Affiliation:
1. Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, University of Georgia, Tifton, GA 31793, USA
2. Department of Entomology, University of Georgia, Tifton, GA 31793, USA
Abstract
Ground speed variations are common and unavoidable during pesticide applications with agricultural sprayers. Field tests were conducted to evaluate the effect of varying ground speeds on spray deposition and quality with a commercial agricultural boom sprayer without a rate controller (CNS) in 2021 and equipped with a rate controller (SRC) in 2022. During each year, the sprayer boom was split evenly among three different nozzle types (XRC, AIXR, and TTI) to attain different droplet sizes (medium, very coarse, and ultra-coarse, respectively). Prior to testing, the sprayer was calibrated to deliver an application rate of 187 L ha−1 at a spray pressure of 207 kPa and ground speed of 9.7 km h−1. For spray deposition and quality assessment, pesticide applications were made at five different ground speeds of 9.7, 12.9, 16.1, 19.3, and 22.5 km h−1, and data were collected by placing water-sensitive paper at different locations across the sprayer boom and in the field. Results for CNS indicated that spray deposition reduced significantly (p < 0.05) with an increase in ground speed across all three nozzle types, primarily due to a decrease in the quantity of spray droplets applied per unit area. The quantity of spray droplets and spray deposition was more consistent among the ground speeds for SRC. Ground speed affected spray quality for both CNS and SRC; however, the spray quality variations were greater for SRC due to an increase in spray pressure with ground speed. Among nozzle types, the trends in spray deposition and quality were similar for the XRC and TTI nozzles as observed for CNS and SRC. However, the AIXR nozzle showed inconsistent spray deposition and quality as ground speed varied. The results of this study indicated agricultural sprayers equipped with a rate controller provide adequate and consistent spray deposition compared to conventional sprayers (no rate controller) when ground speed changes occur during pesticide applications. While spray quality is also affected when using a rate controller, best management practices including proper nozzle selection and application at nominal ground speeds should be followed to minimize these effects and ensure effective technology utilization.
Funder
Georgia Peanut Commission
National Peanut Board
Subject
Engineering (miscellaneous),Horticulture,Food Science,Agronomy and Crop Science
Reference32 articles.
1. [USDA-NASS] (2022, November 13). United States Department of Agriculture-National Agricultural Statistics Service. 2021 Agricultural Chemical Use Highlights, Available online: https://www.nass.usda.gov/Surveys/Guide_to_NASS_Surveys/Chemical_Use/.
2. Fernandez-Cornejo, J., Nehring, R.F., Osteen, C., Wechsler, S., Martin, A., and Vialou, A. (2014). Pesticide Use in US Agriculture: 21 Selected Crops, 1960–2008, United States Department of Agriculture. USDA-ERS Economic Information Bulletin 124.
3. [USDA-NASS] (2022, November 11). United States Department of Agriculture-National Agricultural Statistics Service. 2021 U.S. Farm Production Expenditures, Available online: https://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/Highlights/2022/2021_FarmExpenditures.pdf.
4. Monitoring controller-based field sprayer performance;Ayers;Appl. Eng. Agric.,1994
5. An investigation of factors affecting sprayer control system performance;Ayers;Appl. Eng. Agric.,1990
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献