Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology

, Volume 12, Issue 4, pp 781–791 | Cite as

Deficiencies in numerical models of anisotropic nonlinearly elastic materials

  • A. Ní Annaidh
  • M. Destrade
  • M. D. Gilchrist
  • J. G. Murphy
Original Paper

Abstract

Incompressible nonlinearly hyperelastic materials are rarely simulated in finite element numerical experiments as being perfectly incompressible because of the numerical difficulties associated with globally satisfying this constraint. Most commercial finite element packages therefore assume that the material is slightly compressible. It is then further assumed that the corresponding strain-energy function can be decomposed additively into volumetric and deviatoric parts. We show that this decomposition is not physically realistic, especially for anisotropic materials, which are of particular interest for simulating the mechanical response of biological soft tissue. The most striking illustration of the shortcoming is that with this decomposition, an anisotropic cube under hydrostatic tension deforms into another cube instead of a hexahedron with non-parallel faces. Furthermore, commercial numerical codes require the specification of a ‘compressibility parameter’ (or ‘penalty factor’), which arises naturally from the flawed additive decomposition of the strain-energy function. This parameter is often linked to a ‘bulk modulus’, although this notion makes no sense for anisotropic solids; we show that it is essentially an arbitrary parameter and that infinitesimal changes to it result in significant changes in the predicted stress response. This is illustrated with numerical simulations for biaxial tension experiments of arteries, where the magnitude of the stress response is found to change by several orders of magnitude when infinitesimal changes in ‘Poisson’s ratio’ close to the perfect incompressibility limit of 1/2 are made.

Keywords

Nonlinear soft tissues Anisotropy Additive decomposition Finite element simulations 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adams LH, Gibson RE (1930) The compressibility of rubber. J Wash Acad Sci 20: 213–223Google Scholar
  2. Beatty MF, Stalnaker DO (1986) The poisson function of finite elasticity. J Appl Mech 53: 807–813MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bonet J, Wood R (2008) Nonlinear continuum mechanics for finite element analysis. University Press, CambridgeMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bridgman PW (1944) The compression of sixty-one solid substances to 25000 kg cm2, determined by a new rapid method. Proc Am Acad Arts Sci 76: 9–24Google Scholar
  5. Carew TE, Vaishnav RN, Patel DJ (1968) Compressibility of the arterial wall. Circ Res 23: 61–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Christensen RG, Hoeve CAJ (1970) Comparison between theoretical and experimental values of the volume changes accompanying rubber extension. J Polym Sci A 1(8): 1503–1512Google Scholar
  7. Chuong CJ, Fung YC (1984) Compressibility and constitutive equation of arterial wall in radial compression experiments. J Biomech 17: 35–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Crisfield MA (1991) Nonlinear finite element analysis of solids and structures. Volume 1: Essentials. Wiley, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Destrade M, Gilchrist MD, Motherway J, Murphy JG (2012) Slight compressibility and sensitivity to changes in Poisson’s ratio. Int J Numer Meth Eng 90: 403–411MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Erdemir A, Guess TM, Halloran J, Tadepalli SC, Morrison TM (2012) Considerations for reporting finite element analysis studies in biomechanics. J Biomech 45: 625–633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. FEBio Documentation, http://mrl.sci.utah.edu/software/febio. 2012
  12. Fong JT, Penn RW (1975) Construction of a strain-energy function for an isotropic elastic material. Trans Soc Rheol 19: 99–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gasser TC, Ogden RW, Holzapfel GA (2006) Hyperelastic modelling of arterial layers with distributed collagen fibre orientation. J R Soc Interface 3: 15–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gent AN, Suh JB, Kelly SG III (2007) Mechanics of rubber shear springs. Int J Nonlinear Mech 42: 241–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hearmon, RF (1974) The elastic constants of crystals and other anisotropic materials. In: Hellwege KH (ed) Landolt-Börnstein Tables, Group III, vol 11, pp 1–154Google Scholar
  16. Holzapfel GA (2000) Nonlinear solid mechanics. Wiley, ChichesterMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. Holzapfel GA, Gasser TC, Ogden RW (2000) A new constitutive framework for arterial wall mechanics and a comparative study of material models, J. Elasticity 61: 1–48MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Holzapfel GA, Stadler M, Schulze-Bauer CAJ (2002) A layer-specific three-dimensional model for the simulation of balloon angioplasty using magnetic resonance imaging and mechanical testing. Ann Biomed Eng 30: 753–767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Horgan CO, Murphy JG (2009a) Constitutive modeling for moderate deformations of slightly compressible rubber. J Rheol 53: 153–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Horgan CO, Murphy JG (2009b) On the volumetric part of strain-energy functions used in the constitutive modeling of slightly compressible solid rubbers. Int J Solids Struct 46: 3078–3085MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. LS-DYNA Keyword User’s Manual, version 971 (2007) Livermore Software Technology CorporationGoogle Scholar
  22. Ní Annaidh A, Bruyère K, Destrade M, Gilchrist MD, Maurini C, Otténio M, Saccomandi G (2012a) Automated estimation of collagen fibre dispersion in the dermis and its contribution to the anisotropic behaviour of skin. Ann Biomed Eng 40: 1666–1678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ní Annaidh A, Bruyère K, Destrade M, Gilchrist MD, Otténio M (2012b) Characterising the anisotropic mechanical properties of excised human skin. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 5: 139–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ogden RW (1997) Nonlinear elastic deformations. Ellis Horwood, Chichester (1984). Reprinted by Dover, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. Ogden RW (2003) Nonlinear elasticity, anisotropy, material stability and residual stresses in soft tissue, CISM courses and lectures series no. 441. Springer, Wien, 65–108Google Scholar
  26. Penn RW (1970) Volume changes accompanying the extension of rubber. Trans Soc Rheol 14: 509–517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rashid B, Destrade M, Gilchrist MD (2012a) Mechanical characterization of brain tissue in compression at dynamic strain rates. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 10: 23–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rashid B, Destrade M, Gilchrist MD (2012b) Mechanical characterization of brain tissue in tension at dynamic strain rates. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2012.07.015
  29. Simo JC, Taylor RL (1991) Quasi-incompressible finite elasticity in principal stretches. Continuum basis and numerical algorithms. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 85: 273–310MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sansour C (2008) On the physical assumptions underlying the volumetric-isochoric split and the case of anisotropy. Eur J Mech A Solids 27: 28–39MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Vito RP, Dixon SA (2003) Blood vessel constitutive models—1995–2002. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 5: 413–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Weiss JA, Makerc BN, Govindjeed S (1996) Finite element implementation of incompressible, transversely isotropic hyperelasticity. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 135: 107–128MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Ní Annaidh
    • 1
  • M. Destrade
    • 1
    • 2
  • M. D. Gilchrist
    • 1
  • J. G. Murphy
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.School of Mechanical and Materials EngineeringUniversity College DublinDublinIreland
  2. 2.School of Mathematics, Statistics and Applied MathematicsNational University of IrelandGalwayIreland
  3. 3.Centre for Medical Engineering ResearchDublin City UniversityDublinIreland

Personalised recommendations