Skip to content

Advertisement

  • Meeting abstract
  • Open Access

A biomechanical research of foot pressure for lower extremity in gait wearing trail walking shoes

  • 1Email author,
  • 2,
  • 2,
  • 2 and
  • 2
Journal of Foot and Ankle Research20147 (Suppl 1) :A136

https://doi.org/10.1186/1757-1146-7-S1-A136

  • Published:

Keywords

  • Contact Area
  • Maximum Pressure
  • Maximum Force
  • Plantar Pressure
  • Heel Strike

The aim of this study is to analyze foot pressure distribution of trail walking shoes while walking. Hiking, a recreational activity which is able to exercise whole body in the nature without any cost, has compositive effects which can reduce stress, strengthen muscles of entire body and improve cardiopulmonary function [1]. The Topography is hard near the surface and has rough characteristic because of rocks. These condition can lead to injuries to feet in hiking and aggravating fatigability of foot when people hike for a long time [2],so hiking boots which are specially functioned are encouraged because walking on the rough surface has latent dangerousness of injury [3]. Trail walking shoes generally provide more stability and support than regular walking shoes. Trail walking shoes are for natural trails. In rocky, rooted, dusty and muddy trails, a trail walking shoe gives added traction and support.

Ten healthy males participated in this study. All subjects were free of lower extremity pain, history of serious injuries or operative treatment or subjective symptoms interfering with walking. Each subject wore four different shoe types during walking trials on a treadmill at a constant speed of 4.2km/hour. Pressure distribution data (contact area, maximum force, peak pressure, maximum mean pressure) were collected with pressure device at a sampling rate of 100Hz. Shoes used in the experiment are which developed in four shoes. Developed trail walking shoes (Type A), first developed trail walking shoes (Type B) and other company’s trail walking shoes (Type C, Type D) are selected for the experiment. Tested about ‘Comparison in Lightweightedness’ among the shoes (Figure 1). ‘Comparison in Lightweightedness’s result is Type A (324.92 g) < Type B (350.70 g) < Type C (374.67 g) < Type D (397.16 g).
Figure 1
Figure 1

Type A: developed trail walking shoes, Type B: first developed trail walking shoes, Type C, D: other company’s trail wxalking shoes

Table 1

Result of Foot Pressure

Mask

Contact Area(cm2)

Maximum Force(N)

 

A

CA

B

C

D

A

CA

B

C

D

Total

142.187

142.739

142.049

146.076

139.403

677.276

703.008

708.275

715.217

690.800

M1

58.507

58.046

57.975

57.618

58.474

558.903

552.363

568.875

539.680

565.046

M2

42.356

44.444

42.660

47.957

40.930

152.873

194.191

168.769

215.201

173.182

M3

40.664

39.659

40.782

39.834

39.483

402.950

412.355

436.040

407.802

416.908

Mask

Peak Pressure(kPa)

Maximum Mean Pressure(kPa)

 

A

CA

B

C

D

A

CA

B

C

D

Total

237.516

272.143

256.418

273.346

270.940

78.084

79.048

79.767

76.533

81.563

M1

235.927

268.839

256.130

272.763

264.915

95.864

95.639

98.354

94.568

96.709

M2

87.566

111.221

98.818

126.280

96.161

44.034

50.660

47.934

53.151

48.168

M3

166.622

177.161

171.323

162.103

192.218

99.827

104.309

107.090

102.840

105.777

* CA: Control Average = (Type C + Type D)/2

Contact area of functional shoes (Type A) increased in comparison to general shoes (Type C, Type D). At the same time, foot pressure decreased in comparison to general shoes (Type C, Type D). It is expected that Type A Functional shoes give more comfort and fit by increasing the contact area and decreasing peak pressure.

In the result of the analysis of plantar pressure, Type A reported higher than other shoes on the forefoot. At the maximum force, Type A is observed as the smallest maximum force in almost part. These results, which is similar to Park (2009)’s research [3], decreased the confining pressure which can lead the deformation of forefoot’s toe. In the maximum pressure result, the outcome is similar to maximum force, which the smallest is Type A < Type D < Type B < Type C. This can decline the impulse which occurs in heel strike section, as a result, this can decrease the fatigability of foot in long-time walking. In addition, similar to Oh and Lee (2009)’s research [4], it can lighten the impulse force delivered to the body, as being the important factor which can decrease the weight to the leg joint. As examining the result of the average pressure, Type A < Type C < Type D < Type B is observed.

In this thesis, we analyzed the contact area of plantar pressure, maximum force, maximum pressure, average pressure. Through this result, we can know impact force alleviation for foot and physical fatigue, too.

When considering the pressure change of the foot, Type A’s contact area of foot is wider than the others. So, its wearing feeling will be better than the others. In case of maximum pressure, it is lower than the others and mid foot, hind foot’s result is similar. So, we expect ‘shockproof and to disperse pressure’ will be good. Also, with foot and shoe contact area’s increase, there may be amaximum force and maximum pressure decrease. So, it can decrease the foot’s and pelvic limb’s fatigue.

We offer the data of the dispersing pressure functionality of walking hiking shoes, so it can be of help to a product’s functionality improvement.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Footwear Biomechanics Team, Footwear Industrial Promotion Center, Busan, Korea
(2)
Busanil Science High School, Busan, Korea

References

  1. Lee HS, Jung GS, Yoo HH: Slope Analysis of Mountain Trail Using Mobile GPS. The Korean Society for GeoSpatial Information System. 2009, 17 (2): 81-90.Google Scholar
  2. Park SB, Lee JS: Analyses of GRF & Insole Foot-Pressure Distribution: Gait Patterns and Types of Trekking Boots. Korean Journal of Sport Biomechanics. 2007, 17 (4): 190-200.Google Scholar
  3. Hettinga BA, Stefayshyn DJ, Fairbairn JC, Worobets JT: Biomechanical effects of hiking on a non-uniform surface. Proceeding. of the 7th Symposium. 2005, Footwear Biomechanics, Cleveland, OH, USA, 41-42.Google Scholar
  4. Park JJ: A Comparative Analysis on Changes of Foot Pressure by Shoe Heel Height during Walking. Korean Journal of Sport Biomechanics. 2009, 19 (4): 771-778.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. Oh YJ, Lee CM: The Study on 3-Axes Acceleration Impact of Lower Limbs Joint during Gait. Journal of the Ergonomics Society of Korea. 2009, 28 (3): 33-39.View ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Park et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Advertisement