Comparison of reciprocating-knife roller-, rotary-knife roller-, and saw-ginning Pima and Upland cottons

Authors: Whitelock, Derek; Armijo, Carlos; Delhom, Christopher - Chris; Wanjura, John; Tumuluru, Jaya Shankar; KOTHARI, NEHA - Cotton, Inc; MARTIN, VIKKI - Cotton, Inc

Submitted to: National Cotton Council Beltwide Cotton Conference
Publication Type: Abstract Only
Publication Acceptance Date: 1/21/2024
Publication Date: 4/18/2024
Citation: Whitelock, D.P., Armijo, C.B., Delhom, C.D., Wanjura, J.D., Tumuluru, J., Kothari, N., Martin, V. 2024. Comparison of reciprocating-knife roller-, rotary-knife roller-, and saw-ginning Pima and Upland cottons. National Cotton Council Beltwide Cotton Conference, Fort Worth, TX, January 3-5, 2024. p. 401-403.

Interpretive Summary:

Technical Abstract: The rotary-knife roller gin stand is the only roller gin used in the United States, while the reciprocating-knife roller gin is more widely used in other parts of the world. It’s been demonstrated that roller gin stands preserve fiber quality better than saw gin stands and evidence suggests that reciprocating-knife and rotary-knife roller gin stands produce similar quality cotton fiber. To date, no results have been published from controlled research studies comparing the two types of roller gin stands tested with U.S. cottons. Experiments were conducted at the USDA-ARS Southwestern Cotton Ginning Research Laboratory in Las Cruces, New Mexico comparing saw ginning, rotary-knife roller ginning, and reciprocating-knife roller ginning of Pima and Upland cottons. The ginning treatments included a 40-in. wide Hardwicke-Etter reciprocating-knife roller gin stand, a 40-in. wide conventional speed Hardwicke-Etter rotary-knife roller gin stand, and a 46-saw Continental Double Eagle saw gin stand (Bajaj Steel Industries, Nagpur, India). Both roller stands had the U.S. industry standard, laminated cotton fabric and rubber compound roll covering. Lint cleaning included a mill-type cleaner (similar to the Lummus Guardian lint cleaner, Lummus Ag Technology, Savannah, GA) after roller ginning, and a controlled-batt saw-type lint cleaner after saw ginning. The results showed that the rotaryknife stand had 4.0 to 5.5 times the capacity of the reciprocating-knife stand and about 30% of the capacity of the saw gin stand (Figure 1). Differences in HVI and AFIS fiber properties between the rotary-knife and reciprocating-knife stands were few or insignificant (Tables 1–4). Fiber from the rotary-knife stand tended to be slightly longer with more uniform length and fewer neps but had more foreign matter than that from the reciprocating-knife stand. Loan value of the fiber from the two roller stands was essentially the same. In summary, the results indicated that a rotary-knife roller gin stand produces fiber of similar quality to a reciprocating-knife roller gin stand but at 4-5 times the capacity.