For those on the fly, hit play to hear a shortened, narrated version.
I have far too many photos and videos of airblast sprayers blowing straight up through treetops, or downwind through the last row, during spring applications. I chose not to include any in this article to avoid people recognizing the operations. If you haven’t seen anyone doing it, maybe it’s you!
I recognize that it can be a tricky balance to adjust a sprayer for spring applications. It’s counterintuitive, but a bare tree can be difficult to spray. Young and/or bare trees represent small targets which have a very low catch efficiency, so a lot of spray will miss. Switching nozzles to adjust rates doesn’t help much in this regard – it’s far better to adjust travel speed and air settings, and we’ll get to that in a moment.
That lack of foliage also means wind moves through the orchard unabated, so the sprayer may have to blow a little harder into the wind to compensate. In the case of a low-profile axial sprayer, which blows laterally and upward, that means creating greater risk for blowing too high, and blowing through downwind rows.
That off-target deposition represents a huge loss of materials and potential for drift incidents. To add insult to injury, many of those early season applications often have oil components, which require a drench (higher volume) and are more easily seen by bystanders (opaque droplets). All in all, it’s a bad time of year for crop protection PR. Learn more about drift and drift prevention here: BeDriftAware.
Air Adjustments
So, let’s start with air. Air carries spray droplets, so 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.
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.
Nozzle Adjustments
Now pay particular attention to which nozzles are on or off. 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.
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.
Travel Speed, Wind, and Coverage Assessment
Now let’s consider travel speed. If the wind is blowing hard through the orchard, you can increase the air speed or slow down the sprayer to focus longer. However, in both cases, you run the risk of overblowing the downwind rows by a considerable margin. Easily three rows in a high-density orchard.
This downwind coverage is cumulative, so when you assess your coverage (preferably using water sensitive paper), don’t do so until you’ve made a few upwind passes. So much of that spray ends up on the orchard floor, and still more evaporates or blows up, but some of it will hit and it adds up.
Downwind Boundary
Finally, pay attention to where you are in the block. It may be necessary to turn off the downwind bank of nozzles on the final downwind three (or more) rows. That means you’ll be performing the dreaded alternate row (one-sided) application, and I’ll be the first to say that’s not ideal. However, in this case, the spray will blow back and help cover the unsprayed side. Again, use water sensitive paper to confirm the job you’re doing.
Final Thoughts
And, of course, seriously consider when it’s time to wait for better conditions. No one likes to do that, especially when rain is imminent and the ground stays soft, but the alternative is a lot of waste and a poor application. If this always seems to be the fight you’re having, maybe it’s time to consider the return on investment of a tower sprayer, or a shrouded sprayer. Towers improve matters since they more easily reach the treetop without having to blow as hard, and without angling air upward. Shrouded recycling-style sprayers (if they fit the architecture) help even more.
Plan to do all of this (especially the capital investment number crunching) before the season starts and be prepared to change sprayer settings on the fly, as required. Don’t be the subject of my next spring drift photo.
Any description of airblast sprayer start-up must, contextually, make assumptions on how it was winterized for long-term storage. This cyclic relationship is why I use a chicken-and-egg title slide when giving this presentation.
Answer: It was the rooster.
The inability to describe one process without the other is further complicated by the possibility that the sprayer is brand new and was therefore never winterized. So, what follows is an attempt at a logical sequence of pre-season maintenance activities to restore a winterized sprayer, or initiate a new sprayer.
New Equipment
If this is a new sprayer, you have an opportunity to perform some preventative maintenance.
Loosen, lubricate and re-tighten clamps. Always back gears off before tightening to avoid stretching them. (Image from Purdue Extension publication PPP-121: Preparing Spray Equipment for Winter Storage and Spring Startup)Use double clamps on pressurized lines for added safety. Wider clamps are better and T-bolt clamps are better than worm-gear.Put thread release on bolts and re-tighten with a torque wrench (not an impact tool). Use a paint pen to mark nut, washer and bolt for future visual checks. This is called a “Witness Mark”.Protect hoses and wires at rub points. Follow hoses and with a paint pen, number the hose-ends and connections for future reference.Using a new tractor? You may have to re-calibrate to account for different gear ratios. When hitching a new sprayer, note that the distance from the ball on the drawbar hitch to the tip of the PTO should be ~14″. Don’t exceed maximum working angles for PTO shafts (usually <25 degrees). If your tractor or implement manufacturer says differently, go with that. And get it in writing.
Winterizing (Long-term storage)
If you are preparing the sprayer for long-term storage, follow the normal rinsing process, but don’t reinstall strainers and nozzles.
Look in the nozzle bodies for debris. Discard worn or broken nozzles.Soak, scrub, rinse and store nozzles and nozzle strainers. You may replace them once the sprayer is clean, but I prefer to store them separately since they have to come back off during start-up.
With the agitation on, circulate undiluted plumbing antifreeze (the sprayer already has 5-10 L (1.25-2.5 gallons) of water in the system from the decontamination process) for five minutes and drain it through the plumbing system (not the booms).
Disconnect hoses where they attach to the booms and drain as much liquid from the sprayer as possible. (Image from Munckhof Sprayers). Take the time to examine any hose fittings.Clean the sprayer (Triple rinse with a detergent) and scrub the exterior. Do not use pressure washers on bearings, fittings, pumps or any lubricated or moving parts.Examine fan blades for cracks, build-up or nicks that can cause imbalance. Replace (not just repair) punctured entrance grills.Don’t ignore tank damage. Poly tanks are prone to sun damage and cracks. Never climb into a tank to repair it. Quite often, replacement is the best option.Clean and inspect wheel assemblies. It’s best to do this during winterization to prevent bearing corrosion as the sprayer sits all winter.Remove any rust and repaint (or just touch up). Paint not only looks good, it protects.The excellent YouTube channel Ask Tractor Mike proposed storing the PTO shaft indoors in two pieces, and to cut away a portion of the interior guard to facilitate reassembly later on. Also, use a paint pen to mark the splines on the shaft for easier hook-up (see inset top-right of image).RV antifreeze is a 50% solution of antifreeze and water with a rust inhibitor. It should not cause phytotoxicity if sprayed or dumped, but be sure to dispose of it away from water sources during start-up. Turn the pump manually to get antifreeze throughout the system. Close the nozzle bodies, loosely fit the tank lid and store indoors. (Image from Purdue Extension publication PPP-121: Preparing Spray Equipment for Winter Storage and Spring Startup).
Spring Start-up
Most operators are guilty of neglecting their airblast sprayers and babying their tractors. Sprayers are precision tools that must be kept in good operating order to prevent costly breakdowns, improve their performance, and increase their lifespan.
Your car is serviced based on distance travelled. Your sprayer should receive regular maintenance based on working hours, per the manufacturer’s recommendations. Daily sprayer inspections are part of regular maintenance since the operator will (hopefully) find small problems before they become big problems.
Never assume your sprayers is ready to go right out of long-term storage. Parts seize, scale breaks away from surfaces, and small beasties sometimes choose to eat, or make their homes in, cozy sprayers.
When planning spring start-up, never assume the winterized sprayer is ready for immediate hook-up. Expect a minimum half day per sprayer.Attempting to loosen or shift something that hasn’t moved in several months is risky. Pressure gauges snap off, fittings crack, welds break. Expect the unexpected and either have spare parts on hand, or a plan to get them quickly.Parts are most likely to seize during the first spray. Bearings and PTO universal joints, especially.Start-up is a good time to lubricate parts. Grease the guard ring bearing every 100 hours, the universal joint cross every 25 hours and the shaft and shear bolt regularly.Insects, birds and rodents eat, or make homes in, sprayers. Professional rodent bait/traps, steel wool and peppermint oil/gel are possible solutions.Check belt tension, alignment and wear. (Image from Purdue Extension publication PPP-121: Preparing Spray Equipment for Winter Storage and Spring Startup).
Pump specific maintenance is beyond the scope of this article. Hypro recommends changing oil after 40 hours of break-in operation and every 500 hours after that. The diaphragms should be replaced every 1,000 hours. Generally speaking, EPDM (black) diaphragms are a better choice for airblast sprayers, while the Desmopan (amber) diaphragms are really for lawn care sprayers.
Pump maintenance is beyond this article, but change the oil every 500 hr or 3 months. Use a paint pen to write on the pump what type of oil it requires, and then date the filters. Note the “winterized” sticker.
At minimum, check the tire pressure. Hard tires drive faster, but leave compacted ruts. Soft tires drive slower, but disperse weight better. Airblast sprayer wheel assemblies should be cleaned and inspected as part of regular annual maintenance. Wheel bearing maintenance before long-term storage may prevent water from corroding the bearings.
Ensure tire pressure matches the ideal stamped on the tire. Or, if using less pressure to avoid spring soil compaction, ensure both tires have the same pressure.
The relief valve on your sprayer should always be in the bypass position during start-up. If your gauge spikes then the gauge may always read high afterwards and should be replaced.
A reminder to always set the relief valve to the bypass position when starting up the sprayer. This is one reason why pressure gauges spike and can eventually fail.
Replacing leaking, opaque or inaccurate gauges improves sprayer performance. Be sure to use the oil-filled variety of gauge to eliminate a bouncing needle. You can also get suppressors that fit between the gauge and sprayer to prevent pulsing. Consult the article on testing airblast pressure gauge reliability.
Use a wrench to turn gauges at the nut. Don’t twist them by hand holding the face. Ensure they are not opaque, leaking, plugged or resting above the zero pin.
Many spray materials do not mix well and one of the common causes of uneven application is poor agitation. If you find deposits at the sump in the bottom of the sprayer after an application, your agitation is insufficient. For mechanical agitators, check for propeller wear and ensure paddles are secure on the agitator shaft. Learn more about agitation here.
If the agitator shaft is leaking a little, tighten the packing. The packing gland is a common source of leaks. Keep it properly greased. If a leak occurs you can usually repair it by tightening the bolts on the packing gland by ½ a turn, but if that doesn’t work you may have to remove and repack (or replace) it.
On sprayers with mechanical agitators, look for prop wear and loose or damaged paddles. Fill the sprayer with water and looks for tank leaks. Tighten the bolts 1/2 turn if the packing gland on the agitator shaft is leaking. You may have to remove and repack the gland if the leak persists.Look for signs of hose wear and examine the sprayer for leaks while under pressure. Be careful when pressurizing the sprayer for the first time in the spring; this is when lines are likely to come loose or burst. (Image from Purdue Extension publication PPP-121: Preparing Spray Equipment for Winter Storage and Spring Startup).Minerals chelate (i.e. scale) more readily on stainless steel than plastic tanks. In either case, the first tank of water and leftover antifreeze should be sprayed from the nozzle bodies with no line or nozzle strainers, and no nozzles. Replace them once the tank is sprayed out.
The last step is calibrating the sprayer, and that process really depends on your definition. If the preceding steps conflict with those of the manufacturer’s, always follow the manufacturer’s. Do this for reasons of safety and to preserve any warranty.
Thanks to Fred Whitford (Purdue University), Gail Amos and Mark Ledebuhr (Application Insight LLC) for reviewing the content of this article and for their helpful edits.
In the summer of 2024, six Ontario vineyards participated in an authorized herbicide trial. The objective was to assess efficacy as well as determine if the product fit the timing for seasonal weed and sucker management. If successful, it could replace the expensive and time-consuming manual labour required to remove suckers.
Each vineyard applied the same rate, at similar times, employing optimal sprayer settings. A few weeks after application, the researchers and registrant toured the vineyards. They were pleased with how quickly and effectively the product worked on both targets at all six locations. However, one vineyard reported visual injury on a sloped region of their operation.
This raised two questions:
Assuming the cause was drift, and not direct overspray, why did it only happen in a specific region of a single vineyard?
Whether drift or overspray, what is the potential for the applied rate to cause injury?
The vineyard manager and sprayer operator investigated the application equipment and found no problems with how the sprayer was calibrated or operated. Further, the nearby weather stations recorded reasonable environmental conditions. So, that seemed to discount accidental overspray and wind-borne drift.
Then we considered the topography. The level portion of the vineyard appeared undamaged, but as it began to slope downhill, we saw damage on leaves and shoots in the bottom half of the canopy. It was almost as if a stratum of herbicide stayed level as the ground fell away. We discussed temperature inversions, volatility, and sprayer wake, but nothing fit.
Then we stepped back and found ourselves looking up at the Niagara Escarpment. The Escarpment is a long cliff formed by erosion, separating the higher, level ground from where we stood below. And then we had an idea: Could the product have been lifted into contact with the canopy by a Katabatic wind?
The theory
On clear nights with calm winds, the ground cools rapidly. Air in contact with the colder ground cools by conducting heat to the ground and by radiating upwards. When this cooling process occurs along mountain slopes, or on top of a plateau, the cooling air becomes colder and denser, causing it flow downslope like water. Perhaps a layer of relatively cool Katabatic wind off the escarpment slid under the warmer layer of air in the downslope portion of the vineyard. And, perhaps, any product still suspended in the air was lifted upwards into contact with the grape canopy.
Cold air (blue) slides under a warmer layer of air (orange) that carries traces of herbicide in the form of Very Fine, suspended droplets. It is lifted into contact with the lower portions of the grape panels.
Even the coarsest hydraulic nozzle produces a population of driftable fines. These fines take a long time to fall, and some are essentially buoyant. In the following histograms, we see actual data from a nozzle rated between Medium and Coarse. The operators actually used an air-induction nozzle with a much coarser spray quality, but we’re using this data set as a worst-case scenario example. If we divide the volume produced into its constituent droplet sizes, we see that most of the volume is comprised of droplets between 150 and 250 microns.
However, droplet diameter shares a cubic relationship with volume. If we plot that same volume by number of droplets, we see the majority are between 18 and 74 microns in diameter. These very small droplets would fall so slowly that any atmospheric disturbance would displace them. Depending on the crop’s sensitivity to the herbicide, they might carry sufficient active ingredient to cause injury, assuming they didn’t evaporate to the point that they were no longer biologically active.
There are a lot of assumptions in this theory, and perhaps it’s far fetched, but it was the best we could figure. So, if those droplets were lifted into contact with the canopy, were they capable of causing injury? To find out, we conducted a simple, non-replicated bioassay.
The bioassay
On the morning of July 12, we filled a spray bottle with 50% of the field-rate (including 1% v/v MSO) and set the nozzle to the finest setting. We applied a single spritz about mid-way up the canopy of the same Riesling grapes on a VSP flat cane training system. We did this on the upwind side on both older (lower canopy) and newer growth (upper canopy). Then we performed a series of serial dilutions, halving the concentration each time, and repeating the application.
Our hope was to see a subtle response curve when we plotted concentration against tissue damage. Perhaps we’d even see a different curve for older versus newer tissue.
The vineyard manager photographed and recorded observations on an approximately weekly schedule, with a gap in observations between weeks three and six. The following images show the results of a ½ dose treatment, and a 1/16 dose treatment tracked during that period.
The results
We observed the following:
Fruit, foliage, and shoots were injured at all doses by three days after application.
Initial injury remained stable; no secondary injury was observed.
The degree of injury at the lowest dose was significantly more severe than the injury observed following the original May 31st application.
Regular vineyard operations, such as mechanical leaf removal in the fruiting zone and hedging, removed some of the damaged leaves and shoots.
The study did not include an assessment of harvest quality.
This was severe injury, even at the lowest rate. When compared to another herbicide commonly used for perennial weed control (e.g. Ignite SN – glufosinate ammonium) the injury we saw manifested very quickly.
Recently, researchers at Cornell have been exploring the herbicide we used in this study in perennial weed and sucker control in apple orchards. They did not experience any drift issues and found it to be effective between 90-180 ml/ha (0.5-1 oz/ac) (personal communication). That’s ~4x less than the rate proposed for registration in Canada, and it suggests the herbicide in question was certainly capable of causing the damage at very low concentrations.
Ultimately, we can’t be certain how the initial off-target damage occurred, but we were able to evaluate damage potential using a rough-and-simple bioassay that any grower can try. In unusual cases of drift it’s important to know if the product we suspect is even capable of causing the damage. A simple evaluation using serial dilution and a squirt bottle can tell us if we need to look more closely, or look somewhere else to explain injury.
Thanks to Kristen Obeid, OMAFA Weed Specialist (Horticulture) and Josh Aitken, Vineyard Manager of Cave Spring Vineyard for their contributions to this work.
Editor’s Note: Any brand-specific references or recommendations in this article are based on the author’s experience. Sprayers101 endeavours to preserve brand independence and impartiality to best serve our readers. This article was originally posted in 2018.
During my many years of work in the Australian vegetable and horticultural industry, I am continually asked:
Q. What is the best spray unit to use?
My answer is simple:
A. The one that has been correctly set up and matched to the crop you are spraying.
That can be hard to achieve, especially in vegetable crops where the target can vary enormously from bare ground to upright leaf crops (e.g. onions), to horizontal leaf crops (e.g. potatoes and brassica).
Generally, I have found that air-assist booms offer the best starting point for achieving good spray coverage of vegetable crops. However, like any spray boom, they must be set up correctly. Air-assist booms are more expensive and require a few more horses to operate, which is why most Australian vegetable growers prefer to make do with a non air-assist boom.
So, if air-assist isn’t an option, it then becomes imperative to determine the most suitable nozzles for their particular requirements. I have worked in many vegetable crops over the years. I’ve held my share of “fluorescent dye nights” and checked spray coverage and canopy penetration with many grower groups. Based on my experience, there are three types of nozzles I recommend for most vegetable crops:
Nozzle #1: Air Induction Flat Fan
Here’s what I say when the grower (inevitably) asks which nozzle is the best for every task:
Using only one nozzle will compromise some aspect of a series of applications. However, the Syngenta 110 025 air induction nozzle generally performs well. Manufactured by Hypro it creates more droplets per liter than other air induction nozzles of the same size (as of 2018). (Editor’s note: as of 2025, a likely North American equivalent is alternating-direction Syngenta 3D 90’s. They produce a high-velocity Extremely Coarse-Ultra Coarse spray quality and the manufacturer claims they improve the penetration of broad leaf canopies over conventionally-angled sprays. However, when drift potential is low, travel speed is reasonable, and boom height is low, alternating-direction Defy 3Ds produce a Medium-Coarse Spray quality which may be more conducive to retention on hard-to-wet vertical targets).
As long as the crop isn’t too large (e.g. later season), I recommend this nozzle with lower water volumes. This is because I tend to see more application issues arising from excessive water rates that wash product off the plant. Unless you are after soil borne diseases, avoid run-off and wastage by using the SAI 110 -25 with volumes of about 200 L/ha. The following graph shows the results of application volume on brussels sprout coverage (per Syngenta UK).
Nozzle #2: Narrow Spray-Angle Flat Fan
When I am trying to increase canopy penetration, I like the Syngenta Vegetable Nozzle (SV65-04 flat fan). I feel the narrow spray fan angle delivers a directed spray pattern into the crop canopy which can significantly improve penetration. This is a good fit for late-season insecticide and fungicide sprays in brassica crops, where pests and diseases can be hidden deep in the crop canopy.
I worked with a vegetable grower who was having trouble controlling sclerotinia in his mature fennel crop. The target was the base of the stem, deep in the canopy. In the following image you can see the water sensitive paper taken from ground-level in the canopy. The nozzles used from left to right are; Hardi Twin AI 110-05, Syngenta 65-06 vegetable nozzle and Syngenta AI 110-05. Coverage was estimated using the SnapCard app (freely available for iPhone and Android platforms). (Editor’s note: as of 2025, Syngenta’s silver 06 and gold 08 vegetable nozzles are not available in North America. They produce high volume, slow-moving, Coarse-Very Coarse sprays. TeeJet’s Visiflo is a 65 degree tip, but produces too fine a spray quality to be serviceable. As spot-spraying is increasingly adopted, the development of narrow-angled nozzles is anticipated and may offer a reasonable alternative.).
So, I know pyrethrum is a flower and not a vegetable crop (think chrysanthemum), but it can be hard to penetrate, so this is a good example. We compared five nozzles and estimated coverage using SnapCard. The Veg 65-04, AI 110-035, and Twin AI 110-04 seemed to improve coverage over the Defy 3D 85-04 and conventional AI 110-04.
For broadacre farmers (i.e. field or cereal crops) the SV65 flat fan nozzle has also proven to be extremely successful at penetrating thick standing stubble residue when using pre-emergent herbicides. Likewise, it performs well when targeting lower leaves during fungicide applications. Again, I believe that this is due to the narrow fan angle of the spray giving a more direct spray down through both the stubble and the current season’s foliage. Be attentive to nozzle spacing and boom height when using narrow fan angles to ensure correct overlap and complete coverage.
Nozzle #3: Angled Flat Fan
For onions and broadleaf crops (e.g. potatoes and beans), I feel the nozzles that have their spray fans angled forwards and backwards along the (non air-assist) boom are best suited.
The following image shows coverage from angled sprays on simulated upright targets in the field using water sensitive paper.
The Syngenta angled nozzles are designed with a 30° incline intended to improve foliar coverage down to the lower leaves on some vegetable crops. Although originally designed for use in potato crops, I have also had success in other vegetable crops such as onions and leeks. (Editor’s note: as of 2025, the Gold 04 and Orange 05 potato nozzles do not appear to be commercially available, although possibly in Ireland. They produced a ~Medium spray quality at an angle similar to that of the vegetable nozzles).
Summary
No matter the nozzle choice, or how good the application technique may be, the priority should be to manage disease and insect pests early in crop development. If you are trying to control heavy pressure from disease or insects and it’s deep within the crop canopy, often, you’re going to come off second best. Prevention is always better than cure, no matter what crop protection product you are spraying.
With that caveat, I’ll leave you with my suggested nozzle choices. Preferably, I would suggest installing (at least) a triplet nozzle selector to quickly change between three nozzles for each crop.
Crop
Growth Stage
Water Volume (L/ha)
Suggested Nozzle
Notes
Cabbage
Small, open
100-200
Air Induction
Run-off is the enemy of small plants.
Hearted
300-800
65 ° Fan Angle Nozzle
Angled spray important to get spray under top leaves. Use twin cap option for volumes greater than 300 L/ha.
Carrots
Small
100-200
Air Induction
Carrots are good at catching spray. Angling nozzles e.g. Twin Cap will give best results.
Large
200-400
65 ° Fan Angle Nozzle
65º fan the best for penetrating to crown. Apply volume of 200 L/ha, increasing to 400 L/ha in denser crops. Avoid air induction (aka bubble jet) and hollow cone nozzles for later application timings.
Brussels Sprouts
Small, open
100-200
Syngenta AI 110025
Run-off is the enemy of small plants.
Large
200-300
Syngenta 3D nozzle 85 04 or 85 05
Leeks
Small
100
Syngenta 3D Nozzle 85 03, 85 035 and 85 04 cover both sides of the plant.
Coverage, run-off and missing the target are the problems likely in Leeks. Angled spray forward and backwards is important. High Volumes = Run-off.
Large
200-300
Syngenta 3D nozzle 85 04 or 85 05
Angled spray forward and backward. High Volumes = Run-off.
Lettuce
Small, open
100-200
Air Induction
Run-off is the enemy of small plants.
Hearted
300-800
65 ° Fan Angle Nozzle
Onions
Small
100
Syngenta 3D Nozzle 85 03, 85 035 and 85 04 cover both sides of the plant.
Coverage, run-off and missing the target are the problems likely in onions. Angled spray forward and backwards is important. High volumes = run-off.
Large
200
Syngenta 3D Nozzle 85 04 or 85 05
Angled spray forward and backward to cover both sides of the plant.
Potatoes
Prior to row closure
100
Syngenta Pre-em 03 nozzle
Angled spray forward and backward.
After row closure
Syngenta 3D Nozzle 85 03, 85 035 and 85 04
Pre harvest (desiccation)
200-400
Syngenta 3D Nozzle 85 04 or 85 05
The desiccation of very large canopies may require up to 400 L/ha of water on the 1st application.
Peas and Edible Beans
Small
100
Syngenta 3D Nozzle 85 04 for 7–9 km/hr. Syngenta 3D Nozzle 85 05 for 10–12 km/hr.
Medium spray quality and use higher water volumes in dense crops. All nozzles 0.4-0.5 m above top of crop.
Closed Transfer Systems (CTS) permit the direct transfer of pesticides from container to sprayer while isolating the process from the operator and the environment. Similar systems are already used with bulk pesticide containers and in other industries to dispense a wide range of liquids from household products to industrial chemicals. In the case of small-volume containers (e.g., up to 20 L), these systems include an integrated container rinsing function.
The UK’s Iain Robertson testing Pentair’s Cleanload Nexus Coupler
CTS are comprised of two parts: The Cap (or Adaptor) and the Coupler. The CTS cap is either pre-fitted on the pesticide container, or the user must remove and replace the existing, non-CTS cap with an adaptor. Generically, the container is then locked into the coupler, and a valve in the cap or adaptor opens to permit chemical to be drawn out. If a partial amount is required, the valve can be closed to re-seal the container for safe removal, and the coupler and lines can then be rinsed. If the full amount is required, then the container is also rinsed prior to removal.
Regulatory Requirements: Canada
Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) considers the requirement for closed transfer when products go through their natural re-evaluation cycle. They define it as follows:
“A closed system means removing a pesticide from its original container, rinsing, mixing, diluting, and transferring the pesticide through connecting hoses and couplings that prevent exposure to the pesticide.”
The requirement is primarily a means of reducing operator exposure and point-source contamination during filling, but can also be used to impose rate restrictions, or in response to reformulation. In recent years, several pesticides have had statements added to the labels regarding the requirement for a closed transfer system. They have stated that there have been three scenarios that they have included closed systems on labels:
The registrant requested closed systems be used in the occupational risk assessment.
Closed systems were required when triggered by the occupational risk assessment as a form of mitigation to reduce exposure to the mixer/loader. This is the most common reason it gets added.
Closed systems were used in the specific exposure study submitted to PMRA that was used in the risk assessment.
As standardized language is developed, Canadian operators can expect to see statements that vary in their specificity, such as in the following two examples:
Product 1: “Requirement for additional personal protection equipment (PPE) and engineering controls when mixing/loading and applying to various crops.” Product 2: “Closed mixing/loading systems are required. A closed system means removing a pesticide from its original container, rinsing, mixing, diluting, and transferring the pesticide through connecting hoses, pipes, and couplings that are sufficiently tight to prevent exposure of any person to the pesticide or rinsing solution.”
Questions and concerns have been raised by registrants and growers as these changes have appeared on pesticides with particularly important actives. As of 2025:
Products with standard CTS label statement:
Lorox L Herbicide
Ethrel PGR
Dibrom Insecticide
Products that require CTS without standard label statement:
Bravo ZN Fungicide (bulk totes only, chlorothalonil in 10 L jugs does not require CTS)
Captan 480 SC and Captan L Fungicide (only if open cab AND exceeding a maximum L/day threshold)
Products that may require CTS but not clear on the label:
Sevin XLR Insecticide – “use a closed mixing system”
In some cases, registrants have avoided the requirement by splitting the label rate and promoting multiple applications to ensure rates do not reach the PMRA’s threshold for closed transfer. Another strategy is to remove small-volume formats and rely on Intermediate Bulk Containers (IBC or totes), which already employ closed transfer. If neither option is available, registrants may face expensive changes (which are currently unspecified) to their injection molding process. This is assuming North American small-volume container packers respond to emerging Canadian requirements.
Commercial horticultural and specialty crop growers (or field croppers with smaller acreages and diversified crops) are more likely to purchase pesticides in small-volume containers as opposed to a tote. For growers, the practical requirements for compliant closed transfer are not well understood. Most do not currently have CTS and feel a retrofit is overly burdensome (e.g. slow, expensive, complicated), incompatible with their equipment, or redundant with conventional PPE.
As Canadian agriculture comes to terms with these regulatory changes, the European experience offers valuable insight.
Regulatory Requirements: Europe
In Europe, reducing operator exposure and point source contamination during filling has long been a regulatory priority. Regulatory requirements for CTS are slated or already exist. The following dates are “fluid estimates” that will depend on the politics of each country. At the time of writing, the Netherlands are planning to make it compulsory on liquid formulations by 2025. Denmark will follow by 2024-25 and Belgium by 2026. The Czech Republic already stipulates about 12 separate products must be used in combination with CTS, and a blanket requirement is under discussion. In some cases, growers will be granted a three-year transition period before they must show that they have a capable CTS. Currently the UK doesn’t yet have any concrete targets, but they have been testing CTS since 2017 and their experiences have informed product development and the creation of international standards. According to a 2023 article in EI Operator, CropLife Europe stated that Europe is on track to make CTS available to all European farmers by 2030
Recycling
According to easyconnect (c. 2024), Germany is on the cusp of agreeing to accept both jugs and caps for shredding. Currently the caps are collected separately (if at all) because they aren’t typically rinsed. This is the same as in Canada.
Cap and foil collection awaiting disposal.
However, because the transfer systems also rinse the connection, the caps are down to the same 0.01% residue limit as the jugs, so as long as they’re dry, they’re both recyclable. Discussions are ongoing with France to make the same agreement.
ISO definitions of CTS
The 2021 publication of ISO 21191 has greatly facilitated CTS development. The standard defines what a CTS is and specifies the testing methods and compliance criteria for both operator and environment-related safety. Summarizing key points in the ISO:
The CTS shall
connect to containers and application equipment;
control flow and measuring of all or a part of the container content;
rinse the container into the application equipment;
flush the CTS equipment as well as the interface;
permit operation while using appropriate personal protection equipment specified on pesticide label and any associated operator’s manual;
have clearly labelled controls;
be designed to avoid any return of liquid to the clean water supply.
The CTS shall not
cause leakage when the device is connected to the mix tank or application equipment;
influence the circulation system of the connected application equipment;
allow the introduction of air that promotes foaming or reduces pump performance;
leave a residue level of more than 0.01% of the containers nominal volume following rinsing.
The ISO was reinforced by a 2023 Crop-Life Europe study that tested three systems applying for ISO certification. It demonstrated a more than 98% reduction in operator exposure (while using gloves) for the easyFlow M, GoatThroat, and Cleanload Nexus systems. These systems, and others, are described below.
Note: when using crop protection products, it remains a legal obligation for operators to wear the personal protection equipment indicated on the product label.
Commercial Systems
Pesticide container compatibility is fundamental to the success of any CTS design. There are exceptions, but many agrichemical companies in Europe and North America already employ a 63 mm screw cap for small-volume containers. According to the EPA (EPA 40 CFR Part 165 Subpart B), liquid agricultural pesticides in containers that are rigid and have capacities equal to or larger than 3 liters must have a screw cap either 63 or 38 mm in diameter and at least one thread revolution at 6 threads per inch. Depending on the CTS design, jugs may or may not require a tamper-proof foil. As of 2024, the first available jugs in the U.K. did not have foils.
The following systems are compatible with the 63 mm cap and are emerging as viable options at the time of writing. Some have been commercially available for several years and others are either new or still in development. Cost and availability will vary based on regional distribution and demand. Interested readers are advised to contact the manufacturer to confirm compatibility with their preferred products.
The easyFlow was developed with support from Bayer and has been available for more than 10 years. It requires the operator to remove the existing container cap and replace it with the easyFlow adaptor, which features a built-in knife that automatically cuts any foil seal. It is compatible with container sizes between 1 and 15 L. There are three versions of the easyFlow coupler.
easyFlow
The original easyFlow coupler installs directly to the sprayer tank. Once the pesticide container is joined (maximum 10 L format), product pours via gravity straight into the sprayer tank. The container can then be rinsed using an external water source (e.g. via a garden hose) with a min. ¾” diameter, anti backflow valve and water pressure between 3-6 bar.
easyFlow directly mounted on sprayer tank (image from FreeForm)
easyFlow M
The easyFlow M is a standalone coupler that supports containers over 10 L and permits dosing via an integrated measuring unit just below the mounting point. The measuring unit holds up to 2,250 ml with a minimum volume of 60 ml and graduations of 20 ml (50 ml over the 400 ml mark). Product transfer is achieved either by gravity, or by a pump (e.g. Teed to the suction side of the sprayer pump).
easyFlow M mounted on separate transfer station (image from FreeForm)
According to agrotop, a 5L container under suction took 2-2.5 minutes to empty and clean during the Croplife study. For reference, some operators claim they are able to drain and triple rinse in less than a minute using a traditional pour into an inductor. An operator in wheat aims to fill in 5-10 min depending and uses 5-10 jugs. On the other hand, CTS users have claimed a “hidden savings” from the overlap in operations where the product from one jug is still entering the system as another is being drained and a third is being prepared. AgroTop sells an optional vent spike called a “Chucker” that makes the process faster still, but penetrating the jug raises questions about ISO compliance.
Empty containers can then be rinsed before removal, or partial containers removed leaving the adaptor on the jug. While this unit can be mounted on the side of the sprayer, most UK farmers that have trialed this system opted to install it on a portable cart.
This system is still under development and information is limited. The easyFlow QF coupler reputedly has all the features of the M but is compatible with all manner of container and employs a 12 VDC supply to automatically meter the dose (starting from a minimum 1 L volume). The rinsing process is electronically automated as well.
Videos of the easyFlow systems in use can be seen hereand here. In the United states, these couplers are carried by Greenleaf Technologies. In Canada, it is also carried by FreeForm, a plastic molding company out of Saskatchewan.
US-based GoatThroat has provided industrial liquid transfer solutions since 2001. Their CCS-8600 series requires the operator to remove the existing container cap and replace it with an adaptor with a siphon tube (which also pierces any foil). The container is then pressurized by a hand pump or compressor, forcing chemical into a measuring cylinder before it’s drawn into the sprayer. A clean water line then rinses the container (if emptied completely) and system before decoupling. The adapter can be left on containers if using partial volumes.
Comparatively, this system transfers and rinses more slowly than other small-format container systems and is entirely manual with multiple steps to transfer product. However, it now has a compressor option to replace manual pumping and it is highly customizable, making compatible with any container from a 1 L jug to a 1,000 L IBC tote. Further, its ability to transfer as little as 5 ml increments makes it a good option for small-acreage horticultural, specialty crop, and research farms where accurate partial loads are prioritized.
The easyconnect cap was originally developed by IPN Scholle with the support of BASF and is currently under development by Easy Cap and United Cap. It is compatible with container sizes between 1 and 15 L (possibly 20 L).
Because the cap is factory-fitted, it never has to be manually unscrewed or removed and works without requiring a tamper-proof foil. Its success is contingent on major agrochemical manufacturers agreeing to pre-fit it on their products. This has been facilitated by the easyconnect Working Group (ECWG), a consortium of ten major agrichemical companies, including those selling biological products and liquid fertilizers, that are supporting the European implementation of this format.
BASF displayed their compatible coupler, the ezi-connect at the 2023 Agritechnica in Hanover, Germany. Transfer requires the operator to snap off a dust cover, invert the container, and connect and lock it into the coupler. Another lever advances a probe and allows partial volumes to be dispensed via a vacuum generated by the hopper. Finally, a trigger controls rinsing water and undoing a catch allows the assembly to be rotated to improve cleaning without removing it.
Easyconnect will be factory installed on 1, 5 and 10 L containers in 2024. This will not be the entire portfolio from all agrichemical companies in the easy connect working group, but will represent a “significant amount” that will demonstrate commitment. In 2022, Syngenta released some information about their new jug format, the Evopac. In November 2024, Syngenta released this short video describing the design, which has the easyconnect cap and several features informed by sprayer operators to make it as safe and convenient as possible. The ezi-connect coupler will be launched in Europe in the 2025-2026 season.
The Cleanload Nexus is a JKI-approved coupler designed for use with easyconnect caps on 1 to 15 L containers. The supplied 25 mm x 4 m suction hose can be connected by teeing it directly into the sprayer suction line ahead of the venturi (mounted to sprayer) or using a suitable dry-break coupler (mounted on a portable transfer station). The supplied 16 mm x 2.5 m rinse water hose connects to a clean rinse water source either on or off the sprayer.
The Cleanload Nexus in use
It is entirely mechanical and has just two manual controls. The first is a lever that locks the cap in place. Rotating the lever controls the emptying rate, which is between 0.5 and 1 L/sec at 4 bar, depending on liquid viscosity. The time to empty and rinse a 15 L container at 3.5 bar is about 2 minutes, and users have stated that this is as fast or faster than traditional pouring and rinsing methods.
For dosing, it currently relies on the operator using scale markings on the side of the pesticide container. It has been noted that the plunger mechanism displaces sufficient volume that it must be accounted for when reading graduations. Alternately, the calibrated suction hose connected to the sprayer can be used to assess larger volumes. The hose is, according to many, not a viable method for dosing and improvements are reputedly under development. Neither approach can achieve the ISO +/- 2.5% dosing accuracy, so Pentair has developed a dosing cylinder add-on that sits between the Cleanload Nexus and the sprayer and provides +/-1% accuracy (anticipated launch was in November 2023). A new measuring device, the Ezi-Connect VacTran Measure Unit by Wisdom Systems, was introduced in 2024 and is discussed in this article from EI OPerator.
Plumbing diagram for the Cleanload Nexus (from Pentair website).
While this video depicts 4 quarter-turns separated by 10-15 seconds rinses, practical application sees the simultaneous full rotation of the jug during a 30 second rinse. While the unit will rinse itself, some keep a dedicated jug full of clean water on hand and run that through the system last to ensure it’s left in a clean state. Note: operators say they only thoroughly rinse the cap when using a partial volume.
Israel’s Tefen has produced dosing pumps and flow products for many years and began field testing the AccuRite CTS coupler in 2022. With a single digital interface to operate the filling process and mobile capabilities for remote management and cloud-based record keeping (e.g., date, time and chemical usage). It is designed to work with the easyconnect cap on containers ranging from 1 to 20 L. This is slow compared with the ~60L/min. from the Pentair system, but Tefen is working to improve the speed.
Its diaphragm pump can deliver partial volumes at 0.1 L increments with an accuracy of +/- 2.5% of the smallest container used, and a minimum of 0.5 litres remaining in the container. Skip to the 1:50 mark to see the product reviewed (no English) in this video. In 2024, the following instructional video was released:
We saw one moulded into a Kverneland sprayer (now owned by Kubota) that was designed to couple with the current induction bowl. This is the first time a sprayer company has altered their design to accommodate a CTS and it points to the future.
Lechler’s Coupler is compatible with the easyconnect cap and features more electrical automation in its design. It requires a 12V electric supply and creates suction (typically from the sprayer’s venturi) to draw out the chemical. A small metering motor automatically moves the probe that enters the container to adjust emptying rate. It employs a pressurized water line running at about 6 bar.
The system will be controlled via a smartphone app, where the operator can choose partial or full emptying of product containers and control the operating and rinsing processes. Rather than metering flow, the unit employs three load cells with vibration compensation to weigh product. Lechler claims this is more accurate (automatic dosing to a set volume with +/- 2.5% accuracy), because it can compensate for different product densities. The user manually enters these values from product SDS, but likely QR codes will be used in the future.
The system underwent further testing in 2024 and commercial availability is anticipated for 2025. Farmer’s Weekly covered the details of this system following Agritechnica 2023.
Aspects of Applied Biology 147, 2022 International Advances in Pesticide Application Review of ISO 21191 Closed Transfer Systems Performance Specifications. Nancy Westcott and Jan Langenakens.
This article was originally co-authored by Mick Roberts (Owner/Editor of Pro Operator Magazine) with significant contributions from Jan Langenakens (Principal at AAMS) and informed by insightful communications with both users and manufacturers of CTS. It has been updated as of January, 2025.
