RESEARCH AND EDUCATION

The effect of the coefficient of friction and tightening speed on

the preload induced at the dental implant complex with the
finite element method
Haddad Arabi Bulaqi, MSc,a Mahmoud Mousavi Mashhadi, PhD,b Farideh Geramipanah, DDS, MS,c
Hamed Safari, DDS, MS,d and Mojgan Paknejad, DDS, MSe

INTRODUCTION ABSTRACT
One of the most important Statement of problem. To prevent screw loosening, a clear understanding of the factors influ-
factors in the survival and encing secure preload is necessary.
success of dental implants is Purpose. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of coefficient of friction and
their biomechanical properties. tightening speed on screw tightening based on energy distribution method with exact geometric
Problems with single tooth modeling and finite element analysis.
implants include screw joint Material and methods. To simulate the proper boundary conditions of the screw tightening
instability, screw loosening, process, the supporting bone of an implant was considered. The exact geometry of the implant
and fracture as the result complex, including the Straumann dental implant, direct crown attachment, and abutment screw
of fatigue. 1-3
Clinically, screw were modeled with Solidworks software. Abutment screw/implant and implant/bone interfaces
loosening is more critical in were designed as spiral thread helixes. The screw-tightening process was simulated with Abaqus
software, and to achieve the target torque, an angular displacement was applied to the
cemented restoration because
abutment screw head at different coefficients of friction and tightening speeds. The values of
the intact removal of the crown torque, preload, energy distribution, elastic energy, and efficiency were obtained at the target
is problematic in many patients. torque of 35 Ncm. Additionally, the torque distribution ratio and preload simulated values were
Additionally, crown loosening compared to theoretically predicted values.
may create oblique forces at the Results. Upon reducing the coefficient of friction and enhancing the tightening speed, the angle of
implant-abutment connection.4 turn increased at the target torque. As the angle of turn increased, the elastic energy and preload
Abutment screw loosening also increased. Additionally, by increasing the coefficient of friction, the frictional dissipation energy
was reported in 7% of im- increased but the efficiency decreased, whereas the increase in tightening speed insignificantly
plants restored as single molar affected efficiency.
or premolar crowns.5 Also, Conclusion. The results of this study indicate that the coefficient of friction is the most influential factor
screw loosening and implant on efficiency. Increasing the tightening speed lowered the response rate to the frictional resistance,
abutment hexagonal rotational thus diminishing the coefficient of friction and slightly increasing the preload. Increasing the tightening
misfit appear to be directly speed has the same result as reducing the coefficient of friction. (J Prosthet Dent 2015;-:---)
correlated.6 Jemt et al7 ob-
served that the prevalence of screw loosening in the first Bickford9 described the screw loosening process as
year of function was 43%. In another study, 26% of these
8
occurring in 2 steps. First, external loads such as masti-
screws needed to be retightened within the first year. cation may erode the preload in the screw joint by

a
Graduate student, Department of Mechanical Engineering, School of Mechanics, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
b
Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, School of Mechanics, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
c
Associate Professor, Implant Research Center, Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
d
Assistant Professor, Department of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, Qom University of Medical Sciences, Qom, Iran.
e
Associate Professor, Dental Research Center, Department of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY 1

2 Volume
Clinical Implications
During the clinical assembly of implant compo-
nents, understanding the effect of the coefficient of
friction and tightening speed on preload might
improve the stability of joint surface characteristics
and tightening speed. This could reduce the inci-
dence of screw loosening. Therefore, the use of
electronic or powered torque controller to control
the speed of tightening might be useful.
producing vibration and micromovement. Second, the
preload falls below a critical value so that the external
forces and vibrations cause the mating threads to turn or
“back off.” Interface parameters have an important role
in screw loosening.10 These factors include tightening
torque,11 functional load,12 preload or clamping force,12
thread embedment or relaxation,13 and misfit.14
The preload created in the implant complex is
dependent on the tightening torque, modulus of elas-
ticity of materials, coefficient of friction of contact sur-
faces,12 speed of tightening, lubrication, component
fitness,13 and screw design parameters,15 such as taper
angle, contact length, inner and outer diameters of the
members, and depth of insertion. Friction and preload
are inversely correlated so that with decreasing friction,
preload increases.16 Additionally, the manufacturing
process influences the coefficient of friction. Other in-
fluential factors include metallurgical properties, design,
quality of surface finish, quantity of wet or dry lubricant,
and tightening speed.17,18 The coefficient of friction is
enhanced by increasing the material hardness and sur-
face roughness, and reduced by lubrication (dry and wet)
and tightening speed.17 The humid medium reduces the
resistive frictional force by eliminating the shear force.4
Likewise, the sliding speed has an inverse proportional
relationship with the coefficient of friction.19 Burwell
et al20 suggested reducing the frictional force to increase
the sliding speed.
According to first law of thermodynamics, tightening
the threaded fasteners is essentially an energy transfer
process, wherein the total energy (work done by torque =
torque × angular displacement) is converted to 3 forms of
energy: kinetic, elastic, and frictional dissipation at the
total duration of the fasteners tightening process. The
target torque applied to the implant complex is mostly
absorbed as conical head friction, thread friction, and
preload. Preload is used to develop the clamping force
that holds the components together.18,21-23
Budynas and Nisbett24 presented uniform pressure
and uniform wear theories for calculating the torque in
the conical region. For d/D (diameter ratio) > 0.6, both
these theories give the same result. In the uniform
pressure theory, which is highly applicable for the new
THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY
- Issue -
conical surface, the pressure distribution in the radial
direction is uniform at the conical surface. Budynas and
Nisbett24 offered equation (1) to determine the frictional
resistance of conical torque ðTc Þ and equation (2) to
determine the frictional resistance of thread torque ðTth Þ
(according to the pressure uniform theory). Wrench tor-
que ðTw Þ is the sum of conical and thread torque;
equation (3).
m D3 −d3
Tc = × ×F=Kc ×F (1)
3 sin b D2 −d2
dm L+ðm×p×dm ×sec aÞ
Tth = × ×F=Kth ×F (2)
2 ðp×dm Þ−ðm×L×sec aÞ
Tw =Tc +Tth =½Kc +Kth $×F (3)
Tc Kc
Tc−w = = (4)
Tw Kc +Kth
Tw 35
P= = (5)
Kc +Kth Kc +Kth
where Tc−w is the ratio of conical torque to the wrench
torque; F is the preload created in the screw, P is the
preload at the recommended torque of 35 Ncm, m is the
coefficient of friction in the threads and conical head, d
is the inner head friction diameter, D is the outer head
friction diameter, b is the cone angle, a is the half angle
of the thread, L is the pitch, and dm is the pitch
diameter. The geometric parameters are presented in
Figure 1.
Cantwell et al13 stated that the angle of rotation in the
applied torque of 12, 20, and 32 Ncm increased by 73%,
76%, and 62%, respectively, in gold-coated titanium
abutments. In another study, Lang et al23 observed that
gold-coated abutment screws can gain more preload
than ordinary noncoated screws by obtaining lower shear
strength. The increase in preload was 24%, 24%, and
26% in the applied torque of 12 Ncm, 20 Ncm, and 32
Ncm, respectively.23 Nigro et al4 suggested that lubri-
cating abutment screws with saliva may reduce abutment
screw loosening. In a study conducted by Stüker et al,25
the generated preloads on gold screws (dry lubricant)
were 3 times greater than on titanium screws. In a finite
element analysis study, Jorn et al12 indicated that the
friction coefficient has a major influence on preload. In an
experimental study, Sayed et al26 also found that by
increasing the screw tightening speed in lubricated plain
and zinc coated fasteners, the nut factor values and
Bulaqi et al
- 2015
D
Wrench
zone
d 3-dimensional model of the bone, wherein the cortical
Conical
zone
β
dm
L
Thread
zone
2α
Figure 1. Geometric parameters of implant complex. d=2:015 mm;
D=2:6 mm; a=2b= p=6 radian; L=0:4 mm; dm =1:66 mm.
coefficient of friction decreased slightly. Work by Oliver
et al16 found that as the screw tightening speed
increased, the thread and underhead coefficient of fric-
tion decreased for lubricated and unlubricated fasteners,
but the preload force increased.
Although friction and tightening speed are both
important interacting factors influencing the preload,
most investigations have only focused on friction, dis-
regarding the effect of tightening speed. These studies
are mainly experimental and have investigated the effect
of surface characteristics and tightening speed on the
coefficient of friction.13,16,23,25,26 The experimental
methods are time consuming and costly. Additionally,
stress-strain and the force induced in the surrounding
bone and implant complex have rarely been calculated
precisely; therefore, the finite element approach was used
in this investigation. The finite element method (FEM) is
advantageous because it provides accurate, reliable in-
formation, as well as a precise representation of complex
geometries and the internal state of stress and other
mechanical quantities. However, FEM is approximate,
and, although the obtained results should be considered
qualitative, they can be useful in studying various pa-
rameters and in further characterization of the problem.
Thus FEM provides an appropriate comparison of the
quality of stress distribution within the implant complex.
Bulaqi et al
3
In this study, an attempt is made to investigate the effect
of coefficient of friction and tightening speed on preload/
clamping from the energy viewpoint.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
For a simulation with proper boundary conditions of the
screw tightening process, the bone surrounding the
implant was considered. A cone beam computed to-
mography image of a mandible was used to construct a
and trabecular areas were separated. Then, a computer-
aided design file was created by reverse engineering
methods with Solidworks software (Dassault Systèmes).
To simulate the tightening process of the abutment
screw within the implant complex, the exact geometry of
the components was obtained by microscope projection
to allow the resulting clamping and preload force to be
investigated within the complex. A 4.18 mm Straumann
dental implant ITI (SLA 043.031S; Institute Straumann),
direct crown attachment (048.642; RN SynOcta gold
abutment), and abutment screw (048.356; SynOcta basal
screw) were chosen as the standard model, and the
manufacturer’s recommended torque of 35 Ncm was used.
The inner surfaces of the bone and implant bore were
geometrically modeled with a continuous spiral threaded
bore, and the outer surfaces of the abutment screw and
implant were geometrically modeled with a continuous
spiral threaded helix. The implant thread pitch was
1.25 mm, and abutment screw thread pitch was 0.4 mm.
Tangential behavior and contact interfaces with a specific
coefficient of friction were defined for the contacting
reciprocal interfaces. Four coefficients of friction (m) of
0.1, 0.12, 0.16, and 0.20 were assumed in order to
compare the influence of qualitative and quantitative
characteristics of the surface.27,28 Normal behavior was
modeled as hard contact. The implant complex was in-
serted into the sectioned mandibular bone, upon which
the boundary conditions were applied. Because complete
osseointegration was considered, the bone-implant in-
terface was defined as “tie contact.” The implant complex
was assembled within the bone. A “snug tight” condition
between the abutment screw-abutment and abutment
screw-implant were provided so that the initial torque
was zero (Fig. 2).9
Isotropic and homogeneous materials were applied to
the modeling. The mechanical behavior of implant
component material was considered in elastic and plastic
regions. Additionally, the mechanical properties of the
surrounding bone were only considered in the linear
elastic region. The mechanical properties of the materials
were obtained from the manufacturer specifications and
the literature29 and are presented in Table 1.
Abaqus 6.11 software (Dassault Systèmes Simulia
Corp) was used to perform explicit dynamic simulations.
THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY
4 Volume - Issue -

Figure 3. Finite element models. A, Fixture. B, Abutment. C, Abutment

screw.

Figure 2. Three-dimensional solid model of implant complex assembled

within bone. 40

.20
35

0
2, =
6,
Table 1. Mechanical properties of materials simulated

0.1
0.1 oF
30

C
Young
Torque (Ncm)

Material modulus Poisson Density Strength Elongation 25

0,
component (GPa) ratio Density(g/cm3) (MPa) (%) 0.1
Gold abutment* 136 0.37 17.5 765 10 min 20
Titanium grade 4* 110 0.34 4.5 550 15 min
29
15
Cortical bone 13.7 0.3 3 190 2 max
Trabecular bone 29
1.37 0.3 3 10 2 max 10 SoT = 15 rpm
*Manufacturer’s specifications. SoT = 30 rpm
5

Table 2. Number of tetrahedral elements for each part in model
Part
Implant (fixture)
Abutment screw
Abutment
Cortical bone
Trabecular bone
An explicit element library and free meshing technique
with linear geometric order were applied to generate
tetrahedral elements. The number of elements for each
of the models are listed in Table 2, and Figure 3 shows
the meshed models of fixture, abutment screw, and
abutment.
Upon a complete turn around its axis, the abutment
screw displaces one pitch along the axis. Torque is
created by the resultant rotational resistance. Clamping
force and preload are induced by the resistance against
the axial displacement. Preload manifests as the elon-
gation in the abutment screw. In order to achieve the
recommended torque in this single-step simulation,
angular displacement was applied to the head of the
abutment screw at speeds of tightening of 15 and 30
rotations per minute (rpm) and under different frictional
conditions.
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Number of Elements Angle (radian)
78 774
Figure 4. Wrench torque values with respect to angle of turn. SoT: Speed
32 303
of tightening.
24 925
39 700
55 947
The amounts of wrench torque in terms of the angle
of turn were investigated under different frictional con-
ditions and rotational speeds. To validate the obtained
data, the predicted and simulated ratio of conical torque
to wrench torque and preload were compared. Finally,
the energy distribution and the transfer ratio of the total
energy to the frictional dissipation, elastic, and kinetic
energies were derived, and the efficiency and amount of
elastic energy were obtained under different frictional
conditions.
RESULTS
The wrench torque-angle curve is shown in Figure 4 at
various frictional conditions and rotational speeds. The
values of turn angle and conical torque at the target
torque are listed in Table 3. Additionally, Figure 5A
compares the simulated and predicted values of conical
to wrench torque ratio ðTc−w ; equation [4]), Figure 5B
compares simulated and predicted values of preload at

THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY Bulaqi et al

- 2015 5

Table 3. Turn angle and conical torque values at target torque for each Table 4. Simulated and predicted values of conical to wrench torque
coefficient of friction and speed of tightening ratio and preload for each coefficient of friction and speed of tightening
Angle (radian) Conical Torque (Ncm) Ratio of Tc to Tw ðTc−w Þ Preload (N)
Coefficient
of Friction 15 rpm 30 rpm 15 rpm 30 rpm Simulated Simulated
Coefficient
0.10 0.47 0.54 26.04 25.51 of Friction 15 rpm 30 rpm Predicted 15 rpm 30 rpm Predicted
0.12 0.39 0.47 26.39 25.97 0.10 0.744 0.729 0.735 574 593 577
0.16 0.30 0.37 27.77 26.50 0.12 0.754 0.742 0.748 489. 504 488
0.20 0.24 0.31 27.09 26.88 0.16 0.765 0.757 0.764 377 393 375
0.20 0.774 0.768 0.774 312 320 304

0.9
1
Ratio of Tconical to Twrench

0.75

0.8
0.6

Energy Ratio
0.45 0.6 Kin/Tot energy
Equation (4) Fri/Tot energy
0.3
Tightening speed = 30 rpm 0.4 Ela/Tot energy
0.15 Tightening speed = 15 rpm
0.2
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Coefficient of Friction A 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Angle (radian) A
750
Equation (5) 1
Tightening speed = 30 rpm
600
Tightening speed = 15 rpm 0.8
Preload (N)

Energy Ratio

450 0.6
(CoF, SoT) = (0.20, 15)
(CoF, SoT) = (0.12, 15)
300 0.4
(CoF, SoT) = (0.20, 30)
(CoF, SoT) = (0.12, 30)
0.2
150
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Coefficient of Friction B 0
Figure 5. Comparison of predicted and simulated values. A, Conical to 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
wrench torque ratio. B, Preload. Angle (radian) B
Figure 6. A, Transfer energy distribution (CoF=0.12, SoT=30 rpm). B,
the target torque (equation [4]), and their values at Ratio of frictional dissipation to total energy. CoF: Coefficient of friction;
SoT: Speed of tightening.
different frictional conditions and rotational speeds are
presented in Table 4.
was compared at the coefficients of friction of 0.12 and
Figure 6A shows the ratio of elastic, kinetic, and
0.2 and at tightening speeds of 15 and 30 rpm. The values
frictional dissipation energies to the total energy (m=0:12,
of these ratios, efficiency, total energy, and elastic energy
SoT=30 rpm). At the beginning of the screw tightening
at the recommended torque are reported in Table 5.
process, the ratio of kinetic energy to the total energy
(Kin/Tot) equaled 1 unit, and the ratio of frictional
DISCUSSION
dissipation and elastic energy to the total energy (Fri/Tot
and Ela/Tot) was zero. The proportional values of energy Screw retained components are used to convert torque to
ratios at recommended torque were 0.2% (Kin/Tot), tension. Upon turning an abutment screw with a wrench,
88.75% (Fri/Tot), and 11.05% (Ela/Tot). In Figure 6B, the the external work (total energy) is applied on the implant
ratio of frictional dissipation energy to the total energy complex. During the screw tightening process, this

Bulaqi et al THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY

6 Volume
Table 5. Energy and efficiency values for different coefficients of friction
and speed of tightening
Coefficient of Fri/Tot Target Angle
Friction, Speed Energy Efficiency Torque of Turn
of Tightening (%) (%) (Ncm) (radian)
(0.12, 15) 88.93 10.82 35 0.39
(0.20, 15) 90.85 8.65 35 0.24
(0.12, 30) 88.75 11.05 35 0.47
(0.20, 30) 90.72 8.88 35 0.31
energy is converted into kinetic, frictional dissipation,
and elastic energies, which are distributed differently
during the process.9,21 Geometric parameters, surface
quality, and frictional response are the key factors influ-
encing these distributions. For a specific geometry of the
implant complex, the geometric parameters are constant,
but the coefficient of friction could be varied by dry and
wet lubrication and also tightening speed.4,13,15-17,19 At
the start of the turning process, the kinetic energy was
equal to the total energy, and at the end of process (at
target torque), the amount of kinetic energy was almost
zero (Fig. 6A).
Frictional dissipation energy is the result of energy
dissipation in the conical and thread zones.9,18,23 The
measured torque is the result of the rotational resistance
force that is induced by the coefficient of friction in these
2 zones.
Elastic energy is stored in the form of elastic defor-
mation or preload in the abutment screw and provides
the holding power to clamp the parts together. This
energy is directly related to the square root of preload.9,30
By defining efficiency as the ratio of elastic energy (useful
energy) to total energy, preload can be increased by
reducing the frictional dissipation energy as a result of
decreasing the coefficient of friction. Because most of the
total energy is converted into heat through the frictional
dissipation energy,9 efficiency is estimated to be less than
10% at most mechanical complexes31; the kinetic energy
at the recommended torque is negligible.
According to the modern theory of friction, between
dry metal surfaces or with a dry lubricant, local minute
welds occur at the rough peaks of surfaces in contact
with each other. In other words, adhesion and sliding
friction force can limit the motion between the 2 sur-
faces.20 Burwell et al20 presented 2 methods of studying
the effects of speed on the frictional force at a dry metal
surface: (1) increase of the shear strain rate at the local of
welding junctions and (2) the length of required time for
a junction of full strength to be formed. Additionally,
according to hydrodynamic theory for a wet friction
condition, by increasing the speed, the contact pressure
between the surfaces increases and thus film thickness
between these surfaces increases, thereby reducing the
coefficient of friction.24
The effect of coefficient of friction and tightening
speed can be assessed in 3 ways: torque-angle
THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY
- Issue -
relationship, ratio of conical torque to wrench torque
ðTc−w ), and energy distribution. In accordance with the
Total Elastic torque-angle curve shown in Figure 4, as the coefficient
Energy Energy
(Ncm) (Ncm) of friction increases, the frictional force or the rotational
13.65 1.48 resistance force also increases, leading to a higher slope
8.4 0.73 of the curve. With the increase of the curve slope, the
16.45 1.82 target torque was achieved at a lower angle of turn
10.85 0.96 (Table 3).13
By increasing the tightening speed, the length of
required time for junction deformation at a specific angle
of turn was reduced.20 In other words, by decreasing the
response rate to the frictional resistance, the friction force
and rotational resistance force decrease, leading to a
lower torque-angle curve slope. To achieve the target
torque, such a reduction leads to greater angular rotation
as a result of greater tightening speed (Table 3).16
The created torque within the conical zone has a
different distribution that is dependent on geometric
parameters such as height and angle of the cone.13,15 The
data presented in Table 3 imply that for a cone angle of
15 degrees, the torque distribution is almost 75% for the
conical zone and 25% for the thread zone. Merz et al32
reported that these distributions for ITI implants with a
cone angle of 8 degrees were 91% for the conical zone
and 9% for the thread zone.32
The values predicted by Equation 4 show that by
decreasing the coefficient of friction, the ratio of Tc to Tw
decreased (Fig. 5A); this was confirmed by the simulated
data (Table 4). Considering that the increase of tight-
ening speed was accompanied by a decrease in the Tc−w
values, it can be concluded that increasing the tightening
speed has the same result as reducing the coefficient of
friction.16,19
According to the results predicted by Equation 5 and
the simulated data in Figure 5B, the coefficient of friction
and preload are inversely correlated.12,16,19 Additionally,
the simulated data further indicate that as the tightening
speed increases, the preload also increases. As a result,
the tightening speed and preload are directly related, in
that with an increase in speed, the coefficient of friction
decreases.4,23,25 By comparing the difference of gained
preload under various frictional conditions, it can be
concluded that the tightening speed effect increased at
lower coefficient of friction (Table 4).16,19
A better understanding of the screw tightening pro-
cess can be achieved through the transferred energy
distribution (Fig. 6A). The area under the torque-angle
curve is proportional to the total energy required to
tighten the fastener. By multiplying the target torque by
the turn angle, the required total energy for tightening
can be approximately calculated. The ratio of frictional
dissipation energy to total energy was enhanced at the
target torque by increasing the coefficient of friction,
thereby decreasing efficiency (Table 5), whereas this
ratio decreased for a specific angle of turn because of the
Bulaqi et al
- 2015
smaller area under the torque-angle curve. Tightening
speed has a negligible effect on efficiency; however, if
increased, the elastic energy and thus preload would also
increase (Fig. 6B).
CONCLUSION
Within the limitations of this FEM analysis, decreasing
the coefficient of friction resulted in decreased frictional
dissipation energy and a subsequent increase in turn
angle, thus increasing the efficiency enhanced preload
and elastic energy. Torque distribution at the conical
zone was approximately 75% and at the thread zone
approximately 25%. By increasing the tightening speed at
a specific turn angle, the length of required time for a
junction of full strength to form decreased, leading to a
subsequent decrease in the coefficient of friction and
friction force. Higher tightening speed showed no sig-
nificant effect on efficiency. However, as the elastic en-
ergy increased, the preload also increased. Increasing the
tightening speed has the same result as reducing the
coefficient of friction. To achieve the specified target
torque, speed of tightening has more of an effect at a
lower coefficient of friction. Increasing the tightening
speed and reducing the coefficient of friction are 2
influencing factors in enhancing preload and thus
improving stability and preventing screw loosening.
REFERENCES
1. Worthington P, Bolender CL, Taylor TD. The Swedish system of osseointe-
grated implants: problems and complications encountered during a 4-year
trial period. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1987;2:77-84.
2. Zarb GA, Schmitt A. The longitudinal clinical effectiveness of osseointegrated
dental implants: the Toronto study. Part III: Problems and complications
encountered. J Prosthet Dent 1990;64:185-94.
3. Glantz PO, Rangert B, Svensson A, Stafford GD, Arnvidarson B, Randow K,
et al. On clinical loading of osseointegrated implants. A methodological and
clinical study. Clin Oral Implants Res 1993;4:99-105.
4. Nigro F, Sendyk CL, Francischone CE Jr, Francischone CE. Removal torque
of zirconia abutment screws under dry and wet conditions. Braz Dent J
2010;21:225-8.
5. Simon RL. Single implant-supported molar and premolar crowns: a ten-year
retrospective clinical report. J Prosthet Dent 2003;90:517-21.
6. Binon PP. The effect of implant/abutment hexagonal misfit on screw joint
stability. The International journal of prosthodontics 1996;9:149-60.
7. Jemt T, Lekholm U, Grondahl K. 3-year followup study of early single
implant restorations ad modum Branemark. Int J Periodontics Restorative
Dent 1990;10:340-9.
8. Jemt T, Laney WR, Harris D, Henry PJ, Krogh PH Jr, Polizzi G, et al.
Osseointegrated implants for single tooth replacement: a 1-year report from a
multicenter prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991;6:29-36.
9. Bickford JH. An introduction to the design and behavior of bolted joints. 3rd
ed. New York: Marcel Dekker; 1995. p. 515-64.
10. Aboyoussef H, Weiner S, Ehrenberg D. Effect of an antirotation resistance
form on screw loosening for single implant-supported crowns. J Prosthet
Dent 2000;83:450-5.
Bulaqi et al
7
11. Jaarda MJ, Razzoog ME, Gratton DG. Effect of preload torque on the
ultimate tensile strength of implant prosthetic retaining screws. Implant Dent
1994;3:17-21.
12. Jorn D, Kohorst P, Besdo S, Rucker M, Stiesch M, Borchers L. Influence of
lubricant on screw preload and stresses in a finite element model for a dental
implant. J Prosthet Dent 2014.
13. Cantwell A, Hobkirk JA. Preload loss in gold prosthesis-retaining screws as a
function of time. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004;19:124-32.
14. Farina AP, Spazzin AO, Consani RL, Mesquita MF. Screw joint stability after
the application of retorque in implant-supported dentures under simulated
masticatory conditions. J Prosthet Dent 2014;111:499-504.
15. Bozkaya D, Muftu S. Mechanics of the taper integrated screwed-in (TIS)
abutments used in dental implants. J Biomech 2005;38:87-97.
16. Oliver M, Jain V. Effect of tightening speed on thread and
under-head coefficient of friction. Journal of ASTM International 2006;3:
45-52.
17. Burguete RL, Johns RB, King T, Patterson EA. Tightening characteristics
for screwed joints in osseointegrated dental implants. J Prosthet Dent
1994;71:592-9.
18. Barbosa GS, Silva-Neto JP, Simamoto-Junior PC, Neves FD, Mattos Mda G,
Ribeiro RF. Evaluation of screw loosening on new abutment screws and after
successive tightening. Braz Dent J 2011;22:51-5.
19. Rabinowicz E. Friction and wear of materials. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley; 1995.
20. Burwell JT, Rabinowicz E. The nature of the coefficient of friction. J Appl Phys
1953;24:136-9.
21. Breeding LC, Dixon DL, Nelson EW, Tietge JD. Torque required to loosen
single-tooth implant abutment screws before and after simulated function.
International J Prosthodont 1993;6:435-9.
22. Tzenakis GK, Nagy WW, Fournelle RA, Dhuru VB. The effect of repeated
torque and salivary contamination on the preload of slotted gold implant
prosthetic screws. J Prosthet Dent 2002;88:183-91.
23. Lang LA, Kang B, Wang RF, Lang BR. Finite element analysis to determine
implant preload. J Prosthet Dent 2003;90:539-46.
24. Budynas RG, Nisbett JK. Shigley’s mechanical engineering design. 9th ed.
New York: McGraw-Hill; 2011. p. 845-55.
25. Stüker RA, Teixeira ER, Beck JC, da Costa NP. Preload and torque removal
evaluation of three different abutment screws for single standing implant
restorations. J Appl Oral Sci 2008;16:55-8.
26. Sayed A, Nassar SG, Ramanathan M. Effect of tightening speed on the
torque-tension and wear pattern in bolted connections. J Press Vessel
Technol 2006;129:426-40.
27. Haack JE, Sakaguchi RL, Sun T, Coffey JP. Elongation and preload stress
in dental implant abutment screws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant 1995;10:
529-36.
28. Bowden FP, Tabor D. The friction and lubrication of solids. Oxford New York:
Clarendon Press ; Oxford University Press; 2001.
29. Borchers L, Reichart P. Three-dimensional stress distribution around a
dental implant at different stages of interface development. J Dent Res
1983;62:155-9.
30. Beer FP. Mechanics of materials. 6th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2011. p. 694-9.
31. Cornwell JF. Some observation on friction in screw threads. Wear 1981;67:
329-39.
32. Merz BR, Hunenbart S, Belser UC. Mechanics of the implant-abutment
connection: an 8-degree taper compared to a butt joint connection. Int J Oral
Maxillofac Implant 2000;15:519-26.
Corresponding author:
Dr Mojgan Paknejad
Dental Research Center
Tehran University of Medical Sciences
North Amir-Abad, Tehran
IRAN
Email: mpaknejad@hotmail.com
Acknowledgments
The authors thank the Amirkabir University of Technology’s high-performance
computing research center (HPCRC) for computing support of this research.
Copyright © 2015 by the Editorial Council for The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry.
THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY