2004
DOI: 10.1016/s0168-874x(03)00113-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

p-version of the finite-element method for highly heterogeneous simulation of human bone

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Shapiro et al [30], [2] generated inverse distance weighing interpolation with R-function and distance fields. Shin et al [19] proposed representation scheme FGM as an analogy to constructive solid geometry (CSG) scheme of solid modeling. Kumar et al [10], [42] proposed a set based approach with separate sets representing geometry model and attribute model respectively.…”
Section: Heterogeneous Human Body Modelingmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Shapiro et al [30], [2] generated inverse distance weighing interpolation with R-function and distance fields. Shin et al [19] proposed representation scheme FGM as an analogy to constructive solid geometry (CSG) scheme of solid modeling. Kumar et al [10], [42] proposed a set based approach with separate sets representing geometry model and attribute model respectively.…”
Section: Heterogeneous Human Body Modelingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For analysis of bone, the heterogeneity of cortical and cancellous bone is commonly accounted for by considering several sets of elastic modulus for bone material [4]. Muller et al [19] developed a three dimensional heterogeneous model of the human tibia for finite element analysis. Recently Cheng et al proposed heterogeneous solid representation scheme based on material feature [6].…”
Section: Heterogeneous Human Body Modelingmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…A possible solution lies in assigning each integration point the average value of the stiffness corresponding to the surrounding pixels. Nevertheless the size of this influence area is not univocally defined, Müller-Karger et al (2004).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A possible solution lies in assigning each integration point the average value of the stiffness corresponding to the surrounding pixels. Nevertheless the size of this influence area is not univocally defined, [25].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%