Mechanical properties of running shoe foams

NewsBot · Sep 28, 2016

Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.
Mechanical ageing performance of minimalist and traditional footwear foams
Nadine M. Lipa, Paul K. Collins, Jason Bonacci, Scott G. Piland, James W. Rawlins & Trenton E. Gould
Footwear Science; in press

The aim of this study was to obtain a fundamental understanding of how running shoe midsole foam thickness contributes to footwear degradation using the heel and forefoot regions of traditional (TS) and minimalist (MS) running shoes. We hypothesized that ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA) foam midsole material properties and footwear degradation performance under a biofidelic mechanical ageing protocol would differ as a function of shoe type and thickness. Attenuated total reflectance Fourier transform infrared spectra indicated that the foam chemical compositions were similar and confirmed that all midsoles were composed of EVA copolymer. Differences in density and cell size were detected between shoes and thicknesses. MS foam was uniformly high density (ρMS = 240 kg/m3), while TS foam consisted of two co-molded layers with forefoot density (ρTS-FF = 250 kg/m3) greater than heel (ρTS-H = 160 kg/m3). Relative density and cell size values were generally proportional and inversely proportional to density, respectively. Degradation from mechanical ageing was greatest in the first 2 km of ageing, with the full ageing (21 km) resulting in an average 54% loss of energy absorption. Regardless of shoe type or foam microstructure, thicker and softer heel foams absorbed 83% more energy but degraded at a 49% faster rate. The fact that the heel degraded more rapidly than forefoot caused the drop to decrease at an equivalent rate for both shoe types. Overall, thickness was a greater predictor of average performance than microstructure variables for the present footwear conditions. However, the apparent drawback of thicker foam was exemplified by heel samples, which underwent a 1.4 mm greater loss of thickness and lost 550 mJ more energy absorption than forefoot samples.
Click to expand...

Admin2 · Sep 28, 2016

Related Topics:
Aging comparison of two running shoes with different technology
Puma running shoes add the 'energy return' midsole
New cushioning system on the Mizuno Wave Tenjin
Running economy in shoes designed to boost energy return
Saucony's Everun Cushioning Material
Increased Vertical Impact Forces and Altered Running Mechanics with Softer Midsole Shoes
Effects of different midsole densities under the forefoot
Puma now adding a responsive foam
Effect of age of running shoe on running biomechanics
Running shoe cushioning does not affect injury rate
Fresh Foam Technology from New Balance Running Shoes
Influence of rearfoot and forefoot midsole hardness on biomechanical and perception variables during
adidas: BOOST; New midsole technology

NewsBot · Nov 28, 2019

The Effect of Material Characteristic of Shoe Soles during
Long Duration Running
Chan Siow Cheng, J P Tan and Tan Yin Qing
International Conference on Biomedical Engineering (ICoBE)

Long duration running has been associated with musculoskeletal injuries such as
patellofemoral pain syndrome and knee osteoarthritis. This study was designed to investigate
the effects of two different shoe insoles on kinematic and kinetic performance during long
duration running. In total 15 subjects (7 males and 8 females) were recruited to perform 15
minutes continuous running on the treadmill in 3 different shoe insole conditions: (i) no insole;
(ii) Ethyl Vinyl Acetate (EVA) insole and (iii) Polyurethane (PU) insole. The result revealed a
significant increase in maximum vertical ground reaction force (VGRF) with the PU insole
compare with the no insole and EVA insole conditions (p<0.05). There is no difference
between conditions in kinematic variables: step length, stride length and cadence (p>0.05).
Click to expand...

Mechanical properties of running shoe foams

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

Admin2 Administrator Staff Member

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

Uphill running improves achilles tendon mechanical properties

The clinical measure of forefoot-shank alignment and mechanical properties of the midfoot joint

Asymmetry of Achilles tendon mechanical and morphological properties between both legs

Lower Limb Mechanical Properties: Determining Factors and Implications for Performance

Effect of heating on the mechanical properties of insole materials

Effect of the posterior tibial and peroneal longus on the mechanical properties of the foot arch

Mechanical Properties of the Achilles Tendon Aponeurosis Are Altered in Athletes With Achilles Tendi

Share This Page

Mechanical properties of running shoe foams

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

Admin2 Administrator Staff Member

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

Uphill running improves achilles tendon mechanical properties

The clinical measure of forefoot-shank alignment and mechanical properties of the midfoot joint

Asymmetry of Achilles tendon mechanical and morphological properties between both legs

Lower Limb Mechanical Properties: Determining Factors and Implications for Performance

Effect of heating on the mechanical properties of insole materials

Effect of the posterior tibial and peroneal longus on the mechanical properties of the foot arch

Mechanical Properties of the Achilles Tendon Aponeurosis Are Altered in Athletes With Achilles Tendi

Share This Page

Useful Searches