STM Journals Peer-reviewed research from Consortium e-Learning Network

Journal of Polymer & Composites Original Research

Design and Fabrication of a 3D-Printed Femur Model: Insights into Mechanical Properties and Implant Research

  1. Raji Nareliya Mishra Department of Mechanical Engineering, Amity School of Engineering and Technology, Amity University, Gwalior
  2. Anshul Gangele Department of Mechanical Engineering, Amity School of Engineering and Technology, Amity University, Gwalior
  3. Veerendra Kumar Department of Mechanical Engineering, Director, Technical Education, Bhopal

Abstract

This study is an attempt to analyse the 3D printing of the female femur model of the central India region and provides ample suggestions for bone implant research. This article discusses the design development and experimental validation of finite element analysis (FEA) results with the 3D-printed bone model. Using CT scan data, the FE analysis is executed on a real femur bone of a 25-year-old female of 52 kg weight with heterogeneous material characteristics and physiological loading conditions. The femur bone model is fabricated using a cost-effective 3D printer, fused deposition modelling (FDM), with a filament spool of polylactic acid (PLA). Compression tests were conducted on the fabricated PLA femur-bone model derived from a CT scan, providing insights into its mechanical behaviour under a specific load of 510 N. The total deformation during the FE analysis and compression test of the 3D printed model was 1.339 mm and 1.558 mm, respectively. The results show a strong relationship between porosity, mechanical strength, and chemical and biological stability, which is crucial for patient-specific modelling (PSM), designing medical implants and understanding implant and injury mechanisms.

Keywords

References (39)

  1. Venkatesan J, Anil S, Murugan SS. 3D Bioprinted Alginate-Based Biomaterials for Bone Tissue Engineering. Journal of 3D Printing in Medicine. 2020;4(4):175-179. doi:10.2217/3dp-2020-0029
  2. Pahr D, Reisinger A. A review on recent advances in the constitutive modeling of bone tissue. Curr Osteoporos Rep. 2020;18(6):696–704.
  3. Maharaj PSR, Maheswaran R, Vasanthanathan A. Numerical analysis of fractured femur bone with prosthetic bone plates. Procedia Eng. 2013; 64:1242–51.
  4. Zafar MJ, Zhu D, Zhang Z. 3D Printing of Bioceramics for Bone Tissue Engineering. Materials. 2019;12(20):3361. doi:10.3390/ma12203361
  5. Rahimnejad M, Rezvaninejad R, Rezvaninejad R, França R. Biomaterials in bone and mineralized tissue engineering using 3D printing and bioprinting technologies. Biomedical Physics & Engineering Express. 2021;7(6):062001. doi:10.1088/2057-1976/ac21ab
  6. Zhigailov S, Musalimov V, Aryassov G, et al. Modelling and simulation of human lower-limb motion. Int Rev Model Simul (IREMOS). 2016;9(2):114.
  7. Qian Z, Vannan MA. Personalized Treatment Planning for Heart Interventions using Tissue-Mimicking 3D Printing. Journal of 3D Printing in Medicine. 2018;2(2):43-46. doi:10.2217/3dp-2017-0024
  8. Albrecht LD, Sawyer SW, Soman P. Developing 3D Scaffolds in the Field of Tissue Engineering to Treat Complex Bone Defects. 3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing. 2016;3(2):106-112. doi:10.1089/3dp.2016.0006
  9. Yosibash Z, Trabelsi N. Reliable patient-specific simulations of the femur. In: Gefen A, editor. Patient-Specific Modeling in Tomorrow’s Medicine. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer; 2012. p. 3–26.
  10. Pankaj P. Patient‐specific modelling of bone and bone‐implant systems: the challenges. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Biomedical Engineering. 2012;29(2):233-249. doi:10.1002/cnm.2536
  11. Aimar A, Palermo A, Innocenti B. The role of 3D printing in medical applications: a state of the art. J Healthc Eng. 2019;2019:5340616.
  12. Wong TM, Jin J, Lau TW, et al. The use of three-dimensional printing technology in orthopaedic surgery. J Orthop Surg. 2017;25(3):2309499017718905.
  13. Ganguli A, Pagan-Diaz GJ, Grant L, Cvetkovic C, Bramlet M, Vozenilek J, et al. 3D printing for preoperative planning and surgical training: a review. Biomedical Microdevices. 2018;20(3). doi:10.1007/s10544-018-0301-9
  14. A M, Mohan AA, Reddy MH. Manufacturing of customized implants for orbital fractures using 3D printing. Bioprinting. 2021;21:100113.
  15. Decoster TA, Gehlert RJ, Mikola EA, Pirela-Cruz MA. Management of post-traumatic segmental bone defects [Internet]. 2004 [cited 2025 Mar 19]. Available from: https://insights.ovid.com/pubmed?pmid=14753795
  16. Attias N, Lehman RE, Bodell LS, Lindsey RW. Surgical management of a long segmental defect of the humerus using a cylindrical titanium mesh cage and plates: a case report [Internet]. 2005 [cited 2025 Mar 19]. Available from: https://insights.ovid.com/pubmed?pmid=15758677
  17. Sørensen MS, Gregersen KG, Grum-Schwensen T, Hovgaard D, Petersen MM. Patient and implant survival following joint replacement because of metastatic bone disease. Acta Orthop. 2013;84(3):301–6.
  18. Niinomi M. Recent metallic materials for biomedical applications. Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A. 2002;33(3):477-486. doi:10.1007/s11661-002-0109-2
  19. Alvarez K, Nakajima H. Metallic scaffolds for bone regeneration. 2009;2(3):790–832.
  20. Karachalios T, Tsatsaronis C, Efraimis G, et al. The long-term clinical relevance of calcar atrophy caused by stress shielding in total hip arthroplasty: a 10-year, prospective, randomized study. J Arthroplasty. 2004;19(4):469–75.
  21. Bobbert FSL, Zadpoor AA. Effects of bone substitute architecture and surface properties on cell response, angiogenesis, and structure of new bone. J Mater Chem B. 2017;5(34):6175–92.
  22. Reznikov N, Boughton OR, Ghouse S, et al. Individual response variations in scaffold-guided bone regeneration are determined by independent strain- and injury-induced mechanisms. Biomaterials. 2019;194:183–94.
  23. Yan Y, Chen H, Zhang H, et al. Vascularized 3D printed scaffolds for promoting bone regeneration. Biomaterials. 2019;190–191:97–110.
  24. Kumar M, Ramakrishnan R, Omarbekova A. 3D printed polycarbonate reinforced acrylonitrile–butadiene–styrene composites: composition effects on mechanical properties, microstructure and void formation study. J Mech Sci Technol. 2019;33(11):5219–26.
  25. de V, Engelen R, Janssen E. Impact strength of 3D-printed polycarbonate. Facta Univ Ser Electron Energ. 2020;33(1):105–17.
  26. Dessoky N, El-Mahallawy A, Fahmy M, et al. Use of custom-made PEEK plates for the treatment of mandibular fracture. Alex Dent J. 2020;45(3):112–7.
  27. Kim MM, Boahene KD, Byrne PJ. Use of customized polyetheretherketone (PEEK) implants in the reconstruction of complex maxillofacial defects. Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2009;11(1):53–7.
  28. Li CS, Vannabouathong C, Sprague S, et al. The use of carbon-fiber-reinforced (CFR) PEEK material in orthopedic implants: a systematic review. Clin Med Insights Arthritis Musculoskelet Disord. 2015;8:33–45.
  29. Sharkey PF, Hozack WJ, Rothman RH, et al. Why are total knee arthroplasties failing today? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002;(404):7–13.
  30. Liu W, Zhou J, Ma Y, et al. Fabrication of PLA filaments and its printable performance. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng. 2017;275:012033.
  31. Tümer EH, Erbil HY. Extrusion-based 3D printing applications of PLA composites: a review. Coatings. 2021;11(4):390.
  32. Kumar R, Singh R, Farina I. On the 3D printing of recycled ABS, PLA and HIPS thermoplastics for structural applications. PSU Res Rev. 2018;2(2):115–37.
  33. Chakladar ND, Harper LT, Parsons AJ. Optimisation of composite bone plates for ulnar transverse fractures. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2016;57:334–46.
  34. Samiezadeh S, Tavakkoli Avval P, Fawaz Z, et al. On optimization of a composite bone plate using the selective stress shielding approach. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2015;42:138–53.
  35. Male vs female femur: unique differences and morphology [Internet]. Biology Insights; 2025 Mar 19 [cited 2025 Mar 19]. Available from: https://biologyinsights.com/male-vs-female-femur-unique-differences-and-morphology/
  36. Yang H, Ma X, Guo T. Some factors that affect the comparison between isotropic and orthotropic inhomogeneous finite element material models of femur. Medical Engineering & Physics. 2010;32(6):553-560. doi:10.1016/j.medengphy.2010.01.004
  37. Chen G, Wu FY, Liu ZC, Yang K, Cui F. Comparisons of node-based and element-based approaches of assigning bone material properties onto subject-specific finite element models. Medical Engineering & Physics. 2015;37(8):808-812. doi:10.1016/j.medengphy.2015.05.006
  38. Nareliya R, Veerendra K. Biomechanical analysis of human femur bone. Int J Eng Sci Technol. 2011;3(4):3090–4.
  39. Kumar S, Singh R, Singh T, Batish A. Fused filament fabrication: A comprehensive review. Journal of Thermoplastic Composite Materials. 2020;36(2):794-814. doi:1177/0892705720970629
Support