Title: Bending, Buckling, and Case Study in Stress Shielding
1Bending, Buckling, and Case Study in Stress
Shielding
2Bending
- Pure Bending
- The longitudinal strain is linearly varying
with the distance from the neutral axis. - ?x-y/?
- ?m-c/?
- For a linear elastic isotropic solid loaded in
1-D ?xE?x - ?mMc/I
- ?x-My/I
- 1/? M/EI (curvature)
3Buckling
- Eulers formula-- buckling of a centrally
compressed bar - Assume initially straight and loaded by centrally
applied load - If P is less than Pcrit then it is stable and
experiences only axial compression - Load is calculated from the deflection curve.
- For one fixed end
- Pcr ?2EI/4l 2
- --it is the smallest load that can keep the
bar in a slightly bent shape. - For a bar with built in ends
- Pcr 4?2EI/l 2
- Can occur in overload in fracture fixation
devices
4Clinical relevance of bending
- Total Stress can be calculated by combining the
axial and bending stresses. - About 200,000 THR surgeries annually in the U.S.
- Main design problems
- Stress shielding
- Loosening
Circular cross section (hollow)
5Loading at Hip Joint
(courtesy Dr. Tom Andriacchi, Stanford University)
6THR Material Requirements
- Biocompatibility
- function in body without local or systemic
rejection response - Resistant to corrosion, degradation, and wear
- Similar mechanical properties (strength,
stiffness, friction) to structures they replace - High quality and low cost
7THR procedure
- Existing hip joint is completely removed and
replaced with an artificial hip - Diseased femoral head is removed
- Acetabulum is reamed and acetabular component is
inserted - Bone marrow is extracted from proximal femoral
canal and femoral stem is inserted into cavity
8Fixating Implant
- Two methods of fixating artificial components to
bone bone cement and bony ingrowth
(http//orthoinfo.aaos.org)
9Early Development of THR
- First THR used stainless steel femoral stem
fixated with bone cement - In mid 1970s started to see increase in stem
fractures of devices implanted in the 1960s
(courtesy Dr. Tom Andriacchi, Stanford
University))
10Solution to Fracture Problem
- Material
- changed manufacturing processes
- introduced Cobalt-Chromium alloy stem (stronger
and stiffer)
- Geometry
- made stems thicker in high stress areas
- Solved stem fracture problem
- Introduced other problems
11Bone Loss - Stress Shielding
- Wolffs Law (1869) bone adapts (remodels) in
response to the mechanical loads placed on it - Stiff implant changes mechanical loads on femur
Solution Make implant more flexible
(courtesy Dr. Tom Andriacchi)
12How do we make beam more flexible?
- reduce axial rigidity (EA)
- reduce flexural rigidity (EI)
13Example Problem
- Composite circular beam made of metallic core
(stem) and outer sleave made of bone - Axial compressive force F -3000 N (4 Body
Weights for 168 lb person) - Bending moment M 30 N-m
- Neglect shear force
- Bone shaft diameters
dout 2.5 cm din 1.0 cm - Longitudinal modulus of cortical bone 17 GPa
14Example Problem
- For simplicity, perform analysis of two loading
cases separately - Use three different materials for stem
- stainless steel (E 193 GPa)
- Co-Cr alloy (E 214 GPa)
- titanium alloy (E 124 GPa)
- Use two different stem diameters
- 1.1 cm
- 1.5 cm
15Composite Beam Theory
- Axial loading
- Pure Bending Moment (max stress)
16Compressive Stress Axial Loading
- Bone without implant 7.3 MPa
- 1.1 cm stainless steel stem
- Bone 2.0 MPa Stem 23.1 MPa
- 1.5 cm stainless steel stem
- Bone 1.3 MPa Stem 14.7 MPa
- 1.5 cm Co-Cr stem
- Bone 1.2 MPa Stem 14.9 MPa
- 1.5 cm Titanium stem
- Bone 1.9 MPa Stem 13.6 MPa
- 1.1 cm Titanium stem
- Bone 2.8 MPa Stem 20.1 MPa
17Compressive Stress Bending
- Bone without implant 20.0 MPa
- 1.1 cm stainless steel stem
- Bone 14.0 MPa Stem 70.4 MPa
- 1.5 cm stainless steel stem
- Bone 8.4 MPa Stem 56.8 MPa
- 1.5 cm Co-Cr stem
- Bone 7.8 MPa Stem 69.0 MPa
- 1.5 cm Titanium stem
- Bone 10.8 MPa Stem 47.2 MPa
- 1.1 cm Titanium stem
- Bone 15.8 MPa Stem 50.8 MPa
18Combined Max Compressive Stress
- Worst case for stress shielding
- 1.5 cm Co-Cr
- Best case for stress shielding
- 1.1 cm Titanium
(http//news.bbc.co.uk)
19Case Study on Bone Resorption
- Bobyn and Engh (1988) examined 411 cases of
cementless hip replacements - They categorized the extent of bone resorption
for each case as none, 1st degree, 2nd degree, or
3rd degree
- For stems gt 1.3 cm, 28 had 2nd or 3rd degree
bone resorption - For stems lt 1.3 cm, 6 had 2nd or 3rd degree bone
resorption
20Summary
- THR is a great bioengineering achievement that
has improved millions of lives - THR design has improved greatly over the last 4
decades through a proper understanding of the
loading conditions and the properties of the
materials