Evaluation of Different Mechanized Wheat Harvesting Systems in Egypt: Case Study Within the EU KAFI Programme

The mechanization of wheat harvesting in Egypt is a critical step towards enhancing food security. This study evaluated the operational performance, grain loss, and economic viability of four wheat harvesting systems for the ‘Sakha 95’ variety in the Nile Delta. To evaluate and rank the different systems based on multiple criteria, the Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) was employed. A Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replicates was used to test three self-propelled combine harvesters (Claas [4.2 m], Field-King [2.0 m], Daedong [1.4 m]) alongside one semi-mechanized system (reaper–binder + stationary thresher). The TOPSIS analysis identified the Field King combine as the most recommended system (Rank 1), providing the optimal balance between operational efficiency and cost. It achieved the lowest direct harvesting cost (3386.66 EGP ha−1) with a minimal grain loss of only 0.05%. The Claas combine secured Rank 2. While it reached the highest effective field capacity (1.18 ha h−1) and near-total grain recovery (0.005% loss), its ranking was influenced by its high initial purchase price and fuel consumption. The reaper–binder system (Rank 3) and Daedong combine (Rank 4) followed. Despite having the highest operational cost (7371.42 EGP ha−1) and higher grain losses (0.72%), the reaper–binder remains a scientifically justified choice for integrated crop-livestock systems, as its ability to produce ready-to-use “soft straw” provides a net economic advantage for smallholders. The study concludes that while large combines are ideal for the “New Lands,” mid-sized units like the Field King are best suited for scaling through cooperatives in fragmented landscapes.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
AgriEngineering
Published
2026-03-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/agriengineering8030087
Primary Topic
Agronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluation of Different Mechanized Wheat Harvesting Systems in Egypt: Case Study Within the EU KAFI Programme

Yousry Shaban, F.G. Ceglie, Simone Bergonzoli, Galal Aboelasaad et al.
AgriEngineering
Agronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems
article

Evaluation of Different Mechanized Wheat Harvesting Systems in Egypt: Case Study Within the EU KAFI Programme

Yousry Shaban, F.G. Ceglie, Simone Bergonzoli, Galal Aboelasaad, Luca Cozzolino, Ahmed Fawzy Elkot, Luigi Pari, Massimo Brambilla, Hamada Morgan
article en

Abstract

The mechanization of wheat harvesting in Egypt is a critical step towards enhancing food security. This study evaluated the operational performance, grain loss, and economic viability of four wheat harvesting systems for the ‘Sakha 95’ variety in the Nile Delta. To evaluate and rank the different systems based on multiple criteria, the Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) was employed. A Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replicates was used to test three self-propelled combine harvesters (Claas [4.2 m], Field-King [2.0 m], Daedong [1.4 m]) alongside one semi-mechanized system (reaper–binder + stationary thresher). The TOPSIS analysis identified the Field King combine as the most recommended system (Rank 1), providing the optimal balance between operational efficiency and cost. It achieved the lowest direct harvesting cost (3386.66 EGP ha−1) with a minimal grain loss of only 0.05%. The Claas combine secured Rank 2. While it reached the highest effective field capacity (1.18 ha h−1) and near-total grain recovery (0.005% loss), its ranking was influenced by its high initial purchase price and fuel consumption. The reaper–binder system (Rank 3) and Daedong combine (Rank 4) followed. Despite having the highest operational cost (7371.42 EGP ha−1) and higher grain losses (0.72%), the reaper–binder remains a scientifically justified choice for integrated crop-livestock systems, as its ability to produce ready-to-use “soft straw” provides a net economic advantage for smallholders. The study concludes that while large combines are ideal for the “New Lands,” mid-sized units like the Field King are best suited for scaling through cooperatives in fragmented landscapes.

AgriEngineeringVol. 8(3)
Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NO), Agricultural Genetic Engineering Research Institute (EG), Agricultural Research Center (EG)
European Commission, Agenzia Italiana per la Cooperazione allo Sviluppo
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 35%
Agronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.