See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/315619126

Comparative Study of Endodontic Files with Various Cross Sections with Varying
Threads

Article  in  Advanced Science, Engineering and Medicine · January 2014

DOI: 10.1166/asem.2014.1454

CITATION READS
1 545

3 authors, including:

R. N. Khapre Chetana Makade

Shri Ramdeobaba College of Engineering and Management Nagpur vspm dental college and research institute
12 PUBLICATIONS   19 CITATIONS    22 PUBLICATIONS   210 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Finite Element Analysis and Comparison of Protaper and Hero Endodontic file Segments Subjected to Bending and Torsional Load View project

Case reports View project

All content following this page was uploaded by R. N. Khapre on 31 May 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Copyright © 2014 by American Scientific Publishers Advanced Science,
All rights reserved. Engineering and Medicine
Printed in the United States of America Vol. 6, pp. 1–6, 2014
(www.aspbs.com/asem)

Comparative Study of Endodontic Files with

Various Cross Sections with Varying Threads
R. Khapre1, ∗ , J. Sarve1 , and C. Makade2
1
Civil Engineering Department, Shri Ramdeobaba College of Engineering and Management,
Katol Road, Nagpur, 440022, Maharashtra, India
2
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, VSPM’s Dental College and Research Center,
Nagpur, 440019, Maharashtra, India

Finite element analysis (FEA) of endodontic files using ANSYS is presented in this study. A comparative study
of four endodontic file models having different cross sections with varying number of threads is carried out
to understand their behavior under torsional and bending loads. Linear elastic as well as non linear material
behavior is considered during the analysis. Various results are obtained in form of equivalent von-Mises stress,
torsional stiffness, support reactions and presented in from of contours and charts. The obtained results were
validated by comparing them with the analytical solution and results available in literature. Discussion is pre-
sented on suitability of cross section under bending and torsional loads and effect of increase in number of

ARTICLE
threads on flexibility of endodontic file.

KEYWORDS: Endodontic Files, Root Canal Treatment, Finite Element Method, Nitinol.

1. INTRODUCTION Berutti, et al.5 and Subramaniam, et al.6 presented a

In dentistry endodontic files are widely used in Root
Canal Treatment (RCT). The dentist drive these files
into complex anatomy of root canal system mainly for
cleaning and shaping of infected root canal after access
opening. To sustain the stresses generated during clean-
ing and shaping procedure these files requires a mate-
rial having high strength and high flexibility. New metal
alloys have been introduced as a part of the attempt to
improve the quality of endodontic files. The most promis-
ing alloy of this time is Nitinol, which is equiatomic alloy
of NiTi. It has a peculiar characteristic of ‘shape mem-
ory alloy,’ which provides very good elastic flexibility to
instruments.
Earlier, endodontic files were made from stainless steel
which provided required strength but not the flexibil-
ity, particularly for rotary endodontic. Literature review1
2
reveals that files made from NiTi are more flexible than
stainless steel. The flexibility of endodontic files not only
depends on the material but also on the geometry. There
are various NiTi files available that are made from different
cross sections. These files were analyzed and compared by
several researchers using finite element method3
4 based
software like ANSYS,5–7
10–14 ABAQUS.8
9
∗
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Email: khaprern@rknec.edu
Received: xx Xxxx xxxx
Accepted: xx Xxxx xxxx
comparative study of two NiTi endodontic root canal files
namely ProTaper and Profile. Detailed finite element anal-
ysis was presented on two file models by applying bend-
ing moments and torsion. Their study shows that ProFile
model is more elastic than ProTaper model. Montalvao and
Alcada7 presented comparison of two NiTi files namely
ProFile GT and ProFile GT Series X. Both files were made
from NiTi alloys but have slightly different stress strain
behavior as they were manufactured through different pro-
cess. Finite element analysis was carried out on two full
length file models of ProFile GT and ProFile GT X using
commercial software ANSYS. Both models were analyzed
for bending as well as torsion. Analysis proved that Pro-
File GT X file is more flexible than ProFile GT file.
Baek, et al.8 presented comparison of four NiTi file
having different geometric characteristics considering lin-
ear elastic behavior of NiTi. four different cross sections
namely triangle, s-rectangle, rectangle and square was used
to generate finite element models of endodontic files with
varying taper. Comparison of these files was carried out
based on values of torsional stiffness and equivalent von-
Mises stress obtained after application of angular rotation
on file models. It was concluded that the torsional stiffness
has higher value for files having less pitch and larger cross
sectional area. Lee, et al.9 carried out comparative study
of cyclic fatigue resistance of four files namely ProTaper,
HeroShaper, ProFile and Mtwo. Stress analysis was car-
ried out using Finite Element Method and fracture analysis

Adv. Sci. Eng. Med. 2014, Vol. 6, No. xx 2164-6627/2014/6/001/006 doi:10.1166/asem.2014.1454 1

 Comparative Study of Endodontic Files with Various Cross Sections with Varying Threads
using fatigue test and it was concluded that the higher cur-
vature generates higher stress in NiTi files which reduces
lifetime of endodontic files.
Khapre, et al.10 presented comparison of two NiTi files
namely ProFile and Twisted file models. Finite element
based ANSYS Workbench software was employed for the
analysis of segment of these files models for bending
and torsional loads. Study concluded that the Twisted file
model is more flexible than ProFile model. Rigidity curves
generated from transient finite element analysis was pre-
sented and discussed for both file models. Khapre, et al.11
presented a study on comparison of two NiTi endodontic
files namely Protaper and Twisted file. Finite element anal-
ysis was carried out using commercial software ANSYS
11.0 on full length file models subjected to lateral load
and displacement applied at the tip. It was reported that
the twisted file model shows greater displacement as com-
pared to ProTaper file model for same magnitude of load.
Load displacement curve was also presented that confirms
the Twisted file model is more flexible than the ProTaper
file model.
Khapre, et al.12
13 presented the comparison of ProFile
ARTICLE
file model with Twisted file model. The comparison was
based on finite element analysis of complete file models
analyzed in ANSYS bending loads only. Load displace-
ment curve proved that the Twisted file model is more
flexible than ProFile file model. The magnitude of maxi-
mum von-Mises stresses generated in Twisted file model
was found to be significantly higher than that of ProFile
file model. Khapre, et al.14 presented comparison of four
cross sections used by Beak, et al.8 Study was carried
out on segment of 1.8 mm length of file models having
constant cross section subjected to bending as well as tor-
sion, using finite element analysis. Moment rigidity curve
depicts that the s-rectangle cross section is most flexible
when subjected to torsional loads.
The present study aims at comparison of four cross
sections used by Baek, et al.8 and Khapre, et al.14 for
design of endodontic file systems based on their finite
element analysis. It also discusses the effect of variation
in number of threads in endodontic files on their behav-
ior under torsion and bending. Twelve finite file models
were created and analyzed using ANSYS and obtained
results inform of equivalent von-Mises stress distribution,
torsional stiffness and support reaction were presented and
compared.
2. NiTi CHARACTERISTICS
Figure 1 shows the stress–strain characteristics of NiTi.
As behavior of NiTi is highly non linear, the character-
istics curve of NiTi can be divided into three parts a–b,
b–c, c–d. In the first part (a–b), stress strain relationship
is linear and alloy is in a more stable crystalline phase.
This phase is called as austenitic phase. In the second part
(b–c), stress strain relationship is also linear but almost
2 Adv. Sci. Eng. Med., 6, 1–6, 2014
Khapre et al.
1600
Actual Stress Strain Curve
1200 Approximate Stress Strain Curve
Stress (MPa)
800
400
0
0 4 8 12 16 20
Strain (%)
Fig. 1. Stress–strain characteristics (actual and approximated) of NiTi.
horizontal. In this phase, very small stress produces large
strain that makes NiTi super elastic. This phase is known
as transition phase. In the third part (c–d) stress strain
relationship is highly non linear. This phase is called as
martensitic phase. It shows typical stress strain relation-
ship for alloy till breaking point, where gradual increase in
strain can be observed with increase in stress. Since NiTi
is highly flexible and can handle larger strains, this helps
in cleaning and shaping of the root canal of infected teeth.
While performing finite element analysis, the stress strain
behavior of NiTi can be approximated by three lines a–b,
b–c, c–d as shown in Figure 1. The Young’s modulus of
these three portions is 35,700 MPa, 860 MPa, and 11,600
MPa respectively. The approximate Poisson’s ratio of 0.3
was considered for NiTi during the analysis.
3. ANALYTICAL PROCEDURE AND
RESULTS
According to literature,15 When a cantilever beam of uni-
form cross section is subjected to rotation  at free end,
then reactive torsional moment of T = GJ /L is gener-
ated at fixed end.15 Similarly when a cantilever beam of
uniform cross section is subjected to displacement  at
free end, the reactive force of F = 3EI/L3 is generated
at fixed end.15 Considering these two equations, a sam-
ple beam of 1.0 mm diameter with 12.0 mm length was
analyzed by applying rotation of 20 and displacement of
1 mm at free end while the other end was kept fixed. Only
linear elastic behavior of NiTi was considered by taking
values of modulus of elasticity E = 35
700 MPa and Pois-
son’s ratio  = 03. Same cantilever beams are modeled
in finite element based software ANSYS and analyzed for
both linear elastic (E = 35
700 MPa and Poisson’s ratio
 = 03 and non linear (Fig. 1) behavior of NiTi. The
results obtained are validated by comparing them with ana-
lytical results in Table I. Analytical results match well
with the results obtained from ANSYS considering lin-
ear elastic behavior of NiTi. The magnitude of torsional
moment and support reaction is nearly half when non lin-
ear behavior is incorporated. This difference is due to
highly non linear behavior of NiTi. As analytical method
uses only linear behavior of material therefore it is difficult
Khapre et al. Comparative Study of Endodontic Files with Various Cross Sections with Varying Threads

Table I. Validation of results obtained from ANSYS with analytical Table II. Details of geometry and mesh for twelve file models.
results.
Cross C/S area No. of Volume
ANSYS ANSYS section at tip (mm2 ) threads (mm3 ) Nodes Elements
Loading Analytical (linear) (non linear)
s-rectangle 0.3247 5 1.7102 1521 200

Rotation of 20 (N -mm) T = 3921 T = 39528 T = 1827 10 1.7392 2653 384
Displacement of 1 mm (N ) R = 3042 R = 3073 R = 1537 15 1.7465 3268 474
Rectangle 0.4330 5 2.2592 1521 200
10 2.3135 1941 256
15 2.4160 2301 304
to validate results obtained from ANSYS considering non
Square 0.5000 5 2.5124 1371 180
linear behavior of NiTi. 10 2.6065 1521 200
15 2.673 1671 220
Triangle 0.3248 5 1.4043 1051 135
4. FEA OF ENDODONTIC FILES 10 1.4944 1189 153
The file models were generated with 5, 10 and 15 threads 15 1.5235 1350 174
considering four different cross sections shown in Figure 2.
The length of file was considered as 12 mm and constant
taper of 5.83% was considered by taking tip and edge
stiffness as compared with non linear material behavior.
diameter 0.3 mm and 1.0 mm respectively. Table II shows
The magnitude of torsional stiffness is higher for square
the details of geometry and mesh of all file models. These
and rectangular cross section. Triangular cross section
file models was then tested for torsional loads and bending
shows lowest stiffness as compared with other file models.
load considering linear elastic as well as non linear mate-
This is due to the greater cross sectional area as compared
rial behavior. At first an angular rotation of 20 is applied

on each file model at the edge keeping the tip of the file
as fixed. The distribution of equivalent von-Mises stress is
shown in Figure 3. The magnitude of von-Mises stress was
found to be maximum at the tip of each file model. The
stress distribution is highly complex and shows meager
difference in the magnitude of maximum von-Mises stress
for various number of threads for same cross sections.
These file models were also tested for bending by apply-
ing 1 mm displacement at tip keeping the edge fixed.
Equivalent von-Mises stress distribution obtained is shown
in Figure 4. The variation in maximum stress is very less
for various number of threads with similar cross sections.
Maximum von-Mises stress was observed between two
cutting edges in the region of tip.
Torsional stiffness was also calculated for each file
model when subjected torsional loads. Figure 5 shows the
variation in magnitude of torsional stiffness when NiTi
behavior was considered as linear elastic and non lin-
ear. The results shown in Figure 5 are also compared
with the results presented by Baek8 and it was found that
results match well. Figure 5 shows that the files analyzed
considering linear elastic material behavior shows more
ARTICLE
to other file models. The s-rectangle file model shows
slightly higher stiffness than triangle file model as it has
slightly larger cross sectional area. Figure 5 also shows
that the stiffness of file model increases with increase in
number of threads for same cross section. This is due to
slight increase in volume of file with increase in the num-
ber of threads.
The variation in support reaction obtained in all file mod-
els when subjected to bending loads is shown in Figure 6.
The magnitude of support reaction developed is smallest for
s-rectangular file model as compared to other cross section.
The square file model shows higher reaction as compared
to other file models. The support reaction decreases with
increase in number of thread. Variation in moment of iner-
tia along the length of file is mainly responsible for such
behavior. As the shape of files is continuously changing
with length, it is difficult to compute and compare the val-
ues of moment of inertia for all cross section.
5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
After performing finite element analysis on file models
with four cross sections with varying number of threads,

Triangle S-Rectangle Rectangle Square

Fig. 2. Cross section details at edge.

Adv. Sci. Eng. Med., 6, 1–6, 2014 3

 Comparative Study of Endodontic Files with Various Cross Sections with Varying Threads Khapre et al.

(i) 5 threads (ii) 10 threads (iii) 15 threads

(a) Triangle
ARTICLE

(i) 5 threads (ii) 10 threads (iii) 15 threads

(b) S-Rectangle

(i) 5 threads (ii) 10 threads (iii) 15 threads

(c) Rectangle

(i) 5 threads (ii) 10 threads (iii) 15 threads

(d) Square

Fig. 3. Equivalent von-Mises stress distribution in file models subjected to torsional loading.

4 Adv. Sci. Eng. Med., 6, 1–6, 2014

Khapre et al. Comparative Study of Endodontic Files with Various Cross Sections with Varying Threads

(i) 5 threads (ii) 10 threads (iii) 15 threads

(a) Triangle

ARTICLE
(i) 5 threads (ii) 10 threads (iii) 15 threads
(b) S-Rectangle

(i) 5 threads (ii) 10 threads (iii) 15 threads

(c) Rectangle

(i) 5 threads (ii) 10 threads (iii) 15 threads

(d) Square

Fig. 4. Equivalent von-Mises stress distribution in file models subjected to bending loads.

Adv. Sci. Eng. Med., 6, 1–6, 2014 5

 Comparative Study of Endodontic Files with Various Cross Sections with Varying Threads Khapre et al.

2.5 negative rake angle. Both s-rectangle and triangle cross

Torsional stiffnes
(N-mm/radian)
5 Linear 5 Non Linear
2 sections have negative rake angles which is suitable for
10 Linear 10 Non Linear
1.5 scraping action. It is recommended to use S-Rectangular
15 Linear 15 Non Linear
1 cross section because it has greater rake angle as compared
0.5 to Triangular cross section.
0
Triangle S-Rectangle Rectangle Square
Acknowledgment: The authors would like to thank
Fig. 5. Variation in torsional stiffness for four cross sections calculated Computer Center, Civil Engineering Department, Shri
considering linear and non linear behavior of NiTi. Ramdeobaba College of Engineering and Management,
Nagpur for providing computational facility and ANSYS
Support reaction (N)

0.35
0.3
5 Linear 5 Non Linear Workbench software to carry out this work.
10 Linear 10 Non Linear
0.25
15 Linear 15 Non Linear
0.2
0.15 References and Notes
0.1 1. H. Walia, W. Brantley, and H. Gerstein, Journal of Endodontics
0.05 14, 346 (1988).
0 2. S. Thompson, International Endodontic Journal 33, 297 (2000).
Triangle S-Rectangle Rectangle Square 3. O. Zienkiewicz, R. Taylor, and J. Zhu, The Finite Element
Method: Its Basis and Fundamentals, 6th edn., Elsevier, Butterworth
Fig. 6. Variation in support reaction for four cross sections calculated
Heinemann, Germany (2005).
considering linear and non linear behavior of NiTi.
4. K. Bathe, Finite Element Procedures, 2nd edn., edited by
W. Stenquist, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1995).
5. E. Berutti, G. Chiandussi, I. Gaviglio, and A. Ibba, Journal of
Endodontics 29, 15 (2003).
ARTICLE

Rake angle 6. V. Subramaniam, R. Indira, M. Srinivasan, and P. Shankar, Journal

Triangle S-Rectangle
Fig. 7. Rake angle for triangle, S-rectangle cross sections and conven-
tional plane tool.
it was found that two cross sections namely s-rectangle
and triangle are more flexible as compared to other rect-
angle and square cross sections. It was found that trian-
gle cross section is most flexible when subjected torsional
loads whereas s-rectangle cross section is most flexible
when subjected to bending loads. It was also found that
the number of threads affects the flexibility of file mod-
els. As number of threads increases, the volume of file
also increase, which directly affects the flexibility of file
models resulting in increased stiffness.
It is well known fact that higher rake angle is adopted
for efficient cutting which can be observed in conventional
plane tool (Fig. 7). According to literature16 positive rake
angle provides more efficient cutting as compared to
of Conservative Dentistry 10, 112 (2007).
7. D. Montalvao and F. Alcada, Journal of Endodontics 37, 1158
(2011).
Plane blade
8. S. Baek, C. Lee, B. Kim, W. Lee, and H. Kim, Journal of Endodon-
tics 37, 1283 (2011).
9. M. Lee, A. Versluis, B. Kim, C. Lee, B. Hur, and H. Kim, Journal
of Endodontics 37, 1152 (2011).
10. R. Khapre, S. Rathi, and S. Shinde, Proceedings of International
Conference on Structural Engineering, Construction and Manage-
ment, Kandy, Sri Lanka, December (2011).
11. R. Khapre and S. Shinde, Proceedings of International Conference
on Recent Advances in Engineering, Technology and Management,
Mumbai, India, May–June (2012).
12. S. Shinde, R. Khapre, and S. Rathi, International Journal of Pure
and Applied Research in Engineering and Technology 1, 100 (2013).
13. S. Shinde, R. Khapre, and S. Rathi, Proceedings of International
Conference on Emerging Trends and Research in Engineering and
Technology, Amaravati, India, March (2013).
14. R. Khapre, J. Chouhan, H. Khungar, and P. Hudiya, Proceedings
of International Conference on Recent Trends in Engineering and
Technology, Kodaikanal, India, March (2013).
15. F. Beer, E. Johnston, and J. DeWolf, Mechanics of Material, 2nd
edn., Tata McGraw-Hill, New Delhi, India (2008), pp. 132–144.
16. E. R. Mounce, The Dental Clinics of North America 48, 137 (2004).

6 Adv. Sci. Eng. Med., 6, 1–6, 2014

View publication stats