Downforce Controller Verification for Variable-Soil Planting Depth

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Maintaining optimal downforce between soil and ground-engaging wheels in agricultural implements is challenging due to spatial variations in soil moisture and properties, leading to potential compaction and yield loss.

Innovation Solution

A method involving downforce controllers with electro-hydraulic pressure reducing-relieving valves and a fluid control system that adjusts pressure dynamically based on real-time soil conditions, using sensors and a monitoring system to maintain desired downforce across multiple row units.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Manufacturing precision

If downforce is increased to maintain planting depth in variable soil conditions, then planting depth consistency is improved, but soil compaction increases causing yield loss

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveplanting depth consistencyVSAvoidsoil compaction
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The implement is divided into multiple independently controlled downforce zones, with each row unit equipped with its own downforce controller. This segmentation allows each zone to apply only the necessary downforce for its specific local soil conditions, preventing excessive compaction in any single area while maintaining planting depth consistency across the entire implement width.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system applies different downforce levels to different spatial locations based on real-time soil condition sensing. Each row unit's downforce is locally adjusted according to its specific soil moisture and properties, rather than applying uniform downforce across all row units. This local quality approach optimizes planting depth maintenance while minimizing compaction in areas where it is not needed.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Object-affected harmful factors

If downforce is decreased to reduce soil compaction, then yield loss is reduced, but planting depth consistency deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesoil compactionVSAvoidplanting depth consistency
Core Design Contradiction:
Object-affected harmful factorsVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

The system incorporates real-time feedback from soil condition sensors and downforce measurement systems. Each row unit's downforce controller continuously receives feedback on actual downforce applied and soil conditions, then automatically adjusts hydraulic pressure to maintain the target downforce level. This closed-loop feedback ensures planting depth consistency is maintained while avoiding excessive compaction.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The downforce control system is dynamically adjustable rather than static. Hydraulic pressure to each row unit can be continuously modified in real-time based on changing soil conditions, implement speed, and actual downforce measurements. This dynamic control allows the system to maintain optimal planting depth consistency while adapting to prevent compaction as conditions change during operation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

3Device complexity

If uniform downforce is applied across all row units, then system complexity is reduced, but spatial variation in soil conditions cannot be addressed

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol system complexityVSAvoidspatial adaptation to soil conditions
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The system uses a universal hydraulic control architecture that can provide both uniform and variable downforce control across all row units. The same hydraulic manifold and valve technology is used throughout, but the system can operate in multiple modes: uniform downforce for homogeneous soils or variable downforce for heterogeneous soils. This multi-functionality allows spatial adaptation without requiring fundamentally different control systems for each mode.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

4Adaptability or versatility

If variable downforce control is implemented across row units, then spatial variation in soil conditions is addressed, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvespatial adaptation to soil conditionsVSAvoidcontrol system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system merges multiple individual row unit control functions into a single centralized hydraulic manifold and control architecture. Rather than having completely independent hydraulic systems for each row unit, the design combines hydraulic circuits while maintaining individual electronic control capability. This merging reduces overall system complexity while preserving the ability to apply variable downforce to each row unit based on spatial soil variation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

This solution allows for precise control of downforce, reducing compaction and ensuring consistent planting depth, thereby enhancing yield and operational efficiency by adapting to spatial variations in soil conditions.

Implementation Method 1

A method involving downforce controllers with electro-hydraulic pressure reducing-relieving valves and a fluid control system that adjusts pressure dynamically

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectHydraulic pressure control: Hydraulic Press

Data Source

PatentEP3725142B1Method for verifying of a plurality of downforce controllers on an agricultural implement
Publication Date: 2021.12.08 PRECISION PLANTING LLC
  • EP3725142B1 patent drawingFigure 1A
  • EP3725142B1 patent drawingFigure 1B
  • EP3725142B1 patent drawingFigure 1C

AI summary

A method for verifying operation of a pressure control valve (140) on an agricultural implement (10) is provided. The method comprising the steps of setting each of a plurality of row unit's down pressure control valve (140) to a zero pressure, setting each of the row unit's lift pressure control valve (740) at a lift pressure to cause each said row unit (200) to raise. Each row unit is confirmed as raised (200). Each of the row unit's down pressure control valve (140) are set at a down pressure sufficient to counteract the lift pressure to cause the row unit (200) to lower. Each row unit (200) is confirmed as lowered.