頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 稻米乾燥中心作業效率評估=Evaluation of the Operating Efficiency on Rice Drying Center |
---|---|
作 者 | 楊江益; 吳柏青; | 書刊名 | 宜蘭農工學報 |
卷 期 | 14 1997.06[民86.06] |
頁 次 | 頁43-59 |
分類號 | 434.119 |
關鍵詞 | 稻米; 乾燥; 燃油效率; 作業效率; Rice; Drying; Fuel efficiency; Operating efficiency; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 稻米為本省重要糧食作物之一,全年生產量約2,071,968公噸。農林廳為減輕農 民稻米乾燥加工的負擔, 目前於全省共輔導 57 個農會及 2 個民間倉庫設置稻米乾燥中心 。但由於各乾燥中心的乾燥機廠牌型式及總容量都不一致,在乾燥中心設置之效率評估則缺 乏相關文獻以供參考。故本研究以 10 噸及 20 噸乾燥機進行單機性能試驗,並以試驗結果 進行成本分析,發現 20 噸乾燥機不僅在乾燥速率方面優於 10 噸乾燥機,且在乾燥成本分 析上亦較為經濟,估計每乾燥 1 公噸的乾穀可節省 8.1 元的折舊成本。此外,以問卷方式 對全省 57 所稻米乾燥中心進行信賴區間為 95 %的列聯分析。分析結果顯示:各乾燥中心 在燃油費用及人事費用占烘乾費的比例為 17.3 %及 22.5 %。至於一期作及二期作的比較 ,二期作的乾燥成本較一期作為高,一期作及二期作的燃油及人事費總合分別為稻穀烘乾費 用的 25.1 %及 31.4 %。稻米乾燥中心之乾燥機總臺數中,如果 20 噸乾燥機所占的比例 愈高,則乾燥中心之燃油效率愈高,而乾燥中心之總作業容量與燃油效率則無顯著相關性。 在 18 個作業影響因子中,對燃油效率的影響程度依次為:乾燥機總臺數中 20 噸乾燥機所 佔比例 (臺 / 臺 )、總臺數、乾燥機總作業容量中 20 噸乾燥機所佔比例 (噸 / 噸 )、每 日平均作業量對總作業容量之比例。 |
英文摘要 | Rice is the major grain production in Taiwan. Annual yield of rice was up to 2,071,968 tons. In order to lower the cost of grain drying, Department of Agriculture sponsored 57 Farmer Associations and 2 private rice warehouses to build 59 Rice Drying Centers islandwide. Different model and capacity of rice dryers were used in each rice drying center. The operating efficiency of rice drying center was not evaluated in the past few years. This study was so investigate the performance of 10-ton and 20-ton rice dryers, and to evaluate the drying cost based on the results of performance tests. The experimental results showed drying rate of 20-ton dryer was faster than 10-ton dryer. The drying cost using 20-ton dryer was lower than that using 10-ton dryer. If 20-ton dryer was used, 8.1 dollars per ton of rice drying can be saved for the cost for depreciation of rice dryer. Besides, a survey was made based on 57 rice drying centers islandwide. Eighteen operating factors were evaluated based on the survey. Ratio of 20-ton rice dryer, number of dryer, ratio of daily operating capacity to the full capacity significantly affect the fuel efficiency. Fuel and labor cost for each drying center were 17.3% and 22.5% of total drying cost, respectively. Fuel and labor cost for first and second season crop were 25.1% and 31.4% of total drying cost, respectively. However, drying cost for first season crop was higher than that of second season crop. The results was evaluated using contingency analysis with 95% confidence level. The result of contingency analysis indicated that higher the ratio of 20-ton dryer was used, higher the fuel efficiency of rice drying center. However, the fuel efficiency was not significantly related with the total drying capacity. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。