Differences in Stress and Total Deformation Due to Muscle Attachment to the Femur
To achieve accurate and precise results of finite
element analysis (FEA) of bones, it is important to represent the
load/boundary conditions as identical as possible to the human body
such as the bone properties, the type and force of the muscles, the
contact force of the joints, and the location of the muscle attachment.
In this study, the difference in the Von-Mises stress and the total
deformation was compared by classifying them into Case 1, which
shows the actual anatomical form of the muscle attached to the femur
when the same muscle force was applied, and Case 2, which gives a
simplified representation of the attached location. An inverse
dynamical musculoskeletal model was simulated using data from an
actual walking experiment to complement the accuracy of the
muscular force, the input value of FEA. The FEA method using the
results of the muscular force that were calculated through the
simulation showed that the maximum Von-Mises stress and the
maximum total deformation in Case 2 were underestimated by 8.42%
and 6.29%, respectively, compared to Case 1. The torsion energy and
bending moment at each location of the femur occurred via the stress
ingredient. Due to the geometrical/morphological feature of the femur
of having a long bone shape when the stress distribution is wide, as
shown in Case 1, a greater Von-Mises stress and total deformation are
expected from the sum of the stress ingredients. More accurate results
can be achieved only when the muscular strength and the attachment
location in the FEA of the bones and the attachment form are the same
as those in the actual anatomical condition under the various moving
conditions of the human body.
[1] D. T. Reilly, A. H. Burrstein, V. H. Frankel, "The elastic modulus for
bone" Journal of Biomechanics., vol.7, 1974, pp. 271-275.
[2] P. Knauss, "Material properties and strength behavior of the compact
bone tissue at the coxal human-femur" Biomedical Techniques., vol.26,
1981, pp. 311-315.
[3] P. Knauss, "Material properties and strength behavior of spongy bone
tissue at the coxal human-femur" Biomedical Techniques., vol.26, 1981,
pp. 200-210.
[4] R. A. Brand, R. D. Crowninshield, C. E. Wittstock, D. R. Pedersen, C. R.
Clark. F. M. van Krieken, "A model of lower extremity muscular
anatomy" Journal of Biomechanical Engineering., vol.104, 1982, pp.
304-310.
[5] D. R. Pedersen, R. A. Brand, D. T. Davy, "Pelvic muscle and acetabular
contact forces during gait" Journal of Biomechanics., vol.30, 1997, pp.
959-965.
[6] M. Viceconti, M. Baleani, A. De Lollis, A. Toni, "An FEA-based protocol
for the pre-clinical validation of custom-made hip implants" Medical
Engineering & Technology., vol.22, 1998, pp. 257-262.
[7] G. N. Duda, M. Heller, J. Albinger, S. Olaf, E. Schneider, L. Claes,
"Influence of muscle forces in femoral strain distribution" Journal of
Biomechanics., vol.31, 1998, pp. 841-846.
[8] J. D. Currey, "The many adaptations of bone" Journal of Biomechanics.,
vol.36, 2003, pp. 1487-1495.
[9] C. Bitsakos, J. kerner, I. fisher, A. A. Amis "The effect of muscle loading
on the simulation of bone remodeling in the proximal femur" Journal of
Biomechanics., vol.38, 2005, pp. 133-139.
[10] A. D. Speirs, M. O. Heller, G. N. Duda. W. R. Taylor, "Physiologically
based boundary conditions in finite element modeling" Journal of
Biomechanics., vol.40, 2007, pp. 2318-2323.
[11] I. Jonkers, N. Sauwen, G. Lenaerts, M. Mulier, G. V. Perre, S. Jaecques,
"Relation between subject-specific hip joint loading, stress distribution in
the proximal femur and bone mineral density changes after total hip
replacement" Journal of Biomechanics., vol.41, 2008, pp. 3405-3413.
[12] A.T.M Phillips, "The femur as a musculo-skeletal construct: A free
boundary condition modeling approach" Medical Engineering &
Physics., vol.31, 2009, pp. 673-680.
[13] N. S. Sverdlova, U. Witzel, "Principles of determination and verification
of muscle forces in the human musculoskeletal system: Muscle forces to
minimize bending stress" Journal of Biomechanics., vol.43, 2010, pp.
841-846.
[14] R.Bryan, P. S. Mohan, A. Hopkins, F. Galloway, M. Taylor, P. B. Nair,
"Statistical modeling of the whole human femur incorporating geometric
and material properties" Medical Engineering & Physics., vol.32, 2010,
pp. 57-65.
[1] D. T. Reilly, A. H. Burrstein, V. H. Frankel, "The elastic modulus for
bone" Journal of Biomechanics., vol.7, 1974, pp. 271-275.
[2] P. Knauss, "Material properties and strength behavior of the compact
bone tissue at the coxal human-femur" Biomedical Techniques., vol.26,
1981, pp. 311-315.
[3] P. Knauss, "Material properties and strength behavior of spongy bone
tissue at the coxal human-femur" Biomedical Techniques., vol.26, 1981,
pp. 200-210.
[4] R. A. Brand, R. D. Crowninshield, C. E. Wittstock, D. R. Pedersen, C. R.
Clark. F. M. van Krieken, "A model of lower extremity muscular
anatomy" Journal of Biomechanical Engineering., vol.104, 1982, pp.
304-310.
[5] D. R. Pedersen, R. A. Brand, D. T. Davy, "Pelvic muscle and acetabular
contact forces during gait" Journal of Biomechanics., vol.30, 1997, pp.
959-965.
[6] M. Viceconti, M. Baleani, A. De Lollis, A. Toni, "An FEA-based protocol
for the pre-clinical validation of custom-made hip implants" Medical
Engineering & Technology., vol.22, 1998, pp. 257-262.
[7] G. N. Duda, M. Heller, J. Albinger, S. Olaf, E. Schneider, L. Claes,
"Influence of muscle forces in femoral strain distribution" Journal of
Biomechanics., vol.31, 1998, pp. 841-846.
[8] J. D. Currey, "The many adaptations of bone" Journal of Biomechanics.,
vol.36, 2003, pp. 1487-1495.
[9] C. Bitsakos, J. kerner, I. fisher, A. A. Amis "The effect of muscle loading
on the simulation of bone remodeling in the proximal femur" Journal of
Biomechanics., vol.38, 2005, pp. 133-139.
[10] A. D. Speirs, M. O. Heller, G. N. Duda. W. R. Taylor, "Physiologically
based boundary conditions in finite element modeling" Journal of
Biomechanics., vol.40, 2007, pp. 2318-2323.
[11] I. Jonkers, N. Sauwen, G. Lenaerts, M. Mulier, G. V. Perre, S. Jaecques,
"Relation between subject-specific hip joint loading, stress distribution in
the proximal femur and bone mineral density changes after total hip
replacement" Journal of Biomechanics., vol.41, 2008, pp. 3405-3413.
[12] A.T.M Phillips, "The femur as a musculo-skeletal construct: A free
boundary condition modeling approach" Medical Engineering &
Physics., vol.31, 2009, pp. 673-680.
[13] N. S. Sverdlova, U. Witzel, "Principles of determination and verification
of muscle forces in the human musculoskeletal system: Muscle forces to
minimize bending stress" Journal of Biomechanics., vol.43, 2010, pp.
841-846.
[14] R.Bryan, P. S. Mohan, A. Hopkins, F. Galloway, M. Taylor, P. B. Nair,
"Statistical modeling of the whole human femur incorporating geometric
and material properties" Medical Engineering & Physics., vol.32, 2010,
pp. 57-65.
@article{"International Journal of Medical, Medicine and Health Sciences:60739", author = "Jeong-Woo Seo and Jin-Seung Choi and Dong-Won Kang and Jae-Hyuk Bae and Gye-Rae Tack", title = "Differences in Stress and Total Deformation Due to Muscle Attachment to the Femur", abstract = "To achieve accurate and precise results of finite
element analysis (FEA) of bones, it is important to represent the
load/boundary conditions as identical as possible to the human body
such as the bone properties, the type and force of the muscles, the
contact force of the joints, and the location of the muscle attachment.
In this study, the difference in the Von-Mises stress and the total
deformation was compared by classifying them into Case 1, which
shows the actual anatomical form of the muscle attached to the femur
when the same muscle force was applied, and Case 2, which gives a
simplified representation of the attached location. An inverse
dynamical musculoskeletal model was simulated using data from an
actual walking experiment to complement the accuracy of the
muscular force, the input value of FEA. The FEA method using the
results of the muscular force that were calculated through the
simulation showed that the maximum Von-Mises stress and the
maximum total deformation in Case 2 were underestimated by 8.42%
and 6.29%, respectively, compared to Case 1. The torsion energy and
bending moment at each location of the femur occurred via the stress
ingredient. Due to the geometrical/morphological feature of the femur
of having a long bone shape when the stress distribution is wide, as
shown in Case 1, a greater Von-Mises stress and total deformation are
expected from the sum of the stress ingredients. More accurate results
can be achieved only when the muscular strength and the attachment
location in the FEA of the bones and the attachment form are the same
as those in the actual anatomical condition under the various moving
conditions of the human body.", keywords = "Musculoskeletal modeling, Finite element analysis,
Von-Mises stress, Deformation, Muscle attachment.", volume = "6", number = "3", pages = "55-4", }