Development of furrow opener for liquid fertilizer application in soil

Furrow opener for liquid fertilizer delivery

Authors

  • PREM K SUNDARAM ICAR Research Complex for Eastern Region, Patna, Bihar, India
  • INDRA MANI Vice-Chancellor, Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth, Parbhani, Maharashtra, India
  • ROAF A PARRAY Div. of Agricultural Engg., ICAR Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, India
  • TAPAN KHURA ICAR Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, India
  • SATISH D LANDE Div. of Agricultural Engg., ICAR Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, India
  • ADARSH KUMAR Div. of Agricultural Engg., ICAR Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21921/jas.v12i01.15226

Keywords:

Furrow opener design, liquid fertilizer placement, soil backfill cover, draft requirement, hoe opener

Abstract

Designing a furrow opener for the simultaneous placement of seed and liquid fertilizer posed a challenge due to the toxic effects of liquid fertilizers like UAN on seeds. To address this, furrow openers were developed to place fertilizer at a deeper depth and seeds at a shallower depth, with horizontal spacing between the respective delivery tubes. Two types of furrow openers—hoe and shovel—were designed and tested in a soil bin to evaluate soil spread width, backfill cover, draft, and vertical separation between seed and fertilizer. Among the tested parameters, backfill cover and draft were key selection criteria. Results showed greater backfill cover with shovel-type openers (6.33 cm) compared to hoe-type (5.77 cm) at 11% soil moisture and a working depth of 9 cm. At 6% moisture content, backfill cover increased due to reduced cohesion between soil particles, with values of 7.63 cm and 7.93 cm for hoe and shovel types, respectively. Draft requirement was lower for shovel openers (132 N) than hoe types (148 N), attributed to their lower rake angle. Overall, the shovel-type opener exhibited better performance in terms of backfill and lower draft, indicating its suitability for efficient seed and liquid fertilizer application in varying soil conditions.

Author Biographies

PREM K SUNDARAM, ICAR Research Complex for Eastern Region, Patna, Bihar, India

Senior Scientist 

Division of Land and Water Management 

INDRA MANI, Vice-Chancellor, Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth, Parbhani, Maharashtra, India

Vice-Chancellor 

ROAF A PARRAY, Div. of Agricultural Engg., ICAR Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, India

Senior Scientist 

Division of Agricultural Engineering 

TAPAN KHURA, ICAR Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, India

Principal Scientist 

Div. of Agricultural Engineering 

References

Baker C J and Afzal C M. 1986. Dry fertilizer placement in conservation tillage: seed damage in direct drilling (no-tillage). Soil & Tillage Research 7:79-93.

Chaudhuri D. 2001.Performance evaluation of various types of furrow openers on seed drills: A Review. J. Agric. Engg. Res. 79(2): 125-137.

Choudhary M A, Yu G P and Baker C J.1985. Seed placement effects on seedling establishment in direct-drilled fields. Soil & Tillage Research 6:79-93.

Darmora D P and Pandey K P. 1995. Evaluation of performance of furrow openers of combined seed and fertilizer drills. Soil & Tillage Research 34(2): 127-139.

Hasimu A and Chen Y. 2014. Soil disturbance and draft force of selected seed openers. Soil & Tillage Research 140:48-54.

Kant K. 2008. Studies on design parameters of aqueous fertilizer placement with seed drill. PhD. Thesis. Division of Agricultural engineering, Indian Agricultural research Institute, New Delhi.

Kemper W D and Rosenau R C. 1984. Soil cohesion as affected by time and water content. Soil Science Society of America Journal 48(5): 1001-1006.

McKyes E. 1985.In: Soil Cutting and Tillage. Elsevier, New York.

Downloads

Published

2025-03-31

Most read articles by the same author(s)