J. agric. Engng Res.
(1998) 71, 373—383
Article No. ag980336
Mechanical Load and its Effect on Bulb Onions due to Harvest and Post-harvest
Handling
B. Herold; B. Oberbarnscheidt; M. Geyer
Institute of Agricultural Engineering Bornim, Max-Eyth-Allee 100, D-14469 Potsdam-Bornim, Germany
(Received 23 June 1997; accepted in revised form 26 June 1998)
Data records of an artificial fruit (PMS-60) showed
that bulb onions are subjected to a considerable number
of mechanical impacts under practical harvest and post-
harvest handling conditions. The effect of number and
intensity of impacts on onion storage losses was studied
in laboratory drop tests by using hard and soft impact
surfaces. After storage, the mass losses (due to transpira-
tion and respiration losses, or rot and sprouting) were
determined. The data from the artificial fruit (number of
impacts, peak load and load integral of single impacts)
recorded under the same drop test conditions were re-
lated to the resulting onion mass losses. In this way,
allowable load thresholds for onions were derived and
expressed in terms of PMS-60 data. These threshold data
were used to evaluate practical handling systems by using
the artificial fruit, and to predict the risk of onion storage
losses based on measured impact data.
( 1998 Silsoe Research Institute
1. Introduction
During harvesting and post-harvest handling, agricul-
tural products such as bulb onions are very frequently
subjected to mechanical loading. Mechanical loads
above the allowable level can cause onion damage con-
sisting of surface lesions or internal bruising. The latter
kind of damage can result in considerable quality losses
and decay during storage.
Previous engineering research has been directed to
developing both objective methods for detection of dam-
age sources1, 2 and also to determine allowable load thre-
sholds in the case of a single load on the produce.3–5
Hyde et al.6 studied the impact behaviour of apples,
onions and potato tubers during multiple constant im-
pact loading on the same location each time. They found
that the rebound height increased for each successive
0021-8634/98/120373#11 $30.00/0
impact and approached a constant asymptotic value.
Based on this, they partitioned the impact energy into
rebound, absorbed and bruising energy. They did not
discuss damage accumulation due to multiple impacts in
practice. Studies by Herold and Habelt,7 and Molema
and Bouman8 in potato handling, showed that the de-
signer of handling lines has to pay attention to the
number of mechanical loads. Relatively low but very
frequent mechanical loads were blamed for blackspot
damage in potato tubers. In a similar way, multiple
mechanical loads could also cause quality losses of other
commodities such as onions. Usually, onion damage is
not immediately visible but it causes increased respir-
ation and storage loss.
The objectives of this study were: (1) to determine
the respiration response and storage loss of bulb onion
due to multiple mechanical loads under laboratory
conditions; (2) to develop relationships between result-
ing onion storage losses and mechanical loads mea-
sured by means of the artificial fruit2 PMS-60 under
equivalent conditions; and (3) to acquire data on
mechanical loads during harvesting and handling for
predicting the risk of onion damage under practical
conditions.9
2. Materials and methods
2.1. PMS-60 equipment and techniques
The PMS-60 system used in this study has been de-
scribed in detail elsewhere.2 It consisted of a pressure
measuring sphere (PMS), an interface device for data
transfer from and to a personal computer, and the soft-
ware to operate the system and process the recorded
data. The diameter of the pressure measuring sphere was
62 mm, and its mass was 180 g. The sphere consisted of
a rubber ball (rubber hardness: 80° Shore-A) filled with
373 ( 1998 Silsoe Research Institute
374 B. H ER O LD E¹ A¸ .
silicon oil, whose hydraulic pressure level changed in
response to external mechanical load. An electronic data
acquisition unit was embedded inside the sphere contain-
ing a stand-alone microcomputer, a fluid pressure sensor,
and a rechargable battery. This unit was able to detect
pressure caused by both static and dynamic mechanical
load events, if they exceeded a preset threshold. The
measured data were stored, together with time from an
internal clock.
Size, mass and elastic compliance of the PMS were
similar to that of onions and potatoes,2 although the
sphere’s average density (o"1)4 g/cm2) was higher than
that of these commodities. It should also be noted that
the spherical shape caused the PMS to roll more easily.
Under static load conditions (compression between par-
allel plates), the measuring range was 0—100 N, and the
measuring error was approximately 5% (in the lower
range, about 10%). Under dynamic loading (dropping
the sphere at random orientation vertically onto a hori-
zontal surface), the measured pressure values showed
a relatively strong dependence on the orientation angle
during impact application. For this reason the measuring
error was higher, and 10—15 measuring runs are required
to obtain representative average results. To simplify mat-
ters, a static calibration mode (between parallel plates)
was performed. Presuming the existence of mechanical
similarity between PMS-60 and real onions, the PMS-60
load data could be used to describe approximately the
onion impact behaviour.
Fig. 1. Definition of parameters of a mechanical load event measured by PMS-60
The operation of the PMS was as follows. A five-pin
connector joined the sphere to the serial interface of
a personal computer. The sphere’s data acquisition unit
was controlled (including setting of data sampling rate,
sampling threshold value, and other parameters) using
software on a portable computer. In operation, the
sphere was initialized, disconnected from the computer
and passed with the commodities through the machin-
ery. The sphere was then reconnected to the per-
sonal computer to transfer recorded data for further
processing.
From measured data of each mechanical load event,
three parameters could be derived:
(1) duration of the load event,
(2) peak force (i.e. the maximum value of the load event),
and
(3) load integral (i.e. the area under the force—time curve
for the load event).
An example of an impact and definitions of load para-
meters are given in Fig. 1.
The number of recorded mechanical loads or im-
pacts, the peak force and the load integral of each
load event were used to evaluate the measured handling
process.
For data acquisition under laboratory drop tests as
well as under practical conditions, the sampling rate was
set at 3 kHz (sufficient to acquire both static loads and
short impacts), and the preset sampling threshold was
 ME CH A N IC AL LO AD A N D I TS EF FE CT O N B UL B O N I O N S
20 N. Experiences showed no significant damage if
onions are contacting flat surfaces under mechanical load
equivalent to force values below 20 N.
2.2. Comparison with other devices
Since 1989, two types of instrumented spheres have
been available that are able to record mechanical load
data together with time from an internal clock. These
spheres have been developed for basically the same pur-
pose. They are used to mimic real fruit and to require
information on mechanical loads applied to fruit during
handling. The main alternative to the PMS-60 is the
impact recording sphere1 IS100. The IS100 shell is made
of bee’s wax or plastic and is relatively rigid. The sphere
was originally developed to detect causes of apple bruises
and is not very robust. Inside the sphere, accelerations
are measured with a triaxial acceleration sensor. The
IS100 is calibrated under dynamic load conditions using
drops from different heights onto a horizontal surface. Its
measuring range is 0—500 g where g is the acceleration
due to gravity, and the measuring error is nearly 5%. The
IS100 measures impact deceleration, but unlike the
PMS-60 it cannot detect static load events.
2.3. Bulb onion response to laboratory drop tests
Preliminary studies showed that most mechanical
loads were due to drops during transfers between suc-
cessive components of machinery. Hence, laboratory
investigations were focussed on drop tests simulating
successive transfers. Tests were performed in the period
1994/95.
Onions of the cultivar ‘‘Rijnsburger Balstora’’ were
harvested carefully by hand. Onions ranging from 40 to
80 mm in diameter were selected and placed in a room to
dry for four days. Onions were divided at random into
fifteen 35 kg samples. One sample was used as a control.
Each of the other 35 kg onion sample was given one of
the following treatments. The onions of each sample were
placed one by one at random orientation onto a belt
conveyor (belt speed 0)4 m/s), and dropped from heights
of 17)5, 35, 70 and 105 cm onto a horizontal impact
surface. After bouncing off the impact surface, each onion
was caught to avoid a second impact. This procedure was
repeated successively to give the desired number of
drops. The desired numbers of drops were defined ac-
cording to two different levels of impact kinetic energy
(or of equivalent drop height sum), where the drop height
sum was the drop height multiplied by the number of
drops. The values were 210 cm, calculable in four ways
(12]17)5, 6]35, 3]70, 2]105 cm), and 630 cm
375
(36]17)5, 18]35, 9]70, 6]105 cm). Each sample was
subjected to one of these multiple drops onto either
a 10 mm thick steel plate (steel) or a PVC-conveyor belt
(belt) stretched over 400 mm spaced support rollers (the
impact was between the supports). The minimum drop
height of 17)5 cm was used only for drops onto the steel
plate. Immediately after testing, the 15 samples were
divided into two groups. The first group was used for
respiration tests. From each sample two 1)5 kg sub-
samples (about 20 onions in each) were selected at
random and placed into two closed containers with con-
trolled ventilation. These 30 containers were stored in-
side a dark room at 12—14°C, with a relative humidity of
60%, and a fresh airflow 10 1/kg h. Two infrared gas
analyzers (VTI Valtronics 2007 DHE) were used to re-
cord the onion respiration (difference between the carbon
dioxide percentages of the incoming and the outgoing air
flow) for each container. The onion respiration was re-
corded for a period of about 11 weeks.
The second group was used for a 5 month storage test.
In a similar way, two 15 kg subsamples from each sample
were placed in separate cylindrical containers with per-
meable steel walls and stored in an airy shed. These 30
containers were covered by a tent-cloth, and an electric
radiator was switched on if the air temperature fell below
0°C. This way, the storage temperature changed between
#15°C and !1°C, and the relative humidity was near
the open air humidity. On half of these containers (one of
each sample), a static load equivalent to an onion pile 5 m
high was applied by means of a flat plate. The difference
between initial mass (before storage) and final mass (after
storage) was attributed to transpiration and respiration
losses. Other loss portions after storage were determined
in connection with EC quality standards by grading the
stored onions into marketable (sound), rotted and
sprouted, and other unsaleable components (separated
skins, dirt).
2.4. Relationship between mechanical load input and
resulting onion storage losses
The pressure measuring sphere PMS-60 was subjected
to the same laboratory drop test conditions as applied to
bulb onions, and the resulting load data were recorded.
Only the parameters peak force and load integral of the
first impact of each drop were selected, so that a single
impact event could be graphically represented as a data
point on a peak force versus load integral diagram. The
parameters for multiple drops (impacts) were obtained by
adding the parameters of single impacts. The following
parameters were used as load input for further calcu-
lation: the number of drops, the peak force, and the load
integral of the single drop, the sum of peak forces, and the
376 B. H ER O LD E¹ A¸ .
sum of load integrals of multiple drops. The data for
onion storage losses (mass and quality losses) and the
PMS-60 laboratory test data were processed by means of
regression analysis in order to create a mathematical
relationship between mechanical load applied and onion
storage losses.
2.4. ¸oad data acquisition under practical conditions
Mechanical loads were measured during all practical
handling steps from harvest to storage. Measuring runs
covered lifting, windrowing to a swath, harvesting from
the swath and loading onto a truck, unloading from
a truck, separation of under-sized onions and dirt, and
delivery to storage. The measuring runs were repeated
10—15 times, because a single run might not be represen-
tative of the possible diversity of paths through the ma-
chinery. Multiple runs also reduced the measuring errors
of the PMS-60 occurring in single runs (see Section 2.1).
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Bulb onion response to laboratory drop tests
Onion respiration rates for onions dropped onto steel,
drop height sum 630 cm, and for the non-loaded control
Fig. 2. Respiration rate of dropped and non-dropped (control) onions during an 11 week test period for given drop height sum in cm
are shown in Fig. 2. Initially, the respiration rates in-
creased strongly with time, including the control. Onions
dropped from 105 cm reached the highest value of
26 mg/kg h CO . Then a gradual decrease occurred. By
2
the end of 12 d, the respiration rates seemed to reach an
approximately constant level. After 16 d, a further de-
crease was observed. Thereafter, the respiration rates did
not show substantial changes except the samples sub-
jected to 105 and 70 cm drop height. After the 19th day,
the values for the sample with 17)5 cm drop height and
the control reached the same final value of about
8 mg/kg h CO .
2
Table 1 lists the onion respiration and transpiration
rates on the 19th day, the accumulated respiration and
transpiration (over 19 d), and the mass loss (19th day) for
drops from 105, 35, and 17)5 cm onto both steel and belt
(drop height sums of 630 and 210 cm). The greatest onion
response was due to 105 cm drop height at 630 cm drop
height sum onto steel (first line in Table 1). Under that
condition, the respiration and transpiration rates of the
onion showed the highest values (17 mg/kg h CO , and
2
46 mg/kg h H O), while the accumulated transpiration
2
and the mass loss were nearly the same as for 35 cm drop
height (drop height sum 630 cm, steel). The respiration
values ranked clearly according to drop height, drop
height sum, and impact surface. The ratio of accumulated
respirations between the highest (105 cm, 630 cm, steel)
and the lowest (35 cm, 210 cm, belt) mechanical input was
 ME CH A N IC AL LO AD A N D I TS EF FE CT O N B UL B O N I O N S 377

Table 1
Onion response to different treatments after 19 d storage (averages of two 1 · 5 kg subsamples)

Drop Respiration Transpiration Accumulated Accumulated

Drop height rate rate respiration transpiration Mass loss
Impact Number height, sum, (at 19th day), (at 19th day), (19 days), (19 days), (19 days),
surface of drops cm cm mg/kg h mg/kg h g/kg g/kg g/kg

Steel plate 6 105 630 17)0 46)0 9)5 27)5 34)1

Steel plate 18 35 630 10)7 42)8 6)3 27)8 34)5
Steel plate 36 17)5 630 7)8 35)8 4)9 24)4 29)4
Steel plate 2 105 210 9)6 34)9 5)6 23)5 27)1
Steel plate 6 35 210 9)2 36)8 4)9 22)7 25)7
Steel plate 12 17)5 210 7)6 28)9 4)0 21)0 28)7
Conveyor belt 6 105 630 9)2 33)7 4)5 21)4 24)6
Conveyor belt 18 35 630 6)4 27)6 3)7 21)1 25)9
Conveyor belt 2 105 210 6)8 28)2 3)9 19)9 21)1
Conveyor belt 6 35 210 6)7 30)2 3)6 19)8 23)4
Not dropped 0 0 0 7)0 32)6 3)7 19)8 21)7

approximately 2)6. This was the most sensitive indicator
of mechanical stress. On the other hand, the values of
transpiration and mass loss were not so clearly ranked,
and the corresponding ratios of accumulated transpira-
tions and mass loss were lower, in both cases about 1)4.
Both accumulated respiration and transpiration of
lowest mechanical input (35 cm, 210 cm, belt) did not
differ from non-dropped control, and the mass losses
were only slightly different. Evidently, the respiration
rate was influenced by random variations between the
onion samples.
For drops onto hard steel, the accumulated respiration
depended more strongly on drop height than on number
of drops. This result was not found for drops onto the
soft belt. In that case, the accumulated respiration caused
by the different mechanical inputs did not substantially
differ from that of the control (except for the case of the
105 cm drop height and 630 cm drop height sum). This
can be attributed to the different deformation stress in-
duced by hard and soft impact surfaces on the ‘‘medium’’
hard bulb onion. Impacts onto the soft belt were assumed
to cause only effects on small volumes of onion cell tissue.
In contrast, an increased respiration seemed to reflect
physiological response of large volumes of cell tissue due
to hard impacts.
Table 2 shows the results of long-term storage tests
with 15 kg subsamples. Herein, additional results are
included from drop test onto the belt from a height of

Table 2
Percentages of onion mass losses after 5 month storage (data from each 15 kg subsample)

Storage Impact Drop height sum, cm

height surface 0 210 210 210 210 280 630 630 630 630 700
(static
load), Drop height, cm
m 0 17)5 35 70 105 140 17)5 35 70 105 140

Number of drops
0 12 6 3 2 2 36 18 9 6 5

Total loss, %

5 Steel 13)4 18)4 16)9 18)6 25)0 NA 17)2 24)9 23)5 34)0 NA
0 Steel 17)5 NA 14)4 NA 24)3 NA NA 19)2 NA 26)0 NA
5 Belt 13)4 NA 12)8 NA 15)2 15)9 NA 21)8 22)0 21)1 16)2
0 Belt 17)5 NA 15)6 NA 11)9 NA NA 19)7 NA 17)3 NA

NA"not available.
378 B. H ER O LD E¹ A¸ .

140 cm (drop height sum 280 and 700 cm). Total loss The direct mass loss, i.e. the difference between initial
parameters are given, i.e. the difference between initial and final mass due to respiration and transpiration, in-
mass of subsample as above and its final mass after creased gradually with increasing both drop height and
removing the unsaleable components. Two static load drop height sum for drop onto steel. For drops onto the
conditions during storage are considered: with static load belt, a strongly increasing effect was found with increas-
(equivalent to 5 m height of storage pile), and without ing number of drops. For drops onto both steel and belt,
static load (equivalent to 0 m height). These results agree the direct mass loss decreased with increased static load
with those from respiration tests. The ‘not dropped’ con- during storage.
trols had total losses of 13)4% and 17)5%, respectively. The total mass loss increased strongly with increasing
The highest total loss, 34%, was found for six drops onto drop height for drops onto steel. However for drops onto
steel from 105 cm (with static load). However for the the belt, a gradual decrease was found. For both impact
drops onto the belt, the highest total loss, 22%, was for surfaces, an increasing drop height sum led to gradually
nine drops from 70 cm (with static load). Most of the increasing total mass loss.
samples stored without static load showed lower total The loss due to rotting increased strongly when a static
losses. load was applied for drops onto both steel and belt.
The relations between different load factors and stor- Increasing drop height was found to cause increasing
age losses were studied by several simple linear regression rotting loss for drops onto steel, while for drops onto the
analyses. The analyses were done separately for both belt, the drop height sum had increasing effect.
drops onto steel and drops onto belt, including on the The loss due to sprouting was not significantly affected
one side the number of drops x , drop height x , drop by drops onto the belt. For the drops onto steel, an
1 2
height sum x and static load during storage x , and on increasing effect of drop height was found, while the
3 4
the other, direct mass losses y , total mass losses y , loss static load caused decreased sprouting loss.
1 2
due to rotting y , and loss due to sprouting y :
3 4
y 2 "b #b x #b x #b x #b x (1)
1, ,4 0 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 3.2. Relationship between mechanical load input and
The different load conditions have a significant effect on resulting onion storage losses
different portions of onion storage losses which is ex-
pressed by the amount and the sign of regression coeffi- Summarizing these results, very different relations
cients b (Table 3). were found between load input and onion storage
i losses for the two impact surfaces. In order to explain
this behaviour, the PMS-60 load data were used to devel-
Table 3 op a clearer model of impacts against hard and soft
Results of regression analyses based on data of onion storage surfaces.
losses (level of significance for probability p595%) The data of PMS-60 measurements under equivalent
drop conditions are shown in the peak force versus load
Regression coefficient b
i integral diagram (Fig. 3). This diagram is useful to dis-
Regressand Regressor Drop onto steel Drop onto criminate between static and dynamic load events, and
belt among the latter between ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ impacts. The
plotted points represent the impact loads for 330 drops
x NS 0)088 from heights between 10 and 110 cm onto steel, and for
1
y x 0)011 NS
1 2 420 drops from heights between 10 and 140 cm onto the
Direct mass loss x 0)0027 NS
3 belt. Separate regression lines were calculated for drops
x !0)26 !0)15
4 onto steel (line A), and for drops onto the belt (line B),
x NS NS
1
y x 0)094 !0)029 respectively, and entered in the diagram. From these
2 2
Total mass loss x 0)0074 0)0113 data, it could be concluded that the value of load integral
3
x NS NS
4 did not exceed 0)9 Ns under impact conditions. There-
x NS NS
1 fore, the region C with higher values of load integral was
y x 0)061 NS
3 2 separated from the region of the graph where impacts
Rotting loss x NS 0)0068
3
x 0)89 0)49 occurred.
4
x NS NS Based on the storage loss data and on the averaged
1
y x 0)033 NS
4 2 impact data from PMS-60 measurements, a multiple
Sprouting loss x NS NS
3 linear regression analysis for total storage losses S¸ using
x !0)33 NS
4 the number of drops (impacts) n, the peak force F , the
max
NS"not significant parameter. sum of peak forces n F , the load integral ¸I, and the
max
 ME CH A N IC AL LO AD A N D I TS EF FE CT O N B UL B O N I O N S
Fig. 3. Peak force versus load integral diagram with the impact data from PMS-60 drop tests onto steel and onto belt, and with the
damage threshold lines calculated according to resulting 5% additional onion storage losses for different numbers of drops
sum of load integrals n¸I, gave the following equation:
S¸"13)9!0)566n#0)054F !0)0027nF
max max
!9)8¸I#3)31n¸I
where r2"0)71 (r"correlation coefficient) and N"25
(N"number of data points).
This regression model reflected satisfactorily the basic
relations between mechanical load measured by means of
PMS-60 and resulting total mass losses for impacts
against both hard and soft impact surfaces (Fig. 4).
3.3. Application of relationship for damage prediction
Equation (2) could be used to describe the potential for
onion storage losses, based on PMS-60 data of mechan-
ical loads during handling.
To define the allowable mechanical load thresholds or
damage thresholds, a mechanical load was assumed to be
damaging if the storage losses of the dropped onions
differed significantly (p"95%) from those of not drop-
ped onions. The damage threshold lines for onions under
multiple drop conditions were constructed by using the
regression equation, Eqn (2). Transposing this equation,
data pairs of the peak force and the load integral can be
calculated for given (assumed) values of number of im-
379
pact loads and total mass losses. The value of total mass
losses was assumed according to 5% additional mass
losses (added to calculated mass loss of the ‘not dropped’
control). The number of impacts were assumed as shown
(2) in Fig. 3. The calculation of two appropriately selected
data pairs (points in the peak force versus load integral
diagram) is sufficient for each of the given values. Then
the line joining each of the two points represents the
corresponding damage threshold line in this diagram.
The direction of these threshold lines indicated which
parameters determined the risk of onion storage losses. If
only a few impacts occurred, then the peak force was
more important than the load integral. However, in the
case of numerous impacts, the load integral had greater
effect than the peak force.
By means of the lines A and B, combined with damage
threshold lines as defined above, the peak force versus
load integral diagram was divided into eight classes of
different mechanical load regions (see partition of data in
Fig. 6). These load regions were defined as follows:
¸oad region 1
description: weak impacts;
effect: negligible effect (additional mass losses
(1%).
¸oad regions 2 and 3
description: mechanical loads due to very soft or light
impacts (region 2) or small quasistatic load
380
Fig. 4. Total mass losses of dropped onions after a 5 month storage period in comparison with that of not loaded onions (data calculated
by regression analysis)
and scraping (region 3), e.g. during flow
out of bunker, or permanent load in bulk
store up to 5 m height;
effect: insignificant effect.
¸oad regions 4, 5 and 7
description: medium and strong impacts;
effect: non-allowable load levels particularly in
regions 7 and 5, i.e. technical improvement
is required (addition mass losses '5%);
mostly allowable load level in region 4, if
only a few impacts occur;
¸oad regions 6 and 8
description: medium and strong quasistatic load and
scraping, e.g. on shed;
effect: preliminary estimated: partly allowable
in region 6; non-allowable load level in
region 8, i.e. technical improvement is
required.
It should be noted that the threshold boundaries are
not sharp. The definition of load regions was an ap-
proach to evaluate the strength as well as the number of
load events. That means the method is strictly valid only
for multiple impacts of the same level as applied for the
above described laboratory conditions.
B. H ER O LD E¹ A¸ .
3.4. PMS-60 load data and estimation of practical
handling damage
The mechanical load sequence detected by the PMS-
60 during passage through a windrower is shown in
Fig. 5. The run was recorded with a sampling frequency
of 3)33 kHz over a period of 6 s and with a load threshold
of 15)7 N. All load events above a threshold of 20 N are
presented. The first is shown with an expanded time axis
(top, left). This load event had a duration of 27)4 ms due
to a quasistatic compressive load. The expanded
force—time diagram is also shown for a typical impact
event with a duration of 5)5 ms (top, right).
Average results of 20 measuring runs through the
windrower are presented in Table 4. Most of detected
load events were impacts with small values of load inte-
gral and of peak force. The probability of an impact with
peak force above 100 N during a run was 20%. A quasi-
static load was found to occur in 60% of runs.
The raw data of the occurrence of different mechanical
loads could be useful for direct comparison of different
technologies as well as of different operation modes of
handling machinery. However, this data alone does not
enable an estimate of the damaging effects on produce.
Therefore, the practical load data measured by means of
the PMS-60 were added to the peak force versus load
integral diagram. The intention was to use the same
 ME CH A N IC AL LO AD A N D I TS EF FE CT O N B UL B O N I O N S 381

Fig. 5. Force-time diagram of a PMS-60 measuring run through the windrower (diagrams of a quasistatic, and an impact load,
respectively, with expanded time axis including the sampling points are shown on the top)

relation found under laboratory conditions, in order to
evaluate the measured practical load data. Figure 6
shows data collected by the PMS-60 during 20 measur-
ing runs through an onion harvester and the following
transfer onto a truck. Several hundreds of load events
were recorded. Most of them were impact loads, i.e. the
values of their load integral did not exceed 0)9 N s. The
majority of impacts were low (peak force below 100 N),
while load integral values were spread over a wide range.
Using the procedure to classify the load events into the
eight load regions, the resulting data are shown in
Table 5. The data from the windrower, from harvesting
including transfer to the truck, and from postharvest
handling (including unloading the truck and transport to
the storage pile), are shown in rows 1—3, respectively. The
great majority of impact loads were classified into load
region 1, while about 15 impacts into load regions 4,
5 and 7 would exceed the allowable threshold. Harvest-
ing from the windrow, and in particular the transfer from
the harvester onto the truck were found to cause severe
mechanical loads. Some of these impacts had high forces
related to low levels of load integral, which corresponded

Table 4
Classification of mechanical loads detected by means of PMS-60 during windrowing of onions according to peak force and load
integral (averaged numbers of loads from 20 runs)

Number of loads

Load integral, N s
Peak force, N 0—0)2 0)2—0)5 0)5—0)9 0)9—5 '5 Sum

20—60 45)9 4)6 0)3 0)2 0)3 51)3

60—100 1)4 2)4 0)1 0)1 0)0 4)0
100—140 0)0 0)2 0)0 0)0 0)0 0)2
140—180 0)0 0)0 0)0 0)0 0)0 0)0

Sum 47)3 7)2 0)4 0)3 0)3 55)5

382 B. H ER O LD E¹ A¸ .

Fig. 6. Peak forces versus load integral diagram with the different load regions shown, together with data points of load events recorded
during a PMS-60 run through an onion harvester (*) and the transfer onto truck (]) (data collected during 20 measuring runs through
machinery)

to dropping from about 1 m onto steel. Small impacts 4. Conclusions

occurred during windrowing. The handling steps from un-
loading the truck to storage also caused numerous impacts
of medium and small levels at the many transfer points.
These data can be applied to identify where improve-
ments in the handling technique are required. It should
be noted that no results exist on the effect of multiple
impacts at different (mixed) levels. Unfortunately, in
practical production, multiple drops of different levels
occur, and so this evaluation method could be considered
to be a preliminary approach.
Nevertheless, the method identifies the most important
factors which affect the onion damage and resulting stor-
age losses.
Multiple mechanical loads had a significant effect on
onion respiration rate as well as on additional mass
losses after a five month storage period. Therefore, these
parameters are more appropriate for determining onion
response to excessive mechanical stress than parameters
of visible damage that are evaluated immediately after
mechanical loading.
Results of laboratory drop tests at two kinetic energy
levels (according to number of drops multiplied by drop
height) indicated a complex relation between mass losses
after five months storage period, and drop height, num-
ber of drops and elastic compliance of impact surface. In

Table 5
Classification of mechanical loads detected by means of PMS-60 during harvest and postharvest handling according to the eight load
regions (averaged numbers of loads from 21 runs)

Number of loads

Load region
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Sum

Windrowing 49)3 2)1 0)6 3)4 0)1 0)0 0)0 0)0 55)5
Harvesting 85)3 7)4 2)6 6)3 0)2 0)2 0)0 0)0 102)0
Postharvest handling 47)6 1)7 2)4 5)0 0)1 0)0 0)1 0)0 56)9
Sum 182)2 11)2 5)6 14)7 0)4 0)2 0)1 0)0 214)4
 ME CH A N IC AL LO AD A N D I TS EF FE CT O N B UL B O N I O N S
the case of dropping onto a hard surface (steel plate), the
mass losses increased predominantly with increasing
drop height. If the onions were dropped onto a soft
impact surface (e.g. a freely stretched conveyor belt), then,
at the same energy level, the mass losses corresponded
predominantly to the number of drops.
From laboratory multiple drop test results, a regres-
sion equation was derived, that described the onion stor-
age losses as a function of load parameters (number of
drops, peak force, load integral) acquired by using the
PMS-60 under equivalent conditions. Based on this re-
gression function, a procedure was developed to evaluate
the damage risk caused by handling techniques. Further
research is required to explore the results to mixed load
level conditions.
Two kinds of critical load sources emerged from prac-
tice: too many loads due to insufficiently optimized oper-
ating system, and excessively high peak forces due to
rough transfers.
References
1
Zapp H R; Ehlert S H; Brown G K; Armstrong P R; Sober
S S Advanced instrumented sphere (IS) for impact measure-
ments. Transactions of the ASAE, 1990, 33(3), 955—960
383
2
Herold B; Truppel I, Siering G; Geyer M A Pressure
measuring sphere for monitoring handling of fruit and veg-
etables. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 1996,
15(1), 73—88
3
Schulte-Pason N L; Timm E J; Brown G K Apple, peach
and pear impact damage threshods. ASAE-Paper No. 90-
6002
4
Lin X; Brusewitz G H Peach bruise thresholds using the
instrumented sphere. Transactions of the ASAE, 1994, 37(4),
509—513
5
Pang D W; Studman C J; Banks N H Apple bruising thre-
sholds for an instrumented sphere. Transactions of the ASAE,
1994, 37(3), 893—897
6
Hyde G M; Bajema R W; Zhang W Measurement of impact
damage thresholds in fruit and vegetables. Selected Papers of
IV International Symposium on Fruit, Nut, and Vegetable
Production Engineering, Valencia-Zaragoza/Spain, Vol. 2,
22—26 March 1993, 231—243
7
Herold B; Habelt R Weniger Producktbeschädigungen durch
exaktes Messen (Less produce damage by exact measuring).
Landtechnik, 1992, 47(1-2), 78—81
8
Molema G J; Bouman A Investigation of blackspot in rela-
tion to measurements made with an instrumented sphere in
the post-storage handling of table potatoes. Proceedings of
the Meeting of the Section Engineering (EAPR), Soltau/Ger-
many, 6—8 March 1995, 27—36
9
Oberbarnscheidt B; Geyer M; Herold B Einfluss mechanis-
cher Belastungen auf Atmung und Masseverluste bei Speisez-
wiebeln (Affect of mechanical loads on respiration and mass
losses of bulb onions). Bornimer Agrartechnische Berichte,
1996 (8), 139—159, ISSN 0947-7314