Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T23:18:21.108Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sweet pepper maturity evaluation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2017

B. Harel ,
P. Kurtser ,
Y. Parmet  and
Y. Edan
B. Harel*
Affiliation:
Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel
P. Kurtser
Affiliation:
Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel
Y. Parmet
Affiliation:
Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel
Y. Edan
Affiliation:
Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

This paper focuses on maturity evaluation derived by a color camera for a sweet pepper robotic harvester. Different color and morphological features for sweet pepper maturity were evaluated. Side view and bottom view of sweet paper were analyzed and compared for their ability to classify into 4 maturity classes. The goal of this study was to differentiate between the two center classes which are difficult to separate. Statistical analysis of 13 different features in reliance to the maturity classification and the views indicated the best features for classification. The results show that the features that can be used for classification between the two central classes from both bottom and side views are: Hue range, Equal2Real – the ratio between the equivalent equal sized circle perimeter to the shape perimeter and Area2Peri – the ratio between the area to the perimeter.

Keywords

Computer visionFruit maturityRobotic harvestingSweet peppersAgricultural robots
Type
Crop Sensors and Sensing
Information
Advances in Animal Biosciences , Volume 8 , Special Issue 2: Papers presented at the 11th European Conference on Precision Agriculture (ECPA 2017), John McIntyre Centre, Edinburgh, UK, July 16–20 2017 , July 2017 , pp. 167 - 171
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bac, CW, Eldert, JH, Jochen, H and Edan, Y 2014. Harvesting Robots for High-Value Crops: State-of-the-Art Review and Challenges Ahead. Journal of Field Robotics 31, 888–911.Google Scholar
Brosnan, Tadhg and Da-Wen, S 2004. Improving Quality Inspection of Food Products by Computer Vision––a Review. Journal of Food Engineering 61 (1), 3–16.Google Scholar
Edan, Y 1995. Design of an Autonomous Agricultural Robot. Applied Intelligence 5, 41–50.Google Scholar
Edan, Y, Dima, R, Tamar, F and Gaines, EM 2000. Robotic Melon Harvesting. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation 16 (6), 831–835.Google Scholar
Frank, CA, Nelson, RG, Simonne, EH, Behe, BK and Simonne, HA 2001. Consumer Preferences for Color, Price, and Vitamin C Content of Bell Peppers. HortScience 36 (4), 795–800.Google Scholar
Gomes, Juliana FS and Fabiana, RL 2012. Applications of Computer Vision Techniques in the Agriculture and Food Industry: A Review. European Food Research and Technology 235 (6), 989–1000.Google Scholar
Harel, B, Kurtser, P, Van Herck, L, Parmet, Y and Edan, Y 2016. Sweet Pepper Maturity Evaluation via Multiple Viewpoints Color Analyses. in CIGR-AgEng Conference. Aarhus, Denmark.Google Scholar
Jayas, DS, Paliwal, J and Visen, NS 2000. Review Paper (AE—Automation and Emerging Technologies). Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 77 (2), 119–128.Google Scholar
Jochen, H, Jos, R, Jan, WH and Eldert, JH 2014. Fruit Detectability Analysis for Different Camera Positions in Sweet-Pepper. Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) 14 (4), 6032–6044.Google Scholar
Jun, Q, Akira, S, Sakai, S and Naoshi, K 2012. Extracting External Features of Sweet Peppers Using Machine Vision System on Mobile Fruits Grading Robot. International Journal of Food Engineering 8 (3), 22.Google Scholar
Kader, AA 1999. Fruit Maturity, Ripening, and Quality Relationships. Acta Horticulturae 485, 203–208.Google Scholar
Kitamura, S and Oka, K 2005. Recognition and Cutting System of Sweet Pepper for Picking Robot in Greenhouse Horticulture. IEEE International Conference Mechatronics and Automation 4, 1807–1812.Google Scholar
Kitamura, S, Oka, K, Ikutomo, K, Kimura, Y and Taniguchi, Y 2008. A Distinction Method for Fruit of Sweet Pepper Using Reflection of LED Light. Proceedings of the SICE Annual Conference 1, 491–494.Google Scholar
Li, Changyong, Qixin, C and Feng, G 2009. A Method for Color Classification of Fruits Based on Machine Vision. WSEAS Transactions on Systems 8 (2), 312–321.Google Scholar
Lorente, D, Aleixos, N, Gómez-Sanchis, J, Cubero, S, García-Navarrete, OL and Blasco, J 2012. Recent Advances and Applications of Hyperspectral Imaging for Fruit and Vegetable Quality Assessment. Food and Bioprocess Technology 5, 1121–1142.Google Scholar
Mitcham, Beth, Marita, Cantwell and Adel, K 1996. Methods for Determining Quality of Fresh Commodities. Perishables Handling Newsletter 85, 1–5.Google Scholar
Ram, Tomer, Zeev, W, Israel, P and Edan, Y 2010. Olive Oil Content Prediction Models Based on Image Processing. Biosystems Engineering 105 (2), 221–232.Google Scholar
Tantrakansakul, Piyaphat and Thanate, K 2014. The Classification Flesh Aromatic Coconuts in Daylight. 2014 11th International Conference on Electrical Engineering/Electronics, Computer, Telecommunications and Information Technology (ECTI-CON) 1–5.Google Scholar
Wang, Qi, Hui, W, Lijuan, X and Qin, Z 2012. Outdoor Color Rating of Sweet Cherries Using Computer Vision. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 87, 113–120.Google Scholar