TY - JOUR

T1 - Fluid—structure interaction in axially symmetric models of abdominal aortic aneurysms

AU - Fraser, K H

AU - Li, M X

AU - Lee, W T

AU - Easson, W J

AU - Hoskins, P R

PY - 2009/2/1

Y1 - 2009/2/1

N2 - Abdominal aortic aneurysm disease progression is probably influenced by tissue stresses and blood flow conditions and so accurate estimation of these will increase understanding of the disease and may lead to improved clinical practice. In this work the blood flow and tissue stresses in axially symmetric aneurysms are calculated using a complete fluid—structure interaction as a benchmark for calculating the error introduced by simpler calculations: rigid walled for the blood flow, homogeneous pressure for the tissue stress, as well as one-way-coupled interactions. The error in the peak von Mises stress in a homogeneous pressure calculation compared with a fluid—structure interaction calculation was less than 3.5 per cent for aneurysm diameters up to 7 cm. The error in the mean wall shear stress, in a rigid-walled calculation compared with a fluid—structure interaction calculation, varied from 30 per cent to 60 per cent with increasing aneurysm diameter. These results suggest that incorporation of the fluid—structure interaction is unnecessary for purely mechanical modelling, with the aim of evaluating the current rupture probability. However, for more complex biological modelling, perhaps with the aim of predicting the progress of the disease, where accurate estimation of the wall shear stress is essential, some form of fluid—structure interaction is necessary.

AB - Abdominal aortic aneurysm disease progression is probably influenced by tissue stresses and blood flow conditions and so accurate estimation of these will increase understanding of the disease and may lead to improved clinical practice. In this work the blood flow and tissue stresses in axially symmetric aneurysms are calculated using a complete fluid—structure interaction as a benchmark for calculating the error introduced by simpler calculations: rigid walled for the blood flow, homogeneous pressure for the tissue stress, as well as one-way-coupled interactions. The error in the peak von Mises stress in a homogeneous pressure calculation compared with a fluid—structure interaction calculation was less than 3.5 per cent for aneurysm diameters up to 7 cm. The error in the mean wall shear stress, in a rigid-walled calculation compared with a fluid—structure interaction calculation, varied from 30 per cent to 60 per cent with increasing aneurysm diameter. These results suggest that incorporation of the fluid—structure interaction is unnecessary for purely mechanical modelling, with the aim of evaluating the current rupture probability. However, for more complex biological modelling, perhaps with the aim of predicting the progress of the disease, where accurate estimation of the wall shear stress is essential, some form of fluid—structure interaction is necessary.

UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1243/09544119JEIM443

U2 - 10.1243/09544119JEIM443

DO - 10.1243/09544119JEIM443

M3 - Article

VL - 223

SP - 195

EP - 209

JO - Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part H: Journal of Engineering in Medicine

JF - Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part H: Journal of Engineering in Medicine

SN - 0954-4119

IS - 2

ER -