News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


JSPayne

  • Karma: +0/-0
Hopefully I'll get a little participation from some supers on this one, though it does require you have some pretty decent records. In my honest opnion, I really believe the following equation is how "efficient use of irrigation" should be measured:

% of Returned ET = ((( TI / 325,824) / IA) *12) / ETa)

Where:

TI = Total Irrigation Used (in gallons)
IA = Irrigated Acres (in acres)
ETa = Total ET (evapotraspiration) for the year, less any rainfall

Basically, the results from this formula will negate the size of the property and the weather, two very big factors that account for the amount of water a course uses. Simply reporting total gallonage used to compare how courses use water is ridiculous. But a measure such as this tells two things: (1) what kind of grass is being grown (cool season grasses (rye, poa, bent, etc.) will generally require a higher % returned ET, warm season grasses (bermuda, etc.) less and (2) how efficiently a superintendent returns the water lost by the plant (ET) to the soil.

Hope it's not too laborious of a request, but thought it might be useful here to get some numbers for reference, as I would like to present this idea to my local superintendent association as a way to check ourselves.

My number for 2008 is 84.85%.
"To be nobody but yourself in a world which is doing it's best, night and day, to make you everybody else means to fight the hardest battle any human being can fight; and never stop fighting." -E.E. Cummings

Jeff Johnson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Quick Irrigation Poll for the Supers (warning: some math required!)
« Reply #1 on: February 09, 2009, 03:49:14 PM »
Why don't you post this on Turnet, I bet you will get more responses.
Jeff Johnson

Kyle Harris

Re: Quick Irrigation Poll for the Supers (warning: some math required!)
« Reply #2 on: February 09, 2009, 03:50:08 PM »
I'm interested to see some of the responses.

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Quick Irrigation Poll for the Supers (warning: some math required!)
« Reply #3 on: February 09, 2009, 04:06:06 PM »
JS,

Don't work in the industry but am curious about numbers and formulas in general.

Where does the constant of 325,824 come from?
Is the variable TI based on average monthly gallons uses as you later multiply by 12?

Thanks,

Kalen

Greg Chambers

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Quick Irrigation Poll for the Supers (warning: some math required!)
« Reply #4 on: February 09, 2009, 04:30:40 PM »
325824 is the number of gallons in an acre foot of water
"It's good sportsmanship to not pick up lost golf balls while they are still rolling.”

Bradley Anderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Quick Irrigation Poll for the Supers (warning: some math required!)
« Reply #5 on: February 09, 2009, 05:30:23 PM »
John,

I am glad you put this up here. I was just getting ready to set my system up to run off of ET.

Are you running the same % of ET on greens, tees, fairways, and roughs?

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Quick Irrigation Poll for the Supers (warning: some math required!)
« Reply #6 on: February 09, 2009, 05:55:31 PM »
Some questions....how much water...in gallons does grass transpire in a day...is there a formula? Does it vary by grass type?  Why would you run a different % for greens than fairways?  If the ET for your area is 5" in July why not simplify and set your program to put down X amount per night to equal 5" for the month?
No one is above the law. LOCK HIM UP!!!

Greg Chambers

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Quick Irrigation Poll for the Supers (warning: some math required!)
« Reply #7 on: February 09, 2009, 06:18:19 PM »
Some questions....how much water...in gallons does grass transpire in a day...is there a formula? Does it vary by grass type?  Why would you run a different % for greens than fairways?  If the ET for your area is 5" in July why not simplify and set your program to put down X amount per night to equal 5" for the month?

That's exactly how golf courses become overwatered.  There is no such thing as simplifying the irrigation application.
"It's good sportsmanship to not pick up lost golf balls while they are still rolling.”

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Quick Irrigation Poll for the Supers (warning: some math required!)
« Reply #8 on: February 09, 2009, 06:41:53 PM »
Greg..are you a super?

Why can't you simplify?  If it rains you shut her down. If the temps cool off, you shut her down...if your soil/grass is losing 2 tenths of an inch of moisture everyday, why would you not replace it via irrigation...at some point?
No one is above the law. LOCK HIM UP!!!

Steven_Biehl

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Quick Irrigation Poll for the Supers (warning: some math required!)
« Reply #9 on: February 09, 2009, 08:56:16 PM »
JSPayne,

I have done the same thing, however, only on a day to day basis.  I used the same method, my equation is slightly different:

((TI/27154)/IA)/ETa

27154 is the number of gallons over one acre 1" deep.  Your equation takes Acre-ft, then later divides by 12 to get Acre-in. (That is what the 12 is Kalen)

I only did it a few times. The reason is the resulting number was always very near 85%.  Which made sense, because in the irrigation computer the ET adjustments for fairways, tees, and approaches were set at 85%.  So, the computer would take the ET data and figure how much needed to run.  Then, the next day, I take the gallons applied, and figure back and get the ET adjustments. I would not run greens  from ET data, so the days that greens would run, the numbers would be different.  I never figured for the entire year, but logic would tell me the number would be close to 85%

Craig,

There is formula for figuring inches of water lost by the plantand soil per day.  It is called the Penman formula that monitors radiation, temperature, wind speed, and humidity to figure the inches of water lost per day.  From inches you can figure gallons over an area by the number above(27154 gallons per acre-in).

There are a lot of variables that may effect ET, including grass type. Soil type, turf density, traffic, etc.

The may be a few reasons for running a different % on greens than fairways.  Different height of cut or possibly a different grass are the main reasons.

As for simplifying the irrigation system, running from ET data is very simple especially if there is a weather station collecting the data.  Once the computer has the data for the heads on the course, the computer can do all the figuring.  Every day the computer would download data from the weather station, and then figure the ET from that data. The programs would the run the irrigation for the needed time to replace the ET for the day.  If the ET was 0.13" one day, the 0.24" the next the computer would make the necessary adjustments to run more water.  So, a standard setting was not needed.  The weather station would also monitor rain events and shut the irrigation system down if a certain amount of rain had been recieved.  And, even better, you could enter data into the program for how much moisture your soil can hold.  The irrigation will then stay off until the system calculates it is time to run the system again. For example if your soil holds 0.24" of water, and you receive enough rain to fill the soil, the system will not run again until the total 0.24" has be lost to ET. So, I wrote all that to tell you this, you can simplify, but the computer can do it for you.
"He who creates a cricket ground is at best a good craftsman but the creator of a great hole is an artist.  We golfers can talk, and sometimes do talk considerable nonsense too, about our favourite holes for hours together." - Bernard Darwin, Golf

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Quick Irrigation Poll for the Supers (warning: some math required!)
« Reply #10 on: February 09, 2009, 09:38:25 PM »
Steven....I don't know about your experiences, but I have seen every type of soil all on the same golf course....more than once...so.........how much water needed to fill your soil can vary from fairway to fairway...for example.   Computers can do some wonderful work....make matters easier....but can you get too carried away with this fine tuning and tinkering?...another problem I see....last golfers off the course in the evening might be 9:30pm....so you program to start irrigating shortly there after....and then comes morning and your first golfers are going off at 6:30am....hmmmm....went its hot and dry you might not have enough time to water all 18 holes the way you want.
No one is above the law. LOCK HIM UP!!!

Steven_Biehl

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Quick Irrigation Poll for the Supers (warning: some math required!)
« Reply #11 on: February 09, 2009, 10:04:09 PM »
It is possible to set up the computer to adjust for soils that hold more water or less water.  It is even easier if there is more that one weather station on the property for the computer to take data from. You can do lots of fine tuning, but the good thing is the programs now make it very easy to keep up on it. I never had any problem with getting the irrigation done before golf.  The trick I use is this. When the  golfers are out in the evening, they are on the back nine. So, the beginning holes start at 8pm, the back nine holes later.  Then in the morning, there may be just a few things running on the back nine. Irrigation is usually off by the time mowers get there.
"He who creates a cricket ground is at best a good craftsman but the creator of a great hole is an artist.  We golfers can talk, and sometimes do talk considerable nonsense too, about our favourite holes for hours together." - Bernard Darwin, Golf

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Quick Irrigation Poll for the Supers (warning: some math required!)
« Reply #12 on: February 09, 2009, 10:20:58 PM »
Thanks Steven..good information.   The level of sophistication between computers vary...how much does a system that can get to the level of detail you speak of cost?
No one is above the law. LOCK HIM UP!!!

Steven_Biehl

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Quick Irrigation Poll for the Supers (warning: some math required!)
« Reply #13 on: February 09, 2009, 10:33:40 PM »
My experience is with the RainBird systems, I can't speak for other systems.  RainBird has a service that has a yearly subscription for golf courses that provides the computer, software, all updates, 24 hour service, everthing you need to stay up-to-date.  I think that service is around $5000 a year(not positive). And a weather station will cost another $5000 a piece. So, not cheap, but is very powerful.

For not a lot more work, you can buy an atmometer for $300 to measure ET.  Then, enter that ET into the program each day. Even better, buy a couple to see how the ET varies at different spots on the course.
"He who creates a cricket ground is at best a good craftsman but the creator of a great hole is an artist.  We golfers can talk, and sometimes do talk considerable nonsense too, about our favourite holes for hours together." - Bernard Darwin, Golf

JSPayne

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Quick Irrigation Poll for the Supers (warning: some math required!)
« Reply #14 on: February 10, 2009, 12:43:48 AM »
Glad to see the interest here, although aside from Steven no real numbers coming forth. I was particularly interested to see the different regions, as I would assume some would have to water more/less than ours here in CA.

Water, especially here in CA, is already and is constantly becoming a VERY VERY important topic for golf courses. The winter rainfall here has not been promising, so many are very uncertain what lies ahead.

For those of you really interested in more of the math, I'll try to break things down a little more tomorrow. Tonight it's late....ok well 9:45pm, but us supers tend to get up a bit early. :) More to come on ET and using it to irrigate as precisely as possible....
"To be nobody but yourself in a world which is doing it's best, night and day, to make you everybody else means to fight the hardest battle any human being can fight; and never stop fighting." -E.E. Cummings

Donnie Beck

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Quick Irrigation Poll for the Supers (warning: some math required!)
« Reply #15 on: February 10, 2009, 06:46:54 AM »
I am not sure what this number means but I came up with .5322 for 2008

Matt Day

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Quick Irrigation Poll for the Supers (warning: some math required!)
« Reply #16 on: February 10, 2009, 06:47:35 AM »
I'm not a super but know a little bit about our Rainbird Cirrus system and how its set up with the weather station. Currently watering 65 hectares of grass in about 9 hours using valve in head sprinklers and pump station that can run at 180 litres per second

Were on pure sand, with Kikuyu fairways and bent greens and currently in a hot Perth summer. Greens are mowed at 3mm and fairways at 9mm, rough is left at 25mm.

From memory bent greens are set on 110% of ET and kikuyu on 75% of ET as an average. Its been 38 degrees celsius today so that figure might be changed manually by the super, he's got a very good handle on things and we don't do a lot of hand watering.

We also apply wetting agent weekly during summer (November to March) through the irrigation system utilising a direct injection unit which makes a huge difference in combatting dry patch and reducing water use. The other product that seems to help with water use is Primo (growth regulator), reduces the node length and seems to reduce heat stress

Scott Wicker

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Quick Irrigation Poll for the Supers (warning: some math required!)
« Reply #17 on: February 10, 2009, 08:31:27 AM »
My number is .4286.  I'm with Donnie....not sure what that means.  I don't have a weather station so I had to use the mean ET rate for the area. 

I agree with Greg above in that reliance on computers CAN lead to over watering.  I'm sure there are success stories that prove the contrary.  But I am careful to occasionally remind myself that science will never completely replace the "art" of greenkeeping. 
Scott Wicker

JSPayne

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Quick Irrigation Poll for the Supers (warning: some math required!)
« Reply #18 on: February 10, 2009, 09:30:58 AM »
Donnie and Scott,

Essentially your numbers mean that you are returning 53.22% and 42.86% of the water loss by the plant through evaporation and transpiration (ET) via your irrigation. These numbers being significantly lower than mine can mean a couple things but I would wager on one of these two: (1) you both are growing warm season grasses which don't have as high a water requirement as the ryegrass and bentgrass that I grow or (2) your total ET doesn't have the rainfall subtracted from it. Often, the ETo is the number reported by weather stations, which is the gross ET disregarding any rain. ETa is actual ET, which is water lost by the plant less any rainfall received. For example, my ETo for 2008 was 68.04, less my rainfall of 15.21 inches gives me an ETa of 52.83, which is the correct number to use for the equation. BTW, the ETo of 68.04 essentially means that the grass on my course, through evaportaion from the soil and transpiration through the plant, used the equivalent of 68.04 inches of rain. So you can see with only 15.21 inches of actual rain why we need to water so much.



Moving on to more info about irrigation systems, the conversation could get very far ranging. Almost all golf courses have automated irrigation systems nowadays, which is good at least to not leave watering up to an individual running around in the middle of the night trying to get it just right. However, some systems are much more automated and easily manipulated than others. Many supers still have older systems and no on-sight weather station and water very much by feel, simply choosing from experience how many minutes of water they think the course needs any given night. Admittedly, some supers are very good at this, and even those with brand new fancy systems understand their course and conditions enough such that they could operate in this fashion fairly well too.

However, with the newer compertized system with a central control in the office, you can easily get much more precise. I'll try to simply walk through a number of ways our system is set up here. First, we have an on-site weather station, which measures ET, temperature, rainfall, wind, humidty, and solar radiation. That information is sent to the central computer to use. The first step is I have entered a "crop coefficient", which effectively reduces whatever the weather station spits out as an ET to a lesser number closer to what my particular grass type needs. For us, watering mainly 100% ryegrass, that coefficient is around 0.8, or 80% of actual ET. For warm season grasses like bermuda, a coefficient of 0.6 is usually more reasonable. This same effect can also be achieved by using what some programs call a "global adjust" that simply allows you to reduce the output of the whole system by a flat percentage.

Next, we have individual programs created to run irrigation on every part of the golf course: greens, tees, fairways and roughs, even native areas, landscape, lake fills, etc etc. You can make a program for anything. Ours are broken down into front 9 and back 9, then by hole number, all of which are individuallly adjustable. Some supers go farther than that and make seperate programs for hilly areas, shady areas, typically wet and typically dry areas. If you run your system off ET, as I do, all of these programs have their own percentage which can be manually adjusted to put out a certain percent of the days ET (which has already been partially reduced system-wide from the crop coefficient remember).

So for example, my tees are usually at 100%, as they are sand based, drain well and tend to dry out quickly. My fairways on native soil are usually between 80-110% depending on weather and time of year. However, I can have my front 9 fairways at 100%, but if #3 and #5 are really baking still, I can turn up JUST those fairways to 110 or 120% for a night or two. What's more, if there's just a few spots that are baking, we can go in and adjust the INDIVIDUAL SPRINKLER to 110 or 120% or whatever gives us the right amount of water to keep the area alive, but still not overly wet. It's a daily balancing act of checking the whole course, making lists and adjusting areas as needs require.

So what goes on in the computer is that it takes the ET, reduces it by the crop coefficient, then adjust up or down for program percentage adjustments, then adjusts again for any sprinkler percentage adjustments, then takes the individual sprinklers make, model, spacing, nozzle size, and rotation speed to figure out the equivalent minutes that sprinkler needs to run to put out the desired amount of water.

Does your brain hurt yet?  ;D

One last thing, as all I've described above is simply how most irrigation systems are run nowadays by supers, there are always other ways to do it, which are by no means less effective and highly dependant on the site and experience of the super.

I don't water my greens off ET at all. I have bentrgrass USGA spec greens. This means they are sand based with a perched water table. So when I water heavily, or it rains alot, the green drains well but water will perch about 8-14" below the soil surface due to the construction of the green to make a "pool" of water for the plant to pull from. I choose to water my greens 30 minutes 2-3 times a week. If I water every night, the soil surface will be kept wetter, and will be ideal for Poa annua, with shallow roots, to take hold, grow and thrive. To combat this, by watering deeply and less often, the water drains away from the surface, pools farther down in the profile where only the deeper rooting bentgrass can get at it and keeps the playing surface more dried out and firm without overly stressing the bentgrass plant. Of course, this only works if your green soil profile is functioning properly and water actually DOES drain quickly and perch at the sand/gravel interface deep in the profile.

So there you have it......that's how you use ET to water a golf course. And the equation I posted is simply a measure of how much of that ET lost by the plant is being replaced by the super. Obviously, if a super is returning over 100% of ET, I would venture to say they're definetely overwatering.....or their calculations are way off.  ;D But any numbers below 100% can give a good indication and level ground for discussion of water use efficiencies over a wide range of courses, locations and situations.

I must also preface the above conclusion with the fact that use of this equation requires diligent, excellent record keeping by the super to make sure they know exactly how much water is being used to irrigate and not fill lakes or pools or is also being used by the clubhouse, etc etc. Also, the addition of an on-site weather station is going to give much more accurate ET information than data taken from the nearest publicly available weather station, which could be located in a very different microclimate or surroundings.
"To be nobody but yourself in a world which is doing it's best, night and day, to make you everybody else means to fight the hardest battle any human being can fight; and never stop fighting." -E.E. Cummings

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Quick Irrigation Poll for the Supers (warning: some math required!)
« Reply #19 on: February 10, 2009, 09:57:06 AM »
Yeah...like I said...area ET in July is 5"...set system for X amount per night.... ;D


Wow...this irrigation stuff can get complicated quickly...if you are injecting something through your system can you control where it's going?  For example...you want to put down a growth regulator on the fairways....and only the fairways? 
No one is above the law. LOCK HIM UP!!!

Greg Chambers

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Quick Irrigation Poll for the Supers (warning: some math required!)
« Reply #20 on: February 10, 2009, 10:17:33 AM »
Nice post JS.

Craig,

People do set up their irrigation systems to do just what you said, and those courses tend to be what I would call over watered.  I make adjustments to my irrigation daily.  Sometimes I'll come back in just before the cycles start and change it again, if I see something I don't like while I'm playing in the afternoon.  I don't have a weather station, but I do have all the other bells and whistles, so I do it more by what I feel the turf needs, but making these adjustments is relatively easy.

As for injecting, I would never put a growth regulator in the system.  Too many major hazards involved with that.  I do put out soil treatments and wetting agents, occasionally a micro nutrient application, but that's about it. 
"It's good sportsmanship to not pick up lost golf balls while they are still rolling.”

Joe Hancock

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Quick Irrigation Poll for the Supers (warning: some math required!)
« Reply #21 on: February 10, 2009, 11:06:58 AM »
There's a lot of good reading here, and I'm going to go through it again sometime to try to better comprehend what's being said.

One thing I think should be emphasized is that a plant is not necessarily going to die if the ET rates are higher than the amount of water replenished. In other words, plants are capable of surviving dry spells as well as wet spells.....and some spells last for years. The key is to have a hardy plant.

Joe
" What the hell is the point of architecture and excellence in design if a "clever" set up trumps it all?" Peter Pallotta, June 21, 2016

"People aren't picking a side of the fairway off a tee because of a randomly internally contoured green ."  jeffwarne, February 24, 2017

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Quick Irrigation Poll for the Supers (warning: some math required!)
« Reply #22 on: February 10, 2009, 11:34:33 AM »
Joe...seems to me it's all about soil and root depth...I wonder though...lets say your grass is losing a lot of moisture....do you have to eventually replenish that moisture to keep plant stress from being a concern as you go into winter?
No one is above the law. LOCK HIM UP!!!

Joe Hancock

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Quick Irrigation Poll for the Supers (warning: some math required!)
« Reply #23 on: February 10, 2009, 11:39:33 AM »
Craig,

That really depends on what the plants have been conditioned to in the past. Not just the immediate past, but say for the past few seasons. If the grass is used to being wet, don't dry it too much going into any season, let alone winter when dry winds can take its toll.

The thing I think is important with irrigation is to get out of thinking about moisture on a daily need basis, but think more in terms of how plants go through moisture cycles throughout the seasons and throughout their lifespan.

I hope that makes some sense,

Joe
" What the hell is the point of architecture and excellence in design if a "clever" set up trumps it all?" Peter Pallotta, June 21, 2016

"People aren't picking a side of the fairway off a tee because of a randomly internally contoured green ."  jeffwarne, February 24, 2017

Alan FitzGerald CGCS MG

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Quick Irrigation Poll for the Supers (warning: some math required!)
« Reply #24 on: February 10, 2009, 02:10:08 PM »
JS

Ran the formula, again, without a weather station used the average et and arrived at 38%....

I've been lucky to use both Rainbird's and Toro's control systems. There are many differences in their set-up and usability but both have similar capabilities.

Personally I'm not a big fan of using ET as, although a great tool for some, I think it's relying too much on a machine and on preprogrammed assumptions. I know I can keep the golf course drier by watering only when the turf needs it and not just constantly 'topping' it off. I also feel that stressing the turf a little makes it stronger over time and increases it's ability to withstand drought stress over time. My assistant and I sit down daily to tweak the runtimes as needed, however it's now at the point that it mainly just consists of adjusting area runtimes not necessarily individual heads. We also have a palm pilot that we can use to adjust head runtimes if needed as we ride around and it will update the central at the end of the day.

I am trying a couple of the Toro sensors at the moment, (besides temp, right now, not much use as the ground is frozen...) but I believe these, amongst their other benefits, will be a very relevant way to judge watering rates in the future, especially once there's a seasons worth of data accumulated from them.

Anyway there is no wrong or right way (if there was the manufactors wouldn't offer the option) and it is down to the Supers personal opinion and philosophy.
Golf construction & maintenance are like creating a masterpiece; Da Vinci didn't paint the Mona Lisa's eyes first..... You start with the backdrop, layer on the detail and fine tune the finished product into a masterpiece

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back