• Korean Journal of Applied Biomechanics
• /
• v.33 no.1
• /
• pp.25-33
• /
• 2023

Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the differences in static arch height and ankle stability according to the preference for insole height and hardness in the arch area. Method: The study participants were 20 adult males (age: 22.7 ± 1.8 yrs., height: 175.3 ± 4.3 cm, body weight: 72.5 ± 7.7 kg). First, the arch heights of all subjects were measured in static postures (sitting and standing). The inversion and eversion movements of the ankle joint were analyzed during walking (1.3 m/s & 1.7 m/s) and running (2.7 m/s & 3.3 m/s). The variables (static arch height, and inversion and eversion angle of ankle joint) were compared by classifying groups according to the preference for the height and hardness of the arch of the insole. First, it was divided into a high arch insole preference group (HAG, n=8) and a low arch insole preference group (LAG, n=12) according to the preference for the arch height of the insole. Second, it was divided into a high hardness insole preference group (HHG, n=7), medium hardness insole preference group (MHG, n=7), and low hardness insole preference group (LHG, n=6), according to the preference for the arch hardness of the insole. Results: First, the range of motion (ROM) of inversion-eversion at the ankle joint during walking was statistically smaller in HAG than in LAG (p<.05). Second, the arch height change of HHG was statistically greater than that of MHG and LHG (p<.05). Conclusion: In the case of flexible flat feet with a large change in arch height, providing a high hardness arch insole that can disperse foot pressure can improve comfort. It was found that people with high medial and lateral sway of the ankle joint preferred a low arch insole, but it is necessary to differentiate and compare the insole heights of the arch part in detail. In addition, in the case of fast motion such as running, the preference for the arch height and hardness of the insole was not related to the static arch height and ankle stability.

• Structural Engineering and Mechanics
• /
• v.39 no.6
• /
• pp.751-765
• /
• 2011

The present paper deals with the identification of a concentrated damage in an elastic parabolic arch through the minimization of an objective function which measures the differences between numerical and experimental values of static displacements. The damage consists in a notch that reduces the height of the cross section at a given abscissa and therefore causes a variation in the flexural stiffness of the structure. The analytical values of static displacements due to applied loads are calculated by means of the principle of virtual work for both the undamaged and damaged arch. First, pseudo-experimental data are used to study the inverse problem and investigate whether a unique solution can occur or not. Various damage intensities are considered to assess the reliability of the identification procedure. Then, the identification procedure is applied to an experimental case, where displacements are measured on a prototype arch. The identified values of damage parameters, i.e., location and intensity, are compared to those obtained by means of a dynamic identification technique performed on the same structure.

• Structural Engineering and Mechanics
• /
• v.41 no.1
• /
• pp.83-94
• /
• 2012

Assessment of a monumental concrete arch bridge with a total length of 210 meters having three major spans of 30 meters and a height of 65 meters, which is located in an earthquake-prone region in southern part of the country is presented in this study. Three-dimensional finite element model of the bridge was generated using a commercially available general finite element analysis software and based on the outcomes of a series of in-depth acceleration measurements that were conducted on-site, the model was refined. By using the structural parameters obtained from the dynamic and the static tests, calibrated model of the bridge structure was obtained and this model was used for necessary calculations regarding structural assessment and evaluation.

• Physical Therapy Korea
• /
• v.19 no.3
• /
• pp.115-123
• /
• 2012

It is important to assess foot posture when investigating the relationship between lower extremity dysfunctions and foot types. Although several measurements of static foot posture have been used, there is no consensus regarding clinical measurements for foot posture. The aim of this study is to explore the differences among navicular drift (NDt), foot posture index (FPI), arch index (AI), dorsal arch height ratio (DAHR), normal navicular height truncated (NNHt) and to discover the most effective measurement. After foot types were classified by navicular drop test (NDp), clinical measurements of NDt, FPI, AI, DAHR, and NNHt were performed on 64 subjects' feet. ANOVA analysis was used for the variance of the difference between the NDp and the five kinds of clinical measurements, and the level of significance was set at ${\alpha}$=.05. The results showed that all five clinical measurements demonstrated significant differences with navicular drop. In post-hoc, FPI and NNHt showed significant differences in all foot types. The five clinical measurements are suitable the classification of foot types through the NDp. Therefore, it could be possible to assess correct and objective foot posture by using FPI and NNHt.

• Geotechnical Engineering
• /
• v.9 no.1
• /
• pp.69-78
• /
• 1993

The Coulomb and Rankine theories have been usually used for design of retaining walls, in which the earth pressures have been assumed as a triangular distribution For the rigid retaining w리1 with inclined bacuace and horizontal surface backfilled by cohesionless soils, the analytical method of earth pressure distribution has been newly suggested by using the concept of the flat arch. The active thrust obtained by this method agrees well with those by the existing theories, except the Rankine solution. The analyzed results show that the height to the center of pressure depends mainly on the inclination of the back wall and the wall friction, instead of 0.33H, where H is the wall height.