International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, ISSN 0973-4562 Vol. 10 No.

85 (2015)
Research India Publications; http/www.ripublication.com/ijaer.htm

ANALYSIS OF CARBON FIBER REINFORCED POLYMER

COMPOSITE HIP PROSTHESIS BASED ON STATIC AND DYNAMIC
LOADING
Praveen Kumar. A*,
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
SSN college of Engineering,
Chennai, India
E-mail: praveenphd15@gmail.com
*corresponding Author

Dr. G.S Kumarasamy,

Professor,
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
KCG College of Technology,
Chennai, India.
E-mail: kumarasamy.gs@gmail.com

Nikhil.N,
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
KCG College of Technology,
Chennai, India
E-mail: nikhil.n.designer@gmail.com
Abstract The need for alternate innovative materials in
orthopedics arises from the recognition of the stress-shielding
effect of bone due to high-modulus implants presently made of
metal alloys. Prosthesis materials which have lower modulus will
result in the construction of a more bio-mechanically compatible
prosthesis. In this respect, modern materials like composite
materials are gaining importance, because they offer the potential
for implants with tailor-made stiffness in contrast to metals.
These materials have better mechanical and other characteristics
than their constituent elements. Conventional materials like
stainless steel ,titanium alloys, cobalt chrome alloys and are
replaced by polymer composite materials, since they possess
superior biomechanical properties, such as better fatigue
strength, chemical resistance, environmental stability and
biocompatibility. The materials chosen for acetabular cup is
UHMWPE and for femoral head by polymer composites. Using
ANSYS software which is a finite element solver, stress analysis
under static and maximum loading conditions are done and the
results are compared with the existing system made up of
conventional material TiAl6V4 ,also compared with the
mechanical properties of cortical bone. It is observed that the
conventional material Titanium alloy experiences peak stress and
strain whereas the chosen composite materials (such as carbon
fiber reinforced polyether ether ketone PEEK and epoxy) are
very nearer to the results of cortical bone with lower stress
distribution.

known as hip joint prosthesis. Over an estimated 800,000

total hip replacements are being performed worldwide
annuallyThe human hip joint is well constructed for its
intended use: standing, walking and running. The hip joint is
an example of a congruous joint. Both the concave
(acetabulum) and the convex (femoral head) are symmetrical,
and the joint space is same at all points with slight deviation to
permit adequate lubrication. The ranges of motion of the hip
joint are extension, flexion, adduction, abduction, and rotation,
with specific physiological limitation by the soft tissues of the
joint [2]. In the Finnish Arthroplasty Register, between 1980
and 1999, 12,224 revision hip arthroplasties were recorded and
there are almost 40,000 revision total hip arthroplasties
(THAs) performed annually in the United States. This number
has steadily increased over the past 20 years, and is expected to
continue to increase over the next several decades [3]. Failures
of hip prosthesis have been reported due to fatigue failure of
hip joint stem [4, 5], fracture of bone cement [6] and wear
caused by sliding present between head and socket [7].
Experimental studies have found that the resultant force
acting through the hip joint during normal walking is around
300% body weight. The hip joint could be damaged under
complex walking motions. It is well-known that fully
understanding the stress distribution is very useful for both preoperative planning and post-operative rehabilitation. The short
and long term behavior of a THR is dependent on obtaining the
optimal stress distribution within the bone-implant construct.
To estimate the failures of the prosthesis, finite element analysis
has been used. This method is widely used as a time saving and
cost efficient computing method in biomedical engineering [5].
The purpose of this study is to numerically analyze and
compare the differences between the conventional material
TiAl6V4 and composite materials carbon fiber reinforced
PEEK [8] and carbon fiber reinforced epoxy which are applied
in the prosthetic hip joint in terms of deformation and stress
distribution under static (load due to the dead weight of the
body) and dynamic (load due to walking cycle) loading
conditions.

Keywords acetabulum, hip prosthesis, biomechanics, polymer

composites, finite element analysis, PEEK

I. INTRODUCTION
Human body carries body weight and absorbs shock using
hip joint during walking and climbing stair conditions.The hip
joint is one of the largest load bearing joint between femur and
acetabulum of pelvis which is lined with a layer of cartilage
that reduces friction and acts as a shock absorber. The primary
function of hip joint is to support weight of the body in both
the static and walking postures [1]. When the bone is exposed
to arthritis, injury due to heavy force, this protective layer is
damaged, causing extreme pain. In the event of a failure of the
natural hip joint, it is replaced with an artificial hip joint,

574

International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, ISSN 0973-4562 Vol. 10 No.85 (2015)
Research India Publications; http/www.ripublication.com/ijaer.htm

and a 0.5 mm clearance between the cup and the femoral head.
There are 0.5mm clearance between the cup and the femoral
head which is filled with artificial cartilage. After the suitable
materials are assigned to each component the necessary
boundary conditions are applied by fixing the back side of the
acetabular cup. The non-frictional contact between the elements
is given. The surface to surface contact pair was created
between the outer layer of acetabulum with outer layer of
cartilage (contact 2161 and target 2233) and another surface to
surface contact pair was created between the inner layer of
cartilage with the femoral head (contact 2161 and target 2161).

II. FINITE ELEMENT MODEL

Finite element method (FEM) is a computer-based method that
can be used to analyze such complex continua and gives result
within 5-10% of the exact solution depending on the proper
finite element model. This technique is so very powerful that it
may save our time and resources used in animal
experimentation, while testing the efficacy of newly designed
prosthesis or a biomaterial. According to the statistical data,
[9] the geometrical shape of human natural femoral head is
similar to the ellipse as shown in the fig.1.

III. MATERIAL PROPERTIES

A Biomaterial is defined as synthetic material that is used to
replace or restore function to a body tissue and is continuously
or intermittently in contact with body fluids. First and foremost,
a biomaterial must be biocompatible; it should not elicit an
adverse response from the body, and vice versa. Additionally, it
should be nontoxic and non-carcinogenic. These requirements
eliminate many engineering materials that are available. Most
synthetic biomaterials used for implants are common materials
familiar to the average materials engineer or scientist. In
general, these materials can be divided into the following
categories: metals, polymers, ceramics, and composites.
Composite materials are modern materials made out of different
material combinations with different mechanical properties
resulting in structures with superior behavior as compared to
conventional monolithic materials [10]. Commonly used resins
are thermoplastic and thermosetting resins. Thermoplastic
resins have a good biocompatibility due to a good
intermolecular bond which can be increased by cross linking.
Thermosetting resins allow more sophiscated products due to
their lower viscosity during manufacturing. Reinforced
composites have more fatigue resistance than un-reinforced
composites, which is very important in joint replacement [11].
Bones as a hard tissue are strong and stiff and clearly have high
elastic modules. Human Bones are naturally and structurally
composite material made of collagen fibers and nano crystals of
hydroxyapatite which are sediment in collagen fibers.

Fig 1 Section of human hip joint

But, the artificial femoral head is sphere shape or similar to the

rotundity shape. The difference in ellipse and sphere femoral
head could cause the mechanics and biology problems. The
ellipse shape femoral components have the more lowness
stress distribution area and more small distortion magnitude
than rotundity shape artificial femoral head. It is better to
replace rotundity femoral head with ellipse shape artificial
femoral head. The three-dimensional finite element mesh was
zoned from CAD model, using a commercially available preprocessing program as shown in the fig.2.

Polymer Matrix Composite (PMC) is the material consisting

of a polymer (resin) matrix combined with a fibrous reinforcing
dispersed phase. Initially the properties of conventional material
Ti6Al4V is applied to the femoral head .The mechanical
properties [12] of Ti6Al4V are of Youngs Modulus 110 GPa
and Poisson ratio 0.3. The UHMWPE lining was taken to be
8mm thick having a Youngs Modulus of 1.4 GPa and a
Poissons ratio 0.3. The area between the cup and head is filled
with the artificial cartilage which has the youngs modulus of 2
GPa and Poisson ratio of 0.3.All the materials are assumed to
be linear elastic and isotropic. Then the orthotropic properties
of composite materials are applied, the most suitable
biomaterials [13] carbon fiber reinforced with PEEK, carbon
fiber reinforced with epoxy is chosen for the femoral head. The
mechanical properties [14] of carbon fiber reinforced with
epoxy are Ex =120Gpa, Ey =10Gpa, Ez=10Gpa, NUXY=0.16,
NUYZ=0.2, NUZX=0.16, Gxy=5.2 Gpa, Gyz =3.8 Gpa, Gzx
=6Gpa. The mechanical properties[14] of carbon fiber
reinforced with PEEK are Ex= 135.3 GPa, Ey=9 GPa, Ez= 9
GPa, Gxy=5.2 GPa , Gxz=5.2 GPa, Gyz=1.9 GPa, NUXY= 0.34,

Fig.2 FEA model for hip prosthesis

This model is designed based on the true femoral head

statistical data. Fully nonlinear frictional sliding contact finite
element analyses were conducted using the Ansys program. The
model consisted of three parts, the acetabular cup, artificial
cartilage and femoral head. The femoral head is set at a 28 mm

575

International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, ISSN 0973-4562 Vol. 10 No.85 (2015)
Research India Publications; http/www.ripublication.com/ijaer.htm

NUYZ= 0.46 NUZX=0.34. In order to compare with the stress

distribution values of cortical bone, the mechanical properties
[14] of cortical bone are applied. Ex = 17.5 GPa, Ey= 11.7 GPa,
Ez= 9.3 GPa, Gxy=5.59 GPa , Gxz=5.03 GPa, Gyz=4.23 GPa,
NUXY= 0.205, NUYZ= 0.302, NUZX=0.109.

this work which can benefit the evaluation and redesign of

artificial joint. In dynamic analysis, the DOF of the acetabulum
backing is also fixed. The measured angle of hip joint during
normal walking is approximately 25degrees (in slow walking).
The force on the joint varies during the gait cycle as shown in
Fig.4. The direction of the force points to the centre of the
femur head as shown in fig. 5.

IV. LOADING CONDITIONS

Stress analysis determines the stress and strain in materials
and structures subjected to static or dynamic forces or loads.
Stress analysis may be applied as a design step to structures that
do not yet exist or an investigative process for parts that have
failed. The aim of the analysis is usually to determine whether
the element or collection of elements, usually referred to as a
structure, behaves as desired under the prescribed loading. For
example, this might be achieved when the determined stress
from the applied force(s) is less than the tensile yield strength
or below the fatigue strength of the material. The boundary
conditions consisted two parts, static and maximum loading.
The purpose of stress analysis is to compare various possible
implant materials in term of their ability to produce a similar
stress magnitude with respect to the natural stress magnitude of
the bone.
A. Static loading conditions

Fig.4 Sketch map of Gait cycle

In the static analysis, the models simulate the human
standing status. In standing status the joint bears
approximately one third of the human weight, assuming
human weight to be 60Kg, then the load on the hip joint
was assumed to be 200N. The direction of the force points
to the centre of the femur head as shown in fig 3.

Fig. 5 Maximum loading condition

The peak loading occurs at heel strike, mid-stand and toeoff. Numerical values are given in Table 1[15]. Different gait
parameters were calculated with different peak joint forces.
Loadings at the three points are important for evaluating joint
characteristics.

Fig 3 Static loading condition

In the analysis, the degree of freedom (DOF) of acetabulum

backing should be fixed in order to simulate the standing
status. The loading time is one second. Usually, normal
walking is the most common status during day life. The
magnitude and distribution of stress and displacement in this
course become more important in order to understand the
working status of the artificial joint.

Table 1 Joint force during a gait cycle

Gait

B. Dynamic loading conditions

The magnitude and distribution of stress and displacement
during walking are important to understand the working of the
artificial joint. The dynamic process analysis is the key point of

Peak
force

Value(N)

Heel strike

4.64 BW

3637.76

Mid stand

3.51 BW

2751.84

Toe-off

4.33 BW

3394.72

BW(BODY WEIGHT=60 kg)

576

International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, ISSN 0973-4562 Vol. 10 No.85 (2015)
Research India Publications; http/www.ripublication.com/ijaer.htm

V. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

During static loading, the peak deformation of TiAl6V4 is
0.006521 mm whereas for carbon-PEEK and carbon-Epoxy are
0.001491 mm and 0.001632 mm. The peak stress for TiAl 6V4
is 1.5896 MPa whereas for carbon-PEEK and carbon-Epoxy are
0.3320 MPa and 0.3570 MPa.

The ellipse model has the smallest magnitude on the

bottom of acetabulum, shown with blue color, and the biggest
value on the inner circle of the acetabulum, shown with red
color as shown in the fig. 6, fig. 7, fig.8.

Fig.6 Deformation plot for CF-PEEK under static loading

Fig.9 Deformation plot for CF-PEEK under dynamic loading

Fig.7 Von misses Stress plot for CF-PEEK under

static loading

Fig.10 Von mises Stress plot for CF-PEEK under dynamic

loading

Fig.8 Von misses strain plot for CF-PEEK under

static loading

Fig.11 Von mises strain plot for CF-PEEK under dynamic

loading

577

International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, ISSN 0973-4562 Vol. 10 No.85 (2015)
Research India Publications; http/www.ripublication.com/ijaer.htm

. From the contour plots shown in fig.9, fig.10, fig.11

Deformation, stress and strain under Dynamic loading are
higher than static loading. During Dynamic loading, the peak
deformation of TiAl6V4 is 0.652102 mm whereas for carbonPEEK and carbon-Epoxy are 0.12497 mm and 0.14497 mm.
The peak stress for TiAl6V4 is 230.58 MPa whereas for carbonPEEK and carbon-Epoxy are 41.55 MPa and 44.55 MPa. From
the above results, the conventional material Titanium alloy
experiences peak stress, peak strain whereas the results of the
chosen composite materials (such as carbon fiber reinforced
polyether ether ketone PEEK and epoxy) are similar to the
results of cortical bone with lower stress distribution.

Fig.14 Vonmises strain histogram during static loading

Fig.12 Deformation histogram during static loading

Fig.15 Deformation histogram during Dynamic loading

Fig.13 Von mises stress histogram during static loading

Fig.16 Vonmises stress histogram during Dynamic loading

578

International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, ISSN 0973-4562 Vol. 10 No.85 (2015)
Research India Publications; http/www.ripublication.com/ijaer.htm

materials are better than titanium alloy and also the properties
and stress distribution are similar to the cortical bone.
REFERENCES
[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]
Fig.17 Vonmises strain histogram during Dynamic loading

[5]

Fig.12 , Fig.13 , Fig.14 ,are the histograms for deformation,

von misses stress and strain of joint under static loading
whereas Fig.15 , Fig.16 , Fig.17, are the histograms for
deformation, von misses stress and strain of joint under
maximum loading which is nonlinear and is more complicated
than static loading. With the artificial cartilage covering the
femoral head increases the contact area between the femoral
head and the acetabulum and the load is dispersed onto the
added area which decreases the elastic deformation and the
peak stress .

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

VI. CONCLUSION

[10]

Thus the static and maximum loading properties of the ellipse

model which is more similar to the structure of the natural hip
joint are found by replacing the conventional material Ti6Al4V
by polymer composite materials such as carbon fiber
reinforced with polyetheretherketone and carbon fiber
reinforced with epoxy. The current metal hip prostheses made
of titanium alloys have a modulus, which is an order of
magnitude greater than that of the surrounding cortical bone.
The mismatch between the moduli causes the majority of the
load to be carried by the prosthesis. This results in the lack of
an effective transfer of load to the surrounding femoral bone.
Such a phenomenon (termed as stress shielding) is known to
cause resorption of the unloaded bone by the human body, due
to decreased bone tissue strain level. From the above results, it
is found that the lower modulus implant materials such as
carbon and aramid fiber reinforced polymer matrix composite

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

579

N.D.L. Burger, P.L. Vaal, J.P. Meyer, Failure analysis on ultra-high

molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) acetabular cups. Eng. Fail.
Anal. 14, 13291345 (2007)
Heller. M.O,2001, Musculo-skeletal loading conditions at the hip during
walking and stair climbing, Journal of Biomechanics Vol.34 pp. 883
893.
K.J. Bozic, S.M. Kurtz, E. Lau, K. Ong, T.P. Vail, D.J. Berry, The
epidemiology of revision total hip arthroplasty in the United State. J.
Bone. Jt. Surg. 91, 128133 (2009).
S. Griza, C. Kwietniewski, G.A. Tarnowaski, F. Bertoni, Y. Reboh,
Fatigue failure analysis of a specific total hip prosthesis stem design. Int.
J. Fatigue. 30, 13251332 (2008).
B.A. Behrens, C.J. Wirth, H. Windhagen, I. Nolte, A. Lindenberg, A.
Bouguecha, Numerical investigations of stress shielding in total hip
prostheses. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part H: J. Eng. Med. 222(H), 593600
(2008).
I. Brown, H. Zhang, L. Blunt, S. Barrans, Reproduction of fretting wear
at the stem-cement interface in total hip replacement. Proc. Inst. Mech.
Eng., Part H: J. Eng. Med. 221, 963971 (2007).
J.S. Wu, J. Hung, C. Shu, J. Chen, The computer simulation of wear
behaviour appearing in total hip prosthesis. Comput. Methods. Program.
Biomed. 70, 8191 (2003).
Hai-bo jiang,Static and dynamic mechanics analysis on artificial hip
joints with different interface designs by the finite element method,
Journal of bionic engineering. 4(2) pp. 123-131.( 2007).
Hai-bo jiang ,Biomechanics characteristics of new type artificial hip
joint proceedings of the 3rd International Conference of Bionic
Engineering, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 258-262.( 2010).
Ramakrishna.S,
Biomedical applications of polymer-composite
materials: a review Composites Science and Technology, Vol. 61, Issue
9, pp. 11891224 (2001).
Praveen kumar.A, A Review on Importance and Recent Applications of
Polymer Composites in Orthopaedics International Journal of
Engineering Research and Development, pp. 40-43(2012).
Rao Seetharama.Y 2012, Stress analysis of composite propeller by
using finite element analysisInternational Journal of Engineering
Science and Technology, Vol. 4(8) pp.3866-3875.
Chaodi Li, Christopher Granger, 2003 Failure analysis of composite
femoral components for hip arthroplasty Journal of Rehabilitation
Research and Development, Volume 40 No. 2,pp. 131 - 146
H. F. ElSheikh, B. J. MacDonald, M. S. J. Hashmi. 2003, Finite
element simulation of the hip joint during stumbling: a comparison
between static and dynamic loading Journal of Materials Processing
Technology, 143-144: 249-255.
Cheal E, Spector M, Hayes W. 1992 Role of loads and prosthesis
material properties on the mechanics of the proximal femur after total hip
arthroplasty Journal of Orthopaedic Research,10, pp.405-422