Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.

I asked in another thread, "so unless the surface of the insole (of the shoe) is considered (incorporated) in the milling process then wouldn't there likely be a change of the surface topography of the (shank-dependent) orthoses (with applied load)?".
..... which, obviously, would alter the forces from the foot orthoses. This is in comparison to shank-independent foot orthoses.
Yes/no?

I have reposted as no replies to my previous post were made (which admittedly is not unusual for my posts)

mark

 

"Supported" EVA behaves a lot differently than unsupported EVA. Solidly supported EVA, if high enough durometer, can deform less than plastic. If there is a gap between the EVA and the shank of the shoe, the EVA device will deform quite easily when loaded. Conversely, if the EVA device made for a shoe that has a flat interior is placed in a shoe with some "arch" the EVA device will bend over the arch and have a higher arch than it would in the flat shoe. So, the shank dependent orthotic has to be ground, on its underside, to match the shape of the shoe that it is placed in. The device will feel different when placed in shoes with a different shank shape.

The shank independent device will be much less likely to have changes in the shape of the top surface of the device when placed in different shoes.

Is that what you were asking?

Eric

 

Exactly, thanks Eric, I did use the Search facility but couldn't find this mentioned, as far as I got