Loading...
Anand Agricultural University, Anand
Anand Agricultural University (AAU) was established in 2004 at Anand with the support of the Government of Gujarat, Act No.(Guj 5 of 2004) dated April 29, 2004. Caved out of the erstwhile Gujarat Agricultural University (GAU), the dream institution of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and Dr. K. M. Munshi, the AAU was set up to provide support to the farming community in three facets namely education, research and extension activities in Agriculture, Horticulture Engineering, product Processing and Home Science. At present there seven Colleges, seventeen Research Centers and six Extension Education Institute working in nine districts of Gujarat namely Ahmedabad, Anand, Dahod, Kheda, Panchmahal, Vadodara, Mahisagar, Botad and Chhotaudepur
AAU's activities have expanded to span newer commodity sectors such as soil health card, bio-diesel, medicinal plants apart from the mandatory ones like rice, maize, tobacco, vegetable crops, fruit crops, forage crops, animal breeding, nutrition and dairy products etc. the core of AAU's operating philosophy however, continues to create the partnership between the rural people and committed academic as the basic for sustainable rural development. In pursuing its various programmes AAU's overall mission is to promote sustainable growth and economic independence in rural society. AAU aims to do this through education, research and extension education. Thus, AAU works towards the empowerment of the farmers.
Browse
4 results
Search Results
ThesisItem Open Access DEVELOPMENT AND PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF MANUALLY OPERATED CONO-WEEDER FOR PADDY CROP(COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY ANAND AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY GODHRA, 2016) HITESHKUMAR BABUBHAI SHAKYA; Dr. R.SWARNKARIn middle Gujarat region, weeding operation in wetland paddy is largely done by hand or Khurpi. Another method is the use of mechanical weeders viz., manual or power weeders i.e. engine or tractor operated weeder. Power weeder is not suitable for wetland condition due to increased weight and operational difficulties in puddle field condition. Japanese paddy weeder and TNAU conoweeder are the package equipments and largely adopted by the farmers of the region.ThesisItem Open Access INVESTIGATION ON NOISE ATTENUATION PERFORMANCE OF EXHAUST MUFFLERS OF FARM TRACTORS WITH APPROPRIATE DESIGN ALTERATIONS(AAU, Anand, 2017) M. D. VORA; Dr. R. SwarnkarMechanical equipment is the most popular kind of farm power sources being used in current times in the field of agriculture. Majority of the farm operations connected with crop production processes are successfully adapted to mechanization. Tractor has remained at centre as a source of farm power and has played a vital role in agricultural mechanization. All mechanical equipments produce noise and vibrations of different intensities. Excessive vibrations and noises have been considered as damaging factors to both men and machines. Noisy environment has been one of those threats which have emerged out of modern life styles in urban and rural areas both. Tractors dominate rural areas most. While cultivating a field, tractors operate for long hours and generate high level of noises that make an imact on the operators and the neighbourhood. It has now been established that exceeded noise levels cause negative impacts resulting into the mental tiredness and lesser working efficiency. Noise exceeding the certain limits can even cause permanent damage to hearing ability of human beings. Tractor noise is composed of mainly two kinds of noises (i) noise due to motions of machinery parts & vibrations involved, and (ii) noise that is generated during the repeated explosions taking place into the cylinders during combustion which is delivered out through exhaust that is termed as exhaust noise. Exhaust mufflers play an important role in the mitigation of noise levels arising out of engine operation. Reactive muffler is most commonly used on tractors. Investigating the [II] effect of altered design of mufflers on the noise levels can be helpful as a strategic attempt to mitigate the ill effects taking place on human health and comfort due to noise generated out of tractor and farm machinery operations. The primary function of a reactive silencer is to reflect sound waves back to the source. Energy is dissipated in the extended flow path resulting from internal reflections. Reactive silencers generally consist of several pipe segments that interconnect with a number of larger chambers. The reflective effect of the silencer chambers and piping (typically referred to as resonators) essentially prevents some sound wave elements from being transmitted past the silencer. The reactive silencers are more effective at lower frequencies than at high frequencies, and are most widely used to attenuate the exhaust noise of internal combustion engines. The examination of existing noise and vibration levels on farm tractors provided useful data on the intensities of noise and vibrations associated with farm tractor. Vibration levels were observed in velocity (mm/s) and acceleration (m/s2). Regression analysis of data revealed the extent of the effect of vibration levels in longitudinal (X), lateral (Y) and vertical (Z) directions (as observed upon different tractor surfaces) on the noise levels generated. The linear regression equation and graphs were obtained with vibration component as an explanatory variable on x-axis and respective noise level as dependent variable on y-axis along with corresponding value of coefficient of determination (R2). The values of R2 for the linear equation expressing noise level as a function of vibration velocity in X, Y & Z direction were respectively found 0.9333, 0.731 & 0.8597 and 0.9854, 0.9992 & 0.9853 for Tractor-1 (mini tractor) and Tractor-2 respectively. The values of R2 for the linear equation expressing noise level as a function of vibration acceleration in X, Y & Z direction were respectively found 0.9783, 0.9102 & 0.9999 and 0.8936, 0.7796 & 0.9705 for Tractor-1 (mini tractor) and Tractor-2 respectively. The detailed noise level measurement was conducted under three selected muffler mountings namely muffler-A, B & C along with standard muffler (muffler-S) on Tractor-1 i.e. mini tractor (muffler-B excluded) & Tractor-2 (muffler-A excluded). The noise levels (SPL in dBA) recorded at operator’s ear level revealed that the mean noise level observed under muffler-C (82.95 dBA) on Tractor-1 (mini tractor) was significantly lower than that recorded under muffler-S (83.09 dBA) but was not significantly different when compared with noise level obtained under muffler-A (83.04). While, on Tractor-2, the noise levels observed under muffler-B (84.52 dBA) [III] & muffler-C (84.46 dBA) both were significantly lower than that recorded under muffler-S (84.90 dBA). The difference in noise levels generated under muffler-A & C on Tractor-1 (mini tractor) was found significant. But, difference in noise levels among altered design mufflers on Tractor-2 i.e. muffler-B & C was found insignificant. The noise level (SPL) test conducted at 10 m distance from the tractor revealed that on Tractor-1 (15 hp mini tractor), the noise levels observed under muffler-A (67.44 dBA) & muffler-C (67.43 dBA) both were significantly lower than that recorded under muffler-S (68.09 dBA). Similarly, on Tractor-2 (60 hp), the noise levels observed under muffler-B (71.53 dBA) & muffler-C (71.90 dBA) both were significantly lower than that recorded under muffler-S (72.61 dBA). Though, difference in noise levels of altered design mufflers namely muffler-A & muffler-C on Tractor-1 (mini tractor) was not found significant. But, the noise level observed under muffler-B on Tractor-2 was found significantly lower than that observed under muffler-C. At 30 m distance away from Tractor-1 (15 hp mini tractor), mean noise levels measured under muffler-A (60.27 dBA) & muffler-C (59.92 dBA) both were significantly lower than that recorded under muffler-S (60.51 dBA). Similarly on Tractor-2 (60 hp), mean noise levels measured under muffler-B (62.72 dBA) & muffler-C (62.70 dBA) both were significantly lower than that recorded under muffler-S (62.89 dBA). Noise level observed under muffler-C was also significantly lower than that observed under muffler-A on Tractor-1 at 30 m distance away from the tractor. But, the difference between noise levels under muffler-B & muffler-C on Tractor-2 was however insignificant. On Tractor-1 (mini tractor), the noise attenuation observed under muffler-S, muffler-A & muffler-C in comparison to no muffler mounting were respectively found 3.0, 3.2 & 3.3 % at ear level, 1.9, 2.9 & 2.9 % at 10 m distance and 2.4, 2.7 & 3.4 % at 30 m distance when noise levels were counted in decibels. When noise levels were counted in μPa, the amount of noise attenuation observed under muffler-S, muffler-A & muffler-C in comparison to no muffler mounting were respectively found 25.9, 26.7 & 27.6 % at ear level, 13.9, 20.6 & 20.6 % at 10 m distance and 15.9, 17.8 & 21.5 % at 30 m distance on Tractor-1 (mini tractor). Thus, muffler-C performed well followed by muffler-A & muffler-S in the next positions with average attenuability of 23.2, 21.7 & 18.6 percent (averaged over three distances of observation) respectively. On Tractor-2, the noise attenuation observed under muffler-S, muffler-A & [IV] muffler-C in comparison to no muffler mounting were respectively found 5.7, 6.1 & 6.1 % at ear level, 3.8, 5.3 & 4.8 % at 10 m distance and 4.6, 4.9 & 4.9 % at 30 m distance when noise levels were counted in decibels. When noise levels were calculated in μPa unit, the amount of noise attenuation observed under muffler-S, muffler-A & muffler-C in comparison to no muffler mounting were respectively found 44.4, 46.9 & 46.9 % at ear level, 28.4, 36.9 & 33.9 % at 10 m distance and 29.2, 30.8 & 30.8 % at 30 m distance on Tractor-1 (mini tractor). Thus, muffler-B performed well followed by muffler-C & muffler-S in the next positions with average attenuability of 38.2, 37.2 & 34 percent (averaged over three distances of observation) respectively. Peak frequency observations obtained under muffler-C on Tractor-1 were found quite lower than that observed under standard muffler (muffler-S) at two places of measurement viz. at ear level and at 10 m distance. But this was not in similar fashion on Tractor-2 where lower peak frequency occurrences were greater under muffler-S than C. Analysis of amplitude levels of tractor noise frequencies conducted with the help of spectrograms revealed greater presence of lower frequencies in the range 0-2.5 kHz at 1500, 1750 & 2000 RPM at ear level under modified muffler than that observed under standard muffler.ThesisItem Open Access DEVELOPMENT AND PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF MANUALLY OPERATED CONO-WEEDER FOR PADDY CROP(Anand Agricultural University, Anand, 2016) HITESHKUMAR BABUBHAI SHAKYA; Dr. R.SWARNKARIn middle Gujarat region, weeding operation in wetland paddy is largely done by hand or Khurpi. Another method is the use of mechanical weeders viz., manual or power weeders i.e. engine or tractor operated weeder. Power weeder is not suitable for wetland condition due to increased weight and operational difficulties in puddle field condition. Japanese paddy weeder and TNAU conoweeder are the package equipments and largely adopted by the farmers of the region.ThesisItem Open Access DEVELOPMENT AND PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF MANUALLY OPERATED CONO-WEEDER FOR PADDY CROP(Anand Agricultural University, Anand, 2016) HITESHKUMAR BABUBHAI SHAKYA; Dr. R.SWARNKARIn middle Gujarat region, weeding operation in wetland paddy is largely done by hand or Khurpi. Another method is the use of mechanical weeders viz., manual or power weeders i.e. engine or tractor operated weeder. Power weeder is not suitable for wetland condition due to increased weight and operational difficulties in puddle field condition. Japanese paddy weeder and TNAU conoweeder are the package equipments and largely adopted by the farmers of the region.