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.

1

Thursday, January 19th 2012, 2:08pm

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...

Thoughts?

wsommariva

Supreme Member

Posts: 332

Location: Northern New Jersey

2

Thursday, January 19th 2012, 2:22pm

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.

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "wsommariva" (Jan 19th 2012, 3:19pm)


Central Irrigation

Supreme Member

Posts: 306

Location: Central Minnesota

3

Thursday, January 26th 2012, 3:48pm

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.

Mitchgo

Supreme Member

Posts: 502

Location: Seattle

4

Thursday, January 26th 2012, 10:22pm

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

wsommariva

Supreme Member

Posts: 332

Location: Northern New Jersey

5

Friday, January 27th 2012, 8:21am

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

Central Irrigation

Supreme Member

Posts: 306

Location: Central Minnesota

6

Friday, January 27th 2012, 2:35pm

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:

wsommariva

Supreme Member

Posts: 332

Location: Northern New Jersey

7

Friday, January 27th 2012, 3:09pm

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

hi.todd

Supreme Member

Posts: 395

Location: Houston, Texas

8

Friday, February 3rd 2012, 9:33pm

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:
:thumbup: :thumbsup:

Mitchgo

Supreme Member

Posts: 502

Location: Seattle

9

Saturday, February 4th 2012, 12:29am

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-

http://www.ameslkwater.org/2010-02-23_Fee_Schedule.pdf

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

hi.todd

Supreme Member

Posts: 395

Location: Houston, Texas

10

Sunday, February 5th 2012, 1:51pm

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.
:thumbsup:
:thumbup: :thumbsup:

Rate this thread