Vol. 16—1962 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society

3.36
Table 2.'J:h,e etfe..ct Oi .. , spee4~. J':~."MeleSize. anci..~.". of hOPper..fiu.ill8!~~' .
the ilmount of' granul«; JII'otedal (in pa),-. ae~ivered by Applicator 2*.
.. . . . '.~
., ". ' . _. ., ,
_.'[~;:J)egr~e of Kopper Fullness
.~
Particle size I; full ; full ~
2 mph
15/30 103.3 b 101.8 ab 108.6 c
24/48 10!).6 cd 101.1 ab 112.6 d
30/60 98.5 a 102.1 ab 108.8 c
4 mph
15/30 50.8 ab 50.0 ab 49.9 ab
24/48 51.6 abc 49.1e 56.6 d
30/60 " 52.1 abc 53.5 bed '$5.0 cd
.)
6 mph iJ I,
15/30 36.1 a 35.5 a 36.0 a
24/48 34.5 a 34.6 a 37.8 a
30/60 37.0 a 36.3 a 38.1 a -.
c
* numbers follGw.4bythe same letter within anyone
speed are not significantly different from each other.
This applicator also showed a significantly higher delivery rate from the
left side than from the right.
The output generally decreased as the level of material in the hopper
decreased. but not necessarily in a linear manner (Figure 1). A s1gni£icant
granule size x hopper level interaction showed that the granule sizes did not
react the same for all hopper levels. .
Different particle sizes did not act the same ~y at all speeds. As is
shown in Table 2 the 30/60 granule size yielded the lowest of all sizes at
2 mph (-\ full) but almost the highest at 4 mph. Th. effect was mainly linear.
A significant speed x hopper level interaction show.~c~hat ~he output of the
different hopper;levels did not act"ln the same manner for the different speeds.
The -\ hopper level output consistently fell between the output of the full and
~ hopp~r .levels.
:.Al;