Perfilómetro electrónico de varillas para la medición de la movilización del suelo

Palabras clave: láser, LiDAR, rugosidad del suelo, ultrasonido

Resumen

Objetivo del estudio: Desarrollar y validar un perfilómetro electrónico de varillas capaz de operar de forma independiente en condiciones de campo, y comparar sensores láser, LiDAR y ultrasónicos para identificar la tecnología menos afectada por interferencias ambientales durante la medición de la rugosidad superficial del suelo.

Área de estudio: Universidad Federal de Paraná, Curitiba, Brasil.

Materiales y métodos: El experimento se realizó en laboratorio bajo un diseño completamente aleatorizado, comparando un perfilómetro convencional con perfilómetros electrónicos equipados con sensores láser, LiDAR y ultrasónicos. Se evaluaron la rugosidad modificada, el área elevada, el área movilizada, el hinchamiento y el espesor del suelo, con siete repeticiones por tratamiento. Los datos fueron sometidos a pruebas de normalidad y homogeneidad y posteriormente a análisis de varianza; cuando se detectaron diferencias significativas, las medias se compararon mediante la prueba de Student–Newman–Keuls (SNK) con un nivel de significancia del 5 %.

Resultados principales: El perfilómetro electrónico de varillas mostró una precisión, exactitud y confiabilidad satisfactorias en comparación con el método convencional, confirmando la validación del equipo. Entre los sensores evaluados, el sensor ultrasónico presentó el desempeño más consistente y confiable en la lectura de las varillas, debido a la amplitud de su haz, lo que incrementó la probabilidad de detección y redujo la sensibilidad a interferencias externas como la incidencia solar y la reflectancia del suelo.

Aspectos destacados de la investigación: La selección del sensor afecta críticamente la confiabilidad de la medición en la perfilometría de varillas mejorada electrónicamente en condiciones de campo.

Descargas

La descarga de datos todavía no está disponible.

Citas

Azevedo GCD, Zimmermann GG, Jasper SP, Ferraz RDS, Moreno FG, Savi D, 2023. Validation of automated measurements of soil tillage variables with laser and ultrasound sensors. Rev. Bras. Eng. Agríc. Ambient 27: 577-584. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v27n8p577-584

Barreto BB, Rivera FP, McKenzie BM, Preedy K, Liu Y, Dupuy LX, Braga Jr RA, 2023. Analysis of the Effect of Tilling and Crop Type on Soil Structure Using 3D Laser Profilometry. Agric 13: 2077. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13112077

Błaszczak-Bąk W, Suchocki C, Kozakiewicz T, Janicka J, 2023. Measurement methodology for surface defects inventory of building wall using smartphone with light detection and ranging sensor. Meas 219: 113286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2023.113286

Borges DF, Gonçalves FAR, Junior JDG, Souza CFE, Carvalho Filho A, 2019. Perfilômetro de barra corrediça: avaliação de metodologia para análise da rugosidade do solo. Energ. Agric 34: 471-478. https://doi.org/10.17224/EnergAgric.2019v34n4p471-478

Carvalho Filho A, Centurion JF, Silva RPD, Furlani CE, Carvalho LC, 2007. Soil tillage methods: alterations in the roughness of the soil. Eng. agríc 27: 229-237.

Chandrasegar V, Koh J, 2023. Estimation of Azimuth Angle Using an Ultrasonic Sensor for Automobile. Remote Sens 15: 1837. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15071837

Dusséaux R, Vannier E, 2022. Soil surface roughness modelling with the bidirectional autocorrelation function. Biosyst. Eng 220: 87-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2022.05.012

Ewetumo T, Egbedele IA, Joseph-Ojo CI, Fagbamiye-Akinwale OM, 2019. Development of low-cost soil tillage profilometer. Icon Res Eng J 3: 365-371.

Fanigliulo R, Antonucci F, Figorilli S, Pochi D, Pallottino F, Fornaciari L, et al., 2020. Light drone-based application to assess soil tillage quality parameters. Sensors 20: 728. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20030728

Feng Z, Zheng X, Li X, Liu H, Tao Z, Wang C, Song J, 2024. Soil Surface Roughness Characteristics Under Different Agricultural Tillage Practices-A Case Study in the Black Soil Region of Northeast China. JSTARS 17: 10781-10792. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTARS.2024.3405952

Foldager FF, Pedersen JM, Haubro Skov E, Evgrafova A, Green O, 2019. LiDAR-based 3d scans of soil surfaces and furrows in two soil types. Sensors 19: 661-613. https://doi.org/10.3390/s19030661

Francetto TR, Alonço ADS, Brandelero C, Machado ODDC, Veit AA, Carpes DP, 2016. Disturbance of Ultisol soil based on interactions between furrow openers and coulters for the no-tillage system. Span. j. agric. res 14: e0208-e0208. https://doi.org/10.5424/sjar/2016143-9148

Gilliot JM, Vaudour E, Michelin J, 2017. Soil surface roughness measurement: A new fully automatic photogrammetric approach applied to agricultural bare fields. Comput. Electron. Agric 134: 63-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2017.01.010

Gong L, Gao B, Sun Y, Zhang W, Lin G, Zhang Z, Liu C, 2024. PreciseSLAM: Robust, Real-Time, LiDAR–Inertial–Ultrasonic Tightly-Coupled SLAM With Ultraprecise Positioning for Plant Factories. IEEE Trans. Industr. Inform 20: 8818-8827. https://doi.org/10.1109/TII.2024.3361092

Liang Q, Wang Z, Yin Y, Xiong W, Zhang J, Yang Z, 2023. Autonomous aerial obstacle avoidance using LiDAR sensor fusion. Plos one 18: e0287177. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0287177

Martinez-Agirre A, Álvarez-Mozos J, Giménez R, 2016. Evaluation of surface roughness parameters in agricultural soils with different tillage conditions using a laser profile meter. Soil Till Res 161: 19-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2016.02.013

Mihálik M, Malobický B, Peniak P, Vestenický P, 2022. The new method of active SLAM for mapping using LiDAR. Electronics 11: 1082. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11071082

Mudarisov S, Farkhutdinov I, Khamaletdinov R, Khasanov E, Mukhametdinov A, 2022. Evaluation of the significance of the contact model particle parameters in the modelling of wet soils by the discrete element method. Soil Till Res 215: 105228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2021.105228

Nazari M, Arthur E, Lamandé M, Keller T, Bilyera N, Bickel S, 2023. A meta-analysis of soil susceptibility to machinery-induced compaction in Forest ecosystems across global climatic zones. Curr. For. Rep 9: 370-381. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40725-023-00197-y

Nijak M, Skrzypczyński P, Ćwian K, Zawada M, Szymczyk S, Wojciechowski J, 2024. On the Importance of Precise Positioning in Robotised Agriculture. Remote Sens 16: 985. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16060985

Niskanen I, Immonen M, Hallman L, Mikkonen M, Hokkanen V, Hashimoto T, Heikkilä R, 2023. Using a 2D profilometer to determine volume and Thickness of stockpiles and ground layers of roads. J. Transp. Eng 149: 04022074. https://doi.org/10.1061/JPEODX.PVENG-1149

Odey SO, Manuwa SI, 2018. Development of Profilometer for Measuring Area of Soil Disturbance by Narrow Tillage Tools. Int. J. Res. Eng. Sci 6: 26-32.

Pelenis D, Barauskas D, Dzikaras M, Viržonis D, 2024. Four-Channel Ultrasonic Sensor for Bulk Liquid and Biochemical Surface Interrogation. Biosensors 14: 66. https://doi.org/10.3390/bios14020066

Ren X, Zou W, Jiao J, Stewart R, Jian J, 2023. Soil properties affect crop yield changes under conservation agriculture: A systematic analysis. Eur. J. Soil Sci 74: e13413. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejss.13413

Sanad H, Moussadek R, Mouhir L, Oueld Lhaj M, Dakak H, El Azhari H, Zouahri A, 2024. Assessment of soil spatial variability in agricultural ecosystems using multivariate analysis, soil quality index (SQI), and geostatistical approach: A case study of the Mnasra Region, Gharb Plain, Morocco. Agronomy 14: 1112. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14061112

Senni AP, Tronco ML, Pedrino EC, Silva RPD, 2024. Automated Windrow Profiling System in Mechanized Peanut Harvesting. AgriEngineering 6: 3511-3537. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriengineering6040200

Toth M, Stumpp C, Klik A, Strauss P, Mehdi-Schulz B, Liebhard G, Strohmeier S, 2024. Long-term effects of tillage systems on soil health of a silt loam in Lower Austria. Soil Till Res 241: 106120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2024.106120

Uddin MJ, Moheuddin MM, Kowsher M, 2019. A new study of trapezoidal, simpson’s 1/3 and simpson’s 3/8 rules of numerical integral problems. Appl. math. sci.: int. j 6: 1-14. https://doi.org/10.5121/mathsj.2019.7401

Vogel HJ, Balseiro-Romero M, Kravchenko A, Otten W, Pot V, Schlüter S, Baveye PC, 2022. A holistic perspective on soil architecture is needed as a key to soil functions. Eur. J. Soil Sci 73: e13152. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejss.13152

Wang R, Ong DE, Peerun MI, Jeng DS, 2022. Influence of surface roughness and particle characteristics on soil–structure interactions: A state-of-the-art review. Geosciences 12: 145. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences12040145

Wang YJ, Wang N, Li M, Li H, Huang GQ, 2024. End-users’ acceptance of intelligent decision-making: A case study in digital agriculture. Adv. Eng. Inform 60: 102387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2024.102387

Zhao Z, Wei H, Liu S, Xue Z, 2024. Estimation of agricultural soil surface roughness based on ultrasonic echo signal characteristics. Soil Till Res 239: 106038. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2024.106038

Zhou S, Ren J, Chen Q, Zhang Z, 2023. Dynamic Change Patterns of Soil Surface Roughness and Influencing Factors under Different Tillage Conditions in Typical Mollisol Areas of Northeast China. Agronomy 13: 1817. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13071817

Zimmermann GG, Jasper SP, Savi D, Ferraz RS, Gracietti EA, 2023. Development of an electronic profilometer to measure mobilization variables in soil harrowing. Span. j. agric. res 21: e0204-e0204. https://doi.org/10.5424/sjar/2023212-19811

Publicado
2026-02-06
Cómo citar
Zimmermann, G. G., Jung , E. A., de Mendonça , W. S., Francetto, T. R., Gracietti , E. A., & Jasper , S. P. (2026). Perfilómetro electrónico de varillas para la medición de la movilización del suelo. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research, 23(4), 21483. https://doi.org/10.5424/sjar/2025234-21483
Sección
Ingeniería agraria