Automatic control of water and fertilizer integration main buyer country

When they talk aboutautomatic control of water and fertilizer integration, they immediately imagine complex panels with sensors - but in reality, the key buyer most often looks at three things: reliability in the field, ease of calibration and the ability to work with local agrochemicals. This gap between the “technical picture” and real needs - what you encounter when delivering to the CIS regions.

Main mistakes when selecting equipment

Often customers demand maximum automation, but do not take into account water quality. I've seen cases wherewater and fertilizer integration systemsfailed due to hard water - salt clogged the injectors over the course of the season. We had to install additional filters, which increased the cost by 15–20%. This is a nuance that is not written in catalogs, but it is critical for long-term work.

Another point is compatibility with local fertilizers. Some imported plants are designed for liquid forms, but we still actively use powder forms. If the concentration is incorrect, a sediment appears that clogs the entire system. We have to modify the mixing units - sometimes we simply increase the volume of the tank and install an additional mixer.

By the way, about temperature conditions. In Kazakhstan, for example, changes from +35°C during the day to +10°C at night in the summer are the norm. This affects the viscosity of fertilizers and dosage accuracy. We have to add thermal compensation to the algorithms, although initially it was not included in the basic versions.

Practical cases of system adaptation

Last year we supplied equipment for a greenhouse complex near Almaty. The customer insisted on a European system, but after the first season they were faced with the problem of calibrating EC sensors - local water gave an error of up to 20%. We switched to a hybrid solution: the basic automation was supplemented with manual correction valves. Not perfect, but works reliably.

There was an interesting experience with drip irrigation in Uzbekistan. Therebuyer's main countryoften requires compatibility with existing infrastructure. We had to integrate the new control system with the old Soviet pumping stations. They made transition modules - more expensive, but cheaper than a complete replacement.

The demand for remote control is growing, but not everywhere there is a stable Internet. In some areas, GSM modems with periodic connections are still used. You have to configure command buffering and local data storage.

Technical nuances that are rarely written about in instructions

pH sensors are a different story. In the field, they need to be calibrated every 2-3 weeks, rather than quarterly, as manufacturers recommend. Dust, humidity changes, solar radiation - all this reduces accuracy. We add service contracts with frequent checks.

Energy consumption seems like a small thing, but in remote farms it is critical. A standard system with frequency converters and sensors can consume 3–5 kW/hour. With limited capacity, work cycles must be optimized, sometimes sacrificing response speed.

Control interfaces - I still see farms where it is easier for operators to work with mechanical buttons than with touch screens. Dust, dirt, working with gloves - all this affects the choice of controls.

Experience of Shandong Linyao Intelligent Agriculture Technology Co.,Ltd

Our companyShandong Linyao Intelligent Agriculture Technology Co.,LtdI started with simple filtration systems, but gradually came to complex solutions. Nowintegration of water and fertilizers- this is 60% of our projects. The peculiarity is that we do not just supply equipment, but adapt it to specific conditions: from water quality to personnel qualifications.

Last year we implemented a project in the Fergana Valley - we modernized the irrigation system for an apple orchard. The main difficulty was that there was a heterogeneous network: some of the pipes were laid back in the 80s, some were modern HDPE. We had to develop transitional solutions and step-by-step automation.

We are currently testing a system that predicts the need for fertilizers based on data from weather stations. It’s too early to talk about the results - there are problems with accuracy in conditions of sudden weather changes. But even the basic option, adjusted for temperature and humidity, provides fertilizer savings of up to 12–15%.

Prospects and limitations of technology

The main barrier is not the cost of equipment, but personnel training. I have seen modern systems that were idle because agronomists were afraid to set them up. Now in new projects we immediately lay down three-stage training: basic familiarization, practical setup and solving typical problems.

It's interesting to watch the development of wireless technology. LoRaWAN in agriculture is promising, but still expensive for mass implementation. In the next 2-3 years, I think more affordable solutions will appear.

Cautomatic controlthere is also a downside - some farms rely too much on technology, forgetting about agronomic control. No system can replace regular plant inspection and soil analysis. Technology should help, and not completely replace a specialist.

Conclusions for practitioners

If we considerautomatic control of water and fertilizer integrationas an investment - the payback in our conditions is 2-4 seasons. But only with proper adaptation and service support. There are no universal solutions; each project requires individual configuration.

When choosing equipment, look not at the number of functions, but at maintainability and availability of spare parts. Sometimes a simple system with the ability to quickly repair is better than a complex one that sits idle for weeks waiting for a specialist.

And most importantly, start with a pilot site. Even if you plan to automate your entire farm, first test the system on 10–15 hectares. This will allow you to identify specific problems in your production without major risks.