3 ms·
Like 3d printing, I think this only solves problems for a small subset of the people who will buy this. In the case of 3d printing, industrial engineers could
by mikebelanger 10y ago
Like 3d printing, I think this only solves problems for a small subset of the people who will buy this. In the case of 3d printing, industrial engineers could prototype things much faster, before ultimately sending it to a factory for large scale production. In the case of FarmBot, I can see some agriculture scientists working in greenhouses benefiting from automating the planting, testing and controlling of certain crops. Especially if precise timing and its documentation are needed.
But for the average consumer, this doesn't seem particularly economical. Automation of this kind of thing only makes sense when you have a significantly larger field. I still think this is a great idea, but I think its reach is a bit overstated.
- sharpercoder 10y agoThe design looks reasonably scalable.
- dzhiurgis 10y agoWouldn't arm design be much simpler though?
- mikebelanger 10y agoAn arm would be simpler, but might get awkward for larger plots. Some kind of self-driving vehicle with an arm might be the most scaleable.
- randomdata 10y agoBut for larger scale operations, does it scale any better than the existing technology, which is also pretty much fully automated these days? Take soybeans. Typically you want to plant around 130,000 seeds per acre. I estimate by the video that it takes about three seconds to plant a single seed. That's four days just to plant a single acre of land. The John Deere DB120 planter claims to be able to plant 75 acres per hour. Naturally, you can add more of these machines, but with that goes up the cost and complexity. I'm not so certain the economics would favour such a device.