Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A novel comparison between standard and new testing procedures to assess shock absorbency of third generation artificial turfs

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Sports Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study aims to re-examine to what extent the testing procedure of the Artificial Athlete Berlin (DIN18032) is a valid evaluation method to assess the shock absorbency of third generation artificial turf (3-g turf) and to establish a new testing procedure, which precisely reflects the acute load by human sports action. The DIN test was conducted for 3-g turfs with different infill component. The baseline of the load of acute human sports action was obtained from the ground reaction force underneath the standard type of 3-g turf sample during landing from a 55-cm height with minimal shock attenuation. For reproducing the force similar to such a hard landing, a testing rig was developed and the same 3-g turf samples were tested. The DIN test failed to distinguish most types of 3-g turf and was found to be inappropriate to evaluate the shock absorbency of the 3-g turf mainly due to bouncing actions of the test foot on measured samples. In contrast, the newly developed testing rig succeeded in illustrating the differences of shock attenuation properties among most types of 3-g turfs in a high loading condition. In terms of players’ safety, the necessity of high loading test using an alternative testing procedure was highlighted.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Árnason Á, Gudmunsson Á, Dahl HA, Johannsson E (1996) Soccer injuries in Iceland. Scand J Med Sci Sports 6:40–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ekstrand J, Timpka T, Hägglund M (2006) Risk of injury in elite football played on artificial turf versus natural grass: a prospective two-cohort study. Br J Sports Med 40:975–980

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Fuller CW, Clarke L, Molloy MG (2010) Risk of injury associated with rugby union played on artificial turf. J Sports Sci 28:563–570

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Fuller CW, Dick RW, Corlette J, Schmalz R (2007) Comparison of the incidence, nature and cause of injuries sustained on grass and new generation artificial turf by male and female football players. Part 1: match injuries. Br J Sports Med 41:i20–i26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Fuller CW, Dick RW, Corlette J, Schmalz R (2007) Comparison of the incidence, nature and cause of injuries sustained on grass and new generation artificial turf by male and female football players. Part 2: training injuries. Br J Sports Med 41:i27–i31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Steffen K, Andersen TE, Bahr R (2007) Risk of injury on artificial turf and natural grass in young female football players. Br J Sports Med 41:i33–i37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Andersson E, Ekblom B, Krustrup P (2008) Elite football on artificial turf versus natural grass: movement patters, technical standards, and player impressions. J Sports Sci 26(2):113–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Dixon SJ, Batt ME, Collop AC (1999) Artificial playing surfaces research: a review of medical, engineering and biomechanical aspects. Int J Sports Med 20:209–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Nigg BM (1990) The validity and relevance of tests used for the assessment of sports surfaces. Med Sci Sports Exerc 22:131–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Williams S, Hume PA, Kara S (2011) A review of football injuries on third and fourth generation artificial turfs compared with natural turf. Sports Med 41:903–923

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Caple M, James I, Bartlett M (2012) Mechanical behavior of natural turf sports pitches. Sports Eng 15:129–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Carré MJ, Haake SJ (2004) An examination of the Clegg impact hammer test with regard to the playing performance on synthetic sports surfaces. Sports Eng 7:121–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Francis PR, Leigh M, Berzins A (1988) Shock absorbing characteristics of floor used for dance exercise. Int J Sport Biomech 4:282–305

    Google Scholar 

  14. Fujitake K, Yamamoto T, Takemura M (2007) A comparison of the mechanical characteristics of natural turf and artificial turf football pitches. Footb Sci 4:1–8

    Google Scholar 

  15. Huang TJ, Chang LT (2009) Design and evaluation of shock absorbing rubber tile for playground safety. Mater Design 30:3819–3823

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. Dixon SJ, Stiles VH (2003) Impact absorption of tennis shoe-surface combinations. Sports Eng 6:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Durá JV, Hoyos JV, Lazano L, Martínez A (1999) The effect of shock absorbency sports surfaces in jumping. Sports Eng 2:103–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kolitzus HJ (1984) Functional standards for playing surfaces. In: Frederick EC (ed) Sport shoes and playing surfaces: biomechanical properties. Human Kinetics Publishers Inc, IL, pp 98–118

  19. Andréasson G, Lars P (1986) Effects of shoe and surface characteristics on lower limb injuries in sports. Int J Sport Biomech 2:202–209

    Google Scholar 

  20. DIN (1991) DIN Standard 18032-2. Sports halls; halls for gymnastics and games; floors for sporting activities, requirements, testing. Deutsches Institut Fur Normung, Berlin, Germany

  21. Harrison M (1999) Factors affecting the results of the ‘Berlin Artificial Athlete’ test. http://www.isss-sportsurfacescience.org/page.asp?node=34&page=1&action=readmore&r_s=33324.86&tid=49. Accessed 18 April 2013

  22. International Association of Athletics Federations (2009) IAAF Certification system: track facilities testing protocols. http://www.iaaf.org/mm/Document/Competitions/TechnicalArea/04/85/77/20110414053903_httppostedfile_CertSys11_2_24133.pdf. Accessed 31 Aug 2012

  23. International Basketball Federation (2010) Official basketball rules 2010. http://www.fiba.com/downloads/Rules/2010/OfficialBasketballRules2010.pdf. Accessed 31 Aug 2012

  24. Fédération Internationale de Football Association (2008) FIFA quality concept for football turf. http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdeveloping/pitch&equipment/50/15/94/footballturfbookletenglish_07012009.pdf. Accessed 31 Aug 2012

  25. International Rugby Board (2008) Regulation 22: Standard relating to the use of artificial playing surfaces. http://www.irb.com/mm/document/lawsregs/0/regulation22080611_6080.pdf. Accessed 31 Aug 2012

  26. Blackburn S, Nicol AC, Walker C (2005) Development of a biomechanically validated turf testing rig. In: Proceedings of the XXth Congress of the International Society of Biomechanics, Cleveland State University, Ohio, p 120

  27. Wisløff U, Castagna C, Helgerud J, Jones R, Hoff J (2004) Strong correlation of maximal squat strength with sprint performance and vertical jump height in elite soccer players. Br J Sports Med 38:285–288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Chamari Y, Hachana Y, Ahmed YB, Galy O, Sghaïer F, Chatard JC, Hue O, Wisløff U (2004) Filed and laboratory testing in young elite soccer players. Br J Sports Med 38:191–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. McNitt-Gray JL (1993) Kinetics of the lower extremities during drop landings from three heights. J Biomech 26:1037–1046

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Midigan ML, Pidcoe PE (2003) Changes in landing biomechanics during a fatiguing landing activity. J Electromyogr Kines 13:491–498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Yeow CH, Lee PV, Goh JC (2011) An investigation of lower extremity energy dissipation strategies during single-leg and double-leg landing base on sagittal and frontal plane biomechanics. Hum Mov Sci 30:624–635

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Research Centre of Health, Physical Fitness and Sports, Nagoya University, Nagoya, 464-8601, Japan

    Hiroyuki Nunome & Yasuo Ikegami

  2. Graduate School of Education and Human Development, Nagoya University, Nagoya, Japan

    Koichiro Inoue

  3. Faculty of Education, Art and Science, Yamagata University, Yamagata, Japan

    Hironari Shinkai

  4. Department of Sport Education, Hokusho University, Ebetsu, Japan

    Rumi Kozakai

  5. Faculty of Psychological and Physical Fitness, Aichi Gakuin University, Nisshin, Japan

    Hiroshi Suito

Authors
  1. Hiroyuki Nunome
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Koichiro Inoue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hironari Shinkai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rumi Kozakai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Hiroshi Suito
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yasuo Ikegami
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hiroyuki Nunome.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nunome, H., Inoue, K., Shinkai, H. et al. A novel comparison between standard and new testing procedures to assess shock absorbency of third generation artificial turfs. Sports Eng 17, 103–112 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12283-013-0146-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12283-013-0146-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation