Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Erin K. Oneida, Marjolein C.H. van der Meulen, Anthony R. Ingraffea Cornell University Ithaca, NY
12th International Conference on Fracture Ottawa, Canada July 12-17, 2009
Results
Discussion
(Mohsin et al., 2006)
Acknowledgements
2
Motivation
Each year, 2 million Americans over age 50 suffer a skeletal fracture1
Understanding relationships among geometry, material properties, and damage propagation could explain fracture risk and provide direction for preventative treatment development
3 1. Burge et al., 2007 2. Center et al., 1999
Cancellous Bone
Cortical Bone
Osteon
Interstitial Bone
10-500 m
3-7 m
Femur (cm)
Osteon Cement Line
150 m
Haversian Canal
4
1. Abraham et al., 1998 2. Nalla et al., 2003 3. Mohsin et al., 2006 4. Perren, 2002
Osteon Osteon
100 m
Objective
To use computational modeling together with detailed experimental data to identify the relationships among microstructural features and damage evolution in cortical bone
+
FE Model Experimental Data
Explain?
100 m
10
Material Properties:
Einterstitial Eosteonal
Osteon Haversian Canal Interstitial Bone
Model and mesh generated in a few min. on desktop computer
11
1 mm
1 mm
0.0625 mm thick
12
Crack Template
14
15
Deformed View
16
Compute Parameters of Interest e.g., Stress Intensity Factors (KI, KII, KIII)
YES NO Repeat Crack Growth? Grow Crack Front According to Chosen Growth Rule e.g., Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics:
Automatic Re-meshing
K ai a given K mean
i I
18
0.135 mm
0.135 mm
0.135 mm
0.135 mm
0.135 mm
0.135 mm
0.135 mm
0.135 mm
crk8
0.135 mm
30
31
Grow Crack
Osteon
Canal (Models #1 and #2) Canal (Model #3) Model #1 Crack Front --Model #3 Crack Front
Crack
Outer Boundary
X Coordinate (mm)
32
Discussion of Results
Variation in crack front growth apparent between Models #1 and #2
-When inside an osteon, crack grew less when modulus was lower
Cracks behaved as expected in all models for given loading scenario Future Studies will explore: Additional variations in material properties and geometry apparent at the microscale
Different crack growth formulations (e.g., cohesive zone modeling) Variations in crack orientation, size, and number of cracks Different loading scenarios
Ultimately, developed modeling capabilities will be validated using experimental data related to crack growth at the microscale 33
Overall Discussion
Modeling framework created and used to study crack propagation in bone at the microscale:
Model generation tool allowed for quick creation of variable digital models of bone Cracks were successfully inserted and grown according to chosen criteria Small parametric study allowed for investigation of effects of material property and geometry variations on crack growth
With basic tools in place, a broader parametric investigation can be performed in the future
34
Acknowledgements
Thanks for financial support: Ross-Tetelman Fellowship Cornell Center for Materials Research (NSF DMR 0089992) NIH Grant AR 053571 Thanks for technical assistance: Dr. Bruce Carter Dr. Paul Wawryznek Cornell Fracture Group Members Thank-you for your time!
35