Category: Speciality Sprayers

Main category for all sprayers that are not horizontal booms

  • “Bee” Responsible with Pesticide Sprays

    “Bee” Responsible with Pesticide Sprays

    Horticultural crops cannot be produced commercially without the use of pesticides to manage the impacts of insects and pathogens. Growers recognize the importance of pollinators and in some cases, rely on bees for pollination. Growers are practicing due-diligence to try to minimize the effects of necessary pest management activities on bees. There’s a fine balance between managing pests effectively and economically and minimizing the effects of pesticides on pollinators. Impact on pollinators is a major consideration for the registration of pesticides.

    Not all pesticides are toxic to honeybees.

    Not a honeybee, but a great photo of a pollinator on a spray boom near some nozzles. Too good not to use.

    Growers use IPM practices which means that they are spraying only when necessary (monitoring for pest levels) rather than following a calendar-based program. Because each droplet of spray that does not land on the target (the crop) is wasted money, growers are more conscious of drift and are using technology to reduce off-target drift.

    The Ontario Bees Act states “No person shall spray or dust fruit trees during the period within which the trees are in bloom with a mixture containing any poisonous substance injurious to bees unless almost all the blossoms have fallen from the trees.” While some crops, like grapes and peaches, do not rely on insects for pollination, bees may still visit their flowers and they are still present in vineyards and orchards before and after bloom, foraging for nectar and pollen on flowering plants in row middles and surrounding vegetation areas. We have been promoting row middle management with flowering plants to encourage the presence of beneficial insects. Honey bees are also attracted to these plants. For this reason, it’s important to recognize that sprays applied to manage pests may have adverse effects on honey bees as well.

    One of the most important things to do is to maintain communication between growers/custom operators and beekeepers. While it’s common sense to not allow insecticides to drift directly onto bee hives, bees will usually forage up to 3 km from a hive and when food sources are scarce, they are known to fly as far as 12 km (8 miles) (Download reference).

    BeeConnected is an app connecting registered beekeepers with registered farmers and spray contractors, enabling anonymous communication on the location of hives and crop protection product activities. The app is available free of charge through a web browser, the Apple App Store and Google Play.

    Here are a few others things you can do:

    Read the pesticide label:

    Carefully follow listed precautions with regard to bee safety. In some cases a product may not be used while bees are actively foraging.

    Product selection:

    Pesticides (insecticides and fungicides) are not all equally toxic to honey bees. It is also important to be familiar with the relative toxicity of pest control products to bees. In Publication 360, Fruit Crop Protection Guide, the relative honeybee toxicity is now listed in the fungicide and insecticide activity tables of each chapter. The impact of products that are moderately toxic to bees can be can be minimized if dosage, timing and method of application are correct. Highly toxic products may cause severe losses if used when bees are present at treatment time or within a few days thereafter.

    Choose the least hazardous insecticide formulation. Emulsifiable formulations normally have a shorter residual toxicity to bees than wettable powders and flowables which, in addition to having residual characteristics can be more easily picked up from the flowering plant while bees are gathering pollen.

    Spray timing:

    Whenever possible, apply products with toxicity to bees in late evening, night or early morning while bees are not foraging (generally between 8 p.m. and 8 a.m.). Evening applications are less hazardous to bees than early morning applications. Warm days and nights can extend the foraging period; therefore applications may be necessary later in the evening or earlier in the morning under unusually warm conditions. Do not apply insecticides when cool temperatures are expected after treatment. Residues will remain toxic to bees for a much longer time under cool conditions. Do not apply insecticides that are toxic to bees on crops in bloom, including crops containing weeds or cover crops in bloom. Avoid treating during hot evenings if beehives are very close to the target field and honey bees are clustered on the outside of the hives.

    Remove alternate pollen sources:

    Where feasible, eliminate weeds or flowers in row middles by mowing at least 2 days before a pesticide with toxicity to bees is to be applied.

    Minimize off-target drift:

    Drift of spray applications can cause significant bee poisoning problems, particularly when drift reaches colonies or adjacent flowering weeds. In general, sprays should not be applied if wind speed exceeds 10 mph and favors drift towards colonies. Give careful attention to position of bee colonies relative to wind speed and direction. Ensure that there are no colonies directly in the orchard at the time of spray. Select drift-reducing spray nozzle technology, whenever possible. Since fine droplets tend to drift farther, apply spray at lower pressures or choose low-drift nozzles that reduce drift by producing a medium to coarse droplet size.

    Calibrate spray equipment often. Air-blast sprayers can produce finer droplets with greater drift potential. When using an air-blast sprayer, consider redirecting or turning off nozzles, or use technologies that reduce drift (for example, towers, multirow, tunnel and target-sensing sprayers). Shut off sprayer when making turns at field ends or gardens, near large puddles, ponds and other sources of water that may be used by pollinators and other wildlife.

    There is a precaution to nighttime spraying: you must be aware of inversions. When you spray during an inversion, the larger drops fall quickly (per normal), but smaller lighter droplets fall very slowly (a few centimetres per second). They do not disperse. Instead, they move with the air they were released into, evaporating very slowly, over great distances. These small particles, as well as vapours from volatilizing products, are capable of moving for kilometers and are therefore subject to drift.

    The only sure way to know if you are in an inversion is to take two air temperature readings: the first about 10 cm from the ground, and the second about three metres off the ground. If the surface air temperature is cooler, you are in an inversion. The magnitude of the difference indicates how strong the inversion is. Accurate measurements are difficult to manage with conventional thermometers (Although the new Spot-On Inversion Detector makes it possible). It is generally easier for sprayer operators to watch for the following cues:

    • Large temperature swings between daytime and the previous night.
    • Calm (e.g. less than 3 km/h wind) and clear conditions when the sun is low.
    • Intense high pressure systems (usually associated with clear skies) and low humidity where you intend to spray.
    • Dew or frost indicating cooler air near the ground (fog may be too late).
    • Smoke or dust hanging in the air or moving laterally.
    • Odours travelling large distances and seeming more intense.
    • Daytime cumulus clouds collapse toward the evening.
    • Overnight cloud cover is 25% or less.

    If you suspect a strong inversion, don’t spray. Postpone the application if possible.

    Reducing pesticide injury to honey bees requires communication and cooperation between beekeepers and growers and applicators. It is important that beekeepers understand cropping practices and pest management practices used by farmers in the vicinity of their apiaries. Likewise, pesticide applicators should be sensitive to locations of apiaries, obtain a basic understanding of honey bee behavior, and learn which materials and application practices are the most hazardous to bees.

    Furthermore a number of native pollinators such as bumblebees, leaf cutter bees, sweat bees and squash bees are also important pollinators in some crops and they too require consideration. While it is unlikely that all poisonings can be avoided, a balance must be struck between the effective use of insecticides, the preservation of pollinators and the rights of all — the beekeeper, farmer and applicator.

  • Spraying Large Nut Trees – Part 2

    Spraying Large Nut Trees – Part 2

    This article continues from Part 1.

    Droplet size

    Droplet size influences droplet behaviour. The following table lists the pros and cons to changing droplet size when overall spray volume (e.g. L/ha) remains constant.

    Relative Spray QualityProsCons
    Coarser DropletsLower drift potential because they resist deflection by wind and evaporation from heat and low humidity.Lower droplet count may reduce coverage.
    Greater mass means they move ballistically, propelled at higher speeds by pressure for greater distance.May fall out of the spray before reaching the top or centre of the canopy.
    Coarser droplets do not penetrate dense canopies as easily as finer droplets.
    Redistribution due to bounce, shatter or run-off may either improve or compromise coverage.Redistribution due to bounce, shatter or run-off may either improve or compromise coverage.
    Finer Droplets Higher droplet count may improve coverage (if they arrive at the target).Higher drift potential from wind, and evaporation from heat and low humidity.
    Finer droplets penetrate denser canopies better than coarser.
    Finer droplets move unpredictably and require optimal air settings to direct them to the target. Sprayer design and air settings will determine if it is optimal for nearby or distant targets, but it is rarely if ever both.Finer droplets move unpredictably and require optimal air settings to direct them to the target. Sprayer design and air settings will determine if it is optimal for nearby or distant targets, but it is rarely if ever both.

    It is preferred to use nozzles that create coarser droplets at higher rates (to compensate for fewer droplets) in the higher boom positions. They are more likely to stay on course to the tops of the trees, and when they miss, many fall out of the air rather than contribute to drift.

    Learn more about strategies to reach the top of a canopy here.

    Finer droplets have very little mass and therefore very little kinetic energy. This means they slow quickly (imagine throwing a feather) and require entraining air to carry them to the target. Finer droplets also evaporate quickly, particularly on hot and dry days (i.e. unsuitable Delta T conditions). If employed, they should be distributed in the lower-middle portion of the boom where they have the least distance to travel and are most likely to be intercepted by canopy.

    Boom distribution

    Unlike a broad acre boom sprayer, where each nozzle emits the same rate, an airblast boom can distribute spray unevenly. For a curved (axial) boom, the rule of thumb is to produce 2/3 of the overall volume from the top 1/3 of the boom. This compensates for the distance and greater proportion of canopy it is intended to cover.

    A vertical (tower) boom positions each nozzle roughly the same distance from the target, and if that target is a hedged canopy, the spray can be distributed equally over the boom. Research has demonstrated that there is no appreciable advantage to one spray shape over another (e.g. flat fan, hollow cone, full cone) other than the spray quality they produce.

    In extreme cases, operators might elect to “fire hose” spray to the tops of canopies using high pressures. This is achieved by using streaming nozzles or removing the swirl/whirl/disc plate in a disc-core combination nozzle in the top few nozzle positions. Given the heavy demand on the pump and the inaccuracy of the method, this should only be considered when air fails to reach the tops of trees.

    Learn more about nozzling an airblast sprayer here.

    Spray coverage and diagnostics

    It’s well understood that spray coverage has a negative correlation with tree height. The irony is that in large nut trees the upper portion of the canopy produces much of the harvest. Taken collectively, this may explain why pest activity is also highest in the upper canopy. When choosing a spray volume and boom distribution, the metric is threshold coverage in the top 1/3 of the canopy. This requires us to define threshold coverage.

    If ribbons and leaf movement represent the feedback mechanism for air settings, then water sensitive paper (WSP) is the choice for spray coverage. Placement in tall trees can be tricky, given that we are most concerned with coverage at the top, but this can be overcome by mounting the WSP on telescoping poles. Papers can be oriented horizontally to represent a leaf, or curled around the pole to give panoramic coverage and emulate a nut. Beware over-blowing in the lower canopy, which creates a shingling effect where leaves cover one another (or the WSP) and block coverage.

    Fluorescent dyes and kaolin clay show spray coverage in situ, but there are drawbacks. Few growers will spray dye and come back at night with a black light to examine targets. Further, a target sprayed with dye or clay cannot be sprayed a second time, which means the grower can’t adjust the sprayer and try again in the same canopy. And finally, it’s very difficult to determine if there is more or less coverage with clay or fluorescent dye.

    Learn more about how to use water sensitive paper here.

    WSP is fast, cheap and effective. With the exception of drench applications, the most demanding spray application (e.g. contact fungicide) should produce a spray coverage pattern of 85 drops per cm2 and 10-15% total coverage on 80% of the targets. This threshold comes from collective research and experience in many horticultural crops, and should true hold for tree nut.

    Be prepared to make changes to your sprayer calibration to compensate for tree height, canopy density, and weather conditions throughout the season. The feedback from water sensitive paper is far more accurate than shoulder-checks and leaf residue. It takes some time and effort, but it’s well worth it. Coverage is King.

    What others have done

    Researchers like Brad Higbee (Paramount Farming Co.) and Ken Giles (UC Davis) have explored spray coverage and efficacy from different sprayer configurations to combat Naval Orange Worm in almond. What follows is a summary of their observations. This information comes from their presentations and conversations with Brad.

    Ten years of trials spanned travel speeds of 3-6.5 km/h, volumes of 1,400-2,150 L/ha, and sprayer-generated airspeeds (measured at source) of 80-290 km/h. They looked at efficacy, residue levels and WSP coverage both in leaves and on the nuts themselves. When comparing sprayer configurations, the target almond tree was divided into four levels:

    • Level 1 = 1.8 m to 2.5 m (Lower canopy)
    • Level 2 = 3.0 m to 3.7 m
    • Level 3 = 4.2 m to 4.9 m
    • Level 4 = >5.5 m (Upper canopy)

    Many configurations were tested, but the following figure shows the top four. Of those not shown, most notable are the Bell 206 helicopter (280 L/ha at 50 km/h) and the Curtec AC 1000 Cross-Flow tower.

    A. Air-O-Fan low profile axial D-240 (Also used Air-O-Fan 232).
    B. Progressive Ag two-head 2650 electrostatic air-shear with 4 m tower (Also used 4.9 m three-head and 5.5 m four-head).
    C. Blueline Accutech 10-head air-shear tower.
    D. Low-profile axial airblast with two Sardi-style fans on mast. Upper fans set to 70% overall fan speed and spray volume. Axial fan and nozzles set to 30%

    Here is a summary of their observations:

    • Spray coverage and residue deposition was weakest in upper half (Levels 3 and 4) of canopy. Tower sprayers tended to provide more uniform coverage across vertical levels. For low-profile axial sprayers, most of the residues were deposited in the lower half of the tree.
    • The Air-O-Fan low-profile axial had the highest overall residues. But, above 3.7 m there was severe drop off in coverage. PTO-driven sprayers seemed as effective as engine driven. Incremental improvements were observed on this sprayer when using multiple banks of booms, full cone and hollow cone nozzles.
    • The Progressive Ag tower provided the highest residue deposition above 3.7 m and modest deposition in the lower canopy. While tower sprayers tended to provide more uniform coverage, the Progressive Ag was not significantly better than the Air-O-Fan overall.
    • Aerial application (280 L/ha) combined with the Air-O-Fan low-profile axial sprayer (1,870 L/ha) did increase residues in the upper canopy, but did not result in greater damage reduction relative to the Air-O-Fan alone.
    • Slowing the Air-O-Fan low-profile axial sprayer from 4 to 3.2 km/h resulted in 30% more coverage and 47% higher residue deposition overall.
    • Electrostatic treatments did not perform well on WSP (small droplet size was suspected), but they were among the best in residue deposition at full volume and “delivered surprising residues at high speeds/low volumes”.

    Brad has done remarkable work studying the impact of several sprayer configurations. While many were tested, there are still more that might be considered.

    Canopy management

    When all else fails, we are left with only one alternative: canopy management. Hedging and pruning the trees to create sprayer clearance opens canopies to spray (and light and air) and is a critical part of crop protection.

    Learn more about the benefits of canopy management here.

    Topping trees to bring them to a manageable height to improve coverage and reduce drift may be the only viable option for protecting the crop. I acknowledge that a great deal of nut production takes place in the upper third of the canopy, and it is beyond the scope of this article to discuss production and yield economics. However, when the crop is left unprotected, the yield quality is negatively impacted and it has been shown that a reduction in harvest weight is offset by the improvement in overall quality.

    Where plants are very old and overgrown (such as macadamia), it is highly recommended that the orchardist engage a local crop expert and discuss a strategy for canopy management. There are many benefits, including:

    • Improved harvest quality
    • Fewer refills (saving time and water)
    • Less time to spray means more timely applications
    • Potential chemistry savings
    • Savings in gas, noise and equipment wear and tear
    • Potential for reduced off target spray drift

    Summary

    Spraying large nut trees is a challenging proposition. A number of inter-connected factors are involved and an operator must address all of them make spraying as efficient and as effective as possible.

    • Adjust sprayer air settings first, using canopy penetration as your guide to travel speed.
    • Distribute the 2/3 of the volume and coarser spray quality to the top 1/3 of the boom.
    • Consider an air-assisted vertical boom configuration to improve coverage uniformity and reduce drift.
    • Use water sensitive paper for critical coverage feedback and make changes based on that feedback.
    • Develop a canopy management strategy to improve spray coverage and yield quality.
  • Spraying Large Nut Trees – Part 1

    Spraying Large Nut Trees – Part 1

    Introduction

    I’ve studied spray applications in a diversity of crops, both broad acre and specialty, but perhaps nothing is as challenging large tree nut canopies. Australia’s macadamia orchards can form >10 metre high, >4 metre deep canopy walls! So in writing this article I face the opposite situation I normally encounter when advising on airblast sprayer settings.

    In my region, fruit orchard, cane, bush and vine crops are typically sprayed with airblast sprayers. Over the years, through breeding and crop management, these operations have densified. The idea is that smaller, uniform crops can be managed, protected and harvested more efficiently. The ratio of quality fruit to planted area goes up, and input costs go down.

    However, our aging fleet of sprayers are overpowered relative to the target. This means much of what I do involves demonstrating to sprayer operators what sufficient coverage looks like, and then teaching how to restrain sprayer parameters to achieve this ideal coverage as efficiently as possible.

    So, are there any commonalities?

    Yes! The need to understand what “good coverage” looks like, and the parameters that affect it, is universal to any airblast operation. Assuming the operator already has product choice and pest staging well in hand, there are three major factors that influence the quality of the spray application: The sprayer settings, the geometry of the target and the environmental conditions.

    In theory we can discuss each of these factors individually, but in practice they interact with one another. It is wrong to adjust one factor without considering the other two. This is also why you should be wary of anyone that tries to sell you a sprayer by demonstrating it in an empty lot on a calm day! Always calibrate a sprayer in the planting, in weather conditions you would normally spray in.

    Air volume and direction

    Air adjustments are perhaps the most impactful changes you can make to your operation. The air stream created by the sprayer not only conveys the spray solution to the target, but opens the canopy and exposes leaf surfaces to the spray. In order to achieve adequate coverage, the volume (and speed) of sprayer-generated air must be sufficient to span the distance from sprayer to target, and then displace the volume of air in the canopy while depositing the spray.

    I admit to a bias when it comes to air shear systems. These sprayers utilize sprayer-generated air to atomize the spray liquid as well as convey it. As such, you cannot easily adjust the air without affecting spray quality (aka average droplet size or VMD). My preference is an arrangement where nozzle selection allows you to control spray quality independent of air settings. In any case, adjusting air settings requires the operator to “see” air.

    In my region, I advise tying 25 cm lengths of flagging tape at the top, middle and bottom of the far side of the upwind tree. Then, drive past with the air on and the spray booms off. If the ribbons stand straight out, the sprayer is over-blowing and the operator can drop to a lower fan gear, reduce the tractor RPM’s (if using a positive displacement-style pump) or drive faster. If the ribbons don’t move, the opposite steps can be taken. If the ribbons still won’t move, the sprayer is under-powered, it’s too windy to spray, or the canopy is too large.

    Learn more about these topics here.

    Let’s explore that last point. In the case of a canopy as large as macadamia, it is unlikely a low-profile axial sprayer can produce sufficient air volume to displace all the air in the canopy – particularly at the top of the tree. In this case a more humble goal would be to move the leaves at the trunk, indicating that the sprayer is managing to drive the air to the centre. To monitor this, an observer wearing safety goggles would have to stand at the far side of the upwind trunk and (while being very careful of flying debris) watch for leaf movement.

    This becomes increasingly difficult to monitor as the target gets fuller, higher, and farther away from the sprayer. Consider the macadamia trees in the following figure:


    The observer will have difficulty seeing leaf movement at the top of either the taller or shorter tree, but we can safely assume there will be less movement as a function of height. Since our goal is uniform penetration throughout the canopy, we must somehow compensate for this differential. Consider the following figure which extrapolates the path between the sprayer air outlet and the tree:

    In this figure we have divided each side of a low-profile axial sprayer into halves. The bottom half of the air outlet must produce enough air volume to displace area X. I realize I’m mixing area and volume, but bear with me. For the taller tree, the upper half of the outlet must produce enough air to displace 2.5 times the area versus the bottom half. Given that it is a single air outlet, this means inconsistent coverage.

    Comparatively, the shorter tree requires a more uniform air distribution. While this improves matters, there are further challenges. Sprayer-generated air slows and disperses proportional to distance, requiring more air to compensate. Also, orchard wind speed increases with elevation, increasing the potential for interference and dispersion. So, the taller the tree, the harder it is to achieve uniform canopy penetration.

    Spraying shorter nut trees with a low-profile axial sprayer is possible. The sprayer would require a large fan (≥1 m diameter), an aggressive fan blade pitch and a high fan speed. Air deflectors and air separation vanes would also be needed to segregate and focus the air. And travel speed would play a significant role.

    Travel Speed

    Travel speed should be considered as function of air penetration. A slower travel speed (~2 km/h) facilitates the displacement of stagnant canopy air with sprayer-generated air. Further, a slower travel speed reduces the wake effect that can suck finer droplets from the swath.

    It may seem counter-intuitive, but slower speeds can result in greater productivity. There is no need to increase the volume sprayed per hectare, so additional refills are not an issue. Further, improving spray coverage at slower speeds may prevent the need for an additional “clean-up” application later on, saving time and reducing environmental impact. Time lost to slower travel speed can also be reclaimed with more efficient loading practices.

    Learn more about travel speed here and productivity here.

    Directed Sprays and Off-Target Deposition

    When the height of the target tree exceeds alley width, or when branches overgrow alleys, many low-profile axial sprayers suffer from line-of-sight issues. Lower branches/leaves block the upper canopy and too many nozzles target the lower canopy. See the figure below.

    One option is to direct spray vertically to ensure the swath reaches the top of the canopy. In this case it is hoped that droplets remain Coarse enough to fall from the swath and penetrate the canopy, or blow laterally with prevailing wind (left side of figure). This unadvisable strategy is unlikely to achieve consistent results and greatly increases the potential for drift.

    Alternately, the top of the swath can be vectored directly at the top of the tree, but it must pass through canopy to reach it (right side of figure). This strategy increases the potential for drift, risks missing a portion of the upper canopy and is also unlikely to yield consistent results.

    Ideally, we would use a sprayer design that brings the air (and nozzles) closer to the target. Hypothetically, there are several possible configurations, but in practice their success will be hampered by boom sway and roll (from sloped plantings or uneven alleys) and pressure drop restrictions (from boom height). Here are a few possibilities:

    A. A vertical boom with a tapered inflatable bag to convey and redirect the air laterally (typically one-sided).
    B. An axial sprayer topped with a ducted tower with vertical booms, terminating in either a second axial fan or one-sided cannon.
    C. An axial sprayer with a vertical mast with a series of Sardi-style nozzle/fan assemblies distributed along the height.

    Learn more about towers here.

    In the following figure we see how two possible arrangements might work. On the left is a vertical boom with a tapered air assist system. This provides the shortest distance-to-target for each nozzle and in moving laterally, the air will more easily penetrate horizontal limbs. It also reduces the potential for drift.

    On the right is a novel arrangement proposed by Dr. Ken Giles (UC Davis, California). A Sardi-style fan and nozzle assembly is elevated above the canopy from an axial sprayer. His intention was to create air and fluid interaction to generate turbulence that could improve uniformity and decrease drift. He proportioned 70% of the overall spray to the top fan, and the remaining 30% from the ground. Working in almond, he saw more even coverage distribution compared to a low-profile axial sprayer and noted it reduced off target drift. For a target as tall as macadamia, additional fans would likely be required.

    In Part 2 we discuss Droplet size, Boom distribution, Spray coverage and diagnostics, California research and Canopy management.

  • Airblast Towers are Worth Considering

    Airblast Towers are Worth Considering

    Are you considering shelling out for a tower extension for your airblast sprayer? Spray towers are an excellent investment, but they warrant special consideration. Towers move the air and nozzles closer to the target compared to the curved booms on a conventional airblast sprayer. When the distance-to-target is reduced, the odds of droplets reaching the target are improved. That means less pesticide drift and more deposit in the plant canopy.

    Be Aware: Nozzles need a minimal distance from the target to create an optimal spray pattern, so do not get too close.

    Many growers report savings when switching from conventional airblast to towers. The towers are more efficient at depositing the spray, so they have to reduce their typical sprayer volumes to prevent run-off. We worked with one apple grower that switched from a conventional sprayer to one with a tower. His lake-side orchard was plagued by wind, and his conventional sprayer had a relatively small fan diameter (~2 feet) that couldn’t compete. Traditionally, the grower used higher spray volumes to compensate. His new tower sprayer had a larger fan (~3 foot diameter) but perhaps equally import was that the tower reduced the distance-to-target. As a result, he was able to reduce his spray output by more than 200 L/ha while improving his overall coverage! That represented considerable cost savings and reduced environmental impact.

    Towers may provide better coverage than conventional sprayers in orchards with horizontal scaffolding. The tower sprays between branches, penetrating more easily, while the conventional sprayer has to spray through them. Concept from K. Blagborne, British Columbia.
    Towers may provide better coverage than conventional sprayers in orchards with horizontal scaffolding. The tower sprays between branches, penetrating more easily, while the conventional sprayer has to spray through them. Concept from K. Blagborne, British Columbia.

    While there are many benefits associated with towers, they are not suitable for all situations:

    • Towers must be taller than the highest target (e.g. treetop)
    • Towers should be used on level ground. Towers will roll on the vertical axis (i.e. tip left and right) on uneven ground, potentially missing or over-shooting targets
    • Towers must be able to clear netting, trellises, or an overhanging canopy.
    The perils of towers on uneven ground. For towers to be effective, the tower must be at least as tall as the target. When the target is only slightly higher than the tower, some sprayer operators install an additional nozzle body on the top deflector plate to extend the reach.
    The perils of towers on uneven ground. For towers to be effective, the tower must be at least as tall as the target. When the target is only slightly higher than the tower, some sprayer operators install an additional nozzle body on the top deflector plate to extend the reach.
    A home-grown airblast sprayer with tower. PVC ducts, sheets of plastic, a squirrel cage blower and grower ingenuity. While it looks suspect, and difficult to clean, it reputedly works very well in highbush blueberries.
    A home-grown airblast sprayer with tower. PVC ducts, sheets of plastic, a squirrel cage blower and grower ingenuity. While it looks suspect, and difficult to clean, it reputedly works very well in highbush blueberries.

    Occasionally, we have discovered areas along tower outlets where there is reduced air flow. You can usually feel these “dead zones” with your hand (beware flying debris), but it’s better to observe short ribbons attached to the nozzle bodies as described in our articles about adjusting air direction and speed/volume. In low fan gear, watch to see if any ribbons flag or appear slack from a lack of air, you can “borrow” air by re-positioning neighbouring deflectors. If that’s not possible, try replacing the conventional nozzles in the dead zone with air induction nozzles; coverage should improve in that zone because pressure propels coarser droplets further than finer droplets. We’ve seen significant improvements using this technique in high density orchards.

    In the end, if a tower will fit in our operation, we suggest it’s a worthwhile investment that will make coverage more consistent, reduce off-target drift and possibly reduce the volume of spray needed per hectare.

    Towers come in many shapes and sizes. Orchards aren’t the only good fit for towers; grapes, bushes and canes can also benefit from small towers.
    Towers come in many shapes and sizes. Orchards aren’t the only good fit for towers; grapes, bushes and canes can also benefit from small towers.
  • Nozzle Sizing and Calibration Charts

    Nozzle Sizing and Calibration Charts

    Need to find the right nozzle size for your application?  Sometimes a simple chart is the easiest way to figure things out.  Print it and place it in your sprayer cab.

    In this chart, identify your water volume along the top row, and follow the column until you encounter the travel speeds you’re interested in.

    Once you’ve encountered your travel speed, move along the row to the left to identify the nozzle size and spray pressure.

    Make sure that your travel speeds are achieved at a pressure that’s right for the nozzle you’re using. For most air-induced nozzles, this will be about 60 to 70 psi (highlighted).

    Once you’ve decided on a nozzle size, the travel speed column for that size becomes the travel speed range at various pressures. Avoid operating a low-drift spray below 30 psi – its pattern will be too narrow and likely its spray quality will be too coarse for good results.

    Click on the images or text below to download a high quality pdf version of each chart, starting from the top with US, 15″ spacing, then US, 20″, then US 30″, then metric, 50 cm. Print, laminate, and place them in your sprayer cab.

    Calibration Chart (US, 15 in)

    Download Application Chart (US units, 15″ spacing)

    Calibration Chart (US, 20 in)

    Download Application Chart (US units, 20″ spacing)

    Calibration Chart (US, 30 in)

    Download Application Chart (US units, 30″ spacing)

    Application Chart 2015 (metric)

    Download Application Chart (metric, 50 cm spacing)

    Make your own chart using this Excel Template.