What did you learn from testing earlier versions of the Bracehorn?
Share
Short answer: Dominic identifies two variables that required repeated trial and error during development: length and angle. On length, he found that a device that was too long would catch on the back of the user's calf area, interfering with the motion rather than assisting it. On angle, he found the tolerance was narrow in both directions. If the degree of the angle was too severe, it threw off the way the foot slid into the shoe. If the angle was too straight, the device made contact in the wrong area for the user. Getting both dimensions correct required substantial experimentation, and he describes length and angle as the two elements the team had to genuinely play around with before arriving at the final production version of the Bracehorn.
In Dominic's words
Length was one factor, because if it is too long it would actually catch the back part of their calf area. And then also the degree of the angle, because if it is too much, it throws off the way their foot slides in, and if it is too straight, it hits them in the wrong area. So it is the length and also the angle of the Bracehorn that we had to really play around with to get right.
Those two things sound simple but they took the most work. With length, you would think longer is better because it gives the user more reach, but past a certain point it starts hitting the calf and it works against you. With the angle, there was a narrow window.
Too aggressive and the foot does not slide in properly. Too flat and it makes contact somewhere it should not. We went back and forth on both of those until it was right.