Re: [compost_tea] Capability of sprayers WAS::::Re: Spraying methods - electro static sprayer

From: Robert Norsen <bnbrew_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 22:38:00 -0700 (PDT)

Oversimplified description, electrically augmented spray systems.
The sprayer output nozzles are isolated electrically and a high voltage very low amperage current is applied. The opposite charge is grounded. In this manner the plants would be oppositly charged. The mist droplets being oppositley charged seek out areas of the plant that are not recently discharged by the last droplet.
 
In theory all areas of the plant would be evenly covered. A positively charged droplet lands on a ground / negative ground, the net charge goes neutral. Is the droplet falling on the opposite charge different than a bird landing on a high voltage power line?
 
Does a bird get a quick thrill landing on a power line? Probably not because the bird would become like charged as it got close to the wire. The total amount of current required to change the bird from Pos to Neg charge would be extremely small. Likewise the amonunt of current flow to change a droplet from + to - would be extremely small and would occur in the moisture so the bug would be like the birds innards, not as much affected as the birds feet.
 
If you haven't already guessed I have no clue of the electical impact going on here, bird or microbe. Grin Bob It sure works well when this system is used to apply paint.

dkemnitz2000 <dkemnitz2000_at_yahoo.com> wrote:
---
Bob, I don't have that type of sprayer. Can you be more specific in
your treatment (spraying) method? Guess I don't know about the
electrostatic sprayer. How does it spray w/o lectricity? Gotta go
wash test tubes now. Wow data is great. Actually it's a lot of
inside work. I know enuf already! Dennis










In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com, Robert Norsen wrote:
> Yes you would need to compare LIVE bugs to know anything useful.
If the bugs ere dead the microscope alone might not know the
difference. I know when I don't know. This is one for Elaine.
Bob
>
> dkemnitz2000 wrote:--- In
compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com, Robert Norsen
> wrote:
> > I would suggest that you dew it Dennis cuz yew have the lab.
> Herez how. You start with two or more pans of sterile water with
> just enough molasses in it to keep em happy. you cover one pan and
> spray with the lectircity OFF. Then you cover that pan and open
the
> other, spray with the lectricity ON. Then you use the micorscope
>
>
> HOWWWW do I use it?????We need a test method. Like stain used,etc.
I
> think it'll take epifluorescence and a stain to differentiate
viable
> bugs. just my guess and memory of something. Gotta go run Vit b1
> and b2. be back shortly .. Dennis
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> and compare the results. To make sure you repeat the experiment
> several times and with identical brews at nearly the same time and
> all such rules to get an scienificlly exact comparrison. In the
> water the bugs should be alive and wigglin.
> > If there is a difference how much? Should tell whether the
> lecticity shocked em.
> > Any better test plan? don't see how you can measure the ctivity
> of the bugs on foliage, Bob
> >
> > dkemnitz2000 wrote:
> > ---Hello Ken and Bob: How are you going to determine viability
of
> > those critters under the scope? You might see a few in there
with
> > tails but many(tails and/or critters) probably won't move. Seems
> > like it will take some specialized preparation using other than
> > direct microscopy.
> > Dennis Kemnitz in KS
> >
> >
> >
> > In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com, "t3rcattle" wrote:
> > > Bob,
> > >
> > > Yes, there is better coverage of all surfaces. And the water
> > pressure
> > > is about 20 pounds.
> > >
> > > I am not sure about microbe survival. Since I have a
microscope
> > now,
> > > I will use it to test how well the microbes survive after
going
> > thru
> > > the sprayer. I will do a test next week and let you know what
I
> > find.
> > >
> > > Ken
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com, Robert Norsen
> > wrote:
> > > > Very interesting. Can you tell us more about the effects?
Less
> > > overspray? Better coverage top and bottom of leaves, stems and
> > > branches evenly covered? Microbe survival? It would seem that
> > the
> > > process would be better for the microbes. Larger nozzel at low
> > > pressure, ACT lofted into foliage by air. slight charge takes
> the
> > mist
> > > to a surface rather than letting it drift away. Or am I
> > overstating
> > > the advantages? Bob
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links





Yahoo! Groups Links









Received on Sat Sep 18 2004 - 09:11:16 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Feb 07 2012 - 14:15:29 EST