Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
S. Searcy, J. Schueller, Yeong Bae, S. Borgelt, B. Stout (1989)
Mapping of Spatially Variable Yield During Grain CombiningTransactions of the ASABE, 32
T. Colvin (1990)
Technical Note: Automated Weighing and Moisture Sampling for a Field-Plot CombineApplied Engineering in Agriculture, 6
(1997)
Sorghum grain flow convolution within a conventional combine har
(1997)
Satellite monitoring for precision decision support. In: Precision Agriculture
H. Auernhammer, M. Demmel, T. Muhr, J. Rottmeier, K. Wild (1993)
Yield Measurements on Combine Harvesters
S. Birrell, K. Sudduth, S. Borgelt (1996)
Comparison of sensors and techniques for crop yield mappingComputers and Electronics in Agriculture, 14
P. Reitz, H. Kutzbach (1996)
Investigations on a particular yield mapping system for combine harvestersComputers and Electronics in Agriculture, 14
R. Vansichen, J. Baerdemaeker (1991)
Continuous wheat yield measurement on a combine
(1993)
Yield determination using an instrumented Claas combine
J. Ambuel (1995)
Knowledge and decision support for variable rate application of materials in prescription farming
G. Anderson, C. Yang (1996)
Multispectral videography for site-specific farm management, 2818
B. Missotten, G. Strubbe, J. Baerdemaeker (1996)
Accuracy of grain and straw yield mappingPrecision Agriculture
(1996)
Weigh wagon vs. yield monitor comparison
Comparisons were made between yield measurements with an impact based yield sensor and an electronic scale in adjacent harvest strips and on the same grain stream within a combine. Yield measurements in adjacent strip comparisons were more prone to errors as the segment lengths decreased. Grain yield difference between the yield sensor and electronic scale ranged from 5 to 14%, 4 to 13%, 3 to 12%, and 2 to 11% for 15, 30, 60, and 300 m long segments. The yield differences between neighboring segments might have been caused by yield variability to a degree; however, a consistent decrease in yield differences with increasing segment lengths implied that better accuracies could be obtained in longer management areas. The combine responses to grain yield changes and the effect of varying ground speed on accuracy were also evaluated by creating artificial yield patterns in harvest strips. Grain diffusion within the combine was more obvious when abrupt yield changes were introduced at known locations. Grain mixing and redistribution inside the combine may dictate the selection of segment sizes in the site-specific decision making process. Constant ground speed provided more stable grain flow values than varying ground speed. The average error in yield estimate was 3.4% and 5.2% at constant ground speed and varying speed, respectively. Careful calibration and constant combine speed were important to achieve better accuracy with the grain yield monitor.
Precision Agriculture – Springer Journals
Published: Oct 8, 2004
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.