A study into the fracture control of 3D printed intraosseous transcutaneous amputation prostheses, known as ITAPs

Joshua Bird; Euan Langford; Christian Griffiths; Joshua Bird; Euan Langford; Christian Griffiths

doi:10.3934/bioeng.2020003

AIMS Bioengineering

2020, Volume 7, Issue 1: 29-42. doi: 10.3934/bioeng.2020003

Previous Article Next Article

Research article Special Issues

A study into the fracture control of 3D printed intraosseous transcutaneous amputation prostheses, known as ITAPs

College of Engineering, Swansea University, Swansea, UK

Received: 07 November 2019 Accepted: 14 February 2020 Published: 17 February 2020

Amputated femurs traditionally have multiple health concerns, including the risk of infection. One way to mitigate this risk could be to use an intraosseous transcutaneous amputation prosthesis (ITAP), which is a way of attaching a prosthesis directly to the bone of the user. This paper attempts to customize an ITAP used in a transfemoral amputation so that it fails in a controlled manner, should failure be unavoidable. ABS specimens were 3D Printed and tested to understand how current designs fail. From these tests, an alternative design was developed. Simulations were conducted to insure the optimized design would withstand expected forces from walking. Titanium samples were then produced using additive manufacture and were subjected to tensile testing. These specimens incorporated a notch in the centre of the specimen to act as a stress concentrator. The design presented in this paper identified that the location of failure should move towards the prosthesis, and away from the femur. It was also shown that, titanium was found to have a greater breaking force than the femur; and is therefore not viable for use at this current stage.
- prostheses,
- ITAP,
- additive manufacture,
- tensile testing,
- notched specimen
Citation: Joshua Bird, Euan Langford, Christian Griffiths. A study into the fracture control of 3D printed intraosseous transcutaneous amputation prostheses, known as ITAPs[J]. AIMS Bioengineering, 2020, 7(1): 29-42. doi: 10.3934/bioeng.2020003

Related Papers:

Abstract

Amputated femurs traditionally have multiple health concerns, including the risk of infection. One way to mitigate this risk could be to use an intraosseous transcutaneous amputation prosthesis (ITAP), which is a way of attaching a prosthesis directly to the bone of the user. This paper attempts to customize an ITAP used in a transfemoral amputation so that it fails in a controlled manner, should failure be unavoidable. ABS specimens were 3D Printed and tested to understand how current designs fail. From these tests, an alternative design was developed. Simulations were conducted to insure the optimized design would withstand expected forces from walking. Titanium samples were then produced using additive manufacture and were subjected to tensile testing. These specimens incorporated a notch in the centre of the specimen to act as a stress concentrator. The design presented in this paper identified that the location of failure should move towards the prosthesis, and away from the femur. It was also shown that, titanium was found to have a greater breaking force than the femur; and is therefore not viable for use at this current stage.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the support of the Future Manufacturing Research Institute, College of Engineering, Swansea University and Advanced Sustainable Manufacturing Technologies (ASTUTE 2022) project, which is partly funded from the EU's European Regional Development Fund through the Welsh European Funding Office, in enabling the research upon which this paper is based. Further information on ASTUTE can be found at www.astutewales.com.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interests.

References

[1]	Tranberg R, Zügner R, Kärrholm J (2011) Improvements in hip-and pelvic motion for patients with osseointegrated trans-femoral prostheses. Gait Posture 33: 165-168. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2010.11.004
[2]	Pendegrass CJ, Goodship AE, Price JS, et al. (2006) Nature's answer to breaching the skin barrier: an innovative development for amputees. J Anat 209: 59-67. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7580.2006.00595.x
[3]	Albrektsson T, Jansson T, Lekholm U (1986) Osseointegrated dental implants. Dent Clin North Am 30: 151-174.
[4]	Newcombe L, Dewar M, Blunn GW, et al. (2013) Effect of amputation level on the stress transferred to the femur by an artificial limb directly attached to the bone. Med Eng Phys 35: 1744-1753. doi: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2013.07.007
[5]	Thambyah A, Pereira BP, Wyss U (2005) Estimation of bone-on-bone contact forces in the tibiofemoral joint during walking. Knee 12: 383-388. doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2004.12.005
[6]	Rho JY, Kuhn-Spearing L, Zioupos P (1998) Mechanical properties and the hierarchical structure of bone. Med Eng Phys 20: 92-102. doi: 10.1016/S1350-4533(98)00007-1
[7]	Willett TL, Dapaah DY, Uppuganti S, et al. (2019) Bone collagen network integrity and transverse fracture toughness of human cortical bone. Bone 120: 187-193. doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2018.10.024
[8]	Bettamer A, Hambli R (2016) Finite Element Simulation of Fracture Profile of Bone Material: A Case of Study Applied to Human Femur Specimen Elsevier.
[9]	Zioupos P, Currey JD (1998) Changes in the stiffness, strength, and toughness of human cortical bone with age. Bone 22: 57-66. doi: 10.1016/S8756-3282(97)00228-7
[10]	Currey JD (2010) Mechanical properties and adaptations of some less familiar bony tissues. J Mech Behav Biomed 3: 357-372. doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2010.03.002
[11]	Iori G, Heyer F, Kilappa V, et al. (2018) BMD-based assessment of local porosity in human femoral cortical bone. Bone 114: 50-61. doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2018.05.028
[12]	Marco M, Giner E, Larraínzar-Garijo R, et al. (2017) Numerical modelling of femur fracture and experimental validation using bone simulant. Ann Biomed Eng 45: 2395-2408. doi: 10.1007/s10439-017-1877-6
[13]	Reilly DT, Burstein AH (1975) The elastic and ultimate properties of compact bone tissue. J Biomech 8: 393-405. doi: 10.1016/0021-9290(75)90075-5
[14]	Griffiths CA, Howarth J, De Almeida-Rowbotham G, et al. (2016) A design of experiments approach to optimise tensile and notched bending properties of fused deposition modelling parts. Proc IMechE Part B: J Engineering Manufacture 230: 1502-1512. doi: 10.1177/0954405416640182
[15]	Tanoto YY, Anggono J, Siahaan IH, et al. (2017) The effect of orientation difference in fused deposition modeling of ABS polymer on the processing time, dimension accuracy, and strength. AIP Conference Proceedings 1788: 030051. doi: 10.1063/1.4968304
[16]	Murr LE, Gaytan SM, Ramirez DA, et al. (2012) Metal fabrication by additive manufacturing using laser and electron beam melting technologies. J Mater Sci Technol 1-14. doi: 10.1016/S1005-0302(12)60016-4
[17]	Chen Y, Frith JE, Dehghan-Manshadi A, et al. (2017) Mechanical properties and biocompatibility of porous titanium scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. J Mech Behav Biomed 75: 169-174. doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2017.07.015
[18]	Zheng L, Luo JM, Yang BC, et al. (2005) 3D finite element analysis of bone stress around distally osteointegrated implant for artificial limb attachment. Key Eng Mater 288–289: 653-656. doi: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.288-289.653
[19]	Devinuwara K, Dworak-Kula A, O'Connor RJ (2018) Rehabilitation and prosthetics post-amputation. Orthop Trauma 32: 234-240. doi: 10.1016/j.mporth.2018.05.007
[20]	Langford E, Griffiths CA (2018) The mechanical strength of additive manufactured intraosseous transcutaneous amputation prosthesis, known as the ITAP. AIMS Bioeng 5: 133-150. doi: 10.3934/bioeng.2018.3.133
[21]	Tinius Olsen, Frame Capacities from 1 to 50 kN (200-11k Ibf), 2017.Available from: https://www.tiniusolsen.com/tinius-olsen-products/tensile-compression-tinius-olsen/st-series.
[22]	Plastics. Determination of tensile properties. General principles. BS EN ISO 527-1, 2019 Available from: https://bsol.bsigroup.com/Bibliographic/BibliographicInfoData/000000000030377399.
[23]	Mather BS (1968) Variation with age and sex in strength of the femur. Med Biol Eng 6: 129-132. doi: 10.1007/BF02474265
[24]	Metallic materials. Tensile testing. Merhod of test at room temperature. BS EN ISO 6892-1, 2019 Available from: https://bsol.bsigroup.com/Bibliographic/BibliographicInfoData/000000000030395181.
[25]	Chang KH (2013) Product Performance Evaluation using CAD/CAE: The Computer Aided Engineering Design Series New York: Academic press.
[26]	Irwin GR, Paris PC (1971) Fundamental aspects of crack growth and fracture. Engineering Fundamentals and Environmental Effects New York: Academic Press, 1-46.
[27]	Welsch G, Boyer R, Collings EW (1993) Materials and Properties Handbook: Titanium Alloys USA: ASM international.
[28]	Niinomi M, Liu Y, Nakai M, et al. (2016) Biomedical titanium alloys with Young's moduli close to that of cortical bone. Regen Biomater 3: 173-185. doi: 10.1093/rb/rbw016
[29]	Attar H, Bermingham MJ, Ehtemam-Haghighi S, et al. (2019) Evaluation of the mechanical and wear properties of titanium produced by three different additive manufacturing methods for biomedical application. Mater Sci Eng 760: 339-345. doi: 10.1016/j.msea.2019.06.024
[30]	Young WC, Budynas RG, Sadegh AM, et al. (2002) Roark's Formulas For Stress and Strain New York: McGraw-Hill.
[31]	Barenblatt GI (1962) The mathematical theory of equilibrium cracks in brittle fracture. Advances in Applied Mechanics New York: Academic Press, 55-129. doi: 10.1016/S0065-2156(08)70121-2
[32]	Newman JC, Raju IS (1981) An empirical stress-intensity factor equation for the surface crack. Eng Fract Mech 15: 185-192. doi: 10.1016/0013-7944(81)90116-8

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2020 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)