• 대한인간공학회지
• /
• 제20권1호
• /
• pp.63-72
• /
• 2001

Rearfoot control can be defined as the relative ability of a shoe to limit the amount of subtalar joint pronation immediately following footstrike. A normal amount of pronation provides a means of decreasing peak forces experienced by the leg, but excessive pronation of the foot can be arised its injures. The purpose of this study is to compare amount of pronation according to a difference between medial and later hardness of shoe midsole for better design of running shops. The experiment is examined for 7 running shoes. 8 males. to measure the Achilles tendon angle and rearfoot angle using high speed camera. The results is conducted that the changes of Achilles tendon angle significantly differ at each test shoe with increased running speed. And, a difference between medial and lateral hardness of midsole affects rearfoot motion of runner. The displacements of maximal Achilles tendon angle described a amount of pronation motion is decreased when medial hardness of midsole is large more than lateral.

• 한국운동역학회지
• /
• 제15권3호
• /
• 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.

• 한국산업경영시스템학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국산업경영시스템학회 2002년도 춘계학술대회
• /
• pp.291-296
• /
• 2002

The midsole hardness of athletic footwear affects capability of absorbing impact shock and controls rearfoot movement during running and walking. The prior studies were focused on examining the proper hardness of footwear for rearfoot movement or to finding effective hardness for absorbing impact shock. The displacements of maximal Achilles tendon angle described a amount of pronation motion is decreased when medial hardness of midsole is large more than lateral. Increasing hardness of footwear midsole are effected to reduce maximum and intial pronation angle, but declined the ability of impact shock during heelstrike. For determination of effectiveness hardness of midsole, therefore, the study that makes a compromise between rearfoot movement and absorbing impact during footstrike must be performed. The purpose of this study is to examine quantitative values of rearfoot control and absorbing impact shock with different hardness of medial and lateral midsole on heel portion. The results are useful to define biomechanical hardness of midsole for developing running shoes. As variable for impact shock, accelerations onto shank and knee are measured during 4 running speeds (5, 7, 9, 11km/h). Also, maximum and $10\%$ pronation angle (Achilles tendon angle) were measured using high-speed camera.

• 한국운동역학회지
• /
• 제31권3호
• /
• pp.168-175
• /
• 2021

Objective: To investigate the static and dynamic analysis of ankle joint complex between subjects with chronic ankle instability (CAI) and healthy controls. Method: A total of 38 subjects and CAI group (N=19) and healthy control (N=19) participated in this first study. Variables that were measured in this study were as follows: 1) Subtalar joint axis inclination and deviation 2) Rearfoot angle 3) Navicular drop test 4) Heel alignment view in alignment analysis. Intra Correlation Coefficient (ICC) is used for reliability. A secondary 17 subjects are recruited including 9 of CAI and healthy for gait analysis between group. Lower extremity sagittal, frontal, and transverse kinematics were measured. All data were analyzed to ensemble curve analysis. Results: 1) There were statistically significant differences in standing rearfoot, navicular drop, heel alignment view, subtalar joint (STJ) inclination and deviation. 2) Only in sagittal, meaningful difference is showed during walking in gait analysis. Conclusion: Morphological problem can affect ankle sprain in aspect of structure with no relation to compensation of neuromuscular.

• 한국운동역학회지
• /
• 제30권1호
• /
• pp.7-16
• /
• 2020

Objective: It is to find factors related to stability through analysis of plantar pressure factors according to the level of instability when performing Snatch. Method: Foot pressure analysis was performed while 10 weightlifters performed 80% of the highest level of Snatch, and motion was classified and analyzed in 3 grades according to the level of instability. Results: First, in Bad Motion, the movement distance of the pressure center in the direction of ML and AP was larger significantly in Phase 2. Second, in Phase 2, the number of zero-crossing in the AP direction was larger statistically significantly in Good Motion. Third, in the bad motion in Phase 3, the number of zero-crossing in the ML direction showed a significantly larger value. Fourth, in Phase 4, it was found that the more stable the lock out motion, the greater the activity of foot controlling in the left and right directions. Fifth, Phase 3, the greater the Maximum/Mean foot pressure value, the more stable the pulling action. Sixth, in Phase 2, the foot pressure was concentrated with a wide distribution in the midfoot and rearfoot. Seventh, the triggering number of the forefoot region was small in the last pull phase. Eighth, the number of triggers in the toe area was significantly higher during Good Motion in Phase 4. Conclusion: Summarizing the factors of instability in Snatch, there was no significant difference in Phase 1 for each condition. In order to enhance the stability in Phase 2, the sensory control ability in the AP direction is required, and focusing the foot pressing motion with a wide distribution in the middle and rear parts increases the instability. In Phase 3, it was found that the more unstable, the more sensory control activity was performed in the ML direction, the stronger the forefoot pressing action should be performed for a stable Snatch. In Phase 4, It is important that the feet sensory control activity in ML directions and the control ability of the toes in order to have stable Lock out motion.

• 한국운동역학회지
• /
• 제15권2호
• /
• pp.69-81
• /
• 2005

In this study using two-dimensional system of the analysis of image, when normal males in their twenties who have normal foot and step with heel first are walking and running, they who are wearing running shoes or barefoot are testing and comparing the exchange factors of heel control. There are following results of this test by verifying them with T-Test. 1) When they are running, there are two big different gap which is $6.05^{\circ}$ between barefoot and wearing the running shoes. The former is $174.79^{\circ}{\pm}6.31$ and the latter is $180.84^{\circ}{\pm}4.69$. But it is not statistically significant. The angle of first step with heel is $100.42^{\circ}{\pm}3.95$ with barefoot and $93.97^{\circ}{\pm}094$ with wearing the running shoes. In this case, it is statistically significant(p<.01) 2) When they are running, the angle of the Achilles' tendon has different gap which is $5.24^{\circ}$ between barefoot and wearing the running shoes. The former is $179.70^{\circ}{\pm}4.23$ and the latter is $184.94^{\circ}{\pm}4.09$. It is not statistically significant. The angle of minimal step with heel is $96.30^{\circ}{\pm}3.07$ with barefoot and $90.84^{\circ}{\pm}0.44$ with wearing the running shoes. In this case, it is statistically significant(p<.01). 3) In the angle of the Achilles' tendon and the angle of first step with heel, when they are walking, the angle of the Achilles' tendon has different gap which is $1.81^{\circ}$ between barefoot and wearing the running shoes. The former is $6.39^{\circ}{\pm}0.83$ and the latter is $8.20^{\circ}{\pm}1.85$. It is not statistically significant. The angle of first step with heel is $2.32^{\circ}{\pm}0.51$ with barefoot and $3.22^{\circ}{\pm}1.44$ with wearing the running shoes. It is not statistically significant. 4) In the angle of the take-off of Achilles' tendon, when they are walking, the angle of the take-off of Achilles' tendon has different gap which is $3.88^{\circ}$ between barefoot and wearing the running shoes. The former is $177.62^{\circ}{\pm}8.78$ and the latter is $173.74^{\circ}{\pm}16.31$. It is statistically significant(p<.05). Therefore, they are running, the angle of the take-off of Achilles' tendon is $178.37^{\circ}{\pm}19.28$ with barefoot and $171.26^{\circ}{\pm}12.18$ with wearing the running shoes. It is statistically significant(p<.05).