Banner
Current IssueEditorial BoardOnline First ArticlesArchive
Current IssueEditorial BoardOnline First ArticlesArchive

volume 28 issue 2 (june 2007) : 118-126

MECHANICAL PICKING OF COTTON - A REVIEW

M
M. Muthamilselvan
K
K. Rangasamyt
D
D. Ananthakrishnan2
R
R. Manian3
1Agricultural Energy and Power Division, Central Institute of Agricultural Engineering, Nabi Bagh, Berasia ~oad, Bhopal - 462 038, India.

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Muthamilselvan M., Rangasamyt K., Ananthakrishnan2 D., Manian3 R. (2025). MECHANICAL PICKING OF COTTON - A REVIEW. Agricultural Reviews. 28(2): 118-126. doi: .

ABSTRACT

The cost of cotton production is excessively high, reducing the profit margin available to the farmer. Picking is one of the major labour intensive operations in cotton cultivation consuming the lion's share of the expenditure. Hence the only option available is the mechanical picking method. The development of cotton picker will be the first step into the mechanization of cotton cultivation. Cotton harvesters are of two basic types, viz, picker and stripper. The picker is selective where as stripper is non-selective. Modem strippers can be classified according to two general stripping principles. The finger principle and the roll principle, whereby the plants pass between two inclined rotating rollers or between a roller and a stripping bar, Strippers are most successful in the areas where plants are small and the fibres are rather short, hard bodies and easy to clean. By reviewing the mechanical picking methods, it may be concluded that by considering the cost of picking, break-even point, pay-back period, cost saving, time saving and energy saving, picking through cotton picker is promising.

KEYWORDS

    REFERENCES

    1. Ahmed, M.H. (1985). Agric. Mech. in Asia, Africa and Latin America, 16 (4): 51-53.
    2. Ahmed, M.H. et.al. (1987). Agric. Mech. Asia, Africa & Latin America, 18(2): 29-32, 36.
    3. Anonymous. (2005). Annual Report, Cotton Corpn. ofIndia,12 pp.
    4. Batchelder, D.G., et. al. (1961). Oklahoma Agr. Exp. Sta. Bun. 8-589.
    5. Batchelder, D.G., et. al. (1982). Trans. ASAE25: 62-64.
    6. Bauer, PJ., et. al. (1998). Proc. of 21" Annual Southern Conservation 1iIlage Conference Arkansas, USA, 15-17 July 1998.
    7. Bennett, CA (1938). Agric. Engg.September 19 (3): 386-388.
    8. Brashears, AD. (1988). ASAE Paper No. 68-1043, 13 pp.
    9. Brashears, AD. (1988). Proc. Beltwide Cotton Production Research conference, Louisiana, USA, 3-8Jan 1988: 161-162.
    10. Brashears, AD. (1989). Proc. Beltwide Cotton Production Conference., National Cotton CouncU ofAmerica, Memphis, Tennessee, USA. 36-38 pp.
    11. Brashears, AD. (1992). ASAE Paper No.92-1035, 9 pp.
    12. Chaudhry, M.R. (1997). Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conference, New Orleans, USA, Jan 6-10,1997 Vol. (2): 16-18 pp.
    13. Chen, L.H., et. al. (1992). Trans. ASAE, 35: 1071-1077.
    14. Clayton, J.E., et. al. (1965). Contamination of cotton by lubricants from mechanical harvesters, USDA, ARS 42-111.
    15. Columbus, E.P., et. al. (1988). Beltwide Cotton Production Research Conference, Cotton Engg. Systems Conference, Louisiana, USA, 3-8 Jan. 1988: 162-164.
    16. Colwick et. al. (1953). South Coop. Series Bull. 33, March
    17. Colwick et. al. (1957). South. Coop. Series Bull. 49. February.
    18. Colwick et. al. (1965). South. Coop. Series Bull. 100. March.
    19. Colwick, R.E, et. a/. (1979). Tech. Bull., Mississippi Agric. Experimental Station, Mississippi State No. 94, 16 pp.
    20. Corley, T.E. and Stokes, C.M. (1964). Trans. ASAE: 281-286 and 290.
    21. Corley, T.E. (1966). Trans. ASAE (9): 326-328 and 332.
    22. Corley, T.E. (1970). Trans. ASAE: 768-773 and 778.
    23. Dick, J.B., et. aJ. (1958). Mississippi. Agric.lnfo. Sheet, 573.
    24. Goyal, M.R. et. al. (1979) Agric. Mech. Asia, Africa & Latin America. Spring, pp 73-78.
    25. Hudspeth, E.B. (1971). Texas Agrit. Exp. sta. PR 1728.
    26. Khalilian, A, et. al. (1999). J Cotton Sci., 3 (3): 122-125.
    27. Kirk. I.w. (1964). Texas Agric. Exp. Sta. PR 2258.
    28. Kirk.l.W. et. al. (1964). Texas Agr. Exp. Sta. PR 2311.
    29. Kirk, I.w., et. al. (1973). Trans. ASAE:446-449.
    30. Link, DA and CW. Bocknop. 1964. Trans.ASAE, 7(1): 8-13 and 16.
    31. Lindsey, et. al. (1967). Mississippi Agric. Exp. Sta. Bun. 739. 126 AGRICULTURAL REVIEWS
    32. Matthews, E.J. and Tupper, G.R. (1965). Trans. ASAE (8): 568-571.
    33. Mayfield, W.A. (1989). Proc. Beltwide Cotton Production Conference, 38-39. National Cotton Council of America, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
    34. Montgomery, R.A. and Wooten, o.B. (1958). Studies of lint quality and moisture relationships in cotton through harvesting and ginning, USDA, ARS 42-14.
    35. Narayanan, S.S. and Sundaram, V. (1999). International Seminar on Cotton held at CIRCOT, Mumbai, Dec. 10·12, 1999. Book of papers: 4-15.
    36. Oates, WJ., et. al. (1952). Agric. Engg.. 33 (3): 135,136 and 142.
    37. Parish, R.L. and Shelby. KR. (1974). Trans. ASAE (17): 1076-1077.
    38. Porterfield, J.G., et. al. (1964). Oklahoma Agric. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bull. T-111.
    39. Roberson, P.M. (1966). Agric. Engg., 47 (1): 139 and 141
    40. Saw, E. and Azizov, M. (1991). Khlopok. No.4, 20-21.
    41. Sappenfield, WP., et. al. (1983). ASAE Paper No. 83-1577, 23 pp.
    42. Sappenfield, WP., et. a/. (1984). Trans. ASAE (27) : 1287-1291.
    43. Shaw, C. Scott and Clayton, J.E. (1965). Effects of trash deposits in cntton picker baskets, USDA, ARS 42-112.
    44. Shpolyanskii, D.M., et. al. (1984). Tekhnika V SeI'skom Khozyaistve, No.8, 60-61.
    45. Smith, H.P. (1964). Farm Machinery EqUipment. McGraw-Hili, New York. pp. 356,
    46. Smith, L.A and Dumas, WT. (1982). Trans. ASAE, 25 (2): 291-296.
    47. Stapleton, H.N., et. al. (1967). Trans. ASAE (10): 226-229 and 232.
    48. Tupper, G. R. (1964). Trans. ASAE (7): 306.
    49. Tupper.G.R.(1966). Trans. ASAE (9): 110-111, 113.
    50. Varies, E.D., et. al. (1991). Proc. of Beltwide Cotton Conference held in New Orleans, USA, ~n. 10·14, 1993,542-543.
    51. Vories, ED. and Bonner, C.M. (1995). Bull., Arkansas Agric. Experi. Stn., No.945,16 p.
    52. Warjura, D.E and Baker, R.v. (1978). Trans. ASAE: 22 (2): 273-278 and 282 .
    53. Wanjura, D.E, et. al. (1979). Trans. ofASAE23 (2): 233-236 and 242.
    54. Wanjura, D.E and Brashears, AD. (1983). Trans. ofASAE27 (1): 54-58.
    55. Williamson, E.B. and Fulgham, EE. (1956). Mississippi Farm Res. Stn.
    56. Williamson, E.B. 1960. Annual Mississippi S-2 RepOrt (Unpublished), 42 pp.
    57. Williamson, E.B. and Riley, J.A. (1961). Trans. ASAE (5): 164-165 and 169.
    58. Williamson, E.B. et. al. (1966). USDA Marketing Res. Rep. 730.
    Published In
    Agricultural Reviews
    Article Metrics
    Metrics Icon
    0
    Views
    0
    Citations
    Reviewed By
    Share Article
    Download Article
    In this Article
      Contact us
      Follow us

      volume 28 issue 2 (june 2007) : 118-126

      MECHANICAL PICKING OF COTTON - A REVIEW

      M
      M. Muthamilselvan
      K
      K. Rangasamyt
      D
      D. Ananthakrishnan2
      R
      R. Manian3
      1Agricultural Energy and Power Division, Central Institute of Agricultural Engineering, Nabi Bagh, Berasia ~oad, Bhopal - 462 038, India.

      • Submitted|

      • First Online |

      • doi

      Cite article:- Muthamilselvan M., Rangasamyt K., Ananthakrishnan2 D., Manian3 R. (2025). MECHANICAL PICKING OF COTTON - A REVIEW. Agricultural Reviews. 28(2): 118-126. doi: .

      ABSTRACT

      The cost of cotton production is excessively high, reducing the profit margin available to the farmer. Picking is one of the major labour intensive operations in cotton cultivation consuming the lion's share of the expenditure. Hence the only option available is the mechanical picking method. The development of cotton picker will be the first step into the mechanization of cotton cultivation. Cotton harvesters are of two basic types, viz, picker and stripper. The picker is selective where as stripper is non-selective. Modem strippers can be classified according to two general stripping principles. The finger principle and the roll principle, whereby the plants pass between two inclined rotating rollers or between a roller and a stripping bar, Strippers are most successful in the areas where plants are small and the fibres are rather short, hard bodies and easy to clean. By reviewing the mechanical picking methods, it may be concluded that by considering the cost of picking, break-even point, pay-back period, cost saving, time saving and energy saving, picking through cotton picker is promising.

      KEYWORDS

        REFERENCES

        1. Ahmed, M.H. (1985). Agric. Mech. in Asia, Africa and Latin America, 16 (4): 51-53.
        2. Ahmed, M.H. et.al. (1987). Agric. Mech. Asia, Africa & Latin America, 18(2): 29-32, 36.
        3. Anonymous. (2005). Annual Report, Cotton Corpn. ofIndia,12 pp.
        4. Batchelder, D.G., et. al. (1961). Oklahoma Agr. Exp. Sta. Bun. 8-589.
        5. Batchelder, D.G., et. al. (1982). Trans. ASAE25: 62-64.
        6. Bauer, PJ., et. al. (1998). Proc. of 21" Annual Southern Conservation 1iIlage Conference Arkansas, USA, 15-17 July 1998.
        7. Bennett, CA (1938). Agric. Engg.September 19 (3): 386-388.
        8. Brashears, AD. (1988). ASAE Paper No. 68-1043, 13 pp.
        9. Brashears, AD. (1988). Proc. Beltwide Cotton Production Research conference, Louisiana, USA, 3-8Jan 1988: 161-162.
        10. Brashears, AD. (1989). Proc. Beltwide Cotton Production Conference., National Cotton CouncU ofAmerica, Memphis, Tennessee, USA. 36-38 pp.
        11. Brashears, AD. (1992). ASAE Paper No.92-1035, 9 pp.
        12. Chaudhry, M.R. (1997). Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conference, New Orleans, USA, Jan 6-10,1997 Vol. (2): 16-18 pp.
        13. Chen, L.H., et. al. (1992). Trans. ASAE, 35: 1071-1077.
        14. Clayton, J.E., et. al. (1965). Contamination of cotton by lubricants from mechanical harvesters, USDA, ARS 42-111.
        15. Columbus, E.P., et. al. (1988). Beltwide Cotton Production Research Conference, Cotton Engg. Systems Conference, Louisiana, USA, 3-8 Jan. 1988: 162-164.
        16. Colwick et. al. (1953). South Coop. Series Bull. 33, March
        17. Colwick et. al. (1957). South. Coop. Series Bull. 49. February.
        18. Colwick et. al. (1965). South. Coop. Series Bull. 100. March.
        19. Colwick, R.E, et. a/. (1979). Tech. Bull., Mississippi Agric. Experimental Station, Mississippi State No. 94, 16 pp.
        20. Corley, T.E. and Stokes, C.M. (1964). Trans. ASAE: 281-286 and 290.
        21. Corley, T.E. (1966). Trans. ASAE (9): 326-328 and 332.
        22. Corley, T.E. (1970). Trans. ASAE: 768-773 and 778.
        23. Dick, J.B., et. aJ. (1958). Mississippi. Agric.lnfo. Sheet, 573.
        24. Goyal, M.R. et. al. (1979) Agric. Mech. Asia, Africa & Latin America. Spring, pp 73-78.
        25. Hudspeth, E.B. (1971). Texas Agrit. Exp. sta. PR 1728.
        26. Khalilian, A, et. al. (1999). J Cotton Sci., 3 (3): 122-125.
        27. Kirk. I.w. (1964). Texas Agric. Exp. Sta. PR 2258.
        28. Kirk.l.W. et. al. (1964). Texas Agr. Exp. Sta. PR 2311.
        29. Kirk, I.w., et. al. (1973). Trans. ASAE:446-449.
        30. Link, DA and CW. Bocknop. 1964. Trans.ASAE, 7(1): 8-13 and 16.
        31. Lindsey, et. al. (1967). Mississippi Agric. Exp. Sta. Bun. 739. 126 AGRICULTURAL REVIEWS
        32. Matthews, E.J. and Tupper, G.R. (1965). Trans. ASAE (8): 568-571.
        33. Mayfield, W.A. (1989). Proc. Beltwide Cotton Production Conference, 38-39. National Cotton Council of America, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
        34. Montgomery, R.A. and Wooten, o.B. (1958). Studies of lint quality and moisture relationships in cotton through harvesting and ginning, USDA, ARS 42-14.
        35. Narayanan, S.S. and Sundaram, V. (1999). International Seminar on Cotton held at CIRCOT, Mumbai, Dec. 10·12, 1999. Book of papers: 4-15.
        36. Oates, WJ., et. al. (1952). Agric. Engg.. 33 (3): 135,136 and 142.
        37. Parish, R.L. and Shelby. KR. (1974). Trans. ASAE (17): 1076-1077.
        38. Porterfield, J.G., et. al. (1964). Oklahoma Agric. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bull. T-111.
        39. Roberson, P.M. (1966). Agric. Engg., 47 (1): 139 and 141
        40. Saw, E. and Azizov, M. (1991). Khlopok. No.4, 20-21.
        41. Sappenfield, WP., et. al. (1983). ASAE Paper No. 83-1577, 23 pp.
        42. Sappenfield, WP., et. a/. (1984). Trans. ASAE (27) : 1287-1291.
        43. Shaw, C. Scott and Clayton, J.E. (1965). Effects of trash deposits in cntton picker baskets, USDA, ARS 42-112.
        44. Shpolyanskii, D.M., et. al. (1984). Tekhnika V SeI'skom Khozyaistve, No.8, 60-61.
        45. Smith, H.P. (1964). Farm Machinery EqUipment. McGraw-Hili, New York. pp. 356,
        46. Smith, L.A and Dumas, WT. (1982). Trans. ASAE, 25 (2): 291-296.
        47. Stapleton, H.N., et. al. (1967). Trans. ASAE (10): 226-229 and 232.
        48. Tupper, G. R. (1964). Trans. ASAE (7): 306.
        49. Tupper.G.R.(1966). Trans. ASAE (9): 110-111, 113.
        50. Varies, E.D., et. al. (1991). Proc. of Beltwide Cotton Conference held in New Orleans, USA, ~n. 10·14, 1993,542-543.
        51. Vories, ED. and Bonner, C.M. (1995). Bull., Arkansas Agric. Experi. Stn., No.945,16 p.
        52. Warjura, D.E and Baker, R.v. (1978). Trans. ASAE: 22 (2): 273-278 and 282 .
        53. Wanjura, D.E, et. al. (1979). Trans. ofASAE23 (2): 233-236 and 242.
        54. Wanjura, D.E and Brashears, AD. (1983). Trans. ofASAE27 (1): 54-58.
        55. Williamson, E.B. and Fulgham, EE. (1956). Mississippi Farm Res. Stn.
        56. Williamson, E.B. 1960. Annual Mississippi S-2 RepOrt (Unpublished), 42 pp.
        57. Williamson, E.B. and Riley, J.A. (1961). Trans. ASAE (5): 164-165 and 169.
        58. Williamson, E.B. et. al. (1966). USDA Marketing Res. Rep. 730.
        In this Article
          Contact us
          Follow us
          Published In
          Agricultural Reviews

          Editorial Board

          View all (0)