data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/abbd2/abbd28eb894282b05025ffa70b12237df432f6a0" alt="Geek :geek:"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/18a8a/18a8ac117434fabb660d5c7539d2ab99c0cd5bca" alt="Razz :P"
"Nike Vaporfly shoes make runners faster, but they're controversial - Business Insider" https://www.businessinsider.de/internat ... ?r=US&IR=T
As key movement is only one-dimensional as opposed to the two dimensions of foot movement in running, some aspects of the 'Vaporfly' clearly don't apply, for example what is covered in the last paragraph from the quoted passage (on forward movement).The Nike Vaporfly sole helps runners lose less energy per step
Jake Riley, an American runner who finished ninth in the 2019 Chicago marathon, has said the Nike Vaporfly 4% shoes feel like „running on trampolines.“
The secret is in the sole, which is designed to help runners get the most forward push for each stride — or, in Burns‘ words, to run faster for the same „energy expenditure.“ The soles consist of a foam layer and carbon-fiber plate fused together.
In addition to protecting our legs from the impact of striking the ground, running shoes store and release energy to propel us forward. The midsole acts like a spring, compressing when a runner lands, storing the energy from that foot strike, and expanding again to return that stored energy into the ground to push them forward.
Not all of that stored energy gets returned with each footfall, though — some dissipates as heat. But the Vaporfly’s design minimizes that amount of lost energy, giving the runner more bang for the buck.
Traditional running shoes generally use ethylene vinyl-acetate foam, which returns about 65% of the energy you put into it, according to Burns. The Vaporfly, by contrast, uses a new type of foam called Pebax, which is about 87% efficient. (The patent is owned by a French chemical company called Arkema.) The addition of the carbon-fiber plate helps the Pebax foam compress and expand quickly.
„Otherwise it would be like a marshmallow,“ Burns said.
Kyle Barnes, a movement scientist who authored a study about the Vaporfly shoes in February, told Business Insider that the carbon-fiber plate is curved under the front of the shoes, which also makes a big difference. That curvature, he said, helps quickly rock a runner from their heels to their toes as they land and push off again.
Over 26.2 miles, 4% more efficiency is a lot
1. This is some grade-A copypasta beauty. Thank you for enriching my life with this bit of self-aggrandizing horseshittery.Keybug wrote: 29 Mar 2021, 08:42 1. I knew I shouldn't have tried to enlighten this haven of keyboard luddites and traditionalists with my brilliant idea, should have just gone straight to reddit!
2. The argument that minor improvements in typing feel and speed don't matter is pretty rich coming from people spending 100s of $$ to get that beamspring / blue Alps feel...
3. With the proper adjustments to the foam's density, height etc, who's to say that it might not actually be more effective for typing than for running?
4. Please stop it with the 'bottoming out is bad' rap! The idea of actively decelerating your fingers in mid fall without feedback at the exact same position for every keypress and expecting to reach similar speeds, error rates and ergonomics as with bottoming out is just preposterous. Learn to love your bottom (!), just make sure it's agreeably soft. Hooray for soft bottoms! (Not so much for mushy ones, though - that's where the high-tech foam comes in, I suppose...)
micmil wrote: 29 Mar 2021, 15:221. This is some grade-A copypasta beauty. Thank you for enriching my life with this bit of self-aggrandizing horseshittery.Keybug wrote: 29 Mar 2021, 08:42 1. I knew I shouldn't have tried to enlighten this haven of keyboard luddites and traditionalists with my brilliant idea, should have just gone straight to reddit!
2. The argument that minor improvements in typing feel and speed don't matter is pretty rich coming from people spending 100s of $$ to get that beamspring / blue Alps feel...
3. With the proper adjustments to the foam's density, height etc, who's to say that it might not actually be more effective for typing than for running?
4. Please stop it with the 'bottoming out is bad' rap! The idea of actively decelerating your fingers in mid fall without feedback at the exact same position for every keypress and expecting to reach similar speeds, error rates and ergonomics as with bottoming out is just preposterous. Learn to love your bottom (!), just make sure it's agreeably soft. Hooray for soft bottoms! (Not so much for mushy ones, though - that's where the high-tech foam comes in, I suppose...)
2. Literally nobody has made that argument.
3. Grams of force over the course of 4mm of key travel vs 100+ pounds of force over 26 miles of travel. Stop comparing these things.
4. You seem to be arguing something nobody is talking about.
Look, you just seem like you want to be mad because nobody thinks your oh-so-brilliant idea, which amounts to how foam-based switches already work, is any good. Yes, please, go to reddit. I'm sure many of us will see you over there. Don't be surprised when nobody gives a damn over there either.
You're not much one for subtlety and irony then?micmil wrote: 29 Mar 2021, 15:22 1. This is some grade-A copypasta beauty. Thank you for enriching my life with this bit of self-aggrandizing horseshittery.
that that minor improvements in typing feel and speed don't matter.2. Literally nobody has made the argument.
it's no less ridiculous than worrying about the efficiency loss from bottoming out key presses
I wasn't, as - indeed - it wouldn't make any sense. What I would like to compare is one step of a runner vs. a single keypress - or a very long typing session to a marathon run.3. Grams of force over the course of 4mm of key travel vs 100+ pounds of force over 26 miles of travel. Stop comparing these things.
when discussing bottoming out.4. You seem to be arguing something nobody is talking about
bottom out.you could simply LEARN TO TYPE BETTER and not
Well, no and yes - but with 'state-of-the art' foam.You want to be mad because nobody thinks your oh-so-brilliant idea, which amounts to how foam-based switches already work, is any good.
Wow, something I said must have really gotten to you. Peace!Yes, please, go to reddit. Don't be surprised when nobody gives a damn over there either.
Sure. "Trolling."
Haaaaaave you met rubber domes?Bjerrk wrote: 29 Mar 2021, 20:02 I'd say that you want one that rises quite sharply over the last few tenths of a millimeter (before bottom-out).
AKA: Tactility.Keybug wrote: 29 Mar 2021, 22:30 Just like you say, there should be a very steep rise of the force curve at the very end to still give the nervous system the 'you've hit bottom' feedback while making it a bit easier on the finger joints and at the same time recycling as much of the energy back into the upwards movement as opposed to hammering it down into the desk.
Hi micmil,micmil wrote: 30 Mar 2021, 00:04 Sure. "Trolling."![]()
Haaaaaave you met rubber domes?Bjerrk wrote: 29 Mar 2021, 20:02 I'd say that you want one that rises quite sharply over the last few tenths of a millimeter (before bottom-out).Or foam. Neither will be fully solid, they just have a REALLY solid rise in the force curve. Even if you soften this curve all you're effectively doing is aping "mushy" key feel.
It could potentially be similar to hall effectKeybug wrote: 30 Mar 2021, 08:36 Well, the idea is that it should be bouncy rather than mushy. There is a difference...
Tactility isn't what I'm talking about as it is supposed to signal actuation rather than the physical end of the movement so it is usually placed far above the switch's bottom.
Using r/mechanicalkeyboards as a reference is a bad idea. The insularity is on part with Goldeneye speedrunners, who didn't even know that looking at walls increases framerate for 20 years after everyone already knew that.Keybug wrote: 30 Mar 2021, 19:57 Yes, a non-linear spring would do that, except non-linear springs don't exist according to this very interesting bit of keyboard science that I just managed to dig up. This supports Bjerrk's and my contention above that, really, a second element (spring, foam or whatever) is needed to properly manage bottoming-out in a switch, controlling the disspation / reversal of energy etc. If MX clear / Hako switches did this really well, I bet they would have become much more popular...
Correction: Progressive springs do exist, but are apparently sold exclusivley by Spirit Designs are not available in any of the major stock springs! See this interesting comparison of different spring variations here.
Will have to go and buy some of those progressive springs now!
Isn't this what people call 'mushy'? Sounds a lot like the Mitsumi KSR things in the C64, where there's a massive rubber pad on the bottom of the slider. Or the semi mechanical Tai Hao 'switches' with super stiff springs over a membrane. Both of those are pretty much impossible to bottom out in any appreciable way. Neither feel great. Even Cherry MY is a bit like this.edlee wrote: 25 Apr 2021, 06:08 It would be nice if there were some cushioning during the bottoming out of a key press so that your fingers do not impact a hard, unyielding surface
This is how almost every switch that exists works already. That's just how a spring works. Bottoming out? Use heavier springs until you aren't.Keybug wrote: 25 Apr 2021, 12:01 I was trying to make a fine distinction between bouncy and mushy.
For me, 'mushy' means that a lot of your kinetic energy just dissipates on bottoming out. As material representing this quality, I would suggest some sort of foam or sponge.
Bouncy, however, describes a kind of trampoline effect where a mechanism (spring, magnetic 'reversal', special 'Vaporfly'-style polymer etc.) soaks up that energy and then creates an impulse back into the reverse direction...