Nuyttens D, Baetens K, De Schampheleire M, Sonck B
Institute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research (ILVO), Technology and Food Agricultural Engineering, Belgium.
Commun Agric Appl Biol Sci. 2008;73(4):769-74.
Three contrasting drift risk assessment means were evaluated when predicting absolute losses of sedimenting pesticide drift from field crop sprayers namely PDPA laser measurements, wind tunnel measurements (both indirect drift risk assessment means) and field drift experiments (direct drift risk assessment means). In total, 90 PDPA laser measurements, 45 wind tunnel experiments and 61 field drift experiments were performed with 10 different spray nozzles at a pressure of 3.0 bar. The effect of nozzle size (ISO 02, 03 04 and 06) and nozzle type (standard flat fan, low-drift flat fan, air inclusion) on the amount of near-field sedimenting spray drift was studied. The reference spray application was defined as a Hardi ISO F 110 03 standard flat fan nozzle at a pressure of 3.0 bar with a nozzle or boom height of 0.50 m and a driving speed of 8 km.h(-1) for the field measurements; conditions that were always used for the comparative assessment of the different investigated nozzle-pressure combinations. A comparison is made between the results obtained with the indirect drift assessment means and the direct drift assessment method to evaluate the potential of these three different drift assessment means. Droplet size as well as droplet velocity characteristics are related with DRPt (field experiments) and DPRP (wind tunnel experiments). Because of the strong intercorrelation between droplet size and velocity characteristics for the nozzle-pressure combinations investigated in this study, simple first-order linear regressions with one of the droplet characteristics as a predictor variable, were the best choice to predict DRPt and DPRP. Results showed that with the indirect risk assessment means (wind tunnel and PDPA laser measurement), driftability experiments can be made with different spraying systems under directly comparable and repeatable conditions and both methods are suited to permit relative studies of drift risk. Moreover, based on these indirect drift measurements and a statistical drift prediction equation for the reference spraying, it is possible to come to a realistic estimate of field drift data at a driving speed of 8 km.h(-1) and a boom height of 0.50 m.
在预测大田作物喷雾器沉积农药漂移的绝对损失时,评估了三种截然不同的漂移风险评估方法,即粒子动态分析仪(PDPA)激光测量、风洞测量(均为间接漂移风险评估方法)和田间漂移试验(直接漂移风险评估方法)。总共使用10种不同的喷雾喷嘴,在3.0巴的压力下进行了90次PDPA激光测量、45次风洞试验和61次田间漂移试验。研究了喷嘴尺寸(ISO 02、03、04和06)和喷嘴类型(标准扁平扇形、低漂移扁平扇形、空气混入型)对近场沉积喷雾漂移量的影响。参考喷雾作业定义为:在田间测量中,使用Hardi ISO F 110 03标准扁平扇形喷嘴,压力为3.0巴,喷嘴或喷杆高度为0.50米,行驶速度为8 km·h⁻¹;这些条件始终用于不同研究的喷嘴 - 压力组合的比较评估。对间接漂移评估方法和直接漂移评估方法获得的结果进行比较,以评估这三种不同漂移评估方法的潜力。液滴大小以及液滴速度特性与田间试验中的沉积农药漂移百分比(DRPt)和风洞试验中的沉积农药漂移潜力(DPRP)相关。由于本研究中研究的喷嘴 - 压力组合的液滴大小和速度特性之间存在很强的相互相关性,因此以其中一个液滴特性作为预测变量的简单一阶线性回归是预测DRPt和DPRP的最佳选择。结果表明,使用间接风险评估方法(风洞和PDPA激光测量),可以在直接可比且可重复的条件下,对不同的喷雾系统进行漂移性试验,并且这两种方法都适合进行漂移风险的相对研究。此外,基于这些间接漂移测量以及参考喷雾的统计漂移预测方程,可以对行驶速度为8 km·h⁻¹和喷杆高度为0.50米时的田间漂移数据进行实际估计。