1. Date of download: 10/28/2017
Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
From: Simulated Bioprosthetic Heart Valve Deformation under Quasi-Static Loading
J Biomech Eng. 2005;127(6): doi: /
Figure Legend:
A schematic of the overall study design, showing the experimental (left side) and computational side (right side), with comparisons performed on the measured and predicted strain fields (center). A novel aspect of the current study is the utilization of actual individual leaflet structural and material parameters, as well as validation using surface strains.

2. Date of download: 10/28/2017
Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
From: Simulated Bioprosthetic Heart Valve Deformation under Quasi-Static Loading
J Biomech Eng. 2005;127(6): doi: /
Figure Legend:
One camera view of valve 1 at 0mmHg transvalvular pressure, showing the marker array used for strain measurements, and the width (in pixels) of the valve

3. Date of download: 10/28/2017
Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
From: Simulated Bioprosthetic Heart Valve Deformation under Quasi-Static Loading
J Biomech Eng. 2005;127(6): doi: /
Figure Legend:
The FE model showing the trileaflet geometric configurations, which are attached to the wireform stent

4. Date of download: 10/28/2017
Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
From: Simulated Bioprosthetic Heart Valve Deformation under Quasi-Static Loading
J Biomech Eng. 2005;127(6): doi: /
Figure Legend:
The biaxial mechanical data for the 1MPa equibiaxial Lagrangian stress test protocol for all six leaflets from two valves studied. Unlike our previous study on the biaxial mechanical properties of GLBP (see Ref. ), test specimens were tested aligned to the leaflet circumferential and radial axes since the collagen fiber orientation were generally ±45°.

5. Date of download: 10/28/2017
Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
From: Simulated Bioprosthetic Heart Valve Deformation under Quasi-Static Loading
J Biomech Eng. 2005;127(6): doi: /
Figure Legend:
Comparison of FE predicted and experimentally measured maximum principal strain magnitude for valve 1 leaflet 2 for each pressure level at each of the six leaflet regions (Fig. ). Peak strains increased predictably with increasing transvalvular pressure. Overall, most regions demonstrated close agreement with the FE model results, with the best agreement in region 3 (typically 0.5% strain difference) and the worst in region 5 (∼2.5%).