Automatic Section Control (ASC) is a long-standing trend for spraying in agriculture. It promises to minimise spray overlap areas. The core idea is to (i) switch off spray nozzles on areas that have already been sprayed, and (ii) to dynamically adjust nozzle flow rates along the boom bar that holds the spray nozzles when velocities of boom sections vary during turn maneuvers. ASC is not possible without sensors for accurate positioning data. Spraying and the movement of modern wide boom bars are highly dynamic processes. In addition, many uncertainty factors have an effect such as cross wind drift, nozzle clogging in open-field conditions, etc. In view of this complexity, the natural question arises if a simpler alternative exist. Therefore, ASC is compared to a proposed simpler one- or two-sections alternative that uses predictive spray switching. The comparison is provided under nominal conditions. Agricultural spraying is intrinsically linked to area coverage path planning and spray switching logic. Combinations of two area coverage path planning and switching logics as well as 3 sections-setups are compared. The three sections-setups differ by controlling 48 sections, 2 sections or controlling all nozzles uniformly with the same control signal as one single section. Methods are evaluated on 10 diverse real-world field examples, including non-convex field contours, freeform mainfield lanes and multiple obstacle areas. An economic cost analysis is provided to compare the methods. A preferred method is suggested that (i) minimises area coverage pathlength, (ii) offers intermediate overlap, (iii) is suitable for manual driving by following a pre-planned predictive spray switching logic for an area coverage path plan, and (iv) and in contrast to ASC can be implemented sensor-free and at low cost. Surprisingly strong economic arguments are found to not recommend ASC for small farms.

This paper presents within an arable farming context a predictive logic for the on- and off-switching of a set of nozzles attached to a boom aligned along a working width and carried by a machinery with the purpose of applying spray along the working width while the machinery is traveling along a specific path planning pattern. Concatenation of multiple of those path patterns and corresponding concatenation of proposed switching logics enables nominal lossless spray application for area coverage tasks. Proposed predictive switching logic is compared to the common and state-of-the-art reactive switching logic for Boustrophedon-based path planning for area coverage. The trade-off between reduction in pathlength and increase in the number of required on- and off-switchings for proposed method is discussed.

Within the context of in-field path planning and under the assumption of nonholonomic vehicle models this paper addresses two tasks: smoothing of headland path edges and smoothing of headland-to-mainfield lane transitions. Both tasks are solved by a two-step hierarchical algorithm. The first step differs for the two tasks generating either a piecewise-affine or a Dubins reference path. The second step leverages a transformation of vehicle dynamics from the time domain into the spatial domain and linear programming. Benefits such as a hyperparameter-free objective function and spatial constraints useful for area coverage gaps avoidance and precision path planning are discussed. The method, which is a deterministic optimisation-based method, is evaluated on a real-world field solving 3 instances of the first task and 16 instances of the second task.