Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Soil & Tillage Research 98 (2008) 150–163

www.elsevier.com/locate/still

Use of an instrumented disc coulter for mapping soil

mechanical resistance
A. Hemmat a,*, V.I. Adamchuk b, P. Jasa b
a
Department of Farm Machinery, College of Agriculture, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan 84156-83111, Iran
b
Department of Biological Systems Engineering, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE 68583-0726, USA
Received 13 July 2007; received in revised form 14 November 2007; accepted 28 November 2007

Abstract
A soil mechanical resistance sensor with a large-diameter disc coulter was developed to delineate areas of differing soil strength
across agricultural fields. The instrumented disc coulter consisted of a 76.2 cm disc with two depth-measuring sensors (rotary
potentiometer and ultrasonic proximity sensor) along with a global positioning system (GPS) receiver to georeference operating
depth measurements. The consistency and repeatability of the system response were evaluated by making six passes across long-
term tillage comparison plots with different degrees of soil disturbance, including: 20 cm plowing, 15 cm disking, 30 cm chiseling,
and no-till in several combinations. At the time of testing, standard soil cone penetrometer measurements were taken. The
relationship between the average cone index in the 0–30 cm soil profile (CI0–30 cm) and the disc operating depth was evaluated. In
addition, the cumulative energy density of the given depth of penetration defined as specific cone penetration energy (J m2 or
N cm1) for each tillage plot was calculated using the cone index profiles. The average measured depth in each tillage plot was
compared to the average predicted depth (dci) of a fixed specific cone penetration energy (Pci). Static calibration tests on the depth
sensors showed excellent linearity with coefficients of determination (R2) greater than 0.99. The results showed that, on the average,
the changes in the depth measured with the rotary potentiometer were 44 and 68% of the changes in the depth measured with the
ultrasonic proximity sensor while the disc coulter was passing across, or along, the tillage plots. This difference was primarily due to
the sinkage of the tractor wheels. The depth measured with the ultrasonic sensor had significant correlation with both CI0–30 cm and
dci. This was partially due to the fact that a significantly high correlation (R2 = 0.97) between the CI0–30 cm and dci was observed,
which was not expected and originated from the type of soil profiles present. The instrumented disc coulter is a low soil disturbance
system and could be used as an inexpensive and simple sensor to obtain information about the mechanical condition of the soil for
spot tillage or other management decisions.
# 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Cone index; Disc coulter; Soil compaction; Soil mechanical resistance sensor

1. Introduction explain reasons for these differences have largely

Significant differences in crop yield within a field have
been reported in many parts of the U.S. Attempts to
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +98 311 391 3493;
fax: +98 311 391 2254.
E-mail address: ahemmat@cc.iut.ac.ir (A. Hemmat).
centered on pest and nutrient variability. However, Raper
et al. (2000a) stated that the variability in soil
composition and structure is a likely cause for extremely
variable yields, particularly in southeastern U.S. soils.
The presence of a compacted root-restricting layer in
soils can prevent adequate root growth. Reduced root
elongation contributes to temporal drought stress under
rainfed crop management, which frequently limits the

0167-1987/$ – see front matter # 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.still.2007.11.003
 A. Hemmat et al. / Soil & Tillage Research 98 (2008) 150–163
potential yield (Gray and Pope, 1986; Taylor, 1990).
These dense and compacted layers can occur naturally
(clay pan) or be imposed through farming (plow pan or
surface compaction) (Spoor, 2006).
Many producers in the mid-south and southeastern
U.S. resort to some form of annual deep tillage to break
through the hardpan layers, usually to a uniform depth,
for optimum crop performance (Raper et al., 2000a;
Gorucu et al., 2006). This approach has many draw-
backs. In most cases, farmers are not aware whether this
annual subsoiling is necessary, which parts of a field are
most compacted, nor the optimum depth of subsoiling.
In addition, both depth and thickness of hardpan layers
can vary substantially from field to field and within a
particular field (Clark, 1999; Raper et al., 2000a,b;
Gorucu et al., 2006). Therefore, applying uniform depth
tillage over the entire field may not be needed and,
therefore justifiable in terms of potential benefits and
costs. To determine the optimum tillage depth for more
efficient control of the hardpan layers, the depth of the
hardpan layer must be mapped. In previous research
(Garner et al., 1986), it was found that there is very little
to gain from tilling soil deeper than the compacted layer
and, in most cases, it is detrimental to till into a deeper
clay layer.
When the depth of tillage is adjusted based on the
depth of the hardpan, significant savings in energy and
potential reductions in soil erosion can be achieved. With
maps of the depth of the hardpan layer for entire fields,
producers have the information needed for setting and
adjusting the depth of tillage. Eventually, it would be
possible to consider delineating management zones,
which could require different tilling depths (Raper et al.,
2005). Such site-specific tillage, which modifies the
physical properties of soil only where the tillage is
needed for optimum crop growth, has several advantages.
Raper (1999) estimated that the energy cost of subsoiling
could be decreased by as much as 34% with variable
versus uniform tillage. Fulton et al. (1996) reported that
fuel consumption could be reduced by 50% using site-
specific tillage compared to subsoiling the entire field.
To prescribe site-specific tillage, both the horizontal
and the vertical variability of soil mechanical resistance
within a field are needed. Two approaches have been
used to obtain soil mechanical strength variability
maps: (1) stop-and-go method (standard cone pene-
trometry), and (2) on-the-go soil strength profile
sensing. Measurement of the mechanical resistance of
soil to a penetrating object is recognized as a
conventional method to estimate the level of soil
mechanical resistance. The American Society of
Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASABE) has
151
specified a penetrometer with a conical tip as the
standard method to determine a soil strength index
based on a quasi-static test (ASABE, 2006). Even when
automated, cone penetrometer measurements are time
consuming and highly variable. In the second method, a
narrow tine (vertical knife) equipped with load
transducers is typically used (Adamchuk et al., 2004).
To compare soil strength measured with an
instrumented tine and using a standard cone penet-
rometer, the nature of the soil disturbance ahead of each
penetrating tool should be similar. The soil failure mode
in front of a cone is of a bearing-capacity type (Chung
et al., 2006). For a narrow tine, a similar kind of failure
occurs only below the critical depth (typically more
than six times the width of the tine), since soil failure
normally changes from the crescent type at the top to the
lateral type below this critical depth (Godwin and
O’Dogherty, 2007). Thus, soil failure near the surface is
of a three-dimensional crescent type. For example, for a
16 mm (5/8 in) wide vertical tine the three-dimensional
type of failure occurs down to 100 mm. However, for a
backward raked narrow tine such as a disc coulter the
bearing-capacity type soil failure starts near the surface.
Even for the concave disks with a zero sweep angle (the
face of disk is parallel to the direction of travel), all the
soil reaction is of the scrubbing form. The scrubbing
component is compressive in nature and always
produces an upward vertical force. The force was
estimated by Godwin et al. (1987) using the bearing-
capacity theory.
Rolling coulters have been used to cut crop residue,
open furrows, or for implement stabilization. A rolling
coulter can be characterized by its shape, diameter, and
sharpness. Large-diameter coulters have good residue
cutting ability and a relatively high vertical force
requirement (Schaaf et al., 1981). Draft forces and
vertical forces on coulters increase with depth,
diameter, soil strength, and/or presence of residue
(Schaaf et al., 1981; Kushwaha et al., 1986). These
force increases were attributed to larger surface areas of
contact with the soil resulting from either the diameter
or penetration depth increase (Kushwaha et al., 1986).
Tice and Hendrick (1991) measured disc coulter forces
and evaluated the predictive ability of 12 coulter force
models. They concluded that the Matsepura model
(Matsepura and Makarova, 1961) predicted coulter
forces better than any of the other 11 models which were
evaluated. The Matsepura model suggested that the
coulter draft and vertical forces were directly propor-
tional to operating depth taken to a power.
Smith et al. (1994) analyzed draft data of four disc
coulter shapes using a time series and compared the
152 A. Hemmat et al. / Soil & Tillage Research 98 (2008) 150–163
results with the ones obtained by Young (1986) for
chisels. They found that coulters show potential for
being used as an on-the-go sensing system to quantify
soil physical conditions. More recently, a cycling disc
coulter was developed by Pitla and Wells (2006) to
measure soil impedance between depths of 100 and
330 mm. They found a coefficient of determination (R2)
of 0.51 between the cone index and a coulter index
defined as the vertical force on the coulter divided by the
circumference of the coulter segment below the soil
surface.
In modern operations, large-diameter disc coulters
have been used to stabilize towed implements (e.g.,
planters). Therefore, an instrumented disc coulter
paired with a positioning device (GPS receiver) could
provide a sensing method that does not require an
additional field trip. For example, the disc coulter could
be equipped with a simple depth-measuring sensor
indicating spatial variation in the soil mechanical
condition.
To compare the assessed soil strength when a
standardized cone penetrometer and various on-the-go
mapping implements were used, many researchers have
applied the linear regression method. The cone index is
a point estimate of soil strength at a given depth,
whereas the operating depth of the disc coulter depends
upon the soil strength up to a certain depth under its
edge. Therefore, it was hypothesized that the use of
specific cone penetration energy (the cumulative energy
density from soil surface down to a given depth) could
be a more appropriate measure of the in-field soil
strength.
The objectives of this research were to: (1) develop a
soil mechanical resistance sensor using a commercially
available disc coulter stabilizer, (2) determine if the
vertical movement of a spring-loaded disc coulter in the
soil can be used to assess soil strength, (3) study the
suitability of a rotary potentiometer and an ultrasonic
proximity sensor to measure coulter operating depth,
and (4) evaluate the relationship between disc coulter
operating depth and 0–30 cm cone index average (CI0–
30 cm), as well as the depth (dci) corresponding to a fixed
specific cone penetration energy (Pci) to be defined in
this work.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Sensor development
The soil mechanical resistance sensor used in this
study was based on a commercial disc coulter marketed
as a stabilizer for agricultural implements (Sunco
Marketing, North Platte, NE, USA).1 It was 76.2 cm in
diameter, 6 mm thick and sharpened on both sides, so
the angle of the beveled edge was 20.48. The disc was
mounted on a hub connected through an arm to the
mounting bracket. A torsion spring provided the disc
with downward force. The mounted bracket was
connected to a three-point hitch frame using a mounting
plate. While operating the sensor, the vertical move-
ment of the three-point hitch was manually blocked by
locking the frame to the drawbar. To maintain a steady
position of the mounting bracket, six 19 kg ballast
weights were added (Fig. 1).
A wire-wound rotary potentiometer (Clarostat 58C1-
5K, Honeywell Sensing and Control, Golden Valley,
MN, USA) with a single-turn was used to monitor the
vertical motion of the disc coulter with respect to the
mounting bracket. The potentiometer was mounted at
the rotation point of the coulter arm to measure its
angular position. An ultrasonic proximity sensor (PLE,
Electro AGASTAT Corp., Sarasota, FL, USA) was used
to measure the actual operating depth of the disc coulter.
This sensor was attached to the safety shield of the disc
so that its orientation was close to vertical during a
normal field operation (Fig. 1).
The rotary potentiometer and ultrasonic proximity
sensor were calibrated with respect to the ground after
placing the tractor with the system onto a level concrete
surface and removing the disc. The calibration
equations were linear with coefficients of determination
(R2) greater than 0.99 in both cases.
Although the torsion spring was maintained loaded
during the entire field operation, the load applied to the
coulter was not constant. Thus, even relatively small
changes in pivoting arm angular displacement could
provide measurable variation in the downward force
applied to the coulter. A load cell (3116-20k, Lebow
Products, Inc., Troy, MI, USA) was used to measure this
downward force at the end of the pivoting arm while
moving it up and down. This force was measured for a
series of static tests representing different operating
depths.
The signals from both sensors were captured using
a 12-bit A/D converter (CXLDK, Crossbow Technol-
ogy, Inc., San Jose, CA, USA) and a specially
designed software interface. The data were sampled at
1
Mention of a trade name, proprietary product, or company name is
for presentation clarity and does not imply endorsement by the
authors, Isfahan University of Technology (Isfahan, Iran), or the
University of Nebraska-Lincoln (Lincoln, Nebraska, USA), or exclu-
sion of other products that may also be suitable.
 A. Hemmat et al. / Soil & Tillage Research 98 (2008) 150–163
Fig. 1. Disc coulter soil sensor mounted on the three-point hitch of a tractor (direction of travel is from right to left).
approximately 36 Hz and stored in a text-delimited
file. Geographic coordinates (longitude and latitude)
and travel speed were determined using a GPS
receiver (Add-On GPS 3100, Ag Leader Technology,
Inc., Ames, IA, USA) with coast guard differential
correction. While post-processing the recorded data,
erroneous measurements of the ultrasonic sensor were
filtered out and both streams of data were smoothed
using a 19 point moving averaging.
Cone index measurements were conducted using
either a handheld cone penetrometer (The Investigator
Compaction Meter, Spectrum Technologies, Inc., Plain-
field, IL, USA) or a custom-designed, tractor-mounted,
electrically driven cone penetrometer system. The
handheld penetrometer had a 308 cone with a 12.8 mm
diameter of the base, whereas the tractor-mounted
penetrometer had a 308 cone tip with a 20.2 mm
diameter of the base. Both sensors were operated at
vertical speeds that did not exceed 30 mm s1.
2.2. Sensor evaluation
A set of long-term tillage plots located at Rogers
Memorial Farm (Lincoln, NE, USA) were used to
evaluate the instrumented disc coulter system. These
tillage plots with controlled-traffic were established in
1981 and have had a sorghum–soybean crop rotation.
Sharpsburg silty clay loam is the soil series dominating
the plots.
In April 2007, following soybeans the previous year,
two experiments were conducted. During Test 1, six
153
parallel passes were made across eight different plots
perpendicular to the crop rows. During Test 2, the
sensor was operated between crop rows with no traffic
(center rows).
Eight tillage plots from two adjacent long-term
experiments were used during Test 1 (passing across the
rows). Those included: (1) plowing (moldboard) + -
disking (P-D), (2) disking only (D1), (3) no-till (NT1),
(4) no-till with history of cultivation (NT2), (5) non-
disturbed soil (ND—no-till with certain tillage history
previous seasons), (6) chiseling only (C), (7) disking
only (D2), and (8) another no-till (NT3). During Test 2
(operating in parallel to the crop rows), 18 plots with the
following six tillage treatments were used: (1) plowing
(moldboard) + double disking (P-D-D), (2) chise-
ling + disking (C-D), (3) double disking (D-D), (4),
single disking (D), (5) no-till (NT1), and (6) no-till with
history of cultivation (NT2). The relative location of
these tillage plots is shown in Fig. 2. Both plowing and
chiseling were performed in the Fall of 2006. While the
first disking operation was performed prior to the tests,
the second disking was done between Test 1 and Test 2.
Therefore, the tillage treatments provided for the two
tests were not identical. The depths of plowing, chiseling
and disking were 20, 30, and 15 cm, respectively.
During Test 1, the instrumented disc coulter was
operated perpendicular to the rows along six passes
(three in each direction). All the passes were made
within a 5 m wide strip. The average travel speed was
approximately 2 km h1. Manual cone penetrometer
measurements were made in the middle between each of
154 A. Hemmat et al. / Soil & Tillage Research 98 (2008) 150–163

Fig. 2. The map of tillage plot with georeferenced measurements (operating depth of the instrumented disc coulter and tractor–mounted cone
penetrometer). Plot labels include P, C, D, NT, and ND to indicate plowed, chiseled, disked, no-till, and non-disturbed soil conditions, or their
combinations at the time of testing.

the two adjacent passes at a depth of 45 cm (5 cm
increments) at 5 points equally spaced along the 9 m
width of each tillage plot. Therefore, a total of 15 cone
penetrometer measurements was done in each tillage
plot. At the same time, two independent soil samples
from a depth of 5 to 15 cm were taken from each plot to
measure gravimetric water content.
For Test 2, five 55 cm deep georeferenced cone index
profiles (2.5 cm increment) were obtained along the
length of each tillage plot using the tractor-mounted
penetrometer. Then, the instrumented disc coulter was
run along the same path parallel to the crop rows
(Fig. 2). Only non-trafficked row middles were used for
this test. In each of the 18 plots (six tillage treatments
replicated three times), three soil samples were obtained
from the 7.5 to 20 cm depth to measure gravimetric
moisture.
2.3. Data analysis
To compare measurements obtained using the
instrumented disc coulter and cone penetrometers,
several alternative procedures were considered. Various
aspects of soil–soil and soil–metal failure have been
known to influence soil impedance to penetration of
either of the two tools (Chung et al., 2006; Godwin
et al., 1987). For example, depth of coulter operation
can be compared to an average cone penetrometer
measurement in the top 30 cm layer of soil (maximum
tillage depth in the experimental plots and also common
rooting zone).
However, the operating depth of the disc coulter is
influenced by the bulk strength of soil, versus the depth-
specific measurements of the cone index (CI). There-
fore, a general relationship between the penetrating
depth of the cone penetrometer to achieve a fixed
specific energy level (Pci) and the operating depth of the
disc coulter was anticipated to be independent of the
shape of the soil profile. The cone penetration energy
criterion, Pci, was defined as the integrated area
enclosed under the cone penetrometer profile:
Zdci
Pci ¼ CI dz (1)
0
where Pci represents energy per unit cross-sectional
area of the cone (i.e., kPa cm = 103 J cm2 =
101 N cm1), which characterizes the specific
cone penetration energy required to push a cone
 A. Hemmat et al. / Soil & Tillage Research 98 (2008) 150–163 155

penetrometer from the surface to the depth dci, and z is
the vertical downward coordinate with respect to the
soil surface.
For each experiment (Test 1 and Test 2), the fixed
value of Pci was calculated so that the average predicted
depth dci (Eq. (1)) was the same as the average operating
depth of the disc coulter (davg). Then, CI profile-specific
estimates of dci were calculated numerically to compare
them with corresponding disc coulter operating depths.
In addition, the comparison between ultrasonic and
rotary potentiometer sensors was anticipated to expose
sinkage of the tractor wheels due to the compactible
layer of soil near the surface. Unlike the ultrasonic
sensor, the potentiometer sensor measures disc depth
with respect to the tractor. All presented comparisons
were performed using the simple linear regression
method.
to lower depths and partially release the spring.
However, due to the hysteresis present in the torsion
spring (caused by friction between individual coils), the
loading and unloading data did not correspond to each
other. That is why the downward force cannot be
accurately predicted using the instrumented coulter
depth measurement. On the other hand, during a normal
depth of operation between 0 and 25 cm, the downward
force ranged from 1 to 3 kN, and significant vertical
motion of the disc coulter could be expected only if soil
reaction was close to either end of this range (<1–2 kN
the disc will move down and above >2–3 kN the disc
will move up). For this study, we considered the trend in
measured operating depth as an indicator of the ability
of the soil to provide sufficient reaction force causing
the disc downward force to oscillate within its normal
operating range (1–3 kN).

3. Results and discussion
3.1. Torsion spring testing
During field operation, the instrumented disc coulter
is preloaded with a torsion spring. The change of
downward force applied to the disc with respect to the
depth of operation is shown in Fig. 3. There was a linear
trend for loading and unloading data. At the depth
corresponding to the disc touching the ground, the
downward force was approximately 3 kN with about
30 N cm1 decrease as the disc was able to penetrated
3.2. Cone index and specific cone penetration
energy depth profiles
An average cone index profile was determined for
each plot by averaging 15 and 5 profiles from each
tillage plot for Test 1 (cross-passing and manual
penetrometer) and Test 2 (running-along the plots and
tractor-mounted penetrometer), respectively. These
average profiles and the overall average disc coulter
operating depth (davg) are shown in Figs. 4a and 5a. The
gravimetric soil moisture measurements performed at
the time of cone penetrometry are summarized in
Table 1. During both experiments (Test 1 and Test 2), P-
D/P-D-D was shown to have the lowest CI values,
whereas NT treatments indicated the highest CI among
all plots. The D/D-D and C/C-D plots resulted in the

Table 1
Gravimetric soil water content (dry basis, g/g) in tillage plots at the
time of cone penetrometry (Tests 1 and 2)
Tillage plota Test 1 Tillage plot Test 2
b
Mean S.D. Mean S.D.
P-D 25.2 1.4 P-D-D 25.0 3.2
D1 25.9 4.5 C-D 28.1 1.1
NT1 25.5 0.5 D-D 26.3 3.3
NT2 26.8 0.5 D 28.7 0.5
ND 24.8 0.7 NT1 28.7 0.7
C 29.8 1.7 NT2 26.8 2.8
D2 25.2 1.0
NT3 28.7 1.4
Overall 26.5 2.2 Overall 27.3 2.2
Fig. 3. Relationship between the downward load provided by the
a
torsion spring and the depth (d) of disc coulter operation with respect P, C, D, NT, and ND stand for plowing, chiseling, disking, no-till,
to soil surface (negative depth means the coulter is above ground; Fl is and non-disturbed soil.
b
the force during loading; Fu is the force during unloading). Standard deviation.
156 A. Hemmat et al. / Soil & Tillage Research 98 (2008) 150–163
Fig. 4. Cone index (a) and specific cone penetration energy (defined
by Eq. (1)) (b) vs. depth for eight tillage plots (Test 1–crossing crop
rows; P, C, D, NT, and ND stand for plowing, chiseling, disking, no-
till, and non-disturbed soil; Pci (Eq. (1)) indicates fixed specific cone
penetration energy that would produce dci (Eq. (1)) equal to the overall
average disc coulter operating depth of davg = 12.3 cm).
middle values for CI. There was no abrupt change in CI
profile for any of the long-term tillage plots. The
average moisture content during Test 2 was slightly
(<1 g/g) higher than during Test 1, and the overall cone
index average over all plots for Test 2 was generally
lower than that for Test 1.
Figs. 4b and 5b show the relationship between
cumulative depth (same as dci in Eq. (1)) and cumulative
energy density (specific cone penetration energy Pci in
Eq. (1)). Predicting dci for a fixed value of Pci can be
used to better distinguish the mechanical properties of
Fig. 5. Cone index (a) and specific cone penetration energy (defined
by Eq. (1)) (b) vs. depth for six tillage plots (Test 2–parallel to crop
rows; P, C, D, and NT stand for plowing, chiseling, disking, and no-till
soil; Pci (Eq. (1)) indicates fixed specific cone penetration energy that
would produce dci (Eq. (1)) equal to the overall average disc coulter
operating depth of davg = 17.9 cm).
the soil among different tillage treatments since it is
sensitive to the shape of CI profiles (unlike the fixed
depth averaging) and the major tillage impact occurring
close to the soil surface. During both tests, the strength
of soil increased with depth, and no-till plots had
generally greater strength compared to the tilled soil. Of
particular interest was the grouping of fall chiseling
with spring disking during Test 1 (cross-passing) and
the overlaying of the D-D (double-disking) curve with
P-D-D (plowing + double-disking) during Test 2 (tra-
veling along crop rows).
In general, the magnitude of cone index measure-
ments was moderate (<2 MPa) with absolutely no root
 A. Hemmat et al. / Soil & Tillage Research 98 (2008) 150–163
restricting layers detected. This prevented us from
investigating the applicability of the instrumented disc
coulter to delineate compacted field areas, but studying
its ability to distinguish between different soil condi-
tions was feasible.
3.3. Depth sensors comparison
Fig. 6a shows the relationship between depth
measurements performed using the rotary potenti-
ometer and ultrasonic proximity sensor during Test 1.
Almost all the points were located below the 1:1 line.
The slope of the fitted linear regression line was about
Fig. 6. Linear correlation of coulter depth measured using rotary
potentiometer vs. ultrasonic proximity sensor (a) for Test 1 and (b) for
Test 2. P, C, D, NT, and ND stand for plowing, chiseling, disking, no-
till, and non-disturbed soil.
157
0.44 with 2.6 cm intercept. The regression indicates
that, on average, the change in the depth as measured by
the potentiometer was 44% of the change in the depth as
measured by the ultrasonic sensor. This difference was
related to sinkage of the tractor wheels. The values
measured in P-D and NT plots had the largest and
smallest deviations from the 1:1 line. This illustrates
that loosening soil close to the surface allows greater
sinkage of tractor wheels, which may cause compaction
during the growing season versus the no-till field with
its relatively constant year round soil strength.
A similar relationship between the operating depths
measured using both sensors was observed during Test 2
Fig. 7. Differences in depth measured with both sensors as a function of
average cone index in 0–30 cm soil profile (a) for Test 1 and (b) for Test
2. P, C, D, NT, and ND stand for plowing, chiseling, disking, no-till, and
non-disturbed soil. Ovals represent clusters of plots with similar dis-
tinguishable characteristics relevant to the sensor differences.
158 A. Hemmat et al. / Soil & Tillage Research 98 (2008) 150–163

(Fig. 6b). However, the slope of the linear regression
line was increased to about 0.68 with zero intercept. The
regression indicates that, on average, the change in the
depth as measured by the potentiometer was only 68%
of the change in the depth as measured by the ultrasonic
sensor. This was due to the fact that the tractor wheels
were traveling along traffic lanes allowing us avoid
oscillating pitching attitude of the tractor observed
during Test 1.
The relationships between the differences in depths
measured with both sensors and the average cone index
in the first 30 cm of the soil profile (CI0–30 cm) are shown
in Fig. 7. Tillage plots with similar differences were
grouped using ovals. These groupings showed that as
the soil strength in the topsoil layer decreased (through
mechanical soil disturbance), the differences in
operating depths measured with both sensors increased.
Therefore, under variable soil strength and bare surface
conditions, the ultrasonic proximity sensor attached to
the safety shield of the coulter provided more
representative measurements of the coulter operating
depth.
3.4. Sensor response to different soil treatments
The spatial variation in disc coulter operating depth
measured with the ultrasonic sensor during all six
passes of Test 1 is shown in Fig. 8a. The operating depth
had similar changes across all plots during repeated
travel in both directions. The spatial variability in
measured depth for the first pass of the Test 1 (most
northern pass in Fig. 2) is shown in Fig. 8b. It clearly

Fig. 8. Spatial variability in depth measured with ultrasonic sensor as the disc coulter passing (a) across (Test 1) and (b) along (Test 2) tillage plots.
Only one pass is illustrated for Test 2. P, C, D, NT, and ND stand for plowing, chiseling, disking, no-till, and non-disturbed soil.
 A. Hemmat et al. / Soil & Tillage Research 98 (2008) 150–163
Fig. 9. Relationship between average cone index in the 0–30 cm soil
layer and the operating depth of the disc coulter measured with the
ultrasonic proximity sensor for (a) Test 1 and (b) Test 2. Horizontal
and vertical error bars indicate  1 S.D. of the mean cone index and
measured depth. P, C, D, and NT stand for plowing, chiseling, disking,
and no-till.
reveals the degree of non-uniformity in three of the 18
plots (especially for P-D-D plot). The change of
operating depth with distance in NT1 and D plots was
less significant. Although smoothed, field measure-
ments produced 4 cm error providing visual spread of
measurements made at close spatial proximity more
than 10 cm. This error could originate from electrical
noise combined with surface micro-terrain affecting the
measurements. A more aggressive low-pass signal
processing can be implementing for practical applica-
tions. Presence of this noise did not affect the averages
159
Fig. 10. Relationship between average cone index in the 0–30 cm soil
layer and the operating depth of disc coulter measured with the
ultrasonic proximity sensor as the coulter passed along and across
the tillage plots (Test 1 and Test 2 combined).
used in the follow-up analysis. The gravimetric
moisture contents at the time of experiment in P-D-
D, NT1 and D plots were 22.7, 28.0, and 29.3% (dry
basis), respectively.
3.5. Coulter operating depth and cone index
profiles
The average cone index in the 0–30 cm soil layer was
used as the overall soil strength indicator for each tillage
plot. The average CI over this depth was chosen due to
the fact that the depth of the deepest soil loosening in the
tillage experiment was 30 cm. The relationships
between CI and the average operating depth of the
coulter measured with the ultrasonic proximity sensor
were linear and significant (Fig. 9). As expected, with
an increase in soil strength, the depth of penetration of
the disc into the soil decreased. A higher coefficient of
determination was obtained for Test 1 than for Test 2.
Although, plot heterogeneity was the main contributor
to moderate correlation, it was observed that the
position of the disc coulter with respect to the crop rows
also affected the measurements. Therefore, for practical
sensor deployment, it may be suggested that the
instrumented disc coulter should be moved diagonally
to the crop rows (stand-alone operation), or in a
consistent location between rows (behind planter).
Fig. 10 shows the relationship between the depths
measured with the ultrasonic sensor and the average
cone index in 0–30 cm soil profile for both experiments
(Test 1 and Test 2). The negative and significant
160 A. Hemmat et al. / Soil & Tillage Research 98 (2008) 150–163
Fig. 11. (a) Relationship between the average specific cone penetra-
tion energy and the average profile depth and (b) linear correlation
between average depths measured with the ultrasonic sensor and
predicted at 1447 N cm1 of specific cone penetration energy as
the disc coulter was operated across the tillage plots (Test 1). P, C,
D, NT, and ND stand for plowing, chiseling, disking, no-till, and non-
disturbed soil. Pci represents a level of specific cone penetration
energy (defined in Eq. (1)) at which the average predicted depth
(dci) over all tillage plots is equal to the overall average coulter depth
(davg) measured by the ultrasonic proximity sensor.
correlation between the soil resistance and the operating
depth of the coulter suggests that the change in
operating depth of the disc coulter does correspond
to the change in soil strength. Despite the difference in
cone penetrometers used for the two tests, both datasets
appeared to be complimentary.
Figs. 11a and 12a show the relationship between the
average profile depth over all tillage plots and specific
cone penetration energy for Test 1 and Test 2,
Fig. 12. (a) Relationship between the average specific cone penetra-
tion energy and the average profile depth and (b) linear correlation
between average depths measured with the ultrasonic sensor and
predicted at 1136 N cm1 of specific cone penetration energy as
the disc coulter was operated along the tillage plots (Test 2). P, C,
D, and NT stand for plowing, chiseling, disking, and no-till. Pci
represents a level of specific cone penetration energy (defined in
Eq. (1)) at which the average predicted depth (dci) over all tillage plots
is equal to the overall average coulter depth (davg) measured by the
ultrasonic proximity sensor.
respectively. The overall average instrumented disc
coulter operational depths (davg) for Test 1 and Test 2
were 12.3 and 17.9 cm, respectively (as shown in
Figs. 4a and 5a). To make these average operating
depths equal to the average depths of fixed specific cone
penetration energy, the specific cone penetration
energies were fixed at 1477 and 1136 N cm1 for Test
1 and Test 2, respectively. In Figs. 11b and 12b, the
predicted depths at these energy levels (as shown in
 A. Hemmat et al. / Soil & Tillage Research 98 (2008) 150–163 161

Fig. 13. Relationship between the operating depth of the disc coulter
measured with the ultrasonic proximity sensor and the depth predicted
using specific cone penetration energy as the coulter passed along and
across the tillage plots (Test 1 and Test 2 combined).

Figs. 4b and 5b) were plotted against the disc coulter

operating depths for all tillage plots. For Test 1, all data
points were located around the 1:1 line (Fig. 11b),
whereas for Test 2, the linear regression line had a slope
greater than 1 (Fig. 12b). Therefore, when crossing the
plots, the predicted depths (dci) showed the same rate of
response to changes in soil treatment as the measured
operating depth (their averages were set to be the same
for each experiment). On the other hand, when
operating parallel to the cropping rows, the predicted
depth had a higher rate of response to changing soil
conditions than the measured operating depth. This was Fig. 14. Relationship between average cone index in the 0–30 cm soil
primarily due to the extended range of operating depths layer and the predicted depth of the disc coulter using specific cone
penetration energy for Test 1 (a) and Test 2 (b). P, C, D, NT, and ND
in soils with lower strength when the maximum
stand for plowing, chiseling, disking, no-till, and non-disturbed soil.
operating depth was reached. When pooling results Pci represents a level of specific cone penetration energy (defined in
of both tests together (Fig. 13), the overall regression Eq. (1)) at which the average predicted depth (dci) over all tillage plots
equation had an R2 equal to 0.66, whereas R2 was only is equal to the overall average coulter depth (davg) measured by the
0.58 when the measured depth was compared with the ultrasonic proximity sensor.
CI averaged from 0 to 30 cm.
The correlation between the predicted depths at
specific cone penetration energies of 1447 and (CI0–30 cm) and the instrumented disc coulter operating
1136 N cm1, and the average cone index in the 0– depth predicted using the same profile (dci). This finding
30 cm soil profile for Test 1 and Test 2 are shown in could be attributed to the fact that the cone index
Fig. 14. The regression equation for Test 1 was linear profiles had consistent shapes and can explain similar
and for Test 2, was a second-order polynomial, and both results when comparing measured operating depth with
had R2 = 0.97. When these data sets were pooled either CI0–30 cm or dci. In conditions when the CI profiles
together (Fig. 15), it become obvious that the second for different locations of the field would cross each
order behavior observed for Test 2 could also apply to other, the specific cone penetration energy concept may
Test 1, whereas Test 1 covered only the linear section of provide a better indication of bulk soil strength and,
this relationship. The data suggest a strong relationship therefore, correlate with the depth of the instrumented
between the average of the cone penetrometer profile disc coulter.
162 A. Hemmat et al. / Soil & Tillage Research 98 (2008) 150–163
Fig. 15. Relationship between the disc penetrating depth predicted by
specific cone penetration energy, and in-situ soil strength measured
with a cone penetrometer.
3.6. Sensor application and future development
Large-diameter disc coulters are usually used as
implement stabilizers to reduce the lateral movement of
the implement with respect to the crop rows. With
relatively inexpensive additions, such coulters could be
used to log georeferenced data related to the mechanical
strength of the top layer of the soil. With the
instrumented system developed, it would be possible
to delineate field areas with suspected compaction that
may prevent healthy crop root development.
Although the ultrasonic proximity sensor was found
to be suitable for measuring disc coulter operation in
bare soil conditions, a rough soil surface and excessive
crop residue may limit its applicability. The rotary
potentiometer sensor by itself cannot provide relevant
output because it relies on the coulter’s position with
respect to the tractor. Therefore, another mechanical
sensor should be deployed to measure the actual depth
of disc coulter operation. Paired with a load measuring
transducer, the instrumented system could provide
sufficient feedback for a more advanced assessment of
soil mechanical conditions, but will present a more
expensive solution.
4. Conclusions
In this study an instrumented disc coulter capable of
measuring and recording the georeferenced depth of
operation was developed and evaluated. The system was
tested by traveling across and along the plots of a long-
term tillage experiment. A series of cone index profiles
was obtained at the time of testing. A cumulative energy
density (specific cone penetration energy, N cm1) as a
measure of in-field soil bulk strength was derived from
the average cone penetrometer measurements for each
tillage plot. The correlation between the operating depth
of the coulter and the cone index as well as the predicted
depth at a given specific cone penetration energy was
significant (R2 > 0.5). This was due to the strong
relationship between the CI0–30 cm and the predicted
penetrating depth of the coulter (dci) which was
explained by the shape of the cone index profiles
present in this study. The system that was developed
was a simple and inexpensive tool capable of generating
data for mapping soil strength indicators throughout
agricultural fields.
Acknowledgments
This publication is a contribution of the University
of Nebraska Agricultural Research Division, sup-
ported in part by funds provided through the Hatch
Act. This study was accomplished while the first
author was on an academic leave in the Department of
Biological Systems Engineering at the University of
Nebraska-Lincoln (Lincoln, NE, USA) with financial
support from Isfahan University of Technology
(Isfahan, Iran). The authors would like to thank
Daniel Jahraus, an undergraduate student in the
Mechanized Systems Management program, for his
assistance while developing and field testing the
instrumented disc coulter.
References
Adamchuk, V.I., Hummel, J.W., Morgan, M.T., Upadhyaya, S.K.,
2004. On-the-go soil sensors for precision agriculture. Comput.
Electron. Agric. 44, 71–91.
ASABE, 2006. S313.3. Soil Cone Penetrometer. Standards, 53rd
edition. ASABE, St. Joseph, Michigan.
Chung, S.O., Sudduth, K.A., Hummel, J.W., 2006. Soil failure models
for vertically operating and horizontally operating strength sen-
sors. Trans. ASABE 49 (4), 851–863.
Clark, R.L., 1999. Evaluation of the potential to develop soil strength
maps using a cone penetrometer. ASAE Paper No. 99-3109.
ASABE, St. Joseph, Michigan.
Fulton, J.P., Wells, L.G., Shearer, S.S., Barnhisel, R.I., 1996. Spatial
variation of soil physical properties: A precursor to precision
tillage. ASAE Paper No. 96-1012. ASAE, St. Joseph, Michigan.
Garner, T.H., Musen, H.L., Dodd, R.B., 1986. Management data for
primary tillage of coastal plain soil. In: Proceedings of the
Beltwide Cotton Production Research Conferences, Las Vegas,
Nevada, pp. 465–466.
Godwin, R.J., O’Dogherty, M.J., 2007. Integrated soil tillage force
prediction models. J. Terramech. 44, 3–14.
 A. Hemmat et al. / Soil & Tillage Research 98 (2008) 150–163
Godwin, R.J., Seig, D.A., Allott, M., 1987. Soil failure and force
prediction for soil engaging discs. Soil Use Manage. 3 (3), 106–
114.
Gorucu, S., Khalilian, A., Han, Y.J., Dodd, R.B., Smith, B.R., 2006.
An algorithm to determine the optimum tillage depth from soil
penetrometer data in coastal plains soils. App. Eng. Agric. 22 (5),
625–631.
Gray, L.E., Pope, R.A., 1986. Influence of soil compaction on soybean
stand, and yield and phytophthora root rot incidence. Agron. J. 78
(1), 189–191.
Kushwaha, R.L., Vaishnav, A.S., Zoerb, G.C., 1986. Soil bin evalua-
tion of disc coulters used under no-till crop residue conditions.
Trans. ASAE 29 (1), 40–44.
Matsepura, M.E., Makarova, N.A., 1961. Vzaimodejstvie pochvoo-
brabatyvayuschikh mashin i orudij s pochvoj. (Interaction of soil-
working machines and implements with soil.). Voprosy Zemle-
del’cheskoj Mekhaniki (Problems of Agricultural Mechanics.) 7,
45–46. (Minsk, Belarus).
Pitla, S.K., Wells, L.G., 2006. Development of an electro-mechanical
system to identify & map adverse soil compaction using
GIS&GPS. ASABE Paper No. 061,056. ASABE, St. Joseph,
Michigan.
Raper, R.L., 1999. Site-specific tillage for site-specific compaction: is
there a need? In: Proceedings of the International Conference on
Dryland Conservation/Zone Tillage, Beijing, China.
Raper, R.L., Schwab, E.B., Dabney, S.M., 2000a. Spatial variation of
the depth of the root-restricting layer in an upland soil of northern
163
Mississippi. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference
on Geospatial Information in Agriculture and Forestry, Lake
Buena Vista, Florida, pp. I-249–I-256.
Raper, R.L., Schwab, E.B., Dabney, S.M., 2000b. Site-specific mea-
surement of site-specific compaction in the Southeastern United
States. In: Proceedings of the 15th ISTRO Conference, Fort
Worth, Texas.
Raper, R.L., Schwab, E.B., Dabney, S.M., 2005. Measurement and
variation of site-specific hardpan for silty upland soils in the
Southeastern United States. Soil Till. Res. 84, 7–17.
Schaaf, D.E., Hann, S.A., Lindwall, C.W., 1981. Performance evalua-
tion of furrow openers cutting coulters and press wheels for seed
drills. In: Crop Production with Conservation in 80’s, ASAE, St.
Joseph, Michigan, pp. 76–81.
Smith, B.E., Schafer, R.L., Johnson, C.E., 1994. Using coulters to
quantify the soil physical condition. ASAE Paper No. 941,040.
ASAE, St. Joseph, Michigan.
Spoor, G., 2006. Alleviation of soil compaction: requirements, equip-
ment and techniques. Soil Use Manage. 22, 113–122.
Taylor, J.H., 1990. Soil compaction research in the eighties: an
international overview. ASAE Paper No. 90-1072. ASAE, St.
Joseph, Michigan.
Tice, E.M., Hendrick, J.G., 1991. Disc coulter forces: evaluation of
mathematical models. Trans. ASAE 34 (6), 2291–2298.
Young, S.C., 1986. Real-time identification of soil physical condition
for tillage control applications. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation.
Auburn University, Dep. Agric. Eng., Auburn, AL.