Electrostatic Induction Spray-charging System (Embedded Electrode) for Knapsack Mist-blower
Current Journal of Applied Science and Technology,
The introduction of electrically charged sprays in agricultural application has become inevitable for better control on droplet transference with reduced drift with less spray chemical requirements. The study was under taken to develop an electrostatic induction spray charging system as attachment to knapsack mist-blower. A high voltage generator was fabricated on the basis of Cockcroft-Walton voltage multiplier principle with input of 6 V DC battery. A self-atomizing hydraulic nozzle was developed to deliver the droplet spectrum required for effective electrostatic charge induction. The prototype was evaluated for charge to mass ratio (mC. kg-1) at five electrode potentials (1 kV, 2 kV, 3 kV, 4 kV and 5 kV) at four electrode placement positions from atomization zone (0, 5, 10 and 15 mm). The charge mass ratio (CMR) value of spray cloud was measured using Faradays Cage at five positions from nozle tip (50, 100, 150, 200 and 250 cm). The electrode voltage potential at 5 kV at its position 5 mm from the atomization zone shown the maximum CMR value of 1.088 mC.kg-1. In contrast with commercial system (ESS-MBP90) it was observed that except at 50 cm distance, the developed charging system, at 4 kV and 5 kV, surpassed commercial system in CMR from 100 cm to 250 cm distances. The droplet spectrum of the developed system was analysed and observed that the size of droplets were 100 to 200 µm. The developed system found to be cost effective and significantly consistent over the commercial one.
- charge to mass ratio
- electrode placement position
How to Cite
Abhilash PC, Singh N. Pesticide use and application: An Indian scenario. J. Hazard. Mater. 2009;165:1-12.
Bindra OS, Singh H. Pesticide application equipment. Published by Mohan Primlani, Oxford and IBH Publishing Co., Delhi. 1971;61-157.
Patel MK, Sahoo HK, Nayak MK, Kumar A, Ghanashyam C, Amod K. Electrostatic Nozzle: New trends in agricultural pesticide spraying. Int. J. Electr. & Electronics Eng. 2015;6-11.
Patel MK, Sahoo HK, Nayak MK, Kumar A, Ghanshyam C, Kumar A. Electrostatic nozzle: New trends in agricultural pesticides spraying. SSRG International Journal of Electrical and Electronics Engineering; 2016.
Bowen HD, Splinter WE, Carleton WM. Theoretical implications of electrical fields on deposition of charged particles. Trans. ASAE. 1964;7(1):75–82.
Law SE. Agricultural electrostatic spray application: a review of significant research and development during the 20th century. Journal of Electrostatics. 2001;51-52:25-42.
Law SE, Lane MD. Electrostatic deposition of pesticide spray onto foliar targets of varying morphology. Trans. ASAE. 1981; 24(6):1441–1445.
Wang ZT, Wen JL, Wang XY. High voltage electrostatic spray. High Volt. Eng. 2008; 34(5):1067-1072.
Law SE, Cooper SC. Depositional characteristics of charged and uncharged droplets applied by an orchard air carrier sprayer. Transactions of the ASAE. 1988; 31(4):984-989.
Mishra P, et al. Studies on effect of electrostatic spraying in orchards. Agric. Eng. Int., J. CIGR. 2014;16(3):60-69.
Sumner HR, Herzog GA, Sumner PE, Bader M, Mullinix BG. Chemical application equipment for improved deposition on cotton. J. Cotton Sci. 2000; 4(1):19–27.
Kirk IW, Hoffmann WC, Carlton JB. Aerial electrostatic spray system performance. American Society of Agricultural Engineers. 2001;44(5):1089–1092.
Maski D, Durairaj D. Effects of electrode voltage, liquid flow rate, and liquid properties on spray chargeability of an air-assisted electrostatic-induction spray-charging system. J. Electrostat. 2010; 68(2):152–158.
Maynagh BM, Ghobadian B, Jahannama MR, Hashjin TT. Effect of electrostatic induction parameters on droplets charging for Agricultural Application. J. Agric. Sci. Technol. 2009;11:249-257.
Ru Y, Zheng JQ, Zhou HP. Electric field distribution produced by circular electrode of induce charging nozzle. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng. 2008;24:119-122.
Yamane S, Miyazaki S. Study on electrostatic pesticide spraying system for low-concentration, high-volume applica-tions. JARQ. 2017;51(1):11–16.
Yu D, Castle GSP, Adamiak K. Dynamic induction charging of particles with finite conductivity. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2010; 46(3):1159-1165.
Kihm KD, Kim BH, McFarland AR. Atomization, charge and deposition characteristics of bipolarly charged aircraft sprays. Atomization and Sprays. 1992;2: 463-481.
Law SE, Bowen HD. Charging liquid spray by electrostatic induction. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers. 1966;9(4):501- 506.
Lv TG. Study of electro-spray system characteristics. J. Agric. Mechanizat. Res. 2009;8:54-70.
Oyarce P, Gurovich L. Electrical signals in avocado trees - Responses to light and water availability conditions. Plant Signaling & Behavior. 2010;5(1):34-41.
Gupta CP, Singh G, Muhamein M, Dante ET. Field performance of a hand-held electrostatic spinning-disc sprayer. Trans. ASAE. 1992;35(6):1753-1758.
Gupta CP, Singh G, Parameshwar kumar, M, Ganapathy S. Farmer driven electrostatic low-volume sprayer. Innova-tive Scient. Res. U.S.-Israel CDR program, AIT, Bangkok. 1989;1-21.
Almekinders H, Ozkan HE, Reichard DL, Carpenter TG, Brazee RD. Spray deposition patterns of an electrostatic atomizer. Trans. ASAE. 1992;36(6):1361-1367.
Law SE. Electrostatic induction instrument for tracking and charge measurement of airborne agricultural particulates. Trans. ASAE. 1975;40-47.
Mamidi V, Ghanashyam C, Patel MK, Reddy V, Kapur P. Electrostatic hand presuure swirl nozzle for small crop growers. Int. J. Appl. Sci. & Tech., Res. Excellence. 2012;2(2):164-168.
Robson S, Mauri MT, Fernandes HC, Monteiro PM, Rodrigues, Cleyton BA. Parameters of electrostatic spraying and its influence on the application efficiency. Rev. Ceres, Vicosa-Brazil. 2013;60(4):474-479.
Shrimpton JS, Yule AJ. Eletro-hydro dynamics of charge injection atomization regimes and fundamental limits. At. Sprays. 2003;13:173-190.
Hoffmann WC, Hewitt AJ. Comparison of droplet imaging systems for water-sensitive cards. Proc. Asp. Appl. Biol. 2004;71:463-466.
Abstract View: 1123 times
PDF Download: 400 times