| People | Locations | Statistics |
|---|---|---|
| Naji, M. |
| |
| Motta, Antonella |
| |
| Aletan, Dirar |
| |
| Mohamed, Tarek |
| |
| Ertürk, Emre |
| |
| Taccardi, Nicola |
| |
| Kononenko, Denys |
| |
| Petrov, R. H. | Madrid |
|
| Alshaaer, Mazen | Brussels |
|
| Bih, L. |
| |
| Casati, R. |
| |
| Muller, Hermance |
| |
| Kočí, Jan | Prague |
|
| Šuljagić, Marija |
| |
| Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-Artemi | Brussels |
|
| Azam, Siraj |
| |
| Ospanova, Alyiya |
| |
| Blanpain, Bart |
| |
| Ali, M. A. |
| |
| Popa, V. |
| |
| Rančić, M. |
| |
| Ollier, Nadège |
| |
| Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro |
| |
| Landes, Michael |
| |
| Rignanese, Gian-Marco |
|
Gill, H. S.
University of Bath
in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%
Topics
Publications (18/18 displayed)
- 2024Experiments and numerical modelling of secondary flows of blood and shear-thinning blood analogue fluids in rotating domainscitations
- 2024Auxetic fixation devices can achieve superior pullout performances compared to standard fixation conceptscitations
- 2021Properties of PMMA end cap holders affect FE stiffness predictions of vertebral specimens
- 20213D Printed Medical Grade Ti-6Al-4V Osteosynthesis Devices Meet the Requirements for Tensile Strength, Bending, Fatigue and Biocompatibility
- 2019Evaluating strength of 3D printed screw threads for patient-specific osteosynthesis plates
- 2019Evaluation of optimised cervical spine viscoelastic elements for sport injury analysis
- 2018The effect of plate design, bridging span, and fracture healing on the performance of high tibial osteotomy plates – an experimental and finite element study.citations
- 2017Validated cemented socket model for optimising acetabular fixation
- 2017Effect of absorbed fatty acids on physical properties of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene
- 2017Use of contrast agents on polymeric materials
- 2016A Python Package to Assign Material Properties of Bone to Finite Element Models from within Abaqus Software
- 2016An open source software tool to assign the material properties of bone for ABAQUS finite element simulationscitations
- 2016A validated specimen specific finite element model of vertebral body failure
- 2016Variations in Cortical Thickness of Composite Femur Test Specimens
- 2015Tibial Fracture after Unicompartmental Knee Replacement: The Importance of Surgical Cut Accuracy
- 2014Classification of retinal ganglion cells in the southern hemisphere lamprey Geotria australis (Cyclostomata)citations
- 2014Effect of Q-switched laser surface texturing of titanium on osteoblast cell response
- 2013Fracture of mobile unicompartmental knee bearingscitations
Places of action
| Organizations | Location | People |
|---|
article
An open source software tool to assign the material properties of bone for ABAQUS finite element simulations
Abstract
A new software tool to assign the material properties of bone to an ABAQUS finite element mesh was created and compared with Bonemat, a similar tool originally designed to work with Ansys finite element models.Our software tool (py_bonemat_abaqus) was written in Python, which is the chosen scripting language for ABAQUS.The purpose of this study was to compare the software packages in terms of the material assignment calculation and processing speed.Three element types were compared (linear hexahedral (C3D8), linear tetrahedral (C3D4) and quadratic tetrahedral elements (C3D10)), both individually and as part of a mesh.<br/><br/>Comparisons were made using a CT scan of a hemi-pelvis as a test case. A small difference, of -0.05 kPa on average, was found between Bonemat version 3.1 (the current version) and our python package.Errors were found in the previous release of Bonemat (version 3.0 downloaded from www.biomedtown.org) during calculation of the quadratic tetrahedron Jacobian, and conversion of the apparent density to modulus when integrating over the Young’s modulus field.These issues caused up to 2 GPa error in the modulus assignment.For these reasons, we recommend users upgrade to the most recent release of Bonemat.<br/><br/>Processing speeds were assessed for the three different element types.Our Python package took significantly longer (110 s on average) to perform the calculations compared with the Bonemat software (10 s). Nevertheless, the workflow advantages of the package and added functionality makes ‘py_bonemat_abaqus’ a useful tool for ABAQUS users.