## 5 Experimental Results and Discussion
### Experimental Results and Analysis  
The measured parameters of the lifting cylinder and motor are obtained through experiments (Figure 13), and the deviation rate between the measured parameters and the theoretical parameters is calculated to reflect the rationality of the design based on the deviation rate, which is calculated by the following formula:  
\[\zeta=\frac{S-S_{C}}{S}\times 100\%\]  
where \(S\) is the theoretical value and \(S_{C}\) is the actual value.  
The analysis of the data in Tables 2 and 3 shows that the average time taken for the extension of the cutting table lifting cylinder to the predetermined position is 4.8 s, the average lifting speed is 0.076 m/s, the average reaching back speed is 0.094 m/s when the cutting table lifting cylinder is contracted from the predetermined position to the starting position, the average telescopic displacement of the cylinder is 367.6 mm, the average displacement deviation is 2.1 mm, and the average speed of the comb motor is at 233 r/min. The average deviation of the displacement of the piston rod extension and retraction of the lift cylinder from the simulation result is 0.64%, the average deviation of the piston rod extension speed from the simulation result is 0.78%, the deviation of the retraction speed from the simulation result is 4.44%, the average deviation of the comb motor speed is 2.1%, and the deviation rate of the five tests is basically stable. From the deviation calculation results, the cylinder displacement deviation is small, and the piston rod retraction speed deviation is large, indicating that when the comb picking mechanism is falling, affected by the gravity of the picking mechanism itself, the cylinder pressure  
Figure 12: Physical Prototype Testing. (**a**) Physical prototype of mountain pepper harvester; (**b**) prototype lift test chart.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline
**Number of Times** & **Load Torque (N.m)** & **Rotational Speed (r/min)** \\ \hline
1 & 30 & 236 \\
2 & 35 & 230 \\
3 & 40 & 233 \\
4 & 45 & 234 \\
5 & 50 & 232 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 3: Comb hydraulic motor speed test results.  
becomes large, the load-sensitive system adjusts, the cylinder operating speed is affected, but from the actual operating effect the system fully meets the operational requirements. The external environment to which the comb motor is subjected is variable, the factors encountered during the tests are variable, and the theoretical calculations and simulations are performed under ideal conditions, but these deviations are within the normal range and do not affect the operational results.  
In the actual situation, the lineup of the pipeline is not the ideal linear distribution, all of them will have some bends. The system loading start-up takes longer than the theoretical simulation, resulting in a greater deviation rate of the cylinders. The deviation rate of the circuit may be reduced if it is in continuous operation. However, during the whole test, the harvester operated sensitively and without lagging, and there was no obvious vibration impact on the hydraulic cylinder. The comb motor has a small change in rotational speed when affected by external loads, showing good working performance of the improved load-sensitive system, which meets the performance requirements of the actual work of the pepper harvester.