• Home
  • Browse
    • Current Issue
    • By Issue
    • By Author
    • By Subject
    • Author Index
    • Keyword Index
  • Journal Info
    • About Journal
    • Aims and Scope
    • Editorial Board
    • Publication Ethics
    • Peer Review Process
  • Guide for Authors
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Contact Us
 
  • Login
  • Register
Home Articles List Article Information
  • Save Records
  • |
  • Printable Version
  • |
  • Recommend
  • |
  • How to cite Export to
    RIS EndNote BibTeX APA MLA Harvard Vancouver
  • |
  • Share Share
    CiteULike Mendeley Facebook Google LinkedIn Twitter
Journal of Soil Sciences and Agricultural Engineering
arrow Articles in Press
arrow Current Issue
Journal Archive
Volume Volume 16 (2025)
Volume Volume 15 (2024)
Volume Volume 14 (2023)
Volume Volume 13 (2022)
Issue Issue 12
Issue Issue 11
Issue Issue 10
Issue Issue 9
Issue Issue 8
Issue Issue 7
Issue Issue 6
Issue Issue 5
Issue Issue 4
Issue Issue 3
Issue Issue 2
Issue Issue 1
Volume Volume 12 (2021)
Volume Volume 11 (2020)
Volume Volume 10 (2019)
Volume Volume 9 (2018)
Volume Volume 8 (2017)
Volume Volume 7 (2016)
Volume Volume 6 (2015)
Volume Volume 5 (2014)
Volume Volume 4 (2013)
Volume Volume 3 (2012)
Volume Volume 2 (2011)
Volume Volume 1 (2010)
Volume Volume 34 (2009)
Volume Volume 33 (2008)
Volume Volume 32 (2007)
Volume Volume 31 (2006)
Volume Volume 30 (2005)
Volume Volume 29 (2004)
Volume Volume 28 (2003)
Volume Volume 27 (2002)
Volume Volume 26 (2001)
Volume Volume 25 (2000)
Abo-habaga, M. (2022). Comparison among Three Chisel Plough Shares Forms. Journal of Soil Sciences and Agricultural Engineering, 13(1), 39-42. doi: 10.21608/jssae.2022.127101.1065
M. m. Abo-habaga. "Comparison among Three Chisel Plough Shares Forms". Journal of Soil Sciences and Agricultural Engineering, 13, 1, 2022, 39-42. doi: 10.21608/jssae.2022.127101.1065
Abo-habaga, M. (2022). 'Comparison among Three Chisel Plough Shares Forms', Journal of Soil Sciences and Agricultural Engineering, 13(1), pp. 39-42. doi: 10.21608/jssae.2022.127101.1065
Abo-habaga, M. Comparison among Three Chisel Plough Shares Forms. Journal of Soil Sciences and Agricultural Engineering, 2022; 13(1): 39-42. doi: 10.21608/jssae.2022.127101.1065

Comparison among Three Chisel Plough Shares Forms

Article 6, Volume 13, Issue 1, January 2022, Page 39-42  XML PDF (589.54 K)
Document Type: Original Article
DOI: 10.21608/jssae.2022.127101.1065
View on SCiNiTO View on SCiNiTO
Author
M. m. Abo-habaga email
Agricultural engineering - faculty of agriculture -mansoura university
Abstract
A comparison among three chisels plough shares forms i.e., shovel with a width of 10 cm, breaker sweep with a width of 15 cm and wing with a width of 20 cm was executed with soil having a silt loam texture under constant operating circumstances. The main results of the current study can be summarized as follows;  The soil surface after ploughing with shovel shares form possessed the greatest percentage of the roughness (59.03%), whereas utilization of the breaker sweep and wing shares form leaved the soil surface with roughness of 51.9 and 37.9%, respectively. The percentage ploughed area after ploughing at depth of 18 cm was 55.37%, 64.2695 and 75% from the total area with usage of shovel, breaker sweep and wing shares forms, respectively. The power required for ploughing process at an operating depth of 18 cm and forward speed of 0.8 m Sec-1 were 7.92, 11.76 and 9.3 kW, while the unit draught of soil was 0.62, 0.8 and 0.54 kN cm-2 concerning the shovel shares form, breaker sweep shares and wing shares form, respectively.   Generally, it can be concluded that the chisel plough with wing shares form is the most suitable primary tillage implement.
Keywords
Shove share; breaker sweep and wing
Statistics
Article View: 196
PDF Download: 397
Home | Glossary | News | Aims and Scope | Sitemap
Top Top

Journal Management System. Designed by NotionWave.