Fachhochschule Osnabrück University of Applied Sciences Use of the BOs-1EP for the low-sample estimation of the spatial distribution of grain sizes * ** ** S. Hinck , K. Mueller , N. Emeis , O. Christen *** FARMsystem Hinck&Kielhorn, PO Box 1965, 49009 Osnabrueck, Germany, E-Mail: [email protected] ** University of Applied Sciences Osnabrück, P.O.Box 1940, 49009 Osnabrück / Germany *** Institute of Agronomy and Crop Science, Agricultural Faculty, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, 06099 Halle/Saale / Germany * Introduction Information concerning field characteristics, e.g. the soil particle size distribution, is of great importance for practical farming, especially if the farmer are using precision farming. By using geoelectrical systems to record the electrical properties of the soil the mapping expenditure for e.g. the determination of the soil texture may be reduced. The measured electrical conductivity correlates with the soil texture. Hence different conductivity values reveal differences in soil properties. In that way soil particle size may be determined by means of electrical conductivity measurements. Material and Method Comparison of the three used measurement systems BOs-1EP ARP03 EM38 Measurement method Detection of the complex electrical conductance Direct current, four-terminal electrode arrays Electromagnetic Electrical contact (sensor <> soil) Galvanic (direct contact measurement) Galvanic (direct contact measurement) Induction (contactless) Electrical excitation Electrode Transmitting electrode Transmitting coil Frequency 125.000 Hz 150 Hz 14.600 Hz Electrode depth: 25 cm Electrode arrangement 1 (EC1) Measured depth: 0 – 50 cm Horizontal dipole mode: 63% of the signal response describe a depth down to 60 cm Measurement property Defined measured volume in a defined depth Measurement is the integral over the measured depth Measurement is the integral over the measured depth Date of measuring 14. March 2007 Autumn 2004 14. March 2007 Measurement depth Test field The measurements were carried out on an agricultural field of the University of Applied Sciences Osnabrück. This field is divided into 10m * 10m grid cells, each of which is pedologically mapped. The total number of all grid cells is 224. The soil samples were taken over a depth of 0 – 30 cm. In the laboratory the soil particle size (sand, silt and clay) was analysed based on a sedimentation analysis, exemplified the clay content is shown. (s. Fig. 1) Estimation of the soil particle size by using a regression equation The regression is based on a selection of seven grid cells and transferred to all grid cells. The calculated estimate value is computed with the analyzed value. A negative value describes an underestimation and a positive value describes an overestimation (s. Fig. 2, 3 and 4). The total and relative hits are listed in Tab 1. Results BOs-1EP Fig. 1: Analyzed clay content (measuring depth 0 – 30 cm) Fig. 2: BOs-1EP: Estimated clay content (s. value at grid cell); yellow-orange-red coloring shows the spatial distribution of the electrical conductivity (left hand side); Difference between analyzed (s. fig 1) and estimated clay content for each grid cell (right hand side) Fig. 3: ARP03: Estimated clay content (s. value at grid cell); yellow-orange-red coloring shows the spatial distribution of the electrical conductivity (left hand side); Difference between analyzed (s. fig. 1) and estimated clay content for each grid cell (right hand side) BOs-1EP Tab. 1: Hits of the soil particle size estimation with an accepted deviation (in percentage points) to the analyzed value for each soil sensor system (n = 224) Sand Difference in percentage hits hits points (count) (%) Fig. 4: EM38: Estimated clay content (s. value at grid cell); yellow-orange-red coloring shows the spatial distribution of the electrical conductivity (left hand side); Difference between analyzed (s. fig. 1) and estimated clay content for each grid cell (right hand side) ARP03 Silt Clay Sand EM38 Silt Clay Sand Silt Clay hits (count) hits (%) hits (count) hits (%) hits (count) hits (%) hits (count) hits (%) hits (count) hits (%) hits (count) hits (%) hits (count) hits (%) hits (count) hits (%) 0 13 6 30 13 20 9 16 7 32 14 20 9 9 4 28 13 12 5 ±1 42 19 91 41 69 31 39 17 95 42 67 30 32 14 89 40 57 25 ±2 82 37 147 66 114 51 69 31 134 60 106 47 57 25 144 64 98 44 ±3 107 48 178 79 161 72 95 42 171 76 135 60 78 35 174 78 126 56 ±4 130 58 201 90 183 82 112 50 202 90 160 71 107 48 199 89 145 65 ±5 153 68 214 96 201 90 130 58 213 95 177 79 132 59 212 95 161 72 ±6 174 78 219 98 211 94 148 66 219 98 194 87 152 68 222 99 178 79 Discussion It is possible to do a acceptable estimation of the soil particle size by using the geoelectrical measuring results. The mapping expenditure can be reduced clearly. The spatial distribution of grain sizes is an important information for the farmer to optimize the plant production. Comparing the estimation results of the three different measuring principles the both galvanic working systems shows a higher accuracy of hits than the inductive working system does. Furthermore the estimation results of the BOs-1EP show a higher accuracy of hits than the ARP03 does. current (I) voltage (U) phase shifting (- 90°) Interdisciplinary Research Project PIROL Sub-project Soil Sciences / Soil Sensors Technology current (I) voltage (U) magnitude of current Funded by: Sub-project Prof. Dr. Klaus Mueller (Soil Sciences) manager: Prof. Dr. Norbert Emeis (Soil Sensors Technology) Contact: Dr. agr. Stefan Hinck Internet: www.pirol.fh-osnabrueck.de zero-crossing time zero-crossing phase shifting time
© Copyright 2024