Where the Long-Term Savings Come From

The long-term cost advantage of non-infill turf does not come from one single item. It comes from several cost reductions working together.

Installation Cost: The Initial Gap Is Often Smaller Than Expected

Traditional filled systems require additional material procurement and labor for sand and rubber infill installation. Infill must be evenly distributed, brushed, compacted, and checked.

A non-infill system simplifies the installation process:

1. Base preparation
2. Turf layout and seaming
3. Fixing and compaction

Because there is no infill distribution process, installation time may be reduced by 50% or more in some project conditions, while labor demand may be reduced by approximately 40%–50%.

The risk of rework caused by uneven infill distribution is also reduced. For large projects, labor and schedule savings can offset part of the higher material cost.

Maintenance Cost: The Main Source of Long-Term Savings

This is where non-infill turf usually shows its strongest cost advantage.

Traditional filled turf may require:

• Annual sand top-up of approximately 2–3 kg/m²/year
• Rubber granule top-up of approximately 0.5–1 kg/m²/year
• Brushing and redistribution
• Decompaction
• Dust and debris removal
• Local infill repair
• Regular surface leveling

Depending on usage intensity, annual maintenance can reach a significant cost per square meter.

Non-infill turf generally requires much simpler maintenance:

• Leaf and debris removal
• Occasional rinsing
• Periodic inspection of seams and edges
• Light brushing where needed

In many operating scenarios, non-infill turf maintenance cost can be reduced to approximately one-third to one-fifth of a traditional filled system, sometimes lower depending on field use and local labor cost.