Medical Engineering & Physics
Volume 32, Issue 6 , Pages 584-594 , July 2010

Surrogate articular contact models for computationally efficient multibody dynamic simulations

  • Yi-Chung Lin

      Affiliations

    • Department of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
    • ,
  • Raphael T. Haftka

      Affiliations

    • Department of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
    • ,
  • Nestor V. Queipo

      Affiliations

    • Applied Computing Institute, University of Zulia, Maracaibo, Venezuela
    • ,
  • Benjamin J. Fregly

      Affiliations

    • Department of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
    • Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
    • Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author at: Department of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering, 231 MAE-A Building, PO Box 116250, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-6250, USA. Tel.: +1 352 392 8157; fax: +1 352 392 7303.

Received 16 July 2009 ,Revised 8 February 2010 ,Accepted 10 February 2010.

References 

  1. Schiehlen W, Guse N, Seifried R. Multibody dynamics in computational mechanics and engineering applications. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering. 2006;195:5509–5522
  2. Sharf I, Zhang YN. A contact force solution for non-colliding contact dynamics simulation. Multibody System Dynamics. 2006;16:263–290
  3. Glocker C. Formulation of spatial contact situations in rigid multibody systems. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering. 1999;177:199–214
  4. Cheng RC-K, Brown TD, Andrews JG. Non-uniqueness of the bicompartmental contact force solution in a lumped parameter mathematical model of the knee. Journal of Biomechanics. 1990;23:353–355
  5. Halloran JP, Easley SK, Petrella AJ, Rullkoetter PJ. Comparison of deformable and elastic foundation finite element simulations for predicting knee replacement mechanics. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering. 2005;127:813–818
  6. Knight LA, Pal S, Coleman JC, Bronson F, Haider H, Levine DL, et al. Comparison of long-term numerical and experimental total knee replacement wear during simulated gait loading. Journal of Biomechanics. 2007;40:1550–1558
  7. Lanovaz JL, Ellis RE. A cadaverically evaluated dynamic FEM model of closed-chain TKR mechanics. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering. 2009;131:051002
  8. Halloran JP, Petrella AJ, Rullkoetter PJ. Explicit finite element modeling of total knee replacement mechanics. Journal of Biomechanics. 2005;38:323–331
  9. Godest AC, Beaugonin M, Haug E, Taylor M, Gregson PJ. Simulation of a knee joint replacement during a gait cycle using explicit finite element analysis. Journal of Biomechanics. 2002;35:267–275
  10. Lanovaz JL, Ellis RE. Dynamic simulation of a displacement-controlled total knee replacement wear tester. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part H: Journal of Engineering in Medicine. 2008;222:669–681
  11. D’Lima DD, Steklov N, Fregly BJ, Banks SA, Colwell CW. In vivo contact stresses during activities of daily living after knee arthroplasty. Journal of Orthopaedic Research. 2008;26:1549–1555
  12. Donahue TL, Hull ML, Rashid MM, Jacobs CR. A finite element model of the human knee joint for the study of tibio-femoral contact. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering. 2002;124:273–280
  13. Sarathi Kopparti P, Lewis G. Influence of three variables on the stresses in a three-dimensional model of a proximal tibia-total knee implant construct. Bio-medical Materials and Engineering. 2007;17:19–28
  14. Rawlinson JJ, Furman BD, Li S, Wright TM, Bartel DL. Retrieval, experimental, and computational assessment of the performance of total knee replacements. Journal of Orthopaedic Research. 2006;24:1384–1394
  15. Knight LA, Pal S, Coleman JC, Bronson F, Haider H, Levine DL, et al. Comparison of long-term numerical and experimental total knee replacement wear during simulated gait loading. Journal of Biomechanics. 2007;40:1550–1558
  16. Bei Y, Fregly BJ. Multibody dynamic simulation of knee contact mechanics. Medical Engineering & Physics. 2004;26:777–789
  17. Fregly BJ, Bei Y, Sylvester ME. Experimental evaluation of an elastic foundation model to predict contact pressures in knee replacements. Journal of Biomechanics. 2003;36:1659–1668
  18. Fregly BJ, Sawyer WG, Harman MK, Banks SA. Computational wear prediction of a total knee replacement from in vivo kinematics. Journal of Biomechanics. 2005;38:305–314
  19. Zhao D, Sadoka H, Sawyer WG, Banks SA, Fregly BJ. Predicting knee replacement damage in a simulator machine using a computational model with a consistent wear factor. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering. 2008;130:011004
  20. Landon RL, Hast MW, Piazza SJ. Robust contact modeling using trimmed NURBS surfaces for dynamic simulations of articular contact. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering. 2009;198:2339–2346
  21. Moran MF, Bhimji S, Racanelli J, Piazza SJ. Computational assessment of constraint in total knee replacement. Journal of Biomechanics. 2008;41:2013–2020
  22. Strickland MA, Taylor M. In-silico wear prediction for knee replacements—methodology and corroboration. Journal of Biomechanics. 2009;42:1469–1474
  23. Cox SE, Haftka RT, Baker CA, Grossman B, Mason WH, Watson LT. A comparison of global optimization methods for the design of a high-speed civil transport. Journal of Global Optimization. 2001;21:415–433
  24. Farhang-Mehr A, Azarm S. Bayesian meta-modelling of engineering design simulations: a sequential approach with adaptation to irregularities in the response behaviour. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering. 2005;62:2104–2126
  25. Liu B, Haftka RT, Akgun MA. Two-level composite wing structural optimization using response surfaces. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization. 2000;20:87–96
  26. Queipo NV, Pintos S, Rincon N, Contreras N, Colmenares J. Surrogate modeling-based optimization for the integration of static and dynamic data into a reservoir description. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. 2002;35:167–181
  27. Roux WJ, Stander N, Haftka RT. Response surface approximations for structural optimization. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering. 1998;42:517–534
  28. Wang GG, Shan S. Review of metamodeling techniques in support of engineering design optimization. Journal of Mechanical Design. 2007;129:370–380
  29. Xiong Y, Chen W, Apley D, Ding X. A non-stationary covariance-based Kriging method for metamodelling in engineering design. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering. 2007;71:733–756
  30. Bouzid AH, de Technologie Superieure E, Champliaud H. On the use of dual Kriging interpolation for the evaluation of the gasket stress distribution in bolted joints. In: Proceedings of the ASME pressure vessels and piping conference. 1998;
  31. Chang PB, Williams BJ, Santner TJ, Notz WI, Bartel DL. Robust optimization of total joint replacements incorporating environmental variables. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering. 1999;121:304–310
  32. Lin YC, Farr J, Carter K, Fregly BJ. Response surface optimization for joint contact model evaluation. Journal of Applied Biomechanics. 2006;22:120–130
  33. Lin YC, Haftka RT, Queipo NV, Fregly BJ. Two-dimensional surrogate contact modeling for computationally efficient dynamic simulation of total knee replacements. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering. 2009;131:041010
  34. Halloran JP, Erdemir A, van den Bogert AJ. Adaptive surrogate modeling for efficient coupling of musculoskeletal control and tissue deformation models. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering. 2009;131:011014
  35. McKay MD, Beckman RJ, Conover WJ. A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code. Technometrics. 2000;42:55–61
  36. Hammersley JM. Monte Carlo methods for solving multivariable problems. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 1960;86:844–874
  37. Myers RH, Montgomery DC. Response surface methodology: process and product in optimization using designed experiments. New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc.; 1995;
  38. Diwekar UM. Introduction to applied optimization. Springer; 2003;
  39. Kalagnanam JR, Diwekar UM. An efficient sampling technique for off-line quality control. Technometrics. 1997;39:308–319
  40. Hosder S, Watson LT, Grossman B, Mason WH, Kim H, Haftka RT, et al. Polynomial response surface approximations for the multidisciplinary design optimization of a high speed civil transport. Optimization and Engineering. 2001;22:431–452
  41. Kaufman MD, Balabanov V, Burgee SL, Giunta AA, Grossman B, Haftka RT, et al. Variable-complexity response surface approximations for wing structural weight in HSCT design. Computational Mechanics. 1996;18:112–126
  42. Mack Y, Goel T, Shyy W, Haftka RT. Surrogate model-based optimization framework: a case study in aerospace design. Studies in Computational Intelligence. 2007;51:323–342
  43. Krige DG. A statistical approach to some mine valuations and allied problems at the Witwatersrand. University of Witwatersrand; 1951;
  44. Walker PS, Blunn GW, Broome DR, Perry J, Watkins A, Sathasivam S, et al. A knee simulating machine for performance evaluation of total knee replacements. Journal of Biomechanics. 1997;30:83–89
  45. DesJardins JD, Walker PS, Haider H, Perry J. The use of a force-controlled dynamic knee simulator to quantify the mechanical performance of total knee replacement designs during functional activity. Journal of Biomechanics. 2000;33:1231–1242
  46. An KN, Himenso S, Tsumura H, Kawai T, Chao EYS. Pressure distribution on articular surfaces: application to joint stability analysis. Journal of Biomechanics. 1990;23:1013–1020
  47. Blankevoort L, Kuiper JH, Huiskes R, Grootenboer HJ. Articular contact in a three-dimensional model of the knee. Journal of Biomechanics. 1991;24:1019–1031
  48. Li GA, Sakamoto M, Chao EYS. A comparison of different methods in predicting static pressure distribution in articulating joints. Journal of Biomechanics. 1997;30:635–638
  49. Pandy MG, Sasaki K, Kim S. A three-dimensional musculoskeletal model of the human knee joint. Part 1: Theoretical construct. Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering. 1998;1:87–108
  50. Kane TR, Levinson DA. Dynamics, theory and applications. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1985;
  51. Lophaven SN, Nielsen HB, Sundergaard J. DACE-A Matlab Kriging toolbox. 2002;
  52. Archard JF, Hirst W. The wear of metals under unlubricated conditions. In: Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series A—Mathematical and physical sciences. 1956;
  53. Fisher J, Dowson D, Hamdzah H, Lee HL. The effect of sliding velocity on the friction and wear of UHMWPE for use in total artificial joints. Wear. 1994;175:219–225
  54. Fishman GS. Monte Carlo: concepts, algorithms and applications. Springer; 1996;
  55. Valero-Cuevas FJ, Johanson ME, Towles JD. Towards a realistic biomechanical model of the thumb: the choice of kinematic description may be more critical than the solution method or the variability/uncertainty of musculoskeletal parameters. Journal of Biomechanics. 2003;36:1019–1030
  56. Martens H, Naes T. Multivariate calibration. New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc.; 1984;
  57. Wu YT, Millwater HR, Cruse TA. Advanced probabilistic structural-analysis method for implicit performance functions. AIAA Journal. 1990;28:1663–1669
  58. Pal S, Haider H, Laz PJ, Knight LA, Rullkoetter PJ. Probabilistic computational modeling of total knee replacement wear. Wear. 2008;264:701–707
  59. Lin YC, Walter JP, Banks SA, Pandy MG, Fregly BJ. Simultaneous prediction of muscle and contact forces in the knee during gait. Journal of Biomechanics. 2010;43:945–952

PII: S1350-4533(10)00029-9

doi: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2010.02.008

Medical Engineering & Physics
Volume 32, Issue 6 , Pages 584-594 , July 2010

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution