| |
| Web URL(s): | https://scisoc.confex.com/scisoc/2018am/meetingapp.cgi/Paper/113133
Last checked: 11/21/2018
Requires: JavaScript |
|---|
| Publication Type:
| Report |
|---|
| Content Type: | Abstract or Summary only |
|---|
| Author(s): | Burbrink, Conlan;
Sorochan, John C.;
Dickson, Kyley H. |
|---|
| Author Affiliation: | University of Tennessee-Knoxville, Knoxville, TN |
|---|
| Title: | Soccer ball rebound is affected by athletic field construction and turf type |
|---|
| Section: | Undergraduate (SASES) sessions
Other records with the "Undergraduate (SASES) sessions" Section
SASES undergraduate research context - Poster III
Other records with the "SASES undergraduate research context - Poster III" Section
|
|---|
| Meeting Info.: | Baltimore, Maryland: November 4-7, 2018 |
|---|
| Source: | ASA, CSSA and SSSA International Annual Meetings. 2018, p. 113133. |
|---|
| Publishing Information: | [Madison, Wisconsin]: [American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Canadian Society of Agronomy] |
|---|
| # of Pages: | 1 |
|---|
| Abstract/Contents: | "Although soccer is normally played on natural turf, the use of synthetic turf has gain popularity in recent years. One concern with the use of synthetic turf for soccer is that the ball may react differently on artificial surfaces compared to natural grass. Using FIFA test method 01 for ball rebound, a soccer ball was dropped at nine locations from 2 m onto six natural grass and seven synthetic turf surfaces. The rebound of the ball was measured acoustically. The natural grass surfaces included bermudagrass (2.2 cm mowing height) over sand, Kentucky bluegrass (3.2 cm) over silt loam, Kentucky bluegrass (7.6 cm) over sand, Kentucky bluegrass (2.5 cm) over sand, perennial ryegrass (1.3 cm) over sand, and perennial ryegrass (7.6 cm) over sand. The synthetic turf surfaces included AstroTurf 3D3 (rubber infill, Shockwave underlayment), AstroTurf 3D3 (rubber, SP14), AstroTurf NRG (cork and coconut fiber, Shockwave), AstroTurf NRG (Nike Grind, Shockwave), AstroTurf DT32 (Guardian DT, Powerbase), AstroTurf CAFTKO (rubber, gravel), and AstroTurf DT32 (Nike Nano, Powerbase). For the synthetic surfaces, ball rebound ranged from 77.4 cm to 97.6 cm with Astroturf CAFKO surface producing the greatest bounce. The natural grass surfaces ranged from 38.1 cm to 79.6 cm with perennial ryegrass (1.3 cm) over sand producing the greatest rebound. AstroTurf 3D3 (rubber, Shockwave), 3D3 (rubber, SP14), and DT32 (Guardian DT, Powerbase) performed similarly to perennial ryegrass (1.3 cm) over sand, but were all significantly greater than the other grass-rootzone-mowing height combinations. All other synthetic turf systems produced ball rebounds greater than any natural turf surfaces." |
|---|
| Language: | English |
|---|
| References: | 0 |
|---|
| Note: | This item is an abstract only!
"Poster Number: 1022" |
|---|
| ASA/CSSA/SSSA Citation (Crop Science-Like - may be incomplete):
Burbrink, C., J. C. Sorochan, and K. H. Dickson. 2018. Soccer ball rebound is affected by athletic field construction and turf type. Agron. Abr. p. 113133. |
| Fastlink to access this record outside TGIF: https://tic.msu.edu/tgif/flink?recno=302351 |
| If there are problems with this record, send us feedback about record 302351. |
| Choices for finding the above item: |
|---|
| Web URL(s):
https://scisoc.confex.com/scisoc/2018am/meetingapp.cgi/Paper/113133
Last checked: 11/21/2018
Requires: JavaScript |
| Find from within TIC:
Digitally in TIC by record number.
Related material digitally in TIC by record number. |
| Request through your local library's inter-library loan service (bring or send a copy of this TGIF record) |
