Study of the operational parameters of crops turbine sprayer (turbo liner) on spray quality and diameter of droplets, using image processing

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

• F. Behzadi Pour
• M. Ghasemi-Nejad Raeini
• M. A. Asoodar
• A. Marzban
• S. Abdanan Mehdizadeh

Department of Mechanics of Biosystem Engineering, Khuzestan, Ramin Agriculture and Natural Resources University, Khuzestan, Iran

https://doi.org/10.22067/jam.v7i1.48194

Abstract

Introduction
Today, attention to safety and environmental issues in all sectors in agriculture, industry and services is very important. Chemical poisons play an important role in rapid progress of agricultural products. Every year about 25 to 35 percent of the world's crops are affected by insects, weeds and plant pathogens disappear and this figure would be raised to 80% if no control was applied. Drift problem and its devastating effects are the most important issue which related to users and sprayers manufacturers. Spray drift reduction and improvements in the efficiency of pesticide application processes are global goals. Where ever spraying is applied, drift will be produced and it must be controlled by controlled of the droplet size. The application of these sprayers is the high in the farms (the number of 2303 in Iran). So, this research was carried out to improve the quality of work in these sprayers by studying the droplets diameter and the spray quality index.
Materials and Methods
The research was conducted at the University of Khouzestan Ramin Agriculture and Natural Resources. Tests were done with 20 m of water sensitive papers at a distance of 2 meters from each other. To evaluate the technical items affecting on drift, an experiment was conducted using a turbo liner sprayer (TURBINA S.A. 800) and the John Deer (JD) 3140 tractor. A completely randomized factorial design was applied. By using 3 replications and the factors were spraying pressure applying three levels (10, 25 and 35 bar), the fan speed with two levels (1998 and 2430 rpm) and forward speed with two levels (9 and 13.5 km hr-1). The sprayer started the application, spraying a solution of water and tracer (yellow Tartrazine E 102), 15m before the water sensitive papers and then moved over the water sensitive papers. The spraying was continued 15 m after the end of the sampling area. After spraying, sensitive papers were photographed and then volume diameter of 50% (DV50) and median numerical diameter (NMD) and spraying quality indicator were calculated. A Spectrophotometry device at the wavelength of 427 nm, Image J and sas 9.2 software were used for measurement. This research was carried out in accordance with the calendar crop canola spraying in field conditions and the weather was calm that the wind speed was 0- 2.5 km hr^-1, relative humidity was 29.7% - 32.5% and air temperature was 18.8˚C – 20.7˚C.
Results and Discussion
According to the results sprayer pressure, fan speed and forward speed were shown significantly different (P≤0.01) on the volume diameter of 50% (DV50) and median numerical diameter (NMD). The effect of spraying pressure on distributing quality indicator was shown significant (P ≤ 0.01), but the fan and forward speed did not shown any significant effect. Mean comparison of the interaction of pressure and forward speed on the spray quality index and the number median diameter were shown significant (P ≤ 0.01), but they did not shown any significant effect on the volume diameter of 50% (DV50). With increasing spraying pressure and fan speed, the droplet size, volume diameter of 50% (DV50) at 72% and numerical median diameter (NMD) at 69% and distributing quality indicator at 46% were decreased that were corresponded with the result of Czaczyk et al. (2012), Peyman et al. (2011), Nuyttens et al. (2009) and Landers and Farooq (2004). With increasing spraying pressure and forward speed, the droplet size, numerical median diameter (NMD) at 63% and distributing quality indicator at 35% were decreased that these resulted were corresponded with the results of Naseri et al. (2007) and Dorr et al. (2013).
Conclusion
With increasing spraying pressure, fan and forward speed, the droplet size, volume diameter of 50% (DV50) and numerical median diameter (NMD) were decreased. Therefore, spraying quality indicator was decreased. The maximum pressure (35 bars), maximum fan speed (2430 rpm) and maximum forward speed (13.5 km hr^-1) were able to produce the minimum spraying quality indicator (10.3). At the minimum pressure (10 bars), maximum fan speed (2430 rpm) and minimum forward speed (9 km hr^-1), the maximum spraying quality indicator (2.91) was resulted.

Keywords

• Drift
• Image processing
• Turbo linear sprayer
• Volume diameter
• Spray uniformity

20.1001.1.22286829.1396.7.1.6.1

Main Subjects

• Image Processing

References

1. Balsari, P., E. Gil, P. Marucco, M. Gallart, C. Bozzer, C. Llop, and M. Tamagnone. 2014. Study and development of a test methodology to assess potential drift generated by air- assisted sprayers. DiSAFA Crop protection Technology (Italy) and Politechnic University of Catalonia – DEAB (Spain): 9.

2. Balsari, P., P. Marucco, and M. Tamagnone. 2007. A test bench for the classification of boom sprayers according to drift risk.Crop protection. 26: 1482-1489.

3. Czaczyk, Z., G. Kruger, and A. Hewitt. 2012. Droplet size classification of air induction flat fan nozzles. Journal of plant protection research 52 (4): 415-420.

4. Daneshjoo, M. A., M. H. Abbaspour-Fard, M. H. Aghkhani, and M. Ariyan. 2009. Software design and evaluation of appropriate Mass Density Measurement and droplet size in Sprayer. Journal of Plant Protection (Agricultural Science and Technology). University of Mashhad. 22 (2): 171- 181. (In Farsi).

5. Dorr, G. J., A. J. Hewitt, S. W. Adkins, J. Hanan, H. Zhang, and B. Noller. 2013. A comparison of initial spray characteristics produced by agricultural nozzles.Crop production 53: 109-117.

6. Douzals, J. P., C. Sinfort, and E. Cotteux. 2010. Spraying quality assessment of a mist blower used on banana crops. International conference on agricultural engineering- Agricultural Engineering: 1-11.

7. Gil, E., P. Balsari, M. Gallart, J. Liorens, P. Marucco, P. G. Andersen, X. Fabregas, and J. Liop. 2015. Determination of drift potentional of different flat fan nozzles on a boom sprayer using a test bench. Crop protection 56: 58-68.

8. Gil, E., M. Gallart, J. Llorens, and J. Llop. 2012. Determination of Drift Potential Value (DPV) for different flat fan nozzles using a horizontal drift test bench. Department of agro food engineering and biotechnology 8: 6.

9. Gil, E., J. Llorens, J. Llop, X. Fabregas, and M. Gallart. 2013. Use of a terrestrial lidar sensor for drift detection in vineyard spraying. Sensors. 13: 516- 534.

10. Landers, A. and M. Farooq. 2004. Reducing Drift and Improving Deposition in Orchards. Cornell University, NYSAES, Geneva, NY 14456, USA: 380- 384.

11. Naseri, M., M. H. Abbaspour-Fard, H. Chaji, and A. Heidarzade. 2007. Effect of nozzle orifice diameter, pressure pump and forward speed tractor on the uniformity spraying in Turbo liner sprayer. The fifth national congress of agricultural machinery and mechanization of ferdowsi university of Mashhad: 9. (In Farsi).

12. Nuyttens, D., P. De Schampheleire Verboven, E. Brusselman, and D. Dekeyser. 2009. Droplet size and velocity characteristics of agricultural sprays. American society of agricultural and biological engineers (ASABE). 52 (5): 1471-1480.

13. Otsu, N. 1979. A threshold selection method from grey level histograms. Ieee transactions on systems, man and cybernetics. 9 (1): 62-66.

14. Peyman, L., Sh. A. abdollahpour, B. Rana bonab, M. Moghadam, and A. Mahmoudi. 2011. Evaluation of factors affecting on the uniform droplet size using standard cv. First National Congress of Science and New Technologies (the of Plant Protection) at Zanjan University: 4. (In Farsi).

15. Purhajy, F., and M. Mazaheri Tehrani. 2013. Study of image processing with the ImageJ software at the formulation sesame cream with soybean flour. Twenty-first National Congress of Food Science and Technology, University of Shiraz: 4. (In Farsi).

16. Safari, M., F. Amirsheghaghi, N. Loveymi, and H. Chagi. 2009. Assessment of common sprayer used in wheat fields. Karaj Agricultural Engineering Research Institute Publications 10 (4): 1-12. (In Farsi).

17. Wolf, T. E., R. Graver, K. Wallace, S. R. Shewchuk, and J. Maybank. 1993. Effect of protective shields on drift and deposition characteristics of field sprayers. Canadian journal of plant science 73: 1261-1993.