Charles Heumphreus Memorial Lecture

reillyshoe wrote:
Excellent presentations by Dr. Ross and Mr. Reilly. Glue-on/forcepad demo went smoothly. Glueing was done with great efficiency and catlike neatness. He makes it look too easy. I'd guess lecture attendance at around a hundred with about 15+% being farriers. Live shoeing demo was limited to 40 so some folks missed out on it.

How about a synopsis? Pictures? What you got out of it?

Forgot my camera. The most interesting part, for me, was when Mr. Reilly was talking about (and demonstrating with some of his forceplate analysis slides) how a horse that lands and loads laterally at a walk will load pretty much straight down the middle at a trot. "Balance" is different at different gaits, and pehaps not all gaits can be made to load the foot the same way on one horse. I've been thinking about how slightly out of balance tires wobble at certain speeds and not others and how tighter operating tolerances are necessary at higher speeds and how a slightly "crooked" machine (which could not, for some reason, be straightened) would need to be tuned so as not to be damaged at higher speeds if that makes any sense at all. Wish I could give you a better description.

boxnsafe wrote:
good stuff. thought provoking.

boxnsafe wrote:Is this this "new" information?

tbloomer wrote:
Maybe new to some , but still good info. And Pat has come up with a definitive way of illustrating an important principle. Thanks for posting Chris.

Tom, I'd be interested in more of your thoughts on the subject, seriously. This thread has potential.

Regards

Thanks for your comments Chris, I hope it was worthwhile and I hope people learned something (vets and farriers alike).

Tom,
If you are looking for something "new" at a farrier conference, you are going to be limited to a few minutes per year. How much has really changed in the past few centuries?

Having said that, I actually try to present information that is a bit different from the norm. Glue on shoes are not that common in CA, and many people had not seen them applied. The demo with the in-shoe force plate is also a different perspective. If nothing else, I asked people to see if their eyes matched the observations with the force plate- was the force where they expected it to be? did the horse land and breakover where they expected it? Did it stay the same at different gaits on this horse?

Was this "new"? Well, I surprised by the info.

reillyshoe wrote:That's what I was really asking.

I tried posting this same information on this forum several times. Posted vector diagrams as proofs. People argued with me. That's why I stopped using vector diagrams and math on the forum - just a wast of time.

Sometimes people need to "see" stuff presented in a different way.

Western Hill Forge wrote:Ok.

Since we have measured the COP moving more toward the center at the trot, what does this information do for your thought process on the "lateral support shoe" that seems to be so popular with sport horse farriers?

reillyshoe wrote:But CA is glue!

tbloomer wrote:
It makes me wonder about how the lateral support should would change the COP at the trot. Would it move more toward the center, or past it.

Regards

Western Hill Forge wrote:Hard or soft ground?

tbloomer wrote:
The funny part is that your observation did NOT hold true for the horse we measured. The CoF did not move appreciably between the walk and the gait. The foot impact went from lateral at the walk to flat at the trot.

With all respect to your vector diagrams, I think the point is that theories abound in hoof care. Is the force system limited? Of course, it not perfect. I do think it challenged the attendees to consider the individual variation of a limb, and the differences between their expectations and what the force measuring system observed.

The horse has a say in foot impact and loading, and it is difficult to incorporate this into any vector diagram or model theory of hoofcare.

reillyshoe wrote:Was the force at impact the same at the walk as at the trot? What percentage of the total vertical weight component is absorbed at impact during the walk compared to what % is absorbed at the trot - over different periods of time.

The horse has to absorb the same or more (velocity) total ground force at the trot as it does at the walk, in a shorter period of time with fewer foot prints covering the same distance. Does the limb extend under the horse more at the trot than the walk? If so, then the foot itself may intercept the ground at a different angle because the entire limb is at a different angle.
They were pretty much the same as Rooney's.
It provides information about the intersection of forces in a two dimensional plane at the foot print. Some of that information is helpful in an educational way. Some of it may be confusing because of the two dimensional aspect not accounting for the horizontal components of acceleration/momentum. It may be even more confusing because the horses weight centroid (center of gravity) changes its position relative to the foot print during all phases of loading during movement.
What does the sensor show if you increase the hoof angle with a wedge?
I did not suggest a theory of hoof care in regards to the diagrams. A vector diagram illustrates a force component in a direction.

According to Pat Reilly, "the sensor only measures pressure."

The diagrams I have posted in the past illustrated the vertical gravity component only in relation to the horse's center of gravity and the foot print at mid stance. My point was to encouraged folks to consider the location of the horse's center of gravity when viewing ground force (pressure) measurements. I've yet to figure out why people are so intimidated by this idea.

No gravity, no pressure.

No pressure, no foot, no horse.