{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020833333333333332, 'fraction_numerical': 0.020833333333333332, 'mean_word_length': 5.30625, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Finite element and photoelastic modelling of an abdominal aortic aneurysm: a comparative study

Rupture prediction of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) remains a clinical challenge. Finite element analysis (FEA) may allow for improved identification for intervention timing, but the method needs further substantiation. In this study, experimental photoelastic method and finite element techniques were compared using an idealised AAA geometry. There was good agreement between the numerical and experimental results. At the proximal and distal end of the AAA model, the maximum differences in principle strain for an internal pressure of 120 mmHg had differences ranging from 0.03 to 10.01%. The maximum difference in principle strain for the photoelastic and the finite element model at a pressure of 120 mmHg was 0.167 and 0.158, respectively. The current research strengthens the case for using FEA as an adjunct to the current clinical practice of utilising diameter measurement for intervention timing.