See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/331963135

Design and Evaluation of Crushing Hammer mill

Article · January 2019

CITATION READS

1 9,911

1 author:

Mohamed Ibrahim
Faculty of Agriculture - Cairo University
38 PUBLICATIONS   95 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Mohamed Ibrahim on 23 March 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Misr J. Ag. Eng., 36 (1): 1 - 24 FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

DESIGN AND EVALUATION OF CRUSHING

HAMMER MILL
M. M. IBRAHIM (1) M. S. OMRAN (1) E. N. ABD ELRHMAN (2)

ABSTRACT
A grain size reduction hammer mill for crushing corn (Zea mays L.) was
designed depending on variety characteristics and by using computer
aided design “ANSYS” software. Suitability of fabricated hammer was
tested at three levels of hammer rotor speeds (RS) (600, 1000 and 1440
rpm), three levels of screen holes diameter (Sd) (2, 4 and 6 mm) and three
levels of feeding rates (FR) (60, 90 and 120 kg h-1). Geometric mean
diameter of crushed corn (dgw), machine productivity (Pm), consumed
energy (CE) and cost (CO) were evaluation criteria. Results indicated
that the highest (Pm) (113 kg h-1) and lowest (CE and CO) were at 1440
rpm (RS), 6 mm (Sd) and 120 kg h-1 (FR). The empirical results obtained
from experiments were used to introduce a derived mathematical
equation to predict the value of "dgw, Pm, CE and CO" as a function of
"RS, FR and Sd".
Keywords: Hammer mill, design, grinding, crushing, maize, consumed
energy.
INTRODUCTION

M
aize or corn (Zea mays L.) yearly cultivated area in Egypt was
2.192 million feddans. According to Annual Statistics (FAO,
2017), the total yearly production of maize 7.1 million tonnes
with average specific yield of 3.24 tons fed-1. Corn occupies the third
high priority among the leading cereal crops after wheat and rice
(Verheye, 2010 and Zohry et al., 2016).The amount of imported corn
was about 10805.6 million tons in 2014 (Abd ElFatah et al., 2015).
Maize is consumed directly by humans, animal feed, poultry diets with
uniform nutritive value, corn starch, corn syrup, oil, protein, as a
coproduct as anthocyanins which used as naturally sourced colors in food
and cosmetics, alcoholic beverages, and recently as biofuels

(1) Assoc. Prof., Agric. Eng. Dept., Fac. of Agric., Cairo Univ.
(2) Assist. Prof., Agric. Eng. Dept., Fac. of Agric., Cairo Univ.

Misr J. Ag. Eng., January 2019 -1-

 FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

(Pérez-Bonilla et al., 2014; Dabbour et al., 2015 and Herrera et al.,

2018). Islam et al. (2015) mentioned that around 60% corn is used in
poultry feed as a feed ingredient. Feed quality and appearance is directly
related to the corn moisture which had a direct effect on storage [Link]
most studies focusing on optimal grain size, specifically corn particle
size, showed that smaller corn particle size has a greater surface area to
volume ratio (Parsons et al., 2006). In addition, grain size reduction is
affected by several criteria, such as grain hardness, toughness, initial
particle size, moisture content, softening temperature, purity required,
physiological effect, feeding rate and machine operating variables (Mani
et al., 2004 and Tumuluru et al., 2014). Moreover, both compression and
shear forces were involved in size reduction of granular grains (Berk,
2018). Therefore, reduction mills equipment were classified according to
main action exerted on the processed material as impact, pressure,
attrition, and shearing milling. Total specific energy of switchgrass,
wheat straw, and corn stover increased by 37, 30 and 45%, respectively,
with an increase in hammer mill speed from 2000 to 3600 rpm (Bitra et
al., 2009). El Shal et al. (2010) mentioned that the proper conditions for
operating the hammer mill used to produce pelleting feed were drum
speed of 2250 rpm (33.56 m/s), grain moisture content (10%), concave
clearance (5 mm) and hammer thickness (5 mm). Wołosiewicz-Głąb et
al. (2017) fabricated a fully automated laboratory hummer milling device
worked by generated rotating electromagnetic field as an energy source.
A significance relation was found between rice flour physiochemical and
gelatinization properties and dry or wet milling process
(Leewatchararongjaroen and Anuntagool, 2016). Milling area is
defined by collision energy where wear of particles occurs in the upper
half of milling chamber. A direct correlation between high milling speeds
and collision energy, energy efficiency and accelerated wear of rice were
observed (Han et al., 2016). A vibratory mill was developed depending
on theory of angular oscillations, characterized by five degrees of
freedom at 1500 rpm and 0.75 kW power for grinding maize, peas, rye
and wheat at moisture content 8 - 11%. Grinding efficiency was
evaluated by determining specific area, m2, and particle size distribution,
µm, at angular velocity of the drive shaft 110 rad s-1. It was possible to
produce a material with a specific surface of 5000 cm2 g-1 at rate of 220
kg h-1 and specific energy consumption of 0.003 kW h kg-1 (Bulgakov et
al., 2018). It was found that as feed rates increases the power
requirements of the grinding operation increased while it decreased with
increasing screen opening size (Yousf, 2005). The objective of the
present work is to design, fabricate and evaluate low-cost hammer mill
Misr J. Ag. Eng., January 2019 -2-
 FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

during crushing grains and besting its performance with geometric mean
diameter of crushed grain, machine productivity, consumed energy and
cost.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
2.1 Physical and mechanical properties of corn kernel
2.1.1 Physical properties
Physical properties of the corn (SC- 168 variety) kernels were obtained at
moisture content 12.34 % w.b. Some physical properties of corn kernels
that are related to the crushing process were measured using SmartGrain
Phenotyping Software developed by Tanabata et al. (2012), a scanned
image contains (100 kernel) with three replicates were analysed.
Projection area size; mm2, perimeter length; mm, length; mm, width;
mm, roundness, length to width ratio and distance between intersection
of length and width (IS) and center of gravity (CG) were calculated at
scale 0.0869 mm pixel-1. The kernel thickness was measured with
calliper and bulk density was determined using the standard test weight
procedure method.
2.1.2 Compression test
The parallel-plate compressive test was carried out to determine the
mechanical properties using a universal testing machine (Instron – 1000
N). Individual corn kernel was uniaxilly compressed at a cross-head
speed of 5 mm min-1 to a total deformation 10 mm. A plate (diameter 7.5
cm) compressed a corn kernel slab placed on a mounted fixed table. A
random 10 corn kernel were taken for compression tests. The test was
done on three axes which are the major axis, the minor axis and the
intermediate axis. The dimension of each axis was determined before
starting the test (Fig. 1).

Misr J. Ag. Eng., January 2019 -3-

 FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

Compression force

Fig. (1): Corn kernel loaded between the two parallel plates by
universal testing machine.
A typical force-deformation curve is shown in Fig. (2). The force-
deformation curve exhibited two peak points. The first peak corresponds
to the yield point at which kernel damage was initiated. The second peak
corresponds to the maximum compressive force.

Fig. (2): A Typical force-deformation curve for agricultural

materials.
Rupture energy (RE) or work required for rupture was determined by
calculating the area under the force–deformation curve from the
following equation (Soyoye et al., 2018):
Fr Dr
RE  (1)
2
Where
Fr : Rupture force, N.
Dr : Deformation at rupture point, m.

It was calculated specific rupture energy (J kg-1) = RE/m, where m is the

mass of the tested kernel (kg).

Misr J. Ag. Eng., January 2019 -4-

 FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

2.2 Design of machine components

Some parameters were considered in the design of some parts of the
machine: easy of operation, economy to make the machine affordable and
within the capacity of the local farmers, using standard component and local
available material. The designed machine shown in Fig. (3) consisted of the
following units:
2.2.1 Feeding unit
The major parameter governing the size and configuration of the feed
hopper is the throughput capacity of the machine. The hopper must be
able to accommodate enough corn kernels to achieve the desired
throughput capacity. Feeding unit was pyramidal in shape and made by
plate steel 2 mm thick. The hopper dimensions are 20 x 20 cm top
opening, 10 x 10 cm base opening and 25 cm height. The plate was
marked and cut to sizes and then welded together.
2.2.2 Frame and support
The frame was manufactured from steel structures of angle-cross section
(L 40 mm ×40 mm×4 mm). The dimensions of the frame are 120 cm
length, 65 cm width, and 80 cm height. The frame includes two parts first
part for supporting the motor and second part for supporting the hammer
mill.
2.2.3 Power transmission unit
Pulley size: V-belt was used because it is mostly common used, where a
great amount of power is to be transmitted from one pulley to another,
according to Khurmi and Gupta (2005):
N1D1 = N2D2 (2)
Where
N1, N2 : Speed of driving and driven pulley respectively, rpm.
D1, D2 : Diameter of driving and driven pulley respectively, mm.
The machine will operate at three speeds: 600 (6.8), 1000 (11.3) and
1440 (16.3) rpm (m s-1). So, Substituting the required speeds at the mill
unit (N1 are 600, 1000 and 1440 rpm, the rated speed of the electric
motor N2 was 1440 rpm), D1 and D2 where calculated as given in the
table (1).

Misr J. Ag. Eng., January 2019 -5-

 FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

1 Machine base 9 Feed hopper

2 Bolts and nut M10 10 Control gate
3 Motor 11 Hammer chamber
4 Rotary caster single bearing wheel 12 Hammers
5 Multi-pulleys block 13 Main shaft
6 V-belt = 16 mm 14 Hammer arm
7 Single-pulleys block 15 Screen
8 Bearing housing UCP205-100 16 Belt stretcher
Fig. (3): Diagrammatic sketch of the hammer mill.
Table (1): Values of D1 and D2 for driving and driven pulley.
Rotor velocity Pulley of machine Pulley of motor
(m sec-1) N1 (rpm) D1 (mm) N2 (rpm) D2 (mm)
1st 6.8 600 140 1440 58
2 nd 11.3 1000 140 1440 97
3 rd 16.3 1440 140 1440 140

Misr J. Ag. Eng., January 2019 -6-

 FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

Length of belt (L): The length of the belt was calculated from the following
equation (Khurmi and Gupta, 2005):

 D  D2 
2

L  D1  D 2   2x  1 (3)
2 4x
Where
X : Distance between centres of the two pulleys (= 40 cm).
So, the maximum belt length (L) is 1.2 m.
2.2.4 Milling unit
Hammer mill operates on the impact principles and crushing. The
hammer mill consists of a number of hammers put into radical position
on rotor shaft which rotates in a thick steel housing. The material is fed
into the mill unit from a hopper; the hammers strike the material with
great force and pulverize it. At a surface on the bottom of the housing
and close to the tip of the hammers is a screen. The crushing materials in
the form of ground particles pass through the screen.
Kinetics of hammer rotation
The basic assumptions of the hammer rotate were (Fig. 4):
1. Rotor hammer mass is greater than mass of single particles of corn
kernel.
2. Before impact, linear velocity of the crushing bar is much more
important than the particle velocity of corn kernel, so kinetic energy
of particles is negligible.

Hammer
Vs Vh Corn particle

mP mP
mh mh
TF T0

After impact Before impact

Fig. (4): Mechanism of crushing by impact in a hammer crusher

Misr J. Ag. Eng., January 2019 -7-

 FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

The crushing effect depend on kinetic energy of hammer, this depends on

the interchange of energy between hammer and particle or the loss of
energy due to impact. Based on dynamics of non-elastic collision and the
conservation of linear momentum before and after the impact, it can get
the following equation:
mh Vh = (mh + mp) VS (4)
Initial kinetic energy (T0) of the system before impact is,
T0 = ½ mh Vh2 (5)
Where
mh : Mass of one hammer (= 49.52 g).
mp : Mass of corn particle.
Vh : Velocity of hammer (6.8, 11.3 and 16.3 m s-1).
VS : System velocity (hammer + crushed corn particles) at the end
of impact.
Final kinetic energy (TF) of the system is give by the following equation:
TF = ½ (mh + mp) VS2 (6)
It can write (TF) as follows:
2 2
mh Vh
TF  (7)
2(mh  m p )
The amount of kinetic energy lost due to crushing impact (TC) is given by
the following equation:
 m 2 V 2  mh 2 
TC  TF  T0   h h  
2  (m  m )  (8)
  h p 

Where, the kinetic energy of particles is negligible, so TF = T0 = ½ mh

Vh2
By applying the previous equation, the kinetic energy of one hammer
ranges from 1.14 to 6.58 joule (Vh ranges from 6.8 to 16.3 m s-1).
The total mass of the number of corn particles that impacted with one
hammer at simultaneously = mp × hammer height (Hh) /width of corn
kernel = 0.353 g × 70 mm / 8.76 mm = 2.82 g. The specific energy of
the one hammer to rupture the corn ranges from 405.99 to 2332.80 J kg-1.
By comparing the previous result with rupture energy computed from the
force deformation curve (RE/m) in table (5), the specific kinetic energy

Misr J. Ag. Eng., January 2019 -8-

 FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

of the one hammer should be much higher than specific kinetic energy
associated to corn particles (RE/m).
The exerted centrifugal force by the hammer
Centrifugal force of the hammers can be calculated by following
equation (Hannah and Stephens, 2004):
2
mh vh
Fh   N h m h rh h
2
(9)
rh
Where
Fh : Centrifugal force, N.
Nh : Number of hammers = 10.
mh : Hammer mass, kg.
rh : Radius of hammer, m = 0.053.
2 rN
ωh : Angular velocity of hammer, (=150.72 red sec-1) = .
60
N : Velocity of the hammer = 1440 rpm.

For the hammer Mass (mh) = ρ × Vc (10)

Where
ρ : Density of the material (for steel = 7860 kg m-3).
VC : Volume of the hammer (dimensions 7 cm × 3 cm × 0.3 cm).
Each hammer was drilled at the bottom (hole of 10 mm), to enable to be
put it into position on the hammer shaft.
Mass of each hammer = 49.52 g, number of hammers 10, so the
centrifugal force exerted by the hammer = 596.21 N (upward).
2.2.5 Main shaft
In order to transfer the power to the main shaft of the hammer mill, the
various members (such as pulleys, and bearings) are mounted on it. The
design of shaft is based on combined shock and fatigue, bending and
torsional moment (Fig. 6). The diameter of the main shaft was calculated
as following (Eric, 1976):
d3 
16
K b M b 2  K t M t 2 (11)
S s
Where
d : Diameter of shaft, m.

Misr J. Ag. Eng., January 2019 -9-

 FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

Mb : Resultant bending moment, N-m.

Mt : Torsional moment, N-m.
Kb : Combined shock and fatigue factor applied to bending moment.
Kt : Combined shock and fatigue factor applied to torsional moment.
Ss : Allowable shear stress of the shaft material, MN-m-2.
The values of Kb and Kt were taken as 1.5 and 1.0 respectively for the
gradually applied load on the rotating shaft and the allowable shear stress
of the shaft (Ss) as 40 MN-m-2 based on American Society of Mechanical
Engineers (ASME).
Mb was calculated by analyzing moments due to vertical loading in
bending moment diagrams of the shaft. Mt was calculated by the
following equation:
P  60
Mt  (12)
2 N
Where
P : Transmitted power, W.
Using P = 750 W and N = 600 rpm, Mt was calculated as 11.94 N-m.
The maximum bending moment
The overall loading system on the shaft is as shown in Fig. (6).
For the pulley:
Weight of pulley (WP) = Vp × p × g (13)

Where
VP : Volume of the pulley, m3 (140 mm – diameter and 40 mm –
thick)
p : Density of the pulley material (for aluminium = 2700 kg m-3).
So, weight of pulley (Wp) = 16.3 N.
According to ASTM Standards, the V-belt is 16 mm that can transmit 2 –
15 kW.
Belt Force: The power transmitted by a belt drive is a function of the
belt tensions and belt speed. The belt tensioning forces on the pulley was
calculated according to the following equations (Khurmi and Gupta,
2005).
2.3 log T1 / T2 = µ θ cosec β (14)

Misr J. Ag. Eng., January 2019 - 10 -

 FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

Mt = (T1 - T2) R1 (15)

Where
T1 : Belt tension in tight side, N.
T2 : Belt tension in loose side, N.
µ : Coefficient of friction between belt and pulley (µ= 0.25).
θ : Belt wrap angle, radian = (180 - 2 α) π/180.
D1  D2
α : sin   .
2x
x : Distance between centres of the two pulleys (= 400 mm).
2 β : Groove angle of the pulley (32˚).
Mt : Torsional moment, N-m.
R1 : Radius of the machine pulley, m.
Torque transmitted by the pulley (Mt) = 11.94 N-m. From the previous
equations, T1 and T2 were calculated and are given in table (2):
Table (2): Values of belt tension in tight and loose sides.
D1 D2 α θ T1 T2 T1 / T2 T1+T2
(mm) (mm) (degree) (radian) (N) (N) (N)
140 58 5.86 2.94 183.31 12.74 14.39 196.05
140 97 3.07 3.03 182.17 11.60 15.7 193.78
140 140 0 3.14 181.04 10.46 17.3 191.50
The maximum value of T1+T2 = 196.05 N, with T1 = 183.31 and T2 =
12.74 N, it was taken in the calculations. So, total load acting on pulley =
T1+T2 + Wp = 212.35 N.
Accordingly, the shaft is subjected to vertical loads of the values presented
in table (3) and Fig. (6).
The centrifugal force exerted by the hammer = 596.21 N (upward), so
distributed vertical loading = 596.21 /0.12 (length loaded of the shaft) =
4968.42 N-m-1.
Table (3): Vertical loads on the main shaft.
Type of load At (A) At (B)
596.21 N (4968.42 N-m ) -1
Vertical 212.35 N
The vertical load diagram is shown in Fig. (6). Let RP and RQ represent the
reactions at bearings P and Q respectively for vertical loading. Taking
moments about P, ∴ RQ = 467.58 N ∴RP = 851.44 N

Misr J. Ag. Eng., January 2019 - 11 -

 FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

Bending moment diagram (B.M.D): The Fig. (5) shows the free body
diagram, to calculate the moment at P.
4968.42 N m-1 4968.42 . x N

596.21 N 596.21 N
Fig. (5): Free body diagram for vertical load at point (A).
B.M. at A, MP = 4968.42 × (0.12)2/2 = 35.77 N-m
B.M. at Q, MQ = 596.21 × 0.3 – 851.44 × 0.24 = - 25.48 N-m
Fig. (6) shows the bending moment diagram for vertical loading. It is
obvious that P is the point of maximum bending moment.
Maximum bending moment (Mb) was found to be Mb = 35.77 N-m. The
maximum torque was found to be Mt = 11.94 N-m.
By applying in the equation (11), shaft diameter of the main shaft (d) should
be equal or more than 19.13 mm = 20 mm.
2.2.6 Bearing selection
The selection of a rolling bearing is made from a manufacturer's catalogue
FAG rolling bearing catalogue was used to select the machine ball bearing.
2.2.7 Electric motor
Electric motor with single phase (220 V), power 1 hp at 1440 rpm was used
as a power source for hammer mill.
2.3 Finite element modeling
The 3-D Finite Element modelling of the main shaft was designed by
using ANSYS software (Version 14). The shaft is analyzed by ANSYS in
three steps. First step involve meshing of the object and input material
properties of shaft in software.

Misr J. Ag. Eng., January 2019 - 12 -

 FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

0.12 m 0.24 m 0.12 m

B
A P Q

T2 WP T1

212.35 N
RP
Load diagram
Fh = 596.21 N RQ
4968.42 N-m-1

596.21 N

212.35 N
O
S.F. diagram

255.23 N

35.77 N-m

B.M. diagram

25.48 N-m

Fig. (6): The shearing and bending moment diagrams of the main shaft.
The shaft had converted into 4127 elements and 7601 nodes. Second step
involve selection of analysis type static and putting the boundary
condition of loading and displacement in term of degree of freedom at
the end occurring on shaft and then running the ANSYS software to get

Misr J. Ag. Eng., January 2019 - 13 -

 FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

the analysed result in form of stress and deformation. The stress and
deformation of the shaft observed after analysis is shown in Fig. (7). The
-2
maximum stress in shaft is 12.47 N mm which is far less than the yield
-2
strength of the material (45 N mm ). So, that shaft diameter is sufficient
under these the current working conditions.

(a) Von Mises Stress (b) Deformations

Fig. (7): Von Mises Stress and deformations of the rotor shaft in
ANSYS.
2.4 Performance evaluation
The hammer mill was evaluated at three screen holes diameter, three
levels of rotor speed and three feed rates. According to literature data
(Srivastava et al., 2006; CIGR, 1999), in reference to this information,
machine productivity, consumed energy and cost were evaluated at each
combination of variables.
Table (4): Experimental plan for evaluating the machine.
Variables Levels
Screen holes diameter (Sd) , mm 2, 4, 6
-1
Hammer rotor speed (RS), rpm (m s ) 600 (6.8), 1000 (11.3), 1440 (16.3)
Feeding rate (FR), kg h-1 60, 90 , 120
Evaluation of the hammer mill was performed taking the following
measuring parameters:
2.4.1 Geometric mean diameter (dgw)
Particle size distribution of the ground corn after ground was
determined according to ASABE Standard S319.3 by calculating
geometric mean diameter (ASABE, 1999). About 100 g sample of

Misr J. Ag. Eng., January 2019 - 14 -

 FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

grinds was placed on the top of a stack of sieves arranged from

the largest to smallest opening. The duration of sieving was
determined by 10 min. After sieving, the mass retained on each
sieve was weighed. The geometric mean diameter (dgw) of particle
diameters for the sample were calculated according to the
aforementioned standard using the following equation:
 n -

  (Wi log d i ) 
d gw  log 1  i 1 n 
(16)
 



i 1
Wi 

Where
dgw : The geometric mean diameter, mm.
Wi : The mass on the ith sieve, g.
n : The number of sieves.
di : The nominal sieve aperture size of the ith sieve, mm.
2.4.2 Machine productivity (Pm)
Time of milling process was measured by means of a stop watch.
The machine productivity was calculated as follows:
W
Pm  (17)
T
Where
Pm : The machine productivity, kg h-1.
W : The mass of sample, kg.
T : Milling time, hour.
2.4.3 Required power (RP) and consumed energy (CE)
The required electric power under machine working load (RP) was
calculated according to Chancellor (1981) by the following equation:
RP = V × I × cos  (18)
Where
RP : The required power for crushing, W.
V : Potential difference, Voltage (I phase = 220 voltage).
I : Line current, Amperes.
cos  : Power factor (= 0.64).

Misr J. Ag. Eng., January 2019 - 15 -

 FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

A digital clamp meter and Voltmeter were used for measuring

current intensity and voltage respectively.
The consumed energy (CE) is power per unit productivity; it was
calculated by using the following equation:
Consumed energy = (RP/Pm), W h kg-1 (19)
2.4.4 Costs (CO)
Machine cost was determined using the fixed costs and variable costs
according to Srivastava et al. (2006), where the price of fabricated
machine was 4000 L.E (according to 2017 local conditions). The
operating cost (CO) was determined using the following equation:
Total machine costs (L.E h -1 )
Operating cost (CO)  -1
, L.E ton-1 (20)
Machine productivity (ton h )

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

3.1 Corn kernel properties
Table (5) reports the some physical and mechanical properties of the corn
kernel.
Table (5): Physical and mechanical properties of corn kernel.
Parameters Values
Length, mm 11.76
Width, mm 8.76
Thickness, mm 3.96
Mass, g 0.353
Bulk density, kg m -3 1475
Length-to-width ratio 1.35
Perimeter length, mm 36.80
Distance between IS and CG, mm 1.28
Roundness 0.67
Area size, mm 2 72.59
Longitudinal 713.6
Rupture energy
Lateral 359.0
(RE/m), J kg-1
Diagonal 170.7

Misr J. Ag. Eng., January 2019 - 16 -

 FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

3.2 Geometric mean diameter

Fig. (8) illustrates the relationship between geometric mean diameter of
the corn particle after ground "dgw" and hammer rotor speed "Rs" at
different feeding rates "FR" and screen holes diameter "Sd". The obtained
data showed that geometric mean diameter increased with increasing
screen holes diameter and decreased with increasing both feeding rate,
and hammer speed.
The geometric mean diameter ranged from 0.611 to 2.166 mm with
hammer rotor speed of 600 to 1440 rpm, screen holes diameter of 2 to 6
mm and the feeding rate of 60 to 120 kg h-1. It could be noticed that the
lowest values of geometric mean diameter were obtained at (RS) 1440
rpm, (Sd) 2 mm and (FR) 60 kg h-1, however the highest values of
machine productivity were obtained at (RS) 600 rpm, (Sd) 6 mm and (FR)
120 kg h-1.
Feeding rate (kg h-1) 60 90 120
2.30
2 - mm 4 - mm 6 - mm
Geometric mean diameter, mm

2.10
Screen holes diameter
1.90

1.70

1.50

1.30

1.10

0.90

0.70

0.50
600

1000

1440

600

1000

1440

600

1000

1440

Rotor speed, rpm

Fig. (8): The effect of hammer speed, feeding rate and screen holes
diameters on grind corn geometric mean diameter.
3.3 Machine productivity
Fig. (9) illustrates the relationship between crushing machine
productivity "Pm" and hammer rotor speed "Rs" at different feeding rates
"FR" and screen holes diameter "Sd". The obtained data showed that the
crushing productivity increased with increasing feeding rate, screen holes
diameter and hammer speed.

Misr J. Ag. Eng., January 2019 - 17 -

 FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

The machine productivity ranged from 30 to 112 kg h-1 with hammer

rotor speed of 600 to 1440 rpm, screen holes diameter of 2 to 6 mm and
the feeding rate of 60 to 120 kg h-1. It could be noticed that the lowest
values of machine productivity were obtained at (RS) 600 rpm, (Sd) 2 mm
and (FR) 60 kg h-1, however the highest values of machine productivity
were obtained at (RS) 1440 rpm, (Sd) 6 mm and (FR) 120 kg h-1.
Feeding rate (kg h-1) 60 90 120
120
2 - mm 4 - mm 6 - mm
110
-1

Screen holes diameter

Machine productivity, kg h

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
600

1000

1440

600

1000

1440

600

1000

1440
Rotor speed, rpm

Fig. (9): The effect of hammer speed, feeding rate and screen holes
diameters on machine productivity.
3.4 Consumed energy
Fig. (10) illustrates the relationship between consumed energy "CE" and
hammer rotor speed "Rs" at different feeding rates "FR" and screen holes
diameters "Sd". The obtained data showed that the consumed energy
decreased with increasing feeding rate, screen holes diameter and
hammer speed. The consumed energy ranged from 7.5 to 21 W.h kg -1
with hammer rotor speed of 600 to 1440 rpm, screen holes diameter of 2
to 6 mm and the feeding rate of 60 to 120 kg h-1. It could be noticed that
the lowest values of consumed energy were obtained at (RS) 1440 rpm,
(Sd) 6 mm and (FR) 120 kg h-1, however the highest values of consumed
energy were obtained at (RS) 600 rpm, (Sd) 2 mm and (FR) 60 kg h-1.
3.5 Cost
Fig. (11) illustrates the relationship between crushing machine cost "CO"
and hammer rotor speed "Rs" at different feeding rates "FR" and screen
holes diameters "Sd". The obtained data showed that the crushing cost

Misr J. Ag. Eng., January 2019 - 18 -

 FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

increased with increasing of both feeding rate, screen holes diameter and
hammer speed. The crushing machine cost ranged from 76 to 283.3 L.E
kg ton-1 with hammer rotor speed of 600 to 1440 rpm, screen holes
diameter of 2 to 6 mm and the feeding rate of 60 to 120 kg h-1. It could be
noticed that the lowest values of machine cost were obtained at (RS) 1440
rpm, (Sd) 6 mm and (FR) 120 kg h-1, however the highest values of
machine cost were obtained at (RS) 600 rpm, (Sd) 2 mm and (FR) 60 kg h-
1
.
Feeding rate (kg h-1) 60 90 120
24
2 - mm 4 - mm 6 - mm
-1

Screen holes diameter

Consumed energy, W.h kg

21

18

15

12

6
600

1000

1440

600

1000

1440

600

1000

1440

Rotor speed, rpm

Fig. (10): The effect of hammer speed, feeding rate and screen holes
diameters on machine consumed energy.
Feeding rate (kg h-1) 60 90 120
300
2 - mm 4 - mm 6 - mm
Screen holes diameter
250
-1
Cost, L.E ton

200

150

100

50
600

1000

1440

600

1000

1440

600

1000

1440

Rotor speed, rpm

Fig. (11): The effect of hammer speed, feeding rate and screen holes
diameters on machine cost.

Misr J. Ag. Eng., January 2019 - 19 -

 FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

3.6 Regression models for the performance parameters

The screen holes diameter, rotor speed and feeding rate were used as
factors affecting the values of geometric mean diameter, machine
productivity, consumed energy and cost within their tested values.
Multiple regression approach (by using SPSS software version 16) was
used to derive a linear regression equation. Equation (21) expresses
mathematical relation.
Y = a. Sd + b. RS + c. FR + k (21)
Where
Y : The value of geometric mean diameter, machine
productivity, consumed energy, and cost.
Sd : Screen holes diameter, mm (2 ≤ Sd ≤ 6).
RS : Rotor speed, rpm (600 ≤ RS ≤ 1440).
FR : Feeding rate, kg h-1 (60 ≤ FR ≤ 120).
a, b, c & k : Empirical constants.
The values of the empirical constants (a, b, c and k) and the coefficient of
determination (R2) of equation (21) are shown in table (6).
Table (6): The empirical constants and the coefficient of
determination (R2) for the performance parameters.
Empirical constant
(Y) R2
a b c k
Geometric mean diameter (dgw), mm 0.177 0.297 -0.0002 0.002 0.982
Machine productivity (Pm), kg h-1 6.306 0.017 0.637 -37.003 0.937
-1
Consumed energy (CE), W.h kg -1.097 -0.002 -0.116 29.140 0.929
-1
Cost (CO), L.E ton -16.11 -0.040 -1.167 368.2 0.791
This regression equation can be used as a guide to forecast the expected
values of the studied operation parameters.
CONCLUSION
The obtained results can be summarized as follows:
1. The lowest values of geometric mean diameter were obtained at
(RS) 1440 rpm, (Sd) 2 mm and (FR) 60 kg h-1.
2. The highest values of machine productivity were obtained at (RS)
1440 rpm, (Sd) 6 mm and (FR) 120 kg h-1.

Misr J. Ag. Eng., January 2019 - 20 -

 FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

3. The lowest values of consumed energy were obtained at (RS) 1440

rpm, (Sd) 6 mm and (FR) 120 kg h-1.
4. The lowest values of machine cost were obtained at (RS) 1440 rpm,
(Sd) 6 mm and (FR) 120 kg h-1.
5. The validity of this research outcomes with different kinds of grains
may be a valuable recommended for future studies.
REFERENCES
Abd El Fatah, H, E. Mohamed, M. Hassan and K. Mohamed. 2015.
An economic analysis for maize market in Egypt. Middle East
Journal of Agriculture Research, 4 (4): 873-878.
ASABE. 1999. Method of determining and expressing fineness of feed
materials by sieving. Standard ASABE NO: S319.4. St. Joseph,
Mich. ASABE: 563-566.
Berk, Z. 2018. Size reduction. Food process engineering and technology.
3rd Edition., Academic Press: 165-191.
Bitra, V. S. P., A. R. Womac, N. Chevanan, P. I. Miu, C.
Igathinathane, S. Sokhansanj and D. R. Smith. 2009. Direct
mechanical energy measures of hammer mill comminution of
switchgrass, wheat straw, and corn stover and analysis of their
particle size distributions. Powder Technology, 193 (1): 32-45.
Bulgakov, V., S. Pascuzzi, S. Ivanovs, G. Kaletnik and V. Yanovich.
2018. Angular oscillation model to predict the performance of a
vibratory ball mill for the fine grinding of grain. Biosystems
Engineering, 171: 155-164.
Chancellor, W. J. 1981. Substituting information for energy in
agricultural. Trans. ASAE Paper No. 0001- 2351.
CIGR. 1999. Handbook of agricultural engineering. Volume III. Plant
production engineering. The International Commission of
Agricultural Engineering. Published by the ASABE.
Dabbour M. I., A. Bahnasawy, S. Ali, Z. El- Haddad. 2015. Grinding
parameters and their effects on the quality of corn for feed
processing. J. Food Process Technol, 6:482.
El Shal, M. S., M. A. Tawfik, A. M. El Shal and K. A. Metwally.
2010. Study the effect of some operational factor on hammer mill.
Misr J. Ag. Eng., 27(1): 54 – 74.
Misr J. Ag. Eng., January 2019 - 21 -
 FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

Eric, O. 1976. Machinery’s Hand Book. 20th ed. New York, Industrial
Press.
FAO. 2017. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations,
FAOSTATE data base. [Link] subset
= agriculture.
Han, Y., F. Jia, Y. Zeng, L. Jiang, Y. Zhang and B. Cao. 2016. Effects
of rotation speed and outlet opening on particle flow in a vertical
rice mill. Powder Technology, 297: 153-164.
Hannah, J. and R. Stephens. 2004. Advanced Theory and Examples in
Mechanics of Machines. Edward Arnold (Publishers) Ltd, London;
5th Edition, pp.1-128.
Herrera, J., B. Saldana, L. Camara, J. D. Berrocoso and G. G.
Mateos. 2018. Influence of grinding size of the main cereal of the
diet on egg production and eggs quality of brown egg laying hens
from 33 to 65 weeks of age. Poult. Sci., 97(7): 2506-2515.
Islam, S., M. Haque and S. Hossain. 2015. Effect of corn moisture on
the Quality of Poultry Feed. Journal of Poultry Science and
Technology. Vol. 3(2): 24-31.
Khurmi, R. S. and J. [Link]. 2005. Theory of Machines. New Delhi:
Eurasia Publishing house. 315.
Leewatchararongjaroen, J. and J. Anuntagool. 2016. Effects of dry-
milling and wet-milling on chemical, physical and gelatinization
properties of rice flour. Rice Science, 23(5): 274-281.
Mani, S., L. G. Tabil and S. Sokhansanj. 2004. Grinding performance
and physical properties of wheat and barley straws, corn stover and
switchgrass. Biomass and Bioenergy, 27(4): 339-352.
Parsons, S., A., N. P. Buchanan, K. P. Blemings, M. E. Wilson and J.
S. Moritz. 2006. Effect of corn particle size and pellet texture on
broiler performance in the growing phase. The Journal of Applied
Poultry Research, 15(2): 245-255.
Pérez-Bonilla, A., M. Frikha, R. P. Lázaro and G. G. Mateos. 2014.
Type of grinding of the main cereal of the diet affects production of
brown egg-laying hens. Animal Feed Science and Technology,
194: 121-130.

Misr J. Ag. Eng., January 2019 - 22 -

 FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

Soyoye, B. O., O. C. Ademosun, and L. A. S. Agbetoye. 2018.

Determination of some physical and mechanical properties of
soybean and maize in relation to planter design. Agricultural
Engineering International: CIGR Journal, 20(1): 81–89.
Srivastava, A. K., C. E. Goering, R. P. Rohrbach and D. R.
Buckmaster. 2006. Engineering principles of agricultural
machines. 2nded. St. Joseph, Michigan: ASABE.
Tanabata, T., T. Shibaya, K. Hori, K. Ebana and M. Yano. 2012.
High throughput phenotyping software for measuring seed shape
through Image Analysis. Plant Physiology, 160 (4): 1871–1880.
Tumuluru, J. S., L. G. Tabil, Y. Song, K. L. Iroba and V. Meda.
2014. Grinding energy and physical properties of chopped and
hammer milled barley, wheat, oat and canola straws. Biomass and
Bioenergy, 60: 58-67.
Verheye, W. 2010. Growth and production of maize: traditional low-
input cultivation. In: Verheye, W. (ed.), Land Use, Land Cover and
Soil Sciences. Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS),
UNESCO-EOLSS Publishers, Oxford, UK. [Link]
Wołosiewicz-Głąb, M., D. Foszcz and S. Ogonowski. 2017. Design of
the electromagnetic mill and the air stream ratio model. IFAC-
Papers On Line, 50(1): 14964-14969.
Yousef, I. S. 2005. A study on performance improvement of the local
manufactured hammer mill used in poultry forms. J. Agric., Sci.
Mansoura Univ., 30 (11): 6827-6840.
Zohry, A., S. Ouda and T. Noreldin. 2016. Solutions for maize
production-consumption gap in Egypt. Conference: 4th African
Regional Conferences on Irrigation and Drainage (ARCID) -
Aswan, Egypt.
‫الملخص العربي‬
‫تصميم وتقييم آلة الجرش المطرقية‬
) 2( )1( )1(
‫ عيد نصر الدين عبد الرحمن‬.‫د‬ ‫ محمد سيد عمران‬.‫د‬ ‫ محمد محمود إبراهيم‬.‫د‬
‫تعتبر عملية الجرش من العمليات الضرورية إلعداد األعالف والتى تتم عادة بإستخدام المجارش‬
‫التى تعمل بنظرية التصادم حيث يتم تقليل حجم جزيئات الحبوب حتى تمر من خالل غرابيل لها‬

Misr J. Ag. Eng., January 2019 - 23 -

 ‫‪FARM MACHINERY AND POWER‬‬

‫فتحات معينة‪ .‬ترجع أهمية الجرش إلى تحسين هضم الحبوب بتوحيد درجة نعومة الحبوب‬
‫المجروشة كما يسهل خلطها وبخاصة عند عمل أصابع العلف مما يؤدي لتقليل الفاقد‪.‬‬
‫وتهدف هذه الدراسة إلى تصميم وتصنيع وتقييم آلة جرش صغيرة الح جم‪ .‬وللو صول لل هدف تم‬
‫االتى‪:‬‬
‫‪ -1‬دراسة بعض الخصائص الطبيعية والميكانيكية ل صنف ا لذرة (‪ )SC- 168‬المنت جة محل يا ذو‬
‫محتوى رطوبي ‪ %13.21‬على أساس رطب ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -3‬تصميم آلة الجرش بإستخدام المعادالت التصميمية ثم بإستخدام بر نامج ‪( ANSYS‬اإل صدار‬
‫‪ )11‬الخاص بتحليل اإلجهادات للتنبؤ بقيم اإلجهادات الواقعة على عمود الجرش الدوار‪.‬‬
‫‪ -2‬تصنيع اآللة وتتكون من وحدة الجرش ذات الم طارق ومجمو عة لن قل الحر كة باإل ضافة إ لى‬
‫محرك كهربائي قدرته ‪ 1‬حصان‪.‬‬
‫‪ -1‬تقييم اآللة المصممة وذلك بإستخدام ثالث سرعات مختلفة لعمود الجرش ( ‪– 1666 – 066‬‬
‫‪ 1116‬لفة د‪ – )1-‬ثالث معدل تغذية ( ‪ 136 – 06 – 06‬كجم ساعة‪ – )1-‬ثالث أقطار لفت حة‬
‫الغرابيل (‪ 0 – 1 – 3‬مم)‪ ،‬تم درا سة تأثير هذه العوا مل ع لى متو سط ق طر جزي ئات ا لذرة‬
‫المجروشة‪ ،‬السعة اإلنتاجية لآللة‪ ،‬الطاقة المستهلكة أثناء الجرش‪ ،‬تكلفة عملية الجرش‪.‬‬
‫توصلت الدراسة ألهم النتائج التالية‪:‬‬
‫‪ .1‬متوسط قطر جزيئات الذرة المجروشة يقل بزيادة سرعة الجرش لكل أقطار الغرابيل‪ ،‬وتزداد مع‬
‫زيادة كال من أقطار الغرابيل ومعدل التغذية‪ ،‬وكان أقل متوسط قطر الجزيئات (‪ 6.011‬مم) مع‬
‫إستخدام سرعة جرش ‪ 1116‬لفة د‪ 1-‬وقطر غربال ‪ 3‬مم ومعدل تغذية ‪ 06‬كجم ساعة‪.1-‬‬
‫‪ .3‬السعة اإلنتاجية لآللة تزيد مع زيادة سرعة الجرش ومعدل التغذية لكل أقطار الغرابيل المستخدمة‪،‬‬
‫وكانت أكبر سعة إنتاجية لآللة (‪ 113‬كجم ساعة‪ )1-‬مع إستخدام سرعة جرش ‪ 1116‬لفة د‪ 1-‬وقطر‬
‫غربال ‪ 0‬مم ومعدل تغذية ‪ 06‬كجم ساعة‪.1-‬‬
‫‪ .2‬الطاقة المستهلكة فى الجرش تقل مع زيادة كل من سرعة الجرش ومعدل التغذية و أقطار الغرابيل‬
‫المستخدمة‪ ،‬وكانت أقل طاقة مستهلكة ( ‪ 5.7‬وات ‪ .‬ساعة كجم‪ )1-‬مع إستخدام سرعة جرش ‪1116‬‬
‫لفة د‪ 1-‬وقطر غربال ‪ 0‬مم ومعدل تغذية ‪ 136‬كجم ساعة‪.1-‬‬
‫‪ .1‬تكلفة عملية الجرش تقل مع زيادة كل من سرعة الجرش ومعدالت التغذية وأقطار الغرابيل‬
‫المستخدمة‪ ،‬وكانت أقل تكلفة (‪ 50‬جنية طن‪ )1-‬مع إستخدام سرعة جرش ‪ 1116‬لفة د‪ 1-‬وقطر غربال‬
‫‪ 0‬مم ومعدل تغذية ‪ 136‬كجم ساعة‪.1-‬‬
‫‪ .7‬تم التوصل إلي معادلة بطريقة اإلنحدار الخطي بإستخدام البر نامج اإلح صائى ‪( SPSS‬اإل صدار ‪)10‬‬
‫وذ لك للتن بؤ بالقيم المختل فة لمتو سط ق طر جزي ئات ا لذرة المجرو شة‪ ،‬ال سعة اإلنتاج ية لآل لة‪ ،‬الطا قة‬
‫المستهلكة‪ ،‬تكلفة عملية الجرش كدالة فى سرعة الجرش ومعدل التغذية وقطر الغرابيل‪.‬‬
‫‪ .0‬نوصى بإ جراء ب عض الت جارب ع لى الماكي نة مع مخت لف الح بوب اال خرى م ثل ال فول وغير ها ال تى‬
‫تستخدم مع األعالف‪.‬‬
‫‪ )1‬أستاذ الهندسة الزراعية المساعد ‪-‬كلية الزراعة ‪ -‬جامعة القاهرة‪.‬‬
‫(‪ )2‬مدرس الهندسة الزراعية ‪-‬كلية الزراعة ‪ -‬جامعة القاهرة‪.‬‬
‫‪Misr J. Ag. Eng., January 2019‬‬ ‫‪- 24 -‬‬

‫‪View publication stats‬‬