Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Design and Development of a Smart Variable Rate Sprayer Using Deep Learning
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Design and Development of a Smart Variable Rate Sprayer Using Deep Learning
Do you wish to request the book?
Design and Development of a Smart Variable Rate Sprayer Using Deep Learning
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Design and Development of a Smart Variable Rate Sprayer Using Deep Learning
2020
Overview
The uniform application (UA) of agrochemicals results in the over-application of harmful chemicals, increases crop input costs, and deteriorates the environment when compared with variable rate application (VA). A smart variable rate sprayer (SVRS) was designed, developed, and tested using deep learning (DL) for VA application of agrochemicals. Real-time testing of the SVRS took place for detecting and spraying and/or skipping lambsquarters weed and early blight infected and healthy potato plants. About 24,000 images were collected from potato fields in Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick under varying sunny, cloudy, and partly cloudy conditions and processed/trained using YOLOv3 and tiny-YOLOv3 models. Due to faster performance, the tiny-YOLOv3 was chosen to deploy in SVRS. A laboratory experiment was designed under factorial arrangements, where the two spraying techniques (UA and VA) and the three weather conditions (cloudy, partly cloudy, and sunny) were the two independent variables with spray volume consumption as a response variable. The experimental treatments had six repetitions in a 2 × 3 factorial design. Results of the two-way ANOVA showed a significant effect of spraying application techniques on volume consumption of spraying liquid (p-value < 0.05). There was no significant effect of weather conditions and interactions between the two independent variables on volume consumption during weeds and simulated diseased plant detection experiments (p-value > 0.05). The SVRS was able to save 42 and 43% spraying liquid during weeds and simulated diseased plant detection experiments, respectively. Water sensitive papers’ analysis showed the applicability of SVRS for VA with >40% savings of spraying liquid by SVRS when compared with UA. Field applications of this technique would reduce the crop input costs and the environmental risks in conditions (weed and disease) like experimental testing.
