Plantar Force Spectra Across Midsole Densities and Treadmill Speeds: A Spatially Resolved Analysis in Relation to Material Properties
Source abstract
Abstract
Running shoe midsoles are designed to attenuate impact forces while maintaining or improving performance. However, the literature is equivocal, likely due to measurement systems, whereas in vitro testing is conclusively favourable. This study investigated three densities of ATPU foam, comparing in vitro mechanical properties with in vivo plantar force spectral characteristics derived from individualised pressure distributions during treadmill running at varied speeds. In vitro results of slab foam and shoes showed strong positive relationships between impact variables normalised to total impact energy and foam density (r2 > 0.90), and strong negative relationships for time-domain variables normalised to deformation (mm) as density increased (r2 > 0.89). During running, lower midsole density increased ground contact time across speeds (p = 0.041), while spatially resolved high-frequency PSD and peak impact force both decreased (p = 0.043; p = 0.030). However, there were no differences between total vertical force and midsole density (p = 0.232). Relationships between in vitro Peak G and high-frequency PSD were strong across all speeds (r2 = 0.63–0.91). Conversely, reducing midsole density increased active peak force across speeds (p = 0.003), which was strongly related to in vitro energy return (r2 > 0.89). Therefore, plantar force spectra and spatially resolved analyses demonstrate how foam density properties translate from in vitro to in vivo treadmill running, with lower-density foam improving impact attenuation but elevating propulsive forces. Future work needs to verify this in an outdoor setting.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Lower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies · Sports injuries and prevention · Diabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and Management
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
School of Sport, Exercise and Nutrition, College of Health, Massey University, Palmerston North 4472, New Zealand
Altra Running, Denver, CO 80202, USA
References (68)
Show source-provided references
1. Variations in ground reaction force parameters at different running speeds10.1016/0167-9457(83)90005-2 ↗
2. Biomechanical factors affecting running economy10.1097/00005768-200108000-00014 ↗
3. Running Technique is an Important Component of Running Economy and Performance10.1249/MSS.0000000000001245 ↗
4. The Relationship Between Running Economy and Biomechanical Variables in Distance Runners10.1080/02701367.2012.10599870 ↗
5. The effect of muscle stiffness and damping on simulated impact force peaks during running10.1016/S0021-9290(99)00048-2 ↗
6. Biomechanics of shod and barefoot running: A literature review10.1590/1517-869220202606219320 ↗
7. Attenuation of foot pressure during running on four different surfaces: Asphalt, concrete, rubber, and natural grass10.1080/02640414.2012.713975 ↗
8. Runners adjust leg stiffness for their first step on a new running surface10.1016/S0021-9290(99)00078-0 ↗
9. Softer and more resilient running shoe cushioning properties enhance running economy10.1080/19424280.2014.918184 ↗
10. The influence of running velocity and midsole hardness on external impact forces in heel-toe running10.1016/0021-9290(87)90324-1 ↗
11. Running in highly cushioned shoes increases leg stiffness and amplifies impact loading10.1038/s41598-018-35980-6 ↗
12. Differences in running biomechanics between a maximal, traditional, and minimal running shoe10.1016/j.jsams.2019.08.008 ↗
13. Differences in stride length and lower limb moments of recreational runners during over-ground running while barefoot, in minimalist and in maximalist running shoes10.1080/19424280.2021.1878285 ↗
14. Effects of the material of running shoes on biomechanical characteristics during running10.1080/15376494.2018.1513613 ↗
15. The ‘heel impact’ force peak during running is neither ‘heel’ nor ‘impact’ and does not quantify shoe cushioning effects10.1080/19424280.2010.542186 ↗
16. Baltich, J., Maurer, C., and Nigg, B.M. (2015). Increased Vertical Impact Forces and Altered Running Mechanics with Softer Midsole Shoes. PLoS ONE, 10.10.1371/journal.pone.0125196 ↗
17. Mechanical energy contribution of the metatarsophalangeal joint to running and sprinting10.1016/S0021-9290(97)00081-X ↗
18. Interaction of running shoe midsole hardness and bending stiffness on the lower-limb joints mechanics10.1080/19424280.2023.2199272 ↗
19. Biomechanics and footwear research 1970–200010.1080/19424280.2023.2209045 ↗
20. Enhancing dynamic energy return and performance of running shoes: Replacing talc with multi-walled carbon nanotubes derived from plastic wastes in midsole foam10.1016/j.apmt.2023.102016 ↗
21. Ergogenic distance running shoes: How do we think they work and how can we understand them better?10.1080/19424280.2022.2127545 ↗
22. Uddin, K.Z., Nguyen, H.A., Nguyen, T.T., Trkov, M., Youssef, G., and Koohbor, B. (2024). In-plane density gradation of shoe midsoles for optimal energy absorption performance. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part P J. Sports Eng. Technol., 17543371241272843.10.1177/17543371241272843 ↗
23. Macdermid, P.W., and Walker, S.J. (2025). Spectral and Spatial Analysis of Plantar Force Distributions Across Foot-Strike Patterns During Treadmill Running. Appl. Sci., 15.10.20944/preprints202507.2649.v1 ↗
24. Energy return in footwear–revisited10.1080/19424280.2024.2369995 ↗
25. Basic research on midsole material designing10.1080/19424280.2011.575815 ↗
26. Compression fatigue of elastomeric foams used in midsoles of running shoes10.1080/19424280.2024.2317881 ↗
27. Implications of sample size and acquired number of steps to investigate running biomechanics10.1038/s41598-021-82876-z ↗
28. Polyurethane foam materials and their industrial applications10.1002/pi.6441 ↗
29. Post-crosslinkable thermoplastic polyurethane for control of mechanical properties after processes10.1016/j.polymer.2021.124350 ↗
30. Super Low Density Polyurethane Systems for Sports Shoes10.1177/0021955X0003600403 ↗
31. A Comparison of the Energetic Cost of Running in Marathon Racing Shoes10.1007/s40279-017-0811-2 ↗
32. (2017). Standard Test Methods for Flexible Cellular Materials–Slab, Bonded, and Molded Urethan Foams: Designation (Standard No. ASTM D3574).
33. (2021). Standard Test Method for Rubber Property–Durometer Hardness: Designation (Standard No. ASTM D2240).
34. (2024). Standard Test Method for Rubber Property–Resilience by Vertical Rebound: Designation (Standard No. ASTM D2632).
35. (2021). Standard Test Methods for Vulcanized Rubber and Thermoplastic Elastomer–Tension: Designation (Standard No. ASTM D412).
36. A method for reliable measurement of heel-to-toe offset in sports footwear10.1080/19424280.2021.1916620 ↗
37. Eckelt, M., and Mally, F. (2020). Running Shoes—Possible Correlations of Biomechanical and Material Tests. Proceedings, 49.10.3390/proceedings2020049025 ↗
38. (2006). Standard Test Method for Shock Attenuating Properties of Materials Systems for Athletic Footwear: Designation (Standard No. ASTM F1614-99(2006)).
39. (2013). Standard Test Method for Impact Attenuation of Athletic Shoe Cushioning Systems and Materials: Designation (Standard No. ASTM F1976-13).
40. (2004). Longitudinal Stiffness of Footwear (Standard No. TM194).
41. Niswander, W., Wang, W., and Kontson, K. (2020). Optimization of IMU Sensor Placement for the Measurement of Lower Limb Joint Kinematics. Sensors, 20.10.3390/s20215993 ↗
42. Measuring joint kinematics of treadmill walking and running: Comparison between an inertial sensor based system and a camera-based system10.1016/j.jbiomech.2017.03.015 ↗
43. Wolski, L., Halaki, M., Hiller, C.E., Pappas, E., and Fong Yan, A. (2024). Validity of an Inertial Measurement Unit System to Measure Lower Limb Kinematics at Point of Contact during Incremental High-Speed Running. Sensors, 24.10.3390/s24175718 ↗
44. The effect of speed on leg stiffness and joint kinetics in human running10.1016/S0021-9290(99)00133-5 ↗
45. Running Shoes of the Postmodern Footwear Era: A Narrative Overview of Advanced Footwear Technology10.1123/ijspp.2023-0446 ↗
46. Macdermid, P.W., Walker, S.J., and Cochrane, D. (2025). The Effects of Cushioning Properties on Parameters of Gait in Habituated Females While Walking and Running. Appl. Sci., 15.10.20944/preprints202411.0549.v2 ↗
47. An investigation into plantar pressure measurement protocols for footwear research10.1016/j.gaitpost.2014.07.026 ↗
48. Monitoring kinematic changes with fatigue in running using body-worn sensors10.1109/TITB.2012.2201950 ↗
49. Characteristics of shock attenuation during fatigued running10.1080/0264041031000140383 ↗
50. Effects of heel-toe drop on running biomechanics and perceived comfort of rearfoot strikers in standard cushioned running shoes10.1080/19424280.2020.1734868 ↗
51. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. [2nd ed.].
52. Effect of shoe cushioning on landing impact forces and spatiotemporal parameters during running: Results from a randomized trial including 800+ recreational runners10.1080/17461391.2020.1809713 ↗
53. Advanced footwear technology and its impacts on running mechanics, running economy and perception of male and female recreational runners10.1080/19424280.2024.2378702 ↗
54. Foot strike patterns of runners at the 15-km point during an elite-level half marathon
55. Foot-Strike Pattern and Performance in a Marathon10.1123/ijspp.8.3.286 ↗
56. Relationship between foot strike pattern, running speed, and footwear condition in recreational distance runners10.1080/14763141.2016.1226381 ↗
57. Effect of midsole geometry on foot-strike pattern and running kinematics10.1080/19424280.2013.767863 ↗
58. Effect of different forefoot rocker radii on lower-limb joint biomechanics in healthy individuals10.1016/j.gaitpost.2021.03.008 ↗
59. Influence of the Heel-to-Toe Drop of Standard Cushioned Running Shoes on Injury Risk in Leisure-Time Runners:A Randomized Controlled Trial With 6-Month Follow-up10.1177/0363546516654690 ↗
60. The biomechanics of running and running styles: A synthesis10.1080/14763141.2021.1873411 ↗
61. ‘Whip from the hip’: Thigh angular motion, ground contact mechanics, and running speed10.1242/bio.053546 ↗
62. Lower impact forces but greater burden for the musculoskeletal system in running shoes with greater cushioning stiffness10.1080/17461391.2021.2023655 ↗
63. Nguyen, T., Do, T., Lau, M., and Phee, S. (2014, January 12–13). Modelling, design, and control of a robotic running foot for footwear testing with flexible actuator. Proceedings of the the 1th International Conference in Sports Science & Technology (ICSST), Singapore.
64. Kinematic adaptations during running: Effects of footwear, surface, and duration10.1249/01.MSS.0000126605.65966.40 ↗
65. Effects of Shoe Cushioning Upon Ground Reaction Forces in Running10.1055/s-2008-1026043 ↗
66. Optimal footwear longitudinal bending stiffness to improve running economy is speed dependent10.1080/19424280.2019.1696897 ↗
67. Effects of midsole cushioning stiffness on Achilles tendon stretch during running10.1038/s41598-022-07719-x ↗
68. Zhu, X., Liu, J., Liu, H., Liu, J., Yang, Y., and Wang, H. (2023). Effects of Midsole Hardness on the Mechanical Response Characteristics of the Plantar Fascia during Running. Bioengineering, 10.10.3390/bioengineering10050533 ↗