SYNTHETIC SURFACES
Trends in synthetic turf provision
What is the current trend in synthetic pitch surfaces? The main trend over the last decade has been towards ‘third generation’ or 3G surfaces. A mixture of relatively long-pile yarns with rubber and sand infills, these surfaces have been developed to replicate the playing performance of high-quality natural turf surfaces, and have become very popular for football and rugby use. While we do still see many multi-use surfaces chosen
where there is a need to accommodate a range of sports, particularly within the educational sector, there’s also been a steady move towards synthetic surfaces designed for spe- cific sports, including football, rugby and hockey.
Have the standards of synthetic pitches changed over recent years? I believe that the standards of construction are generally very high, though the industry has been through some- thing of a learning curve as 3G surfaces have become more common. For example, contractors have had to learn new installation techniques for different surface types, and to develop the skills required. There is now much more sophis- ticated equipment available to ensure that infill materials are installed correctly, generally in thinner, more uniform layers to achieve the correct quality and performance. The advent of 3G surfaces also led to the more frequent
use of unbound or dynamic forms of base construction, rather than the more traditional, fully-engineered pitches. If the technical requirements of this form of construc- tion are not fully appreciated and it’s regarded simply as a more cost-effective solution, problems of poor surface level tolerances and poor drainage can arise. There has been a general trend back towards fully-engineered construction for synthetic pitches.
What are the significant technological improvements to synthetic turf ? There have been significant advances in the yarns and fi- bres used for synthetic turf surfaces. There’s now a much
SAPCA Pitch Division chair Mark Freeman gives an update on synthetic turf trends and how to ensure a high standard installation
wider range of yarns available, with different profiles, shapes and thicknesses, which make it easier to achieve the playing performance needed for individual sports, and with greater consistency. Fibres are now also more durable – enabling surfaces to achieve longer life expectancy.
What standards are there for specific sports? With the development of numerous test methods that at- tempt to measure and compare the playing characteristics of sports surfaces objectively, it is now common for sports governing bodies – typically at international level – to stipulate the playing performance they recommend or require for different levels of use and standards of play. There are also now agreed British/European Standards for synthetic sports surfaces. The Sports and Play Construction Association’s
(SAPCA) Code of Practice for the Design and Construction of Synthetic Turf Pitches complements these performance requirements and sets out the minimum standards of con- struction that should be used to achieve the desired playing characteristics. The Code of Practice also provides valuable guidance on the construction and specification options.
How should someone choose the right standards for their project? It’s vital that specifiers – and those offering technical advice – should fully understand the numerous options for perfor- mance standards and construction specifications and the different qualities of alternative materials and products. The level of playing performance standard for the synthet-
ic surface should be chosen according to the type of facility and the intended standards of play; considerable amounts of project funding can be wasted choosing the most stringent standards if they are simply not appropriate to the facility. At a school or in a public park, for example, it is very unlikely that an international competition will be held. When analysing competing quotes or tenders, it‘s impor-
tant to compare specifications and products very carefully on a like-for-like basis to judge true value for money. There
40 Read Sports Management online
sportsmanagement.co.uk/digital
Issue 3 2011 © cybertrek 2011
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84