Lisa Posted October 24, 2002 Share Posted October 24, 2002 Okay. I am 5'6" tall and I have a pair of (very nice) 4¼" high heels. Now, when I put my shoes on I'm only 3.5" taller. Anyone want to shed some light on this one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurieheels Posted October 24, 2002 Share Posted October 24, 2002 Lisa dear, it is simple! When wearing heels, your body changes the curvature. The ankles move into a different position, and the body just assumes a different shape. So the height of the heel, when shifting the balance point of the body, cannot translate into actual height gained. This is why wearing heels makes a woman look more attractive, as the experts say. Because the body takes on more dramatic curves. I know others can answer this with more detail, but consider it the evening news version of the answer, and not the 60 Minutes in depth documentary style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoverfly Posted October 24, 2002 Share Posted October 24, 2002 Well...I thought about this one and I have a good idea how this happens but I am not 100 percent sure. So here is my version. But Laurie has nailed it for simplicity. I know for one thing is that up to a cretin point you can raise your self to the heel at a ratio 1" to 1". But after a cetin point for every inch the heel rises, you rise even less than the previous inch. Lets say the heel rises another 1" but you only raise .875" (7\8th of a inch). This ratio keeps reducing as you go higher for every inch the heel rises. This works up to a 6" heel, any thing after that you don't gain very much or at all unless you are standing on your toes (Ballet boots). You may feel higher but in reality you don't get much from it in height. This is all because of the body mechanics limitations of the foot and ankle. When you add something to increase your height you are taking away something as well. A good example is when you put your heels on. Your foot print gets smaller than it was when you were standing bare foot. Lets say 8" long with heels on Vs 12" bear foot. Your are compromising, because in order to match the vertural height that you think you are going to get when you put the heels on, you have to add height to your body as well. Since you can't, reality is you are going to be shorter than you think you are just because you are changing only one variable, and you need to change two in order for it to work. Also if you know any trigonometry you are dealing with two right (90 degree) triangles. I think, I am a little rusty so I am not going into great depth. One is your body to your feet when standing bare footed in which this angle changes when adding the height of a heel to it. The other is your virtual height with heels on to the floor, this one stays fixed at right angle. So if you know any trig, here is simple a brain teaser for you. But the (a) side of the triangle falls short when wearing heels to the virtual triangle. Come to think of it there might be three triangles involved here and it might be the shoe. I may be wrong... but hay it's been almost ten years since Tech School. Hello, my name is Hoverfly. I’m a high heel addict…. Weeeeeeeeeee! 👠1998 to 2022! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom-NL Posted October 24, 2002 Share Posted October 24, 2002 If your knowledge of the Italian language is good enough, you can find some information about this on the Italian website "Tacchi a Spillo" at http://www.geocities.com/FashionAvenue/3099/corpo.htm . Scroll down to the part that begins with this picture: (you can try to use a free online translation engine like Babelfish, at http://babelfish.altavista.com ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Shoe Posted October 24, 2002 Share Posted October 24, 2002 Laurie is actually more correct than she realises. As you go up on tip toe, your knees go forward and your back curves. Usually, every inch of heel equates to roughly 3/4" of extra height. Graduate footwear designer able to advise and assist on modification and shoe making projects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Shoe Posted October 24, 2002 Share Posted October 24, 2002 Laurie is actually more correct than she realises. As you go up on tip toe, your knees go forward and your back curves. Usually, every inch of heel equates to roughly 3/4" of extra height. Graduate footwear designer able to advise and assist on modification and shoe making projects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firefox Posted October 24, 2002 Share Posted October 24, 2002 The relationship is not linear. The higher you go the more the law of diminishing returns applies. When you get to very high heels the ankle is just moving forward and not up. The extra inches of heel end up shooting past the back of the foot with very little component that contributes to height gain. Spine curvature and muscular compensation also has a bearing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoverfly Posted October 24, 2002 Share Posted October 24, 2002 Not linear huh??? So what are you saying is that you are measuring a slinky? Just kidding. Hello, my name is Hoverfly. I’m a high heel addict…. Weeeeeeeeeee! 👠1998 to 2022! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Posted October 24, 2002 Share Posted October 24, 2002 why? are you feeling slinky? I think we should be measuring the angle between ball and heel to best get a better picture of how high the heel is, thus a proportional view is achieved Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sassynheels Posted October 25, 2002 Share Posted October 25, 2002 I agree with Francis. Measuring from the ball(vertex) to the heel is how I think of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romu Posted October 28, 2002 Share Posted October 28, 2002 Hi Lisa (and other people ...) The gain of height associated to a given heel's height is allways less than the heel's height. A basic way to increase the height of the wearer is to add a platform : the gain of height is one inch for every inch of platform's thickness. The high heeled shoes (w/o platform) are based on the fact that the foot is a very complex articulation. Let's make a simple observation : observe your bare foot starting from flat on the floor and increasing the height of the heel : - the front part of the foot is allways flat on the floor - the rear part of the foot is mobile, rotating around an imaginary vertex at the boundary of the the fixed and mobile parts of the foot. Let's make another observation : the physical deformation induced by the high heel is entirely located in the foot. There is no deformation in the leg or in the knee. (Yes, I know that this is a 'first order' approximation because people who wear high heels often have to compensate in various ways the influence of high heels) Hence, the gain of height associated to a given heel's height is the gain of height of the ankle as this articulation is involved in the rotation of the rear part of the foot. This gain of height is of course non linear and the exact solving requires some trigonometry (I can send this model for the one who are interested). Let's define the 'efficiency' of the heels as the ratio (gain of height / heel's height). The efficiency of the heels is allways less than 1. The efficiency of the heels diminishes with higher heels. Sincerely Romu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trolldeg Posted October 29, 2002 Share Posted October 29, 2002 Hi Lisa (and other people ...) The gain of height associated to a given heel's height is allways less than the heel's height. A basic way to increase the height of the wearer is to add a platform : the gain of height is one inch for every inch of platform's thickness. The high heeled shoes (w/o platform) are based on the fact that the foot is a very complex articulation. Let's make a simple observation : observe your bare foot starting from flat on the floor and increasing the height of the heel : - the front part of the foot is allways flat on the floor - the rear part of the foot is mobile, rotating around an imaginary vertex at the boundary of the the fixed and mobile parts of the foot. Let's make another observation : the physical deformation induced by the high heel is entirely located in the foot. There is no deformation in the leg or in the knee. (Yes, I know that this is a 'first order' approximation because people who wear high heels often have to compensate in various ways the influence of high heels) Hence, the gain of height associated to a given heel's height is the gain of height of the ankle as this articulation is involved in the rotation of the rear part of the foot. This gain of height is of course non linear and the exact solving requires some trigonometry (I can send this model for the one who are interested). Let's define the 'efficiency' of the heels as the ratio (gain of height / heel's height). The efficiency of the heels is allways less than 1. The efficiency of the heels diminishes with higher heels. Sincerely Romu don't you think a 1" heel would make you exactly 1" taller? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romu Posted October 30, 2002 Share Posted October 30, 2002 Jenny send me some data (in 1998) concerning her gain of height vs heel's height (1" to 5") These measures confirm the general rules : - the efficiency of heels is allways < 1 - the efficiency is lower for higher heels Concerning low heels (like 1" or 2.5 cm), we muste take into account the fact that the thickness of the sole is not negligible. A shoe with a 1 cm heel is equivalent to a 1 cm platform shoe. Sincerely Romu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romu Posted November 12, 2002 Share Posted November 12, 2002 Here are the data collected by jenny on herself. Her shoe size is EUR40 / GB 7 / USA 9. Her height in bare feet is 5' 7.25" (1.71 m). Heel's height (cm - in) Gain of height (cm - in) Efficiency (%) 2.5 (1) 2 (0. 80 5 (2) 3.3 (1.3) 66 9 (3.5) 5.2 (2.05) 58 10 (4) 6.2 (2.44) 62 12 (4.75) 7.5 (2.95) 62 14 (5.5) 8.7 (3.42) 62 4.25" heels seem to be more eficient with you Lisa (3.5" taller) than with Jenny (onl 3" taller with 3.75" heels). What is your shoe size and what kind of shoes did you wear (pumps, mules, ...) ? By the way, I would like to gather a certain number of data like these. So I send a call for data to the people (male or female) who wear heels and could perform the kind of measurements. I thank you in advance. Romu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisa Posted November 15, 2002 Author Share Posted November 15, 2002 I have a size 9.5 US shoe. The shoes in question were a pump shoe with no platform (of course). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurieheels Posted November 16, 2002 Share Posted November 16, 2002 Exactly, because as Lisa knows, platforms are nasty, awful things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoverfly Posted November 19, 2002 Share Posted November 19, 2002 May not be what you are looking for but might be of intrest. http://users.powernet.co.uk/wingett/Explain.htm Hello, my name is Hoverfly. I’m a high heel addict…. Weeeeeeeeeee! 👠1998 to 2022! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts