液体浸入、激光衍射、PDPA 和阴影成像在评估农业喷嘴液滴大小方面的比较

Q2 Agricultural and Biological Sciences Agriculture Pub Date : 2024-07-19 DOI:10.3390/agriculture14071191
Salvatore Privitera, Emanuele Cerruto, G. Manetto, Sebastian Lupica, David Nuyttens, D. Dekeyser, I. Zwertvaegher, M. R. Furtado Júnior, Beatriz Costalonga Vargas
{"title":"液体浸入、激光衍射、PDPA 和阴影成像在评估农业喷嘴液滴大小方面的比较","authors":"Salvatore Privitera, Emanuele Cerruto, G. Manetto, Sebastian Lupica, David Nuyttens, D. Dekeyser, I. Zwertvaegher, M. R. Furtado Júnior, Beatriz Costalonga Vargas","doi":"10.3390/agriculture14071191","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Spray droplet diameters play a key role in the field of liquid plant protection product (PPP) application technology. However, the availability of various measurement techniques, each with its unique operating principles for evaluating droplet size spectra, can lead to different interpretations of spray characteristics. Therefore, in this study, four measurement techniques—Liquid Immersion (LI), Laser Diffraction (LD), Phase Doppler Particle Analysis (PDPA), and Shadowgraphy (SG)—were utilized to evaluate the droplet size distribution of agricultural spray nozzles. Additionally, PDPA and SG were used to assess the average velocity of spray droplets. Experiments were conducted in three different laboratories with the main aim of comparing results obtained with various types of equipment utilized under ordinary practical conditions. Spraying tests were carried out using three flat fan nozzles and an air-induction flat fan nozzle. As a general trend, the lowest values for droplet diameters were measured using the Laser Diffraction technique, followed by Shadowgraphy. The PDPA technique provided the highest values for mean diameters (D10, D20, and D30) and the numeric median diameter (Dn0.5), whereas the Liquid Immersion method yielded the highest values for the Sauter mean diameter (D32) and volumetric diameters (Dv0.1, Dv0.5, and Dv0.9). Importantly, all measurement techniques were able to discriminate the four nozzles based on their Dv0.5 diameter. Average droplet velocities showed a similar pattern across the four nozzles with the PDPA and the SG measurement techniques. The differences in diameter values observed with the four measurement techniques underline the necessity of always including reference nozzles in spray quality assessments to base classifications on relative rather than absolute values.","PeriodicalId":7447,"journal":{"name":"Agriculture","volume":"104 18","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison between Liquid Immersion, Laser Diffraction, PDPA, and Shadowgraphy in Assessing Droplet Size from Agricultural Nozzles\",\"authors\":\"Salvatore Privitera, Emanuele Cerruto, G. Manetto, Sebastian Lupica, David Nuyttens, D. Dekeyser, I. Zwertvaegher, M. R. Furtado Júnior, Beatriz Costalonga Vargas\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/agriculture14071191\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Spray droplet diameters play a key role in the field of liquid plant protection product (PPP) application technology. However, the availability of various measurement techniques, each with its unique operating principles for evaluating droplet size spectra, can lead to different interpretations of spray characteristics. Therefore, in this study, four measurement techniques—Liquid Immersion (LI), Laser Diffraction (LD), Phase Doppler Particle Analysis (PDPA), and Shadowgraphy (SG)—were utilized to evaluate the droplet size distribution of agricultural spray nozzles. Additionally, PDPA and SG were used to assess the average velocity of spray droplets. Experiments were conducted in three different laboratories with the main aim of comparing results obtained with various types of equipment utilized under ordinary practical conditions. Spraying tests were carried out using three flat fan nozzles and an air-induction flat fan nozzle. As a general trend, the lowest values for droplet diameters were measured using the Laser Diffraction technique, followed by Shadowgraphy. The PDPA technique provided the highest values for mean diameters (D10, D20, and D30) and the numeric median diameter (Dn0.5), whereas the Liquid Immersion method yielded the highest values for the Sauter mean diameter (D32) and volumetric diameters (Dv0.1, Dv0.5, and Dv0.9). Importantly, all measurement techniques were able to discriminate the four nozzles based on their Dv0.5 diameter. Average droplet velocities showed a similar pattern across the four nozzles with the PDPA and the SG measurement techniques. The differences in diameter values observed with the four measurement techniques underline the necessity of always including reference nozzles in spray quality assessments to base classifications on relative rather than absolute values.\",\"PeriodicalId\":7447,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Agriculture\",\"volume\":\"104 18\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Agriculture\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14071191\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Agricultural and Biological Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agriculture","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14071191","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Agricultural and Biological Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

喷雾液滴直径在液体植物保护产品(PPP)应用技术领域发挥着关键作用。然而,由于存在各种测量技术,每种技术都有其独特的操作原理来评估液滴粒径光谱,因此会导致对喷雾特性的不同解释。因此,本研究采用了四种测量技术--液体浸入(LI)、激光衍射(LD)、相位多普勒粒子分析(PDPA)和阴影成像(SG)--来评估农用喷雾喷嘴的液滴粒度分布。此外,PDPA 和 SG 还用于评估喷雾液滴的平均速度。实验在三个不同的实验室进行,主要目的是比较在普通实际条件下使用各种类型的设备所获得的结果。使用三个扁平扇形喷嘴和一个空气感应扁平扇形喷嘴进行了喷雾试验。总体趋势是,使用激光衍射技术测得的液滴直径值最小,其次是阴影测量法。PDPA 技术提供了最高的平均直径值(D10、D20 和 D30)和数值中值直径(Dn0.5),而液体浸入法提供了最高的萨特平均直径值(D32)和体积直径值(Dv0.1、Dv0.5 和 Dv0.9)。重要的是,所有测量技术都能根据 Dv0.5 直径区分四种喷嘴。使用 PDPA 和 SG 测量技术,四个喷嘴的平均液滴速度显示出相似的模式。四种测量技术观察到的直径值差异突出表明,有必要在喷雾质量评估中始终包括参考喷嘴,以便根据相对值而非绝对值进行分类。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison between Liquid Immersion, Laser Diffraction, PDPA, and Shadowgraphy in Assessing Droplet Size from Agricultural Nozzles
Spray droplet diameters play a key role in the field of liquid plant protection product (PPP) application technology. However, the availability of various measurement techniques, each with its unique operating principles for evaluating droplet size spectra, can lead to different interpretations of spray characteristics. Therefore, in this study, four measurement techniques—Liquid Immersion (LI), Laser Diffraction (LD), Phase Doppler Particle Analysis (PDPA), and Shadowgraphy (SG)—were utilized to evaluate the droplet size distribution of agricultural spray nozzles. Additionally, PDPA and SG were used to assess the average velocity of spray droplets. Experiments were conducted in three different laboratories with the main aim of comparing results obtained with various types of equipment utilized under ordinary practical conditions. Spraying tests were carried out using three flat fan nozzles and an air-induction flat fan nozzle. As a general trend, the lowest values for droplet diameters were measured using the Laser Diffraction technique, followed by Shadowgraphy. The PDPA technique provided the highest values for mean diameters (D10, D20, and D30) and the numeric median diameter (Dn0.5), whereas the Liquid Immersion method yielded the highest values for the Sauter mean diameter (D32) and volumetric diameters (Dv0.1, Dv0.5, and Dv0.9). Importantly, all measurement techniques were able to discriminate the four nozzles based on their Dv0.5 diameter. Average droplet velocities showed a similar pattern across the four nozzles with the PDPA and the SG measurement techniques. The differences in diameter values observed with the four measurement techniques underline the necessity of always including reference nozzles in spray quality assessments to base classifications on relative rather than absolute values.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Agriculture
Agriculture Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Horticulture
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: The Agriculture (Poľnohospodárstvo) is a peer-reviewed international journal that publishes mainly original research papers. The journal examines various aspects of research and is devoted to the publication of papers dealing with the following subjects: plant nutrition, protection, breeding, genetics and biotechnology, quality of plant products, grassland, mountain agriculture and environment, soil science and conservation, mechanization and economics of plant production and other spheres of plant science. Journal is published 4 times per year.
期刊最新文献
Effects of Abscisic Acid on Rice Seed Dormancy: Antioxidant Response and Accumulations of Melatonin, Phenolics and Momilactones Classification of Degradable Mulch Films and Their Promotional Effects and Limitations on Agricultural Production Deep Learning with a Multi-Task Convolutional Neural Network to Generate a National-Scale 3D Soil Data Product: The Particle Size Distribution of the German Agricultural Soil Landscape Enhanced Food-Production Efficiencies through Integrated Farming Systems in the Hau Giang Province in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam The Influence of Nitrogen and Sulfur Fertilization on Oil Quality and Seed Meal in Different Genotypes of Winter Oilseed Rape (Brassica napus L.)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1