Slips and falls occur due to inadequate slip resistance from running shoes on track surfaces, leading to injuries. To address this, the current study evaluated the slip resistance of eighteen commonly used running shoes on two different track surfaces under controlled slipping conditions. Shoe outsoles were replicated using thermoplastic polyurethane to assess the slip resistance performance on common surfaces such as ethylene propylene diene monomer (EPDM) and synthetic material-based track surfaces. Slip resistance was quantified using a robotic biofidelic slip testing device, which measured the available coefficient of friction (ACOF). The results showed that the synthetic surface provided better resistance. Furthermore, a correlation between ACOF and apparent contact area was also analysed. Shoes with modified hexagonal or block-based tread designs and radial tread grooves demonstrated the highest ACOF. It is expected that this research will assist runners in selecting shoes that enhance their performance and reduce slip-related injuries.
FifeARamseyCEsculierJF, et al.How do road runners select their shoes? A systematic review. Footwear Sci2023; 15: 103–112.
2.
WaltonPDFrenchDP. What do people think about running barefoot/with minimalist footwear? A thematic analysis. Br J Health Psychol2016; 21: 451–468.
3.
MaakTGMackCDColeBJ, et al.Sports performance and injury research: methodologic limitations and recommendations for future improvements. Arthrosc J Arthrosc Relat Surg2020; 36: 2938–2941.
4.
SunXLamWKZhangX, et al.Systematic review of the role of footwear constructions in running biomechanics: implications for running-related injury and performance. J Sports Sci Med2020; 19: 20–37.
5.
IraqiAChamRRedfernMS, et al.Coefficient of friction testing parameters influence the prediction of human slips. Appl Ergon2018; 70: 118–126.
6.
BeschornerKEMeehanEEIraqiA, et al.Designing shoe tread for friction performance: a hierarchical approach. Footwear Sci2021; 13: S97–S99.
7.
Frias BocanegraJMFongDTP. Playing surface traction influences movement strategies during a sidestep cutting task in futsal: implications for ankle performance and sprain injury risk. Sport Biomech2022; 21: 380–390.
8.
LiKWWuHHLinYC. The effect of shoe sole tread groove depth on the friction coefficient with different tread groove widths, floors and contaminants. Appl Ergon2006; 37: 743–748.
9.
YamaguchiTUmetsuTIshizukaY, et al.Development of new footwear sole surface pattern for prevention of slip-related falls. Saf Sci2012; 50: 986–994.
10.
JakobsenLLysdalFGBagehornT, et al.The effect of footwear outsole material on slip resistance on dry and contaminated surfaces with geometrically controlled outsoles. Ergonomics2023; 66: 322–329.
11.
IraqiAVidicNSRedfernMS, et al.Prediction of coefficient of friction based on footwear outsole features. Appl Ergon2020; 82: 102963.
12.
FalesCWStoneRTVan GroningenD, et al.Tread patterns and the effect on basketball player slippage. Proc Hum Factors Ergon Soc2020; 64: 1328–1332.
13.
ClarkeJCarréMDammL, et al.Understanding the influence of surface roughness on the tribological interactions at the shoe-surface interface in tennis. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part J J Eng Tribol2012; 226: 636–647.
14.
WorobetsJTPanizzoloFHungS, et al.Increasing running shoe traction can enhance performance. Res J Text Appar2014; 18: 17–22.
15.
Ferro-SánchezAMartín-CastellanosAde la RubiaA, et al.An analysis of running impact on different surfaces for injury prevention. Int J Environ Res Public Heal2023; 20: 6405.
16.
StrakCMałekMJackowskiM, et al.Safety comes first: novel styrene butadiene rubber (SBR) and ethylene propylene diene monomer (EPDM) surfaces as a response to sport injuries. Mater2021; 14: 3737.
17.
ChangW-RGrönqvistRLeclercqS, et al.The role of friction in the measurement of slipperiness, part 1: friction mechanisms and definition of test conditions. Ergonomics2001; 44: 1217–1232.
18.
BeschornerKERedfernMSPorterWL, et al.Effects of slip testing parameters on measured coefficient of friction. Appl Ergon2007; 38: 773–780.
19.
GuptaSChatterjeeSMalviyaA, et al.Traction performance of common formal footwear on slippery surfaces. Surfaces2022; 5: 489–503.
20.
BeschornerKEChandaAMoyerBE, et al.Validating the ability of a portable shoe-floor friction testing device, NextSTEPS, to predict human slips. Appl Ergon2023; 106: 103854.
21.
AschanCHirvonenMMannelinT, et al.Development and validation of a novel portable slip simulator. Appl Ergon2005; 36: 585–593.
22.
LiKWChangWRLeamonTB, et al.Floor slipperiness measurement: friction coefficient, roughness of floors, and subjective perception under spillage conditions. Saf Sci2004; 42: 547–565.
23.
LiKWChinJC. Effects of tread groove orientation and width of the footwear pads on measured friction coefficients. Saf Sci2005; 43: 391–405.
24.
StefanyshynDJWannopJW. The influence of forefoot bending stiffness of footwear on athletic injury and performance. Footwear Sci2016; 8: 51–63.
25.
TheisenDMalisouxLGeninJ, et al.Influence of midsole hardness of standard cushioned shoes on running-related injury risk. Br J Sports Med2014; 48: 371–376.
26.
SerranoCSánchez-SánchezJLópez-FernándezJ, et al.Influence of the playing surface on changes of direction and plantar pressures during an agility test in youth futsal players. Eur J Sport Sci2020; 20: 906–914.
27.
AbdelkrimNBEl FazaaSEl AtiJ.Time–motion analysis and physiological data of elite under-19-year-old basketball players during competition. Br J Sports Med2007; 41: 69–75.
28.
LuoGStefanyshynD. Identification of critical traction values for maximum athletic performance. Footwear Sci2011; 3: 127–138.
29.
GuptaSChatterjeeSMalviyaA, et al.Frictional assessment of low-cost shoes in worn conditions across workplaces. J Bio-Tribo-Corrosion2023; 9: 1–13.
30.
ASTM F2913-17. Standard Test Method for Measuring the Coefficient of Friction for Evaluation of Slip Performance of Footwear and Test Surfaces/Flooring Using a Whole Shoe Tester. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM, 2017.
31.
MalviyaAGuptaSChatterjeeS, et al.Development of a novel biomedical device for shoe traction safety characterization. J Eng Res2024; 12: 268–274.
32.
YadavPGuptaSSharmaD, et al.Slip-resistance performance of basketball shoes tread patterns on common courts. Appl Mech2025; 6: 1–17.
33.
JonesTIraqiABeschornerK. Performance testing of work shoes labeled as slip resistant. Appl Ergon2018; 68: 304–312.
34.
GuptaSChatterjeeSMalviyaA, et al.A novel computational model for traction performance characterization of footwear outsoles with horizontal tread channels. Comput2023; 11: 23.
35.
ChandaAJonesTGBeschornerKE. Generalizability of footwear traction performance across flooring and contaminant conditions. IISE Trans Occup Ergon Hum Factors2018; 6: 98–108.
36.
YamaguchiTYamadaRWaritaI, et al.Relationship between slip angle in ramp test and coefficient of friction values at shoe-floor interface measured with cart-type friction measurement device. J Biomech Sci Eng2018; 13: 17-00389.
37.
ShibataKAbeSYamaguchiT, et al.Development of a cart-type friction measurement device for evaluation of slip resistance of floor sheets. J JAPAN Soc Des Eng2016; 51: 721–736.
38.
GuptaSSidhuSSChatterjeeS, et al.Effect of floor coatings on slip-resistance of safety shoes. Coatings2022; 12: 1455.
39.
HemlerSLPlinerEMRedfernMS, et al.Traction performance across the life of slip-resistant footwear: preliminary results from a longitudinal study. J Safety Res2020; 74: 219–225.
40.
GuptaSSharmaDSinglaR, et al.Frictional performance of geometrically modified footwear outsoles with obliquely oriented tread patterns. IISE Trans Occup Ergon Hum Factors2024; 12: 233–245.
41.
GuptaSChatterjeeSMalviyaA, et al.Effect of shoe outsole wear on friction during dry and wet slips: a multiscale experimental and computational study. Multiscale Sci Eng2023; 5: 62–76.
42.
Newcastle University. Coefficient of determination, R-squared.
43.
IslamSGideKDuttaT, et al.The effect of tread patterns on slip resistance of footwear outsoles based on composite materials in icy conditions. J Safety Res2023; 87: 453–464.
44.
CowapMJHMoghaddamSRMMenezesPL, et al.Contributions of adhesion and hysteresis to coefficient of friction between shoe and floor surfaces: effects of floor roughness and sliding speed. Tribol - Mater Surf Interf2015; 9: 77–84.
45.
StrobelCMMenezesPLLovellMR, et al.Analysis of the contribution of adhesion and hysteresis to shoe-floor lubricated friction in the boundary lubrication regime. Tribol Lett2012; 47: 341–347.
46.
MoghaddamSRMRedfernMSBeschornerKE. A microscopic finite element model of shoe-floor hysteresis and adhesion friction. Tribol Lett2015; 59: 1–10.
47.
ŽůrekMMarkusíkDRebendaD, et al.The effect of hardness and surface roughness of elastomer on friction between shoe soles and particle-contaminated floors. Tribol Lett2025; 73:106.
48.
LiKWChenCJ. The effect of shoe soling tread groove width on the coefficient of friction with different sole materials, floors, and contaminants. Appl Ergon2004; 35: 499–507.
