comparison of active optical sensors

23
COMPARISON OF ACTIVE OPTICAL SENSORS Ray Asebedo and Dave Mengel Kansas State University

Upload: christmas

Post on 22-Feb-2016

82 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Comparison of Active Optical Sensors. Ray Asebedo and Dave Mengel Kansas State University. Previous work. K-State has had sensor based N rate algorithms available for use with the GreenSeeker and CropCircle sensors since 2009, for wheat and grain sorghum. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Comparison of Active Optical Sensors

COMPARISON OF ACTIVE

OPTICAL SENSORS

Ray Asebedo and Dave MengelKansas State University

Page 2: Comparison of Active Optical Sensors

PREVIOUS WORK K-State has had sensor based N rate

algorithms available for use with the GreenSeeker and CropCircle sensors since 2009, for wheat and grain sorghum.

The wheat algorithms were revised and expanded as to single topdress or intensive N management versions in 2013.

These algorithms seem to work successfully with the GreenSeeker and Crop Circle sensors.

Page 3: Comparison of Active Optical Sensors

KSU SENSOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Focus on developing Nitrogen fertilizer

Recommendation and yield estimation models for corn, wheat and grain sorghum.

Models are for use state wide, over a wide range of growth stages, climatic conditions, cropping systems and variable field conditions.

Currently available algorithms and those under construction are not made specifically for one brand of sensor, but for all active light source sensors that use Red NDVI.

Page 4: Comparison of Active Optical Sensors

BASIC QUESTIONS Do we need to develop specific

algorithms for each of the sensors currently available when using sensors on corn?

Can we develop calibrations for a variety of sensors in order to normalize the data and allow our algorithms to be used with multiple brands and models of sensors?

Can any Red NDVI sensor work with the KSU algorithms with the accuracy and precision we intended?

Page 5: Comparison of Active Optical Sensors

SENSOR COMPARISON TOPICS Height Sensitivity Speed Sensitivity Signal to Noise Correlation of Red NDVI across sensors

Page 6: Comparison of Active Optical Sensors

EXPERIMENT DESIGN 7 Corn sites in 2013 Plot size 10 feet wide by 50 feet long 0 to 220 lbs N/ac applied in single and

split applications at preplant, V6, V10, and R1.

Treatments arranged in an RCBD with 4 replications

Plant populations ranged from 17000 plts/ac to 33000 plts/ac

Page 7: Comparison of Active Optical Sensors

SENSORS UTILIZED AND METHODS Trimble Greenseeker 2 Trimble Greenseeker HandHeld (pocket

sensor) Holland Scientific Crop Circle ACS-470 Holland Scientific Rapid Scan (obtained

late)Ground Speed 3 fps (walking)Height 36 inches above canopy

Page 8: Comparison of Active Optical Sensors

BASIC SENSOR DIFFERENCES

Trimble Greenseeker 2 Uses Red 660 nm and NIR 770 nm Sensor to Canopy Range: 24 to 60 inches Sampling rate 20 hz

Trimble Greenseeker Handheld Uses Red 660 nm and NIR 770 nm Sensor to Canopy Range: 24 to 48 inches Sampling rate 2 hz Pulse Modulation

Page 9: Comparison of Active Optical Sensors

BASIC SENSOR DIFFERENCES

Holland Scientific Rapid Scan Red 670 nm and NIR 780 nm Sensor to Canopy Range: 12 to 118 inches Sampling Rate : 12 hz

Holland Scientific ACS-470 Red 670 nm and NIR 760 nm Sensor to Canopy Range: 22 to 60 inches Sampling Rate : 10 hz

Page 10: Comparison of Active Optical Sensors

Rapid Scan AboveGreenseeker Handheld Below

ACS-470 AboveGreenseeker 2 Below

Page 11: Comparison of Active Optical Sensors

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.90

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

f(x) = 0.858708615604542 x + 0.0893390193706338R² = 0.982444678067905

ACS-470 vs Greenseeker 2

ACS-470 (Red NDVI)

Gree

nsee

ker 2

(Red

ND

VI)

2013 CORN V6 THROUGH R1

Page 12: Comparison of Active Optical Sensors

2013 CORN V6 THROUGH R1

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.90.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

f(x) = 0.8662022344687 x + 0.1375790698055R² = 0.933446690439036

ACS-470 vs Rapid Scan

ACS-470 (Red NDVI)

Rap

id S

can

(Red

ND

VI)

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.90.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

f(x) = 0.76353661793 x + 0.215568325303R² = 0.960744623832011

ACS-470 vs Greenseeker HH

ACS-470 (Red NDVI)

Gre

ense

eker

Han

dhel

d (R

ed N

DV

I)

Page 13: Comparison of Active Optical Sensors

2013 CORN V6 THROUGH R1

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.90.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

f(x) = 0.863238373837874 x + 0.154456870703979R² = 0.947215439230631

Greenseeker 2 vs Greenseeker HH

Greenseeker 2 (Red NDVI)

Gre

ense

eker

Han

dhel

d (R

ed N

DV

I)

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.90.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

f(x) = 0.896857198173 x + 0.129228751926R² = 0.900084855222171

Greenseeker 2 vs Rapid Scan

Greenseeker 2 (Red NDVI)

Rapi

d Sc

an (

Red

ND

VI)

Page 14: Comparison of Active Optical Sensors

INITIAL SUMMARY Greenseeker 2 and ACS-470 provide

similar data throughout the growing season.

Rapid Scan and Greenseeker Handheld also correlate well with the Greenseeker 2 and ACS-470. The NDVI values from the handhelds are

slightly higher.Appears to be more variability in the data

from the handhelds.

Page 15: Comparison of Active Optical Sensors

SITE SPECIFIC

201 203 205 207 209 211 213 2150.5

0.55

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

Sterling Corn V10 17000 Plants/Acre

ACS-470Greenseeker 2Greenseeker HandheldRapid Scan

Plot

Red

ND

VI

Check Plot

N Ref Strip

All of the sensors follow the same trends. The amount of observed NDVI change is less in the handheld sensors. Lower plant population, erect leaf architecture, sensor footprint and sampling rate are potential reasons.

Page 16: Comparison of Active Optical Sensors

STERLING CORN V10

Page 17: Comparison of Active Optical Sensors

201 204 207 209 2160

102030405060708090

100110

Sterling Corn V10 Nitrogen Recommendations

ACS-470Rapid ScanGreenseeker HandheldGreenseeker 2

Plot

Nitr

ogen

Rec

omm

enda

tions

(lbs

/ac)

180 lbs N/ac 120 lbs N/ac 180 lbs N/ac 0 lbs N/ac 60 lbs N/ac

Applied Treatment

Page 18: Comparison of Active Optical Sensors

SITE SPECIFIC

100 102 104 106 108 110 112 114 116 1180.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

Rossville Corn R1 33000 Plants/Acre

ACS-470Greenseeker 2Greenseeker HandheldRapid Scan

Plot

Red

ND

VI

N Ref Strip

Check Plot

Within plot height variation caused significant issues with the data obtained with the Greenseeker Handheld due to a smaller working range for height. The Rossville site was on a deep sand soil but contained pockets of clay lenses which led to extreme height variation.

Page 19: Comparison of Active Optical Sensors

ROSSVILLE CORN V10

Page 20: Comparison of Active Optical Sensors

106 107 111 112 1150

102030405060708090

100110120

Rossville Corn R1 N Recommen-dations

ACS-470Rapid ScanGreenseeker HandheldGreenseeker 2

Plot

Nitr

ogen

Rec

omm

enda

tion

s (lb

s/ac

)

0 lbs N/ac 180 lbs N/ac 60 lbs N/ac

180 lbs N/ac 120 lbs N/acApplied Treatment

Page 21: Comparison of Active Optical Sensors

FIELD N RECOMMENDATION

Rapi

d Sc

an

Gree

nsee

ker H

H

Gree

nsee

ker 2

ACS-

470

V10 V10 V10 V10Sterling Sterling Sterling Sterling

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90 Bulk N Rec

lbs

N/a

c

Rapi

d Sc

an

Gree

nsee

ker H

H

Gree

nsee

ker 2

ACS-

470

R1 R1 R1 R1Rossville Rossville Rossville Rossville

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100 Bulk N RecStd Dev

lbs

N/a

c

Page 22: Comparison of Active Optical Sensors

SUMMARY The ACS-470 and Greenseeker 2 can use the

same basic algorithm, but calibrating the algorithm for the sensor being utilized will likely improve the recommendations.

The Rapid Scan and Greenseeker Handheld will require calibration of an algorithm designed for the ACS-470 or Greenseeker 2.

The Greenseeker Handheld displays a tendency to give inconsistent data for corn sites with significant variability. Therefore we cannot recommend its use on corn at this time until this issue has been resolved.

Page 23: Comparison of Active Optical Sensors

CONTINUING RESEARCH Further research is needed in order to

evaluate the site specific performance of these sensors and determine if sensor methods and settings need to be adjusted depending upon the crop condition, hybrid, populations, and current environmental conditions in order to optimize results for Variable Rate and Bulk field N applications.