Current Journal of Applied Science and Technology

Volume 43, Issue 6, Page 101-108, 2024; Article no.CJAST.116759

ISSN: 2457-1024
(Past name: British Journal of Applied Science & Technology, Past ISSN: 2231-0843,
NLM ID: 101664541)

Battery Powered Agricultural Sprayers:

A Review
Akhilesh Chandraker a++*, V. M. Victor a#, S. V. Jogdand a#
and D. Khalkho b#
a Department of Farm Machinery and Power Engineering, SVCAET&RS, IGKV, Raipur, Chhattisgarh,
India.
b Department of Soil and Water Engineering, SVCAET&RS, IGKV, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India.

Authors’ contributions

This work was carried out in collaboration among all authors. All authors read and approved the final
manuscript.

Article Information
DOI: https://doi.org/10.9734/cjast/2024/v43i64390

Open Peer Review History:

This journal follows the Advanced Open Peer Review policy. Identity of the Reviewers, Editor(s) and additional Reviewers,
peer review comments, different versions of the manuscript, comments of the editors, etc are available here:
https://www.sdiarticle5.com/review-history/116759

Received: 08/03/2024
Review Article Accepted: 12/05/2024
Published: 16/05/2024

ABSTRACT

Agricultural technology is undergoing rapid change, with continuous improvements in farm

machinery, buildings, and production facilities. The quest for cheaper and enhanced energy sources
is essential for the efficient and seamless operation of these facilities. Day to day depleting reserves
of fossil fuels has motivated researchers to work on alternate source of energy. A battery has been
proved a good alternative to fossil fuels for the operation of moving objects. A battery-powered
agricultural sprayer, driven by a DC pump running on electricity stored in a battery, offers numerous
advantages. Their operation is more cost-effective due to lower maintenance costs and has a lesser
environmental impact compared to pumps powered by internal combustion engines (ICE).
Additionally, they produce less vibration than petrol sprayers. With such sprayers, farmers can
conduct spraying operations themselves, thus enhancing efficiency without needing additional labor.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
++
Technical Assistant;
#
Professor;
*Corresponding author: E-mail: akhilesh_chandraker@rediffmail.com;

Cite as: Chandraker, A., Victor, V. M., Jogdand, S. V., & Khalkho, D. (2024). Battery Powered Agricultural Sprayers: A Review.
Current Journal of Applied Science and Technology, 43(6), 101–108. https://doi.org/10.9734/cjast/2024/v43i64390
 Chandraker et al.; Curr. J. Appl. Sci. Technol., vol. 43, no. 6, pp. 101-108, 2024; Article no.CJAST.116759

Several researchers carried out work on battery powered sprayers, in the different locations of the
world. Different types of sprayers have been modified and successfully and efficiently operated on
electricity generated in batteries. The review cover both solar power charged batteries and domestic
electricity charged batteries. Research findings also indicated the reduction in drudgery of human
labours involved in the spraying operation. These sprayers are an excellent means to cover large
areas quickly and effortlessly. In summary, this innovative solution addresses the challenges of
manual labor while promoting efficient, precise and sustainable agricultural practices.

Keywords: Battery sprayers; farm machinery; pump running; pesticides duster; manual pumping;
spray application.

1. INTRODUCTION evaluated to achieve objectives like weight

reduction and the ability to empty the feeder unit
In agriculture, spraying is a crucial task dispenser within a three-hour timeframe. The
performed by farmers to safeguard cultivated duster, characterized as portable and cost-
crops from insects, pests, fungi and diseases. effective, proved to be a valuable asset for small-
This necessitates the application of various scale agriculture, nurseries, horticulture, and
insecticides, pesticides, fungicides and nutrients. community farming endeavors.
Hand-operated knapsack sprayers are widely
used in India, demanding operators to Varikuti et al. [2] designed a multiple power-
continuously pump the heavy knapsack for liquid supplied fertilizer sprayer. The proposed system
discharge. This repetitive action often leads to underwent testing using both AC and solar
fatigue and strain on the operator's back, charging methods. The study's results revealed
shoulders and hand muscles. Fuel-operated that the calculated analytical and practical times
power sprayers, while effective, come with required to fully charge a 12V, 7Ah battery were
drawbacks such as high operational costs due to 16.67 hours and 17.2 hours, respectively. Once
fuel consumption and emission of polluting fully charged, this battery could spray 580 liters
gases, contributing to environmental concerns. of fertilizer, providing coverage for approximately
To address these challenges, the battery- 2 to 2.5 ha of land. Although the proposed
operated sprayer emerges as a groundbreaking system incurs a slightly higher initial cost
innovation in precision spraying technology. compared to a conventional sprayer, its ongoing
These sprayers offer consistent pressure for operational expenses are significantly lower. This
uniform liquid coverage, catering to diverse system can be utilized for the application of
needs in gardening, agriculture, pest control and fertilizers, insecticides, fungicides, and paint
sanitation. Their versatility, eco-friendly design, using the established methodology.
reduced noise levels and enhanced safety
position them as the preferred choice for Ritiesh et al. [3] developed and fabricated a
professionals and homeowners seeking efficient solar-powered agricultural pesticide sprayer,
and reliable spraying solutions. which was subjected to field testing following
established protocols. The solar-powered spray
2. BATTERY POWERED SPRAYERS pump system functioned effectively for 6 hours,
with the battery still indicating a charge of
Jivrag et al. [1] developed a solar-operated multi- 12.74V, indicating that it hadn't been fully
granulated pesticides duster. This creation discharged. The sprayer exhibited a fluid
accomplished by the utilization of a solar panel, discharge rate of 327 ml/min. The device took
an impeller-type centrifugal blower, gear approximately 3 hours to cover an acre of land.
reduction mechanism, dispensers, DC motors, The system's weight was 8 kg, and when filled
and batteries. Additionally, the duster was with fluid, the maximum weight reached 23 kg.
equipped to operate on electric power, a useful The sprayer successfully produced fine droplets
feature for situations lacking sunlight. The of atomized particles.
primary function of this device was to evenly
distribute solid granulated (powder) pesticides. Yadav et al. [4] investigated a solar-powered
The operator could regulate the pace and sprayer designed for agricultural applications.
discharge of various insecticides through push Their study revealed that it took 14.45 hours to
buttons and toggle switches. Technical fully charge a 12V, 12Ah battery. A fully charged
parameters of the device were devised and battery could then spray 580 liters of fertilizer,

102
 Chandraker et al.; Curr. J. Appl. Sci. Technol., vol. 43, no. 6, pp. 101-108, 2024; Article no.CJAST.116759

effectively covering approximately 5-6 acres of panels. The solar module produced and
land. delivered 20.88 Ah of current and required 9.6
hours for a complete charge. Releasing 100 Ah
Shailesh et al. [5] designed and developed a from the battery necessitated 2.6 hours. Prior to
multipurpose pesticide spraying machine. The complete battery discharge from a fully charged
employed solar panel had a capacity that state, approximately 888.46 liters of fertilizer was
generated 17V and 0.58A. The flow rate dispensed. In the field, the developed sprayer
achieved with this machine was 2.5 times greater exhibited a field capacity of 0.945 ha/h for cotton
compared to a manually operated sprayer. crops and 1.012 ha/h for red gram crops. The
Furthermore, the spraying area covered per hour average operating speed was determined to be
was 2.6 times higher than that of a manually 2.7 km/h for cotton crops and 3.0 km/h for red
operated sprayer and 1.5 times greater than a gram crops. The spraying activity draft was
backpack sprayer. recorded as 802.65 N for cotton crops and
804.38 N for red gram crops.
Anisa and Geeta [6] designed and assessed a
solar-powered pesticide sprayer. The solar panel Singh et al. [9] developed a solar powered
generated 17 V and 1A during daylight hours, knapsack sprayer. This device has been
from 9.30 AM to 4.30 PM. Additionally, a 12V, developed to alleviate the constant energy
8Ah battery could be fully charged in 7 hours with application required for throttle regulation in
a simultaneous charging rate of 1.3A. The conventional knapsack sprayers. Laboratory and
sprayer's module was capable of continuous field tests were conducted to assess the flow
spraying for 7 to 8 hours. The total cost of the rate, application rate of the sprayer, and the
model was Rs. 7000. charging time of the battery utilized in this
developed sprayer. The time needed to fully
Bharatbhai [7] designed an automatic agricultural charge a 12 V, 8 Ah battery capacity was
pesticide spraying vehicle with specific features. determined to be 9.6 hours analytically and 11.2
A 6-meter long boom was constructed using 20 hours practically. Results indicated a flow rate
mm square and 2 mm thick hollow pipes. The ranging from 2 to 3 L/min using various nozzles,
power source was a 6.5 HP self-propelled toolbar with an application rate of 850 l/ha to 1280 l/ha.
(measuring 1570 L × 600 W × 1290 H in mm), The sprayer demonstrated its capacity to cover
coupled with an HTP pump (ASPEE HTP pump) 850 l/ha to 1280 l/ha in 7.15 hours at a walking
of 3.5 hp, operating at 900-950 rpm. The pump speed of 0.70 m/s. Additionally, the 10W solar
had a discharge rate of 24 l/m and a maximum panel generates 0.833 Amp. The overall design
pressure of 800 PSI. Hollow cone spray nozzles of the developed solar-operated knapsack
were used with a discharge of 0.9 l/m and a cone sprayer places the weight of both the panel and
angle of 40°. The tank capacity was 250 liters. the sprayer on the operator's shoulders, yet it
During field testing, the prototype of the self- ultimately ensures effortless operation.
propelled boom sprayer was evaluated in cotton
and chilli crops for parameters such as actual Murthy et al. [10] developed a solar pesticide
field capacity, theoretical field capacity, fuel sprayer. The operation of solar-powered pumps
consumption, etc. The self-propelled sprayer was is more economical primarily due to lower
tested at an average speed of 3.27 km/h in operation and maintenance costs and has a
cotton crops and 3.12 km/h in chilli crops. The smaller environmental footprint compared to
average actual field capacity of the self-propelled pumps powered by internal combustion engines.
boom sprayer was found to be 1.28 ha/h in Solar pumps are particularly useful in areas
cotton crops and 1.69 ha/h in chilli crops. The where grid electricity is unavailable and
average field efficiency of the self-propelled alternative sources, such as wind, cannot provide
boom sprayer was 62.74% in cotton crops and sufficient energy. The cost of solar panels
81.02% in chilli crops. typically constitutes the majority, up to 80%, of
the system's overall cost. The size of the PV
Aravinda et al. [8] designed a solar-powered high system depends directly on the pump's size, the
clearance sprayer that was drawn by bullocks required water volume (m³/d) and the available
and subsequently tested on a farm. The system solar irradiance. Solar sprayers offer numerous
employed two 250 W capacity Solar PV panels to advantages. Apart from reducing spraying costs,
power a DC motor combined with a pump. The they also save on fuel or petrol expenses.
selection of the 1500 rpm DC motor was based Additionally, there are savings on transportation
on the available voltage output from the solar PV costs associated with purchasing petrol.

103
 Chandraker et al.; Curr. J. Appl. Sci. Technol., vol. 43, no. 6, pp. 101-108, 2024; Article no.CJAST.116759

Maintenance for solar sprayers is simple, and or herbicides. The developed sprayer reduces
they produce less vibration compared to petrol labor drudgery, time and is very much suitable
sprayers. Farmers can carry out spraying for marginal and small farmers. This sprayer is
operations themselves without needing additional user and eco-friendly. The area coverage of the
labor, thereby increasing spraying efficiency. developed boom sprayer was 0.61 ha/h, with a
field efficiency of 83.56%. The production cost of
Chandrashekar et al. [11] evaluated the the boom sprayer was Rs. 5,650.0 and the
performance of solar operated push type operational cost was 92.0 Rs./hr.
sprayer. The push-type solar-operated sprayer
comprises a 20W PV module and two Bankar and Dable [13] developed a battery-
diaphragm-type pumps, each with a capacity of operated agricultural sprayer that includes a 20
0.03hp. The system underwent performance W solar panel, a 12 V DC pump with a discharge
testing to assess nozzle discharge variation rate of 2.89 L/min, a 12 V 8 Amp lead-acid
concerning different operating pressures and battery, a 20-liter pesticide tank, and spray
heights. Under normal climatic conditions, the nozzles, among other components. It is powered
sprayer exhibited higher discharge rates between by solar energy, with the solar panel absorbing
12 noon and 1 pm due to increased solar solar energy first, which is then converted into
intensity, measured at 991 and 980 W/m2, electrical energy by the photovoltaic cell. This
respectively. Solar intensity dropped to a electricity charges the battery, which
minimum of 580 W/m2 by 5 pm in the evening. subsequently powers the DC motor. The DC
The panel generated a current of 1.25 A, motor operates the DC pump, drawing liquid from
requiring 4.31 hours to discharge the 7.2 Ah the intake of the liquid tank. The liquid is then
battery fully. A fully charged battery covers an sprayed from the DC motor outlet through a
area of 1.9 hectares. The calculated actual and nozzle attached to the spray pipe. The developed
theoretical field capacities for a field bean crop, solar-powered sprayer, with a 14 L capacity,
with forward speeds of 0.528m/s and 0.583m/s, features an efficient system to prevent deep
were 0.29 ha/h and 0.32 ha/h, respectively. discharging and overcharging of the battery,
Consequently, the overall field efficiency of the performing efficiently at 2.8 kg/cm2 (40 psi)
push-type solar sprayer is 90.62%. The operating pressure for pesticide application. The
operational cost of the solar-operated push-type spray spectrum was found to be uniform with the
low clearance sprayer was determined to be 38.5 selected nozzle and operating pressure,
Rs./h. The total cost for one unit of the push-type enhancing the quality of spray and ultimately
solar sprayer is approximately Rs. 12,685. improving chemical efficacy and pest control
efficiency. The battery can be fully charged in
Gururaj et al. [12] developed and evaluated three hours, enabling the sprayer to operate for
performance of cycle mounted battery operated six hours. Additionally, the mean heart rate and
boom sprayer. The cycle-mounted battery- BPDS were lowest for the solar sprayer, covering
operated boom sprayer technology is highly an area more than twice as large (3000 m2)
suitable as an alternative energy device for compared to manual and air-assisted sprayers,
power sprayers. These energy sources are indicating lower physiological demand and
clean, risk-free, and pose no harm to humans or discomfort on body parts.
the environment. The developed sprayer was
tested for chilly crops, with a crop spacing of Mohite et al. [14] developed a solar-powered
0.60×0.45 m (row × plant) and observed crop pesticide sprayer to reduce the labor-intensive
height ranging from 0.55 to 0.84 m, with an tasks associated with manual pesticide spraying
average value of 0.69 m. The nozzle discharge in agriculture. The system involves the creation
rate was measured at 51.1 liters per hour, with a of a remotely controlled, semi-automated vehicle
spray coverage width of 2.91 m and an powered by solar energy. This vehicle is
operational speed of 2.52 km/h. Comparatively, specifically designed to apply pesticides and
the initial investment and operational costs of the insecticides directly onto individual lesions with
cycle-mounted battery-operated boom sprayer high precision, thereby minimizing chemical
were lower than those of existing power sprayers waste and ensuring efficient application. Its
in the market. Uniform spray distribution was sustainable solar-powered design, coupled with a
observed throughout the field, and the sprayer 12 V 7 Ah battery, renders it cost-effective and
performed satisfactorily under field conditions. It environmentally friendly. The vehicle's operations
can also be used for vegetables, row crops, and are managed by an Arduino Uno and controlled
orchard crops to apply chemicals, bio-pesticides, remotely. Movement is facilitated by a 12 V DC

104
 Chandraker et al.; Curr. J. Appl. Sci. Technol., vol. 43, no. 6, pp. 101-108, 2024; Article no.CJAST.116759

gear motor, which is driven by the IBT_2 motor hectares. On a yearly basis, the break-even point
driver. In essence, this innovative solution (BEP) for the battery-operated walk-behind type
addresses the challenges of manual labor while sprayer was 2.21 years.
promoting efficient, precise and sustainable
agricultural practices. The prototype offers Sinha et al. [17] developed a battery-operated
substantial area coverage at low costs, sprayer based on general spraying principles.
eliminating the need for harmful chemicals and This system operates using direct current
reducing farm labor. It can also be remotely from a battery, utilizing a pressure pump
monitored, making it suitable for small and with a liquid flow capacity of 7.5 LPM at a
medium-sized farmers. Moreover, it has the pressure of 120 PSI (8 bar). The developed
potential to be scaled up for applications such as multipurpose battery-operated wheel sprayer
fertilizers, pesticides, fungicides, and lawn includes a 12V, 12AH rechargeable battery, a
watering, thereby contributing to the 12V, 5AH pressure pump, a charging unit, and a
advancement of Indian farming practices. The control switch.
project's integration of pesticide spraying not only
reduces farmers' workload and health risks but El-Sayed et al. [18] conducted a study on a
also involves the construction of robust vehicles knapsack sprayer powered by a DC motor via a
capable of traversing uneven terrain and carrying 12 V lead acid battery charged by a solar panel
necessary equipment. (photovoltaic) oriented towards sunlight. The
main components of the system include
Karale et al. [15] designed and developed a photovoltaic (PV) or solar cells, a charger
battery-electric vehicle sprayer to reduce controller, a rechargeable battery, a DC motor
dependency on fossil fuels, featuring a low-cost with speed control using a dimmer, and a pump
battery-electric vehicle with a boom sprayer connected to a 20-liter capacity tank for suction
attachment. The developed system ensures high and pressurization of the liquid to the sprayer
uniformity of spray distribution along with swath boom via a flexible hose. The complete recharge
coverage and offers easy adjustment of the time for the battery was determined to be 330
boom height over the target crop. The battery- minutes (5.5 hours). Depending on the motor
electric vehicle (BEV) sprayer underwent testing speed, battery discharge time ranged from 4 to 9
in both laboratory and experimental field settings hours, with the motor drawing 0.85 to 1.85 Amps
to optimize operating parameters for green gram at 2000 to 3400 rpm. This discharge time, at
crops. It was determined that a 1 kW, 48 V BLDC different speeds, is sufficient to cover an area of
electric motor was capable of propelling the 3 to 6.82 fed/day (assuming a day's work is 6
vehicle. Various forward speeds (2.0, 2.5, and hours) with an application rate of 67 to 104.7
3.0 km/h) and nozzle configurations (operating liters per fed. Spray intensity notably increased
pressures of 2.5, 3.0, and 3.5 kg/cm2, with orifice with nozzle discharge. Maximum spray
diameters of 0.6 mm, 0.8 mm, and 1.0 mm) were deposition was observed at the center of the
studied in the experimental field. Field tests spray, with droplet deposition decreasing as the
conducted using these optimized parameters spray width increased. This technology is highly
revealed that the effective field capacity of the suitable for energy-efficient agricultural
sprayer was 1.09 ha/h, with a field efficiency of machinery for powering sprayers, and its
79.81 percent. principles can be applied to various types of
agricultural sprayers.
Mishra et al., [16] developed a battery-operated
walk-behind type sprayer aimed at reducing Chavan et al. [19] developed a solar-powered
discomfort and the time required for spraying. agricultural pesticide sprayer. The prototype was
This type of sprayer is economical, more designed considering parameters such as
efficient, and sprays at a faster rate. It proves desired spraying efficiency, low weight,
helpful for small-scale farmers and unskilled affordability, user-friendliness, extended
laborers who can operate it without difficulties. operating time and rapid area coverage. The
The operating hours of the pump using 8 Amp or sprayer consists of a 16-liter PVC tank, a 20 W
12 Ah batteries were expected to be 2-3 hours or solar panel, a 12V-5A charge controller, a 12V-
5-6 hours, respectively. The total annual cost of 9Ah lead-acid battery, a 12V-2.2A brushless DC
the battery-operated walk-behind type sprayer motor, a diaphragm pump with 3 lit/min discharge
was Rs 19,165.80. The break-even point (BEP) rate, an 11 mm diameter, 2-meter length hose
calculated on an area basis for the battery- pipe and a potentiometer. For testing, it was
operated walk-behind type sprayer was 171 exposed to sunlight from 10 am to 1 pm to

105
 Chandraker et al.; Curr. J. Appl. Sci. Technol., vol. 43, no. 6, pp. 101-108, 2024; Article no.CJAST.116759

completely charge the battery from 10.55 V to for additional labor, thus increasing
13.56 V. The battery continuously drew current operational flexibility and efficiency.
through the charge controller from the solar 8. Quiet Operation: They tend to operate
panel to meet the motor's demand for operating more quietly compared to petrol-powered
the pump. The solar-powered spray pump sprayers, which can be advantageous in
system functioned for 6 hours and the battery noise-sensitive areas or during early
indicated a charge of 12.74 V, indicating it had morning or late-night operations.
not been fully discharged. The fluid discharge
rate of the system was 327 ml/min. It takes 3 4. LIMITATIONS OF BATTERY
hours for the system to cover 1 acre of land. The OPERATED SPRAYER
weight of the system is 8 kg, and the maximum
weight of the system, considering fluid is 23 kg. While battery-operated sprayers offer numerous
The system produced fine droplets of atomized advantages, they also have some limitations:
particles, reducing user fatigue and improving the
quality of pesticide spraying.
1. Limited Battery Life: The runtime of
3. ADVANTAGES OF BATTERY battery-operated sprayers is limited by the
capacity of the battery. Depending on the
OPERATED SPRAYER
size of the battery and the intensity of use,
Battery-operated sprayers offer several operators may need to recharge or replace
advantages: batteries frequently, leading to downtime
during recharging.
1. Cost Efficiency: They reduce operational 2. Charging Time: Recharging batteries can
costs by eliminating the need for fuel or take several hours, which can disrupt
petrol, thus providing long-term savings for workflow and may not be feasible for
farmers. continuous or time-sensitive spraying
2. Environmental Friendliness: Battery- operations.
powered sprayers have a lower 3. Initial Cost: Battery-operated sprayers
environmental impact compared to typically have a higher upfront cost
traditional petrol-powered sprayers, as compared to traditional petrol-powered
they produce fewer emissions and sprayers. While they may offer long-term
pollutants. savings in operating costs, the initial
3. Less Maintenance: These sprayers investment can be a barrier for some
typically have simpler maintenance farmers.
requirements compared to petrol-powered 4. Limited Power: Battery-powered sprayers
counterparts, reducing downtime and may have lower power output compared to
repair costs. petrol-powered counterparts, which could
4. Reduced Vibration: Battery-operated affect their performance, particularly when
sprayers generally produce less vibration spraying thick or viscous liquids or
during operation, resulting in a smoother covering large areas.
spraying process and potentially reducing 5. Maintenance of Batteries: While battery-
operator fatigue. powered sprayers generally have simpler
5. Ease of Use: They are often easier to use maintenance requirements compared to
and operate, requiring less physical effort petrol-powered ones, proper care and
from the operator. This can increase maintenance of batteries are essential to
efficiency and productivity, especially for ensure optimal performance and longevity.
longer spraying tasks. This includes periodic inspection, cleaning
6. Versatility: Battery-powered sprayers can and replacement of batteries when
be used in various settings and necessary.
environments, including indoor applications 6. Environmental Impact of Battery
where emissions from petrol-powered Production: The production and disposal
equipment may pose health or safety of batteries can have environmental
concerns. consequences, including resource
7. Independence: With battery-operated extraction, energy consumption, and waste
sprayers, farmers can conduct spraying disposal. While battery technology
operations independently, without the need continues to improve, addressing these

106
 Chandraker et al.; Curr. J. Appl. Sci. Technol., vol. 43, no. 6, pp. 101-108, 2024; Article no.CJAST.116759

environmental concerns remains a 6. Anisa and Geeta. Convert the fuel

challenge. operating system as free energy operating
system for agriculture implementation.
5. CONCLUSION International Journal of Agricultural
Engineering. 2017;10(1):124-129.
Battery-powered sprayers are well-suited for 7. Bharatbhai JD. Automatic agriculture
small and medium-sized farmers and they can be pesticide spraying vehicle. International
scaled up for use with fertilizers, pesticides, and Journal of Engineering Development and
fungicides. These sprayers also provide greater Research. 2017;5(4):1585-1590.
flexibility and mobility since they are not reliant 8. Aravinda YK, Veerangouda M, Prakash
on a tractor or other vehicle for power. Battery- KV, Anantachar M, Nadagouda S.
operated sprayers offer several advantages over Development and field evaluation of
traditional sprayers. Firstly, they provide greater bullock drawn solar powered high
mobility and convenience since they don't require clearance sprayer. International Journal of
a constant power source or manual pumping. Chemical Studies. 2019;7(6):2102-2105.
This allows users to cover larger areas with less 9. Singh K, Padhee D, Parma AK, Sinha BL.
effort and time. Additionally, battery-operated Development of a solar powered knapsack
sprayers are often more environmentally friendly sprayer. Journal of Pharmacognosy and
and cost-effective in the long run, as they Phytochemistry. 2018;7(1):1269-1272.
eliminate the need for fuel or electricity, and can 10. Murthy K, Kanwar R, Yadav I, Das V. Solar
be recharged for multiple uses. Moreover, they pesticide sprayer. International Journal of
typically offer more precise control over spray Latest Engineering Research and
application, resulting in reduced waste and more Applications. 2017;2(5):82-89.
efficient use of resources. 11. Chandrashekar Neeraja J, Raghavendra
V. Performance evaluation of solar
COMPETING INTERESTS operated push type sprayer. International
Journal of Current Microbiology and
Authors have declared that no competing Applied Sciences. 2018;7(12):1448-456.
interests exist. 12. Gururaj TR, Mallesh KU, Basavaraj,
Chaitanya. Development and performance
REFERENCES evaluation of cycle mounted battery
operated boom sprayer. International
1. Jivrag A, Vinayak C, Aditya B. Solar Journal of Agriculture Sciences, 2020;
operated multiple granulated pesticide 12(24):10503-10505.
duster. Pro. Wor. Cong. Engg. 2011;3(2): 13. Bankar V, Dable NA. Design and analysis
88-92. of modified agricultural sprayer machine.
2. Varikuti VR, Mathapati S, Amarapur B. International Journal for Research in
Multiple power supplied fertilizer sprayer. Applied Science & Engineering
International Journal of Science and Technology. 2022;10(8):222-230.
Research Publications. 2013;3(8):1-5. 14. Mohite N, Mahadik S, Jadhav H,
3. Ritiesh C, Amir H, Sanika M, Swapnil N, Mhamunkar S, Asokan S. International
Deepak D. Design and construction of Journal of Creative Research Thoughts.
solar powered agricultural pesticide 2024;12(3):964-969.
sprayer. International Journal of I. and 15. Karale DS, Shinde A, Awate NP, Thakare
Applied Computer Science. 2015;4(4):145- SH. Design, development and testing of
150. battery electric vehicle sprayer.
4. Yadav SP, Pooja MK, Anushree V, International Conference on Advances in
Bhujade. Solar powered sprayer for Mechanical Engineering-2022, IOP Conf.
agricultural use. Int. J. Res. Sci. Engg. Series: Materials Science and Engineering.
2015;1(3):182-186. 2022;1259(2022):012021 IOP Publishing.
5. Shailesh M, Shubham K, Pratik K, DOI:10.1088/1757-899X/1259/1/012021.
Roadney J, Nishat I, Rupesh DK. Design 16. Mishra PK, Kumar M, Shivam Singh VK,
and development of multipurpose Singh DK, Singh RJ, Kumar A, Gupta A.
pesticides spraying machine. International Development of battery operated walk
Journal of Advance Engineering. Glob. behind type sprayer. The Pharma
Tech. 2016;4(3):1945-1944. Innovation Journal. 2023;12(9);67-73.

107
 Chandraker et al.; Curr. J. Appl. Sci. Technol., vol. 43, no. 6, pp. 101-108, 2024; Article no.CJAST.116759

17. Sinha Y, Jay Chauhan J, Tandan J, Patel Arab Universities Journal of Agricultural
K, Kaushik SP. Development of Sciences. 2021;29(2):505-17.
multipurpose battery operated wheel 19. Chavan R, Hussain A, Mahadeokar S,
sprayer. International Journal of Current Nichat S, Devasagayam D. Design
Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 2019; and construction of solar powered
8(11):1766-1772. agricultural pesticide sprayer.
18. El-Sayed AH, Kabany AF, Elhelew W. A International Journal of Innovations &
study on pesticide sprayer powered by Advancement in Computer Science. 2015;
solar energy appropriate for small farms. 4(4):145-150.
_________________________________________________________________________________
© Copyright (2024): Author(s). The licensee is the journal publisher. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms
of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use,
distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Peer-review history:
The peer review history for this paper can be accessed here:
https://www.sdiarticle5.com/review-history/116759

108