## 4 Conclusions  
In the present study, two small pepper harvester attached to a walking cultivator (PHAWC) prototypes were designed and produced. The two prototypes were designed and produced to be different in terms of their main frame material, the form of their dividers and picking guides, as well as their helix rotation speeds. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Item** & **Source** & **DF** & **ANOVA SS** & **Mean Square** & **F Value** & **Pr \textgreater{} F** \\ \hline HE \({}^{1}\) & Variety & 1 & 214.7282 & 214.7282 & 10.78 & 0.0065 \\  & Rotational speed (rpm) & 2 & 365.1086 & 182.5543 & 9.16 & 0.0038 \\  & Variety\({}^{\prime\prime}\)rpm & 2 & 22.3976 & 11.1988 & 0.56 & 0.5843 \\  & Error & 12 & 239.0906 & 19.9242 & & \\  & Total & 17 & 841.3251 & & & \\ \hline SHR \({}^{2}\) & Variety & 1 & 1780.0555 & 1780.0556 & 25.43 & 0.0003 \\  & Rotational speed (rpm) & 2 & 32.4444 & 16.2222 & 0.23 & 0.7966 \\  & Variety\({}^{\prime\prime}\)rpm & 2 & 44.4444 & 22.2222 & 0.32 & 0.7339 \\  & Error & 12 & 840.0000 & 70.0000 & & \\  & Total & 17 & 8696.9444 & & & \\ \hline PLR \({}^{3}\) & Variety & 1 & 17.0917 & 17.0917 & 3.78 & 0.0755 \\  & Rotational speed (rpm) & 2 & 142.9982 & 71.4991 & 15.83 & 0.0004 \\  & Variety\({}^{\prime\prime}\)rpm & 2 & 11.0023 & 5.5011 & 1.22 & 0.3299 \\  & Error & 12 & 54.1964 & 4.5163 & & \\  & Total & 17 & 225.2888 & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
\({}^{1}\) HE: harvest efficiency; \({}^{2}\) SHR: successfully harvested rate; \({}^{3}\) PLR: pepper left on plant rate.  
\end{table} 
Table 4: Statistical results of field test based on rotational speed of helix and variety of pepper. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Prototype** & **Variety** & \
\begin{tabular}{c} **Rotational Speed of** \\ **helix (RPM)** \\ \end{tabular} & **AVE/SD** &
\begin{tabular}{c} **HE \({}^{1}\)** \\ **(\%)** \\ \end{tabular} & **SHR \({}^{2}\)** & **PTR \({}^{3}\)** & **PLR \({}^{4}\)** & **GLR \({}^{5}\)** & **DR \({}^{6}\)** \\ \hline First version & AR & 500 & AVE \({}^{7}\) & 75.8 & 63.9 & 18.0 & 11.0 & 16.9 & - \\  & Legend & & SD \({}^{8}\) & 5.6 & 6.2 & 7.8 & 3.2 & 2.1 & - \\ \cline{2-8}  & Jeokyoung & 500 & AVE & 81.9 & 64.7 & 17.3 & 5.7 & 12.3 & - \\  & & SD & 4.6 & 12.3 & 12.9 & 2.3 & 2.7 & - \\ \hline  & & 510 & AVE & 78.0 & 46.2 & 31.2 & 8.9 & 13.0 & 0.7 \\  & & SD & 8.1 & 5.5 & 7.0 & 2.2 & 7.4 & 0.6 \\  & AR & 610 & AVE & 86.2 & 46.2 & 38.1 & 7.0 & 6.9 & 2.3 \\  & Legend & & SD & 1.6 & 8.8 & 8.4 & 2.1 & 2.7 & 1.2 \\  & & 730 & AVE & 91.7 & 45.6 & 44.3 & 1.9 & 6.3 & 2.3 \\  & & SD & 5.7 & 5.4 & 11.1 & 0.6 & 5.2 & 1.2 \\ \hline  & & 510 & AVE & 87.2 & 64.0 & 21.4 & 8.0 & 3.5 & 2.0 \\  & & SD & 0.9 & 5.6 & 4.9 & 3.6 & 1.8 & 1.0 \\  & Jeokyoung & 610 & AVE & 93.8 & 63.5 & 28.2 & 2.8 & 3.5 & 2.0 \\  & & SD & 3.2 & 15.5 & 17.1 & 2.2 & 1.7 & 2.0 \\  & & AVE & 95.3 & 70.1 & 23.1 & 1.2 & 3.5 & 2.3 \\  & & SD & 2.7 & 4.4 & 5.2 & 0.5 & 2.7 & 0.6 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
\({}^{1}\) HE: harvest efficiency; \({}^{2}\) SHR: successfully harvested rate; \({}^{3}\) PTR: pepper with twig rate; \({}^{4}\) PLR: pepper left on plant rate; \({}^{5}\) GLR: ground fall loss rate; \({}^{6}\) DR: damage rate; \({}^{7}\) AVE: average; \({}^{8}\) SD: standard deviation.  
\end{table} 
Table 3: Experiment results of field test based on rotational speed of helix and variety of pepper for each prototype. Field performance tests were conducted using two species of chili pepper, the AR Legend and Jeokyoung. These were the species considered most suitable for mechanization and as such were used as the test samples. The tests were repeated three times with various helix rotation speeds; a maximum speed of 500 rpm was used for the first PHAWC prototype, and speeds of 510, 610, and 730 rpm were used for the second PHAWC prototype. The Jeokyoung species of pepper was found to be most suitable for mechanization with both PHAWC prototypes as its harvest efficiency was higher and its pepper left on plant rate and ground fall loss rate were lower.