Skip to Main Content
Skip Nav Destination
ASTM Selected Technical Papers
Pesticide Formulations and Delivery Systems, 28th Volume: Global Trends and Regulatory Drivers in the Crop Protection Industry
By
Arlean M. Rohde
Arlean M. Rohde
1
ExxonMobil Chemical Co.
,
Houston, TX
Search for other works by this author on:
Craig Martin
Craig Martin
2
FMC Corp.
,
Princeton, NJ
Search for other works by this author on:
Gerald Otis
Gerald Otis
3
Bayer CropScience
,
Kansas City, MO
Search for other works by this author on:
ISBN:
978-0-8031-5523-7
No. of Pages:
177
Publisher:
ASTM International
Publication date:
2009

It is important to understand the evaporation process of pesticide droplets on targets for increasing the efficiency and efficacy of foliar applied insecticide and fungicide spray applications. Evaporation characteristics of five droplet sizes (246, 343, 575, 762, and 886 μm) under three relative humidity (RH) conditions (30, 60, and 90 %) were studied in a laboratory. Sequential images of evaporating droplets placed inside a small environmentally controlled chamber were obtained using a stereoscope for determination of droplet evaporation time and residual patterns. The spray mixtures included different combinations of water, a nonionic colloidal polymer drift retardant, an alkyl polyoxyethylene surfactant, and an insecticide. The droplet evaporation was investigated on the surfaces of hydrophilic and hydrophobic glass slides which represented ideal non-waxy and waxy leaf surfaces, respectively. Among the spray mixtures investigated, the droplets containing the drift retardant had the longest evaporation time, and the droplets containing the surfactant had the shortest evaporation time after these additives were added into insecticide mixtures. The mean evaporation time of 246, 343, 575, 762, and 886 μm droplets containing water and the insecticide without additives at 60 % RH on the hydrophilic surface were 43, 77, 133, 226, and 384 s, respectively. The mean evaporation times of the same size droplets containing the same insecticide but mixed with the surfactant were 26, 47, 77, 156, and 251 s, respectively. The evaporation time of 575 urn droplets containing the drift retardant at 60 % RH increased from 159 s to 224 s when the deposition surface changed from the hydrophilic slide to the hydrophobic slide. The evaporation time of droplets greatly increased as RH increased, and also increased exponentially as the droplet size increased. Therefore, spray additives, target surface fine structure and RH greatly influenced the evaporation time of spray droplets.

1.
Ramsdale
,
B. K.
, and
Messersmith
,
C. G.
, “
Nozzle, Spray Volume, and Adjuvants Effects on Carfentrazone and Imazamox Efficacy
,”
Weed Technol.
 0890-037X, Vol.
15
,
2001
, pp. 485–491.
2.
Spanoghe
,
P.
,
Schampheleire
,
M. D.
,
der Meeren
,
P. V.
, and
Steurbaut
,
W.
, “
Review Influence of Agricultural Adjuvants on Droplet Spectra
,”
Pest Manage. Sci.
 1526-498X, Vol.
63
,
2007
, pp. 4–16.
3.
Ozkan
,
H. E.
,
Reichard
,
D. L.
,
Zhu
,
H.
, and
Akerman
,
K. D.
, “
Effect of Drift Retardant Chemicals on Spray Drift, Droplet Size and Spray Pattern
,” ASAE Paper No. 92-1613,
ASAE
, St., Joseph, Mich.
4.
Salyani
,
M.
, and
Cromwell
,
R. P.
, “
Adjuvants to Reduce Drift From Handgun Spray Applications
,”
In Pesticide Formulations and Application Systems
, ASTM STP 1146, Vol.
12
,
Devisetty
B. N.
,
Chasin
D. G.
, and
Berger
P. D.
, Eds.,
ASTM International
,
West Conshohocken, PA
,
1992
, pp. 363–376.
5.
Smith
,
A.
, “
Adjuvants in Crop Protection
,” Grow Bus. Report DS 86,
Pharma Books Ltd.
, New York,
1993
.
6.
Ranz
,
W. E.
, and
Marshall
,
W. R.
, “
Evaluation from Droplet (Part I)
,”
Chem. Eng. Prog.
 0360-7275, Vol.
48
, No.
3
,
1952
, 141–146.
7.
Ranz
,
W. E.
, and
Marshall
,
W. R.
, “
Evaluation from Droplet (Part II)
,”
Chem. Eng. Prog.
 0360-7275, Vol.
48
, No.
4
,
1952
, pp. 173–180.
8.
Picknett
,
R. G.
, and
Bexon
,
R.
, “
The Evaporation of Sessile or Pendant Drops in Still Air
,”
J. Colloid Interface Sci.
 0021-9797, Vol.
61
, No.
2
,
1977
, pp. 336–350.
9.
Baines
,
W. D.
, and
James
,
D. F.
, “
Evaporation of a Droplet on a Surface
,”
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.
 0888-5885, Vol.
33
,
1994
, pp. 411–416.
10.
Cooper
,
W.
,
Edwards
,
L.
, and
Hardaway
,
F.
, “
Vapour/Liquid Hazards Associated with Persistent Liquid Drop on Non-porous Surfaces
,” ARCSL-TR-82092,
Chemical System Laboratory, Aberdeen Proving Ground
, Maryland.
11.
Westin
,
S. N.
,
Winter
,
S.
,
Karlsson
,
E.
,
Hin
,
A.
, and
Oeseburg
,
F.
, “
On Modeling of the Evaporation Of Chemical Warfare Agents on the Ground
,”
J. Hazard. Mater.
 0304-3894, Vol.
63
,
1998
, pp. 5–24.
12.
Chachalis
,
D.
,
Reddy
,
K. N.
,
Elmore
,
C. D.
, and
Steele
,
M. L.
, “
Herbicide Efficacy, Leaf Structure, and Spray Droplet Contact Angle Among lpomoea Species and Smallflower Morningglory
,”
Weed Sci.
 0043-1745, Vol.
49
,
2001
, pp. 628–634.
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this chapter.
Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal