Ch. 5 - Structural Analysis of MSK Systems - Beam Theory Flashcards
Why using models to help us calculate the stresses in bone and bone-implant systems, why do we aim to choose the simplest model to do the job?
Because that way we have
- fewer assumptions
- less chance for error
State 2 potential advantages of Beam Theory.
- It can be used to describe a number of skeletal structures, as well as bone-implant systems
- It is a simple model that can be used to validate results obtained from a more complex model (e.g. FEA)
Give 4 examples of 1 material beams in the MSK system that could be analysed using simple beam theory.
- A bone strut
- The femoral neck component of a total hip replacement
- The elastic behaviour of bone specimens
- Long bone behaviour
Elaborate on 2 examples of a 2 material beam in the MSK system that could be analysed using simple beam theory.
- A fractured long bone treated using a plate attached with screws. After healing the device and bone form a composite beam. Initially the system can be thought of as a single material beam with the rod carrying all the force. As the bone heals, both materials are carrying load and now the system can be considered a composite beam.
- Bone specimens from the longitudinal axis of a bone when tested in bending to failure. With yielding, cross-section will have sections behaving elastically and others inelastically.
Elaborate on how both a cemented and an uncemented total hip replacement stem can be modelled as a 3 material beam.
- Cemented: PMMA (bone cement) is the 3rd material
- Cementless: fibrous tissue layer that forms around porous coating is the 3rd material
The derivation of beam theory is based on 3 elements. What are they?
- A strain-displacement relationship
- Equilibrium relationships
- Material behaviour
What is the fundamental assumption of all beam theory?
That all plane sections before loading remain plane after loading.
How is strain distribution different in response to axial loading vs. bending?
Axial loading - strain is constant over the cross-section
Bending - strain varies linearly from the neutral axis
State the fundamental assumptions according to beam theory for the case of a 1-material symmetric beam under axial loading.
- Plane sections remain plane after loading
- The material is elastic with a linear stress-strain diagram (Hooke’s Law applies)
- The only stress is the longitudinal stress in the x direction - All other stress components are assumed to be 0 and the beam is in equilibrium. (Each longitudinal fibre of the beam is subjected to only tension or compression).
According to beam theory, what is true about the stress in a one material beam that does not hold for beam of more materials?
The stress in a one material beam does not depend on the material because the elastic modulus term E drops out. It depends only on load and beam geometry.
State the fundamental assumptions according to beam theory for the case of a 1-material symmetric beam under bending.
- Bending moment is applied about an axis perpendicular to the plane of symmetry (there is no out of plane bending)
- Plane sections remain plane after loading
- Deformations vary linearly across any cross-section
- Reference (neutral) axis is that which neither lengthens nor shortens
State the fundamental assumptions according to beam theory for the case of a 3-material symmetric beam.
- Assume the composite beam deforms as a one-material beam:
1. Plane sections remain plane after loading
2. Each material shows linear elastic behaviour - Hooke’s Law applies for each component
- Piecewise linear normal stress variation sigma = E x epsilon
Why is the neutral axis usually the geometric centroid in a symmetric 1-material beam but not in a composite beam?
In a composite beam, the location of the neutral axis is affected by positions and material properties of each component.
How can you determine the location of the neutral axis for a composite beam?
Using the equilibrium condition for the axial force.
How is the situation of an unsymmetrical beam fundamentally different from that of a symmetrical beam?
- We can no longer assume that the member will bend in the plane of the couples
- In general, the neutral axis of the section will not coincide with the axis of the couple