........................................................................................47

Page | vii
 LIST TABL

Table 1.1 Outline..............................................................................................................5

Table 3.1 Bill of Materials.............................................................................................13
Table 3.2Result of frictional force at different height....................................................19
Table 3.3 Volume of cup for different shape of onion...................................................26
Table 4.1 Summery of Findings.....................................................................................43
Table 5.1 Cost description..............................................................................................48
Table A1 – basic static and dynamic capacities of various types of radial ball bearings
.............................................................................................................................................65
Table A2 – principal dimensions for radial ball bearings..............................................66
Table A3 – values of X and Y for dynamically loaded bearings...................................67
Table A4 – Values of service factor for bearings...........................................................67
Tables A5 – Number of teeth on the sprocket................................................................68
Table A6- characteristics of roller chains according to IS: 2403 – 1991.8....................68

Page | viii
 SYMBOL AND NOMENCLATURE
d 1 …………………………………………………. ,…... Pitch circle of smaller
diameter

d 2 ………………………………………………….. …… Pitch circle of larger

diameter

F m ………………………………………………........................................Man force

F t ……………………………………………………..……………... Tangential force

k 1 …………………………….…………. ……….………….. …... Chain link

L ………………………………..…………… …………………… …… Length of
chain

Mb ……………………………….……………………... ………...……...Mass of
bucket

M c…………………………………….….………………….…….……..……. Mass of
cup

M t ………………………………………..…………..…....................……….....Mass
total

N1 ………………………………………………...…………….….. Large sprocket

speed

N g ……………………………………………………...……………..…….Ground
wheel

P ………………………………………………………………………………. …..
Pitch

Page | ix
 Q ……………………………………………………………... ……….….…..
Capacity

r …………………………………………………………… ………...radius of the

wheel

P ……………………………………………..………….. …………………………
Pitch

W …………………………………………..……….… …...…… …. .Load on the

chain

z 1 ………………………………………….....……………….Teethe of smaller
sprocket

Z2 ……………………………………………… …..……………Teethe of large

sprocket

V …………………………………………………………….…….….…….….
volume

ρ ……………….......................................................................The bulk destiny of

onion

ABBREVIATION
ANSYS…………………………...…………………….…………..………Analysis
system
CAD……………………………………………………….………computer-aided
drawing
RPM……………………………………………………………….....Revolution per
minute

Page | x
Page | xi
Page | xii
 CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the study
The onion is a major vegetable used in many different ways in daily diet. The demand
for onions is worldwide. Its use is not limited to any climate or associated with any
nationality; and, they are grown in as many areas of the world as any cultivated crop.
Onions are found in most markets of the world in any season of the year.
[Shimeles,(2003)]; He investigate that Ethiopia has a variety of vegetable crops grown
in different agro-ecological zones produced through commercial as well as small farmers
both as a source of income as well as food. Onion (Allium Cepa) is among the mostly
cultivated vegetable crops on large areas of our country. It is the basic ingredient to all
types of sauces prepared in Ethiopia. it also used for export purpose. Onion growing
farmers undergo challenges in planting of onion seedlings because of shortage of farming
labors during planting onion crops. This has to overcome.
[Fikre M, May/2010]; Onion bulb can be classified into two categories those are yellow
and red onions. The yellow varieties are produced short day onions. The red varieties, on
the other hand, are produced because of their long storage life. There are two methods of
onion seed production, Seed to seed and bulb to seed method; both can be used in seed
production. But the bulb to seed is the most commonly used method in Ethiopia. This
method has a number of merits; options of selection of bulbs of good size, uniform,
typical color, free from diseases and physical damages. Onion (Allium cepa) is best grown
on places having an altitude of 700-1800 meters above sea level in winter (kiremt) and
autumn (meher) seasons but in small scale. Onion production can be affected by several
biotic, a biotic and management factors, but cultivars, soil and climate, seedling age, bulb
weight, spacing (plant spacing), date of planting and seed quality are very important.
Those factors planting population with respect to row spacing and plant spacing have most
decisive impact on onion seed production.
Onion cultivation needs more labor to complete the crop production. In every stage
from seed sowing to until post-harvest, onion crops needs more farm workers, especially
during the mass seed sowing and transplantation. To weed out the labor crises in carrying
out the above two agricultural operations connected with cultivation, mechanization of

Page | 1
onion transplanting is necessary. A transplanted is an agricultural machine used for
transplanting seedlings to the field. This is very important as it reduces the time taken to
transplant seedlings (when compared to manual transplanting).It is largely done by hand
in Ethiopia and most developing countries by large investments in labor, time, and cost.
This project aimed to design the manual operated transplanting machine in such a way
that anyone can operate it easily and more of compatible with the way of plantation and
also being affordable by the farmer’s to improve efficiency of planting and to efficiently
reduce time of planting.

Page | 2
 1.2. Problem Statement

Most of the Ethiopian farmers planting onion on small scale use traditional methods for
broadcasting and seed dropping behind the plow, which affects germination due to the
non-uniform placement of seeds at the proper depth. Those methods of onion planting
depend heavily on manual labor; this part of the cultivation is very laborious because the
holes for each seed are dig by finger, which is painful and dangerous in case some sharp
material like sharp stone, rusted metal pieces, and splinter cut the finger. It may take the
According to plant spacing is important for the quality of onion. When the farmers use
manual whole day for six individuals to do the plantation on a quarter hectare of land.
Labor to plant the onions the planting gap is not consistent. It may be far a parted and
may cost as utilization of land use, or it may decrease the yield. And also weeding or
preparing the row for the seed will be challenging with the manual planting method.
The other thing is that most of the machines are digital, which makes them complex for
our country’s smallholder farmers and needs the skill to operate the machine. Also, they
are too large to be used on the small-scale farm, and they are powered by fuel, which is
not easily available in rural areas this makes them very costly.
Therefore, considering this, our team tries to look into the available ways of
modernizing the plantation of onion considering the currently available technological
facilities together with the cultural planting technique and economic capability of the
farmers and developing light onion planting machine is found the best engineering
solution. The planting machine developed performs three main consecutive processes;
furrow the ground followed by planting the seed and finally close the borrowed land with
a dragged curved metal plate.

Page | 3
1.3. Objective of the study
1.3.1General Objective
To design and simulate of manually operated onion planting machine using cost-
effective and technology systems for effective and efficient operation.
1.3.2 Specific objective
 Design a mechanism for transplanting onion seedlings
 Design of chain and sprocket with cup
 Design of plough(open soil) and cover soil
 Design of frame and bucket
 To make simulation of manually operated onion planting machine.
 Preparing 3D drawing using AutoCAD software
 Cost breaks down
1.4. Scope and limitation of the study
Analysis every parts of Onion planting machine to know the advantages and
disadvantages of the current product. It does not involve motor driving to onion planting.
The design includes material selection, mechanism design, dimensional analysis, strength
analysis, component selection, and model of the machine. This machine is designed for
medium scale Ethiopian farmers. Besides, the project is limited to one raw planting
mechanism; because of the design limitations of the size of carrying bucket are limited
and lack simulation application. Lack of time to refer many books. Lack of access internet
connection to use many references. While planting onion bulb the Soil should be well
prepared to be leveled.
1.5. Significance of the study
Explicitly of the project will solve the problem of Ethiopia facing in the vegetables
cultivating sector, boosting the agro-economy and also maximizing the crop yield for
home and for exporting. And it will be a way to support the poor farmers who fade the
whole country with their bare hand in terms of: Time saving, increasing their productivity,
minimizing the labor cost, and boosting their economic level.
Implicit of study can also solve the part of design in to simple when compared to the
existing model, Easy to repair by farmers itself and maintenance is less. And pushing
force is reduced by decreasing the weight of the model.

Page | 4
Page | 5
1.6. Methodologies
The methodology is the systematic, theoretical analysis of the methods applied to a
field of study. It comprises the theoretical analysis of the body of methods and principles
associated with a branch of knowledge. Typically, it encompasses concepts such as
theoretical models, phases, and quantitative or qualitative techniques. A methodology
does not set out to provide solutions. Instead, a methodology offers the theoretical
underpinning for understanding which method, set of methods, or best practices can be
applied to a specific case, for example, to calculate a specific result.
The objective of this project will achieve by taking the following materials and
methodologies.
Table 1.1 Outline

Start Problem
identification Litertural review

Simulation Design anaysis

Conclusion

Page | 6
 CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Machine background
For centuries, the power had come from the farmer, his family and animals. In the early
part of the 20th Century, machines were replacing animals, and that process continued
despite the Great Depression. It may be that the drought and hard times meant that buying
machines made more sense than ever before.
[Bakhtaran and Loghavi (2009) [4]], designed and developed a manually operated
planter for garlic bulbs mounted on two bicycle wheels and equipped with a toothed belt
distribution mechanism. The toothed rubber belt was equipped using the sponge teeth 25
×47 mm and 25 mm high. In field tests using the prototype equipment, bulbs were spaced
at 5 bulbs per m.
[Boyhan, G., D.Granberry, & T.Kelley, Vol. 7(2001),[14]; investigate that Hand
powered mechanical Trans planter. This machine consists of a seedling tray, forks, handle
and skids. This has been design to plant them in 6 rows, through forks pick-up the
seedlings a by pressing the handle. For every stroke of the handle the seedling tray moves
side wards for uniform picking of seedlings by the forks. The row spacing is about
200mm while the operator punching the handle at the desired spacing.

Figure2.1 Hand Powered Mechanical Trans Planter [2]

[Yenpayubet, Vol. 57. (2002)[16]; He studied the design and development of a garlic
planter which contain two models which included the vertical metering plate with
triangular grooves and the bucket type garlic planter. The bucket type garlic planter
presented the most impressive results. The new prototype garlic planter had 12 rows and
Page | 7
was attached to 5 HP power tiller. The garlic planter was tested under actual field
conditions. The results indicated that the optimum width of garlic planter was 0.8 m or 8
rows.
[M.R. Bakhtiari and M.Loghavi (2009)[15], reported that the results of different
planting density depicted that lower planting density had significantly increased the
number of leaves per plant, average bulbs weight and diameter, neck - thickness of bulbs
and percent survival, whereas the higher planting density significantly increased weight of
cull bulbs and total yield of bulbs; however, it reduced average bulb weight and diameter.
In the 1980’s different types of transplanting machine was developed from the one which
is operated by mechanical labor to the most complicated and software integrated
transplanting machine.
[SMaheshwari,TK Verma MR(2007) [5], designed and developed a manually operated
planter for garlic bulbs mounted on two bicycle wheels and equipped with a toothed belt
distribution mechanism. The toothed rubber belt was equipped using the sponge teeth
25 ×47 mm and 25 mm high. In field tests using the prototype equipment, bulbs were
spaced at 5 bulbs per m.
[Maheswari and Verma (2007), [5] modified and evaluated a garlic planter at Etawa.
The speed of planter was 1.8 km/h, actual operating time in 24.6 minute was required to
cover area of 0.01 ha with field capacity of 0.02 ha/h and field efficiency was 78 %. The
bulk density, moisture content, test weight of garlic seeds, were 1.525 g/cm3, 16.3 % and
660 g, respectively. The average plant population of garlic sown by manually operated
garlic planter was 65 plants/m2 whereas; the plant population of garlic sown by traditional
method was 75 plants/m2. This did not show significant difference. The germination (%)
of garlic after 10 days of sowing by manually operated garlic planter was 69.6 % whereas;
germination by traditional method was 75.6 %. The germination of garlic after 20 days of
sowing by manually operated garlic planter was 87.4 % whereas; germination by
traditional method was 88.9 %. This did not show significant difference. The average
yield by manually operated garlic planter and manual planting was 60.83 and 64.68 q/ha,
respectively.

Page | 8
 [Bakhtiari and Loghavi (2009), [4] worked on innovatively designed tractor mounted,
Ground-wheel drive, triple unit, row crop precision planter capable of planting three rows
of garlic (Allium sativum L.) clove on each raised bed. The major components of this
planter included; chassis and transport wheels, leister bidder unit, seed hopper, seed
metering drum, sweeper, knocker, seed tube, furrow openers and seed coverers. The
metering drums and sweepers were driven by two ground wheels through a chain drive
system. Laboratory evaluation of the planter components, especially the seed metering
mechanism revealed a satisfactory performance of the planter components, except a few
modifications which were needed before conducting field tests. The performance
parameters measured/calculated during the field tests included: seeding mass rate, seeding
depth, seed spacing, miss index, and multiple index and seed damage. The results showed
that the new machine is capable of planting 220,000 plants/ha at the seeding depth and
spacing of 12.3 and 22.7 cm, respectively. Also, miss index, multiple index and seed
damage were measured as 12.23, 2.43 and 1.41 %, respectively.
[M. R. Bakhtiari1, and M. Loghavi; Vol. 11: 125-136 (2009)[15]. Work on
Development and Evaluation of an Innovative Garlic Clove Precision Planter. Which
designed tractor mounted machine, The major components of this planter include; chassis
and transport wheels, seed hopper, seed metering drum, sweeper, knocker, seed tube,
furrow openers and seed conveyers. The machine has the capable of planting three rows of
garlic (Allium sativum L.). The metering drums and sweepers are driven by two ground
wheels through a chain drive system.

Figure2.2 Onion Planting Machines Tractor Operated [2]

Page | 9
 As mentioned above and in figure 2.2 onion planting machines imported in
Ethiopia right now are mostly designed for large scale farming field owned by the
government and investors and are tractor operated. They are too expensive to be owned by
poor farmers of Ethiopia plus the maintenance cost is high with the tractors spare part
costs and fuel cost considered and they are not environmental friendly.
[Maheshwari, TK Verma MR. (2007)[5] found that Adam Red onion variety grown at
intra - row spacing of 10 cm gave the highest bulb diameter (5.78 cm) as compared to
intra - row spacing of 8 cm (5.65) and 6 cm (5.28 cm) though the means did not show
statistically significant difference. Aliyu et al. (2009) also found that significantly tallest
plant was obtained from a wider intra- row spacing of 20 and 25 cm of onion plants. The
authors suggested that closer spacing resulted in competition among plants for nutrient
and light thus resulting short plants while the plants grown in wider spacing had adequate
space and consequently they were not severely competing for resources for their growth
and development.
[V.V. SARAF, volume 8,2015[18];He studied the design of manually operated garlic
planter, The garlic planter consist of; main frame, seed box, metering mechanism, ground
wheel with lugs, adjustable furrow opener and seed tube, covering bracket and marker.
Two persons are required for operating the planter. One person require for pulling the
implement in forward direction and another for direction control. The field evaluation of
manually operated garlic planter was undertaken with objectives i.e. to evaluate the field
performance, to modify manually operated garlic planter and to study the economics of
manually operated garlic planter.
[Malve A.C.1 and Rajendraand Vikas Th,Vol 2.2019[19]:They studied the design and
Manufacturing of manually operated Onion Plantation Machine. The machine has eleven
functional components of seed sowing machine those are Frame Making, Spoke Machine,
Spoon Attachment to Chain, Ground Wheel, Bearing Attachment to Chain, Furrow
Opener, Sweep, Plant Rotor Shaft, Ground Wheel Shaft and Intermediate Shaft, Chain and
Sprocket Arrangement, Plant Tube, Plant Covering Unit, Plant Box, Plant Rotor. A

Page | 10
manually operated template row planter was designed and implemented to improve
planting efficiency and decrease drudgery involved in manual planting method.
[Ashutosh Pandirwar,J. K. Singh and Adarsh Kumar,vol.50 no.1 2019[20]; Develop the
Semi-Automatic Six Row Onion Seedlings transplanted. A six row semi-automatic
transplanted consists of three-point hitch, plug metering system, funnel, and press wheel
and power transmission system. Manual transplanting operation was also carried out to
compare the performance and economics of mechanical transplanting with the developed
machine. One person was required for feeding in each row.
[Lokesh Kumawat1, H. Raheman1 and Vikas Singh, Vol.9 (2020) [21]; this paper
portrayed that Design and Development of a Tractor Drawn Automatic Onion
transplanted. The machine has a furrow opener, a covering device, conveying belt and
cutting units, a seedling delivery tube for each of the four rows and two ridges for making
two ridges each of 40 cm wide at the top. The onion transplanted was developed to
transplant 4- rows of onion seedlings at a time with a spacing of 10 cm between each row.
Through the seedling delivery tubes the furrow opener was conveyed by paper pot. The
movement of paper pot is employed by belt type conveying unit. Rotary cutters were
powered by ground wheel whereas vertical blade was powered by a motor using the
tractor battery. The average row to row spacing, plant to plant spacing and depth of
placement were found to be 8.12 cm, 20.3 cm, and 2.99 cm, respectively
This project is narrow the gap by providing the poor farmers of Ethiopia with
affordable and environmentally friendly onion planting machine with low maintenance
cost and no fuel need. And also this study we improve the machine by decreasing the parts
and easily operated ways.

Page | 11
 2.1. Working Principle
First set up the onion seeding plough directly to the row of the field. The opening
plough opens the soil and ready for the dropping bulb .when we start to push the handle
back wheel starts to rotate. Now the rotation of the back wheel will be transformed to the
front sprocket with the help of power chain then it will rotate the chain with cup. When
the chain with cups start rotating the cups scoop the onion bulbs one at a time from the
bucket and drop the bulb when they are upside down. At the last the closing plough will
cover the bulb with soil.(add assembly drawing)

Page | 12
 CHAPTER FOUR
DESIGN ANALYSIS
3.1. Design specification
The design specification or design parameters of this project are:
 Manual operated onion planter machine.

 Pushing or driving force of human F = 120 N.

 Radius of back Ground wheel Gr = 200 mm

 Radius of front ground wheel Gr=150 mm

 8 working hours per day.

 The speed of operation V = 3 Km/Hr. (0.83 m/s)
 Handling length (L) =0.8 m
3.2. Material selection

Material selection is one of the leading functions of effective engineering design as it

determines the reliability of the design in terms of industrial and economical aspects. A
great design may fail to be a profitable product if unable to find the most appropriate
material combinations. We are mainly concentrated on the properties of the materials

Page | 13
which are identified as the potential materials for that specific design described us:
Availability of material, Mechanical properties, Wear of materials, Corrosion, Ability to
manufacture, Cost

Page | 14
 Table3.1 Bill of Materials
S/ Name of the component Material Quantity
No.
Power Wheel and front wheel Stainless steel 3

1
2 Bucket, Stainless steel 1

3 Cups Stainless steel 17

4 Opening plow Stainless steel 1

5 Covering plow Stainless steel 1

6 Handel Cast iron 1

7 Frame Cast iron 1

8 Shaft Hardened steel 2

9 Chain and Sprocket with cup Hardened steel 2

3.3. Design of ground wheel

Wheel is circular rotating part which helps the machine to roll on the ground. The overall
weight of the machine is also carried on wheel, then due to the weight and friction of the ground
torque will be created on the connecting shaft which also uses the machine to perform its work.
We have select stainless steel because it needs high corrosion resistance since the wheel
contact with the ground which has moisture, then stainless steel has high corrosion resisting
ability.
 In order to get ground wheel speed first diameter of the wheel is must specified
V × 60
Ng = ……………………………………………… (eq.1)
πD
Where: V=velocity
D= Diameter of wheel and N g=speed of ground wheel
The average needed revolution per minutes ( N g) of the ground wheel axle can be found with
formula

Page | 15
 πDNg
V=
60
V × 60 0.83 ×60
Ng = = = 39.65 ≈ 40 RPM
πD 3.14 ×0.4

 Tangential force on the wheel.

Figure 3.1 FBD of Force Analysis

F t = F m × cos 𝜃………………………from figure above (eq.2)
Where: F t= Tangential force which applied at an angle 𝜃 on the machine
F m = man force
r = radius of wheel
 In order to find the forces we should have first find inclination angel.

Figure 3.2 FBD of the handle and ground wheel

From the above free body diagram: to find the angle of the handle to the frame
We have: h =r + L*sin 𝜃 ….. From above free body diagram

Page | 16
 Since height(h) vertical height of the handle from the ground we have select the height in
order to have enough tangential force (0.6m,0.7m,0.8m)
 Vertical height of handling from ground at (h)= 0.6m
h =r + L*sin 𝜃
0.6 m =0.2m + 0.8m * sin 𝜃
𝜃=sin-10.5
𝜃 = 30°

Now we can find the tangential force F t

At h=0.6m above the ground we have 𝜃 = 30°
F t = F m × cos 𝜃
= 120 N × cos30°
= 103.92N
 Considering the season of planting onion the coefficient of friction can be changed.
Here to rotate the wheel the friction force should less than that of tangential force.
Ff ≤ Ft
μmg≤ Ft ……………………………………………………………. (eq. 2)
Where: m= amount of mass, g= gravitational force
µ= coefficient of friction
 We take μ of the snow to be 0.2
m
g=9.8
s2
0.2 ×9.8 × m≤ 103.9 N
m≤53Kg
This amount of mass will rest one each side of the wheels
F f = 53× 0.2× 9.8= 103.7N
 torque created on the wheel
T= r× F f ……………………………………………………..……… (eq. 3)
The torque created on the back wheel due to friction force
T= r× F f
T = 0.2× 103.7N
= 20.74 Nm

Page | 17
  We take μ of the rough ground to be 0.3
m
g=9.8
s2
0.3 × 9.8× m≤ 103.9 N
m≤35 Kg
This amount of mass will rest one each side of the wheels.
F f = 35× 0.3× 9.8= 102.9N
 torque created on the wheel
The torque created on the back wheel due to friction force
T= r× F f
T = 0.2× 102.9N
= 20.58 Nm
We take μ of the wet to be 0.4
m
g=9.8
s2
0.4 × 9.8 ×m ≤103.9 N
m≤ 26Kg ≈26Kg
This amount of mass will rest one each side of the wheels.
F f = 26× 0.4× 9.8= 101.9N
 torque created on the wheel
The torque created on the back wheel due to friction force
T= r× F f
T = 0.2× 105.84N
= 21.16 Nm
Vertical height of handling from ground at (h) = 0.7 m
0.7 m =0.2m + 0.8m * sin 𝜃
𝜃=sin-10.625
𝜃 = 38.68°≈39°
At h=0.7m above the ground we have 𝜃 = 39°
F t = F m × cos 𝜃
= 120 N × cos39°
= 93.26 N
Considering the season of planting onion the coefficient of friction can be changed.

Page | 18
 Here to rotate the wheel the friction force should less than that of tangential force.
Ff ≤ Ft
 When We take μ of the snow to be 0.2
m
g=9.8
s2
0.2 ×9.8 × m≤ 93.26 N
m≤ 48Kg
This amount of mass will rest one each side of the wheels
F f = 48× 0.2× 9.8= 94N
 torque created on the wheel
The torque created on the back wheel due to friction force
T= r× F f
T = 0.2×93.26 N
= 18.6 Nm
 when We take μ of the rough ground to be 0.3
m
g=9.8
s2
0.3 × 9.8× m≤ 93.26 N
m≤32 Kg
This amount of mass will rest one each side of the wheels.
F f = 35× 0.3× 9.8= 94N

 torque created on the wheel

The torque created on the back wheel due to friction force
T= r× F f
T = 0.2× 94N
= 18.8 Nm
 when We take μ of the wet to be 0.4
m
g=9.8
s2

Page | 19
 0.4 × 9.8 ×m ≤93.26 N
m≤24Kg
This amount of mass will rest one each side of the wheels.
F f = 24× 0.4× 9.8= 94N
 torque created on the wheel
The torque created on the back wheel due to friction force
T= r× F f
T = 0.2× 94N
= 18.8 Nm
Vertical height of handling from ground at (h) = 0.8 m
0.8 m =0.2m + 0.8m * sin 𝜃
𝜃=sin-10.75
𝜃 = 48.34°≈48°
At h=0.8m above the ground we have 𝜃 = 48°
F t = F m × cos 𝜃
= 120 N × cos48°
= 80.3 N
 Here to rotate the wheel the friction force should less than that of tangential force.
Ff ≤ Ft
Considering the season of planting onion the coefficient of friction can be changed.
 When We take μ of the snow to be 0.2
m
g=9.8 2
s
0.2 ×9.8 × m≤ 80.3 N
m≤ 41Kg
This amount of mass will rest one each side of the wheels which means there is 50 Kg total
mass.
F f = 41 × 0.2× 9.8= 80.36
 torque created on the wheel
The torque created on the back wheel due to friction force
T= r× F f
T = 0.2×37.24N

Page | 20
 = 7.448 Nm
 when We take μ of the rough ground to be 0.3
m
g=9.8
s2
0.3 × 9.8× m≤ 80.3 N
m≤ 27Kg
This amount of mass will rest one each side of the wheels which means there is 50 Kg total
mass.
F f = 27× 0.3× 9.8= 79.4N
 torque created on the wheel
The torque created on the back wheel due to friction force
T= r× F f
T = 0.2× 79.4N
= 15.88 Nm
 We take μ of the wet to be 0.4
m
g=9.8
s2
0.4 × 9.8 ×m ≤80.3 N
m≤20 Kg
This amount of mass will rest one each side of the wheels which means there is 50 Kg total
mass.
F f = 20× 0.4× 9.8= 78.4N
 torque created on the wheel
The torque created on the back wheel due to friction force
T= r× F f
T = 0.2× 78.4N
= 15.68 Nm
Table 3.2 Result of frictional force at different height
At height 0.6 and 𝜃 = At height 0.7and 𝜃 At height 0.8and 𝜃
30° = 39° = 48°

Type Snow Ro We Sno Ro We Sno Ro We

Page | 21
of ground μ(0.2) ugh t w ugh t w ugh t
μ(0.3) μ(0.4 ) μ(0.2) μ(0.3) μ(0.4 ) μ(0.2) μ(0.3) μ(0.4 )
Tange F t= 103.9N F t=93.26 N F t=80.3 N
ntial force
Frictio 103.7 102 101 94 94 94 80. 79. 78.
nal force .9 .9 36 4 4
(N)
Torque 20.74 20. 21. 18. 18. 18. 16. 15. 15.
(Nm) 58 16 6 8 8 07 88 68
 Depending on the above result to have high torque of the machine in which the machine
operates in different season at height of handle 0.6m above the ground. And the average torque
exerted on the back wheel can be 20.8nm
Design of front wheel
The revolution per minutes ( N f ) of the front wheel axle can be found with formula
πDNF
V=
60
V × 60 0.83 ×60
NF = = = 52.86 53 RPM
D 3.14 ×0.3
Now we can find the force Ft
F t = F m × sin 𝜃
= 120 N × sin37°=72.2N………. 𝜃 = 36.8°≈37°
Here to rotate the wheel the friction force should lase than that of tangential force.
Ff ≤ Ft
μmg≤ Ft
We take μ of the rough ground to be 0.3 g = 9.8m/s 2
0.3×9.8× m≤72.2 N
m≤ 24.5 ≈24 Kg
F f = 24× 0.3× 9.8= 70.56N
The torque created on the wheel due to friction force
T = 0.15× 70.56N= 10.584 Nm

Page | 22
 3.4. Design Of Power Transfer Chain And Sprocket Selection Force Analysis
The transmission from the initial source of power which is the rotation of the ground wheels
. When pushed by the operator is with help of a chin drive and sprocket mechanism.
Power = F×V……………….Robert l, motto, machine element in mechanical design (eq.)
Where: F = force P= 120 N× 0.83 m/s
V = speed = 99.6 W
The chains are used to transmit power from one shaft to another by means of sprocket which
rotates at the same speed or at different speeds. The amount of power transmitted depends upon
the following factors:
Type of chain selected: simplex power transmission chain will be used due to no slip takes
place during chain drive (perfect velocity ratio) .We used chain to transfer power from the
ground wheel to metering mechanism.
Chain which transfer power from the ground wheel to metering mechanism.
Analysis of chain
Velocity Ratio (V R):
N1
Vr = ………………………………………… Kurmi machine design (eq. 4)
N2
N 1 = N g = 40RPM = because the sprocket speed is connected with a single shaft.
Derive Power = 99.6 W
N 2 = the smaller sprocket = 20 RPM
N 1 40
Then: V r = = =2
N 2 20
Fore larger sprocket ( Z2 ¿:
N
Z1 = Z2 × 1 …..……………………………… Kurmi machine design (eq. 5)
N2
I. For smaller sprocket = 27 = Z1
N1
II. For the larger sprocket = Z2 = Z1 × = 54
N1
 The design power = drive power × service factor (ks)
k s=K 1 × K 2 × K 3 K 1 = load factor =variable load =1.25
= 1.25×1.5 ×1 K 2 = lubrication factor = 1.5 for periodic
= 1.875 K 3 = Rating factor = for 8 hr per a day =1

Page | 23
 Design power = 99.6 W × 1.875 = 186.75 W
Corresponding to sprocket speed N 1=40 RPM and design power 186.75 Won pitch
P = 15.875 mm, Chain No 10B
Roller diameter (d) = 10.16 mm, Minimum width of Roller (w) = 9.65 mm
Braking load (W B ¿ = 106N
 pitch circle diameter(d 1 ¿:
180
d 1 = pcosec ……………………… .…........ Kurmi machine design (eq. 6)
Z1
The pitch circle diameter of the smaller sprocket (d 1)
180 180
d 1 = pcosec = 15.875mm cosec
Z1 27
= 136.74 mm
=0.13674 m

Pitch circle diameter for large sprocket (d 2)

180 180
d 2 = pcosec = 15.875 cosec
Z2 54
= 273 mm
= 0.273 m

 The pitch line velocity of two sprockets(v)

π × d1× N1
v= ………………………………… Kurmi machine design (eq. 7)
60

Pitch line velocity of the smaller sprocket (V)

π d1 N 1 π 0.1367 × 40
ѵ= = = 0.286 m/s
60 60
 Load on the chain (W)
DrivePower
W= ………………………… Kurmi machine design (eq.8)
Pitc h LineVelocity
Drive Power 99.6 W
W= = = 57.34 N
Pitch Line Velocity 0.286 m/s

Page | 24
  Factor of safety(Fs)
W b 106. N
Fs= =
W 57.34 N
Fs=1.8
 Minimum center distance between larger and smaller sprockets should be 30 to 50 times
the pitch let us take 40 time
Center distance between the sprockets
= 40 × p = 40× 15.875 = 635 mm
To accommodate initial sag in the chain the value of center distance is reduced by 2 – 5 mm
the we assume 3 to get more clearance
Correct center distance = X = 635 – 3 = 632 mm
 No of chain link(k):
Z +Z 2X Z −Z 1 2 p
K= 1 2 + +[ 2 ] …………………Kurmi machine design (eq. 9)
2 p 2π X
We know the no of chain link
Z 1 +Z 2 2 X Z −Z 1 2 p
K= + +[ 2 ]
2 p 2π X
27+54 2(632) 54−27 2 15.875
K= + +[ ]×
2 15.875 2× 3.14 473.25
K= 100.26≈ 100

 Length of chain ( L ):
L = K.P……………….………………… Kurmi machine design (eq.10)
L = K.P = 100 ×15.875 = 1587.5 mm ¿1.6 m

Figure 3.3 Power Transmission Chain and Sprocket

T tAndT s =Tension in the tight side and tension on the slack side of the belt respectively in
Newton.

Page | 25
 V = velocity of the chain in m/s
The torque exerted on the larger sprocket (T L ¿ is given by
T L = (T t−T s ¿ × R LS ,
R LS = radius of larger sprocket
But the torque exerted on the sprocket is equal to torque exerted on the shaft by the ground
wheel.
28.5 Nm = (T t−T s ) × 0.136 m
T t−T s = 114.7 N ………………..…… (eq. 11)
Similarly the torque on the smaller sprocket (T S ¿
T S=(T t−T s )× RSS , R ss = radius of smaller sprocket
The relation between the tight side and slack side tension, in terms of coefficient of friction
and the angel of contact is given by the formula.
Tt
2.3log = μ𝜃
Ts
The angel of contact 𝜃
R LS −R SS
Sinα = , X = minimum center distance = 473.25 mm
X
136.74
R SS= = 68.37 mm
2
0.136−0.06837
Sinα = = 0.14
0.47325
α =¿ 8. 2°
Angel of contact 𝜃
𝜃 = 180°- 2(α )
= 180°- 2 (8.2°)
= 163.6°, 2.854 rad
The coefficient of friction between the chain and the sprocket is nearly 0.28 =μ
Tt
2.3log = 0.28 ×2.854
Ts
Tt
Log =0.35
Ts

Page | 26
 Tt
= 2.23
Ts
T t = 2.23 T s ………….……….. (eq. 12)
Substituting Equation 13 in Equation 12 The value of T s will be,
T t−T s =¿ 114.7 N

2.23T s−T s = 114.7 N

1.23T s = 114.7 N
T s= 93.3 N
T t = 2.23×46.82 = 207.9 N
Torque exerted on the smaller sprocket will be
T SS=(T t −T s )× R SS
= (207.9 N – 93.3 N) × 0.06837
= 7.835 Nm
 Shaft design, Inner diameter of sprocket and design of key for smaller sprocket
Shaft design
We have torque exerted on the smaller sprocket T= 7.835 Nm
Allowable Shear stress of hardened steel τ =42MPa (from Kurmi machine design)
π
T= × τ ×d 3…………………………………… Kurmi machine design (eq.13)
16
Where; d= diameter of shaft, Then
π
7.835= ×42 × d3 =9.82≈10mm
16
To find the inner diameter of metering chain sprocket
Inner diameter of sprocket= diameter of shaft + clearance
We take clearance 0.05mm since we use the shaft to transfer power which is enough
Inner diameter of sprocket= 10mm + 0.05mm =10.05mm
Design of key: we select rectangular sunk key. Because, the distribution of forces along the
length and width of key is uniform. We need 2 keys
w= d / 4 and t = d/6………………………………………… Kurmi machine design (eq.14)
w= d / 4= 10/4=2.5mm
And t =10/6=1.6mm

Page | 27
 3.5. Design of cup

Specification
 We designed this cups for onion bulbs which have diameter ( 2.5 -3.5cm)
 The small size onion bulb weight is ( 20 - 50g )
 The cup diameter will be (b¿ = 3 cm
 The cup base diameter will be(d)=1.5 cm
 The cup depth will be (h c ¿ = 2.5 cm
 Thickness of the cup (t c ¿ = 0.2 cm
Total weight of the cup with an onion (W T )

W T = weight of cup + weight of onion bulb…….……………….. (eq. 15)

Where: W T = total weight
m C =¿ Mass of cup
Density of Aluminum is¿ ) for the cups because of the light weight property and its corrosion
resistance because the machine operates in humid environment.
The total weight of the cup with onion bulb
W T = weight of cup + weight of onion bulb
For Onion diameter at 2.5 cm
πh 2
Volume (V C ) = (d + db.+b 2)……………………….. (eq.16)
12
π × 2.5
= (1.52 + 1.5 × 2.5 + 2.52 ¿
12
V c = 8.01cm3
M cup = ρ Vc
= 2.7 g/cm3 ×8.01cm3
= 21.63 g=0.02163kg
For Onion diameter at 3 cm
πh 2
Volume (Vc) = (d +db+ b2 )…………………… (eq.17)
12
π × 2.5
Vc= ¿)
12

Page | 28
 Vc=10.3 cm3
mcup = ρ Vc
= 2.7 g/cm3 ×10.3cm3
= 27.81 g=0.02781kg
For Onion diameter at 3.5 cm
πh 2
Volume (V C ) = (d + db + b 2)………………………..(eq.18 )
12
π × 2.5
= ( 1.52 + 1.5 × 3.5 + 3.52 ¿
12
Vc= 12.92 cm3
mcup = ρVc
= 2.7 g/cm3 ×12.92cm3
= 34.88 g=0.03488kg
Table3.3 Volume of cup for different shape of onion
No Onion diameter in Volume of a cup in Mass cup(g)
3
. cm cm
1 2.5 8.01 21.63
2 3 10.3 27.81
3 3.5 12.92 34.88
Considering the above result we design the cup for the average size of onion blubs.
Then we take 3 diameter of onion size.

Then weight of cup (W C ¿ ¿

W C = m cup ×g…………………………………………………… (eq. 19)

Where: wc= weight of cup

27.81× 9.8
WC = = 0.27 N
1000
W T = (mass of cup + mass of onion) g
We take mass of onion 4kg
=¿ ) 9.8m/s
= 4.19 N

Page | 29
3.6. Design of conveying chain and sprocket

Figure 3.4 Conveying Sprocket

Assumption
Speed N 3 is the same as N 2 because they are on the same shaft.
Speed N 3 is equal to N 4 , they have same sprocket number and equal pitch circle diameter
The speed N 2=N 3 =N 4 = 20 RPM
Analysis
N 3 20 RPM
 Velocity ratio = V R 2 = = =1
N 4 20 RPM
By using the velocity ratio we read from table 3.3 above
Z3 = 31 = Z 4, the same sprocket used.
 The design power
Design power = Drive power × service factor (Ks)
K S =K 1 × K 2 × K 3 K 1 = load factor =variable load =1.25
= 1.25×1.5 ×1 , K 2 = lubrication factor = 1.5 for periodic =1.875 K3
= Rating factor = for 8 hr per a day =1
But the drive power is calculated by the formula (power on the 3rd sprocket)
2 π N 3T
P=
60
2 π ×20 ×7.835
=
60
= 16.4 W
Design power = 16.4 W × 1.875 = 30.75 W = 0.03075 W

Page | 30
 With sprocket speed N3 = 20 RPM and design power = 30.75 W we get the pitch P
P = 12.7 mm, (From table 3.4 above)
Roller diameter d r = 8.31mm
Minimum width W 2 = 7.75mm
Braking Load W B 2 = 106N N, Now sprocket 3 pitch diameter d 3
180 180
d 3 = pcosec ( ) = 12.7cosec ( )
z3 31
= 125.5 mm = 0.1255 m
But the two sprockets are the same
 The pitch line velocity of two sprockets
π × d 3 × N 3 π × 0.1255× 20 RPM
V3 = =
60 60
= 0.131 m/s
 Minimum center distance between the identical sprockets
Center distance = 30× pitch= 30×12.7mm = 367.1mm
To accommodate initial sag in the chain the value of center distance is reduced by 2-5 mm.
Corrected center distance X2 = 362.1mm
 We now the no of chain link
Z 2 +Z 4 2 X Z +Z p
K= + + [ 3 4] 2
2 p 2π X
31+ 31 2(367.1) 31+31 2 12.7
K= + +[ ]×
2 12.7 2× 3.14 367.1
K= 90
 Length of chain (L)
L = K× P = 90×12.7 = 1143mm = 1.143m
 Load on the chain
The load on the chain is the total sum of the load due to drive power + load due to the weight
of cups + load due to the weight on bulbs.
 Number cup need

Page | 31
 In order to have a strong and healthy seedlings selected is planted at 5cm-10cm space
between plants on the rows (Lemma and Shimeles, Research Experiences in Onion Production,
2003).
Then we have assumed 7cm the average to have efficient plantation in order to have good
products. The since our conveying chain length is 1143mm;
114.3 cm
Then number of cup = =16.8≈17 cups available.
7 cm
Load due to the drive power
Drivepower 16.4 W
W1 = = = 125.19 N
PitchlineVelocity 0.131m/ s
Load of weight of the cups without onion
No of cups without onion =17
W 2 = 17×0.27 N = 4.59 N
Total load on the chain (W T )
W T =W 1 +W 2 =¿ 125.19 N +4.59 N
= 129.78N
 Shaft design, Inner diameter of sprocket and design of key for metering chain
Shaft design
We have torque exerted on the smaller sprocket T= 7.835 Nm
Allowable Shear stress of hardened steel τ =42MPa (from Kurmi machine design)
π
T= × τ ×d 3…………………………………… Kurmi machine design (eq.20)
16
Where; d= diameter of shaft, Then
π
7.835= ×42 × d3
16
d=9.82≈10mm
To find the inner diameter of metering chain sprocket
Inner diameter of sprocket= diameter of shaft + clearance
We take clearance 0.05mm since we use the shaft to transfer power which is enough
Inner diameter of sprocket= 10mm + 0.05mm =10.05mm
Design of key: we select rectangular sunk key. Because, the distribution of forces along the
length and width of key is uniform. We need 2 keys

Page | 32
 w= d / 4 and t = d/6………………………………………… Kurmi machine design (eq.21)
w= d / 4= 10/4=2.5mm
And t =10/6=1.6mm

3.7. Design of bucket

Assumption
 Base area ( B1 ¿ = 10cm ×10cm = 100 cm2
 Base area ( B2 ¿ =30cm ×30cm = 900 cm2
 Base area b 1 = 9.8cm ×9.8cm = 96 cm2 , thickness of the bucket is 2cm
 Base area b 2 = 29.8cm ×29.8cm = 888.04 cm2, thickness of the bucket is 2cm

h
Volume (V) = [B + B + B +B ]...........................mathematical equation (eq.22)
3 1 2 √ 1 2
Capacity of bucket (Q) = V× ρ ……………….….………… mathematical equation (eq.23)
Where: Q = capacity in kilogram
V= volume
ρ = Bulk destiny of onion

Figure 3.5 Bucket

First find the resultant volume
h
Volume (V) = [B + B + B +B ]
3 1 2 √ 1 2
40
= [100+900+√ 100× 900 ]
3

Page | 33
 = 17333.3cm3
The area of bucket covered with onion is V1
h1
Volume V 1 = [b 1+b 2+√ b1 +b 2 ]
3
39.8
= [96+888.04+√ 96+888.04 ]
3
=16929.86 cm3
Volume resultant (V R ¿ = V-V 1
= 17333.3 cm3-16929.86 cm3
= 403.44 cm3

Now the capacity of the box is calculated as

Q = V× ρ , Q = capacity in kilogram
V= volume m3
ρ = Bulk destiny of onion in Kg/m3
Q = 0.0173333 ×290 Kg/m3
= 5.02 Kg
The bucket capacity is taken as 4 kg as the top 8 cm height of the bucket is to be kept empty
to avoid spillage.
We use milled steel for the bucket
ρ m = 7.85 g/cm3
V R = 403.44 cm3, resultant volume of bucket
The mass of the bucket will be
M b = ρ m×V
= 7.85 × 403.44= 3167g = 3.167 Kg
3.8. Design of frame

For the seeder body there are several members which are attached together to form a rigid
body. Generally, these members can be categorized as follows:
1. Vertical members: - this is the main member to which the axle, horizontal members and
compartment body are attached.

Page | 34
 2. Horizontal members: -Basic/ main horizontal beam, beam to which the openers are
attached which is equipped with grippers at its ends.
3. Transverse members: -pulling bars and stabilizing bars
4. Housing: -compartment housing, disc casings and funnels.
More of these components need no analysis as the material and methods used to produce
these parts are good enough to withstand the less substantial load and stresses that may be
developed. However, on the other side, few basic members need through analysis to say that they
are capable of carrying and transmitting the load and disturbance stresses subjected to them. As a
result the main members that need analysis are discussed in the next part.

Assumption
 length of the frame ( LF ) = 92 cm
 A hallow rectangular
 Mass of onion ( M O) = 4Kg
 Mass of chain ( M C ) = 12.77Kg
 Mass of man power¿) = 12.23Kg
 Mass of cup ( M cup ¿ = 0.02781x9=0.25kg
The mass of the bucket is calculated ( M B ) = 3.167Kg
The total mass on the frame will be,
Mass total ( M total ¿ = mass of cup + mass of chain + mass of bucket + mass of onion + mass of
man power
M t = 0.25 + 14.6 + 3.167 + 4 + 12.23
M t = 32.6Kg
The frame free body.

Page | 35
 Figure 3.6 Free Body Diagram of Frame
Replace distributed load by equivalent concentrated load, will be;
3.26 N
F C= ×10 cm
cm
= 32.6 N
The reaction force can be calculated as:
+↺ ∑ M A =0…………………………… From equilibrium formula (eq.24)
R By ×92−32.6 ×72=0
2347.2
R By= =25.5 N
92
+↑ ∑ FY =0…………………………….. From equilibrium formula (eq.25)
R Ay + R By −32.6=0
R Ay =32.6−25.5=7.1
+→ ∑ F X =0 ………………………………….. From equilibrium formula (eq.26)
−R Bx=0 R Bx =0
Find shear force and bending moment equation by section the frame structure;

Figure 3.7 Section 1-1

+↑ ∑ FY =0
7.1−V =0
V =7.1 N
+↺ ∑ M z=0
−7.1∗x + M =0

Page | 36
 M =7.1 x……………………………………………. (eq.27)

Figure 3.8 Section 2-2

+↑ ∑ FY =0
7.1−32.6−V =0
V =−25.5 N
+↺ ∑ M z=0
−7.1∗x +32.6 ( x−72 ) + M =0
M =7.1 x−32.6 ( x−72 )……………………………….. (eq. 28)

Now draw the shear force and bending moment diagram

Figure 3.9 Shear Force and Bending Diagram of Frame

For the volume of the frame Vf = AT ×LF ,
A = 4 cm ×4 cm= 16 cm2
Now the mass of the frame will be calculated Mf
MF =ρ ×Vf
= 7.85 g/cm3× 212.5= 1668.5 = 1.67 Kg
Frame on both side of the wheel will be
2MF = 1.67× 2 = 3.34 Kg
Assuming a factor of safety as (Fs) = 2

Page | 37
 σ ut 400 N
Permissible stress σ p= = =200
Fs 2 mm2
Now calculating moment of inertia ( I g ¿
b× h2 24 ×153 4
Where I g 1=I g 2=I g3 = = =6750 mm
12 12
Y = center gravity of the system
Y = ( A1 y 1+ A 2 y 2 + A3 y 3 ¿ / A 1+ A 2 + A 3
Y = [(47*24)15 + (32*24)15 + 25*24)15]/1128 + 768 + 600
Y = 15mm
Now moment of inertia about parallel axis ( I P ¿ written as,
I P = (I g 1 + A 1 +h 12 ¿

I P =6750 mm4 +0
Where Ip1 = Ip2 = Ip3 = 6750mm 4
So, Total moment of inertia will be,
I =I P 1 + I P 2 + I P 3
I = 20250mm 4
M×y
Now calculate maximum stress σ m=
I
M× y
σ actul= =(5112 × 15)/20250 mm 4
I
N
¿ 3.78
mm2

σ actual <σ p Design is safe

3.9. Design of shaft

We have torque exerted on the larger sprocket is equal to the torque exerted on the back
wheel.
Torque of back wheel is =20.8Nm
Allowable Shear stress of hardened steel τ =42MPa
π
Then 20.8= × 42× d 3
16
d=19mm
Design of key w= d / 4= 19/4=4.75mm and t =19/6=3.1≈3mm

Page | 38
Assume Total vertical load = 50N
Assuming maximum weight of the sprocket (larger) is 0.5Kg
Ws = 0.5Kg × 9.8 m/s2 = 4.9 N
The total vertical load exerted at the center of the shaft at the location of the larger sprocket
Wtv = 51.819 N + 4.9 N = 56.719 N

Figure 3.10 Force Distribution on the Shaft

First find the reaction forces of R B and R D will calculated as;
+↺ ∑ M B =0
F A ×0.3−F C ×23.6+ R D × 47.2−F E × 47.5=0
35.893 ×0.3−4 × 23.6+ R D × 47.2−35.893 ×47.5=0
47.2 R D=1788.55
R D=37.893 N
+↑ ∑ FY =0
−F A + R B−F C + R D −F E =0
R B=4+35.893∗2−37.893
R B=37.893
Now calculate shear force and bending moment equation by section the beam;

Figure3.11Section 1-1
+↑ ∑ FY =0
−F A−V =0
V =−¿35.893 N
Page | 39
+↺ ∑ M z=0
F A ( x ) + M =0
M = -35.893x ………………….…….. (4.26)

Figure 3.12 Section 2-2

+↑ ∑ FY =0
−F A + R B−V =0
V = 37.893 – 35.893 = 2 N
+↺ ∑ M Z =0
F A ( x ) −R B ( x−0.3 ) + M =0
M =37.893 ( x−0.3 ) −35.893 ( x ) … … … … … … … .(4.27)
Now draw the shear force and bending moment diagram

Figure 3.13 Shear Force and Bending Moment Diagram

Material for shaft is made of 45c8 steel having;
Ultimate tensile stress = 350Mpa

Page | 40
 Ultimate shear stress = 300Mpa
Factor of safety = 2
Now, calculate allowable tensile stress and allowable shear stress
σ ut 350 N
σ t= = = 175
Fs 2 mm2
τ ut N
τ= =300/2 = 150
Fs mm2
According to maximum bending moment theory, equivalent twisting moment T e
T e =√ M 2 +T 2
Where M = maximum bending moment
T = Torque
From the bending moment diagram the maximum B.M = 364.32 N-mm
And from the shaft sprocket T = 2294 N-mm
T e =√364.322 +2294 2
¿ 2324.73 Nmm
Again the equivalent bending moment is calculated as,
M e =1/2 ¿
¿ 1/ 2 ¿
= 1/2[365.32 + 2324.73] N-mm
M e =1344.52 N −mm
Maximum shear stress in the shaft will be,

32 M 2 2
16 T
τ max=1 /2

16 T e
√( πd 3 ) ( )
+4
πd 3
2324.73× 16 2
σ max= 3
= 3
=0.185 N /mm
πd π × 40
According to maximum normal stress theory, the maximum normal stress in the shaft
will be
32
σ max= ¿]
πd 3
32
σ max= ( M)
πd 3

Page | 41
 32
σ max= ¿
π × 403
N
= 0.214¿ 0.214
mm3
σ max <σ t Design is safe

3.10. Selection of Bearing

In order to select a most suitable ball bearing, first of all, the basic dynamic radial load (C) is
calculated. To calculate the basic dynamic radial load capacity (C) first the dynamic radial loads
(W) should be calculated:

W =X ×V ×W R +Y ×W A….Shigley’s Mechanical Engineering Design, Eighth Edition (eq.)

Where: X = radial load factor

Y = axial load factor
V = rotation factor
W R = radial load
W A = axial load
M = mass of pulley
g = gravity
Radial load:
W R=T 1 +T 2 +T c
W R=207.9+ 93.3+2.9
W R=304.1 N
Axial load:
W A =T 1+T 2 + Mg
W A =207.9+93.3+(0.8 × 9.81)
W A =309.048 N
To find the value of X and Y the following ratios should be calculated:
W A 309.048
= =1.016
WR 304.1
W A 309.048
= =0.0193
Co 16000

Page | 42
 Where the value of C o taken from Appendix Table 2 based on the bearing number 208. The
bearing number is read from Appendix Table3 based on the bore diameter of the bearing.
According to the above two ratios the value of X = 0.56 and Y = 1.4 from Appendix Table . The
rotation factor is take as one for inner race rotating bearings.

Now the value of dynamic equivalent radial load can be calculated as:

W =X ×V ×W R +Y ×W A
W =(0.56 × 1× 304.048)+(1.4 ×309.048)
W =602.96 N
Therefore, the basic dynamic radial load rating can be calculated as:
L 1k
C=W ( 6 )
10
Where:
C = basic dynamic radial load rating L = rating life
W = equivalent dynamic load L H = average life of bearing
k = 3, for all bearing
The average life of bearing is 5 year and the machine works 100 days per year at 8 hours per
day, then:
L H =5× 100 ×8=4,000 hours
The rating life is:
L=60 × N 2 × L H
L=60 × 20× 4,000
L=4.8 ×106 revolution
The basic dynamic radial load rating is:
L 1k
C=W ( )
106
4.8× 106 13
C=602.96 N ×( )
10 6
C=1.017 KN
Then the basic dynamic radial load is multiplied by the service factor ( k s) to get the design
basic dynamic radial load capacity. Take service factor (k s) is 2.5 from Table A2.

Page | 43
 design basic dynamic radial load capacity=C × k s =3.11 ×1.5=1.5255 KN

Figure 3.14 Radial ball bearing

Therefore, based on the value of the internal (bore) diameter and the design dynamic radial
load capacity bearing number 206 is selected from Table A 3which have the following
dimensions:
Bore diameter = 40 mm, Outer diameter = 80 mm, Thickness = 18 mm
3.11. Selection of Openers ploughs
Openers are typical ploughs that used in the seeder to make enough furrows by opening the
soil and let good and easy placement of seed and fertilizer. The very wide range of farm
conditions openers subjected to makes openers critical member to analysis.
The openers as described above are subjected to various stresses which emanate from the
dominant reaction due to opener-soil interaction, therefore, as an option it is assumed that the
following parameters are suitable to perform the desired operation. The geometries of the
openers given in this part are generally proportional to the traditional plough and to same of
practically implemented comparable openers discussed in the literature
There are two basic features selected for the inline seeder conditions. Both of them are
discussed below with illustrating sketches and tables:
1. Solid square steel rod with reasonable cross sections and shearing end, that is to be made by
forging an end of the square bar to the required shape, and the bar need to be bend to some
angle so that to get good shearing angle.
2 A circular steel tube with sufficient wall thickness, in which the shearing edge is created by
cutting/ shaping one end of the tube to the desired shape. This type of opener provides a very
nice and easy attachment of seed and fertilizer tubes

Page | 44
 Figure 3.15 Plough
type

Page | 45
 3.12. Covering mechanism
It is the mechanism used to cover the furrows soon after seed and fertilizer are placed
properly. Usually the covering mechanism of seeders contains two basic parts; the first is a part
that cover the soil back to the furrows and the second part is that used to compacts the coved soil
following the first part. The importance and necessities of both covering and compacting are
discussed in the literature; therefore by any means it is mandatory to provide both of them. But
the present practical alternatives are less attractive financially for our farmers hence we are
forced to look for other conventional cum efficient mechanism.
To some extent chains are applicable to covering system, still no analysis of chain covering
mechanism found being necessary. As a result for the inline seeder this chain mechanism is
adopted. Getting proper covering and compaction using chains is hence a matter of selection.

Page | 46
 CHAPTER FIVE
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1. Results

Table4.1 Summery of Findings

S/ Design Parameters Symbols Values Unit
No
Diameter of Front wheel D1 30 Mm
1
Diameter of Back wheel D2 40 Mm
2
speed of Back wheel Nb 40 RPM
3
speed of Front wheel Nf 53 RPM
4
Torque on Front wheel Tf 22.5 Nm
5
Torque on Back wheel Tb 21.2 Nm
6
Length of chain L 1811.57 Mm
7
Top width of belt B 13 Mm
8
Thickness of belt T 8 Mm
9
Diameter of shaft Ds 30 Mm
10 Ld 1
Length of driving shaft 780 Mm
11 Bore diameter of bearing Db 40 Mm
12 Outer diameter of bearing Do 80 Mm

13 Thickness of bearing tb 18 Mm

14 Number of teeth of first Z1 54 Mm

sprocket

Page | 47
 Number of teeth of second Z2 27 Mm
15
sprocket
16 Pitch of larger sprocket P 15.875 Mm

17 Pitch of smaller sprocket P 12.7 Mm

18 Roller diameter D 10.16 Mm

19 d2
Pitch circle diameter for 273 Mm
20 larger

21
22 Pitch circle diameter for d1 136.74 Mm
smaller
23
Mass of the bucket mb 3.167 Mm
24
Volume V 403.44 Mm
25
Thickness t 15 Mm
26
Length Lf 925 Mm
27
Thickness t 5 Mm
28
Outer diameter DO 25 Mm
29
Inner diameter Di 21 Mm
30
Thickness t 4 Mm
31
Length of handle Lh 800 Mm

Page | 48
 4.3. Discussion
The design and selection results of components which are listed in table 4.1 are gotten from
the detailed design of the machine which have safe dimension and suitable or appropriate to
construct the onion planting machine then based on this results we can manufacture a conveyor
fitted onion planting machine.
In general the design is safe in analysis. This is proven by factor of safety of chain, equivalent
twisting moment of shaft, bursting and working pressure of pipes, maximum bending moment of
support and pushing bar and also buckling of the frame are obtained within the safe limit. In
addition to this selection of bearing, selection of screw, selection of cup and selection of Handel
is done within the correct required value.
4.4. Simulation of frame with ANSYS
Simulation is a powerful software technology for simulating a physical behavior on the
computer. Will it break? Will it deform? Will it get too hot? These are the type of question for
which simulation provide accurate answer. Instead of building prototype and developing
elaborate testing regimens to analysis the physical behavior of product. Engineers can elicit this
information quickly and accurately on the computer.
The project of manual operated onion planting machine frame can be simulated by using
ANSYS soft ware. Total deformations of frame, mesh, maximum shear stress, shears elastic
stress.
ANSYS software. Show total deformation of frame below can be concluded that the red color
show the machimim deformation of the parts and the blue color show the parts at which the
frame safe

Page | 49
Figure4.1Total deformation of frame

Figure4.1Mesh

Page | 50
Figure4.2Maximum shear stress

Figure4.3Shear elastic stress

Page | 51
 CHAPTER FIVE
COST BREAKDOWNS
Table5.1 Cost description
s/n Component Material Quantit Unit Total
o y Cost
1 Power Wheel Stainless steel 2 600 1200
2 Front wheel Stainless steel 1 600 600
3 Bucket Stainless steel 1 300 300
4 Cups Stainless steel 17 100 1700
5 Opening and Stainless steel 2 300 600
Covering plough
6 Handel Cast iron 1 300 300
7 Frame Cast iron 1 1000 1000
9 Shaft carbon steel 3 600 1800
10 Screw Hardened steel 10 120 1200
11 Chain and Sprocket Malleable cast iron 2 1000 1000
Total 11,050
This is only the cost of material so that the components can be purchased or casted or welded,
having all these components, they need to be integrated which is another cost of manufacturing
so that these components are assembled and welded together to give the desired strength of the
machine as a whole. Therefore we estimated the cost of manufacturing to be 3500 birr, therefore
the total cost of the machine is the sum of material cost and manufacturing cost.
Total cost = cost of material + cost of manufacturing
= 11,050 + 3500
= 14550 birr

Page | 52
 CHAPTER SIX
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
6.1. Conclusions
We conclude in the design and simulation of manually operated onion planting machine Most
of Ethiopian farmers producing onion on small scale use traditional methods for sowing/
planting such as broadcasting and seed dropping behind the plough, which effects germination
due to the non-uniform placement of seeds at the proper depth. All methods of onion planting
depend heavily on manual labor. So this design used to solve this problem by reducing the
human effort with in an effective time saving. This machine is used to recommend row to raw
and bulb to bulb spacing to get optimum yields, but when the farmers use manual labor to plant
the onions the planting gap is not consistent.
This design is designed with all appropriate input data and the results of all parts are
analytically identified. This design and simulation of manually operated onion is very efficient,
easy to manufacture and easy to operate.
Generally, the design of this machine has been successfully designed with chain conveyor
mechanism and other peripherals in a correct implication of analysis and 3D model by using
AutoCAD software.

Page | 53
 6.2. Recommendations
There are many problems that are faced by the design and simulation of manually operated
onion planting machine. To solve this problem use the mechanism of chain and sprocket
mechanism best solution by developing some futures which was used in previous manual
operated system by developing some futures which was chain and sprocket mechanism we
recommended the following basic points those who wants to update some futures of the
machine:
Beginning from the technique of seedling raising, a systematic research on the mechanization
of onion planting transplanting should be carried out. The existing trans planters should be
improved so as to meet the needs of the specialized peasant households. In particular in the
design of the onion planting there was many difficulties which in general are emanate from lack
of experiment based information on the aggregate agricultural technology issues.

Page | 54
 6.3. Future work
In the future, the system can be improved by using the engine for power driven as it
will give the efficiency in plantation and also will reduce the effort of human being.
Some of the tasks couldn’t be done due to limitation of machining tool, scientific data andneeds
further study to develop the technology more.
 Increasing the number of row by System optimizing,
 Reduction the weight of component by further material and size change
 Specify the number of onion seedling which is vary according to variety

Page | 55
 REFERENCE
1. J.E. Shigley, Mechanical engineering design, 2008, 5st edition, McGraw Hill, N.Y,
2. R.S. khurmi, J.k. Gupta, A textbook of machine Design, 2005, 13 th edition, Ram Nagar,
New Delhi
3. William Orthwein, Machine Component design, 2003 , 2nd edition, Jaico publishing house,
Mumbai
4. Bakhtaran and Loghavi, 2009 Development of Metering Device for Onion Bulb Planter
http://ndpublisher in, Accessed 15 March 2019.
5. SMaheshwari, TK Verma MR, 2007 Modification and Performance Evaluation of Garlic
Planter.J.Agricultural Engineering Today, Vol. 31(2); 11-14, Accessed on March 2019.
6. Mr. Jarudchai Yenayub, Mr. Sonluck Kingthong and AP. Jiraporn Benjaphragairat, 2002
Design and development of A Garlic Planter In Thailand, Accessed on March 2019
7. William Orthwein, Machine Component design, 2003 , 2nd edition, Jaico publishing house,
Mumbai
8. Tulu Taffa, Soil and Water Conservation for Sustainable agriculture, 2002, Mega
Publishing Enterprise, A.A Ethiopia
9. Advancing the Art, 1997,Zero tillage farmers Association, Manitoba North Dakota,
10. Conservation tillage system and management, Mid-West Plan Service, agricultural and
Biosystems Engineering Department, Lowa State University, Ames
11. Increasing wheat yield Sustainably through Agronomic Means, 1997, Paper 98-01,
CIMMYT
12. Olani Nikus and Fikre Mulugeta,Onion seed production techniques,Asella, Ethiopia,
May/2010
13. Devdas Shetty, Ph.D., and Richard A. Kolk P.E.mechatronics system design,second
edition, SI,(1997)
14. Boyhan, G., D. Granberry, & T. Kelley.Rice Transplanting Machine Int. Journal of
Engineering Research and Application, Vol. 7 (2001)
15. M. R. Bakhtiari1, and M. Loghavi; Development and Evaluation of an Innovative Garlic
Clove Precision PlanterVol. 11: 125-136 (2009), worked on innovatively designed tractor

Page | 56
16. Yenpayub et; journal of metallurgy and material science, Volume 57. (2002)
17. Maheswari and Verma,Design And Development Of Paddy Seedling
Transplanting,Volume 2 (2007),
18. V.V. SARAFDepartment of Farm Power and Machinery, volume 8,2015
19. Malve A.C.1, Rajendraand Vikas Th, International Research Journal of Engineering and
Technology (IRJET),Volume: 06 Issue: 12 | Dec 2019
20. Ashutosh Pandirwar,J. K. Singh and Adarsh Kumar;Development and Evaluation of Semi-
Automatic Six Row Onion Seedlings Trans planter,vol.50 no.1 2019
21. Lokesh Kumawat1, H. Raheman1 and Vikas Singh, International Journal of Current
Microbiology and Applied Sciences ISSN: 2319-7706 Volume 9 Number 2 (2020);
22. Benjaphragairat, J. and Nobutaka, I. Design and control of metering system and furrow
openers for garlic planter. (2010).

Page | 57
 APPENDIX
Appendix A1: PART DRAWINGS AND ASSEMBLY
Ground wheel

FRONT WHEEL

HANDLE

Page | 58
FRAME

Page | 59
 BUCKET

PLOUGH LAND AND COVER

Page | 60
ASSAMBLY

Page | 61
Page | 62
Appendix A2
Table A1 – basic static and dynamic capacities of various types of radial ball bearings

Table A2 – principal dimensions for radial ball bearings.

Page | 63
Table A3 – values of X and Y for dynamically loaded bearings.

Page | 64
Table A4 – Values of service factor for bearings

Tables A5 – Number of teeth on the sprocket

Page | 65
Table A6- characteristics of roller chains according to IS: 2403 – 1991.8

Page | 66