Atomization Index to Bridge the Physicochemical Properties of Polymer–Surfactant Adjuvants and Multivariate Spray Metrics: Guiding Pesticide Formulation Efficient Design

Peng Hu; Ruirui Zhang; Liping Chen; Longlong Li; Qing Tang; Andrew J. Hewitt

doi:10.1016/j.eng.2026.04.019

Engineering ›› :202604019 DOI: 10.1016/j.eng.2026.04.019

research-article

Atomization Index to Bridge the Physicochemical Properties of Polymer–Surfactant Adjuvants and Multivariate Spray Metrics: Guiding Pesticide Formulation Efficient Design

Author information +

History +

PDF (8178KB)

Abstract

Pesticide spraying is a primary approach for the chemical management of pests, diseases, and weeds. The efficient design of formulations and their accurate application constitute a systems engineering problem that combines formulation chemistry, application technology, and agronomic practice. The droplet size distribution (DSD), which is determined by the physicochemical properties of the formulation during atomization, has a direct influence on deposition efficiency, drift potential, and control performance. Conventional atomization indicators, such as volume median diameter (VMD), Sauter mean diameter (D₃₂), and relative span (RS), do not adequately provide a quantitative connection between the physicochemical properties of formulations and the droplet size spectrum needed for effective biological control. A comprehensive atomization quality index that incorporates formulation properties and the optimal droplet size is therefore urgently required. To fill this gap, five atomization parameters, relative diffusion ratio (RD), RS, fractal dimension (FD), drift droplet proportion (V₁₅₀, ≤ 150 lm diameter), and D_v0.5 (also referred to as the VMD), were chosen to construct the atomization bridging index (ABI). The ABI allows a comprehensive quantitative assessment of atomization quality and shows a strong correlation with the physicochemical microstructure of the formulation. The analysis indicates that micelle–polymer complexes generated through polymer–surfactant interactions markedly improve the ABI by jointly lowering dynamic surface tension (DST) and increasing viscosity. The evaluation findings show that the associative polyethylene oxide (PEO)/sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) system demonstrates outstanding performance over a broad pressure range. At 250 kPa, the PEO/SDS system at 1× the critical micelle concentration (CMC) reaches the highest ABI value, corresponding to the Class I category, and is therefore recommended as the optimal spraying system. Overall, ABI establishes a robust physicochemical-spray linkage framework and provides new guidance for identifying key formulation parameters in pesticide adjuvant design.

Keywords

Atomization bridging index (ABI) / Spray atomization / Multivariate spray metrics / Agricultural adjuvants / Polymer–surfactant interaction / Unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) spraying

Cite this article

Download citation ▾

Peng Hu, Ruirui Zhang, Liping Chen, Longlong Li, Qing Tang, Andrew J. Hewitt. Atomization Index to Bridge the Physicochemical Properties of Polymer–Surfactant Adjuvants and Multivariate Spray Metrics: Guiding Pesticide Formulation Efficient Design. Engineering 202604019 DOI:10.1016/j.eng.2026.04.019

登录浏览全文

4963

注册一个新账户忘记密码

References

Publishing order | Descend order by publishing year | Descend order by cited within

[1]	Hilz E, Vermeer AW . Spray drift review: the extent to which a formulation can contribute to spray drift reduction. Crop Prot 2013; 44:75-83.

[2]	Bhattarai M, Al—Terke H, Liu K, Wan Z, Kilpeläinen P, King AWT, et al. Wood biomolecules as agricultural adjuvants for effective suppression of droplet rebound from plant foliage. Adv Sci 2025; 12(17):2416686.

[3]	Idziak R, Sobczak A, Waligóra H, Szulc P, Majchrzak L . Effect of multifunctional adjuvants on physical and chemical features of spray liquid and efficacy in sugar beet. Appl Sci 2023; 13(15):8768.

[4]	Silva MDGC, Medeiros AO, Converti A, Almeida FCG, Sarubbo LA . Biosurfactants: promising biomolecules for agricultural applications. Sustainability 2024; 16(1):449.

[5]	Fan Y, Tan Y, Dou Y, Huang S, Tian X . Reducing the contact time of bouncing droplets on superhydrophobic surfaces: foundations, strategies and applications. Chem Eng J 2023; 476:146485.

[6]	Nie W, Tian Q, Bao Q, Niu W, Li R, Akanyange SN . Low micelle, high activity series Gemini dust suppressant: targeted dust suppression based on nucleophilic substitution. Constr Build Mater 2025; 458:139547.

[7]	Niu W, Nie W, Bao Q, Tian Q, Liu F, Li R, et al. Interactions between fluorocarbon surfactant and coal dust at macro, meso and molecular scales and their applications in coal dust control. Chem Eng J 2023; 475:146059.

[8]	Hu P, Zhang R, Yang J, Chen L . Development status and key technologies of plant protection UAVs in China: a review. Drones 2022; 6(11):354.

[9]	Kannan N, Martin D, Srinivasan R, Zhang W . Adjuvants for drone—based aerial chemical applications to mitigate off—target drift. Drones 2024; 8(11):667.

[10]	Xia Z, Zhou Q, Zhang Y, Zhang T, Xue W . N—succinyl—chitosan as ecofriendly pesticide carriers: nano encapsulation and synergistic antifungal effect on 4—hydroxyphenyl—2—propenyl—1—one derivatives based on chalcone structure. J Adv Res 2025; 71:55-65.

[11]	Wang C, He X, Zeng A, Herbst A, Wongsuk S, Qiao B, et al. Measuring method and experiment on spray drift of chemicals applied by UAV sprayer based on an artificial orchard test bench. Trans Chin Soc Agric Eng 2020; 36:56-66. Chinese.

[12]	Liu F, Nie W, Peng H, Xu C, Guo L, Niu W, et al. Characteristics of internal and external flow fields and the atomization mechanism of air—assisted atomizing nozzles determined by large eddy simulation and experiments. Energy 2025; 15:138383.

[13]	Nuyttens D, Baetens K, De Schampheleire M, Sonck B . Effect of nozzle type, size and pressure on spray droplet characteristics. Biosyst Eng 2007; 97(3):333-45.

[14]	Zhu H, Reichard DL, Fox RD, Brazee RD, Ozkan HE . Simulation of drift of discrete sizes of water droplets from field sprayers. Trans ASAE 1994; 37:1401—7.

[15]	Zeng W, Deng J, Gao Q, Jia R, Lan Y, Zhang J, et al. P20 plant protection UAV to control cnaphalocrocis medinalis by reduced pesticide application. Trans Chin Soc Agric Eng 2021; 37:53-9. Chinese.

[16]	Butts TR, Samples CA, Franca LX, Dodds DM, Reynolds DB, Adams JW, et al. Spray droplet size and carrier volume effect on dicamba and glufosinate efficacy. Pest Manag Sci 2018; 74(9):2020—9.

[17]	Ferguson JC, Chechetto RG, Hewitt AJ, Chauhan BS, Adkins SW, Kruger GR, et al. Assessing the deposition and canopy penetration of nozzles with different spray qualities in an oat (Avena sativa L.) canopy. Crop Prot 2016; 81:14-9.

[18]	Tang Y, Fu Y, Guo Q, Huang H, Tan Z, Luo S . Numerical simulation of the spatial and temporal distributions of the downwash airflow and spray field of a co—axial eight—rotor plant protection UAV in hover. Comput Electron Agric 2023; 206:107634.

[19]	Tang Q, Chen L, Zhang R, Deng W, Xu M, Xu G, et al. Effects of application height and crosswind on the crop spraying performance of unmanned helicopters. Comput Electron Agric 2021; 181:105961.

[20]	Zhang H, Wen S, Chen C, Liu Q, Xu T, Chen S, et al. Downwash airflow field distribution characteristics and their effect on the spray field distribution of the DJI T30 six—rotor plant protection UAV. Int J Agric Biol Eng 2023; 16(2):10-22.

[21]	Zhan Y, Chen P, Xu W, Chen S, Han Y, Lan Y, et al. Influence of the downwash airflow distribution characteristics of a plant protection UAV on spray deposit distribution. Biosyst Eng 2022; 216:32-45.

[22]	Wang Z, Herbst A, Bonds J, Zhang A, Zhang C, He X . Stereoscopic test method for low—altitude and low—volume spraying deposition and drift distribution of plant protection UAV. Trans Chin Soc Agric Eng Trans CSAE 2020; 36:54-62. Chinese.

[23]	Hewitt AJ . Adjuvant use for the management of pesticide drift, leaching and runoff. Pest Manag Sci 2024; 80(10):4819—27.

[24]	Carvalho FK, Antuniassi UR, Chechetto RG, Mota AAB, De Jesus MG, De Carvalho LR . Viscosity, surface tension and droplet size of sprays of different formulations of insecticides and fungicides. Crop Prot 2017; 101:19-23.

[25]	Nairn JJ, Forster WA . Importance of adjuvant formulation properties in predicting wetting on leaf surfaces. Pest Manag Sci 2024; 80(2):212—9.

[26]	Nairn JJ, Forster WA . Importance of leaf surface and formulation properties in predicting wetting outcomes. Pest Manag Sci 2024; 80(2):202-11.

[27]	Faers MA, Sato Y, Hilz E, Lamprecht S, Dong J, Qi F, et al. Suspension Concentrate crop protection formulation design and performance for low spray volume and UAS spray application. Pest Manag Sci 2024; 80(2):220-34.

[28]	Song R, Wu Y, Bao Z, Gao Y, Zhao K, Zhang S, et al. Machine learning to predict the interfacial behavior of pesticide droplets on hydrophobic surfaces for minimizing environmental risk. ACS Sustain Chem & Eng 2022; 10(42):14034—44.

[29]	Li Z, Li Z, Gao Y, Zhang C, Zhao K, Guo Y, et al. Assemblies disaggregation and diffusion dictated droplet impact and wetting behaviors on hydrophobic surface. J Mol Liq 2021; 339:116826.

[30]	Dorr GJ, Hewitt AJ, Adkins SW, Hanan J, Zhang H, Noller B . A comparison of initial spray characteristics produced by agricultural nozzles. Crop Prot 2013; 53:109—17.

[31]	Lachin K, Niane M, Person M, Mazet J, Delaplace G, Turchiuli C . Prediction of droplets characteristic diameters and polydispersity index induced by a bifluid spraying nozzle by the means of dimensional analysis. Chem Eng Sci 2023; 265:118187.

[32]	Nie W, Tong K, Bao Q, Niu W, Tian Q, Li R, et al. Regulation mechanism of the surfactant hydrophilic headgroup on the wettability of bituminous coal: experiments and molecular dynamics simulations. Constr Build Mater 2025; 458:139685.

[33]	Nie W, Xu Z, Niu W, Tian Q, Li R, Shi C, et al. Impact and mechanism of different counterion structures in anionic surfactants on enhancing anthracite coal wettability. Compos Part B Eng 2025:113121.

[34]	Zhang H, Lan Y, We S, Chen C, Xu T, Chen S . Modelling approach of spray retention on rice in plant protection using unmanned aerial vehicle. Trans Chin Soc Agric Eng 2022; 38:40-50. Chinese.

[35]	Bergeron V, Bonn D, Martin JY, Vovelle L . Controlling droplet deposition with polymer additives. Nature 2000; 405(6788):772—5.

[36]	Su H, Liu Y, Gao Y, Fu C, Li C, Qin R, et al. Amyloid—like protein aggregation toward pesticide reduction. Adv Sci 2022; 9(13):2105106.

[37]	Halthur T, Carlstedt J . Polymer—surfactant interactions and compatibility for ionic surfactants combined with hydrophilic polymers: stability and miscibility vs segregative or associative phase separation and deposition. Curr Opin Colloid Interface Sci 2025; 76:101894.

[38]	Ergungor Z, Smolinski JM, Manke CW, Gulari E . Effect of polymer—surfactant interactions on elongational viscosity and atomization of peo solutions. J Non—Newt Fluid Mech 2006; 138(1):1-6.

[39]	Kooij S, Sijs R, Denn MM, Villermaux E, Bonn D . What determines the drop size in sprays? Phys Rev X 2018; 8(3):031019.

[40]	Miller E, Cooper—White J . The effects of chain conformation in the microfluidic entry flow of polymer—surfactant systems. J Non—Newt Fluid Mech 2009; 160(1):22-30.

[41]	Wang R, Dorr G, Hewitt A, Cooper—White J . Impacts of polymer/surfactant interactions on spray drift. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp 2016; 500:88-97.

[42]	Hu P, Zhang R, Chen L, Li L, Tang Q, Yan W, et al. Effect of polymer adjuvant type and concentration on atomization characteristics of nozzle. Agriculture 2024; 14(3):404.

[43]	Zhang R, Hu P, Li L, Tang Q, Yang J, Yang J, et al. Fine—grained method for determining size and velocity distribution patterns of flat—fan nozzle—atomised droplets based on phase doppler interferometer. Comput Electron Agric 2024; 225:109343.

[44]	Lechler. Agricultural spray nozzles and accessories. Metzingen: Lechler; 2023.

[45]	Hu P, Zhang R, Sun J, Li L, Chen L, Tang Q, et al. A rapid method for qualitative evaluation of nozzle spraying potential drift based on phase doppler interferometer measurement. Measurement 2026; 259(Pt A):119593.

[46]	Chen C, Li S, Wu X, Wang Y, Kang F . Analysis of droplet size uniformity and selection of spray parameters based on the biological optimum particle size theory. Environ Res 2022; 204(Pt B):112076.

[47]	Dai Q, Hong T, Song S, Li Z, Chen J . Influence of pressure and pore diameter on droplet parameters of hollow cone nozzle in pipeline spray. Trans Chin Soc Agric Eng 2016; 32:97-103. Chinese.

[48]	Song S, Chen J, Hong T, Xue X, Xia H, Song Y . Variation of droplet diameter in wind field for long—range air—assisted sprayer. Trans Chin Soc Agric Eng 2017;2017(33):59-66. Chinese.

[49]	Fan S, Chen S, Wu Z, Wu S, Chen Y, Liu D, et al. Analysis of droplet size distribution and selection of spray parameters based on the fractal theory. J Clean Prod 2022; 371:133315.

[50]	Weixing Z, Tiejun Z, Tao W, Zunhong Y . Application of fractal geometry to atomization process. Chem Eng J 2000; 78(2—3):193-7.

[51]	Krishnan G, Cryer SA, Turner JE, Sasi RN . Spray atomisation in multiphase flows with reference to tank mixes of agricultural products. Biosyst Eng 2022; 223:232-48.

[52]	Zhang R, Li L, Fu W, Chen L, Yi T, Tang Q, et al. Spraying atomization performance by pulse width modulated variable and droplet deposition characteristics in wind tunnel. Trans Chin Soc Agric Eng Trans CSAErgungorE 2019; 35:42-51. Chinese.

[53]	Wu H, Zhang Z, Zhang F, Wu K, Roberts WL . Characterization of fully developed air—assisted spray unsteadiness using RP—3 jet fuel. At Sprays 2024; 34(2):29-52.

[54]	Sijs R, Bonn D . The effect of adjuvants on spray droplet size from hydraulic nozzles. Pest Manag Sci 2020; 76(10):3487-94.

[55]	Bersenev EA, Matthews L, Rein V, Fong RJ, Konovalov OV, Briscoe WH . Balance of hydrophobic and electrostatic interaction of polymers and surfactants: case of anionic surfactant and hydrophobically modified polymer. J Colloid Interface Sci 2025; 693:137572.

[56]	Zhang X, Xiong L . Effect of adjuvants on the spray droplet size of pesticide dilute emulsion. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp 2021; 619:126557.

[57]	Sijs R, Kooij S, Bonn D . How surfactants influence the drop size in sprays from flat fan and hollow cone nozzles. Phys Fluids 2021; 33(11):113608.

[58]	Altieri A, Cryer SA, Acharya L . Mechanisms, experiment, and theory of liquid sheet breakup and drop size from agricultural nozzles. At Sprays 2014; 24(8):695-721.

[59]	Yang W, Jia W, Ou M, Zhong W, Jiang L, Wang X . Effect of physical properties of an emulsion pesticide on the atomisation process and the spatial distribution of droplet size. Agriculture 2022; 12(7):949.

[60]	American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASABE). ANSI/ASABE S572.3: spray nozzle classification by droplet spectra. St. Joseph: American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASABE) ; 2020.

[61]	Herbst A . A method to determine spray drift potential from nozzles and its link to buffer zone restrictions. In: Proceedings of the Annual International Meeting; 2001 Jul 29—Aug 1; Sacramento, CA, USA. St. Joseph: American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASABE);2001. p. 011047.

[62]	Balsari P, Gil E, Marucco P, van de Zande JC, Nuyttens D, Herbst A, et al. Field—crop—sprayer potential drift measured using test bench: effects of boom height and nozzle type. Biosyst Eng 2017; 154:3-13.