Comparison of various contact algorithms for poroelastic tissues

Fabio Galbusera, Maxim Bashkuev, Hans Joachim Wilke, Aboulfazl Shirazi-Adl, Hendrik Schmidt

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Capabilities of the commercial finite element package ABAQUS in simulating frictionless contact between two saturated porous structures were evaluated and compared with those of an open source code, FEBio. In ABAQUS, both the default contact implementation and another algorithm based on an iterative approach requiring script programming were considered. Test simulations included a patch test of two cylindrical slabs in a gapless contact and confined compression conditions; a confined compression test of a porous cylindrical slab with a spherical porous indenter; and finally two unconfined compression tests of soft tissues mimicking diarthrodial joints. The patch test showed almost identical results for all algorithms. On the contrary, the confined and unconfined compression tests demonstrated large differences related to distinct physical and boundary conditions considered in each of the three contact algorithms investigated in this study. In general, contact with non-uniform gaps between fluid-filled porous structures could be effectively simulated with either ABAQUS or FEBio. The user should be aware of the parameter definitions, assumptions and limitations in each case, and take into consideration the physics and boundary conditions of the problem of interest when searching for the most appropriate model.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1323-1334
Number of pages12
JournalComputer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering
Volume17
Issue number12
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Fingerprint

ABAQUS
Tissue
Boundary conditions
Contacts (fluid mechanics)
Compaction
Physics
Fluids

Keywords

  • biological soft tissues
  • confined compression
  • contact algorithm
  • FEBio
  • permeable media
  • porous contact

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Bioengineering
  • Biomedical Engineering
  • Computer Science Applications
  • Human-Computer Interaction

Cite this

Comparison of various contact algorithms for poroelastic tissues. / Galbusera, Fabio; Bashkuev, Maxim; Wilke, Hans Joachim; Shirazi-Adl, Aboulfazl; Schmidt, Hendrik.

In: Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering, Vol. 17, No. 12, 2014, p. 1323-1334.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Galbusera, Fabio ; Bashkuev, Maxim ; Wilke, Hans Joachim ; Shirazi-Adl, Aboulfazl ; Schmidt, Hendrik. / Comparison of various contact algorithms for poroelastic tissues. In: Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering. 2014 ; Vol. 17, No. 12. pp. 1323-1334.
@article{55242a89041542138d93e05baf115452,
title = "Comparison of various contact algorithms for poroelastic tissues",
abstract = "Capabilities of the commercial finite element package ABAQUS in simulating frictionless contact between two saturated porous structures were evaluated and compared with those of an open source code, FEBio. In ABAQUS, both the default contact implementation and another algorithm based on an iterative approach requiring script programming were considered. Test simulations included a patch test of two cylindrical slabs in a gapless contact and confined compression conditions; a confined compression test of a porous cylindrical slab with a spherical porous indenter; and finally two unconfined compression tests of soft tissues mimicking diarthrodial joints. The patch test showed almost identical results for all algorithms. On the contrary, the confined and unconfined compression tests demonstrated large differences related to distinct physical and boundary conditions considered in each of the three contact algorithms investigated in this study. In general, contact with non-uniform gaps between fluid-filled porous structures could be effectively simulated with either ABAQUS or FEBio. The user should be aware of the parameter definitions, assumptions and limitations in each case, and take into consideration the physics and boundary conditions of the problem of interest when searching for the most appropriate model.",
keywords = "biological soft tissues, confined compression, contact algorithm, FEBio, permeable media, porous contact",
author = "Fabio Galbusera and Maxim Bashkuev and Wilke, {Hans Joachim} and Aboulfazl Shirazi-Adl and Hendrik Schmidt",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1080/10255842.2012.745858",
language = "English",
volume = "17",
pages = "1323--1334",
journal = "Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering",
issn = "1025-5842",
publisher = "Informa Healthcare",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of various contact algorithms for poroelastic tissues

AU - Galbusera, Fabio

AU - Bashkuev, Maxim

AU - Wilke, Hans Joachim

AU - Shirazi-Adl, Aboulfazl

AU - Schmidt, Hendrik

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Capabilities of the commercial finite element package ABAQUS in simulating frictionless contact between two saturated porous structures were evaluated and compared with those of an open source code, FEBio. In ABAQUS, both the default contact implementation and another algorithm based on an iterative approach requiring script programming were considered. Test simulations included a patch test of two cylindrical slabs in a gapless contact and confined compression conditions; a confined compression test of a porous cylindrical slab with a spherical porous indenter; and finally two unconfined compression tests of soft tissues mimicking diarthrodial joints. The patch test showed almost identical results for all algorithms. On the contrary, the confined and unconfined compression tests demonstrated large differences related to distinct physical and boundary conditions considered in each of the three contact algorithms investigated in this study. In general, contact with non-uniform gaps between fluid-filled porous structures could be effectively simulated with either ABAQUS or FEBio. The user should be aware of the parameter definitions, assumptions and limitations in each case, and take into consideration the physics and boundary conditions of the problem of interest when searching for the most appropriate model.

AB - Capabilities of the commercial finite element package ABAQUS in simulating frictionless contact between two saturated porous structures were evaluated and compared with those of an open source code, FEBio. In ABAQUS, both the default contact implementation and another algorithm based on an iterative approach requiring script programming were considered. Test simulations included a patch test of two cylindrical slabs in a gapless contact and confined compression conditions; a confined compression test of a porous cylindrical slab with a spherical porous indenter; and finally two unconfined compression tests of soft tissues mimicking diarthrodial joints. The patch test showed almost identical results for all algorithms. On the contrary, the confined and unconfined compression tests demonstrated large differences related to distinct physical and boundary conditions considered in each of the three contact algorithms investigated in this study. In general, contact with non-uniform gaps between fluid-filled porous structures could be effectively simulated with either ABAQUS or FEBio. The user should be aware of the parameter definitions, assumptions and limitations in each case, and take into consideration the physics and boundary conditions of the problem of interest when searching for the most appropriate model.

KW - biological soft tissues

KW - confined compression

KW - contact algorithm

KW - FEBio

KW - permeable media

KW - porous contact

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84899450846&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84899450846&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/10255842.2012.745858

DO - 10.1080/10255842.2012.745858

M3 - Article

C2 - 23244496

AN - SCOPUS:84899450846

VL - 17

SP - 1323

EP - 1334

JO - Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering

JF - Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering

SN - 1025-5842

IS - 12

ER -