Microscopic tissue damage has been observed in otherwise healthy cancellous bone in humans and is believed to contribute to bone fragility and increased fracture risk. Animal models to study microscopic tissue damage and repair in cancellous bone would be useful, but it is currently not clear how loads applied to a whole animal bone are related to the amount and type of resulting microdamage in cancellous bone. In the current study we determine the relationship between applied cyclic compressive overloading and the resulting amount of microdamage in isolated rat tail vertebrae, a bone that has been used previously for in vivo loading experiments. Rat caudal vertebrae (C7-C9, n = 22) were potted in bone cement and subjected to cyclic compressive loading from 0 to 260 N. Loading was terminated in the secondary and tertiary phases of the creep-fatigue curve using custom data-monitoring software. In cancellous bone, trabecular microfracture was the primary form of microdamage observed with few microcracks. Trabecular microfracture prevalence increased with the amount of cyclic loading and occurred in nine out of 10 specimens loaded into the tertiary phase. Only small amounts of microdamage were observed in the cortical shell of the vertebrae, demonstrating that, under axial cyclic loading, damage occurs primarily in regions of cancellous bone before overt fracture of the bone (macroscopic cracks in the cortical shell). These experiments in isolated rat tail vertebrae suggest that it may be possible to use an animal model to study the generation and repair of microscopic tissue damage in cancellous bone.
The number and size of resorption cavities in cancellous bone are believed to influence rates of bone loss, local tissue stress and strain and potentially whole bone strength. Traditional two-dimensional approaches to measuring resorption cavities in cancellous bone report the percent of the bone surface covered by cavities or osteoclasts, but cannot measure cavity number or size. Here we use three-dimensional imaging (voxel size 0.7 × 0.7 × 5.0 μm) to characterize resorption cavity location, number and size in human vertebral cancellous bone from nine elderly donors (7 male, 2 female, ages 47–80 years). Cavities were 30.10 ± 8.56 μm in maximum depth, 80.60 ± 22.23 *103 μm2 in surface area and 614.16 ± 311.93 *103 μm3 in volume (mean ± SD). The average number of cavities per unit tissue volume (N.Cv/TV) was 1.25 ± 0.77 mm−3. The ratio of maximum cavity depth to local trabecular thickness was 30.46 ± 7.03 % and maximum cavity depth was greater on thicker trabeculae (p < 0.05, r2 = 0.14). Half of the resorption cavities were located entirely on nodes (the intersection of two or more trabeculae) within the trabecular structure. Cavities that were not entirely on nodes were predominately on plate-like trabeculae oriented in the cranial-caudal (longitudinal) direction. Cavities on plate-like trabeculae were larger in maximum cavity depth, cavity surface area and cavity volume than cavities on rod-like trabeculae (p < 0.05). We conclude from these findings that cavity size and location are related to local trabecular microarchitecture.
The dynamic response of storage tanks subjected to seismic loading is complex. Analyzing the structural response of a tank is not only dependent on accurately modeling the major design features and simulating the seismic loading, but also the sloshing of the fluid contained within the tank can affect the overall behavior and likely failure modes. Advanced dynamic simulation techniques, such as the ones discussed herein, permit comparison between these closed-form methods and computational predictions; that is, any potential conservatism or lack thereof associated with traditional design by rule methodologies can be identified using computational analysis. Additionally, for tanks that were not originally designed to a modern Code or recommended practice that includes consideration for seismic loading, the computational analysis methods discussed in this study offer a means to evaluate the structural integrity of vintage tanks under seismic loading conditions that are still in service today. This paper discusses explicit dynamic finite element analysis (FEA) techniques to simulate seismic loading on a large, aboveground, in-service Ammonia storage tank that carries a high consequence of failure. The fluid-structure interaction and sloshing behavior of the contained fluid are directly accounted for. Commentary on using smooth particle hydrodynamics (SPH), coupled Eulerian-Lagrangian (CEL), and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis techniques is provided. The underlying methodology behind these simulation techniques is discussed, and the overall dynamic response of the tank is investigated. The results from the explicit dynamic seismic simulations are compared with the current seismic design guidance provided in API 650 [1] and equivalent static simulation techniques (documented in Part I of this study [2]). Furthermore, this case study highlights a practical application where advanced analysis is employed to investigate a real-life fluid-structure interaction problem.
Modeling of cyclic elastic-plastic material behavior (hardening) has been widely identified as a critical factor in the finite element (FE) simulation of weld residual stresses. The European Network on Neutron Techniques Standardization for Structural Integrity (NeT) Project has provided in recent years both standard test cases for simulation and measurement, as well as comprehensive material characterization. This has allowed the role of hardening in simulation predictions to be isolated and critically evaluated as never before possible. The material testing information is reviewed, and isotropic, nonlinear kinematic and combined hardening models are formulated and tested. Particular emphasis is placed on material model selection for general fitness-for-service assessments, as it relates to the guidance for weld residual stress (WRS) in flaw assessments of in-service equipment in Annex E of the FFS standard, API 579-1/ASME FFS-1.
For equipment designed to ASME or API standards, it is common practice to perform impact testing of base material and/or weldments to establish the Minimum Design Metal Temperature (MDMT). The impact test is typically a Charpy V-Notch (CVN) test and the test temperature is set equal to the MDMT. The required Charpy energy at MDMT can vary anywhere from 10 ft-lbs to 40 ft-lbs depending on material specification, thickness, and the ASME/API standard. The detailed historical background behind the Charpy energy requirements of different ASME/API standards is not well documented. Additionally, no credit is given for post weld heat treatment (PWHT) of impact tested materials. The CVN tests are used because they are quick and economical for quality control, but the tests only provide a relative indication of material toughness. Consequently, the current impact test requirements lead to inconsistent results in brittle fracture assessments, conducted through explicit fracture mechanics. In this paper, two examples are presented to highlight the inconsistencies of the current impact test requirements. A methodology of estimating MDMT for impact tested materials based on fracture mechanics, consistent with Welding Research Council (WRC) Bulletin 562 [1] is also presented. Furthermore, this methodology explicitly accounts for the effects of PWHT (and the influence of weld residual stress on crack driving force) for impact tested materials. A methodology of adjusting MDMT for in-service impact tested materials is also presented. In the interest of moving towards harmonizing the impact test requirements, an alternative procedure for establishing impact test requirements is presented for ASME/API consideration.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.