home | subscribe | contact us | advertise with us | feature editorial guidelines | research editorial guidelines | gcsaa.org
June 2007
 


In this issue

On the Web

Feature articles

The Insider

Departments

Research

GCM blog

GCM's Ask the Experts

Be in the know when you go with the flow

What to look for when working with an irrigation consultant.

Photos courtesy of Leo Pellant

Ask a superintendent to name the most important tool for maintaining quality turf and the answer most likely will be the golf course irrigation system.

However, you may be among many superintendents facing the same dilemma: Golfers expect excellent turf, but your irrigation system is antiquated, has inadequate and non-uniform coverage and requires a high degree of maintenance, both in dollars and labor. Your career depends on having a well-designed, cost-efficient irrigation system, but because new systems are costly, your committee, board or membership decides that a replacement can “wait just one more year.”

The “one more year” grows into two, three, four or more years. You keep pleading, and finally, the board agrees on an irrigation consultant, who prepares plans and specifications for a new system.

The consultant’s bid arrives, the financing is in place, the membership has approved the project, you get bids from contractors and anxiously await construction. But you may be unaware of a whole new set of problems — problems for which the membership could blame you for years to come; problems you could avoid by following certain procedures and asking questions of the consultant during the design process.

After a new irrigation system is installed, your role in the project will be either applauded or looked down upon by the board. Every member will have an opinion. Knowing at the beginning what to expect from the irrigation consultant — and the right questions to ask — can mean the difference between being a hero or a goat.

Early intervention
It’s not enough for you to rely on the expertise of the irrigation consultant. No one knows the idiosyncrasies and requirements of the golf course better than you. The consultant should know these details, as well as your requirements for irrigating the course, during the design process. The same principles apply to new golf courses and those being renovated. The newly installed irrigation system will meet expectations if you ask the right questions and insist on being involved during the design phase. The consultant should welcome your involvement.

Before the irrigation plans begin, provide the irrigation consultant with required weekly moisture application amounts for greens, fairways, tees, roughs, driving range, etc. Turfgrass varieties will differ from feature to feature, each having its own moisture requirement. The consultant should factor in maximum moisture application amounts when looking at the system programming schedule and the final hydraulic design.

Require the consultant to provide a written design analysis by the time you finalize irrigation plans. After the system is installed, you won’t want to have to explain to the membership why you have to water 14, 16 or even more hours each day in July and August to keep the course green.

The grand tour
Before irrigation plans start, you and a representative of the board and/or membership should conduct a thorough tour of the course with the consultant and take notes to refer to before final plans are presented. The consultant may not recognize aspects of the course that create irrigation problems unless they are explained. For example, certain areas of the course may have been built over rock and may have only a few inches of soil covering the rock. Another area may have sandy soil. Some areas may have constant severe drainage problems with subsurface water, while others may present drainage problems only during rainy days. Certain terrain may create wind conditions that aren’t prevalent in other areas. Ask the consultant for confirmation that the problems are being addressed. You certainly don’t want to compound a drainage problem with “plenty of good coverage.”

Firm foundations
During the planning phase, the consultant will prepare preliminary coverage patterns for all course features and show areas of coverage for each sprinkler head on the plans. Your input is extremely important, and you must have time to inspect the proposed coverage. You may find areas needing adjustment. Coverage in some areas may be deleted, and other areas may require coverage that wasn’t originally planned or perhaps a more specialized coverage. The consultant should revisit the project site as many times as necessary to develop a coverage plan that you understand and that satisfies you and your board.

It’s also important that everyone understand how the installed irrigation system will perform throughout the entire golf course. If for some reason you don’t have a chance during the planning phase to meet with the consultant and give your input, demand an opportunity to study and critique the coverage plans before final plans are prepared. Protect yourself, and avoid members asking later, “Why aren’t we getting coverage in that area?”

During Topeka (Kan.) Country Club’s 2004 irrigation remodel, the certified irrigation consultant visited the project site several times when the coverage and piping plans were being prepared, according to Leo Pellant, GCSAA Class A superintendent.

“I knew of places on the course that, if they weren’t handled right, would present continuing problems because of various turf requirements and with drainage,” the 27-year GCSAA member recalls. “Several modifications were made by the consultant as the plans were being drawn. Also, the meetings with our committee and officers that he required during the design work kept everyone abreast of what type of system they could expect. We got what we wanted.”

During Topeka (Kan.) CC’s 2004 irrigation remodel, the certified irrigation consultant visited the project site several times when the coverage and piping plans were being prepared. Photos courtesy of Leo Pellant.

Obviously, irrigation requirements differ from project to project. Some projects provide “wall-to-wall” coverage, while others exclude coverage of roughs or park-like areas.

Regardless of the project’s complexity, each fairway should have individually designed coverage, with uniform coverage throughout. Roughs usually aren’t as critical to the facility as playing areas, and you may not need a high degree of uniform coverage there.

Adjoining fairways should each have uniform coverage within the limits of each fairway, with irregularities in uniformity taking place in the roughs between the fairways. If the project calls for irrigation beyond the fairways and the consultant has simply inserted a uniformly spaced coverage pattern over the entire project (or even a portion of the total area) with little regard to uniform coverage in each fairway, question the consultant’s method. A uniform coverage pattern doesn’t necessarily mean there will be uniform coverage within the limits of each fairway.

Coverage uniformity for each course feature throughout the entire project is an important goal of the consultant’s design. Computer programs can quickly insert a coverage pattern into features shown in a drawing. However, no two fairways, greens or other golf course features are alike. So computer programs may stretch or compress equipment manufacturers’ recommended spacing. Also, if spacings are stretched beyond programmed limits, the programs may insert additional heads. Head spacings can be too compressed, leading to a fairway area that is too wet.

Coverage patterns created by computer programs may not reflect the idiosyncrasies and requirements of individual golf courses. Keep in mind that these computer programs were created to minimize the consultant’s time, skill and effort required to develop plans. The old fashioned way of manually designing coverage for each individual feature, though slower and much more tedious, may still be best, and probably does more to protect your interests. While studying the preliminary coverage plans, question any area of coverage where head spacings are stretched or compressed. Coverage uniformity in the completed project will only be as good as the plans, and it’s too late to raise questions after the system is installed.

No regrets
You probably have a personal preference for the type of irrigation system you want to work with for years, and most boards and members elect to not be involved with those decisions. It’s the consultant’s responsibility to provide a design based upon your preferences. But enter into the project with your mind open to new ideas and opinions. Gain as much knowledge as possible about brands of equipment, manufacturers’ and distributors’ service policies, types of control systems and types of irrigation designs. Don’t be reluctant to consult with other GCSAA members and others in the golf course maintenance industry.

Tell the consultant during your first meeting how much time you allow each night for irrigation. Your desired watering window will factor into main line pipe sizing, pump-station operating characteristics, operating schedules, etc., and can affect your system’s initial cost. A system with an eight-hour watering window may actually be tens of thousands of dollars more than a system with a 20-minute-longer watering window.

The consultant should produce the most cost-efficient and hydraulically sound irrigation design possible, and should let you and your employer know that your desired watering window is being considered, as well as variations of that window. If you haven’t seen a written systems analysis that gives both the hydraulic effects and costs resulting from several varying watering windows, protect your interests by requiring such a report to present to your employer.

While the irrigation system is being designed, the consultant performs calculations to determine the system’s performance and operating parameters, with separate calculations for each type of course feature. The requirements and operating parameters for all the feature types can then be determined and combined, and an analysis made of the entire system design. Information determined includes:

• Number of heads that will operate simultaneously in each type of entity
• Required control panel capacity for each type of entity and the entire system
• Maximum rate of flow (GPM) during each watering cycle
• Pump station operating characteristics
• Estimated pump station operational costs, both seasonal and annual
• Cycle-elapse time for each type of entity and the entire system (watering window)
• Required cycle water demand for each type of entity and the entire system
• Percentage of the required weekly moisture amount applied in one hour for each type of entity
• Total number of sprinkler heads in each type of entity and the entire system
• Estimated cost for construction of the project

Get it in writing
Before beginning work, obtain a written report from the consultant to confirm that information you provided at the initial meeting (required weekly moisture application amounts and desired watering window) was used as a basis for the system design. Study the report before preparing final plans. The report will help you fully understand the workings of the system, and will assure you that the consultant’s design is in the best interests of your facility.

If you’ve convinced your employer that you require an updated irrigation system, proceed with caution and do it right. Hire a certified irrigation designer who has a golf course specialty (see www.irrigation.org for resources), and one who is independent and not affiliated with equipment manufacturers, contractors or other industry-related organizations so that he or she can work for you with no conflict of interest. Doing so actually will save money.


Charles A. Fulton (www.crownsystms.net) has designed irrigation systems for residential, commercial, institutional, athletic field and golf course projects since 1963. Based in northwest Arkansas, he is a board-certified golf course irrigation auditor and a certified golf course irrigation designer.

RECENT issues

May
2007

April
2007