| Literature DB >> 30364013 |
Ruo-Xun Fan1, Jie Liu1, Yong-Li Li1, Jun Liu2, Jia-Zi Gao3.
Abstract
Long-term exposure to low-frequency vibration generated by vehicle driving impairs human lumbar spine health. However, few studies have investigated how low-frequency vibration affects human lumbar mechanical properties. This study established a poroelastic finite element model of human lumbar spinal segments L2-L3 to perform time-dependent vibrational simulation analysis and investigated the effects of different vibrational frequencies generated by normal vehicle driving on the lumbar mechanical properties in one hour. Analysis results showed that vibrational load caused more injury to lumbar health than static load, and vibration at the resonant frequency generated the most serious injury. The axial effective stress and the radial displacement in the intervertebral disc, as well as the fluid loss in the nucleus pulposus, increased, whereas the pore pressure in the nucleus pulposus decreased with increased vibrational frequency under the same vibrational time, which may aggravate the injury degree of human lumbar spine. Therefore, long-term driving on a well-paved road also induces negative effects on human lumbar spine health. When driving on a nonpaved road or operating engineering machinery under poor navigating condition, the auto seat transmits relatively high vibrational frequency, which is highly detrimental to the lumbar spine health of a driver.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30364013 PMCID: PMC6186348 DOI: 10.1155/2018/7962414
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Figure 1The schematic diagram of human lumbar spine geometric and finite element model. (a) Lumbar geometric model; (b) lumbar finite element model.
Material properties of the lumbar finite element model.
| Structure | Solid phase material | Fluid phase material | References | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elastic modulus (MPa) | Poisson's ratio | Permeability (m4/Ns) | Void ratio | ||||
| Cancellous bone | Linear-elastic | 100 | 0.2 | 1e−13 | 0.4 | [ | |
| Cortical bone | Linear-elastic | 10000 | 0.3 | 1e−20 | 0.02 | [ | |
| Annulus fibrosus | Linear-elastic | 357-550 | 0.3 | [ | |||
| Annulus ground substance | Hyper-elastic | C10=0.315 | D=0.688 | 9e−16 | 2.33 | [ | |
| Nucleus pulposus | Hyper-elastic | C10=0.125 | D=2.475 | 3e−16 | 4 | [ | |
| Ligament/Facet | Hyper-elastic | Fitting from previous experiment | [ | ||||
Figure 2Contour plot of strain on the vertebral bodies of lumbar finite element model under compressive force of 1000 N. (a) L2; (b) L3.
The predicted elastic and creep strains in different regions of lumbar finite element model under compression.
| Anterior | Middle | Posterior | |
|---|---|---|---|
| L2 | |||
| Elastic strain | 0.689% | 0.301% | 0.377% |
| Creep strain | 0.497% | 0.256% | 0.0486% |
| L3 | |||
| Elastic strain | 0.671% | 0.294% | 0.364% |
| Creep strain | 0.485% | 0.233% | 0.0473% |
Figure 3Comparison of the vibrational responses between the established finite element model and the experimental specimens under the sinusoidal anterior–posterior displacement of 0.6 mm at a frequency of 1 Hz.
Figure 4Effects of different vibrational frequencies on axial effective stress.
Figure 5Effects of different vibrational frequencies on maximum radical displacement.
Figure 6Effects of different vibrational frequencies on fluid loss.
Figure 7Effects of different vibrational frequencies on pore pressure.