Abstract
This paper1 presents an application of several definitions of a mean set for use in footwear design. For a given size, footprint pressure images corresponding to different individuals constitute our raw data. Appropriate footwear design needs to have knowledge of some kind of typical footprint. Former methods based on contour relevant points are highly sensitive to contour noise; moreover, they lack repeatability because of the need for the intervention of human designers. The method proposed in this paper is based on using mean sets on the thresholded images of the pressure footprints. Three definitions are used, two of them from Vorob’ev and Baddeley-Molchanov and one morphological mean proposed by the authors. Results show that the use of mean sets improves previous methodologies in terms of robustness and repeatability.
This work has been supported by projects TIC2002-03494 from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology, CTIDIA-2002-133, RGY 40/2003 and GV04B-032 and GV04A-177 from the Generalitat Valenciana.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
A.J. Baddeley and I.S. Molchanov. Averaging of random sets based on their distance functions. Journal of Mathematical Imaging and Vision, 8:79–92, 1998.
A. Bataller, E. Alcántara, J.C. González, A.C. Garcia, and S. Alemany. Morphological grouping of Spanish feet using clustering techniques. In E. Hennig and H. Stacoff, A. and Gerber, editors, Proceedings of Fifth Symposium on Footwear Biomechanics, pages 12–13, 2001.
P.R. Cavanagh and M.M. Rodgers. The arch index: a useful measure from footprints. Journal of Biomechanics, 20(5):547–551, 1987.
G.S. Daniels. The average man? Technical Note WCRD 53-7, Wright Air Development Center, Wrigth-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, 1952.
E.C.F. Goonetilleke, R. S. Ho and R. H. Y. So. Foot anthropometry in Hong Kong. In Proceedings of the ASEAN 97 Conference, pages 81–98, 1997.
M.R. Hawes, R. Heinemeyer, D. Sovak, and B. Tory. An approach to averaging digitized plantagrams curves. Ergonomics, 37(7):1227–1230, 1994.
M.R. Hawes and D. Sovak. Quantitative morphology of the human foot in a North American population. Ergonomics, 37(7):1213–1226, 1993.
M.R. Hawes, D. Sovak, M Miyashita, S.J. Kang, Y. Yoshihuku, and S. Tanaka. Ethnic differences in forefoot shape and the determination of shoe comfort. Ergonomics, 37(1):187–193, 1994.
M. Kouchi and E. Tsutsumi. Relation between the medial axis of the foot outlina and 3-d foot shape. Ergonomics, 39(6):853–861, 1996.
P.E. Lestrel. Morphometricsfor the life sciences. World Scientific Press, 2000.
T. Lewis, R. Owens, and A. Baddeley. Averaging feature maps. Pattern Recognition, 32:1615–1630, 1999.
W. Liu, J. Miller, D. Stefanyshyn, and B.N. Nigg. Accuracy and reliability of a technique for quantifying foot shape, dimensions and structural characteristics. Ergonomics, 42(2):346–358, 1999.
A. Luximon, R.S. Goonetikelle, and K.L. Tsu. Foot landmarking for footwear customization. Ergonomics, 46(4):364–383, 2003.
G. Matheron. Random sets and Integral Geometry. Wiley, London, 1975.
S. Pheasant. Bodyspace. Anthropometry, Ergonomics and Design. Taylor and Francis, London, 1986.
Wunderlich R.E. and Cavanagh PR. Gender differences in adult foot shape: Implications for shoe design. Medicine and Science in Sports & Exercise, 33(4):605–611, 2000.
C. Sforza, G. Michielon, N. Frangnito, and V.F Ferrario. Foot asymmetry in healthy adults: Elliptic fourier analysis of standardized footprints. Journal of Orthopaedic Research, 16(6):758–765, 1998.
A. Simó, E. de Ves, G. Ayala, and J. Domingo. Resuming shapes with applications. Journal of Mathematical Imaging and Vision, 20:209–222, 2004.
D. Stoyan and H. Stoyan. Fractals, Random Shapes and Point Fields. Methods of Geometrical Statistics. Wiley, 1994.
B.Y.S. Tsung, M. Zang, Y.B. Fan, and D.A. Boone. Quantitative comparison of platar foot shapes under different wheight-bearing conditions. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 40(6):517–526, 2003.
R.S. Urry and S.C. Wearing. A comparison of footprint indexes calculated form ink and electronic footprints. Journal of American Podiatric Medical Association, 91(4):203–209, 2001.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2005 Springer
About this paper
Cite this paper
Domingo, J. et al. (2005). Quantifying Mean Shape and Variability of Footprints Using Mean Sets. In: Ronse, C., Najman, L., Decencière, E. (eds) Mathematical Morphology: 40 Years On. Computational Imaging and Vision, vol 30. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3443-1_41
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3443-1_41
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-3442-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-3443-5
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)