Skin friction related behaviour of artificial turf systems
Tay SP, Fleming P, Hu X, Forrester S
Journal of sports sciences · 1 citation
Review labels
Neutral facts our review recorded about how this study was done. They describe method, never whether we like the result.
How it was studied
- Design
- In vitro/mechanistic study (classified by our AI screen)
- Studied in
- Cells or lab samples
- Main outcome
- No health outcome
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Funding not disclosed
Publication
- Published
- 2016-08-25 · J Sports Sci · vol. 35 · issue 15 · pp. 1500–1507
- Publisher
- Taylor & Francis
- Cited
- 8 citations · more than 77% of similar papers · 1.1× the field average
- References
- 25 works
- Access
- Open access (repository copy) · CC-BY-NC-ND
- Research areas
- Sports injuries and prevention · Sports Performance and Training · Lower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies
- Keywords
- Parasitic drag, Abrasive, Abrasion (mechanical), Surface finish, Materials science, Surface roughness, Infill, Artificial skin, Coefficient of friction, Composite material, Structural engineering, Biomedical engineering, Engineering, Drag
- MeSH
- skin, humans, athletic injuries, surface properties, friction, facility design and construction, floors and floorcoverings
4 authors
From GB, SG
- Sock Peng TayLoughborough University; Nanyang Technological University
- Paul Richard Fleming · correspondingLoughborough University; Nanyang Technological University
- Xiao HuNanyang Technological University
- Steph ForresterLoughborough University; Nanyang Technological University
Abstract
The occurrence of skin friction related injuries is an issue for artificial turf sports pitches and remains a barrier to their acceptance. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the current industry standard Securisport® Sports Surface Tester that measures skin surface related frictional behaviour of artificial turf. Little research has been published about the device and its efficacy, despite its widespread use as a standard FIFA test instrument. To achieve a range of frictional behaviours, several "third generation" (3G) carpet and infill combinations were investigated; friction time profiles throughout the Securisport rotations were assessed in combination with independent measurements of skin roughness before and after friction testing via 3D surface scanning. The results indicated that carpets without infill had greatest friction (coefficients of friction 0.97-1.20) while those completely filled with sand or rubber had similar and lower values independent of carpet type (coefficient of friction (COF) ≈0.57). Surface roughness of a silicone skin (s-skin) decreased after friction testing, with the largest change on sand infilled surfaces, indicating an "abrasive" polishing effect. The combined data show that the s-skin is damaged in a surface-specific manner, thus the Securisport COF values appear to be a poor measure of the potential for skin abrasion. It is proposed that the change in s-skin roughness improves assessment of the potential for skin damage when players slide on artificial turf.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher.
Community trust
Loading…
How much do you trust this study's findings?
Comments
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inSomething wrong here?
Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inEducational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.