64 Development of Power Operated Coconut Dehusker (2014) (Patil S.R)

DEVELOPMENT OF POWER OPERATED COCONUT
DEHUSKER
A Thesis submitted to the
DR. BALASAHEB SAWANT KONKAN KRISHI VIDYAPEETH

DAPOLI 415 712.
Maharashtra State (India)
In the partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree
of
MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY
(AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING)
in
FARM MACHINERY AND POWER
By
Patil Sachin Ramchandra
B. Tech. (Agril. Engg.)
DEPARTMENT OF FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
DR. BALASAHEB SAWANT KONKAN KRISHI VIDYAPEETH
DAPOLI 415 712. DIST. RATNAGIRI. M.S. (INDIA)
JULY 2014
37
38
CANDIDATES DECLARATION
I hereby declare that the experimental work and its interpretation of the thesis
entitled Development of Power Operated Coconut Dehusker or part of thereof has
not been submitted for any other degree or diploma of any University nor the data have
been derived from any thesis/publication of any University or scientific organization.
The sources of material used and all assistance received during the course of
investigation have been duly acknowledged.
Place: CAET, Dapoli (Sachin Ramchandra Patil)

Date: / /2014 (Reg. No. ENDPM-064/2012)
Dr. P. U. Shahare
39
M. Tech (FMP), Ph. D (FMP)
Professor and Head,
Department of Farm Machinery and Power,
College of Agricultural Engineering and Technology,
Dr. Balasaheb Sawant Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth,
Dapoli- 415 712, Dist. Ratnagiri,
Maharashtra, India.
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the research project report entitled Development of Power
Operated Coconut Dehusker submitted to the Faculty of Agricultural Engineering and
Technology, Dr. Balasaheb Sawant Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth, Dapoli, Dist. Ratnagiri
(Maharashtra State) in the partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the
degree of MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY (AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING) in
FARM MACHINERY AND POWER embodies the record of a piece of bonafide
research work carried out by Mr. Sachin Ramchandra Patil under my guidance and
supervision. No part of the research project report has been submitted for any other
degree, diploma or publication in any other form.
The assistance and help received during the course of this project work and
sources of the literature have been duly acknowledged.
Place: CAET, Dapoli (P. U. Shahare)

Date: / / 2014 Chairman,
Advisory Committee and Research Guide
40
Dr. P.U. Shahare
M. Tech (FMP), Ph. D (FMP)
Professor and Head,
Department of Farm Machinery and Power,
Maharashtra, India.
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the project report entitled Development of Power

Operated Coconut Dehusker submitted to the Faculty of Agricultural Engineering,
Dr. Balasaheb Sawant Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth, Dapoli, Dist. Ratnagiri (Maharashtra
State) in the partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of
MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY (AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING) in FARM
MACHINERY AND POWER, embodies the record of a piece of bonafied research
work carried out by Mr. Sachin Ramchandra Patil under the guidance and supervision
of Dr. P. U. Shahare, Professor and Head, Department of Farm Machinery and Power,
College of Agricultural Engineering and Technology, Dapoli. No part of the project
report has been submitted for any other degree, diploma or publication in any other form.
Place: CAET, Dapoli (P. U. Shahare)

Date: / / 2014 Professor and Head
Department of farm Machinery and Power
41
Dr. N. J. Thakor
M.Tech. (IIT), Ph. D. (Canada), FIE, FISAE.
Professor and Head,
Department of Agricultural Process Engineering,
Maharashtra, India.
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the project report entitled Development of Power

Operated Coconut Dehusker submitted to the Faculty of Agricultural Engineering,
Dr. Balasaheb Sawant Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth, Dapoli, Dist. Ratnagiri (Maharashtra
State) in the partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of
MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY (AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING) in FARM
MACHINERY AND POWER, embodies the record of a piece of bonafied research
work carried out by Mr. Sachin Ramchandra Patil under the guidance and supervision
of Dr. P. U. Shahare, Professor and Head, Department of Farm Machinery and Power,
College of Agricultural Engineering and Technology, Dapoli. No part of the project
report has been submitted for any other degree, diploma or publication in any other form.
Place: Dapoli (Dr. N. J. Thakor)

Date: / / 2014 Associate Dean
College of Agricultural Engineering and Technology
42
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Emotions cant be adequately expressed in words hence my acknowledgements
are much more than what I am expressing here.
It is my proud privilege to express my heartfelt indebtedness and deepest sense of

gratitude to Dr. P. U. Shahare, Professor and Head, Department of Farm Machinery
and Power, College of Agricultural Engineering and Technology, Dapoli, whose
unquestioned mastery on thesis subject, talented and versatile advice, scholastic
guidance, profound interest in research, enticed and inspiring discussion throughout the
course of our study gave me this unique experience of planning, conducting and
presenting the research.
I express my special thanks to Dr. K. G. Dhande, Associate Professor,

Department of Farm Machinery and Power for his valuable suggestions and guidance
for research work. I wish to express my profound sense of gratitude to Dr. V. V. Aware,
Associate Professor, Department of Farm Machinery and Power for his valuable help,
inspiration, and constant interest in this project work. I wish to express my heartiest
reverence to Er. N. A. Shirsat, Assistant Professor, Department of Farm Machinery and
Power, who had been a source of immense help to me during the course of this
investigation. Dr. A. G. Mohod, Associate Professor, Department of Electrical and
Other Energy Sources, for his constant encouragement and help whenever required.
I am extremely grateful to Er. S. V. Pathak, Associate Professor, Department of
Farm Machinery and Power, for his valuable and timely co-operation.
I express my heartiest thanks to Mrs. R. N. Palte, Senior Research Assistant,
Department of Farm Machinery and Power, who had been a source of immense help to
me during the course of this investigation. I am thankful to I heartily thank to Mr.
Mahesh Patil, Assistant Engineer-RKVY, Department of FMP for his constant support
and coordination during field performance of machine.
I am extremely grateful to Dr. N. J. Thakor, Associate Dean and Prof. dilip
MAHALE, Ex. Associate Dean, College of Agricultural Engineering and Technology,
Dr. BSKKV, Dapoli for encouragement and for making available all the necessary
facilities for prosecuting the study.
43
I placed on record my deep sense of gratitude to all my course teachers and
scientists of the College of Agricultural Engineering and Technology, Dapoli for their
help and involvement during the course of study.
No words can adequately express our indebtedness to workshop members, Mr.

Gimhavanekar N.S., Mr. Mahadik S.V., Mr. Ruke R.P., Mr. Jadhav S.S., Mr. Kadam S.R.,
Mr. Pawar C.M., Mr. Jadhav V.M., Mr. Patil N. S., Mr. Shigvan S. N., Mr. Mane M.S.,
Mr. Bhatkar P.D., Mr. Nalage R. J., Mr. Jadhav N.V., Mr. Patil N.B., Mr. Pulekar S.S.
who have been a source of immense help to me during the course of this project. I am
thankful to Mr. Tambe S.J., Lab Assistant and Shri. Chogale H.G. Foreman Supervisor
for their advice and help.
Our heartily thanks to all those who have contributed in one or other way for
successful completion of study.
I will always recall with pride the department of Farm Machinery and Power
with all the staff members for their helpful attitude and assistance during the entire
course of study.
I shall be failing in my duty if I do not acknowledge the sincere contribution of

my Seniors and friends Subhash, Girish, Vaibhav, Niteen, Vishal, Swapnil, Balaji,
Dhruvil, Parth, Prashant, Rohan, Pradeep, Omkar, Purushottam and Suraj for their kind
support and help throughout the completion of project.
No words are enough to express the great sacrifice, love, devotion and
inspiration of my beloved parents and my sisters. I would have not been successful in this
difficult endure of Master degree study in supplying me all the necessary inputs by
scarifying their needs. No words are enough to describe their efforts in building up my
educational career and my all-round development.
I express my sincere thanks to those who directly and indirectly extended help
during the research work.
Place : CAET, Dapoli

Date : / /2014 (Sachin Ramchandra Patil)
44
CONTENT
CHAPTER TITLE PAGE

Candidates declaration i
Certificates ii-iv
Acknowledgements v-vi
Content vii-ix
List of Tables x
List of Figures xi
List of Plates xii
List of Abbreviations xiii
List of Symbols xiv
Abstract xv-xvi
I. INTRODUCTION 1-3
II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE 4-15
2.1 Physiological properties of coconut 4
2.2 Coconut dehusker 6
2.2.1 Design of coconut dehusker 6
2.2.1.1 Manually operated coconut dehusker 6
2.2.1.2 Power operated coconut dehusker 9
2.2.2 Performance and testing of coconut dehusker 13
2.2.2.1 Manually operated coconut dehusker 13
2.2.2.2 Power operated coconut dehusker 14
III. MATERIALS AND METHODS 16-36
3.1 Determination of properties of coconut 17
3.1.1 Coconut size 17
3.1.2 Sphericity of nut 18
3.1.3 Roundness 18
3.1.4 Weight of coconut 19
45
3.1.5 Moisture content 19
3.1.6 Thickness of husk 19
3.1.7 Penetration resistance 20
3.1.8 Dehusking moment 20
3.2 Development of power operated coconut dehusker 22
3.2.1 Power requirement of machine 22
3.2.2 Components of power operated coconut dehusker 22
3.2.2.1 Main frame 23
3.2.2.2 Electric motor 23
3.2.2.3 Gear box 23
3.2.2.4 Cam design 23
3.2.2.4.1 Construction of displacement diagram of cam design 24
3.2.2.4.2 Construction of cam profile 25
3.2.2.5 Lifter 27
3.2.2.6 Holding mechanism 28
3.2.2.7 Cutting blade 28
3.2.2.7 Splitting mechanism 29
3.2.3 Power transmission 29
3.3 Working of coconut dehusker 29
3.4 Performance of developed power operated coconut 35
dehusker
3.4.1 Time required to dehusking coconut 35
3.4.2 Output capacity 35
3.4.3 Dehusking efficiency 35
3.5 Instrument used for measurement 35
3.7 Cost of operation 36
IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 37-50
4.1 Properties of coconut 37
4.1.1 Thicknes and Moisture content of husk 40
4.1.2 Penetration resistance and dehusking moment 41
4.2 Performance evaluation of developed power operated 42
coconut dehusker
4.2.1 Performance of newly developed dehusker for ungraded 42
coconuts
46
4.2.2 Performance of newly developed dehusker for graded 44
coconuts
4.2.2.1 Dehusking time 44
4.2.2.2 Dehusking capacity 44
4.2.2.3 Dehusking efficiency 45
4.3 Comparative performance of newly developed dehusker 49

and existing dehusker (Dr. BSKKV, design)
4.4 Operating cost 49
V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 51-54
VI. BIBLIOGRAPHY 55-57
VII. APPENDICES 58-66
Appendix-A 58
Appendix-B 60
Appendix-C 61
Appendix-D 63
Appendix-E 65
47
LIST OF TABLES
Table Title Page No.

No.
1.1 Coconut producing countries and their production 1
1.2 Coconut production in Konkan region 2
3.1 Instrument used for performance evaluation of developed coconut 36
dehusker
4.1 Sizes and sphercity of coconut fruit 38
4.2 Weight and roundness of coconut fruit 39
4.3 Thickness and Moisture content of husk 40
4.4 Penetration resistance 41
4.5 Dehusking moment 41
4.6 Performance of developed dehusker for ungraded coconut 43
4.7 Dehusking time required for graded coconut 46
4.8 Output capacity of developed dehusker for graded coconut 47
4.9 Dehusking efficiency of developed dehusker for graded coconut 50
7.1 Cost of material required for fabrication 61
48
LIST OF FIGURES
Fig. No. Title Page No.
2.1 Manually operated coconut dehusker 7

2.2 Coconut dehusker. (Dr. BSKKV, design) 8
2.3 TNAU Pedal operated coconut dehusker 9
2.4 Power operated coconut dehusker (TNAU, design) 12
3.1 The three principal dimensions major(a), minor(b), and 18
intermediate axis(c) of coconut
3.2 Construction of cam displacement diagram 25
3.3 Construction of cam profile 26
3.4 Isometric and Schematic view of cam 26
3.5 Isometric and Schematic view of lifter 27
3.6 Isometric and Schematic view of holding mechanism 28
3.7 Schematic representation of developed power operated dehusker 33
3.8 Isometric view of developed power operated dehusker 34
4.1 Variation of average dehusking time for different grades of 47
coconuts
4.2 Variation of output capacity for graded coconuts 47
4.3 Variation of efficiency for graded coconuts 49
49
LIST OF PLATES
Plate No. Title Page No.

3.1 Measurement of Penetration force 21
3.2 Measurement of Dehusking moment 21
3.3 Cam and follower 30
3.4 Lifter with cutting blades 30
3.5 Holding mechanism 31
3.6 Splitting mechanism 31
3.7 Developed power operated coconut dehusker 32
3.8 Working of developed dehusker 32
50
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Abbreviation Description
cm centimeter
Dr. B.S.K.K.V. Dr. Balasaheb Sawant Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth
eg. Example
et al and others
etc. et cetera, and other things
Fig. Figure
g Gram
GR Gear ratio
ha Hectare
hp horse power
hr Hour
i.e. that is
kg Kilogram
l/h liters per hour
m Metre
min. Minute
mm Milimetre
No. Number
Sec Second
51
LIST OF SYMBOLS
Symbols Description
% Per cent
= Equal to
+ Plus
Multiplication
/ Division
Pie
0
C Degree celsius
Rupees
52
ABSTRACT
DEVELOPMENT OF POWER OPERATED COCONUT
DEHUSKER
By
Sachin Ramchandra Patil
Dr. Balasaheb Sawant Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth, Dapoli-415 712,
Dist. Ratnagiri, (Maharashtra)
2014.
Research Guide: Dr. P. U. Shahare
Department: Farm Machinery and Power
Coconut palms are grown in more than 93 countries of the world, with a total
production of 5.4 billion tons per year. An individual coconut fruit is made up of an
outer exocarp, a thick fibrous fruit coat known as husk, the hard protective endocarp
or shell called eyes are at one end of the nut. Dehusking is the process of removing the
outer covering called husk from the coconut to get two important commercial products
such as copra or dried kernel and fibers or coir. Separation of its husk from the nut
(dehusking) constitutes the, most difficult and dangerous operation in its processing.
Traditional methods of dehusking are quite time consuming with risk inclusion.
Manually dehusking process work is not only hard and dangerous but requires
considerable skill, strong wrist and arm. Motorized and hydraulic coconut dehusking
machine are commercially available in market but cost of this machine is limiting factor
in Konkan region.
In order to develop power operated coconut dehusker some properties like size,
sphericity, weight, roundness, moisture content, penetration resistance and dehusking
moment etc. were measured and determined. The dehusker was designed and fabricated
considering these properties.
The developed dehusker consists of main frame, electric motor, gear box, cam
and follower, lifter, holding mechanism and splitting mechanism etc. The power from
electric motor was transmitted to gear box. It reduces the speed of output shaft to 36 rpm.
The coconut is fitted in two jaws, developed for holding nuts both side. The cam fitted on
gear box shaft operates lifter and blade for cutting coconut at outer periphery. The
provision was made to vertical rod with the same cam. This operates one of cutting blade
53
for splitting of coconut husk. For further cuts on periphery, coconut has to rotate by
operator. The loosened coconut then unloaded from jaws and husk and nut is separated.
For testing of newly developed dehusker, its performance was studied in to two
different tests. Initially its performance was tested for ungraded coconuts, and finally
performance was tested for different grades of coconuts. The performance evaluation
was carried on the basis of dehusking time, output capacity, dehusking efficiency and
operating cost etc. The dehusker, dehusk is any shape and sizes of coconut without nut
breakage. The average dehusking time required to dehusk one coconut was 30.6 sec and
output capacity was 118 nuts per hours, which is 40 per cent higher than the manual
dehusker. The average dehusking efficiency of developed power operated dehusker was
96.62 per cent. The cost of fabrication of machine was Rs. 13882/- and total operating
cost for dehusking for one coconut was Rs. 0.32 per coconut which is Rs. 0.10 less per
coconut with dehusking of manually operated coconut dehusker.
54
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Coconut (Cocos nucifera) is one of the worlds most useful and important
perennial plans. An individual coconut fruit is made up of an outer exocarp, a thick
fibrous fruit coat known as husk, the hard protective endocarp or shell called eyes
are at one end of the nut. Coconut palms are grown in more than 93 countries of the
world, with a total production of 5.4 billion tons per year. India is the third largest
coconut producing country in terms of area and production. The top ten countries and
their production during 2011 are shown in Table 1.1 (Nwankwojike et al. 2012).
Table 1.1 Coconut producing countries and their production
Sr. No. Country Production
(metric tones)
1 Indonesia 16,300,000
2 Philippines 14,500,000
3 India 9,500,000
4 Brazil 3,033,830
5 Sri Lanka 1,950,000
6 Thailand 1,500,000
7 Mexico 959,000
8 Vietnam 940,000
9 Malaysia 710,000
10 Papua New Guinea 650,000
Traditional areas of coconut cultivation in India are the states of Kerala, Tamil
nadu, Karnataka, Goa, Andra Pradesh, Orissa, West Bengal, Pondicherry, Maharashtra
and the islands of Lakshdweep and Andaman and Nicobar. Maharashtra ranks seventh in
area and production. The area covered under the coconut cultivation in the Maharashtra
is around 21,000 hectares and production of coconut is 187.56 million nuts with 8931
nuts per hectares. Konkan is one of the major area in the state where coconut is grown.
55
The area under coconut in this region is 19337 hectares and total production is 782.51
lakh nuts (Jayavel et al. 2011). The district wise area, production and productivity of
coconut is shown in Table 1.2
Table 1.2 Coconut production in Konkan region
Sr. Districts Area, (ha) Production, Productivity,
No (lakh nuts) (nuts/ ha)
1 Ratnagiri 4882.0 443.91 9093
2 Raighad 2257.0 136.51 6049
3 Sindhudurg 10115 531.39 5254
4 Thane 2083.0 202.09 9702
Total 19337 782.51 7524
Coconut has considerable significance in the national economy in view of rural

employment and income generation. There is need to support the perishing industry with
a vision to make its farming productive and remunerative. In the present market the use
of coconut and its products as a functional food, nutritional food, pharmaceutical and
cosmetics has greater market and this demand is increasing continuously. Now days the
coir and coir products have made good progress and export quality products are
manufactured in the country. The geotextile and coir composite has a potential for
erosion control, soil and moisture conservation. The coir pith has a growing demand for
horticultural plants.
The coconut reaching markets are either partially husked or dehusked as per
demand and requirements in distant markets. Coconuts meant for copra making are fully
husked. Coconut meant for distant market places are left with some fibers covering the
eyes or on all around the nuts. Such partially husked coconuts minimize the breakage
during transportation and attain longer keeping quality (Ghosal et al. 2011).
Separation of its husk from the nut (dehusking) constitutes the first, most
difficult and dangerous operation in its processing. Dehusking is the process of removing
the outer covering called husk from the coconut to get two important commercial
products such as copra or dried kernel and fiber or coir. (Nwankwojike et al.2012).
Although coconut is of immense economic importance to both the industrialist and rural
area, the processing of coconuts after harvesting involves dehusking, which at present is
56
labour intensive. Dehusking the coconut without damaging the useful coir and nut is an
art which can be performed only by skilled workers. ( Nijaguna, 1988).
Traditionally the dehusking of coconut is done with sickle or koyta. It is quite
time consuming, risky and drudgeries. This traditional method poses threat and unsafe to
the life of people involved. Many times during dehusking husk usually bounces back on
body parts. Sometimes hands, face and other body parts injured. The use of metal spike
was developed later to overcome these negative features of dehusking of the coconut
fruit. The use of inverted spear is other method, where nut is impacted on spear and then
rotated simultaneously. This looses the husk which can be removed easily. It need
worker to be in bending posture, which is uncomfortable when work is continuous for
many hours. Manually dehusking process requires hitting and impacting of coconut
sharply down on blade, twisting to one side, loosening the husk and detaching the fibres
from the shell. This action is repeated several times until the entire fibres are removed.
This increases the discomfort, waist pain when the work is performed longer. There is a
potential danger of finger injury if there is any loss of concentration. Thus the work of
coconut dehusking is not only hard and dangerous but requires considerable skill,
practice and strong wrist and arm.
Motorized and hydraulically operated coconut dehusking machine are commercial
available in market but they are costly. These machines are of foreign origin, requires
high investment and high maintenance. The farmers in the Konkan region are poor and
their investment capacity is too small. The land is fragmented into small pieces and
percentage of marginal farmers is 72 per cent. Considering this socio economic
constrains in Konkan region; these costlier power operated machines are not suitable.
So the need arises to develop a coconut dehusker, which is simple in operation,
reasonable in cost, less risky, with higher rate of dehusking, minimum nut breakage and
distortion of the extracted fiber and portable. Keeping the above point in mind a project
entitled Development of power operated coconut dehusker is under taken with
following objectives.
Objectives
1. To develop power operated coconut dehusker.
2. To evaluate the performance of developed coconut dehusker.
57
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Dehusking is the process of removing the outer covering called husk from the
coconut. Separation of its husk from the nut (dehusking) constitutes the first, most
difficult and dangerous operation in its processing. Dehusking is done by traditional
manual methods or using tools and machinery. The use of which is the popular
traditional methods for coconut dehusking poses threat and unsafe to the life of people,
some cut their hands, and face as it usually bounces back on hitting the husk, laborious,
and time consuming.
This chapter deals with review of research work done in past by various
investigators on the topic under study. This chapter reveals the review related to various
technological developments on coconut dehusking. The chapter has cited the review
under following heading.
2.1 Physiological properties of coconut.
2.2 Coconut dehusker.
2.2.1 Design of coconut dehusker.
2.2.1.1 Manually operated coconut dehusker.
2.2.1.2 Power operated coconut dehusker.
2.2.2 Performance and testing of coconut dehusker.
2.2.2.1 Manually operated coconut dehusker.
2.2.2.2 Power operated coconut dehusker.
2.1 Physiological Properties of Coconut

58
Jarimopas et al. (2009) studied physical characteristics of intact and trimmed
young coconuts fruits. A number of young coconut fully mature fruit of the Namhom
variety were obtained. Thirty intact and 30 trimmed young coconut fruit were randomly
selected from three big fruit markets in the Bangkok metropolitan area. The diameter D
and height H of each intact fruit were measured using vernier calipers. The physical
characteristics of each trimmed fruit sample fruit height h1, shoulder height h2, shoulder
diameter ds, base diameter db were measured. On average intact fruit were 180 mm in
height and 160 mm in diameter. The height and diameter of its shell were 99 and 105
mm, respectively. The characteristics of the trimmed fruit were 136 mm height, 90 mm
shoulder height, 126 mm shoulder width, 108 mm base width, 35.60 crest angle and 84.40
base angles.
Terdwongworakul et al. (2009) studied the physical properties of fresh young

Thai coconut for maturity sorting. Judging the maturity of young coconut was difficult
and thus a harvested crop typically featured fruit of varying levels of maturity, which
currently require was manual grading. In an attempt to help reduce the time and costs
associated with the grading process, the correlations between the physical, mechanical,
physiological and acoustic properties of coconuts and their maturity levels were
investigated. The analysis showed that specific gravity, husk rupture force and husk
firmness showed a decreasing trend with progressing days after pollination. Other
properties including resonant frequency, shell rupture force, shell firmness, total soluble
solids, flesh thickness, wet flesh weight and dry flesh weight indicated an increase in
values with days after pollination. The flesh thickness was the parameter best correlated
with days after pollination.
Alonge and Adetunji (2010) studied the properties of coconut related to its
dehusking. One hundred seeds were randomly selected for the physical properties such
as the shape, size, volume, density, surface area. They observed that the major diameter
varied from 17.36 cm to 19.70 cm, surface area varied from 4724 mm2 to 5797 mm2,
seed volume varied from 600 cm3 to 800 cm3 with an average density of 1.065 g/cm3.
The coefficient of friction was high for plywood and minimum for glass, the average
modulus of elasticity was 153.625 N/mm with an average load at yield and deformation
at yield at 5390.6 N and 35.22 mm respectively on the major axis.
Alonge and Folorunso (2012) determined the some engineering properties of

coconut related to its cracking. As part of steps towards the development of processing
59
and handling equipments for the seeds, some engineering properties such as size,
sphericity, roundness, volume, surface area, density, coefficient of friction against
different materials and compression tests were studied. The authors reported that the
major diameter varied from 132.3 mm to 101.4 mm with a mean value of 112.1 mm,
surface area varied from 5986 mm2 to 4621 mm2, the seed volume varied from 7060
mm3 to 4350 mm3, with an average density of 1.043 kg/m3. The coefficient of friction
reported to be 0.531 for glass, 0.431 for plywood and 0.436 for galvanized steel.
2.2 Coconut Dehusker
For obtaining a coconut shell the husk available over it is removed. This is
removed manually or using tools and machinery. Manual methods are labourios and time
consuming involve lot of drudgery. Dehusking tools and machinery are now
commercially. The available tools and machinery for coconut dehusking their design,
construction, working etc. are given below.
2.2.1 Design of Coconut Dehusker
2.2.1.1 Manually operated coconut dehusker
Dinanath et al. (1987) developed the coconut dehusker. The machine specifically
designed to remove the husks from the coconut fruit including a plurality of rollers
rotating in opposite directions effectively toward one another where each roller include a
plurality of penetrating spikes sharpened to penetrate effectively engage the husk portion
of the coconut fruit. The interaction of the rollers in combination with the gripping action
of the spike serves to tear away the husk from the nut leaving the nut in fact.
Nijaguna (1988) developed manually operated coconut dehusker. The manual

method of dehusking coconut was replaced by using either a machete or spikes were
used. These methods had drawbacks of unsatisfactory and incomplete dehusking,
breakage of coconut shell, spoilage of useful coir etc. The dehusker was consisted of the
base of the unit, which is made of mild steel angle; two galvanized iron pipes of 50 mm
diameter. The bottom blade unit was fixed, 120o-spaced blades which could be rotated
using the bottom blade lever. The top blade support ring houses the top blade unit, which
consisted of three fixed 120o spaced blades and a companion set of three pairs of
movable hinged blades also spaced 120o apart. The developed coconut dehusker is
shown in Fig. 2.1.
60
Kwangwaropas (1990) developed the manually operated coconut dehusker. The
tool was consisted of four main parts i.e. frame, lever mechanism, dehusking mechanism,
and the lifting mechanism. He reported that two labours were required to work
synchronously. One to operate the transporting and lifting mechanism in conjunction
with the dehusking mechanism while the other to pick up turning and handling coconuts.
Fig. 2.1 Manually operated coconut dehusker (Nijaguna, 1988)
Kwangwaropas (1991) developed a manually operated coconut dehusker. It was

consistsed of the frame, a holding and revolving mechanism, a lifting mechanism and
dehusking mechanism. Only one operator was required to operate the machine. A
coconut was sieved by the holding mechanism before lifted up and dehusked. The
revolving mechanism enables the operator to rotate the nut radially and dehusked the
remaining portion. Remaining fibrous was taken out manually. He reported that besides a
special holding and revolving mechanism to operate in conjunction with a dehusking
tong, the operation was easy and safe.
Anonymous (2003) reported a simple hand operated portable de-husking device

available commercially. It was a light weight approximately 2.5 kg, pedestal mounted
61
unit, with a twin blade opening mechanism. The coconut was impacted on the upright
wedge-like twin blades by hand and a sector of the husk pried open by separating the
movable blade from the stationary blade by lifting the hand lever. This operation was
typically repeated several times to remove the remaining husk. It is also reported that it is
being used in India, with significantly improved de-husking efficiency and output.
Owolarate et al. (2008) developed second class lever mechanism type tool for
aiding manual dehusking of coconut. The machine on testing indicated that the handle of
the lever was required to dehusk the Nigerian tall coconut variety having spericity 75-81
per cent. A female worker was able to dehusk with a machete, a vertical tool and the new
dehusking lever an average 35, 12 and 47 nuts per hours.
Dr. BSKKV, Dapoli developed hand operated coconut dehusker (Gutte, 2011). It
was consisted of two triangular shape blades one was fixed to vertical support and other
blade operates with hand lever. The vertical support was fixed on base. Its weight was
2.2 kg. Coconut was impacted on two blades placed closely. Using hand lever, blades
were opened to dehusk the coconut. This was repeated to 4-5 times to remove the husk of
coconut completely. The device developed by Dr. BSKKV Dapoli is shown in Fig. 2.2.
Fig. 2.2 Coconut dehusker (Dr. BSKKV, design)
62
Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbtore developed a pedal operated
coconut dehusker (Anonymous, 2014). It was consisted of two sharp edged blades, one
being stationary and the other movable - operated by a foot pedal through linkage
mechanism. The twin-blades were mounted on a tubular stand. The unhusked coconut
was pierced on the wedge like blades and then the foot pedal was pressed to split open
and separate a portion of the husk. The operation was repeated 3-4 times until complete
dehusking was done. The developed pedal operated coconut dehusker is as shown in Fig.
2.3.
Fig. 2.3 TNAU Pedal operated coconut dehusker.
2.2.1.2 Power operated coconut dehusker
Kwangwaropas (1992) developed hydraulically operated coconut dehusking

machine. It consisted of three main parts such as the frame, the power unit together with
hydraulic system, and dehusking mechanism. Two persons were required to work
synchronously. One to operate the machine while the other to take out minor remaining
fibrous husk from the shell of the dehusked coconut and collects them.
Hydraulically operated coconut dehusking machine was developed by

Kwangwaropas (1992). Two sets of the hydraulic coconut dehusking machine were tried.
63
Their hydraulic and electrical control circuits were connected in series to enable them
operating contemporaneously. Each machine consisted of the frame, a lifting mechanism,
a dehusking mechanism, an ejecting mechanism, and a nuts pan. During operation, each
operator put a coconut on the lifting mechanism in order to start the working cycle
automatically. As a result, the nuts were immediately pushed up and seized by the
holding teeth under the supplement of the hydraulic reducing circuit. After that the
dehusking mechanisms started to operate via the sequence circuit. At the end of the
cycle, both mechanisms returned to their original positions. Some remaining fibres were
taken out manually after the next cycle was started.
Kwangwaropas (1998) developed general purpose coconut dehusking machine.

The machine consisted of four main parts ie, a frame, a power and transmission unit, a
dehusking mechanism, a polishing mechanism and in addition, a husk conveying
mechanism. A 220 volts 2 hp electric motor was used as the power unit and transmitted
to the dehusking mechanism. The dehusking mechanism consisted of two revolving
cylindrical rotors rotated in opposite direction. There were six fins fixed on each rotor.
As coconut was put on dehusking rotors, the operator pressed a cover down on the nut.
The authors reported that it required about 4.77 seconds to complete dehusking of nut.
Gajakos et al. (2008) developed a power operated coconut dehusker. It consisted

of main parts like frame, electric motor, speed reduction unit and dehusking unit. The
dehusking unit consisted of two cylinders viz. dehusking cylinder and idle cylinder.
Dehusking cylinder was provided with triangular shaped teeth, which on rotation of the
cylinder penetrated into the husk and pulled it away from the coconut. Single person was
required for operating the dehusker.
Hamid et al. (2009) developed a power operated coconut dehusker.The dehusker

consisted that the 5.5 Hp petrol engine which was transmitted power to a hydraulic
pump. The pump operated the hydraulic motor that rotated the chain and rollers with
spikes. The rollers were vertically inclined and covered with mild steel mesh tunnel.
Dehusking process required a coconut to be dropped from the top feeding into the tunnel
with rotating rollers and then dropping down by gravity. The rotating spikes squeeze the
husk; detach the husk from the nut and then pushing the husk at the back of the rollers.
The clean nut drops into the bottom basket.
64
Ghosal et al. (2011) developed a power operated coconut dehusker. The machine
developed at College of Agricultural Engineering and Technology, OUAT,
Bhubaneswar. The developed power operated coconut dehusker was reported to be safe
to operate, easy to fabricate, commercially feasible and economically viable. The
machine consisted of frame, electric motor, reduction unit, belt and pulley, lever and
knife etc. It was operated by an electric motor with a reduction unit for actuation of sharp
edged metallic fingers; one fixed and other movable with help of a movable cam to
dehusk the manually fed coconut.
Jacob and Kumar (2012) designed power operated coconut dehusking machine
considering the drawbacks of manual dehusking methods, and existing automated
dehusker. This power operated coconut dehusking machine operated on single phase, 1
hp electric motor. It consisted of main parts like frame, electric motor, speed reduction
unit and dehusking unit. Single person was required for operating the dehusker. During
the tests, average time required for dehusking a coconut was found to be 25 seconds, and
the machine could dehusk 120-150 coconuts per hour.
Nwankwojike et al. (2012) developed a coconut dehusking machine. The

machine consisted frame, dehusking unit, conveying unit, barrier plates/clearer, handle
and bearing housing. The developed coconut dehusking machine was very easy to
operate and required one operator. The coconut were placed between the rollers, the
rollers with spike were rotated by the handle. The rollers rotated in opposite directions
towards the centre causing. Due to rotation of rollers and spikes the gripping and tearing
of husk from the coconut. A screw conveyor was mounted 70 mm below the rollers
which was rotated in same direction and had proper discharge of dehusked nuts.
Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbtore developed power operated

coconut dehusker (Anonymous, 2014). The machine consisted of semi-circular stationary
concave and rotating drum with knives. The electric motor of 3 hp with 10:1 speed
reduction unit was used to drive the drum. The power was transmitted from motor to
reduction unit using V -belt and further power from reduction unit to rotating drum was
transmitted with chain and sprockets. During operation, the small knives bite the coconut
fed through the inlet. At the outlet the nut is fed through two rollers to remove parts of
husk remaining on the nut after dehusking. It takes about 10 to 20 seconds with the
65
rotating drum speed of 22-32 rpm. The TNAU developed coconut dehusker is shown in
Fig. 2.4.
Fig. 2.4 Power operated coconut dehusker (TNAU, design)
Fletchers Engineering Ltd manufactured a robust hydraulically-operated coconut

dehusking machine which was commercially available (Anonymous, 2014). It was
reported that it is a safe and reliable machine that uses high tensile steel cutting blades to
make the de-husking process quick and efficient. The dehusker could be powered by a
mounted electric motor, a gasoline or diesel-fueled engine, or even by a tractor's
hydraulic system. If continuously operated, the machine could dehusk over 2500
coconuts in an 8-hour day. The only required maintenance involves a daily check of the
nuts and bolts and oiling twice a day. This process takes about 10 minutes. Frequently
blade sharpening was not necessary, since they last for years.
Method Machine Works developed coconut dehusking machine (Anonymous,

2014). It was operated by 2 hp diesel engine. The machine weight was 250 kg. The
overall dimensions (L W H) of machine were 1.30 1.20 1.40 m. It was operated
by single operator with capacity of dehusking 300 nuts per hours.
Nandhakumar and James (Anonymous, 2014) developed automatic coconut

dehusking machine using machatronics principles. This project technique consisted of
pair of curved shells, multi hooks and two double acting pneumatic cylinders to remove
the husk of the coconut, and one single acting pneumatic cylinder to hold and press the
66
coconut. A 5/2 spring return single solenoid direction control valve was used to actuate
the two pistons which were used to remove the husk and 2/2 single solenoid direction
valve was used to actuate the holding cylinder which press and hold the coconut in the
shell.
2.2.2 Performance and Testing of Coconut Dehusker
2.2.2.1 Manually operated coconut dehusker
Baboo (1981) improved model of coconut dehusker, which was developed

basically in UK. The machine can dehusk coconut of any shape and size with the nut
breakage of 1 per cent. One, two and three operators could dehusk 500, 1600, 3000 nuts,
respectively in 8 hours. The operation of dehusker involves six movements which can be
shared by 2 or 3 operators.
Nijaguna (1988) studied the performance of the developed coconut dehusker. The
dehusker was simple, sturdy and efficient nine blade dehusker unit, financially beneficial
to labourers and producers. The unit could dehusk about 250 coconuts per hour
compared with about 75 nuts per hour from a skilled worker using the spike method. It
could be operated by unskilled labourers. The breakage rate was very low, about 1%.
The overall performance of the dehusker was satisfactory and there was considerable
reduction in the effort needed for operating the device as compared to other devices. The
cost benefit analysis indicates that it was commercially viable.
Kwangwaropas (1991) tested the manually operated coconut dehusking machine.

This machine required the maximum pushing force of 25 kg on dehusking lever for the
first dehusking and reduced to 12 kg for dehusking the last portion of fibres. Average
dehusking speed of dehusker was 30-35 seconds per coconut.
Gutte (2011) studied the performance of manually operated coconut dehusker

developed by Dr. BSKKV, Dapoli. It was reported that capacity of dehusker for
dehusking the coconut was 48 coconuts per hours. Average time required to dehusk one
coconut was 45.24 seconds. It requires 4 strokes to dehusk the coconut totally.
Kerala Agricultural University developed a very simple and effective tool for
easy dehusking of coconuts (Anonymous, 2014). It takes about 8 to 12 seconds for
dehusking a nut depending on the type and maturity. The tool was light, very simple to
use and handy and could be used both indoors and outdoors.
67
Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbtore developed a pedal operated
coconut dehusker (Anonymous, 2014). It was suitable for small farmers to dehusk
coconut with ease and minimal effort. It could be conveniently used in the household for
domestic dehusking both by men and women. It dehusking capacity was reported to 50-
60 nuts per hours and cost of machine to Rs. 600.
2.2.2.2 Power operated coconut dehusker
Kwangwaropas (1992) studied the performance of hydraulically operated coconut

dehusking machine. This machine consisted of a 1.5 kW 220 volts electric motor to drive
hydraulic pump. The oil was delivered 50 kg/cm2 under the working pressure at 14.2
liters per minute to feed the reducing circuit and sequence circuit in order to operate the
lifting and dehusking mechanism. This machine was operated by two persons and
observed that the average dehusking speed was 10-12 seconds/coconut. The total cost of
operation was reported to be Rs. 1.8/coconut which was about half of the price of the
convectional dehusking method.
Jaysheelan (2003) studied the performance of coconut dehusker developed under

the assistance of National Innovation Foundation. This machine makes 4 or 8 equal parts
of husk with dehusking capacity of 200-250 nuts per hours. It dehusked the single nut
within 20 seconds. Machine weight about 60 kg. The machine cost is reported to be
Rs.15000.
Hamid et al. (2009) studied performance of developed coconut dehusker

machine. The machine requires only one operator to feed the coconut into the machine.
Hundreds of coconuts from four different varieties were tested in the mechanical coconut
dehusking machine. The performance of machine in terms of reliability, durability,
functionality, safety, work rate, cost and efficiency were studied. The efficiency of the
machine was tested for four local coconut varieties viz. Malayan tall 92.5 % and 85% for
ripened and matured nut respectively, Matag 85%, Mawa 77%, and Yellow dwaft 46%.
The machine was capable to dehusks 270-300 nuts/hr or 7-10 sec/nut. The dehusker
machine was also found stable, reliable, and durable less maintenance, technically
feasible and economically viable.
Ghosal et al. (2011) studied the performance of a power operated coconut

dehusker. It was observed that the dehusker developed could dehusk 300 nuts per hour
68
with a dehusking efficiency of about 92 per cent. The cost of use of the machine was
calculated to be Rs 0.10 per nut.
Ghosal and Mohanty (2012) claimed that the power operated coconut dehusker
(OUAT, Bhubaneswar design) was suitable among the coconut growers of the state,
(Orissa) and compared its performance with other prevailing manually operated coconut
dehuskers. They observed that the number of nuts dehusked per hour, dehusking
efficiency and cost of dehsusking per nut in case of power operated dehusker were 300,
92 per cent and Rs. 0.10, respectively and 125, 83 per cent, Rs. 0.20 in case of hand
operated dehusker, and 170, 85 per cent, Rs. 0.15 in case of pedal operated dehusker,
respectively. The power operated dehusker was found to be safe to operate, easy to
fabricate, commercially feasible and economically viable as compared to other manually
operated dehuskers.
Its ergonomical performance was also evaluated by Ghosal and Mohanty (2012).
The performance and ergonomical study of a power operated coconut dehusker and other
manually operated coconut dehusker was carried out for its suitability among the farmers
on the basis of dehusking efficiencies. Ergonomical consideration like heart rate, oxygen
consumption rates etc. were taken during the operation. Dehusking of coconut was very
tedious job and many of the labourers show reluctance for this work as it causes injury to
them by traditional method. Lower working heart rate (115.2 2.28), lower oxygen
consumption rate (0.62 0.08 l/min.), lower relative cost of work load (VO2 max = 32.96
5.60%) and lower overall discomfort rate (4.4 0.41) in power operated dehusker were
noted and compared to other hand operated and pedal operated dehusker.
Nwankwojike et al. (2012) studied the performance of coconut dehusking

machine. Performance test analysis conducted shows that the machine dehusks coconut
fruits without nut breakage and distortion of the extracted fibre length and also that its
average dehusking efficiency and capacity was 93.45% and 79 coconuts per hour. All
materials used in the fabrication of this machine were of standard specifications and
locally sourced. They estimated cost of producing one unit of the machine to Rs. 12126.
69
CHAPTER III
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The chapter materials and methods consist of an approach for design of power
operated coconut dehusker, materials and methodology adopted for conducting study,
facility developed for performance evaluation of power operated coconut dehusker.
Coconut dehusker now days are available in market. Some of the State
Agricultural Universities have developed manually operated as well as power operated
dehusker. The commercially available coconut dehuskers are quite expensive. The
capacity of manually operated dehusker is less. In order to increase the capacity of
manually operated dehusker, to reduce drudgery involved in manual operation the power
operated coconut dehusker was developed and it performance was evaluated. It was
developed with view to find the best solution for the medium farmers who need higher
capacity machine and having some investment capacity. The machine was developed
considering various factors affecting design and its performance. The various points
considered for this study are mainly,
1) Physical properties of coconut
2) Dehusking technique
3) Size and capacity of machine
4) Ergonomical consideration.
An efforts were made to develop the power operated coconut dehusker for
medium capacity intermediate version, between manual and high capacity commercial
available unit looking into constraints, limitations and requirements. The dehusker was
needed to develop considering following points,
1) The developed dehusker should be able to dehusk the coconut of different sizes.
70
2) It should be able to dehusk with 6-7 horizontal cuts/impact when the coconut is
placed horizontally.
3) There should be arrangement for holding the coconut from both sides firmly
when it is placed horizontally.
4) To have cuts or impacts on periphery of coconut, there should be some automatic
arrangement.
5) The impact of cutter blade should be sufficient enough to penetrate axially into
coconut from outside.
6) The impacting blade should be reciprocated upward and downward while
penetrating into coconut.
7) The reciprocating speed should be designed to get required cuts.
8) There should be some arrangement for rotating coconut which is supported from
outside.
9) There should be some arrangement for splitting of husk immediately to the blade
penetrates into coconut.
10) It should have minimum power requirement for better economy.
11) There should be no damage to the coconut and the fiber should be not distorted
lengthwise.
Considering above points it was decided to develop motor operated dehusker
having minimum power requirement, cam operated penetrating mechanism, and coconut
holding and splitting mechanism.
3.1 Determination of Properties of Coconut

In order to design coconut dehusker holding, penetrating and dehusking
mechanism the properties of coconut viz. size, weight, roundness, spericity, thickness
etc. are important. For determination of physical as well as mechanical properties of
coconut for this experimental purpose the coconuts were obtained from the Department
of Horticulture, Dr. BSKKV, Dapoli. Total 50 coconuts of Banavali variety were
randomly selected.
Physical properties like size, spericity, roundness, weight, moisture content etc.
were studied. In mechanical properties the parameters like penetration resistance,
dehusking moment etc. were studied. The properties determinations are described below.
3.1.1 Coconut size
71
The coconut size was determined by measuring the dimension of the principal
axis; major, intermediate and minor of randomly selected coconut fruits using verniar
caliper. The major, minor and intermediate axes for coconuts are shown in Fig. 3.1. The
size of fifty coconuts (cv. Banavali) was measured and recorded.
Fig. 3.1. The three principal dimensions major(a), minor(b), and intermediate axis(c) of
coconut
3.1.2 Sphericity of nut
A direct measurement of the major, intermediate and minor axis of the

seeds using a verniar caliper was done. Calculation of sphericity was carried out using
the following formula;
Sphericty = (abc)1/3/ a
Where,
a, b, c are major, intermediate and minor axes.
3.1.3 Roundness
A coconut was selected randomly and placed on a graph sheet of paper on a

horizontal table. The projected area of a coconut in its natural reset position was traced
on the graph paper by mean of a pencil. The projected area was measured from the graph
paper. The smallest circumscribing circle was drawn on the tracing of projected area.
The diameter of circle was measured and the area of circle calculated. This was found
using the following formula;
Area = r 2
72
Where,
r = radius of the circle
The projected area (Ap) to the area of circumscribing circle (Ac) gives the
roundness of each nut.
Roundness = Ap/Ac
Where,
Ap = Projected area of traced coconut, mm2
Ac = Area of smallest circumscribing circle, mm2
3.1.4 Weight of coconut
The randomly coconut samples were selected and weighted on electronic

weighing balance of M/S Phoenix Company (L.C. 2 gm.). Total 50 samples were taken
and their observations were noted.
3.1.5 Moisture content
The moisture content of coconut husk was measured by oven dry method.
Initially the sample with the known weight was kept in oven at 130 C for six hours. The
sample was cooled in desiccators and weighed using an electronic weighing balance. The
moisture content of sample was calculated by following formula.
W2 W3
M .C.% 100
W3 W1
Where,
M.C. = moisture content, dry basis, %
W1 = weight of box, g
W2 = weight of box + sample, g
W3 = weight of box + sample after drying, g
3.1.6 Thickness of husk
73
The thickness of the coconut husk was measured by the verniar caliper. The
samples were randomly selected and at the center of the husk the thickness was
measured. Total 100 observations were selected. The thickness of husk gave the stroke
length of cutting blades.
3.1.7 Penetration resistance
The penetration resistance was determined using the set up developed. The
penetration resistance set up is shown in Plate 3.1.
It consists of rectangular frame, base platform, weighing platform and vertical

rod. The rectangular frame was made with M.S. angle (45455 mm). In order to rest the
coconuts firmly on base frame, four M.S. round bar (6 mm) were welded to rectangular
frame in a concave manner. The vertical guiding rod (45 mm dia.) was welded to a frame
for sliding the weighing platform. The length of guiding rod was 610 mm. The weighing
platform was made in rectangular shape of M.S. angle (45455 mm) and M.S. flat plate
(45 mm) was welded to rectangular frame. One collor (50 mm dia.) was welded to
backside of weight platform which was able to slide up and down over the vertical
guiding rod. Two triangular blade of coconut dehusker (Dr. BSKKV, design) were
placed together and welded to the weighing platform at the bottom side in inverted
position.
The coconut was placed on base platform. Keeping the weight on weight
platform, it was allowed to drop on the coconut placed. In order to penetrate blade
through the outer husk of coconut up to 25 mm, the weight in platform was increased
from 4 to 10 kg at 2 kg interval. The force required to penetrate into the inner shell of
coconut by the coconut was recorded. This was considered as penetration resistance by
the coconut. Total twenty observations were noted
3.1.8 Dehusking moment
The dehusking moment required for dehusking coconut was measured using the
load cell. The load cell was attached to manual dehusker developed by Dr. BSKKV,
Dapoli. The set up of dehusking moment measurement as shown in Plate 3.2
The lower end of load cell was fixed to the lever of dehusker at 100 mm distance
from the top and upper end of load cell was free for operating the dehusking lever. The
74
coconut whose dehusking moment required for dehusking is to determine was impacted
on the upper blade of dehusker. The lever was operated. The blade splits and it also splits
the husk of coconut. The force required for dehusking coconut was displayed on the
display unit of digital load cell. Total twenty observations of dehusking moment were
noted.
Plate 3.1 Measurement of Penetration resistance
75
Plate 3.2 Measurement of Dehusking moment
3.2 Development of Power Operated Coconut Dehusker

In order to develop power operated coconut dehusker having medium capacity, it
was decided to use electric motor for the dehusker. Keeping the similar technique
adopted for dehusking coconut as in Dr. BSKKV developed manually operated dehusker,
the electric motor was provided to reduce the drudgery in manual dehusking. The efforts
were made to develop the machine of semiautomatic category. The impact of coconut on
dehusking blade as in manual dehusker was replaced with automatic vertical
reciprocating blade mechanism and splitting mechanism. The coconut holding in hand
was replaced with holding mechanism with easy rotation of coconut by operators hand.
3.2.1 Power requirement of machine
The coconut dehusker was operated by an electric motor. The required power for
operating the dehusker was calculated by measuring the penetration resistance and
dehusking moment as there are two actions i.e. upward impact and splitting. The
maximum force required out of these two was considered for calculating power
requirement. The power of motor was calculated by following formula -
2 nT
P
4500
76
Where,
P= Power of motor, HP
n = Revolution per minute
T= Torque, N-m
3.2.2 Components of power operated coconut dehusker

The various functional components of power operated coconut dehusker are as
follows -
1. Main frame
2. Electric motor
3. Gear box
4. Cam
5. Lifter
6. Holding mechanism
7. Cutting blades
8. Splitting mechanism
3.2.2.1 Main frame

Main frame in rectangular shape was fabricated using M. S. angle
(45455 mm) for supporting the components. The overall length, width and height of
main frame were kept as 620 mm, 465 mm and 785 mm respectively. An electric motor
was fitted at the bottom side of the frame. Cam, gear box and splitting mechanism were
also supported by main frame at bottom.
3.2.2.2 Electric motor
The power requirement was 0.9 HP. Therefore a single phase, 1 HP,
commercially available electric motor was selected as power source for coconut
dehusker. The details of the power calculation are given in Appendix-B.
1 HP commercially available single phase, electric motor [Make- Crompton

Greaves] was selected for this study.
3.2.2.3 Gear box

It was assumed that total 6-7 cuts on the exocarp of coconut by the blade were
required to dehusk the coconut. Considering 5-6 coconuts dehusking in one minute, total
36 (average) cuts by the cutting blade needs to be given on coconut in one minute. It was
77
decided to have lifter mechanism with cutting blades moving upward, there will be 36
upward stroke of cutting blade in one minute. Considering one cut for one revolution of
cam, an average speed of camshaft comes to 36 rpm. If motor speed is 1440 rpm, then
the gear ratio is -
Gear ratio =
= 36/1440
= 0.025
Hence reduction ratio = 40:1
Hence commercially available gear box having reduction ratio 40:1 was selected
for coconut dehusker.
3.2.2.4 Cam Design

Cam is a rotating machine element which gives reciprocating or oscillating
motion to another element known as follower. For the coconut dehusker radial cam
having offset type follower was considered. The displacement diagram was constructed
initially. On the basis of displacement diagram the cam profile was constructed. The
profile was cut finally of M.S. flat plate of 10 mm thick and cam was designed. The
detail about construction of displacement diagram and cam profile explained as follows.
3.2.2.4.1 Construction of displacement diagram to cam design
1) Cam and follower combination was determined to set uniform velocity of
follower.
2) Stroke length of cam was determined from the size of radial intermediate axis
and blade penetration. The maximum intermediate size was 174 mm and
minimum size was 100 mm which was measured in physical properties of
coconut. The coconut was hold horizontally, hence radial intermediate size is
74/2 = 37 mm, it is nearly 40 mm. Similarly, it was determined that the blade
penetration in coconut was up to 20 mm. Therefore 40 mm plus 20 mm i.e 60
mm stroke length was taken.
78
3) The outstroke of 300 for penetration, dwell period 600 for splitting action and
return stroke of 300, and remaining resting of 2400 for revolving the coconut
was assumed.
4) Horizontal line of AX = 3600 was drawn with some suitable scale, on this line
AD=300 was marked to represent the outstroke of the follower, DE=600 to
represent the dwell and EH=300 to represent the return stroke and HX=2400 to
represent resting period.
5) A 60 mm vertical line AY was drawn, which is the stroke length of follower and
completed the rectangle.
6) Dividing the outstroke and return stroke in to equal number of parts and vertical
lines were drawn.
7) The AD and HX was joined with straight line.
8) The complete displacement diagram as shown by ADEHX which is shown in
Fig. 3.2.
Fig. 3.2 Construction of cam displacement diagram
3.2.2.4.2 Construction of cam profile

1) It was considered that the axis of follower passes through the axis of the cam
shaft.
2) Base circle with the radius equal to the minimum radius of the cam such as 60
mm was drawn with the O as a centre.
3) Angle AOS = 300, angle SOT = 600 and angle TOH = 300 was drawn, which
represented the outstroke, dwell and return stroke.
4) Angle AOS and angle TOH was divided into equal parts as same in
displacement diagram.
5) Points 1, 2, 3 and 0, 1, 2, 3 were joined with the centre O.
79
6) Now 1B, 2C, 3D and 0E, 1F, 2G distance were set from the displacement
diagram.
7) Points A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H were join and completed profile diagram.
At center of cam plate, a M.S. round pipe (40 mm diameter) of length 60 mm was
welded. On outer surface of this pipe M. S. flat plate (25 mm) was welded for splitting
mechanism. The surface of follower was grooved so it fit properly on cam. Follower
was attached to the lifter with nut and bolt. The schematics view of the cam and
displacement diagram are as shown in Fig. 3.3.
The cam transmits reciprocating power to the lifter. For operating the splitting
rod the M.S. flat was welded to the cam at starting of outstroke, in such way that it can
push the splitting rod. The isometric and schematic views of cam are shown in Fig. 3.4.
The pictorial view of cam and follower is shown in Plate 3.3.
Fig. 3.3. Construction of cam profile
80
Fig. 3.4. Isometric and Schematic views of cam
3.2.2.5 Lifter
Lifter of the developed coconut dehusker was made of the square aluminum pipe
of size 40403 mm. At the lower end of lifter a follower was joined by the nut and
bolts, and at the upper end one dehusking blade was welded. The lifter moves upward
and downward by the cam and follower. Hence to support the lifter it was enclosed in
guider. The lifter easily slides in this guider, which is made up of the square aluminum
pipe of size 45 mm. The length of lifter was 440 mm and guider length was 300 mm The
isometric and schematic views of lifter are as shown in Fig. 3.5 and pictorial view shown
in Plate 3.4.
81
Fig. 3.5. Isometric and Schematic view of lifter
3.2.2.6 Holding mechanism
Holding mechanism of developed dehusker to hold coconut firmly during

operation consists of two spike jaws. Out of these jaws one jaw is spring loaded and
other jaw is fixed on platform. The jaws were made by welding spikes (7 numbers)
around M.S. round bar 40 mm diameter. The spikes were also made with M.S. round bar
6 mm diameter and 55 mm in length. The spikes were sharp ended at one end. Six spikes
were welded around M.S. bar, while one spike was welded at the center. Other jaw was
made spring loaded and lever was provided for its horizontal movement. These facilitate
the fixing and removal of nut easily. Two circular jaws with spikes on periphery were
fabricated and fixed on the platform. The jaws not only hold the coconut firmly but also
rotate within the bushes. Both the bushes of jaws were welded on square aluminum pipe
of 40 mm size and 190 mm height. The figure and pictorial view of holding mechanism
as shown in Fig. 3.6 and Plate 3.5
82
Fig. 3.6. Isometric and Schematic view of holding mechanism
3.2.2.7 Cutting blade

. The cutting blades were in triangular section and made up of case hardened
silica manganese steel (EN 42). The one cutting blade was fixed to the lifter and other
was movable and fitted to the splitting rod with lever arrangement for splitting the husk.
The blades were sharpened at the edges hence it penetrate in the husk and split the
coconut.
3.2.2.8 Splitting mechanism
The coconut from outer side was getting cuts by the dehusking blades when it
was operated by cam and lifter. For dehusking, the husk was splitted by blades. Splitting
mechanism is also operated by the cam. Out of two blades one blade was fixed and other
moves outward. The two blades were hinged at bottom and movable blade was
connected to vertical round bar through a lever (connecting rod lever mechanism).
During the upward stroke of cam, the lifter with closed blades penetrates into coconut.
After penetration, movable blade split by moving outward which operated by connecting
rod lever mechanism. The connecting rod lever mechanism was operated by M.S. flat
which was welded to camshaft at start point of dwell period. It continuously pushes up
83
till the ending of dwell period. After ending of dwell period the blade move to downward
and close together. The M.S. flat made up a T section of size 255 mm. It has curvature
for progressively smooth operation of connecting rod lever mechanism. The pictorial
view of splitting mechanism as shown in Plate 3.6
3.2.3 Power Transmission
The power from electric motor is transmitted to gear box. It reduces the speed of
output shaft to 36 rpm. The cam fitted on gear box shaft operates lifter and blade for
cutting coconut at outer periphery. From same cam vertical rod was operated when
operate lever operated to splitting mechanism of machine.
The newly developed power operated coconut dehusker is shown in Plate 3.7.
The different views of the machine is shown in Fig. 3.7 and 3.8
3.3 Working of Coconut Dehusker
A newly coconut dehusker is electric motor operated machine. For dehusking

coconut, it is held horizontally in the holding jaws. After switching on the motor, the
blades penetrate in the coconut while moving upward. Same time splitting action is done.
The coconut is rotated by hand and further cut on periphery of coconut is obtained by
upward movement of blade. The splitting mechanism split the coconut husk on outside
the nut. This procedure is repeated 6-7 times for loosening the nut. Then the loosened
coconut is unloaded from the jaws and loosened husk from the nut is removed by hand.
The working of newly developed machine is shown in Plate 3.8
84
Plate 3.3 Cam and follower
Plate 3.4 Lifter with cutting blades
85
Plate 3.5 Holding mechanism
Plate 3.6 Splitting mechanism
86
Plate 3.7 Developed power operated coconut dehusker
Plate 3.8 Working of developed dehusker
87
Fig. 3.7 Schematic representation of developed power operated dehusker
88
1. Main frame, 2. Motor, 3. Gear box, 4. Cam, 5. Splitting mechanism, 6.
Lifter, 7. Holding mechanism, 8. Spring, 9. Handle
Fig. 3.8 Isometric view of developed power operated dehusker
89
3.4 Performance of Developed Power Operated Coconut Dehusker
The performance of newly developed power operated coconut dehusker was
tested for its time required to dehusk the coconut, dehusking capacity and dehusking
efficiency. The tests are conducted at Department of Farm machinery and power, Dr.
BSKKV, Dapoli.
3.4.1 Time required dehusking the coconut
The time required for dehusking the coconut with developed machine was
measured using the stopwatch. The total time required for dehusking includes time for
coconut fixing, splitting time, unloading time for coconut and time required to remove
the loosen husk.
3.4.2 Output capacity
The dehusking capacity of machine was determined from the average dehusking
time required to dehusk the coconut. It is measured in nuts per hours.
3.4.3 Dehusking efficiency

The dehusking efficiency of power operated coconut dehusker was calculated by
the following formula.
Dehusking efficiency =
At first the husk was weighted on the weighing balance after dehusking on the
dehusker. Then the remaining husk present in coconut was removed completely from the
dehusked coconut manually to know the total weight of husk. Then by using above
formula the dehusking efficiency was calculated.
3.5 Instruments Used For Measurement
For evaluating the performance of coconut dehusker following accessories,

instruments were used. The instruments used to measure different parameters of
developed coconut dehusker are tabulated in Table 3.1
90
Table 3.1 Instruments used for performance evaluation of developed coconut dehusker
Sr. No. Parameter Instrument Least Count Range
1 Time Stop watch 0.5 Seconds 0-30 min
2 Speed Non contact type 1rpm 0-9999 rpm

tachometer
3 Weight of Electronic 0.01g 0-5000 g

coconut Balance
4 Length, Steel rule 1mm 0-300 mm

Width
5 Force Load cell 0.1gm 0-200 kg
0 300 mm
6 Size Vernier caliper 0.01 mm
3.6 Cost of Operation
The cost of operation of machine is divided under two heads known as

fixed cost and variable cost. The details of calculations are placed in Appendix D.
Fixed cost includes:
1. Depreciation
2. Interest
3. Insurance and housing
Variable cost includes:
1. Labour
2. Electricity charges
3. Repairs and maintenance
Standard procedure was adopted for calculating operating cost. While calculating
the operational cost the life of machine was considered to five years and machine use
(Annual) to 1000 hours.
91
CHAPTER IV
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter deals with result obtained from the various tests conducted during
the experiments. Initially the properties of coconut were studied. Power operated
dehusker was developed and tested. During the performance test measure the parameters
viz. Weight of husk, dehusking efficiency, time required to dehusking etc. were studied.
The details about the result obtained are given and discussed below.
4.1 Properties of coconut
The various properties of coconut fruit were studied for determination of shape
size, sphericity, weight, roundness etc. For these measurement total fifty coconuts were
selected randomly (cv. Banvali). The dimensions of coconut viz. size, sphericity,
weight, roundeness etc. were measured and tabulated in Table 4.1 and 4.2. The details
calculations are given in Appendix-A.
From table it was observed that diameter at major axis varied from 153 to 213
mm. At minor axis it varied from 106 to 170 mm while at intermediate axis it varied
from 98 to 160 mm. The average diameter of coconut selected for this measurement at
major, minor, and intermediate axis were obtained as 184.91 mm, 131.62 mm, and
130.86 mm respectively. The sphericity values were obtained in the range of 0.75 to 0.89
with average value of 0.76.
The weight and roundness values of the coconut were also determined. (Table
4.2) The weights of coconut were obtained in range of 619.5 to 1836 g with an average
of 903.58 g. The projected area and area of circumscribing circle were also measured.
The minimum value of 146 cm2 and maximum value of projected area was obtained as
282 cm2 while the minimum and maximum value of area of circumscribing circle were
obtained as 206 cm2 and 400 cm2 respectively. The average range of projected area and
area of circumscribing circle were 201 cm2 and 295.31 cm2 respectively. The average
92
roundness value of the coconut was found to be 0.68 it was ranged from 0.54 to 0.94 for
the sample selected under this study.
93
Table 4.1 Sizes and sphercity of coconut fruit (cv. Banvali)
Sample Major axis Minor axis Intermediate Sphercity Sample Major axis Minor axis Intermediate Sphercity
(mm) (mm) axis, (mm) (mm) (mm) axis, (mm)
1. 196 152.9 138 0.778 26. 207 170 160 0.816
2. 210 117 137 0.678 27. 175 111 102 0.683
3. 174 132 140 0.806 28. 204 136 149 0.747
4. 176 116 129 0.746 29. 189 123 119 0.706
5. 199 125 125 0.697 30. 197 148 153 0.794
6. 186 130 113.6 0.716 31. 178 133 128 0.773
7. 180 114.7 105.7 0.686 32. 192 124 118 0.699
8. 166 125 135 0.808 33. 197 155 153 0.806
9. 175 126 131 0.774 34. 174 135 133 0.799
10. 176.5 132 132 0.783 35. 180 143 138 0.806
11. 191 127 130 0.730 36. 175 120 117 0.734
12. 203 106 98 0.601 37. 186 122 120 0.714
13. 185 136 130 0.763 38. 182 129 128 0.754
14. 182 151.7 114.7 0.767 39. 160 130 127 0.822
15. 175 135 137 0.804 40. 168 128 118 0.772
16. 153 140 136 0.888 41. 184 145 139 0.799
17. 173 135 130 0.796 42. 187 132 130 0.750
18. 175 133 131 0.788 43. 177.5 127 123 0.753
19. 175 126 116 0.743 44. 208 160 155 0.788
20 187 147.3 120 0.757 45. 170 136 130 0.807
21. 178 130 144 0.798 46. 165 129 117 0.782
22. 175 119 138 0.773 47. 190 157 155 0.833
23. 180 131 141 0.788 48. 197 138 128 0.731
24. 213 148 153 0.753 49. 206 160 155 0.794
25. 192 125 138 0.738 50. 173 123 120 0.752
Average 184.91 131.62 130.86 0.757
94
Table 4.2 Weight and roundness of coconut fruit (cv. Banvali)
Sample Weight Projected Area of Roundness Sample Weight Projected Area of Roundness
(g) area, (Ap) circumscribing (g) area, (Ap) circumscribing
(cm2) circle, (Ac) (cm2) circle, (Ac)
(cm2) (cm2)
1. 1190 266 314 0.847 26. 1836 282 400.94 0.703
2. 713 189 346.18 0.545 27. 643.5 153 218.92 0.698
3. 881 176 301.56 0.583 28. 1379 252 265.76 0.948
4. 769 203 295.44 0.687 29. 711 162 265.76 0.609
5. 786.5 207 289.38 0.715 30. 1027.5 226 314 0.719
6. 792 185 292.4 0.632 31. 645.5 187 264.6 0.706
7. 1006.5 174 265.76 0.654 32. 723 196 290.4 0.674
8. 901.5 188 266.02 0.706 33. 1115.5 210 294.8 0.712
9. 782.5 193 314 0.614 34. 951 165 265.78 0.620
10. 971 192 274.5 0.699 35. 848 214 340.52 0.628
11. 772.5 197 329.89 0.597 36. 932 192 298.5 0.643
12. 814.5 147 262.88 0.559 37. 870 260 323.6 0.803
13. 757 184 283.5 0.649 38. 982 156 230.92 0.675
14. 858 217 310.86 0.698 39. 775 225 312.4 0.720
15. 1003.5 184 248.71 0.739 40. 952 222 265.8 0.835
16. 766.5 146 206.01 0.708 41. 850 150 285.5 0.525
17. 925 191 298.49 0.639 42. 792 201 320.4 0.627
18. 914 183 277.45 0.659 43. 932 186 250.85 0.741
19. 619.5 195 292.4 0.666 44. 1045 256 392.65 0.651
20 912 216 277.45 0.778 45. 841 175 265.4 0.659
21. 884 202 289.38 0.698 46. 758 225 320.48 0.702
22. 776 253 379.94 0.665 47. 915.5 182 270.45 0.672
23. 850 192 274.5 0.699 48. 1020 198 300.1 0.659
24. 1070 274 379.94 0.721 49. 1430 220 323.46 0.680
25. 795 222 323.49 0.686 50. 957 205 290.23 0.706
Average 903.58 201.7 295.31 0.684
95
4.1.1 Thickness and moisture content of husk
The physical properties of coconut viz. thickness and moisture content of husk
was measured. The thickness of husk was measured by the verniar calliper. The average
thickness was observed as 19.46 mm. The thickness of husk was obtained in the range of
12 to 30 mm.
The moisture content (w.b.) of coconut husk was determined by oven dry
method. The data on thickness and moisture content of husk is shown in Table 4.3. The
moisture content in coconut husk ranged from 18 to 30 per cent. The average moisture
content was found to be 24.9 per cent.
Table 4.3 Thickness and Moisture content of husk

Sample Thickness of Moisture content
husk (%)
(mm)
1 30 27.72
2 14 27.2
3 12 23.0
4 15 27.0
5 22 22.2
6 25 26.2
7 17 22.0
8 16 20.0
9 15 19.2
10 19 27.0
11 13 29.0
12 19 22.0
13 24 26.2
14 18 25.0
15 19 23.8
16 17 25.6
17 16 19.0
18 21 27.0
19 18 25.0
20 17 18.2
21 19 29.2
22 19 25.0
23 21 26.2
24 24 25.4
25 20 30.0
26 21 26.0
27 16 27.0
28 13 30.0
29 19 22.0
30 17 26.0
Avg. 19.46 24.9
96
4.1.2 Penetration resistance and dehusking moment
Under mechanical properties of coconut penetration resistance and dehusking

moment were determined. Penetration and dehusking moment were calculated to know
the power requirement of power operated coconut dehusker. The dehusking moment was
determined by using the load cell on manually operated coconut dehusker (Dr. BSKKV,
design). The maximum value of dehusking moment (15.69 N-m) was considered for
designing of new power operated coconut dehusker. The maximum penetration force and
dehusking moment were observed as 98.1 N and 15.69 N-m respectively. Observations
of penetration force and dehusking moment are shown in Table 4.4 and 4.5).
Table 4.4 Penetration resistance
Samples Penetration resistance Samples Penetration resistance

(N) (N)
1 39.24 11 78.48
2 39.24 12 78.48
3 39.24 13 78.48
4 39.24 14 78.48
5 39.24 15 78.48
6 58.86 16 98.1
7 58.86 17 98.1
8 58.86 18 98.1
9 58.86 19 98.1
10 58.86 20 98.1
Maximum 98.1
Table 4.5 Dehusking moment
Samples Dehusking moment, (N-m) Samples Dehusking moment, (N-m)

1 14.71 11 7.848
2 11.77 12 12.75
3 10.79 13 9.81
4 15.69 14 10.79
5 13.73 15 13.73
6 10.79 16 15.69
7 8.829 17 14.71
8 14.71 18 9.81
9 15.69 19 11.77
10 9.81 20 14.71
Maximum 15.69
4.2 Performance evaluation of newly developed power operated coconut
dehusker
97
The performance of newly developed power operated dehusker was carried out at
Department of Farm Machinery and Power, Dr. BSKKV, Dapoli. For testing the
performance studied in to two different tests. i.e. performance of dehusker for ungraded
coconuts and performance test for graded coconuts.
4.2.1 Performance of newly developed dehusker for ungraded coconuts
During first initial test, the performance of dehusking machine was tested for
hundred randomly selected ungraded coconut samples (cv. Banvali). The observations
viz. total time required, weight of total husk available on coconut, weight of husk
removed, were taken and dehusking efficiency was determined.
The data revealed that (Table 4.6) the dehusking time for coconuts varied from
23 to 50 seconds. The variation in dehusking time is due to variation in size of coconut.
The average dehusking time was found to be 30.66 seconds. On the basis of removal of
husk, the dehusking efficiency of machine was calculated. For the total sample tested,
the husk weight of coconut was found in the range of 111 to 719 g. The data as weight of
husk removed of each sample indicated that there was a variation of weight husk
removed by the machine in the range of 102 to 708 g. The average weight of husk on
samples and husk removed from samples were obtained as 397 and 384 g respectively.
The dehusking efficiency of the machine was found in the range of 82 to 99 per cent.
The machine worked in a satisfactory manner and resulted into average efficiency of
96.62 per cent.
Thus, the machine gave encouraging performance. No damage and slippage of

coconut were obtained throughout the testing period. This indicated that the cutting and
gripping mechanism of developed machine worked well. The variation in husk removal
was observed and hence the variation in dehusking efficiency was noticed.
Table 4.6 Performance of developed dehusker for ungraded coconuts
Sr. Total Weight of Weight of Dehusking Sr. Total Weight Weight of Dehusking
No. time total husk husk efficiency No. time of total husk efficiency
98
(sec) (g) removed (%) (sec) husk removed (%)
(g) (g) (g)
1 50 274 268 97.81 51 39 407 398 97.79
2 30 282 273 96.81 52 25 421 415 98.57
3 41 415 402 96.87 53 30 279 271 97.13
4 32 498 486 97.59 54 31 414 408 98.55
5 36 343 336 97.96 55 34 353 348 98.58
6 28 316 300 94.94 56 34 436 422 96.79
7 26 351 343 97.72 57 29 294 287 97.62
8 44 271 261 96.31 58 31 200 189 94.50
9 36 284 264 92.96 59 40 460 455 98.91
10 28 324 317 97.84 60 34 496 489 98.59
11 34 111 102 91.89 61 30 602 589 97.84
12 36 437 426 97.48 62 41 244 235 96.31
13 39 294 289 98.30 63 30 288 285 98.96
14 35 326 317 97.24 64 32 381 367 96.33
15 27 703 623 88.62 65 27 496 489 98.59
16 32 657 644 98.02 66 31 176 170 96.59
17 32 339 307 90.56 67 25 468 458 97.86
18 35 500 473 94.60 68 36 378 367 97.09
19 27 464 454 97.84 69 30 435 422 97.01
20 34 345 332 96.23 70 28 451 443 98.23
21 31 347 334 96.25 71 29 719 708 98.47
22 35 530 511 96.42 72 27 442 438 99.10
23 37 402 387 96.27 73 28 595 578 97.14
24 28 502 412 82.07 74 28 408 402 98.53
25 34 296 284 95.95 75 38 453 431 95.14
26 33 280 271 96.79 76 36 502 485 96.61
27 29 622 595 95.66 77 28 490 474 96.73
28 38 392 372 94.90 78 29 205 195 95.12
29 26 205 196 95.61 79 29 378 375 99.21
30 27 295 289 97.97 80 29 429 420 97.90
31 26 409 402 98.29 81 25 398 392 98.49
32 24 309 298 96.44 82 33 418 405 96.89
33 29 269 261 97.03 83 31 501 485 96.81
34 28 382 365 95.55 84 24 495 475 95.96
35 27 389 377 96.92 85 30 452 429 94.91
36 28 379 370 97.63 86 25 443 434 97.97
37 31 463 450 97.19 87 32 380 367 96.58
38 24 325 297 91.38 88 32 346 338 97.69
39 26 451 418 92.68 89 30 431 422 97.91
40 26 364 354 97.25 90 29 298 290 97.32
41 27 459 451 98.26 91 23 409 397 97.07
42 28 331 325 98.19 92 30 483 469 97.10
43 29 339 331 97.64 93 24 291 275 94.50
44 29 404 395 97.77 94 24 524 520 99.24
45 30 382 369 96.60 95 31 460 450 97.83
46 29 416 397 95.43 96 26 363 350 96.42
47 24 284 267 94.01 97 31 401 369 92.02
48 34 445 437 98.20 98 26 415 405 97.59
49 31 661 649 98.18 99 36 360 353 98.06
50 32 438 428 97.72 100 24 304 298 98.03
Avg. 30.6 96.62
4.2.2 Performance of newly developed dehusker for graded coconuts
99
The coconuts were graded into different size viz. small, medium and large.
Accordingly they were designated into grade A, grade B, and grade C. For each
grades total sixty samples were selected. The size of grade 'A' varies between 115 to 135
mm, grade 'B' is 136 to 155 mm and grade 'C' is 156 to 175 mm. The coconuts of
different grades were dehusked using newly developed dehusker and observations on
dehusking time, weight of husk available, weight of husk removed were taken and
dehusking efficiency of the machine was determined. The dehusking time, output
capacity and dehusking efficiency for different grades of coconuts are as given through
Table 4.7-4.9.
4.2.2.1 Dehusking Time
It is evident that (Table 4.7) the dehusking time for grade A coconuts varied
from the 23 to 35 seconds with average dehusking time 29.15 seconds. For grade B
coconuts the dehusking time varied from 22 to 33 seconds and average time was 28.28
seconds while grade C coconuts the average dehusking time was 30.58 seconds with
the range of 27 seconds to 39 seconds.
4.2.2.2 Dehusking Capacity
The dehusking capacity of machine was determined from the dehusking time
required to dehusk the coconut. The output capacity of developed dehusker is varied for
different grade. The average dehusking capacity of machine for grades A coconut is
125 nuts per hours and it was varied with the 105 to 155 nuts per hours. For grade B
coconuts the dehusking capacity varied from 110 to 165 nuts per hours with average
capacity 130 nuts per hours which was maximum among the three grades. The output
capacity for grade C coconuts was 115 nuts with range of 95 to 135 nuts per hours. The
higher size of coconut is responsible for higher dehusking time. The varying dehusking
time for different sizes of coconut resulted in to dehusking capacities variation of
different grades of nuts.
Graphically the dehusking time and capacity of newly developed machine for
coconuts of different grades are presented in Fig. 4.1. and Fig 4.2. This indicated the
higher dehusking time resulted into low output capacity and vice versa. Coconuts of
grade B gave highest dehusking capacity indicated suitability of B grade coconuts for
the developed machine for maximum capacity. Incomplete development of fibre
100
structure, thickness and insufficient reach of blade might be responsible for lower value
of capacity with C grade coconuts. However higher surface area and thickness might
have resulted in to higher dehusking time and lower capacity.
4.2.2.3 Dehusking Efficiency
The dehusking efficiency of the machine for different grades of coconut as given
in Table 4.9. It was revealed that the dehusking efficiency of grades A coconut is
varied with the 90.22 to 98.30 per cent with average value of 94.81 per cent, while
average dehusking efficiency with grade B coconuts was 95.58 per cent with range of
90.32 to 98.37 per cent, and for grade C coconuts it varied with 90.78 to 98.55 per cent
with the average of 95.79 per cent. It also indicated that dehusking of grade C coconuts
resulted into higher efficiency of 95.79 per cent while grade B coconuts of 95.58 per
cent which is followed by grade A coconuts with 94.81 per cent. There was difference
in sizes of coconuts hence variation in dehusking efficiency was obtained.
The relationship of different grades of coconut and dehusking efficiency is shown

in Fig. 4.3. The higher efficiency for higher size of coconut and lower value of efficiency
for small size coconut was noticed through this experimentation. The better fibres
structure development and reach of dehusking blade into coconut in case of bigger size
coconut might be responsible for higher dehusking efficiency, while incomplete
development of fibres structure and insufficient reach of dehusking blade might have
resulted into lower dehusking efficiency. This also indicated the suitability of smaller
coconut for the developed machine for higher efficiency. To avoid damage to nuts during
transportation, the dehusked coconut with more husk remained are preferred. In this
context higher size coconut viz. A grades with lower efficiency are more suitable for
the developed machine.
101
Table. 4.7 Dehusking time required for graded coconut
Dehusking time, (sec) Dehusking time, (sec) Dehusking time, (sec)

Sr. No. Grade Grade Grade Sr. No. Grade Grade Grade Sr. No. Grade Grade Grade
A B C A B C A B C
1 23 26 32 21 34 30 30 41 29 31 29
2 33 27 31 22 28 29 32 42 30 28 30
3 28 27 34 23 31 32 29 43 27 30 34
4 27 33 33 24 29 31 33 44 33 29 36
5 26 27 29 25 29 32 31 45 29 29 33
6 23 22 35 26 31 27 32 46 27 28 28
7 30 24 30 27 28 29 30 47 29 29 36
8 33 26 31 28 27 30 32 48 23 30 35
9 26 24 29 29 30 31 32 49 24 26 30
10 29 24 32 30 32 29 39 50 27 28 33
11 24 28 29 31 29 31 30 51 28 28 31
12 28 23 32 32 28 28 29 52 26 27 39
13 33 27 31 33 31 30 34 53 27 26 31
14 35 25 38 34 28 31 38 54 28 31 27
15 32 24 29 35 30 29 37 55 31 33 36
16 31 22 33 36 31 31 31 56 29 29 33
17 28 27 30 37 32 26 30 57 30 28 32
18 34 29 31 38 27 28 28 58 28 30 34
19 29 30 33 39 35 31 35 59 35 31 31
20 29 26 31 40 26 30 31 60 32 27 30
Average 29.15 28.28 31.88
102
Table. 4.8 Output capacity of developed dehusker for graded coconut
Sr. No. Grades of coconuts Average time Output capacity

(sec) Nuts/hours
1 A 29.15 125
2 B 28.28 130
3 C 31.88 115
33
Average dehusking time, sec
32
31
30 Average time
29
28
27
26
A B C
Coconut grades
Fig. 4.1 Variation of average dehusking time for graded coconuts
135
130
Output capacity, nuts/hrs.
Out put capacity

125
120
115
110
105
A B C
Coconut grades
Fig. 4.2 Variation of output capacity for graded coconuts
103
Table. 4.9 Dehusking efficiency of developed dehusker different grades of coconut
Dehusking efficiency, (%) Dehusking efficiency, (%) Dehusking efficiency, (%)

Sr. No. Grade Grade Grade Sr. No. Grade Grade Grade Sr. No. Grade Grade Grade
A B C A B C A B C
1 96.64 95.79 97.81 21 95.09 90.32 90.32 41 93.62 95.24 97.67
2 97.89 92.67 97.57 22 90.23 94.39 94.39 42 93.77 95.68 94.79
3 95.10 93.10 94.99 23 96.00 95.14 95.14 43 92.50 96.54 96.97
4 95.68 96.34 92.81 24 95.12 93.81 93.81 44 95.42 94.58 95.33
5 94.83 95.35 97.04 25 95.54 94.50 94.50 45 96.38 96.79 97.97
6 96.11 97.61 95.93 26 93.75 91.63 91.63 46 93.09 94.87 98.13
7 96.77 95.33 96.28 27 91.95 94.91 94.91 47 97.19 97.74 93.03
8 91.57 95.41 94.75 28 91.50 90.71 90.71 48 94.30 97.70 95.79
9 98.33 98.13 92.37 29 93.22 93.18 93.18 49 95.77 95.42 93.83
10 91.12 96.41 97.03 30 96.40 96.19 96.19 50 91.88 96.34 96.34
11 94.34 96.64 96.48 31 95.45 96.60 96.60 51 95.24 96.73 96.79
12 97.38 94.17 98.24 32 92.67 96.67 90.32 52 97.91 93.85 95.86
13 93.97 97.44 98.02 33 95.67 94.71 94.39 53 93.91 97.39 95.15
14 96.05 98.38 94.74 34 95.69 97.24 95.14 54 96.55 96.48 97.49
15 96.59 97.28 96.70 35 93.63 97.99 93.81 55 90.35 94.98 98.56
16 94.49 96.72 95.47 36 94.86 95.88 94.50 56 95.56 96.27 93.97
17 97.61 96.33 98.21 37 94.06 97.94 91.63 57 91.30 96.33 96.72
18 95.78 94.33 96.01 38 93.91 95.29 94.91 58 97.01 95.18 97.32
19 96.36 96.36 98.17 39 96.84 95.61 90.71 59 92.80 97.00 96.09
20 98.21 93.69 97.80 40 96.30 95.61 93.18 60 93.99 94.02 95.92
Average 94.81 95.57 95.81
104
96
95.8
Dehusking efficency, per cent

95.6
Dehusking effiency
95.4
95.2
95
94.8
94.6
94.4
94.2
Grade A Grade B Grade C
Coconut grades
Fig. 4.3 Variation of efficiency for graded coconuts
4.3 Comparative performance of newly developed dehusker and existing

dehusker (Dr. BSKKV, design)
The performance of newly developed coconut dehusker indicated that (Section 4.2.1,
Table 4.4) the average time required for dehusking of one coconut was 30.6 sec., which
resulted the capacity of dehusker to 118 coconuts per hours. The capacity of Dr. BSKKV
manually operated dehusker was found to be 48 coconuts per hours. (Gutte B.)
Performance wise, the capacity of newly developed dehusker is found to be higher by

70 coconuts per hours which is almost 2.5 folds (145.83%) than manual dehusker.
4.4 Operating Cost
The specifications and the quantity of materials used in fabrication of power operated
coconut dehusker are given in Appendix-C. Considering the prevailing rates of materials, the
cost of fabrication of prototype was estimated as Rs.13822/-.
For operating cost of machine, the life of machine was considered as 5 years, with an
annual use of 1000 hours. The cost of operation of machine per hour was found to be Rs.
38.49 for newly developed power operated dehusker while the cost of dehusking per coconut
is Rs. 0.32 per coconut. Details calculations for cost of operation per hour for developed
power operated coconut dehusker are given in Appendix- D.
The operating cost of newly developed dehusker was also compared with manual
method. (Dr. BSKKV, design). The operating cost of manually dehusker was Rs. 20.31 per
hours, while cost of dehusking per coconut is Rs. 0.42 per coconut. The detail calculations of
operating cost of manual method is given in Appendix- E.
This indicated that the operating cost of dehusking coconut with newly developed
machine was Rs. 0.10 less (23.80 per cent) per coconut than manual method. The remarkable
saving is Rs. 14.18 per hours indicated that the power operated dehusker is economically
more better manually operated dehusker.
cvi
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Coconut (Cocos nucifera) is one of the world most useful and important perennial
plants. Coconut palms are grown in more than 93 countries of the world, with a total
production of 5.4 billion tons per year. An individual coconut fruit is made up of an outer
exocarp, a thick fibrous fruit coat known as husk, the hard protective endocarp or shell
called eyes are at one end of the nut. Although coconut is of immense economic importance
to both the industrialist and rural area.
Dehusking is the process of removing the outer covering called husk from the coconut
to get two important commercial products such as copra or dried kernel and fibers or coir.
Separation of its husk from the nut (dehusking) constitutes the, most difficult and dangerous
operation in its processing. Presently, dehusking practices includes traditional methods. This
methods are quite time consuming with risk inclusion. Another implement used is inverted
spear, where nut is impacted on spear and then rotated simultaneously so as to loosen the husk
that can be removed easily. It needs worker to bend from waist, which is uncomfortable when
work continuous for many hours. Manually dehusking process requires the operator to bring
the coconut sharply down into the blade, twisting to one side, loosen the husk and detaching
the fiber from the shell. This action is repeated several times until the entire fibers are
removed. The work is not only hard and dangerous but requires considerable skill, strong
wrist and arm. Motorized and hydraulic coconut dehusking machine are commercial available
in market but cost of this machine is limiting factor in Konkan region. Therefore by keeping
the region specific need in view this project was under taken with the following objectives,
3. To develop power operated coconut dehusker.

4. To evaluate the performance of developed coconut dehusker.
Initially the some properties of coconuts were studied. The properties of coconut viz.
size, sphericity, weight, roundness, husk thickness, moisture content, penetration resistance
and dehusking moment etc. were measured and determined.
cvii
Main frame in rectangular shape was fabricated using M. S. angle (45455 mm) for
supporting the components. The overall length, width and height of main frame were kept as
620 mm, 465 mm and 785 mm respectively. The power requirement of the machine was
determined as 1 hp. The cam was designed and developed for 60 mm stroke length and to
operate lifter vertically with reciprocating speed of 36 strokes per minute. Two cutting blades
were hinged at bottom side and fixed at upper end of lifter. The outer blade was connected to
vertical round bar through connecting rod lever mechanism to the same cam for operating
splitting mechanism. At upper side one platform of size of M. S. sheet was welded. Two
holding jaws made up of M. S. in form of spikes (7 numbers) fixed above horizontally. The
right jaw was made spring loaded and operated by lever for easy unloading and loading of
coconuts. Once, the electric motor is made an through gear box (40:1 ratio). The power
transmitted to cam and finally to cutting and splitting mechanism. The dehusking blades on
lifter penetrate in the husk and split the coconut by splitting mechanism. For further cuts on
periphery, coconut was rotated by operator. The loosened coconut was unloaded from jaws
and husk and nut was separated.
For testing the performance of newly developed dehusker, its performance was studied
in to two different tests. Initially its performance was tested for ungraded and randomly
selected coconuts, and finally performance was tested for different grades of coconuts. The
performance evaluation carried on the basis of dehusking time, output capacity, dehusking
efficiency and operating cost etc.
Conclusions
After performance evaluation of developed coconut dehuskers following
conclusions are drawn,
1) The performance of power operated coconut dehusker was satisfactory.

2) The developed dehusker dehusk coconuts without nut breakage and without cutting
the useful coir fibers.
3) Average time required to dehusk one coconut was 30.6 seconds and average output
capacity was 118 coconuts per hours, which was 145.83 per cent higher than manual
operated dehusker.
4) The best performance of machine was observed with grade B coconut, having the
output capacity of 130 coconuts per hours which was 13.04 per cent greater than grade
A and 4 per cent higher than grade C coconuts.
cviii
5) The maximum dehusking efficiency of developed power operated coconut dehusker
was obtained with grade C coconuts 95.81 per cent, which was 1.04 per cent and
0.25 per cent higher over A and B grades coconut respectively.
6) The cost of fabrication for the developed power operated coconut dehusker was
13822/- and the total operating cost for dehusking the coconut is 38.49 per hours.
7) The cost of dehusking the one coconut with power operated dehusker was 0.32 per
coconut which is 0.10 (23.80 per cent) per coconut less as compared to manually
operated dehusker.
Suggestions for Future Work
The following suggestions are useful for obtaining further improvement in the
performance of the power operated coconut dehusker.
1. The performance of developed coconut dehusker should be carried with different
moisture content of coconut and different varieties.
2. For reducing the dehusking time the holding mechanism made as automatic type.
cix
CHAPTER VI
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alonge, A. F. and Folorunso, A. O. 2012. Some engineering properties of coconut relevant to

its cracking. Proceeding of NABEC-CSBE/SCGAB 2012 Joint Meeting and Technical
Conference, Lakehead university, Orillia. July 15-18.
Alonge, A. F. and Adetunji, W. B. 2010. Properties of coconut relevant to its dehusking.

Proceeding of XVIIth world congress of the International Commission of Agricultural
and Bio system engineering (CIGR) June: 13-17.
Anonymous, 2003. Coconut husk extraction and coir processing: potential value- added export
value. United States agency for International development georegetown, Guyana.
Anonymous, 2014. Kerala Agriculture University.
www.kau.edu/machinerytech.html
Anonymous, 2014. Tamilnadu Agriculture University, Coimbtore.

www.agritech.tnau.ac.in/expert_system/coconut/coconut_farm_implement.html
Anonymous, 2014. Manual of Method machine works, Malaysia.
www.coconutmachine.com
Anonymous, 2014. Manual of Fletchers Engineering Limited, Australia.
Baboo, B. 1981. Development of manually operated coconut dehusker. Journal of plantation of

crops:95-99.
Dinanath, S.; Trinidad C.; and Tobago, 1987. Coconut dehusking machine. United States
Patent. Patent number:4708056.
Gajakos, A. V.; Nalawade, S. M.; Aware, V. V.; Patil, S. B. and Thakur, B. B. 2008.
Development of power operated coconut dehuskur. Ag-Update, 3 (1&2): 167-170.
Ghosal, M. K. and Mohanty, S. K. 2012. A study on the comparative performance evaluation of

different types of coconut dehuskers. Int. J. of Agril. Sci.,(8): 57-62.
cx
Ghosal, M. K. and Mohanty, S. K. 2011. Ergonomical study and performance evaluation of
different types of coconut dehuskers. Int. J. of Agril. Engg. 4(8): 45-51.
Ghosal, M. K.; Mohanty, S. K.; Mishra, M. and Sutar, N. C. 2011. Development and
performance evaluation of a power operated coconut dehusker. Research J. of Agril.
Sci., 2(3): 707-709.
Gutte, B. N. 2011. Performance evaluation of hand operated coconut dehusker. Unpublished

Thesis, B.Tech. (Agril. Engg.), Dr. Balasaheb Sawant Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth,
Dapoli.
Hamid, A.; Ahmad, M. T. and Ngalim , A. 2009. Design and performance of a coconut
dehusker machine. Mechanization and automization research center:1-12.
Jacob, B. and Kumar, R. 2012. Design and fabrication of coconut dehusking machine green
technologies (ICGT). International conference at Trivandrum: 155-159.
Jarimopas, B.; Ruttandat, N. and Terdwongworankul, A. 2009. An Atomatic Trimming

Machine for Young Coconut Fruit. Biosysytem Engg., (103): 167-175.
Jaysheelan, R. 2003. Coconut dehusker. National innovation foundation (NIF).

www.nifindia.org
Jayavel, R. and Dharmalingam, S. 2011. Coconut: The versatile palm. Market survey: 9-14.
Khurmi, R. and Gupta, J. K. 2004. A textbook of Theory of machines, Eurasia publishing house
(pvt) limited, Ram Nagar, New Delhi: 774-785.
Kwangwaropas, M. 1990. Design manufacturing and testing of the manually operated coconut
dehusking machine. Kesetsart journal:434-442
Kwangwaropas, M. 1991. Development and improvement of the manually operated coconut

dehusking machine. Kesetsart journal:77-93
Kwangwaropas, M. 1992. Design manufacturing and testing of the hydraulically operated

coconut dehusking machine. Kesetsart journal, (25): 219-233
Kwangwaropas, M. 1992. Development and improvement of the hydraulic coconut dehusking

machine. Kesetsart journal, (5).
cxi
Kwangwaropas, M. 1998. Research and development of a general purpose coconut dehusking
machine. Research abstract conducted by university lecturers in Thailand: 216-217.
Nandhakumar, K. and James, J. J. 2014. Automatic coconut dehusking machine using

mechatronics principles. Jayalaxmi institute of technology, Thoppur, Dharmapuri.
Nwankwojike, B. N.; Onuba, O. and Ogbonna, U. 2012. Development of coconut dehusking

machine for rural small scale farm holders. Int. J. of Innovation Technology and
Creative Engg., (2)3.
Nijaguna, B. T. 1988. Design development and testing of coconut dehusker. J. of Food Engg.,
(8): 287-301.
Owolarate, O. K.; Badmus, O. A. and Adeyemi, N. A. 2008. Development of coconut

dehuaking lever. Journal of food science and technology,(45)3:279-281
Patil, S. B. and Thakur B. B. 2005. Development of power operated coconut dehusker.

Unpublished Thesis, B.Tech. (Agril. Engg.), Dr. Balasaheb Sawant Konkan Krishi
Vidyapeeth, Dapoli.
Terdwongworakul, A.; Chaiyopong, S.; Jarimopus, B. and Meeklongsaen, W. 2009. Physical

properties of fresh young Thai coconut for maturity sorting. J. of Biosystem Engg., (3):
208-216.
cxii
CHAPTER VII
APPENDICES
Appendix A
Properties of Coconut Fruit of Banavali Variety
Sample calculations
1) Coconut size
1) Major axis (a) 196 mm
2) Minor axis (b) 152.9 mm
3) Intermediate axis (c) 138 mm
2) Sphericity of nut
Where,
a, b, c are major, intermediate and minor axes
Sphericty = (196 152.9 138)1/3 /196

= 152.5/196
= 0.77
3) Roundness
Area = r 2
Where,
The projected area (Ap) to the area of circumscribing circle (Ac) gives the roundness
of each seed.
Roundness = Ap/Ac
Where,
Ap = Projected area of traced seed,
Ac = Area of smallest circumscribing circle
cxiii
Ac = r 2
= 3.14 (10)2
= 314
Roundness = Ap/Ac
= 266 / 314
= 0.8471
4) Moisture content
W2 W3
M .C.% 100
W 2 W1
Where,
117 103
M .C.% 100
117 66.5
= 27.72
cxiv
CHAPTER VII
APPENDICES
Appendix A
Properties of Coconut Fruit of Banavali Variety
Sample calculations
5) Coconut size
4) Major axis (a) 196 mm
5) Minor axis (b) 152.9 mm
6) Intermediate axis (c) 138 mm
6) Sphericity of nut
Where,
a, b, c are major, intermediate and minor axes
Sphericty = (196 152.9 138)1/3 /196

= 152.5/196
= 0.77
7) Roundness
Area = r 2
Where,
The projected area (Ap) to the area of circumscribing circle (Ac) gives the roundness
of each seed.
Roundness = Ap/Ac
Where,
Ap = Projected area of traced seed,
Ac = Area of smallest circumscribing circle
cxv
Ac = r 2
= 3.14 (10)2
= 314
Roundness = Ap/Ac
= 266 / 314
= 0.8471
8) Moisture content
W2 W3
M .C.% 100
W 2 W1
Where,
117 103
M .C.% 100
117 66.5
= 27.72
cxvi
APPENDIX B
a) Calculation of Gear Reduction

Output RPM = Input RPM Gear ratio
36 = 1440 gear ratio
Gear ratio = 0.025
From the calculations we required the reduction ratio is 40:1. From this output was 36
RPM.
b) Calculation of Torgue
The penetration resistance and dehusking moment is required to dehusk the coconut.
Whichever is maximum taken in to consideration for calculation of torgue. From measured
values the dehusking moment was maximum, and maximum dehusking moment was 156.9 N.
Torgue = force distance
156.9 0.1
15.6 N-m
c) Power Requirement of Machine
Power is the rate at which work is done. The rate at which the engine can do work is
measured in HP.
2nT
P=
4500
Where,
P = power, HP
n = no. of revolution
T = Torque N-m
2 36 15.6
4500
P= 0.78 HP
Design power = (service factor) x (calculated power)
= 1.2 0.78
= 0.94 HP
cxvii
Appendix C
Cost estimation of developed power operated coconut dehusker
Table 7.1 Cost of material required for fabrication
Sr. No. Particular Material and Weight Rate Amount

Specification (kg) / kg
1 Foundation frame MS angle 30 55 1650
45455 mm
2 Motor and gear box MS angle 9 55 495
base 25255 mm
3 Platform 16 SWG 2 60 120
MS sheet
4 Cam and follower MS flat plate 2 55 110
5 Holding jaw MS round bar 3 55 165

20 mm dia.
6 Splitting rod guider MS round pipe 0.900 55 52
20 mm dia.
(380 mm long)
7 Splitting rod MS round bar - - 100
18 mm dia.
(560 mm long)
8 Lifter Aluminum - - 180
square pipe
40 mm dia.
(820 mm long)
9 Guider Aluminum - - 150
square pipe
45 mm dia.
(680 mm long)
10 Motor and gear box 1 hp - - 8500
11 Dehusking blade MS hardened - - 300

steel
11,822
Total material cost,
cxviii
Total cost = Material cost + Fabrication cost
= 11822 + 2000
= 13822
cxix
APPENDIX D
1. Determination of cost of operation per hour of power operated coconut dehusker
Unit cost of Machine

Cost of machine, Rs -13822
Working life of machine, year -10
Annual use h/year -1000
Salvage value, % -5
Annual interest on investment, % -12
Insurance cost and Taxes, Rs -2% of initial cost
Repair and maintenance, Rs -5% of initial cost
Cost of Housing, Rs - 1.5%of initial cost
Operator cost, Rs - 160 per person
1. Fixed cost per hour

1. Depreciation ( Rs/Hr)
= (C-S) / (L H)
= (13822-691.1) / (5 1000)
= 2.62 Rs/Hr.
2. Interest (Rs. /Hr)
= ((C+S) / 2) I / (100 H)
= ((13822+ 691.1) /2) 12 / (100 1000)
= 8.70 Rs/Hr.
3. Insurance and taxes (Rs. /Hr.) = 2 % of initial cost
= (2 13822/100)/1000
= 0.276 Rs/Hr.
4. Housing (Rs./Hr) = 1.5 % of initial cost
cxx
= (1.5 13822/100)/1000
= 0.207 Rs/Hr.
Total fixed cost = 1+ 2 + 3 + 4
= 2.62 + 8.70 + 0.276 + 0.207
= 11.80 Rs/Hr.
2. Variable cost
1. Operators cost
= Wage of operator / Working Hours
= (160/8)
= 20Rs/Hr.
2. Repair and maintenance (Rs /Hr) = 5 % of initial cost
= (5 13822/100)/1000
= 0.6911 Rs/Hr.
3. Electricity charges (Rs /Hr) = Rs. 8 per kWH
= 0.99 6.03
= 6 Rs/Hr.
Total Variable cost = 1 + 2 + 3
= 20 +0.6911 + 6
= 26.69 Rs/Hr.
3. Operating Cost
Cost of operation = Fixed Cost + Variable Cost
=11.80 +26.69
= 38.49 Rs/Hr.
cxxi
APPENDIX E
2. Determination of cost of operation per hour of manually operated coconut

dehusker
Unit cost of Machine

Cost of machine, Rs -245
Working life of machine, year -5
Annual use h/year -1000
Salvage value, % -5
Annual interest on investment, % -12
Insurance cost and Taxes, Rs -2% of initial cost
Repair and maintenance, Rs -2% of initial cost
Cost of Housing, Rs - 1.5%of initial cost
Operator cost, Rs - 160 per person
1. Fixed cost per hour

1. Depreciation ( Rs/Hr)
= (C-S) / (L H)
= (245-12.25) / (51000)
= 0.04655 Rs/Hr.
2. Interest (Rs. /Hr)
= ((C+S) / 2) I / (100 H)
= ((245 + 12.25) /2) 12 / (100 1000)
= 0.2572 Rs/Hr.
3. Insurance and taxes (Rs. /Hr.) = 2 % of initial cost
= (2 245/100)/1000
= 0.0049 Rs/Hr.
cxxii
4. Housing (Rs./Hr) = 1.5 % of initial cost
= (1.5 13822/100)/1000
= 0.003675 Rs/Hr.
Total fixed cost = 1+ 2 + 3 + 4
= 0.04655 + 0.2575 + 0.0049 + 0.0036
= 0.3125 Rs/Hr.
2. Variable cost
1. Operators cost
= Wage of operator / Working Hours
= (160/8)
= 20Rs/Hr.
2. Repair and maintenance (Rs /Hr) = 2 % of initial cost
= (2 245/100)/1000
= 0.0049 Rs/Hr.
Total Variable cost = 1 + 2
= 20 + 0.0049
= 20.0049 Rs/Hr.
3. Operating Cost
Cost of operation = Fixed Cost + Variable Cost
= 0.3125 + 20.0049
= 20.3174 Rs/Hr.
cxxiii
cxxiv

64 Development of Power Operated Coconut Dehusker (2014) (Patil S.R)

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

64 Development of Power Operated Coconut Dehusker (2014) (Patil S.R)

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

DEVELOPMENT OF POWER OPERATED COCONUT

A Thesis submitted to the

DR. BALASAHEB SAWANT KONKAN KRISHI VIDYAPEETH

In the partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree

FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

DEPARTMENT OF FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

Place: CAET, Dapoli (Sachin Ramchandra Patil)

Place: CAET, Dapoli (P. U. Shahare)

This is to certify that the project report entitled Development of Power

Place: CAET, Dapoli (P. U. Shahare)

This is to certify that the project report entitled Development of Power

Place: Dapoli (Dr. N. J. Thakor)

It is my proud privilege to express my heartfelt indebtedness and deepest sense of

I express my special thanks to Dr. K. G. Dhande, Associate Professor,

No words can adequately express our indebtedness to workshop members, Mr.

I shall be failing in my duty if I do not acknowledge the sincere contribution of

Place : CAET, Dapoli

CHAPTER TITLE PAGE

4.3 Comparative performance of newly developed dehusker 49

Table Title Page No.

Fig. No. Title Page No.

2.1 Manually operated coconut dehusker 7

Plate No. Title Page No.

Coconut has considerable significance in the national economy in view of rural

2.2.1.1 Manually operated coconut dehusker.

2.2.1.2 Power operated coconut dehusker.

2.2.2 Performance and testing of coconut dehusker.

2.2.2.1 Manually operated coconut dehusker.

2.2.2.2 Power operated coconut dehusker.

2.1 Physiological Properties of Coconut

Terdwongworakul et al. (2009) studied the physical properties of fresh young

Alonge and Folorunso (2012) determined the some engineering properties of

2.2 Coconut Dehusker

2.2.1 Design of Coconut Dehusker

2.2.1.1 Manually operated coconut dehusker

Nijaguna (1988) developed manually operated coconut dehusker. The manual

Fig. 2.1 Manually operated coconut dehusker (Nijaguna, 1988)

Kwangwaropas (1991) developed a manually operated coconut dehusker. It was

Anonymous (2003) reported a simple hand operated portable de-husking device

Fig. 2.2 Coconut dehusker (Dr. BSKKV, design)

Fig. 2.3 TNAU Pedal operated coconut dehusker.

2.2.1.2 Power operated coconut dehusker

Kwangwaropas (1992) developed hydraulically operated coconut dehusking

Hydraulically operated coconut dehusking machine was developed by

Kwangwaropas (1998) developed general purpose coconut dehusking machine.

Gajakos et al. (2008) developed a power operated coconut dehusker. It consisted

Hamid et al. (2009) developed a power operated coconut dehusker.The dehusker

Nwankwojike et al. (2012) developed a coconut dehusking machine. The

Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbtore developed power operated

Fig. 2.4 Power operated coconut dehusker (TNAU, design)

Fletchers Engineering Ltd manufactured a robust hydraulically-operated coconut

Method Machine Works developed coconut dehusking machine (Anonymous,

Nandhakumar and James (Anonymous, 2014) developed automatic coconut

2.2.2 Performance and Testing of Coconut Dehusker

2.2.2.1 Manually operated coconut dehusker

Baboo (1981) improved model of coconut dehusker, which was developed

Kwangwaropas (1991) tested the manually operated coconut dehusking machine.

Gutte (2011) studied the performance of manually operated coconut dehusker

2.2.2.2 Power operated coconut dehusker

Kwangwaropas (1992) studied the performance of hydraulically operated coconut

Jaysheelan (2003) studied the performance of coconut dehusker developed under

Hamid et al. (2009) studied performance of developed coconut dehusker