Impact Sprinkler Pattern Modification: Kincaid
Impact Sprinkler Pattern Modification: Kincaid
Impact Sprinkler Pattern Modification: Kincaid
D. C. Kincaid
MEMBER
ASAE
VOL. 34(6): NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 1991 2397
Figure la shows a schematic of the spoon, nozzle, and
the deflector and its mounting point. Figure lb shows a
schematic of the deflector design which is divided into two
types which will be discussed later. Figure 2 shows the
deflector parts, including a spacer and mounting screw, and
the deflector mounted on a sprinkler. A hole is drilled in
the arm and threaded to accept the mounting screw. The
deflector shown is 40 mm in length and was cut from
2 mm thick aluminum angle.
The basic relationship describing the movement of the
impact arm is:
where
CC = is angular acceleration of the arm (rad/s 2),
= is angular velocity (rad/s),
T = is spring torque acting on the arm at any
instant (N-m),
I = is moment of inertia of the arm (kg-m 2 ),
= is angle of rotation (rad), measured clockwise
from the position of maximum extension (see
fig. 1) when 0.) = 0, t = 0, and t is time (s).
2398 TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASAE
a. b. C.
50% of the normally undisturbed angle (0.50 < 0/0; < 0.55)
t /t, = sin- I [(p0/(20,) )0.5] /sin - 1[(p/2)°.5] (5) (refer to fig. 3). Figure 1 shows the deflector angle O d.
The angular velocity of the arm at impact (0 = 0;) can be
determined from equation 3. The velocity and angle 0; is
where p = 0;/0 0. also determined by the impulse of the jet acting on the
spoon. Referring to figure la, it is assumed that the spoon
Equation 5 is plotted in figure 3 for values of p from 0.1 deflects the jet at a right angle at a radius, r. The torque
to 1.0. Figure 3 shows that the dimensionless angle-time created by the jet acting on the spoon is:
relationship is very insensitive to p. The percent of time
that the jet is undisturbed by the spoon is not very sensitive
..r. =pqVr (6)
to initial spring torque. For example, if it is desired to 1
deflect the jet for 30% of the time that the jet is undisturbed
by the spoon, the deflector angle should cover about 45 to where Ti = torque (N-m),
V = jet velocity (m/s),
r = impulse radius (m),
q = nozzle flow rate (L/s), and
P = density of water 1 kg/L.
The acceleration due to the jet impulse is:
a =(t i – t o )/I (7)
2
o) /2 = Op j — T o )/i (8)
VOL. 34(6): NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 1991 2399
where Op = to/C is the preload angle and TABLE 1. Moment of inertia, spring constant and initial
0 2 = - TO/C. torque of selected 19 mm (3/4 in.) base sprinklers
C
Impact arm To
Note that the arm impact angle, 0 1 , is independent of the Sprinkler (kg-m 2 ) (Nm/rad)
(Nm)
Material
moment of inertia and is dependent only upon the spring
constant and preload angle, and somewhat dependent on Nelson F33 Brass 0.00037 0.023 0.025
nozzle flow due to the effect of equation 6 on equation 9. Rainbird 301-1 Brass 0.00030 0.017 0.040
Rainbird 30EF Aluminum 0.00012 0.009 0.016
Table 1 gives measured moment of inertia, spring 0.020 0.025
Weather Tec 10-30 Brass 0.00029
constant, and initial torque from several sprinklers. The
moment of inertia was measured by alternately weighing
the arm, cutting off segments of the arm in 10 mm radial
increments and calculating the inertia of each segment. The TABLE 2. Calculated and measured impact angle and
spring constant was calculated from spring torque impact frequency of a Rainbird 30H sprinkler
measurements at angles of 0 and 45° (measured r frequency td
counterclockwise from the sprinkler body). Note that the
(kPa) (1../s) (mm) (deg) (deg) (deg) (s) (s) (rad / s)
aluminum arm has much lower moment of inertia and
spring constant. However, the ratio I/C is relatively calc meas calc meas
constant, resulting in nearly equal impact frequencies for 207 0.25 70 5.0 33 35 5.7 5.7 0.0064 0.081 13.6
these sprinklers. 207 0.25 80 5.0 38 35 55 5.7 0.0060 0.086 14.6
Data for verification of equations 4 through 9 were 207 0.25 80 4.0 31 35 5.9 5.7 0.0053 0.079 13.1
207 0.25 80 45 34 35 5.7 5.7 0.0057 0.083 13.9
obtained by using a video camera mounted directly above 5.7 5.7 0.0050 0.083 14.0
207 0.25 90 4.0 35 35
an operating sprinkler to measure the impact angle and 276 0.28 90 4.0 45 42 5.2 5.3 0.0043 0.092 16.1
impact frequency (number of impacts per second). The 276 0.34 90 4.0 53 52 4.9 4.9 0.0039 0.099 17.8
camera recorded 60 frames per second, and by using single 207 0.29 90 4.0 40 43 5.4 5.0 0.0046 0.088 15.1
frame advance the angle was determined within about Note: C = 0.017 Nm / rad,
2° accuracy. The impact frequency was accurately 1 = 0.0003 4.-m 2 ,
determined by counting frames through several cycles. To = 0.043 Nm.
Nozzle
— CD 1 1 /64
- - MG9S
_c --- FCN 5.0
E
E
ai
a
2 4 6 8
16
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Distance, m
Distance,
Figure 6-Effect of pressure on pattern with a Type 1 deflector, 0c = 9,
Figure 4-Comparison of patterns with different nozzle types. = 18°.
VOL. 34(6): NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 1991 2401
TABLE 3. Uniformity coefficient (CU%) for various nozzle deflector Windspeed, mi/hr
combinations, with square spacings and no wind, using a Nelson F33 sprinkler
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Nozzle Pressure Deft Radius Spacing m (ft)
100
1cPa (psi) deg m 12 (40) 14 (45) 15 (50) 17155) 18 (60; Sprinkler: F33 Nozzle: FCN 4
Triangular. 15 97 95 97 96 89 95 Spacing: 1 2x 1 5m Pressure kPa(psi)
Rectangular' 15 88 87 80 73 80 207(30)D
90 276(40)D
FCN4t 207 30 25-32 13 88 90 90 87 84
FCN4t 276 40 25-32 14 90 90 88 86 84 85 345(50)D
FCN4t 207 30 9-20 13 85 81 81 82 77 207(30)N
FCN4t 207 30 9-18 14 86 82 78 78 80
FCN4t 207 40 9-18 15 85 85 81 79 80
80 276(40)N
345(50)N
FCN 4t 207 30 none 145 69 75 61 55 60 75
FCN4t 276 40 none 155 71 81 73 65 66
FCN4t 345 50 none 16 77 86 78 71 70 70
FCN4t 414 60 none 16 81 87 79 75 75
2402 TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASAE
Windspeed, mi/hr Windspeed, mi/hr
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
100 100
Sprinkler: F33 Nozzle: FCN 4 Pressure: 207kPa(30pti)
95 Spacing: 12x15m Pressure 207 kPa 95
Nozzle Defl.
FCN 4 Typel
90 90 - — FCN 5 Type 1
Deflector - - CD5/32 none
85 Type 1 85
CD11/64 none
80 Type 2 80
- — None
75 75
70 70
65 65
60 60
55 55
50 50
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Windspeed, m/s Windspeed, m/s
Figure 9—Uniformity vs. windspeed with two types of deflectors.
Figure 10—Uniformity vs. windspeed comparing the Type 1 deflector
with square (CD) nozzles.
leaving the jet undisturbed for longer periods, which helps
to maintain a larger pattern radius, as shown in figure 5. easier to build than Type 2. This type deflector is easily
Figure 10 compares the deflector tests with the diffuse adjusted and maintains relatively high uniformity for a
jet CD nozzle. The deflector appears to perform as well or reasonably wide range of nozzle pressures and flows. A
better than the diffuse jet at medium and low windspeeds, high degree of uniformity and flow control, over a wide
but may not perform better at high winds (> 5 m/s). pressure range, can be obtained with flow control nozzles
and the intermittent deflector.
The addition of the deflector creates a slight imbalance
in the arm which can cause increased vibration of the
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION sprinkler if the riser is flexible. If this is a problem, the arm
The intermittent deflector was conceived as a means of may need to be rebalanced with the deflector in place.
modifying the application pattern of a sprinkler without
using continuous jet diffusion techniques. The tests with no
wind show that by adjusting the angles of the deflector, the REFERENCES
distribution pattern can be made to approach the triangular ASAE Standards, 36th Ed. 1989. S330.I. Procedure for
shape with a slight reduction in pattern radius, which sprinkler distribution testing for research purposes. St.
results in high uniformities of application. However, the Joseph, MI: ASAE.
outdoor tests show that the classical triangular distribution ASAE Standards, 36th Ed. 1989. 5398.1. Procedure for
pattern is not necessarily optimum, a more rectangular sprinkler testing and performance reporting. St. Joseph,
pattern with a larger radius being more advantageous for MI: ASAE.
windy conditions. Christiansen, J. E. 1942. Irrigation by Sprinkling. California
The Type 2 deflector gave the best results with no wind. Eg. Exp. Sta. Bulletin 570.
It appears that the Type 1 deflector, in which the jet is Irrigation Journal. 1990. 1989 Irrigation Survey. Irrigation
undeflected once per impact arm cycle, and the jet is Journal 40(1):23-34.
deflected approximately 30% of the time, is the best Kincaid, D. C. 1982. Sprinkler pattern radius. Transactions
configuration for wind conditions. It is also smaller and of the ASAE 25(6):1668-1672.
VOL. 34(6): NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 1991 2403