AN ENCHNEERING ANALYSES OF ONfi‘i'i-‘E-FARM HANDLENG AND i3ACKtE-NEG OE: CUiTNA'E'ED ELEEBERRIES AND THE fiE‘J’ELCWMENT Oi? EIWS’RGVED METHODS [45%) EQUEPMENT EGR HANQLENQ AND FACKENG THIS Fifii‘g? Watch; ‘531' m Dagmar 6% M. S. MJCfi'fifiAN S‘E‘ATE COLLEGE me'clm H. ~23an 319515 This is to certify that the thesis entitled "An Engineering Analysis of On-The-Farm Handling and Packing of Cultivated Blueberries and .the Development of Improved Methods & Equipment for Handling & Packing This Fruit" presented by Jordan H. Levin has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for * L degree in Agricultural Engineering ’ Mummdmza Major professor Date February 15; 1955 0-169 AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS OF ON—THE~FARM hANDLING AND PACKING OF CULTIVATED BLUEBERRIES AND THE DEVELOPBIENT 0F IMPROW‘D METHODS AND E’UIP MENT FOR HANDLING AND PACKING THIS FRUIT 35’ Jordan H. Levin ”A AN ABSTRACT Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Agricultural Engineering Year 1955 Approved __ (L W )7? . @0431, r THES'S JORDAN H. LEVIN ABSTRACT .Michigan blueberry production has increased very rapidly during the period 1935-1955. Harvesting and packing methods did not keep up with production. The study was made to determine whether or not improvements and economies in packing and handling could be obtained and, if so, how they could be brought about. Conventional methods of harvesting, handling and packing blue- berries were anaLyzed. A trailer pick-up system and an on—the-farm central packing operation were developed and tested under commercial conditions. The results of using the new method and equipment were analyzed and compared with those obtained when conventional methods and equipment were used. It was found that the trailer pickdup system of assembling the fruit increased pickers' output and facilitated central farm packing. Central packing increased efficiency and output, lowered costs and enabled growers to put up a better and more uniform package. AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS OF ON-THE—FARM HANDLING AND PACKING OF CULTIVATED BLUEBERRIES AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF IMPROVED METHODS AND EQUIPMENT FOR HANDLING AND PACKING THIS FRUIT By JORDAN H. LEVIN A THESIS Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Agricultural Engineering 1955 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to express his sincere thanks to Dr. E. G. McKibben, Chief of the Agricultural Engineering Research Branch, U.S.D.A.; and to'W. M. Hurst, Head of Mechanical Preparation and Conditioning Section, U.S.D.A. who granted permission to base this paper on data which was accumulated during the course of U.S.D.A. research. He is greatly indebted to H. P. Gaston, of the Department of Horticulture, Michigan State College, for his valuable assistance in conducting the study. The author also extends sincere thanks to Dr. W. Carleton, who offered helpful suggestions during the course of the work and in preparing this paper. II 350830 TAbLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Importance of the Blueberry Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Reasons and Purpose of Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Review of Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 Experimental Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Description of Methods and Results of Experiments . . . . . . . . 8 Conventional Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Carrier Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lo Pail Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1h Shed Packing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Improved Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Trailer Pick-up . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Central Packing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Comparisons. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Carrier and Pail Methods vs Trailer Pick-up . . . . . . . 38 Shed Packing vs Central Packing . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ho Recommendations for future stud}- . . .~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140 Literature Review. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . hl Appendix 0 c o c o o o o o o 0 o 0 o o c 0 o o o o c o c c c o o O u‘ I.“ ‘Q 15.! LIST OF 'I‘ij'il Pf‘l TABLE 1. Growth of Michigan Cultivated Blueberry Industry . . . . II. Carrier Method Tnne Rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III. Pail Method Time Rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV. Rate of Packing in Sheds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V. Trailer Pics—up Time Rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VI. Standard Time Rates for Central Fucking . . . . . . . . . VII. How Picker's Time was Spent Under Various Methods . . . . VIII. Output For Worker and of Total Crew for Cellophaning and Binding 0 c c o o o o O o O o o c o O LIST OF FIGURES Page 1. Michigan production of cultivated blueberries (based on records of Michigan Bluewerry Growers' Association). . . . 3 2. Layout of a typical ZS-acre blueberry field (1,2,3 and h are packing sheds) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3. Fruit being harvested into hfi-pint pails . . . . . . . . . 10 h. Berries are poured into pint cups which have been Set in a carrier. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I] 5. At the shed, cups are removed from the carrier and set on trays by the picker. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 o. When berries are handled in pails they are usually poured from one pail to another for sorting . . . . . . . . . . . lh ?. A picker checking-in several pails of berries at the of the SIXC‘dS O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 15 8. Berries being put into lugs at the shed. These lugs are Ezenttocamlirlgpiallts‘ccocoo00.000.000.018 9. Berries being packed into 30-pound tins at the shed . . . 18 10. After the berries have been set on trays by the pickers, the shed boy sets these trays within easy reach of the packer, or stockpiles them on shelves. . . . . . . . . . . 19 ll. View of hand packing operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 12. Another view of hand packing Operation . . . . . . . . . . 21 I}. View of trailer and picker checking-in two pails of berries. 0 O O C o o O O O c 0 O o o o c c c c o o o o o c 23 lh. .Layout of central packing line . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 1%. View of sorting table . . . . . . . . .l. . . . . . . . . 27 In. View of the mechanical shaker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 17. Another View of the mechanical shaker . . . . . . . . . . a8 18. Two pints identically filled with berries . . . . . . . . 30 V Figure Page 19. The same two pints except that the pint on the right was placed on the mechanical shaker for eight seconds . . . 30 20. One worker places frames on trays and places 12 pint cups inside each frame. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 21. The pails of berries are transferred from the trailer to the holding tables on arrival at the packing center. . . 32 22. One worker dumps the berries into the tray-frame-pint-cup assembly 0 o o o 0 c o o o o o o o o o c o c o o o o c o 33 23. The berries were settled in the pint cups by vibrating them from 6 to 10 seconds. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3h 2h. One girl places the filled pint under the holding frame and covers it with cellophane . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 25. The nailcr at work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 VI INTRODUCTION The low-bush (wild) blueberry is native to North America. The suppLy of fruit was so abundant up to the turn of the century that there was not.much incentive to bring this fruit into cultivation. In 1908, because of the fact that the supply of wild blueberries was rapidly diminishing, Dr. F. V. Coville of the U.S.D.A. became ins terested in the cultivation of this fruit. He studied the soil require- ments, selected breeding stock and developed several varieties of large size and high quality blueberries. The first commercial planting was made at White's Bog, near New Lisbon, New Jersey, and the first comercial shipments of cultivated blueberries were made from there in 1916. The Michigan Experiment Station started investigations of blue- berries in 1923 at the South Haven ExPerimental Station. The first come mercial plantings in Michigan were made near Grand Junction in 1928. In the early years the growth of the industry'was slow. Michigan's commercial crop was still small in l9h0, being just over 10,000 crates. About this time growers began to realize the commercial possibilities of the cultivated blueberry and several hundred acres were planted. When these plantings began to bear fruit four years later, the produc- tion increased to over 100,000 crates. This production was marketed at a good profit and growers again increased their acreage. In l9Sh over 1,000,000 crates were produced in.lichigan. 'l. A. Donald, Manager of the Michigan Blueberry Growers' Association, estimates that the crop will be over 1,500,000 twelve-pint crates in 1955 and 2,000,000 by 1957. Similar expansion took place in New Jersey and North Carolina, the other states that produce blueberries in commercial quantities. In l95h production in New Jersey was about the same as in Michigan (1,000,- 000 crates) and production in North Carolina was about h00,000 crates. The rapidly rising production of cultivated blueberries has already surpassed the amount of wild blueberries harvested in this country an- nually. The wild blueberry production is now about 1,000,000 crates, 3/h of which is produced in Maine. This production is on the decrease. Fig. 1 shows graphically the rapid increase of blueberry production and number of growers in.Michigan. The gross return from an acre often.exceeds $1,000. In the area where this fruit is grown it is of considerable commercial significance. This year the Michigan crop returned over $2,500,000 to growers and, as already pointed out, the crop is rapidly increasing. Ever since commercial plantings were made the demand for the fruit has exceeded the supply to the point where even inefficient growers could usually make a profit. Most growers have concentrated their ef- forts on increasing their acreage rather than increasing efficiency of handling and packing. Research agencies that have worked in the blueberry field have, for the most part, concentrated their efforts on cultural studies be- cause little or nothing*was known about the growth habits of the plant. Because of these facts very little effort has been made to improve packing and handling techniques. The methods employed today are, in most cases, similar to those used by the first commercial growers 25 Asogmwoomms .mnosouo E333 5320.3 no echoes.” co comma 32.3533 consignee Ho scavenged Suwanee: H .mfim am. mm. mm. Hm. Om. ms. 9.? we? on. Q? .3. Q? NJ. .3. 0:. an. _ . v . .A a . . .. m . , m.“ ‘ ooouooa 08.8mm 000.com 000.400: 000.com 000.000 000.02. TDABLE I. GROWTH OF MICHIGAN CULTIVaTED BLUEBERRY INDUSTRY m— .——_ —!-‘ :‘ Year Number Production Dollar of in 1 Value gf Growers Crates Sales 1938 20 1939 30 8,839 17,650 19h0 36 10,952 19,000 19h1 bl u6,h30 88,000 19u2 uh 7h,190 182,000 l9h3 51 68,321 26h,000 19th 82 7h,508 2h9,000 19h5 105 107,870 h29,000 19h6 136 123,539 h16,000 19h? 176 101,3h5 322,000 19h8 190 135,59h uh5,000 19h9 231 320,000 78h,000 1950 286 500,000 1,180,000 1951 338 h50,000 1,110,000 1952 372 685,000 1,633,000 1953 1:10 897,000 2,175,000 195k h18 1,000,500 2,575,000 l. Crates contain 12 pints each 2. Dollar values rounded off to nearest thousand years ago. A study made by wright and Johnson (1h) in l9h6 showed that the cost of picking, handling and packing blueberries was more than l/3 of the total production cost. This figure exceeds that of other fruits. Increased production will no doubt mean.lower gross returns, and many growers will have to increase the efficiency of their operations or operate at a loss. The directors of the Blueberry Growers Associa- tion have indicated that the most logical place to cut costs is in handling, harvesting and packing. The study here reported.was undertaken to determine whether or not economies in handling and packing can be obtained and, if so, how they can best be brought about. REVIEW OF LITERATURE The literature on the wild blueberry as well as the cultivated blueberry was reviewed. All the available publications on the subject were obtained from states producing blueberries. A review of articles appearing in trade and popular magazines was made. A list of the 31 publications and the 16 magazine articles reviewed appears in the ap- pendix. Only six of the 31 government and state publications mention handl- ing and packing, and then only briefly. A total of only six pages was devoted to discussion of these operations. Chandler (8)1and Dow (25) mention the method of handling wild ber- ries. They both state that the berries are gathered with hand-rakes having h2-h8 teeth and are put into one-half bushel baskets. The blue- berries are then put through field winnowing machines, driven by gas en- gines, which remove some of the leaves and stems. About 95 percent of the wild crop then goes to the processing plants to be canned or frozen. Bailey (26) and Johnston (18 and 20) mention briefly the handling and packing of cultivated blueberries. Their discussion can be summar— ized by the following few sentences. Cultivated berries are hand picked into small pails that are hung on a strap tied around the picker's waist. The undergrade berries, leaves and stems are removed and the marketable berries put into pint boxes and covered with cellophane. The cellophane sheet is fitted tightly over the box and held in place by means of a rubber band. This operation is performed by hand. The boxes are usually l/ Numbers in parentheses refer to appended references. packed for market in lZ—pint crates called flats. The articles appearing in trade and popular magazines dealt mostly with the history, cultural practices and economics of growing blueber- ries. In the articles where harvesting and packing were mentioned, only one or two paragraphs were devoted to these operations. The discussions were essentially the same as those in the publications already mentioned. The review of literature showed that up to this time very little thought has been given to handling and packing. EXPERLJETITAL MEN-10D Industrial engineering techniques are being applied more and more to agricultural operations. Examples of the kind of analytical data obtainable with the aid of industrial engineering methods are: Standard unit-time requirements for performance of essential on-the-farm tasks; estimates of the proportion of working time that is actually spent in productive work; and pattern of flow in handling. With such data better work methods, better layouts and more efficient equipment can be developed. The methods usually used in ootaining this material are the ''time study“ and the "production study". In the ”time study“ the amount of time required to perform specific operations is measured. In the "pro- duction study" a continuous time log of each operation, delay or other event associated with a particular job is made. The actual experimental work was carried out in the following four phases: 1. The Conventional Methods of Harvesting, Handling and Packing Were Analyzed. In this phase of the work time, production, motion and cost studies of the various steps involved were made. Layout and equipment were studied. Standard unit times and rates were worked out for each operation as well as actual rates and times. Sixteen different blueberry plantations were visited and twenty-eight packing sheds studied. A New Method Fbr Handling and Packing Blueberries Was Developed. An analysis of the data obtained in the first step led the investi- gator to believe that the efficiency of handling and packing might be improved. In an attempt to improve the efficiency of these op- erations a new procedure for handling and packing was worked out. New Ebuipment Which Would Facilitate the method Was Designed and Constructed. In some instances the new procedure required new pieces of equipment or modifications of existing mechanical aids. A field trailer, movable storage table, filling table, sorting table, mechanical shaker, holding table, cellOphaning and packing units, and nailing table were designed and constructed. The New Method and Equipment were Tested and Evaluated. Arrange- ments were made to test the new method under actual commercial conditions with a large blueberry grower. Over 50,000 pints of berries were handled and packed in a threeaweek period by the new method and equipment. An engineering analysis was made and the results compared to those obtained when the conventional methods were used. DESCRIPTION OF HBPLCLS AND RESULTS OF EXPERIMENTS CONVENTIONAL SYSTEIS lost of the commercial blueberry growers in Michigan provide a centrally located packing shed for each five to seven acres of full-bearing plants. The picking crew in any field work together in the area surrounding one of the sheds and carry the harvested fruit to that shed for packing. When the fruit is harvested from that area, the picking crew is moved to another section of the field and a new shed is opened for receiving and packing the fruit. The layout of a typical 2S-acre blueberry field showing four packing sheds appears in Fig. 2. F 1009 ft. 4 2 ' I 70 l 5119 I 270' , \. §padways 1000' *H—-— SOO'————+— 2501—». _ t 5. i L “:2 l:— 250' g. 2 Layout of a typical 25-acre blueberry field a, 2, 3 and h are packing sheds) 10 From this layout and others it can be calculated that the average distance a picker walks in making the round trip to the shed is approxi- mately [1110 feet. It was found that there were two methods in c0mmon.use for carry- ing the fruit to the sheds. They are the "carrier" method and the "pail" method. The "Carrier” Nethod_ The various steps involved when the carrier method is used are as follows: 1. Fruit is picked in pails holding from four to ten pints, the size depending on the personal preference of the owner. (Fig.3) .I‘ J ‘~ . e ' . - ‘ J ' ~_ v , ' v.‘ “ ‘.‘ *"~ 2"?!" .' .'* 1 '\'.‘e . -. - $1; ~~.'~a..~.v-.. - ‘ use _ ‘ .g V . ‘ b”‘ '1 .‘ ‘ r ... w ‘ I \ “ I. " ‘ ‘ .fl‘m .‘ . .1 , a ‘Q ' ‘1 Q / Rube Fig. 3 Fruit being harvested into ué pint pails. These pails are hung on a strap tied around the picker's waist. Plants in the picture are only 3 years old and not in full bearing. ll 2. After being picked the fruit is poured from pails into pint cups which have been previously placed in carriers. As the fruit is being poured the picker sorts out the defective fruit. (Fig. h) Fig. h Berries are poured into pint cups which have been set in a carrier. Note plants are in full bearing. 3. When all of the pint cups in a carrier have been filled, the carrier is moved to the shed by the picker. b. At the packing shed the picker moves the filled cups from his carrier to a tray and.makes sure that all the cups are heaped with berries. he is then credited with the number of pints he has checked in. (Fig. 5) l2 Fig. 5 At the shed cups are removed from the carrier and set on trays by the picker. He makes sure each cup is heaped.with berries. S. The picker then fills his carrier with empty cups and returns to his station in the field and proceeds as before. Table 2 shows the standard time required to perform each step. 1t also shows how the average picker and the superior picker spends his time during the working day. The standard times shown in this table, as well as figures in Tables3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8, are based on studies of many workers handling hundreds of pints of blueberries. See.Appendix P for details (page 50). 13 TABLE II CARRIER METHOD TIME RATES AVERAGE PICKER SUPERIOR PICKER Operation Std. Mine. % of Std. Mine. % of Time for 8 hr. Time for 8 hr. Mins.2 65 pts. day Mins2 80 pts. Day Picking 511.0 351.5 73.2 h5.0 360.0 75.0 Sorting 2.5 16.0 3.3 2.5 20.0 h.2 ‘Walking 1.3 8.5 1.8 1.2 10.0 2.1 Check In 3.0 19.5 l..0 3.0 211.0 h.9 Walldng 1.3 8.5 1.8 1.2 10.0 2.1 Resting - h0.0 8.h - 20.0 h.2 Reassignment1 - 36.0 7.5 - 36.0 7.5 1180.03 1180.0 1] When a picker finishes picking a row he is assigned a new one by the field boss. Standard times are minutes per 10 pints of berries. Based on an 8-hour day or h80 minutes. '{Q Pickers normally harvest between 50 and 85 pints per 8-h0ur day, the average being 65 pints per'day when this method is used. The super- ior picker picks faster than the average (10 pints in hS minutes as compared to 5h.minutes) and he spends less time resting (20 minutes per day instead of to minutes). Pickers takeaibout two to three minutes to sort and pour 10 pints of fruit into the carriers, the average time being 2.5 minutes. As pointed out in the discussion of the field layout, the picker ‘walks on the average of 220 feet each way from the picking area to the 1h shed. The pickers walk at about 2% miles per hour, therefore it takes them between 27 and 78 seconds each way. On the average, when picking in carriers the pickers check in just a little over a carrier (10 pints) per trip, which means they spend about 1* minutes walking to the shed and another 1} minutes returning for every 10 pints picked. At the shed the pickers spend from 2.5 to h minutes per carrier for transferring the pints from the carrier to trays and for checking- in the fruit, the average being 3 minutes. Under the carrier method the worker spends approximately 7.5 per- cent of his time being assigned rows for picking, about the same amount in resting, about 15 percent walking and sorting fruit, and from 73 to 75 percent of his time in actual picking. The "Pail" Method The various steps involved in this method are listed below: 1. Fruit is harvested in pails as in the carrier method. 2. After being picked the fruit is usually poured from one pail '0 ‘ ‘. ‘ o \ , C ~ ~ . . " ‘ :fSrz‘e‘ \ ' x .. ' 9 ‘f‘ fix“ to another and defective berries removed (Fig. 6). ’1 Fig. 6 When berries are handled in pails they are ‘nfusually poured from one pail in another for sorting. 15 3. After several pails are filled with sorted berries they are carried to the packing shed. h. At the packing shed the filled pails are checked in and a supply of empty pails is obtained. (Fig. 7) Fig. 7 A picker checking-in several pails of berries at one of the sheds. 5. The picker then returns to his harvesting area and resumes work as before. Table 3 lists the steps involved in the pail method and shows standard unit times and the amount of time spent in each step during an 8-hour day. It was found that with this method the average picker harvested 70 pints per 8-hour day and a superior picker 85 pints. This is an increase over the carrier method. TABLE III PAIL METHOD TIME RATES 16 AVERAGE PICKER SUPERIOR PICKER Operation Std. Mins. % of Std. Mine. % of Time 1 for 8-hr. Time 1 for 8-hr. Mine. 70 pts. Day Mins. 85 pts. Day Picking 52.0 360.0 75.0 1.11.0 372.1 77.7 Sorting 2.5 17.h b.0 2.5 21.3 h.h ‘Walking 1.3 9.3 2.0 1.2 11.1 2.2 Check In 1.0 7.0 1.3 1.0 8.5 1.8 'Walking 1.3 9.3 2.0 1.2 11.0 2.2 Resting - 1.0.0 8.2 - 20.0 11.2 Reassignment - 36.0 7.5 - 36.0 7.5 1.80.0 1.80.0 see :22?- 1/ Standard times are minutes per 10 pints of berries The picker harvested between 50 and 90 pints of berries per 8-hour day, the average being 70 pints for this method. At the picking area it took the picker from 2 to 3 minutes to pour ten pints from one pail to another and sort out the defective berries. The distances walked and the rate of walking were the same as for the carrier method,for the layout of the fields was the same. It was .found that the pickers carried 2.8h pails per trip on the average, which is about 12 pints, making the time spent in walking 10 pints about the same as in the carrier method. 17 At the shed very little time was spent. The picker set down his full pails, was credited for the number of pints, ootained empties and returned to the field. Time spent was about one minute per 10 pints checked in. When using the pail method the worker, as in the carrier method, Spent approximately 7.5 percent of his time being assigned rows and about the same amount of time in resting. However, he spent about 10 percent in walking and sorting, which left between 75 and 77 percent for the actual picking Operation. Table 3 shows, as did Table 2, that the reason the superior picker harvested more fruit was the faster picking rate and less resting tine. Shed Packing All the blueberries received at the packing sheds are either placed in lug boxes or thirty-pound tins and dispatched to processing plants, or they are packaged for the fresh fruit market. For Processing» The capacity of lug boxes and the tins is approximately the same, about 2h pounds of berries. A packer can fill either of them at the rate of one every two minutes when the berries are checked in at the sheds in pails (Figs. 8 & 9). However, when the fruit arrives in carriers it takes about five to eight minutes per tin or lug. At most sheds the fruit is checked at a rate of 500 to 700 pints per hour, which is about 20 to 30 lugs or cans per hour. This means that if the fruit comes in pails one checker and one packer can handle it. if the fruit comes in carriers one checker and two packers are needed because of the extra time needed to empty the large number of containers. n '- .. . ”'1: Fig. 8 Berries being put into lugs at the shed. These lugs are sent to canning plants. —.— .5 b——_ ”if-.,i lAv—__..—A, ,_-_‘ Fig. 9 Berries being packed into 30-pound tins at the shed. These containers hold 2h pounds of berries and go to the freezing plants. 18 l9 EEELEIE§2.§35£§£. Practically all the michigan grown blueberries which are sold as fresh fruit are put up in pint boxes covered with cellophane that is held or by a rubner band. Twelve of these boxes are placed in a “aster container called a flat. The individual pint boxes are of at- tractive appearance and the flat can be handled and displayed easily. Although practically all the fruit is marketed through the Blue— berry Growers' Association, it is packed by the individual growers. The most serious problem faced by most growers is that of packag- ing the berries rapidly and ecenamicilly. This work is ordinarily done in the various packing sheds already mentioned. The berries that are to be sold as fresh fruit are brought to the sheds by the carrier method which has already been described. The trays on which the filled pint; have been placed are set down within easy reach of a packer. (Fig. 10). Fig. 10 After the berries have“been set on trays my the pickers, the shed—boy sets these trays within easy reach of the packer or stockpiles them on shelves. 20 The packer moves a filled pint to a position in front of her, covers it with a piece of cellophane, slips a packing frame over the pint in such a way that the cellophane i: held down while a rubber band is slipped onto the package (Figs. ll and 12). The pint is then removed from the frame and placed in a flat. The operation consists of five separate movements. Another worker called the "nailer" staples or nails a slatted cover and stamps the grade and the grower's name on each flat after it has been filled with 12 pints of berries, and also keeps the packers supplied with empties. Fig. ll View of the hand pecking operation 21 I I. 1 ‘0 Fig. 12 View of the hand packing Operation Table h shows the time required for packing TABLE IV RATE OF PACKING IN SHEDS Operation No. per min. . No. per hour per packer per packer Packing lugs .6 36 Packing 30 lb. tins .6 36 Packing pint cups for fresh market h.0 2&0 pint cups or 20 flats A shed crew generally consists of one shed boss who supervises the shed operation and checks the fruit in, a shed boy, a nailer and two packers. Such a crew can pack for fresh market up to 330 flats 22 (hOOO pints) and SO lugs or cans in an 8-hour day. This is atout 9.2 flats per hour per worker when the crew is packing for the fresh market. The study of motions involved, layout and standard time require- ments led the writer to believe that the efficiency of packing could be increased. IMPROVED METHODS Trailer Pickup gystem In order to reduce the amount of time pickers spend in walking and sorting fruit it was decided a trailer pickup system,using only pails,should be used instead of conventional systems of handling. It was hoped the result would be more time spent in actual picking and.more efficient handling. A low narrow trailer 3.5 feet wide and 10 feet long, having a capacity of 150 four-and-one-half-pint pails was designed and constructed. The trailer was procided with a canvas awning to keep rain and the sun off the holding area. The hitch was constructed in such a way that the trailer could be turned in a short radius. The trailer was pulled up and down the rows by a tractor in such a way that the piCKers could check-in their fruit with a minimum amount of walking. At the time the picker checked-in his full pails of fruit he was provided with a supply of empty pails so he could immediately return to his picking work \Fig. 13). 23 Fig. 13 View of trailer and picker checking-in two pails of berries. Table 5 shows the steps a picker goes throughvvhen the fruit is O picked up by a trailer. Standard unit-time requirements and amount of time spent during an eight-hour day for each operation of the picker are also shown. TABLE V TRAILER PICKUP TIME RAThS 2h AVERAGE PICKER SUPERIOR PICKER Operation Std. Mina. s of Std. Mine. % of Time for 8-hr. Time for 8~hr. Mins.l 7h pts. Day Minsj' 89 pts. Day Picking 52.0 382.0 79.1 un.0 390.0 81.3 Sorting 2.5 18.5 3.7 2.5 22.5 h.7 Walking .5 3.0 .6 .h 3.75 .8 Check In 1.0 7.5 1.5 1.0 9.0 1.9 Walking .5 3.0 .6 .h 3.75 .8 Resting - 30.0 6.0 - 15.0 3.0 Reassignment - 36.0 7.5 - 36.0 7.5 1/' Standard times are minutes per 10 pints of berries When fruit was checked-in to a trailer, pickers harvested between 50 and 95 pints of berries in an eight-hour day. The average picxer harvested 7h pints per day. The picker spent 7.5 percent of his time being assigned rows for picking and 8 percent of his time resting. He did not have to walk far to check-in fruit and as a result did not rest as much as when he had to walk to the shed. J(-‘ess walking meant that he spent approximately 7 percent of the time walking, checking—in and sorting. This left 80 percent of the time for actual picking. “e therefore was able to har- vest more fruit per day. 25 After the pails were checked in at the trailer the fruit, if it was destined for a processor, was poured into cans or lugs by the trac- tor driver and a helper. J~Ihese two workers could handle as much as 5,000 pints a day because the fruit arrived at the trailer in pails. If the fruit was to be packed for the fresh-fruit market, the filled pails were placed in the trailer and hauled to a central pack- ing house equipped to receive and pack berries which came in pails. Central Packing The study of the conventional methods of packing led the writer to believe that the efficiency of this operation could be improved by central packing. A layout for central packing was made and necessary equipment designed and constructed. Procedures for pack- ing blueberries that arrived by trailer in pails were worked out. Fig. lb shows the layout of the packing line. Items 1, 2 and 3 are mobile receiving and storage tables. They are 36 inches high, of sturdy construction, mounted on castors so they can be moved easily, and have a capacity of 75 four-and-a-half-pint pails each. 1he purpose of these tables is to provide surfaces onto which the fruit could be unloaded quickly from the trailers and moved about the packing floor easily. These tables were also used to stock empty pails and move them to the trailer to be returned to the pickers. Item h is a sorting table (Fig. 15). This piece of equipment was used when it was necessary to remove defective fruit. The table con- sisted of a white oilcloth—covered and hinged top on which it was easy to see the berries, and which would hold a full pail of berries. After the fruit was inspected the top was raised and the berries rolled off. The table was inexpensive yet very effective. 26 .mdaphom flamenco some mmasaob con: must no haco pmxnoa NH mnoxcoa mo soapmooq x oases mcfl>fiooom Amsmpa Ho soapafinommo now an m 1mm momma mmmv mafia weekend flamenco mo psozoq 4H .mfim madam ocaaflm mafim xoopm flea ~33 mcfi>fimoom wcfibwmoom m a x m N X fllll NH magma magma magma x waflamz 328 memes: Salaam wanders seesaw S a. e m s ,\v m N film: x manna mafia: mcaocdm hnmwafixsa .HH e maaameaoaaou a a m .m um .m.m 27 Item 5 is a table on which the pint boxes are filled with berries. Item 6 is a mechanical vibrator over which the filled pints passed. The purpose of this piece of equipment was to cause the fruit to settle sufficiently to prevent the development of a slack pack dur- ing transit. Fig. 15 View of the sorting table. Berries from one full pail just covered the surface. The defective fruit can easily be seen against the white surface. The advantage of handling berries in pails has been recognized by growers and has been pointed out in a previous section. however, pails have not been used because the invariable result was a slack un- attractive pack which the sales managers found hard to merchandise. Filling the pint cups in the field, and the jarring which occurred when they were carried to the sheds, caused the fruit to settle before the cellophane was applied. The fruit packed in this way carried better, 28 and no objectionable settling took place as a result of vibration in truck transit. f. 'I‘ ”" F ,. . i- ‘r- . ’ - -"* V “’7 .1 t I." ' " .' ' My. '4 3* “I ‘ B ( . 1‘ .1 _ 'i' Figs. 16 and 17. Views of the mechanical shaker. The lower view shows the bearing which is attached to the frame and the one which is attached to the shaker platform with the eccentric shaft going through it. 29 The shaker (Figs. 16 and 17) had a platform 22 inches by 30 inches which could hold two frames of 12 pints each,at the same height as the rest of the line, so materials could be moved from one unit to another. This vibrating surface was set on airplane shock mountings. The motion was a 360 degree circular motion of 1/8 inch diameter at 600 rpm. This motion was achieved by driving a shaft at 600 rpm with a 1/8 inch offset through a bearing rigidly connected to the vibrating surface. l'he drive was from a l/h hp electric motor through a variable speed pulley so that the number of vibrations per minute chould be changed. It was found 600 rpm was most effective. The rotary type motion was used because it is simple to obtain, and effective for settling the berries (see Figs. 18 & 19). Other types of motion such as vertical, horizontal or any combination could have been obtained by proper design if it had been deemed advisable. Item 7 (Fig. lb) is a holding taole on which the filled pints were held until picked up by the ”cellophaner". This table had a slatted top through which excess blueberries dropped. These were collected in lugs and then sent to the processor. Items 8 and 9 are cellophaning and banding units. These are im- portant pieces of equipment because the speed of the whole line is de- termined by how fast the berries pass through these units. Each machine was provided with a hinged arm activated by a foot pedal in one direction and a spring in the other direction. It was by means of this device that .the cellophane holding frame was lowered onto the filled pint. When in this position a rubber band was placed on the filled pint and the pint then removed and placed in a flat resting on item 10. 30 Item 10 is a sturchl table on which the flats were stamped and covers were applied and nailed on. It was constructed with a shelf so that a supply of lids, cellophane and rubber bands could be kept handy. Fig. 18. Two pints identically filled with berries. “: ‘ v 1... 9, ' -~:qvw V- 7"".- ~.. 7— ‘ _, , v .‘-1 w — Fig. 19 The same two pints except that the pint on the right was placed QT! the mechanical shaker for eight seconds. Note how it has settled. 't is now ready for cellophaning. 31 Item 11 is an auxiliary table on which a worker placed a tray and a 12 x 16 inch bottomless wood frame just large enough to hold 12 pints, (Fig.20). When the frame had been filled with empty pints the entire assembly consisting of tray, frame and pints was lifted onto the filling table ( item h). Fig. 20 One worker places frames on trays and places 12 pint cups inside each frame. 1his work is done on the auxiliary table next to the line. When the trailer load of filled pails arrived at the central packing house the pails were transferred to the storage tables (Fig.21). The tractor driver then loaded the trailer with empty pails and returned to the field. ' ' . C I "3 ,,'.l ' “ "'u _ . ’ . ‘ ‘11..» u.‘v h.‘ \ .- - o_ ' _ ‘ :3} t"? t" ."1‘, v - “\ ' ‘ r‘ a “'"fi‘? .3: "1J5. Fig. 21 The pails of berries are transferred from the trailer to the holding tables on arrival at the packing center. 32 33 One of these holding tables containing filled pails was moved into working position at the end of the packing line. A worker then poured the fruit from the pails into the tray-frame-pint-cup assembly (Fig. 22). .1. 9 . 1‘ 9 Fig. 22 One worker dumps the berries into the tray-frame- pint-cup assembly. 3h The filled frame assembly was then moved onto the shaker. After 6 to 10 seconds, during which time the fruit settled in the pints, the assembly was pushed.to the holding table and the frame removed, leaving the tray containing the properly filled pint cups within easy reach of the packers (Fig. 23). Fig. 23 The berries were settled in the pint cups by vibrating them from 6 to 10 seconds. . . At each station the "cellophaner" picked up a filled pint, moved it into position under the packing frame, placed a piece of cellophane over the fruit, and moved the packing frame into holding position by means of a foot pedal. Another worker, the "bander" applied the rubber band in such a way as to hold the cellophane in place, and then set the packed pint into the flat (Fig. 2b). As previously pointed out, the cellophaning and banding operation is composed of five:steps. When the 35 banding unit was used the step of applying the frame was changed from a hand action to a foot action. The remaining four steps were split up so that the cellophaner performed two of them and the bander the other two. This resulted in a faster rate of packing. If > a "’ i.lfll.i 4' V ligee‘ _ . ‘ 5 Fig. 2b One girl places the filled pint under the holding frame and covers it with cellophane. Another girl applies a rubber band and places the packed pint cups into a flat which holds twelve. Vhen a flat was filled another work, the ”nailer", applied a cover, stamped the flat and stock—piled it for shipment (Fig. 25). Fig. 25 The nailer at work. 36 37 Table 6 lists the steps involved in central packing, and the time required to perform each step. The packers cellophaned and banded flats at rates between hS and 60 per hour. The average was 50 flats per hour. This meant that with the two cellopharing-banding stations, fire line could turn out 100 flats per hour or 1200 pints. TABLE VI STANDARD TIME RATES FOR CENTRAL PACKING A“ -._‘ M. __--.l- - - . __ k _._L Operation Pints Flats per hour per hour Making tray-frame-pint 1320 110 assemblies Dumping fruit and shaking 1320 110 CellOphaning 600 50 Banding 600 50 Nailing 1500 125 The crew of seven or eight workers packed at the rate of 100 flats or 1200 pint cups per hour. During the trials this crew packed over 50,000 pint cups. The crew consisted of: cellophaners (girls) banders (girls) nailer (man) dumper (girl) tray-frame-pint assembler (man) grader-handyman (girl) (was not always used) F’F‘F‘FJRDAJ When a crew of seven was used the rate per worker was lh.3 flats per hour. When a crew of eight was used the rate of packing, per worker, was 12.5 flats per hour. 38 COMPARISONS Carrier and Pail Methods XE Trailer Pickup. Table 7 shows how the picker Spent his time while working under each of the above methods. TABLE VII HOW PICKER'S TIME WAS SPENT UNDER VARIOUS METHODS Operation Carrier Pail Trailer-Pickup Picking 73.2% 75% 79.1% Sorting 3.3 h.O 3.7 Walking 1.8 2.0 .6 Check In h.0 1.3 1.5 Walking 1.8 2.0 .6 Resting 8.h 8.2 6.0 Reassignment 7.5 7.5 7.5 Average pints picked per day 65 70 7h The picker was able to spend more time in actual picking when work- ing under the trailer pick-up method and therefore he could harvest more fruit per day. An increase of h to 9 pints per worker is of im- portance. A field boss can handle up to 100 pickers efficiently. Crews of this size are utilized and the hOO-9OO pints which they could pick under the trailer system are normally lost. Not only does the trailer pickdup system result in more fruit picked per worker but it makes possible the assembly of fruit at one place for central packing and shipping. 39 Shed Packing XE Central Packing. Table 8 compares the rate of cello- phaning and banding per person and the output per worker for each type of packing. TABLE VIII PER-DAY OUTPUT PER WORKER AND OF TOTAL CREW FOR CELLOPHANING AND BANDING Operation Shed packing Central packing Cellophaning and banding 20 flats 25 flats Total crew 9.2 to 10 flats 12-5 to 15 flats Central packing utilizing preSent equipment is more efficient than shed packing. The new method is not only faster but enables the grower to put up a more uniform pack and to exercise a more positive control of quality of the pack. Central packing also makes the physical handling of the packed fruit easier and facilitates accounting because all the fruit is assembled and shipped from one point. Another significant advantage of central packing is that it makes a considerable number of packing sheds unnecessary. A SO-acre planta- tion that uses the conventional method must provide 10 packing sheds which together cost from $5,000 to $7000. In central farm packing, one house costing $1,500 to 32,000 would provide an adequate amount of space. This building could be used in the off season for shop or storage. 1. ho CONCLUSIONS Conventional methods of handling and packing tend to be expensive, cumbersom and inefficient. The trailer pick-up system of assembling the fruit increases pickers' output and facilitates central farm packing. Central packing: Increases efficiency and output Lowers costs Enables growers to put up a better and more unifonm package RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE STUDY Conduct research to find a mechanical means of picking the fruit in order to speed up picking and get more of the fruit harvested. Investigate the possibility of further improvement by using larger picking containers and improving the trailer pick-up system. Develop a completely automatic cellophane and banding unit. hl LITERATURE REVIEWED U.S.D.A. and College Publications 1. 2. 9. 10. ll. 12. 13. 1):. 1921, l93h’ 1939: 19h3, 1%0, 19h3, 1911.3, 19b3, l9hh, l9llh’ l9l‘lll) 1W6, 19h6, 192:6, 19h6. Oct., Coville, F. V., U.S.D.A. Bul. 971 Directions for blueberry culture Oct., Johnston, Stanley, Mich. State Agr. Expt. Bul. 2S2 Cultivation of the highbush blueberry Nov., Merrill, T. A., Mich. Agr. Expt. Quart. Bul., Vol.22, No. 2. Acid tolerance of the highbush blueberry May, Beckwith, c. s., New Jersey Agr. Expt. Sta. Uul., Ciro. h57. Blueberries in the garden Aug., Beckwith, C. 8., New Jersey Agr. Expt. Sta. Circ. h72 Insects attacking blueberry fruit Aug., Beckwith, C. S., New Jersey Agr. Expt. Sta. Circ. 1473 Locating and preparing fields for the cultivated blueberry Nov., Doran, W. J., and Bailey, J. 3., Mass. Agr. Expt.Sta. Bul. h10. Propagation of the highbush blueberry Dec., Chandler, F. B., Maine Agr. Expt. Sta. Bul. h23 Lowbush blueberries May, Brightwell, W. T., and Johnston, S., Mich. Agr. Expt. Sta. Bul. 192. Pruning the highbush blueberry May, Doehlert, C. A., New Jersey Agr. Expt. Sta. Circ. h83 Fertilizing commercial blueberry fields in New Jersey July, Chandler, F. B., Maine Agr. Expt. Sta. Bul. h28 Composition and uses of blueberries March, Doehlert, C. A., New Jersey Agr. Expt. Sta. Circ.h90 Prepagating blueberries from hard wood cutting May, Bailey, J. S., and French, A. P., Mass. Agr. Expt. Sta. Bul. hjl. Identification of blueberry varieties by plant characters June, Wright K. T., and Johnston, 8., Mich. Agr. Expt. Sta. Circ. Bul. 203. Small fruit costs in Michigan July, Chandler, F. B., and Mason, J. 0., Maine Agr. Expt. Sta. Bul. hh3. Blueberry weeds in Maine and their control lc’o 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 2h. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 31. l9h6, 19h7, 1947, 19h8, l9h5, l9h6, 1911?, lyhy, lyhy, 1950: 1950, 1950, 1951, 1931) 195?, h2 Dec., Gaston, H. P., Mich. Agr. Expt. Sta. Ext. Folder F96 how to pick blueberries March, Doehlert, C. A., and Tomlinson, W. F., New Jersey Agr. Expt. Sta. Circ. 50h Blossom weevil on cultivated blueberries march, Johnston, S., Mich. Agr. Expt. Sta. Ciro. Bul. 188 Essentials of blueberry culture Jan., Johnston, S., Mich. Agr. Expt. Sta. Tech. Bul. 205 Behavior of highbush and lowbush blueberry selections and their hybrids growing on various soils located at different levels April, Mich. State College Ext. Folder F 119 Hints on blueberry growing May, Blasberg, 0., Vermont Agr. Expt. Sta. Pamphlet l9 Growing blueberries in Vermont Feo., Hitz, C. W., Maine Agr. Expt. Sta. Dul. h67 Increasing plant stand in blueberry fields Nov., Hayne, D. W., and Cardinell, H. A., Mich. Agr. Expt. Sta. Quart. Bul. Vol. 132, No.2. Damage to blueberries by birds Dec., Darrow, G. M., New Jersey Agr. Expt. Sta. D'ul. 7h? Two new blueberry varieties March, Dow, D. F., Maine Agr. Expt. Sta. bul. h79 Producing blueberries in Maine June, Bailey, J. S., and Franklin, H. J., and Kelly, J. L., Mass. Agr. Expt. Sta. Bul. 356. Blueberry culture in massa- chusetts June, Morrow, E. B., and Darrow, G. M., North Car. Agr. Exp. Sta. Spec. Circ. #10. The Murphy and Wolcott Blueberry May, Darrow, G. M., and wilcox, R. B. USDA Farmers' Bul.1951 Blueberry growing June, Boller, C. A., Oregon Agr. Expt. Sta. Bul. h99 Growing blueberries in Oregon Jan., Shutak, V. G., and Christopher, E. P., Rhode Island Agr. Expt. Sta. Bul. 312. Sawdust mulch for blueberries May, Lathrop, F. H., Maine Agr. Expt. Sta. dul. 500 Fighting the blueberry fruit fly in Maine h3 Articles Which Appeared in Trade Magazines 1. 2. 10. ll. 12. 15. 16. 1923, 1931, 1935) 1935, 1937: 19112, l9h3, 1911b», 191.5 , l9hb, l9h9, l9h9, 1950: 1951, 1953, 7’1 19-)“, Oct., Watts, H., AaERICAN FRUIT GROnLR,hJ:10 Growing blueberries commercially Aug., Cutler, W. L., RURAL NEW YORKER,9U:85h-S Blueberry culture in Massachusetts May, Johnston, 5., AMERICAN FRUIT GROWER,hn:9 Commercial blueberry culture July, Van Deman, R., COUNTRY GENTLERAN, 105:50-1 Blueberry aristocrats Dec., BETTER FRUIT, 32:3 Development of the blueberry Sept., Rose, P., SATURDAY EVENING POST Blueberry Queen Oct. Sydnor,'W. D., RURAL NEW YORKER, 102:5o7 Blueberries on the Pacific Coast April, Green, E. E., NATIONAL HORTICULTURE MAGAZINE, 232121 Blueberries in the midwestern region Nov., Johnston, 8., AMERICAN FRUIT GROWER, 65:10-11 Michigan's cultivated blueberry industry Spring, Laycock, G., FARM QUARTERLY, 78-83 (pgs.) Blueberries march, FARM JOURNAL, 73:63-7h There's money in blueberries Sept., Benson, E. N., RURAL NEW YORKER, 99:5-31 Blueberries in Eastern Maine July, huston, S., MOTOR NEWS Michigan strikes blueberries Feb., Strattcn, G. L., AMERICAN FRUIT GRONER, 71:)h This is the way to grow blueberries June, AMERICAN FRUIT GROWER, 73:35-39 Jan., Scott, D. n., AMERICAN FRUIT GROKER, 7h:l8 Berries and brambles B. C. E. F. Ab APPENDIX Page A sample sheet of time study on field operations - - - . .145 A sample sheet of production study on field operations. .h6 A sample sheet of time study on packing operations- . . ~h7 A sample sheet of production study 0n packing operations.hb Calculation of approximate average distance walked to sheds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .h9 Basis for Tables 2—8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50 LS SAMPLE." U1" FIELD TIME STUDY DATA 511133? Blueberry Handling Math“ M Place V 771' —4 [rte/J 3 Shed £136": Date 42.45232 W 7 Operation ', Time Amount Distance Pick"? "-‘IH., I Pm/ man 30-, ’ '. Man 3"“, ’ ” won-nan 21.6 I .. boyflnyJ) Sovtbnj ‘79:“— / Pm) Mt.» 1mm .1 -. 3.») (1),”) .13 53-m— I ' boy (171”) E Walk”) 3,] mm 400’ t 3- 9 " V00 ' t 9-3 .. 570' 1.; - 310’ 3‘ flgkmj 2.2..) I P"/ 90" Q57") 5 2.9.0 I " '0 z 33-! I '° " Lutb‘. SJU‘APLE UF FIELD PRODUCTION STUDY DA‘JTA SHEET Blueberry Handlj :19 Me shod YVOr/m'rlul Stud} Pall MLOLZJJW“! Operation rock“) Sortonj Flak”! Sor‘flz walkm thck WI.) Pest walk Rec-la o PIGKW restJ F 14km? Sortmj Pick") 30"th wallenj o‘chun w“ Nan: pacha SOFtHHj PULNMJ yest’ PILHmJ Sort pocHWj Sort pack I 4 : Time 9.00 AH 8'13 8' at]? (50 951% 8:3 8’!" 857‘m 859 903 9’3 9 Ih’ 91). 92.3 993 9‘”! 995’° 9%" 99'? IO!) loll IDI7 [018' ID 33 lo 37 wry Mr! Amount I rhO/ / I I I]? 3],, 0 Place I rum, [2 Foal a Date a!’ (0 'f’t Distance aw» 390' fie/9’9] 7fQI/J 3 4060'; Woo-[(u— ~H4n — 227-3 0 )mr a/L U7 SAMPLE OF TIME STUDY ON PACKING OPERATIONS Blueberry Handling Me'bhOd z in; St” {I}! Place fl/a ni/Q 1”. I [If gent“! Pfidfln} Date £31-” Operation Time Amount Uistance P’GClhj ’1’, 13 In PDJI-rloq ’7’é5c1- Iop'i': t“ “35 3C He’s“. ID °\ £ \ 9! no S '3 gs‘ 9/ 3.0 E 3 X VJ’ /o 9 § Cel’op‘nuub on Pint. 60 30,13 . z 59 3.0 of," \\ 30 [D ‘5‘) Stu .c s 45 .3) It: ;; ‘§ _ 39 IO 3‘ bandtnj 5/ go i 62. 9.0 g {3 r {I ‘/ «10 I” \S’ c‘l\ r v s 3/ IO m k, ’5 k5 ’ Jk { IO 0 Vpbvh‘hj i z + ‘ L \'r PM J 4 I ‘Htt ‘3 n 1‘ 5‘ 4 ill p13 g : Stu é n. .. ¢ ‘3 1 b 6 IL 0 A z I ' 1 .9 i 1 i ‘ ‘ I 9 i. _' 1 i * J SAMPLE OF PRODUCTION STUDY ON PACKING OPERATIONS Blueberry Handling Method Eyeiu‘fiog Stud), Place gum/e P/ Fa/jr M Date A-” Complete. 4:- v Operation Time Amount Distance PC‘GHM [1:30f4 -- S rt lapt.+¢.t If] [07 «fr 0" in: 3’0 ran. c. 15’" 1‘0 0 (diary-T4 3 0/ thum 330 4» Mth 3 H0 F‘JH H30 177 W in.“ 105.6! % A 051 ‘0 I «all», / amp, I OIJMJ/n- Flrj‘t’ Fur) 9+ are“; 2 Lauder: I a Cc/IUPAéan Cl'cw 0+ 7 L9 CALCULATION OF APPRCJLIMATE AVERAGE DISTAI‘JCE i'u'.'J..KI_'JD TO SHEUS O _, [caution 0+ )0“.ka sanL 0— - alts-tang; ‘to 347:. o4 fie/CL. d f’ , Pad! {A‘n SUM 0+ a” t)"- V.5 o’Iwc/CCL O a... by [101th 0* Pi) CJHA/s ayerqc. qugnma dastangc. w‘ncA tzulli “JO-MCQ' 'n‘ (f, 43mm9- It. Add. 48" 0/ 9.0 490 / ) _.; w =d'3tfiuag' w art“, arta. ‘/ area-3 a H3 0.0.24.0 Tf/y 3‘ 3 :— O O 3 3 i 72, ; Baa-[4 ~60 ma +V,L(u9+zzmafl »———[1f3' +L(I+U1')j-— [0+0] 3X1 :2 :fl/wv- 8!)- ”x0764... fit at a; ... 6VIVQ7‘, distanct,‘ {X ‘7‘“. i ‘4:- 376% 0y “I. 5+ 3.)»ch 03 on MictJ’L 0+ 6 QCVCS accruye, distant. well?“ («now») =. .76x17o := ior-1‘? t5 JAch' Table Table Table Table Table Table Table 53 BASIS FOR TABLES II-VIII II. The carrier method time rates are based on time and pro- duction studies of 22 pickers working in four different fields, harvesting 300 pints of blueberries. III. The pail method time rates are based on time and pro- duction studies of 18 pickers working in three different fields, harvesting 350 pints of blueberries. IV. The shed packing rates are based on the packing of 151 lugs and 139 tins by three different workers. V. The trailer pick-up time rates are based on time and pro- duction studies of 21 pickers working in one field, harvesting 340 pints of blueberries. VI. The central packing time rates are based on the packing of 7,000 pints of blueberries. VII. The time rates shown in this table are based on Tables II, III and IV. VIII. worker output is based on the packing of 1,200 pints in three different packing sheds and 10,000 pints in the central packing line. ”'WfiifilflflnflflifllflufifiiuflffllljiiijfiuiflfizlfifilTl'es