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 2691 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 The thread may already be out of date.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 10 posts

Sunday, February 5th 2012, 1:51pm

by hi.todd

I checked it out, and I looked closer at my bill. It actually looks about the same as your lake district rates. You are right it is relative.

I shut off my PVB this winter and I got my first 48 dollar water bill, yesterday. It feeds pretty good. I am going to trouble shoot my own system. If that doesn't work, I am going to install a master valve. I am also going to install the Toro nozzles at my house and M P Rotators.

It has helped me be more empathetic to my customers. At least, I know what they are feeling.

Lets have a good season, It is starting off pretty good for Jan and Feb.

Saturday, February 4th 2012, 12:29am

by Mitchgo

A properly designed zone will use less water ultimately because you are applying the water more evenly. A triangle spaced design or square space design is much better by all means then a single row.

Todd $250 per month for a luxury item doesn't sound too bad. I guess it's relative

Check this out-

Ames Lake Water District is apart of the unincorporated east side of Redmond, wa .. They are NAZI's!

Most of the yards in this area rang from .5/3 acres
Our policy is to leave the programming exactly how we found it unless it's some wild setting.

We cap off systems here more then anywhere else because of the water bills. The biggest bill I've personally come across was 22k from a main line break on a 1.5 acre lot.

At my house which is 30 miles south of redmond on a third of an acre lot, my 2 month water bill was $175 at about 45,000 gallons. If I lived in Ames Lake it would be $2,658.25

Friday, February 3rd 2012, 9:33pm

by hi.todd

You are all probably right in your climates. I noticed that all the comments on this thread or topic came from fairly cool climates.

If it were in a hot climate or Texas, you would probably just have to run the irrigation system longer. In Houston, We pay a lot for our water. High water bills. I got one to prove it. I am always on my schedule and I turn off when I can, but the foundation requires a fair amount of water or it will shift or move.

We have to design to get it done with water conservation and without waste, the best way to do that here is head to head.

I am really starting to get in to the Hunter MP Rotator and the Toro Precision series nozzle because I pay a lot for my water. Some of the other cities around Houston don't pay that much yet. It is coming.

What is a lot? 250$ per month for 3 or 4 times a week on 7 zones, and a couple of showers every day, and some laundry.

It is a lot to me, for water. It is coming to us all, I probably am just lucky and got it first.

Stepping down from my soap box, have a great year everybody!!

:thumbsup: :thumbup:

Friday, January 27th 2012, 3:09pm

by wsommariva

Thank you for that detailed answer. I've seen diagrams of the triangle method but couldn't see when it was useful.

Friday, January 27th 2012, 2:35pm

by Central Irrigation

You can use triangular spacing on any area. It is, however, easier to design a square spacing system on larger areas. If an area can easily be sectioned into blocks, where length and width are similar, then squared spacing is recommended from a cost perspective. Triangular spacing is typically used when width is less than length, much like a blvd or narrow strip along a house. The problem with triangular spacing is that it requires a bit more initial investment in pipe and digging than would a single line of heads along a sidewalk. In the case of the O.P. a single line of heads would not cover the width properly, which means he would more than likely need to add a second line of heads along the street to cover the dry areas. If this second line is indeed needed (lack of flow/pressure which limits him to MPR nozzles) then triangular spacing would be the way to go. If he were to layout in a triangular spacing using 180* nozzles, then the lack of width coverage would be limited since he would have 2 heads from the opposite side covering what didn't get hit. :thumbsup:

Friday, January 27th 2012, 8:21am

by wsommariva

That would be using 180 degree heads correct? Is this method appropriate for large areas also?

Thursday, January 26th 2012, 10:22pm

by Mitchgo

I agree- Alternate your heads in a triangle form and you should be fine

Thursday, January 26th 2012, 3:48pm

by Central Irrigation

Really depends on your soil. Clay soils are more forgiving than sandy soils. Water will spread more on clay soil. Uncovered areas will show brown during severe drought, however.

I would recommend triangular spacing, in which a head is placed next to the sidewalk, the next on the opposite side. In essence, each head alternates sides. That is assuming you have to use MP's due to low pressure/flow restraints.

Thursday, January 19th 2012, 2:22pm

by wsommariva

You want to follow the pros advice here more than my thoughts, but for what's it worth....I used Toro strip heads last year and they mostly watered at the farthest end of the stream with little or no water at the head. (I had them on risers about 12 inches off the ground for shrubs) I had to redesign that portion of my install. Hunter MP strips may work better, I don't know. I had one area that I thought was under designed also. I made sure I had extra capacity in the zone just in case. And indeed I ended up adding a head to solve the problem. So I think you need more heads in your 7 x 70, now or later.

Thursday, January 19th 2012, 2:08pm

by kronic24601

head to head, always needed?

I'm doing head to head on the main lawn, but there is a strip of grass on the other side of the sidewalk. It is 7'x70' or so. I really want to use those special "strip MP rotators" however, their maximum distance is 5' (6' depending on PSI). If I line them up they won't quite get to each of the heads and will be off by about 2 feet on each side.

Will this be a big deal? Is there an alternative strip style design that goes up to 7 feet? I'm trying to avoid having to use 2-3x the number of heads here...