TITLE : AN IMPROVISED MAIZE SHELLING MACHINE

PRESENTED BY: NYALE JAMES MWANGO

INDEX NUMBER: 1061200601

CENTER NAME : KENYA COAST NATIONAL POLYTECHNIC

SUPERVISOR : MARTIN MULWA

PRESENTED TO: KNEC FOR AWARD OF DIPLOMA IN MECHANICAL

ENGINEERING (PRODUCTION)

DATE :

1
AN IMPROVISED MAIZE SHELLING
MACHINE

2
DECLARATION
I hereby declare that this project is my original work and has not been represented for the award
of any certificate, diploma or degree into any institution. This project should not be produced or
transmitted inform or by any electrical means recording or otherwise without the proper
permission from the author.
STUDENT NAME SUPERVISOR NAME
NYALE JAMES MWANGO MARTIN MULWA
SIGN………………………………………… SIGN…………………….……..
DATE…………………………………………. DATE…………………………..
TEL…………………………………………. TEL………….…………………

i
Table of Contents
DECLARATION..............................................................................................................................i
DEDICATION...............................................................................................................................iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT..............................................................................................................iv
ABSTRACT/SYNOPSIS................................................................................................................v
CHAPTER ONE..............................................................................................................................1
1.0 INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................1
1.1 BACKGROUND.......................................................................................................................1
1.2 JUSTIFICATION......................................................................................................................3
1.3 OBJECTIVES............................................................................................................................3
1.3.1 Broad Objective...................................................................................................................3
1.3.2 Specific Objectives..............................................................................................................4
1.4 STATEMENT OF THE SCOPE...............................................................................................4
CHAPTER TWO.............................................................................................................................5
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW..........................................................................................................5
2.1 Maize Shelling Techniques........................................................................................................8
2.1.1 Hand shelling.......................................................................................................................8
2.1.2 Maize-shelling with Rotary Equipment..............................................................................9
2.2 The link in the Maize shelling techniques.................................................................................9
CHAPTER THREE.......................................................................................................................11
3.0 METHODOLOGY..................................................................................................................11
3.1 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................11
3.2 DEFINITION OF NATURE OF ACTIVITY.........................................................................12
3.2.1 Preparation of Drawings or Design...................................................................................12
3.2.2 Block Diagram and Steps Followed.....................................................................................13
3.3 SPECIFICATIONS..................................................................................................................14
3.4 COST ANALYSIS..................................................................................................................16
3.5 PRODUCTION OF COMPONENTS.....................................................................................17
3.5.1 Toothed Gearing................................................................................................................17
3.5.2 Hopper Design (Inlet Tray)...............................................................................................18
3.5.3 The Main Frame................................................................................................................19

ii
 3.5.4 Shelling Shaft Design........................................................................................................20
3.5.5 Blowing Shaft Design.......................................................................................................21
3.5.6 Bearing Selection..............................................................................................................21
3.5.7 Sprocket Selection.............................................................................................................22
3.5.8 Other Design Considerations.............................................................................................22
[Link] Calculation of the Shearing Force and Bending Moment of the Shaft at Different....22
[Link] Force in the beater discs required for threshing..........................................................23
[Link] The Radius, r, of the shelling Arm..............................................................................23
[Link] Determination of Threshing Torque...........................................................................24
[Link] Determination of the Power Delivered by primary Shaft...........................................24
[Link] Determination of Torsional Moment, MT The torsional moment, MT, is given by. .24
[Link] Bending Stress.............................................................................................................24
[Link] Torsional Stress...........................................................................................................25
[Link] Torsional Rigidity.......................................................................................................25
[Link] Lateral Rigidity...........................................................................................................25
3.6 ASSEMBLY............................................................................................................................27
3.7 TESTING OF EACH BLOCK................................................................................................29
3.7.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................................29
3.8 TESTING AND CONFORMITY OF RESULTS TO SPECIFICATIONS............................30
4.1 DATA ANALYSIS.................................................................................................................31
4.2 FINDINGS...............................................................................................................................31
4.2.1 (1). An Improvised Maize Shelling Machine Method......................................................32
4.2.2 (2). Hand Shelling Method................................................................................................32
4.2.3 (3). PTO Tractor Sheller....................................................................................................33
4.2.4 Overall Grain Damaged.....................................................................................................33
4.2.5 Shelling Efficiency............................................................................................................34
4.3 CONCLUSIONS.....................................................................................................................35
4.4 RECOMMENDATIONS.........................................................................................................35
4.5 REFERENCES........................................................................................................................36
4.6 APPENDIX..............................................................................................................................37

iii
DEDICATION
I dedicate this project to my parents, they showed me the important of embracing education and
change at large, I therefore honor them, I also dedicate this project to my brothers and sisters
who helped me in my research work and finally my project tutor Mr Martin Mulwa for his
hardworking and step by step guide.

iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
My first acknowledgement goes to the Almighty for the gift of life during the project time, my
sincerely appreciation goes to my family who facilitated and assisted in my research work and
finally express my deepest gratitude to my lecturer with his tireless efforts and professionalism
who assisted me complete this project.

v
ABSTRACT/SYNOPSIS
The processing of agriculture products into quality form not only prolongs the useful life of these
products but also increase the net profit farmers make from such products. In this emphasis was
placed on demand led design which involved understanding of farmers and design an appropriate
system that meets the needs. The objective of the work was to design, construct and evaluate a
low cost maize shelling machine for the law scaled farmers in Kilifi county Kenya.
The method used involved collecting of farmers shelling needs and opinions, selecting of
appropriate materials that were cheap and readily available and considering the failures of
already existing methods to come up with a compact design that could cover the areas of
weaknesses of the other methods. The research found was that most of students were kept out of
school for some weeks in order to perform the shelling exercise as most of them considered the
process as an important activity and some farmers especially women are the ones that did the
operation. Most of them who used hand shelling methods had wounds in their fingers. Most of
them could not afford the hiring of PTO tractor shelling machines as they were expensive and
were considered for the large scale farmers. In addition to that they added that PTO shelling
machines damaged the grain.
The problems experienced led to coming up with an improved maize shelling machine so as to
help the community in consideration of working efficiency, a cheap and compact design, easy to
operate, portable and environmental friendly.
The machine was designed and after the experiments to compare different factors of the different
mechanisms of performing the shelling task, it was seen that the improvised maize shelling
machine was the best as it shelled more kilograms of grains within a short period of time
compared to hand [Link] was also seen that the PTO shellers were the best in production of
many kilograms of shelled grains within a short period of time but damaged 75% of the total
kilograms so people underrated this machine due to its high rate number of damaged grains and
in addition to that the machine was expensive to hire for the local poor famers, it was termed as a
high scaled machine for the rich farmers with huge Acres of plantations. With hand shelling it
produced 100% of grains without breakage but the number of kilograms produced per a given
time was high. Only one kilogram was shelled in 30 Minutes. So the farmers accepted the
introduction of an Improvised Maize Shelling Machine as they said it was the best in terms if
production, easy to use, portable and less seeds were damaged.
It was concluded that the production of the Improvised Maize shelling machine was the best to
be used by the farmers of Chonyi as it had uncountable advantages to the local farmers and
welcomed the project to the society with all their hearts. The thresher can help to substantially
reduce the human labour involved in threshing at an affordable cost and also reduces the time
used for threshing operation on small farms considering the deduced fact that energy
requirements solely depend on the crank speed of operating the machine. There is no doubt that
the machine will ease the long term problem of maize shelling especially for the rural farmers.

vi
 CHAPTER ONE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND
Maize is one of the most important staple crops in the world. In Kenya, for example, 45% of the
population considers maize meal (Ugali) to be their survival food, making it the most consumed
food of the country. According to the D-Lab Corn Sheller writing at the Massachusetts Institute
of Technology (Accessed on Oct 4th 2013), maize accounts for 43% of the Latin American diet.

In Asia, maize production is over 200 billion kilograms a year and it is expected that the total
maize production in developing countries will eventually overtake production in industrialized
countries.

Maize is the most important cereal grain in the world, after wheat and rice, providing nutrients
for humans and animals and serving as a basic raw material for the production of starch, oil and
protein, alcoholic beverages, food sweeteners and, more recently, fuel.

It is because of the important place of maize that it’s handling, processing and preservation
within the optimum conditions must be analyzed. The major steps involved in the processing of
maize are harvesting, drying, de husking, shelling, storing, and milling. All these processes are
costly and for the rural farmers to maximize profits on their produce, appropriate technology that
suites their needs must be used.

Maize processing not only prolongs its useful life but also increases the net profit farmers make
from mechanization technologies. It is in this line that one of the most important processing
operations done to bring out the quality of maize is shelling of maize. It is basically the removal
of the maize kernels from the cob. This separation, done by hand or machine, is obtained by
shelling, by friction or by shaking the products; the difficulty of the process depends on the
varieties grown, and on the moisture content as well as the degree of maturity of the grain.

1
For a long time now, shelling maize to remove the grain from the cob has been a time
consuming, tedious and a mind cracking process especially to the many small scale farmers in
the country who basically practice subsistence maize farming. However, traditional shelling
methods do not support large-scale shelling of maize, especially for commercial purposes.

Hand shelling takes a lot of time, even with some hand operated simple tools. In this papers
study area, most mechanized shellers designed for maize shelling are tractor PTO shaft operated
and cause great damage to the maize seeds likewise breaking the cob to pieces. Such shellers are
equipped with rotating shelling drum with beaters or teeth, which cause damages to the seed.
Besides, the cost of purchasing such shellers are high for the rural farmer and therefore call for
the need of a relatively low cost maize shelling mechanism that will be affordable to such
farmers not only to meet their shelling requirement but also to improve the shelling efficiency
and reduce damage to the seed.

Many small scale maize farmers opt to shell their maize produce by use of hand, something that
is time consuming and tiresome. Shelling the annual maize harvest by hand typically takes weeks
with children sometimes kept out of school to help with the work of shelling the maize to meet
their daily food requirements. This is because processing food for survival takes priority over
education in subsistence farming households since the staple food in the country is maize meal
(Ugali).

In addition, the hardened, dry maize can also be painful to shell and lead to hand injuries. For
this reason, other such farmers choose to use simple hand held tools which are strenuous as well
as slow.

For the large scale maize farmers, those who tend over 10 acres of maize crop for commercial
purposes, shelling their produce has not really been a big problem majorly because they have
sufficient capital to hire combined harvesters from well established companies and organizations
Including amongst others KSC(Kenya seed company) and ADC(Agricultural Development
Corporation) Alternatively, quite a number of such extensive maize farmers own tractors or they
have the capacity to hire tractors which operate Sheller machines.

2
It is in this regard that this paper presents the design of modified hand operated maize Sheller
which is typically a Sheller for the small scale farmers who tend to maize farms less than five
acres. For these farmers, the produce is approximately twenty sacks of maize in cobs or less per
acre of cultivated farm.

After all this research, the call for the need of a relatively low cost maize shelling machine,
hence I decided to come up with the improvised grain shelling machine which is cheap to the
low scale farmers compared to the tractor shellers.
Secondly the machine is user friendly as it is easy to use and portable due to its small size but
with a higher working efficient. It will solve the shelling difficulties and injuries caused by hand
shelling and reduce time wastage for the process. Children won't be kept out of school due to
shelling issues and finally the farmers will get quality grains as this machine causes no damage
or breaking of grains

1.2 JUSTIFICATION
Chonyi area requires a conventional maize shelling technique that would significantly cater for
the farmers harvest capacity and which many households can afford. This is with due
consideration to the following reasons:
1. Most of the maize grown by such rural farmers is for food rather than for commercial
purpose.
2. Industrial maize shellers are too expensive to be purchased by such rural farmers.
3. For most of the farmers, the cost of hiring the service of industrial shellers is high with
respect to the amount of grain output at the end of the farming season.
4. Rotary and pedal-powered maize shellers require too much energy inputs which limits
their adoption by most of the farmers since they become cumbersome to use and result to
too much fatigue

1.3 OBJECTIVES

1.3.1 Broad Objective

The broad objective of this project is to design a maize cob Sheller.

3
1.3.2 Specific Objectives
The specific objectives include the following:
1. To review the existing maize shelling techniques in Kilifi county.
2. To determine energy requirement for operating the machine.
3. To come up with a project that do not damage the corn grain while shelling
4. To come up with a machine that can be used by small scale industries and farmers
5. To produce a shelling machine that is cheap, safe and user friendly
6. To provide a device capable of field operation in combination and portable to area of
demand.

1.4 STATEMENT OF THE SCOPE

This modified Sheller is to be a manually operated equipment. Its work output will depend on the
operator(s) as well as on the machine itself. The operator is to perform the maize shelling
operation by rotating a crank handle and therefore, proper crankshaft height and crank length
would be necessary for efficient operation of the machine. Improper crankshaft height and shaft
length will result in discomfort to the operator and difficulties in the smooth operation of the
equipment, thus resulting in lower work efficiency.

In view of the above this paper focuses on energy considerations which arise from among other
factors, the physiological and psychophysical responses of the rural farmer during operation of
the maize Sheller at different shaft handle heights and shaft lengths and to carry out design
modification in work system so as to have higher man-machine system efficiency. It is in this
regard that speed of the toothed gearing in the design system will be analyzed to facilitate the
determination of forces in the primary shaft as well as the power transmitted to the shelling unit.

4
 CHAPTER TWO

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

Maize shelling is an important step towards the processing of maize to its various finished
products like flour. Grinding or shelling operations of maize follow the harvest and whatever
pre-drying of the crop is undertaken. This operation can be carried out in the field or at the
storage environment.

The different methods of maize shelling can be categorized based on various mechanization
technology used. These includes: hand-tool-technology, animal technology, and engine power
technology. (FAO Corporate Document Repository on Agricultural engineering in development -
Post-harvest operations and management of food grains)

The invention of the modern crank-operated maize Sheller is widely attributed to Lester E.
Denison from Middlesex County Connecticut, quoted in Critical Evaluation of Locally
Fabricated Maize Shelling Machine, Adewole, C. A., Babajide T. M, International Journal of
Engineering Science and Innovative Technology (IJESIT) Volume 4, Issue 2, March 2015
A patent was issued for a freestanding, hand operated machine that removed individual kernels
of maize by pulling the cob through a series of metal-toothed cylinders which stripped the
kernels off the cob, based on numeric model given by During that same century, dozens of
American patents were filed for maize shellers made of wood as stated in Design and Fabrication
of Corn Shelling and Threshing Machine from the work written by Kedar Patil, Shamuvuel
Pandit, et. Al, International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and
Technology, Vol. 5, Issue 7, July 2016 but these shellers had some weaknesses like not shelling
the maize 100% or close to that as they left the maize unshelled and the life span of the machine
was short.
Other shellers were made of iron or a combination of the two, including one in 1845 by Joseph
Briggs of Saratoga County Design as stated in Development and Fabrication of a Low Cost Corn
Deseeding Machine, by Anant J. Ghadi, and Arunkumar P, International Journal of Research in
Engineering and Technology, Volume: 03 Issue: 08, Aug-2014. His Sheller produced similar
results to that of the Denison Sheller but was a compact unit, designed to be supported on a
bench or chair.

5
In the early 1900's, a number of engine-powered maize shellers were developed which provided
the foundation for modern commercial and agricultural shellers and a good example is the buch-
2-hole antique shellers referring to These large stream-powered machines have now been mostly
replaced with the use of the Design and Development of Maize Thresher for Rural Dwellers by
Human Pedal Power by modern combine harvester that strips the kernels from the maize cob
while the maize is being harvested in the field as it is stated but Since the introduction of the
modern maize Sheller in the 1800's, the basic design, Fabrication and Performance Evaluation of
a Motorized Maize Shelling Machine in the journal D.O Aremu, et. Al, International Journal of
New Technologies in Science and Engineering, Vol.5, No.5, 2015 showed how the changes
happened and how the replacement of the traditional methods to modern methods.
The function of this machine has remained the same with most modern-day maize shellers
bearing a strong resemblance to the original models designed by inventors like Denison and
Briggs based on numeric model given in the reference Design Consideration of Corn Sheller
Machine, Anirudha G. Darudkar, Dr. C. C. Handa, International Journal for Innovative Research
in Science & Technology, Volume 2, Issue 02, July 2015

The tractor PTO (power take off) shaft operated shellers are equipped with rotating threshing
drum with beaters or teeth, which cause damages to the seed. The tractors can cause great
damage to the maize seeds i.e. breaking the cob to pieces). Besides, the cost of purchasing such
shellers are high for the rural farmer and as a result of all these, it will be difficult for the rural
farmers to maximize profits on their produce therefore the need for a relatively low cost maize
shelling mechanism that will be affordable to the farmers not only to meet their shelling
requirement but also to improve the threshing efficiency and reduce damage to the seed, based
on numeric model given by D.O Aremu in Design, Fabrication and Performance Evaluation of a
Motorized Maize Shelling Machine, D.O Aremu, et. Al, International Journal of New
Technologies in Science and Engineering, Vol.5, No.5, 2015

Community based seed production (CBSP) is a sustainable phenomenon implied in hill and high-
hills of Nepal under the hill Maize research program under collaboration with Nepal Agricultural
Research Council (NARC); CIMMYT, Nepal; Directorate of Crop Development (CDD) by B.
Ashwin Kumar in development and performance evaluation of a hand operated maize Sheller, B.
Ashwin Kumar and Shaik Haneefa begum, International Journal of Agricultural Engineering,

6
Volume 7, Issue 1, RESEARCH PAPER April, 2014, with the objective to produce quality seeds
of maize at local level and to increase the use of improved quality seeds and eventually increase
the crop production. Maize kernels are in general shelled from the cob manually using hands as
stated by FAO. (1992) Maize in human nutrition. FAO food and Nutrition series, No25. Food
and Agriculture organization. Manual shelling of maize is labor intensive and typically takes
weeks and months for shelling the manual harvest. The mechanized alternatives to shelling
maize by hand are available but they are often unaffordable for subsistence farmers. Wooden
corn Sheller is a simple but traditional device made locally for shelling the maize kernels and
distributed to CBSP farmers group. All data observed and analyzed in the present study reveals
the corn Sheller is equally efficient and saved the time, labors and other resources. The corn
Sheller could be used for maize processing and conditioning.

The invention of all these machines by Lester E Dennison based on numeric model as stated in,
Critical Evaluation of Locally Fabricated Maize Shelling Machine, Adewole, C. A.,Babajide
T.M, International Journal of Engineering Science and Innovative Technology (IJESIT) Volume
4, Issue 2, March 2015 were mounted on a bench and this made the machine not portable, the
machine also didn't satisfy most farmers as its production was 70% and most maize were pulled
out with maize grains which needed farmers to perform other finishing exercise using hands.

Again the machine used pedal to generate the energy or power that performed the exercise. An
improvised Maize grain Sheller is able to improve the performance as it uses a motor to produce
power which reduces the labour of cycling a pedal and make performance easy, it is also portable
and can be carried to any place and it gives 98% production as the maize remain in the machine
for a required period of time where if the shelling process is done, grains will be allowed to
move out through the outlet and cobs through the cob outlet.
Comparing the Improved maize grain Sheller with the tractor PTO shaft operated machine are
expensive to the small scale farmers and the poor farmers giving them a challenge to purchase or
hire such machines. These machine also use crushers that most of them cause’s great damages
and breaks most of the grains making them not safe especially to small farmers who depend on
the same grains to act as seeds for the coming seasons. Couse a lot of damage, coming up with
this improvised maize grain Sheller to help avoid the chaos experienced earlier and lately as the

7
 machine is 98% efficient, user friendly, cheap, portable and durable compared to the PTO shaft
operated machines and earlier pedal benched shelling machine made by Mr. Lester E Denison in
1839 based on numeric model as quoted in Development And Fabrication Of A Low Cost Corn
Deseeding Machine, Anant J. Ghadi, and Arunkumar P , International Journal of Research in
Engineering and Technology , Volume: 03 Issue: 08 , Aug-2014,

2.1 Maize Shelling Techniques

Depending on the influence of agronomic, economic and social factors, threshing or shelling is
done in different ways:
1. shelling by hand, with simple tools;
1. mechanical shelling, with simple machines operated manually;
2. Mechanical shelling, with motorized equipment.

2.1.1 Hand shelling

The easiest traditional system for shelling maize is to press the thumbs on the grains in order to
detach them from the ears. Another simple and common shelling method is to rub two ears of
maize against each other. These methods however require a lot of labour.
It is calculated that a worker can hand-shell only a few kilograms an hour. Shelling of maize, as
well as of sunflowers, can be more efficiently accomplished by striking a bag full of ears or
heads with a stick. Maize and sunflowers can also be shelled by rubbing the ears or heads on a
rough surface.
Small tools, often made by local artisans, are sometimes used to hand-shell maize. With these
tools, a worker can shell 12 to 20 kg of maize an hour.

8
2.1.2 Maize-shelling with Rotary Equipment
Manual shellers, which are relatively common and sometimes made by local artisans, permit
easier and faster shelling of ears of maize. These come in several models, some of them equipped
to take a motor; they are generally driven by a handle or a pedal. Use of manual shellers
generally requires only one worker. A good example is the Antique maize shellers.
The major setbacks with these shellers are that their threshing capacities are low and most of
them require to be fixed on benches before operation. Also their method of operation is too
cumbersome from the fact that the crank handle is directly connected to the grinding chamber
and therefore the effect of friction is too vigorous during the shelling process.

2.2 The link in the Maize shelling techniques

Although there exist a number of maize shelling techniques as earlier discussed, each of the
technique has its own shortcomings which in general call for the design of this modified maize
sheller. These drawbacks include the tediousness involved in manually operating hand held
maize shelling devices, the cost of buying motorized maize shelling equipment is unaffordable to
the small scale maize farmers, existing hand operated rotary shellers especially those constructed

9
by the local artisans require the farmer to use too much energy to shell very little maize. Most
farmers find this as a waste of time and other valuable resources. The recent developments in
maize shelling techniques as well as the design presented in this paper would provide alternative
options that can be adopted to meet the sheller needs of such rural farmers.

10
 CHAPTER THREE

3.0 METHODOLOGY

3.1 INTRODUCTION
The methods that were used to design this project were three phases, the first phase involved the
collection of the rural farmer’s needs. Second stage was the design of an appropriate system to
meet their needs and finally to communicate results to the farmers and determine whether their
shelling requirements have been solved.

The farmer Sheller needs were vital in identifying the performance of the shelling machines that
were currently available in the market. Majority of the farmers in the site under study lamented
on the high costs charged by local business men and women who offered maize shelling services
normally for hire. Such shellers were usually powered by tractor PTO and require more than
eight people for its effective operation. The farmers were therefore forced to dig deep into their
pockets to facilitate payment of such casual workers alongside the payment of machine service.
Considering the low harvest capacity of individual farmers from the sizes of their farms as stated
earlier in this paper, such a move would have costed them a lot and cut a great deal on their
returns.

I used fabrication method to come up with the project as it needed a compact and hard materials
like metals, the motor and steel. Engineering operations were also used to perform different
requirements like welding, milling to come up with the complete parts.

On the other hand, the farmers termed such techniques as those of shelling by hand and use of
sticks to beat maize in sacks so as to shell as stone age shelling techniques that were a waste of
time and energy and which would only be adopted as a fall back plan if all means to shell their
produce fail. The use of small rotary shellers such as the antique Sheller presented a further
challenge since they had to set up a working bench on which they could mount the machine.

Additionally, the farmers also complained of the slow rate at which such equipment remove
kernels from the cobs and most of them were reluctant to use them frequently.

11
They suggested that if a cheaper solution would be availed to them to solve their maize shelling
problem, with minimal breakage of the kernel and cob then such a technique would be warmly
welcome and embraced by individual farmers or a group of such rural farmers.

3.2 DEFINITION OF NATURE OF ACTIVITY

On the field determination of farmer shelling capacity is vital. Comparison was made on the time
taken to shell the quantity of maize harvested per farmer and the time taken before deterioration
sets in. It was important to consider the fact that appropriate technology for storage of maize
produce was not readily available including pesticides to handle weevil attack. Pesticides were
purchased from local agro-vets and did not last long hence the needed and requested the design a
shelling mechanism that would eliminate breakage of kernels as much as possible to reduce
chances of easy attack by the pests.
Essentially, rural farmers’ problems in relation to maize shelling had to do with energy inputs in
shelling of their produce, cost of the shelling technology used and mechanical advantage of using
the equipment as well as self-reliance of the equipment in terms of rigidity, support and
portability.

3.2.1 Preparation of Drawings or Design

The parameters considered in the design of this maize cob Sheller include the following;
1. Dried cobs with maize kernel moisture content of 15% to 18% to ease the removal of the
kernels from the cob.
2. Overall height of the machine to facilitate ease of operation by a rural farmer of average
height.
3. Overall width and breadth of the machine for purposes of storage space in the rural
farmers’ granaries.
4. Weight of the equipment for portability
The project needed a drawing or design that would bring a compact and best final results. And
for the best results I had to consider different factors which included;

Size of the machine to design as this would affect the use of materials because a big sized design
would lead to use of more materials which would be expensive

12
Effectiveness of the final drawing after the design. I tried to approximate how the final results of
the machine would affect the operation of the final ma chine.

Availability of the materials, coming up with a simple design would assure me of getting already
available material at a cheap price.

3.2.2 Block Diagram and Steps Followed

13
Step 1(Grain inlet)
It the part of the shelling machine where the well dried maize is entered into the machine, the
grain inlet has a door that is opened when entering the maize and closed when it is [Link] can also
be used to check if the maize is fully shelled.
Step 2(Shelling)
The part where shelling operation takes place, inside this section we have the toothed shelling
disc that performs the shelling operation through the force of rotating beater that pulls and she'll
the maize cobs by friction against the spiked cast iron projections on either side of the Sheller
bar.
Step 3(cob outlet)
This is an open section on the side of the shelling section with a door that when shelling is
complete, the door is opened and cobs are thrown out by force of the rotating Sheller bar.
Step 4(sieve)
The sieve is made up with small holes of a given size that can only allow passage of the maize
grain leaving the cobs on the shelling section.
Step 5(Grain collector)
This is a part on the process which collects the grain after being sieved. In this section the grain
has dirty, dust and small pieces of cobs
Step 6(Blowing)
It is the part connected to the grain collector which has a fan that is used to blow the dust out
through the dust outlet.
Step7 (Grain outlet)
This is the final step of the process, in this part, the clean grains are collected after undergoing all
the process ready for storage.

3.3 SPECIFICATIONS
The design of this maize Sheller was based on consideration of design specifications whose
choice was based a number of factors that include the availability of construction materials
needed for a further fabrication of the work presented in this paper, cost of such materials,
desired size of the machine for Ergonomics of using it, machinability factor which includes,

14
installation, simplification, and durability as well as the prolonged life of using the machine.
These design specifications include the following;
1. Overall dimension 1100mm x 680mm x 1600mm
2. Shaft of at least 600mm in length and 50mm in diameter.
3. Hopper of Overall Height 620mm inlet allowance of 550mm by 550mm
4. Crank handle of length 160mm and height 400mm
5. Spur gears of gear ratio above 3, with the driven preferably being a free wheel cog gear.
6. Small/large sprockets (4-13 STD/8-23STD) respectively
7. Flywheel of at least 14kg in weight
8. Sheller wheels of at least 20kg total weight
9. Centre to center shaft distance not less than 600mm
10. Angle steel bars of 1.5 by 1.5 and 3mm thickness

15
3.4 COST ANALYSIS
S/N item description unit cost (KSH)
S/N ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT COST

1 Sheet metal 16gauge mild steel sheet Unit 7M *3M 2500

2 Bolts and nuts M10 30 pcs 300

3 Solid shaft Mild steel (D,40mm 2 pcs 1200

L,730mm)

4 Handle With sleeve 1 pc 400

5 Gears Spur gears driven 2 pcs 1400

6 Chain Bush roller chain 1.5M 1 pc 200

long

7 Big/small sprocket (D8"",D4"") 2 pcs 300

8 Bearing (D,41mm) 6 pcs 300

9 Flywheel D,360mm, D,41mm 1 pc 200

10 Threshing Unit thresher discs and 1 pc 1500

spiked bar

11 Collector tray Construction 1 pc 1000

12 Angle mild steel bars 11/2 by 11/2 and 2M thick 4 400

13 Motor 2.234 kw,speed of 1430 1 5000

rpm

TOTAL 14,700

Labour cost= 2,300 ksh

For cost evaluation purposes, the following table presented a table for the cost list of material of
the project modification and possible construction or fabrication of this motor driven shelling
machine.
Total cost = matercost+ labour cost
Total cost = 14,700+2,300=17,000 ksh

16
3.5 PRODUCTION OF COMPONENTS

3.5.1 Toothed Gearing

The driver and driven toothed gearing system in this design project was meant to minimize the
effect of slipping which would otherwise reduce the velocity ratio of the system.
The motion and power transmitted by gears is kinematic ally equivalent to that transmitted by
friction wheels
For two toothed gears mounted on shafts, having sufficient rough surfaces made of cast iron that
were joined through welding to provide the projections that would perform the pulling and
beating, having sufficient rough surfaces and pressing against each other, a little consideration
would show that when one wheel is rotated by a rotating shaft, it would rotate the other wheel in
the opposite direction. The teeth minimize slipping and for as long as the tangential force, P
exerted by the first wheel does not exceed the maximum frictional resistance between the two
wheels, the second wheel will be rotated by first wheel.
The relationship in the speed of the driver and driven gears of the spur gearing system is given
By
N1. T1 = N2. T2
Where; N1 and N2 are the speeds of the driver and follower gears whereas, T1 and T2 are their
respective number of teeth. This design incorporates a gear system where the driver and the
driven gears have a teeth ratio A: B with the speed of the driven being A/B times that of the
driver wheel.
For this design, the toothed gearing is the aspect of the drive train that determines the relation
between the cadence, the rate at which the crank handle and the rate at which the driven gear
turn. A spur gear system with the driver having 42 teeth and the driven free wheel cog gear
having 13 teeth is recommended. This combination would result to a gear ratio of 3.23.
However, any other gear combination that would allow a gear ratio above 3 was adoptable. The
driven freewheel cog gear I chose on the basis of having a freewheel mechanism which basically
was a design consideration to allow for coasting. The gear worked using internal planetary or
epicyclic gearing which alters the speed of the hub casing and the wheel itself, relative to the
speed of the driving gear.

17
3.5.2 Hopper Design (Inlet Tray)

Dimensions in CM
The hopper was designed to be fed in a vertical position only. The material that I used for the
construction was mild steel sheet metal, which is readily available in the market at affordable
costs.
The hopper had the shape of a frustum of a pyramid truncated at the top, with top and bottom
having rectangular forms.

18
3.5.3 The Main Frame
The main frame I designed was to supports the entire weight of the machine. The total weights
carried by the main frame are:
Weight of the hopper and housing;
Weight of the threshing chamber;
The collector and pot; and the bearings, gears and Chains.
The two design factors considered in determining the material required for the frame were
weight and strength. In this design work, angle steel bar of 1 by 1 and 2mm thickness was to be
used to give the required rigidity.

Dimensions in CM

19
3.5.4 Shelling Shaft Design
A shaft is a rotating or stationary member, usually of circular cross-section having such elements
as gears, pulleys, flywheels, cranks, sprockets and other power transmission elements mounted
on it.
The design presented in this paper comprised of two shafts; the primary and the secondary shaft
The primary shaft was to be fitted to the spur gear system on one end and to a flywheel on the
other end. The secondary shaft is designed to have threshing discs attached to it (by welding) and
parallel to the primary one with a chain drive mounted to connect the two. Both shafts are solid
shafts of ductile material and circular cross-section designed to be supported on bearings.
Shaft design consisted, primarily of the determination of the correct shaft diameter to ensure
strength and rigidity when the shaft was transmitting power under various operating and loading
conditions.
For this design a shaft of diameter 15cm and length 60cm was best to serve the interests of
achieving the overall machine width and also lower the costs of materials that would be required
for the machine is to be constructed. Preferably, such a shaft had a key way and with the
specified dimensions it will served best in both cases of the shaft requirement since the design
incorporated two shafts. The key was a design consideration meant to firmly hold in place the
flywheel to be mounted as well as the driven gear

Dimensions in CM

20
3.5.5 Blowing Shaft Design
This shaft is the shaft that hold the blower connected to the blowing pulley. It is rotated at a
maintained speed averagely to blow away any dirty, dust and light small maize cob remains and
any impurities.

3.5.6 Bearing Selection

On selecting the bearing, I considered its load carrying capacity, life expectancy and reliability.
The relationship between the basic rating life, the basic dynamic rating and the bearing load. It is
assumed that this machine will be designed to operate for 8 hours per day. So I selected the type
of bearings that could meet the requirements.

21
3.5.7 Sprocket Selection
The project needed two shaft sprockets to drive the chain connected to the motor.A strong and
durable sprocket.

D= 100 mm. B1=20mm

D1= 98 mm. L=50mm
D2= 78mm
D3 = 40mm

3.5.8 Other Design Considerations

[Link] Calculation of the Shearing Force and Bending Moment of the Shaft at Different
Sections of the Shaft Here:
S.F. = upward forces downward forces;
B.M = forces x perpendicular distances.
Where; S. F=Shearing Force
B.M=Bending Moments
Type of operation Life in operation
Infrequently operated 500
Brief operation only 4,000-8,000
Intermittent operation 8,000-15,000
One shift operation 15,000-30,000
Continuous operation 30,000-60,000

22
Continuous operation with high production capacity 100,000

[Link] Force in the beater discs required for threshing

The beater discs whose surfaces are designed with alternating rasp bars and grooves, and which
are attached to the secondary shaft extending to the threshing chamber, rotate with the shaft,
giving rise to centripetal force:
F = m ω2 r, (11)
Where;
F = centripetal force;
m = mass of discs;
ω = angular velocity;
r = max disc radius.
[Link] Determination of Angular Velocity.
The angular velocity, is given by:
= 2. N/60, (12) where:
N = speed of the shaft in r.p.m.

[Link] The Radius, r, of the shelling Arm

The radius, r, of the threshing arm increases along the length of the shaft and also decreases
towards the other end of the shaft, Where;
r = radius of threshing arm and it is given as
rmax = 0.045m (assumed),
rmin = 0.035m (assumed), so that
Centripetal force rmax (F) = m. 2rmax,
at
Centripetal force
at
rmin (F) = m. 2rmin.

23
[Link] Determination of Threshing Torque
The torque, T, is given by:
T = F x r, (13) Where;
F = available centripetal force;
r = shelling radius

[Link] Determination of the Power Delivered by primary Shaft

Power, P = work done per second:
P = (work done)/time = (force x distance)/time = force x velocity.
Velocity =ω r,
Where;
ω = angular velocity;
r = radius.
Therefore, power = F. r

[Link] Determination of Torsional Moment, MT The torsional moment, MT, is given by

MT = 9,550 x KW/N, where:
KW = power delivered;
N = revolutions per minute.

[Link] Bending Stress

According to Hall et al. (1988), for bending load, bending stress (tension or compression) is:
Sb = Mbr/I. (14)
Hence,
Sb = (32Mb)/(. d 3),
Where;
Sb = bending stress;
Mb = bending moment;
d = shaft diameter;
I = moment of inertia
Also, I =. d4/64, for a cylindrical shaft (PSG Tech 1989).

[Link] Torsional Stress

According to Black and Adams (1968), torsional stress is determined using
xy = MT r/J. (15)
But J =. d4/32, hence, xy = (16MT)/ (. d3), Where
xy = Torsional stress N/m2;
MT = torsional moment;
r = radius of shaft;
J = Polar moment of area;
d = diameter of shaft.

[Link] Torsional Rigidity

Torsional rigidity of a shaft is based on permissible angle of twist. The amount of twist.
permissible depends upon the particular application and varies from 0.3 degree/m for a machine
tools shaft to about 3 degrees/m for line shafting as given by:
(584 MTL)/(Gd4), (16) Where;
θ= angle of twist (degree);
L = length of shaft (m);
MT = torsional moment (Nm);
G = Torsional modulus of rigidity (N/m2);
d = diameter of shaft (m).

[Link] Lateral Rigidity

The lateral rigidity of a shaft is based upon the permissible lateral deflection for proper bearing
operation, accurate machine tool performance, shaft alignment etc. Amount of deflection can
also be calculated by two successive integrals of the formula:
d2y/dx2 = (Mb)/(EI), (17) where;
Mb = bending moment N/m2;
E = Modulus 'of elasticity (N/m2);
I = Moment of inertia (m4).
3.3.10 shelling Unit
The shelling unit for this design is composed of two metallic discs mechanically attached to the
secondary shaft and rotating against a rigid spiked metallic surface. The discs are connected
facing each other and rotate as block and their surfaces is to be of grooves and rasp bars so as to
provide a rough contact on the maize cob against the spiked rigid metallic surface. Hence this
forced friction results to the threshing of maize kernels from the cob.

Below the discs, a collector and pot metallic member is to be fitted and is designed also to
incline towards its central longitudinal axis where an opening is allowed for grain collection as
the cobs pass over the member surface towards the exit where they are collected. The grain is to
be collected below the machine.
3.6 ASSEMBLY
LABELS PARTS QUANTITY

1 Frame 1

2 Shelling shaft 1

3 Blowing shaft 1

4 Maize inlet tray 1

5 Maize outlet 1

6 Shelling shaft pulley 1

7 Blowing shaft pulley 1

8 Grain collector 1

9 Hopper 1

10 Motor 1

11 Engine seat 1

12 Toothed Sheller 1

13 Blower 1

14 Bearing 4
3.7 TESTING OF EACH BLOCK

3.7.1 Introduction
After the whole assembly, I had to test every part and every section of the whole assembled
machine. I did this to verify and test the working of each component I made. I did this so that I
could get the final functioning and make any changes and upgrades incase a part failed. The
testing was considered in the crucial parts and blocks which included;
1. Maize inlet tray
2. Shelling dram
3. Sieving holes
4. Grain collector and blower test
5. Grain outlet
1. Maize inlet
This is the part where maize can be introduced into the machine. After switching on the machine
I entered ten pieces of unshelled maize and the system operated well, I also used the door in this
section too confirm whether the maize shelling process was going on and found it was well
constructed.
2. Shelling drum
It is in this part where the shelling operation took place and the shelling bar projections pulled
the maize to the system and the operation went on well, pulling, beating and threshing without
impact force, I also used the door at this section which throws the cobs out using force from the
rotating shelling bar. The part operated well.
3. Sieving holes
They were allocated at the bottom of the shelling drum housing with small holes that I made
them sized to allow only grain to pass through and leave away the cobs and it operated perfectly
4. Grain collector and blower test
As the grain dropped from the sieving holes by gravity, the fan performed the blowing process
effectively and removed out some dust and small particles of cobs that were light and clean grain
dropped to the bottom of the grain collector
5. Grain outlet
This part was made in a slopping way mainly to allow free flow of grains as the fall on the
bottom part of the grain collector and maize moved out freely without any problems.

3.8 TESTING AND CONFORMITY OF RESULTS TO SPECIFICATIONS

After testing the whole machine, I found that it worked as planned and all parts were performing
their general tasks. I also discovered that the wire mesh at the back of the grain collector that was
purposed for removal of dust and small pieces of cobs had small hole that only dust could pass
but small pieces of cobs remained which I had to change and fix one with quite wide openings
and it worked very well.
Getting the minimum time so shell a given weight of maize I carried two trials and got the
maximum shelling time for a given kilograms of maize.
Trial one; I added one bucket full of unshelled maize 15Kgs and took 3 minutes then switched
off the machine. The final product was good but the maize cobs came out with grains.
Trial two; I added the same one bucket full of unshelled maize 15Kgs and waited for 5 minutes
then switched off the machine and found the results pleasing as all the grains were shelled and no
cobs came out with grains. I concluded that for every 15Kgs of unshelled maize is shelled in
6mim and this was operational time for the shelling machine.
 CHAPTER FOUR

4.1 DATA ANALYSIS

Prior to the experimental activities, theoretical and practical training were done to the host
farmers at Chonyi so that they could be familiar with the operation of the Sheller. Samples were
taken to test the shelling machine and it's shelling efficiency and capacity.
Manual cylindrical shellers, the PTO tractor shellers and hand shelling tools were conducted with
different genders. Semi-structured questionnaires were used to collect farmer’s opinions during
the process. Survey data was collected for most of the traditional maize shelling method, the
modern PTO tractor shellers and improvised Maize shelling machine.
Three separate trials were done and three samples from each trials. Mass of shelled and unshelled
from plain sieve, cob and grain outlet was measured to estimate the shelling efficiency. The
weight of the broken grain was also measured.
Total grain output weight was weighed to estimate sample similarity in both of the
demonstrations. FAO procedures were done to ensure machine efficiency. Data was analyzed
using qualitative analysis and descriptive statistics.

4.2 FINDINGS
Maize Sheller was subjected to test and it was found to shell very effectively. The following
parameters were determined from data collected.
1. Capacity (rate of shelling) mass of shelled grains ÷ time taken (s) × 3600 kg/h
Shelling efficiency = mass of shelled grains ÷ total mass of grains (shelled+unshelled) ×100%
Grain damage = mass of damage grain ÷ mass of shelled grains×100%
Maize samples were taken and the average mass of maize measured is 0.250kg.
4.2.1 (1). An Improvised Maize Shelling Machine Method

Trial Mass of grain (kg) Time taken (s) Rate of shelling Mass of grain (kg)
expression Kg/h

1 0.202 12 0.202×3600÷12 60.6

2 0.434 32 0.434×3600÷32 48.8

3 0.262 17 0.262×3600÷17 55.5

Mean 73.3

4.2.2 (2). Hand Shelling Method

Trial Mass of grain (kg) Time taken (s) Rate of shelling Mass grain (kg)
expression Kg/h

1 0.202 460 0.202×3600÷460 1.58

2 0.434 800 0.434×3600÷800 1.95

3 0.262 512 0.262×3600÷512 1.84

Mean 1.79
4.2.3 (3). PTO Tractor Sheller

Trial Mass of grain (kg) Time taken (s) Rate of shelling Mass of grain (kg)
expression Kg/h

1 0.202 8 0.202×3600÷8 90.9

2 0.434 26 0.434×3600÷26 60

3 0.262 10 0.262×3600÷10 94.3

81.7

4.2.4 Overall Grain Damaged

Total mass (kg) all 3 trials= 0.898 kg Total Mass of Rate of damaging %Total grain
Name of mechanism damage grains (kg) expression damage

Improvised Maize shelling machine 0.78 0.78÷0.898×100 86.6%

Hand shelling method 0.89 0.89÷0.898×100 99%

PTO TRACTOR SHELLERS 0.64 0.64÷0.898×100 71.2%

4.2.5 Shelling Efficiency

Mechanism Mass of Mass of Total mass of grain Shelling Shelling

shelled unshelled (kg) efficiency (kg) efficiency
grain(kg) grain (kg) (%)

1 1.234 0.065 1.299 1.234÷1.299×100 94%

2 0.260 0.020 0.722 0.260÷0.722×100 36%

3 1.246 0.050 1.415 1.246÷1.415×100 88%

After the experiments were done, it was found that mechanism (1) An improvised Maize shelling
machine led in the efficiency of work with 94% followed by PTO tractor SHELLERS with an
efficiency of 88% then finally hand shelling method with 36%.
The project I made had several advantages as it produced a good amount of kilograms per the
given time and at the same time the weight of broken grain was less compared to the PTO tractor
shellers which produced so many kilograms of shelled grains but the weight of broken grain was
high compared to that of an improvised Maize Sheller and hand shelling.
Hand shelling had the lowest shelling efficiency as the weight of kilograms produced per given
time was less, it took a lot of time to shell just one kilograms of shelled grains but in terms of
broken grains it was the best as very little grain got broken.
4.3 CONCLUSIONS
It was concluded that the production of the Improvised Maize shelling machine was the best to
be used by the farmers of Chonyi as it had uncountable advantages to the local farmers and
welcomed the project to the society with all their hearts.
This me fabricated with the use of locally available materials. The machine is simple, less bulky
and the ergonomic considerations in the design would allow for its comfortable use in a
standing/sitting posture for it can easily be operated by either male or female subjects with either
left or right hands. This is justified by an overall height of 1.25 m of the machine design as well
as the low energy requirement at an average of 412N and an initial average torque of 12.36 Nm.
The thresher can help to substantially reduce the human labour involved in threshing at an
affordable cost and also reduces the time used for threshing operation on small farms considering
the deduced fact that energy requirements solely depend on the crank speed of operating the
machine. There is no doubt that the machine will ease the long term problem of maize shelling
especially for the rural farmers.

4.4 RECOMMENDATIONS
Whoever wishes to produce such a machine should consider the length of the shelling shaft and
have a motor that can generate enough power for him/her and finally consider the moisture
content for best results.
4.5 REFERENCES
[1] Critical Evaluation of Locally Fabricated Maize Shelling Machine, Adewole, C. A., Babajide
T. M, International Journal of Engineering Science and Innovative Technology (IJESIT) Volume
4, Issue 2, March 2015
[2] Design and Fabrication of Corn Shelling and Threshing Machine, Kedar Patil, Shamuvuel
Pandit, et. Al, International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and
Technology, Vol. 5, Issue 7, July 2016
[3] Design, Construction and Performance Analysis of a Maize Thresher for Rural Dweller J.N.
Nwakaire et al., Nigerian Journal of Technology Vol. 30, No. 2, June 2011
[4] Design and Development of Maize Thresher for Rural Dwellers by Human Pedal Power,
Praveen Kiran mali, Dr.C.N. Sakhale, S.D. Shelare, International Journal of New Technologies
in Science and Engineering Vol. 2, Issue 4, October 2015
[5] Design Consideration of Corn Sheller Machine, Anirudha G. Darudkar, Dr. C. C. Handa,
International Journal for Innovative Research in Science & Technology, Volume 2, Issue 02,
July 2015
[6] Design, Development and Fabrication of a Low Cost Corn Deseeding Machine, Anant J.
Ghadi, and Arunkumar P, International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology,
Volume: 03 Issue: 08, Aug-2014,
[7] Design, Fabrication and Performance Evaluation of a Motorized Maize Shelling Machine,
D.O Aremu, et. Al, International Journal of New Technologies in Science and Engineering,
Vol.5, No.5, 2015
[8] Design, development and performance evaluation of a hand operated maize Sheller, B.
Ashwin Kumar and Shaik Haneefa begum, International Journal of Agricultural Engineering,
Volume 7, Issue 1, RESEARCH PAPER April, 2014
4.6 APPENDIX
PTO- Power Take Off

ADC- Agricultural Development Corporation

FAO- Food and Agriculture Organization

KSC- Kenya Seed Company

CDD- Crop Development Directorate

NARC- Nepal Agricultural Research Council