Abstract
AbstractThe architecture of contemporary footwear is the result of a long history of footwear development. In this history, part of the argumentation behind the architecture has been lost, causing footwear developers to make decisions based on habits and badly underpinned assumptions. New insights on the negative influence of most conventional footwear on human (foot) health and the design freedom that arises from modern manufacturing techniques, create the urge to reconsider the common way of developing. By reverse architecting conventional footwear, this paper derives an A3 Architecture Overview of conventional footwear. In the future this overview should provide a tool for enabling product evolution towards healthy footwear, by allowing developers to consciously and purposefully deviate from ‘the standard architecture’ while taking into account the consequences of design decisions they make. The approach that is described in this paper is also applicable to the development of architecture overviews for other product families.
Highlights
The architecture of nowadays conven onal footwear is the result of a long history of footwear design, manufacturing and marke ng
Together with a shortlist of the key-drivers (Bonnema 2008; Heemels et al 2006) that represent the high-level requirements of specific footwear, these provide the views to be presented in an A3 Architecture overview for conventional footwear
We need to expand and update the set to include interests of other stakeholders, like the producer and store operator. To evaluate both the physical and functional overviews that were established, first a number of pictures of footwear anatomy was randomly collected via Pinterest and the used terminology was compared with the overviews in Appendix A and Figure 3
Summary
The architecture of nowadays conven onal footwear is the result of a long history of footwear design, manufacturing and marke ng. In this long history, part of the argumenta on behind the architecture has been lost, causing footwear developers to make decisions based on beliefs, habits and badly underpinned assump ons. Footwear developers have succeeded to include many more func ons, partly - or some mes en rely taking over func ons from the human body (see func onal view). Footwear developers have succeeded to include many more functionalities These functionalities, often partly – or even entirely – show a mismatch with the functions of the human body. Instead of preserving healthy feet, this can have many adverse shortand long-term effects; the natural shape of the foot can be deformed, loading in the joints can be changed, plantar sensation can be reduced, the foot-strike pattern can be altered, the foot-strength and elastic energy storage can be reduced, evaporation of perspiration can be reduced and the maturation of the foot can be hampered, resulting in pain, reduced mobility and high societal costs (Buldt & Menz 2018; D’Août et al 2009; Frey 2000; Lieberman et al 2010; Perl, Daoud & Lieberman 2012; Rose et al 2011)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
