To improve the efficiency of the drilling of round steel pipes used for the construction of greenhouses, we developed an automated drilling system that can be operated by one worker. The system enables us to (1) detect the weld seam of a steel pipe with an eddy current sensor, (2) set any drilling location on the pipe easily from a touch panel, and (3) avoid the need to remove burrs or rough edges on the drilling surface. We compared the work efficiency of the new system with that of conventional manual drilling. The new system reduced labor and time, irrespective of the number of drilling operations, and obviated the need for skill in setting the drill and identifying the weld seam by eye. Conventional manual operation requires two or more workers, but the new system requires only one. Since the system uses a pair of drill bits installed directly opposite each other, there is no need to remove burrs or rough edges.

View full abstract

Because demand for labor is at its peak during the sugarcane harvesting season, mechanical harvesting is beneficial on the small islands of far southwestern Japan. The efficiency and stability of farm management there can be improved by grouping small, scattered farms and the use of mechanical harvesting contractors. For efficient machinery operation, it is necessary to optimize the work plan. Agricultural work can be planned by recording machinery operations in the fields and analyzing the data. To do this, we mounted a digital tachograph system, as widely used in the transportation industry, on a small sugar cane harvester to record the work of the harvester. Using engine revolution data, it was possible to record the working conditions of the harvester precisely. Using GPS data, it was possible to measure the area harvested with an error of ≤8%. The harvest volume was estimated from images obtained with a digital camera. The working efficiency of this harvester over the course of a day proved to be low, at approximately 0.4, compared with typical values of 0.6–0.85 for common agricultural machinery; the field working efficiency was as low as 0.35. The likely explanation for the low efficiency is the use of a one-way harvest in back and forth motions.

View full abstract