Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-wq484 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T03:31:24.862Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fracture Mechanisms of Bone: A Comparative Study between Antler and Bovine Femur

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 March 2011

P.Y. Chen ,
F.A. Sheppard ,
J.M. Curiel  and
J. McKittrick
P.Y. Chen
Affiliation:
Materials Science and Engineering Program, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093-0418, U.S.A.
F.A. Sheppard
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093-0411, U.S.A.
J.M. Curiel
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093-0411, U.S.A.
J. McKittrick
Affiliation:
Materials Science and Engineering Program, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093-0418, U.S.A. Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093-0411, U.S.A.
Get access

Abstract

In this study, fracture toughness of North American elk (Cervus elaphus canadensis) antler and bovine femur were measured using four-point bending tests on single-edge notched compact samples (ASTM C1421). Tests were conducted on crack growth directions longitudinal and transverse to the long axis of antler and bone in both dry and hydrated conditions to study the effects of fiber orientation and hydration. Fracture toughness results in the transverse orientation were much higher than that in the longitudinal orientation and increased with degree of hydration for both antler and bovine femur. The fracture toughness of antler was ∼ 50% higher than that of bovine femur. The highest fracture toughness value was obtained from the hydrated antler in the transverse orientation, which reached 10.31 MPa·m1/2 compared to that measured from bovine femur, which was 6.35 MPa·m1/2. The crack propagation and fracture surface were characterized using scanning electron microscopy. Toughening mechanisms, including crack deflection by osteons, uncracked ligament bridging, and microcracks formation, are observed and discussed. Comparisons between antler and bone are made.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 1132: Symposium Z – Mechanics of Biological and Biomedical Materials , 2008 , 1132-Z01-04
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2009

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

REFERENCES

1. Henshaw, J., Nature 231, 469 (1971).Google Scholar
2. Chapman, D.I., Mam Review 5, 121 (1975).Google Scholar
3. Currey, J.D., J Biomech 12, 313 (1979).Google Scholar
4. Skedros, J.G., Durand, P., Bloebaum, R.D., J Bone Miner Res 10 (Suppl 1), 441 (1995).Google Scholar
5. Currey, J.D., Philos Trans R Roc Lond B 304, 509 (1984).Google Scholar
6. Zioupos, P., Currey, J.D., Sedman, A.J, Med Eng Phys 16, 203 (1994).Google Scholar
7. Kitchener, A.C., “Fighting and the mechanical design of horns and antlers,” Biomechanics in animal behaviour, ed. Domenici, P. and Blake, R.W. (Oxford 2000).Google Scholar
8. Blob, R.W., Snelgrove, J. M., J Morphol 267, 1075 (2006).Google Scholar
9. Landete-Castillejos, T., Currey, J.D., Estevez, J.A., Gaspar-López, E., Garcia, A., Gallego, L., Bone 41, 794 (2007).Google Scholar
10. Chen, P.-Y., Stokes, A.G., McKittrick, J., Acta Biomater 5, 693 (2009).Google Scholar
11. Robertson, D.M., Robertson, D., Barret, C.R., J Biomech 11, 359 (1978).Google Scholar
12. Bonfield, W., Grynpas, M.D., Young, R.J., J Biomech 11, 473 (1978).Google Scholar
13. Vashishth, D., Tanner, K.E., Bonfield, W., J Biomech 33, 1169 (2000).Google Scholar
14. Yeni, Y.N., Norman, T.L., J Biomed Mater Res 51, 504 (2000).Google Scholar
15. Lucksanambool, P., Higgs, W.A.J., Higgs, R.J.E.D., Swain, M.W., Biomaterials 22, 3127 (2001).Google Scholar
16. Nalla, R.K., Kinney, J.H., Ritchie, R.O., Nature Materials 2, 164 (2003).Google Scholar
17. Vashishth, D., J Biomech 37, 943 (2004).Google Scholar
18. Nalla, R.K., Kruzic, J.J, Kinney, J.H., Ritchie, R.O., Biomaterials 26, 217 (2005).Google Scholar
19. Adharapurapu, R.R., Jiang, F., Vecchio, K.S., Mater Sci Eng C 26, 1325 (2006).Google Scholar
20.ASTM C1421-01b. “Standard test methods for determination of fracture toughness of advanced ceramics,” In: Annual Book of ASTM Standards vol 15.01 (PA, ASTM 2006).Google Scholar
21. Nalla, R.K., Balooch, M., Ager, J.W., Kruzic, J.J, Kinney, J.H., Ritchie, R.O., Acta Biomater 1, 31 (2005).Google Scholar