Re: [aeration]

Steve Nordquist (
Sat, 06 Jun 1998 00:39:49 -0500

In case anyone missed it, thursday's Suck
was an amazing synopsis of Matt Drudge, what gets reported, and how
news and fluff are cross-developed, complete with consistent reference to
Canada as She is Put:
Calgary Herald
reports that schools around the
country are staging "psycho
drills" designed to help kids
survive attacks by demented
fellow students
...odd lumps in portage aside...what kinds of declaration
are needed for those phones? Just a change in one's travel registry?

Did I send the note, about 5W foot generators for travellers
and plain old alkalines not being such a bad idea, or crash?

David Long wrote:

> >How else will people learn that high pressure deep areation is
> >similar in cost, and superior to surface areation?
> (Disclaimer: I am not a turf engineer; my degree was not awarded by CIT)

//WARNING// No URI beyond this point. (Sorry. Does not apply to
archive!)I sort of elided that.... Also, on the case, the cost of keeping
pressure in the pipe(i.e. running the pumps twice a day) is too high for a crop
that doesn't specifically
make good money, like barley or wine grapes, or turf grass in Phoenix.
...plenty of webpages on plain grapes.

> Superior? Unless one has hardpan, deep aeration is overkill,

Well, the maintenance cost is associated mostly with the power spentirrigating,
so you can stop that and just aerate to keep the pipes clear.
Granted, the cost of superficial improvement will be lower than installing
the mothership under your lawn or feature of other property, but you
know you want it.

> most compaction occurs within a few inches of the surface. If leaving
> cores on the turf is a concern, drag after aeration. The cores can
> either substitute for or extend a topdressing, so it isn't really an
> extra pass.

ah...oh. Install this thing and you get compaction for 3', along withaeration.

> As far as similar in cost goes, one must look at cost-of-ownership.
> What's the mechanical complexity of "high pressure deep aeration"?
> Does one need a tractor with a power-take off?

You don't use a tractor, that's the idea! You actually have thickishPVC with
holes in it buried more than a meter down, where you
should be getting into some pretty solid stuff, and a header at
either end of the ladder (10-foot rung spacing.) Once the rungs
have been covered...done under some pressure, if you like/can...
a bit and are not found stoppled, fill more and try pumping air
up to 1800 psi, drogue the 3.5"ish I.D. of the rungs from the
detached headers, and try to bury the headers without a big
failure. Then secure your pumps from vandals.

At that point, you can try irrigating and aeration pressure.
The system doesn't foul once you manage to get it installed,
and if it does aerating for a full day tends to clear it.
The tank tends to be buried with the header; it is large.

> What size tank does
> one need for a reasonably sized field? How maintenance-intensive
> is such a system? It seems difficult to believe that such a system
> won't require more maintenance and downtime than a simple aerator and
> drag, even if the capital costs are within an order of magnitude.

No downtime for 10yrs if you got aeration close enough to the headers
so that there is no repurcussion from frost heave. It might make Canada
more useful....

What's this, QNX chosen for a new desktop box? Is a duopoly coming? .....