Laserfiche WebLink
<br />, <br /> <br />. cans and used the formulas from the Certified Irrigation Auditors Manual, under my supervision. <br />Many of the readings in the prelimimllY audit had shown wide ranges of millimeter readings, <br />from almost empty cups to near full, and we were concerned about the effect on the calculations. <br />Therefore, we would sometimes perform two or three audits on the suspect zones to confirm the <br />data. The consistent readings verified the zone's particular coverage and problems, therefore, <br />we were positive of our placement of catchment devices and the grid we used to receive our <br />readings. <br /> <br />New Head and Product Placement <br /> <br />In this phase, the connection of field products and Gear Drive Rotors commenced and the <br />data from the preliminary audit drove the reasoning for nozzle section. Based on the nozzle flow <br />outputs and data provided by the manufacturer, Hunter Industries, correct nozzle choices are <br />important in establishing uniform distribution and coverage. Flow volume can also be affected <br />by the dynamic pressure and area to be covered. The selection of nozzle per head was driven in <br />our case by a standard 52' head to head triangular spaced area grid. In evaluating the nozzle <br />selection provided with each head, the nozzle selected remained almost constant through all <br />applications, with fewer other nozzle combinations needed based on elevation changes in the <br />zone profiles and off shaped areas. The most noticeable characteristic immediately seen was the <br />fall out pattern that the heads delivered, which were very consistent from close to the head <br />throughout the effective range ofthe coverage area. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Final Audit <br /> <br />Some unexpected conclusions were derived from the final audit, the most noticeable <br />being how much we were going to be able to eliminate low head drainage. The heads purchased <br />had included a built in check valve and in the past on our low head areas flooded pathways and <br />adjacent trails, the lines bled off excess water from the lines out through the heads. For joggers, <br />walkers, and bikers this created a mud laden path and created erosion problems. With the check <br />valve we immediately saw when the head retracted it stopped the bleed off and contained the <br />water within the line. Maybe not too exciting for some but for us and the trail user, a cleaner <br />environment and user. <br />During the Audit I was fortunate enough to have as a community service worker Ernest <br />Romero of the Postal Service. Ernest was involved in maintenance of grounds areas at a local <br />post office and was involved with myself in the Audit evaluations. At the time we began to <br />employ the field remote provided as part of the grant package and he noticed as we were in the <br />field, when certain zones were commanded to turn on, that we had several problems associated <br />with mainline breaks that had not earlier been detected. Our purchase of this item paid off <br />immediately and pinpointed for myself a problem that would have been more difficult and time <br />consuming to detect. <br />Our results upon review were arguably better than expected. The distribution of <br />uniformity improved from a low of .49 to a high of .97 and an average of .69 from the <br />preliminary audits .44. Consequently, the precipitation rate went from a low .41 to a high of. 71 <br />and an average of .54. Even with a lower precipitation rate a more consistent P.R. is found <br />through all the zones. <br /> <br />. <br />