R&D · Lab · Concept exploration
Most of my case work is a static plate matched to a defect. This asks a different question: what does it take to design a joint that has to move, bear load, and stay anchored inside the body?
This one started from a question, not a patient case: after the kind of reconstruction I do in my regular case work, what happens to a joint that's actually supposed to move - like the jaw? A cranial plate just has to sit still and integrate. A joint has to articulate, carry load through that articulation, and still anchor securely to bone. This is my attempt at designing for that - modelled loosely on the temporomandibular joint, with a ball head that seats into the socket near the temporal bone, an internal lattice through the stem for bone integration, and a screw-fixed footplate along the mandible.
This is a personal design exploration, not a delivered or clinically reviewed device. It hasn't gone through biomechanical testing, material validation, or surgical review. I'm sharing it because the process of working through it taught me a lot about designing for movement rather than just fit - not as a claim that it's ready for use.
How it's built
The mechanism is one continuous piece: a polished ball head for articulation, a stem with an internal lattice structure for bone ingrowth, and a perforated footplate for fixation into the mandible.
Fit on anatomy
The joint modelled against a full skull, from the angle it sits at through to how it reads from the front, top, and underneath.
Close detail
The joint surface and the fixation footplate are the two points doing the most mechanical work, so both got extra attention.
The case work is about matching an exact anatomy. This was about learning what changes when the part also has to move.
I'm always interested in harder mechanical problems in biomedical design, even the ones without a patient attached yet. Reach out if you'd like to talk through it.
Send a message