laboratory testing abrasion & infill id

LABORATORY TESTING

ABRASION & INFILL ID

Unit #2 ● 155 River Road ● Bow ● New Hampshire ● 03304

Telephone: (603) 715 5453 ● E-Mail: [email protected] of 4

Project Information

Summary Sports Labs USA was commissioned to perform infill identification and abrasion testing. Infill

samples were sent to our laboratory. The tests performed were per the standards listed

below.

Each system sample was constructed using the infill combinations shown in the component legend below per ASTM E11 – Standard Specification for Woven Wire Test Sieve Cloth and Test Sieves.

ASTM F1015 - Standard Test Method for Relative Abrasiveness of Synthetic Turf Playing Surfaces

Project Name Guardian Innovations TPE Abrasion Infill Identification

Sample Received

4/11/2016

Client Information

Guardian Innovations 3044 Adriatic Court Peachtree Corners, GA 30071

Date May 5, 2016

Report Status Final

Job No. 90905/991

Prepared by Kieran O’Donnell

Field Operation Manager

Checked By Jeffrey Gentile

Laboratory Director

Notes:

1. This report has been prepared by Sports Labs USA with all reasonable skill, care and diligence within the terms of the contract with the Client and within the limitations of the resources devoted to it.

2. This report is confidential to the Client and Sports Labs USA accepts no responsibility whatsoever to third parties to whom this report, or any part thereof, is made known. Any such party relies upon the report at their own risk.

3. This report shall not be used for engineering or contractual purposes unless signed by the Author and the Checker and unless the report status is “Final.”

LABORATORY TESTING




Table Contents

Project Information .................................................................................................................................. 1 Summary .................................................................................................................................................. 1 General Information ................................................................................................................................. 2 Abrasiveness Results Tables ..................................................................................................................... 2 Infill Description ....................................................................................................................................... 3 Sample Photos .......................................................................................................................................... 3 Infill Grading ............................................................................................................................................. 4 End of Report ............................................................................................................................................ 4

General Information

Test Methods ASTM F1015 Abrasion Plate, Trymer 2000 foam

ASTM E11 – Standard Specification for Woven Wire Test Sieve Cloth and Test Sieves

Test Date 5/3/16 Total dry sample weight (g)

422.70 Material TPE

Weather Conditions

5/3/16 Air Temp (° F) 72

Humidity % 45 Misc. Notes None

Abrasiveness Results Tables

PreWeight Post Weight

Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Trial 4 Total Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Trial 4 Total

1.9792 2.0292 2.0507 2.043 8.1021 1.4015 1.366 1.473 1.5118 5.8

Abrasiveness Index (%)

39.2

LABORATORY TESTING




Infill Description

Characteristic Results

Guardian Innovations TPE

Particle Size (mm) 1-1.6

Particle Shape Round/High Spherocity

Bulk Density (g/cm3) 0.37

Sample Photos

LABORATORY TESTING




Infill Grading

Particle Size Distribution for Guardian Innovations TPE

SEIVE SIZE (mm) Weight (g) Retained (%) Passing (%)

4 0 0.00 100.00

3.35 0 0.00 100.00

2.5 0 0.00 100.00

2 0 0.00 100.00

1.6 2.1 0.50 99.50

1.25 408.6 96.66 2.84

1 11.9 2.82 0.02

0.8 0.1 0.02 0.00

0.63 0 0.00 0.00

0.5 0 0.00 0.00

0.315 0 0.00 0.00

0.2 0 0.00 0.00

Passing to base tray 0 0.00 0.00

Check 422.7

End of Report

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

0.1 1 10

PA

SSIN

G (

%)

SIEVE SIZE (MM)

Guardian Innovations TPE

Particle Size Distributionfor Guardian InnovationsTPE

LABORATORY TESTING PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

Unit #2 ● 155 River Road ● Bow ● New Hampshire ● 03304 Telephone: (603) 715-5453 ● E-Mail: [email protected]

Page 1 of 11

Project Information

Summary Each system was constructed and prepared per EN 12229: Surfaces for sports areas - Procedure for the

preparation of synthetic turf and textile pieces. Sports Labs USA was commissioned to perform laboratory

testing for the following characteristics listed below.

Advanced Artificial Athlete Tests: Force Reduction Vertical Deformation, & Energy Restitution – STC Advanced Artificial Athlete Protocol

EN 1177- HIC Impact Attenuation (Hemispherical Drop Missile) – EN 1177

Gmax Impact Attenuation (Flat Faced Drop Missile) – ASTM F355A

Rotational Resistance – EN15301

Vertical Ball Rebound

Pill Burn

Infiltration – DIN 18-035

Complete results and background information can be found in the subsequent sections of this report.

Project Name Comparative Lab Testing Combination Testing Performance Evaluation

Client Information


Report Date November 9, 2016 Test Dates 4/15/2016, 5/13/2016

Sample Arrival 4/11/2016 Report Status Final

Job No. 90905/991

Prepared by Kieran O’Donnell Field Operation Manager

Checked by Jeffrey Gentile

Laboratory Director

Notes:






Page 2 of 11

Table Contents Project Information ........................................................................................................................... 1 Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 1 System Description ........................................................................................................................... 2 Summary Results Table ..................................................................................................................... 3 Force Reduction (Advanced Artificial Athlete) .................................................................................. 4 Vertical Deformation (Advanced Artificial Athlete) .......................................................................... 5 Energy Restitution (Advanced Artificial Athlete) .............................................................................. 6 ASTM F355A Gmax/HIC Impact Attenuation (Flat Faced Drop Missile)............................................ 7 EN 1177- HIC Impact Attenuation (Hemispherical Drop Missile) ..................................................... 8 Rotational Resistance – EN15301 ..................................................................................................... 9 Vertical Ball Rebound – EN 12235................................................................................................... 10 Infiltration – DIN 18-035 ................................................................................................................. 11 End of Report .................................................................................................................................. 11

System Description

System ID System Description

29S/30TPE_2.25 Slit Film_No Pad 2.70 lbs Sand per sq. ft. /2.79 lbs TPE per sq. ft over 2 1/4" 42 oz Slit film, No Pad

29S/40TPE_2.25 Slit Film_No Pad 2.70 lbs Sand per sq. ft. /3.72 lbs TPE per sq. ft over 2 1/4" 42 oz Slit film, No Pad

29s/30TPE_2.25 Slit Film_Brock SP14

2.70 lbs Sand per sq. ft./2.79 lbs TPE per sq. ft. over 2 1/4" 42 oz Slit film, Brock SP14

20s/50TPE_2.5 Slit Film 1.86 lbs Sand per sq. ft./4.65 lbs TPE per sq. ft. over 2 1/2" 48 oz Slit Film Carpet,

No Pad

LABORATORY TESTING

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

Unit #2 ● 155 River Road ● Bow ● New Hampshire ● 03304 Telephone: (603) 715 5453 ● E-Mail: [email protected]

Page 3 of 11

Summary Results Table

System ID Force

Reduction (%)

Vertical Def

(mm)

Energy Restit

(%)

355A "Flat" Gmax

355A "Flat"

HIC

Critical Fall

Height (m)

Rotational Resistance

Ball rebound

Pill Burn

Infiltration (in/hr)

29S/30TPE_2.25 Slit Film_No Pad 53 6 29 174 571 1.09 38 0.87 PASS 88

29S/40TPE_2.25 Slit Film_No Pad 58 7 27 144 421 1.24 31 0.88 PASS 78

29s/30TPE_2.25 Slit Film_Brock SP14 65 8 27 92 208 1.46 37 0.69 PASS n/a

20s/50TPE_2.5 Slit Film_No Pad 66 9 23 108 269 120 30 .9 n/a n/a

LABORATORY TESTING



Page 4 of 11

Force Reduction (Advanced Artificial Athlete) Force Reduction measures the impact absorption provided by surface to a player under foot as they run. A lower value describes a surface that is harder underfoot. The results are compared to the *STC performance guidelines of 57% to 68% for a Community Field and 62% to 68% for Stadium Field.

*Referring to Guidelines for Synthetic Turf Performance, updated with 2015 manual guidelines

53

58

6566

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

29S/30TPE_2.25 Slit Film_NoPad


29s/30TPE_2.25 Slit Film_BrockSP14

20s/50TPE_2.5 Slit Film_NoPad

Forc

e R

edu

ctio

n (

%)

Avg Force Reduction Per System

LABORATORY TESTING



Page 5 of 11

Vertical Deformation (Advanced Artificial Athlete) Vertical Deformation measures the amount a surface compresses as an athlete runs across it. This value is often related to speed of play and surface stability. The results are compared to the *STC performance guidelines of 6 mm to 11 mm for a Community Field and 6 mm to 10 mm for Stadium Field. Vertical Deformation typically will reduce over time as a field receives use.


67

89

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14



29s/30TPE_2.25 SlitFilm_Brock SP14


Def

orm

atio

n (

mm

)Avg Vertical Deformation Per System

LABORATORY TESTING



Page 6 of 11

Energy Restitution (Advanced Artificial Athlete) Energy Restitution is defined as the energy returned as a percentage of the energy of applied. This can be thought of as the springiness of the surface. This value relates to the feel underfoot as well as the speed of play. Although this measurement is not a part of the official standard, it is a useful measure. The recommended range is 20% to 50%.


29

27 27

23

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40





Ener

gy R

esti

tuti

on

(%

)Avg Energy Restitution Per System

LABORATORY TESTING



Page 7 of 11

ASTM F355A Gmax/HIC Impact Attenuation (Flat Faced Drop Missile) The ASTM F355A Impact Hardness is the official device / method for assessing the hardness of synthetic turf athletic fields. It is used to gauge impact attenuation based on a predetermined head / body impact. This is a 20 Ib “missile” with a tri-axial accelerometer dropped from a height of 24 in. The *STC recommends that the Gmax values be less than 165.


174

144

92108

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350





Un

its

of

Gra

vity

(G

's)

Avg F355A (Flat) Gmax Per System

LABORATORY TESTING



Page 8 of 11

EN 1177- HIC Impact Attenuation (Hemispherical Drop Missile) The EN 1177- Impact attenuating play surfacing determination of critical fall height method is similar to the method commonly used for assessing playground surfacing in the United States. Internationally it is the primary method for both synthetic turf and playground surfacing. This device calculates the Head Injury Criteria (HIC). This is used to gauge the probability of head injury potential resulting from a surface impact. This device is a hemispherical 10 Ib “missile” with a tri-axial accelerometer. The hemisphere is dropped from (4) different heights to determine the height at which the HIC would be 1000. This height is referred to as the critical fall height. It is recommended that the critical fall height values be greater than 1.3 meters.

1.09

1.24

1.46

1.20

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50





Cri

tica

l Fal

l Hei

ght

(m)

Critical Fall Height Per System

LABORATORY TESTING



Page 9 of 11

Rotational Resistance – EN15301 Rotational Resistance measures the interaction between the cleat sole and the surface relating to the ability of a player to change direction. Higher values can relate to a surface that resists the rotation of a foot when a player is changing direction and increase the potential for lower extremity injury. *STC guidelines recommend the results being 30n to 45n. The test results can be found in the results table below.


38

31

37

30

0

10

20

30

40

50




20s/50TPE_2.5 Slit Film

New

ton

Met

ers


LABORATORY TESTING



Page 10 of 11

Vertical Ball Rebound – EN 12235 Measures how high the ball bounces when falling vertically onto a synthetic turf field. A Ball is released from 2m and the height of its rebound from the surface is calculated. The ball is first calibrated on a level concrete surface to 1.35m. *STC recommends from 60cm to 85cm. The test results can be found in the results table below.


0.87 0.88

0.69

0.90

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00





Met

ers

Vertical Ball Rebound

LABORATORY TESTING



Page 11 of 11

Infiltration – DIN 18-035 Surfaces for sports areas - Determination of water infiltration rate test. The purpose of this testing was to provide permeability rates for the tested surface. *STC recommends >7 inches per hour. A temperature correction factor of .919 was used per EN 12616. Test results can be found in the table below.


End of Report

88

78

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

29S/30TPE_2.25 Slit Film_No Pad 29S/40TPE_2.25 Slit Film_No Pad

Inch

es p

er H

ou

rInfiltration



Page 9 of 11

Rotational Resistance – EN15301 Rotational Resistance measures the interaction between the cleat sole and the surface relating to the ability of a player to change direction. Higher values can relate to a surface that resists the rotation of a foot when a player is changing direction and increase the potential for lower extremity injury. *STC guidelines recommend the results being 30n to 45n. The test results can be found in the results table below.


38

31

37

0

10

20

30

40

50

29S/30TPE_2.25 turf_No Pad 29S/40TPE_2.25 turf_No Pad 29s/30TPE_2.25 turf_Brock SP14

New

ton

Met

ers


LABORATORY TESTING

SPECIFIC GRAVITY & COMPRESSION TEST


Telephone: (603) 715 5453 ● E-Mail: [email protected] Page 1 of 3

Project Information

Summary

Sports Labs USA was commissioned to find the specific gravity of the material. The sample was tested using ASTM D792 Method A. Density and Specific Gravity are calculated.

Sports Labs USA was also commissioned to test three samples of infill to ensure that there was no change in the materials ability to rebound after undergoing compression testing of pre-baked and non-baked samples. Sample A was left as a constant and not heated before the compression testing. Samples B and C where pre baked before testing at 110°C for Sample B and 175°C for Sample C. During testing all three samples were placed under 25% compaction and baked at a temperature of 70°C for a period of 22 hours per test method ASTM D395 method B. Afterwards the samples were allowed to rest for approximately 30 min before measurements were made to compare how much the material was able to rebound in comparison to each other.

Project Name TPE Infill Specific Gravity Compression test

Sample Received

1/13/2016

Client Information


Date May 5, 2016

Report Status Final

Job No. 90905/991



Checked By Jeffrey Gentile

Laboratory Director

Notes:




LABORATORY TESTING




Table Contents

Project Information .................................................................................................................................. 1 Summary .................................................................................................................................................. 1 General Information ................................................................................................................................. 2 Specific Gravity Results ............................................................................................................................. 2 Compression Results ................................................................................................................................ 2 Sample Photos .......................................................................................................................................... 3 End of Report ............................................................................................................................................ 3

General Information

Test Method Compression test-ASTM D395 Specific Gravity- ASTM D792 Testing Device Method B Method A

Test Date 4/1816 thru 4/19/16 Product Info TPE Infill

Weather Conditions

Indoor Air Temp (° F) 72

Humidity % 45 Misc. Notes None

Specific Gravity Results

Average (min) Range (max)

Specific Gravity 1.314992345 1.310228 to 1.318066

Compression Results

Average (min) Range (max)

Compression Rebound (%) 85.33 84.55 to 86.71

LABORATORY TESTING




Sample Photos

Pre Compression Sample A Pre Compression Sample B Pre Compression Sample C

Post Compression Sample A Post Compression Sample B Post Compression Sample C

End of Report

LABORATORY TESTING TEMPERATURE EVALUATION


November 1, 2016 ● Page | 1

Project Information

Summary

The following testing was performed to determine the relative effect infill can have on the

surface temperature of a synthetic turf system. A number of synthetic turf systems were

tested, each used the same synthetic turf carpet with only the infill varied between systems.

All were exposed to infra-red heat lamps for a prolonged period to simulate the heating of

the sun in a controlled environment. The resulting temperatures were observed and

recorded.

Project Name

Temperature Evaluation SBR Rubber vs TPE

Client Info


Report Date

11/1/2016 Test Date

4/21/2016

Report Status

Final Job no. 90905/991

Prepared by Kieran O’Donnell Field Operation Manager

Checked by Jeffrey Gentile Laboratory Director

Notes: 1. This report has been prepared by Sports Labs USA with all reasonable skill, care and diligence within the terms of the contract with the Client and within the limitations of the resources devoted to it. 2. This report is confidential to the Client and Sports Labs USA accepts no responsibility whatsoever to third parties to whom this report, or any part thereof, is made known. Any such party relies upon the report at their own risk. 3. This report shall not be used for engineering or contractual purposes unless signed by the Author and the Checker and unless the report status is “Final.”




Introduction

Sports Labs USA was commissioned to perform a temperature evaluation on two turf

systems, each with a different infill composition paired with the same synthetic turf carpet.

The results will be compared to show a relative temperature difference.

Procedure

Each system was constructed and prepared per EN 12229: Surfaces for sports areas -

Procedure for the preparation of synthetic turf and textile pieces.

Each system was constructed using the infill combinations shown in the systems description

table below.

The samples were conditioned to room temperature for at least 24 hours.

The following sensors were used to capture and record measurements to a digital data

logger every 60 seconds:

(2) thermo-couples mounted in series to provide a 2 point average of the surface

temperature.

The samples were heated for 3.5 hours. All of the data was compiled and the average

temperatures for each hour were found. This report will present for each system, the hourly

average temperature recorded at each sensor as well as the average for each type of

temperature measurement sensor.




System Descriptions

System ID System Description

SBR Rubber / Sand

Synthetic Turf Carpet: 2.25" Slit Film Infill Combination: 50% SBR Rubber/50% Silica sand (by weight)

¾” Pile Exposure

TPE/Sand

Synthetic Turf Carpet: 2.25" Slit Film Infill Combination: 50% TPE/50% Silica sand (by weight)

¾” Pile Exposure




System Results

SBR Rubber / Sand

Avg Temperature per Time Period

Temperature (F°) per Sensor

Exposure Time Period Surface Sensor #1 Surface Sensor #2

0hr-1hr 160.3 163.5

1hr-2hr 182.3 183.4

2hr-3hr 198.6 190.7

3hr-3.5hr 208.2 204.3

Guardian Innovations TPE/Sand

Avg Temperature per Time Period

Temperature (F°) per Sensor

Exposure Time Period Surface Sensor #1 Surface Sensor #2

0hr-1hr 144.9 158.2

1hr-2hr 167.5 178.7

2hr-3hr 173.3 180.5

3hr-3.5hr 174.6 181.7




Comparison Results

Average Surface Sensor Temperature per Time Period

Average Temperature (F°) per Sensor Type

Exposure Time Period

SBR Rubber / Sand Temp Difference

(F°) Guardian Innovations

TPE/Sand

0hr-1hr 161.9 10.4 151.6

1hr-2hr 182.9 9.8 173.1

2hr-3hr 194.7 17.8 176.9

3hr-3.5hr 206.3 28.1 178.2

End of Report

100.0

120.0

140.0

160.0

180.0

200.0

220.0

0hr-1hr 1hr-2hr 2hr-3hr 3hr-3.5hr

Ave

rage

Tem

p (

F°)

Avg Surface Sensor Temperature

SBR Rubber Guardian Innovations TPE

LABORATORY TESTING THERMAL STABILITY & TGA


Telephone: (603) 715-5453 ● E-Mail: [email protected]

May 5, 2016 ● Page 1 of 3

Project Information

Thermal Stability Behavior Summary Sports Labs USA was commissioned to perform infill thermal stability behavior testing. The

purpose of this testing was to determine at which temperature the material will start to melt

and agglomerate. Samples were received at the lab on April 11th, 2016

Procedure The equipment used was a Quincy 20AF Hydraulic forced air gravity convection oven to heat

the material and an Omega HH147U Data logger to track temperature. The oven heat was

increased by 5 °C at a time and stabilized for 15 minutes at each interval until changes

caused by the effect of the heat was observed

Project Name TPE Infill Thermal Stability Behavior Thermogravimetric Analysis

Client Information Guardian Innovations 3044 Adriatic Court Peachtree Corners, GA 30071

Date Performed April 20, 2016

Report Status Final

Job No. 90905/991



Checked by Jeffrey Gentile

Laboratory Director

Notes: 1. This report has been prepared by Sports Labs USA with all reasonable skill, care and diligence within the terms of the contract with the Client and within the limitations of the resources devoted to it.






May 5, 2016 ● Page 2 of 3

Thermal Stability Results

Temp °C Temp °F Remark

70 158 No agglomeration noticed











125 257 Agglomeration noticed- testing stopped

Sample Photos

Pre testing Post testing




May 5, 2016 ● Page 3 of 3

Thermogravimetric Analysis (TGA) Summary Sports Labs USA was commissioned to perform infill Thermogravimetric Analysis testing

(TGA). The purpose of this testing was to provide quantitative measurement of mass change

in materials associated with transition and thermal degradation. Samples were received at

the lab on April 11th, 2016.

Procedure Thermogravimetric Analysis measures the percent weight loss of a test sample while the

sample is heated at a uniform rate in an appropriate environment. The loss in weight over

specific temperature ranges provides an indication of the composition of the sample,

including volatiles and inert filler, as well as indications of thermal stability.

Thermogravimetric Analysis Results

End of Report

3044 Adriatic Court Peachtree Corners, Georgia 30071 [email protected] | 770.667.6004

www.guardianinnovations.com

GMAX TEST RESULTS GUARDIAN TPE INFILL

*Patent Pending

TEST 1

GMAX Performed by: GreenFields®

1.5" GSI

- Sand

1" GSI 1/2" Sand

3/4" GSI 3/4" Sand

1.5" GSI 1" Sand

1.5" GSI - Sand

1" GSI 1/2" Sand

1 70 99 102 125 109 143 2 88 113 113 130 120 173 3 90 126 125 133 122 185

Avg: 82.67 112.67 113.33 129.33 117.00 167.00 With Pad Without Pad

TEST 2

GMAX Performed by: Astroturf® GMAX Over Stone 2.0ss/1.0 Guardian TPE Infill At 1500 Cycles on the JE108 with an infill loss of 8%

Control Powerbase ASP15 Rebounce 12

E-Core 10mm

1 162.46 79.08 86.11 99.71 115.36 2 186.79 85.76 96.17 107.6 126.27

3 195.35 87.21 98.63 110.14 129.17

Avg: 181.53 84.02 93.64 105.82 123.60

laboratory testing abrasion & infill id

Documents