The Effect of Power Sources in the Agricultural Tractor and the Developed Sprayer System on the Performance of the Electrical and Mechanical Sprayer System and some Performance Indicators of the Engine

Abstract

An experiment was conducted to study the effect of the sprayer type according to the source of power and the size of the spray nozzle concerning the quality of the spray produced and fuel consumption.Two types of sprayers were used: a conventional boom sprayer (S1) and a modified (electrified) boom sprayer (S2), along with three sizes of the XR TeeJet 110 spray nozzle (N). The following technical performance indicators were examined: Density of coverage (drops/cm2) using ImageJ software, a 600dpi business card scanner, specifically the ScanShell 800N by CSSN, Inc, and water-sensitive paper (WSP), rate of spray nozzles discharge (ml/min), and fuel consumption (liters/hectare) using a calibrated cylinder, and the percentage of weed control by sampling treated and untreated weeds. The experiment was designed as a complete randomized block design in the order of the system (Nested design). Sprayer type had significant effect on spray coverage and nozzle discharge rate. The conventional boom sprayer resulted in a coverage of 169.5 drops/cm2, while the modified (electrified) boom sprayer achieved only 149.4 drops/cm2. The discharge rate was 707.5 ml/min when using the conventional boom sprayer, compared to 671.2 ml/min with lower pesticide consumption when using the modified (electrified) boom sprayer.The smaller-sized XR TeeJet 110.015 VP nozzle (N1) outperformed the other nozzle sizes in terms of coverage (178.7 drops/cm2), weed control percentage (84.56%), and lower pesticide consumption (lower nozzle discharge) of 490.4 ml/min.