WO1991003180A1 - Structures de semelle de chaussure utilisant un plan de stabilite theoriquement ideal - Google Patents

Structures de semelle de chaussure utilisant un plan de stabilite theoriquement ideal Download PDF

Info

Publication number
WO1991003180A1
WO1991003180A1 PCT/US1990/004917 US9004917W WO9103180A1 WO 1991003180 A1 WO1991003180 A1 WO 1991003180A1 US 9004917 W US9004917 W US 9004917W WO 9103180 A1 WO9103180 A1 WO 9103180A1
Authority
WO
WIPO (PCT)
Prior art keywords
sole
shoe sole
foot
shoe
sides
Prior art date
Application number
PCT/US1990/004917
Other languages
English (en)
Inventor
Frampton E. Ellis, Iii
Original Assignee
Ellis Frampton E Iii
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Ellis Frampton E Iii filed Critical Ellis Frampton E Iii
Priority to DE69031835T priority Critical patent/DE69031835T2/de
Priority to EP90914318A priority patent/EP0489858B1/fr
Priority to DK90914318T priority patent/DK0489858T3/da
Publication of WO1991003180A1 publication Critical patent/WO1991003180A1/fr

Links

Classifications

    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A43—FOOTWEAR
    • A43B—CHARACTERISTIC FEATURES OF FOOTWEAR; PARTS OF FOOTWEAR
    • A43B13/00—Soles; Sole-and-heel integral units
    • A43B13/14—Soles; Sole-and-heel integral units characterised by the constructive form
    • A43B13/143—Soles; Sole-and-heel integral units characterised by the constructive form provided with wedged, concave or convex end portions, e.g. for improving roll-off of the foot
    • A43B13/146—Concave end portions, e.g. with a cavity or cut-out portion
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A43—FOOTWEAR
    • A43B—CHARACTERISTIC FEATURES OF FOOTWEAR; PARTS OF FOOTWEAR
    • A43B13/00—Soles; Sole-and-heel integral units
    • A43B13/14—Soles; Sole-and-heel integral units characterised by the constructive form
    • A43B13/143—Soles; Sole-and-heel integral units characterised by the constructive form provided with wedged, concave or convex end portions, e.g. for improving roll-off of the foot
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A43—FOOTWEAR
    • A43B—CHARACTERISTIC FEATURES OF FOOTWEAR; PARTS OF FOOTWEAR
    • A43B13/00—Soles; Sole-and-heel integral units
    • A43B13/14—Soles; Sole-and-heel integral units characterised by the constructive form
    • A43B13/143—Soles; Sole-and-heel integral units characterised by the constructive form provided with wedged, concave or convex end portions, e.g. for improving roll-off of the foot
    • A43B13/145—Convex portions, e.g. with a bump or projection, e.g. 'Masai' type shoes
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A43—FOOTWEAR
    • A43B—CHARACTERISTIC FEATURES OF FOOTWEAR; PARTS OF FOOTWEAR
    • A43B13/00—Soles; Sole-and-heel integral units
    • A43B13/14—Soles; Sole-and-heel integral units characterised by the constructive form
    • A43B13/143—Soles; Sole-and-heel integral units characterised by the constructive form provided with wedged, concave or convex end portions, e.g. for improving roll-off of the foot
    • A43B13/148—Wedged end portions

Definitions

  • This invention relates generally to the structure of shoes. More specifically, this invention relates to the structure of running shoes. Still more particularly, this invention relates to variations in the structure of such shoes using a theoretically ideal stability plane as a basic concept.
  • a shoe according to the invention comprises a sole having at least a portion thereof following the contour of a theoretically ideal stability plane, and which further includes rounded edges at the finishing edge of the sole after the last point where the constant shoe sole thickness is maintained.
  • the upper surface of the sole does not provide an unsupported portion that creates a destabilizing torque and the bottom surface does not provide an unnatural pivoting edge.
  • the shoe in another aspect, includes a naturally contoured sole structure exhibiting natural deformation which closely parallels the natural deformation of a foot under the same load.
  • the naturally contoured side portion of the sole extends to contours underneath the load-bearing foot.
  • the sole portion is abbreviated along its sides to essential support and propulsion elements wherein those elements are combined and integrated into the same discontinuous shoe sole structural elements underneath the foot, which approximate the principal structural elements of a human foot and their natural articulation between elements.
  • the density of the abbreviated shoe sole can be greater than the density of the material used in an unabbreviated shoe sole to compensate for increased pressure loading.
  • the essential support elements include the base and lateral tuberosity of the calcaneus, heads of the metatarsal, and the base of the fifth metatarsal.
  • the shoe sole is naturally contoured, paralleling the shape of the foot in order to parallel its natural deformation, and made from a material which, when under load and tilting to the side, deforms in a manner which closely parallels that of the foot of its wearer, while retaining nearly the same amount of contact of the shoe sole with the ground as in its upright state under load.
  • a deformable shoe sole according to the invention may have its sides bent inwardly somewhat so that when worn the sides bend out easily to approximate a custom fit.
  • Fig. 1 is a rear view of a heel of a foot for explaining the use of a stationery sprain simulation test.
  • Fig. 2 is a rear view of a conventional running shoe unstably rotating about an edge of its sole when the shoe sole is tilted to the outside.
  • Fig. 3 is a diagram of the forces on a foot when rotating in a shoe of the type shown in Fig. 2.
  • Fig. 4 is a view similar to Fig. 3 but showing further continued rotation of a foot in a shoe of the type shown in Fig. 2.
  • Fig. 5 is a force diagram during rotation of a shoe having motion control devices and heel counters.
  • Fig. 6 is another force diagram during rotation of a shoe having a constant shoe sole thickness, but producing a destabilizing torque because a portion of the upper sole surface is unsupported during rotation.
  • Fig. 7 shows an approach for minimizing destabilizing torque by providing only direct structural support and by rounding edges of the sole and its outer and inner surfaces.
  • Figs. 8A to 81 illustrate functionally the principles of natural deformation as applied to the shoe soles of the invention.
  • Fig. 9 shows variations in the relative density of the shoe sole including the shoe insole to maximize an ability of the sole to deform naturally.
  • Fig. 10 shows a shoe having naturally contoured sides bent inwardly somewhat from a normal size so then when worn the shoe approximates a custom fit.
  • Fig. 11 shows a shoe sole having a fully contoured design but having sides which are abbreviated to the essential structural stability and propulsion elements that are combined and integrated into discontinuous structural elements underneath the foot that simulate those of the foot.
  • Fig. 12 is a diagram serving as a basis for an expanded discussion of a correct approach for measuring shoe sole thickness.
  • Fig. 1 shows in a real illustration a foot 27 in position for a new biomechanical test that is the basis for the discovery that ankle sprains are in fact unnatural for the bare foot.
  • the test simulates a lateral ankle sprain, where the foot 27 - on the ground 43 - rolls or tilts to the outside, to the extreme end of its normal range of motion, which is usually about 20 degrees at the heel 29, as shown in a rear view of a bare (right) heel in Fig. 1.
  • Lateral (inversion) sprains are the most common ankle sprains, accounting for about three-fourths of all.
  • the especially novel aspect of the testing approach is to perform the ankle spraining simulation while standing stationary.
  • the absence of forward motion is the key to the dramatic success of the test because otherwise it is impossible to recreate for testing purposes the actual foot and ankle motion that occurs during a lateral ankle sprain, and simultaneously to do it in a controlled manner, while at normal running speed or even jogging slowly, or walking. Without the critical control achieved by slowing forward motion all the way down to zero, any test subject would end up with a sprained ankle.
  • the Stationary Sprain Simulation Test (SSST) consists simply of standing stationary with one foot bare and the other shod with any shoe. Each foot alternately is carefully tilted to the outside up to the extreme end of its range of motion, simulating a lateral ankle sprain.
  • the Stationary Sprain Simulation Test clearly identifies what can be no less than a fundamental flaw in existing shoe design. It demonstrates conclusively that nature's biomechanical system, the bare foot, is far superior in stability to man's artificial shoe design. Unfortunately, it also demonstrates that the shoe's severe instability overpowers the natural stability of the human foot and synthetically creates a combined biomechanical system that is artificially unstable. The shoe is the weak link.
  • the test shows that the bare foot is inherently stable at the approximate 20 degree end of normal joint range because of the wide, steady foundation the bare heel 29 provides the ankle joint, as seen in Fig. 1. In fact, the area of physical contact of the bare heel 29 with the ground 43 is not much less when tilted all the way out to 20 degrees as when upright at 0 degrees.
  • the new Stationary Sprain Simulation , Test provides a natural yardstick, totally missing until now, to determine whether any given shoe allows the foot within it to function naturally. If a shoe cannot pass this simple litmus test, it is positive proof that a particular shoe is interfering with natural foot and ankle biomechanics. The only question is the exact extent of the interference beyond that demonstrated by the new test.
  • the applicant's designs are the only designs with shoe soles thick enough to provide cushioning (thin-soled and heel-less moccasins do pass the test, but do not provide cushioning and only moderate protection) that will provide naturally stable performance, like the bare foot, in the Stationary Sprain Simulation Test.
  • Fig. 2 shows that, in complete contrast the foot equipped with a conventional running shoe, designated generally by the reference numeral 20 and having an upper 21, though initially very stable while resting completely flat on the ground, becomes immediately unstable when the shoe sole 22 is tilted to the outside.
  • the tilting motion lifts from contact with the ground all of the shoe sole 22 except the artificially sharp edge of the bottom outside corner.
  • the shoe sole instability increases the farther the foot is rolled laterally.
  • the instability induced by the shoe itself is so great that the normal load-bearing pressure of full body weight would actively force an ankle sprain .if not controlled.
  • the abnormal tilting motion of the shoe does not stop at the barefoot's natural 20 degree limit, as you can see from the 45 degree tilt of the shoe heel in Fig. 2.
  • the slipping of the foot within the shoe is caused by the natural tendency of the foot to slide down the typically flat surface of the tilted shoe sole; the more the tilt, the stronger the tendency.
  • the heel is shown in Fig. 2 because of its primary importance in sprains due to its direct physical connection to the ankle ligaments that are torn in an ankle sprain and also because of the heel's predominant role within the foot in bearing body weight.
  • Fig. 3A illustrates that the underlying problem with existing shoe designs is fairly easy to understand by looking closely at the principal forces acting on the physical structure of the shoe sole.
  • the weight of the body held in the shoe upper 21 shifts automatically to the outside edge of the shoe sole 22.
  • the tilted shoe sole 22 provides absolutely no supporting physical structure directly underneath the shifted body weight where it is critically needed to support that weight.
  • An essential part of the supporting foundation is missing.
  • the only actual structural support comes from the sharp corner edge 23 of the shoe sole 22, which unfortunately is not directly under the force of the body weight after the shoe is tilted. Instead, the corner edge 23 is offset well to the inside.
  • a lever arm 23a is set up through the shoe sole 22 between two interacting forces (called a force couple) : the force of gravity on the body (usually known as body weight 133) applied at the point 24 in the upper 21 and the reaction force 134 of the ground, equal to and opposite to body weight when the shoe is upright.
  • the force couple creates a force moment, commonly called torque, that forces the shoe 20 to rotate to the outside around the sharp corner edge 23 of the bottom sole 22, which serves as a stationary pivoting point 23 or center of rotation.
  • Fig. 3B show that the full force of body weight 133 is split at 45 degrees of tilt into two equal components: supported 135 and unsupported 136, each equal to .707 of full body weight 133.
  • the two vertical components 137 and 138 of body weight 133 are both equal to .50 of full body weight.
  • the ground reaction force 134 is equal to the vertical component 137 of the supported component 135.
  • Fig. 4 show a summary of the force components at shoe sole tilts of 0, 45 and 90 degrees.
  • Fig. 4 which uses the same reference numerals as in Fig. 3, shows that, as the outward rotation continues to 90 degrees, and the foot slips within the shoe while ligaments stretch and/or break, the destabilizing unsupported force component 136 continues to grow.
  • the sole 22 is providing no structural support and there is no supported force component 135 of the full body weight 133.
  • the ground reaction force at the pivoting point 23 is zero, since it would move to the upper edge 24 of the shoe sole.
  • Fig. 5 illustrates that the extremely rigid heel counter 141 typical of existing athletic shoes, together with the motion control device 142 that are often used to strongly reinforce those heel counters (and sometimes also the sides of the mid- and forefoot) , are ironically counterproductive. Though they are intended to increase stability, in fact they decrease it.
  • Fig. 5 shows that when the shoe 20 is tilted out, the foot is shifted within the upper 21 naturally against the rigid structure of the typical motion control device 142, instead of only the outside edge of the shoe sole 22 itself.
  • the motion control support 142 increases by almost twice the effective lever arm 132 (compared to 23a) between the force couple of body weight and the ground reaction force at the ,pivot point 23.
  • Fig. 6 shows that the same kind of torsional problem, though to a much more moderate extent, can be produced in the applicant's naturally contoured design of the applicant's earlier filed applications.
  • the concept of a theoretically-ideal stability plane was developed in terms of a sole 28 having a lower surface 31 and an upper surface 30 which are spaced apart by a predetermined distance which remains constant throughout the sagittal frontal planes.
  • the outer surface 27 of the foot is in contact with the upper surface 30 of the sole 28.
  • it might seem desireable to extend the inner surface 30 of the shoe sole 28 up around the sides of the foot 27 to further support i (especially in creating anthropomorphic designs) Fig.
  • FIG. 6 indicates that only that portion of the inner shoe sole 28 that is directly supported structurally underneath by the rest of the shoe sole is effective in providing natural support and stability. Any point on the upper surface 30 of the shoe sole 28 that is not supported directly by the constant shoe sole thickness (as measured by a perpendicular to a tangent at that point and shown in the shaded area 143) will tend to produce a moderate destabilizing torque.
  • Fig. 7 illustrates an approach to minimize structurally the destabilizing lever arm 32 and therefore the potential torque problem.
  • the finishing edge of the shoe sole 28 should be tapered gradually inward from both the top surface 30 and the bottom surface 31, in order to provide matching rounded or semi-rounded edges.
  • the upper surface 30 does not provide an unsupported portion that creates a destabilizing torque and the bottom surface 31 does not provide an unnatural pivoting edge.
  • the gap 144 between shoe sole 28 and foot sole 29 at the edge of the shoe sole can be "caulked” with exceptionally soft sole material as indicated in Fig. 7 that, in the aggregate (i.e. all the way around the edge of the shoe sole) , will help position the foot in the shoe sole.
  • it will deform easily so as not to form an unnatural lever causing a destabilizing torque.
  • Figs. 8A-8C illustrate clearly the principle of natural deformation as it applies to the applicant's design, even though design diagrams like those preceding (and in his previous applications already referenced) are normally shown in • an ideal state, without any functional deformation, obviously to show their exact shape for proper construction. That natural structural shape, with its contour paralleling the foot, enables the shoe sole to deform naturally like the foot. In the applicant's invention, the natural deformation feature creates such an important functional advantage it will be illustrated and discussed here fully. Note in the figures that even when the shoe sole shape is deformed, the constant shoe sole thickness in the frontal plane feature of the invention is maintained.
  • Fig. 8A shows upright, unloaded and therefore undeformed the fully contoured shoe sole design indicated in Fig. 15 of United States Patent Application 07/239,667 (filed 02 September 1988) .
  • Fig. 8A shows a fully contoured shoe sole design that follows the natural contour of all of the foot sole, the bottom as well as the sides.
  • the fully contoured shoe sole assumes that the resulting slightly rounded bottom when unloaded will deform under load as shown in Fig. 8B and flatten just as the human foot bottom is slightly rounded unloaded but flattens under load. Therefore, the shoe sole material must be of such composition as to allow the natural deformation following that of the foot.
  • the design applies particularly to the heel, but to the rest of the shoe sole as well.
  • the fully contoured design allows the foot to function as naturally as possible. Under load. Fig. 8A would deform by flattening to look essentially like Fig. 8B.
  • Figs. 8A and 8B show in frontal plane cross section the essential concept underlying this invention, the theoretically ideal stability plane which is also theoretically ideal for efficient natural motion of all kinds, including running, jogging or walking.
  • the theoretically ideal stability plane 51 is determined, first, by the desired shoe sole thickness (s) in a frontal plane cross section, and, second, .by the natural shape of the individual's foot surface 29.
  • the theoretically ideal stability plane for any particular individual is determined, first, by the given frontal plane cross section shoe sole thickness (s) ; second, by the natural shape of the individual's foot;, and, third, by the frontal plane cross section width of the individual's load-bearing footprint which is defined as the supper surface of the shoe sole that is in physical contact with and supports the human foot sole.
  • Fig. 8B shows the same fully contoured design when upright, under normal load (body weight) and therefore deformed naturally in a manner very closely paralleling the natural deformation under the same load of the foot.
  • An almost identical portion of the foot sole that is flattened in deformation is also flattened in deformation in the shoe sole.
  • Fig. 8C shows the same design when tilted outward 20 degrees laterally, the normal barefoot limit; with virtually equal accuracy it shows the opposite foot tilted 20 degrees inward, in fairly severe pronation.
  • the deformation of the shoe sole 28 again very closely parallels that of the foot, even as it tilts.
  • Fig. 8C also represents with reasonable accuracy a shoe sole design corresponding to Fig. 8B, a naturally contoured shoe sole with a conventional built-in flattening deformation, as in Fig. 14 of the above referenced September 2, 1988, Application, except that design would have a slight crimp at 145.
  • the naturally contoured side design in Fig. 8B is a more conventional, conservative design that is a special case of the more generally fully contoured design in Fig. 8A, which is the closest to the natural form of the foot, but the least conventional.
  • Figs. 8D-8F show a stop action sequence of the applicant's fully contoured shoe sole during the normal landing and support phases of running to demonstrate the normal functioning of the natural deformation feature.
  • Fig. 8D shows the foot and shoe landing in a normal 10 degree inversion position
  • Fig 8E shows the foot and shoe after they have rolled to an upright position
  • Fig. 8F shows them having rolled inward 10 degrees in eversion, a normal pronation maximum.
  • the sequence of illustrate clearly the natural deformation of the applicant's shoe sole design follows that of the foot very closely so that both provide a nearly equal flattened base to stabilize the foot. Comparing those figures to the same action sequence of Figs.
  • Fig. 9 shows the preferred relative density of the shoe sole, including the insole as a part, in order to maximize the shoe sole's ability to deform naturally following the natural deformation of the foot sole. Regardless of how many shoe sole layers (including insole) or laminations of differing material densities and flexibility are used in total, the softest and most flexible material 147 should be closest to the foot sole, with a progression through less soft 148 to the firmest and least flexible 149 at the outermost shoe sole layer, the bottom sole. This arrangement helps to avoid the unnatural side lever arm/torque problem mentioned in the previous several figures.
  • the forgoing principle of preferred relative density refers to proximity to the foot and is not inconsistent with the term uniform density as used in United States Patent Application 07/219,387 filed July 15, 1988 and 07/239,667 filed September 2, 1988.
  • Uniform shoe sole density is preferred strictly in the sense of preserving even and natural support to the foot like the ground provides, so that a neutral starting point can be established, against which so-called improvements can be measured.
  • the preferred uniform density is in marked contrast to the common practice in athletic shoes today, especially those beyond cheap or "bare bones" models, of increasing or decreasing the density of the shoe sole, particularly in the midsole, in various areas underneath the foot to provide extra support or special softness where believed necessary. The same effect is also created by areas either supported or unsupported by the tread pattern of the bottom sole.
  • the most common example of this practice is the use of denser midsole material under the inside portion of the heel, to counteract excessive pronation.
  • Fig. 10 illustrates that the applicant's naturally contoured shoe sole sides can be made to provide a fit so close as to approximate a custom fit.
  • the shoe soles so produced will very gently hold the sides of each individual foot exactly. Since the shoe sole is designed as described in connection with Fig. 9 to deform easily and naturally like that of the bare foot, it will deform easily to provide this designed-in custom fit.
  • Fig. 11 illustrates a fully contoured design, but abbreviated along the sides to only essential structural stability and propulsion shoe sole elements as shown in Fig.
  • HE shows the horizontal plane bottom view of the right foot corresponding to the fully contoured design previously described, but abbreviated along the sides to only essential structural support and propulsion elements.
  • Shoe sole material density can be increased in the unabbreviated essential elements to compensate for increased pressure loading there.
  • the essential structural support elements are the base and lateral tuberosity of the calcaneus 95, the heads of the metatarsals 96, and the base of the fifth metatarsal 97 (and the adjoining cuboid in some individuals) . They must be supported both underneath and to the outside edge of the foot for stability.
  • the essential propulsion element is the head of the first distal phalange 98.
  • Fig. 11 shows that the naturally contoured stability sides need not be used except in the identified essential areas. Weight savings and flexibility improvements can be made by omitting the non-essential stability sides.
  • the design of the portion of the shoe sole directly underneath the foot shown in Fig. 11 allows for unobstructed natural inversion/eversion motion of the calcaneus by providing maximum shoe sole flexibility particularly between the base of the calcaneus 125 (heel) and the metatarsal heads 126 (forefoot) along an axis 120.
  • An unnatural torsion occurs about that axis if flexibility is insufficient so that a conventional shoe sole interferes with the inversion/eversion motion by restraining it.
  • the object of the design is to allow the relatively more mobile (in inversion and eversion) calcaneus to articulate freely and independently from the relatively more fixed forefoot instead of the fixed or fused structure or lack of stable structure between the two in conventional designs.
  • the forefoot can be subdivided (not shown) into its component essential structural support and propulsion elements, the individual heads of the metatarsal and the heads of the distal phalanges, so that each .major articulating joint set of the foot is paralleled by a freely articulating shoe sole support propulsion element, an anthropomorphic design; various aggregations of the subdivision are also possible.
  • the design in Fig. 11 features an enlarged structural support at the base of the fifth metatarsal in order to include the cuboid, which can also come into contact with the ground under arch compression in some individuals.
  • the design can provide general side support in the heel area, as in Fig. HE or alternatively can carefully orient the stability sides in the heel area to the exact positions of the lateral calcaneal tuberosity 108 and the main base of the calcaneus 109, as in Fig. HE' (showing heel area only of the right foot) .
  • Figs. 11A-D show frontal plane cross sections of the left shoe and Fig.
  • HE shows a bottom view of the right foot, with flexibility axes 120, 122, 111, 112 and 113 indicated.
  • Fig. 11F shows a sagittal plane cross section showing the structural elements joined by very thin and relatively soft upper midsole layer.
  • Figs. HG and 11H show similar cross sections with slightly different designs featuring durable fabric only (slip-lasted shoe) , or a structurally sound arch design, respectively.
  • Fig. HI shows a side medial view of the shoe sole.
  • Fig. HJ shows a simple interim or low cost construction for the articulating shoe sole support element 95 for the heel (showing the heel area only of the right foot) ; while it is most critical and effective for the heel support element 95, it can also be used with the other elements, such as the base of the fifth metatarsal .97 and the long arch 121.
  • the heel sole element 95 shown can be a single flexible layer or a lamination of layers. When cut from a flat sheet or molded in the general pattern shown, the outer edges can be easily bent to follow the contours of the foot, particularly the sides. The shape shown allows a flat or slightly contoured heel element 95 to be attached to a highly contoured shoe upper or very thin upper sole layer like that shown in Fig. HF.
  • the size of the center section 119 can be small to conform to a fully or nearly fully contoured design or larger to conform to a contoured sides design, where there is a large flattened sole area under the heel.
  • the flexibility is provided by the removed diagonal sections, the exact proportion of size and shape can vary.
  • Fig. 12 illustrates an expanded explanation of the correct approach for measuring shoe sole thickness according to the naturally contoured design, as described previously in Figs. 23 and 24 of United States Patent Application 07/239,667 (filed 02 September 1988).
  • the tangent described in those figures would be parallel to the ground when the shoe sole is tilted out sideways, so that measuring shoe sole thickness along the perpendicular will provide the least distance between the point on the upper shoe sole surface closest to the ground and the closest point to it on the lower surface of the shoe sole (assuming no load deformation) .

Landscapes

  • Footwear And Its Accessory, Manufacturing Method And Apparatuses (AREA)

Abstract

Une construction pour une chaussure, en particulier une chaussure d'athlétisme, comprend une semelle qui épouse la forme du pied, en particulier les côtés, et qui possède une épaisseur constante dans les sections de plan frontal. L'épaisseur du contour des côtés de la semelle de chaussure est égale et par conséquent elle varie exactement de la même manière que l'épaisseur de la partie de la semelle portant la charge varie due au soulèvement du talon, par exemple. La semelle de la chaussure, lorsqu'elle est sous une charge et inclinée vers le côté, se déforme d'une manière parallèle à la déformation du pied de l'utilisateur tout en conservant pratiquement le même degré de contact avec le sol lorsque cette semelle se trouve dans un état droit. La semelle de chaussure déformable possède une partie supérieure ou ses côtés pliés vers l'intérieur de sorte que lorsqu'ils sont usés, les côtés se replient vers l'extérieur facilement pour s'adapter à une pointure particulière. La semelle de chaussure comprend en outre une semelle à contour naturel qui est tronquée le long de ses côtés en des éléments de propulsion et de stabilité structuraux uniquement essentiels qui sont combinés et intégrés dans les mêmes éléments structuraux discontinus de la semelle de chaussure sous le pied et qui se rapprochent des éléments structuraux principaux d'un pied d'un être humain et de leur articulation naturelle.
PCT/US1990/004917 1989-08-30 1990-08-30 Structures de semelle de chaussure utilisant un plan de stabilite theoriquement ideal WO1991003180A1 (fr)

Priority Applications (3)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
DE69031835T DE69031835T2 (de) 1989-08-30 1990-08-30 Schuhsohlenkonstruktion mit anwendung einer theoretischen idealen stabilitätsebene
EP90914318A EP0489858B1 (fr) 1989-08-30 1990-08-30 Structures de semelle de chaussure utilisant un plan de stabilite theoriquement ideal
DK90914318T DK0489858T3 (da) 1989-08-30 1990-08-30 Skosålskonstruktion, hvori der er anvendt et teoretisk ideelt stabilitetsplan

Applications Claiming Priority (2)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US40071489A 1989-08-30 1989-08-30
US400,714 1989-08-30

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
WO1991003180A1 true WO1991003180A1 (fr) 1991-03-21

Family

ID=23584706

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
PCT/US1990/004917 WO1991003180A1 (fr) 1989-08-30 1990-08-30 Structures de semelle de chaussure utilisant un plan de stabilite theoriquement ideal

Country Status (9)

Country Link
US (1) US20020007572A1 (fr)
EP (1) EP0489858B1 (fr)
JP (1) JP3060033B2 (fr)
AT (1) ATE161152T1 (fr)
AU (1) AU6432390A (fr)
DE (1) DE69031835T2 (fr)
DK (1) DK0489858T3 (fr)
ES (1) ES2113349T3 (fr)
WO (1) WO1991003180A1 (fr)

Cited By (19)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
EP0593441A4 (fr) * 1989-10-03 1992-12-21 Anatomic Res Inc Structures de semelles de chaussure corrective utilisant un contour plus grand que le plan de stabilite theoriquement ideal.
WO1994003080A1 (fr) * 1992-08-10 1994-02-17 Ellis Frampton E Iii Structures de semelle de chaussure
WO1996039060A1 (fr) * 1995-06-05 1996-12-12 Frampton Erroll Ellis, Iii Structure de semelle de chaussure
WO1997001295A1 (fr) 1995-06-26 1997-01-16 Frampton Erroll Ellis, Iii Structures de semelles de chaussures
US5893221A (en) * 1997-10-16 1999-04-13 Forest Footwear L.L.C. Footwear having a protuberance
US6272774B1 (en) 1997-08-21 2001-08-14 Trisport Limited Shoe cleats
US6990755B2 (en) 2003-10-09 2006-01-31 Nike, Inc. Article of footwear with a stretchable upper and an articulated sole structure
US7010869B1 (en) 1999-04-26 2006-03-14 Frampton E. Ellis, III Shoe sole orthotic structures and computer controlled compartments
US7290357B2 (en) 2003-10-09 2007-11-06 Nike, Inc. Article of footwear with an articulated sole structure
US7334350B2 (en) 1999-03-16 2008-02-26 Anatomic Research, Inc Removable rounded midsole structures and chambers with computer processor-controlled variable pressure
US7555851B2 (en) 2006-01-24 2009-07-07 Nike, Inc. Article of footwear having a fluid-filled chamber with flexion zones
US7707742B2 (en) 1999-04-26 2010-05-04 Ellis Iii Frampton E Shoe sole orthotic structures and computer controlled compartments
US7752772B2 (en) 2006-01-24 2010-07-13 Nike, Inc. Article of footwear having a fluid-filled chamber with flexion zones
US8873914B2 (en) 2004-11-22 2014-10-28 Frampton E. Ellis Footwear sole sections including bladders with internal flexibility sipes therebetween and an attachment between sipe surfaces
US8919015B2 (en) 2012-03-08 2014-12-30 Nike, Inc. Article of footwear having a sole structure with a flexible groove
US8959802B2 (en) 2003-10-09 2015-02-24 Nike, Inc. Article of footwear with a stretchable upper and an articulated sole structure
US9510646B2 (en) 2012-07-17 2016-12-06 Nike, Inc. Article of footwear having a flexible fluid-filled chamber
US9568946B2 (en) 2007-11-21 2017-02-14 Frampton E. Ellis Microchip with faraday cages and internal flexibility sipes
US9609912B2 (en) 2012-03-23 2017-04-04 Nike, Inc. Article of footwear having a sole structure with a fluid-filled chamber

Families Citing this family (7)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US7471565B2 (en) * 2006-08-22 2008-12-30 Micron Technology, Inc. Reducing effects of program disturb in a memory device
US11901072B2 (en) 2012-04-18 2024-02-13 Frampton E. Ellis Big data artificial intelligence computer system used for medical care connected to millions of sensor-equipped smartphones connected to their users' configurable footwear soles with sensors and to body sensors
US9877523B2 (en) 2012-04-18 2018-01-30 Frampton E. Ellis Bladders, compartments, chambers or internal sipes controlled by a computer system using big data techniques and a smartphone device
US20200367605A1 (en) 2012-04-18 2020-11-26 Frampton E. Ellis Smartphone-controlled active configuration of footwear, including with concavely rounded soles
US10226082B2 (en) 2012-04-18 2019-03-12 Frampton E. Ellis Smartphone-controlled active configuration of footwear, including with concavely rounded soles
US9030335B2 (en) 2012-04-18 2015-05-12 Frampton E. Ellis Smartphones app-controlled configuration of footwear soles using sensors in the smartphone and the soles
CN114668221A (zh) * 2017-05-23 2022-06-28 耐克创新有限合伙公司 具有分阶段压缩刚度的圆顶状鞋底夹层

Citations (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US3308560A (en) * 1965-06-28 1967-03-14 Endicott Johnson Corp Rubber boot with fibreglass instep guard

Patent Citations (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US3308560A (en) * 1965-06-28 1967-03-14 Endicott Johnson Corp Rubber boot with fibreglass instep guard

Cited By (45)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
EP0593441A4 (fr) * 1989-10-03 1992-12-21 Anatomic Res Inc Structures de semelles de chaussure corrective utilisant un contour plus grand que le plan de stabilite theoriquement ideal.
EP0593441A1 (fr) * 1989-10-03 1994-04-27 ELLIS, Frampton E. III Structures de semelles de chaussure corrective utilisant un contour plus grand que le plan de stabilite theoriquement ideal
WO1994003080A1 (fr) * 1992-08-10 1994-02-17 Ellis Frampton E Iii Structures de semelle de chaussure
WO1996039060A1 (fr) * 1995-06-05 1996-12-12 Frampton Erroll Ellis, Iii Structure de semelle de chaussure
WO1997001295A1 (fr) 1995-06-26 1997-01-16 Frampton Erroll Ellis, Iii Structures de semelles de chaussures
US6272774B1 (en) 1997-08-21 2001-08-14 Trisport Limited Shoe cleats
US5893221A (en) * 1997-10-16 1999-04-13 Forest Footwear L.L.C. Footwear having a protuberance
US10016015B2 (en) 1999-03-16 2018-07-10 Anatomic Research, Inc. Footwear soles with computer controlled configurable structures
US9398787B2 (en) 1999-03-16 2016-07-26 Frampton E. Ellis, III Removable rounded midsole structures and chambers with computer processor-controlled variable pressure
US7562468B2 (en) 1999-03-16 2009-07-21 Anatomic Research, Inc Removable rounded midsole structures and chambers with computer processor-controlled variable pressure
US8656607B2 (en) 1999-03-16 2014-02-25 Anatomic Research, Inc. Soles for shoes or other footwear having compartments with computer processor-controlled variable pressure
US7334350B2 (en) 1999-03-16 2008-02-26 Anatomic Research, Inc Removable rounded midsole structures and chambers with computer processor-controlled variable pressure
US8291614B2 (en) 1999-03-16 2012-10-23 Anatomic Research, Inc. Removable rounded midsole structures and chambers with computer processor-controlled variable pressure
US8667709B2 (en) 1999-04-26 2014-03-11 Frampton E. Ellis Shoe sole orthotic structures and computer controlled compartments
US7707742B2 (en) 1999-04-26 2010-05-04 Ellis Iii Frampton E Shoe sole orthotic structures and computer controlled compartments
US7793429B2 (en) 1999-04-26 2010-09-14 Ellis Iii Frampton E Shoe sole orthotic structures and computer controlled compartments
US8261468B2 (en) 1999-04-26 2012-09-11 Frampton E. Ellis Shoe sole orthotic structures and computer controlled compartments
US9414641B2 (en) 1999-04-26 2016-08-16 Frampton E. Ellis Shoe sole orthotic structures and computer controlled compartments
US7010869B1 (en) 1999-04-26 2006-03-14 Frampton E. Ellis, III Shoe sole orthotic structures and computer controlled compartments
US8959802B2 (en) 2003-10-09 2015-02-24 Nike, Inc. Article of footwear with a stretchable upper and an articulated sole structure
US7607241B2 (en) 2003-10-09 2009-10-27 Nike, Inc. Article of footwear with an articulated sole structure
US6990755B2 (en) 2003-10-09 2006-01-31 Nike, Inc. Article of footwear with a stretchable upper and an articulated sole structure
US7392605B2 (en) 2003-10-09 2008-07-01 Nike, Inc. Article of footwear with a stretchable upper and an articulated sole structure
US7290357B2 (en) 2003-10-09 2007-11-06 Nike, Inc. Article of footwear with an articulated sole structure
US7171767B2 (en) 2003-10-09 2007-02-06 Nike, Inc. Article of footwear with a stretchable upper and an articulated sole structure
US9107475B2 (en) 2004-11-22 2015-08-18 Frampton E. Ellis Microprocessor control of bladders in footwear soles with internal flexibility sipes
US9642411B2 (en) 2004-11-22 2017-05-09 Frampton E. Ellis Surgically implantable device enclosed in two bladders configured to slide relative to each other and including a faraday cage
US8959804B2 (en) 2004-11-22 2015-02-24 Frampton E. Ellis Footwear sole sections including bladders with internal flexibility sipes therebetween and an attachment between sipe surfaces
US11503876B2 (en) 2004-11-22 2022-11-22 Frampton E. Ellis Footwear or orthotic sole with microprocessor control of a bladder with magnetorheological fluid
US9271538B2 (en) 2004-11-22 2016-03-01 Frampton E. Ellis Microprocessor control of magnetorheological liquid in footwear with bladders and internal flexibility sipes
US9339074B2 (en) 2004-11-22 2016-05-17 Frampton E. Ellis Microprocessor control of bladders in footwear soles with internal flexibility sipes
US11039658B2 (en) 2004-11-22 2021-06-22 Frampton E. Ellis Structural elements or support elements with internal flexibility sipes
US8873914B2 (en) 2004-11-22 2014-10-28 Frampton E. Ellis Footwear sole sections including bladders with internal flexibility sipes therebetween and an attachment between sipe surfaces
US10021938B2 (en) 2004-11-22 2018-07-17 Frampton E. Ellis Furniture with internal flexibility sipes, including chairs and beds
US8925117B2 (en) 2004-11-22 2015-01-06 Frampton E. Ellis Clothing and apparel with internal flexibility sipes and at least one attachment between surfaces defining a sipe
US9681696B2 (en) 2004-11-22 2017-06-20 Frampton E. Ellis Helmet and/or a helmet liner including an electronic control system controlling the flow resistance of a magnetorheological liquid in compartments
US7752772B2 (en) 2006-01-24 2010-07-13 Nike, Inc. Article of footwear having a fluid-filled chamber with flexion zones
US7555851B2 (en) 2006-01-24 2009-07-07 Nike, Inc. Article of footwear having a fluid-filled chamber with flexion zones
US9568946B2 (en) 2007-11-21 2017-02-14 Frampton E. Ellis Microchip with faraday cages and internal flexibility sipes
US8919015B2 (en) 2012-03-08 2014-12-30 Nike, Inc. Article of footwear having a sole structure with a flexible groove
US9609912B2 (en) 2012-03-23 2017-04-04 Nike, Inc. Article of footwear having a sole structure with a fluid-filled chamber
US11297898B2 (en) 2012-03-23 2022-04-12 Nike, Inc. Article of footwear having a sole structure with a fluid-filled chamber
US9510646B2 (en) 2012-07-17 2016-12-06 Nike, Inc. Article of footwear having a flexible fluid-filled chamber
US10499705B2 (en) 2012-07-17 2019-12-10 Nike, Inc. Article of footwear having a flexible fluid-filled chamber
US11399595B2 (en) 2012-07-17 2022-08-02 Nike, Inc. Article of footwear having a flexible fluid-filled chamber

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
JP3060033B2 (ja) 2000-07-04
DE69031835D1 (de) 1998-01-29
AU6432390A (en) 1991-04-08
ATE161152T1 (de) 1998-01-15
EP0489858B1 (fr) 1997-12-17
DK0489858T3 (da) 1998-08-31
ES2113349T3 (es) 1998-05-01
JPH04507364A (ja) 1992-12-24
US20020007572A1 (en) 2002-01-24
EP0489858A1 (fr) 1992-06-17
DE69031835T2 (de) 1998-05-14

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
US7127834B2 (en) Shoe sole structures using a theoretically ideal stability plane
EP0489858B1 (fr) Structures de semelle de chaussure utilisant un plan de stabilite theoriquement ideal
US6308439B1 (en) Shoe sole structures
US6675499B2 (en) Shoe sole structures
US6789331B1 (en) Shoes sole structures
US5317819A (en) Shoe with naturally contoured sole
US6115941A (en) Shoe with naturally contoured sole
EP0424471B1 (fr) Chaussure a semelle profilee naturellement
US6708424B1 (en) Shoe with naturally contoured sole
EP0860121B1 (fr) Semelle de chaussure et chaussure et sandale comprenant cette semelle
US20080005931A1 (en) Shoe sole orthotic structures and computer controlled compartments
US20010049887A1 (en) Shoe sole with rounded inner and outer surfaces
US20020116841A1 (en) Shoe soles with midsole sides of increased thickness
WO1996039060A1 (fr) Structure de semelle de chaussure
JP3041007U (ja) 靴の底およびそれを含む靴ならびにサンダル

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
AK Designated states

Kind code of ref document: A1

Designated state(s): AT AU BB BG BR CA CH DE DK FI GB HU JP KP KR LK LU MC MG MW NL NO RO SD SE SU

AL Designated countries for regional patents

Kind code of ref document: A1

Designated state(s): AT BE BF BJ CF CG CH CM DE DK ES FR GA GB IT LU ML MR NL SE SN TD TG

WWE Wipo information: entry into national phase

Ref document number: 1990914318

Country of ref document: EP

REG Reference to national code

Ref country code: DE

Ref legal event code: 8642

WWP Wipo information: published in national office

Ref document number: 1990914318

Country of ref document: EP

NENP Non-entry into the national phase

Ref country code: CA

WWG Wipo information: grant in national office

Ref document number: 1990914318

Country of ref document: EP