Here - PFI Group

More documents

Recommendations

Info

22 Newsletter Innovative Method for Fitting Shoes This assignment procedure is illustrated by a number of examples: For a given foot the maximum heel width was 61 mm, the maximum instep width 77 mm, and the projected ball width 86 mm. The difference between the instep width and the heel width is then 77 – 61 = 16 mm, i.e. the difference is smaller than 17 mm; the backfoot is of type A. The difference between the projected ball width and the instep width is 86 – 77 = 9 mm, i.e. the difference is smaller than 11; the forefoot is of type 1. The complete foot was classified as type A1 (example in Fig. 4). In the case of another foot the maximum heel width was 64 mm, the maximum instep width 88 mm, and the projected ball width 104 mm. The difference between the instep width and the heel width is then 88 – 64 = 24 mm, i.e. the difference is greater than 17 mm; the backfoot is of type B (see Fig. 5). The difference between the projected ball width and the instep width is 104 – 88 = 16 mm, i.e. the difference is greater than 11; the forefoot is of type 2. The complete foot was classified as type B2 (see Fig. 6). These different foot types cannot be obtained by conventional grading because the heel would be scaled up or down in proportion to the ball measurement. RESEARCH When Does a Shoe Fit? Fig. 4: Test person of foot type A1 Fig. 5: Test person of foot type B2 Last Development The foot measurements for all shoes sizes were subsequently sorted according to these foot types and the distribution of the various other foot measurements examined in order to be able to assign further measurements to these types. On the basis of these results the measurements were determined for lasts for closed street shoes with a flat toe spring. For sample size 37 a heel width of 58 mm was assigned to the sole of the type A last, and one of 55 mm in the case of the type B last. A medium width, width number 5, corresponding to a girth of 215 mm was selected for the type A1 foot, width number 6 (220 mm girth) for types A2 and B1, and width number 7 (225 mm girth) for type B2. Comparison of the types showed that types A2 and B1 differed only in the heel width. For the tests a further last was produced as a combination of these two. Accordingly, type A2B1 differs only in the heel width of the last sole, which is 57 mm. The instep height was the same for all types at 65 mm. The same was done for court shoe lasts, for which somewhat different, narrower values were selected for the heel width. Type A had a heel width of 54 mm and type B a width of 50 mm. The court shoes had a heel pitch of 60 mm. No A2B1 combination last was made in this case because the more stringent fitting demands on this kind of shoe allow no room for compromises. Fig. 6: Test person with shoe type B2
WHEN DoES A SHoE FIT? Wearing Tests The lasts were used to make shoes for wearing tests. The feet of the test persons were measured and assigned to the corresponding foot type. All the shoes were tried on for evaluation, or, in the case of a readily recognisable foot type, the appropriate shoe was immediately selected. Evaluation was undertaken both by the test person and by the person carrying out the tests. The wearing tests showed that, in addition to the width, the fit of the heel is very important. Shoes of type B fitted test persons with a slender heel more comfortably than those of type A. In contrast, test persons with a wide heel felt better in shoes of type A. However, the test persons included a number of people for whom the available widths did not come into question because their feet required an even narrower width. Combination of the results of this project and greater gradation steps (see final report of AiF Research Project 14993) can assure a significantly better supply of correctly fitting shoes. 01.2011 Magazine of the Test and Research Institute Pirmasens The detailed results can be found in <strong>PFI</strong>’s final report on AiF Project 15857. The research project was funded by the Federal German Ministry of Economics and Technology via the German Association of Industrial Research Organisations (AiF) in accordance with a resolution adopted by the German Parliament. Contact: Dr. Monika Richter <strong>PFI</strong> Pirmasens e.V. Phone: +49 6331 - 249027 E-Mail: monika.richter@pfi-germany.de 23
Page 1 and 2: When Does a Shoe Fit? How is Chromi
Page 3 and 4: Chemistry How is Chromium(VI) Forme
Page 5 and 6: NEWS The accident at the Fukushima
Page 7 and 8: NEWS “We shall gladly pursue that
Page 9 and 10: NEWS Welcome to the Team Kai Tinsch
Page 11 and 12: The response of alumni has been so
Page 13 and 14: THE ECo SHoE - STILL JUST A DREAM?
Page 15 and 16: THE ECo SHoE - STILL JUST A DREAM?
Page 17 and 18: PFI INVESTS IN PILoT PLANT The foll
Page 19 and 20: NEW EU-PRoJECT PRoPoSALS SUBMITTED
Page 21: WHEN DoES A SHoE FIT? Search for Co
Page 25 and 26: JoINT PFI AND LGR RESEARCH PRoJECT
Page 27 and 28: JoINT PFI AND LGR RESEARCH PRoJECT
Page 29 and 30: Round-Robin Test Methodology The me
Page 31 and 32: Results and Conclusion A correlatio
Page 33 and 34: Procedure Widely Used in the Footwe
Page 35 and 36: Changes Concerning the Test organis
Page 37 and 38: Which Shoelace is Suitable for Whic
Page 39 and 40: The various colour and structural e

Here - PFI Group

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?