Journal of Materials Processing Technology 143–144 (2003) 249–255
Finite element simulation of the hip joint during stumbling:a comparison between static and dynamic loading
H.F. El’Sheikh, B.J. MacDonald, M.S.J. Hashmi
School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, Centre for Engineering Design and Manufacture, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland
Finite element stress analysis technique has been used to optimize both design and material selection in load-bearing components inartiﬁcial hip joints based on the static load analysis, by selecting the peak load during the patient activity. In this study, a component wassubjected to a dynamic load due to stumbling and the peak static load of the same patient load activity. Two quantitative measures arecalculated: peak stress and stressed volume. It has been shown that each measure may lead to differing conclusions. It is concluded thatfrom a thorough analysis of the hip prosthesis components (prosthesis, cement mantle and bone) it is not the peak stress but rather theproportion of the stressed elements (or stressed volume) which should be the indicator if a precise analysis of the load transfer mechanismisrequired.Instaticanalysisthematerialwasassumedtobelinearelasticcontinuumwithisotropicproperties,whereasindynamicanalysisit was assumed to be bi-linear elasto-plastic.© 2003 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
Artiﬁcial hip replacement; Hip prosthesis; Finite element method; Simulation
Although pre-clinical validation procedures have sig-niﬁcantly improved in the last few years, some importantfactors, affecting the biomechanical performance of hipimplants, are still very difﬁcult to account for. Using aclever combination of numerical models and experimentsin vivo it is possible today to replicate the major part of thefailure scenario previously observed in the clinical practice.However, many important factors are still very difﬁcult totake into account during these studies. In particular, theseaspects related to the patient (skeletal anatomy, bone qual-ity, muscles, level of activity or biological response) or tothe surgeon (bone surgery, implant position and ﬁt, jointcenter relocation or muscle surgery). Until now, modelsdeveloped to predict stresses in total hip replacements havebeen generally poorly validated.This could be because
all the pre-clinical simulations were performed statically,that is by selecting the greatest load at a particular time of the activity cycle.So far, all the results in these studies were conducted byassumingthepeakloadsduringthenormalgaitataparticulartime (static loads), but in fact the hip is exposed to variedloads, for example, when climbing the stairs, stumbling or
email@example.com (M.S.J. Hashmi).
jumping. These kind of loads could be considered as impactloads, and they could cause the artiﬁcial hip to fail.This study aims to take account of patient activity (stamp-ing, jumping, walking, etc.) when designing total hip re-placement. In this regard the stress ﬁeld in the artiﬁcial hipcomponents (prostheses, cement mantle, and bone) is ana-lyzed statically and dynamically with nonlinear simulation.In the dynamic case, simulations have been conducted to in-vestigate the effect of the loading pattern on the stress-basedcriteria to assess implant longevity. Two quantitative mea-sures are calculated: peak stress and stressed volume. It hasbeen shown that each measure may lead to differing conclu-sions.
2. Finite element model
The ﬁnite element models were generated using ANSYSﬁnite element software (version 5.6). A standardized femurwas used as a basis for the ﬁnite element model.The ge-
ometry contained Linea Aspera on the posterior side and thefemur displayed a noticeable bow in the anterior–posteriorplane. A combination of free and mapped meshing was usedto generate two hip prosthesis models for static and dynamicstudies. The types and number of elements used are giveninTable 1.The prosthesis was uncollared and its stem was designedto be tapered and follows the shape of internal cortical bone.
0924-0136/$ – see front matter © 2003 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/S0924-0136(03)00352-2