Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
Ideas to gage water in a rice paddy? — Parallax Forums

Ideas to gage water in a rice paddy?

Tracy AllenTracy Allen Posts: 6,664
edited 2014-06-24 09:43 in General Discussion
I've been asked to come up with a method to figure out how much water there is in a rice paddy just before planting. This has to do with voracious snails that eat the shoots, and biocontrol using a soapy substance extracted from quinoa hulls. The pesticide is expensive, and the dose per volume needs to be well controlled. Each paddy covers about 4 hectares (200m x 200m), and the water is about 4 to 7 cm deep. The way they do it now is to have a couple of people walk around in the paddy with a meter stick, and while one takes a reading, the other writes it down in a notebook for later transcription to a computer for the calculation. They take several samples at the corners and at the center. The accuracy is not good.

One way to semi-automate this would be to instrument the meter stick with a depth sensor, a GPS, a data logger and a pushbutton. However, I think they are looking for something more sophisticated. The thing that comes to mind is a raft with depth sensor/GPS/wireless/data logger that can either be controlled from shore, or be preprogrammed to hit waypoints, lots of them.

How would one propel or build such a raft? Also, for the depth sensor, the coolest thing would probably be ultrasound, but at that shallow depth it would have to be an interferometer rather than a ping-type device. Or maybe could a servo controlled feeler.

Ideas?
«1345

Comments

  • Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) Posts: 23,514
    edited 2014-06-02 12:17
    Tracy,

    Would the raft have to be automated to avoid running over the rice shoots?

    At that small depth range, a laser line generator aimed at an angle and coupled with a linear array sensor might suffice to measure the bottom contour, so long as turbidity is not an issue.

    -Phil
  • Duane DegnDuane Degn Posts: 10,588
    edited 2014-06-02 12:41
    Geir Andersen over on Let's Make Robots has done a lot of cool aquatic robots. This raft robot came to mind when I read your post. He has other projects you might find interesting here.

    Of course better than a raft would be a quadcopter buzzing around lowering probes. It might look like a giant dragonfly laying eggs.

    Back to the raft. I was trying to think or some sort of touch sensor that would work in the mud but I didn't really like most of the ideas I could come up with. One idea I kind of like is to use a weight with an accelerometer inside and have the ground detected by an abrupt acceleration. As I think about this a bit more I'm sure there are other low tech ways to detect the bottom. The tension on the line lowering the weight could be monitored in order to find the bottom. A hinged feeler gauge device might work.

    If you had a rod on slight tension pointing downward, you could monitor the angle of the rod to determine the depth. I've often thought a magnetic encoder would make a good water proof knob of sorts. The magnetic encoder could be attached to the rod's hinge point to monitor the angle of the rod. There's sort of an example of a magnetic encoder used as a knob in the video in this post. An optical encoder on the hinge would be another option.

    I agree it would be nice to have a non-contact method to detect the depth but I'd only be guessing (more than before) on what might work.
  • Tracy AllenTracy Allen Posts: 6,664
    edited 2014-06-02 12:42
    Phil, my understanding is that the treatment occurs before the shoots are set. The substrate is fairly smooth and hard. I'll have to ask for clarification about the turbidity.

    Interesting idea about the line generator. So, the instrument would measure the length of the projected line, is that right? Via a video camera?
  • WBA ConsultingWBA Consulting Posts: 2,934
    edited 2014-06-02 12:46
    Tracy,
    Very interesting challenge and could be a lot of fun to solve! Here are the first thoughts that ran through my mind when I read your description:
    Airboat.jpg
    • Google image search has several homemade airboats that might work better for rice paddies. I searched for "RC Airboat" and "RC Foam Airboat".
    • Extreme idea: Quadcopter equipped with a "floating buoy" dangling from a line below the quadcopter. Fly to a position, drop to where the buoy is on the water, and the buoy contains electronics for the measurement (feeler, sonar, etc)
    Sensing method could easily dictate the transport mechanism, but with a foam airboat, weight should not be a major concern. Another thought is a weighted lever that hangs off the end of the boat. Use an encoder to determine it's angle and based upon it's drop, the angle would vary. Use a servo with a spool/string to pull the lever back up. Here's a crude sketch:
    Airboat2.jpg




    EDIT: It would appear that Duane and I think a lot a like, but I type slower............
    505 x 499 - 75K
    1024 x 584 - 27K
  • Tracy AllenTracy Allen Posts: 6,664
    edited 2014-06-02 12:46
    Duane, I'm off to look at raft robot.

    "giant dragonfly laying eggs" hehe!

    If there is a feeler on a post, it should have a blunt wide end. I'm told that the substrate is pretty hard, but that does vary over the area.
  • dmagnusdmagnus Posts: 271
    edited 2014-06-02 12:51
    Just brainstorming...
    I think the raft could be made so it only draws a couple of centimeters, with a small propeller (screw - the processor would be on the raft :-)
    The whole thing, including the smarts could be powered by a small LIPO battery. If people can walk around in there, the bottom must be fairly firm, although I would think it would be somewhat muddy if the shoots are to be planted in it. Also assume the shoots are planted with some space between rows, etc., so the craft would have to be programmed to follow the rows. (PING sensors to keep it centered in the rows? Or just whiskers?)
    I'll bet there are any number of small RC boats that could be adapted to this...EDIT - Like they said. :blank:
  • Duane DegnDuane Degn Posts: 10,588
    edited 2014-06-02 12:55
    EDIT: It would appear that Duane and I think a lot a like, but I type slower............

    It's a bit eerie how much we do (even the quadcopter). You have better pictures though.
  • Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) Posts: 23,514
    edited 2014-06-02 13:23
    So, the instrument would measure the length of the projected line, is that right? Via a video camera?
    No, the laser line would be at right angles to the axis of the (lensed) linear array sensor and at a slant w.r.t. the bottom. It's only necessary for the sensor to measure the position of the laser line where its image intersects the linear array.

    Here's a diagram: http://forums.parallax.com/showthread.php/113366?p=813695&viewfull=1#post813695

    -Phil
  • Tracy AllenTracy Allen Posts: 6,664
    edited 2014-06-02 13:54
    Duane, that raft robot from Geir Andersen is tethered to shore by a wire, so it travels in a straight line until it is pulled up short by the tether. Then the winch lowers the weight (down to 10m, taking readings) and pulls it up again under radio control. Then the raft is pulled back in by hand using the wire. Hmmm.

    I like the idea of the air boat. About steering, the commercial "Alligator" says "Twin air rudders with adjustable single link between steering servo and rudders for fast, powerful response". I'm not sure how that works. I'll have to find time to follow the links for DIY airboats. You're right, there are a lot! How about a quad-copter props turned up to horizontal?

    The probe does not have to be long. A linear gear of the sort that is used to raise/lower the radio aerial on a car might work, with a touch switch for contact with the bottom.
    '
  • Tracy AllenTracy Allen Posts: 6,664
    edited 2014-06-02 14:04
    Phil, thanks. The TSL1401-DB linescan camera. Nice diagrams and explanation, as usual. I think I even have a piece of rubylith lying around. The turbidity of the water is still a question. You know how it is field work. You can't count on anything close to ideal conditions.
  • jonesjones Posts: 281
    edited 2014-06-02 14:08
    One thing you might consider is something larger. A regular wheeled robot with tall wheels to keep the brains and drive above the waterline lets you sense the bottom with nothing more than the wheels themselves so the platform is always a known height above the bottom. A little pivoting rod with a float gives you depth. I think running on the bottom would also be easier from a control standpoint than using a little boat, which might be hard to control in a breeze. Wheels might seem a bit strange for a water vehicle but if it doesn't get much deeper than 7 cm it might be practical. I think if it's fairly small I might make the thing essentially a boat hull anyway, just in case it runs over a deep spot :smile:.

    -Bob

    Edit: if it sounds crazy, google "rice planter" or "rice transplanter". They're wheeled vehicles. The paddy looks more like a mud puddle than a lake.
  • john_sjohn_s Posts: 369
    edited 2014-06-02 16:26
    How about Milone Technologies eTape http://www.parallax.com/product/29131 interfaced to your own wireless nodes - or Camalie Networks mesh of arduino based nodes http://99.115.132.118/html//cs3prod.htm .

    I'd say 5 nodes as "...They take several samples at the corners and at the center..."; plus eTape sensors positioned not vertically but rather at certain angle to cover their whole range of 12" (as the max water level is expected to be below 10cm).
  • $WMc%$WMc% Posts: 1,884
    edited 2014-06-02 17:02
    Since the sub-straight (the mud) is constant, And water seeks its own level. Wouldn't a single point measure work?
    '
    I think your way over thinking this.
  • PublisonPublison Posts: 12,366
    edited 2014-06-02 17:09
    A hovercraft could also work as the payload vehicle. I've built a couple of full scale over the last 20 years. They work well in less than ideal conditions, (sand bars, floating debris).

    DSC00132.jpg


    The height can be predetermined by measuring the skirt height under cushion power motor. Thrust motor would have no consequence on that measurement.

    Jim
    1024 x 768 - 204K
  • RforbesRforbes Posts: 281
    edited 2014-06-02 17:14
    Dig a hole in the deepest part or maybe center of the rice paddy and insert a well-type casement. Make it 10 feet deep and 2 ft diameter. Install a pump and filter to keep it mucked out. Throw a pressure transducer in the bottom and calibrate your controller for the head pressures induced on it. Correlate head pressure to volume and thereby approximate depth. Use ratiometric data from chemical doses to fine tune it.

    .... thats a workable plan but will certainly present some challenging hurdles.

    Edit- but in all honesty I think ANYTHING with a hovercraft is friggin cool and MUST be part of the solution! For uh, errr... engineerings' sake. It's just gotta be done!
  • xanaduxanadu Posts: 3,347
    edited 2014-06-02 17:35
    200x200 meters of uncontrolled muddy aquatic conditions 4cm to 7cm deep... They should have just asked for a Mars rover it would have been done by now.

    Got a picture of the paddy in question?
  • john_sjohn_s Posts: 369
    edited 2014-06-02 18:23
    $WMc% wrote: »
    Since the sub-straight (the mud) is constant, And water seeks its own level. Wouldn't a single point measure work?
    '
    I think your way over thinking this.

    One sensor per rice paddy's enough of course - I just tried to repeat "their approach" as close as possible :)
  • Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) Posts: 23,514
    edited 2014-06-02 18:32
    I think the point of an array of samples is that the depth is not constant across the entire paddy, i.e. the bottom is not perfectly flat and level. And with depths ranging between about 1.5" and 3" across four hectares, it doesn't take many skipped or inaccurate readings to miss the overall water volume estimate by a lot.

    -Phil
  • xanaduxanadu Posts: 3,347
    edited 2014-06-02 18:42
    I think the point of an array of samples is that the depth is not constant across the entire paddy, i.e. the bottom is not perfectly flat and level. And with depths ranging between about 1.5" and 3" across four hectares, it doesn't take many skipped or inaccurate readings to miss the overall water volume estimate by a lot.

    -Phil

    Unless it's a US government operation.
  • kwinnkwinn Posts: 8,697
    edited 2014-06-02 18:50
    A pair of wheels or treads that run on the bottom of the paddy with a captive but free floating raft that measures the distance between the bottom of the wheels/treads and the raft height.
  • Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) Posts: 23,514
    edited 2014-06-02 18:57
    Similar to kwinn's idea: Since the water is so shallow, a robot that ran along the bottom rather than floating might be simpler. It could have an open-bottom tube in the center reaching into the water. In the tube would be a float whose height could be measured by any number of means. The reason for using a tube is to reduce as much as possible any effects of surface waves that might be caused by the bot's motion through the water.

    On prerequisite for this technique is that the horizontal feature size of any depth anomalies would have to be much greater than the bot's wheel spacing.

    -Phil
  • kwinnkwinn Posts: 8,697
    edited 2014-06-02 19:19
    Something like this.
    893 x 288 - 7K
  • kwinnkwinn Posts: 8,697
    edited 2014-06-02 19:58
    @Phil

    Yep, at least 101 ways to do the measurement. A plastic tube makes a good guide/container for a float. Ping pong balls make great floats. Add a strip of perf board and a photo interrupter to the float and you can measure depth to 0.1". Drill the holes out to 50 thou and you can get 0.05". Of course you may have to reduce the current to the led or paint the PCB black, but saving power is always a good thing.
  • macrobeakmacrobeak Posts: 354
    edited 2014-06-02 20:37
    Tracey,
    I presume this application is for the 3rd world, so I suggest the solution below.
    The answer lies in those bare-basic paddy tractors they use in SE Asia. (I love those things; just a chassis, portable diesel engine, a few belts and great big metal wheels. When they are finished plowing the paddy they disconnect the portable diesel engine and hook it up to their boat, food mill, electric generator or whatever needs power next!)
    Make a robot with big spoked wheels that looks like like a paddy tractor. Use some of the spokes as depth gauges by fitting them with sliding floats with magnets and reed switches on the spokes.
    Fit the paddy tractor robot with a GPS and data logging module.
    Get a young lad to drive the robot up and down the paddy field using a standard hobby remote controller.
    Download the GPS and depth data from the data capture into a software application and calculate your volumes.
  • kwinnkwinn Posts: 8,697
    edited 2014-06-02 20:47
    macrobeak wrote: »
    Tracey,
    I presume this application is for the 3rd world, so I suggest the solution below.
    The answer lies in those bare-basic paddy tractors they use in SE Asia. (I love those things; just a chassis, portable diesel engine, a few belts and great big metal wheels. When they are finished plowing the paddy they disconnect the portable diesel engine and hook it up to their boat, food mill, electric generator or whatever needs power next!)
    Make a robot with big spoked wheels that looks like like a paddy tractor. Use some of the spokes as depth gauges by fitting them with sliding floats with magnets and reed switches on the spokes.
    Fit the paddy tractor robot with a GPS and data logging module.
    Get a young lad to drive the robot up and down the paddy field using a standard hobby remote controller.
    Download the GPS and depth data from the data capture into a software application and calculate your volumes.

    Love the simplicity of this idea but how do you determine which spoke to take the measurement from?
  • ElectricAyeElectricAye Posts: 4,561
    edited 2014-06-02 20:57
    I'm presuming a developing nation scenario. Could you make a device that attaches to a farm worker's bare leg? As he walks around, it measures the water level with respect to his foot resting on the muddy bottom? In fact, if the snail-killing gunk is applied by humans walking in the paddies, could the foot-mounted measuring apparatus effectively integrate the volume of water the worker has recently traversed and dispense the potion accordingly? A small crew of people "armed" with such devices (on their legs) might be able to measure and dispense all in one passing??? Just thinking out loud.
  • Tracy AllenTracy Allen Posts: 6,664
    edited 2014-06-02 22:06
    Lots of ideas for the ol' rice cooker.

    I should add that although each paddy is around 4 hectares, there are hundreds of paddies, thousands of hectares. Thus a search for a quicker way to profile. The depth is not consistent across the paddy, and will change from one planting to the next. That is why a single point or small set of fixed points per paddy is not enough. Later on, once the profile is known, the fact that water seeks its own level can allow a single point measurement to track changes in total volume. How many points are necessary? I guess that is one thing that needs to be determined. The rice robot would presumably be deployed one paddy at a time.

    I've been told now that the water will be quite clear, not a mud puddle at this stage. But I suppose that condition will change when a person or a vehicle or a robot or planting machinery stir it up. Photo? Here is one that conveys a sense of the enormity.

    I like the ideas about the wheeled robot with an angular or linear encoder attached to a float or bottom probe. Something like an oversize boe-bot. It has a physical definiteness to it. I understand about the stilling issue. The 'bot could stop at points to allow ripples to settle.

    The paddy tractor with a sensor on a spoke or spokes--mechanically simple. I suppose you would sync the measurement to the spoke position, acquire when pointed down.

    Then there is that dragonfly. The copter with a dip stick.

    The current project is not third world. It is in the EU, where the snails are invaders not yet established. I'm pretty sure they are looking for something with more panache than some poor guy's leg! :innocent:
  • LoopyBytelooseLoopyByteloose Posts: 12,537
    edited 2014-06-02 23:33
    Well, it seems the idea to get the actual average depth over a very large surface area. I used to have similar problems with estimating concrete when pouring sidewalks and slabs. When the area is so huge and the average depth range is so narrow, the chances of error go way up.

    I suspect that the density of the sampling is critical to getting better accuracy. So a simple automated approach that does the whole field would achieve a lot more than just doing the corners and the center of the field.

    And I suspect that keeping a historic record of depths should be useful as the contour of the underlying bed is unlikely to change much over time. To prove that is true, ask the farmers if they have figured out there own best estimate of what amount of chemical works. They may have arrived at some good figures via trial and error.


    So the solution may be more in the maths than in deriving a fancy method or device.

    Of course, you could consider installing survey benchmarks at the corner of every field and try to lock in a precise reference grid.
  • TorTor Posts: 2,010
    edited 2014-06-03 02:15
    jones wrote: »
    One thing you might consider is something larger. A regular wheeled robot with tall wheels to keep the brains and drive above the waterline lets you sense the bottom with nothing more than the wheels themselves so the platform is always a known height above the bottom. A little pivoting rod with a float gives you depth. I think running on the bottom would also be easier from a control standpoint than using a little boat, which might be hard to control in a breeze. Wheels might seem a bit strange for a water vehicle but if it doesn't get much deeper than 7 cm it might be practical. I think if it's fairly small I might make the thing essentially a boat hull anyway, just in case it runs over a deep spot :smile:.

    -Bob

    Edit: if it sounds crazy, google "rice planter" or "rice transplanter". They're wheeled vehicles. The paddy looks more like a mud puddle than a lake.
    I've been walking past rice fields every day this spring.. and watched them in their dry state, then flooded, then planted with a machine, and then hand-planted everywhere the machine couldn't get to (which is something like five-ten metres from land or any other obstacle). And later, watched the frogs and the herons walking in the fields..
    Anyway, the above suggestion by Bob (a couple of other posts have suggested something similar) is one which appeals to my gut feeling about what would work.

    -Tor
  • LoopyBytelooseLoopyByteloose Posts: 12,537
    edited 2014-06-03 03:11
    It would be wonderful if one could eliminate all the direct probing and running machinery over the field.

    If one could fly over with a quad-copter, photograph in the right combo of filter and spectrum, and then get a computer to determine average depth by color variation -- the whole process would be less expensive and more efficient. I just have not idea about the feasibility of such an approach. Some form of radar might be another good alternative.
Sign In or Register to comment.