1984
DOI: 10.1016/0141-8130(84)90017-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A study of dense mineralized tissue by neutron diffraction

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

4
61
1

Year Published

1992
1992
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 92 publications
(66 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
4
61
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Such micromechanical models predict, on the basis of mechanical properties of bone elementary constituents (hydroxyapatite, collagen, water), the (poro-)elasticity tensors at the different hierarchical levels of the material, from tissue-specific composition data, such as porosities and mineral/collagen content. There-the explicit consideration of the extrafibrillar mineral crystals whose existence was evidenced earlier [Lees et al, 1984a, 1994, Prostak and Lees, 1996, Pidaparti et al, 1996, Benezra Rosen et al, 2002, and further confirmed by the kinetics of recent demineralization experiments [Balooch et al, 2008]. In this sense, the challenge of micromechanics-supported, consistently upscaled microstructure-property relationships for poroelasticity in bone has been met quite reasonably.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Such micromechanical models predict, on the basis of mechanical properties of bone elementary constituents (hydroxyapatite, collagen, water), the (poro-)elasticity tensors at the different hierarchical levels of the material, from tissue-specific composition data, such as porosities and mineral/collagen content. There-the explicit consideration of the extrafibrillar mineral crystals whose existence was evidenced earlier [Lees et al, 1984a, 1994, Prostak and Lees, 1996, Pidaparti et al, 1996, Benezra Rosen et al, 2002, and further confirmed by the kinetics of recent demineralization experiments [Balooch et al, 2008]. In this sense, the challenge of micromechanics-supported, consistently upscaled microstructure-property relationships for poroelasticity in bone has been met quite reasonably.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Again, we have to consider close packing of collagen as to get access to properties of molecular collagen. It is known from neutron diffraction studies [Lees et al, 1984a, Lees, 1987 that diffractional spacing (a measure for the lateral distance of collagen molecules) reduces from 1.5 nm (for wet collagen) to 1.1 nm (for maximally packed (dry) collagen). Accordingly, the cross sectional area of a tensile specimen would reduce by the ratio 1.5/1.1, so that the strength of molecular collagen follows to be 1.5/1.1 times higher than that of wet collagen, i.e.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In Eq. (35), v col = 335.6 nm 3 is the volume of a single collagen molecule [Lees, 1987]; v fib is the volume of one rhomboidal fibrillar unit with length 5D, width b, and height d s ; b = 1.47 nm is an average (rigid) collagen crosslink length valid for all mineralized tissues [Lees et al, 1984b], D ≈ 64 nm is the axial macroperiod of staggered assemblies of type I collagen [Hodge and Petruska, 1963], and d s is the tissue-specific neutron diffraction spacing between collagen molecules, which depends on the mineralization and the hydration state of the tissue [Lees et al, 1984a;Bonar et al, 1985;Lees et al, 1994b]. For wet tissues, d s can be given in a dimensionless form [Hellmich and Ulm, 2003], as a function of ρ ec only…”
Section: 'Universal' Relations Between Extracellular Mass Density Andmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Skakle & Aspden did not cite the density of their material. Lees (2003) showed that the lateral spacing d for compact bone collagen is strongly linear with the inverse wet density,…”
Section: Sidney Leesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They found the lateral spacing of wet tissue human compact bone to be 1.230 nm, and 1.191 nm when dry. Lees et al (1984) reported ®nding the lateral spacing for cow bone, of density 2.04 Mg m À3 , to be 1.24 nm wet and 1.16 nm dry. Skakle & Aspden did not cite the density of their material.…”
Section: Sidney Leesmentioning
confidence: 99%