ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Measurement and classification methods using the ASAE S572.1 reference nozzles
 
More details
Hide details
1
United States Department of Agriculture Agricultural Research Service, 2771 F&B Road, College Station, Texas 77845, USA
2
Wilbur-Ellis, 4396 East Evans Road, San Antonio, Texas 75289, USA
3
University of Nebraska, 402 West State Farm Road, North Platte, Nebraska 69101, USA
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Zbigniew Czaczyk
United States Department of Agriculture Agricultural Research Service, 2771 F&B Road, College Station, Texas 77845, USA
Submission date: 2012-07-31
Acceptance date: 2012-09-17
 
Journal of Plant Protection Research 2012;52(4):447–457
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
An increasing number of spray nozzle and agrochemical manufacturers are incorporating droplet size measurements into both research and development. Each laboratory invariably has their own sampling setup and procedures. This is particularly true about measurement distance from the nozzle and concurrent airflow velocities. Both have been shown to significantly impact results from laser diffraction instruments. These differences can be overcome through the use of standardized reference nozzles and relative spray classification categories. Sets of references nozzles, which defined a set of classification category thresholds, were evaluated for droplet size under three concurrent air flow velocities (0.7, 3.1 and 6.7 m/s). There were significant, though numerically small, differences in the droplet size data between identical reference nozzles. The resulting droplet size data were used to categorize a number of additional spray nozzles at multiple pressure and air flow velocities. This was done to determine if similar classifications were given across the different airspeeds. Generally, droplet size classifications agreed for all airspeeds, with the few that did not, only differing by one category. When reporting droplet size data, it is critical that data generated from a set of reference nozzles also be presented as a means of providing a relative frame of reference.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors have declared that no conflict of interests exist.
 
REFERENCES (16)
1.
Arnold A.C. 1990. A comparative study of drop sizing equipment for agricultural fan-spray atomizers. Aerosol Sci. Tech. 12 (2): 431–445.
 
2.
ASAE S572.1. 2009. Spray Nozzle Classification by Droplet Spectra. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng., St. Joseph, MI., 4 pp.
 
3.
Czaczyk Z. 2012. Influence of air flow dynamics on droplet size in conditions of air assisted sprayers. Atomization and Sprays (accepted to publishing on July 23rd), 9 pp.
 
4.
Doble S.J., Matthews G.A., Rutherford I., Southcombe E.S.E. 1985. A System for classifying hydraulic nozzles and other atomizers into categories of spray quality. p. 1125–1133. In: Proc. Brighton Crop Prot. Conf. – Weeds. Brighton, UK, 18–21 November 1985, 1300 pp.
 
5.
Dodge L.G. 1987. Comparison of performance of drop-sizing Instruments. Appl. Optics 26 (7): 1328–1341.
 
6.
Dodge L.E., Rhodes D.J., Reitz R.D. 1987. Drop-size measurement techniques for Ssprays: comparison of malvern and laser-diffraction, and aerometrics phase/doppler. Appl. Optics 26 (11): 2144–2154.
 
7.
Elsik C.M. 2011. Round-robin evaluation of ASTM standard test method E2798 for spray drift reduction adjuvants. J. ASTM Int. 8 (8): 1–22.
 
8.
Frost A.R., Lake J.R. 1981. The significance of drop velocity to the determination of drop size distributions of agricultural sprays. J. Agric. Eng. Res. 26 (4): 367–370.
 
9.
Hewitt A.J. 2000. Spray drift: impact of requirements to protect the environment. Crop Prot. 19 (1): 623–627.
 
10.
Hewitt A.J., Johnson D.R., Fish J.D., Hermansky C.G., Valcore D.L. 2002. Development of the spray drift task force database for aerial applications. Environ. Tox. Chem. 21 (3): 648–658.
 
11.
Lefebvre A.H. 1989. Atomization and Sprays. p. 367–409. In: “Drop Sizing Methods” (N. Chigier, ed.). Hemisphere Publishing Corporation, New York, 421 pp.
 
12.
Southcombe E.S.E., Miller P.C.H., Ganzelmeier H., van de Zande J.C., Miralles A., Hewitt A.J. 1997. The international (BCPC) spray classification system including a drift potential factor. p. 371–380. In: Proc. Brighton Crop Prot. Conf. – Weeds. Brighton, UK, 17–20 November 1997, 1202 pp.
 
13.
Spray Drift Task Force Study No. A95-010, Miscellaneous Nozzle Study 1997, EPA MRID No. 44310401.Tishkoff J.M. 1984. Spray characterization: practices and requirements. Optical Eng. 23 (5): 557–560.
 
14.
Womac A.R. 2000. Quality control of standardized reference spray nozzles. Trans. ASAE 43 (1): 47–56.
 
15.
Womac A.R., Maynard R.A., Kirk I.W. 1999. Measurement variations in reference sprays for nozzle classification. Trans. ASAE 42 (3): 609–616.
 
16.
Young B.W., Bachalo W.D. 1988. The direct comparison of three “In-Flight” droplet sizing techniques for pesticide spray research. p. 483–497. In: “Optical Particle Sizing: Theory and Practice” (G. Govesbet and G. Grehan, eds.). Plenum Press, New York, 642 pp.
 
eISSN:1899-007X
ISSN:1427-4345