Finite Element Analysis and Experimental Testing of Stiffness of the Sarafix External Fixator

Mešić, Elmedin; Vahid, Avdić; Pervan, Nedim; Repci'c, Nedzad

doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2015.01.533

Cited by 31 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Mesic et al (18) , and Tananan et al (15) by approximately 62.92%, 43.55%, and 23.35% respectively, and lower than device by Koo et al (19) , and Marcelo et al (7) by approximately 16.55% and 33.26% respectively.…”

Section: Present Study 20528mentioning

confidence: 76%

TThe Effect of Dynamic Interfragmentary Movement on the Mechanical Performance of External Fixation Devices for Open Tibial Fractures

Leetha¹,

Phunpeng²,

Rooppakhun

2017

The Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Industrial Application Engineering 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interfragmentary movement (IFM) in bone formations during tibial shaft fracture stabilization is known to influence the outcome of fracture healing, as well as the performance of external fixation devices. Theoretically, the construction stiffness of a fixation device, including pin insertion configuration, is associated with tibial fracture stability. The objective of this study is to investigate the effect of interfragmentary movement during tibial fracture healing time using finite element analysis, with particular regard for the construction stiffness of the external fixation device. The effect of the distance between pin insertion and the pin length on the mechanical performance of the external fixation device was also performed, with reference to the ASTM F1541 standard. The mechanical stiffness ratio between the fracture site and skeleton device during each healing phase was calculated. According to the numerical results, the axial stiffness of the device displayed values in the range of 130 -950 N/mm. The effect of the pin length on the construction stiffness was found to be higher than the effect of the distance between pin insertions. It is implied that the load sharing between the stabilization occurred in fixation device and callus during first seven weeks.

show abstract

Section: Present Study 20528mentioning

confidence: 76%

TThe Effect of Dynamic Interfragmentary Movement on the Mechanical Performance of External Fixation Devices for Open Tibial Fractures

Leetha¹,

Phunpeng²,

Rooppakhun

2017

The Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Industrial Application Engineering 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This behaviour could be justified by the global stiffness variation of the external fixator. A smaller free pin span makes the whole structure stiffer than a larger one [29,30], and for any given regenerate stiffness of callus, a more flexible fixation tends to increase the ratio of the total load supported by the callus [31,32]. Nevertheless, the results of Figure 5, and Tables 3 and 4 show also that increasing the axial distance from 70 mm to 90 mm does not change load share ratios very much.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

The Effect of External Fixator Configurations on the Dynamic Compression Load: An Experimental and Numerical Study

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(1) Objective: External fixation systems are commonly used by surgeons to ensure stabilization and consolidation of bone fractures, especially in patients who are at high risk for systematic complications. Both rigid and elastic external fixations are important in the fracture healing process. This study aims to evaluate the behavior of the Orthofix Limb Reconstruction System (LRS)® in the dynamic compression mode. (2) Methods: Experimental and numerical setups were developed using a simplified model of a human tibia which consisted of a nylon bar with a diameter of 30 mm. The bone callus was included in both setups by means of a load cell-based system, which consisted of two carbon epoxy laminated composite plates with a final stiffness of 220 N/mm. The system was evaluated experimentally and numerically, considering different numbers of pins and comparing distances between the external fixator frame and the bone, achieving a good correlation between experimental and numerical results. (3) Results: The results identified and quantified the percental load transferred to the fracture and its sensibility to the distance between the external fixator and bone. Additionally, LRS locking stiffness was evaluated which resulted from the clamp-rail clearances. The results show that the blocking effects of the free clamp movement are directly related to the fixator configuration and are responsible for changes in the amount of load that crosses the bone callus. (4) Conclusions: From the biomechanical point of view, the results suggest that the average bending span of Schanz pins and the weights of the patients should be included into clinical studies of external fixators comparisons purpose.

show abstract

“…The length of an adult femur bone is 48 cm while the diameter of the cortical bone is 2.34 cm. The thickness of the cortical bone at the femoral shaft is 3 mm [6]. There are 4 screws attached to the femur bone where the distance of each pins was set to be 62 mm, 162 mm and 62 mm to each other.…”

Section: Finite Element Modelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Half pins stress shielding interaction behavior at implant-bone interface

Ibrahim

Daud

Hassan

et al. 2018

IJIE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Finite Element Analysis and Experimental Testing of Stiffness of the Sarafix External Fixator

Cited by 31 publications

References 4 publications

TThe Effect of Dynamic Interfragmentary Movement on the Mechanical Performance of External Fixation Devices for Open Tibial Fractures

TThe Effect of Dynamic Interfragmentary Movement on the Mechanical Performance of External Fixation Devices for Open Tibial Fractures

The Effect of External Fixator Configurations on the Dynamic Compression Load: An Experimental and Numerical Study

Half pins stress shielding interaction behavior at implant-bone interface

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About