Cargando…

Biomechanical Analysis of Woodpecker Response During Pecking Using a Two-Dimensional Computational Model

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) and chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) due to the impact is a critical health concern. Impact mitigation strategy is a vital design paradigm to reduce the burden of TBI and CTE. In this regard, woodpecker biomimicry continues to attract attention. However, a direct c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ganpule, Shailesh, Sutar, Sunil, Shinde, Kaustaubh
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7379169/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32766228
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2020.00810
_version_ 1783562580640399360
author Ganpule, Shailesh
Sutar, Sunil
Shinde, Kaustaubh
author_facet Ganpule, Shailesh
Sutar, Sunil
Shinde, Kaustaubh
author_sort Ganpule, Shailesh
collection PubMed
description Traumatic brain injury (TBI) and chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) due to the impact is a critical health concern. Impact mitigation strategy is a vital design paradigm to reduce the burden of TBI and CTE. In this regard, woodpecker biomimicry continues to attract attention. However, a direct comparison between a woodpecker and human biomechanical responses is lacking. Toward this end, we investigate the biomechanical response of a woodpecker during pecking using a two-dimensional head model. We also analyze the response of concurrent human head model to facilitate direct comparison with woodpecker response. The head models of woodpecker and human were built from medical images, the material properties were adopted from the literature. Both woodpecker and human head models were subjected to head kinematics obtained during pecking and resulting biomechanical response is studied. For the pecking cycle simulated in this work, peak rotational velocity and acceleration were ∼15 rad/s and 7,057 rad/s(2). These peak values are commensurate with the kinematics threshold values reported in human TBI. Our results show that, for the same input acceleration, the strains and stresses in the woodpecker brain are approximately six times lower than that of the human brain. The stress reduction is mainly attributed to the smaller size of the woodpecker head. The effect of pecking frequency and multiple pecking cycles have also been studied. It is observed that the strains and stresses in the brain are increased by ∼100% as pecking frequency is doubled. During multiple pecking cycle, dwell period of ∼90 ms tend to relax the stresses in the woodpecker brain; however, the amount of relaxation depends on the value of the decay constant. The comparison of biomechanical response against the axonal injury threshold suggests that for peak rotational acceleration of 7,057 rad/s(2) the maximum principal strain in the brains of woodpecker and human exceed the threshold limit. Acceleration scaling relationship between a woodpecker and equivalent human response is also developed as a function of head size. We obtain a scaling factor, [Formula: see text] , of 0.11 for baseline head sizes and a scaling factor of 1.03 as the human head size approaches woodpecker head size.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7379169
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73791692020-08-05 Biomechanical Analysis of Woodpecker Response During Pecking Using a Two-Dimensional Computational Model Ganpule, Shailesh Sutar, Sunil Shinde, Kaustaubh Front Bioeng Biotechnol Bioengineering and Biotechnology Traumatic brain injury (TBI) and chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) due to the impact is a critical health concern. Impact mitigation strategy is a vital design paradigm to reduce the burden of TBI and CTE. In this regard, woodpecker biomimicry continues to attract attention. However, a direct comparison between a woodpecker and human biomechanical responses is lacking. Toward this end, we investigate the biomechanical response of a woodpecker during pecking using a two-dimensional head model. We also analyze the response of concurrent human head model to facilitate direct comparison with woodpecker response. The head models of woodpecker and human were built from medical images, the material properties were adopted from the literature. Both woodpecker and human head models were subjected to head kinematics obtained during pecking and resulting biomechanical response is studied. For the pecking cycle simulated in this work, peak rotational velocity and acceleration were ∼15 rad/s and 7,057 rad/s(2). These peak values are commensurate with the kinematics threshold values reported in human TBI. Our results show that, for the same input acceleration, the strains and stresses in the woodpecker brain are approximately six times lower than that of the human brain. The stress reduction is mainly attributed to the smaller size of the woodpecker head. The effect of pecking frequency and multiple pecking cycles have also been studied. It is observed that the strains and stresses in the brain are increased by ∼100% as pecking frequency is doubled. During multiple pecking cycle, dwell period of ∼90 ms tend to relax the stresses in the woodpecker brain; however, the amount of relaxation depends on the value of the decay constant. The comparison of biomechanical response against the axonal injury threshold suggests that for peak rotational acceleration of 7,057 rad/s(2) the maximum principal strain in the brains of woodpecker and human exceed the threshold limit. Acceleration scaling relationship between a woodpecker and equivalent human response is also developed as a function of head size. We obtain a scaling factor, [Formula: see text] , of 0.11 for baseline head sizes and a scaling factor of 1.03 as the human head size approaches woodpecker head size. Frontiers Media S.A. 2020-07-17 /pmc/articles/PMC7379169/ /pubmed/32766228 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2020.00810 Text en Copyright © 2020 Ganpule, Sutar and Shinde. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Bioengineering and Biotechnology
Ganpule, Shailesh
Sutar, Sunil
Shinde, Kaustaubh
Biomechanical Analysis of Woodpecker Response During Pecking Using a Two-Dimensional Computational Model
title Biomechanical Analysis of Woodpecker Response During Pecking Using a Two-Dimensional Computational Model
title_full Biomechanical Analysis of Woodpecker Response During Pecking Using a Two-Dimensional Computational Model
title_fullStr Biomechanical Analysis of Woodpecker Response During Pecking Using a Two-Dimensional Computational Model
title_full_unstemmed Biomechanical Analysis of Woodpecker Response During Pecking Using a Two-Dimensional Computational Model
title_short Biomechanical Analysis of Woodpecker Response During Pecking Using a Two-Dimensional Computational Model
title_sort biomechanical analysis of woodpecker response during pecking using a two-dimensional computational model
topic Bioengineering and Biotechnology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7379169/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32766228
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2020.00810
work_keys_str_mv AT ganpuleshailesh biomechanicalanalysisofwoodpeckerresponseduringpeckingusingatwodimensionalcomputationalmodel
AT sutarsunil biomechanicalanalysisofwoodpeckerresponseduringpeckingusingatwodimensionalcomputationalmodel
AT shindekaustaubh biomechanicalanalysisofwoodpeckerresponseduringpeckingusingatwodimensionalcomputationalmodel