Effect of contouring on bending structural stiffness and bending strength of the 3.5 titanium SOP implant
Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 16, 2026

Cantilever Bending of Murine Femoral Necks
Published on: January 5, 2022
Scott Rutherford1, Malcolm G Ness
1Croft Veterinary Hospital, Cramlington, UK. s.rutherford@croftvets.co.uk
Objective:
To compare the bending structural stiffness (BSS) and bending strength (BS) of the 3.5 titanium (Ti) string of pearls (SOP) plate and the 3.5 316LVM stainless steel SOP plate; and the effect of contouring on the BSS and BS of the 3.5 Ti SOP plate.
Study Design:
In vitro experimental static 4-point bending materials testing.
Sample Population:
Twenty-five 3.5 mm Ti and five 3.5 mm 316LVM stainless steel SOP locking bone plates.
Methods:
Each plate was tested in 4-point bending until 10 mm of displacement was achieved. BSS and BS were then calculated for each plate. A 2-sample t-test was used to compare the mean BSS and BS of the different groups.
Results:
The 3.5 Ti SOP plate had lower mean BSS (0.00263 Nm(2) ) but similar mean BS (12.8 Nm) when compared to the 3.5 316LVM SOP (0.00402 Nm(2) , 13.0 Nm). Prebending the 3.5 Ti SOP diminished its mean BSS (0.00224 Nm(2) ) and mean BS (9.4 Nm) when compared to the Ti control. Pretwisting the 3.5 Ti SOP increased its mean BSS (0.00273 Nm(2) ) but decreased its mean BS (12.4 Nm) when compared to the Ti control.
Conclusion:
The 3.5 Ti SOP is less stiff but of similar strength to the 3.5 316LVM stainless steel SOP. Prebending the Ti SOP significantly lowers its stiffness and strength. Pretwisting the SOP actually increases its stiffness but slightly lowers its strength.
Related Concept Videos
Residual Stresses in Bending
Bending of Curved Members - Strain Analysis
The important part of bending analysis for such a member is the...
Stress Concentrations
The stress concentration...
Stress Concentrations
Stress Concentrations in Circular Shafts
Torsion of Noncircular Members
