applied
sciences
Article
Effect of Soccer Ball Panels on Aerodynamic Characteristics and
Flow in Drag Crisis
Yuki Sakamoto 1 , Masaki Hiratsuka 2






Citation: Sakamoto, Y.; Hiratsuka, M.;
Ito, S. Effect of Soccer Ball Panels on
Aerodynamic Characteristics and
Flow in Drag Crisis. Appl. Sci. 2021,
11, 296. https://doi.org/10.3390/
app11010296
Received: 12 November 2020
Accepted: 16 December 2020
Published: 30 December 2020
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neu-
tral with regard to jurisdictional clai-
ms in published maps and institutio-
nal affiliations.
Copyright: © 2020 by the authors. Li-
censee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and con-
ditions of the Creative Commons At-
tribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 296. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11010296
and Shinichiro Ito 2, *
1 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Graduate School of Kogakuin University, 1-24-2 Nishi-Shinjuku,
Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 163-8677, Japan; am19022@ns.kogakuin.ac.jp
2 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Kogakuin University, 1-24-2 Nishi- Shinjuku,
Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 163-8677, Japan; hiratsuka@cc.kogakuin.ac.jp
* Correspondence: ito@cc.kogakuin.ac.jp; Tel.: +81-90-8461-0487
Featured Application: Soccer balls.
Abstract: The panel patterns of soccer balls that change with each World Cup have a significant
impact on the balls’ aerodynamic and flight characteristics. In this study, the aerodynamic forces of
eleven types of soccer ball with different panel patterns were measured in a wind tunnel experiment.
We characterized the panel shapes of soccer balls by the length, cross-sectional area, and the panel
grooves’ volume. The results confirmed that the drag and drag crisis characteristics are dependent
on the groove length and volumes. Flow separation points were visualized by an oil film experiment
and particle image velocimetry (PIV) measurement to understand the drag crisis of the soccer balls.
The results showed that the panel shape of the ball significantly changes the position of the separation
point near the critical region, where the drags crisis occurs. In the critical region, laminar and
turbulent flows coexist on the ball. On the other hand, the effect of panel shape on the separation
point position is small in subcritical and supercritical states.
Keywords: drag crisis; soccer ball; flow separation; oil film; particle image velocimetry (PIV)
1. Introduction
In soccer, the aerodynamic characteristics of the ball have a significant effect on the
development of the game. A new type of soccer ball is introduced at each World Cup and
other major international tournaments, and the shape of the panels that make up the ball
has a significant influence on its behavior. The Teamgeist, the ball used in the 2006 World
Cup, was made up of sandpaper-shaped panels instead of the traditional pentagonal and
hexagonal ones. Teamgeist‘s flight path changes irregularly when it is kicked in a way
that does not allow the ball to rotate, and many impressive goal scenes were created by
using this blur ball. This technique attracted people all over the world and became a new
style of soccer. After this period, the ball’s surface panels became diversified, and balls
with various types of panels, such as star-shaped and vortex-shaped balls, appeared. The
influence of the panel shape on the ball’s flight path has become an essential aspect of ball
design. Various aerodynamic studies have been conducted to elucidate the mechanism of
this effect.
When the ball is in drive spinning, the drag and lift due to the Magnus force are on
the ball [1,2]. The magnitude of the lift force is greatly affected by the speed and rotation
rate of the ball. The negative Magnus force is also reported under limited conditions [3].
On the other hand, the irregular lateral forces that cause blurring balls were not measured
in the drive spin ball, so irregular flights were not observed.
In contrast, when the ball does not spin, a lateral force is applied to the ball that causes
irregular flight paths. In a non-spinning ball, twin vortices are formed in the wake of the
ball, and jets between the vortices cause the lateral force. The presence of twin vortices
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 296 2 of 14

and jets in the wake of the ball has been confirmed by visualization measurements using
smoke [4] and tuft grids [5]. Synchronized measurements of the lateral force and the wake
vortex using 3D-PIV (three-dimensional Particle Image Velocimetry) showed that, the jet
was the cause of the lateral force. The direction and flow rate of the formed jet coincided
with the lateral force applied to the ball [6].
It was also reported that for the balls composed of asymmetric panels with low gyro-
scopic rotation, the jet’s direction formed in the wake changes with the ball’s rotation [7].
On the other hand, no significant change in jet direction was observed when the panel
shape was symmetrical. These results suggest that the panel shape is related to the degree
of change in the jet flow direction and the resulting blur in the flight path.
In addition to the lateral force, the magnitude of the drag force on non-spinning
balls varies greatly between different ball panels that has a significant effect on the flight
trajectory [8,9]. In particular, it has been reported that the length of the ball’s seam and
the cross-sectional area and depth of the ball affect lift and drag [9,10], and there is a
relationship between the smaller lateral forces in balls with shorter groove lengths [11,12].
The Reynolds number in which the drag crisis occurs is also affected by the number
of grooves in the ball [13,14]. The drag crisis is a phenomenon in which the drag coefficient
decreases significantly as the flow changes from laminar to turbulent, increasing the
Reynolds number. Dimpled balls also induce drag crisis at a smaller Reynolds number
than those without [15]. The region of the Reynolds number where the flow transitions
from laminar to turbulent is called the critical region, which is a complex flow between
laminar and turbulent flows. Immediately after the kick, the velocity of the soccer ball is so
high that the surrounding flow becomes turbulent. However, when the velocity decreases
due to drag, the ball passes through this critical region and reaches the laminar flow region.
Therefore, it is important to understand the flow around the ball in the critical region to
consider the ball’s trajectory [16–18].
Visualization of the flow is one of the most effective methods to elucidate the mecha-
nism of the drag and lateral forces applied to the ball. Besides the previous visualization
measurements on the jet flow [4–6], Hong et al. [19,20] reported that the position of flow
detachment varied with the location of the ball panel grooves, the number of seams, and
the spacing of the grooves, using the 2D particle image velocimetry (PIV) measurement.
Visualization measurements of flow using smoke wire reported that the flow separation
position moved back further for balls with larger surface roughness than balls with smaller
surface roughness [3].
However, previous visualization measurements have mainly focused on the laminar
and turbulent regions. The critical region, which is considered important in twin vortices
and irregular orbital changes, is still unexplored. In this study, we visualized and measured
the effects of panel type and ball orientation on the flow and the ball’s flight path in the
critical region. First, drag coefficients were measured for 11 different types of soccer balls.
Next, we measured the separation points of the flow in the critical region by oil film
experiments and 2D-PIV measurements for selected balls.

2. Materials and Methods

The following four types of experiment were conducted in this study: measurement
of the groove shape to characterize the surface properties of the balls, fluid force mea-
surements, oil film experiments to identify the location of flow separation, and 2D-PIV
measurements to measure the flow in the vicinity of the separation location. The eleven
balls used in the experiments are summarized in Table 1. All of the balls were employed
in past international competitions. It can be observed that the number and shape of the
panels that make up the ball vary greatly. All of the balls have a circumference of 0.068–
0.070 m, a diameter of 0.22 m, a weight of 410–450 g, and a gauge pressure of 0.06–0.11 MPa,
which meets the standards of the FIFA (International Federation of Association Football).
Groove shape and fluid force measurement were performed on all balls, but the oil film
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 296 3 of 14

experiments and 2D-PIV measurements were applied on only a few of the balls listed in
Table 1.

Table 1. A list of the balls measured in this study. Groove and aerodynamic force measurements were performed on all the
balls. Oil film and 2D-PIV measurements were performed on the balls marked with a circle in the table.

2.1. Groove Shape Measurement

To characterize the balls by the shape of the groove, the length, cross-sectional area,
and total volume of the grooves at the panel joint of each ball were measured. The groove
length was measured by placing a string over all the grooves. Some soccer balls have more
than one type of panel binding groove. Each type of groove was measured three times,
and its average value was determined. 3.6% of the maximum variation for each ball in
the three measurements. The cross-sectional area and dimensions of the grooves were
measured using a KEYENCE VR-3000 one-shot 3D-shape instrument, as shown in Figure 1.
The cross-sectional area and depth of the grooves were calculated using the application, as
shown in Figure 2. The depth and cross-sectional area were determined with an accuracy
of 1.00 × 10−3 m and 1.00 × 10−6 m2 , respectively. The total groove volume was calculated
by multiplying the groove length by the cross-sectional area for each groove type. The total
groove volume was defined by the following equation:
n
V= ∑ L i · Si (1)
i =1

wheres V shows the total groove volume of a ball, Li shows the length of i th type of groove,
Si shows the cross-sectional area of i th type of groove, and n shows the number of groove
types in a ball.
n accuracy of 1.00 × 10−3 m and 1.00 × 10−6 m2, respectively. The total groove volume was calculated
y multiplying the groove length by the cross-sectional area for each groove type. The total groove
olume was defined by the following equation:
𝑛

𝑉 = ∑ 𝐿𝑖 ⋅ 𝑆𝑖 (1)
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 296 4 of 14
𝑖=1
heres 𝑉 shows the total groove volume of a ball, 𝐿𝑖 shows the length of i th type of groove, 𝑆𝑖 shows
e cross-sectional area of i th type of groove, and n shows the number of groove types in a ball.

Figure Figure
1. Groove shape measurement.
1. Groove shape measurement.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 14

Figure 2. An example of 2.groove

Figure shape measurement.
An example of groove shapeThe green line shows
measurement. the shape
The green of the the
line shows ballshape of the ball
surface, the red line indicates
surface, the the
reddepth of the groove,
line indicates andofthe
the depth theyellow area
groove, anddenotes the cross
the yellow section the cross section
area denotes
of the groove. of the groove.

2.2. Fluid Force Measurement

2.2. Fluid Force Measurement
Fluid force measurements were performed on eleven types of different soccer balls
Fluid force measurements were performed on eleven types of different soccer balls with a wind
with a wind tunnel. The wind tunnel we used is an open type with a sirocco fan. The
tunnel. The wind tunnel we used
outlet’s size isisan open
0.38 m× type with
0.38 m, aand
sirocco fan. Theofoutlet’s
the length size is 0.38 m
the measurement × 0.38 is 0.78 m.
section
m, and the length of the measurement section is 0.78 m. The velocity range was
The velocity range was 3~29 m/s with ±1.5% fluctuation, and the turbulence 3~29 m/s with ± 1.5% intensity
fluctuation, and the turbulence
was ±1.0%. The fluid force was measured in the range of wind speed from of
intensity was ± 1.0%. The fluid force was measured in the range 3 to 29 m/s
wind speed from 3 toevery29 m/s1 every
m/s. 1This m/s.speed
This speed
rangerange
coverscovers
most most
of theofspeed
the speedof a of a soccer
soccer ball is kicked
ball that
that is kicked in a realingame
a real[16].
game For[16].
shooting or a freeor
For shooting kick, thekick,
a free ball is
thekicked
ball isout at about
kicked out 30 m/s, 30 m/s,
at about
and aerodynamic drag anddecelerates
aerodynamic it to about 15 m/s [9]. The
drag decelerates it toball may15also
about m/s be[9].
kicked
Theout ballatmay
a slower
also be kicked
speed when passing. Theout drag
at a slower speed
coefficients when
were passing.byThe
measured dragthe
placing coefficients
ball so thatwere measured
the wind hit theby placing
upper panel face of thethepictures
ball so shown
that theinwind
Tablehit the upper
1. The panel on
force acting facetheofsoccer
the pictures
balls was shown in Table 1. The
measured
force acting on the soccer balls was measured by a three
by a three component load cell (Fx, Fy, Fz), LMC-3520A by Nissho Electric Works. The measured component load cell (Fx, Fy, Fz),
LMC-3520A by Nissho Electric Works. The measured
values were sampled at 1000 Hz for 9.0 s and averaged. The experimental conditions are shown values were sampled at in
1000 Hz for
Figures 3 and 4. The ball was mounted with cobra-type rear support. The drag coefficient, CD, was4. The ball
9.0 s and averaged. The experimental conditions are shown in Figures 3 and
was mounted with cobra-type rear support. The drag coefficient, CD , was defined by the
defined by the following equation:
following equation:
D
CD = 1 (2)
𝐷 2 ρU 2 · A
𝐶𝐷 = (2)
1 2
2 𝜌𝑈 ∙ 𝐴
where D, r, U, and A denote the drag force of the ball, the density of the air, the uniform
wind speed, and the projected cross-sectional area of the ball, respectively. Reynolds
where D, r, U, and A denote
number the drag
(Re) is aforce of the ball,
dimensionless the density
number defined of as
thethe
air,ratio
the of
uniform
inertialwind
force speed,
to viscous force.
and the projected cross-sectional area of the ball, respectively. Reynolds
Reynolds number, Re, is defined as the following equation: number (Re) is a dimensionless
number defined as the ratio of inertial force to viscous force. Reynolds number, Re, is defined as the
following equation: Re = Uν· D (3)
𝑈∙𝐷
where ν denotes the kinematic 𝑅𝑒 = viscosity. (3)
𝜈
where 𝜈 denotes the kinematic viscosity.
where D, r, U, and A denote the drag force of the ball, the density of the air, the uniform wind speed,
and the projected cross-sectional area of the ball, respectively. Reynolds number (Re) is a dimensionless
number defined as the ratio of inertial force to viscous force. Reynolds number, Re, is defined as the
following equation:
𝑈∙𝐷
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 296 𝑅𝑒 = (3) 5 of 14
𝜈
where 𝜈 denotes the kinematic viscosity.

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 14

Figure 3. FluidFluid
Figure 3.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW
forceforce
measurement (back).
measurement (back). 5 of 14

Figure 4. Fluid force measurement (side).

Figure 4. Fluid
Figure force
4. Fluid measurement
force (side).
measurement (side).
2.3. Measurement of Separation Point by Oil Film Experiments
2.3. Measurement of Separation Point by Oil Film Experiments
2.3. Measurement of Separation Point by Oil Film Experiments
In this method, oil film is applied to the
In this ball surface
method, oil filmunder the wind
is applied to theflow.
ball Since
surface the oil film
under theflows
wind flow. Since the oil
to theInpoint
this method,
where the oilflow
film separates
isfilm
applied
flows totothe
from ball
the
the surface
ball
point under
surface,
where the
theflow
the wind
separation flow.
separates Since
point
from can
thethe
be oil film flows
obtained
ball surface,by
the separation point
to the pointoil
measuring where the flowafter
distribution separates from the
canmeasurement.
be obtained byball
As surface,inoil
shown
measuring the separation
Figure 5, the point
distribution can be obtained
oil-film-coated
after measurement. Asbyshown in Figure 5,
ball was
measuring
placed in theoilwind
distribution
tunnel and after measurement.
measured
the As shown
by flowing
oil-film-coated ball the wind
was in under
placed Figure
in thea5, the tunnel
oil-film-coated
turbulent
wind wind
andspeed ball was
of 29.6
measured by flowing the wind
placed
m/s. in the wind
A mixture tunnel
of oleic and
acid, measured
under
liquid paraffin,by flowing
a turbulent andwind the wind
speed
tetra-tri-iron ofunder a turbulent
29.6 m/s.
oxide powder waswind
A mixture of speed
employed of 29.6
oleic acid,
for liquid paraffin, and
the
m/s. A mixture of oleic acid, tetra-tri-iron
oil. liquid paraffin, oxide
andpowder was employed
tetra-tri-iron oxide powderfor thewas
oil. employed for the
oil.

Figure 5. Oil
Figure film
5. Oil experiment
film (Krasava).
experiment (Krasava).
2.4.Figure
2D-PIV5. Oil film experiment (Krasava).
Measurement
2.4. 2D-PIV Measurement
In order to visualize the location of the flow separation point and the flow in the
2.4. 2D-PIV Measurement
In order to visualize the location
vicinity offorthetheflow
fourseparation
balls shownpointin and
Table the1,flow
2D-PIVin the vicinity for the
measurements were performed as
In order
four balls to visualize
shown in Tablethe location
1, shown ofFigure
the flow
2D-PIVinmeasurements separation
6. Three point
velocity
were andwere
ranges
performed the flow inin
measured:
as shown theFigure
vicinity6. for
subcritical the (laminar flow),
region
Three
four balls
velocity shown
ranges in Table
were 1,critical
measured: 2D-PIV region,
subcritical and supercritical
measurements
region region
were performed
(laminar flow), (turbulent
as shown
critical region,flow).
inand PIV
Figure images
6. Threewere taken with a
supercritical
region (turbulent flow). PIV images were taken with a NAC MEMRECAM HX-3 at 2000 FPSmegapixels.
velocity ranges were NAC
measured: MEMRECAM
subcritical region HX-3 at
(laminar2000 FPS
flow), with
critical a resolution
region, and of 5
supercritical
with a A Lee Laser
region (turbulent
resolution MODEL
flow). PIVAimages
of 5 megapixels. Lee Laser LDP-100MQG
wereMODEL
taken with was used as
a NAC MEMRECAM
LDP-100MQG the laser
was used as light
HX-3 source,
the at 2000
laser with a
FPSsource,
light peak
with a pulse power of
resolution
with a peakofpulse
5 megapixels.
power of A 2.0Lee
kW.Laser
We MODEL LDP-100MQG
used Koncerto was used
II, an analysis as thefrom
software laserSeika
light Digital
source,
with a The
Image. peaklaser
pulse power
light sheetofwas
2.0 placed
kW. Weonused Koncerto
a meridian lineII,ofan
theanalysis software
soccer ball from Seika Digital
and photographed from
Image.
the sideThe
withlaser light sheetcamera.
a high-speed was placed
The on a meridian
high-speed line of shooting
camera’s the soccerinterval
ball andwas
photographed
set to 15 μs,from
the
the sideframe
average with arate
high-speed
was 2000camera.
fps, andThe high-speed
the thickness of camera’s shooting
the laser light sheetinterval
was set was set toThe
to 3 mm. 15 smoke
μs, the
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 296 6 of 14

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 14

2.0 kW. We used Koncerto II, an analysis software from Seika Digital Image. The laser light
sheet was placed on a meridian line of the soccer ball and photographed from the side
with a high-speed camera. The high-speed camera’s shooting interval was set to 15 µs, the
average frame rate was 2000 fps, and the thickness of the laser light sheet was set to 3 mm.
The smoke of Dioctyl sebacate was used as tracer particles.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 14

Figure 6. 2D-PIV (particle image velocimetry)measurement.

3. Results and Discussion

Figure 6. 2D-PIV (particle image velocimetry)measurement.
Figure 6. 2D-PIV (particle image velocimetry) measurement.

3.1. Grooveand
3. Results Shape 3. Results and Discussion
Measurement
Discussion
3.1. Groove Shape Measurement
3.1. Figures 7a–c
Groove Shape show the total
Measurement Figurelength,
7a–c showthethecross-sectional
total length, thearea, and the area,
cross-sectional totalandvolume ofvolume
the total the panel
of
grooves. For those with multiple types ofFor
the panel grooves. grooves, such
those with as Ordem,
multiple Teamgeist,
types of grooves, such
Figures 7a–c show the total length, the cross-sectional area, and the total volume of the panel
and as Merlin, the length
Ordem, Teamgeist,
and cross-sectional area and Merlin,
weretypes the
measured length and cross-sectional
separately. Ordem, area were
Merlin,and measured
and Finaleseparately.relativelyMerlin,
Ordem,
grooves. For those with multiple of grooves, such as Ordem, Teamgeist, Merlin, thehave
length longer
and Finale have relatively longer groove lengths and larger groove volumes. On the other
groove lengths and
and cross-sectional larger
area were groove
Delta,volumes.
measured
hand, Teamgeist,On
separately. andthe
Ordem, otherhave
Merlin,
Jabulani hand, Delta,
andaFinale have
shorter Teamgeist,
relatively
length and Jabulani
longer
and a smaller have
cross-sectional
groove lengths and larger
a shorter length and a smallergroove volumes. On the
cross-sectional
area of grooves, other hand,
resulting in aarea Delta,
of total
smaller Teamgeist,
grooves, and
grooveresulting Jabulani have
in athesmaller
volume. Thus, total
length and groove
volume of
a shorter length and a smallerthe cross-sectional
grooves vary area times,
several of grooves, resulting
depending on in ball
the a smaller
type. total groove
volume. Thus, the length and volume of the grooves vary several times, depending on the ball type.
volume. Thus, the length and volume of the grooves vary several times, depending on the ball type.

Figure 7. Specifications of ball groove: (a) Total groove length, (b) Cross section of each groove, and
(c) Total 7.
Figure groove volume. of ball groove.
Specifications
Figure 7. Specifications of ball groove: (a) Total groove length, (b) Cross section of each groove, and
3.2. Fluid Force Experiment (c) Total groove volume.
3.2. Fluid Force Experiment
Figure 8 shows the CD diagram for 8each
Figure showsball.the
TheCDdrag coefficients
diagram for each ofball.
all the
Theballs
drag are large in the
coefficients of all the balls are
3.2. Fluid Force Experiment Reynolds
laminar flow region where the large in the laminar flow region where the Reynolds number isReynolds
number is low, but in the turbulent area where the low, but in the turbulent
number is high,
Figure a dragthe
8 shows crisis occurs,
Carea where
D diagram
andthethe
for drag
eachcoefficient
Reynolds Thebecomes
number
ball. is small.
a dragIncrisis
high,coefficients
drag the recently
occurs,
of all thereleased
and the drag
balls coefficient
are large in the
Merlin, the Reynolds number at which
becomes the drag
small. In thecrisis occurs
recently is smaller
released than the
Merlin, in other
Reynoldsballs.number
The drag at which the drag
laminar flow region where the Reynolds number is low, but in the turbulent area where the Reynolds
coefficients in the laminar and crisisturbulent
occurs is smaller
regionsthanwereinrelatively
other balls.moreThe drag coefficients
extensive in theof
than those laminar
the and turbulent
number is high, a drag
other balls. As shown in Figurecrisis
regionsoccurs,
8, were
Merlin and
relativelythe drag coefficient
more extensive
was characterized by athan
more becomes
those small.
of the other
considerable In the
As recently
balls.groove
panel released
shown in Figure 8,
Merlin, thevolume
length and Reynolds than number
theMerlin at
was
other balls.which the drag
characterized
This larger by acrisis
total more occurs
volume is smaller
considerable
of the grooves panel than length
hasgroove
affected intheotherand balls.
drag volumeThe than drag
the
crisis and drag
coefficients in coefficient.
the laminar other
The balls.
changes
and This
in thelarger
turbulent drag total volume
coefficient
regions were of of
thethe grooves
other
relatively has affected
ballsmore
were consistent
extensive the with
drag
than crisis and of
those dragthe
the trends shown in previous coefficient.
studies The changes
[8,9,12,21–23]. in the
Thus, drag
the coefficient
drag of
coefficient the other
dropped balls were
rapidly consistent
from with the
other balls. As shown intrends Figure 8, Merlin
shown in previous was characterized
studies [8,9,12,21–23]. byThus,
a more
the drag considerable
coefficient droppedpanel rapidly
groove
about 0.5 to 0.2 in the Reynolds numbers range from 1.0 × 105 to 2.4 × 105. This drag crisis corresponds
length and volume than from the other balls.
about 0.5 This
to 0.2 larger
in the totalnumbers
Reynolds volume of the
range fromgrooves
1.0 × 10 has5 to 2.4 affected5 thedrag
× 10 . This drag
to a change in the aspect of the flow around the ball from laminar to turbulent, but the Reynolds
crisis
number andatdrag
whichcoefficient.
the drag crisisThe changes
occurs variesin the drag coefficient
significantly from ball to ball.of the other balls
Therefore, were consistent with
we focused
the
on trends
the firstshown
and the inlastprevious
Reynolds studies
numbers [8,9,12,21–23].
of the drag crisisThus, the dragthese
to characterize coefficient
phenomena. dropped
The rapidly from
first and
about 0.5last Reynolds
to 0.2 in thenumbers
Reynolds of the drag crisis
numbers are smallest
range from 1.0 at 1.0
× 10× 510to and
5
2.4 1.2
× 10× 510 for Evopower
. This
5
drag crisis corresponds
and largest at 1.8 × 105 and 2.4 × 105 for Jabulani. The Reynolds number between the start and
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 296 7 of 14

crisis corresponds to a change in the aspect of the flow around the ball from laminar to
turbulent, but the Reynolds number at which the drag crisis occurs varies significantly
from ball to ball. Therefore, we focused on the first and the last Reynolds numbers of the
drag crisis to characterize these phenomena. The first and last Reynolds numbers of the
drag crisis are smallest at 1.0 × 105 and 1.2 × 105 for Evopower and largest at 1.8 × 105
and 2.4 × 105 for Jabulani. The Reynolds number between the start and endpoints of the
drag crisis, the critical region’s width, is about 0.3 for Evopower and about 0.6 for Jabulani,
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR which is also a significant difference between the balls.
PEER REVIEW 7 of 14

Figure 8. The drag coefficient (CD ) diagram of each ball.

Figure 8. The drag coefficient (CD) diagram of each ball.
Figures 9 and 10 show the relationship between the volume of the grooves and the
Figures 9 and 10 show the
Reynolds relationship
number to clarifybetween the volume
the dependence of the
of the grooves
start and end and Reynolds
of the drag crisis and the
number to clarify thewidth
dependence of theregion
of the critical start and endpanel
on ball of thegeometry.
drag crisis Asand the width
shown of the there
in the figure, critical
is a strong
region on ball panel geometry. As shown in the figure, there is a strong correlation between the region.
correlation between the grooves’ volume and the Reynolds number of the critical
grooves’ volume andThe thecorrelation coefficients
Reynolds number of theare −0.63region.
critical for theThestarting Reynolds
correlation number are
coefficients −0.83 for the
and−0.63
ending
for the starting Reynolds Reynolds
number andnumber.
−0.83 forFigure 11 shows
the ending the relationship
Reynolds between
number. Figure 11 the groove
shows the volume
relationship between the groove volume and the width of the critical region. Overall, the width of smaller
and the width of the critical region. Overall, the width of the critical region became
as the groove
the critical region became smallervolume was increased.
as the groove volume wasHowever, whenHowever,
increased. Evopowerwhen was excluded,
Evopowerthere was
no clear correlation between the groove volume and the width of the critical region. Thus,
was excluded, there was no clear correlation between the groove volume and the width of the critical
the panel grooves significantly impact how the drag crisis occurs, i.e., the transition from
region. Thus, the panel grooves significantly impact how the drag crisis occurs, i.e., the transition
laminar to turbulent flow. In order to elucidate the details of this mechanism, we continued
from laminar to turbulent flow. In order to elucidate the details of this mechanism, we continued to
to visualize the separation points by oil film experiments and 2D-PIV measurements to
visualize the separation points by
investigate oilthe
how filmtransition
experiments fromand 2D-PIV
laminar measurements
to turbulent flow istoinduced.
investigate
Thehowrelationship
the transition from laminar to turbulent flow is induced. The relationship between groove
between groove volume and the drag coefficient in subcritical and supercritical regions is volume
and the drag coefficient
shown in subcritical
in Figures and 12 andsupercritical
13. There is regions
a weak is correlation
shown in Figure
between 12 and Figure volume
the groove 13. and
There is a weak correlation between the
drag coefficient groove
of 0.40 andvolume
−0.20 inand drag
each coefficient
velocity range,of respectively.
0.40 and −0.20Inintheeach
subcritical
velocity range, respectively.
region, whereIn thethe
subcritical region, the
flow is laminar, where
dragthe flow is laminar,
coefficient increasesthe
withdrag
the coefficient
number of grooves,
i.e., theofrougher
increases with the number grooves, thei.e.,
surface, the higher
the rougher the dragthe
the surface, coefficient.
higher the Indrag
the turbulent,
coefficient.supercritical
In
the turbulent, supercritical region, the drag coefficient decreased as the volume of the grooves may be
region, the drag coefficient decreased as the volume of the grooves increased. This
increased. This may due
be dueto the degree
to the degree of accelerated
of accelerated turbulence,
turbulence,butbut
thethe
trend waswas
trend notnot
very clear.
very clear.
 the transition from laminar to turbulent flow is induced. The relationship between groove volume
and the drag coefficient in subcritical and supercritical regions is shown in Figure 12 and Figure 13.
There is a weak correlation between the groove volume and drag coefficient of 0.40 and −0.20 in each
velocity range, respectively. In the subcritical region, where the flow is laminar, the drag coefficient
increases with the number of grooves, i.e., the rougher the surface, the higher the drag coefficient.8 of
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 296 In14
the turbulent, supercritical region, the drag coefficient decreased as the volume of the grooves
increased. This may be due to the degree of accelerated turbulence, but the trend was not very clear.

Figure 9. The relationship between the Starting Reynolds number (Re) of drag crisis and total groove
Figure 9. The relationship between the Starting Reynolds number (Re) of drag crisis and total groove
volume.
volume.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 14

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 14

.Figure 10. The relationship between the Ending Reynolds number (Re) of drag crisis and total groove. volume.
Figure 10. The relationship between the Ending Reynolds number (Re) of drag crisis and total groove.
volume.
.Figure 10. The relationship between the Ending Reynolds number (Re) of drag crisis and total groove. volume.

Figure 11. The relationship between the width of the critical region and total groove volume.

Figure 11. The relationship

Figure between between
11. The relationship the widththe
ofwidth
the critical
of theregion
criticaland totaland
region groove
totalvolume.
groove volume.
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 296 Figure 11. The relationship between the width of the critical region and total groove volume. 9 of 14

Figure
Figure 12. The 12. The relationship
relationship between
between groove groove
volume volume
and and drag coefficient
drag coefficient (CDsubcritical
(CD) in the ) in the subcritical re-
regions. gions.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 14

Figure 13. The relationship between groove volume and drag coefficient (CD) in the supercritical
Figure 13. The relationship between groove volume and drag coefficient (CD ) in the supercritical re-
regions. gions.

3.3. Oil Film Experiments

3.3 Oil film experiments
Figure 14 shows side 14
Figure views
shows of side
oil film
viewsmeasurements for (a) a smooth
of oil film measurements for (a) aball, (b) Telstar
smooth ball, (b)18, (c) 18,
Telstar
Krasava, (d) Finale, and (e)
(c) Krasava, Vantaggio.
(d) Finale, and (e) The wind direction
Vantaggio. The wind was set from
direction wasleft to right.
set from All
left to right.
measurements All weremeasurements
performed atwere performed
supercritical at supercritical
conditions with Reconditions
= 4.3 × 105.with Resmooth
In the 105 . In the
= 4.3 × sphere
(a), the first andsmooth
secondsphere (a), the
separation firstappeared
points and second on separation
the surface.points appeared
This feature on the surface.
is consistent with aThis
feature is consistent with a previous study [4]. The dashed line shows
previous study [4]. The dashed line shows the line of separation bubbles that reattach to the sphere’s the line of separation
surface after the bubbles
boundary that reattach
layer hastodetached.
the sphere’sThesurface aftershows
solid line the boundary
the pointlayer has detached.
at which the flowThe
around the sphere finally separated. As shown in this figure, detachment is delayed in the turbulent As
solid line shows the point at which the flow around the sphere finally separated.
shown in this figure, detachment is delayed in the turbulent flow, indicating that the
flow, indicating that the drag coefficient under the turbulent flow is small. On the other hand, only
drag coefficient under the turbulent flow is small. On the other hand, only the turbulent
the turbulent separation line is observed in the soccer ball with panel grooves. This result indicates
separation line is observed in the soccer ball with panel grooves. This result indicates that
that the panel grooves have shifted the flow from laminar to turbulent flow. The separation point is
the panel grooves have shifted the flow from laminar to turbulent flow. The separation
nearly the samepoint
for allissoccer
nearlyballs, corresponding
the same to the
for all soccer factcorresponding
balls, that the CD values were
to the factalmost
that thetheCsame
D values
for the drag measurements at a velocity of 29.6 m/s.
were almost the same for the drag measurements at a velocity of 29.6 m/s.

Figure 14. The results of the oil film experiment to show the separation point on the panels.
 around the sphere finally separated. As shown in this figure, detachment is delayed in the turbulent
flow, indicating that the drag coefficient under the turbulent flow is small. On the other hand, only
the turbulent separation line is observed in the soccer ball with panel grooves. This result indicates
that the panel grooves have shifted the flow from laminar to turbulent flow. The separation point is
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 296 10 of 14
nearly the same for all soccer balls, corresponding to the fact that the CD values were almost the same
for the drag measurements at a velocity of 29.6 m/s.

Figure 14. The results of the oil film experiment to show the separation point on the panels.
Figure 14. The results of the oil film experiment to show the separation point on the panels.

Figure 15 shows the Figure

relationship between
15 shows the CD valuesbetween
the relationship in the supercritical
the CD valuesregion obtained
in the from region
supercritical
the fluid force measurements and the
obtained from the fluid
separation position in the and
force measurements oil film
the experiment. The CD value
separation position in the oil film
increases as the separation angle increases, and this correlation coefficient is as large
experiment. The CD value increases as the separation angle increases, and this as 0.90.
correlation
Therefore, the position of the detachment point changes depending on the shape of the ball groove
coefficient is as large as 0.90. Therefore, the position of the detachment point changes de-
in the supercritical region,
pending and
onthe
thedrag
shapecoefficient
of the ballchanges
groove accordingly.
in the supercritical region, and the drag coefficient
changes accordingly.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 14

Figure
Figure 15. The 15. The relationship
relationship between the between
CD values CDthe
the in values in the supercritical
supercritical region andregion and the separation
the separation
position of the oil film
position of the oil film experiments. experiments.

3.4. 2D-PIV Measurement

3.4. 2D-PIV Measurement
In order to clarify the influence of ball panels and grooves in the critical region, 2D-PIV
In order tomeasurements
clarify the influence of ball panels
were performed. Tablesand
2–5grooves
show the inresults
the critical region, 2D-PIV
of Evopower, Vantaggio,
measurements were performed.
Jabulani, Tables measured
and Teamgeist 2–5 show inthethe
results of Evopower,
subcritical, Vantaggio,
critical, and Jabulani,
supercritical flow and
regions.
Teamgeist measured in the subcritical, critical, and supercritical flow regions. The ball is painted the
The ball is painted black to reduce the reflection of the PIV laser. The flow around
black to reduce ball is influenced
the reflection byPIV
of the the complex
laser. Thethree-dimensional
flow around the ball groove geometryby
is influenced and
theiscomplex
considered
three-dimensionalto have
groovea three-dimensional
geometry and isstructure.
consideredTherefore,
to haveina order to obtain three-dimensional
three-dimensional structure.
information
Therefore, in order to obtainabout the flow around
three-dimensional the ball, the
information flowthe
about wasflowmeasured
aroundatthe three locations
ball, the flowwith
different positions of the measurement surface. The lines drawn in
was measured at three locations with different positions of the measurement surface. The lines drawn the pictures of balls
a, b, and c indicate the plane measured by the PIV. The structure of the
in the pictures of balls a, b, and c indicate the plane measured by the PIV. The structure of the surface surface grooves
on each surface depends on the bonding status of the panels. In the images of the PIV
grooves on each surface depends on the bonding status of the panels. In the images of the PIV
measurements, the separation point and flow direction from the separation position are
measurements, the separation point and flow direction from the separation position are shown as
shown as white circles and solid lines.
white circles and solid lines.

Table 2. The PIV results of Evopower with the different panel orientations and flow velocity.
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 296 11 of 14

Table 2. The PIV results of Evopower with the different panel orientations and flow velocity.

Table 3. The PIV results of Vantaggio with the different panel orientations and flow velocity.

1
Table 4. The PIV results of Jabulani with the different panel orientations and flow velocity.
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 296 12 of 14

Table 5. The PIV results of Teamgeist with the different panel orientations and flow velocity.

2 supercritical regions, the flow direction at the separation

In both the subcritical and
point and the wake were almost the same for the same type of ball in any measurement
plane. In the subcritical region, the flow separation occurred at around 90◦ for all the balls
when the residence point was set to 0◦ . The CD in this region was relatively large, about 0.5.
The fast separation of the laminar flow increased the width of the wake, which resulted in
higher pressure drag.
Next, in the supercritical region, the CD was smaller, about 0.2, because the flow
transitioned to turbulence with the increase of the Reynolds number, and the detachment
was delayed. As a result, the wake became narrower, and the pressure drag became small.
The location of flow detachment in the supercritical region was generally consistent with
the location of the detachment shown by the oil film experiments in Figure 11.
Finally, for the flow in the critical region, the position of the separation point and
the direction of the wake varied depending on the position of the measured surface. For
example, in the Vantaggio measurement planes a and c in Table 3, the separation position
of the critical region flow was behind the ball and showed the same trend as the results
for the supercritical region. On the other hand, in panel b, the detachment position is
about 90◦ , indicating that the flow is detached in the same way as it is in the subcritical
region. Therefore, even for the same ball, depending on the surface properties of the flow
path, laminar and turbulent flow regions coexist in the critical region. Similar results were
obtained for the other three types of balls. There was no clear correlation between variation
in the separation point and the groove volume.
For the soccer ball, the drag reduction in the critical region was slower. Also, the
width of the Reynolds number of the drag crisis was wider than it was for the smooth
ball. These characteristics are due to the wide range of Reynolds numbers that change
from laminar to turbulent flow depending on the position of the ball, as seen in the present
results. In addition, in the critical region where laminar and turbulent flows coexist at
different positions, the formation of jets is not uniform around the ball. This uneven
formation suggests that if the ball is rotating slowly, the direction of the jet would also
rotate with the ball and possibly cause an irregular flight path. After the ball is kicked,
the drag force reduces the velocity of the flow and decelerates through the critical region
to the subcritical region. The non-uniformity of the flow around the ball due to this flow
transition is considered to be important to the irregular trajectory of the ball.
On the other hand, it was difficult to determine how the grooves drive turbulence
from the present results. For example, in the Jabulani case shown in Table 5, figure c does
not appear to be driving turbulence at first glance because the surface is smooth. However,
it detaches the slowest of the three measured surfaces. Therefore, it is also indicated that
the requirement for turbulence in critical region is not just the number of grooves. In
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 296 13 of 14

order to understand in more detail how the geometry of the groove promotes turbulence,
more detailed measurement and analysis is needed, including not only two-dimensional
measurements, but also three-dimensional effects. In this study, analysis was based on
the flow visualized by PIV and focused on the location of the separation point. In future
work, it will be important to quantitatively analyze the wake width of the flow and the
flow structure around the groove for a more detailed understanding of flow transitions.

4. Conclusions
In order to clarify the relationship between the aerodynamic forces and the shape of
the soccer ball panel grooves, measurements of the shape of the grooves, hydrodynamic
forces, oil film experiments, and 2D-PIV measurements of the separation point and flow
were conducted. As a result, the following results were obtained.
1. The dependence of the drag coefficient of each ball on the Reynolds number was
measured. In addition to the magnitude of drag coefficients, the Reynolds number of
the drag crisis was different for each panel shape.
2. As the total volume of panel grooves increased, the Reynolds number at which the
drag crisis occurred and the Reynolds number at which it ended tended to be smaller.
3. Although smaller than in the critical region, in the laminar and turbulent regions,
there was ball dependence and panel dependence on the location of the separation
point of the flow.
4. In the critical region, laminar and turbulent flows coexist on the ball, and the separa-
tion point of the flows varies greatly depending on the panel surface. Such an uneven
flow would affect the formation of the soccer ball’s jet and its irregular flight path.
5. Immediately after the ball is kicked, its velocity is large, and it flies in a supercritical
state. The ball is slowed down by aerodynamic drag during its flight, but when the
total volume of the grooves is large, the supercritical state is more likely to continue,
and the CD value and flow conditions do not change much. On the other hand, when
the total volume of the groove is small, the critical state is entered earlier, and the CD
value and flow conditions change significantly. Therefore, to keep the ball on a stable
trajectory, the ball should be designed so that the volume of the grooves is large.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, S.I.; methodology, S.I.; validation, Y.S., S.I. and M.H.;
investigation, Y.S.; data curation, Y.S.; writing—original draft preparation, Y.S. and M.H.; writing—
review and editing, M.H.; visualization, Y.S.; supervision, S.I. and M.H.; project administration, S.I.;
All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Passmore, M.; Rogers, D.; Tuplin, S.; Harland, A.; Lucas, T.; Holmes, C. The aerodynamic performance of a range of FIFA-approved
footballs. J. Sports Eng. Technol. 2012, 226, 61–70. [CrossRef]
2. Kray, T.; Franke, J.; Frank, W. Magnus effect on a rotating soccer ball at high Reynolds numbers. J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 2014,
124, 46–53. [CrossRef]
3. Alam, F.; Chowdhury, H.; Moria, H.; Fuss, F.K. A comparative study of football aerodynamics. Procedia Eng. 2010, 2, 2443–2448.
[CrossRef]
4. Taneda, S. Visual observations of the flow past a sphere at Reynolds numbers between 104 and 106. J. Fluid Mech. 1979, 85,
187–192. [CrossRef]
5. Murakami, M.; Kondoh, M.; Iwai, Y.; Seo, K. Measurement of aerodynamic forces and flow field of a soccer ball in a wind tunnel
for knuckle effect. Procedia Eng. 2010, 2, 2467–2472. [CrossRef]
6. Hiratsuka, M.; Ito, S.; Miyasaka, K.; Konno, A. Stereo three-dimensional particle image velocimetry measurement and aero-
dynamic force analysis of non-spinning soccer balls. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part P J. Sports Eng. Technol. 2020, 234, 146–153.
[CrossRef]
7. Ito, S.; Kamata, M.; Asai, T.; Seo, K. Factors of unpredictable shots concerning new soccer balls. Procedia Eng. 2012, 34, 152–157.
[CrossRef]
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 296 14 of 14

8. Goff, J.E.; Asai, T.; Hong, S. A comparison of Jabulani and Brazuca non-spin aerodynamics. J. Sports Eng. Technol. 2014, 228,
188–194. [CrossRef]
9. Goff, J.E.; Hong, S.; Asai, T. Aerodynamic and surface comparisons between Telstar 18 and Brazuca. J. Sports Eng. Technol. 2018,
232, 342–348. [CrossRef]
10. Hong, S.; Goff, J.E.; Asai, T. Effect of a soccer ball’s surface texture on its aerodynamics and trajectory. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part P
J. Sports Eng. Technol. 2019, 233, 67–74. [CrossRef]
11. Hong, S.; Sakamoto, K.; Washida, Y.; Nakayama, M.; Asai, T. The influence of panel orientation on the aerodynamics of soccer
balls. Procedia Eng. 2014, 72, 786–791. [CrossRef]
12. Hong, S.; Asai, T. Effect of panel shape of soccer ball on its flight characteristics. Sci. Rep. 2015, 4, 5068. [CrossRef]
13. Alam, F.; Chowdhury, H.; Stemmer, M.; Wang, Z.; Yang, J. Effects of surface structure on soccer ball aerodynamics.
Procedia Engineering. 2012, 34, 146–151. [CrossRef]
14. Goff, J.E. A review of recent research into aerodynamics of sport projectiles. Sports Eng. 2013, 16, 137–154. [CrossRef]
15. Hong, S.; Asai, T. Aerodynamic effects of dimples on soccer ball surfaces. Heliyon 2017, 3, e00432. [CrossRef]
16. Goff, J.E.; Carr, M.J. Trajectory analysis of a soccer ball. Am. J. Phys. 2009, 77, 1020–1027. [CrossRef]
17. Myers, T.G.; Mitchell, S.L. A mathematical analysis of the motion of an in-flight soccer ball. Sports Eng. 2013, 16, 29–41. [CrossRef]
18. Mizota, T.; Kurogi, K.; Ohya, Y.; Okajima, A.; Naruo, T.; Kawamura, Y. The strange flight behavior of slowly spinning soccer balls.
Sci. Rep. 2013, 3, 1871. [CrossRef]
19. Hong, S.; Asai, T.; Seo, K. Visualization of air flow around soccer ball using a particle image velocimetry. Sci. Rep. 2015, 5, 15108.
[CrossRef]
20. Hong, S.; Asai, T.; Seo, K. Flow Visualization Around Panel Shapes of Soccer Ball. Procedia Eng. 2015, 112, 391–394. [CrossRef]
21. Asai, T.; Seo, K. Aerodynamic drag of modern soccer balls. SpringerPlus 2013, 2, 171. [CrossRef]
22. Goff, J.E.; Hobson, C.M.; Asai, T.; Hong, S. Wind-tunnel Experiments and Trajectory Analyses for Five Nonspinning Soccer Balls.
Procedia Eng. 2016, 147, 32–37. [CrossRef]
23. Kiratidis, A.L.; Leinweber, D.B. An aerodynamic analysis of recent FIFA world cup balls. Eur. J. Phys. 2018, 39, 034001. [CrossRef]