Core77

A Look at Under Armour's 3D ARCHITECHs, Spotted At Autodesk University

Cool and innovative, but don't step in mud

By Emily Suzuki - December 1, 2016

in Sneakers

Back in March, Under Armour revealed the first 3D printed shoes to actually hit the market, the 3D ARCHITECHs. These were and still are a big deal because they kicked off what has now turned into a case of 2016 3D printed footwear retail mania. During our time at this year's Autodesk University, we spotted the 3D ARCHITECHs IRL (and partially deconstructed!).

Cameo alert: Rain Noe's hand

Enter a caption (optional)

Here's a quick video showing how the soles are made:

Enter a caption (optional)

"Under Armour Used selective laser sintering (SLS) to 3D print the ARCHITECH's flexible yet durable complex lattice structure, made from a bonded chalky substrate." (display stand copy in first image)

The 3D ARCHITECH's lattice sole structure is durable—and looks extra cool when removed from the rest of the shoe—but what happens if the wearer runs through mud? Or in a worse and more unlikely scenario, animal poop? Answer: weighed down sneakers and a lot of cleaning.

These kicks may be restricted to indoor sports, but what matters right now is the new sole design Under Armour created. They set the standard for 3D printed sneakers to move beyond a normal sneaker design and push forward to something new. This year, we've also covered the Reebok Liquid Speeds, which use liquid 3D printing instead of powder and look similar to the 3D ARCHITECHs if you squint really hard.

I find the design—while restrictive—of the 3D ARCHITECHs is more innovative, while the process of creating the Liquid Speeds takes the win over the ARCHITECHs.

What are your thoughts? Which method/design do you find more game changing?

o
1

Favorite This
Q
3

Comment

Comments

Nick T

8 years ago

Z

Z

Reply

Keep an open mind, guys. Innovation can't happen without thinking outside the box and trying to push the envelope, eh?

I think the UA Architect might be a step in developing adaptive personalized training shoes. The lattice structure of the heel provides cushioning support but will bottom out with enough weight, as can be seen here: https://redshift.autodesk.com/3d-printed-shoes/ However; this could be turned into an advantage for athletes who move through various exercises during a workout.

For example, you wouldn't want to wear the same shoes for your olympic lifts as you would for your warm-up run. A well cushioning running shoe is great for running but that cushioning leads to instability during a hang clean (Olympic lifting shoes actually have solid wooden heels to provide maximum stability) So if the UA Architect's heel could be engineered for specific weight ranges it could mean athletes may only need to buy one pair of training shoes. Bottoming out = solid foundation for olympic lifts and springy lattice = good cushioning for running.

As for manufacturing and price: 1) Consumers (read athletes) already pay outrageous prices for "performance" footwear (Nike basketball shoes routinely cost $200, not to mention fashion footwear - just go shop at Nordstroms....) and 2) additive manufacturing processes and materials are constantly becoming more efficient and more reliable. It's only a matter of time until it becomes truly affordable/reasonable to use those methods for mass production.

!Report as spam
Michl Ratata

8 years ago

Z

Z

Reply

As a mechanical engineer and a runner I can't comment on the design side of this, but I just don't see how 3D printing can improve shoes. It will only make them more expensive and more prone to fatigue and failure. Especially when considering aspects such as pronation of the foot, different length legs, etc I can only envision that this kind of sole will degrade faster an dmore unpredictable than the soles we have. And for all its worth we have the best quality athleticwear that has ever existed.
I agrees with amunta nul in that this could be interesting for a small percentage of the population IF this gave us the ability to tailor soles and shoes to certain needs / disabilities / rehab scenarios. For mass production I don't see any advantage.

!Report as spam
amunta nul

8 years ago

Z

Z

Reply

The sole looks slightly more functional in their store photos: https://www.underarmour.com/en-us/pid1289007-100

But they are absolutely hideous. It's really just a publicity stunt, though, unless you could "customize performance" there's absolutely no reason to 3D print shoe soles except for aesthetics.

!Report as spam