Top Banner
2D Deformation and Creep Response of Articular Cartilage By: Mikhail Yakhnis & Robert Zhang
23

2D Deformation and Creep Response of Articular Cartilage

Feb 15, 2016

Download

Documents

Gerry

2D Deformation and Creep Response of Articular Cartilage. By: Mikhail Yakhnis & Robert Zhang. Motivation. Articular cartilage transfers load between bones enables smooth motion along joints Cartilage has limited capacity for self repair - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript

2D Deformation and Creep of Articular Cartilage

2D Deformation and Creep Response of Articular CartilageBy: Mikhail Yakhnis & Robert ZhangMotivationArticular cartilage transfers load between bones enables smooth motion along joints

Cartilage has limited capacity for self repairApplications: biomaterials, prosthetics, biomedical devices

http://nigelhartnett.onlinemedical.com.au/images/articular%20knee%20injury.jpg2Problem DescriptionConsider cartilage in an unconfined compression under constant load FAnalyze the 2D elastic deformation over time

Articular CartilageFCompression plateFrictionless SupportsMaterial BackgroundCartilage often modeled as a viscoelastic material Viscous and elastic by superpositionElasticity and viscosity can be linear or nonlinearEstablished models: Kelvin-Voigt, Maxwell, Standard-Linear Solid

http://www.allsealsinc.com/allseals/Orings/maxwell.gif4Mathematical Model for Cartilage

Mechanical Analogue of Kelvin-Voigt Modelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Kelvin_Voigt_diagram.svg5Assumptions for ModelB3B2B1B4xyFcLExperimental Data

Data Book on Mechanical Properties of Living Cells, Tissues, and Organs /. Tokyo ; New York : Springer, 1996. Print. Derivation of Weak Form Derivation of Weak Form Decoupling a Transient Problem Reddy, J. N.. "Time-Dependent Problems." An introduction to nonlinear finite element analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. . Print.10Displacement Equation for Creep ResponseModeling Creep in MATLABChanges in Preprocessor.mProvide initial displacementDefine time step Adjust boundary conditions

Changes in Assemble.mAssemble the damping matrix [C]

Changes in NodalSoln.mAdd initial condition, damping, time inputsModify reaction force and displacement equations

Modeling Creep in MATLABDiscussion:MATLAB result converges toward experimental data farther away from initial time 10% error at 6 seconds

MATLAB model reaches equilibrium faster than experimental dataModeling Creep in MATLABModeling Creep in ANSYS

ANSYS Advanced Nonlinear Materials: Lecture 3 Rate Dependent Creephttp://www.ansys-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Three-Types-of-Creep.png

15Considerations for ANSYS ModelWhat experimental data is available to us? Can we fit the experimental data to the model? Can we use the built-in Mechanical APDL curve fitting procedure? Is there more emphasis on primary creep or secondary creep? Does the model satisfy our constitutive equation?Parameters in the ANSYS ModelANSYS Advanced Nonlinear Materials: Lecture 3 Rate Dependent Creep17ANSYS Results Creep ResponseLong Term Response 3000 SecondsShort Term Response 30 Seconds

Animation of Deformation in ANSYS

Comparison of ANSYS and ExperimentResult:Theoretical Model-Based ANSYS data tends to overshoot experimental dataError is between 30% to 40% per data pointExperimental-based model performs better

Discussion: Results demonstrate the limitations of ANSYS modelsA combined primary-secondary model is idealLong term response in ANSYS is not accurateFunction models primary responsePrimary + Secondary Time HardeningANSYS Model: Mesh and Time RefinementTime% Difference w.r.t. Base Case-MeshTimeMesh and Time1-0.4590.000-0.4702-0.3670.025-0.2024-0.2941.4471.1456-0.2672.0081.7338-0.2552.2612.001102.7322.3842.136Mesh [Nodes]Time [s]Base Case805Between 0.1 and 900Refinement15747Between 1e-4 and 1e-2Sensitivity AnalysisTimeBase CaseCase C1Difference %Case C2Difference %Case C5Difference %13.60E-036.64E-0384.597.70E-03114.096.53E-0381.4924.36E-037.69E-0376.209.53E-03118.547.39E-0369.3645.23E-038.92E-0370.511.18E-02124.928.23E-0357.3565.68E-039.56E-0368.201.29E-02127.258.55E-0350.4385.92E-039.89E-0367.131.35E-02128.258.67E-0346.46106.04E-031.01E-0266.611.38E-02128.748.71E-0344.23*The simulation did not converge at C2 +50% so C2 +10% was used instead2D Deformation and Creep Response of Articular CartilageBy: DJ Mikey Mike & Big Rob ZhangThank you for listening. Questions?