Comparing stress-strain curves from different methodologies

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on comparing stress-strain curves derived from different methodologies in arterial research. The user conducted a circumferential stretch test on a 1cm segment of a 5mm diameter artificial artery, while a comparable study used a 10cm segment of a 4mm diameter natural artery subjected to burst pressure testing. The user seeks clarity on whether these differing dimensions and methodologies affect the comparability of the stress-strain curves and Young's moduli. The discussion emphasizes the importance of adhering to ASTM standards for material testing and suggests that finite element analysis (FEA) could provide deeper insights into the material properties.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of stress-strain curve analysis
  • Familiarity with ASTM testing standards
  • Knowledge of finite element analysis (FEA) techniques
  • Basic principles of material mechanics and Young's modulus
NEXT STEPS
  • Research ASTM standards relevant to stress-strain testing of materials
  • Learn about finite element analysis (FEA) and its applications in material testing
  • Explore hand calculation methods for stress analysis in tubular structures
  • Investigate comparative studies on artificial versus natural artery testing methodologies
USEFUL FOR

Medical researchers, biomechanical engineers, and anyone involved in the study of arterial mechanics and material properties will benefit from this discussion.

keno.mentor
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
I am a medical researcher with little physics background but currently completing a study of the physical characteristics of arteries.

I am trying to compare the stress-strain curve from my study with that of other studies. The problems are 1) the dimensions of the arteries in these other studies are slightly different from mine and 2) the methodology is different.
Can the stress-strain curves be compared? Does the calculation of stress (in KPa) and strain (dimensionless) take these differences into account such that these curves are comparable?

To elaborate:
I derived a S-S curve by circumferential stretch of a 1cm segment of 5mm diameter tube.
The comparable study took a 10cm segment of 4mm diameter tube, tied off the one end and subjected it to increasing fluid pressure. Is it reasonable to compare the S-S curves (and Young's moduli) derived from these 2 studies and make a general statement of how these 2 materials differ or are similar?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
This is precisely why there are ASTM methods for testing materials. Google the ASTM method, and then look at the methodologies for the two cases compared to the ASTM method. If everything seems reasonable, then you can probably be safe to compare data.
 
Thanks for the reply Kevin.

I haven't been able to find anything that helps me though - ASTM standards is a bit of a rabbit hole and most of the articles need to be paid for.

Unless you can point me to a specific reference or document?
 
Ideally repeat both experiments and come to a definite conclusion .

Otherwise do a proper stress analysis of both test samples .

Hand calculation would probably give adequate results .

FEA would not be too difficult if you wanted more sophistication .
 
Thanks Nidum.

To clarify: I am testing an artificial artery, which I am analysing in the way I described above (circumferential stretch). I am trying to compare this data to another group's study, which tested a 'natural' artery with burst pressure testing.

Could you expand on 'FE models'?
 
http://www.ansys.com/-/media/Ansys/corporate/images/about/magazine/AA-V1-I1-Full-Version.pdf
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
9K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
8K