Víctor Hugo Merani, Facundo Guilino, M. Ponce, J. M. Vazquez, L. Larrieu, A. Giambelluca, P. Platz, Santiago Tour, Matilde Mur
{"title":"农业喷洒:评价方法的比较","authors":"Víctor Hugo Merani, Facundo Guilino, M. Ponce, J. M. Vazquez, L. Larrieu, A. Giambelluca, P. Platz, Santiago Tour, Matilde Mur","doi":"10.29393/chjaas37-33pavm90033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A study was conducted in order to compare two types of artificial collectors (water-sensitive paper and photographic paper) using two software programs (Gotas-PC and CIR1.5) for the assessment of spray applications with two different nozzle types (XR11002VP and TXA8002VK). The evaluated parameters were DV0.5, droplet number density and efficiency, this was compared to the colometric determination with bright blue tracer. The trial was conducted inside a closed facility, under semi-controlled conditions, in absence of wind and on a uniform level ground. Droplet number density did not show significant differences between collectors using Gotas-PC, but differences were found with CIR1.5. For water-sensitive paper, efficiency is overestimated with CIR1.5 software but underestimated with Gotas-PC. However, both software programs underestimate with photographic paper according to the smaller imprints that result in lower values of DV0,5 and efficiency. In applications with smaller droplet population, efficiency is similar with both software programs. The CIR1.5 software is more sensitive for analyzing drops on both collector types and can distinguish a larger number of drops and smaller sizes. water-sensitive paper, photography paper, Kromecote, Gotas-PC.","PeriodicalId":42485,"journal":{"name":"Chilean Journal of Agricultural & Animal Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"PULVERIZACIONES AGRÍCOLAS: COMPARACIÓN DE METODOLOGÍAS PARA SU EVALUACIÓN\",\"authors\":\"Víctor Hugo Merani, Facundo Guilino, M. Ponce, J. M. Vazquez, L. Larrieu, A. Giambelluca, P. Platz, Santiago Tour, Matilde Mur\",\"doi\":\"10.29393/chjaas37-33pavm90033\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A study was conducted in order to compare two types of artificial collectors (water-sensitive paper and photographic paper) using two software programs (Gotas-PC and CIR1.5) for the assessment of spray applications with two different nozzle types (XR11002VP and TXA8002VK). The evaluated parameters were DV0.5, droplet number density and efficiency, this was compared to the colometric determination with bright blue tracer. The trial was conducted inside a closed facility, under semi-controlled conditions, in absence of wind and on a uniform level ground. Droplet number density did not show significant differences between collectors using Gotas-PC, but differences were found with CIR1.5. For water-sensitive paper, efficiency is overestimated with CIR1.5 software but underestimated with Gotas-PC. However, both software programs underestimate with photographic paper according to the smaller imprints that result in lower values of DV0,5 and efficiency. In applications with smaller droplet population, efficiency is similar with both software programs. The CIR1.5 software is more sensitive for analyzing drops on both collector types and can distinguish a larger number of drops and smaller sizes. water-sensitive paper, photography paper, Kromecote, Gotas-PC.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42485,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Chilean Journal of Agricultural & Animal Sciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Chilean Journal of Agricultural & Animal Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.29393/chjaas37-33pavm90033\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRONOMY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chilean Journal of Agricultural & Animal Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29393/chjaas37-33pavm90033","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"AGRONOMY","Score":null,"Total":0}
PULVERIZACIONES AGRÍCOLAS: COMPARACIÓN DE METODOLOGÍAS PARA SU EVALUACIÓN
A study was conducted in order to compare two types of artificial collectors (water-sensitive paper and photographic paper) using two software programs (Gotas-PC and CIR1.5) for the assessment of spray applications with two different nozzle types (XR11002VP and TXA8002VK). The evaluated parameters were DV0.5, droplet number density and efficiency, this was compared to the colometric determination with bright blue tracer. The trial was conducted inside a closed facility, under semi-controlled conditions, in absence of wind and on a uniform level ground. Droplet number density did not show significant differences between collectors using Gotas-PC, but differences were found with CIR1.5. For water-sensitive paper, efficiency is overestimated with CIR1.5 software but underestimated with Gotas-PC. However, both software programs underestimate with photographic paper according to the smaller imprints that result in lower values of DV0,5 and efficiency. In applications with smaller droplet population, efficiency is similar with both software programs. The CIR1.5 software is more sensitive for analyzing drops on both collector types and can distinguish a larger number of drops and smaller sizes. water-sensitive paper, photography paper, Kromecote, Gotas-PC.
期刊介绍:
Revista Chile de Agricultura y Ciencias Veterinarias es una revista de acceso abierto (open access), que significa que su contenido está disponible en forma gratuita para los usuarios y sus instituciones. Los usuarios pueden leer, descargar, copiar, distribuir, imprimir, buscar, o establecer una conexión a los artículos sin necesidad de pedir autorización previa al editor o a los autores. Esto es de acuerdo con la definición de Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI). Los artículos se publican bajo una licencia de Creative Commons reconocimiento No Comercial 4.0 Internacional. Copyright: Se autoriza la reproducción y cita de los artículos publicados en Chilean Journal of Agricultural & Animal Sciences (ex Agro-Ciencia), siempre que se indique el nombre del autor(es), año, volumen, número y páginas. Las opiniones y afirmaciones expuestas en los trabajos representan exclusivamente los puntos de vista de los autores. La mención de productos o marcas comerciales en la revista no implica una recomendación por parte de la Universidad de Concepción.