You are not logged in.

Reply

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 395 days ago. The thread may already be out of date. Please consider creating a new thread.

Message information
Message
Settings
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 10 posts

Friday, August 2nd 2013, 2:51pm

by Wet_Boots

I don't love the idea of MP Rotators on well water, although we run all our well-water supplies through a 100-mesh stainless-steel filter screen before any of the system ever sees it, so that would probably provide sufficient protection.

How much territory are you covering? It might be that you would want the 12+ gpm more than you'd want Rotators with the additional hours of running time.

Friday, August 2nd 2013, 12:26pm

by TomD365 (Guest)

Thanks for all of the input. I redid the bucket test with better ball valve that I could adjust more easily. I ended up creating a pump chart at various pressures. Here is what I have for flow and pressure:
12.5 GPM @ 40 PSI
10 GPM @ 50 PSI
9.3 GPM @ 55 PSI
These readings are after the PVB. My estimates say I will have 40-45 PSI @ the heads if I design for about 9 GPM per zone. If I understand how this works, being a little higher or lower than 9 GPM of flow, will raise or lower the pressure at the heads. I don't think I can go much below 9 GPM or the pressure switch on the tank will cycle the pump on and off.

This is my first system with a well as the supply source and I am gaining knowledge and confidence at this point. Does my thinking on pressure and flow from a well make sense to the experts?

At this point, I am thinking I will do the entire system with MP Rotators (about 49) heads.

Any thoughts or suggestions?

Tom in Michigan


[/list]

Monday, July 29th 2013, 6:07pm

by Dan123 (Guest)

I'm using the Hunter MP rotors, and have 30PSI at the heads and the work great, I even have the MP gauge to verify it's 30psi.
If you look in the technical specs for the Hunter MP rotors, they even recommend 30 PSI regulated pop up's if you want a reduced distance, so they are definitely designed for down to 30psi.
I did some testing, and added a few more heads, and they really sucked at 25psi, so don't go that low.

Thursday, July 25th 2013, 10:53pm

by electrifiedmale

27 PSI at the sprinklers. I intend to use all sprays or MP Rotators.
MP rotators are not going to work well at 27 psi, if at all. When Hunter says they work best at or need 40, they mean it.

If you have the pressure to run them they work great but performance takes a nose dive very very quick if you don't have the pressure. There isn't any wiggle room at all with them.

Monday, July 15th 2013, 10:04am

by Wet_Boots

Figure on sprays, and forget the Rotators. If you had a lawn fit for rotor heads, you would be adjusting the pressure switch to get higher pressure at the heads.

Note that if you did raise the pressure switch settings, you would first increase the air charge in the pressure tank, to match up with the new settings.

You want to avoid cycling. Even at a slow cycle rate, the varying pressure can shorten the life of the zone valves.

Sunday, July 14th 2013, 4:19pm

by TomD365 (Guest)

Finished the bucket test today and the best balance of flow and pressure is 12.5 GPM @ 40 PSI. At that pressure the pump kept running and the flow was consistent over the hour that I let it run. If I reduced the flow, the pressure increased but, the pump would eventually kick off.

This measurement is taken right after the PVB before the mainline connects to the first valve. Estimating the other losses in the system:
  • 100' of 1" poly mainline to the farthest valve - 4PSI loss
  • Valve (Richdel 204AT) I couldn't find data on this valve - estimate 5 PSI loss
  • Laterals and fittings - longest run about 80' of 1" poly - 4 PSI loss
This leaves me with about 27 PSI at the sprinklers. I intend to use all sprays or MP Rotators. If I design with this information, can I just put the heads a little closer together than the 30 PSI spacing? Also, if I limit the flow through each zone to about 10 GPM, will I get good coverage and minimize the pump cycling? That flow rate would also leave a little flow for the occasional toilet flush while the sprinklers are running...

Tom in Michigan

Saturday, July 13th 2013, 4:11pm

by Wet_Boots

Don't go too nuts. You are trying to define the supply at one central point, in order to work from there. You could just as easily do this further upstream, and simply use a chart to account for the pressure lost through the PVB.

Pressure loss is what this is all about. You have a steady-state flow at a certain pressure, a pressure from which you will subtract all the losses encountered until the water reaches the sprinkler heads.

Saturday, July 13th 2013, 12:20pm

by TomD365 (Guest)

Thanks, Wet_Boots for the reply. Follow-up question. My valves are located at the zones instead of being ganged on a manifold in one location. Would I get better results doing the bucket test on the output side of the farthest valve? Then my only pressure loss deductions would be the laterals and fittings. Am I thinking right here?

Tom in Michigan

Saturday, July 13th 2013, 11:22am

by Wet_Boots

Downstream of the PVB is where the system is, and that's where you want to know the pressure, when you perform a 'bucket test'

Cycling in intervals measured in minutes isn't going to ruin the pump. It does make the zone valves work harder, so they all should have flow controls.

Saturday, July 13th 2013, 10:24am

by TomD365 (Guest)

Bucket Test Downstream from PVB?

Long time lurker - first time poster. What a great site! You guys have given me the confidence / knowledge to improve my existing, poorly designed system. I have read all the posts in this and other sites and am gaining confidence in my ability to design the system. Maybe you can help with a couple of questions that I am stuck on.

What I Have:
  1. 3/4 HP Submersible - 1" pipe to the house
  2. Immediately back out with 1" pipe, up to Febco 1" PVB on the outside wall
  3. Down from PVB with copper to 1" poly mainline
  4. 7 zones with no consistant GPM useage or precipitation rates (looks like previous homeowner did the system from Home Depot stuff)
  5. Most of the zones spray out from the house with no head to head coverage and few heads spraying toward the house
  6. Toro, Hunter, Rainbird, Orbit heads. Rotors and sprays mixed on several zones
  7. The well cycles every few minutes when the system is running (very bad?)
  8. Largest area to cover is about 40' x 120'
What I Want To Do:
  1. Redesign the system to get even PR around the yard
  2. Get good head to head coverage as much as reasonable
  3. Reuse the mainline - 1" poly and add mainline and laterals as required by the design
  4. Add zones if design dictates
  5. I like the look of MP Rotators or the RB version and would use them for all lawn areas.
My questions:
  1. Can I do the bucket test where the mainline comes out of the PVB instead of before the PVB
  2. If this is OK, do I ignore the PVB pressure loss in my calculation
  3. I will be doing the test as described in tutorial with gage, ball valve and watching the pump start / stop cycles.
Any and all help from the professionals would be welcomed!

Tom in Michigan