AirDrain Natural Turf Submittal : simplebooklet.com

AirDrain What drains better than Air For Natural Turf Thru a research project conducted at Texas A M it was concluded that you can reduce your irrigation needs using AirField Systems AirDrain The five year research project was jointly funded by the United States Golf Association and AirField Systems and was a collaborative effort between Texas A M AirField Systems and the United States Golf Association The data from the research showed that the AirField Systems drainage profile provided between one to three more days of plant available water than a United States Golf Association recommended gravel and sand profile Click here for more information about the study titled A Comparison of Water Drainage and Storage in Putting Greens Built Using Airfield Systems and USGA Methods of Construction Natural Turf 10 11 Root Zone USGA Spec Sand Profile AirDrain s Perched Water Table AirDrain Geocell Drainage Layer Filter Fabric AirDrain Geocell Filter Fabric Impermeable Liner optional Filter Fabric if Liner used Compacted Subgrade Per Geotechnical Engineer Benefits of an AirField System Design include 1 to 3 more days of plant available water stored in the root zone depending on climate Significantly reduces daily irrigation needs as told to us by our customers Healthier turf Stronger root system as told to us by our customers 100 Vertical Drainage under the entire playing surface AirDrain is a 100 recycled copolymer with the impact modifier metallocene qualifying it as a No Break plastic Helps eliminate standing water Simplifies maintenance as told to us by our customers Minimal site disturbance Far less excavation and disposal Several Installation days are saved over a gravel installation Compact shipping that reduces overall storage and transportation costs An AirDrain System sand profile creates its own perched water table

Page 2

Note The information in this article has been adapted from the original work published in Crop Science titled Water Storage in Putting Greens Constructed with United States GolfAssociation and Airfield Systems Designs Mcinnes and Thomas 2011 51 1261 1267 and in HortScience titled Water Flow Though Sand based Root Zones atop Geotextiles Rose Harveyet aJ 2012 47 1543 1547 The research was coJlaboratively funded by Texas A M University Airfield Systems Oklahoma City OK and the United States GolfAssociation Airfield Systems offers an alternative to the standard USGA putting green design Their design utilizes a highly porous I inch deep plastic grid AirDrain Figure 1 in place of a 4 inch deep gravel layer As with gravel AirDrain allows rapid lateral movement of excess water to drains and thus provides for uniform horizontal moisture content within the root zone While voids in AirDrain are very effective in transmitting water they are much too large for the sand in the root zone to bridge for self support so a geotextile is used atop the grid to prevent infilling of the void space Use of geotextiles in putting green construction has been controversial due to the perceived potential for clogging of the fabric by migrating fine particles and eventual loss of permeability USGA Putting Green Natural Tuff We became interested in the hydraulic performance of the Airfield Systems design after Texas A M University constructed a soccer field with the Airfield System design in 2002 Anecdotal evidence from field managers suggested that the new field required less frequent watering than the University s football field that had been constructed following the USGA design While the two fields were constructed with different root zone mixtures and the physical environments surrounding the fields are quite different we suspected that there may have been a difference in the amount of water stored in root zones on fields constructed with the two designs i e a difference in the vertical distributions of water content in the root zones We knew from the physics of water in sand that the amount of water stored in a root zone decreases with increasing tension at the bottom of the AirField Systems Green root zone and we expected because of the geometrical and physical differences in the designs that there would be differences in water tension at the bottom of the root zones Geotextile 4 inch Gravel Layer Ail Oraill Geogrid Imperme hle liner or Geotextile PrelHued SUb Base Figure 1 The highly porous I inch deep AirDrain right offers an alternative to the 4 inch deep gravel layer in the standard USGA putting green design above left 2013 by United States Golf Association All rights reserved TERO Vol 12 4 6 10 I July August 2013 Please see Policies for the Reuse of USGA Green Section TGIF Number 224057 Publications 6

Page 3

To test for differences in tension developed at the bottom of the root zones of the two designs we constructed laboratory based test cells from 4 inch diameter PVC pipe containing profiles of the Airfield Systems and USGA greens Using tensiometers we were able to demonstrate that the tension that developed at the bottom of the root zone in the Airfield Systems design was appreciably less than that in the USGA design At that point we thought it worthwhile to investigate this finding on a slightly larger scale and a more realistic setting To this end we constructed test greens in 14 inch diameter PVC pipe Three sands and three gravels were chosen such that they covered the ranges from coarser to finer sides of the USGA recommendations for particle size distribution To create root zone mixtures the coarser two sands had peat moss added to increase water retention The finer sand was GRASS SURFACE SPECIFIED SAND ROOT ZONE MIX PREPARED SUBGRADE PER GEO TECHNICAL ENGINEERS REPORT Cross section of a putting green using the AirDrain instead of a 4 inch gravel layer in a USGA green Drawing courtesy of AirField Systems 16 r top of root zone VI While the root zone may be saturated above the drainage layer the water is under tension so the term perched water table often used to describe the state of water in the root zone immediately above the drainage layer is a bit of a misnomer A better term might be perched capillary fringe Capillary fringe is the saturated zone above a water table where water is under tension The further upward from the bottom of the root zone the greater the water tension As distance increases upward and water tension increases the root zone eventually begins to desaturate as the largest pores drain As distance increases beyond this height water content continues to decrease As a consequence the tension that develops at the bottom sets the starting tension and determines the thickness of the saturated zone and the amount of water stored in the root zone profile Figure 2 The depth and hydraulic properties of the drainage layer determine the magnitude of tension that develops at the bottom of the root zone AirDrain is l inch deep so the maximum tension that can develop at the bottom of the root zone during drainage in the Airfield Systems design would be 1 inch of water Gravel is typically 4 inches deep so the tension that could develop would be up to 4 inches of water depending on the hydraulic properties of the gravel and the depth to which sand ingresses pores of the gravel Water is slow to drain from small pores into large pores but if both systems were sealed from evaporation the tensions would eventually reach 1 and 4 inches at the bottom of the root zone in the Airfield Systems and USGA design greens respectively An occasional finger of sand penetrating the gravel in the USGA design green can lead to an appreciably quicker increase in tension at the root zone gravel interface this area represents the amount of water stored in the profile about 3 inches 12 Q

Page 4

Figure 3 Test greens constructed in 14 inch PVC pipe with either gravel or geotextile atop AirDrain as the drainage layers Both types of test greens contained a pair of porous cups connected to plastic tubing that formed manometer tensiometers to allow measurement of water pressure or tension at the root zonedrainage layer interface was under less tension than the water in test greens constructed with the USGA design by about 2 2 inches of water tension Figure 5 This lower tension was associated with an increase in water storage of about 0 5 inch in the Airfield System design greens above that in the USGA design greens Figure 5 This increase in water retention could lead to less frequent necessity to irrigate Because of reduced tension at the bottom of the root zone these results also implied that the tension at which root zone mixtures should be tested for capillary porosity when intended to be used in an Airfield System design green should be reduced to achieve similar not amended These three root zone mixtures were used in combination with the three gravels to construct test greens of the USGA design The gravel layer in all of the test greens was 4 inches deep An intermediate choke layer of coarse sand was not used The same three root zone mixtures were used in combination with four geotextiles atop AirOrain to construct test greens of the Airfield Systems design We used the Lutradur polyester geotextile prescribed by Airfield Systems at the time and chose three additional geotextiles that had the same apparent opening size 0 2 mm but differed in material and or manner of construction Manometertensiometers were used to measure pressure or tension that developed at the root zone drainage layer interface of both designs Figure 3 After the test green columns were packed with 12 inches of the root zone mixtures they were sprigged with MiniVerde bermudagrass supplied by King Ranch TurfgrassWharton Farms Wharton TX Following a period to grow in the grass a series of experiments were conducted that measured the amount of water stored in the root zone profiles and the water tension that developed at the bottom of the root zones of the different treatments after irrigation and drainage Vertically oriented time domain reflectometry TOR probes were used to measure the amount of water stored in the root zone profiles Figure 4 Periodically during the course of the study the test greens were watered until drainage was observed and then the amount of water stored in the profiles and the water tension at the bottom of the root zones were recorded for 48 hours As with our preliminary lab study we found that the water at the bottom of the root zones of test greens constructed with the Airfield design Figure 4 Test green with vertically installed 1 ft long TOR probe used to measure average water content within the root zone profile 2013 by United States Golf Association All rights reserved TERO Vol 12 4 6 10 I July August 2013 Please see Policies for the Reuse of USGA Green Section TGIF Number 224057 Publications 8

Page 5

year long laboratory experiment to investigate a range of geotextiles that were suited to supporting sand in the Airfield System design and determine whether or not they limit drainage out of the root zone In this experiment 6 inch diameter PVC columns were used to contain combinations of 12 inches of three sand mixes with 10 geotextiles held atop AirOrain Figure 6 Manometer tensiometers again were used to measure pressure or tension at the sand geotextile interfaces Mix 1 had a particle size distribution that ran down the center of the USGA specs Mix 2 was made by blending Mix 1 with a sandy clay loam 9 1 by mass and Mix 3 was made by blending Mix 1 with a sand having excess fines 1 1 by mass Mix 1 and Mix 2 met USGA recommendations Mix 3 contained twice the recommended amount of very fine sand The apparent opening sizes of the geotextiles used ranged from 0 15 to 0 43 mm After the sands were added to the columns they were regularly irrigated Periodically the rate that I inch of irrigation water drained from a column was measured and the pressure tension at the sandgeotextile interface was recorded For the first six months any particles that washed out of the sand through the geotextiles were accumulated and analyzed for total dry weight and particle size distribution At the end of the study the saturated hydraulic conductivity of the sand geotextile combinations were measured Statistical analyses showed that drainage rate saturated hydraulic conductivity and mass of eluviated particles were not dependent on the properties of the geotextiles but rather on the properties of the sands Figure 7 Most all of the particles that washed out of the columns were of clay and silt sizes This could be construed as evidence that the geotextiles were sieving out larger particles but we found that the size of particles in the drainage water was not related to the apparent opening size of 3 2 T 1 v t Vi 3 1 C1l u c S e 3 0 Airfield Systems design I 2 9 a c c 2 8 Vl 2 7 2 6 II 2 5 0 0 USGA design r 1 t 0 5 1 0 1 5 2 0 2 5 3 0 Water Tension at Bottom inches of water 3 5 Figure 5 Range in the mean amount of water stored in 12 inch root zone profiles in Airfield Systems geotextiles atop AirOrain and USGA gravels design test greens 12 hours after irrigation Means were of the three root zone mixture treatments and variations shown were from drainage type treatments i e type of geotextile or gravel Stored water in the profile was measured by TOR and water tension was measured with manometertensiometers moisture retention to greens built according to the USGA recommendations In doing so slightly coarser sand would meet specifications for capillary water retention in the Airfield design Conversely sands that push the very fine side of the current recommendations might not meet specifications for air filled porosity The question of whether or not geotextiles used in a green will clog with fines migrating out of the root zone was also studied To address this issue we conducted a Figure 6 Columns used to measure potential clogging of geotextiles by fines migrating out of the root zone 2013 by United States Golf Association All rights reserved TERO Vol 12 4 6 10 I July August 2013 Please see Policies for the Reuse of USGA Green Section TGIF Number 224057 Publications 9

Page 6

1 0 0 8 OJ c u pressure atop any of the geotextiles during drainage as would have occurred if the geotextile had been restricting drainage out of the column In conclusion the results of our studies gave no reason to prevent more widespread use of Airfield Systems design as an alternative to the USGA method for putting green construction Airfield Systems design produces additional water holding capacity above the USGA design which leads to more plant available water given the same root zone mixture and possibly less frequent requirement for irrigation Our data also support the general use of properly sized geotextiles to support sand based root zones in putting greens Geotextiles with apparent opening size of 0 2 mm worked well in our test greens and a woven geotextile with an apparent opening size twice as large 0 43 mm retained the root zone sand just as well r r 1f t 0 6 i 1f c o u 0 4 irttmt t t h rlt M Mt t _rtl u 0 2 i t 1H I1 IlJ 0 0 i 0 00001 0 0001 0 001 0 01 0 1 Particle Diameter mm Figure 7 Size distribution of particles washed out of the three sand mixes through the geotextiles The solid line for each sand mixture represent the mean fraction of particles finer than a given diameter over 30 columns containing the mixture 10 geotextiles with 3 replicates and the dashed lines represent one standard deviation each side of the mean Summary Points Water at the bottom of the test green rootzones constructed with the Airfield design was under less tension than the water in test greens constructed with the USGA design about 2 2 inches of water tension This lower tension was associated with an increase in water storage of about 0 5 inch in the Airfield System design greens above that in the USGA design greens Geotextiles with apparent opening size of 0 2 mm worked well in test greens and a woven geotextile with an apparent opening size twice as large 0 43 mm retained the root zone sand just as well The geotextiles that were tested prevented the migration and passage of the sand rootzone mixture into the drainage layer but it appeared that the tested sands were responsible for determining the particle sizes leaving the columns The results gave no reason to prevent more widespread use of Airfield Systems design as an alternative to the USGA method for putting green construction the geotextiles which it should have been if the geotextiles were acting as sieves i e the geotextiles with the larger AOS would have let larger particles pass and vice versa but this did not happen The geotextiles obviously prevented the passage of particles as their purpose is to prevent migration of the root zone sand into the drainage layer but it appeared in our study that the sands were responsible for determining the particle sizes leaving the columns Drainage rates from the columns containing the sand without added fines increased over the year presumably because pore channels in the sand were widened when silt and clay washed out of the profile Drainage rates of the columns containing the two sands with additional fines decreased over the year but the decrease was not statistically related to the properties of the geotextiles To test if the sands themselves were clogging saturated hydraulic conductivities were measured as layers of sand were removed from columns Since saturated hydraulic conductivity would not depend on the depth of sand in a hydraulically uniform column any observed changes would be due to difference in the conductivity of the layers removed compared to those remaining We found that when surface layers were removed the saturated hydraulic conductivity increased indicating that the surface layers had lower conductivities This was not too surprising as the majority of inter particle pores of sand meeting USGA recommendation are smaller than the apparent opening sizes of the geotextiles we tested In support of our conclusion that the sands were clogging and not the geotextiles we did not notice a build up of positive DR KEVIN J MCINNES is Professor of Soil and Environmental Physics in the Department of Soil and Crop Sciences Texas A M University His research focuses on water and energy transport in soil KEISHA M ROSE HARVEY graduate student in the Department of Soil and Crop Sciences Texas A M University JAMES C THOMAS CPAg is senior research associate in the Department of Soil and Crop Sciences at Texas A M University 2013 by United States Golf Association All rights reserved TERO Vol 12 4 6 10 I July August 2013 Please see Policies for the Reuse of USGA Green Section TGIF Number 224057 Publications 10

Page 7

Page 8

4 3 2 1 0 25 Slope Toward Trench Hydroseed or Sand Based Thin Cut Sod Concrete Curbing Sand Root Zone Mix D D A Compacted Subbase per Geotechnical Engineer Prepared Subbase per Geotechnical Engineer C C Perforated Pipe Gravel Bedding Material B B Geotextile Airdrain Air Void Geotextile only extends 3 ft past trench Impermeable Liner Geotextile per Geotechnical Engineer Geotextile DRAWN Gary 3 11 2012 Airfield Systems CHECKED QA A This drawing specifications and the information contained herein is for general presentation purposes only All final drawings and layouts should be determined by a licensed engineer s 4 Airfield Systems 8028 N May Avenue Suite 201 Oklahoma City OK 73120 405 359 3775 http www airfieldsystems com 3 TITLE A Natural Grass System MFG APPROVED SIZE The information contained in this drawing is the sole property of Airfield Systems Any reproduction in part or as a whole without prior written consent is prohibited 2 C SCALE REV DWG NO 7 Natural Grass NG_003 SHEET 1 1 OF 1

Page 9

Page 10

Page 11

General Information General Construction Injection Molded Copolymer Composition Copolymer Polypropylene Using an Impact Modifier Dimensions 31 784 x 31 880 x 1 000 7 03 sq ft Unit Weight 3 1 lbs Material Resin Pellets Shipping Parts Per Pallet 114 Pallet Dimensions 33 x 33 x 48 Pallet Weight 390 lbs Area Coverage Per Pallet 798 sq ft Pallets Per Trailer 114 3 wide x 2 tall x 19 deep Area Covered Per Trailer 90 972 sq ft ASTM and ISO Properties 1 Physical Nominal Value Test Method 0 940 ASTM D792 20 g 10 min ASTM D1238 Nominal Value Test Method 57 490 lb ft3 ASTM D1505 2 145 psi ASTM D638 16 ASTM D638 100 175 psi ASTM D790 Compression Strength 73 F 233 psi unfilled ASTM D6254 Impact Nominal Value Test Method Specific Gravity Melt Mass Flow Rate 230 C 2 16 kg Mechanical Density Tensile Strength Yield 73 F Tensile Elongation Yield 73 F Flexural Modulus 73 F Notched Izod Impact 73 F 0 125 in ASTM D256 Thermal Nominal Value Test Method 160 F ASTM D648 Deflection Temperature Under Load 264 psi Unannealed Expansion Contraction Index1 Temperature Humidity Length Width 100 F 98 31 881 31 817 5 F 0 31 765 31 713 Change 116 104 Joint Expansion Contraction Capacity 420 572 Safety Factor 362 550 Examples of Usage Application Safety Factor Auto 40 psi x 168 Truck 1 Required Strength 110 psi x 61 DC10 Independent laboratory testing conducted by TRI Environmental Inc 250 psi TSI Testing Services Inc and Wassenaar x 27

Page 12

Proper Sequencing and Orientation of AirDrain GeoCell Panels for Rapid Installation Pallet Staging AirDrain pallets cover approximately 798sqft per pallet and should be staged accordingly within the installation area so that you minimize the amount of time to stage the AirDrain grid along the install lines across the project Typically placing the AirDrain every 65 feet across and 15 20 feet back from each other Call AirField with questions that you might have about proper staging and installation All Installations must start in the Top Left Corner of the Field and work Left to Right to be installed properly 1 Orientate the AirDrain GeoCell materials with the integral indicator tab to the panel s bottom left corner painted yellow Install the AirDrain units by placing units with the connectors and platforms up creating a flat surface for the profile above If the male connectors do not fall or drop into the female connectors then the orientation is incorrect please call AirField Systems Immediately at 405 359 3775

Page 13

2 Install the AirDrain panels across the field in a rowed pattern Staggering of rows will allow for multiple row completion by a multi manned crew 3 Once the first row has progressed across the project start with a second row Have a person staging the panels in three s snapped together along the row The crew can then install the left side of the panel while elevating slightly the top portion so the male and female connectors don t sync once the left side has been snapped with a pull along the row direction the top portion should fall into place and with a bottom vertical pull holding the inside of parts 1 3 snap all three parts in place 4 AirDrain panels can be shaped to individual field areas as needed with appropriate cutting device If a typical field is installed correctly there should only be two sides that would need to be trimmed A If only a few parts need to be trimmed use tin snips B If many parts require trimming set up a table and use a circular saw with a no melt plastic cutting saw blade Visit AirField Systems Flickr page to watch a video of a 74 000 sq ft project for Chesapeake Energy illustrating a 3 man crew installation DISCLAIMER The preceding and following drawings and or general installation guidelines are provided only to show a concept design for installation and are not instructions for any particular installation These drawings and general instructions are not complete and are provided only to assist a licensed Geo Technical Engineer a Landscape Architect and or Civil Engineer in preparing actual construction and installation plans These drawings and instructions must be reviewed by a licensed Geo Technical Engineer a Landscape Architect and or Civil Engineer and adapted to the condition of a particular installation site and to comply with all state and local requirements for each installation site THESE DRAWINGS AND OR GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS DO NOT MODIFY OR SUPPLEMENT ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES INCLUDING MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE IF APPLICABLE RELATING TO THE PRODUCT 6 20 14