Acceso usuarios
Due to high demand for aesthetically pleasing urban landscapes from continually increasing population in Florida, new methods must be explored for outdoor water conservation. Three brands of evapotranspiration (ET) controllers were selected based on positive water savings results in arid climates. ET controllers were evaluated on irrigation application compared to a time clock schedule intended to mimic homeowner irrigation schedules. Three ET controllers were tested: Toro Intelli-sense; ETwater Smart Controller 100; Weathermatic SL1600. Other time-based treatments were TIME, based on the historical net irrigation requirement and RTIME that was 60% of TIME. Each treatment was replicated four times for a total of twenty St. Augustinegrass plots which were irrigated through individual irrigation systems. Treatments were compared to each other and to a time-based schedule without rain sensor (TIME WORS) derived from TIME. The study period, August 2006 through November 2007, was dry compared to 30-year historical average rainfall. The ET controllers averaged 43% water savings compared to a time-based treatment without a rain sensor and were about twice as effective and reducing irrigation compared to a rain sensor alone. There were no differences in turfgrass quality across all treatments over the 15-month study. The controllers adjusted their irrigation schedules to the climatic demand effectively, with maximum savings of 60% during the winter 2006�2007 period and minimum savings of 9% during spring 2007 due to persistent dry conditions. RTIME had similar savings to the ET controllers compared to TIME WORS indicating that proper adjustment of time clocks could result in substantial irrigation savings. However, the ET controllers would offer consistent savings once programmed properly.
