Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T06:59:14.865Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mechanisms Governing the Inelastic Deformation of Cortical Bone

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2011

C. Mercer ,
R. Wang  and
A. G. Evans
C. Mercer
Affiliation:
Materials Department, University of California Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, U.S.A.
R. Wang
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Engineering, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada.
A. G. Evans
Affiliation:
Materials Department, University of California Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, U.S.A.
Get access

Abstract

To understand the inelastic response of bone, a two-part investigation has been conducted. In the first, a flexural test protocol has been designed and implemented that monitors the axial and transverse strains on both the tensile and compressive surfaces of cortical bone. The results are used to assess the relative contributions of dilatation and shear to the inelastic deformation. Unload/reload tests have characterized the hysteresis and provided insight about the mechanisms causing the strain. These tests reveal strain healing attributed to sacrificial bonds. The second part devises a model for the stress/strain response, based on a recent assessment of the nano-scale organization of the collagen fibrils and mineral platelets. The model rationalizes the inelastic deformation in tension, as well as the permanent strain and hysteresis.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 873: Symposium K – Biological and Bio-Inspired Materials and Devices , 2005 , L2.2/K2.2
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Gibson, L. J. and Ashby, M. F., Cellular Solids: Structure and Properties, Pergamon Press, Oxford U. K. (1988).Google Scholar
2 Braidotti, P., Branca, F. P. and Stagni, L., J. Biomech., 30, 155 (1997).Google Scholar
3 Saski, N., Tagami, A., Goto, T., Taniguchi, M., Nakata, M. and Hikichi, K., J. Materials Science: Materials in Medicine, 13, 333 (2002).Google Scholar
4 Katz, E. P. and Li, S. T., J. Mol. Bio., 73, 351 (1973).Google Scholar
5 Gibson, L. J., J. Biomech., 18, 317 (1985).Google Scholar
6 Currey, J. D., Clin. Orthopaed. Rel. Res., 73, 209 (1970).Google Scholar
7 Currey, J. D., The Mechanical Adaptations of Bones, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ (1984).Google Scholar
8 Reilly, D. T. and Burstein, A. H., J. Biomech., 8, 393 (1975).Google Scholar
9 Stölken, J. S. and Kinney, J. H., Bone, 33, 494 (2003).Google Scholar
10 Hayes, W. C. and Carter, D. R., J. Biomed. Mat. Res., 10, 537 (1976).Google Scholar
11 Burr, D. B. and Hooser, M., Bone, 17, 431 (1995).Google Scholar
12 Wang, R. Z., Suo, Z., Evans, A. G., Yao, N. and Aksay, I. A., J. Mater Res., 16, 2485 (2001).Google Scholar
13 Evans, A. G. and Zok, F. W., Solid State Physics, 47, 177 (1994).Google Scholar
14 Moore, T. L. A. and L Gibson, J., J. Biomech Eng., 125, 769 (2003).Google Scholar
15 Smith, B. L. et al., Nature, 399, 761 (1999).Google Scholar
16 Thompson, J. B., Nature, 414, 773 (2001).Google Scholar
17 Watanabe, M., Mercer, C., Levi, C. G. and Evans, A. G., Acta Mater., 52, 1479 (2004).Google Scholar
18 Bennett, M. B., Ker, R. F., Dimery, N. J. and Alexander, R. M., J. Zool., Lond., 209, 537 (1986).Google Scholar
19 Landis, W. J., Bone, 16, 533 (1995).Google Scholar
20 Weiner, S. and Wagner, H. D., Annual Rev. Mater. Sci., 28, 271 (1998).Google Scholar
21 Eppell, S. J., Tong, W., Katz, J. L., Kuhn, L. and Glimcher, M. J., J. Orthopaed. Res., 19, 1027 (2001).Google Scholar