Spray Coverage Analysis Using a Hand-held Scanner

Franz, Eric

doi:10.13031/2013.28459

Cited by 25 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Imaging techniques for droplet deposition are not new (Carlton, 1967;Bouse et al, 1990) and the development of accurate software for the visual characterisation of droplet deposition has been ongoing since 1985 (Ahlers and Alexander, 1985;Carlton and Bouse, 1981;Franz, 1993). Several imaging systems have been developed to characterise and quantify droplet deposition and have been found to provide reasonable data: Swath Kit Ò (Hoffmann and Hewitt, 2005;Mierzejewski, 1991), USDA Image Analyzer (Hoffmann and Hewitt, 2005); Droplet Scan Ò (Hoffmann and Hewitt, 2005;Wolf, 2003), Deposit Scan (Zhu et al, 2011); Image J (Rasband, 2008), and Drop Vision Ò -Ag (Leading Edge Associates, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing a novel smartphone application – SnapCard, compared to five imaging systems to quantify droplet deposition on artificial collectors

Ferguson

Chechetto

O’Donnell

et al. 2016

Computers and Electronics in Agriculture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tPrevious work sought to compare the results from imaging software for characterising droplet coverage, but none exists examining these five software programs: Droplet Scan Ò , Swath Kit Ò , Deposit Scan, Image J, and Drop Vision Ò -Ag. Additionally, a freely available smartphone application (App), SnapCard was developed to provide an extension tool for in-field analysis of spray collectors, but nothing has been published regarding its comparison to other imaging software systems. The present study was conducted to compare five existing imaging software types against the new App, SnapCard. Six nozzles producing different spray qualities were selected to spray a water + Brilliant Blue Dye solution over two artificial collector types (water sensitive paper and Kromekote Ò ). Each collector was assessed for percent coverage using the five imaging systems and SnapCard. Objectives of this study were: 1. To establish a baseline dataset using the sprayed cards and five commonly used imaging systems, and compare the coverage results from each. 2. Use the baseline data from Objective 1 as a measurement of precision to judge the results from SnapCard. 3. Make an assessment of SnapCard against the other imaging software type data in the study.Results showed that SnapCard has similar measured coverage means compared to other image analysis systems. For both collector types, SnapCard measured coverage within one standard deviation of the means across nozzle types. SnapCard is able to provide an immediate answer without expensive software or needing a laboratory to measure sprayed collector coverage with precise results, which further underscores its value. The other software types were not all similar for coverage, but the data followed the same trends for droplet size. Increasing the droplet size consistently decreased the coverage, across both collector types. Droplet Scan reported the highest coverage while Drop Vision-Ag and Swath Kit gave lower coverage values on water sensitive paper and Kromekote Ò collectors, respectively.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing a novel smartphone application – SnapCard, compared to five imaging systems to quantify droplet deposition on artificial collectors

Ferguson

Chechetto

O’Donnell

et al. 2016

Computers and Electronics in Agriculture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The available methods for analysis of the pesticide deposition are either sophisticated or expensive, for that reason, new alternatives are tried (Franz, 1993;.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of microscopic method and computational program for pesticide deposition evaluation of spraying

Chaim

Pessoa

Neto

et al. 2002

Pesq. agropec. bras.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

_ The main objective of this work was to compare two methods to estimate the deposition of pesticide applied by aerial spraying. Hundred and fifty pieces of water sensitive paper were distributed over an area of 50 m length by 75 m width for sampling droplets sprayed by an aircraft calibrated to apply a spray volume of 32 L/ha. The samples were analysed by visual microscopic method using NG 2 Porton graticule and by an image analyser computer program. The results reached by visual microscopic method were the following: volume median diameter, 398±62 µm; number median diameter, 159±22 µm; droplet density, 22.5±7.0 droplets/cm 2 and estimated deposited volume, 22.2±9.4 L/ha. The respective ones reached with the computer program were: 402±58 µm, 161±32 µm, 21.9±7.5 droplets/cm 2 and 21.9±9.2 L/ha. Graphs of the spatial distribution of droplet density and deposited spray volume on the area were produced by the computer program.Index terms: agricultural chemicals, aerial application, application methods, density, volume.Comparação de método microscópico e programa computacional para a estimativa da deposição de agrotóxicos pela pulverização aéreaResumo _ O principal objetivo deste trabalho foi comparar dois métodos para estimar a deposição de agrotóxicos aplicados por pulverização aérea. Foram distribuídos 150 cartões sensíveis à água numa área de 50 m de comprimento por 75 m de largura, para amostrar gotas pulverizadas por uma aeronave calibrada para aplicar um volume de calda de 32 L/ha. As amostras foram analisadas pelo método de visualização microscópica com a utilização de uma gratícula de Porton NG 2 e por um programa de computador analisador de imagens. Os resultados obtidos pelo método de visualização microscópica foram: diâmetro mediano volumétrico, 398±62 µm; diâmetro mediano numérico, 159±22 µm; densidade de gotas, 22,5±7,0 gotas/cm 2 e volume depositado estimado, 22,2±9,4 L/ha. Os respectivos resultados obtidos pelo programa de computador foram: 402±58 µm, 161±32 µm, 21,9±7,5 gotas/cm 2 e 21,9±9,2 L/ha. O programa de computador possibilitou a produção de gráficos com a distribuição espacial da densidade de gotas e volumes depositados na área da aplicação.Termos para indexação: produtos agroquímicos, aplicação aérea, métodos de aplicação, densidade, volume.

show abstract

“…But on-target deposition and the related spray drift form field herbicide spraying operations are influenced by many factors, field tests to collect droplets data are very expensive and time consuming. It also found difficulty in capture the image from the spray field in the traditional method of mechanical measurement [2].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Diode Laser Imaging detection technology in pesticide application

Zhang

Hu²

2010

2010 2nd International Conference on Industrial and Information Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to solve the faults in usual detection of droplet distribution and motion in pesticide application and agricultural spraying field, a new method is given for the analysis of droplets characteristics and motion with PDIA (Particle/Droplet Image Analysis) and digital image processing technique. The diode laser is an illumination system that provides pulses of infrared laser light with variable pulse durations and pulse frequencies. During the analysis of the size of droplet and the velocity, images of droplets in pesticide spray field have been captured by using high-speed imager. The parameter of droplet such as size, perimeter, equivalent diameter, Shape factor and position etc, have been calculated with digital image processing technology. The trace of droplet in diff erent frames has been tracked with the method, which is based on flag tracking and droplet neighborhood matching probability technique. The results showed this method can both realize the motion trace of droplet in different image frames and analyses the velocity of droplet. This technique can detect the droplet parameters quickly and accurately for agricultural sprays, and provide the basic way for research on flow visualization image analysis in pesticide application.

show abstract

Spray Coverage Analysis Using a Hand-held Scanner

Cited by 25 publications

References 0 publications

Assessing a novel smartphone application – SnapCard, compared to five imaging systems to quantify droplet deposition on artificial collectors

Assessing a novel smartphone application – SnapCard, compared to five imaging systems to quantify droplet deposition on artificial collectors

Comparison of microscopic method and computational program for pesticide deposition evaluation of spraying

A Diode Laser Imaging detection technology in pesticide application

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About