This is not a peer-reviewed article.

Paper No. 031022

An ASAE Meeting Presentation

Comparative study between a whole stalk chopper prototype and manual

harvesting burned sugar cane (Saccharum spp.) in Brazil
By
T. C. Ripoli, Full Professor, Ph.D.
ESALQ – Universidade de São Paulo – Piracicaba, SP, Brazil

M. L. C. Ripoli, M.Sc., Agr. Eng.

UNESP – Faculdade de Ciências Agrárias – Botucatu, SP, Brazil

J. M. Orsolini, Mechanical Eng.

ESALQ – Universidade de São Paulo – Piracicaba, SP, Brazil

Written for presentation at the

2003 International Annual Meeting
Sponsored by ASAE
Riviera Hotel and Convention Center
Las Vegas, NV
July 27-30, 2003

ABSTRACT:
The present study had the objective to analyze the Operational and Economic Performances of a
whole stalk chopper prototype for sugar cane, comparing them with the found values in the bibliography and
referring to the manual cut in burned sugar cane and suggest modifications on the machine mechanical
project. The analyzed prototype is presented as a substitution option for the hand workers, which are
responsible for the sugar cane cut. The methodologies that had been used in this study were proposed by
Ripoli (1986) and Molina Jr. (2000). The prototype was the Phoenix CM500i®, manufactured by Motocana®
Ltd. The tests had been carried out in Costa Pinto Sugar Mill, located in Piracicaba county, Sao Paulo State,
during the month of July 2000. The following parameters had been determined: Cut Effective Capacity;
Manipulation Effectiveness; Losses; Strange Matter Harvested and a Estimated Cost in the Cut Effective
Capacity, Operations costs reduced 36,6%. Dealing with the prototype, projection’s exercises had been made
on the basis of the suggested modifications referring to in its mechanical project.
Key Words: prototype, operational performance; economic performance; whole stalk chopper; sugar cane;
mechanization.

The author(s) is solely responsible for the content of this technical presentation. The technical presentation does
not necessarily reflect the official position of ASAE, and its printing and distribution does not constitute an
endorsement of views which may be expressed.
Technical presentations are not subject to the formal peer review process by ASAE editorial committees;
therefore, they are not to be presented as refereed publications.
Quotation from this work should state that it is from a presentation made by (name of author) at the (listed)
ASAE meeting.
EXAMPLE — From Author’s Last Name, Initials. “Title of Presentation.” Presented at the Date and Title of
meeting, Paper No X. ASAE, 2950 Niles Road, St. Joseph, MI 49085-9659 USA.
For information about securing permission to reprint or reproduce a technical presentation, please address
inquiries to ASAE.
 2
ASAE, 2950 Niles Rd., St. Joseph, MI 49085-9659 USA
Voice: (616) 429-0300 FAX: (616) 429-3852 E-Mail:hq@asae.org
INTRODUCTION

The sugar cane mechanized harvest system that predominates in Brazil uses combined harvesters.
However, due to its high value of acquisition and the necessity of modifications in many of the systems, the
sugar cane small producers do not have access to this technology. Thus, the appearing of a whole stalk chopper
with a lower acquisition value which does not demand modifications on transport and reception subsystems is a
sufficiently interesting alternative, since 30% of the sugar cane area (1,500,000 ha) in Brazil belong to small
farmers who use the manual cut with mechanical loading system.
The present study had the objective of analyze the operational and economic performances of an whole
stalk chopper prototype and the manual system with mechanical load system, both in burned sugar cane.

MATERIAL & METHODS

Figure 1 shows the whole stalk chopper prototype studied called Phoenix CM500i®, from Motocana
Máquinas and Implementos Ltda. (Piracicaba, São Paulo, Brazil) with Volvo Penta engine of 165 kW at 1,900
rpm. Also shows the field conditions during the tests.

(A) (B)

Figure 1 – (A) Side view of the prototype. (B) Field conditions of the study area and burn quality.

The study area is geographically located at Latitude 22º38’09”S, Longitude 47º47’03”W and an altitude
of 507m, in Piracicaba, São Paulo State, Brazil. The sugar cane variety was RB84-5257 with a 784.56 kN.ha-1
productivity.
It was used a Motocana® sugar cane loader built on a MF295 tractor; three dumping trucks and a load
truck to transport the harvested material for the two studied systems and also 30 workers (manual cutters)
Field determination used the following equipment and utensils: Kiowa® load cell (maximum reading
capacity of 9.807 N); platform scale for trucks (maximum capacity of 294,210 N); graduated burettes (maximum
reading capacity of 0.5 and 1.0 liter); two fiber glass measuring tapes (25 and 50 m) and digital chronometers.

OPERATIONAL PERFORMANCE

For the sugar field characterization it was adopted the methodology proposed by Balastreire & Ripoli
(1975) and to determinate the prototype parameters for operational performance it was used by Ripoli (1996).
Twelve repetitions had been carried out, each one of them is one “operational cycle”, as Figure 2 shows.
 3

Figure 2 – Operational cycle stages: (1 to 2) sugar cane rows cutting operation; (2 to 3) prototype moving to
field’s border to unload; (3) unloading the harvested material and (3 to 4) prototype returning to the
field to the nest cutting row, finalizing the cycle.

It was evaluated quantitatively the harvest losses. Theses losses where separately determined in “stalks
and/or its fractions” and “pieces of stalks in the stubble (stubs)”, also was determined the Stalk Tops Index (IP);
Green Leaves and Dry Leaves Index (IP); Root Index (IR); Vegetal Strange Matter Index (IV); Mineral Strange
Matter Index (IM); Non Selected Matter Index (IW) and Total Strange Matter Index (IT).
The manual cut tests were made through the accompaniment of 30 manual cutters hired for this job by
the sugar mill. Each worker was considered a repetition. They worked a 8 hours shift per day. It was determined
the time and amount of stalks cut for a day of work. The manually cut ton cost taken in consideration was the
one paid by the sugar mill to each worker, plus social taxes.
For the determination of the estimates of the prototype’s operational costs it was adopted the method
proposed by Hoffmann et al.(1976). The used economic variables for this estimate are presented below:
• Prototype initial value: US$130,000 or R$249,600,00 (US$1.00 = R$ 1,92);
• Final value (or scrap iron value): 10,0% of the initial value (US$13,000.00);
• Useful life: 5 years or 11,250 hours (2,250 hours per year);
• Insurance taxes: 1.0% of the initial value;
• Shelter tax: 0.5% of the initial value;
• Depreciation: linear method;
• Interests: 12% per year;
• Administration taxes: 0.0085 US$.kN-1or 3.67 US$.h-1;
• Lubricant and filters, hydraulic oil: For lubricant and filters the technical recommendations adopted
came from the sugar cane harvesters manufacturers (0.126 L.h-1 and 1.77 US$.L-1) and for the
hydraulic oil it was used the average consumption of many sugar mills of the State of São Paulo,
0.0017 L.kN-1 or 0.716 L.h-1 (1.927 US$.L-1);
• Mechanic’s labor: Estimate of 300 h.ano-1, on 40% of the wage of the operator (US$3,756.25);
• Operator’s labor: 0,024 US$.kN-1 or 9,39 US$.h-1;
• Spare parts: The annual value of 0.008 US$.kN-1 or 3.331 US$.h-1 was used, as manufacture
recommendation.
Due to be dealing with a prototype, the cost variables for economic performance determination came
from the estimates supplied by the manufacturer, presented in matters of harvested material: 0.77 US$.kN-1 cost
of annual maintenance; cost of the driver of 0,022 US$.kN-1 and administration tax of 0,0088 US$.kN-1.

RESULTS & DISCUSSION

The sugar cane field was considered erect, according to the chosen methodology, because the results
presented a 94.81% of the stalks located within a range of 45º inclinations and over in relation to the soil surface,
condition this ideal for the mechanized harvest and basic for standardized tests with harvest machines. The abed
and lying stalks had represented 5,08% and 1,08%, respectively.
Table 1 shows the prototype values, for losses that can be associates with the Manipulation
Effectiveness values found. In relation to Losses Index (stalks and/or its fractions) the values were significantly
high if related with other studies results. This happened mainly in the sugar cane manual cut.
 4

Table 1. Average results of losses of stalks and/or its fractions, in percentage, and agricultural productivity
gotten by operational cycle (repetitions) by the prototype.
Parameters AA PA MC TP CN CNS
(m2) (kN.ha-1) (kN.ha-1) (%) (%) (%)
Averages 273.20 871.92 827.03 6.22 5.05 1.17
DP 36.77 108.38 102.58 1.51 1.22 0.52
CV 13.46 12.43 12.40 24.28 24.16 44.44
AA=Sampled area; PA=Yield; MC=Amount of sugar cane harvested; TP=Total of losses; CN=Stalks not
harvested; CNS= Fractions of stalks not harvested present in the stubble, DP=Standard Deviation;
CV=Coefficient of variation.

Results found in the bibliography presented smaller values then the ones obtained in relation of harvest
losses, in terms of stalks and/or its fractions not harvested and of the remaining losses in the stubble, these due to
the raised basal cut of the operation, in kN.ha-1, respectively: in harvesters 1,74 and 1,02 (Furlani Neto et al.,
1984); 0.58 and 0,65 (Tillmann, 1994) and 1.28 and 0,46 (Peixoto & Delgado, 1988). The two last ones in
manual cut system.
Figure 3 illustrates a one of the repetition sample made to obtain the harvest losses. In this example, the
losses can be characterized by fractions of stalks, not occurring losses in the stubble and nor losses of whole
stalks. A probable justification for this situation, beyond the good operation of basal cut due to the ability of the
operator associated with the systematized terrain is the varietal question could have influenced, aspect not
analyzed in this study.

(C)

(A)

(B)

Figure 3 – Example of a sample separation which shows the harvest losses, resulting in (A) fractions of stalks
not harvested, (B) strange matter found aggregated to it and (C) particles of difficult separation.

In Table 2 it is possible to observe that the stage responsible for the biggest time consumption in the
operational cycle was the row cutting stage. The time consumed in the stage 2 to 3 (as seen on Figure 2) varied
depending on the field’s geometry, conditions of the unloading place and also the prototype operational
conditions.

Table 2. Speed and time averages consumed in some stages of the operational cycles.
Parameters VCO VCI TCO TSA TDE TEM
-1 -1
(km.h ) (km.h ) (%) (%) (%) (%)
Averages 4.44 5.70 38.05 30.13 11.45 20.36
DP 0.21 0.48 5.41 4.79 3.43 7.37
CV 4.73 8.42 14.22 15.90 29.96 31.55
VCO=Prototype cutting speed; VCIT=Operational cycle speed; TCO=Time spent during the row cut operation;
TSA=Time spent to exit the field; TDE=Time spent to unload the harvested material; TEM=Time spent to return
back to the field to begin a new cycle; DP=Standard Deviation; CV=Coefficient of variation.
 5
In face of these results presented in Table 2, clearly that one of the reasons for the low machine
operational capacity is due to the extended time consumed in moving out of the sugar cane field and unloading
the harvested material.
Concerning the results about the stages of the cycle variables nothing it was found in the bibliography,
since this prototype presents an operational characteristic totally differentiated of the old chopper machines that
existed in the market so far.
Comparing the values of Table 3 with the ones found by Moraes & Neves (1997) and Nunes Juniors &
Pinto (1999), for vegetal and mineral strange matter, respectively, values between 9.90% and 0.30%; and 6.60%
and 1.10% can be assured that based on the data that exists a heterogeneity of values. These different values
could happen due to different field conditions, to different methodologies adopting and to the different machine
characteristics studied.

Table 3. Average values of raw material quality harvested by the prototype.

Parameters EM MEV MEM MNI MET CEB CEL
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (kN.h-1) (kN.h-1)
Averages 93.84 2.05 0.22 1.15 3.35 413.08 398.27
DP 1.50 0.96 0.10 0.53 1.11 32.86 28.55
CV 1.60 46.83 45.45 46.09 33.13 7.95 7.17
EM=Manipulation effectiveness; MEV=Vegetal strange matter; MEM=Mineral strange matter; MNI=
Unidentified material; MET=Total Strange matter; CEB=Gross effective capacity; CEL=Net effective capacity;
DP=Standard Deviation; CV=Coefficient of variation.

According to Ripoli (1996) the determination of the Total Strange Matter Index is facilitated by the use
of the sampling probe. In parallel, the Total Index of Losses of 6.59%, obtained was superior to the average
values of 5% adopted as desirable. The same author says that the index is inversely proportional to the value
registered for the Manipulation Effectiveness that must indicate a minimum of 95%, so that a machine comes to
be certified.
It is observed that the Vegetal Strange Matter Index of 2.05% was greater that found by Ripoli (1986)
and Furlani Neto (1984), of 0.14 to 0.56% and 1.36% respectively. The Mineral Strange Matter Index of 0,22%
was compatible with the ones found by Ripoli (1986), 0,18 to 0,33%, and inferior to the 2,39% obtained by
Furlani Neto (1984).
Referring to the manual cut and mechanical loading system the results are shown in Table 4.

Table 4. Average results of the manual cut and mechanical loading system.
Parameters PA THD MEV MEM MET TP
(kN.ha-1) (kN.day-1) (%) (%) (%) (%)
Averages 813.56 85.75 7.97 0.33 8.30 1.71
S. D. 98.79 7.54 1.67 0.12 2.78 0.43
C.V. 12.14 8.79 20.95 36.36 33.49 25.15
PA=Yield; THD=Tons per man per day; MEV=Vegetal strange matter ; MEM=Mineral strange matter (soil);
TP=Total of losses; SD=Standard deviation; CV=Coefficient of variation.

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

The prototype’s highest operational cost and the most evident is its depreciation, that is responsible for
24.89%, followed by the machine’s operator and fuel costs, as represented in Figure 4. The operational costs list
analyzed is presented in Table 5. The currency conversion rate was US$1.00=R$1,92. Considering the Gross
Effective Capacity of 413.08 kN.h-1, obtained in the assay, the estimated prototype cost per kN of cut sugar cane,
in the field conditions studied was of 0.101 US$.kN-1.
 6

Depreciation 24,89
Operator 22,47
Fuel 21,29
Mechanical labor 8,79
Spare parts 7,98
Administration taxes 7,47
Taxes 3,30
Hydraulic oil 1,38
Insurance 1,20
Shelter 0,69
Lubricants 0,54

0,00 5,00 10,00 15,00 20,00 25,00

(%)

Figure 4- Percentage of the components of the esteem operational cost for the archetype.

Table 5. Hourly and annually cost estimates of the prototype (for 2,250 hours)
Cost items Hour costs Annual costs
(US$) (US$)
Depreciation 10.40 23,400.00
Operator 9.39 21,128.91
Fuel 8.90 20,026.17
Mechanical labor 0.50 1,126.88
Spare parts 3.33 7,494.14
Administration taxes 3.67 8,261.72
Taxes 3.12 7,020.00
Hydraulic oil 1.38 3,104.30
Insurance 0.58 1,300.00
Shelter 0.29 650.00
Lubricants/filters 0.22 502.73
Total 41.79 94,014.84

In 1999/2000 harvest season the Costa Pinto Sugar Mill had the following average values for manual
cut, mechanical loading and transportation of burned sugar cane: average capacity in the manual cut per worker
of 98 kN.dia-1; manual cut costs (on a contract job basis) of 0.159 US$.kN-1; mechanical loading average
capacity of 4.414 kN.dia-1 (considering 1 day with 24 hours of work); mechanical load cost of 0.036 US$.kN-1;
truck transportation cost in a 5 miles distance was 0.46 US$.kN-1 and the average sugar cane weight loaded per
claw’s cycle of 5,383.85 N.
According to a Costa Pinto briefing, in the same season, the manual cut cost on the same basis was
around 0.159 us$.kN-1 of cut sugar cane. Comparing this value with the estimated reached by the prototype of
0.101 US$.kN-1, under the assay conditions and also considering the Net Effective Capacity obtained, it is
clearly observed that occurred a 0.058 $.kN-1 reduction in the cutting costs, what means an 36.5% economy per
kN of cut sugar cane with the prototype when compared with manual cut.
 7
CONCLUSIONS

Talking about the cut cost per ton the prototype demonstrated to consist in a viable and positive option if
compared with the manual cut.
The chosen methodology for the comments demonstrated itself to be suitable to obtain the desired data.
Modifications in the mechanical project of the prototype are justified, objectifying the improvement of
its operational and economic performances.

REFERENCES

BALASTREIRE, L.A.; RIPOLI, T.C. Estudos básicos para quantificação de colhedoras e veículos de
transporte. In: SEMINÁRIO COPERSUCAR DA AGROINDÚSTRIA AÇUCAREIRA, 3., Águas de
Lindóia,1975 Anais. Águas e Lindóia: COPERSUCAR, 1975. p.345-353.
CÂMARA, G.M.S.; OLIVEIRA, E.A.M. Produção de cana-de-açúcar. Piracicaba: FEALQ, 1993. 242p.
FURLANI NETO, V.L. Incidência da matéria estranha e perdas no campo nos processos de corte manual e
com colhedoras amontoadoras em cana-de-açúcar (Saccharum ssp). Piracicaba, 1984. 120p. Dissertação
(Mestrado) – Escola Superior de Agricultura “Luiz de Queiroz”, Universidade de São Paulo.
FURLANI NETO, V.L.; FERNANDES, J.; STOLF, R.; COLETTI, J.T. Perdas no campo pelo sistema de
corte mecanizado com canas inteiras amontoadas. Saccharum, v.33, n.7, p.30-33, jul./ago. 1984.
HOFFMANN, R.; SERRANO, O.; NEVES, E.M.; THAME, A.C.M.; ENGLER, J.J. C. Administração da
empresa agrícola. São Paulo. Pioneira. 1976. 323p.
MIALHE, L.G.; RIPOLI, T.C.C. Evaluación de cosechadoras automotrices de cana de azúcar.Caracas:
Distribuidora Venezolona de Azúres, 1976. 326p.
MOLINA JÚNIOR, W.F. Proposta de metodologia descritiva para ensaio padronizado de colhedoras de
cana-de-açúcar (Saccharum spp). São Carlos, 2000. 140p. Tese (Doutorado) – Escola de Engenharia de
São Carlos, Universidade de São Paulo.
MORAES, E.E.; NEVES, J.L.M. Colheita de cana crua: perdas no campo e impurezas na carga. In:
SEMINÁRIO DE TECNOLOGIA AGRONÔMICA, 7., Piracicaba, 1997. Anais. Piracicaba: Copersucar,
1997. p.288-297.
NUNES JÚNIOR, D.; PINTO, R.S.A. As perspectivas para o centro-sul nas safras 99/00 e 00/01:
oportunidades estratégicas. In: SEMINÁRIO SOLUÇÃO E NOVIDADES NA MECANIZAÇÃO DA
CANA-DE-AÇÚCAR, Ribeirão Preto, 1999. Anais. Ribeirão Preto: IDEA, 1999. p.63-80.
PEIXOTO, A.A.; DELGADO, F.R.M.C.R. Manejo da colheita: III Perdas de cana no campo, com corte em
leitos de 5 e 7 linhas. Brasil Açucareiro, v. 106, n 4, p.18-21, 1988.
RIPOLI, T.C.C. Modelagem de desempenho operacional de carregadora autopropelida para cana-de-açúcar
(Saccharum ssp). Piracicaba, 1986. 102p. Tese (Doutorado) – Escola Superior de Agricultura “Luiz de
Queiroz”, Universidade de São Paulo.
RIPOLI, T.C.C. Ensaio & certificação de máquinas para colheita de cana-de-açúcar In: MIALHE, L.G.
Máquinas agrícolas: ensaio e certificação. Piracicaba: CNPq; PADCT/TIB; FEALQ, 1996. cap. 13,
p.634–674.
RIPOLI, T.C.C.; RIGHI. J.C.; PEXE, C.A. Estudo comparativo entre três métodos de corte de cana-de-
açúcar. In: SEMINÁRIO COPERSUCAR DE AGROINDÚSTRIA AÇUCAREIRA, 3., Águas de Lindóia,
1975. Anais. Águas de Lindóia: Copersucar, 1975. p. 335-344.
TILLMANN, C.A.C. Avaliação dos desempenhos operacional e econômico de sistema de colheita semi-
mecanizada em cana-de-açúcar com e sem queima prévia. Piracicaba, 1994. 111p. Dissertação (Mestrado)
– Escola Superior de Agricultura “Luiz de Queiroz”, Universidade de São Paulo.