Performance of a liquid manure injector in a soil bin and on established forages
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rahman, S., Chen, Y., Zhang, Q., Tessier, S. and Baidoo, S. 2001. Performance of a liquid manure injector in a soil bin and on established forages. Canadian Biosystems Engineering/Le genie des biosystemes au Canada 43: 2.33-2.40. In this study, a liquid manure injector was tested both in a soil bin and in three established forage fields containing heavy clay and sandy soils. The injector featured sweep cutting tools behind Y-shaped coulters. In the soil bin, cutting forces and soil disturbance were measured for a single tool with coulter (WC) and without coulter (WOC) at three injection depths (50, 100, and 150 mm) and two tool forward speeds (0.56 and 1.40 m/s). In the forage fields, the injection unit with eight sweeps with coulters was tested at two depths (D1=80 to 90 and D2=110 to 150 mm) and three manure application rates (R1=28, R2=56, and R3=112 m3/ha). Soil disturbance, odour, and ammonia concentration in air above the ground following manure injection, and forage yields were measured. In the soil bin, the draft force and soil disturbance for both WC and WOC increased significantly with increased injection depth, and the speed effect was only significant for the WOC. Overall, more draft force and soil disturbance was observed for the WC than for the WOC arrangement. The effect of the Y-shaped coulter in front of the sweep was noticeable as the vertical force increased significantly below 100 mm. In the field study, soil disturbance increased significantly with injection depth in the sandy soils. No significant differences in odour concentrations were observed between treatments R3D1 and R2D2. However, manured plots had higher odour concentrations than the initial background levels. Ammonia emission was detected above the soil surface only for the treatment R3D1 in the clay soil. Forage yields were not significantly affected by injection depth or manure application rate. The combinations of the highest application rate and greatest injection depth increased the yield when compared to the control plot. Forage yield reduction was observed as the result of grass damage associated with the tillage operation of the injector. Un enfouisseur de lisier a ete etudie a la fois dans un bac de sol et trois differents champs de plantes fourrageres sur des sols sableux et argileux. L’enfouisseur consistait en un chisel en V precede d’un coutre bombe en forme de Y. Dans le bac de sol, les forces resultantes du cisaillement du sol et le derangement du sol furent mesurees pour un outil avec (WC) ou sans (WOC) coutre pour trois profondeurs d’enfouissement (50, 100 et 150 mm) ainsi que deux vitesses d’avancement (0,56 et 1,40 m/s). Dans les chaumes de plantes fourrageres, une rampe d’epandage comprenant huit enfouisseurs, incluant les coutres, fut evalue a deux profondeurs (D1, variant entre 80 et 90 mm et D2, entre 110 et 150 mm) et trois taux d’application de lisier (R1, R2 et R3 correspondant a 28, 56 et 112 m3/ha). Des donnees sur le derangement du sol, la concentration d’odeur et d’ammoniac dans l’air a la surface du sol suivant l’enfouissement du sol, ainsi que les rendements des plantes fourrageres furent recueillies. Les essais en bac du sol montrent l’effort de tirage et le derangement du sol pour WC et WOC augmentent avec une profondeur d’enfouissement accrue, mais que l’influence de la vitesse n’est significative que pour WOC. L’effort de tirage est generalement plus eleve pour WC que pour WOC. L’action du coutre forme en Y precedant le chisel en V s’exprime plus clairement par une force verticale elevee a des profondeurs au dela de 100 mm. En plein champs, le derangement du sol s’accroissait notablement avec la profondeur d’enfouissement dans le sol sableux. Aucune difference au niveau des concentrations d’odeurs ne fut detectee entre les combinaisons R3D1 et R2D2. Cependant, les concentrations d’odeurs au sol suivant l’epandage etaient plus elevees que pour les echantillons temoins recueillis avant les essais. On a pu detecter des concentrations mesurables d’ammoniac au sol que pour la combinaison R3D1 sur le sol argileux. Les rendements en fourrages n’ont pas ete influences par la profondeur d’enfouissement ni par le taux d’application. Toutefois, la combinaison R3D2 a favorise des rendements plus eleves relativement au traitement de reference, qui n’a pas recu de lisier. On a remarque que le travail du sol occasionne par les enfouisseurs endommageaient les plantes fourrageres au point d’en reduire leur rendements.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".