COMPARATIVE STUDY OF SHOE-SURFACE INTERACTION IN TRAIL RUNNING - SUBJECTIVE AND OBJECTIVE EVALUATION

The purpose of this study is to compare and evaluate different running shoes in various surface conditions in two measurement phases. In the subjective test, fourteen trail runners performed the experiment with three running shoes in distinct surface conditions. Three features, comfort, cushioning and traction, were rated by means of questionnaire. In the objective measurement, a traction tester device was configured to simulate the movement and evaluate the rotational traction of the three shoes on different surfaces. The subjective test showed a significant difference with respect to comfort and cushioning. The objective measurement in dry conditions showed a significant decrease (P \u3c 0.05) in rotational traction on different surface types; rotational traction in wet conditions was significantly lower (P \u3c 0.05) than in dry conditions

Evaluating the Effect of Shoes with Varying Mass on Vertical Ground Reaction Force Parameters in Short-Term Running

International Journal of Exercise Science 15(1): 191-205, 2022. Past investigations have revealed that running shoes affect ground reaction force parameters. However, these studies are unclear as to whether these changes, which occur while running in different shoe types of differing masses, are the result of the structural design or the mass of the shoe. The main aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of shoe mass on vertical ground reaction force parameters: active peak and impulse. Methods. 21 male runners (24.52 years old (± 3.09) and 77.13kg (± 7.9)) participated in the experiment. A baseline shoe (BS) = 283g and four weighted shoes (shoe 2 = 333g, shoe 3 = 433g, shoe 4 = 533g and shoe 5 = 598g) were compared for 8 minutes of running on the instrumented treadmill. Each shoe was compared in a repeated measurement with the BS. Results showed that active peaks and impulses differed significantly (p \u3c .05) between the BS and weighted shoes, except for shoe 2. From the threshold of 433g (shoe 3, which is 1.5 times heavier than the BS), we observed a significant increase in the vertical ground reaction force peak (1.86%) and impulse (1.84%). Other shoes such as shoe 4 and shoe 5, produced increasingly active peaks (N) of 2.08% N and 2.45% N compared to the BS. Increase of shoe masses in shoe 3, shoe 4, and shoe 5 resulted in an increase of impulse up to 1.84% Nm, 1.85% Nm and 2.49% Nm compared to the BS. Our determination of the shoe masses influencing these kinetic parameters may be a step towards reducing running-related injuries that result from accumulated microtrauma