Can the Height of Barrier Plate Affect the Efficiency of the Cleaning Unit of Grain Harvester Separation - Research Proposal Example

Table of Contents 1.0.RESEARCH QUESTION 1 2.0.METHODOLOGY 2 2.1.Objectives 2 2.2.Research Design 4 2.3.Sampling techniques and sample size 4 2.4.Research instruments 4 2.5.Reliability and validity of the instruments 5 2.6.Data Analysis 5 3.0.CRITICAL EVALUATION OF METHODOLOGY 6 1.0. RESEARCH QUESTION Can height of the barrier plate affect efficiency of cleaning unit of grain harvester separation for harvest time weed seed collection? Researches have suggested different methods that can affect the efficiency of the cleaning unit of grain harvesters for separation time weed seed collection. One of such methods is the adjustment of the air velocity or adjustment of the sieve inclination (McDonald and Copeland, 2012). However, there is need to assess whether the barrier plate affect the efficiency of the cleaning unit of grain harvester separation for harvest time weed seed separation. The research question as suggested proposes a method of improving grain harvester separation efficiency by proposing the best height of the plate barrier that will effectively allow cleaning unit of the grain harvester separation. 2.0. METHODOLOGY 2.1. Objectives One objective of the research is to critically assess whether height of the barrier plate affects efficiency of cleaning unit of grain harvester separation for harvest time weed seed collection. The objective has been chosen since it is the broad point about what the research hopes to accomplish and the desired outcome from the process of researching. The objective has focussed on long-term outcomes intended to ascertain recent trends in grain harvester separation for harvest time weed seed collection in general and the efficiency of cleaning unit of grain harvester separation for harvest time weed seed collection in particular. In addition, the objective introduces what is missing from the previous researches such as Berry et al. (2012); Owen et al. (2014); Vogel and Peukert (2003) as reviewed thus identifying the gap in knowledge. The gap in knowledge that the proposal finds to be holding back the field is what the entire research will attempt to address thus providing the linkage or concordance between the identified objective and parts of central hypotheses that have been inherent in reviewed studies such as Westerman et al. (2012). The second objective of the research is to assess whether there is a demonstration on the systematic methodologies of approaching the design of grain harvester separation for harvest time weed seed collection and management which is also essential in knowing the method which influences its efficiency. Other than focusing on the objective of the research as detailed above, readers will find the following objectives as thesis focus: a. The best method of designing the height of the barrier for cleaning unit of grain harvester separation for harvest time weed seed collection b. Giving explanation on the correct ways of using the designed height of the barrier plate and tools which can be applied by project engineers and farmers at different times so as to contribute the efficiency of the grain harvester separation. From this perspective, generally, while the objectives as stated above seem to be broad in their approach, they are focussed and practical when put as follows: Critically compare quantitative and qualitative data from previous researches, experiments as well as respondents from questionnaires and interviews proposed by this study with a view to integrating such with literature reviews and understand the research question. The objective on the other one hand has been designed to augur well with plans the research intends to take in order to deal with practical problem or ethical issues that may be encountered. As Walsh and Powles (2014) argued, research objectives can also help in having research plan, choosing interview theme and shaping the questions that will be asked during data collection. Again, it is specific and thus linking the secondary research problem. Another point to note regarding the objective is that they show that the research proposal will be looking for actionable information and knowledge from qualitative research and it is for this reason that the question is general thus helping to link the primary research problems. 2.2. Research Design Basing on objectives and the research question, its design is a conceptual structure within which it will conduct and constitute a blueprint for the collection, measurement and analysis of data that will be obtained from different case studies including sampled projects that have different heights of barrier plate. According to Anwar (2013) research design should be interrogative in nature and should be used for getting answers to the research question used in the study; it provides a framework through which a research is conducted. 2.3. Sampling techniques and sample size The study intends to use data from civil, structural and electrical engineering fields and such data will be confined to different regions. For the research to document latest trend in grain harvester separation for harvest time weed seed collection, comparative analysis will be carried out between different grain harvester separations. To justify the study group, the sample will be the focal point; the result drawn from the investigation will be interpreted and used directly to represent the population (Walsh and Powles, 2007). 2.4. Research instruments The research has adopted secondary data collection method to gather information because it is essential to have different sources of information for verification and comprehensiveness (Walsh et al. 2012). Based on the number of cases this research has identified as the sample, secondary and primary data has been adopted due to their key advantage of objectivity and the absence of bias. In as much as this research notes the disadvantage of secondary sources of information such as being irrelevant and may also not be readily available in some cases, primary sources will be highly dependable due to reliabilities they offer. 2.5. Reliability and validity of the instruments Wollner et al. (2015) state that validity is the extent to which an instrument for data collection measures what it purports to. A research on grain harvester separation for harvest time weed seed collection requires that samples taken for study exhibit reliability. According to Chauhan et al. (2014), validity is the meaningfulness of inferences and accuracy of data collected based on the research results. As a result this research should offer a level of stability or the internal consistency of measuring instrument for a period. It will also consider such instrument to be reliable if it provides consistent results. In this study, reliability of the instrument will be tested using Cronbach’s Alpha test in order to find out if they achieve a satisfactory level of acceptance Chauhan et al., 2014). The Cronbanch is a method of measuring internal consistency more so in a study which involves regression analysis. Kviz et al. (2015) advocate that a reliability coefficient of α = 0.7 if adopted can denote an acceptable level of internal reliability. 2.6. Data Analysis Data analysis will be based on the objectives and research question of the study. The data collected and restored will be analysed using Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) version 20.0. Since data collected will be from different sources, the regression analysis will be carried out to determine the extent to which cleaning unit of grain harvester separation have inherent problems that contribute to inefficiency of grain harvester separation for harvest time weed seed collection. 3.0. CRITICAL EVALUATION OF METHODOLOGY One of the strengths of the methodology is that the qualitative data and their analysis refine and explain those statistical results by exploring participants’ views in more depth. Secondly, a methodological triangulation has been suggested in the methodology. Eraud et al. (2015) state that methodological triangulation is the use of more than one method to answer the research question. In methodology above has avoided conflicting views and approaches as the methodology included elements of both the quantitative and qualitative approaches. Thirdly, the study suggests qualitative method of data collection as a type of scientific investigation that seeks to employ a set of predefined procedures systematically in order to collect evidence, answer the question suggested and produces new findings that are applicable beyond the existing boundaries of study. In addition, the data collection approach the research has suggested seeks to understand a particular the research topic or problem from the perspective of the population involved. Contrariwise, one of the weaknesses of the methodology proposed is that it has not identified research philosophy. According to Ladizinsky (2014), a research philosophy is a belief, and understanding of how data should be collected and analysed. It can be noted that the study has identified ways of data collection without setting a philosophy that will guide the process. In other words, since the philosophy lacks, the research will not be able to look towards developing the relationship between research objectives and questions so that findings and data gathering and analysis can be interpreted in a specific paradigm. Since the study has not set specific research philosophy, Ladizinsky (2014) argues that it may not be easy for a research process to develop clear research background and knowledge so that the nature of a piece of research question can be conceptualised within the framework of data that that have been gathered. Secondly, the methodology does not have mixed method in the data collection. The research used one approach without employing both qualitative and quantitative research techniques. Kviz et al. (2015) indicate that the application of a mixed-method approach improves the reliability of research in the sense that it helps in measuring of the degree to which the research instrument yield consistent results or data after a repeated administration. In addition to this, there seems to be lack of clear rationale for choosing the method adopted other than the fact that it provides a general understanding of the research problem. References Anwar, P., Juraimi, A. S., Puteh, A., Selamat, A., Man, A., & Hakim, A. (2013). Seeding method and rate influence on weed suppression in aerobic rice. African Journal of Biotechnology, 10(68), 15259-15271. Berry, N. K., Saunders, C. & Fielke, J. M. (2012). Relating the power used by the Harrington Seed Destructor to chaff throughput In: International Conference of Agricultural Engineering, 8-12th July 2012 Valencia, Spain. CIGR. Chauhan, B. S., Abeysekera, A. S., Wickramarathe, M. S., Kulatunga, S. D., & Wickrama, U. B. (2014). Effect of rice establishment methods on weedy rice (Oryza sativa L.) infestation and grain yield of cultivated rice (O. sativa L.) in Sri Lanka. Crop Protection, 55, 42-49. Eraud, C., Cadet, E., Powolny, T., Gaba, S., Bretagnolle, F., & Bretagnolle, V. (2015). Weed seeds, not grain, contribute to the diet of wintering skylarks in arable farmlands of Western France. European Journal of Wildlife Research, 61(1), 151-161. Kviz, Z., Kumhala, F., & Masek, J. (2015). Plant remains distribution quality of different combine harvesters in connection with conservation tillage technologies. Agronomy Research, 13(1), 115-123. Ladizinsky, G. (2014). 23 Origin and domestication of the Southwest Asian grain legumes. Foraging and farming: the evolution of plant exploitation, 31, 374. McDonald, M., & Copeland, L. O. (2012). Seed production: principles and practices. Springer Science & Business Media. Owen, M. J., Martinez, N. J., & Powles, S. B. (2014). Multiple herbicide‐resistant Lolium rigidum (annual ryegrass) now dominates across the Western Australian grain belt. Weed Research, 54(3), 314-324. Vogel, L. & Peukert, W. (2003). Breakage behaviour of different materials--construction of a mastercurve for the breakage probability. Powder technology, 129:101-110. Walsh, M. J. & Powles, S. B. (2007). Management of herbicide resistance in wheat cropping systems: Learning from the Australian experience, Pest Management Science, vol 70, no 9, pp 1324-1328. Walsh, M. J., & Powles, S. B. (2014). High seed retention at maturity of annual weeds infesting crop fields highlights the potential for harvest weed seed control. Weed Technology, 28(3), 486-493. Walsh, M. J., Harrington, R. B. & Powles, S. B. (2012). Harrington Seed Destructor: A New Nonchemical Weed Control Tool for Global Grain Crops. Crop Sci., 52:1343-1347. Westerman, P.R., Atanackovic, V., Royo-Esnal, A., Torra, J. (2012) Differential weed seed removal in dryland cereals, Arthropod-Plant Interactions, vol 6, no 4, pp 591-599. Wollner, A., Bartos, P., Celjak, I., Dolan, A., & Petrovic, A. (2015). Rating of Harvester Threshers Case 8120 and New Holland CX 8080. Read More