Hello. Please sign in!

A Longitudinal Study of Playground Surfaces to Evaluate Accessibility - Final Report

Installation

Surface materials/systems were installed by both contractors and the playground owners’ maintenance staff.  PIP was exclusively installed by contractors specializing in the surface material.  Participating playground owners believed the intensive installation requirements for PIP, from mixing the binder to troweling the material level, were best completed by contractors experienced with the surface material.  The intensive installation requirements also made it necessary for the contractor to return to sites for repairs due to vandalism or patches at locations where equipment may have been removed. The costs for return repairs or patches were dependent upon whether the project was covered under the warranty.  The most notable installation concerns were raised at sites where the PIP appeared in good condition, but when tested with the TRIAX did not meet the ASTM standard for impact attenuation.  The PIP surface at two swing bays for a new installation was found in non-compliance with HIC scores well over the 1,000 HIC allowable under the standard.  Had the playground owner decided not to utilize the field test for impact attenuation, they likely would not have learned of the product failure at the swings until well after the warranty had expired.  This example further illustrates the critical need for field testing immediately following installation and throughout the life cycle of the playground.

Other deficiencies for PIP were cited in areas where the granules from the top layer began flaking off within the first three years of installation.  This flaking condition has been linked to either inadequate ratio of bonding agent to granules when mixed on site; and/or failure of the bonding agent to properly cure when installed at 40 degrees Fahrenheit and falling.  The manufacturer installation instructions show the preferred atmospheric temperature for installation to be 40 degrees Fahrenheit and rising.  Left unattended over time, areas where the top granular layer has flaked away can lead to non-compliant clear ground space at play equipment such as swings, transfer systems and the egress of slides.  Deficiencies related to installation methods may not become evident for months or even years.  Thus, it is necessary for the playground owner to prepare for these situations prior to purchase through the terms of the warranty and/or specified funds for maintenance.

HYB-A (outdoor carpet) and HYB-C (artificial grass) were installed by contractors representing the manufacturers.  These surface systems required installers experienced with laying the sub-surface, adjoining seams, and affixing the surface material to the border.  Separation at the seams appeared to be the most prevalent concern following installation.  Repairs to seams must be made by the contractor and costs are dependent upon the terms of the product warranty.

Three playground owners selected TIL and HYB-B (rubber top mat system) based on perceptions that the surface systems would be easy for park crews to install and maintain, thus producing cost savings for the agencies.  The learning curve for installation of the TIL proved to be most challenging.  The first installation of the TIL was perceived as so difficult for the park maintenance crew that any cost savings was mitigated by the lengthy learning process.  By the time the playground owner had installed its fourth playground with TIL, the agency had decided to transition to a different surface. On the contrary, another playground owner that contracted the TIL installation to a preferred manufacturer’s installer was very pleased. They cited the ease for their park maintenance crew to replace a tile here or there as a primary reason to continue use of the TIL.  The playground owners using HYB-B reported the surface system was easy to install and maintain once their park maintenance crews received sufficient training from the manufacturer.  One of the playground owners using HYB-B had gone on to install their second playground site with no issues or complaints.

EWF was most frequently installed by park maintenance crews and perceived as relatively easy compared to other surface materials.  Sites installed with EWF were found to have the highest SDS within the first year of installation including deficiencies with excessive running slope, cross slope and change in level.  Upon further inquiry with the playground owners, it was found that none of the owners were aware of EWF manufacturers’ recommendations for installing the material in layers, applying water and compacting each layer.  The lack of EWF particle compaction and layered installation is considered the major contributing factor leading to undulation within the surface area at the participating playground sites. Since this information has been shared with the playground owners, many have begun to rethink their approach to EWF installation.  One of the playground owners transitioned to installation where the EWF is delivered by truck and blown into the sites by a contractor as opposed to traditionally dumped, shoveled and raked by their maintenance crew.  The playground owner believed there to be better control of the depth and reach of the blown EWF.  However, they did not consider it to be a cost savings.  The park maintenance crew was still required to level and compact surface areas where they believed the EWF delivery crew had not done a satisfactory job of achieving an accessible route and level transitions between the EWF and PIP.  Other playground owners are considering the installation of EWF as an opportunity to use volunteers to assist in compaction by running drum roller teams across the surface area.

[MORE INFO...]

*You must sign in to view [MORE INFO...]