Back to Search Start Over

Comparison of elastic properties of open-cell metallic biomaterials with different unit cell types

Authors :
Hedayati, R. (author)
Sadighi, M. (author)
Mohammadi-Aghdam, M (author)
Hosseini-Toudeshky, H (author)
Hedayati, R. (author)
Sadighi, M. (author)
Mohammadi-Aghdam, M (author)
Hosseini-Toudeshky, H (author)
Publication Year :
2018

Abstract

Additive manufacturing techniques have made it possible to create open-cell porous structures with arbitrary micro-geometrical characteristics. Since a wide range of micro-geometrical features is available for making an implant, having a comprehensive knowledge of the mechanical response of cellular structures is very useful. In this study, finite element simulations have been carried out to investigate the effect of structure unit cell type (cube, rhombic dodecahedron, Kelvin, Weaire-Phelan, and diamond), cross-section type (circular, square, and triangular), strut length, and relative density on the Young's modulus, shear modulus, yield stress, shear yield stress, and Poisson's ratio of open-cell tessellated cellular structures. It was desired to see whether or not and to what extent each of the aforementioned parameters affect the mechanical properties of a porous structure. It was seen that the strut cross-section type does not have a considerable effect on the structure Young's modulus while its effect on the structure yield stress is significant. The strut length was not effective on the mechanical properties if the relative density was kept constant. It was also observed that the structure unit cell type and relative density have a considerable effect on the elastic properties. The highest and the lowest stiffness and strength belonged to the cube and diamond unit cell types, respectively. The rhombic dodecahedron structure with circular cross-section had a high yielding strength (second among all the cases) while its Young's modulus was relatively low. Therefore, it is the best choice for applications with low stiffness requirements, such as biomedical implants.<br />Accepted Author Manuscript<br />Biomaterials & Tissue Biomechanics

Details

Database :
OAIster
Notes :
English
Publication Type :
Electronic Resource
Accession number :
edsoai.on1357836977
Document Type :
Electronic Resource
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1002.jbm.b.33854