Advertisement

Finite Element Modeling of Human Femur Using CT Data: A Biomechanical Analysis

  • Amrita Francis
  • Ashwani Shrivastava
  • Chetna Masih
  • Nidhi Dwivedi
  • Priyanka Tiwari
  • Raji Nareliya
  • Veerendra Kumar
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Bioengineering book series (LNBE)

Abstract

Biomechanics is the development, extension, and application of mechanics for the purpose of understanding better the influence of mechanical loads on the structure, properties, and function of living things. Biomechanics focuses on design and analysis, each of which is the foundation of engineering. CT scan data is widely used to make realistic investigations on the mechanical behavior of bone structures using Finite Element Analysis (FEA). The purpose of this paper is to create anatomically accurate, 3D finite element models of the right human proximal femur for 17, 32, and 40-year-old-male patients using individual CT scan data. Thus, allowing the biomechanical analysis of the male right human proximal femur of different age groups loaded under physiologic forces at constant angle of 28°, i.e., at varying body weights of 70 and 75 kg, respectively which is shared equally by the lower limbs, that affect femur during weight bearing acting at different conditions and to determine the total deformation, equivalent Von-Mises stress distribution, maximum principal stress distribution, and fatigue tool throughout the whole femur, and comparing the results. Analysis of this model will provide data unavailable at this time to orthopedic surgeons, engineers, and researchers of human orthopedics.

Keywords

Biomechanics computed tomography Finite element modeling Human femur 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Dr. (Mrs.) Shobha Katheria, Principal Medical Officer, Ordnance Factory Hospital, Itarsi, M.P. India, Dr Rakesh Tirkey, Assistant Professor of Medical College, Jabalpur, M.P, India and Dr. Pushpraj Bhatele, for providing medical imaging data and supporting our work.

Conflict of Interest Statement

None of the authors have any conflict of interest to declare that could bias the presented work.

References

  1. 1.
    Hanumantharaju HG, Shivanand HK (2010) Strength analysis and comparison of SS316L, Ti-6AI-4 V and Ti-35Nb-7Zr-5Ta used as orthopaedic implant materials by FEA, 2nd international conference on chemical, biological and environmental engineering (ICBEE 2010): 101–105Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gdoutos EE, Raftopoulos DD, Baril JD (1982) A critical review of the biomechanical stress analysis of the human femur. J Biomater 3:2–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nather A, Ong HJC, Aziz Z (2005) Bone grafts and bone substitutes—basic science and clinical applications. World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd, Structure of bone; 5Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rohlmann A, Mossner U, Bergmann G, Kolbel R (1982) Finite element analysis and experimental investigation of stresses in a femur. J Biomed Eng 4:242–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wille H, Rank E, Yosibash Z (2012) Prediction of the mechanical response of the femur with uncertain elastic properties. J Biomech 45(7):1140–1148 Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Grassi L, Schoileo E, Taddei F, Zani L, Juszczyk M, Cristofolini L, Viceconti M (2012) Accuracy of finite element predictions in sideways load configurations for the proximal human femur. J Biomech 45:394–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Trabelsi N, Yosibash Z, Milgrom C (2009) Validation of subject-specific automated p-FE analysis of the proximal femur. J Biomech 42: 234–241Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yosibash Z, Trabelsi N, Milgrom C (2007a) Reliable simulations of the human proximal femur by high-order finite element analysis validated by experimental observations. J Biomech 40: 3688–3699Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yosibash Z, Padan R, Joscowicz L, Milgrom C (2007b) A CT-based high-order finite element analysis of the human proximal femur compared to in vitro experiments. ASME J Biomech Eng 129(3): 297–309Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Taylor ME, Tanner KE, Freeman MAR, Yettram AL (1996) Stress and strain distribution within the intact femur: compression or bending? Medical Eng Phy, Elsevier Science Ltd 18(2):122–131Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jun-hai Z, Shu-fang MA, Wue-ying W (2009) Finite element analysis of femur stress under bending moment and compression load, 2nd international conference on biomedical engineering and informatics (BMEI 2009): 1–4Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bitsakos JK, Fisher I, Amis AA (2005) The effect of muscle loading on the simulation of bone remodelling in the proximal femur. J Biomech 38: 133–139Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Duda GN, Schneider E, Chao EYS (1997) Internal forces and moments in the femur during walking. J Biomech 30(9): 933–941Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Simoes JA, Vaz MA, Blatcher S, Taylor M (2000) Influence of head constraint and muscle forces on the strain distribution within the intact femur. Med Eng Phys 22:453–459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Brand RA, Crowninshield RD, Wittstock CE, Pederson DR, Clark CR, Van Krieken FM (1982) A model of lower extremity muscular anatomy. J Biomech 104: 304–310Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Amornsamankul S, Kaorapapong K, Wiwatanapataphee B (2010) Three-dimensional simulation of femur bone and implant in femoral canal using finite element method. Int J Math Comput Simulation 4(4): 171–178Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kulkarni MS, Sathe SR (2008) Experimental determination of material properties of cortical cadeveric femur bone. Trends Biomater Artif Organs 22(1):9–15Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Burgers TA, Mason J, Niebur G, Ploeg HL (2008) Compressive properties of trabecular bone in the distal femur. J Biomech 4: 1077–1085Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Heller MO, Bergmann G, Deuretzbacher G, Claes L, Haas NP, Duda GN (2001) Influence of femoral anteversion on proximal femoral loading: measurement and simulation in four patients. Clinical Biomech 16: 644–649Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Materialise’s Interactive Medical Image Control System (MIMICS) 10.01: User Manual:Materialise, http://www.materialise.com/mimics/
  21. 21.
    Testi D, Viceconti M, Baruffaldi F, Cappello A (1999) Risk of fracture in elderly patients: a new predictive index based on bone mineral density and finite element analysis. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 60:23–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Viceconti M, Bellingeri L, Cristofolini L, Toni A (1998) A comparative study on different methods of automatic mesh generation of human femurs. Medical Eng Phy 20: 1–10Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nareliya R, Kumar V (2011) Biomechanical analysis of human femur bone. Int J Eng Sci Technol 3(4): 3090–3094Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer India 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amrita Francis
    • 1
  • Ashwani Shrivastava
    • 1
  • Chetna Masih
    • 4
  • Nidhi Dwivedi
    • 1
  • Priyanka Tiwari
    • 1
  • Raji Nareliya
    • 3
  • Veerendra Kumar
    • 2
  1. 1.Government Engineering CollegeJabarlpuIndia
  2. 2.Government Engineering CollegeJabalpurIndia
  3. 3.Hitkarni College of Engineering and TechnologyJabalpurIndia
  4. 4.Government Engineering CollegeJabarlpurIndia

Personalised recommendations