Mode shapes evaluation of trunk shakers used in oil olive harvesting

Transactions of the ASABE

Volumn 50, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 727-732

  Castro García, Sergio ^a   Gil Ribes, Jesús A ^b   Blanco Roldán, Gregorio L ^b   Agüera Vega, Juan ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SEVILLE   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CÓRDOBA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Acceleration; Frequency; Modal testing; Olive fruit harvesting; Trunk shaker

Indexed keywords

MODAL TESTING; OLIVE FRUIT HARVESTING; TRUNK SHAKERS;

AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY; DYNAMIC ANALYSIS; HARVESTING; NATURAL FREQUENCIES; VEGETABLE OILS;

FRUITS;

ACCELERATION; BARK; DYNAMIC ANALYSIS; FREQUENCY ANALYSIS; FRUIT; HARVESTING; MACHINERY; OIL PRODUCTION;

EID: 34447526578     PISSN: 21510032     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Abdel-Fattah, H., K. A. Shackel, and D. C. Slaughter. 2003. Methodology for determining almond shaker displacement and frequency. Applied Eng. in Agric. 19(2): 141-144.
2. Affeldt, H. A., D. E. Marshall, and G. K. Brown. 1988. Relative dynamic displacements within a trunk shaker clamp. Trans. ASAE 31(2): 323-330.
3. Affeldt, H. A., G. K. Brown, N. L. Pason, C. L. Burton, and E. J. Timm. 1989. Tree trunk growth and damage prognoses by digital image analysis. Trans. ASAE 32(5): 1812-1820.
4. Anthonis, J., K. Deprez, and H. Ramon. 2002. Design and evaluation of a low-power portable test rig for vibration tests on mobile agricultural machinery. Trans. ASAE 45(1): 5-12.
5. Barranco, D., R. Fernández, and L. Rallo. 2004. El Cultivo del Olivo. 5th ed. Madrid. Mundi-Prensa.
6. Blanco, G. L., J. Agüera, J. Gil, and K. Kouraba. 2004. Experimental determination of factors giving rise to olive damage during harvesting with trunk shakers. AgEng 2004. Leuven, Belgium.
7. Brown, G. K., J. R. Frahm, L. J. Segerking, and B. F. Cargill. 1987. Bark strengths and shaker pads vs. cherry bark damage during harvesting. Trans. ASAE 30(5): 1266-1271.
8. Clijmans, L., H. Ramon, and J. De Baerdemaeker. 1998. Structural modification effects on the dynamics behavior of an agricultural tractor. Trans. ASAE 41(1): 5-10.
9. Ewins, D. J. 2000. Modal Testing: Theory, Practice, and Application. Baldock, U.K.: Research Studies Press.
10. Frahm, J. R., G. K. Brown, and L. J. Segerlind. 1988. Mechanical properties of trunk shaker pads. Trans. ASAE 31(6): 1674-1679.
11. Gil, J. A., G. L. Blanco, and J. Agüera. 2001. Optimization of the design and use of shaker machines for mechanical harvesting of the olive trees in Spain. ASAE Paper No. 011096. St. Joseph, Mich.: ASAE.
12. Horvath, E., and G. Sitkei. 2001. Energy consumption of selected tree shakers under different operational conditions. J. Agric. Eng. Res. 80(2): 191-199.
13. Horvath, E., and G. Sitkei. 2005. Damping properties of plum tree shaken at their trunks. Trans. ASAE 48(1): 19-25.
14. LMS. 1996. CADA-Pc. Ver 2.0. Leuven, Belgium: LMS.
15. MAPYA. 2003. Agricultural statistics. Madrid, Spain: Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación. Available at: www.mapya.es. Accessed 27 December 2005.
16. Ortiz-Cañavate, J., J. Gil Sierra, and F. Juste. 1980. Design and testing of a tree shaker. ASAE Paper No. 801045. St. Joseph, Mich.: ASAE.
17. Parloo, E., P. Guillaume, J. Anthonis, W. Heylen, and J. Swevers. 2003. Modelling of sprayer boom dynamics by means of maximum likelihood identification techniques: Part 1. A comparison of input-output and output-only modal testing. Biosystems Eng. 85(2): 163-171.
18. Richardson, M. H. 1986. Global frequency and damping estimates from frequency response measurements. In Proc. 4th IMAC Conference, 465-470. Bethel, Conn.: Society for Experimental Mechanics.
19. Whitney, J. D., D. B. Churchill, S. L. Hedden, and G. H. Smerage. 1988. Trunk shakers for citrus harvesting: Part I. Measured trunk shaker and tree trunk motion. Trans. ASAE 42(2): 93-106.