Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 28, 2026

Finite Element Modeling for the Simulation of the Quasi-Static Compression of Corrugated Tapered Tubes
Published on: January 6, 2023
A comparison of density-modulus relationships used in finite element modeling of the shoulder
Nikolas K Knowles1, G Daniel G Langohr2, Mohammadreza Faieghi3
1School of Biomedical Engineering, The University of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada; Roth|McFarlane Hand and Upper Limb Centre, Bioengineering Laboratory, Surgical Mechatronics Laboratory, St. Josephs Health Care, 268 Grosvenor St., London, ON, Canada; Collaborative Training Program in MSK Health Research, and Bone and Joint Institute, The University of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada.
Abstract:
Subject- and site-specific modeling techniques greatly improve the accuracy of computational models derived from clinical-resolution quantitative computed tomography (QCT) data. The majority of shoulder finite element (FE) studies use density-modulus relationships developed for alternative anatomical locations. As such, the objectives of this study were to compare the six most commonly used density-modulus relationships in shoulder finite element (FE) studies. To achieve this, ninety-eight (98) virtual trabecular bone cores were extracted from uCT scans of scapulae from 14 cadaveric specimens (7 male; 7 female). Homogeneous tissue moduli of 20 GPa, and heterogeneous tissue moduli scaled by CT-intensity were considered. Micro finite element models (µ-FEMs) of each virtual core were compressively loaded to 0.5% apparent strain and apparent strain energy density (SEDapp) was collected. Each uCT virtual core was then co-registered to clinical QCT images, QCT-FEMs created, and each of the 6 density-modulus relationships applied (6 × 98 = 588 QCT-FEMs). The loading and boundary conditions were replicated and SEDapp was collected and compared to µ-FEM SEDapp. When a homogeneous tissue modulus was considered in the µ-FEMs, SEDapp was best predicted in QCT-FEMs with the density-modulus relationship developed from pooled anatomical locations (QCT-FEM SEDapp = 0.979µ-FEM SEDapp + 0.0066, r2 = 0.933). A different density-modulus relationship best predicted SEDapp (QCT-FEM SEDapp = 1.014µ-FEM SEDapp + 0.0034, r2 = 0.935) when a heterogeneous tissue modulus was considered. This study compared density-modulus relationships used in shoulder FE studies using an independent computational methodology for comparing these relationships.
Related Concept Videos
Evolutionary Relationships through Genome Comparisons
Phasor Relationships for Circuit Elements
In the time domain, Ohm's law provides a fundamental relation between the current flowing through a resistor and the voltage across it:
Relationship Formation
Relation between Poisson's ratio, Modulus of Elasticity and Modulus of Rigidity
Muscles of the Shoulder
Anterior Thoracic Muscles
The anterior thoracic muscles include the serratus anterior, subclavius, and...
Classification of Elements and Compounds
Compounds are pure substances composed of two or more elements in fixed, definite proportions. Compounds are classified as ionic or molecular (covalent) based on the bonds...

