Recurring Meeting of Cleveland Clinic - University of Utah

Date: February 10, 2016

Time: 2:00 PM EST

Means: Conference call

Attendees:

1. Ahmet Erdemir (Cleveland Clinic)
2. Jeff Weiss (University of Utah)
3. Steve Maas (University of Utah)

Agenda:

1. Discuss immediate action items from the last meeting.
2. Modeling with shell elements.
3. Scheduling meeting with Stanford University team.
4. Decide action items for next meeting.
5. Other.

Immediate Action Items:

• Cleveland Clinic (Ahmet)
  • Re-schedule conference call with Stanford University team.
• University of Utah (Jeff)
  • Recap new shell element formulations for possible implementation in FEBio.
• University of Utah (Steve)
  • Evaluate potential contact formulation changes to accommodate shell elements.

  • Ask Dave Rawlins to compile a newer version of PostView compatible to visualize simulation results with in situ strains.

  • Provide documentation on the use of in situ strain feature.

Notes:

1. Discuss immediate action items from the last meeting.
   • Jeff e-mailed Ben about rescheduling of conference calls. There was no need for a rescheduling based on Ben's schedule. For this meeting, Ben had to fill-in for someone else to teach a class.
   • Steve found out that shell formulations in FEBio do not work well with contact. He attributed the problem to the loads being applied to reference surface. He recommends a specialized contact formulation. Jeff recommended a specialized element formulation, i.e. for thick shells. Steve will check the former strategy.
   • Steve sent Ahmet an example problem with node/element numbering discontinuity.
   • Steve did not provide documentation on the use of in situ strain feature. He has sent Ahmet an example, which is likely to be self explanatory. Ahmet will work on this. Ahmet recommended that the FEBio distribution supporting in situ strain feature and the documentation should be available to the users at the time the manuscript goes to press. Steve and Jeff are working on the revision of the manuscript. Steve has been chasing down a theoretical concern raised by Gerard Ateshian. Steve will focus on the documentation once the revised manuscript is out.

   • Dave still needs to compile and provide PostView compatible with in situ strain feature. Steve will remind him.

2. Modeling with shell elements.
   • See relevant discussion topic in the agenda item above.
3. Scheduling meeting with Stanford University team.
   • Joy Ku from Stanford University was not able to attend this conference call. Ahmet asked the University of Utah team about possible scheduling. Jeff is usually available on Wednesday. Ideally, a conference call after ORS meeting (March 4-7, 2016) will work, e.g. March 10 (Thursday), March 11 (Friday), or March 14 (Monday).
4. Decide action items for next meeting.
   • See Immediate Action Items above.
5. Other.
   • Ahmet was wondering if it would be possible to apply gravitational loading without deforming the geometry. This feature may be useful for modeling of breast, lungs, brain, etc. Steve noted that in situ strain feature may allow this, i.e. target zero in situ strain with no change in geometry constraint while applying a gravitational field. This strategy may help calculate strains (deviations from zero in situ strain) that match geometry and balances gravitational forces. It may be exciting to discuss such applications in the manuscript for in situ strain feature.