Literature DB >> 12169029

Elastic flexural properties of multistranded stainless steel versus conventional nickel titanium archwires.

Brian K Rucker1, Robert P Kusy.   

Abstract

Based on a recent investigation that modeled the elastic properties (ie, strength, stiffness and range) of multistranded wires made from linearly elastic materials, three-stranded (triple) and six-stranded coaxial (coax) stainless steel (SS) wires were compared to single-stranded (single) SS and conventional nickel titanium (NiTi) leveling wires. To measure Young's modulus of elasticity (E), flexural tests were performed with an Instron mechanical testing machine in a three-point bending arrangement having a span length of 8.9 mm or 12.5 mm. A strong correlation between wire stiffness and the area moment of inertia demonstrated that strand interaction was negligible at low activations and that E = 199 GPa was constant even for the heavily drawn coax strands. Using the Instron with an extensometer, the 0.1% yield strengths (sigma(YS)) of the single SS wires and the straight inner strands within the coax wires were tested. The ratio of the sigma(YS) to the ultimate tensile strength averaged 0.81 for the single wires, 0.88 for the coax wires, and was subsequently assigned 0.85 for the triple wires. The average sigma(YS) values were 1.88, 1.83, and 1.78 GPa for the single, triple, and coax SS wires, respectively. For each NiTi wire, both the sigma(YS) and the elastic limit (sigma(EL)) via cyclic loading were measured. The conventional NiTi wires displayed nonlinear elasticity, as the average sigma(EL) values (1.10 GPa) were 50% higher than the average sigma(YS) values (0.73 GPa). Compared to the elastic properties of the conventional NiTi wires, the triple and coax SS wires generally matched the stiffness, but had only one-third to one-half of the strength and range. Since the properties of strength and range are both proportional to sigma(YS), fabrication using alloys with enhanced sigma(YS) values would allow multistranded SS archwires to compete better against conventional NiTi products.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12169029     DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(2002)072<0302:EFPOMS>2.0.CO;2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Angle Orthod        ISSN: 0003-3219            Impact factor:   2.079


  8 in total

1.  Effect of archwire qualities and bracket designs on the force systems during leveling of malaligned teeth.

Authors:  W Perrey; A Konermann; L Keilig; S Reimann; A Jäger; C Bourauel
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 1.938

2.  Super-elasticity in vitro assessment of CuNiTi wires according to their Austenite finish temperature and the imposed displacement.

Authors:  Noémie Copelovici; Maï-Linh Tran; François Lefebvre; Pascal Laheurte; Delphine Wagner
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2022-05-01       Impact factor: 2.684

3.  Clinical variability in arch wires: a preliminary study evaluating mechanical and surface characteristics of two different sized rectangular stainless steel wires.

Authors:  Alessandro Vena; Jason Carey; Hisham Badawi
Journal:  Open Biomed Eng J       Date:  2007-08-03

4.  Alignment efficiency of superelastic coaxial nickel-titanium vs superelastic single-stranded nickel-titanium in relieving mandibular anterior crowding: a randomized controlled prospective study.

Authors:  Biju Sebastian
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2011-10-19       Impact factor: 2.079

5.  Efficiency, behavior, and clinical properties of superelastic NiTi versus multistranded stainless steel wires: a prospective clinical trial.

Authors:  Satpal S Sandhu; V Surendra Shetty; Subraya Mogra; Joseph Varghese; Jasleen Sandhu; Jagpreet S Sandhu
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2012-01-06       Impact factor: 2.079

6.  Torque expression capacity of 0.018 and 0.022 bracket slots by changing archwire material and cross section.

Authors:  Angela Arreghini; Luca Lombardo; Francesco Mollica; Giuseppe Siciliani
Journal:  Prog Orthod       Date:  2014-09-25       Impact factor: 2.750

7.  Comparison between fiber-reinforced polymers and stainless steel orthodontic retainers.

Authors:  Alessandra Lucchese; Maurizio Manuelli; Claudio Ciuffreda; Paolo Albertini; Enrico Gherlone; Letizia Perillo
Journal:  Korean J Orthod       Date:  2018-02-06       Impact factor: 1.372

8.  The Effect of Material Type and Location of an Orthodontic Retainer in Resisting Axial or Buccal Forces.

Authors:  Jaana Ohtonen; Lippo Lassila; Eija Säilynoja; Pekka K Vallittu
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2021-04-29       Impact factor: 3.623

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.