bulletin 4607 issn 1448-0352 tramline farming systems · tramline farming systems technical manual...

91

Tramline Farming SystemsTechnical manual

Bulletin 4607ISSN 1448-0352FEB 2004

1

DISCLAIMER1. The information, representations and statements contained in this publication are provided for general information purposes only.2. The State of Western Australia, the Minister for Agriculture, the Chief Executive Officer of the Department of Agriculture and theirrespective officers, employees and agents:a) do not make any representation or warranty as to the accuracy, reliability, completeness or currency of the information, representationsor statements in this publication;b) shall not be liable, in negligence or otherwise, to any person for any loss, liability, damage, personal injury or death arising out of any actor failure to act by any person in using or relying on any information, representation or statement contained in this publication.3.a) The State of Western Australia, the Minister for Agriculture, the Chief Executive Officer of the Department of Agriculture and theirrespective officers, employees and agents do not endorse or recommend any product specified in this publication or any manufacturer of aSpecified Product. Brand, trade and proprietary names have been used solely for the purpose of assisting users of this publication to identifyproducts.4. This publication has been designed for use by competent farming industry practitioners.5. Users of this publication should obtain independent advice and conduct their own investigations and assessments of any proposals thatthey may be considering in light of their particular circumstances.

Tramline Farming Systems:Technical Manual

© State of Western Australia 2004.

Compiled by Bindi Webb, Paul Blackwell, Glen Riethmuller and Jeremy Lemon, Department of Agriculture Western Austalia, GRDC Project DAW 718.

Bulletin 4607ISSN 1448-0352FEB 2004

3

AcknowledgementsWe would like to acknowledge all the farmersand others who have participated in thisresearch including Dan and Tony Critch, MilesObst, Kevin Thomas, Rohan Ford, Nigel andDon Moffat, Paddy Barber, Glenn and TonyFretwell and the Liebe Group for the provisionof trial sites. Thank you to Mike Collins, PeterNewman, Greg Hamilton, Peter Walsh, BillCrabtree, Wayne Chapman, Don Yule, StewartCannon and Jeff Tullberg for your valued

input. Thanks to Rudi Bartels of BEELINETechnologies for guidance systemterminology. Thank you to the GrainsResearch and Development Corporation andthe Department of Agriculture for funding thisproject DAW 718 ‘The development of tramlinefarming for Western Australian cropping’ andthe Sustainable Energy Development Office(SEDO) of the Department of Energy ofWestern Australia for funding C359M SEDO.

4

Contents

1.0 Introduction............................................................................................................................. 9

2.0 Tramline farming decision tree.................................................................................................10

3. 0 Summary of tramline farming definitions..........................................................................11

3.1 Definitions.............................................................................................................................11

3.2 Benefits..................................................................................................................................11

3.3 Estimated costs.........................................................................................................................11

4.0 Setting priorities.........................................................................................................................12

5.0 What direction?.........................................................................................................................15

5.1 Up and back...........................................................................................................................15

5.2 Round and round.........................................................................................................................16

6.0 Guidance systems.........................................................................................................................19

6.1 Marker arms..........................................................................................................................19

6.2 Video guidance.........................................................................................................................19

6.3 Electronic GPS guidance.............................................................................................................19

6.4 Post seeding guidance...............................................................................................................21

6.5 Guidance terminology..................................................................................................................21

7.0 Machinery matching...................................................................................................................26

7.1 Why in match the harvester?...................................................................................................26

7.2 Matching machinery widths......................................................................................................26

7.3 Matching machinery tracks...................................................................................................28

7.4 Machinery modification options.................................................................................................29

8.0 Tramline design.........................................................................................................................37

8.1 Bare........................................................................................................................................37

8.2 Fuzzy......................................................................................................................................37

8.3 Sown......................................................................................................................................38

8.4 Furry tramlines.....................................................................................................................38

8.5 Tramline maintenance...........................................................................................................39

9.0 Layout Planning..........................................................................................................................43

9.1 Length of run.........................................................................................................................43

9.2 Access roads...........................................................................................................................43

9.3 Tramline orientation.............................................................................................................43

9.4 Surface water control.............................................................................................................44

10.0 Agronomic opportunities.........................................................................................................49

10.1 Easier stubble handling...........................................................................................................49

5

10.2 Old furrow sowing......................................................................................................................49

10.3 Shielded spraying................................................................................................................49

10.4 Relay planting.........................................................................................................................53

11.0 Tramline farming case studies...............................................................................................57

11.1 Getting started.........................................................................................................................57

Case study 1: Darren Baum..........................................................................................................57

Case study 2: The Logues and Porters.................................................................................58

11.2 Consolidating the system......................................................................................................60

Case study 3: John and Caroline Young......................................................................................60

Case study 4: Tom and Denise, David and Joanna Lewis............................................................61

Case study 5: Colin and Fiona Pither..........................................................................................62

Case study 6: Paddy and Sharon Barber......................................................................................63

Case study 7: Lindsay and Karen Chappel...................................................................................64

Case study 8: Geoffrey and Vivienne Marshall............................................................................65

Case study 9: Miles and Aiden Obst..........................................................................................66

11.3 Fully matched system...........................................................................................................67

Case study 10: Harold and Jo, Glenn and Narelle Millington....................................................67

Case study 11: Don and Anne, Nigel and Tanya Moffat........................................................69

Case study 12: Rohan and Carol Ford...................................................................................71

Case study 13: Anthony and Daphne, Glenn and Lisa Fretwell...........................................73

Case study 14: Kim and Dianne, Neil and Jo Diamond........................................................75

Case study 15: Owen and Terri Brownley.............................................................................77

APPENDIX 1: Tramline farming research..................................................................................81

1.1 Improved efficiency..........................................................................................................81

1.2 Compaction control.........................................................................................................82

1.3 Improved weed control (inter-row shield spraying).......................................................83

1.4 Tramline design...............................................................................................................83

1.5 Economics of tramline farming......................................................................................85

1.6 References.........................................................................................................................88

7

Section 1,2,3 and 4

Introduction

Tramline farmingdecision tree

Summary of TramlineFarming-definitions,benefits and costs

Setting priorities

9

Tramline farming improves farm productionand efficiency by controlling traffic andconfining compaction to permanent tramlinesand reducing overlap. This manual will helpyou develop your farming system to get thetramline farming benefits. The manualcontains information on the principles andtechniques of implementing a tramlinefarming system. There are many optionsavailable, so you can tailor the system to suityour own farm.

In eastern Australia, controlled traffic farming(CTF) is another term used for permanentwheel track farming. The system is based onbare, straight tramlines. The term tramlinefarming is more commonly used in WesternAustralia where the system is closer to theoriginal European concept of using baretramlines for spraying only to avoid weed andsoil erosion problems. Although most tramlinefarmers work in straight lines, some Australiangrowers, mostly from Western Australia, haveshown that tramline farming can be workedsuccessfully round and round. The termstramline farming and controlled trafficfarming can be used interchangeably. For thepurpose of this manual we will refer totramline farming.

The tramline farming decision tree on page 2is an overall summary of the decisions youneed to make in designing your system andthe options available. You can then refer toeach section as required.

There are five main choices to make:1. What are your farm priorities?2. What direction do you want to work yourpaddock?3. What guidance system would you like?4. What machinery widths and tracks do youwant to base the system on?5. What tramline type is suitable?When answering these questions keep in mindyour own farm situation, including things likebudget, farm layout, and climate. A tramlinefarming system can be developed over anumber of years according to yourcircumstances.

Please read this manual in conjunction withother published material on tramline-basedsystems, for example, Controlled TrafficFarming, Kondinin Group July 2000 FarmingAhead, No. 103 p28-42, and February 2003,No. 134 p18-31; Controlled Traffic FarmingGuide , Conservation Farmers 2003; andtechnical information about raised bedfarming. For example Hamilton, G., Bakker,D. (in press) Raised Bed Farming Manual,Department of Agriculture Western Australia.

1.0 Introduction

This manual containsinformation on theprinciples andtechniques ofimplementing atramline farmingsystem.

The terms tramlinefarming and controlledtraffic farming can beused interchangeably.

Intr

od

uct

ion

10

2.0 Tramline farming decision tree

1. What are my farm priorities?

2. Direction (Section 5)

3. Guidance (Section 6)

4. Matching (Section 7)

5. Tramline type (Section 8)

Low cost Medium cost High cost and greater accuracy

Match to seeder width

Inputs only

Future?

Reduce compaction and crop damage

Tramlines for guidance Weed and erosion concerns

What tramline farming system will suit me?Choose your own path by starting at No.1

2:1 large seeders >12m

Inter-row methodsShielded sprayer

Relay plantingPre-furrowing

(Section 9)

Centre guide row/gap Bare Fuzzy

Use a centre guide row for in-crop guidance or change row spacing

between tramlinesWHOLE FARM PLANBEFORE STARTING

(Section 10)

Reduce inputs

approx 3% approx10%

Reduce compaction5-15% yield benefit

Increase weed control options

Agronomic opportunitiesi.e.Better stubble

handling, relay planting

Round and round

One marker arm or video

camera

Two marker arms

Contract marking and marker arms

DGPS(visual)

DGPS(autosteer)

Up and back

Future?

Match tracks

No headerapprox. 2.0m track forseeding, spraying andspreading equipment

Match headerapprox 3.0m track for all machinery

Make tramlines

Sown Furry

Match widths boom-spray and seeder

3:1 small seeders <12m

(Plan to fit header)

One wheeled tramlines

11

3.1 DefinitionsTramline farming or controlled traffic farmingis a crop and fodder production system whichconfines tyre and track induced soilcompaction to permanent tramlines bycontrolling traffic. This produces softer cropzones and allows easy access into the crop forrow cropping, relay planting or raised bedtechniques. An ideal system has all equipmentmatched for compatibility of width and tracks.

Tramline farming uses a guidance systemwhich may be mechanical, such as markerarms, or electronic, such as video or globalpositioning systems (GPS)) for more accuratedriving to minimise overlap and to set up andmaintain tramlines. Tramline farming canwork round and round or up and back.

Accurate driving and matching machineryoperational widths are very complementaryto precision farming methods for zonefarming and for variable rate applications offertilisers and herbicides.

increases over time;• grain quality: for example, fewer

screenings in cereals and more oil incanola by improved soil characteristics andplant root access to water.

More agronomic opportunitiesThe use of high accuracy technology providesnew agronomic opportunities such as:• relay of summer crops before grain legume

is harvested, using relay planting;• better fertiliser use by placement near row,

deep ripping and placement on alternateinter-rows;

• banding of post-emergent fungicides andinter-row shielded spraying;

• better stubble handling by running tinesbetween rows of the previous crop;

• sowing back into old furrows or pre-madefurrows after early rains or wet harvests.

The tramline farming benefits of reducedinputs and increases in yield have been shownto translate into improved gross margins of

Table 3.1. Relative value of major benefits (efficiency and yield based on conservative figures).

Benefit Amount Value

3.0 Summary of tramline farming definitions,benefits and costs

Benefits of tramlinefarming include 3 to 10per cent reduction ininputs and 5 to 15 percent increase in cropyields.

A tramline farmingsystem is estimated toreduce fuel use by up to25 per cent.

Intr

od

uct

ion

3.2 BenefitsBetter efficiencyCrop production efficiency is increased withtramline farming by:• reduced input costs of 3 to 10 per cent

from less overlap through more accuratedriving;

• easier driving from using a guidancesystem, which reduces fatigue;

• earlier access for operations such asseeding, spreading and spraying on thecompacted tramlines in wet conditions.

A tramline farming system is estimated toreduce fuel use by up to 25 per cent. Fuel andfertiliser savings could translate to 200 tonnesof greenhouse gas abated for each tonne ofimproved grain production.

Better yield and valueLess crop damage and soil compaction byconfining wheels to permanent tramlines canimprove:• crop yield by 5–15 per cent, depending on

soil type, the degree of track matching andthe duration of the system. Yield benefit

$45/ha (Table 3.1). The yield benefit fromreducing compaction and crop damage isgreater when compared to the overlap savings.

See Appendix 1 for more details on researchresults studying the benefits of tramlinefarming.

3.3 Estimated costsThe cost of tramline farming varies dependingon the guidance system you choose and yourcurrent on-farm machinery setup. The widerange of guidance systems and machineryavailable means that changes can generally bemade within any farm budget and may be madeover a period of time. Guidance systems canrange from low cost marker arms to moreexpensive and accurate Differential GlobalPositioning System (DGPS) auto-steer systems(Table 3.2).

Costs to modify machinery widths may varyfrom a few dollars to change a boomspray widthto the changeover costs to buy anotherharvester front or an alternative seeder.

Less over lap 5% $7.50 ($150/ha of inputs)More yield 10% $30 (2 t/ha yield and $150/t on-farm)

12

The costs to modify machinery tracks varygreatly, but are generally within the range of$1000 to $5000 per item of machinery. Newequipment is now being manufactured withadjustable tracks, for example adjustableboomspray axles and tracked tractors.

Other costs that may be associated withdeveloping and improving a tramline farmingsystem include:• the cost of designing and modifying

paddock layouts to improve efficiency;• new specialized equipment such as inter-

row shielded sprayers ($20, 000 to 50,000).

Simple estimate of costs and benefits fromTramline$CalculatorThere is a simple spreadsheet available tocalculate the benefits for your situation andcompare to the possible costs for yourmachinery. Contact the Department ofAgriculture Western Australia, ph (08) 99568555.

4.0 Setting prioritiesCapturing the most effective benefits for anindividual farming enterprise needs a cleardecision on the most important priorities toaim for. Each property has its own agronomicsituation and unique set of equipment, as wellas the unique skills of the grower. Thisdiversity between enterprises makes a singlerecommended recipe for adapting to tramlinefarming impossible. The most importantrecommendation is that tramline farming isseen as a farming system and implemented ina planned manner within the long-term goalsfor your enterprise.

It is important to consider your own farmpriorities. Almost all farmers wish to reducetheir input costs and improve the soil. Forsome, controlling compaction, or new weedcontrol options, or agronomic opportunitiesmay be important. Your priorities willdetermine the tramline farming system youdevelop. The savings gained from reducingoverlap could be then used to financematching machinery. If you are unsure, tryone paddock in a trial.

The most importantrecommendation isthat tramline farmingis seen as a farmingsystem andimplemented in aplanned manner withinthe long-term goals foryour enterprise.

Table 3.2. Approximate guidance system costs (2003) (Only a rough guide; manufacturers will provide more detail)

System Camera Marker arms DGPS visual DGPS auto-steer

Approx. cost ($) 600 1000—2000 3500—6000 4000—40,000 50—60,000 80—100,0

Home made/ second-hand +/- 1m +/- 20 cm +/- 2 cmCommercial

13

Section 5

Direction of working

15

5.1 Up and back (parallel) workingTraditionally, tramline farming is done withworking up and back in straight lines. This isthe most efficient method of working apaddock because:• driving to a straight line is easier than

following a curved path;• double worked corners of round and round

operations are eliminated;• precise inter-row or close to row operations

work more easily in straight lines.However, every paddock on the farm may notbe suitable for up and back farming becauseof complications with paddock shape and

obstructions such as trees and rocky outcrops.In such situations it is possible to sow alongthe contour. (See Section 9 Layout)

Challenges implementing up and backworkingAs with all new systems there are challenges.The following are some challenges andpotential solutions noted by growers changingto working up and back:

Challenge: tight turns and overlap at the endof the run for the seeding equipment.

Photo 5.1: ‘Rip skip’ is illustrated very well in this paddock as two varieties of wheat were briefly mixed up whenthe seed of one variety finished before the skips had been filled in.

Figure 5.1. ‘Clapper corners’

5.0 Direction of working

Start

Finish

Overlap

Source: Paul Blackwell, Department of Agriculture, WA' Kondinin Group. Reproduced in Farming Ahead No 134, for more information on Farming Ahead contact 1800 677 761

Up and back is the mostefficient method ofworking a paddock.

Dir

ecti

on

16

Solution: ‘rip skip’: this is where every secondseeding run is seeded then the seeder comesback and fills in the gaps as seen in the photobelow. This method can be done easily withelectronic DGPS guidance.

Challenge: lots of switches to flick at the endof the run to lift the bar out of the ground andturn the air seeder off and back on again.Solution: the ‘clapper corner’ was developedby Lindsay Chappel who uses the rip skippingmethod and leaves his bar in the groundthroughout the operation, creating curvedheadlands on the edge of the paddock (Figure5.1). This will be a compromise whencompared to lifting the bar out of the groundon the ends and then seeding the endseparately, as there will be more overlap andsome parts of the headland not sown. On theother hand, the risk of errors, such asforgetting to turn the air seeder back on, isreduced.

Challenge: swath falls over or crop lodges.Growers working up and back have notedsome problems with swathing crops down thetramlines as the swath tends to fall down thetracks and is too low to pick up. Anotherproblem is lodging crops that can be pickedup in one direction but not in the other.Solution: in these cases consider aligning thelayout at right angles to your prevailing wind.If this is not convenient then it may be onesituation where you don’t work on thetramlines at harvest.

Challenge: unloading at harvest.Solution: the placement of field bins requiressome planning. Work out the distance you cantravel in an average crop before the harvesterbin fills and put in an access road or a turnaround point. Or if working with a chaser binon the tramlines you need to think about whatside the unloading auger is on. Harvestingalternate rows as a ‘rip skip’ can help.

Challenge: avoiding double sowing on theends.Solution: if seeding up and back there are afew options to avoid double sowing on theends. Seed around the paddock the width ofthe boomspray before starting to work up andback. When turning on the ends lift your barout when you get to the edge. The laps sownon the outside act as a guide for when to liftthe bar and turn the air seeder off.Alternatively, you could seed the ends of thepaddocks when you finish, or if you have a wideaccess road, use that as your turning point, orwhen using auto-steer, seed a clapper corner.

Challenge: rough paddocks changing fromworking round and round.Solution: seed the tramlines for the first fewyears to smooth out the paddock. Oncesmooth, lift the tines behind the tractorwheels. Alternatively, use a tractor with verygood suspension and a comfortable seat!

5.2 Round and round (racetrack)Anti-clockwise round and round sowing is themost familiar method of operating in WesternAustralia and a tramline farming system canbe worked this way. Only one marker arm andone modified row width for tracking is needed.Corner problems can be reduced wherepossible by not double sowing corners andkeeping seeding runs in groups of two or threeto match the sprayer width. Tramline farminground and round can be used as a cheapintroduction to the system before moving toup and back working.

If corners are not double sown, all croppingoperations can be quicker but the applicationrates of fertilisers and pesticides are stillcompromised on corners if the applicationcontinues as the machine turns, overdosingthe inside of the turn and underdosing theoutside. Consider why you sow corners in thefirst place. If it is for weed or erosion controlthen ensure other control measures are taken.

Tramline farminground and round canbe used as a cheapintroduction to thesystem before movingto up and backworking.

17

Section 6

Guidance systems

19

There is a range of different guidance systemsavailable to suit individual farm budgets andpriorities, ranging from cheap mechanicalguidance to more precise and costly electronicguidance systems. Generally the bigger thecropping area, the greater the savings frompreventing overlap by using electronicguidance. Farmers with programs greater than1500 ha and input costs of around $100/ha havemade savings of about 10 per cent by using anaccurate electronic guidance system. This goesa long way towards rapidly recovering the costof the system. Refer to Table 6.2 for a summaryof guidance systems.

6.1 Marker armsMarker arms provide mechanical guidance.These can be as simple as a length of steel pipesupported by cables and dragging a section ofanchor chain. The more advanced marker armsare fully hydraulic, double fold systems. Thecost of building you own marker will varydepending on what materials you have availableand the complexity of the design. The cost of afully hydraulic arm marker arm ranges from$3500 to $6000 (2003 prices).

The disadvantages of using mechanical markerarms are obstructions such as trees, andregular repairs. Some suggestions to overcomeproblems are:

Difficulty finding marks in stubble: the use ofchains and ‘mad rabbits’ on marker arms is avery old method, but has advantages over a discbecause of lower maintenance, a clearer markand less dependence on the height of the arm.

Following a mark or line: this can be moreaccurate if a mark on the front of the bonnetis lined up with a mark on the cab screen toform a ‘gun sight’. Bonnets with a centralcrease or line are better for this. Putting afront wheel on the mark is also reliable, butthis method reduces the ability to straightenout ‘wobbles’.

Difficulty finding tramlines after stockdamage: there is little known about the effectof stock on tramlines. Some farmers arereporting difficulty finding the tramlines thefollowing year from stock damage. Placing apeg or selecting a landmark to mark thecentre of the first run may provide guidancefor future years. Contract GPS tramlinemarking is another option if the system usedis accurate enough to return to the same placethe following year.

6.2 Video camera guidanceA video camera located on the edge of a seederbar and linked to a monitor mounted in thecab of the tractor can be used to steer to theoutside row of the previous run. The cost ofthis system was approximately $600 in 2003.As the camera is located on the bar there isless risk of damaging it on obstacles.

6.3 DGPS guidanceElectronic systems are based on differentialglobal positioning systems (DGPS) satellitesignals. These systems offer more reliabilityand practicality than marker arms. Theyrange in complexity from a differential system

Photo 6.1 One marker arm seeding round and round

6.0 Guidance systems Farmers withprograms greater than1500 ha and input costsof around $100/ha havemade savings of about10 per cent by using anaccurate electronicguidance system.

Gu

idan

ce

20

(l-band or high precision-dual frequency) thatuses a series of satellites (up to 12 satellites),with a differential correction provided by anetwork of accurately surveyed referencepoints via a geostationary satellite, to a realtime kinematic (RTK) system with differentialcorrection from a local on-farm base station.L-band or high precision systems have a

steering accuracy of about +/- 10–90 cm (submeter) with drift from day to day. High qualitybase station systems are accurate to about +/-1-2 cm with little drift but they have shorterrange because the base station must bestationary on-farm.

Automatic steering can be applied to anyelectronic guidance system for most currenttypes of tractors. Automatic steering uses asteering kit fitted to each tractor and takes overfrom the steering wheel. The guidance systemcan be easily transferred between tractors,although not the steering kit. The mostaccurate auto-steer comes from a base stationsystem.

Visual guidance systems can operate up andback or round and round. Auto-steer systemsgenerally have been designed work up andback (parallel), although a few manufacturershave developed a system to steer round andround (race track).

The cost of electronic guidance systems canrange from $11,000 for DGPS visual guidanceto $90,000 for DGPS with auto-steer (2003prices).

Satellite reception can sometimes deteriorateor drop out. The presence of on-ground marks(such as tramlines or central marker rows)will provide some guidance when thesetechnical difficulties occur. This is a sensible‘belt and braces’ strategy. Software is beingdeveloped to predict when satellites are likelyto be down. During these times you couldundertake maintenance or other jobs, changeshifts or fill up.

Photo 6.2 A video camera located on the wing of the air seeder bar (a) is used to record animage displayed in the tractor cab (b) on the left.

Figure 6.1. Tractor receiving signals from satellites for DGPS guidance.

Stationary differential base

station

Stationary differential satellite

UHF

21

6.4 Contract markingEmploying a contract marker who has an auto-steer DGPS system to mark every spraying runup and back maybe a feasible option forgrowers who crop less than 1500 hectares. Twomarker arms can then be used at seeding tofill in the adjacent seeding runs. Alternatively,every run could be marked by the contractor.

6.5 Post-seeding guidanceMost of the guidance systems mentioned aboveare for guiding the seeding tractor, althoughGPS-based systems can be used for anypaddock operation. Marks on the ground orin the crop can be left for the driver to follow,for example the tyre marks of a tow-behindair seeder box. Centre guide rows can be madeby widening the two middle rows or leaving abroad row. Visible tramlines are another formof post-seeding guidance (see Section 8Tramline design). All post-seeding guidancerelies on accurate seeder positioning with itsown suitable guidance system.

6.7 Guidance terminologyThis is some of the terminology used toevaluate electronic guidance systems.

Absolute positioning —Positioning withrespect to a well-defined coordinate system(for instance, WGS84). An example of this ispost-processing of logged data to precisely

Photo 6.3 Base station located on-farm to achieve +/- 1-2cm accuracy with a DGPS auto-steer guidance system. Check the manufacturer’s recommendations for the ideal positionrelative to the working area.

Photo 6.4 Every boomspray run has been marked in this paddock by a contractor.

Gu

idan

ce

22

determine the true position of a base station(see http://www.auslig.gov.au/geodesy/sgc/wwwgps/).

Accuracy — Accuracy is a statisticalmeasurement of freedom from error or howclose a measurement is to the true butunknown value. It is generally defined as aninterval, confidence level or probability withinwhich the true value is likely to occur. Forexample, 1 m circular probability error (CEP)means that 50 per cent of the measurementsare within one metre of the true position.

Cross-track error — The distance from thecurrent way line measured at right angles tothe way line.

Precision — Precision refers to how small aunit the instrument can measure. Acentimetre level receiver is more precise thana metre level receiver, for example A poor basefix with a DGPS product can result in veryprecise measurements that are offset from thetrue position, for instance very precise butinaccurate.

Photo 6.5 A central guide row made in the center of the bar by pushing two rows close together is visible after harvest (38 cm broad rows).

Relative positioning— The determination of relative positionsbetween two or more receivers which aresimultaneously tracking the same GPS signals,where one receiver is static and the others aremobile.

Repeatability — Repeatability or repeatableaccuracy is a statistical measurement of theaccuracy with which a user can return to aprevious position. The main confusion withthe term repeatability is the time frame withinwhich it is used. To reduce confusion, the term‘Absolute repeatability’ is used by somemanufacturers to refer to repeatability that canbe used from season to season.

Way line — Line between two points, A andB, that sets the initial direction of travel andsubsequent path of travel parallel to this line.

Central guide row

23

Table 6.1. Benefits and problems of guidance systems.

System Benefits Problems

Marker arms or video camera

• Low cost

• No technical support required

• Mechanical guidance (mark on the ground)

• Can be difficult to see mark in stubble

• No auto steer

• Only for ripper and seeder• Maintainence cost, low precision

• Turns can be tight in up and back working

Contract markingby DGPSauto-steer

• No capital cost • May lose marks before seeding if grazing stock in the paddock• Possible to obtain digital

elevation maps at the same time

• Marking costs need to be less than saving from overlap achieved by owning a DGPS guidance system

Marine beacon • Independance from stationary satellite (no annual lease cost)

• Limited to areas with reception mainly near the coast but can have inland reception depending on land relief

• Free correction signal • Radio reception may be poor during stormy weather or at dawn and dusk

• Electrical noise (fans in cabs) may affect the signal

• One-off capital cost for receiver

• Around same price and accuracy as differential satellite

Differential basestation

• Independence from stationary satellite (no annual cost)

• 10 km range for each base station position

• Higher cost electronic system. Refer to section 6.3

• Base station service cost may be high depending on distance from service centre

• More accuracy • Very little drift from day to day

Differential basestation withauto-steer

• Better driving accuracy than visual

• Most expensive system

• Easier driving and freedom to monitor paddock and seeding equipment• Can't 'rip skip' * to reduce tight turns at the end of seeding runs

• Needs a steering kit for each tractor• May require regular stops to zero gyro

• 10 km range and 'line of sight' for each base station position for some models• Small areas not cost effective for auto-steer purchase (less than 1500 ha)

* 'Rip skip' refers to seeding every second run before filling in the alternate runs.

Gu

idan

ce

25

Section 7

Matching machinerywidths and tracks

26

Ideally, all machinery tracks and widths shouldmatch but large grain harvesters with widewheel tracks, offset harvester fronts and largeair seeder bars greater than 12 metres canmake matching difficult. As soil is compactedmost in moist conditions, spraying andseeding equipment is the most importantmachinery to match. If you have lots of easilycompacted sandplain soil or tend to have wetharvests then seriously consider fitting in thegrain harvester.

7.1 Why match in the grain harvester?There are several reasons why matching the

harvester into a tramline system is a goodidea.

• Harvesters and chaser bins are the heaviestequipment on most farms and cause soilcompaction during wet harvests or wheresoil is moist from shallow watertables. Thiscompaction can be severe enough to carryover many seasons.

• Harvesters will thresh and separate grainmore efficiently when large amounts ofpower are not being used for traction,especially when harvesting on recentlydeep ripped sand.

• On-ground guidance from sprayingtramlines can be confused by wheel tracksfrom harvest that do not match thetramlines for the other operations.

• There may be integrated weed controloptions (weed seeds and chaff fromharvesters dumped on tramlines), whichcould be more efficient than chaff carts.

If you are planning to fit the harvester in thenit is best to base the widths and tracks of thewhole system on the harvester because theharvester can be the most expensive piece of

equipment to modify. Harvesters with 11metre fronts are commonly offset and causedifficulties for matching in up and backoperations (not such a problem for round andround operations). There are now centred beltharvester fronts available up to 14 metres.

If matching the harvester initially requiressubstantial modifications it is possible to startwith matching the seeding and sprayingequipment and include the harvester later.Controlled traffic farmers in Queensland whohave been tramline farming for up to five yearsare finding that after initially matching onlythe spraying and seeding equipment they nowwish to include the harvester. To accommodatethis they are modifying their equipment tothree metre tracks.

7.2 Matching boomspray and air seederbar widthsThe easiest machinery width ratio to operatein the paddock is a 3:1 boomspray:air seederbar width ratio as it fits neatly to the edge ofthe paddock (Figure 7.1). This ratio works wellfor systems using small air seeder bars andcombine seeders less than 12 metres wide. Theharvester can be easily matched to the systemat 1:1 harvester:air seeder bar ratio, forexample:a) 9.1 m air seeder bar, 27.3 m boomspray, 9

or 18.2 m spreading, 9.1 m harvester front;b) 12 m air seeder bar, 36 m boomspray, 12

m spreading and 12 m harvester front.Some growers found that making the airseeder bars 10 to 30 centimetres smaller thantheir cutter bars on the harvester front createdtoo much gap at harvest time. This occursbecause the point guards are wider than thecutter bar and can draw more crop into theharvester front. Setting the bar width to matchthe cutter bar is the best option. Having theair seeder bar wider than the cutter bar couldpose a problem in sparse crops such as lupins.

Other odd number ratios have been used withsmall combine seeders such as a 5:1boomspray: seeder bar ratio, for example, a 4m combine seeder and 20 m boomspray.

Larger air seeders (greater than 12 metreswide) are better suited to a 2: 1 boomspray:airseeder bar ratio, for example:a) 12 m air seeder bar, 24 m boomspray, 12 m

spreader;b) 13.5 m air seeder bar, 27 m boomspray, 13.5

m spreader;c) 15 m air seeder bar, 30 m boomspray and

15 m spreader;d) 18 m air seed bar, 36 m boomspray, 18 m

spreader.

7.0 Matching machinery widths and tracks

Figure 7.1. 3:1 boomspray to air seeder bar ratio.

Boomspray FENCE

Seeding width

Sprayingtramlines

If matching theharvester initiallyrequires substantialmodifications it ispossible to start withmatching the seedingand sprayingequipment and includethe harvester later.

27

Figure 7.3. 2 :1 air seeder bar:boomspray ratio including the harvester and deep ripper in the system

Figure 7.2 a). Drive the first lap on the seeding join with the outside quarter of the boom shut off, then continue onthe tramlines.

Shut off this sectionof the boom

FENCE

Drive the second lap, and the rest,

on the tramline

Drive first lap on seeding join

Figure 7.2 b). Make wing tramlines and drive down the seeding join. A wing tramline can be made by lifting a tineon the wing of the seeder that is half your wheel axle width from the edge of the bar.

FENCE

Drive the rest of the paddockon alternative wing tramlines

Make one tramline oneach wing of the seeder

Fence

On wing tramlines

a Harvester cut to take out

invading weedsfrom the edgeof the paddock(or cut for hay)

RipperWing

tramlinesCentral

tramlines

Boomspray

Header

Seeder

Wing tramlines

The 2:1 boomspray:air seeder bar ratio can betricky on the edge of the paddock but can bedone by shutting off sections of the boomspray

(Figure 7.2a). Consider how many sectionswould be ideal when upgrading yourboomspray.

Mac

hin

ery

28

An alternative to shutting off sections of theboom is to make spraying tramlines in thewings of the air seeder bar and drive down theseeding joins. This can be effective if you havea 17.6 m bar, 35 m boomspray and a 9.1 mharvester. This approach is illustrated inFigure 7.2b while 7.2a shows a compromiseat the edge of the paddock to allow normaluse of tramlines after the first pass with theboomspray.

Wider air seeders can be modified to fit twowidths of the harvester front as shown inFigure 7.3.

7.3 Machinery wheel track matchingfor tramlinesTo get the most from a tramline farmingsystem it is essential to match wheel track

width. This may involve some modificationsto axles (see Section 7.4 Modification options).Generally farm machinery fits tracks of 2.2 to2.7 m but some later model harvesters havetrack widths slightly greater than 3 m.Therefore 3 m is the preferred width formatching in the harvester.

Multiple width tramlinesWhen machinery models or finances hamperusing a common track it is possible to use twoor more pairs of tramlines: for example, onetrack for the ute-pulled sprayer (about 1.8 m),one for the spreaders and seeding tractor(about 2 m), and one for the air seeder cartand the harvester (about 3 m). However, a tyrewidth of about 300–600 mm can result incontinuous wheelings between 1.5 m (theinside edge of the ute tyre) and 3.6 m from

Figure 7.4. The ‘one-wheel’ tramline to accommodate many track widths.

Self-propelled sprayer

Utility vehicle

Tractor

One tramline to confine most of the compaction


To get the most from atramline farmingsystem it is essential tomatch wheel trackwidth.

29

the centre line, giving 2.1 m of compacted soil.A better solution is to use a ‘one-wheeled’tramline for multiple track widths (Figure7.4), or a ‘three-wheeled tramline’ for acombination of 3 m and 2 m track widths.

For example, if you have 3 m tracks left by thetow-behind air seeder cart and a 2 m track forspraying and spreading, you could work up andback with the left or right hand spraying orspreading wheel on the left air seeder cartmark of each seeding run. This confines halfof the compaction to one common tramlineand leaves two other tramlines, one for the 3m tracks and one for the 2 m tracks. This is 50per cent less compaction than you would havehad from two pairs of separate tramlines.Keeping to the north side of the 3 m tramlinesensures that the offset between seeding andspraying or spreading is consistent in thepaddock. Using a one-wheel or three-wheeltramline is easier in round and roundoperations than up and back; the commontrack is always on the same side (left or right)

in the whole paddock. This can be used as astepping stone to matching all machinerytrack widths.

7.4 Machinery modification optionsMost existing machinery does not havematching widths or wheel tracks so changingcropping machinery and wheel track width isessential to win the most benefit from tramlinefarming systems. The purchase of all newequipment is not necessary to begin tramlinefarming as many machines already on-farmcan be modified to match widths and tracks.On-farm costs of modifications have beenabout $2000 to $10,000 for many WesternAustralian farms (Table 7.1). But beforemaking modifications, consult manufacturers’warranty specifications and occupationalhealth and safety standards.

If modifications are not practical for yourmachinery, plan to update your machinery tomore suitable widths and tracks during yourusual machinery changeover periods. New

Table 7.1. Summary of machinery modification costs from the case studies; 2001/2002 prices.

TOTAL ($ in 2002)

Seeding tractor

Farm Spraying tractor

Air seeder box

Boomspray Spreader

Ford 4500 4500 11000*Moffat 100 800 3000 4000Lewis 1330 1900 1710 5000Chappel 1900 2000Fretwell 4500 3500 8000

* With $2000 to modify the air seeder bar wheels.

Photo 7.1 Cotton reels have been used to take the John Deere JD4250 MFWD tractor axle out to 3 m

The purchase of all newequipment is notnecessary to begintramline farming asmany machinesalready on-farm can bemodified to matchwidths and tracks.

If modifications are notpractical for yourmachinery, plan toupdate your machineryto more suitable widthsand tracks during yourusual machinerychangeover periods.

Mac

hin

ery

30

machinery is being designed to have easilyadjustable track widths and more commonmatching widths.

Options for modifying machinery widthBoomspray — Changing the width of aboomspray may be as simple as adding a tapor clamp to reduce the spraying width or smallextensions to increase it.

Air seeder bar — It may be possible to removetines or discs to reduce the width or extendthe frame to add more tines or discs.

Spreader — Adjust the throwing distance ofthe spinners, which is often difficult beyond18 m. Otherwise change to an air spreadersystem with suitable ease of loading.

Harvester front — Wider harvester fronts arenormally offset to assist unloading. Centredfronts are required for the best tramlinelayouts. Some engineering companies areoffering modification of offset fronts.Otherwise change the front or the harvester.There are now centred belt front harvesterfronts available up to 14 m. However, to unloadinto a chaser bin on the run the auger mayneed to be lengthened or extensions added tothe chaser bin. Prices vary depending onwidth, platform type and options required. Forexample, a 12.2 m centred draper front with abat reel begins at approximately $65,000 plusGST (2003 price).

Deep ripper — Some increase of deep rippingwidth, for the same tractor power, may bepossible when tines are lifted or removed fromwhere the tramlines are needed. Matching theripper to a wider air seeder may also be possibleby using guidance to rip with two lifted tineswhere the tramlines go (in the central part ofthe air seeder width), then modifying the widthof the ripper and dropping the two lifted tinesto rip the miss between. For example, for a 12m seeder and a 9 m ripper, the ripper first runson guidance at 12 m spacing with the two tineslifted for the unripped tramlines, then the twotines are lowered, the ripper folded to rip 3 mand the gaps between the first runs are rippedout.

Options for modifying machinery tracksIn most instances the reason for changingmachinery wheel tracks is to include theharvester on an approximately 3 m track.

Boomspray — It may be possible to move andstrengthen the axles. Hydraulically adjustableaxles (2–3 m) are commercially available thatwill extend or retract the axle for moreconvenient road travel. Alternatively, changethe sprayer, especially to a self-propelled modelif moving to 3 m tramlines.

Tractor (spraying, seeding and spreading) —use manufacturer’s adjustments; extend andstrengthen axles; use ‘cotton reels’ to extendfront wheel assist axles; change to a tracked

Photo 7.2 This John Deere tractor has had the front axle extended to 3 m centres

31

tractor with row-crop settings for a 3 mtramline. It is better to extend the axlesbecause farmers who have used cotton reelsto extend their front axles have reportedincreased wear on the bearings. However, ifthe tractor is needed for other purposes suchas mowing, the ease of removing the cottonreels to narrow the track is an advantage.

Seeding tractor — Duals can be removedwithin manufacturer’s specifications to allowsingles on 3 m centres. In some cases duals ortriple tyres may still be required in the earlystages of establishing tramlines to help provide

enough traction for deep ripping through theexisting compaction. The additional wheelsmay also be needed for flotation in other partsof the seeding program. To confine most ofthe compaction to the main tramlines increasethe pressure in the inner dual tyres and reduceit in the outer tyres. The outer tyres then causeless compaction outside the tramline and canimprove flotation when off the tramline, suchas on end workings, like trainer wheels on achild’s bicycle. Be careful not to reduce thepressure in the outer tyres too much and causetyre damage. Minimum tyre pressure

Photo 7.3 The spreader has been mounted on an old truck axle modified to a 3 m track. Modifications to vehicle axles may require riskassessment on-farm and re-certification for road use.

Photo 7.4 Chaser bin with a side hopper used to unload on tramlines with a 9.1 m harvester front.

Mac

hin

ery

32

specifications must be observed and thecombined pressures must be sufficient to carrythe total load.

It may be possible to rotate the wheels. Trackedtractors and self-propelled sprayers cansometimes be run on row-crop settings (3 m)and can thus match the track width of theharvester.

Spreader — the axles of the spreader could bemodified using cotton reels or old truck rimsor by extending the axles for 3 m tracks.Harvester— It is difficult to change the axleof a harvester so most other machines mustbe modified to match it. The front wheelscould be rotated on some older modelharvesters. Access to grease points behind thewheels may be reduced on some models. Thegeneral rule to modifying harvester tracks isthat the front wheels are set at their minimumtrack and the rear wheels follow within thewheel marks of the front wheels.

Chaser bins — Axles can be widened to fitwider tramlines, but the main difficulty isunloading the harvester while both are onadjoining tramlines. Rob Taylor of Dalby,Queensland has a catching hopper on the sideof his chaser bin and a cross auger to distributethe load evenly (Photo 7.4). Old PTOharvesters can be converted into chaser binswhich fit a 3 m track (Photo 7.5). The harvesterauger must then be long enough to reach. Forexample, a 9.1 m harvester front can unloadinto a chaser bin on adjacent tramlines with a6.7 m auger. It is possible to extend the augersto unload into a chaser bin. (See Photo 7.6).

Setting up the bar and tine spacingTine spacing will vary depending on the typeof crops you grow and your climaticconditions. As wider row spacing is becomingmore common for pulse crops than cereals itis important to consider the guess row. Theguess row is the gap between twoneighbouring seeding runs, for example one

Photo 7.6 Extended auger on a John Deere harvester with a 9.1 m front to enable unloading into a chaser bin onadjacent tramlines

Photo 7.5 Unloading on adjacent tramlines with a 9.1 m harvester front.

33

row spacing. If the guess row is not consideredwhen setting up the bar the gap between twoneighbouring seeding runs can be too smallor rows may overlap.

Tine spacing does not have to be evenly spacedacross the bar. A variation in tine spacing, suchas rows between the wheel tracks closertogether, can provide some extra in-cropguidance. Some farmers start by:1. setting up the tines for a centre row or

central gap in the middle of the seeder bar;2. setting the tines in place around the

tramlines and;3. on the edges on the bar;4. then fill in the gaps.If you are going to change the row spacingbetween cereal and pulse crop or summercrops you may wish to keep tines more evenlyspaced. If you are planning to include an inter-row shielded sprayer in the system, ideally thetine spacing needs to be the same on both sidesof the bar.

The following row spacings work well ifalternating between wide and narrow rowspacings using 3 m centre wheel tracks:• 38 cm/76 cm• 25 cm/ 76 cm• 25 cm/50 cm• 19 cm/76 cm

If using 2 m wheel track centres try:• 34 cm/101 cm• 45 cm/101 cm

ExerciseTake a tape measure over to the shed andmeasure the operating widths and tracks ofall your machinery used for cropping. Usingthe page provided, draw sketches of yourmachinery.

Note:1. Remember when measuring the bar tine

to tine add one row spacing to get theoperating width. Many people have beencaught out by this.

2. Try to use either imperial or metric whenmeasuring equipment as there can besmall differences. This is a commonproblem when using US built tractors andharvesters and Australian built air seederbars and boomsprays.

Mac

hin

ery

35

Section 8

Tramline design

37

Traditionally tramlines have been left bare.However, due to concerns with herbicideresistance, gaps in the crop and potentialerosion on non-wetting sands, particularly inWestern Australia, there are other optionsavailable. The suitability for in-crop guidanceof the other designs varies.

8.1 Bare tramlinesBare tramlines provide a firm compacted zonefor running machinery and no crop is damagedduring post-seeding operations. Baretramlines are very visible for in-crop guidance.

Bare tramlines can be left by lifting the tineor blocking the seed and fertiliser, behind thewheel of the seeding tractor. Ideally, the widthof a bare tramline should fit all the machinerywheels to avoid crop damage but this maymean the gap is too wide in cereals, creatingweed control problems. The width of the baretramline commonly varies from one missing18 cm row to two missing 30 cm rows. Narrowbare tramlines seem to be a good compromiseto provide visual guidance and weed control,while reducing wheel-induced crop damage.

A common concern raised by growers whencontemplating bare tramlines is that byremoving a tine for the tramline productionwill be reduced as there are two less rows ofcrop per seeding r un. However, yieldcompensation is often reported from the edgerows of bare tramlines, where the seed fromthe unused tubes on the tramline have beendiverted into the edge rows. The plants on theedge row have better access to water and

sunlight. Such yield compensation from edgerows on sandy soils in Western Australia isbeing supported by trial work (See Appendix1 Research results). Research trials also showthat the overall yield benefits more thancompensate for the area lost to bare wheeltracks.

8.2 Fuzzy tramlinesFuzzy tramlines can be used in situationswhere some in-crop guidance is desirable butweed competition is a concern.

8.0 Tramline design

Photo 8.1 Bare tramline Photo 8.2 Fuzzy tramline Photo 8.3 Sown tramline


Figure 8.2. Sown tramline with central guide row.

Tram

lines

38

Fuzzy tramlines are made by rolling top-dressed seed into the tramline with one of thefollowing wheels of the seeder. The seed andfertiliser is sprayed from hoses taken out ofthe seeding boot in the tramline zone andstrapped to the frame about 800 mm abovethe ground. The wheel rolls them in and abroad green band of crop is formed. This canbe distinguished from the sown rows next toit and followed for spraying and spreading onthe appropriate seeder laps. (See Photo 8.3.)Lugged tyres are better for ‘planting’ this top-dressed seed. Trifluralin and drought can be aproblem with this method. Fuzzy tramlinesdo provide clear in-crop guidance in cerealsbut can be difficult to see in advanced canola.

8.3 Sown tramlinesSown tramlines together with a central guiderow are a useful substitute for bare tramlineswhen soil throw is needed for herbicideincorporation (such as Trifluralin) in a cerealphase (Figure 8.2). The rows in the tramlinesare sown with shallow points or disc openersto retain as much firmness as possible in thetramline and assist traction. The soil throwbetween the points mixes in the herbicide.Leaving the tines down for the first few yearsmay help smooth out rough paddocks whenchanging from working round and round thepaddock to up and back.

A sown tramline is often difficult to distinguish

from the rest of the crop, so the central row ofthe air seeder can be modified to make itdifferent to the other rows. Try using a twincentral row and perhaps moving theneighbouring rows further from the centre.For spraying, spreading and even harvestingthe centre row can be followed. If you haveDGPS guidance, the central guide row canprovide insurance if the electronic system fails.The wheel marks from a tow-behind air cart(not a trike!) will also help to identify thetramline in a young crop when sown tramlinesare used. A central guide row is not very usefulin crops with a dispersed canopy such as canolaor lupins. Different row spacing between thetramlines to the rest of the bar has helpedsome growers for guidance.

8.4 Furry (chaff) tramlines

A few growers who have matched the harvesterinto the system are diverting chaff fromharvesters onto bare tramlines. The chaff onthe tramlines may have a few different effects:1) provide a mulch effect which reduces weedgermination;2) weeds may germinate in the tramlines butcan then be targeted specifically for weedmanagement such as drop nozzles over thetramline;3) encourage early weed germination in a dryautumn to improve knockdown herbicideefficiency.The extra cover may also reduce the risk of

Photo8.4. Chaff diverters

Leaving the tines downfor the first few yearsmay help smooth outrough paddocks whenchanging from workinground and round thepaddock to up andback.

39

erosion. The effect of this technique on weedburden is being assessed. Three tramlinefarmers in Western Australia developed chaffdiverters for their harvesters in 2002.

8.5 Tramline maintenanceGood tramline maintenance to avoid long-term problems relies on setting up the systemwell by:• choosing the most efficient direction for

the inpaddock operations and watermovement;

• deciding on the most convenient access forloading and unloading;

• taking care with areas prone to being wet;• setting up the whole system well with

unripped tramlines where an initial deepripping is employed.

Once the system has been designed it isimportant to maintain the tramlines toprevent problems such as weedy or deeplyrutted tramlines. Following are some tips ontramline establishment and maintenance:

Photo 8.5. Chaff diverted into the tramline froma three tonne crop.

Making tramlines in wet conditions — Makingtramlines on soil too wet and loose hassometimes caused excessive sinkage in tracks.Not cultivating or deep ripping the tramline,cutting shallow or using disc seeding unitswhere the tramline is planned can help. Thisensures a firmer track and less sinkage. Thebest approach is to avoid conditions that aretoo wet but, if necessary, running some tracksat slightly wider widths than others can alsohelp to spread the sinkage. Rutted tramlinescan be filled by a grading chain or a smudgebar mounted on the cultivator or seeder to pulldry surface soil back into the rut and firm itwith a following wheel, such as from the tow-behind bin. Alternating tramlines for eachoperation is another option. Tyres could alsobe rotated to pull in soil with the tread pattern.

Losing depth control at seeding — If the mainseeding bar wheels are in depressed tramlines,and the seeder has no independent depthcontrol for each sown row, the rows near thetramline can be sown too deeply. Independentdepth control on each row, using, for instance,

Table 8.1. A comparison between different tramline types.

ProductionDesign Visual guidance

Dust raised during spraying

Firm running

Weed controlby competition

Bare Very good Some Yes Poor Nil@Sown Fair* No Good ModerateFurther testing

requiredFuzzy Fair# Least Yes Good*** Poor##

Furry Good Yes Nil@Further testing required

Further testing required

* Visible early with tow-behind box wheel marks or using a central guide row. # Poor in non-cereal crops. @ Some compensation possible from edge rows. ***Trifluralin problems (poor incorporation). ## Poor emergence in dry seasons and when rolled in with smooth tyres.

Once the system hasbeen designed it isimportant to maintainthe tramlines toprevent problems suchas weedy or deeplyrutted tramlines.

Tram

lines

40

Figure 8.3. Extra spray nozzles installed behind the wheels can overcome the effect of dust. This figure was suppliedby Conservation Farmers Inc. and the Department of Natural Resources and Mines, Queensland from (2003)Controlled Traffic Farming Guide, Conservation Farmers Inc., Toowoomba, Queensland.

parallelogram seeder units from Janke, Gyraland Ausplow or ‘U’ boot designs, can helpovercome this problem.

Spray-only tramlines with tramlinecontrollers — Too many bare tramlines cancreate confusion with the boomspray operatorwhen it comes to choosing spraying tramlines.A solution to this is to set up the bar to seedtramlines very shallowly, compared to otherrows (this digs up less tramline and conservessome firm running), then use a tramlinecontroller to turn off the seed only on the runsneeded for spraying.

Tramline controllers can be bought fromEurope or North America. These automaticcontrollers just need to be told how many lapsof the seeder fit into one width of the sprayer.They will use electronic signals and solenoidsto automatically close off the correct numberof rows to fit the sprayer and spreader wheelsin the paddock and match the seeder. Thecontroller may also be able to change over themarker arms at the end of each run. Thecurrent designs are for up and back seeding.

If using DGPS guidance another option maybe to seed every spraying run first with thetramline tines up then come back and fill inwith the tines down.

Controlling weeds in bare tramlines — If moreweeds develop in bare tramlines than the restof the paddock some options are:• use a narrow bare tramline. This means

the wheels may run on the edge row

causing the head in the rows of thetramline to stay greener for longer thanthe rest of the crop or reduce grain quality.If the harvester fits, the system guardscould be put on the knife in the tramlinezone to prevent green heads from goingthrough the harvester;

• alternate tramlines for spraying so thatunwheeled tramlines are sprayed resultingin low dust and no herbicide bluntingwheel impact on the weeds in the non-wheeled tramlines;

• on some soil types, the use of alternatetramlines for spraying may also producebeneficial wheel damage to weeds in thetramline;

• some UK farmers spray knockdownherbicide onto the tyres of the sprayer toclean up the tramlines;

• put extra nozzles, higher rate nozzles ordrop down nozzles on the sprayer in thetramline position. Crop deflectors couldbe used to minimise crop damage;

• shielded spray hoods on bare tramlinescould be used while spraying (slowly) oras a separate operation if some tramlinesare worse than others;

• reduce dust when spraying. Dust frombare tramlines can be a problem whenspraying. To reduce the dust and counterits effect on herbicide uptake, try usingdouble nozzles as shown in Figure 8.3.

Direction of travel

Front nozzle turns dust to mud

Back nozzle puts chemical on plants

Double nozzles with flat fans Double spacing nozzles with

tapered fans (nozzles positioned on edge of wheel)

41

Section 9

Layout planning

43

Whole farm planning is very important whenintroducing new technologies such astramline farming into your system, as often achange in paddock layout is required to getthe most effectiveness from the newtechnology.

Useful tools for planning layouts include aerialphotographs, farm maps, topographic and soiltype maps, even yield maps and, of course,your own knowledge of the farm. Tramlinefarming is very compatible with precisionagriculture technologies such as variable ratetechnology. Some changes may take morethan one season to put into practice but it ishelpful to have a plan for the future. If in doubtabout layout contact a professional consultant,as layout mistakes may cause severe erosiondamage and are often expensive to remedy.

To design the most efficient layout consider:• length of run;• access roads;• tramline orientation;• surface water control.

9.1 Length of runFor maximum efficiency of croppingoperations generally, the longer the run thebetter, as the numbers of corners and turningsare reduced. In some cases it may be practicalto join paddocks (see Figure 9.1).

At the same time, consider how practical longruns are and surface water control issues.Some growers are choosing to plant trees tostraighten up the edges of paddocks or keep

paddocks with too many obstacles as dedicatedstock paddocks.

9.2 Access roadsLong runs are the most efficient for loadingand unloading machinery during seeding andharvesting. Think about where your accessroads need to go. Calculate how far you cantravel at seeding before you need to refill andat harvesting before you need to unload. Accessroads can be used to turn around on and bedesigned to control surface water.

9.3 Tramline orientationTramline orientation may vary depending onthe characteristics of the paddock, soil typeand slope. If the paddock is fairly uniform,select the longest run. Some people choose torun tramlines north–south to avoid drivinginto the sun early in the morning or late inthe evening.

The other issue to consider when laying outtramlines is whether you go up and down slopeor across slope. There are both positives andnegatives for each situation, so you will needto assess each situation on an individual basis.

Working up and down allows the slope to drainuniformly and reduces the risk of rillformation from furrow overflows when thepaddock is sown on the contour. However,without careful design and some remediation,the run-off may be directed by the furrows toareas that would not normally receive theflows, causing erosion, flooding andwaterlogging. In heavy rainfall episodes, run-

Figure 9.1. A hypothetical example of improved efficiency from longer runs.

9.0 Layout planning

Three originalpaddocks sown aroundand around with about16 corner headlandsand 3 centre. The

paddocks are separated by fences, laneways and blocks of trees.

The 3 paddocks arecombined into one.

Fences are removed, laneways are sown,

but blocks of trees arepreserved. Tramline

Farming is done up andback to make the runsas long as possible.

If in doubt about layoutcontact a professionalconsultant, as layoutmistakes may causesevere erosion damageand are often expensiveto remedy.

Lay

ou

t

44

off from tramlines, up and down the hill, maycause massive erosion in the tramlines if thevolume of water is too large and the run is toolong. This must be balanced against theproblems of contour layouts where heavyrainfall leads to flow concentration and theformation of deep gullies in the paddock.

In light rainfalls, seeding along the contourcan trap moisture in the furrows. Across slopeworking can also distribute water evenly acrossthe paddock. Waterlogging or erosion couldoccur if the water is channelled into old gullylines or low points in the paddock.

In both cases erosion may occur if watercollected from elsewhere enters the furrowsor tramlines.

9.4 Surface water controlIn developing your tramline farming systemit is important to make sure the layout of yourtramlines is compatible with the control andsafe disposal of run-off. Consulting contourmaps and understanding the water movementon your property is a good background fordetermining your tramline layout and theappropriate control measures. Importantthings to consider include:• good stubble cover;• degree of slope;• length of slope;• soil infiltration properties;• rainfall intensity;• preventing run-on from areas that shed

water, such as roads or rocky outcrops; and• water control and disposal options.

Soil infiltration — As a general rule, the betterthe soil structure the higher the infiltrationrate. After a long period of no-till seeding andno stock, soil structure between the rows canbe much more permeable because the macro-pores and bio-pores are protected from annualdisturbance. The best evidence of thishappening is the lack of increased drain or damfilling, even in wet years. This seems to beoccurring on many soil types, with theexception of non-wetting sands. Infiltration isexpected to improve even more whentramlines are used as restricting compactionconserves the soil structure betweentramlines. Infiltration also decreases as the soilprofile fills up with water. If the soil pores arealready full and rain falls, run-off can occur.

Stubble cover — Maintaining good stubblecover levels is important to reduce the risk oferosion. Organic matter from plant roots helpsto improve the soil structure by binding soilparticles together and providing channels forrapid water penetration. Good stubble coverlevels can be maintained by practising no-tilland managing grazing. This means not over-grazing during the summer months.

Preventing run on — Tramlines should beprotected from any run-on water; for example,some headlands, corners, adjacent bush orrocky outcrops can shed water into tramlinesand cause the beginning of rills or gullies.Tramlines should run over a hilltop and notstop at the top to reduce the hilltop run-offbeing fed down a tramline.

Options for surface water controlWhere there is a likelihood of erosion, floodingor waterlogging, conservation earthworksshould be installed. A few possible optionsfollow.

Strategic broad grade banks located at the baseof the slope and appropriate positions up-slopemay help to reduce these problems when mostof the seeding is up and down slope. Broadbased channels can be used on two to six percent slopes. A common practice in easternAustralia is to drive over the banks withmachinery at right angles where possible andat no less than 45 degrees to avoid machinerydamage and erosion. This needs to be provenfor Western Australia as climatic conditionsand soil types are very different to easternAustralia. The broad banks in eastern Australiaare seeded all the way over or along to reducethe potential for erosion and reduce weedinvasion. This may be a challenge in WesternAustralia as we have very shallow topsoil.

On long runs, access tracks could be made intocatch drains and mounds that the seeding andspraying equipment can pass over safelyduring cropping operations.

It is possible to work tramlines betweenexisting contour banks.

Long runs may be shortened by adding stripbreaks. Strip cropping is a practice of breakingup an easily degradable area into bays byincluding strips of vegetation (often grassesor pasture) to reduce the run-off and erosionpotential. These strips are alternately croppedeach year.

After a long period ofno-till seeding and nostock, soil structurebetween the rows canbe much morepermeable becausethe macro-pores andbio-pores areprotected fromannual disturbance.

45

Run-off from all drains and broad banks shouldbe disposed of safely into grassed waterways,existing waterways or dams.

There has been limited research in WesternAustralia into this issue. Please keep a lookout for new information and consult your localsurface water control expert.

Further reading:Keen, M. (1998) Common Conservation WorksUsed in Western Australia, Resource,Management Technical report 185,Department of Agriculture Western Australia,Geraldton.

Agricultural Resource Management SurfaceWater Management Structures Design andSpecifications for a Broad Based Channel(Terrace) Code 10.

Lay

ou

t

47

Section 10

Agronomic opportunitiesof tramline farming

49

The establishment of permanent tramlinesprovides many opportunities for agronomy astramlines can provide good in-crop accesswithout damaging the crop throughmechanical means or compaction by thewheels of machinery. Some of theseopportunities are:• easier stubble handling;• sowing into old furrows;• inter-row shielded spraying including band

spraying;• relay planting.

10.1 Easier stubble handlingTramlines provide opportunities for easierstubble handling through improved precisionby using a guidance system. The seeder barcan be guided to allow tines or discs to runbetween the existing crop rows or stubblelines. The potential benefits from retainingstubble include soil moisture retention andreduced erosion risk.

One method of seeding between old rows is topull the seeder by an offset hitch, to the left orright by half a row spacing. If the seeder ismoved to the left, the left-most tine is removedand put on the right-hand side to balance thepull. Other tines may need moving to ensure

the frame wheels have a tine in front of themto form a fresh furrow and guide the frame.For large air seeder bars this approach maynot work as the tines may slip back into theold furrows as this is the path of leastresistance.

Tramlines may allow the easier use of discseeders to reduce soil disturbance as discopeners are more effective when the soil is lesscompacted. If seeding between old rows, thedisc encounters less stubble and hair pinningproblems are lessened.

10.2 Old furrow sowingWhile sowing into old rows may be adisadvantage in some instances, sowing intothe old furrow can be an advantage. Sowingback into old furrows takes advantage of thewater harvesting capabilities of furrows. DGPSauto-steer guidance with a base station wouldbe very useful in this situation. Trialsconducted at Pindar in Western Australiaindicate that pre-furrowing a pasture paddockdry in summer (if cover is good enough tominimise erosion risk) improves water entryand crop establishment when the crop isseeded into the furrows after early autumnrains. (See Photo 10.2.)

Sowing back into old furrows may also be anadvantage for using any residual fertiliser fromthe previous year. Potential problems with rootdisease or nutrient toxicity need to beconsidered.

10.3 Inter-row shielded sprayingInter-row shields enable the use of non-selective herbicides between crop rows toimprove weed control. The concept was

10.0 Agronomic opportunities of tramline farming

Photo 10.1. Seeding into premade furrows.

Photo 10.2. Seeding into pre-made furrows with precise DGPS guidance system.

Ag

ron

om

ico

pti

on

s

50

initially developed in North America as asubstitute for inter-row cultivation in rowcropping. Shield models such as ‘red ball’ wereimported to Australia for row cropping inQueensland and New South Wales. The red ballshield is named for the red ball in the flowmeter that indicates that the nozzles insidethe hood are clear. Recently, growers inVictoria and Western Australia have beenacquiring less expensive designs to fitnarrower row spacing than the typical onemetre spacing in eastern Australia.

The idea of this is to capitalize on the use oflower cost, knockdown herbicide between therows and reduce higher cost selectiveherbicides and fungicides in the crop row. Thiscan at least halve the cost of herbicides in grainlegumes and helps to reduce the developmentof resistance to selective herbicides. Otheradvantages of shielded sprayers include,

reduced spray drift and the possibility ofspraying in weather conditions that may betoo windy for broadacre spraying.

On a shielded sprayer there are three possiblespray circuits: one in the shield, between therows; one into the row from the side of theshields (lay-by nozzles); and one over the topof the row for band spraying (Figure 10.1). Itis possible to set up the system to run severaldifferent chemicals at once.

When setting up for using row crop shieldedsprayers consider the following:• guidance system (if any) — 2 cm DGPS

preferred as manual steering is verydependent on operator ability and accuracytends to drop off during a shift;

• seeder bar setup, row spacing;• banding residual herbicide in-row at

seeding;

Photo 10.3. ‘Redball’ type shields.

Shield

Band spray

Lay-by spray Inter-row spray

Late crop

Possible steering error

Early crop

Figure 10.1. Shield spraying design principles.

The idea of inter-rowshield spraying is tocapitalize on the use oflower cost, knockdownherbicide between therows and reduce highercost selective herbicidesand fungicides in thecrop row.

51

• direction of working;• shield design;• mount for shield (boom, mounting arm or

bracket);• nozzle mount, size, and so on;• flaps and brush to keep spray in the shield;• lift system;• anti-drip system.

Shield designThere are several different designs for shieldsavailable.

Fixed shield (red ball type): red ball typeshields are normally mounted on a three point

Photo 10.4. The setup used for the Rowcrop Rocket designed by Mike Collins mounted on a spray ute in 2002. The shields are set up the samedistance behind the hitch point as the ute axle is in front. As a consequence, when the ute turned to the left, the ute rear swings to the right, helpingto compensate for the tendency for the shields to cut the corner.

linkage boom. Their lateral position in relationto the row is determined by the position ofthe tractor relative to the row, so that anysteering error with the tractor affects the weedcontrol effectiveness and crop damage. Therow zone must be wide enough so that theshield can be far enough away from the rowto not damage the crop when at its closestposition to the row, and does not leaveunsprayed ground when at its furthestdistance from the row . This leads to theoverlap being determined by the precision ofthe steering system. (See figure 10.1.)

Photo 10.5. The setup for Rowcrop Rockets mounted on a spray ute on a 40m radius curve. This is about themaximum angle for this setup.

Ag

ron

om

ico

pti

on

s

52

Self-steering shields:A self steering shield has been designed byMike Collins, Department of AgricultureWestern Australia, to reduce the reliance ofshield spraying accuracy on the steeringsystem. The development of the ‘RowcropRocket’ design follows the principle of a trailedshield on wheels that keeps the spray nozzleat the correct height and reduces steeringerrors. The wheels also reduce spray splashinto the crop row. The wheels are angled tothe vertical to be parallel with the spray, toallow closer treatment to the base of the cropplant. Trials have shown that the wheels helpguide the shield. They either run in thefurrows of unseeded rows (with central wheel,

Photo 10.6. Self-steering shields made by Harold and Glenn Millington, Burracoppin, from on-farm materials.

Millington’s system, Photo 10.6), or hug thewalls of press wheel grooves (Rowcrop Rocket,Photo 10.5) when the crop plants are small,or run along the base of crop stems when theplants are bigger. The greater the precision,the narrower the in-row zone can be.

Further readingCollins, M. and Holmes, J. (2003).Lupin Row Cropping: Herbicides to Band,Shield Design and Economics. Crop Updates2003, Department of Agriculture Perth.

Photo 10.7. The Diamond’s precision planter on tramlines in 2001 lupin crop before relay planting.

A self steering shieldhas been designed toreduce the reliance ofshield sprayingaccuracy on thesteering system.

53

Photo 10.8. Ten week old maize after lupin harvest.

Nozzle selectionMike Collins, WANTFA, Northam.Nozzles used for row crop spraying shouldhave an even distribution across their width.The manufacturer normally designates themas ‘even’ or ‘E’ nozzles. Normal boomspraynozzles are therefore not suitable, as they havean elliptical pattern and are designed to beused with each adjacent nozzle overlappingby 50 per cent, to result in an even overallpattern.

The variables to consider when selectingnozzles are, operating pressure, bandwidth(with inter-row spraying this is the insidewidth of the shield, not the row spacing), andoperating speed. From the calculation results,the nozzle size can be chosen to fit within thedesired water rate per hectare range. Nozzleangle is of concern to achieve the rightbandwidth to suit the height and width of theshield.

In some shield designs, it is possible to turnthe nozzles around so that the fan is at lessthan right angles to the direction of travel,resulting in a narrower band. This is necessarywith band spraying in order to place the nozzleat a reasonable height to reduce bandwidthvariations due to ground undulations (yet nottoo high to get excessive band distortion dueto crosswinds).

With band spraying using a pre-emergentherbicide at seeding and intra-row banding(where a selective herbicide is sprayed into the

crop row when the inter-row zone is sprayedwith shields), there is difficulty in finding smallenough nozzles. Trials by the Department ofAgriculture Western Australia have used an8001E nozzle for band spraying at seeding. At8 km/hr, for a 12.5 cm band the water rate:= 0.32 x 600 = 192 L/ha125.125 x 8

Another problem relating to small nozzles isthe likelihood of blockages with bandedherbicides such as propyzamide (or Kerb‘) thatare a wettable powder. Later formulations ofpropyzamide appear to be more finely ground,and have performed better.

10.4 Relay planting

When rising watertables in low-lying areas orhillside seeps are fresh enough to supportsummer crops or pastures, relay planting is auseful method of planting the summer species.The summer crop species is planted betweenthe rows of a winter crop when the winter cropis close to maturity, such as at leaf drop inlupins or anthesis in cereals. Summer cropsrequire a minimum ground temperature atwhich they germinate and grow so there maybe some instances where this method is notuseful. The soil may also be wetter beforeharvest to help establish the crop, because thewinter crop shades the soil surface.

Relay planting overlaps the winter andsummer growing seasons. The summerspecies is at a young stage, but lower than

The summer cropspecies is plantedbetween the rows of awinter crop when thewinter crop is close tomaturity, such as atleaf drop in lupins oranthesis in cereals.

Ag

ron

om

ico

pti

on

s

54

cutter bar height when the winter species isharvested, which should allow more time formore water use before the summer speciesmatures. The extra water use by the summerspecies can help reduce the rate of watertablerise or reverse it.

Experience with relay cropping in WesternAustralia is limited. Lupins are arecommended crop for relay planting as whenthe ground temperature is generally warmenough the lupins are dropping their leaves,which opens the canopy providing light for theestablishment of the summer crop as well as

some protection from the wind. Summer cropspecies suitable for relay cropping in lupinswill vary depending on your climaticconditions.

Relay planting of deep-rooted perennials andpastures, for instance lucerne, may also be anoption to consider if summer cropping is notfeasible. There is current research beingundertaken on establishing lucerne in July toAugust on 1 m rows in a cereal crop to increasewater usage.

55

Section 11

Tramline farmingcase studies

57

The following case studies outline the tramlinefarming systems being developed by 15farmers in Western Australia to suit their ownfarming systems. Each farm is at a differentstage of development from getting started, toconsolidating the system, to fully matched.

11.1 Getting started

Case study 1: Darren Baum

Reason for tramline farmingWellstead farmer Darren Baum was aparticipant of the Tramline Tour 2001 toQueensland and New South Wales. Seeing thesystems working in the east encouragedDarren to have a go on his property. Hebelieves tramline farming will be verycomplementary to his no-till system. ‘Ourexperiences this year have proved the systemis worthwhile and we would like to move tothe next level’(2003).

Guidance systemDarren Baum has seeded their croppingprogram for two years round and round usingone marker arm as an introduction to tramlinefarming. The tractor is driven down the markleft by the marker arm by lining up with thebadge in the centre of the tractor bonnet.

MachineryAll the machinery widths are matched to

include the harvester:• 9.1 m Ausplough DBS air seeder bar pulled

with a JD 8450 tractor;

• 27.3 m boomspray with a JD7810 frontwheel assist tractor;

• 9.1 m JD STS 9650 harvester.

TramlinesAs the wheels don’t match at this stage theyleave a bare central guide row for the sprayerto follow. The mark has been left by removingone tine from the middle. In 2002 they movedtwo tines in the centre of the bar out 8 cmeither side. Darren has decided this gap is notwide enough for clear guidance throughoutthe season, although in the early stages of cropgrowth the mark is still easy to follow forspraying. Weeds are an issue in the centrerow so next year he might try putting twonozzles down the central row to spray moreselective herbicide and hopefully achievebetter weed control.

Observed benefitsDarren estimates they saved 4–12 per centinput costs working round and round with onemarker this season, depending on the shapeof the paddock. He was able to save enoughfertiliser for his lucerne sowing. Spraying hasbeen much easier following a mark.

Driving at night has become less tiring atseeding because the driver has a mark left bya disc on the end of the marker arm to follow.The marker arm has helped inexperienceddrivers reduce overlap. They put a foammarker on the end of the marker arm to makethe mark more visible at night. This hasworked very well.

11.0 Tramline farming case studiesKEY FEATURES:• one marker arm• round and round• harvester width

matched

Farm location:WellsteadArea cropped 2003:2800 haAnnual rainfall:380–450 mmMain soil types:loamEnterprises:• cropping• occasional agistment

of stock

Photo 11.1. Darren’s seeding and spraying equipment are almost matching.

Cas

e st

ud

ies

58

Future plansNext year, Darren would like to purchase asecond marker arm and work up and back.Plans for next year also include modifyingwheel tracks. The airseeder will be easy tomodify and his seeding tractor (JD 8450)currently has duals that could be removed andrun on singles at three metres. He is a littleconcerned about removing the duals as thebar was hard to pull given the hard groundand dry conditions this season.

Case Study 2: The Logues and Porters

‘Riverside’, owned by the Porters, was sharedcropped with John and Phil Logue to tramlinesfor the second year in 2003.

Reason for tramline farmingTramlining is being undertaken to avoid soilcompaction and lengthen the interval betweendeep ripping operations. It should also makesummer weed spraying a lot less stressful (lesstime spent looking for foam!) and shouldenable more night spraying in the summer.

Guidance system1997–2001: one marker arm (Flexicoil) roundand round;2002: two marker arms (one was Flexicoilmarker arm and the other was homemade).The seeding tractor is driven to a mark on theedge of the bonnet;2003: DGPS visual guidance plus or minus 10cm accuracy was used at seeding. DGPS visualsubmeter accuracy was used in the selfpropelled sprayer.

Photo 11.2. Bob, Phil and John attaching a marker arm before beginning to seed a new paddock.

MachineryTheir seeding and spraying machinery widthsmatch at a 2:1 ratio:• 17.37 m air seeder bar;• 34.7 m self-propelled boomspray;• 2x 11 m harvesters.

Tramlines• 2.7 m track for seeding and tractor and

boomspray wheels;• sown and fuzzy or bare central guide row.

In 2002, the Logues did not modify anyequipment except for lifting two tines in linewith air seeder wheels to make a fuzzytramline. To make the fuzzy tramline theoutlet of the seed tube was lifted 300 mm abovethe ground. The Logues found the fuzzytramlines difficult to see. In 2003 the Loguesleft no fuzzy tramlines as they had a GPSguidance system in the sprayer. The tyremarks from the air seeder box also providedguidance as they were visible in the earlystages of crop growth.

Only the tractor wheels and boomspray wheelsline up at this stage. The back wheels of theairseeder box are outside the preferred tackwidth and the front wheels and seeder barwheels are inside it, making a wheeled zoneof three metres. At this stage no modificationshave been made as they are not convinced thatcompaction at seeding is a problem. For thelast two years the zones with the most wheelsand compaction have yielded most on thesandy soil. This effect is being investigated,as observations of poor crop growth in thewheeltracks of the harvester from previousseasons indicate compaction may still be aissue.

KEY FEATURES:• round and round

marker arm• up and back two

markers

Farm location:AjanaArea cropped 2002:7290 haAnnual rainfall:308 mmMain soil types:sand, loamEnterprises:cropping: wheat, canola,lupins, barley

59

LayoutBob Porter has been using one marker armworking round and round since 1997. He hasbeen very impressed with the results on hisproperty. Bob has reduced the height of hiscontour banks to allow seeding over the bankswith a Flexicoil air seeder bar. This has madeseeding less complicated and faster. Rockheaps and lone trees have been progressivelyremoved to reduce obstacles in the paddock.The Porters have a regular tree plantingprogram that compensates for the removal oflone trees.

Since 2002 the tramlines have been workedmainly up and back although some odd-shapedpaddocks were sown round and round withone marker arm.

The Porters have found navigating the seederand marker arms around lone trees and smallclumps challenging. They are experts atrepairing marker arms. The marker armproblems resulted from the homemade arm,which could not be retracted, and which cutdeep grooves at the end of paddocks whenturning around — it would cut up the soil andbury the seed too deep.

Future plansIn 2004 DGPS auto-steer will be fitted to theseeding tractor.

Cas

e st

ud

ies

60

11.2 Consolidating the system

Case Study 3: John and Caroline Young

Kojonup farmers John and Caroline Younghave been tramline farming for five years. TheYoungs run a mixed crop and sheep enterpriseon 1100 hectares.

BenefitsJohn estimates his fertiliser and herbicidecosts have been reduced by up to 10 per centworking up and back using tramlines.

The firm tramlines provide a definiteadvantage for in-crop spraying. John does notneed to use duals and is able to spray whenmany of his neighbours cannot because it istoo wet. When John first started tramlinefarming his neighbours gave him a hard timeabout all the missing rows in the paddock.

Photo 11.3. John’s simple guidance rod to help follow the last row of the previous seeding run.

KEY FEATURES:• simple guidance arm

following the edge ofprevious the combinerun

• up and back

Farm location:KojonupArea cropped 2003:400 haAnnual rainfall:530 mmMain soil types:gravelly sand over clay,loamy sand over clayEnterprises:• cropping: wheat,

canola, barley, fababeans

• sheep

Guidance systemJohn uses a very simple guidance system thatcost about $100. The system consists of a metalrod mounted under the engine of his tractorreaching the width of his combine. At eachend of the rod, a trailing plastic strip is placedto run in the last row from the previous passof the combine. As the rod is no wider thanthe combine and the driver can see it fromthe cab there is no risk of breaking it off ontrees.

John leaves two bare tramlines on eachseeding run by removing a tine from behindthe tractor wheels. Bare tramlines provideguidance for the sprayer. The tracks are 500mm wide. Finding the previous year’s trackscan sometimes be a challenge after summergrazing the stubble.

Machinery• 4 m Shearer TCD combine;• 20 m boomspray;• harvester front width varies depending on

contractor.Tramlines• bare;• 1.8 m track seeding tractor Deutz DX110

and spraying tractor Deutz DX430.

Layout issuesIn Kojonup the Youngs have many trees, rockheaps and hills to negotiate. During seedingJohn tries to keep diversions around trees inmultiples of five to fit his boomspray width.John believes he has no more erosion workingup and down slopes than when he seededround and round. He does practice no-till andretains good stubble cover.

61

Case Study 4: Tom and Denise, Davidand Joanna Lewis

In 2002 Tom and David Lewis with wivesDenise and Joanna of Bruce Rockimplemented a tramline farming system ontheir property for as little as $7900.

Reason for tramline farmingThe Lewises’ reasons for beginning a tramlinesystem include:• a need to limit compaction after 22 years

of continuous cropping (tramlines makecompaction work for you not against you);

• the use of all inputs becomes much moreaccurate;

• spraying is a lot easier and less tiring bybeing able to follow tramlines and nothaving to look for foam.

Guidance systemThe guidance system consists of video camerasand a Garmin 182 DGPS. See section 6.2,page 19. The Garmin 182 DGPS picks up anAMSA marine correctional signal fromFremantle or Albany. It is a free service andgives accuracy to around a metre. It has provenvery worthwhile for seeding to date.

The cameras are set up on each extremity ofthe seeder with a small sight made of lightangle steel about 80 mm from the lens to lineup on the previous run. A monitor ispositioned in the tractor aligned with thecentre of the bonnet. The black and whitecameras pick up plenty of light, even at night,and give a clear view and focus. The camerasdon’t appear to suffer from vibration althoughthe system has not been run for long periodsof time yet (one season). Dust on the lens wasconsidered a potential problem. Practically, allthat is required is an occasional wipe with aclean cloth, usually while filling up.

KEY FEATURES:• low cost video

guidance• up and back

Farm location:Bruce RockArea cropped 2002:2446 haAnnual rainfall:350 mmEnterprises:cropping: wheat, barley,triticale, lupins, canola

Table 11.1. Lewis’s equipment modifications and costs for tramline farming 2002.

Operation Equipment Modifications Cost ($)

Seeding Seeder bar Ausplow DBS 12.2 m wide

Air seeder Bourgault 3225 Track altered to 2250 mm 1900

Liquid cart custom built - 3 tanks

Tractor John Deere 9300 Not altered at this stage4wd radial duals

Spraying Sprayer custom - 25m wide Modified track 1710

Tractor John Deere 6600 front Modified track using spacers 1330wheel assist

Modification cost 4940

Guidance Garmin 182 DGPS with 2 video 2 cameras, monitor and 3000cameras

Total 7940

cable $600

The system of cameras and DGPS give areasonably accurate and economical entry intotramlining, avoiding the need to purchase andmaintain more expensive marker armequipment. Some experience and skill isneeded to obtain the maximum potential fromusing this system. If the video screen iswatched too closely it can be tiring.

MachineryTo match their seeding and sprayingmachinery some modifications were required.

At this stage the harvester (11 m front) hasbeen left out of the system. Seeding is up andback with bare tramlines on 2.25 m centres.The bare tramlines are left by lifting one tineon each side of the seeding machine behindthe wheels of the seeding tractor.

Layout issuesEstablishing tramlines required a review of theexisting layout of paddocks and rethinkingsome areas to end up with a more efficientdesign. Some areas of the farm consideredunsuited to tramlining initially will beincluded after a study of the farm map andsome relocation of tracks. Early considerationof the system suggested about 60–70 per centof the farm was suited to an up and backtramline layout; this has now been raised toat least 80 per cent.

Plans for the futurePlans for the near future involve establishingpermanent tramlines through some‘straightening up’ of initial runs, possibly ayear or two to settle on the most efficientlayouts and inter-row shield spraying. A fewnew access gates will be needed onto roads dueto tracks being altered. Some individual treeswill be removed over time; these are wellcompensated for through planting new treesin a planned program.

Cas

e st

ud

ies

62

Case Study 5: Colin and Fiona Pither

Colin and Fiona Pither began the first stageof implementing a tramline system on theirproperty at Ongerup in 2002. Colin returnedfrom the tramline farming tour to the EasternStates in 2001 very enthusiastic about thebenefits controlled traffic could provide to hisno-till farming system. Due to budgetrestrictions Colin has begun a plan for the nextfive or so years to obtain guidance and modifyhis machinery to get the full benefits of thesystem.

Reasons for tramline farming• accuracy of working;• easier for less skilled labour;• reduced compaction;• eliminate missed weed control;• easier stubble handling;• potential to spray between rows.

Guidance systemIn 2002 Colin worked up and back with twomarker arms on his seeder bar and JD visualDGPS guidance in his spraying tractor. In2003 he sold the marker arms because theywere too difficult to operate on uneven countryand used DGPS guidance in his seeding tractoras well. Drift was an issue, particularly if theystopped for three to four hours, but in thatcase they simply reset the system to therequired mark. At this stage Colin believes itis accurate enough for what they want to dountil they can afford to go to auto-steer.

MachineryIn 2002 his machinery width and tracks werenot matched. He has now matched the widthsand some of the tracks that will eventuallyinclude the harvester.• 10.9 m Ausplow DBS air seeder bar;• air seeder bin 3 m wheel track centres;• 32.7 m Burando Hill boomspray with

adjustable axle to 3 m pulled by a JD7810spraying tractor. Rear tractor wheels are 3m track;

• 11 m harvester (the harvester front iscurrently offset).

Colin is changing over his John Deere 8400model tractor to a tracked tractor that willeasily allow the tracks to be moved out to threemetres.

Tramlines• two bare tramlines;• track width 3 m centred.

BenefitsColin has found working up and back alongstraight lines much easier for spraying. Wherepossible they work north and south, side-onto the wind, which is good for spraying andspreading. He has been removing some gradebanks to work up and down slopes. This seasonthey have had above 500 mm rainfall and therehas been no soil erosion or water loggingwhere there used to be. Colin thinks this maybe a combination of working up and downslope to drain the water away and working deepto remove compaction with the DBS tines. Hebelieves they will need to observe whathappens over the next few seasons beforemaking any definite conclusions. In the futuresome fences may need to be changed to makepaddocks simpler to work.

KEY FEATURES:• two marker arms and

DGPS guidance• up and back• no tracks match but

it is a future plan

Farm location:OngerupArea cropped 2003:3000 haAnnual rainfall:450 mmEnterprises:cropping: wheat, barley,canola, lupins, sheep,lucerne, pasture.

63

Case Study 6: Paddy and SharonBarber

Paddy and Sharon Barber have been tramlinefarming for two years.

Reason for tramline farmingPaddy was a participant on the Tramline Tour2001 to New South Wales and Queensland. Hefound this tour very valuable and it helped himto further appreciate the benefits a controlledtraffic system can provide. Paddy believestramline farming ‘is a simple concept withgreat benefits particularly in terms of reducinginputs’. In the future he would like to investin auto-steer to overcome driver lapse inconcentration causing wiggly seeding lines.

Guidance systemIn 2001 Paddy used one marker arm and sowedone fuzzy tramline round and round. In 2002he seeded his 4400 ha program up and backusing DGPS visual (John Deere) guidance, andin 2003 used auto-steer.

Machinery• 10.8 m air seeder bar;• 32.5 m boomspray;• 16.25 m multi-spreader;• 10.8 m harvester front.

Tramlines• 2 m track;• two bare tramlines in lupins and canola;• two fuzzy tramlines in cereals.

Layout issuesPaddy seeds three laps around the paddockbefore commencing up and back seeding andsprays two full laps when spraying, otherwisethe turns are too tight. The seeder bar is liftedout of the ground to avoid double seeding.Paddy has used fuzzy tramlines in his cerealsas a precaution on his water-repellent sandysoils. Last year he found the fuzzy tramlineseasy to follow while spraying. These wereeasiest to follow in cereals throughout thegrowing season but they were a little difficultto follow at times in the canola and lupincrops. Therefore, this season bare tramlineshave been left in lupins and canola.

Observed benefitsPaddy has found working up and back betterthan round and round as his overlap wasfurther reduced because no headlands wereseeded. Spraying has been much easier.During 2001 Paddy estimates that crop inputswere reduced by around five per cent and thishas further increased to seven per cent withelectronic guidance.

Future plansWhile the long-term aim is to match harvesterwidth to the tramlines there is a difficulty withan offset harvester front and how to fit a chaserbin on the tramlines. As machinery is changedover Paddy will select machines to match andenhance his tramline farming system.

Photo 11.4. Paddy seeding in 2002 up and back withdGPS auto-steer.

KEY FEATURES:• 2001 round and

round marker arm• 2002 DGPS

guidance up andback

Farm location:GibsonArea cropped 2003:3350 haAnnual rainfall:450 mmMain soil types:shallow to mediumdepth sand over gravelover clay at 30–50 cmEnterprise:cropping: wheat, maltbarley, canola and lupins

Cas

e st

ud

ies

64

Case Study 7: Lindsay and KarenChappel

Lindsay and Karen Chappel from Perenjorihave been using tramlines for two years sinceLindsay returned from the Tramline Tour 2001to New South Wales and Queensland in 2001.

Guidance systemA DGPS auto-steer (Beeline) with a basestation is used in the seeding tractor to seedup and back. Bare tramlines are used asguidance for spraying.

Machinery• 17.6 air seeder bar• 35m boomspray• 17.6m spreader

• 11m harvester front

Some modifications were required to bringLindsay’s air seeder box track to 2.2 m (costingabout $1900) and 15 minutes labour was all ittook to shut down some nozzles on theboomspray to bring it to 35 metres in width.

Bare tramlines were left by lifting two tinesbehind the tractor wheels making sprayingvery simple. ‘No foam marker or bent neck!’

When turning at the end of the run the bar isleft in the ground while sowing alternate runsto form ‘curve sown’ headlands in somepaddocks to save time. Sowing is completedby filling in the unsown runs while still sowingas the seeder turns on the headlands. This isnow known as the ’clapper corner’. Lindsaydeveloped this system to avoid confusing thetractor driver by having too many switches toflick on and off at the ends of the run. Thisreduces the risk of making mistakes such asforgetting to turn the air seeder back on afterturning. The DGPS system allowed ripskipping (sowing alternate runs) to make theturns wider.

Layout issuesIn order to have longer and more efficient runsthe Chappels have been removing contourbanks. After many years of no-till the soilstructure and water infiltration rate hasimproved such that contour banks have notbeen filling with water. This has been quitean expensive exercise but Lindsay is confidentthe savings could be made up in one year withreduced overlap. Lindsay is also seeding upand down slopes as he saw done on theTramline Tour to Queensland in 2001. This isto keep any run-off evenly distributed, but ithas raised a few neighbours’ eyebrows.

Observed benefitsAn immediate benefit for Lindsay ofimplementing his tramline system was thecost saving from reduced overlap. Lindsay hasreduced his overlap from 19 per cent to oneper cent in paddocks. ‘One paddock in previousyears was always sprayed 130 hectares butusing tramlines the paddock was only 109hectares: that is a reduction in overlap by 19per cent. Tell that to the non-believers — asaving that big is hard to imagine’.

Photo 11.5. Lindsay chappel standing on his bare tramlines 2002.

KEY FEATURES:• up and back DGPS

auto-steer• removal of contour

banks• no-till and annual

chemical fallow• curve sown

headlands

Farm location:Perenjori, MorawaProperty size:6720 haArea cropped 2003:4800 haAnnual rainfall:324 mmEnterprises:Cropping only: wheat,barley, canola

65

Case Study 8: Geoffrey and VivienneMarshall

Reason for tramline farmingGeoffrey and Vivienne Marshall haveundertaken the challenge to capture thebenefits of tramline farming on their propertyat Hyden. Geoffrey sees ‘tramlining andprecision farming as natural progressions forcropping systems,’ particularly for his no-tillsystem.

‘Agronomy driven logic is my main reason forseeking high accuracy auto-steer capacity.Having a tined (Conserva-Pak) seeding systemwith 300 millimetre spacings and continuouscrop, many possibilities arise. The strength ofthe rotation is logically the success of thepulse, legume or alternative crop such ascanola, et cetera. The cash driver is still cereals.We need to change this’.

The potential agronomic benefits that Geoffreysees tramline farming and no-till can offer are:Soil benefits — precise fertiliser rates andplacement, less soil disturbance leading tomany subtle improvements, recycling ofnutrients, maintaining an even layer of cropresidue over the whole paddock, wider rowspacings for some crops, less soil compaction.Spraying possibilities — substantiallyreducing reliance on chemical inputs andcosts, use a shielded sprayer to allow moreselective use of residual and knockdownherbicides, reduce selective herbicideresistance, optimising spraying opportunities,less cultivation leading to fewer weeds, thedesire to use discs for crop establishment.Cost efficiencies —- no overlap means real costsavings on each operation. ‘Depending on howaccurate we were previously, savings of 3 to10 per cent can be achieved. Fertiliser is asingle large item where big dollars can besaved.’

Guidance systemGeoffrey works up and back using a basestation DGPS auto-steer (Farmscan) guidancesystem in both his seeding and sprayingtractors.

Machinery• 15.2 m air seeder bar;• 30.4 m boomspray;• 11 m harvester.

Tramlines• 2 m centres;• sown.

Future plansNext season Geoffrey is upgrading hismachinery to a 12 m air seeder bar and 36 mboomspray all on 3 m wheel track centres. Thetracks and widths are being modified to fit theharvester into the system which, when thebudget permits, will be a 12 m platform.

KEY FEATURES:• up and back• DGPS auto-steer

guidance

Farm location:HydenArea cropped 2003:2400 haAnnual rainfall:320 mmEnterprises:cropping only: wheat,barley, lupins, canola

Cas

e st

ud

ies

66

Case Study 9: Miles and Aiden Obst

Mingenew farmers Miles and Aiden have beenseeding up and back with tramlines since2001.

Reason for tramline farming and benefitsThe Obsts first considered tramline farmingto get the benefits of reduced overlap and inputcosts (saving on pesticides and fertilisers) andincreased yields. The use of a DGPS auto-steersystem together with tramline farming hasprovided the Obsts with many agronomicopportunities to improve their farmingsystem. Miles believes ‘the development of ashield sprayer and the opportunity to sowinter-row lupins into wide rows is a new toolto use in the fight against herbicide resistance’.The auto-steer DGPS system in the seedingtractor has reduced driver fatigue. Theharvester may also be auto-steer this season.

Guidance systemThe Obsts use DGPS auto-steer (Beeline)system in their seeding tractor and a basestation located on farm.Machinery• 12 m air seeder bar;• 36 m boomspray;• 11 m harvester;• 12 m inter-row shielded sprayer.

Tramlines• 2 m track for seeding tractor and sprayer;• 3 m track for air seeder box;• three wheel tramline, sown.

The Obsts’ seeding and spraying equipmentoperate on three tramlines, as the wheel tracksare different widths ( 3 m tracks for the tow-behind air cart and a 2 m track for sprayingand spreading). When spraying or spreadingMiles works up and back with his left or righthand spraying or spreading wheel on thenorthern air cart mark of each seeding run.This confines half of the compaction to onecommon tramline and leaves two othertramlines, one for the 3 m tracks and one forthe 2 m tracks. This is 50 per cent lesscompaction than he would have had from twopairs of separate tramlines. Keeping to thenorth side of the 3 m tramlines ensures thatthe offset between seeding and spraying orspreading is consistent in the paddock.

Future plansChallenges for next year include maintainingthe accuracy of the guidance system to sowinto old furrows, to gain benefits of waterharvesting and residual fertiliser. In the futureMiles would like to convert his seeder bar tothree-point linkage to enable better controlof the bar and shorter turns at the end of eachup and back run.

KEY FEATURES:• up and back dGPS

auto-steer• shield spraying• three wheeled

tramline

Farm location:MingenewArea cropped 2002:3800 haAnnual rainfall:400 mmMain soil types:sand plainEnterprises:• cropping: wheat,

lupins, canola,• sheep, cattle

Photo 11.6. Obst’s inter-row shielded sprayer.

67

11.3 Fully matched systems

Case Study 10: Harold and Jo, Glen andNarelle Millington

Burracoppin farmers Harold and Jo Millingtonand their son and daughter-in-law Glen andNarelle have been using no-till for about sixyears and tramline farming round and roundfor two years since 2002.

Guidance systemThe Millingtons use one marker arm to workround and round. The first track around thepaddock is made very accurately, by markingout with a disc marker mounted on their ute.

The ute maintains a constant distance fromthe fence by a ‘feeler’ gauge mounted on theopposite side of the ute from the marker arm(Figure 11.1). The feeler gauge has a strip ofplastic on the end, which clicks on the fenceto tell the driver that the ute is in the correctposition. The seeding tractor later follows themarked line to help layout the seeding lapsvery precisely.

Machinery• 17.9 m air seeder bar;• 35.8 m boomspray;• 17.9 m spreader;• 9.1 m harvester.

Photo 11.7. Millington’s spreader and sprayer on bare tramlines.

KEY FEATURES:• round and round,

one marker arm• machinery matched

Farm location:BurracoppinArea cropped 2003:1860 haAnnual rainfall:250–300 mmMain soil types:sand, loam clayEnterprisesCropping only: wheat,barley, lupins, canolaCropping only

Source: Glen Millington and Paul Blackwell, Department of Agriculture, WA' Kondinin Group. Reproduced in Farming Ahead No 134, for more information on Farming Ahead contact 1800 677 761

Fence

Arm and disc marking the centre

of the first lapFeeler gauge

helping steer theutility at a constantdistance from the

fence

Figure 11.1. Marking out the first run using a plastic feeler gauge.

Cas

e st

ud

ies

68

The Millingtons’ main expense to starttramline farming was $2000 for the purchaseof a marker arm.

Tramlines• 2.4 m track;• bare for canola and lupins and fuzzy for

cereals.

All machinery runs on the same track width.The seeding tractor, air seeder, spreader andharvester use a pair of bare tramlines in thecentre of the air seeder bar. Each wing hasbare tramline (one from each pass of the bar)for spraying and harvesting from. Veryaccurate and precise marking with markerarms allows the spraying tramline to fit thetramlines for each wing. The Millingtons sowtheir cereal crops on 38 cm wide rows withlegumes having a single skip row betweenpairs of 38 cm rows making 76 cm rows.

Future plansFuture plans include the use of inter-rowshield spraying. Harold and Glen havedeveloped and tested an 18 m self-steer inter-row shield spray hood. Most of the materialshave been collected from around the farm; anold scarifier bar has been modified as the frameand the shields have been made from empty200 L herbicide drums. Their Flexi-N tankused at seeding doubles as the tank for shieldspraying. To make the shields track betweenthe crop rows a small wheel has been attachedin the centre at the back of the shield that runsin a furrow left at seeding. The shields areused on 76 cm spacings which have been madeby blocking off every second tube at seeding.The tine is left down to form a furrow whichthe spray hood wheels follow. Harold also hassome innovative ideas for improved weedcontrol based on harvester modifications toput the harvester chaff on the tramlines.

69

Case Study 11: Don and Anne, Nigeland Tanya Moffat

Moonyoonooka and Tenindewa farmers Donand Anne Moffat with their son and daughter-in-law Nigel and Tanya have accepted thechallenge to tramline in some very hilly androcky country.

Reason for tramline farmingThe Moffats’ main motivation for moving to atramline system was to reduce compaction andinputs, although at this stage they have seenno evidence of a reduction in inputs. ‘A 55hectare paddock sprayed last year sownnormally is still 55 hectares this year withcontrolled traffic’. However, they will not giveup hope of reducing inputs and next year planto sow a bigger area to tramlines.

Guidance systemIn their first season of tramline farming in2002, spraying tramlines were marked insummer using a borrowed DGPS auto-steersystem. These tramlines were convenientlyused for spraying and spreading beforeseeding.

When seeding this year, the seeder followedpre-made marks every third seeder run widthand put down both marker arms to mark outthe adjacent runs. This works well with a 3:1fit between bar and boom. Both arms werethen retracted and the disc marks were usedas a guide to seed adjacent runs. The pre-made

marks were often difficult to follow due tostock damage during autumn and burntharvester rows.

In 2003 they again used a contractor with aDGPS auto-steer guidance system to mark newpaddocks for tramlines. Every second run wasmarked to enable rip skipping and widerturning. In the future, to avoid stock damagepre-seeding, marking will be done as close toseeding as possible. In paddocks that werecropped the previous season the tramlineswere used for guidance at seeding. No markerarms were used as the tramlines were stillquite visible.

MachineryIn 2002 the Moffats modified their machinerywidths and tracks to fit the harvester on 3 mtracks.

Costs of modifications and machinery areshow in Table 11.2. In 2003 modificationsincluded rebuilding the multi-spreader axleand changing the air seeder box to tow-behindwith 3 m wheel track centres to help recognisethe tramlines in crops, especially in lupinssown with double row spacings.

Layout issuesAll controlled traffic (1035 ha) working wasup and back. Very tricky paddocks were sownas normal round and round. The Moffats haveleft bare tramlines for the harvester to followduring harvest and hope to be able to use these

KEY FEATURES:• up and back• two marker arms• all matching

machinery• hilly and rocky

country

Farm location:Moonyoonooka andNorth TenindewaArea cropped 2002:1600 haAnnual rainfall:Moonyoonooka 450 mmTenindewa 325 mmEnterprises:• cropping: wheat,

barley, lupins, canola• sheep, cattle

Photo 11.8. Moffat’s using the tramlines from the previous season for guidance at seeding.

Cas

e st

ud

ies

70

for seeding for next year. Tramlines were runup and down slope where possible. To makeruns more efficient the Moffats have removedsome contour banks and fences. Since movingto no-till farming in 1995 it has becomeevident that the contour banks weren’trunning water due to better soil structure andwater infiltration.

Table 11.2. Moffats’ machinery modifications and costs 2002.


Seeding Seeder bar Brought back to 8.9 m 2002 and 29 tine John Shearer Trashworker

back to 9 m 2003No cost

Air seeder No cost3 t John Shearer tow between Tractor

JD8640 4WD Removed duals and wound out 100to 3 m

Spraying 27 m boomspray Extended axle to 3 m track. 3000Rebuilt boom to parallel lift to enableboom to fold inside the wheels forroad transport

Tractor Track spread to 3 m using cotton 800 JD4250 MFW reel spacers

Spreading 18 m Multi-spreader Track widened to 3 m using cotton reels but was not very successful. (more detail)

Modification cost 3900

Guidance 2 marker arms 5290

Total 9190

Observed benefitsSpraying has become very easy with tramlinesto follow instead of foam markers. Nigel was aparticipant of the Tramline Farming Tour 2001to Queensland and New South Wales. Afterseeing the benefits of controlled traffic in theeast, Nigel realised their machinery was quitewell matched and could be simply modified toimplement a tramline farming system of theirown.

71

Case Study 12: Rohan and Carol Ford

Reason for tramline farmingRohan and Carol Ford from Balla begantramline farming in 2002, motivated by theneed to alleviate soil compaction, improve soilhealth and an increasing concern that thechemical farming system is not sustainable.Rohan was also searching for a new challenge.

Ninety-five per cent of their farm is yellowsands and deep wheel ruts from the harvesterare still evident 10 years after harvest. Workingfrom the tramlines, including deep ripping,will confine compaction from machinerymovement in the paddock to help conserve thebenefits of deep ripping.

Guidance systemIn 2002 Rohan seeded their 2700 ha programto tramlines using two marker arms and DGPS(John Deere) guidance system. Thecombination was used to improve drivingaccuracy because using marker arms onundulating soil was difficult. To avoidproblems with the marker arm and tight turnson the ends in 2003, Rohan upgraded hisseeding tractor to a JD tracked tractor withauto-steer using the Greenstar DGPS system.This enabled him to rip skip, sowing everysecond seeder run in one pass across a paddockand filling in the missed runs on the returnpass.

MachineryRohan has matched his machinery width andtracks to the harvester to reduce compactionat harvest and because nine metres was themost economical width. His bar was about10.67 m so to match his machinery widths he

would have needed to widen his boomsprayand buy a new 10.97 m harvester front, whichwould cost $20,000 alone compared to $22,000to modify most of his equipment.

Some modifications were required to move thewheels on the seeder bar, air seeder box,sprayer and spreader to 3 m (Table 11.3). Theirseeding tractor has now been traded for atracked tractor (8320T) with an adjustabletrack to 3 m to be used for spraying andseeding operations.

The harvester (JD9600) will be just off thetramline on 3.4 m centres, but the chaser binwill be modified to fit the tramline track andallow grain to be transferred from theharvester on an adjacent tramline. Theharvester wheels will fit when the harvester istraded in the future.

TramlinesTramlines were sown in the first year becauseRohan was concerned about erosion of baretramlines on his in water-repellent sands. Insome paddocks the Fords found the crop inthe rows on the tramlines emerged first andwas easy to see for post-emergent spraying.They used DGPS guidance (Greenstar) toguide them to the correct row. Rohanexperimented with fuzzy tramlines but theydid not work very well on the non-wetting soil,as the smooth tyre on the air seeder box didnot press the seed into the sand.

Rohan now uses bare tramlines to make themmore visible for spraying late in the seasonand reduce crop damage. One tine was liftedbehind the tracks to leave a 40 cm gap for thetramline (20 cm row spacing is used forcereals). The tractor tracks are a bit wider than

KEY FEATURES• up and back 2

markers and DGPSguidance

• all machinery fits theharvester

• deep ripping fromtramlines

Farm location:BallaArea cropped 2003:2980 haAnnual rainfall:250–300 mmMain soil types:yellow sandEnterprises:• cropping: lupins,

barley, wheat• sheep, cattle

Table 11.3. Fords’ machinery modifications and costs.


Seeding 9m seeder bar Change to 3 m track 2000germinator disc opener

Air seeder Morris Change to 3 m track No costair tank

Tractor JD8870 4WD Remove duals to run single tyres (710/70R-38 radial)

Spraying 27 m boomspray Change to 3 m track 3500 Beverley hydroboom

Spreading 18 m multi-spreader Was truck mounted now 4500tow behind

Deep ripper 9 m Removed 2 tines to not rip No costtramlines

Modification costs 10,000

Guidance Greenstar Upgrade and guidance program 55002 marker arms 6500

Total 22,000

Cas

e st

ud

ies

72

this 40 cm gap, but Rohan has decided this isa good compromise to leaving a wider baretramline that may become weedy and havegreater potential for erosion. Rohan hasnoticed the spraying tramlines are deeper thanthe unused tramlines. The challenge for nextyear will be to maintain an even seeding depth.

Layout issuesTramlines were seeded up and back, north andsouth except for one paddock that had veryshort runs north to south, so that one wasseeded east to west. Before beginning to sowa paddock the seeder was run up and back onthe ends to provide a guide for when to turnand when to lift the bar. Turning was verytight on the ends of the runs because as theywere unable to rip skip using two marker arms.

Benefits and observationsRohan highlights the importance of precisedriving. ‘Educating drivers is important sothey understand the reason to drive straightand what you are trying to achieve. Tramlineshave given us a step in the right direction tocontrol weeds, chemical use (resistant weeds)and a more effective use of fertiliser in ournon-wetting soils’.

The easy in-crop access tramlines provide isenabling Rohan to trial deep ripping betweenestablished rows of barley or lupin cropsduring the growing season. In 2003, togetherwith Dr Paul Blackwell, Department ofAgriculture, he has experimented with deepripping in between lupins on 50 cm wide rows.If there is no resulting yield penalty in thelupins, this may be a better time for deepripping as it is a relatively quiet time of yearand the soil is still moist. Deep ripping isusually done after the first rains in April whenthere is pressure to start seeding.

Photo 11.9. Deep ripping between lupin rows during flowering

73

Case Study 13: Anthony and Daphne,Glenn and Lisa Fretwell

North-east Newdegate farmers Tony and GlenFretwell have been tramlining since 2001.

Initial tramline farming systemThe Fretwells introduced controlled traffic totheir 4000 ha cropping program with thepurchase of one marker arm and a 36.57 mboomspray. Most paddocks were sown roundand round leaving one bare row as a guidanceline for the sprayer and contract spreader. Thisguidance line was used for night spraying andcontract spreading before the purchase of anyGPS based equipment. Up and back workingwas tried in two paddocks. During 2001 theFretwells learned a great deal about the costsavings from overlap reduction and thesimplicity of navigation for all paddockoperations by following a guidance line in thestubble.

Guidance system since 2002A Beeline Navigator Broadacre (maximumerror 20 cm) is swapped between the 4WD JD8960 sowing tractor and the spray tractor. TheFretwells fitted auto-steer on their JD 9600harvester in 2002. Tines are removed andfuzzy or bare tramlines are left at 3 m wheelcentres on every 18 m run.

MachineryThe progression to full tramline farming in2002 seemed natural as the machinery ownedwas close to matching in widths.• 18 m air seeder bar;• 36 m boomspray;• 18 m multi-spreader;• 9.1 m harvester front;• 18 m inter-row shielded sprayer.


auto-steer guidance• shielded spraying• harvester fits the

system

Farm location:North-east NewdegateArea cropped 2003:5350 haAnnual rainfall:356 mmMain soil types:sand, loam, clayEnterprises:cropping only: wheatbarley, lupins, canola

Tramlines• 3 m tracks;• fuzzy and bare.By matching all wheel spacing to the 3 m ofthe harvester any advantages from controlledsoil compaction will also be won. Both tractorshave been converted to single tyres at 3 mwheel spacing. The track width of Fretwell’sfront wheel assist tractor is being convertedto 3 m by extending the differential and driveaxles. Glenn purchased a kit from TasweldEngineering, Toowoomba for $4500. and theextensions are covered by John Deerewarranty. In time, the air seeder box will bechanged to a four wheeled style rather thanthe current trike style. The boomspray hasbeen fitted with a hydraulically adjustable axlethat is about 2 m for road transport and canbe adjusted to 3 m in the paddock to matchthe tramlines. The chaser bin poses a problemin the system since it is the greatest singlecontributor to soil compaction on the farmand the harvester auger will not reach into itwhile on tramlines.

LayoutAll paddocks are worked up and back from theside of the paddock, giving the longest straightrun, while going north to south where possibleand up and down slopes rather than acrossslopes. In 2002 all contour banks, more fences,all single trees and more rock heaps wereremoved from paddocks to simplify operations.

Inter-row shield sprayerThe Fretwells are also developing an 18.23 mshielded sprayer. ‘We have observed theshielded spraying concept working in otherindustries and are excited by the preliminaryresearch in the Western Australian broad acre

Photo 11.10. Fretwell’s harvester on auto-steer.

Cas

e st

ud

ies

74

environment. There seems room for progressof this concept for our style of farming. It fitswell with straight line farming system, auto-steering, herbicide resistance management,and herbicide cost reductions. With furtherexperimentation of shield design and wide rowspacing, we foresee this practice effective forcanola, faba beans and field peas as well as thelupin crops’.

Photo 11.11. Fretwell’s seeding tractor pulling the chaser bin with a matching 3m wheel track.

75

Case Study 14: Kim and Dianne, Neiland Jo Diamond

Buntine farmers Kim and Dianne togetherwith Neil and Jo Diamond started tramlinefarming in 2002. They have now been usingthe system for two years.

Reason for tramline farming andbenefitsKim and Neil’s observations of successfultramline farming systems on the TramlineFarming tour to New South Wales andQueensland in 2001 inspired them toimplement the system on their own property.

Neil Diamond believes ‘the input cost savingsachievable with controlled traffic are too greatto ignore. The system has allowed us betteropportunities for relay planting summer cropsand perennials (lucerne) and the use of shieldspraying in lupins. Once the driver has learnthow to use the navigator, driving has becomeeasier and less fatiguing’.

Guidance systemThe Diamonds use a DGPS auto-steer(Beeline) system with a base station to guidetheir seeding and spraying tractors. Neil pre-marked paddocks before seeding as insuranceif auto-steer was not available. This was donetwo ways in combination with other paddock

Table 11.12. The Diamond shielded sprayer.

operations for greater efficiency:• while fertiliser was spread on auto-steer

way lines a pair of marker arms mountedon a three-point linkage frame were usedto mark runs;

• while burning, auto-steer way lines wereused to rake stubble into windrows on 9 mspacings for guides during spraying andseeding.

MachineryThe Diamonds have matched their machinery

width to fit the harvester in the system andhave two track widths for differentmachinery.

• 9.1 m Flexicoil 820 air seeder bar at 18 cmrow spacing for cereals and three-pointlinkage toolbar for lupins on 76 cm rowspacings for lupins;

• 27 m Hardi hydraulic lift-fold boomspray;• 9.1 m harvester;• 9.1 m inter-row shielded sprayer.

The Diamonds have designed and built a 9 mshield sprayer, mounted on three-point linkagewith Holtfreters in Northam. The sprayer has19 shrouds set at 450 mm row spacings. Two800 L tanks are mounted on the bar and one800 L tank is mounted on the front of thetractor. The sprayer will be used for inter-rowshield spraying between 45 cm lupin rows.Early spraying runs of the shield sprayer havegone well.


auto-steer• Pre-marking• Relay planting Shield

spraying

Farm location:BuntineArea cropped 2002:2660 haAnnual rainfall:325 mmMain soil types:Loam, gravelEnterprises:cropping wheat, barley,oats, lupins, lucerne,sheep, pigs, cattle

Cas

e st

ud

ies

76

Tramlines• 2.2 m track for seeding tractor Stieger

ST310 III, spraying tractor John Deere7600 MFWD, boomspray, air seeder boxFlexicoil 1330 and FlexiN cart;

• 3 m track harvester;• bare tramlines on 2.2 m.

Relay plantingTramlining has provided another option ofrelay planting maize into lupins. In 2001, theDiamonds used a precision summer cropplanter to sow maize on 1 m spacings betweenrows of lupins when the lupins were fillingpods about 10 weeks before harvest. At harvest

the tallest maize was 300 mm high — the sameheight as the lowest lupins pods. The maizewas pushed under the cutter bar as the lupinswere harvested. Relay planting gave at least a10-week period of sowing advantage,compared to normal sowing after harvest. Themaize was also sown into wetter soil. Becausethe lupins were dropping their leaves whenthe maize was planted, more light was able toreach the emerging maize crop. As well assummer crops, lucerne will also be plantedinto barley at 1 m spacings after post-emergentspraying.

77

Case Study 15: Owen and TerriBrownley

Lake King farmers Owen and Terri Brownleystarted tramline farming in 2002.

Reason for tramline farming• agronomic gains. Inter-r ow shielded

spraying, sowing between last year’s croprows for better stubble handling with a nostock system;

• help prevent harvest compaction with wetharvests;

• try to concentrate weed seeds from harvestinto wheel tracks for better control;

• help prevent compacted subsoil all overpaddocks;

• band spray residual chemicals andfungicides to prevent full soilcontamination.

Guidance systemOwen uses DGPS auto-steer (John Deere) inhis seeding tractor and visual DGPS guidance(Farmscan and John Deere DGPS) in hisspraying tractors to work up and back.

MachineryThe Brownleys have designed their system toinclude the harvester on 3 m wheel tracks.• 12.3 m Flexicoil air seeder bar;• 12.3 m triple disc air seeder bar;• 36.9 m boomspray;• 12.3 m spreader;• 12.3 m and 11 m harvesters;• 12.3 m inter-row shielded sprayer.

A 12.3 m custom built harvester front byMidwest Fabrications is centre mounted onone of Owen’s harvesters. Residue spreadingand chaff control systems are being designedto divert chaff onto the tramlines. The otherharvester has an offset 11 m harvester frontthat is currently used for harvesting peas andbeans separate from the centre feed machine.It will be a challenge to fit this into the system.

Some modifications of axles were required totake the wheel tracks out to 3 m centres. Theboomspray is towed by a JCB fast track, theaxles of which have been extended to threemetres. The axle modification was done byTasweld Engineering in Toowoomba. The axleextensions used have been warranted by JCB.The boomspray wheels slide out hydraulicallyto 3 m after the booms have been folded out.

The seeding tractor is a JD tracked tractor seton 3 m track spacing. The tracks are 400 mmwide to fit in the 600 mm tramlines and giveplenty of grip for the tractor’s 300 horsepower.

The chaser bin axle has been widened to 3 m.It travels 90 per cent of the time on tramlinesexcept when emptying the harvester, when itmoves off the tramlines. This will hopefullybe overcome next harvest.

Tramlines• 3 m track;• bare. To be covered with weed seeds then

straw.

KEY FEATURES• Up and back• DGPS guidance• All machinery

matched includingthe harvester

Farm location:Lake KingArea cropped 2003:3000 haAnnual rainfall:365 mmMain soil types:Shallow sand andgravelly sand, neutralloamsEnterprises:Cropping only: wheat,barley, canola, fababeans, summer cropsCropping only

Photo 11.13. Owen’s JCB with modified axles to 3m towing a boomspray with adjustable axles.

Cas

e st

ud

ies

78

Owen left bare tramlines by blocking off theseed tubes behind the wheels and lifting thetines. The seeder bars have a centre tine on300 mm row spacing and every second rowfor wide row work or every third row forsummer crops.

BenefitsThe potential for on-farm trials with matchingharvester and seeder width is enormous. Theplots are harvested as part of the normalpaddock operations and yield mapped data areinterpreted after harvest. There are no delayswith weigh trailers and cleaning up missedareas after the trial is harvested.

The inter-row shielded sprayer has improvedthe efficiency of spraying fungicides on pulsecrops. The over row nozzles are used to bandspray fungicide on the 600 mm crop row earlyin the growing season. Precise placement offungicides in pulse crops by spraying youngplants with the over row nozzles has reducedthe amount of fungicides required for crop

protection. Bare tramlines have reduced cropdamage from traffic when multipleapplications have been required.Inter-row spraying is used to control weeds inwide row winter crops and warm season’scrops.

Future plansA strategy to reduce the weeds in the baretramlines is required. Owen plans to trydiverting chaff onto the tramlines at harvest.Another issue to be addressed is the tramlinesbecoming slushy during winter anddeveloping ruts. This makes a bumpy ride forlater traffic and the ruts holds water thatcauses even more bogginess.

Owen recommends thinking about paddocklayout before starting a tramline farmingsystem particularly if you are planning toremove fences in the future. If you have thesame way lines in two paddocks that willeventually be combined there is no need toreset the tramlines.

79

Appendix 1

Appendix

81

1.1 Improved efficiency

Tramline farming improves croppingefficiency by reducing overlap as a guidancesystem is used to set up the tramlines on aneven spacing across the paddock. The inputsavings of seed, fertiliser, herbicide and fuelwill vary depending on the accuracy of theguidance system, paddock layout and driveraccuracy. For example, when operating roundand round, using one marker arm, an estimateof five per cent less inputs is reasonable basedon trials and farmer experience. When thepaddock is seeded up and back using DGPSauto-steer (2 cm accuracy), without cornersowing, farm experience shows that a 10 percent reduction of inputs is reasonable.

Fuel use efficiency in machinery running ontramlines has been reported to increasebecause wheels are running on firm, compacttramlines that cause less rolling resistance andwheel slip compared to running on the rest ofthe paddock. Queensland research showed up

Table 1.1. Long-term tramline trial results at Mullewa (on yellow sand).

Year 1997 1998 1999 2000Crop Wheat Lupin Wheat Canola

Yield of normal 2.41 1.10 2.45 0.945system, t/ha

Yield of tramline 2.6 1.21 2.77 1.055farming system, t/ha

Benefit over 8% 10% 13% 12% normal trafficLSD (5%) 0.11 0.127

Grain quality benefit - - Less screenings More oil

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

$/ha

wheat lupins wheat canola

overlap

new compaction

old compaction

to 50 per cent reduction in fuel use when thetramlines were not tilled compared to tilledsoil in clay soils (Tullberg and Wylie, 1994).

Tramlines can be a great benefit for seedingand spraying operations after deep rippingsandy soil if the tramlines are not ripped.Measurements at Mullewa, Western Australia,found a 10 per cent reduction in fuel use whenunripped tramlines were used for seeding andspraying operations compared to machineryrunning on deep ripped soil. Recent researchis measuring the benefits of tramlines for fueluse more accurately. Opportunities forapplying critical spray applications from firmtramlines in wet conditions, without losingtraction or getting bogged, provide otherbenefits.

The relative economic benefits of compactioncontrol are much larger than the benefits fromreduced costs due to less overlap. Figure 1.1shows that the gross margin benefits fromcompaction control are even greater in later

Figure 1.1. Annual growth margin benefits of tramline farming at Mullewa over four seasons from either reducedinputs from less overlap (3 to 4 per cent), new compaction in the season, or old compaction accumulated fromprevious seasons. The overlap of successive wheelings is 80 per cent and the yield loss from the tramlines is notincluded in the calculations.

Ap

pen

dix

82

-60

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

wheat

lupins

canola

-70

-80

-90

yiel

d ef

fect

, %

previous

spreading

spraying late

spraying early

seeding

seasons when the residual effect of oldcompaction from previous seasons is included.

More recent analysis (Blackwell et al., 2003)has shown that a net gross margin benefit ofmore than $50/ha can be expected from asandplain farm adopting tramline farming inWestern Australia, based on benefits fromoverlap and compaction control, as well as useof shielded sprayers in lupins and reduced fueluse.

1.2 Compaction control

Soil compaction and wheel damage to growingcrops can reduce yield in many situations.Compaction restricts plant root access to soilwater and nutrients because soil structure isdamaged.

Trials at the University of Queensland, Gattonindicate controlled traffic improvesinfiltration, reduces run-off and improves cropyield on self-mulching black earth (Tullberget al. 2001; Yuxia et al. 2001). Crop yield wasincreased by up to 16 per cent.

Crop yield of barley, wheat and beans increasedwith the absence of wheels by 12–17 per centon red brown earth at Roseworthy, SouthAustralia (Ellis et al. 1992). As 10 per cent ofthe paddock was lost to wheels from baretramlines left every seeding run, this translatesto a two to seven per cent yield increase frompracticing tramline farming.

Similarly, results from trials at Mullewaindicated there was approximately a 10 per

cent yield benefit of tramline farming sandysoil over normal traffic for a wheat-lupin-wheat-canola rotation, after deep rippingbefore the first wheat (Table 1.1). The tramlinesystem was based on 9.1 m with bare tramlinesleft every third run for spraying.

Further increases in yield benefit come fromlater seasons as the soil between the tramlinesis compacted less and improvement inpaddock soil structure can be maintained. Theupper limit of benefits to date in WesternAustralian trials is about 14 per cent. Limiteddata has been collected on the response ofdifferent crops, however, the response of barleyand canola appears similar to wheat, but effectson lupins seem less.

Compaction effects from wheel marks canoften be seen by delayed flowering of the cropand greener lines where the wheels have run.Research at Mullewa on sandy soil showed thatthe yield loss within a wheel mark, comparedto uncompacted soil, from a tyre or trackloaded by more than 1 t can be up to 100 percent for late post-emergence operations andup to about 40 per cent for seeding, wetharvests and for wheel marks from previousseasons, compared to deep ripped conditions(Figure 1.2).

Post-crop emergence operations have a greatereffect on crop yield as soil compaction isfurther compounded and the plant is alsomechanically damaged (such as stemsbroken).

Figure 1.2. Yield loss within wheel marks on yellow sand at Mullewa 1997-2000.

83

The quality of grain is also affected bywheeling. Cereal grain from wheel marks hadhigher screenings and canola had less oil thanfrom zones with no wheel marks (Blackwell,2000).

The first pass of a wheel has been found tocause the most compaction (Tullberg, 2001).Little compaction may occur if the soil is dryand sets hard in summer, for example yellowsand. Subsoil compaction may not be reducedusing rubber-tracked vehicles, compared withvehicles with tyres. Blunden et al (1994)showed that in wet conditions compaction insandy soils from track machines was greaterthan for tyres at 30 cm depth.

1.3 Improved weed control (shieldedspraying)Tramline farming assists inter-row shieldedspraying by providing well-marked seeder rowswith little overlap and a firm tramline for easyaccess to the crop for the vehicle operatingthe shielded sprayer.

A trial in 2000 at Miles Obst’s farm atMingenew on pale sand over gravel was plantedwith Wonga lupins on 56 cm rows and a 91cm row space for the tramline. The crop waseither grown with normal agronomy(simazine and selective herbicides applied bya boomspray), shield sprayed with Roundup“between the rows at main stem flowering,green manured, brown manured or croptopped. Green and brown manuring wereincluded as alternative weed managementstrategies. Details of the crop results and weedcontrol are shown in Table 1.2. In the growingseason, 192 mm of rain fell; less than half theannual average rainfall.

The shield treatment gave the largest yield andhad the lowest growth of blue lupin weeds.Presumably the large blue lupin weedscompeted for soil moisture in this dry seasonand contributed to a reduction of yield in theother treatments. There must have also beensome compensation in the shielded crop for

Table 1.2. Plant establishment, growth and yield; * significantly more or less than normal agronomy.

Treatment Yield Plants Dry matter) Gross (t/ha) (/m2) (g/m2 income

($/ha)lupin grass lupin grassbluelupin

blue lupin

1. Normal agronomy 1.07 44 2.3 4 184 29 6.4 1812. Green manuring 0 53 3 16* 237 48 38* 03. Brown manuring 0 55 3.8 4 273* 64 16* 04. Crop topping 1.04 37 1.5 2 287* 25 0.2 177 5. Hoods and topping 1.19* 42 0.5* 3 255 0.5* 7.5 202LSD(5%) 0.08 17 1.9 10 69 30 22 ($170/ t)

the lack of crop in the tramlines, compared tothe other treatments.

The economic benefits of shielded sprayingover a lupin-wheat phase were made with theRyegrass Integrated Management model(RIM). For the model run we used a lupin yieldof 1.2 t/ha and a wheat yield of 2.34 t/ha ($170and $180/t respectively). No grass selectivescould be used in the lupins and there was 25per cent carry-over of the initial 500 seeds/m2

of ryegrass into the wheat phase. The wheatwas grown with delayed sowing and highseeding rates to maximise weed control. Theshield treatments tested were:• the worst case scenario with only 80 per

cent control by inter-row shields; or• the best case scenario with additional

KerbÆ for in-row control (only used in thenon-cereal phases and paid for by savingthe cost of simazine) for 98 per cent weedcontrol (Table 1.3).

The inter-row shield treatment, including in-row weed control, gave the best gross marginin the lupin year and averaged over the twoyears, and ryegrass numbers were also keptrelatively stable. This should encourage thedevelopment of low cost shields for use onnormal farm spraying equipment. Unlikegreen manuring, the shielded sprayingtreatment provides some income in the firstyear as well as weed control.

1.4 Tramline designThe type of tramline used can vary dependingon whether weed control is an issue or somein-crop guidance is required. Ultimately, baretramlines are the best for visible guidance,minimising crop damage and grain qualityconcerns from damaged crop, and they arefirm for running machinery. However, somegrowers are concerned that taking a crop rowout for the tramline will reduce potential cropyield. There is evidence to suggest that theedge rows of a bare tramline will compensateto some degree for the missing row.

Ap

pen

dix

84

A trial at Mullewa on sand and red loam in2003 studied the yield response of four wheatvarieties Carnamah, Wyalkatchem, Westoniaand Calingiri in the tramline zone (rows inthe tramline and the two edge rows) of bare,fuzzy or sown tramlines that were not usedfor spraying tramlines. The extra seed fromthe bare tramline was diverted into the edgerows.The bare tramline zone had less yield than thesown tramline zone, except for the longerseason variety, Calingiri, which grew 25 percent more grain (350 kg/ha) in the tramlinezone with 50 per cent less screenings than thecrop outside the tramline zone (Figure 1.3).This indicates varieties may respond tocompaction and competition in different ways.

Wyalkatchem notably showed lesscompensation than the other varieties. Moreresearch is needed to clarify the effect of extraseed in the edge rows, the width of the baretramline, and the soil density under thetramline.

Fuzzy tramlines had the poorest yield in thetramline zone, especially Wyalkatchem witha 900 kg/ha penalty. Carnamah and Calingiriseemed best adapted to fuzzy tramline design.However, fuzzy tramlines still provide somein-crop guidance and weed control throughcompetition.

Shallow sown tramlines had the mostconsistent yield benefit in the tramline zone,

Table 1.3. Estimates of ryegrass and gross margins for different systems over a lupin-wheat phase using RIM model

Lupin year Wheat year

Ryegrass (seeds or plants/m2 ) % Seeds; Plants; Seeds; Plants;

control April Nov April NovRes.RG no G.selective, 70 500 151 5195 1173

normal agronomyGreen manure with simazine 99 500 3 155 35Inter-row shields on 80% width, 80 500 38 1487 336

no in-row controlInter-row shields +in-row control; 98 500 17 591 134

98% grass control

Gross margin $/ha 2 years Average over

2 years

Res.RG no G.selective, 21 110 131 65.5normal agronomy

Green manure with simazine -130 275 145 72.5Inter-row shields on 80% width, 29 172 201 100.5

no in-row controlInter-row shields +in-row control; 59 212 271 135.5

98% grass control

400

bare

fuzzy

sown

600

200

0

-200

-400

-600

-800

-1000

kg/h

a lo

ss o

r g

ain

of

yie

ld

Isd for variety

Wyalkatchem

Carnam

ah

Westonia

Calingiri

Figure 1.3. Grain yield loss or gain in the tramline zone (tramline width and both edge rows) for bare, fuzzy andsown tramlines and four varieties of wheat at Mullewa in 2003.

85

especially about 400 kg/ha in Westonia. Rowsof crop in the tramline offer no on-groundguidance. This could come from auto-steeroptions or central broad rows and wheel marksfrom tow-behind air seeders. Further benefitsof sown instead of fuzzy tramlines are thelevelling of rough running when the seedingdirection is changed from racetrack to parallel.The tramlines studied were not used forspraying, so late crop damage was notmeasured. It would be expected the yield inthe fuzzy and sown tramlines would be lowerif used for spraying tramlines.

1.5 Economics of tramline farmingSome growers are concerned that tramlinefarming is too expensive. A calculator wasdeveloped by the Western AustralianDepartment of Agriculture to predict theeconomic benefits gained on farms bycomparing the yield and input benefitsaccording to the area cropped and the degreeof precision available (Blackwell et al. 2002).

Four different cases were simulated using thecalculator, ranging from a low cost investmentin one marker arm and retaining a racetrack(round and round) pattern, to the mostexpensive option of DGPS auto-steer and atramline controller. These results assume thatthe seeder bar and boomspray already matchtwo or three to one, yields are 2 t/ha, on-farmprice for wheat is $150/t and costs are $60/hafor fertiliser and $40/ha for herbicides.Guidance costs may vary depending onsuppliers and developments in technology.

The figures used for yield benefits shown inTable 1.4 are based on trial results and on-farm measurements in Western Australia. Thetrial estimations have been reduced by 50 percent to conservatively estimate what a farmcropping operation can achieve, due to lessprecision than in the trial work.

In addition, when a tramline controller is usedto enable tramlines not used for spraying orspreading to be sown, an extra 0.5 per cent

yield increase is estimated for the extra yieldfrom plants in the tramlines.Overlap savings of five per cent for round andround operations and 10 per cent for up andback are assumed.

Results

Case 1. One marker arm, one fuzzy tramlineand operating round and round

As little as 500 ha of wheat crop grown withtramline farming could pay for the cost of onemarker arm ($2500) to work round and roundand leave fuzzy tramlines (Figure 1.4). This isa good introduction to the concept of tramlinefarming and enables an easier transition intoup and back operations, where there are muchbetter and longer term benefits from straighttramlines.

Case 2. Two marker arms and workingup and back in straight lines

Two marker arms and working up and backare the most common arrangement used byfarmers in Queensland and New South Waleswho adopted controlled traffic farming in thenineties. Some of these early users still feellittle need for electronic guidance, apart fromwhen establishing new tramlines. Once thetramlines are marked they can be visuallyfollowed during crop operations and insubsequent years.

One thousand hectares of wheat crop grownwith tramline farming will easily pay for thecost of two marker arms ($5000). Another pairto mount on the deep ripper would also bejustified (Figure 1.5).

Table 1.4. Actual and estimated improvements to wheat yield from different degrees of tramline farming. This is the first year of a wheat crop on sand, after deep ripping.

Conditions Trial estimated increase %

Conservative on-farm effect %

No matching tracks 0 0 Matching tracks, only 7 3.5 (50% of trial results) mechanical guidance

Matching tracks, with electronic 7 5 (closer to trial results guidance for all operations due to more precision

in driving)

Ap

pen

dix

86

Case 3. Two marker arms and a tramlinecontroller working up and back

The cost of the marker arms and controller canbe paid for in about 1000 ha of cropping fromoverlap savings and yield benefits (Figure 1.6).The controller also makes the spraying andspreading operations more efficient becausethere is less possible confusion about whichtramlines to use.

One marker arm round and round

140000130000120000

90000

110000100000

60000

8000070000

30000

5000040000

2000010000

0

Gro

ss m

arg

in (

$)

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000area cropped (ha)

Yield benefit

cost

3.5

%0

Figure 1.4. Estimated economic benefits of one marker arm, one fuzzy tramline working round and round. Grossmargins are based on 2 t/ha yield, $150/t on-farm price, $60/ha fertiliser cost and $40/ha herbicide cost. Ten percent input reduction. Yield benefit zero per cent equals overlap savings only; 3.5 per cent equals matching tracksand mechanical guidance.

Two marker arms up and back140000130000120000

90000

110000100000

60000

8000070000

30000

5000040000

2000010000

0

Gro

ss m

arg

in (

$)

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000area cropped (ha)

Yield benefit

cost

3.5

0

Figure 1.5. Estimated economic benefits of two marker arms working up and back. Gross margins are based on 2 t/ha yield, $150/t on-farm price, $60/ha fertiliser cost and $40/ha herbicide cost. Ten per cent input reduction. Yieldbenefit zero per cent equals overlap savings only; 3.5 per cent equals matching tracks and mechanical guidance.

Case 4. DGPS auto-steer and twosteering kits working up and back instraight lines

It would be difficult to pay for DGPS auto-steer(plus or minus 20 cm accuracy) and twosteering kits ($65,000) in one year from onlyoverlap savings. At least about 3000 ha ofsandplain cropping would be needed to pay offthe cost when there is good track matching

87

and auto-steer is used for seeding and sprayingoperations to obtain the full benefit of thesystem (Figure 1.7). A second steering kit maynot be required in the spraying tractor if baretramlines or some form of in-crop guidanceis used.

ConclusionsThis is a conservative estimate of benefitsbecause it is only calculated for the first yearof a tramline system. More realistic estimates

come from benefits calculated over a periodof years and are paid for by loans at anappropriate interest rate. The dollar values ofcrops and yield used in these calculations areon the low side of average to ensure aconservative analysis. This analysis does notinclude the benefits from other agronomicopportunities that are possible usingtramlines, for example shielded spraying, relayplanting and sowing into previous furrows.

Two marker arms and tramline controller

140000130000120000

90000

110000100000

60000

8000070000

30000

5000040000

2000010000

0

Gro

ss m

arg

in (

$)

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000area cropped (ha)

Yield benefit

cost

3.5

0

Figure 1.6. Estimated economic benefits of two marker arms and a tramline controller working up and back. Grossmargins are based on 2 t/ha yield, $150/t on-farm price, $60/ha fertiliser cost and $40/ha herbicide cost. Ten percent input reduction. Yield benefit zero per cent equals overlap savings only; 3.5 per cent equals matching tracksand mechanical guidance.

DGPS autosteer

140000130000120000

90000

110000100000

60000

8000070000

30000

5000040000

2000010000

0

Gro

ss m

arg

in (

$)

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000area cropped (ha)

Yield benefit

cost

3.5

0

5

Figure 1.7. Estimated economic benefits of DGPS auto-steer guidance working up and back. Gross margins arebased on 2 t/ha yield, $150/t on-farm price, $60/ha fertiliser cost and $40/ha herbicide cost. Ten per cent inputreduction. Ten per cent input reduction. Yield benefit zero per cent equals overlap savings only; 3.5 per cent equalsmatching tracks and mechanical guidance, 5 per cent equals DGPS, matching tracks and electronic guidance.

Ap

pen

dix

88

1.6. References

Blackwell, P.S., Webb, B., Lemon, J.L. andRiethmuller, G. (2003) Tramline Farming;pushing Controlled Traffic further forMediterranean Farming Systems in Australia.Proceedings of the 16th Triennial Conferenceof the International Soil and Tillage ResearchOrganisation, St Lucia, University ofQueensland, Brisbane, July 2003.

Blackwell, P.S., 1999–2001 Reports of yield andgross margin benefits from Tramline Farmingsystems for wheat, lupins and canola; as wellas shield spraying in lupins, Agribusiness CropUpdates 1999–2001; Perth Western Australia;Department of Agriculture.

Blackwell, P., Webb, B., McAlpine, S.(2002).Economics of Tramline farming systems,Farming Systems for Sustainability.Agribusiness Crop Updates. Perth, p 51-52.

Blackwell, P.S., Vlahov, V., Malcolm, G. andBaxter, R. (1995). Simplified on-far mcontrolled traffic systems in WesternAustralia. Proceedings of the First NationalControlled Traffic Conference. Yeppoon.Queensland.

Blackwell, P., Diamond, K., Diamond, N.(2002). Relay planting from Tramlines toincrease water use and productivity of summercrops, Farming Systems for Sustainability.Agribusiness Crop Updates. Perth. p 53-54.

Blunden, B.G., McBride, R.A., Daniel, H. andBlackwell, P.S. (1994), Compaction of anEarthy Sand by Rubber tracked and TyredVehicles, Australia Journal of Soil ScienceResearch 32:1095-1108.

Ellis, T.W., Sedaghatpour, S., Thomas, J.(1992). Three Years of Controlled TrafficCropping at Roseworthy. Conferenceproceedings Engineering in Agriculture.Albury. New South Wales. p109-114.

Tullberg, J. N. (2001). Controlled traffic forsustainable crop production. Proceedings ofthe 10th Australian Agronomy Conference.Hobart. 29th Jan 1st Feb.

Tullberg, J.N., Ziebarth, P.J. and Yuxia Li(2001). Tillage and traffic effects on run-off.Australian Journal of Soil Science 30: 249-257.

Tullberg, J. and Wylie, P. (1994). Energy inAgriculture, Conservation FarmingInformation Centre. Dalby. Queensland.

Yuxia Li, Tullberg, J.N. and Freebairn, D.M.(2001). Traffic and residue cover effects oninfiltration. Australian Journal of Soil Science39: 239-247.

Further reading:

Chapman, W., Blackwell, P., Webb, B., Tullberg,J., Walsh, P. and Cullian, A. (2003). Time toput machinery on right track. Farming AheadNo. 134. Kondinin Group. Cloverdale. p 18-31.

Farming Ahead No. 103, Controlled TrafficFarming Research Report, pages 28-42

White, B. (2003) Tests put GPS units on levelplaying field. Farming Ahead No 142.Kondinin Group. Cloverdale, p16-26.

Useful websiteswww.controlledtrafficfarming.comwww.agric.wa.gov.auwww.grdc.com.au

90

91

0115

2/2/

04-1

m W

est

Pri

nt M

anag

emen

t

bulletin 4607 issn 1448-0352 tramline farming systems · tramline farming systems technical manual...

Documents