Checking the engine

Complete right femur

HFValid Pat001

Patient: HFValid Pat001
Modality: CT · University of Bologna
Source: Aldieri et al. (2025) · CC BY 4.0

Femur · finite element analysis

Loading the complete femur

Loading solved bone mesh…

Cut-away slices the bone facing you; scroll to zoom into the cut face.

Clinical metrics

Published fall model · SfePy solve

HFValid Pat001

Fracture risk · published HFValid model (ARF0)

Absolute risk of fracture at time 0 (ARF0) that the study authors' finite-element and falling model gives this femur

47%

47.1 %

ARF0 as published

The study authors' model estimate, not a personal probability: 4 of the 101 women fractured during the study's follow-up, while the median ARF0 was 44.3 %.

4 who fractured · 53.7–73.2 %

7.8 %median 44.3 %78.1 %

Higher than 56 of the 101 women in the study
A sideways fall would load this femur 2.2–3.2× its strength

Standing-load stress ratio (15.8 ÷ assumed 150 MPa): 10.6%
Peak stress (nodal average): 15.8MPa
Young’s modulus (assumed): 10.0GPa
Bone volume: 408.1cm³

ARF0, in the dataset README's words: “The FE model was also coupled with a multiscale falling model to estimate the Absolute Risk of Fracture at time 0 (ARF0), as reported in [Bhattacharya2019].” Aldieri et al. (2025), HFValid, CC BY 4.0. The strength a fall is set against is the femur's minimum sidefall strength (MSF) from the same model; fall forces from van den Kroonenberg et al. 1995.

The stress ratio is this femur's highest nodal-averaged stress under 800 N standing load (15.8 MPa, the top of the colour scale; single-element peak 42.0 MPa) against an assumed bone strength of 150 MPa. Research data, not a diagnosis.

AI fracture risk analysis

Sideways fall: 2.2–3.2× this femur's strength

HFValid MSF against published fall forces · Pat001

For a care team: where a resident's femur would sit among the study's 101 women, shown here for HFValid subject Pat001. Research data, not a diagnosis or medical advice.

Analysing this femur's published fracture risk…

In plain words

Explaining the femur's results in plain words…

All numbers and method

Live engine run

Solving

Engine self-test: sample_bone.nii.gz is a small synthetic test volume, not the reference femur. These are the Rainbone engine's results for that input.

Input file: sample_bone.nii.gz
API: rainbone.health
History: Awaiting a completed result

The API maps CT values to stiffness with a simple linear rule and places the supports and the load by the scan's extent, not by anatomy. Assumed material, no clinical validation. Not a medical device.

Rainbone is a research prototype. Simulations use assumed material properties and are not validated for clinical diagnosis or treatment decisions.

Complete right femur

Femur · finite element analysis

Fracture risk (ARF0)

Study range and median

Higher than 56 of the 101 women

Women who fractured

Sideways fall load

Standing-load stress ratio

Peak stress (nodal average)

Young’s modulus (assumed)

Bone volume

Sideways fall: 2.2–3.2× this femur's strength

In plain words