European Journal of Clinical and Biomedical Sciences
Volume 2, Issue 2, April 2016, Pages: 6-13
Received: Sep. 6, 2016;
Accepted: Oct. 7, 2016;
Published: Oct. 28, 2016
Views 4942 Downloads 219
K. V. Arun, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Government Engineering College, Haveri, Karnataka, India
K. K. Jadhav, Union Public Service Commission, New Delhi, India
Femoral fractures are among the most common major injuries that an orthopedic surgeon will be required to treat. During fracture treatment of femur bone the biomaterials are used for fracture healing. Evaluation of femur fractures using clinical data is confounded by multiple patient and fracture specific factors making it difficult to draw meaningful conclusions, despite the inclusion of large number of patient data. Therefore the biomechanical testing of the femur bone plays a vital role in the evaluation the femoral fractures. The main mechanical characteristics which will influence on the fracture damage of the femur are impact resistance, fracture toughness and bending strength. The experimental investigation is carried out to evaluate these damage characterizing parameters in femur. In order to evaluate the influence of the loading type on the pre cracked femur, the notched femur bone has been tested under impact and bending loads. Also the effect of these loads on the femur with implant has been determined. The results have shown the femur strength is extremely variable with respect to the different regions. Each damage characterizing parameter has shown maximum dependency on the matrix of the femur and its hardness. The macroscopic observations of the fractured specimens have shown that, the chipping of the bone, longitudinal cracks and the multiple cracks in femur are most dangerous.
K. V. Arun,
K. K. Jadhav,
Behaviour of Human Femur Bone Under Bending and Impact Loads, European Journal of Clinical and Biomedical Sciences.
Vol. 2, No. 2,
2016, pp. 6-13.
M. Portigliatti, Barbos, S. Carando, A. Ascenzl and A.Boyde. On the structural symmetry of human femurs. Bone. 1987:8: 165-169.
J. W. T. Dickerson. Changes in the composition of the human femur during growth. Biochem. J. 1962: 82: 56-61.
P. J. A. Bollen, A. G. Lemmens, A. C. Beynen, O. Meyer and J. itskes-Hoitinga. Bonecomposition in male and female göttingenminipigs fed variously restrictedly and near ad libitum. Scand. J. Lab. Anim. Sci. 2006: 33-3:
Y. Nakabayashi, MD, H. W. Wevers, Ir, Ing, T. D. V. Cooke, MA, MB, BChir,and M. Griffin, PhD. Bone strength and histomorphometry of the distal femur, The Journal of Arthroplasty. 1994: 9-3.
Robert K. Jensen J. Human morphology and its role in the mechanics of movements. Biomechanics. 1993: 26: 81-94.
Georg N. Duda, Erich Schneider and Edmund Y. S. Chaot J. Internal Forces And Moments In The Femur During Walking. Biomechanics. 1997: 30-9: 933-941.
Timo Jamsa, Aki Vainionpa, Raija Korpelainen, Erkki Vihriala Juhani Leppaluoto. Effect of daily physical activity on proximal femur. Clinical biomechanics Vol, No 21, 2006: 21: 1–7.
A. Rohlmann, U. Mbssner, G. Bergmann and R. Kthlbel J. Finite element analysis and experimental investigation of stress in a femur. Biomedical. Eng. 1982: 4: 241-246.
E. E. Gdoutos, J. D. Baril D. D. Rafto poulos. A critical review of the biomechanical stress analysis of the human femur. Biomaterials. 982: 3: 1-8.
John L. Stone. Gary S. Beupre and Wilson C. Hayes. Multiaxial strength characteristics of trabecular bone. Biomechanics. 1983: 16(9): 743-752.
N. L. SvnsNssoN, S. Valliappan and R. D. Wood J. Stress analysis of human femur with implanted charnley prosthesis. Biomechanics. 1977: 10: 581-588.
ConstainBitca, Paul DoruBarsanescu, MihaiMihalcut. Study on Pure Shear Tests and Fatigue Properties of Human Cortical Bone. Pp no 67-72.
J. C. Mishra, S. Roy. Mathematical analysis of a specimen of tubular bone subjected to tortional loading. Computers Mathematical Applications. 1991: 21-2-3: 141-147.
Fotios Katsamanis and Demetrios, D. Rafro Poulost. Determination of Mechanical Properties of Human Femoral Cortical Bone by Hopkinson Bar Stress Technique, swnrhrrucs, Vol No 23. No. II, 1990, Pp. No 11-73.
Mrudula S. Kulkarni, S. R Sathe. Experimental Determination of Material Properties of Cotical Cadaveric Femur Bone, Trends Biomater. Artificial organs, Vol No 22(1), 2008, Pp No 9-15.
Tony M. Keav. NY, Robert E. Borchers, Lorna J. Girson,t and Wilson C. Hayes J B, Theoretical Analysis Of The Experimental Artifact In Trabecular Bone Compressive Modulus, Vol. No 26. No 4s, 1993, Pp No 599-607.
G. Harry van Lenthe, RomainVoide, Steven K. Boyd, Ralph Müller. Tissue modulus calculated from beam theory is biased by bone size and geometry implication for the use of three point bending test to determine bone tissue modulus. Bone. 2008: 43: 717–723.
Brian P. McNamara, T Luca CristofoliniJ Aldo Toni and David Taylors J. Relation between bone prosthesis bonding and load transfer in total hip reconstruction. Biomechanics, Vol. 30. No. 6, I997: 30-6: 621-630.
Jonathan D. Rupp, Carol A. C Flannagan, Shashi M. Kuppa. Injury risk curves for the skeletal knee- thigh- hip complex for knee- impact loading. Accident Analysis and Prevention. 2009: 1-6.
Y. N. Yeni and T. L. Norman. Fracture Toughness of Human Femoral Neck: Effect of Microstructure, Composition, and Age. 2000: 26(5): 499-504.
C. J. Wang, C. J. Brown, A. l, Yettram, P. Procter, Inflamedullarynaila some design features of the distal end. Medical Engineering and Physics. 2003: 25: 789-794.
Dianielle L. Miller, Tarun Goswami. A review of locking compression plate biomechanics and their advantages as internal fixators in fracture healing. Clinical Biomechanics. 22: 1049-1062.
C. M. Robinson, C. I. Adams, M. Craig, W. Doward, Clarke and J. Auld. Implant-Related Fractures of the Femur Following Hip Fracture Surgery. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. 2002: 84-A(7): 1116-1122.