Agronomy 13 01305

agronomy
Article
Design Optimization and Mechanism Analysis of Water
Jet-Type Inter-Plant Weeding Device for Water Fields
Wenqi Zhou 1 , Kai Song 1 , Xiaobo Sun 1 , Qiang Fu 2 , Yijia Wang 3, * , Qi Wang 1 and Dongwei Yan 4
1 College of Engineering, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, China; zwq@neau.edu.cn (W.Z.);
s220701007@neau.edu.cn (K.S.); sunxiaobo@neau.edu.cn (X.S.); wangqi@neau.edu.cn (Q.W.)
2 School of Water Conservancy & Civil Engineering, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, China;
fuqiang0629@126.com
3 Department of Industrial and Manufacturing Systems Engineering, The University of Hong Kong, LG-108,
Composite Building, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong SAR 999077, China
4 Mechanical Teaching and Research Department, School of Electrical and Mechanical Engineering,
Pingdingshan University, Pingdingshan 467000, China; 26120@pdsu.edu.cn
* Correspondence: yijiaw@connect.hku.hk; Tel.: +86-166-297-4902
Abstract: Existing rice inter-plant weed control devices have difficulty achieving inter-plant weed
control in one pass. Due to the complex environment of paddy fields, these devices have a low weed
removal rate and high seedling damage rate, making it difficult to ensure high-quality operation.
This study innovatively designed a water jet-based rice inter-plant weed control device. Based on the
mechanism of water jet erosion of soil, it can erode and excavate the soil layer on which weeds depend,
achieving inter-plant weed control in paddy fields. The optimal range of structural parameters of
the water jet angle and nozzle opening diameter was analyzed. The results showed that the optimal
structural parameters of the device were a jet angle of 31◦ and a nozzle opening diameter of 4 mm,
which can achieve the best operational performance. Based on virtual simulation experiments,
single-factor and multi-factor orthogonal rotation combination experiments were carried out with
weed removal rate as the test index and different operating speeds and nozzle outlet pressures as
the test factors to optimize the water jet-based inter-plant weed control device. The experimental
results showed that when the working parameters of the water jet-based inter-plant weed control
device were a forward speed of 0.30 m·s−1 and a nozzle outlet pressure of 1.50 MPa, the weed
Citation: Zhou, W.; Song, K.; Sun, X.;
removal rate was the highest at 92.78%. Field validation experiments showed that the weed removal
Fu, Q.; Wang, Y.; Wang, Q.; Yan, D.
rate was 90.16% and the seedling damage rate was 1.80% under this operation condition, and the
Design Optimization and Mechanism
Analysis of Water Jet-Type Inter-Plant
quality of the operation met the requirements of inter-plant weed control technology. This study
Weeding Device for Water Fields. provides a technical reference for promoting the development of inter-plant weed control technology
Agronomy 2023, 13, 1305. https:// in paddy fields.
doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13051305
Keywords: inter-plant weed control in paddy fields; water jet; structural parameters; finite
Academic Editor: Andrea Peruzzi
element method
Received: 14 April 2023
Revised: 1 May 2023
Accepted: 4 May 2023
Published: 6 May 2023 1. Introduction
Rice is one of the world’s most important food crops, and ensuring rice production
safety is crucial [1–4]. Weeds in paddy fields are an important component of agricultural
ecology, with over 40 species of weeds such as barnyard grass and wild arrowhead causing
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
harm to rice growth [5–8]. Weeds in paddy fields compete with rice for nutrients, sunlight,
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
and water during growth and development, and also promote the spread of diseases and
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
pests, seriously affecting the quality and yield of rice [7–9].
conditions of the Creative Commons
To address the serious harm caused by weeds in paddy fields, numerous scholars
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
have conducted research and investigations, and herbicide application is often used to
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ remove weeds and ensure rice yield [10]. However, this method not only wastes resources
4.0/). but also leads to herbicide residues and soil and water pollution with increasing use
Agronomy 2023, 13, 1305. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13051305 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/agronomy

Agronomy 2023, 13, 1305 2 of 21
of fertilizers, causing environmental damage [11]. Precision agriculture has become an

increasingly important topic in recent years [12,13]. Mechanical weeding technologies in
precision agriculture have greater potential to reduce agricultural products’ dependence on
agricultural chemicals such as herbicides [14,15].
Therefore, mechanical weeding, as an environmentally friendly weed control technol-
ogy, can improve the soil environment and promote the absorption of fertilizer by crop
roots while avoiding environmental pollution caused by herbicide residues during weed-
ing [16,17]. Many scholars have designed different types of inter-plant mechanical weeders
for paddy fields, including umbrella-shaped weeding discs developed by the Japanese
companies Misen and Yoma that use composite movements to treat both rice and weeds
simultaneously. These discs have a rotary structure and high weeding efficiency, but also
high seedling damage rates [18]. The swing-type weeding comb produced by Kubota uses
elastic teeth to interact with the rice soil and weed roots in a vertical reciprocating motion,
burying or removing inter-plant weeds. Although this reduces the seedling damage rate,
the average weeding rate is only 40% [19]. Tian et al. [20] developed an inter-plant rice
weeding device with an upright structure and an arc-shaped elastic weeding tooth evenly
distributed on a weeding disc [13]. During operation, the weeding tooth rotates around
the vertical axis and moves forward with the machine to complete the inter-plant weeding.
Ratnaweera et al. [21] developed a weeder for paddy fields that can work in three rows at
a time, and its weeding device is equipped with two weeding rollers in the same row for
compound weeding, but it is not equipped with an inter-plant weeding device. However,
this device is prone to unnecessary seedling damage. Due to the problem of seedling or
root damage caused by inter-plant weeding devices, as well as their low weeding rates,
image recognition technology and electronic sensors have been applied in paddy field
weeding equipment to reduce the seedling damage rate. However, due to the interference
of factors such as the interlaced growth of rice seedlings and weeds in the field and water
surface reflection, the accuracy of plant positioning and identification with sensors is not
satisfactory and the effect of inter-plant weeding to avoid seedling damage is not good,
which has not been well resolved [22–24].
This study proposes an innovative inter-plant weeding device that uses high-pressure,
high-speed water jets to erode and crush the soil layer where weeds attach and grow for
weed control.
When conducting research on the interaction between mechanical weeding compo-
nents and soil, many scholars often have often used discrete element software for virtual
simulation experiments [25–27]. However, these studies have mostly focused on the condi-
tions of dryland soil operation, while the weeding operation environment in paddy fields
is more complex, including both a water layer and a soil layer [25]. Therefore, discrete
element virtual simulation software is no longer suitable for this study, and a dynamic
analysis software package, LS-DYNA, was selected to construct the virtual simulation
experiment environment.
As a mature dynamic analysis software package developed by LSTC (Livermore Soft-
ware Technology Corporation) in the United States, LS-DYNA is mainly used for nonlinear
finite element analysis, which can provide real numerical simulations for problems that are
difficult to analyze or are complex and diverse in the real world [28–30]. At present, many
scholars have extensively carried out numerical simulations using LS-DYNA software
for different models and applied it to the research field of agricultural machinery [22].
Long et al. [31] used the explicit dynamics analysis module of ANSYS software to simulate
and analyze the flow–solid coupling process of a rake-type weeding wheel, and obtained
the coupling stress between the weeding wheel and the soil–water model and the soil
disturbance rate through software post-processing. This provided theoretical and data
references for virtual simulation analysis of different rice fields and rice weeding machines.
Wang et al. [32] conducted virtual simulation analysis on the sugarcane cutting process
using LS-DYNA software and established a simulation model of cutting sugarcane with
a cutting knife. They analyzed the cutting mechanism of the cutting knife and obtained
Agronomy 2023, 13, 1305 3 of 21
Agronomy 2023, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 21
the trend between blade vibration and work quality during force cutting of sugarcane was
theoretical
obtained.g,and data references
providing theoreticalfor the
anddesign of sugarcane
data references for cutters. Sun,ofZhou,
the design and Lin
sugarcane [30]
cutters.
established
Sun, Zhou,aand motion model
Lin [30] of three-dimensional
established a motion model elastic projectile bodies inelastic
of three-dimensional multi-material
projectile
fluid
bodiesmedia using the finite
in multi-material element
fluid mediaanalysis
using the software LS-DYNA.
finite element Theysoftware
analysis performed fluid–
LS-DYNA.
solid
Theycoupling
performed simulation
fluid–solid of coupling
the collision process of
simulation between the projectile
the collision process and waterthe
between and ob-
projec-
tained
tile andthe impact
water andofobtained
key factors the on the water
impact of keysurface
factorsof
onthe
theprojectile. This model
water surface can also
of the projectile.
be used
This to analyze
model can alsothe
befluid–solid
used to analyze coupling problems of
the fluid–solid multiple
coupling solid bodies
problems impacting
of multiple solid
fluids,
bodiesproviding
impactingafluids,
reference for determining
providing a referencechanges in the state
for determining of thein
changes fluid caused
the state of by
the
fluid caused
projectile by projectile impact.
impact.
Inthis
In thisstudy,
study, aa water
water jet-based
jet-basedinter-plant
inter-plantweeding
weedingdevice
devicewas
wasusedusedasasthe
theresearch
research
carrier.LS-DYNA
carrier. LS-DYNAsoftware
softwarewas wasemployed
employedto toconstruct
constructaafluid–structure
fluid–structureinteraction
interactionmodel
model
of the jet–water–soil system. Virtual simulation experiments were conducted
of the jet–water–soil system. Virtual simulation experiments were conducted to determine to determine
theoptimal
the optimalstructural
structuralparameters
parametersof ofthe
thewater
waterjetjetweeding
weedingdevice
deviceto toreveal
revealthetheerosion
erosion
processofofsoil
process soilbybythe
thewater
water jetjet
in in
thethe soil–water
soil–water environment.
environment. The The optimal
optimal operating
operating pa-
parameters
rameters of device
of the the device
werewere determined
determined through
through benchbench tests,
tests, and theand the efficacy
efficacy of the
of the device
device
was was verified
verified throughthrough field tests.
field tests.
2.2.Materials
Materialsand andMethods
Methods
2.1. Overall Structure and Working Principle of Water Jet Weeding Device
2.1. Overall Structure and Working Principle of Water Jet Weeding Device
The structure of the water jet inter-plant weeding device is shown in Figure 1. It
The structure of the water jet inter-plant weeding device is shown in Figure 1. It mainly
mainly consists of a water tank, a plunger pump, a water supply pipeline, a jet frame, and a
consists of a waterblock.
nozzle mounting tank, aTheplunger
plunger pump,
pump a water supplyto
is connected pipeline,
the water a jet frame,
tank throughand aa suction
nozzle
mounting block. The plunger pump is connected to the water tank through
pipe. A pressure gauge is installed at the outlet of the plunger pump, which is followed a suction pipe.
by
Aa pressure gauge is installed at the outlet of the plunger pump, which
water delivery manifold and a three-way valve. The three-way valve is connected to theis followed by a water
delivery
nozzle and manifold and on
mounted a three-way
the nozzle valve. The three-way
mounting block viavalve is connected
a water delivery to the nozzle
branch pipe. andThe
mounted on the nozzle mounting block via a water delivery branch pipe.
jet frame is fixed on the mounting frame, and the nozzle mounting block is symmetrically The jet frame is fixed
on the mounting
distributed frame,
on both and
sides of the
the nozzle mounting
jet frame. The waterblockjetisinter-plant
symmetrically
weedingdistributed on both
device converts
sides of the jet frame. The water jet inter-plant weeding device converts
mechanical energy into kinetic energy of the water jet, which is applied to the soil mechanical energy
layer
into kinetic energy of the water jet, which is applied to the soil layer
where weeds grow and are attached, causing erosion and excavation, and removing weeds where weeds grow and
are attached, causing
from the paddy field. erosion and excavation, and removing weeds from the paddy field.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Figure
Figure1.1.Schematic
Schematicdiagram
diagramofofthe
thestructure
structureofofthe
thewater
waterjet
jetinter-plant
inter-plantweeding
weedingdevice
device(1.
(1.Water
Watertank.
tank.
2.2.Suction
Suctionpipe.
pipe.3.3.Plunger
Plungerpump.
pump.4. 4.
Pressure gauge.
Pressure 5. Water
gauge. 5. Waterdelivery manifold.
delivery manifold.6. Three-way valve.
6. Three-way 7.
valve.
Water delivery
7. Water branch
delivery pipe.pipe.
branch 8. Nozzle mounting
8. Nozzle block.block.
mounting 9. Nozzle. 10. Jet frame.
9. Nozzle. 10. Jet11. Mounting
frame. frame).
11. Mounting
frame).
During operation, the nozzle mounting block with nozzles is installed on the jet frame at
a set angle,
Duringwhich can be the
operation, adjusted.
nozzleThe mounting
mounting block
block is symmetrically
with placed
nozzles is installed onontheboth sides
jet frame
of
atthe seedling
a set angle,and located
which canclose to the mudThe
be adjusted. surface below the
mounting water
block layer. The plunger
is symmetrically pump
placed on
draws wateroffrom
both sides the the waterand
seedling tanklocated
under the drive
close of amud
to the power sourcebelow
surface and increases
the water thelayer.
pressure
The
and velocity
plunger of the
pump waterwater
draws flow. from
The water flow istank
the water thenunder
delivered to the of
the drive nozzles
a powerinstalled
sourcein and
the
nozzle mounting
increases blocks on
the pressure andboth sides of the
velocity thejet frame
water through
flow. The the water
water flow delivery
is thenpipeline.
delivered Theto
water jet sprays
the nozzles towards
installed the nozzle
in the soil layer, where inter-plant
mounting weeds
blocks on both grow
sides of and areframe
the jet attached, at a
through
set
theangle.
waterThe soil layer
delivery is eroded
pipeline. Theand broken
water down into
jet sprays smallthe
towards soilsoil
particles,
layer, which
where are carried
inter-plant
away by the water flow or directly dissolved in the surface water. Due to the fragile root
Agronomy 2023, 13, 1305 4 of 21

weeds grow and are attached, at a set angle. The soil layer is eroded and broken down into
small soil particles, which are carried away by the water flow or directly dissolved in the
surface water. Due to the fragile root system of inter-plant weeds, they lose their support
system of inter-plant weeds, they lose their support force as the soil they attach to is peeled
force as the soil they attach to is peeled off by the water jet. The inter-plant weeds are then
off by the water jet. The inter-plant weeds are then carried away by the water flow along the
carried away by the water flow along the direction of erosion of the peripheral broken soil
direction of erosion of the peripheral broken soil particles, as shown in Figure 2. Under the
particles, as shown in Figure 2. Under the buoyancy of the water layer, the inter-plant
buoyancy of the water layer, the inter-plant weeds float to the surface of the water, completing
weeds float to the surface of the water, completing the weeding operation. Because of the
the weeding operation. Because of the stratification of paddy soil and the difference in depth
stratification of paddy soil and the difference in depth and strength of the rooting systems
and strength of the rooting systems of rice and weeds, under a certain jet impact force and
of rice and weeds, under a certain jet impact force and jet angle, the jet erosion action
jet angle, the
excavates jet erosion
a certain depthaction
and excavates a certain
width of soil, whichdepth
can and widththe
complete of soil, whichoperation
weeding can com-
plete the weeding operation without affecting the stability
without affecting the stability of the rice seedling root system.of the rice seedling root system.
Direction
of advance
water layer
mud layer
soil layer
1 2 3 4
Figure
Figure 2. Schematic diagram
2. Schematic diagramof ofthe
theworking
workingprinciple
principleofofthe
thewater
waterjetjet inter-plant
inter-plant weeding
weeding device
device (1.
(1. Seedlings. 2. Water jet. 3. Weeds. 4. Soil crushing core).
Seedlings. 2. Water jet. 3. Weeds. 4. Soil crushing core).
2.2.
2.2. Analysis
Analysis of of the
the Optimal
Optimal Range
Range of of Structural
Structural Parameters
Parameters of of the
the Water
Water Jet
Jet Weeding
WeedingDevice
Device
2.2.1. Operating Conditions of Water Jet Weeding Device
2.2.1. Operating Conditions of Water Jet Weeding Device
The rice transplanting time in Heilongjiang Province varies slightly every year and
The rice transplanting time in Heilongjiang Province varies slightly every year and gen-
generally falls around mid-May. Transplanting usually lasts for about seven days. With the
erally
increase falls
in around
temperaturemid-May. Transplanting
and sufficient usually
sunlight, lastsinforpaddy
weeds aboutfields
sevengrow
days.rapidly,
With theand
in-
crease in temperature and sufficient sunlight, weeds in paddy
this is the peak period of weed hazards. The paddy field weeding environment includes fields grow rapidly, and this is
the peak period of weed hazards. The paddy field weeding environment
barnyard grass, rice seedlings, soil, water, and other factors. The soil can be divided into three includes barnyard
grass, rice
layers: mud seedlings,
layer, soilsoil, water,
layer, andandplowother factors.
bottom TheThe
layer. soilmud
can be divided
layer into three
is relatively layers:
soft, and,
mud layer, soil layer, and plow bottom layer. The mud layer is relatively
according to the literature [26,33], the depth of the mud layer, h1 , ranges from 20 to 50 mm; soft, and, according
to the literature
of the [26,33], thehdepth of the mud layer, h1, ranges from 20 to 50 mm; the depth of
the depth soil layer, 2 , ranges from 180 to 200 mm. The rice planting distance, H1 , in
the soil layer, h2, ranges from 180 to 200 mm. The rice planting distance, H1, in Heilongjiang
Heilongjiang Province is 300 mm, the plant spacing, H2 , is 10–15 mm, the transplanting depth,
hProvince is 300 mm, the plant spacing, H2, is 10–15 mm, the transplanting depth, h3, is 15–20
3 , is 15–20 mm, and the rice root depth, h4 , is 8–10 mm. At this time, barnyard grass is mostly
mm, and
single-rooted, the rice
androot depth,mostly
the roots h4, is 8–10
growmm. At mud
in the this time,
layer,barnyard
with a depth grassofis8–30
mostly
mm. single-
The
rooted, and the
environment for roots mostly
inter-plant grow in
weeding inthe mudfields
paddy layer,
is with
shown a depth of 8–30
in Figure 3. mm. The envi-
ronment for inter-plant weeding in paddy fields is shown in Figure 3.
Agronomy 2023,13,
Agronomy2023, 13,1305
x FOR PEER REVIEW 55 of
of2121
water layer
seedlings
water layer
barnyard grass
seedlings
barnyard grass
h3
l
h1
h3
l
h1
h4
h2
h4
h2
H1
H1
Figure 3. Weed control operation environment between rice plants in paddy fields.
2.2.2. Water Jet Angle
2.2.2. Water Jet Angle
2.2.2.
TheWater
size ofJet theAngle
water jet angle directly affects the area of soil erosion and damage caused
The size of the water jet angle directly affects the area of soil erosion and damage
by the water
causedThe bysize jet,
the of thereby
the water
water affecting
jet, the
jet angle
thereby weed
directly
affecting control
affects
the effect.
weed Weed
thecontrol
area control
ofeffect.
soil operation
erosion
Weed and in the
damage
control inter-
caused
operation
plant
inbythespaces of
theinter-plant paddy
water jet, thereby fields is
spacesaffecting limited
of paddy by
thefieldsthe width
weediscontrol
limited of rice
effect. root
Weed
by the growth.
widthcontrol To avoid
operation
of rice damage to
in the inter-
root growth. To
the rice root
plant damage
avoid system
spaces oftopaddy caused
the rice by
fields inter-plant
rootissystem
limitedcaused weeding,
by the width the design width
of rice root
by inter-plant of the
growth.the
weeding, weeding
Todesign compo-
avoid damage
width ofto
nenttheis
the generally
rice
weeding belowcaused
root component
system 200ismm, byand thebelow
inter-plant
generally remaining
weeding,
200 mm,100themm
and wide
design area
width
the remaining is of
thetherange
100 of wide
weeding
mm weeding
compo-
area
between
nent is rice plants.
generally Within
below 200 two
mm, weeks
and theafter transplanting,
remaining 100 mm
is the range of weeding between rice plants. Within two weeks after transplanting, the the
wideweed
area root
is thesystem
range is
of single-
weeding
rooted
between
weed with
rootriceasystem
root length
plants. of 8 totwo
Within
is single-rooted 30 mm,weeks
with and thetransplanting,
after
a root root
length system
of 8 mainly
tothe
30 weed
mm,grows root
and inthe
theroot
loose
system mud
issystem
single-
layer (20 to
rootedgrows
mainly 50
with ain mm
root deep).
thelength The
loose mud length
of 8 tolayer
30 mm,of the
(20 to rice
and
50the root
mmroot system
system
deep). is 80
Themainly to 100
length grows mm,
of the rice and
in the
root the
loose root
mud
system
system
islayer grows
80 to(20100tomm, into
50 mm a denser
anddeep).
the root soil layer.
Thesystem During
lengthgrows the
of the into weeding
rice root system
a denser process
soilislayer.of the
80 to During water
100 mm,the jet
and paddy
the root
weeding
field weeding
system
process grows
of thedevice,
into athe
water jet selection
denser
paddy of the
soilfield
layer. water jet
During
weeding the angle
device, should
weeding
the not only
process
selection meet
of the
of the the require-
water
water paddy
jet angle
ments
fieldof
should theonly
weeding
not inter-plant
device,
meet the weeding
the selection
requirementsfieldofwidth
the but
water
of the also meet
jet angle
inter-plant the requirements
should
weeding not
fieldonly
width of
meetbutthe
the
alsoweed-
require-
meet
ing depth.
ments
the of the inter-plant
requirements weedingdepth.
of the weeding field width but also meet the requirements of the weed-
ingEstablish
depth. a coordinate
Establish a coordinate system
system with the the
with mudmudlayerlayer
surface as theasx-axis
surface and the
the x-axis and ricetheseed-
rice
ling row
seedling as the
Establish y-axis. The intersection
the y-axis. system
row asa coordinate of
The intersection the
with the mudrice seedling
of the
layerrice row and
seedling
surface the
as therow mud layer
andand
x-axis thethesurface
mud is
ricelayer
seed-
atsurface
point
ling rowO, as point
is as
at shown
the O,inasFigure
y-axis. shown
The 4.in Figureof4.the rice seedling row and the mud layer surface is
intersection
at point O, as shown in Figure 4.
y
barnyard grass
y
barnyard grass
1
½2 aa
d
M
M 1
½2 aa O
d
N θθ
M
M x Ⅲ O
N θ θ x Ⅲ
l
Ⅱ Ⅰ
Ⅱ
c
l
Ⅱ Ⅰ
Ⅱ L
c P
L
P
Figure
Figure4.4.Schematic
Schematicdiagram
diagramofofthe
therelationship
relationshipbetween
betweenweeding
weedingdepth
depthand
andwater
waterjet
jetangle.
angle.
Figure 4. Schematic diagram of the relationship between weeding depth and water jet angle.
Agronomy 2023, 13, 1305 6 of 21
Taking the depth of the weed root system as the theoretical excavation depth, the
relationship between the water jet angle, weeding width, and weeding depth is expressed
as Equation (1):
l
tan θ = a (1)
2
where l represents the weeding depth, in meters, a represents the inter-plant weeding width,
in meters, and θ represents the angle between the water jet and the x-axis (◦ ).
Given the values of a = 100 mm and l between 8 and 30 mm, we can obtain 0.04 ≤ tan θ ≤ 0.6.
Then, we can determine that the range of water jet angles is 10◦ ≤ θ ≤ 31◦ .
2.2.3. Nozzle Diameter

For the water jet weeding device in the inter-plant environment, weeding occurs in a
submerged water environment. When the nozzle diameter is fixed, the effective target range
of the submerged water jet is shorter than that of a non-submerged water jet. The nozzle
diameter also has a significant impact on the effective target range of the submerged water
jet. Therefore, selecting an appropriate nozzle diameter and target range can effectively
improve the working efficiency of the submerged water jet.
Under the same conditions, a circular nozzle has a higher jet velocity and turbulence
energy compared to nozzles with other outlet shapes. The impact area on the target
plate is the widest, inducing a stronger central impact pressure and erosion ability [34,35].
Minjie Chen and Xiaobing Pan’s [36] research showed that for circular nozzles, the erosion
performance of the submerged water jet increases with the target distance within the
effective target range, showing an increasing then decreasing trend. The range of the
effective target distance L is related to the nozzle diameter as shown in Equation (2).
5d ≤ L ≤ 20d (2)
where L is the target distance of the water jet submerged by the weeding device, in mm
and d is the diameter of the nozzle in the unit of mm.
In order to fully utilize the erosion performance of the submerged water jet of the
weeding device on the soil layer where the weed roots are located, the length of the erosion
path of the submerged water jet should be shorter than the effective target distance of the
submerged water jet, as shown in Figure 4.
2
1
a + l 2 = c2 (3)
2
c ≤ 15d (4)
where c is the length of the soil eroded in the submerged water jet direction with the unit
of mm.
When the known parameter a = 100 mm is substituted into Equations (3) and (4) with
l = 8 mm, the resulting value of d is ≥337.3 mm. Similarly, when l = 30 mm, the resulting
value of d is ≥388.7 mm. Considering all factors, a value of d ≥ 4 mm is chosen, with
a corresponding effective target distance of L ≈ 58 mm. Therefore, the selected nozzle
diameter is d = 4 mm.
2.2.4. Soil Penetration Pressure

The destructive effect of a submerged water jet on the weed root–soil layer is not only
related to various parameters of the jet but also closely related to the physical and chemical
properties of the soil being impacted. According to the research conducted by Fanshan
Li and Jiahong Li [37], the critical penetration pressure Fcr per unit area of soil is not only
Agronomy 2023, 13, 1305 7 of 21
related to the impact pressure of the jet but also to the physical properties of soil such as
shear strength, permeability, particle size, density, etc., as shown in Equation (5):
d60 −2 −1
Fcr = ςτ f2 ( ) γd (5)
k
where ς is the correction coefficient, with ς = 1.8 × 1010 [38] , τ f is the soil shear strength
(kPa), d60 is the limited particle size of soil particles (mm), γd is the dry density of soil
(N·m−3 ), k is the soil permeability coefficient (m·s−1 ), and d60 /k is the soil’s erosion
resistance strength.
By setting F > Fcr , the critical soil penetration pressure p0 of the jet-type inter-plant
weeding device during weeding operation should satisfy:
d60 −2 x 2 −1
p0 > 2.125 × 1012 τ f2 ( ) ( ) γd (6)
k R0
According to the literature on soil-related parameters in Northeast China [39–41],

values were taken for the soil parameters that affect the critical soil failure pressure of water
jet weeding: τ f = 25 kPa, d60 = 50 mm, γd = 1.43 × 104 N·m−3 , and k = 1.17 × 10−6 m·s−1 .
At a constant flow rate, as the nozzle diameter increases, the outlet pressure decreases and
the jet kinetic energy decreases. The critical soil penetration pressure p0 decreases with the
increase in R0 . When the nozzle opening diameter is d = 4 mm and x = L = 58 mm, the
critical soil penetration pressure can be calculated as p0 ≥ 0.53 MPa.
2.3. Simulation Results

Based on the analysis of the structural parameters of the water jet inter-plant weeding
device, it is known that the nozzle diameter, jet inclination angle, and excavation perfor-
mance are related. In order to explore the impact of nozzle diameter and jet inclination
angle on excavation performance, we selected the experimental factors of a water jet inter-
plant weed control device model, which features nozzle diameters of 4.0, 4.5, 5.0, 5.5, and
6.0 mm and jet inclination angles of 10.00, 15.25, 20.50, 25.75, and 31.00◦ at a pressure of
0.53 MPa. A virtual simulation model of the water jet inter-plant weed control device was
established using the explicit dynamics analysis software LS-DYNA, and a finite element
fluid–solid coupling numerical simulation analysis was conducted using the ALE (arbitrary
Lagrange–Euler) algorithm combined with the single-factor test method.
2.3.1. Experimental Method

Since there is no unified standard for performance evaluation indicators of water–soil
flow–solid coupling virtual simulation experiments, referring to the study of Barr et al. [42],
the excavation depth h and soil disturbance rate S were used as evaluation indicators. The
excavation depth was defined as the distance from the deepest point of excavation to the
mud surface measured using the LS-PrePost post-processing module of the LS-DYNA
software. The soil disturbance rate S was defined as the ratio of the number of soil grids S1
with decreased density due to erosion and the total number of grids S2 in the water–soil
composite model. The soil disturbance rate was calculated using Equation (7).
S1
S= × 100% (7)
S2
where S represents the soil disturbance rate, expressed in %, S1 represents the number
of grid units where soil density has decreased, and S2 represents the total number of soil
grid units.
Agronomy 2023, 13, 1305 8 of 21
2.3.2. Nozzle Virtual Simulation Model Construction

Agronomy 2023, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW A three-dimensional model of the nozzle was created using Creo 7.0 software. In8 order of 21
to reduce the computational time of the numerical simulation, the jet nozzle model was
simplified and defined as a rigid body material for simulation. The material of the nozzle
g∙mm −3, elastic modulus of 2.12 × 105 MPa, Poisson’s ratio of 0.288 [19], and a jet source was
g∙mmdefined
was −3, elasticusing
modulusthe keyword MAT_RIGID,
of 2.12 × 105 MPa, Poisson’swithratio
parameters set asand
of 0.288 [19], follows: density
a jet source was of
added.
0.00786 The
g · finite
mm element
−3 , elastic simulation
modulus of test×was
2.12 10 5conducted
MPa, usingratio
Poisson’s the unit
of system
0.288 ofand
[19], g-mm-
a jet
added. The finite element simulation test was conducted using the unit system of g-mm-
ms. The mesh
source model of finite
the nozzle is shown in Figure 5.
ms. Thewasmesh added.
modelThe element
of the nozzle simulation
is shown test was
in Figure 5. conducted using the unit system
of g-mm-ms. The mesh model of the nozzle is shown in Figure 5.
Figure 5.
Figure5. Nozzle meshing
Nozzlemeshing
5.Nozzle geometry
meshinggeometry model.
geometrymodel.
model.
Figure
2.3.3. Water–Soil
2.3.3. Water–Soil Coupled Virtual Simulation Model Construction
2.3.3. Water–Soil Coupled Virtual Simulation Model Construction
Thewater
The waterjet jetinter-plant
inter-plantweeding
weeding device
device operates
operates on on
thethe coupled
coupled material
material of water
of water and
The water jet inter-plant weeding device operates on the coupled material of water and
soil. The soil material selected was the MAT-FHWA-SOIL material in LS-DYNA, and and
and soil. The soil material selected was the MAT-FHWA-SOIL material in LS-DYNA, the
soil. The soil
the main materialitsselected
values was the MAT-FHWA-SOIL materialmmin −3LS-DYNA, grainand the
main values of itsof parameters
parameters were: were: soil density
soil density 0.0016 0.0016
g mm−3−3g, soil , soil
grain density density
0.0027 g
main −3values
0.0027 g mm of−3its parameters
, bulk modulus were:
1.56soil
Mpa,density
shear 0.0016
modulus g mm 1.42, soil
Mpa, grain density
cohesion 0.0027
0.016 Mpa, g
mm , bulk modulus 1.56 Mpa, shear modulus 1.42 Mpa, cohesion 0.016 Mpa, internal friction
mm −3, bulk modulus 1.56 ◦
internal Mpa,
, andshear modulus 1.4240% Mpa, cohesion 0.016 Mpa, internal friction
angle 15°,friction angle 15content
and moisture moisture
40% [43],content [43],
and other parameters and other parameters
are selected are selected
referring to the
angle 15°,
referring and
to themoisture
MAT147 content
test 40%
value [43],
and and other
considering parameters
the soil are
as an selected
isotropic referring
material to [44].
the
MAT147 test value and considering the soil as an isotropic material [44]. The water layer ma-
MAT147
The water test value and
layer material considering
was selectedthe soil as an
as the in isotropic
MAT-NULL material [44].
material The water
in LS-DYNA layer ma-
terial was selected as the MAT-NULL material LS-DYNA with a density of 0.001 gwith mm−3a
terial
densitywasofselected
0.001 g as
mm −3MAT-NULL
the and a cut-off material
pressure inof
LS-DYNA
− 1 × 10 −with
5 Mpa.a density of 0.001 g mm−3
and a cut-off pressure of −1 × 10−5 Mpa. −5
and aTo cut-off pressure
simulate of −1 ×field
theactual
actual 10 operation
Mpa. state, a water–soil model
To simulate the field operation state, a water–soil model waswas builtbuilt using
using Creo Creo
7.0
7.0 To simulate
software. Two the actual fieldsolids
rectangular operation
were state, a water–soil
constructed as the model
water was
layerbuilt using
virtual Creo 7.0
simulation
software. Two rectangular solids were constructed as the water layer virtual simulation model
software.
model Two rectangular virtualsolids were constructed Theassoil
thevirtual
water layer virtual model simulation model
and theandsoil the soilsimulation
virtual simulation
model. The model.
soil virtual simulationsimulation
model was nestedwas nested
inside the
and the
insidelayersoil virtual
the water simulation model. The soil virtual simulation model was nested inside the
water model,layer and model,
meshingand andmeshing and node
node sharing weresharing were
carried out carried
using out usingsoft-
the meshing the
water
meshing layersoftware
model, and meshing and
hypermesh. Then,nodethesharing were coupling
water–soil carried outmodelusing was the meshing
defined soft-
with
ware hypermesh. Then, the water–soil coupling model was defined with material properties
ware hypermesh.
material properties Then, thethe
using water–soil
LS-PrePost coupling
software model was and
for pre- defined with materialbefore
post-processing properties
being
using the LS-PrePost software for pre- and post-processing before being imported into LS-
using
imported the LS-PrePost
into LS-DYNA. software To for
reducepre- and post-processing
the virtual simulation before
time, being
the imported
actual model into wasLS-
DYNA. To reduce the virtual simulation time, the actual model was simplified to a 1/4 model.
simplified
DYNA. to a 1/4
To reduce themodel.
virtual The soil layer
simulation time,was
thedefined as 500was
actual model mm × 300 mm
simplified to a×1/460model.
mm in
The soil layer was defined as 500 mm × 300 mm × 60 mm in length, width, and height, and
length,
The soil width,
layer was anddefined
height,as and500themm water
× 300layer
mmwas × 60set
mm as in
500 mm ×width,
length, 300 mm and×height,
100 mm, andas
the water layer was set as 500 mm × 300 mm × 100 mm, as shown in Figure 6.
shown in Figure 6.
the water layer was set as 500 mm × 300 mm × 100 mm, as shown in Figure 6.
Figure 6.
Figure 1/4composite
6. 1/4 compositewater–soil
water–soilmodel.
model.
Figure 6. 1/4 composite water–soil model.
The commonly used soil material model in LS-DYNA software is MAT_FHWA_SOIL.
The commonly used soil material model in LS-DYNA software is MAT_FHWA_SOIL.
Based
Theoncommonly
the literature
used[19,31,45,46], the following
soil material model in LS-DYNAparameters
softwarewere set for the soil: soil
is MAT_FHWA_SOIL.
Based on the literature−[19,31,45,46], the following parameters
3 , particle density −3 ,were set for the soil: soil density
density
Based onof 1.60
the g · mm
literature [19,31,45,46], the of 0.00273
following g · mm
parameters water
were content
set for the of 40%,
soil: soilcohesive
density
of 1.60 g∙mm−3, particle density of 0.00273 g∙mm−3, water content of 40%, cohesive force of
of 1.60 g∙mm−3, particle density of 0.00273 g∙mm−3, water content of 40%, cohesive force of
0.0155 MPa, shear modulus of 1.42 MPa, bulk modulus of 1.56 MPa, and internal friction angle
0.0155 MPa, shear modulus of 1.42 MPa, bulk modulus of 1.56 MPa, and internal friction angle
of 15°. The remaining parameters were set to the experimental values of material MAT147.
of 15°. The remaining parameters were set to the experimental values of material MAT147.
Material 9 (MAT_NULL) was used to define the water layer and air layer. The density of
Material 9 (MAT_NULL) was used to define the water layer and air layer. The density of
Agronomy 2023, 13, 1305 9 of 21
force of 0.0155 MPa, shear modulus of 1.42 MPa, bulk modulus of 1.56 MPa, and internal
friction angle of 15◦ . The remaining parameters were set to the experimental values of
material MAT147. Material 9 (MAT_NULL) was used to define the water layer and air layer.
The density of the water layer was 1 g·mm−3 , the cutoff pressure was −1 × 10−5 MPa,
and the viscosity coefficient was 8.68 × 10−14 MPa·s. The density of the air layer was
1.1 × 10−6 g·mm−1 , the cut off pressure was −1 × 10−9 KPa, and the viscosity coefficient
was 1.75 × 10−17 MPa·s. The EOS state equation was defined to set the parameters of soil
and air materials.
2.4. Bench Test

The working performance of the water jet inter-plant weeding device directly affects
the weeding rate of the device. The opening diameter range of the jet mechanism nozzle,
the jet angle range, and the outlet pressure range of the water jet inter-plant weeding
device were determined through theoretical analysis, and the structural parameters of
the key components of the water jet inter-plant weeding device were determined through
virtual simulation experiments on the erosion performance of the jet using LS-DYNA, and a
prototype was manufactured. A test bench was set up to verify the accuracy of the structural
parameters determined through the virtual simulation experiment and to optimize the best
working parameter combination of the forward speed and nozzle outlet pressure.
To investigate the working performance of the water jet inter-plant weeding device,
high-pole variety Chuangliangyou 4418 rice and barnyard grass were collected from the
experimental field of Northeast Agricultural University in Acheng District, Harbin City,
Heilongjiang Province, China (45◦ 310 1800 N, 127◦ 20 5800 E). Seedlings and weeds were col-
lected in batches7, 14, and 21 days after heading. Seedlings and barnyard grass seedlings
with straight stems and good growth were selected for the test bench experiment on
23 May 2021.
The experimental soil was taken from Jianhua Village, Acheng District, Harbin City,
Heilongjiang Province (45◦ 300 41.7600 N, 126◦ 590 54.9600 E), and was a typical northeast sticky
black soil. The soil parameters were adjusted based on the soil condition during paddy
field cultivation, with soil hardness ranging from 0.6 to 1 MPa and water content ranging
from 15% to 25%. The experimental crops were based on rice seedlings and major weeds
(e.g., barnyard grass) during paddy field tillage, with an average height of 220–250 mm for
rice seedlings. Barnyard grass was grown in seedling trays for 7–14 days, with a height of
about 80 mm, a main root length of ≤30 mm, a stem diameter of 1 mm, and 2–3 leaves. To
ensure that the soil structure strength around the roots of the barnyard grass was similar
to that in the field, the weeds were transplanted with seedling soil. Barnyard grass was
planted in the weeding area of the soil trough, with a planting density of 36 plants·m−2
and a planting depth of 8–30 mm. To investigate the maximum anti-bending pressure of
rice roots and the inter-plant weeding effect with different operation parameters, the rice
seedlings were subjected to an anti-bending pressure water pressure test, and barnyard
grass was subjected to a reasonable density planting and water jet weeding test. The test
site for the stand was the Agricultural Machinery Laboratory of the College of Engineering
at Northeast Agricultural University (45◦ 440 2700 N, 126◦ 430 2500 E). The main equipment
used in the water jet inter-plant weeding device stand test included an electric motor
frequency conversion cabinet control system, a water jet inter-plant weeding device test
trolley system, an acrylic water storage tank, and a stainless steel soil trough. The tools
used during the testing process included a scraper, a scraper, a stopwatch, and a steel
ruler. The AC electric motor frequency conversion cabinet control system (model Y90S-4,
Shanghai Libo Electric Motor Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China) was used to control the forward
working speed of the test trolley, facilitating the adjustment of the working parameters
of the water jet inter-plant weeding device. The water jet inter-plant weeding device test
trolley system included a test trolley and a soil trough guide rail, where the test trolley was
used to fix the water tank, plunger pump, and jet mechanism, and the soil trough guide
rail allowed the weeding device to travel in a straight line. The acrylic water tank was
Agronomy 2023, 13, 1305 10 of 21
Agronomy2023,
Agronomy 2023,13,
13,xxFOR
FORPEER used
PEERREVIEW
REVIEW for the rice root anti-bending pressure water pressure test, and the stainless steel soil
10 of
10 of 21
21
trough was used to simulate the soil environment during paddy field cultivation for the
rice seedlings and barnyard grass transplanting, as shown in Figures 7 and 8.
Figure7.
Figure
Figure 7.Equipment
7. Equipmentfor
Equipment forthe
for thewater
the waterpressure
water pressuretest
pressure testof
test ofrice
of riceseedlings’
rice seedlings’resistance
seedlings’ resistanceto
resistance tomechanical
to mechanicaldamage
mechanical damage
damage
(1.
(1.Jet
(1. Jet pipeline.
Jetpipeline. 2.
pipeline. 2. Jet
2. Jet rack.
Jet rack. 3. Rice root system. 4. Water tank. 5. Nozzle.).
rack. 3. Rice root system. 4. Water tank. 5. Nozzle.).
Figure8.
Figure
Figure 8.Equipment
8. Equipmentfor
Equipment forwater
for waterjet
water jetinter-plant
inter-plantweeding
inter-plant weedingtest
weeding teston
test onthe
on theplatform
the platform(1.
platform (1.Walking
(1. Walkingmotor.
Walking motor.2.
motor. 2.Test
2. Test
Test
vehicle.
vehicle. 3.
3. Plunger
Plunger pump.
pump. 4.
4. Power
Power motor.
motor. 5.
5. Soil
Soil trough.
trough. 6.
6. Jet
Jet mechanism.).
mechanism.).
vehicle. 3. Plunger pump. 4. Power motor. 5. Soil trough. 6. Jet mechanism.).
2.4.1.Single-Factor
2.4.1.
2.4.1. Single-factorTest
Single-factor TestMethod
Methodfor for Rice
forRice Seedling’s
RiceSeedling’s Resistance
Seedling’sResistance
Resistanceto to Hydraulic
toHydraulic Fracturing
HydraulicFracturingFracturing
The
Thehydraulic
The hydraulic fracturinglimit
hydraulicfracturing
fracturing limit
limit test
test
test forfor
for inter-plant
inter-plant
inter-plant ricerice
rice rootroot
root systems
systems systems is conducted
isisconducted
conducted byinject-
by by
inject-
injecting
ing water water
through through
a nozzle a nozzle
at a at
pressure a pressure
range of range
0.50 to of
3.50
ing water through a nozzle at a pressure range of 0.50 to 3.50 MPa, with a fixed interval jet of0.50
MPa, to 3.50
with aMPa,
fixed with
intervala fixed
jet of
interval
waterfor
water jet of
for11ssper water
pergroup. for
group.During 1 s per
Duringthe group. During
theinter-plant
inter-plantjet the inter-plant
jetweeding
weedingtest, jet
test,the weeding
theforward
forwardrange test,
rangeof the forward
ofthe
thedevice
device
range
isisset of0.26
setat
at the to
0.26 device
to0.54
0.54m∙s is
m∙s set
−1, at
−1 and
, and 0.26
theto
the natural
natural ·s−1 , andwidth
0.54 mdrooping
drooping the natural
width ricedrooping
ofrice
of rootsin
roots inwater width
water isisof rice roots
measured
measured to
to
inbewater
be ≤20mm.
≤20 is measured
mm. Basedon
Based onthe to
thebe ≤20 mm.
drooping
drooping widthBased
width and
and on the
the
the drooping
forward
forward width
speed
speed ofthe
of and
the the forward
device,
device, themaximum
the speed
maximum
of the device,
erosion
erosion time was
time the
wasmaximum
calculatederosion
calculated to be
to be 0.07time
0.07 wasease
ss (for
(for calculated
ease to be 0.07
of calculation
of calculation and
and s (for ease ofthe
to expand
to expand calculation
the range of
range of
and to
parameter expand tests,the1 srange
is of
selected).parameter
The tests,
impact of1 s
the is selected).
water jet on The
the
parameter tests, 1 s is selected). The impact of the water jet on the rice root system is explored. impact
rice root of the
system water
is jet
explored.on
the rice root11system
After
After ss of
of water
wateris explored.
jet impact
jet impact on on thethe rice
rice root
root system,
system, the the number
number of of broken
broken roots roots in in
the After
the water
water tank1 s of
tank is water
is counted.
counted. jet impact
Each group
Each on the
group ofrice
of root system,
experiments
experiments the number
is repeated
is repeated 55 times
times of and
broken
and the theroots
average
average in
the
value
value water
is tank is
is taken.
taken. counted.
Broken
Broken Each
roots
roots aregroup
are considered
considered of experiments
damaged roots.
damaged is repeated 5 times and the average
roots.
value is taken. Broken roots are considered damaged roots.
2.4.2. Single-Factor
2.4.2. Single-Factor Test Test Method
Method for for Water
Water Jet-Based
Jet-Based Inter-Plant
Inter-Plant Weed Weed ControlControl DeviceDevice
2.4.2. Single-Factor Test Method for Water Jet-Based Inter-Plant Weed Control Device
AAsingle-factor
single-factortest testwas
wasconducted
conductedto tostudy
studythe thevariation
variationin inthe
theinter-plant
inter-plantweed weedcontrol
control
A single-factor test was conducted to study the variation in the inter-plant weed
effect under working conditions with a forward speed
effect under working conditions with a forward speed of 0.26–0.54 m∙s and a nozzle outletof 0.26–0.54 m∙s −1 and a nozzle outlet
−1
control effect under working conditions with a forward speed of 0.26–0.54 m·s−1 and a
pressureof
pressure of0.5–1.75
0.5–1.75MPa MPa(determined
(determinedaccording accordingto tothe
therange
rangeof ofthe
theinter-plant
inter-plantrice riceroot
rootsys-sys-
nozzle outlet pressure of 0.5–1.75 MPa (determined according to the range of the inter-plant
tem’s resistance
tem’s resistance to to impact
impact pressure).
pressure). The The weed
weed control
control raterate was
was selected
selected as as the
the evaluation
evaluation
rice root system’s resistance to impact pressure). The weed control rate was selected as
indexfor
index forthe
theinter-plant
inter-plantpaddy paddyweed weedcontrol
controldevice’s
device’s benchtest. test.TheThetest
testrectangular
rectangularwater water
the evaluation index for the inter-plant paddy weed bench control device’s bench test. The test
tank area
tank area waswas selected
selected as as the
the testing
testing area.
area. Weeds
Weeds with with intact
intact roots,
roots, non-serious
non-serious stem stem and and
rectangular water tank area was selected as the testing area. Weeds with intact roots, non-
leaf breakage,
leaf breakage, and
andleaf the ability
thebreakage, to continue
ability to continue to survive
to survive after the
after theto operation
operation of the weeding device
serious stem and and the ability to continue survive of after thethe weeding
operationdevice of
weredefined
were definedas asineffective
ineffectiveweed weedcontrol.
control.Weeds Weedswith withfloating
floatingrootsrootson onthe thewater
watersurface
surfaceor or
completelyburied
completely buriedstems, stems,leaves,
leaves,and androots
rootsin inthe
thesoil
soilwere
wereconsidered
consideredeffective effectiveweed weedcon- con-
trol. The
trol. The formula
formula for for calculating
calculating the the weed
weed control
control raterate isis shown
shown in in Equation
Equation (8): (8):
Agronomy 2023, 13, 1305 11 of 21
the weeding device were defined as ineffective weed control. Weeds with floating roots on
the water surface or completely buried stems, leaves, and roots in the soil were considered
effective weed control. The formula for calculating the weed control rate is shown in
Equation (8):
W − W2
y1 = 1 × 100% (8)
W1
where y1 represents the weed control rate, expressed as a percentage (%), W 1 represents the
total number of weeds in the test area before weeding, in units of plants, and W 2 represents
the total number of weeds in the test area after weeding, in units of plants.
2.4.3. Multi-Factorial Test Method for Water Jet-Based Inter-Plant Weeding Device
The multifactorial test method uses a quadratic rotation combination orthogonal
design test scheme to analyze the interactive effects of nozzle outlet pressure and forward
speed on weeding performance. Forward speed and nozzle outlet pressure are taken
as experimental factors, and weeding rate was used as the performance indicator for
multi-factorial testing.
Based on the single-factor test results of forward speed and nozzle outlet pressure
for the inter-plant weeding device, the experimental factor variation range for the test
bench was selected. On this basis, a two-factor five-level quadratic rotation orthogonal
combination design experiment was adopted to study the optimal working parameters of
the device. During the experiment, the weeding rate data of the device were continuously
recorded, and each group of tests was repeated 3 times to obtain the average value, with 1
group for every 4 m of test distance. The coded levels of the designed experimental factors
are shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Codes of test factors.
Experimental Factors
Codes
Forward Speed x1 /(m·s−1 ) Nozzle Outlet Pressure x2 /(MPa)
−1.414 0.26 0.53
−1 0.30 0.70
0 0.40 1.40
1 0.50 1.50
+1.414 0.54 1.67
2.4.4. Field Test Method

In order to investigate the field operation performance of the water jet inter-plant
weeding device for paddy fields, the integrated water jet inter-plant weeding device
was configured, and the forward speed of the machinery was taken as the experimental
factor and the weeding rate as the experimental indicator. The field performance test was
conducted by considering the inter-plant weeding status before and after weeding.
The field test was conducted on the 14th day after rice transplanting, from 15 June 2021
to 21 June 2021, in Tuanshe Village, Acheng District, Harbin City, Heilongjiang Province,
China (45◦ 310 56.2800 N, 127◦ 100 06.9600 E). The water depth was 3050 mm and the mud foot
depth was 120,150 mm. The height of the seedlings was 210~240 mm, and the row spacing
and plant spacing were 300 mm and 120 mm, respectively [38]. No herbicide sealing
treatment was conducted in the field, and the main weeds were barnyard grass with a
small amount of wild amaranth. The average density of barnyard grass was 38 plants·m−2 .
The field operation situation of the field test is shown in Figure 9a.
Agronomy
Agronomy 13, x 13,
2023, 2023, FOR 1305
PEER REVIEW 12 of 12
21 of 21
(a) (b)
Figure 9. 9.
Figure Field
Fieldtest
testoperation
operation conditions: (a)field
conditions: (a) fieldcondition
condition during
during the the experiment;
experiment; (b) test
(b) field field test
operation condition.
operation condition.
TheThewater
fieldjet
testinter-plant
equipmentweeding devicebywas
was operated integrated
a Kubota 2ZGQ-6Dinto the rice transplanter,
(NSPU-68CMD) rice and
transplanter connected by a three-point suspension.. The driver keeps
the forward speed was controlled at three different speeds (0.3 m∙s , 0.4 m∙s , and 0.5 m∙s−1)
−1 the transplanter
−1
running
to ensure in a straight
consistency inline
the during
working theparameters
operation toofavoid affecting
the device. Eachthe accuracy
group wasof the test three
repeated
results. The main equipment used in the experiment included a steel ruler (range: 30 cm), a
times, and the test results were averaged.
tape measure (range: 10 m), a stopwatch, a water pump, a calibration pole, and a digital
Prior to the experiment, the paddy field was evenly divided into nine areas, with the front
camera. The actual field operation situation is shown in Figure 9b.
and rearThe5m serving
water as the testweeding
jet inter-plant buffer zone to ensure
device the machine
was integrated entered
into the the test area at a
rice transplanter,
constant
and the forward speed was controlled at three different speeds (0.3 m·s , 0.4 m·stest
speed and stopped in a timely manner. The middle 15 m served
− 1 as the area. The
−1 , and
number − 1
0.5 m·sof weeds in the
) to ensure test area in
consistency was
thecounted
working and markedofbefore
parameters weeding.
the device. After weeding,
Each group was
therepeated
remaining threeweeds
times,in thethe
and weeded areawere
test results wereaveraged.
counted. The plant damage rate can be ob-
tained byPrior to the experiment,
calculating the totalthe paddy field
number was evenly
of seedlings divided
within theinto nine areas,
weeding range with the the
before
front and rear 5 m serving as the test buffer
experiment and the number of damaged seedlings after weeding. zone to ensure the machine entered the test
area at a constant speed and stopped in a timely manner. The middle 15 m served as the
In this study, we designed a water jet inter-plant weed control device and elaborated
test area. The number of weeds in the test area was counted and marked before weeding.
the working principle, then analyzed the working mechanism, obtained the main param-
After weeding, the remaining weeds in the weeded area were counted. The plant damage
eters
rateaffecting the operational
can be obtained performance,
by calculating constructed
the total number a water–soil
of seedlings within thefluid–solid
weeding range coupling
virtual simulation model using LS-DYNA software, and
before the experiment and the number of damaged seedlings after weeding. designed a virtual simulation test,
bench test,
In thisand fieldwe
study, test program.
designed a water jet inter-plant weed control device and elaborated
the working principle, then analyzed the working mechanism, obtained the main parame-
ters affecting
3. Results the operational performance, constructed a water–soil fluid–solid coupling
and Discussion
virtual simulation model using LS-DYNA software, and designed a virtual simulation test,
3.1. Results and Analysis of Jet–Water–Soil Fluid–Solid Coupling Virtual Simulation Test Process
bench test, and field test program.
Figure 10 shows the relationship between the nozzle diameter d = 4 mm, different jet
3. Resultsangles
inclination and Discussion
θ, excavation depth h, and soil disturbance rate S analyzed based on the
3.1. Results and
simulation results. Analysis of Jet–Water–Soil Fluid–Solid Coupling Virtual Simulation Test Process
Figure 10 shows the relationship between the nozzle diameter d = 4 mm, different jet
inclination angles θ, excavation depth h, and soil disturbance rate S analyzed based on the
simulation results.
(a) (b)
Figure 10. The relationship between the different jet inclination angles θ, excavation depth h, and
soil disturbance rate S for a nozzle opening diameter of d = 4 mm, as analyzed based on simulation
results: (a) the fitting curve between the different jet inclination angles θ and excavation depth h for
d = 4 mm; (b) the fitting curve between the different jet inclination angles θ and soil disturbance rate
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Results and Analysis of Jet–Water–Soil Fluid–Solid Coupling Virtual Simulation Test Proce
Figure 10 shows the relationship between the nozzle diameter d = 4 mm, different
Agronomy 2023, 13, 1305 13 of 21
inclination angles θ, excavation depth h, and soil disturbance rate S analyzed based on
simulation results.
(a) (b)
Figure 10. The Figure 10. The relationship

relationship between the between
differentthe different jetangles
jet inclination inclination angles θ,depth
θ, excavation excavation
h, anddepth h, a
soil disturbance rate S for a nozzle opening diameter of d = 4 mm, as analyzed based on simulat
soil disturbance rate S for a nozzle opening diameter of d = 4 mm, as analyzed based on simulation
results: (a) the fitting curve between the different jet inclination angles θ and excavation depth h
results:
Agronomy 2023, 13, x FOR PEER (a) the fitting curve between the different jet inclination angles θ and excavation depth h for 13 of 21
REVIEW
d = 4 mm; (b) the fitting curve between the different jet inclination angles θ and soil disturbance r
d = 4 mm; (b)Sthefor fitting curve between the different jet inclination angles θ and soil disturbance rate
d = 4 mm.
S for d = 4 mm.
The experimental
The experimental resultsthat
results indicate indicate
with athat with anozzle
constant constant nozzleboth
diameter, diameter, both excava-
excavation
tion depth h and soil disturbance rate S increase with increasing jet
depth h and soil disturbance rate S increase with increasing jet inclination angle. inclination angle.
Figure 11Figure
shows11the
shows the relationship
relationship betweenbetween
differentdifferent nozzle diameters
nozzle diameters d, excavation
d, excavation
depth h, and soil disturbance rate S for a jet inclination angle
depth h, and soil disturbance rate S for a jet inclination angle of θ = 31 . of
◦ θ = 31°.
(a) (b)
Figure 11.Figure 11. Relationships

Relationships between between
differentdifferent nozzle diameters
nozzle diameters d, excavation
d, excavation depth h,depth h, and
and soil soil disturb-
distur-
ance rate S when the jet inclination angle θ = 31°: (a) fitting curve between different nozzle diameters
bance rate S when the jet inclination angle θ = 31◦ : (a) fitting curve between different nozzle diameters
d and excavation depth h when θ = 31°; (b) fitting curve between different nozzle diameters d and
d and excavation depth h when θ = 31◦ ; (b) fitting curve between different nozzle diameters d and
soil disturbance rate S when θ = 31°.
soil disturbance rate S when θ = 31◦ .
According According to the experimental

to the experimental results,results,
whenwhen the nozzle
the nozzle diameter
diameter is constant,
is constant, both both exca-
excavation depth h and soil disturbance rate S increase as the jet inclination angle increases. Figure
vation depth h and soil disturbance rate S increase as the jet inclination angle increases.
Figure 1111shows
showsthe theanalysis
analysis of of the
the simulation
simulation results,
results,which
whichillustrates
illustrates that when
that whenthethe
jetjet
inclination
angle is fixed at 31°, both
◦ excavation depth h and soil disturbance
inclination angle is fixed at 31 , both excavation depth h and soil disturbance rate S increase rate S increase as the nozzle
diameter increases.
as the nozzle diameter increases.
With increasing
With increasing nozzle diameter,
nozzle diameter, under the under
samethe same pressure
pressure condition, condition,
the demand the demand
for for
flow rate from the device to the jet pump will also increase,
flow rate from the device to the jet pump will also increase, leading to higher energy con-leading to higher energy consump-
sumption tion
andand water
water requirements.When
requirements. Whenthe thenozzle
nozzlediameter
diameter is is dd ==44mm,
mm,the theexcavation
excavationdepth can
depth canreach
reachmore
more thanthan 30 30
mm,mm,andand thethewater jet can
water meet
jet can the excavation
meet the excavation requirements
requirementsof the soil. In
order to avoid energy waste, reduce flow rate and configuration
of the soil. In order to avoid energy waste, reduce flow rate and configuration requirements, requirements, and obtain
and obtain higher water jet velocity and better cavitation effect [47], the device is selected a nozzle
higher water jet velocity and better cavitation effect [47], the device is selected with
diameter
with a nozzle of 4 mm,
diameter of 4and
mm,a andjet angle of 31°of
a jet angle is 31 ◦ is chosen
chosen to increase the excavation
to increase depth and dis-
the excavation
depth andturbance rate. rate.
disturbance
To simulateTo simulate the jet–water–soil
the jet–water–soil flow–solid flow–solid
couplingcoupling
under the under the operating
operating conditions conditions
of a of a
nozzle diameter
nozzle diameter of 4 mmofand 4 mm and
a jet a jetof
angle 31◦ ,of
angle the31°, the flow–solid
flow–solid coupling coupling simulation
simulation nozzlenozzle was
stationary
was stationary whilewhilethethe internal
internal jetjetwas
wascontinuously
continuouslyspraying
spraying at aa fixedfixedpoint
pointtotosave
savecomputa-
tion time and simplify the calculation. The CONSTRAINED_JOINT_REVOLUTE keyword
was used to create constraints on the nozzle. The ALE element (water–soil model) was de-
fined as the main structure MASTER, and the Lagrange element was defined as the second-
ary structure SLAVE. The penalty coupling algorithm was used for flow–solid coupling
simulation. To facilitate the observation of the simulation erosion effect of the water jet, the
higher water jet velocity and better cavitation effect [47], the device is selected with a nozzle
diameter of 4 mm, and a jet angle of 31° is chosen to increase the excavation depth and dis-
turbance rate.
To simulate the jet–water–soil flow–solid coupling under the operating conditions of a
Agronomy 2023, 13, 1305
nozzle diameter of 4 mm and a jet angle of 31°, the flow–solid coupling simulation nozzle 14 of 21
was
stationary while the internal jet was continuously spraying at a fixed point to save computa-
tion time and simplify the calculation. The CONSTRAINED_JOINT_REVOLUTE keyword
wascomputation
used to createtimeconstraints
and simplifyon the
the nozzle. The
calculation. TheALE element (water–soil model) was de-
CONSTRAINED_JOINT_REVOLUTE
fined
keyword was used to create constraints on the nozzle. Theelement
as the main structure MASTER, and the Lagrange was defined
ALE element as model)
(water–soil the second-
arywas
structure
definedSLAVE. The structure
as the main penalty coupling
MASTER, algorithm was used
and the Lagrange for flow–solid
element was definedcoupling
as
simulation.
the secondaryTo facilitate
structurethe observation
SLAVE. of thecoupling
The penalty simulation erosion
algorithm waseffect
usedoffor
the water jet, the
flow–solid
coupling result
simulation simulation.
modelTowas
facilitate the observation
symmetrically of the simulation
transformed along theerosion
Y-axiseffect of theto ob-
direction
water jet, the simulation result model was symmetrically transformed along
tain a 1/2 model. The excavation effect was better when the soil was eroded by the jet at the Y-axis
direction to obtain a 1/2 model. The excavation effect was better when the soil was eroded
2459.9 us. The flow–solid coupling simulation process is shown in Figure 12.
by the jet at 2459.9 us. The flow–solid coupling simulation process is shown in Figure 12.
Figure 12. Flow–solid coupling simulation process. (Time unit: us, blue part: water material, brown
part: soil material).
Figure
3.2. 12.
Figure Flow–solid
Single-factor
12. Flow–solid coupling
coupling simulation
Experimental process.
Resultsprocess.
simulation (Time
and Analysis
(Time unit:
on
unit: theus,
us, blue
Test
blue part:
Stand
part: water
water material,
material, brownbrown
3.2.1. Results and Analysis of Single-factor Test of the Rice Roots’ Resistance to
3.2.Hydraulic
3.2. Shear
Single-Factor
Single-factor Failure Pressure
Experimental
Experimental Results and
Results and Analysis
Analysisononthethe
Test Stand
Test Stand
3.2.1. Results and Analysis of Single-Factor Test of the Rice Roots’ Resistance to Hydraulic
Figureand 13 shows theofresults of the single-factor test of the rice roots’ resistance to hy-
3.2.1.
ShearResults Analysis
Failure Pressure Single-factor Test of the Rice Roots’ Resistance to
draulic
Hydraulic shear
Shear failure pressure.
FailurethePressure The pressure at which the rice roots were broken was 1.5 MPa
Figure 13 shows results of the single-factor test of the rice roots’
after 7 days of transplantation and 2 MPa after 14 days. Thereafter, the number of broken resistance to
Figure 13
hydraulic shows
shear thepressure.
failure results ofThethepressure
single-factor testthe
at which of rice
the rice
rootsroots’
were resistance
broken wasto hy-
roots increased with the increase in pressure. The root–soil symbiotic structure of the rice
1.5 MPa
draulic shear after 7 days
failure of transplantation
pressure. The pressure andat2 Mpa
which after
the14 days.
rice rootsThereafter,
were broken the number
was 1.5 MPa
root
of
system
broken
is more
roots
stable,
increased with
and
the
its shear in
increase
and tensile The
pressure.
strength is lower
root–soil
than structure
symbiotic
that of the root–
after 7 days of transplantation and 2 MPa after 14 days. Thereafter, the number of broken
soil
of thesymbiotic
rice rootwithstructure.
system Thestable,
hydraulic shear failuretensile
pressure at which thethan
rice that
root system
roots increased theisincrease
more and its
in pressure. shear
Theand strength
root–soil symbiotic is structure
lower of the rice
detached fromsymbiotic
of the root–soil the attached soil was
structure. Thelower thanshear
hydraulic that failure
of the root–soil
pressure at symbiotic
which thestate.
rice There-
root system is more stable, and its shear and tensile strength is lower than that of the root–
fore, a maximum nozzle outlet pressure of 1.5 MPa was chosen to
root system detached from the attached soil was lower than that of the root–soil symbiotic meet the non-damage
soilstate.
symbiotic structure. The hydraulic shear failure pressure at which the rice root system
requirement.
Therefore, a maximum nozzle outlet pressure of 1.5 Mpa was chosen to meet the
detached
non-damage from requirement.
the attached soil was lower than that of the root–soil symbiotic state. There-
fore, a maximum nozzle outlet pressure of 1.5 MPa was chosen to meet the non-damage
requirement.
Figure 13.Results
Figure 13. Resultsofof
thethe
water pressure
water test for
pressure testrice
forroot
riceanti-breaking limit. limit.
root anti-breaking
3.2.2. Results and Analysis of Single Factor Test of Water Jet-Based Inter-Plant Weeding
Figure 13. Results
Device on TestofBench
the water pressure test for rice root anti-breaking limit.
The test
3.2.2. Results results
and of the
Analysis effect of
of Single forward
Factor Testspeed on weeding
of Water Jet-Basedrate were analyzed
Inter-Plant Weedingusing
Origin software.
Device on Test Bench The relationship between weeding rate and forward speed was plotted to
analyze the trend of the effect of forward speed on weeding performance, as shown in Fig-
The test results of the effect of forward speed on weeding rate were analyzed using
ure 14.
Agronomy 2023, 13, 1305 15 of 21
Figure 13. Results of the water pressure test for rice root anti-breaking limit.
3.2.2. Results and Analysis of Single Factor Test of Water Jet-Based Inter-Plant Weeding
3.2.2.
DeviceResults
on Testand Analysis of Single Factor Test of Water Jet-Based Inter-Plant Weeding
Bench
Device on Test Bench
Origin software. The relationship between weeding rate and forward speed was plotted to
Origin software. The relationship between weeding rate and forward speed was plotted
analyze
to analyzethethe
trend of the
trend effect
of the of forward
effect speed
of forward on weeding
speed performance,
on weeding as shown
performance, in Fig-
as shown in
ure 14.
Figure 14.
Figure 14. Analysis

Figure 14. Analysis of
of the
the influence
influence of
of forward
forwardspeed
speedon
onweeding
weedingrate.
rate.
Under the operating conditions of a nozzle outlet pressure of 1.10 MPa and forward
speedUnder the operating
of (0.260~0.540) m∙sconditions
−1, the weedingof a nozzle outlet pressure
rate gradually of 1.10
decreases Mpa
with theand forward
increase in
speed of (0.260~0.540) m · s −1 , the weeding rate gradually decreases with the increase in
forward speed. When the forward speed is 0.260 m∙s , the average weeding rate is 84.58%;
−1
forward −1 , the average weeding rate is 84.58%;
m·sweeding
when thespeed. When
forward the is
speed forward
0.540 m∙sspeed is 0.260
−1, the average rate is 73.94%.
whenWhen
the forward speed speed
the forward is 0.540ism ·s−1 , the
lower, average
under weeding rate
the condition is 73.94%. nozzle outlet
of unchanged
Whenthe
pressure, thewater
forward speed isdevice
jet weeding lower, acts
under on the
the condition
weeds forof unchanged
a longer nozzle
time [48], outlet
which is
pressure, the water jet weeding device acts on the weeds for a longer
more likely to wash away the soil around the weed roots [31], causing the weeds to float time [48], which is
more
on thelikely
waterto surface
wash awayof thethepaddy
soil around
field the
andweed roots [31],
achieving causing
a better the weeds
weeding effect.toWith
float on
an
the water surface of the paddy field and achieving a better weeding
increase in speed, the time for the water jet weeding device to act on the weeds becomeseffect. With an increase
in speed, the time for the water jet weeding device to act on the weeds becomes shorter,
shorter, resulting in some weeds floating on the water surface but not completely de-
resulting in some weeds floating on the water surface but not completely detached from
tached from the soil, leading to a decrease in the weeding rate.
the soil, leading to a decrease in the weeding rate.
The results of the single-factor test of the nozzle outlet pressure on the weeding rate
The results of the single-factor test of the nozzle outlet pressure on the weeding rate
were analyzed using Origin software, and the relationship between the weeding rate and
were analyzed using Origin software, and the relationship between the weeding rate and
the nozzle outlet pressure was plotted to analyze the trend of the influence of the nozzle
the nozzle outlet pressure was plotted to analyze the trend of the influence of the nozzle
outlet pressure on the weeding performance, as shown in Figure 15.
outlet pressure on the weeding performance, as shown in Figure 15.
Figure 15. Analysis of the influence

Figure 15. influence of
of nozzle
nozzle outlet
outlet pressure
pressure on
on weed
weed control
controlrate.
rate.
Under the operating conditions with a forward speed of 0.428 m−1·s−1 and a nozzle
Under the operating conditions with a forward speed of 0.428 m∙s and a nozzle out-
outlet pressure of (0.50~1.75) Mpa, the overall weed control performance index gradually
let pressure of (0.50~1.75) MPa, the overall weed control performance index gradually in-
increases with the increase in the nozzle outlet pressure. When the nozzle outlet pressure
creases with the increase in the nozzle outlet pressure. When the nozzle outlet pressure is
is 0.50 Mpa, the average weed control rate is 70.13%; when the nozzle outlet pressure is
0.50 MPa, the average weed control rate is 70.13%; when the nozzle outlet pressure is 1.75
1.75 Mpa, the average weed control rate is 82.13%.
MPa, the average weed control rate is 82.13%.
When the nozzle outlet pressure is lower, under the constant forward speed, the nozzle
When the nozzle outlet pressure is lower, under the constant forward speed, the noz-
outlet pressure may not be high enough to wash away the soil attached to the roots of
zle outlet pressure may not be high enough to wash away the soil attached to the roots of
weeds, and some weeds cannot be completely separated from the soil, resulting in a low
weeding rate. The higher the nozzle outlet pressure, the easier it is to wash away the soil
attached to the roots of weeds [49], causing the weeds to float on the surface of the paddy
field, resulting in a better weeding effect.
Agronomy 2023, 13, 1305 16 of 21
weeds, and some weeds cannot be completely separated from the soil, resulting in a low
weeding rate. The higher the nozzle outlet pressure, the easier it is to wash away the soil
attached to the roots of weeds [49], causing the weeds to float on the surface of the paddy
field, resulting in a better weeding effect.
3.3. Results and Analysis of Multifactorial Experiment on Test Bench

Based on the single-factor experimental results of the jet-type inter-plant weeding
device’s forward speed and nozzle outlet pressure, a range of factor variations was selected
for the test bench experiment. To investigate the optimal working parameters of the
device while considering the interaction between nozzle pressure and forward speed on
operational performance [12], a two-factor five-level quadratic rotation orthogonal design
experiment was conducted. During the experiment, the weeding rate data of the device
were continuously recorded. Each group consisted of one trial distance of 4 m and was
repeated three times, and the average value was taken. The results of the multifactorial
experiment on the test bench are shown in Table 2.
Table 2. Experimental design and measurement results.
Experimental Factors Experimental Index

Numbers
Forward Speed x1 /(m·s−1 ) Nozzle Outlet Pressure x2 /(MPa) Weeding Rate ya1 /(%)
1 0.30 0.70 76.67
2 0.50 0.70 72.82
3 0.30 1.50 95.33
4 0.50 1.50 78.67
5 0.26 1.10 85.86
6 0.54 1.10 73.34
7 0.40 0.53 68.2
8 0.40 1.67 82.62
9 0.40 1.10 72.62
10 0.40 1.10 70.27
11 0.40 1.10 73.60
12 0.40 1.10 71.36
13 0.40 1.10 70.38
14 0.40 1.10 73.67
15 0.40 1.10 71.65
16 0.40 1.10 70.32
Using Design-Expert 8.0.6 software, the experimental results were processed to obtain
a mathematical model with weed removal rate as the response variable and forward speed
and nozzle outlet pressure as the experimental factors, as shown in Equation (9):
y a1 = 136.85 − 341.7x1 + 9.72x2 − 80.06x1 x2 + 477.5x12 + 16.75x22 , (9)
3.3.1. Response Surface Analysis

Based on the results of the multi-factor experiment, in order to visually analyze the
trend of the influence of forward speed and nozzle opening diameter on weed removal
rate, Design-Expert 8.0.6 software was used to output a response surface and contour map
of the influence of forward speed and nozzle outlet pressure on the weed removal rate of
the jet-type inter-plant weeding device, as shown in Figure 16.
3.3.1. Response Surface Analysis
Based on the results of the multi-factor experiment, in order to visually analyze t
trend of the influence of forward speed and nozzle opening diameter on weed removal ra
Agronomy 2023, 13, 1305
Design-Expert 8.0.6 software was used to output a response surface and contour
17 of 21
map of t
influence of forward speed and nozzle outlet pressure on the weed removal rate of the je
type inter-plant weeding device, as shown in Figure 16.
(a) (b)
Figureof16.
Figure 16. Effects Effects speed
forward of forward speed outlet
and nozzle and nozzle outlet
pressure onpressure on weed
weed removal rateremoval rate of the devi
of the device.
(a) Response(a) Response
surface plot;surface plot; plot.
(b) contour (b) contour plot.
Based on theBased on the regression

quadratic quadratic regression model (7)
model Equation Equation (7) and
and Figure 16a,Figure
it can 16a, it can be co
be con-
cluded thatcluded that of
the effects theforward
effects of forward
speed and speed
nozzleand nozzle
outlet outletonpressure
pressure on weed
weed removal removal ra
rate
aresignificant,
are extremely extremely significant,
and there isand there is an interaction
an interaction effect
effect between between
them. them. The experimen
The experimental
results show that when the forward speed is constant, the weed removal rate of the jet-type
inter-plant weeding device decreases with a decrease in the nozzle outlet pressure. When
the nozzle outlet pressure is constant and in a low position, the weed removal rate first
decreases and then increases with an increase in the forward speed. The main reason for
this phenomenon is that when the forward speed changes in the range of 0.30–0.40 m·s−1 ,
the time of soil erosion per unit area decreases, and the weed removal rate decreases accord-
ingly. When the forward speed changes in the range of 0.4–0.5 m·s−1 , the amplitude of the
transverse and longitudinal vibration of the jet-type inter-plant weeding device increases
due to the increase in the forward speed, resulting in the occurrence of a transverse and
longitudinal pulsating jet caused by the amplitude change of the jet [50], which enhances
the erosion and transportation performance, and, thus, the weed removal rate increases.
When the nozzle outlet pressure is constant and in a high position, the jet erosion ability
is strong. With the increase in the forward speed, the time of soil erosion per unit area in
the weeding area decreases, which reduces the degree of soil layer stripping for weed root
growth, and the weed removal rate decreases accordingly.
3.3.2. Analysis of Variance

The analysis of variance of the effects of forward speed and nozzle outlet pressure on
weed removal rate is shown in Table 3.
Table 3. Analysis of variance of factors affecting weed removal rate.
Sum of Degrees of
Source of Mean p Value
Squares of Freedom F Value
Variance Square (Significance)
Dispersion (DOF)
Regression model 715.48 5 143.10 35.85 <0.0001
Factor x1 1882.56 1 182.56 45.73 <0.0001
Factor x2 252.03 1 252.03 63.14 <0.0001
Factor x1 2 182.40 1 182.40 45.69 <0.0001
Factor x2 2 57.46 1 57.46 14.39 0.0035
Factor x1 x2 41.02 1 41.02 10.28 0.0094
Residual 39.92 10 3.99
Lack of fit 25.78 3 8.59 4.26 0.0523
Error 14.14 7 0.02
Sum 755.40 15
Agronomy 2023, 13, 1305 18 of 21
Based on the analysis of variance results for the factors’ effects on weed removal rate
in Table 3, it can be seen that x1 , x2 , x1 2 , x2 2 and x1 x2 have a significant impact on the
regression model. All factors have an extremely significant impact on the weed removal
rate regression model, which confirms the significance of the regression equation and the
good fit of the model since the lack-of-fit variance is not significant.
On this basis, the optimal combination of experimental factors for the jet-type inter-
plant weed control device was designed and optimized, and a mathematical model was
established for the effect of experimental factors on the experimental index, taking into
account the range of factor levels. The regression model was then analyzed, and the
regression Equation (8) was obtained.


 maxya1
 0.26 m/s ≤ x1 ≤ 0.54 m/s

(10)

 s.t. 0.50 MPa ≤ x2 ≤ 1.50 MPa
0 ≤ y a3 ( x1 , x2 ) ≤ 1
 
Using Design-Expert 8.0.6 software, the optimal combination of factor levels that
satisfied the weeding rate was obtained. The optimal operating conditions were a forward
speed of 0.30 m·s−1 and a nozzle outlet pressure of 1.50 MPa, resulting in a weeding rate of
92.78%. The optimal parameter combination was validated on the test bench by performing
five repetitions of the experiment, and the average value was taken as the final validation
test result. The weeding rate for the validation test on the test bench was 90.62%, which was
consistent with the optimization result and met the requirements for inter-plant weeding
in paddy fields.
3.4. Field Validation Test Results and Analysis

The results of the field verification test of the water jet inter-plant weeding device in
the paddy field are shown in Table 4.
Table 4. Field performance test results of water jet weeding device in paddy field.
Weeding Rate/% Seedling Injury Rate/%

Number Forward Speed/(m·s−1 )
Experiment Results Mean Experiment Results Mean
1 0.3 89.68 1.70
2 0.3 89.90 90.16 1.83 1.80
3 0.3 90.89 1.88
4 0.4 87.82 1.74
5 0.4 88.01 88.08 1.79 1.79
6 0.4 88.43 1.84
7 0.5 86.84 1.75
8 0.5 87.00 87.15 1.88 1.84
9 0.5 87.61 1.89
According to Table 4, the maximum average weeding rate of the water jet-based inter-
plant weeding device in the paddy field is 88.08% at a current device speed of 0.4 m·s−1 ,
with a seedling damage rate of 1.79%. The minimum average seedling damage rate is 1.80%
at a current device speed of 0.3 m·s−1 , with an average weeding rate of 90.16%. Considering
the weeding efficiency, the optimal operating speed is chosen as 0.3 m·s−1 , and the water
jet-based inter-plant weeding device can meet the requirements for inter-plant weeding in
paddy fields.
In this study, an innovative water jet-based weeding method was proposed, and the
important factors affecting the weeding performance and their interactions were explored
through virtual simulation experiments, bench tests, and field experiments. Traditional
mechanical weeding devices mainly use mechanical parts to flexibly make contact with
rice seedlings and inter-plant weeds and achieve inter-plant weeding in paddy fields
by controlling contact force and contact area [50]. This method can achieve inter-plant
Agronomy 2023, 13, 1305 19 of 21
weeding in paddy fields effectively, but it may cause seedling damage, which affects
rice yield. Moreover, due to the need for direct contact between mechanical weeding
components and rice seedlings, the operation speed needs to be greatly reduced to avoid
seedling damage, seriously affecting the operation efficiency [17]. This study abandoned
the use of mechanical components to make contact with plants and instead used water
jets to make contact with rice seedlings and weeds, thus avoiding potential problems and
reducing seedling damage rate while significantly improving operation efficiency.
This study explored the operation performance and effect of a water jet-based weeding
device, but there is still significant room for improvement. Currently, the inter-plant
weeding operation of the water jet-based device consumes a large amount of water. In
future research, we will obtain water from the tilled paddy field environment and develop
an integrated system of “water intake–filtering–jetting”. Moreover, in order to reduce soil
compaction and excessive disturbance, we will incorporate a tillering fertilizer application
device to achieve a multi-functional operation of fertilization and weeding in one step.
4. Conclusions
In this study, we innovatively designed a water jet-type inter-plant weeding device
for paddy rice seedlings and weeds by analyzing the structure and water jet characteristics
of rice seedlings and weeds, combined with the principle of geotechnics, to obtain the key
factors affecting the performance of water jet weeding operation: jet inclination, nozzle
opening diameter, and critical breaking pressure, and used the display dynamics software
LS-DYNA to conduct a water jet weeding mechanism study. The water jet weeding process
was analyzed, and the optimal combination of parameters of the water jet-type inter-plant
weeding device was explored based on a bench test and field test, and the following
conclusions were obtained.
The range of values for the jet inclination angle of the water jet-type inter-plant
weeding device is 10◦ ≤ θ ≤ 31◦ , the range of values for the nozzle opening diameter is
d ≥ 4 mm, and the critical nozzle breaking pressure is 0.53 MPa.
The single-factor virtual simulation test of water–soil fluid–solid coupling shows that
when the nozzle diameter is constant, with the increase in the jet inclination angle, the
excavation depth h and soil disturbance rate S increase; when the jet inclination angle is set,
with the increase in the nozzle diameter, the excavation depth h and soil disturbance rate
S increase. The optimal combination of structural parameters is nozzle opening diameter
d = 4 mm, jet inclination angle θ = 31◦ , excavation depth in this state h = 31.88 mm, soil
excavation depth S = 31.88 mm, and soil disturbance rate S = 11.69%.
The results of the ultimate hydraulic pressure test of rice root systems against impact
showed that the ultimate pressure of rice root systems against breakage was 1.5 Mpa.
The bench test results of the water jet-type inter-plant weeding device showed that
the device had the best weeding operation performance, with a 92.78% weeding rate, when
the forward speed was 0.3 m/s and the nozzle outlet pressure was 1.5 MPa. The field
performance test results showed that the maximum average weeding rate of the water
jet-type inter-plant weeding device was 90.16% and the seedling damage rate was 1.80%
when the forward speed was 0.3 m/s, which satisfied the weeding operation requirements.
This study explores the possibility of weeding operation using a water jet and provides
a reference for the innovative design of mechanical weeding devices to promote inter-plant
weeding in paddy fields.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, W.Z.; methodology, K.S.; software, K.S. and X.S.; valida-
tion, Q.F.; formal analysis, D.Y.; investigation, Q.W.; resources, X.S.; data curation, K.S.; writing—
original draft preparation, W.Z.; writing—review and editing, Y.W.; visualization, Y.W.; supervision,
Y.W.; project administration, Y.W.; funding acquisition, Y.W.; All authors have read and agreed to the
published version of the manuscript.
Agronomy 2023, 13, 1305 20 of 21
Funding: This research was financially supported by the Heilongjiang Provincial Natural Science
Foundation of China (No. JJ2022YX0432), Heilongjiang Postdoctoral Foundation (No. LBH-TZ2211),
and Academic Backbone of Northeast Agricultural University.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank their schools and colleges, as well as the funding
providers of the project. All support and assistance is sincerely appreciated.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Chaves, F.C.; Broeckling, C.D. The Future of Rice Demand: Quality beyond Productivity; Springer International Publishing: Berlin,
Germany, 2020.
2. Prasad, R.; Shivay, Y.S.; Kumar, D. Current status, challenges, and opportunities in rice production. Rice Prod. Worldw. 2017, 1–32.
[CrossRef]
3. Muthayya, S.; Sugimoto, J.D.; Montgomery, S.; Maberly, G.F. An overview of global rice production, supply, trade, and
consumption. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2014, 1324, 7–14. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
4. Poddar, R.; Acharjee, P.U.; Bhattacharyya, K.; Patra, S.K. Effect of irrigation regime and varietal selection on the yield, water
productivity, energy indices and economics of rice production in the lower Gangetic Plains of Eastern India. Agric. Water Manag.
2022, 262, 107327. [CrossRef]
5. Janrao, P. Management Zone Delineation in Precision Agriculture Using Data Mining: A Review. In Proceedings of the IEEE
Conference ICIIECS 2015, Coimbatore, India, 19–20 March 2015.
6. Cao, W. Analysis of the Influence of Parameters of a Spraying System Designed for UAV Application on the Spraying Quality
Based on Box–Behnken Response Surface Method. Agriculture 2022, 12, 131.
7. Tataridas, A.; Kanatas, P.; Chatzigeorgiou, A.; Zannopoulos, S.; Travlos, I. Sustainable Crop and Weed Management in the Era of
the EU Green Deal: A Survival Guide. Agronomy 2022, 12, 589. [CrossRef]
8. Kunz, C.; Weber, J.F.; Peteinatos, G.G.; Sökefeld, M.; Gerhards, R. Camera steered mechanical weed control in sugar beet, maize
and soybean. Precis. Agric. 2017, 19, 708–720. [CrossRef]
9. Wang, J.W.; Tang, H.; Wang, J.F. Comprehensive utilization status and development analysis of crop straw resource in Northeast
China. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Mach. 2017, 48, 1–21.
10. Hong, N.H.; Xuan, T.D.; Eiji, T.; Khanh, T.D. Paddy weed control by higher plants from Southeast Asia. Crop. Prot. 2004, 23,
255–261. [CrossRef]
11. Chen, L.; Wang, Z.-Z.; Wu, Y.-B.; Jin, M.; Tang, X.-Y.; Wang, C.-X.; Zhang, W.-L. Research advances on characteristics, damage and
control measures of weedy rice. Acta Agron. Sin. 2020, 46, 969–977. [CrossRef]
12. Zhang, Y.; Tian, L.; Cao, C.; Zhu, C.; Qin, K.; Ge, J. Optimization and validation of blade parameters for inter-row weeding wheel
in paddy fields. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13, 1003471. [CrossRef]
13. Rahaman, F.; Juraimi, A.S.; Rafii, M.Y.; Uddin, K.; Hassan, L.; Chowdhury, A.K.; Karim, S.M.R.; Rini, B.Y.; Yusuff, O.; Bashar,
H.M.K.; et al. Allelopathic potential in rice—A biochemical tool for plant defence against weeds. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13, 1072723.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
14. Watanabe, H. Development of lowland weed management and weed succession in Japan. Weed Biol. Manag. 2011, 11, 175–189.
[CrossRef]
15. Qi, Y.; Li, J.; Yan, B.; Deng, Z.; Fu, G. Impact of herbicides on wild plant diversity in agro-ecosystems: A review. Biodivers. Sci.
2016, 24, 228–236. [CrossRef]
16. Shaner, D.L.; Beckie, H.J. The future for weed control and technology. Pest Manag. Sci. 2014, 70, 1329–1339. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
17. Long, Q.I.; Chuang, L.I.U.; Jiang, Y. Present status and intelligent development prospects of mechanical weeding technology and
equipment for rice. J. South China Agric. Univ. 2020, 41, 29–36.
18. Tajuddin, A. Development of a power weeder for low land rice. IE I 2009, 90, 15–17.
19. Jinwu, W.; Xiaochi, M.A.; Han, T.; Qi, W.; Yipeng, W.U.; Zhenjiang, Z. Design and Experiment of Curved-tooth Oblique Type
Inter-row Weeding Device for Paddy Field. Nongye Jixie Xuebao/Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Mach. 2021, 52, 91–100.
20. Tian, L.; Cao, C.; Qin, K.; Fang, L.; Ge, J. Design and test of post-seat weeding machine for paddy. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng. 2021, 14,
21. Ratnaweera, A.C.; Rajapakse, N.N.; Ranasinghe, C.J.; Thennakoon, T.; Kumara, R.S.; Balasooriya, C.P.; Bandara, M.A. Design of
power weeder for low land paddy cultivation. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Sustainable Built Environment
(ICSBE-2010), Kandy, Sri Lanka, 13–14 December 2010.
22. Hossain, M.A. Agronomic practises for weed control in turmeric (Curcuma longa L.). Weed Biol. Manag. 2005, 5, 166–175. [CrossRef]
23. Ma, G.; Bai, L.; Liu, D.; Liu, X.; Lu, Y.; Yu, L. Control effects of different herbicides combinations on the resistance weeds in direct
seeding rice fields. Chin. Agric. Sci. Bull. 2012, 28, 195–199.
Agronomy 2023, 13, 1305 21 of 21
24. Ma, X.; Qi, L.; Liang, B.; Tan, Z.; Zuo, Y. Present status and prospects of mechanical weeding equipment and technology in paddy
field. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng. 2011, 27, 162–168.
25. Sadek, M.A.; Chen, Y.; Zeng, Z. Draft force prediction for a high-speed disc implement using discrete element modelling. Biosyst.
Eng. 2021, 202, 133–141. [CrossRef]
26. Wang, Y.; Xue, W.; Ma, Y.; Tong, J.; Liu, X.; Sun, J. DEM and soil bin study on a biomimetic disc furrow opener. Comput. Electron.
Agric. 2019, 156, 209–216. [CrossRef]
27. Aikins, K.A.; Antille, D.L.; Ucgul, M.; Barr, J.B.; Jensen, T.A.; Desbiolles, J.M.A. Analysis of effects of operating speed and depth
on bentleg opener performance in cohesive soil using the discrete element method. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2021, 187, 106236.
[CrossRef]
28. Bae, D.-M.; Zakki, A.F. Comparisons of multi material ALE and single material ALE in LS-DYNA for estimation of acceleration
response of free-fall lifeboat. J. Soc. Nav. Archit. Korea 2011, 48, 552–559. [CrossRef]
29. Han, Y.; Liu, H. Finite Element Simulation of Medium-Range Blast Loading Using LS-DYNA. Shock. Vib. 2015, 2015, 631493.
[CrossRef]
30. Sun, Q.; Zhou, J.; Lin, P. Dynamic analysis of fluid-structure interaction for water impact of projectile using LS-DYNA. J. Syst.
Simul. 2010, 22, 1498–1501.
31. Long, Q.I.; Zhongwei, L.; Xu, M.A.; Yongxin, T.; Likai, J. Validation and analysis of fluid-structure interaction between rotary
harrow weeding roll and paddy soil. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng. 2015, 31, 29–37.
32. Wang, T.; Liu, Z.; Yan, X.; Mi, G.; Liu, S.; Chen, K.; Zhang, S.; Wang, X.; Zhang, S.; Wu, X. Finite Element Model Construction and
Cutting Parameter Calibration of Wild Chrysanthemum Stem. Agriculture 2022, 12, 894. [CrossRef]
33. Jinfeng, W.; Jinwu, W.; Dongwei, Y.A.N.; Han, T.; Wenqi, Z. Design and Experiment of 3SCJ—2 Type Row Weeding Machine for
Paddy Field. Nongye Jixie Xuebao/Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Mach. 2017, 48, 71–78.
34. Huang, F.; Hu, B.; Zuo, W.; Li, S.Q. Experiments on the impact pressure of high-pressure water jet under different nozzle shapes.
J. Chongqing Univ. 2019, 42, 124–133.
35. Kang, C. Fundamentals and Applications of High-Pressure Water Jet Technology; Machinery Industry Press: Beijing, China, 2016.
36. Chen, M.; Pan, X. Hydraulic Analysis and Calculation; China Water Conservancy and Hydropower Publishing House: Beijing,
China, 2010.
37. Li, F.; Li, J. Research on the mechanism of jet breaking and its engineering application. Fluid Mach. 1997, 25, 26–29.
38. Zhang, Z.; Dong, Z. Viscous Fluid Dynamics; Tsinghua University Press: Beijing, China, 1998.
39. He, X.; Sang, Q.; Zheng, F. An Experimental Study on Impact of Multiples Agent Actions on Sloping Water Erosion in Different
Mollic Thickness Regions of Northeast China. J. Soil Water Conserv. 2021, 35, 103–109.
40. Zhang, L.; Wang, R.; Zhang, C.; Wang, S.; Xu, T. Intelligent irrigation strategy based on regulated deficit theory and fuzzy control
for rice in cold region. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng. 2016, 32, 52–58.
41. Wang, Z.L.; Chang, G.Y.; Jiang, Q.X.; Fu, Q.; Chen, W.J. Constructing pedo-transfer functions based on grey relational and
nonlinear programming to estimate hydraulic parameters in black soil. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng. Trans. CSAE 2019, 35, 60–68.
42. Barr, J.B.; Ucgul, M.; Desbiolles, J.M.A.; Fielke, J.M. Simulating the effect of rake angle on narrow opener performance with the
discrete element method. Biosyst. Eng. 2018, 171, 1–15. [CrossRef]
43. Chen, Y.; Huang, B.; Chen, Y. Deformation and strength of structural soft clay under cyclic loading. Chin. J. Geotech. Eng. 2005, 27,
1065–1071.
44. Lewis, B.A. Manual for Ls-Dyna Soil Material Model 147; Math. Model. (No. FHWA-HRT-04-095); Federal Highway Administration:
Washington, DC, USA, 2004.
45. Abbo, A.J.; Sloan, S.W. A smooth hyperbolic approximation to the Mohr-Coulomb yield criterion. Comput. Struct. 1995, 54,
46. Junhong, D.; Xianlong, J.; Yizhi, G. Study on 3-D numerical simulation for soil cutting with large deformation. Trans. Chin. Soc.
Agric. Mach. 2007, 38, 118–121.
47. Bao, C.; Long, X.; Liang, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Zhang, Z. Simulation Analysis of Cavitating flow and thrust characteristics of High-pressure
Waterjet Propulsion Device. Hydraul. Pneum. 2023, 47, 12.
48. Wang, S.; Su, D.B.; Wang, Z.M.; Jiang, Y.Y.; Zhang, L.N.; Tan, Y. Design and experiments of the cam swing rod intra-row weeding
device for lettuce farm. Trans. CSAE 2021, 37, 34–44.
49. Jin, C.; Chen, C.; Pan, D.; Zhu, Y.; Li, X.; Zhong, X.; Zhang, H.; Zhang, Y. Influence of key parameters of submerged water jets on
the erosion volume of natural gas hydrate sediments. Drill. Eng. 2019, 5, 1–7.
50. Chong, D.; Zhao, Q.; Yuan, F.; Wang, W.; Chen, W.; Yan, J. Research on the steam jet length with different nozzle structures. Exp.
Therm. Fluid Sci. 2015, 64, 134–141. [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Agronomy 13 01305

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Agronomy 13 01305

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Agronomy 13 01305

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

agronomy

Agronomy 2023, 13, 1305. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13051305 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/agronomy

of fertilizers, causing environmental damage [11]. Precision agriculture has become an

Agronomy 2023, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 21

2.2.3. Nozzle Diameter

2.2.4. Soil Penetration Pressure

According to the literature on soil-related parameters in Northeast China [39–41],

2.3. Simulation Results

2.3.1. Experimental Method

2.3.2. Nozzle Virtual Simulation Model Construction

2.4. Bench Test

2.4.4. Field Test Method

Figure 10. The Figure 10. The relationship

Figure 11.Figure 11. Relationships

According According to the experimental

Agronomy 2023, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 21

Agronomy 2023, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 21

Agronomy 2023, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 21

Figure 14. Analysis

Figure 15. Analysis of the influence

3.3. Results and Analysis of Multifactorial Experiment on Test Bench

Experimental Factors Experimental Index

y a1 = 136.85 − 341.7x1 + 9.72x2 − 80.06x1 x2 + 477.5x12 + 16.75x22 , (9)

3.3.1. Response Surface Analysis

Based on theBased on the regression

3.3.2. Analysis of Variance

3.4. Field Validation Test Results and Analysis

Weeding Rate/% Seedling Injury Rate/%

You might also like