Spray drift: impact of requirements to protect the environment

Hewitt, Andrew

doi:10.1016/s0261-2194(00)00082-x

Cited by 78 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Spray droplet size is arguably one of the primary factors influencing both on-and off-target deposition of applied sprays (Hewitt 2000;Hewitt et al 2002). The ability to evaluate the effect that both spray nozzles and tank mix adjuvants have on the resulting drop size is critical.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurement and classification methods using the ASAE S572.1 reference nozzles

Fritz¹,

Hoffmann²,

Czaczyk³

et al. 2012

Journal of Plant Protection Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An increasing number of spray nozzle and agrochemical manufacturers are incorporating droplet size measurements into both research and development. Each laboratory invariably has their own sampling setup and procedures. This is particularly true about measurement distance from the nozzle and concurrent airflow velocities. Both have been shown to significantly impact results from laser diffraction instruments. These differences can be overcome through the use of standardized reference nozzles and relative spray classification categories. Sets of references nozzles, which defined a set of classification category thresholds, were evaluated for droplet size under three concurrent air flow velocities (0.7, 3.1 and 6.7 m/s). There were significant, though numerically small, differences in the droplet size data between identical reference nozzles. The resulting droplet size data were used to categorize a number of additional spray nozzles at multiple pressure and air flow velocities. This was done to determine if similar classifications were given across the different airspeeds. Generally, droplet size classifications agreed for all airspeeds, with the few that did not, only differing by one category. When reporting droplet size data, it is critical that data generated from a set of reference nozzles also be presented as a means of providing a relative frame of reference.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurement and classification methods using the ASAE S572.1 reference nozzles

Fritz¹,

Hoffmann²,

Czaczyk³

et al. 2012

Journal of Plant Protection Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A redução dos custos em função do manejo adequado pode resultar em aumento da produção sem, necessariamente, aumentar o uso de agrotóxicos e, como afirma Cunha (2008), é comum se dar muita importância aos agrotóxicos em virtude do seu potencial risco ambiental e notícias de contaminação de animais e seres humanos (Hewitt, 2000;Barcellos et al, 2005;Alister & Kogan, 2006) e pouca à técnica de aplicação empregada que poderá reduzir esses riscos potenciais (Cunha, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Deriva de equipamentos costais na aplicação de glyphosate

Rodrigues

Abi-Saab

Gandolfo

et al. 2015

Rev. bras. eng. agríc. ambient.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

R E S U M OObjetivou-se, neste trabalho, comparar o risco potencial de deriva provocada por três equipamentos que utilizam diferentes taxas de aplicação do herbicida glyphosate. Os equipamentos avaliados foram: pulverizador costal de acionamento manual, pulverizador costal pressurizado e um pulverizador de micronização centrífuga acionado eletricamente. Os equipamentos foram testados com as pontas de pulverização AXI 110015 e AXI 11003. O risco potencial de deriva foi avaliado em túnel de vento com coletas nas distâncias de 5, 10 e 15 m em relação ao local de pulverização e nas alturas de 0,2; 0,4; 0,6; 0,8 e 1,0 m em referência ao túnel de vento. O pulverizador de micronização centrífuga acionado eletricamente apresentou risco de deriva inferior aos demais equipamentos; a mesma ponta de pulverização, AXI 110015, avaliada em túnel de vento, pode oferecer risco de deriva diferente quando utilizada em pulverizadores costais de acionamento manual e pressurizado. Drift of glyphosate application using backpack sprayers A B S T R A C TThe aim of this research was to compare the potential risk of drift caused by three backpack sprayer in the application of glyphosate herbicide. The sprayers evaluated were: hand-held backpack sprayer, pressurized sprayer and electrically driven centrifugal sprayer. The hand-held backpack sprayer and pressurized sprayer were tested with AXI 110015 and AXI 11003 nozzles. The drift potential was evaluated in the samples collected at 5, 10 and 15 m distances and at 0.2; 0.4; 0.6; 0.8 and 1.0 m height in the tunnel. The electrically driven centrifugal sprayer showed lower drift in relation to other equipment. The same nozzles, AXI 110015, evaluated in the wind tunnel, can offer different drift potential when used in pressurized sprayers and hand-held backpack sprayer.Palavras-chave: herbicida pontas de pulverização tecnologia de aplicação pulverizadores costais

show abstract

“…The ease with which these substances can be used, their initial low cost and the lack of knowledge on the part of growers has led to an overuse of pesticides, with dangerous consequences. Only in the last few years have agricultural techniques brought about improvements in the pesticides used (Hewitt, 2000). There can be no doubt that advances in this field have provided a more effective range of choices, for growers and the environment in particular.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%