A Comparison Between Bearing and Non-bearing Human Bone: Mechanical Testing and Micro-Architecture Assessment

  • Xavier RoothaerEmail author
  • Rémi Delille
  • Hervé Morvan
  • Eric Markiewicz
  • Christian Fontaine
Conference paper
Part of the Conference Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Mechanics Series book series (CPSEMS)


An adult skeleton has over 200 bones. Each bone has a specific function. These different functions bring different types of mechanical loadings. To ensure a healthy behavior of the bone, a throughout life process occurs on the micro-architecture of the cortical bone. This process highly depends on the stress applied on the bone. The micro-architecture is able to supply blood and nutrients into the bone matrix and acts on the bone remodeling process. The architecture is formed by vascular canals where the orientation depends on the main axis of the mechanical loading. Vascular canals of the cortical bone located in long bone diaphysis are mainly oriented along the longitudinal axis of the diaphysis. Moreover, the canal network is tortuous and several geometrical features should affect the macroscopic behavior of the bone. The novelty of this work is to use a method which accurately describes the vascular architecture of the cortical bone based on micro-computed tomography and to correlate these results with the macroscopic mechanical behavior of the cortical bone. This experimental study is based on the extraction of cortical bone samples from four cadaveric human subjects. For each human subject, left and right humeri and femurs are studied. Dumbbell-shaped bone specimens are prepared from each bone. Care was taken to preserve bone properties after extraction: a maximum of 15 days was fixed between the extraction and the mechanical testing. Samples were constantly kept hydrated and stored at 4 °C in order to avoid frost/defrost cycles. Specimens are scanned and subsequently mechanically loaded to failure. Results will show the impact of the laterality of the bone on the architecture, the impact of loading on the bone on the architecture by comparing humeral and femoral samples for each human subject and finally the impact of the architecture on the mechanical behavior of the bone.


Cortical bone Architecture Tensile test Bearing bone Haversian canals 



This research is funded by the French Ministry of Higher Education and Research and is carried out within the framework of the CNRS Research Federation on Ground Transports and Mobility, in articulation with the ELSAT2020 project supported by the European Community, the Hauts de France Regional Council. The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of these institutions.


  1. 1.
    D.M.L. Cooper, C.E. Kawalilak, K. Harrison, B.D. Johnston, J.D. Johnston, Cortical bone porosity: what is it, why is it important, and how can we detect it? Curr. Osteoporos. Rep. 14(5), 187–198 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    H.M. Frost, Tetracycline-based histological analysis of bone remodeling. Calcif. Tissue Res. 3(3), 211–237 (1969)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    H.M. Frost, Mean formation time of human osteons. Can. J. Biochem. Physiol. 41(5), 1307–1310 (1963)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    M.J. Mirzaali, A. Bürki, J. Schwiedrzik, P.K. Zysset, U. Wolfram, Continuum damage interactions between tension and compression in osteonal bone. J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater. 49, 355–369 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    U. Stefan, B. Michael, S. Werner, Effects of three different preservation methods on the mechanical properties of human and bovine cortical bone. Bone 47(6), 1048–1053 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    X. Neil Dong, X. Edward Guo, The dependence of transversely isotropic elasticity of human femoral cortical bone on porosity. J. Biomech. 37(8), 1281–1287 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    F. Libonati, L. Vergani, Bone toughness and crack propagation: an experimental study. Procedia Eng. 74, 464–467 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    R. Bry, Contribution à l’étude de la variabilité des propriétés mécaniques de l’os cortical diaphysaire d’un os porteur (fémur) et non-porteur (humérus). PhD thesis. (Valenciennes, 2015).
  9. 9.
    B. Perchalski et al., Asymmetry in the cortical and trabecular bone of the human humerus during development. Anat. Rec. (Hoboken) 301(6), 1012–1025 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    F. Vandenbulcke et al., On the mechanical characterization of human humerus using multi-scale continuum finite element model, in 2012 IRCOBI Conference, Dublin, 2012, pp. 598–610Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    M.J. Mirzaali et al., Mechanical properties of cortical bone and their relationships with age, gender, composition and microindentation properties in the elderly. Bone 93(Supplement C), 196–211 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    X. Roothaer, R. Delille, H. Morvan, B. Bennani, E. Markiewicz, C. Fontaine, A three-dimensional geometric quantification of human cortical canals using an innovative method with micro-computed tomographic data. Micron 114, 62–71 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    X. Roothaer, R. Delille, H. Morvan, B. Bennani, E. Markiewicz, C. Fontaine, « Quantitative method for the three-dimensional assessment of human cortical long-bone architecture based on micro-CT images ». CMBBE 2018. Lisbon, Portugal (2018)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    D.M.L. Cooper, A.L. Turinsky, C.W. Sensen, B. Hallgrímsson, Quantitative 3D analysis of the canal network in cortical bone by micro-computed tomography. Anat. Rec. B. New Anat. 274B(1), 169–179 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    N. Otsu, A threshold selection method from gray-level histograms. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 9(1), 62–66 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    G. Zhang, X. Deng, F. Guan, Z. Bai, L. Cao, H. Mao, The effect of storage time in saline solution on the material properties of cortical bone tissue. Clin. Biomech. 57, 56–66 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    L. Duchemin et al., Prediction of mechanical properties of cortical bone by quantitative computed tomography. Med. Eng. Phys. 30(3), 321–328 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xavier Roothaer
    • 1
    Email author
  • Rémi Delille
    • 1
  • Hervé Morvan
    • 1
  • Eric Markiewicz
    • 1
  • Christian Fontaine
    • 2
  1. 1.CNRS, UMR 8201, LAMIHUniversity Polytechnique Hauts-de-FranceValenciennesFrance
  2. 2.Department of Anatomy, Faculty of MedicineUniversity of Lille 2Lille CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations