• Korean Journal of Applied Biomechanics
• /
• v.15 no.3
• /
• pp.1-7
• /
• 2005

Excessive pronation and impact force during running are related to various running injuries. To prevent these injuries, three type of running shoes are used, such as cushioning, stability, and motion control. Although there were may studies about the effect of midsole hardness on impact force, no study to investigate biomechanical effect of motion control running shoes. The purpose of this study was to determine biomechanical difference between cushioning and motion control shoes during treadmill running. Specifically, plantar and rearfoot motion, impact force and loading rate, and insole pressure distribution were quantified and compared. Twenty male healthy runners experienced at treadmill running participated in this study. When they ran on treadmill at 3.83 m/s. Kinematic data were collected using a Motion Analysis eight video camera system at 240 Hz. Impact force and pressure distribution data under the heel of right foot were collected with a Pedar pressure insole system with 26 sensors at 360 Hz. Mean value of ten consecutive steps was calculated for kinematics and kinetics. A dependent paired t-test was used to compare the running shoes effect (p=0.05). For most kinematics, motion control running shoes reduced the range of rearfoot motion compared to cushioning shoes. Runners wearing motion control shoe showed less eversion angle during standing less inversion angle at heel strike, and slower eversion velocity. For kinetics, cushioning shoes has the effect to reduce impact on foot obviously. Runners wearing cushioning shoes showed less impact force and loading rate, and less peak insole pressure. For both shoes, there was greater load on the medial part of heel compared to lateral part. For pressure distribution, runners with cushioning shoes showed lower, especially on the medial heel.

• Korean Journal of Applied Biomechanics
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.13-23
• /
• 2010

The purposes of this study was to investigate the biomechanical influence of the walking shoe with a plate spring in the heel and interchangeable heel cushioning elements. Eighteen subjects walked in three conditions: 1) the walking shoes Type A-1 with a soft heel insert, 2) the Type A-2 shoe with a stiff heel insert, 3) a general walking shoe(Type B). Ground reaction forces, leg movements, leg muscle activity and ankle, knee and hip joint loading were measured and calculated during overground walking. During walking, the ankle is a few degrees more dorsiflexed during landing and the knee is slightly more flexed during takeoff with the Type A shoes. As a result of the changes in the walking movement, the ground reaction forces are applied more quickly and the peak magnitudes are higher. Muscle activity of the quadricep, hamstring and calf muscles decrease during the first 25% of the stance phase when walking in the Type A shoes. The resultant joint moments at the ankle, knee and hip joints decrease from 30-40% with the largest reductions occurring during landing.

• Transactions of the Korean Society of Mechanical Engineers A
• /
• v.30 no.3 s.246
• /
• pp.241-248
• /
• 2006

Shoe cushioning systems are important to prevent body injuries. This study developed and evaluated a cushioning system to reduce impact force on the heel. The cushioning system suggested consist of a polyurethane pocket, which contains water and porous grains of open cell to dissipate the energy effectively. Load-displacement curves fer the shoe cushioning system were obtained from an instrumented testing machine and the results were compared with various pockets with air, water or grains. Mechanical testings showed that the pocket with 5g porous grain was the best for the cushioning system. This system can be applied to the design of various kind of sport shoes.

• Korean Journal of Applied Biomechanics
• /
• v.16 no.1
• /
• pp.19-30
• /
• 2006

The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of foot orthotics on the overall comfort and muscle activity during running. The subjects were 10 members from the joggers' club which consisted of 2 women and 8 men. These individuals ran on the treadmill by 4.0m/s speed with and without the custom foot orthotics. The data concerning the overall comfort was collected by a questionairre that examined the overall comfort, heel cushioning, forefoot cushioning, medio-lateral control, arch height, heel cup fit, shoe heel width, forefoot width, and shoe length The MegaWin ver. 2.1(Mega Electronics lid, Ma. Finland) was used to gain electromyography signals of the muscle activity; Tibialis anterior, medial gastronemius, lateral gastronemius, vastus lateralis, vastus medialis, biceps femoris, and rectus femoris were measured. The results of the study were as follows. 1. During running the overall comfort was higher for the foot arthotic condition than the nonorthotic condition. Among the inquiries the overall comfort showed the biggest difference comparing the two conditions. and the shoe heel width showed the highest score for contort. 2 The muscle activity of the biceps femoris, and vastus lateralis in the stance period decreased. due to the foot orthotics. The muscle activity of the vastus medialis in the swing period also decreased and the muscle activity tibialis anterior in the stance and swing stance decreased as well During running, orthotics showed positive result in foot comfort. The foot comfort related to decreased stress, muscle activity, and foot arch strain. Overall comfort and the adequate decrease of muscle activity were associated with injury prevention and the best method to prevent injury semms to be the maintenance of foot comfort.

• Korean Journal of Applied Biomechanics
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.105-119
• /
• 2004

To enhance our understanding of the loads on the foot during treadmill running, we have used a pressure-sensitive insole system to determine pressure, rate of loading and impulse distributions on the plantar surface during treadmill running, both in minimally cushioned footwear and in cushioned shoes. This report includes pressure, rate of loading, impulse and contact time data from a study of ten subjects running on a treadmill at 4.0m/s. Among heel-toe runners, the highest peak pressures and highest rates of loading were observed under the centre of the heel and in the medial forefoot. The arch regions were only lightly loaded. Contact time was greater in the forefoot than in the heel. Two-thirds of the impulse recorded during the step was the result of forces applied through the forefoot, mostly in the region of the metatarsal heads. The distribution of loads in the shoe suggests that the load distributing properties of the cushioning system are most important in the centre of the heel, under the metatarsal heads and great toe. Shock attenuation is primarily required under the centre of the heel and to lesser extent under the metatarsal heads. Some energy dissipation may be desirable in the heel region because it causes shock to be absorbed with less force. All the 'propulsive' effort is applied through the forefoot. Therefore, this region should as resilient as possible.

• Korean Journal of Applied Biomechanics
• /
• v.19 no.1
• /
• pp.149-157
• /
• 2009

The purpose of this project was to determine biomechanical differences between Type A(Korean brand) and Type B(world top brand) badminton shoes and to make recommendations to improve the fit and function of Type A badminton shoes. Measurements of shoe shape and dimensions, foot movement within the shoe, cushioning of ground reaction forces, in-shoe pressure and outsole traction were performed. In addition, subjective feedback of the fit and function of the shoes was quantified for 17 recreational badminton players. Type A shoe had a much higher heel and shallower heel cup, so the heel was not secured well in the shoe and the ankle joint was higher off the ground. Foot slippage was up to 40% greater in Type A shoe than Type B shoe. Impact forces and peak pressures under the foot were generally higher with Type A shoe compared to Type B shoe. The flexion axis of Type A shoe occurred in the midfoot, not at the ball of the foot like Type B shoe, where you would want the shoe flexion to occur. In summary, there are several characteristics where A Type shoe and B Type differ. Therefore, a few recommendations are provided to help improve the fit and function of A Type shoe.