Advertisement

Automation of the shoe last grading process according to international sizing systems

  • Juan José Hinojo-Pérez
  • Miguel Davia-Aracil
  • Antonio Jimeno-MorenillaEmail author
  • José Luis Sánchez-Romero
  • Faustino Salas
ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Abstract

The last is the basic industrial component in footwear manufacturing, from which product development starts. Correct last grading ensures the best fit for the intended group of users of the footwear model to be produced. The size marked on the last should respect the specific intervals defined in the different international sizing systems, like the European, UK, US or Mondopoint systems, which are all described in international standards. New approaches in the field of CAD/CAM have emerged over recent years towards the automation of this process. However, these are partial approaches that neither address the grading process according to the different standards nor consider the various parts of the shoe that are not affected by size increments. This paper presents a new accurate and efficient technique for the automation of the shoe last grading process based on the conjugate gradient method. Through this method, it is possible to obtain a graded shoe last that conforms to the international standards in force relative to shoe sizing and allows for the shoe parts that are not affected by size increments. This technique is based on the target measures of length and perimeter of the last to be graded and aims to minimise the quadratic difference between these values and those obtained from the graded last. This method has been evaluated through a battery of tests performed on a geometrically heterogeneous group of shoe lasts. The results obtained were accurate and the execution time was fast enough to be used for mass production.

Keywords

Footwear manufacturing Grading Shoe last Conjugate gradient ISO standards 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Wang CS (2010) An analysis and evaluation of fitness for shoe lasts and human feet. Comput Ind 61(6):532–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cheng FT, Perng DB (1999) A systematic approach for developing a foot size information system for shoe last design. Int J Ind Ergon 25(2):171–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Thompson ALT (2008) A South African podometric study—does the shoe fit the foot? (Doctoral dissertation)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mochimaru M, Kouchi M, Dohi M (2000) Analysis of 3-D human foot forms using the free form deformation method and its application in grading shoe lasts. Ergonomics 43(9):1301–1313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Driscu M, Costea M (2013) Shoe last grading and experimental estimation of dimensional variation using Delcam Crispin 3D—Last Maker. Rev Pielarie Incaltaminte 13(2):125–138Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kim SH, Shin KH, Chung W (2008) A method for modifying a surface model with non-uniformly scattered displacement constraints for shoe sole design. Adv Eng Softw 39(9):713–724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Luximon A, Zhang Y, Luximon Y, Xiao M (2012) Sizing and grading for wearable products. Comput Aided Des 44(1):77–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Xiong J, Zhao J, Jiang Z, Dong M (2010) A computer-aided design system for foot-feature-based shoe last customization. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 46:11–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tuan PN, Tuan HM, Hien TTT, Bong TD (2009) Research and development of a new grading software in footwear industry. Science & Technology Development 12(16)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Davia M, Jimeno-Morenilla A, Salas F (2013) Footwear biomodelling: an industrial approach. Computer Aided Des 45(12):1575–1590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    ISO/TS 19407:2015 - Footwear sizing: conversion of sizing systemsGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    ISO/TS 19408:2015 - Footwear sizing: vocabulary and terminologyGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chen J, Gong Y, Jin T, Tong S (2005) Development of an integrated CAD/CAM system for shoe last. In Mechatronics and automation, 2005 I.E. International Conference 2;1107–1111Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jimeno A, Cuenca S (2003) Reconfigurable computing for tool-path computation. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 21(12):945–951CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Juan José Hinojo-Pérez
    • 1
  • Miguel Davia-Aracil
    • 1
    • 2
  • Antonio Jimeno-Morenilla
    • 2
    Email author
  • José Luis Sánchez-Romero
    • 2
  • Faustino Salas
    • 1
  1. 1.Spanish Footwear Technology Institute (INESCOP), Polígono Campo AltoEldaSpain
  2. 2.Department of Computer TechnologyUniversity of AlicanteAlicanteSpain

Personalised recommendations