Iranian Journal of Orthopedic Surgery

Modeling of creep and creep recovery behaviors of PDLLA/PCL/bioactive glass nanocomposites as promising ACL reconstruction screws: the effects of bioglass reinforcement phase

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Javad Esmaeilzadeh 1
saeed hesaraki 2
mohammad-mehdi Hadavi 2
mohammad hosein Ebrahimzadeh 3

1 Esfarayen University of Technology, Esfarayen, North Khorasan, Iran

2 Biomaterials Group, Nanotechnology and Advanced Materials Department, Materials and Energy Research Center, Tehran, Iran

3 Orthopedic Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Science, Mashhad, Iran.

https://doi.org/10.22034/ijos.2020.121418
Abstract
Background: To study the creep behavior for a series of biodegradable nanocomposites, which are used as implantable devices in the body such as bioscrews, is a crucial factor. In the current paper, we are investigating these biomaterials -short-time creep and creep recover manners- in several classic models.
Methods: The creep and creep recovery behaviors of nanocomposites composed of biodegradable polymer blends, poly (D/L) lactic acid (PDLLA) and polycaprolactone (PCL) reinforced with three different contents of 1, 3 and 6 percent weight percentage (Full name?)% bioactive glass nanoparticles (m-BGn) were modeled. Several theoretical models including Findley power law, Burgers and Weibull models were used to establish the relations between m-BGn dispersion and final creep and creep-recovery behaviors of nanocomposites.
Results: The Findley power law model confirmed that the lowest ‘A’ and highest ‘n’ parameters ( A is the amplitude of the transient creep strain and n is the time exponent) belong to the sample with the highest young modulus and the nanocomposites compared to PDLLA/PCL  blends have the lower ‘A’ and higher ‘n’ which can be related to retardation effect of m-BGn on creep strains. Besides, the burgers model results illustrated that all viscoelastic and viscoplastic parameters for nanocomposites possess higher values than those of the neat PDLLA/PCL blend. It means that the addition of glass nanoparticles leads to decrease creep strain , increasing the Burgers model prediction values which have inverse trend with . Moreover, the weibull distribution model results acknowledge that the introduction of m-BGn into PDLLA/PCL polymeric blends cause decrease  in the viscoelastic strain recovery values. This is due to hindering effects of m-BGn on creep recovery behavior of nanocomposites.
Conclusion: The results obtained from modeling of creep-recovery manners of PDLLA/PCL blend and its nanocomposites approved that the bioactive glass reinforcement nanoparticles play  impeding role on creep and creep recovery behaviors.     
           Level of evidence: I
 
 

Keywords

Keywords: PDLLA/PCL blend
Bioactive glass nanoparticles
creep and creep recovery behavior
Modeling
  1. Chopek J, Kmita G, Rosó P. Lifetime Prediction of Polymer Composite Implants Based on Creep and Fatigue Tests, Annals of trasnplantation, 2004; 9: 26-29.
  2. P, MartucciJ F, IannaceS., Vázquez A. Influence of the Fiber Content and the Processing Conditions on the Flexural Creep Behavior of Sisal–PCL–Starch Composites, Journal of Thermoplastic Composite Materials, 2002; 15(3): 253-265.
  3. Kim JS, Muliana AH. A combined viscoelastic–viscoplastic behavior of particle reinforced composites, International Journal of Solids and Structures, 2010; 47: 580–594.
  4. Daver F, Kajtaz M, Brandt M, Shanks RA. Creep and Recovery Behavior of polyolefin-Rubber Nanocomposites Developed for Additive Manufacturing, Polymers (Basel), 2016; 8(12): 437.
  5. Hanemann T, Dorothée Vinga Szabó. Polymer-Nanoparticle Composites: From Synthesis to Modern Applications, Materials, 2010; 3: 3468-3517.
  6. Pegoretti A, Kolarik J, Peroni C, Migliaresi C. Recycled poly(ethylene terephthalate)/layered silicate nanocomposites: morphology and tensile mechanical properties, Polymer, 2004; 45: 2751-58.
  7. Perez CJ, Alvarez VA, Azquez AV. Creep behavior of layered silicate/starch– polycaprolactone blends nanocomposites, Materials Science and Engineering A, 2008; 480: 259–265.
  8. Esmaeilzadeh J, Hesaraki S, HadaviS M, Ebrahimzadeh MH, Esfandeh M. Microstructure and mechanical properties of biodegradable poly (D/L) lactic acid/ polycaprolactone blends processed from the solvent-evaporation technique, Materials Science and Engineering: C, 2017; 71: 807-819.
  9. Esmaeilzadeh J, Hesaraki S, Hadavi SM, Ebrahimzadeh MH, Esfandeh M. Poly (d/l) lactide / polycaprolactone/bioactive glass nanocomposites materials for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction screws: The effect of glass surface functionalization on mechanical properties and cell behaviors. Materials science and Engineering C,2017; 77: 978-989.
  10. Esmaeilzadeh J, Hesaraki S, Ebrahimzadeh MH, Asghari GhH, Kachoei AR. Creep behavior of biodegradable triple-component nanocomposites based on PLA/PCL/bioactive glass for ACL interference screws, The archive of bone & joint surgery, 2019, 7 (6) 531-537.
  11. Yao Z, Wu D, Chen C, Zhang M. Creep behavior of polyurethane nanocomposites with carbon nanotubes, Composites: Part A, 2013; 50: 65–72.

 

 

  1. Perez CJ, Alvarez VA, Azquez AV. Creep behavior of layered silicate/starch– polycaprolactone blends nanocomposites, Materials Science and Engineering A, 2008; 480: 259–265.
  2. Georgiopoulos, E. Kontou. The effect of wood-fiber type on the thermo-mechanical performance of a biodegradable polymer matrix, Journal of applied polymer science, 2015; 132(27), 42185.
  3. Martins C, Pinto V, Guedes RM, Marques AT. Creep and Stress Relaxation Behaviour of PLA-PCL Fibres – A Linear Modelling Approach, Procedia Engineering, 2015; 114: 768-775.
  4. Findley WN, La JS, Onaran K: Creep and Relaxation of Nonlinear Viscoelastic Materials with an Introduction to Linear Viscoelasticity, Dover Publications Inc, NewYork, 1998.
  5. Ward IM: Mechanical Properties of Solid Polymers, John Wiley and Sons Ltd,Weinheim, 1983.
  6. Fancey KS. A mechanical model for creep, recovery and stress relaxiation in polymeric materials, J. Mater. Sci. 2005; 40: 4827–4831.

Home

Submit Manuscript

Contact Us