vvvvvvvvvvvv

So, the question I would ask is how this support differs from the support of a heart bar shoe? Any ideas on the theories? I have not measured a heart bar, but here is the loading pattern for this foot as shown:
http://www.horseshoes.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=178&pictureid=1358


The image on the left is the flat shoe without the pad. The middle image is the pad as shown in the pictures. The image on the right has the material cut out under the distal margin of P3.

This horse lands on his toe at the walk, and the pad also acts as a wedge, rocking him forward on his lateral toe. Please notice that the pad has caused the hoofwall to be unloaded in the heels, which is interesting since so many refer to shoes as "peripheral loading devices". Maybe "it depends"!

That is pretty interesting, but I'm not sure I understand the procedure exactly, it would help if you could one day post some photos of the sequence you are using. Maybe I'm just **** (but my momma says I'm special).

I'll take some pictures tomorrow.

cool, looking forward to it:)

reillyshoe wrote:

Verifying and comparing loading patterns of different types of shoes is virtually useless unless you have a clear and reliable reference point when positioning the shoes on the hoofcapsule. In my opinion the absence of such a reference point is the biggest flaw of Meike van Heels research that she has conducted and was paid for by Mustad.

Might I suggest you use the COA for such a reference?

Delenda Carthago!



Ronald Aalders

Pat it kind of looks like a steward clog

Yes and no. It might look like a Stewart clog, and breakover like a Stewart clog, but I bet it loads the hoof differently than a Stewart clog. I would think the clog would not transfer a greater load to the frog/sole as this setup appears to.

reillyshoe wrote:What about when IM is used between clog and sole? Or, when additional changes/additions are added to the bottom of the clog?

Rick Burten wrote:
Rick,
The impression material is softer than a shoe (or a piece of wood), and therefore a greater amount of the weight is transferred to the regions where the harder surfaces are in contact with the hoof. This is usually the hoofwall. When I measure the effect of adding Equipak to a hoof, the outline of a shoe is still very clearly evident on the force measuring sensor.

I'm surprised the IM stays in the foot without a web or mesh pad. Its a good easy idea though.
I think it would load the frog and sole very much the same as a clog , IF the clog had IM underneath. Maybe the clog would still spread the load out a little bit less concentrated though because of the firmness of the clog. . Who knows. Whatever works.

Here is a mock up of the process.
1. A shod foot, with IM and a domed plastic plate:
http://www.horseshoes.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=178&pictureid=1368

2. Add IM to foot:
http://www.horseshoes.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=178&pictureid=1369

Tape in place, and set foot down until IM sets (about 5 minutes):
http://www.horseshoes.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=178&pictureid=1370
http://www.horseshoes.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=178&pictureid=1371

I got it now. Interesting. Kinda like the domed plates that were being used by some, but with soft support that is transferred and dispersed, while still easing breakover in the same manner. What sort of hooves are you applying this to? What do they look like when they come back to be reset. Are these horses being ridden and worked? Have any of them lost the IM material during the interval?

that foot almost kicked you:D

just kidding.............any more clinics at NBC soon?

The farrier conference was postponed in light of financial uncertainty here at NBC. I will have more info shortly.