Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
THE SMART GUIDE TO
SYNTHETIC SPORT SURFACES THIRD EDITION - 2014
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 2
SPORT INSPIRES A NATION Synthetic Sports Surfaces Create The Opportunity For The Next Generation
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 3
Welcome and Purpose
The popularity of synthetic surfaces used by many sports
as an alternative to natural grass has grown significantly
over the past two decades.
Many sports now use synthetic surfaces as their primary
surface, such as athletics, hockey and tennis. Many other
sports utilise synthetic technology to cope with the demand
for sports fields and surfaces, including bowls, cricket and
football - soccer, rugby union, rugby league, gridiron,
Australian rules. This heightened interest in synthetic
surfaces is due to a number of factors:
Playability – to ensure a standard of play that is
consistent and safe.
Availability – to encourage more people to enjoy sport
or recreational activities and allow Local Government
Authorities to keep up with the growing demand.
Environmental – to counter the damage to natural turf
due to either prolonged drought or excessive rain.
Financial – to allow organisations to charge users an
affordable price for pitches/courts, while making a return
on their investment that covers the whole of life costs.
This Smart Guide to Synthetic Surfaces (3rd
Edition)
provides your organisation with information to understand
how synthetic surfaces technology can assist you achieve
your sport development and facilities objectives.
It provides all the information that your organisation needs
to consider when deciding, planning, selecting, installing,
maintaining, replacing and managing a synthetic sports
surface.
Enjoy the read
Martin Sheppard
Author
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 4
Acknowledgements
Smart Connection Consultancy is extremely grateful to the
sports peak bodies, various suppliers and manufacturers
who have provided information, photographs and case
studies for this guide, and who have allowed this book to
be circulated to Local Government in Australia free of
charge by sponsoring each section.
Without their support we would not be able to achieve our
goal of providing greater knowledge to the industry.
We would also like to thank the numerous colleagues,
clients and organisations that we have completed work for
in the sports industry. It is your appetite for change and
progression that makes our job so rewarding.
Copyright
Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
No parts of the publication may be reproduced in any form
or by any means without the permission of Smart
Connection Consultancy.
1st Edition: (September 2010)
2nd
Edition (February 2012)
3rd
Edition (February 2014)
ISBN: 978-0-646-57181-2
Disclaimer
Smart Connection Consultancy does not accept any liability
for the accuracy of the information provided. All material
and information that is provided from the third parties is
done so in good faith and to assist organisations in
deciding whether synthetic surfaces are the right option for
their needs.
To ascertain greater relevance, all organisations should
engage an experienced and competent consultancy to
conduct a thorough feasibility study to ensure the correct
approach and discussion making process.
Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd
AAMI Park, 60 Olympic Boulevard, Melbourne, 3001
PO Box 5247, South Melbourne,
Victoria, 3205, Australia
t: +61 3 9421 0133
w: www.smartconnection.net.au
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 5
Contents
Welcome and Purpose ........................................................... 1 Acknowledgements ............................................................... 4 Copyright ................................................................................ 4 Disclaimer ............................................................................... 4
1 Australian Sport – The Changing Environment
8 1.1 Australian Success .................................................... 8 1.2 Changing Trends ....................................................... 8 1.3 Implications on People, Programs and Places ...... 12 1.4 Local Government and Sports Planning
Considerations ......................................................... 13
2 Synthetic Turf Systems Evolution 17 2.1 History and Evolution .............................................. 17 2.2 Evolution in Australia .............................................. 18 2.3 Present Challenges .................................................. 19 2.4 Future Focused ........................................................ 19 2.5 Synthetic Surface Uses ........................................... 20 2.6 Using Synthetic Surfaces ........................................ 23
3 Synthetic Sports Turf Systems 26 3.1 Introduction .............................................................. 26 3.2 Synthetic Turf Yarn .................................................. 26 3.3 The Backing ............................................................. 28 3.4 Infill ........................................................................... 28 3.5 Shockpad.................................................................. 31 3.6 Pavement .................................................................. 32 3.7 Drainage ................................................................... 32
4 Standards for Synthetic Surfaces 35 4.1 Importance of Standards ......................................... 35 4.2 Developing Performance Standards ....................... 35 4.3 Laboratory and Field Standards ............................. 36 4.4 Licensee’s / Preferred Producers............................ 36 4.5 Sports Standards ..................................................... 36 4.6 The Importance of Testing ...................................... 37 4.7 Durability Considerations ........................................ 37
5 Environmental Considerations 40 5.1 Introduction .............................................................. 40 5.2 Climate Change / Weather Patterns ........................ 40 5.3 Water Management .................................................. 40 5.4 Carbon Footprint ...................................................... 41 5.5 Ecosystem Impacts.................................................. 41 5.6 Green Engineering ................................................... 43
6 Health, Safety and Risk Management 47 6.1 Introduction .............................................................. 47 6.2 Player Safety and Injuries ........................................ 47 6.3 Surface Playability ................................................... 49 6.4 Health Risk to Community ....................................... 50 6.5 Players Safety and Injuries ...................................... 51 6.6 Infection Risk ........................................................... 52 6.7 Heat Stress ............................................................... 53 6.8 Risk Management .................................................... 54
7 Sport by Sport 58 7.1 Sports Adoption of Synthetic Technology ............. 58 7.2 Australian Rules Football / Cricket ......................... 58
7.3 Baseball ....................................................................60 7.4 Bowls ........................................................................60 7.5 Football (soccer) ......................................................61 7.6 Gridiron / American Football ...................................63 7.7 Hockey ......................................................................63 7.8 Rugby League...........................................................65 7.9 Rugby Union .............................................................67 7.10 Tennis .......................................................................69 7.11 Multi-Sport Areas .....................................................71
8 Financial Strategy to Afford a Synthetic
Surface 74 8.1 Introduction ..............................................................74 8.2 The Whole of Life Expense Commitment ................74 8.3 Revenue Generation Strategy..................................76
9 Planning for Synthetic Fields 79 9.1 Introduction ..............................................................79 9.2 Why Produce a Synthetic Pitch/Field Strategy? .....79 9.3 The Smart Planning Framework ..............................79 9.4 Funding Strategy ......................................................80 9.5 Professional Support & Advice ...............................81 9.6 Useful Contacts and Reading ..................................82
10 Design Considerations 85 10.1 Introduction ..............................................................85 10.2 Statutory Planning Considerations .........................85 10.3 Site Selection ............................................................85 10.4 Park Master Planning ...............................................86 10.5 Pitch Design .............................................................86 10.6 Ancillary Design Options .........................................86
11 Sustainable Construction 90 11.1 Introduction ..............................................................90 11.2 Engineered Base Pavement .....................................90 11.3 Construction Considerations ..................................91
12 Maintenance 95 12.1 Maintenance in Perspective .....................................95 12.2 General Principles ....................................................95 12.3 Specialised Maintenance .........................................96 12.4 Maintenance Resources...........................................97
13 Programming and Management of Synthetic
Turf 100 13.1 Introduction ............................................................ 100 13.2 Usage and Capacity of the Surface ....................... 100 13.3 Programming of Use, Maintenance and Rest ....... 100 13.4 Pricing Points ......................................................... 101 13.5 Footwear for Users of Synthetic ............................ 101
14 Management of the Facility 105 14.1 Introduction ............................................................ 105 14.2 Vision Drives Management .................................... 105 14.3 Management Options ............................................. 105 14.4 Funding Arrangements .......................................... 106 14.5 Alternative Funding and Management Options .... 107
15 Procurement 110 15.1 Introduction ............................................................ 110 15.2 Planning .................................................................. 110 15.3 Procurement Strategy ............................................ 110
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 6
15.4 Evaluation Process ................................................ 112 15.5 Project Management .............................................. 112
Appendix 1: Key Contacts 114 1.1 Solution Providers and Advisors .......................... 114 1.2 Australian Sports Surface Suppliers and
Manufacturers ........................................................ 114 1.3 Supplier Details ...................................................... 115
Appendix 2: Water Harvesting Modelling – Reuse of
water collected from a synthetic pitch 124 1. Scenario’s ....................................................................... 124 2.Rainfall Considerations .................................................. 124 Turf watering Needs ........................................................... 124
Appendix 3: Literature Review of Safety Research for
Synthetic Surfaces 129
Appendix 4: Self-assessment Questionnaire 134
Smart Connection Company – Profile 138 Introduction and Overview ................................................ 138 Consultant Profile – Martin Sheppard – Managing Director138
Our Proven Track Record 139
What we can offer 140
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 7
SECTION 1:
AUSTRALIAN
SPORT – THE
CHANGING
ENVIRONMENT
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 8
1 Australian Sport – The Changing
Environment
1.1 Australian Success
For the last sixty years, Australia has “punched above its
weight” in world sport, when you consider its success in the
Olympics, rugby, tennis, netball and swimming, to name a
few. As the population continues to grow from under 10
million in the 1960’s to over 20 million now, the challenge
for Australia is how to keep performing at the highest level.
Photo 1: Leyton Hewitt - has continued to "Punch Above his Weight" especially in Davis Cup Tennis
With changing trends in society, sports participation is no
longer as high a priority as it used to be. The challenge for
sports teams and organisations is how to connect with the
local community to keep people active, recreating and
playing sport?
Indeed, in some cities, although the level of sedentary
lifestyles is growing in the community, the number of junior
participants of some sports continues to grow. However,
many of the children playing sport are showing overweight
tendencies, so they need to exercise more often and
reduce their food intake, which is a far bigger challenge
than just sports participation, but one that sport can be
incorporated.
The challenge for Local Governments is that many cities
and communities were designed for a smaller population,
meaning that the number of facilities is not relative to the
population growth. This simple ‘supply and demand’ model
is presenting challenges.
In addition, climatic changes over the past few decades are
no longer conducive with natural turf, which struggles to
recover and cope with the increased usage by many
traditional sports clubs. So imagine if another two percent
of the community played sport and children committed to
an extra night a week playing sport. The fields wouldn’t be
able to cope.
So planning for the future has become a challenge, not
only for the peak bodies of sport, local sports associations
and sports clubs, but also for the key owners of these
facilities, Local Government.
This first section explores the key trends of sport and
identifies the impact they are having on community facilities.
It also explains why many Local Governments are working
with sport to develop complimentary facilities and solutions
using synthetic surface technology to meet participation
needs.
1.2 Changing Trends
Recognising that Australians are becoming increasingly
time-poor and more cognoscente of their fiscal positions
post GFC, the Australian Sports Commission completed a
series of research projects to identify trends in participation
in sport.
The first three reports in 2012 and 2013 explored the
Mega-Trends of Sport1 together with specific participation
trends for adults (14 – 65 years) and children (5 – 13 years).
The Mega-Trends report explored the major shifts in
environmental, social and economic conditions that will
alter the way people live and perceive sport.
Mega-trends of participation 1.2.1
The six Mega-Trends have been defined by the report as:
1. A Perfect Fit
People are fitting sport into their increasingly busy and
time-fragmented lifestyles to achieve their own personal
health and wellbeing goals. This is reflected in the
participation rates of ‘casual activities’ such as aerobics,
jogging/walking, gym membership and casual kick-arounds
in the park with friends which have grown significantly over
the past decade. At the same time participation rates in
many traditional organised team sports have declined.
Australians are increasingly playing sport to get and stay fit,
rather than staying fit to play sport.
2. From Extreme to Mainstream
Capturing the rise of adventurous lifestyles and alternative
sports, that are popular with the thrill-seeking, younger
generations. Adventure sports such as BMX, skateboarding,
Parkour, rock climbing, and extreme running are growing in
popularity. Even the Olympics are embracing these sports
to stay relevant.
1 The Future of Australian Sport – CSIRO/Australian Sports Commission 2012
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 9
Photo 2: More than sport - it’s the social boundaries that it can bridge
3. More than Sport
A holistic view of sport, providing broader benefits is being
recognised by all levels of Government, as well as the
commercial and community sectors. The benefits of mental
and physical health gain, social inclusion and equality of
opportunity as well as crime prevention, is being seen as
reasons for the promotion, development and participation
of sport.
4. Everybody’s Game
Australia and many other OECD countries face the
challenge of an ageing population, affecting the type of
sports the population can play. Indications are that
Australians are embracing sport into their old age. To retain
strong participation rates, sports of the future will need to
cater for the change in cultural make-up of Australia,
recognising that a multicultural society brings multi-needs,
preferences and habits. The industry needs to capture the
interest and investment of these diverse cultures.
5. New Wealth, New Talent
Population growth and investment in developing countries,
especially Asia, will increase athletic prowess at major
competitions, such as the Olympics. It will also provide
emerging new business markets through media (social and
traditional), sports equipment, services and events.
6. Tracksuits to Business Suits
Market forces are likely to put greater pressure on sports to
be more professional in the future, with larger associations
expected to use paid staff as opposed to volunteers to
ensure ‘quality of experience’. Directly linked to this is the
level of recompense that participants receive and expect to
benefit from. The result may see some of the less
supported sports losing participants to the ‘richer sports’.
The participation drivers for adults and children will help the
clubs and service providers understand the market
segmentation better so that programs can be developed to
encourage them to play, recreate and participate in sport
more.
Market Segmentation of Adults for Sports 1.2.2
Participation
The Australian Sport Commission publication Market
Segmentation for Sports Participation (March 2013):
identifies that Australians (14 - 65 yrs) are becoming
increasingly time-poor and more fiscally aware of what they
can afford. Changing lifestyles, lack of time, reserve
money consequence and a change of priorities from sport
to recreation, as well as using sport as part of their fitness
campaign is making it difficult to understand the changing
attitudes and behaviors of the community in relation to
sport, or should we say ‘traditional sport’.
Recognising the changing community preferences, this
Market Segmentation Study identified the market into
groups of consumers, with similar needs, attitudes and
behaviors. The report identifies the consumer’s
perceptions and needs and then explores what sport can
do to capture that interest.
The strongest aspect, when combined with ‘The Future of
Australian Sport’ study, is that the change provides a clear
indication that more people are using sport as a means to
an end (e.g. for fitness, social interaction, health benefits
etc.). This provides an exciting opportunity for community
recreation facilities and programs and the way we think.
The Study divides the consumer into three categories:
i. Existing Sports Club Members
- Sports loyalists
- Socially engaged
- Sports driven
- Apathetic clubbers
ii. Non-sports club members with high potential for
acquisition
- Side line sportsters
- Club wary
- Ponderers
iii. Non-sports club makers with low potential for
acquisition
- Self focused
- Sports indifferent
- Sports atheists
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 10
The characteristics of the adult segmentation are:
Sports Loyalists
Who: Sport is their life, mainly male under 30 - high
proportion of teenagers. Less than 10 percent of
Australians are competitive and participate regularly.
Need: Imperative to be part of a club, with social networks
and peer recognition. They feel the need to engage and
also want to have the opportunity to change direction to
allow them to achieve their goals easily with no barriers.
They also need to consider how to transition from school to
club and also post 30+, keep their involvement in clubs and
sport.
Programs: They need to be offered club or program
memberships based on competitive and social
opportunities where they can also network with their peers.
Places: Club facilities and formal training bases.
Photo 3: Cricket team members are very loyal and traditional
Socially Engaged
Who: Less than 10 percent of Australians, predominantly
males with high incomes and white collar jobs who enjoy all
aspects of sport especially with a social aspect.
Need: Interest in playing sport with others, in teams and
challenging themselves whilst having fun. Highly engaged
in sport and active within clubs. The challenge is keeping
them and expanding their horizons so they continue to
have fun as their interest has a tendency to wane as they
reach 25 - 40 yrs.
Programs: Club based if they are socially orientated.
Recreation programs that are competitive and with teams
as well as shortened games to combine competition / social
aspects.
Places: Anywhere
Sports Driven
Who: High level of physical activity but social interaction
low as the sports participation is main driver. Normally
younger, wealthier urbanites, high proportion from CALD
backgrounds. They have personal drivers of self-
improvement.
Need: Normally have busy lives and try to balance sport,
family and work. If clubs don’t offer options they are more
than capable of ‘finding alternative options’ as their free
time decreases.
Programs: Fun-runs at lunch, pre/post work and
competitive sports programs. They use sport for fitness, not
about getting fit to play sport.
Places: Anywhere.
Apathetic Clubbers
Who: 20 percent of population, more likely to be male and
teenagers and less likely to be positive about sport.
Need: Need to feel less pressure to be ‘good at sport’ to
belong and have a certain ease of joining.
Programs: Recreational sports programs to keep interest
and non-membership based entry options. Make programs
easy to attend.
Places: Quality facilities.
Sideline Sportsters
Who: They value the opportunity for personal time,
participation and the friends it makes. They have stopped
‘playing’ maybe because of family or work and normally
can’t commit the time that ‘traditional club membership’
programs expect.
Need: Casual participation as many are older people (40+)
who have left sport but still keep fit. With the right option,
this is a prime group to get back into the clubs.
Programs: Recreational programs that ‘get them active
again’ which can be linked to clubs as a pathway to
reconnect. Clubs need to partner with recreation centers to
ensure pathways.
Places: Clubs and recreation centers.
Club Wary
Who: Enjoy sport but have reservations about clubs due to
previous experiences and see clubs as wanting significant
commitment which they don’t want to offer.
Need: Avoid over commitment and could be happy to be
recreation members as they actually want to get involved
but don’t know how or where to look.
Programs: Recreational programs to re-engage on
specific sports and would be available for the 45 minute
sports experience.
Places: Clubs and recreation centers.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 11
Ponderers
Who: Often married with children at home, active to very
active people that take part in activities that are solo or fit
around other commitments.
Need: They understand the benefits of physical activity
and sport and derive strong personal satisfaction and
achievement from participation. They do show some
interest in joining clubs but only if they have flexibility and
options that don’t interfere with their other commitments.
Many use sport to keep fit.
Programs: Sport for fitness programs with flexible joining
options or group training which has self-completion.
Places: Clubs, recreation centres and parks etc.
Self-focused
Who: Typically female with personal drivers who are
turned off by the competitive nature of sport.
Need: Exercise alone, need balance from other
commitments they have and in essence want something
that focuses on their needs.
Programs: they enjoy sport but only use it as a mode to
keep their fitness, so the opportunity is based around
fitness/active programs and classes such as Tennis
Australia’s Cardio-Fitness. The programs need to be
measureable and show improvement.
Places: Recreation facilities.
Sport Indifferent
Who: Less engaged, indifferent to all types of sport.
Need: Hard to engage and may need to highlight other
benefits which may be more appealing such as Wii-fitness
or workplace health programs.
Programs: Corporate health programs and programs
linked with other interests such as Arts/Dance programs.
Places: Workplace and arts venues such as libraries.
Sports Atheists
Who: Totally disengaged in sport and sports clubs and
physical activity is low (less than once a week). Leads a
more sedentary lifestyle.
Need: Few products to engage these people in sports
clubs. May get them interested in administration, but not
participation.
Programs: Non-sports programs in the sports
environment (e.g. photography, arts etc.)
Places: Venues.
Market Segmentation of Children for Sports 1.2.3
Participation
The Australian Sports Commission publication (May 2013):
Market Segmentation for Sports Participation: Children,
identifies the trends, needs, motivations and barriers for
sports participation for the 5 - 13 year olds.
The study identifies six segmentation groups for this
population cohort and are classified as follows:
Social Loyalists ‘Sport clubs are the best! I love
to be able to play sports and with
friends.’
Sport Driven ‘Like being part of a club to play
sports but they sometimes want
to try other activities and that is
annoying.’
Apathetic Clubbers ‘I don’t mind playing sport with
my club but I am a bit over it.’
Thrifty
Enthusiasts
Pote
ntials
‘Sport is great and so are clubs –
I’d like to be part of a club again.’
Ponderers ‘I’d like to do more sport but I
don’t really know how.’
Sport Resistant
Non
Pote
ntials
‘I don’t really like sport, people
just want to win.’
The Study provides key summaries and insights of how the
sport and community recreation sectors can understand the
motivations and barriers and therefore have a greater
change of embracing this cohort and encouraging them to
be more physically active and play sport.
As an industry we can embrace these findings and the
study states:
“Australian children were generally more positive than
Australian adults in their views of physical activity and sport,
with adults ascribing fewer positive benefits to sport due to
a perceived association with competition. The vast majority
of children believed sport provides a multitude of benefits
that include physical benefits, mental benefits, social
benefits, and fun and enjoyment. To a lesser degree,
competitive success was important to children.”
To further help sport consider how it might deliver
opportunities for children, the ASC has also released a new
report from research it commissioned from Victoria
University, the ‘Validation of the Playing for Life (P4L)
Philosophy’. The P4L report provides a validated approach
that sports may be able to adopt to better target Australian
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 12
children whose primary motivation to participate in sport is
to have fun and play with friends. The P4L report can be
accessed at www.ausport.gov.au
When these trends are considered in relation to facility
planning, design and management the key issues to be
considered is that facilities need to reflect the needs of the
community. That means they need to be programmed
differently from the traditional sports club facilities if a larger
share of the community are to be activated.
Although the ‘traditional’ membership sports club is still
alive, a number of community clubs which have not evolved
to meet the new needs of the community, have
experienced a significant reduction in participation. These
include bowls, track and field athletics and tennis. The use
of synthetic technology for sports fields provides greater
flexibility for programming and are more likely to attract a
broader community cohort.
1.3 Implications on People, Programs and
Places
The key opportunities from the ASC three trend and market
segmentation publications clearly identify the target
audiences that should be targeted, and then the learning’s
from the drivers of these groups should be used to develop
programs and activities. Finally the issues of place should
be considered, and not just from a traditional perspective.
Impact of research on target audiences 1.3.1
The market segmentation reports show that not everyone
will embrace sport in the community, so the priorities
should be for an organisation to target audiences that can
be converted easily and with some encouragement.
1.3.1.1 Adult priority segmentation
Existing sports club members including sports loyalists,
socially engaged, sports driven and apathetic clubbers
have been identified as “low hanging fruit” if the offering
can be fine-tuned to encourage them back or to ensure you
keep them.
There is also great potential for clubs to change their
traditional sports membership package to encourage the
targeted audiences of; side-line sporters, club wary and the
ponders who can all be encouraged to take part in
programs and activities, as opposed to joining membership
of clubs.
1.3.1.2 Children priority segmentation
The three key groups for under 14 year olds are sports
loyalists, sports driven and apathetic clubbers, with the
potential groups being the thrifty enthusiasts and the
ponderers.
Across all children’s segments, the underlying motivation
for participating in sport is to have fun and socialise. This
is a key message to be emphasised in communications, in
addition to ensuring that clubs actively maintain this aspect
of participation across all age groups and grades.
Consideration should also be given to whether
modifications to existing or new product offerings would
retain current or attract new consumer segments for
children.
Programs and activities to meet future need 1.3.2
The reports identify that people are time poor and desire
greater participation for ‘casual activities’ and programs,
not traditional organised sports club membership.
“Australian’s are increasingly playing sport to get and stay
fit, rather than staying fit to play sport”.
The key learnings can be summarised as:
Providing sport delivery that focuses on fun and
enjoyment rather than competition.
Providing products and services that are inclusive;
promote equal treatment; and focus on fun and
participation regardless of skill level and ability.
Providing a variety of pricing packages and different
types of membership that allow for flexibility of
attendance and time commitment.
Identifying the potential for growth opportunities with
regards to sport club membership by understanding
the needs of different segments and the products they
may be attracted to.
Photo 4: Small sided games such as football can use the synthetic fields more intensely than natural grass
Government, the commercial and community sector
recognise that sport brings additional benefits around
mental and physical health, social inclusion as well as
crime prevention etc.
Participant’s expectations have grown and the quality of
experience needs to grow to meet those expectations. The
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 13
range of programs and activities need to include examples
such as:
Sport for Fun – socialisation of sport where
participants want the ability to socialise and increase
their friendships – they are not as keen for “closed
clubs” which are hard to get in and be accepted.
Casual and recreational competitions where new
people are being introduced is embraced. Fun runs as
opposed to Athletic Club track, field and road races are
more popular.
Sport for Fitness – using sport to keep fit, whether
that is a casual 5-a-side league competition once a
week or a fitness class around a specific sport such as
Tennis Australia’s Cardio Fitness.
Recreational Sport – many sports and leisure centres
are offering mid-week competitions and programs
where there is a form of casual completion for indoor
and outdoor sports where the participants do not need
to be part of a club. These programs are growing
considerably.
Sports Express – many people only have a short
period of time to exercise and participate – so if an
activity can be programmed into 45-60 minutes this will
encourage a greater number of the time poor people
who still want to ‘play’ but struggle to incorporate it with
the busy work or family commitments.
The Question of Place 1.3.3
The Question of Place is considered from a series of
perspectives including:-
Places to recreate – especially important for young
people to have a kick around and be able to play
‘street sport’ – which historically has been on street
corners, in parklands and back alleys. In Europe the
adoption of Multi-use Games Areas (MUGA) has seen
significant investment and designs for young people to
hang out and play safely. Many next to sports facilities,
in school grounds and next to Skate facilities.
Photo 5: Pop up Park Dandenong (VIC) source ABS Sports Fields)
Places to Play (sport) – With greater participation the
ability for synthetic technology to cope with greater
usage will allow for more people to play sport, more
often. The design needs to allow for the traditional
sport, such as Football and then use Futsal or 5-a-side
for the recreational and training needs as well as
juniors and seniors.
Flexibility of Place – combining multi-sport at a
competitive level allows for seasonal variations and
encourages greater utilisation of the facility.
Photo 6: Dimboola Memorial Secondary School (Source: TEAM Sports)
The facility needs to be able to provide traditional sports
team competition (e.g. full football, hockey or rugby fields)
as well as flexibility for small sided games, which can be
offered to the community for ‘casual competitions’.
People are prepared to pay more for quality services as
opposed to traditional volunteer programs.
The management of the facility needs to be able to balance
competitive sports development, training, program and
recreational promotion to maximise patronage.
1.4 Local Government and Sports Planning
Considerations
The Planning Cycle 1.4.1
Many Local Governments are finding the desire for
community sports clubs to have access to more “field-time”
a challenge. It is important in exploring and justifying the
need for a new facility, that appropriate research, forward
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 14
planning and community consultation are given to provide a
compelling rationale for need.
The key stages that should be explored will normally
include:
1. Identify Need or Demand
Demographic analysis - who are currently playing the
sports and if there are any participation projections and
what is the likelihood of participation increase.
It is important to see Exercise in Recreation and Sport
Survey (ERRAS) and Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS)
data and contextualise against the participant trends
discussed earlier to appreciate the likelihood of future
participation numbers and the programs needed.
2. Compare Against Supply
Explore current facilities and measure capacity with current
participation patterns.
Compare population changes for the future and align
against capacity of current facilities to identify the growth of
capacity (hours/fields) needed for each aspect of the game
such as competition, training and recreational use
(Futsal/5-a-side etc.).
Identify supply for both sports that complement each other
and seasonal specific sports in order to increase usage.
3. Strategic Alignment
Explore internally and externally the priorities and principals
for provision, programs and specific target audiences that
may influence the facility. This may include type, standard
and management of the facility, the funding or geographic
priority, or the partners who may be involved such as
governments, education or sport.
4. Scope of Facility
The draft scoping of the facility options could be
established here ready for the consultative phase. This will
allow the targeted or broad community consultation to have
a structured approach and not just a ‘wish list approach’.
The consultation will enhance and firm-up this scoping and
allow the facility to be developed more succinctly, whilst
being embraced by all stakeholders.
5. Financial Considerations
The financial strategy for the development and
management of the facility should consider each stage of
the whole of life costings of the capital investment,
maintenance and replacement costs. Also funding strategy
for each state will need to be explored.
6. Management Options
The management strategy needs to be linked to the
strategic alignment (how it will be used); the facility scope
(what is there to manage) and the target audience and
therefore how it will be programmed?
Depending on these considerations the management
options should be explored objectively.
Project Management 1.4.2
What are the logistical arrangements for its development in
terms of time, funding, management etc.?
Who do you need to collaborate with to ensure its success
from design to delivery?
All of this planning should combine both a recreation/sports
strategy together with a playing field strategy. A playing
field strategy (or Pitch Strategy) should be conducted
across the whole municipality and also consider the impact
on the neighbouring councils.
The best documents to consider using and guiding the
planning process can be downloaded from:
i) Playing Pitch Strategy Guidelines – An approach to
developing and delivering a playing pitch strategy (OCT
2013: Sport England; The FA; RFU; ECB; RFL and
England Hockey)
www.sportengland.org/facilities-planning/planning-for-
sport/
ii) Needs Assessment Guide – Sport and Recreation
Facilities (2007: WA Department of Sport and
Recreation)
www.dsr.wa.gov.au/needsassessmentguide
iii) Facility Planning Guide – Sport and Recreation
Facilities (2007: WA Department of Sport and
Recreation) www.dsr.wa.gov.au/facilityplanningguide
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 15
Case Study - TigerTurf
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 16
SECTION 2:
SYNTHETIC TURF
SYSTEMS
EVOLUTION
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 17
2 Synthetic Turf Systems Evolution
2.1 History and Evolution
The popularity of synthetic surface technology in sport has
been embraced by both community and elite levels over
the past five decades.
The technology has evolved significantly from the first
generation carpet that was developed by Monsanto for the
Ford Foundation at Moses Brown School, Providence,
Rhode Island in 1964. The first major commercial
mainstream surface was used in 1966 at the Houston
Astrodome in Texas. Key milestones over the past 50
years include:
1960’s
First Generation Turf (1964). A knitted nylon carpet with a
foam backing was used for indoor Gridiron, but lacked the
sophistication of the present systems.
In 1968 athletics installed its first synthetic athletics track
for the Mexico Olympics. The times and performances
were so impressive that the sport’s governing body has
never returned to natural surfaces, supporting the
technology in order to continue to improve performances.
Photo 7: 1968 Olympic Games Synthetic Track
1970’s
The use of the 1st generation nylon carpets continued in
American stadiums where light was too poor for natural
grass growth. Although the “turf look” was a positive use of
technology, it didn’t provide an accurate reflection of
natural playing surfaces. The coarseness of the nylon
resulted in inconsistent playing conditions and injuries
caused the majority of football and baseball surfaces to be
replaced with natural grass again.
One sport that did prosper with the use of synthetic turf
during this time was hockey. When the synthetic grass was
wet the ball played far faster and the game was far more
enjoyable. The sport embraced the technology and the first
international hockey game using artificial turf was played at
McGill University, Canada in 1975. The following year it
was show-cased at the Montreal Olympics, where it has
been used ever since.
At the turn of the decade there were two schools of thinking
around the use of synthetic technology:
i. Performance needs to mirror natural grass – with the
use of the 1st generation surfaces needing to perform
more closely to natural grass; and
ii. Performance enhanced surfaces – with IAAF
(athletics) choosing the rubber tracks and FIH (hockey)
choosing technology to improve the performance of
natural surfaces.
These opposing viewpoints can still be seen 40 years on
when we compare how sports have embraced the use of
technology.
1980’s
The 2nd
generation synthetic turf was developed to look and
feel like grass, with the soil replaced with sand and the
blades of grass replaced with 20-35mm tightly packed
polypropylene yarn. This was softer than the nylon on
players’ skin, but when combined with sand, created some
challenges:
- Playability – the sand infill and yarn combination didn’t
let the large ball used for football (soccer) have the
same playing characteristics as on natural turf. It
bounced unpredictably and the roll was far faster; and
- Safety – the friction on skin was significant and caused
‘skin burns’ which then developed into wounds if not
treated.
The durability for community football pitches (5-a-side
facilities) was excellent and allowed many more people to
play the game. As 5-a-side in the United Kingdom has
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 18
larger participation rates than 11-a-side this was a positive
outcome.
Four United Kingdom professional football clubs invested in
synthetic turf in the 1980’s, including Queens Park Rangers
(Loftus Road), Luton Town (Kenilworth Road) and Oldham
Athletics (Bonding Park).
Hockey continued to embrace the technology with most
major competitions being played on synthetic watered turf.
Photo 8: 2nd Generation Synthetic Turf (source: Cranfield University www.cranfield.ac.uk)
At the end of the decade the European governing body for
soccer EUFA ruled that professional level games should
not be played on synthetic turf.
1990’s
The major manufacturers of synthetic turf understood the
benefits to community and elite sport that the technology
could offer, but could not convince the world sports’
governing bodies by themselves.
The peak body with the most interest in the 1990’s was
FIFA for football (soccer) and they made it clear that the
playability and performance needed to reflect the standards
of natural turf.
The 3rd
generation synthetic turf was born using a different
and more holistic approach in Europe and America. After
much research, the end of the 1990’s saw a new
generation turf, using a softer yarn, polyethylene, with
rubber granules and sand now used more as ballast rather
than the key component of the infill. This allowed the
surface to take a normal stud, which convinced the rugby
codes, AFL and cricket to try this 3rd
generation, joining
football and gridiron.
2000’s
This decade saw the defining period for the use and
adoption of synthetic technology, with many sports
embracing the benefits. Many of the sports peak bodies:
- Developed standards for elite and/or community pitch
performance, including football (FIFA), rugby union
(IRB), hockey (FIH), bowls (WB), athletics (IAAF),
Australian Rules football (AFL) and tennis (ITF).
- Introduced an accreditation scheme for suppliers
and/or products.
- Changed the rules of the game so that players could
compete on the surfaces (Football (FIFA), Rugby
Union (IRB), Bowls and AFL).
- Ensured that pitches were tested regularly to meet the
standards; and
- Promoted the use of the technology to grow
participation in the game.
2.2 Evolution in Australia
Australia has embraced turf technology just as the rest of
the world has and a quick insight into the evolution, sport
by sport is best seen in the Table 1 below.
Type Year State Comments
Cricket Wicket (outdoor)
1983
2010
NSW
NSW
Supergrass product installed
First integrated and tested AFL/CA wicket and outfield installed at Northbridge oval
Indoor Cricket 1970's WA Dennis Lillee wicket
Soccer (not certified)
1998
2007
ACT
Vic
Astroturf USA, 3rd generation (sand/rubber) at the Australian Institute of Sport (AIS)
Harvest Home – Whittlesea City Council
AFL/Cricket 2010 Melbourne, Vic
TEAM Sports, round sand infill on shock pad, for Melbourne City Council at JJ Holland Park
Rugby 2000
2014
Gold Coast, QLD
Lane Cove Council
TEAM Sports, Runaway Bay Super Sports Centre, 3rd generation (sand/rubber) – not accredited
First IRB Regulation 22 Rugby Field
Hockey (water based)
1987
NSW
Supergrass, Homebush State Sports Centre using 15mm straight yarn.
Hockey (sand based)
1987 ACT Balsam Pacific, Lyneham Hockey Cnt, 34mm sand filled
Lawn bowls (not carpet)
1986/87 NSW Supergrass, City Bowls Club, Sydney, 25mm sand filled
Tennis (rebound type)
1982 NSW Multi-use netball etc.
Tennis (lawn type)
1978 NSW Ampol Petroleum Co, imported first 19mm synthetic grass court and installed at Ingleside, Sydney
Tennis (Clay type)
2001 Victoria Grass Manufacturers, first terra cotta coloured yarn with clay coloured sand.
Grid Iron 2011 Endeavour 5 sports, NSW
TEAM Sports, with permanent five yard markings and temporary blue paint sidelines and goal lines.
Table 1: Evolution of Synthetics in Australia
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 19
2.3 Present Challenges
Drivers and Benefits 2.3.1
The main reasons given for installing a synthetic surface for
sport and recreational use are:
Climatic: Under drought and water restrictions or
excessive rain conditions, it can be difficult to
maintain a safe and suitable natural grass surface.
Synthetic sports surfaces in general are not affected
by the reduced or increased rainfall;
Usage: There is a limit to the hours natural turf can be
used before there is a significant impact on surface
condition. A high quality natural turf surface may only
withstand use for up to 20 hours2 per week before it
starts to deteriorate. Synthetic surfaces can sustain
significantly higher use than natural grass with 60
hours3 plus per week as an acceptable expectation;
Maintenance: Maintaining a turf surface can be time
consuming, expensive and generally requires a
qualified person to do it. Synthetic surfaces require
lower ongoing maintenance than a natural turf
surface;
Consistency and quality of play: Synthetic surfaces
provide a consistent and safe surface all year round
for all sports to play on, improving the quality of
performance for each sport compared with natural
playing surfaces;
Health: By allowing play on the surface more often
and under safer conditions, it enhances physical
health of participants;
Mandated: some sports governing bodies insist that if
a particular level of game is played, it has to be on a
particular level of synthetic surface (e.g. International
Athletic Associations Federation with athletics,
Federation of International Hockey with hockey fields
etc.).
Negative Perceptions 2.3.2
There is a significant lack of understanding about the
technology, with some community concern around how the
technology is made, managed and/or how it integrates into
the local environment. The major concerns include:
Environmental integration – whether there is a
negative impact on the environment
Player comfort and safety – for injuries, overall safety
and impact between the surface and the player
2 As quoted by Sports Turf Institute in conference 2011 before deterioration of turf on
average in Australia 3 FIFA at NSSCE Conference in Sydney quoted 80 hours per week as their expectations
in Europe
Loss of open space – some Local Government
authorities (LGA’s) have found that some sections of
the community believe synthetic installations will
translate to loss of open space. This needs to be
considered in the design of the parkland
Financially Profitable – the initial cost (around $1m
per football pitch) is high but compared with the
number of participants and the cost per hour of use,
the synthetic surface could be as little as 25 percent
of the cost of an equivalent natural turf
2.4 Future Focused
The future use of synthetic turf will be based on the use
and functionality of the technology with key focuses on:
Multi-use - Usability for many sports. A one turf
standard has been developed by key sports allowing
Local Government - as a major investor in the
technology - to use a single field for many sports.
Safety - To address perceptions and challenges that
the technology faces, including the heat differential
with natural turf. The use of light coloured or
natural/organic infill’s, ‘coolant’ yarn technology and
water capillary technology to keep the surface
temperature lower will become more important
Greener - Green technology, using recycled
components and recyclable after its lifespan, will be
more important to decision makers.
Durability - With the increased patronage on the
surface, the synthetic turf systems will need to evolve
to meet the challenge of greater usage - in excess of
60 hours per week. The durability test for some sports
(e.g. FIFA 2 Star recommended pitch) is as low as
5,200 revolutions. The new standards are being
tested around 50,000 – 100,000. This may need to be
the norm in the future.
Some suppliers of 3rd
generation synthetic turf for large ball
sports such as football have spruiked that a 4th
generation
is here. This has been described as a surface that needs
no infill. It is unlikely this approach would be embraced by
the industry without significant testing at the highest level.
In hockey the world governing body (FIH) acknowledges
that there is a need to provide pitches that have the playing
characteristics of a ‘wet pitch’ but without the use of water.
This challenge has been worked through by the major
manufacturers and a number of sand-dressed and ‘dry’
fields have been installed and are being used.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 20
In tennis the use of synthetic grass with red coloured sand
granules has been installed in several places across
Australia.
2.5 Synthetic Surface Uses
Types of Synthetic Surface 2.5.1
There are a number of synthetic surface types that can be
linked to specific uses (e.g. rubber – for athletic tracks;
water based carpet for Hockey etc.). As the surface can be
flexible to use both indoors and outdoors the following
types are normally used.
1. Synthetic turf
Long pile, sand and rubber filled turf (3G - third
generation)
Photo 9: Football (soccer) has been most pro-active with the introduction of synthetic football turf
Long pile turf has long blades of fibre similar to natural turf
playing surfaces. The long grass fibres (40mm – 70mm in
length) allow for a greater amount of infill to be integrated
into the pitch, adding to the shock absorbency and force
reduction characteristics of the ground. These fibres can be
monofilament (single fibre) or multi-ended filament yarns
(brush-like at the tip). The pitch infill normally comprises a
performance infill and shock absorbing and cushioning
surface emulating the performance characteristics we
come to expect from a natural turf pitch. Some sports such
as rugby also need to have a shock absorbing cushion
system under the ‘turf’, and this may be stipulated.
A synthetic turf pitch provides the player with a sure-footed
and consistent playing surface that is free from bumps,
hollows and imperfections whilst being unaffected by the
sun and rain. There is a standard of turf available for most
levels of sporting competitions, including:
- Australian Rules Football - AFL
- Football (soccer) – FIFA
- Cricket – Cricket Australia
- Rugby (union and league) – IRB & RFL
Short pile sand and rubber filled turf
All weather, multi-use short pile turf stands between 12mm
– 25mm high and is normally dressed with sand and/or
filled with rubber granules, leaving approximately 5mm –
8mm of the grass tips showing. The fibres used are
generally more dense and stable because of the use of
tufted filaments woven into a carpet-like template. It also
imitates the speed and playability of natural turf. This type
of surface is ideal for fast paced balls to ground contact
much like we see in sports like lawn bowls, tennis and
hockey.
Due to the multi-purpose nature of short pile sand and
rubber filled surfaces, there are a wide range of standards
and specifications depending on the sport and level of
competition being played on them. Lawn bowls for example,
follows the international guidelines for its artificial green
provision.
Water based turf
These all-weather water-based turf pitches are generally
described as a dense, medium height, non-directional
carpet pile with a height of approximately 12mm. Its fibres
allow across-the-ground passing and accuracy of the rolling
ball, ensuring regular control over the speed and bounce.
The Federation of International Hockey (FIH) has
developed special artificial pitch specifications for
international and national level hockey, known as either
‘global or national standard’, using a water-based or hybrid
carpet. In addition they also have a multi-sport standard for
community use.
Photo 10: Water based Hockey field South Australia Hockey Centre (Source: TEAM Sports)
Hybrid turf
A hybrid synthetic turf system is becoming more and more
popular as an alternative to water based turf pitches as
availability of water decreases. This surface can be played
wet or dry and accommodates most levels of playing
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 21
standards up to international games. The pitch is dressed
with a light layer of sand or none at all because the pitch
can be played either wet or dry depending on the level of
competition required for that specific match. It is ideal for
today’s climatic conditions.
Photo 11: Hockey ‘Hybrid Turf’ surface
2. Carpet
Turf carpet – Limited infill of sand or rubber
Short pile carpet is increasingly being used as a safer,
more attractive and visually stimulating alternative to
asphalt in many schools and community areas. It can be
laid in different colours, line markings and patterns and
suits the needs of multipurpose areas. The short pile turf
offers a safer and more aesthetically pleasing and cooler
option to asphalt, however it can be warmer in the sun than
natural grass turf. Carpet is usually a woven ‘carpet-like’
synthetic surface that may not require any or only a limited
infill, the pile height is always very short and the fibres are
quite coarse, “brush-like” and sturdy.
There is a range of carpet types including; monofilaments
(single blades) based on various yarn types, fibrillated
(grass with a lattice structure), and fine fibrillated (finer
perforations compared to general fibrillated turf). Non-
directional characteristics are introduced by texturised
(yarn passed through a heated texturiser that crimps the
yarn) or the knit de knit process.
Due to the multi-purpose nature of short pile carpets they
are generally only used at schools, playgrounds and for
other community level purposes and therefore the
standards may be limited as competitive sports are not
played on them.
Carpet
This type of playing surface is flexible in its use and
resembles a woven carpet that you can either roll out or
place over an existing hard surface in large rolls. Generally
this type of carpet is used for competitive and local use and
by many is regarded as the best surface for bowls.
Photo 12: Lawn Bowls have been using synthetic surfaces since the 1970’s
3. Rubberised/Rubber surfaces
Rubber
Rubberised surfaces like athletics tracks, are generally
made of all weather, multiple layers of polyurethane
embedded with rubber granules for optimal cushioning and
shock absorbency which adds to the force reduction of the
surface. Generally the materials used in athletics tracks are
designed to resist UV degradation and are non-hazardous,
with no heavy metals used in their ingredients.
The surfaces have a seamless finish, with the embedded
texture allowing the water to run through the track offering
all weather usage and the maximum UV protection aspects.
IAAF has developed certified systems for international,
national and local athletics competitions.
4. Artificial clay
Artificial clay
Artificial clay is a synthetic surface with the appearance
and performance of clay, which combines synthetic carpet
and specifically graded coloured sand and reduces the
need for constant watering. It is increasingly being used to
replace existing clay-based tennis courts. This is now the
preferred tennis surface because of its durability, playability
and the fact that there is no need for water on this surface
for it to play comparably to clay.
Photo 13: Artificial Clay Surface – Greensborough Vic (Source: TigerTurf)
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 22
Tennis is one of only a few sports that have an official
specification on the use of clay playing surfaces.
5. Acrylic varieties
Acrylic / non-cushioned hard court
Acrylic surface coated layer set onto rubber pad is used for
a variety of sports. Generally the surface will sit at 5mm –
15mm off of the base/ground and can vary from one 5mm
rubber pad all the way to many layers of shock absorbing
rubber layers below an acrylic surface. Acrylic surfaces
generally expel water quite quickly so there is no need to
dry or even cease play if the surface gets wet from rain.
The acrylic surface layer itself is very durable, all weather
and UV resistant, making it resistant to degradation. It can
range from the more economical hard court coating to the
high performance cushioned coating discussed above.
Players benefit from the quality traction and shock
absorbent nature of the playing surface. Ideal for clubs,
schools and community level use.
Due to the multi-purpose nature of acrylic surfaces they are
generally only used at schools, playgrounds and for other
community level purposes and therefore the standards may
differ depending on the specific purpose.
Cushioned hard court
Cushioned hard court is a specially constructed ‘cushioned
acrylic’ hard court surface designed to increase shock
absorption in the court itself and reduce players’ foot and
leg fatigue. Unlike other cushioning systems, it provides a
firm and uniform surface. This prevents the subtle fatigue
caused by playing on a soft, spongy surface. This type of
surface has been used at the Australian Open, the
Medibank International, the Adelaide International and the
Hopman Cup.
This type of surface is normally a series of flexible layers
installed in liquid form on site that contain rubber and
acrylic particles. The multiple cushion layers are installed
prior to the top surfacing system.
Ball bounce and speed are affected by this surface by the
function of the surface finish (e.g. aggregate selection and
density). Users can continue to gain all the benefits of this
surface with the added comfort of the elastic layers.
There are two standards of competition grade cushioned
hard court: ‘tournament’ specifications and ‘prestige’
specifications - the only difference being the under-base.
The prestige system has been chosen by Tennis Australia
as the playing surface for the Australian Open series. The
International Tennis Federation (ITF) pace rating
classification ensures that the court speed is within the
guidelines needed.
6. Stabilised turf
Many of the top stadiums around the world are now using
an integrated synthetic system with their natural grass,
including the MCG, Etihad in Melbourne, Dunedin and
Forsyth Barr Stadium in New Zealand, as well as nine
English football league club grounds.
Integrating natural turf with synthetic turf root system allows
for the natural grass to be reinforced below the ground to a
depth of 200mm. This has provided up to three times the
normal usage patterns according to the sales literature of
the Australian distributor. The combination of fibrillated
synthetic turf and natural turf allows the natural grass roots
to become entwined in the matrixes web of synthetic grass,
growing downwards through a plastic mesh and into the
foundation material, providing a stabilised solution for
stadiums. See Figure 1 for a local Australian example.
The predominantly sand filled layer provides an excellent
growing environment for the natural turf with the durability
of synthetic grass. As one supplier’s marketing material
states, “The plant’s roots, crowns, rhizomes and stolons
that grow within the stabilised zone are shielded from wear
damage, extending the field’s playability and accelerating
turf recuperation following regional use.
Figure 1: Cross Section of Desso Grassmaster Reinforced natural grass (source www.hgturf.com.au)
Shear damage and compression displacement become a
thing of the past. As with traditional natural turf grass fields,
groundsmen managing this (product) are encouraged to
practice the essential turf maintenance strategies of
aeration, topdressing and scarifying.
Key aspects of this stabilised system include:-
1. The natural turf grass blades reside above the tops of the
synthetic tufts creating a fully natural grass surface. If
the turf canopy is worn away, the sand-filled synthetic
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 23
matrix continues to provide a consistent, sure-footed
playing field;
2. The grass roots become entwined in the matrix of
synthetic tufts and, unimpeded, grow downward through
the plastic mesh and into the foundation material below;
3. The predominantly sand fill layer is selected to be
compatible with the site’s foundation material, minimising
the potential for layering and assuring high water
infiltration rates through the turf; and
4. The tough plastic mesh immediately below the vertical
fibres acts as the anchor for the components above it
and provides additional horizontal subsurface load
bearing capacity.
2.6 Using Synthetic Surfaces
The most important aspect when considering what type of
synthetic surface to use, is what purpose the surface will be
used for. This ‘fit for purpose’ approach is critical to ensure
that the correct standard and type of surface is selected.
The Smart Sports Surface Continuum (Figure 2) identifies
the level and type of use with a corresponding synthetic
surface type.
1. Active
Lifestyle
2.
Physical
Activity
3. Play 4. Recreation 5. Training
and
Competition
6. Elite or
Professional
Sport
Passive
needs
Active
walking
and
jogging
Play
grounds
and areas
for
children
Social non-
competitive
sport at
local level
Training
and
competition
on facilities
that need
set
standards
Performance
standards
need to be
demonstrate
d
Landscap
e grass
Hard
surface
for
durabilit
y on
rubber
jogging
Soft play
areas
around
equipmen
t colourful
play
Larger
areas for
adults,
multi-sport
zones that
do not have
performanc
e standards,
good for
casual
recreation.
Surface
recreation
sports
specified
standards
that aim at
ensuring
player
safety and
surface
performanc
e
The top
range of
surface
standards for
key sports for
either
community
level,
professional
or stadium
needs
Figure 2: Smart Sports Surface Continuum
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 24
Section 2 Case Study – HG Sports Turf – Synthetic Turf Systems Evolution
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 25
SECTION 3:
SYNTHETIC
SPORTS TURF
SYSTEMS
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 26
3 Synthetic Sports Turf Systems
3.1 Introduction
The perception that synthetic turf is the most important
aspect of the system needs to be broadened. Although the
synthetic turf is important, the whole system is complex and
integrated with no single part being more important than
the other. It is a system of components that are
interdependent upon each other. The system normally
comprises of:
- Synthetic turf yarn (3.2)
- The backing (3.3)
- Infill (3.4)
- Shockpad (3.5)
- Pavement (3.6)
- Drainage (3.7)
This section explores each of these six components and
provides a detailed understanding of how each is ‘made’
and why they are important for the success of the synthetic
turf system.
3.2 Synthetic Turf Yarn
The synthetic turf aspect of the system has yarn that is
developed through an extrusion process from a
combination of polymers to provide either a softer
polyethylene based fibre or a slightly harder polypropylene
fibre. The first generation was made from nylon
(polyamide) yarn, which was prone to friction burns due to
its coarse nature.
The current manufacturing process produces one of two
forms of yarn, a monofilament single thread of yarn or a
slit-film tape, commonly known as fibrillated yarn. The
process for both types of yarn includes taking the raw
materials, namely the polyethylene polymer (which is
almost exclusively used for long grass fields) and the
colour and melting them in an extruder.
Photo 14: Example of Mono-filament and Fibrillated Tape (Source: FieldTurf)
The melted and coloured material is then either pushed
through a spinneret (similar to a thick spaghetti maker) to
the shape of the monofilament and then cooled, or formed
into a film, cooled and then perforated in a fibrillated tape.
Photo 15: Extrusion Process producing mono-filament yarn
The mix of polymers follows the above process. The
formulas of the polymers are a proprietary intellectual
property of the yarn manufactures as they strive for the
right balance between fibre rigidity (to keep the fibre
upright) and softness, for feel and skin/player interaction.
The key variables that need to be considered with the yarn
include:
UV Resistance 3.2.1
As Australia has one of the most aggressive climates with
one of the highest UV levels in the world, it has a direct
impact on the longevity of the synthetic turf system. The
yarn should be provided with a warrantee against UV.
Some cheaper yarns that are being imported into Australia
may not have been tested to the appropriate levels needed,
and this should be considered. The UV stabilisation is a big
part of the yarn cost and is tested using a QUV machine
that exposes the yarn to high levels of artificial UV light and
combined with artificial weathering (heat, light, rain etc.)
simulates eight years of exposure. This normally involves
3,000 hours of testing.
The Australian standard that the surface needs to adhere
to is AS2001-4: B02-2001, for minimal UV degradation.
Colour Fastness 3.2.2
Extensive weathering such as heat, rain and wind can
impact on the colour fastness of the pigments in the yarn.
When combined with intensive play, the pigments, if not
stabilised with the yarns’ polymers, can cause accelerated
breakdown. In some earlier yarns (pre 2002) the use of
heavy lead pigments (e.g. lead chromate) were used. The
key manufacturers in the late 1990’s embraced the EU
Packaging Directive removing heavy metals from recycled
plastic packaging products (1994). Some cheaper imported
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 27
products may not have embraced these standards. It is
important that any purchaser of synthetic surfaces ensures
that this is adhered to by the supplier.
The Australian standard for colour fastness in artificial light,
which can be used to test the colour fastness, is AS2001-4
BO2-2001 which also addresses the minimum UV
degradation.
The safety of the colour pigment is not addressed by any
Australian standard and the European DIN standard 18035
states that the levels should be:
Heavy Metal Acceptable Level Units
Lead <0.04 mg/L
Cadmium <0.0005 mg/L
Chrome Total <0.05 mg/L
Mercury <0.001 mg/L
Zinc <3.0 mg/L
Table 2: Acceptable heavy metal levels (source: DIN 18035)
Length of Yarn 3.2.3
The length of the yarn is determined by the purpose of use,
whether that is 11mm for hockey, 60mm for rugby union or
220mm for synthetic horse racing tracks. Some sports
determine the length of the yarn (e.g. rugby union at 60mm
minimum) while others focus on the performance outcomes
only.
Sport Normal Range
Bowls 10mm - 15mm
Football (11-a-side) 40mm - 65mm
Football (5-a-side) 20mm - 65mm
Rugby League 40mm - 65mm
Rugby Union 60mm minimum
Tennis 10mm - 25mm
Australian Rules 40mm - 65mm
Hockey 12mm - 65mm
Cricket Wicket 9mm - 10mm
Table 3: Example of yarn height ranges for each sport
Thickness of Yarn 3.2.4
There is balance between the thickness of the yarn, which
may assist with its ability to remain standing and the
softeners of a slightly thinner yarn. Over the years,
manufacturers have tried many sorts of yarn types to
optimise the balance of thickness and softness to polymers.
Photo 16: Examples of different structures of yarn (Source: TigerTurf)
At the recent FSB synthetic surface expo the trend was for
a mono-filament yarn that was between 300 microns & 430
microns thick.
Mono-filament VS Fibrillated 3.2.5
When the yarn is extruded, there are normally five (5)
broad options:
Monofilament fibre – a single length or blade which
tries to replicate that of a single blade of natural grass.
A grass with this yarn would normally have a greater
amount per square metre. It is also renowned for
staying upright longer and being more durable.
Fibrillated Yarn – The yarn is produced in a sheet (slit-
film sheet) then cut to the width desired, so the texture
has more uniformity than the single blade of the mono-
filament yarn with the superior turf bind and economies
of a fibrillated yarn.
Hybrid system – Some manufacturers are offering a
combined yarn system that offers the aesthetics and
durability of a monofilament yarn with the superior tuft
bind and economies of a fibrillated yarn.
Knit-de-knit – straight yarn that is given the tight curly
appearance for hockey pitches, producing a non-
directional surface.
Texturised - Straight yarn that is heat-set to produce a
tight curly appearance which is non-directional to meet
the needs of hockey. This approach is also used for
the “thatch” part of the ‘grass-system’ mainly for
landscape grass, reducing the need for infill.
Cooler Grass Technology 3.2.6
Most of the manufacturers have a proprietary approach to
the reduction the heat retention in the yarn, some claim by
20-30%. This is worth considering when purchasing. It is
always worth considering the question 20-30 percent of
what? This reduction normally occurs because the
polymers in the yarn are able to reflect infrared and
dissipate heat into the atmosphere, as opposed to
absorbing them into the yarn.
Pile Weight/ Density 3.2.7
Identifying the quality of yarn within a square meter, using
the number of stitches and the gauge manufacture. As a
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 28
rule, the tighter the pile, the higher the price. The linear
density is a measure of the weight of the yarn, and is
referred to as the ‘Denier’.
3.3 The Backing
The backing material is critical as it holds the tufted yarn in
place but also needs to be durable enough to hold the field
in place, so there is no shrinkage or expansion. It is also
critical for connecting each roll of grass on the field,
allowing water to pass through the surface.
The yarn is predominantly tufted through the backing and
the yarn needs to have a coating or glue type bonding
agent so that the tufts cannot be easily moved or pulled out.
The most commonly used coating is a polyurethane
bonding agent, due to its superior water resistance. Latex,
thermo-plastic coatings, natural rubber and other bonding
agents can also be used. The porosity of the backing is
normally achieved in one of two ways; either using a heat
soldering hole and puncturing across the roll of grass, or
having the polyurethane backing only attributed to the yarn
tufted areas and the space in between the tufts is therefore
more porous..
The majority of carpet backing is double backed with the
‘second backing’ sprayed on to seal the carpet tufts. Some
manufacturers only ‘seal’ the turf and gauge, leaving the
space between not double sealed, allowing for greater
water porosity. These pictures below provide an
understanding of the two key options.
The water porosity through the carpet backing must be
achieved for the key sports. For instance in football
(soccer) the FIFA guidelines are 180ml per hour. In rugby
union the IRB guideline is 500ml per hour, whilst Australian
Rules (AFL) is 200ml. Smart Connection Company
recommends all pitches should have a porosity rate of
500ml per hour. It’s important to design drainage rates to
cope with this.
Photo 17: Examples of Backing Surfaces
Carpet Seams and Joining 3.3.1
The carpet is normally created on rolls of 3.5m – 4.5m in
width and these are laid width wise across the field. The
‘straight lines’ are normally integrated when woven and the
circular lines laid at installation.
Any other straight seams are usually secured by sewing or
using an adhesive, depending upon the manufacturer’s
system. The important point is that the carpet should be
seamless and have a maximum possible joint strength.
The adhesives used should be proven in Australia and are
not considered volatile in adverse weather conditions (e.g.
heat, rain, wind, humidity etc.).
Photo 18: Example of seam failure
3.4 Infill
The infill within the 3G long grass synthetic turf aims to
provide a consistency between the ball, player and surface
interaction that allows the synthetic system to perform to
the required standards.
There are a number of aspects that need to be considered
when choosing the most appropriate infill for a sports field
including:
The type of infill for the surface;
The depth and height of the infill compared to the
yarn, and
The amount of infill.
Purpose of Infill 3.4.1
The infill, or lack of it, is needed to assist the performance
of the whole grass system, which ensures that the yarn
plays a similar role as the soil in natural grass fields. The
different types of grass surfaces that are commonly
categorised are as follows:
1) Unfilled
Although the first nylon pitches in the 1960’s were unfilled,
the pitch systems are far more sophisticated now-a-days.
Water is used; predominantly for hockey’s premium
standard - global .Water is applied through an irrigation
system immediately prior to play, increasing the speed of
the ball interaction with the surface. Technology is now
looking for unfilled fields that have similar playing
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 29
conditions as traditional water based pitches. Many are
sand dressed instead.
2) Sand-Dressed
Dressed synthetics surfaces aim to add weight to the
carpet to keep the denier pile upright while also maintaining
the playing standards for hockey. Some football (soccer) 5-
a-side/futsal courts use this type of system as it seems to
provide a more durable solution to people using flat training
shoes.
Photo 19: Example of a mixed profile of sand and rubber infill
3) Filled Fields
The aim of the filling is to replicate soil in a natural pitch
where the grass/synthetic yarn is held upright. The filling
can be compiled from rubber, sand or organic infill’s. The
amount of fill is normally determined by the manufacturer,
when they consider the length of grass yarn, the
performance outcomes, the shock pad & purpose of the
field. For instance rugby union has to be at least 60mm,
whilst hockey can be around 11mm.
Type of Infill 3.4.2
Depending on the manufacturers systems, there will always
be a choice for the purchaser depending upon the
affordability and philosophical standing. Some Local
Governments do not like the idea of using recycled types
(SBR) due to community perceptions, although these
perceptions have been proved unfounded. In essence
there are five types of infill, all offering slightly different
options, but with the same outcome, namely the
performance standards stipulated by the sport(s). The key
options are:
1) Crumbed Rubber (SBR)
The most popular infill in the Asia Pacific region, probably
due to the cost effective price point. Derived from recycled
truck tyres that are ground up and recycled. Two types of
crumbled rubber are used – ambient and organic. They are
both predominantly metal free, and according to the United
States, Synthetic Turf Council’s (STC) Guidelines for crumb
rubber infill should not contain liberated fibre in the amount
that exceeds 0.01 percent of total weight of crumbed
rubber.
Photo 20: Crumbed Rubber (Source: TigerTurf)
Recycled and shredded rubber is normally 0.5 - 2mm in
size, is the least expensive and still provides the necessary
sliding and shock absorbing qualities. The shredding of the
rubber is normally completed mechanically. Sifting
technology is used to ensure that the dimensions are
correct. The benefits are that it is recycled, economical, UV
stable and has a long life span. The black rubber has,
according to the UK’s Sport and Play Construction
Association’s (SAPCA) independent Consultant polymer
chemist, Dr Bryon Willoughby, “selected to offer optimum
performance in a demanding application which requires
strength, fatigue and abrasion resistance”. SBR is a
general purpose rubber.
Both the ambient and cryogenically shredded rubber can
be coated with obscurants, sealers or anti-microbial
substance if required. This approach provides a great
aesthetic appeal but the additional cost may not justify it for
may LGA’s.
2) Sands
Silica sand is the preference for sports fields due to the
rounding of each particle, as opposed to the sharpness of
natural sand, as you would find on the beach. This sand is
chemically stable, fracture resistant, non-toxic and is
rounded.
Photo 21: Silica Sand (Source: www.flexsand.com)
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 30
It can be used by itself, as seen in some sites in Victoria
and ACT or in combination with rubber or organic infills. It
is important that the Silica sand has a high purity of grains
of more than 90 percent as recommended by the STC. This
sand can also be coated with either a firm or flexible
coating which is normally elastomeric or acrylic, forming a
coating that allows for different sizes depending on the
system’s needs.
3) TPE (Thermo Plastic Elastomer)
This is a new material, which is heated and compressed
into grains or various shapes for performance. Once cooled,
it retains its new shape, is elastic in nature and can also be
recycled. It has a long life and shows durability according to
various manufacturers.
Photo 22: TPV Granules provide a greater colour range and less UV degradation (Source: Surface Designs)
This ‘virgin plastic’ infill is non-toxic, chemically stable,
resits fading and is long lasting. It can also provide the
benefit of being recycled at the end of the “grasses life”.
Providing a wide range of colours, TPE is often used in
playgrounds, athletic tracks as well as for field infills. It has
elastic properties, uniform shape and its virgin rubber and
filling provide a high performance infill option.
4) EPDM Infill (Ethylene Propylene Terpolymer)
This type of infill is produced from a polymer recovered
from three monomers: ethylene, propylene and diene. It is
manufactured new with options for various colours made to
order. It is odourless and offers consistent quality. It is often
used beside playgrounds and on tracks as well as for
performance infill. It is commonly coloured in light colours
and provides a significant contrast from the traditional black
SBR.
Photo 23: EPDM 'Bionic' infill (Source MILOS)
5) Organic Infill
There seems to be some experimentation using organic or
natural infill’s by a small number of companies. The mix of
the organic infill may have a bearing on other
considerations. The basic approaches seem to be:
i. Cork infill – allowing cork to be stripped from trees
(every nine years) then used as a top TPE type infill
with similar rebound qualities. As it does not take water
it will not break down like other organic infills. It is
cooler than rubber, stable and retains its shape. The
marketing rational from a key supplier states that it has
12 million air cells per cubic cm. It is the most costly
but an excellent solution.
ii. Cork/organic infill – allowing less cork with other
plant/organic compounds such as coconut husk etc.
There seems to be more concerns about this
combination due to:
- The plant/organic compound breaking down quickly
with the typical level of use that Australian LGA’s
programme their pitches (e.g. 40-60 hours).
- Additional cost of maintenance due to compaction
and possible organic growth with plant substance.
- Additional cost of continual replacement and top-up.
- This option, in Australia’s climate also needs to be
watered regularly as it will turn to dust with the
breakdown of the natural fibres.
Some would say this negates the benefits of synthetic turf
and a hybrid stabilised turf/grass solution should be
considered.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 31
Photo 24: Organic Infill (Source: Limonta)
Future Directions 3.4.3
The European suppliers are promoting a light coloured
EPDM which offers strong shock absorption whilst also
ensuring that some of the heat issue is realised. This is yet
to be tested in Australia in significant amounts.
At the National Synthetic Surfaces Conference and Expo
(2013) a yarn manufacturer launched a recycled polymer
infill which had been tested and showed characteristics that
indicated that their product would reduce heat by more than
10 percent.
Rubber Infill Migration 3.4.4
Rubber infill is lighter than water and also has a tendency
to migrate across areas of a field. FIFA raised this as a
concern at a recent Australian conference4 and indicated
that they are exploring the options of how this could be
stabilised.
Amount of Infill 3.4.5
The amount of infill used in a field will depend on how the
manufacturers systems work and against what sports
performance standards are chosen. If a shock pad is used,
then for the same football codes the yarn length may be as
little as 43mm. In Europe the mix of silica sand and EPDM
is being used with a yarn of 43 mm allowing 21mm for the
fibre to be left above the infill with an infill level of around
22mm.
The import aspects to consider are the structure of infill or
square meter and the thickness of the yarn fibres to allow
the yarn to stay upright.
Photo 25: EPDM (Virgin Rubber) Infill allowing around 20mm of grass above the infill
4 National Synthetic Surfaces Conference and Expo June 2013 (NSSCE)
3.5 Shockpad
Shockpad Considerations 3.5.1
The shockpad is an elasticated layer (E-layer) between the
base and the synthetic grass carpet. It is used by many
suppliers to provide a degree of comfort, meet the sports’
requirements for critical fall height and extend the life of the
pitch.
The types and thickness of shockpads need to be
considered as part of the overall synthetic surface system
to ensure that the important requirements of international
sports standards, regarding shock absorption, energy
restitution and vertical deformation are met. These
requirements may not be met with the compaction of
rubber infill.
There has been much consideration, opinions and sales
propositions put forward as to whether a shockpad for a
synthetic grass field for football (soccer, rugby and AFL) is
needed. Many experts believe that if the pitch is played on
intensively it is unlikely the playing characteristics will meet
the sports performance standards over time if there is not a
shockpad in place. Due to the youthfulness of the FIFA
Quality Concept and the level of retesting that has been
completed on pitches, it is hard to ascertain with much
certainty the impact of not having a shockpad.
The belief of the majority of Australian suppliers is that a
shockpad is critical in the long-term to achieve performance
standards. Over the next couple of years it will be
interesting to explore how many FIFA 1 Star pitches have a
shock pad that are re-tested and achieve the performance
criteria, after four and eight years.
The question therefore, is what needs to be considered
when deciding on the type of shock pad, especially if the
client feels less confident that they will be able to meet the
exact routine maintenance obligations?
Types of Shockpad 3.5.2
The types and thickness of shock pads needs to be
considered as part of the overall synthetic surface system.
This is to ensure that the important requirements of
international sports standards regarding shock absorption,
energy restitution and vertical deformation are met. There
are two kinds of shock pads:
i. Pre-fabricated construction
There are a number of systems on the market, including
roll-out pads, normally up to 5m in width, prefabricated
sheets which once laid out can reduce the time of
installation. The latest approach to the preformed shock
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 32
pads is to allow for breathing in the pad for when they
expand and contract.
Photo 26: Prefabricated Shockpad being laid (Source: TEAM Sports)
Some shockpads are currently being developed with
breathable channels which allow water through easier and
also trap air, making them cooler (according to the
marketing literature). Tests are being held to ascertain the
reality of this process.
ii. In-situ construction
This surface infill mix comes in a variation of thickness
between 35mm and 10mm and consists of a polyurethane
binder mixer combined with rubber crumb (SBR) or
shredded rubber (e.g. soles of training shoes). The mix
needs to be perfected with the infill for the system to be
optimised.
The IRB have stated in their performance standards that
“shockpads are preferred’’ and at a conference in New
Zealand5 said they would recommend a shockpad is used
for their fields every time.
Photo 27: Insitu Shockpad being laid (Source: STI)
5 NZRA Turf Conference (June 2013)
Loughborough University (http://sportsurf.lboro.ac.uk)
identified that the binder (glue) percentage strength should
ideally be between 12 percent and 16 percent when laying
shockpads.
In 2014, FIFA is expected to release the results from their
research on the benefits of shockpads compared with the
ability to achieve performance targets over time. The
report is likely to conclude what industry experts have been
saying for some time; that if a synthetic system does not
have a shockpad, the level of maintenance needs to be
higher and more consistent. The shockpad is seen as
providing a greater degree of certainty of achieving the
performance targets over time, particularly with the higher
level of use.
3.6 Pavement
It is critical to ensure that the sub-base and pavement is
designed by a civil engineering specialist so that it can
support the synthetic surface system. The design should
be based against data from the locations/field inspections
including topographical survey, geotechnical report,
drainage study etc.
The focus of the sub-base and pavement base design must
be able to achieve the following:
Support the vehicle load during the construction,
maintenance and replacement phases,
Integrate with the synthetic surface to ensure that the
sports’ performance criteria is achieved,
Support the load on the pitch once in use, including
players and maintenance machinery to ensure no
negative deformation of the surface,
Protect the surface from other sub-grade movement
or water.
3.7 Drainage
Drainage is critical to the success of a synthetic sports field
and a number of key aspects need to be considered before
deciding which approach to take, namely a vertical or
horizontal solution. The following conditions need to be
explored prior to purchase as they could make a significant
impact on the design and therefore the cost and success of
the system as a whole.
Sports Guidance 3.7.1
All key grass sports stipulate that water must drain through
the surface initially. This means that the waste cannot drain
horizontally ‘on top’ of the field, to avoid the pooling of
water. Each sport has different performance standards,
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 33
with regards to the permeability of the system that the turf
needs to be able to demonstrate.
Site Conditions 3.7.2
The site may influence the type of drainage used. If it’s
being laid on a concrete base, vertical drainage may not be
an option, indeed if the soil base is contaminated, it could
be better to use a horizontal drainage solution.
A ‘storm rate’ needs to be calculated, using the statistics for
a 5 - 10 year rain period from the weather bureau in each
state/territory in order to identify a projected hourly rain-fall.
The drainage needs to be able to cope with at least this
level of rain, particularly if it is higher than the standard for
that sport.
Flow Conditions 3.7.3
The flow through the base material or drainage cell and the
associated pipe work needs to be able to meet the
permeability requirements of either the sports standards
and/or the site conditions.
Careful evaluation is needed of the drainage approach,
normally by a consultant engineer.
Vertical Drainage Option 3.7.4
The traditional natural-turf drainage system is commonly
used for the synthetic surface by using design
combinations with ‘AG-drains’ positioned under the
pavement with a permeable base allowing the water under
gravity is permeate the ground until it meets the drains.
The pipe work then feed to collector drains and finally to a
larger ‘storm-water’ drain and connect to either a water-
harvesting system or the local drainage.
The concern with this type of system is that in laying the
AG-drains, there could be significant movement in the base
and the compaction post-laying of the drains accuracy is
not always successful without some damage.
Horizontal Drainage Option 3.7.5
A horizontal drainage option is becoming more popular for
synthetic sports turf where the pavement as some believe
that the use of AG Drains can present problems longer
term with movement and cracks.
Photo 28: Example of horizontal drainage cell under shockpad (Source: Wayne Stuart - City of Swan, WA)
The water permeates through the turf/shockpad system
either through a drainage cell or by using the drainage
channels in a shockpad. Alternatively the road base can be
designed on an angle so the water can dissipate to
drainage around the outside of the field before being taken
away.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 34
SECTION 4:
STANDARDS FOR
SYNTHETIC
SURFACES
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 35
4 Standards for Synthetic Surfaces
4.1 Importance of Standards
The development of standards for synthetic surfaces by the
peak bodies of sport has been one of the reasons for the
rapid acceptance of surfaces by the community. It provides
confidence that there will be interaction between the
surface, player and the ball and reflects the playing
characteristics essential for each sport.
The majority of sports (with the exception of hockey,
athletics and tennis) want the synthetic playing surface to
replicate the playing qualities and performance
characteristics of good quality natural grass.
This backing by the sports bodies has resulted in quality
standards and processes being developed for the majority
of the key sports that have embraced synthetic technology.
The standards now include:
Standards for the surface performance (e.g. FIFA
Quality Programme for football turf Handbook of
requirements);
Standards for key components of the synthetic system
(e.g. EN 15330.1 Surfaces for Sports areas –
Synthetic turf and needle – punched surfaces primarily
designed for outdoor use);
Standards for the testing laboratory by each sport;
Rules of the game relative to the use of Synthetic
Sports Turf.
In addition the sport may have regional or local ‘overlays’
for the size of the playing area for specific levels of the
game (e.g. Hockey NSW Association Facilities
Sustainability Guidelines).
It is critical for the players, sport and the purchaser (e.g.
Local Government) to ensure that the pitch is installed as
requested and the performance is compliant, in order to
reduce risk.
4.2 Developing Performance Standards
Almost all governing sporting bodies that have published
performance specifications or standards for artificial playing
surfaces, started their evaluation with a survey of natural
grass pitches. FIFA evaluated natural grass surfaces in
major stadiums in Europe, the AFL/CA analysed the
behaviour of stadium and community grounds in Australia
and the English RFL reviewed natural grass stadium
pitches and community grounds in England through a
summer and winter period.
Typically, a natural grass-synthetic turf hybrid can be found
in major stadium installations around the world, which uses
root-stabilized fibre-sand or fibre-elastic natural grass
systems. Typical community grounds are soil-based
natural grass surfaces which were surveyed during winter
and summer (see Table 4). In summary both, the ProPitch
study in England conducted as part of the English RFL
performance system as well as the AFL/CA study
conducted by the University of Ballarat6 concluded that
typical community grounds are harder and firmer than well-
maintained stadium grounds. As a result, most existing
performance standards distinguish between stadium and
community use when applying synthetic surfacing solutions.
Pro
pert
y
Dess
o
Gra
ssm
as
ter
Fib
res
an
d
Fib
reela
sti
c
So
il-b
ase
d
(win
ter)
So
il-b
ase
d
(su
mm
er)
Ball
Rebound
0.80 –
1.00m
0.75 –
0.90m
0.65 –
0.95m
0.60 –
0.80m
0.80 –
1.0m
Ball Roll 5.0 – 6.5 m 5.5 – 7.0
m
4.5 – 7.5 m 4.0 – 5.0
m
4.75 –
5.75 m
Underfoot
friction
40 – 50 Nm
*
30 – 40
Nm
30 – 50
Nm
25 – 35
Nm
40 – 55
Nm
Impact
Response
45 – 55 %
**
2 – 4 mm
***
45 – 55 %
3 – 5 mm
50 – 57 %
4 – 6 mm
62 –68 %
7 – 8 mm
53 – 65 %
4 – 8 mm
HIC/Critical
Fall Height
1.5 m 1.7 m 2.5 – 3.5 m n/a n/a
Table 4: Natural Grass Performance (ProPitchSystem study, England) Note:
* Rotational Resistance studded sole
** Shock absorption
*** Vertical deformation
In all sports, the data received was then used to model
performance criteria for the use of synthetic surfaces.
Common to all standards, is the fact the specifications can
be divided into three areas:
1. Product identification and durability,
2. Ball-surface interaction,
3. Player-surface interaction.
Depending on the specific playing characteristics of each
sport and the level the sport is being played at,
performance standards have been developed against the
three areas above. These performance standards are
measured by specific test equipment both in the laboratory
and on the field. It’s the field that receives the certification
– NOT the product.
6 Twomey, D., Otago, L., Saunders, N.; Development of Standards for the Use of Artificial
Turf for Australian Football and Cricket; University of Ballarat; 2007
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 36
4.3 Laboratory and Field Standards
The majority of sports have a process that needs to be
followed before a particular field is certified or accredited
against the sports performance standards. This process,
which varies with each sport, generally has the following
five stages:
Step 1: Manufacturer Agreement
The manufacturer needs to demonstrate to the world
governing body of the sport that they have the credentials
to produce a field to the correct standards and can provide
quality assurance - either under a license (entry level) or
preferred provider/producer status (higher levels of quality
assurance needed).
Step 2: Laboratory Test
An accredited laboratory identified by the sport’s governing
body tests a sample product to ensure it performs
according to their ‘Testing Handbook/Guide’. If the product
passes the laboratory tests it can then be used for
installation.
Step 3: Pitch/Field Installation
The manufacturer, or one of their licensees will install the
product which has been laboratory tested into the field.
Once installed and settled (normally around 40 hours/ up to
1 week) it can be tested.
Step 4: Insitu-Field Test
The independent and accredited laboratory on behalf of the
sports peak body (e.g. AFL; FIFA; IRB; FIH etc.) will test
the field against each performance criteria and ensure that
the field installed, matches the system characteristics that
the laboratory test ‘passed previously’.
Step 5: Certification
The world governing body of the sport will issue a
certificate for the playing field/court and this will be relevant
for the duration of that certificate, which can vary from: one
year (FIFA 2 star); two years (IRB, AFL); four years (FIFA 1
star) ; and up to 10 years (Tennis Court Recognition
Program).
4.4 Licensee’s / Preferred Producers
Each sport has its own approach for recognising
manufacturers (not to be confused with suppliers of the
synthetic turf) in a manner that works for them. Some have
two tier systems, others a single system as shown in Table
5 following.
Sports
Body Licensee
Preferred
Producer Commentary
AFL/Cricket
Australia -
New system standard
January 2014
FIFA New standard
expected late 2014 /
early 2015
IRB Only 1 level
FIH - Product focused
RFL - NRL (Australia)
considering options
ITF - - Product focused
Table 5: Sports Licensee/Preferred Producer Synopsis
4.5 Sports Standards
Each of the key sports has their own standards, with many
built on the FIFA Quality Concept Standards. Section 7
explores each in depth, Table 6 provides a summation:
Sp
ort
Go
vern
ing
Bo
dy
Res
po
ns
ible
for
Sy
nth
eti
cs
Sta
nd
ard
Nam
e
Sta
nd
ard
of
Pla
y/U
se
1. Football (Soccer)
FIFA FIFA Quality Program for Football Turf – community and stadium / professional levels
Community Use FIFA 1 star
Professional & Stadium Use FIFA 2 star
2. Rugby Union IRB Regulation 22
3. Rugby League RFL (UK) & NRL (Australia)
Guide to synthetic turf pitches for Rugby League
Community
Stadium
4. Australian Rules Football
AFL AFL/Cricket Australia Synthetic Turf Program
Community Use
5. Hockey FIH Global
National
Multi-sport
6. Tennis ITF Court Pace classification Program
ITF Recognition Program
ITF Recognised Supplier
7. Cricket Cricket Australia/AFL
Community
8. Multi-sport ‘One Turf Standard’
One Turf Standard IRB with FIFA; FIH; AFL; GAA; NRL
Community
Table 6: Standards of Sport
The major sports of football (FIFA); rugby union (IRB);
rugby league (RFL); hockey (FIH); Gaelic football (GAA)
and AFL/Cricket Australia have combined resources to
offer Local Government, education and sports sections a
multi-sport surface, also known as One Turf Standard. The
key performance standard components will be similar to
those shown in Table 7:
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 37
Characteristics Common Range
AFL/CA Community
Level Standard
FIFA 1 Star
IRB Regulatio
n 22
FIFA 2 Star
Critical Fall Height (m)
1.3 1.3 depending on headform
- 1.3 -
Hardness (g) 60-120 ≤ 120g - - -
Vertical deformation (mm)
4-8 4-11 4-9 5.5-11 4-8
Shock Absorption (%)
40-70 50-70 55-70 55-70 60-70
Energy restitution (%)
20-50 20-50 - 20-50
Abrasion (%) ± 30% ± 30% ± 30% ± 30% ± 30%
Friction 0.35-0.75 0.35-0.75 0.35-0.75 0.35-0.75 0.35-0.75
Traction – football studs (Nm)
30-45 25-50 25-50 35-45 30-45
Traction – cricket spikes (Nm)
15-25 15-25 - - -
Traction – cricket studs (Nm)
7-15 - - -
Ball roll – calibrated ball (m)
4-8m 4-12m 4-10m - 4-8m
Ball roll – cricket (m)
4-8m 4-15m - - -
Vertical ball rebound (m)
0.6-0.85m 0.6-1.0m 0.6-1.0m 0.6-1.0m 0.6-0.85m
- Cricket ball 0.1-0.4 0.1-0.4
Angled ball rebound (%)
- Calibrated ball 50-60 45-70 45-70 50-70 45-60
- Cricket ball 35-60 35-60
Durability test 20,500 20,000 20,500 - 5,200
Infill Splash ≤ Category 3
Surface regularity
3m 10mm 3m 10mm 3m 10mm 3m 10mm 3m 10mm
Table 7: Exploring common playing performance criterion between sports
4.6 The Importance of Testing
The importance of having the field tested is linked to
‘Achieving Performance’ and ‘Risk Mitigation’. The key
sports have considered both issues. The AFL and Cricket
Australia have partnered with JLT Insurance to ensure that
only fields that are tested can be used for competition
games. In rugby union, Regulation 22 states that the field
should be re-tested every two years and the local union
should ensure that the member unions and the IRB are
insured against claims.
The benefits of testing:
Peace of mind that it meets the required
standards,
The durability of the product should last the
planned life expectancy,
There will be reduced risks associated with the
system,
The maintenance is being carried out adequately,
The ongoing performance characteristics are
being achieved.
4.7 Durability Considerations
Photo 30: Lisport Test in Laboratory
If the field is to be used intensely (in excess of 50 hours per
week), such as for junior coaching, it is worth requesting a
higher durability cycle. This is measured with the Lisport
Test as shown above, where the machine replicates the
impact of studded boots on the turf.
To ensure the durability of the Lisport Test meets the
needs of intensive use, (in excess of the 20,200 requested
for the FIFA 1 Star Recommended Pitches), we
recommend at least 50,200 cycles per field.
Depending on the grass type, some can last longer than
others. The three photos below show the results of the
Lisport Test being used for 50,000, 70,000 and 150,000
cycles. Each test comes with a laboratory report and this
should be sought at the procurement stage.
Photo 29: Three grasses showing the effects of the Lisport test (50,000; 70,000 and 150,000 cycles)
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 38
Section 4 Acousto-Scan Sport Surface Industry. Case
Study
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 39
SECTION 5:
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATIONS
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 40
5 Environmental Considerations
5.1 Introduction
Local Government and sport has shown true leadership by
being more environmentally conscious when making
investment decisions around major projects such as the
installation of synthetic fields.
This section explores some of the key considerations the
industry is considering in consultation with local
communities.
5.2 Climate Change / Weather Patterns
Climate change has resulted in more extreme weather
patterns over the last few decades. Indeed since the
1950’s most of eastern and western Australia has seen
significant rainfall reductions while the north west of
Australia has become wetter during the same period.7
On a global front the mean global temperature has
increased 0.76m°C since 1850. Australian Governments
have already had to take drastic action and issue water
bans for sports fields as part of drought interventions in
Victoria and Western Australia over the past decade.
Facilities need to consider the consequences of reduced
water availability on natural turf. With reduced rainfall and
dwindling water resources in key parts of Australia,
synthetic turf technology is being considered as the
solution, by many organisations such as LGA’s and Sports
Bodies.
The time of day that pitch use is scheduled also needs to
be taken into consideration, when determining what
competitions, school use and training can take place. The
facilities needed for spectators also needs to be factored in.
In regards to climate issues and increased temperatures,
there are impacts that need to be managed with synthetic
surfaces:
Direct impacts to sports
Limitations on school-based daytime physical education
programs, especially during summer, and
More frequent heat stress-related health events.
Indirect impacts to sports
Increased demand for water-based recreational pursuits,
Increased exposure to UV radiation,
Reduced participation in outdoor fitness-related health
initiatives,
Summer daytime events rescheduled to evening fixtures,
7 www.climatechangeinaustralia.com.au/pastchange.php
Funding demands for sports field lighting and air
conditioned indoor facilities,
Financial stress on poorer clubs due to the cost of night
events,
Increased respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, and
Increased risk of bushfires in natural recreation areas
(parks and bushland).
Suppliers of sports facilities and organisations need to
consider the heat implications, use of heat mitigation
technology and ensure that the procurement process for
synthetic turf addresses these issues. A heat policy would
assist in the management of these implications.
Photo 31: Effect of drought on natural turf
In summary the synthetic surface needs to consider:
Using heat reduction technology to reduce the ambient
temperature of the surface and up to one metre above
the ground,
The management of playing on the surface, and
The use of water to keep the turf cool.
5.3 Water Management
Water management for sports fields is critical in both
assisting the growth of natural grass and the restoration of
fields after ‘a hard days usage’. If adequate water is not
available, fields soon disintegrate, become hard and lose
the thatch of grass on top that assists with ball and player
interaction.
In addition, the risk of safety concerns increases and player
comfort decreases. If synthetic sports turf is used, a water
harvesting strategy can be adopted, collecting the water
from the synthetic field and using it for the natural turf
pitches nearby.
Water harvesting is the capture and recycle of rain through
field irrigation and drainage. Many Local Governments are
opting to implement water harvesting and contemporary
irrigation methods to maintain the ground when faced with
climatic conditions and high demand overuse issues.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 41
Photo 32: Water harvesting from a tennis court into nearby tanks (Source: Grassports)
There are significant advantages in grouping synthetic
fields (1-2 fields) and possibly even having them co-located
with natural turf so that the synthetic fields can be used to
water harvest irrigation supplies for the ongoing
maintenance of natural turf surfaces. Recent case studies
in Melbourne (see Appendix 2) show that water harvesting
can collect enough rain water to water one cool grass and
two warm grass natural turf fields, simply by building
adequate size holding tanks.
5.4 Carbon Footprint
It is thought that the carbon footprint for natural grass is
lower than that of an artificial surface. This is when you
compare the installation and maintenance of grass (e.g.
fertiliser production, mowing and maintenance) with the
synthetic surface option and what’s involved in its
production, transportation and disposal of materials.
Carbon Offset 5.4.1
Significant research has been completed about the
comparisons, for example:
A Canadian Study8 found that a 9,000m
2 synthetic
facility over 10 years, recorded a total CO2 emission of
55.6 tonne and the tree planting offset requirements
was 1,861 trees.
Natural grass helps remove carbon dioxide (carbon
sequestrian) from the atmosphere via photosynthesis
and stores it as organic carbon in soil, depending on
factors such as land practices and climatic conditions.
Therefore grass contributes to soil organic matter,
mainly through its root system, which makes it an
important carbon sink. A carbon sink is something that
can store some carbon-containing compound for a
8 Meil, J and Bushi L, 2007. ‘Estimating the Required Global Warming Offsets to Achieve
a Carbon Neutral Synthetic Field Turf System Installation’. Athena Institute, Merrickville, Ontario, Canada.
period of time. A typical lawn of 232m2, converts
enough carbon dioxide from the atmosphere to provide
adequate oxygen for a family of four9.
According to the University of Ballarat study, only
growing forests produce a net gain of oxygen because
they store carbon in wood in the trees themselves,
whereas grass stores carbon in the form of sugars,
starches and cellulose. However the important point is
that natural grass is often cut - particularly on a playing
field - which releases the carbon as it breaks down and
rots, plus the reduction in blade length reduces the
amount of absorption. This is compared with trees,
which drop leaves while the wood components are
more likely to stay intact. It should be noted that plants
continue to release carbon dioxide and water into the
atmosphere through the process of cellular respiration.
Therefore, the net production oxygen in grass is very
small in comparison to trees and bushes.
Research10
from the United States suggests
greenhouse gas emissions from natural turf production
and maintenance is greater than the amount of carbon
that can be stored in them. This study also found that
athletic sports fields do not store as much carbon as
ornamental grass due to soil disruption by tilling and
resodding. However, this methodology of research has
since been reviewed and modified to suggest that it is
a net sequester or carbon dioxide. Essentially, the
difference is to do with the ability to counter balance
emissions through the carbon sink.
In 2010, the BASF Corporation Eco-Efficiency Analysis11
compared synthetic fields with professionally installed and
maintained grass fields. It concluded that the use of
synthetics can lower consumption of energy and raw
materials and the generation of solid waste depending on
field usage. BASF also found that the average life cycle
over 20 years of natural grass fields are 15 per cent higher
than the synthetic alternatives.
5.5 Ecosystem Impacts
To support the idea that ground rubber materials are
unhealthy, questions have been raised as to whether the
materials in artificial turf surfaces mix with water run-off and
put contaminants into ground water, adversely affecting the
9 TurfGrass Producers International, 2010. “Natural Grass and Artificial Turf: Separating
Myths and Facts’ published by Turf Grass Resource Centre, www.TurfResourceCentre.org viewed August 2011. 10
Townsend-Small, A Czimczik, C.I, 2010. ‘Carbon Sequestration and Greenhouse Gas emissions in Urban Turf’ University of California (Irvine). Published in : Geophysical Research Letters (USA) Vol 37, 22 January 2010) 11
Submission for Verification of Eco-efficiency Analysis Under NSF Protocol P352, Part B Synthetic Turf, Eco-Efficiency Analysis Final Report – August 2010. BASF Corporation, NJ.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 42
air quality and eco-system. Thee NYS DOH12
factsheet
show that the water run-off has no effect on toxicity when
compared with the key test criteria or other environmental
impacts to organisms and meets all the state and federal
water quality standards. Reports also reinforce that runoffs
from fields into rivers, lakes, creeks, ponds, etc. contain
chemical fertilisers and pesticides that are used on grass
fields, as opposed to synthetic turf fields, where the runoff
will be mostly pure water, drained through percolation rock
and collected in catches under the field.
There have been a number of studies on the impact of
synthetics on the local ecosystem including ones from the
California Environmental Protection Agency, the Norwegian
Institute of Public Health, the French National Institute of
Environment and Risk and probably the most
comprehensive study, the Swiss Ministry of Environment,
Traffic, Energy and Communications (2005-2007).
Photo 33: Swiss Study collecting rain water through various synthetic sports surface systems
The Swiss Study13
Ministry of Environment, Traffic, Energy
and Communications reported results of a field study on
the Environmental Compatibility of Synthetic Sports
Surfaces. The study explored the secretion of synthetic
surfaces from three sources:
i. Disintegration by UV radiation,
ii. Mechanical destruction by abrasion, and
iii. Diffusion of ingredients and washing off by rain
water.
The secreted substances included:
Rubber chemicals: aromatic amines, benzothiazoles,
anilin, cyclohexylamin,
PAH’s: Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (16),
Total organic nitrogen compounds,
DOC, and
Zinc.
12
New York State Department of Health, Bureau of Toxic Substance Assessment (2008). Fact Sheet: Crumb rubber infilled synthetic turf athletic fields. New York 13
Results of a Field Study on Environmental Compatibility of Synthetic Sports Surfaces by Edwin Müller, dipl.Chem
The testing was in a controlled environment with rain
washing through the synthetic and natural turf systems
over a two-year period then collected and measured for the
secreted substances. The results are summarised as
follows:
PAH’s – PAH’s are ubiquitous substances and are present
in sewage water in similar concentrations as in water
draining from sports surfaces. The report summarises that
there is no risk for the environment.
Zinc – The zinc is mainly absorbed by the mineral base
layer with the concentration of zinc in rainwater actually
higher than the seeping water collected underneath the
sports surface. The general result of the research was that
there is no risk to the environment if production of synthetic
sport surfaces and their installation follows recognised
rules of technology.
The rules of technology include the Swiss and German
Regulation DIN 18035 parts 6 and 7 and ESM105. These
state that the requirements of metals needs to be less than:
Mercury ≤ 0.01 mg/l,
Lead ≤ 0.04 mg/l,
Cadmium ≤ 0.005 mg/l,
Chromium ≤ 0.008 mg/l,
Zinc ≤ 3.0 mg/l, and
Tin ≤ 0.05 mg/l.
The New York State Department of Health14
recognised
these requirements and a paragraph in its ‘chemical
exposure’ section states:
“Exposure to a chemical requires contact with it. Contact
with a chemical occurs in these ways: swallowing it
(ingestion exposure), breathing it (inhalation exposure),
and having it come in contact with the skin (dermal
exposure) or eyes (ocular exposure). The potential for
harmful effects from exposure to a chemical depends on
the amount of the chemical a person contacts, how the
chemical enters the body (ingestion, inhalation, dermal, or
ocular), how often contact occurs, and the toxic properties
of the chemical. The ability of a chemical to be released
from a substance (e.g. crumb rubber) is an important factor
in determining how much exposure actually occurs. Other
factors that can influence a person's risk for adverse health
effects from environmental chemicals include age, gender,
general health, genetic differences, exposure to other
chemicals and lifestyle choices.”
14
New York State Department of Health, Bureau of Toxic Substance Assessment (2008). Fact Sheet: Crumb rubber infilled synthetic turf athletic fields. New York.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 43
Car tyres are manufactured from natural and synthetic
rubbers and contain numerous chemical additives,
including zinc, sulphur, carbon black, and oils that contain
polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and volatile organic
chemicals. Crumb rubber is manufactured from used tyres,
so it is safe to say that although there are chemical
additives in crumb rubber, they are no more toxic than a
car tyre.
A French study15
measured the concentration of organic
chemicals emitted as gases (known as volatile organic
compounds or VOCs) from crumb rubber under laboratory
conditions. The data was used by the French National
Institute for Industrial Environment and Risks to evaluate
possible health effects from inhaling VOCs released from
synthetic turf. The researchers concluded that the
concentration of organic compounds emitted did not pose a
health concern for athletes, officials or spectators.
Some types of synthetic turf fibres contain elevated levels
of lead (e.g. in the range of about 2,000 to 9,000 parts per
million). Degradation of these fibres can form a dust that
presents a potential source of lead exposure to users of the
fields. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(USA) and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry (France) addressed the potential for lead
exposures from synthetic turf fibres in a June 2008 Health
Advisory.16
The tests identified that older fields that were made of
nylon fibres or a nylon/polyethylene blend contained levels
of lead that pose a possible public health concern. Tests of
only polyethylene fibres showed that these fields contained
very low levels of lead.
The report continues, “The risk of harmful lead exposure is
low from new fields with elevated lead levels in their turf
fibres because the turf fibres are still intact and the lead is
unlikely to be available for harmful exposures to occur.”
5.6 Green Engineering
Green Engineering is the process of designing or operating
systems in a manner that uses energy and sustainable
resources (e.g. at a rate that doesn’t compromise the
natural environment) or the ability for future generations to
meet their own needs. It explores how products are
manufactured, the materials used and the disposal of them,
in a feasible, economical and therefore sustainable manner,
which results in minimising the pollution impact for
generations to come. The basic concept of green
15
French National Institute for Industrial Environment and Risks 2010 16
http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/artificialturf.htm
engineering is based around the ability to offset or reduce
the carbon footprint by choosing a specific product that
may have a less harmful impact because it’s recycled,
recyclable or even renewable/reusable. By exploring these
three concepts, purchasers can consider the impacts on
their synthetic surface strategy.
Photo 34: 27,000 tyres are saved from landfill by using them in a typical sized football field
Recycled – means that the synthetic surfaces are made
out of (at least 25 percent) recycled content. The benefit of
this is that they are not drawing on ‘virgin or prime’
resources, which may be limited or by creating them would
have a significant impact on the carbon footprint. Within
most synthetic surface systems (e.g. a single
football/soccer field – 8,000m2):
The recycled infill material is made from an estimated
27,000 tyres,
The shock pad can be made out of recycled running
shoes,
The ’grass’ can be made from recycled plastic drink
bottles – saving 240,000 bottles from the tip.
Recyclable – means that the synthetic surface system
where possible can be used again, and may mean:
Re-using the compartments of the system – as
recently shown in the 2013 London Olympics Games
hockey field (STI),
Recycling the concrete base for other building
products and needs,
Recycling some grasses (presently only in
USA/Europe) into plastic pellets which can then be
used for plastic recycled bins, plastic park furniture etc.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 44
Photo 35: London Olympic Games reused their fields as part of their legacy program in facilities outside the Olympic Park
Reusable – means that the components can be changed
and reused.
The infill, and in some circumstances the shockpad,
are examples of reusable components of synthetic
sports turf systems.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 45
Section 5 case study – STI – Environmental Considerations
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 46
SECTION 6:
HEALTH, SAFETY
AND RISK
MANAGEMENT
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 47
6 Health, Safety and Risk
Management
6.1 Introduction
The health and safety of all sports facilities is a concern to
the asset owner and the sports program providers. As a
result there tends to be a sophisticated decision making
process to minimise the potential risk to players, etc.
At times there is a perception that if the surface is not
natural grass, it is not safe. In Australia, local community
groups have expressed concern at the prospect of the
natural grass being replaced by synthetic surfaces.
What is not understood by these community groups, is that
if many community level natural grass surfaces were tested
to the same rigour as synthetic sports surfaces, they would
not pass the performance criteria that synthetic turf would.
Therefore, the synthetic sports turf is safer than most
badly-worn community playing fields.
The key concerns for health and safety are predominantly:
Player safety and injuries,
Surface playability,
Health risks to community,
Heat management.
This section explores each of these concerns.
6.2 Player Safety and Injuries
There is a perception that there are more sports injuries on
synthetic grass surfaces than on natural turf. A number of
studies show that this is not the case. For example the
New York State Department of Health17
provides specific
guidance from its research:
“There is a common perception that there are more sports
injuries on synthetic than on natural turf athletic fields.
Many factors influence the rate of sports injuries, including
the type of playing surface. The many kinds of synthetic turf
surfaces and changes in the turf products over the years
complicate the assessment of how the playing surface
affects injury rates.”
17
Fact Sheet: Crumb-Rubber Infilled Synthetic Turf Athletic Fields (2008) (NYS DOH Factsheet)
Photo 36; Field with markings for several sports (Source: TigerTurf)
Injury Studies conducted by FIFA and UEFA 6.2.1
The world governing body of football FIFA and the Union of
European Football Associations (UEFA) conducted one of
the early studies on injuries comparing artificial turf and
natural grass. The three year study covered 18
professional teams with a total exposure of 160,000 hours18
.
The study yielded a slightly lower risk of muscle injuries but
showed slightly higher risk on ligament injuries with rate of
knee injuries being the same between both surface types
(see Table 8: Number of Injuries per 1,000 hours exposure).
However, the study did not analyse the influence of
footwear when playing on both surfaces.
Artificial Turf Natural Grass
Muscle Injury
Strain 4 7
Hamstring 2 3.5
Ligament
Sprain 7 5
Ankle 4 2.5
Knee 2 2
Table 8: Number of Injuries per 1,000 hours exposure
Following the initial study, FIFA conducted a two month
study with thirty semi-professional players on three artificial
turf and six natural grass fields located across Spain, the
Netherlands and Norway.19
For purposes of consistency,
all players used the same boots with rounded studs
(Adidas Copa Mondial). The study focused on player-
surface interaction and player-kicking dynamics using
500Hz high-speed video analysis. During the player-
surface interaction a ‘single-cut’ move (see photos 36 and
37) was analysed in terms of turning time, exit speed and
slip pattern. With regards to player-kicking dynamics the
18
Ekstrand, J., Timpka, T., Haegelund, M.; British Journal of Sports Medicine; 40; 975-980; 2006 19
Nokes, L.; FIFA Study into Player-Surface Interaction on Natural Turf and Football Turf; 2010
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 48
backward inclination of the leg (see photo 37), (#1) the
kicking foot angle (#2), the knee position (#3), the pronation
of the standing foot (#4) as well as the upper body
positioning (#5) were analyzed. As performance measures,
heart rate, blood lactate levels and movement analysis of
the players were used. The results showed no statistical
differences in kicking dynamics, no evidence of increased
physiological stress or difference in velocity when
performing on artificial turf and natural grass. In fact the
climatic differences between the various locations had a
bigger influence than the difference between the two
surface types.
Photo 37: Single Cut Move
Photo 38: Kicking Dynamics
Injury Studies conducted on behalf of Rugby 6.2.2
Union
The risk of injury associated with play of rugby union on
artificial turf was the subject of a medical study in 201020
.
In particular the study looked at lower limb and joint-
ligament injuries. The results when comparing artificial
versus natural surfaces showed no significant statistical
differences in the rate of injuries when comparing the two
surface types. In addition, the study yielded no significant
difference in the severity of injury sustained. Overall the
study concluded that the risk of injury was not different
when comparing playing activity on artificial turf with natural
grass surfaces.
20
Fuller, C., Clarke, L., Molloy, M.; Journal of Sports Sciences; Vol 28; Issue 5; 2010
NCAA Injury Surveillance Program 6.2.3
The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) in the
United States maintains a comprehensive injury
surveillance program which regularly summarises the
injuries sustained in various sports. According to the
surveillance data collected between the seasons 2004/05
to 2008/09 the majority (more than half) of injuries occur in
the lower limb area (see Table 9: American Football
Injuries (Surveillance Program 2004-2009). However, the
study did not distinguish between playing surfaces.
Injury Percentage (in %)
Concussion 7.4
Head, face, neck 4.3
Upper limb 16.9
Torso, pelvis 11.9
Lower limb 50.4
Other 9.1
Table 9: American Football Injuries (Surveillance Program 2004-2009)
A five year study of American high schools
21 also
concluded that more than half of the injuries sustained in
American football at a high-school level are recorded in the
lower extremity area. This study differentiated between
playing activity on artificial turf and natural grass and
showed slightly higher rates of injury on artificial grass
compared to natural grass (see Table 10). Similar findings
were concluded by Hershman et al22
when looking at
specific lower extremity injury rates on grass and artificial
turf playing surfaces in National Football League (NFL)
games.
Body Area Artificial Turf Natural Grass
Cranial/cervical 10.1 % 19.2 %
Upper extremity 28.1 % 23.2 %
Thoracic 7.9 % 6.4 %
Lower extremity 53.9 % 51.2 %
Table 10: American High-School Football Injuries
Summary 6.2.4
Of the various independent studies2324 2526
reviewed from
2006 to 2011, the common finding is that there is not an
increase in the number of injuries associated with synthetic
turf when compared to natural turf. Seemingly the only
negative consideration is where sports people alternate
21
Meyer, M., Barnhill, B.; The American Journal of Sports Medicine; Vol 32; No. 7 22
Hershman, E., Anderson, R., Berfeld, J., Bradley, J., Coughlin, M.,Johnson, R., Spindler, K., Wojtys, E., Powell, J.; American Journal of Sports Medicine, Online Sep 2012 23
Ekstrand J, Nigg B. Surface-related injuries in soccer. Sports Medicine 1989;8:56-62. 24
Arnason A, Gudmundsson A, Dahl H. Soccer injuries in Iceland. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sport 1996; 6:40-45. 25
Stanitski CL, McMaster JH, Ferguson RJ. Synthetic turf and grass: A comparative study. Am J Sports Med 1974;2(1):22-26. 26
Engebretsen L. Fotballskader og kunstgress. Tidsskrift for den Norske lægeforening 1987;107(26):2215
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 49
between surface types which may result in varied and
increased injuries. This may be similar to long distance
runners who run on synthetic tracks then on asphalt, which
are more susceptible to shin soreness.
Although the ability of the studies to detect differences in
the injury rates was limited by the small number of injuries
reported, the studies concluded that there were no major
differences in overall injury rates between natural and
infilled synthetic turf. Although each study found some
differences in specific injury types, there was no consistent
pattern across the studies.
One of the key safety concerns that have been expressed
by sport organisations is the potential for head injuries from
contact with a synthetic surface. This concern is assessed
by determining the ability of the surfaces to absorb impact
using one of two test methods and provides the acceptable
level of playing surface for specific sports. By comparison,
a recent study of community and stadium natural surface
fields in Sydney27
were typically below the corresponding
expected synthetic level. Many natural turf fields are not
tested against a standard. (If they were, many fields would
fail the standards set for synthetic surfaces). Rugby union
has begun to test natural turf surfaces in some States of
Australia to protect their players. The abrasiveness of
synthetic turf fibres may contribute to the injury risk among
athletes, particularly for abrasions or ‘turf burns.’ The
degree of abrasiveness appears to be dependent on the
composition and shape of the turf fibres. A study conducted
at Penn State University suggests that synthetic turf with
nylon fibres is more abrasive than synthetic turf with other
fibre types.
Regarding injury a study conducted by FIFA’s Medical
Assessment and Research Centre (F-MARC)28
compared
the injuries sustained at the FIFA U-17 tournament in Peru
in 2005 which was played entirely on artificial turf, with the
injuries sustained at previous FIFA U-17 tournaments
which were mostly played on natural turf. The research
showed that there was very little difference in the incidence,
nature and cause of injuries observed during games played
on artificial turf compared with those on grass.
In another study reported in the British Journal of Sports
Medicine, Reference results showed there was no
evidence of greater injury risk when playing soccer on
artificial turf when compared with natural turf in the
Swedish Premier League. The researchers did report an
27
UST study of NSW community natural grass standards (2011) by Acousto Scan 28
FIFA Medal Assessment and Research Centre (2006)
increased incidence in ankle injuries on artificial turf;
however the study was limited due to its small sample size.
The limited results collated by FIFA suggest that the rate
of injury on third generation synthetic turf is similar to that
of natural turf, but the type of injury may differ.
The Synthetic Turf Council has provided independent
research papers for confirmation of injury occurrence when
natural grass and synthetic grass is compared (see
Appendix 3).
6.3 Surface Playability
Playability studies commissioned by FIFA 6.3.1
Probably the most comprehensive studies on playability of
any sport comparing artificial surfaces versus natural grass
have been commissioned by FIFA. In 2006, FIFA
commissioned UK-based Prozone to analyse data from
UEFA Cup matches played on both surfaces using a video-
based performance analysis system29
. The aim of the
study was to analyse the potential impact that artificial turf
may have on the pattern of a game and therefore
performance and playability30
. UEFA cup matches between
Red Bull Salzburg and Blackburn Rovers were analysed
using the Prozone Match Viewer system.
The analysis yielded that games played on the artificial
surface at Red Bull Salzburg and the natural grass surface
at Blackburn Rovers showed no significant differences in
terms of performance and playability. The number of total
passes played was very similar (703 on artificial turf versus
720 on natural grass) with a success rate of more than 80
percent passes completed on both surfaces. In addition,
the number of tackles, interceptions, clearances, and the
shooting accuracy were similar on both surfaces (see Table
11).
Artificial Turf Natural Turf
Event Red
Bull
Rovers Total Total Rovers Red
Bull
Total Passes 336 367 703 720 405 315
Completion 78 % 81 % 80 % 83 % 85 % 81 %
Tackles 21 23 44 43 17 26
Interceptions 127 113 240 233 126 107
Clearances 16 33 49 44 19 25
Shooting
Accuracy
39 % 50 % 43 % 43 % 43 % 44 %
Table 11: Tactical Events Red Bull Salzburg vs. Blackburn Rovers
29
Di Salvo, V., Collins, A., McNeil, B., Cardinale, M.; International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport; 6; 108-119, 2006 30
FIFA Technical Study with Prozone, 2006
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 50
Similar technical studies have been extended by FIFA to
cover Champions League, Dutch Football, the U20’s World
Cup and the Russian League. The five Studies show
similarities between games played on artificial turf and
natural grass. To eliminate a potential home-team bias,
only the events for the away team were included in these
subsequent studies (see Table 12).
Event Artificial Turf Natural Grass
Passes 314 313
Passes completed 78 % 80 %
Passes forward 145 148
Balls received 351 353
Headers 64 64
Interceptions 125 118
Tackles 30 28
Crosses 12 13
Shots 14 13
Table 12: FIFA 5-Study Technical Overview
Dutch Professional Coaches Survey 6.3.2
The European Synthetic Turf Organization (ESTO)
commissioned a survey of members of the Dutch
Professional Coaches Association. Even though natural
turf in excellent condition remains the preference, the
responses given were positive towards artificial playing
surfaces (see Table 13).
Question? Yes No
Are players able to develop better
technical skills by training on synthetic
turf?
62 % 38 %
Longer term, will players’ techniques be
better developed by playing and training
on synthetic turf?
57 % 43 %
Does training and playing on synthetic
turf improve skill acquisition amongst
players?
69 % 30 %
Would you like your team to play passing
football, and if yes, is this easier to
implement on an artificial pitch?
71 % 29 %
Do you see synthetic turf as being the
future of the game?
64 % 36 %
Table 13: Survey of Dutch Professional Coaches Association
Study commissioned by Rugby Union 6.3.3
When reviewing the artificial turf specification and in
particular the pile height requirement of IRB regulation 22,
IRB commissioned biomechanical studies of the rugby
scrum. During machine scrumming, scrum engagement,
techniques for effective and safe scrumming and injury
risks were reviewed. The study concluded that scrumming
on artificial turf is safe and similar to natural grass and as a
result the minimum pile height requirement for artificial turf
could be lowered from the original 65mm down to 60mm31
.
Study commissioned by Australian Rules 6.3.4
Football
Due to the limited number of facilities with artificial playing
surfaces, there is currently no detailed study regarding
playability available for AFL activities. It should be noted
that a study conducted by the University of Ballarat32
was
utilised to assist in the development of standards for the
use of artificial turf for Australian Football and Cricket.
6.4 Health Risk to Community
The Environmental Protection Agency in America (EPA)
issued the following statement title “Playgrounds and
Synthetic Turf Fields”33
, in which it states:
“There have been concerns about the health implications of
the use of recycled tire crumb in playgrounds and in
synthetic turf athletic fields. In response to these concerns,
EPA conducted a Scoping-Level Field Monitoring Study of
Synthetic Turf Fields and Playgrounds.”
The final report was issued in 2009 and concluded that on
average, concentrations of components monitored in this
study were below levels of concern. To supplement this
study’s limited data, the United States EPA met with state
and local representatives in 2010 to review other available
field monitoring studies including a 2010 risk assessment of
artificial turf fields conducted by four state agencies of the
state of Connecticut which concluded that exposures and
risks were not elevated (relative to what is commonly found
in outdoor air) for either children or adults using the fields.
In 2010, the California Office of Environmental Health
Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) issued a safety study of
artificial turf containing crumb rubber made from recycled
tyres34
. The study which was founded by the Department
of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) and
examined the possible human health risks of outdoor
athletic fields made from artificial turf containing recycled
crumb rubber with respect to skin abrasions, bacteria
harbored by the turf, inhalable particulate matter, and
volatile organic compounds. The report concluded these
fields do not pose a serious public health concern, with the
possible exception of an increased skin abrasion rate on
artificial turf relative to natural turf.
31
IRB Regulation 22, Artificial Rugby Turf Performance Specification, One Turf Technical Manual, 2012 32
Twomey, D, Otago, L., Saunders, N.; Development of Standards for the Use of Artificial Turf for Australian Football and Cricket; University of Ballarat; 2007 33
source: http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/conserve/materials/tires/health.htm 34
California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery. (2010). Safety study of artificial turf containing crumb rubber infill made from recycled tyres: Measurements of chemicals and particulates in the air, bacteria in the turf, and skin abrasions caused by
contact with the surface. Sacramento, CA.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 51
6.5 Players Safety and Injuries
There is a perception that there are more sports injuries on
synthetic grass surfaces than natural turf. The New York
State Department of Health35
provides specific guidance
from their research, namely:
“There is a common perception that there are more sports
injuries on synthetic than on natural turf athletic fields.
Many factors influence the rate of sports injuries, including
the type of playing surface. The many kinds of synthetic turf
surfaces and changes in the turf products over the years
complicate the assessment of how the playing surface
affects injury rates".
The Synthetic Turf Council has identified the following
research Studies and Technical Papers (See Appendix 3
for detail) for consideration:
Epidemiology of Patellar Tendinopathy in Elite Male
Soccer Players, Hagglund, Zwerver and Ekstrand
(2011)
Patellar tendinopathy is a relatively mild but fairly common
condition among elite soccer players, and the recurrence
rate is high. This study investigated the epidemiology of
patellar tendinopathy in 2,229 elite male soccer players
from 51 European elite soccer clubs playing on natural
grass and synthetic turf between 2001 and 2009. Objective:
To compare the risk for acute injuries between natural
grass (NG) and third generation artificial turf (3GAT) in
male professional football.
Conclusion: Exposure to artificial turf did not increase the
prevalence or incidence of injury.
Risk of injury on third generation artificial turf in
Norwegian professional football, Bjorneboe, Bahr and
Andersen (2010)
The study aimed at comparing the risk for acute injuries
between natural grass (NG) and third-generation artificial
turf (3GAT) in male professional football. All injuries
sustained by players with a first-team contract were
recorded by the medical staff of each club, from the 2004
throughout the 2007 season. An injury was registered if the
player was unable to complete the football activity or match
play. From a total of 668 match injuries, 526 on grass and
142 on artificial turf the overall acute match injury incidence
was 17.1 per 1,000 match hours on grass and 17.6 on
artificial turf. Correspondingly, the incidence for training
injuries was 1.8 on grass and 1.9 on artificial turf
respectively.
35
Fact Sheet: Crumb-Rubber Infilled Synthetic Turf Athletic Fields (2008) (NYS DOH Factsheet)
Conclusion: No significant differences were detected in
injury rate or pattern between 3GAT and NG in Norwegian
male professional football.
Comparison of injuries sustained on artificial turf and
grass by male and female elite football players,
Ekstrand, Hagglund and Fuler (2010)
The objective of this study was to compare incidences and
patterns of injury for female and male elite teams when
playing football on artificial turf and grass. Twenty teams
(15 male, five female) playing home matches on third-
generation artificial turf were followed prospectively; their
injury risk when playing on artificial turf pitches was
compared with the risk when playing on grass. Individual
exposure, injuries (time loss) and injury severity were
recorded by the team of medical staff. In total, 2105 injuries
were recorded during 246 hours of exposure to football.
Seventy one percent of the injuries were traumatic and 29
percent overuse injuries.
Conclusion: There were no significant differences in the
nature of overuse injuries recorded on artificial turf and
grass for either men or women.
Injury risk on artificial turf and grass in youth
tournament football, Soligard, Bahr and Andersen
(2010)
The aim of this study was to investigate the risk of acute
injuries among youth male and female footballers playing
on third-generation artificial turf compared with grass. Over
60,000 players 13 – 19 years of age were followed in four
consecutive Norway Cup tournaments from 2005 to 2008.
Injuries were recorded prospectively by the team coaches
throughout each tournament. The overall incidence of
injuries was 39.2 per 1000 match hours; 34.2 on artificial
turf and 39.7 on grass. However, there was a lower risk of
ankle injuries, and a higher risk of back and spine and
shoulder and collarbone injuries, on artificial turf compared
with on grass.
Conclusion: There was no difference in the overall risk of
acute injury in youth footballers playing on third-generation
artificial turf compared with grass.
Very Positive Medical Research on Artificial Turf, FIFA
Medical Assessment and Research Centre (2010)
The aim of this research was to compare injuries sustained
at the FIFA U-17 tournament in Peru, which was played
entirely on “football turf” (synthetic turf) with the injuries
sustained at previous U-17 tournaments, which were
played mainly on well-manicured grass.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 52
Conclusion: There was very little difference in the
incidence, nature and causes of injuries observed during
those games played on artificial turf compared with those
played on grass.
Risk of injury in elite football played on artificial turf
versus natural grass: a prospective two-cohort study,
Ekstrand, Timpkin and Huggland (2006)
The aim of the study was to compare injury risk in elite
football [soccer] played on artificial turf compared with
natural grass.
Conclusion: No evidence of a greater risk of injury was
found when football was played on artificial turf compared
with natural grass. The higher incidence of ankle sprain on
artificial turf warrants further attention, although this result
should be interpreted with caution as the number of ankle
sprains was low.
Risk of injury on artificial turf and natural grass in
young female football [soccer] players, Steffen,
Andersen and Bahr (2007)
The aim was to investigate the risk of injury on artificial turf
compared with natural grass among young female football
[soccer] players.
Conclusion: The overall risk of acute injury to among
young female football [soccer] players was similar between
artificial turf and natural grass.
Comparison of the incidence, nature and cause of
injuries sustained on grass and new generation
artificial turf by male and female football players, Fuller,
Dick Corlette and Schmalz (2007)
The aim was to compare the incidence, nature, severity
and cause of match injuries (Part 1) and training injuries
(Part 2) sustained on grass and new generation turf by
male and female footballers. The National Collegiate
Athletic Association Injury Surveillance System was used
for a two-season (August to December) study of American
college and university football teams (2005 season: men 52
teams, women 64 teams; 2006 season: men 54 teams,
women 72 teams).
Conclusion: There were no major differences in the
incidence, severity, nature or cause of match injuries or
training injuries sustained on new generation artificial turf
and grass by either male or female players.
Although each study found some differences in specific
injury types, there was no consistent pattern across the
studies.
One of the key safety considerations is the potential for
head injuries from contact with a synthetic surface, which
have been assessed by determining the ability of the
surfaces to absorb impact. The force of impact on frozen or
well-worn natural turf is typically below the acceptable level
but many pitches are not tested against this.
6.6 Infection Risk
Tworney Dotogol, Saunders, and Schwarze (2008)36
, on
behalf of Cricket Australia and the AFL, researched the
issue of health considerations concerning the infill used in
synthetic grass. The research asserted that the infill could
present health problems if it was inhaled or swallowed.
The New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) has
also explored the concern of infection risk, with the
following outcomes from its studies:
“Some people have expressed concern that infections,
including Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus
(MRSA), may be more common among users of synthetic
turf fields than users of natural turf fields. This possibility
has not been studied systematically, and no definitive
statements can be made about differences in risk between
the two surfaces.” It continues, “At least two questions are
important in evaluating the risk of infection. Does skin
damage occur more frequently on synthetic turf than
natural turf, thus providing a place where infections are
more likely to occur? And are there more germs on
synthetic turf than natural turf?”37
While injury studies have not consistently identified
differences in abrasion and laceration risks between natural
and infilled synthetic turf, some types of synthetic turf may
result in more skin abrasions. Although very few tests have
been performed, data available does not suggest the
widespread presence of infectious agents, such as MRSA,
on synthetic turf fields. As reported by the New York State
Department of Health38
, outdoor or indoor synthetic turf
surfaces are no more likely to harbour infectious agents
than other surfaces in the same environments. Disease
outbreak investigations conducted in response to illnesses
caused by a variety of germs (e.g., MRSA, campylobacter,
meningococcal, echovirus, herpes simplex virus, hepatitis
virus, coxsackie virus) have not identified playing fields,
either natural or synthetic, as likely to increase the risk of
transmitting infections.
36
Twomey, D., Otago, L., Saunders., & Schwarz, E. (2008). Development of standards for the use of artificial turf for Australian Rules Football and Cricket. University of Ballarat 37
Fact Sheet: Crumb-Rubber Infilled Synthetic Turf Athletic Fields (2008) (NYS DOH Factsheet) 38
Fact Sheet: Crumb-Rubber Infilled Synthetic Turf Athletic Fields (2008) (NYS DOH Factsheet)
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 53
Skin cuts and abrasions that may result from contact with
athletic fields, including both natural and synthetic fields,
are susceptible to infection. Athletes and others
developing skin abrasions should clean the wounds and
seek prompt medical attention. There are conflicting
reports that the ground rubber materials used for infill may
be unhealthy. Yet, most studies on toxicity levels dispel this
notion. Most studies show that rubber does not pose any
serious risks39
. The only exception is when people are
allergic to latex (6 percent of population), which is
sometimes found in tyre rubber.
Photo 39: Rubber granular infill for a synthetic surface
6.7 Heat Stress
The temperature of artificial surfaces rises significantly
more than natural turf surfaces, especially on a hot sunny
day (20 – 40 percent hotter). Reported surface-to-air
temperature ratios are approximately one for both natural
turf and artificial turf under overcast conditions40
.
According to one research on synthetics the mean (range)
of ratios for natural grass was 1:41 (1.38 to 1.44) whilst the
mean (range) for artificial turf was 1:62 (1.3 to 1.81).
In this study, the results of the temperature measurements
obtained from the fields studied in Connecticut indicate that
solar heating of the materials used in the construction of
synthetic turf playing surfaces does occur and is most
pronounced in the polyethylene and polypropylene fibres.
39
A Scoping-Level Field Monitoring Study of Synthetic Turf Fields and Playgrounds. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, November 2009. 40
Milone and Macbroom, Environmental Effects of Synthetic Turf Athletics Field (2008
Photo 40: Synthetic Baseball Diamond, where heat policy means no play during peak sun, as directed by the sport
Maximum temperatures of approximately 156°F were noted
when the fields were exposed to direct sunlight for a
prolonged period of time. Rapid cooling of the fibres was
noted if the sunlight was interrupted or filtered by clouds.
Significant cooling was also noted if water was applied to
the synthetic fibres in quantities as low as one ounce per
square foot. The elevated temperatures noted for the fibres
generally resulted in an air temperature increase of less
than five degrees even during periods of calm to low winds.
The rise in temperature of the synthetic fibres was
significantly greater than the rise in temperature noted for
the crumb rubber. Although a maximum temperature of
156°F was noted for the fibres, a maximum temperature of
only 101°F, or approximately 16 degrees greater than the
observed ambient air temperature, was noted for the crumb
rubber.
The heat issue is being considered by many of the
synthetic grass manufacturers. At the 2011 FSB Synthetic
Surfaces Tradeshow in Cologne, Germany this was a key
topic with a number of initiatives being promoted, including:
i. Cool grass technology
A number of synthetic system manufacturers have worked
with the yarn manufacturers and using specific polymers to
offer cool grass technology that can reduce heat by up to
20 percent compared with traditional synthetic grass.
ii. Water on grass
The latest technology demonstrates how water can be
harvested from the natural rain and then recovered on the
pitch system. One example by a lead European company41
shows how a small capillary action takes the water from
under the surface and lets it drip onto the grass around it.
This showed a reduction of around 14°C between two
synthetic grasses under an infrared light / heat lamp.
41
Hydrograss Technology from Domo Grass
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 54
Photo 41: Demonstration of Hydrograss technology from Domo Grass (Cologne FSB Trade Show 2011)
Another example was the use of a balance tank next to a
hockey pitch, which kept the pitch water at the right level
for the FIH Global Standard, thus reducing the need for
water cannons and reducing the evaporation. This test
case was for hockey and the results used to impact other
turf types by 2014 for all pitches. It is expected that this
could reduce the heat by 20°C from where normal synthetic
surfaces would be on a 40°C+ day.
iii. Infill
There was a clear move from many infill suppliers to
provide options that move away from the very cost effective
SBR. The move to infill’s such as coated SBR (Styrene-
Butadiene-Rubber), coated and/or cryogenically frozen
sands, EPDM (Ethylene-Propylene-Diene-Rubber), TPE
(Thermoplastic Elastomers) and natural organic infills.
High surface temperatures can lead to heat stress related
conditions, especially in children. In hot climates artificial
surfaces are often watered to reduce the surface
temperature; however this can increase the humidity, which
is not desirable for participants. A heat policy (e.g. restrict
play when surface temperatures reach a certain level) may
be required in hot climates.
6.8 Risk Management
To alleviate some of the risks associated with the perceived
health concerns surrounding synthetic surfaces, the New
York Department of Health provided a summation as
viewed in Table 14.
Health
concern
Finding
Heat stress Surface temperatures on crumb-rubber infilled
synthetic turf fields can reach levels of
discomfort and may contribute to heat stress.
This warrants consideration when making
decisions about installing and using a synthetic
turf field. While watering synthetic turf may
briefly reduce surface temperatures, a number
of factors may influence its effectiveness.
People using these fields should be advised to
remain hydrated and to seek relief from the
heat in shaded areas.
Injury Overall, studies have found no consistent
differences in injury rates between natural and
crumb-rubber in filled synthetic turf.
Infection Skin cuts and abrasions that may result from
contact with athletic fields (natural and
synthetic turf) are susceptible to infection.
Athletes and others developing skin abrasions
should clean the wounds and seek prompt
medical attention.
Latex allergy At the present time, NYSDOH is unaware of
any occurrences of latex allergy resulting from
contact with crumb rubber or synthetic turf
fields.
Chemical
exposures
Based on the available information, chemical
exposures from crumb rubber in synthetic turf
do not pose a public health hazard. Refer to
DIN 18035.
Table 14: Summary of information for Crumb-Rubber infilled Synthetic Turf Athletics Fields Fact Sheet (Source: Original detail from New York Department of Health)
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 55
Section 6 Case Study- Turf One – Health, Safety and Risk
2 pages
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 56
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 57
SECTION 7:
SPORT BY SPORT
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 58
7 Sport by Sport
7.1 Sports Adoption of Synthetic Technology
This Smart Guide to Synthetic Surfaces has explained the
process for establishing standards for key sports. This
section explores each sport’s standard in layman’s terms,
provides key contacts for each sport and how the reader
can gain additional information.
When developing the specification for a new synthetic field
the suggested process should be:
Appreciate and be able to articulate how the field will
be used – community or stadium use or more
specifically ≤ 20 hours (stadium) or more likely 40
hours plus (community),
Link your forecasted usage with the sports standards,
Contact the sports’ governing bodies to ensure that the
field sizes meet the standards,
Build the complementary services around the fields,
including appropriate fencing; lighting; changing
facilities and coaches boxes etc., and
Obtain “sign off” from the peak body to ensure the
design will meet their competition levels (e.g. Hockey
NSW; Football Federation Victoria etc.)
The sports included in this section are:
1. Australian Rules Football (AFL)
2. Baseball
3. Bowls
4. Football (soccer)
5. Gridiron (American football)
6. Hockey
7. Rugby league
8. Rugby union
9. Tennis
10. Multi-sport / One Turf Standard
7.2 Australian Rules Football / Cricket
Approach to using Synthetic Surfaces 7.2.1
As custodian of the game, the AFL has recognised the
need to develop ways to increase the carrying capacity of
their surfaces and protect them against weather extremes
as more people wish to play their sport. This approach
should assist in increased participation rates, reduce
injuries and allow more people to play more often.
In 2007 the AFL together with Cricket Australia, Sport and
Recreation Victoria and Australia’s largest public sector
insurance company, JLT Trustees, collaborated with
researchers42
to develop a set of guidelines for community
use of synthetic surfaces on which to play Australian Rules
Football and cricket. As the majority of Australian Rules
Football grounds are also cricket grounds, it was important
for any standards to ensure it was suitable for play by both
sports.
The study explored the playing characteristics of quality
natural turf and developed the performance criteria that the
surface needs to play against, including the mechanical
properties of the surface, ball and player interactions with
the surface, using internationally recognised testing
equipment and procedures.
The results of the study enabled a development of
standards for Artificial Turf for AFL and Cricket43
since this
time three AFL pitches have been tested, a number of
others have been installed where cricket is played on
football (soccer pitches), and the same standards are used.
In 2013 the standards were updated with a user-friendly
handbook44
for any sport. The handbook ‘fine-tuned’ the
standards, in light of what has been learnt on synthetic turf
since 2008.
Standards for the Sport 7.2.2
The AFL and Cricket Australia standards that have been
adopted are targeted to the community level and not for
elite or professional levels. The performance standards are
listed in Table 15. It is worth noting that other quality and
durability requirements also apply:
TEST TEST METHOD CONDITIONS REQUIREMENT
Critical Fall Height
Uniaxe Impact Tester (AS/NZS 4422) Uniaxe Impact Tester (BS EN 1177)
Dry, Wet and Aged
≥ 1.2 m ≥ 1.3 m
Hardness Clegg Impact Tester Dry, Wet and Aged
≤ 120 G
Force Reduction
Advanced Artificial Athlete
Dry, Wet and Aged
50 – 70%
Energy Restitution
Advanced Artificial Athlete
Dry, Wet and Aged
20 – 50%
Vertical Deformation
Advanced Artificial Athlete
Dry, Wet and Aged
4 – 11 mm
Abrasion – Change in Friction Force
Securisport Test Apparatus
Dry ≤ 30%
Friction – Coefficient of Friction
Securisport Test Apparatus
Dry ≤ 0.70%
Traction Football Studs
Studded Boot Apparatus (EN 15301-1 )
Dry, Wet and Aged
25 Nm – 50 Nm
a
Traction Cricket Spikes
Studded Boot Apparatus (EN 15301-1 )
Dry, Wet and Aged
15 Nm – 25 Nm
a
Traction Cricket Cleats
Studded Boot Apparatus (EN 15301-1 )
Dry, Wet and Aged
7 Nm – 15 Nm
a
Ball Roll Inclined Ramp Dry and Wet 4 m – 12
42
Ballarat University (now Federation University) 43
Development Standards for the use or Artificial Turf for Australian Football and Cricket (2008 DIW May; L. Otago; N. Saunders; E. Schwarz: University of Ballarat School of Human Movement and Sport Science 44
Australian Football League and Cricket Australia Handbook of Testing for Synthetic Turf (Sep 2013 www.aflcommunity.com.au)
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 59
TEST TEST METHOD CONDITIONS REQUIREMENT
Calibrated Ball (EN12234) m
Ball Roll Cricket
Inclined Ramp (EN12234)
Dry and Wet 4 m – 15 m
Vertical Ball Rebound Calibrated Ball
Vertical Rebound Frame (EN12235)
Dry, Wet and Aged
0.6 m – 1.0 m
Vertical Ball Rebound Cricket
Vertical Rebound Frame (EN12235)
Dry, Wet and Aged
0.1 m – 0.4 m
Angled Ball Rebound Calibrated Ball
Angled Ball Shooter Dry Wet
45% - 70% 45% - 80%
Angled Ball Rebound Cricket
Angled Ball Shooter Dry and Wet 35% - 60%
Infill Splash Vertical Rebound Frame
Dry ≤ Category 3
Table 15:AFL/ Cricket Australia key performance criteria for synthetic fields
Regarding cricket, many councils have used synthetic
wickets for years and this has historically been covered by
soil during the winter months. This often causes safety
concerns and reduces the consistency of play where the
soil is located. According to Cricket Victoria guidance45
, the
wicket should be 25m long and 2.4m wide, and the turf
should be between 9 and 10mm in length.
Licensee Program 7.2.3
Since the development of standards the AFL and Cricket
Australia established a licensee program that ensures the
quality of synthetic surfaces installed will meet the player
and ball performance criteria with the surface and has the
durability required.
The licensee program includes laboratory and field testing.
The six step process includes:
1. Synthetic turf manufacturer submits sample(s) to
accredited laboratory
2. Product is tested and results returned to the AFL
Must pass to continue
3. Field is installed with approved product, samples are
taken for identification and construction quality reports
must be provided to field test agent
4. Onsite testing is undertaken after one month of play
or 160 hours of play
5. Field test results returned to AFL/CA
If pass, AFL/CA issues field certification
6. Re-testing will take place approximately every two
years after installation
AFL/Cricket Australia has a number of licensed
manufacturers and these can be found at
45
Reference: Letter to LGA’s in Victoria –dated 2010
www.aflcommunity.com.au. The AFL/Cricket Australia
Licensed Manufacturers are listed as:
Desso Sports Systems (under license to H G Turf)
FieldTurf (under license to TurfOne)
Grassman
Sports Technology International
TEAM Sports
Each certified field needs to be re-tested every two years to
ensure that its performance is current.
Field Installation 7.2.4
Recent examples of Australian fields that have been
installed and certified include:
Wadhurst Oval, Melbourne Grammar School (Vic).
Saltwater Reserve, Point Cook, Wyndham Council
(Vic).
Narrabeen Sports High School, Pittwater Council
(NSW).
In addition other fields that have not been certified include:
Northbridge Oval, City of Willoughby (NSW).
JJ Holland Park, City of Melbourne (Vic).
For cricket the standard approach is normally a synthetic
wicket on a concrete base which allows for consistency of
play. There are no performance standards for these
predominantly permanent seasonally used wickets.
Photo 42: Australian Rules training at Wyndham Council’s new AFL/ CA certified pitch in Point Cook (Source: Team Sports)
Contact details: AFL and Cricket Australia
Ricky Bell, Infrastructure & Planning
Manager
Visy Park, Gate 3 Royal Parade
Carlton North VIC 3054
GPO Box 4337, Melbourne VIC 3001
t: +41 3 8341 6085
w: www.aflcommunityclub.com.au
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 60
7.3 Baseball
Although the first synthetic sports turf system was installed
into the Houston Astrodome in 1966 and the artificial grass,
ChemGrass was known as AstroTurf after the facility name,
there has been revised success in this sport.
The majority of synthetic fields were laid onto a concrete
base and therefore the spring and softness was lost. This
combined with the heat in some grounds, and the lack of
performance standards resulted in the majority of Major
League Baseball league facilities taking the turf out.
Photo 43: Geelong Baseball Centre
One appropriate solution would be for the grass of the
diamond and outfield to be a 3G grass, with shockpad to a
multi-sport standard such as the One Turf Standard.
The pitcher’s mound and ‘sliding boxes’ could remain as
clay/granetic sand for the top level games. There are a
number of synthetic sports turf installations for baseball in
Australia including Geelong and The State
Softball/Baseball Centre in Altona (Victoria).
Contact details: Baseball Australia
Baseball House
2 Palm Meadows Drive
Carrara QLD 4211
t: +41 (7) 5510 6800
w: www.baseball.com.au
7.4 Bowls
Synthetic bowling surfaces were introduced in the late
1970’s and early 1980’s. World Bowls approved the use of
synthetic turf as an acceptable playing surface for lawn
bowls in the year 2000. The two main types of synthetic
surfaces used for outdoor bowls are sand filled (tufted) and
non-sand filled (woven) with an option of needle-punched.
The rules of the game allow for the use of synthetics and
go as far as endorsing specific suppliers of lawn bowl
pitches on their international world bowls website,
www.worldbowlsltd.co.uk – three of which are Australian
companies.
Bowling green’s generally consist of all weather or multi
use short pile turf stands between 12mm – 25mm high and
are normally dressed with sand, with some rare
installations being filled with rubber granules, or
alternatively the needle felt carpet where there is no infill.
The fibres used are generally more dense and stable
because of the use of tufted filaments woven into a carpet
like template. This type of surface closely imitates the
speed and playability of natural turf and is ideal for fast
paced ball to ground contact for sports like hockey, where a
consistent smooth playing surface increases performance
characteristics.
It should be noted that synthetic bowling greens still require
water if grass is used (i.e. not the carpet). Irrigation of the
surface during extended dry periods will maintain a
consistent moisture level in the sub-base material and
prevent movement. Some clubs also water their synthetic
greens to control pace and those with sand filled carpets
regularly water to contain the sand particles and settle dust.
Photo 44: Lawn bowls have been using synthetic carpets for decades
There is no set specification for any particular artificial turf
type as long as the surface matches the playing
characteristics regulated by the state/national body (e.g.
Royal Victorian Bowls Association (RVBA) Greens
Committee). These regulations are referred to as the
‘Green Laws’ specifying the playing characteristics of lawn
bowls in Australia.
The running speed requirement of the green is an integral
part of the playing characteristics and was developed in
2005 and is endorsed by the RVBA. The specification
applies to all clubs and competitions associated with the
RVBA and the recommended speed of the green is set at
between 13 and 17 seconds.
Synthetic and other artificial surfaces have been used in
community level bowls since the late 1970’s and have
increased in quality and design each year. Community level
bowls still use a variety of artificial surfaces and in some
cases on wet days, clubs roll out the traditional carpet like
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 61
material to provide an alternative playing surface when
others are not available.
Community and club level lawn bowling greens are
governed by the state associations and greens undergo
what is known as a ‘Green Inspection’. Country
associations, metropolitan groups and councillors adhere
to the ‘Green Inspection’ report criterion. The greens
undergo a ‘Green Inspection’ conducted by the green
keeper and the outcome of this inspection is the ‘Green
Inspection’ report. The report will identify which category
of playing surface the bowling green falls into. The state
associations apply a letter grading system to their surface
grading of the green, where; A = very good, B = good, C
= average, D = poor and E = unsuitable for pennant.
Anything below this standard is not for use under any
circumstances.
Draw is related to the green speed – as the speed
increases there is greater draw. Due to the bias on the
bowl, draw is an integral component to the game of bowls
as it requires skill to draw a bowl close to the target and
determines the way in which the game is played. The
‘running speed’ of the green is also measured with the use
of a timing ramp. The recommended speed of the green is
set between 13–17 seconds and applies to all clubs and
competitions associated with the RVBA.
A slow green (<12 seconds) means that there will be
narrow draw – a game of diminished skill, more akin to
“skittles”. Excessive draw is common on greens with
speeds in excess of 17 seconds and is undesirable as the
bowls can infringe on adjoining rinks or restrict which side
can be played when playing on end rinks. Playing on
excessively fast rinks can be difficult and is not enjoyable
for the average club bowler.
It is recommended a 1m concrete apron on surrounds, to
reduce lawn clippings dropping onto and contaminating the
surface.
For further details on the specification criteria and
evaluation methods log on to www.bowlsvic.org.au.
Contact
Details:
Bowls Australia
Darebin International Sports Centre
John Cain Memorial Park
281 Darebin Road, Thornbury VIC 3071
t: +41 (3) 9480 7100
w: www.bowlsaustralia.com.au
7.5 Football (soccer)
Approach to using Synthetic Surfaces 7.5.1
Football has been played on synthetic grass for a number
of decades with the Federation International de Football
Association (FIFA) embracing the benefits of synthetic turf
allowing more people to play ‘The World Game’. The use
of synthetic grass surfaces (designated ‘Football Turf’ by
FIFA) over the past 15 years has resulted in the
development of performance standards based on quality
natural turf performance standards.
Photo 45: Football Turf has now been laid in more than 75 fields in Australia
To ensure that the quality of football turf was consistent
across the globe FIFA developed the FIFA Quality
Programme in 2001 and is continually improved with the
latest guidelines46
. These guidelines are due to be updated
and re-issued late 2014 or early 2015.
The FIFA Quality Programme for Artificial Turf is a rigorous
test program for football turf that assesses the ball surface
interaction, player surface interaction and durability of the
product.
FIFA has two categories of performance standards,
namely:
FIFA Recommended 1 Star – aimed at high
surface use for municipal or sports club level
field (recommended for more than 20 hours
use per week).
FIFA Recommended 2 Star – for professional
and stadium usage (recommended for less
than 20 hours use per week).
Within each recommended category there is a durability
test (Lisport Test) which simulates wear and tear from
usage. This durability test is key to the decision making of
which type of field to purchase. The FIFA 2 Star pitch only
needs 5,200 cycles simulated wear, while FIFA 1 Star pitch
is 20,200 cycles.
46
FIFA Quality Concept for Football Turf – Handbook of Requirements –January 2012
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 62
Therefore the durability of a FIFA 1 Star is four times that of
a standard FIFA 2 Star Recommended pitch.
Standards for the Sport 7.5.2
The performance standards measured are the same for
both categories, although the acceptable criteria range
differs slightly. This allows the FIFA 1 Star Recommended
field categories, which only has to be tested every four (4)
years to have greater latitude (less than 5 percent
difference in most categories) to meet the needs of the
intensity that a 40 - 60 hour usage pattern would expect.
The standards for the two surfaces are identified in Table
16:
Pro
per
ty
Tes
t
Met
ho
d
Test Conditions
Preparation Temp Condition
FIFA 2 Star
FIFA 1 Star
Vertical ball rebound
FIFA 01 &
FIFA 09
Pre-conditioning
23ºC
Dry 0.60m –
0.85m
0.60m – 1.0m Wet
Simulated Wear – 5,200 cycles
Dry 0.60m
– 0.85m
N/A
Simulated Wear – 20,200 cycles
Dry N/A 0.60m –
1.0m
Angle ball rebound
FIFA 02 Pre-conditioning 23ºC Dry
45% - 60%
45% -70%
Wet 45% - 80%
Ball roll FIFA 03 Pre-conditioning 23ºC Dry
4m – 8m
4m – 10m Wet
Shock Absorption
FIFA 04a &
FIFA 09
Pre-conditioning
23ºC
Dry 60% - 70%
55% - 70%
Wet
Simulated Wear – 5,200 cycles
Dry 60% - 70%
N/A
Simulated Wear – 20,200 cycles
Dry N/A 55% - 70%
Pre-conditioning 40ºC Dry 60% - 70%
55% - 70%
FIFA 04a 1st impact
- -5ºC Froze
n 60% - 70%
55% - 70%
Vertical Deformation
FIFA 05a &
FIFA 09
Pre-conditioning
23ºC
Dry 4mm – 10mm
4mm – 11mm Pre-conditioning Wet
Simulated Wear – 5,200 cycles
Dry 4mm – 10mm
N/A
Simulated Wear – 20,200 cycles
Dry N/A 4mm – 11mm
Rotational Resistance
FIFA 06 &
FIFA 09
Pre-conditioning
23ºC
Dry 30Nm –
45Nm
25Nm – 50Nm Wet
Simulated Wear – 5,200 cycles
Dry 30Nm
– 45Nm
N/A
Simulated Wear – 20,200 cycles
Dry N/A 25Nm – 50Nm
Linear Friction – Stud Deceleration Value
FIFA 07
Pre-conditioning 23ºC
Dry 3.0g – 5.5 g
3.0g – 6.0 g
Wet
Linear Friction – Stud Slide Value
Pre-conditioning 23ºC
Dry 130 – 210
120 – 220
Wet
Skin / surface friction
FIFA 08 Pre-conditioning 23ºC Dry 0.35 – 0.75
0.35 – 0.75
Skin abrasion
FIFA 08 Pre-conditioning 23ºC Dry ± 30% ± 30%
Table 16: FIFA Quality Concept for Football Turf – Handbook of Requirements – Key Performance Criteria
The re-testing of fields is FIFA 1 Star Recommended pitch
every four years and FIFA 2 Star Recommended pitch
every 12 months.
Licensee / Preferred Producer Program 7.5.3
FIFA has developed a two-tier accreditation program for
manufacturers and suppliers of football turf to the industry
to ensure that the client is purchasing from a reputable
supplier.
FIFA Licensee
The two-tier systems entry level is known as a FIFA
licensee, which indicates that the company is both
committed to the FIFA Quality Programme, has quality
systems in place and has fields ready to test. The pre-
requisites47
for application include:
ISO 9001 or equivalent,
Evidence that the company is a tufting company,
3 fields that have been tested to the International
Artificial Turf Standards (IATS),
Maintenance guidelines for at least one of its synthetic
systems,
Reference of a qualified civil engineer who conducts
work for the organisation,
Product declaration of the product that is to be tested
in the initial test,
Method statement for the installation of the artificial turf
system to be tested initially, and
Business plan covering the company’s intentions as a
FIFA Quality Programme Licensee.
At the time of the Smart Guide going to press, FIFA has 21
licensees of which four (4) seem to be offering products in
Australia/ New Zealand. They are:
Astroturf,
Desso,
Mondo S.P.A., and
TigerTurf.
A full list can be found on the FIFA website at
www.FIFA.com/Quality
FIFA Preferred Producer (FPP)
To provide greater certainty to purchasers of ’Football Turf,
FIFA introduced a second tier accreditation program in
2004 to focus on the quality assurance of the installation for
the Whole of Life of the field.
47
FIFA Quality Programme for Football Turf: Application as Licensee
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 63
The eligibility criteria is more onerous than the licensee’s
accreditation. Applicants must:
Have been a FIFA licensee for a minimum of two (2)
years,
Have a minimum of ten (10) FIFA-certified fields at the
moment of application,
Comply with the Code of Conduct of the WFSGI
(World Federation of the Sporting Goods Industry),
and
Have no legal action or dispute in the past two years
by or with FIFA or a member association of FIFA.
The key aspect of this FPP status is that the manufacturer
has to ensure that any of their distributors, partners,
affiliates or anyone representing them, installs a quality
product, otherwise as the parent company/FPP they may
have to ensure that any corrections or repairs are
conducted. For the end consumer the main advantage in
using a FIFA preferred producer is that they only have to
deal with one company for the whole installation from the
construction planning to maintenance.
In the majority of tenders that Smart Connection Company
works on, we encourage closed tenders with only FPP’s
eligible to apply because the FPP status significantly
reduces risk to the purchaser.
With Australia/New Zealand the following FPP’s offer their
products directly or through licensees:
CC Grass (Tuff Turf),
FieldTurf (One-Turf),
Greenfields (HG Turf),
Limonta (Greenplay),
Polytan / STI,
Saletx Oy (HG Turf), and
TEAM Sports,
Full details of contacts for both FIFA licensee’s and FIFA
preferred producers are listed at www.FIFA.com/Quality.
Field Installation 7.5.4
Recent installations over the past 6 - 7 years for football
fields total over 60, Victoria has the majority (over 50), and
NSW has approximately 10, with another 30 plus pitches to
be installed by 2015. Recent commitment and installations
for Tasmania, ACT, WA, SA and Qld demonstrate how this
technology is encouraging people to play the game.
To obtain more information about the FIFA Quality
Programme directly from FIFA visit www.FIFA.com/Quality.
Contact details: FIFA
FIFA – Strasse 20
PO Box 8044 Zurich, Switzerland
t: +41 (0) 43 222 777
w: www.fifa.com
e: http://www.fifa.com/contact/form.html
7.6 Gridiron / American Football
In 1969, Franklin Field, University of Pennsylvania switched
from grass to artificial turf. Over the past 40 years some of
the National Football League (NFL) teams have changed
back to natural grass, with some also deciding to reinvest
in the latest generation synthetic technology. The
University of Pennsylvania is one example that switched
from synthetic (2nd
generation) to natural grass before
reverting to a 3rd
generation pitch.
In Canada all eight stadiums in the Canadian Football
League (CFL) use synthetic sports turf.
There are no standards for gridiron / American football
except the Clegg Hammer Test which measures hardness.
If an organisation was to consider this in Australia / New
Zealand, it is recommended they should consider the IRB
rugby union or AFL/Cricket Australia standards, especially
due to the critical head fall criteria.
Contact details: Gridiron Australia
P.O. Box 170
Woden, ACT 2606
w: www.gridironaustralia.org.au
7.7 Hockey
Approach to Using Synthetic Surfaces 7.7.1
Hockey, under the guidance of the International Hockey
Federation (FIH) has been promoting the use of synthetic
surfaces since the first surface was used in Canada in
1976 for an international game. In their latest handbook for
synthetic surfaces48
FIH state that their objectives to code
the relevant performance requirements is to ensure that
hockey pitches and matches are conducted for:
Consistency – to reflect relative team merit,
Quality – to provide an opportunity for players to
display and develop their skills,
Safety – to ensure playing conditions offer
comfortable playing considerations and reduce
risk to players/officials, and
48
Handbook of Performance, Durability and Construction Requirements for Synthetic Turf Hockey Pitches (FIH – May 2013)
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 64
Playability – to extend playability, especially in
adverse weather conditions.
FIH are keen to promote the game across the world and
believe that the use of synthetic sports and synthetic
hockey surfaces will provide greater access to facilities to
participate in various forms of hockey. By providing quality,
safety and consistency of play, participants will feel more
confident in developing their skills, enjoying the game more
and FIH hope, continue playing the game throughout their
life.
Photo 46: London Blue Hockey Field, as its now known (Source: STI)
Standards for the Sport 7.7.2
In 2013, FIH re-scoped the approval levels for the use of
synthetic turf products, with three standards of turf now
being recognised:
Global For FIH world-level competitions, including
specified qualifying tournaments.
National For other instrumental matches and higher
level national competitions.
Multi-sport For other levels of play; subject to national
association regulations, surfaces designed
to cater for a number of sports and where
hockey may not be the primary sport.
These are the key aspects that FIA have identified to
underpin their performance requirements49
.
i) The performance standards aim at allowing
players to use the fields in a safe and comfortable
manner,
ii) Approved products from licensed manufacturers
are published on the FIH website (www.fih.ch)
which has been tested by an FIH accredited
laboratory, demonstrating compliance to the
appropriate FIH standards. These products are
only valid for the specified duration, and
iii) Pitches are granted a certificate of compliance
after field testing by an accredited laboratory, only
when they meet the specified performance
standards. A current list of certified pitches is
49
Handbook of Performance, Durability and Construction Requirements for Synthetic Turf Hockey Pitches (FIH – May 2013)
published on the FIH website (www.fih.ch) which
are valid for two (2) years from the date of testing.
The performance standards for installed pitches are
illustrated in Table 17:
Performance Requirements
Global Pitch National Pitch
Multi-sport Pitch
Product compliance with manufacturer’s declaration
Yes Yes Yes
Ball rebound
Mean 100mm to 400mm
Individual test positions < ± 10% from mean
Mean 100mm to 400mm
Individual test positions < ± 20% from mean
Mean 75mm to 400mm
Individual test positions < ± 20% from mean
Ball roll
Mean ≥ 10m
Individual test < ± 10% from mean
Mean ≥ 8m
Individual test < ± 20% from mean
Mean ≥ 5m
Individual test < ± 20% from mean
Ball roll deviation ≤ 3° ≤ 3° ≤ 3°
Underfoot friction
Leroux Pendulum
Coefficient of friction 0.6 to 1.0
Individual tests < ± 0.1 from mean
Coefficient of friction 0.6 to 1.0
Individual tests < ± 0.2 from mean
Coefficient of friction 0.6 to 1.0
Individual tests < ± 0.2 from mean
Rotational Resistance
25 – 45 Nm
Individual tests < ± 3 from mean
25 - 45 Nm
Individual tests < ± 3 from mean
25 – 50 Nm
Individual tests < ± 3 from mean
Impact response 40 to 60% 40 to 65% 40 to 65%
Individual tests < ± 5% from mean
Individual tests < ± 5% from mean
Individual tests < ± 5% from mean
Pitch dimensions and markings
Line length ± 50mm
Line width ± 10mm
Circle radius ± 30mm
Penalty spots position ± 30mm
Length of 300mm marks ± 30mm
Diagonals < 300mm difference
Pitch run-offs (minima) Back-line 2m same synthetic turf surface
Side-line 1m same synthetic turf surface
Both plus 1m synthetic turf or alternative
Pitch slope Longitudinal fall < 0.2%
Longitudinal fall < 1.0%
Longitudinal fall < 1.0%
Pitch profile
Lateral fall < 0.4%
Exceptions < 0.4% permitted on FIH approval
Lateral fall < 1.0%
Lateral fall < 1.0%
Pitch smoothness
Deviation ≤ 6mm above or below 3m straight edge
Deviation above or below 300mm straight edge
≤ 2mm ≤ 3mm ≤ 3mm
Pitch watering As specified by turf manufacturer
If specified by turf manufacturer
If specified by turf manufacturer
Pitch permeability ≥ 150mm per hour
≥ 150mm per hour
≥ 150mm per hour
Colour FIH approved FIH approved
FIH approved
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 65
Performance Requirements
Global Pitch National Pitch
Multi-sport Pitch
Artificial lighting See FIH Guide to the Artificial Lighting of Hockey
Pitches
See FIH Guide to the Artificial Lighting of
Hockey Pitches
See FIH Guide to the Artificial Lighting of
Hockey Pitches
Table 17: Key Performance Requirements for Hockey Fields
Product Licensing 7.7.3
Manufacturers of synthetic turf for hockey pitches or multi-
sport used for hockey may apply to the FIH to have their
products registered as FIH approved products. Once
tested by an independent and accredited laboratory they
are listed on the FIH website. Only licensed manufacturers,
their subsidiaries and licensees may seek FIH approval for
their products.
Contact details: International Hockey Federation
Rue du Valentin 61
CH – 1004 Lausanne, Switzerland
t: +41 (21) 641 0606
w: www.fih.ch
7.8 Rugby League
Approach to using synthetics Surfaces 7.8.1
Rugby league in Australia and New Zealand is controlled
under their national governing body, namely the National
Rugby League (NRL) in Australia and the NZRL in New
Zealand.
The world governing body for the sport, the Rugby League
International Federation (RLIF) currently seems to have
limited scope in relation to synthetic surface governance.
The UK’s governing body for rugby league, the Rugby
Football League (RFL) have embraced the technology and
set standards which have been used at both community
and stadium/professional level.
Standards for the Sport 7.8.2
The Rugby Football League (RFL) standard based on the
European Standard EN 15330-1: Surfaces for Sport Areas
has been modified for the specific requirements of rugby
league. The standard takes into account the results of a
comprehensive study into the performance of natural grass
pitches. Typically, a natural grass-synthetic turf hybrid
system called Desso Grassmaster is found in major
stadium installations around the world alongside root-
stabilized fibre-sand or fibre-elastic natural grass systems.
Recognising that many artificial turf rugby league pitches
will also be used for football or rugby union the RFL
standard has been aligned with the requirements for FIFA
and IRB regulation 22 wherever possible.
Similar to the FIFA Quality Concept the RFL performance
standard recognises requirements for community and
stadium use (see Table 18). Products suitable for rugby
league play have to pass initial laboratory approval before
being able to be installed and tested in the actual field
application. Whilst community pitches shall be retested
every two years, stadium pitches require a field retest on
an annual basis.
Property Stadium fields Community Fields
Ball Rebound 0.8 – 1.1 m 0.6 – 1.1 m
Rotational Resistance 35 – 50 Nm 25 – 55 Nm
Shock Absorption 50 – 65 % 50 – 70 %
Vertical Deformation 3.0 – 8.5 mm ≤ 11.0 mm
Head Injury Criterion ≥ 1.3 m ≥ 1.3 m
Table 18: Selected RFL Field test Performance Requirements
The English RFL standard specifies two categories of
performance: The category called ‘stadium’ is intended to
replicate the characteristics of high-level natural grass as
found in well maintained stadium settings. Surfaces
meeting the ‘stadium’ category are intended for use in
professional matches and training. The second category
called ‘community’ which has a wider acceptance range
than the stadium category is supposed to replicate the
characteristics of good quality community natural grass
fields.
In general, community grounds have to sustain a much
higher level of use compared to stadium pitches that are
predominantly used for competition matches and
professional training. In this respect, the RFL categories
‘stadium’ and ‘community’ are comparable to the FIFA
recommended Two Star and One Star categories.
However, in terms of expected durability the RFL standard
recognises only a high level of resistance to simulated use
by specifying 20,200 conditioning cycles whereas FIFA
allows 5,200 cycles for its FIFA recommended Two Star
category. The RFL approach seems to reflect the
expectation that in a stadium setting artificial turf has to
sustain a much higher level of use compared with natural
grass. Accordingly the different categories and their
respective acceptance ranges apply to both the laboratory
test requirements as well as the field test requirements.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 66
The RFL Rugby League Standard - The detail 7.8.3
From the research conducted with similar long grass ball
sports including the football codes of rugby union, soccer
and Australian rules there are many similarities to the
needs of rugby league in Australia that will influence any
future considerations for Australia.
From comprehensive testing by Labosport International into
the performance of natural turf fields at community and
stadium levels during both winter 2010 and summer 2011,
they developed a standard which best replicated the
playing conditions of quality grass fields. The Rugby
League Performance and Construction Standard for
Synthetic Pitches are now used for both training and
competition fields at community and elite level.
Similar to other performance standards, the specifications
for laboratory and field test requirements in the RFL
standard can be divided into three areas:
1. Product identification and durability
2. Ball-surface interaction
3. Player-surface interaction.
Product identification tests apply to all components of the
surface system. The artificial grass component is analysed
in terms of its carpet configuration, such as machine gauge
(e.g. distance between the rows of tufts), pile height, pile
weight as well as tufts and total mass per unit area. Pile
yarn materials are characterised in terms of the polymer
used and the tensile strength of the pile yarn. The quality of
the carpet construction is determined by the tuft withdrawal
force, tensile strength of the carpet and joint strength. The
prescribed shock pad or elastic layer is identified by its
thickness, tensile strength and force reduction.
Performance and stabilising infill are characterised by
particle grading and shape in addition to bulk density. Both
yarn and performance infill typically of polymeric nature,
are subjected to artificial weathering testing for color
change and changes in material composition (e.g.
degradation).
Due to the shape of the rugby league ball, the ball-surface
interaction tests generally refer to a football rather than a
rugby ball. The expectation is that hard and compacted
surfaces produce a ball rebound that is too high, whereas
very soft surfaces cause the ball to rebound too low.
Player-surface interaction tests have also been harmonised
with FIFA Quality Concept and IRB One Turf standard.
Measurement of shock absorption, vertical deformation and
energy restitution are being determined using the new
Advanced Artificial Athlete (AAA) device. The RFL
standard acknowledges that values prescribed for energy
restitution are meant as target values and do not prevent
passing of a product if values are found to be outside the
prescribed range. Similar to other performance standards,
rotational resistance, skin friction and abrasion are used to
set parameters for safe interaction between the player and
the surface. Similar to the rugby union standard in IRB
Regulation 22, the RFL standard uses the head injury
criterion in accordance with EN 1177 and specifies a critical
fall height of equal or greater than 1.3m. Generally, the
majority of laboratory tests are conducted on dry and wet
sample specimen.
Photo 47: Stadium Perimeter Advertisement (Source: Signgrass)
For field testing, the surface, ambient temperature and the
ambient relative humidity are recorded as part of the field
test report. Field testing also assesses surface regularity
using a straightedge and graduated wedge and the
gradient of the pitch. Finally, infill depth and vertical free
pile height have to fall within prescribed ranges of the
manufacturers declared value.
Additionally the porosity of pitches may be perceived as an
issue in certain parts of the country, which receives short
bursts of rain that is intense and often curtails games and
training on natural turf. The RFL standard for porosity is
the toughest of all sports; the shock pad needs to be
permeable enough to allow more than 300mm of water to
pass through its surface.
Product Licensing 7.8.4
There is no product licensing presently in Australia, or by
the world governing body. It is anticipated that in 2014
Australia’s NRL will consider this process.
Contact details: National Rugby League
Rugby League Central
Driver Avenue, Moore Park NSW 2021
t: +41 (2) 9359 8500
w: www.nrl.com
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 67
7.9 Rugby Union
Introduction 7.9.1
Rugby union has historically been played on grass, despite
several proposals over the years for alternative solutions,
including clay, shade, sand and the second generation
artificial grass. All presented a similar problem of critical
head fall and skin abrasion.
Photo 48: Rugby Union playing on synthetic field (Source: Team Sports)
In the past half-decade the technology around synthetic turf
has provided proven solutions for the game of rugby and
the International Rugby Board (IRB) has embraced this
because of the benefits for increasing participation, quality
of play and consistency for the game.
To ensure the quality and consistency of the surface the
IRB developed, the IRB Artificial Rugby Turf Performance
Specification50
, in consultation with FIFA. This standard
was integrated into the Game Regulation 2251
and provides
guidance on how it can be used for the game.
In order to boost global participation in the game, rugby
shares the use of sports fields with various sports, and in
2010, the IRB introduced the IRB Turf One Program. This
standard integrated the key ‘long grass’ sports such as
football, rugby union, Australian rules, American football
and hockey. See Section 7.10 for full details.
The IRB has only one standard for synthetic turf, that
applies to both community and stadium use.
50
IRB Artificial Rugby Turf Performance Specification One Turf Technical Manual 51
Regulation 22: Standard relating to the use of artificial rugby turf
Performance Standards 7.9.2
Similar to the FIFA performance standards, the IRB has
identified three basic categories that are broadly defined
as:
Ball/surface Interaction: The reaction of a ball to the
surface.
Player/surface Interaction: The reaction of a player to
the surface.
Durability: The resistance of the surface to wear and
tear and the environment.
For a field to become compliant to the IRB Regulation 22,
the following process needs to be followed:
Step 1 Unions, clubs or organisations seeking to
install or use an artificial surface should
follow the IRB Regulation 22 requirements.
Step 2 Manufacturer/IRB Preferred Turf Producer
submits a product to an IRB Accredited Test
Institute.
Step 3 Laboratory Test including:
Identification tests,
Durability,
Climatic resistance,
Player/surface interaction, and
Ball/surface interaction.
If the product passes these tests, the
manufacturer/IRB Preferred Turf Producers
can proceed to Step 4.
Step 4 Installation of pitch with a ‘Laboratory
Approved System’.
Step 5 Field Testing – The field has four key
aspects tested, including:
Construction tests,
Player/surface interaction,
Ball/surface interaction, and
Identification tests.
Step 6 Approval Status
Once the pitch meets all requirements the
national Member Union then grants it
‘approved status’.
The performance criteria for the surface are identified in
Table 19 and Table 20.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 68
Property Test Method
Test Conditions Require- ments Preparation Temp. Conditi
on
Vertical ball rebound - football
EN 12235 (results expressed as absolute rebound)
Pre-conditioning 23°C
Dry 0.60m – 1.0m
Wet 0.60m – 1.0m
Simulated Wear 23°C Dry 0.60m – 1.0m
Angle ball rebound
Determination of Angle Ball Rebound f
Pre-conditioning 23°C
Dry 45% - 70%
Wet 45% - 80%
Shock Absorption
AAA Version (Appendix 2)
Pre-conditioning 23°C
Dry 55% - 70% Wet
Simulated Wear Dry 55% - 70%
Pre-conditioning 40°C Dry 55% - 70%
Pre-conditioning -5°C Frozen 55% - 70%
Energy Restitution
AAA Version
Pre-conditioning 23°C
Dry 20% - 50% Wet
Simulated Wear Wet 20% - 50%
Pre-conditioning -5°C Frozen 20% - 50%
Pre-conditioning 40°C Dry 20% - 50%
Head Injury Criteria
EN 1177 Loose particulate
Pre-conditioning
23°C
Dry ≥ 1.3m Wet
Simulated Wear **
Dry ≤ 1000 HIC @ 1.0m Fall height
Head Injury Criteria*
EN 1177 Loose Particulate
Pre-conditioning 40°C Dry
≤ 1000 HIC @ 1.3m Fall height
Vertical Deformation**
AAA Version
Pre-conditioning 23°C Dry 5.5mm – 11mm
Pre-conditioning
23°C
Wet 5.5mm – 11mm
Simulated wear Dry 5.5mm – 11mm
Rotational Resistance
EN 15301 – 1 With football studs
Pre-conditioning 23°C Dry 30Nm – 45Nm
Wet 30Nm – 45Nm
Simulated Wear 23°C Dry 30Nm – 45Nm
Linear Friction – Stud Deceleration Value
Determination of Linear Friction Stud Slide Value and Stud Deceleration f
Pre-conditioning 23°C
Dry 3.0g – 6.0g
Wet 3.0g – 6.0g
Linear Friction – Stud Slide Value
Pre-conditioning 23°C
Dry 120 – 220
Wet 120 - 220
Skin / surface friction
Determination of Skin/Surface Friction and Skin Abrasion f
Pre-conditioning 23°C Dry 0.35 – 0.75
Skin abrasion
Procedure for simulated mechanical abrasion during use f
Pre-conditioning 23°C Dry ± 30%
Table 19: Laboratory Test Requirements f Developed by FIFA as FIFA Test Methods for the FIFA Quality Concept for
Football Turf Handbook of Test Methods January 2012 Edition.
*The HIC (Head Injury Criteria) test at 40°C needs to be conducted as soon
as practicable after removing the sample from the heating chamber. It is
then tested via the determination of three single impacts of HIC <1000 at
1.3m drop height.
** As determined by three single drops on the surface of the conditioned
sample after simulated wear.
Samples shall be preconditioned using a studded roller as
per the FIFA methods. Simulated wear means 20,200
cycles of the Lisport machine.
Where the test method specifies that a sample shall be
tested ‘wet’ a standard wetting procedure is adopted.
Property Characteristic Test Method Requirement
Following Artificial Weathering in accordance with EN 14836:2005 (UVA) the following tests
should be carried out
Artificial turf Colour change EN ISO 20105-A02 ≥ Grey scale 3
Pile yarn (s) Tensile strength
minimum
requirements
EN 13864
Fib ≥ 30N
Mono ≥ 8N
Pile yarn (s) Tensile strength EN 13864 Percentage
change from
unaged to be no
more than 50%
Polymeric infill Colour change EN ISO 20105-A02 ≥ Grey scale 3
Joint strength:
stitched seams
Joint strength -
unaged
EN 12228 Method 1
2500N/100mm Joint strength – after
immersion in hot
water
EN 13744 & EN 12228
Method 1
Joint strength:
bonded seams
Joint strength -
unaged
EN 12228 Method 1
2500N/100mm Joint strength – after
immersion in hot
water
EN 13744 & EN 12228
Method 1
Joint strength:
peel strength
(bonded
seams only)
Joint strength – after
immersion in hot
water
EN 13744 & EN 12228
Method 2 25N/100mm
Carpet
strength
Direct tension ISO 13934-1 25N/mm
Table 20: Laboratory Test Requirements (continued)
Property Test Method Condition Requirement
Tensile strength of shock
pads and e-layers (if
supplied as part of system)
EN 12230 Unaged 0.15Mpa
Water permeability* EN 12616 Unaged > 500mm/h
Table 21: Additional tests for Rugby Union under Regulation 22
*Not applicable to surfaces designed specifically for indoor use.
Surfaces that fail the shock absorption test at -5°C may
only be installed on pitches that have an under pitch
heating system or in locations that do not experience
temperatures below 0°C.
Note: SBR and coated SBR are treated as two separate
products.
IRB Preferred Turf Producer 7.9.3
The following companies are Preferred Turf Producers
(PTP’s) and a full updated list can be found on the IRB
website (www.irbplayerwelfare.com):
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 69
Edel Grass B.V. (N/A),
Field Turf Takett SAS (TurfOne),
Greenfields B.V. (HG turf / TigerTurf),
Limonta Sports C.P.A. (Greenplay Limonta
Australia),
Polytan / Sports Technologies Australia (STI), and
SIS Group (TEAM Sport).
Field Installation 7.9.4
Over the past few years global embracing of synthetic turf
for Rugby Union has progressed significantly with countries
such as Canada ( with 3 fields); China (1); Hong Kong (3);
France (23); United Kingdom (15); and New Zealand (8)
installing the surface.
Within Australia is it expected that the first couple of pitches
will be installed in 2014 at Lane Cove in NSW.
Contact details: Australian Rugby Union (ARU)
ARU Headquarters, Ground Floor 29-
57 Christie St
St Leonards NSW 2065
t: +41 (2) 8005 5555
w: www.rugby.com.au
International Rugby Board (IRB)
Huguenot House,
35-38 St Stephen's Green
Dublin 2, Ireland
t: + 00 353 1 240 9200
w: www.irb.com
7.10 Tennis
Introduction 7.10.1
The International Tennis Federation (ITF) has developed a
series of ‘Court Surface Association Programs’ that
categorise the speed of the courts and quantify the quality
of installation. Irrespective of the surface type, the two
programs explore the pace of the surface through the ITF
Court Pace Classification Program. The ITF Recognition
Program allows for both products to be tested against the
Court Pace Classification Program and individual courts
can be rated.
Types of Surface 7.10.2
The types of surfaces that are recognised by the ITF have
been classified in their publication ITF Approved Tennis
Balls, Classified Surfaces and Recognised Courts. A
Guide to Products and Test Methods52
and are
summarised in table 22 following.
Surface code
Type Description
A Acrylic1 Textured pigmented, resin-
bound coating
B Artificial Clay2 Synthetic surface with the
appearance of clay
C Artificial grass2 Synthetic surface with the
appearance of natural grass
D Asphalt3 Bitumen-bound aggregate
E Carpet Textile or polymeric material supplied in rolls or sheets of finished product
F Clay4 Unbound mineral aggregate
G Concrete3 Cement-bound aggregate
H Grass Natural grass grown from seed
J Other e.g. modular systems (tiles), wood, canvas
Table 22: ITF Approved Tennis Balls, Classified Surfaces and Recognised Courts
Notes: All surfaces may be porous or non-porous, with the exception of
‘clay’ and ‘grass’, which are always porous.
1 Normally forms only the uppermost few millimetres of a court.
2 “Appearance” relates only to the form of the uppermost surface material
and not other characteristics (e.g. colour). These surfaces are typically
composed of a carpet matrix dressed with clay, sand and/or rubber
aggregate.
3 Used only when the material itself forms the playing surface. When used
as a base for other surfaces (e.g. acrylic), reference will be made only to the
playing surface.
4 This term denotes a type of surface that is constructed from naturally-
derived materials, and includes unbound sand or clay.
ITF Court Pace Classification Program 7.10.3
To assist clubs and tennis organisations to select the
surface most suited to their requirements the ITF Court
Pace Classification Program identifies the surface into one
of five (5) categories:
1. Slow ≤ 29,
2. Medium-slow 30 – 34,
3. Medium 35 – 39,
4. Medium-fast 40 – 44, and
5. Fast ≥ 45.
52
www.itftennis.com/technical
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 70
Photo 49: Andy Murray returns a shot at the Australian Open on the cushioned floor
The court pace is established by using a simple test53
which records the velocity before and after the bounce.
The increased smoothness of the court surface increases
the speed of the ball and similarly the rougher the surface
the more it slows the ball down. Additionally the higher a
bounce a surface produces the slower the court will be
because players have more time to reach the ball. Both of
these factors are reviewed.
A product that has been tested in an ITF Accredited
Laboratory (on site or in a laboratory) is included purely on
the Court Park Rating and is classified for three (3) years.
This list can be seen as part of ITF’s website
(www.itftennis.com).
ITF Recognition Program 7.10.4
The ITF Recognition Program is targeted at those venues
where the standard of play demands the specification of
precise playing characteristics. Although ITF states that
this may include regional tennis centres or where
national/international tournaments may be held, it is just as
relevant as a quality control progress to ensure that the
court standards and pace required have been delivered.
There are two levels of recognition, which according to the
ITF54
guidelines state:
1) One-Star ITF Recognition, and
2) Two-Star ITF Recognition.
The ITF Recognition Programme is targeted at those
venues where the standard of play demands the
specification of precise playing characteristics, e.g. at
international tournaments and national or regional tennis
centres.
One-Star ITF Recognition
Key installation properties of a court must meet ITF
recommendations, which include a visual inspection to
identify any cracks or gaps in the surface and to confirm
53
ITF Approved Tennis Balls, Classified Surfaces and Recognised Courts – A Guide to Products and Test Methods 54
ITF Court Surface Assessment Program
that the appearance is uniform. Any bumps or dips in the
surface are measured and the slope and planarity of the
court are established. Finally, the positions of the court
markings and net are checked to ensure they are within
acceptable limits.
Two-Star ITF Recognition
In addition to the One-Star ITF Recognition process, the
Court Pace Rating is compared with the ITF Classified
value for the surface product. Therefore, only surfaces
which have obtained ITF classification can be tested for
Two-Star ITF Recognition. If the surface product is not
classified, the supplier can apply for ITF classification using
the results of the on-site Two-Star Pace Rating test.
Applications and Validity
An application for ITF Recognition can be submitted by any
party with interest in the tennis facility, such as the owner,
the organiser of a tournament held at that facility, or the
supplier or installer of the court.
ITF Recognition expires when the court is resurfaced, or
after 10 years, depending on which is sooner. However,
the results are only valid on the day of testing, as
properties of the court may change, due to factors such as
ambient conditions, use and maintenance.55
If the venue is
therefore used for competitions annually at a high level it
should be re-tested accordingly.
The application for ITF Recognition can be submitted by
the installer, court owner (e.g. Local Government), the
tennis club or peak body (e.g. Tennis NSW etc.) or a
tournament organiser.
If successful, the results for the venue and courts will be
published on the ITF technical website for a One-Star
Recognition. If a Two-Star is established the product brand
name will also be displayed.
ITF Recognised Supplier or Installer 7.10.5
Suppliers who have obtained a certain number of ITF
Recognition awards for their courts will be awarded Elite
ITF Recognition Supplier/Installer status, in recognition for
their continued quality of their products and workmanship.
The two levels are:
Elite Silver Level – for 10 or more installations as
either an installer or supplier, and
Elite Gold Level – for 50 or more installations as
either an installer or supplier.
55
ITF Court Surface Assessment Programmes (p6)
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 71
Within Australia the governing body of tennis is Tennis
Australia (www.tennis.com.au)
Contact details: International Tennis Federation
The Technical Centre
ITF Licensing (UK) Ltd.
Bank Lane, Roehampton,
London SW15 5XZ United Kingdom
t: +44 (0) 20 8878 6464
w: www.itftennis.com
Tennis Australia
Melbourne Park, Olympic Boulevard,
Melbourne Vic 3000
t: +61 (3) 9914 4000
w: tennis.com.au
7.11 Multi-Sport Areas
Approach to Synthetic Surfaces 7.11.1
There are many positive examples where a purchaser of a
new synthetic sports turf is interested to use the surface for
more than one sport. In these cases a request has been
made to ensure the performance standards meet the needs
of the sports involved. Some of these collaborations have
included:
Football code collaboration (soccer; Australian
Rules Football; Rugby Union and Rugby League)
Football (FIFA 1 Star) with Hockey (National and
Multi-sport)
Hockey (National) and Tennis (untested)
Photo 50: Collaboration of multi-sport field (Football, AFL & Cricket) between Whittlesea City Council and Mill Park Secondary College
In Australia there is only one published standard to date
that formally combines two sports and that is the
AFL/Cricket Australian community surface standard. The
reality of this standard is that it is predominantly for Aussie
Rules, as the cricket wicket has no standard, just the
outfield.
Photo 51: Football and Hockey (Source: Team Sports)
Draft standards are expected to be issued in 2014, that
combine the football codes of soccer, rugby union, rugby
league, Australian rules/cricket, gridiron and Gaelic football.
In addition hockey’s world governing body (FIH) has
endorsed these standards, for their multi-sport performance
criteria.
The benefits for the client or purchaser will be that they can
program many sports at different times of the year, which
could be very beneficial.
Standards for the Sport 7.11.2
The draft standards are presently being agreed and will be
promoted by all of the partnering sports once agreed. This
should be ready in 2014. The IRB are the key driver of this
approach and the standard will likely be communicated by
them.
Photo 52: Proposed Design for Lane Cove Council (NSW) for a Cricket, AFL, Football and Rugby Union Multi-sports Field (Source: Smart Connection Company/DCE)
Product Licensing 7.11.3
There is no licensing scheme in process at present.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 72
Section 7 case study – Sport by Sport – ABS Sports Fields
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 73
SECTION 8:
FINANCIAL
STRATEGY TO
AFFORD A
SYNTHETIC
SURFACE
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 74
8 Financial Strategy to Afford a
Synthetic Surface
8.1 Introduction
For a prospective purchaser to appreciate the cost of the
investment, this section explores a number of aspects
including:
The expense commitment, which includes:
- The whole of life costs of a typical synthetic pitch
installation.
- The maintenance costs.
- The replacement costs.
The ability to generate revenue to offset the
investment.
- The pricing strategy.
- The return on investment.
This section explores a typical 110m x 71m football pitch
covering 7,810m2. These same principles can be used for
any sports surface.
Photo 53: Melbourne Grammar School, with a Football (TigerTurf) and AFL field (HG Turf)
8.2 The Whole of Life Expense Commitment
To appreciate the investment needed, there are three
stages of a field’s whole of life (WOL) which need to be
considered and are shown in Table 23 – 25. These are for
a FIFA 1 Star recommended pitch and includes ancillary
equipment such as goal posts, fencing and floodlights. The
three stages are:
Capital Investment – including field and ancillary
items, fences, lights etc.
Maintenance Costs – depending upon the level of
use.
Replacement Costs – considered over 10, 20 and 30
years.
Within each of these WOL stages, the tables have
considered the following aspects:
Capital Investment and Installation Costs 8.2.1
Consider the design and construction costs of a field of
7,810m2 field to a FIFA 1 Recommended Pitch standard
pitch (Table 23 example). In addition, ancillary items such
as fencing, lighting, goals and coaches boxes have been
considered and therefore costed in.
Table 23: Capital Investment Required
Maintenance Costs 8.2.2
The recurring maintenance costs consider the routine
professional grooming that is essential for appearance,
playability and preventative maintenance, in order to
maximise the field’s life expectancy.
The greater the usage, the greater the maintenance
needed – the modelling therefore considers three usage
rates with additional maintenance investment needs,
namely:
Less than 40 hours per week usage needing six
hours maintenance per week,
Between 40 and 60 hours usage per week
needing eight hours maintenance per week, and
Over 60 hours per week of usage needing 10
hours maintenance per week.
The maintenance calculations in Table 24 have been
based on an external maintenance company meeting the
suggested maintenance program that FIFA recommends.
Capital Investment and Installation Costs
Component Aus. $ cost
Pitch Costs
Design $10,000
Site establishment, documentation & project
management$60,000
Sub grade works $70,290
Drainage, gutters and concrete works $164,010
base pavement and asphalt $335,830
synthetic surface $312,400
shock pad installation $156,200
Pitch Sub total $1,108,730
Ancillary Costs
Fencing $78,100
Lighting $273,350
Irrigation (optional) $0
Equipment $50,000
other $0
Ancillary costs Sub-Total $401,450
TOTAL COST FOR FIELD $1,510,180
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 75
Table 24: Maintenance Costs
Replacement 8.2.3
The funding required for the field, shockpad and ancillary
items over three periods of 10, 20 and 30 years is identified
in Table 25. The shockpad and ancillary items (fencing,
lights etc.) will need some minor repairs every 10 years and
the shockpad replaced every 20 years. All of this has been
identified in the modelling.
Table 25: Replacement Costs
Whole of Life Costs 8.2.4
To appreciate the WOL costs for the field, Table 26 shows
the workings. It assumes a capital amortisation timeline
over 10, 20 and 30 years. Table 26 shows the annual
amortisation rates for each of the three options:
Table 26: Whole of Life Costs
From the figures shown in Table 26 it is possible to identify
the cost of investment on a per hour basis. The calculations
are based on the field being programmed for 50 weeks of
the year. Table 27 shows that the costs vary significantly
depending on the amortisation strategy and the facility’s
level of usage. It ranges from $36p.h. based on 60 hours
usage over a 30 year amortisation strategy, to $201p.h.
based on a 10 year strategy. This allows the purchaser to
decide on the pricing strategy needed to fund a WOL return
on investment strategy.
Photo 54: Football (FIFA 1 Star) and Hockey (FIH National) at ANU in Canberra (Source: HG Turf)
The number of hour’s usage is the other variable that will
influence the ROI strategy. Table 27 shows the costs
based on a range of five levels, from a stadium usage of 20
hours per week up to 60 hours. It is envisaged that with
the right programming most facilities would be between 50
and 60 hours per week.
This would mean that an average cost for using the facility
would have to be around $36 per annum, assuming that
council was funding the whole investment.
Component Aus. $ cost
Pitch Costs under 40 hours 40 - 60 hours Over 60 hours
Routine maintenance grooming $ 12,000 16,000$ 20,000$
Professional service grooming $ 3,000
4,000$ 5,000$
Algaecide / Weedicide materials $ 500 $ 500 $ 500
Pitch Sub total $ 15,500 20,500$ 25,500$
Ancillary Costs
Fencing
Lighting
Irrigation (optional) $ -
Equipment
Ancillary costs Sub-Total $ -
TOTAL COST FOR FIELD 15,500$ 20,500$ 25,500$
Maintenance Costs (based on 40 hours use)
Replacement Costs
Component
years 10 & 30
costs year 20 costs
Pitch Costs
Removal & disposal of
existing synthetic grass
surface
$ 19,525 $ 19,525
Shock pad rectification $ 25,773
Synthetic surface installation $ 312,400 $ 312,400
Shock pad replacement every
20 amortised pa $ 156,200
Pitch Sub total $ 357,698 $ 488,125
Ancillary Costs
Fencing (replace chainmesh) $ 15,000 $ 15,000
Lighting $ 48,000 $ 48,000
Irrigation (optional)
Equipment $ 7,000 $ 7,000
Ancillary costs Sub-Total $ 70,000 $ 63,000
TOTAL COST FOR FIELD 427,698$ 551,125$
Time Period Replacement Assumptions
Less than 40 hr.
WOL Cost $
Annual
Amortised
Rate
40 - 60 hrs.
WOL Cost $
Annual
Amortised
Rate
More than 60
hr. WOL Cost $
Annual Amortised
Rate
$2,092,878 $209,288 $2,142,878 $214,288 $2,192,878 $219,288
Replace the surface & some ancillaries
Replace shock pad $2,799,003 $139,950 $2,899,003 $144,950 $2,999,003 $149,950
$3,381,701 $112,723 $3,531,701 $117,723 $3,681,701 $122,723
Ten years (10)
Twenty years
(20)
Thirty years
(30)
Replace the surface & some ancillaries
Replace the surface & some ancillaries
Whole of Life Costing's for Field
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 76
Table 27: Whole of Life Costs Model per hour of use
Alternative Expense Commitment Options 8.2.5
Some purchasers take the view that the capital cost is a
commitment that they make and the recurring revenue is
what needs to be addressed in the pricing strategy. To
assist in appreciating the cost of this the following Tables
explore the maintenance and replacement costs (at today’s
prices) over the agreed amortization period, Table 28
shows the cost based on the capital not being taken into
account.
Table 28: Maintenance and Replacement Cost Model, per hour of use
There is a significant difference in the costs that need to be
covered in an ROI pricing strategy. This is shown in Table
28 with the hourly rate of recovery needed to cover all
costs.
8.3 Revenue Generation Strategy
Introduction 8.3.1
The revenue generation strategy and the pricing strategy
will influence the ability for the purchaser to develop a
comprehensive ROI on their capital investment. This
section shows the potential through a modelling exercise
that focuses on the ability for the facility to program field
usage for a number of users and the prices that could be
charged (Table 29 provides an example). The strategy on
Programming is explored in Section 13.
Pricing Strategy 8.3.2
The pricing strategy reflects a balance between the ability
to pay and the need to pay. One option is that the
organisations who cannot afford to pay, such as schools,
have reduced costs and the adults using the facility pay an
appropriate fee.
The suggested pricing points that need to be considered
and possibly adjusted by the purchaser may include:
Pricing Considerations
Cost of Full Pitch Hire $70
Cost of Half Pitch Hire $50
Cost of Quarter Pitch Hire $40
No. of people playing on full 24
No. of people playing on each half 20
No. of people playing on each quarter 16
Cost per person for soccer $10
Cost of coaching - Jnr $5
Cost of coaching -Snr $10
Cost for -FFS - Snr $3
Cost of - FFS - Jnr $2
Cost for School Usage -full $10
Cost for School Usage - half $7.50
Cost of School Usage - quarter $5
Com'y Club Usage (inc. floodlights) $75
Number of weeks usage a year 50
Typical membership rate (20% to pitch) $270
Table 29: Pricing Considerations
From this pricing strategy the programming strategy can be
considered based on levels of usage. Typically the
programming strategy explores 20 to 70 hours a week
usage and can generate a significant return, depending on
the programming approach. By appreciating the cost
needed to cover the ROI the programming can be
structured to ensure that this is achieved. Programming is
addressed in Section 13.
Weekly Hours
UsageDescription 10 years 20 years 30 years
20 Very low - stadium usage $201 $135 $108
30 Low usage $134 $90 $72
40 Medium usage $101 $67 $54
50 High usage $80 $54 $43
60 Very high usage $67 $45 $36
3.1:WOL Costs ROI per Hour of Use per YearUsage Cost Comparator Options
Weekly Hours
UsageDescription 10 years 20 years 30 years
20 Very low - stadium usage $56 $62 $60
30 Low usage $37 $41 $40
40 Medium usage $28 $31 $30
50 High usage $22 $25 $24
60 Very high usage $19 $21 $20
Maintain & Replace Costs ROI per Hour of UseUsage Cost Comparator Options
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 77
Section 8 case study – Sekisui Foam - Financial Strategy
to Afford a Synthetic Surface
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 78
SECTION 9:
PLANNING FOR
SYNTHETIC FIELDS
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 79
9 Planning for Synthetic Fields
9.1 Introduction
Simply, the more time spent in the planning process the
more likely procurement of the right synthetic surface will
meet the needs of an organisation and its users.
This section explores the planning, justification and scoping
process that an organisation should undertake prior to
committing such a large amount of resources.
9.2 Why Produce a Synthetic Pitch/Field
Strategy?
Producing a playing pitch strategy (natural, synthetic or
both) is important for Local Government and sports to
ensure that future needs, playing loads, standards and
location are correct and that the management is
appropriate. Although this may seem time consuming
initially, it will become a benchmark as the municipality
grows or the sport’s participation numbers increase. The
benefits, opportunities and considerations for planning at
an early stage include:
Strategic benefits
Ensures a strategic approach to playing pitch provision,
as part of an open space or recreation facilities strategy.
Provides robustness for grant aid and internal funding
bids. It can also be used with developers to quantify
future needs and therefore ensure adequate developer
contributions are focused in the right place.
Address sport and recreation strategy, policy delivery,
and demonstrates how it will meet other broader
strategies including health, social inclusion,
environmental, community development or specific
activity centre strategies.
Planning
Provide evidence for establishing new pitches in growth
areas or development applications.
Acts as a protection tool against loss of facilities in the
future or working with other providers (e.g. education
providers, state Government), to ensure that decisions
they take will not impact negatively on the recreation or
sports facility provision.
Provides an asset register and categorisation of use.
Acts as a tool to unlock latent demand by ensuring that
the best management model is used.
Funding
It identifies the most appropriate funding options to
realise the delivery of the strategy against the WOL costs
which include:
- Construction costs (CapEx or capital works),
- Maintenance costs,
- Replacement costs (plus CPI),
- Revenue opportunities, and
- Return on investment (ROI).
Considers a philosophical approach to costing the
hire/use of the field needs to be considered. Should it be
subsidised like natural grass pitches are or should it be a
fee for service that offsets the maintenance and
replacement costs?
What third parties can assist with the capital costs?
These may include Government funding, sports
organisation donations, education establishment co-
funding or developer contributions.
Risk reduction
The strategy should consider all risks associated in being
able to deliver a strategy with suggested interventions
needed to minimise risk and optimise usage.
9.3 The Smart Planning Framework
To ensure that an organisation achieves the best value for
itself, its players and the community, it should consider its’
needs from a number of perspectives. The Smart Planning
Framework will guide an organisation through a rigorous
and comprehensive process to ensure all aspects are
considered. This Framework comprises of 10 points:
1. Agree and Commit to Process
Ensure the process is embraced by all stakeholders, tailor
the Smart Planning Framework for your specific needs.
2. Demand Analysis
Use research, such as ERASS, ABS and sports specific
projections over life expectancy (20 years plus), to identify
the present demand, future projections and likelihood of
growth in participation. This should provide the
organisation with the latent demand opportunity.
3. Supply Considerations
Compare the present facilities, capacity and utilisation of
facilities in the area to identify any gaps in provision and at
what standard.
4. Projected Facility Needs
Identify the projected number of pitches/surfaces/courts
needed to satisfy the likely converted latent demand for
peak and off peak. Ensure the seasonality research on
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 80
usage is conducted over the whole year and not specific to
a single sports season.
5. Place Management
Identify within the geographical area all of the potential
sites, develop an assessment tool to evaluate against the
environmental, financial and community considerations to
develop a ranking for the preferred locations. Ensure that
the latent demand, if it is to be converted, has a strategy
that is realistic and achievable; otherwise any projections
could be wasted.
6. Management Options
Develop a management strategy for how to optimise usage
and return for the organisation.
7. Design Strategy
Develop the cost and design options for the new facility.
8. Financial Strategy
Structure the whole of life costs into a capital and
operational or recurring revenue strategy to identify how
much the facility will cost annually. Using the management
philosophy, explore the costing strategy to recoup the
annual whole of life costs as necessary.
9. Recommendations
Be succinct and to the point on the recommendations
together with detailing how the process moves forward.
10. Continuous Improvement
Keep the strategy robust and up to date as changes to the
variables arise (e.g. population projections; new
policy/strategy adoptions etc.)
Photo 55: North Park University Masterplan Design
9.4 Funding Strategy
Initial Thinking 9.4.1
An organisation should consider its ability to fund the
investment, over what period and who it can collaborate
with if they need to raise funds. This section explores some
of the options available, whether the organisation is a Local
Government authority (LGA), school, college, university,
sport or other organisation.
Photo 56: North Park University Actual Field
From the planning process, the organisation should
appreciate the cost of the facility and be able to identify the
probability of being able to fund the three key stages
(capital costs, maintenance and replacement costs). The
options available for an organisation to raise the money
needed for each stage should meet the aspects in the
following section.
Capital Raising 9.4.2
To raise money for the project the organisation could
consider the following:
o Government funding initiatives
State/Territory and Federal Government may offer financial
support for part of the capital cost or part of the
development such as lighting, accessibility, club rooms,
water harvesting or even a grant towards the synthetic
surface system. Discuss the options with your
State/Territory, Sports and Recreation Department or local
State/Federal Member.
o Philanthropic trusts and foundations
Grants or donations may be available from various
philanthropic trusts and foundations. By being creative and
applying with other stakeholders (e.g. specialist target
community groups focussing on the health or social
outcomes as well as selling the geographical
access/inclusive benefits of facilities) there may be a
greater chance of success.
Most organisations only offer support once or twice a year.
One of useful resource to access is GrantSearch
(www.grantsearch.com.au) which has a database of 3,000
entries, providing $8 billion to 18,000 recipients every year.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 81
o Loans
Secure loans through banks or agencies that may offer a
lease purchase agreement. Smart Connection Company
can develop a business case for clients which can be used
to secure funding.
Alternatively, unsecured loans or debentures are available,
normally provided by people keen to support the sport in a
personal capacity. They may seek recognition (e.g. as a
sponsor) and the repayment would be over an agreed
timeline and include interest.
Sometimes loans can be guaranteed by the LGA, the
Education Department, or sport peak body etc. in which
case the sport organisation can gain an improved
preferential rate due to the guarantee status.
o In-kind contributions
There may be options for members of clubs or local
community organisations to donate time, skills or resources
to a particular project. This may be in the form of
consultancy or project management assistance, removal of
soil/debris, construction or demolition of specific materials.
It is important to ensure that the generosity of the donation
is not lost on the quality of the infrastructure needed for
such a substantial project undertaking.
Sponsorship can also contribute either in-kind or financial
resources to projects. In return the sponsor may want their
brand promoted. It may be possible to secure a surface
supplier to sponsor the facility and reduce their cost
accordingly.
9.5 Professional Support & Advice
The success of any project involves sourcing expert advice
at each critical stage. The purchasing organisation needs
to ensure that the best technical knowledge is used to
support a project team of people from within the
organisation.
In Victoria more than 10 percent of synthetic football
(soccer) pitches have been forced to have major
rectifications made, such as re-laying of the turf or relaying
the pavement base, at significant cost to the supplier and
or client. To ensure that the likelihood of this is significantly
reduced, the project committee needs to ensure that the
following skills at each of the appropriate stages; namely
knowledge based information, is sourced.
Photo 57: Martin Sheppard (Author) providing advice at Synthetic Surfaces Master Class, Melbourne
Planning
A sport planning consultancy with extensive experience in
synthetic surface management.
Site condition assessment
A geotech engineer to produce a report will be required for
the site at intervals that reflect the quality of the subsurface.
This will allow an appropriate pavement to be developed
that focuses on the isolation of potential movement of the
synthetic surface system and subgrade.
Design
The type of procurement adopted; namely detailed
specification or design and construct, will determine the
level of design and engineering skills. A civil consultancy is
strongly recommended to ensure that the engineering
component is considered appropriately.
Procurement
An experienced consultant who appreciates the tendering
process, the use of sport preferred providers and the civil
engineering needs, as well as the sports facilities technical
accessories.
Project management
To ensure that each stage of the quality control of the
project is being achieved (e.g. surety of pavement,
drainage capacity and synthetic surface standards) the
Project team should ensure that critical hold points are
programmed and resourced. This should then ensure that
the project reaches the delivery dates.
Quality standards assessment
An independent sport-testing laboratory should be engaged
to assess the fields/surface performance to ensure what
was ordered has been delivered (e.g. FIH Global Hockey
Field, FIFA 1 Star recommended pitch).
When choosing organisations to support the project, they
should be able to demonstrate:
- Experience with synthetic surfaces, specific to your scope,
- Qualifications and/or number of installations,
- Sports/peer recommendations, and
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 82
- Independence from any of the
manufacturers/installers/suppliers.
Obtain a schedule of fees and references before engaging
the consultant, engineer or project manager.
9.6 Useful Contacts and Reading
Most State Departments of Sport and Recreation provide
resources that can be downloaded as part of their support
to the industry. For example, under “Publications”, WA
Department of Sport and Recreation has a comprehensive
guide of resources. In addition other State/Territory
departments have resources which can be sourced from
these web sites:
WA – www.dsr.wa.gov.au
VIC – www.dpcd.vic.gov.au/sport
NSW – www.dsr.nsw.gov.au
TAS – www.development.tas.gov.au/sportrec
QLD – www.communities.qld.gov.au/sportrec
NT – www.sportandrecreation.nt.gov.au
SA – www.recsport.sa.gov.au
Peak leisure organisations such as Parks and Leisure
Australia provide documentation for their members on
planning etc. www.parksleisure.com.au
Funding may be available from state government
departments or state bodies such as water authorities.
Photo 58: Installing a Global (wet) hockey pitch (Source: STI)
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 83
Section 9 Case study – Multisport Concepts – Planning for your Synthetic Surface
Ad
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 84
SECTION 10:
DESIGN
CONSIDERATIONS
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 85
10 Design Considerations
10.1 Introduction
The construction, maintenance and replacement of the
synthetic surface need to be considered at the design
stage, to ensure that the best outcomes are achieved for
the life cycle of the facility.
The design and planning needs to consider:
Planning issues,
The synthetic surface system of sub-base and base,
drainage, shock pad and synthetic surface,
The construction and engineering process,
Lighting, fencing, netting and ancillary spaces,
Multi-sport or single sport layout and design,
Environmental and sustainable issues, and
How to minimise maintenance.
10.2 Statutory Planning Considerations
The location of the synthetic sports field will impact on
whether you need to apply for planning permission which
may vary in each state/territory. In some education
facilities (schools and universities) you may not need
planning permission. In some states a full Development
Application (D.A.) process needs to be followed, which
includes community consultation.
The key aspects that need to be considered are:
The asset proposed; fencing, synthetic field, design,
colour etc.,
Floodlights; number, luminous intensity, spread,
spillage, glare etc.,
Logistics; Hours of use, noise generation, and
Vehicle parking; access and egress to the site and
number of cars parking if increased usage is expected.
10.3 Site Selection
A transparent and rigorous process whereby community
and stakeholders are engaged in the selection process will
result in achieving the best site. Failure to do this
adequately may result in the possible challenge by
stakeholders and community who may not appreciate the
‘bigger picture’ if they have not been involved.
The selection criteria for a typical site may consider some
or all of the following:
Central location
The chosen site should have an appropriate overlay (e.g.
district or regional playing fields) so that there isn’t conflict
throughout the municipality or with neighbouring LGA’s.
There are good examples where a number of LGA’s share
the resourcing of a single regional sports facility or precinct.
As the users do not distinguish the council ownership, this
approach can be linked to regional needs across local
council boundaries.
Photo 59: Football field designed to ensure that the footballs did not stray onto the Road (Source: Grassports)
Park siting
When exploring the best site within a specific parkland, the
most appropriate positioning may need to consider the
following:
- Siting to replace current deteriorated field,
- Next to current pavilion and utilities,
- On a non-home field of any specific club, if shared,
- Best site to optimise management and usage options,
- Away from trees and flood plains,
- Preferably not over a rubbish tip, that still shows
movement,
- Close to public transport,
- Large enough so that the fully designed field can
include ‘run-offs’ and warm-up areas etc., and
- Access to the field for machinery whilst being built.
The logistics around the field need to be considered to
optimise usability, including:
Lighting
Consider the field’s needs for both training and competition
as well as any spill for residents. Most systems now have
remote control of lights. A lightning plan is needed for any
new site to ensure it achieves the sports standards. Some
sports can request significantly high specifications for lights
and this should be considered appropriately as the
investment in such a system may not be warranted for the
majority of use.
Access
Within the parkland and around the local area, there will be
significant increases in traffic, both by vehicles and
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 86
pedestrians. Consider access and egress for pedestrians,
spectators and users of the turf.
Orientation
Ideally north-south to avoid low sun-glare.
Maintenance
The logistics of bringing vehicles (e.g. cherry pickers),
tractors and maintenance machines onto the pitch including
emergency vehicles.
Water and utilities
Ensure that portable water can be sourced for users and
spectators, as well as electricity for both the lighting and
the pavilion etc.
10.4 Park Master Planning
There are a number of components that should be
considered to ensure that the site is appropriately “master
planned”.
History of site: - what has it been used for previously?
Are there any locations which have significant historic
interest? Was the site used as a tip etc.? These and
other aspects could have an impact on both the
management and the asset development strategy
adopted.
Engineering assessment: - by conducting a
geotechnical engineering assessment the report
should identify the base and soil structure which will
then interfere with the base needs.
Flood and rain levels: - explore the 1 in 20; 1 in 50 and
1 in 100 year flood levels and implications to the site.
Also check the rain levels over the past five and 10
year periods to ascertain the water drainage levels
needed to be able to cope with accommodating that
level of drainage in the synthetic system.
Drainage/utility services: – identify any existing sub-
surface utility and drainage services under, across or
connected to the area that the playing field may impact.
Topography and earthworks: – explore the site to
ascertain the levelness of the site, the need to move
earth around the site to gain the best level base and
the needs of the spectators (e.g. using the excess top
soil for viewing hills) so that this can be costed as part
of the project.
10.5 Pitch Design
The design of the pitch will be dictated by the sports needs
at the State/Territory/National Level, dependent upon what
level the field will be played at. The design for the field can
normally be sourced from the National/State/Territory peak
body which has a website to promote the dimensions etc.
Alternatively the Western Australian Department of Sport
and Recreation has useful resources, which show the latest
pitch markings for all key Australian sports.
(www.dsr.wa.gov.au).
In Sydney a new pitch has been designed for a client by
TEAM Sports that allows the football pitch to be designed
and managed Monday to Thursday as a 5-a-side centre,
with 8 mini-pitches. Friday night to Sunday night it will be
used for 11-a-side competitive games. This multi-use
approach allows both recreational and competitive use of a
facility. As seen in Section 10.6, flexibility of design around
key management options has been resourced.
10.6 Ancillary Design Options
To ensure that the field works effectively, key ancillary
design options should be considered including:
Dividing Nets: Nets can be used for keeping balls in and
spectators out, but in a manner that is more flexible than a
static fence. The photos above shows how with a set of
nets being drawn north south and east west on a full
football field can be divided into numerous sections, ready
for recreational use.
Photo 60: Cricket nets being used to protect spectators as well as participants (Melbourne Grammar School - HG Turf)
Fencing: If fencing is used, consider whether it can be
moved or removed for certain events and whether it needs
gates that are locked or just closed over. Access onto the
pitch for maintenance and machinery needs to be
considered.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 87
Photo 61: Fences on mini-courts can also be used to attach netball rings etc. (Endeavour Sports High School - NSW)
Water: Drinking fountains situated closed to entrance
gates are beneficial to both players and spectators.
Floodlights: Floodlights allows for greater programming of
the synthetic field in the evenings, which means increased
patronage and a greater return on investment. The lighting
system chosen must be able to provide flexibility to the
purchaser and users. Look for the following offerings:
Ability to light all or parts of the field, depending on
use,
Use for training (e.g. 50 lux) and competition (e.g.
100 lux) so you can choose which level,
Ability to program, turn on and off remotely,
Light sensitive settings, and
A system that meets the needs of the sport for the
standard being played. TV standard lights are not
required, as the majority of large ball sports are
adequately played on 50/100 lux settings.
It is recommended that a lighting engineer is employed as
part of the project tem to ensure that the best lighting
options are chosen.
If an organisation cannot afford lights at the same time as
the field installation, it is recommended that the power
supply and cables are laid under the synthetic turf ready for
the lights at a later date. In other words, design them at the
same time, gain planning permission and ensure that the
footings are designed into the field.
Photo 62: Capital Football Facilities include a warm up area behind main field. (ACT - TigerTurf Field)
Warm-up/Skill Drill Areas: Consider designing a space
so that the next user can warm-up off the main pitch,
allowing for smooth and quick transition. The use of a
different colour turf for a sprint straight or boxes for ball
drills etc. should be considered, maximising use of the
whole field.
Photo 63: Wesley College Emblem (Source: Grassports)
Logos and Emblems: Although some sports do not allow
logos and emblems on the playing area some
manufacturers can now offer these located close to the
pitch.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 88
Section 10 Case Study – TEAM Sports – Design
Consideration
Ad
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 89
SECTION 11:
SUSTAINABLE
CONSTRUCTION
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 90
11 Sustainable Construction
11.1 Introduction
To ensure that the planning, engineering, construction,
maintenance and recycling of the end product is achieved
in a sustainable manner, this section explores a selection
of principles for sustainable management.
Sustainable construction explores three key perspectives
which are inter-related but when managed, can reduce the
environmental impact over a construction project’s entire
lifetime, while optimising its economic viability and
remaining socially inclusive within the community.
For projects considering using synthetic turf technology the
following framework should be considered:
Figure 3: A Sustainable Management Framework
To appreciate the model, the sustainable approach
considers the environment, economic viability and social
perspective. The areas where each aspect intersects,
allows for a category to define how you describe the project
as shown in Table 30.
Perspective
Sustainable A perfect balance to a project between
environmental impact being low; social
inclusiveness that encourages greater uptake
safely and is economical.
Viable Any affordable and viable approach to manage
the environmental impact.
Equitable Balance between the social inclusiveness and
optimising the economic viability of the project,
normally against the WOL costs.
Bearable The environmental impact can still optimise the
social inclusiveness in the community.
Environmental
Impact
Reduction
Aim to reduce the environmental impact over
its WOL, the environmental impact on the site.
This could reduce maintenance, using recycled
products and could be recyclable at its end of
life.
Economically That the WOL costs are affordable including
the capital investment of the installation, the
Perspective
Viable maintenance costs and the replacement
funding needed. The revenue opportunities that
can be generated offset the WOL costs,
making the project economically viable.
Socially
Inclusive
Encourage the greatest level of use by the
broadest spectrum of the community.
Table 30: Sustainable Management Definitions
11.2 Engineered Base Pavement
The synthetic surface system needs to sit on a secure base
to ensure that any sub-surface movement or changes do
not affect the playing and performance characteristics of
the surface. The pavement base should be specified by
the geotechnical engineer from a detailed geotech report
that needs to be completed for each field. The needs for
the pavement base will also be influenced by any site
investigations including topographical survey, drainage
studies, ‘Dial Before You Dig’ analysis and the Geotech
Report.
Depending on the complexity of the site, the engineer
(geotech, structural or civil), should be able to determine
the recommended form of construction to prepare the sub-
base and the pavement type.
The pavement should be designed for 30 years life
expectancy and guarantee’s requested accordingly. This
should allow for three synthetic carpet lives.
Photo 64: Preparing for the base by taking the top soil off the field (Source: Turf One)
The pavement should allow for vertical loads (e.g. cherry
pickers, ambulance, and maintenance vehicles), playing
loads and the protection of the sub-base from water or the
pavement from sub-base movement.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 91
The typical pavement bases include:
Road base
Aggregates normally form larger crushed rock on the base,
reducing in size to stones, gravel and sand providing a
porous base for the water to drain.
Open asphalt
Normally provides a long lasting base, to allow a better
base for the synthetic grass to ‘sit on’. The asphalt has
less chance of movement due to the binding agents used
and is normally laid over a crushed rock road base.
Concrete
A significant base that offers no porous tendencies and is
normally used when there is significant movement
expected from the sub-base. As many playing fields in
NSW are over rubbish tips, this is a viable proposition to
maximise the life of the surface. It is certainly the most
expensive, but also provides the optimum base to use.
Photo 65: Tennis Court over concrete roof (Source: Grassports)
The construction process may vary between suppliers but
the following principles are normally followed:
Excavate top soil to the agreed level that provides a
firm road–bearing striation,
Prepare drainage infrastructure,
Build base,
Install drainage into sub-base or under sub-base if
natural drainage. If horizontal drainage, a waterproof
membrane would be used under the synthetic surface,
and
Compact sub-base to maximum then prepare
synthetic carpet system.
11.3 Construction Considerations
The key considerations after the type of pavement has
been agreed, includes:
Drainage 11.3.1
The drainage strategy needs to consider the following
aspects:
o The ability to drain adequate water from the pitch once
water is applied (e.g. Hockey Global Water based
system); or through rain or floods is critical for the
surface performance. The porosity of the surface and
drainage channels need to be able to cope with the
sports performance standards regarding porosity
which are between 180ml (FIFA) and 500ml (IRB) per
hour.
o The type of drainage for all the sports needs to be
vertical through the synthetic grass component of the
system, with either horizontal or vertical drainage
under the carpet. Vertical drainage normally drains
through the pavement and sub-base to agricultural
drains (Aggi drains), before being ‘taken away’ through
storm water drainage, possibly for water harvesting.
Horizontal drainage usually uses an inclined sub-base
under the pavement that uses gravity to disperse the
collected water to collection pits or drains around the
outside of the sports field. Alternatively the use of
drainage cells that sit below the shockpad and above
the pavement are becoming more common. Both
horizontal options normally use an impervious
membrane so that the water does not drain below the
sub-base.
Irrigation 11.3.2
Currently, irrigation for synthetic sports fields are only
considered necessary for hockey’s elite level pitches and
organic filled long grass fields.
The predominantly accepted irrigation systems are static
and normally include pop-up sprinklers, similar to natural
turf pitches or the cannon type watering for hockey sports
fields. The Cannon System normally involves fitting three
or four high pressure water cannons down each long side
of the pitch, allowing them to be able to shoot water to
cover half a pitch width. These substantial rain guns
usually have strong pumps to ensure the pressure needed
to deliver around 66 – 76m3 per hour, or 3mm of water in
10-15 minutes over the whole field.
To achieve this, the water is stored and recycled in a tank
under or close to the hockey field.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 92
Water Harvesting 11.3.3
The construction of a synthetic sports surface provides an
opportunity to water harvest rainfall. For instance, a typical
football (soccer) pitch (0.8h) can collect 0.06mL of water for
every 1mm of rain on the pitch, which means for Melbourne,
Victoria typical annual rainfall of 650mm, approximately
3.9mL of water can be collected.
By identifying the irrigation needs for a natural turf pitch
and comparing various technical components, including the
specific rain fall for that region, a water collection capacity
can be identified and a water harvesting strategy employed
between the synthetic surface and the natural pitch.
A recent case study in Victoria demonstrates the ability to
use a synthetic soccer turf pitch for watering cool and warm
grass pitches.
Case Study 1: Water Harvesting
The estimated water and irrigation requirements of
cool-season turf (e.g. ryegrass, p.o.a.) and warm-
season turf (e.g. couchgrass, kikuyu) in Melbourne
was calculated using a model based on rainfall,
evaporation, and crop factors:
Rainfall & evaporation: Monthly averages were
obtained from the Bureau of Meteorology station
(Melbourne Regional Office 2009).
Month Rainfall
(mm)
Evaporation
(mm)
January 10.8 39.9
February 11.9 36.4
March 11.3 27.3
April 13.4 17.5
May 12.7 11.2
June 11.5 7.7
July 10.8 8.4
August 11.3 11.9
September 13.6 17.5
October 15.0 24.5
November 13.9 30.8
December 13.3 36.4
Annual 650 1,167
Table 31: Monthly rainfall and evaporation
Chart 1: Monthly rainfall and evaporation
Crop factor: The crop factor is the proportion of
water used by a plant compared to the depth of
water evaporated from a Class ‘A’ pan. Crop
factors of 0.6 and 0.8 were used for warm-season
and cool-season turf respectively (strong vigorous
growth).
Turf water requirement: The water required by the
turf (evapotranspiration) is calculated by
multiplying evaporation by the crop factor and this
must be supplied by either rainfall or irrigation.
Theoretical irrigation requirement: The amount of
irrigation required is calculated by subtracting the
rainfall from the water used by the turf. The volume
of irrigation required can then be calculated given
1 L equals 1 mm of water over 1m2.
Realistic irrigation requirement: The theoretical
irrigation requirement will be significantly less than
the actual amount used in practice due to inherent
inefficiencies in sprinkler distribution, the effect of
wind on distribution and non-effective rainfall (e.g.
deep drainage, runoff, evaporation). In practice the
annual irrigation requirement may be up to 50
percent greater when these factors are taken into
account.
It must also be noted that the calculated irrigation
requirement assumes the incidence of average
rainfall and in a drought year, this is an under
estimate.
Weekly Turf
Water
Requirement
Weekly Turf Irrigation
Requirement
Monthly Turf Irrigation
Requirement
Mth mm/wk mm/wk ML/ha/wk Theoretical
ML/ha/mth
Realistic
ML/ha/mth
Jan 31.9 21.1 0.21 0.93 1.4
Feb 29.1 17.2 0.17 0.69 1.03
Mar 21.8 10.5 0.11 0.47 0.7
Apr 14.0 0.6 0.01 0.03 0.04
May 9.0 -3.7 -0.04 -0.17 -0.25
Jun 6.2 -5.3 -0.05 -0.23 -0.34
Jul 6.7 -4.1 -0.04 0.18 -0.27
Aug 9.5 -1.8 -0.02 0.08 -0.12
Sep 14.0 0.5 0 0.02 0.03
Oct 19.6 4.6 0.05 0.2 0.3
Nov 24.6 10.8 0.11 0.46 0.69
Dec 29.1 15.8 0.16 0.7 1.05
3.5 5.25
Table 32: Estimates Turf Water Use and Irrigation Requirement - Cool Season Turf. Shaded values indicate irrigation required
The realistic annual irrigation requirement for cool-
season turf grown in Melbourne is 5.25 ML/ha and
irrigation is required from September to April (eight
months). Typical scenarios of size of pitch and type
of grass are shown in Appendix 2.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Rainfall (mm) Evaporation (mm)
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 93
Section 11 Case Study(add) – Pierlite– Sustainable
Construction
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 94
SECTION 12:
MAINTENANCE
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 95
12 Maintenance
12.1 Maintenance in Perspective
Maintenance is critical for the short-term effectiveness of
the surface in terms of playability, injury minimisation and
aesthetics including the longer term because it can
increase longevity and sustainability of the field.
Photo 66: Example of maintenance with drag brush
Key sports such as football (FIFA) and hockey (FIH)
provide excellent guides for maintenance considerations,
which both have the same objectives, namely to:
Promote the benefits of developing a documented and
policed maintenance regime linked to the level of use,
Educate the reader to the different protocols and
procedures needed,
Emphasise the need for regular monitoring and
inspection,
Recognise the need to refer to experts, and
Ensure that the maintenance is considered as part of
the procurement process.
The maintenance guides can be sourced from both
websites (see Section 7) for contact details or specialised
maintenance companies in Appendix 1.
12.2 General Principles
The key quality manufacturers will all have maintenance
manuals for the surface being installed and this should be
requested as part of the procurement process.
Using the appropriate maintenance equipment specific to
that type of sports surface is critical to a successful plan.
Indeed most of the main suppliers can now offer
maintenance contracts to maintain the fields. The price
normally ranges from $10,000 to $25,000 depending on the
surface type (hockey being the easiest) to third generation
football.
Maintenance plans should be developed around a
structured routine linked to usage. The type of maintenance
listed below includes a typical regime for a 3G field. The
types of maintenance include:
i. Surface cleaning
Leaves, nuts, needles and other airborne detritus, should
not be allowed to remain on the pitch surface as they may
break down and form a growing re-division for algae and
moss. A soft brush or mechanical leaf sweeper works
effectively. The use of litterbins, soil mats for shoes and
cigarette bins reduces the debris.
ii. Grooming
Aimed at reducing the probability of compaction or a ‘skin’
forming and reducing the drainage properties or indeed the
build-up of algae and moss.
Drag brushing, with a stiff brush preferably weekly,
depending upon usage rates. It is important that this is
carried out at a pace that allows the brushes to effectively
operate, it is suggested that this is not performed at more
than 3km per hour.
Photo 67: Specialist Power brushes (Source: STI)
A deeper ‘power brush’ grooming may be used to disturb
the rubber infill and ensure no compaction. This is normally
conducted by the installer as it needs a specialist machine
which de-compacts and redistributes the infill particle. This
also ensures that the fibres remain upright.
iii. Deep cleaning
If the surface becomes over-compacted or impervious, a
deep clean may be needed, where the installer will use a
specialist machine to remove a proportion of the infill
(containing most of the dirt) from the carpet and replace it
with either cleaned or new infill. This can extend the life of
the pitch. For moss algae prevention and removal, the pitch
should be treated with a quality proprietary moss and algae
killer annually. In some cases, twice yearly may be needed.
iv. Removal of weeds
Weeds will occasionally appear on the surface due to wind-
blown seeds. Hand removal carefully taking out the roots
should suffice. Oil-based weed-killers should not be used.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 96
v. Stain removal
Most stains can be removed with hot water and a typical
household detergent.
The responsibility for maintenance normally falls between
routine and specialist maintenance where specific
machinery is needed. This is best explained in the Table 33.
Maintenance
Activity
Responsibility Examples
Regular Ground staff
Field owners
Daily inspections
Weekly
grooming
Specialist Surface installer
Trained technician
Surface de-
compaction
Rotating brush
and infill cleaning
Infill rejuvenation
Repairs
Algae treatment
Table 33: Maintenance Activity
A typical maintenance schedule may look like this:
Daily Weekly Monthly
Fixtures
and
fittings
Make sure
gates are
shut and
secure
Top up
levels at
key places
(penalty
area etc.)
Clean
natural
debris and
any
rubbish
Clear any
weeds,
especially
around
fences
Brush
surface of
field
Infill
levels
Seams of
inlaid
lines
checked
Drag
brush
Treat pitch for
moss and weeds
Power brush
Deep clean
Surface
Decompaction (6
monthly)
Ensure that in the design process, maintenance
considerations are addressed, including:
- Pavement base needs to be able to cope with
weight of maintenance machinery, including pitches
for lights etc.,
- Additional goal areas to reduce ‘high wear areas’,
- Installation of shoe/boot cleaners, rubbish bins,
- Routing player traffic so that high pedestrian wear
areas are reduced,
- Smoking/rubbish bins provided so that rubbish is not
taken onto the field,
- Signage educating users on the type or style of
footwear to be used, and
- Provision for access of maintenance equipment in
fence design by using double gates etc.
The key guidance for 3G pitches from the FIFA
Maintenance Guide56
includes:
- Regular maintenance,
- Brush the surface regularly in accordance with the
manufacturer’s instructions with the process
following all directions and not just a single
direction,
- Keep the infill levels appropriately high as per
recommendations,
- Keep the surface clean from contaminants (e.g.
cigarettes, gum, leaves etc.),
- Decompaction should be programmed in,
- Check seams to ensure safety,
- Winter maintenance, and
- Treatment of moss, algae and weeds.
12.3 Specialised Maintenance
This activity must be performed by a trained technician with
specialist equipment only. This type of maintenance is
complementary to the regular maintenance and will only be
of benefit if the regular activity is performed diligently.
For a sand and rubber filled surface, an in depth cleaning
of the surface is performed. We recommend this two times
per year. In conjunction with this, the technician will also
groom the fibres to ensure they are standing upright. These
activities have a direct impact on ball roll and rebound, and
the shock absorbent characteristics of the surface.
This cleaning procedure involves the use of a rotating
brush with a suction component, which proceeds to
straighten the pile, clean the infill and remove extraneous
materials from the surface. For ultimate benefit, this activity
ideally needs to be performed when the surface is dry.
As per the regular maintenance, the surface will also be
checked for seam integrity, wear in high traffic areas, and
vegetation growth on the surface and immediate surrounds.
The surface will also be groomed in four directions as
indicated in the following diagrams:
56
FIFA Quality Program for Football Turf: How to Maintain Football Turf
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 97
Treatment of Algae and Moss
Algae growth is a natural occurrence due to humidity.
Algae invasions in wet pitches occur more frequently in
warmer climates, especially in pitches that are not cleaned
regularly and thoroughly. Usually the first sign is when the
synthetic grass turns brown or black in patches and
becomes slippery.
As a preventative measure, spraying the surface at given
intervals with an approved algae treatment is
recommended. The most important action by the pitch
proprietor is the early detection and reporting to their
maintenance company. Normally there is a need to obtain
approval from the turf supplier before any chemical is
applied to the surface.
12.4 Maintenance Resources
FIFA has developed a maintenance portal that has online
maintenance manager software, with a log book that:
Provides weekly, monthly and biannual
maintenance guides,
Ensures all maintenance is recorded, and
Includes the ‘FIFA virtual learning environment’ to
provide additional maintenance knowledge.
Their maintenance manual can be downloaded from their
website (FIFA Maintenance Portal
https://turfmaintenance.fifa.org/index.php)
FIH has developed an excellent maintenance guide for
hockey pitches. The “Guide to the Care and Maintenance
of Synthetic Turf Hockey Pitches’’ and is available from its
website (www.FIH.ch).
Photo 68: Typical specialist machine for third generation fields
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 98
Section 12 Case Study – Grassports - Maintenance
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 99
SECTION 13:
PROGRAMMING
MANAGEMENT OF
SYNTHETIC TURF
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 100
13 Programming and Management
of Synthetic Turf
13.1 Introduction
The management and programming of the synthetic sports
facility needs to be considered prior to the procurement
process and should be planned at the initial stage as this
will impact on aspects such as:
Usage and capacity of the surface,
Programming of usage, maintenance and rest,
Pricing points to encourage greatest usage, and
Footwear arrangements which may impact on
design issues.
This section explores all of these areas to provide guidance
for an organisation’s consideration.
Photo 69: Endeavour Sports High School format allows for optimising the programming of the fields
13.2 Usage and Capacity of the Surface
The usage of the synthetic turf is dependent on many
aspects that have already been addressed within this guide.
In essence, if the nature of how the facility will be used is
recognised this will influence the durability needs of the
surface that is chosen.
If the field will be used intensively and in excess of 50
hours per week it is worth ensuring that the durability of the
Lisport Test is in excess of the 20,200 requested by FIFA 1
Star Recommended Pitches. We recommend at least
50,200 cycles.
The usage strategy can vary from 20 hours for a traditional
stadium up to in excess of 70 hours per week for a
comprehensively programmed facility. The options may
include:
Stadium usage
Low use, around 20 hours per week for training a couple of
hours per day and matches at the weekend. In this case a
FIFA 2 Star, FIH Global, RFL Stadium standard pitch could
be used.
Club (medium) usage
Medium use, around 30 hours per week and used for
training (four hours per day) and weekend matches (five
hours each day). The usage would indicate a higher
durability need than the one identified in the FIFA 2 Star
Standard of 5,200 to 20,200 reps (FIFA 1 Star Lisport Test).
Club/mixed (high) usage
Integrating week day, evening times and weekend usage
for matches allows organisations such as schools and
community groups use - approximately 40 hours usage.
Mixed (intense) usage
Starting around 50 hours per week, requires greater
durability with usage being opened to coaching sessions,
club use and matches. Normally this diversity of use is
programmed by the owner to ensure transparency and a
rigour in the allocation of times.
Intense program
Programming daily (seven hours plus) including weekend
games. Many organisations may have usage that includes
schools (at a nominal fee), lunch time recreational
competitions, coaching sessions, club training and social
competitions on weekdays, and matches on a weekend.
Typically a 60 hour week.
Comprehensive program
Developing the previous category to around 70 hours or
above. There needs to be a sufficient amount of time built
into the program for maintenance at this level.
13.3 Programming of Use, Maintenance and
Rest
Even synthetic sports turf needs to be managed carefully.
If the junior coaching is always held in the same spot 3 - 4
hours every day, the wear patterns and the intensity will
quickly be identified.
Intensive use of the field needs to be rotated within the
programming, so that areas can be rested and groomed.
Maintenance should be programmed every 40 hours and
not just weekly, irrespective of how often used.
Maintenance, rest, programmed usage should be seen as
complementing each other.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 101
Photo 70: Lily Football Field (NSW) - (Source TEAM Sports)
13.4 Pricing Points
The cost that many clients charge to allow people to play
on the field varies from free to a commercial rent. Some of
the considerations when deciding on the pricing points
include:
ROI Strategy
What level of costs do you want the income to cover?
Is this the WOL costs (capital installation, maintenance
and replacement), maintenance and replacement or
just maintenance etc.?
Development Pathway
Is the focus to encourage targeted groups to play more
sport (e.g. school children) and therefore wish to only
charge them a nominal cost or offer it free of charge?
What Will People Pay
Many sports clubs claim they cannot afford to pay a
commercial rate to use a synthetic sports field and
gain the support of local politicians etc. There are
many examples where clubs have been successful in
gaining use for a very low or free of charge rate, only
then to promote and run their own competitions and
generate tens of thousands of profit. The same
council are then left to pick up the additional
maintenance costs.
In NSW recently one commercial centre rented out their
synthetic football (soccer) pitch for around $50,000 for 6
months on a Sunday where the association plays all of its
matches. This amounts to approximately $13 per player for
90 - 120 mins a game; a price that was agreed by all clubs.
LGA’s and sports organisations need to show leadership
and balance the price points depending on the costs that
need to be recovered.
13.5 Footwear for Users of Synthetic
Introduction 13.5.1
To optimise the life expectancy of the synthetic yarn,
research by manufacturers and universities has been
conducted regarding the wearing of appropriate footwear57
.
Appropriate footwear should be worn to:
Minimise damage to the playing surface,
Manage the risk of injury.
Types of Shoes 13.5.2
Most manufacturers of synthetic sports fields provide
guidance on the appropriate footwear to use. With some
manufacturers, the warrantee may be linked to the use of
appropriate footwear.
The types of footwear could include:
Moulded stud,
Screw-in studs (aluminium or metal),
Bladed boots,
Dimpled boots,
Flat soled shoes, and
Non-sports shoes (e.g. stilettos, walking shoes).
An excellent guide for long-grass sports is the English FA
publication ‘Third Generation Football Guidance’ (2012
www.theFA.com)
Minimising Damage to the Playing Surface 13.5.3
The concept of the synthetic turf being held upright by the
infill allows the players to wear studs that “touch and lay off
the infill” as opposed to the yarn. If the player is wearing
flat shoes, such as trainers, then the sole of the shoe
compress both the infill and the grass yarn as the whole of
the shoe is providing friction against the yarn.
Over time, the yarn will break down; so flat shoes on Third
Generation Grass should not be used.
Propensity for Injury with Inappropriate 13.5.4
Footwear
In December 2013, the Chartered Institute for the
Management of Sport and Physical Activity58
, published
their guidance on this subject. Research from the
University of Dundee59
and Exeter60
identified key findings
around texts that they had completed independently,
including:
57
CIMSPA GUIDANCE NOTE: GN011 Acceptable sporting footwear for users of synthetic sports surfaces 58
Acceptable sporting footwear for users of synthetic sports surfaces – CIMSPA Guidance Note: GNO11 59
University of Dundee, Institute of Motion Analysis and Research; Prof Ranis Abboud – 2010 60
University of Exeter: Daniel Craig; the effects of playing surfaces and footwear on biomechanical responses of soccer players
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 102
The traditional stud is safe for use on synthetic
surfaces, and
Choosing to wear football boots with bladed cleats
puts the users at greater risk of injury.
Recommended Footwear 13.5.5
The English FA guidance has been used as a basis,
together with information from the FIH and CIMSPA is
shown in Table 34.
Type of
Boot
v’s
Type of
Surface
Studs
Bla
des
Dim
ple
d
Fla
t s
ole
d
(Tra
iner
etc
.)
No
n-s
po
rts
sh
oe
s
Mo
uld
ed
Scre
w i
n
<15m
m
Scre
w i
n
>15m
m
3G Field
Sand-
dressed
Sand-
filled
Not
ideal
Fully
synthetic
carpet
Water
based
carpet
Not
ideal
Table 34: Type of Boot v’s Type of Surface
Key: acceptable not acceptable
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 103
NSSCE flyer inserted here
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 104
SECTION 14:
MANAGEMENT OF
THE FACILITY
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 105
14 Management of the Facility
14.1 Introduction
The management of many sports grounds and facilities are
determined historically. The development of a synthetic
surface provides the opportunity to review the management
approach of the facilities.
Different sports facilities will have different peak and
seasonal peak times, which will impact on the programming
of the surfaces and may also allow them to be used for
other sports. e.g. netball and tennis may share a cushioned
surface during the year.
Bowls may have peak usage during the day and not the
evenings due to the demographic of the users, soccer
plays in the winter and cricket could use the surface in the
summer and so on. Ultimately, it’s about how
complementary sports can work together to optimise usage,
and then how can this be best managed.
Photo 71: Unique Management Option at Knox Football Stadium between Knox City Council and Football Federation Victoria
The decision on how best to manage a synthetic surface
sports field can be influenced by many political and
logistical issues including:
Council’s sport club usage or facility management
philosophy and provision - should it be internally,
procured, leased or managed by clubs etc.,
The ability of organisations (e.g. sports clubs) or the
commercial sector (e.g. YMCA, Belgravia Leisure) to be
able to provide the type of services needed at the
community level,
Council’s approach and philosophy on charging sports
clubs or associations to recoup the level of cost of
maintenance or for the capital investment possibility, and
Charging a market rate with strong programming would
generate surplus funds that councils can put towards
developing other facilities or more importantly
establishing a replacement fund.
14.2 Vision Drives Management
To identify the best management approach, key goals
should be agreed on what the facility is hoping to achieve.
A recent Local Government facility that adopted synthetic
technology had the following vision and strategic focus,
which Smart Connection Company developed with the
client.
Vision: To provide an opportunity for more people to
recreate and participate in sport, by providing
quality, safe and sustainable playing fields.
Mission: To use the technology of synthetic sports turf to
allow for greater use by the community who wish
to play, recreate, train and compete, whilst
satisfying demand.
Key Principles: The sports fields will be managed
programmed and maintained in accordance with
the following principles:
Priority Alignment
We will manage in accordance with our organisations’
strategic priorities, which also reflect our stakeholders and
collaborators needs.
Accessible and Community Inclusiveness
The design, management and how we position access to
the facility reflects our desire to encourage local and
citywide participation so the field encourages use by the
whole community.
Environmental Integration
The design will be environmentally friendly, integrating into
the natural environment and where possible be driven by
‘Green Technology Principles’ by using recycled products,
maintaining the fields in an environmentally responsible
manner and recycling the waste products after its use.
Economically Prudent
The facility will ensure that over its WOL (30 years) it will
be cost neutral to our community (i.e. the income raised will
at least cover the cost of the installation, maintenance and
replacement).
14.3 Management Options
There are a number of options on how best to manage a
sports field on precincts, whether that is with synthetic
surfaces or not. The four basic models are shown in Table
35.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 106
Social
Consideration
Environmental
Consideration
Financial
Consideration
Governance
Consideration
1. Directly managed
Council’s priorities
for community
development &
social priorities will
influence focus,
priorities and
strategy for
delivery.
Ability to align with
council’s open
space plan & can
change more
readily if needed.
All income to be
retained by council
to be reinvested as
appropriate.
Total governance
control.
2. Partnership / Committee of Management
Important that the
‘Committee of
Management’ has
the same focus as
council. If not there
is limited social
and community
benefit.
The Committee of
Management
needs to be given
a strong
environmental
focus. Normally
the council still has
the responsibility
for this area as
asset owner.
The Committee of
Management may
keep the income
and profits. It may
be charged a rent.
It should establish
a ‘replacement’
fund for the pitch
upgrade every 8-
10 years.
May need
substantial
support, as it may
not have the
governance ability
either strategically
or operationally.
3. Clubs
Total focus is
normally on their
needs and they do
not always think
about other sports
or the broader
community needs.
The club needs to
be given a strong
environmental
focus. Normally
the council still has
the responsibility
for this area, as
asset owner.
The club keep the
income and profits.
They may be
charged a rent.
They should be
made to keep a
‘replacement’ fund
for the pitch
upgrade every 8-
10 years.
May need
substantial
support, as they
may not have the
governance ability
whether
strategically or
operationally.
4. Sub-contracted management (management or lease)
Normally a
specification is
developed to
ensure that the
social dimensions
are considered. If
it is part of a
leisure centre,
there will be a
strong skill base
already
established.
Council’s and the
management
company need to
agree on
environmental
outcomes for the
facility for which
they may be jointly
responsible.
Management
company receive
income or a profit
share and pay a
management fee.
The benefit of this
model is the strong
programming will
generate
significant returns.
Management
company is
responsible for
governance.
Table 35: Management options
Some councils have found that the current tenancy
arrangement (sole occupancy) does not lend itself to the
installation of synthetic turf surfaces for some sports. This
is due to a number of considerations including:
Tendency of clubs to have sole use of specific pitches
and control of use. This does not encourage open access
for all clubs.
Low rent. Some councils are only charging 2 - 5% of the
yearly nominated cost for natural turf which means that
there may be an expectation that the rent for the
synthetic surface will be the same.
The need for the replacement cost of a synthetic turf to
be introduced through a fee for service costing model.
We recommend this is linked to a defined replacement
period based on hours use per week. e.g. 15 percent of
replacement value per year needs to be raised by hire
fees so that every 10 years there is adequate money to
pay for the replacement.
A number of councils have adopted a management hybrid
model whereby it manages the booking and maintenance
of the facility directly, mainly through its parks or recreation
departments. In particular, the programming aspect is
addressed by having a representative act as a go between
for all clubs, in order to prioritise usage, and ensure a fully
inclusive policy dome against some key principles, which
may include allowing free usage for training whilst allowing
the clubs natural turf pitches to recuperate.
Photo 72: Summerville Secondary College working with local community clubs to increase participation outside school hours (Source: http://www.evergreen.com.au
14.4 Funding Arrangements
There are a number of options on how best to identify and
fund a sports field or precinct, whether that is with synthetic
surfaces or not. The four basic options include:
Council funded – Councils may choose to fund
the pitches from reserves and some may expect to receive
a replacement/return on that investment through fees
charged. Council could borrow to fund such investments.
Some councils can claim ‘developers contribution’ funding.
State Government / peak body funding – sports
and recreation departments in Victoria and NSW have a
number of funding grants (up to $300,000) for synthetic turf
pitches and a the major facilities fund. In addition peak
bodies (e.g. Tennis Australia, AFL etc.) may be able to
provide some financial assistance for such purchases. To
date, other State Government Departments have not
established funded programs for synthetic surface
investment.
Club funded – Some clubs may have the
reserves to fund, or ability to borrow to fund such an
investment. Some clubs could offer to prepay rental of the
pitches in advance to assist the council to fund the capital
cost.
Lease purchase – Some local suppliers of
synthetic turf offer a lease purchase scheme over an
agreed period (normally 3 - 5 years) and this allows the
owners to use the guaranteed income to offset the lease
costs. This is similar to the approach of a fitness gym
equipment lease.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 107
14.5 Alternative Funding and Management
Options
Depending on the vision of an organisation there may be
alternative options to consider for the funding and
management of the proposed synthetic facility. These
options include:
Partnership Funding
Where two parties co-fund a facility and both have different
needs (e.g. school during the day and council of an
evening) usage or management is normally reflected in the
amount that each invests.
They may have limited land options, so could partner with a
local school, which can use and manage it during the day,
as it would be on their land. In the evening it would be
managed by the LGA. Successful examples of this include:
Mill Park Secondary College and Whittlesea City
Council (Vic)
Photo 73: Mill Park Secondary College
RMIT University – Victoria
Photo 74: RMIT University invested in a Football field with running track and a Hockey / Football Multi-sport field
Other partnerships may include developments between the
private sector and the education sector, such as the one at
Endeavour Sports High School in Sutherland (NSW),
where the private sector funded and developed a full size
football (soccer) field and ten 5-a-side mini-pitches.
During the day, the school uses it for their children at the
secondary school and the evenings and weekends ‘Soccer
Fives’ manage and provide programs for its use for the
community on a fee for service basis.
Photo 75: East Keilor Leisure Centre can program and hire the field out as they would a sports hall to generate income for Council who programs the majority of club usage of the field.
In Victoria, Knox City Council developed a partnership with
the State Football Federation (FFV) who co-funded and
managed the Knox Regional Soccer Centre.
Replacement Funding
Many LGA’s can find the resources to develop the funding
of the initial capital investment, then the clubs who use the
facility have the opportunity to collect all income and invest
into a ‘sinking fund’ for the maintenance and replacement.
This is a very common approach with hockey pitches and
leased tennis courts or bowls rinks and this model is
expected to be seen more in other sports such as soccer.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 108
Section 14 case Study – TEAM Sports – Management of
the Facility
Ad
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 109
SECTION 15:
PROCUREMENT
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 110
15 Procurement
15.1 Introduction
The aim of any procurement project must be to secure the
most appropriate goods and services that are fit for
purpose at a best value for organisation and
community/stakeholders.
To achieve such an outcome a due process needs to be
considered. The Smart Procurement Model © provides a
step-by-step process in the logistics that surround the
procurement of a synthetic sports field. The Smart
Procurement Model has four key stages:
Planning
Procurement process
Evaluation program
Project management.
This section explains each stage.
15.2 Planning
At the start of any synthetic field project, the planning
phase needs to be conducted to ascertain a clear project
need, scope, financial costing and management strategy.
A simple approach would include:
i) Understand what you want to achieve
How will it be used and who will manage it?
ii) What standards will it need to perform to?
In relation to a sports performance outcome, playability,
local overlay, safety, environmental considerations,
testing/certificate and warranty.
iii) What technology aspects should you consider
in the design?
Everything from the type of pavement, infill options,
recycled or recyclable yarn, use of shockpad and what
sports design overlay is needed.
iv) What can you afford?
Be creative and consider the revenue implications from the
hire and use of the facility. Does the organisation amortize
the cost over a defined period (e.g. 30, 20, 10 years etc.)?
v) Benchmark against others
Seek advice from other venues and facilities and explore
what has worked well and what hasn’t. Even negatives can
be very positive learning for your design and procurement
process.
vi) Ancillary considerations
As part of the planning explore car parking, access and
egress at the site, use of fences, type of changing rooms,
water, security etc.
vii) Risk assessment for the site
From a procurement process, community and stakeholder
public relations, financial and engineering etc.
These seven steps should provide you with a game plan
that can be used to communicate and document what you
are looking to achieve. The use of an independent
consultant, such as Smart Connection Company, can
provide you with an independent approach to this planning
stage.
15.3 Procurement Strategy
The procurement strategy has a number of components
that need to be considered and then a strategy tailored to
your own needs. The approach that we promote with
clients includes:
Promotion and Procurement Phase 15.3.1
There are two options, a single or two stage process. The
two stage process, normally known as an Expression of
Interest (EoI) stage is followed by the Request for Tender
(RFT) stage.
This two stage process allows the short-listing of
companies, normally based on experience, quality,
capacity and capability to do the project. This stage also
identifies whether that organisation has the product line
needed. The EoI stage focuses on their ability as opposed
to the technical project management content needed for
your specific needs.
The second stage, or single stage of only a one step
process, is known as the Request for Tender (RFT) or
Request for Quote (RFQ) process. This stage is very
specific; normally each of the companies who tender at this
stage provide a price and product submission with absolute
detail against the tender/quote request. This will allow
council or sport to decide who would be the best supplier
for their needs.
Specification Type 15.3.2
There are predominantly three (3) types of specification
used for this process, which need to be considered:
i) Detailed Specification
This provides each tenderer with the detailed design and
specification so that everyone is bidding against the same
component design. The drawback with this is that each
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 111
manufacturer has their own design which makes their
systems work at an optimal level. So to provide the detail
on drainage etc. could mean that the best design and
product could not meet a detailed specification design. The
risk of success and failure sits with the client.
Photo 76: Northbridge Oval began as a Detailed Specification and ended up as a Design and Construct because it allowed for greater innovation to integrate the cricket wicket into the football turf
ii) Design and Construct (D&C)
This provides each tenderer with the outcomes needed
against the engineering needs (e.g. through a Geotech
report and recommendation) and sports surface (e.g. FIFA
1 Star recommended pitch).
iii) Design and Construct (Hybrid)
There may be certain components that need aspects of the
first two options. Such as, if a specialised pavement is
needed then this may be a detailed specification contract
together with a D&C specification for the synthetic turf
system. This is the approach we would normally adopt.
The Market
There are two (2) options that can be considered here as
part of the procurement strategy:
i) Open Tender/EoI – Any organisation that can deliver
what the project tenders/quotes require. This can be
time consuming for the client and may use a two
stage process as described earlier to short-list.
ii) Closed Tender – Where there has been a selection
process already. This can be seen as an internal (e.g.
an EoI process or a select list of tenders) that
council/sport may already have. Alternatively an
external list may be derived from an ‘approved list’ by
the sport’s governing body. They have required
quality manufacturers to prove certain quality
capabilities. Some clients are only offering projects to
either licensee’s or preferred producers/providers of
the product range. A full list of licensees and
preferred producers/providers for each sport is
identified in Section 7.
Evaluation Strategy 15.3.3
The key considerations are simple; who is going to
evaluate the tenderers and against what? The key aspects
should be:
Who:
The Tender Evaluation Panel (TEP) should include the
client manager; the manager of the service/facility, the
project manager during the installation phase and an
independent consultant. The TEP should have access to
the Geotech engineer if a D&C specification is used to
ensure that what is proposed is adequate for the venue.
What:
The tender should be evaluated against key aspects and
components that can demonstrate:
▪ Quality of organisation – experience, capacity,
capability.
▪ Quality of product – accreditation, proven installations,
example of requested products and in a similar
environment, peak body recognition.
▪ Project logistics – qualified people, project plan.
▪ Price – with capital, schedule of rates and
maintenance.
Procurement Paperwork 15.3.4
The paperwork involved in the process is linked to a single
or two-stage process and normally you would expect to
have the following:
i) RFT – This documentation explains the process or
rules for tendering and most councils’ have
standard conditions that they use for the majority
of large capital works projects.
ii) Tender Schedules – these are critical and should
NOT be generic. They should be linked to the
information needed for evaluating each tender
against a tender evaluation strategy
iii) Conditions of Contract – The rules of how the
project will be managed, normally from a client’s
perspective, but should identify the roles and
responsibilities of all involved, including any third
parties who may be performing project
management roles
iv) Specification – Either a D&C, detailed or hybrid
specification as explained earlier.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 112
Photo 77: Willows Oval - ANU University have installed a Hockey Football field (Source: HG Sports Turf)
15.4 Evaluation Process
The evaluation process starts once the tender is received
and circulated to the TEP members. Remember to ask for
the same number of bid documents as there are panel
members, plus one. This way you can keep the signed
original and also alleviates the need for you to photocopy
one for each TEP member.
The evaluation process should be completed independently
initially and then the TEP collectively agrees the consensus
score, thus ensuring agreement against EACH criterion.
The top two or three tenders normally then receive
reference checks followed by interviews to clarify any
aspects and also to check that you can work with them.
The tenderers should be asked to bring the key people who
will be involved in the project to the interview.
15.5 Project Management
The project management of the contract is critical to
provide confidence back to the client and also to ensure
that the engineering requirements have been installed to
ensure that the performance characteristics are achieved,
that the surface will be safe and last for a realistic time
period.
Photo 78: JJ Holland Park - Melbourne - was project managed by Melbourne City Council, but not all clients have the in-house skills - so understanding the critical hold points is essential
To ensure that these outcomes can be achieved it is wise
to have Critical Hold Points (CHP’s) where tests can be
carried out to ensure that the engineering components will
achieve the desired outcomes. It will not be easy to rectify
faulty workmanship retrospectively and this approach can
be very costly.
The CHP’s should be designed to complement the final
performance testing of the major sports, so that
construction or material defects do not occur. Typically the
inspections are at the end of each major stage of
construction, including:
Sub-grade preparation through drainage construction
depth, compaction levels, water permeability, gradients
etc.,
Pavement and foundations, and
Synthetic surface and line marking.
Samples of aggregates, shockpad, synthetic turf, infill
materials, e-layer etc. should be collected and confirmed by
an independent laboratory for compliance to the agreed
material specification.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 113
Section 15 Case Study – DCE – Procurement
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 114
Appendix 1: Key Contacts
1.1 Solution Providers and Advisors
Smart Connection Consultancy
AAMI Park, Ground Level East, 60 Olympic Boulevard, Melb., Vic 3205
Tel: +61 (3) 9421 0133
www.smartconnection.net.au
Dalton Consulting Engineers (Civil Engineering Specialists)
255 Whitehorse Road, PO BOX 349 Balwyn, Vic 3103
Tel: +61 (3) 9888 6866 Fax: +61 (3) 9888 6880
www.dceprofile.com
Acousto-Scan Pty Ltd (Laboratory Testing)
20/109A Bonds Road, Punchbowl, NSW 2196
Fax +61 (02) 8006 4016, Mobile +61 (0)415 423334
www.acoustoscan.com.au
1.2 Australian Sports Surface Suppliers and Manufacturers
La
nd
scap
e a
nd
no
n-
accre
dit
ed
sp
ort
s f
ield
s
FIF
A P
refe
rred
Pro
du
cer
FIF
A L
icen
see
IRB
Pre
ferr
ed
Pro
du
cer
FIH
Lic
en
sed
man
ufa
ctu
rer
FIH
Pre
ferr
ed
pro
du
cer
ITF
AF
L/
Cri
cket
Au
str
alia
Lic
en
see
ABS Sports Fields Supply & install under
license from STI/ Polytan
yes 3rd
party
3rd
party
3rd
party
3rd
party
3rd
party
Grassports Supply & install under
license from STI/ Polytan
yes 3rd
party
3rd
party
3rd
party
3rd
party
3rd
party
Greenplay Australia Supply and install under
license from Limonta
yes 3rd
party
3rd
party
Grassman Manufacturer, supply and
install
yes yes yes
HG Sports Turf Supply & install under
license from Desso, Saltex
and Greenfields
yes 3rd
party
3rd
party
3rd
party
3rd
party
STI / Polytan Manufacturer, supply and
install
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
TEAM Sports Manufacturer, supply and
install
yes yes yes yes yes yes
TigerTurf Manufacturer in New
Zealand, supply and install
yes yes yes
Tuff Turf Supply and install under
license from CCG
yes 3rd
party
Turf One Supply and install under
license from Fieldturf
yes 3rd
party
3rd
party
3rd
party
3rd
party
3rd
party
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 115
1.3 Supplier Details
Name of Organisation: Grassports Australia
Contact Person: Bernard Evans - Director
Address of Head Office: 1/38 Green Street, Doveton VIC 3177
Telephone: + 61 3 9792 0622
Web: www.grassports.com.au
Email: [email protected]
Sport
Product Range
(if under license)
Level of Association
(e.g. Licensee, Preferred Producer etc.)
Football (FIFA) Ligaturf, POLIGRAS Preferred Producer under license to STI
Rugby Union (IRB) Ligaturf, POLIGRAS Preferred Producer under license to STI
AFL/Cricket Australia Ligaturf, POLIGRAS Licensee under license to STI
Hockey (FIH) POLIGRAS Preferred Producer under license to STI
Athletics (IAAF) Rekortan, Spurtan Licensee under license to STI
Bowls Supergrasse Licensee under license to STI
Rugby League Ligaturf, POLIGRAS Supply/Contract
Tennis (ITF) Supergrasse, POLICLAY, Laykold Some systems ITF rated
Multisport FIFA/FIH Ligaturf, POLIGRAS Dual accreditation possible under license
to STI
Multisport FIFA/ITF POLIGRAS Dual accreditation possible under license
to STI
Multisport
FIFA/IRB/RFL/AFL/CA
Ligaturf, POLIGRAS Multi-accreditation possible under license
to STI
Multi-use court sports,
school ovals
Supergrasse, POLIGRAS Supply/Contract under license to STI
Indoor Sports Halls Dynapoint Supply/Contract under license to STI
Synthetic landscaping Evergreen Supply/Contract
Cricket Supergrasse
Cernturion
Supply/Contract
Supply/Contract
Name of Organisation: Greenplay Australia Pty Ltd
Contact Person: Anthony Saba - Director
Address of Head Office: 3/550 Churchill Rd, Kilburn SA 5084
Telephone: 1300 769 499
Web: www.greenplay.com.au
Email: [email protected]
Sport
Product Range
(if under license)
Level of Association
(e.g. Licensee, Preferred Producer etc.)
Football (FIFA) Soccer Pro Range Preferred Producer under license to
Limonta
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 116
Name of Organisation: Greenplay Australia Pty Ltd
Rugby Union (IRB) Rugby Pro Range Preferred Producer under license to
Limonta
Hockey (FIH) Newgrass Range Licensee under license to Limonta
Tennis (ITF) Newgrass Range Licensee under license to Limonta
Name of Organisation: Grass Manufacturers Pty Ltd T/A Grassman
Contact Person: Colin Scotts - Major Sporting Projects Executive
Address of Head Office: Unit 8.1, 1A Hale St, Botany, NSW 2019
Telephone: +61 2 9316 7244 / 0405 546 394
Web: www.grassman.com.au
Email: [email protected]
Sport
Product Range
(if under license)
Level of Association
(e.g. Licensee, Preferred Producer etc.)
AFL/Cricket Australia Various products Licensed synthetic turf manufacturer
Hockey (FIH) H204D, Truplay, Ultraglide Licensee
Tennis (ITF) Classic Game, Classic Clay,
Club40, Advantage Pro
General Member
Name of Organisation: HG Sports Turf Pty Ltd
Contact Person: Hamish Sutherland - Managing Director
Address of Head Office: 6/403 Flemington Road, North Melbourne VIC 3051
Telephone: +61 3 9329 8154
Web: www.hgsportsturf.com
Email: [email protected]
Sport
Product Range
(if under license)
Level of Association
(e.g. Licensee, Preferred Producer etc.)
Football (FIFA)
Greenfields MX/Slidemax
Saltex MTRX
Desso iDNAx
Preferred Producer under license
Preferred Producer under license
Licensee under license
Rugby Union (IRB)
GreenFields Slidemax
Saltex MTRX
Desso iDNAx
Preferred Producer under license
Preferred Producer under license
AFL/Cricket Australia Desso iDNAx Licensee under license
Hockey (FIH) GreenFields TX Licensee under license
Rugby League
GreenFields MX/Slidemax
Saltex MTRX
Desso iDNAx
Licensee under license
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 117
Name of Organisation: HG Sports Turf Pty Ltd
Tennis (ITF) Local and International Suppliers Some ITF certification
Multisport
FIFA/IRB/RFL/AFL/CA/FIH
Desso iDNAx Multi certification under license
No Infill GreenFields NF
Desso UNI-X
N/A
Name of Organisation: Pierlite Australia Pty Ltd
Contact Person: Andrew Nagy -Technical Manager - Sports
Address of Head Office: 96 Gow Street, Padstow NSW 2211
Telephone: +61 (2) 9794 9300
Web: www.pierlite.com
Email: [email protected]
Sport
Product Range
(if under license)
Level of Association
(e.g. Licensee, Preferred Producer etc.)
Football (FIFA) Disano, Philips, Pierlite Master distributor – Australia and
manufacturer
Rugby Union (IRB)
Disano, Philips, Pierlite
Master distributor – Australia and
manufacturer
Disano, Philips, Pierlite
Master distributor – Australia and
manufacturer
AFL/Cricket Australia
Disano, Philips, Pierlite
Master distributor – Australia and
manufacturer
Disano, Philips, Pierlite
Master distributor – Australia and
manufacturer
Hockey (FIH)
Disano, Philips, Pierlite
Master distributor – Australia and
manufacturer
Disano, Philips, Pierlite
Master distributor – Australia and
manufacturer
Athletics (IAAF)
Disano, Philips, Pierlite
Master distributor – Australia and
manufacturer
Disano, Philips, Pierlite
Master distributor – Australia and
manufacturer
Bowls
Disano, Philips, Pierlite
Master distributor – Australia and
manufacturer
Disano, Philips, Pierlite
Master distributor – Australia and
manufacturer
Rugby League
Disano, Philips, Pierlite
Master distributor – Australia and
manufacturer
Disano, Philips, Pierlite
Master distributor – Australia and
manufacturer
Tennis (ITF)
Disano, Philips, Pierlite
Master distributor – Australia and
manufacturer
Disano, Philips, Pierlite
Master distributor – Australia and
manufacturer
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 118
Name of Organisation: Sekisui Foam Australia; Sekisui Alveo
Contact Person: Phil Cocking – Sales and Marketing Manager
Address of Head Office: 1 Parraweena Rd , Taren Point NSW 2229
Telephone: +61 2 9525 9880
Web: www.alveosport.com
www.sekisuifoam.com.au
Email: [email protected]
Name of Organisation: Polytan / Sports Technology International Pty. Ltd.
Contact Person: James Tritt - Technical Manager
Address of Head Office: Factory 3, Dunlopillo Drive, Dandenong South, VIC 3175
Telephone: +61 3 8792 8000
Web: www.sti-sports.com
Email: [email protected]
Sport
Product Range
Level of Association
(e.g. Licensee, Preferred Producer etc.)
Football (FIFA) Ligaturf, POLIGRAS Preferred Producer
Rugby Union (IRB) Ligaturf, POLIGRAS Preferred Producer
AFL/Cricket Australia Ligaturf, POLIGRAS Licensee
Hockey (FIH) POLIGRAS Preferred Producer
Athletics (IAAF) Rekortan, Spurtan Licensee
Bowls Supergrasse Promaster Licensee
Rugby League Ligaturf, POLIGRAS N/A
Tennis (ITF) Omnicourt, Supergrasse,
POLICLAY, Laykold
Some systems ITF rated
Multisport FIFA/FIH Ligaturf, POLIGRAS Dual accreditation possible
Multisport FIFA/ITF POLIGRAS Dual accreditation possible
Multisport
FIFA/IRB/RFL/AFL/CA Ligaturf, POLIGRAS
Multi-accreditation possible
Cricket wickets Supergrasse N/A
Multi-use court sports,
school ovals Supergrasse
N/A
Indoor Sports Halls Dynapoint N/A
Synthetic landscaping Evergreen N/A
Name of Organisation: TEAM Sports
Contact Person: John Curtis - Chief Executive Officer
Address of Head Office: 165 Prospect Highway, Seven Hills NSW 2147,
PO Box 445, Seven Hills NSW 2147
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 119
Name of Organisation: TEAM Sports
Telephone: 1800 652 548
Web: www.teamsports.com.au
Email: [email protected]
Sport
Product Range
(if under license)
Level of Association
(e.g. Licensee, Preferred Producer etc.)
Football (FIFA)
FIFA 1-Star
FIFA 2-Star
FIFA Preferred Producer
Rugby Union (IRB) Regulation 22 Preferred Producer
AFL/Cricket Australia AFL/CA Licensee
Hockey (FIH)
Global
National
Licensee
Athletics (IAAF) IAAF Registered
Bowls World Bowls Board Registered
Tennis (ITF)
Court Pace – Medium
Court Pace – Medium-Fast
Court Pace – Fast
ITF Foundation
Name of Organisation: TigerTurf Australia PTY Ltd
Contact Person:
Jos McKenzie - Sales and Marketing Assistant
Nick Kerr - National Sales and Marketing Manager
Address of Head Office: 1/12 Latitude Boulevard, Thomastown, VIC 3074
Telephone: +61 3 9464 5052
Web: Tigerturf.com
Email: [email protected]
Sport
Product Range
(if under license)
Level of Association
(e.g. Licensee, Preferred Producer etc.)
Football (FIFA)
Endurance 40 – FIFA 1*
Endurance 50 – FIFA 1* & 2*
Endurance 60 – FIFA 1*
Endurance 60P – FIFA 1* & IRB
Pinnacle 40 – FIFA 1* & 2*
Pinnacle 60 – FIFA 1* & 2*
Pinnacle 60P – FIFA 1* & IRB
FIFA Licensee
Rugby Union (IRB)
Endurance 60P – FIFA 1* & IRB
Pinnacle 60P – FIFA 1* & IRB
IRB Preferred Producer
AFL/Cricket Australia
Evo Pro – English Cricket Board
Deluxe – English Cricket Board
Hockey (FIH) Evo Pro – FIH National FIH Licensed Manufacturer
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 120
Name of Organisation: TigerTurf Australia PTY Ltd
Glide – FIH Global
Trophy – FIH National
WETT Pro – FIH Global
Bowls
SuperGreen 2 – World Bowls
BowlsWeave – World Bowls
World Bowls
Tennis (ITF)
Evo Pro – ITF Fast
Trophy – ITF Fast
Advantage – ITF Medium / Fast
Commercial Grand Prix – ITF
Medium / Slow
Elite – ITF Medium / Fast
Momentum – ITF Fast
Tournament 1000 – ITF Medium /
Fast
Tournament – ITF Medium
Volley Pro – ITF Fast
ITF Foundation
Name of Organisation: Tuff Turf Pty Ltd
Contact Person: Fraser Gehrig - Company Director
Address of Head Office: 53 Shearson Crescent, Mentone Vic 3194
Telephone: 1800 887 326
Web: www.tuffturf.com.au
Email: [email protected]
Sport
Product Range
(if under license)
Level of Association
(e.g. Licensee, Preferred Producer etc.)
Football (FIFA)
FIFA Star 1
FIFA Star 2
Preferred Producer under license to CC
Grass
Hockey (FIH)
National
Global
FIH Licensee under license to CC Grass
Tennis (ITF) International
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 121
Name of Organisation: Turf One Pty Ltd
Contact Person: Lyndon Joslyn - Director
Address of Head Office: 330 Towts Road, Whittlesea Vic 3757
Telephone: +61 (3) 9719 1900
Web: www.turfone.com.au
Email: [email protected]
Sport
Product Range
(if under license)
Level of Association
(e.g. Licensee, Preferred Producer etc.)
Football (FIFA) FieldTurf Revolution Licensee to FieldTurf (FIFA Preferred
Producer)
Rugby Union (IRB)
FieldTurf Revolution Licensee to FieldTurf (IRB Preferred
Producer)
AFL/Cricket Australia FieldTurf Revolution Licensee to FieldTurf (AFL/CA licensed
manufacturer)
Hockey (FIH) FieldTurf Hockey Gold Licensee to FieldTurf (FIH Preferred
Producer)
Athletics (IAAF) Beynon BSS 1000 and BSS 2000
Running Track
Licensee to FieldTurf (IAAF Preferred
Producer)
FieldTurf and Beynon are sister
companies under the Tarkett Sports
umbrella
Rugby League FieldTurf Revolution Licensee to FieldTurf
Tennis (ITF) Various premium tennis products
Any other
Airfield
FieldTurf Airfield Turf
Federal Aviation Administration
approved)
Licensee to FieldTurf
Name of Organisation: Acousto-Scan Pty LTD
Contact Person: Grant Humphreys - Managing Director
Address of Head
Office:
20/109a Bonds Rd
Punchbowl NSW, 2196 , Australia
Telephone: +61 (2) 9533 7220 Mobile +61 2 0415 423334
Web: www.acoustoscan.com.au
Email: [email protected]
Sport
Product Range
(if under license)
Level of Association
(e.g. Licensee, Preferred Producer etc.)
Football (FIFA) Test Institute FIFA Field Test Institute
Rugby Union (IRB) Test Institute IRB Field Test Institute
AFL/Cricket Australia Test Institute AFL/CA Test Laboratory
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 122
Name of Organisation: Acousto-Scan Pty LTD
Hockey (FIH) Test Institute FIH Test Institute Laboratory
Athletics (IAAF) Test Institute IAAF Field Test Institute Pending
Bowls Test Institute Test Laboratory
Rugby League Test Institute Field Test Institute
Tennis (ITF) Test Institute Field Test Institute One Star
Any other
Basket Ball (FIBA)
ISSS
FIBA Test Laboratory
ISSS Scientific member
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 123
Appendix 1 ad/case study TEAM sports
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 124
Appendix 2: Water Harvesting
Modelling – Reuse of water
collected from a synthetic pitch
1. Scenario’s
Estimated water requirements for cool and warm
season turf. This case study was completed for a
Melbourne based client and developed with Sports Turf
Consultants.
Water collection and reuse
Scenario 1: Water collected from a full size synthetic
soccer pitched. Used for irrigating a football / cricket
oval (cool season)
Scenario 2: Water collected from a full size synthetic
soccer pitched. Used for irrigating a football / cricket
oval (warm season)
Scenario 3: Water collected from a full size synthetic
soccer pitched. Used for irrigating a full size
soccer pitch (cool season)
Scenario 4: Water collected from a full size synthetic
soccer pitched. Used for irrigating a full size soccer
pitch (warm season)
Scenario 5: Water collected from a half size synthetic
soccer pitched. Used for irrigating a football / cricket
oval (cool season)
Scenario 6: Water collected from a half size synthetic
soccer pitched. Used for irrigating a football / cricket
oval (warm season)
Scenario 7: Water collected from half size synthetic
soccer pitched. Used for irrigating a full size soccer
pitch (cool season)
Scenario 8: Water collected from a half size synthetic
soccer pitched. Used for irrigating a full size soccer
pitch (warm season)
2.Rainfall Considerations
Month Rainfall (mm) Evaporation
(mm)
January 10.8 39.9
February 11.9 36.4
March 11.3 27.3
April 13.4 17.5
May 12.7 11.2
June 11.5 7.7
July 10.8 8.4
August 11.3 11.9
September 13.6 17.5
October 15.0 24.5
November 13.9 30.8
December 13.3 36.4
Annual 650 1,167
Table 36: Mean Weekly Rainfall (shown monthly) and Evaporation (Canberra)
Table 37: Mean Weekly (shown monthly) Rainfall & Evaporation (mm)
Turf watering Needs
Month Cool Warm
January 31.9 23.9
February 29.1 21.8
March 21.8 16.4
April 14.0 10.5
May 9.0 6.7
June 6.2 4.6
July 6.7 5.0
August 9.5 7.1
September 14.0 10.5
October 19.6 14.7
November 24.6 18.5
December 29.1 21.8
Crop Factor 0.8 0.6
Table 38: Weekly Turf Water Usage (mm/week)
0
20
40
60
Janu
…
Feb
r…
Ma
rch
April
Ma
y
June
July
Augu
st
Sept…
Octo
…
No
ve
…
De
ce
…
Rainfall (mm)
Evaporation (mm)
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 125
Month Cool Warm
January 21.1 13.1
February 17.2 9.9
March 10.5 5.0
April 0.6 -2.9
May -3.7 -6.0
June -5.4 -6.9
July -4.1 -5.7
August -1.8 -4.2
September 0.4 -3.1
October 4.6 -0.3
November 10.8 4.6
December 15.8 8.5
Table 39: Weekly Irrigation Requirement (mm/week) (Shaded values indicate irrigation required)
Month Cool Warm
January 0.21 0.13
February 0.17 0.10
March 0.11 0.05
April 0.01 -0.03
May -0.04 -0.06
June -0.05 -0.07
July -0.04 -0.06
August -0.02 -0.04
September 0.00 -0.03
October 0.05 0.00
November 0.11 0.05
December 0.16 0.08
Table 40: Weekly Irrigation Requirement (ML/ha/week) (Shaded values indicate irrigation required)
Month Cool Warm
January 0.93 0.58
February 0.69 0.40
March 0.47 0.22
April 0.03 -0.12
May -0.17 -0.26
June -0.23 -0.30
July -0.18 -0.25
August -0.08 -0.19
September 0.02 -0.13
October 0.20 -0.01
November 0.46 0.20
December 0.70 0.38
Annual 3.5 1.8
Table 41: Monthly Irrigation Requirement (ML/ha/month)
(Shaded values indicate irrigation required)
Month Cool Warm
January 1.40 0.87
February 1.03 0.60
March 0.70 0.34
April 0.04 -0.19
May -0.25 -0.40
June -0.35 -0.44
July -0.27 -0.38
August -0.12 -0.28
September 0.03 -0.20
October 0.30 -0.02
November 0.69 0.30
December 1.05 0.56
Annual 5.24 2.66
Table 42: Realistic Monthly Irrigation Requirement (ML/ha/month)
Shaded values indicate irrigation required
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 126
Month
Mo
nth
ly
Rain
fall
mm
Wate
r
Co
llecte
d M
L
Irri
gati
on
Dem
an
d M
L
EO
M61
Sto
rag
e M
L
Irri
gati
on
62
Dem
an
d M
et
May 56.2 0.34 0.34
no
irrigation
June 49.4 0.30 0.63
no
irrigation
July 47.7 0.29 0.92
no
irrigation
August 50.2 0.30 1.22
no
irrigation
September 58.2 0.35 0.03 1.54 100%
October 66.5 0.40 0.37 1.57 100%
November 59.5 0.36 0.83 1.10 100%
December 59.1 0.35 1.26 0.20 100%
January 47.9 0.29 1.68 0.00 29%
February 47.6 0.29 1.24 0.00 23%
March 50.2 0.30 0.84 0.00 36%
April 57.4 0.34 0.05 0.30 100%
650 3.90 6.29
Table 43: Water Collection and Reuse - Scenario 1
Water collected from: Full size (0.75ha) synthetic soccer pitch
Used for irrigating: Football/Cricket oval (1.2ha, cool season)
Maximum stored volume of water: 1.6ML
Month
Mo
nth
ly
Rain
fall
mm
Wate
r
Co
llecte
d M
L
Irri
gati
on
Dem
an
d M
L
EO
M S
tora
ge
ML
Irri
gati
on
Dem
an
d M
et
May 56.2 0.34 0.34
no
irrigation
June 49.4 0.30 0.63
no
irrigation
July 47.7 0.29 0.92
no
irrigation
August 50.2 0.30 1.22
no
irrigation
September 58.2 0.35 1.57
no
irrigation
October 66.5 0.40 1.97
no
irrigation
November 59.5 0.36 0.35 1.97 100%
December 59.1 0.35 0.68 1.65 100%
January 47.9 0.29 1.05 0.89 100%
February 47.6 0.29 0.72 0.46 100%
March 50.2 0.30 0.4 0.36 100%
April 57.4 0.34 0.70
no
irrigation
650 3.90 3.20
Table 44 above Water Collection and Reuse - Scenario 2”
Water collected from: Full size (0.75ha) synthetic soccer pitch
Used for irrigating: Football/Cricket oval (1.2ha, warm season)
Maximum stored volume of water: 2.0ML
61
EOM Storage – volume of water at the end of month 62
Irrigation Demand Met – percentage of the irrigation requirement met
Month
Mo
nth
ly
Rain
fall
mm
Wate
r
Co
llecte
d M
L
Irri
gati
on
Dem
an
d M
L
EO
M S
tora
ge
ML
Irri
gati
on
Dem
an
d M
et
May 56.2 0.34 0.34 no irrigation
June 49.4 0.30 0.63 no irrigation
July 47.7 0.29 0.92 no irrigation
August 50.2 0.30 1.22 no irrigation
September 58.2 0.35 0.02 1.55 100
October 66.5 0.40 0.23 1.72 100
November 59.5 0.36 0.52 1.56 100%
December 59.1 0.35 0.79 1.13 100%
January 47.9 0.29 1.05 0.36 100%
February 47.6 0.29 0.77 0.00 84%
March 50.2 0.30 0.52 0.00 58%
April 57.4 0.34 0.03 0.32 100
650 3.90 3.93
Table 45: Water Collection and Reuse - Scenario 3
Water collected from: Full size (0.75ha) synthetic soccer pitch
Used for irrigating: Full size (0.75ha) soccer pitch (cool season)
Maximum stored volume of water: 1.7ML
Month
Mo
nth
ly
Rain
fall
mm
Wate
r
Co
llecte
d M
L
Irri
gati
on
Dem
an
d M
L
EO
M S
tora
ge
ML
Irri
gati
on
Dem
an
d M
et
May 56.2 0.34 0.34 no irrigation
June 49.4 0.30 0.63 no irrigation
July 47.7 0.29 0.92 no irrigation
August 50.2 0.30 1.22 no irrigation
September 58.2 0.35 1.57 no irrigation
October 66.5 0.40 1.97 no irrigation
November 59.5 0.36 0.22 2.10 100%
December 59.1 0.35 0.42 2.04 100%
January 47.9 0.29 0.65 1.67 100%
February 47.6 0.29 0.45 1.51 100%
March 50.2 0.30 0.25 1.56 100%
April 57.4 0.34 1.90 no irrigation
650 3.90 2.00
Table 46: Water Collection and Reuse - Scenario 4
Water collected from: Full size (0.75ha) synthetic soccer pitch
Used for irrigating: Full size (0.75ha) soccer pitch (warm season)
Maximum stored volume of water: 2.1ML
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 127
Month M
on
thly
Rain
fall m
m
Wa
ter
Co
lle
cte
d
ML
Irri
ga
tio
n
Dem
an
d M
L
EO
M S
tora
ge
ML
Irri
ga
tio
n
Dem
an
d M
et
May 56.2 0.13 0.13 no irrigation
June 49.4 0.11 0.24 no irrigation
July 47.7 0.11 0.34 no irrigation
August 50.2 0.11 0.46 no irrigation
September 58.2 0.13 0.03 0.55 100
October 66.5 0.15 0.37 0.34 100
November 59.5 0.13 0.83 0.00 57%
December 59.1 0.13 1.26 0.00 11%
January 47.9 0.11 1.68 0.00 6%
February 47.6 0.11 1.24 0.00 9%
March 50.2 0.11 0.84 0.00 13%
April 57.4 0.13 0.05 0.08 100
650 1.46 6.29
Table 47: Water Collection and Reuse - Scenario 5
Water collected from: Half size (0.28ha) synthetic soccer pitch
Used for irrigating: Football/Cricket oval (1.2ha, cool season)
Maximum stored volume of water: 0.6ML
Month
Mo
nth
ly
Rain
fall
mm
Wate
r
Co
llecte
d M
L
Irri
gati
on
Dem
an
d M
L
EO
M S
tora
ge
ML
Irri
gati
on
Dem
an
d M
et
May 56.2 0.13 0.13 no irrigation
June 49.4 0.11 0.24 no irrigation
July 47.7 0.11 0.34 no irrigation
August 50.2 0.11 0.46 no irrigation
September 58.2 0.13 0.59 no irrigation
October 66.5 0.15 0.74 no irrigation
November 59.5 0.13 0.35 0.51 100
December 59.1 0.13 0.68 0.00 95%
January 47.9 0.11 1.05 0.00 10%
February 47.6 0.11 0.72 0.00 15%
March 50.2 0.11 0.40 0.00 28%
April 57.4 0.13 0.13 no irrigation
650 1.46 3.20
Table 48: Water Collection and Reuse - Scenario 6
Water collected from: Half size (0.28ha) synthetic soccer pitch
Used for irrigating: Football/Cricket oval (1.2ha, warm season)
Maximum stored volume of water: 0.7ML
Month
Mo
nth
ly
Rain
fall
mm
Wate
r
Co
llecte
d M
L
Irri
gati
on
Dem
an
d M
L
EO
M S
tora
ge
ML
Irri
gati
on
Dem
an
d M
et
May 56.2 0.13 0.13 no irrigation
June 49.4 0.11 0.24 no irrigation
July 47.7 0.11 0.34 no irrigation
August 50.2 0.11 0.46 no irrigation
September 58.2 0.13 0.02 0.57 100
October 66.5 0.15 0.23 0.49 100
November 59.5 0.13 0.52 0.10 100
December 59.1 0.13 0.79 0.00 30%
January 47.9 0.11 1.05 0.00 10%
February 47.6 0.11 0.77 0.00 14%
March 50.2 0.11 0.52 0.00 21%
April 57.4 0.13 0.03 0.10 100
650 1.46 3.93
Table 49: Water Collection and Reuse - Scenario 7
Water collected from: Half size (0.28ha) synthetic soccer pitch
Used for irrigating: Full size (0.75ha) soccer pitch (cool season)
Maximum stored volume of water: 0.6ML
Month
Mo
nth
ly
Rain
fall
mm
Wate
r
Co
llecte
d M
L
Irri
gati
on
Dem
an
d M
L
EO
M S
tora
ge
ML
Irri
gati
on
Dem
an
d M
et
May 56.2 0.13 0.13 no irrigation
June 49.4 0.11 0.24 no irrigation
July 47.7 0.11 0.34 no irrigation
August 50.2 0.11 0.46 no irrigation
September 58.2 0.13 0.59 no irrigation
October 66.5 0.15 0.74 no irrigation
November 59.5 0.13 0.22 0.65 100
December 59.1 0.13 0.42 0.36 100
January 47.9 0.11 0.65 0.00 71%
February 47.6 0.11 0.45 0.00 24%
March 50.2 0.11 0.25 0.00 45%
April 57.4 0.13 0.13 no irrigation
650 1.46 2.00
Table 50: Water Collection and Reuse - Scenario 8
Water collected from: Half size (0.28ha) synthetic soccer pitch
Used for irrigating: Full size (0.75ha) soccer pitch (warm season)
Maximum stored volume of water: 0.7ML
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 128
Appendix 2 ad/case study ABS
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 129
Appendix 3: Literature Review of
Safety Research for Synthetic Surfaces
3.1 Safety Studies
“Safety Study of Artificial Turf Containing Crumb Rubber Infill
Made from Recycled Tires: Measurements of Chemicals and
Particulates in the Air, Bacteria in the Turf, and Skin
Abrasions Caused by Contact with the Surface” Summary
presentation by OEHHA and Cal/EPA.
California Office of Environmental Health Hazard
Assessment (OEHHA)
Pesticide and Environmental Toxicology Branch: Funded by
the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery
(CalRecycle)
October 2010
Conclusion: No public health concerns were identified
regarding the inhalation of volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) or particulates (PM2.5) above artificial turf;
Artificial turf harbored fewer bacteria (including MRSA and
other Staphylococci) than natural turf; The rate of skin
abrasions per 1,000 player hours was two- to three-fold
higher on artificial turf compared to natural turf; The sum of
these latter two effects on the skin infection rate for athletes
competing on artificial turf relative to natural turf cannot be
predicted from these data alone.
"An Evaluation of the Health and Environmental Impacts
Associated with Synthetic Turf Playing Fields"
University of Connecticut Health Center The Connecticut
Agricultural Experiment Station Department of Public Health
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection July
2010
The headline from the July 30, 2010 News Release from the
Connecticut Department of Public Health announced, "Result
of State Artificial Turf Fields Study: No Elevated Health
Risk." Comprising separate reports from the four state
agencies listed above, the Final Report presents the results
of an extensive study into the health and environmental
risks associated with outdoor and indoor synthetic turf fields
containing crumb rubber infill. "This study presents good
news regarding the safety of outdoor artificial turf fields,"
stated Department of Public Health Commissioner Dr. J.
Robert Galvin. The above link is to the Overall Executive
Summary, which includes links to the News Release, the four
separate reports from the state agencies, and the report by
the Peer Review Committee from The Connecticut Academy
of Science and Engineering.
“Review of the Impacts of Crumb Rubber in Artificial Turf
Applications”
University of California, Berkeley, February 2010 Laboratory
for Manufacturing and Sustainability
Prepared for: The Corporation for Manufacturing Excellence
(Manex)
“The research conducted by Manex and Berkeley is among
the most comprehensive reports to date, reviewing and
assessing existing studies from the past 12 years, as well as
containing independent analysis. The conclusions of this
study validate key findings from other recent studies,
demonstrating the materials are both cost-effective and
safe." From Manex/UC Berkeley Press Release posted
April 5, 2010. Click here for full Press Release.
"A Scoping-Level Field Monitoring Study of Synthetic Turf
Fields and Playgrounds" U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, November 2009
This study and statements of safety by the U.S. EPA of
synthetic turf fields and playgrounds containing crumb rubber
from recycled tires complements the study and statement of
safety by the CPSC in 2008 (see below). In its Press
Release, the EPA summarized its findings, including the
following:
The levels of particulate matter, metals, and volatile organic
compound concentrations in the air samples above the
synthetic turf were similar to background levels;
All air concentrations of particulate matter and lead were well
below levels of concern;
Zinc, which is a known additive in tires,…was found to be
below levels of concern.
See December 10, 2009 EPA Press Release, “Limited EPA
Study Finds Low Level of Concern in Samples of Recycled
Tires from Ballfield and Playground Surfaces”
"Chemicals and Particulates in the Air Above the New
Generation of Artificial Turf Playing Fields, and Artificial Turf
as a Risk Factor for Infection by Methicillin-Resistant
Staphylcoccus Aureus (MRSA)" Office of Environmental
Health Hazard Assessment, California Environmental
Protection Agency, July 2009
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 130
There is a negligible human health risk from inhaling the air
above synthetic turf, and, though data gaps exist, it is
“unlikely that the new generation of artificial turf is itself a
source of MRSA….” (Significantly the OEHHA did not review
the January 2009 results of the study into the lifespan of
staph on grass and synthetic turf sponsored by the STC and
the Pennsylvania Turfgrass Council - see below.) The
OEHHA summary of the results is posted on its website. The
full report includes an important Addendum that references
reports by the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation and Department of Health (May 2009) and the
New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene
(March 2009) - see below.
"An Assessment of Chemical Leaching, Releases to Air and
Temperature at Crumb-Rubber Infilled Synthetic Fields" New
York State Department of Environmental Conservation and
New York State Department of Health, May 2009
In its Press Release, the NYSDEC announced that this new
comprehensive study concludes that crumb rubber infilled
synthetic fields "poses no significant environmental threat to
air or water quality and poses no significant health concerns."
"Air Quality Survey of Synthetic Turf Fields Containing
Crumb Rubber Infill" TRC, March 2009. Prepared for NY
City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene
"In summary, an analysis of the air in the breathing zones of
children above synthetic turf fields do not show appreciable
impacts from COPCs [Contaminants of Potential Concern]
contained in the crumb rubber. Therefore, a risk assessment
was not warranted from the inhalation route of exposure." Of
69 VOCs, 17 PAHs, including Benzothiazole, 10 metals, and
a range of particulate matter tested, the COPCs that were
detected in the ambient air samples above the crumb rubber
synthetic turf fields were found in similar concentrations in
the air samples above the grass field and the background
locations.
“CPSC Staff Finds Synthetic Turf Fields OK to Install, OK to
Play On,” U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission,
NEWS from CPSC, July 30, 2008
The CPSC staff conducted tests of synthetic turf products for
analysis of total lead content and accessible lead. In the
above News Release it concludes that, “young children are
not at risk from exposure to lead in these fields.” For a
summary of the analytical methods used and the test results,
see “CPSC Staff Analysis and Assessment of Synthetic Turf
‘Grass Blades”
"A Review of the Potential Health and Safety Risks from
Synthetic Turf Fields Containing Crumb Rubber Infill"
Prepared for New York City Department of Health and
Mental Hygiene by TRC, May 2008
A comprehensive 180-page review of available scientific
literature and research on synthetic turf with crumb rubber
infill covering such topics as chemical composition and
human health risks from crumb rubber infill, risks of physical
injury, heat-related illness, staph, etc. A summary of the
available research is also included.
"Review of the Human Health & Ecological Safety of
Exposure to Recycled Tire Rubber found at Playgrounds and
Synthetic Turf Fields"
Prepared for Rubber Manufacturers Association by
ChemRisk, Inc., July 17, 2008
A report by an independent environmental firm on the human
health and ecological risks from ground rubber in
playgrounds and sports fields, and based on a thorough
review of studies from advocates and opponents to the use
of recycled tire materials.
"Environmental Effects of Synthetic Turf Athletics Fields"
Milone & MacBroom, December 2008
HEAT: On hot sunny days, surface temp of the fibers was
40-50 degrees hotter than ambient temp; air temp at 2’
above surface or under cloud cover was near
ambient. Crumb rubber was only a few degrees hotter than
ambient. Watering the field had a short-term effect.
OFF-GASSING: EHHI identified certain compounds of
concern in its very limited 2007 laboratory study of the
chemicals contained in crumb rubber – benzothiazole,
volatile nitrosamines, and 4-(tert-octyl) Phenol. MMI tested
for these compounds in the air above the synthetic turf fields
with crumb rubber infill at several locations. A “very low
concentration” of benzothiazole was found at 1 of 2 fields --
the other compounds were not detected.
LEACHING: Testing done over 1 year period. Test for zinc,
lead, selenium, and cadmium, and compared to lowest
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 131
aquatic life criterion for each element. Only zinc detected,
and then well below water quality standard.
"Follow-up Study of the Environmental Aspects of Rubber
Infill, A Laboratory study (perform weathering tests) and a
field study, rubber crumb from car tyres as infill on artificial
turf"
INTRON, commissioned by two tyre associations, and
supervised by the National Institute for Public Health and
the Environment and by the Ministry of Housing, Spatial
Planning and the Environment in the Netherlands, April 2008
"The impact of weathering of the rubber crumb for the
technical lifetime of an artificial turf field (approx. 10 to 15
years) does not cause the leaching of zinc from the rubber
crumb...to exceed the threshold values..."
Environmental and Health Evaluation of the Use of
Elastomer Granulates (Virgin and from Used Tyres) as Filling
in Third-Generation Artificial Turf"
Author: Dr. Robert Moretto (EEDEMS) 1
ADEME/ALIAPUR/FIELDTURF TARKETT 2007 Scientific
long-term study for French organizations
Study of quality of water passing through SBR, TPE and
EPDM granules, and of gases emitted by the sports
fields. No impact from these materials on water resources;
no effect on health from inhaling VOC and aldehydes emitted
by materials in close, poorly ventilated indoor facility or
outdoors; ecotoxicologically, no impact on the
environment. Extensive bibliography.
"Evaluation of Health Effects of Recycled Waste Tires in
Playground and Track Products" Office of Environmental
Health Hazard Assessment of California EPA, January 2007
Evaluation of toxicity due to ingestion based on existing
literature - risk is well below de minimus level considered an
acceptable cancer risk. Evaluation of toxicity due to ingestion
based on gastric digestion simulation - same as above.
Evaluation of toxicity due to chronic hand-to-surface-to-
mouth activity -low risk of adverse noncancer health
effects. Slightly higher than de minimus level for chronic
ingestion of chrysene, but low enough to be considered an
acceptable cancer risk. Skin sensitization - no sensitization
observed.
Evaluating the potential for damage to the local environment
and ecology - soil samples under a playground surface
burned in a fire contained levels of metals, VOCs, PAHs,
dioxins and furans at or below background, suggesting low
risk. Air above the burn site was judged by the U.S. EPA as
posing no health risk. Concentrated leachate from tire
shreds produced in a lab was toxic to several organisms, but
a rain event would not likely produce leachate in such
concentrations to cause toxicity to these
organisms. Shredded tires used above the ground water
table produced no toxicity in sentinel species.
3.2 Player Safety
“Epidemiology of Patellar Tendinopathy in Elite Male Soccer
Players”
Hagglund, M., PT, PhD; Zwerver, J., MD, PhD; Ekstrand, J.,
MD, PhD American Journal of Sports Medicine, June 2011,
0363546511408877
Patellar tendinopathy is a relatively mild but fairly common
condition among elite soccer players, and the recurrence rate
is high. This study investigated the epidemiology of patellar
tendinopathy in 2,229 elite male soccer players from 51
European elite soccer clubs playing on natural grass and
synthetic turf between 2001 and 2009.Objective: To compare
the risk for acute injuries between natural grass (NG) and
third-generation artificial turf (3GAT) in male professional
football.
Conclusion: “Exposure to artificial turf did not increase
the prevalence or incidence of injury.”
"Risk of injury on third generation artificial turf in Norwegian
professional football"
Bjørneboe J, Bahr R, Andersen TE (2010) British Journal of
Sports Medicine, 44: 794-798.
Methods: All injuries sustained by players with a first-team
contract were recorded by the medical staff of each club,
from the 2004 throughout the 2007 season. An injury was
registered if the player was unable to take fully part in football
activity or match play.
Results: A total of 668 match injuries, 526 on grass and 142
on artificial turf, were recorded. The overall acute match
injury incidence was 17.1 (95% CI 15.8 to 18.4) per 1000
match hours; 17.0 (95% CI 15.6 to 18.5) on grass and 17.6
(95% CI 14.7 to 20.5) on artificial turf. Correspondingly, the
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 132
incidence for training injuries was 1.8 (95% CI 1.6 to 2.0); 1.8
(95% CI 1.5 to 2.0) on grass and 1.9 (95% CI 1.5 to 2.2) on
artificial turf respectively. No significant difference was
observed in injury location, type or severity between turf
types.
Conclusion: No significant differences were detected in
injury rate or pattern between 3GAT and NG in
Norwegian male professional football.
"Comparison of injuries sustained on artificial turf and grass
by male and female elite football players"
Ekstrand J, Hägglund M, Fuler CW (2010) Scandinavian
Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, DOI:
10.1111/j.1600-0838.2010.01118.x
The objective of this study was to compare incidences and
patterns of injury for female and male elite teams when
playing football on artificial turf and grass. Twenty teams (15
male, 5 female) playing home matches on third-generation
artificial turf were followed retrospectively; their injury risk
when playing on artificial turf pitches was compared with the
risk when playing on grass. Individual exposure, injuries
(time loss) and injury severity were recorded by the team
medical staff. In total, 2105 injuries were recorded during
246 000 h of exposure to football. Seventy-one percent of the
injuries were traumatic and 29% overuse injuries. There were
no significant differences in the nature of overuse injuries
recorded on artificial turf and grass for either men or women.
The incidence (injuries/1000 player-hours) of acute
(traumatic) injuries did not differ significantly between
artificial turf and grass, for men (match 22.4 v 21.7; RR 1.0
(95% CI 0.9–1.2); training 3.5 v 3.5; RR 1.0 (0.8–1.2)) or
women [match 14.9 v 12.5; RR 1.2 (0.8–1.8); training 2.9 v
2.8; RR 1.0 (0.6–1.7)]. During matches, men were less likely
to sustain a quadriceps strain (P=0.031) and more likely to
sustain an ankle sprain (P=0.040) on artificial turf.
"Injury risk on artificial turf and grass in youth tournament
football"
Soligard T, Bahr R, Andersen TE (2010) Scandinavian
Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, DOI:
10.1111/j.1600-0838.2010.01174.x
The aim of this prospective cohort study was to investigate
the risk of acute injuries among youth male and female
footballers playing on third-generation artificial turf compared
with grass. Over 60000 players 13–19 years of age were
followed in four consecutive Norway Cup tournaments from
2005 to 2008. Injuries were recorded prospectively by the
team coaches throughout each tournament. The overall
incidence of injuries was 39.2 (SD: 0.8) per 1000 match
hours; 34.2 (SD: 2.4) on artificial turf and 39.7 (SD: 0.8) on
grass. After adjusting for the potential confounders age and
gender, there was no difference in the overall risk of injury
[odds ratio (OR): 0.93 (0.77–1.12), P=0.44] or in the risk of
time loss injury [OR: 1.05 (0.68–1.61), P=0.82] between
artificial turf and grass. However, there was a lower risk of
ankle injuries [OR: 0.59 (0.40–0.88), P=0.008], and a higher
risk of back and spine [OR: 1.92 (1.10–3.36), P=0.021] and
shoulder and collarbone injuries [OR: 2.32 (1.01–5.31),
P=0.049], on artificial turf compared with on grass. In
conclusion, there was no difference in the overall risk of
acute injury in youth footballers playing on third-generation
artificial turf compared with grass.
“Very Positive Medical Research on Artificial Turf”
Turf Roots Magazine 01, pp. 8-10 www.fifa.com
A report of medical research conducted by FIFA’s Medical
Assessment and Research Centre (F-MARC) comparing
injuries sustained at the FIFA U-17 tournament in Peru,
which was played entirely on “football turf” (synthetic turf)
with the injuries sustained at previous U-17 tournaments,
which were played mainly on well-manicured grass. “The
research showed that there was very little difference in the
incidence, nature and causes of injuries observed during
those games played on artificial turf compared with those
played on grass.”
“Risk of injury in elite football played on artificial turf versus
natural grass: a prospective two-cohort study”
J Ekstrand, T Timpka, M Hagglund British Journal of Sports
Medicine 2006; 40:975-980
Objective: “To compare injury risk in elite football [soccer]
played on artificial turf compared with natural grass.”
Conclusion: “No evidence of a greater risk of injury was
found when football was played on artificial turf
compared with natural grass. The higher incidence of
ankle sprain on artificial turf warrants further attention,
although this result should be interpreted with caution
as the number of ankle sprains was low.”
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 133
“Risk of injury on artificial turf and natural grass in young
female football [soccer] players”
Kathrin Steffen, Thor Einar Andersen, Roald Bahr British
Journal of Sports Medicine 2007; 41:i33-i37
http://bjsm.bmj.com
Objective: “To investigate the risk of injury on artificial turf
compared with natural grass among young female football
[soccer] players.”
Conclusion: “In the present study among young female
football [soccer] players, the overall risk of acute injury
was similar between artificial turf and natural grass.”
“Comparison of the incidence, nature and cause of injuries
sustained on grass and new generation artificial turf by male
and female football players”
Colin W Fuller, Randall W Dick, Jill Corlette, Rosemary
Schmalz
British Journal of Sports Medicine 2007; 41 (Supplement
1):i20-i26 (Part 1: match injuries)
British Journal of Sports Medicine 2007; 41 (Supplement
1):i27-i32 (Part 2: training injuries) Abstracts available at
http://bjsm.bmj.com
Objective: “To compare the incidence, nature, severity and
cause of match injuries (Part 1) and training injuries (Part 2)
sustained on grass and new generation turf by male and
female footballers.”
Methods: The National Collegiate Athletic Association Injury
Surveillance System was used for a two-season (August to
December) prospective study of American college and
university football teams (2005 season: men 52 teams,
women 64 teams; 2006 season: men 54 teams, women 72
teams).
Conclusion of both Part 1 and Part 2: There were no
major differences in the incidence, severity, nature or
cause of match injuries or training injuries sustained on
new generation artificial turf and grass by either male or
female players.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 134
Appendix 4: Self-assessment Questionnaire
To assist with ‘checking’ where your organisation is regarding being ready for the installation of synthetic surfaces, Smart
Connection Company use a questionnaire when we meet new clients. This questionnaire has been adapted into a self-
assessment questionnaire for your assistance
Follow the sections logically through and if you need any more assistance, we at Smart Connection Company would be
more than happy to provide a complimentary hour to review your answers and make suggestions on the way forward. Just
call us on (03) 8696 7500.
1. Planning considerations
1.1 Does the pitch fit into a planning overlay?
1.2 Does the pitch fit into a facilities hierarchy or could it?
1.3 Do you need to consider policies and strategies (e.g. health, environmental)?
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
2. Supply and demand considerations
1.1 Is the present supply of pitches allowing the demand to be met?
1.2 Is the present demand meeting state averages for the sport and could it continue to grow?
1.3 How much more growth can be sustained on the pitches?
1.4 How many pitches are above 20 hour usage per week?
1.5 How would a synthetic pitch fit into the sports facility hierarchy?
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
3. Surface type considerations
3.1 What sports would be played on the surface in season/out of season?
3.2 What type of play would the surface be used for? (e.g. recreation/play, training, competition)?
3.3 What would be the expected weekly usages?
i. In peak season
Junior
rec/school
Training Comp Juniors Comp Seniors Total
Less 12h
12h - 20h
20h - 40h
40h - 60h
Over 60h
ii. In off peak season?
________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________
3.4 Are there any surface standards applied by the sports (e.g. FIH – National for Hockey) and which ones could apply to this
project?
Sport Standard Durability considerations Other considerations
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 135
4. Design considerations
4.1 Pitch line markings – What are the key sports you are looking to mark the pitch for?
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Size of field – what size of field do you want (with run off etc.) that meets the standard of play you will be promoting?
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Markings
i. What markings need to be considered?
ii. Can others be permanent/temporary blanked out or temporary put in?
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Do you want training lines/dimensions marked out on pitch or to the sides?
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ancillary facilities
i. Fences
Do you want the pitch fenced? If so what height?
Do you want high fencing behind the goals?
What entrance do you want onto the pitch players, maintenance machines, and spectators?
Do you need additional goal posts, training goals etc.?
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Lighting
Do you need additional lighting?
If so what lux?
Where will the cables be run, do they need to be under the pitch?
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Sports design
Does there need to be integration of sports built into the design (e.g. cricket, football, soccer)?
Is there adequate car parking for the increased patronage that the synthetic surface will generate?
______________________________________________________________________________________________
Training aids
Do you need to contain between half or a third pitch so that the field can be used accordingly for competition and
training?
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
5. Management considerations
5.1 Programming
What would be a typical week’s program for winter (88) season and which would be:
R = School and casual recreational games
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 136
T = Training, intense usage (senior/junior)
JC = Matches/comps for juniors
SC = Matches/competitions for seniors
Calculate the number of hours use per day, per week/season.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Management
With this number of hours, how is it best managed in relations to:
i. Programming bookings
ii. Operational daily
iii. Collecting fees
iv. Maintenance
________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Time /
Day
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Time /
Day
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
9am 9am
10am 10am
11am 11am
12noon 12noon
1pm 1pm
2pm 2pm
3pm 3pm
4pm 4pm
5pm 5pm
6pm 6pm
7pm 7pm
8pm 8pm
9pm 9pm
10pm 10pm
TOTALS TOTALS
Table 51: Summer and winter seasons
5.2 Economic consideration
1. Repayment philosophy
How does council expect to fund the capital development?
Does it need to borrow money and then use the income generation ability to repay the loan?
If so what period? What needs to be raised annually?
________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Replacement philosophy
Does council expect the annual income to be used to generate a replacement income base (RIB)?
What does the replacement income base need to be in 6/8/10 years’ time at both todays and projected costs?
What needs to be collected annually to be able to achieve the annual RIB
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 137
________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Pricing philosophy
Does council have a pricing strategy philosophy for indoor sports, other synthetic surfaces and outdoor pitches? Which is
appropriate for this pitches bearing in mind replacement philosophy and repayment philosophy?
Are there any other similar standard pitches that can be used as a benchmark, if so where? And what price?
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Pitch Owner Price peak Price off peak
What should the prices be for this pitch?
Notes:
________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Description Hourly peak Hourly off peak
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 138
Smart Connection Consultancy –
Profile
Introduction and Overview
Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd (SCC) is pleased
to share our company profile, so you have confidence that
we are experienced in providing advisory services in the
areas of synthetic surfaces technology for sport, from a
planning, standards, compliance, provision and playability
point of view.
For the past eight years Smart Connection Consultancy
has been providing advice to Local Government council’s
around Australia; State and Territory Governments as well
as national, state and territory sports peak bodies.
We take a highly consultative approach and work closely
with our clients during each stage of a project. We realise
that a number of skills are required to comprehensively
address your needs so we combine our own knowledge,
resources and skill sets with external specialists to provide
a one-stop-shop for your needs.
We have a very simple goal; we want to exceed
expectations and not only deliver on your goals and
address the outcomes that you are seeking, but also
provide transfer of knowledge to enhance the
understanding of your staff in the area of synthetic surface
technology.
Based in Melbourne, we work across Australia and the
Asia Pacific Rim, harnessing a multitude of professional
skills and expertise to provide advice and management
solutions for the leisure and sports industry.
Consultant Profile – Martin Sheppard – Managing
Director
Smart Connection Consultancy’s
Managing Director, Martin
Sheppard, is an international
speaker whose expertise is
recognised for aligning synthetic
surfaces and facility development,
with player pathways, supply and
demand forecasting and
participation strategies. His
2013/14 presentation and
conference schedule included Thailand, Hawaii, North
America, New Zealand and Cologne, in addition to the 30
plus presentations within Australia.
Martin has worked in the sport, recreation and leisure
industry for nearly 35 years, managing a diverse
portfolio of facilities including leisure centre’s, sports
facilities, museums, arts centres, theatres, parks,
cemeteries and crematorium, ice rinks, golf courses and
tourism destinations.
In addition, Martin has had a strong focus on program
development and delivery for specific target audiences,
including sports development, health promotion,
physical activity and recreation participation programs
and elite sports pathways. This allows him to have a
comprehensive understanding of the challenges that
many of his clients face.
Martin has developed a unique knowledge that has
resulted in the major synthetic surface suppliers and
manufacturers in Asia Pacific seeking his advice and
direction on the future of the industry. He has been
involved on some of the industry’s most innovative
Australian projects over the past seven years including:-
Working with and collaborating with the world,
Australian and state governing and peak bodies of
sport, including Hockey (FIH, HACT); Australian
Rugby League (NRL); Australian Rules Football
(AFL); Football (FIFA, FFV, Capital Football); Rugby
Union (IRB & ARU) and Tennis Australia.
Developing Australia’s first two National Synthetic
Surfaces Conference and Expo’s with support from
FIFA, IRB, Hockey Australia, AFL/Cricket Australia,
Tennis Australia, Skateboarding Australia, Parks
and Leisure Australia, New Zealand Recreation
Association, Community Sport Australia and more
than 30 key suppliers from the Asia Pacific Rim.
Feasibility studies and business cases for the
installation of synthetic solutions for the sports of
Football (soccer), Australian Rules, Cricket, Hockey,
Rugby Union, Athletics and multi-sport.
Procurement and project management of FIFA 1
and 2 star pitches; hockey national standard; AFL/
Cricket Australia; IRB Regulation 22 pitches.
Participation and growth strategies using synthetic
technology around the sports of Hockey, Football,
Australian Rules, Athletics and Rugby Union
Promotion of environmentally friendly solutions
including water harvesting, environmental infill’s and
green engineering practices.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 139
Publication of Australia’s pre-eminent publication on
synthetic technology – The Smart Guide to Synthetic
Surfaces.
Rigorous business planning around how to manage
and optimise facilities.
Photo 79: Recent Project: Feasibility into City of Swan synthetic multi-sport field development
Martin continues to develop his knowledge of synthetic
sports surfaces. Over the past 30 years, he has
successfully managed facilities including synthetic
athletics tracks, football pitches, cricket wickets and
outdoor sports areas.
Conferences
Martin has chaired various national, state and local
community committees in addition to industry forums, and
working groups. Speaking on the management planning
and development of synthetic surfaces has taken Martin
into many sectors including the build and construction
sector, parks and open space sector, the prison service,
education sector and civil engineering.
Publications
Martin has published extensively for a global audience:
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Surfaces (editions 1-
3)
Procurement and Contract Management (2005)
Physical Activity and Participation (2007)
Australasian Leisure Management magazine (2007 -
2013: 10 articles)
He has been commissioned to write articles for industry
magazines on the latest trends in synthetic surfaces.
Professional Memberships
Fellow – Chartered Institute of Management of Sport
and Physical Activity (CIMSPA) (UK)
Chair – Physical Activity Australia Registration
Board for Fitness Professionals
Committee Member – School Sport Victoria
Foundation
Member – Australian Leisure Facilities Association
Member – Parks and Leisure Australia
Member – VicSport
Member – Physical Activity Australia (PAA)
Our Proven Track Record
The company’s expertise in leisure, sport and physical
activity planning, synthetic feasibility and community
wellbeing studies is well regarded, with individual team
members recognised as reputable professionals in their
own areas of expertise.
Smart Connection Company has comprehensive
experience with the issues involved in sports facility
management, planning and development. The civil
engineering properties and playability of synthetic
surfaces with regards to such provision over recent
years has been omitted in many project teams, but
Smart Connection Company has strong collaborators to
ensure that this is addressed for our clients. To this end,
we have successfully completed a number of standards
reviews, sports strategies, master plans and feasibility
studies relevant to the industry, including:
NRL (2013) – Review of playing standards for
synthetic surfaces
Marrickville Council (2013) – Procurement (Design
and Build) for Arlington Reserve (FIFA 1 Star)
Sutherland Shire Council (2014) – Procurement
(Design and Build) for two (FIFA 1) Football (Soccer),
AFL & Cricket pitches
City of Ryde Council (2013) – Synthetics
Feasibility Study & Strategy
ACT National Hockey Centre (2012-13) –
Participation and Business Case Strategy
MacArthur Football Association (2013) –
Business case for Synthetic Football pitch
City of Whitehorse (2012) – Synthetics Feasibility
Study & Strategy
Pittwater Council (2012) – Procurement (Design
and Build) for Narrabeen Sports College – AFL,
Rugby Union and Football (FIFA 1 Star) pitch
City of Swan (2011-13) – Feasibility of Synthetic
Surfaces for Ellenbrook District Playing Fields
including demographic modelling to identify needs
for the sports of Football, Rugby, Hockey, multi-sport
/ recreation as well as exploring cricket / AFL
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 140
City of Willoughby (2011) – Strategic Advice and
Procurement Process, advice on synthetic surface, to
meet needs of Football (FIFA 1 Star) and Cricket
(AFL/CA) with Australia’s first ever AFL/CA surface
standard also meeting FIFA standards
Moreton Bay Regional Council (2011 & 2012) –
Feasibility advice on development of synthetics policy
and feasibility tools for assessment of future facilities
Pittwater Council (2012) – Procurement advice and
project management for new synthetic facility in
partnership with education department and AFL
City of Warringah (2010) – Strategic Advice and
Procurement Process – provision of advice on surface
type for sport, and then we wrote the specification for
the civil and sports surface in conjunction with Dalton
Consulting Engineers (DCE)
City of Knox (2010 & 2011) – provision of strategic
advice on the modelling, participation and development
for the Knox Soccer Centre
ACT Territory Government (2011) – Synthetic
Surfaces Feasibility Study (including 3 specific master
planning programs and successful government
submissions for funding)
City of Whittlesea (2009) – 3 synthetic pitches (FIFA
2 + FIFA 1) - feasibility study and procurement advice
ACT Football Federation (2008) – Feasibility &
Business Modelling Study – Hawker Oval – FIFA 1
standard – feasibility study, business case modelling
and management strategy
Banyule City Council (2011) – Soccer Synthetic
Feasibility Study
City of Melbourne (2005-2008) – Synthetic Feasibility
Study (x2) and procurement advice for in process for
multi-sport synthetic
City of Melton (2011) – advice on synthetic surface
options for soccer and cricket
City of Kingston (2009) – Advice on type of surface
and procurement process for two FIFA pitches
Photo 80: Procurement of two football fields for Kingston City Council
ACT Education Department (2008) – Two grants
obtained for Multi-sports & Football (FIFA 2)
Yarra Ranges Shire Council (2010) – Procurement
support for a synthetics FIFA 1 Star
Moonee Valley Council (2010) – Successful grant
application and the procurement process is currently
being planned
City of Stonington (2010) – Synthetics Surfaces
Feasibility Study
ACT Government (2008) – Synthetic pitch strategy
development
ACT Government (2008) – Diagnostic tools –
synthetic pitches
Port Stephens Council (2009) – Advice on
synthetic surfaces
Delfin Land Lease (Penrith) (2007) – Sports
precinct master planning study
Boroondara City Council (2009) – Sustainable
sports surfaces study
Kingston and Bayside City Councils (2008) –
Artificial sports surface study
Photo 81: Recent Project: Procurement of Northbridge Oval – Football FIFA 1 Star & AFL/ Cricket Community Standard pitch
Football Federation Victoria /Surf Shire Council
(2008/09) – Regional soccer feasibility study
East Gippsland and Wellington Shire Councils
(2009) – Development of strategic plan for sporting
infrastructure
Eastern Region soccer strategy (2007) – SRV,
FFV and six councils
Baw Baw Shire (2006) – Trafalgar and Yarragon
recreation needs study and sports precinct master
plans
What we can offer
Smart Connection Consultancy offers a range of services
for each stage of the planning, design, procurement,
project management, and programming of the synthetic
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 141
surface. This allows our clients to have confidence that
they only need to contract one organisation and we will
project manage the process for them. The key stages
include:
Planning and knowledge building
We offer clients advice and knowledge sharing at this first
stage so they can contextualise the opportunity, consider
the options strategically, with rigor and demonstrable facts
tested and prioritised to ensure that the most appropriate
options are determined. These services include:
Knowledge sharing master classes
Planning workshops
Sports participation strategies
Facility feasibility studies and strategies
Synthetic field installation tours - The good, bad
and the (very) ugly
Photo 82: Master class tour of a facility with Local Governments by Martin Sheppard
Design
Our strategic relationship with Dalton Consulting
Engineers (DCE) in Melbourne, (www.dceprofile.com/)
and with similar organisations in other countries and states
ensures we have the design studio to work with our clients
so their vision can be achieved.
This includes the design for procurement or in-house
development. Our links to the world governing bodies of
sport are at the key levels and we can ensure that the
design meets the needs of our clients and also the
standards of the sport.
Photo 83: Design example for project in NSW
Procurement support
Smart Connection Consultancy has supported and
managed a large number of procurement projects for
Local, State and Territory Government departments as
well as sport at a local and state level. The
collaboration with DCE brings strong backgrounds in
both procurement and the civil engineers perspectives
allowing us to cover all bases whether that is Design
and Construct or Detailed Specification options.
We assist and support every stage of the procurement
process to ensure that the client is provided with a
solution that is fit for purpose, considering the following
aspects:
1. Planning and Design – Identifying what level
of performance is needed, what durability, how it
integrates with the landscape, how it is going to be
managed and what constraints there are on site. All of
this will guide the decision making around the
Procurement Strategy (1 or 2 stage process);
2. Procurement Strategy – Expression of
Interest and /or Request For Tender – we can run the
program or support our client to do it. We can design
and develop the specification, schedules, complete the
drawings, develop the evaluation strategy as well as
take it to market. Every stage of the process has rigor
and is transparent.
3. Tender Evaluation – Offering independent
process that ensures that the right organisation and
product is chosen for your project in a transparent
manner.
4. Project Management – Through DCE’s
expertise they can project manage the process for our
clients from design to practical completion.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 142
Program provision and management
Understanding how to manage the synthetic facilities is
critical for success. Martin has managed synthetic
surface sports facilities since the early 1990’s. He
understands the balance between community use,
sports pathway and development sessions while
ensuring there is a strategy for replacement cost
recovery.
Smart Connection Consultancy has conducted business
cases and strategies for more than 50 sport and
Government organisations with the aim of developing
greater participation at their facilities. Recently, we’ve
been working with a five pitch hockey centre to optimise
their usage and increase their return so that they can
afford to replace the fields.
Standards & advocacy
Smart Connection Consultancy has worked with key
sports bodies in Australia in the development and
guidance of new standards including the National
Rugby League (NRL).
In addition we have provided guidance to national and
state sport organisations on how to interpret and inform
their clubs and organisations on the use and installation
of synthetic surfaces.
With support and open access to FIFA, IRB, Tennis
Australia, Bowls Australia, AFL; Hockey Australia as
well as peak industry bodies in Australia, New Zealand,
Asia, America and Europe, Smart Connection
Consultancy is a strong collaborator to have on any
synthetic surface project.
We continue to promote the benefits of synthetic
surface technology as a way for an organisation to
promote opportunities for their community to be more
active through play, recreation and sport at all levels.
The Smart Guide to Synthetic Sport Surfaces
© Smart Connection Consultancy Pty Ltd 2015 143
Po Box 5247 South Melbourne
Victoria, Australia, 3205
+61 3 9421 0133
0404022355