Spray techniques: how to optimise spray deposition 
and minimise spray drift

Zande, J.C. van de; Huijsmans, J.F.M.; Porskamp, H.A.J.; Michielsen, J.M.G.P.; Stallinga, H.; Holterman, H.J.; Jong, Adriaan de

doi:10.1007/s10669-007-9036-5

Cited by 34 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However it should be noted that this conclusion regarding the soil cover is based on data from one author only. The interception values recommended by FOCUS (2002) were based on publications by Becker et al (1999), Ganzelmeier (1997 and Van de Zande et al (2000) and described in more detail by Linders et al (2000). The experimental field data referred to in these publications are limited.…”

Section: Correlation Between Soil Cover and Interceptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The estimated interception values were compared against some field data from literature by Becker et al (1999). Linders et al (2000) compared some of the data against field data reported by Van de Zande et al (2000) but did not alter the estimated values. Some criteria and rules were used to estimate the interception values (personal communication Ton van der Linden).…”

Section: Correlation Between Soil Cover and Interceptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Collection and evaluation of relevant information on crop interception for the revision of the Guidance Document on Persistence in Soil

Beinum

Beulke

2010

EFSA Supporting Publications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A literature search was carried out on behalf of EFSA to collect measurements of spray interception by crops. Various methods were used in literature for measuring interception and for deriving the interception values from the measurements. Advantages and disadvantages of the different methodologies are discussed. Reported measurements for interception by cereal crops were collated in a database, together with any additional information regarding the data, such as information related to the crop or the sprayer equipment. Interception values were calculated from the reported measurements and listed in the database.The interception values for cereals were analysed and compared with the FOCUS interception values currently used for PEC soil and groundwater calculations. Factors that may have affected interception were analysed and discussed, as well as the relationship between interception and the soil cover of the crop at the time of spray application. Based on the available data, the FOCUS values seem to overestimate interception during tillering (GS20-29) and during the final growth stages (GS70-99), while interception is underestimated during the later part of stem elongation (GS33-39). CFT/EFSA/PPR/2009/02. Accepted for Publication in October 2010Spray interception by crops during pesticide application 2The present document has been produced and adopted by the bodies identified above as author(s). This task has been carried out exclusively by the author(s) in the context of a contract between the European Food Safety Authority and the author(s), awarded following a tender procedure. The present document is published complying with the transparency principle to which the European Food Safety Authority is subject. It may not be considered as an output adopted by EFSA. EFSA reserves its rights, view and position as regards the issues addressed and the conclusions reached in the present document, without prejudice to the rights of the authors.The crop interception table currently used for PEC soil and groundwater calculations was compiled by members of the FOCUS groundwater group (FOCUS, 2000). Limited experimental data was available to the workgroup when these interception values were established. The aim of this project was to collate any data on interception by crops from publicly available literature and to analyse the data in relation to the current FOCUS values (FOCUS, 2002).A literature search was performed to retrieve available literature that reports measurements of spray interception by agricultural crops. Nineteen reference databases were searched using the Dialog host for terms related to "deposition" or "interception". The search terms and logic are set out in Chapter 2 of this report. More than 2000 references were found. The relevance of the literature references was checked against a list of minimal criteria. Where necessary the full articles were retrieved. A reference list was compiled for rejected references with their reason for rejection. A total of 55 references with relevant crop interception...

show abstract

Section: Correlation Between Soil Cover and Interceptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Correlation Between Soil Cover and Interceptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collection and evaluation of relevant information on crop interception for the revision of the Guidance Document on Persistence in Soil

Beinum

Beulke

2010

EFSA Supporting Publications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to the Chinese Civil Aviation Industry Standards, measuring droplet drift materials are usually polyethylene wire, glass, filter paper, water sensitive paper, chromatography and other methods. Many domestic and foreign experts and scholars researched on aerial spraying operation efficacy [18][19][20][21] . Some used water sensitive paper and mylar card to analyze the deposition parameters.…”

Section: Introduction mentioning

confidence: 99%

Drift and deposition of pesticide applied by UAV on pineapple plants under different meteorological conditions

Wang

Lan

Zhang

et al. 2018

International Journal of Agricultural and Biological Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spray drift has always been a focus research area in the field of unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) application. Under the fixed premises of UAV operating parameters, such as height, speed and spraying liquid, the droplet drift is mainly affected by meteorological conditions. In this research, the spray drift and deposition tests were conducted using a QuanFeng120 UAV in a pineapple field under various different meteorological conditions. The experimental results showed that with the changes of UAV operating height and wind speed, the start position of the in-swath deposition area changed 4 m in the extreme situation. The percentage of the total spray drift was from 15.42% to 55.76%. The position of cumulative spray drift that accounted for 90% of the total spray drift was from 3.70 m to 46.50 m relative to the flight line. According to the downwind spray drift curve, the nonlinear equations of the same type under the four operating conditions of the UAV were fitted. The spray drift and the deposition of UAV application were significantly affected by different meteorological conditions and UAV operating heights. The results could provide a theoretical basis for UAV spraying in pineapple plants and support for spray drift control and prediction.

show abstract

“…Generally, studies on spray characterization involve nozzles that are spraying vertically downwards, as it is the case for boom sprayers. However, in vineyards or in orchards, the liquid is sprayed horizontally, or even upwards, and may lead to more airborne drift than that in arable crops [7]. That is the reason why it would be worthwhile to assess spray nozzles in horizontal position as well as in vertical position.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Nozzle Orientation on Droplet Size and Droplet Velocity from Vineyard Sprays

Vallet¹,

Tinet²,

Douzals³

2015

JAST-B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spray drift has become an important issue in pesticide application. Vineyard spraying is particularly interesting to consider, as pesticide droplets are not directed towards the ground but rather towards the targeted crop. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of nozzle orientation on droplet size and droplet velocity using three different nozzles (IDK, TVI and TXA) used in vineyards. Two series of measurement were performed in order to assess the effect of the gravity on sprays. Droplet size and one-dimensional droplet velocity characteristics were measured using a phase Doppler particle analyser (PDPA). Two planes, i.e., one horizontal and one vertical, were considered. Results suggest that the nozzle orientation slightly affects the size distribution, which is shifted towards larger droplets when nozzles spray horizontally compared to vertically spray. However, droplet axial velocity distribution is shifted towards lower values. Supposing that the only droplets which can reach the crop are those with an axial velocity greater than 1 m/s and a diameter larger than 100 µm, results showed significant differences according to the nozzle and orientation. More than 98.6% of the spray volume would reach the target whatever the orientation of the IDK nozzle, 78.8% of the spray volume would reach the crop when the TVI nozzle sprays horizontally, while only 16.0% of the spray volume would reach the crop when TXA nozzle sprays horizontally. This paper offers new perspectives in the comprehension and the optimization of the deposition process into the vegetation based from droplet size and velocity profiles from horizontally oriented sprays from flat fan or hollow cone nozzles.

show abstract

Spray techniques: how to optimise spray deposition and minimise spray drift

Cited by 34 publications

References 4 publications

Collection and evaluation of relevant information on crop interception for the revision of the Guidance Document on Persistence in Soil

Collection and evaluation of relevant information on crop interception for the revision of the Guidance Document on Persistence in Soil

Drift and deposition of pesticide applied by UAV on pineapple plants under different meteorological conditions

Effect of Nozzle Orientation on Droplet Size and Droplet Velocity from Vineyard Sprays

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About