A New Method and Set of Parameters for Evaluating the Cushioning Effect of Shoe Heels, Revealing the Inadvertent Design of Running Shoes

I tiakina i:
Ngā taipitopito rārangi puna kōrero
I whakaputaina i:Bioengineering vol. 12, no. 5 (2025), p. 467
Kaituhi matua: Fuss, Franz Konstantin
Ētahi atu kaituhi: Scharl Tizian, Nagengast Niko
I whakaputaina:
MDPI AG
Ngā marau:
Urunga tuihono:Citation/Abstract
Full Text + Graphics
Full Text - PDF
Ngā Tūtohu: Tāpirihia he Tūtohu
Kāore He Tūtohu, Me noho koe te mea tuatahi ki te tūtohu i tēnei pūkete!

MARC

LEADER 00000nab a2200000uu 4500
001 3211860216
003 UK-CbPIL
022 |a 2306-5354 
024 7 |a 10.3390/bioengineering12050467  |2 doi 
035 |a 3211860216 
045 2 |b d20250101  |b d20251231 
100 1 |a Fuss, Franz Konstantin  |u Chair of Biomechanics, Faculty of Engineering Science, University of Bayreuth, D-95440 Bayreuth, Germany; tizian.scharl@ipa.fraunhofer.de (T.S.); niko.nagengast@uni-bayreuth.de (N.N.) 
245 1 |a A New Method and Set of Parameters for Evaluating the Cushioning Effect of Shoe Heels, Revealing the Inadvertent Design of Running Shoes 
260 |b MDPI AG  |c 2025 
513 |a Journal Article 
520 3 |a According to standards, the heel soles of running shoes are currently tested with an energy absorption of 5 J. This study offers an alternative method to improve the measurement of cushioning properties. The new method uses the ratio of absorbed energy to applied force and determines the maximum of this ratio (optimum or shoulder point) and the associated optimal force, energy, and displacement. This method was applied to 112 shoe models using compression testing. The method was found to be insensitive to strain rates and identified shoes that were over-, well-, or under-designed (running before, at, or after the shoulder point, respectively) relative to the range of the first ground reaction force peak (0.700–2 kN). The optimum ratio was between 0.6 J/kN (barefoot shoes) and 11.2 J/kN (Puma RuleBreaker), the optimal energy was between 0.5 and 40.6 J, the optimal force was between 0.1 and 4.6 kN, and the optimal displacement was between 3 and 23 mm. Participants ran at or near the shoulder point (within the design forgiveness range) unless they were too heavy and ran at their preferred running speed. This study proposes replacing current standards with the new method, allowing consumers to make informed decisions regarding injury prevention while running. 
653 |a Running 
653 |a Exercise 
653 |a Impact tests 
653 |a Physical fitness 
653 |a Heels 
653 |a Cushioning 
653 |a Injury prevention 
653 |a Athletic shoes 
653 |a Shoes 
653 |a Energy absorption 
653 |a Standards 
653 |a Footwear 
653 |a Bioengineering 
653 |a Shoes & boots 
653 |a Optimization 
653 |a Chronic illnesses 
653 |a Injuries 
653 |a Energy 
653 |a Shoulder 
653 |a Test methods 
653 |a Clothing 
653 |a Sports facilities 
700 1 |a Scharl Tizian  |u Chair of Biomechanics, Faculty of Engineering Science, University of Bayreuth, D-95440 Bayreuth, Germany; tizian.scharl@ipa.fraunhofer.de (T.S.); niko.nagengast@uni-bayreuth.de (N.N.) 
700 1 |a Nagengast Niko  |u Chair of Biomechanics, Faculty of Engineering Science, University of Bayreuth, D-95440 Bayreuth, Germany; tizian.scharl@ipa.fraunhofer.de (T.S.); niko.nagengast@uni-bayreuth.de (N.N.) 
773 0 |t Bioengineering  |g vol. 12, no. 5 (2025), p. 467 
786 0 |d ProQuest  |t Engineering Database 
856 4 1 |3 Citation/Abstract  |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3211860216/abstract/embedded/7BTGNMKEMPT1V9Z2?source=fedsrch 
856 4 0 |3 Full Text + Graphics  |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3211860216/fulltextwithgraphics/embedded/7BTGNMKEMPT1V9Z2?source=fedsrch 
856 4 0 |3 Full Text - PDF  |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3211860216/fulltextPDF/embedded/7BTGNMKEMPT1V9Z2?source=fedsrch