Apple Bruising. II. A "Mechanical Apple" 

 Measures Fruit Impact During Packing 

 and Transport 



William J, Bramlage 



Department of Plant & Soil Sciences, University of Massachusetts 



A series of recent reports from Michigan State Uni- 

 versity describe results of an intense study of causes of 

 apple bruising. This research was cooperative between 

 personnel of the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Agriculture 

 Research Service, and the Agricultural Engineering De- 

 partment at Michigan State University. In the previous 

 article [Fruit Notes 53(4):15-17], we summarized their 

 study of bruising of Golden Delicious apples on commer- 

 cial grading and packing lines. Here we shall describe a 

 companion study of this situation that gives new insight 

 into the problems. 



This study was reported in a paper entitled, "Bruising 

 Impact Data Acquisition and Analysis in Apple Packing 

 and Handling Systems, Utilizing the Instrument Sphere 

 (IS)." The paper was presented to the American Society 

 of Agricultural Engineers on June 26-29, 1988, by B. R. 

 Tennes, H. R. 2Lapp, D. E. Marshall, and P. R. Armstrong. 



The "Instrument Sphere" used in this study is an 

 ingenious device designed to simulate an apple and to 

 record impacts it experiences as it passes through typical 

 commercial operations. It is the size of an apple and is a 

 battery-powered computer that senses impacts and rec- 

 ords them over times. 



This device was passed 3 times through 5 different 

 packing lines along with the apples being graded on those 

 lines. Results are summarized in Figure 1, in which 

 maximum acceleration on any run is shown at 19 positions 

 on a generic packing Une. 



As acceleration increases above about 50 g's, the risk 

 of apple bruising increases. In Figure 1 it can be seen that 

 high acceleration rates (rates of impact) occurred at many 

 points, especially from the initial water dumping through 

 the singulator after waxing, and in the automatic bagging 

 operation. These results generally substantiate the visually 



^tti^ 



*^^ 



M-Q 



1. WATER DUMPER = 67 g's 



2. SUBMERSION TANK = 58 g's 



3. UNDERSIZE ELIMINATOR = 73 g's 



4. INSPECTION ROLLERS = 68 g's 



5. WASHER/WAXER = 73 g's 



6. DRYER TUNNEL = 130 g's 



7. SINGULATOR = 54 g's 



8. SIZER DROPOUT = 40 g's 



9. TWO WAY CONVEYOR = 22 g's 

 lO.BAGGER AUGERS = 51 g's 



< 1 J 



1 1. WEIGH PANS = 48 g's 



12. CONVEYOR TRANSFER = 29 g's 



13. BAG CLOSER MECH. = 34 g's 



14. CONVEYOR = 43 G 



15. TRAY PACKS -25 g's 



16. AUTOMATIC BAGGER = 120 g's 



17. JUMBO PACK =34 g's 



18. PACKING TABLE = 14 g's 



19. BOX ONTO PALLET 



20. PUT INTO BOX - 58 e's 



Figure 1. A schematic drawing of a generic apple packing line, with points of fruit transfer nimibered 

 consecutively from input to the water dumper (1) to putting bags into cartons (20). The maximum acceleration 

 (g's) of the Instrument sphere is shown at each transfer point during 3 runs on each of 5 different packing lines. 



