SysCon 2008 - IEEE International Systems Conference
Montreal, Canada, April 7-10, 2008
Precision Guidance of Agricultural Tractors for Autonomous Farming
R. Eaton1, J. Katupitiya2, K. W. Siew2, and K. S. Dang2
The University of New South Wales
Sydney NSW 2052, Australia
Tel:+612 9385 4059 R.Eaton@unsw.edu.au
Abstract- The agricultural industry is undergoing significant cul-
tural shifts at present and will continue to do so into the future.
These shifts have come about due to the emergence of more
corporate' style farming, where declines in the labour workforce
and increased emphasis on global competition, means a demand for
increased efficiency and productivity in farming operations. Such
a demand in turn lends itself to so called Precision Autonomous
Farming (PAF). This paper presents ongoing work and progress
in implementing a Systems Engineering approach to agricultural
automation. An overview of the fanning system is presented, depict-
ing a system-of-system architecture. Each sub-system is described
in more detail, and include the crop layout system, the software
system, and the precision autonomous agricultural machinery sys-
tem. Such autonomous machinery is usedfor seeding, crop sensing,
harvesting, weeding and other follow-up operations. The authors
propose the development and ongoing management of a Precision
Farming Data Set (PFDS) formed off-line before crop cultivation,
and used to achieve optimal performance of the farming system by
specifying the spatial precision required for agricultural operations.
Preliminary results are shown, highlighting the development and
use ofafully instrumented tractorfor use in agricultural operations,
as well as initial research into developing high level path tracking
controller for such machinery.
Keywords- Precision Farming, Precision Agriculture, Autonomous
Agricultural vehicles.
I. INTRODUCTION
The agricultural farming industry is facing significant chal-
lenges at present. As with many industries, we have seen a
gradual shift in culture, whereby farming has become highly
mechanized, as opposed to predominantly labour intensive,
This mechanization is necessary now to maintain the vast
expanses of land marked for crop cultivation, and to do so
in a manner which will be efficient and productive.
Over time, the availability of skilled and unskilled labour
ha ecied
has ls adding
declinedalso ddn thene
to the need fo mor mehnzto.
formoremechanizatn.
In addition to this, it is increasingly more difficult for
communities to sustain the farming industry in a time when
it is more globally competitive. Such competition has lead to
moecoprtie'famn, hrelrercrort ntte..
tend to drive the industry and assume a caretaking role. These
issues have taken the agricultural farming industry into new
and challenging
directions.
1 Shoo o Elctica Eninerig Teecmmuicaio, 2Scoolof
Mechanical & Manufacturing Engineering
978-1 -4244-2 150-3/08/$25.OO ©2008 IEEE
One of the consequences of a reduced labour workforce
and more corporate style farming, has been the need to
develop autonomous farming systems, capable of deploying
autonomous sensors and farming machinery, under central-
ized tele-supervision. It is the belief of the authors that such
autonomous machinery will in the future form the backbone
of precision autonomous farming systems. For most optimal
efficiency and productivity, the autonomous farming systems
will also oversee the use of precision agricultural and en-
vironmental information and ensure its interaction with the
autonomous farming machinery.
In shifting towards autonomous farming, arguably one
of the biggest challenges is in developing and integrating
robotic solutions into the farming landscape. The more
unstructured and uncertain the environment is, the more
machine intelligence is required to achieve the required pre-
cision operation. Such intelligence in autonomous machines
is still to be tested and deployed successfully in a commercial
manner. And in order to assist in the precision robotic
operations, a further challenge will then be to introduce as
much structure as possible into the environment in the pre-
crop cultivation stage.
At the research level, there are a number of fronts pro-
gressing. Work in Precision Agriculture (PA) is, among
other things, constantly evolving to provide better and more
information about the agronomic requirements of the crop
in order to produce maximum yield. In the development
of precision autonomous machinery, much work has been
carried out in several areas. These include tractor guidance,
whether it be laser-based [1], or GPS-based ( [2], [3], [4]).
For agricultural tasks, precision guidance of the tractor is
necessary, but not sufficient, as the tasks themselves are
generally carried
out by some form of trailing implement. As
a result, research has been carried out in order to precisely
dynamicmodein hseen c arion [5], an[6,
whi advanc cnr teni ared bin [5], and [6],
while advanced control techniques are being developed to
accurately guide tractor-implement (and similar) systems,
[7,8]Fial,tjeorpanngndctolfatcutd
veilsadfrngmcnryeansaetalsuenth
~development of precision farming. A number of studies have
taken advantage of the structure of the underlying dynamics
of the vehicles for path planning and control, [9], [10], [11],
[12], [13], [14]. machinery. The available resources and type of crop used
The paper is organized as follows: An overview of the may also have some impact on this determination. If traffic
farming system is presented in Section II including a system- directions for the machinery can be laid out to minimize
of-systems description. In Section III, progress made in the the gravitational effects on the equipment (such as seeding
development of precise and automated agricultural machin- equipment), a major source of unwanted disturbance forces
ery is described, including a tractor-implement set-up for on the movement of the machinery can be also minimized
precision seeding, and an autonomous vehicle testbed for or eliminated. This will improve the crop laying accuracy as
precision and non-herbicidal crop weeding. Results will be well as the efficiency of the machines being operated.
presented here, including those obtained from work done In addition to land geometry and land contours, data
on the advanced modeling of a tractor-implement system pertaining to soil type and condition may be important for
with an additional attached trailer, the physical testing of determining crop layout, even whether to plant crop or not in
the instrumentation on board a John Deere tractor, and certain areas deemed inappropriate for seeding. Other factors
preliminary trajectory planning and control simulations. may include the need to tailor the crop layout to also suit
the most optimal delivery of inputs to farming machinery
including fuel, seeds, fertilizer, herbicides and pesticides, as
The farming system, as with all systems, is driven by well as the extraction of outputs, namely the crop.
a set of inputs to produce a set of outputs, often via a
complex and inter-related set of sub-systems. Here, the B. PFDS and PADS
outputs typically include such variables as the crop yield
and quality,
and ualty,and nd
he efficiency
the eficenc of farming armng oeraions It iS proposed that the farm or crop layout process produces
operations,' alall of ~~~~~~~~~~a
' Precision Farming Data Set (PFDS) which describes the
aPrcsoFrmnDtaStPDSwhhderiste
which translate into economic benefit if maximized. Inputs croplayout. Such a set will describe the navigation and
driving the system may include the type and amount of seed, spatial accuracy requirements for the crop and provide a
fertilizer, and pesticide used in cropping, the fuel used to basis for other farming machinery sub-systems where spatial
drive the machinery, as well as factors such as land geometry accuracy is required. In the case of broad acre farming, the
and available resources on the farm.
PFDS will take the form of a route map for the tractors. Pre-
The farming system can be in fact viewed and described cision is required in seeding operations, for example, where
as a more complex system-of-systems. A high level archi- current framing trends demand an accuracy less then 2cm in
tectural depiction is shown in Figure 1. the lateral direction of crop rows to adhere to the PFDS.
Contour Land If this precision is achieved, overlapping of crop growth
Map Geometry Resources Crop Type is minimized ensuring a much more consistent density of
crop. In addition though, the need to localized crop through
sophisticated sensing can be eliminated, thus enhancing the
speed and cost effectiveness of follow-up operations.
Farming Layout System A Precision Agriculture Data Set (PADS) will work in
conjunction with the PFDS to ensure the agronomy require-
ments of the crop are satisfied. The PADS is a continually
evolving entity, developing as the crop growth continues and
when crop sensing and other follow-up operations are taking
place. It specifies such information as fertilizer type for a
specific crop, application rates tied to spatial data, herbicide
Autonomous and pesticide formulas and dosages, once again tied to spatial
Machinery Operations
System ongoing monitoring
data, as well as information such as
ADS crop growth rates and soil conditions with respect to the
bFDS/
PFDS
/ADS
PFDs\* FDPQS spatial data. It is this data set which is used to develop the
Seeding Crop Sensing Follow-up
Operations
arvestin appropriate PFDS for all farming machinery operations.

Fig. 1. The Farming System Architecture C. Automated Machinery Operations

A. Farming Layout System
In order to introduce and maintain a good structure in
farming systems, the process of determining the best farm
Or crop layout is very important, particularly in broad-
acre farming. As can be seen from Figure 1, information
about land geometry and contour maps are considered in
order to determine the optimal traffic directions for the
This system is more abstract in its nature, but encompasses
the operation of all farming machinery, whether partially or
completely automated. It is a sub-system of the complete
farming system, which in turn is comprised of smaller sub-
systems each dealing with more specific agricultural tasks.
These smaller sub-systems include such things as crop seed-
ing, crop sensing, follow-up operations, and harvesting, and
must of course be governed and operated in a coordinated
fashion. The following describes the machinery operations
briefly, however the reader is referred to [15] for more
detailed descriptions.
1) Seeding System: Arguably one of the most important
operations, the seeding systems must adhere to the PFDS
in positioning each plant. All subsequent machinery-based
operations on the crop will be then based on the seeding
placement accuracy. In addition, placement of a plant in
the current crop can have an effect on future crops in
terms of operations and determination of its crop layout.
The importance of accuracy in this stage cannot be stressed
enough. Seeding takes place with the use of a tractor pulling
a trailing seeding implement. It is the implement that actually
carries out the operation of placing the seeds. It is therefore
vital that not only the tractor is accurately guided, but in
particular the implement is accurately guided as well.
In farming situations, it can be difficult to achieve imple-
ment accuracy due to several factors, the most pronounced
being significant disturbance forces which act on it. These
disturbance forces are predominantly due to either significant
ground engagement, or gravitational effects. Ground engage-
ment comes about due to the nature of seeding. Seeding
implements are typically large, sometimes over lOm wide,
and carry with them many individual seeding tines which
need to dig into the ground up to 12cm. Due to the ground
undulation and variations in soil condition, ground contact
with the implement can vary and also give rise to variations
in the dig depth. If we take into account the need to carry the
required seed and fertilizer for planting, whether it be on the
seeding implement itself, or on an additional trailing unit,
then the forces acting on the implement can be significant
causing it to deviate from its desired course.
Controlling the accuracy of the implement thus becomes
an important, but also difficult task. Its importance lies not
only in the ability to adhere to the PDFS, but also because it
contributes to reduced over-cropping and increased ability to
perform inter-row cropping in alternating seasons. It is the
current aim of the authors to design, build, and control an
implement to achieve such required accuracy.
2) Crop Sensing System: The crop sensing system be-
comes active during the growth stage of the crop. Various
parameters can be measured, such as foliage growth, soil
moisture content, and weed prevalence and growth. These
measured parameters are then fed into the continually evolv-
ing PADS, such that it enhances the efficient and accurate
utilisation of the machinery used for follow-up operations.
So, delivery of inputs such as fertilizer, herbicides, and
pesticides for example, can be done more accurately from
a dosage point of view as well as spatially. The added
advantage of such sensing is that it provides trend and
monitoring data which can be studied and utilized for future
crop plantings. Crop sensing can be done with the aid of
the PFDS, used to guide the farming machinery, possibly
consisting of a mobile platform of some sort with appropriate
instrumentation for sensing. Alternatively, sensing may take
place via aerial means to detect such parameters as foliage
growth.
An increasingly important issue in broad-acre crop farm-
ing is the detection and eradication of weeds. The crop
sensing system will play an important role in the detection
of these weeds. Present technology is typically crude, in so
far as detection techniques aim to discern weeds from actual
crop, but not to discern the individual weed types. To allow
the weed eradication process to be optimized and tailored
for different weeds, methodologies need to be developed to
be able to discriminate individual weed types.
3) Follow-up Operations: Follow-up operations are simi-
larly ongoing throughout the growth of the crop. In particular,
they include such operations as fertilizing, and application of
herbicides and pesticides. These operations are aided and
by the crop sensing data obtained and mentioned earlier,
as well as the PFDS originally constructed. Autonomous
machinery can be used to undertake these tasks, possibly
consisting of a mobile platform such as a tractor, and a
means to perform the specific operation. Unlike the seeding
operation, follow-up operations will be controlled by the
use of the PADS in order to determine quantities such as
fertilizer rate and weed treatment and dosage for a given
spatial location. The accuracy required here, as well as the
difficulty in maintaining accuracy, is not as great as that of
the seeding system. This is primarily due to the lack of
significant ground contact for follow-up operations, which
is otherwise necessary with seeding.
4) Harvesting: In the final stage of the crop cycle, har-
vesting lends itself also to autonomous operation. Harvesting
machinery can traverse the crop field once again guided
by the PFDS. As with follow-up operations, the precision
required here is not as demanding as that required when
seeding. Harvested crop needs to be collected and transported
out of the field such that the harvesting continues without
interruption. This requirement can be satisfied with the use
of autonomous grain collecting vehicles operating adjacent
to, and coordinated with the harvester. Importantly also,
the harvesting stage should accommodate on-the-fly crop
yield and quality measurement. This data, acquired while
the harvested crop travels between the harvester and the
collecting vehicle, is placed in the PADS and provides
spatially sorted quality information, as well as a means to
sort the harvested crop into different categories based on
quality.
D. Farming Software System
The autonomous farming system will be controlled and
overseen by a distributed and embedded computer system.
form, the computer and software architecture
In its simplest
Fig. 2. As can be seen, the architecture is
is depicted in
composed of a central or supervisory computer and sev-
eral distributed node computers, one each for each of the
autonomous machines carrying out operations. For larger
farms, multiple autonomous machines may exist for each
of the autonomous operations, and the farm my be split
into regions. In this case, each autonomous machine will
still be controlled via its own embedded computer, perhaps
with a local control computer controlling, supervising and
coordinating each machine and reporting directly to the
central supervisory computer.
CENTRAL COMPUTER
Farming
Layout System
AL A +
PADS PADS PADS
PFDS PFDS PFDS PFDS
Seeding Crop
SeedingSensing Follow-up
Operations Havsighzr
Harvesting
Remote Remote Remote
Sensing Operations Harvesting
Computer Computer Computer
Fig. 2. The Farming System Software Architecture
In the figure, the central supervisory computer is re-
sponsible for all 'higher' level intelligence required for the
farming, including intelligence of a precision
f i agricultural
i Work by the authors in the area of automated farm ma-
nature. It would be operated from the farm's central base
location. In particular, it will be responsible for: supervising
and monitoring all farming operations, particularly those
involving autonomous vehicles where safety and reliability
are vital; providing command input so that farm staff can
change conditions or farming variables in the system, and
importantly have control over the level of automation used
on the farm; the management of the PADS and PFDS, which
not only includes storage of the data, but all intelligence
associated with constructing and updating the data sets;
executing the farm layout system, discussed earlier, drawing
on the PADS and other inputs to construct an appropriate
PFDS for use by the autonomous machinery; maintaining
communication between it and the distributed nodes at the
autonomous machinery end of the farm; any other high level
farming intelligence required whether it be of a precision
agricultural nature or otherwise.
Each distributed computer node exhibits its own specific or
'lower' farm level intelligence, however takes its instruction
from the central computer. The terms 'higher' and 'lower'
level intelligence here refer to the type of intelligence ex-
hibited from a farm hierarchy point of view, and not to the
amount of intelligence. In fact, the amount of intelligence re-
quired to perform some autonomous operations, in particular
those requiring high precision, is significant.
For each distributed node computer, it listens to communi-
cation from the central computer, accepting the PFDS and/or
the PADS as input, implements the required intelligence, for
example any sophisticated path planning, and carries out the
necessary task, which also includes often complex trajectory
tracking. In order to control the machinery, it will gather
all sensor data and appropriately actuate the machine. Some
nodes, such as those responsible for crop sensing, will also
be responsible for updating the PADS by communicating the
appropriate data to the central computer.
III. PROGRESS IN AUTOMATING FARMING MACHINERY
As stated in [15], the advantages afforded by the deploy-
ment of autonomous and unmanned farming machinery can
be significant, both from an economic as well as a safety
point of view. Such machinery predominantly allows for
superior precision in operations, on a much more consistent
sbasis, and for significantly extended hours of operation.
Arguably also, many hazards associated farming operations
are centred around human operators. Although some new
hazards will be introduced with unmanned machinery, their
operation will still reduce or eliminate any such human
.
hazards.
As proposed in [15], each farming machine responsible for
specific agricultural tasks is termed a Precision Autonomous
Farming (PAF) unit, and may be dedicated to one task, or
be multi-functional. For increased production and efficiency,
and where practical, multiple PAF units may be used simul-
taneously, requiring increased intelligence and coordination,
as discussed in Section 11-D.
cieyi nsvrlfot,rltdt
hseeding the hand
rgesn rcso
on one and follow-up operations on th
the
seei ote oehand on of llow-u.oTis on
Coter selln
reported below
A Precision Autonomous Seeding Machinery
As already established, seeding takes place via the use
of a seeding implement being pulled by a tractor. Precise
guidance of the tractor alone is not sufficient to achieve
the required precision, so some means has to be devised to
guide the implement precisely also. One avenue of research
by the authors is focussing on the design and precise guid-
ance of an active (rather than passive) seeding implement,
pulled by an autonomous tractor. Design of a prototype
active implement has been carried out, with construction
now being undertaken. Work with the precision guidance of
the autonomous tractor continues however, with the system
now fully instrumented and efforts being directed towards
more complete and extended dynamic models, and designing
different trajectory tracking nonlinear controllers.
1) An Autonomous Agricultural Tractor Testbed: It is
fairly widely known that so called "auto-steer" tractors
are already commercially available, which provide precise
navigation via GPS (RTK-GPS). These tractors control the
steering of the tractor, but while still requiring it to be
manned as usual. The authors have been continuing work
with a now retro-fitted John Deere compact agricultural
tractor, as introduced in [15], and pictured in Fig. 3.
A platform is located at the rear of the tractor, and used
to mount most necessary equipment, including the on-board
computer, motor amplifier, watchdog circuitry for safety,
remote start-up circuitry, Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU),
modems for all navigation, encoder circuitry, and connector
boxes.

Fig. 3. John Deere Compact Agricultural Tractor
Navigation is arguably one of the most important sub-
system on the tractor, and is achieved through the use of
dual Differential RTK GPS aided by a tilt sensor and IMU
system. Two GPS receivers are located on top of, and either
side of, the tractor roll bar, with accuracies of 2cm and 20cm
respectively. Differential GPS data is obtained via the use
of a third base station receiver, fixed at a pre-determined
location. The dual GPS data allows the accurate (to within
2cm) position, as well as roll and yaw to be determined.
Determining the pitch of the tractor is only possible with
the additional information obtained from the tilt sensor. The
IMU is precisely mounted on the platform also, and provides
acceleration information. It is primarily used for short term
position tracking in between GPS measurements and as a
back-up to the dual differential GPS. It is important to stress
the need for tractor orientation information as well as spatial
position information. The orientation of the tractor will not
only have an influence on the behaviour of the tractor, but
also, and more importantly, on any attached implements.
Orientation information becomes a more significant issue
in an agricultural setting where there are real conditions to
contend with, such as ground undulation and uncertainty,
sloping terrain, and tyre slippage. In addition to the above
instrumentation, wheel encoders are installed, one on each
rear wheel, and enable an back-up measurement of the
velocity of the tractor, but more importantly, can be used
to provide information about rear wheel slippage when its
data is compared to data from the navigation system.
Simple testing of the tractor's instrumentation and control
can also be undertaken on the University campus. Testing and
confirmation of the GPS navigation system was done on the
campus oval, and yielded several sets of results, one of which
is displayed in Fig. 4. Here, the GPS data was obtained in
real-time while the tractor was driven manually, and loaded
into Google Earth g) off-line later. The data shows several
parallel runs made across the oval, each time going around
the edge of the oval to start the new run.
A vital part of any autonomous and unmanned vehicle is
safety. On the John Deere tractor, much of the safety is the
Fig. 4. Testing of the GPS Navigation System, plotted with Google
Earth ®
responsibility of the watchdog system, which ensures safe
operation of the tractor under all circumstances. In the event
of any fault condition, the watchdog system is required to
halt all mechanical sub-systems of the tractor, in particular,
propulsion and steering. As software forms an integral part
of the system, software failures contribute to most of the fault
conditions. Software interacts with the watchdog system, by
re-triggering a one-shot timer periodically. This re-triggering
keeps the watchdog system alive. Failure to re-trigger the
timer will result in a halt in tractor operations.
The software system driving the tractor element is made
up of a remote and external on-board computer. The re-
mote computer set up with wireless access to the on-board
computer. Most software tasks however, are implemented on
the on-board computer, driven by Linux with a real-time
kernel, RTLinux, installed, and in operation for hard real-
time performance. The responsibilities of the software system
can be categorized as follows; (i) to provide run-time fault
detection and recovery mechanisms on both computers for
safe operation; (ii) to provide remote access between the on-
board and remote computer platforms; (iii) to provide hard
real-time control of the various tractor subsystems; (iv) to
allow user interaction with the tractor sub-systems to vary
system parameters, as well as command the watchdog sys-
tem; (v) to facilitate remote command and data monitoring,
as well as system diagnostics. Several software processes or
tasks, executing on both the remote and on-board computer,
undertake these responsibilities. In particular, on the on-
board computer, two real-time and independent threads are
created and are responsible for the navigation and control
of the tractors sub-systems. The first thread runs with a
period of 0.5s, somewhat governed by the data rate of the
GPS system. It is responsible for extracting and processing
available GPS data to produce the position and orientation of
the tractor. The second and higher priority thread runs with a
period of 5Oms, again its rate somewhat governed this time
by the data rate of the IMU system. It is responsible for
extracting and processing the IMU acceleration data to also
yield the position and orientation of the tractor. The IMU data
provides a means of achieving greater temporal precision in
between GPS samples, although due to integrator drift, it is
not as accurate in the longer term. So, each time a new and
more accurate GPS sample comes in, it is used to update or
overwrite the current position and orientation calculated by
the IMU.
In order to ensure precise navigation of the tractor, a high-
level path tracking controller has to be designed and im-
plemented, which is responsible for determining appropriate
actuations for the tractor, including the desired steering angle
and desired wheel speed. Low-level feedback controllers to
control the actual steering angle and wheel speed have been
designed and implemented.
2) Modeling of a Tractor-Implement-Trailer: The tractor
described above provides a vital foundation for building
the Precision Autonomous Farming (PAF) units, which will
be charged with the responsibility of carrying out specific
agricultural tasks. For the seeding system, for example, as
discussed in Section II, precise and autonomous seeding
is considerably challenging due to the level of precision
required, but also the complex and significant ground contact
forces disturbing the whole unit. The unit will consist of the
tractor and the seeding implement minimally, but to add to
the challenge, it may also include a third trailing element for
carrying the necessary seed and fertilizer.
A vital part of being able to control such complex and
challenging systems is developing comprehensive models
which describe their dynamic behaviour as a whole, and
how their constituent parts interact. Only then can one be
confident of designing an appropriate control to achieve the
precise guidance. Work in [15] reported the detailed dynamic
modeling of a tractor and implement unit. This work has now
been extended to include an additional trailing element, such
as that used for carrying seed and fertilizer for the seeding
system.
As with previous work, this new model accounts for
both non-slip and slip conditions, where the non-slip model
is representative of ideal conditions, and the slip model
represents conditions likely to be encountered in real farming
situations. The model is based on the John Deere tractor
already retro-fitted by the authors. Other points of note about
the model include:
* its highly nonlinear nature;
. its inputs, which include propulsion of the rear tractor
wheel and steering of both the tractor and implement
wheels. Steering of the implement provides active im-
plement control and is necessary for its precise guid-
ance;
. its outputs, which include the spatial position and ori-
entation of the implement, and the alignment angles
between the implement and tractor, and trailer and
implement;
. the use of disturbance forces to simulate real farm-
ing conditions, including wheel slip, rolling resistance,
ground contact drag forces, and terrain related lateral
gravity forces.
Figures 5-7 show simulation results for the tractor-
implement-trailer model under varying conditions. Specifi-
cally, the tractor is subjected to constant propulsion inputs,
and the steering is varied. After steering the tractor straight
for a time, the front wheel steering is actuated to the right
for a short period, and then actuated to the left again to
straighten the tractor wheel up. In Fig. 5, the animated
trajectory of the tractor-implement-trailer is shown as it
traverses around the bend under no-slip conditions. These
results can be considered to be the desired trajectory for the
steering commands given. The square in the figure represents
the tractor, the first triangle represents the implement and the
second triangle represents the trailer. For Fig. 6, the same
trajectories are plotted under the same conditions, however
this time allowing for the slip model instead. A significant
difference is observed. Finally, in Fig. 7, the trajectory of the
implement is plotted, comparing both the no-slip condition as
well as the effects of differing lateral disturbance levels. The
disturbance forces applied simulate the effect of traversing
across ground with a grade of 2% and 6%, sloping from
top to bottom in the plot. This demonstrates the need for
a steering and propulsion controller for the tractor and
implement to maintain accurate path tracking while subjected
to disturbances.
5
0
>
-10
mTracplementor
-1 -- Trailer
-15
40 45 50 55 60
x (M)
Fig. 5. Tractor-Implement-Trailer trajectory under no-slip condition
3) Precision Guidance of a Tractor: The task of precisely
controlling the tractor-implement-trailer in a practical farm-
ing situation is a substantial undertaking. Of course, the task
needs to be achieved by taking a step-by-step approach.
The first step in this approach is to precisely guide the
tractor alone. Much work has already been done in this
regard as discussed, and indeed commercially available auto-
steer systems are in existence and being used. However,
progress still needs to be made in being able to control
them robustly, in other words, in the presence of significant
disturbance forces acting on the vehicle. These forces can
manifest themselves into wheel slip, both in the longitudinal
and lateral direction. Some recent work in [16] and [14]
have addressed such an issue by including slip velocity
disturbance components in a kinematic model. In [14], the
 are shown below in Fig. 8. The figure shows the simulation
5 of the tractor under sliding mode control with disturbance
or slip velocities acting on it. As can be seen the tractor is
attempting to track a trajectory made up of straight lines and
semi-circular paths. The initial position of the tractor is in
error and thus the control has to bring it into line with the
0E -5 desired trajectory. Slip velocities are applied and assumed to
be at a level up to approximately 10% of the velocity of the
tractor.
-10
. Tractor
Implement
---Trailer 35
-15 ____;_____;___l
40 45 50 55 60 65 70
x (m ) 30 .-=

25 Soli - tractor
Fig. 6. Tractor-Implement-Trailer trajectory with slip, no disturbances Dashed - reference

;0 ,f< 1t r =,,>$= ¢= +< <

.gu 20
------ 15.. l
i10

0,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

, \ x
-10-

-16
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
-1 Non-s[lp x (m)
Sip nodstsrbance
S io,smal distUbance
-20 S p largedisturbance
0 a 20 xCm4 60 70 Fig. 8. Robust trajectory tracking using sliding-mode control

The next step after verification of successful practical

Fig. 7. Implement trajectories for all cases
tractor drive is assumed to be front wheel, allowing a so
called flatness-based approach to control design. The model
in [16] assumes that the drive is rear wheel, which is a more
practical scenario. Here, a backstepping control approach is
used while assuming the disturbance velocities are essentially
time invariant, allowing adaption to be implemented.
Recent work by the authors in [17] provides an alternative
control design method, which improves on the good work
done in [16]. Once again, a kinematic model is assumed,
however unlike in [16] and extra integrator is in place on
the steering system, also a more realistic model. Also, the
design methodology allows for disturbance velocities which
are bounded but not time-invariant. The control is a mix
of sliding-mode control and backstepping. The sliding-mode
control allows us to push the kinematic state trajectory
onto a surface in state space, and make it slide along this
surface until it reaches it ultimate and desired destination,
It is a technique which can be robust to certain bounded
disturbances by also using a switching control law.
Work is still being undertaken to execute this controller
and others on the existing John Deere tractor, and results
are immanent, however simulation results are promising and
control is to extend the results to include the steerable
implement to help counter the large disturbance forces.
B. Non-Herbicidal Weeding Machinery
In general, weed eradication takes places two to three
weeks into most of the broad acre crop growth. Weed erad-
ication requires the two stages of weed detection and weed
destruction. The systems that are currently operating have
crude means of detecting weeds. Any plant that appear to
absorb more nitrogen is considered a weed. Weed destruction
is mostly by spraying a herbicide. The current practices do
not allow the herbicide treatments to be optimized to suit the
weeds to be eradicated as there are no means of identifying
the individual weed types. Hence there is a need to develop
methodologies to detect the prevalence and the individual
weed types so that the correct treatment and dosage can be
applied to individual weed types.
A more advantageous approach is to find non-herbicidal
methods. Methodologies such as electrocution, electropo-
ration, microwaving, heating and cooling etc should be
considered as alternatives. This immediately eliminates the
need to determine the herbicide formula and dosage and
therefore, the need to identify the weed type. These methods
are particularly suitable for crop that is planted according
to a PFDS. In general, the weeds that grow on the crop
row itself will be defeated by the crop. However, all plants,
weeds or otherwise, that grow in the inter-row space will
absorb nutrients that were meant for the crop and will cause
growth retardation of the crop. The authors have completed
preliminary developments of a non-herbicidal weeder that
has PFDS/laser/vision guided crop tracking capability with
high voltage plasma arcs targeting all plants in the inter-row
space. The small foot print (0.75m x 0.50 x 0.45m) robot
shown in Fig. 9 which has motorized Ackermann steering,
electronically geared rear wheel drive and differential, a pair
of stereo cameras, a laser range finder, GPS and a long
range communication system. A five electrode plasma arc
generation system will be attached to a well insulated cradle
that will be extending out at the back of the robot.
madetowardsachievingafutureprecision auton-
auoomuFfring.system robot agriculturebism
Weecisiong
Fig .
Weeding
9.
Research and development of this system is currently
progressing.
of~~~~~ ~CONCLUSION
IV. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~hAmerican
This paper has presented the requirements and progress
made towards achieving a future precision autonomous farm-
ing system. The system proposed is a relatively complex [10] J. Yang and J. wheeled
altovide stherlinketredand thediferarchicanent -siste ting
s tesnonholonomic
at a cn15(3)I578-587, 1999.
tems within systems. The systems described include a mix [11] M. Fliess, J. Levine, P. Martin, and P. Rouchon. Flatness and defect
of precision agriculture and autonomous, robotic farming
machinery. Such a mix is increasingly important for the
successful future operation of the farming industry. For an
autonomous farming system, precision agriculture is most
important for setting guidelines for the precision machinery
to follow, such as the most appropriate and efficient farm
laot swell layout,
as dosage
as types and levels for fertilizer,
herbicides and pesticides. Such guidelines are inherent in the
proposed PADS and PFDS. It is these data sets which tend to
provide the link between the different sub-systems within the
tonomous farming machinery. Work continues in the precise
navigation of an autonomous seeding unit consisting of a
tractor and implement, while autonomous and non-herbicidal
weeding is also being addressed via the construction of a
small footprint weeder unit.
This work is supported in part by the Grains Research and
Development Corporation, funded by the Australian Federal
Government, as well as the ARC Centre of Excellence
program, funded by the Australian Research Council (ARC)
and the New South Wales State Government.
REFERENCES
[1] Tsubota Ryo, Noguchi Noboru, and Mizushima Akira. Automatic
guidance with a laser scanner for a robot tractor in an orchard. Pro-
ceedings of the International Conference on Automation Technology
for Off-road Equipment, ATOE 2004, pages 369 - 373, 2004.
Fig Thomas Bell. Automatic tractor guidance using carrier-phase differ-
ential gps. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 25(l):53 - 66,
2000.
[3] B. Thuilot, C. Cariou, L. Cordesses, and P. Martinet. Automatic
guidance of a farm tractor along curved paths, using a unique cp-dgps.
IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems,
2:674 - 679, 2001.
[4] F. Nelson, T. Pickett, W. Smith, and L. Ott. The greenstar precision
farming system. In Position Location and Navigation Symposium
IEEE, pages 6-9, 1996.
[5] L. Feng and Y He. Study on dynamic model tractor system for
automated navigation applications. Journal of Zhejiang University:
Science, 6A(4):270-275, 2005.
[6] H. Pota, J Katupitiya, and R. Eaton. Simulation of a tractor-implement
model under the influence of lateral disturbances. In Proceedings of
Orleans, December 2007.
[7] J.-Y Wang and M. Tomizuka. Gain-scheduled h-inf loop-shaping
.
controller for automated guidance of tractor-semitrailer combination
vehicles. In Proc. of the American Control Conference, pages 2033-
D 2000.
2037
[]Pushkar Hingwe, Andrew K. Packard, and Masayoshi Tomizuka.
Linear parameter varying controller for automated lane guidance-
experimental study on tractor semi-trailers. Proceedings of the
IEEEulur
46thslo Conference,Conference,
Ineraioa
Control 3:2038 - 2042, 2000. Control, New:12-16,
onoh Decision
[9] K Pathak and S. Agrawal. An integrated path-planning and control
approach for nonholonomic unicycles using switched local potentials.
IEEE Trans. on Robot., 21(6):1201-1208, 2005.
Kim. Sliding mode control for trajectory tracking of
mobile robots. IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom.,
ofControl,
non-linear systems: Introductory theory and examples. Int. J of
61(6):1327-1361, 1995.
[12] H. Sira-Ramirez and S. K. Agrawal. Differential Flat Systems. New
York: Marcel Dekker, 2004.
[13] J.of Ryu, S. K. Agrawal, and J. Franch. Motion planning and control
a tractor with a steerable trailer using differential flatness. In
Proc. ASME Int. Design Engineering technical Conf (IDETC), pages
DETC2007-35288, 2007.
[14] Agrawalmobile
S. K. and J.-C. Ryu. Trajectory planning and control ofa
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~car-like
robot with slip using differential flatness. In To appear,
Proc. IEEE Int. Conf on Robotics and Automation, 2008.
[15] J. Katupitiya, R. Eaton, and T. Yaqub. Systems engineering approach
to agricultural automation: New developments. In Proc. of the 1st
Annual IEEE Int. Systems Conference, 2007.