## 4 Experiment and Analysis
### Experimental Results and Analysis  
Table 6 displays the computed results of the percentage of sorted sugarcane roots for each trial group. As shown in the table, the average proportions of sugarcane sorting in the 10 experimental groups were as follows: 0 stalks (10.28%), 1 stalk (3.61%), 2 stalks (4.45%), 3 stalks (80.56%), and 4 stalks (1.11%). This indicates that the experimental value of the physical prototype (80.56%) is smaller than the simulation value (87.96%), with a relative error of 8.4% between the two. The deviation between the experimental and simulated results falls within an acceptable range. According to Reference [35], when the number of fed sugarcane stalks is \(\leq\)3, the leaf stripping device operates smoothly. However, the blockage rate of the device increases, and its throughput efficiency decreases as the number of fed stalks rises. Notably, the proportion of sorted sugarcane with four stalks in this experiment is only 1.11%, demonstrating that the sorting mechanism achieves effective performance. Furthermore, this throughput effectively avoids the blockage caused by overfeeding sugarcane.  
Examine the causes of the error as follows: (1) Obtain test samples are sugarcane that has recently been harvested and transferred, including the leaves and tips. During the collection and transfer process, the leaves and stems of the sugarcane will become entangled with one another, making it difficult for the sugarcane to spread out during the  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Grouping**} & **0 Cane as a** & **1 Cane as a** & **2 Cane as a** & **3 Cane as a** & **4 Cane as a** \\  & **Proportion** & **Proportion** & **Proportion** & **Proportion** & **Proportion** \\  & **(\%)** & **(\%)** & **(\%)** & **(\%)** & **(\%)** \\ \hline
1 & 8.33 & 8.33 & 16.67 & 66.67 & 0 \\
2 & 0 & 8.33 & 8.33 & 83.33 & 0 \\
3 & 0 & 8.33 & 0 & 91.6 & 0 \\
4 & 0 & 0 & 8.33 & 83.33 & 8.33 \\
5 & 8.33 & 16.67 & 0 & 75.00 & 0 \\
6 & 0 & 0 & 16.67 & 83.33 & 0 \\
7 & 16.67 & 8.33 & 0 & 75.00 & 0 \\
8 & 0 & 0 & 8.33 & 91.6 & 0 \\
9 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 100 & 0 \\
10 & 0 & 0 & 8.33 & 91.6 & 0 \\ average & & & & & \\ amount & 3.33 & 5.00 & 6.67 & 84.15 & 0.83 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 6: Sorting and communicating the findings.  
sorting and conveying process. In addition, there are differences in diameter or morphology between individual sugarcane stalks, which will also affect the transportation process, and the simulation process simplifies the sugarcane, so there is a certain error in the sorting effect. (2) The simulation assumes that the feed for each test is a fixed 40 sugarcane, and the fluctuation of the feed has a certain error on the sorting effect. However, in the test process, because the manipulator's process of grasping the sugarcane for feeding is not continuous, there will be a situation in which the lifting conveyor belt is unable to continuously and stably convey the sugarcane into the gap in the sugarcane feeding mechanism. This results in an increase in the proportion of 0 sugarcane sorted by the sorting mechanism. (3) While the simulation test idealizes the rigidity and motion control of the equipment, the field environmental conditions (such as dust, vibration, etc.) have an impact on the stability of the physical prototype's operation. As a result, there are some errors in both the simulation and the physical prototype test results.