Category: Coverage

Articles related to horizontal boom sprayer coverage

Deciding on the Right Way to Spray
“What is the right way to apply this pesticide?” It’s one of the classic questions. Applicators know that spray method determines the efficacy of the application as well as its environmental impact. And it has to use time and water resources efficiently to make sense.
To answer the question properly, we need to take things one step at a time.
1. Canopy: To start, we need to look at the canopy that our application will go into. If it’s an early season spray into a seedling crop, then the canopy won’t be much of a barrier. Lower water volumes can be possible. Droplet size will only depend on the target type and the pesticide mode of action.
Small weeds require more smaller droplets to secure effective targetting
If it’s a later application into the bottom of a maturing canopy, the foliage may intercept the spray before it reaches the target area. More water will likely be needed, and droplet size may become more critical for getting the spray to its destination. Dense canopies are a real challenge and lower-canopy deposition usually benefits from finer sprays because the small droplets can turn corners better.
Dense canopies are very difficult for a spray to penetrate. Higher water volumes and smaller droplets are the key tools that help.
2. Water Volume: Regardless of canopy, the range of application possibilities will depend on the water volume and spray quality combination. It’s math: assuming some constant amount of coverage on each leaf, more layers of foliage will require more water. Using less water volume will make it necessary to use finer sprays to keep droplet numbers constant. More water will allow coarser sprays. This decision has implications for drift, and by extension, affects the number of hours we can spray in a day. More drift tolerance means better application timing and overall productivity.
The tradeoffs between water volumes and droplet sizes are seen in this figure. Once a certain threshold of coverage has been reached, a further increase in coverage may not provide any additional control.
3. Target Type and Droplet Behaviour: Whatever spray we use, the target plant or insect needs to intercept, collect, and retain the spray droplet. This is where the fun begins. Target leaves may be vertical or horizontal, large or small. Their waxy surface may be easy-to-wet or difficult-to-wet. The general rules of thumb are that larger, more horizontal and easy-to-wet surfaces are better suited for coarser sprays – these are intercepted more efficiently and stick readily. That is a reason why most broadleaf weeds and crops are very compatible with low-drift sprays.
Large targets (left) are most efficient at intercepting larger droplets (provided droplet bounce is not a problem) because smaller droplets may evade capture. Smaller targets are usually missed by larger droplets but are very capable of capturing smaller droplets.
On the other hand, smaller, vertically oriented and difficult-to-wet plants require finer sprays for effective targetting. Larger drops tend to miss these targets or bounce off them. Most grassy, and some broadleaf weeds (especially at early growth stages) fall into this category.
4. Mode of Action: There are nearly 30 modes of action on the herbicide world, and another ten modes for insecticides and fifteen for fungicides. The effect of droplet size and water volume on their uptake and translocation varies, and it’s probably not correct to generalize too much. There is one notable product, glyphosate. For this product, research has consistently shown that large droplets and more concentrated mixtures provide better uptake. But we’ve also seen problems when this is over-done, causing localized toxicity and limiting translocation.
With many products, we’ve sometimes seen better performance with finer sprays due to improved coverage, yet at other times less performance due to rapid evaporation. On the whole, it’s probably still fair to say that contact modes of action require finer sprays and higher water volumes, even if there is the occasional exception. And systemic products can typically handle coarser sprays. We’ve always been surprised just how coarse we seem to be able to push the system before any loss of efficacy.
What does it all mean? In spraying, we need to accommodate a lot of diversity. The average application is broad-spectrum, targeting large and small broadleaf and grassy plants. Many sprays are tank mixes of several modes of action. It’s impossible to prescribe a specific spray for each situation. We need a little bit of everything. And the spray should not be drift-prone. It’s easy to see that we need to aim for the middle to accommodate everything.
The traditional flat fan nozzle, either in its conventional or low-drift form, generates a wide range of droplet sizes that can range from 5 µm to about 2000 µm. If we need fine droplets, they’re there. If we need larger droplets, they’re also there. The proportion of the total spray volume in each specific size fraction depends on the nozzle choice and size, the spray pressure, and the adjuvant mix in the tank. Overall, the system is very robust, and although it requires some tweaking, a well chosen average spray can achieve most tasks well enough.
A typical spray quality chart shows the expected spray quality for a range of nozzle sizes and pressures. Spray quality measurements follow standards set by the ISO and ASABE, these change from time to time and therefore charts tend to become outdated.
Our research has repeatedly shown that a Coarse spray is a good starting point that does most things well. It is acceptable to move into a Very Coarse or coarser category provided water volumes are also raised, and provided the target types and modes of action are suited for this change.
It is rarely necessary to spray finer than Coarse, and when this is done, we recommend against spraying finer than a Medium spray. There is simply no advantage from product performance, and drift risk becomes unacceptable.
Tweaking the System. In order to maximize the performance of your spray, and the efficiency of your overall spray program, here is some advice:
1. Know the spray quality of your nozzles, and their response to spray pressure. Manufacturers publish this information in their catalogues and on-line. Make this your homework assignment.
2. Use the coarsest spray that you can afford to. This will make the application safer, it will widen the weather window, and it will simply let you get more done in a day or a season. Coarse sprays work.
3. Use spray pressure and water volume to fine tune the application for a specific purpose. If using a contact product, you can keep the same nozzle you used for a systemic product. Apply more water or use more spray pressure to generate more droplets.
4. Do not skimp on water. Higher water volumes tend to make an application more uniform, robust, and crop-safe. Spray coverage improves. Canopy penetration improves. Coarser sprays are possible. The only exception to this rule is glyphosate, which works better in lower water volumes. But with higher glyphosate rates and more tank mixing, even that exception is disappearing.
5. Learn as much as you can about how your pesticides work and where they need to be in your canopy. Apply your knowledge to select optimal water volumes and spray qualities.
6. Be wary of people who advise very low water volumes in conjunction with fine sprays. They want to appeal to your need for efficiency, but do so at the cost of consistency and environmental stewardship. Plus these types of applications are illegal for many of our products.
June 7, 2017
How Do Hydraulic Low-Drift Nozzles Work?
Low drift nozzles have become the standard way to apply pesticides from a boom sprayer. In order to use them properly, we need to understand how they are designed and how they are intended to work.
Sprayer nozzles have three functions on a sprayer.
1. Metering flow
2. Atomizing liquid
3. Distributing liquid uniformly
Accurate metering of the flow is done through precise machining or molding of the nozzle.
Atomization of a liquid occurs by imposing some sort of force on the liquid that causes it to break up from a stream or a sheet into droplets of the desired spray quality.
Distribution is done by generating a pattern that, in combination with adjacent nozzles, produces similar dosages in appropriate droplet sizes and densities, along the target area.
All three of these functions are confirmed by the nozzle manufacturer, but the properties are likely to change with wear.
Atomization
Atomization forces could be air-shear (used in some aircraft, airblast, or twin-fluid nozzles), centrifugal energy (used in rotary atomizers), electrical energy (used in some electrostatic sprayers), or hydraulic pressure (used in the most common nozzles, the flat fan or hollow-cone tips).
Typically, the higher the applied energy, the greater the break-up of the spray. More air-shear resulting from faster aircraft or fan speeds, faster rotation of a cage, or more hydraulic pressure all have similar effects: they create finer sprays.
Most nozzles produce polydisperse sprays, comprised of a large number of different droplet sizes. For hydraulic flat fan nozzles, droplets ranging from 5 to 2000 µm can be produced. The exact distribution of the volume in these droplet sizes depends on the nozzle design, the spray liquid, and the pressure. Here are three examples, representing approximately Medium, Coarse, and Extremely Coarse sprays.
Droplet size distribution by number and volume from a Medium spray. Note the majority of the droplets are small, but the majority of the volume (dose) is in somewhat larger droplets.
Droplet size distribution by number and volume from a Coarse spray. Like in the Medium spray, the majority of the droplets are small although there is fewer of them. The majority of the volume is in intermediate sized droplets.
Droplet size distribution by number and volume from a Very Coarse spray. While the majority of the droplets are small as in the finer sprays, their overall number is sharply reduced from the finer sprays. The volume is now in the largest droplet sizes.
Let’s focus on hydraulic nozzles, by far the most common in agriculture.
Spray Pressure
Spray pressure is a useful tool for controlling droplet size from any hydraulic nozzle. Need a finer spray? Add pressure. It is also the basis for the age-old recommendation that lower pressures are a good tool for reducing drift.
We impose practical limits on the upper and lower range of recommended pressures based on several other factors, chief among them the spray pattern.
Spray patterns of a certain width, or angle, are required for proper pattern overlap. The convention is to space hydraulic nozzles at 15 or 20 inch intervals along a boom, and operate them at about 20” above the target. Boom height values will depend on the fan angle of the nozzle and the degree of overlap required. For low-drift flat fan tips, a minimum 100% overlap is best. With 100% overlap, the spray pattern width at target height is twice the nozzle spacing. With this approach, at any point under the boom, the target receives droplets from the closest two nozzle patterns.
Pattern angles are published by manufacturers, but in practice, angles often differ from those values and can vary with spray formulation. Importantly, they tend to become narrower at lower pressures. The exact pressure at which this happens depends on the tip design, but experience shows that pressures below 20 psi for conventional nozzles, and 30 to 40 psi for low-drift nozzles, result in poor (too narrow) patterns. Narrow patterns reduce overlap, resulting in poor distribution.
TeeJet AI11003 at 20 psi
TeeJet AI 11003 at 80 psi
We might also limit pressures at the upper end, based on drift potential. Most conventional flat fan nozzles, for example, drift excessively at pressures above 60 psi or so, hence that limit.
Low Drift Nozzles
Low drift nozzles were quickly adopted by applicators due to their ability to reduce drift and thereby widen the window of safe spray application. They work by using a two-stage design (often called “pre-orifice”) to reduce the internal operating pressure of the tip. The pre-orifice, the original liquid inlet, is round and sized for the nominal flow of the tip. The exit orifice is eliptical in shape and has a larger flow capacity than the pre-orifice, by about 1.2-fold to 2.5-fold. The larger exit creates an internal pressure drop, so the pattern formation produces larger droplets as though the operating pressure had been reduced. Most modern low-drift tips also introduce air into the nozzle via a built-in venturi. This further suppresses the formation of driftable droplets and introduces air into the interior of the nozzle, adding some pressure back to the system.. The Albuz AVI nozzle schematic below explains the venturi design.
Cross-section of the Albuz AVI venturi nozzle.
The tapered channel inside the nozzle is a venturi, which draws air into the nozzle via integrated ports. When low-drift nozzles are operated beside conventional nozzles at the same pressure, low-drift nozzles produce much fewer driftable fines, and also more larger droplets.
But while the two-stage design is useful for managing drift, it also conceals the actual operating pressure of the exit orifice in these tips. The exit orifice is important – it is the part of the nozzle that does the atomizing and that forms the pattern.
Let’s illustrate the pressure inside a low-drift tip by operating an air-induced low-drift nozzle at 60 psi. This nozzle has a pre-orifice size of 03 (0.3 US gpm at 40 psi, blue) and an exit orifice size of 06 (0.6 US gpm at 40 psi, grey). The operator sees 60 psi on the gauge. What is the exit orifice pressure?
The exit tip has twice the flow-rate of the pre-orifice, and therefore operates at one quarter the pressure, or 15 psi. Recall the square-root relationship between flow rate and pressure.
The relationship between spray pressure and flow rate. Doubling the flow rate requires a quadrupling of pressure
That’s not the whole story. The internal venturi is drawing additional air into the nozzle chamber, and depending on the operating pressure, this could be from 5 to 15 psi. The amount added depends on the specific nozzle, its flow rate, and its pressure. Let’s add 10 psi in this case. The exit tip is actually at 25 psi.
Now let’s assume the pressure gauge reads 40 psi, and that the venturi generates 5 psi additional pressure. The actual exit orifice pressure is now only 15 psi. This is at the lower limit at which a spray is atomized, and at which a good pattern can form.
Our general recommendation with venturi-style low-drift tips has been to avoid pressures below 30 or 40 psi for that reason. We’re trying to prevent the spray becoming too coarse for adequate coverage, and also to prevent the spray pattern from collapsing.
The upside of this design is that the same principle allows for much higher-pressure operation without creating excessive drift. These types of nozzle can, in fact, be operated at 70 to 90 psi without becoming very drift-prone because the pressure at which the spray liquid is atomized is likely only 30 or 40 psi (the actual exit pressure and drift potential will depend on the nozzle and the formulation).
Speed Range
A low-drift nozzle with a pressure operating range from 30 to 90 psi (i.e., 3-fold) would have a flow rate range of 1.73 (i.e., the square root of 3 due to the square root relationship of flow rate and spray pressure). This means that the fastest travel speed (at 90 psi) would be 1.73 times the slowest travel speed (at 30 psi).
A conventional nozzle operating between 20 and 60 psi would have the same travel speed range. So why don’t we just do that? The main reason is that the two-stage design lowers the overall amount of drift substantially, something a conventional nozzle can’t achieve even at very low pressures.
A second reason is that even at high pressures, a two-stage design will likely drift less than an conventional nozzle. This is still the case if the conventional nozzle is operating at low pressures. Any spray quality chart comparing spray qualities of conventional and low-drift tips will demonstrate that.
Pulse Width Modulation
PWM uses a solenoid to intermittently shut off nozzle flow, between 10 and 100 times per second (Hz) depending on the manufacturer. This has implications for nozzle design because the nozzle must not leak liquid during the brief off-cycle. If it does, the small amount of liquid leaving the nozzle will not only not atomize properly, it will also cause a pressure drop within the nozzle which must be replenished with the next on-pulse. This will mean the on-pulse will operate at a lower initial pressure, affecting pattern development and atomization. For this reason, venturi-style low-drift nozzles have not been recommended with PWM. The venturi provides an alternate exit for air or liquid, compromising nozzle performance.
And yet, some venturi style nozzles do, in fact, produce acceptable patterns with PWM according to the nozzle manufacturers. This goes to show that nozzle design can continue to evolve to provide the best in drift reduction technology with PWM. Design for PWM suitability should be at the top of nozzle manufacturers’ agendas.
Nozzle design continues to evolve. But in the foreseeable future, spray pressure will continue to control pattern width and droplet size. That’s why understanding the pressure limits of any specific nozzle type, and maintaining pressure within those limits, is so important in any spray operation.
April 4, 2017
Exploding Sprayer Myths (ep.7): Boom Height
It’s a new season of Exploding Sprayer Myths so we’ve got a new opening sequence!
In this episode we demonstrate the importance of nozzle spacing, spray angle and boom height. We also turn a hapless pineapple into a projectile and spray dyed antifreeze on a cold winter day.
Learn more about how boom height affects spray deposit uniformity, and why that should concern you, by going here.
This episode was filmed on location at the Syngenta Honeywood Research Facility in Plattsville, Ontario. We thank them for generously allowing us to commandeer their facility and staff for the day.
And of course, none of this would be possible without the talented staff at Real Agriculture. Make sure you tune into RealAg radio.
A little extra fun:
We received this email after a grower heard Tom speak at a meeting. A compelling observation about how nozzle spacing and drift affects men everywhere:
Tom: I really enjoyed your talk in Humboldt yesterday. During the coffee break immediately after, I went to the washroom and noticed 3 guys spread evenly across 5 urinals. Wow. Talk about worrying about spray drift. When I returned to my table and told my wife of my findings, she commented that it must have something to do about the distance to the target, as it couldn’t possibly be that the pressure was too high!
March 27, 2017
Three Features that Should be Standard on all Sprayers
One of my main activities in the winter is public speaking. Attending producer meetings gives me the privilege of meeting many farmers, learning about their operations, and sharing my research results.
I enjoy providing practical solutions to problems. But there are three issues that always come up to which I wish I had better answers. Here they are:
1. The Correct Spray. We’re stuck with compromises in this area. We need small droplets for coverage. We need large droplets for drift control. We need to keep application volumes moderate for productivity. We’ve basically asked the nozzle to shoulder the entire burden of our application needs, seeking a spray that hits all the right notes. Not too fine. Not too coarse. Able to work with fast and variable travel speeds and high, variable boom heights.
Based on our research in field crops such as wheat, canola, corn, lentils, etc., we can be confident that Coarse, even Very Coarse sprays, coupled with a reasonable water volume, are appropriate for most modes of actions and target situations. These sprays contain enough small droplets for good coverage, and their larger droplets work surprisingly well in most cases. Sure, a finer spray could save some water. And a coarser spray would reduce drift even more. But we need a compromise spray, combined with some lucky weather, to get the job done.
And yet we usually make spray quality recommendations with caveats, because droplet size alone isn’t enough. Drift is always a possibility, no matter how coarse we go. Coverage is not guaranteed, especially if the canopy is dense. Finer sprays will get deeper into a broadleaf canopy, but then we may have drift or evaporation to deal with. The nozzle size, volume, and travel speed relationship has to be just right so the spray pressure is in the correct range. And on it goes.
I’d like to give the overworked nozzle some help. We used to use shrouds to protect fine sprays from drift. Now it’s time to let air assist take over that task.
Air assist booms can accelerate (i.e., add kinetic energy to) small droplets so they’re less prone to off-target movement. Properly adjusted, air assist can carry these droplets deeper into the canopy and enhance their deposition.
A good air-assist system allows the user to select the strength and direction of the airblast to match canopy, boom height, and travel speed conditions.
Air assist is the workhorse of most fruit-tree and vineyard spraying. It has to be done right to provide all the benefits I mentioned, and certain approaches should be rejected. For example, there are some companies using air assist to promote very fine sprays with very low volumes. That’s the wrong use of the technology, and invites a backlash.
Instead, we need systems that work with existing spray practice to address some of its classic shortcomings, such as drift management, deposit uniformity, and canopy penetration.
Let’s see some products. It’s time to bring air-assist to the mainstream of agricultural spraying.
1. Boom Height, Level, Sway and Yaw Control. Boom height is so fundamental it’s almost boring. We’ve long said that it’s important to set the boom at the right height for proper nozzle overlap and drift control. It was easy with wheeled booms. But over the last 15 years, suspended booms coupled with fast speeds have caused booms to rise again (RISE OF THE BOOMS!).
Fact is that there are some tasks we’re asking of nozzles that they simply can’t achieve without level, low booms. Drift control is one such thing. Low booms are surprisingly effective at reducing drift, not only because winds are lower closer to the canopy, but also because droplet velocities are faster closer to the nozzle.
Angled sprays for fusarium headlight control are another thing that is more effective with low booms.
Spray droplets released from an angled spray soon slow down and get swept back by air resistance and begin to fall vertically, or move with wind currents, reducing their intended benefit. Low booms can prevent that.
Uniform and low booms also keep deposit variability more manageable. They can save energy needed for air-assist systems. The shorter the path to the target, the less air-velocity will be needed to get it there.
So how about it? Can we have boom linkages and suspension systems, coupled with sensors and hydraulics, that are stable and maintain 20” above canopy at 16 mph on uneven ground? Can we have systems that do this reliably enough that we’re prepared to invest in, say, expensive nozzle bodies? It’s possible.
1. Sprayer Cleanout. One of my favourite questions about cleanout is: “When do you know that you’re finished cleaning the sprayer tank and booms?” Inevitably, someone from the back yells: “In two weeks!” And we laugh, knowingly.
We have a terrible system of sprayer decontamination. It’s a process that is awkward, imperfect, and time consuming, often leading to poor practice. I’ll ask a group of producers what they do with their pesticide waste. The response is silence. I don’t blame them for not telling me that they dump the remainder on the ground somewhere, but I’d rather they didn’t. Sprayer designs don’t help.
What we need is a system that guarantees results. To start, a tank gauge that is reliably accurate to the nearest gallon would remove some of the filling guesswork and help minimize leftovers.
We need a remainder volume (volume left in the non-boom plumbing after the pump sucks air) that is known and small, because that remainder can’t be expelled and needs to be diluted. The smaller it is, the easier it is to dilute.
We need pumps that can run dry, so nobody has to fear spraying the tank out completely.
We need a wash system that requires little volume and works quickly, like continuous rinsing.
We need plumbing that is easy to understand and whose inside surfaces do not absorb pesticide, or hide it in corners and dead ends. Perhaps it’s a recirculating system. Perhaps it hasn’t been invented yet.
We need pesticide formulations that clean up easily. We need an easier way to inspect and clean filters. And we need a safe place to put any waste that can’t be sprayed out in a field.
I’d like to see a sprayer that can be decontaminated in 10 minutes without the operator leaving the cab, and without any spillage of spray mixture. Clean enough to spray conventional soybeans after a tank of dicamba. Clean enough to spray canola after a tank of tribenuron. I know it’s possible.
I also know what many of our European readers are thinking right now. Much of what I’ve discussed exists in the EU in some form or another. Why does the North American, and to a lesser extent the Australian market, not have these features?
Part of the reason is federal standards and regulations. Some European countries test and approve products for remaining tank volume, boom stability, and spray drift, for example. Others have sprayer performance criteria that must be met to be eligible for sale in that country. An increasing number have mandatory sprayer inspection.
These requirements serve to protect the producer and the environment. They’re an example of useful government actions. Despite, or perhaps because of, stricter rules, the entire EU marketplace is very competitive, with about 75 sprayer manufacturers. Bottom line: producers benefit.
We need leadership, preferably from a combination of government, industry, and producers, to achieve better sprayer designs. Our market has room for products that make it easier to prevent drift, protect water, and protect yields.
As they say, a rising tide lifts all boats. And it will certainly make my job easier.
March 21, 2017
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