Soil translocation by narrow openers with various bent leg geometries

No-till farmers in Australia often use narrow point openers to place seed and fertiliser in furrows in conjunction with the spraying of pre-emergence herbicides. These openers can produce excessive soil throw which creates problems such as increasing the depth of soil cover on adjacent furrows, herbicide contamination above seed in adjacent furrows, increased stimulation of weed seed germination and furrow moisture loss. This study evaluated the effect of a range of bent leg narrow opener geometries on soil movement when operating at 120 mm depth and 8.2 kmh −1 . Results showed that a bent leg opener geometry combined with a chamfered face could loosen a furrow without throwing soil laterally out of the furrow due to the shank being offset (bent) away from the central upheaval of soil. The bent leg openers were also able to loosen soil with minimal mixing of soil layers. Increasing the shank offset from the furrow centre reduced the surface soil interaction with the vertical shank section operating in the furrow. Decreasing the side bend angle from 65° to 45° reduced surface tracer lateral movement. Adding a leading foot to a bent leg opener reduced the loosened cross sectional area by 13% due to the shallower engagement of the side-leg portion. These findings have implications for optimising no-till seeding practises through better control of soil throw, aiming to: reduce weed seed germination and soil moisture loss, enable narrower row spacing options, the safer use of pre-emergence herbicides incorporated when seeding and higher operating speeds.

[1]  Stephen B. Powles,et al.  Management Strategies for Herbicide-resistant Weed Populations in Australian Dryland Crop Production Systems , 2007, Weed Technology.

[2]  Jude Liu,et al.  Soil-straw-tillage tool interaction: Field and soil bin study , 2007 .

[3]  Deepak Chaudhuri,et al.  Performance evaluation of various types of furrow openers on seed drills--a review , 2001 .

[4]  H. Page Harrison Soil Reacting Forces for a Bentleg Plow , 1988 .

[5]  T. Tavakoli Hashjin,et al.  Soil-Bin Performance of a Modified Bent Leg Plow , 2008 .

[6]  Y. Gan,et al.  No-till farming systems , 2008 .

[7]  J. Fielke,et al.  Soil translocation by narrow openers with various rake angles , 2012 .

[8]  D. Reicosky,et al.  SeedChaser: Vertical soil tillage distribution model , 2007 .

[9]  Soil translocation with tillage tools , 1999 .

[10]  Richard J. Godwin,et al.  Soil Failure with Narrow Tines , 1977 .

[11]  Richard J. Godwin,et al.  A review of the effect of implement geometry on soil failure and implement forces , 2007 .

[12]  Shafiqur Rahman,et al.  Soil Movement resulting from Sweep Type Liquid Manure Injection Tools , 2005 .

[13]  Randy L. Raper Force Requirements and Soil Disruption of Straight and Bentleg Subsoilers for Conservation Tillage Systems , 2005 .

[14]  C. McCulloch,et al.  Vertical movement of weed seed surrogates by tillage implements and natural processes , 2006 .

[15]  D. Wyse,et al.  Tillage Effects on Seed Distribution and Common Milkweed (Asclepias syriaca) Establishment , 1996, Weed Science.

[16]  Christopher Preston,et al.  Influence of tillage systems on vertical distribution, seedling recruitment and persistence of rigid ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) seed bank , 2006, Weed Science.

[17]  C. L. Mohler A Model of the Effects of Tillage on Emergence of Weed Seedlings. , 1993, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[18]  J. Fielke,et al.  Soil translocation by narrow openers with various blade face geometries , 2013 .