**5. Conclusions**

(1) A contrast test was carried out on the tensile properties of high-performance film and ordinary polyethylene film, and the test results showed that the elongation at break and the yield stress of the high-performance film before and during the operation were higher than those of the ordinary polyethylene film. The tensile property at a near-end position of the cotton plants was higher than that for a far-end position. When the sampling direction was horizontal, the elongation at break and the tensile yield stress of the ordinary polyethylene film were higher than those when the sampling direction was vertical, and the elongation at break of the high-performance film was higher than that when the sampling direction was vertical, its tensile yield stress was lower than that when the sampling direction was vertical. With the increase in the film laying period, the elongation at break and tensile yield stress had downward tendencies, and, within 0–30 days, the scales of decrease in the elongation at break and tensile yield stress were higher than those during 30–180 days.

(2) Test results showed that the range in tensile stress on the film was 15.97~21.86 MPa when the film is pulled up from different sampling positions, at different film pick-up angles, and with different types of film. The minimum tensile yield stress of the highperformance film with a thickness of 0.01 mm was higher than the maximum film tensile stress required for pulling up the film by the curl-up film collector. The influence order of the test factors on the film tensile stress was film pick-up angle > sampling position > type of film. After a variance analysis on the test data, the results showed that the sampling position and film pick-up angle had significant influences on the tensile stress of the film, while the type of film had an insignificant influence.

(3) Test results showed that during operation of the film collectors, the 11SM-1.2 curl-up film collector with a fixed film pick-up angle achieved a higher film recycling rate on the film laid in the same year and a higher working performance in collecting film of different types and with different thicknesses than the 1JRM-2000 curl-up film collector. The 11SM-1.2 curl-up film collector achieved a film recycling rate of 85.45% and 96.11% on the high-performance film with thicknesses of 0.008 mm and 0.01 mm. The 1JRM-2000 curl-up film collector achieved a film recycling rate of 81.16% on the high-performance film with a thickness of 0.01 mm laid in the same year, which satisfied the requirements of

GB/T25412-2021. Its working performances were 8.24 km/h, 9.37 km/h, and 6.15 km/h, respectively, which could satisfy the demand in production.

(4) In real production, the linear velocity of the film-curling mechanism and the advancing speed of the machine cannot be equally consistent; therefore, the monitoringfeedback–control system is generally adopted to realize a dynamic equilibrium between the linear velocity of the film-curling mechanism and the advancing speed of the machine, thus enhancing the complexity of the machine. If the difference between the linear velocity of the film-curling mechanism and the advancing speed of the machine is too large, the film is easily torn off. Since the automatic film-guiding mechanism can automatically supply film, the working performance of the 11SM-1.2 curl-up film collector is not affected by the difference between the linear velocity of the film-curling mechanism and the advancing speed of the machine.

(5) In the future, we can optimize the curl-up collecting method of film collectors from the perspective of a simulation analysis, and subsequent tests should consider test indexes, such as the number of instances of film breakage and the impurity rate of the film, to find out the optimal mechanical structure and working parameters, and to make preparations for secondary or multiple utilizations of the collected film.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, methodology, investigation, data curation, formal analysis, and writing—original draft preparation: J.L.; software, visualization, and validation: X.L., L.Z. and X.Z.; writing—review and editing, X.W.; project administration, funding acquisition, resources, and supervision: Y.J. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, grant number 51965059; Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences' Key Cultivation Project of Scientific and Technological Innovation, grant number xjkcpy—2021003; The Special Project of Basic Scientific Activities for Non-profit Institutes supported by the government of Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, grant number KY2022018.

**Institutional Review Board Statement:** Not applicable.

**Informed Consent Statement:** Not applicable.

**Data Availability Statement:** Not applicable.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.

#### **References**

