
Want to get news alerts delivered direct to your inbox? Edit your email preferences.
Going Dutch on Weed Control!
3 hours ago by: andy dixon
"What is the point when 97% of herbicides are used by private ..."
Build it and they will come... a report on the Isle of Man's first seminar for the industry
19 hours ago by: petermarkcraig
"Thank you for those very kind words Mike. I genuinely felt t ..."
Will it take hose pipe bans and Drought Orders to see legislative compliance?
2 days ago by: vid
"Hi Dave, this may be of help to well financed or municipal s ..."
Build it and they will come... a report on the Isle of Man's first seminar for the industry
4 days ago by: Pitchcare Peter
"Who's a fantastic tool? 'Genius' might be slightly overst ..."
Build it and they will come... a report on the Isle of Man's first seminar for the industry
4 days ago by: Cranfield
"A fantastic tool for promoting our wonderful industry and th ..."
By Dr Colin Mumford,Dr Andrew Mitchell & Keith McAuliffe in General Sports on 18th Dec 2008 12:00
Best Use Modelling for Sport Surfaces Project - Setting the standard for Council managed winter sport fields
The measurement of the performance characteristics of a sports field provides knowledge of the current condition of the sports field, and enables comparisons to be made to prescribed standards. If certain performance characteristics, such as surface hardness or drainage, are identified as being below the prescribed standards, informed decision making, as to the adjustments the management practices require to achieve the prescribed standards, can be made.
An empirical set of prescribed standards for council managed sports fields has been proposed by the New Zealand Sports Turf Institute (NZSTI). These standards are based upon observations and measurements made by senior Agronomists over many years across a broad range of sports fields. An example of the proposed standard is given in the following table.
Proposed Performance standard - for Council managed sports fields
|
Component |
Limits |
Notes |
|
Total ground cover |
> 98% at start of a winter/summer playing season; >80% during a playing season No bare areas greater than 100 mm in diameter |
Visual assessment using a quadrate (0.5 x 0.5m or greater) divided into 100 squares |
|
Weed cover |
< 20% grass weeds no broad leaf weeds |
Visual assessment using a quadrate (0.5 x 0.5m or greater) divided into 100 squares |
|
Evenness |
< 20mm |
Measured below 3m straight edge |
|
Surface slope - Direction of play - Across play |
1.25% 2.5% |
Measured using 3m straight edge and Smart digital level or similar |
|
Surface Hardness |
35 - 150g |
2.25kg Clegg Hammer |
|
Worm activity |
< 6 surface casts per m2 |
Count number of surface cast in a quadrate (0.5x0.5m or greater) divided into 100 squares |
|
Soil drainage |
No visual symptoms of poor drainage in top 50mm*, no surface water remains 1 hour after rainfall ceases |
Assessed from 50mm soil core taken to 100mm, visual assessment of surface |
* Visual symptoms include red/orange or grey mottling, heavy clay layers near surface, continuous layers of blue/black, anaerobic odour
Monitoring the progress of the desired changes to the performance characteristics through a process of reviewing and re-measurement will show whether or not:
· Any adjustments to the management practices were effective.
· Any further adjustments to the maintenance practices are required.
· The sports field has achieved the prescribed standard.
The Best Use Modelling for Sports Surfaces Project, developed by the NZSTI, incorporates a programme of periodic measurement and assessment of the performance characteristics of a sports field, and suggests the direction that future management decisions and practises should take to achieve or maintain specified performance characteristics through:
· Benchmarking existing performance characteristics.
· Identifying any management practises that may be limiting field performance.
· Identifying changes to maintenance practices that are required to improve field performance.
· Producing a calendar of specific maintenance work, such as aeration treatments.
· Providing advice on best practise.
In some instances, dependant on the aspirations of the sports field manager, the recommendation of upgrading existing infrastructure, such as installing drainage or irrigation, may be required, even to the point where a complete reconstruction of the surface is necessary.
Measuring performance characteristics
Two distinct areas of a sports field are measured; the soil profile properties, and the field's surface quality and performance. The evaluation of the soil profile is carried out to a depth of up to 300 mm (if possible). The properties that are measured and recorded include: depth of thatch, visible rooting depth, depth of soil layers, a determination of the soil texture and basic structure, and the presence of any mottling and anaerobic odours (Figure 1). Soil samples from 0-50 and 50-100 mm are collected for determination of volumetric water content, bulk density and percent organic matter. For sand carpet fields, the degree of contamination of the top 40 mm of sand by fine soil and organic material is also determined.
|
|
|
|
Figure 1: Example soil profile cores showing some of the variation in the profiles of the sports fields tested.
The field's surface quality and performance is measured by assessing the following:
· Total percentage ground cover (including weeds) (Figure 2).
· Turf species composition.
· Percentage weed cover.
· Identification of weed species present.
· Surface hardness.
· Soil penetration resistance.
· Soil shear resistance.
· Surface evenness under a three metre straight edge.
· Surface slope in the direction of play and across the field of play.
· Evaluation of earth worm activity.
|
|
|
|
Figure 2: Some examples of total ground cover assessments - (from left to right) 10%, 30%, 60% and 100% cover.
Furthermore, the testing can be extended to incorporate infiltration rate and traction testing, as well as a full survey of field levels and an environmental compliance audit (ECA). With the option of having additional tests carried out, the Best Use Modelling Project service can be tailored to the specific needs of the council.
Ideally year-round testing is conducted to show any seasonal variation, particularly in ground cover and surface hardness. Where testing is limited, however, due to a full fixture list, budgetary constraints or other limiting factor, initial tests are carried out in the winter months when, in general, field performance is at its worst. Issues of poor ground cover, restricted drainage, and worm activity are clearly evident during the winter sports season.
Test locations
The locations of the tests correspond with those published previously, giving consistency in the sampling, and therefore achieving more reliable, repeatable long term testing. Testing positions for rugby (union and league) fields include four of the five locations described by McClement and Baker (1994), in an angled transect across the field (Figure 3). One wing location (fifth location of McClement and Baker) is substituted for an area which is most likely to become limiting, such as an area of poor grass cover or high concentration of weeds. Testing positions for football (soccer) fields include the six locations used by Holmes and Bell (1986) and Bell and Holmes (1988) representing areas of high, medium and low wear However, if another area of the field - an area of poor grass cover, high weed concentration or an existing large bare area - is likely to become limiting, this location would be substituted for one of the low wear areas. Each testing position covers an area of approximately 5 x 5 m, and within each test area three replicates of each performance test are undertaken.
|
|
For more information about SSMES, please contact Baz Woodcock on
Telephone 06 356 8090 ext 707
Fax 06 354 0081
Mobile 027 500 1333
E-mail bwoodcock@nzsti.org.nz
NZ Sport Turf Institute would like to thank SPARC and Technology NZ for their assistance with funding the Best Use Modelling for Sport Surfaces Project, and also the eight pilot councils for allowing access to their sports fields and for the information they contributed.
References
Bell, M.J. and Holmes, G. (1988). 'The playing quality of association football pitches', Journal of the Sports Turf Research Institute, 64, 19-47.
Holmes, G. and Bell, M.J. (1986). 'A pilot study of the playing quality of football pitches', Journal of the Sports Turf Research Institute, 62, 74-90.
McClements, I. and Baker, S.W. (1994). 'The playing quality of rugby pitches', Journal of the Sports Turf Research Institute, 70, 29-43.
Article kindly supplied curtesey of the New Zealand Turf Sports Turf Insitute (Inc) Published in their New Zealand Turf Management Journal (November 2008 Vol 23, no.4 issue).
Read more articles in General Sports, by Dr Colin Mumford,Dr Andrew Mitchell & Keith McAuliffe or from December 2008.