Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

1 Part B1Spray Protection with Low Application Technology (SPLAT) 1. SCIENTIFIC / TECHNOLOGICAL OBJECTIVES, NOVELTY AND CONTENTS Problem 1Spraying is probably.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "1 Part B1Spray Protection with Low Application Technology (SPLAT) 1. SCIENTIFIC / TECHNOLOGICAL OBJECTIVES, NOVELTY AND CONTENTS Problem 1Spraying is probably."— Presentation transcript:

1 1 Part B1Spray Protection with Low Application Technology (SPLAT) 1. SCIENTIFIC / TECHNOLOGICAL OBJECTIVES, NOVELTY AND CONTENTS Problem 1Spraying is probably an unavoidable adjunct to practical production of bulk crops for mass markets but it is an evil one in the eyes of all apart from chemical corporations. However safe products and procedures may be, there is universal public prejudice that spraying entails risks from residues and wildlife damage from wind drift, also pollution from excess application and inadequate disposal 2Costs of chemicals have diminished farming margins almost to extinction without subsidy whilst removal from potable water is claimed to be an intolerable burden by the water supply industry. Inevitably the food supply sector from production to consumption wants nothing to do with anything other than claimed “naturality” for organic produce however far from reality that virtuality may be. Opportunity 1A decade ago an undistinguished midlife career academic abruptly bifurcated his tedious campus lifestyle by forming a company naively thinking to channel whimsical ideas into profitable products. Surprisingly soft success with UK-DTI SMART Innovation Awards left him with principle proven and patented prototype spray nozzles but no obvious rationale for bringing these advances to market. 2SPRAY = Stimulated Pulsation Ranging Applications deliverY was verified to halve wind-drift with standard drop-sizes and sustain standard wind-drift with halved drops. Wetting coverage scales on deposition drop number as dominant determinant so prima facie expectation should be 7/8ths less volumetric supply with acceptable drift, subject to demonstrated satisfactory interstitial penetration. 3With confidence stalled in sprayed produce and inevitably set to plateau in organic options (below), SPRAY offers a unique opportunity for rational intercession distinctively styled EC(O)LEAN 3rd way meaning EC-assisted access to lean & clean practices and thereby also savings in chemical costs which presently account for upwards 1/3rd produce price paid to arable farmers. Persuasive photograph

2 2 4Research is needed carrying SPRAY's present physical performance parameterisations on drift and deposition to proper evaluations in representative crop architectures, also scoping to biological efficacy assessments conducted under protocols sufficing for sector access - ideally going some way at least to conform with regulatory standards demanded for approved applications practices. Relevance 1Under licence from IPR-holding Coordinator SME A1, SPRAY systems will be made by crop-spray maker Proposer SME A3 for application by grape-wine grower Proposer SME A2, other grower SMEs and other crop producers and providers across the farming sector which is dominantly serviced by SMEs who will benefit from reduced chemical cost and increased application flexibility. Research 1The deliverable will be a verified spraying system accessing low volume control and coverage with SPRAY’s patented principle of air activation. It can be exploited as forerunner for all applications in crop protection, indeed is generically applicable for diminished drop sizes with less ambient scavenging thereby achieving extended delivery range for improved deposition or dispersion 2Immediate goals are: [] characterise efficacy in representative crop architectures [] demonstrate chemical savings substantially exceed existing marginal ones [] demonstrate drift reductions in field applications [] prove prototype systems and ruggedisation in prolonged field use [] confirm prospective boosted versatility in applications timing carries over to field operational realities. 3All aspects are pre-competitive prototyping prerequisites prior to proving production procedures and protocols on configuration of specifications as upgrade retrofits or as new machines exploiting the new capability, or evaluation / optimisation for combined exploitation with independent emergent prospects for reductions in chemical volume from use of GM crops and patch recognition methods. Conformity 1Farming improvement complies in all respects with Quality of Life KA5.1.1 (higher profitability with less subsidy, also assurance + competition benefit) whilst reduced wildlife damage (less drift) and general betterment (less water pollution) accords with Sustainable Environment KA1, KA2 and also is squarely in the spirit of BATNEEC = Best Available Technique Nor Entailing Excessive Cost.

3 3 Overview 1Crop protection delivery systems were for decades dictated by hydraulic nozzle standards, perhaps the only exception being charge-enhancement and that merely a diversionary cul de sac. However, the past decade has seen an avalanche of ancillary activities in nozzle novelties and flow gadgets, even as futuristic innovations entailing weed autovision for GPS-located patch spraying. 2Less futuristic and much more readily accepted by the arable farming community has been a variety of products incorporating air assistance to achieve improved control, notably as curtains / sleeves restraining spray sheets against scavenging by wind (both natural and translational) and as induction / injection nozzles emitting air-liquid mixtures (Pest Management Sci (2000) 56, 974-976) 3Curtain units entail installation of a cumbersome distribution bag along the boom thereby conflicting with mass minimisation for stability on rough terrain – moreover in displacing wind flow the bag also amplifies downstream turbulence and thereby increases dispersion drift of fines that in any case tend to be entrained upwards into circulation patterns of the ground-blocked curtain flows 4Mixing nozzles by comparison entail only incorporation of matrices of compressor-fed supply lines to the deployed nozzles or indeed merely venturi-suction, the extra power here for increased internal dissipation drawn from the liquid flow. Both approaches marginally reduce both demand and drift volumes but hybrid nozzles being simpler and cheaper have proved more attractive. 5Low-drift hydraulic nozzle variants exploit larger drops known to increase ground deposition. Mixing nozzles use larger drops which are argued by their proponents to be hollow, bursting on impact to shower fines into the canopy. Whatever the truth, activists, organicists and commercialists are now aligned in protesting about notional risks and real removal costs of pesticides in potable water. 6It is a justified worry that arable operations entailing routine noxious discharges to the environment are still essentially sector self-regulated and not independently adjudicated like all other industrial operations. Arguably this cosiness has discouraged seriously sensible solutions for the core issue that only a miniscule fraction of what is delivered into the canopy actually goes to crop protection.

4 4 Innovation 1Air-assist curtains operate on ambient entrainment scaling (low pressure, high flow) and air- mixing nozzles operate on internal dissipation scaling (high pressure, low flow) but SPRAY distinctively and uniquely operates on fan fragmentation scaling (mid pressure, mid flow). The scalings comply with a thermodynamic principle of power proportionality (pressure x flowrate) for coupling control. 2Consistent with these considerations, air curtains are supplied by fans (<10kPa) whilst air-mixers employ compressors (>100kPa or equivalent from the liquid in venturi mixers) but blowers (~30kPa) are appropriate for SPRAY. Fans are bulky and compressors are fussy compared with blowers. so SPRAY arguably has a prima facie edge on rugged simplicity for farming applications. 3SPRAY's novelty entails quasi-coplanar sheet air jets to excite autonomous galloping in the liquid fanjets ejected from standard hydraulic crop spraying nozzles. The ejected drops are smaller because the liquid sheet is stretched and its emissions are scavenged into salient edge vortex clusters thereby substantially boosting inertial resistance to wind drift. 4Clustering does not impair deposition quality because resonant galloping is sustained at kilohertz frequencies so spacing is small and individual drops are expelled by destruction of the air vortices during impact on and interstitial deformation within the canopy. Arguably this last effect may be magnified in high interstitial tortuosities associated with densely resistant crop architectures. 5Overdosing is the last resort for difficult morphologies presented by trees and bushes, also broad-leaved and ground-hugging varieties, and even to drenching on non-foods like flowers and cotton. Excess run-off to ground is exacerbated when larger drops are used to boost penetration. SPRAY clustered delivery of small drops conveyed in high speed air may well ameliorate these problems. Strategy 1The principle need is practitioner confidence that promising physical performance in the laboratory carries over to biological efficacy in representative crops and is at least as robust as established systems to vagaries of field conditions and weather variabilities whilst saving sufficient chemical to warrant capital investment even as retrofit when the sector is so seriously strapped for finance.

5 5 2Four crop categories will be targeted for this exercise - vegetables. fruits, cereals and flowers. Field evaluations will be conducted under supervisory guidance from agronomical authorities to ensure sector credibility of these exercises. Laboratory biological assays will be done in parallel with field evaluations as benchmarks for judgments on shortfalls attributable to field complications. Execution 1Establish benchmark penetration and deposition profiles in architectures defined by degree of difficulty index [] confirm improvements by comparator assessments against standard sprayers [] laboratory assays leading the way to assess advantages and difficulties of adaptations like drop-legs [] laboratory assays lagging as diagnostic aids on field failures [] marketing evaluations 2WP1 (M1-3) protocols and timings for field evaluations [] WP2 (M1-6) mechanical proving of prototype sprayer system [] WP3 (M6-18) field assessments with prototype and second system incorporating improvements [] WP4 (M9-M18) marketing investigation and optimisation [] WP5 (M18-24) dissemination and promotion [] WP6 (M1-24) - laboratory initiative and support actions 3Coordinator / IPR holder SME A1 will be pivotal pin between SME Proposers A2, A3 plus 2-4 others and RTD Provider A4 plus 1-2 others for specialist skills in particular produce and one for marketing inputs. Cost projected on an all-inclusive basis of Euro300k / Proposer + Euro 60k / Provider in total estimated Euro1800M for execution and completion over 24 months. 2. COMMUNITY ADDED VALUE AND CONTRIBUTION TO EU POLICIES Dimension 1Protective spraying is a longstanding European-wide practice norm. It will not cease just because it is distasteful. If it did then bulk crop production could not be viably maintained at costs accessible to consumers on average disposable incomes. The resulting strain on arable sequestering of the countryside would also be deemed an unacceptable cost by everyone including organicists.

6 6 2Reduced applications by exploitation of more sensible spraying strategies affords an answer which will be deemed an acceptable compromise by all apart from vested interests in the status quo ante (viz chemical corporations) and apart from lobbyists in the organic and wildlife brigades whose real hidden agendas reside in political agitation, not supposed safeguarding of health and ecology. 3Acceptance of this European innovation in its European birthplace is crucial for global penetration. It also demands demonstrations of advantages for representative realisations in all crop categories, not merely the subset associated with significant crops in one member state. Involvement of various SME produce providers from various member states is a key component of the plan. 4Business strategy here will not just be selling nozzles but composite spraying systems as machines optimally configured for this new technology and as retrofit upgrades from mechanical assemblies through to patch applicators using auto-recognition algorithms of which advanced variants are being presently pursued in EC-FP5 Project IST-1999-10388 on which ideas-IPR are also held by A1 5Participation of European SME food representatives from across the supply matrix defined by crop categories in production through processing to retailing will afford essential access to confidence creation in a sector that has been notoriously apathetic to novelty beyond short-term cost-cutting commercialism, retroactive even in accepting technological advances at the operational sharp end. Policies 1SPLAT is aligned with EC Agenda 2000 (CAP) "encourages sustainable agriculture... employing people in rural areas". Delivered it would directly aid European farmers whose long-term EC lifelines have been stretched to breaking point in recent years by commercial catastrophes emanating from the UK. With goodwill and luck this initiative might just help redress the balance slightly.

7 7 3. CONTRIBUTION TO COMMUNITY SOCIAL OBJECTIVES Quality 1Whilst they won’t yet recognise it never mind concede it, retail supermarket outlets will be grateful for emergence of EC(O)LEAN's third way filling the gulf between organic and conventional cropping in produce generation of benefit to the European consumer. Percy Public always plumps for the least agony option in the war between wallet (first) and will (second) - but here it would be win-win. Employment 1The chemical agrisector is undergoing a major shake-out, retreat even, in the face of heavily hyped hysteria by hostile media throughout Europe. The mechanical side is splintered into numerous SME suppliers shirt-tailing a few large leading concerns. SPLAT will save some rural real jobs but a great many more would be created in accessing SPRAY's generic market from this agriplatform. Environment 1Minimal dose-drift crop spraying is the best practical compromise considering the cost penalties (indeed impracticalities) of absolute avoidance to both producers and consumers and unattractive if not definitely damaging impact on the environment of existing practices accepted by regulators but increasingly opposed by interests ranging from politically driven activists to profit driven companies 4. ECONOMIC IMPACT AND EXPLOITATION POTENTIAL Position 1Genetically modified crops should have found easy entry into Europe, riding on ample assurance from longstanding acceptability Stateside. They didn’t because their arrival coincided with brewing up of public worries about hazards from poor practices in farm and food processing, triggered by BSE but subsequently contaminating all other aspects of industrially intensified modern farming.

8 8 2There is no rational risk connection between BSE, GMOs and pesticides (now even F&M) but fears were fuelled in opportunistic misinformation campaigns by apocalyptic activists exploiting sector ineptness in public relations and by media manipulating eco-cliques masquerading as protectors of the public from everything deemed "politically unnatural” in the food supply chain - save organic! 3Organic methods cannot feed to subsistence levels poorer populations nor meet expectations of cash-strapped consumers in affluent areas. Organic obsessions will be self-limiting on cost and contradiction (copper-based insecticides, unpasteurised manure), ironically also the detensified expansion in land-use which will be resisted by the same groupings that procured its ascendancy! 4Arable operations entailing routine noxious discharges to the environment are still sector- regulated, not independently adjudicated as for all other industrial sectors doing likewise. This cosiness has obstructed emergence of sensible solutions whereas BATNEEC elsewhere spawned a spectrum of suppressors and industry survived its imposition despite initial resistance against its imposition. Impact 1Substantial reductions in chemical use will be resisted by the agri-corporates, so sensible strategy might dictate pricing SPRAY more as if it was an adjuvant than an add-on. GM promotions featured prospects of 30% reductions but for premium products tied to premium seeds whereas SPRAY's prospect is generic, bigger and presumably additive thereby compounding savings on GM crops. 2Based on component costs, SPRAY if anything could be cheaper than all other air-enhancing aids - bag-based curtain sprayers being upwards of twice the price of compressor-mixed nozzle sprayers and blowers being cheaper than compressors (specific energy basis). Redesign of its prototype air nozzles (only 25% efficient) could access 3-fold reduction in SPRAY's present power demand. 3Newly launched spray machinery would have provided a perfect platform for premium pricing but major recent revenue contractions mean that entry will likely need to be won by working in margins set more by mechanical than chemical expectations (value ratio 20+) and initially more on retrofit elements of the mechanical side (value ratio 10 or so) at least in depressed European markets.

9 9 Exploitation 1The SME Coordinator will patent IPR-extensions beyond prior protection as agreed appropriate in individual agricultural applications and acting on behalf of SME partners. Expanded adoption will be promoted by granting of licences for uptake by others across the sector subject only to competitive commercial considerations, especially favouring SMEs including for applications in other sectors. 2Once SPRAY's economical and environmental effectiveness is confirmed in each application SME Coordinator will ensure all act in consort to achieve rapid introduction and promotion of production, distribution and support chains to secure advantage from earliest exploitation implementation initially by EU producers as application-specific affiliates but soonest practicable as EU exports 3Bolstered by success in the agri-arena, SME Coordinator will resume endeavour to procure interest from other sectors as beneficiaries of SPRAY's generic capacity to enhance fineness and throw of hydraulically generated droplet dispersions, notably in applications for combustion (boiler burners) and cooling / quenching, also firefighting including boosted sprinklers and even snow-makers. Dissemination 1RTD Providers will publicise results in learned and popular outlets to encourage wider attention for SPRAY's novel physical principle and practical realisation, thereby amplifying interest and boosting opportunities for adoption in other arenas. SME Partners will announce their achievements via the media and trade associations, exhibitions and seminars, complementing research coverage. 2Further funded projects will be needed to realise the full potential of this discovery spawned from a well-meant national SME scheme that failed to cater for market transfer, now (hopefully) to be commercially converted courtesy of an EU focal programme for SMEs as appropriate platform to procure European success in revenues and jobs from global exploitation of a good idea.

10 10 5. MANAGEMENT, PARTNERSHIP AND RESOURCES Research 1The need is for COOPERATIVE actions between SMEs as established equipment providers and SMEs as established equipment users, on both sides possessing sound general practice facilities but lacking in-house research support for successful delivery of this project. The need will be met by RTD providers and whole venture knitted together by the IPR-holding coordinator SME A1. Structure 1Flow Research Evaluation Diagnostics (FRED) Ltd was founded in 1988 as a UK SME for supply of flowological services from maritime military gizmos and safety scenarios as UK-DERA / HSE-OSD contractor to industrial and environmental fix-ups for a broadly based array of entities from blue-chip corporates to struggling SMEs, recently supplemented with project management activities. 2FRED provides two inputs - firstly access to patented IPR, initially for evaluation, later (hopefully) for exploitation under licence and secondly supply of services as Coordinator SME A1 for the proposed project in which role FRED's MD will draw on extensive experience at the provider-user interface including from fourfold successes in UK-DTI's SMART Scheme which spawned SPRAY. 3Xxxxx Xxxxxxxxxx xx Xxxxx xx Xxxxx (SME A2) has an established trading position in provision of grapes for port wine production and are eager to access for themselves SPRAY's superior performance in controlled delivery of fine droplets, not just for chemical savings but also reduced water they know is achievable but cannot presently access unless the prevailing weather allows. 4X X Xxxxxxx (XXX) Ltd, (SME A3) as equipment supplier has a longstanding position and reputation as sprayer manufacturer. XXX is keen to take up this chance to boost sales in a declining market, seeing SPLAT as an ideal platform also for European visibility of its products. XXX's MD has already committed to static testbed confirmation of SPRAY's performance. 5Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx's XXXXX (RTD A4) will bring Pr Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx' unique skills as a lifelong gifted academic to SPLAT. XXXXX is internationally renowned for its efficacy evaluations in the laboratory and in the field (especially Third World needs in backpack sprayers), here amplified by energetic dissemination supplementing earlier endorsements of SPRAY's meritorious principles.

11 11 6Additional SMEs will be recruited to access complementary crop categories ideally representing recognised regional European specialities but most crucially diverse and encompassing the full spectrum of delivery difficulties. An RTD provider will also be recruited for provision of the market analysis expertise, possibly another also should particular crop growers pose particular problems. Management 1FRED Ltd will maintain good practice in coordinating communications, visits and delivery schedules observing EC rules and regulations in monitoring all commercial aspects including the exploitation plan. FRED's MD has ongoing firsthand coordination experience in ERB IC15-CT98-0904 as well as motivational experience as IPR-holding participant in EC-FP5 Project IST-1999-10388. Amended and approved in EC negotiation Part B2Spray Protection with Low Application Technology (SPLAT) FeasibilityA! subcontractor, A2 unchanged, A3 coordinator 1Scale-up static tests are under way to extend confidence in patent basis claims already verified by an independent laboratory. They will continue on assembly practicalities, results to augment findings from this project but not part of its paid work whose objective is to confirm confidence by desk work addressing the following performance items. Cost = Euro2400 (30 hours). 2Use existing data to demonstrate favourable dropsizes and distributions from SPRAY's activation principle compared and contrasted with established products using air assistance as antidrift shrouds and in mixture ejectors 3Use established literature to retrieve correlations relating deposition coverage to spray parameters and to biological efficacy, especially in relation to significance of challenging crop architectures like broad-leaved and stiff-stalked vegetables, ground-hugging and dense-bush berries, orchard fruits including vineyard grapes 4Retrieve guidelines on empirically established practices in dosages applied to difficult crops including non-food ones like cotton and flowers for which substantial overdosing may be standard practice as compared with straight-stalked cereals most commonly used as sector benchmarks

12 12 5Evaluate technical risks especially regarding receptivity with present power draw for air activation which is toward top end used in established products and scope accessibility of reduction available in principle but as yet unexplored from improved configuration of air-jet nozzles Market analysis 1A strategic framework is needed to encourage sympathetic reception not just from more obvious immediate targets but more widely over the spectrum of vested interests in this arena, of which some significant players are suggested below, others surely emerging once the exercise is under way. Cost = Euro3200 as Euro2000 to suitable subcontractor plus Euro1200 (15 hours). 2Identify consolidating concerns in the water treatment sector about particular spraying practices like low-drift larger drop deliveries with increased ground deposition and assess impact of likely incoming regulatory controls, also procure visibility of more primitive practices / products in poorer countries to assess opportunities for wider disbursement to recipient beneficiaries 3Assess awareness of eco-lobbyists to reality recognition that zero spraying is impracticable for provision of bulk cropped products at prices affordable on average incomes, also identify and quantify scope for public awareness initiatives to combat media misinformation disseminated as hysterically hyped agitation by eco-activists often with hidden careerist campaign agendas 4Evaluate susceptibility of supermarket retailers to notion that low-dose low-drift pest protection is a viable third way of presenting their produce to consumers – not just a choice between cheap conventional and expensive organic but best of all “EC(O)LEAN” as a BATNEEC (Best Available Technique Not Entailing Excessive Cost) compromise on routine agricultural discharges. 5Explore options for conventional campaigns on best specification for receptivity on cost also by economies of scale but also recognise the enormous (factor 20+) disparity between the chemical and mechanical sides of the market with a view to assessing extent to which a new product might be seen as a chemical-economising adjunct rather than a mechanical-enhancing gizmo. 6Configure consolidation campaign as launch options sequenced on profitability and geography not excluding poorer peoples as prospective beneficiaries but realistically recognising investment income will be critical for campaigns in the US and Japan. This component will be specified and supervised by coordinator but will involve all parties in conjunction with specialist subcontractor.

13 13 Novelty 1Complementary surveys of recent developments in flowological and biological facets of spraying applications are needed to gauge the power of present patents held by A1 - European 0835163, United States 09/156,600 + 5,810,260, Japanese pending (all generic protecting principle without reference to particular practicality). Cost = Euro3k as Euro1k search fees plus Euro2k (25 hours) 2The European Patent Office “Quick Scan” service will be used for a worldwide patent / literature search, concentrating on potentially competitive technologies especially in the Americas, Asia and East Europe and supplemented by a survey of CORDIS for similar European Research projects. Special attention will be paid to niche nuances as extension opportunities for present protection. Search 1A systematic supply-chain selection procedure will be employed to attract additional members for the envisaged consortium of 4-6 SME Proposers and 2-3 RTD Providers. Procurement of these new participants will entail 6-9 meetings and be completed within 4 months immediately following approval of the Exploratory Award. Cost = Euro10k as Euro4k on travel plus Euro6k = 75 hours. 2Principle objective is to recruit SME representatives as end-user prospective beneficiaries from across the board in consumable crops (vegetable / salad, fruit / berry, grape / hop, cereal) and in nonconsumable categories (flowers, trees, hedges, grasses, streets), also companion equipment manufacturer-suppliers always retaining complementarity by application / regional separation. 3Stimulate involvement of one or more ecological entities with intelligent interests in this arena, as a dissemination platform for increased reality recognition that spraying is inevitable for affordable bulk crops. Ideally an SME or acceptably equivalent status for eligibility as partner but if not then externally associated for benefit of politically powerful publicity opposing "organic only" champions 4Attract attention a from forward-thinking food retail chain (at least one UK-major is looking for life beyond organic everything), not as eligible participant of course but affiliated (ideally formally so) for prospect of endorsement as declared intent to adopt EC(O)LEAN in affordable produce lines subject to convincing evidence of substantial savings from the evaluation validation programmes

14 14 5Procure an SME representative (or LCE - Large Corporate Enterprise as adoptive affiliate) from the drinking water supply sector, bait being a plausible prospect of reduced ground deposition of sprayed pesticides and concomitantly reduced contamination of surface and ground supplies. On same basis, solicit involvement / affiliation of environmental companies / agencies for niche benefit. 6An RTD provider paying attention to reducing power demand of SPRAY's activating air supply, ideally sufficient to access low-powered backpack implementations as avenue to adoption in poorer countries. Maybe add an RTD provider with chemical / material expertise augmenting mechanical and biological components already involved to assess adjuvants as an aid to power reduction. 7Delivery will demand scrutiny of all elements in several supply chains, utilising search support from all participants, from National Contact Points and Innovation Relay Centres, also CORDIS and via European Trade Associations, etc. Affiliated attention amplifiers will be sought to promote export targets in the Americas and the Asias, crucial for generation of investment and taxable revenues. Planning 1Proposal planning and preparation for satisfactory submission is the principal purpose of these activities. in furtherance of which 5-10 meetings are envisaged as visits between prospective partners including a final one involving all participants in the full proposal. Cost will total Euro11k as Euro 8k for time (100 hours) plus Euro3k on allowable travel and subsistence (5 days). 2Outcomes from all aspects of the workplan will be presented clearly concisely and legibly in the full proposal incorporating commercial considerations as market profiling and scoping surveys plus novelty verification searches and augmentation analyses, as submission to the EC within 6 months and adequately in advance of due date for evaluation, in particular entailing all elements as follows: 3Eligibility of project and partner components [] consistency with objectives agreed by partners [] satisfactory distributions of effort and remuneration [] programme of tasks, responsibilities, durations and costs [] flow + bar charts of scheduled deliverables and dates, also assessment critical points [] adequate management structure and agreed apportionment of IPR exploitation

15 15 Budget PEOPLETRIPSSUBCCOMPUTOHEADTOTAL FEASIBILITY01000 01200 00200 02400 MARKET01000 02000 00200 03200 NOVELTY01667 01000 0033303000 PARTNER0100004000 04800 0020010000 PROPOSAL 010000300006800 0020011000 TOTAL056670700015800 0113329600 Statement The tabulated schedule will be completed within 6 months. Xxxxxxxx as Coordinator SME A3 hereby requests the contribution of Euro22200 (75% of the tabulated total) from the EC in order to undertake the work as itemised. Static field demonstration in ambient headwind showing complete inhibition of drift from near half-boon equipped with SPRAY hybrid nozzles in contrast to uninhibited drift from far half-boom equipped with standard hydraulic nozzles. Same liquid flow rates on both sides but SPRAY nozzles emitting drop sizes maybe not much more than half (VMD measure) those from the conventional nozzles. Photo courtesy of Pr Graham Mathews. Return

Download ppt "1 Part B1Spray Protection with Low Application Technology (SPLAT) 1. SCIENTIFIC / TECHNOLOGICAL OBJECTIVES, NOVELTY AND CONTENTS Problem 1Spraying is probably."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google