On 6/29/2011 7:30 PM, James Nipper wrote:
I have a vacation property in the mountains, of about six acres, two acres
of which are cleared and developed. I have areas away from the house area
in which I need water access for watering plants, flowers, etc. Ideally, I
would love to have about three faucets in areas that are up to about 400
feet away from the house.

I can purchase 500 to 600 feet of hoses, and with the use of "T's" add
several branches (hoses) to allow me to water in several selected areas.
But, if I use high quality hoses, this would be pretty expensive, and it all
seems so "temporary."

I am wondering if it would be more economical to run a main line of about
500 feet, using some sort of plastic pipe (cannot remember the name of the
current most common), and then run my hose branches from that ? (The main
line would have to lay on the ground, through the woods). Whatever I use,
I need to be able to drain the line during winters, but I suppose I could
get fittings for this equipped with a drain screw or valve or something.

Any ideas of what I should look for, or use ? Any general ideas of how to
accomplish what I am trying to do ?

thanks !!

James


Poly pipe is great for underground lines. It doesn't lay flat very well
so I'm not sure how it would work above ground. Here's a link:
http://www.aquascience.net/pipe/index.cfm?id=552

RBM wrote:
On 6/29/2011 7:30 PM, James Nipper wrote:
I have a vacation property in the mountains, of about six acres, two acres
of which are cleared and developed. I have areas away from the house area
in which I need water access for watering plants, flowers, etc. Ideally, I
would love to have about three faucets in areas that are up to about 400
feet away from the house.

I can purchase 500 to 600 feet of hoses, and with the use of "T's" add
several branches (hoses) to allow me to water in several selected areas.
But, if I use high quality hoses, this would be pretty expensive, and it all
seems so "temporary."

I am wondering if it would be more economical to run a main line of about
500 feet, using some sort of plastic pipe (cannot remember the name of the
current most common), and then run my hose branches from that ? (The main
line would have to lay on the ground, through the woods). Whatever I use,
I need to be able to drain the line during winters, but I suppose I could
get fittings for this equipped with a drain screw or valve or something.

Any ideas of what I should look for, or use ? Any general ideas of how to
accomplish what I am trying to do ?

thanks !!

James


Poly pipe is great for underground lines. It doesn't lay flat very well
so I'm not sure how it would work above ground. Here's a link:
http://www.aquascience.net/pipe/index.cfm?id=552

A small air compressor can blow the lines clear of water for the winter.
Fifteen pounds of pressure should do the job. I use a quick release adapter
for the compressor and the adapter attached to a short water hose. Just
make sure the end of the line is open for drainage. I just use the
underground lines just for watering the plants around my home, not in
distant areas.

The biggest problem you are going to have is water pressure at the end of
500 feet depending on the pressure you already have. An extra water tank
could be used that is under greater pressure than the household pressure
could solve that problem if needed, but not a cheap option. Or slowly fill
up a cistern at the end of the line and use pump to water the area needed.

Again depending on your home water pressure, those extra methods may not be
needed.

--
Enjoy Life... Nad R (Garden in zone 5a Michigan)

RBM wrote:
On 6/29/2011 7:30 PM, James Nipper wrote:
I have a vacation property in the mountains, of about six acres, two
acres of which are cleared and developed. I have areas away
from the house area in which I need water access for watering
plants, flowers, etc. Ideally, I would love to have about three
faucets in areas that are up to about 400 feet away from the house.

I can purchase 500 to 600 feet of hoses, and with the use of "T's" add
several branches (hoses) to allow me to water in several
selected areas. But, if I use high quality hoses, this would be
pretty expensive, and it all seems so "temporary."

I am wondering if it would be more economical to run a main line of
about 500 feet, using some sort of plastic pipe (cannot remember the
name of the current most common), and then run my hose branches from
that ? (The main line would have to lay on the ground, through the
woods). Whatever I use, I need to be able to drain the line
during winters, but I suppose I could get fittings for this equipped
with a drain screw or valve or something. Any ideas of what I should look
for, or use ? Any general ideas of
how to accomplish what I am trying to do ?

thanks !!

James


Poly pipe is great for underground lines. It doesn't lay flat very
well so I'm not sure how it would work above ground. Here's a link:
http://www.aquascience.net/pipe/index.cfm?id=552

You don't say where this water is coming from. Is it town water, well
water, what?

If you are laying pipe then poly pipe is what you need, it will be the
cheapest choice for such a distance. All the fittings you would ever want
are available. It can be laid underground if the ground isn't too rocky.
The quickest method is with a ripper/feeder on a tractor. This is a blade
that cuts a slit trench that has a metal tube behind it, you feed the poly
down the tube into the slit as the tractor moves at walking pace, then you
tred the slit down and it's done.

OTOH it can also be laid along fences on top of the ground. If going to
this much trouble don't do it in 12mm (1/2 inch pipe) but somewhere around
32mm (1 1/4 ") to 40mm (1 1/2 "). This solution depends on what is pumping
the water and how much rise or fall there is along the length. The joints
in polypipe are easily undone to allow draining by gravity, ground slope
permitting.

A quite different solution: what about saving water adjacent to the area
that you want to water? I am thinking of a tank collecting water from the
roof of an outbuilding or a small dam/pond in a gully.

David

On 6/29/2011 7:30 PM, James Nipper wrote:
I have a vacation property in the mountains, of about six acres, two
acres of which are cleared and developed. I have areas away
from the house area in which I need water access for watering
plants, flowers, etc. Ideally, I would love to have about three
faucets in areas that are up to about 400 feet away from the house.

I can purchase 500 to 600 feet of hoses, and with the use of "T's" add
several branches (hoses) to allow me to water in several
selected areas. But, if I use high quality hoses, this would be
pretty expensive, and it all seems so "temporary."

I am wondering if it would be more economical to run a main line of
about 500 feet, using some sort of plastic pipe (cannot remember the
name of the current most common), and then run my hose branches from
that ? (The main line would have to lay on the ground, through the
woods). Whatever I use, I need to be able to drain the line
during winters, but I suppose I could get fittings for this equipped
with a drain screw or valve or something. Any ideas of what I should look
for, or use ? Any general ideas of
how to accomplish what I am trying to do ?

It would help to know what water volume, how often, and what climate.
If you'e on a well your system may not be capable of raising water
very high so it would help to know your topography. Six acres is not
very much area, if essentially square then the distance from center to
the perimeter is not very far. If there is a centrally located high
point you might consider erecting a tank, either on the ground or on a
tower... fill the tank with a pump and let gravity work with hose(s)
to reach your various watering points. Personally for watering a few
plants here and there I'd fit a wagon with a tank and with a tractor
tow the water wagon to whatever needs watering... that is exactly how
I water my plants... if you ever tried to drag a couple of hundred
feet of hose, especially filled with water you'd soon give that up.
And attempting to bury pipe in forested/raw land without heavy
excavating equipment is practically impossible.

Brooklyn1 Gravesend1 wrote:
It would help to know what water volume, how often, and what climate.
If you'e on a well your system may not be capable of raising water
very high so it would help to know your topography. Six acres is not
very much area, if essentially square then the distance from center to
the perimeter is not very far. If there is a centrally located high
point you might consider erecting a tank, either on the ground or on a
tower... fill the tank with a pump and let gravity work with hose(s)
to reach your various watering points. Personally for watering a few
plants here and there I'd fit a wagon with a tank and with a tractor
tow the water wagon to whatever needs watering... that is exactly how
I water my plants... if you ever tried to drag a couple of hundred
feet of hose, especially filled with water you'd soon give that up.
And attempting to bury pipe in forested/raw land without heavy
excavating equipment is practically impossible.

I have done the wagon thing, it is a pain in the... Takes time to fill them
up and time to drain it. I however typically use the lengthy hose. I have
four one hundred foot lite weight hoses with quick connectors. I mean do
not get the heavy duty hoses because they are heavy. I can set up the hoses
and take them down in less than thirty minutes. I often use a soaker hose
or soaker wand at the receiving end because pressure is diminished for
spraying.

One thing about lite weight hoses. Do not leave the hose set up in the hot
sun with the pressure on and water not flowing. The water will heat up and
bust the hose on a hot day. But lite weight hoses are easy to carry or put
in a garden wagon.

One can rent a walk behind "Ditch Witch" for digging trenches. Four hundred
feet would take eight hours depending on terrain. Some cheap "Ditch
Witches" can beat you up at the end of the day, good models will not.

--
Enjoy Life... Nad R (Garden in zone 5a Michigan)

80 cents a foot? That's more pricey than garden hose?

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"RBM" wrote in message
...

Poly pipe is great for underground lines. It doesn't lay
flat very well
so I'm not sure how it would work above ground. Here's a
link:
http://www.aquascience.net/pipe/index.cfm?id=552

Stormin Mormon wrote:
80 cents a foot? That's more pricey than garden hose?

A 500 foot garden hose isn't going to pass much water.

On Thu, 30 Jun 2011 07:22:08 -0700, "Bob F"
wrote:

Stormin Mormon wrote:
80 cents a foot? That's more pricey than garden hose?

A 500 foot garden hose isn't going to pass much water.

Why not? Hose length has no bearing on water volume, only diameter
matters.

Brooklyn1 wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jun 2011 07:22:08 -0700, "Bob F"
wrote:

Stormin Mormon wrote:
80 cents a foot? That's more pricey than garden hose?

A 500 foot garden hose isn't going to pass much water.

Why not? Hose length has no bearing on water volume, only diameter
matters.

Is that your final answer?

Wrong again.

It's gentler, to supply some reason, rather than flat
contradiction.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"Bob F" wrote in message
...

A 500 foot garden hose isn't going to pass much water.

Why not? Hose length has no bearing on water volume, only
diameter
matters.

Is that your final answer?

Wrong again.

A 500 foot garden hose isn't going to pass much water.

Why not? Hose length has no bearing on water volume, only
diameter
matters.

Is that your final answer?

Wrong again.

Stormin Mormon wrote:
It's gentler, to supply some reason, rather than flat
contradiction.




Do you really need a reason? Or is it perfectly obvious to you?

If you take a mile of hose, or one 50 foot length, what percentage of the single
hose water will get through the mile length, with the same high volume source
and hose diameter? 100%? You don't really think so, do you?

I know from my experience that two hoses in series deliver significantly less
water than one. Now multiply that effect for a 500 foot hose.

For tapping beer from kegs, they even use the line length to drop the pressure
to avoid foaming. 3/16" beer line produces 2 psi drop per foot at the flow of a
normal tap.

In article ,
"Stormin Mormon" wrote:

It's gentler, to supply some reason, rather than flat
contradiction.

Lemme see whether I understand your point. Try this:

You're wrong, because you're a top-posting Mormon.

How'd I do?

When I was in the fire service, we learned that both length
and diameter matters. Smaller hose increases pressure drop,
usually measured in psi drop per 100 feet of length.

500 foot hose has 5 times the pressure drop of 100 foot
hose. In this case, both size matters, and length matters.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"Brooklyn1" Gravesend1 wrote in message
...


A 500 foot garden hose isn't going to pass much water.

Why not? Hose length has no bearing on water volume, only
diameter
matters.

On Thu, 30 Jun 2011 18:05:26 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:

When I was in the fire service, we learned that both length
and diameter matters. Smaller hose increases pressure drop,
usually measured in psi drop per 100 feet of length.
500 foot hose has 5 times the pressure drop of 100 foot
hose.

Prove it.

You obviously weren't paying attention in class... so long as pressure
and diameter remains constant volume remains constant... it's when
there is pressure loss and diameter decreases that volume decreases...
fire hose diameter reduces even when moved around corners... every
sailer learns this from shipboard fire control tutorials. And were
you truly in fire service you'd know that fire hose lays flat when
unpressurized and it's diameter changes with changes in pressure...
all you did at the firehouse is polish the firemen's poles.

Brooklyn1 wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jun 2011 18:05:26 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:

When I was in the fire service, we learned that both length
and diameter matters. Smaller hose increases pressure drop,
usually measured in psi drop per 100 feet of length.
500 foot hose has 5 times the pressure drop of 100 foot
hose.

Prove it.

Try the equation for pressure drop in lines he

http://hydraulik.empass.biz/

or the graph he


http://www.polypipe.com.au/images/PP...m%20design.pdf



You obviously weren't paying attention in class... so long as pressure
and diameter remains constant volume remains constant... it's when
there is pressure loss and diameter decreases that volume decreases...
fire hose diameter reduces even when moved around corners... every
sailer learns this from shipboard fire control tutorials. And were
you truly in fire service you'd know that fire hose lays flat when
unpressurized and it's diameter changes with changes in pressure...
all you did at the firehouse is polish the firemen's poles.

When somebody challenges what you say instead of reaching for the personal
insults you would look less foolish and juvenile if you did some research to
see if just maybe you have made a mistake. It's not like this was the first
time. You could also try an apology now and then if you have made an honest
mistake - I won't be holding my breath waiting.

David