Fig 1.
The mechanical experiment of the femoral trabecular bone, (a) Harvesting the specimens (b) Positioning of 8 samples in each bone (c) Experimental setup including DIC system (d) Loading configurations, left is the uniaxial and right is confined setup.
Fig 2.
The configuration of the femora in experimental set-up [21] (left ) and FEA simulation(right).
Fig 3.
The regression analyses of the measured experimental data for femoral trabecular bone: (a) Youngs’s modulus; (b) Yield stress in the uniaxial compression; (c) Yield stress in the confined compression.
Fig 4.
Force-displacement data of five cadaveric femora [18].
Fig 5.
Continuous and Discontinuous regression of Young’s modulus (left) and Yield stress (right).
Cortical data was adapted from [20].
Table 1.
Power-Law equations of the material parameters in continuous and discontinuous approaches (BMD [gr/ml]).
Fig 6.
Stress-strain data of a sample with BMD of 207.5 mg/ml in uniaxial simulation (left) and a BMD of 208.3 mg/ml in confined simulation (right) with two different material models versus experimental results.
Fig 7.
The equivalent plastic strain represents permanent deformation of a femoral sample with a BMD of 207.5 mg/ml.
Fig 8.
Comparison between the distributions of the equivalent plastic strain, indicating the fracture locations of the FEA models and the actual fracture location in experiment.
The graphs on the right show the force-displacement data of the FEA models and physical experiments. *Images of cadaveric specimens were adapted from [18].