Technology, energy, agriculture transport AIC

Ihor OSADCHYI – Postgraduate Student of National university of life and environmental science of Ukraine, (03041, Ukraine, Kyiv, Heroes of Defense St., building 15, 03041, e-mail: igorubee@gmail.com, http://orcid.org/). 

The article is devoted to experimental research of the efficiency of the pneumatic cleaning system of radar sensors of navigation systems on self-propelled sprayers in field conditions. The relevance of the research is due to the problem of contamination of visual row guidance sensors with plant residues, dust, dew and other elements, which reduces the accuracy of the navigation systems and requires frequent stops for manual cleaning. 
The paper presents the design of the developed pneumatic cleaning system, which consists of an air compressor with a receiver, a distribution system, air nozzles and an electronic control unit. The technical characteristics of the system components and the principle of its operation in pulse mode are described. 
Field tests were carried out during a full 24-hour work shift on a self-propelled sprayer Case Patriot with a Raven navigation system in the conditions of processing corn crops in the milk ripeness phase. The effect of different operating modes of the system (pressure 2, 4, 6, 8 bar and pulse time 1, 5, 10, 20 seconds) on the efficiency of cleaning sensors under different types of pollution and microclimatic conditions in four time periods of the day was studied. 
The results showed that in the daytime, with dry dust pollution, the 4 bar mode with 5 seconds of blowing is sufficient (efficiency 95%). In the evening, with combined pollution, a pressure of 6-8 bar for 15-20 seconds is required (efficiency 75-85%). The most difficult conditions are observed at night with high humidity of 85-95%, when the maximum mode provides 80% of the cleaning efficiency. The morning period is characterized by rapid drying of wet dirt, which requires a 6-8 bar mode for 15-20 seconds (efficiency 70-78%). 
The study confirms the feasibility of using pneumatic cleaning systems on self-propelled sprayers, which contributes to increasing productivity, reducing crop losses and improving the quality of technological operations. 

1.    Badue, C., Guidolini, R., Carneiro, R. V., Azevedo, P., Cardoso, V. B., Forechi, A., Jesus, L., Berriel, R., Paixão, T. M., Mutz, F., et al. (2021). Self-driving cars: A survey. Expert Systems with Applications, 165, 113816. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113816 [in English].
2.    Gao, C., Wang, G., Shi, W., Wang, Z., & Chen, Y. (2022). Autonomous driving security: State of the art and challenges. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 9(10), 7572–7595. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/JIOT.2021.3118575 [in English].
3.    Litman, T. (2021). Autonomous vehicle implementation predictions. Victoria Transport Policy Institute. URL: https://www.vtpi.org/avip.pdf [in English].
4.    Society of Automotive Engineers. (2021). Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to driving automation systems for on-road motor vehicles (SAE J3016). SAE International. [in English].
5.    Chen, Z., Yin, J., Farhan, S. M., Liu, L., Zhang, D., Zhou, M., & Cheng, J. (2025). A comprehensive review of obstacle avoidance for autonomous agricultural machinery in multi-operational environments. Smart Agricultural Technology, 6, 100081. URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589721725000819 [in English].
6.    Machavaram, A. R. (2025). Intelligent path planning for autonomous ground vehicles in dynamic environments utilizing adaptive neuro-fuzzy control. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 144, 110119. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2025.110119 [in English].
7.    Trierweiler, M., Peterseim, T., & Neumann, C. (2020). Automotive LiDAR pollution detection system based on total internal reflection techniques. In Proceedings of SPIE 11302. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2538416 [in English].
8.    Son, S., Lee, W., Lee, J., Lee, J., Lee, H., Jang, J., Cha, H., Bae, S., & Ryu, H.-C. (2024). Examining the optimization of spray cleaning performance for LiDAR sensor. Applied Sciences, 14(18), 8340. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/app14188340 [in English].
9.    Göktürk, K., & Jönsson, A. (2019). Developing a resource-efficient sensor cleaning system for autonomous heavy vehicles (Master’s thesis). KTH Royal Institute of Technology. URL: https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2:1371223 [in English].
10.    Porav, H., Bruls, T., & Newman, P. (2019). I can see clearly now: Image restoration via de-raining. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) (pp. 7087–7093). https://www.robots.ox.ac.uk/~mobile/Papers/ICRA19_porav.pdf [in English].
11.    Kenk, M. A., & Hassaballah, M. (2020). Vehicle detection in adverse weather. arXiv preprint. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.05402 [in English].
12.    Pao, W. Y., Howorth, J., Li, L., Agelin-Chaab, M., Roy, L., Knutzen, J., Baltazar-y-Jimenez, A., & Muenker, K. (2024). Investigation of automotive LiDAR vision in rain from material and optical perspectives. Sensors, 24(10), 2997. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/s24102997 [in English].
13.    Byeon, M., & Yoon, S. W. (2020). Analysis of automotive LiDAR sensor model considering scattering effects in regional rain environments. IEEE Access, 8, 102669–102679. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2990156 [in English].