scholarly journals Traction forces generated during studded boot‐surface interactions on third‐generation artificial turf: A novel mechanistic perspective

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Steph Forrester ◽  
Paul Fleming
Keyword(s):  
Surface Interactions ◽  
Third Generation ◽  
Artificial Turf ◽  
Traction Forces

scholarly journals Novel Methodology for Football Rebound Test Method

Sensors ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (6) ◽  
pp. 1688
Author(s):  
Enrique Colino ◽  
Lis Corral-Gómez ◽  
David Rodríguez-Rosa ◽  
Sergio Juárez-Pérez ◽  
Jorge García-Unanue ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Field Evaluation ◽  
Surface Interactions ◽  
Test Method ◽  
Artificial Turf ◽  
Precise Position ◽  
Relevant Task ◽  
Ball Surface ◽  
New Apparatus ◽  
Single Field ◽  
Time Required

Assessing and keeping control of the mechanical properties of sport surfaces is a relevant task in sports since it enables athletes to train and compete safely and under equal conditions. Currently, different tests are used for assessing athlete- and ball-surface interactions in artificial turf pitches. In order to make these evaluations more agile and accessible for every facility, it is important to develop new apparatus that enable to perform the tests in an easier and quicker way. The existing equipment for determining the vertical ball behavior requires a complex and non-easily transportable device in which the ball must be fixed to the upper part of the frame in a very precise position by means of a magnet. The rebound height is determined by capturing the acoustic signal produced when the ball bounces on the turf. When extended tests are conducted, the time required to evaluate a single field is too high due to the non-valid trials. This work proposes a novel methodology which allows to notoriously decrease the time of testing fields maintaining the repeatability and accuracy of the test method together with a compact device for improving its mobility and transport. Simulations and experiments demonstrates the repeatability and accuracy of the results obtained by the proposed device, which decreases the non-valid trials and notoriously reduces the time for field evaluation.

scholarly journals Influence of different playing surfaces on bone mass accretion in male adolescent football players: A one-season study

2019 ◽  
Vol 233 (4) ◽  
pp. 536-547
Author(s):  
Gabriel Lozano-Berges ◽  
Ángel Matute-Llorente ◽  
Alejandro Gómez-Bruton ◽  
Alex González-Agüero ◽  
Germán Vicente-Rodríguez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Mineral Density ◽  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Bone Mass ◽  
Bone Mineral ◽  
Elastic Layer ◽  
Areal Bone Mineral Density ◽  
Football Players ◽  
Third Generation ◽  
Artificial Turf ◽  
Mineral Density

There are different surfaces on which football is played, but their influence on bone mass accretion still remains unknown. The aims of this study were to compare bone mass accretion between football players and controls, and evaluate the influence of two different playing surfaces on bone accretion. A total of 27 male football players (13.2 ± 0.5 years) and 15 controls (12.6 ± 1.1 years) participated in this study. Football players were classified into two groups according to the surface they trained on: 14 on third-generation artificial turf with elastic layer and 13 on third-generation artificial turf without elastic layer. Bone mineral content and areal bone mineral density were measured using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Bone mineral apparent density variables were calculated. Bone geometry and strength of the non-dominant tibia were assessed with peripheral quantitative computed tomography. For both football players and controls, bone variables measured at subtotal body, lumbar spine, legs and tibia ( p < 0.05) significantly increased. Based on the time spent practicing football, the increase in areal bone mineral density for the legs ( p < 0.05) was higher in football players than controls. Moreover, lumbar spine bone mineral apparent density increased more in third-generation artificial turf without elastic layer players in comparison with third-generation artificial turf with elastic layer players ( p < 0.05). Playing football on third-generation artificial turf with elastic layer and third-generation artificial turf without elastic layer seems to positively affect bone mass during growth. After playing for one season on these playing surfaces, football practice on third-generation artificial turf without elastic layer with the lower shock absorption seems to have produced the highest increment in areal bone mineral density at lumbar spine. Thus, football practice on surfaces with lower shock absorption could provide an extra benefit on bone health.

scholarly journals Influence of the Mechanical Properties of Third-Generation Artificial Turf Systems on Soccer Players’ Physiological and Physical Performance and Their Perceptions

PLoS ONE ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. e111368 ◽  
Author(s):  
Javier Sánchez-Sánchez ◽  
Jorge García-Unanue ◽  
Pedro Jiménez-Reyes ◽  
Ana Gallardo ◽  
Pablo Burillo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Properties ◽  
Physical Performance ◽  
Soccer Players ◽  
Third Generation ◽  
Artificial Turf

Physical and Physiological Responses of Amateur Football Players on Third-Generation Artificial Turf Systems During Simulated Game Situations

2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (11) ◽  
pp. 3165-3177 ◽  
Author(s):  
Javier Sánchez-Sánchez ◽  
Jorge García-Unanue ◽  
José L. Felipe ◽  
Pedro Jiménez-Reyes ◽  
David Viejo-Romero ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Physiological Responses ◽  
Football Players ◽  
Third Generation ◽  
Artificial Turf ◽  
Simulated Game

scholarly journals Abrasion injuries on artificial turf: A real risk or not?

2014 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 91
Author(s):  
Dara M Twomey ◽  
Lauren A Petrass ◽  
Paul R Fleming
Keyword(s):  
Surface Layer ◽  
Injury Prevention ◽  
Surface Interactions ◽  
Prevention Strategies ◽  
Artificial Turf ◽  
Test Device ◽  
Time Loss ◽  
Measurement Device ◽  
Real Risk ◽  
Negative Perceptions

Abrasion injuries result in damage only to the surface layer of skin and can result in player discomfort and changes in performance. The perceived fear of abrasion injuries on artificial turf playing surfaces has significantly affected the adoption of these surfaces, particularly in sports that involve frequent player-surface interactions. The underreporting of abrasion injuries due to how time-loss injuries are defined and the lack of validity of the current abrasion measurement device highlight the need for more research to understand fully the incidence and nature of abrasions on artificial turf playing surfaces and the effect of these injuries on playing behaviour. Improved reporting of abrasion injuries and a more biofidelic test device could assist in both the development of abrasion-related injury prevention strategies and in dispelling players’ negative perceptions of abrasions on artificial turf. 

The effect of different playing surfaces on soccer skill performance

2021 ◽  
pp. 174795412110663
Author(s):  
Reilly O’Meagher ◽  
John O’Reilly ◽  
Ajmol Ali
Keyword(s):  
Movement Time ◽  
Third Generation ◽  
Artificial Turf ◽  
Wooden Floor ◽  
Natural Grass ◽  
Skill Performance ◽  
Artificial Surfaces ◽  
Alternative Understanding ◽  
Better Than ◽  
Indoor And Outdoor

Football (soccer) is traditionally played on natural grass but artificial surfaces are becoming an increasing popular alternative. Understanding how different surfaces affect a player's skill performance has not been examined. This study sought to compare soccer skill performance, using a validated test, on natural grass, third generation (3G) artificial turf, and indoor sprung wooden floor. Following familiarisation, 14 male players (12.7 ± 0.5 years-old, with 6.21 years playing experience) performed the Loughborough Soccer Passing Test (LSPT) on three different surfaces in the following order: indoor, grass and artificial turf. Players were given two practise attempts before the best of two trials were recorded. Movement time was faster on artificial turf (45.1 ± 1.3 s) than natural grass (46.2 ± 1.8 s; p = 0.045), but there was no difference in overall LSPT performance between grass (54.1 ± 4.2 s) and artificial turf (54.0 ± 4.7 s; p = 0.92). Overall LSPT performance was better on indoor surface (50.9 ± 4.6 s) than grass (p = 0.02) and artificial turf (p = 0.02) due to reduced penalty time on the indoor surface (5.5 ± 3.3 s) than grass (7.9 ± 2.9 s; p = 0.001) and artificial turf (8.9 ± 3.9 s; p = 0.003). There is no difference in soccer skill performance between grass and 3G artificial turf. Skill performance on an indoor surface was ∼6% better than both grass and 3G artificial turf due to better ball control and/or accuracy of passing. Our findings will enable comparison of studies using the LSPT on indoor and outdoor (grass or artificial) surfaces.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document