Department of Bioengineering FRACTURE PROPERTIES OF CHICKEN BONES WITH AND WITHOUT MARROW 101A1 Edwin Akrong – Background & Hypothesis Ping-Chien (Sam)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Chapter 11 Mechanical Properties of Materials
Advertisements

Overview of Loads ON and IN Structures / Machines
Normal Strain and Stress
Chapter 3 Mechanical Properties of Materials
Measuring Instruments
Home Work #3 Due Date: 11 Mar, 2010 (Turn in your assignment at the mail box of S581 outside the ME general office) The solutions must be written on single-side.
Forging new generations of engineers. Tensile Test Report Graphical Analysis and Computational Results of Collected Data.
Department of Bioengineering A Comparison of Suture Type: Dermabond Liquid Adhesive vs. Traditional Sutures Group: TA4 Hannah Zelman – Background & Hypothesis.
Department of Bioengineering BRIEF PROJECT TITLE/TOPIC (font 32) Group 101-A2 Joseph Kimmel – Background & Hypothesis Jon Wang – Methods & Protocol George.
Department of Bioengineering Instron Uniaxial Tensile Testing: Mechanical Failure Properties of Suturing and Steri-Strips GROUP #5 Seungyon Kim – Background.
1 Statistical Work in Nanomaterial Research A Statistical Approach to Quantifying the Elastic Deformation of Nanomaterials. (X. Deng, C. F. J. Wu, V. R.
Aims, Objectives and Hypotheses Aims/Objectives Aims/Objectives To determine the effects of surrogate meat (rubber) thickness and loading rate on fracture.
University of Pennsylvania Department of Bioengineering Aims/Objective & Hypothesis: UHMWPE Tensile Testing GROUP 2WB UHMWPE main component of THA acetabular.
Testing Effectiveness of Common Antacids
Shear Stress and Strain
Department of Bioengineering Modeling of Wound Closures Under Uniaxial Tensile Loading 101A3 Tefesehet Mesfin – Background & Hypothesis Ryan Stuckert –
University of Pennsylvania Department of Bioengineering Aims/Objective & Hypothesis(es): Quantifying Chicken Bone Decalcification by Mass Section 102 GROUP.
T.M.F.T: Thermal Mechanical Fatigue Testing
University of Pennsylvania Department of Bioengineering Aims/Objective & Hypothesis: Bone Decalcification and Fracture Strength GW4B The objective of this.
Department of Bioengineering FAILURE ENERGY: COMPARING SUTURE PERFORMANCE UNDER UNIAXIAL TENSION GROUP 101B1 Alison Agres – Background & Objective Ted.
Sample Problem 9.8 For the uniform beam and loading shown, determine the reaction at each support and the slope at end A. SOLUTION: Release the “redundant”
FYI: All three types of stress are measured in newtons / meter2 but all have different effects on solids. Materials Solids are often placed under stress.
University of Pennsylvania Department of Bioengineering Aims/Objective & Hypothesis: Effect of Calcium Content on Bone Fracture Energy Group Tuesday -
9 Torsion.
STRUCTURES Outcome 3 Gary Plimer 2008 MUSSELBURGH GRAMMAR SCHOOL.
Lecture 8 – Viscoelasticity and Deformation
Thermal Degradation of Polymeric Foam Cored Sandwich Structures S.Zhang 1, J.M.Dulieu-Barton 1, R.K.Fruehmann 1, and O.T.Thomsen 2 1 Faculty of Engineering.
L0 and L1 Structure Deflections During Installation of Silicon Sensors C H Daly 8/24/2003.
Department of Bioengineering Instron Uniaxial Tensile Testing and Image Analysis of Suture Performance in Chicken Skin 102B 5 Bari Dane Megan Liszewski.
University of Pennsylvania Department of Bioengineering Objectives & Hypotheses: Analysis of the Effect of Calcium Content on Chicken Bone Fracture Energy.
University of Pennsylvania Department of Bioengineering Aims/Objective & Hypothesis(es): MATERIAL TESTING: ROCKWELL HARDNESS & IMPACT ENERGY Group 101B5.
Department of Bioengineering Effect of Decalcification on Fracture Strength in Chicken Bones Group 102A5 Tim Bakke Vincent Cina Jonathan Lee Wee Siong.
Department of Bioengineering Tendon Stiffness and Strain Distribution GROUP 4B Dipal Patel – Background & Hypothesis Joe Frey – Methods & Protocol Chrysta.
3 Torsion.
University of Pennsylvania Department of Bioengineering Aims/Objective & Hypothesis: Fracture Energy of De-calcified Chicken Bones Group WA2 Central Hypothesis:
Department of Bioengineering Buffering Capabilities of Guinea Pig Blood GROUP MB3 Kim Coughlan, Barry Huang, Laura Michelis, Le Truong.
By Prof. Dr. Wail Nourildean Al-Rifaie
Department of Bioengineering Bone Repair Techniques: Fracture Testing of Chicken Bones 102-1B Ted Lee – Background & Hypothesis Nikhil Deshmukh – Methods.
Mechanical Properties of Materials
Department of Bioengineering Brandon Chen Stephen Cifelli Robert Metter Ek Kia Tan Uniaxial Suture Strength Testing Group TB2.
Department of Bioengineering Tensile Properties of Chicken Skin Treated with Trypsin-EDTA Group 3A Sakil Chundydyal – Background & Hypothesis Arnav Mukherjee.
University of Pennsylvania Department of Bioengineering Objectives & Hypotheses: REINFORCED BONE SURROGATE FRACTURING 101-A3 Objectives: To determine the.
Department of Bioengineering SUTURE PERFORMANCE 102 A Gyong Min Bak – Background & Hypothesis Heather Forquer – Methods & Protocol Kelvin Leung – Deliverables.
Department of Bioengineering Suture Performance Under Uniaxial Tensile Testing Group: 101A5 Ilan Epstein – Background & Hypothesis Neha Jha – Methods &
Department of Bioengineering Suture Performance of Stitches and Medical Adhesives 102 A2 Valerie Meausoone David Solomon Indraneel Gowdar Sarah Casey.
1 MFGT 104 Materials and Quality Compression, Shear, Flexural, Impact Testing Professor Joe Greene CSU, CHICO.
University of Pennsylvania Department of Bioengineering Objective To even force distribution over all stitches and thus increase force needed for system.
Haseeb Ullah Khan Jatoi Department of Chemical Engineering UET Lahore.
Department of Bioengineering Structural Properties of Glued-Wood Surrogates 102B_4 Yang Zhang – Background & Hypothesis Kevin Clark – Methods & Protocol.
University of Pennsylvania Department of Bioengineering Aims/Objective & Hypotheses: Instron Uniaxial Tensile Testing of Suture Performance Group: TA2.
MESF593 Finite Element Methods
Department of Bioengineering Instron Uniaxial Tensile Testing: Structural & Material Properties of Sutures Group 102 3B Leia Harbour Julianne Huegel Will.
Elasto - plastic behavior of beam-to- column connections with fillets of steel bridge frame piers.
ISE 311 Tensile Testing Lab in conjunction with Section 3.1 in the text book “Fundamentals of Modern Manufacturing” Third Edition Mikell P. Groover 4/25/2008.
PLASTIC ANALYSIS OF BEAMS - SANDEEP DIGAVALLI. AT A GLANCE OF THIS TOPIC  BASIS OF PLASTIC THEORY  STRESS-STRAIN CURVE OF PLASTIC MATERIALS  STRESSES.
Chapter 4. Mechanical Testing: Tension Test and Other Basic Tests
Mechanics of Materials Dr. Konstantinos A. Sierros
Overview of Loads ON and IN Structures / Machines
Sample Problem 9.8 For the uniform beam and loading shown, determine the reaction at each support and the slope at end A. SOLUTION: Release the “redundant”
Fracture Energy of Chicken Bones:
Material Joining and Beam Bending
Impact of Stitch Density on Suture Performance
Lecture 9 – Deformation and Damage
Lecture 9 – Deformation and Damage
Lecture 8 – Deformation and Damage
Knoop and Vickers Microindentation Hardness
Lecture 9 – Deformation and Damage
PDT 153 Materials Structure And Properties
Suggested Experiments
Mechanical Properties Of Metals - I
Presentation transcript:

Department of Bioengineering FRACTURE PROPERTIES OF CHICKEN BONES WITH AND WITHOUT MARROW 101A1 Edwin Akrong – Background & Hypothesis Ping-Chien (Sam) Wu – Methods & Protocol Sagar Singh – Deliverables & Pitfalls Reesa Child – Equipment & Budget Deeksha Gulati – Budget Justifications

Department of Bioengineering Background: Bone structural properties are important in treating fractures. A bone’s susceptibility to fracture is correlated to its modulus of elasticity and its capacity to absorb energy. Similar to rods and beams, bones deform when a load is applied. Bones absorb energy that is released when fractured, which occurs when sufficient loads are applied. Maximum force and stiffness for chicken bone with marrow were experimentally determined to be ±26.79N and ±94.1N/m, respectively. Hypothesis(es) & Aim(s) or Objective(s): Aims To use a 3-Point Bending Test to determine the failure properties of chicken bones with marrow and without marrow. Hypothesis Chicken bones without marrow will have weaker structural properties than those with marrow and will demonstrate a 10% reduction in maximum force, and 5% reduction in stiffness. Edwin Akrong

Department of Bioengineering Methods & Protocol: Set up Instron machine and calibrate. Use previously determined loading and sampling rate. Remove meat from each chicken leg bone. Store each bone in a dampened paper towel until time of use. 5 samples of chicken bone will be used. Cut off the ends of the bone with tendons attached with the bone saw to expose the inner part of the bone. Remove bone marrow with the seeker. Using a dial caliper, make necessary geometric measurements of the bone specimen. Mount the specimen in the bending jig. Note the orientation and point of contact of the bone. Determine the position and length between clamps, which will be the same for all bone specimens. Conduct the bending test and record resulting fracture pattern. Repeat the above steps with the four other bone specimens, acquiring data for each test. Stiffness will be determined by fitting a linear regression to the data points in between 5% and 75% of the maximum force. A two-tailed unpaired t-test with α=0.05 will be used to compare the stiffness and maximum force of bone with marrow and bone without marrow. Ping-Chien (Sam) Wu

Department of Bioengineering Proposed Deliverables/Findings: Sagar Singh BONE PROPERTIES DIAMETER (mm) THICKNESS (mm) AREA (10^- 3m^2) STIFFNESS (N/cm) MAX FORCE (N) Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Mean Standard Deviation Variance Fracture Point Maximum Force Figure 1: Table of Preliminary results of breaking marrow-filled bones along with a sample specimen graph of Force against Displacement. Table above demonstrates the preliminary results of specimen breaking with bone marrow present. Relative numerical results indicate it is feasible to remove the bone marrow and obtain measurable results. It is expected that maximum force and stiffness in specimens without marrow would be about 10% smaller and 5% smaller, respectively, than the results shown above. Specimen Force-Displacement graphs would be similar in shape, but would show less variance in results.

Department of Bioengineering Potential Pitfalls: Possible Problems: Determining and applying a consistent means of removing the bone marrow from each specimen. Hollow bones do not provide a completely homogeneous specimen for breakage, since the internal geometry of the bones may differ. Hence, there might be inconsistency within groups of results. Proposed Solutions: Using a photoresistor and sending a beam of light through the hollow portion of the bone and assigning an arbitrary threshold amplitude of light (threshold voltage), which each bone specimen must adhere to, ensuring consistency. The light will allow the determination of how much of the bone marrow has been removed. Sagar Singh

Department of Bioengineering Equipment/Materials and Budget & Justification: Equipment: The 3-point bending test will be conducted using the Instron Model 4444 materials testing machine and bending jig. Supplies: 5 chicken legs to provide sufficient data; knives and cutting board to remove the meat from the chicken bones; calipers and rulers to make measurements of the specimen. New Purchased Equipment: 1)Mopec Inc. Bone Cutting Autopsy Saw, Supplier: Fisher Scientific (Fisher Catalogue), Catalogue Number: NC , Price: $75.90; 215.9mm blade, open frame 304.8mm. This is needed to cut both ends off of the bones so that the bone resembles a uniform rod. 2) Fisherbrand Seeker with Bent End, Supplier: Fisher Scientific (Fisher Catalogue), Catalogue Number: , Price: $12.32 (Ea); nickel-plated steel probe with round handle, curved point tapered and blunt at end, overall length: 152mm. This will be used to remove the marrow inside the bone, so that the bone mimics a hollow uniform rod. Reesa Child & Deeksha Gulati