You are not logged in.


Dear visitor, welcome to SPRINKLER TALK FORUM - You Got Questions, We've Got Answers. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains how this page works. You must be registered before you can use all the page's features. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.

Attention: The last reply to this post was 2909 days ago. The thread may already be out of date. Please consider creating a new thread.

Message information
Automatically converts internet addresses into links by adding [url] and [/url] around them.
Smiley code in your message such as :) is automatically displayed as image.
You can use BBCode to format your message, if this option is enabled.
Security measure

Please enter the letters that are shown in the picture below (without spaces, and upper or lower case can be used).

The last 5 posts

Thursday, June 2nd 2011, 1:06am

by PerryNZ

Yet More Questions. Please Indulge Me (aka Be Patient)

Aside from the water conservation angle, what's the big
difference between a rotor and a rotator? Gears? What's
the evenness of precipitation across the radius for rotors
versus MPs? Does a rotor use more volume & require higher
pressure for a given radius than a rotator?

Is water use reduction the only benefit difference between
the two? The property already has movable sprinkler stands
with 2.8 & 4 mm nozzle-size sprinklers. (what you call impact)
They're Naan 415S and can sector. They get used in other areas,
but have been used on the 'existing lawn areas' as shown in
the rough layout plan in my first post.

All that said, if the row of MP2000s near the deck were sub-
stituted with 180 degree rotors at the edge of the deck, they
would need to be able to equal the radius throw of an MP2000
x 2, right? (Presuming the rest of the concept plan holds good)
Would the rest of the concept plan need much alteration if
rotors were used, in place of MPs?

Although water conservation is not a critical issue, the more
zones that can run at once, the better. To achieve that needs
a tricky balance between radius covered, number of outlets
and output volume per outlet when reckoned against the
pump's volume/flow capacity @ 2 bar.

I appreciate both the interest and assistance implicit in the
questions - thanks.

Thursday, June 2nd 2011, 12:12am

by Mitchgo

well if it was me, I wouldn't want water constantly hitting my deck. I would install heads near the deck spraying outwards.

Make sure to get a filter on your system

My question is why use mp rotators, why not rotors?. The whole point for them is water conservation. With a well , it's not AS important

Wednesday, June 1st 2011, 8:52pm

by PerryNZ

What Would Work Better?

Uncertainty; fewer sprinklers; lack-of-knowledge; ignorance;
[mis-]perceived simplicity? All of those and more?

This is a rural situation. "Overspray" is a non-issue. I.e. no need
to fit nicely within a pattern determined by paths, fences, side-
walks, neighbours, etc. There are grape vines growing along
the front of the deck, which have their own trickle system.

Wednesday, June 1st 2011, 7:41am

by Wet_Boots

Why only full-circle heads?

Wednesday, June 1st 2011, 5:48am

by PerryNZ

MP Rotator Concept Plan Questions

Lots of questions. Please bear in mind that some expressions may not 'internationalize' very well.
Mine or any replies.

I'm assessing the MP Rotators for this place:

My tentative layout looks like this:

A mix of three, two and one thousand series. The header pipe will be under the deck of the house,
on the surface, with laterals heading up the page, as you look at it. It's a very stony area, so I'm
planning to use 4" pop-ups, running off 5 x 1" thin-wall alkathene laterals.

The bare dirt areas are to have trees dotted around. Although the area gets grass frosts, ground
freezing doesn't occur. The area dries out easily in summer. Irrigation will be mainly at night.
Any controlling will be done by a timer at the pump. I.e. ON/OFF only. There are other zones
already installed, such as woodlots, using microsprinklers. These can use any surplus pumping
capacity, to keep operating pressure circa 2.25 bars, at the pump.

Anticipated operating pressure in 30 PSI. The 4" semi-positive displacement submersible pump
down the well is capable of 7000 litres per hours @ circa 90 PSI. Volumes go up as pressure goes
down. The supplier was vague, saying that over 10,000 LPH was likely at pressures in the 30-40
PSI range.

The layout above is very approximate. Please let me hear your observations and comments.