Cited by 263Fatigue and fracture mechanicsBone fractures and treatmentsBone health and osteoporosis research

Bone creep-fatigue damage accumulation

Open access
Caler, William E., Carter, Dennis R.·1989·Journal of Biomechanics

Abstract

Creep and fatigue tests were performed on human femoral cortical bone and the results were compared to a cumulative damage model for bone fracture. Fatigue tests in tension, compression, and reversed loading with a tensile mean stress were conducted at 2 Hz and 0.02 Hz. Load frequency had a strong influence on the number of cycles to failure but did not influence the total time to failure. Bone displayed poor creep-fracture properties in both tension and compression. The fracture surfaces of the tensile creep specimens are distinctly different than those of the compressive specimens. The results suggest that tensile cyclic loading creates primarily time-dependent damage and compressive cyclic loading creates primarily cycle-dependent damage. However, data for load histories involving both tensile and compressive loading indicate lower time to failure than predicted by a simple summation of time-dependent and cycle-dependent damage.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0021-9290(89)90013-4

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Cortical bone has greater resistance to fatigue failure at higher loading frequencies.

    “Cortical bone has greater resistance to fatigue failure in compression than in tension (22) and at higher loading frequencies (23, 24).”

    From Bone Mechanical Properties in Healthy and Diseased States (2018) · cites this paper as [24]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Caler, W. E., & Carter, D. R.
Affiliations
  • Stanford University (US)
  • United States Department of Veterans Affairs (US)
Venue
Journal of Biomechanics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1989
Volume
22
Issue
6-7
Pages
625-635
ISSN
0021-9290 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1998461406
Cited by
263
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 5
FWCI
2.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Biomechanics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (AR 32377)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanics of Materials › Fatigue and fracture mechanics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Bone fractures and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Bone health and osteoporosis research
Keywords
fatigue damage, cumulative damage model, femoral cortical bone, load frequency, reversed loading, fracture morphology, time to failure, bone fractures
MeSH terms
Adult, Bone and Bones, Elasticity, Haversian System, Humans, Male, Microscopy, Electron, Scanning, Middle Aged, Models, Biological, Stress, Mechanical, Tensile Strength, Time Factors, Fractures, Stress

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review