1 / 44

Michael “Mick” Peterson PhD University of Maine C. Wayne McIlwraith DVM, PhD

Michael “Mick” Peterson PhD University of Maine C. Wayne McIlwraith DVM, PhD Colorado State University. Surfaces Standardized Tests, Engineering Support & National Laboratory. Recommendations of: The Welfare and Safety of the Racehorse Summit Keeneland Sales Pavilion

dacian
Download Presentation

Michael “Mick” Peterson PhD University of Maine C. Wayne McIlwraith DVM, PhD

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Michael “Mick” Peterson PhD University of Maine C. Wayne McIlwraith DVM, PhD Colorado State University Surfaces Standardized Tests, Engineering Support & National Laboratory

  2. Recommendations of: The Welfare and Safety of the Racehorse Summit Keeneland Sales Pavilion Lexington, Kentucky March 17-18, 2008 RECOMMENDATION 1: TRACK SURFACES Primary Objective: Promote consistent and safe track surfaces conditions

  3. What is Needed? • Clearinghouse for surfaces data • Reliable & consistent testing • Risk assessment data • Sharing of methods • Different regional needs • Create a culture of data

  4. Practice Not Research • Track Materials – Synthetic & Natural • Non-linear More loadthe harder • Strain rate dependent • Synthetic creep • Dirt shows dynamic softening • Not easy or standard tests

  5. Consistent Track Composition • Consistent test methods • New methods when needed • Database of results for research Open to all users:Non-proprietary methods A Single Reliable Lab for the Industry

  6. Measurement Methods:Dirt Composition • Many tests for dirt established • Need comparative data • Not repeatable between labs • Clay mineralogy (X-Ray Diffraction) • Fiber weight percentage

  7. Small or missing peaks Implementation:X-Ray Diff. (XRD) • Clay mineralogy • “East Coast” vs. “California” • “No” clay in most east coast tracks

  8. Measurement Methods:Synthetic Composition • Wax composition • Temperature sensitivity New Funding

  9. Implementation:Quality Control of Materials • Sand Matters…even in synthetic surfaces • Microscopy • XRD Mineralogy

  10. Implementation for Two Tracks: Different Wax, Different Performance

  11. Permeability – Sensitive Topic • April 28, 2008: Bangor Raceway has cancelled Wednesday & Friday race cards due to unsuitable track conditions. • From Bangor Daily News • Postponement irk Horsemen • Heavy Rains Prove Problematic for Harness Horsemen STARDARD MEASUREMENTS BEFORE THE START OF THE MEET

  12. Laboratory for Analysis of Track Materials • A central lab to compare between tracks • Consistent data • Current labs:agriculture civil engineering • Data for research • Link to injury database • Developing new tests of materials • Coordinating high cost specialized testing XRD, DSC

  13. Central Track Surfaces Lab • Modeled on drug testing labs: But this is on the ground floor • National facility: Regional duplication only if needed • Initial seed money: • Capital costs • Initial labor, training and “certification” • Continuing funding • Initial investors, forms part of the board to determine research priorities • Tracks subscribe, standard package • Pay per test on added materials and as needed

  14. Maintenance Matters • Different tracks do things differently • Justified reasons • Weather • Design • Usage • Develop best practices

  15. Maintenance & Condition Reporting System Start simple, research leads to expansion… The model – start simple On-Track Injury …catastrophic, then expand Jeff Blea & Wayne McIlwraith … other injuries

  16. Maintenance & Condition Reporting System • Weather data logging • Data logger for at standard location • Temperature, humidity, precipitation, wind, UV & visible light, evaporation rate and track temperatures • Linked to maintenancereporting database (and handicapping?)

  17. Performance TestingWhat the Horse Sees….. • The perfect surface needs to perform in the real world • Temperature • Moisture • Maintenance • Performance of the surface • Shear strength • Stiffness Performance Testing

  18. Performance testing… • On-site performance monitoring • Research must show that the measures relate to safety of the horse • Daily measurement of performance • Periodic measurement of composition Do the research and determine which factors pose a risk

  19. Surface has different function during phases of gait: Impact/loading • Lower vertical modulus reduces strain rate and peak loads • Shear failure reduces horizontal peak accelerations

  20. Surface has different function :Breakover/Propulsion • Shear strength to support hoof during propulsion • Control hoof rotation during turn http://www.wyammyranch.com/horses/sangria.jpg

  21. Issues with Harness Racing • Dynamic shear loading is higher than thoroughbred horses • Hoof problems and soft tissue issues with surface Thanks to our model: Dorunbluefortunate

  22. 1° impact 2° impact Support Breakover (midstance) A B C D From Thomason and Peterson, VCNA. From Thomason and Peterson, VCNA.

  23. Biomechanical Hoof Tester • Biomechanical Hoof Tester • Started in 1998, testing in 2004 • Comparison of 26 tracks and 6 Synthetic Tracks • During breaks (40 min) • Simultaneously measure shear and hardness

  24. Fast Slow Soft Hard SurfacePerformance Vertical Variability Shear Variability • Location on the graphAmount of variability

  25. Fast Fast Slow Slow Soft Soft Hard Hard Example: What Happens? Rip, Till and then Set a Racetrack? Softer & More Variable Slightly Faster A hard track is not necessarily low shear

  26. Centralize Results for Research • Central data repository • Maintenance methods • Performance testing • Track composition • Data can be tied to outcomes • Learn as methods evolve

  27. Funding to get to this Stage • Initial funding: AQHA Racing • Second year of funding: Oak Tree, Del Mar, Fairplex, CARF, Santa Anita, Hollywood, TOC • Funding from Dolly Green, Southern California Equine Foundation and Oak Tree • Pay for services from tracks since 2005 • Current research grant Grayson-Jockey Club • Need a mechanism to implement the research

  28. Laboratory Anticipated Cost and Revenue Model • Expected to be self supporting in fourth year, • Total capital costs: $178,500 • Total labor costs (first three years): $205,000 • Initial funding from consortium of users • Capital costs primarily year 1 and 2 • Labor expense growth through year 3 • After capital costs covered: ~20 tracks to support full time operation

  29. Track Testing Machine • First machine • Additional engineering cost • “End user” software • First machine, $208,000 • Machine 2 through 5 • Real time database link • Significant fabrication savings • Overall cost 22% lower Shared cost, shared machines: Testing within financial realities of industry Big Fresno Fair

  30. Database and Monitoring • Database costs and track personnel costs • Make use of existing personnel • IT people with backside experience • Integrate into existing workflow • Capital costs modest • Weather station and wireless system: $2600 • Hardware for maintenance system: $3000

  31. Philosophy – Culture of Data • Need to provide a common set of measures • Measures based on: • Biomechanics • Procedures • Consistent track material • Support research: • What surfaces are safe? • When are they unsafe (climate, composition?) • Provide tools & lab support to evaluate materials • Need to move the entire industry forward, being sensitive to financial realities of tracks.

  32. How to Move Forward • Basic performance tests …consistently performed • Evaluate the results – safety & performance! • All track maintain shear without excess hardness • Multiple answers • Climate • Materials

  33. The remaining question:Epidemiology?It only matters is we help horses and riders

  34. Issues in Musculoskeletal Disease • Conformation • Individual predisposition • Pre-existing disease • Shoeing • Training • Track surfaces • Multi-factorial risk No disease no breakdown…. Tracks did not “cause” the problem, they CAN improve the situation

  35. Acknowledgements • Initial support & encouragement, Dan Fick AQHA Racing • Continued research funding: Grayson Jockey Club Research Foundation, Polytrack, Del Mar, Keeneland, Santa Anita, CARF, TOC, Fairplex, Dolly Green Foundation, Oak Tree Racing Association

  36. Barbaro Making tracks Better for the entire sport Questions? Union Fair

  37. Surfaces Central Engineering

  38. What is Measured? • Vertical stiffness • Resistance to slip • Both should be dynamic becauseof the speeds of the horse This matches tests for synthetic turf playing surfaces ASTM F1551-94

  39. High dynamic load Shear Lower dynamic load Vertical No failure, do not cup out Use shear failure, reduce accelerations The Ground Reaction

  40. Implementation:Ground Penetrating Radar • Imaging of base and track consistency • Available for diagnosing local base problem, image before you dig • Base line on 14 tracks including synthetics

  41. Simpler Tests… Temperature • Clegg hammerWeak correlation to times at Del Mar • Temperature was a better (and easier) predictor • Clegg hammer may work on turf (not harrowed) • Clegg hammer not sensitive to harness tracks – care about shear Time (sec.) Clegg

  42. 3) Research on track materialsSome Data Needs to be Explored Yes the data is repeatable! Is this wax surface sensitive to moisture not temperature?

  43. Implementation: Wax DSC Added wax High temperature wax used initially New wax reduces temperature sensitivity at critical 100-125°F

More Related