| |
| Web URL(s): | https://archive.lib.msu.edu/tic/its/articles/2005jou15.pdf
Last checked: 09/29/2008
Requires: PDF Reader |
|---|
| Access Restriction: | Certain MSU-hosted archive URLs may be restricted to legacy database members. |
|---|
| Publication Type:
| Refereed |
|---|
| Author(s): | Baker, S. W.;
Woollacott, A. R. |
|---|
| Author Affiliation: | Baker: STRI, St Ives Estate, Bingley, West Yorkshire, United Kingdom |
|---|
| Title: | Comparison of the playing performance of "third generation" artificial grass with natural turf used for professional soccer |
|---|
| Section: | Invited papers
Other records with the "Invited papers" Section
|
|---|
| Meeting Info.: | Llandudno, Wales, UK: July 10-15 2005 |
|---|
| Source: | International Turfgrass Society Research Journal. Vol. 10, No. Part 1, 2005, p. 15-26. |
|---|
| Publishing Information: | Aberystywth, Ceredigion, UK: International Turfgrass Society |
|---|
| # of Pages: | 12 |
|---|
| Keywords: | TIC Keywords: Comparisons; Natural versus artificial turf; Artificial turf; Soccer fields; Ball rebound resilience; Traction; Surface hardness; Ball roll measurement
|
|---|
| Abstract/Contents: | "Artificial turf surfaces have changed considerably since they were first used for professional football in the United Kingdom in 1981. The "third generation" pitches have a considerably longer pile, which is infilled with rubber crumb or a blend of rubber and sand. The objective of the current study was to compare the newer designs of artificial turf surfaces with good quality natural grass pitches. Eight natural turf pitches used for professional soccer were each visited on three occasions at different times of the season. Tests examined ball/surface interaction (ball rebound, distance rolled and velocity change) and player/surface interaction (traction, hardness and shock absorbency). The same measurements were also carried out on seven third generation artificial turf surfaces. The physical properties of the natural turf varied, depending on measurement position and time of the year. The measurements allowed the "normal" range for playing characteristics of natural turf to be identified. For example, if the top 10% and bottom 10% of recorded values were removed, ball rebound ranged from 42-50%, distance rolled ranged from 5.4-9.9 m, traction ranged from 37-60 N m and hardness values ranged from 108-168 gravities. In general terms, the best of the artificial turf surfaces gave comparable performance to good quality natural turf with respect to ball rebound, traction and hardness. For ball roll, most of the artificial turf pitches had a surface that was "faster" end of the range recorded on natural turf." However, two artificial turf surfaces gave vlaues that overlapped with the "faster" end of the range recorded on natural turf. |
|---|
| Language: | English |
|---|
| References: | 12 |
|---|
| See Also: | Other items relating to: Artificial vs. Natural Turf Surfaces |
|---|
| Note: | Partial reprint appears in CUTT, v. 16, n. 4, 2005, p.3 with variant title "Synthetic turf performance"
Figures
Tables
Graphs |
|---|
| ASA/CSSA/SSSA Citation (Crop Science-Like - may be incomplete):
Baker, S. W., and A. R. Woollacott. 2005. Comparison of the playing performance of "third generation" artificial grass with natural turf used for professional soccer. Int. Turfgrass Soc. Res. J. 10(Part 1):p. 15-26. |
| Fastlink to access this record outside TGIF: https://tic.msu.edu/tgif/flink?recno=105288 |
| If there are problems with this record, send us feedback about record 105288. |
| Choices for finding the above item: |
|---|
| Web URL(s):
https://archive.lib.msu.edu/tic/its/articles/2005jou15.pdf
Last checked: 09/29/2008
Requires: PDF Reader |
| 
MSU catalog number: SB 433 .I52 v. 10 |
| Request through your local library's inter-library loan service (bring or send a copy of this TGIF record) |
