Granulated agricultural adjuvant and method of making and using same

Abstract

A granulated defoamer has a dry ammonium sulfate which has been combined with a mixture of at least two of the following materials, anionic surfactant, an organic acid and a defoamer. The method of creating the granulated defoamer and method of using the same in agricultural spraying of vegetation.

Claims

1. A granulated adjuvant comprising granulated ammonium sulfate and a mixture of a defoamer, an anionic surfactant, and an organic acid, and said mixture being a coating on said ammonium sulfate granules; wherein said defoamer is emulsified silicone defoamer present in an amount of about 0.49 to 1.00% (m/m); wherein said anionic surfactant is 80 percent sodium dioctyl sulphosuccinate; wherein said surfactant is present in an amount of about 0.02 to 0.12% (m/m); wherein said organic acid is citric acid; wherein said citric acid is present in an amount of about 1.83% (m/m) based on total granule weight; wherein said ammonium sulfate granules are present in an amount of about 97.05 to 97.56% (m/m); and wherein said ammonium sulfate granules have a dimension of about 3.3 mm to 3.5 mm.

2. The granular adjuvant of claim 1 comprising, said granulated adjuvant being water soluble.

3. The granular adjuvant of claim 2 comprising, said granulated adjuvant being structured to be dissolved in water at ambient temperature.

4. The granular adjuvant of claim 1 comprising, said granulated adjuvant having a maximum dimension of about 5 mm.

5. The granular adjuvant of claim 1 comprising, said coating being self-adhered to said ammonium sulfate granules.

6. The granular adjuvant of claim 5 including, said coating being continuous.

7. A granulated adjuvant comprising, ammonium sulfate granules coated with a mixture of (a) emulsified silicone defoamer, (b) 80 percent sodium dioctyl sulphosuccinate solution, and (c) citric acid; wherein said ammonium sulfate granules are present in an amount of about 97.05 to 97.56% (m/m); wherein said 80 percent sodium dioctyl sulphosuccinate solution is present in an amount of about 0.02 to 0.12% (m/m); wherein said citric acid is present in an amount of about 1.83% (m/m) based on total granule weight; wherein said defoamer is present in an amount of about 0.49 to 1.0% (m/m); and wherein said ammonium sulfate granules have a dimension of about 3.3 mm to 3.5 mm.

Description

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

(1) FIG. 1 is a schematic illustration of a method of making the granulated adjuvant of the present invention.

(2) FIG. 2 is a schematic illustration of the combining of the granulated adjuvant and a pesticide or pesticides in a water solution followed by subsequent spray distribution of the same.

(3) FIG. 3 is a schematic illustration of a rotating drum which is structured to receive ammonium sulfate, a defoamer and other materials employed in creating the solid granular adjuvant.

(4) FIG. 4 is a cross-section taken through 4-4 of FIG. 3 of the drum of FIG. 3 showing a portion of the internal drum structure.

(5) FIG. 5 is a longitudinal cross-section of the rotating drum of FIG. 3 taken through 5-5.

DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

(6) As employed herein, the term pesticide shall have its ordinary meaning and shall expressly include, but not to limited to, chemical formulations which function as herbicides, fungicides, algicides, moldicides, and insecticides.

(7) As employed herein, the term defoamer means a material which will both resist formation of foam and reduce the amount of existing foam present. The term is also employed to refer to foam inhibitors, foam breakers, as well as defoamer/anti-foam agents.

(8) The present invention involves providing a water soluble solid of granulated material which is an adjuvant containing ammonium sulfate and a defoamer. Among the preferred materials employed in water soluble solid granulated adjuvants are ammonium sulfate and at least one material selected from the group consisting of a defoamer, an anionic surfactant and an organic acid.

(9) Referring to FIG. 1, there is shown a mixer 2 which is operatively associated with a blender 4, each of which may be a type well known to those skilled in the art for the present purposes. In a preferred sequence, the blender 4 receives and blends an anionic surfactant 6, and a defoamer 10. The output of blender 4 is delivered to mixer 2. To this is added ammonium sulfate 14 and an organic acid. The output from blender 4 is coated and self-bonded onto the ammonium sulfate in mixer 2 to provide the granulated solid dry adjuvant. The blending is generally accomplished at ambient temperature and pressure. The output of mixer 2 is delivered to a granulated adjuvant storage receptacle 16.

(10) Referring to FIG. 2, when it is desired to use the granulated solid adjuvant 24, a tank sprayer 20 which contains a suitable solvent, preferably water, receives a predetermined amount of one or more pesticides 22 and granulated adjuvant 24. At a water temperature above freezing the pesticide 22 and the granulated adjuvant 24 both are dissolved in the water contained in tank sprayer 20 promptly. The amount of foam in tank sprayer 20 having been controlled by the granulated adjuvant, results in the sprayer spraying the pesticide(s) 20 onto the vegetation 26 desired to be protected in an improved manner.

(11) FIGS. 3 through 5 show a way of creating the granulated solid adjuvant employing a rotating mixer will be considered. While a number of types of blenders and mixers may be employed to accomplish the objective of creating the granulated solid adjuvant, FIGS. 3 through 5 illustrate a preferred approach. The drum 40 rotates about axis D-D. It has an exterior shell 40 and an appropriate motor and means operatively associated with the drum (not shown) so as to achieve axial rotation at the desired speed.

(12) With reference to FIG. 4, there is shown a hollow annulus 42 which contains an exit nozzle 44 to move air circumferentially within the annulus 42 in order to resist dust entering the mixing chamber 46. A series of baffles such as 48, 50, 52, 56, for example, are positioned within and secured to the interior of the rotating drum. The baffles 48, 50, 52 56 will be so contoured and spaced relative each other and the drum interior surface in a manner well known to those skilled in the art. This serves to create maximum impact between the ammonium sulfate and the defoamer and other materials contained in the adjuvant to enhance the efficiency of the ammonium sulfate being coated by the additional materials.

(13) FIG. 5 shows the generally tapered drum 40 showing examples of baffle 60 and 62 with the inlet 64 through which the materials to be mixed enters.

(14) This process results in the ammonium sulfate granules being coated with the defoamer and other materials. The coating will preferably be substantially continuous and self-adhered to the ammonium sulfate granules.

(15) The Table shows extensive data comparing the efficiency of various formulations in terms of the ammonium sulfate, a surfactant, an organic acid and a defoamer in various concentrations with defoaming action being quantified in the last column.

(16) The Table confirms the efficiency of the various formulations in terms of resisting foaming or destroying foam.

(17) Unless in a specific location it is expressly stated to the contrary, all references to weight percent or % (m/m) refer to weight percent based upon the total solid product. As each formulation was manufactured to 100 grams, mass in grams corresponds to % (m/m). The foam knockdown values are in percent which is the difference between the total foam volume based on the original volume of the foam.

(18) It is preferred that the ammonium sulfate be present in the amount of about 50 to 99.39% (m/m) and preferably, about 97.17 to 98.05% (m/m) and most preferably, about 97.05 to 97.56% (m/m). The ammonium sulfate may have a maximum granular dimension of about 2 to 15 mm and preferably about 2.5 to 5 mm and most preferably about 3.3 mm to 3.5 mm.

(19) The formulation will contain a surfactant such as 80 percent solution dioctyl sulphosuccinate in the amount of about 0.10 to 47.68% (m/m) and preferably about 0.12 to 38.14% (m/m).

(20) The organic acid such as citric acid will be present in the amount of 0.90 to 2.22% (m/m), preferably, 1.32 to 2.22% (m/m) and most preferably about 1.75 to 1.85% (m/m).

(21) The defoamer will preferably be present in an amount from 0.1 to 1.00 weight percent and preferably, about 0.30 to 0.60% (m/m). Among the preferred defoamers are a material selected from the group consisting of emulsified silicone defoamer, polydimethylsiloxane, silicon dioxide and polyether-modified polydimethylsiloxane.

(22) In another embodiment of the invention, the citric acid is eliminated and a successful percent foam inhibition was achieved by substituting at least one material selected from the group consisting of nitrilotriacetic acid (CAS: 139-13-9) ascorbic acid and acetic acid (CAS: 64-19-7). Each of these would be employed in the range of about 0.90 to 2.22 weight percent and preferably about 1.32 to 2.22% (m/m).

(23) The surfactant is selected from the group consisting of doctyl sulphosucciate, sodium lauryl sulfate, sodium laureth-4 and sodium stearate. The surfactant may be present in the amount of about 0.12 to 47.68% (m/m) and preferably about 0.12 to 0.32% (m/m). In a further embodiment, the formulation has been used without the surfactant.

(24) In mixing the composite granules with the water, one would normally rely on the amount of pesticide which would be separately introduced into and dissolved in the water. The adjuvant in terms of quantity introduced into the water may follow generally the amount employed in the prior art practice of being introduced separately into the pump sprayer.

(25) The sprayer may be any conventional agricultural sprayer and may be used in its ordinary manner in distributing the solution containing the adjuvant and the fungicide dissolved in the water.

(26) The present invention has provided a novel solid granular agricultural adjuvant which is combined in a solid containing both ammonium sulfate and a defoamer in addition to other preferred ingredients. It also provides a method for making the same and method for using the same. The resulting formulation produces a free-flowing solid without of any undesired agglomeration with no deleterious effects on long term stability. The material is totally water soluble and exhibits excellent foam prevention and foam destruction properties. The unique and simple solid formulation contains ammonium sulfate, a surfactant, a defoamer and an organic acid based scale inhibitor/water softener.

EXAMPLE

(27) In order to evaluate the method of making the solid defoamer of the present invention, the method of using the same and the effectiveness the results from which are reported in the Table were conducted.

(28) Various defoamers were formulated into the solid formulation. The solids were then dissolved in water and transferred to a graduated cylinder before the addition of a known amount of powerful foaming agents (Barlox 1260, 60% active cocoamine oxide surfactant) which has high foaming properties. The foaming agent was added and the solution was mixed using a mechanical Dispermat according to the previously described conditions. The volume of foam above the liquid interface was measured 1 minute after the mixer was turned off

(29) The volume of foam was quantified by simple visual analysis in the graduated cylinder and compared to the volume of foam generated with a negative control. The graduated cylinder had calibrated measurement lines. The results were reported as % Foam Inhibited (compared to the negative control) where 100% was no foam generation and 0% was identical to the volume of foam generated in the negative control.

(30) By way of initial example, the solution of the negative control generated 107 mL of foam under the above foam generating stress conditions. The solid adjuvant formulation with no defoamer, when dissolved in water, and mixed with the foaming agent, produced 101 mL of foam, resulting in a 6% inhibition in the volume of foam generated.

(31) Experimental Method

(32) As described hereinabove and seen in the Table, various defoamers/anti-foam agents were formulated into the solid formulation. The solid products were then dissolved in water and transferred to a graduated cylinder before the addition of a known amount of powerful foaming agents (Barlox 1260, 60% active cocoamine oxide surfactant).

(33) The amount of the solid formulations chosen to be dissolved in water corresponds to common end-use rates of ammonium sulfate in agricultural applications. The amount of the foaming agent and surfactant utilized was chosen based on surfactant loadings commonly seen in water based pesticide formulations. The solution containing the experimental solid formulations and the foam generation agent in water were then mixed under identical and known foam generating conditions (30 seconds at 5000 RPM using a Dissolver Dispermat? CN Lab Dispersion Mixer). The volume of foam could be quantified by simple visual analysis in the graduated cylinder and compared to the volume of foam generated with a negative control. The results were reported as % Foam Inhibited (compared to the negative control) where 100% was no foam generation and 0% was identical to the volume of form generated in the negative control.

(34) In order to assemble the extensive Table which contains data from the testing performed with regard to the present invention, the following assembly may be employed. Each of the pages in pages 11 through 16 have at their margin at least two capital letters contained within parenthesis. If a capital letter on one page is matched to a letter on an adjacent page, the six page Table will be established. For example, the Table portion on page 11 to the right has (A) and page 12, to the left has (A). Those two letters should be positioned adjacent to each other. Similarly, (B) on page 12 should be positioned adjacent to (B) on page 13. This establishes the top three pages in the proper order. Page 14 will have at its upper edge a (C) which matches the lower (C) on page 11. Similarly, the (D) of pages 12 and 15 will match and the (E) of pages 13 and 16 will match. Aligning the pages in this fashion provides the complete Table.

(35) TABLE-US-00001 TABLE Experimental Solid Formulation Specifics, Qualitative Particle Screening of the Formulated Product, and Foam Inhibition Data 80% Sodium Emulsified Polyether- Dioctyl Silicone modified Ammonium sulphosuccinate Citric Acid Defoamer Polydimethyl Silicon Polydimethyl- Sulfate (g) Solution (g) (g) (g) siloxane (g) Dioxide (g) siloxane (g) Control 98.05 0.12 1.83 (A) Formulation with No Defoamer Formulation 97.56 0.12 1.83 0.49 1 Formulation 97.56 0.12 1.83 0.49 2 Formulation 97.56 0.12 1.83 0.49 3 Formulation 97.56 0.12 1.83 0.49 4 Formulation 97.95 0.12 1.83 0.1 5 Formulation 97.05 0.12 1.83 1 6 Formulation 50 47.68 1.83 0.49 7 Formulation 98.49 0.12 0.9 0.49 8 Formulation 97.17 0.12 2.22 0.49 9 Formulation 98.07 0.12 1.32 0.49 10 Formulation 97.66 0.02 1.83 0.49 11 Formulation 97.36 0.32 1.83 0.49 12 Formulation 97.95 0.12 1.83 0.1 13 Formulation 97.05 0.12 1.83 1 14 Formulation 97.95 0.12 1.83 0.1 15 Formulation 97.05 0.12 1.83 1 16 Formulation 97.95 0.12 1.83 0.1 17 Formulation 97.05 0.12 1.83 1 18 Formulation 97.68 1.83 0.49 19 Formulation 99.39 0.12 0.49 20 Formulation 97.56 0.12 0.49 21 Formulation 98.49 0.12 0.49 22 Formulation 97.17 0.12 0.49 23 Formulation 98.05 0.12 24 Formulation 97.56 0.12 0.49 25 Formulation 98.49 0.12 0.49 26 Formulation 97.17 0.12 0.49 27 Formulation 98.05 0.12 28 (C) 80% Sodium Sodium Sodium Laureth- Sodium Nitrilotriacetic Acetic Acid Dihexyl lauryl 4 phosphate Stearate acid (CAS: (CAS: 64-1 sulphosuccinate sulfate (CAS: (CAS: 42612- (CAS: 822- 139-13-9) Ascorbic Acid 9-7) Solution (g) 151-21-3) 52-2) 16-2) (A) 1.83 (B) 0.9 2.22 1.83 1.83 0.9 2.22 1.83 (D) Pass through Amount of Solid Water Used 5 mm Product to be for foam Foaming Agent % Foam screen Dissolved (g) test(mL) (g) Inhibition (B) yes 0.5 100 0.15 4% yes 0.5 100 0.15 100% yes 0.5 100 0.15 93% yes 0.5 100 0.15 49% yes 0.5 100 0.15 70% yes 0.5 100 0.15 91% yes 0.5 100 0.15 100% yes 0.5 100 0.15 86% yes 0.5 100 0.15 88% yes 0.5 100 0.15 88% yes 0.5 100 0.15 90% yes 0.5 100 0.15 100% yes 0.5 100 0.15 99% yes 0.5 100 0.15 89% yes 0.5 100 0.15 94% yes 0.5 100 0.15 82% yes 0.5 100 0.15 88% yes 0.5 100 0.15 83% yes 0.5 100 0.15 90% yes 0.5 100 0.15 88% yes 0.5 100 0.15 82% yes 0.5 100 0.15 91% yes 0.5 100 0.15 78% yes 0.5 100 0.15 92% yes 0.5 100 0.15 13% yes 0.5 100 0.15 88% yes 0.5 100 0.15 82% yes 0.5 100 0.15 80% yes 0.5 100 0.15 10% (E) (C) Formulation 97.58 1.83 0.49 29 Formulation 97.42 1.83 0.49 30 Formulation 59.54 1.83 0.49 31 Formulation 98.07 1.83 32 Formulation 97.56 0.12 0.49 33 Formulation 98.49 0.12 0.49 34 Formulation 97.17 0.12 0.49 35 Formulation 98.05 0.12 36 Formulation 97.56 1.83 0.49 37 Formulation 97.36 1.83 0.49 38 Formulation 97.66 1.83 0.49 39 Formulation 98.05 1.83 40 Formulation 97.56 1.83 0.49 41 Formulation 97.36 1.83 0.49 42 Formulation 97.66 1.83 0.49 43 Formulation 98.05 1.83 44 Formulation 97.56 1.83 0.49 45 Formulation 97.36 1.83 0.49 46 Formulation 97.66 1.83 0.49 47 Formulation 98.05 1.83 48 Negative Control Baseline 97.56 1.83 0.49 Control 1 Baseline 97.56 0.12 0.49 Control 2 Baseline 97.56 0.12 1.83 0.49 Control 3 Positive 0.49 Control 1 Positive 0.49 Control 2 Positive 0.49 Control 3 Positive 0.49 Control 4 (F) (D) (A) 0.1 (B) 0.26 38.14 0.1 1.83 0.9 2.22 1.83 0.12 0.32 0.02 0.12 0.12 0.32 0.02 0.12 0.12 0.32 0.02 0.12 (E) (B) yes 0.5 100 0.15 75% yes 0.5 100 0.15 77% yes 0.5 100 0.15 72% yes 0.5 100 0.15 3% yes 0.5 100 0.15 81% yes 0.5 100 0.15 71% yes 0.5 100 0.15 88% yes 0.5 100 0.15 9% yes 0.5 100 0.15 65% yes 0.5 100 0.15 69% yes 0.5 100 0.15 54% yes 0.5 100 0.15 11% yes 0.5 100 0.15 65% yes 0.5 100 0.15 69% yes 0.5 100 0.15 23% yes 0.5 100 0.15 0% yes 0.5 100 0.15 56% yes 0.5 100 0.15 68% yes 0.5 100 0.15 26% yes 0.5 100 0.15 3% n/a 100 0.15 0% no 0.5 100 0.15 35% no 0.5 100 0.15 26% no 0.5 100 0.15 96% n/a 100 0.15 100% n/a 100 0.15 93% n/a 100 0.15 50% n/a 100 0.15 66%

(36) The results of extensive testing are shown on the Table. In addition to the control formulation, the negative control and groups of three and four positive controls, a total of 48 formulations were tested and evaluated in terms of the percent of foam inhibition. In general, the inhibition was deemed to a successful defoaming experience if the percentage shown in the last column of the Table was preferably at least 70 percent. It is preferable that the percentage be at least 80 percent.

(37) With regard to citric acid, in those formulations where it was employed, it was employed in the amount of 1.83% (m/m) with the exception of several which departed from this range.

(38) The formulations in general varied as to the particular defoamer employed. With the emulsified silicone defoamer when employed (with the exception of formulation 6) being present in the amount of 0.49% (m/m). The other defoamers which appear in the following three columns were each employed with several formulations.

(39) Considering the last five columns on the right side of the Table, except for some of the baseline controls, the granular materials pass through a 5 mm screen. The amount of solid product to be dissolved was 0.50% (m/m). The amount of water employed in the test was 100 milliliters with 0.15% (m/m) of the specific foaming agent being employed. The final column lists the foam inhibition results of the various combinations.

(40) Without analyzing each constituent component of the tests, several observations will be made. More specifically, formulations 7 through 12 produced foam inhibition ranging from 86 to 100 percent. Formulation 20, which eliminated the citric acid from the formulation, produced 82 percent foam inhibition. Baseline control formulation 1 eliminated the surfactant and had a foam suppression of 35 percent. Baseline control 2 eliminated the citric acid and had a foam inhibition of 26 percent. Baseline controls 1-3 were not successful in that the first two produced large agglomerates and the third exhibited much lower volume metric density per gram of material making it unfavorable for commercial packaging. The defoamers shown in columns 5 through 7 of the Table produced a variety of results depending upon the amount of a particular defoamer employed. Formulation 2 produced a foam inhibition of 93 percent, while formulation 3 produced a foam inhibition of 49 percent and formulation 4 produced a foam inhibition of 70 percent. Formulations 13 through 18 used in combination with two different defoamers and two different quantities of defoamer showed inhibitions ranging from 83 percent to 89 percent with those employing the greater weight of defoamer 1.00% (m/m) producing a better result than those using the lower weight 0.10% (m/m).

(41) The tests of formulations 20 through 23 show the use of no citric acid and two defoamers with the second being employed with different weights. These resulted in inhibition percentages ranging from 78 to 92.

(42) Detailed examples of the preparation of certain formulations will now be considered.

(43) Control Formulation with No Defoamer

(44) This formulation had the ingredients shown in the Table. It was prepared in the following manner. To a stainless-steel tumble blender was added 97.56% (m/m) of Ammonium Sulfate (less than 3 mm in particle diameter) under ambient humidity and temperature conditions with 1.83% (m/m) of citric acid being added directly on top of the ammonium sulfate. The tumbler was turned on and mixed at 45 rpm and mixed for 5 min at clockwise rotation. The motor was stopped and immediately switched to counterclockwise rotation for an additional 5 minutes. The mixer was again stopped before 0.12% (m/m) of an 80% active aqueous solution of sodium dioctyl sulphosuccinate was added. The mixture was tumbled for 5 minutes clockwise and 5 minutes counterclockwise. The material which was the final granulated product was removed from the tumbler and delivered to a plastic container which was sealed and stored at room temperature.

(45) Defoamer Containing Experimental Formulation 1

(46) In this formulation, 0.49% (m/m) of an emulsified silicone defoamer composed of: 55% (m/m) of polydimethylsiloxane CAS:63148-62-9, 3% m/m silicon dioxide (CAS: 67762-90-7), and 42% m/m polyether-modified polydimethylsiloxane (CAS: 64365-23-7) was slowly added to a separate vessel containing 0.12% (m/m) of an 80% active aqueous solution of sodium dioctyl sulphosuccinate. This mixture was stirred at 100 rpm for 5 minutes. To a stainless-steel tumble blender was added 97.56% (m/m) of Ammonium Sulfate (less than 3 mm in particle diameter) under ambient humidity and temperature conditions. The vessel was stirred at 85 rpm before adding the liquid mixture of emulsified defoamer and aqueous sodium dioctyl sulphosuccinate into the lower port of the tumbler. The mixture was immediately stirred for 10 minutes at 80 rpm clockwise and 5 minutes counterclockwise. The mixer was stopped and 1.83% (m/m) of citric acid was added directly on top of the ammonium sulfate blend. The tumbler was turned on and mixed at 65 rpm and mixed for 5 min at clockwise rotation. The motor was stopped and immediately switched to counterclockwise rotation for an additional 5 minutes. The mixture was tumbled for 5 minutes clockwise and 5 minutes counterclockwise. The material which was the final granulated product was removed from the tumbler and stored in a sealed plastic container at room temperature.

(47) Defoamer Containing Experimental Formulation 2

(48) In this formulation, 0.49% (m/m) of polydimethylsiloxane (CAS:63148-62-97) was slowly added to a separate vessel containing 0.12% (m/m) of an 80% active aqueous solution of sodium dioctyl sulphosuccinate. This mixture was stirred at 100 rpm for 5 minutes. To a stainless-steel tumble blender was added 97.56% (m/m) of Ammonium Sulfate (less than 3 mm in particle diameter) under ambient humidity and temperature conditions. The vessel was stirred at 85 rpm before adding by the liquid mixture of emulsified defoamer and aqueous sodium dioctyl sulphosuccinate into the lower port of the tumbler. The mixture was immediately stirred for 10 minutes at 80 rpm clockwise and 5 minutes counterclockwise. The mixer was stopped and 1.83% (m/m) of citric acid was added directly on top of the ammonium sulfate blend. The tumbler was turned on and mixed at 65 rpm and mixed for 5 min at clockwise rotation. The motor was stopped and immediately switched to counterclockwise rotation for an additional 5 minutes. The mixture was tumbled for 5 minutes clockwise and 5 minutes counterclockwise. The material which was the final granulated product was removed from the tumbler and delivered to a plastic container which was sealed and stored at room temperature.

(49) Defoamer Containing Experimental Formulation 3

(50) In this formulation, 0.49% (m/m) of pure silicon dioxide (CAS: 67762-90-7) was slowly added to a separate vessel containing 0.12% (m/m) of an 80% active aqueous solution of sodium dioctyl sulphosuccinate. This mixture was stirred at 100 rpm for 5 minutes. To a stainless-steel tumble blender was added 97.56% (m/m) of Ammonium Sulfate (less than 3 mm in particle diameter) under ambient humidity and temperature conditions. The vessel was stirred at 85 rpm before adding by the liquid mixture of emulsified defoamer and aqueous sodium dioctyl sulphosuccinate into the lower port of the tumbler. The mixture was immediately stirred for 10 minutes at 80 rpm clockwise and 5 minutes counterclockwise. The mixer was stopped and 1.83% (m/m) of citric acid was added directly on top of the ammonium sulfate blend. The tumbler was turned on and mixed at 65 rpm and mixed for 5 min at clockwise rotation. The motor was stopped and immediately switched to counterclockwise rotation for an additional 5 minutes. The mixture was tumbled for 5 minutes clockwise and 5 minutes counterclockwise. The material which was the final granulated product was removed from the tumbler and delivered to a plastic container which was sealed and stored at room temperature.

(51) Defoamer Containing Experimental Formulation 4

(52) In this formulation, 0.49% (m/m) of polyether-modified polydimethylsiloxane (CAS: 64365-23-7) was slowly added to a separate vessel containing 0.12% (m/m) of an 80% active aqueous solution of sodium dioctyl sulphosuccinate. This mixture was stirred at 100 rpm for 5 minutes. To a stainless-steel tumble blender was added 97.56% (m/m) of Ammonium Sulfate (less than 3 mm in particle diameter) under ambient humidity and temperature conditions. The vessel was stirred at 85 rpm before adding by the liquid mixture of emulsified defoamer and aqueous sodium dioctyl sulphosuccinate into the lower port of the tumbler. The mixture was immediately stirred for 10 minutes at 80 rpm clockwise and 5 minutes counterclockwise. The mixer was stopped and 1.83% (m/m) of citric acid was added directly on top of the ammonium sulfate blend. The tumbler was turned on and mixed at 65 rpm and mixed for 5 min at clockwise rotation. The motor was stopped and immediately switched to counterclockwise rotation for an additional 5 minutes. The mixture was tumbled for 5 minutes clockwise and 5 minutes counterclockwise. The material which was the final granulated product was removed from the tumbler and delivered to a plastic container which was sealed and stored at room temperature.

(53) Defoamer Containing Experimental Formulation 25

(54) In this formulation, 0.49% (m/m) of an emulsified silicone defoamer (composed of: 55% (m/m) of polydimethylsiloxane (CAS:63148-62-9), 3% (m/m) silicon dioxide (CAS: 67762-90-7), and 42% (m/m) polyether-modified polydimethylsiloxane CAS: 64365-23-7) was slowly added to a separate vessel containing 0.12% (m/m) of an 80% active aqueous solution of sodium dioctyl sulphosuccinate. This mixture was stirred at 100 rpm for 5 minutes. To a stainless-steel tumble blender was added 97.56% (m/m) of Ammonium Sulfate (less than 3 mm in particle diameter) under ambient humidity and temperature conditions. The vessel was stirred at 85 rpm before adding the liquid mixture of emulsified defoamer and aqueous sodium dioctyl sulphosuccinate into the lower port of the tumbler. The mixture was immediately stirred for 10 minutes at 80 rpm clockwise and 5 minutes counterclockwise. The mixer was stopped and 1.83% (m/m) of ascorbic acid (CAS: 50-81-7) was added directly on top of the ammonium sulfate blend. The tumbler was turned on and mixed at 65 rpm and mixed for 5 min at clockwise rotation. The motor was stopped and immediately switched to counterclockwise rotation for an additional 5 minutes. The mixture was tumbled for 5 minutes clockwise and 5 minutes counterclockwise. The material which was the final granulated product was removed from the tumbler and delivered to a plastic container which was sealed and stored at room temperature.

(55) Defoamer Containing Experimental Formulation 29

(56) In this formulation, 0.49% (m/m) of an emulsified silicone defoamer (composed of: (m/m) of polydimethylsiloxane CAS:63148-62-9, 3% m/m silicon dioxide CAS: 67762-90-7, and 42% (m/m) polyether-modified polydimethylsiloxane CAS: 64365-23-7) was slowly added to a separate vessel containing 0.12% (m/m) of an 80% active aqueous solution of sodium dihexyl sulphosuccinate (CAS: 3006-15-3). This mixture was stirred at 100 rpm for 5 minutes. To a stainless-steel tumble blender was added 97.56% (m/m) of Ammonium Sulfate (less than 3 mm in particle diameter) under ambient humidity and temperature conditions. The vessel was stirred at 85 rpm before adding the liquid mixture of emulsified defoamer and aqueous sodium dioctyl sulphosuccinate into the lower port of the tumbler. The mixture was immediately stirred for 10 minutes at 80 rpm clockwise and 5 minutes counterclockwise. The mixer was stopped and 1.83% (m/m) of citric acid was added directly on top of the ammonium sulfate blend. The tumbler was turned on and mixed at 65 rpm and mixed for 5 min at clockwise rotation. The motor was stopped and immediately switched to counterclockwise rotation for an additional 5 minutes. The mixture was tumbled for 5 minutes clockwise and 5 minutes counterclockwise. The material which was the final granulated product was removed from the tumbler and delivered to a plastic container which was sealed and stored at room temperature.

(57) As exemplified by the foregoing, the present invention provides a unique dry, free-flowing solid adjuvant for use with pesticides was formulated with an ammonium sulfate and with a liquid defoamer coated thereon that exhibited excellent foam prevention in standardized tests.

(58) The negative control not unexpectedly, provided 0 percent inhibition. In testing a formulations 1 through 48, all of the coated granules passed through a 5 mm screen and the amount of solid product to be dissolved equaled 0.50% (m/m). the amount of water used was 100 milliliters. Each formulation was manufactured to 100% (m/m) so that mass in grams corresponded to the (% m/m). In all of the tests, the foaming agent employed was in the quantity of 0.15% (m/m).

(59) For example, the solution of the negative control generated 107 mL of foam under the above foam generating stress conditions. The solid adjuvant formulation with no defoamer, when dissolved in water, and mixed with the foaming agent, produced 101 mL of foam, resulting in a 6% inhibition in the volume of foam generated.

(60) Considering formulations 29 through 31, wherein different amounts of 80 percent sodium dioctyl sulphosuccinate solution were employed, the inhibition percentage ranged from 72 to 75 percent. When the defoamer was eliminated, the inhibition percentage dropped to 3 percent in formulation 32.

(61) Formulations 37 through 39 wherein the percentage of surfactant sodium lauryl sulfate varied, the percentage inhibition range from 54 percent to 65 percent and when the defoamer was not used, inhibition dropped to 11 percent.

(62) Considering formulations 41 through 43 with varying percentages of the surfactant sodium laureth-4 phosphate being employed, the percentage inhibition ranged from 23 to 69 percent. When the amount of surfactant dropped from 0.0 to 0.02% (m/m) in formulation 44, where the defoamer was not used, the inhibition dropped to 0 percent.

(63) Considering formulations 45 through 47 wherein the surfactant sodium stearate was used in different percentage, the inhibition range varied from 26 percent to 56 percent with there being a definite correlation between the quantity of the surfactant employed and the percentage inhibition. In formulation 48 which involves no defoamer and the lowest quantity of the surfactant, the inhibition was 3 percent.

(64) Baseline Control 1 did not employ the surfactant 80 percent sodium dioctyl sulphosuccinate solution and produced an inhibition percentage of 35 percent. Baseline Control 2 did not employ citric acid and resulted in a 26 percent inhibition. Baseline Controls 1 and 2 did not result in a granular, free-flowing product. The material clumped into large agglomerates which could be broken into smaller units with aggressive mechanical manipulation.

(65) Baseline Control 3 employed ammonium sulfate, the surfactant, citric acid and emulsified silicone defoamer and produced a 96 percent inhibition. Baseline Control 3 utilized ammonium sulfate that ranged from 3 mm to 250 mm in particle size. The material did not clump, but exhibited lower volumetric density per 1% (m/m) of material, making it unfavorable for traditional commercial packaging. In testing for undesired agglomeration, the experimental formulations were passed through a 5 mm sieve with 10 seconds of general shaking. If all the material passed through then the material is deemed as free-flowing with no unwanted agglomeration.

(66) Positive Controls 1 through 4 each employed one of the defoaming agents in the amount of 0.49% (m/m) without employing ammonium sulfate, 80 percent sodium dioctyl sulphosuccinate solution and citric acid. They produced, respectively, inhibitions of 93 percent, 50 percent and 66 percent.

(67) The negative control employed was 100 ml of water with 0.195% (m/m) of a 60 percent active cocoamine oxide surfactant which is specifically designed for high foam buildup.

(68) Positive Control 1 is 100 milliliters of water with 0.19% (m/m) of 60 percent active cocoamine oxide surfactant and 0.49% (m/m) of emulsified silicone defoamer.

(69) Positive Control 2 was 100 milligram of water with 0.195% (m/m) of 60 percent active cocoamine oxide surfactant and 0.49% (m/m) of polydimethyl siloxane.

(70) Positive Control 3 was 100 ml of water with 0.195% (m/m) of 60 percent active cocoamine oxide surfactant and 0.49% (m/m) of pure silicon dioxide.

(71) In measuring foam inhibition, the solid adjuvant formulation was dissolved in room temperature tap water in 1 L graduated cylinder and stirred for 10 revolutions with a mixing paddle by hand. The foaming agent was added and the solution was mixed using a mechanical Dispermat according to the previously described conditions. The volume of foam above the liquid interface was measured 1 minute after the mixer was turned off

(72) In a preferred embodiment, an emulsified silicone defoamer was formulated at 0.5% (m/m) into a solid product containing: 97.07% (m/m) Ammonium Sulfate (<3 mm diameter), 0.12% (m/m) of a 80% Sodium Dioctyl sulphosuccinate solution, 1.83% (m/m) citric acid.

(73) Whereas particular embodiments of the invention have been disclosed herein for purposes of illustration, it will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that numerous variations of the details may be made without departing from the invention as described in the appended claims of the specification.