Abstract
The study of the micro-physical characteristics of spray droplets provides crucial insights into the impact of sprinkler water on soil erosion, leaf impact, and the microclimate of agricultural environments. However, the variability in measurement outcomes across different technologies due to their distinct measurement principles is a significant challenge. This research aims to evaluate and compare the droplet diameter, velocity, application rate, and kinetic energy rate using four distinct measurement technologies: the paper stain method (PS), flour pellet method (FP), laser precipitation monitor (LPM), and two-dimensional video disdrometer (2DVD), alongside a rain gauge (RG) in the context of sprinkler irrigation conditions. The results reveal that: (1) The FP method struggled to capture small droplets under the same spray conditions, while the PS method recorded a maximum droplet diameter exceeding 7 mm. The LPM registered the highest droplet count per unit area and time, notably capturing a significant number of small droplets (< 1 mm). Conversely, the 2DVD provided a more uniform distribution of droplet sizes, with the LPM’s mean equivalent droplet diameter (dv) being 0.86 times that of the 2DVD. (2) Although droplet diameters and velocities measured by the 2DVD, LPM, FP, and PS, decreased with increased working pressure, these technologies concurred when assessing low-velocity and small-diameter droplet. (3) The 2DVD’s larger sampling area compared to other methods enables the acquisition of more representative droplet characteristics, including their irregular shapes, suggesting its utility in measuring the micro-physical properties of sprayed droplets. (4) Based on the kinetic energy rate measured by the 2DVD under identical conditions, kinetic energy rate calibration factors of 0.88, 1.15, and 1.10 are suggested for the LPM, FP, and PS, respectively. This study provides essential data for calibrating and applying various droplet measurement technologies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
References
Abd Elbasit MAM, Yasuda H, Salmi A, Anyoji H (2010) Characterization of rainfall generated by dripper-type rainfall simulator using piezoelectric transducers and its impact on splash soil erosion. Earth Surf Proc Land 35(4):466–475. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.1935
Abd Elbasit MAM, Yasuda H, Salmi A (2011) Application of piezoelectric transducers in simulated rainfall erosivity assessment. Hydrol Sci J 56(1):187–194. https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2010.546359
Al-Kayssi AW, Mustafa SH (2016) Modeling gypsifereous soil infiltration rate under different sprinkler application rates and successive irrigation events. Agric Water Manag 163:66–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2015.09.006
Armenise E, Simmons RW, Ahn S, Garbout A, Doen SH, Mooney SJ et al (2018) Soil seal development under simulated rainfall: structural, physical and hydrological dynamics. J Hydrol 556:211–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.10.073
Atlas D, Ulbrich CW (1977) Path- and area-integrated rainfall measurement by microwave attenuation in the 1–3 cm band. J Appl Meteorol 16(12):1322–1331. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1977)0162.0.CO;2
Bartholomew MJ (2009) Disdrometer and tipping bucket rain gauge handbook. Clim Res Facil. https://doi.org/10.2172/1019411
Bautista-Capetillo C, Zavala M, Playán E (2012) Kinetic energy in sprinkler irrigation: different sources of drop diameter and velocity. Irrig Sci 30(1):29–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-010-0259-8
Beard KV, Bringi VN, Thurai M (2010) A new understanding of raindrop shape. Atmos Res 97(4):396–415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2010.02.001
Blanchard DC, Spencer AT (1970) Experiments on the generation of raindrop-size distributions by drop breakup. J Atmos Sci 27:101–108
Bradley SG, Stow CD (1974) The measurement of charge and size of raindrops: part I. The disdrometer. J Appl Meteorol 13(1):114–130. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1974)0132.0.CO;2
Burguete J, Playán E, Montero J, Zapata N (2007) Improving drop size and velocity estimates of an optical disdrometer: implications for sprinkler irrigation simulation. Trans ASABE 50(6):2103–2116. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.24112
Chang WY, Lee GW, Jou JD, Lee WC, Yu CK (2020) Uncertainty in measured raindrop size distributions from four types of collocated instruments. Remote Sens 12(7):1167. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12071167
Chen R, Li H, Wang J, Song ZY (2023) Critical factors influencing soil runoff and erosion in sprinkler irrigation: water application rate and droplet kinetic energy. Agric Water Manag 283:108299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2023.108299
Clardy DE, Tolbert CW (1961) Electronic disdrometer. Rev Sci Instrum 32(8):916–919. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1717560
Cottenot L, Courtemanche P, Nouhou-Bako A, Darboux F (2021) A rainfall simulator using porous pipes as drop former. CATENA 200:105101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2020.105101
Deboer DW, Monnens MJ, Kincaid DC (2001) Measurement of sprinkler droplet size. Appl Eng Agric 17(1):11–16
Eigel JD, Moore ID (1983) A simplified technique for measuring raindrop size and distribution. Trans ASAE 26:1079–1084
Frasson RPM, Cunha LK, Krajewski WF (2011) Assessment of the thies optical disdrometer performance. Atmos Res 101(1–2):237–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2011.02.014
García-Ramos FJ, Vidal M, Boné A, Malón H, Aguirre AJ (2012) Analysis of the air flow generated by an air-assisted sprayer equipped with two axial fans using a 3D Sonic anemometer. Sensors 12(6):7598–7613. https://doi.org/10.3390/s120607598
GB/T 27612. 3-2011/ISO 15886-3:2004. Agricultural irrigation equipment–Sprinklers–Part 3: characterization of distribution and test methods (In Chinese with English abstract)
Ge MS, Wu PT, Zhu DL, Ames DP (2016) Comparison between sprinkler irrigation and natural rainfall based on droplet diameter. Span J Agric Res 14(1):e1201. https://doi.org/10.5424/sjar/2016141-8076
Ge MS, Wu PT, Zhu DL, Zhang L (2018) Analysis of kinetic energy distribution of big gun sprinkler applied to continuous moving hose-drawn traveler. Agric Water Manag 201:118–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2017.12.009
Ge MS, Wu PT, Zhu DL, Zhang L (2020) Comparisons of spray characteristics between vertical impact and turbine drive sprinklers—a case study of the 50pyc and hy50 big gun-type sprinklers. Agric Water Manag 228:105847. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2019.105847
Iserloh T, Ries JB, Arnáez J, Boix-Fayos C, Butzen V, Cerdà A et al (2013) European small portable rainfall simulators: a comparison of rainfall characteristics. CATENA 110:100–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2013.05.013
Kavian A, Mohammadi M, Cerda A, Fallah M, Abdollahi Z (2018) Simulated raindrop’s characteristic measurements. A new approach of image processing tested under laboratory rainfall simulation. CATENA 167:190–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2018.04.034
King BA, Winward TW, Bjorneberg DL (2010) Laser precipitation monitor for measurement of drop size and velocity of moving spray-plate sprinklers. Appl Eng Agric 26(2):263–271. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.29551
Kohl RA, Deboer DW (1984) Drop size distributions for a low pressure spray type agricultural sprinkler. Trans ASAE 27(6):1836–1840. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.33054
Kohl RA, Bernuth R, Huebner G (1985) Drop size distribution measurement problems using a laser unit. Trans ASAE 28(1):190–192. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.32226
Kruger A, Krajewski WF (2002) Two-dimensional video disdrometer: a description. J Atmos Oceanic Tech 19(5):602–617. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0426(2002)0192.0.CO;2
Lanza LG, Merlone A, Cauteruccio A, Chinchella E, Stagnaro M, Dobre M et al (2021) Calibration of non-catching precipitation measurement instruments: a review. Meteorol Appl 28:e2002. https://doi.org/10.1002/met.2002
Li H, Ren ZY, Tang Y, Yuan SQ, Zhu XY (2005) Measurement and amelioration of the test to raindrop size of sprinklers. Trans Chin Soc Agric Mach 36(10):50–53. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1000-1298.2005.10.014.(InChinesewithEnglishabstract)
Liu JP, Liu XF, Zhu XY, Yuan SQ (2016) Droplet characterisation of a complete fluidic sprinkler with different nozzle dimensions. Biosys Eng 148:90–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2016.05.008
Liu XC, He BS, Zhao SJ, Hu S, Liu L (2019) Comparative measurement of rainfall with a precipitation micro-physical characteristics sensor, a 2d video disdrometer, an ott parsivel disdrometer, and a rain gauge. Atmos Res 229:100–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2019.06.020
Macedo PMS, Pinto MF, Sobrinho TA, Schultz N, Coutinho TAR et al (2021) A modified portable rainfall simulator for soil erosion assessment under different rainfall patterns. J Hydrol 596:126052. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.126052
Magarvey RH (1956) Stain method of drop size determination. J Meteorol 14:182–184
Meshesha TD, Tsunekawa A, Tsubo M, Haregeweyn N, Tegegne F (2016) Evaluation of kinetic energy and erosivity potential of simulated rainfall using Laser Precipitation Monitor. CATENA 137:237–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2015.09.017
Montero J, Tarjuelo JM, Carrión P (2003) Sprinkler droplet size distribution measured with an optical spectropluviometer. Irrig Sci 22:47–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-003-0069-3
Montero-Martínez G, Torres-Pérez EF, García-García F (2016) A comparison of two optical precipitation sensors with different operating principles: the pws100 and the oap-2dp. Atmos Res 178–179:550–558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2016.05.007
Sadeghi SH, Abdollahi Z, Darvishan AK (2013) Experimental comparison of some techniques for estimating natural raindrop size distribution on the south coast of the Caspian Sea, Iran. Hydrol Sci J 58(6):1374–1382. https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2013.814917
Salvador R, Bautista-Capetillo C, Burguete J, Zapata N, Serreta A, Playán E (2009) A photographic method for drop characterization in agricultural sprinklers. Irrig Sci 27(4):307–317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-009-0147-2
Sarwar A, Peters RT, Shafeeque M, Mohamed A, Arshad A, Ullah I et al (2021) Accurate measurement of wind drift and evaporation losses could improve water application efficiency of sprinkler irrigation systems a comparison of measuring techniques. Agric Water Manag 258:107209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2021.107209
Sayyadi H, Nazemi AH, Sadraddini AA, Delirhasannia R (2014) Characterising droplets and precipitation profiles of a fixed spray-plate sprinkler. Biosys Eng 119:13–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2013.12.011
Shen ES, Liu G, Abd Elbasit AM, Zhan XY, Feng Q, Dan CX et al (2022) Comparison of a laser precipitation monitor, piezoelectric transducer and particle imaging transient visual measurement technology under simulated rainfall in laboratory conditions. J Hydrol 610:127978. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2022.127978
Sudheer KP, Panda RK (2000) Digital image processing for determining drop sizes from irrigation spray nozzles. Agric Water Manag 45(2):159–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-3774(99)00079-7
Thurai M, Huang GJ, Bringi VN, Randeu WL, Schnhuber M (2007) Drop shapes, model comparisons, and calculations of polarimetric radar parameters in rain. J Atmos Oceanic Tech 24(6):1019–1032. https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH2051.1
Tokay A, Kruger A, Krajewski WF (2001) Comparison of drop size distribution measurements by impact and optical disdrometers. J Appl Meteorol 40:2083–2097
Vaezi AR, Ahmadi M, Cerda A (2017) Contribution of raindrop impact to the change of soil physical properties and water erosion under semi-arid rainfalls. Sci Total Environ 583:382–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.01.078
Wang Y, Li MN, Hui X, Meng YY, Yan HJ (2020) Alfalfa canopy water interception under low-pressure sprinklers. Agric Water Manag 230:105919. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2019.105919
Xu XZ, Zhang HW, Zhu MD (2004) Measurement method of raindrop particle size and its improvement. Soil Water Conserv China 02:22–24. https://doi.org/10.14123/j.cnki.swcc.2004.02.010.(InChinesewithEnglishabstract)
Yan HJ, Bai G, He JQ, Lin G (2011) Influence of droplet kinetic energy flux density from fixed spray-plate sprinklers on soil infiltration, runoff and sediment yield. Biosys Eng 110(2):213–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2011.08.010
Zhan XY, Guo MH, Zhao J, Shi HJ, Shui JF (2018) Microphysical features of raindrop and rainfall energy based on particle imaging transient measurement technology. Trans Chin Soc Agric Eng 34(2):107–113. https://doi.org/10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2018.02.014
Zhan XY, Zhao J, Feng Q, Shui JF, Guo MH (2020) Particle imaging auto-measurement system for microphysical characteristics of raindrops in natural rain. Atmos Res 242(4):104963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2020.104963
Zhang R, Liu YC, Zhu DL, Zhang XM, Gao F, Zheng CJ (2023a) Modelling the spray range of rotating nozzles based on modified ballistic trajectory equation parameters. Irrig Drain 72:343–357. https://doi.org/10.1002/ird.2784
Zhang R, Zheng CJ, Zhu DL, Wu PT, Liu YC, Zhang XM, Khudayberdi N, Liu CX (2023b) Variation in sprinkler irrigation droplet impact angle on the physical crusting properties of soils. Agric Water Manag 289:108514. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2023.108514
Zhang R, Liu YC, Zhu DL, Wu PT, Zheng CJ, Zhang XM (2023c) Construction and validation of the improved Ballistic model for sprinkler water trajectory considering jet fragmentation and droplet shape. Trans Chin Soc Agric Eng 39(5):43–52. https://doi.org/10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.202211173.(InChinesewithEnglishabstract)
Zhang R, Liu YC, Zhu DL, Wu PT, Zheng CJ, Zhang XM, Khudayberdi N, Liu CX (2023d) Simulating droplet distribution characteristics for sprinkler irrigation with a modified ballistic model. Comput Electron Agric 215:108437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2023.108437
Zhu XY, Tian S, Liu XF, Bao Y, Liu JP, Jiang JY (2015) Test bench for testing raindrops by laser raindrop spectrometer. CN201410746374.8 (In Chinese with English abstract)
Zhu ZR, Zhu DL, Ge MS (2022) Effects of irrigation characteristics and plant morphological features on interception of sprinkler water by maize plants. Irrig Sci. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-022-00823-w
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the National major research and development program of China (NK202319030303); National Key Research and Development program of China (2021YFE0103000); The National Key Research and Development program of China (2022YFD1900400-4); Key Research and Development Program of Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region (2022BBF02026).
Funding
This article is funded by the National Key Research and Development program of China, 2021YFE0103000. The National Key Research and Development program of China, 2022YFD1900400-4, Key Research and Development Program of Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, 2022BBF02026, Key Research and Development Program of Shaanxi Province, 2020ZDLNY01-01.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Rui Zhang: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Writing-Original Draft Yichuan Liu: Investigation, Discussion Delan Zhu: Conceptualization, Supervision Pute Wu: Validation, Writing-Review & Editing Wenbo Xia: Investigation Changjuan Zheng: Resources, Project administration Xiaomin Zhang: Resources, Project administration
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Zhang, R., Liu, Y., Zhu, D. et al. Comparative analysis of micro-physical characteristics of sprayed droplets using various measurement technologies. Irrig Sci (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-024-00920-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-024-00920-y