4.5 Article

Constitutive model for brain tissue under finite compression

Journal

JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICS
Volume 45, Issue 4, Pages 642-646

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2011.12.023

Keywords

Brain tissue biomechanics; Finite deformation; Viscoelasticity; Compression test; Isochronous curves

Funding

  1. Southern Consortium for Injury Biomechanics [DTNH22-01-H-07551]
  2. Temple University College of Engineering

Ask authors/readers for more resources

While advances in computational models of mechanical phenomena have made it possible to simulate dynamically complex problems in biomechanics, accurate material models for soft tissues, particularly brain tissue, have proven to be very challenging. Most studies in the literature on material properties of brain tissue are performed in shear loading and very few tackle the behavior of brain in compression. In this study, a viscoelastic constitutive model of bovine brain tissue under finite step-and-hold uniaxial compression with 10 s(-1) ramp rate and 20 s hold time has been developed. The assumption of quasi-linear viscoelasticity (QLV) was validated for strain levels of up to 35%. A generalized Rivlin model was used for the isochoric part of the deformation and it was shown that at least three terms (C-10, C-01 and C-11) are needed to accurately capture the material behavior. Furthermore, for the volumetric deformation, a two parameter Ogden model was used and the extent of material incompressibility was studied. The hyperelastic material parameters were determined through extracting and fitting to two isochronous curves (0.06 s and 14 s) approximating the instantaneous and steady-state elastic responses. Viscoelastic relaxation was characterized at five decay rates (100, 10, 1, 0.1, 0 s(-1)) and the results in compression and their extrapolation to tension were compared against previous models. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available