bioRxivBioengineeringPreprint
Mesh convergence depends on the element formulation of finite element brain models
Abstract
Finite element (FE) head models are virtual tools to study brain biomechanics and their predictions must be numerically convergent. Previous convergence studies focused on the influence of mesh size, but the potential effect of element formulation on model convergence was often ignored. To address this, one original model with brain mesh size as 6.4 {+/-} 1.9 mm was modified to generate three derivatives with the same mesh topology but different element sizes, i.e., a coarse model (mesh size: 12.2 {+/-} 3.9 mm), a medium model (mesh size: 3.2 {+/-} 1.0 mm), and a fine model (mesh size: 1.6 {+/-} 0.5 mm). Three commonly used element formulations, i.e., reduced integration, selectively reduced (S/R) integration, and full integration, were implemented to the brain elements. These models were subjected to rotational loadings along the axial, coronal, and sagittal axes, respectively. The maximum relative displacement at representative sites and 95th percentile maximum principal strain at the whole brain level were used to evaluate mesh convergency. The results showed that the S/R integration yielded a 5% difference between the original and medium meshes, while the reduced and full integration revealed a difference over 5% even between the medium and fine meshes. This study verified that the mesh convergence of FE brain models is affected by the choice of element formulation and the S/R integration contributes to the fastest convergence behavior than the reduced and full integrations. It provided practical information on how to develop numerically convergent and computationally efficient FE brain models. HighlightsO_LIThis study verifies that the choice of element formulation affects the mesh convergence behavior of finite element brain models C_LIO_LIThis study finds the selectively reduced integration yields the fastest convergence behavior than the reduced and full integration C_LIO_LIThis study provides practical guidance on the choice of mesh density and element formulation on how to develop numerically convergent and computationally efficient finite element brain models. C_LI
- Citations
- 0
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Surface-Based vs. Voxel-Based Finite Element Head Models: Comparative Analyses of Strain Responses
Zhou Zhou, Xiaogai Li, Svein Kleiven·Biomechanics and Modeling in MechanobiologyPeer-reviewed·Mar 11, 2025
- Development and Validation of an MRI-Derived Head-Neck Finite Element Model
H. Bahreinizad, S. K. Chowdhury, … F. Santos·bioRxiv·Feb 12, 2023
- PARS: an automated, open-source pipeline for subject-specific finite element head modelling from MRI
Vahid Darvishi, Emily Yik Kwan Chan, … Mazdak Ghajari·bioRxiv·Jul 6, 2026
- An anatomically accurate and personalizable head injury model: Significance of brain and white matter tract morphological variability on strain
X. Li, Z. Zhou, S. Kleiven·bioRxiv·May 20, 2020
- Fiber orientation downsampling compromises the computation of white matter tract-related deformation
- Incorporating and compensating cerebrospinal fluid in surface-based forward models of magneto- and electroencephalography
Matti Stenroos, Aapo Nummenmaa·bioRxiv·Jun 24, 2016