Development and evaluation of a remotely controlled and monitored self-propelled
            sprayer in tomato crops

Penido, Édilus de Carvalho Castro; Teixeira, Mauri Martins; Fernándes, Haroldo Carlos; Monteiro, Paulo Barros; Cecon, Paulo Roberto

doi:10.5935/1806-6690.20190002

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The final image of the multipurpose hybrid sprayer (Shabareesha et al, 2019). Penido et al (2019) developed and evaluated a remotely controlled and monitored self-propelled sprayer in tomato crops. The fundamental prototype comprises an agricultural mini tractor, a motorized pneumatic sprayer (atomizer), and a group of electronic and mechanical sensors and actuators, which permit the assembly to be controlled remotely and pictures captured by a video camera to be viewed on a tablet.…”

Section: Terrestrial Sprayingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Field sprayer technology: acritical overview

Elwakeel

Ahmed²,

Eldin³

et al. 2022

Al-Azhar Journal of Agricultural Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Farmers use different types of sprayers for the management of the pest. Successful pest management depends not only on the quality of the pesticide and insecticides but also on the use of the right plant protection appliances. Hence, proper selection based on ergonomic, economic, efficacy, and ecological and use of equipment for pesticide application has a direct effect on crop productivity. Normally, the spray efficiency, which usually is estimated by cost-income of the agricultural industry, increases from handoperated sprayers with low application rate, small coverage area in a certain time interval, and low travel speed to large-scale sprayers which could apply pesticide with much higher application rate, bigger coverage area in a certain time interval and higher travel speed. This research aims to identify and inventory the different types of pesticide application systems used around the world.

show abstract

Section: Terrestrial Sprayingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Field sprayer technology: acritical overview

Elwakeel

Ahmed²,

Eldin³

et al. 2022

Al-Azhar Journal of Agricultural Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Tractor steering teleoperation control with fuzzy PID algorithm based on delay time measurement with timestamp

Lü

et al. 2020

2020 Chinese Automation Congress (CAC)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Development and Evaluation of a Prototype Self-Propelled Crop Sprayer for Agricultural Sustainability in Small Farms

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In most Asian countries, farmers have smallholdings ranging from one to two hectares. The tractor-mounted boom sprayers cannot practically be used in small size farms with divided plots and complex terrain. To cope with these issues, a prototype self-propelled crop sprayer was developed, including a 20-hp engine, 300 L liquid tank, and hydraulically-controlled spray boom with eight hollow cone nozzles. The spray symmetry of the hollow cone nozzle was evaluated under four pressures (2.5, 3, 3.5, and 4 bar) in the laboratory. The operating parameters of the sprayer, such as forward speed (4, 6, and 8 km h−1), spray height (40, 55, and 70 cm), and pressure (3, 5, and 7 bar) were optimized by measuring three spray characteristics including droplet density, coverage percentage, and Volume Median Diameter (VMD) in the cotton field. The results revealed that the nozzle spray was symmetrical at 2.5 and 3 bar pressure as the R2 value was higher than 0.96. The field test result showed that in all treatments, treatments T14 (6 km h−1, 55 cm, 5 bar) and T22 (8 km h−1, 55 cm, 3 bar) were suitable for spraying medium-to-low concentration solution (post-emergence herbicides and fungicides) and high concentration solution (insecticides and pre-emergence herbicides), respectively. The spray characteristics at treatments T14 and T22 were 64.7 droplets cm−2, 26.7%, 230 µm, and 39 droplets cm−2, 14.9%, and 219.8 µm respectively. The field efficiency of the sprayer was 61%. The spraying cost per unit area was 55–64% less compared to manual labor cost. In conclusion, a prototype self-propelled crop sprayer is an efficient and environment-friendly technology for small farms. Operating the sprayer at the optimal parameters also saves operational costs and time.

show abstract

Development and evaluation of a remotely controlled and monitored self-propelled sprayer in tomato crops

Cited by 3 publications

References 2 publications

Field sprayer technology: acritical overview

Field sprayer technology: acritical overview

Tractor steering teleoperation control with fuzzy PID algorithm based on delay time measurement with timestamp

Development and Evaluation of a Prototype Self-Propelled Crop Sprayer for Agricultural Sustainability in Small Farms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About