Kinematics of the Revolving-knife Disc-type Sugarcane Basecutter I

Fundamental Mathematical Relationships1

Moses Frank Oduori*, Jun Sakai and C. P. Gupta *Corresponding Author, Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, The University of Nairobi, P. O. Box 30197, GPO 00100, Nairobi, KENYA. Email: foduori@uonbi.ac.ke and mfwedida@yahoo.com

Abstract
Equations of motion for the cutting edges of a revolving-knife disc-type sugarcane basecutter are derived using the method of linear homogeneous transformations. Using the differential calculus, an inequality is derived which expresses the condition for sound kinematic design of this type of basecutter. The inequality is validated by use of computer graphic simulation of the motion of the cutting edges, and is seen to be of general applicability. Although the derivation of the inequality does not consider the mechanics of the cutting process as such, the results should be useable as constraints in a design algorithm.

1. Introduction
Although sugarcane harvesting machines are common in regions such as Australia, Central and South America, Japan, South Africa and the United States of America, information regarding the rational design of the basecutter, a mechanism used on sugarcane harvesting machines to cut the cane at the base, is hard to find. In this paper, a kinematic theory is proposed, that may be used in the design of one type of basecutter.

This paper was published in the journal Agricultural Mechanization in Asia, Africa and Latin America, Volume 23, Number 4, 1992.

1 of 17

2. Cutters Commonly Used on Agricultural Machines

Cutters commonly used on agricultural field machinery typically execute either, a combination reciprocating and translating motions, or a combination of rotary and translatory motions. In either case, the translatory motion, which shall be referred to as advance motion, is necessary in order to transport the implement to its work. 2.1 Rotary Cutters Rotary cutters used on agricultural field machines may be classified into two major categories on the basis of their characteristic kinematics: Category 1 Cutters whose cutting edges move in a plane that is perpendicular to their axis of rotation. These may be referred to as disc cutters since their motion is akin to that of a spinning, translating disc. This category includes the common types of disc mowers. Category 2 Cutters whose cutting edges describe a cylinder about their axis of rotation. These may be though of as cylinder cutters since their motion is akin to that of a rolling cylinder with more or less slip or skid. This category includes horizontal axis mowers. Category 2 cutters need to travel over the crop that they cut and are therefore not suited to cutting tall crops such as sugarcane. Category 1 cutters may be further classified into two sub-categories: Category 1A Cutters with a continuous cutting edge that is formed on the periphery of a circular disc. Cutting is effected either by the slicing action of a smooth cutting edge or the abrading action of a serrated cutting edge. A category 1A cutter with a serrated cutting edge was used on a sugarcane cutting machine at the Indian Institute of Sugarcane Research (Sharma et. al., 1985). A variant of the category 1A cutter consists of twin contrarotating discs with either one or both discs having smooth or serrated cutting edges (Mollah et. al., 1986) Category 1B Cutters with a number of discrete cutting edges formed on blades that are coupled to the periphery of a disc or other rotating frame. The cutting edges may be of fixed orientation relative to the rotating frame or they may be hinged to the frame. Cutting is effected either by a combination of impact and slicing, in the case of a smooth cutting edge, or a combination of impact and abrasion, in the case of a serrated cutting edge. This last category, with blades that are rigidly fastened to the rotating frame, finds the widest application on sugarcane harvesting machines and is the subject of this paper. 2 of 17

Here, it shall be termed the revolving-knife disc-type sugarcane basecutter, which seems to be adequately descriptive of its form and function. Fig. 1, below, illustrates a basecutter of this type that was used in some laboratory experiments (Oduori et. al., 1988).

Blade

Rotation

Axis of Rotation

Translation

Fig. 1 The Revolving-knife Disc-type Sugarcane Basecutter

3. Kinematic Analysis
3.1 Definitions and Assumptions Figure 2, overleaf, illustrates the configuration of cutting edges on the cutter, at an arbitrary time, t0 , which shall be the initial moment of configuration. At this moment, the origin, O, of the stationary Cartesian coordinate frame of reference coincides with the centre of rotation of the cutter. For simplicity, straight cutting edges are illustrated in Fig. 2. However, where the cutting edge is curved, either along its whole length or along some part of its length, it may still be represented by a straight line joining its tip (understood to mean the point on the cutting edge that is farthest from the centre of rotation of the cutter) and its root (understood to mean the point on the cutting edge that is nearest to the centre of rotation of the cutter) without nullifying the applicability of the results of this analysis. In Fig. 2, RT , RR , and L are the sides of a triangle whose other properties are , R and T . Kinematically, the blades and the rotating frame (disc) comprise a single rigid 3 of 17

body. Since a just-rigid system of three points, such as the apices of a triangle, requires three constraints (Rosenberg, 1977), any three properties, not all angles, would be adequate to define a unique triangle. It is convenient, in the present case, to use RT , RR , and to define the configuration of the cutting edges. Rotation

Tip Circle

RR
Translation

RT R
Root Circle

T
Fig. 2 Configuration of the Cutting Edges The following assumptions are made throughout this analysis: 1. 2. The cutting edges are of fixed orientation (defined by R in Fig. 2) relative to the rotating frame. The blades are uniformly distributed around the periphery of the cutter. Thus, if there are n blades in total then the angle denoted by in Fig. 2 is equal to 2 n radians or 360 n degrees. The cutter rotates in a horizontal plane about its centroidal axis with a constant rotational velocity (rad/s), taken to be positive in the clockwise sense. The rotational velocity may also be denoted by N (rpm) such that N = 30 . 4 of 17

3.

4.

The cutter translates along a straight path within the plane of its rotation and towards the positive X direction with a constant velocity V (m/s), termed the advance velocity. The advance velocity may also be denoted S (km/h) such that S = 3.6V . Furthermore, it is often convenient to express the advance velocity in terms of the rotational velocity, as follows:

V = R0

(3.1)

In the above equation, R0 may be thought of as the rate of advance of the cutter, in metres per radian of rotation of the cutter. 3.2 Trajectories of the Cutting Edges By the method of linear homogeneous transformations, the displacement of a point in a rigid body whose motion is two-dimensional (planar) may be represented by a matrix equation of the following form (Crouch, 1981; Kinzel et. al., 1981; Suh et. al., 1967; Pettofrezzo, 1966; Denavit et. al., 1955):

X 2 D11 Y2 = D21 k D 31
In the above equation: The column vector {X 1 displacement. The column vector {X 2 displacement.

D12 D22 D32

D13 X 1 D23 Y1 D33 k

(3.2)

Y1 Y2

k } gives the position of the point in question before

T

k } gives the position of the point in question after

T

The square matrix of order three Dij

[ ]

is known as the displacement matrix.

Moreover, in the column vectors in equation (3.2), the third component, k , can be any real number. In Fig. 3, overleaf, commencing with the leading blade (BLADE 1) and the trailing blade (BLADE 2) at the indicated positions, at time t0 , at any other subsequent time, t , the positions of the blades relative to the stationary Cartesian frame of reference may be derived as follows. For the tip of the cutting edge of the leading blade:

5 of 17

 X T 1 (t ) cos t sin t t X T 1 (t0 ) YT 1 (t ) = sin t cos t 0 YT 1 (t0 ) R 0 0 1 R0 0

Y

(3.3)

BLADE 1

BLADE 2

RT cos t

X Vt

RT sin t

dY

X (t ) X ()
Fig. 3 Trajectories of Successive Cutting Edges

XS

It should be evident in Fig. 3 that X T 1 (t0 ) = 0 and YT 1 (t0 ) = RT . By using these initial coordinates and equation (3.1), equation (3.3) may be expanded and reduced to the following parametric equations:

X T 1 (t ) = Vt + RT sin t YT 1 (t ) = RT cos t

(3.3a)

For the root of the cutting edge of the leading blade, the displacement matrix remains unchanged, since the cutter is a single rigid body in the kinematic context. However, the initial position of the point in question must be specified correctly, as follows:

X R1 (t ) cos t sin t t X R1 (t0 ) YR1 (t ) = sin t cos t 0 YR1 (t0 ) R 0 0 1 R0 0

(3.4)

6 of 17

It should be evident in Fig. 3 that X R1 (t0 ) = RR sin and YR1 (t0 ) = RR cos . By using these initial coordinates and equation (3.1), equation (3.4) may be expanded and reduced to the following parametric equations:

X R1 (t ) = Vt + RR sin (t + ) YR1 (t ) = RR cos(t + )

(3.4a)

Similarly, for the tip and the root of the trailing edge, which rotationally lags the leading edge by an angle , the following equations can be derived:

X T 2 (t ) = Vt + RT sin (t ) YT 2 (t ) = RT cos(t ) X R 2 (t ) = Vt + RR sin (t + ) YR 2 (t ) = RR cos(t + )

(3.5a)

(3.6a)

In the above equations, the subscripts T and R refer to the tips and the roots of the blades, respectively, while the subscripts 1 and 2 refer to the leading and trailing blades, respectively. The blades describe trochoidal trajectories which are illustrated in Fig. 3, for half a rotation of the cutter. Blade motion beyond the final positions indicated in Fig. 3 comprises idle strokes (as opposed to cutting strokes) during which the blades move over areas where the crop has already been cut. 3.3 Condition for Sound Kinematic Design of the Cutter Considering the moments in time, denoted t and , such that the Y coordinate of the tip of the leading edge at time t is equal to the Y coordinate of the root of the trailing edge at time , it should then be evident from equations (3.3a) through (3.6a) that:

RT cos t = RR cos( + )

YT 1 (t ) = YR 2 ()

(3.7)

Though t and are both variable, each pair of such values must satisfy equations (3.7). The corresponding X coordinates are the following:

X R 2 () = V + RR sin ( + )

X T 1 (t ) = Vt + RT sin t

(3.8)

Recall that the cosine of any angle can never be greater than + 1 or less than 1. When this fact is used along with equations (3.7), it leads to the following inequality: 7 of 17

1 cos( + ) 1 RT 1 cos t 1 RR
Hence:

R R cos 1 R t cos 1 R R R T T

(3.9)

Thus, if analysis is limited to cutting strokes during one complete rotation of the cutter, equations (3.9) set the relevant range of values of t , which is illustrated graphically in Fig. 4, below.

RT
Relevant Range of

RR

Fig. 4 Relevant Range of t

Here, a variable X S is introduced such that:

X S = X R 2 () X T 1 (t )

= V ( t ) + RR sin ( + ) RT sin t

(3.10)

8 of 17

Within the relevant range of t , patches of area in the wake of the cutter which would not be traversed by the cutting edges would occur wherever X S is greater than zero. The cutter should be designed to avoid such occurrence. For negative values of X S , the trajectories of successive cutting edges would overlap, a situation that can be tolerated. In Fig. 3, an elemental strip of area, of length X S and width dY , is indicated, which is not traversed by the cutting edges. If the largest possible of such elemental strips of area were made to be equal to, or less than zero, all such areas would be eliminated. Since dY is infinitesimal, and therefore essentially constant, the elemental areas such as the one indicated in Fig. 3 may be considered to be directly proportional to X S . Thus, the largest of these elemental areas corresponds to the following.

X S = 0; t

2 X S >0 t2

(3.11)

Partial differentiation of equation (3.10) with respect to t yields the following:

X S =V t 1 + RR cos( + ) t RT cos t t

(3.12a)

By using equations (3.7) and applying the first of the conditions stated in (3.11), equation (3.12a) may be reduced to the following:

X S = 1(V + RT cos t ) = 0 t t
Equation (3.12b) has two possible solutions, the first of which is the following:

(3.12b)

=1 t
Now the second of equations (3.7) may be differentiated to obtain the following:

(3.13)

RT sin t = t RR sin ( + )
Thus, from equations (3.13) and (3.13a), it must follow that:

(3.13a)

RT sin t = RR sin ( + )

(3.13b)

Moreover, if both equations (3.7) and equation (3.13b) hold true, then it must follow that:

9 of 17

RT = RR

(3.13c)

The result stated in equation (3.13c) is not consistent with the design of the cutter that is under consideration and therefore equation (3.13) is a trivial solution to equation (3.12b). The second possible solution to equation (3.12b) is the following:

V + RT cos t = 0

V RT cos t = = R0

(3.14)

As a further check of the condition for the elemental area X S dY to be the largest, the second partial derivative of X S with respect to t is obtained from equation (3.12b) and then the second of the conditions stated in equation (3.11) is applied to obtain the following:

2 X S 2 = (V + RT cos t ) 2 2 t 1 RT sin t < 0 t2 t

From equations (3.14) and (3.15a), the following inequality can be obtained:

(3.15a)

2 t 1 RT sin t > 0

(3.15b)

Now, within the relevant range of t , RT sin t is positive, and 2 must be positive too ( is real). Therefore, it must follow that:

>1 t

(3.16a)

By a similar procedure to that which was used to obtain equation (3.13c), the inequality in (3.16a) can be shown to lead to the following result:

RT > RR

(3.16b)

The result stated in (3.16b) is consistent with the design of the cutter under consideration and it proves that equation (3.14) is the relevant condition for the elemental area X S dY to be the largest. An expression for the largest value of X S can now be formulated and then set to be less than, or equal to zero, as a condition for the sound kinematic design of the cutter. The procedure is as follows: 10 of 17

From equations (3.7) and (3.14):

RT cos t = RR cos( + ) = R0
Thus:

(3.17a)

cos t =

1 R0 t = cos R T R0 RT

2

(3.17b)

and:

R sin t = 1 0 R T
Similarly:

(3.17c)

cos( + ) =

1 R0 = cos R + R R0 RR
2

(3.17d)

and:

R sin ( + ) = 1 0 R R

(3.17e)

The value of X S corresponding to the largest elemental area, and denoted by X S max , is obtained using equation (3.10), which is reproduced below, and equations (3.17b) through (3.17e), and then set to less than, or equation to, zero.

X S = V ( t ) + RR sin ( + ) RT sin t
or:

(3.10)

X S = R0 ( t ) + RR sin ( + ) RT sin t
Thus:

(3.18)

R R X S max = R0 cos 1 0 cos 1 0 R R R T

+ + RR 2 R0 2 RT 2 R0 2 0
11 of 17

The above expression may be manipulated algebraically to yield the following:

R 1 R0 1 R0 T + cos R cos R + R R T 0

2 R 2 2 1 R 1 R0

(3.19)

In equation (3.19), the variables , , RR and RT define the number and configuration of the cutting edges on the cutter, as illustrated in Fig. 2, and the quantity denoted R0 is the rate of advance of the cutter, in metres per radian of the rotation of the cutter, as earlier defined in equation (3.1). All angular quantities, including the values of the arccosine terms, are in radians, and all linear quantities are in metres. That this inequality should be satisfied is the condition for sound kinematic design of the basecutter.

4. Validation
To validate expression (3.19), an experiment was performed on computer. An interactive computer program was written in N88BASIC, which runs under MS-DOS on the NEC-9800 series of personal computers. The program requires the input of the number of blades ( n ) on the cutter along with RR , RT and R . The value of is then readily computed ( = 2 n radians) and the corresponding value of is computed using the following equation, which should be evident in Fig. 2:

R sin R = R sin 1 R RT

(4.1)

The program then searches for the value of R0 which, along with the given values of , , RR and RT , will satisfy expression (3.19), for the critical case when the right-hand side of this expression is just equal to the left-hand side. Having found that value, the program then computes and plots the successive positions of two successive cutting edges. A sample result of the experiment is given in Fig. 5, overleaf, which proves that expression (3.19) is actually valid.

5. Discussion
Since the absolute value of the cosine of an angle cannot be greater than unity, and the square-root of a negative number is imaginary, cases where R0 is greater than RR cannot be evaluated by use of expression (3.19). Furthermore, negative values of R0 RR and R0 RT have no physical meaning since R0 , RR and RT must all be positive. Therefore, it follows that R0 RR RT . 12 of 17

Fig. 5 Sample Result of the Validation Experiment

A situation may be considered where RR = RT . Then, expression (3.19) yields the result and equation (4.1) leads to the result = 0 . Since cannot be negative, the equality of RR and RT leads to the result = = 0 and L = 0 . This situation implies an infinite number of cutting edges of zero length, which is not consistent with the design of the cutter under consideration. However, an infinite number of tangentially oriented, infinitesimally short cutting edges conforms to a disc cutter with a continuous cutting edge on its periphery. Therefore, expression (3.19) applies to the more general design of disc cutter beyond that with a finite number of discrete cutting edges. Expression (3.19) is in a form that is not convenient to use, but may be transformed into a set of simpler but equivalent expressions as follows. Referring to Fig. 6, overleaf, it should be evident that the following relations hold true:

1 1 R 2 2 R 2 2 tan A = R 1 ; tan B = T 1 R0 R0 cos( A) = R0 R ; cos( B ) = 0 RR RT

Using the above expressions, a transformed version of expression (3.19) can be written as follows:

13 of 17

 + tan A A (tan B B )

R0 R0 1 A = cos 1 R ; B = cos R R T

(5.1)

In the above expressions, all angles are in radians. This set of three expressions contains seven variables, which means that the values of any four of the variables may be chosen arbitrarily, and the rest can be calculated to satisfy the set of expressions. An interesting and simplifying case occurs when is set equal to 1 = ( A B ) , which means L = L1 (see Fig. 6).

A 1
B

R0

RR
RT L1

Fig. 6 Graphical Interpretation

Then, the set of expression (5.1) can be reduced to the following:

1 1 T = sin (R0 RT ); R = sin (R0 RR ); = R T R T R0 R L 1 R 1 = R0 R0

2 1 2 1 2

(5.2)

14 of 17

In the above set of expressions, the values of any three of the eight variables may be chosen arbitrarily and then the other five quantities be calculated to fit the set of expressions. The kinematics of a disc cutter of the type considered in this paper have been dealt with by other scholars. An equation that appears elsewhere (Kanafojski et. al., 1976) instead of expression (3.19), is derived by assuming that the largest value of X S (defined in section 3.3) corresponds to the condition that Y (t ) and therefore Y ( ) is zero, an assumption that is not mathematically justifiable. However, according to this assumption, equations (3.7) reduce to the following:

t = + =

(5.3)

Moreover, equation (3.10) then reduces to the following:

V ( t ) + RR RT = 0
From equations (5.3) and (5.4), the following can be derived:

(5.4)

R RR =+ T R 0

(5.5)

The equation that actually appears in the book (Kanafojski et. al., 1976), when written in the notation used in this paper, is the following:

L cos T R0

(5.6)

If T (and therefore, ) is small, equation (5.6) conforms, approximately, to the second of the set of expressions (5.2). However, it must be noted that the set of expressions (5.2) should be applied as a set. To use any single expression from the set without satisfying the other expressions in the set is likely to lead to inaccurate results. A version of expression (3.19) for the case of radially oriented straight cutting edges ( = 0 ) was derived elsewhere using a rather less rigorous approach (Oduori and Gupta, 1988). Expression (3.19) in this paper is a generalization of the earlier paper, to include cutting edges of arbitrary orientation, relative to the rotating frame.

6. Summary of Important Mathematical Expressions

Expressions that were derived in section 5 and are deemed to be important are presented below in units of measure that are more often used in practice than the SI units used in section 5. 15 of 17

The set of expressions that represents the general condition for sound kinematic design of the revolving-knife disc cutter follows:

+ B A + 57.3(tan A tan B )

9.55V 9.55V 1 A = 180 cos 1 NR ; B = 180 cos NR R T R sin R = R sin 1 R RT

(6.1)

The above set of equations may be used in conjunction with the following equation: (6.2)

For the particular case where we set = A B , the following set of expressions may be used:

NRT 2 NRR 2 57.3 1 57.3 1 9.55V 9.55V 9.55V 9.55V V ; T = sin 1 ; R = sin 1 L NR NR 60 N R T

0.5

0.5

(6.3) ; = R T

In all the above equations, V is in metres per second, N is in revolutions per minute, the angles A , B , , R , T and are all in degrees, and the distances RR and RT are in metres. The expressions should be used with reference to Fig. 2 and Fig. 6.

7. Conclusions
1. The equations of motion of a revolving-knife, disc-type sugarcane basecutter, assumed to rotate at constant rotational velocity while simultaneously translating at constant advance velocity, were derived from first principles, using the method of linear homogeneous transformations. Using the differential calculus, an inequality was derived which represents the condition for sound kinematic design of the basecutter. The inequality was validated by means of computer graphic simulation of the motion of the basecutter. A geometrical interpretation of the criterion for sound kinematic design of the basecutter led to two sets of mathematical expressions, of a more convenient form for practical use. The first set of three equations contains seven variables, any four of which may take on arbitrary values. The second set of five expressions contains eight variables, any three of which may take on arbitrary values. The second set should be used wherever possible. 16 of 17

2.

3.

4.

The design of the basecutter should take into account, not only the kinematics of the cutter but also the mechanics of the cutting process itself. Theoretical and empirical investigations into such factors as the forces acting and the energy expended in the cutting process are necessary. Though this paper considers the sugarcane basecutter in particular, the results obtained here should apply to the general class of disc cutters with a number of discrete cutting edges, moving in a plane that is perpendicular to the axis of rotation.

5.

References
1. 2. CROUCH, T. (1981). Matrix Methods Applied to Engineering Rigid Body Mechanics. Pergamon Press. DENAVIT, J. and R. S. HARTENBERG (1955). A Kinematic Notation for Lower Pair Mechanisms Based on Matrices. Journal of Applied Mechanics Vol. 22, Transactions of the ASME, Series E Volume 77: 215 221 KANAFOJSKI, Cz. And T. KARWOWSKI (1976). Agricultural Machines, Theory and Construction, Volume 2 Crop Harvesting Machines, Chapter 2. United States Department of Commerce, National Technical Information Service. KINZEL, GARY L., ROBERT HOLMES and SAMUEL HUBER (1981). Computer Graphics Analysis of Rotary Tillers. Transactions of the ASAE 24(6): 1392 1395, 1399. MOLLAH, M. M. R. and J. KILGOUR (1986). An Improved Cutting and Bunching Machine for Harvesting Grain Crops in Bangladesh. Agricultural Mechanization in Asia, Africa and Latin America, 17(2): 49 54. ODUORI, M. F. and C. P. GUPTA (1988). Design of the Revolving Knife-Type Sugarcane Basecutter. Paper No. 88-5511, American Society of Agricultural Engineers, St. Joseph, MI. PETTOFREZZO, ANTHONY J. (1966). Matrices and Transformations. Dover Publications Incorporated, New York. ROSENBERG, M. REINHARDT (1977). Systems, Chapter 6. Plenum Press. Analytical Dynamics of Discrete

3.

4.

5.

6.

7. 8. 9.

SHARMA, M. P. and K. SINGH (1985) Partial Mechanization of Sugarcane Harvesting. Agricultural Mechanization in Asia, Africa and Latin America, 13(3): 47 50.

10. SUH, C. H. and C. W. RADCLIFFE (1967). Synthesis of Plane Linkages with Use of the Displacement Matrix. Journal of Engineering for Industry, Transactions of the ASME, Series B, 89(2): 206 214.

17 of 17