Effect of Nozzle Type on Spray Drift in Banding Application

Article Preview

Abstract:

The most important problem that faces spraying application process in the field is spray losses as result to spray drift to non target areas by action of air flow. Spray drift from conventional TeeJet even flat nozzle TPE and Drift Guard Even flat nozzle DGE (pre orifice nozzle) for banding application was investigated and compared under wind tunnel conditions. This paper examined effect nozzle heights 50 and 60 cm on spray drift. To determine the effect of wind speed on spray drift, wind tunnel was used to product three cross wind speeds 1, 2 and 3m/s. According to the results from this study, nozzle type affected significantly the spray drift. Increasing wind speeds had a high significant effect on increasing the spray drift. Nozzle height affected significantly the spray drift, the closer the nozzle is to the ground, the more the likelihood of spray drift is minimized. This study supports the use of nozzle type DGE as a means for minimizing spray drift.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Info:

Periodical:

Pages:

520-525

Citation:

Online since:

December 2013

Export:

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Permissions PLS:

Сopyright:

© 2014 Trans Tech Publications Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Share:

Citation:

* - Corresponding Author

[1] J. H. Combellack: Weed Res. 22 (1982) 193–204.

Google Scholar

[2] S.C.K. Carlsen, N.H. Spliidand and B. Svensmark: Chemosphere. 64 (2006) 778-786.

Google Scholar

[3] S. Ghosh and J.C.R. Hunt : J. Fluid Mech. 365 (1998) 109-136.

Google Scholar

[4] C.S. Parkin and P.N. Wheeler: Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research. 63 (1996) 35-44.

Google Scholar

[5] J.C. Phillips and P.C.H. Miller: J. Agric. Eng. Res. 72(2) (1999) 161-170.

Google Scholar

[6] P.J. Walkate, P.C.H. Miller and A.J. Gilbert: Aspects of Applied Biology, Pesticide Application, 57 (2000) pp.49-56.

Google Scholar

[7] S.D. Murphy, P.C.H. Miller and C.S. Parkin: Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research. 75 (2000) 127-137.

Google Scholar

[8] P.C.H. Miller and E. M. C. Butler: Crop Protection. 19 (2000) 609-615.

Google Scholar

[9] H. Zhu, J.W. Dorner, D.L. Rowland, R.C. Derksen and H. E. Ozkan: Biosystems Eng. 87 (2004) 275-283.

DOI: 10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2003.11.012

Google Scholar

[10] E.W. Robert: Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service (2000).

Google Scholar

[11] Spraying System CO: catalog 51-m. USA (2011) pp.1-144.

Google Scholar

[12] P.C.H. Miller, A.G. Lane, C.M. Sullivan, C.R. Tuck and E.M.C. Butler: Aspects of Applied Biology 84. International Advances in Pesticide Application, (2008) p.9 –16.

Google Scholar

[13] L.E. Bode, B.J. Butler and C.E. Goering: Transactions of the ASAE, 19 (1976) 213-218.

Google Scholar

[14] P.C.H. Miller, M. C Butler, A.G. Lane, C.M.O. Sullivan and C.R. Tuck: Aspects of Applied Biology, Crop Protection in Southern Britain, 106, (2011) 281-288.

Google Scholar

[15] D. Nuyttens, M. De Schampheleire, K. Baetens, B. Sonck: Transactions of the ASABE, 50 (2007) 1129-1140.

DOI: 10.13031/2013.23622

Google Scholar

[16] H. Bahrouni, C. Sinfort and E. Hamza,. In Proceeding of The XVIIth World Congress of the International Commission of Agricultural Engineering (CIGR). 13-17 June. Québec, Canada (2010).

Google Scholar

[17] H. Guler, H. Zhu, E. Ozkan, R. Derksen and C. Krause: Journal of ASTM International, 3 (2006) 1-9.

Google Scholar

[18] E.M.E. Sehsah and A. Herbst: Misr J. Ag. Eng. 27 (2010) 438 – 464.

Google Scholar

[19] E.S.E. Southcombe, P.C. Miller, H. Ganzelmeier, J.C. Van De Zande, A. Miralles and A.J. Hewitt: Proceeding of the Brighton Crop Protection Conference Weeds 1997, p.371− 380.

Google Scholar