-
-
Skip navigation
(Access key: S).
Contact information.
Many running injuries are caused by continued use of improper or worn running shoes. The increase in incidence of injury can be directly correlated to the degradation of the materials used in shoe sole construction. The degree to which a shoe sole degrades is directly related to the changing elasticity of the material. We have proposed the use of Flexi-Force® piezoelectric force sensors combined with an integrated circuit to indirectly measure shoe sole elasticity. Once calibrated, each circuit will have a diode that lights when the sole is worn past its useful life.
We have tested the shoes on a group of distance runners at certain intervals to determine the output of our circuit with shoe wear. All available progress reports are included below. We took second place at the 2005 Engineering Expo, which provided us with a prize of $500.
| Week | Reporting Period Beginning | Activities |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | January 21 | Team met for the first time this semester and reviewed the project status. Team positions were assigned. Our advisor and client were both contacted via email. |
| 2 | January 28 | Team met with Stephanie Whitehorse, an intellectual property manager with WARF, to discuss what we will need to do as we move on with our project. Discussed shoe manufacturer contacts and further possibilities for technology sale. |
| 3 | February 4 | Our team analyzed the paperwork for our patent application, and applied to present in the Engineering Expo 2005. We also started analyzing our circuit and possible improvements (printed circuit, PIC chip, soldered circuit). |
| 4 | February 11 | Our team found a group of individuals to potentially allow us to monitor the degradation of their shoe soles, and contacted them by email. |
| 5 | February 18 | Our team met with our client to discuss further funding of our project, and contacted the runners whom we would purchase shoes for. We also began scheduling them for the first series of tests to monitor the shoe soles, depending on how much they intended to run. |
| 6 | February 25 | Our team purchased a bread board for soldering and met with Paul Victorey to discuss our circuit and possible transformation to a PIC chip. We sat down as a group and discussed where we would go with the testing and what our next steps would be. |
| 7 | March 4 | Our team worked on soldering a circuit to have a permanent form of our breadboard, and we reworked our original circuit to ensure optimal signals. |
| 8 | March 11 | Our team worked on soldering a circuit to have a permanent form of our breadboard. |
| 9 | March 18 | Our team rebuilt the circuit and tested our first pair of shoes after a known distance of running associated wear. The mid-semester presentation was completed. We prepared to conduct similar tests on the other runners’ shoes. |
| 10 | March 25 | Spring Break, no classes or meetings |
| 11 | April 1 | Our team continued testing shoes and building more circuits to test the various shoes |
| 12 | April 8 | Our team continued testing |
| 13 | April 22 | Our team prepared for and presented in the Engineering EXPO |
| 14 | April 29 | Our tesm continued testing, prepared for the final presentation, and worked with a microprocessor to replace our circuit |
| 15 | May 6 | Our team coninued testing, presented, and continued work with the microprocessor |
 |
Mid-semester PowerPoint Presentation (May 1 2005, 1222 kb) |
 |
Shoe Testing Proposal (Mar 15 2005, 26 kb) |
|
PDS (Mar 16 2005, 35 kb) |
|
Final report from last semester (Mar 16 2005, 2345 kb) |
|
Final BME Design Presentation (May 1 2005, 1222 kb) |
|
Final Report (May 4 2005, 2373 kb) |
