this presentation premiered at watersmart innovations · 2017. 5. 12. · a novel device that,...

This presentation premiered at WaterSmart Innovations

watersmartinnovations.com

http://watersmartinnovations.com/

SNWA Watering Group Assistant Study

Kent Sovocool Mitchell Morgan Michael Drinkwine Philip Orme

When are people really inefficient?

Day-of-Week Watering Restrictions

Compliance Model for Fall 2007

7%

25%

68%

Complete Compliance

Averaged Three or Fewer Irrig. Days perWeek

Averaged Four or More Irrigation Daysper Week

Background Seasonal research on mandatory watering

restrictions reveals low rates of compliance and that the most water on a relative basis is wasted during the Fall.

Messaging appears to have a positive influence

on compliance, but difficult to sustain. SNWA Board in 2007 authorized $250,000 for

RFP for development of a device that would assist residents in complying with watering restrictions – The Watering Group Assistant.

What is a Watering Group Assistant?

A novel device that, properly used, keeps any common irrigation system in compliance with watering restrictions.

Interrupts the common wire.

Capabilities for both spray and drip stations.

In theory, people can always

be in compliance after installation. No more having to remember to change your clock.

Compliance with both day-of-

week and time of day restrictions throughout the year.

So, Let’s See them!

Alex-Tronix Model Dig Indoor Model Dig Outdoor Model

Irrometer Model Hunter Model Toro Model

Research Results

Initial Popularity based on 1st month’s requests

29

15

50

11

3

42

Satisfaction Surveys

At the end of 2010 Surveys were mailed out to all currently enrolled participants 357 mailed out 113 returned 32% return rate

Questions asked respondents to rate device(s), study, and other demographic factors

What Level of Familiarity do you have with the Watering Group Assistant (after a couple years

use)?

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

1 - Very Unfamiliar 2 - Not So Good 3 - Okay 4 - Very Good 5 - Excellent

17%

4%

46%

25%

8% 8% 8%

28% 24%

32%

5%

10%

38%

24% 24%

0%

17%

37%

27%

20%

0%

22%

56%

22%

0%

17%

8%

21%

38%

17%

Alextronix

DIG In

DIG Out

Hunter

Irrometer

Toro

81% at least “Okay” level of Familiarity

Participant Average Familiarity with Watering Group Assistant Rating (after a couple years use)

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

Alextronix DIG In DIG Out Hunter Irrometer Toro

2.79

3.64 3.52 3.50

3.00 3.29

Alextronix

DIG In

DIG Out

Hunter

Irrometer

Toro

1 - Very Unfamiliar 2 - Not So Good 3 - Okay 4 - Very Good 5 - Excellent

Differences Not Statistically Significant for this sample size

How Satisfied were you with the Watering Group Assistant?

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

1 - Unsatisfactory 2 - Needs Improvement 3 - Average 4 - Very Good 5 - Excellent

8% 8%

29%

17%

38%

0%

8% 8%

27%

58%

5% 5%

10%

29%

52%

0%

7%

17%

40% 37%

22%

0%

22%

44%

11% 9% 9%

23%

41%

18%

Alextronix

DIG In

DIG Out

Hunter

Irrometer

Toro

89% at least “Okay” level of Satisfaction

Participants Average Satisfaction with Watering Group Assistant Rating


0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

4.50


3.32

4.32 4.19 4.07

3.22 3.50

Alextronix

DIG In

DIG Out

Hunter

Irrometer

Toro

1 - Unsatisfactory 2 - Needs Improvement 3 - Average 4 - Very Good 5 - Excellent

How well do you feel the Watering Group Assistant Matches Water Use with your Landscape?

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

1 - Doesn't Match 2 - Not So Well 3 - Okay 4 - Very Well 5 - Excellent

13% 13%

26%

35%

13%

0%

8%

17%

38% 38%

5% 5%

10%

29%

52%

0%

13% 13%

33%

40%

25%

0%

38% 38%

0%

5%

23%

27%

36%

9%

Alextronix

DIG In

DIG Out

Hunter

Irrometer

Toro

83% at least “Okay” level of Satisfaction

Average Watering Group Assistant Matches Water Use Rating

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

4.50


2.79

4.04 4.14

4.00

2.88

3.50 Alextronix

DIG In

DIG Out

Hunter

Irrometer

Toro

1 - Doesn't Match 2 - Not So Well 3 - Okay 4 - Very Well 5 - Excellent


What Benefit do you find Most Pleasing about the Watering Group Assistant?

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1 - Auto adjusts 2 - No WW Fees 3 - H2O Conservation 4 - Less Clock Programing 5 - Saves Money

80%

4% 8%

0%

8%

54%

13% 10% 10%

13%

91%

9%

0% 0% 0%

58%

5%

15% 15%

8%

71%

0%

29%

0% 0%

50%

4%

25%

14%

7%

Alextronix

DIG In

DIG Out

Hunter

Irrometer

Toro

Percentage of Participants that Dropped out of Study

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%


8%

18%

26%

8%

43%

18%

Alextronix

DIG In

DIG Out

Hunter

Irrometer

Toro

Problems with original programming. Irrometer fixed these, but nonetheless many

participants dropped out due to dissatisfaction

Early Study Group Observations

59%

41%

Fall-Winter Average Day-Of Week Compliance - Examination of 30 Days before installation

Non-Compliance

Comply

Sample Size = 105

Early Study Group Observations

29%

71%

Fall-Winter Average Day-Of Week Compliance - Examination of 30 Days after installation

Non-ComplianceComply

Sample Size = 105

Historical Watering Day Restriction Compliance

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Spring'05

Fall '05 Winter'05 - '06

Spring'06

Fall '06 Winter'06 - '07

Spring'07

Fall '07

18

4.2 7 11.1 3.7

18.4 12.4

7.6

43

23.8

36

49

18.1

37.3

37.8

24.2

39

72

57

39.9

78.2

44.3 49.8

68.2

Perc

ent o

f Sam

ple

Sample Period

Irrigated More

Irrigate AllowedNumber

Perfect Compliance

Compliance Rates for Day of Week Restrictions Historical vs. Watering Group Assistant (WGA)

23%

26%

51%

WGA Fall 2008 n = 53

8%

24%

68%

Historical

Complete Comply

Averaged AllowedDays

Averaged More ThanAllowed

n=236

8%

24%

68%

Historical

Complete Comply

Averaged Allowed Days


n=236

43%

19%

37%

WGA Fall 2009 n = 139



8%

24%

68%

Historical

Complete Comply



n=236

25%

29%

46%

WGA Fall 2010 n = 151

Average number of Irrigation Days per week – Fall

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Perc

ent o

f Sam

ple

Average Number of Irrigation Days Per Week

Pct Historical Pop

Pct All WGAs

4.47 days per week

3.92 days per week


11%

41%

49%

Historical

Complete Comply

Averaged Allowed Days


n=224

41%

31%

28%

WGA (Winter 2009) n = 135


11%

41%

49%

Historical

Complete Comply



n=224

21%

41%

38%

WGA (Winter 2010) n = 155

Average number of Irrigation Days per week – Winter

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Perc

ent o

f Sam

ple


Pct Historical Pop

Pct All WGAs

1.63 days per week

2.09 days per week


27%

44%

30%

WGA Spring 2010 n = 147

15%

47%

38%

Historical

Complete Comply

Averaged AllowedDaysAveraged More ThanAllowed

n=219


31%

32%

37%

WGA Spring 2011 n = 109

15%

47%

38%

Historical

Complete Comply

Averaged AllowedDaysAveraged More ThanAllowed

n=219

Average number of Irrigation Days per week – Spring

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Perc

ent o

f Sam

ple


Pct Historical Pop

Pct All WGAs

3.64 days per week

3.50 days per week

Compliance Rates for Day of Week Restrictions By Season Historical vs. All WGAs

61%

44%

70% 76%

65%

76%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Fall Winter Spring

Perc

ent o

f Irr

igat

ion

Day

s in

Com

plia

nce

Season

Historical

All WGAs

70%

77%

66%

77%

84%

71% 75%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Historical Dig Indoor Dig Outdoor Alex-Tronix Toro Irrometer Hunter

Perc

ent o

f Irr

igat

ion

Day

s In

Com

plia

nce

Group

p<.83 p=1.0 p<.77 p<.13 p=1.0 p<.99

Compliance Rates for Day of Week Restrictions By Season Historical vs. Each WGA for Spring (green denotes

statistically significant improvement relative to historical)

Compliance Rates for Day of Week Restrictions By Season Historical vs. Each WGA for Fall (green denotes statistically

significant improvement relative to historical)

61%

75% 70%

79% 78%

70%

80%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%


Perc

ent o

f Irr

igat

ion

Day

s In

Com

plia

nce

Group

p<.01 p<.76 p<.00 p<.00 p<.88 p<.00

Compliance Rates for Day of Week Restrictions By Season Historical vs. Each WGA for Winter (green denotes

statistically significant improvement relative to historical)

44%

67%

55%

64% 66% 60%

69%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%


Perc

ent o

f Irr

igat

ion

Day

s In

Com

plia

nce

Group

p<.01 p<.86 p<.01 p<.01 p<.69 p<.00

WGA Water Savings Calculation - Winter

Historical Irrigation Days per Week = 2.09

WGA Group Irrigation Days per Week = 1.63

This represents a savings of 51.4 gallons per day.

51.4 X 120 days = 6165 gallons for Winter.

y = 112.96x + 38.736 R² = 0.9893

-

100

200

300

400

500

600

0 1 2 3 4 5

Aver

age

Dai

ly Ir

rigat

ion

Use

Average Irrigation Days per Week

Savings: 1047 gallons per home average in Spring. 6355 gallons per home average in Fall. 6165 gallons per home average in Winter.

Potential Savings = 12,520 to 13,567 gallons per Home/YR

on average (13% of irrigation use during these seasons. 37%-39% of

max theoretical savings)

WGA Water Savings Calc

Concerns about successful scaling of seasonal water

savings to annual consumption

Treatment Group

-

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

Mon

thly

Con

sum

ptio

n (1

000s

of G

allo

ns)

WGA PostWGA Pre

Comparison Group

-

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

Mon

thly

Con

sum

ptio

n (1

000s

of G

allo

ns)

Compare PostCompare Pre

Both Groups

Both the Treatment and Comparison Groups show essentially identical levels of reduced annual usage. Note though not a perfect comparison.

Group JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC TOTAL Differences

WGA Pre 14.32 13.67 20.22 27.15 39.88 45.95 49.43 46.45 36.40 29.68 19.01 15.00 357.16

WGA Post 13.31 12.61 21.32 25.56 39.24 42.65 43.36 40.44 28.98 24.22 16.14 12.47 320.30 36.86

Compare Pre 15.58 14.60 20.62 26.26 36.80 42.48 46.11 43.31 35.39 29.43 19.94 16.45 346.97

Compare Post 14.14 12.88 19.35 23.42 32.83 36.10 39.30 38.44 32.11 26.98 19.42 15.29 310.28 36.70

Units = 1000s of gallons

WGA Group Reduction = 7420 gallons

Comparison Group Reduction = 3280

WGA Group Reduction = 3300 gallons

Comparison Group Reduction = 6390

Conclusions

Most people accepting of WGA and felt it matched water needs to landscape.

Most liked feature is automatic adjustment to each watering season restriction (convenience).

No clear evidence of differentiation by device in terms of acceptability though issue with initial Irrometer program was apparent.

Much higher overall level of compliance with day-of-week watering restrictions at properties with WGA.

Conclusions Compliance greatly improved in Fall and Winter

and may slightly be improved in Spring. Sustainment of savings over time could be an

issue. Any savings potential from summer Time-of-Day compliance not yet evaluated.

Evidence of statistically significant improvement in compliance in above seasons for Dig (Indoor), Alex-Tronix, Toro, and Hunter products.

Evidence of potential for significant water savings. In Las Vegas this could be 12,520 to 13,567 gallons per year per home (13% of outdoor irrigation use in target seasons).

Evidence of annual savings is elusive. Similar savings rate for comparison group as seen for treatment group.

Changed seasonal distribution of watering may not necessarily equate to water savings.

There may be a tendency towards over-reliance on the device, especially in non-target watering season (Spring/Summer). Speculation that people may not manage their irrigation as closely because they’re reliant on the device.

This may not favor the WGA approach as developed, but still more work needed to evaluate this.

Conclusions

Questions

SNWA Watering Group Assistant Study

this presentation premiered at watersmart innovations · 2017. 5. 12. · a novel device that,...

Documents