Surface Workshop Sheffield, April 3. 2007

adidas Football Research Innovations

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

TopicsFootball Innovation in between performance and injury preventionFIFA quality concept for artificial turf/ UEFA Football Turf Commissionadidas approach to analyze traction characteristicsConclusion

FOOTBALL INNOVATION

IN BETWEEN

PERFORMANCEAND

INJURY PREVENTION

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

adidas innovation team

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

Product Based Innovation Group• Working in specific areas of

innovation- Footwear- Apparel- Hardware- Balls

Supports Brand with Technology & Innovation

• Create Stories / Brand Platforms

What does

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

Multi Discipline Innovation Group

Innovation MangementIndustrial DesignEngineering (mechanical / electronic)DevelopmentBio MechanicsAdvanced Marketing Communications

Goal: Create Innovation Concepts

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

adidas Partner for Football R&D

Uni FreiburgHPL Uni CalgaryUni Loughborough STRGUni Sheffield SERGUni SiegenDeutsche Sporthochschule Köln

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

Product Innovation in Football

Comfort

Performance

Injury Prevention

Foot - Shoe - SystemSurface-

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

Injury Statistics

High injury rates (13-35 injuries

per 1000 h) (Giza, 2003)

64%-88% lower extremities

(Ekstrand, 1983)

17%-21% Ankle and 20 % Knee

(ACL: 64% Stop to continue

sport) (Orchard, 2001)

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

Reasons for Football Injuries?

• Risk: Time in Season• Risk: Fatigue• Risk: Pre-Injuries• Risk: Missing muscular control• Risk: Football boot / ground conditions• Others…….

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

Risk: Football boot /Ground conditions

Robot Traction TestCadaver tests – Studs to minimize direct injuries

HPL Uni Calgary

Fóotball Simulation

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

FIFA Quality Concept for Artificial Turf

Slip resistance

horizontal movement related to players perception

the deceleration of the foot during stops

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

FIFA Quality Concept for Artificial Turf

Traction

needed for change of direction

measures torque necessary to start the motion of a studded sole

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

FIFA Quality Concept for Artificial Turf

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

FIFA Quality Concept for Artificial Turf

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

adidas Traction Tester

Test Boot

Applied Normal Load (700 N)

Load cell providingforce measurement

Actuator

Laptop to recordforce-time output

adidas Football - Artificial Turf

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

Starting (Translational Movement)

Representative of a player pushing

off for a sprint

Performance +++

Injury Prevention +

adidas Traction Tester

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

Pivotpoint of the

tractiontester

adidas Traction TesterTurning (Rotational Movement)

Representative of a player performing a quick turn

Injury Prevention +++

Performance +

(excessive rotational traction is correlated with injuries)

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

Goal: Quantify traction values of adidas football shoes on FIFA recommended artificial turfs

Objectives

traction benchmark of 4 well-established and successful shoe-natural grass combinations

Compare natural grass combinations to 6 shoe types on 4 artificial turf samples under dry and wet conditions

adidas benchmark

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

Mania FG Copa Mundial Pulse X-TRX SG World Cup

Benchmark Traction Natural Turf

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

Force-Time Traces

Translation

0,0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1,0

1,2

1,4

1,6

1,8

2,0

0 1 2 3 4

Time (s)

COT

Copa

Mania TRX

World Cup

Pulse XTRX

(CO

T us

edfo

rsim

plic

ity)

Rotation

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

0 1 2 3 4

Time (s)

Torq

ue (N

m)

Copa

Mania TRX

World Cup

Pulse XTRX

benchmark traction natural turf

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

Natural-turf based Acceptance Zone defined using standard deviation of maximum and minimum values of

COT & Torque for well-established shoes

benchmark traction natural turf

Natural Turf SG and FG Benchmarks

1,73

1,41

1,711,56

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

World Cup (SG) Copa Mundial(FG)

Pulse XTRX (SG) Mania TRX (FG)

Turf

Max

imum

CO

T

Natural Turf SG and FG Benchmarks

63,1

75,4

55,660,0

0

20

40

60

80

World Cup (SG) Copa Mundial(FG)

Pulse XTRX (SG) Mania TRX (FG)

Turf

Max

imum

Tor

uqe

(Nm

)

Translation Rotation

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

COT v Torque for Accepted Configurations

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Torque (Nm)

CO

TCOT v Torque for Accepted Configurations

Copa on Natural-DryTRX on Natural-Dry

XTRX on Natural-Wet Wolrd Cup on Natural-Wet

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Torque (Nm)

CO

T

Extreme Torque

InsufficientTorque

InsufficientTranslationalTraction

Extreme TranslationalTraction

COT v Torque for Accepted Configurations

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Torque (Nm)

CO

T

AcceptedZone

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

Copa Mundial Mundial Team

Predator Mania TRX Predator Pulse XTRX

TRX Turf F30 HG

benchmark traction artificial turf

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

COT v Torque for Accepted Configurations

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Torque (Nm)

CO

T

AcceptedZone

COT v Torque for Dry Polythan Configurations

Copa

Mundial

Mania FGPulse SG

TRXturf F30 HG

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Torque (Nm)

CO

T

Results:dry sample 1

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

COT v Torque for Accepted Configurations

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Torque (Nm)

CO

T

AcceptedZone

COT v Torque for Polythan Wet Configurations

Copa

Mundial

Mania FGPulse SG

TRXturf

F30 HG

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Torque (Nm)

CO

T

Results:wet sample 1

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

COT v Torque for Accepted Configurations

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Torque (Nm)

CO

T

AcceptedZone

COT v Torque for Dry XL Configurations

Copa

Mundial

Mania FGPulse SG

TRXturf

F30 HG

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Torque (Nm)

CO

T

Results: dry sample 2

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

COT v Torque for Accepted Configurations

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Torque (Nm)

CO

T

AcceptedZone

COT v Torque for XL Wet Configurations

CopaMundial

Mania FG

Pulse SG

TRXturf

F30 HG

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Torque (Nm)

CO

T

Results: wet sample 2

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

Copa Rotation Traces on Dry Surfaces

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

0 1 2 3 4

Time (s)

Torq

ue (N

m)

Natural Dry (FG)

Field Turf Dry

Polytan Dry

Tarkett Sommer Dry

XL Dry

natural grass

Sample1

Sample2

Sample3

sample4

Comparing Torque-Time Traces:

•Warning: we mustconsider the completetrace!!!

natural turf - rotation

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

0 1 2 3 4

Time (s)

Torq

ue (N

m)

Copa

Mania TRX

World Cup

Pulse XTRX

benchmark traction artificial turf

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

Conclusions:Traction outsoles deliver lower torques compared to traditional outsoles

Important parameters

Peak ForcesForce Time Curves

A shoe recommendation is only reasonable for a certain combination of surface and surface condition (moisture, maintenance, wear, aging, …)!

benchmark traction

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

University of Freiburg

Study with Football Players: stud configurations and knee injuries

Benchmark of different stud configurations (traditional Studs versus TraXion studs).

Measure the influence on specific loads of the human skeleton (especially the knee).

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007Electromyography

m. vastus

medialis

m.

peroneaus

m. tibialis

anterior

m. gastrocnemius

m. bicepsfem.

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

Normalised (percent)

Mom

ent (

New

tonm

etre

per

kilo

)D

ors

Pla

nAnkle Dors/Plan Moment

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

-0.50

0.00

0.50

1.00

Normalised (percent)

Mom

ent (

New

tonm

etre

per

kilo

)A

ddA

bd

Ankle Ab/Add Moment

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

-0.40

-0.30

-0.20

-0.10

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

Normalised (percent)

Mom

ent (

New

tonm

etre

per

kilo

)In

tE

xt

Ankle Rotation Moment

Change of directionsChange of directions

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

-2.0

-1.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

Normalised (percent)

Mom

ent (

New

tonm

etre

per

kilo

)Fl

exE

xtKnee Flex/Ext Moment

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

0.00

1.00

Normalised (percent)

Mom

ent (

New

tonm

etre

per

kilo

)V

arV

alg

Knee Valg/Var Moment

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

-0.40

-0.30

-0.20

-0.10

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

Normalised (percent)

Mom

ent (

New

tonm

etre

per

kilo

)In

tE

xt

Knee Rotation Moment

Change of directionChange of direction

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

Final Conclusions

• TRAXION Studs do have positive influence on Performance and NO negative influence on knee injuries!

• We are able to measure and evaluate traction behavior of all shoe surface/ground conditions.

• We want to offer the possibility to choose the optimal Football boot solution for all players!

H. Koerger, Sheffield 2007

Thank you!