Using Flame for Weed control in Some Crops

Abstract

The performance of locally flaming weeder machine pulled with tractor through three levels of gas pressure (1, 1.5 and 2 bar), flame height above the ground (15, 20 and 25 cm) and four travel speeds (0.6, 0.9, 1.2 and 1.5 km/h) in the machine actual field capacity and field efficiency under both a single or double rows of burners were evaluated. The machine consist of the main frame and the flaming system which consisted of four burners were installed in one or two rows with suitable inclination and opening air outlet and propane gas as well as three heights from the ground surface. The evaluation of the flaming machine showed acceptable results which is suitable for use with an organic olive and apple agriculture to obtained very powerful tool for weed control and lowest recovery rates. Thereby, the most successful parameters were double burner rows, travel speeds 0.6 km/h and highest gas pressure 2 bar as well as lowest flaming height (15cm) while, the gas consumption calculated by 40kg/fed. The obtained result revealed that the control activity of flaming in some narrow and broad leaved weeds was exhibited highly positive responses than perennial weeds. The weed control efficiency increased with lower travel speed and higher gas pressure as well as burner height. Further studies will be recommended for design a suitable burner and sensors to give regularity fire between the crops seedling and to avoiding the harmful effect on the economic plants.

Heat-Applicator Machine for Weed Control

“…Another factor that could have increased the efficiency of the tested prototype is related to the height and angle of the burners relative to the weeds, which were 0.30 m and 30°, respectively, in the present experiment. According to Dress & Balah (2016), a speed of 0.42 m s −1 , a gas pressure of 196 kPa, a burner height of 0.25 m, and an angle of 45° provided a 54.6% efficiency in weed control, reaching 72.0% with an application height of 0.15 m. Figures 3a and 3b show that the weed control rate increased proportionally to gas consumption, as observed by Kang (2001), who reported that approximately 40 kg ha −1 of LPG provides a weed control between 80 and 90%.…”

“…The LPG doses varied because these authors used the heat treatment technique in different species and stages of plant development, with different water levels in the plants. Moreover, the travel speed of the heat applicator and height and angle of the applicator nozzle are factors that influence the amount of gas consumed in the application and the weed control efficiency (Ulloa et al, 2010;Dress & Balah, 2016).…”

“…According to Ulloa et al (2010), an 80% weed control is considered an acceptable level for organic agriculture. Several factors influence the design and efficiency of a heat-applicator machine, such as the application speed, gas pressure, and type, height, and angle of burners relative to weeds (Ulloa et al, 2010;Dress & Balah, 2016). In addition, the species, vegetative stage of weeds, and even the time of day when the intervention is carried out influence the efficiency of the heat treatment application (Ulloa et al, 2012).…”