Comparison of Rotational Traction of Athletic Footwear on Varying Playing Surfaces Using Different Normal Loads

As an athlete accelerates, stops, and changes direction, numerous forces are transmitted to the lower extremities. The interaction between an athlete’s shoe and the playing surface has been indicated as a factor in lower extremity injury risk. In particular, high rotational forces may result in increased injuries to the lower extremities. Rotational traction forces produced by eight different cleated shoes on Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis L.), AstroTurf GameDay Grass 3D, FieldTurf Revolution, and Sportexe Omnigrass 51 under three normal loads (vertical forces) of 787, 1054, and 1321 N were measured using Pennfoot, a portable traction testing device. Of the treatments in this study, shoe type influenced rotational traction most, with differences among shoes being nearly four times as large as those among playing surfaces. Traction was either the same or within several Nm on each surface tested. Traction on the three synthetic turf surfaces ranged from 49.3 to 53.1 Nm and the traction level of Kentucky bluegrass was 52.3 Nm. Traction levels among shoes ranged from 43.8 to 58.6 Nm. The results of this study indicate that footwear selection has a larger effect on rotational traction, and potentially injury risk, than the playing surfaces evaluated in this study. Traction Testing on Natural and Synthetic Turf The interaction between an athlete’s shoe and the playing surface likely influences lower extremity injury risk. Specifically, injuries to lower extremities may result from an athlete’s foot becoming “entrapped” in the playing surface during pivoting movements (Lambson et al, 1996; Orchard et al., 2001; Torg et al., 1974). Researchers have attempted to quantify lower extremity injury risk by measuring the rotational traction forces that occur between shoes and playing surfaces (Andreasson et al., 1986; Bonstingl et al, 1975; Heidt et al., 1996; Livesay et al., 2006; McNitt et al., 2004a; Torg et al., 1996; Villwock et al., 2009a, 2009b). Rotational traction is the traction related to rotational motion about an axis normal to the surface (American Society for Testing and Materials, 2009). In the following studies, Published in Applied Turfgrass Science DOI 10.2134/ATS-2013-0073-RS © 2014 American Society of Agronomy and Crop Science Society of America 5585 Guilford Rd., Madison, WI 53711 All rights reserved. No part of this periodical may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Permission for printing and for reprinting the material contained herein has been obtained by the publisher. T.J. Serensits and A.S. McNitt, Dep. of Plant Science, The Pennsylvania State Univ., 116 ASI Building, University Park, PA 16802. Received 25 Oct. 2013. *Corresponding author (serensits@psu.edu). Published July 9, 2014

[1]  Stephen J. Spells,et al.  Spatial characterisation of natural and third-generation artificial turf football pitches , 2006 .

[2]  Andrew Scott McNitt,et al.  EVALUATION OF THE PLAYING SURFACE HARDNESS OF AN INFILLED SYNTHETIC TURF SYSTEM , 2004 .

[3]  Johan Bellemans,et al.  Torsional injuries of the lower limb: an analysis of the frictional torque between different types of football turf and the shoe outsole , 2012, British Journal of Sports Medicine.

[4]  J S Torg,et al.  The shoe-surface interface and its relationship to football knee injuries , 1974, The Journal of sports medicine.

[5]  P. Renström,et al.  Torque developed at simulated sliding between sport shoes and an artificial turf , 1986, The American journal of sports medicine.

[6]  C A Morehouse,et al.  Torques developed by different types of shoes on various playing surfaces. , 1975, Medicine and science in sports.

[7]  Donald S. Loch,et al.  Putting science behind traction measurements , 2006 .

[8]  Eric A Nauman,et al.  Peak Torque and Rotational Stiffness Developed at the Shoe-Surface Interface , 2006, The American journal of sports medicine.

[9]  R. Haut,et al.  The effects of various infills, fibre structures, and shoe designs on generating rotational traction on an artificial surface , 2009 .

[10]  Andrew Scott McNitt,et al.  Development and Evaluation of a Method to Measure Traction on Turfgrass Surfaces , 1997 .

[11]  H Seward,et al.  Intrinsic and Extrinsic Risk Factors for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury in Australian Footballers * , 2001, The American journal of sports medicine.

[12]  Darren J. Stefanyshyn,et al.  Footwear traction at different areas on artificial and natural grass fields , 2012 .

[13]  J. Crandall,et al.  Development and assessment of a device and method for studying the mechanical interactions between shoes and playing surfaces in situ at loads and rates generated by elite athletes , 2012, Sports Biomechanics.

[14]  M. Howard,et al.  Differences in Friction and Torsional Resistance in Athletic Shoe-Turf Surface Interfaces , 1996, The American journal of sports medicine.

[15]  B M Nigg,et al.  Surface-Related Injuries in Soccer , 1989, Sports medicine.

[16]  P. Landschoot,et al.  Effects of Turfgrass, Cutting Height and Soil Conditions on Traction , 2004 .

[17]  Steve Haake,et al.  High-speed observations of football-boot-surface interactions of players in their natural environment , 2007 .

[18]  J S Torg,et al.  The Effect of Ambient Temperature on the Shoe-Surface interface Release Coefficient , 1996, The American journal of sports medicine.

[19]  J. Garrick,et al.  Football cleat design and its effect on anterior cruciate ligament injuries. , 1996, The American journal of sports medicine.

[20]  C. Hirsch,et al.  Experimental ankle-joint fractures. , 1965, Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica.

[21]  John W Powell,et al.  Football Playing Surface and Shoe Design Affect Rotational Traction , 2009, The American journal of sports medicine.