Table 4.
Comparison of four clamping techniques and their suitability for biomechanical testing.
| Sand paper clamping | Partial plastination | Cryogenic clamping | 3D printed clamping system | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Level of standardization (e.g. specimen alignment, clamping length) | Low | Moderate | Moderate | High |
| Ease of use | Easy | Complex | Moderate | Easy |
| Use of potentially dangerous goods? | No | Yes (solvents & resin) | Yes (liquid N2) | No |
| Adaptability to various tissues | None | None | Moderate | High |
| Modularity | None | None | None | High |
| Material slippage | High | Minute | Low | Low |
| Work time involved for preparation excluding testing | 15 mins/sample | 30 mins/sample | 15 mins/sample | 10–15 mins/sample |
| Applicability for quasi-static testing | Suitable | Suitable | Suitable | Suitable |
| Applicability for cyclic and fatigue testing | Unsuitable (material slippage) | Unsuitable (avulsion at the clamping interface) | Unsuitable (continuous cooling necessary, temperature decrease of tissues) | Suitable for ≥105 cycles |
| Throughput | high | low | moderate | high |
| Type & price of consumables and mounting materials per specimen | Sandpaper ca. 0.30 NZ$ (0.18 US$/€) |
Acetone, resin 5–7 NZ$ (3–4 US$/€) |
Liquid nitrogen 1 NZ$/l (0.60 US$/l) |
Printing materials ca. 0.50 NZ$ (0.30 US$/€) |
| Reusability of consumables | not given | not given | not given | estimated 3–5×* |
| Desinfectability | poor | poor | good | good |
| Sterilizability | poor | poor | good | poor |
| Suitable field of application | Preliminary tests | Highly-specialized applications | Small sample sizes, high tensile forces | High-standardization-high-throughput experiments |
*Applied to aseptic conditions using 50% ethanol or Viraclean®.