We usually show our drip rings attached to lateral lines anyway. But if we were using it on a reveg site, maybe we wouldn't have to.
General question to all who might be reading this post: Are people using a flush valve at each drip ring? I seems that each ring is a one-way trip. So in concept every one would. But with the box and all, the cost of installing a tree ring goes up substantially. Our detail shows one at each ring. But wondering if that's an industry standard or overkill. Thanks for your input.
I don't speak for the water, but if my two cents is worth anything, I would venture to say that a flush valve at the furthest or lowest point should be all that is needed, not in every ring. Thinking about manual vs auto flush also might make a difference, but typically, if a valve is going to be opened for flushing purposes, then the higher volume of flow should allow more water through each path of the rings, pushing debris through each ring segment until it is pushed out the path of least resistance. I would love to hear other inputs as well.
I don't understand your quest. Are you irrigating trees (drip rings) with the same valve that is being used to irrigate shrubs (with emitters or drip areas)? It would seem that one wouldn't want them calculated together. I'm interested but confused.
Some of the contractors I work with will put an extra loop of drip line around trees, in what other wise is a shrub-tree-GC area. So, I use the new Drip Ring tool to calc the flow and length of tubing, then use that info to create a drip emitter, which I drop into drip line areas. They get added to the total flow. My question to J is, can the drip rings just be treated the same way, but still be able to be piped separately if so desired (which is how drip emitters in a drip line area are treated).
Well it does work the same way as drip emitters, in that they are listed separate from the dripline.
So this way you can still choose All or All Drip if you wish, or you can zone them separate from the dripline.