ASSISTANCE SYSTEM FOR AN AGRICULTURAL TEAM

Description

[0001] The present invention relates to an assistance system for an agricultural team according to the preamble of claim 1 and to an agricultural team according to the preamble of claim 15.

[0002] Agricultural implements typically consist of a tractor and at least one implement. These implements are attached to the tractor via an interface. The implements generally serve to perform agricultural tasks, primarily field cultivation. These tasks can include sowing or fertilizing, applying pesticides, tillage such as plowing, harvesting such as mowing, or baling after mowing. A common feature of these field operations is that specific machine parameters must be defined for both the tractor's and the implement's working units in order to implement an optimization strategy for the entire implement combination.The aim here is to achieve various team optimization goals depending on user specifications, which may relate, for example, to machining quality, machining speed, wear or efficiency.

[0003] It is generally difficult to find optimal settings with regard to the respective combination optimization strategy, as different system behaviors arise depending on the combination of tractor and implement, each requiring the specification of different machine parameters.

[0004] The prior art (DE 10 2018 111 076 A1) from which the invention is based relates to an assistance system according to the preamble of claim 1. The known assistance system is assigned to an agricultural tractor-implement combination. Both the tractor and the implement are assigned an automatic setting unit for generating machine parameters for the respective working units. This allows individual optimization goals to be implemented decentrally for the tractor on the one hand and the implement on the other. In addition, the known assistance system includes a control unit superior to the individual automatic setting units, which is referred to as a "supervisor." The setup of such a supervisor is reduced to the compilation of rule sets assigned to the individual automatic setting units.This approach makes it difficult to fully exploit the optimization potential arising from the resulting system behavior. This is particularly true when the optimization strategy to be implemented leads to competing optimization goals for the tractor and the implement.

[0005] Further assistance systems for agricultural vehicles are known from the publications EP 3 243 368 A2, EP 3 243 367 A2 and DE 10 2016 118203 A1.

[0006] The invention is based on the problem of designing and further developing the known assistance system in such a way that the optimization potential is exploited to a greater extent within the optimization process.

[0007] The above problem is solved by the features of the characterizing part of claim 1.

[0008] The fundamental consideration is that a process supervisor is provided, for whom a coordination rule exists or is generated. This coordination rule forms the basis for coordinating tractor and implement setting systems to implement the vehicle combination optimization strategy. The coordination rule is derived from a characteristic of at least one tractor setting system and a characteristic of at least one implement setting system. This means that the coordination rule results from the characteristic features of the respective setting systems according to a derivation rule. Such characteristic features include, for example, functional relationships between the work units to which the setting systems are assigned.

[0009] The coordination rule is not only the basis for the transmission of control data between the process supervisor and the individual setting machines, but also, in particular, for the transmission of control data between the individual setting machines, especially between at least one tractor setting machine and at least one implement setting machine.

[0010] The control data mentioned above refers to all data processed by the setting machines to generate machine parameters. This includes setpoints, manipulated variables, sensor data, and the like. Machine parameters, on the other hand, are those parameters specified to the working units for their control.

[0011] The exchange of control data between at least one tractor control unit and at least one implement control unit is noteworthy because the tractor and implement are combined in a user-defined, and therefore unpredictable, way to form an agricultural combination with its own resulting system behavior. This exchange of control data allows, for example, an implement control unit to take into account the state of a tractor control unit. In this context, it is conceivable that the tractor control unit signals to the implement control unit that a control reserve has been exhausted, so that the power requirement of the implement control unit is reduced to prevent the tractor's drive motor from stalling.

[0012] Specifically, it is proposed that a coordination rule exists or is generated in the process supervisor, which is derived from the at least one tractor setting machine and the at least one implement setting machine, and that the process supervisor, based on the coordination rule, performs the coordination of the at least one tractor setting machine and the at least one implement setting machine by transferring control data between the process supervisor and at least one tractor setting machine and / or at least one implement setting machine, and by transferring control data between at least one tractor setting machine and at least one implement setting machine.

[0013] The preferred embodiments according to claims 2 to 5 relate to advantageous aspects of the coordination specification. According to claim 2, it is of particular importance which control data are to be transferred between the individual setting mechanisms of the tractor and the implement during the implementation of the optimization strategy. In the simplest case, only assignments between the relevant control data are defined, which the process supervisor takes into account during the optimization process.

[0014] In the further preferred embodiment according to claim 3, it is assumed that the individual setting machines can implement correspondingly individual optimization goals. In this case, the coordination specification contains information on whether the individual tractor-side and implement-side optimization goals can be implemented independently of one another. If this is not the case, the coordination specification preferably contains information on the extent to which the individual optimization goals depend on one another and, in particular, to what extent the individual optimization goals compete with or even exclude one another. This is also taken into account by the process supervisor within the framework of the optimization process.

[0015] In the further preferred embodiment according to claim 4, the coordination rule contains information on whether tractor-side optimization goals and implement-side optimization goals are in competition. This can be taken into account by the process supervisor during the optimization process.

[0016] The tractor-side and implement-side control data can also be related to each other through functional connections. An example of this is tractor-side control data concerning the output torque of the power take-off (PTO) shaft, and implement-side control data concerning the input torque of the implement's drive shaft.

[0017] The functional relationships described above can be particularly well represented in data processing by a characteristic map or a series of characteristic maps (claim 6). Relationships across different aggregates can be easily captured by comparing the variables relevant to the characteristic maps. For example, a tractor-side characteristic map relating to efficiency can readily be assigned to a corresponding implement-side characteristic map relating to efficiency.

[0018] In the further preferred embodiment according to claim 7, the vehicle combination optimization strategy corresponds to a multi-objective optimization consisting of several vehicle combination optimization objectives, which are translated into individual optimization objectives based on the coordination rule. Here, the process supervisor preferably performs a balancing act, based on the coordination rule, to determine which individual optimization objectives are best suited to achieving the vehicle combination optimization objectives.

[0019] The further preferred embodiment according to claim 8 takes into account the fact that, in a tractor-trailer combination, the tractor and the implement are arranged offset in the direction of travel. For example, it is conceivable that the tractor has an implement in the form of a mower unit at the front and an implement in the form of a forage wagon at the rear. In this case, control data from the mower unit can be transmitted to the forage wagon at the rear via its mower adjustment control unit, which, based on the coordination rule, enables predictive control of the forage wagon. In particular, it is conceivable that the mower unit could report an increased power demand to the forage wagon due to an increasing crop density, even before this power demand actually arises at the forage wagon.In this respect, the consideration of the temporal sequence of control data from at least one tractor setting machine and / or at least one implement setting machine is of particular importance.

[0020] The further preferred embodiment according to claim 9 allows the user to intervene in the definition of the tractor-team optimization strategy via an input / output unit. In a particularly preferred embodiment, the process supervisor only provides the user with a selection of tractor-team optimization strategies that are also feasible with the currently used agricultural tractor-team.

[0021] The preferred embodiment according to claim 10 also relates to multi-objective optimization, wherein one vehicle-to-vehicle optimization objective relates to the tractor and another vehicle-to-vehicle optimization objective relates to the implement. If these two vehicle-to-vehicle optimization objectives cannot be implemented independently of each other, a weighting of the vehicle-to-vehicle optimization objectives is again provided.

[0022] Preferably, the assistance system is equipped with several tractor setting devices, including, for example, an engine setting device, a power take-off (PTO) setting device, or a tire pressure setting device. Here, the advantage of the proposed solution becomes particularly clear. Given the generic design of the coordination regulation, the number of setting devices is irrelevant.

[0023] The coordination specification can, in principle, be generated by the process supervisor themselves. Alternatively, the process supervisor can receive the coordination specification from an external, preferably cloud-based, data processing system. In the latter case, the coordination specification can be generated externally based on a multitude of information sources, particularly using expert systems, and with high computing power. This can be especially advantageous when dealing with multiple automated hiring processes.

[0024] The proposed solution can be applied to all types of tractor-side and implement-side setting machines. Advantageous variants for these setting machines are the subject of claim 13.

[0025] Furthermore, the proposed solution allows for the implementation of virtually any optimization objective. Claim 14 relates to the preferred optimization objectives concerning processing quality, throughput, wear, efficiency, or costs. Depending on the configuration of the agricultural implement, numerous other implement optimization objectives are conceivable.

[0026] According to a further teaching as claimed in claim 15, which has independent significance, an agricultural team as such is claimed. It is essential that the agricultural team comprises an assistance system according to one of the preceding claims. Reference may be made to all statements concerning assistance systems.

[0027] The invention will now be explained in more detail with reference to a drawing that merely illustrates exemplary embodiments. The drawing shows Fig. 1 shows a proposed agricultural team with a proposed assistance system in a structural diagram, and Fig. 2 shows the assistance system according to Fig. 1 in a structural diagram.

[0028] The embodiment shown in the figures, which is preferred in this respect, relates to an assistance system 1 for an agricultural vehicle combination 2, wherein the agricultural vehicle combination 2 consists of at least one tractor 3 and at least one implement 4 and comprises a number of working units.

[0029] The tractor 3 can be any type of tractor 3, for example, a tractor. The implement 4 can also be any type of implement 4, for example, a plow, a harrow, a cultivator, a fertilizer spreader, a mower, a hay turner, or a baler 5. The following discussion focuses on an agricultural combination 2 consisting of a tractor and an implement 4 with a baler 5. All related statements apply accordingly to all other implement combinations.

[0030] The assistance system 1 has at least one tractor setting machine 7 for controlling the tractor working units 6, which processes control data to generate machine parameters for the tractor working unit 6 in question.

[0031] In this context, an "automaton" serves to autonomously control a work unit to implement an optimization strategy by generating machine parameters and supplying them to the work unit. The automatic machine can include a rule interpreter that executes the rules of a rule set, control loops for adjusting setpoints, or similar components. A work unit to which such an automatic machine is assigned can operate autonomously when the optimization strategy, which may include one or more optimization goals, is specified. The automatic machine can be implemented as a self-contained hardware control unit. However, it is also conceivable that the automatic machine is implemented as a software control unit that runs on the same hardware as other automatic machines.

[0032] Typical tractor setting machines 7, each assigned to a specific working unit, include an engine setting machine, a transmission setting machine, a hydraulic setting machine, a power take-off (PTO) setting machine, a tire pressure setting machine, or similar. These tractor setting machines 7 are in Fig. 2 represented by corresponding pictograms.

[0033] The assistance system 1 has at least one implement setting unit 9 for controlling the implement working units 8. This unit operates essentially like the tractor setting units 7 (here too, the implement setting unit 9 processes control data to generate machine parameters for the respective implement working unit 8), but is located on the implement side. Typical implement setting units 9, using the baler 5 shown as an example, include a pickup unit, a cutting unit, a compression pressure unit, a wrapping unit, a tire pressure unit, or similar. These implement setting units are also integrated into Fig. 2 represented by corresponding pictograms.

[0034] The assistance system 1 includes a process supervisor 10, which coordinates the tractor setting machines 7 and the implement setting machines 9 within an optimization process to implement a vehicle combination optimization strategy with at least one vehicle combination optimization goal, preferably with several vehicle combination optimization goals. The process supervisor 10 is a control unit. It can be implemented as a self-contained hardware control unit. However, it is also conceivable that the process supervisor 10 is implemented as a software control unit that runs on hardware together with other machines or the like.

[0035] The tractor setting machines 7 and the implement setting machines 9 are each configured to implement individual optimization goals. Since the assigned working units on the tractor side 3 and on the implement side 4 are always functionally related to each other, good optimization results can hardly be achieved with separate, individual optimization processes.

[0036] It is therefore essential that, for optimal coordination of the setting machines in the process supervisor 10, a coordination rule 11 exists or is generated, which is derived from the at least one tractor setting machine 7 and the at least one implement setting machine 9. It is further essential that, based on the coordination rule 11, the process supervisor 10 coordinates the at least one tractor setting machine 7 and the at least one implement setting machine 9 by transferring control data between the process supervisor 10 and at least one tractor setting machine 7 and / or at least one implement setting machine 9, and by transferring control data between at least one tractor setting machine 7 and at least one implement setting machine 9.

[0037] By applying a proposed coordination rule 11 and specifically by transferring control data between at least one tractor setting machine 7 and at least one implement setting machine 9, an optimization quality for the entire agricultural combination 2 can be achieved that far exceeds the optimization quality that would be achievable if each setting machine were optimized separately.

[0038] In the illustrated embodiment, the agricultural vehicle combination 2 comprises only a single implement 4, which, as mentioned above, includes a baler 5. In principle, two or more implements 4 can also be provided.

[0039] The Process Supervisor 10 is now tasked with coordinating the tractor setting machines 7 and the implement setting machines 9 in such a way that the combination optimization strategy is implemented. For this purpose, the Coordination Regulation 11 is available to the Process Supervisor 10, as proposed.

[0040] Numerous possibilities exist for the interpretation of coordination rule 11. Here, and preferably, it is intended that coordination rule 11 defines which control data are to be transferred, and in what manner, between at least one tractor setting machine 7 and at least one implement setting machine 9 within the framework of implementing the optimization strategy. Fig. 2This section uses a control data exchange scheme as an example, though not exhaustive, to illustrate the fundamental types of control data exchange envisaged. One example is the exchange of control data between the tractor's engine control unit and the implement's tire pressure control unit, enabling the implement's tire pressure control unit to react to a control reserve in the tractor's combustion engine falling below a minimum threshold. The method of transmitting the relevant control data can be rule-based. In the simplest case, the relevant control data is transmitted continuously, cyclically, or trigger-based and used by the respective receiver as needed.

[0041] The at least one tractor setting machine 7 and the at least one implement setting machine 9 are preferably configured to implement individual optimization goals. The coordination rule 11 then defines how the process supervisor 10 generates and specifies individual optimization goals within the framework of implementing the optimization strategy. In the illustrated embodiment, the tractor-implement combination optimization strategy could include the tractor-implement combination optimization goal with regard to processing quality. The coordination rule 11 then stipulates that the processing quality can be adjusted via the compression pressure and the wrapping specification within the baler, resulting in an individual optimization goal for each of the compression pressure setting machines and the wrapping setting machines with regard to processing quality, specifically the quality of bale production.

[0042] Furthermore, it is provided here, and preferably, that the at least one tractor setting machine 7 and the at least one implement setting machine 9 are set up to implement individual optimization goals, whereby the coordination rule 11 defines the extent to which tractor-side optimization goals and implement-side optimization goals compete.

[0043] Optimization goals that often appear to be in conflict are, on the one hand, optimizing throughput on the implement side and, on the other hand, optimizing efficiency on the tractor side. This is because, in the case of baler 5, increasing throughput is associated with an increase in power requirement, which in turn usually leads to an increase in fuel consumption and, therefore, in a simplified view, to a reduction in efficiency.

[0044] Coordination rule 11 preferably also defines relationships between control data of the at least one tractor setting unit 7 and the at least one implement setting unit 9, which are based on functional relationships, in particular mechanical connections or couplings, between the respective tractor unit and the respective implement unit. In the simplest case, such functional relationships are due to the existence of a drive-related coupling between the tractor 3 and the implement 4.

[0045] Furthermore, it is preferably provided here that the at least one tractor setting machine 7 and / or the at least one implement setting machine 9 comprises at least one characteristic map 12 that represents functional relationships within the respective working unit. These characteristic maps 12 representing functional relationships are in Fig. 2merely hinted at. It was already mentioned above that characteristic curves 12 are particularly well suited for the systematic recording of functional relationships.

[0046] The proposed solution is particularly suitable when the vehicle combination optimization strategy comprises several vehicle combination optimization objectives. In this case, it is the task of the process supervisor 10, within the optimization process, to translate the vehicle combination optimization objectives into individual optimization objectives based on the coordination rule 11 and to assign them to at least one tractor setting machine 7 and / or at least one implement setting machine 9.

[0047] The possibility of a proactive implementation of an optimization strategy arises from the fact that the coordination rule 11 includes the temporal sequence of control data from the at least one tractor setting machine 7 and / or the at least one implement setting machine 9. A vehicle combination optimization strategy preferably includes the implementation of vehicle combination optimization goals by proactively considering control data based on the coordination rule 11 and, in particular, the temporal sequence of the control data. In the illustrated embodiment, the process supervisor 10 can supply the implement 4 with mechanical power even before the power requirement arises.

[0048] Preferably, the assistance system 1 comprises a driver assistance system 13 with an input / output unit 14 for user interaction, wherein the vehicle combination optimization strategy can be parameterized by the user via the input / output unit 14. Preferably, the process supervisor 10 provides various vehicle combination optimization strategies for selection and / or parameterization by the user via the input / output unit 14, based on the coordination rule 11.

[0049] Furthermore, it is preferably provided here that the team optimization strategy has several team optimization goals. A weighting can then be assigned to each team optimization goal via the input / output unit 14, with the process supervisor 10 implementing the individual team optimization goals according to their weighting. This is in Fig. 2The example shown here allows the user to adjust the weighting using assigned sliders, which are displayed and adjustable, for example, on a touchscreen. From top to bottom, the sliders correspond to the optimization goals regarding processing quality, throughput, wear, or efficiency.

[0050] Alternatively or additionally (not shown), it may be advantageous for the user to be able to adjust the weighting between the tractor 3 and the implement 4 with regard to an optimization goal. For example, an optimization goal may concern the optimization with regard to wear, where a weighting can be applied as to whether the wear should primarily affect the tractor 3 or the implement 4.

[0051] Preferably, the assistance system 1 comprises several tractor setting machines 7, which serve to set machine parameters of working units assigned to the tractor 3. Alternatively or additionally, the assistance system 1 comprises several implement setting machines 9, which serve to set machine parameters of working units assigned to the implement 4.

[0052] This makes it clear that the control of the agricultural team 2 is possible in a particularly simple way by providing the process supervisor 10 and the associated coordination rule 11 as proposed, even if there are several automatic setting devices.

[0053] The optimal generation of the coordination rule 11 is of particular importance in this context. Accordingly, it is preferably provided that the process supervisor 10 derives the coordination rule 11 from a characteristic of the at least one tractor setting machine 7 and from a characteristic of the at least one implement setting machine 9. Alternatively, and particularly preferably, however, it is provided that the process supervisor 10 receives the coordination rule 11 from an external, in particular cloud-based, data processing system.

[0054] It has already been pointed out that the at least one tractor setting unit 7 can be configured as an engine setting unit, a transmission setting unit, a hydraulic setting unit, a PTO setting unit, a tire pressure setting unit, or the like. Alternatively or additionally, the at least one implement setting unit 9 can be configured as a pickup setting unit, a cutting setting unit, a compression set setting unit, a wrapping setting unit, a tire pressure setting unit, or the like.

[0055] Furthermore, it is preferably stipulated here that a vehicle combination optimization goal is the optimization of processing quality, throughput, wear, or efficiency of the agricultural vehicle combination 2. Other vehicle combination optimization goals are conceivable.

[0056] Furthermore, according to another teaching, which is of independent importance, an agricultural vehicle combination 2 with a tractor 3 and an implement 4 is claimed. According to this further teaching, it is essential that the agricultural vehicle combination 2 incorporates a proposed assistance system 1. Reference may be made to all statements relating to the first teaching. Reference symbol list

[0057] 1 Assistance system 2 Agricultural team 3 Tractor 4 Implement 5 Baler 6 Tractor working unit 7 Tractor setting machine 8 Implement working unit 9 Implement setting machine 10 Process supervisor 11 Coordination regulation 13 Driver assistance system 14 Input / output unit 15 Exchange scheme

Claims

1. An assistance system for an agricultural vehicle and trailer combination (2), wherein the agricultural vehicle and trailer combination (2), formed by at least one towing vehicle (3) and at least one mounted implement (4), has a number of working assemblies, wherein, in order to control towing vehicle working assemblies (6), the assistance system (1) has at least one towing vehicle automatic setting system (7) which processes control data in order to generate machine parameters for the relevant towing vehicle working assembly (6), wherein, in order to control mounted implement working assemblies (8), the assistance system (1) has at least one mounted implement automatic setting system (9) which processes control data in order to generate machine parameters for the relevant mounted implement working assembly (8), wherein the assistance system (1) has a process supervisor (10) which coordinates towing vehicle automatic setting systems (7) and mounted implement automatic setting systems (9) in the context of an optimisation process in order to implement a vehicle and trailer combination optimisation strategy with at least one vehicle and trailer combination optimisation objective, characterized in that the assistance system is configured in a manner such that a coordination specification (11) is present or generated in the process supervisor (10), the coordination specification being derived from the at least one towing vehicle automatic setting system (7) and the at least one mounted implement automatic setting system (9), and in that on the basis of the coordination specification (11), the process supervisor (10) carries out the coordination of the at least one towing vehicle automatic setting system (7) and the at least one mounted implement automatic setting system (9), whereby control data are transferred between the process supervisor (10) and at least one towing vehicle automatic setting system (7) and at least one mounted implement automatic setting system (9) and whereby control data are transferred between at least one towing vehicle automatic setting system (7) and at least one mounted implement automatic setting system (9).

2. The assistance system according to claim 1, characterized in that, in the context of the implementation of the optimisation strategy, the coordination specification (11) defines which control data are to be transferred in which manner between at least one towing vehicle automatic setting system (7) and at least one mounted implement automatic setting system (9).

3. The assistance system according to claim 1 or claim 2, characterized in that the at least one towing vehicle automatic setting system (7) and the at least one mounted implement automatic setting system (9) are configured to implement individual optimisation objectives and in that the coordination specification (11) defines how, in the context of the implementation of the optimisation strategy, the process supervisor (10) generates and specifies individual optimisation objectives.

4. The assistance system according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that the at least one towing vehicle automatic setting system (7) and the at least one mounted implement automatic setting system (9) are configured to implement individual optimisation objectives and in that the coordination specification (11) defines to what extent towing vehicle-side optimisation objectives and mounted implement-side optimisation objectives act in competition.

5. The assistance system according to claim 1 or claim 2, characterized in that the coordination specification (11) defines relationships between control data for at least one towing vehicle automatic setting system (7) and at least one mounted implement automatic setting system (9) which pertain to functional interconnections, in particular mechanical connections or couplings, between the relevant towing vehicle assembly and the relevant mounted implement assembly.

6. The assistance system according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that the at least one towing vehicle automatic setting system (7) and / or the at least one mounted implement automatic setting system (9) comprises at least one characteristic diagram (12) which represents functional interconnections within the relevant working assembly.

7. The assistance system according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that the vehicle and trailer combination optimisation strategy comprises a plurality of vehicle and trailer combination optimisation objectives which, in the context of the optimisation process, the process supervisor (10) transforms into individual optimisation objectives on the basis of the coordination specification (11) and specifies them to at least one towing vehicle automatic setting system (7) and / or at least one mounted implement automatic setting system (9).

8. The assistance system according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that the coordination specification (11) comprises the temporal sequence of control data for at least one towing vehicle automatic setting system (7) and / or at least one mounted implement automatic setting system (9) and in that a vehicle and trailer combination optimisation strategy comprises the implementation of vehicle and trailer combination optimisation objectives, whereby control data are taken into consideration anticipatorily on the basis of the coordination specification (11) and in particular the temporal sequence of the control data.

9. The assistance system according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that the assistance system (1) has a driver assistance system (13) with an input / output unit (14) for the dialogue with the user and in that the vehicle and trailer combination optimisation strategy can be parameterized by the user via the input / output unit (14), preferably in that, on the basis of the coordination specification (11), the process supervisor (10) presents different vehicle and trailer combination optimisation strategies via the input / output unit (14) for selection and / or parameterization by the user.

10. The assistance system according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that the vehicle and trailer combination optimisation strategy has a plurality of vehicle and trailer combination optimisation objectives, preferably in that a respective weighting can be assigned to the vehicle and trailer combination optimisation objectives via the input / output unit (14) and in that the process supervisor (10) implements the individual vehicle and trailer combination optimisation objectives in a weighted manner.

11. The assistance system according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that the assistance system (1) has a plurality of towing vehicle automatic setting systems (7) which serve to generate machine parameters of associated working assemblies of the towing vehicle (3), and / or in that the assistance system (1) has a plurality of mounted implement automatic setting systems (9) which serve to generate machine parameters of associated working assemblies of the mounted implement (4).

12. The assistance system according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that the process supervisor (10) derives the coordination specification (11) from a characteristic of the at least one towing vehicle automatic setting system (7) and from a characteristic of the at least one mounted implement automatic setting system (9), or in that the process supervisor (10) receives the coordination specification (11) from an external, in particular cloud-based, data processing system.

13. The assistance system according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that the at least one towing vehicle automatic setting system (7) is designed as an engine automatic setting system, as a transmission automatic setting system, as a hydraulics automatic setting system, as a power take-off automatic setting system, as a tyre pressure automatic setting system or the like.

14. The assistance system according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that a vehicle and trailer combination optimisation objective is the optimisation of a processing quality, a throughput, a wear or an efficiency of the agricultural vehicle and trailer combination (2).

15. An agricultural vehicle and trailer combination with a towing vehicle (3) and a mounted implement (4), characterized in that the agricultural vehicle and trailer combination (2) has an assistance system (1) according to one of the preceding claims.