Did the default rotor head precip rate change? I was messing around with a new watering time and noticed my run time had decreased quite a bit. After digging around I noticed the default precip rate for rotor head changed from .7 to 1.0. Is this a bug on my end or was this intentionally changed?
Yes, we made some slight adjustments on default values for precip rates, root zone depth, efficiency, managed allowed depletion, and probably a couple more things I’m forgetting. Long month
These were made to bring us more in-alignment with industry standards as well as making the overall system(s) water less
We did not modify any custom nozzles.
Will the changes in precip rates automatically adjust a user’s current schedule, or does the user need to delete current / create a new schedule to reflect this?
@Brg468, just curious, how did the time changes look to you? Let us know if you have any concerns about the recommended run times.
You will need to delete/re-add.
The biggest push to get these ‘more’ dialed-in is our flex schedules.
We wanted to make sure we weren’t over watering (or suggesting over watering).
The great thing is once you’ve accurately set these values, it (hopefully) will be set and forget.
I think it knocked about 20 min off my total run time. I had done a rough estimate on the precip rate for one of my 5 zones (planning to do the rest eventually) and came up with 1.02 in/hr, so the new rate matches almost perfectly with that zone. I thought the original run times were a bit long so I like the change.
Just deleted / added the same schedule. It just knocked off 40+ minutes off my full schedule from 2 hr 56 min to 2 hr 14 min. The biggest change was the rotary nozzles from 59 minutes each zone to just 33 minutes.
Interestingly, the perennial zone actually increased by 2 minutes. Thanks for the update.
I want to make sure I understand this, with the changes that have been made, I should delete my current schedule. But keep all my settings the same and recreate the schedule again?
I just had water budgeting applied and everything seems ot be running fine. Or should I delete the current schedule after the update is released.
Correct, we will incorporate the new defaults.
It depends. If you are going to stay with fixed schedules, I would delete/re-add if you want to use the new defaults.
If you are going to use flex schedules, then you might want to just wait. Your call
I’ll wait because the flex schedules may be a game changer… And I am extremely happy with the Iro. I love the water budgeting and I want to make sure my reports are correct. I don’t want to change anything right now with a new release around the corner.
As long as we are getting good customer data (zone attributes set correctly) and accurate weather data that measures ET (evapotranspiration) and precipitation, watering will be much more efficient in terms of frequency.
that is exactly where I need to spend some time with the system. I only have 4 zones, but some changes are needed and I need to have a better understanding of the Iro. That is why I am spending so much of work day on the forum instead of work!!! LOL
@franz & @emil - I have to ask a similar question to @canons900. I’ve seen a couple of references in a few threads, where you guys have indicated (or at least my interpretation) that when you make back end changes, we need to delete and recreate schedules or zones in order to get our systems to pick up the new settings.
Could you please clarify. I hope I have this wrong! I assume through continuous analysis and feedback, you guys will always be making adjustments based on new learnings. I hope those adjustments are pushed to our IROs, schedules, zone configs transparently.
It would also be good to let us know what changes are being made so that we are informed and understand what could cause adjustments to be made to our watering times.
Generally correct. This is one instance where we changed default values for some nozzles and other advanced zone settings that for fixed schedules, you will only benefit by rebuilding your schedule. Everything else we modify in the cloud will automatically get applied.
I don’t expect to make these types of changes again.
@franz - when such changes are made that require us to take an action to benefit from the change, are we informed? Did I miss the ‘memo’?
A push notification message for potential user interaction would be a good start.
Good point. Overall no action was needed for these new defaults, but they eventually could help with water use reduction, which is a good thing. Noted, and any other changes that could possibly affect run times for the better, we will get some type of notification out.
+1 on the push notification. I would love to get these from the IRO. And I do when the schedule runs in the morning. But for a system update. That would be great.