2015INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERINGOpen access

Comparative performance of different puddling equipments

R.S. Chhina

Open full text 2 citations

Abstract

This study was conducted at farmer's field as well as at KVK farm in Gurdaspur district of Punjab to evaluate the performance of various puddling implements viz., pulverizing roller (T 1 ) and rotavator (T 2 ) with comparison to conventional method of puddling (T 3 ) being used by the farmers in the various parts of the state. In T 1 the puddling was done by two passes of pulversing roller whereas in T 2 it was done with only single pass of rotavator and in T 3 by two passes of cultivator followed by two passes of planker. The puddling index (PI) was highest in T 2 (71.5%) followed by T 1 (69.3 %) and T 3 (49.8 %). The PI of all the treatments differed significantly from each other, though the PI in T 1 and T 2 was far better than T 3. The infiltration rate in case of T 1 and T 2 was 11.8 and 17.6 per cent lower than T 3 , respectively. The net returns (Rs. 52,250/ha) and benefit cost ratio (3.1) was highest in case of T 1 , followed by T 3 (Rs. 52,100/ha and 2.7) and T 2 (Rs. 51970/ha and 2.5) treatments, respectively.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This study was conducted at farmer's field as well as at KVK farm in Gurdaspur district of Punjab to evaluate the performance of various puddling implements viz., pulverizing roller (T 1 ) and rotavator (T 2 ) with comparison to conventional method of puddling (T 3 ) being used by the farmers in the various parts of the state. In T 1 the puddling was done by two passes of pulversing roller whereas in T 2 it was done with only single pass of rotavator and in T 3 by two passes of cultivator followed by two passes of planker. The puddling index (PI) was highest in T 2 (71.5%) followed by T 1 (69.3 %) and T 3 (49.8 %). The PI of all the treatments differed significantly from each other, though the PI in T 1 and T 2 was far better than T 3. The infiltration rate in case of T 1 and T 2 was 11.8 and 17.6 per cent lower than T 3 , respectively. The net returns (Rs. 52,250/ha) and benefit cost ratio (3.1) was highest in case of T 1 , followed by T 3 (Rs. 52,100/ha and 2.7) and T 2 (Rs. 51970/ha and 2.5) treatments, respectively.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 2 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This study was conducted at farmer's field as well as at KVK farm in Gurdaspur district of Punjab to evaluate the performance of various puddling implements viz., pulverizing roller (T 1 ) and rotavator (T 2 ) with comparison to conventional method of puddling (T 3 ) being used by the farmers in the various parts of the state. In T 1 the puddling was done by two passes of pulversing roller whereas in T 2 it was done with only single pass of rotavator and in T 3 by two passes of cultivator followed by two passes of planker. The puddling index (PI) was highest in T 2 (71.5%) followed by T 1 (69.3 %) and T 3 (49.8 %). The PI of all the treatments differed significantly from each other, though the PI in T 1 and T 2 was far better than T 3. The infiltration rate in case of T 1 and T 2 was 11.8 and 17.6 per cent lower than T 3 , respectively. The net returns (Rs. 52,250/ha) and benefit cost ratio (3.1) was highest in case of T 1 , followed by T 3 (Rs. 52,100/ha and 2.7) and T 2 (Rs. 51970/ha and 2.5) treatments, respectively.

Key concepts: Puddling, Environmental science, Agricultural engineering, Engineering, Agronomy, Biology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparative performance of different puddling equipments — Research Paper | ScholarLens