Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums

You are currently viewing our podiatry forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view all podiatry discussions and access our other features. By joining our free global community of Podiatrists and other interested foot health care professionals you will have access to post podiatry topics (answer and ask questions), communicate privately with other members, upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, access other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisements in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!

  1. Everything that you are ever going to want to know about running shoes: Running Shoes Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Have you considered the Critical Thinking and Skeptical Boot Camp, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
Dismiss Notice
Have you liked us on Facebook to get our updates? Please do. Click here for our Facebook page.
Dismiss Notice
Do you get the weekly newsletter that Podiatry Arena sends out to update everybody? If not, click here to organise this.

Compare and Contrast Advanced Composite Combat Boot Orthotic Systems for US Army

Discussion in 'Biomechanics, Sports and Foot orthoses' started by Dr. Steven King, Nov 19, 2018.


Please Compare and Contrast the work and innovations of the two US military contractors

  1. Sure cool I'll do that. I have the accumen to understand this science.

    0 vote(s)
  2. Safer Soldiers? How can i help?

    0 vote(s)
  1. Dr. Steven King

    Dr. Steven King Well-Known Member

    Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.

    US Army Small Business Innovation Research contracts with awards in the hundreds of thousands of US dollars have been spent on the follow two Advanced Composite Combat Boot Orthotic Systems.

    PHASE I Contract Objectives: Phase I will include multiple concept designs and development of a working orthotic. The prototype will be supported with an analysis of the predicted biomechanical performance benefits, such as the reduction of internal load and the increased energy return of the orthotic. Performance considerations for the orthotic should include: 1) outperforming ASTM F2412-05 puncture standards; 2) reducing combat boot weight by >10%; 3) reducing injury risk by >10%; 3) a significant decrease in oxygen consumption; 4) be fire retardant; and 5) increase subjective comfort ratings by 10% when compared to traditional combat boot.

    Please Compare and Contrast the work and innovations of the two contractors.

    Diapedia LLC


    Kingetics LLC

    Lives and Limbs depend on the better science.
  2. Dr. Steven King

    Dr. Steven King Well-Known Member

    To be fair we should also include Nike's Vapor Fly 4% in this composite comparison with their rear and aft leaf spring shoe midsole system.


    How does this differ from the mechanics of the leaf spring prosthetic feet we have been building since the 1970's?

    Removing foam gives us more room to roam.

    Happy Friday!

    Prosthetic Foot with leaf springs

    Nike Shoe with carbon fiber midsole insert.

    Kind of looks like Nike has patented a device that has been sold by OrthoBaltic and Otto Bock for over 20 years now. ??


    Begging for Brain Bandwidth,
  3. eddavisdpm

    eddavisdpm Active Member

    Are both foot plates the same, that is, the product from Cascade and that from Orthobaltic?
  4. Dr. Steven King

    Dr. Steven King Well-Known Member

    Aloha Ed,

    I am not sure if they are exactly the same.
    They could have different carbon fiber layup schedules and different resin systems that would change the elastic modulus but the shape is the same thus the mechanics will be very similar.
    Rieckens also has a contoured carbon fiber leaf spring plate.

    Question why is the distal end of the Nike spring plate pre-bent upward?
    Wouldn't you want to the spring to be more flat so you could load it more?

    They have to pre-bend the springs to fit into bent foam shoes that have a bent toe-spring modification made to the last.
    They cannot figure out how to make a flat plate comfortable on the metatarsal heads.

    https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/toe spring

    "The toe spring reduces the resistance to flexion that the shoe places on the foot when the foot is flexed at the MTPJs, and thus reduces both fatigue during walking and wear at the vamp area of the upper"

    Why do we do this if it has been reported the stiffness at the MPJ's is directly related to the power and stability of gait?



    The horse is stuck behind the cart.
  5. Dr. Steven King

    Dr. Steven King Well-Known Member

    Here is another entry by VKTRY Gear into the carbon fiber race.

    It use a concave carbon plate that provides a heel and forefoot leaf spring.
    The website claims some interesting testing results.
    It is of the opposite design from the Ottobock-Acor-Springlite-Rickens-Ossur-SpryStep-Nike foot plates with a convex shape-contour.
    No mention of the elastic spring modulus value is given on the website.

    "Simply by putting VKs into your shoe or cleat, you can rapidly generate more force into the ground.
    This combination of increased ground force (+8.1% peak force) and increased explosiveness (+9.3% rate of force development) immediately translates to running faster and jumping higher.
    Most sports insoles are made from foam and plastic and provide virtually no energy return." Website How it Works Page.

    I wonder how much more loading the metatarsals and heel take on with this design?

    A hui hou,


Share This Page