Systematically modified crash-pad reduces impact shock in running shoes

Heidenfelder, Jens; Sterzing, Thorsten; Milani, Thomas L.

doi:10.1080/19424281003781543

Cited by 29 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The later occurrence of peak impact force and lower loading rates for SH running is consistent with findings regarding the effectiveness of compliant materials in footwear (De Wit et al 1995, Heidenfelder et al 2010, Shorten & Mientjes 2011) and supports our second hypothesis. It is this external cushioning layer, present only in the SH condition, which is likely to be the mechanism behind the reduction in loading rates and delayed time to peak impact, particularly as the BFT and MS conditions are relying on the heel fat pad that provides very limited shock reduction and attenuation (De Clercq et al 1994).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…Another key component of traditional trainers thought to affect running mechanics, is the external cushioning layer that is often not present in minimalist footwear and absent when BFT. An increased stiffness (or absence) of such cushioning has been reported to increase loading rates and peak pressures (De Wit et al 1995, Heidenfelder et al 2010, Shorten & Mientjes 2011. Furthermore, observations have shown that reducing the level of shoe cushioning can increase peak plantar pressures at the midfoot and toe regions (Wiegerinck et al 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of a seven-week minimalist footwear transition programme on footstrike modality, pressure variables and loading rates

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of a seven-week minimalist footwear transition programme on footstrike modality, pressure variables and loading rates

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This variable has been shown to consistently correlate with rearfoot hardness of running shoes (Clarke et al, 1983;De Wit et al, 1995;Heidenfelder et al, 2008). The loading rate was also able to characterize rearfoot cushioning differences of running shoes featuring different crash-pad heights (Heidenfelder et al, 2010). Kinematic analyses demonstrated that runners adapt their running style in response to shoe and surface hardness (Tenbroek et al, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Influence of rearfoot and forefoot midsole hardness on biomechanical and perception variables during heel-toe running

et al. 2013

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Running shoe cushioning research has focused widely on rearfoot (RF) characteristics, whereas forefoot (FF) characteristics have been rather neglected. However, altered cushioning may affect running biomechanics and respective subjective perception at RF and FF. Thus, this research compared the effect of running shoes with different midsole hardnesses at RF and FF. Methods: Twenty-eight heel-toe runners were tested in five experimental shoe conditions that featured three segmented EVA midsoles (RF, midfoot (MF), FF). Three conditions had the same midsole hardness at RF and FF (soft (SS), medium (MM), hard (HH)). Two conditions had different RF and FF midsole hardness (soft-RF/hard-FF (SH), hard-RF/soft-FF (HS)). All midsoles featured the same MF segment of medium hardness. Vertical ground reaction forces and lower extremity kinematics during stance, subjective cushioning of the heel-toe transition and the overall comfort were quantified. Data were analysed using Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests, repeated measures ANOVA, Bonferroni post-hoc tests (p < 0.05), and effect size analyses ( p h 2 ). Results: The consistent midsole shoe conditions showed increased maximum loading rates of impact and propulsion peaks from SS to HH. Respective maximum loading rates of SH were similarly to SS, and respective maximum loading rates for HS were similar to HH. Subjectively, the consistent midsole conditions were rated according to their mechanical properties and softer shoes were preferred over harder shoes. In the varied midsole shoe conditions, SH was perceived similar to SS, whereas HS was perceived similar to MM. Conclusion: The examined biomechanical variables were influenced almost entirely by respective RF cushioning properties. The hard FF did not negatively affect cushioning perception as long as the RF was soft. Combining a soft FF with a hard RF improved inferior cushioning perception associated with shoes being hard at RF and FF.

show abstract

“…The axis of rotation was adjusted to represent the approximate position of the subtalar joint axis [5,12]. A neutral rearfoot angle was individually defined for each subject in each footwear condition during a static trial on a calibration plate [12,15]. The angular velocity of the goniometer signal was obtained by simple numerical differentiation of the goniometer signal during ground contact.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Single Gyroscope Can Be Used to Accurately Determine Peak Eversion Velocity during Locomotion at Different Speeds and in Various Shoes

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Gyroscopes have been used in previous studies to measure the peak angular velocity of the shoe or foot in the frontal plane (evVel). However, it is not clear whether different test conditions (footwear hardness or locomotion speed) can influence the accuracy of evVel. The purpose of the present study was to compare the accuracy of gyroscopes and electrogoniometers when measuring evVel and the time until evVel (t_evVel) in 12 different conditions using a single axis gyroscope attached to the heel cap. Twenty-four recreational runners were instructed to walk and run on a 15-m indoor track at four locomotion speeds (1.5, 2.5, and 3.5 m/s, and individual running speed) and in three footwear conditions (low to high hardness). The gyroscope data and electrogoniometer data were sampled at a rate of 1000 Hz. Comparisons between both measurement devices showed small mean differences up to 49.8 ± 46.9 deg/s for evVel and up to 5.3 ± 3.5 ms for t_evVel. Furthermore, strong relationships between gyroscope and electrogoniometer data were found for evVel as well as for t_evVel for all conditions. It can be concluded that gyroscopes can be used to accurately determine evVel and t_evVel under a variety of conditions.

show abstract

Systematically modified crash-pad reduces impact shock in running shoes

Cited by 29 publications

References 12 publications

Effects of a seven-week minimalist footwear transition programme on footstrike modality, pressure variables and loading rates

Effects of a seven-week minimalist footwear transition programme on footstrike modality, pressure variables and loading rates

Influence of rearfoot and forefoot midsole hardness on biomechanical and perception variables during heel-toe running

A Single Gyroscope Can Be Used to Accurately Determine Peak Eversion Velocity during Locomotion at Different Speeds and in Various Shoes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About