4.2 Article

DEVELOPMENT OF A TEST STAND TO QUANTIFY THE RESPONSE OF A PLANTER'S AUTOMATIC DOWNFORCE CONTROL SYSTEM

期刊

TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASABE
卷 64, 期 5, 页码 1533-1543

出版社

AMER SOC AGRICULTURAL & BIOLOGICAL ENGINEERS
DOI: 10.13031/trans.14047

关键词

Automatic downforce control; Downforce test stand; Gauge wheel load; Simulation

资金

  1. Kansas State University Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study developed a laboratory-scale row unit downforce test stand and used simulation scenarios to evaluate the response time of the downforce control system and the load distribution between the gauge wheels, opening discs, and closing wheels.
In recent years, precision planters have incorporated automatic control of the row unit downforce to reduce sidewall soil compaction, maintain proper seeding depth, and control row unit ride quality. By applying an appropriate row unit downforce, more uniform emergence and increased yield can be obtained. However, little research exists on evaluating the response and accuracy of downforce control systems during planting. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to (1) develop a laboratory-scale row unit downforce test stand and (2) use the test stand to evaluate the downforce control system response time and the load distribution between the gauge wheels, opening discs, and closing wheels using simulation scenarios based on real-world soil and terrain data. The downforce test stand was able to distribute the applied downforce to the row unit gauge wheels, opening discs, and closing wheels. It was also capable of varying the row unit ride height. The simulation scenarios using the test stand showed that the downforce control system maintained the target gauge wheel load (GWL) of 379 N within +/- 223 N for more than 94% of the time during all simulations. The downforce control system was also able to manage the GWL within 1.3 s for disc load variations up to 667 N.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据