PDA

View Full Version : 2" filter


Trouthead
04-17-2007, 02:05 PM
I get my water from an irrigation ditch located uphill from my subdivision. We have a sealed system that supplies us with raw water for lawn sprinkling at 40 lbs of pressure.

I have never filtered this water but use very large brass twist in sprinkler heads 3/4 and 1/2 with the restrictors removed. I move a lot of water but I waste a lot too. I would like to water with the restrictors in place, but need a filter

The water is supplied to my in ground system through a 2 inch schedule 40 pipe and valve. Any ideas about reasonably priced 2 inch filters that clean easily. the water has lots of debris at various times including snakes which I have pulled out of the sprinkler heads.

Dirty Water
04-17-2007, 03:21 PM
Get a Rusco Spin down strainer.

http://www.cie-inc.com/Manufacturers/Rusco/pictures/spin-down.gif

PurpHaze
04-17-2007, 10:15 PM
How many snakes will fit in that strainer Jon? :laugh:

Dirty Water
04-17-2007, 10:34 PM
They have a special snake removal valve in the bottom.

I'd rather pull the bowl off and dump out a snake or two than pick them out of heads lol.

Trouthead
04-19-2007, 04:59 PM
The snakes were at least dead. Not rattlesnakes, just garter snakes.

thanks for the info.

Trouthead
08-08-2008, 10:19 AM
Thinking I might have know best i ordered a Rusco Spin Down Filter in the sediment trapper style, (basically a smaller filtering area with space for debris) On bad advice from another site, I orderd a 140 mesh filter.

It would filter for about 1 minute before plugging. So.... I ordered a 30 mesh sediment trapper filter insert. It would be good for less than an hour. So I emailed the supplier about the problem asking if the regular spin down filter with more surface might work better, they said no and suggested an automatic flush system for apporx $300.00. I decided to go ahead with the spin down type in 30 mesh and that helped but I would still plug up in about 2-4 hours.

I ended up emailing RUSCO. They suggested I stay with the spin down type and they offered to send me (FREE) two specially made filters. One in 24 mesh and the other in 12 mesh.

The 24 mesh is working beautifully getting at least 12 hours of filtering before it is too plugged to pass water. I haven't tried the 12 mesh, but will today.

RUSCO was great to deal with while the supplier (name available on request) was next to worthless.

Organic material in the water is difficult to deal with and does not flush well when the flush valve is opened with any of the various mesh sizes. The best part is I have not had a single head plug up due to organic material in better than 6 weeks.

Also switched out some heads to K-Rain Prosports. I really like them.

Waterit
08-08-2008, 10:26 AM
Thinking I might have know best

1st mistake - you might have, but never admit it here without wearing a flameproof suit!:laugh:



RUSCO was great to deal with while the supplier (name available on request) was next to worthless.

Name of supplier hereby requested.


Organic material in the water is difficult to deal with and does not flush well when the flush valve is opened with any of the various mesh sizes.

Thought about installing a cistern? The organics would settle out, then all you'd have to worry about is occasionally pumping it out.


Also switched out some heads to K-Rain Prosports. I really like them

Oh God, make it stop...

Trouthead
08-09-2008, 12:35 AM
Freshwater Systems.

A cistern will not work unless I want to add an electric pump. As it is now we have 40 pounds of pressure in a sealed piped system that generates the pressure from the drop from our point of diversion to the subdivision. Works great to have pressure from gravity.

Kiril
08-09-2008, 01:00 AM
http://www.amiad.com/filters/taf_series_2.asp

Trouthead
08-09-2008, 09:06 AM
Looks like a possible solution, but I couldn't find the cost. My guess is in the $500.00 range. It does look like the two filter inserts RUSCO gave me to try are going to work. Hope it keeps my sprinkler heads from wearing out so fast.

lowvolumejeff
08-09-2008, 09:23 AM
Hi, If you upgrade, consider a media filter up stream of a spin filter. costly, yes. But less expensive than a heart attack i would surely suffer if i was checking a clogged head and a snake emerged.

You probably have sen the filter review at Jess Stryker's site, but here is a link if not.
http://www.irrigationtutorials.com/filters.htm

You might also consider some sort of pre-filter (at least to keep snakes out on the inflow).

Just some thoughts. Jeff

Wet_Boots
08-09-2008, 09:29 AM
It would be easier to use the coarsest possible strainer and have impact heads do the watering. How many zones is the system?

DanaMac
08-09-2008, 09:40 AM
and have impact heads do the watering.

I've seen rollie-pollies (don't know how to spell them) clog Maxi-paws. No filter, and probably came from the outlet side of the head, but still they were clogged. I know the wester slope of colorado uses more Maxis due to dirty water.

Waterit
08-09-2008, 09:46 AM
I've seen rollie-pollies (don't know how to spell them) clog Maxi-paws. No filter, and probably came from the outlet side of the head, but still they were clogged. I know the wester slope of colorado uses more Maxis due to dirty water.

We've cleaned treefrogs, small lizards, and pine beetles out of Maxis and Minis. They usually get in when there is an indexer present that doesn't have spare ports blocked off.

Maxis and Minis don't work well here - when they pop up you have a hole just waiting for sand, grass clippings, leaves, etc. to flow into, even when set at proper height. We all know how useless concrete or plastic head-rings are, and what a PITA putting gravel around a head is. Have seen a lot of roots grow up into them also.

Wet_Boots
08-09-2008, 09:48 AM
I've seen rollie-pollies (don't know how to spell them) clog Maxi-paws. No filter, and probably came from the outlet side of the head, but still they were clogged. I know the wester slope of colorado uses more Maxis due to dirty water.Never seen that happen. Of course, with a two-inch supply, one could always go to larger above-ground impacts.

Kiril
08-09-2008, 11:14 AM
Never seen that happen. Of course, with a two-inch supply, one could always go to larger above-ground impacts.

piker ...........

Wet_Boots
08-09-2008, 11:28 AM
With 40 psi, that might not perform. Even a Rainbird 35 would have problems.

Kiril
08-09-2008, 11:31 AM
Sure it would.

http://www.kometirrigation.com/w3k/docs/2008/TAB%20TwinMax%20US%20Units.pdf

Wet_Boots
08-09-2008, 11:43 AM
70+ foot radius with 25 psi? Ohhhhh, sure. I believe that. Not.

bicmudpuppy
08-09-2008, 12:12 PM
70+ foot radius with 25 psi? Ohhhhh, sure. I believe that. Not.

BUT,But, but............they put it on the internet, in a chart..........it just MUST be true..........
ROFLMFAO

On a more serious note, if your spin down filter is self cleaning with a manual ball valve like Jon suggested in the first place.......replace the ball valve with a dirty water solenoid valve like an Irritrol 204/205 and be Happy :) run the valve from the controller. First, last or both.

bicmudpuppy
08-09-2008, 12:16 PM
Sure it would.

http://www.kometirrigation.com/w3k/docs/2008/TAB%20TwinMax%20US%20Units.pdf

N.B.: Performance data were obtained under ideal testing conditions and may be adversely affected by wind and other factors. Pressure refers to pressure at nozzle. A lowered trajectory angle improves the irrigation efficiency in windy
conditions. For every 3° drop of the trajectory angle the throw is reduced by approximately 3 to 4%. For solid-set applications, it is advised to take into account the appropriate throw-reduction factor for local atmospheric conditions in order to
assure overlapping and coverage of the irrigated area.

Fine print is a glorious thing. It lets them print all kinds of tripe and, if your not smart enough to understand it, then you get what you deserve.

Anyone want to guess what inlet pressure he would need BEFORE a filter to have 25psi OUTPUT at the NOZZLE.........pushing over 30gpm??

CAPT Stream Rotar
08-09-2008, 12:18 PM
N.B.: Performance data were obtained under ideal testing conditions and may be adversely affected by wind and other factors. Pressure refers to pressure at nozzle. A lowered trajectory angle improves the irrigation efficiency in windy
conditions. For every 3° drop of the trajectory angle the throw is reduced by approximately 3 to 4%. For solid-set applications, it is advised to take into account the appropriate throw-reduction factor for local atmospheric conditions in order to
assure overlapping and coverage of the irrigated area.

Fine print is a glorious thing. It lets them print all kinds of tripe and, if your not smart enough to understand it, then you get what you deserve.

Anyone want to guess what inlet pressure he would need BEFORE a filter to have 25psi OUTPUT at the NOZZLE.........pushing over 30gpm??


70 pounds?

im just guessing.

Kiril
08-10-2008, 02:13 AM
I can read mudpup, and the post was TIC, but since you want to make an issue out of it, is there any sprinkler on the market that doesn't state the exact same thing? Funny thing about specs, you don't take them as expected field performance. That said, the gun will still operate at 40 PSI won't it? If you want to run your sprinklers in windy conditions then your going to pay the price, regardless of what type of sprinkler you use. How about not stating the obvious next time.

As far as your filter question, what is the Cv of the filter?

bicmudpuppy
08-10-2008, 07:09 AM
I can read mudpup, and the post was TIC, but since you want to make an issue out of it, is there any sprinkler on the market that doesn't state the exact same thing?
Actually.........most performance spec sheets are by inlet pressure, not nozzle pressure............and to get 25psi@ a .51" hole I would expect you to need an inlet pressure of about triple that (scary, Rotor is pretty close)

Funny thing about specs, you don't take them as expected field performance. That said, the gun will still operate at 40 PSI won't it? If you want to run your sprinklers in windy conditions then your going to pay the price, regardless of what type of sprinkler you use. How about not stating the obvious next time.

And the one nice thing about these cannons is wind is not near the issue. If I run that Royal Coach with the .5" nozzle on a manual valve only so it doesn't slam off, It throws about 100' radius. The difference into a 10-15mph wind is less than 5'. A resi rotor that throws 40' will see more loss than that on the same day.

Kiril
08-10-2008, 10:31 AM
Actually.........most performance spec sheets are by inlet pressure, not nozzle pressure

I was referring to testing conditions, but then I think you knew that. It is worth noting the OP didn't state where his pressure reading was taken, you assumed it wasn't nozzle pressure, which is probably a safe bet, but nonetheless an assumption.

And the one nice thing about these cannons is wind is not near the issue.

Agreed

If I run that Royal Coach with the .5" nozzle on a manual valve only so it doesn't slam off, It throws about 100' radius. The difference into a 10-15mph wind is less than 5'.

Got any catch can data? I would be interested in seeing how much of that water actually fell where it was intended to fall because unless your wind direction moves with your sprinklers, your not throwing into the wind the majority of the sprinkler travel.

A resi rotor that throws 40' will see more loss than that on the same day.

Once again, stating the obvious. Wind losses are inversely proportional to droplet size.

bicmudpuppy
08-10-2008, 01:28 PM
I was referring to testing conditions, but then I think you knew that. It is worth noting the OP didn't state where his pressure reading was taken, you assumed it wasn't nozzle pressure, which is probably a safe bet, but nonetheless an assumption.
No, it is not an assumption, the 40#'s was the quoted pressure on the supply of the raw water feed.



Got any catch can data? I would be interested in seeing how much of that water actually fell where it was intended to fall because unless your wind direction moves with your sprinklers, your not throwing into the wind the majority of the sprinkler travel.


I'm not worried about the CEU. I'm watering humps and hills that don't normally get water and the sprinkler is doing what it was intended to do. I am not and don't intend to become a lab rat. I did my time in the lab and completed my degree.

The VERY first thing I learned in college was a disdain for the education I was working toward. 90% of the book stuff will not work or translate to real world. Knowing and understanding the theories is important, but........get dirty and actually experience how far off most of that knowledge falls from truth.

Kiril
08-10-2008, 03:03 PM
No, it is not an assumption, the 40#'s was the quoted pressure on the supply of the raw water feed.

That is correct, measured where? Remember, this is gravity supplied pressure.

90% of the book stuff will not work or translate to real world. Knowing and understanding the theories is important, but........get dirty and actually experience how far off most of that knowledge falls from truth

Pretty bold statement .... 90%. I suppose all those laws of physics don't apply either?

To some extent I do agree, but also disagree. Yes, some book knowledge does not cross over well in the field, some does. FYI, most all of the course work I did was for field application, not theoretical research.

I am curious ... do you have any specific examples of non-theoretical knowledge that falls far from truth?

BrandonV
08-10-2008, 03:15 PM
Thinking I might have know best i ordered a Rusco Spin Down Filter in the sediment trapper style, (basically a smaller filtering area with space for debris) On bad advice from another site, I orderd a 140 mesh filter.

It would filter for about 1 minute before plugging. So.... I ordered a 30 mesh sediment trapper filter insert. It would be good for less than an hour. So I emailed the supplier about the problem asking if the regular spin down filter with more surface might work better, they said no and suggested an automatic flush system for apporx $300.00. I decided to go ahead with the spin down type in 30 mesh and that helped but I would still plug up in about 2-4 hours.

I ended up emailing RUSCO. They suggested I stay with the spin down type and they offered to send me (FREE) two specially made filters. One in 24 mesh and the other in 12 mesh.

The 24 mesh is working beautifully getting at least 12 hours of filtering before it is too plugged to pass water. I haven't tried the 12 mesh, but will today.

RUSCO was great to deal with while the supplier (name available on request) was next to worthless.

Organic material in the water is difficult to deal with and does not flush well when the flush valve is opened with any of the various mesh sizes. The best part is I have not had a single head plug up due to organic material in better than 6 weeks.

Also switched out some heads to K-Rain Prosports. I really like them.

what was the name of the auto flush one? I'm needing one on a 2" system and am have a hard time getting comparisons.

Trouthead
08-10-2008, 05:59 PM
To add a bit of fire to the last series of posts, the pressure of my system was calculated by the engineer that designed it. It was someone in the State of Wyoming Water Engineer's office, (deal with all irrigation issues) When I use a pressure tester that screws on to a hose I get about 35 lbs of pressure. This all varies according to how much use the system is getting, and how high the water is running at our point of diversion.

On the raingun issue, I had a 2 inch rainbird raingun that I was going to use, but it needs to be installed in cement to be solid enough to move and not break all the piping. Further (if I remember right) all connections must be metal piping.

The auto flush system was recommended by Freshwater systems , but I don't have the email in which they reccommended it.

Thanks for all the advice and I still like K- Rain rotors.

Wet_Boots
08-10-2008, 06:31 PM
Unless you are running a one-zone system, 35 psi almost puts you in Maxipaw territory.

hoskm01
08-10-2008, 06:46 PM
I still like K- Rain rotors.



And you had so much potential here!

Mike Leary
08-10-2008, 07:08 PM
And you had so much potential here!

Not.....back to the factory for re-grooving.

Trouthead
08-11-2008, 09:25 AM
I do use some maxi paws on my two zone system. I have a very odd design, since I have lots of volume but relatively low pressure. Most of my system is 2 inch or in some sections 1.5 inch supply line. My heads come off those lines with no drop to inch or 3/4 inch lines, the only neck down is at the nippple. Also use some large brass in the ground old golf course style fittings for the 3/4 inch impact rotors. I have however replaced any of the heads around the house with K-RAIN rotors, as they have less overspray and are quiet at night.

My spacing is large so it would not be unusual to water for 24 hours and then not hit it again for 6 days. Lawn is nice and green with the 90-100 degree temps we have and just about never any rain.

I might have designed it differently but 23 years ago I didn't know any better.

I read the K-Rain sections, but I have only had experience with them for this season so far so good.

Wet_Boots
08-11-2008, 09:56 AM
3/4-inch brass impact heads will last long enough to give you several decades to mull over your design.

Trouthead
08-11-2008, 06:32 PM
My brass sprinklers all seem to last approx a year and then they are worn out. Poor rotation. I am a rookie at this (my house is the only system I have contact with), and until this year I didn't realize you can rebuild some impacts.

I have enough volume to run them without the nozzle, restrictors.

It is a bizzare system, but it does keep things green.

Wet_Boots
08-11-2008, 06:49 PM
If you only get one year from an impact head that can last decades, something isn't quite right. For 1/2-inch impact heads, you may as well stick with Maxipaws, and adjust the arm spring for low-pressure operation.

Trouthead
08-13-2008, 12:51 AM
the not right part is sand in the water. It is pretty abrasive and wears out the bushings that allow for smooth rotation. Originially I tried a 140 mesh screen in the filter to get rid of some of the sand, but it would not allow water to pass due to the organic material plugging up the filter.

AI Inc
08-13-2008, 05:29 AM
the not right part is sand in the water. It is pretty abrasive and wears out the bushings that allow for smooth rotation. Originially I tried a 140 mesh screen in the filter to get rid of some of the sand, but it would not allow water to pass due to the organic material plugging up the filter.

Have you tried 2 filters? One with a #24 mesh and then 1 after it with a 100 or 140?

Trouthead
08-13-2008, 09:21 AM
I keep thinking about trying that, but it adds another $150.00 to the costs. Ultimately that might be the solution, as filters (even at $150.00 X 2) are cheaper than $25-$50 sprinkler heads. I do howevever have the name of a head rebuilder in CA. I have enough old heads sitting around that if rebuilt will give me 30 more years of service.

With two filters the water might be clean of organics and also sand, but I still think the 140 will plug pretty fast. With any of the meshs that permit a reasonable cleaning schedule, they do so because they let the organic matter pass through. Any organics passing through will then be caught by the 140, so maybe instant plug?

S.I.
09-02-2008, 02:31 AM
Where are you located in WY? May be able to help you out a little if I am familiar with your sub-division.