Document Type : Research Article
Authors
1 Research Institute of Agricultural Engineering
2 IRIPP
3 AERI
Abstract
Introduction
About 30% of the annual losses of agricultural products are caused by pests, diseases and weeds. Spraying is still the most common method of their control. At present, all kinds of manual and tractor-mounted sprayers are used for spraying. The use of manual spraying is associated with high consumption of poison, damage of farmer and product and very low work efficiency. Tractor-mounted sprayers are more efficient than manual sprayers and require less labor, but their use involves problems such as compacting the soil and crushing the product. In recent years, UAV sprayers have been used to spray farms and orchards. UAV spraying can increase the spraying efficiency by more than 60% and reducing 20-30% of poison volume. According to the capabilities of the UAV sprayer and problems of the current spraying methods, the purpose of this research is to evaluate the performance of the UAV sprayer to control the canola aphid and compare its results with turbo liner sprayer.
Materials and Methods
In the present research, the UAV sprayer as a new method of spraying to fight canola aphids was technically and economically evaluated and its results were compared with the turbo liner sprayer (conventional method of spraying in the region). The design was replicated in triplicate as a completely randomized design. Field tests were conducted on the canola crop at the stemming stage when at least 20% of the plants were infected. The measured parameters included drift, spraying quality, field capacity, field efficiency, energy consumption and spraying efficiency.
Results and Discussion
Based on the results, the amount of consumption volume distributed by UAV sprayer and turbo liner sprayer was equal to 11.1 and 187.6 liters per hectare, respectively. The particle drift in spraying with UAV sprayer and turbo liner sprayer were, 53.3 and 80%, respectively. The quality coefficient of UAV sprayer and turbo liner sprayer were 1.15 and 1.21, respectively. So, the farm efficiency of the UAV sprayer and turbo liner sprayer was equal to 51.4% and 32.3%, respectively. Based on the results of the analysis of variance the average density of aphids before spraying, there was no statistically significant difference in different treatments. However, in three, seven and 14 days after spraying, there was a significant difference between the control treatment and the spraying treatments; So the density of aphids in the plots sprayed with UAV sprayer and turbo liner sprayer after spraying was less than 100 aphids per stem, but in the control treatment, the density varied between 250-700 aphids per stem. A comparison of the average efficiency of the UAV sprayer and turbo liner sprayer with the t-test showed that both sprayers had acceptable results in controlling the canola aphid population and in the 14 days after spraying, the efficiency of the UAV sprayer was higher than that of the turbo liner sprayer.
Conclusion
- The volume consumption used by the turbo liner sprayer was 17 times more than that of the UAV sprayer.
- The drops drift in spraying with the turbo liner sprayer was about 34% more than the drift of the UAV sprayer.
- The field efficiency of the UAV sprayer was 59.1% more than the field yield of the turbo liner sprayer.
- The energy consumption of the turbo liner sprayer per hectare was 7 times the energy consumption of the UAV sprayer.
- The efficiency percentage of UAV sprayer 14 days after spraying obtained 92.7 %. Due to the lower drift, volume consumed, the energy consumed, and the higher efficiency and spraying quality, this method is recommended to control canola aphid.
- It is recommended that, the Tee-jet nozzles are suitable for controlling the aphid population. To improve the performance of the UAV sprayer for controlling aphid, a flight height of 1-1.5 meters from the top of the crop, a flight speed of less than 7 m/s, and spraying speed of less than 4 m/s are recommended. Also, with field spraying in the earlier stage, it is possible to prevent the spread of the pest in the stemming stage and further spread of the pest.
Keywords
Main Subjects
)
Send comment about this article