Category: Spray Basics

Selecting a Field Sprayer Nozzle
This article is reproduced, with permission, from Ohio State University Extension’s factsheet FABE-528.
Although nozzles are some of the least expensive components of a sprayer, they hold a high value in their ability to influence sprayer performance.
Nozzles meter the amount of liquid sprayed per unit area, controlling application rate, as well as variability of spray over the width of the sprayer boom. Nozzles also influence droplet size, affecting both target coverage and spray drift risk.
Nozzles come in a wide variety of types and sizes. The best nozzle for a given application will maximize efficacy, minimize spray drift, and allow compliance with label requirements such as application rate (gallons per acre) and spray droplet size. Selecting the best nozzle requires careful consideration of all the factors listed below:
Nozzle Type
- Sprayer operation parameters
  - Application rate, spray pressure, travel speed
- Type of chemical sprayed
  - Herbicides (soil incorporation, pre/post emergence)
  - Insecticides
  - Fungicides
  - Fertilizers and growth regulators
- Mode of action of chemical (spray coverage requirement)
  - Systemic
  - Contact
- Application type (broadcast, band, directed, air assisted)
- Target crop (field crops, vegetables, vineyard, shrubs and trees, etc.)
- Spray drift risk
Nozzle Size
Each nozzle type is designed for a specific type of target and application. For example, a nozzle designed for broadcast spraying is not good for spraying pesticides over a narrow band. Luckily, most nozzle manufacturers’ catalogues have charts showing which nozzle type will be best for a specific job. Check the websites of nozzle manufacturers to reach their catalogues. For more information, contact your county Extension office.
Nozzle manufacturers’ catalogs provide tables and charts showing application rates (gallons per acre or gpa), given a nozzle’s flow rate (gallons per minute or gpm) delivered at various pressures (psi) and travel speeds (mph). These tables are useful tools for selecting the appropriate nozzles, pressure and speed to spray chemicals at application rates prescribed by product labels. However, the charts are only for a limited number of travel speed and nozzle spacing situations. There may be situations where the charts will not provide information associated with your sprayer setup (nozzle spacing) and operating conditions (travel speed and spray pressure). The Apps developed by most of the major nozzle manufacturers can provide you the exact nozzle flow rate required for any given set of application parameters, and identify a specific set of nozzle recommendations for the given application parameters.
To find these Apps, simply visit the App Store in your smart phone or tablet and do a search under “Spray Nozzle Calculator”, or some other key words related to nozzle size selection. You may also want to do a search under the name of the nozzle company from which you are interested in buying the nozzles. However, some Apps are not user friendly and sometimes they do not take into account the droplet size requirements when recommending nozzles. Although the Apps and tables in catalogues may expedite the nozzle size selection process, it is best to understand the procedure and the maths nozzle manufacturers use to generate the values listed in tables and to recommend nozzles in their Apps. The procedure used by the nozzle manufacturers to generate numbers in tables and in their Apps is explained below. By following the steps mentioned below, you should be able to determine the exact nozzle flow rate (gpm) required for your spray application parameters.
Once the exact nozzle flow rate is determined, you can then look at the catalogue to select the nozzle that will provide you the flow rate at a practical pressure setting.
Steps to select the proper nozzle size:
The following steps must be taken to determine the nozzle flow rate (gpm):
1. Select the application rate in gallons per acre (gpa). This is a management decision you will have to make based on pesticide label recommendations, field conditions and water supply.
2. Select a practical and safe ground speed in miles per hour (mph).
3. Determine the spray width per nozzle (W). For broadcast applications, W = nozzle spacing (distance between two nozzles on the boom) in inches. For band spraying, W = band width in inches. For directed spraying, W = row spacing in inches (or band width) divided by the number of nozzles per row (or band).
4. Determine the flow rate (gpm) required from each nozzle by using the following equation: gpm = (gpa x mph x W) / 5,940 (5,940 is a constant to convert gpa, mph and inches to gpm).
5. Select a nozzle size from the manufacturer’s catalogue that will give the flow rate (gpm) determined in Step 4 when the nozzle is operated within the recommended pressure range. If a nozzle of this size is not available, change the travel speed in the equation above and determine the new flow rate required.
An Example
For example: You want to spray a pre-emergence herbicide at 15 gpa, at a speed of 8 mph. The distance between the nozzles on the boom is 20 inches. The herbicide label requires a spray quality of “Medium.” What should be the flow rate of the nozzle you will choose?
gpm = (gpa × mph × W) ÷ 5,940
Since this is a broadcast application (pre-emergence), W is the distance between nozzles (W = 20″). Filling in the variables yields the following calculation:
gpm = (15 gpa × 8 mph × 20 in) ÷ 5,940 = 0.4 gpm
This means, to apply 15 gpa at a speed of 8 mph with this sprayer setup, we need to select a nozzle with a flow rate of 0.4 gpm.
Now, we go to the nozzle catalogue, and find a nozzle that will give us a flow rate of 0.4 gpm, while operating the sprayer at an applicable pressure and travelling at 8 mph. Catalogues have charts for each nozzle, similar to the one shown on the next page. The first column gives the color code of the nozzle (which indicates flow rate), nozzle ID number, and the appropriate filter type for the nozzle. Column 2 gives the pressure range at which the nozzle should be operated. Column 3 gives the spray quality, a measure of spray droplet size (fine, medium, coarse, etc.) produced at different pressure settings. Columns 4 and 5 give the flow rate of nozzles in gallons per minute and ounces per minute, respectively, at different pressure settings. Column 6 gives gallons per acre application rate at different travel speed settings.
First, we need to find the best type of nozzle for our application. In their catalog, the nozzle manufacturer recommends a flat-fan pattern type nozzle for broadcast application of pre-emergence herbicides. Then we find a chart associated with the nozzle type recommended.
The chart shown happens to be for that type of a nozzle. Now we proceed with the process to determine the appropriate size of the nozzle.
Example of a typical nozzle rate table.
In our example above, the equation in Step 4 resulted with a flow rate of 0.4 gpm. Now, we look at Column 4 (gpm per nozzle) to determine the nozzle that provides us 0.4 gpm. Using the chart, we see that the nozzles XRC8004 or XRC11004 (shown in red) provide 0.4 gpm flow rate at 40 psi operating pressure. This nozzle also happens to provide Medium (designated with “M”) spray quality as recommended on the herbicide label. Under these operating conditions, this sprayer should apply 15 gpa at 8 mph as we expected. The validation of this is also evident on the chart. If you look at Column 6, choose 8 mph ground speed, the nozzle we selected will spray approximately 15 gallons per acre (14.9 gpa shown on the chart) at 8 mph travel speed and 40 psi spray pressure.
There may be multiple numbers of nozzles that can satisfy the 0.4 gpm flow rate requirements. However, they may not satisfy the desired spray quality and/or desired travel speed. It may be necessary to adjust pressure and/or travel speed according to nozzle selection. For example, the Brown XRC8005 nozzle is capable of producing 0.4 gpm, and achieving 15 gpa at 8 mph, if the spray pressure is reduced to about 25 psi. Similar calculations can be made using the equation below to come up with other GPM (flow rate) and PSI (pressure) combinations to satisfy the required 15 gpa application rate:
(GPM₁ ÷ GPM₂) = (√PSI₁ ÷ √PSI₂)
In this example, reducing the pressure to 25 psi alters the spray quality to “Coarse,” violating the label recommendation. When changing pressure is not an appropriate choice, the only other practical option is to change the travel speed. There is an inverse linear relationship between the travel speed (mph) and the application rate (gpa). The relationship is expressed by the equation:
(GPA₁ ÷ GPA₂) = (MPH₁ ÷ MPH₂)
or
(GPA₁ × MPH₁) = (GPA₂ × MPH₂)
Using the relationship above, we can determine that increasing the travel speed to 9.9 mph and keeping the sprayer operating at 40 psi will yield 15 gpa, as described below. The chart shown earlier indicates when using XRC11005, GPA₁ = 18.6 at 8 mph (MPH₁) at 40 psi. We want to find out what the new travel speed (MPH₂) should be to achieve 15 gpa (GPA₂). Using the equation above:
(18.6 GPA × 8 MPH) = (15 GPA × MPH₂)
so
MPH₂ = (18.6 GPA × 8 MPH) ÷ 15 GPA = 9.9 MPH
However, increasing travel speed to 9.9 mph may not be practical or safe. When changes to pressure or travel speed as dictated by the equations above are neither practical nor safe, it may be necessary to select a different nozzle.
In this example, it looks like the best nozzles to use for our application situation are XRC8004 or XRC11004, both providing 0.4 gpm at 40 psi. The only difference between these two nozzles is in the angle of spray pattern: one produces an 80 degree fan pattern (XRC8004), while the other one (XRC11004) produces a 110 degree fan pattern. Due to the difference in the angle of the spray pattern, each of these nozzles require different boom heights to obtain proper overlap between two adjacent nozzles.
Calibrate the sprayer
Selecting the right type and size of a nozzle is not sufficient to end up with accurate, effective and efficient application of chemicals sprayed. Changes in ground conditions (tilled, un-tilled, grass, wet, dry), and the topography of the field sprayed (flat, sloped) will affect the ground speed which is one of the variables used in determining the correct nozzle size. Nozzle orifices wear out with time causing larger flow rates and distorted spray patterns than when they were new. The gpm flow rate values given in catalogues or in Apps are based on spraying water only. Spraying solutions with higher densities than water (most spray solutions are) will affect the flow rates of nozzles at the same spray pressure. For the reasons mentioned above, sprayers should be calibrated frequently, especially when the field conditions change, to determine the actual application rate.
Calibration is easy, and there are many ways to do it. regardless of the method chose, three measurements will be taken:
- actual ground speed,
- the distance between nozzles, and
- nozzle flow rate for a given length of time.
One easy method is explained in an OSU Extension Publication (AEX 520) listed in the references at the end of this article.
Keep several types of nozzles on the boom
Remember that one specific type of nozzle will not be best for all applications. For this reason, it is best to have several types and sizes of nozzles on the boom so that you can switch to the “best” nozzle choice for a given spraying job. As shown in the pictures below, there are various types of sprayer components and setups you can buy to configure your boom so the new set up allows you to easily switch from one nozzle to another instantly.
Keep spray drift in mind when selecting nozzles
One of the major problems challenging pesticide applicators is spray drift, which is defined as movement of pesticides by wind from the application site to an off target site. Drift is influenced by many factors which are discussed in detail in two OSU Extension publications (Bulletin 816 and AEX-525) listed in the references at the end of this article. Equipment, especially the nozzles, used to spray pesticides play a significant role in generating as well as reducing spray drift. In nozzle catalogues, you can see a number of different nozzles of the same type, in terms of spray pattern. For example, one can find nozzles within the same “flat-fan” category classified as “low-drift.” Research conducted at Ohio State and elsewhere clearly indicate that nozzles labelled as “low-drift” significantly reduce spray drift as discussed in OSU Extension publication AEX-523 (listed in the references below). If drift is, or becomes a concern, it may be best to switch from a conventional flat-fan nozzle to a “low-drift” flat-fan nozzle with the same flow rate. Therefore, it is best to have more than one type of a “flat-fan” pattern nozzle on the boom.
Summary and conclusions
Nozzles are typically the least costly items on a sprayer, but they play a key role in the final outcome from a spraying job: achieving maximum efficacy from the pesticide applied while reducing the off-target (drift) movement of pesticides to minimum. Pesticides work well if the rates on labels are achieved during application. This can be achieved only if the right nozzle type and the proper size of the nozzles are on the sprayer, and the sprayer is operated properly.
Although the Apps and tables in catalogs may expedite the nozzle size selection process, it is best to understand the process and the math nozzle manufacturers use to generate the values listed in tables, and to generate nozzle recommendations in their Apps. This procedure, explained in this publication, hopefully will help you to determine the exact nozzle flow rate (gpm) required for your spray application parameters, while highlighting some other important parameters such as spray pressure, droplet size, spray coverage on the target, and drift, all of which should be given serious consideration when selecting the best nozzle for a spraying job.
Acknowledgments
The author thanks Mary Griffith, Agriculture and Natural Resources Extension Educator, OSU Extension; Dr. Larry C. Brown, Professor and Extension Specialist, Department of Food, Agricultural and Biological Engineering, The Ohio State University; and Dr. Robert “Bobby” Grisso, Professor and Associate Director, Virginia Cooperative Extension, Virginia Tech University, Department of Biological Systems Engineering; for reviewing this publication and for their editorial contributions.
References
1. Ozkan, E. Calibrating boom sprayers. Ohio State University Extension publication AEX-520, Columbus, Ohio.
2. Ozkan, E. New nozzles for spray drift reduction. Ohio State University Extension publication AEX-523, Columbus, Ohio.
3. Ozkan, E. and R.C. Derksen. Effectiveness of Turbodrop® and Turbo Teejet® nozzles in drift reduction. Ohio State University Extension publication AEX-524, Columbus, Ohio.
4. Ozkan, E. and H. Zhu. Effect of Major Variables on Drift Distances of Spray Droplets. Ohio State University Extension publication AEX-525, Columbus, Ohio.
December 2, 2016
How to evaluate airblast coverage
Note: While there’s nothing wrong with this article, a more recent article on this subject can be found here.
It’s nearing the end of a long morning of spraying and you just want to get it done. As the tank empties and you watch the last of the spray cloud waft through the row, you’re thinking about rinsing out and moving on… but did the spray land where you wanted?
How do you really know if you hit the target?
Maybe you’re content with the occasional “shoulder checks” you made from the cab while spraying. Perhaps you stop at the end of the row and get out of the tractor to look for wet foliage during.
Maybe you plan to return once the product is dry and look for white residue.
This early morning “shoulder check” was photographed by the operator using his smartphone. You can’t see coverage, but gaps in the spray will show if nozzles are plugged. You can also check to see if you are overshooting or blowing through the target. Photo Credit – C. Hedges, ON.
These are all good feedback practices, but a more accurate method is the use of water-sensitive paper, which turns from yellow to blue wherever spray touches it. You can easily see the distribution of the spray and the overall area covered, and it can be quantified so you can compare one sprayer set-up to another, or see the impact of weather, or even the effects of nozzle choice, pressure and water volume.
Water- (and oil-) sensitive paper: Cheap, simple and available on-line or in person from your favourite sprayer equipment store.
Draw a map
Begin by creating a simple drawing of the tree, cane, bush,vine, etc. you wish to spray. Label the drawing with unique numbers that correspond to where you are going to place the papers. Write the numbers on the back of each paper so you can see where they came from after they are collected. You should also note the pass number, so you can differentiate between each sprayer setup and corresponding pass. You might make a change and want to see how it affects coverage, and it’s very easy to mix up the papers if you haven’t record everything clearly. Plan to do this for at least two plants upwind from the sprayer to ensure you will get an accurate representation of average coverage. Be sure to wear disposable gloves and avoid dew so the papers don’t react prematurely.
Create a simple drawing of the target. Number positions on the drawing that correspond to where you plan to place the papers.
Distribute the papers
It is critical to distribute the papers evenly throughout each target canopy. They should be placed in key locations where pest damage has been an issue in the past (e.g. scab at the top of a tree, or spotted-wing drosophila at the bottom-centre of highbush blueberry), or anywhere coverage is notoriously difficult. Our preference is to place them at the top, centre and bottom of a tree canopy as well as laterally from the outer edge of the canopy beside the sprayer moving in towards the trunk.
Number positions on the drawing that correspond to where you plan to place the papers. Label the papers as well so you know where they came from. Consider writing the pass number and the position (e.g. 1-1 would be Pass 1, Position 1) so you can evaluate the changes to the sprayer settings from pass to pass. Later, all the information from the calibration can be entered into your spray records, like in this mock-up.
We use spring-back paper clips attached to alligator clips at 90 degrees to attach the papers to small branches. You can also staple them to the upper or lower face of the leaves (as long as they don’t cause leaf to droop). You can wrap them around stems for panoramic coverage or to monitor drenches. They can be stapled the trunk to show if spray is aimed into the canopy or being wasted. You can even skewer to the ground using wire flags to to illustrate poor lower-nozzle positioning and/or canopy run-off. Put them wherever you want to know about spray coverage!
This home-made double-ended alligator clip holds papers at right angles. One end for the paper, the other end to a twig or wire flag.
We typically orient them facing the alleys so their sensitive faces are square to the sprayer as it passes. We often use two in each location, oriented back-to-back facing each alley so you can resolve coverage from both sides. The important part is to ensure you are consistent. Mark the location in the canopy with some colourful flagging tape so you can find the papers after you spray, and if you wish to replace them with fresh papers to evaluate another pass, orient them the same way to make the comparison fair.
Water-sensitive papers located in five positions in an Empire apple tree. Two papers were pinned back-to-back in each position, distributed evenly throughout the canopy, facing the alleys. One paper was located at the lowest branch to determine if the lowest nozzle position needed to be on. Another paper was pinned to the ground face-up under the tree to show any excessive waste. Be consistent from pass to pass.
Spray, check and spray again
Once the papers are in place, pass by on one side with both booms open (as you would normally spray). Be sure to start spraying well before passing the target, and keep spraying afterwards to ensure the resultant coverage represents an actual application. It is very informative to get out of the cab and examine the papers before passing by on the other side. You can learn a lot about how the wind is affecting the spay.
Once papers are in place, pass by spraying with both booms open to emulate a typical spray day. Be sure to start spraying well before passing the target, and keep spraying afterwards to ensure the resultant coverage represents an actual application. It can be very informative to examine coverage at this point to see how wind is affecting the spray. Then, pass by on the other side to complete the application.
An example of the coverage obtained on water-sensitive papers placed throughout an apple tree canopy, and on the ground beneath it.
Interpret the patterns
You might notice the outer portions of larger canopies receive more spray than the inside. This is hardly surprising given that spray must pass through the outside to get to the inside. As a result, inner papers often receive proportionally less spray and should be the basis for determining if you have sufficient spray coverage. This is also why the label recommendation of “spraying to the point of runoff” is unhelpful: the outer portion of wide, dense canopies often begin to drip before the inner portion receives sufficient coverage. Further, how do you spray to the point of runoff? How do you know when to stop before it’s too late? Label language can be frustrating…
When water-sensitive paper is sprayed to the point of run-off, the blue dye will drip. This is fine for a drench (dilute) application, but excessive for a typical concentrated application like foliar fungicides and insecticides.
When assessing coverage, don’t follow the droplet counts in the small guide that comes with the paper sensitive paper kit – they haven’t been updated for a very long time and are more appropriate for field crop applications – not airblast applications. Research and experience suggest that 85 discrete fine/medium-sized droplets per square centimetre and a total coverage of 10-15% should be sufficient for most foliar insecticides and fungicides. Remember, this is only a suggested threshold and in the case of coarser sprays, focus more on even distribution and the 10-15% coverage.
It’s debatable, but 85 Fine/Medium-sized drops per square centimetre and about 15% total surface covered on a minimum 80% of all papers represents adequate airblast spray coverage for most foliar applications. It is less applicable for applications made with Coarse/Very Coarse droplets, because there are fewer of them and they generally cover more area. In this case, focus more on the even distribution of spray and the 15% coverage. An extreme example of this is a drench (dilute) application of oil where total saturation is the goal. Conversely, ultra-low volume applications employ Very Fine droplets and a better metric is uniform, high droplet density rather than area covered.
Make a change and try again
There’s no easy way to define a threshold between sufficient and insufficient spray coverage. When you retrieve and examine the papers, think about how the product is intended to work: “Is it a contact, trans-laminar or locally systemic pesticide? What are the odds that an insect or spore will come in contact with residue? Will I be spraying again soon (e.g. fungicide) and will the spray already on the leaves have residual activity?” Regarding that last thought, protectant fungicide applications are often layered, so what one spray misses, the next will catch. Quite often, “sufficient coverage” is less than most sprayer operators think.
If you are content with the coverage, record your sprayer settings to use them again in that block (in similar weather, and assuming the crop canopy doesn’t change significantly before the next spray day). If you are not content, make a change to the sprayer to improve matters, reset the papers, and go again. It can take time and some effort to get it right, but improved coverage and reduced waste are ample financial reward for your efforts.
Other methods of evaluating coverage
It should be noted that while water-sensitive paper is versatile, cheap and easy to use, it has its shortcomings. Placement and orientation of the paper is very important; it’s easy to hit papers on the outside of the canopy with the sensitive-side facing the sprayer. It’s considerably harder when they are at the very centre of the canopy, or hiding behind fruit. When the thin edge of the paper is oriented to the spray (i.e. oriented facing the ground), it presents very little surface and can be difficult to hit.
Use enough air to only just ruffle the leaves. This exposes all surfaces, however briefly, to the spray. Too much air will align leaves with the spray, exposing only their thin edge and making coverage difficult. Too much air may also cause leaves to shingle (overlap), and create shadows like on the grape leaves shown here.
Further, the papers won’t show the finest droplets (<50 µm), so there may be spray even though you can’t see it. Taken collectively with the product’s mode of action (i.e. contact or locally systemic), and any possible re-distribution by rain or dew, spray coverage becomes a good indicator for protection, but it isn’t definitive. While coverage is a good indicator, improved coverage does not always mean improved efficacy.
Some sprayer operators use other methods to confirm their coverage. Kaolin clay is an inert compound that leaves white residue when dry. Red, yellow or green water-soluble, food-grade dyes will also indicate coverage. Even fluorescent dyes such as phosphorus can be sprayed at night and illuminated under black lights.
Kaolin clay and fluorescent dies sprayed into fruit canopies give a lot of information about sprayer coverage, but are relatively inconvenient compared to water-sensitive paper.
Red food-grade dye sprayed from a horizontal boom to demonstrate downwind drift onto a white target. This was a messy experiment and my hands, and the sprayer, were pink for a long time afterwards. Photo Credit – J. McDougall, Ontario.
Take home
These methods give the sprayer operator a lot of information because they land on the actual target, not a piece of paper hung in the canopy. But, they require a lot of time and effort and are typically out of reach for most operators. Further, they do not allow multiple applications on the same canopy to compare the effect of sprayer settings on coverage – once the target is sprayed, it’s sprayed.
No matter which method you choose to use, understanding how changes to you sprayer, or the impact of weather, affect coverage is a critical piece of information. Operators should make an effort to evaluate spray coverage. Here are a few videos describing the process:
Using water-sensitive paper for airblast coverage diagnostics – thanks to Penn State, Univ. New Hampshire and Chazzbo Media (2014).
Checking water-sensitive paper in an orchard. Tower is spraying only water during a calibration run (2013).
November 28, 2016
The Pressure Gauge Shows More Than Pressure
Kim Blagborne (formally with Slimline Manufacturing) has long said that the pressure gauge on an airblast sprayer indicates more than just pressure. It can be used to diagnose a number of pump and plumbing issues… if you know what to look for. Here’s Kim’s troubleshooting guide to reading into what your gauge is REALLY telling you:
Scenario One
“As the tank empties, the pressure drops”
First, try adjusting the pressure regulator (assuming a positive displacement pump). If you can maintain the pressure up until the tank empties, your intake line may be loose and it’s sucking the bottom of the tank. Check the fitting between the suction filter and the pump. Apply a light coating of grease to the O-rings on the elbows and filter to ensure a complete seal.
Second, try stopping mid-tank (that is, turn off the tractor PTO and let the sprayer sit for a few minutes). Does the pressure gauge return to the original set pressure? If so, then the intake line inside sprayer has likely come loose entirely. Open the lid, and using a straightened-out coat hanger, hook the intake line and give a few gentle tugs – it should not be able to move. If it does, you’ll have to re-fasten the intake line so it’s not sucking the bottom of the tank.
The humble coat hanger. It opens our cars and now fixes our sprayers. Remarkable!
Scenario Two
“When I first start the sprayer, the pressure drops or fails to maintain constant pressure as the tank empties”
This might indicate improper mixing practices because the filter is probably plugging with product. Alternately, your PTO speed may be too slow to drive sufficient mechanical agitation. Check the suction filter as soon as the problem occurs (don’t finish spraying). If you wait to check when the tank is empty, the evidence of a plugged filter could be washed away before you can confirm it. This problem often happens when spraying nutrients, or when products aren’t compatible.
If that’s not it, it could be a collapsed suction valve. The pump will sound like it’s “missing” (like an misfiring engine). The suction valve might need to be replaced.
Or, perhaps you notice that you can compensate for the pressure drop by adjusting the regulator on the first tank. But it has to be dropped back down again for the second tank. In this case, the regulator might be sticking or jamming. Disassemble it and look for grit in the barrel of the regulator, then lubricate the parts.
Scenario Three
“I lose pressure when I turn my boom(s) on or off”
In this scenario, the pressure is fine as you approach the end of the row. You turn off the outside boom (or both) and finish the turn. But, when you re-engage both booms, the pressure drops. Even when you adjust the pressure regulator to compensate (assuming a positive displacement pump), the unit only gains the lost pressure slowly. In this case, the regulator might be sticking or jamming. Disassemble it and look for grit in the barrel of the regulator, then lubricate the parts.
Scenario Four
“The pressure gauge spikes when I turn off the boom(s)”
If you run a Turbomist, it could be the bypass balance. To solve this issue, head over to this article and pan down to see the step-by-step. If it isn’t the balance, then it’s likely the regulator. The issue of a spiking gauge and how to correct for it is covered thoroughly in this article by Ag mechanic extraordinaire Murray Thiessen.
Scenario Five (a positive displacement pump issue)
“My gauge pulses”
Is it more than a 20 psi range? Have you noticed that the deviation gets less as the PTO speed increases? Well, the pump pressure check-valve may have collapsed. Check the pressure check valves in the pump for broken springs on the suction valve plate.
Does the needle move rapidly through a 5 to 10 psi range? The accumulator pressure might be low. Try adjusting system pressure via the regulator and if that changes how the needle is responding, then set an air compressor to 90 psi (or manufacturer’s recommended pressure) and charge the accumulator.
Perhaps the needle movement is not affected by system pressure changes or the PTO speed. In this case the accumulator may have failed entirely and the diaphragm will need replacement.
Scenario Six
“My calibration is going farther than expected”
Sure, that sounds pretty good at first, but it may be that the gauge is stuck. With the PTO off and the spray boom on, the gauge must read “ZERO”. If it doesn’t, pony up the $50.00 and get a new one.
May 30, 2016
What’s my Spray Quality, in 3 Simple Steps
The introduction of dicamba and 2,4-D tolerance traits in corn and soybeans was accompanied by an unprecedented emphasis on spray drift management by the registrants. Product label statements for 2,4-D choline and the new formulations of dicamba emphasize spray drift control to a greater degree than previous products.
In Canada, labels make prominent reference to the appropriate “spray quality”, a term referring to an internationally standardized droplet size classification (ASABE S572.2). In this standard, the droplet size spectrum produced by a nozzle is communicated using terms such as “Medium”, “Coarse”, “Very Coarse” etc., and used to describe the potential for spray coverage and spray drift. Spray qualities are colour coded for easy recognition.
An example of this label language is shown for Enlist Duo below:
“Droplet Size: Apply as a coarse to extremely coarse spray (ASABE S572 Standard). Use drift reducing nozzle tips in accordance with manufacturer directions that produce a droplet classification of coarse to extremely coarse to significantly reduce the potential for drift.”
Although spray qualities are voluntarily measured and published by most nozzle manufacturers, their appearance on the label makes their use a legal requirement. This is because the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) conducts a risk assessment which assumes, in this case, that a Coarse spray quality supports certain calculated buffer zones (15 m in this case) to protect sensitive ecosystems from Enlist Duo damage.
The use of coarser sprays can be used to reduce this buffer zone somewhat, in accordance with an on-line “Site-Specific Buffer Zone Calculator” published by the PMRA.
The challenge for applicators will be to determine the spray quality of their current application method. Here’s a relatively simple three-step process to find out.
Step 1: Identify the nozzles currently on the sprayer.
It seems basic, but it’s surprising how many applicators can not name their spray nozzle. If unsure, closely inspect the nozzle, looking for the manufacturer’s name, the nozzle model, and its flow rate. Most nozzles will have this information printed right on them. Here are pictures of the most common nozzles. Can’t find the info? Have a look at this article for websites with pictures.
Major manufacturers include Hypro (John Deere via private label), Agrotop (marketed by Greenleaf in North America), Hardi, Lechler, TeeJet, Wilger, and Billericay Farm Systems (Air Bubble Jet). Manufacturers produce many models, but most are easily identified by a series of letters and numbers. For example, all nozzles will be offered in several fan angles (80º and 110º are most common), and flow rates (in US gpm).
To be more helpful, flow rates are colour coded according to an international standard. This table shows the colours and lists flow in US units in (gpm at 40 psi) and metric (L/min at 3 bar).
The combination of series of letters or numbers shown on nozzles follows a relatively consistent pattern: Fan angle and flow rate arranged as 11003 or 03-110. In this case, the nozzle produces a 110 degree fan and has a flow rate of 0.3 US gpm. The use of US gpm at 40 psi to designate flow rate is an international standard.
The nozzle model is frequently inserted into this stamp, and is manufacturer specific. For example, TeeJet may include “AIXR” in its stamp, and Agrotop may include “TDXL”. Hardi’s MiniDrift is abbreviated MD. Some nozzles may not list their fan angle. Others (Air Bubble Jet) are blank, creating a mystic aura of superiority. Others leave the information printed on the nozzle cap.
A bit of experience is very helpful, especially with John Deere nozzles, where the nomenclature inexplicably eliminates the first digit of the 110 or 120 degree fan angle. So the JD 11004 is labelled “1004”. That’s a bit like saying “my truck sas a 50 engine”, when you mean it has a 350. How’s a city person supposed to know you don’t mean the trusty old 250 straight 6?
Step 2: Obtain spray quality information on the nozzle.
Most manufacturers publish the recommended pressure range and the spray quality of their nozzles. This information can be found in their product catalogues, or on their websites, or in smartphone apps.
Although the designation of Spray Quality is governed by an international standard that is designed to standardize droplet sizing among various labs, we do see some variation in results. Part of this is due to the continued evolution of the standard, requiring manufacturers to re-do some tests, or at least re-analyze their data. For example, ASABE S572.3 was released in conjunction with ISO25358 which changed the boundaries for the coarser sprays. These changes are beginning to be seen in the newer catalogues.
Another problem is that testing is done with plain water. It is well known that the use of certain formulations or adjuvants can affect spray quality. Currently, the standard does not address these effects, and data should be used with some caution.
Step 3: Identify the expected pressure for a given travel speed and water volume.
The same catalogues or websites that publish spray quality also produce charts that list the expected spray pressures at various travel speeds and water volumes.
Becoming familiar with using these charts enables the applicator to predict the spray pressure the nozzle will be operating at. For example, if an applicator intends to apply 10 gpa using a yellow (02) nozzle, this table shows the following: The nozzle will be operating at 30 psi at 5 mph, at 40 psi at 6 mph, at 60 psi at 7 mph, at 70 psi at 8 mph, and at 90 psi at 9 mph. The applicator should know the nozzle’s spray quality at each of those pressures.
Nozzle sizing follows a slightly different procedure for Pulse-Width-Modulation (PWM) systems, requiring the nozzle to be over-sized about 30% or so. Since the majority of new sprayer sales now include PWM, we’ve prepared a special article just for this system here.
Travel speed and/or spray volume should be adjusted to ensure the sprayer operates at a pressure which creates the desired spray quality. In other words, the pressure gauge should be used as a speedometer. If the nozzle model or size doesn’t produce the desired results, the applicator should consider changing nozzles. Once the right combination of factors has been determined, the spray pressures that created the label-required spray quality should be noted. From that point, the applicator can choose travel speeds that maintain the necessary pressure range.
Summary
It is up to applicators and industry representatives to ensure that herbicide products are applied according to label requirements. We expect significant scrutiny on spray drift from new products and need to ensure that proper application methods are used at all times. It’s important that everyone understands just how to do it.
Dr. Scott Bretthauer (U. Illinois) gives a nice summary in this video by Precision Labs:
December 4, 2015
Hydraulic Fittings: A Galling Metallurgical State of Affairs
So it’s been a long spraying season and as you perform your annual maintenance you grudgingly admit that the hoses have given their all. Before you run out to get more of the same, give some thought to the hydraulic fittings (i.e. hose adaptors and couplers). Many feel that stainless steel (SS) is the best choice for hydraulic fittings: It must be, because it’s certainly the shiniest and most expensive choice! But before you opt for stainless, here are a few things you should know.
SS requires surface oxidization to resist corrosion. Oxidation forms a protective barrier called a “passivation layer”, but it’s susceptible to mechanical damage. It can be penetrated as abrasive powders flow past. The layer will reform when it dries, only to be sanded off again during the next spray. The wear is on-going. If the newly-exposed SS remains submerged in a liquid, the passivation layer will not reform. Without it, SS surfaces corrode at a high rate, and in extreme cases SS will even corrode inside of itself and become a hollow shell.
When two pieces of stainless steel are forced together, the passivation layer gets scraped off, allowing parts to gall (or ‘weld’). In fact, any similar metals in physical contact will naturally gall to each other, but stainless steel is especially susceptible. When disassembled, the ‘welded’ material must be torn apart. This destructive galling can be reduced with lubrication during assembly and avoided altogether by mating dissimilar materials (e.g. bronze and stainless steel). Technically, mating different types of stainless steels (e.g. martensitic against austenitic) could work, but it is possible that two different alloys electrically connected in a humid environment may act as a voltaic pile and corrode even faster. This is probably a moot point because many do not have access to different SS alloys when choosing fittings.
Sometimes we see black or galvanized pipe fittings on sprayers, but I don’t recommend either. Galvanizing is only slightly better than black pipe and since the threads are cut after being galvanized the threads are essentially black pipe, anyway.
So what about plated steel fittings? They’re available with swivels and can seal on faces and seats (rather than on the thread – which is much easier to assemble and disassemble). They can be crimped onto the hoses, eliminating the need for hose clamps that fail or snag and cut the operator. (As a related aside, hydraulic hose is not really compatible with most spray products – the steel wire inside the rubber begins to corrode and unexpected failure is common. Even when spraying above 200 psi there are better high pressure-rated choices than hydraulic hose.) Mechanically, these fittings are a great option, but unfortunately the plating is designed for oil, not pesticide. Within a year they rust internally and seize up. To add insult to injury, the flaking rust is notorious for plugging nozzles.
A better choice is brass (or even bronze) fittings (e.g. pipe, SAE 45° and hose barb). Just like the crimped plated steel fittings, brass SAE 45° fittings can swivel and seal on seats and they are easily assembled and disassembled over many seasons. Brass fittings are more costly than black or galvanized pipe but cost less than hydraulic or SS fittings. Conveniently, they’re available at most hardware stores.
While brass may be the best metal material for the sprayer fittings, I feel that plastic is the most economical and in many applications is superior to metal. But, that’s a topic for a follow-up article. So, before you spring for SS hydraulic fittings, consider cheaper and more effective alternatives like brass or plastic. And, if only for the sake of your mechanic, please don’t over tighten fittings. It is unnecessary and causes endless damage and frustration.
October 28, 2015