13 / 33
13
Initially the group explored the following
equipment:
•
the GOAT from Nexus Robotics of Brossard,
Quebec;
•
the RoamIO HCT from Korechi Innovations Inc.
of Oshawa, Ontario; and
•
the OmniPower and OmniDrive systems from
Raven Applied Technology (Canada) of Emerald
Park, Saskatchewan.
As highlighted by Baresich during the presentation,
other equipment was also added, including the
Escalquens, from France-based Naio Technologies
Oz and Dino robotic systems—distributed in North
America by GMABE of St-Liguori, Quebec.
Using robotics, laser visual sensors and artificial
intelligence, these autonomous weeders were put
through the paces at the Baresich farm.
The Realities of Oz (and Dino)
Baresich applied the Naio autonomous weeders using
only GPS for navigation across small, two-acre plots
using multi-pass techniques. The Oz maximum speed
is 1.8 km/h with an output of approximately 0.247 acres
per hour. The Dino, for reference, could run twice as
fast and had an output of 2.3 acres per hour.
Where a crop was planted using RTK (real-time
kinematic) position, the robots were used to mark A-B
lines to navigate. Conversely, if no crop was planted,
the robots’ RTK receiver was attached to the planter
and an app was used to mark the A-B points for the
robot to follow.
The fields tested contained Brussels sprouts, cabbage,
carrots, celery, onions, peppers, tomatoes, sweet corn,
cauliflower, asparagus and tree nurseries.
Although weeding and tillage tools were provided by
Naio—such as blades, hoes, harrows, tines, brushes
and springs, Baresich said that while they sometimes
performed extremely well, sometimes they didn’t. As
such, new tools were fabricated that better-fit the soil
types and conditions for Ontario.
Baresich found that while some tools like the harrows
performed very well, others could not break the soil
up to the degree expected owing to soil type and
compaction. He also found that heavy amounts of crop
residue posed a problem for the robot systems.
He noted, however, that robots are adjustable via tire
alignment and tool configuration and can be adapted
to many different row spacings.
Overall, Baresich reported that when the robots used
smaller tines, each had difficulty breaking up soil crust
in highly compacted soils.
While larger blades left the soil overly clump for
Baresich’s liking, he found that larger deep-set tines
provided the best option on his land.
For weeding itself—just as with standard weeding
equipment, the autonomous weeders also had issues
with weed roots clogging up the works.
While using a deeper tool could resolve the issue, it
was noted that it also caused the robots to veer off
course. Baresich found, however, that along with extra
weight and a set of dual tires, the issue was resolved.
He mentioned that Naio has since developed an
additional weight kit to counter that issue.
Overall, the Oz robots were straightforward to operate
and understand, said Baresich, adding that the RTK
GPS navigation system was “generally sufficient” in
keeping the robots away from the crop while just
attacking the weeds.
The RTK issues were minimal, he explained, using the
Case IH RTK network via VRS.
He said that the Oz worked fine with wet conditions—
no issues—and could traverse most ruts.
PHOTO: haggertycreek.com