Efficiency Analysis Of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Spraying For Potato Cultivation In The Hilly Region Of Uttarakhand

Authors

  • Tejas Ashok Bhosale, Ramesh Pal, Shailaja Punetha, K C Singh, Manju Negi, Gargi Goswami and B P Nautiyal Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.64252/pjeffk33

Abstract

This study investigated the effectiveness of unmanned aerial vehicle based spraying, focusing on application rate, theoretical field capacity, effective field capacity, and field efficiency. Treatments systematically varied drone operational speeds (1, 3, or 5 m/s) and spray heights (2, 3, or 4 m). Findings revealed a clear inverse relationship between flight parameters and application rate; with a constant nozzle discharge (2.5 l/min), the highest rate (167.026 l/ha) occurred at the lowest speed and height, while the lowest rate (15.955 l/ha) was at the highest speed and height. This confirms that increasing flight speed or height directly reduces the application rate, aligning with fluid dynamics principles. Conversely, theoretical field capacity, representing maximum potential coverage, increased significantly with higher speeds and heights, ranging from 0.9 ha/h to 8.80 ha/h. Effective field capacity, a more realistic measure accounting for non-productive time like refilling and battery changes, varied from 0.807 ha/h to 7.248 ha/h for drones. Field efficiency, reflecting operational time utilization, ranged from 81.34% to 93.98%. While theoretical capacity highlights potential, effective capacity underscores practical efficiency, heavily influenced by operational downtime and operator skill. These results emphasize that optimizing drone flight parameters and minimizing non-productive time are crucial for maximizing the efficiency and productivity of agricultural spray applications.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2025-05-23

How to Cite

Efficiency Analysis Of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Spraying For Potato Cultivation In The Hilly Region Of Uttarakhand. (2025). International Journal of Environmental Sciences, 11(6s), 1237-1244. https://doi.org/10.64252/pjeffk33