Abstract
Designing an agricultural robot must be supported by characterization of target crop. In this study, three verities of pumpkin including JEJEJ, TC2A, and Hokutokou were taken under physical evaluation to find an appropriated robotic harvesting procedure. The main objective of this study was finding required parameters to design a unique end-effector for harvesting the pumpkin. In this regard, three experimentations were conducted including general physical properties for investigating the pumpkin orientation and possible harvesting methodologies, compression strength test for measuring the compression yield force in grasping stage, and bending-shear test for measuring the yield force to cut the stem. The results showed that the average pumpkin's lift weight was 26% more than pumpkin's pure weight. The orientation of all specimen was unified in the range of (-90°, +90°) when the pumpkins were lifted to a certain height. In average, the tested pumpkins have a radius, volume, and weight of 105.62 mm, 4.95 × 106 mm3, 3.03 kg, respectively. The combination of lifting technique with pumpkin parametrization were made the infrastructure of a robotic harvesting methodology. Based on the compression test, the maximum, minimum, and average compression force of JEJEJ, TC2A, Hokutokou was 4.66, 4.58, and 4.61 kN; 2.81, 2.06, and 2.24 kN; and 3.37, 3.1, and 3.23kN, respectively. The optimum stress and time period in during of stem cutting were 2.84, 3.3, and 2.01 N ⁄ mm2 and 2.4, 2.03. and 1.39 s for JEJEJE, TC2A and Hokutokou, respectively when a single angles blade with 60° was used to cut the stems.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 19
Claim · model-written summary
Average pumpkin lift weight was 26% more than pure weight.
Verbatim
e0“the average pumpkin's lift weight was 26% more than pumpkin's pure weight”
Claim · model-written summary
Lifted pumpkins had orientations from -90° to +90°.
CucurbitaOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The orientation of all specimen was unified in the range of (-90°, +90°) when the pumpkins were lifted to a certain height.”
Claim · model-written summary
Average tested pumpkin radius was 105.62 mm.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the tested pumpkins have a radius, volume, and weight of 105.62 mm, 4.95 × 106 mm3, 3.03 kg, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Average tested pumpkin volume was 4.95 × 106 mm3.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the tested pumpkins have a radius, volume, and weight of 105.62 mm, 4.95 × 106 mm3, 3.03 kg, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Average tested pumpkin weight was 3.03 kg.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the tested pumpkins have a radius, volume, and weight of 105.62 mm, 4.95 × 106 mm3, 3.03 kg, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Lifting technique and pumpkin parametrization formed a robotic harvesting method.
Verbatim
e0“The combination of lifting technique with pumpkin parametrization were made the infrastructure of a robotic harvesting methodology.”
Claim · model-written summary
JEJEJ maximum compression force was 4.66 kN.
Verbatim
e0“the maximum, minimum, and average compression force of JEJEJ, TC2A, Hokutokou was 4.66, 4.58, and 4.61 kN; 2.81, 2.06, and 2.24 kN; and 3.37, 3.1, and 3.23kN, respectively”
t0“pumpkin”
Claim · model-written summary
TC2A maximum compression force was 4.58 kN.
Verbatim
e0“the maximum, minimum, and average compression force of JEJEJ, TC2A, Hokutokou was 4.66, 4.58, and 4.61 kN; 2.81, 2.06, and 2.24 kN; and 3.37, 3.1, and 3.23kN, respectively”
t0“pumpkin”
Claim · model-written summary
Hokutokou maximum compression force was 4.61 kN.
Verbatim
e0“the maximum, minimum, and average compression force of JEJEJ, TC2A, Hokutokou was 4.66, 4.58, and 4.61 kN; 2.81, 2.06, and 2.24 kN; and 3.37, 3.1, and 3.23kN, respectively”
t0“pumpkin”
Claim · model-written summary
JEJEJ minimum compression force was 2.81 kN.
Verbatim
e0“the maximum, minimum, and average compression force of JEJEJ, TC2A, Hokutokou was 4.66, 4.58, and 4.61 kN; 2.81, 2.06, and 2.24 kN; and 3.37, 3.1, and 3.23kN, respectively”
t0“pumpkin”
Claim · model-written summary
TC2A minimum compression force was 2.06 kN.
Verbatim
e0“the maximum, minimum, and average compression force of JEJEJ, TC2A, Hokutokou was 4.66, 4.58, and 4.61 kN; 2.81, 2.06, and 2.24 kN; and 3.37, 3.1, and 3.23kN, respectively”
t0“pumpkin”
Claim · model-written summary
Hokutokou minimum compression force was 2.24 kN.
Verbatim
e0“the maximum, minimum, and average compression force of JEJEJ, TC2A, Hokutokou was 4.66, 4.58, and 4.61 kN; 2.81, 2.06, and 2.24 kN; and 3.37, 3.1, and 3.23kN, respectively”
t0“pumpkin”
Claim · model-written summary
JEJEJ average compression force was 3.37 kN.
Verbatim
e0“the maximum, minimum, and average compression force of JEJEJ, TC2A, Hokutokou was 4.66, 4.58, and 4.61 kN; 2.81, 2.06, and 2.24 kN; and 3.37, 3.1, and 3.23kN, respectively”
t0“pumpkin”
Claim · model-written summary
TC2A average compression force was 3.1 kN.
Verbatim
e0“the maximum, minimum, and average compression force of JEJEJ, TC2A, Hokutokou was 4.66, 4.58, and 4.61 kN; 2.81, 2.06, and 2.24 kN; and 3.37, 3.1, and 3.23kN, respectively”
t0“pumpkin”
Claim · model-written summary
Hokutokou average compression force was 3.23 kN.
Verbatim
e0“the maximum, minimum, and average compression force of JEJEJ, TC2A, Hokutokou was 4.66, 4.58, and 4.61 kN; 2.81, 2.06, and 2.24 kN; and 3.37, 3.1, and 3.23kN, respectively”
t0“pumpkin”
Claim · model-written summary
JEJEJE optimum stem-cutting stress was 2.84 N ⁄ mm2.
Verbatim
e0“The optimum stress and time period in during of stem cutting were 2.84, 3.3, and 2.01 N ⁄ mm2 and 2.4, 2.03. and 1.39 s for JEJEJE, TC2A and Hokutokou, respectively when a single angles blade with 60° was used to cut the stems.”
t0“pumpkin”
Claim · model-written summary
TC2A optimum stem-cutting stress was 3.3 N ⁄ mm2.
Verbatim
e0“The optimum stress and time period in during of stem cutting were 2.84, 3.3, and 2.01 N ⁄ mm2 and 2.4, 2.03. and 1.39 s for JEJEJE, TC2A and Hokutokou, respectively when a single angles blade with 60° was used to cut the stems.”
t0“pumpkin”
Claim · model-written summary
Hokutokou optimum stem-cutting stress was 2.01 N ⁄ mm2.
Verbatim
e0“The optimum stress and time period in during of stem cutting were 2.84, 3.3, and 2.01 N ⁄ mm2 and 2.4, 2.03. and 1.39 s for JEJEJE, TC2A and Hokutokou, respectively when a single angles blade with 60° was used to cut the stems.”
t0“pumpkin”
Claim · model-written summary
Stem-cutting times were 2.4, 2.03, and 1.39 s for JEJEJE, TC2A, and Hokutokou, respectively.
Verbatim
e0“2.4, 2.03. and 1.39 s for JEJEJE, TC2A and Hokutokou, respectively”
t0“pumpkin”