PDA

View Full Version : A HUGE thanks to everyone here.......I think


CRUZMISL
07-31-2004, 07:22 PM
You may recall this thread in which I had trouble with a poorly designed sprinkler system.

http://www.lawnsite.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=78374

I bought some Rainbird bodies and some of the MP3000's to replace my Nelson 6000's. I only did one zone and all I can say is I am VERY impressed. The coverage on these things are amazing AND I can have more than 4 heads on one zone. This allows me to possibly add another head if I have an area that isn't covered while still being within the allowable GPM of my water supply.

I do have one question. Is the coverage very even when they are working at maximum throw? I say this because the Nelson 6000's can throw really far but will be drier than a bone around the head. It looks as though they have fantastic coverage but I want to be sure.

I am thinking of swapping out the entire system. Good idea or bad? This is where the "I think" in the title comes in. Now I have more work to do but if I can get grass that looks like a carpet then I'll do what it takes. The simplicity of these things is amazing. THANKS for the great advice!!

Joe

DGI
08-01-2004, 02:25 AM
They're "drier than a bone around the head" because you don't have proper coverage. The heads should throw into one another to avoid this. Heads do not water up close.

I'd try to get someone who is high in rank from the company to come out and explain why you don't have head to head coverage. Not that they'll do anything, though.

JimLewis
08-01-2004, 06:10 AM
I do have one question. Is the coverage very even when they are working at maximum throw? I say this because the Nelson 6000's can throw really far but will be drier than a bone around the head.

The answer to this all depends on the spacing.

First, you need to understand proper sprinkler head placement. I recommend reading this [free] manual put out by Rainbird to fully understand spacing;

Rainbird Irrigation Design Tutorial (http://www.rainbird.com/pdf/turf/IrrigationDesignManual.pdf)

(p.s. that's a BIG file. Give it a few minutes to download)

Typically, 60% coverage is okay, and 50% coverage (head-to-head coverage) is better. But I believe I read that with the MP Rotators, you actually have to space them more like 40% coverage - because of the way they were designed.

I don't know why you were having those problems with the Nelson heads. That's atypical. In fact, usually the reverse is true - you should have more water near the head than you do at the end of the throw. Anyway, that shouldn't be a problem with the MP Rotators. They are designed much better. In fact, they have the best matched-precipitation rate of any head made. But again, that's only if they are spaced properly. Even if they are not spaced properly, I don't think you'll encounter any problems like you mentioned before. There should be plenty of water near the heads.

Also, keep in mind that with the MP Rotators, you have to water a LOT more than you do with traditional heads. Like 2-3 times longer. You'll actually be using less water. It's just that they throw out a lot less water per minute than typical heads do. Which isn't a bad thing. It's actually good, because you'll have less run-off and more absorbsion.

CRUZMISL
08-01-2004, 10:14 AM
So are you saying the MP's actually need to be spaced closer than the current 6000's?

JimLewis
08-02-2004, 02:55 AM
Not necessarily. I don't know what spacing you already have. But I believe the MP3000s need to be spaced like 25' appart. 30' at the most. That's if they are operating at full operating capacity.

CRUZMISL
08-02-2004, 12:46 PM
My current head spacing is about 25ft. so I should be OK. I do know one thing though, the amount of water the 3000's throw out are just as much as my Nelson rotors. One zone is at 11.83GPM's Hopefully the 10gpm rule for 3/4 pipe won't play a huge role in the performance. Any thouhts?