Tissue mechanics / Phase 2 · Physical time
Brain Tissue Mechanics Laboratory
Pull, compress, shear and indent a three-dimensional tissue sample. Explore a bonded implant in a pre-existing tract.
Study-specific viscoelastic mechanics, not an injury predictor. Mixed macrocell pressure, three nonlinear laws and finite-strain material history. Published presets include poor fits in some loading modes; read the evidence panel. No pia rupture or cutting.
Only converged material states enter the time history. Optimizer iterations are not tissue motion in physical time.
Forces and stress are predictions of this discretized example, not validated implantation measurements.
What this release does—and does not—establish
The scene is driven by volumetric mechanics, not a spring animation. Analytical energy, force-gradient, rigid-motion, affine-patch and geometry tests check the numerical implementation. The status panel reports optimization convergence, positive-volume checks and the actual compute time on this device. The worker stops a solve at a 25-second compute budget; loading external anatomy is separate.
Indentation is a finite spherical contact problem sampled at surface nodes. The micromotion experiment prescribes a perfectly bonded, rigid cuboid inside an already formed tract. It has no cutting law, pia layer, frictional sliding, electrode bending or insertion-force prediction. Sharp-corner peak stresses require refinement and must not be used as injury thresholds.
Cellular tubes are approximations of measured H01 skeleton radii, not segmented membrane surfaces. Their passive deformation does not model cell-specific stiffness, relative sliding, fluid pressure, adhesion or injury. Dense EM geometry, independently calibrated cellular properties and puncture/contact validation remain separate next stages.