EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 329 (2020) MATEC Web Conf., 329 (2020) 03077 References
Open Access
Issue
MATEC Web Conf.
Volume 329, 2020
International Conference on Modern Trends in Manufacturing Technologies and Equipment: Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science (ICMTMTE 2020)
Article Number 03077
Number of page(s) 7
Section Mechanical Engineering
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/202032903077
Published online 26 November 2020
  1. O. Sachenkov, R. Hasanov, P. Andreev, Y. Konoplev, Determination of muscle effort at the proximal femur rotation osteotomy, IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng., 158(1), 012079 (2016). [Google Scholar]
  2. O.A. Sachenkov, R.F. Hasanov, P.S. Andreev, Yu.G. Konoplev, Numerical study of stress-strain state of pelvis at the proximal femur rotation osteotomy, Russ. J. Biomech., 20(3), 220–232 (2016), doi:10.15593/RJBiomech/2016.3.06. [Google Scholar]
  3. D. Kaplun, M. Golovin, A. Sufelfa, O. Sachenkov, K. Shcherbina, V. Yankovskiy, E. Skrebenkov, O.A. Markelov, M.I. Bogachev, Three-dimensional (3D) model-based lower limb stump automatic orientation, Appl. Sci., 10(9), 3253 (2020), doi:10.3390/app10093253. [Google Scholar]
  4. R. Pryazhevskiy, I. Akhtyamov, A. Morgunova, H.M. Jihad, A. Nevzorov, O. Sachenkov, Modeling of contact interaction of an endoprosthetic knee joint, Adv. Intell. Syst. Comput., 1018, 612-617 (2020), doi:10.1007/978-3-030-25629-6_95. [Google Scholar]
  5. R.A. Kayumov, I.Z. Muhamedova, B.F. Tazyukov, F.R. Shakirzjanov, Parameter determination of hereditary models of deformation of composite materials based on identification method, J. Phys. Conf. Ser., 973(1), 012006 (2018), doi:10.1088/1742-6596/973/1/012006. [Google Scholar]
  6. R.A. Kayumov, Structure of nonlinear elastic relationships for the highly anisotropic layer of a nonthin shell, Mech. Compos. Mater., 35(5), 409-418 (1999), doi:10.1007/BF02329327. [Google Scholar]
  7. D.V. Berezhnoi, E.V. Antonova, I.S. Balafendieva, N.R. Vildanova, V.V. Miheev, L.R. Sekaeva, Investigation of nonlinear deformation of solid and porous elements of three-dimensional structures, J. Phys. Conf. Ser., 1158(2), 022023 (2019), doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1158/2/022023. [Google Scholar]
  8. D.V. Berezhnoi, N.F. Gabsalikova, V.G. Izotov, V.V. Miheev, Modeling of deformation of ground media on the basis of the particle method in a two-dimensional formulation, IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng., 208(1), 012028 (2017), doi:10.1088/1757-899X/208/1/012028. [Google Scholar]
  9. S. Gupta, P. Dan, Bone geometry and mechanical properties of the human scapula using computed tomography data, Trends Biomater. Artif. Organs, 17(2), 61-70 (2004). [Google Scholar]
  10. T.S. Kaneko, M.R. Pejcic, J. Tehranzadeh, J.H. Keyak, Relationships between material properties and CT scan data of cortical bone with and without metastatic lesions, Med. Eng. Phys., 25(6), 445-454 (2003). [Google Scholar]
  11. F. Eggermont, L.C. Derikx, J. Free, R. van Leeuwen, Y.M. van der Linden, N. Verdonschot, E. Tanck, Effect of different CT scanners and settings on femoral failure loads calculated by finite element models, J. Orthop. Res., 36(8), 2288-2295 (2018). [Google Scholar]
  12. J.Y. Rho, M.C. Hobatho, R.B. Ashman, Relations of mechanical properties to density and CT numbers in human bone, Med. Eng. Phys., 17(5), 347-355 (1995). [Google Scholar]
  13. N. Kharin, O. Vorobyev, P. Bolshakov, O. Sachenkov, Determination of the orthotropic parameters of a representative sample by computed tomography, J. Phys. Conf. Ser., 1158(3), 032012 (2019). [Google Scholar]
  14. O. Gerasimov, N. Kharin, O. Vorobyev, E. Semenova, O. Sachenkov, Determination of the mechanical properties distribution of the sample by tomography data, J. Phys. Conf. Ser., 1158(2), 022046 (2019). [Google Scholar]
  15. N.V. Kharin, O.V. Vorobyev, D.V. Berezhnoi, O.A. Sachenkov, Construction of a representative model based on computed tomography, PNRPU Mech. Bull., 3, 95-102 (2018). [Google Scholar]
  16. O.A. Sachenkov, O.V. Gerasimov, Y.V. Koroleva, D.A. Mukhin, V.V. Yaikova, I.F. Akhtyamov, F.V. Shakirova, D.A. Korobeynikova, K.K. Chzhi, Building the inhomogeneous finite element model by the data of computed tomography, Russ. J. Biomech., 22(3), 291-303 (2018). [Google Scholar]
  17. P. Marcián, J. Wolff, L. Horáčková, J. Kaiser, T. Zikmund, L. Borák, Micro finite element analysis of dental implants under different loading conditions, Comput. Biol. Med., 96, 157-165 (2018). [Google Scholar]
  18. L. Giovannelli, J.J. Rodenas, J.M. Navarro-Jimenez, M. Tur, Direct medical image-based Finite Element modelling for patient-specific simulation of future implants, Finite Elem. Anal. Des., 136, 37-57 (2017). [Google Scholar]
  19. T.P. Harrigan, R.W. Mann, Characterization of microstructural anisotropy in orthotropic materials using a second rank tensor, J. Mater. Sci., 19, 761-767 (1984). [Google Scholar]
  20. T.A. Carniel, B. Klahr, E.A. Fancello, On multiscale boundary conditions in the computational homogenization of an RVE of tendon fascicles, J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater., 91, 131-138 (2019). [Google Scholar]
  21. P. Marcián, Z. Florian, L. Horáčková, J. Kaiser, L. Borák, Microstructural finite-element analysis of influence of bone density and histomorphometric parameters on mechanical behavior of mandibular cancellous bone structure, SSP, 258, 362-365 (2017). [Google Scholar]
  22. F. Eggermont, L.C. Derikx, N. Verdonschot, I.C.M. Van Der Geest, M.A.A. De Jong, A. Snyers, Y.M. Van Der Linden, E. Tanck, Can patient-specific finite element models better predict fractures in metastatic bone disease than experienced clinicians, Bone Joint Res., 7(6), 430-439 (2018). [Google Scholar]
  23. G. Hettich, R.A. Schierjott, H. Ramm, H. Graichen, V. Jansson, M. Rudert, F. Traina, T.M. Grupp, Method for quantitative assessment of acetabular bone defects, J. Orthop. Res., (2018), doi:10.1002/jor.24165. [Google Scholar]
  24. F. Marwa, E.Y. Wajih, L. Philippe, M. Mohsen, Improved USCT of Paired Bones Using Wavelet-based Image Processing, IJIGSP, 10(9), 1-9 (2018), doi:10.5815/ijigsp.2018.09.01. [Google Scholar]
  25. K.P.K. Mithun, A. Gauhar, M.R. Mohammad, H.A.S.M. Delowar, Automatically Gradient Threshold Estimation of Anisotropic Diffusion for Meyer’s Watershed Algorithm Based Optimal Segmentation, IJIGSP, 6(12), 26-31 (2014), doi:10.5815/ijigsp.2014.12.04. [Google Scholar]
  26. K.P.K. Mithun, M.R. Mohammad, Metal Artifact Reduction from Computed Tomography (CT) Images using Directional Restoration Filter, IJITCS, 6(6), 47-54 (2014), doi:10.5815/ijitcs.2014.06.07. [Google Scholar]
  27. O. Gerasimov, F. Shigapova, Y. Konoplev, O. Sachenkov, Evaluation of the stress-strain state of a one-dimensional heterogeneous porous structure, IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng., 158(1), 012036 (2016). [Google Scholar]
  28. O. Gerasimov, F. Shigapova, Y. Konoplev, O. Sachenkov, The evolution of the bone in the half-plane under the influence of external pressure, IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng., 158(1), 012037 (2016). [Google Scholar]
  29. E. Semenova, O. Gerasimov, E. Koroleva, N. Ahmetov, T. Baltina, O. Sachenkov, Automatic processing and analysis of the quality healing of derma injury, Adv. Intell. Syst. Comput., 831, 107-113 (2019). [Google Scholar]
  30. N. Chernov, H. Ma, Computer Vision, Least squares fitting of quadratic curves and surfaces (Book chapter), 287-302 (2011). [Google Scholar]
  31. V.V. Yaikova, O.V. Gerasimov, A.O. Fedyanin, M.A. Zaytsev, M.E. Baltin, T.V. Baltina, O.A. Sachenkov, Automation of bone tissue histology, Front. Phys., 7, 91 (2019), doi:10.3389/fphy.2019.00091. [Google Scholar]
  32. A. Ridwan-Pramana, P. Marcian, L. Borak, N. Narra, T. Forouzanfar, J. Wolff, Finite element analysis of 6 large PMMA skull reconstructions: A multi-criteria evaluation approach, PLoS ONE, 12, e0179325 (2017), doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0179325. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.