Biomaterials: Processing, Characterization, and Applications

  • Damien Lacroix
  • Josep A. Planell


Biomechanics is the study of the mechanics of a part or function of a living body and of the forces exerted by muscles and external loading on the skeletal structure. Biomechanics dates back to ancient times where the study of arthritis was known to be induced by joint disease. But it is only at the beginning of the twentieth century that biomechanical studies of joint materials such as articular cartilage, ligament, and bone began. Living tissues have some similarities with conventional engineering materials although they usually have complex structures that make them more difficult to study. In this chapter, a description of the composition and structure of the main tissues found in mammals is given. The relations between composition, structure and biomechanical properties are presented for bone, cartilage, skin, tendons and ligaments, muscles, and blood vessels and arteries. Finally, some aspects of joint biomechanics are described.


Articular Cartilage Synovial Fluid Cortical Bone Trabecular Bone Collagen Fiber 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



  1. Fung YC, ed. Biomechanics: Mechanical Properties of Living Tissues. Springer-Verlag: New York, NY, 1981.Google Scholar
  2. Mow VC, Ratcliffe A, and Woo SL-Y, eds. Biomechanics of Diarthrodial Joints, Springer-Verlag: New York, NY, 1990.Google Scholar
  3. Cowin, SC, ed. Bone Mechanics Handbook. 2nd edn, CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2001Google Scholar
  4. Odgaard A and Weinans H, eds. Bone Structure and Remodeling, World Scientific, Singapore, 1995.Google Scholar
  5. Martini, FH. Fundamentals of Anatomy and Physiology, 4th edn, Prentice Hall International: New Jersey, 1989.Google Scholar
  6. Daniel DM, Akeson WH, and O’Connor JJ, eds. Knee Ligaments: Structure, Function, Injury, and Repair, Raven Press: New York, NY, 1990.Google Scholar
  7. Buckwalter JA, Einhorn TA, and Simon SR, eds. Orthopaedic Basic Science: Biology and Biomechanics of the Musculoskeletal System. 2nd edn,, Am Acad Orthop Surg: Rosemont, Il, 2000, pp. 567–580.Google Scholar
  8. Bilezikian JP, Raisz LG, and Rodan GA, eds. Principles of Bone Biology, Academic Press: San Diego, 1996Google Scholar
  9. Martin RB and Burr DB, eds. Structure, Function, and Adaptation of Compact Bone, Raven Press: New York, NY, 1989.Google Scholar
  10. Mow VC and Ratcliffe A, eds. Structure and Function of Articular Cartilage, Boca Raton, FL, CRC Press, 1993.Google Scholar
  11. Mow VC and Hayes WC, eds. Basic Orthopaedic Biomechanics, 2 edn, Lippincott-Raven: Philadelphia, PA, 1997.Google Scholar
  12. Mow VC, Flatow EL, Atheshian GA. Biomechanics. In Buckwalter JA, Einhorn TA, Simon SR, eds. Orthopaedic Basic Science: Biology and Biomechanics of the Musculoskeletal System, 2nd edn, Am Acad Orthop Surg, 2000, pp. 133--180.Google Scholar


  1. Ascenzi A. The micromechanics versus the macromechanics of cortical bone – a comprehensive presentation, J Biomech Eng, 1988, 8: 143.Google Scholar
  2. Ashman RB, Corin JD, and Turner CH. Elastic properties of cancellous bone: measurement by an ultrasonic technique. J Biomech, 1987, 20: 979.Google Scholar
  3. Bostrom MPG, Boskey A, Kaufman JJ, and Einhorn TA. Form and function of bone. in Buckwalter JA, Einhorn TA, and Simon SR, eds. Orthopaedic Basic Science: Biology and Biomechanics of the Musculoskeletal System, 2nd edn,, Am Acad Orthop Surg: Rosemont, Il, 2000, Chapter 13, pp. 319–370.Google Scholar
  4. Burr DB, Martin RB, Schaffler MB, and Radin EL. Bone remodeling in response to in vivo fatigue damage. J Biomech, 1985, 18: 189.Google Scholar
  5. Burr DB. Muscle strength, bone mass and age related bone loss. J Bone Miner Res, 1997, 12, 1547.Google Scholar
  6. Burstein AH, Reilly DT, Martens M. Aging of bone tissue: Mechanical properties. J Bone Joint Surg, 1976, 58B: 82–86.Google Scholar
  7. Burstein AH, Zika JM, Heiple KG, and Klein L. Contribution of collagen and mineral to the elastic-plastic properties of bone. J Bone Joint Surg, 1975, A57: 956.Google Scholar
  8. Bonfield W and Tully AE. Ultrasonic analysis of the Young’s modulus of cortical bone. J Biomed Eng, 1982, 4: 23–27Google Scholar
  9. Caler WE, Carter DR. Bone creep-fatigue damage accumulation. J Biomech, 1989, 22: 625–635.Google Scholar
  10. Carter DR, Caler WE. A cumulative damage model for bone fracture. J Orthop Res, 1985, 3:84–90.Google Scholar
  11. Carter DR and Hayes WC. Bone compressive strength: The influence of density and strain rate. Science, 1976, 194: 1174.Google Scholar
  12. Carter DR and Hayes WC. The compressive behaviour of bone as a two-phase porous structure. J Bone Joint Surg, 1977, 59A: 954–962.Google Scholar
  13. Courtney AC, Wachtel EF, Myers ER, and Hayes WC. Effects of loading rate on strength of the proximal femur. Calcif Tissue Int, 1994, 55: 53–58.Google Scholar
  14. Currey JD. The effects of drying and re-wetting on some mechanical properties of cortical bone. J Biomech, 1988, 21: 439–441.Google Scholar
  15. Ding M, Dalstra M, Danielsen CC, Kabel J, Hvid I, and Linde F. Age variations in the properties of human tibial trabecular bone. J Bone Joint Surg (Br), 1997, 79: 995–1002.Google Scholar
  16. Donahue HJ. Gap junctional intercellular communication in bone: A cellular basis for bone mechanostat set point. Calcif Tissue Int, 1998, 62: 85.Google Scholar
  17. Evans GP, Behiri JC, Currey JD, and Bonfield W. Microhardness and Young’s modulus in cortical bone exhibiting a wide range of mineral volume fractions and in a bone analogue. J Mater Sci Mater Med, 1990, 1: 38.Google Scholar
  18. Frost HM. A determinant of bone architecture: the minimum effective strain. Clin Orthop Rel Res, 1983, 175: 286Google Scholar
  19. Frost HM. Bone “mass” and the “mechanostat”, a proposal. Anat Rec, 1987, 219: 1.Google Scholar
  20. Gibson LJ. The mechanical behaviour of cancellous bone. J Biomech, 1985, 18: 317.Google Scholar
  21. Hasegawa K, Turner CH, and Burr DB. Contribution of collagen and mineral to the elastic anisotropy of bone. Calcif Tissue Int, 1994, 55: 381.Google Scholar
  22. Holden JL, Clement JG, and Phakey PP. Age and temperature related changes to the ultrastructure and composition of human bone mineral. J Bone Miner Res, 1995, 10: 1400.Google Scholar
  23. Keaveny TM and Hayes WC. Mechanical properties of cortical and trabecular bone, in Hall BK, ed. Bone, vol 7, CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 1993, pp. 285–344.Google Scholar
  24. Keaveny TM, Wachtle EF, Ford CM, and Hayes WC. Differences between the tensile and compressive strengths of bovine tibial trabecular bone depend on modulus. J Biomech, 1994, 227: 1137–1146.Google Scholar
  25. Klein-Nulend J, van der Plas A, Semeins CM, Ajubi NE, Frangos JA, Nijweide, PJ, and Burger EH. Sensitivity of osteocytes to biomechanical stress in vitro. FASEB J, 1995, 9: 441–445.Google Scholar
  26. Lanyon LE. Osteocytes, strain detection, bone modeling and remodeling. Calcif Tissue Int, 1993, 53(Suppl 1): 102.Google Scholar
  27. Linde F, Hvid I, and Pongsoipetch B. Energy absorptive properties of human trabecular bone specimens during axial compression. J Orthop Res, 1989, 7: 432–439.Google Scholar
  28. Linde F, Nørgaard P, Hvid I, Odgaard A, and Søballe K. Mechanical properties of trabecular bone: Dependency on strain rate. J Biomech, 1991, 24: 803.Google Scholar
  29. Linde F and Sorensen HC. The effect of different storage methods on the mechanical properties of trabecular bone. J Biomech, 1993, 26: 1249.Google Scholar
  30. Martin RB. Toward a unifying theory of bone remodeling. Bone, 2000, 26: 1.Google Scholar
  31. Martin RB and Boardman DL. The effects of collagen fiber orientation, porosity, density and mineralization on bovine cortical bone bending properties. J Biomech, 1993, 26: 1047–1054.Google Scholar
  32. McElhaney JH. Dynamic response of bone and muscle tissue. J Appl Physiol, 1966, 21: 1231–1236.Google Scholar
  33. Melvin JW. Fracture mechanics of bone. J Biomech Eng, 1993, 115: 549–554.Google Scholar
  34. Owan I, Burr DB, Turner CH, Qiu J, Tu Y, Onyia JE, and Duncan RL. Mechanotransduction in bone: osteoblasts are more responsive to fluid forces than mechanical strain, 1997, Am J Physiol, 273: C810.Google Scholar
  35. Peaock M. Effects of calcium and vitamin D insufficiency on the skeleton. Osteoporosis Int, 1998, 8: S45.Google Scholar
  36. Reilly DT, Burstein AH, and Frankel VH. The elastic modulus for bone. J Biomech, 1974, 7: 271–275.Google Scholar
  37. Rho J-Y, Ashman RB, and Turner CH. Young’s modulus of trabecular and cortical bone material: ultrasonic and microtensile measurements. J Biomech, 1993, 26: 111–119.Google Scholar
  38. Rho J-Y, Tsui TY, and Pharr GM. Elastic properties of human cortical and trabecular lamellar bone. Bone, 1996, 18: 417–428.Google Scholar
  39. Rice JC, Cowin SC, and Bowman JA. On the dependence of the elasticity and strength of cancellous bone on apparent density. J Biomech, 1988, 21: 155–168Google Scholar
  40. Roodman GD. Cell biology of the osteoclast. Exp Hematol, 1999, 27: 1229–1241Google Scholar
  41. Schaffler MB and Burr DB. Stiffness of compact bone: effects of porosity and density. J Biomech, 1988, 21: 13–16Google Scholar
  42. Schaffler MB, Radin EL, and Burr DB. Mechanical and morphological effects of strain rate on fatigue of compact bone. Bone, 1989, 10: 207–214Google Scholar
  43. Turner CH. Yield behaviour of cancellous bone. J Biomech Eng, 1989, 111: 1–5Google Scholar
  44. Van der Perre G and Lowet G. Physical meaning of bone mineral content parameters and their relation to mechanical properties. Clin Rheumatol, 1994, 13(Suppl 1): 33.Google Scholar
  45. Wright TM and Hayes WC. Tensile testing of bone over a wide range of strain rates: effect of strain rate, micro-structure and density. Med Biol Eng Comput, 1976, 14:671–680.Google Scholar


  1. Anderson DD, Brown TD, and Radin EL. The influence of basal cartilage calcification on dynamic juxtaarticular stress transmission. Clin Orthop, 1993, 286:298–307.Google Scholar
  2. Armstrong CG and Mow VC. Variations in the intrinsic mechanical properties of human articular cartilage with age, degeneration, and water content. J Bone Joint Surg, 1982, 64A: 88–94.Google Scholar
  3. Bachrach NM, Valhmu WB, Stazzone E, Ratcliffe A, Lai WM, and Mow VC. Changes in proteoglycan synthesis of chondrocytes in articular cartilage are associated with the time-dependent changes in their mechanical environment. J Biomech, 1995, 28: 1561–1569.Google Scholar
  4. Buckwalter JA and Mankin HJ. Articular cartilage I: Tissue design and chondrocyte-matrix interactions. J Bone Joint Surg, 1997, 79A: 600–611.Google Scholar
  5. Buckwalter JA, Kuettner KE, and Thonar EJ. Age-related changes in articular cartilage proteoglycans: electron microscopic studies. J Orthop Res, 1985, 3: 251–257.Google Scholar
  6. Edwards J. Physical characteristics of articular cartilage. Proc Inst Mech Eng, 1967, 181: 16.Google Scholar
  7. Freeman MAR. The fatigue of cartilage in the pathogenesis of osteoarthrosis. Acta Orthop Scand, 1975, 46: 323.Google Scholar
  8. Front P, Aprile F, Mitrovic DR, and Swann DA. Age-related changes in the synthesis of matrix macromolecules by bovine articular cartilage. Connect Tissue Res, 1989,19: 121–133.Google Scholar
  9. Guilak F. Compression-induced changes in the shape and volume of the chondrocyte nucleus. J Biomech, 1995, 28: 1529–1541.Google Scholar
  10. Lai WM and Mow VC. Drag-induced compression of articular cartilage during a permeation experiment. J Biorheol, 1980, 17: 111.Google Scholar
  11. Lohmander S. Proteoglycans of joint cartilage: structure, function, turnover and role as markers of joint disease. Baillieres Clin Rheumatol, 1988, 2: 37–62.Google Scholar
  12. Mankin HJ, Mow VC, Buckwalter JA, Iannotti JP, and Ratcliffe A. Articular cartilage structure, composition, and function, in Buckwalter JA, Einhorn TA, and Simon SR, eds. Orthopaedic Basic Science: Biology and Biomechanics of the Musculoskeletal System, 2nd edn, Am Acad Orthop Surg: Rosemont, Il, 2000, Chapter 17, pp. 443–470.Google Scholar
  13. Mankin HJ and Thrasher AZ. Water content and binding in normal and osteoarthritic human cartilage. J Bone Joint Surg, 1975, 57A: 76–80.Google Scholar
  14. Mow VC, Homes MH, and Lai WM. Fluid transport and mechanical properties of articular cartilage. A review, J Biomech, 1984, 17: 377.Google Scholar
  15. Mow VC, Proctor CS, and Kelly MA. Biomechanics of articular cartilage, in Nordin M and Frankel VH, eds. Basic Biomechanics of the Musculoskeletal System, 2nd edn, Lea & Febiger: Philadelphia, PA, 1989, pp. 31–57.Google Scholar
  16. Mow VC and Ratcliffe A. Structure and function of articular cartilage and meniscus, in Mow VC and Hayes WC, eds. Basic Orthopaedic Biomechanics, 2nd edn, Lippincott-Raven: Philadelphia, PA, 1997, pp. 113–177Google Scholar
  17. Mow VC, Ratcliffe A, and Poole AR. Cartilage and diarthrodial joints as paradigms for hierarchical materials and structures. Biomaterials, 1992, 13: 67–97.Google Scholar
  18. Mow VC, Zhu W, and Ratcliffe A. Structure and function of articular cartilage and meniscus, in Mow VC and Hayes WC, eds. Basic Orthopaedic Biomechanics, Raven Press, New York, NY, 1991, pp 143–198.Google Scholar
  19. Roughley PJ. Structural changes in the proteoglycans of human articular cartilage during aging. J Rheumatol, 1987, 14: 14–15.Google Scholar
  20. Rosenberg LC. Structure of cartilage proteoglycans. in Burleigh PMC, Poole AR, eds. Dynamics of connective tissue macromolecules, North Holland Publisher: Amsterdam, 1975, pp. 105–128Google Scholar
  21. Scott JE. Proteoglycan: collagen interactions in connective tissues. Ultrastructural, biochemical, functional and evolutionary aspects. Int J Biol Macromol, 1991, 13: 157–161.Google Scholar


  1. Barbenel JC and Evans JH. The time-dependent mechanical properties of skin. J Invest Dermatol, 1977, 69: 31820.Google Scholar
  2. Edwards C and Marks R. Evaluation of biomechanical properties of human skin. Clin Derm, 1995, 13: 375–380.Google Scholar
  3. Finlay B. The torsional characteristics of human skin in vivo, J Biomed Eng, 1984, 6: 567–73.Google Scholar
  4. Langer K. On the anatomy and physiology of the skin, III (1862). Translated by Gibson T. Br J Plast Surg, 1978, 31: 185–99.Google Scholar
  5. Siguhara T, Ohura T, Homma K, and Igawa HH. The extensibility in human skin: variations according to age and site. Br J Plast Surg, 1991, 44: 418–22.Google Scholar
  6. Vogel HG. Age dependence of mechanical and biochemical properties of human skin, Part I: Stress-strain experiments, skin thickness and biochemical analysis. Bioeng Skin, 1987, 3: 67–91.Google Scholar
  7. Vogel HG. Age dependence of mechanical and biochemical properties of human skin. Part II: Hysteresis, relaxation, creep and repeated strain experiments. Bioeng Skin, 1987, 3: 141–76.Google Scholar
  8. Wijn P, Brakkee AJM, Kuiper JP, and Vendrik AJH. The alinear viscoelastic properties of human skin in viva related to sex and age, in Marks R and Payne PA, eds. Bioengineering and the skin, MTP Press: Lancaster, 1981, pp. 135–45.Google Scholar

Tendon and Ligament

  1. Amiel D, Frank C, Harwood F, Fronek J, and Akeson W. Tendons and ligaments: a morphological and biochemical comparison. J Orthop Res, 1984, 1: 257–265.Google Scholar
  2. Butler DL, Kay MD and Stouffer DC. Comparison of material properties in fascicle-bone units from human patellar tendon and knee ligaments. J Biomech, 1986, 19: 425–432.Google Scholar
  3. Cribb AM and Scott JE. Tendon response to tensile stress: An ultrastructural investigation of collagen: proteoglycan interactions in stressed tendon. J Anat, 1995, 187: 423–428.Google Scholar
  4. Haut RC. The influence of specimen length on the tensile failure properties of tendon collagen. J Biomech, 1986, 19: 951–955Google Scholar
  5. Haut RC. Age-dependent influence of strain rate on the tensile failure of rattail tendon. J Biomech Eng, 1983, 105: 296–299.Google Scholar
  6. Hubbard RP and Chun KJ. Mechanical responses of tendons to repeated extensions and wait periods. J Biomech Eng, 1988, 110: 11–19.Google Scholar
  7. Kastelic J, Galeski A, and Baer E. The multicomposite structure of tendons. Connect Tissue Res, 1978, 6: 11.Google Scholar
  8. Kennedy JC, Hawkins RJ, Willis RB, and Danylchuck KD. Tension studies of human knee ligaments: yield point, ultimate failure, and disruption of the cruciate and tibial collateral ligaments. J Bone Joint Surg, 1976, 58A: 350–355.Google Scholar
  9. Shadwick RE. Elastic energy storage in tendons: Mechanical differences related to function and age. J Appl Physiol, 1990, 68: 1033–1040.Google Scholar
  10. Viidik A. Experimental evaluation of the tensile strength of isolated rabbit tendons. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg, 1967, 1: 141.Google Scholar
  11. Woo SL. Mechanical properties of tendons and ligaments: I. Quasistatic and nonlinear viscoelastic properties. Biorheology, 1982, 19: 385–396.Google Scholar
  12. Woo SL, An KA, Frank CB, Livesay GA, Ma CB, Zeminski J, Wayne JS, and Myers BS. Anatomy, biology and biomechanics of tendon and ligament. in Buckwalter JA, Einhorn TA, and Simon SR, eds. Orthopaedic Basic Science: Biology and Biomechanics of the Musculoskeletal System, 2nd edn, Am Acad Orthop Surg: Rosemont, Il, 2000, Chapter 24, pp. 581–616.Google Scholar
  13. Woo SL, Chan SS, and Yamaji T. Biomechanics of knee ligament healing, repair and reconstruction. J Biomech, 1997,30: 431–439.Google Scholar
  14. Woo SL, Gomez MA, Woo YK, and Akeson WH. Mechanical properties of tendons and ligaments: II. The relationships of immobilization and exercise on tissue remodeling. Biorheology, 1982, 19: 397–408.Google Scholar
  15. Woo SL, Ohland KJ, Weiss JA. Aging and sex-related changes in the biomechanical properties of the rabbit medial collateral ligament. Mech Ageing Dev, 1990, 56: 129–142.Google Scholar


  1. Alexander R and McN Vernon A. The dimension of knee and ankle muscles and the forces they exert. J Hum Mov Stud, 1975, 1: 115–123.Google Scholar
  2. Baldwin KM, Winder WW, and Holloszy JO. Adaptation of actomyosin ATPase in different types of muscle to endurance exercise. Am J Physiol, 1975, 229: 422–426.Google Scholar
  3. Best TM, McElhaney J, Garrett WE Jr, and Myers BS. Characterization of the passive responses of live skeletal muscle using the quasi-linear theory of viscoelasticity. J Biomech, 1994, 27: 413–419.Google Scholar
  4. Close RI. Dynamic properties of mammalian skeletal muscles. Physiolo Rev, 1972, 52: 129–197.Google Scholar
  5. Elftman H. Biomechanics of muscle. J Bone Joint Surg, 1966, 48A: 363–373.Google Scholar
  6. Garrett WE and Best TM. Anatomy, physiology and mechanics of skeletal muscle, in Buckwalter JA, Einhorn TA, Simon SR, eds. Orthopaedic Basic Science: Biology and Biomechanics of the Musculoskeletal System, 2nd edn, Am Acad Orthop Surg, 2000, Chapter 26, pp. 683–716.Google Scholar
  7. Josephson RK. Contraction dynamics and power output of skeletal muscle. Ann Rev Physiol, 1993, 55: 527–546Google Scholar
  8. Hill AV. The heat of shortening and the dynamic constants of muscle. Proc R Soc London Ser B, 1938, 126: 136–195.Google Scholar
  9. Hill AV. The dimensions of animals and their muscular dynamics. Sci Prog, 1950, 38: 209–230.Google Scholar
  10. Huxley AF and Simmons RM. Proposed mechanism of force generation in striated muscle. Nature, 1971, 233: 533–538.Google Scholar
  11. Huxley AF. Muscle structure and theories of contraction. Prog Biophys Chem, 1957, 7: 255–318.Google Scholar
  12. Murray M, Gardner G, Mollinger L, and Sepic S. Strength of isometric and isokinetic contractions: knee muscles of men aged 20 to 86. Phys Therapy, 1980, 60: 412.Google Scholar
  13. Taylor DC, Dalton JD Jr, Seaber AV, and Garrett WE Jr. Viscoelastic properties of muscle-tendon units: the biomechanical effects of stretching. Am J Sports Med, 1990, 18: 300–309.Google Scholar
  14. Woittiez RD, Huijing PA, Boom HB, et al. A three-dimensional muscle model: quantified relation between form and function of skeletal muscles. J Morphol, 1984, 182: 95–113.Google Scholar

Blood Vessel and Artery

  1. Burton AC. Relation of structure to function of the tissues of the wall of blood vessels. Physiol Rev, 1944, 34: 619–642.Google Scholar
  2. Burton AC. Properties of smooth muscle and regulation of circulation. Physiol Rev, 1962, 42: 1–6.Google Scholar
  3. Nichol J, Girling F, Jerrard W, Claxton EB, and Burton AC. Fundamental instability of small blood vessels and critical closing pressures in vascular beds. Am J Physiol, 1951, 164: 330–344.Google Scholar
  4. Roach MR, Burton AC. The reason for the shape of the distensibility curves of arteries. Canad J Biomech & Physiol, 1957, 35: 681–690.Google Scholar
  5. Roach MR, Burton AC. The effect of age on the elasticity of human arteries. Canad J Biomech & Physiol, 1959, 37: 557–569.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Bioengineering of Catalonia, C. Baldiri Reixas, 13BarcelonaSpain
  2. 2.Department of Materials Science and MetallurgyTechnological University of CataloniaBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations