This past Saturday, I took my youngest to his soccer game. The first thing I noticed, after the fact that it was unseasonably warm, was the condition of the playing field. The grass was brown and crunchy, and the soil was dry, hard, and cracked.
So what does this have to do with field safety? The less dense and lush the turf is, the dryer the soil, the harder the playing surface. Below is a link to information provided by the Sports Turf Managers Association, on the technical aspects of field hardness. But as you can imagine, the harder the surface, the greater chance for an athlete to be injured. .
The importance of irrigating and maintaining a correct soil moisture level goes beyond athletic field aesthetics. Several years ago, I was working with a public school system in Maryland. They were working towards irrigating all their athletic fields. I asked the man leading the charge, how he was able to convince the school district to go forward with such an investment? Not because I did not see value in the project, but it is not what is common practice in our area. He proceeded to tell me that he feels as the school district's athletic fields are outdoor classrooms. Athletic events and PE classes are held daily on the fields. Would you allow your child to practice in a gymnasium with cracked floors, or sit in a class room with holes in the wall!? Well said!
http://www.stma.org/sites/stma/files/STMA_Bulletins/Field_Hardness%20FINAL.pdf
Tuesday, September 13, 2016
Wednesday, April 20, 2016
A Smart Controller is not in the Budget
A smart controller is an irrigation controller, that adjusts run times, based on data the controller obtains. This may come in the form of a soil moisture sensor, basic weather station, or complex weather station that is located on site. It may also receive weather information via WiFi, cell signal, etc. Once the controller obtains the data, it estimates how much water needs to be replaced in the soil.
Research has shown that the use of a smart controller, on average, reduces landscape water consumption by 30%. In our area, due to the amount of rain we typically receive, the savings are probably higher. Research has also shown, that the use of a smart controller, can prevent over-watering, resulting in a healthier landscape.
The average installed price, for irrigation, on our 10 most recent projects is $30,000. These include larger commercial sites, small pad sites, and athletic fields. Two of those projects refused to discuss smart controllers, because of budget constraints. To upgrade the controller on the first project, I would estimate that it would have increased the cost by $500. The second project, $100. I believe the water savings in the first year would have paid for the increase in costs!
Research has shown that the use of a smart controller, on average, reduces landscape water consumption by 30%. In our area, due to the amount of rain we typically receive, the savings are probably higher. Research has also shown, that the use of a smart controller, can prevent over-watering, resulting in a healthier landscape.
The average installed price, for irrigation, on our 10 most recent projects is $30,000. These include larger commercial sites, small pad sites, and athletic fields. Two of those projects refused to discuss smart controllers, because of budget constraints. To upgrade the controller on the first project, I would estimate that it would have increased the cost by $500. The second project, $100. I believe the water savings in the first year would have paid for the increase in costs!
Thursday, January 21, 2016
Reducing Water Use Through Landscape Design
As an irrigation consultant/designer, there are many methods we can use to minimize landscape water usage. Product selection, sprinkler spacing, plant specific zoning, and smart technologies to name a few. What we, as irrigation professions, do not have control of is the plant species and site layout. A plant species will require a certain amount of water regardless of an irrigation design. It may not be feasible to zone a lone shrub with a group of other shrubs that are on the other side of the property.
Recently ANSI/ASABE S623 "Determining Landscape Plan Water Demands" has been published. It is a total of 14 pages, with cover sheet. This is an excellent read for any Landscape Architect or designer, who would like to reduce the water needed to keep their designed landscape aesthetically pleasing.
Feel free to post comments or questions about this standard!
Recently ANSI/ASABE S623 "Determining Landscape Plan Water Demands" has been published. It is a total of 14 pages, with cover sheet. This is an excellent read for any Landscape Architect or designer, who would like to reduce the water needed to keep their designed landscape aesthetically pleasing.
Feel free to post comments or questions about this standard!
Friday, January 8, 2016
Frequent or Deep and Infrequent, Which Watering Method is Best?
https://www.flickr.com/photos/asianturfgrass/8922147839/in/photostream/
Above is a link to a graph, illustrating the varying soil volumetric water content, over the course of a month. It compares two irrigated plots: One receiving frequent irrigation with short cycle times, and the other receiving infrequent irrigation with longer cycle times.
I came across this chart on Twitter. It received numerous replies and likes. The popular method, in the irrigation profession, is a deep and infrequent approach. The scientific theory behind this choice is to encourage deep roots, resulting in a more drought resistant and healthy landscape.
So, I am suggesting the chart is incorrect and we should ignore the results?
NO!
Then every irrigation system operator should change their method of programming, and irrigate more frequently with shorter cycle times?
NO!
This chart provides important data, and its results should be considered when programming an irrigation system. However, I do not think the chart provides a complete picture. It is important not to take a cookie cutter solution approach for every site. The irrigation system operator should work with an irrigation consultant, irrigation contractor, and landscape architect to establish the best baseline irrigation program. This should include site conditions, thresholds, goals, site uses, etc. The baseline program should be site specific, not a one-size-fits-all guess.
Above is a link to a graph, illustrating the varying soil volumetric water content, over the course of a month. It compares two irrigated plots: One receiving frequent irrigation with short cycle times, and the other receiving infrequent irrigation with longer cycle times.
I came across this chart on Twitter. It received numerous replies and likes. The popular method, in the irrigation profession, is a deep and infrequent approach. The scientific theory behind this choice is to encourage deep roots, resulting in a more drought resistant and healthy landscape.
So, I am suggesting the chart is incorrect and we should ignore the results?
NO!
Then every irrigation system operator should change their method of programming, and irrigate more frequently with shorter cycle times?
NO!
This chart provides important data, and its results should be considered when programming an irrigation system. However, I do not think the chart provides a complete picture. It is important not to take a cookie cutter solution approach for every site. The irrigation system operator should work with an irrigation consultant, irrigation contractor, and landscape architect to establish the best baseline irrigation program. This should include site conditions, thresholds, goals, site uses, etc. The baseline program should be site specific, not a one-size-fits-all guess.
Thursday, November 13, 2014
Annual Precipitation Trends Upwards for Pennsylvania
Below is a good article from the Extension Office at Penn State. It discusses an increase in annual heavy precipitation events, resulting in the state become more drought "tolerant."
http://extension.psu.edu/natural-resources/water/news/2014/penn-state-webinar-asks-2013-is-pennsylvania-becoming-drought-resistant#.VGNsnanJhKs.twitter
Does this mean we no longer need to irrigate our lawns in PA? Absolutely not. Our most recent summers have include extended periods of no or little rain. The lawns have needed supplemental water to prevent dormancy. Once dormancy starts, a lot of water is need to bring the lawn out of dormancy. Also, when lawns become stressed, this is also the time weeds start popping up. The amount of fertilizers and pesticides required can be reduced with a healthy lawn.
Does this mean we do not have to minimize the amount of water we put on our lawns? Again, absolutely not! Water conservation is important. But, if you do not feel strongly about water conservation, over watering your lawn is still a bad idea. It promotes shallow root development and disease problems. Just like people, too much of a good thing is also bad for grass.
http://extension.psu.edu/natural-resources/water/news/2014/penn-state-webinar-asks-2013-is-pennsylvania-becoming-drought-resistant#.VGNsnanJhKs.twitter
Does this mean we no longer need to irrigate our lawns in PA? Absolutely not. Our most recent summers have include extended periods of no or little rain. The lawns have needed supplemental water to prevent dormancy. Once dormancy starts, a lot of water is need to bring the lawn out of dormancy. Also, when lawns become stressed, this is also the time weeds start popping up. The amount of fertilizers and pesticides required can be reduced with a healthy lawn.
Does this mean we do not have to minimize the amount of water we put on our lawns? Again, absolutely not! Water conservation is important. But, if you do not feel strongly about water conservation, over watering your lawn is still a bad idea. It promotes shallow root development and disease problems. Just like people, too much of a good thing is also bad for grass.
Monday, November 10, 2014
Product Substitutions and Non-Proprietary Plans
Found in the Quality Assurance section of our specifications we include the following:
"Random product substitutions will not be accepted. The functionality of the irrigation design and system is based on characteristics of the products listed in these specifications and accompanied plan. Contractors wishing to substitute any product must submit, in writing, reasons for proposed substitution, product specifications, revised plan, and performance data to the Owner’s Representative and Irrigation Consultant. If written approval is granted, products may be substituted. Any products found during the final walk through, not previously approved, will be removed and replaced with an acceptable product at the contractor’s expense."
Similar products can have varying hydraulic characteristics from different manufacturers. Different flow rates, pressure requirements, and operating ranges. To minimize sizes due to pressure and flow requirements, a designer has to choose one product to make accurate hydraulic calculations. Changing products on a plan can require changes in other products, pipe sizing, scheduling, or water requirements.
A non-proprietary plan is almost an open ended plan allowing the contractor to select the products. The products selected must meet the minimum specifications, but can still have varying hydraulic characteristics. When designing a system, that a specific product is not called out, we need to design for the worse case. This can lead to higher pressure requirements, larger pipe sizes, larger valve sizes, etc.
The biggest selling point for non-proprietary plans is to avoid a manufacturer having the ability to charge more for their products. However, contractors typically buy irrigation products from an irrigation distributor. The manufacturer has no control of pricing per project, the distributor does. Most distributors carry multiple products from multiple manufacturers. A contractor has the choice to purchase the materials for each job from two or more local suppliers. This results in distributors trying to undercut the other for the sale. Usually on the same product.
When bidding from a plan, the biggest irrigation cost variable is labor. Most products, of similar quality, are close in price. Usually the savings is minimal when opting for one manufacturer over another.
"Random product substitutions will not be accepted. The functionality of the irrigation design and system is based on characteristics of the products listed in these specifications and accompanied plan. Contractors wishing to substitute any product must submit, in writing, reasons for proposed substitution, product specifications, revised plan, and performance data to the Owner’s Representative and Irrigation Consultant. If written approval is granted, products may be substituted. Any products found during the final walk through, not previously approved, will be removed and replaced with an acceptable product at the contractor’s expense."
Similar products can have varying hydraulic characteristics from different manufacturers. Different flow rates, pressure requirements, and operating ranges. To minimize sizes due to pressure and flow requirements, a designer has to choose one product to make accurate hydraulic calculations. Changing products on a plan can require changes in other products, pipe sizing, scheduling, or water requirements.
A non-proprietary plan is almost an open ended plan allowing the contractor to select the products. The products selected must meet the minimum specifications, but can still have varying hydraulic characteristics. When designing a system, that a specific product is not called out, we need to design for the worse case. This can lead to higher pressure requirements, larger pipe sizes, larger valve sizes, etc.
The biggest selling point for non-proprietary plans is to avoid a manufacturer having the ability to charge more for their products. However, contractors typically buy irrigation products from an irrigation distributor. The manufacturer has no control of pricing per project, the distributor does. Most distributors carry multiple products from multiple manufacturers. A contractor has the choice to purchase the materials for each job from two or more local suppliers. This results in distributors trying to undercut the other for the sale. Usually on the same product.
When bidding from a plan, the biggest irrigation cost variable is labor. Most products, of similar quality, are close in price. Usually the savings is minimal when opting for one manufacturer over another.
Wednesday, September 24, 2014
Too Many Heads / Sprinklers!
Looks like there are a lot of heads! Maybe too many?
Looks like there is a lot going on, any way we can clean it up?
These are the most common responses received, the first time an irrigation plan is reviewed. Irrigation plans are much more functional than visually appealing.
Distribution uniformity describes how even the water is being applied throughout an irrigation zone. If we place measuring cups in different locations, we want close to the same measurements of water.
One aspect of irrigation design, that affects distribution uniformity, is head spacing. A designer uses personal experience, manufacturerer's data, and site condtions to decide on the best head spacing. Approriately spaced heads results in a higher distribution uniformity. Heads spaced too far apart results in a lower distribution uniformity.
A low distibution uniformity rate results in a mix of over and under watered areas. A high distibution uniformity rate results in minimizing water use and maximizing plant health. Yes it is true that water in our area is viewed as being cheap, but replacing plants is not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)