Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T02:41:51.106Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Poroelastic Indentation Analysis for Hydrated Biological Tissues

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2011

Michelle L. Oyen ,
Amanpreet K. Bembey  and
Andrew J. Bushby
Michelle L. Oyen
Affiliation:
[email protected], Cambridge University, Engineering Dept., Trumpington St., Cambridge, CB2 1PZ, United Kingdom, 01223 332 680, 01223 332 662
Amanpreet K. Bembey
Affiliation:
[email protected], Queen Mary, University of London, London, E1 4NS, United Kingdom
Andrew J. Bushby
Affiliation:
[email protected], Queen Mary, University of London, London, E1 4NS, United Kingdom
Get access

Abstract

Indentation techniques are employed for the measurement of mechanical properties of a wide range of materials. In particular, techniques focused at small length-scales, such as nanoindentation and AFM indentation, allow for local characterization of material properties in heterogeneous materials including natural tissues and biomimetic materials. Typical elastic analysis for spherical indentation is applicable in the absence of time-dependent deformation, but is inappropriate for materials with time-dependent responses. Recent analyses for the viscoelastic indentation problem, based on elastic-viscoelastic correspondence, have begun to address the issue of time-dependent deformation during an indentation test. The viscoelastic analysis has been shown to fit experimental indentation data well, and has been demonstrated as useful for characterization of viscoelasticity in polymeric materials and in hydrated mineralized tissues. However, a viscoelastic analysis is not necessarily sufficient for multi-phase materials with fluid flow. In the current work, a poroelastic analysis—based on fluid motion through a porous elastic network—is used to examine spherical indentation creep responses of hydrated biological materials. Both analytical and finite element approaches are considered for the poroelastic Hertzian indentation problem. Modeling results are compared with experimental data from nanoindentation of hydrated bone immersed in water and polar solvents (ethanol, methanol, acetone). Baseline (water-immersed) bone responses are characterized using the poroelastic model and numerical results are compared with altered hydration states due to polar solvents.

Keywords

bonebiologicalelastic properties
Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 975: Symposium DD – Mechanics of Biological and Bio-Inspired Materials , 2006 , 0975-DD07-05
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2007

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. Field, J S and Swain, M V, J. Mater. Res. 8, 297–306 (1993).Google Scholar
2. Oliver, W C and Pharr, G M, J. Mater. Res. 7, 1564–83 (1992).Google Scholar
3. Lee, E H and Radok, J R M, Contact problem for viscoelastic bodies, J. Applied Mech. 27, 438–44 (1960).Google Scholar
4. Johnson, K L, Contact Mechanics. UK: Cambridge University Press, (1985).Google Scholar
5. Oyen, M L, Phil. Mag. 86, 5625–5641 (2006).Google Scholar
6. Oyen, M L, J. Mater. Res. 20, 2094–2100 (2005).Google Scholar
7. Cuy, J L, Mann, A B, Livi, K J, Teaford, M F, and Weihs, T P, Arch. Oral. Biol., 47, 281–91 (2002).Google Scholar
8. Oyen, M L and Ko, C-C, J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Med., 18, 623–8 (2007).Google Scholar
9. Bembey, A K, Oyen, M L, Bushby, A J, Boyde, A, Phil. Mag. 86, 5691–5703 (2006).Google Scholar
10. Bembey, A K, Bushby, A J, Boyde, A, Ferguson, V L, Oyen, M L, J. Mater. Res. 21, 1962–8 (2006).Google Scholar
11. Mattice, J M, Lau, A G, Oyen, M L, Kent, R W, J. Mater. Res. 21, 2003–10 (2006).Google Scholar
12. Cowin, S C, J. Biomech. 32, 217–38 (1999).Google Scholar
13. Agbezuge, L K and Deresiewicz, H, Israel J. of Tech. 12, 322–38 (1974).Google Scholar
14. Selvadurai, A P S, Int. J. Solids Structures 41, 2043–64 (2004).Google Scholar
15. Zysset, P K, Guo, X E, Hoffler, C E, Moore, K E, Goldstein, S A, J. Biomech. 32, 1005–12 (1999).Google Scholar
16. Lakes, R S, J. Materials Science, 26, 2287–2292 (1991).Google Scholar
17. Vollrath, F, Rev. Molec. Biotech. 74, 67–83 (2000).Google Scholar