Progress 04/01/14 to 03/31/18
Outputs
Target Audience:Year 1: The target audience reached through our project efforts during Year 1 included the grape growers that participated in the representative vineyard panels that we worked. These included the following face-to-face panel meetings: Texas 100 Acre Wine Grapes Panel (Texas South Plains area): 5 wine grape growers Texas 50 Acre Wine Grapes Panel (Texas South Plains area): 4 wine grape growers California 100 Acre Table Grapes Panel (San Joaquin Valley area): 4 table grape growers California 40 Acre Individual Tray Dried Raisins Panel (San Joaquin Valley area): 1 raisin grower California 40 Acre Open Gable Trellis System Raisins (San Joaquin Valley area): 1 raisin grower California 40 Acre Overhead Trellis System Raisins (San Joaquin Valley area): 1 raisin grower Oregon 10 Acre Wine Grapes Panel (Willamette Valley area): 4 wine grape growers Washington 250 Acre Wine Grapes Panel (Eastern Washington): 5 wine grape growers We have also had communication with the California Table Grapes Commission (Executive Director and a research staff member). This represented 25 grape growers and 2 industry organization personnel that we worked with to date. Year 2: The target audience reached through our project efforts during Year 2 included the grape growers that participated in the representative vineyard panels that we worked with in gathering data for the project. These included the following, broken into initial panel meetings, and follow-up data validation panel meetings via web/phone conferences: INITIAL PANEL MEETINGS: California Wine Grapes Panel (Napa Valley): 4 wine grape growers (3/24/16) New York Wine Grapes Panel (Finger Lakes area): 6 wine grape growers (7/15/15) PANEL DATA VALIDATION & FOLLOW-UP WEB CONFERENCE MEETINGS: New York Wine Grapes Panel (Finger Lakes area): 5 wine grape growers (7/15/15) California 40 Ac. Open Gable Trellis System Raisins (San Joaquin Valley area): 1 raisin grower (6/12/15) Washington 250 Ac. Wine Grapes Panel (Eastern Washington): 2 wine grape growers (5/15/15) Oregon 10 Ac. Wine Grapes Panel (Willamette Valley area): 4 wine grape growers (5/14/15) Texas 50 Ac. Wine Grapes Panel (Texas South Plains area): 4 wine grape growers (5/4/15) Texas 100 Ac. Wine Grapes Panel (Texas South Plains area): 2 wine grape growers (4/23/15) Combined, the grower panels represented 28 grape growers in year 2. Years 3 and 4: Dr. McCorkle participated in several robotic technology tradeshows and conferences for the purpose of visiting with technology developers, and others in related fields, about this project; and about opportunities for robotics in wine and table grape production. Each person received a copy of our 4-page article entitled "The potential for robotic technology for grape production in the U.S." that describes the project. The individual contacts made during this outreach effort are summarized below where the number of people (representing companies and organizations) are categorized based on the type of business the company or organization is in. *Robotic technology developers: 24 6 of them were with 3 different companies. *General/diverse technology companies: 5 *Robotic/technology component parts: 2 *Farm/vineyard equipment manufacturing companies: 4 *Drone companies: 5 3 were people with the same company. *Vineyard consulting companies: 3 All 3 were with the same company. *Grower/grower industry groups: 7 2 were from the same company. *Academic/extension Ag Engineering: 3 All 3 were with the same university. *Data Management: 2 *Farm/vineyard industry media and marketing: 2 *Innovation commercialization, investment banking: 2 *Agricultural input supplier: 1 In total, this outreach effort resulted in one-on-one conversations with 60 people representing 50 companies and organizations. Interfacing with the industry also resulted in a face-to-face meeting with an agricultural robotics technology development company in Florida (March 2018). As a result of this project, and the outreach effort with technology developers in years 3 and 4, Dr. McCorkle was invited to speak at the national Blueberry Technology Symposium in Salt Lake City, UT in February 2018. The symposium was attending by approximately 120 people representing blueberry growers and various technology industries. The purpose of the presentation was to highlight the vineyard robotics assessment project, and the current status of technology in the wine and table grapes industry with the hope that it would stimulate some ideas to the benefit of blueberry growers and their interests of using robotic technology in blueberry production. As a result of a contact made at the symposium, Dr. McCorkle was contacted by the Chief Technology Officer for a robotics company in Massachusetts. This led to a conference call to discuss the project, and opportunities for robotics with vineyards. Changes/Problems:A change was made to the project, and approved by NIFA (Jill Auburn), in the Fall of 2015. Given that robotic technology will not be available for vineyards to adopt in the near future (life of this project); there was no longer a need during the lifespan of this project to assess the economic feasibility of growers adopting robotic technology. This caused the target audence to change from growers, to technology developers, which resulted in the project team conducting an extensive outreach effort with robotic technology developers in years 3 and 4. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?Each of the vineyard panel meetings served as a professional development activity for the panel members as they have discussed and exchanged ideas about various aspects of grape production, labor issues, and technology. These data gathering meetings were educational for the panel members. An evaluation instrument was administered to the panel members to measure their perceived change in knowledge. The results of the evaluations are summarized as follows. Number of panel members: 34 Number of responses: 23 (67.6%) On a scale of 1 to 4 (1=poor, 2=fair, 3-good, 4=excellent), please rate your understanding of: Current and potential robotic technology capabilities: 2.52 (pre), 3.43 (post) Potential limitations of robotic technology: 2.35 (pre), 3.09 (post) Challenges of adopting robotics for various grape production practices: 2.65 (pre), 3.48 (post) Perceived barriers to grower adoption: 2.78 (pre), 3.22 (post) Vineyard cost of production: 3.26 (pre), 3.50 (post) Additional questions: What attribute of a potential robot do you see as being the most important to vineyard owners? Most frequent responses were: ability to perform multiple tasks, adaptable to varying vineyard conditions, and the hours per day that it could operate. What are the top three production issues in your area? Most frequent responses were: labor availability, labor costs, and weather. As a part of the project's outreach effort with technology developers, the discussions with viticulture industry leaders and technology developers (target audience) was a professional development opportunity for the target audience as they learned about this project, the economic analysis that was conducted (which many of them were very interested in), and the need for new technology in wine and table grape production How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?As this project evolved, the communities of interest became technology developers, wine grape industry leaders, and to some extent, investment bankers. In order to disseminate the project results to these groups, a member of the project team attended 10 conferences and/or trade shows that focused on robotic technology or precision agriculture. The purpose was to conduct outreach with technology developers, wine grape industry leaders, and investment bankers. This exercise resulted in one-on-one conversations with 60 individuals representing 50 companies and organizations (described in more detail in the Target Audience section of the Final Report). Each person received a copy of the 4-page article entitled "The potential for robotic technology for grape production in the U.S." that describes the project and results. This effort resulted in a face-to-face meeting with an agricultural robotics technology development company in Florida. After learning about this project indirectly from the outreach effort, a robotics company in Massachusetts contacted Dr. McCorkle for more information, which led to a conference call to further discuss the opportunity for robotics for wine grape growers. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?
Nothing Reported
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
SUMMARY OF VINEYARD PANEL VISITS TEXAS PANHANDLE (South Plains): While the majority of these farms are already heavily automated, we did recognize several potential applications for robotics. For instance, robotic technology could be beneficial in the finish pruning of vines, as well as in yield and crop estimation. CENTRAL VALLEY, CALIFORNIA (Table Grapes): We identified four major areas for table grapes that would benefit from the use of robotics: selective cluster picking, in-row transport, and cluster cleaning. These vineyards could also benefit from automated crop monitoring, crop and yield estimations, robotic trimming of shoots and leaf clusters, and pruning. OREGON: Wine grape production is very similar across the board and highly driven by marketing and tourism. The focus is on premium white wines ($30 +/bottle), and the perception of quality is extremely important. These vineyards could benefit from robot-assisted in-row transport of grapes, crop and yield monitoring, pruning, cluster trimming, and secondary leaf removal. WASHINGTON: Vineyards in eastern Washington tend to be large, and produce wine grapes for mid-to-low priced wines. Seasonal hand labor can be hard to find. Washington vineyards are highly mechanized, leaving less of a need for tasks to be robotized. However, there is some opportunity for robotics for finish pruning and crop yield monitoring. NEW YORK (Finger Lakes): The Finger Lakes area is similar to Oregon. Cane pruned white wines dominate the region. One difference is that New York wines do not command the same price as Oregon. Due to diseases associated with high rainfall amounts in the area, precision mechanical spraying is deployed in the fields up to 14 times per year, and mechanized harvesting is used heavily in this region. Cane pruning, as well as shoot thinning is predominately done by hand. A robot that can effectively do crop monitoring and estimating would greatly benefit the region. If a robot could be developed such that it could selectively prune, pull brush, tie vines, and remove suckers, it would be of interest to this vineyard region. NAPA VALLEY, CALIFORNIA: Napa is its own micro market and does not accurately represent the rest of California. It is marketed more as a vacation destination than as a typical agricultural area; therefore the economics of the area are driven more from a tourism model than an agricultural model with a cost cutting philosophy. Mechanization appears to be limited because it does not fit well with the "hand crafted" vineyard narrative of the region. Therefore, it is the recommendation of this study that the area be treated as an outlier when considering the utility and potential of robotics in CA vineyard production. Vineyard operations vary greatly across the state from totally hand produced to highly mechanized operations. Wine that sells for less than $20/bottle were from heavily mechanized operations and high priced wines that sell for $50+/bottle were mainly from hand crafted operations. Therefore, the potential for robotics is generally not consistent across the state at this time. That said, a robot crop monitoring and yield estimation make sense for most, if not, all vineyards, as well as in-row fruit transport, and potentially pruning and thinning. ECONOMICS OF ROBOTIC TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT An important factor in assessing the feasibility of robotic technology for vineyards is the cost of labor. The cost of using human labor to accomplish each vineyard task was analyzed to evaluate the economics of potentially deploying robotic technology as a force multiplier in vineyards. The cost of vineyard labor over 7 years was used to estimate a maximum price (labor replacement price) for each vineyard task that growers would be able to pay for new technology to accomplish these same tasks. The labor replacement price is the price of technology that makes the ownership and operating cost of new technology equal to the cost of labor. The labor replacement prices are intended to serve as a guide for technology developers to determine if they can develop the technology for a price that is at or below this general price level. Please refer to: "The Potential for Robotic Technology for Grape Production in the U.S.", available at: https://agecoext.tamu.edu/viticulture-robotics/ RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ROBOTIC APPLICATIONS The study team recommends the following applications for robotic technology development. These recommendations factor in the following criteria: existing mechanized tools on the market, the economic aspect of using technology, and the state of the technology to accomplish the task. FINISH PRUNING: Current mechanical pruners are not accurate enough to maintain high-quality finish pruning, thus, follow-up hand pruning is still needed. The high cost of manual pruning ($300-$500/acre) would likely support the capital cost of purchasing and maintaining a robotic pruner. SUCKER REMOVAL is the removal of extra shoots on vine trunks and cordons that take away nutrients from fruit growth. It would rank as one of the simpler tasks that could be performed by robotics. Given the minimal economic and labor impact of sucker removal, this study only recommends the development of this robotic capability as a secondary task for an existing mobile, robotic platform that has navigation, manipulation and vision capabilities for performing its primary tasks. CROP MONITORING AND YIELD ESTIMATION are cost prohibitive and labor intensive tasks that this study recommends should be automated with precision robotics. One major advantage of robotic ground vehicles is that they provide better viewing angles of the ripening fruit than UAVs. In order to produce useful data for the customer, complex data processing can condense results to easy-to-interpret heat maps and summary charts, allowing farmers to interpret current and historic data more easily. Significant research is ongoing in this area and some robotic monitoring platforms have been demonstrated (e.g. VineRobot, VineScout, Efficient Vineyard project). WEEDING: Weeding and soil aeration are ideal tasks for robotic vehicles. With GPS knowledge of row locations, and a vision system to keep proximity to the vines, a weeding attachment can be easily integrated onto a robotic vehicle. This task could also be performed in conjunction with crop monitoring, depending on the lighting conditions needed for the latter task. HARVESTING TABLE GRAPES: While spike labor is still required at harvest time, a longer duration harvest allows for multiple passes and may allow for a shared workforce among regional farms. Another distinction between table grapes and wine grapes is that canopy management of table grapes results in less foliage and more uniform location of grape clusters. Therefore, the fruit is in a better position on the vine for detection by computer vision. Not only is the technology more suited for table grape harvesting than wine grapes, but the economic benefits are also heavily favored as well. It is our recommendation that funding for computer recognition, end effector optimum design, and motion planning be considered in the near future. IN-FIELD TRANSPORTATION: Manual harvesting requires workers to use picking baskets, bags, buckets, or plastic crates and then haul them to a general collection area. Produce that is packed in-field is generally transported using carts that are moved by hand or pulled via small tractors. After visiting growers in five different states, it was determined that in-field transportation served as one of the most feasible applications of robotic technology in grape production, both economically and technologically. At this point in time, the study team does not recommend robotics for the following vineyard applications (tasks): pre-pruning, shoot positioning, shoot tying, leaf thinning, and harvesting of wine grapes (harvesting needs more research).
Publications
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Accepted
Year Published:
2017
Citation:
McCorkle, D.A., E.W. Hellman, R.M. Dudensing, and Dan D. Hanselka. Economics of Precision Mechanization in Wine and Table Grapes Production. Abstract published in the conference proceedings of the World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology (WASET), ICPAFS 2017: 19th International Conference on Precision Agriculture and Food Security. New York, New York. June 4-5, 2017.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Accepted
Year Published:
2018
Citation:
Dr. McCorkle was invited to speak about the current and future direction of technology in wine grape production. He presented The Future of Precision Technology in Wine Grape Production to an audience of approximately 120 people. Most participants were blueberry
growers from the U.S., Canada, Australia, and Europe.
Citation:
D.A. McCorkle. "The Future of Precision Technology in Wine Grapes Production." National Blueberry Technology Symposium, Salt Lake, City, UT, February 27, 2018.
|
Progress 04/01/16 to 03/31/17
Outputs
Target Audience:The target audience for the remainder of the project is technology developers and investors. Dr. McCorkle attended the annual Unified Wine & Grape Symposium (Jan. 24-27, 2017) in Saramento, CA for the purpose of networking with technology developers, and wine and table grape industry leaders for the purpose of identifying key individuals that could be influential in the effort to bring new technology to vineyards. During the symposium, Dr. McCorkle visited with the following individuals, all of whom are interested in this effort: Nathan Dorn, CEO, Food Origins John Aguirre, President, California Association of Wine Grape Growers Nick Dokoozlian and Keith Striegler, E & J Gallow Winery Aaron Llange, Lange Twins Family Winery and Vineyards Joe Osterman, Allied Grape Growers Mark Greenspan, President, Advanced Viticulture, Inc. John Jaeger, Microbiologist, Advanced Viticulture, Inc. Dan Vyenielo, Viticulturist, Advanced Viticulture, Inc. Dustin Wales, Mechanical Engineer, VMECH Mike Fitzgerald, AGH Gary Soares, On Target Spray Systems Each person received a copy of the four page article describing this research project, and the need for new technology in viticulture. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?As a part of the project's outreach effort, the discussions with viticulture industry leaders and technology developers (target audience) is a professional development opportunity for the target audience as they can learn about the project, the need for new technology for vineyards, and the economics of technology development. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?As previously indicated, the target audience for the remainder of the project is technology developers. During the Unified Wine & Grape Symposium in Sacramento, CA (January 2017), Dr. McCorkle talked to 11 people representing equipment manufacturers, specialty crops industry leaders, wine grape industry leaders, and wine grape production consultants about this research project. Each person received a copy of the 4-page publication entitled "The Potential for Robotic Technology for Grape Production in the U.S" which describes the project, data collected, analysis conducted, and the results. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?The plan for the next reporting period is focused on conducting outreach to technology development companies with the goal being to stimulate interest among technology developers to address the need for new technology in wine and table grape production. The primary method for outreach activities will be by participating in robotics technology conferences and trade shows, and by following up with contacts made. The team will also identify robotics technology development companies to contact directly. The research team is also going to send a copy of the 4-page publication entitled "The Potential for Robotic Technology for Grape Production in the U.S" to all growers that participated in the representative wine and table grape vineyards panel process. This publication will also be made available on the web.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Accomplishments for Goal 1 occurred and were reported in years 1 and 2. For Goal 2, we have conducted extensive analysis of the current labor costs associated with each specified vineyard task identified as having potential for robotic technology development for all five representative wine grape vineyards and the table grapes vineyard (CA). The target audience for the results of this analysis is technology developers with whom we are conducting outreach. A brief description of this analysis is as follows. An important factor in assessing the feasibility of robotic technology for vineyards is the cost of human labor. The cost of using human labor to accomplish each vineyard task was analyzed to evaluate the economics of potentially deploying robotic technology as a force multiplier in vineyards. The labor cost was used to estimate a maximum price that growers would be willing to pay for new technology to accomplish these same tasks. To assess the labor costs, the net present value (NPV) of the labor cost for each field task was calculated over 7 years (the expected life of new technology). NPV, a tool commonly used in investment analysis, was used to discount the annual labor cost cash outflows to account for the time value of money. A discount rate of 5% was used. To compare the labor NPV to potentially having new robotic technology developed, a labor replacement price (technology price) was calculated as the technology price that would make the NPV of purchasing robotic technology equal to the NPV of the labor cost. Several assumptions were used in this analysis, including some assumptions specific to finish spur pruning related to the potential speed (vines/hour for example) of the technology. For all other vineyard tasks, it is assumed that the speed of new technology will be equal to human speed. For all vineyard tasks, estimates of operating and ownership costs were included. While human speed will most likely have faster peak speeds, it is assumed that robotics will have a more consistent speed over the long run, making the speeds on average equal over time. When purchasing new technology, one important assumption is that operating costs include the cost of a technology manager working 50% of the time the equipment is running. This person is paid at the higher equipment operator wage rate. The results of this analysis include the range of labor hours (across the five states) required per acre using the current method of performing each vineyard task with human labor, and the range of NPV of the associated labor cost over 7 years for a 100 acre vineyard. These data and the analysis assumptions were then used to calculate the maximum labor replacement price for each vineyard task, by state. The variation in production systems across the five states is evident in the wide range of labor hours required per acre for some vineyard tasks, and there are some tasks that are not used in every state. As a result, there is corresponding variation in the maximum labor replacement prices. For some tasks, developing new technology is not currently feasible from an economic standpoint. In general, for areas that have an adequate supply of vineyard labor, growers may not be incentivized to pay more than these maximum prices. In areas where there is a shortage of labor or the labor supply is tight, growers may have an incentive to pay more than this maximum technology price. The prices are intended to serve as a guide for technology developers to determine if they can develop the technology for a price that is at or below this general price level. For smaller vineyards that may not be able to afford the price of new technology, a leasing or equipment sharing arrangement could be considered for this segment of the market. While there is some variation across states, in general, the panels indicated the tasks that are the most in need of new technology are pruning, shoot thinning, cluster thinning, and suckering. One option that could be pursued by technology developers is to develop a robotic vehicle that has multi-tasking capabilities. For Goal 3, following the NIFA-approved change in the project last year, the team is currently conducting outreach with technology developers (the target audience) to educate them on the need for new technology for vineyards, and the economics of robotic technology development. The goal is to stimulate interest among technology developers to develop new technology for wine and table grape vineyards.
Publications
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Accepted
Year Published:
2017
Citation:
McCorkle, D.A., Dudensing, R.M., Hellman, E.W., Hanselka, D.D. "Evaluating the Potential for Robotic Technology in California Table Grape Production." Selected Poster. 2017 Southern Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting. Mobile, AL. February 4-7, 2017.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Awaiting Publication
Year Published:
2018
Citation:
McCorkle, D.A., R.M. Dudensing, D. Hanselka, E.W. Hellman. "Economics of Potential for Robotic Technology for Wine Grape Production Practices in Selected Growing Areas of the U.S." International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business. Accepted and final edits are complete, will be published in late 2018 or early 2019.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Accepted
Year Published:
2017
Citation:
McCorkle, D.A., R.M. Dudensing, D. Hanselka, E.W. Hellman. "Evaluating the Potential for Precision Mechanization in U.S. Wine Grape Production." 2016 Agricultural and Applied Economics Assocation (AAEA) Annual Meeting, Boston, MA., July 31-August 3, 2016.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Accepted
Year Published:
2017
Citation:
McCorkle, D.A., R.M. Dudensing, E.W. Hellman, D. Hanselka, R. Allen, and K. Gunnett. "Assessing the Economic Viability of Wine Grape Production in the U.S. and Possibilities for Robotic Technology Development." 2016 American Association of Wine Economists Annual Conference. Bordeaux, France. June 21-25, 2016.
- Type:
Other
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2017
Citation:
McCorkle, D.A., E.W. Hellman, D.D. Hanselka, R.M. Dudensing, and R. Allen. "The Potential for Robotic Technology for Grape Production in the U.S. Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service, Department of Agricultural Economics, The Texas A&M University System, College Station, Texas, January 2017.
|
Progress 04/01/15 to 03/31/16
Outputs
Target Audience:The target audience reached through our project efforts during Year 2 includes the grape growers that are participating in the representative vineyard panels that we worked with in gathering data for the project. These include the following, broken into initial panel meetings, and follow-up data validation panel meetings via web/phone conferences: INITIAL PANEL MEETINGS: California Wine Grapes Panel (Napa Valley): 4 wine grape growers (3/24/16) New York Wine Grapes Panel (Finger Lakes area): 6 wine grape growers (7/15/15) PANEL DATA VALIDATION & FOLLOW-UP WEB CONFERENCE MEETINGS: New York Wine Grapes Panel (Finger Lakes area): 5 wine grape growers (7/15/15) California 40 Ac. Open Gable Trellis System Raisins (San Joaquin Valley area): 1 raisin grower (6/12/15) Washington 250 Ac. Wine Grapes Panel (Eastern Washington): 2 wine grape growers (5/15/15) Oregon 10 Ac. Wine Grapes Panel (Willamette Valley area): 4 wine grape growers (5/14/15) Texas 50 Ac. Wine Grapes Panel (Texas South Plains area): 4 wine grape growers (5/4/15) Texas 100 Ac. Wine Grapes Panel (Texas South Plains area): 2 wine grape growers (4/23/15) Combined, the grower panels represent 28 grape growers that we worked with in year 2. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?Each of the panel meetings has served as a professional development activity for the panel members as they have discussed and exchanged ideas about various aspects of grape production. I don't think there is any doubt that most panel members left the meeting learning something. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Preliminary results from the project have been disseminated to growers through a presentation at the Precision Farming Expo, and to the academic and extension community through presentations at the Southern Agricultural Economics Association, American Association of Wine Economists, and the International Workshop on Innovations in the WineIndustry. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?For Goal 1, we will be conducting research on the technical aspects of new precision mechanization/robotic technology for vineyards. This research will be focused on: Define vineyard tasks with potential for robotics application. Using the information we gathered from the vineyards we have visited, we will identify vineyard tasks that would be most appropriate for the use of robotics, either through complete automation or human-robot collaboration. We will also identify a target cost range for each task the robotic solution would need to meet in order to be economically feasible for the task. Define robotic systems and subsystems required for each task. We will break down each of the identified tasks to determine the type of robotic system and subsystems that are necessary for the successful completion of the required operations. Survey products and technologies that meet the needs of each system. After identifying the systems that can perform the vineyard tasks, we will determine what products and technologies are essential to build such a system and carry out the work. To learn about the products and technologies currently available and to evaluate their maturity, we will participate in Specialty Ag conferences focused on automation, and robotics technology focused conferences. We will also research, identify and consult with leading researchers, including but not limited to CMU vision, Cornell, Purdue (robotics vision lab), and NREC. Identify currently available and unavailable technologies. After performing the previously described research, we will create a list of products and technologies currently available and identify the technology that would need to be developed or matured in order to build the aforementioned robotic systems. Investigate the technology gaps. We will further explore the technology identified above as not currently available or not ready for product, by reaching out to the technology leaders and assessing the state of the art and development timelines. Report findings. We will write a report discussing the vineyard tasks with potential robotics application, including concept systems, characteristics, necessary components, state of essential technology, and economics. *For Goal 2 on determining the economic feasibility, we will soon finish developing the model that will be used to assess the economic viability of each representative vineyard using current production practices and technology available. To complete the model development, we will finish inputting the California data into the model and will then be able to validate the model. We have a few revisions to make to all the representative vineyard models. All model revisions and validation will be completed in year 3 and we will be able to present final results. This analysis will include the labor costs for selected production tasks and the net present value of these costs over a 7-10 year timeframe, information that will be very useful to technology developers. *For Goal 3 on disseminating information to technology developers, our plan of work has some overlap with that of Goal 3, and that is to participate in Specialty Ag conferences focused on automation, and robotics technology focused conferences. We will also research, identify and consult with leading researchers, including but not limited to CMU vision, Cornell, Purdue (robotics vision lab), and NREC.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
*Goal 1: Identify production issues and production operations (tasks) that are commonly utilized in the production of wine grapes, and determine which of these operations are most suitable for robotic technology development. This goal is aimed at Year 1 and 2 activities. During year 2, we met with the wine grape vineyard panels in New York and California. In working with the panels in Texas (wine grapes), Oregon (wine grapes), Washington (wine grapes), New York (wine grapes), and California (wine, table grapes, raisins), we have identified several production-related challenges facing vineyards, and several production tasks that may lend themselves to robotic technology development. Based on the feedback we have received from the panels, the most common issues facing vineyards is labor availability and labor cost, followed by weather/production risk, crop estimation, and water availability for irrigation. The two labor issues are directly related to the need for the development of precision mechanization/robotic technology. We have developed a preliminary list of production tasks that may be suitable for robotic technology development. These tasks include pruning, shoot positioning, pulling brush, shoot and cluster/fruit thinning, sucker removal, raising and lowering catch wires, crop estimation, precision weed control, harvesting and in-row fruit transport (table grapes), crop health, disease and pest monitoring/control. Additionally, another idea that surfaced is the need for robotic technology to assist individuals that have a disability. People with disabilities could be an underutilized workforce that could potentially work in vineyards, if they had assistive technology. This list of tasks will be narrowed down as we get deeper into researching the technology needs, and technology available. *Goal 2: Determine the economic feasibility of adopting robotic technology for representative vineyard operations in 5 regions of the U.S. Goals 2 and 3 are affected by the change in the project that was made, and approved by NIFA, in the fall of 2015. Given that robotic technology will not be available for vineyards to adopt in the near future; there is no longer a need during the lifespan of this project to assess the economic feasibility of growers adopting robotic technology. However, we will be able to provide technology developers with some very useful information, including the costs that growers are currently incurring to perform selected production tasks that have the potential for robotic technology, as well as technical aspects such as the speed at which new technology would likely need to perform. During year 2, we met with the wine grape panels in New York and California and collected data from them on the cost of production, labor requirements, assets, loans, financing arrangements, cash flow information, production issues in their respective areas, and areas of production where precision mechanization would be most useful. We have also validated data and preliminary financial statement results via a follow-up meeting with the New York panel. Data validation for the California wine panel occurred during the panel meeting. Goal 2 also includes the development of the simulation model to assess the economic health of vineyards using current production practices and technology. We are close to completing the simulation models for both of the Texas wine grape vineyards, California table grapes and raisin vineyards, and the Oregon, Washington, and New York wine grapes vineyards. We just recently obtained the data for the California wine grapes vineyard and we will be starting on it soon. *Original Goal 3: Educate vineyard managers on robotic technology development for viticulture production, and on assessing the economic feasibility of adopting robotic technology. Given the NIFA approved changes to the project, Goal 3 is revised to: Disseminate information from the project broadly to technology developers with the goal of attracting technology developers to meet the precision mechanization needs of vineyards by speeding up the process of identifying and/or developing improved technology that is needed to facilitate the development of robotic technology/precision mechanization for vineyards. While efforts pertaining to Goal 3 will mostly occur in year 3 of the project, some efforts have already taken place with Dr. McCorkle participating in the Precision Farming Expo in Kennewick, WA in January 2016. The goal of the expo, which features two full days of learning with expert researchers, innovative developers and precision-ag focused technology manufacturers, is to bring agriculturalists and technology developers together to find new tools to increase sustainability. McCorkle presented a paper on the economics of potential robotic technology development for wine grape vineyards in Washington and Oregon (the presentation was well received with a lot of questions at the end), and talked with several conference participants about the precision mechanization needs of vineyards, including researchers at Washington State University who are developing a robotic harvester for apple growers. Some of their work may be useful to the technology challenges related to vineyards.
Publications
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
McCorkle, D.A., R.M. Dudensing, D. Hanselka, E.W. Hellman, R. Allen, and K. Gunnett. Economics of Robotic Technology in Texas Wine Grape Production. Presented Paper. 2016 Southern Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting. San Antonio, TX. February 9, 2016.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
McCorkle, D.A., R.M. Dudensing, D. Hanselka, E.W. Hellman, R. Allen, and K. Gunnett. Economics of Wine Grape Production Practices and the Potential for Robotic Technology in Selected Growing Areas of the U.S. Presented Paper. 2016 International Workshop on Innovations in the Wine
Industry. Montpellier, France. January 21, 2016.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
McCorkle, D.A., R.M. Dudensing, D. Hanselka, E.W. Hellman, R. Allen, and K. Gunnett. Exploring Robotic Technology for Wine Grape Production. Presentation at the 2015 American Association of Wine Economists Annual Meeting. May 28, 2015.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
McCorkle, D.A. Are Wine Grapes Ripe for Precision Mechanization? Presentation at the 2016 Precision Farming Expo. January 7, 2016.
|
Progress 04/01/14 to 03/31/15
Outputs
Target Audience:The target audience reached through our project efforts during Year 1 include the grape growers that are participating on the representative vineyard panels that we have worked with thus far. These include the following the following face-to-face panel meetings: Texas 100 Acre Wine Grapes Panel (Texas South Plains area): 5 wine grape growers Texas 50 Acre Wine Grapes Panel (Texas South Plains area): 4 wine grape growers California 100 Acre Table Grapes Panel (San Joaquin Valley area): 4 table grape growers California 40 Acre Individual Tray Dried Raisins Panel (San Joaquin Valley area): 1 raisin grower California 40 Acre Open Gable Trellis System Raisins (San Joaquin Valley area): 1 raisin grower California 40 Acre Overhead Trellis System Raisins (San Joaquin Valley area): 1 raisin grower Oregon 10 Acre Wine Grapes Panel (Willamette Valley area): 4 wine grape growers Washington 250 Acre Wine Grapes Panel (Eastern Washington): 5 wine grape growers We have also had communication with the California Table Grapes Commission (Executive Director and a research staff member). This represents 25 grape growers and 2 industry organization personnel that we have worked with to date. We are scheduled to meet with the New York and California wine panels in July 2015. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?
Nothing Reported
How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Participating growers have been provided draft production cost budgets and financial statements, which we are reviewing and validating with each panel via a web conference/conference call to (1) ensure we had appropriately captured their input, (2) provide an opportunity for additional input, and (3) demonstrate preliminary draft products to the growers. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?For Goal 1 on identifying production issues and production tasks that may be suitable for robotic technology development, we will meet with the New York and California wine grape panels in July 2015. Sometime soon after these two meetings, we will do a follow-up online/conference call with both of these panels to validate the data we collected from them. This will conclude the data collection phase of the project. For Goal 2 on determining the economic feasibility, we will soon finish developing the model we will use to assess economic feasibility and will begin assessing each representative vineyard budget. This analysis will likely focus on identifying a price range that each representative vineyard could afford to pay for a hypothetical piece of robotic equipment that could perform multiple production tasks. This range would be based on likely labor-replacements rates and expected increasing labor costs in each region over the 10-year planning horizon. For Goal 3 on educating vineyard managers, these activities will occur in Year 3 of the project.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
For Goal 1: Identify production issues and production operations (tasks) that are commonly utilized in the production of wine grapes, and determine which of these operations are most suitable for robotic technology development. This goal is aimed mostly at Year 1 activities. In working with the panels in Texas (wine grapes), California (table grapes, Raisins), Oregon (wine grapes), and Washington (wine grapes), we have identified several production-related issues facing vineyards, and several production tasks that may lend themselves to robotic technology development. Based on the feedback we have received from the panels, the most common issues facing vineyards is labor availability and labor cost, followed by weather/production risk, and water availability for irrigation. The two labor issues are directly related to the need for the development of precision mechanization/robotic technology. We have identifed the following production tasks as being potentially suitable for robotic technology development: pruning, shoot positioning, pulling brush, shoot and cluster/fruit thinning, sucker removal, raising and lowering catch wires, crop estimation, precision weed control, harvesting and in-row fruit transport (table grapes), and crop health, disease and pest monitoring/control. We will be meeting with the New York and California wine grape panels in July 2015 so the production issues and tasks suitable for robotic technology does not yet reflect what we will learn from these two panels. For Goal 2: Determine the economic feasibility of adopting robotic technology for representative vineyard operations in 5 regions of the U.S. Nothing to report for Goal 2 yet as we will address this goal in Year 2. For Goal 3: Educate vineyard managers on robotic technology development for viticulture production, and on assessing the economic feasibility of adopting robotic technology. Nothing to report for Goal 3 as we will address this goal in Year 3.
Publications
|
|