Refill scheduling is the problem of deciding when a robot or other agricultural vehicle should pause in its work to replenish a resource, such as herbicide or fuel. This problem is commonly solved in broadcast spraying, for example, by simply running the spray tank dry and then refilling it.
This strategy actually leads to lost time in traveling to the refill location, and we can show that these time losses can be significant. When multiple machines must queue at a refill location, the problem is made worse.
In this talk, Rob will explain the theoretical difficulty of this problem and give examples from robotic spot-spraying and broadcast spraying to illustrate the potential time losses. He will present an optimisation approach that chooses optimal refill times to minimise travel distance and queuing time. These results apply to agricultural robots, human-driven spray rigs, and any other machine that must refill or empty some material at a fixed location during the course of its work.
Rob will conclude the talk by tying these results into the larger research program in agricultural robotics, including novel machine learning methods for fruit/vegetable detection that support selective harvesting.
Rob Fitch is Associate Professor at University of Technology Sydney.He was previously a Senior Research Fellow with the Australian Centre for Field Robotics (ACFR) at The University of Sydney where he retains an honorary position. He is a leading research scientist in the area of autonomous field robotics. He is interested in systems of outdoor robots and their application to key problems in agriculture and environmental monitoring.
Robert received his PhD in computer science from Dartmouth (USA). He has led research in planning and collaborative decision-making for both ground and aerial robots in a variety of government and industry sponsored projects including those in broad-acre agriculture, horticulture, bird tracking, and commercial aviation.
Very pleased to confirm Aaron McCallion as a speaker at our Annual AgTech Conference LandWISE 2017: Are we ready for automation?
Aaron’s presentation will focus on how public and private data are being integrated to provide better land management outcomes.
For example, a recent European initiative has used data integration to automate pesticide application to crops in a way that protects adjacent natural ecosystems through the use of legal buffer zones identifiable by machine readable maps.
In New Zealand, integration of public and private data is being piloted to assist Maori land owners in achieving economic returns within their environmental, social and cultural values. This is being enabled through open government data initiatives that include legal land titles, vegetation cover maps, soil databases, digital elevation models and remote sensing.
The impact of different land management approaches can be assessed when such public data is combined with private data that includes historic land use practices, climate monitoring, ecosystem health indicators, inputs and financial data.
Visual representation of this spatial data in interactive mapping and analysis tools can then allow users to understand land management issues as well as aid the identification of risk mitigation or restorative strategies.
Aaron will discuss what is needed for such approaches to be effective, and ethical and legal requirements that need to be maintained with respect to privacy where the public or private data could identify individuals.
Aaron McCallion is Executive Director of Waka Digital, a leading Information Technology firm established in 2006 to deliver IT and communications based products and services.
Aaron combines system dynamics modelling, economics and management with his understanding of sustainable development and environmental restoration. His skills include assessment of effectiveness, efficiency, user satisfaction and accessibility to measure or improve the usability of new or existing products or services, including prototypes.
He is a Key Researcher in the MBIE programme, Oranga Taiao, Oranga Tangāta – Knowledge and Toolsets to Support Co-Management of Estuaries and previously in the MBIE gold-rated programme, Manaaki Taha Moana-Enhancing Coastal Ecosystems for Iwi. (2009-2015)
Aaron has a BBS from Massey University and an M.B.A. through the global program operated jointly by Sejong University in Korea and Syracuse University in the United States.
FAR field site, North West corner of Springs and Ellesmere Junction Roads, Lincoln Google map. Access off Springs Road, 300 m north of Roundabout.
Join FAR, Potatoes NZ, and the BHU Future Farming Centre for a roundup of results to date on the use of mesh crop covers for potato pest & disease control and the findings from the current field trial.
How mesh covers are controlling blight
Mesh and tomato potato psyllid TPP control
Aphids and mesh
Potential yield boost from mesh due to improved microclimate
Tomato potato psyllid (TPP) (Bactericera cockerelli) arrived in New Zealand in 2006 and has proved to be a important pest in a number of solanaceae crops, including potatoes. While insecticides have proved effective for its management, this has caused a large increase in agrichemical use which is undesirable, and this option is not available to organic growers. A ‘non-chemical’ means of controlling TPP is therefore desirable. Mesh crop covers are such a non-chemical control: they are akin to fly screen for crops. They are extensively used in Europe for controlling a wide range of pests on an equally wide range of crops by both organic and mainstream growers.
Prior research by the FFC made the serendipitous discovery that mesh crop covers are not only an effective barrier to TPP but they are also achieving significant potato blight (Phytophthora infestans and/or Alternaria solani) control. A correlation has been shown between a reduction in UV a & b light levels and blight and also TPP symptoms.
As mesh can keep out a wide range of potato insect pests, including those that are resistant to insecticides, such as tuber moth, it has the potential to be a single non-chemical solution to both insect pests and blight on potatoes. As potatoes are the 4th most important food crop globally, with more grown in the developing world than the developed world, the potential global impact in terms of reduced agrichemical use is considerable.
However, potato aphids, mostly Myzus persicae, are penetrating the mesh, even mesh that has sufficiently small holes to exclude winged (and wingless) adults. Once inside the mesh, their populations can explode due to the absence of beneficial insects, in effect, it is an unintentional experiment on the level of biological control of aphids.
Mesh with sufficiently small holes to exclude immature aphid instars has been tested and resulted in a second serendipitous that the fine mesh appears to be modifying the under mesh micro-climate resulting in increased yields, while also improving blight control.
Such very fine mesh has the potential therefore to completely control all potato insect pests, as well as blight and increase yield through entirely physical means.
The field day will provide an opportunity to hear more about the research as well as viewing mesh on potatoes.
The NZ Soil Management Field Days offer a two day field aimed at all areas of crop production that needs to cultivate the soil.
The two Days aim to bring together a broad selection of machinery companies keen to demonstrate their products both new and existing.Also present will be new technology looking to improve our understanding of the soil and better ways to control weeds and disease.
Catering on site will be available for the two days with coffee and hot food. Upon registration the first 250 entrants will receive a free event hat.
On the first afternoon FAR will give three presentations on:
Research outcomes for soil management and environmental issues
Cultivation techniques long term trial Northern Crop research site
Soil quality results from focus on potatoes project and then these will be repeated in in the morning of the second day.
Once again many thanks to all the main sponsors and exhibitors and to Sundale Farms for the use of the site.
This is an opportunity to see new technology and techniques from a broad base of suppliers from throughout New Zealand.
The Pukekohe area has a unique 12 months of the year growing potential, a wide variety of crops grown, and some of the biggest grower operations in the country. Within New Zealand there are many companies with new ideas and great equipment which don’t get seen.
Special note to suppliers and potential sponsors
Contact the organisers to ask any questions, they are hoping to accommodate as many companies as possible and expect growers from all over the country to come.
Unfortunately Tim Neale has been forced to miss LandWISE 2017. We look forward to catching up with him when he is able.
Well known to LandWISE regulars, Tim Neale is a precision agriculture specialist and digital agronomist based in Toowoomba in Queensland.
As an agritech innovator, Tim has been at the forefront of farming technologies for over 15 years helping farmers with controlled traffic farming, yield and soil mapping, surface leveling, satellite and UAV imagery and all the processing that goes with it all.
A new Board was elected at the Special General Meeting in September 2016. We welcome new members and thank those retired, some after very long service.
Hugh Ritchie and Scott Lawson retired at the 2016 meeting. Both have been actively involved since the beginning of LandWISE, chairing the Board and helping in many other ways. They remain keen to stay closely involved in advisory capacities.
We are similarly grateful to retiring Mike Flynn and Douglas Giles for their contributions. Mike has also been a solid supporter, long time Board member and with McCain Foods agriculture staff championed the strip-till and minimum tillage work that occupied the first years of LandWISE. Douglas is well known in the Manawatu for his innovative approaches to cropping region.
2016-2017 Board members
Mark Burgess, The University of Auckland, Auckland
Andrew Dawson, Callaghan Innovation, Wellington
Stuart Dykes, Haden & Custance, Hastings
John Evans, Tregynon Farm, Canterbury
Paul Munro, Peracto NZ, Auckland
Brendan Powell, Hawke’s Bay Regional Council
Mark Redshaw, Ballance AgriNutrients, Hawke’s Bay
Bruce Searle, Plant & Food Research, Hawke’s Bay
John van der Linden, Villa Maria Estates, Hawke’s Bay
Simon Wilcox, A. S. Wilcox, Pukekohe
New Board Members
John Evans is a long time LandWISE supporter and a cropping farmer from Rakaia near Ashburton. He grows process vegetables, cereals and specialist seed crops and has some grazing. He has a strong technical and computing bent and wide experience with precision agriculture technologies.
Stuart Dykes is GM of Hayden and Custance, a local robotics company. Stuart has wide experience in mechanical engineering and food science including the viticulture sector. He chaired the VOLBI group that put forward the Hawke’s Bay AgTech Regional Research Institute proposal and says the role LandWISE can play connecting research, technology and farmers /growers is enormously valuable.
John van der Linden is Vineyards Systems Manager at Villa Maria Estate with an overview of viticultural practice and special projects. He was one of the active supporters of the regional research institute proposal and believes LandWISE has a key role supporting new technologies and systems in viticulture and other horticultural activities.
Andrew Dawson is GM of Research at Callaghan Innovation. A strong LandWISE supporter over recent years, he has a very strong knowledge of sensing technologies and commercialisation of technology. He sees LandWISE as a key link between practising farmers and the technology community
Mark Burgess is Director, Institute for Innovation in Biotechnology at the University of Auckland. He was previously with Auckland UniServices linking research and industry and has identified LandWISE as a unique organisation in the agri-tech space.
The Future
This year the Board began reviewing our direction, a process to be completed and presented at the May 2017 AGM. Any thoughts? What is important to you?
Talk to a Board Member or Dan – help shape our future
Now in year two of our OnionsNZ SFF project, we have trials at the MicroFarm and monitoring sites at three commercial farms in Hawke’s Bay and three more in Pukekohe.
2015-16
A summary of Year 1 is on our website. A key aspect was testing a range of sensors and camera systems for assessing crop size and variability. Because onions are like needles poking from the ground, all sensors struggled especially when plants were small. This is when we want to know about the developing crop, as it is the time we make decisions and apply management.
By November our sensing was more satisfactory. At this stage we captured satellite, UAV, smartphone and GreenSeeker data and created a series of maps.
We used the satellite image to create canopy maps and identify zones. We sampled within the zones at harvest, and used the raltioship between November canopy and February yield to create yield maps and profit maps.
Yield assessments show considerable variation, limits imposed by population, growth of individual plants, or both
We also developed relationships between photographs of ground cover, laboratory measurements of fresh weight and leaf area and the final crop yield.
In reviewing the season’s worth of MicroFarm plot measurements and noticed there were areas where yield reached its potential, areas where yield was limited by population (establishment), some where yield was limited by canopy growth (development) and some by both population and development.
This observation helped us form a concept of Management Action Zones, based on population and canopy development assessments.
Management Action Zones – If population is low work for better establishment next season. If plants are small see if there is something that can be done this season
2016-17
Our aims for Year 2 are on the website. We set out to confirm the relationships we found in Year 1.
This required developing population expectations and determining estimates of canopy development as the season progressed, against which field measurement could be compared.
We had to select our “zones” before the crop got established as we did a lot of base line testing of the soil. So our zones were chosen based on paddock history and a fair bit of guess work. Really, we need to be able to identify zones within an establishing or developing crop, then determine what is going on so we can try to fix it as quickly as possible.
In previous seasons we experimented with smartphone cameras and image processing to assess canopy size and relate that to final yields. We are very pleased that photographs of sampling plots processed using the “Canopeo” app compare very well with Leaf Area Index again this season.
Through the season we tracked crop development in the plots and using plant counts and canopy cover assessments to try and separate the effects of population (establishment) and soil or other management factors.
We built a web calculator to do the maths, aiming for a tool any grower or agronomist can use to aid decision making. The web calculator was used to test our theories about yield prediction and management zones.
ASL Software updated the “CoverMap” smartphone application and we obtained consistent results from it. The app calculates canopy ground cover and logs data against GPS position in real time. Because we have confidence that ground cover from image processing is closely related to Leaf Area Index we are working to turn our maps into predictions of final yields.
Maps of canopy cover created from the CoverMap smartphone application show significant variability across the paddock. Canopy increase is seen over time in two maps created a week apart
The current season’s MicroFarm crop is certainly variable. Some is deliberate: we sat the irrigator over some areas after planting to simulate heavy rain events, and we have a poorly irrigated strip. We know some relates to different soil and cover crop histories.
But some differences are unexpected and so far reasons unexplained.
Wide variation within the area new to onions does not follow artificial rain or topographic drainage patterns. This photo is of the area shown far right in the cover maps above.
Together with Plant and Food Research we have been taking additional soil samples to try and uncover the causes of patchiness.
We’ve determined one factor is our artificial rain storm, some crop loss is probably runoff from that and some is historic compaction. We’ve even identified where a shift in our GPS AB line has left 300mm strips of low production where plants are on last year’s wheel tracks!
But there is a long way to go before this tricky crop gives up its secrets.
This project is in collaboration with Plant and Food Research and is funded by OnionsNZ and the MPI Sustainable Farming Fund.
Ballance AgriNutrients and BASF Crop Protection have continued their sponsorship of the LandWISE MicroFarm for 2016-17 and 2017-18. The MicroFarm is hosted by the Centre for Land and Water which provides fields, sheds, equipment and the Green Shed venue for our meetings and seminars. We greatly appreciate their very significant contributions which make the operation possible.
Mark Redshaw put hours into getting the MicroFarm up and running and spending much of his free-time spraying and monitoring onions for two seasons. Now we have our own small sprayer we have taken that task over, but remain most grateful to Mark.
After a number of years of constant pea crops, we are having a break. Our main focus this season has been on onions, crop variability and its drivers. We have plenty of variability, but which factors are driving still proves elusive.
Aerial view of the MicroFarm taken by DJI Phantom showing replicated soil amendment plots on right, flagged replicated plots in onion zones on left, and at far left drought stressed onion beds, the reason we extended the irrigator
We do know topography and drainage are critical factors but they do not explain all the variation we are seeing. To assess their impact, we deliberately applied “heavy rain” to some areas and have been comparing these with areas not subjected to a hard40+mm rain event before emergence.
Artificial heavy rain event applied after planting and before emergence
We prepared an OptiSurface plan two years ago but did not implement it as we were keen to explore variation in our onions trials. Perhaps it is time to act on our own advice!
Topomap created from a Trimble RTK GPS survey shows relative elevations. Yellow highest, purple lowest. Surface flow analysis of topographic maps like this show where water can become trapped and pond.OptiSurface analysis shows where water will pond. In this image, the beds are assumed to be 100mm high. The brown areas will drain, blue and purple areas will have ponding – pale blue least, dark purple most.
The other main crop this season is sweetcorn. We are hosting a series of variety trials and are assessing a soil amendment product to see if it offers an economic advantage to growers.
To assess the soil amendment we set up a six plot replicated trial – with and without the treatment. We randomly split plots to avoid bias, and are taking crop development data through the season. At harvest we will determine paddock yield and the recovery rate of kernels in each plot.
A randomised six plot trial layout for assessing the effect of a soil amendment on a sweetcorn crop. Yellow lines imposed on aerial image from consumer UAV.
A version of this article previously appeared in The Grower
Dan Bloomer has been travelling in Australia and Europe asking, “How ready are robots for farmers and how ready are farmers for robots?”
Notable areas of active research and development globally are scouting, weeding and fruit picking. Success requires machines that can determine and follow a route traversing whatever terrain it must, capture information, identify and selectively remove weeds, and identify, pick and transport fruit. They have to sense, analyse, plan and act.
Robotics is widespread in industries such as car manufacturing that have the exactly the same task being repeated over and over again. With possible exception of robotic milking, farm operations are not like that. Virtually every single case is unique with unique responses needed.
Many groups around the world are looking at robotic weeding . There are many items needing attention. How do we tell weeds from crop plants? Can we do that fast enough and reliably enough to make a robot commercially viable on-farm? Once identified, how do we optimise robotic arm movement to best attack a patch of weeds?
The Australian Centre for Field Robotics (ACFR) at the University of Sydney is well known for its field robots such as the solar powered Ladybird. The new generation Ladybird is known as Rippa, and is currently undergoing endurance testing. Look on YouTube for ACFR videos and you’ll even see SwagBot moving around rolling hill country.
A key theme for Rob Fitch and colleagues is Active Perception: perception being what we can detect with what accuracy and confidence; active meaning in real time and including planning actions. They invest heavily in developing mathematics to get fast results. And they are succeeding.
Using Intel’s RealSense structured light camera it takes them less than half a second to identify and precisely locate groups of apples on a trellis. Within that time they also calculate exactly where to place the camera to get a second confirming view.
Smart maths allow ACFR scientists to capture 3D images and identify and locate apples in less than half a second
Cheryl McCarthy and colleagues at the National Centre for Engineering in Agriculture (NCEA) are conducting a range of research projects that integrate autonomous sensing and control with on-farm operations to robotically manage inputs within a crop. Major projects include automation for weed spot spraying, adaptive control for irrigation optimisation, and remote crop surveillance using cameras and remotely piloted aircraft.
Now Cheryl is using UAVs to capture photos of crops, stitching the pictures to get a whole paddock image, then splitting it up again to efficiently identify and locate individual plants and weeds. This is enabling her to create accurate maps some other weed destroying robot can use.
Research at the University of Southern Queensland investigates UAVs to scout paddocks combined with image stitching and analysis for interpretation to create maps of weeds for later treatment
SwarmFarm founders, Andrew and Jocie Bate grow cereals and pulses near Emerald. Spray-fallow is used to conserve water in this dryland environment and WeedSeeker® and Weedit® technologies reduce chemical use to a very small percentage of traditional broadcast application.
4WD SwarmFarm robots carrying WeedSeeker technology cover the paddock spraying only living weeds
With large areas, most growers move to bigger machinery to maximise labour efficiency. This has a number of adverse effects including significant soil damage and inability to work small areas or work efficiently around obstacles such as trees.
SwarmFarm chose robots as practical light weight equipment. They reason that several small machines working together reduce soil impact and have the same work rate as one big machine. Andrew estimates that adoption of 8 m booms versus 34 m booms could increase the effective croppable area in Queensland by 2%.
Are these robots ready for farmers? Are farmers ready for these robots?
Only SwarmFarm has multiple machines currently working on farm in Australia. They are finalising a user interface that will allow non-graduate engineers (smart farmers) to manage the machines.
The question that remains is, “Why would I buy a specialised machine when I can put a driver on a cheaper conventional tractor or higher work rate sprayer and achieve the same?”
Is it the same?
Travel to Australia was supported by a Trimble Foundation Study Grant
A visit to Denmark in search of farm robotics expanded to include wide span tractors, controlled traffic farming, growing Christmas trees and farm nutrient management plans and audits.
Automation of the agricultural sector has EU and government attention and funding. Despite an influx of refugees and workers from Eastern Europe, the focus is filling a labour void in the agricultural sector.
The new USD Tek Centre housing an engineering research group of around 500 people at the University of Southern Denmark (USD) illustrates the investment.
The Tek Centre at University of Southern Denmark illustrates the investment Europe is making in agritech development
Research institutes, municipalities and government are working on a proposal to turn a nearby commercial airport into a specialised unpiloted aerial system (UAS/UAV) facility.
USD is developing unmanned aerial systems to distribute beneficial insects to grapevines. Ground application results in losses as many beneficials cannot climb to colonise the target plant. The technical hurdle is UAS control – needing to control flight to release the beneficials from 200-500 mm above the canopy.
USD Robotic specialist Kjeld Jensen promotes open source software as key to increasing the pace of development. Having access to standards, stable architecture and software libraries means researchers can focus on new things rather than constantly reinventing the wheel.
An innovation hub in Struer was established in a facility donated by Ericsson Communications when they shifted research and development from Denmark. It is now home to about 150 technologists in a number of start-up companies.
Resident ConPleks Innovation develops automation technology for other manufacturers (for example Intelligent Marking and MinkPapir). The availability of such support makes it much easier for traditional companies to enter the field of robotics.
At the Agro Food Park in Aarhus, AgroIntelli has a focus on autonomy for weed control in organic productions systems, a movement apparently stronger in Europe than in New Zealand. This start-up grew out of a disbanded Kongskilde R&D group.
Safety of unmanned systems is critical. All the above are involved in “SAFE”, a project that brings together major agricultural machinery manufacturers and universities to develop advanced sensors, perception algorithms, rational behaviours for semi-automated tractors and implements and finally autonomous robots.
Hans Henrik Pedersen is well known to LandWISE members for his work on controlled traffic farming and gantry tractors. At Kjeldahl Farms on Samso we saw the prototype 9m ASA-Lift gantry. At 20+tonnes plus another 20+ tonnes with a hopper of onions it’s not a small machine. It seems version two will be different, but development funding is yet to be found.
The ASA-Lift 9m wide span gantry tractor at Kjeldahl Farms
At the Aarhus Agro Food Park Dan Bloomer delivered a presentation on Precision Agriculture in New Zealand to 70 Dutch agronomists and agrichem representatives touring Denmark. An afternoon field trip visited a biogas generator on a dairy farm and a facility for high quality Christmas tree production.
Specialist equipment for commercial production of Christmas trees fits narrow rows and automates labour intensive tasks
Other presentations covered the operation of SEGES, a farmer owned agricultural research and extension organisation performing more than 1,000 field trials every year in partnership with universities, government departments, businesses and trade associations.
SEGES covers all aspects of farming and farm management – from crop production, the environment, livestock farming and organic production to finance, tax legislation, IT architecture, accounting, HR, training and conservation.
A lot of work involves nutrient management. Denmark introduced nitrogen regulations in 1994. We are only now at a similar position. Caps introduced to stop leaching halved losses by 2014 by which time the nitrogen cap was about 25% lower than the economic optimum. With most benefit coming from improved handling of animal manures, the cap is now being lifted.
All Danish farmers must have nutrient management plans with budgets and fertiliser purchase documentation and application records. They are must report annually, work mostly being done by about 3,500 consultants. All fertiliser sales are reported to the Environment Agency so farm reports can be audited.
Dan’s travel was supported by a Trimble Foundation Study Grant
Now in year two of our 
