JIMMA UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES

JIMMA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

FACULTY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

Post Graduate Program
(MSc Mechanical System Design)

Project Title: Design and Development of Manual operated

Animal Feed Mixer Machine

Instructor: Abiyou Solomon

Name: Rebira Wirtu

i
 Table of contents
Acknowledgment............................................................................................................................vi

Abstract:........................................................................................................................................vii

1. Introduction..............................................................................................................................1

1.1. Objective...........................................................................................................................2

1.2. MATERIALS AND METHODS..........................................................................................2

1.2.1. MATERIALS.................................................................................................................2

1.2.1. METHODS................................................................................................................2

2. LITERATURE REVIEW.........................................................................................................3

2.1. BACKGROUND..................................................................................................................3

2.2. Statement of the problem..................................................................................................5

3. Problem definition......................................................................................................................5

3.1. Defining the problem and objective clarification.................................................................5

3.2. Project mission statement......................................................................................................6

3.3. Customer needs process........................................................................................................6

3.4. Gathering raw data................................................................................................................7

3.5. Interpreting data....................................................................................................................7

4. Conceptual Design.......................................................................................................................8

4.1. Definition of Conceptual Design..........................................................................................8

4.2. Concept Generation Methods................................................................................................8

4.3. Decomposition into Main Function and Sub Function.........................................................9

4.4. External and Internal search................................................................................................10

4.5. Functions means tree...........................................................................................................10

4.6. Generating alternative design..............................................................................................11

4.7. Evaluating alternative design concept.................................................................................12

4.9. Basic selection criteria........................................................................................................12

ii
 4.10. Mixing shaft......................................................................................................................14

4.11. Mixing chamber (cylindrical surface):..............................................................................16

4.12. Determination of weighting Factor...................................................................................18

4.13. Product structure...............................................................................................................19

4.14. Selection of Mechanically Operated Animal feed mixer machine...................................20

4.15. Mixing chamber................................................................................................................21

4.16. Design of mixer shaft........................................................................................................21

4.17. Supporting frame (stand):.................................................................................................22

4.18. Design of hopper...............................................................................................................23

4.19. Handle power calculation Assumption.............................................................................24

5. Embodiment Design..................................................................................................................25

5.1. The basic rules of embodiment design................................................................................26

5.2. Principles of embodiment design........................................................................................26

5.3. Component construction.....................................................................................................26

5.4. Bearings, bolt and key selections........................................................................................28

5.5. Assembly of the machine....................................................................................................28

6. Conclusion.................................................................................................................................30

iii
 List of Figures
Figure 1: Concept generation method structure.............................................................................15
Figure 2: Input Output Diagram....................................................................................................15
Figure 3: Main Functional decomposition....................................................................................16
Figure 4: Function Tree means......................................................................................................17
Figure 5: Structure of Objective Tree...........................................................................................24
Figure 6: Weighting factor for each criteria..................................................................................26
Figure 7: solid work of mixing chamber.......................................................................................28
Figure 8: solid work of mixing shaft.............................................................................................29
Figure 9: solid work of mixing frame (support)............................................................................30
Figure 10: solid work of mixing hopper........................................................................................31
Figure 11: solid work of mixing handle........................................................................................32
Figure 12: Components of Animal Feed mixing machine.............................................................34
Figure 13: Solid Assemble of manual operated Animal feed mixer machine...............................36

iv
 List of Tables

Table 1: Weighting evaluation criteria for engine operated animal feed mixer, electric motor

animal feed mixer and manual operated animal feed mixer..........................................................19

Table 2: Decision Matrix for selecting the best concept variant..................................................20

Table 3: Weighting evaluation criteria for Ribbon Blinder mixing shape, mixing shape

(Bioreactor) mixing shape, Spiral shape mixing shaft case...........................................................21

Table 4: Decision Matrix for selecting the best concept variant...................................................21

Table 5: Weighting evaluation criteria for vertical, Horizontal and spiral shaped mixer case.....22

Table 6: Decision Matrix for selecting the best concept variant...................................................23

v
 Acknowledgment
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Mr. Abiyou Solomon (PhD Candidate at Institute
of Mechanic (IFME), Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany)
providing me an opportunity to do the project work and for delivering us this vital course,
product design and development (PDD) to establish scientific and experimental framework of
this study.

vi
 Abstract
Food is one of the most important basic needs of animals like the hogs in order to survive. That
is why food and machinery are related in terms of food production, preparation and other
processes. Traditionally, small scale hog, cattle and poultry raiser like the researcher, used
manual or hand to mix the crushed feed. Venturing into medium scale production, machineries is
needed for the purposed of mixing an ingredients to turn into feeding of the animals. Machine is
a well-known structure consisting of frame works with various moving parts for doing the job
easier, faster and more quality output. A satisfactory mixing process produces a uniform feed in
a minimum time with a minimum cost of overhead, power, and labor.
This study is an attempt towards designing and fabricating a machine capable of mixing feed
constituents. The machine was designed and fabricated with a view of reducing human effort and
time by exploring the various principles associated with machine design.

The general procedure of conceptual design used; concept generation by decomposing into main
and sub function, product ideas from internal and external search, generating alternative solution
by setting criteria’s and Digital Logical Approach has been used for concept evaluation and
selection. The product architecture and configuration finally introduced in the embodiment
design after the selection of final concept. Design and development of mechanically or manually
operated mixer for Animal food mixing machine which is evaluated against the technical and
economical criteria’s can be carried out to be suitable with the most Ethiopians low farmers
capacity.

vii
8
 1. Introduction
Feed is an essential requirement in poultry production as it is in all other livestock keeping.
Oluyemi and Robert (1978) stated that once the poultry man has selected a good bird with long
life ability, high genetic capacity to grow or lay eggs effectively and has prepared the housing
and the management essential for the successful operation, the next thing is to produce the most
efficient nutritionally complete diet to suit a particular environmental condition. Feed production
for livestock, poultry or aquatic life involves a range of activities, which include grinding,
mixing, pelleting and drying operations. New (1987) gave a summary of the different types of
machinery needed for the production of various types of feeds and they include grinders, mixers,
elevators and conveyors, mixers, extruders, cookers, driers, fat sprayers and steam boilers.
Essentially, feed mixing can be done either manually or mechanically. The manual method of
mixing feed entails the use of shovel to intersperse the feed’s constituents into one another on
open concrete floors. The manual method of mixing feed ingredients is generally developed to
characterized by low output, less efficient, labour intensive and may prove unsafe, hence,
hazardous to the health of the intended animals, birds or fishes for which the feed is prepared.
The mechanical method of mixing is achieved by using mechanical mixers developed over the
years to alleviate the shortcomings associated with the manual method. A wide variety of mixers
are available for use in mixing components, the selection of which depends mainly on the phase
or phases the components exists such as solid, liquid or gaseous phases. Some commonly used
solid mixers as discussed by Brennan et al. (1998) includes: Tumbler mixers, Horizontal trough
mixers, Vertical screw mixers etc. These are quite quick and efficient particularly in mixing
small quantities of additives into large masses of materials. Brennan et al., (1998) observed that
regardless of the type of mixer, the ultimate aim of using a mixing device is to achieve a uniform
distribution of the components by means of flow, which is generated by mechanical means. In
most developing countries including Ethiopia, a major common problem facing farmers raising
livestock, poultry and/ or aquatic life is the lack of access to proper feeds that can meet the
nutritional requirements of their flocks at the right time and in the right quality and price.
Augusto et al. (1973), Fagbenro (1988), Kwari and Igwebuike (2001), Diarra et al. (2001) and
many other researchers have indicated the feasibility of the utilization of various forms of farm
and agro-industrial wastes and by-products in the formulation of complete feeds for livestock,
poultry and aquatic life. Although the major essential raw materials required for the formulation

1
of complete feeds from the results of such researches are within easy reach of the farmers and at
low cost, the major limiting factor to taking the full advantages offered by the results of such
researches has been the lack of available appropriate equipment to process the identified raw
materials into the required feeds.
This study is an attempt towards developing and manufacturing vertical screw type poultry feed
mixer that capable of mixing feed constituents, and performance evaluation of the same.

1.1. Objective

Objective of this project is investigating, acquiring, reviewing and product development of

simple mixing machine, mechanical or manual operated with a reasonable cost for our farmers to
an end of the tedious hand work, the harvesting using stick, develop or to increase their income
by minimizing mixing cost, their time and number of workers that participating during mixing
time.

1.2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

1.2.1. MATERIALS
The materials for the construction of the machine were obtained locally so as to be cheap. This
should serve as a guide in material selection. Also the materials will chose on the basis of their
availability, suitability, economy, viability in service among other considerations.
The manual animal feed mixer is made up of the following major parts; Handle, mixer shaft,
blades mounted on the shaft, Bearings, Supporting Structures, hopper etc. The animal feed mixer
can achieve the desired animal feed mixing based on the following design specification of the
various components of the machine.

1.2.1. METHODS
In this project the main goal is the development of manually operated feed mixer by reviewing
the previous mixing method used for mixing feed and drawbacks of the mixer. The objective
identified to accomplish the goal were:

2
  Studying and identifying the present mechanisms
 Identifying the potential problem through abstraction.
 Collecting useful data.
 Interpreting data as the problem definition
 Developing conceptual design and selecting based on the digital logic approach
procedure of product design and development.
 Finally preparing the embodiment design of the product

2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. BACKGROUND
The beginning of industrial scale production of animal feeds can be traced back to the late 1800s,
this is around the time that advance in human and animal nutrition was able to identify the
benefits of a balanced diet, and the importance or role the processing of certain raw materials
played in this. Corn gluten feed mixer was first manufactured in 1882, while leading world feed
producer Purina feeds was established in 1894 by William H Danforth. Cargill which was mainly
dealing in grains from its beginning in 1865, started to deal in feed mixer production at about
1884. The feed industry expanded rapidly in the first quarter of the 1900s with “Purina”
expanding its operations into Canada and opened its first feed mill in 1927. In 1908 Herbert
Johnson, an engineer for the Hobart manufacturing company, invents an electric standing mixer.
His inspiration came from observing a baker mixing bread dough with a metal spoon; soon he
was toying with a mechanical counterpart. By 1915, his 80-quart mixer was standard equipment.
In 1908 the feed industry was revolutionized by the introduction of the first feed mixer used for
mixing pelleted feeds. Farmers still employ crude techniques for processing their products, for
example, they still use hands to mix already crushed feeds, and these crude techniques are not
only labor intensive but also lead to slow level production of small quantities of feed. . It could
be cited that the poor quality products of feed could be as a result of improper mixing of feed.
Again, large quantities of feed will be very difficult to mix by hand if not impossible, thereby
producing poor quality products and reducing production rate. This lowers the profits margin of
the products. On the other hand, the cost of importation of foreign machine for mixing feed is
very high compared to the producer’s mega resources. Generally, this affects the country’s
foreign reverse. Also it tends to bring down the cost of the machine to the reach of the small

3
scale producers. Besides it creates employment opportunities for the farmers, this design was
chosen for reliabilities.. ¾ Long product development, ¾ Countless trial and error, ¾
Accountability ¾ Limited Profitability The cost of machine of this type could be high when
produced under small scale production. But the other advantages are that it does not require any
specialist skill for its operation and it does not call for any elaborate production environment
before it becomes operational
This conform with the findings of Brennan et al. (1998), who reported that in a mixing operation,
non uniformity among components in the mixture decreases with time of mixing until
equilibrium mixing is attained.
The average CV of 5.36 % shows that the mixer’s performance rose from 93.52 % to 94.61 %
(Table 3) due to increased mixing time from 10 min to 20 min.The summary results of the
mixer’s performance are average mixing level in respect of the two mixing durations considered
stood at 94.06 % attained in 15 min (the average of the two mixing durations of 10 and 20 min).
An animal feed mixing machine was designed and fabricated. It was used to mix cattle feed
ingredients yielding an acceptable output hereby saving time and energy.
A mixing performance of up to 95.13 % was attained in 20 minutes while the average value of
coefficient of variation for the three replicates was 5.93 %. The machine is safe to use and
efficient. It was cost effective because the design and fabrication were done locally. The machine
is recommended for use by small and medium stock raisers.
To focus on the regulatory aspect of uniformity, the following excerpt is taken from the 1990
FDA
Regulatory Guidelines (FDA, 1990): Equipment (225.30) - All equipment used in the
manufacture of medicated feed shall have the capacity and capability to produce a homogeneous
medicated feed of the intended potency. The capability of the mixing equipment should be
demonstrated upon installation and periodically as needed to ensure proper adjustments during
operation. Written documentation of the adequacy of the equipment should be available for FDA
review.
It is obvious that the regulation is subject to individual interpretation, but it is apparent that FDA
is moving rapidly toward a program of equipment validation when dealing with feed additives.
In the area of nutrient uniformity, AAFCO (1992) has indicated that the Analytical Variation
Program (AV) used by most state authorities is provided to “allow only for the inherent

4
variability in sampling and laboratory analysis. Manufacturing variations are not included in the
AV values.” In other words, absolute uniformity is expected. In January of 1990, the Degussa
Corp. introduced a program to monitor uniformity of feeds manufactured by customers using
their amino acid and other
Products (Wicker and Poole, 1991). Their results would indicate that only about half of the feeds
tested would be of satisfactory uniformity (coefficient of variation [C.V.] < 10%). About 30%
had a C.V. of 10 to 20% and the remaining 20% of the feed samples had a C.V. of > 30%. It is
not known precisely at what level of uniformity animal performance will be affected, but one can
certainly assume that, at a C.V. of greater than 20%, performance would be decreased
It is apparent that, at least in a significant portion of feed produced, nutrient uniformity criteria
are not being met. As regulatory authorities move toward required equipment validation, it is
imperative that the feed and livestock industries come to an agreement as to what levels of
nutrient uniformity are needed and how that uniformity is to be measured. There currently exists
a standard (ASAE Standards, 1990) for testing solids-mixing equipment for animal feeds;
however, the procedure is complicated and a great deal of the data gathered is meaningless to
regulators and to animal performance.
2.2. Statement of the problem
In the present Scenario due to the gradual decrease of grass land and increase in animal
population, there is too much of demands in the farm sector due to the scarcity of mechanization.
In addition to these, in recent year the Ethiopian government gives attention for Agro-industries
(i.e.) livestock, agro –processing), industrial park. So livestock feeding system is one of given
attention by side of government. It includes by establishing of micro- enterprises which depends
on the livestock Agro- industries. But these micro enterprises have no feed mixer machine for the
purpose of animal feeding in case to increase the animal products and to increase their income.
So there is the need to make a machine which can perform the following operations,
 Easy harvesting of grains
 Less manual efforts
 Low cost and less maintenance
3. Problem definition
3.1. Defining the problem and objective clarification

5
The reason of designing this machine is one of the problem solving of mixing animals feeding
system during mixing. When using animals feed mixing machine we have more advantage than
local mixing system by saving time, minimize labor cost, more product in short of time. The
design incorporates the used of local raw materials for the construction.
The need to make a machine which should perform the following operations,
 Portable mixing of nutrients
 Less manual Energies

 Low cost and less maintenance

3.2. Project mission statement

In order to provide guidance during product development phases, which usually formulates a
detailed definition of the product, target market and assumptions under which product will be
developed. These decisions are highlighted in the product mission statement which includes the
following
Mission statement:- Mechanically or manually operated Animal feed mixer machine for
animals
Key business goals:
 To spread appropriate technology to the country
 Serve as plant form for all future animal breeding products and solutions
Primary market:- Farmers
Secondary market:- Medium Investors or micro-business
Assumptions and constraints
 Manually operated: mechanically
 Weight of the machine: should be carried by donkey, mule, horse and human
force.
 Can be manufactured in Ethiopia
Stake holders:
 Purchasers and farmers
 Manufacturing operations

6
  Service operations
 Distributors and resellers

3.3. Customer needs process

Identifying customer needs is itself a process, for which we present a five-step method. We
believe that a little structure goes a long way in facilitating effective product development
practices, and we hope and expect that this method will be viewed by those who employ it not as
a rigid process but rather as a starting point for continuous improvement and refinement. The
five steps are:-
1. Gather raw data from customer: through reviewing different literature, existing solution etc.
2. Interpret the raw data in terms of customer needs
3. Organize the needs into a hierarchy of primary and secondary
4. Establish the relative importance of the needs
5. Reflect on the result and the process

3.4. Gathering raw data

During analyzing the customer need process, raw data should be gathered by the following
methods
 Reviewing different international and national journal papers
 Observing the traditional method in use and the existing technical problems of a solution

Regarding the mechanically operated Animal feed mixer machine, the following questions to
help us know what their need is.
 When and why do they use the manually operated Animal feed mixer machine?
 What do they encounter about the existing manually operated Animal feed mixer
machine?
 What do they want to be improved about the existing method?
 What issues do they consider when purchasing the manually operated Animal feed mixer
machine?

7
3.5. Interpreting data
While interpreting the data the following guidelines are considered
 Express the need as specifically as the raw data
 Express the need as an attribute of the product

Based on the above questions and guidelines, data were gathered from the customers through
data collection method stated in the methodology and interpreted as follows.
 The Animal feed mixer machine will crop grain
 The Animal feed mixer machine is light weight
 The harvesting reaper machine is easily push able and operated

4. Conceptual Design
4.1. Definition of Conceptual Design
The feasibility study of manually operated Animal feed mixer machine is the process by which
its design is initiated, carried to the point of creating a number of possible solutions of manual
mixer, and narrowed down to a single best concept, we call this Conceptual design phase. Dieter,
G.E., (1991) had given the definition of conceptual design as follow as: “It is the phase that
requires the greatest creativity, involves the most uncertainty, and requires coordination among
many functions in the business organization. The goal in this phase is to validate the need,
produce a number of possible solutions, and evaluate the solutions on the basis of physical
realizability, economic worthwhileness, and financial feasibility.” [16]
4.2. Concept Generation Methods
In the concept generation phase we should ask the following questions to start with,
 What existing solution concepts, if any, could be successfully adapted for this
application?
 What new concept might satisfy the establishment needs and specifications?
 What methods should be used to facilitate the concept generation process?

Basically there are five concept generation methods:-

8
 Figure 1: Concept generation method structure

4.3. Decomposition into Main Function and Sub Function

Decompose complex problem into simpler sub-problems is essential because many design
challenges are too complex to solve as a single problem. Consequently let’s decompose the
harvesting machine in to simpler sub problems in order to tackle the problems one by one in a
focused way. This is the main function of the manually operated reaper machine with the input
and output diagram.

Energy (manually) Mechanical operate Energy

(rotational) Animal feed mixer

Materials (molasses salt... Homogenous mix

Signal signals

Figure 2: Input Output Diagram

9
 Material Signal
Energy

Mixing Rotational
External
materials motion
force

Human Ribbon Mechanical

force shaped link
shaft
Figure 3: Main Functional decomposition

4.4. External and Internal search

By conducting external searches from literature to find existing solutions to satisfy either the
overall problem or a sub-problem identified during the decomposition step. These results are
found; engine operated feed mixer machine which is
1. High cost.
2. Heavy maintenance.
3. Need skilled person.

Conducting internal searches to find the new solution to satisfy the overall or sub function.
Finally come up with the following solution.
1. Human force rotating mixer machine.
2. Manual operated animal feed mixer machine
3. Low cost animal feed mixer.

4.5. Functions means tree

Using function tree means we are going to further analyzing the function of the mechanically
operated feed mixer machine we can divide the main function of the mixing machine into sub
functions and we can determine the means for these sub functions.

10
 Mixer

Animal feed
mixer

Mixing
Body Frame
mechanism

Hopper Manual
Mixing chamber rotation
Mixer shaft
assembly assembly

Mixer shaft
Blade rotation
Outlet
chute

Handle Handle
rotation

Homogenous
Figure 4: Function Tree means Mixed out
4.6. Generating alternative design
To select one of the superlative choices given for each component, there are steps to be followed.
1. Setting Criteria
2. Calculating a weighting factor for each criterion
3. Evaluating each design with respect to the selected criteria by using a decision matrix.
4. Select the preeminent design based on the decision matrix.

The type and number of criteria are determined by individual judgment. There are no proper set
of rules for setting design criteria, since it depends on the type and application of design and its
complication. The aim is to generate the complete range of alternatives design solutions for a

11
product, and hence to widen the search for potential new solutions. Of course this is achieved by
analyzing the functions and means that we have established in the previous section. Here we
should think exhaustively what possible solution we might get to achieve every sub functions of
the reaper. As a result we get number of design alternatives. In the design of mechanically
operated feed mixer machine out of the possible alternatives four of them will be analyzed here
just to show the methods.
a) Manual operated animal feed mixer
b) Engine operated animal feed mixer
c) Electric motor operated animal feed mixer
Labelling the above concepts as concept 1, 2 and 3.
4.7. Evaluating alternative design concept
In order to make any kind of evaluation, it is necessary to have a set of criteria and these must be
based on the design objectives i.e. what it is that design is meant to achieve. The objective will
include technical and economic factors, user requirements and so on. Hence the following
objectives are chosen to evaluate the design characteristic of each feature. Cost, performance,
reliability, availability, maintainability, power we may have the same or different evaluating
criteria, which depend on the type of features to be evaluated as well as the amount of
dependency if it affects adversely, we could use as a measuring criteria for that feature.
4.9. Basic selection criteria
1. Durability
2. Ease of handling
3. Ease of maintenance
4. Ease of manufacture
5. Ease of mountable
6. Ease of use
7. Low complexity of components
8. Low cost
9. Low susceptibility of vibration
10. Low wear of moving parts
11. Portability
12. Simple assembly

12
These criteria are general ones. We may evaluate component wise and for the design as a whole
too. But we may not use all the criteria for the every component. That is we make selection of
criteria to suit the much intended purpose of the component. Now let us screen our design
alternative using the set of above selected criteria and let us give their scored values in order to
have the best screened design alternatives for the manually operated animal feed mixer machine.

Evaluation Criteria of engine operated animal feed mixer, electric motor animal feed mixer and
manual operated animal feed mixer.

Table 1: Weighting evaluation criteria for engine operated animal feed mixer, electric motor
animal feed mixer and manual operated animal feed mixer.

Criteria 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Un Weighted
weighted Over all
over values values
1 - 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 6 0.0923

2 0 - 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 5 0.0769

3 1 0 - 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 7 0.1077

4 0 1 1 - 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 5 0.0769

5 1 0 0 1 - 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 6 0.0923

6 0 1 0 0 0 - 1 0 0 1 0 0 3 0.0462

7 1 0 0 1 1 0 - 1 0 1 0 1 6 0.0923

8 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 - 0 0 1 1 5 0.0769

9 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 - 0 1 0 7 0.1077

10 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 - 0 1 5 0.0769

11 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 - 0 5 0.0769

12 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 - 5 0.0769

There three concepts of engine operated animal feed mixer, electric motor animal feed mixer and
manual operated animal feed mixer.
A = Manual operated animal feed mixer
B = Engine operated animal feed mixer

13
 C = Electric motor operated animal feed mixer
Table 2: Decision Matrix for selecting the best concept variant
Criteria 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Overall
alternativ satisfacti
e ons

OWVi 0.092 0.076 0.1077 0.076 0.092 0.046 0.092 0.076 0.107 0.0769 0.076 0.0769
3 9 9 3 2 3 9 7 9
A % 50 25 25 10 10 25 25 50 50 75 90 50

%* 4.765 1.923 2.6925 0.769 0.923 1.155 2.308 3.845 5.385 5.7675 6.921 3.845 40.299
OWVi
B % 25 10 50 10 50 25 75 10 10 50 90 50
%* 2.308 0.769 5.386 0.769 1.15 1.15 6.923 0.769 1.077 3.845 6.921 3.845 34.912
OWVi
C % 90 100 100 90 90 100 100 90 100 90 25 90
%* 8.307 7.69 10.77 6.921 8.307 4.62 9.23 6.921 10.77 6.921 1.923 6.921 89.301
OWVi

4.10. Mixing shaft

Mixing shaft is a part which is used to mix feed in homogenous form. They are many mixing
shapes

1. Ribbon Blinder mixing shape

2. Mixing (Bioreactor) mixing shape

3. Spline shape mixing shaft

Evaluation criteria of Ribbon Blinder mixing shape, mixing shape (Bioreactor) mixing shape and
Spline shape mixing shaft

1. Homogeneity of mixed feed

2. Low complicity of component

3. Portability of shaped shaft

4. Easy to Assembly

14
5. Low cost
Table 3: Weighting evaluation criteria for Ribbon Blinder mixing shape, mixing shape
(Bioreactor) mixing shape, Spiral shape mixing shaft case.

Criteria 1 2 3 4 5 Un weighted Weighted

over values Over all values
1 - 1 0 1 1 3 0.333
2 0 - 1 0 0 1 0.111
3 1 0 - 1 0 2 0.222
4 0 1 0 - 0 1 0.111
5 1 0 1 0 - 2 0.222

There three concepts of engine operated animal feed mixer, electric motor animal feed mixer and
manual operated animal feed mixer

A= Ribbon Blinder mixing shape

B= Mixing shape (Bioreactor) mixing shape

C= Spline shape mixing shaft

Table 4: Decision Matrix for selecting the best concept variant

Criteria 1 2 3 4 5 Overall
Alternative satisfactions

OWVi 0.333 0.111 0.222 0.111 0.222

A % 90 75 75 50 50

%* OWVi 29.97 8.325 16.65 5.55 11.1 71.595

B % 50 25 75 90 90
%* OWVi 16.65 2.775 16.65 9.99 19.98 66.045

C % 25 25 50 75 50
%* OWVi 8.325 2.775 11.1 8.325 11.1 41.625

15
So that according to the Decision matrix for selecting the best concept from the three concept,
concept A is selected which is Ribbon Blinder mixing shape case.

4.11. Mixing chamber (cylindrical surface):

Mixing chamber is a place where the mixing process is carried out by the rotating shaft joined
with propeller. There are three different shapes of cover case.

a) Vertical shaped mixer

b) Horizontal shaped mixer

c) Spiral shaped mixer

Evaluation criteria of Vertical, Horizontal, and Spiral shaped mixing chamber case

1) Low cost

2) Easy maintenance

3) Easy Use

4) Simplicity

5) Ease of handling

Table 5: Weighting evaluation criteria for vertical, Horizontal and spiral shaped mixer case

Criteria 1 2 3 4 5 6 Un Weighted
weighted Over all values
over
values
1 - 0 0 1 1 0 2 0.133
2 1 - 1 0 1 1 4 0.266
3 1 0 - 0 0 1 2 0.133
4 0 1 1 - 1 0 3 0.2
5 0 0 1 0 - 0 1 0.067
6 1 0 0 1 1 - 3 0.2

16
 Three concepts of mixing chamber

A =Vertical shaped mixer

B= Horizontal shaped mixer

C= Spiral shaped mixer

Table 6: Decision Matrix for selecting the best concept variant

Criteria 1 2 3 4 5 6 Overall
Alternative satisfactions

OWVi 0.133 0.267 0.133 0.2 0.067 0.2

A % 50 75 25 25 50 50

%* OWVi 6.65 20.025 3.325 5 3.35 10 48.35

B % 75 90 90 75 75 90
%* OWVi 9.975 24.03 11.97 15 5.025 18 84
C % 50 50 25 25 75 50
%* OWVi 6.65 13.35 3.325 5 5.025 10 43.35

Operating system, Material availability, Economy, Simplicity of the technology

Machine Operating Simplicity of technology Economy Material availability

17
 Young Age Easy of Low manufacturing Availability
Technology cost Technology on market

Adult Age
Easy of
High temperature
maintenance
resistance
Old Age
Easy of
manufacturing High strength

Corrosion
resistance
Figure 5: Structure of Objective Tree

4.12. Determination of weighting Factor

When many design criteria’s are used to specify the degree of importance of each, it may be
difficult to re-establish weighting factors. One way to do so is to use a digital logic approach.
Each property is compared in every combination taken two at a time. To make the comparison,
the property that is considered to be the more important of the two is given a one and the less
important a zero, the total number of properties under consideration are:
n(n−1)
N=
2
Where
N = the total number of possible comparison pairs.
n = the total number of criteria

4.13. Product structure

The construction of a decision tree is a useful technique when decisions must be made in
succession into the future. Determining weighting factors for criteria is an inexact process.
Intuitively we recognize that a valid set of weighting factors should sum to 1. Therefore, when n
is the number of evaluation criteria and w is the weighting factor,
18
 n

∑ wi=1, 0< wi<0

i=1

wi = the weighting factor =mi /N

mi = the total number of positive decisions for the i th criteria
Now using this principle we can apply for the listed design alternative in generating alternative
to select the best one.

Feed mixing
machine A (1)

Driving power Mixing unit C (0.58)

B(0.42)

Mechanical Electric Mixing Shaft (0.5) Mixing chamber I

Engine (0.3) F
D(0.4) motor E (0.3) G (0.5)

Ribbon shaft Vertical

Manual (0.78) J (0.4) K shape (0.2) N

Spiral shaft Horizontal

Handle (0.9) Q (0.3) L shape (0.6) O

Bioreactor Spiral shape

shaft (0.3) M (0.2) P

19
 Figure 6: Weighting factor for each criteria

a) Selection of driving and power unit

Handle – path ABDJQ = 1*0.42*0.4*0.78*0.9 = 0.29484

Engine- path ABF =1*0.42*0.3 =0.126
Electric motor path =ABF = 1*0.42*0.3 =0.126
Mixing chamber selection
Vertical mixing chamber = ACIN = 1*0.58*0.5*0.2 = 0.058
Horizontal mixing shape = ACIO = 1*0.58*0.5*0.6 = 0.174
Spiral mixing shape = ACIP = 1*0.58*0.5*0.2 = 0.058
Type of mixing shaft
Ribbon shaft = ACGK = 1*0.58*0.5*0.4 = 0.116
Spiral shaft = ACGL = 1*0.58*0.5*0.3 = 0.087
Bioreactor shaft = ACGM = 1*0.58*0.5*0.3 = 0.087
Since the overall weighting factor of end evaluation criteria are calculated from those the highest
value recorded of weighting factor for each criteria
So, the weighted value of the selected design is
= 0.29484+0.174+0.116 = 0.58484

4.14. Selection of Mechanically Operated Animal feed mixer machine

Table 1: Selected design of major components

Design of manual operated animal feed mixer machine
Design of Mixing chamber (cylindrical surface)
Design of mixer shaft

Design of Supporting frame (stand)

Design of hopper

Design of Handle

20
4.15. Mixing chamber
Mixing chamber is a place where the mixing process is carried out by the rotating shaft joined
with propeller. Assuming the height of mixing chamber to be 50 cm, and shaft of 25 mm is inserted
inside of this cylinder. Therefore;

π d2 l
Volume =
4

Figure 7: solid work of mixing chamber

4.16. Design of mixer shaft

 The length of shaft is 80cm
 Maximum allowable shear stress of mild steel of mild steel = 42Mpa
 Homogeneous shaft
 Shear modulus of mild steel material of mild steel material = 79.3 ×109 N/m2
 Force applied by the man, F = m× ω .

21
 2 πN
ω=
60

Figure 8: solid work of mixing shaft

×2π ×N 2 π ×70
F = m× ω = m =15 × = 15kg × 7.3 rad
60 60
= 109 N
When the shaft is subjected to a twisting moment (or torque) only, then the diameter of the shaft
may be obtained by using the torsion equation.

4.17. Supporting frame (stand):

The designed stand frame should be to support the machine without collapse. Total load of the
machine was given by the following assumptions;
 The density of material (mild steel) = 7.85g/ cm3,
 Force applied by the operator 109N
 Height of stand 80cm ,
Width 33cm

22
 Figure 9: solid work of mixing frame (support)

4.18. Design of hopper

Mass of hopper (M3) = Volume x density

Volume = 1/3 ×h ×( A+ B+√ A × B)
A = a*b a = Top length = 35.5 cm
B = c*d b = Top width = 33.5 cm
c = bottom opening length = 32.3 cm
d = bottom opening width = 21 cm
h = height of hopper = 23 cm

23
Figure 10: solid work of mixing hopper

A = a*b = 35.5 * 33.5 = 1189.3 cm2

B = c*d = 32.3 *21
678.3 cm2
A + B = 0.1189 cm2+0.068 m2
= 1867.55 m2
1
Volume = ×23 ×(1867.55 m2+898.05)
3
= 21203 cm3
Mass of hopper (M3) = Volume x density
1
= 21203 cm3 x 7.85 g/cm3×
1000
=16.6 kg

4.19. Handle power calculation Assumption

1. Maximum revolution that a man can exert is (N) = 70 rpm;

24
2. Losses in the handle rotating due to friction is 25%;
Radius of mixer chamber 0.25 m
But power,
P=Tw Where;
T= F*r,

Figure 11: solid work of mixing handle

ω=2 πN /60
N = 70 rpm, considering 25% losses, take 45 rpm
P= Tw Where;
T= (F*r*2 πN /60) = (45*109*0.25*¿ 2∗π∗70/60)
P = 128W

25
5. Embodiment Design

5.1. The basic rules of embodiment design

The final design phase will finish the development of the reaper. At the end it has to be
completely defined in the following three basic rules of embodiment design: simple,
unambiguous, reliable.
Unambiguous: - fulfillment of technical use of manually operated reaper is clear and
uncomplicated
Simple: - there are no unnecessary functions or shapes other than fulfilling the main function in
which any one can simply understand how it will work, can use the machine
Reliable: - the feed mixer is usable in a myriad of conditions without harming the user or
environment

5.2. Principles of embodiment design

Minimum manufacturing cost: machining manufacturing procedure will be used to simple
production of the machine.
Minimum space requirement: all the designed part after assembly
Minimum weight: handle, RHS frame, ribbon shaft of the product
Minimum losses: during manufacturing, by means of machining and welding
Optimum handling: caster will be used for the stability of the feed mixing uniformly

5.3. Component construction

The main components of the machine are; handle, RHS frame, mixing chamber, mixing shaft,
hopper, blade welded, and sub components like bearing, bolt, key, belt & belt housing, and
others might be selected as their level of importance. The product configuration, architecture of
the feed mixer is prepared using solid work software. In the 3D figures below, the geometry and
mechanism by which the components assembled together is clear and understandable, while the
working principle in which the machine is human force operated by rotating motion from the
handle to the mixing shaft by means of pin fastener mechanism and the ribbon welded on shaft
operates and used to uniform the animal feed. The outlet chute helps to output the mixed feed

26
which were uniformed during mixing time and hopper used store mixing material before go to
mix.

27
 Figure 12: Components of Animal Feed mixing machine

5.4. Bearings, bolt and key selections

a. Bearings
Depending on the type of design, size and operational parameters of the driving mechanism, we
use deep groove ball bearings for the shaft and other motion transferring. Since it takes both
radial and axial loads. These bearings require little maintenance and their starting resistance is
negligible. Strength check type: ISO Bearing type: Deep groove ball bearing single raw
b. Bolts
Here the bolts are used to connect two parts together for assembling.
c. Keys
The keys are used to connect the gear and pulley with the shaft and transfer motion

28
5.5. Assembly of the machine
Parts of the feed mixing machine was assembled together ready for the performance test

29
Figure 13: Solid Assemble of manual operated Animal feed mixer machine

30
6. Conclusion
Manually operated animal feed mixer machine is very crucial for our country Ethiopia, even
though is not currently produced in industries as well as in a small micro-enterprise. As clearly
the design worked out in this paper we can have the production of manually operated animal feed
mixer machine that is produced in local industries with the available and cheap materials. The
design can be carried out with affordable capacity of most skilled person. And also a better
quality and huge product can be produced. That in turn will save a huge amount of foreign
currency which was paid to import these huge machineries and also able to provide the low
farmers to use the machine in affordable and reduce the amount of unemployed peoples.

31
REFERENCE

[1] ASAE Standards, (ASAE S380 DEC1975 R2006). Test Procedure to Measure Mixing Ability
of Portable Farm Batch Mixers, pp. 261 – 262.

[2] Brennan J. G, Butters, J. R., Cowell, N. D. and V Lilley, A. E. 1998. Food engine operations,
3rd ed. Elsevier Applied Science, London. pp. 91 - 107 and 287 – 89.

[3] Cajindos, J.R. 2014. Design and Fabrication of Horizontal Screw Type Mixer for Livestock
Feed Meal. JPAIR Multidisciplinary Research, AJA Registrars, Inc.

[4] Clark, J. P. 2005. Case Studies in Food Engineering, Food Engineering Series. Springer
Dordrecht Heidelberg. London New York.

[5] Ibrahim, S. O. and Fasasi, M. B. 2004. Design and development of a portable feed mixer for
small-scale poultry farmers. Proc. NIAE 26, Nov. 28- Dec. 2, Ilorin.

[6] Lindley, J.A. 1991. Mixing processes for agricultural and food materials. Journal of
Agricultural Engineering Research 48:153-170.

[7] R.S. Khurmi and J.K Gupta, 2004, Theory of Machine, Eurasia Publishing House (PVT)
LTD, Ramnagar, New Delhi-110055.

[8] Sharma, P. C and Aggar - Wal, D. K. 1998. Machine Design (Mechanical Engineering
Design) in S.I Units S. K Kataria and Sons publishers and Book Sellers, Delhi, India.

[9] Neil S., 2011, “Mechanisms and Mechanical Devices Sourcebook,” 5th Ed. New York.
[10] Pahl G. et Al. 2007, “Engineering Design; A Systematic Approach,” Germany, 3rd Ed.
[11] Dieter, G.E., 1991 “Engineering Design,” Mcgraw-Hill, New York
[12] Kesselring F., 1954, “Technical Composition,” Springer, Berlin.

32
33