pj22 Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Do higher heeled shoes need to be smaller than lowered heeled shoes to accommodate the added effect of gravity forcing the foot into the toe box? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Shoe Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Eh? Graduate footwear designer able to advise and assist on modification and shoe making projects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Flexible toes and ball of the foot size I think is your first answer, the variable could be if that area is sloped then gravities effect will cause a slide down. to prove it put a small ball (bearing in the footbed and see where it stays (providing shoe is placed on a level surface). Al Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Shoe Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Are you guys for real? Graduate footwear designer able to advise and assist on modification and shoe making projects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Histiletto Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Place a pencil on the table horizontally. Then pick up the pencil and hold it vertically. At which position is the absolute length of the pencil smaller? Using the substitution properties equating the pencil to a person's foot, apply the same evaluation. At which position did the foot loose it's absolute length. Granted the pencil and the foot take up less horizontal surface area when vertically positioned, but they are basically the same length holding up the rest of their components mass. It's only an illusion that they are seen as smaller units when the mass is propped up. That is one of the reasons why we like to wear high heels, to make our feet look smaller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 What will fall faster in a vaccum? A feather or a lead weight?.... Charlie Everything I say is a lie!.......I'm lying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hhboots Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 haha @Charlie: neither, I believe they fall at the same rate. I get Histiletto's point, which is that the overall surface area where the shoe meets the floor decreases as the heel height increases. Which is obvious. Measure the length of the same size shoe, in flats, 2 inch heels, 4 inch heels, and 6 inch heels, of course you'll see the lengthwise measurement of the shoe's contact area with the floor decrease as the heel gets higher. Basic geometry of a triangle applies (viewing the shoe from the side). However, I am not sure that really answers the OP's question. Perhaps Histiletto was just being sarcastic and I missed it. Anyway, I think I am with Dr. Shoe... Eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onyourtoes Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Regarding OP's question. Any required difference in foot length due to mechanics, angles, etc., are taken into consideration by the shoemaker. You shouldn't have to buy a different size to compensate for heel height. I do see many sites advise to go up a size on extreme heels, but my own experience says otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roniheels Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Regarding OP's question. Any required difference in foot length due to mechanics, angles, etc., are taken into consideration by the shoemaker. You shouldn't have to buy a different size to compensate for heel height. I do see many sites advise to go up a size on extreme heels, but my own experience says otherwise. I am no science wiz by any means. But onyourtoes is correct. I wear the same size in my 4", 5", and 6" high heels. The heel height, at least on my shoes, doesn't force a change in shoe size. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 I am no science wiz by any means. But onyourtoes is correct. I wear the same size in my 4", 5", and 6" high heels. The heel height, at least on my shoes, doesn't force a change in shoe size. Ditto. Al Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Okay.. I'll be serious for a minute... Think trigonometry, right triangles, and the pythagorean theorem. The trick here is that as all experienced heel wearers realize, shoe size is NOT a function of heel height. For a given manufacturer, we tend to always order the same size shoe regardless of the heel height and with great fitting success. If the shoe size is equated to the long leg of our right triangle, which it has to be and can be considered the length of the wearer's foot, 'C', and is held constant. (trust me, it IS...) and the heel height is 'A' and is variable and we solve for 'B' which would be the projected footprint on the ground.. The pythagorean theroem goes like this: A^2 + B^2 = C^2 or heel height^2 + projected footprint^2 = length of foot^2 Since we're solving for the projected heel height, 'B'... B^2 = C^2 - A^2 or projected footprint^2 = length of foot^2 - heel height^2 Which clearly shows that increasing the heel height, decreases the projected footprint on the ground and that decreasing the heel height increases the projected footprint on the ground. It's also clear that with a standard, non-platform shoe that the heel height can never exceed the length of the foot. If the two are equal, we're talking ballet boots.. Personally, I think my first post in this thread was funnier... lol Charlie Everything I say is a lie!.......I'm lying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Histiletto Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Do higher heeled shoes need to be smaller than lowered heeled shoes to accommodate the added effect of gravity forcing the foot into the toe box? Actually, like Dr Shoe, I really don't really know what answer you're seeking from the question posed. Please extrapolate or at least divulge the reasoning for such a quiry. Certainly, there is a point where the higher the heel, the less the heel is a factor in supporting the weight of the person. Which means the ball-joints of the toes are the main bearers of the body at the most vertical position and the foot just kind of leans against the heel. The toe box needs to be constructed so that it gives the proper support to the ball-joints and the positioning of the toes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Shoe Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Okay.. I'll be serious for a minute... Think trigonometry, right triangles, and the pythagorean theorem. The trick here is that as all experienced heel wearers realize, shoe size is NOT a function of heel height. For a given manufacturer, we tend to always order the same size shoe regardless of the heel height and with great fitting success. If the shoe size is equated to the long leg of our right triangle, which it has to be and can be considered the length of the wearer's foot, 'C', and is held constant. (trust me, it IS...) and the heel height is 'A' and is variable and we solve for 'B' which would be the projected footprint on the ground.. The pythagorean theroem goes like this: A^2 + B^2 = C^2 or heel height^2 + projected footprint^2 = length of foot^2 Since we're solving for the projected heel height, 'B'... B^2 = C^2 - A^2 or projected footprint^2 = length of foot^2 - heel height^2 Which clearly shows that increasing the heel height, decreases the projected footprint on the ground and that decreasing the heel height increases the projected footprint on the ground. It's also clear that with a standard, non-platform shoe that the heel height can never exceed the length of the foot. If the two are equal, we're talking ballet boots.. Personally, I think my first post in this thread was funnier... lol Charlie Actually it doesn't work like that at all. You need to take into account of where the bones are. Assuming the forepart of the foot is flat it is only the rearward two thirds of the foot which is at an angle. However, because of where the ankle joint is situated, there comes a certain point where an increase in heel height does little to increase the angle of the foot. However, this is way beyond "walkable" height for all but the very expert heel wearer and quite some way short of ballet boot. Graduate footwear designer able to advise and assist on modification and shoe making projects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hhboots Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 After carefully re-reading the OP, my thought is either pj22 was having a strange head trip the day he made the OP, or he wanted to have some fun and see where this was going to end up. Certainly, he realizes the foot is constructed with solid bones within, and while the length of the foot might compress very slightly (maybe ~2%) if you measured a foot flat on the floor vs one standing in a ballet boot for example, otherwise, the length of the foot is fairly constant regardless of heel height. Anyway, it has been a fun thread regardless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Actually it doesn't work like that at all. You need to take into account of where the bones are. Assuming the forepart of the foot is flat it is only the rearward two thirds of the foot which is at an angle. However, because of where the ankle joint is situated, there comes a certain point where an increase in heel height does little to increase the angle of the foot. However, this is way beyond "walkable" height for all but the very expert heel wearer and quite some way short of ballet boot. You're correct Dr. Shoe. My example was a crude, very simplified straight line analysis of the basic outer right triangle formed by the perimeter of a foot in a high heeled shoe. The real deal is clearly a bit more complicated as you've pointed out. One thing that's absolutely true is that my post got you to be more involved in this thread than your first reply. For that I take full credit and my work here is done! Chuckle Charlie Everything I say is a lie!.......I'm lying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Himark Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 Perhaps the original poster was referring to a different phenomenon. I've noticed that after wearing high heels for a couple of hours, my feet are forced by body weight further into the toe box. This may be partly because the shoes stretch a bit and partly because the feet themselves adapt to the narrow point of the shoes. In any case, the shoes become loose after wearing for a while, and I don't like shoes that want to fall off. So when buying high heels, I look for shoes that are a bit too tight at first, knowing that they will loosen as they are worn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pj22 Posted March 5, 2011 Author Share Posted March 5, 2011 Exactly! That is what I was referring to. Thanks for making it more clear. I am suprised that more heelers don't experience this Now, for those of you who wanted to take my physics problem and turn it into a geometry question- Lets stick to the subject. Thanks to all for the interesting replys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Posted March 5, 2011 Share Posted March 5, 2011 Now, for those of you who wanted to take my physics problem and turn it into a geometry question- Lets stick to the subject. Thanks to all for the interesting replys. The clearer the subject, the easier it is to stay on it. lol Charlie Everything I say is a lie!.......I'm lying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts