Bending, Buckling, and

Case Study in Stress Shielding

 Bending

Pure Bending For a linear elastic

The longitudinal strain is isotropic solid loaded in
linearly varying with the 1-D: σ x=Eε x
distance from the neutral
axis.

∀ σ m=Mc/I
∀ ε x=-y/ρ
∀ σ x=-My/I
∀ ε m=-c/ρ
• 1/ρ = M/EI (curvature)
 Buckling

• Euler’s formula-- • For one fixed end:

buckling of a centrally Pcr= π 2EI/4l 2
compressed bar
• Assume initially straight --it is the smallest load
and loaded by centrally that can keep the bar in
applied load a slightly bent shape.
• If P is less than Pcrit • For a bar with built in
then it is stable and ends:
experiences only axial
Pcr= 4π 2EI/l 2
compression
• Load is calculated from Can occur in overload in
the deflection curve. fracture fixation devices
 Clinical relevance of bending

• Total Stress can be

calculated by combining F −M
c
the axial and bending σ= +
A I
stresses.
• About 200,000 THR Ei F −Ei Mci
σi = +
∑EiAi ∑Ei Ii
surgeries annually in the
U.S.
• Main design problems: i i
– Stress shielding π 4 4
– Loosening (
A= π r −ri
o
2
)
2
4
(
I = ro −ri )
Circular cross section
(hollow)
 Loading at Hip Joint

Hip C o n tac t F o rc e
F(t) (1.5 m/sec)

( B o d y W e i g h t)
4
F(t) F(t)
3

1 1.1m/sec)

0
0 50 100
% Stance Phase

(courtesy Dr. Tom Andriacchi, Stanford University)

 THR Material Requirements

• Biocompatibility
– function in body without local or systemic
rejection response
• Resistant to corrosion, degradation, and
wear
• Similar mechanical properties (strength,
stiffness, friction) to structures they
replace
• High quality and low cost
THR procedure
• Existing hip joint is completely
removed and replaced with an
artificial hip
• Diseased femoral head is removed
• Acetabulum is reamed and
acetabular component is inserted
• Bone marrow is extracted from
proximal femoral canal and femoral
stem is inserted into cavity
 Fixating Implant

• Two methods of fixating artificial components to

bone: bone cement and bony ingrowth

(http://orthoinfo.aaos.org)
 Early Development of THR

• First THR used stainless steel femoral stem

fixated with bone cement
• In mid 1970’s started to see increase in
Compression
Tension

stem fractures of devices implanted in the

1960’s

Noticed fracture was initiated on the lateral surface

•
Cause: fatigue fracture of stem
–

(courtesy Dr. Tom Andriacchi, Stanford University))

Solution to Fracture Problem

• Material
– changed manufacturing processes
– introduced Cobalt-Chromium alloy stem
(stronger and stiffer)

• Geometry
– made stems thicker in high stress areas

• Solved stem fracture problem

• Introduced other problems
 Bone Loss - Stress Shielding
• Wolff’s Law (1869): “bone adapts (remodels) in
response to the mechanical loads placed on it”
• Stiff implant changes mechanical loads on femur

Solution:
Solution:Make
Makeimplant
implantmore
more
(courtesy Dr. Tom Andriacchi) flexible
flexible
 How do we make beam more flexible?

• In axial loading case:

σ F
ε= =
E EA
– reduce axial rigidity (EA)
• In pure bending case:
M
κ=
EI
– reduce flexural rigidity (EI)
Example Problem

• Composite circular beam made of

metallic core (stem) and outer
sleave made of bone
• Axial compressive force F = -3000 N
(4 Body Weights for 168 lb person)
• Bending moment M = 30 N-m
• Neglect shear force
• Bone shaft diameters:
dout = 2.5 cm din = 1.0 cm
• Longitudinal modulus of cortical
bone = 17 GPa
 Example Problem

• For simplicity, perform analysis of two

loading cases separately
• Use three different materials for stem:
– stainless steel (E = 193 GPa)
– Co-Cr alloy (E = 214 GPa)
– titanium alloy (E = 124 GPa)
• Use two different stem diameters:
– 1.1 cm
– 1.5 cm
 Composite Beam Theory

• Axial loading:

Ebone F Estem F
σ bone = σ stem =
Ebone Abone + Estem Astem Ebone Abone + Estem Astem

• Pure Bending Moment (max stress):

Ebone M (d out / 2) Estem M (d stem / 2)

σ bone =− σ stem = −
Ebone I bone + Estem I stem Ebone I bone + Estem I stem
Compressive Stress: Axial Loading
• Bone without implant: 7.3 MPa
• 1.1 cm stainless steel stem:
– Bone: 2.0 MPa Stem: 23.1 MPa
• 1.5 cm stainless steel stem:
– Bone: 1.3 MPa Stem: 14.7 MPa
• 1.5 cm Co-Cr stem:
– Bone: 1.2 MPa Stem: 14.9 MPa
• 1.5 cm Titanium stem:
– Bone: 1.9 MPa Stem: 13.6 MPa
• 1.1 cm Titanium stem:
– Bone: 2.8 MPa Stem: 20.1 MPa
Compressive Stress: Bending
• Bone without implant: 20.0 MPa
• 1.1 cm stainless steel stem:
– Bone: 14.0 MPa Stem: 70.4 MPa
• 1.5 cm stainless steel stem:
– Bone: 8.4 MPa Stem: 56.8 MPa
• 1.5 cm Co-Cr stem:
– Bone: 7.8 MPa Stem: 69.0 MPa
• 1.5 cm Titanium stem:
– Bone: 10.8 MPa Stem: 47.2 MPa
• 1.1 cm Titanium stem:
– Bone: 15.8 MPa Stem: 50.8 MPa
 Combined Max Compressive Stress

• Worst case for stress

shielding
– 1.5 cm Co-Cr
• Best case for stress
shielding
– 1.1 cm Titanium
(http://news.bbc.co.uk)
Case Study on Bone Resorption

• Bobyn and Engh (1988) examined 411

cases of cementless hip replacements
• They categorized the extent of bone
resorption for each case as none, 1st
degree, 2nd degree, or 3rd degree

• For stems > 1.3 cm, 28% had 2nd or

3rd degree bone resorption
• For stems < 1.3 cm, 6% had 2nd or
3rd degree bone resorption
Summary

• THR is a great bioengineering

achievement that has improved
millions of lives
• THR design has improved greatly
over the last 4 decades through a
proper understanding of the
loading conditions and the
properties of the materials