The document summarizes the FEA/CFD process which includes: 1) Defining the problem, creating a model, assigning properties and boundary conditions in pre-processing. 2) Choosing an algorithm and running the analysis/solution in solution/analysis. 3) Interpreting and visualizing results in post-processing to identify causes and optimal designs. 4) Validating simulation results experimentally through methods like 3D printing, dynamic testing, and pressure measurements to verify the model is accurate.

1. FEA/CFD for Biomedical
Engineering
Week 1 Part 3: The
FEA/CFD Process Part 2

2. CFD/FEA process
I. Pre-Processing
• Define the problem
• Model
• Discretisation
• Assign Physical Properties
• Assign boundary conditions
II. Solution/Analysis
• Choose algorithm
III. Post-Processing
• Interpret results
IV. Validation

3. Solution/Analysis
1 2
k
u1 u2
F1 F2






=












−
−
2
1
2
1
F
F
u
u
k
k
k
k
FEA
Linear Static Analysis
If computational model is used, state clearly the
name of the package

4. Solution/Analysis
Solidworks Simulation
Solidworks Flow Simulation
Dedicated packages:
• ANSYS
• COMSOL

5. Post-Processing
Once an analysis is complete, the results can be visualized across the
model or domain
e.g. Displacement/Stress/Flow Velocity
Based on the findings, can you
• Identify the cause of the problem?
• Identify an optimal design?
The process can then be refined and repeated

6. Validation
FEA/CFD Results are an approximation at best and are dependant on
the underlying assumptions
(rubbish in = rubbish out)
• Validation should always be conducted
• Simulation is a tool for informed design

7. Validation – Experimental - 3D printing

8. Validation - Experimental Analysis
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Cycles (thousands)
Permanent
deformation
(mm) 0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Dorsiflexion
angle
(degree)
Permanent
deformation
Approximated
dorsiflexion degree
Dynamic test estimating
fatigue resistance

9. Validation - Experimental Analysis
Regions
Measured peak
pressure: Mean
and range of the
three subjects:
(kPa)
Peak
pressure
predicted by
FE model
(kPa)
Patella
tendon
305 (157-394) 278
Anterolateral
tibia
233 (162-398) 270
Anteromedial
tibia
114 (110-166) 131
Popliteal
depression
354 (201-466) 334

10. Physical Problem
Mathematical
Model
Numerical solution
Does answer
make sense?
Refine analysis
Accept solution
YES!
No!
Apply most
appropriate
mathematical
model
Design improvements
Structural optimization
Refine physical
problem

11. Most Common Fractures
3rd
Jabran A et al. Parametric Design Optimisation of Proximal Humerus Plates Based on Finite
Element Method. Annals of Biomedical Engineering. 2018
Proximal Humerus Fractures

12. Preparation time per FE model: 8hrs 30s
Automation of FE model
creation process
+
(99.8% Reduction)
Developed algorithms to filter out clinically
irrelevant implant designs: 93.5% reduction in
search space
Development of finite element
model of bone-plate construct
1300 In vitro mechanical tests
of bone-plate constructs