Giuseppe Pellizzi Prize 2018

Transcription

1 Giuseppe Pellizzi Prize th Members Meeting of the Club of Bologna November 10, 2018 AIRBLAST SPRAYERS SPRAY DRIFT PERFORMANCE EVALUATION. Application of direct (ISO22866:2005) and new alternative indirect test methods for spray drift assessment. Grella Marco

2 The use-phase in the life-cycle of pesticide until 2009 Introduction Directive 91/414/EEC Directive 98/8/EC Regulation 396/2005 Directive 2000/60/EC Legislative lack Directive 2006/12/EC Directive 91/686/EEC PPP application not adequately addressed by legislation.

3 Introduction Council of European Union adopted Sustainable Use of Pesticide SUD- directive (128/2009/EC) Main strategy of SUD to achieve its goals was the mitigation of environmental risks related to pesticide application REDUCTION OF POINT SOURCE POLLUTION SPRAY DRIFT REDUCTION IMPORTANCE OF SPRAY DRIFT ASSESSEMENT to objectively evaluate/classify sprayers according to their drift risk

4 Introduction SPRAY DRIFT defined by ISO22866:2005 the quantity of plant protection product that is carried out of the sprayed area (treated) by the action of air currents during the application process. During and immediately after spray application non-target receptors can be exposed: - Non-target crops - Water courses and sensitive areas (playgrounds, schools, parks, etc.) - Bystanders

5 Main international Standard concerning spray drift in bush/tree crops. Introduction Currently, the unique standardized procedure to assess spray drift amount generated by PAE used in tree/bush crops is that provided by ISO22866: Methods for field measurement of spray drift. NO available standardized procedure to classify PAE used in tree/bush crops according their drift reduction performances!!! ADAPTATION OF ISO AND ISO ISO Drift classification of spraying equipment. Part 1: Classes (ISO :2006) Part 2: Classification of field crop sprayer by field measurements (ISO :2010)

6 Problems to face when following ISO22866 Introduction Difficulties to apply ISO field layout Difficulties to find a suitable crop (rows orientation) in relation to the site-specific wind characteristics Bare soil parcel downwind to the sprayed area Difficulties to meet the atmospheric conditions required by ISO RH (no limitation) Air temperature between 5 and 35 C Wind speed - Mean > 1m s -1 - Minimum and maximum (no limitation) - Outliers (< 1m s -1 ) < of 10% of records (using 1Hz sampling frequency) Wind direction - Mean between 90 ± 30 azimuth (spray track) - Centered direction (no more than 30% of records shall be > 45 azimuth from the perpendicular of the spray track)

7 Introduction Example of wind conditions recorded during drift trials in orchard Replicates Configuration 1 Configuration 2 Configuration 3 Configuration 4 Seconds after application start Seconds after application start Seconds after application start Only 50% of trials accomplish the environmental ISO requirements

8 Problems to face when following ISO m downwind distance Introduction 10% Influence of crop architecture (canopies): Growth stage Variety Training system Pruning system Drift (% of application rate) 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% Leaf Area Index (LAI) BBCH:11 BBCH:18 BBCH:55 BBCH:65 BBCH:79 Example: espalier-trained vineyard (Cv. Pinot Grigio) Guyot pruned

9 Introduction NEED TO DEVELOP AN ALTERNATIVE TEST METHOD TO PERFORM COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT OF SPRAY DRIFT GENERATED BY AIRBLAST SPRAYERS SMART ALTERNATIVE TEST METHOD AIMED TO EASILY AND PROPERLY CLASSIFY THE PAE AS A FUNCTION OF THEIR DRIFT REDUCTION PERFORMANCE AVOIDING THE UNCONTROLLABLE VARIABLES THAT STRONGLY AFFECT FINAL RESULTS ATMOSPHERIC CONDITIONS CROP TYPES Overall wind effect Canopy architecture Development Layout of plantation Training system Growth stage

10 A The proposed solutions. MOVE FROM "REAL" DRIFT VALUE TO "POTENTIAL" DRIFT. from direct to indirect test method DRIFT POTENTIAL: relative drift values obtained in CALM OF WIND and WITHOUT CROP/TARGET. Introduction as already done for field crop sprayer ISO22401: Methods for measurement of potential drift from horizontal boom sprayers systems by use of a test bench. B USE OF ad hoc TEST BENCH. C MEASUREMENTS OF RELATIVE SPRAY DRIFT VALUES. The spray drift reduction performances and relative classification is based on the comparison of candidate spraying equipment with the reference spray system. Absolute spray drift values, necessary for the PPP risk assessment for registration purposes, can only be obtained applying standardized method ISO22866:2005.

11 Objectives TO COMPARE THE CLASSIFICATION OF DIFFERENT PAE USED IN BUSH/TREE CROP SPRAY APPLICATION ACCORDING TO DRIFT RISK USING: STANDARDIZED METHOD ISO22866:2005 (direct method) NEW TEST METHOD (test bench indirect method) At the same time assess the influence of wind speed and direction on the final spray drift results At the same time evaluate the repeatability of results obtained in two different laboratories (IT & SP)

12 TRIALS PERFORMED using both methods (direct/indirect) Sprayer: Dragone k2 500 Nozzle type (pressure 1.0 Mpa): ATR80 orange (active n 6 + 6) 596 L ha -1 TVI8002 (active n 6 + 6) 626 L ha -1 Fan air flow rate: HIGH (20,000 m 3 h -1 ) LOW (11,000 m 3 h -1 ) Forward speed: 6 Km/h Sprayer: Fede Qi90 Futur 2000 Nozzle type (pressure 1.5 Mpa): ATR80 red (active n 8 + 8) 932 L ha -1 TVI80025 (active n 8 + 8) 896 L ha -1 Fan air flow rate: HIGH (46,000 m 3 h -1 ) LOW (29,000 m 3 h -1 ) Forward speed: 6 Km/h Materials & methods Dragone K2 500 Fede Qi90 Futur2000 ATR TVI ATR TVI LOW HIGH LOW HIGH LOW HIGH LOW HIGH 6Km/h 6Km/h 6Km/h 6Km/h 6Km/h 6Km/h 6Km/h 6Km/h

13 Materials & methods The ISO 22866:2005 methodology (direct method)

14 WIND DIRECTION Materials & methods The ISO 22866:2005 methodology (direct method) Weather station Z + Y + Ground Drift Collectors (10 sampled distances and 6 discrete sample positions at each distance) 30 m

15 The new methodology (test bench - indirect method) Concrete flat lane. Materials & methods 20m Trigger 40 Trigger Sprayer Test system Petri bench system dishes starts to closed reveal the placed activated application the with in collectors the collectors by sprayer slots using and after inside pass only initially 4s and the it. the sprayer collectors covered side (nozzles) facing by revealed test the pass bench test by in test bench front sliding bench test acitvated. iron bench. opening. plates. 0.5m 20m Test bench. 20m 1.5m Weather station.

16 Materials & methods The new methodology (test bench - indirect method) The test bench collects the spray fraction, defined potential drift fraction, that remains suspended over the test bench immediately after passage of the sprayer and can potentially be carried out of the target by environmental air currents.

17 Materials & methods Laboratory analysis to determine the amount of tracer collected by samplers (same procedures for both methodologies tested -direct & indirect-) and built the deposition curves. Calculation of Drift Values ISO 22866:2005, direct method- Calculation of Drift Potential Values test bench, indirect method- Mid-ordinate rule method Ad hoc new designed method nn DDDDDD = DD ii CCCCCCCCCC ii=1 10 CCCCCCCCCC = DDDDDD nn 10 nn=1

18 ISO22866: Ground spray drift and Drift Values Results Only the nozzles type have a statistical influence on Drift Value (ANOVA). The different fan airflow rates do not show statistical differences.

19 Results Test Bench method: Drift Potential Values Dragone k2 500 Fede Qi90 Futur 2000 No statistical effect of laboratory was assessed on final results of Drift Potential Value (ANOVA) Nozzles type and fan air flow rate adopted have a statistical influence on Drift Potential Value (ANOVA)

20 COMPARISON OF DRIFT REDUCTION RESULTS OBTAINED APPLYING INDIRECT (test bench) and DIRECT (ISO22866:2005) TEST METHODS Results E E D C E E D E C E F F Reference: ATR6H Potential spray drift reduction (%) and classes of reduction achieved by PAE configurations tested according with ISO (A 99 %, B 95 % 99 %, C 90 % 95 %, D 75 % 90 %, E 50 % 75 % and F 25 % 50 %.)

21 Results Applying ISO22866: the EFFECT OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION ON FINAL SPRAY DRIFT EVALUATION WAS DETERMINED BOTH IN TERMS OF TOTAL SPRAY DRIFT DEPOSITION AND VARIABILITY OF RESULTS AMONG REPLICATIONS The ISO22866 did not allow discrimination among all sprayer settings tested. Only the use of drift-reducing nozzles determines a statistical spray drift reduction: the effect of fan airflow rate was concealed by environmental wind conditions at the time of spray application. The test bench always allowed discrimination among all sprayer settings tested. New indirect test bench method is less susceptible to uncontrollable variables, especially wind influence, providing less variable results.

22 Conclusions The potential spray drift measurements carried out using the test bench provides reliable results for the assignment of potential drift score related to a reference spray equipment. THIS RATING COULD BE AN USEFUL INSTRUMENT FOR FARMERS, SPRAYERS MANUFACTURERS AND LAWMAKERS APPROACHING IN SPRAY DRIFT REDUCING POLICY Farmers would be provided of practical indications for the choice of the appropriate sprayer setting solution to limit spray drift Sprayers manufacturers could easier and more objectively determine the potential spray drift reduction of their production. Policy and regulation institutions could consider potential spray drift classification for the designation of appropriate mitigation measures E.g. definition of adjustable buffer zones width depending on PAE or SDRT adopted

23 For further information Conclusions Grella, M., Gil, E., Balsari, P., Marucco, P., & Gallart, M. (2017). Advances in developing a new test method to assess spray drift potential from air blast sprayers. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Engineering, 15(3), e0207. Grella, M., Gallart, M., Marucco, P., Balsari, P., & Gil, E. (2017). Ground deposition and airborne spray drift assessment in vineyard and orchard: the influence of environmental variables and sprayer settings. Sustainability, 9(5), 728. Grella, M., Marucco P., Manzone M., Gallart M., & Balsari P. (2017). Effect of sprayer settings on spray drift during pesticide application in poplar plantations (Populus spp.). Science of the Total Environment, 578,

24 Thank for your attention!!!