Effect of Radial Clearance, Corner Radius and Micro-Lateralization on Contact Stress of Metallic and Ceramic Hip Prosthesis – A Finite Element Analysis
Abstract
Edge loading leads to high contact stress at the rim of the contact. This is due to less radial clearance and excessive lateral head displacement which potentially causes implant failure. The ceramic implants have a high possibility of fracture compared with metallic implants because of above-said reasons. The present study focuses on the investigation of contact stress for the combined effect of radial clearance (0.05-0.75 mm) and micro-lateralisation conditions (1-2.5 mm) for Metal-on-Metal (M-o-M) and Ceramic-on-Ceramic (C-o-C) pairs. The contact stresses are analysed for round corners of the acetabulum cup geometry for the above-said combinations with four different arc radii (1- 4mm). Finite element modeling (FEM) of femur head with half of the acetabulum cup is considered for the current study. Contact stress values obtained for 2 mm and 4 mm round corner geometry are quite low when compared with 1 and 3 mm round corners even for larger radial clearances and high lateral head displacements. The study also showed von Mises stress value obtained for M-o-M pair is quite low for 4 mm round corner for larger radial clearance and high lateral head displacements. Similarly, in C-o-C pair the compressive stress values are minimum for 4 mm round corner. Since the stress values were minimum for 4 mm round corner geometry, it clearly indicates that even edge loading occurs and the round corner geometry would be very helpful in reducing the stress for both M-o-M and C-o-C pairs.
Finite element model with round corner acetabulum cup.
…
Contact stress (MPa) plot for M-O-M pair.
…
Maximum compressive stress comparison for C-o-C pairs.
…
Comparison of current study with existing study.
…
Description
Indexed in scopushttps://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.uri?authorId=57213800249 |
Article metrics10.31763/DSJ.v5i1.1674 Abstract views : | PDF views : |
Cite |
Full Text![]() |
Conflict of interest
“Authors state no conflict of interest”
Funding Information
This research received no external funding or grants
Peer review:
Peer review under responsibility of Defence Science Journal
Ethics approval:
Not applicable.
Consent for publication:
Not applicable.
Acknowledgements:
None.