Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
8959798 | Science & Justice | 2018 | 9 Pages |
Abstract
Results suggested walking footprint length with ghosting (x¯â¯=â¯268.61â¯mm) was greater than standing fleshed foot length (x¯â¯=â¯264.3â¯mm) and jumping footprint length with ghosting (x¯â¯=â¯261.57â¯mm). However, standing fleshed foot length was found to be greater than walking (x¯â¯=â¯254.85â¯mm) or jumping (x¯â¯=â¯255.63â¯mm) footprint lengths without ghosting. Forefoot widths showed standing fleshed foot width (x¯â¯=â¯105.66â¯mm) was greater than walking (x¯â¯=â¯95.63â¯mm) or jumping (x¯â¯=â¯98.03â¯mm) footprint widths. This study identifies variation in measurements of the standing fleshed foot and those of walking and jumping footprints, including variability between different dynamic states.
Keywords
Related Topics
Physical Sciences and Engineering
Chemistry
Analytical Chemistry
Authors
Nicolas Howsam, Andrew Bridgen,