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 4036 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 The thread may already be out of date.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, May 31st 2007, 5:51am


I hate it when people do that

Wednesday, April 25th 2007, 1:38pm

by Wet_Boots

Current demand is immaterial. Exposure of very-low-power controller circuitry to external wiring is problematical, as anyone trying to extend the length of a Hunter SRR connector can attest to. No reason that someone can't manufacture such a controller, that would accept sensor 'commands' - but economics argue against it. Figure that this would be something for the 'home automation' type of electronics.

Wednesday, April 25th 2007, 9:13am


There really shouldn't be any more of a current demand on the system. All detection would be external, just another way of activating the flow. I guess it hasn't really come up in the past. Interesting to know about the hose end products.

Wednesday, April 25th 2007, 8:01am

by Wet_Boots

There already are motion-activated sprinklers. Strictly a hose-end product, to deter animals. No reason they won't work against people. As for controllers accepting motion-sensor input to 'command' watering, I expect it isn't practical, from an economic standpoint. The very-low-power circuitry of a sprinkler controller doesn't easily allow for much in the way of inputs.

Wednesday, April 25th 2007, 6:14am


dry contact activation of controller

I own an alarm company in Vancouver British Columbia. I was just looking at my webstats and noticed someone was looking for a motion detector that activated a sprinkler system. My mind quickly starting picturing a soaking wet crackhead running away from the scene of a potential crime. After all, water drastically reduces the re-sale value of a flat screen monitor.

It seems like a fairly easy concept, connect an alarm output to a dry contact input. Is there such a beast in the water world that would accept a dry contact input to trigger a zone of sprinklers? This could be really fun.[:D]