Predictive Crop State Mapping for Harvester Setting Control

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Agricultural harvesters face performance degradation when operating in areas with varying crop states, such as downed crops, due to the need for adjusted machine settings to prevent grain loss and optimize harvesting efficiency.

Innovation Solution

The use of in-situ sensors and predictive mapping technology to generate a functional predictive crop state map, which combines vegetative index, seeding characteristic, predictive yield, and predictive biomass data to control the harvester's operations, allowing for real-time adjustments in speed, direction, and header settings based on crop state.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If the agricultural harvester operates at constant speed and settings throughout the field, then the operation is simple and continuous, but harvesting efficiency decreases in areas with downed crops due to performance degradation

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveharvesting efficiencyVSAvoidmachine settings management
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically adjusts machine settings based on real-time crop state conditions. The harvester transitions from static, constant-speed operation to dynamic speed and setting adjustments based on sensor-detected crop conditions (standing vs. downed crop), allowing optimal harvesting efficiency in varying field conditions without requiring manual operator intervention for each change.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements a feedback loop where in-situ sensors continuously detect crop state, the control system processes this information, and automatically adjusts machine settings in response. This closed-loop feedback enables the harvester to adapt to downed crop areas by modifying speed and header configurations, resolving the contradiction between maintaining simple operation and achieving high harvesting efficiency in variable conditions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Productivity

If the harvester manually adjusts settings for downed crop areas, then harvesting efficiency in those areas improves, but the complexity of operation increases and grain loss may occur during adjustment

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveharvesting efficiency in downed crop areasVSAvoidtime for manual adjustment
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The harvester system performs self-adjustment of machine settings without requiring manual operator intervention. The automated control system detects crop state changes and independently modifies speed and header configurations, eliminating the time loss associated with manual adjustments while maintaining harvesting efficiency in downed crop areas.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system prepares for upcoming downed crop areas by detecting crop state changes in advance and pre-adjusting machine settings before entering problematic zones. This preliminary action prevents grain loss that might occur during reactive manual adjustments, as the harvester is already optimized for the detected crop conditions when it reaches those areas.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Reliability

If the harvester uses standard harvesting settings for the entire field, then the operation is straightforward and continuous, but grain loss increases in areas with downed crops due to inadequate crop handling

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecrop handling qualityVSAvoidmachine configuration management
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies different machine settings to different local areas of the field based on detected crop state. Instead of uniform settings across the entire field, the harvester implements location-specific configurations (speed, header height, reel position) tailored to whether the crop is standing or downed, thereby improving crop handling quality and reducing grain loss in problematic areas while maintaining simple overall operation through automation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Data Source

PatentUS11849671B2Crop state map generation and control system
Publication Date: 2023.12.26 DEERE & CO
  • US11849671B2 patent drawing
  • US11849671B2 patent drawing
  • US11849671B2 patent drawing

AI summary

One or more information maps are obtained by an agricultural work machine. The one or more information maps map one or more agricultural characteristic values at different geographic locations of a field. An in-situ sensor on the agricultural work machine senses an agricultural characteristic as the agricultural work machine moves through the field. A predictive map generator generates a predictive map that predicts a predictive agricultural characteristic at different locations in the field based on a relationship between the values in the one or more information maps and the agricultural characteristic sensed by the in-situ sensor. The predictive map can be output and used in automated machine control.