4.8 Article

Sub-lamellar microcracking and roles of canaliculi in human cortical bone

Journal

ACTA BIOMATERIALIA
Volume 8, Issue 3, Pages 1093-1100

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2011.11.013

Keywords

Bone fracture; Cortical bone; Inelastic deformation; Microcracking; Canaliculi

Funding

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research
  2. Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research
  3. UBC
  4. Province of British Columbia
  5. Centre for Hip Health and Mobility (CHHM) at UBC

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Bone is a tough biological material. It is generally accepted that bone's toughness arises from its unique hierarchical structure, which in turn facilitates distributed microcracking prior to fracture. Yet, there has been limited progress on the detailed roles of the structural elements in the microcracking process. The present study examines the structure-microcracking relations at the lamellar and sub-lamellar levels of human cortical bone subjected to compressive loading. Laser scanning confocal microscopy revealed a clear influence of the local structure and porosity of the Haversian systems' lamellae on microcrack development. In particular, crack initiation and growth under transverse compression were associated with stress concentration at canaliculi. Later stages of microcracking showed extensive sub-lamellar cracks forming cross-hatched patterns and regularly spaced 0.5-1.7 mu m apart. The density, size and regularity of the crack patterns suggest enhanced inelastic deformation capacity through cracking control at the level of mineralized collagen fibril bundles. The present study thus improves the current understanding of the nature of inelastic deformation and microcracking in bone and further suggests that bone's resistance to fracture is achieved through microcrack control at multiple length scales. (c) 2011 Acta Materialia Inc. Published by 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

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available