Performances evaluation of four typical unmanned aerial vehicles used for pesticide application in China

Abstract

In recent years, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for plant protection have achieved rapid development in China. In order to test and evaluate the performances of pesticides application and development status of UAVs in China, four typical UAV models were selected to test the spraying coverage, penetrability, droplets density and the work efficiency. The results showed that the deposition and spraying liquid coverage were inconsistent both in lateral and longitudinal direction. Under the condition of the similar amount of spray volume and operation parameters, the volume median diameter (VMD) of the droplet was negatively correlated with the coverage density. The failure of the UAVs for plant protection mainly took up on the blockage of nozzle, transfusion tube and the liquid pump. The failure rate of UAVs took up 3.73%-4.36% of the total working time. The operation of UAVs during ground service took up 50% of the total working time, the preparation work took up 10%, and the route planning took up around 10%, while net operation time only took up around 30%. On the whole, the high efficiency of UAV was not fully achieved; the daily operated area was not in a satisfactory level now. The spraying performances of UAVs still need further improvement.

Application method affects pesticide efficiency and effectiveness in wheat fields

“…Shilin et al . showed that UAV spray can improve the droplet distribution, coverage ratio and penetrability of pesticides . A similar phenomenon was also observed in this study, whereby the UAV and mister sprayer resulted in more depositions and better penetrability and uniformity compared to the two traditional spraying methods.…”

“…Li et al . showed that high‐volume conventional sprayers with coarse nozzles and low spray quality cause ineffective pesticide application, excessive pesticide residues and a high risk of operator exposure, while use of a UAV was found to increase application precision efficiency . Wang et al .…”

“…Li et al showed that high-volume conventional sprayers with coarse nozzles and low spray quality cause ineffective pesticide application, excessive pesticide residues and a high risk of operator exposure, 30 while use of a UAV was found to increase application precision efficiency. 15 Wang et al also revealed that UAVs are more cost effective and energy efficient compared to conventional sprayers. 31 Comparisons of the mist sprayer and UAV revealed no statistically significant differences in terms of FHB control, but the working efficiency of the UAV was 13.3 times greater than that of the mist sprayer and the potential risks to humans and the environment were reduced.…”

“…Problems with pesticide residues as a result of very low effectiveness (less than 50% availability) have therefore attracted a great deal of attention . The efficiency of these sprayers is also very low due to high labour intensity and the high occupational risk of exposure . In the past 10 years, a number of spraying techniques have therefore been developed or modified with the aim of increasing deposition effectiveness, while reducing pesticide residues and operator exposure .…”

“…13,14 The efficiency of these sprayers is also very low due to high labour intensity and the high occupational risk of exposure. 15 In the past 10 years, a number of spraying techniques have therefore been developed or modified with the aim of increasing deposition effectiveness, while reducing pesticide residues and operator exposure. 16 For example, popularization of the boom sprayer has greatly reduced the labour intensity of spraying as well as dramatically improving the overall operating efficiency.…”