Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9290(98)00026-8
Title: Steady flow dynamics of prosthetic aortic heart valves: A comparative evaluation with PIV techniques
Authors: Lim, W.L. 
Chew, Y.T. 
Chew, T.C. 
Low, H.T. 
Keywords: Comparative analysis
Particle image velocimetry
Prosthetic heart valves
Reynolds stresses
Issue Date: May-1998
Source: Lim, W.L., Chew, Y.T., Chew, T.C., Low, H.T. (1998-05). Steady flow dynamics of prosthetic aortic heart valves: A comparative evaluation with PIV techniques. Journal of Biomechanics 31 (5) : 411-421. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9290(98)00026-8
Abstract: Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV), capable of providing full-field measurement of velocities and flow stresses, has become an invaluable tool in studying flow behaviour in prosthetic heart valves. This method was used to evaluate the performances of four prosthetic heart valves: a porcine bioprostheses, a caged ball valve, and two single leaflet tilting disc valves with different opening angles. Flow visualization techniques, combined with velocity vector fields and Reynolds stresses mappings in the aortic root obtained from PIV, and pressure measurements were used to give an overall picture of the flow field of the prosthetic heart valves under steady flow conditions. The porcine bioprostheses exhibited the highest pressure loss and Reynolds stresses of all the valves tested. This was mainly due to the reduction in orifice area caused by the valve mounting ring and the valve stents. For the tilting disc valves, a larger opening angle resulted in a smoother flow profile, and thus lower Reynolds stresses and pressure drops. The St. Vincent valve exhibited the lowest pressure drop and Reynolds stresses.
Source Title: Journal of Biomechanics
URI: http://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/58729
ISSN: 00219290
DOI: 10.1016/S0021-9290(98)00026-8
Appears in Collections:Staff Publications

Show full item record
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

36
checked on Dec 13, 2017

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

32
checked on Nov 16, 2017

Page view(s)

28
checked on Dec 16, 2017

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.