Topic of Discussion: High Speed Optical Sorting in the Field Winemaking Viticulture.
-
Upload
derrick-nichols -
Category
Documents
-
view
218 -
download
0
Transcript of Topic of Discussion: High Speed Optical Sorting in the Field Winemaking Viticulture.
Topic of Discussion:High Speed Optical Sorting in the
Field
Winemaking
Viticulture
Winemaking
Viticulture
Some Key Optical Equipment Features
• Session Long Productivity• Instantaneous Productivity• Session Long “Bi-Product” • Instantaneous “Bi-Product”• Average Berry Size Measurement (mm)• Min and Max Berry Size• Color
– Green Berries– Pink*
• Uniformity of Shape• Pips
Winemaking
Viticulture
Sorting Productivity
• Hand Tons Per 8 Hours– Range: 15-33~ Tons– Average: 25~ Tons– Ave Tons/Hour: 3.1 T/A
• Selectiv Machine Tons Per 8 Hours– Range: 25-45~ Tons– Average: 35~ Tons– Ave Tons/Hour: 4.4 T/A
Winemaking
Viticulture
Bi-Product Details
• Rachis Weight– Range: 4 to 12%~– Average: 6%~
• Optical Sorting Bi-Product– Range: 0.5-11%~– Average: 2.5%~
Artificial intelligence
Image analyzed by
artificial intelligence
Raw image of the color
scanner
SORTED MATERIAL EXPERIMENT(POST DE-STEMMER)
Sorted Fruit Stream
Optically Sorted Fruit94.6 % Berries (mostly whole)
3.5% Raisins 0.4% MOG 1.5% Juice
MOG
Raisins Whole Berries
Broken Berries & SkinsRejected Stream
19.7%
31.8%33.6%
11.1%
51.5%
Control
Sorted
Rejected
Pictures of must in fermenter during cold soak (2nd punch down).
Volume of Sorted vs. Rejected Fruit.
1.5% “loss” of “good fruit”
Winemaking
Viticulture
Vineyard Operations Impact; Reality Check
• Example:– 8X5 Spaced Vineyard– 2 Drop Clusters x 0.26 lbs = 0.52 lbs– 0.3~ t/a x 4.5 acres = 1.4 tons “Dropped”– 50% “good fruit” in cluster x 1.4 tons= 0.7 tons– 1,400 lbs “good fruit” in reject stream– Lose 3.5 x’s more “good fruit”
@ two clusters dropped per vine
Out of site out of mind….
Winemaking
Viticulture
Vineyard Operations Impact; Reality Check
No labor costs in the field to drop the fruit.
Changing thinning attitudes in vineyard.
HY10 Optical Sorter Trial @ RMW 10/28/10 Comparison of Sorted and Rejected Fruit
0
200
400
600
800
1000
Gra
ms
of
Re
co
ve
red
Ma
teri
al P
er
Kilo
gra
m o
f S
am
ple
(S
ort
ed n
=20
/ Rej
ecte
d n
=10)
Grape Material (g) Raisins (g) MOG (g)
MOG (g) 3.65 336.04
Raisins (g) 35.42 111.62
Grape Material (g) 946.68 515.40
Sorted Stream Rejected Stream
Summary Conclusions:Reduced capital investment for wineries (W $)Fewer winery crush days/hours/minutes (W $)Less money spent on labor thinning (G $)Less “good fruit” being dropped during thinning (G $)Increased hang time (W $)Mechanical harvested and sorted fruit is superior to SOP hand picked fruit* (G&W $)
Napa Wine/Vit Tech
1. Improve the quality of Napa Valley Wines
2. Provide some technical information to members
4. Aid members in solving technical winemaking and viticulture problems
5. Carry on enological and viticulture research
Twitter: @WalshVineyardsFacebook: facebook.com/WalshVineyardsYouTube: Walsh Vineyards Management ChannelWeb: www.walshvineyards.com
Thank You