Spray that is not directed at the target is wasted spray. Many pesticide labels specifically require the operator to restrict spray to the target canopy. Spray that escapes above the canopy is a significant source of off-target drift. Foliar applications that extend below the canopy are not efficacious and represent waste and lost productivity.
A spring application or oil and chloropyfiros. Estimate of 50% waste (in red).
Air carries spray droplets, so the first step in any adjustment should be to perform a ribbon test to ensure the air outlets are oriented correctly. This is achieved by adjusting deflectors (e.g. low profile axial), the air outlets on a tower, or the entire head on a wrap-around design with individual fan/nozzle combinations.
Spray height should always exceed the canopy height by a small degree. This compensates for the increase in wind speed with elevation, the potential loss of spray height with faster travel speeds, and uneven alleys that cause the sprayer to rock, which changes the spray angle.
Spray angles change as a sprayer rocks on uneven alleys. It is more important that spray is directed at the top of a canopy than at the bottom.
It is less critical that spray align with the lower portion of the canopy. As air energy wanes, or as droplets begin to lose momentum, finer droplets will slowly fall, depositing on random surfaces. Coarser droplets will quickly fall towards the bottom of the canopy, settling primarily on upward-facing surfaces. This secondary deposition can also occur from the cumulative impact of blow-through from upwind rows.
Once the air is aligned, park the sprayer in an alley. Stand behind the sprayer and extrapolate a direct line from each nozzle to target canopy. Nozzles that point at the canopy should be left on. Nozzles that point above or below can be blocked, or turned off via valves or rotating roll-overs. Some roll-over nozzle bodies can be swiveled up or down 15 degrees to fine tune the spray angle. An alternative would be to permanently rotate the nozzle body fitting in the boom line. When aiming nozzles using a roll-over nozzle body, be careful not to swivel them too far or the valve will partially close and compromise the spray pattern.
Use a ladder when adjusting nozzles on a tower sprayer. Some sprayer chassis and tanks are designed to accept a climber, but even so they can be slippery. Please be careful.
When extrapolating, remember that the centre of a nozzle only indicates the centre of the spray pattern. Cone and fan angles can span 60 to 110 degrees, depending on the influence of air. Therefore, even though the centre of the lower-most nozzle intersects the bottom of the target canopy, you may still be able to turn it off because the nozzle above has that portion covered.
Adjust spray distribution across the boom at the beginning and roughly mid-way through the spray season to ensure the sprayer will uniformly cover the target with the optimal volume. These adjustments should account for both canopy growth and fruit set.
For example, as the season progresses in an orchard, fruit may cause limbs to hang lower and warrant a new spray distribution. Turning on the bottom nozzle position will help, but it doesn’t account any increase in density throughout the canopy. You may need more volume distributed across the entire boom. Another example: as grape bunches begin to close, sprayer operators may direct fungicides exclusively at the fruit zone and not the entire canopy.
Remember to always check coverage using water sensitive paper. It’s not worth saving a bit of spray if you’re missing a bit of your target.
There are many advantages to using rate controllers, but their primary role is to maintain a constant application rate. All sprayers change speed on hills, at row-ends, or in response to surface conditions. Since flow from an uncontrolled sprayer is constant, the application rate varies significantly (up to 40% in hilly conditions). Rate controllers compensate for changing speed by adjusting flow.
Hilly operations create highly variable application rates. Changes in travel speed can translate to 40% variability in rate applied. Rate controllers adjust flow to compensate.
Pesticide is not saved directly (since increased uphill rates already cancel out reduced downhill rates), but consider the pesticide label. Labels that list a range of rates are contingent on pest pressure and crop size, but also compensate for poor coverage from low-performing equipment. When coverage uniformity is improved, experience has shown that operators can safely spray at minimal rates.
Experience has also demonstrated that when coverage uniformity is improved, pack-out benefits follow. Even a modest improvement represents a quick return on investment. Equally important, a more consistent application reduces the risk of higher residue levels on the uphill and improves crop protection on the downhill.
Now, if you are wondering if a rate controller is right for your operation, or if you should just stop reading now, consult this handy decision support matrix:
This decision support matrix will help you decide if a rate controller is right for your operation. Spoiler alert: It probably is.
Rate controller categories
The following table categorizes controllers based on how they control flow. The categories are successively more expensive and complicated, but there’s commensurate value. For example, while not specified here, high-end rate controllers offer value-added features such as as-applied mapping (a powerful management tool).
Description
Pros
Cons
Good: Monitors and adjusts pressure. Uses math to assume flow.
System monitors pressure, but does not register flow. For example, if nozzle flow is restricted, back pressure increases. The controller will compensate to correct pressure, implicitly reducing flow, but the operator is not alerted to the actual problem.
Better: Monitors and adjusts flow, not pressure.
Alerts operator to changes in flow. Operator usually sets the percent error threshold a little high to ignore transient changes.
System will not register pressure deviations. At threshold speed, pressure may drop too low. This can cause inconsistent check valve operation and spray pattern collapse. With tall booms, the top nozzles may close completely.
Best: Monitors flow and pressure and adjusts flow.
-Best likelihood of a consistent application. -Alarms or automatic compensation of flow and pressure (user sets hard stops). -Provides a low tank level warning. -Stores preset calibrations to quickly switch between blocks.
-Highest cost. -Steepest learning curve. -More “wire-wiggling”. -Operators often choose to over-apply at low speeds as a tradeoff for uniform output and consistent atomizer performance.
Rate controller adoption and components
As we write this, less than 10% of air-assist sprayers have rate controllers. In the dark old days of the 1980’s, air-assist operators were ill-advised to install high flow, low pressure field sprayer controllers. That history of mismatched components and subsequent bad experiences continues to hinder widespread adoption.
Today’s components, however, are specific to air-assist sprayers and have made installations easier and more successful. Do your homework and speak with the manufacturer (not necessarily the local dealer) to ensure the controller, and all its components, meet your needs. Let’s describe the components so you’re prepared to have the conversation:
Console
Flow meter(s)
Flow control valve (including electric boom shut-offs)
Speed sensor
Wire harness
Examples of rate controller components.
Console
The console is the interface. The user enters criteria about the sprayer, the planting, and calibration data and receives information about sprayer performance. Select a console designed for air-assist sprayers and not field sprayers. Controllers intended for horizontal booms perceive swath in two dimensions, but air-assist controllers account for multiple vertical booms or boom sections in the swath (see the following figure).
Field sprayer rate controllers used in vertical crops must be “tricked” when programming swath. Leading air-assist rate controllers can assign flow to zones on a single vertical section (left) and adjust swath (sometimes called width) for multiple booms (right).
Flow meter
With rate controllers, flow is detected by one or more flow meters positioned pre-manifold. The relief valve becomes more of a safety device, defining the high pressure limit and bypassing flow if required. Most rate controllers use a flowmeter with no ability to monitor pressure. While still effective, adding a pressure sensor ensures nozzles are operating in the desired pressure range.
Turbine or paddle meters are inexpensive and acceptably accurate. They require periodic cleaning because some chemistry can accumulate and interfere with their moving parts. Filtration helps to minimize this issue. Magnetic or ultrasonic meters have no moving parts, higher resolution, wider metering ranges and aren’t affected by the viscosity of the spraying solution or entrained foam. However, they are considerably more expensive than mechanical meters.
Flow control valve
Unlike boom control valves that are open or closed, flow control valves are capable of a range of adjustments. Valve actuation is controlled by 12 volt servomotors. The level of precision depends on the style of valve.
Butterfly valves: Simple, inexpensive, and typically for pressures <10bar (150psi). Some have minor leak-by when closed. Control is less precise as the valve opens because the orifice gets geometrically larger. This gives a narrow metering range.
Calibrated ball valves: Versions available for all pressures. May be simple flow through balls with similar metering limits to a butterfly. A better ball design is also available that offers a linear flow rate through the entire adjustment range, offering more stable rate control over the entire flow range. Several manufacturers offer these. All ball valves offer zero flow when closed.
Left- A butterfly valve. Right- A ball valve. Notice how a small change in the opening angle translates into a large change in the orifice size; this is difficult to control manually. Servomotors not pictured.
Compared to field sprayers, air-assist sprayers travel slower and use lower flow rates. It is a mistake to employ valves intended for high-flow, high-speed sprayers.
Speed: Valves are rated by connection size (½”, ¾”, etc.) and opening time (e.g. 1-14 seconds are common). Many rate controllers can be programmed to optimize adjustments for the speed and size of the valve.
Precision: As control valves open over their 90° range, the ability to control flow is less precise. Slower valves give less precision, but greater stability.
Size: Valve size should accommodate maximum flow and no more. If the valve is too large, it can only meter flow over the first few degrees of opening. For example, let’s say a valve capable of 200 L/min (50 gpm) and rated 1 second is used. Your sprayer meters 0-20 L/min (0-5 gpm). This means the whole metering range happens in the first tenth of a second. Even lightning-fast consoles will give unstable readings (aka hunting) as the computer overshoots the target in an effort to comply.
Control valves are “service parts”. Seals, moving parts and abrasive liquids mean they will require regular care and eventual replacement. It’s a wise precaution to make them accessible and easily removable. We suggest installing them with quick-connects (see top-right of the previous collage of rate controller components above) to make field-maintenance fast and easy.
Speed sensor
Speed can be based on GPS, engine tachometer readings, radar, or wheel rotations. Newer rate controllers may even take the speed directly from the tractor’s data feed. Price, reliability and crop conditions are all factors you should consider in the choice.
GPS: Easiest to deploy, very accurate (especially RTK-GPS) and reasonably priced. However, overhead canopy can block satellite signals. Some controllers compensate for the GPS losses with sophisticated internal kinematic devices that measure the inertia of the sprayer and calculate speed when the GPS is not reliable.
Wheel rotation speed sensors: An entry-level sensor, it’s typically a reed switch or Hall effect sensor that detects either the lug nuts or magnets installed on the rotating wheel. More magnets improve accuracy. Its exposure makes it prone to physical damage, and readings change with tire radius (which changes as the tank empties, on soft ground and with temperature). This is why wheel sensors are calibrated in the alley, with the tank half full and both tires at the same pressure.
Radar speed sensors: Employing the Doppler effect to measure speed, radar is the most accurate sensor. They are unaffected by terrain, slope or tank volume. They can be mounted anywhere in sight of the ground. They are, however, the most expensive and are typically not repairable if they fail.
Tachometer speed sensors: Largely obsolete, they measure the tractor’s tachometer speed and convert it to travel speed. Difficult to install and prone to the same inaccuracy as wheel sensors.
Interface sensors: Relatively new, some rate controllers interface with tractor electronics to receive speed data. ISOBUS, the standard interface language that agricultural electronics are increasingly adopting, makes this data exchange more common.
Wire harness
It may seem we’re drilling deep to mention wires, but standards are changing. Many controllers employ traditional analog wiring, but they are being made obsolete by the newer ISOBUS option.
Traditional Analog: Simple wires with automotive or custom plugs designed to match components. Relatively inexpensive and sometimes field repairable, analog wiring carries signal voltage (and power) to and from the controller to drive valves and receive analog sensor data. Communication is one-way: Sensor to controller, controller to valves.
Modern ISOBUS: Bus systems are more like a computer network, where digital signals travel back and forth between the controller and each component. Components that require power are wired directly to a battery. This results in a greatly simplified harness. The controller’s single ISOBUS wire “daisy chains” all components to relay commands and receive status, which makes system monitoring and diagnosis easier and more effective.
Conclusion
Rate controllers are a worthy consideration for your existing or future air-assist sprayer. Assess your needs and work with a knowledgeable dealer or manufacturer that can assemble and install a system appropriate for your operation.
An airblast sprayer inspection is part of preventative maintenance. This daily activity identifies small problems before they become big ones. You can do it at the filling station, so it’s fairly convenient.
Don’t think of it as stealing time from your spray day… it’s part of your spray day. Don’t skip it. If time is tight there are many other ways to improve your work rate.
This spray plane was left on the runway with the engine exposed for less than four hours. When the owners returned they found a precocious bird had built a nest! Perform regular sprayer inspections – you never know what you’ll find. Photo Credit – S. Richard, New Brunswick.
Note: Always wear appropriate personal protective equipment (as indicated on the product label), including hearing protection.
Inspection steps
Follow this generic inspection process. If your sprayer manufacturer or manager advises additional steps, be sure to perform them.
Before filling
1. Work with a rinsed sprayer parked on level ground (e.g. the filling station).
2. Check lines/hoses and fittings for signs of wear or cracking. Leaks or bulging may only become apparent under pressure (see Test spray).
3. Filters, screens, strainers and nozzles are clean and unbroken. Leaks may only become apparent under pressure (see Test spray).
As a plastic suction filter ages, it can warp or become brittle. When this happens, the O-ring may no longer sit correctly and the unit may allow air to be drawn into the lines. They should be cleaned and inspected when the sprayer is rinsed.
4. Engage each nozzle shut-off valve or nozzle body flip position. They can seize or loosen with time.
Begin filling
5. Begin filling the sprayer 1/2 full with water.
6. For PTO-driven sprayers, confirm universal joint(s), sprayer-tractor hitch and all connections are clean, lubricated and secure.
7. Check that all guards (e.g. PTO shaft shield) are in place and intact.
8. Ensure fan blades are unbroken and scraped clean. Intake grill(s) must also be clean and unbroken.
9. When 1/2 full, stop filling and check tire pressure (tractor and sprayer).
Test spray
For multi-row sprayers, you may have to move the sprayer off the fill pad for the test spray; it’s easier with the air off, if possible. Perform the following steps:
10. Open the manifold valve to fill the lines and begin spraying clean water.
11. Ensure each nozzle sprays correctly. Get out of the cab to inspect, don’t just shoulder-check. This gives the opportunity to double-check for line-bulges and leaks.
12. Ensure the agitation / bypass system is functioning properly.
13. Check that the tank is secure on the chassis and both crack and leak-free.
Complete filling
Continue filling. Once the sprayer is back up to 1/2 full, mix products per usual. If your sprayer manufacturer advises contrary or additional steps for a sprayer inspection, be sure to perform them.
Sprayer inspections become repetitive, so it’s easy to accidentally miss things. Have you ever driven home while preoccupied, only to discover you don’t remember how you got there? Download our checklist to keep you engaged and to help ensure accuracy. Consider printing and laminating it for repeated use with a dry-erase marker.
You never know what you’ll find during an inspection. I found a robin’s nest hidden on this vineyard sprayer’s pump.
Anyone that operates heavy machinery should perform a preventative maintenance inspection before using the equipment. It’s no different for airblast sprayer operators; embrace the daily walkaround.
Sprayer math is important. It ensures the operator applies the correct product rate and has enough to complete the job. But, it assumes the airblast sprayer is behaving as expected… and it often doesn’t. After confirming the airblast travel speed, use one of the following methods to assess sprayer output. There are pros and cons to each.
The area method
Operators that claim the sprayer empties in the same place every time assume everything’s alright. They are performing a variation on the area method.
Essentially, you fill the sprayer with enough water to spray one hectare (or acre) and then spray that area. If the tank empties where expected, you know your output rate (i.e. volume / area). But, there are a few problems with this method:
Most operators don’t have an accurate test area marked off, and even when they think they know the area, measurements prove otherwise. They’re always amazed when this happens.
The area method has poor resolution. It reveals the total output but does not assess individual nozzles. For example, partially-blocked nozzles and worn nozzles average out (we’ve seen it). Rate controllers provide whatever pressure is required to match the desired output, masking individual nozzle problems.
The dip stick method
Another method is to fill the sprayer to a known volume using a flow meter, while observing a sight level or a graduated dip stick. Then, while parked, the operator sprays for a given amount of time and determines the difference in the volume remaining in the tank.
This method can be defeated if volume is misread. It’s an easy error to make if the sprayer is parked on a grade, or the dipstick shifts in a tank with a rounded bottom. And, of course, it also masks individual nozzle problems.
Sight levels can be misleading when the sprayer is parked on a grade. They are often opaque and hard to read.
The timed output method
The preferred method is to measure the output of each nozzle individually. We performed a review on several timed output methods here. It can be messy and time consuming, but it’s accurate. Appropriate personal protective equipment is required to perform the timed output method – expect to get wet.
1. Fill the rinsed sprayer half-full with clean water and park it on a level surface.
2. With the fan(s) off, bring the sprayer up to operating pressure. Start spraying with all nozzles open (closing any will change the pressure).
3. You will need 1 meter (3 feet) of 2.5 cm (1″) diameter braided hose (have a second, longer hose to reach the top of a tower sprayer). It should be stiff enough that you can slip it over a nozzle body while holding the other end. Use it to guide flow into a collection vessel, held with your other hand. The hose not only reaches the top nozzle on towers, but it lets foam dissipate before it gets to the vessel.
4. When the flow from the hose is steady, direct it into the collection vessel for 30 seconds (a partner with a stopwatch is very helpful). It is preferable to collect for a minute because it improves the accuracy.
5. Determine and record the nozzle output per minute. Graduations on plastic collection vessels are unreliable. It’s preferable to weigh the output on a cheap, digital kitchen scale. One milliliter of clean water weighs one gram. Don’t forget to subtract the weight of the vessel (this is called taring) and double the output if you only collected for 30 seconds.
Interpreting the results
Once you have recorded all the outputs, you will have to convert the output to U.S. gallons or liters per minute, depending on units in the nozzle manufacturer’s catalogue (see common conversions below).
Replace any nozzles that are 10% (or preferably 5%) more or less than the rated output. This not only indicates a rate problem, but likely a problem with droplet size as well. If enough nozzles are worn, consider replacing all of them. Nozzles should go on as a set, and come off as a set (unless replacing a broken tip, of course). This can be an expensive proposition for large airblast sprayers, but it is part of operational costs.
Don’t assume new nozzles are accurate. We’ve found +/- 5% flow variation right off the shelf. Keep your receipts.
Testing and replacing nozzles is an important part of sprayer operation, no matter how many there are. This Air-O-Fan is nozzled for Australian almonds.
Helpful conversions
Anyone that has tried the timed output method in Canada knows the pain of our Metric-esque (Mocktric?) units. We’re an odd hybrid because our label rates are in metric, but our nozzles and many of our sprayers are US Imperial. You can find a complete collection of conversion tables here, but the most common calculations are reproduced below:
If collecting in ounces, converting to U.S. Gallons per minute:
If collecting in millilitres or grams converting to U.S. Gallons per minute:
If collecting in ounces, converting to litres per minute:
If collecting in millilitres or grams converting to litres per minute:
If collecting in ounces, converting to Imperial gallons per minute:
If collecting in millilitres or grams converting to Imperial gallons per minute:
A more sophisticated option
The timed output method is slow and requires math. You can avoid both problems by using electronic calibration vessels like the Innoquest SpotOn SC-4. We’ve tested both, and they are as accurate as weighing the output – but much faster.
They can, however, be fooled by foam. We’ve had good results using a length of braided hose to direct the flow and dissipate most of the foam. Typically, foaming means the sprayer wasn’t rinsed enough.
The SpotOn calibration vessel is easier, faster and more accurate than the classic pitcher-and-stopwatch approach to timed output tests. The SC-4 (pictured) is for airblast and SC-1 is for field sprayers.
Another approach is to hose-clamp multiple hoses over nozzle bodies and spray all at once. This is tricky and takes time. Plus, if you suffocate the nozzle’s exit orifice (creating back pressure) or block the air inlets on AI nozzles, you will get a false reading.
Be careful not to plug air inlets on air induction nozzles – you may get a false reading.
We prefer nozzle clamps over hose clamps (see the AAMS-Salvarani nozzle clamp pictured below). There are pincers designed to latch behind the nut of the nozzle body, but compatibility can sometimes be an issue (e.g. with Turbomist sprayers).
Passive flow meters (also pictured below) remove the need for a collection vessel, but they’re a better fit for field sprayers since they have to be held in place manually. They are difficult to source in North America because their accuracy is questionable, but they are fine for comparing relative flow from tip to tip.
Nozzle clamp or flow meter, avoid suffocating the nozzle exit orifice or AI nozzle air inlets.
Left: Nozzle body hose clamp. Right: Passive flow meter.
Some grower groups, or professional consultants, spring for very sophisticated and accurate units, such as AAMS-Salvarani flow measurement system pictured below.
AAMS-Salvarani flow measurement system. We used these on a pumpkin sprayer in New Hampshire, but they work with airblast too.
No matter your preferred method, take the time to confirm your sprayer output at the beginning of the season and whenever you make repairs or significant changes to your sprayer.
This article describes a method for assessing airblast sprayer coverage based on a protocol developed by Dr. David Manktelow (Applied Research and Technologies Ltd., NZ). It was co-written with David Manktelow and Mark Ledebuhr (Application Insight, LLC, USA). An older article describing canopy coverage assessment can be found here.
Why assess coverage?
Airblast sprayer configuration can require a lot of guesswork. There’s too much time between spraying and observing the results for operators to evaluate adjustments. They need timely feedback to assess the fit between sprayer and target.
Achieving adequate coverage of target surfaces (e.g. fruit, wood, inner canopy, etc.) is the basis of effective crop protection. Assessing coverage as soon as possible alerts the operator to correctable problems. The following three methods are helpful, but they have limitations.
The shoulder-check
Shoulder-checks can identify leaks and plugs, but operators cannot detect variation in flow from nozzle-to-nozzle (even when it’s over 50%). The vantage point also makes it difficult to determine if spray is passing under, over or through the target row. It is better to perform an inspection with the help of a partner outside the sprayer as part of a formal pre-spray check.
Shoulder-checks are fine for detecting plugged or leaking nozzles, but the vantage point makes it hard to discern much else.
Run-off
Unless specified by the pesticide label (e.g. drenching bark
with oil), spraying to run-off usually means excessive and non-uniform
coverage. It’s been demonstrated in trees and vines that when the outer canopy
begins to drip, the inner has only received about half the spray volume.
Efficacy trials confirm that spraying to run-off will provide protection, but it’s unnecessarily wasteful. Loses of 10-15% have been measured at the point run-off. Additional spray volume may increase coverage in the inner canopy, but the saturated outer canopy receives no additional deposit. The excess simply drips off. Further, there are potential phytotoxicity issues at the drip-points where residues concentrate as they dry.
Dripping is an unreliable coverage criterion because the threshold for run-off depends on the nature of the target surface (e.g. waxy, hairy, vertical) and the product formulation (e.g. oils, stickers, spreaders) and droplet size.
Run-off is not a reliable indication of good coverage.
Inspecting wetting and residue
Inspecting targets for wetting or residue can give a broad indication of whether a target received spray, but it’s hard to see on some plant surfaces. Dry fluorescent tracers and kaolin clay can help operators visualize deposits on actual plant surfaces, but they are messy, time-consuming and after-the-fact (i.e. too late too correct sprayer settings).
Helpful Tip: Look for residue on high-contrast infrastructure, like trellises or black irrigation lines. Remember, they are sill only subjective indicators.
The preferred method
Water sensitive paper
This method relies on water sensitive papers to help visualize spray coverage. The yellow side can resolve droplets >50µm in diameter, turning blue where it contacts moisture. With the aid of smartphone apps such as SnapCard (as of 2026, may no longer be available), or portable scanners such as DropScope, water sensitive papers can be used to characterize droplet density and droplet size up to 30% total coverage.
These surrogate surfaces do not show the spreading effects that can occur on plant surfaces (especially where surfactants are used). They also show lower deposits than leaves, which move freely in airblast air. Nevertheless, they give a useful indication of potential coverage.
To avoid fingerprints, wear gloves or handle them by the back and edges. They will slowly turn blue in humid conditions, so keep them sealed in their foil package when not in use. Packages of 50, 25x75mm (1×3 inch) papers are available online or from local agrichemical retailers for about $50.00.
Preparing water sensitive papers
You will need ten pushpins (five dark coloured, five light coloured), ten papers and a resealable plastic bag. The following process may seem like close-up magic but with practice you can quickly prepare multiple sets of papers.
Remove eleven papers from the foil package.
Stack them yellow-side-up and flip the top paper over.
Using the flipped paper, carefully fold the stack in half. Now ten are folded yellow-side-out.
Expose 1/4 of the middle paper. Pinching the stack firmly will flex it and give support as you pierce the corner with a pushpin (twist as you push).
Use the pushpin as a handle to slide it from the stack and drop it into a Ziploc bag. Repeat the process for the remaining nine papers (return the outside one to the package for later use).
They will remain viable in the sealed bag for several days before they are used in the target canopy. Once placed in the canopy, ten folded papers provide 20 target surfaces.
Six steps to preparing and attaching water sensitive paper.
Placing the papers
To avoid boundary effects, don’t place papers in the periphery of the planting. To make sure the sprayer is up-to-speed and the canopy is not overly exposed to wind, go a short distance into the target row and pick a representative tree or vine. The pins will hold the papers to stems, twigs and leaf petioles. Shadowing from leaves is inevitable, but try to avoid placing them up against fruit, leaves or wood. Relative placement within the canopy depends on canopy size:
Small canopies
For grape, pin five dark pins into stems next to inner bunches deep in canopy. Pin the five light pins around the outer bunches, oriented with one side of the paper exposed to the sprayer. When you stand back, it should be hard to see the inner papers.
Similar positioning can be used for berry canes and bushes. Pin five dark pins in the inner canopy, spanning the height but oriented randomly. Pin five light pins in the outer canopy, spanning the height but oriented with one side exposed to the sprayer.
Helpful Tip: Keep the papers clustered in a 1-2m (6 ft) row and tuck the Ziploc bag into the dripline to mark where they are. They shouldn’t take long to find after spraying.
Medium canopies
For high-density orchards and larger trellised canopies, a ladder might be required. Pin five dark pins in the inner canopy, spanning the height but oriented randomly. Pin five light pins in the outer canopy, spanning the height but oriented randomly
Large canopies
For large trees (e.g. tree nut, citrus, sour cherry), a
modified approach is required. Instead of dark pins, use sections of plastic or
galvanized conduit. Note the wire clips developed to affix papers to the
conduit in the image below. Any method of firmly affixing the papers is
acceptable.
Stand at the trunk and raise the conduit section by section to
reach the full height of the canopy. Attach five papers as you erect the
conduit mast with one at the top, one at the bottom and the other three evenly
distributed. A wrap of electrical tape may be required to help hold sections
together. Then, pin five light pins in the outer canopy, oriented randomly and
spanning as high as can be conveniently reached.
Helpful Tip: Tie a length of flagging tape near the papers to make them easier to find and replace between assessments.
Use lengths of metal or plastic conduit to create a mast that can span the height of large canopies. Distribute papers evenly along the length as it is assembled.Larger trees, like nuts, citrus and sour cherry make it harder to assess all canopy positions (and to spray them).
Spraying
It is preferable to spray clean water from a rinsed sprayer, but you can assess coverage during a chemical spray if label restrictions permit re-entry. Always wear PPE when required.
Spray the target row as you normally would (e.g. both sides, alternate row middle, multiple rows) in weather you would normally spray in. Retrieve the papers as soon as they are dry enough to handle.
Complete the top section, being sure to describe the sprayer set-up, application volume and weather conditions at the time of spraying. Either staple or glue the recovered papers to the form. Try to arrange them relative to their original positions in the canopy.
Helpful Tip: Glue sticks work very well but avoid lumps that will show through.
What do you think of the coverage seen on the 20 surfaces in this example? Seven of the 20 surfaces (35%) show almost no deposit, and 10 (50%) have visibly low numbers of relatively large droplets – that is usually an indication of inadequate coverage.
Assessing each paper
Research and experience suggest that a droplet density of about 85 Fine/Medium-sized droplets per cm2 and about 15% overall coverage is adequate for most foliar insecticides and fungicides. With experience, this can be judged by eye. Note: only 80% of all papers require this minimal threshold coverage. This is described later in the article.
Helpful Tip: It is sometimes helpful consider the amount of yellow left between the blue.
Grade each of the 20 surfaces as (E)xcessive, (A)dequate or (I)nadequate by circling the corresponding letter on the form.
Adequate satisfies minimal coverage.
Excessive will provide crop protection, but often indicates unnecessary waste.
Inadequate includes non-uniform coverage and nil coverage.
There are a few notable exceptions:
Make allowances for papers where potentially Adequate coverage has been masked by an adjacent obstacle (see paper number 5, below).
Finer sprays will have very high droplet counts and less volume. Paper number 6 (below) would be Inadequate for a high volume, dilute application. However, this uniform distribution is Adequate for a low volume, concentrated application (e.g. mistblower).
Coarser sprays may have lower droplet counts or coalesce into blobs (see paper number 2, below). Focus on even distribution and the 15% overall coverage.
Unless using a scanner, visually assessing papers can be subjective. Rely on droplet density, overall coverage and the product’s mode of action when making a determination. Paper number 6 is Adequate for a mistblower due to the high droplet density and uniformity.
Assessing the canopy
Spray coverage can be highly variable. This method employs 20 surfaces and semi-random orientation to offset some of that variability. Minimal coverage (i.e. Adequate and Excessive) should be achieved on 80% of the papers.
Complete canopy coverage is not required. Studies in New Zealand winegrapes showed a direct correlation between the percentage of Inadequate papers and levels of bunch botrytis. Disease levels increased as the number of Inadequate papers increased over 20%.
Watch for the following in the overall coverage patterns:
Clustered gaps in coverage
This occurs when spray fails to reach the targets. Gaps often occur in the top third of large canopies and deep in dense canopies. This could indicate problems with air speed/orientation, dense canopies, or inadequate flow from corresponding nozzle positions.
Uneven coverage
In medium and large canopies, the outer canopy often receives more spray than the inner canopy, and this may be unavoidable. Be aware that an even distribution of droplets on poorly covered surfaces could indicate underdosing relative to bluer surfaces.
Run-off
This is typical in the outer portion of large and/or dense canopies during high volume (i.e. dilute) applications. More than 50% of surfaces will be thoroughly wetted; Papers will curl, and blue dye may drip off. Unless specified on the product label, it is excessive for foliar applications, but may be unavoidable.
In low volume (concentrate) applications, run-off could indicate poor nozzle distribution or tight alleys. It is generally undesirable and indicates waste.
Improving canopy coverage
This is an iterative process requiring a few attempts before coverage is improved. Try to identify the most limiting factor, make a single adjustment, and then reassess. Consider factors such as travel speed, sprayer air output, nozzle rates and overall spray volume. Also consider canopy management and weather conditions.
When water sensitive papers are prepared in advance, each assessment should take two people about 20 minutes. Compare assessments side-by-side. When one set of papers appears “bluer” than another, measurements have shown it represents >20% difference in actual canopy deposits. This is very likely to have a biological impact.
This small investment of time and money can return better crop protection, greater efficiency, and confidence that the airblast sprayer is doing the job.
Real world example
While in Mildura, AU, we were invited to optimize a Silvan wrap-around multirow sprayer in box-hedged grape. Originally an air-shear sprayer, it was converted to employ air induction hollow cone nozzles (six air outlets per row-side, 550 L/ha [50 gpa], 8.5 km/h [5.3 mph]).
A Silvan wrap-around multirow sprayer in grape.
We noted that the outer arms were 2.8m (9 ft) from the canopy, and the inner arms were 2.1m (7 ft). We brought them in to 2.1m and employed the previously described assessment method to establish a baseline for comparison (see assessment number 1).
The outer arm was brought in until nozzles on both arms were equidistant from the target canopy.Assessment Number 1 (Left). Mostly Inadequate.
Watching as the sprayer passed, we noted the canopy compressed rather than ruffled. This was likely caused by the air outlets being perpendicular to the canopy. When the canopy closed, air and spray were deflected rather than allowed to penetrate. There were also V-shaped plates in each air outlet left over from its days as an air-shear sprayer that deflected the air in strange ways.
We angled the air ducts and decided to remove the 80 degree air induction nozzles. There have been recent reports of improved grape canopy penetration from the new Arag 40 degree hollow cones, so we tried them. Unfortunately, we chose nozzles with too high an output and the operating pressure dropped below 3 bar (44 psi). With poor atomization, the resulting coverage was still poor. Note the finer droplet size from the switch from air induction to conventional hollow cones (see assessment number 2).
Assessment Number 2 (Middle). Finer droplets and still mostly Inadequate.
Time was limited, so we made two significant changes before the final assessment (yes, we know we said one at a time). First, we rearranged the nozzles. 60% of the total volume was from 40 degree nozzles aiming finer droplets at the fruit zone. The remaining 40% was from 80 degree A.I. nozzles aiming coarser, drift-resistant droplets at the upper canopy. This also restored our working pressure.
Then we noticed the position of the nozzles relative to the air outlets. The air preceded the nozzles, which would leave the droplets trailing behind the air rather than carried into the canopy. We turned the nozzle/duct assembly 180 degrees, so the nozzles preceded the air outlet. The final assessment showed greatly improved coverage (see assessment number 3).
Flipped nozzle/air duct assemblies so nozzles preceded air to better entrain the spray. Assessment Number 3 (Right). Far better coverage, but still room for improvement at the top of the canopy.
The sprayer operator reaped immediate benefit from the two hours of assessment and reconfiguration and has continued to use this method to optimize the match between his sprayers and crops throughout the season.
