Adjustable Targeting Field Treatment System for Precision Pest Control

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current farm management systems face inefficiencies in pest identification and treatment, leading to potential crop damage, excessive pesticide use, and wasteful applications due to the lack of precise timing and targeted application methods.

Innovation Solution

A field treatment system comprising a vehicle equipped with a data collection unit, interface for parameter input, calculation unit for probability scoring, and treatment unit, utilizing sensors and AI for vegetation detection and prioritization based on probability scores and thresholds to optimize pesticide application.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Area of stationary object

If broad application of pesticide is used to treat the field, then the coverage area is increased, but the pesticide waste and cost increase

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecoverage areaVSAvoidpesticide waste

Core Design Contradiction:

Area of stationary objectVSLoss of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies different treatments to different zones within the field based on detected pest presence and severity. The field is divided into treatment zones where pesticide is applied only where needed, rather than uniform broad application. This resolves the contradiction by maintaining coverage area while reducing pesticide waste through localized treatment.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The field is segmented into multiple treatment zones based on pest detection data. Each zone receives appropriate treatment based on its specific pest infestation level. This segmentation allows the system to cover the entire field area while minimizing pesticide use by treating only the necessary segments.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

2Quantity of substance

If pesticide application is delayed to reduce cost, then the pesticide expense is reduced, but the crop damage increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvepesticide expenseVSAvoidcrop damage

Core Design Contradiction:

Quantity of substanceVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary detection and monitoring of pest populations to determine the optimal application time. By detecting pest presence and growth stages early, the system schedules pesticide application at the most effective moment, preventing crop damage while optimizing pesticide usage and cost.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system continuously monitors pest populations and provides feedback on infestation levels and trends. This feedback enables dynamic adjustment of application timing to achieve the optimal balance between preventing crop damage and minimizing pesticide expense, rather than using fixed schedules.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

3Object-affected harmful factors

If early pesticide application is made to prevent crop damage, then the crop protection is improved, but the additional application cost increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecrop protectionVSAvoidapplication cost

Core Design Contradiction:

Object-affected harmful factorsVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary pest detection and risk assessment to determine whether early application is actually necessary. By having detection capabilities in place beforehand, the system can avoid unnecessary early applications while still protecting crops when truly needed, thus improving crop protection without incurring unnecessary additional costs.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

Continuous monitoring provides feedback on actual pest threats, enabling the system to adjust application timing and avoid unnecessary early applications. This feedback mechanism ensures crop protection is maintained while eliminating wasteful spending on preventive applications when pest pressure is low.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

4Device complexity

If manual field survey is used for pest identification, then the system complexity is reduced, but the treatment precision and productivity decrease

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvesystem complexityVSAvoidtreatment precision

Core Design Contradiction:

Device complexityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system replaces manual mechanical survey methods with automated detection technologies including sensors, imaging systems, and data processing algorithms. This substitution dramatically improves treatment precision and productivity by enabling rapid, accurate pest identification across large areas, while the modular architecture keeps system complexity manageable.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Data Source

PatentUS20240074428A1System and method for adjustable targeting in field treatment

Publication Date: 2024.03.07 PRECISION AI INC

AI summary

A method and system for field treatment. The method comprising a data collection unit for collecting data on a portion of a field; an interface for receiving a first parameter to be considered for treatment of said portion of said field and a first probability score threshold for said parameter; a calculation unit for calculating a first probability score of said first parameter in said data collected; and, a treatment unit for treating said portion of the field based on said first probability score for said first parameter and said first threshold.