base of support

THE MECHANICS + BIOMECHANICS OF PLATFORM ANGLE – PART 10

In THE MECHANICS + BIOMECHANICS OF PLATFORM ANGLE: PART 8,  I stated that after a thorough investigation and analysis of the forces associated with platform angle mechanics I reached the conclusion that rotational (steering) force should be applied to an isolated area of the inner shell wall of the ski boot by the medial aspect of the head of the first metatarsal as shown in the graphic below.Applying rotational or steering force to the medial (inner) aspect of the head of the first metatarsal requires the application of an effort by the skier that attempts to rotate the foot inside the confines of the ski boot. The application of rotational effort to the inner aspect of the vertical wall of the boot shell opposite the head of the first metatarsal will result in a reaction force that pushes the lateral (outside) aspect of the heel bone against the outer corner of the vertical shell wall as shown in the graphic below. The robust structure of the bones of the first metatarsal, midfoot and heel bone serve as a structural element in transferring rotational force to opposing aspects of the shell walls in an eccentric torque couple.The outline of the boot shell in the above graphic was generated from a vertical plane photo of an actual ski boot. The interference created by the inner wall with the localized application of rotational force to the shell wall by the medial aspect of the head of the first metatarsal should be obvious.

The radius of the moment arm acting on the outer aspect of the heel area of the shell is much smaller than the radius of the moment arm acting on the inner aspect of the shell opposite the head of the first metatarsal and many times shorter than the length of the moment arm acting at the shovel of the ski. The result is that rotational force applied to the eccentric torque arm couple by rotation applied to the ankle will attempt to rotate the torque arm and the axis of rotation at the ankle joint about an axis of rotation at the lateral aspect of the heel as shown in the graphic below. This mechanism enables a skier to  apply much greater rotational force into a turn at the center of the ski than can be applied at the shovel. This has signficant implications for platform angle mechanics. In addition to the above, the plane of the rotational force applied by the medial aspect of the head of the first metatarsal and lateral aspect of the heel bone to the shell wall is elevated above the plane of the rotational force at base of the ski below.

In my next post I will discuss what happens when the reaction force from the snow that opposes the 180 degree force applied to the base plane of the ski becomes sufficient to arrest rotation of the ski about its axis of rotation at the ankle joint.

THE MECHANICS + BIOMECHANICS OF PLATFORM ANGLE: PART 10 – SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION


Because of the complex issues I am about to start discussing in the next series of posts I am providing supplemental reference information to assist the reader in understanding the issues associated with platform angle mechanics and biomechanics and underlying process of dynamic stability.

Background of events leading up to the outside ski platform ground balance solution

In late 1989, after gaining valuable insights from the medical textbook, The Shoe In Sport, I had formulated a hypothetical model that explained the macro details of the mechanics and biomechanics of platform angle and the mechanism of user CNS postural balance control.

Insights from The Shoe in Sport:

Correct positioning of the foot is more important than forced constraint and “squeezing” the foot.

Forward sliding of the foot should not be possible. 

From a technical (skiing) point of view, the ski boot must represent an interface between the human body and the ski. This implies first of all an exchange of steering function, i.e., the skier must be able to steer as well as possible, but must also have a direct (neural) feedback from the ski and from the ground (snow). 

The comment about the importance of correct positioning of the foot and the ski boot  representing an interface between the human body and the ski gave me insights that led to the discovery of key mechanical of the foot whose position in relation to the inside edge and X-Y axes of the ski affects the transfer and control of steering and platform forces to the ski and control.

When I wrote the application for US Patent No 5,265,350 in late 1991 and early 1992 I described the mechanics and biomechanics of plantar angle in great detail knowing this information would be freely available to the entire world to use once the patent was published. The only exception was the information covered by claims. Known mechanics and biomechanics are not in themselves patentable.

Patents and Research

It is important to note that patents, even when granted, do not apply to the use of a patented device for the purpose of pure research. Knowing this at the time I wrote the patent, I described the Birdcage research vehicle in sufficient detail with many figures to enable the device to be constructed at minimal cost so research could be conducted by others as soon as possible for the purpose of advancing the knowledge base and science of alpine skiing.

The following unedited text is excerpted from the patent.

……. the teaching of this (patent) application is that force must be applied and maintained only to specific areas of the foot and leg of the user while allowing for unrestricted movement of other areas.

The performance of such mediums (skate blades and skis) is largely dependent on the ability of the user to accurately and consistently apply forces to them as required to produce the desired effect.

In addition, in situations where the user must interact with external forces, for example gravity, the footwear must restrain movements of the user’s foot and leg in a manner which maintains the biomechanical references with the medium with which it is interacting.

Precise coupling of the foot to the footwear is possible because the foot, in weight bearing states, but especially in monopedal function, becomes structurally competent to exert forces in the horizontal plane relative relative to the sole of the footwear at the points of a triangle formed by the posterior aspect and oblique posterior angles of the heel, the head of the first metatarsal and the head of the fifth metatarsal. In terms of transferring horizontal torsional and vertical forces relative to the sole of the footwear, these points of the triangle become the principal points of contact with the bearing surfaces of the footwear. 

The most important source of rotational power with which to apply torque to the footwear is the adductor/rotator muscle groups of the hip joint. In order to optimally link this capability to the footwear, there must be a mechanically stable and competent connection originating at the plantar processes of the foot and extending to the hip joint. Further, the balanced position of the skier’s centre of mass, relative to the ski edge, must be maintained during the application of both turning and edging forces applied to the ski. Monopedal function accommodates both these processes. 

Yet a further problem relates to the efficient transfer of torque from the lower leg and foot to the footwear. When the leg is rotated inwardly relative to the foot by muscular effort a torsional load is applied to the foot. Present footwear does not adequately provide support or surfaces on and against which the wearer can transfer biomechanically generated forces such as torque to the footwear. Alternatively, the footwear presents sources of resistance which interfere with the movements necessary to initiate such transfer. It is desirable to provide for appropriate movement and such sources of resistance in order to increase the efficiency of this torque transfer and, in so doing, enhance the turning response of the ski.

In skiing, the mechanics of monopedal function provide a down force acting predominantly through the ball of the foot (which is normally almost centred directly over the ski edge). In concert with transverse torque (pronation) arising from weight bearing on the medial aspect of the foot which torque is stabilized by the obligatory internal rotation of the tibia, the combination of these forces results in control of the edge angle of the ski purely as a result of achieving a position of monopedal stance on the outside foot of the turn. 

The edge angle can be either increased or decreased in monopedal function by increasing or decreasing the pressure made to bear on the medial aspect of the foot through the main contact points at the heel and ball of the foot via the mechanism of pronation. As medial pressure increases, horizontal torque (relative to the ski) increases through an obligatory increase in the intensity of internal rotation of the tibia. Thus, increasing medial pressure on the plantar aspect of the foot tends to render the edge-set more stable.

There are many figures that illustrate the concepts expressed in the above text which I will include in future posts.

The photo below shows the strain gauges (black disks) fit to the 1991 research vehicle. These gauges recorded first metatarsal forces under and to its inner or medial aspect and the outer and rearmost aspects of the heel bone.

I’ve learned a lot since the above information was made public after the patent was issued on November 30, 1993.

In Part 10, I will discuss the mechanism by which forces applied by the ball of the foot to what I call the Control Center of the platform provide quasi ground under the outside foot and leg in the load phase of a turn for a skier to stand and balance on.

THE MECHANICS + BIOMECHANICS OF PLATFORM ANGLE: PART 8

A soon to be published study (1.) recognizes that recent advances in sensor-technology allow the kinematics and kinetics of skiing to be monitored and data collected during training and actual competitions. The data will generate detailed information about the biomechanical factors related to success in competition and used to individualize training and skiing and equipment for each unique skier and, most important, motivate innovative scientific research for years to come.

 Individualize equipment for each unique skier

I fervently hope that this marks the beginning of the realization of a vision I had 30 years ago; one that resulted in the 1992 on snow studies using a unique instrumented research vehicle I designed with a biomedical engineer. This research vehicle allowed data to be acquired from skiers ranging from World Cup and Olympic champions to neophytes during actual ski maneuvers and meaningful metrics generated with which to assess performance. The objective of the study was to validate my hypothetical model of the mechanics, neurobiomechanics and physics of platform balance and the mechanism of skier CNS mediated dynamic stability. A validated model is essential for the interpretation of performance extrapolated from data. The intent of the subsequent patents was to provide a knowledge base to serve as a foundation for a science that would eventually enable individual skier optimization of every aspect of equipment and make skiing as easy and intuitive as walking for the masses.

A major source of inspiration and direction for my work and especially for my persistence came from the medical text-book The Shoe and Sport, in particular, Part 6 The Ski Boot.

From a technical (skiing) point of view, the ski boot must represent an interface between the human body and the ski. This implies first of all an exchange of steering function, i.e., the skier must be able to steer as well as possible, but must also have a direct (neural) feedback from the ski and from the ground (snow). In this way, the skier can adapt to the requirements of the skiing surface and snow conditions. These conditions can be met if the height, stiffness, angle and functions (rotational axes, ankle joint (AJ)/shaft) of the shaft are adapted, as well as possible to the individual skier.

The modern ski boot must be designed from a functional point of view, i.e., the design must take into consideration the realities of functional anatomy (axes etc.).

It (the design) should not make compromises at the expense of other joints (length of shaft, flexibility and positioning).

It (the ski boot) must represent the ideal connecting link between man and ski (steering and feedback).

I am forever indebted to  Dr. E. Stussi,  Member of GOTS – Chief of Biomechanical Laboratory ETH, Zurich, Switzerland, Professor Dr. M. Pfeiffer of the Institute for the Athletic Science, University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria, Dr. med. H.W. Bar, Orthopedics-Sportsmedicine, member of GOTS, Murnau, West Germany and W Hauser and P. Schaff of the Technical Surveillance Association, Munich, West Germany and other pioneers who inspired my efforts and paved the way to the future of skiing.

In the words of W Hauser and P. Schaff:

In the future, ski boots will be designed rationally and according to the increasing requirements of the ski performance target groups.

I sincerely hope that the work of Supej Matej and H-C Holmberg (1.) ushers in the future of skiing.

The Platform Balance Solution

In previous posts I established that:

  • the axis of rotation of the foot and the ski (steering) resulting from rotation of the femur in the socket of its ball joint with the pelvis by what amounts to a muscle driven torque motor, occurs behind the center of the long running surface of the base of the ski.
  • the ball of the foot of a skier is located on the proximate center of the long running surface of the base of the ski.
  • edging and carving force require components of force with vectors aligned 180 and 90 degrees to the transverse aspect of the base plane of the outside ski.
  • the rotational or steering force (torque) is the source of the vector of the 180 degree force acting into the snow.
  • the point of application of the rotational cutting force when the axis of rotation of the ankle is oriented on the X-Y axis of the ski is mechanically ineffective. The monoplanar nature of the torque makes it less effective in terms of contributing to skier dynamic stability.
  • the effect of side-cut on platform angle mechanics must also be considered.

From a mechanical-neurobiomechanical perspective, the logical place to apply the center of force of the foot acting 90 degrees (or slightly less) to the transverse base plane is under the ball of the foot (i.e. the head of the first metatarsal).

After a thorough investigation and analysis of the forces associated with platform angle mechanics I reached the conclusion that given the robust structure and the degree of stability of the head of the first metatarsal and the fact that the 90 and 180 degree forces should be congruent it seemed logical to apply the force acting 180 degrees to the transverse base plane of the ski to the medial aspect of the head of the first metatarsal. The 1992 study was designed to confirm or disprove the validity of this conclusion.

The graphic below shows the application of the rotational (steering) force to the medial aspect of the head of the first metatarsal.The photo below shows the robust force transfer structures under and on the inner (media) aspect of the head of the first metatarsal. 

In my next post I will discuss the requirements of a ski boot necessary for the user to simultaneously apply plantar force to the platform and rotational force to the medial aspect of the head of the first metatarsal.


  1. Recent Kinematics and Kinetic Advances in Olympic Alpine Skiing: Pyeonchang and Beyond – Supej Matej and H-C Holmberg: Frontiers in Physiology

A DEVICE TO DETERMINE OPTIMAL PERSONAL RAMP ANGLE

This post contains the most important information I have ever written on skiing. It concerns the most important discovery I have made since I began to cast a critical eye on the positions of the various experts about 45 years ago; a method to determine the optimal personal ramp angle of a skier/racer.

By 1978, subjective experiments had taught me that a total ramp angle between the sole of the foot and the base of a ski of more than 3 degrees could have significant adverse effects on skier stability, balance and the ability to control the direction and especially the edge angle, of a ski. Wherever possible, I tried to limit total ramp angle (boot boards + bindings) to below or close to 3 degrees. But ski boot and binding construction often limited my ability to reach this objective. It was limitations in the construction of my current Head World Cup boot that presented challenges in getting the boot board ramp angle below 3 degrees. Through a concerted effort I had managed to reduce ramp angle to 3.3 degrees (bindings are zero) with a noticeable improvement in balance, ski and edge control. But the results of my recent NABOSO insole test suggested that the boot board ramp angle needed to be a lot lower.

The Dynamic Ski Stance Theory

A standard test of the human balance system is to subject a subject to dynamic changes in the platform under their feet. Over the past few years, I made numerous attempts to find the optimal ramp angle for skiing. One method involved assuming my strongest stance on a hard, flat level surface then stepping onto a plate shimmed to a fixed angle then repeating the process with the plate shimmed to a different angle. The results were inconclusive. Every time I went back to the hard, flat level starting surface my balance system seemed to reset. I had to get the angle of the tilted plate well over 3 degrees before I began to sense obvious instability. This led to my positing of a theory that the angle of a plate that a skier is standing on needs to be changed as the skier goes through a stance protocol designed to test stability and what I call a rooted or grounded connection where the skier feels as if their feet are literally rooted in the snow.

Research is Urgently Needed

Before I go any further I want to stress that I believe that an idea, no matter how compelling, is nothing more than a theory until it has been thoroughly tested and has withstood rigorous scrutiny. Even then, no theory should be immune to challenges. Research on this subject is urgently needed and long overdue. With this in mind, I designed the dynamic stance assessment device so it can be easily made with reasonable skills and readily available, inexpensive materials. I have recently completed a 4th generation prototype to serve this end. But a much more sophisticated device can and should be made and used by academic researchers. A servo motor driven ramp with a data acquisition package is the preferred option.

Stance Training is Essential

In order to obtain accurate results with the dynamic stance assessment ramp it is essential that the subject being tested undergo kinesthetic stance training and follow a protocol during testing that is designed to help the subject assess the effect of changes in ramp angle. It is disturbing that few of the skiers tested so far have a kinesthetic sense of the elements of a strong stance. Most have never sensed a strong stance. Worse, no ski pro or coach has ever discussed this crucial aspect of skiing with them. It appears as if it is simply assumed that a skier will automatically find their optimal stance. I can unequivocally state that this is not the case.

Dynamic Stance Ramp Test Results

  • The majority of skiers tested so far were most stable at ramp angles between 2.0 and 2.5 degrees.
  • A number of skiers, myself included, were most stable at close to or under 1.2 degrees.
  • One skier was most stable at 1.6 degrees.
  • One skier appeared to be relatively insensitive to ramp angle until it was above 2.8 degrees.
  • After training, most skiers were sensitive to changes of 0.1 degrees.
  • No skier tested so far was stable over 2.8 degrees.
  • Adding NABOSO insoles further reduced the ramp angle.

I tested most stable at 1.2 degrees; 2.1 degrees less than my existing boot board ramp angle. In order to reduce the boot board ramp angle to 1.2 degrees, I had to raise the toe end of my boot board 9 mm and lower the heel 2 mm for a total reduction of 11 mm.

First On Snow Impressions

Walking in my ski boots with the corrected boot board ramp angle immediately felt different. But the huge impact didn’t come until I started moving over the surface of the snow on my skis. Then the whole world seemed to change. I had a huge deja-vu moment; one that took me back to the solid, stable feeling I had under my feet in my first low-cut leather plastic soled ski boots. It was then that I realized that it was the jacked up heels of my first all plastic, rigid shell ski boots 45 years ago that had destroyed my balance and confidence on skis. This is a big miss for the ski industry, one that should have been caught by those who promote themselves as the experts in skiing, but wasn’t. This miss has huge implications for skiers at every level and ability all the way up to the World Cup. A skier, but especially a racer with a sub-optimal ramp angle will revert to an unstable weight on the heels, back seat Defensive Stance in which the skier is incapable of recruiting the enormous power of the glutes and optimal sensorimotor processes.

First generation device in action. Ratchet socket wrenches raise the ramp by turning bolts set into T-Nuts on each end.


Digital SmartTool electronic level accurate to 2 decimal places


Fourth Generation Stance Ramp assessment prototype. Two x two wood stiffening elements added to the platform.

The skiing of those whose ramp angle has been optimized is elevated to a whole new level provoking immediate comments like the difference is ‘night and day‘. After my transformation, I now believe that until ramp angle is optimized, everything else is irrelevant and that no amount of footbeds, orthotics, cants, alignment or custom fitting can overcome the adverse affect of sub-optimal ramp.

THE MECHANICS OF BALANCE ON THE OUTSIDE SKI: BALANCE PLATFORM MECHANICS

Turntable rotation generated by the powerful internal rotators of the pelvis (the gluteus medius and minimus) in combination with second rocker mechanics can create a platform under the body of the outside ski and foot that a skier can stand and balance on using the same processes to balance on solid ground. The associated mechanics creates a platform under the body of the outside ski by extending  ground reaction force acting along the portion of the inside edge in contact with the snow, out under the body of the ski.

In order to understand the mechanics, we need to start with a profile through the section of the body of the ski, binding and boot sole under the ball of the foot. The graphic below is a schematic representation of a ski with a 70 mm waist and 100 mm shovel and tail with an arbitrary length of 165 mm. The total stack or stand height from the base of the ski to the surface of the boot that supports the foot is 80 mm. The uppermost portion of the schematic shows the shell sidewalls of a 335 boot in relation to the 70 mm width of the stack. A ski with a 70 mm waist will place the center ball of the foot of skiers with US Men’s 10 to 12 feet close to over the inside edge. The heavy black line at the bottom of the stack shows the projection of the sidecut width beyond the waist.The schematic serves as a base on which to overlay a free body diagram showing the forces acting across the interface of the inside edge with the snow. This is where the rubber meets the road.

There are two possible scenarios in terms of the axis on which the center of pressure W of the skier will act. Unless the foot can sufficiently pronate and especially generate impulse second rocker loading, W will lie on the proximate anatomic center of the foot and transverse center of the body of the ski as shown in the graphic below. In this location, W will create a moment arm due to the offset with the GRF Pivot under the inside edge at the waist. The resulting moment of force will externally rotate the ski and foot under load out of the turn while simultaneously rotating the leg externally.The graphic below shows the second scenario where the center of pressure W lies directly over the GRF Pivot under the inside edge. In this position, W will load the inside edge under the ball of the foot and assist edge grip. But in this configuration, rotating the ski onto its inside edge necessitates overcoming the moment of force created by the moment arm resulting from the offset between the GRF Pivot and GRF acting at the limits of the sidecut. This requires a source of torque that acts to rotate the ski into the turn about the pivot acting at the inside edge at the waist of the ski.An obvious source of torque is to use the leg to apply force to the inner aspect of the shaft of the foot; aka knee angulation. But this will not create a platform under the body of the outside ski. Applying a load to the vertical wall of the shell opposite the ball of the foot will apply torque load to center at the GRF pivot as shown in the graphic below. The moment arm is formed by the point at which the Turntable Torque is applied to the boot sidewall (green arrow) to the center of rotation at the GRF Pivot.

 

The torque applied to the vertical sidewall of the boot shell is the Effort. The sidecut of the ski is the resistance. What effect will this have on the body of the ski under the foot? There is a lot more to this subject that I will begin to expand on in my next post.

THE MECHANICS OF BALANCE ON THE OUTSIDE SKI: CLOSED CHAIN OUTSIDE LEG ROTATION

A recently published study on foot pressure data acquired during skiing (1.) recognized that compressive force pressure data acquired in skiing is underestimated by 21% to 54% compared to pressure data acquired on a force platform in a controlled environment.  The underestimation varies depending on the phase of the turn, the skier’s skill level, the pitch of the slope and the skiing mode. The paper states that other studies have stated that this underestimation originates from a significant part of the force actually being transferred through the ski boot’s cuff (to the ski). As a result, the CoP trajectory also tends to be underestimated along both the anterior-posterior (A-P) and medial-lateral (M-L) axes compared to force platforms.

In conclusion, these studies have highlighted a major contribution of different factors to the nGRF applied throughout a turn, such as the foot’s position during a turn (inside vs. outside), the CoP A-P (front to back) displacement, or precise loading of different foot sole regions.  Unfortunately, these results have been studied separately.

There is a lack of continuity across the various positions in skiing and, in particular, a lack of a model with which to explain mechanisms such as balance on the outside ski and open and closed chain internal rotation of the leg and foot in conjunction with progressive inclination and G force loading on it as the skier crosses the fall line in the bottom of a turn. The associated mechanics and biomechanics represent a new paradigm requiring new thinking and new insights. Existing text-book explanations are not sufficient to explain these mechanisms.

Open Chain Whole Leg Rotation vs. Closed Chain Rotation

Rotation of an unloaded (non-weight bearing) lower limb is relatively straight forward when there is a small angle at the knee. As resistance to rotation of the foot is progressively introduced with increasing weight imposed on it, the kinetic chain begins to close. As it closes, the points at which the foot transfers torque to the walls of rigid shell footwear such as ice skates and ski boots starts to emerge as an issue as does the loading of the foot created by the weight of the body imposed on it and the position of COM in relation to the foot.

In order to tension the biokinetic chain and trigger the two-phase Second Rocker, COM must be aligned over the foot as shown in the grahic below.  This alignment requires that the leg adduct (move towards the center of the body) approximately 6.5 degrees. To bring the 3 points of the tripod of the foot into contact with the ground, the foot must evert (sole turn outward) the same amount. Eversion is accompanied by a corresponding torque coupled 6.5 degrees of internal rotation of the leg as shown in the left hand figure in the graphic below (see my post – OUTSIDE SKI BALANCE BASICS: STEP-BY-STEP). The bipedal figure on the right shows adduction, eversion and internal rotation as 0.0 – 0.0 – 0.0 for reference. The monopedal figure on the left shows the changes in adduction, eversion and internal rotation as 6.5 – 6.5 – 6.5.

 

The alignment of COM with the foot can be achieved by moving COM laterally as shown by the arrow emanating from COM in the Monopedal figure or by moving the foot medially as shown by the white arrow or through a combination of the two movements.  The act of positioning COM over the outside foot (Getting Over It), sets in motion internal rotation of the outside leg and eversion of foot into the turn. This engages an over-centre mechanism between the platform of the ski and the inside edge underfoot.

The over-centre mechanism results in an alignment of the resultant force R forming an angle with the transverse aspect of base of the ski that is slightly less than 90 degrees. In order to Get (COM) Over It (the foot), it is essential that the outside leg is not only able to adduct and rotate internally as the foot everts, but to achieve this configuration without delay in order to set up the over-center mechanism. The problem for the majority of skiers is that the objective of most boot fit systems and boot-fitting procedures is to support the foot in a neutral configuration. Eversion of the foot is a component of pronation. Impeding or preventing pronation, restricts or even prevents the required amount of eversion.

Closing the Kinetic Chain on Whole Leg Rotation

Open kinetic chain leg/foot rotation with the foot unloaded (not bearing weight) is relatively simple. But the mechanics and biomechanics begin to get complicated when resistance is progressively introduced that starts to close the kinetic chain as happens when the outside ski is rotated across the path of the skier in the fall line in the bottom of a turn.
The graphic below shows a foot supported on a platform with 2 points of resistance (FR) applied to the platform opposite the 2 points of application of the moments of force, ML (green) and MM (red). The forces tangent to the arc of the moments of rotation are shown as FT.
When the weight of the body is progressively shifted to one foot (i.e. Monopedal Stance) and the foot everts, the talus (shown in gray in the graphic above) moves inward towards the center of the body and shifts slightly rearward as evidenced by the corresponding movement of the inside ankle bone.  This is easily seen when moving from bipedal to monopedal stance on a hard, flat surface while barefoot. In order to effectively transfer torque from the foot to the platform, the forefoot and ankle and knee joints must be fascially tensioned. This requires that the big toe (Hallux) be aligned on the anatomical axis (dashed line) and the forefoot fully splayed. This stabilizes the heel and head of the 1st metatarsal (ball of the foot).  Torque from internal rotation of the leg will be transferred to two discrete points adjacent the Load Counters mounted on the resistance platform.

Removing the resistance force FR from the inner (big toe) aspect of the platform provides insights to what I refer to as the Turntable Effect that is associated with internal rotation of the leg and eversion of the foot that creates an over-center mechanism. The turntable rotation is shown in light yellow. The effect will vary for different structures of the foot depending on the location of the center of rotation of the platform under the foot.

The location of the blade of an ice skate on the anatomical center of the foot has been used to explain why it is easier to cut into a hard ice surface with a skate compared to the edges of a ski. But the real reason it is easier is because ice skaters use the Second Rocker, Over-Center, Turn Table Mechanisms as shown in the graphic below. The skate is positioned under COM. It can be readily seen that the skater is not using the inner aspect of the shaft of the skate to hold the skate on edge.

In my next post, I will discuss the progress of emerging CARV and NABOSO technologies after which I will continue with my discussion of the Mechanics of Balance on the Outside Ski.


  1. Influence of slope steepness, foot position and turn phase on plantar pressure distribution during giant slalom alpine ski racing: Published: May 4, 2017  – Thomas Falda-Buscaiot, Frédérique Hintzy, Patrice Rougier, Patrick Lacouture, Nicolas Coulmy
  2. http://wp.me/p3vZhu-29n

THE SKI BOOT FLEX INDEX INSTABILITY PROBLEM

It has been known for decades that an unbalanced moment of force or torque will be present on the outside ski when the center of pressure of the load applied to the ski by a skier is acting along the center of the transverse axis of the ski where it is offset from GRF acting along the inside edge. Ron LeMaster acknowledges the existence of an unbalanced moment of force on the ouside ski in both The Skier’s Edge and Ultimate Skiing (Edging the skis). LeMaster states in Ultimate Skiing;

The force on the snow is offset from the center of the skier’s and creates a torque on it that tries to flatten the ski.

Ron didn’t get the mechanics right. But he correctly shows the unbalanced torque acting on the ankle joint. LeMaster tries to rationalize that ice skates are easy to cut clean arcs into ice with because the blade is located under the center of the ankle. While this is correct, ice skaters and especially hockey players employ the Two Stage Heel-Forefoot Rocker to impulse load the skate for acceleration. Hockey players refer to this as kick.

In his comment to my post, OUTSIDE SKI BALANCE BASICS: STEP-BY-STEP, Robert Colborne said:

…..In the absence of this internal rotation movement, the center of pressure remains somewhere in the middle of the forefoot, which is some distance from the medial edge of the ski, where it is needed.

The load or weight of COM is transferred to distal tibia that forms the ankle joint. This is the lower aspect of the central load-bearing axis that transfers the load W from COM to the foot. What happens after that depends on the biomechanics. But the force will tend to be applied on the proximate center of the stance foot. This is a significant problem in skiing, (one that LeMaster doesn’t offer a solution for) when the ski is on edge and there is air under the body of the ski. The unbalanced torques will move up the vertical column where they will manifest at the knee against a well stabilized femur.

But this unbalanced torque creates another problem, one that is described in a paper published in 2005 by two Italian engineers (1.) that describes how this load deforms the base of the boot shell.

The Italian study found large amounts of deformation at mean loads of up to 164% body weight were measured on the outer ski during turning. The paper suggests that the ski boot flex index is really a distortion index for the boot shell. The lower the flex index, the greater the distortion potential.

For the ski-boot – sole joint the main problem is not material failure, but large amounts of local deformation that can affect the efficiency of the locking system and the stiffness of the overall system.

Values of drift angle of some degree (>2-3°) cannot be accepted, even for a small period of time, because it results in a direct decrease of the incidence of the ski with the ground.

My post GS AND KNEE INJURIES – CONNECTING THE DOTS (2.) cites studies that found that knee injuries are highest in GS in the shortest radius turns where peak transient forces are highest.

As shown in Figure 2a FR (sum of centrifugal and weight forces) and F GROUND (ground reaction force) are not acting on the same axis thus generating a moment MGR that causes a deformation of the ski-boot-sole system (Figure 2b) leading to a rotation of the ground reaction force direction. The final effect is to reduce the centripetal reaction force of the ground, causing the skier to drift to the outside of the turn (R decreases, causing the drift event).

An imperfect condition of the ski slope will emphasize this problem, leading to difficulties maintaining constant turning radius and optimal trajectory. The use of SGS ski-boot in competitions requires a particular focus on this aspect due to the larger loads that can be produced during races.

I have added a sketch showing that the moment arm M R created by the offset between the F Ground and F R is in the plane of the base of the ski where it results in an Inversion-lateral rotation torque.

The importance of sole stiffness is demonstrated with a simplified skier model…..…ski boot torsional stiffness with respect to ski longitudinal axis in particular is very important as it deeply influences the performance of the skier during turning…. A passage over a bump or a hollow may generate a sudden change in ground reaction force that may lead to a rapid change in the drift angle delta. The ski boot must be as stiff as possible going from the lower part of the boot to the ski (i.e. lower shell-joint-sole system)

As explained in the method section using the simplified model, values of some degree cannot be accepted, even for a small period of time, because the skier stability and equilibrium could be seriously compromised especially when the radius of curvature is small. A non perfect condition of the ski slope will emphasize the problem, leading to big difficulties for maintaining constant turning radius and optimal trajectory.

This excellent paper by the two Italian engineers concludes with the following statements:

Authors pushed forward the integration of experiments and modeling on ski-boots that will lead to a design environment in which the optimal compromise between stiffness and comfort can be reached.

The possibility of measuring accurately the skier kinematics on the ski slope, not addressed in the presented study, could represent a further step in the understanding of skiing dynamics and thus could provide even more insightful ideas for the ski-boot design process.

I first recognized the shell deformation, boot board instability issue in 1980, at which time I started integrating rigid structural boot boots into the bases of boot shells I prepared for racers. The improvement in ski control and balance was significant. The instability of  boot boards associated with shell/sole deformation with 2 to 3 degrees of drift at modest loads of up to 164% body weight has significant implications for footbeds.


  1. AN INNOVATIVE SKI-BOOT: DESIGN, NUMERICAL SIMULATIONS AND TESTING – Stefano Corazza 􀀍 and Claudio Cobelli Department of Information Engineering – University of Padova, Italy – Published (online): 01 September 2005 – https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3887325/
  2. http://wp.me/p3vZhu-zx