Efficiency estimation of striptill soil processing technology

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Efficiency estimation of striptill soil processing technology

I.B. Borisenko1, 3, O.G. Chamurliev1,

G.О. Chamurliev2, M.V. Meznikova1

1 Volgograd State Agricultural University

2 Scientific Research Institute of Design Vid Project

3 Caspian Research Institute of Arid Agriculture

Abstract

This study explores the technology of chilling from the point of view of anthropogenic impact on soil. The influence of the arrangement of workers on technological rocessing is analyzed. The efficiency of resource-saving deep cultivation technology in production of row crops on example of sunflower growing in Volgograd region is estimated. We give technical and economic assessment of sunflower cultivation depending on the technological process of chilling. We defined a competitive technology of basic soil cultivation. Analysis of data obtained shows that the largest area of cross-section of the formation is produced when soil is treated with chisel tools as working organs are arranged such that they form a zone of continuous loosening, accordingly, it has the greatest anthropogenic impact. Field experiments also showed that deep loosening belts to a depth of 0.25...0.35 m, alternating with strips without treatment, are characterized by positive processes. Unprocessed areas become overcrowded (more than 1.3 g/cm3), so they create less favorable, in comparison with processed, conditions for the development of some species of perennial weeds. Studies have shown that, with the main soil-free tillage of the soil to a depth of 0.3 m, from the stubble of winter wheat, stubble conservation was consistent: 69.67% -- over the treated band using striptill technology; 76.33% -- on the processed strip by a chisel with a trail of 0.7 m; 68.67% for a chisel with a trail of 0.35 m. After the passage of the aggregates on the soil surface, all stubble remains within the requirements for SRT AIST 4.6--2010 (more than 60%). The use of striptill technology reduces fuel costs by 35.5% relative to the classical chiesel, and by 27.3% relative to the minimum technology. Accordingly, the cost of wages is reduced by 37.5% compared to the classical chisel and by 24.8% compared to the minimum chisel technology.

Keywords: chiseling, band ripping, deep tillage, anthropogenic impact, striptill technology

Оценка эффективности технологии полосной обработки почвы

2 Научно-исследовательский и проектный институт «Вид Проект»

3 Прикаспийский научно-исследовательский институт аридного земледелия

В статье рассмотрена технология чизелевания с позиции антропогенного воздействия на почву. Проанализировано влияние расстановки рабочих на технологический процесс обработки. Дана оценка эффективности ресурсосберегающей технологии глубокой обработки почвы при производстве пропашных культур на примере выращивания подсолнечника на территории Волгоградской области. Дана технико-экономическая оценка возделывания подсолнечника в зависимости от технологического процесса чизелевания. Определена конкурентоспособная технология основной обработки почвы. Анализ полученных данных показывает, что наибольшая площадь поперечного сечения пласта образуется при обработке почвы буровыми инструментами, поскольку рабочие органы расположены так, что они образуют зону непрерывного рыхления, соответственно, она оказывает наибольшее антропогенное воздействие. Полевые эксперименты также показали, что глубокие рыхлые ленты на глубину 0,25...0,35 м, чередующиеся с полосками без обработки, характеризуются положительными процессами. Необработанные площади становятся загущенными (более 1,3 г/см3), поэтому они создают менее благоприятные по сравнению с обработанными условия для развития некоторых видов многолетних сорняков. Исследования показали, что после основной обработки почвы на глубину 0,3 м с использованием технологии полосной обработки почвы сохранялось 69,67% стерни озимой пшеницы. Использование технологии полосной обработки почвы снижает затраты на топливо на 35,5% по сравнению с классическим обработкой и на 27,3% относительно минимальной технологии. Соответственно, стоимость заработной платы снижается на 37,5% по сравнению с классической схемой и на 24,8% по сравнению с минимальной технологией.

Ключевые слова: глубокая обработка почвы, антропогенное воздействие, технология стриптил, полосная обработка почвы

Introduction

One of the most important ways of stabilizing and improving the economic efficiency of agricultural organizations is the further development of the intensification of production through the use of resource-saving technologies for the cultivation of agricultural crops. The right choice and rational use of soil-cultivating tools, as an executive tool of a sound manufacturing technology, is the main condition for ensuring the growth of productivity and profitability in agriculture. The greatest potential for cost reduction is in the area of basic deep tillage, while a stable reduction in costs is possible with a change in the tool setting that affects the process. soil processing technology

The working organs of machines for processing soil of any type affect the natural environment. Such influence over time leads to a disturbance of the ecosystem. One of the main reasons for this phenomenon is the inconsistency of farming technology. For example, ploughing often leads to erosion of the fertile layer, salinization of soils may be an undesirable consequence of irrigation, and pasture of cattle is accompanied by degradation of grass cover with appearance of conditions for erosion. Anthropogenic impact on soil can be characterized, in particular, by the mechanical destruction of natural environment, determined not only by depth, but also by cross-sectional area. The result of such undesirable effects is described by anthropogenic factor [1]. To study degree of influence of strip farming on environment, we have chosen anthropogenic impact. This made it possible to compare the various technological processes of soil cultivation, on the basis of an implement with chisel working tools, arranged with various interinheritance, providing outcropping to surface [2] and additional device [3] limiting zone of deformation (Strip-till) with a classic chisel, providing a zone of continuous loosening.

Materials and methods

To minimize anthropogenic impact on the soil, it is recommended to reduce energy costs, in particular, depth of processing. That is, change in anthropogenic impact can be characterized by the cross-sectional area of the treated formation. This fact is actual in the production of row crops, the cultivation of which provides a strip mechanical effect on the medium to be treated, as a promising environmental and economical technology. Indicators of rational use and economical use of material and energy resources, expressed in quantitative form, are the requirements of resource use and resource saving [4]. The established indicators of resource use should provide an opportunity to effective assess of resource-saving requirements. The indicator, determined by the ratio of a particular parameter to another, is the specific indicator of resource use.

Considering the fact that for different technologies ratio of treated part of soil to untreated part differs significantly, it can be assumed that the smaller the given dependence in terms of the perimeter of tool capture width, the more effective the technology of soil cultivation from the resource saving point of view. Given that the same chisel tool, working at the same depth, but tuned to a different technological process, it is logical to compare their anthropogenic impact on the meter. In this regard, we introduce the concept of anthropogenic impact coefficient of soil-cultivating tools.

Anthropogenic impact on soil can be characterized by coefficient Kai determined by ratio of loosening area St in the transverse plane to working width Bw of the tool gripping, taking into account the depth hch of its processing:

where F -- area of loosening of the formation in the transverse plane, m2; Bw -- working width of the tool, m; hch -- depth of processing (chiseling), m.

Figures 1--3 show transverse profile diagrams of formation when chisel tool is operated using solid, strip and striptill technologies, respectively.

Fig. 1 . Scheme of transverse profile of formation during operation of chisel tool

Fig. 2. = of transverse profile of formation during operation of chisel tool using technology of strip processing of soil

Fig. 3. Scheme of transverse profile of formation during operation cultivation tools for striptill technology

Taking into account the scheme of transverse profile of formation during the operation of chisel tool using continuous loosening technology (Figure 1) and assuming value of soil deformation angle 90°, the loosening area Fkn transverse plane within working (technological) width of the Bw, tool is determined by depth product difference processing hch on the interfluve M and area of intrasoil comb multiplied by the number of working bodies n. After the transformation, the relationship takes the form:

Figure 4 shows the dependence of cross-sectional area of loosened part of formation from depth, taking into account technology of soil cultivation. As can be seen from the graph, the largest cross-sectional area of loosened part of formation is formed with continuous chiseling. This is explained by the increment of the zone of continuous loosening with increasing depth of processing. The least intensity is the strip technology as a result of cutting zone of deformation of soil with disc knives.

Fig. 4. Dependence of cross-sectional area of loosened part of formation from depth, taking into account processing technology

According to the given expressions (5, 6 and 7), taking into account the adopted values of width of inter-trace (for chiseling -- 0.35 m, strip and striptill treatments -- 0.7 m), bit 0.05 m, strip 0.25 m. Calculated dependences are obtained and graphs are plotted (Fig. 5) for the effect of chilling depth on change in the coefficient of anthropogenic treatment effect for various technological processes of chilling.

According to the graph, the coefficient of anthropogenic impact on the soil with technology of strip chiseling with respect to classical chiseling decreases with increasing depth of processing from 2 to 1.43 times. With striptill it increases from 2.18 to 2.58 times.

Intensity of increase in coefficient of anthropogenic impact on soil with striptill technology relative to band-wise chiseling also increases with increasing depth of processing, but with greater intensity, from 1.09 to 1.81 times. This situation is explained by different intensity of increment in the area of soil cultivation for selected technological processes.

Fig. 5. Dependence of change in coefficient of anthropogenic impact on depth, for various technologies of soil cultivation

Thus, when comparing the studied soil treatment technologies by the factor of anthropogenic impact, it was found that the least coefficient of anthropogenic impact in striptill technology is due to the fact that only a part of the strip is processed. And taking into account running meter, this technology favorably differs from classical and strip chisel processing concerning anthropogenic factor.

Results and discussion

During the field experiments, we obtained results of measuring loosening area of cross section of running meter of cultivated crop for various soil cultivation technologies. The studies were carried out for a chisel tool with a trace of working tools of 0.35 m; chisel tool for strip processing of soil with a trace of working bodies 0.70 m; tools for strip processing by striptill technology (with working tools on the frame of the tool with a trail 0.7 m). The data obtained were analyzed for determination of technological unloading coefficient Kp. This coefficient represents the share of the processing area of the applied technology relative to the area under continuous processing at the same depth and is determined by the ratio of processing areas of technology under consideration with respect to continuous loosening, per running meter of the cultivated crop:

where Brm -- the width of the running meter of the cultivated crop, equal to the width of the aisle or between strip distance with the cultivated crop; h -- depth of processing; Srm -- the processing area of technology under investigation per meter of cultivated crop.

The results of measurements and calculations are presented in Table 1.

Table 1