HG09044 MS105 Approved)

Project HG09044
Review of Mechanisation, Automation, Robotics and Remote Sensing (MARRS) for Australian horticulture
Author - Russel Rankin Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd Horticulture Australia Ltd
January 2010
Commercial-In-Confidence
HG09044 Mechanisation, Automation, Robotics and Remote Sensing (MARRS) in Australian horticulture
January, 2010 Project Leader: Russel Rankin, Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd, Contact Details: 1264 Mt Samson Rd, SAMSONVALE QLD 4520 Mobile. 0411178227. Email: Russel@food-innovation.com.au Internet: www.food-innovation.com.au Purpose: This Literature review was prepared as an outcome of Milestone 105 of project HG09044, Scoping study to review Mechanisation, Automation, Robotics and Remote Sensing in Australian horticulture. The Literature Review aims to provide a broad overview of MARRS type technologies being applied to horticulture here and around the world. Case studies have been included to provide examples of the value and advantages of MARRS applications in horticulture, and of the issues that need consideration. Both pre-harvest and post-harvest applications have been included. Note that this is not intended to be a definitive report of MARRS applications in horticulture. Acknowledgment of funding sources: Food Innovation Partners acknowledge the financial support for this project from Horticulture Australia Limited (HAL). Disclaimers: Any recommendations contained in this publication do not necessarily represent current HAL Limited policy. No person should act on the basis of the contents of this publication, whether as to matters of fact or opinion or other content, without first obtaining specific, independent professional advice in respect of the matters set out in this publication. While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of information contained in this report Food Innovation Partners are unable to make any warranties in relation to the information contained herein. Food Innovation Partners disclaims liability for any loss or damage that may arise as a consequence of any person relying on the information contained in this document.
2|Page
Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044
November 09
TABLE OF CONTENTS
MEDIA SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................... 5 TECHNICAL SUMMARY ................................................................................................................ 7 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 9 Australias horticulture sector .................................................................................................... 10 Productive capacity ................................................................................................................ 10 Drivers in Australias horticulture Industry ............................................................................. 11 Robotics and automation ....................................................................................................... 12 HORTICULTURAL FIELD/ORCHARD APPLICATIONS .............................................................. 14 Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and Global Positioning Systems (GPS) ...................... 14 Remote Sensors ........................................................................................................................ 14 Electromagnetic sensors ........................................................................................................... 16 Automated/Mechanical harvesting ............................................................................................ 16 Case Study - Automated Broad Acreage Harvesting of Broccoli: Matilda Fresh Foods ........ 18 Case Study Robotic Harvesting in Orchards: Carnegie Mellon Universitys Robotics Institute .................................................................................................................................. 19 Case Study - Autonomous Robotic Kiwifruit Picking: Massey University .............................. 22 Case Study Autonomous Robotic Strawberry Picking: Magnificent Pty Ltd ....................... 23 Case study - Automatic Weed Control System for Transplanted Processing Tomatoes Using X-ray Stem Sensing: USDA Agricultural Research Service .................................................. 25 PROTECTED CROPPING (GLASSHOUSE/GREENHOUSE) APPLICATIONS .......................... 26 Case Study Protected Horticulture Robot Harvesting: Bio-oriented Technology Research Advancement Institution ........................................................................................................ 26 Case Study - Robot Picking of Sweet Peppers in a Greenhouse: Kochi University of Technology, Japan ................................................................................................................ 28 PACKHOUSE APPLICATIONS .................................................................................................... 31 Computer Vision Systems ......................................................................................................... 31 Near Infra-red (NIR) technology ................................................................................................ 32 Case study Near Infrared detection of disease states in whole potatoes: Taste Technologies. ........................................................................................................................ 32 Case study NIR internal detection, blemish external detection .......................................... 33 Case Study - Impact Recording Devices. .............................................................................. 34 Robotics/Automated Packing .................................................................................................... 35 Case study Nut sorting: Key Technology. ........................................................................... 36 Case study Robotic packing of Fruit. .................................................................................. 36 ASSOCIATED MARRS TECHNOLOGIES ................................................................................... 40
3|Page
November 09
Traceability Systems ................................................................................................................. 40 Radio frequency identification (RFID) system ........................................................................... 42 Case Study Traceability in the New Zealand kiwifruit industry ........................................... 43 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................. 44 Future MARRS technologies ..................................................................................................... 45 Sensors.................................................................................................................................. 45 Near Infra-red technology ...................................................................................................... 46 X-ray detection....................................................................................................................... 46 Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) Imaging ........................................................................ 46 Future traceability technologies ................................................................................................. 46 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................. 48 CITED LITERATURE .................................................................................................................... 49
4|Page
November 09
MEDIA SUMMARY
The objective of this project HG09044, Scoping study to review Mechanisation, Automation, Robotics and Remote Sensing (MARRS) in Australian horticulture is to provide a broad review of work being undertaken in developing MARRS technologies and solutions, and how these might address the drivers affecting the competitiveness of the industry. As the extent of MARRS developments are vast, varied and the horticulture industry consists of many crops from lettuces and carrots through to grapes, apples and bananas, an overview approach was adopted to enable the project to gain a broad understanding of progress globally in relation to developments and potential barriers to successful commercialisation. In Australia the horticulture industry is made up of 47 separate sectors. Case studies have been included to show the value and advantages MARRS applications can provide horticulture in Australia and to raise awareness of the issues that need consideration in the development and implementation of these types of solutions. Both pre-harvest and post-harvest applications have been included. This review identified a number of critical factors that need to go hand-in-hand with the development of MARRS technologies in horticulture. They are; 1. Agronomy and growing systems that are designed for the effective and efficient application of a mechanisation, automation or robotic system. This is important, in particular for harvesting and crop management systems. 2. A clear path to commercialisation of the technology solution. This activity needs to also consider the business model that a firm will create to make the technology viable. 3. Maintenance and service infrastructure. The development of a supporting infrastructure is also crucial to successful deployment of MARRS solutions as the horticulture industry is located in rural and regional Australia where traditional skill levels in these regions are not focused on MARRS technologies although this is rapidly changing. The development and application of remote sensing technologies is maturing and its implementation and usage increasing. Advances in the technologies and increases in their applications will continue. There are fewer challenges to the application of remote sensing technologies due to the fact that these types of the technologies are non-contact. This is not the case with development of automated harvesting, pruning and plant management systems. This report identified that for applications of MARRS technologies where plant contact is required such as harvesting; there are significant challenges to be overcome. For example the development of robotic harvesting systems will require developments in agronomy in parallel. The elements of agronomy that in many cases will be critical in successful development and implementation of automation solutions will be plant structure and size through both variety selection as well as modified growing structure. For example the development of robotic apple harvesting may require apples to be grown under a trellis system. The orientation of these trellis systems will also be important in terms of maximizing the sunlight exposure for plant growth and fruit ripening. This report has also highlighted the critical importance of developing appropriate business models for successful commercialisation of any MARRS technology. The business model can be seen as the way in which the commercialiser of the technology will make money in the market place. Companies can create and capture value from their new technologies in three basic ways: through incorporating the technology in their current businesses, through licensing the technology to other firms or through launching new ventures that exploit the technology in new markets. Maintenance and service infrastructure is the third critical dimension to successful implementation of MARRS solutions in the future. The development of a support infrastructure is
5|Page Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044 November 09
crucial to successful deployment of MARRS solutions, as the horticulture industry is located in rural and regional Australia and traditional skill levels in these regions are not based around MARRS technologies. Going forward, thought will need to be given to the development of this infrastructure through training and remote support processes.
6|Page
November 09
TECHNICAL SUMMARY
The objective of this Report for project HG09044, Scoping study to review Mechanisation, Automation, Robotics and Remote Sensing (MARRS) in Australian horticulture is to provide a broad review of work being undertaken in developing MARRS technologies and solutions, and how these might address the drivers affecting the competitiveness of the industry. As the extent of MARRS developments are vast, varied and the horticulture industry consists of many crops from lettuces and carrots through to grapes, apples and bananas this approach was adopted to enable the project to gain a broad understanding of progress globally in relation to developments and potential barriers to successful commercialisation. In Australia the horticulture industry is made up of 47 separate sectors. Case studies have been included to provide examples of the value and advantages MARRS applications provide horticulture in Australia and raise awareness of the issues that need consideration in the development and implementation of these types of solutions. These Case Studies also demonstrate some of the critical factors identified below. Both pre-harvest and post-harvest applications have been included. This review identified a number of critical factors that need to go hand-in-hand with the development and introduction of MARRS technologies to horticulture. They are; 1. Agronomy and growing systems that are designed for the effective and efficient application of a mechanisation, automation or robotic system. This is important, in particular for harvesting and crop management systems. 2. A clear path to commercialisation of the technology solution. This activity needs to also consider the business model that a firm will create to make the operation viable. 3. Maintenance and service infrastructure. The development of a supporting infrastructure is also crucial to successful deployment of MARRS solutions as the horticulture industry is located in rural and regional Australia where traditional skill levels in these regions are not focused on MARRS technologies although this is rapidly changing. The development and application of remote sensing technologies is maturing and its implementation and usage increasing. Advances in the technologies and increases in their applications will continue. There are fewer challenges to the application of remote sensing technologies due to the fact that these types of the technologies are non-contact. This is not the case with development of automated harvesting, pruning and plant management systems. This report identified that for applications of MARRS technologies where plant contact is required such as harvesting; there are significant challenges to be overcome. For example the development of robotic harvesting systems will require developments in agronomy in parallel. The elements of agronomy that in many cases will be critical in successful development and implementation of automation solutions will be plant structure and size through both variety selection as well as modified growing structure. For example the development of robotic apple harvesting may require apples to be grown under a trellis system. The orientation of these trellis systems will also be important in terms of maximizing the sunlight exposure for plant growth and fruit ripening. This report has also highlighted the critical importance of developing appropriate business models for successful commercialisation of any MARRS technology. The business model can be seen as the way in which the commercialiser of the technology will make money in the market place. Companies can create and capture value from their new technologies in three basic ways: through incorporating the technology in their current businesses, through licensing the technology to other firms or through launching new ventures that exploit the technology in new markets.
7|Page Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044 November 09
The functions of a business model are as follows: 1. Articulate the value proposition (the value created for users by the offering based on the technology) 2. Identify market segments. Users to whom the technology is useful and the purpose for which it will be used. 3. Define the structure of the companys value chain which is required to create and distribute the offering and determine the assets needed to support the firms position in this chain. 4. Specify the revenue generation mechanism for the company 5. Describe the position of the company within the value network, linking suppliers and customers 6. Formulate the competitive strategy by which the company will gain and hold over rivals. 7. Assess capability required to achieve commercialisation. At a firm level, the critical issue will be the payback period on their investment and on-going maintenance: servicing and spare-parts related to MARRS technologies. Maintenance and service infrastructure is the third critical dimension to successful implementation of MARRS solutions in the future. The development of a support infrastructure is crucial to successful deployment of MARRS solutions, as the horticulture industry is located in rural and regional Australia and traditional skill levels in these regions are not based around MARRS technologies. Going forward, thought will need to be given to the development of this infrastructure through training and remote support processes.
8|Page
November 09
INTRODUCTION
The National Horticultural Research Network (NHRN) was established in 2001 and comprises the Horticultural R&D managers from the State Departments of Primary Industries, CSIRO and University of Tasmania. The focus of the NHRN is collaboration and strategic leadership for R&D to support viable horticulture industries in Australia. NHRN formally meets three times per year primarily with Horticulture Australia Limited (HAL). In 2008 the NHRN undertook a review of all the Horticulture Industry reports received from within its network for the review of prospects in Mechanisation, Automation, Robotics, and Remote Sensing (MARRS). The committee was of the opinion that there are a number of opportunities to introduce MARRS-related technologies and advances at all levels of Australias horticultural operations.1 However, the rate of success and the commercial viability of the possible solutions, vary to a great extent. From an engineering point of view, crop layout structure (eg. glasshouses/greenhouses, highly defined field rows, intensive orchards etc) is the most fundamental aspect for MARRS solutions to be applied most effectively to secure a commercial advantage. Despite structured crop layout, some crops do not lend themselves to bear fruit in a structured way. In such situations, major agronomical input is necessary in the area of plant research. As extreme examples, baby leaf and lettuce can be laid out in a very structured manner while avocado may not be able to be grown so as to present its fruit in a structured way that will facilitate automated harvesting. MARRS-related opportunities can be broadly categorized into three areas crop production, harvest and postharvest. In the case of crop production, crop yield monitors could use precision agriculture and crop sensor applications (remote sensors) allowing growers to provide more accurate water and fertiliser regimes critical in times of drought and high fertiliser costs. The grower would also be better informed to predict physiological events (eg. flowering, fruit set, pest incursions, maturity indices) enabling them to better manage spray regimes, worker schedules, and most importantly predict market yield for domestic and export markets. The technology and software associated with many of these applications is still very much in its infancy and would usually require the producer to be technology literate in order for them to obtain the greatest use from these systems. For harvest operations, the degree of structure varies significantly across the types of crops, hence the success rate of MARRS uptake and application is varied. However, in the case of postharvest operations the structure remains significantly constant. Hence the prospects of MARRS usage in postharvest operations are much higher (certainly in the short-term) than those of harvest operations. The main aim of undertaking MARRS research in horticulture is to achieve competitiveness in the Australian industry in relation to that of international markets. Therefore, to performance rates are of utmost importance. Bearing in mind that Australia currently competes with other emerging economies with significantly larger and cheaper labour pool, the solutions proposed must be able to match the traditional manual production rates. In some cases OH&S issues may also need to be addressed. Australia is well placed to achieve significant gains by taking up MARRS-related technologies, particularly in the crop production and harvest operations of structured crops. To achieve commercial advantages in other crops, thorough investigations are necessary to reduce/eliminate or combine crop production, harvest and post harvest operations. As an example, a cucumber harvester deployed in a protected plantation may be used to determine an individual plants nutrition or pest incursion level for directed fertilizer and pesticide application, the ripeness quality and size, determine whether to harvest or not, then during harvest conduct an instant fruit inspection for blemishes and other defects, grade and package. The NHRN review indicated the possibilities of process integration to minimize costs and increase throughput so that a competitive solution with minimum labour can be achieved.
9|Page
November 09
It is of utmost importance that Australias horticulture industries start to recognize MARRS solutions as part of the entire process. Any MARRS assessment must be carried out on the entire process with and without automation to determine the commercial and economic advantages. Most often the assessment is carried out only on the part that is first considered for automation. It is also quite possible that MARRS solutions may introduce additional MARRS-associated problems to be solved and hence the entire process may have been adversely affected with its introduction, so it is important to thoroughly assess a situation prior to investment. The Review undertaken by the NHRN also recognized that much could be learnt from other industries that have already embraced these strategies both here in Australia as well as overseas programs around automation in agriculture, in particular New Zealand. The committee also noted that there are crop groups that lend themselves to MARRS solutions however; they more than likely do not have the financial strength to fund the development of MARRS solutions that may benefit them. Hence there is a need to assess all industries to ensure replication does not occur and that knowledge of new applications is shared amongst the whole of the horticulture industry as much as possible to reduce costs. In this way, smaller industries will likely benefit from technologies developed by larger industries. In December 2008, at the meeting of the National Horticultural Research Network (NHRN), it was agreed that they would seek to commission through Horticulture Australia (HAL) a scoping study on the application of Mechanisation, Automation, Robotics and Remote Sensing (MARRS) technologies to horticulture in Australia. This scoping study would also develop the Business Case for commercial, industry, State and Commonwealth investment (via HAL) in the development and application of MARRS technologies to Australian horticulture. The study was given the working title Re-engineering horticulture: using MARRS technologies to radically improve the international competitiveness of Australian Horticulture. A Terms of Reference for this scoping study was prepared and Project HG09044: Mechanisation, Automation, Robotics and Remote Sensing (MARRS) in Australian horticulture commissioned.
Australias horticulture sector

The horticulture sector is the second largest sector within Australian agriculture, being slightly less than the grains industry, but well above the combined average contributions of the wool and dairy industries2. Horticulture is diverse incorporating 140 commodities; including industry such as vegetables, fruit, nuts, nursery, turf, cut flowers and extractive crops. Table and dried grapes, but not wine, are also part of the sector. Horticulture is also geographically diverse with horticultural commodities undertaken in almost all 56 catchment areas across Australia. The major growing areas for edible horticulture include the Goulburn Valley of Victoria; the Murrumbidgee Irrigation Area of New South Wales; the Sunraysia district of Victoria/New South Wales; the Riverland region of South Australia; northern Tasmania; southwest Western Australia and the coastal strip of both northern New South Wales and Queensland. Nursery and turf production generally occurs within or close to the capital cities and regional centres. Banana, pineapple, mandarin, avocado, mango and fresh tomato production is concentrated in Queensland; stone fruit and oranges in New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia; processing potatoes in Tasmania; fresh pears, canning fruit and processing tomatoes in Victoria; and apples and fresh vegetables in all States. Productive capacity The two largest product sectors of horticulture, fruit and vegetables have generally achieved increasing GVPs (Gross Value of Production) since 1999-2000. The fruit GVP increased every year apart from 2003-2004 which followed a severe drought. The vegetable GVP has been more
10 | P a g e Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044 November 09
variable and vulnerable to droughts. It has also experienced a significant market downturn for processing vegetables. Since 2000-2001, the main constraint on the industrys productive capacity has been climate variability and the impact of two severe droughts in quick succession on production and farm profitability. Low water availability from natural rainfall and restricted irrigation water allocations have been the key production-limiting factors.3 Drivers in Australias horticulture Industry The key drivers effecting Australias horticulture industry in todays economic environment have been widely recognized as: Competitiveness, labour shortages, Green technologies and sustainability, Industry location, Food safety and security, and Consumer choice.
The increasing costs of production associated with a strong dependency on a secure labour force, greater scrutiny of food safety issues and consumer expectations for environmentally responsible production processes, are driving the industry to better understand, measure and strategically respond to issues involving mechanisation, automation, robotics and remote sensing capability. Despite the challenges facing Australias horticulture industry it has experienced strong growth over the past decade. The inadequacies of national data on industry employment requirements and the absence of aggregated vacancy data mean that it is difficult to systematically document the labour shortage issues in rural Australia.4 The Queensland Fruit and Vegetable Growers Association (Growcom) estimates that due to labour shortages, during harvesting, its members lose up to 10 per cent of their crops produce estimated to be worth $900 million. Such problems are not confined to Queensland. Fruit growers from around Bunbury in the southwest of Western Australia say demand for orchard workers outstrips supply, particularly during harvest season. In Victoria, SPC-Ardmona, says that for the last three years production at their Shepparton cannery has been lower than it might have been because fruit has been left on the trees as there arent enough people to pick it, while a Yarra Valley berry grower says labour shortages in 2004 forced him to drop 6 tonnes of raspberries from his vines. A leading Australian fruit exporter says the lack of a reliable supply of seasonal labour significantly inhibits industry growth in the Murray Valley irrigation region and limits export income.5 The Australian Horticulture Industry cannot afford to take a fragmented approach to MARRS and so consistency of knowledge, interpretation, and application within the industry is vital as the industry comes to terms with a wide range of challenging global issues. The Australian Horticulture industry is looking to have a thorough and up-to-date understanding of the MARRS capabilities within Australia (and overseas where applicable) and what it can offer to this industry. The NHRN, Future Focus process, and HAL Postharvest and Emerging Technologies Portfolio have all identified the need for an across-industry approach to the development of MARRS capability and applications. Many other agricultural industries and industry businesses are already down the path of developing these capabilities. However, there is a need to ensure consistency and reduce the risk of duplication in future funding. It is therefore critical that this study is developed and accepted by the Horticulture Industry as a whole (which includes major Agribusinesses) and that it is capable of delivering meaningful outcomes for all stakeholders. Mechanisation, automation, robotics and remote sensing in the horticulture industry are a high priority for the HAL Postharvest and Emerging Technologies Portfolio. There has been some
significant investment in this area already, however HAL wants to ensure a consistency of approach and cost effectiveness of any future investment in this area as the industry moves forward. This report is the result of a review and assessment of existing technologies that been applied to horticulture both here and overseas. Robotics and automation Robotics and automation in Agriculture is not a new phenomenon: In controlled environments it has a history of over 20 years. However, with the latest increase in computational power combined with a cost reduction, robotics applications are spreading. The development of mechanical assistance or automation in harvesting systems began as early 1883 when Hugh Victor McKay, a 17 year old, tired of turning the heavy handle on his fathers winnowing machine in country Victoria, Australia, wondered if a harvester could be made to winnow as well. With the help of his brothers George and John, he built a prototype made of old metal scraps and farm tools. It was finished in 1884 and called the Sunshine Harvester. It was an immediate success because it separated the grain, straw and chaff using a rotary fan making the entire harvesting process automatic. The study of robot applications for plant production also had an early start in 1984 with a tomato harvesting robot6. Currently there are automated harvesters in the research phase for cherry tomatoes, cucumber, mushrooms, cherry and other fruits. In horticulture, robots have been applied to harvest citrus and apples. So far, no harvesting robot has reached the stage of commercialization, because of their low operation speeds, low success rates, and high costs. The key areas associated with the application of automation to horticultural that have significant challenges to be addressed are: Path finding; navigation both within the rows of an crops and orchards and in order to get to the field, Mapping; keeping track of where the robotic task has already been completed and where it remains to be done, Vision; computer vision recognition of the target such as the trunk, the fruit/produce, the bud, the flower, etc, The design of the mechanical system or robot which will perform the task of picking, spraying, pruning, pollinating, etc, Building an automation platform which is cost effective, can handle rough terrain, sloping ground, mud, soil and rain. This platform needs to be adaptable to other tasks and other crops, Intelligent inspection to decide which targets are appropriate for robotic manipulation. For example, robotic picking is vastly more efficient if only produce of the correct size and colour is picked. Similarly, robotic pollination is most efficient when only female flowers with a suitable spacing are selected for pollination, Produce handling; many horticulture products need to be handled very gently once they have been harvested as a drop over even a small distance may cause bruising. Obstacle avoidance: computer vision recognition of obstacles such as people, poles, wires, stumps and rocks so that an autonomous robot can navigate safely around these. Swarm behavior management: to allow multiple autonomous robots to function together in one area without interfering with each other, Cost; most of the horticultural tasks, such as fruit picking, only last for a few months of the year and it is not cost effective to use a robot for such a short period. Ideally, robots should be capable of performing many different operations, such as picking followed by bud count followed by pollination followed by fruit count, in order to extend the useful work period of the machine and ensure a reasonable payback period, and
12 | P a g e
November 09
Maintenance; As the majority of the horticulture industry is located in rural Australia often in remote areas, it is important to be able to provide the MARRS maintenance and servicing infrastructure. This introduction of MARRS technologies will require a significant up skilling and training program in order to maintain these new and emerging technologies and systems. But it also provides an opportunity to retain and attract a younger workforce to rural Australia that have an interest in computing and the associated skills involved with automation.
13 | P a g e
November 09
HORTICULTURAL FIELD/ORCHARD APPLICATIONS

Precision farming is defined as the application of technologies and principles to manage spatial and temporal variability associated with all aspects of agricultural production. It is a comprehensive approach to farm management designed to optimise agricultural production through the use of information technology that brings data from multiple sources to bear on decisions associated with agriculture production. Precision farming has also been termed as Precision Agriculture (PA), Variable Rate Technology (VRT), spatially variable farming (SVF), GPS based agriculture, Site Specific Farming (SSF), Site Specific Management (SSM). In Precision Agriculture, the field is broken into management zones also called grids based on soil pH, nutritional status, pest infestation, yield rates, and other factors that affect production. Management decisions are based on the requirements of each zone and tools such as Geographic Information Systems (GIS), Global Positioning System (GPS), are used to control zone inputs.
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and Global Positioning Systems (GPS)

Geographic information systems (GIS) are a means of integrating data acquired at different scales and time and in different formats and can be considered to be a collection of spatially referenced data that act as a model of the field. A Global Positioning System (GPS) is a burgeoning technology, which provides unequalled accuracy and flexibility of positioning for navigation, surveying and GIS data capture. Its development makes high accuracy spatial data easier to obtain in less time. It has a tremendous amount of application in GIS data collection, surveying and mapping. It uses satellite and computers to compute positions anywhere on earth. As a result, numerous observations and measurements can be taken at specific positions and GIS can be used to create field maps based on GPS data to record and assess the impact of farm management decisions. A GPS receiver requires at least four satellites to determine its position. However the raw GPS signal is not sufficiently accurate to determine position within a field. An additional signal from a known position (reference) is needed to provide the necessary accuracy, which can come from a land-based reference signal.
Remote Sensors
Sensors are devices that transmit an impulse in response to a physical stimulus such as heat, light, magnetism, motion, pressure and sound. By definition, remote sensing takes place without physical contact with an object, so any of the visual imagery, ultrasound, and reflectance etc processes fall under this category. The most common remote sensing options are aerial and satellite imagery, but technically speaking, it would include things like tractor mounted N-sensor, Weed seeker and close range laser etc. Proximal sensing makes use of contact sensors such as buried soil moisture sensors, load cells etc. However, as is usually the case in agriculture, nobody takes a lot of notice of the strict technical definition, and remote sensing is taken to encompass aerial and satellite imagery used for farm planning and vegetation monitoring/management, and proximal sensing is taken to cover all those things that are "close" to the target, such as tractor mounted sensors (even if they are not in contact with the target) and, of course, those that actually make contact. They can be contact or remote ground based or space based and direct or indirect. They have been developed to measure and monitor soil properties, crop stress, growth conditions, yields, pest and disease infestation, atmospheric properties, water, machinery, etc., used in precision agriculture. They provide the grower with instant (real time) information that can be used to adjust or control operations. They can be used to measure soil and crop properties as the tractor passes over the field, or as an airplane or satellite photographs the field from the sky.
14 | P a g e
November 09
Remote sensors are generally categorised as aerial or satellite sensors that can provide instant maps of field characteristics. An aerial photograph is optical sensors that can show variations in field colour that correspond to changes in soil type, crop development, field boundaries, roads, water, etc. In this case, it can be either Passive RS where sensors detect the reflected or emitted electro-magnetic radiation or Active RS where the sensors detect the reflected responses from objects that are irradiated from artificially-generated energy sources such as radar. One such company providing Remote Sensor technologies both for fruit quality assessment as well as airborne large scale Near Infrared (NIR) assessment of agriculture production is Integrated Spectronics Pty Ltd (http://www.intspec.com/). Integrated Spectronics is an Australian based company established in 1989 to develop and manufacture electro-optical instrumentation for the mining, remote sensing and environmental industries. The company has now expanding its product range into agricultural applications such as product quality assurance and on-line process monitoring and control. The company has developed high performance, hyper spectral imaging spectrometers for earth resources remote sensing and field portable NIR spectrometers. Integrated Spectronics also provides electro-optical consulting services and contract R&D services. The companys products include Field Portable Spectrometers, new novel handheld Vis/NIR spectrometers for quality assessment of fruit. The company also supplies Airborne Hyper-spectral Imaging. Another Brisbane based company providing airborne remote sensing services to the agriculture and horticulture industry is V-TOL Aerospace Pty Ltd7 (www.v-tol.com). V-TOL has a range of commercial and military grade products and services that provide basic point-to-point to sophisticated networked surveillance, and remote sensing capabilities for the horticulture industry. The company has a focus on collecting and networking spatial information using Unmanned Airborne Systems (UAS) and Unmanned Ground Sensors (UGS).
Figure 1. Comparison of satelite Imagery to Unmanned Aircraft
15 | P a g e
November 09
Figure 2. Typical flight paths of Unmanned Aircraft.
Electromagnetic sensors
Scientists at the National Physical Laboratory (NPL) in the United Kingdom are working with KMS Projects and Vegetable Harvesting Systems (VHS) Ltd8 to develop technology as a foundation for intelligent harvesting machines, which can look beneath the leafy layers of a crop, identify the differing materials, and enable precise size identification. This can be used to develop a fully automated harvesting robot.9 The most appropriate technologies to use are radio frequencies, microwaves, terahertz and the far-infra red. These four parts of the electromagnetic spectrum all have potential to safely penetrate the crop layers and identify the size of the harvestable material for a relatively low cost. NPL are developing a methodology for crop identification and selection focusing specifically on cauliflower crops, one of the hardest crops to measure due to the large amount of leafage that covers the vegetable. Researchers at NPL began by modifying microwave measurement systems to measure a cauliflowers structure. A series of measurements made on real crops in the laboratory and field enabled a statistical range of measurements for precise size identification. This data is then designed into an algorithm to enable a simple size indication from a raw measurement with uncertainties. The final technology will be developed for a first generation harvester and tested in a real farming environment. A successful demonstration of the imaging technology was given recently at the Fanuc Robotics site in Coventry, United Kingdom, showing its huge potential for the harvesting of cauliflowers, lettuces and other similar crops. Commercial support has been received to take the project forward and develop the complete product from one of the largest lettuces grower in the United Kingdom.
Automated/Mechanical harvesting
Automated harvesting is governed by the environment in which a particular horticulture crop is grown. Different farming systems, different horticulture production systems and different products will usually require vastly differing harvesting systems. Scarfe et al. (2009) briefly reviewed the literature for semi-robotic systems to not only harvest crops but also in the on-going preparation and maintenance of the crop prior to harvest. Briefly, they describe a manure spreader with GPS guidance that is capable of spreading manure on a field under remote control by an operator 1 km away from the field10. In automatic weed control systems, the reviewers note that while three of the contributing core technologies (guidance, precision in-row weed control and mapping) are used commercially in non-robotic agricultural applications, the key area still requiring development is in weed detection and identification11.
The development of an effective and efficient harvesting system relies on a mechanical harvester matched appropriately to a modified growing system. This modified growing system can be in the form of plant varieties tuned to the harvester or plant structure trained to match mechanical harvesting processes. The Matilda Fresh Foods case study demonstrates this requirement (see below). Mechanical harvesting provides a number of advantages over traditional hand-picking, primarily: (1) decreased risks of contamination by human contact at the field; (2) decreased labour needs; (3) flexibility on speed and timing of harvesting; and (4) the ability to work at night. For the Australian horticulture industry, the major points of interest are the ability to increase harvest rates and the reduction of workers in the field, with the associated cost reduction in salaries, training, sanitary measures on field and lifting aids, among others. These characteristics make mechanical harvesting a very appealing proposition for farms which traditionally experience labour shortages during the harvest season. 12 A study undertaken by Dr Allan Twomey, HAL project VG05073, "Mechanical harvesting of selected vegetables -feasibility study"13 investigated the feasibility of mechanical harvesting of selected vegetables. Mechanical harvest systems have been developed for carrots, potatoes, radishes, beetroot, iceberg lettuce, celery, cabbage, brussels sprouts and cauliflower. This report found that the main interest in Australia is for mechanical harvesting which is targeted at in-field harvesting, grading and further processing all at the one site. The report also indicated that there was less interest in the development of sensors to evaluate the readiness of crops for harvesting. In summary, the main issues with automated harvesting in orchards or in fields is (1) the precision capability of the visioning system for recognition of the ripe produce for harvest, (2) the selection of a grasping device (end effector) which will not damage the produce, and (3) the navigation of the harvester or autonomous robot through the orchard or field (which rely on GPS technology or computer vision)14. Some of these aspects are considered in the case studies for this section. Project VG 05073 provided some benchmark cost benefit estimates for mechanical harvesting. The report indicates that for each crop an expenditure of about $3 to $5 million over a 3 to 5 year period should be expected. This cost includes agronomics, harvester development, materials handling systems, mechanized /automated minimal processing, logistics and marketing. The cost also includes system development in at least two regions (thus including variation of geographydependent factors). The report also provided some estimated gains achieved through mechanical harvest, based on marketable production with the specific quality required by buyers. These estimates are presented in the Table below. The results show a particularly attractive proposition for cauliflower, leafy greens and tomatoes. Crop Benchmark yield range (kg/ha) % harvesting cost reduction targets 70-78 65-75 68-75 55-65 50-70 55-65 45-55 Estimated improvement
Asian brassicas Broccoli (fresh market) Broccoli (processing market) Celery Cauliflower Leafy greens Tomato Roma and bunches
17 | P a g e
Depends on type 15,000 to 20,000 19,500 to 24,000 48,000 to 52,000 40,000 to 45,000 20,000 to 27,500 Depends on type
$5,000,000 $6,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,000,000 $30,000,000 $24,000,000 $20,000,000
November 09
A recent study in the US15 compared selective and non-selective mechanical harvesters for asparagus in terms of efficiency levels, profitability, and yield harvested. A bio-economic model was used to determine the impact on profits and harvested yields by the two mechanical harvesters and their levels of profitability compared to manual harvesting. The results showed that at the efficiency levels observed for the selective mechanical harvester (i.e. 80% of spear recovery rate, 5% of damage rate to the existing spears, and 5% of damage rate to the harvested spears) the profit generated by mechanical harvesting was $1,497/ha, lower than the profit observed for manual harvesting ($1,666/ha). However, the results suggested that further development of the selective mechanical harvester would likely lead to higher profitability ratios than those found for manual harvesting. The development of automated and mechanised harvesting systems for the horticulture industry has been underway since as the late 60s. Dr Estrada-Flores from Food Chain Intelligence has compiled of list of over 225 patents globally on harvesting system inventions for the horticulture industry from 1969 to 2009.16 The critical issues to consider here is: of these patents how many have been successfully commercialised? Of these 225 cited mechanical harvesting patents 40% were registered US Patents, 28% from Japan and only 2% were Australian registered patents. Case Study - Automated Broad Acreage Harvesting of Broccoli: Matilda Fresh Foods Matilda Fresh Foods was Australias largest private exporter of broccoli and onions. Located on the rich pollution free volcanic soils of the Darling Downs, Matilda created a strong Asian presence through high quality products and excellence in delivery to customers. Matilda was also the major producer of fresh, ready to cook and eat, chilled broccoli and cauliflower florets under the Youll Love Coles brand to Coles supermarkets throughout Australia. Matilda utilised a systems approach to the selection, growing, harvesting, processing, transport and logistics and marketing of broccoli products. The innovative components of their production system were: Varietal selection using international benchmarks for productivity and harvestability. Growing systems developed for mechanical harvesting that would build on existing technology for GPS cultivation, seed treatment and irrigation. The innovation was in the development of a production system that integrated with the mechanical harvesting system. The Mechanical harvester was the centre piece of their innovative system. The machinery could harvest heads and stems and mechanically separate and floret them in field. This effectively reduced harvest cost and the transport of the biomass.
This Case shows the essential element of the development of automated harvesting is to match the crop agronomy system with the automation. The agronomy system required the selection of the appropriate broccoli varieties that were tall enough for the harvester and growing practices that involved planting the seeds and seedlings in rows relative to the path of the sun to encourage further tall growing plants. The Harvester capability exceeded the anticipated output which led to a complete revision of the handling and processing systems. The harvester could harvest 56,000 broccoli heads per hour and in addition allowed the automated harvest of material that would previously have remained in the field. An appropriate Business Model was being developed to enable the commercialisation of the Broccoli harvester within the Matilda Farm business. The different models considered were; License an existing harvester manufacturing company to build, sell and service Broccoli Harvesters. Establish a new business to manufacture and sell harvesters.
Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044 November 09
18 | P a g e
Build a limited number of harvesters and establish a contract harvesting company. Separate license agreements for different markets.
Consideration of the potential business models that are required in order to successfully commercialise outcome of any MARRS development is crucial to successful adoption of these technologies in terms of economic returns.
Figure 3. Broad acreage Broccoli Harvester
Case Study Robotic Harvesting in Orchards: Carnegie Mellon Universitys Robotics Institute Two groups of researchers at Carnegie Mellon Universitys Robotics Institute received $10 million in grants from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to build automated farming systems. One is for apple growers and one is for orange growers, but both are designed to improve fruit quality and lower production costs.17 The projects are funded through the USDAs new Specialty Crop Research Initiative. The Comprehensive Automation for Specialty Crops (CASC) Program is led by Sanjiv Singh, research professor of robotics. The Comprehensive Automation for Specialty Crops (CASC) program is a multi-institutional initiative led by Carnegie Mellon Robotics Institute to comprehensively address the needs of specialty agriculture focusing on apples and horticultural stock. CASC is a syndicate of research and commercial companies that have been funded by the USDA Cooperative State Research, Education & Extension Service with matching support from industry and the Pennsylvania Infrastructure Technology Alliance. The Syndicate consists of the Carnegie Mellon University, The Pennsylvania State University, Washington State University, Vision Robotics Corp, Oregon State University, and Purdue University CASC is developing methods to improve production efficiency, identify threats from pests and diseases, and, detect, monitor and respond to food safety hazards.18 Harvesting remains one of the most labor-intensive operations at orchards, but it also is very challenging to automate because of demanding handling requirements and the associated cost requirements. Both projects will investigate new designs for mechanical harvesters, including a vacuum-assisted device that the CASC will use for apple harvesting, but the emphasis will be on aiding human harvesters, rather than replacing them. CASC will focus on apple and ornamental and tree fruit nursery production in Pennsylvania, Washington and Oregon. These states alone have 200,000 acres of apples (60% of the US fresh apple production) produced on about 6,000 farming operations with a farm gate value of US$1.4 billion. These crops are representative of specialty crops grown across the US.
19 | P a g e
November 09
The key industry needs that are being addressed are: early detection of diseases and insects, monitoring of plant health, assessment of crop value, reduction in the amount (and cost) of sprays and nutrients, increase in the efficiency of labor, and reduction of damage to crops at harvest. CASCs goal is to work with the specialty crop industry to fulfill its vision of significantly reducing the cost of production of US fruit, which is fundamental for its survival. Objectives include developing, integrating, testing, deploying, and assessing a carefully chosen set of information, mobility, manipulation and plant science technologies, assessing their socioeconomic utility, and transferring results to the end users via commercialization and extension.
Figure 4. Autonomous Prime Mover for deployment of sensors, based on a Toro Workman MDE utility vehicle
CASC are also developing a crop load estimation system for medium- to high-density orchards.19 The system scans fruit trees to determine the total crop yield, the size, location, and color of each piece of fruit in the orchard. The existing prototype has been able to demonstrate a proof-ofconcept. Design of the first full prototype is currently underway, which will include the form and function of the anticipated design but requiring more evolution to reach the production design. The goal is to create a system that accurately detects more than 95% of the fruit in a typical orchard. Much more research work is required before the system is ready for commercial application.
20 | P a g e
November 09
Figure 5. Vision System detection of Red Apples.
The Integrated Automation for Sustainable Specialty Crop Farming Project, of the Robotics Institutes National Robotics Engineering Center (NREC), received a three-year, US$4 million grant to develop systems for the citrus industry. Both project grants are being matched dollar for dollar by industry, state governments and other funding sources. The NRECs Integrated Automation for Sustainable Specialty Crop Farming Project will deploy a fleet of networked, unmanned tractors in the orange groves of Southern Gardens Citrus (SGC), one of Floridas largest growers. In addition to SGC, collaborators include researchers at the University of Florida, Cornell University and John Deere & Co. Penn State University in the United States is also undertaken related work on innovative technologies for the thinning of fruit trees. Tree fruit are thinned at the blossom or early fruit development stages to ensure larger, higher quality product. This management practice, typically performed by hand, is a labor-intensive and expensive activity. Development of methods to mechanize thinning is a top priority for the tree fruit industry. This project will develop and test new mechanical thinners. Specific project objectives are: Integrate mechanization and tree canopy architecture (as growing systems evolve from a three-dimensional to two-dimensional structure) by investigating training modifications to make flowers or fruit more visible/accessible and new methods of targeting optimum level of crop load adjustment at various stages of bloom/fruit development, Further develop and modify two prototype non-selective fruit thinning devices to improve prototype efficacy and commercialisation potential, Develop and integrate electronic and mechanical technologies for higher precision and selective thinning, Provide technology transfer by pilot testing in orchards with commercial growers.20
The Case Study demonstrates the complexity of some of the MARRS solutions that will be required in the horticulture industry. It also demonstrates that development of robotic picking of apples will require again developments in the agronomy and growing systems. This could be apples grown in a trellis arrangement to provide better access for vision recognition and robotic manipulation for picking.
21 | P a g e
November 09
This case also demonstrates the amounts of funding that the United States industry and government are willing to apply to the development of MARRS solutions for horticulture. It also shows the gap between research and successful commercialisation. Case Study - Autonomous Robotic Kiwifruit Picking: Massey University New Zealand researchers at Massey University have made significant progress into the development of an autonomous kiwifruit picking robot. Similar agrobotic systems include a prototype orange picking robot being developed in Italy and an apple-picker being developed in Belgium. Neither of these is yet commercially viable and both use human operators to position the picking robot.21 In existing kiwifruit Packhouses, approximately 30% of the fruit is rejected on the basis of size and quality. The fruit growers pay the pack house a packing fee which is based on the gross tonnage with a fine for rejects. The ability of the vision software to recognise fruit which is undersize, unripe, misshapen or marked makes the system economically attractive to the growers. The Massey University researchers have developed a robot with intelligent vision system that ensures that only good fruit is picked. The robot receives instruction by radio link and operates autonomously as it navigates through the orchard, picking fruit, and unloading full bins of fruit, teaching empty bins and protecting the picked fruit from rain. Briefly, the kiwifruit picker employs a panoply of cameras: two are mounted looking forward and enable the picker to make its way around the orchard; two are mounted looking toward the rear to locate and handle the fruit bins. There are also a number of cameras that look up at the canopy to coordination with the picking arms. The robot platform being developed is an autonomous 4-wheel drive robotic vehicle which performs the following functions: Uses GPS and intelligent vision to navigate kiwifruit orchards; manoeuvring around obstacles such as posts and recognising braces at the end of each row. Identifies fruit, discriminating for size and gross defects. Picks the fruit and places it gently into the bin. Checks the fruit level at each point in the bin and adjusts fruit placement to fill the bin evenly. Currently, the robot is able to pick at one fruit per second. Decides when the bin is full, goes to the end of the row and unloads the bin. Searches for and picks up an empty bin with its forks, returns to the last position and resumes picking. Operates 24-7, checks for light level and operates floodlights if necessary. Checks for rain or dew and covers the bin with a tarpaulin when this is detected so that picked fruit is protected. Goes into secure mode (for example when the fruit is wet), moving the robotic arms to a safe position, switching the unnecessary power systems off, and maintaining power only to the main (monitoring) computer and radio link. Wakes up when appropriate and resumes picking. Receives and responds to communications via radio link and uses voice recognition to respond to verbal commands. Uses a variety of recovery strategies to deal with faults such as getting stuck, vision becoming obscured, etc. Collects data on the fruit yield from a particular orchard.
The kiwifruit picking robot has spent the six months in an orchard, learning to navigate and to recognise and pick fruit. Fruit picking and handling are still in the experimental phase and development will continue during the 2010 harvest. A video showing the unit operating one of the four robot arms is available at http://www.massey.ac.nz/~rcflemme/current%20projects.html
22 | P a g e
November 09
Figure 6. Autonomous Kiwifruit Picking Robot.
To increase the utilization of the robot, researchers now intend to focus on the robots to also pollinate flowers. Pollination is an expensive and difficult operation in kiwifruit orchards and unexplained bee-hive deaths are a considerable worry to orchardists, therefore some orchardists apply pollen manually so that they are not reliant on bees. Manual applications do not apply the pollen efficiently. The vision system on the automated kiwifruit robot will be developed to recognise female flowers and apply pollen precisely to the flower in an optimal manner (leaving sufficient room between pollinated flowers for the fruit to develop in an unobstructed way) using a customised pollen delivery system attached to the robot hand. The pruning of kiwifruit vines is another expensive and time-consuming operation for the industry. The autonomous robotic system will be adapted to perform this function. The robotic arms of the system will be adapted to pick other types of fruit such as apples and oranges.22 This particular case study demonstrates that developing MARRS solutions that have more than one function makes the introduction of the technology economically viable. In this case the same autonomous robot platform for Kiwifruit will be used for fruit picking, pollinating flowers, spraying and other crop maintenance activities. The platform will also have spillover effects into the wider horticulture industry as it is adapted to harvest other crops such as apples and oranges. Case Study Autonomous Robotic Strawberry Picking: Magnificent Pty Ltd Faced with the ever increasing issues in the labour market, Glass House Mountains strawberry farmer Ray Daniels of SunRay Strawberries Pty Ltd, on the Sunshine Coast north of Brisbane, discovered a solution to the challenges faced by strawberry growers while listening to a presentation on robotic harvesting by agricultural engineer Rudi Bartels at a strawberry growers meeting in 2007.23 Harvest labour costs are the single largest cost item for strawberry growers, accounting for more than half of the total cost of production. The large seasonal labour force that is required also brings many management issues that dwarf the challenges of strawberry cultivation. Issues include the time and costs involved in labour recruitment, language barriers, illegal migrant issues, management of rapidly fluctuating labour requirements, unreliability of low-paid labour, provision of accommodation, transport, medical care, payroll administration, social order costs,
Commer rcial-In-Confidence
training and supervisio costs. It is common for the sma management team of strawber farms on n all rry to spend m more than 70 of their time simply managing all these ancillary labo challeng 0% y our ges. The pressures of hiring, ad dministering and payin large wor forces is further com g ng rk mpounded by the fact that while l labour costs continue t rise, the s s to strawberry price has re emained lar rgely stagna over ant the last 30 years. e g hrough proje BS08014 Robotic s ect 4 strawberry Horticulture Australia is providing support th harvesting for SunRa Strawber ay rries Pty Ltd to engage Magnificen Pty Ltd to develop a robotic d e nt o strawberry harvester. The project is focused on adaptin a field pr y d ng rototype har rvester so th it can hat become a successfully commerc cialised auto onomous machine that can harves field grow t st wn strawberrie in a cost effective m es manner. The autonomous machine that is bein develope must e e ng ed be able to travel along strawberry rows, reco g y ognise ripe strawberrie remove a place berries in es, and b picking tray and utilis telemetry to alert fie personne when the machine n ys se y eld el e needs to be turned at the end of the row.
Figure 7. St trawberry ide entification us sing Vision S System.
A basic field prototype machine h already been deve e has y eloped to de emonstrate the technical subsystems, in ncluding autonomous r row tracking foliage displacement strawberr locating and g, t, ry a strawberry handling. T y This project will take th harvester from a field prototype to a machi that t he r e ine can be utilised in a co ommercial s strawberry p production environment with a des e sign life of at least 5 a years (16 m million berries).
Figure 8. Ro obot Arm pic cking Field St trawberries.
24 | P a g e
November 09
The Universities of Okayama, the University of Utsunomiya and the Universidad Politcnica de Madrid are all developing harvesters for hydroponically grown strawberries. These competitors do not currently pose a direct threat to Magnificent Pty Ltd as they target a niche market that accounts for less than one per cent of world strawberry production. The University of Miyazaki in Japan and Robotic Harvesting LLC (Limited Liability Company) in California are also developing robotic strawberry Harvesters for field grown strawberries. Prof Nagata leads the University of Miyazaki research however has to date been limited to laboratory testing of a robotic gantry. As this research is academically focused and with Prof Nagata semi retired, the Miyazaki Harvester is not perceived as a competitive threat in the medium term24. This Case Study demonstrates that there is a large gap between MARRS technologies developed in the research environment and what is required to operate in a commercial environment. It also highlights the importance of researchers being able to understand the commercial operation associated with growing and harvesting produce. Case study - Automatic Weed Control System for Transplanted Processing Tomatoes Using X-ray Stem Sensing: USDA Agricultural Research Service Recently, a stem detection system was developed for automatic weed control in transplanted tomato fields. This research was conducted through the USDA Agricultural Research Service for the project Sorting agricultural materials for defects using imaging and physical methods.25 Briefly, a portable x-ray source projected an x-ray beam perpendicular to the crop row and parallel to the soil surface. The plants main stem absorbs x-ray energy, decreasing the detected signal and allowing stem detection even in the presence of leaves. This signal is used to control the operation of a pair of weed knives. Minimizing the source to detector distance as the system moved along the row allowed for differences in signal strength between stems and background as high as 180 mV (vs. background noise levels around 30 mV) at low x-ray energy and current levels (25 keV, 7 mA), which is a significant advantage for safety reasons. The detector consisted of a linear array of photodiodes aligned perpendicular to the soil. This configuration helps differentiate branches, which are angled and block only some of the photodiodes, and stems which have the same vertical alignment as the array and hence block all photodiodes. A field trial was conducted in a 15 meter section of row containing 39 tomato seedlings. At a speed of 1.6 km/h, the detection system identified all 39 stems of standing plants with no false positives.26
25 | P a g e
November 09
PROTECTED CROPPING (GLASSHOUSE/GREENHOUSE) APPLICATIONS

Horticulture Australia estimates that Australia has 1,600 ha of protected cropping systems for vegetables. AUSVEG data indicates that in 2006-07 there were 870 ha of protected crops. All indications are that the protected cropping industry is growing fast, at a rate of at least 6% per annum. It is expected that the planted area will treble by 2017, particularly in SA and NSW. Protected vegetable production is currently focused on cucumbers, capsicums, hydroponic lettuces, herbs and tomatoes. The structured environment of protected cropping with its high plant density and high product value, often justify the expense of robotic picking applications. In their brief review of the literature, Scarfe et al. (2008) describe research for an autonomous robot for harvesting cucumbers. However, only 80% of the cucumbers are picked and the average pick-rate is 45 seconds per cucumber27. Belforte et al. (2006)28 undertook a review of robotic harvesting of mushrooms, lettuce and strawberries in greenhouses and note that these are not commercially viable because they are too specific in their purpose (picking is typically a very short period in the life of the crop) and have an unattractively slow pick-rate. They developed a proof-of-concept stationary robot capable of under-leaf spraying and precision fertilization of potted plants which were moved on a conveyor past the stationary robot with a cycle time of 7 to 8 pots per minute. Although the dual functions of the robot mean that it can be used for a greater portion of the plant life, the cycle time is too slow for commercialisation and the problems associated with moving the plants rather than the robots are large29. E.J. van Henten30 in an analysis of a generic crop production process combined with a review of the state of the art in greenhouse mechanisation revealed that the first phases of plant production such as seeding, cutting, grafting and transplanting as well as the final phase of crop production including sorting and packing the harvested produce are already mechanised. Those tasks do not require much human intelligence and/or fast and accurate eye-hand coordination. The available machines are largely based on principles of industrial automation consisting of mechanical solutions with only a limited amount of sensors and intelligence used. The next ten years, the available line of machines will be redesigned, extended and optimised. The middle phase of crop production including crop maintenance and harvest has little or no automation as yet. Maintaining the crop and harvesting rely on human intelligence and ability and are much more difficult to automate. The next ten years will show the advent of the next generation machines that combine smart mechanical design with sensors and artificial intelligence to achieve the fast and accurate eye-hand coordination needed for these difficult tasks. This trend is supported by the commercial development of a strawberry harvester in Japan and a rose harvesting robot and tomato de-leafing robot in the Netherlands. van Henten concluded that progress is slow in the field of robotic harvesting due largely to uncertainty in the working environment of the robot as a result of biological variability and the typical structure of the growing systems used. Progress in the field of greenhouse robotics therefore will not only rely on innovations in the field of robot technology but also on necessary innovations in the field of growing systems and plant breeding to reduce variability and thus to simplify the task. Case Study Protected Horticulture Robot Harvesting: Bio-oriented Technology Research Advancement Institution In Japan, protected horticulture has traditionally relied on small-scale, labor-intensive cultivation practices managed mainly by family members. However, large-scale greenhouses are gaining popularity, and serious enterprise-like management with an emphasis on productivity and employment is spreading. The trend toward larger greenhouses could be accelerated by the development and introduction of MARRS solutions.
26 | P a g e
November 09
The Horticultural Engineering Department at the Bio-oriented Technology Research Advancement Institution (BRAIN) and the National Institute of Vegetable and Tea Science of the National Agriculture & Food Research Organisation in Japan have developed 3D vision and harvesting systems for strawberry, eggplant, and tomato in the Greenhouse environment. The Research teams have developed three types of prototype robots for mechanisation of protected horticultural production. The vision detection algorithms and the harvesting endeffectors were designed to suit each of the target fruits. Color information was used for strawberry and tomato, and size was used for eggplant. The final design of harvesting robots for practical commercial use needs information on crop features (color, shape, and size) and the development of appropriate crop maintenance and environmental conditions.
Figure 9. Hydroponic Strawberry Harvesting robot
Figure 10. Detection of ripen strawberries with vision system.
27 | P a g e
November 09
Figure 11. Eggplant-harvesting robot
Figure 12. Robot Arm picking Egg Plant.
Case Study - Robot Picking of Sweet Peppers in a Greenhouse: Kochi University of Technology, Japan A picking robot for sweet peppers in greenhouse horticulture has been developed by the Intelligent Mechanical System Engineering Department in Kochi University of Technology, Japan. The developed prototype robot has the following; a recognition system and a cutting system. In the recognition system, researchers used image processing with lighting and stereovision. 31 To achieve their objectives, the picking robot has an image processing system with a parallel stereovision, a positioning system to follow the recognized sweet pepper by visual feedback control, and a cutting device. Experiments were initially conducted in the laboratory. First experiments were carried out without leaves, and recognition of the fruit and cutting the stem was successful. The second experiment was carried out with leaves. In this situation, recognition was successful, but the success rate of cutting the stem became low because leaves covered the stem.
28 | P a g e
November 09
Figure 13. Structure of Laboratory Prototype Sweet Pepper picking robot.
Figure14. Example of image processing to identify Sweet Peppers.
29 | P a g e
November 09
Figure 15. Sweet Pepper visual feedback control image.
Both of the above Case Studies demonstrate that development of MARRS solutions maybe achieved quicker by operating in the more structured environment of a Greenhouse. Variation in plant structure and growth is more controlled in this environment and the technology can be protected and have control functions reduced in complexity if operated on fixed tracks.
30 | P a g e
November 09
PACKHOUSE APPLICATIONS
Post harvest manual sorting and grading in the packhouse requires identification of quality factors such as appearance, flavour, nutrients and texture. Potential non-destructive measuring equipment includes X-ray, ultrasonics, Infra red, near infra red (NIR) and magnetic resonance/imaging, but it is NIR that has demonstrated the most potential in the last few years for practical use.
Computer Vision Systems

Computer vision inspection systems have made the transition from theoretical work to practical solutions and are used on many packing lines. However, these systems remain less reliable than humans and tend to be used for initial inspection with final inspection by humans.32 Anecdotally, users observe that they do rather better in subsequent seasons as they gain skills and experience. However, while these systems may be able to find a defect, they are incapable of forensic analysis of defects, i.e., they do not distinguish between rubs, shines, stem punctures etc. Detailed analysis is necessary because blemishes such as stem punctures are fatal because they may lead to rot, while blemishes such as rub in kiwifruit may look unsightly but can be tolerated in the final packed produce. Drs Rory and Clair Flemmer in their paper on Mechnisation in Apple Packhouse in 200933 observed that using straight imaging (cameras), fruit inspection systems see only the surface in colour or in Infra Red light (IR). The technical challenge of inspection is very difficult and the normal approach is to inspect for defects using only IR light. This gives a monochrome (black and white) image which can be assessed based upon threshold values, producing dark blotches which are sufficiently dark and large enough to be the calyx, the stalk or a defect. Based on the geometry of the inspection, two diametrically opposed blotches are inferred to be the stem and calyx and anything else to be a defect. A zone around the stem and calyx is left uninspected because current inspection systems are incapable of distinguishing between features within the zone which should be there (the stem and the calyx) and features which should not be there (such as mold, a puncture or bruise). This means that such inspection techniques have severe limitations. Images captured from light reflected off fruit, which is to say, images in the visual or infra red (IR) spectra, cannot detect internal defects such as bruising. This is because they bounce off the surface and do not sample the volume where the bruise exists. Near infra red (NIR) spectrometry is a technique whereby NIR light is injected into the fruit and some of the light which has passed through some portion of the fruit is recaptured and examined spectroscopically. Spectroscopic examination means that the energy in each wavelength is determined and this in turn is influenced by the internal structure of the fruit. For best results, this requires a fibre optic cable be placed against the fruit in order to project light and this makes it difficult to deploy for continuous high volume fruit inspection. However commercially, it is possible to shine a focused beam onto a fruit and then examine the area around the beam to look at light which has entered the fruit and then been reflected back out. This is not as good but provides some valuable information. Compac34, New Zealand offer two inspection systems; the InVision 5000 and the InVision 9000. The company states that the 5000 Series used on apples measures colour (up to 16 user-defined colours), shape (elongation, flatness and symmetry), diameter (+/- 1mm accuracy) and volume (2mls standard deviation) as well as blemish sorting and can handle up to 25 images per fruit. The 9000 series uses infrared light to detect blemishes of prescribed size which are not located near the stalk or the calyx. It also uses Near Infrared (NIR) spectrometry to measure sugar content. Compac cite fruit handling rates of 12 apples per second and 10 avocadoes per second.
31 | P a g e
November 09
Near Infra-red (NIR) technology

Near-infrared (NIR) spectrometry and calibration are powerful, non-destructive tools for monitoring, regulating and controlling processes that determine product quality. Many industries are using NIR including agriculture, forestry, pharmaceutical and food processing; for either rapid laboratory analysis or as part on in-line sorting processes. NIR can be set up on each lane of an existing sorting machine as the fruit is being graded. The NIR sorting equipment works as follows. 1. A light source is focused to illuminate a piece of fruit as it passes under the NIR system. Some of the light penetrates the fruit and is retransmitted. (This effect can be observed by holding a fruit to a bright lamp in a dark room. The fruit will grow at a distance from where the light is shining on it.) The colour of the transmitted/reflected light is affected by the internal properties of the fruit. A high brix fruit will absorb more light at certain wavelengths than a low brix fruit. This colour difference, too subtle to be seen by the human eye, contains information about the internal properties of the fruit. 2. The fruit reflection is measured by a spectrometer. This is an extremely sensitive color detector, used to measure the color difference in the transmitted reflected light. A digital signal processor (DSP) is used to process the information from the spectrometer and estimate the brix acid or other internal properties. The information is processed by the Internal Quality Sorting software and used as part of the fruit sorting information. Case study Near Infrared detection of disease states in whole potatoes: Taste Technologies. Post-harvest quality evaluation and sorting is required for potato in order to provide reliable and uniform quality of the final processed product in the market place. Similar to many other agricultural products, potato has non-uniform quality and non-uniform maturity at harvest. A New Zealand company, Taste Technologies has developed a sorting method that can find out if potatoes have the Zebra chip disease before they are sent to manufacturers35. Zebra chip refers to dark, unsightly stripes that appear inside afflicted tubers, especially when cut and fried to make chips. The solution is based upon near-infrared (NIR) technology and works by shining a light on the potato as it travels through the sorter. Part of the light will be either absorbed or reflected by the potato. By measuring the ratio of absorption to reflection, growers can tell if there is soluble sugar in the potato, a sign of zebra chip. CSS Farms, which provides potatoes to potato chip giant Frito Lay, has been using the technology to spot zebra chip at its Texas base in the United States since 2008. Taste Technologies and sister company Compac Sorting Equipment36; have sold about 200 sorters with NIR technology, mostly to US growers. Most are used for spotting defects in fruit but about 18 sorters had been sold to test for zebra chip with potato processors. Taste Technologies Taste Tech's NIR technology boasts sorting capabilities for brix and internal flesh color and is capable of being integrated into most fruit and vegetable sorting machines, with application for apple, potato, onion and pomegranate, with more produce coming on line regularly. Currently with the Taste Tech T1 NIR model we can successfully test for water-core, internal rot, internal browning and zebra chip. This Case Study demonstrates the importance of developing an appropriate business model for commercialisation of the MARRS technologies. In this case the business model was based around generating a profitable business for the manufacture and supply of sorting technology for the horticulture industry.
32 | P a g e
November 09
Figure 16. Images of apples that have been sorted for internal browning by the Taste Tech T1 NIR.
Figure 17. Taste Techs Near Infrared cameras in-line.
Case study NIR internal detection, blemish external detection UNITEC Group is an international group leading in manufacturing systems and plants for the processing and sorting of all types of fresh fruit and vegetables37 and has invested significantly on the research and development of non-destructive technology to measure fruit internal quality. UNITEC products are distinguished in the market due to their ability to rotate the fruit while being analysed, thus obtaining a complete measurement. The companys electronic sorter QS_On Line 902 measures the quality parameters of fruits without stones such as apples, pears, kiwis, citrus fruits, etc. and can be installed with other electronic detection systems of weight, optical size, colour, external quality and can be customised according to each packing house needs. The sensor is based on NIR technology and can measure parameters such as: sugar content expressed in Brix degrees, firmness expressed in kg/cm2, ripening grade expressed in scale between 0 and 100, and acidity of a fruit in g/l.
To assess overall fruit quality the UNITEC system has introduced two different categories of attributes for every single fruit; one internal and the other external quality parameters. The use of multiple sensors to measure these attributes and some clever software allows the system to make decisions on the fruits overall quality.
Figure 18. Quality attributes assessed on-line.
Case Study - Impact Recording Devices. The cost of damage in horticulture from bruising is enormous. Techniques for assessing product damage have traditionally been based on survey type studies where a sample of 100 fruit is put through the handling system and any fruit damage is then assessed manually. A recent advance in this area is the use of portable electronic fruit instruments which can detect impact problems in the postharvest process. There are 2 broad types of these, namely those that sense accelerations and those that sense compression. The latter, which are still in the research phase, use a tactile film to measure contact pressures on fruit. Bolen38 in 2006 reviewed both types of devices. In the acceleration-type category, a device developed by Sensor Wireless Inc in Canada39, comes in a number of moulded shapes (for example potatoes, the smart spud) and uses an accelerometer sensor and radio communication to stream data to a handheld data capture device. The most widely used device internationally is the Impact Recording Device (IRD) from Techmark Ink40. It consists of a tri-axial accelerometer mounted inside a soft plastic sphere with a microprocessor embedded in the sphere to record data (maximum acceleration, velocity change, time of event) when the device is placed with the fruit in the produce handling system. GarciaRamos41 used the device to compare the performance of three types of sizers (electronic/cup, mechanical roller and finger sizers) handling peaches and apricots and found that the fruit impact values varied from 31g in the roller sizer to 207g for cup sizers. They also found that the main/worst impact occurred when the sized fruit is transferred from the main conveyor to the drop packing conveyor.
34 | P a g e
November 09
Figure 19. Impact Recording Device (IRD) passing through an apple handling system. This device has been used to record impact intensity in commercial packing lines handling tomatoes, bell peppers, apples, avocado, papaya, pineapple, citrus, mangoes and onions. The Impact Recording Devices are expensive, not very durable, and are difficult to position between fruit. They are useful for showing the critical areas in fruit handling, but do not respond exactly like the particular produce being studied and the output is not related to any level of bruising.
Robotics/Automated Packing
Palletising refers to the operation of loading a pallet with an object such as a corrugated carton in a defined pattern. Depalletising refers to the operation of unloading the loaded object in the reverse pattern. Many factories, food processing plants and palletising plants have automated their application with a palletising robot. Robotic palletising technology increases productivity and profitability. Robotic palletising systems allow for more flexibility to run products for longer periods of time. A robot control system with a built-in palletising function makes it possible to load and unload without spending a lot of time on teaching. Palletising robots are also common in packing plants in the food processing industry as they eliminate OHS issues (strain injury) and work consistently and methodically 24/7.
Figure 20. Flexi picker Robotic tray packer.
35 | P a g e
November 09
However, picking and placing in the packhouse in the horticulture industry is more difficult than packing identical units into boxes (as is the case with cans, bottles and jars). Many growers utilize the same packhouse and often send different produce types throughout a season eg. avocados, citrus, watermelons, rockmelons, which means the handling system will need to accommodate different weights and product conformations. Despite the dimensional variations of a natural product such as fruit and vegetable, automated and robotic packaging of many fruit is common place now. Solutions have been developed to automate handling and packing systems for apples, pears, kiwifruit, stone fruit, citrus, tomatoes, potatoes and onions, and other fruit and vegetables. These systems have been designed to automatically pack fruit into trays at commercial rates and the systems are off-the-shelf. Case study Nut sorting: Key Technology. Vision systems and automated handling technologies are well developed for many of the major nut products such as almond s and peanuts. Systems based upon vibrating conveyors and air jets are able to sort nuts on quality parameters such as chipped/scratched, color defects and sizing. One such technology supplier is Key Technology in Washington USA42. Key Technology also have developed grading/sorting and packaging systems for vegetables, fresh cut salads, berries, and nuts. Recently, a sorting system has been developed for the separation of small in-shell pistachio nuts from kernels without shells on the basis of vibrations generated when moving samples strike a steel plate. Impacts between the steel plate and the hard shells, as measured using an accelerometer attached to the bottom of the plate, produce higher frequency signals than impacts between the plate and the kernels. Signal amplitudes, on the other hand, were highly variable and by themselves were not useful for the separation of samples. An algorithm was developed using both amplitude and frequency information to classify the signals. The algorithm activated an air nozzle to divert in-shell nuts away from the kernel stream. A prototype sorter was tested at throughput rates of 0.33, 10, 20, and 40 nuts per second using a mix of 10% in-shell and 90% kernels. At the lowest throughput rate, classification accuracies were 96% for in-shell nuts and 99% for kernels. For throughput rates between 10 nuts/s and 40 nuts/s, correct classification ranged from 84% to 90% for in-shell nuts. For kernels, accuracy was 95% at 10 and 20 nuts/s and 89% at 40 nuts/s.43 This research was conducted through the USDA Agricultural Research Service for the project Sorting agricultural materials for defects using imaging and physical methods.44 Case study Robotic packing of Fruit. The Massey University School of Engineering and Advanced Technology have developed a prototype packing line for Kiwifruit45. It has been built initially with one out of nine robots and one out of four lanes. The completed system (9 robots, 4 lanes) potentially would pack 250 - 400 trays per hour with only one worker. The fruit goes though the following processes: Softness measurement to give an equivalent penetromer reading for each fruit. Fruit weighing to 0.1g Visual inspection to grade to Zespri standards including blemishes, shape and colour. Soft spot determination. Labeling better than 99 out of 100 labels to stick. Robotic placement in any of the standard trays, including automatic management of the pick for multilayer trays. Automated handling of empty and full trays. Overall control of the system using point and click menus. The complete system is due to run, doing repack, later this year.
36 | P a g e
November 09
A New Zealand company, Fruit Handling Systems Ltd46 has also developed automated handling systems for apples, pears, kiwifruit, stone fruit, citrus, tomatoes, potatoes and onions, and other fruit and vegetables. The Robotic Tray Picker has been designed to automatically pack fruit into trays at commercial rates. Their system is based around the ABB IRB340 Robot and FlexPicker package and is able to reach speeds of 180 pick and place cycles per minute (product dependent). The FHS Tray Picker combines the fruit handling capability with robotic speed and flexibility to produce a system that can singulate, present, identify, track, pick, orientate and place the fruit into the waiting tray in the correct pattern.
Figure 21. ABB FlexPicker packing Kiwifruit. Fruit Handling Systems Ltd has a Kiwifruit packing system installed at Seeka Kiwifruit Industries in New Zealand47 Food retailers have discovered that displays of apples with uniform layers of ripe skin facing shoppers sell better than non-uniform displays. Consequently, supermarket produce buyers are requiring suppliers to undertake this positioning during packing. This task usually means considerable expense in packing millions of apples by hand.
Figure 22. Apples packed for uniform display of color for consumers.
However, a robot introduced at the Hannover Fair 2004 in April, can complete this task by combining data about the fruit gathered from a vision system and manipulating apples with electric linear drives during packing to ensure the ripe skin of the apples face upwards.48 Hoerbiger a German automation company has also developed an automated apple packing machine called the Apfelrobo. Apples are delivered on a conveyor belt, and a suction cup on a belt-driven actuator picks up each one. An air stream rotates the apple until the stalk stands vertically upright. The apple is then rotated through 360 while being inspected by the vision system, which seeks the reddest area. This is determined in real time, and the fruit is rotated, backward or forward, while it is transferred and lowered onto the packaging pallet. The apples are
arranged to point backward, away from the final customers viewpoint. The system finally packs the filled pallets into boxes and places them onto an exit conveyor belt to continue to the stores.
Figure 23. The Apfelrobo apple manipulation-and-handling systems robot consisting of five distinct stages.
Station 1: pick-the suction cup grasps the fruit from the incoming conveyor belt; Station 2: align-a current of air turns the apple over to align it in its vertical stem-goblet axis; Station 3: inspectcamera inspection and digital image analysis to determine most attractive side; Station 4: position-turned through 90 so that the attractive side lies uppermost; Station 5: The apple is transferred into the packaging carton. The arrangement can cope with different types of packaging, as well as simultaneously offering the option of classifying the apples into three userdetermined classes. Digital image analysis covers the classification of the apples size, color, and quality. The total time allowed for apple packing system to complete all of its functions is 2.5 s per apple, so that a productivity of 300 kg per hour can be maintained. This is roughly equal to the performance of a worker, a target figure often used when converting a manual process into an automated one so that bottlenecks are not created further downstream. It is expected that speed increases will follow over a period of time as the industry becomes used to automation. Additionally, the machine is about twice as accurate as a person. The vision system is based on a progressive-scan, color CCD FireWire camera from The Imaging Source. The camera acquires images at a rate of 15 frames/s at full resolution. Due to the robust image-processing system, specialized equipment such as linescan cameras, structured lighting, and measurement lenses are not required. The apple is illuminated by four white 5-W LEDs. No special color correction is needed, only standard white balancing supported by the cameras own device driver.
38 | P a g e
November 09
Figure 24. Progressive-scan, color CCD FireWire camera images the apples at 15 frames/s at full resolution. The apple is illuminated by four white 5-W LEDs. Suction cups orient the apples so that the stem and reddest surface have uniform direction.
At the given object distance, images have a maximum resolution of 5 pixels/mm. Due to the curvature of the fruit, resolution decreases toward the side of the apple, which makes a calibration process necessary. Therefore, the shape of the apple is estimated. The acquired image is re-sampled using the shape information to form an image of the apple, where the images x-axis corresponds to the apple circumference, while the y-axis corresponds to the apple height along the surface. This approach avoids the need for more-expensive equipment such as linescan cameras or structure lighting. The Apfelrobo system is designed for use at fruit wholesalers. One human operator can simultaneously manage up to four Apfelrobos systems, typically replacing five people under the present manual sorting arrangements.
39 | P a g e
November 09
ASSOCIATED MARRS TECHNOLOGIES

The opportunities for automation in the horticulture industry extend beyond crop planting and maintenance, harvesting and packaging systems to many more of the ancillary operations and associated technologies in the industry.
Traceability Systems
Australias horticulture industry enjoys a high level of food quality from a clean safe environment; this is being used as a competitive advantage both domestically and internationally. In Australia traceability is being used to reinforce brand and position at the forefront of the consumers mind. However, like many other countries, we face the challenge of continually improving food quality. In Australias horticulture industry, traceability systems should be viewed as an opportunity, not an imposition. Two major factors compel the need for food traceability; consumer safety and brand protection. Consumers need to be assured of the safety of a product, of its origins, that it was made by approved procedures, that it consists of appropriate ingredients and that the food is true to label. From the producers point of view the prime concern must be protection of their brand because the loss of consumer and buyer confidence in their product can result in far reaching consequences. Traceability is an issue of business systems; it is not just a technical matter. The adoption of traceability systems provides an opportunity for increased efficiencies and better management. It is not merely an impost forced by compliance.
The Traceability Arrow
Business philosophy
To Global traceability
Strategy Enhanced opportunities
Competitiveness Whole chain traceability
From enterprise traceability

Company wide traceability Single business unit traceability
One up/ one down traceability Compliance
Productivity
Business value Driving forces
Quality
Safety
Figure 25. Traceability and business drivers.
40 | P a g e
November 09
The three major aspects of traceability are: Primary traceability of raw materials and ingredients Secondary traceability within processing and packaging Tertiary traceability of the end product.
When all three aspects are in place this is defined as chain traceability. Products and services have customarily been controlled by different paradigms, but the advent of smart packaging, product sensors and traceability systems and the integrating technologies of intelligent device networking can now serve to bring them together and a product and a service supplied simultaneously. A simple example is that of identifying goods with tags or bar codes. These are used in the production sense to provide the retailer with a means of identifying the goods and of following their history of from production, processes used, the transport and cold chain and the packaging; but they can also be thought of in the service sense as providing information to the end user and thus enhancing the products value. Information is the new valueadd. 49 Traceability systems provide companies with competitive advantage through the ability to better to manage supply chains to ensure maximum product quality and freshness along with reduced waste, potential to enter premium markets. There are six essential elements of traceability constituting an integrated agricultural and food supply chain traceability system. These elements are: Product traceability defines the physical location of a product at any stage in the supply chain. Process traceability ascertains the type of activities that have affected the product during the growing and post harvest operations (what, where and when). Genetic traceability includes information on the type and origin (source, supplier). Inputs traceability determines type and origin (source, supplier) of inputs, e.g. fertilizers, additives used for preservation or transformation of the raw materials into processed products. Disease and pest traceability traces the epidemiology of hazards and pests, which may contaminate horticulture products. Measurement traceability relates individual measurement results through calibrations to reference standards and assures the quality of measurements by observing various factors which may have impact on results (such as environmental factors, operator etc.).
The ultimate aim for traceability systems is that they work totally electronically and integrate with technologies such as RFID, thus requiring no paper records. Although not a new technology perse, RFID is still evolving in terms of features, operation and application. Standards and general frameworks for setting up traceability systems have been launched during recent years. For example, the International Organisation for Standardization (ISO) introduced, in the beginning of 2006, two new standards that define the requirements for a traceability system within a food safety management system and the data that needs to be retained. In practice the tools of traceability are labels containing alphanumerical codes (a sequence of numbers and letters of various sizes, generally owners codes); bar codes and automatic radio frequency identification (RFID), of which bar codes seem to be the most frequently used systems currently. The data accuracy and reliability required as well as cost can guide the selection of the traceability tool.
41 | P a g e
November 09
Radio frequency identification (RFID) system

Another technology for managing product identification is radio frequency identification (RFID)system. In radio frequency identification, a transponder or a tag is attached to a product. The tag consists of two parts: a microchip with memory and other electronics, and an antenna that enables the electromagnetic coupling between the microchip and a reader device. The tag memory is typically used for storing product information; either direct information in readable format or a product code, in which the information can be retrieved from a database. RFID systems (e.g. car tolls, DVD hire, library books, tags on clothing etc.) reduce labour costs as no manual scanning operations are required. RFID readers can scan numerous tags at the same time. Identification is very simple and rapid, and additionally more effective resulting in reduction of profit losses caused by e.g. employee and customer theft, vendor fraud or administrative error. For especially food industry, RFID provides improved management of perishable food items. In the wider food industry, many companies have implemented their own traceability systems by effectively automating paper-based traceability records (such as Muddy Boots50 and Theta Technologies51 InformationLeader). Others have extended their existing enterprise software applications and a growing number of users of the Systems, Applications and Products in Data Processing (SAP) Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system have also adopted the SAP traceability module. The Smart-Trace System is currently being developed by the Australian company, Ceebron Pty Limited, in partnership with Meat and Livestock Australia (MLA), Motorola Inc., and Minorplanet Asia Pacific. Smart-Trace is not a traceability system per se, but provides a source of enhanced information to feed into a traceability system proper. 52 Smart-Trace provides its consignor customers with a near real-time, continuous trace of their perishables during delivery. The system uses low-cost, disposable, wireless sensors and mobile phone technology. It gives consignors continuous access to the identity, temperature, and location of their consignments at pallet load level via a web or mobile phone interface. The system provides customers with the 'first to know' advantage in the event of product abuse.
Figure 26. Graphical representation of Smart-Trace system.

Dr Silvia Estrada-Flores principal of Food Chain Intelligence looked at the emergence, adoption and cost benefits of traceability systems being implemented in the horticulture industry in their report VG08087 Opportunities and challenges faced with emerging technologies in the Australian vegetable industry53. Case Study Traceability in the New Zealand kiwifruit industry The New Zealand kiwifruit industry is export driven, built on consistent and timely delivery of quality fresh fruit. With growth in the volume of trade and rising consumer awareness of food safety guidelines, the kiwifruit supply chain encapsulates major logistical challenges that must be met to ensure the New Zealand kiwifruit industrys competitive position in the marketplace. Europe is one of the key markets for New Zealand-grown kiwi fruit, accounting for over 90 million trays of exported kiwifruit every year. Kiwifruit continue to be a key export for New Zealand, with exports accounting for 60.6 per cent of all fruit and nut exports and 27.3 per cent of all horticultural exports in the year to December 2007. As early as 2001, European customers began to focus on fresh produce logistics and traceability, requesting GS1 UCC.EAN-128 Barcode at pack levels to ensure fast and accurate tracking of inventory and other specific data in the supply chain. Kiwifruit operators in New Zealand needed to be able to guarantee a high level of traceability for tracking their cartons and pallets. Mandatory labeling would also protect the investment that New Zealand industry participants were making in improved quality processes. Istari Systems Ltd54, a leading New Zealand developer of supply chain management systems who specialise in the labeling and tracking of products, were well placed to research and develop a system that would ensure full traceability of fruit from orchard to final customer given their wellestablished reputation in supplying specialist solutions to the domestic kiwifruit industry.
43 | P a g e
November 09
RECOMMENDATIONS
This document has looked at the level of MARRS developments that are occurring in Australias Horticulture Industrys as well as those internationally. This report is not meant to be a definitive review of the current usage and development of MARRS technologies in horticulture, but rather a high level review of key developments. As the extent of MARRS developments are vast, varied and the horticulture industry consists of many crops from lettuces and carrots through to grapes, apples and bananas this approach was adopted to enable the project to gain a broad understanding of progress globally in relation to developments and barriers to successful commercialisation. In Australia the horticulture industry is made up of 47 separate sectors. The development and application of remote sensing technologies is maturing and its implementation and usage increasing. Advances in the technologies and increases in their applications will continue. There are less challenges to the application of remote sensing technologies due to the fact application of the technology is non-contact. This is not the case with development of automated harvesting, pruning and plant management systems. This report shows that for applications of MARRS technologies where plant contact is required such as harvesting there are significant challenges to be overcome. For example the development of robotic harvesting systems will require developments in agronomy to be undertaken in parallel. The elements of agronomy that in many cases will be critical in successful development and implementation of automation solutions will be plant structure and size through both variety selection as well as growing structure. For example the development of robotic apple harvesting may require apples to be grown under a trellis system. The orientation of these trellis systems will also be important in terms of maximizing the sunlight exposure for plant growth and fruit ripening. Under Australian conditions, the main drivers for adopting high density trellis systems for fruit orchards are as follows, Earlier production, aiming for commercially acceptable yields from the third year, Higher overall yield potential per hectare, Easier canopy management, as pruning systems are simplified, Higher and more uniform fruit quality, Earlier return on investment, Ease of management of workers, as less training is required for key tasks such as pruning, Ease of picking, as fruit is easy to see, and ease of access to the canopy, and Layout and structure is more compatible with the implementation MARRS technologies such as automated harvesting.
A further example of the importance of integrating automation and agronomy developments is demonstrated by the Case Study - Automated Broad Acreage Harvesting of Broccoli: Matilda Fresh Foods (Page 15). This Case showed the importance of developing an automated harvesting system that matched the crop agronomy system to ensure commercially production rates and harvest yields. The agronomy system required the selection of the appropriate broccoli varieties that were tall enough for the harvester and growing practices that involved planting the seeds and seedlings in rows relative to the sun, to encourage further tall growing plants. This report has also highlighted the critical importance of developing an appropriate business models for successful commercialisation of any MARRS technology. The business model can be seen as the way in which the commercialiser of the technology will make money in the market place. Companies can create and capture value from their new technologies in three basic ways: through incorporating the technology in their current businesses, through licensing the technology to other firms or through launching new ventures that exploit the technology in new markets.
The functions of a business model are as follows: 8. Articulate the value proposition (the value created for users by the offering based on the technology) 9. Identify market segments. Users to whom the technology is useful and the purpose for which it will be used. 10. Define the structure of the companys value chain which is required to create and distribute the offering and determine the assets needed to support the firms position in this chain. 11. Specify the revenue generation mechanism for the company 12. Describe the position of the company within the value network, linking suppliers and customers 13. Formulate the competitive strategy by which the company will gain and hold over rivals. 14. Assess capability required to achieve commercialisation. For companies implementing new MARRS technologies the critical issue is the payback period on their investment and on-going maintenance: servicing and spare-parts. Maintenance and service infrastructure in the future is the third critical dimension to successful implementation of MARRS solutions. The development of a support infrastructure is crucial to successful deployment of MARRS solutions as the horticulture industry is located in rural and regional Australia and traditional skill levels in these regions are not based around MARRS technologies although this is rapidly changing in this age of computers and the Internet. Going forward, thought will need to be given to the development of this infrastructure.
Future MARRS technologies

MARRS technologies will continue to be developed and refined in line with advances in computer integration systems, new imaging equipment and capability. The Western Regional Research Centre (WRRC) Imaging and Sorting Lab, is a research group within the US Department of Agriculture that develops sorters and physical/chemical methods to detect and remove defective, contaminated or otherwise undesirable product from agricultural project streams. These sorters improve the quality of fresh or packaged foods, remove unwanted transmission of materials deleterious to agriculture or health, and/or improve the competitive position55. This lab's research spans a wide variety of imaging and sorting technologiesincluding algorithm development, x-ray imaging, sampling theory, near infrared (NIR) spectroscopy, machine vision, acoustics, and laser imaging. In addition, some of their current projects have been outlined as case studies in this document. Collaboration between WRRC and other international researchers with similar or complimentary interests and capabilities would benefit the development of applications for Australian horticulture. There are a number of current and future technologies that have great potential for future implementation in both harvest and post-harvest horticultural operations. These are discussed briefly below. Sensors Sensing the readiness of crops for harvesting is likely to employ the same sensing technologies as those used in other areas such as ripeness sorting in packing houses or in crop harvesting of tree-crops. Thus, the application in one area of the industry is expected to lead to applicability across the supply chain.
45 | P a g e
November 09
Near Infra-red technology This technology is already being used in-line for detection of sugars, and quality attributes, but it also has significant potential for sorting using other detection parameters such as protein and starch and external and internal blemishes (such as rot). However, these parameters need to be calibrated and tested for high-speed operations and specificity. X-ray detection The ability of x-rays to traverse through matter and reveal hidden contaminants or defects has led to their extensive use in manufacturing industries for quality control inspection. The difficulties inherent in the detection of defects and contaminants in food products have kept the use of x-ray limited to the packaged food sector. Nevertheless, the need for non-destructive internal product inspection has motivated considerable research effort. Improvements in technology, especially more compact and affordable high voltage power sources, high speed computing, and high resolution detector arrays, have made many x-ray detection tasks possible today that were previously unfeasible. These improvements can be expected to continue into the future.56 Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) Imaging Proper lighting is an essential component of any vision system. Since horticulture products have varying optical characteristics in various spectra, many types of imaging techniques and devices have been developed, from the visible region to X-ray, UV, and infrared regions. The latest technologies use Terahertz (THz) imaging through the development of new light sources and detectors. In addition, nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) technology has been also applied to bio-products. Whereas hyper-spectral images are effective for food quality and safety monitoring, fluorescent imaging can aid in the detection of defects in fruits and plants.57 Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) is a property that magnetic nuclei have in a magnetic field and applied electromagnetic (EM) pulse or pulses, which cause the nuclei to absorb energy from the EM pulse and radiate this energy back out. The energy radiated back out is at a specific resonance frequency which depends on the strength of the magnetic field and other factors. This allows the observation of specific quantum mechanical magnetic properties of an atomic nucleus. Many scientific techniques exploit NMR phenomena to study molecular physics, crystals and noncrystalline materials through NMR spectroscopy. NMR is also routinely used in advanced medical imaging techniques, such as in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The application of NMR technology to the assessment of fruit and vegetable quality is in its infancy, but will progress rapidly in the near future. Researchers at the Chonbuk National University in Korea had developed and tested an on-line nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) quality evaluation sensor. The device consisted of a superconducting magnet with a 20 mm diameter surface coil and a 150 mm diameter imaging coil coupled to a conveyor system. The conveyor was run at speeds ranging from 0 to 250 mm/s. The NMR spectra of avocado fruits and one-dimensional magnetic resonance images of fresh cherries were acquired while the fruits were moving on a conveyor belt. The NMR spectra were used to measure the oil/water ratio in avocados and this ratio correlated to percent dry weight, the correlation coefficient varied between 097 and 089 and decreased with increasing speed. One-dimensional magnetic resonance images of cherries were used to detect the presence of pits in cherries. An algorithm based on the change in shape of the one-dimensional image between a cherry with and without a pit yielded good classification of the fruits under static and dynamic conditions.58
Future traceability technologies

Even though the traditional bar codes are the most used systems in marking the products, newer technologies, enabling more data to be included, are becoming more popular. The disadvantage in using barcodes is that they must be read in a certain position which requires human
intervention (thus time and effort) and there is a possibility for error and inefficiency. A label is also easily damaged59 as borne out by common experience at supermarket checkouts. In comparison, RFID systems reduce labour costs as no manual scanning operations are required. An RFID reader can scan numerous tags at the same time; identification is simple and rapid, resulting in reduction of profit losses caused by e.g. employee and customer theft, vendor fraud or administrative error. In the food industry, RFID provides improved management of perishable food items (continuous monitoring of item routing reduces waste and improves customer service levels); Improved tracking and tracing of quality problems by using individual product codes; as well as improved management of product recalls. RFID Tag is also more durable and enables reading in e.g. dirty and cold conditions, which may in case of bar codes be almost impossible. Its larger memory enables individual recognition of products. The main limitation of RFID is the costs of tags. For a low-price food product the cost may be too high. There has been a great lack of standardization for all technical systems (numerical, or bar codes or TAGs), but the situation has been substantially improved. In the end of 2004 an ISOstandard 18000-6C came in force for UHF tags used in RFID technology. The standard is known by name EPC-Gen2. This increased the use and sale of UHF tags quickly followed by reduction of price. In the near future, RFID-based systems will be used, in addition to tracking the goods, also to monitor the quality of the products and the supply chain itself. RFID-based remote sensing will enable e.g. the online spoilage detection of vacuum-packed food products and the continuity of cold chain60. As an alternative to conventional barcodes and RFID, new electrically readable coding techniques have also been developed. These electrically readable codes are cheaper than RFID tags but still have some major benefits of RFID technology. Electrically readable code can be attached to a product using conventional printing techniques combined with special inks. Electrical code itself can be invisible and is not as sensitive to dirt and other visible disturbances as a conventional barcode is. It is also possible to embed some sensor properties into these codes as with RFID tags. Read range and flexibility of the system is not comparable with RFID, though. Innovative technology utilizes microscopic, edible bar codes that can be applied directly onto foods to make them more secure, safer, and also less expensive by replacing one step forward, one step back traceability protocols with reach-through and real-time documentation of the origin and subsequent history of a product. E.g. polydactyl acid or celluloses can be used for producing food markers by extrusion. The size and concentration of these markers must be such that they have no detectable effect on the tare or the texture of the marked product. The information has to be encoded on the surface of a fairly rigid microscopic particle and the particle attached to food by either (1) electrostatic attraction, (2) use of wetting agents, proteins, or lipids as adhesives, or (3) mixing the particles into a material that is subsequently mixed into or applied to a food. Generally binary codes are scored and embedded onto and within a fibre. When placed on/ in food, the markers by definition become Food Additives and must be safe for consumer at maximum level at which a consumer would be exposed. In some cases, it may be useful to use a marker that dissolves after a particular amount of time or after it has been heated to a particular temperature.61
47 | P a g e
November 09
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Author wishes to thank Helen Sargent, Postharvest & Emerging Technologies Manager for Horticulture Australia Limited for her guidance and advice on development of the Review and for access to HAL Reports. The Author would also like to thank the following MARRS Syndicate Members for their input and contributions to the project both in terms of knowledge, experience, guidance and financially One Harvest, Tasmanian Institute of Agriculture Research, University of Tasmania, MAR (Machinery, Automation Robotics) Pty Ltd, Primary Industry South Australia, University of Wollongong, University of Southern Queensland, Queensland Primary Industries and Fisheries, DEEDI, Future Farming Systems, Victorian Department of Primary Industries, Zespri International, CSIRO ICT, Fibre King Pty Ltd Grape Exchange Pty Ltd, SPC Ardmona, Plant & Food Research New Zealand, Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia, and ARC Centre of Excellence for Autonomous Vehicles, University NSW.
48 | P a g e
November 09
CITED LITERATURE
Mechanisation, Automation, Robotics and Remote Sensing (MARRS). NHRN/PISC Feedback per Industry Analysis Plan. 2008 Helen Sargent (HAL), Bob Williams (DPI&F) and Jay Katupitiya (UNSW) NHRN/PISC. Unpublished report Horticulture Australia Ltd.
2 3 4 1
HAL White Paper, 2005. Internal document. Horticulture for Tomorrow website. About Horticulture section.
Policy Position for Horticulture on Seasonal Labour. Horticulture Australia Council. Horticulture Policy Summit Canberra October 2008. Peter Mares, Latrobe University. Seasonal migrant labour: a boon for Australian country towns? 2nd Future of Australias Country Towns Conference, Bendigo. July 2005.
6 5
Kawamura, N., K. Namikawa, T. Fujiura and M. Ura, 1984. Study on agricultural robot (Part1). Journal of the JSAM 46(3): 353-358 V-TOL Aerospace Pty Limited and UAV Flight Services. Unit 18, Rocklea Junction Business Park, 1645 Ipswich Road ROCKLEA Q 4106 www.v-tol.com Vegetable Harvesting Systems. Town Drove, Quadring Spalding, Lincolnshire UK PE11 4PU www.vhsharvesting.co.uk info@vhsharvesting.co.uk. http://www.npl.co.uk/electromagnetics/terahertz/intelligent-harvesting-robot#
10
Murakami, N., Ito, A., Will, J. D., Steffen, K., Inoue, K., Kita, K., Miyaura, S. (2008) Development of teleoperation system for agricultural vehicles. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 63: 81-88.
11
Slaughter, D. C., Giles, D. K., Downey, D. (2008) Autonomous robotic weed control systems. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 61: 63-78.
Estrada-Flores, S. Opportunities and challenges faced with emerging technologies in the Australian vegetable industry.Food Chain Intelligence. HAL Project VG08087, 2009.
13 14
12
Twomey, A., "Mechanical harvesting of selected vegetables -feasibility study", VG05073., Sydney, 2006.
Scarfe, A. J., Flemmer, R. C., Bakker, H. H., Flemmer, C. L. (2009) Development of an autonomous kiwifruit picking robot. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Autonomous Robots and Agents, Wellington, New Zealand. Cembali, T., R.J. Folwell, T. Ball, and C.D. Clary," Economic comparison and non-selective mechanical harvesting of asparagus. Int.J. Veg. Sci. Vol. 14, No. 1, 2008, pp. 4-22.
16 17 15
Dr Silvia Estrada-Flores, Food Chain Intelligence Pty Ltd. Personal communication 2009.
Carnegie Mellon Developing Automated Systems to Enable Precision Farming of Apples, Oranges. November 19, 2008. Byron Spice, Carnegie Mellon University, Robotics Institute 5000 Forbes Ave Pittsburgh, PA 15213 ebspice@cs.cmu.edu. http://www.ri.cmu.edu/news_sub.html
http://www.fieldrobotics.org/casc/CASC/Welcome.html Prof. Sanjiv Singh, Robotics Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Robotics Institute 5000 Forbes Ave Pittsburgh, PA 15213 Automation for Specialty Crops: A Comprehensive Strategy, Current Results, and Future Goals. The 4th IFAC International Workshop on Bio-Robotics, Information Technology and Intelligent Control for Bioproduction Systems (2009 IFAC Bio-Robotics IV Workshop), September, 2009. Carnegie Mellon University, The Pennsylvania State University, Washington State University, Vision Robotics Corp, Oregon State University, and Purdue University http://www.ri.cmu.edu/pub_files/2009/9/BioroboticsSep2009.pdf
20 19
18
http://www.abe.psu.edu/SCRI/index.html
49 | P a g e
November 09
Scarfe, A. J., Flemmer, R. C., Bakker, H. H., Flemmer, C. L. (2009) Development of an autonomous kiwifruit picking robot. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Autonomous Robots and Agents, Wellington, New Zealand.
22 23
21
http://www.massey.ac.nz/~rcflemme/current%20projects.html
http://theland.farmonline.com.au/news/nationalrural/horticulture/fruit/breakthrough-in-strawberryharvesting/1489219.aspx#
24 25
HAL VC Project Submission, 2008 Project BS08014 Robotic strawberry harvesting
USDA Agricultural Research Service. Research Project: Sorting Agriculture Materials for Defects using Imaging and Physical Methods. http://www.ars.usda.gov/research/projects/projects.htm?ACCN_NO=409479
26
Haff, R.P., Slaughter, D.C. (2009) Automatic Weed Control System for Transplanted Processing Tomatoes Using X-ray Stem Sensing. UJNR Food & Agricultural Panel Proceedings
Van Henten, E. J., Hemming, J., Van Tuijl, B. A. J., Kornet, J. G., Meuleman, J., Bontsema, J., Van Os, E. A. (2002) An autonomous robot for harvesting cucmbers in greenhouses. Autonomous Robots, 13: 241258. Belforte, G., Deboli, R., Gay, P., Piccarolo, P., Ricauda Aimonino, D. (2006) Robot design and testing for greenhous applications. Biosystems Engineering 95: 309-321. Scarfe, A. J., Flemmer, R. C., Bakker, H. H., Flemmer, C. L. (2009) Development of an autonomous kiwifruit picking robot. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Autonomous Robots and Agents, Wellington, New Zealand. van Henten, E.J. 2006. Greenhouse Mechanization: State of the Art and Future Perspective. Acta Hort. (ISHS) 710:55-70 http://www.actahort.org/books/710/710_3.htm Sweet Pepper Picking Robot in Greenhouse Horticulture, 2004 K. Oka and S. Kitamura. Intelligent Mechanical System Engineering, Kochi University of Technology, Japan. Leemans, V, Magin, H & Destain, M 2002, On-line fruit grading according to their external quality using machine vision, Biosystems Engineering, vol. 83, pp. 397-404.
33 32 31 30 29 28
27
R. C. Flemmer and C. L. Flemmer, C. L. Mechanisation in Apple Packhouses. Innovation in Production Growing our Future. Hobart August 2009. http://www.compacsort.com/wa.asp?idWebPage=14568&idDetails=121
34
35
Taste Technologies Ltd, 64 - 72 Victoria Street, Onehunga, Auckland, New Zealand, http://www.tastetechnologies.com/Site/Home.ashx Compac Sorting Equipment Limited, 11 Spring Street, Onehunga, Auckland New Zealand www.compacsort.com
37 38 36
http://www.unitec-group.com/Home/tabid/36/Default.aspx
Bolen, A 2006, Technological innovations in sensors for assessment of postharvest mechanical handling systems, International Journal of Postharvest Technology and Innovation, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 16-31.
Sensor Wireless Inc.106E Kensington Rd, Charlottetown Prince Edward Island, Canada. http://sensorwireless.ca/agricultural_products.php?SMARTSPUD
40 41
39
Techmark Inc, 5801 West Mount Hope Highway, Lansing, Michigan. www.techmark-inc.com/impact.asp
Garcia-Ramos, F, Ortiz-Canavate, J & Ruiz-Altisent, M 2004, Evaluation and correction of the mechanical aggressiveness of commercial sizers used in stone fruit packing lines, Journal of Food Engineering, vol. 63, pp. 171-176.
Key Technology, 150 Avery Street, Walla Walla, Washington USA. Telephone: +1 (509) 529-2161 www.key.net
43
42
Haff, R.P., Pearson, T.C. (2007). Separating in shell pistachio nuts from kernels using impact vibration analysis. Sensing and Instrumentation for Food Quality and Safety. 1(4):188-192.
50 | P a g e
November 09
USDA Agricultural Research Service. Research Project: SORTING AGRICULTURAL MATERIALS FOR DEFECTS USING IMAGING AND PHYSICAL METHODS http://www.ars.usda.gov/research/projects/projects.htm?ACCN_NO=409479&showpubs=true
45 46 47
44
http://www.massey.ac.nz/~rcflemme/projects.html Fruit Handling Systems Ltd. 15 Barnes Place, Hastings New Zealand. http://fruithandling.co.nz
Study tour to New Zealand 7-11 December 2009 for Project HG09044 Review of Mechanisation, Automation, Robotics and Remote Sensing (MARRS) for Australian horticulture. Russel Rankin.
48
Vision-guided robot packs produce Matthew Peach. Oct 2004. Online Journal Vision Systems Design. http://www.vision-systems.com /display_article/214564/19/none/none/Feat/Vision-guided-robot-packsproduce. Food Innovation Partners and Allan Bremner & Associates. 2007. Review of Traceability and Product Sensor Technologies relevant to the Seafood Industry. Australian Seafood Cooperative Research Centre. Muddy Boots Software (Australia) Pty Limited PO Box 345 Quirindi NSW. www.muddyboots.com Theta Technologies Pty Ltd. Unit 2b, 70 Flanders St, Salisbury Qld 4107. www.thetatechnologies.com.au
49
50 51 52
Ceebron Pty Ltd, Smart-Trace. 2008. "Enhancing the Integrity of the Cold Chain". National Convention for the Refrigerated Warehouse & Transportation Association. Estrada-Flores, S. 2010 VG08087 Opportunities and challenges faced with emerging technologies in the Australian vegetable industry.
54 53
Food Magazine 2009 Processing kiwifruit - skins and all Istari Systems Ltd. Mt Albert, Auckland New Zealand. www.istari.co.nz
WRRC Western Regional Research Centre, USDA. http://www.ars.usda.gov/Research/docs.htm?docid=13483 Haff, R. P. and N. Toyofuku. (2008) X-ray detection of defects and contaminants in the food industry. Sensing & Instrumentation Food Quality and Safety. 2: 262-273. Review of Automation and Robotics for the Bio-Industry. Tony Grift 1, Qin Zhang 1, Naoshi Kondo 2, K.C. Ting1 1 University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois USA2 Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan Kim S.-M., Chen P., McCarthy M.J., Zion B.Fruit internal quality evaluation using on-line nuclear magnetic resonance sensors. (1999) Journal of Agricultural and Engineering Research, 74 (3), pp. 293301.
59 60 58 57 56
55
Regattieri et al., 2007
Aarnisalo, K., Jaakkola, K., Raaska, L. 2007. Traceability of foods and foodborne hazards. VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland. Research Notes 2395. Nightingale, S.D. & Christens-Barry, W. 2005. Placing bar codes directly onto foods. Food Technology, Vol. 59, No. 2, pp. 36.39.
61
51 | P a g e
November 09

HG09044 MS105 Approved)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

HG09044 MS105 Approved)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Project HG09044

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Australias horticulture sector

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

HORTICULTURAL FIELD/ORCHARD APPLICATIONS

Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and Global Positioning Systems (GPS)

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Figure 1. Comparison of satelite Imagery to Unmanned Aircraft

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Figure 2. Typical flight paths of Unmanned Aircraft.

$5,000,000 $6,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,000,000 $30,000,000 $24,000,000 $20,000,000

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Figure 3. Broad acreage Broccoli Harvester

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Figure 5. Vision System detection of Red Apples.

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Figure 6. Autonomous Kiwifruit Picking Robot.

Figure 7. St trawberry ide entification us sing Vision S System.

Figure 8. Ro obot Arm pic cking Field St trawberries.

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

PROTECTED CROPPING (GLASSHOUSE/GREENHOUSE) APPLICATIONS

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Figure 9. Hydroponic Strawberry Harvesting robot

Figure 10. Detection of ripen strawberries with vision system.

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Figure 11. Eggplant-harvesting robot

Figure 12. Robot Arm picking Egg Plant.

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Figure 13. Structure of Laboratory Prototype Sweet Pepper picking robot.

Figure14. Example of image processing to identify Sweet Peppers.

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Figure 15. Sweet Pepper visual feedback control image.

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Computer Vision Systems

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Near Infra-red (NIR) technology

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Figure 17. Taste Techs Near Infrared cameras in-line.

Figure 18. Quality attributes assessed on-line.

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Figure 20. Flexi picker Robotic tray packer.

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

ASSOCIATED MARRS TECHNOLOGIES

Competitiveness Whole chain traceability

From enterprise traceability

One up/ one down traceability Compliance

Business value Driving forces

Figure 25. Traceability and business drivers.

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Food Innovation Partners Pty Ltd HG09044

Radio frequency identification (RFID) system