Content uploaded by Mostafa Omar Hassan
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Mostafa Omar Hassan on Aug 17, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
Al-Azhar Journal of Agricultural Engineering 3 (2022) 17-25
Contents lists available at Egyptian knowledge Bank (EKB)
Al-Azhar Journal of Agricultural Engineering
journal homepage: https://azeng.journals.ekb.eg/
Full length article
Field sprayer technology: acritical overview
Abdallah E. Elwakeel a
*
, Saad F. Ahmed b, Abdalla M. Zein Eldin b, Loai Nasrat c, Mostafa O.
Hassaan a, Mohamed M. Alsebiey a
a Department of Agricultural Engineering, Faculty of agriculture and natural resources, Aswan University, Aswan, Egypt.
b Department of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture, Alexandria University, Alshatby, Alexandria, Egypt.
c Department of Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Energy Engineering, Aswan University, Aswan, Egypt.
A R T I C L E I N F O
Handling Editor - Dr. Mostafa H. Fayed
Keywords
:
Spraying Systems
Pesticide
Terrestrial spraying
Aerial spraying.
Agricultural Machinery & Power Engineering
A B S T R A C T
Farmers use different types of sprayers for the management of the pest. Successful pest
management depends not only on the quality of the pesticide and insecticides but also
on the use of the right plant protection appliances. Hence, proper selection based on
ergonomic, economic, efficacy, and ecological and use of equipment for pesticide appli-
cation has a direct effect on crop productivity. Normally, the spray efficiency, which
usually is estimated by cost-income of the agricultural industry, increases from hand-
operated sprayers with low application rate, small coverage area in a certain time inter-
val, and low travel speed to large-scale sprayers which could apply pesticide with much
higher application rate, bigger coverage area in a certain time interval and higher travel
speed. This research aims to identify and inventory the different types of pesticide ap-
plication systems used around the world.
1. Introduction
Farmers use different types of sprayers for the man-
agement of the pest. Successful pest management de-
pends not only on the quality of the pesticide and insec-
ticides but also on the use of the right plant protection
appliances. Hence, proper selection based on Ergo-
nomic, Economic, Efficacy, and Ecological and use of
equipment for pesticide application has a direct effect
on crop productivity (Pankaj and Shashidhar, 2018).
Sammons et al. (2005) reported that pesticide spraying
in agricultural crop fields is generally performed in two
ways, namely: (i) terrestrial and (ii) aerial. In the terres-
trial way, which is largely based on ground vehicles,
paths are needed within the crop field, as the vehicles
require permanent contact with the ground during lo-
comotion. The spraying system must be close to the cul-
ture, which reduces the drift of pesticides to neighbor-
ing areas. Additionally, terrestrial spraying can reach a
higher accuracy of spraying distribution in favorable
conditions. For example, it can attend demands of a
*
Corresponding authors .
E-mail address: Abdallah_elshawadfy@agr.aswu.edu.eg (Abdallah E. Elwakeel).
222
Peer review under responsibility of Faculty of Agricultural Engineering, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt.
Received 22 April 2022; Received in revised form 18 May 2022; Accepted 20 April 2022
Available online 3 August 2022
2805 – 2803/© 2022 Faculty of Agricultural Engineering, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt. All rights reserved.
specific culture. On the other hand, this spraying ap-
proach is usually slow and has contact with the culture,
which decreases the production area and can damage
healthy plants. In contrast, aerial spraying allows faster
spraying without the need for paths inside the crop
field. However, the larger distance between the spray-
ing system and the cultivated area increases pesticide
drift to neighboring areas (
Nádasi and Szabó, 2011
).
2. Literature review
The pesticide spraying in agricultural crop fields is
generally performed in two ways, namely: (i) terrestrial
and (ii) aerial. In the terrestrial way, which is largely
based on ground machines, paths are needed within the
crop field, as the vehicles require permanent contact
with the ground during locomotion (Sammons et al.,
2005). The spraying system must be close to the culture,
which reduces the drift of pesticides to neighboring ar-
eas. Additionally, terrestrial spraying can reach a
higher accuracy of spraying distribution in favorable
Elwakeel et al. Al-Azhar Journal of Agricultural Engineering 3 (2022) 17-25
- 18 -
conditions. For example, it can attend demands of a spe-
cific culture. On the other hand, this spraying approach
is usually slow and has contact with the culture, which
decreases the production area and can damage healthy
plants. In contrast, aerial spraying allows faster spray-
ing without the need for paths inside the crop field.
However, the larger distance between the spraying sys-
tem and the cultivated area increases pesticide drift to
neighboring areas (Nádasi and Szabó, 2011).
2.1. Aerial spraying
As much as India depends upon agriculture, still it
is far short of adopting the latest technologies in it to get
a good farm. Developed countries have already started
the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV’s) in their
precision agriculture photogrammetry and remote
sensing (Aditya and Kulkarni, 2016). It is very fast, and
it could reduce the workload of a farmer. In general,
UAVs are equipped with cameras and sensors for crop
monitoring and sprayers for pesticide spraying. In the
past, a Variety of UAV models ran on military and ci-
vilian applications (Van-Blyenburgh, 1999).
In agriculture, the first UAV model is developed by
Yamaha. Unmanned helicopter Yamaha RMAX was in-
troduced for agriculture pest control and crop
monitoring applications. However, Yamaha stopped
their production in 2007. Technical analysis of UAVs in
precision agriculture is to analyze their applicability in
agriculture operations like crop monitoring, crop height
Estimations Pesticide Spraying, soil, and field analysis
(Colomina and Molina, 2014).
UM and Deepak (2018) reported that Unmanned
Aerial Vehicle (UAV) is an aircraft that can fly without
a human pilot and is controlled by the radio channel.
Multi-rotors are the one type of UAVs, further which
are classified into several rotors in their platform:
1. Fixed wing (Fig. 1a) UAVs are entirely different in
their design compared to multi-rotors and the aer-
odynamic shape of two wings are gives an easy
glide of UA (Pederi and Cheporniuk, 2015).
2. A single-rotor helicopter (Fig. 1b) is a model that has
just one big-sized rotor on top and one small-sized
one on the tail of the UAV (Huang et al., 2009).
3. Quad copter (Fig. 1c) (Spoorthi et al., 2017).
4. Hexa copter (Fig. 1d) (Spoorthi et al., 2017).
5. Octo copters (Fig. 1e) are multi-rotors that are lifted
and propelled by four, six, eight rotors (Bendig et
al., 2012).
Fig. 1. UAV types, Fixed Wing (a). Single rotor (b). Quadcopter (c). Hexa copter (d). Octo copter (e). (Pederi and
Cheporniuk, 2015; Huang et al., 2009; Spoorthi et al., 2017; Bendig et al., 2012).
2.2. Terrestrial spraying
Pérez-Ruiz et al. (2015) stated that another form of
production is the cultivation of open field crops. This
allows extensive crop fields and, hence, large-scale pro-
duction. On the other hand, this alternative is the most
expensive agricultural production, since it requires a
larger amount of machinery and more workers to carry
out activities on time. And they also, surveyed the high-
lighted the considerable progress made in this context,
which includes:
Elwakeel et al. Al-Azhar Journal of Agricultural Engineering 3 (2022) 17-25
- 19 -
(i) Autonomous tractors,
(ii) Communication systems and the Global Positioning
System,
(iii) A design for an intelligent spray bar, and
(iv) Thermal and mechanical systems to control weeds.
And the good preliminary results obtained in these
areas show a promising future for the development and
use of autonomous vehicles for precision agriculture.
Despite making significant advances, land vehicles
(whether autonomous or manned) must use routes
within the plantation, and this reduces the production
area. Moreover, deviations in the route already estab-
lished can damage healthy plants and further reduce
productivity, since these machines enter the crop field
several times during the production phase.
Molari et al. (2005) designed a recycling tunnel
sprayer using computational fluid dynamics (CFD)
simulation and reported that tunnel sprayers have the
potential to cut back both drift and runoff, also reducing
the quantity of pesticide required and costs.
Fig. 2. A recycling tunnel sprayer (Molari et al., 2005).
Rayner (2010) designed and fabricated a vehicle-
mounted digital, positioning spray system. The item of
the invention was to supply a high volume, low cost,
sealant spray system for the asphalt industry, accom-
plished particularly through a self-contained vehicle-
mounted spray system utilizing a digital positioning re-
ceiver consisting of a worldwide positioning system
(GPS) or horn radar for vehicle speed sensing and a mo-
tor rpm sensor and a program logic microcontroller for
adjusting output flow of a cloth pump to attain a target
application spray rate of a spraying bar.
Amonye et al. (2014) designed and developed of an-
imal-drawn ground metered axle mechanism boom
sprayer. The spraying technology was developed to be
used by rural farmers in Northern Nigeria. The equip-
ment was constructed using the parameters obtained
from design and tested at farmland within the Univer-
sity premises of Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, in Ni-
geria. The equipment consists of a boom with multiple
controlled droplet applicator (CDA) atomizer nozzles,
a gear pump, a chemical tank, and a chair for an opera-
tor; all attached to a framework bolted to a rear axle.
Abdelmotaleb et al. (2015) developed an autono-
mous navigation agricultural robotic platform (ARP)
based on machine vision. The ARP consisted of two
main parts namely, 1) Power transmission and auto-
guide system; and 2) Robotic platform. The experiments
were carried out at the department of agricultural engi-
neering, faculty of agriculture, Kafr elsheikh University
during 2014-2015. In their study, the experiments were
conducted in the laboratory to optimize the accuracy of
ARP control using machine vision in terms of the au-
tonomous navigation and performance of the robot’s
guidance system.
Fig. 3. Main components of agricultural robotic platform (ARP) (Abdelmotaleb et al., 2015).
Elwakeel et al. Al-Azhar Journal of Agricultural Engineering 3 (2022) 17-25
- 20 -
The average lateral error of autonomous was 2.75,
19.33, 21.22, 34.18 and16.69 mm, while the average lat-
eral error of human operator was 32.70, 4.85, 7.85, 38.35,
and 14.75 mm for straight path, curved path, sine wave
path, offset discontinuity, and angle discontinuity, re-
spectively. The best execution time of image processing
was obtained with the minimum values of the camera
resolution at 500 mm camera height. While increasing
the size of the nozzle at the same height and spray pres-
sure decreased the flight time. The favorable robotic
platform's speeds were obtained at lower values of cam-
era resolutions and wider distances between nozzle and
camera.
Kang et al. (2015) developed a wireless remote-con-
trolled (RC) spraying machine that supported the
S3C6410 embedded controller. This spraying machine
consists of a rotary pesticide selection unit, a real-time
mixing unit, a multi-angle spraying unit, a picture ac-
quisition module, an embedded control module, a wire-
less communication module, and an intelligent mobile
platform. it's specially designed for hilly areas, green-
houses, orchards, and other environments that don't
seem to be accessible to large and medium-sized spray-
ing machines. The wireless (RC) machine achieves pre-
cise proportional and multi-angle flexible spraying
while avoiding liquid waste and direct operator–liquid
contact.
Fig. 4. Structure diagram of the wireless monitoring
system (Kang et al., 2015).
Gonzalez-de-Soto et al. (2016) developed and evaluated
a robotized patch sprayer, the robotized patch sprayer
consisted of an autonomous mobile robot-supported
and agricultural vehicle chassis and a direct-injection
spraying boom that was tailor-made to interact with the
mobile robot. There have been diverse sources
(onboard and remote sensors) that will supply the weed
data for the treatment. Laboratory characterization and
field tests demonstrated that the system was reliable
and accurate enough to accomplish the treatment of
over 99.5 % of the detected weeds and treatment of the
crop with no weed treated was insignificant; approxi-
mately 0.5 % with relation to the entire weed patches
area, achieving major herbicide savings.
Fig. 5. Simplified schematic diagram of the fundamental spraying components (Gonzalez-de-Soto et al., 2016).
Elwakeel et al. Al-Azhar Journal of Agricultural Engineering 3 (2022) 17-25
- 21 -
Adamides et al. (2017) designed and developed a
semi-autonomous agricultural vineyard sprayer. The
sphere experiment evaluated the effect of three design
factors: (a) style of screen output, (b) number of views,
(c) style of robot control data input device. Results
showed that participants were significantly simpler but
less efficient after they had multiple views than after
they had one view. PC keyboard was also found to sig-
nificantly outperform PS3 gamepad in terms of interac-
tion efficiency and perceived usability. Heuristic evalu-
ations of various user interfaces were also performed
using research-based HRI (Human-robot interaction)
heuristics. Finally, a study on participants’ overall user
experience found that the system was evaluated posi-
tively on the user experience questionnaire scales.
Fig. 6. Semi-autonomous agricultural vineyard
sprayer (Adamides et al., 2017).
Yamane and Miyazaki (2017) developed an electro-
static pesticide spraying system as shown in Fig. 7, for
low-concentration, high-volume applications to scale
back vegetable production costs through savings in ag-
ricultural chemical usage and dealing hours for pest
control. the opposite type was a spraying robot for
greenhouse melons. There was no significant difference
within the control of insect pests between robot spray-
ing and the conventional manual spraying method. The
effective displacement unit of the robot was 3.8 a/h.
Pranoy et al. (2017) designed and fabricated of pes-
ticide series spraying machine for multiple crops. The
model was designed by using CATIA and fabrication
was allotted by different techniques. Real-time testing
was allotted at different crops.
Fig. 7. Spraying robot for greenhouse melons (Ya-
mane and Miyazaki, 2017).
Fig. 8. Pesticide series spraying machine (Pranoy et
al., 2017).
Akshaya
et al. (2017) developed of mechanically
operated pesticide sprayer & fertilizer dispenser. The
design has many variables that would be altered to re-
inforce the utility of the vehicle. Increasing tank capac-
ity by addition of another tank with a pump. The frame
is often fabricated from Aluminum alloy with a thicker
Elwakeel et al. Al-Azhar Journal of Agricultural Engineering 3 (2022) 17-25
- 22 -
gauge, which is light in weight and sturdy. The addition
of more nozzles is often done to increase the realm cov-
ered by the machine at any given time, to take care of
the identical pressure all told nozzles, an external pump
is also required.
Fig. 9. A mechanically operated pesticide sprayer
and fertilizer dispenser (Akshaya et al., 2017).
Sarri (2017) designed and tested a low-cost micro-
volume sprayer for bait spraying. An electrical sprayer
with an automatic spray controller based on an open-
source Arduino platform was designed. The prototype
was tested in laboratory condition and on cherry grow-
ing for two seasons in center Italy to assess the opera-
tive reliability. Results showed the efficiency of the
sprayer and the use of bait (Spintor-Fly ®) to control the
cherry pomace fly.
Fig. 10. Main elements of the micro-volume sprayer
for bait spraying (Sarri, 2017).
Singh et al. (2018) developed a solar-operated knap-
sack sprayer as shown in Fig. 11, to avoid problems like
electricity shortage, fatigue thanks to continuous oper-
ating of a manual knapsack sprayer and other difficul-
ties in engine operated sprayer.
Fig. 11. Solar sprayer-operated knapsack sprayer (Singh et al., 2018).
Nangare et al. (2018) designed and fabricated an ag-
ricultural sprayer. The model runs non-fuel and is
straightforward to control for a user. The motive behind
developing this equipment is to make mechanizations
that can help to attenuate effort and also the operator
fatigue and canopy the utmost area within minimum
time as compared to a single sprayer. it's suitable for
spraying at minimum costs for the farmers.
Elwakeel et al. Al-Azhar Journal of Agricultural Engineering 3 (2022) 17-25
- 23 -
Fig. 12. Complete sprayer assembly parts (Nangare et al., 2018).
Sivanainthaperumal et al., (2018) designed and de-
veloped a wheel-spray pump. The spryer was mechan-
ically operated wheel driven, it had been a transporta-
ble device and did not need any fuel to operate, which
is straightforward to maneuver and spray the pesticide
by moving the wheel. This wheel-operated pesticide
spray equipment consumes less time and achieves uni-
form nozzle pressure; a crank mechanism with a piston
pump was used, which was driven by the wheel.
Fig. 13. Main components of the wheel spray pump
(Sivanainthaperumal et al., 2018).
Meganathan et al. (2018) designed and fabricated a
mechanical pesticide sprayer. The machine consumes
less time and saves money as compared with conven-
tional spraying. It covers twice the area of spraying than
manually spraying. It does spray in less amount of time
than that the conventional method dose. This machine
does not require any fuel or power, so maintenance is a
smaller amount.
Fig. 14. Side view of the pesticide sprayer (Mega-
nathan et al., 2018).
Shabareesha et al. (2019) designed and fabricated a
multipurpose hybrid sprayer. The sprayer was de-
signed considering parameters like desired spraying ef-
ficiency, user-friendly, low operating time, and faster
coverage of the area. Thus, the sprayer was designed to
be a price-for-money product within the agriculture
sector.
Fig. 15. The final image of the multipurpose hybrid
sprayer (Shabareesha et al., 2019).
Penido et al. (2019) developed and evaluated a re-
motely controlled and monitored self-propelled
sprayer in tomato crops. The fundamental prototype
comprises an agricultural mini tractor, a motorized
pneumatic sprayer (atomizer), and a group of electronic
and mechanical sensors and actuators, which permit
the assembly to be controlled remotely and pictures
captured by a video camera to be viewed on a tablet. Af-
ter development, the principal dimension, weight, and
operational characteristics of the prototype were identi-
fied. Also, the prototype was used for spraying ten to-
mato plants within the crop, with seven different points
being observed for every plant. The results were ana-
lyzed statistically, giving the subsequent coefficients of
variation: 15.13 % for spray coverage, 18.70 % for drop-
let density, and 16.68% for product deposition on the
folioles. supported these values, it had been concluded
that the event of a remotely controlled and monitored
self-propelled sprayer prototype, and it is used in
spraying tomato crops, were viable.
Elwakeel et al. Al-Azhar Journal of Agricultural Engineering 3 (2022) 17-25
- 24 -
Fig. 16. Propulsion, steering, spray control, and mon-
itoring system (Penido et al., 2019).
3. Conclusions
In this agriculture sector, there is a lot of fieldwork,
such as weeding, reaping, sowing, etc. Apart from these
operations, spraying is also an important operation to
be performed by the farmer to protect the cultivated
crops from insects, pests, funguses, and diseases for
which various insecticides, pesticides, fungicides, and
nutrients are sprayed on crops for protection. The
growing concern to control plant diseases, insects, and
weeds for a qualitative yield of agricultural products is
increasing speedily in many developing countries.
References
Abdelmotaleb, I., Hegazy, R., Imara, Z., Rezk, A., 2015. Development
of an autonomous navigation agricultural robotic platform
based on machine vision. Misr Journal of Agricultural Engineer-
ing 32(4): 1421 – 1450.
Adamides, G., Katsanos, C., Constantinou, I., Christou, G.,
Xenos, M., Hadzilacos, T., Edan, Y., 2017. Design and
development of a semi-autonomous agricultural vine-
yard sprayer: Human -robot interaction aspects.
Journal
of
Field Robo tics 34:1407 –1426.
Aditya, S.N., Kulkarni, S.C., 2016. Adoption and Utilization of
Drones for Advanced Precision Farming: A Review. Interna-
tional Journal on Recent and Innovation Trends in Computing
and Communication, ISSN: 2321-8169, 4 (5), PP. 563 - 565.
7- Van-Blyenburgh, P. (1999): UAVs: an overview. Air & Space
Europe, 1(5-6), pp.43-47.
Akshaya, C., Shirwal, A.R., Bharadwaj, A., Kumar, T.N., Ha-
rish, T., Shankara, D.R., 2017. Development of mechan-
ically operate d pesticide sprayer and fertilizer dis-
penser. International Journal for Scientific Research
and Development 5(4) 2321-0613
Amonye, M.C., Suleiman, M.L., El-Oke ne, A., Abdulmalik I.
O., Makoyo, M., 2014. Design and development of ani-
mal drawn ground metered axle mechanism boom
sprayer. International Journal of Engineering Resear ch
and Applications 4(9): 01-09.
Bendig, J., Bolten, A., Bareth, G. 2012. Introducing a low-cost
mini-UAV for thermal-and multispectral-imaging. Int. Arch.
Photogram. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci, 39, pp.345-349.
Colomina, I., Molina, P., 2014. Unmanned aerial systems for
photogrammetry and remote sensing: A review. ISPRS Journal
of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 92, pp.79-97.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO),
2005. International code of 80 conducts on the distribution and
use of pesticides, revised version. Rome. P6.
Gonzalez-de-Soto, M., Emmi, L., Perez-Ruiz, M., Aguera, J.,
Gonzalez-de-Santos, P., 2016 . Autonomous systems for
precise spraying e Evaluation of a robotized patch
sprayer. 13
th
International Journal on Recent Innovation
in Science, Engineer ing and Management, 1 -18.
Huang, Y., Hoffmann, W.C., Lan, Y., Wu, W., Fritz, B.K., 2009. Devel-
opment of a spray system for an unmanned aerial vehicle plat-
form. American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers
ISSN 0883-8542. 25(6): 803‐809.
Kang, Z., Zhiyong, L.X., Cheng, Z.L., 2015. Key technologies of spray-
ing machine with wireless remote control. International Journal
of Online Engineering, 11:3.
Meganathan, D., Venu , P., Mohan, T.R., Maravan, A., 2018 .
Design and fabrication of mechanical pesticide sprayer.
International Journal of Research Culture Society 2(4).
Molari, G., Benini, L., Ade, G., 2005. Design of a recycling tunnel
sprayer using CFD simulations. Trans. American Society of Ag-
ricultural Engineering 48(2): 463–468.
Nádasi, P., Szabó, I., 2011. On-b oard applicability of mems-
based autonomous navigation system on agricultural
aircraft. Hung. J. Ind. Chem. 39 (2), 229–232.
Nádasi, P., Szabó, I., 2011. Onboard applicability of mems-
based autonomous navigation system on agricultural
aircraft. Hung. Journal of Industrial and Engineering
Chemistry 39 (2), 22 9–232.
Nangare, S.T., Patil, S.S., Ikile, G.P., Jangate, S.R., Patil,
A.M., N alawade, D.K., 2018. Design and Fabrication of
Agricultural Sprayer. 13
th
International Conference of
Recent Innovations in Science, Engineering, And Man-
agement, 2 52-259.
Pankaj, B.G., Shashidhar, S.K.,2018. A Review on Pesticides
Sprayer Technology Approach in Ergonomics, Econom-
ics, and Ecologic in Agriculture Field. Inter national
Journal of Engineering Science Invention (IJESI). E -
ISSN: 2319 – 6734 , p- ISSN: 2319 – 6726. www.ijesi.org,
7 (9), PP 01-05.
Pankaj, B.G., Shashidhar., S.K., 2018. A Review on Pesticides
Sprayer Technology Approach in Ergonomics, Econom-
ics and Ecologic in Agriculture Field. Internationa l
Journal of Engineering Science Invention 7 (9): 01-05.
Panopoulos, P.J., 2005. Design and fabricate a machine that is an au-
tomatic pesticide, insecticide, repellant, poison, air freshener,
disinfectant, or other types of spray delivery system.
USA pa-
tent No.
2005/0224.596 A1.
Pederi, Y.A., Cheporniuk, H.S., 2015. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and
new technological methods of monitoring and crop protection in
precision agriculture. In Actual Problems of Unmanned Aerial
Vehicles Developments (APUAVD), IEEE International Confer-
ence, pp. 298-301. IEEE.
Penido, É.C.C., Teixeira, M.M., Fernandes, H.C., Barros,
Monteiro, P., Cecon, P.R., 2019.
Development and eval-
uation of a remotely controlled and monitored self-pro-
pelled sprayer in tomato crops. Revista Ciência
Agronômica 50(1): 8-17.
Pérez-Ruiz, M., Gonzalez-de, S.P., Ribeiro, A., Fernandez,
C., Quintanilla, P.A., Vieri, M., Tomic, S., Agüera, J.,
2015. Highlights and preliminary results for autono-
mous cr op protection. Computers and Electronics in
Agriculture 110: 150–161.
Pranoy, V., Subrahmanyam, T.D.S., Kumar, C.M., Babu, R.,
2017. Design and fabrication of pesticide series spray-
ing machine for multiple agricultural crops. Interna-
tional Journal for Research in Applied Science and En-
gineering Technology, 5(10):1038 -104 2.
Rayner, R.D., 2010. Vehicle-moun ted digital positioning
spray system. USA patent No. 7,802,737.
Sammons, P.J., Furukawa, T., Bulgin, A., 2005. Autonomous
pesticide spraying robot for use in a greenhouse. In:
Elwakeel et al. Al-Azhar Journal of Agricultural Engineering 3 (2022) 17-25
- 25 -
Australian Confere nce on Robotics and Automation pp.
1–9.
Sammons, P.J., Furukawa, T., Bulgin, A., 2005. Autonomous
pesticide spraying robot for use in a greenhouse. In:
Australian C onference on Robotics and Automation,
pp. 1–9.
Sarri, D., 2017. design and testing of a low-cost micro-vol-
ume sprayer for bait spraying . Contemporary Engineer-
ing Sciences 10(4): 179-192.
Shabareesha, A., Jaswanth, T.S., Sankarshana, S.V., Man ju,
P., 2019. Desig n and Fabrication of Multipurpose Hy-
brid Sprayer. International Journal for Rese arch in Ap-
plied Science and Engineering Technology ISSN: 2321-
9653; 7(6).
Singh, K., Padhee, D., Parmar, A.K., Sinha, B.L., 2018. Development
of a solar-powered knapsack sprayer. Journal of Pharmacog-
nosy and Phytochemistry 7(1): 1269-1272.
Sivanainthaperumal, T., Selvam, M., Pand iyaraj, R., Arun-
raj, S., 2018. Design and development of wheel-spray
pump. Inter national Journal of Emerging Technology in
Computer Science and Electronics ISSN: 0976-1353,
25(5) (Special Issue).
Spoorthi, S., Shadaksharappa, B., Suraj, S., Manasa, V.K., 2017. Freyr
drone: Pesticide/fertilizers spraying drone-an agricultural ap-
proach. IEEE 2nd International Conference on In Computing and
Communications Technologies (ICCCT), pp. 252-255.
UM, R.M., Deepak, B.B.V.L., 2018. Review on Application of
Drone Systems in Precision Agriculture. International Confer-
ence on Robotics and Smart Manufacturing. Procedia Computer
Science, 133, 502–509.
Yallappa, D., Veerangouda, M., Maski, D., Palled, V.,
Bheemanna, M., 2017. Development and evaluation of drone-
mounted sprayer for pesticide applications to crops. IEEE Global
Humanitarian Technology Conference (GHTC) pp. 1-7.
Yamane, S., Miyazaki, M., 2017. Review Study on Electrostatic Pesti-
cide Spraying System for Low-Concentration, High-Volume Ap-
plications. Japan Agricultural Research Quarterly 51(1):11-16.
