The tensile mechanical behavior of the cement-bone interface where there was a large process (plastic) zone at the interface was modeled using a nonlinear fracture mechanics approach. A finite element method was employed, which included a piecewise nonlinear interface, to investigate the behavior of experimental cement-bone test specimens and an idealized stem-cement-bone (SCB) structure. The interface model consisted of a linear elastic region with high stiffness until the yield strength was reached, followed by an exponential softening region, until zero stress. The yield strength and rate of exponential softening after yielding at the cement-bone interface were shown to have a marked effect on the structural stiffness of the SCB model. The results indicate that both yield strength and postyield behavior should be included to characterize the mechanics of the cement-bone interface fully.

Issue Section:
Technical Papers
Topics:
Bone, Cements (Adhesives), Fracture mechanics, Modeling, Yield strength, Stiffness, Finite element methods, Mechanical behavior, Stress
1.
Bittencourt, T. N., 1993, “Computer simulation of linear and nonlinear crack propagation in cementitious materials,” Ph.D. thesis, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
2.
Boone
 
T. J.
,
Wawrzynek
 
P. A.
, and
Ingraffea
 
A. R.
,
1986
, “
Simulation of the fracture process in rock with application to hydrofracturing
,”
Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. & Geomech. Abstr.
, Vol.
23
, pp.
255
–
265
.
3.
Broek, D., 1991, Elementary Engineering Fracture Mechanics, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston.
4.
Clech
 
J. P.
,
Keer
 
L. M.
, and
Lewis
 
J. L.
,
1984
, “
A crack model of a bone cement interface
,”
ASME JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICAL ENGINEERING
, Vol.
106
, pp.
235
–
243
.
5.
Clech
 
J. P.
,
Keer
 
L. M.
, and
Lewis
 
J. L.
,
1985
, “
A model of tension and compression cracks with cohesive zone at a bone–cement interface
,”
ASME JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICAL ENGINEERING
, Vol.
107
, pp.
175
–
182
.
6.
Dohmae
 
Y.
,
Bechtold
 
J. E.
, and
Sherman
 
R. E.
,
1988
, “
Reduction in cement-bone interface shear strength between primary and revision arthroplasty
,”
Clin. Orthop.
, Vol.
236
, pp.
214
–
240
.
7.
Gruen
 
T. A.
,
McNeice
 
G. M.
, and
Amstutz
 
H. C.
,
1979
, “
Modes of Failure of cemented stem–type femoral components: A radiographic analysis of loosening
,”
Clin. Orthop.
, Vol.
141
, pp.
17
–
27
.
8.
Huiskes
 
R.
,
1980
, “
Some fundamental aspects of human joint replacement
,”
Acta. Orthop. Scand. [Suppl.]
, Vol.
185
pp.
109
–
200
.
9.
Ko¨bel, R., Bergmann, G., and Boenick, U., 1976, “Mechanical engineering of the cement-bone bond,” Engineering in Medicine, Schldach, M., and Hohman, D., eds., Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 347–357.
10.
Krause
 
W. R.
,
Krug
 
W.
, and
Miller
 
J.
,
1982
, “
Strength of the Cement–Bone Interface
,”
Clin. Orthop.
, Vol.
163
, pp.
290
–
299
.
11.
Lotz
 
J. C.
,
Gerhart
 
T. N.
, and
Hayes
 
W. C.
,
1990
, “
Mechanical properties of the trabecular bone from the proximal femur: A quantitative CT study
,”
J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr.
, Vol.
14
, pp.
107
–
114
.
12.
Mann, K. A., Ayers, D. C., Werner, F. W., Nicoletta, R. J., and Fortino, M. D., 1997, “Tensile strength of the cement-bone interface depends on the amount of bone interdigitated with PMMA cement,” J. Biomechanics, in press.
13.
Robinson
 
R. P.
,
Lovell
 
T. P.
,
Green
 
T. M.
, and
Bailey
 
G. A.
,
1989
, “
Early femoral component loosening in DF-80 total hip arthroplasty
,”
J. Arthroplasty
, Vol.
4
, pp.
55
–
64
.
This content is only available via PDF.
Copyright © 1997
 by The American Society of Mechanical Engineers
You do not currently have access to this content.