International Journal of Applied Science and Engineering
Published by Chaoyang University of Technology

Hsin-Hung Tu*

Department of Computer-Aided Industrial Design, Overseas Chinese University, Taichung 40721, Taiwan


Download Citation: |
Download PDF


Arch height index (AHI) between sitting and standing is an important reference in assessing foot mobility and foot classification in podiatry clinic. The relationships of three types of AHIs related to different foot lengths in sitting and standing postures are desired to be investigated in clinical applications. The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationships of three arch height indices (AHIs) calculated from total foot length, medial ball length and lateral ball length between sitting and standing postures and to examine the performances of them. Three AHIs of right feet of 150 subjects, including 83 males and 67 females, were measured using 3D foot scanner with an accuracy level of 0.05 cm in sitting and standing postures in this study. The results showed that three AHIs were significantly different from each other, and had the same performances between sitting and standing postures. AHI values in the sitting posture were all larger than those in the standing posture, and AHI-MBL has a better explaining power on AHI-TFL than AHI-LBL on AHI-TFL in both postures. The time and priority of using these three AHIs in evaluating foot types with normality and deformity were suggested.

Keywords: Arch height index (AHI), 3D foot scanner, Foot mobility, Sitting, Standing.

Share this article with your colleagues



  1. Arnold, J.B., Bishop, C. 2013. Quantifying foot kinematics inside athletic footwear: A review. Footwear Science, 5, 55–62.

  2. Butler, R.J., Hillstrom, H., Song, J., Richards, C.J., Davis, I.S. 2008. Arch height index measurement system: Establishment of reliability and normative values. Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association, 98, 102–106.

  3. Cobb, S.C., James, C.R., Hjertstedt, M., Kruk, J. 2011. A digital photographic measurement method for quantifying foot posture: Validity, reliability, and descriptive data. Journal of Athletic Training, 46, 20–30.

  4. Cowan, D.N., Jones, B.H., Robinson, J.R. 1993. Foot morphologic characteristics and risk of exercise-related injury. Archives of Family Medicine, 2, 773–777.

  5. Cornwall, M.W., McPoil, T.G. 2011. Relationship between static foot posture and foot mobility. Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, 4, 1–9.

  6. Dempster, W.T., Gaughran, G.R.L. 1967. Properties of body segments based on size and weight. American journal of anatomy, 120, 33–54.

  7. Franettovich, M.M., McPoil, T.G., Russell, T., Skardoon, G., Vicenzino, B. 2007. The ability to predict dynamic foot posture from static measurements. Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association, 97, 115–120.

  8. Houston, V.L., Luo, G., Mason, C.P., Mussman, M., Garbarini, M., Beattie, A.C. 2006. Changes in male foot shape and size with weightbearing. Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association, 96, 330–343.

  9. Kaufman, K.R., Brodine, S.K., Shaffer, R.A., Johnson, C. W., Cullison, T.R. 1999. The effect of foot structure and range of motion on musculoskeletal overuse injuries. The American Journal of Sports Medicine, 27, 585–593.

  10. Kimura, M., Mochimaru, M., Kanade, T. 2011. 3D measurement of feature crosssections of foot while walking. Machine Vision and Applications, 23, 377–388.

  11. Kramer, P.A., Lautzenheiser, S.G. 2022. Foot morphology influences the change in arch index between standing and walking conditions. The Anatomical Record, 305, 3254–3262.

  12. Krauss, I., Valiant, G., Horstmann, T., Grau, S. 2010. Comparison of female foot morphology and last design in athletic footwear—are men's lasts appropriate for women?. Research in Sports Medicine, 18, 140–156.

  13. Lees, A., Lake, M., Klenerman, L. 2005. Shock absorption during forefoot running and its relationship to medial longitudinal arch height. Foot & Ankle International, 26, 1081–1088.

  14. Luo, G., Houston, V.L., Mussman, M., Garbarini, M., Beattie, A.C., Thongpop, C. 2009. Comparison of male and female foot shape. Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association, 99, 383–390.

  15. Mall, N.A., Hardaker, W.M., Nunley, J.A., Queen, R.M. 2007. The reliability and reproducibility of foot type measurements using a mirrored foot photo box and digital photography compared to caliper measurements. Journal of Biomechanics, 40, 1171–1176.

  16. McPoil, T.G., Cornwall, M.W., Medoff, L., Vicenzino, B., Forsberg, K., Hilz, D. 2008a. Arch height change during sit-to-stand: An alternative for the navicular drop test. Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, 1, 1–11.

  17. McPoil, T.G., Cornwall, M.W., Vicenzino, B., Teyhen, D.S., Molloy, J.M., Christie, D.S., Collins, N. 2008b. Effect of using truncated versus total foot length to calculate the arch height ratio. The Foot, 18, 220–227.

  18. McPoil, T.G., Vicenzino, B., Cornwall, M.W., Collins, N., Warren, M. 2009. Reliability and normative values for the foot mobility magnitude: A composite measure of vertical and medial-lateral mobility of the midfoot. Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, 2, 1–12.

  19. McPoil, T.G., Cornwall, M.W., Abeler, M.G., Devereaux, K.J., Flood, L.J., Merriman, S.E., Sullivan, S., van Der Laan, M.J., Villadiego, T.A., Wilson, K. 2013. The optimal method to assess the vertical mobility of the midfoot: Navicular drop versus dorsal arch height difference. Clin Res Foot Ankle, 1, 1–7.

  20. Robinette, K.M., Daanen, H., Paquet, E. 1999. The CAESAR project: A 3-D surface anthropometry survey. 3DIM’99: Proceedings of Second International Conference on 3-D Digital Imaging and Modeling Conference, 380–386.

  21. Telfer, S., Woodburn, J. 2010. The use of 3D surface scanning for the measurement and assessment of the human foot. Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, 3, 1–9.

  22. Tu, H.H. 2014. Foot volume estimation formula in healthy adults. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 44, 92–98.

  23. Tu, H.H., Lo, V.E.W., Liu, C.W., Liu, Y.P., Yu, C.Y., Chen, C.Y., Liu, L.W. 2021. Body volume estimation equation for male laborers in Taiwan. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 27, 1207–1214.

  24. Pohl, MB., Farr, L. 2010. A comparison of foot arch measurement reliability using both digital photography and calliper methods. Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, 3, 1–6.

  25. Williams, D.S., McClay, I.S., 2000. Measurements used to characterize the foot and the medial longitudinal arch: Reliability and validity. Physical Therapy, 80, 864–871.

  26. Williams, D.S., McClay, I.S., Hamill, J. 2001. Arch structure and injury patterns in runners. Clinical Biomechanics, 16, 341–347.

  27. Xiong, S., Goonetilleke, R.S., Witana, C.P., Weerasinghe, T.W., Au, E.Y.L. 2010. Foot arch characterization a review, a new metric, and a comparison. Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association, 100, 14–24.

  28. Yen, D.Y., Puffer, J.C., Schmalzried, T.P. 1998. Injuries in runners: A prospective study of alignment. Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine, 8, 187–194.

  29. Yu, C.Y., Lin, C.H., Yang, Y.H. 2010. Human body surface area database and estimation formula. Burns, 36, 616–629.

  30. Yu, C.Y., Tu, H.H., 2009. Foot surface area database and estimation formula. Applied Ergonomics, 40, 767–774.

  31. Zifchock, R.A., Davis, I., Hillstrom, H., Song, J. 2006. The effect of gender, age, and lateral dominance on arch height and arch stiffness. Foot & Ankle International, 27, 367–372.

  32. Zifchock, R.A., Theriot, C., Hillstrom, H.J., Song, J., Neary, M. 2017. The relationship between arch height and arch flexibility: A proposed arch flexibility classification system for the description of multidimensional foot structure. Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association, 107, 119–123.

  33. Zifchock, R., Parker, R., Wan, W., Neary, M., Song, J., Hillstrom, H. 2019. The relationship between foot arch flexibility and medial-lateral ground reaction force distribution. Gait & Posture, 69, 46–49.


Received: 2022-12-11
Revised: 2023-04-11
Accepted: 2023-05-16
Available Online: 2023-06-06

Cite this article:

Tu, H.-H. Relationships of three arch height indices related to different foot lengths between sitting and standing postures. International Journal of Applied Science and Engineering, 20, 2022356.

  Copyright The Author(s). This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are cited.