• Air-assisted electrostatic spraying increased canopy deposition by up to 302.7%. • An air-blower velocity of 10 m s -1 maximized performance in low-wind environments. • Air-assisted electrostatic spraying improved greenhouse coverage by up to 49.1%. • Variable-rate electrostatic spraying resulted in deep canopy penetration. • Intelligent systems achieved superior uniformity while reducing agrochemical waste. An air-assisted electrostatic spraying system was optimized in a wind tunnel across a range of air-blower speeds and electrostatic charging conditions, and the optimized configuration was subsequently evaluated in a full-scale greenhouse environment. Wind tunnel results showed that under still-air conditions, an air-blower speed of 10 m s -1 optimized charge-to-mass ratio (CMR) and spray performance, achieving a peak average canopy coverage of 15.4% and deposition of 1.52 µg cm -2 . Under moderate wind conditions of 2.24 m s -1 , the optimal operational parameters shifted; maximum canopy deposition was observed at an air-blower speed of 15 m s -1 , while maximum coverage occurred at 20 m s -1 . Subsequent greenhouse experiments compared conventional and variable-rate ‘intelligent’ spraying systems, both with and without electrostatic charging, to quantify canopy coverage, spray uniformity, and overspray potential. Electrostatic charging enhanced average coverage by 21.5% and 26.8% for conventional and intelligent systems, respectively, compared to the non-electrostatic counterparts. When combined with air-assistance, electrostatic charging increased coverage by 49.1% for the conventional system and 35.5% for the intelligent variable-rate system relative to the conventional non-electrostatic system. Additionally, the intelligent system significantly improved the spray uniformity index and minimized overspray potential in the tested scenarios. These findings suggest that integrating intelligent variable-rate control with air-assisted electrostatic spraying shows promise for improving canopy penetration and reducing excessive upper-canopy deposition in greenhouse environments. Further validation against biological pest control endpoints is needed to confirm the agronomic significance of these improvements.
Herkins et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: