2 Votes
Uneven water coverage? Not an issue
Brandon, I have been referring to this site for the past several days as I think about running my own sprinkler system, and the comments are interesting. I think the people who complain about the lack of full head-to-head coverage or water waste are missing the fact that people looking to install this type of sprinkler system are merely looking for a simple way to replace the manual time and labor of moving sprinklers. If you put an in-ground sprinkler exactly where you earlier had a mobile sprinkler, there is no additional water waste, just added convinience
I am planning on installing a run in my front yard this weekend. I have picked a flexible pipe at Home Depot called CFP Pipe, although I believe this to just be a type of poly pipe. The person workng there said I could use PVC connectors and glue with this pipe, so we’ll see how it all goes. I’ll try to remember to report back here and let everyone know my thoughts. I live in Middle Tennessee so the rocky soil compined with a hilly half-acre make me think that rigid PVC will be too difficult.
One question. Do you notice any pressure loss from using your timers? I tried timers for my hose sprinkler last year but the pressure loss was unacceptable. I hate to think I will end up with the same problem here.
RE: Uneven water coverage? Not an issue by Brandon
When I first put a system in my new front yard, I used six heads all on one circuit. The water pressure / flowrate combination had a hard time keeping up, so I removed the timer to see if that made any difference. It didn’t. There’s nothing saying your flowrate couldn’t be impeded by the timer, however.
To solve my issue, I reduced the number of heads on the line to five. This took care of things. (I compensated for the lost coverage by including the "cut" head and three additional heads on a separate circuit.)
Let me know how things go with the CFP pipe. If I remember correctly, poly pipe was much cheaper than flexible PVC…