216 JOHN C. KOCH 



3. The model of the femur on which the analysis was made 

 was of such a shape that the large mass comprising the greater 

 trochanter was entirely omitted. 



5. The mathematical analysis of the model, although strictly 

 correct for the model, can not be accepted as holding true for the 



-K/l 



[Fig. 13 Culmann's model of a Faii-bairn crane, with the lines of^internal 

 stress computed for a load of 30 kilos as shown. 



femur which has a decidedly different shape from that of the 

 assumed model. 



6. The quantitative relations between the load and the areas 

 of the cross section of the femur have not been determined. 



I believe that the foregoing objections are largely responsible 

 for the rejection of Wolff's theories by some investigators and 



