SKY MEADOW · 2018. 1. 16. · Page: 1 11372 Strang Line Road Lenexa, KS 66215 Phone: 800-362-8873...

YYOOUURR

IISSTTRRCC SSYYSSTTEEMM RREEPPOORRTT

SSKKYY MMEEAADDOOWW CCOOUUNNTTRRYY CCLLUUBB

DDeecceemmbbeerr 2222,, 22001177 GGrreeeennss 44,, 1111,, 1133 && TThhee PPuuttttiinngg GGrreeeenn LLaabb IIDD:: 1177111100003333

PPrreesseenntteedd TToo::

Mr. Ben Bouchard, GCS

TTMM

Page: 1

11372 Strang Line Road Lenexa, KS 66215

Phone: 800-362-8873Phone: 913-829-8873

Fax: 913-829-4013E-Mail: [email protected]: www.istrc.com

December 22, 2017 Mr. Ben Bouchard, GCS SKY MEADOW COUNTRY CLUB 391 E. Dunstable Rd. Nashua, NH 03062

re: Lab ID: 17110033; ISTRC SYSTEMTM BenchMarking of undisturbed core samples from Green #4 [center]; Green #11 [back center]; Green #13 [right center] – 1st & 2nd tiers; the Putting Green [center]. ISTRC Rep: Mr. Paul Skafas / Tom Irwin, Inc.

Dear Ben; We have completed the ISTRC SYSTEMTM BenchMarking of the undisturbed core samples taken from Greens 4, 11, 13 & the Putting Green. The test results are attached and the time lapse photos are included. The section references in this report are to our ISTRC’s Guidebook.

I. BACKGROUND (per Information Supplied to ISTRC)

This is the regular monitoring of the greens on the course to evaluate the effectiveness of the most recent cultural programs. We have included the past test results to better illustrate any trends that are taking place from season to season. These comparisons will allow the staff to quantify any changes that need to take place for both the surface conditions and the long-term health of the plant.

As a general rule, turf quality is a function of the interrelationship between the physical properties of the root zone and the green’s micro-environment. Our research has found that it is possible to compensate for poor growing conditions by manipulating the physical properties of the root zone. Conversely, it is possible to compensate for poor physical properties with an excellent micro-environment. See, Section IV, D – The Green’s Micro-Environment – at page 15.

Page: 2

II. DISCUSSION OF LAB RESULTS The laboratory data can be found in its entirety at the end of this report. There are two sets of data. The first set of data consists of the physical evaluation, the evaluation of the root systems, and the measurement of the organic matter by layer.

The second set of data contains the textural & particle size analysis. The textural analysis measures the percentage of gravel, sand, silt and clay comprising the soil. The particle size distribution analyzes the size distribution of the sand.

We have also attached an aerification displacement chart at the end of the report. We designed the displacement chart to calculate the percentage of surface area that is removed from the green with various size tines and spacing. We have found that the chart is an excellent reference to evaluate the effectiveness of your program. On the following pages we will discuss the current test results. Included with the discussion are selected time lapse photos of the root zone, our Target Table with the greens’ physical properties, and an inch-by-inch analysis of the Textural & Sand Particle Size Distribution. Tables 1 - 4 compare the current test results to our recommended target range for well-drained, sand-based greens.

The time lapse photos included on the following pages were taken to monitor the drying process of your greens and to provide visual confirmation of the tested physical properties. We have found the photos are an excellent indicator of layering and/or variations in water holding properties throughout the profile.

Page: 3

Green #4

The profile is showing major improvements, across the board, despite having a drop in

infiltration ability. We don’t want this one negative to be overvalued as we feel the inflated infiltration ability from 2015 is a result of the missing material from the sample. The current reading is more indicative of what we expect to see and should be able to be sustained with the current properties. Table 1. ‘+’ improvement, ‘=’ no change, ‘-‘ regressed

Green #4 1st tier (0-4”)

Well-Drained Greens (1st tier

Samples)

Comparison Index* +,=,-

November 2017 Dec. 2015

Infiltration Rate [In/hr] At least 6 - 9.00 14.40

Air Porosity [Non-Capillary] ~20% + 15.17% 12.36%

Water Porosity [Capillary] 15% to 25% + 29.53% 36.59%

Bulk Density [g/cc] ~1.35 to 1.45 + 1.39 1.30 Water Holding 10% to 20% + 21.19% 28.21%

Organic Content: 0-1” 1.5% to 2.5% = 1.96% 2.46% Organic Content: 1-2” 1.0% to 2.0% = 2.85% 2.56% Organic Content: 2-3” 0.5% to 2.0% = 3.36% 3.74% Organic Content: 3-4” 0.5% to 1.5% = 2.69% 2.49%

Root Mass at least ½ in. = 3/8 in. 3/8 in.

Feeder Roots at least 3.5 in. –med. density

= Less than 3 in. <3 in.

Nov. 2017 Dec. 2015

Page: 4

Green #11

The profile is showing great improvements and despite the bulk density increasing, this is actually a positive sign that the amount of thatch has been diminished; and the time lapse photos visually confirm this. The infiltration ability is healthy and appears that the water to air ratio is sufficient in supporting proper breathability and permeability. Table 2. ‘+’ improvement, ‘=’ no change, ‘-‘ regressed

Green #11 1st tier (0-4”)


Samples)




Air Porosity [Non-Capillary] ~20% + 16.95% 14.11%


Bulk Density [g/cc] ~1.35 to 1.45 + 1.42 1.27 Water Holding 10% to 20% + 17.30% 27.15%

Organic Content: 0-1” 1.5% to 2.5% = 2.56% 2.03% Organic Content: 1-2” 1.0% to 2.0% = 2.63% 2.88% Organic Content: 2-3” 0.5% to 2.0% = 3.33% 3.37% Organic Content: 3-4” 0.5% to 1.5% = 3.41% 3.26%



+ 3 ½ in. Sparse <3 in.

Nov. 2017 Dec. 2015

Page: 5

Green #13

The infiltration ability for both tiers of Green #13 are frustrating, especially when we see the lack of material in the top tier sample. Moisture should be flowing through the top portion much better than it is. The amount of organic matter near the lower inches is hindering permeability beyond the top 3 inches and hampering breathability beyond the surface. The second tier sample isn’t allowing any moisture to penetrate through, which is hindering permeability beyond the 4 to 5 inch depths. The material resembles native material and will be difficult to amend without aggressive deep tine applications in addition to the hollow tine program. This forces the program to focus mainly on the top several inches. Table 3. ISTRC Target Ranges

Green #13 1st tier (0-4”) 2nd tier (4-8”) Well-Drained Greens

1st tier (0-4”)

2nd tier (4-8”)

Infiltration Rate [In/hr] 3.27 0.92 At least 6 10+

Air Porosity [Non-Capillary] 15.75% 12.04% ~20% At least 20%

Water Porosity [Capillary] 29.35% 25.58% 15% to 25% Less than 20%

Bulk Density [g/cc] 1.32 1.51 1.35 to 1.45 1.40 to 1.50

Water Holding 22.21% 16.95% 10% to 20% Less than 15%

Organic Content [¼-1”] 2.67% [4-5”] 3.52% 1.5% to 2.5% 0.1% to 1.0%

Organic Content [1-2”] 2.59% [5-6”] 3.74% 1.0% to 2.0% 0.1% to 1.0%



Root Mass 3/8 in. N/A at least ½ in. N/A

Feeder Roots Less than 3 in. None at least 3 ½ in. –med. density

at least 3 ½ in. –med. density

Page: 6

Putting Green

The positive movements that the cultural program has made over the past couple of seasons are being overshadowed by the increase in compaction that is hindering healthier permeability and breathability. The low total porosity isn’t able to support a proper infiltration ability and the program must not only increase the total amount of pore space, but also convert a portion of the water pores, back into air pores. We want to see the air porosities increase to at least 15%. Table 4. ‘+’ improvement, ‘=’ no change, ‘-‘ regressed

Putting Green 1st tier (0-4”)


Samples)




Air Porosity [Non-Capillary] ~20% - 12.44% 14.88%


Bulk Density [g/cc] ~1.35 to 1.45 - 1.51 1.30 Water Holding 10% to 20% + 18.54% 25.75%

Organic Content: 0-1” 1.5% to 2.5% = 2.33% 2.16% Organic Content: 1-2” 1.0% to 2.0% + 1.45% 2.65% Organic Content: 2-3” 0.5% to 2.0% = 2.66% 2.82% Organic Content: 3-4” 0.5% to 1.5% = 0.95% 1.43%



= Less than 3 in. <3 in.

Nov. 2017 Dec. 2015

Page: 7

Particle Distribution

Above is the inch-by-inch analysis (upper 4”) of the Textural & Sand Particle Size

Distribution for Green #4’s 1st tier, Green #11’s 1st tier, Green #13’s 1st & 2nd tiers and the Putting Green’s 1st tier. A complete inch-by-inch analysis for the tested greens is also attached to the end of the report. The lower box contains the USGA specifications & ISTRC Guidelines - the upper set is the USGA specifications and the lower set is the expanded guidelines from ISTRC. The particle distributions remain out of USGA specifications, but the top inch for all the greens are showing an increase in fines that does worry us. We understand the use of finer topdressing sands for the ability to work the material into the canopy more effectively, but we have proven that over time a high abundance of fines can actually seal off a green’s ability to breathe and drain. This is a factor that is controllable, and we don’t want to see the current sand create problems down the road. We strongly urge you to perform quality control testing on the most recent topdressing sand to ensure it not only meets USGA specifications, but is also a proper fit for your profiles.

III. SUMMARY

A general discussion on Maintenance Practices is contained in Section V of The ISTRC Guidebook. We encourage you to reference the Guidebook for a wide range of topics relating to the root zone, environmental factors, and maintenance.

Green #4’s 1st tier



Green #13’s 2nd tier

PG’s 1st tier

89 to 100 5 Max. 3 Max. 3 Max. 10 Max. At least 60 20 Max. 5 Max. 10 Max. w/ Fine & V.F. 10 Max. 10 Max. w/Silt & Clay

89 to 100 5 Max. 3 Max. 3 Max. 10 Max. 15 to 25 40+ 10 to 15 20 - #80 5 Max. 10 Max. w/ Fine & V.F. 10 Max. 65 to 85 Optimum 10 Max. w/Silt & Clay

Textural Analysis Sand Particle Size Distribution

Sand Silt Clay Gravel Very Coarse Coarse Medium Medium Med/Fine Fine Very FineUSDA (mm) .05 to 2.00 .002 to .05 <.002 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.18 0.15 0.10 0.05U.S. Sieve (mesh) 270 to 18 (Pan) (Pan) 10 18 35 60 80 100 140 270SAMPLE NAME % Retained on Sieve.25 - 1.0 in. 96.38 1.21 2.41 0.00 1.77 26.03 46.30 11.73 4.63 4.07 1.851.0 - 2.0 in. 94.16 1.95 3.89 0.00 0.00 5.70 31.27 41.93 9.10 3.13 3.032.0 - 3.0 in. 99.52 0.04 0.07 0.37 11.77 24.37 49.73 6.95 2.60 2.45 1.653.0 - 4.0 in. 89.68 5.27 4.40 0.65 3.83 22.67 34.63 11.60 4.95 6.15 5.85

.25 - 1.0 in. 95.77 1.26 2.97 0.00 5.07 28.97 42.35 10.30 4.05 3.60 1.431.0 - 2.0 in. 96.63 0.90 2.47 0.00 2.57 25.90 49.83 10.03 3.35 2.85 2.102.0 - 3.0 in. 95.14 1.44 3.42 0.00 1.83 22.85 51.17 10.77 3.47 2.95 2.103.0 - 4.0 in. 95.57 1.19 3.24 0.00 1.67 21.85 53.37 10.95 3.07 2.33 2.33

.25 - 1.0 in. 96.98 0.81 2.21 0.00 3.97 29.80 43.77 10.33 4.13 3.55 1.431.0 - 2.0 in. 96.97 1.01 2.02 0.00 5.77 27.15 48.10 9.23 2.90 2.47 1.352.0 - 3.0 in. 96.29 1.22 2.12 0.37 12.07 33.07 36.30 7.20 2.60 2.55 2.503.0 - 4.0 in. 92.96 3.89 3.15 0.00 3.15 29.15 39.56 10.00 3.80 4.03 3.27

4.0 - 5.0 in. 79.98 2.66 2.99 14.37 11.70 21.27 24.47 7.30 3.53 6.68 5.035.0 - 6.0 in. 73.17 3.94 4.44 18.45 22.53 15.27 18.05 6.22 3.03 3.77 4.306.0 - 7.0 in. 83.69 4.64 5.34 6.33 5.83 24.07 28.83 8.85 4.47 5.37 6.277.0 - 8.0 in. 80.36 3.85 3.12 12.67 6.93 27.01 26.07 7.57 3.43 4.05 5.30

.25 - 1.0 in. 95.64 1.36 2.73 0.27 7.90 29.15 39.17 9.53 3.87 3.65 2.371.0 - 2.0 in. 96.53 1.16 2.31 0.00 0.77 31.25 43.60 10.43 4.03 3.90 2.552.0 - 3.0 in. 93.03 1.53 3.07 2.37 10.00 26.45 37.37 9.45 3.73 3.60 2.433.0 - 4.0 in. 92.87 1.62 3.24 2.27 9.93 32.55 33.70 8.03 3.10 2.93 2.63

Page: 8

We don’t want the infiltration abilities to mislead the positive steps of the program and tarnish what should be considered an appropriate approach towards these greens. The majority of the properties look great and the profiles appear to be responding well to the current program, which is more aggressive than in the past. This proactive, aggressive approach must be continued to get over the hump in terms of balance and total pore space. The organic percentages remained consistent and in check in comparison to the previous testing, which implies the program was able to control the production of the plant and essentially slow the effects of aging. The biggest difference with the profiles is the increase in the bulk density readings, which indicates a strong lessening of thatch, which is supported by the time lapse photos in the report. This alone, is a strong reason to continue with the approach of the most recent programs. Now that the thatch is beginning to get under control, we are seeing a decline in total pore space with the greens that we have previously tested. This now becomes the main focus of the program to increase the cumulative amount of pore space, while converting portions of the water pores, back into air pores. Unfortunately, the most effective means of accomplishing these goals remains hollow tine aerifications. We want the program to displace no less than 20% surface materials this upcoming season, but ideally, closer to the 25% mark. The 20% goal is consistent with our last recommendations, but the profiles are close to making the shift to being proactively ahead, instead of being reactive and playing catch up. The progress is subject to how aggressive the displacement program can be. The staff should not lose ground continuing with the current program, but on the flip side, should make significant gains if a slight increase in displacement can be implemented. The other facet of the cultural approach remains consistent, frequent venting applications that target as deep as possible to break into the native material and encourage breathability for the plant and promote natural evaporation through the surface for the profile. We just don’t want excessive moisture to lead to surface problems. The second tier sample shows how dense the native material can be and is limiting any permeability or breathability beyond the 4 to 5 inch depths in some cases. This provides insight that the water isn’t even reaching drainage, if some of the greens are built to USGA specs. We understand the course has a mixture of USGA and native soil, push ups. There are some on site tests that are cost effective and can be performed by the staff to evaluate the integrity of the drain lines or the gravel layers to determine if water is able to leave the green, once it penetrates through the profile that we are happy to discuss and share if you like. The current testing has established an initial benchmark of your greens. We recommend that you continue to monitor your greens with regular testing. The information derived from regular testing will allow you to monitor the aging process of the greens, evaluate the effectiveness of the current cultural practices, modify the program based on hard data, make adjustments to the program to meet the individual needs of specific greens, and detect problems before they affect the health of the greens.

Page: 9

If you have any questions or need any additional information we encourage you to give us a call. We are always available to answer questions and discuss ideas with you. Our service is not confined to analyzing undisturbed cores. We do not charge for telephone calls and we encourage our client superintendents to use us as a resource. Sincerely, I.S.T.R.C. by:

Eric J. Doherty, President

I.S.T.R.C. Form: Physical Evaluation "ISTRC SYSTEM" is a Registered TradeMark of I.S.T.R.C.

Copyright 1994 by I.S.T.R.C. Patents 5,668,306 - 5,672,813 - 5,672,814

I.S.T.R.C. Page: 1

"International Sports Turf Research Center, Inc."

11372 Strang Line Rd. Phone: 913-829-8873Lenexa, KS 66215 Phone: 800-362-8873

Fax: 913-829-4013 The I.S.T.R.C. System™

Company: SKY MEADOW COUNTRY CLUBName: Mr. Ben Bouchard, GCS Account No. 6039000

Address: 391 E. Dunstable Rd Date 17-Nov-17

City, ST, Zip Nashua NH 03062 Facility Tom Irwin, Inc.

Physical Evaluation ISTRC Rep. Paul Skafas

ISTRC SYSTEM™ Core Analysis PorosityInfiltration 40 cm Bulk Solids Total Capillary Non-Capillary

Rate Water Holding Density Porosity [Water Pores] [Air Pores]LAB ID NO. SAMPLE NAME in/hr % g/cc % % % %

17110033-G4 Green #4, Center 9.00 21.19 1.39 55.30 44.70 29.53 15.17Organic [ISTRC Walkley/Black] .25 to 1 in. 1.96% Root Mass: 3/8 in.Organic [ISTRC Walkley/Black] 1 to 2 in. 2.85% Feeders: Less than 3 in.Organic [ISTRC Walkley/Black] 2 to 3 in. 3.36%Organic [ISTRC Walkley/Black] 3 to 4 in. 2.69%

17110033-G11 Green #11, Back Center 8.77 17.30 1.42 58.48 41.52 24.57 16.95Organic [ISTRC Walkley/Black] .25 to 1 in. 2.56% Root Mass: 3/8 in.Organic [ISTRC Walkley/Black] 1 to 2 in. 2.63% Feeders: 3 1/2 in. SparseOrganic [ISTRC Walkley/Black] 2 to 3 in. 3.33%Organic [ISTRC Walkley/Black] 3 to 4 in. 3.41%

17110033-G13 Green #13, 1st Tier, Right Center 3.27 22.21 1.32 54.90 45.10 29.35 15.75Organic [ISTRC Walkley/Black] .25 to 1 in. 2.67% Root Mass: 3/8 in.Organic [ISTRC Walkley/Black] 1 to 2 in. 2.59% Feeders: Less than 3 in.Organic [ISTRC Walkley/Black] 2 to 3 in. 3.31%Organic [ISTRC Walkley/Black] 3 to 4 in. 4.61%

17110033-G13 Green #13, 2nd Tier, Right Center 0.92 16.95 1.51 62.38 37.62 25.58 12.04Organic [ISTRC Walkley/Black] 4 to 5 in. 3.52% Root Mass: N/AOrganic [ISTRC Walkley/Black] 5 to 6 in. 3.74% Feeders: NoneOrganic [ISTRC Walkley/Black] 6 to 7 in. 3.78%Organic [ISTRC Walkley/Black] 7 to 8 in. 4.29%

USGA Sample Range [Root Zone Mix] at least 6 10 to 20 1.4 to 1.7 45 to 65 35 to 55 15 to 25 15 to 30

Reviewed by:

I.S.T.R.C. Form: Physical Evaluation "ISTRC SYSTEM" is a Registered TradeMark of I.S.T.R.C.


I.S.T.R.C. Page: 2

"International Sports Turf Research Center, Inc."


Fax: 913-829-4013 The I.S.T.R.C. System™




Physical Evaluation ISTRC Rep. Paul Skafas

ISTRC SYSTEM™ Core Analysis PorosityInfiltration 40 cm Bulk Solids Total Capillary Non-Capillary

Rate Water Holding Density Porosity [Water Pores] [Air Pores]LAB ID NO. SAMPLE NAME in/hr % g/cc % % % %

17110033-PG Putting Green, Center 1.73 18.54 1.51 59.53 40.47 28.04 12.44Organic [ISTRC Walkley/Black] .25 to 1 in. 2.33% Root Mass: 3/8 in.Organic [ISTRC Walkley/Black] 1 to 2 in. 1.45% Feeders: Less than 3 in.Organic [ISTRC Walkley/Black] 2 to 3 in. 2.66%Organic [ISTRC Walkley/Black] 3 to 4 in. 0.95%

USGA Sample Range [Root Zone Mix] at least 6 10 to 20 1.4 to 1.7 45 to 65 35 to 55 15 to 25 15 to 30

Reviewed by:

I.S.T.R.C. Form: Textural Analysis ISTRC SYSTEM is a Registered Trademark of I.S.T.R.C.


I.S.T.R.C.International Sports Turf Research Center, Inc." Page: 1


Fax: 913-829-4013




ISTRC Rep. Paul Skafas


Sand Silt Clay Gravel Very Coarse Coarse Medium Medium Med/Fine Fine Very FineUSDA (mm) .05 to 2.00 .002 to .05 <.002 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.18 0.15 0.10 0.05U.S. Sieve (mesh) 270 to 18 (Pan) (Pan) 10 18 35 60 80 100 140 270

LAB ID NO. SAMPLE NAME % Retained on Sieve

17110033-G4 .25 - 1.0 in. 96.38 1.21 2.41 0.00 1.77 26.03 46.30 11.73 4.63 4.07 1.85Green #4 1.0 - 2.0 in. 94.16 1.95 3.89 0.00 0.00 5.70 31.27 41.93 9.10 3.13 3.031st Tier 2.0 - 3.0 in. 99.52 0.04 0.07 0.37 11.77 24.37 49.73 6.95 2.60 2.45 1.65Center 3.0 - 4.0 in. 89.68 5.27 4.40 0.65 3.83 22.67 34.63 11.60 4.95 6.15 5.85

17110033-G11 .25 - 1.0 in. 95.77 1.26 2.97 0.00 5.07 28.97 42.35 10.30 4.05 3.60 1.43Green #11 1.0 - 2.0 in. 96.63 0.90 2.47 0.00 2.57 25.90 49.83 10.03 3.35 2.85 2.101st Tier 2.0 - 3.0 in. 95.14 1.44 3.42 0.00 1.83 22.85 51.17 10.77 3.47 2.95 2.10Back Center 3.0 - 4.0 in. 95.57 1.19 3.24 0.00 1.67 21.85 53.37 10.95 3.07 2.33 2.33

17110033-G13 .25 - 1.0 in. 96.98 0.81 2.21 0.00 3.97 29.80 43.77 10.33 4.13 3.55 1.43Green #13 1.0 - 2.0 in. 96.97 1.01 2.02 0.00 5.77 27.15 48.10 9.23 2.90 2.47 1.351st Tier 2.0 - 3.0 in. 96.29 1.22 2.12 0.37 12.07 33.07 36.30 7.20 2.60 2.55 2.50Right Center 3.0 - 4.0 in. 92.96 3.89 3.15 0.00 3.15 29.15 39.56 10.00 3.80 4.03 3.27

17110033-G13 4.0 - 5.0 in. 79.98 2.66 2.99 14.37 11.70 21.27 24.47 7.30 3.53 6.68 5.03Green #13 5.0 - 6.0 in. 73.17 3.94 4.44 18.45 22.53 15.27 18.05 6.22 3.03 3.77 4.302nd Tier 6.0 - 7.0 in. 83.69 4.64 5.34 6.33 5.83 24.07 28.83 8.85 4.47 5.37 6.27Right Center 7.0 - 8.0 in. 80.36 3.85 3.12 12.67 6.93 27.01 26.07 7.57 3.43 4.05 5.30

USGA 89 to 100 5 Max. 3 Max. 3 Max. 10 Max. At least 60 20 Max. 5 Max.Recommended SpecificationsISTRC Guidelines 89 to 100 5 Max. 3 Max. 3 Max. 10 Max. 15 to 25 40+ 10 to 15 5 to 10 5 Max.

Reviewed by: ______________________________

65 - 75 Optimum10 Max. Cummulative < 20%10 Max. w/ Fine & V. Fine 10 Max. w/ Silt & Clay

10 Max. w/ Silt & Clay10 Max10 Max. w/ Fine & V. Fine

I.S.T.R.C. Form: Textural Analysis ISTRC SYSTEM is a Registered Trademark of I.S.T.R.C.


I.S.T.R.C.International Sports Turf Research Center, Inc." Page: 2


Fax: 913-829-4013




ISTRC Rep. Paul Skafas


Sand Silt Clay Gravel Very Coarse Coarse Medium Medium Med/Fine Fine Very FineUSDA (mm) .05 to 2.00 .002 to .05 <.002 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.18 0.15 0.10 0.05U.S. Sieve (mesh) 270 to 18 (Pan) (Pan) 10 18 35 60 80 100 140 270

LAB ID NO. SAMPLE NAME % Retained on Sieve

17110033-PG .25 - 1.0 in. 95.64 1.36 2.73 0.27 7.90 29.15 39.17 9.53 3.87 3.65 2.37Putting Green 1.0 - 2.0 in. 96.53 1.16 2.31 0.00 0.77 31.25 43.60 10.43 4.03 3.90 2.551st Tier 2.0 - 3.0 in. 93.03 1.53 3.07 2.37 10.00 26.45 37.37 9.45 3.73 3.60 2.43Center 3.0 - 4.0 in. 92.87 1.62 3.24 2.27 9.93 32.55 33.70 8.03 3.10 2.93 2.63

USGA 89 to 100 5 Max. 3 Max. 3 Max. 10 Max. At least 60 20 Max. 5 Max.Recommended SpecificationsISTRC Guidelines 89 to 100 5 Max. 3 Max. 3 Max. 10 Max. 15 to 25 40+ 10 to 15 5 to 10 5 Max.

Reviewed by: ______________________________

10 Max. w/ Fine & V. Fine 10 Max 10 Max. w/ Silt & Clay

10 Max. w/ Fine & V. Fine 10 Max. 65 - 75 Optimum Cummulative < 20% 10 Max. w/ Silt & Clay

ISTRC International Sports Turf Research Center

Aerification Displacement Chart

Tine Size 1.25” x 1.25” Centers

1.5” x 1.5” Centers



5” x 5” Centers

¼” Hollow Tines 3.14% 2.18% 1.23% 0.79% 3/8” Hollow Tines 7.07% 4.91% 2.76% 1.77% ½” Hollow Tines 12.57% 8.73% 4.91% 3.14% 5/8” Hollow Tines 13.64% 7.67% 4.91% 5/8” Hollow Vertidrain 1.23% ¾” Hollow Tines 7.07% 1.77% ¾” Hollow Vertidrain 1.77% 1” Hollow Tines 3.14% 1” Hollow Vertidrain 3.14% 7/8” Drill & Fill (7” Ctrs) 1.23% Graden Verticutter (15 Blades @ 1” Spacings)

1mm Blade 3.93%

2mm Blade7.87%

3mm Blade11.81%

Note: 1/4" Quadtines remove as much material as Regular 1/2" Hollow Tines 3/8” minimum for ease of topdressing fill if replacement of material is required For double aerification make two passes at approx. 37° (slightly less than 45°) to minimize overlap

IInntteerrnnaattiioonnaall SSppoorrttss TTuurrff RReesseeaarrcchh CCeenntteerr,, IInncc..

FFoorr AAddddiittiioonnaall IInnffoorrmmaattiioonn PPlleeaassee CCaallll::

11--880000--336622--88887733 oorr

991133--882299--88887733

FFaaxx:: 991133--882299--44001133

OOrr VViissiitt OOuurr WWeebbssiittee AAtt::

wwwwww..iissttrrcc..ccoomm

SKY MEADOW · 2018. 1. 16. · Page: 1 11372 Strang Line Road Lenexa, KS 66215 Phone: 800-362-8873...

Documents

Transcript of SKY MEADOW · 2018. 1. 16. · Page: 1 11372 Strang Line Road Lenexa, KS 66215 Phone: 800-362-8873...