Develop efficient millet separator-grader

DEVELOPMENT OF MILLET SEPARATOR-
GRADER FOR EFFECTIVE SEPARATION OF

UNHULLED GRAINS FROM DEHULLED SMALL
MILLET RICE GRAINS
SHRUTHI, P. A.
PALB 3315
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING

UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES
BENGALURU
2015
DEVELOPMENT OF MILLET SEPARATOR-
GRADER FOR EFFECTIVE SEPARATION OF
UNHULLED GRAINS FROM DEHULLED SMALL
MILLET RICE GRAINS
SHRUTHI, P. A.
PALB 3315
Thesis submitted to the

University of Agricultural Sciences, Bengaluru
In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree
MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY
(Agricultural Engineering)
in
PROCESSING AND FOOD ENGINEERING
BENGALURU AUGUST, 2015

Affectionately Dedicated to all the
Farmers and Orphan Children
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING
UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES
BENGALURU - 560065
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the thesis entitled 'Development of Millet Separator-Grader
for Effective Separation of Unhulled Grains from Dehulled Small Millet Rice Grains'
submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of Master of
Technology(Agricultural Engineering) in Processing and Food Engineering to the
University of Agricultural Sciences, Bengaluru, is a bonafide research work carried out by
Ms. Shruthi, P.A., ID NO. PALB-3315 under my guidance and supervision and that no part
of this thesis has been submitted for the award of any other degree, diploma, associateship,
fellowship or any other similar titles.
Bengaluru
August, 2015
Dr.v~~k~Chairperson
APPROVED BY
Chairperson: _ _
/11
/ ~-----L-_f_-
--><~'__'_
U)
Members: 1. gpq£
... . .
--(B-.ki~f-G...::..A-N-N-A-)-
~al7J~dc,
2. -=----==- _
(M. RAMACHANDRA)
3. _ _ ~
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The task of acknowledging the help that was offered to me through this study by
my teachers and friends is bigger than the study itself. I feel scanty of words to the
magnitude of their help. It gives me immense sense of gratification to place on records
my profound gratitude and sincere appreciation to each and every one of those who have
helped me in this endeavour.
At the very outset, my reverences towards “Almighty GOD” for his eternal love,
unceasing help, kindness and blessing which guarded me in completing the present task.
I would like to place on record my deep sense of reverence and gratitude to
chairman of my advisory committee Dr. V. Palanimuthu, Professor and Head,
Department of Agricultural Engineering, UAS, Bengaluru. I owe him a lot for his
valuable suggestions, guidance, intellectual discussion, unceasing support, untiring
patience, stimulating ideas, critical comments, punctuality, friendly atmosphere and a lot
more. In fact, it is my privilege fortune to have an opportunity to work under him and I
sincerely and proudly confess that it has been a grate privilege for me to have been one
of his students.
It is rather difficult to express in words my sincere and heartfelt gratitude to the
members of my Advisory Committee, Dr. B. Ranganna, Emeritus Scientist, UAS, GKVK,
Mr. M. Ramachandra, Retd. Professor, Department of Agricultural Engineering and Mr.
R. Chandru, Assistant Professor, PHT Scheme, UAS, GKVK, Bengaluru.
I gratefully acknowledge the co-operation and help extended by teachers of
Department of Agricultural Engineering and staff during the course of my post-
graduation study in the Department of Agricultural Engineering.
The love, affection and patience of my family have been instrumental for me.
Mere words cannot express my profound indebtedness to my beloved mother
Smt. E.R. Shobha Devi, my noble father Sri P. Aswath Narayana Setty and my sisters
Smt. Anusha Karthik and T.C. Meghana and my brother in law Sri P.S. Karthik for
filling my life with laughter and happiness beyond measure.
My special thanks to my beloved friends Muttanna, Karthik, Shrinivas
Deshpande, Hima John, Puneetha and Sarala and many others for their kind help and
guidance during the study.
I also acknowledge each and every chunk of help, guidance and suggestion from
all my fellow friends, teachers and well-wishers that contributed for the success of my
work.
… Omission of any names in this acknowledgement does not mean lack of
gratitude.
Place: Bengaluru
Date: August, 2015 (P.A. Shruthi)
DEVELOPMENT OF MILLET SEPARATOR-GRADER FOR
EFFECTIVE SEPARATION OF UNHULLED GRAINS FROM
DEHULLED SMALL MILLET RICE GRAINS
P.A. SHRUTHI
ABSTRACT
Physical and engineering properties like moisture content, size, weight of
thousand grains, bulk and true densities, porosity, specific gravity and frictional
properties like angle of repose and static coefficient of friction were determined for
unhulled and dehulled grains of four small millets namely, proso, kodo, foxtail and little
millets. Separation-cum-grading performance of three existing cleaning equipments
namely, destoner, air screen cleaner and specific gravity separator was evaluated to find
their suitability for the selected small millets. A Small millet separator-grader was
developed and tested for its separation-cum-grading performance for the above four small
millet rice grains. The effects of four screen set combinations (S1, S2, S3 and S4) and five
feed mixes (M1, M2, M3, M4 and M5) on cleaning efficiency, screen effectiveness,
cleaning index and performance index of the developed equipment was studied. The
cleaning efficiency was in the range of 97.05-98.20 per cent, screen effectiveness was
0.795-0.882, cleaning index was 0.817-0.895 and performance index was 0.77-0.867. For
tested small millet rice grains, the performance of separator-grader was optimum when
screen set combination S1 (Rd Φ2.0-Rd Φ1.5-Rd Φ1.0) and feed mix upto (90:10) were
used. The cost of separation-cum-grading was in the range of ` 47.20-61.37 per quintal
and the Cost : Benefit ratio was worked to be in the range of 1:1.62 – 1:2.11. The
developed prototype was found to be suitable for effective separation of unhulled millet
grains from dehulled small millet rice.
August, 2015
Dept. of Agricultural Engineering (V. PALANIMUTHU)
UAS, GKVK, Bengaluru Major Advisor
ಕಿರು ಧಾನ್ಯಗಳನ್ುು ಕಿರು ಧಾನ್ಯ ಅಕಿಿಗಳಿಂದ ಬ ೇರ್ಪಡಿಸಿ - ಶ ರೇಣಿಸುವ ಯಿಂತ್ರದ ಅಭಿವೃದ್ಧಿ
ಶ್ುರತಿ, ಪಿ. ಎ.
ರ್ರಬಿಂಧದ ಸಾರಾಿಂಶ್
ಭೌತಿಕ ಮತ್ುು ತಾಿಂತಿರಕ ಗುಣಗಳಾದ ತ ೇವಾಿಂಶ್, ಗಾತ್ರ, ಸಾವಿರ ಧಾನ್ಯಗಳ ತ್ೂಕ, ಬೃಹತ್
ಸಾಿಂದರತ , ನ ೈಜ ಸಾಿಂದರತ , ರಿಂಧರ, ನಿರ್ಧಪಷ್ಟ ಗುರುತ್ವ, ಘಷ್ಪಣ ಯ ಗುಣಲಕ್ಷಣಗಳಾದ ವಿಶಾರಿಂತಿ ಕ ೂೇನ್,
ಸಿಿರ ಗುಣಾOಕ ಘಷ್ಪಣ ಯನ್ುು ಆಯ್ಕಿ ಮಾಡಿದ ನಾಲುಿ ಕಿರು ಧಾನ್ಯಗಳಾದ ಹಾರಕ, ಬರಗು, ನ್ವಣ ಮತ್ುು
ಸಾವ ಹಾಗೂ ಅವುಗಳ ಅಕಿಿಗಳಗ ರ್ರೇಕ್ಷಿಸಲಾಯಿತ್ು. ಅಸಿುತ್ವದಲ್ಲಿರುವ ೦೩ ಯಿಂತ್ರಗಳಾದ ಡಿಸ ೂಟೇನ್ರ್,
ಏರ್ ಸಿಿರೇನ್ ಕಿಿೇನ್ರ್ ಮತ್ುು ಸ ೆಸಿಫಿಕ್ ಗಾರವಿಟಿ ಸರ್ರ ೇಟರ್ ಗಳನ್ುು ಕಿರು ಧಾನ್ಯಗಳನ್ುು ಕಿರು ಧಾನ್ಯ
ಅಕಿಿಗಳಿಂದ ಬ ೇರ್ಪಡಿಸಿ - ಶ ರೇಣಿಸುವ ಸೂಕುತ ಗ ರ್ರೇಕ್ಷಿಸಲಾಯಿತ್ು. ಕಿರು ಧಾನ್ಯಗಳನ್ುು ಕಿರು ಧಾನ್ಯ
ಅಕಿಿಗಳಿಂದ ಬ ೇರ್ಪಡಿಸಿ-ಶ ರೇಣಿಸುವ ಯಿಂತ್ರವನ್ುು ಅಭಿವೃದ್ಧಿರ್ಡಿಸಿ ಮತ್ುು ಅದರ ಕಾಯಪನಿವಪಹಣ ಯನ್ುು
ರ್ರೇಕ್ಷಿಸಲಾಯಿತ್ು. ವಿವಿಧ ಜರಡಿಯ ಗಣ ಸಿಂಯೇಜನ (ಎಸ್೧, ಎಸ್೨, ಎಸ್೩ ಮತ್ುು ಎಸ್೪) ಮತ್ುು
ಉಣಿಸುವ ಮಿಶ್ರಣಗಳನ್ುು (ಯಮ್೧, ಯಮ್೨, ಯಮ್೩, ಯಮ್೪ ಮತ್ುು ಯಮ್೫) ಅಭಿವೃದ್ಧಿರ್ಡಿಸಿದ
ಯಿಂತ್ರದ ಸವಚ್ಛಗ ೂಳಸುವ ದಕ್ಷತ , ಜರಡಿಯ ರ್ರಣಾಮಕಾರತ್ವ, ಶ್ುದ್ಧಿೇಕರಣ ಸೂಚ್ಯಿಂಕ ಮತ್ುು
ಕಾಯಪನಿವಪಹಣಾ ಸೂಚ್ಯಿಂಕ ರ್ರಣಾಮಗಳಗ ಮೌಲಯಮಾರ್ನ್ ಮಾಡಲಾಯಿತ್ು. ಸವಚ್ಛಗ ೂಳಸುವ ದಕ್ಷತ
೯೭.೦೫-೯೮.೨೦%, ಜರಡಿಯ ರ್ರಣಾಮಕಾರತ್ವ ೦.೭೯೫-೦.೮೮೨, ಶ್ುದ್ಧಿೇಕರಣ ಸೂಚ್ಯಿಂಕ ೦.೮೧೭-
೦.೯೯೫ ಹಾಗೂ ಕಾಯಪನಿವಪಹಣಾ ಸೂಚ್ಯಿಂಕ ೦.೭೭೫-೦.೮೬೭ ವಾಯಪಿುಯಲ್ಲಿರುತ್ುದ . ಅಭಿವೃದ್ಧಿರ್ಡಿಸಿದ
ಯಿಂತ್ರದಲ್ಲಿ ಎಸ್೧ (ಆರ್ ಡಿ Φ೨.೦ - ಆರ್ ಡಿ Φ೧.೫ - ಆರ್ ಡಿ Φ೧.೦) ಜರಡಿಯ ಗಣ ಸಿಂಯೇಜನ
ಉರ್ಯೇಗಿಸಿ ಮತ್ುು ೯೫:೧೦ ಉಣಿಸುವ ಮಿಶ್ರಣವರ ಗೂ ಬಳಸಿದಾಗ ಅತ್ುಯತ್ುಮವಾಗಿ ಬ ೇರ್ಪಡಿಸಿ -
ಶ ರೇಣಿಸುವ ಸಾಮರ್ಥಯಪ ಕಿಂಡು ಬಿಂದ್ಧದ . ಅಭಿವೃದ್ಧಿರ್ಡಿಸಿದ ಯಿಂತ್ರದ ಮೂಲಕ ಬ ೇರ್ಪಡಿಸಿ-ಶ ರೇಣಿಸಲು
ತ್ಗಲುವ ವ ಚ್ಚ ರ್ರತಿ ಕಿವಿಂಟಾಲ ೆ ರೂ.೪೭.೨೦-೬೧.೩೭ ಆಗಿರುತ್ುದ ಮತ್ುು ವ ಚ್ಚ : ಆದಾಯ ಅನ್ುಪಾತ್
೧.೦೦:೨.೧೧ - ೧.೦೦:೧.೬೨ ವಾಯಪಿುಯಲ್ಲಿರುತ್ುದ . ಅಭಿವೃದ್ಧಿರ್ಡಿಸಿದ ಯಿಂತ್ರವು ಉತ್ುಮವಾಗಿ ಕಿರು
ಧಾನ್ಯಗಳನ್ುು ಕಿರು ಧಾನ್ಯ ಅಕಿಿಗಳಿಂದ ಬ ೇರ್ಪಡಿಸಿ - ಶ ರೇಣಿಸುವ ಸಾಮರ್ಥಯಪ ಹ ೂಿಂದ್ಧದ .
DUÀ¸ïÖ, 2015
ಕೃಷಿ ಇಿಂಜಿನಿಯರಿಂಗ್ ವಿಭಾಗ (ವಿ. ರ್ಳನಿಮುತ್ುು)
ಜಿ. ಕ . ವಿ. ಕ ., ಕೃಷಿ ವಿಶ್ವವಿದಾಯನಿಲಯ, ಬ ಿಂಗಳೂರು ಮುಖ್ಯ ಸಲಹ ಗಾರರು
CONTENTS
CHAPTER TITLE PAGE No.
I INTRODUCTION 1-3
II REVIEW OF LITERATURE 4-12
III MATERIAL AND METHODS 13-19
IV EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS 20-44
V DISCUSSION 45-48
VI SUMMARY 49-50
VII REFERENCES 51-56
APPENDICES 57-60
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE PAGE
TITLE
No. No.
Physical and engineering properties of unhulled and dehulled small

4.1 21
millet grains
Effect of screen set combinations and feed mix on the cleaning

4.2 24
efficiency of Small Millet Separator-Grader for proso millet rice
Effect of screen set combinations and feed mix on the screen

4.3 25
effectiveness of Small Millet Separator-Grader for proso millet rice

4.4 26
index of Small Millet Separator-Grader for proso millet rice
Effect of screen set combinations and feed mix on the performance

4.5 27
index of Small Millet Separator-Grader for proso millet rice

4.6 29
efficiency of Small Millet Separator-Grader for kodo millet rice

4.7 30
effectiveness of Small Millet Separator-Grader for kodo millet rice

4.8 31
index of Small Millet Separator-Grader for kodo millet rice

4.9 32
index of Small Millet Separator-Grader for kodo millet rice

4.10 34
efficiency of Small Millet Separator-Grader for foxtail millet rice

4.11 effectiveness of Small Millet Separator-Grader for foxtail millet 35
rice

4.12 36
index of Small Millet Separator-Grader for foxtail millet rice

4.13 37
index of Small Millet Separator-Grader for foxtail millet rice
TABLE PAGE
TITLE
No. No.

4.14 39
efficiency of Small Millet Separator-Grader for little millet rice

4.15 40
effectiveness of Small Millet Separator-Grader for little millet rice

4.16 41
index of Small Millet Separator-Grader for little millet rice

4.17 42
index of Small Millet Separator-Grader for little millet rice
Screen set combinations for optimum separation of unhulled small

4.18 44
millets dehulled rice
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE BETWEEN
TITLE
No. PAGES
Cleaning efficiency of prototype Small millet separator-

5.1 grader for proso, kodo, foxtail and little millet rice grains 48-49
with screen set combination S1(Rd Φ2.0-Rd Φ1.5-Rd Φ1.0)
Screen effectiveness of prototype Small millet separator-

5.2 grader for proso, kodo, foxtail and little millet rice grains 48-49
with screen set combination S1(Rd Φ2.0-Rd Φ1.5-Rd Φ1.0)
Cleaning index of prototype Small millet separator-grader

5.3 for proso, kodo, foxtail and little millet rice grains with 48-49
screen set combination S1(Rd Φ2.0-Rd Φ1.5-Rd Φ1.0)
Cleaning index of prototype Small millet separator-grader

5.4 for proso, kodo, foxtail and little millet rice grains with 48-49
screen set combination S1(Rd Φ2.0-Rd Φ1.5-Rd Φ1.0)
LIST OF PLATES
PLATE BETWEEN
TITLE
No. PAGES
Small millets used for performance evaluation studies of

3.1 19-20
developed Small Millet Separator-Grader
Perforated Rectangle and Round opening screens used for

3.2 performance evaluation studies of Developed Small Millet 19-20
Separator-Grader
3.3 Developed Small Millet Separator-Grader 19-20
Different views of developed prototype Small millet

3.4 19-20
separator-grader
I INTRODUCTION
Millets are one of the oldest foods known to humans and are the first cereal grains
to be used for domestic purposes. Millets are small-seeded grasses that are hardy and
grow well in dry zones as rain-fed crops, under marginal conditions of soil fertility and
moisture. They are also unique due to their short growing season. They can develop from
planted seeds to mature, ready to harvest plants in as little as 65 days and are important in
heavily populated areas. When properly stored, whole millets will keep for two or more
years (Stanly and Shanmugan, 2013).
India is the largest producer of many kinds of small millets, which are often
referred to as coarse cereals. Pearl millet (Pennisetum americanum), ragi or finger millet
(Eleusine coracana), foxtail millet (Setaria italica), little millet (Panicum miliare), kodo
millet (Paspalum scrobiculatum), proso millet (Panicum miliaceum) and barnyard millet
(Echinochloa frumentacea) are the important millets cultivated largely in the Asian and
African countries. Though millets occupy relatively a lower position among food crops in
Indian agriculture, they are quite important from the point of food security at regional and
farm level. The total small millets production for the year 2011-12 is 0.40 Million tonnes,
covering an area of 0.80 Million hectares with a productivity of 565 kg/ha. (Ministry of
Agriculture, Government of India). Their cultivation extending from sea level in coastal
Andhra Pradesh up to an altitude of 8000 feet above sea level in hills of Uttaranchal and
North-Eastern states.
Small millet grains are round to oval shaped. The seed coat and husk of foxtail,
little and proso millet are generally of single entity with glossy appearance whereas kodo
and barnyard millet contain multiple layered seed coat. Normally the seed coat is brown
in colour in kodo millet, yellowish in foxtail millet and greenish in other millets. Typical
grain texture and hard seed coat of millets increase their keeping quality but makes them
difficult to process. The husk is non-edible and usually hard to digest similar to the husk
in paddy, whereas the bran is edible. To prepare edible items out of millets, the husk is
separated by milling and along with that generally, the bran is also separated similar to
milled rice. Hulling does not affect the nutrient value as the germ stays intact throughout
this process. Separation of unhulled raw millets from dehulled millet rice grains is a
challenge for the processors since both materials are very small and exhibit almost
similar surface properties and differ a very little in terms of densities.
Most of the small millets produced in India are used as staple food and less in
ready-to-use and convenient food products due to non-availability of proper milling
technology. The major constraints for widespread utilization of millets are its coarse
fibrous seed coat, coloured pigments, astringent flavour and poor keeping quality of the
processed products (Desikachar, 1975). During milling, the milling efficiency and
shelling index are the important parameters that influence the head yield and further
processing. The milling and polishing of millet grains is being tried for a long period with
other processing equipments or machines which are specifically not designed for millets.
Pearling, debranning and chemical treatments of millets overcome some of these
constraints, improve nutritional quality and consumer acceptability (Akingbala, 1991).
Development of millet separator-grader for effective separation of unhulled grains from dehulled small millet rice grains 1
Cleaning and grading is one of the most important unit operations in food
processing, performed to remove foreign and undesirable materials from the bulk and to
separate the grains into various fractions to provide clean and uniform raw material to the
food processing industry. Grain cleaning reduces problems that occur during storage and
handling. Clean grains save storage space and increase marketability. Impurities and
contaminants are separated from sound grains during cleaning process. Impurities found
in grain include unhusked grains, chaff, foreign material, broken kernel, shrunken kernel/
splits and fine or powdered material.
Separation and cleaning are conventionally achieved as a result of differences in

physical and engineering properties of grains such as grain surface area, volume,
sphericity, true density, bulk density, moisture content, porosity, co-efficient of friction
and angle of repose. Many types of grain cleaning machines are available that exploit the
above physical properties of grains, either singly or in some combination. There are air-
screen cleaners, specific gravity separators, pneumatic separators, velvet rolls, spirals,
indent cylinders, indent disks, magnetic separators, electrostatic separators, vibrator
separators and others.
Cleaning of small millet grains is conventionally done using screen or pneumatic

separator. Screen separation is mostly used to separate product on the basis of the
differences in their sizes and multi-screen separators are used for classifying grains into
size grades. The basic purpose of any screen is to separate the feed consisting of a
mixture of grains into fractions such as underflow the particles which pass through the
screen and overflow the materials which are retained over the screen.
A screen is a surface containing a number of equally sized openings. Mesh is

defined as open spaces in a screen. The smallest mesh screen means largest clear
opening. Screen motions include rotary, oscillating and the reciprocating types. Screens
are constructed by perforated sheet metal or woven wire mesh. The available openings in
perforated metal sheets are round, oblong, rectangle and triangular. The openings in wire
mesh are square and rectangular. The size and shape and their combinations of the
screens available in the market are identified by some trade numbers.
The two basic screens for cleaning and grading small millet grains are round-hole
top screen and a slotted bottom screen. The round-hole top screen is selected so as to
drop the round seed through the smallest hole possible and retain anything larger. The
seed drops through the top screen onto the slotted bottom screen, which takes advantage
of seed shape and retains the round, good seed while dropping broken crop seed and
many weed seed. In selecting screens, another point to be considered is the percentage of
open area. A good screen will have openings as close together as possible without
impairing the structural strength of the material.
A combination of sieves with different sizes and shapes of holes with the correct
air flow is developed for each individual crop and adjustments be made even during
cleaning of individual grain types if the characteristics of grain change. Small differences
in hole sizes can have greater impact on separation and grading.
2 Shruthi, P. A., M.Tech. (Agril. Engg.) 2015

The air-screen cleaner is the basic machine in grain cleaning. It makes seed
separations mainly on the basis of three physical properties namely size, shape and
density. There are many makes, sizes, and models of air-screen cleaners ranging from the
small, one-fan, single-screen machine to the large, multiple-fan, six or eight screens
machine with several air columns. Screens are manufactured with many sizes and shapes
of openings. There are more than 200 screen types available and with a four-screen
machine, more than thirty thousand screen combinations are possible.
The screens in an air-screen cleaner are suspended by hangers and this unit is
oscillated by an eccentric unit which imparts a horizontal oscillating motion and a small
vertical motion. These two motions cause the small millet grains to travel downward
through the screen and the grains are thoroughly stirred during the passage.
Cleaning of small millet grains is a subject which is not fully documented as like
other unit operations, mainly because there is less scope for laboratory-scale experimental
work. While processing small millets in the available commercial millet dehulling
machines, the product output generally is an admixture of dehulled millet rice and
unhulled raw millets. Depending on the effectiveness of the machine for dehulling, it is
normally observed that around 10-15 per cent of the raw millets come out without hulling
which are difficult to separate out. There is no satisfactory technology or cleaning /
separating machinery to separate these unhulled small millets from the milled millet rice
grains at present and there is hardly any research effort in this direction to solve this
crucial technological gap. The present study is to address this critical problem of small
millet processing and come out with appropriate Separator-Grader.
Hence, the present study entitled “Development of Millet Separator-Grader for

Effective Separation of Unhulled Grains from Dehulled Small Millet Rice Grains” was
undertaken with the following specific objectives:
1. Study of physical and engineering properties of unhulled and dehulled small

millet grains.
2. Identification, selection and testing of different grain separators for separating
unhulled small millets from hulled millet rice grains.
3. Development of a prototype millet separator-grader suitable for separation of
unhulled whole millets from dehulled millet rice grains.
4. Optimization of operating parameters of the prototype.
5. To workout the cost economics of separation using millet separator-grader.
II REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Considering the objectives of this study, relevant research work related to the
present study has been reviewed and the salient features are summarised in this chapter
under the following headings:
2.1 Physical and engineering properties of food grains

2.2 Screens and screen performance
2.3 Separating and grading machines
2.4 Performance evaluation of different screens
2.1 Physical and engineering properties of food grains

Mwithiga and Sifuna (2005) studied the physical properties of three sorghum
varieties namely, kari-mtama, serena and seredo by reconditioning the grain moisture
content to 13.64-21.95 per cent db. Geometric mean diameter, 1000 grain mass and angle
of repose increased linearly with moisture content. True density, bulk density and
hardness decreased linearly with increase in moisture content while sphericity remained
unchanged. Porosity of kari-mtama decreased slightly but linearly with increase in
moisture content, while for the other two varieties, it increased linearly with the increase
in moisture content.
Ndrika et al. (2006) determined the physical properties of Ex-Borno and Zango
varieties of pearl millet in the moisture content ranging from 7.5-21.2 per cent wb.
Physical properties such as kernel volume, length, width, thickness, geometric mean
diameter, surface area, sphericity, roundness, angle of repose, 1000 kernel weight, bulk
density and porosity were statistically significant at 5 per cent level of significance. The
means of surface area, specific gravity and grain density were not statistically significant
at 5 per cent level of significance. Correlation coefficient between 76 and 95 per cent
were obtained with the relationship between moisture content and grain length, width,
geometric mean diameter and grain volume for both varieties of millet.
Subramanian and Viswanathan (2007) studied the engineering properties for the
grains and flours of barnyard millet, finger millet, foxtail millet, kodo millet, little millet
and proso millet in the moisture content range of 8.7-28.2 per cent db for the grains and
11.1-42.8 per cent db for the flours. Bulk density decreased linearly for the millet grains
and increased logarithmically for millet flours with the increase in moisture content. The
coefficient of static friction increased in the range, 0.26-0.62 for the grains and 0.62-1.13
for the flours with the increase in moisture content. The coefficient of internal friction
ranged between 0.59-1.25 and 0.73-1.16 for the millet grains and flours, respectively in
the moisture content range of 11.11-42.86 per cent db.
Coskuner and Karababa (2007) studied the physical properties of coriander seeds
as a function of seed moisture content in the range of 7.10-18.94 per cent db. Seed length
and bulk density decreased linearly, while width, thickness, arithmetic and geometric
mean diameter, 1000 seed weight and angle of repose increased linearly with increase in
moisture content. Sphericity, seed surface area, seed volume, true density, porosity, static
coefficient friction increased non-linearly with increase in moisture content.
Shirsat et al. (2008) studied the physical and mechanical properties of local
varieties of kodo millet in the moisture content in the range of 13.47-50.60 per cent db. It
was found that 1000 grain mass, sphericity, equivalent diameter increased with increase
in moisture content. Bulk density decreased from 760-640 kg/m3 while true density
increased from 1200-1240 kg/m3. The angle of repose increased linearly with increase in
moisture content. The result indicated that the moisture content of the grains significantly
affects some of the physical and engineering properties of kodo millet.
Balasubramanian and Viswanathan (2010) determined the physical properties of

raw minor millets namely, foxtail, little, kodo, common, barnyard and finger millets in
the simulated moisture content range of 11.1-25 per cent db, since harvesting,
transportation, storage and dehulling operations of minor millets are performed in this
moisture range. Physical properties including 1000 kernel weight, bulk density, true
density, porosity, angle of repose, coefficient of static friction, coefficient of internal
friction and grain hardness were determined.
Ojediran et al. (2010) determined the physical properties of Ex-Borno and

SOSOT-88 varieties of pearl millet by reconditioning the seeds to moisture content
ranging from 10-20 per cent wb. The reconditioned grains were then evaluated for
dimensions, sphericity, bulk density, solid density, porosity, 1000 seed mass, angle of
repose and static coefficient of friction on five structural surfaces. The physical properties
of millet seeds were related to moisture content by polynomial equations. Regression
equations were established expressing the relationship existing between the above
properties and seed moisture.
Singh et al. (2010) studied the physical properties of barnyard millet grain and
kernel. It was found that geometric mean diameter, sphericity, grain surface area, 1000
grain mass, true density (toluene displacement method and proximate composition
method), terminal velocity, dynamic angle of repose, coefficient of internal friction,
coefficient of static friction, specific deformation and rupture energy of the grain were
found to increase with the moisture content from 0.065-0.265 kg/kg dry matter. True
density (proximate composition method), bulk density, interstices and rupture force of
grain were found to decrease with increase in moisture content. Similar trend was
observed for barnyard kernel also.
Vikash et al. (2013) studied the engineering properties of different grades of

makhana using standard techniques at moisture contents ranging from 20-60 per cent db.
Increase in moisture content was found to increase the linear dimensions, 100 seed mass,
bulk density, true density, angle of repose while porosity decreased with increase in
moisture content. Coefficient of friction was found to increase as moisture content
increased from 0.298-0.414, 0.420-0.517 and 0.524-0.639, respectively on glass, wooden
and mild sheet structural surfaces.

2.2 Screens and screen performance
Bartenev (1976) reported that sieves of 3.5 to 10 mm in diameter round holes or
oblong holes with 2.25 to 5.0 mm wide were satisfactorily used for cleaning and grading
the seeds of 11 cultivars of sunflower grown in USSR. The optimum cleaning efficiency
was obtained at a frequency of 350-450 oscillations per minute.
Ermo'ler (1981) reported that corrugated sieves were 60 percent more efficient
than the flat sieves at aperture diameter of 4.5-6.5 mm. As the diameter of aperture was
increased, the difference in the efficiency between flat and corrugated sieves tended to
diminish.
Harrison and Blecha (1983) indicated that cleaning and sorting of particles was
affected by the size of the particles, size of the screen aperture, relative particle to screen
velocity and mean particle velocity. The particle velocity was in turn the function of
screen slope and friction between the particle and the screen.
Sahay (1983) observed that the cleaning efficiency decreased with an increase in
the feed rate. Initial impurity level in the feed had little effect on the efficiency but the
screen effectiveness and performance index increased with an increase in initial
impurities in both wheat and bengal gram.
Bishat and Sinha (1985) reported that seed purity was maximum when air screen
cleaner was operated at 7-10 q/h with air velocities of 15-16 m/s and 5-6 m/s at feed
section and lifter screen section, respectively.
Tan and Harrison (1986) observed that screen oscillation with crank pitman drive
mechanism was better for screening particulates than quick return drive mechanism
according to the index of the screening efficiency.
Javaregowda and Bhole (1987) found that by decreasing grader screen size for
ragi and bajra, considerable quantity of viable seeds which were rejected as undersized
could be saved.
Ahmed (1988) mentioned that the slope of the separating sieve was a controlling
factor of the effectiveness of separation. This effectiveness improved significantly as the
sieve was also a controlling factor in determining the maximum possible feed rates to the
winnowing machine. As the sieve slope increased, the maximum possible feed rates,
provided the other factors are kept the same, was greatly reduced. It was also found that
the maximum values of efficiency of separation are quite different depending on the
number of oscillations per minute used.
Ahmed et al. (1993) developed a winnowing machine and designed in such a way
to change the parameters affecting the separation effectiveness such as the sieve
oscillation, amplitude, sieve angle and feed rate for using a threshed wheat crop.
Separation effectiveness of 97 per cent was obtained at sieve oscillations of 500
cycle/min, sieve angle of 2º and feed rate of 30 kg/h.cm at grain/straw ratio of 1:3.
Basavegowda and Gowda (1994) conducted performance evaluation studies on air
screen seed cleaner (Petkus R-100) and indicated the rated input capacity of 4.2 q/h for
sunflower seeds and screen perforations could be changed from 3.25 to 3.00 mm for
variety EC- 68415 and 3.00 to 2.80 mm for variety Morden without significant loss in
seed quality in terms of germination, vigour and field emergence with an increase in seed
recovery of 15.3 and 5.8 percent respectively.
Webb et al. (2002) conducted a two-dimensional numerical study of the

separation process of crop seeds by screening, using the Discrete Element Method
(DEM) modelling technique. Computational experiments were conducted for the
separation of soybeans and mustard seeds using a vibrating screen. The screening rate
and the required screen length at different feeding rates were discussed in relation to the
discrete particle motion on the screen. The study demonstrated the crucial effect of
particle bed depth on screening efficiency. For a screening system involving granular
materials, the critical feeding rate for the most effective screening operation could be
determined by DEM simulation.
Neale et al. (2003) tested in the laboratory and field the performance of three
types of separator (axial flow, straw walker and multi-cylinder) which were designed to
separate grain from material other than grain (MOG). MOG input to each separator close
to 4 t/h and grain input of 1-2.7 t/h gave separation efficiencies of 95 per cent with 3.1 to
4.2 m2 of straw walker area, 1.7 m2 of multi-cylinder grating and 1.0 m2 of grating in the
axial flow rotary separator.
Shaker and Rahimi (2007) studied the performance of two types of paddy
separator (compartment type and tray type) on three prevalent paddy varieties
(Kamfiruzi, Amol-3 and Nemat). Parameters such as percentage of paddy, brown rice and
rice breakage were measured. Capacity and power requirement of paddy separators were
measured and compared. Tray type separator had more percentage of paddy 76.03 per
cent and brown rice 99.89 per cent compared to compartment type paddy separator with
28.32 per cent and 99.5 per cent of paddy percentage and brown rice, respectively and
rice breakage in tray type separator (18.34 %) was significantly less than that of
compartment type (21.75 %). The capacity of tray type paddy separator was also one and
half time as high as the capacity of compartment type and the power requirement for
compartment type was five times as high as the power requirement of tray type.
Ayman and Amer (2009) developed simple empirical equations to predict

flaxseed properties. Physical, aerodynamic and solid flow properties were evaluated as a
function of change in moisture content from 8.60-23.90 per cent db. Pneumatic
separation equipment was developed and was tested under different combinations of air
stream velocity, feed rate and sample moisture content. The performance of the
equipment was determined using separation efficiency and percentage of seed losses. Air
stream velocity of 2-6 m/s combined with 8.5 kg/h feed rate and 8.6 per cent moisture
content was considered the most favourable combination values.

Simonyan and Dunmade (2010) evaluated two threshing cylinders on sorghum in
a conventional thresher. Threshing speed ranged between 3.6 and 6.4 m/s; fan speed 2.1
and 4.6 m/s and the sieve oscillation speed ranged between 1.47 and 2.59 m/s for cylinder
I and II, respectively. Feed rate ranged between 491 and 720 kg/h for the two cylinders.
Performance test results showed that threshing efficiency averaged 99.9 per cent for each
of the two cylinders. In addition, cleaning efficiency ranged between 94.35 and 96.17 per
cent and 98.06 and 99.8 per cent while cleaning loss ranged between 9.73 and 27.7 per
cent and 6.5 and 9.91 per cent for cylinder I and II, respectively.
Sorica et al. (2011) determined the qualitative parameters for the working process
of indented cylinder separators, in terms of a mathematical model so that they can be
expressed as functions of process parameters for these machines. Tit’s model was used
for the working process of an indented cylinder separator. Formulae and algorithms were
formulated for determining the two important qualitative parameters such as
technological effect and the content of impurities at the machine exit. The formulae were
verified experimentally on an indented cylinder separator using wheat with known
qualitative indices. The results showed the percentage of good grain lost in impurities and
the optimization of the working process of indented cylinder separator using the
qualitative parameters.
Grigg and Siebenmorgen (2013) studied the impact of thickness grading on

milling yields of long- grain rice using a dockage tester (Model XT4) with single
screening (2 × 12 mm slot) conditioned to approximately 12.5 per cent (wb) moisture
content. It was found that 67- 90 per cent thick kernels were obtained resulting in high
head rice yields.
Yogeesha et al. (2013) studied the efficiency of specific gravity separator in

removing partially filled seeds of okra. Bulk seed, was first subjected to an air screen
cleaner with three screens. The good seed fraction obtained was subjected to specific
gravity separation. Three fractions were obtained namely, heavy, medium and light and
they were assessed for quality along with ungraded seed. Test weight, germination
percentage, first count, seedling vigour indices I and II and field emergence were
significantly higher in the heavy seed fraction than in the ungraded seed.
2.3 Separating and grading machines

Igbeka (1984) designed and constructed a machine to sieve rice and beans. This
machine had sieve angle of 4-5º with specific angular velocity of 300-350 rpm. The
sieving efficiency was found to be 20-61 per cent for different moisture contents and
varieties.
Hurburgh Jr. et al. (1996) studied aspiration cleaning of soyabean samples

containing 0.5-4.0 per cent foreign material and 3-22 per cent splits at air velocity of 19
m/s and 10 m/s. Both airflow rates removed 80 per cent of the total non-soybean material
and removed similar amounts of splits. The high airflow rate removed 1.1 per cent of
whole soybeans compared to 0.4 per cent at low airflow rate. At either airflow rate, the
aspirator removed less saleable material and more non-grain material.
Amin (2003) studied some engineering parameters affecting cleaning and
separating efficiency such as type of motions (vibrating or rotary speeds), cells shape
(rectangular, square and circle), position of rectangular cell, sieves inclination and sieving
time were considered for vibratory and rotary machines. It was found that efficiency
increased by increasing sieving time, oscillating and rotary speed.
Awady et al. (2003) developed and tested a separating and cleaning machine for
winnowing rice crop. The cleaning machine consisted of frame, grain hopper, oscillating
dual screen assembly, a centrifugal blower and electric motor. The upper screen separated
the impurities that are bigger than the grain and the lower screen separated those that are
smaller and dust.
Tabatabaeefar et al. (2003) developed a chickpea sieving and grading machine

and determined physical properties, terminal velocity, and coefficient of friction of five
different varieties of Iranian chickpea: Jam, Philip, Bivanij, ILC-482 and ILC-12-60-31
prior to developing the machine. The cleaning, grading and overall efficiency of the
machine were evaluated with 2 kg of hand-cleaned peas (debris-free) mixed with 15 g
chaff and stem and 100 g of clods and stones. The cleaning efficiency of the whole
chickpea was 93 per cent and the debris was 91 per cent with overall machine efficiency
of 84 per cent.
El-Sahrigi et al. (2004) designed and constructed a separating and cleaning unit
for various types of medicinal and aromatic seeds and their associated foreign matter by
making simple adjustments according to types of seeds and its physical properties and
associated impurities. The maximum seed cleanliness was 90.01 per cent and separation
effectiveness was 89.75 per cent at 10.50 Hz, feed rate of 300 kg/h with a slope of 13º
and air velocity of 3.2 m/s.
Paliwal et al. (2004) designed, fabricated and evaluated a lab scale grain cleaning
system for its feasibility to be integrated with a machine vision system. Algorithms were
written to quantify the amount of impurity present in a grain sample only on the basis of
machine-vision extracted features without physically weighing the samples. This
machine-vision-based performance was compared with the physical weighing technique
and the results were statistically similar.
Simonyan et al. (2006) developed a prediction equation describing the cleaning

process in a stationary sorghum thresher using a mathematical model based on physical-
aerodynamic properties of sorghum and machine characteristics. Dimensional analysis
was used to obtain a functional relationship between the cleaning efficiency and
independent variables such as grain moisture content, straw moisture content, grain bulk
density, straw bulk density, feed rate, sieve oscillation frequency, threshing cylinder
speed, diameter of sieve hole, air velocity and particle density. The developed cleaning
efficiency model was verified by comparing the predicted cleaning efficiency with
measured experimental data from the sorghum thresher testing rig. The cleaning
efficiency model showed a good agreement between the predicted and experimental
result at 5 per cent level of significance.

Simonyan and Yilzep (2008) developed a stationary grain thresher and the grain
distribution on the cleaning unit was fractionated by sieve and horizontal air stream along
the sieve length. The influence of feed rate, air speed and sieve oscillation frequency on
cleaning efficiency of sorghum was explored. Grain separation along the sieve can be
divided into three sections: increasing, peak and decreasing sections. Results showed that
cleaning efficiency decreased with increasing sieve oscillation frequency and feed rate.
Cleaning loss increased with increasing sieve oscillation frequency, feed rate and air
speed.
Fouda (2009) investigated the performance of paddy and rice separator

theoretically and experimentally as a function of change in separator sieve angle, paddy
moisture content and feeding ratios. The separator performance was evaluated in terms of
separator productivity, crack percentage, separator efficiency and energy requirements.
The theoretical analyses revealed that the optimum sieve speed of 0.5 m/s (200 rpm)
prevented riding of material on the sieve surface. The experimental results revealed that
the separator performance was optimum when the sieve angle was 15º, paddy moisture
content was 14 per cent and the feeding ratio was 0.80.
Akinoso et al. (2010) developed an air screen cleaner for beniseed with a capacity
of 200 kg/h. The cleaner consisted of two set of vibratory screens (top and bottom) with
2.0 and 1.2 mm diameter, respectively. A centrifugal fan with air speed of 2.5 m/s was
incorporated. Preliminary testing of the machine with three varieties of beniseed showed
that mean efficiency of separating good product from Yandev-55, E8 and Goza-25 were
1.76 ± 0.54, 1.89 ± 0.85 and 1.6 ± 0.74 per cent, respectively. And efficiency of
separating bad products from Yandev-55, E8 and Goza-25 were 1.47 ± 0.41, 1.61 ± 0.64
and 1.23 ± 0.47 per cent, respectively. Total efficiency of the machine was 98.2 ± 0.98,
98.7 ± 1.24 and 98.5 ± 1.09 per cent for Yandev-55, E8 and Goza-25 varieties of
beniseed, respectively.
Salwa et al. (2010) developed a cleaning machine for fennel seeds. The slope of
the sieve unit, air velocity, crank speed and stroke length were adjustable. Seeds were
graded by the machine into three categories, collected at three separate outlets. The
maximum cleaning efficiency obtained for grade one, two and three were 99.15 per cent,
98.74 per cent and 83.65 per cent, respectively with crank speed - 250 rpm, amplitude-20
mm, sieve slope-8.5º and air velocity- 2.7 m/s. The maximum effectiveness of the unit
was 78.8 per cent.
Olukunle and Ademosun (2011) studied the grain cleaning system of a Combine
Harvester by conducting performance evaluation using two cultivars of cowpea (Ife
Brown and IT 716). The machine was operated between a forward speed of 3 and 6 km/h,
thus varying the material feed rate entering the cleaning system from 70 to 110 g/s. The
evaluation was carried out at moisture contents of 17.0, 18.0 and 20.6 per cent wb. The
cleaning system performed efficiently with separation loss of below 3.0 per cent for all
test conditions. Walker losses were between 0.2 and 2.2 per cent in the two varieties for
all test conditions. The maximum and minimum separation losses were 2.4 and 0.2 per
cent at grain moisture content of 17.0 per cent. Minimum values of grain loss occurred at
a feed rate of 70 g/s in the two varieties and at all test conditions.
Marian et al. (2012) analysed the separation process of broken lupine seeds in an
air stream using a pneumatic separator chiefly involving theoretical considerations of
movement and behaviour of mixture particles in a pneumatic canal. The essential factors
affecting the course of separation process were identified and a theoretical correlation
between these factors and separation efficiency were determined.
Muhammad et al. (2013) developed a device for cleaning threshed seeds. The
performance of the prototype was evaluated for sorghum, soybean and millet in terms of
percentage cleaning efficiency and grain loss at various levels of feed rates and fan
speeds. The best performance obtained was: cleaning efficiencies of 95, 98 and 91 per
cent and percentage grain losses of 0.63, 0.81 and 0.75 per cent respectively for sorghum
soybean and millet. The optimum values of feed rates were 4, 2.5 and 3.5 kg/s and the fan
speeds were 415, 505 and 582 rpm for the respective crops.
Nandini et al. (2013) developed an image processing technology and neural

network for grading and quality testing off food grains based on appearance features such
as shape and colour. More than 160 images were used to test the system and was found
80-90 per cent accurate for paddy rice.
Prem Kumar et al. (2014) designed a pedal operated makhana grader. The seeds
were graded by the machine, into four categories obtained at four separate outlets. The
maximum seeds graded for grade one, two, three and four were 99.15, 98.74, 95.68 and
83.65 per cent respectively, obtained at crank speed of 45 rpm and sieve angle of 15º. The
capacity of the grader was about 700-750 kg/hour.
Okunola et al. (2015) developed a portable cereal cleaning machine consisting of

a rotary fan and reciprocating sieve driven by an eccentric shaft. Two sieves of 8 mm
diameter 3 mm × 2 mm oblong apertures were used for the upper and lower sieve
respectively. The angle of tilt of the sieve was varied between 3 and 8º at fan speed of
240 rpm. An optimum separation efficiency of 71 per cent at 3º tilt angle was found for
paddy rice. Results indicated that paddy rice could be effectively separated from light
materials and heavy materials like stones due to difference in geometric and aerodynamic
properties.
2.4 Performance evaluation of different screens

Dehulled rice invariably contains unhulled grains along with the product-dehulled
rice. These undesirable unhulled grains are to be separated from the desired product.
Therefore, separating and grading plays an important role in the food processing industry.
McCabe and Smith (1976) derived an empirical equation to determine the screen
effectiveness which is a measure of success of a screen in closely separating materials A
and B from a binary mixture. The overall screen effectiveness (SE) of screening of A and
B materials is given by

XD(XF−XB)(XD−XF)(1−XB)
SE = ……………… (2.1)
XF (XD−XB)2 (1−XF)
where, XF = Mass fractions of desired material A in feed

XB = Mass fractions of overflow (reject) material in A
XD = Mass fractions of underflow (cleaned) material in A
1-XF = Mass fractions of material B in the feed
1-XB = Mass fractions of material B in the overflow
A Test Code for air screen seed cleaners (Anon., 1980) was formulated in order to
assess the performance of various seed cleaners in terms of cleaning efficiency (CE) and
rated capacity. The CE is defined as the percentage of healthy and clean seed present in
the total seed obtained from the main seed outlet. The rated input capacity of the cleaner
is the feed rate in q/h at maximum cleaning efficiency for continuous operation. The
output of the cleaner at its maximum cleaning efficiency is the rated capacity of the seed
cleaner. Screen effectiveness is calculated using the formula (Anon., 1980).
XC(XF−XR)(XC−XF)(1−XR)
Screen Effectiveness (SE) = ….…..…….. (2.2)
XF (XC−XR)2 (1−XF)
where, XF = Mass fraction of good seed in feed
XC = Mass faction of good seed in cleaned seed outlet
XR = Mass fraction of good seed in reject
(1−XC)
Cleaning Index = 1- …………… (2.3)
(1−XF)
where, 1-XC = Fractions of impurities present in clean seeds
1-XF = Fractions of impurities present in the feed
Javaregowda and Bhole (1987) reported that the cleaning efficiency of the seed
cleaner was synonymous with the fraction of good seed (XC) present in the cleaned seed
mass at the clean seed outlet expressed in percentage. In other words, it was purity of the
cleaned seed mass expressed in percentage.
Cleaning Efficiency (CE), % = XC × 100 ……………. (2.4)
So, the overall performance index of a cleaner can be expressed as

Performance Index (PI) = XC × 100 ……………. (2.5)
III MATERIAL AND METHODS
The present study was conducted to develop a small millet separator-grader with
varying screen set combinations and feed mix for proso, kodo, foxtail and little millet rice
and to determine the optimum operating parameters. This chapter deals with the details of
the material used and methods employed in development of Small millet separator-grader
for effective separation of unhulled small millet grains from dehulled small millet rice.
3.1 Theoretical considerations

The physical properties of small millets are essential for design of equipment for
handling, storing and processing. Knowledge of engineering properties of agricultural
materials are important in the design of machines, structures, processes and controls in
analysing and determining the efficiency of a machine or an operation in developing new
consumer products and in evaluating and retaining the quality of the final product.
Any machine in grain processing system which removes impurities including

unhulled grains from the grain mass is termed as grain separator. It may also separate
clean grains into various fractions under recognized classification. The cleaning
efficiency (CE) represents the percentage of healthy and clean grain obtained from the
main grain outlet of a grain cleaner. Under ideal performance of a grain Separator-
Grader, all the dehulled rice and unhulled grains should separate out and both should be
free from each other. In practice, it never happens during grain cleaning operation.
A typical grain separator-grader normally consists of two sieves, one for scalping
and another for grading and a blower to blow off chaff and lighter materials. Usually
there are few outlets, one for clean seed and two or three for oversized, undersized and
brokens. The efficiency of any grain separator-grader is inversely proportional to feed
rate. The equation for screen effectiveness of a two screen cleaner for separation of two
dissimilar materials is given by (BIS, 2000)
XC(XF−XR)(XC−XF)(1−XR)
Screen Effectiveness (SE) = ……………….(3.1)
XF (XC−XR)2 (1−XF)
Where, XF = Mass fraction of good seed in feed
XC = Mass faction of good seed in cleaned seed outlet
XR = Mass fraction of good seed in reject
At ideal situation, when XC=1 and XR=0, then SE=1
The cleaning index (CI) is also termed as the efficiency of separation. It is the
ratio of the weight fraction of impurities removed from the clean grain lot to the fraction
of impurities originally present in the feed. This is given by a simple input-output
relationship:
(1−XC)
Cleaning Index (CI) = 1- ………………………... (3.2)
(1−XF)
CI = 1, when XC=1 and CI = 0, when XC=XF
The overall performance of the machine could be expressed taking into
consideration of cleaning efficiency (CE) which is equivalent to XC and screen
effectiveness (SE) in terms of performance index. Then the performance index of the
machine could be written as
Performance Index (PI) = CE×SE …………….(3.3)
Since CE=XC, then the above equation becomes
PI= XC×SE
3.2 Study of Physical and Engineering Properties

The small millets viz., little, foxtail, kodo and proso millets were procured in bulk
from All India Coordinated Small Millets Improvement Project, University of
Agricultural Sciences, Bengaluru. The following physical and engineering properties
were studied: size, bulk density, true density, porosity, specific gravity, weight of
thousand grain, moisture content, co-efficient of friction on different surfaces and angle
of repose of unhulled and dehulled small millet grains of little, foxtail, kodo and proso
millet.
3.2.1 Determination of moisture content

The moisture content of unhulled and dehulled small millet grains was determined
by hot air oven method (Hall, 1957). Three grain samples weighing 10 g each were taken
in non-corrosive metal dishes and weighed. The samples were placed in hot air oven
maintained at 105 ºC for 24 hours. After taking out from the oven, the samples were
cooled in a desiccator and weighed. The samples were again kept in the oven, heated for
2 hours cooled and weight was recorded. This procedure was repeated till a constant
weight of the sample was attained. The average moisture content on wet basis of these
samples was calculated using the following equation:
W1−W2
Moisture content (% wb) = W1
where,
W1= initial weight of sample, g
W2= final weight of sample, g
3.2.2 Size
The size of the small millets of unhulled and dehulled small millet grains were
determined by using a micrometer screw gauge, having a least count of 0.01 mm. A
sample of 50 grains was randomly selected. The size of the individual grains were
measured and the average values were determined (Joshi et al.,1993)
3.2.3 Weight of thousand grain

Weight of randomly selected one thousand unhulled and dehulled small millet
grains were measured using a precision electronic balance with a sensitivity of 0.0001 g.

3.2.4 Bulk density
The bulk density was determined by using bulk density box having a volume of
1000 ml. The unhulled and dehulled small millet grains were filled into the box and the
top was levelled off. The grains were then weighed using a precision balance. The bulk
density was calculated using the formula (Mohsenin, 1986):
Weight of grains (kg)
Bulk density (kg/m3) =
Volume of grains including pore space (m3)
3.2.5 True density

The apparatus used for measuring true density consisted of 100 ml measuring jar
and a weighing balance. 50 ml of toluene was taken in a 100 ml measuring jar and known
weight of grain sample was poured into it. The rise in toluene level was recorded and the
true density of the unhulled and dehulled small millet grains was calculated using the
formula (Mohsenin, 1986):
Weight of grains (kg)
True density (kg/m3) =
Volume of grains excluding pore space (m3)
3.2.6 Porosity
Porosity of unhulled and dehulled small millet grains were calculated from the
bulk density and true density values that were found earlier by using the following
formula (Mohsenin, 1986):
BD
Porosity (%) = 1- × 100
TD
where, BD = Bulk density (kg/m3)
TD = True density (kg/m3)
3.2.7 Specific gravity

Specific gravity of unhulled and dehulled small millet grains were determined by
pycnometer method (Mohsenin, 1986). 10 g of the sample was placed in the pycnometer
with sufficient toluene to cover the sample. Gradually the air was exhausted from the
bottle by a vacuum pump to promote the escape of the air trapped under the creases of the
grains. The bottle was then filled with toluene and the temperature was allowed to reach
20 ºC. The weight of the bottle along with sample and toluene was taken.
Specific gravity of toluene×Weight of the grain
Specific gravity =
Weight of the toluene displaced by the grain
3.2.8 Angle of repose

It is the angle between the base and slope of the cone formed on a free vertical fall
of grain on a horizontal plane. It is found by measuring the height and diameter of the
grain heap formed in natural piles by using the expression,
2H
Angle of repose (θ ͦ) = tan-1
D
where, H= height of the pile, m
D= diameter of the pile, m
3.2.9 Static coefficient of friction

The static coefficient of friction of unhulled and dehulled small millet grains was
determined against three structural materials namely, galvanised steel, wood and glass by
inclined plate method (Mohsenin, 1986). When the angle of the inclined surface on which
grains were placed was slowly increased, the small millet grains began to slide. The static
angle of friction (θ) is the angle of the inclined surface at which the grains started sliding
and the coefficient of static friction is tan (θ).
Coefficient of static friction, µ=tan θ
3.3 Development of the prototype Small millet separator-grader

Initially, three commercially available grain cleaning machines namely, destoner,
air screen cleaner and specific gravity separator were tested for separation of unhulled
small millets from their respective dehulled millet rice grains of proso, kodo, foxtail and
little millets using a feed mix of (90:10 - rice : millet). It was found that all the tested
cleaning machines were not satisfactory for separation of unhulled grains from millet rice
grains. Hence, an attempt was made to develop a new prototype Small millet separator-
grader.
3.3.1 Description of prototype Small millet separator-grader

The prototype machine basically consists of a hopper, feed regulating system,
screen shoe, grading screens, blower, eccentric, shaker assembly and supporting frame.
The hopper is of trapezoidal shape and the sides slope inwards to form an outlet situated
above the shaker assembly. The blower consists of blades enclosed in the casing whose
outlet is located to deliver air current over the shaker assembly along the reciprocating
direction of the shaker. The shaker assembly consists of a set of 3 sieves, grain collecting
pan and five grain outlets. It is suspended from the frame using four Φ 12 mm × 100 mm
bolts and nuts that facilitate adjustment of the tilt angle ranging from 1 to 30º. A crank
type eccentric mechanism with adjustable crank length and connecting rod to achieve
various levels of reciprocating amplitudes was employed to drive the shaker assembly. A
motor of 1 hp was mounted on the frame to power the blower and the crank mechanism
using belt and pulley drive. The frame which holds all the components together at their
relative positions is constructed using angle iron.
3.3.2 Constructional details of the developed small millet separator-grader

Feed hopper: It is fabricated using 22 gauge m.s. sheet. It is trapezoidal in shape, sides
sloping downwards and skewed to one end to aid gravity flow of filled grain towards
wide mouthed discharge outlet.
Feed regulating system: A swinging gate made up of metal plate strip that can swing
upto 45º to close or open the discharge opening of feed hopper is constructed to control

the feed rate. The rotational angle of the feed control gate is controlled by means of a
screw lever.
Screen shoe assembly: It is basically a rectangular box, open at the top and on one side
and is fabricated using 18 gauge m.s. steel plate. To facilitate fixing of screens, a pair of
screen shoes (for each screen) was fixed, one each on longitudinal side, with the help of
½'' ‘L’ angle bottom support. From one side of the rectangular box, the screens can slide
through the shoes and can be reasonably secured in position. Three screens are fixed in
the assembly and the overflow of each screen and underflow of bottom screen were lead
to separate outlets. This was possible since each alternate screen sloped in opposite
direction. The entire shoe screen assembly is suspended using 4 bolts from the frame so
that it could shake.
Sieve shaker eccentric assembly: It is basically a crankshaft - connecting rod assembly

driven by the electric motor-pulley arrangement. One end of connecting rod is fixed to
the assembly and the other end is fixed on the crankshaft. The amplitude of oscillation
can be altered by changing the eccentricity of crank mechanism.
Grading screens: The grading screens are fabricated using punched m.s. sheets with all
the burrs removed. Care is taken during mounting of screens to ensure maximum
uniformity on the screening surface. The size and shape of aperture of screens are
selected based on specific requirement.
Blower: It is made up of m.s. sheet. The shaft is mounted on self-aligning bearings. The
blades are statically balanced and four blades are fixed on the shaft.
Frame: The machine is of welded construction with all members cut or formed from
structural steel sections held firmly to ground using four foundation bolts of 16 mm
diameter.
3.3.3 Specifications of Small millet separator-grader

1. Height : 1000 mm
2. Width : 560 mm
3. Length : 1200 mm
4. Power : 1 hp
5. No. of air blower : 1 (Butterfly type blades)
6. No. of screens : 3
7. Screen dimensions : 440 mm × 720 mm (all screens)
8. Screen openings
Round openings : Φ 1.0 mm, Φ 1.5 mm, Φ 2.0 mm and Φ 3.00 mm
Rectangle openings : 1 mm × 20 mm
9. Stroke (Screen) : 80 mm
10. Frequency of vibration (Screen) : 150 cycles
3.3.4 Operation of the Small millet separator-grader
The machine was operated by an electric motor which drives the blower and the
shaker assembly simultaneously. The feed mix that contained dehulled millet rice grain
and unhulled small millet grain was then fed to the machine through the hopper. It flowed
down by gravity and passed through the hopper discharge outlet and dropped across the
fan air current on the top screen of sieve assembly. The non-grain material (like husk)
lower density than the grain was blown out of the machine. The grain feed material
passed through the set of sieves (03 screens) and the overflow of each screen and
underflow were collected from different outlets. The screen combinations were as per the
treatment.
3.4 Performance evaluation of developed Small millet separator-grader

The developed Small millet separator-grader was tested for foxtail, little, kodo
and proso small millet rice grains to determine the cleaning efficiency (CE), screen
effectiveness (SE), cleaning index (CI), performance index (PI) and capacity.
For each millet, the performance characteristics of machine was found by using
four different screen set combinations and five levels of small millet rice grain feed
mixture. The treatment details used in the evaluation of Separator- Grader are given
below:
Independent variables
A) Screen set combination (S) – 4 levels
S1- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S2- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.0
S3- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S4- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5-Re 1.0 × 20
Note: Rd- Round screen openings
Re- Rectangle screen openings
B) Feed mix (M) – 5 levels (Dehulled small millet rice: Unhulled small millet grains)
M1 - 95:5
M2 - 90:10
M3 - 85:15
M4 - 80:10
M5 - 75:25

Observations recorded:
 Fraction of small millet rice in feed (XF)
 Fraction of small millet rice in clean grain outlet (XC)
 Fraction of small millet rice from foreign matter outlet (XR)
Design : Factorial Completely Randomized Design
Replications :2
Dependant variables
 Cleaning Efficiency (CE)
 Screen Effectiveness (SE)
 Cleaning Index (CI)
 Performance Index (PI)
 Capacity
3.4 Statistical analysis

The experimental data were statistically analysed in AKMU Unit, GKVK,
Bengaluru adopting Factorial Completely Randomized Design (FCRD) with two factors.
The ANOVA tables are generated and the treatment significance were analysed.
3.6 Cost economics

The cost economics of developed Small millet separator-grader for processing
different small millet rice grains was determined taking into account fixed and variable
costs as per the procedures described in IS: 9164-1979. The details are given in Appendix
III.
(a) Proso millet rice (b) Kodo millet rice
(c) Little millet rice (d) Foxtail millet rice
Plate 3.1 Small millet rice grains used for performance evaluation of
developed Small millet separator-grader
Plate 3.2 Perforated screens with rectangle and round openings used in the
prototype Small millet separator-grader
Front view Side view
Index
1. Frame 4. Feed regulating system 7. Stepped pulley
2. Screen shoe assembly 5. Blower 8. Motor
3. Feed hopper 6. V-belt
All dimensions are in mm
Plate 3.3 Developed prototype small millet separator-grader
Front view Side View
Overall view
Plate 3.4 Different views of Developed prototype Small millet separator-
grader
IV EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
The results obtained from the studies on Development of Small millet separator-
grader for Effective Separation of Unhulled Grains from Dehulled Small Millet Rice
Grains is presented in this chapter under the following main headings:
4.1 Physical and engineering properties of unhulled and dehulled small millet grains
4.2 Cleaning performance of developed prototype Small millet separator-grader for
proso millet rice
4.3 Cleaning performance of developed prototype Small millet separator-grader for kodo
millet rice
foxtail millet rice
4.5 Cleaning performance of developed prototype Small millet separator-grader for little
millet rice
4.1 Physical and engineering properties of unhulled and dehulled small millet grains
The physical and engineering properties of unhulled and dehulled small millet
grains of proso, kodo, foxtail and little millet grains are presented in Table 4.1.
4.1.1 Moisture content

The moisture content of proso, kodo, foxtail and little millets were found to be
12.2 per cent, 11.6 per cent, 10 per cent and 11.1 per cent for unhulled small millet grains
and 10.8 per cent, 10.6 per cent, 9.2 per cent and 8.7 per cent for dehulled small millet
rice grains, respectively.
4.1.2 Longitudinal diameter

The longitudinal diameter of proso, kodo, foxtail and little millets were found to
be 2.92 ± 0.01 mm, 2.32 ± 0.018 mm, 1.80 ± 0.015 mm and 1.59 ± 0.012 mm for
unhulled small millet grains and 2.89 ± 0.011mm, 2.25 ± 0.016 mm, 1.74 ± 0.013 mm
and 1.54 ± 0.015 mm for dehulled small millet rice grains, respectively.
4.1.3 Transverse diameter

The transverse diameter of proso, kodo, foxtail and little millets were found to be
2.78 ± 0.016 mm, 2.1 ± 0.017 mm, 1.76 ± 0.019 mm and 1.55 ± 0.013 mm for unhulled
small millet grains and 2.74 ± 0.015 mm, 1.96 ± 0.014 mm, 1.72 ± 0.017 mm and 1.52 ±
0.018 mm for dehulled small millet rice grains, respectively.
4.1.4 One thousand grain weight

One thousand grain weight of proso, kodo, foxtail and little millets were found to
be 5.8 ± 0.070 g, 3.2 ± 0.089 g, 2.8 ± 0.011 g and 2.3 ± 0.083 g for unhulled small millet
grains and 4.9 ± 0.063 g, 2.6 ± 0.045 g, 2.0 ± 0.014 g and 1.9 ± 0.013 g for dehulled
small millet rice grains, respectively.
21
Table 4.1: Physical and engineering properties of unhulled and dehulled small millet grains
Proso Kodo Foxtail Little
Properties Unhulled Dehulled Unhulled Dehulled Unhulled Dehulled Unhulled Dehulled

Millet Small Millet Millet Small Millet Millet Small Millet Millet Small Millet
Grains Rice Grains Rice Grains Rice Grains Rice
Moisture content (% wb) 12.2 10.8 11.6 10.6 10 9.2 11.1 8.7
Longitudinal diameter (mm) 2.92±0.010 2.89±0.011 2.32±0.018 2.25±0.016 1.80±0.015 1.74±0.013 1.59±0.012 1.54±0.015
Shruthi, P. A., M.Tech. (Agril. Engg.)
Transverse diameter (mm) 2.78±0.016 2.74±0.015 2.1±0.017 1.96±0.014 1.76±0.019 1.72±0.017 1.55±0.013 1.52±0.018
1000 grain weight (g) 5.8±0.070 4.9±0.063 3.2±0.089 2.6±0.045 2.8±0.011 2.0±0.014 2.3±0.083 1.9±0.013
Bulk density (kg/m3) 892.6±1.02 950±1.26 705±1.40 730.1±1.14 750.7±1.87 800.6±1.18 790.4±1.30 845.4±1.23
True density (kg/m3) 1750.4±1.0 1800.5±1.1 1650.1±1.22 1682±1.12 1550.6 ±1.14 1579.4±1.0 1300.5±1.19 1380.8±1.09
Porosity (%) 49.0±0.89 47.23±0.35 57.27±0.76 56.59±0.91 51.6±0.64 49.30±0.54 39.22±0.59 38.77±0.68
Specific gravity 1.750 1.800 1.650 1.682 1.550 1.579 1.300 1.380
Angle of repose 21 ͦ 07' 27 ͦ 09' 27 ͦ 32' 29 ͦ 08' 27 ͦ 02' 30 ͦ 32' 24 ͦ 29' 26 ͦ 09'
Coefficient of friction
I. Wood 0.3839 0.3249 0.5007 0.6248 0.5317 0.4877 0.6009 0.5095
II. Glass 0.3365 0.2867 0.5727 0.6490 0.5050 0.5543 0.6448 0.5317
III. MS sheet 0.3364 0.3443 0.6105 0.6745 0.5499 0.5897 0.5773 0.5543
2015
4.1.5 Bulk density
Bulk density (kg/m3) of proso, kodo, foxtail and little millets were found to be
892.6 ± 1.02, 705 ± 1.40, 750.7 ± 1.87 and 790.4 ±1.30 kg/m3 for unhulled small millet
grains and 950 ± 1.26, 730.1 ± 1.14, 800.6 ± 1.18 and 845.4 ± 1.23 for dehulled small
millet rice grains, respectively.
4.1.6 True density

True density (kg/m3) for proso, kodo, foxtail and little millets were found to be
1750.4±1.00, 1650 ± 1.22, 1550.6 ± 1.14 and 1300.5 ± 1.19 for unhulled small millet
grains and 1800.5± 1.1, 1682 ± 1.12, 1579.4 ± 1.0 and 1380.8 ± 1.09 for dehulled small
millet rice grains, respectively.
4.1.7 Porosity
Porosity of proso, kodo, foxtail and little millet grains were found to be 49 ± 0.89
per cent, 57.27 ± 0.76 per cent, 51.6 ± 0.64 per cent and 39.22 ± 0.59 per cent for
unhulled small millet grains and 47.23 ± 0.35 per cent, 56.59 ± 0.91 per cent, 49.30 ±
0.54 per cent and 38.77 ± 0.68 per cent for dehulled small millet rice grains, respectively.
4.1.8 Specific gravity

Specific gravity of proso, kodo, foxtail and little millet grains were found to be
1.750, 1.650, 1.550 and 1.300 for unhulled small millet grains and 1.800, 1.682, 1.579
and 1.380 for dehulled small millet rice grains, respectively.
4.1.9 Angle of repose

Angle of repose of proso, kodo, foxtail and little millet grains were found to be
21 ͦ 07 ', 27 ͦ 32', 27 ͦ 02 ', 24 ͦ 29' for unhulled small millet grains and 27 ͦ 09', 29 ͦ 08', 30 ͦ
32' and 26 ͦ 09' for dehulled small millet rice grains, respectively.
4.1.10 Coefficient of friction

4.1.10.1 Wood surface
Coefficient of friction on wood surface for proso, kodo, foxtail and little millet
grains were found to be 0.3839, 0.5007, 0.5317 and 0.6009 for unhulled small millet
grains and 0.3249, 0.6248, 0.4877 and 0.5095 for dehulled small millet rice grains,
respectively.
4.1.10.2 Glass surface

Coefficient of friction on glass surface for proso, kodo, foxtail and little millet
grains were found to be 0.3365, 0.5727, 0.505, 0.6448 for unhulled small millet grains
and 0.2867, 0.649, 0.5543 and 0.5317 for dehulled small millet rice grains, respectively.
4.1.10.3 MS sheet surface
Coefficient of friction on mild steel sheet surface for proso, kodo, foxtail and little
millet were found to be 0.3364, 0.6105, 0.5499 and 0.5773 for unhulled small millet
grains and 0.3443, 0.6745, 0.5897 and 0.5543 for dehulled small millet rice grains,
respectively.

proso millet rice
The effect of screen set combinations and input feed mix on the cleaning
performance of developed Small millet separator-grader for proso millet rice are
presented in Table 4.2 to 4.5.
4.2.1 Cleaning efficiency for proso millet rice

The mean cleaning efficiency of the developed prototype Small millet separator-
grader with four screen set combinations S1, S2, S3 and S4 for proso millet rice was found
to be 98.20, 97.20, 97.24 and 98.30 per cent, respectively. The mean values of cleaning
efficiency for the feed mix M1, M2, M3, M4 and M5 were 99.49, 98.68, 97.82, 96.78 and
95.90 per cent, respectively. It was observed that the machine’s cleaning efficiency was
relatively better with lean feed mix of 95:5 (M1) for all screen set combinations and also
the screen sets S1 and S4 were found to be relatively better when compared to other
combinations. The cleaning efficiency of the machine for proso millet rice was
significant with respect to both screen set combinations and input feed mix.
4.2.2 Screen effectiveness for proso millet rice

The mean screen effectiveness of the developed prototype Small millet separator-
to be 0.882, 0.774, 0.812 and 0.869, respectively. The mean values of screen
effectiveness for the feed mix M1, M2, M3, M4 and M5 were 0.890, 0.774, 0.812 and
0.869, respectively. It was observed that the machine’s screen effectiveness was
the screen sets S1 and S4 were found to be relatively better when compared to other
combinations. The screen effectiveness of the machine for proso millet rice was
4.2.3 Cleaning index for proso millet rice

The mean cleaning index of the developed prototype Small millet separator-
to be 0.895, 0.814, 0.817 and 0.894, respectively. The mean values of cleaning index for
the feed mix M1, M2, M3, M4 and M5 were 0.898, 0.868, 0.845, 0.835 and 0.828,
respectively. It was observed that the machine’s cleaning index was relatively better with
lean feed mix of 95:5 (M1) for all screen set combinations and also the screen sets S1 and
S4 were found to be relatively better when compared to other combinations. The cleaning
index of the machine for proso millet rice was significant with respect to both screen set
combinations and input feed mix.

4.2.4 Performance index for proso millet rice
The mean performance index of the developed prototype Small millet separator-
to be 0.867, 0.785, 0.789 and 0.865, respectively. The mean values of performance index
for the feed mix M1, M2, M3, M4 and M5 were 0.897, 0.862, 0.824, 0.793 and 0.756,
respectively. It was observed that the machine’s performance index was relatively better
with lean feed mix of 95:5 (M1) for all screen set combinations and also the screen sets S1
and S4 were found to be relatively better when compared to other combinations. The
performance index of the machine for proso millet rice was significant with respect to
both screen set combinations and input feed mix.
Table 4.2: Effect of screen set combinations and input feed mix on the cleaning
efficiency of Small millet separator-grader for proso millet rice
Cleaning Efficiency (%)

Feed Mix (M) for various screen set combinations (S)
S1 S2 S3 S4 Mean
95:5 (M1) 99.75 99.22 99.24 99.74 99.49
90:10 (M2) 99.16 98.20 98.23 99.15 98.68
85:15 (M3) 98.27 97.10 97.14 98.80 97.82
80:20 (M4) 97.37 96.17 96.23 97.35 96.78
75:25 (M5) 96.45 95.32 95.37 96.47 95.90
Mean 98.20 97.20 97.24 98.30
ANOVA
Source of variation F Test SEM CD
M * 0.0094 0.0377
S * 0.0105 0.0422
M×S * 0.0210 0.0843
Note: *Feed Mix (M) = Dehulled small millet rice : Unhulled small millet grains
*Screen Set combination (S)
S1- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S2- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.0
S3- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S4- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Re 1.0 × 20
Rd - Round hole perforation
Re - Rectangle perforation
Table 4.3: Effect of screen set combinations and input feed mix on the Screen
Effectiveness of Small millet separator-grader for proso millet rice
Screen Effectiveness
for various screen set combinations (S)
Feed Mix (M)
S1 S2 S3 S4 Mean
95:5 (M1) 0.950 0.820 0.855 0.935 0.890
90:10 (M2) 0.920 0.795 0.830 0.905 0.862
85:15 (M3) 0.880 0.780 0.810 0.865 0.833
80:20 (M4) 0.850 0.750 0.795 0.845 0.810
75:25 (M5) 0.810 0.725 0.770 0.795 0.775
Mean 0.882 0.774 0.812 0.869
ANOVA
M * 0.0018 0.0072
S * 0.0020 0.0081
M×S * 0.0040 0.0162
S1- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S2- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.0
S3- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S4- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Re 1.0 × 20

Table 4.4: Effect of screen set combinations and input feed mix on the Cleaning
Index of Small millet separator-grader for proso millet rice
Cleaning Index
Feed Mix (M)
S1 S2 S3 S4 Mean
95:5 (M1) 0.951 0.844 0.847 0.951 0.898
90:10 (M2) 0.916 0.819 0.823 0.915 0.868
85:15 (M3) 0.884 0.806 0.809 0.883 0.845
80:20 (M4) 0.869 0.802 0.807 0.864 0.835
75:25 (M5) 0.858 0.798 0.801 0.856 0.828
Mean 0.895 0.814 0.817 0.894
ANOVA
M * 0.0006 0.0024
S * 0.0007 0.0027
M×S * 0.0013 0.0054
S1- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S2- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.0
S3- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S4- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Re 1.0 × 20
Table 4.5: Effect of screen set combinations and input feed mix on the Performance
Index of Small millet separator-grader for proso millet rice
Performance Index
Feed Mix (M)
S1 S2 S3 S4 Mean
95:5 (M1) 0.950 0.843 0.848 0.948 0.897
90:10 (M2) 0.911 0.812 0.816 0.910 0.862
85:15 (M3) 0.865 0.783 0.785 0.864 0.824
80:20 (M4) 0.827 0.758 0.764 0.824 0.793
75:25 (M5) 0.781 0.729 0.733 0.781 0.756
Mean 0.867 0.785 0.789 0.865
ANOVA
M * 0.0008 0.0033
S * 0.0009 0.0037
M×S * 0.0018 0.0073
S1- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S2- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.0
S3- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S4- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Re 1.0 × 20

kodo millet rice
performance of developed Small millet separator-grader for kodo millet rice are
4.3.1 Cleaning efficiency for kodo millet rice

grader with four screen set combinations S1, S2, S3 and S4 for kodo millet rice was found
the screen set S1 and S4 were found to be relatively better when compared to other
combinations. The cleaning efficiency of the machine for kodo millet rice was significant
with respect to both screen set combinations and input feed mix.
4.3.2 Screen effectiveness for kodo millet rice

effectiveness for the feed mix M1, M2, M3, M4 and M5 were 0.885, 0.852, 0.817, 0.787
and 0.766, respectively. It was observed that the machine’s screen effectiveness was
combinations. The screen effectiveness of the machine for kodo millet rice was
4.3.3 Cleaning index for kodo millet rice

lean feed mix of 95:5 (M1) for all screen set combinations and also the screen set S1 and
index of the machine for kodo millet rice was significant with respect to both screen set
4.3.4 Performance index for kodo millet rice

with lean feed mix of 95:5 (M1) for all screen set combinations and also the screen set S1
performance index of the machine for kodo millet rice was significant with respect to
Efficiency of Small millet separator-grader for kodo millet rice

Feed Mix for various screen set combinations (S)
(M)
S1 S2 S3 S4 Mean
95:5 (M1) 99.62 99.21 99.30 99.59 99.43
90:10 (M2) 99.22 98.12 98.26 99.19 98.70
85:15 (M3) 98.80 96.88 97.10 98.79 97.89
80:20 (M4) 98.44 95.57 95.82 98.41 97.06
75:25 (M5) 98.05 94.78 95.01 98.01 96.46
Mean 98.82 96.91 97.10 98.80
ANOVA
M * 0.0440 0.0178
S * 0.0049 0.0199
M×S * 0.0099 0.0398
S1- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S2- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.0
S3- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S4- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Re 1.0 × 20

Effectiveness of Small millet separator-grader for kodo millet rice
(M)
S1 S2 S3 S4 Mean
95:5 (M1) 0.910 0.850 0.865 0.915 0.885
90:10 (M2) 0.880 0.820 0.835 0.875 0.852
85:15 (M3) 0.840 0.790 0.810 0.830 0.817
80:20 (M4) 0.805 0.765 0.780 0.800 0.787
75:25 (M5) 0.780 0.750 0.760 0.775 0.766
Mean 0.843 0.795 0.810 0.839
ANOVA
M * 0.0015 0.0060
S * 0.0017 0.0068
M×S * 0.0034 0.0135
S1- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S2- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.0
S3- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S4- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Re 1.0 × 20
Index of Small millet separator-grader for kodo millet rice
Cleaning Index
Feed Mix for various Screen set combinations (S)
(M)
S1 S2 S3 S4 Mean
95:5 (M1) 0.924 0.842 0.859 0.922 0.887
90:10 (M2) 0.922 0.812 0.826 0.919 0.870
85:15 (M3) 0.920 0.792 0.803 0.919 0.858
80:20 (M4) 0.922 0.778 0.791 0.920 0.853
75:25 (M5) 0.922 0.791 0.800 0.921 0.858
Mean 0.922 0.803 0.816 0.920
ANOVA
M * 0.0007 0.0029
S * 0.0008 0.0033
M×S * 0.0016 0.0066
S1- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S2- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.0
S3- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S4- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Re 1.0 × 20

Table 4.9: Effect of screen set combinations and input feed mix on the Performance
Index of Small millet separator-grader for kodo millet rice
Performance Index
(M)
S1 S2 S3 S4 Mean
95:5 (M1) 0.910 0.842 0.859 0.908 0.880
90:10 (M2) 0.870 0.805 0.819 0.871 0.841
85:15 (M3) 0.827 0.770 0.782 0.831 0.802
80:20 (M4) 0.790 0.731 0.744 0.793 0.764
75:25 (M5) 0.764 0.707 0.717 0.761 0.737
Mean 0.832 0.771 0.784 0.833
ANOVA
M * 0.0007 0.0028
S * 0.0008 0.0032
M×S * 0.0016 0.0063
S1- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S2- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.0
S3- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S4- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Re 1.0 × 20
foxtail millet rice
performance of developed Small millet separator-grader for foxtail millet rice are
4.4.1 Cleaning efficiency for foxtail millet rice

grader with four screen set combinations S1, S2, S3 and S4 for foxtail millet rice was
found to be 97.67, 96.62, 96.65 and 97.21 per cent, respectively. The mean values of
cleaning efficiency for the feed mix M1, M2, M3, M4 and M5 were 98.75, 98.39, 97.19,
95.80 and 95.01 per cent, respectively. It was observed that the machine’s cleaning
efficiency was relatively better with lean feed mix of 95:5 (M1) for all screen set
combinations and also the screen set S1 and S4 were found to be relatively better when
compared to other combinations. The cleaning efficiency of the machine for foxtail millet
rice was significant only with respect to input feed mix and not with screen set
combinations.
4.4.2 Screen effectiveness for foxtail millet rice

found to be 0.838, 0.733, 0.774 and 0.826, respectively. The mean values of screen
combinations. The screen effectiveness of the machine for foxtail millet rice was
4.4.3 Cleaning index for foxtail millet rice

found to be 0.861, 0.774, 0.773 and 0.860, respectively. The mean values of cleaning
index for the feed mix M1, M2, M3, M4 and M5 were 0.858, 0.841, 0.812, 0.787, and
0.792, respectively. It was observed that the machine’s cleaning index was relatively
better with lean feed mix of 95:5 (M1) for all screen set combinations and also the screen
set S1 and S4 were found to be relatively better when compared to other combinations.
The cleaning index of the machine for foxtail millet rice was significant with respect to
4.4.4 Performance index for foxtail millet rice

found to be 0.823, 0.743, 0.747 and 0.822, respectively. The mean values of performance

index for the feed mix M1, M2, M3, M4 and M5 were 0.858, 0.833, 0.790, 0.734 and
0.703, respectively. It was observed that the machine’s performance index was relatively
better with lean feed mix of 95:5 (M1) for all screen set combinations and also the screen
set S1 and S4 were found to be relatively better when compared to other combinations.
The performance index of the machine for foxtail millet rice was significant with respect
to both screen set combinations and input feed mix.
Efficiency of Small millet separator-grader for foxtail millet rice

(M)
S1 S2 S3 S4 Mean
95:5 (M1) 99.53 99.03 99.08 99.49 99.28
90:10 (M2) 98.91 97.89 97.93 98.84 98.39
85:15 (M3) 97.93 96.45 96.48 97.91 97.19
80:20 (M4) 96.35 95.25 95.29 96.33 95.80
75:25 (M5) 95.64 94.46 94.48 95.46 95.01
Mean 97.67 96.62 96.65 97.21
ANOVA
M NS 0.2007 0.8073
S * 0.2244 0.9026
M×S NS 0.4487 1.8052
S1- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S2- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.0
S3- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S4- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Re 1.0 × 20
Effectiveness of Small millet separator-grader for foxtail millet rice
(M)
S1 S2 S3 S4 Mean
95:5 (M1) 0.905 0.785 0.825 0.895 0.852
90:10 (M2) 0.890 0.760 0.805 0.870 0.831
85:15 (M3) 0.855 0.730 0.775 0.845 0.801
80:20 (M4) 0.785 0.705 0.740 0.775 0.751
75:25 (M5) 0.755 0.685 0.725 0.745 0.727
Mean 0.838 0.733 0.774 0.826
ANOVA
M * 0.0019 0.0078
S * 0.0022 0.0087
M×S * 0.0043 0.0174
S1- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S2- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.0
S3- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S4- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Re 1.0 × 20

Index of Small millet separator-grader for foxtail millet rice
Cleaning Index
(M)
S1 S2 S3 S4 Mean
95:5 (M1) 0.905 0.810 0.815 0.903 0.858
90:10 (M2) 0.891 0.789 0.793 0.890 0.841
85:15 (M3) 0.862 0.762 0.765 0.861 0.812
80:20 (M4) 0.817 0.757 0.758 0.817 0.787
75:25 (M5) 0.830 0.753 0.754 0.829 0.792
Mean 0.861 0.774 0.773 0.860
ANOVA
M * 0.0006 0.0023
S * 0.0006 0.0026
M×S * 0.0013 0.0052
S1- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S2- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.0
S3- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S4- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Re 1.0 × 20
Table 4.13: Effect of screen set combinations and input feed mix on the
Performance Index of Small millet separator-grader for foxtail millet
rice
Performance Index
(M)
S1 S2 S3 S4 Mean
95:5 (M1) 0.904 0.810 0.815 0.902 0.858
90:10 (M2) 0.884 0.782 0.786 0.882 0.833
85:15 (M3) 0.840 0.732 0.741 0.840 0.790
80:20 (M4) 0.762 0.704 0.709 0.762 0.734
75:25 (M5) 0.724 0.681 0.685 0.723 0.703
Mean 0.823 0.743 0.747 0.822
ANOVA
Source of variation F Test SE CD
M * 0.0005 0.0020
S * 0.0005 0.0022
M×S * 0.0011 0.0044
S1- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S2- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.0
S3- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S4- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Re 1.0 × 20

little millet rice
performance of developed Small millet separator-grader for little millet rice are presented
in Table 4.14 to 4.17.
4.5.1 Cleaning efficiency for little millet rice

grader with four screen set combinations S1, S2, S3 and S4 for little millet rice was found
combinations. The cleaning efficiency of the machine for little millet rice was significant
with respect to both screen set combinations and input feed mix.
4.5.2 Screen effectiveness for little millet rice

combinations. The screen effectiveness of the machine for little millet rice was
4.5.3 Cleaning index for little millet rice

lean feed mix of 95:5 (M1) for all screen set combinations and also the screen set S1 and
index of the machine for little millet rice was significant with respect to both screen set
4.5.4 Performance index for little millet rice

with lean feed mix of 95:5 (M1) for all screen set combinations and also the screen set S1
performance index of the machine for little millet rice was significant with respect to both
screen set combinations and input feed mix.
Efficiency of Small millet separator-grader for little millet rice

(M)
S1 S2 S3 S4 Mean
95:5 (M1) 99.32 98.52 99.01 99.31 99.04
90:10 (M2) 98.28 97.75 97.80 98.76 98.15
85:15 (M3) 97.47 96.47 96.40 97.46 96.75
80:20 (M4) 95.86 95.18 95.19 95.85 95.52
75:25 (M5) 94.35 94.29 94.31 94.33 94.32
Mean 97.05 96.44 96.56 97.14
ANOVA
M * 0.0687 0.2763
S * 0.0768 0.3089
M×S NS 0.1536 0.6178
S1- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S2- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.0
S3- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S4- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Re 1.0 × 20

Effectiveness of Small millet separator-grader for little millet rice
(M)
S1 S2 S3 S4 Mean
95:5 (M1) 0.865 0.715 0.755 0.845 0.795
90:10 (M2) 0.830 0.675 0.725 0.825 0.763
85:15 (M3) 0.800 0.650 0.685 0.785 0.730
80:20 (M4) 0.760 0.625 0.655 0.750 0.697
75:25 (M5) 0.720 0.600 0.625 0.715 0.665
Mean 0.795 0.653 0.689 0.784
ANOVA
M * 0.0018 0.0073
S * 0.0020 0.0081
M×S NS 0.0040 0.0163
S1- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S2- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.0
S3- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S4- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Re 1.0 × 20
Index of Small millet separator-grader for little millet rice
Cleaning Index
(M)
S1 S2 S3 S4 Mean
95:5 (M1) 0.863 0.753 0.803 0.863 0.820
90:10 (M2) 0.830 0.776 0.780 0.830 0.804
85:15 (M3) 0.828 0.762 0.766 0.827 0.796
80:20 (M4) 0.792 0.756 0.759 0.791 0.774
75:25 (M5) 0.773 0.770 0.772 0.772 0.772
Mean 0.817 0.763 0.776 0.816
ANOVA
M * 0.0047 0.0190
S * 0.0053 0.0213
M×S NS 0.0106 0.0425
S1- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S2- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.0
S3- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S4- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Re 1.0 × 20

Table 4.17: Effect of screen set combinations and input feed mix on the
Performance Index of Small millet separator-grader for little millet rice
Performance Index
(M)
S1 S2 S3 S4 Mean
95:5 (M1) 0.862 0.799 0.803 0.861 0.831
90:10 (M2) 0.819 0.771 0.774 0.817 0.795
85:15 (M3) 0.783 0.741 0.745 0.782 0.763
80:20 (M4) 0.733 0.709 0.712 0.732 0.721
75:25 (M5) 0.677 0.682 0.684 0.637 0.670
Mean 0.775 0.740 0.743 0.766
ANOVA
M * 0.0038 0.0154
S * 0.0043 0.0172
M×S NS 0.0086 0.0345
S1- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S2- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.0
S3- Rd Φ3.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0
S4- Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Re 1.0 × 20
4.6 Screen set combination for optimum separation of unhulled millets from
dehulled small millet rice grains
Based on the cleaning performance results of developed prototype Small millet
separator-grader for different millet grains namely, proso, kodo, foxtail and little millet
rice grains, it was observed that with screen set combination S1 (Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd
Φ1.0) the values of cleaning efficiency (97.05-98.20 %), screen effectiveness (0.795-
0.882), cleaning index (0.817-0.922) and performance index (0.775-0.867) was better and
therefore, this screen combination was recommended.
4.7 Cost economics

The cost economics of cleaning and grading of small millet rice grains in the
developed Small millet separator-grader was worked out taking into account of the fixed
and variable costs. The details are presented in Appendix III.
The capital cost incurred for the development of Small millet separator-grader
was about `.9000 which included the motor cost, material cost and fabrication cost ie.,
labour charges. The fixed cost mainly consisted of depriciation while the variable cost
included electricity charges and labour wages. The Cost : Benefit Ratio for was 1.00 :
2.11, 1.00 : 1.79, and 1.00 :1.62 and 1.00 :1.62 for proso, kodo, foxtail and little millet
rice grains, respectively. The cost (`./quintal) of cleaning and grading small millet rice
was `. 47.20 for proso; `.55.60 for kodo; `.61.37 for foxtail and `.61.37 for little millet
rice grains.

Table 4.18: Screen set combinations for optimum separation of unhulled small millets from dehulled rice
Separation Performance Characteristics

Small millet Optimum Screen
rice Combinations Cleaning Efficiency Screen Cleaning Performance
(%) Effectiveness Index Index
Proso Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0 98.20 0.882 0.895 0.867
Kodo Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0 98.82 0.843 0.922 0.832
Foxtail Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 - Rd Φ1.0 97.67 0.838 0.861 0.823
Little Rd Φ2.0 - Rd Φ1.5 – Rd Φ1.0 97.05 0.795 0.817 0.775

44
V DISCUSSION
The development of prototype Small millet separator-grader was based on the
small millet grains properties. The physical and engineering properties of unhulled small
millet grains and dehulled small millet rice grains are discussed in this chapter. The effect
of operational parameters of developed Small millet separator-grader on cleaning
performance viz., cleaning efficiency, screen effectiveness, cleaning index and
performance index are discussed in this chapter under the following main headings:
5.1 Physical and engineering properties of proso, kodo, foxtail and little millet for
unhulled and dehulled small millet grains
proso millet rice
kodo millet rice
foxtail millet rice
little millet rice
5.1 Physical and engineering properties of unhulled and dehulled small millet
grains
The physical and engineering properties of small millet grains in terms of
moisture content, longitudinal and transverse diameter, one thousand grain weight, bulk
density, true density, porosity, specific gravity, angle of repose and coefficient of static
friction were determined for four unhulled and dehulled small millet grains and the
results were presented in Table 4.1. The moisture content ranged between 12.2 to 11.6
per cent for unhulled small millet grains and 10.8 to 8.7 per cent for dehulled small millet
rice grains with the maximum value recorded with proso millet and the minimum in little
millet. Longitudinal diameter ranged from 2.92 ± 0.01 mm to 1.59 ± 0.012 mm for
unhulled small millet grains and 2.89 ± 0.011 mm to 1.54 ± 0.015 mm for dehulled small
millet rice grains with the maximum in proso millet and minimum in little millet.
Transverse diameter ranged from 2.78 ± 0.016 mm to 1.42 ± 0.013 mm for unhulled
small millet grains and 2.71 ± 0.015 mm to 1.40 ± 0.018 mm for dehulled small millet
rice grains with the maximum in proso millet and minimum in little millet. Bulk density
ranged between 892.6 to 790.4 kg/m3 for unhulled small millet grains and 950 to 845.4
kg/m3 for dehulled small millet rice grains with the maximum in proso millet and
minimum in little millet. True density ranged from 1750.4 to 1300.5 kg/m3 for unhulled
small millet grains and 1800.5 to 1380.8 kg/m3 for dehulled small millet rice grains with
the maximum in proso and minimum in little millet. Porosity ranged from 49 to 39.22 per
cent for unhulled small millet grains and 47.23 to 38.77 per cent for dehulled small millet
rice grains. Angle of repose ranged between 27 ͦ 32' to 21 ͦ 07' for unhulled small millet
grains and 30 ͦ 32' to 26 ͦ 09' for dehulled small millet rice grains. The coefficient of static
friction on different surface ranged between 0.6448 to 0.3364 for unhulled small millet
grains and 0.6745 to 0.3443 for dehulled small millet rice. The results obtained in this
study were in conformity with the findings of Balasubramanian and Viswanathan (2010)
for unhulled small millet grains.

proso millet rice
The cleaning performance of developed prototype Small millet separator-grader
has been presented in Tables 4.2 through 4.5 as well as in Fig 5.1 through 5.4. As the
input feed mix contained increasingly more and more unhulled millet grains i.e., from M 1
to M5 the cleaning performance of the separator-grader for proso millet rice decreased.
When the input feed mix contained more amounts of unhulled millet grains, the
opportunity time for the separation of grain through the perforations relatively got
decreased resulting in lower values of cleaning efficiency, screen effectiveness, cleaning
index and performance index.
Generally, the cleaning performance characteristics were found to be better with

screen set combinations S1 and S4 compared to other two combinations S2 and S3. It was
mainly because the top screen used (round hole Φ2.0mm) in S1 and S4 combinations were
same which probably is ideal for proso millet rice. Cleaning efficiency, screen
effectiveness, cleaning index and performance index were found to be high with lean
input feed mix (M1) and for screen set combination (S1) and it was found to be significant
with respect to both input feed mix and screen set combination selected.
Fouda (2009) has also reported similar results during separation of paddy from
rice. Considering all the separating-grading parameters, S1 screen set combination was
found to be optimum for proso millet rice in the developed prototype Small millet
separator-grader.

kodo millet rice
input feed mix contained increasingly more and more unhulled millet grains i.e., from M1
to M5 the cleaning performance of the separator-grader for kodo millet rice decreased.

same which probably is ideal for kodo millet rice. Cleaning efficiency, screen
input feed mix (M1) and for screen set combination (S1) it was found to be significant

Muhammad et al. (2013) have also reported similar results during cleaning of
sorghum, soyabean and millet under varying feed rates and fan speeds. Considering all
the separating-grading parameters, S1 screen set combination was found to be optimum
for kodo millet rice in the developed prototype Small millet separator-grader.

foxtail millet rice
to M5 the cleaning performance of the separator-grader for foxtail millet rice decreased.

same which probably is ideal for foxtail millet rice. Cleaning efficiency, screen
input feed mix (M1) and for screen set combination (S1) and it was found to be significant
Increasing the size of the screen opening in the top screen, resulted in passing of
both unhulled and dehulled small millet grains through the screen resulting in lesser
cleaning performance.
Prem Kumar et al. (2014) have also reported similar results during grading of
makhana into four different categories. Considering all the separating-grading
parameters, S1 screen set combination was found to be optimum for foxtail millet rice in
the developed prototype Small millet separator-grader.
5.5 Cleaning performance of developed prototype Small millet separator-grader

for little millet rice
to M5 the cleaning performance of the separator-grader for little millet rice decreased.

screen set combinations S1 and S4. Lower cleaning performance were obtained for screen
combinations S3 and S4 which is attributed to bigger size of top screen opening and
increase in higher proportion of unhulled small millet grains.
Akinoso et al. (2010) have also reported similar results during cleaning of beni
seed (Sesamum indicum) using an air screen cleaner. Considering all the separating-
grading parameters, S1 screen set combination was found to be optimum for little millet
rice in the developed prototype Small millet separator-grader.
5.6 Cost economics

The cost economics of cleaning and grading of small millet rice grains in the
developed prototype was highly favourable as indicated by high values of Cost : Benefit
Ratio. Hence it is profitable to use the separator-grader in the milled processing line.

Cleaning Efficiency
98.2 98.82 97.67 97.05
Cleaning efficiency, % 100
90
80
70
60
50
Fig. 5.1: Cleaning efficiency of prototype Small millet separator-grader for proso,
kodo, foxtail and little millet rice grains with screen set combination S1
(Rd Φ2.0-Rd Φ1.5-Rd Φ1.0)
1
0.882
0.843 0.838
0.9
Screen effectiveness
0.795
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
Fig. 5.2: Screen effectiveness of prototype Small millet separator-grader for proso,
kodo, foxtail and little millet rice grainswith screen set combination S1(Rd
Φ2.0-Rd Φ1.5-Rd Φ1.0)
Cleaning Index
1
0.922
0.895
0.861
0.9
0.817
Cleaning index
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
Fig. 5.3: Cleaning index of prototype Small millet separator-grader for proso, kodo,
foxtail and little millet rice grainswith screen set combination S1 (Rd Φ2.0-
Rd Φ1.5-Rd Φ1.0)
Performance Index
1
0.867
0.9 0.832 0.823
Performance index
0.775
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
Fig. 5.4: Cleaning index of prototype Small millet separator-grader for proso,
kodo, foxtail and little millet rice grainswith screen set combination S1 (Rd
Φ2.0-Rd Φ1.5-Rd Φ1.0)
VI SUMMARY
Millets are small-grained cereal grasses and are classified based on grain size as
major millets (sorghum and pearl millet) and small millets (finger millet, foxtail millet,
kodo millet, proso millet, barnyard millet and little millet). Millets are nutritionally rich
and occupy an important place in the diet of people in many regions of the world.
Although millets are nutritionally superior to cereals their utilization as a food is still
mostly confined to the traditional consumers and population of lower economic strata.
While processing small millets in the available commercial millet dehulling machines,
the product output generally is an admixture of dehulled millet rice and unhulled raw
millets which poses difficult to segregate. To address the above limitations, the present
investigation entitled “Development of Millet Separator-Grader for Effective Separation
of Unhulled Grains from Dehulled Small Millet Rice Grains” was undertaken.
The physical and engineering properties of four small millets namely, proso,
kodo, foxtail and little millets and their milled rice grains were studied. Initially three
commercially available grain cleaning machines-destoner, air screen cleaner, specific
gravity separator were tested for the separation of unhulled small millets from their
respective dehulled millet rice grains however with little success. Based on the
experience gained, a prototype Small millet separator-grader was developed and it was
tested for its cleaning performance using selected small millet rice grains. The effects of
input feed mix (M) and screen set combinations (S) on the cleaning efficiency, screen
effectiveness, cleaning index and performance index of the developed separator-grader
were studied and the optimum operational parameters were determined. The cost
economics of cleaning and grading small millet rice were also worked out.
From this study, the following specific conclusions are drawn:
1. Among the four small millet grains tested namely proso, kodo, foxtail and little
millet, the moisture content ranged between 11.6 to 12.2 per cent for unhulled
small millet grains and 8.7 to 10.8 per cent for dehulled small millet rice grains.
Longitudinal diameter ranged from 1.59 ± 0.012 mm to 2.92 ± 0.01 mm for
unhulled small millet grains and 1.54 ± 0.015 mm to 2.89 ± 0.011mm for dehulled
small millet rice grains. Transverse diameter ranged from 1.42 ± 0.013 mm to
2.78 ± 0.016 mm for unhulled small millet grains and 1.40 ± 0.018 mm to 2.71 ±
0.015 mm for dehulled small millet rice grains.
2. Bulk density ranged between 790.4 ±1.30 to 892.6 ± 1.02 kg/m3 for unhulled
small millet grains and 845.4 ± 1.23 to 950 ± 1.26 kg/m3 for dehulled small millet
rice grains. True density ranged from 1300.5 ± 1.19 to 1750.4±1.06 for unhulled
small millet grains and 1380.8 ± 1.09 to 1800.5± 1.1 kg/m3 for dehulled small
millet rice grains.
3. Porosity ranged from 39.22 ± 0.59 to 49 ± 0.89 per cent for unhulled small millet
grains and 38.77 ± 0.68 to 47.23 ± 0.35 per cent for dehulled small millet rice
grains.
4. Angle of repose ranged between 21 ͦ 07' to 27 ͦ 32' for unhulled small millet grains
and 26 ͦ 09' to 30 ͦ 32' for dehulled small millet rice grains. The coefficient of static
friction on different surface ranged between 0.3364 to 0.6448 for unhulled small
millet grains and 0.3443 to 0.6745 for dehulled small millet rice grains.
5. Preliminary cleaning performance trials indicated that the destoner, air screen
cleaner and specific gravity separator were not suitable for separation of unhulled
millet grains from dehulled small millet rice.
6. The developed prototype Small millet separator-grader was found to be well

suited for separation-grading of all chosen small millet rice grains.
7. In the developed prototype Small millet separator-grader for selected small millet
rice grains, cleaning efficiency was found to be in the range of 97.05 to 98.20 per
cent; the screen effectiveness was found to be in the range of 0.795 to 0.882; the
cleaning index was found to be in the range of 0.817 to 0.895; the performance
index were found to be in the range of 0.775 to 0.867 and the separation-grading
capacity was found to be in the range of 47.3 to 64.8 kg/h.
8. Among the five types of input feed mix (95:5, 90:10, 85:15, 80:20 and 75:25) and
four screen set combinations (S1- Rd Φ2.0-Rd Φ 1.5-Rd Φ1.0, S2- Rd Φ3.0-Rd
Φ2.0-Rd Φ1.0, S3- Rd Φ3.0-Rd Φ1.5- Rd Φ1.0 and S4- Rd Φ2.0-Rd Φ1.5-Re 1.0
× 20) tested in the separator-grader, the machine was found to work best with
screen set combination S1 (Rd Φ2.0-Rd Φ1.5-Rd Φ1.0) and the lean input feed
mixes upto 90:10 (millet rice: millet) was best for all millet rice grains.
9. The cost of processing for one quintal of dehulled small millet rice from ranged
` 47.20 to ` 61.37 and the Cost : Benefit Ratio was worked to be 1 : 1.62 to 1 :
2.11.

VII REFERENCES
AHMED, S.F., 1988, Effect of control and management on the performance of grain
sieve cleaners. Com. Sci. Dev. Res. 21(254):98-106.
AHMED, S.F., EL-KHEIR, A.M.M. AND EL-TAWWAB, I.M., 1993, Development of

an apparatus suitable for separating wheat products from stationary threshers.
Misr J. Ag. Eng., 10(1):62-76.
AJAV, E.A. AND ADEJUMO, B.A., 2005, Performance evaluation of an okra thresher.
Agricultural Engineering International: the CIGR e-Journal, Manuscript PM 04
006, Vol. VII.
AKINGBALA, J.O., 1991, Effect of processing on flavonoids in millet (Pennisetum

americanum) flour. Cereal Chemistry, 68:180-183.
AKINOSO, R., OLAYANJU, T.M.A., HASSAN, L.O. AND AJIBOSHIN, I.O., 2010,
Design, construction and preliminary testing of a beniseed (Sesamum indicum)
air-screen cleaner. J. Nat. Sci. Engr. Tech., 9(2):141-148.
ALIZADEH, M.R. AND RAHMATI, M.H., 2011, Effect of paddy dehusking rate in
rubber roll sheller on the milling quality of different rice varieties. Elixir
International Journal, 39:4880-4883.
AMIN, E.E., 2003, Effect of some physical and mechanical properties on grading
efficiency. Misr J. Ag. Eng., 20(4):451-470.
ANONYMOUS, 1971, Indian minimum seed certification standards. Central Seed

Committee, Govt. of India, New Delhi.
ANONYMOUS, 1980, Test code for seed cleaners. Indian Standard Institute, New Delhi
IS:67 18-1980.
ANONYMOUS, 1993, International rules for seed testing. Seed Sci. and Technol.,
13(2):361-369.
AWADY, M.N., YEHIA, F., EBAID, M.T. AND ARIF, E.M., 2003, Development and
theory of rice cleaner for reduced impurities and losses. Misr J. Ag. Eng.,
20(4):53-68.
AYMAN, H. AND AMER E., 2009, Aerodynamic and solid flow properties for flaxseeds
for pneumatic separation by using air stream. International Journal of
Agricultural and Biological Engineering, 2(4):31-45.
BALASUBRAMANIAN, S. AND VISWANATHAN, R., 2010, Influence of moisture
content on physical properties of minor millets. J. Food Sci. Technology,
47(3):279-284.
*BARTENEV, V.A., 1976, Peculiarities of sunflower seed treatment by grain cleaning

machinery. Cientifica, 18(3):15-20.
BASAVEGOWDA AND GOWDA, S.J., 1994, Studies on the performance of air screen
seed cleaner for sunflower seeds. Mysore J. Agric. Sci., 28:165-168.
BIS, 2000, Agricultural produce processing equipment-seed cleaners test code. Bureau of
Indian Standards, New Delhi IS, 5718:2000.
BISHAT, B.S. AND SINHA, L.K., 1985, Performance evaluation of an air screen seed
cleaner. Indian Society of Agricultural Engineers, 3:56-61.
COSKUNER, Y. AND KARABABA, E., 2007, Physical properties of coriander seeds.

Journal of Food Engineering, 80:408-416.
DESIKACHAR, H.S.R., 1975, Processing of maize, sorghum and millets for food uses.
J. of Science and Industrial Research, 43:231-237.
EL-SAHRIGI, A.F., AHMED, S.F., HELMY, M.A., SOROUR, H.M. AND HANNA,
S.S., 2004. Construction and development of a cleaning unit suitable for
medicinal and aromatic seed crops. Misr J. Ag. Eng., 21(4):53-66.
ERMOL'ER, Y.I., 1981, The use of corrugated sieves for primary cleaning of grain.
Agril. Engg. Abstr., 7:116-117.
FOUDA, T.Z., 2009, Engineering studies on the performance of paddy and rice separator.
Misr. J. Ag. Eng., 26(2):935- 952.
GRIGG, B.C. AND SIEBENMORGEN, T.J., 2013, Impacts of thickness grading on

milling yields of long grain rice. Applied Engineering in Agriculture, 29(4):557-
564.
HAFIZ, A. AND EISSA, A., 2009, Aerodynamic and solid flow properties for flax seeds
for pneumatic separation by using air stream. Int. J. Agric & Bio. Eng, 4(2):31-45.
HALL, C.W., 1957, Drying farm crops. Agril. Consulting Associates, Inc., Engineering
Specialists. Ann. Arbor. Michigan, Pp. 245-279.
HARRISON, D.J. AND BLECHA, A., 1983, Effect of screen oscillation and aperture
size on performance of cleaners. Transactions of ASAE., 26(2):343-348.

HURBURGH, JR. C.R., BURESCH, J. AND RIPPKE, G., 1996, Aspiration cleaning of
soybeans. Applied Engineering in Agriculture, 12(5):585-586.
IGBEKA, S.V., 1984, An appropriate technology cereal cleaner. American Marketing

Association, 15(2):67-71.
IS, 1979, Guide for estimating cost of farm machinery operation. IS, 9164-1979, Indian
Standards Institution, New Delhi.
JAVAREGOWDA, S. AND BHOLE, N.G., 1987, Rated and handling capacity of air
screen seed cleaners. Seed Res., 15(2):172-175.
JOSHI, D.C., DAS, S.K. AND MUKHERJEE, R.K., 1993, Physical properties of
pumpkin seeds. J. Agric. Engg. Res., 50:305:313.
KUMAR, V., KUMAR, R., RAJAK, D., KUMAR, V. AND ANJANI KUMAR, 2013,
Influence of moisture content and grade on engineering properties of makhana.
Advances in Applied Science Research, 4(6):29-35.
MARIAN, P., PAWEL, S., JACEK, M., KAZIMIERZ, Z. AND DARIUSZ, A., 2012,
The technique and analysis of the process of separation and cleaning grain
materials. Journal of Food Engineering, 109(3):603-608.
McCABE, W.L. AND SMITH, J.G., 1976, Unit operations of chemical engineering. Mc
Graw Hill Book Co., Inc., New York, Pp. 871-872.
MICHAELRAJ, S.J. P. AND SHANMUGAM, A., 2013, A study on millets based

cultivation and consumption in India. International Journal of Marketing,
Financial Services & Management Research, 2:(4).
MOHSENIN, N.N., 1986, Physical properties of plant and animal materials. Garden and
Breach Science Publishers, Inc., New York.
MUHAMMAD, U.S., ABUBAKAR, L.G., ISIAKA1, M. AND DAVIES, R.M., 2013,

Design and evaluation of a cleaning machine. App. Sci. Rep. 1(3):62-66.
MWITHIGA, G. AND SIFUNA, M.M., 2005, Effect of moisture content on the physical
properties of three varieties of sorghum seeds. Journal of Food Engineering,
75:480–486.
NANDINI, S., UTTAM, V. AND PANKAJA, P., 2013, Grading and quality testing of
food grains using neural network. International Journal of Research in
Engineering and Technology, 2(11):545-549.
NDIRIKA, V.I.O., EL OKENE, A.M.I., SULEIMAN, M.L., MOHAMMED, S.S. AND
OYELEKE, O.O., 2006, Determination of selected physical and mechanical
properties and their relationship with moisture content for pearl millet
(Pennisetum glaucum). IAR project:G.I.16. Agricultural Mechanisation Research
Project, Pp. 3-19.
NDUKWU, M.C. AND ONYENWOKE, C.A., 2014, Development of continuous maize

dehulling, cleaning and milling machine. Journal of Agricultural Engineering and
Technology, 22:35-46.
NEALE, M.A., HOBSON, R.N., PRICE, J.S. AND BRUCE, D.M., 2003, Effectiveness
of three types of grain separator for crop matter harvested with a stripping header.
Biosystems Engineering, 84(2):177–191.
OJEDIRAN, J.O., ADAMU, M.A. AND JIM-GEORGE, D.L., 2010, Some physical
properties of pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum) seeds as a function of moisture
content. African Journal of General Agriculture, 6:39-46.
OKUNOLA, A.A., IGBEKA, J.C. AND ARISOYIN, A.G., 2015, Development and
evaluation of a cereal cleaner. Journal of Multidisciplinary Engineering Science
and Technology, 2(6):1588-1592.
OLUKUNLE, O.J. AND ADEMOSUN, O.C., 2011, Performance evaluation of the grain
cleaning system in a combine harvester. Journal of Applied Agricultural
Research, 3:103-109.
PALIWAL, J., JAYAS, D.S., VISEN, N.S. AND WHITE, N.D.G., 2004, Feasibility of a
machine-vision-based grain cleaner. Applied Engineering in Agriculture,
20(2):245-248.
PANASIEWICZ, M., SOBCZAK, P., MAZUR, J., ZAWISLAK, K. AND ANDREJKO,

D., 2012, The technique and analysis of the process of separation and cleaning
grain materials. J. of Food Engineering, 109:603-608.
PREM, K.S., BIKASH, S. AND SURAJIT, M., 2014, Design and performance
evaluation of pedal operated makhana (Euryale ferox salisb) seed grader.
Research Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 5(3):428-431.
SAHAY, K.M., 1983, Performance of seed cleaner as influenced by feed rate and
impurities. Paper presented at 20th ISAE Convention, G.B. Pant Univ. Agri. and
Tech., Pantnagar, India, March 5-7.
SALWA, HANNA, S., SٍHAABAN, AHMED, M. AND ELASHMAWY, N.M., 2010,

Selection of the main factors affecting cleaning and grading fennel seeds at
inclined sieve oscillation, Misr J. Ag. Eng., 27(2):628-643.

SHAKER, M. AND RAHIMI, H., 2007, Comparison of technical and economical
performance of the two kinds of paddy separator in Fars province. Journal of
Agricultural Engineering Research 1(8):85-100.
SHIRSAT, B., PATEL, S., KULKARNI, S.D., BAKANE, P.H. AND KHEDKAR, M.,
2008, Physical properties of kodo millet (Pasplum scorbicalatum L.).
International Journal of Agricultural Science, 4:580-587.
SIDNAL, N., PATIL, U.V. AND PATIL, P., 2013, Grading and quality testing of food
grains using neural network. International Journal of Research in Engineering
and Technology, 2(1):545-549.
SIMONYAN, K.J. AND DUNMADE, I.S., 2010, Comparative analysis of the threshing
cylinders performance on sorghum. Proceedings of XVIIth World Congress of the
International Commission of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering (CIGR).
SIMONYAN, K.J. AND YILJEP, Y.D., 2008, Investigating grain separation and
cleaning efficiency distribution of a conventional stationary rasp-bar sorghum
thresher. Agricultural Engineering International: the CIGR e-Journal, Manuscript
PM 07 028. Vol. X.
SIMONYAN, K.J., YILJEP, Y.D. AND MUDIARE, O.J., 2006, Modelling the grain
cleaning process of a stationary sorghum thresher. Agricultural Engineering
International: the CIGR e-Journal. Manuscript PM 06 012. Vol. VIII.
SINGH, K.P., MISHRA, H.N. AND SAHA, S., 2010, Moisture-dependent properties of
barnyard millet grain and kernel. Journal of Food Engineering, 96:598-606.
SORICA, C., PIRNA, I., GAGEANU, P., MARIN, E. AND POSTELNICU, E., 2011,
Indented cylinder separators - Quality characteristics expressed as functions of
process parameters. Proceedings of International Conference on Innovations,
Recent Trends and Challenges In Mechatronics, Mechanical Engineering and
New High-Tech Products Development – MECAHITECH’11, 3:341- 347.
STANLY, J.M.P. AND SHANMUGAM, A., 2013, A study on millets based cultivation
and consumption in India. International Journal of Marketing Financial Services
and Management Research, 2(4):49-58.
SUBRAMANIAN, S. AND VISWANATHAN, R., 2007, Bulk density and friction

coefficients of selected minor millets grains and flours. J. of Food Engineering,
96:118-126.
SUNDARAM, P.K., SARKAR, B. AND MONDAL, S., 2014, Design and performance
evaluation of pedal operated makhana (Euryale feroxsalisb) seed grader. Research
Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 5(3):428-431.
TABATABAEEFAR, A., AGHAGOOLZADEH, H. AND MOBLI, H., 2003, Design and
development of an auxiliary chickpea second sieving and grading machine.
Agricultural Engineering International: the CIGR e-Journal of Scientific
Research and Development, Manuscript FP 03 005. Vol. V.
*TAN, J. AND HARRISON, H.P., 1986, Screen oscillation for planner and spatial drive
mechanisms. Paper presented in ASAE Meeting-86.
VIKASH, K., RAUSHAN, K., RAJAK, D., VISHAL, K. AND ANJANI, K., 2013,
Influence of moisture content and grade on engineering properties of makhana.
Advances in Applied Science Research, 4(6):29-35.
WEBB, J. LI, C., PANDIELLA, S.S. AND CAMPBELL, G.M., 2002, A numerical
simulation of separation of crop seeds by screening-effect of particle bed depth.
Trans. Institution of Chemical Engineers, 80:109-117.
YOGEESHA, H.S., KASHINATH, B.L., BHANUPRAKASH AND NAIK, L.B., 2013,

Seed quality improvement in okra through specific gravity separation. J. Hortil.
Sci., 8(1):70-73.
www.smallmillets.res.in
*Originals are not seen

APPENDICES
APPENDIX I
List of Abbreviations/Notations
Abbreviations/Notations Description
% Per cent
* Significant at 5 %
/ Per
= Equal to
± Plus or minus
ͦ Degree
@ At
ͦC Celsius
et al. and others
h hour
hp horsepower
ie., that is
kg kilogram
m3 Cubic meter
ml Milli litre
mm Milli meter
M.S. Mild-steel
No. Numbers
NS Non-significant
` Rupees
`/h Rupees per hour
SEM Standard Error of mean
viz., Namely
wb Wet basis
APPENDIX II
Specification and cost of materials incurred for developed

Small millet separator-grader
Sl. Total cost of

Material Size Quantity
No. materials (`)
1 Mild steel frame 4000 × 2400 × 560 mm 20 kg 1400-00
Mild steel Blower

2 560 mm 2 200-00
shaft
3 Electric motor 1 hp 1 no 3000-00
I. 36'' A
4 V- belt Each 1 no 150-00
II. 44'' A
5 Bevel gears 25 mm 2 no 300-00
6 Feed regulating system 1050 mm 01 no 50-00
I. 225 mm 150-00
7 Stepped pulley 2 no
II. 100 mm 100-00
8 Grading screens 750 × 420 mm 4 no 2000-00
370 mm × 400 mm
9 Screen shoe 1 no 1000-00
(18 gauge)
10 Blower bearing blocks 25 mm 2 no 200-00
Nuts, bolts and paints

11 12.5 mm - 100-00
miscellaneous
Total Cost 8650-00
Labour cost 350-00
Total cost of machine 9000-00

APPENDIX III
COST ECONOMICS OF DEVELOPED SMALL MILLET SEPARATOR-

GRADER
1. Fixed cost
a. Material cost + Fabrication cost (C) = ` 9000
b. Salvage value (S) @ 10% of total cost of machine = ` 900
2. Operational cost
a. Annual use (U) (Expected operational hours) = 1200 h/annum
b. Expected life years (L) = 10 years
a) Fixed cost
i. Depreciation (D)
C−S
D= = ` 0.675/h
UL
ii. Interest on capital investment @ 12% per annum on average price (I)
C+S
I= × 0.12 = ` 0.495/h
2U
iii. Repairs/ maintenance cost @ 2% (R)

C
R = UL × 0.02 = ` 0.015/h
Total fixed cost (D+I+R) = ` 1.185/h
b) Operational cost/ Variable cost

i. Power consumption = 0.746 kW/h
Cost per unit of electricity = `. 6
Therefore, cost of electricity = 0.746 × 6 = `. 4.5/h
ii. Labour cost @ `. 200 per day (08 hours) per person or ` 25/h
Total variable cost = (P+b) = 4.5+25 = `. 29.5 /h
Total cost of operation = Total fixed cost + Total variable cost
= `. (1.185 + 29.5)/h
= `. 30.685/h
3. Expected Returns
Capacity of Separator-Grader
For proso millet rice = 64.8 kg/h ≈ 65 kg/h
For kodo millet rice = 58.25 kg/h ≈ 55 kg/h
For foxtail millet rice = 52.5 kg/h ≈ 50 kg/h
For little millet rice = 47.3 kg/h ≈ 50 kg/h
Assume cost of Separating-Grading for customer as 1 `/ kg

I. Proso millet rice = 65 × 1 = ` 65
II. Kodo millet rice = 55 × 1 = ` 55
III. Foxtail millet rice = 50 × 1 = ` 50
IV. Little millet rice = 50 × 1 = ` 50
Cost- Benefit Ratio

I. Proso millet rice = 1: 2.11
II. Kodo millet rice = 1: 1.79
III. Foxtail millet rice = 1:1.62
IV. Little millet rice = 1: 1.62
Cost of cleaning and grading

I. Proso millet rice = (`.30.685/hr)/ (65 kg/hr) × 100 = 47.20 `/quintal
II. Kodo millet rice = (`.30. 685/hr)/ (55 kg/hr) × 100 = 55.60 `/quintal
III. Foxtail millet rice = (`.30.685/hr)/ (50 kg/hr) × 100 = 61.37 `/quintal
IV. Little millet rice = (`.30.685/hr)/ (50 kg/hr) × 100 = 61.37 `/quintal

Develop efficient millet separator-grader

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Develop efficient millet separator-grader

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

DEVELOPMENT OF MILLET SEPARATOR-

GRADER FOR EFFECTIVE SEPARATION OF

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING

Thesis submitted to the

BENGALURU AUGUST, 2015

UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES

CHAPTER TITLE PAGE No.

II REVIEW OF LITERATURE 4-12

III MATERIAL AND METHODS 13-19

IV EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS 20-44

VII REFERENCES 51-56

Physical and engineering properties of unhulled and dehulled small

Effect of screen set combinations and feed mix on the cleaning

Effect of screen set combinations and feed mix on the screen

Effect of screen set combinations and feed mix on the cleaning

Effect of screen set combinations and feed mix on the performance

Effect of screen set combinations and feed mix on the cleaning

Effect of screen set combinations and feed mix on the screen

Effect of screen set combinations and feed mix on the cleaning

Effect of screen set combinations and feed mix on the performance

Effect of screen set combinations and feed mix on the cleaning

Effect of screen set combinations and feed mix on the screen

Effect of screen set combinations and feed mix on the cleaning

Effect of screen set combinations and feed mix on the performance

Effect of screen set combinations and feed mix on the cleaning

Effect of screen set combinations and feed mix on the screen

Effect of screen set combinations and feed mix on the cleaning

Effect of screen set combinations and feed mix on the performance

Screen set combinations for optimum separation of unhulled small

Cleaning efficiency of prototype Small millet separator-

Screen effectiveness of prototype Small millet separator-

Cleaning index of prototype Small millet separator-grader

Cleaning index of prototype Small millet separator-grader

Small millets used for performance evaluation studies of

Perforated Rectangle and Round opening screens used for

3.3 Developed Small Millet Separator-Grader 19-20

Different views of developed prototype Small millet

Separation and cleaning are conventionally achieved as a result of differences in

Cleaning of small millet grains is conventionally done using screen or pneumatic

A screen is a surface containing a number of equally sized openings. Mesh is

2 Shruthi, P. A., M.Tech. (Agril. Engg.) 2015

Hence, the present study entitled “Development of Millet Separator-Grader for

1. Study of physical and engineering properties of unhulled and dehulled small

2.1 Physical and engineering properties of food grains

2.1 Physical and engineering properties of food grains

Balasubramanian and Viswanathan (2010) determined the physical properties of

Ojediran et al. (2010) determined the physical properties of Ex-Borno and

Vikash et al. (2013) studied the engineering properties of different grades of

5 Shruthi, P. A., M.Tech. (Agril. Engg.) 2015

Webb et al. (2002) conducted a two-dimensional numerical study of the

Ayman and Amer (2009) developed simple empirical equations to predict

7 Shruthi, P. A., M.Tech. (Agril. Engg.) 2015

Grigg and Siebenmorgen (2013) studied the impact of thickness grading on

Yogeesha et al. (2013) studied the efficiency of specific gravity separator in

2.3 Separating and grading machines

Hurburgh Jr. et al. (1996) studied aspiration cleaning of soyabean samples

Tabatabaeefar et al. (2003) developed a chickpea sieving and grading machine

Simonyan et al. (2006) developed a prediction equation describing the cleaning

9 Shruthi, P. A., M.Tech. (Agril. Engg.) 2015

Fouda (2009) investigated the performance of paddy and rice separator

Nandini et al. (2013) developed an image processing technology and neural

Okunola et al. (2015) developed a portable cereal cleaning machine consisting of

2.4 Performance evaluation of different screens