Category: Spray Basics

Broadcast Boom Nozzle Spacing
North American built boom sprayers have nozzle spacings of 20” (50 cm in the rest of the world), but other spacings such as 15” (37 cm) and 10” (25 cm) also exist. What are the reasons for these alternative spacings and do they offer any inherent advantages?
Why spacing matters
Nozzles are spaced along a boom to allow their fans (patterns) to overlap sufficiently at the target. In broadcast spraying, a uniform distribution of spray volume gives us the best chance for consistent coverage along the boom. Since flat fan nozzles produce a tapered pattern (i.e. the volume is highest in the centre and diminishes towards the edges), approximately 100% overlap (i.e. 50% from each neighbour) will produce a uniform swath.
Figure 1: Tapered flat fans that require some overlap are the default pattern type for agricultural boom nozzles. This is true of conventional and low-drift styles. Note that the flat fans are turned 15° to prevent the spray patterns from interfering with one another.
The 100% overlap isn’t just for volumetric distribution. Flat fan spray patterns tend to have more and finer droplets in the centre and fewer and coarser droplets at the edges. All droplet sizes contribute to coverage in different ways, so the overlap ensures both number and sizes are evenly distributed along the entire boom.
Figure 2: 30% overlap may achieve volumetric uniformity. But because the centre of the pattern contains the majority of the smaller droplets, low overlap may result in low coverage in the overlap regions, resulting in striping.
Figure 3: Consistent droplet number distribution along the boom requires at minimum 100% overlap (50% from each neighbouring nozzle). This blends those regions of the patterns with high and low droplet densities.
The generic 20” spacing arose from long-held conventions about boom height, fan angle, and travel speed. Specifically, this spacing required a boom height of 20” to obtain good overlap of the once-dominant 80° fan angle. Combined with 0.15 to 0.3 US gallon per minute (gpm) nozzles and travel speeds of 6 to 8 mph, operators were able to apply 5 to 15 US gallons per acre (gpa) volumes. Using nozzles with smaller flow rates would generally result in nozzle blockages.
But what if we want to change any of those variables? How does this affect nozzle spacing? Figuring out the pros and cons of an alternate spacing requires a little math and some contingency management.
Boom Height Math
First the math. If the boom has 20” nozzle spacing and we need 100% overlap, the width of the spray pattern at target height must be two times the nozzle spacing, which is 40″. You must calculate the required fan angle and boom height to achieve this. Most nozzle catalogues have tables to help with this, or you can download a handy spreadsheet to calculate your own scenarios here.
For today’s standard 110° fans, a minimum boom height of 14” is needed to achieve 100% overlap. For 15” spacing, the height is reduced to 11”. For 10” spacing, we drop to a mere 7”. However, consider that most modern suspended booms are not operated at heights less than 24” to allow for sway. At that height, there’s plenty of overlap to go around for 20″ nozzle spacing. For those booms that are able to operate at a consistent height, narrower spacings permit lower heights that will reduce drift potential significantly. Every time we halve boom height, we also halve drift potential.
Figure 4: Using 110° tips with 20″ spacing, the theoretical height at which we achieve 50% overlap is 11″ above target.
By tilting the nozzles forward or backward from the vertical, we can reduce the boom height somewhat further and still get the same overlap. For example, for 20 and 15” spacings, angling nozzles forward or backwards by 30° allows us to drop the boom another 2” closer to the target.
Contingencies
A suspended boom hardly ever stays at a uniform height; It sways up and down with field conditions, topography, etc. This is why many operators set their booms above the minimum height – to prevent striping when the boom sways low. The penalty is that this increases the distance droplets need to travel, increasing drift potential and any turbulent displacement problems arising from the moving boom.
Assuming a 110° flat fan at 24” boom height, each nozzle achieves a theoretical pattern width of about 70”, which is an overlap of 70÷20=3.4-fold or 240% on 20” nozzle spacing. Given a minimally-acceptable overlap of 50% (25% from each neighbouring nozzle), the boom could be as low as 11”. For 15” spacing, the minimum height for 50% overlap is 8”, and for 10” spacing it’s 5”. This means the narrower spray patterns gain 3” to 6” in allowed downward boom movement.
Figure 5: Using 110° tips on 15″ spacing, the height for 50% overlap is 8″ above target.
A second contingency is that spray patterns are rarely the exact value that the nozzle catalogues specify. A so-called 110° nozzle may operate at only 90°, or up to 150°, depending on the nozzle model, the spray pressure, and the tank mix. Learn more here and here. Patterns also don’t continue to grow at their rated fan angle, as droplets slow due to air-resistance and fall more vertically due to gravity. For that reason, a visual check is recommended to ensure the expected overlap is achieved.
Figure 6: Fan angles indicate initial trajectories of droplets at the edge. With distance, gravity pulls these droplets downward, narrowing the pattern width from that achieved theoretically (figure adapted from image in TeeJet catalogue).
A third issue to consider is less related to boom height but nonetheless affects spray distribution. Small droplets move with air currents, and the turbulence created by large, fast sprayers creates enough turbulence to move these droplets significantly. A perfect pattern under static conditions can look quite different at a fast travel speed with a modest side wind. Low booms may help prevent some of this displacement because droplets spend less time in flight, and their average velocity is faster.
Figure 7: Spray deposition onto a 2 mm string to measure deposit uniformity for a fast travel speed and high boom and a slow speed, low boom configuration.
Flow Rate Math
Flow rate requirements per nozzle change whenever we equip a boom at an alternate spacing. The basic formulae are shown below.
Moving from a 20″ to a 15″ spacing would require a nozzle with 0.75 of the flow rate, approximately from a 02 to 015 size, or 03 to a 025 size, or 04 to 03 size, etc.
Pulse Width Modulation
The use of Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) has increased the overlap requirement. With PWM, alternate nozzles are on a 180° timing offset from their neighbours. This means that when running >50% duty cycle, when one nozzle is temporarily off, its neighbours are on. These neighbours’ patterns must now span the gap, and 100% overlap is the absolute minimum to achieve this. PWM users therefore select the wider pattern angles and some opt for >100% overlap.
Figure 8: Pulse Width Modulated booms require 200% overlap so that the entire boom receives proper coverage when the alternate set of nozzles is off. For 110° fans at 20″ spacing, the minimum boom height would be 21″
PWM Considerations
- High flows (greater than 1 US gpm at the nozzle) that are common for fertilizer top-dressing may require higher-flow PWM valves.
- Narrow spacings reduce the individual nozzle flow rates and can therefore support higher application rates before triggering a larger valve requirement.
- PWM valves aren’t cheap and for example 15″ spacing compared to 20″ spacing adds 24 valves on a 120′ boom.
Banding
We noted that 20” nozzle spacing is a standard because it corresponds to what has traditionally been achievable with available boom heights and spray pattern angles. But things can change.
Narrower spacings such as 15” originate with row crops and planter row spacings of 15” or 30”. These spacings exist so the spray pattern can be placed either over the top of a crop row, or in between the rows for banding. Using narrower fan angles and/or lower boom heights, together with “even” (as opposed to “tapered”) fans, banding sprays can be applied over the top of, or between crop rows. Or drop hoses can reach between the rows for top-dressing or directed sprays into the canopy.
Canopy Penetration
With narrower spacing, it can be argued that a greater proportion of the boom length has spray directed directly downward (corresponding to the centre of the pattern). Whether or not this translates into better penetration of a canopy is a fair question. In laboratory trials, use of 10” or 20” spacing did not improve penetration into a broadleaf canopy. But if the lower boom height afforded by the narrower spacing was utilized, some improvements in the deposit of angled sprays onto vertical targets was observed.
Adjusting to Narrower Spacings
As we showed earlier, use of 15” or 10” spacing booms for broadcast sprays requires a smaller nozzle size to achieve the same spray volumes as the 20” spacing. If boom height remains constant, narrower spacings result in greater pattern overlap which provides more latitude for sway. Alternately, lower boom heights can be used.
Using smaller nozzles on narrower spacing presents some challenges. Generally, smaller nozzle size means finer spray quality. If an operator wants to retain the spray quality they had on a 20″ spacing, they may opt to use lower pressure (not advisable for non-PWM systems) or swap to different nozzle design that can produce the desired spray quality at the lower flow rate.
Smaller nozzles are more prone to plugging, so that needs to be managed with filtration, filling practices and water sourcing. Be aware of the the product formulations and their requirements for filter mesh size. Most dry products specify a 50 mesh filter (or coarser). Also, check size options for nozzles. The smallest size for most nozzle models is 015, but certain PWM-specific nozzles are only available in 03 or larger.
The marriage of narrow spacings with individual nozzle shutoff can result in a versatile system capable of producing high resolution banded sprays in narrow seeded crops. For example, consider a boom with a 10” nozzle spacing spacing that matches the seeder row spacing. The operator can shift from 10” to 20” or 30” from the cab if the valve control software allows it. With accurate guidance and good boom levelling, topdressing foliar products (e.g. nutrients, fungicides) can follow the crop row precisely.
Spot Sprays
Spot sprays present a situation where compromises are needed. Some, such as WEEDit, utilize narrower nozzle spacings to allow better treatment resolution and increase product savings. Any one nozzle or sets of adjacent nozzles may be triggered by the sensor. For single nozzle activation, to preserve the value of the better resolution a uniform, narrow band of spray needs to be created. This means a 30° or 40° fan angle from a banding nozzle will be necessary. For example, a 24” boom height will result in a 13” band with a 30° fan, and an 18” band with a 40° fan. In the latter case, the dose would be diluted by 80%, wasting much of the potential savings.
Figure 10: Boom height is critical for banded sprays and for spot sprays. Too wide a pattern on a single nozzle reduces dose, too narrow creates misses.
Frequently, a patch of weeds will trigger several adjacent nozzles. Now these individual bands need to work together to create a uniform swath. This will inevitably require some overlap to avoid gaps, but too much overlap will result in bands where twice the dose will be applied. A tapered fan may suit this situation better. As a result of these varying needs, tolerances for spot spray boom height are even more strict than for broadcast spraying. More thoughts on spot spray nozzle selection are here.
Conclusions
Narrower nozzle spacings on a broadcast boom allow somewhat lower boom heights and these can in turn reduce drift and improve deposition of sprays. Lower flow nozzles will be needed with narrower spacings, requiring management of plugging and potentially a more drift-prone spray quality. The value of narrower spacings depends on the availability of booms that control sway, allowing them to operate at uniform, low heights.
January 12, 2022
The Ideal Sprayer (an open letter to sprayer manufacturers)
Today’s sprayer has to excel at a lot of things. It has to have capacity and low weight. It has to go fast but be comfortable. It needs wide booms that stay level over complex terrain. It has to deliver the right spray volume at the right spray quality for the job. It has to be easy to fill and easy to clean. And of course, it has to be reliable, affordable, and come with dealer support.
We’ve definitely made progress in many of these areas. But the overall package still leaves lots of room for improvement and doesn’t address some issues that are of importance to applicators. Is it time for a reset?
Let’s say cost is no object. Here’s where I think the industry could go.
Focus on spray delivery
Spraying is done to protect crops. We need to do it without harming the environment while being economical with the inputs. These three tenets make up the Application Triangle, sometimes known as the 3 Es of spraying: Efficacy, Environment, Efficiency. The triangle represents the need for balance. A gain in one or two areas often requires a loss in another. That’s why there has never been a so-called “silver bullet” in spraying.
Priority 1: Only spray when and where required. Site specific treatments and IPM have been slow to make their way to the spraying world partly because of the low cost of inputs, but also because of difficulties defining and mapping areas that require different rates or products. The machine learning revolution is changing that. Green on Brown or Green on Green sensing can do more than save inputs. They can generate maps that document the change of weed patches over time, identifying priority areas and threshold densities and flagging problems early.
Priority 2: Integrate air assist. Air carries small droplets towards the target, protecting them from displacement by travel-induced or ambient winds. Once there, air can improve target interception and retention. It has to be done right, though, as improper adjustment can result in the opposite outcome. The reason it’s high on this list is because it improves efficacy and environmental protection at a modest cost.
Priority 3: Improve droplet size control. Nozzle design has improved, but the overall range of spray qualities that is achievable for any specific nozzle remains narrow. Sprays can be made finer or coarser with spray pressure, but this has implications for pattern uniformity. Twin Fluid nozzles currently offer the widest range of spray qualities, allowing one nozzle to do it all. We simply need greater droplet size flexibility on the spray boom.
Priority 4: Use nozzle-specific rate control. At minimum, a sprayer needs a system that allows for individual nozzle rate control within a wide window, say 4:1. This allows consistent dosing over a wide speed range, turn compensation, or local adjustments to dose for specific (sensed) canopy conditions. By layering direct injection at the nozzle on top of this, the sprayer can change rate and volume independently. Being able to spray the right amount in the right spray quality at the right volume, where needed completes the opportunity created by pest and canopy sensing.
Create better infrastructure
The backbone of the sprayer, the frame, drivetrain, boom, tank, pump, and plumbing, are responsible for carrying and delivering the spray liquid. Poor management of these variables results in an unproductive, heavy machine.
Priority 1: Prepare booms for future. A limiting factor in sprayer performance is boom width and stability. Consistent and low boom heights are the cornerstone of good application, ensuring uniform distribution, reducing drift potential, and improving targeting within the canopy. But perhaps as importantly, stable booms are essential for accurate optical spot spraying and any other sensing tasks that will rise in importance. Set a standard for sway, say target height plus or minus 10 cm along the width of the boom, 90% of the time. Do the same for yaw. Accommodate brackets for sensors and wiring harnesses when designing the boom fold.
Priority 2: Improve plumbing. Poorly executed sprayer plumbing causes waste and decontamination headaches. Although rubber hoses attached to plastic fittings provide a very versatile and generic building block, they generate and hide countless niches in which pesticide mixtures or active ingredient residue can accumulate. A simplified design that incorporates more engineered stainless steel tubing, smooth directional and dimensional transitions, interior surfaces that don’t accumulate residues and generate more efficient flows – all these would improve many aspects of the spray operation. It needs to be goal oriented – i.e., zero waste in priming and cleaning, guaranteed decontaminated after a rinse cycle. Draining on the ground should not be necessary.
Priority 3: Save weight. Weight causes compaction and eats fuel. Advanced materials or techniques can save weight while preserving strength. Savings can be applied to capacity. We need to explore advanced materials and trussed or exoskeletal designs (see “Aerodynamics”).
Priority 4: Consider aerodynamics in chassis and boom design. Wind blowing past a tractor, tank or boom, or counter-rotating air from wheels creates turbulence that displaces small droplets within it, reducing uniformity. Cleaner air makes it easier to use smaller droplets, easier to implement air assist or any other drift-reducing technology. This is no small task, as air can come from any direction. But as units become larger and travel faster, this effect can’t be ignored. Monocoque designs that use aerodynamic exteriors to carry machine weight may provide an answer.
Provide quality control
Spraying can be a guessing game, hence the terms “Spray and Pray”. We don’t know the outcome for days or weeks, depending on the mode of action, and by the time the result is known, it is too late to do anything if it’s unsatisfactory. But we can do better in assuring some sort of standard.
Priority 1: Confirm pressure, flow, and patterns at nozzles. The average sprayer has one flow- and one pressure-sensor. It can confirm the flow of the entire spray boom but cannot do that at the nozzle level. PWM has helped, by inferring flow from duty cycle. But actual liquid flow, and its pressure, remain unverified at the spray tip. A visual inspection of the pattern is necessary, and this is not only impractical but also wasteful and potentially hazardous.
Priority 2: Characterize canopy. If we knew the crop canopy was dense or sparse, we could adjust the water volume or rate of the product accordingly. LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) can characterize the physical structure of an object that would indicate density or porosity for which a dose (or droplet size, or air) adjustment may be necessary. This is not some future technology. The iPhone 12 Pro has it. Even RGB image processing could do something very similar.
Priority 3: Confirm coverage and drift. Say we’ve characterized the canopy and adjusted the atomization to suit. Is it having the intended impact? We will need a way to verify that the settings of the sprayer result in the required canopy penetration and coverage, even drift, on-the-go. We would need sprayer-mounted sensors that see spray deposits or an airborne spray cloud. The verification must be fast enough to make corrections during the spray operation. This kind of quality control provides the feedback loop to the first priority, spray delivery. It creates a perfect environment for machine learning and continuous improvement.
Priority 4: Improve user interface. The complexity of modern equipment monitors is great if you’re familiar with their features. But if you’re a new user or less comfortable with layers of screens and buttons and warning beepers, navigating the monitor can be a game stopper. Can we have beginner modes? Or a system where the monitor more actively engages with the user, asking questions or reminding a novice of key settings? The friendliness of the interface is a sleeper issue, it seems less important at first look but can over-ride many equipment features because of the power of a positive user experience.
I challenge sprayer manufacturers to conceptualize and show us the ideal sprayer they’re working towards. The perfect unit may never reach us, as this proposal is rife with technological and cost barriers. But it is nonetheless important to identify priorities and identify possible ways to meet them. As we creep towards the solution with incremental improvements, recall that its not the size of the step that matters, it’s the direction.
October 8, 2021
Spray and Soil Fumigant Buffer Zones in Canada
Spray buffer zones are no-spray areas required at the time of application between the area being treated and the closest downwind edge of a sensitive terrestrial or aquatic habitat. Spray buffer zones reduce the amount of spray drift that enters downwind, non-target areas.
Sensitive Terrestrial Habitats
Sensitive terrestrial habitats can include hedgerows, grasslands, shelterbelts, windbreaks, forested areas and woodlots. Crops and private properties adjacent to treated areas are not considered to be sensitive terrestrial habitats and do not require spray buffer zones. However, labelled spray buffer zones are a good indicator of potential damage to adjacent vegetation. Applicators are responsible for ensuring their spraying programs do not adversely affect neighbouring properties.
Sensitive Aquatic Habitats
Sensitive aquatic habitats can include lakes, rivers, streams (channelized or natural), creeks, reservoirs, marshes, wetlands and ponds. Temporary bodies of water resulting from flooding or drainage to low-lying areas are not considered sensitive aquatic habitats. Nor are aquatic drainage ditches or seasonal water courses that are dry at the time of application. Water body depth will determine the buffer zone distance, as indicated on the pesticide label. Downslope open water may also require a vegetative filter strip .
The pesticide label will indicate when a spray buffer zone is required. The distance will depend on the product used, the method of application and the crop being sprayed. In some cases, the buffer zone may be modified using Health Canada’s Spray Buffer Zone Calculator . When provincial and label restrictions differ, or label restrictions differ between tank mix partners, use the greatest distance.
Buffer zones or No-Spray zones physically separate the end of the spray swath for the nearest downwind sensitive area.
Spray Buffer Zone Calculator
Unless forbidden by the pesticide label, Health Canada’s Spray Buffer Zone Calculator may permit applicators to reduce the size of the spray buffer zone specified on a pesticide label. To be eligible, the product label must specify a field or aerial spray quality coarser than “Very Fine” and finer than “Very Coarse”. All airblast spray qualities are applicable.
Modifications are based on meteorological conditions, sprayer configuration and the application method at the time of application. If modified spray buffer zone distances are less than provincial or municipal distances, use the greater distance.
Applicators that choose to use the calculator must retain a copy of the summary page for at least one year following the application to demonstrate compliance with label directions.
Vegetative Filter Strips
A vegetative filter strip is a permanently vegetated strip of land that sits between an agricultural field and downslope surface waters. Vegetative filter strips reduce the amount of pesticide entering surface waters from runoff by slowing runoff water and filtering out pesticides carried with the runoff.
Pesticide labels may require a vegetative filter strip, or recommend one, as a best management practice. They must be at least 10 metres wide from edge of field to the surface water body and be composed primarily, but not exclusively, of grasses.
Spray buffer zones do not apply to vegetative filter strips unless there is a pre-existing sensitive terrestrial habitat within them. Therefore, vegetative filter strips may overlap spray buffer zones when open water is both downslope and downwind (see illustration). In this case, the minimum 10 metres vegetative filter strip distance must be observed, but the set-back can be larger based on spray buffer zone, provincial or municipal restrictions.
Soil Fumigant Buffer Zones
Soil Fumigant Buffer Zones are mandatory, untreated perimeters surrounding the treated field. They limit user exposure and increase the protection of workers, bystanders and the environment. The distance will depend on the application method, product rate and field size, as indicated on the pesticide label. An Emergency Response Plan is required when residences or businesses are located within 90 metres of the buffer zone perimeter.
Soil fumigant buffer zones have a time component. This Buffer Zone Period begins at the start of the application and ends a minimum 48 hours following the application. Respiratory protection and stop-work triggers, as specified on the pesticide label, will apply to anyone present in the buffer zone area during the buffer zone period.
Buildings and residential areas within the soil fumigant buffer zone must be unoccupied during this period. Unless in transit, non-handlers (including field workers) must be excluded from the soil fumigant buffer zone during this period. Entry is permitted for fumigant handlers with appropriate certification, emergency personnel and local, provincial, or federal officials performing inspection, sampling, or other similar duties.
Image from www.onspecialitycrops.ca
Soil fumigant buffer zone signage must be posted within 24 hours prior to the application and remain posted until the buffer zone period expires. Signage must include, but is not limited to, the date and time the buffer zone period ends and the name, address, and telephone number of the applicator. Soil fumigant buffer zone signage must be located at the outer perimeter of the buffer zone, at all entrances to the field, and along likely routes where people not under the owner’s control may approach. Soil fumigant buffer zone signs are in addition to, and do not replace, fumigant application block signage .
Applicators must develop a written Fumigation Management Plan prior to the start of any application. The plan outlines key steps to ensure a safe and effective fumigation, including site conditions, buffer zones and emergency response planning. Both the owner/operator of the fumigated area and the fumigant applicator must retain signed fumigant management plans as well as a summary of Post-Application Procedures for two years following the application.
October 5, 2021
How Canadian Crop Protection Products are Assessed for Safety
As originally published by The Grower, August 2020.
Pests such as insects, diseases, and weeds can affect our quality of life in many different ways. Pests can represent a threat to public health and the environment as well as create substantial negative impacts to the economy if they are not sufficiently managed.
Crop protection products or pesticides play an important role in agriculture and other sectors in managing pests. These products can be very broad in scope; they include, as defined by the federal government:
“A product, an organism or a substance, including a product, an organism or a substance derived through biotechnology, that consists of its active ingredient, formulants and contaminants, and that is manufactured, represented, distributed or used as a means for directly or indirectly controlling, destroying, attracting or repelling a pest or for mitigating or preventing its injurious, noxious or troublesome effects.”
While dealing with pests is an important aspect of society, crop protection products can also represent a hazard. If not properly managed, their use has the potential to pose risks to the health and well-being of Canadians and to our environment. As such, crop protection products are highly regulated. So how do we ensure the safety of these products in Canada?
The federal government has the responsibility of reviewing and registering pest management products before they can be sold or used in Canada. This is covered by the Pest Control Products Act (PCPA). The primary objective of the PCPA is the prevention of unacceptable risks to human health and the environment resulting from the use of these products. The PCPA also recognizes that pest management is an important factor to both the economy and quality of life in Canada; however, these are considered secondary objectives to health and the environment.
It is the mission of the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) based in Ottawa to execute the implementation of the PCPA and its objectives. Of the 450 employees at PMRA, 73% are scientists, including biologists, toxicologists, epidemiologists, and chemists. Evaluations of products by PMRA are extensive and use a weight of evidence approach that considers the nature and quality of scientific sources in their decision making.
Before the PMRA approves any product for use, regardless of origin, it must undergo a thorough science-based risk assessment and meet strict health and environmental standards. If the proposed use of a product poses unacceptable risks to human health or the environment, it is not registered for use in Canada. It is the responsibility of the company or individual seeking registration to prove their product does not pose unacceptable risks through scientific studies.
During evaluation or re-evaluation of a product, PMRA considers a comprehensive toxicology database to assess potential health effects. Both shorter term and longer-term effects are considered. These include, but are not limited to, studies to characterize acute and chronic toxicity, carcinogenic potential, reproductive and developmental toxicity, immunotoxicity, neurotoxicity, genotoxicity, and endocrine disruption potential. The PMRA assessments are also informed by epidemiological evidence, general scientific knowledge, and published scientific information.
In exposure assessments, sensitive populations and life stages are specifically addressed, including infants, children, and women of child-bearing age. Consideration is given to different activities, dietary habits, food intake, and body weight of children versus adults. A product will only be registered if this estimated exposure raises no concerns. Once this is determined, the PMRA will ensure the label directions indicate the appropriate use instructions to best minimize exposure.
Exposure to a product may occur through different routes (oral, dermal, and inhalation) and pathways (dietary, drinking water, and non-commercial uses). In order to fully assess potential risks, the PMRA conducts aggregate assessments which consider these different pathways and routes. Where it has been demonstrated that a group of pesticides share a common mechanism of toxicity, they are subject to a cumulative risk assessment in which the combined aggregate risks are assessed. In occupational settings such as agriculture and forestry, exposure may occur while handling or applying pesticides. As well, workers re-entering treated areas may be exposed to pesticide residues. These occupational risks are also assessed during the PMRA review.
The PMRA also sets science-based maximum residue limits (MRLs) on food commodities to ensure the food Canadians eat is safe. These limits are enforced by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. The MRLs established for each crop are set at levels well below the amount that could pose a health concern.
Environmental risk assessment integrates the environmental exposure and ecotoxicity information to evaluate the potential for adverse effects on non-target species. This integration is achieved by comparing estimated environmental concentrations (EECs) with concentrations at which adverse effects may occur. The EECs are concentrations of product in various environments, such as in food, water, soil, and air. The EECs can be estimated using standard models, which take into consideration the application rate(s), chemical properties, and environmental fate properties, including the dissipation of the product between applications. In re-evaluations of registered products, EECs can be taken from empirical data.
Ecotoxicity information includes acute and chronic toxicity data for various organisms or groups of organisms from both terrestrial and aquatic habitats including invertebrates, vertebrates, and plants. Toxicity endpoints used in risk assessments may be adjusted to account for potential differences in species sensitivity as well as varying protection goals such as protection at the community, population, or individual level.
A vast amount of scientific data is reviewed when evaluating the safety of crop protection products in Canada. These extensive reviews are posted publicly and include consultations where any stakeholders are invited to submit comments. There is good reason to have high confidence that crop protection products are safe for Canadians and the environment under the conditions of registration.
For those who want a more in depth read, check out the PMRA’s guidance document overview.
September 15, 2021
How Much Horsepower do I Need?
How much horsepower (HP) do you need (really) when pairing a tractor and a towed sprayer or any other PTO powered implement? This important question should be asked BEFORE purchasing any towed implement. Surprisingly, there’s not much guidance out there, so you might hear answers like:
1. Whatever my tractor has must be enough… whatever that happens to be.
2. What?
3. The right amount of HP is what I can afford. Erma, grab that milk can full of egg money…
4. MOAR! (Yes, we know how “more” is spelled, but memes are funny).
Skeletor knows horsepower
Rating Tractor Horsepower
If you thought there was only one way to rate the horsepower of a tractor, well, you’d be wrong. At its simplest, horsepower is:
(torque × engine revolutions) ÷ a constant
We’ll expand on this later. The rub comes in how you define each of these factors and where you measure the power. Let’s start with something simple like engine speed, which is expressed in Revolutions Per Minute or RPM’s.
Engine Speed
So, if horsepower is the result of torque times engine speed, what speed do the manufacturers plug into the formula? One of two values are used:
1. Power Take-Off (PTO) Engine Speed
This is the engine RPM’s that produce the rated operating speed on the PTO. When the PTO is engaged, the engine is directly and mechanically connected to the PTO shaft. Therefore, maintaining the engine at the rated PTO speed, typically between 1,500 and 2,300 RPM depending on if it’s gas, diesel, turbocharged or not, will keep the PTO spinning at a uniform 540 or 1,000 RPM (the two typical PTO speeds) regardless of the driving speed.
2. Maximum Engine Speed.
This is the engine’s maximum intermittent operating speed… just shy of destroying said engine. An engine rated using the maximum speed gives you a false sense of security, because to get that horsepower you’ll be burning a ton of diesel, over-speeding your PTO implement, and wearing your tractor out very, very quickly. You wouldn’t drive your car around town in low gear because you’d redline the engine. Why would you do it to your tractor?
In the speedometer/tachometer (above the steering wheel) on this beautiful old tractor, the first black bar is the PTO rated RPM. The second is PTO Max. Operating with the PTO engaged above PTO Max can be damaging to the implement and to the tractor, and dangerous for the operator.
Horsepower Basics
OK, now we are ready to dig in a little deeper into defining tractor horsepower. What does it mean if, for example, your tractor is rated at 65 HP? We’ll skip the history lesson on watching the output of horses over an average day and move to the modern definition. Horsepower from a rotating shaft (such as the output of an engine) is:
Horsepower = [Torque in foot-pounds × Engine speed in Revolutions Per Minute (RPM)] ÷ 5,252
Here is a typical tractor torque curve. Notice how after peak torque, RPM’s climb quickly but net HP doesn’t. Unless specified, we can assume this is Engine Horsepower, not PTO Horsepower. If the above Torque/HP curves were your tractor, the PTO speed would likely be 1,500-1,600 RPM. According to the graph that would equate to about 82 HP. Running the engine up by 40% (2,100 RPM which is the max speed in this case, gets you about 98 horsepower. That’s only a 20% improvement. Remember, this is engine horsepower, not PTO horsepower, so this may not all be available for you to use. Image from JD.
Total Versus PTO Horsepower
Perhaps our tractor’s 65 HP rating describes Engine Peak Horsepower. This is what the engine would produce on a test stand, and it likely uses the maximum engine speed. This rating is a bit disingenuous. Not only because you will probably operate it at rated PTO engine speed, but also because some power is lost to internal processes, like the power steering pump, automatic transmission pump, alternator, auxiliary hydraulics, et cetera. So peak engine horsepower isn’t usually a very useful number unless you are in marketing and like big numbers.
A more accurate and useful rating is the Power Take-Off (PTO) Horsepower. This is the amount of horsepower available to do work at the PTO shaft. This may be at the rated PTO engine speed or the PTO Maximum speed. Estimating power using either speed offers a much more realistic rating of what you have to work with. As previously noted, PTO Rated Speed is usually near the speed where the engine creates the highest torque per revolution. This is often called the Power Band. Operation in this engine speed range will use the least diesel and result in the greatest amount of life in the machine.
Another important thing about PTO Horsepower is that this is the total amount of power available to do work. This could all go to PTO when the tractor is standing still, but both locomotion and the horsepower required to run the implement need to be subtracted from this number. So if your tractor is indeed 65 PTO horsepower, that’s the actual amount of horsepower you likely have to work with in real life.
In this excerpt from a Kubota Spec sheet, you see that the Rated Engine horsepower is quite a bit higher than the PTO horsepower. A 72 HP “rated” tractor really has 61 horsepower for you to work with. The 106 horsepower version on the right really has 91 PTO horsepower.
The Horsepower that Matters
To sum things up, PTO Horsepower is the number you really need to care about. All this up to now just to describe the nuances of how horsepower is expressed. No wonder HP is a topic that’s avoided. If you can find or download the manual, now you at least have the tools to get to how much horsepower you have to work with.
Maximum Load
In order to answer the question of how much HP you need, you must consider your operation. You need to size your tractor for the biggest load it will ever be used for, even if you only do that thing once a year. Typically this would be a sprayer, rotavator or a brush flail. The rest of the year you won’t burn much extra diesel if you aren’t using the power in a bigger tractor, but you can’t draw on horsepower that isn’t there in a smaller one.
Though it’s not common, you can have too big a tractor. You need only watch “Clarkson’s Farm” for ample evidence (and a chuckle).
The enormous and infamous Lamborghini tractor that starred in “Clarkson’s Farm” on Amazon Prime is a good example of taking horsepower a little too far.
The Basics of Estimating Load
Now that you have the extremes in mind, let’s get to scratchin’. There are three things you must know to determine the maximum load:
1. Locomotion – The power needed to move the tractor and implement
2. Implement Power – The power needed to operate the implement
3. Safety Factor – This is a buffer that gives us a little extra just in case.
For the following guesstimates let’s assume you are doing orchard and vineyard work with a compact/narrow tractor. There really aren’t any hard and fast equations for this, but these will get you in the ballpark. If you are a nut grower with full sized tractors or a vegetable/field crop grower, you may need to scale up.
Locomotion
People discount it, but the power required just to move the tractor and the implement around is substantial. If the implement is a fixed tower sprayer with a 500 gallon tank, this might require 15-20 HP on flat, dry land. If your topography includes hills, or your terrain includes mud or tall grass, you may need to double that requirement. 45 HP just to move around before you even engage the PTO. Speed matters, too; If you are driving 5 mph, you’ll need twice the HP versus driving 2.5 mph.
C’mon Tom! Faster! Redline those RPM’s! Image from www.pigtailpals.com
Implement Power
The manufacturer of the implement should be able to tell you how much horsepower the implement requires. Small, three-point hitch airblast sprayers may only require 10-15 PTO HP. Larger tower sprayers may require 40-50 PTO HP. Brush flails may take 25-45 HP.
This is where things can get sticky and you need to make sure you’re both talking the same language. Some manufacturers will tell you how much power the implement takes, others will skip all the steps in this article and go right to recommending the size tractor they think you’ll need. If you’re unsure, ask. Be sure to factor in the locomotion requirements discussed earlier, the dealer may not understand your conditions in their general recommendation but usually can provide some clarity with a little more information from you.
Safety Factor
It’s always a bad idea to run at 100% of your power capability. Most of you reading this article are likely working with mid-life or older tractors with a few thousand hours on them. Ol’ Bessie loses some of the pep in her step over time. After engine break-in, the tractor will slowly lose power capability over its life. The harder you work it, the faster this occurs. Enthalpy happens (now that’s a great tee-shirt idea). Plan for it. Once you have an idea of your worst-case locomotion and implement power needs, add them up and give yourself another 15% (That is, multiply by 1.15).
Summing It Up
Now we can finally answer the question. In order to determine how much tractor horsepower you need, follow these steps:
1. Understand the real PTO horsepower of the tractor you are considering. This is the only thing that matters. You should be able to find online documentation for this if it doesn’t come with the tractor or you’ve filed it somewhere that you’ll never forget…
2. Establish the maximum load you are likely to encounter. Calculate this by multiplying the sum of Locomotion and Implement Power requirements by a 1.15 Safety Factor.
3. If you are still unsure, discuss these factors with your trusted local tractor dealer, ensuring you are both speaking the same language. It is better to err on too much tractor than not enough, but do so within reason.
Looking at our original orchard application with a 500 gallon tank and a larger tower type sprayer, travelling around 3 mph:
35 HP for locomotion, 40 HP to run the sprayer and 15% safety puts us at 35 + 40 + [0.15 × (35+40)] = 86.25 PTO HP
Wishing you all MOAR POWER and perfect spraying weather.
August 17, 2021