CHAPTER 2

NUMERICAL MODELING OF

HUMAN FOOT

~ If you want to accomplish something in the world, idealism is not enough

- you need to choose a method that works to achieve the goal ~
Richard Stallman

29
2.1 Finite element model of foot-ankle complex

2.1.1 Finite element method

The FEM is a versatile numerical method which allows stress and strain analyses

of complex structures with irregular geometry and material nonlinearities. When a

foot structure is loaded, stresses are generated in different materials (i.e. tissues).

The distribution of these stresses, their magnitudes and orientations throughout

the structure, is a result of complex interplay of the foot skeleton, cartilages,

muscles, ligaments, fascia, and the external environment that arises from foot-

ground interactions. In such a model that mimics the real structures to a certain

degree of refinement, the structural aspects (geometry, material properties, and

loading/boundary conditions) are required to be expressed mathematically.

In using the FEM, the model of the human foot as a geometrical entity,

has to be firstly defined. Modern musculoskeletal imaging techniques such as

magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computer tomography (CT) can be a

source for such complete anatomical structures. The geometrically complex foot

structures, are then discretized into finite number of relatively simple elements

(i.e. FE mesh generation), connected by nodal points or nodes. Each element

can have its own material properties. The equations for describing the

mechanical behavior of these elements are known. The computer program (e.g.

ABAQUS) can calculate the stiffness matrix of each element, and the stiffness

matrix of the whole structure is determined. Knowledge of the structural stiffness

matrix, of the loads and the boundary conditions allows the response of a model

to any form of external loading to be predicted.

30
2.1.2 3-D reconstruction of foot geometry

The three-dimensional soft tissue-skeletal geometry was created based on the

volume reconstruction of the coronal computer tomography (CT) images of the

right foot (non-weight-bearing condition) of a male subject (27 years old, height of

169 cm and body weight of 65.1 kg). The CT scan has a resolution of 0.25ｘ0.25

mm2 (pixel size) with a slice spacing of 1 mm. This allows a detailed

morphological reconstruction of the various anatomical structures of the foot,

including bones, cartilages, and a bulk soft tissue boundary (Fig. 2.1.2.1.). Model

segmentation was performed by MIMICS program (Materialise Inc., Belgium).

Fig. 2.1.2.1. Segmentation of a human foot from individual coronal CT slices. The bones
were modeled as articulated parts enveloped into a bulk soft tissue

Two pixel phases were defined based on gray-scale threshold computing:

the foot skeletal phase and a lumped soft-tissue phase. The hard foot skeleton

and soft tissue were then reconstructed into a solid model (Fig. 2.1.2.2.). The

31
solid model was finally imported into a pre-processor, PATRAN (MacNeal

Schwendler Corporation, USA), for FE mesh generation. Thirty bony parts,

including sesamoids, were created individually and enveloped into the

homogenous mass of foot soft-tissue. Particular attention was given to the

surface geometry of various foot bones (tibia, fibula, talus, calcaneus, navicular,

medial, intermediate and lateral cuneiform, and cuboid, the medial, intermediate

and lateral cuneiforms, and the cuboid, metatarsal bones and phalanges) that

are internally articulated.

Fig. 2.1.2.2. 3-D solid model of foot geometry, including a bulk soft tissue (A) and bones
(B). Note that the foot skeletal was stabilized by actually anatomical ligaments.

Passive soft-tissue stabilizers of the foot skeleton, including ligaments and

plantar fascia, which could not be reconstructed from CT were determined based

on the anatomical descriptions from Primal Pictures 2006 (ANATOMY.TV, Primal

Pictures Ltd., London, UK). A total of 134 ligaments (i.e., multiple element

modeling for major ligament bundles) and a fan-shaped plantar fascia structure

with a 2 mm out-of-plane thickness were incorporated into the model.

32
2.1.3 Model discretization

The reconstructed solid foot model was then used to generate three-dimensional

finite element mesh using various types of structural elements; this process is

known as model discretization. The foot skeleton and the soft-tissue component

were meshed by 160,000 and 240,000 tetrahedral elements (C3D4: full

integration linear element). Meshes for the bones and the soft-tissue component

share same nodes at the interface except those joint space regions where a

series of contact conditions were defined between adjacent bones (Fig. 2.1.3.1.).

The ligament structures were represented by 3-D truss elements (T3D2) with a

“no compression” option, in accordance to their physiological function. This would

allow these elements to resist tension-producing forces when stabilizing the foot

skeleton.

Fig. 2.1.3.1. Finite element mesh of a human foot with (A) soft tissue and (B) internal
bony structures

33
 For the muscular structures, six major extrinsic plantar flexors were

included. To model the gastrocnemius-soleus (G-S) complex, a three-

dimensional geometry of the Achilles tendon was constructed and incorporated

into the posterior extreme of the calcaneus. This facilitates application of G-S

muscle forces through the Achilles tendon-bone junction, and ensure more

realistic muscle load transfer compared to those in previous models, which only

employed nodal points to apply such forces (Gefen et al., 2000, Cheung et al.,

2006). The long tendons of the other five muscles were also inserted into the

model, at their corresponding anatomical attachment sites. This was done using

bar elements based on straight-line approximation, i.e. several bar elements

stringed together to represent the actual tendon trajectory inside the foot.

A mesh sensitivity analysis was performed to ensure that the mesh

density used in the FE model was sufficient to reach the converged numerical

results. Mesh refinement process was carried out in a 2-D plane-strain finite

element model based on a sagittal section through the 2nd ray of the foot. The

total strain energy and displacement served as the convergence criteria, with the

tolerance level being set as the change of less than 5%.

2.2 Material properties for finite element modeling

2.2.1 Cortical and cancellous bones, ligaments, and cartilages

Mechanical properties of cortical bone have been well documented in the

literature. Traditional mechanical testing such as uni-axial tensile or compressive

testing has revealed that material property of cortical bone may be considered as

34
having ‘nearly’ linearly elastic behavior. Measuring mechanical properties of

cancellous bone tissue is far more difficult than measuring those of cortical bone

tissue, due to the extremely small dimension of individual trabeculae. Because of

this difficulty, the reported cancellous bone tissue modulus ranges from 0.76 to

20 GPa (Cowin et al., 1998).

In the current analysis, a quasi-static loading system is applied to the foot

model. According to Huiskes (1996), in the case of quasi-static loading, both

cortical and trabecular bones may be linearly elastic for simplification.

Consequently, in the present model, bone tissues are assumed to be

homogeneous, isotropic, and linear elastic. For the foot bones, Young’s modulus

is taken as 7300 N/mm2, a value that was weighted by Nakamura et al. (1981)

from human cortical and cancellous bone properties and the Poisson ratio is

taken as 0.3. The ligaments, following Cheung et al. (2005), were considered as

non-compressive materials and assigned with a Young’s modulus of 260 MPa, a

Poisson’s ratio of 0.3, and a cross-section of 18.4 mm2.

2.2.2 Achilles and other flexor tendons

In the literature, mechanical properties have been reported for many tendons (e.g.

Achilles tendon and anterior cruciate ligament). Modulus values are generally in

the range of 500~1,850 MPa (Yamamoto et al., 1992, Danto and Woo, 1993).

For the Achilles tendon, uni-axial tension tests have been conducted by Wren et

al. (2001) at lower strain rates of 1%/s and relatively higher strain rate of 10%/s.

The mean moduli found were 816 MPa (± 218) at 1%/s rate and 822 MPa (±211)

35
at 10%/s rate, respectively. Considering the quasi-static loading system used in

the current study, as will be discussed in the following sections, the elastic

modus obtained at lower strain rate is chosen and a common Poisson’s ratio of

0.3 was used as the material properties for the Achilles tendon in the current foot

FE model.

For the flexor tendons, the literature contains the least amount of

information pertaining to their mechanical properties. It was stated that the

stiffness values of flexor hallucis longus (FHL) and peroneus brevis (PB) were

43.3 N/mm (± 14.1) and 43.6 N/mm (± 18.9) (Maffulli et al., 2008), respectively.

Using the relation, a flexor tendon of the foot with a typical cross-sectional area

of 12.5 mm2 was calculated to have a Young’s modulus of 450 MPa (Garcia-

Gonzalez et al., 2009). Thus, the Achilles and other flexor tendons, were

idealized as isotropic linear elastic materials with different Young’s moduli of 816

MPa (Wren et al., 2001) and 450 MPa (Garcia-Gonzalez et al., 2009), and a

common Poisson’s ratio of 0.3. A summary of material properties to define

different tissues for finite element modeling is given in Table 2.2.2.1.

36
Table 2.2.2.1. Summary of FE model listing element type and material properties for
different model entities.

Element Cross-
Entity type E (MPa), v section Reference
(ABAQUS) (mm2)
4-node Cortical and cancellous
Bone tetrahedral 7300, 0.3  bone properties weighted
continuum by Nakamura et al. (1981)
4-node Indentation test conducted
Cartilage tetrahedral 1.01, 0.4  on 1st MTP joint by
continuum Athanasiou et al. (1998)
Properties obtained from
2-node
collateral ligaments of the
Ligament tension-only 260, 0.4 18.4
human ankle joint by
truss
Siegler et al. (1988)
4-node Tensile modulus obtained
Achilles
tetrahedral 816, 0.3  at lower strain rate (Wren et
tendon
continuum al., 2001)
Calculation based on the
Other 2-node stiffness values of flexor
flexor tension-only 450, 0.3 12.5 hallucis longus and
tendons cable peroneus brevis (Garcia-
Gonzalez et al., 2009)
2-node
Plantar Wright and Rennels,
tension-only 350, 0.4 290.7
fascia (1964))
truss
4-node Stress-strain curve
Plantar
tetrahedral Hyperelastic  determined experimentally
soft-tissue
continuum by Chen et al. (2011)

37
2.2.3 Constitutive model for plantar soft tissue

2.2.3.1 Hyperelastic material model

The plantar soft-tissue is a typical load-bearing soft tissue that undergoes very

large strains/deformation (large-strain elasticity) with strongly non-linear stress-

strain behavior when subject to high loads during gait. Furthermore, the plantar

soft-tissue in normal foot is often rich in fluid content, and its material behavior

under compression often resembles those of most elastomers (i.e. solid

rubberlike materials), which exhibit very little compressibility compared to their

shear flexibility. For these materials, their stress-strain relationship is suitable to

be derived from a ‘strain-energy density function’. This function defines the strain

energy stored in the material per unit of reference volume (volume in the initial

configuration) as a function of the strain at that point in the material. For this

reason, these rubberlike materials are usually referred to as hyperelastic

materials, as is the case for the plantar soft tissue. And various hyperelastic

material models have been successfully used to model plantar soft tissue

behavior in finite element simulation (Lemmon et al., 1997, Cheung et al., 2005,

Erdemir et al., 2006).

There are several forms of strain energy potentials available in ABAQUS

to model approximately incompressible isotropic elastomers: the Arruda-Boyce

form, the Marlow form, the Mooney-Rivlin form, the neo-Hookean form, the

Ogden form, the polynomial form, the reduced polynomial form, the Yeoh form,

and the Van der Waals form (Hibbert and Karssonn, 2006). This study focuses

on the Ogden-form hyperelastic constitutive model that are widely used in the

38
literature to model the plantar soft tissue material behavior, because of its

superior non-linear curve-fitting capacity (Erdemir et al., 2005, Cheung et al.,

2006, Chen et al., 2010a).

Firstly, it is useful to give a quick review on the general concepts of large-

strain elasticity applied on hyperelastic isotropic and incompressible materials

(Ogden, 1972). Hyperelastic models are based on the definition of a strain-

energy function U. For an isotropic and incompressible material U can be

expressed as a function of the principal stretches:

U  U 1 , 2 ,  3 2.1

The principal Cauchy stresses are given by:

U
 i  i  p , i = 1, 2, 3 2.2
i

where p is the hydrostatic part of stress, whereas the first term is relative to the

deviatoric part. For incompressible materials (i.e. total volume remains constant

when subjected to compressive forces), we have:

12 3  1 , 3  12 1 2.3

In simple uni-axial compression test, we take and we have for

incompressibility:

1   , 2  3  1 / 2 2.4

We can so define a strain-energy function depending only on the one remaining

independent stretch (λ in the principal loading direction):


U  U 1 , 2 ,  3  U  , 1 / 2  2.5

Again, for uni-axial compression, it derives from Eq. (2.2):

39
 U
  2.6


The models are described below. Once a particular strain-energy function is

chosen, it is straightforward to obtain explicit relations between stress and stretch

from Eqs. (2.1) and (2.6).

2.2.3.2 Ogden model

A very common form of strain energy function is that proposed by Ogden (1972):

  i 1 i 
N
U 1 ,  2 , 3    2 i  3 i /  i 2.7
i 1

where N is a positive integer (normally it can be taken smaller than 3, depending

on its capacity for nonlinear stress-strain curve-fitting), and αi are real

parameters (i.e. material constants) that describe the behavior of this rubber-like

material model. These material constants, and αi, can be positive or negative,

satisfying the condition that:

1 N
  i i   k
2 i 1
2.8

where is the ground state (i.e. initial) shear modulus. Introducing Eq. (2.7) into

Eq. (2.6) and imposing N = 1 (1st-order model), we obtain the form of

hyperelastic Ogden formulation with stress () and stretch () relation given as:


2

 1   ( / 2) 1  2.9

For 1st-order Ogden model, we only have two unknown material constants,

and α, that have to be determined by curve fitting procedure.

40
 In the literature, the stress-strain curves of the plantar soft tissue are often

obtained based on tests of the fat pad under the heel bone (i.e. heel pad)

(Erdemir et al., 2005, Cheung et al., 2005, Lemmon et al., 1997). Since the

primary focus of the current model is the sub-MTH region, the material behavior

has to be determined for soft tissues specific to that location. For this purpose, an

instrument-driven indentation device was developed for realistic in vivo

mechanical characterization (i.e. tissue stiffness and force relaxation behavior) of

the forefoot plantar soft tissue. The indentation force-displacement curve was

directly measured from soft tissue under the metatarsal heads, and was used for

extraction of the material constants to model such tissue. To determine these

material constants, we performed additional simulations of indentation

experiments on human plantar soft tissue under the 2nd MTH, based on this

customized tissue tester. The parameters were chosen such that the reaction

forces upon indentation optimally fit the experimental observations; this yielded

= 3.75 ｘ10-2 MPa and α = 5.5. (See chapter 3, section 3.1.4.3, for detailed

descriptions of plantar soft tissue material property characterization.)

2.2.4 Material model for foot-supporting surface

2.2.4.1 Insoles as supporting interface for foot

Current practice in the prevention of neuropathic foot ulcers often involves

prescription of accommodative in-shoe orthoses or insoles which reduce plantar

pressure levels at locations of bony prominences, particularly under the

metatarsal heads (MTHs) (Cavanagh et al., 2000, Lott et al., 2007, Bus et al.,

41
2008). Those insoles are often fabricated using solid foams that are made up of

polyhedral cells that pack in three dimensions. The foam cells can be either open

(e.g. plastazote) or closed (e.g. Ethylene-vinyl acetate (EVA) foam). Soft insoles

made from such foam materials have excellent energy absorption properties: the

energy absorbed by foams is substantially greater than that absorbed by ordinary

stiff elastic materials for a certain stress level (Nigg et al., 1988). Typical

stressstrain (σε) curve of four types of foam padding material that are

commonly used for fabrication of insoles in therapeutic footwear are shown in Fig.

2.2.4.1. Values were calculated from the force (F) and displacement (D) data

obtained from uni-axial compression test on foam materials using INSTRON

machine (HighWycombe, UK) at biomechanics lab NUS.

4F D
  , 2.10
s 2 L

Fig. 2.2.4.1. Stress-strain curve obtained from uni-axial compression test of deformable
foam padding materials

42
 The samples prepared were 30 mm in diameter (s) and 13.6 mm thick (L).

Each sample was compressed up to a nominal strain of 50% at a displacement

rate of 4 mm/s. From the foam stress-strain curve, three stages can be

distinguished during compression:

1. At small strains (5%) the foam deforms in a linear elastic manner due to cell

wall bending.

2. The next stage is a plateau of deformation at almost constant stress, caused

by the elastic buckling of the columns or plates that make up the cell edges or

walls. In closed cells the enclosed gas pressure and membrane stretching

increase the level and slope of the plateau.

3. Finally, a region of densification occurs, where the cell walls crush together,

resulting in a rapid increase of compressive stress.

2.2.4.2 ABAQUS® hyperfoam material model

In the present model, the foot-supporting surface that the foot makes contact with

was considered to consists of two layers of material – a concrete base modeled

as rigid body, and a 6.8 mm thick, flat, foam pad. Due to the highly-deformable

nature of the foam pad, it was modeled as a compressible, hyperfoam material

(2nd-order) with a strain energy function U of:


2 i   i
  
2
1  2 i  3 i  3  J el  i  i  1 
1
U 
i 1  i 
2 i  2.11

i
Where,  i  2.12
1  2 i

43
Values of these elastomeric foam parameters of the hyperfoam model (i;αi; βi)

were obtained through nonlinear least squares (NLS) minimization provided in

ABAQUS (Hibbert and Karssonn, 2006). Table 2.2.4.2. shows the calculated

hyperelastic constants that fitted to the set of stressstrain (σε) curve data of

Plastazote, which will be used in the modeling study.

Table 2.2.4.2. The material constants of the foam pad used as the foot-supporting
interface from the hyperfoam strain energy function

α1 (MPa) β1 1 α2 (MPa) β2 2
0.467 15.5 0.021 -0.11 3.62 -1.05

2.3 Loading and boundary conditions

To load the foot FE model physiologically, realistic musculoskeletal loads needs

to be defined. Although previous FE modeling of the foot has demonstrated the

potential of such numerical modeling to investigate a number of topics in foot

biomechanics, such as plantar pressure prediction (Lemmon et al., 1997,

Cheung et al., 2005), ligament failure (Wu, 2007), plantar fascia release (Gefen,

2002), and internal tissue stresses (Gefen, 2003, Chen et al., 2010b), most

existing models primarily focus on static standing posture, and modeling of the

muscles has been largely ignored. Thus, compared to the majority of existing foot

models which focus on standing (Gefen, 2002, Cheung et al., 2005, Chen et al.,

2010a), the current model attempted to simulate a muscle-demanding posture

during heel rise, and forefoot sub-MTH stress/strain responses is the focus.

Moreover, to study the human foot mechanism, the complex interplay or

interrelationship among muscular control, internal joint movement, and plantar

44
loading transfer needs to be considered. In this study, relative articulating

movements of the bony joints were simulated in the entire foot (see below). This

is considered as a significant improvement as compared to previous FE models

which have joints that were over-constrained by “fusing” them (Jacob, 2001b,

Gefen, 2002, Wu, 2007, Gefen et al., 2000, Gefen, 2003) or using kinematic-

controlled ‘connectors’ (Budhabhatti et al., 2007, Lemmon and Cavanagh, 1997).

Neither of these two reflect the anatomical joint constraints that are actually

governed by the bony congruence facets and passive stabilizers (i.e. ligaments

and fascia) (Leardini et al., 2000). The modeling strategy utilized here enabled

the foot bones to be self-adapted to the static-equilibrium positions in response to

the external loading boundary conditions. Moreover, a model that includes joint

articulation could be potentially validated via joint kinematics and contact forces

obtained experimentally (Gefen et al., 2000).

2.3.1 Articular joint movement

Relative articular joint movements were included in the foot model. These are

located at the ankle (i.e., joint between articular surface of the tibia and fibula and

talus), tarsus (i.e., adjacent articulations among talus, calcaneus, navicular,

medial, intermediate and lateral cuneiform, and cuboid), tarsometatarsal (i.e., the

medial, intermediate and lateral cuneiforms, and the cuboid, articulating with the

bases of the metatarsal bones) and metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joints, with the

aim to represent the physiological condition experienced by a weight-bearing foot.

To simulate these joint interactions, ABAQUS surface-to-surface “contact”

45
elements (Master/Slave approach, see Fig. 2.3.1.1.) were created for the

corresponding potential contact regions (i.e., articular surfaces) of these bony

joints. Nodes on one surface (the slave surface) contact the discretized

segments on the other surface (the master surface). This allows the bones to

slide over one another without friction.

Fig. 2.3.1.1. Master/Slave approach to model contact interactions. The contact behavior
strictly follows the kinematic implications that slave nodes cannot penetrate master
surface segments (Hibbert and Karssonn, 2006).

Twenty pairs of articulations were modeled as a whole; 1 for ankle joint

interaction, 9 for tarsus joint interactions (including 1 for subtalar joint), 5 for

tarsometatarsal joint interactions and 5 for metatarsal-phalangeal joint

interactions. As the friction was neglected (because physiologically, synovial fluid

lubricates the articulating joints which significantly reduces friction), only

compression forces were transmitted through adjacent bone contacts. The

geometry of individual articular cartilage of these bony joints was not accounted

for; instead, their mechanical properties that contribute to normal joint loading

transfer were modeled. Thus, the governing stiffness during contact was chosen

46
to be 1.01 MPa, based on the compressive material properties of the foot joint

cartilage obtained from the 1st MTP joints (Athanasiou et al., 1998).

2.3.2 Plantar flexor muscle forces

2.3.2.1 Roles of the extrinsic plantar flexor muscles

The functional roles of the extrinsic plantar flexor muscles are to provide stability

of the foot during the stance phase (Sutherland et al., 1980, O'Connor and Hamill,

2004). Anatomically, these musculotendinous units often have specialized long-

tendon structures, which allow them to affect multiple joints inside the foot. This

multi-articular characteristic in extrinsic flexors facilitate control and stabilizing of

major bony joints, including the ankle, the subtalar, and indirectly the

metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joints, and thus provide primary coordination of the

stance-phase placement of the foot, which is essential for normal weight-bearing

of the foot during gait (Perry, 1992).

The gastrocnemius-soleus (G-S) complex associated with the Achilles

tendon is the most dominant extrinsic plantar flexor. Various studies using

cadaveric foot models have established the important biomechanical linkage

among the Achilles tendon, plantar fascia and MTP joints, both statically (Carlson

et al., 2000) and dynamically (Erdemir et al., 2004), early described by (Hicks,

1955) as the Windlass mechanism. With the foot stabilized by flexor muscles

upon heel-rise, substantial dynamic ground reaction forces (GRF) are imposed

solely onto the forefoot, generating highly localized stresses, particularly

underneath the metatarsal heads (MTHs) (Chen et al., 2010b). Such potentially

47
‘detrimental’ stresses may only last for a short-dwelling time in a normal foot,

provided that the coordinative muscles involved activate the right amount of force

at the exact right time during gait (Perry, 1992, Hayafune et al., 1999).

2.3.2.2 Calculation of musculoskeletal loads

As the areas under the MTHs are of particular clinical interest, the instant

the forefoot force reaches a peak (i.e. second peak GRF probably corresponding

to the sub-MTH peak pressure) was chosen for simulation. At the

commencement of the simulation, forefoot kinematic data was used to assist in

replicating the foot pose relative to the ground. Specifically, the second

metatarsal shaft was angled at approximately 25 degrees to the horizontal to

reflect mean forefoot orientation in the sagittal plane (i.e. the main loading plane)

at push-off (Fauth, 2002). The tibia, fibula and the superior surfaces of the soft

tissue were fully constrained. Application of extrinsic muscle forces were

simulated via force vectors in axial alignment with the tendons attached (Fig.

2.3.2.2.).

During push-off, the ground reaction force (GRF) vector, acting at its

center of pressure at the forefoot segment, causes a bending moment along the

ankle joint. This depends on the joint positions and is balanced by the plantar

flexor muscles comprising the gastrocnemius-soleus (G-S) complex, Tibialis

posterior (TIBP), Flexor hallucis longus (FHL), Flexor digitorum longus (FDL),

Peroneus brevis (PB) and Peroneus longus (PL). Note that the G-S complex is

dominant, since the other five extrinsic flexors have only small lever arms.

48
Analysis commenced with this baseline model, driven by musculoskeletal loading.

A maximum vertical GRF of 623.1 N, approximating the second GRF peak during

walking (measured for this particular subject who provides the foot geometry

using Kistler force plates during gait analysis), was generated by contracting the

plantar flexors at the prescribed kinematic configuration. This loading protocol

mimicked the manipulations of the cadaveric study conducted by Sharkey et al.

(1995), which simulated the activity of the flexor tendons by the use of linear

actuators.

Fig. 2.3.2.2. Cut through the element mesh of the finite element model of muscular foot
and ankle complex, incorporating internal soft tissue, skeletal structures, ligaments,
plantar fascia, and musculotendinous units for push-off simulation. Application of muscle
forces were simulated by force vectors align with the tendons attached. FAT =
Gastrocnemius-soleus complex, FTIBP = Tibialis posterior, FFHL= Flexor hallucis longus,
FFDL = Flexor digitorum longus, FPB = Peroneus brevis, and FPL = Peroneus longus.

49
 The initial configurations of the metatarsals were affected slightly because

of considerable deformation of the soft tissues and articulation of various bony

joints. Solution of the model converged with the 2nd metatarsal shaft oriented at

26.8 degrees to the horizontal.

Table 2.3.2.2. The input forces in the muscles applied through the nodes connected to
tendon elements to drive the foot finite element model
th
i muscle Muscle forces No. of nodes
#1 Gastrocnemius Soleus FAT 1620N 30

#2 Tibialis posterior FTIBP 267N 5

#3 Flexor hallucis longus FFHL 130N 4
#4 Flexor digitorum longus FFDL 81N 5
#5 Peroneus brevis FPB 91N 5
#6 Peroneus longus FPL 193N 5

The corresponding total muscle force (TMF) was computed and the forces

in individual muscles are proportional to their physiological cross-sectional areas

(PCSA); i.e. the ith muscle force (MF) is given by:

 TMF i  1,2,3,4,5,6 
PCSAi
MFi  2.13
6
 PCSA j
j 1

This method was similar to the one used by Salathe and Arangio, (2002) in an

analytical foot structure model for estimation of foot flexor muscle forces. The

forces calculated in the present study are listed in Table 2.3.2.2. This

corresponds to approximately 50% of the maximum contractile stresses (~0.40

MPa) in plantar flexor muscles conservatively estimated by Wickiewicz et al.,

50
(1983). Additional analysis was also undertaken, whereby activation of toe

flexors was not considered (i.e. forces applied to FHL & FDL approach zero), in

order to determine the significance of toe flexor muscle forces in realistic toe

load-bearing. The models were solved using the general purpose FE analysis

package ABAQUS (SIMULIA).

2.3.3 Foot-ground interaction with frictional contact

2.3.3.1 Coulomb friction

To model the foot-ground interaction, ABAQUS contact capacities that handle

general frictional contact conditions were utilized. Sliding contact algorithm was

implemented in ABAQUS to model such interaction at the foot-supporting

interface (Fig. 2.3.3.1.). Coulomb's law of friction is enforced globally over a

surface segment within a contact pair: known as a master/slave approach.

Fig. 2.3.3.1. Relative sliding of points with contact constraint. Note the possible evolution
of contact between node 101 and its master surface, BSURF, involving sliding contact
conditions with friction.

51
Using this modeling approach, the contact tractions, including shear interaction,

over the whole plantar surface segments can be computed. Moreover, this

algorithm also accounts for the stick, slip or separation of contacting surfaces

that may be present during foot-ground interaction.

In terms of frictional/shear interactions, the Coulomb's law basically

describes the general mechanical principles of friction, and it belongs to the

classical Laws of Friction. Thus, Coulomb's law follows the three rules of

classical Laws of Friction:

 Friction is independent of sliding velocity.

 Friction is independent of the contact area

 Friction is proportional to the normal force, with constant of proportionality, µ.

According to Coulomb friction, the relationship between friction force (Fy) and

normal force (Fz) can be simply expressed as:

Fy
Fy   Fz ,    Tan( ) 2.14
Fz

Coulomb friction is used to model the frictional contact between the foot

and its supporting surface. As a result of friction, a shear stress proportional to

the local contact pressure would be applied to the surface of the deforming

plantar soft tissue. However, in reality, the frictional contact at foot-supporting

interface can be more complex, as such contact can be an extremely non-linear

dynamic problem (see below).

2.3.3.2 Contact problems at foot supporting interface

52
The classical laws of friction offer a paradigm in which the resistance to relative

motion is determined by the coefficient of friction, µ. As discussed above, in this

traditional paradigm, coefficients of friction are material-dependant constants that

are independent of time, velocity and contact pressure.

In practice, the classical friction paradigm adequately describes only the

time averaged behavior of some simple interactions between uniform, rigid

surfaces. As Marpett (2002) argues, Coulomb’s “Laws” are not fundamental

physical laws but rather “abstractions” that have been widely taught and adopted.

Classical friction does not adequately describe the complex interactions between

compliant, resilient, non-uniform surfaces such as those found in typical foot and

its support’s interfacial contact problems. In these problems, friction is actually

affected by the normal force, by contact area, by sliding velocity, temperature,

humidity and other factors.

Considering the complex nature of such a contact problem, to produce

accurate 3-D contact stresses in the numerical modeling, the coefficient of friction

or shear traction ratio, µ, has to be measured experimentally and input into the

foot model. This is, in fact, one of the primary sources of complexity that is

typically encountered in modeling foot-ground interaction. Previous modeling

studies have largely relied on those empirical values of µ. This is probably one of

the reasons that majority of existing finite element models of foot-supporting

interface are exclusively focused on plantar pressure prediction, while only few

researchers explored potential for modeling plantar shear interaction. In this

study, however, experimental methods will be developed to measure and

53
calculate the actual shear traction ratio, µ, during foot-ground interaction. Details

about this experimental study will be given in Chapter 2.

2.3.4 Finite element model outputs

With full muscular loads applied, this baseline foot model was successfully

solved in a typical geometry at heel rise, with the ankle and metatarsophalangeal

joints maintained at plantar-flexed and extended configurations, respectively (Fig.

2.3.4.1). The ABAQUS CAE/post-processor was used to report results from finite

element calculations. There were several model outcome measures of primary

interest, the contact stresses at foot-supporting interface, bony joint movement,

and von Mises stresses (VMS) in bony structures and internal tissue strains in

ligaments, plantar fascia and plantar soft tissue, and the model’s experimental

validation will be given in Chapter 4.

54
Fig. 2.3.4.1. The finite element predicted stress response of a whole human foot
subjected to comprehensive musculoskeletal loading corresponding to a heel-rise
posture. Outcome measures of primary interest in foot biomechanics, including (A)
stress distributions of bulk soft tissue, (B) metatarsal bones, (C) ligaments and plantar
fascia, can be obtained.

55