Register free!
Search
 
     

Click for Weather
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-06-2011, 05:46 PM
txirrigation txirrigation is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 923
MP Rotator vs Single Stream Rotor

What do you guys think?

In my experince many customers end up running the MPR so much longer that the water savings by the design goes null. Seems like I also get more coverage complaints on the MPR's. I space the 3000's @ 25', 2000 @ 17' (although they are pretty good at 20), and I do not use the 1000's bc they dont work that great.

Also if the customer does not keep the grass cut, the grass blades KILL the MPR streams while the single stream seems to perform OK in long grass. Although the grass should be cut to keep it under the riser hight, we all know the "I mow once every 3 weeks/month customer." Then they wonder why the grass is soooo grean by the sprinkler head, and dead out in the yard.

All this being said, the MPR definitly has advantages. If the customer cuts the grass and understands the concept, they will have much more uniformly green grass with the MPR.

I always try to gauge the home owner before I suggest one or the other.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-06-2011, 06:10 PM
Kiril Kiril is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: District 9 CA
Posts: 18,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by txirrigation View Post
What do you guys think?

In my experince many customers end up running the MPR so much longer that the water savings by the design goes null.
Not following you? A single stream rotor PR rates will generally be close to or considerably lower than the MPR for a comparable radius which means longer run times than the MPR.

I also fail to see how the water savings go out the window. Higher distribution uniformity is what it is. Anything that affects the performance of the MPR will affect the performance of a single stream rotor equally or more so, with the possible exception of plant blockage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by txirrigation View Post
Seems like I also get more coverage complaints on the MPR's. I space the 3000's @ 25', 2000 @ 17' (although they are pretty good at 20), and I do not use the 1000's bc they dont work that great.
I use them all, 1000 - 3000 and have no complaints with coverage. If it is a design issue, the MPR can make up for some of the deficiencies, but it isn't a magic bullet either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by txirrigation View Post
Also if the customer does not keep the grass cut, the grass blades KILL the MPR streams while the single stream seems to perform OK in long grass. Although the grass should be cut to keep it under the riser hight, we all know the "I mow once every 3 weeks/month customer." Then they wonder why the grass is soooo grean by the sprinkler head, and dead out in the yard.
Then use 6" pops or cut down on the water and ferts so it doesn't grow so fast if you are only cutting once a month.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-06-2011, 06:38 PM
GreenLight GreenLight is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Posts: 397
I always hear the "longer run times needed" for mp's vs standard rotors and I still don't get this. Every performance chart I have ever seen says the MP is a close equivalent per radius @ 40 psi to a RB Standard angle 4.0 and a Hunter (red nozzle) 7. Those are both fairly high distribution rate nozzles for residential apps and the MP is about on the same precip rate as both (roughly .4 inches per hour).

I will agree, that I believe you have to over spray edges a bit with mps as they put out a bit of a false radius as they open up and die off.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-06-2011, 06:58 PM
txirrigation txirrigation is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 923
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenLight View Post
I always hear the "longer run times needed" for mp's vs standard rotors and I still don't get this. Every performance chart I have ever seen says the MP is a close equivalent per radius @ 40 psi to a RB Standard angle 4.0 and a Hunter (red nozzle) 7. Those are both fairly high distribution rate nozzles for residential apps and the MP is about on the same precip rate as both (roughly .4 inches per hour).

I will agree, that I believe you have to over spray edges a bit with mps as they put out a bit of a false radius as they open up and die off.
The edges are irritating! To pass an inspection nothing can land on hardscapes, but to get good coverage throughout the throw you have to spray on the hardscape.


Kiril- I am doubting your real world knowlege. Just because it says so in the books, doesnt mean it is so in practice. When you are using the single stream they put down water much faster in the area that the water is landing. Meaning when your using a #7 in a pgp you are putting 3.5 gpm in one stream. With the MPR 3000 you are spreading the 3.14 gpm over many different streams.

Although the book may say different we consistantly have to run MPR's 4-6 min longer to get the same result out of a PGP, 5004, i-20 etc. What I mean by the same result is, green grass.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-06-2011, 09:19 PM
txirrigation txirrigation is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 923
Back to the topic. Which do you guys prefer?

For a while I was a MPR guy, after 175-200 systems with them I think I am going to move back to the PGP/5004
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-06-2011, 09:26 PM
Wet_Boots's Avatar
Wet_Boots Wet_Boots is online now
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: metro NYC
Posts: 39,509
Quote:
Originally Posted by txirrigation View Post

Back to the topic. Which do you guys prefer?

For a while I was a MPR guy, after 175-200 systems with them I think I am going to move back to the PGP/5004
What are your failure patterns with the MPRs? One reason I will favor a Toro Stream Rotor head, besides the cleaner patterns, is that their failures are concentrated at season startup.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-07-2011, 10:01 AM
txirrigation txirrigation is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 923
Kiril-

I saw your post before it was removed. Most of the places I work in we have to submit a plan to the city Architect which he then reviews and if it passes then we get the permit. After we install the system we then have to call out the inspector to come out and confirm that we installed the system per our specs, and any as-built changes have to be noted in red ink and to code.

There are different inspectors and you never know which one is going to show up so I install to the stictest one's standard every time.

-If wind is blowing over 10mph - FAIL
-One drop of water lands on sidewalk, hardscape, house - FAIL
-Anything but dripline used in an area less than 7 ft wide - FAIL
-Matched precip comprimised for any reason- FAIL
-System not hydrozoned- FAIL
-Rain sensor not set at 1/4in-48hr- FAIL
-Heads closer than 6 in to hardscape- FAIL
-Head to Head spacing comprimised- FAIL
-Sprays mixed with rotors- FAIL
-Seasonal run times, gpm per zone, water budget chart not posted-FAIL

I am also:

Licensed Prof Irrigator
Licensed Irrigation Auditor
Licensed BPAT
Austin Water Wise Cert
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-07-2011, 09:21 AM
GreenLight GreenLight is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Posts: 397
The mp is taking a beating. I really do like them and think they have great performance for the most part. I do agree completely that they are not rock solid on the edges and generally take a 10% overspray in each direction to avoid brown spots. Granted if you are accustomed to pulling from a pump and using a large nozzle rotor that is pumping 5-6 gpm a minute then the mp can't compete and shouldn't compete. Smaller residential applications imo they simply can't be touched for flexibility and continuity (example 20-25' width x 65 length with all types of curvature and hourglass design).
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08-07-2011, 09:34 AM
txirrigation txirrigation is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 923
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenLight View Post
The mp is taking a beating. I really do like them and think they have great performance for the most part. I do agree completely that they are not rock solid on the edges and generally take a 10% overspray in each direction to avoid brown spots. Granted if you are accustomed to pulling from a pump and using a large nozzle rotor that is pumping 5-6 gpm a minute then the mp can't compete and shouldn't compete. Smaller residential applications imo they simply can't be touched for flexibility and continuity (example 20-25' width x 65 length with all types of curvature and hourglass design).
I can agree with that.

Who has used the Toro mulit stream? Toro does not have a big name here, but the supplier had one sitting on the desk last week and he said he was going to start selling them. From what I understand they are gear driven?
Anyone with experince post up and give a review.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 08-06-2011, 07:09 PM
Wet_Boots's Avatar
Wet_Boots Wet_Boots is online now
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: metro NYC
Posts: 39,509
I run single-stream rotor zones far longer than stream rotor zones.

(probably because I space PGP heads ninety feet apart )
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump






Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1998 - 2012, LawnSite.comô - Moose River Media
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:24 AM.

Page generated in 0.16783 seconds with 8 queries