Athletic injuries, such as from overstressed musculoskeletal structures, can be traumatic and career ending. ACL (anterior cruciate ligament) injuries are particularly notorious and prone to recurrence. These and other injuries often result from some form of loads (e.g., forces and torques) transferred through the footwear of the athlete to the foot and on to an anatomical member, such as, a bone, ligament, cartilage, tendon or other tissue structure. Mitigation of the transfer of these loads can substantially eliminate or alleviate injury risk to the foot, ankle, lower leg and knee. Because an athlete's footwear defines the ground interface, the footwear defines the focal point of potentially injurious load transfers. Shoe soles for athletic usage often employ high friction materials such as rubber and flexible polymers to “grip” the playing surface, and also employ a texture, ribs or protrusions on the bottom surface to avoid slipping. These materials and structures increase the load transfer from the athletes to the playing surface and when unmitigated, raise these loads an injury threshold.
Cushioning, padding and air bladders purport to distribute forces in conventional shoes, however these devices exhibit behavior similar to conventional springs. Most conventional mechanical springs have a single, consistent positive stiffness (force/displacement) throughout their deformation, e.g., stretching or compressing, until they reach the limit of their displacement, at which point the stiffness becomes fixed and substantially like a solid material. Conventional constant-force springs are characterized by large displacements, and low-forces, such as found for vacuum cleaner cords and tape measures. Constant-force springs are generally characterized by minimal variance or “cushioning” once the constant force is reached and displacement continues equivalent to the constant force.
A force absorbing device for a footwear appliance includes a shoe upper and a shoe sole having a planar sole surface, such that forces between the shoe upper and planar sole surface in ground contact are absorbed by force mitigation assemblies disposed in the shoe sole. A force mitigation assembly adapted for a footwear appliance includes a linkage to a wearer interface responsive to movement based on activity of the wearer, typically defined by the shoe or sneaker upper that encapsulates the foot. An attachment to a sole surface receives ground forces transmitted from frictional contact between the sole surface and a surface against which the sole is disposed, such as for running, turning, etc. A force mitigation assembly in communication with the linkage and the attachment absorbs these forces received from the sole surface for directing the received force to the linkage in a controlled manner. An elastic field in the force mitigation assembly is defined by a resilient material adapted to deform in response to the received force.
Configurations herein are based, in part, on the observation that footwear often includes minimal force absorption material or structure, and that which is present conforms to a conventional spring response. Unfortunately, conventional approaches suffer from the shortcoming that the conventional spring response, having a substantially linear force/displacement curve, rapidly approaches a maximum displacement such that high impact forces are often transmitted to the wearer with little mitigation. Accordingly, configurations herein disclose a force mitigation assembly including an elastic field spring structure packaged for encapsulation in a shoe sole. The elastic field exhibits a flat response, rather than a displacement-proportional response, so that abrupt or impact loads are met with a constant force independent of displacement for absorbing sharp or peak loads that tend to be associated with injury.
Configurations disclosed herein present a force mitigation assembly including an elastic apparatus having an elongated deformable member wrapped around a pair of rigid posts perpendicular to the deformable member, such that the deformable member has substantially equal portions disposed around a circumference of the parallel posts. The parallel posts exhibit a constant size elastic field as the deformable member unwinds from the posts in response to a force exerted on the deformable member at a point between the parallel posts. The deformable member may include a plurality of adjacent deformable members, typically in a gridlike arrangement, such that each of the adjacent deformable members is adapted for independent, measurable deformation in response to the exerted force. Each of the deformable members is responsive to modification for effecting a resistive force in response to the received force.
Configurations disclosed herein proposed a redesigned sole of an athletic shoe with a mechanical system to prevent or reduce the occurrence of ACL injuries in athletes. There are three directions of forces which cause ACL tears in athletes; normal to the ground, shear along the x-axis and shear along the y-axis with the x- and y-axis determined to be parallel to the ground. The shear force directions are addressed with a multi-layered system in the sole of the shoe that allows additional motion in the shear directions.
The foregoing and other objects, features and advantages of the invention will be apparent from the following description of particular embodiments of the invention, as illustrated in the accompanying drawings in which like reference characters refer to the same parts throughout the different views. The drawings are not necessarily to scale, emphasis instead being placed upon illustrating the principles of the invention.
The description below presents an example of a footwear appliance, or shoe, for implementing the disclosed force mitigation assembly using a constant force, or substantially constant force spring structure for mitigating harmful transmission of lateral and torsional (twisting) forces transmitted from shoe soles. The assembly including the constant force spring implements an elastic field approach where a counterforce is based on an area of the engaged elastic field, rather than a length of an elongated or contracted spring. The disclosed elastic field, constant force spring for exerting a linear force response is also applicable in alternate contexts without departing from the claimed approach.
A control threshold 172 defines the point at which mitigation begins to occur. Continued force causes progressively greater displacement to avoid injury by mitigating the force short of the injury threshold 170. Mitigation is such that the lateral or forward movement less than the control threshold 172 is permitted and lateral movement greater than the control threshold 172 is absorbed by the force mitigation assemblies as shown by line 175 prior to forces attaining the injury threshold 170, shown by line 175,′ until crossing the injury threshold at 177.
A shoe as defined herein includes any kind of footwear that is disposed between the foot of a wearer and the surface upon which it is deployed. Deployment, although athletic examples are depicted herein, may be any ambulatory activity such as walking, running, hiking, climbing or any usage that places the wearer's foot and ankle in a load bearing context with a floor, ground or playing surface. As will be apparent by the examples herein, the foot and ankle define a focal point of forces upon the skeletal frame of the wearer during any ambulatory activities, and are therefore a target of force mitigation as disclosed herein. In particular, configurations herein are particularly beneficial to high impact athletics because these activities generate forces that push an extreme threshold of human capacity. Substantial media attention has been directed to sports related injuries, particularly at the college and professional levels, and the resulting monetary aspects, both for rehabilitation and tortious omissions, has garnered the attention of sports management entities.
The elastic field 42 is therefore defined by a portion of the elongated member 50 deforming or compressing in response to the force 46. The resilient material, when disposed against the rigid member 40 extending from an attachment to a shoe sole surface adapted to deform the resilient material in response to a received actuation force 46, exerts a counterforce 52 against the deformation. Since a length of the elastic field 42 along the annular surface 48 remains substantially constant, a reactive force 52 imposed by the elastic field 42 remains substantially constant, in contrast to the conventional spring of
The effect of the spiral biased around the post is that the elastic field 42 includes a deformation section 62 defined by a segment of the elongated member 50 in contact with the rigid member 40. The segment has a length that remains substantially constant during contact with the rigid member 40 while the elongated member 50 deforms to a straight position as it “unwinds” the spiral. In general, the rigid member 40 extends substantially perpendicular from the sole surface, and is coupled to the linkage for receiving the movement based on activity of the wearer. Some additional friction may be encountered by the length of the elongated member 50 remaining “wrapped” around the rigid member, but such friction can be minimized by appropriate material selection.
Different rigidity and cross section properties may be imparted to the elongated member 50 to vary the reactive force 52 in response to the received force direction 46, as the elongated member 50 is deformed out of a rest position from the bias around the post. The elongated member 50 is typically a homogeneous material with a solid cross section, such as nitinol or similar spring material.
The dual post, “goat head” spiral arrangement is oriented in opposed pairs to define each force mitigation assembly 150, thus addressing opposed forces in either direction along one axis or component. Multiple force mitigation assemblies 150, therefore, can be arranged in perpendicular orientation to provide 360 degrees of coverage. For each spiral arrangement, therefore, the elongated member 50 is biased in a rest position around a perimeter of one or more of the rigid members 40 and adapted for slideable deformation in response to the received force. The elastic field 42 is defined by a portion of the elongated member 50 disposed around the perimeter of the rigid members 40. Each of the opposed elongated members 50-N absorbs a component of the received force in a direction opposite to the other of the opposed elongated member 50.
When disposed in a shoe assembly, the plurality of rigid members 40 are in communication between the linkage and the sole surface, such that each rigid member is coupled to either the linkage to the upper sole 80-1 or the sole surface, defined by lower sole 80-2. The elongated member engages each of the rigid members 40 and is biased in a rest position around at least one of the engaged rigid members (typically in pairs). This adapts the elongated member to slideably deform from the rest position in response to the received force.
Implementation of the force mitigation assembly on the interior of the sole body allows force mitigation to occur closer to an axis of twisting or rotary movements, and protects the force mitigation assemblies from impact and wear that may occur around the shoe perimeter. A plurality of force mitigation assemblies 150 may be employed in each shoe, and they may be positioned based on a component of motion absorbed by each device. In one configuration, discussed further below, three force mitigation assemblies are employed. A forward and rearward appliance both mitigate lateral forces to the left and the right. In the case of twisting forces, each would tend to mitigate an opposite direction of rotation. A center appliance mitigates forward and backward movement. Any suitable orientation of the force mitigation assemblies may be employed, as described below.
In the configuration of
Each force mitigation assembly 150 includes an actuator 60 disposed in a slot 64 for mitigating a component of movement in its respective direction (forward or lateral), and allows independent movement in the other component. The three force mitigating appliances 150-N, in one example configuration, may be disposed around the heel and midsection of the sole, leaving approximately a third on the front (toe) side open since twisting and axial forces tend to be defined by the ankle and vertical tibia/shin structures, and forward movement at the toe will still be transferred to the middle force mitigation assembly flanked by the lateral appliances, as now described with respect to
Each force mitigation assembly 150 includes an elastic field 42 defined by a resilient material adapted to deform in response to the received force. The force mitigation assemblies 150 moderate and absorb forces from being transmitted from one sole plane 80 to the other. Each force mitigation assembly 150 is adapted to be installed in the upper 80-1 and lower 80-2 soles for absorbing forces between the sole planes 80.
Each force mitigation assembly includes opposed elongated members 50-1 . . . 50-2 each having a pair of flanking rigid members 40-1 . . . 40-2 and share a common actuator 60. An actuation slot 64 separates individual components of lateral and forward movement, and a circular cavity 66 allows rotation of a post assembly 68 to decouple lateral and forward movement components.
Each force mitigation assembly 150 should tolerate movement in a direction or component other than the axis it is oriented to oppose or mitigate. An arrangement of slots and a pin attached to the actuator 60 allows decoupling of different components of movement. The pin allows mere sliding in directions other than that the force mitigation assembly is intended to oppose. Therefore, when multiple force mitigation assemblies are disposed together, as between the upper and lower soles 80, each avoids restricting movement in directions other than the one it is intended to oppose, allowing free 360 degree movement.
A vertically mounted elongated member 50′ may also be employed to mitigate vertical heel forces.
The slots accommodate components (i.e. forward/lateral) of movement and are arranged perpendicularly so at least one force mitigation assembly 150 is invoked for any planar movement 360 degrees about the sole. Each elongated member, of the opposed elongated members is disposed between a pair of rigid members 40 by engaging an annular surface of the rigid members by a spiral “wrapping.” An actuator 60 responsive to the received force is engaged in a slot 64 defining a path between each pair of rigid members 40. Each actuator 60 is responsive to a received force for engaging a medial section of the elongated member 50 between the corresponding rigid members, and dispose the elongated member 50 for drawing the elongated member in slideable communication along the annular surface of each of the rigid members 40.
Continuing to refer to
The annular members 55 are adapted to slideably deform around the rigid member 40 in response to the received force. As shown, the rigid member 40 is cylindrical and the annular members are substantially semicircular for simultaneously engaging a circumference of the rigid member, the annular members defining an arc around the circumference and terminating at a gap or slot 85 opposed from the central post 53 from which the annular members 55 extend.
In contrast to the approach of
It is conceivable that the force mitigation assemblies may impose a tolerance between the elongated members 50, rigid members 40 and other elements.
While the system and methods defined herein have been particularly shown and described with references to embodiments thereof, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes in form and details may be made therein without departing from the scope of the invention encompassed by the appended claims.
This patent application claims the benefit under 35 U.S.C. § 119(e) of U.S. Provisional Patent App. No. 62/741,795 filed Oct. 5, 2018, entitled “TUNABLE STIFFNESS GOATS HEAD SPRING SYSTEMS,” and is a Continuation-in-Part (CIP) of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/675,989, filed Aug. 14, 2017, entitled “SELF-RECOVERING IMPACT ABSORBING FOOTWEAR,” which is a Continuation-in-Part (CIP) of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/860,877, now U.S. Pat. No. 9,730,486, filed Apr. 11, 2013, entitled “SELF-RECOVERING IMPACT ABSORBING FOOTWEAR,” which claims the benefit under 35 U.S.C. § 119(e) of U.S. Provisional Patent App. No. 61/623,430, filed Apr. 12, 2012, entitled “SELF-RECOVERING IMPACT ABSORBING FOOTWEAR,” all incorporated herein by reference in entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3195685 | Blackstone | Jul 1965 | A |
3251144 | Weitzner | May 1966 | A |
3668792 | York | Jun 1972 | A |
3707047 | Zygmund | Dec 1972 | A |
4546556 | Stubblefield | Oct 1985 | A |
4651446 | Yukawa et al. | Mar 1987 | A |
4670997 | Beekman | Jun 1987 | A |
5224810 | Pitkin | Jul 1993 | A |
5255453 | Weiss | Oct 1993 | A |
5392537 | Goldberg | Feb 1995 | A |
5456027 | Tecchio et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
5502901 | Brown | Apr 1996 | A |
5566478 | Forrester | Oct 1996 | A |
5661927 | Polowinczak et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5692323 | Goldberg | Dec 1997 | A |
5701685 | Pezza | Dec 1997 | A |
5867923 | Lehneis | Feb 1999 | A |
5937544 | Russell | Aug 1999 | A |
6327795 | Russell | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6378169 | Batten et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6665958 | Goodwin | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6684531 | Rennex | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6701645 | Forrester | Mar 2004 | B1 |
7013581 | Greene et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7254905 | Dennison | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7334349 | Sokolowski et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7487606 | Koo et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7654014 | Moore | Feb 2010 | B1 |
7946059 | Borel | May 2011 | B2 |
8261469 | Aveni et al. | Sep 2012 | B2 |
8387279 | Pauk et al. | Mar 2013 | B2 |
8397402 | Lucas | Mar 2013 | B2 |
8771157 | Caponigro | Jul 2014 | B2 |
8776397 | Borel et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
9339074 | Ellis | May 2016 | B2 |
9693605 | Beers | Jul 2017 | B2 |
9730486 | Brown | Aug 2017 | B2 |
10244821 | Elder et al. | Apr 2019 | B2 |
10888138 | Brown | Jan 2021 | B2 |
20060032092 | Drollinger | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20070011919 | Case, Jr. et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070240331 | Borel | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20090113758 | Nishiwaki et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090235556 | Reid | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090278707 | Biggins et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090284368 | Case, Jr. et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20100077638 | Simms | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100122471 | Edington et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20120042540 | Miner | Feb 2012 | A1 |
20120079747 | Seo | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20150040435 | Barnes et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20170325543 | Iuchi et al. | Nov 2017 | A1 |
20180042339 | Barnes et al. | Feb 2018 | A1 |
20180140043 | Farris et al. | May 2018 | A1 |
20180271211 | Perrault et al. | Sep 2018 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2 264 627 | Sep 1993 | GB |
2492864 | Jan 2013 | GB |
WO 2007044451 | Apr 2007 | WO |
2011067768 | Jun 2011 | WO |
2012045512 | Apr 2012 | WO |
Entry |
---|
International Search Report, PCT/US2019/054615, dated Dec. 10, 2019, pp. 2. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20200100559 A1 | Apr 2020 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62741795 | Oct 2018 | US | |
61623430 | Apr 2012 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 15675989 | Aug 2017 | US |
Child | 16592868 | US | |
Parent | 13860877 | Apr 2013 | US |
Child | 15675989 | US |