Figure - PMC

Skip to main content

View full-text article in PMC

. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Mar 1.

Published in final edited form as: Acta Biomater. 2015 Dec 31;32:264–274. doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2015.12.038

Hybrid method and cohesive zone analysis. a) A comparison of the crack opening displacement profiles from the experiments and finite element models for a young specimen. b) A comparison of the crack opening displacement profiles from the experiments and finite element models for an old specimen. The crack profile is shown from the symmetry plane (i.e. COD/2) for longitudinal crack growth. Note that inelastic deformation occurring in front of the crack tip was defined for both traction-free and cohesive model simulations. c) A comparison of the Crack Closure Stress (CCS) profiles for young and old enamel as a function distance from crack tip.

Hybrid method and cohesive zone analysis. a) A comparison of the crack opening displacement profiles from the experiments and finite element models for a young specimen. b) A comparison of the crack opening displacement profiles from the experiments and finite element models for an old specimen. The crack profile is shown from the symmetry plane (i.e. COD/2) for longitudinal crack growth. Note that inelastic deformation occurring in front of the crack tip was defined for both traction-free and cohesive model simulations. c) A comparison of the Crack Closure Stress (CCS) profiles for young and old enamel as a function distance from crack tip.