Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Embedded Finite Elements for Modeling Axonal Injury

  • State-of-the-Art Modeling and Simulation of the Brain's Response to Mechanical Loads
  • Published:
Annals of Biomedical Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to propose and develop a large strain embedded finite element formulation that can be used to explicitly model axonal fiber bundle tractography from diffusion tensor imaging of the brain. Once incorporated, the fibers offer the capability to monitor tract-level strains that give insight into the biomechanics of brain injury. We show that one commercial software has a volume and mass redundancy issue when including embedded axonal fiber and that a newly developed algorithm is able to correct this discrepancy. We provide a validation analysis for stress and energy to demonstrate the method.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10
Figure 11
Figure 12

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Assaf, Y., and O. Pasternak. Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI)-based white matter mapping in brain research: a review. J. Mol. Neurosci. 34(1):51–61, 2008.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Bayly, P. et al. Measurement of brain biomechanics in vivo by magnetic resonance imaging. In: Application of Imaging Techniques to Mechanics of Materials and Structures: Proceedings of the 2010 Annual Conference on Experimental and Applied Mechanics, vol. 4, T. Proulx, Ed. Springer, 2013, pp. 117–128.

  3. Belytschko, T., W. K. Liu, B. Moran, and K. Elkhodary. Nonlinear Finite Elements for Continua and Structures. New York: Wiley, 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  4. De Geeter, N., L. Dupré, and G. Crevecoeur. Modeling transcranial magnetic stimulation from the induced electric fields to the membrane potentials along tractography-based white matter fiber tracts. J. Neural Eng. 13(2):026028, 2016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Murray, D. W., and A. A. Elwi. Nonlinear analysis of axisymmetric reinforced concrete structures. Structural engineering report SER 87 | SER-ID SER87, 1980. https://doi.org/10.7939/R3T14TR1F.

  6. Fish, J. The s-version of the finite element method. Comput. Struct. 43(3):539–547, 1992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Fish, J., and T. Belytschko. Elements with embedded localization zones for large deformation problems. In: Computational Structural Mechanics & Fluid Dynamics, edited by A. K. Noor, and D. L. Dwoyer. Pergamon: Elsevier, 1988, pp. 247–256.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Garimella, H. T., Yuan, H. Johnson, B. D., Slobounov, S. L., and R. H. Kraft. A two-fiber anisotropic constitutive model of human brain with intravoxel heterogeneity of fiber orientation using diffusion spectrum imaging (DSI). In ASME 2014 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, 2014, pp. V003T03A011–V003T03A011.

  9. Garimella, H. T., and R. H. Kraft. Modeling the mechanics of axonal fiber tracts using the embedded finite element method. Int. J. Numer. Methods Biomed. Eng. 33(5):e2823, 2017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Garimella, H. T., and R. H. Kraft. A new computational approach for modeling diffusion tractography in the brain. Neural Regen. Res. 12(1):23, 2017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Garimella, V. An embedded element based human head model to investigate axonal injury. PhD Thesis, Pennsylvania State University, 2017.

  12. Garimella, H. T., A. Przekwas, and R. H. Kraft. Do blast-induced skull flexures result in axonal deformation? PloS ONE 13(3):e0190881, 2018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Giordano, C., S. Zappalà, and S. Kleiven. Anisotropic finite element models for brain injury prediction: the sensitivity of axonal strain to white matter tract inter-subject variability. Biomech. Model. Mechanobiol. 16(4):1269–1293, 2017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gleichgerrcht, E., J. Fridriksson, C. Rorden, and L. Bonilha. Connectome-based lesion-symptom mapping (CLSM): a novel approach to map neurological function. NeuroImage Clin. 16:461–467, 2017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Guertler, C. A., R. J. Okamoto, J. L. Schmidt, A. A. Badachhape, C. L. Johnson, and P. V. Bayly. Mechanical properties of porcine brain tissue in vivo and ex vivo estimated by MR elastography. J. Biomech. 69:10–18, 2018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Guy, J., E. A. Ellis, K. Kelley, and G. M. Hope. Spectra of G ratio, myelin sheath thickness, and axon and fiber diameter in the guinea pig optic nerve. J. Comp. Neurol. 287(4):446–454, 1989.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Hagmann, P., et al. Mapping the structural core of human cerebral cortex. PLoS Biol. 6(7):e159, 2008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Helmut, H. Development of a Continuum-Mechanics-Based Tool for 3D Finite Element Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Structures and Application to Problems of Soil-Structure Interaction. Graz: Graz University of Technology, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Iarve, E. V., D. H. Mollenhauer, E. G. Zhou, T. Breitzman, and T. J. Whitney. Independent mesh method-based prediction of local and volume average fields in textile composites. Compos. Part Appl. Sci. Manuf. 40(12):1880–1890, 2009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Jiang, W.-G., S. R. Hallett, M. R. Wisnom, et al. Development of domain superposition technique for the modelling of woven fabric composites. In: Mechanical Response of Composites, edited by P. P. Camanho. Dordrecht: Springer, 2008, pp. 281–291.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Johnson, C. L., et al. Local mechanical properties of white matter structures in the human brain. NeuroImage 79:145–152, 2013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Makarov, S., A. P. Leone, and A. Nummenmaa. Researching fiber networks: computational modeling of complex fibrous tissue geometries. IEEE Pulse 8(4):58–61, 2017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Mori, S., and J. Zhang. Principles of diffusion tensor imaging and its applications to basic neuroscience research. Neuron 51(5):527–539, 2006.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Ohyama, D., Kurashiki, T., Watanabe, Y., Fujita, Y., and M. Zako. Estimation of mechanical behavior of braided composites based on mesh superposition method. In: 18th International Conference on Composite Materials, Jeju island, Korea, 2011.

  25. Shattuck, D. W., and R. M. Leahy. BrainSuite: an automated cortical surface identification tool. Med. Image Anal. 6(2):129–142, 2002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Sporns, O., G. Tononi, and R. Kötter. The human connectome: a structural description of the human brain. PLoS Comput. Biol. 1(4):e42, 2005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Tabatabaei, S., and S. V. Lomov. Eliminating the volume redundancy of embedded elements and yarn interpenetrations in meso-finite element modelling of textile composites. Comput. Struct. 152:142–154, 2015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Tabatabaei, S., S. V. Lomov, and I. Verpoest. Assessment of embedded element technique in meso-FE modelling of fibre reinforced composites. Compos. Struct. 107:436–446, 2014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Toosy, A. T., O. Ciccarelli, G. J. Parker, C. A. Wheeler-Kingshott, D. H. Miller, and A. J. Thompson. Characterizing function–structure relationships in the human visual system with functional MRI and diffusion tensor imaging. Neuroimage 21(4):1452–1463, 2004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Werring, D., C. Clark, G. Parker, D. Miller, A. Thompson, and G. Barker. A direct demonstration of both structure and function in the visual system: combining diffusion tensor imaging with functional magnetic resonance imaging. Neuroimage 9(3):352–361, 1999.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Zako, M., Kurashiki, T., Kubo, F., and M. Imura. A multi-scale analysis for structural design of fibrous composites–M3 method. In: 15th international conference on composite materials (ICCM-15), CD ed., Durban, 2005.

  32. Zhao, W., Y. Cai, Z. Li, and S. Ji. Injury prediction and vulnerability assessment using strain and susceptibility measures of the deep white matter. Biomech. Model. Mechanobiol. 16(5):1709–1727, 2017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

The authors gratefully acknowledge the support provided by CFDRC, Inc. under a sub-contract funded by the Department of Defense, Department of Health Program through Contract W81XWH-14-C-0045, the U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL) at the Aberdeen Proving Grounds under Contract W15P7T-10-D-D416, the Defense Health Agency under the Contract W81XWH-14-C-0045 and the US Department of Defense through the Contracts W15P7T-10-D-D416, W81XWH-17-C-0216, DOTC-17-01-INIT0086. Neuroimaging data show in Fig. 2 was provided by The Pennsylvania State University Center for Sports Concussion Research and Service, University Park, USA. The authors thank Dr. Sam Slobounov and Dr. Brian D. Johnson for the data provided. We would also like to acknowledge The Pennsylvania State University Social, Life, and Engineering Sciences Imaging Center (SLEIC), High Field MRI Facility for providing access to the imaging equipment. The authors also thank The Pennsylvania State University Institute for Cyberscience for providing the computational resources required for this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Reuben H. Kraft.

Additional information

Associate Editor Raj K. Prabhu oversaw the review of this article.

Harsha T. Garimella and Ritika R. Menghani are co-first authors.

Appendix

Appendix

How Does Our Element Level Corrections Compare to the Transverse Isotropic Constitutive Modeling?

In this section, we will look into some of the implementation details of selected areas of this finite element formulation—that are specific to the embedded element technique.

Transformation Matrix

This matrix can be used to transform a tensor from one coordinate system to another coordinate system. Let’s assume that the first coordinate system is represented by the basis \(\left( {m_{1} ,m_{2} ,m_{3} } \right)\) and the second coordinate system is represented by the basis \(\left( {e_{1} ,e_{2} ,e_{3} } \right)\), then the transformation matrix to transform a tensor from first coordinate system to the second coordinate system can be defined as:

$${\mathbf{T}} = \left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {m_{1} \cdot e_{1} } & {m_{1} \cdot e_{2} } & {m_{1} \cdot e_{3} } \\ {m_{2} \cdot e_{1} } & {m_{2} \cdot e_{2} } & {m_{2} \cdot e_{3} } \\ {m_{3} \cdot e_{1} } & {m_{3} \cdot e_{2} } & {m_{3} \cdot e_{3} } \\ \end{array} } \right]$$
(21)

i.e., if a tensor in the first coordinate system is \({\varvec{\upsigma}}_{m}\) and the same tensor in the second coordinate system is \({\varvec{\upsigma}}_{e}\), then

$${\varvec{\upsigma}}_{c} = {\mathbf{T\sigma }}_{m} {\mathbf{T}}^{T}$$
(22)

This matrix is frequently used in transforming a tensor of interest from fiber to matrix coordinate systems and vice versa.

Adding Embedded Fiber Mass to the Host Element Mass

For implementation purposes, an element level direct lumped mass matrix was used. The below-listed procedure explains the detailed calculation of global mass matrix using the host as well as the embedded element information.

  1. 1.

    Calculate the host element mass using the volume and density information

  2. 2.

    Calculate the total fiber volume embedded in this particular host element

  3. 3.

    Calculate the fiber mass using its volume (Step-2) and using the material model information.

  4. 4.

    Calculate the effective element mass by adding the host and embedded element masses.

  5. 5.

    Divide this effective element mass among all the host element nodes equally and form an element level diagonal mass matrix.

  6. 6.

    Scatter this element level mass matrix into a global mass matrix and repeat this step for all the elements.

Deformation in the Embedded Elements

Since the displacements of the embedded nodes are assumed to be a function of the displacements of the host nodes, it can be shown that the deformation gradient of the embedded elements will be same as that of the host element.

$${\mathbf{F}}_{host} = \frac{{\partial {\text{x}}_{\text{host}} }}{{\partial {\text{X}}_{\text{host}} }} = \frac{{\partial ({\text{X}}_{\text{host}} + {\text{u}}_{\text{host}} )}}{{\partial {\text{X}}_{\text{host}} }} = {\mathbf{I}} + \frac{{\partial {\text{u}}_{\text{host}} }}{{\partial {\text{X}}_{\text{host}} }}$$
(23)

But, since \({\text{u}}_{\text{embed}} = \left[ {\mathbf{N}} \right]{\text{u}}_{{n,{\text{host}}}}\) and \({\mathbf{B}} = \frac{{\partial \left[ {\text{N}} \right]}}{{\partial {\text{X}}_{\text{host}} }}\),

$$\frac{{\partial {\text{u}}_{\text{host}} }}{{\partial {\text{X}}_{\text{host}} }} = {\mathbf{B}}{\text{u}}_{{n,{\text{host}}}} = \frac{{\partial {\text{u}}_{\text{embed}} }}{{\partial {\text{X}}_{\text{host}} }}$$
(24)

Therefore, we can see that the above Eq. (22) can be extended such that

$${\mathbf{F}}_{\text{host}} = {\mathbf{I}} + \frac{{\partial {\text{u}}_{\text{host}} }}{{\partial {\text{X}}_{\text{host}} }} = {\mathbf{I}} + \frac{{\partial {\text{u}}_{\text{embed}} }}{{\partial {\text{X}}_{\text{host}} }} = {\mathbf{F}}_{\text{embed}}$$
(25)

In the above equations, \(\varvec{ }{\mathbf{F}}_{\text{host}}\) represents the deformation gradient of the host element,\(\varvec{ }{\mathbf{F}}_{{{\mathbf{embed}}}}\) represents the deformation gradient of the embedded element,\(\varvec{ }{\text{x}}_{\text{host}}\) represents the current configuration of the host element, \(\varvec{ }{\text{X}}_{{{\mathbf{host}}}}\) represents the reference configuration of the host element, \({\text{u}}_{\text{host}}\) represents the continuum displacement of the host domain,\(\varvec{ }{\text{u}}_{{n,{\text{host}}}}\) represents the nodal displacements of the host domain, \(\varvec{ }{\text{u}}_{\text{embed}} \varvec{ }\) represents the nodal displacement vector of the embedded elements, \({\mathbf{B}}\) represents the strain displacement matrix and \(\varvec{ }\left[ {\mathbf{N}} \right]\) represents the shape function matrix of the host element.

Adding the Nodal Force Contribution from the Embedded Fibers Back to That of the Host Elements

Adding the nodal force vector of the truss element to the host–parent element is not straight forward and involves a complicated procedure. The overall methodology adopted here can be classified into multiple steps:

  1. 1.

    Calculating integration points

  2. 2.

    Calculating the internal nodal force vector.

Calculating Integration Points

This step involves a calculating the integration points and moving between coordinate systems. Note that this step in explained in the context of truss elements embedded in hexahedral host elements. Here, we have three coordinate systems. First one is the global coordinate system (coordinate system in which the host and embedded meshes are defined). The second one is the iso-parametric coordinate system of the host element. And the third one is the iso-parametric coordinate system of the embedded fiber. We will designate these systems as G (global system), LH (iso-parametric coordinate system of the host element) and LE (iso-parametric coordinate system of the embedded fiber), respectively for our future discussion. Since we will be integrating over the fiber volume to calculate the internal nodal force vector contribution from the embedded fibers and adding it to the nodal force vector from the host element, we need the integration points of the embedded fibers calculated in the LH coordinate system (iso-parametric coordinate system of the host element). This can be done using an iterative solver. In our library, we have currently implemented the Newton–Raphson solver for this purpose. More information on the mapping of integration points or the Newton–Raphson solving can be obtained from the dissertation work by Hartl.18

Calculating the Internal Nodal Force Vector of the Embedded Fiber

Once the fiber integration points are calculated in the host element coordinate system, the nodal force vector can be calculated by integrating over the fiber volume using the following equation:

$${\mathbf{f}}_{{e,{\text{fiber}}}}^{\text{int}} = \mathop \smallint \limits_{\text{fiber}} {\mathbf{B}}^{T} {\varvec{\upsigma}}d\varOmega_{f} = \mathop \sum \limits_{{n_{\xi } }} {\mathbf{B}}^{T} {\varvec{\upsigma}} *wts\left( \xi \right)*{\text{jacobian}}_{\text{fiber}}$$
(26)

In the above equation, \(n_{\xi }\) represents the number of Gauss quadrature points, and \(wts\left( \xi \right)\) represents the Gaussian weights of the particular quadrature point.

Calculating the Stress Along the Fiber

As seen in the above sub-section, both the host and embedded elements will have the same deformation gradient. Therefore, the Cauchy stress tensor calculated using the deformation gradient and the embedded fiber material properties will be transformed into the fiber coordinate system (a unit vector along the fiber axis forms the basis of this coordinate system), and the corresponding fiber stress will be calculated.

$${\varvec{\upsigma}}_{fiber} = f\left( {{\mathbf{F}}, {\text{Fiber material model}}} \right)$$
(27)

where F is the deformation gradient and \({\varvec{\upsigma}}_{\text{fiber}}\) is the fiber Cauchy stress tensor calculated in the host element coordinate system.

$${\varvec{\upsigma}}_{{{\text{fiber}} - {\text{axis}}}} = {\mathbf{T}} \cdot {\varvec{\upsigma}}_{\text{fiber}} \cdot {\mathbf{T}}^{T}$$
(28)

Calculating the Strain Along the Fiber

The deformation gradient tensor can be used to calculate the strain projected along the fiber using the following equations:

$${\mathbf{C}} = {\mathbf{F}}^{T} {\mathbf{F}}$$
(29)
$$\lambda_{\text{fiber}} = \sqrt {a_{0} \cdot {\mathbf{C}}a_{0} }$$
(30)
$$\varepsilon_{\text{fiber}} = log\left( {\lambda_{\text{fiber}} } \right)$$
(31)

where C is the right Cauchy-Green deformation tensor, \(\lambda_{\text{fiber}}\) is the stretch along the fiber, a0 is the unit vector along the fiber direction and \(\varepsilon_{\text{fiber}}\) is the strain along the fiber.

EEMA Energy Plot

Since embedded element technique has been formulated using the finite element method, it would be essential for the energy to be conserved. Appendix Figure A1 shows a system and its corresponding energy plot. As expected, the total energy of the system remains zero throughout the span of the simulation.

Figure A1
figure 13

Energy plot for a cube with one fiber (addressing volume redundancy).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Garimella, H.T., Menghani, R.R., Gerber, J.I. et al. Embedded Finite Elements for Modeling Axonal Injury. Ann Biomed Eng 47, 1889–1907 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-018-02166-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-018-02166-0

Keywords

Navigation