1、Designation: F1875 98 (Reapproved 2014)Standard Practice forFretting Corrosion Testing of Modular Implant Interfaces:Hip Femoral Head-Bore and Cone Taper Interface1This standard is issued under the fixed designation F1875; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year oforigina
2、l adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. Asuperscript epsilon () indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.1. Scope1.1 This practice describes the testing, analytical, and char-acteriza
3、tion methods for evaluating the mechanical stability ofthe bore and cone interface of the head and stem junction ofmodular hip implants subjected to cyclic loading by measure-ments of fretting corrosion (1-5).2Two test methods describedare as follows:1.1.1 Method IThe primary purpose of this method
4、is toprovide a uniform set of guidelines for long-term testing todetermine the amount of damage by measurement of theproduction of corrosion products and particulate debris fromfretting and fretting corrosion. Damage is also assessed bycharacterization of the damage to the bore and cone surfaces(4,
5、5).1.1.2 Methods IIThis method provides for short-termelectrochemical evaluation of the fretting corrosion of themodular interface. It is not the intent of this method to producedamage nor particulate debris but rather to provide a rapidmethod for qualitative assessment of design changes which donot
6、 include material changes (1-4).1.2 This practice does not provide for judgment or predic-tion of in-vivo implant performance, but rather provides for auniform set of guidelines for evaluating relative differences inperformance between differing implant designs, constructs, ormaterials with performa
7、nce defined in the context of theamount of fretting and fretting corrosion. Also, this practiceshould permit direct comparison of fretting corrosion databetween independent research groups, and thus provide forbuilding of a data base on modular implant performance.1.3 This practice provides for comp
8、arative testing of manu-factured hip femoral heads and stems and for coupon typespecimen testing where the male taper portion of the modularjunction does not include the entire hip implant, with the taperportion of the coupon identical in design, manufacturing, andmaterials to the taper of the final
9、 hip implant (4,5).1.4 Method I of this practice permits simultaneous evalua-tion of the fatigue strength of a femoral hip stem (in accordancewith Practice F1440) and the mechanical stability and debrisgenerated by fretting and fretting corrosion of the modularinterface.1.5 The general concepts and
10、methodologies described inthis practice could be applied to the study of other modularinterfaces in total joint prostheses.1.6 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded asstandard. No other units of measurement are included in thisstandard.1.7 This standard may involve hazardous materials,ope
11、rations, and equipment. This standard does not purport toaddress all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with itsuse. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard toestablish appropriate safety and health practices and deter-mine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to u
12、se.2. Referenced Documents2.1 ASTM Standards:3E4 Practices for Force Verification of Testing MachinesE466 Practice for Conducting Force Controlled ConstantAmplitude Axial Fatigue Tests of Metallic MaterialsE467 Practice for Verification of Constant Amplitude Dy-namic Forces in an Axial Fatigue Testi
13、ng SystemF561 Practice for Retrieval and Analysis of MedicalDevices, and Associated Tissues and FluidsF746 Test Method for Pitting or Crevice Corrosion ofMetallic Surgical Implant MaterialsF897 Test Method for Measuring Fretting Corrosion ofOsteosynthesis Plates and ScrewsF1440 Practice for Cyclic F
14、atigue Testing of MetallicStemmed Hip Arthroplasty Femoral Components Without1This practice is under the jurisdiction ofASTM Committee F04 on Medical andSurgical Materials and Devices and is the direct responsibility of SubcommitteeF04.15 on Material Test MethodsCurrent edition approved Oct. 1, 2014
15、. Published November 2014. Originallyapproved in 1998. Last previous edition approved in 2009 as F1875 98(2009).DOI: 10.1520/F1875-98R14.2The bold face numbers in parentheses refers to the list of references at the endof this standard.3For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.
16、org, orcontact ASTM Customer Service at serviceastm.org. For Annual Book of ASTMStandards volume information, refer to the standards Document Summary page onthe ASTM website.Copyright ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States1Torsion (Wit
17、hdrawn 2012)4F1636 Specification for Bores and Cones for Modular Femo-ral Heads (Withdrawn 2001)4G3 Practice for Conventions Applicable to ElectrochemicalMeasurements in Corrosion TestingG5 Reference Test Method for Making PotentiodynamicAnodic Polarization MeasurementsG15 Terminology Relating to Co
18、rrosion and Corrosion Test-ing (Withdrawn 2010)4G40 Terminology Relating to Wear and ErosionG61 Test Method for Conducting Cyclic PotentiodynamicPolarization Measurements for Localized Corrosion Sus-ceptibility of Iron-, Nickel-, or Cobalt-Based AlloysG102 Practice for Calculation of Corrosion Rates
19、 and Re-lated Information from Electrochemical Measurements2.2 ISO Standards:ISO 7206-7 Endurance Performance of Stemmed FemoralComponents Without Application of Torsion53. Terminology3.1 Definitions:3.1.1 corrosive wear, nwear in which chemical or electro-chemical reaction with the environment is s
20、ignificant.3.1.2 coverage, nthe length, parallel to the taper surface,that the bore and cone interfaces are in contact.3.1.3 crevice corrosion, nlocalized corrosion of a metalsurface at, or immediately adjacent to, an area that is shieldedfrom full exposure to the environment because of closeproximi
21、ty between the metal and the surface of anothermaterial.3.1.4 external circuit, nthe wires, connectors, measuringdevices, current sources, and so forth that are used to bringabout or measure the desired electrical conditions within thetest cell.3.1.5 femoral head neck extension, na distance parallel
22、 tothe taper axis, from the nominal neck offset length (k)asdefined in Specification F1636, and the center of the head.Such variants from the nominal length are used to adjust forresection level, leg length, and so forth. A positive neckextension equates to the center of the head being locatedfurthe
23、r away from the stem.3.1.6 fretting, nsmall amplitude oscillatory motion, usu-ally tangential, between two solid surfaces in contact.3.1.7 fretting corrosion, nthe deterioration at the interfacebetween contacting surfaces as the result of corrosion andslight oscillatory slip between the two surfaces
24、.3.1.8 fretting wear, nwear arising as a result of fretting.3.1.9 total elemental level, nthe total weight of particulatematter and corrosion ions generated by fretting wear andfretting corrosion. Most analytical techniques are unable toaccurately differentiate between ions and particulates, andther
25、efore, total elemental level refers to all matter and corro-sion products released by fretting wear and corrosion.3.1.10 wear, ndamage to a solid surface, generally involv-ing progressive loss of material, due to relative motion betweenthat surface and a contacting substance or substances.4. Summary
26、 of Test Method4.1 Method IThe femoral stem and head components, orcoupons to simulate head-taper-neck geometry, are loadedcyclically in a manner similar to that described in PracticeF1440. The head neck junction is exposed to a saline orproteinaceous solution, either by immersion of the entiredevic
27、e, or with a fluid containing envelope. The cyclic load isapplied for a minimum of 10 million cycles. At the conclusionof testing, the isolated fluid is withdrawn for chemical analysisfor total elemental level, and characterization of particulatedebris. The taper interface is subsequently disengaged
28、 and thesurfaces inspected for fretting wear and corrosion using opticalmicroscopy and scanning electron microscopy. The output ofthese methods is a quantitative measure of total elemental leveland a qualitative evaluation of damage of the modular interfacecaused by fretting wear and corrosion.4.2 M
29、ethod IIA coupon similar to that used in Method I,or an entire femoral stem and head construct, may be mountedin an inverted position in a test chamber. The chamber is filledwith an electrolyte solution to a level sufficient to submerge thebore and cone interface and a small portion of the exposedne
30、ck. The area of contact and articulation between the ball andthe test apparatus is isolated from the electrolyte, either bybeing above the fill level, or with an elastomeric seal used toisolate the bottom of the test chamber.4.2.1 Procedure AA saturated calomel electrode with aluggin probe is used a
31、s a reference electrode to measurechanges in the corrosion potential with an electrometer. Acounter electrode also may be employed and the polarizationcharacteristics measured with a potentiostat.4.2.2 Procedure BAlarge surface area counter electrode isimmersed in the solution to simulate the area o
32、f the stem. Azero-resistance ammeter is connected between the test deviceand the counter electrode. The difference in current, thusmeasured prior to and during cyclic loading, represents thefretting corrosion current flowing between the modular inter-face (anode) and the metal sheet (cathode).5. Sig
33、nificance and Use5.1 The modular interfaces of total joint prostheses aresubjected to micromotion that could result in fretting andcorrosion. The release of corrosion products and particulatedebris could stimulate adverse biological reactions, as well aslead to accelerated wear at the articulation i
34、nterface. Methodsto assess the stability and corrosion resistance of the modularinterfaces, therefore, are an essential component of devicetesting.5.2 Long-term in-vitro testing is essential to produce dam-age and debris from fretting of a modular interface (4,5). Theuse of proteinaceous solutions i
35、s recommended to best simulatethe in-vivo environment.4The last approved version of this historical standard is referenced onwww.astm.org.5Available from American National Standards Institute (ANSI), 25 W. 43rd St.,4th Floor, New York, NY 10036.F1875 98 (2014)25.3 Short-term tests often can be usefu
36、l in evaluations ofdifferences in design during device development (1-4). Theelectrochemical methods provide semiquantitative measures offretting corrosion rates. The relative contributions of mechani-cal and electrochemical processes to the total corrosion andparticulate release phenomena, however,
37、 have not been estab-lished; therefore, these tests should not be utilized to comparethe effects of changes in material combinations, but rather beutilized to evaluate design changes of bore (head) and cone(stem) components.5.4 These tests are recommended for evaluating the frettingwear and corrosio
38、n of modular interfaces of hip femoral headand stem components. Similar methods may be applied to othermodular interfaces where fretting corrosion is of concern.5.5 These methods are recommended for comparativeevaluation of the fretting wear and corrosion of new materials,coatings, or designs, or a
39、combination thereof, under consid-eration for hip femoral head and neck modular interfaces.Components for testing may be those of a manufacturedmodular hip device (finished product) or sample coupons,which are designed and manufactured for simulation of thehead, taper, and neck region of a modular h
40、ip device.6. Apparatus6.1 Testing MachinesThe action of the machine should beanalyzed thereafter to ensure that the desired form and periodicforce amplitude is maintained for the duration of the test (seePractice E467). The test machine should have a load monitor-ing system, such as the transducer m
41、ounted in line with thespecimen. The loads should be monitored continuously in theearly stages of the test and periodically thereafter to ensure thedesired load cycle is maintained. The varying load as deter-mined by suitable dynamic verification should be maintained atall times to within 62 % of th
42、e maximum force being used inaccordance with Practices E4 and E466.6.2 Specimen Mounting Devices, Method IModular hipand stem components shall be set up as described in PracticesF1440. Coupon samples shall be set up as shown in Fig. 1. Theset up must provide for identical loading geometry as that in
43、Practice F1440.6.3 Specimen Mounting Devices, Method IIModular hipand stem components shall be set-up in an inverted position, asshown in Fig. 2. Coupon samples may be set up as shown inFig. 1, or in an inverted orientation.6.4 Environmental Containment, Method IThe prosthesismay be placed in an env
44、ironmental chamber, which is filledwith the appropriate fluid. Care should be taken to ensure thatthe contact area between the head and the low friction thrustbearing is not exposed to the electrolyte solution. The modularinterface of the prostheses or coupon samples also may beenclosed in an elasto
45、meric sleeve, which contains the electro-lyte. The materials used for such isolation must be nonreactiveand capable of retaining the fluid environment, (that is, preventleakage), throughout the course of testing. The volume of thechamber shall be between 5 and 100 mL.NOTE 1The use of small fluid vol
46、umes with the sleeve containmentmethod may not produce as much fretting corrosion as full prosthesisexposure, due to the reduced surface area of the cathodic metal exposed.6.5 Environmental Chamber, Method IIThe chamber shallbe filled with electrolyte so as to submerge the modularinterface.An elasto
47、meric seal is used to isolate the contact areabetween the head and the load application surface. Similarseals should be employed for coupon sample testing. Forcoupons oriented as shown in Fig. 1, the chamber fill level shallbe kept below the articulation between the head and the loadingapparatus.6.6
48、 Counter and Reference Electrodes, Method IIA coun-ter electrode is included in the external circuit of Method II toact as a cathode for measurement of corrosion currents. Areference electrode is employed for measurement of thecorrosion potential of the specimen.6.6.1 Method II, Procedure AThe count
49、er electrode andsaturated calomel electrode (SCE) shall be employed in accor-dance with Test Methods G5 and G61.NOTE 1For Method I, the fluid is contained within the sleeve. ForMethod II, the device should be submerged in an electrolyte while thecontact area between the top of the head and the loading apparatus is notexposed to the fluid. A counter electrode is placed in the same bath.FIG. 1 Sketch of a Coupon Style of Test SpecimenNOTE 1The cathode sheet surrounds, but does not make contact withthe device being tested. For Procedure A, the counter electrod
