Identification of Peak Stresses in Cardiac Prostheses: Two-Dimensional A Comparison of Two-Dimensional Versus Three-Dimensional Principal Stress Analyses

Arnold Anthony Fontaine, Jeffrey T. Ellis, Timothy M. Healy, Joanne Hopmeyer, Ajit P. Yoganathan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

34 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This study assessed the accuracy of using a two-dimensional principal stress analysis compared to a three-dimensional analysis in estimating peak turbulent stresses in complex three-dimensional flows associated with cardiac prostheses. Three-component, coincident laser Doppler anemometer measurements were obtained in steady flow downstream of three prosthetic valves: a St. Jude bileaflet, Bjork-Shiley monostrut tilting disc, and Starr-Edwards ball and cage. Two-dimensional and three-dimensional principal stress analyses were performed to identify local peak stresses. Valves with locally two-dimensional flows exhibited a 10- 15% underestimation of the largest measured normal stresses compared to the three-dimensional principal stresses. In nearly all flows, measured shear stresses underestimated peak principal shear stresses by 10-100%. Differences between the two-dimensional and three-dimensional principal stress analysis were less than 10% in locally two-dimensional flows. In three-dimensional flows, the two- dimensional principal stresses typically underestimated three-dimensional values by nearly 20%. However, the agreement of the two-dimensional principal stress with the three-dimensional principal stresses was dependent upon the two velocity-components used in the two-dimensional analysis, and was observed to vary across the valve flow field because of flow structure variation. The use of a two-dimensional principal stress analysis with two-component velocity data obtained from measurements misaligned with the plane of maximum mean flow shear can underpredict maximum shear stresses by as much as 100%.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)154-163
Number of pages10
JournalASAIO Journal
Volume42
Issue number3
StatePublished - Dec 1 1996

Fingerprint

Prosthetics
Prostheses and Implants
Lasers
Stress analysis
Shear stress
Anemometers
Steady flow
Flow structure
Shear flow
Flow fields

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Biophysics
  • Bioengineering
  • Biomaterials
  • Biomedical Engineering

Cite this

@article{066a3ed08c4b478ea5d19a01cd0684d9,
title = "Identification of Peak Stresses in Cardiac Prostheses: Two-Dimensional A Comparison of Two-Dimensional Versus Three-Dimensional Principal Stress Analyses",
abstract = "This study assessed the accuracy of using a two-dimensional principal stress analysis compared to a three-dimensional analysis in estimating peak turbulent stresses in complex three-dimensional flows associated with cardiac prostheses. Three-component, coincident laser Doppler anemometer measurements were obtained in steady flow downstream of three prosthetic valves: a St. Jude bileaflet, Bjork-Shiley monostrut tilting disc, and Starr-Edwards ball and cage. Two-dimensional and three-dimensional principal stress analyses were performed to identify local peak stresses. Valves with locally two-dimensional flows exhibited a 10- 15{\%} underestimation of the largest measured normal stresses compared to the three-dimensional principal stresses. In nearly all flows, measured shear stresses underestimated peak principal shear stresses by 10-100{\%}. Differences between the two-dimensional and three-dimensional principal stress analysis were less than 10{\%} in locally two-dimensional flows. In three-dimensional flows, the two- dimensional principal stresses typically underestimated three-dimensional values by nearly 20{\%}. However, the agreement of the two-dimensional principal stress with the three-dimensional principal stresses was dependent upon the two velocity-components used in the two-dimensional analysis, and was observed to vary across the valve flow field because of flow structure variation. The use of a two-dimensional principal stress analysis with two-component velocity data obtained from measurements misaligned with the plane of maximum mean flow shear can underpredict maximum shear stresses by as much as 100{\%}.",
author = "Fontaine, {Arnold Anthony} and Ellis, {Jeffrey T.} and Healy, {Timothy M.} and Joanne Hopmeyer and Yoganathan, {Ajit P.}",
year = "1996",
month = "12",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "42",
pages = "154--163",
journal = "ASAIO Journal",
issn = "1058-2916",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "3",

}

Identification of Peak Stresses in Cardiac Prostheses : Two-Dimensional A Comparison of Two-Dimensional Versus Three-Dimensional Principal Stress Analyses. / Fontaine, Arnold Anthony; Ellis, Jeffrey T.; Healy, Timothy M.; Hopmeyer, Joanne; Yoganathan, Ajit P.

In: ASAIO Journal, Vol. 42, No. 3, 01.12.1996, p. 154-163.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Identification of Peak Stresses in Cardiac Prostheses

T2 - Two-Dimensional A Comparison of Two-Dimensional Versus Three-Dimensional Principal Stress Analyses

AU - Fontaine, Arnold Anthony

AU - Ellis, Jeffrey T.

AU - Healy, Timothy M.

AU - Hopmeyer, Joanne

AU - Yoganathan, Ajit P.

PY - 1996/12/1

Y1 - 1996/12/1

N2 - This study assessed the accuracy of using a two-dimensional principal stress analysis compared to a three-dimensional analysis in estimating peak turbulent stresses in complex three-dimensional flows associated with cardiac prostheses. Three-component, coincident laser Doppler anemometer measurements were obtained in steady flow downstream of three prosthetic valves: a St. Jude bileaflet, Bjork-Shiley monostrut tilting disc, and Starr-Edwards ball and cage. Two-dimensional and three-dimensional principal stress analyses were performed to identify local peak stresses. Valves with locally two-dimensional flows exhibited a 10- 15% underestimation of the largest measured normal stresses compared to the three-dimensional principal stresses. In nearly all flows, measured shear stresses underestimated peak principal shear stresses by 10-100%. Differences between the two-dimensional and three-dimensional principal stress analysis were less than 10% in locally two-dimensional flows. In three-dimensional flows, the two- dimensional principal stresses typically underestimated three-dimensional values by nearly 20%. However, the agreement of the two-dimensional principal stress with the three-dimensional principal stresses was dependent upon the two velocity-components used in the two-dimensional analysis, and was observed to vary across the valve flow field because of flow structure variation. The use of a two-dimensional principal stress analysis with two-component velocity data obtained from measurements misaligned with the plane of maximum mean flow shear can underpredict maximum shear stresses by as much as 100%.

AB - This study assessed the accuracy of using a two-dimensional principal stress analysis compared to a three-dimensional analysis in estimating peak turbulent stresses in complex three-dimensional flows associated with cardiac prostheses. Three-component, coincident laser Doppler anemometer measurements were obtained in steady flow downstream of three prosthetic valves: a St. Jude bileaflet, Bjork-Shiley monostrut tilting disc, and Starr-Edwards ball and cage. Two-dimensional and three-dimensional principal stress analyses were performed to identify local peak stresses. Valves with locally two-dimensional flows exhibited a 10- 15% underestimation of the largest measured normal stresses compared to the three-dimensional principal stresses. In nearly all flows, measured shear stresses underestimated peak principal shear stresses by 10-100%. Differences between the two-dimensional and three-dimensional principal stress analysis were less than 10% in locally two-dimensional flows. In three-dimensional flows, the two- dimensional principal stresses typically underestimated three-dimensional values by nearly 20%. However, the agreement of the two-dimensional principal stress with the three-dimensional principal stresses was dependent upon the two velocity-components used in the two-dimensional analysis, and was observed to vary across the valve flow field because of flow structure variation. The use of a two-dimensional principal stress analysis with two-component velocity data obtained from measurements misaligned with the plane of maximum mean flow shear can underpredict maximum shear stresses by as much as 100%.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0030152830&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0030152830&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 8725681

AN - SCOPUS:0030152830

VL - 42

SP - 154

EP - 163

JO - ASAIO Journal

JF - ASAIO Journal

SN - 1058-2916

IS - 3

ER -