©1980 JCO, Inc. May not be distributed without permission. www.jco-online.

com

Common Sense Mechanics

THOMAS F. MULLIGAN , DDS

Wire/Bracket Relationships volving minimal placement of bands

(brackets), and will soon be moving into
This discussion will appear to extraction treatment involving a greater
be academic at first, and of number of bands, it seems appropriate
little use to the clinically ori- at this time to go into a greater degree of
ented orthodontist, but be "exactness". For, if we can understand
patient. The content will in- what is exact, we can then deviate from
crease your appreciation for the treat- exactness and begin to know the value
ment procedures that follow, which will of applying the same principles in "non-
utilize this information on a clinical level exact" terms, in order to achieve our
in an uncomplicated manner. The rela- objectives in a practical way. In other
tionship of the archwire to the brackets words, we will avoid producing a com-
and tubes, prior to engagement, offers plex appliance to satisfy academic
valuable and interesting information. If needs. Instead, we will keep the appli-
a straight wire is placed over angulated ance simple and "read" the relation-
brackets, a certain angular relationship
develops between the wire and the
plane of the bracket slot (Fig . 95) . The
brackets might be angulated as a result
of the malocclusion or purposely an-
gulated to permit overrotations, etc. In
any case, a straight wire overlying these
brackets, prior to insertion of the wire
--
into the brackets, gives us clues regard-
ing tooth movement. We cannot elimi-
nate "common sense", however, since
identical force systems can produce
different responses due to the biologic
nature of the environment. Teeth ex-
trude more readily than they intrude.
Certain rotations occur more easily
than others in different planes of space.
These force systems can become
quite complex when more than two
teeth are involved . However, because
we have thus far confined our mecha-
Fig. 95 Various angular wire/bracket relation-
nics to relatively simple situations in- ships.

VOLUME XIV NUMBER 4 © 1980 JPO. Inc. 265

 ©1980 JCO, Inc. May not be distributed without permission. www.jco-online.com

COMMON SENSE MECHANICS

ships involved adjacent to the archwire

bends as though only two teeth were
involved . Disregarding the other teeth
will still allow us to get our results, as
the forces transmitted to these "distant"
teeth with relatively light wires requires
time, and we are more interested in the
short-term movements.
Now that we know the emphasis
will be on "practicality", let us not get
lost with details that do not pose a
"clinical" threat. The following is pre-
sented only to create an awareness of Fig. 96 The same wire/bracket relationship can
what happens when wire/ bracket rela- be created by a bend in the wire or a straight
tionships change. As multiple brackets wire in relation to a malocclusion.
enter the picture, the system becomes
complex to apply, as it is then necessary
to add the systems at the various
brackets to determine the net effect.
This can be time-consuming, inexact,
and impractical. If you will read an arti-
cle titled, "Force Systems from an Ideal
Arch" by Burstone and Koenig (AJO,
March 1974), you will appreciate the
true complexity of force systems in
orthodontics. At the same time, I thinK
you will want to utilize what you can in
an efficient and simple manner, even if it
means sacrificing the details involved in
exactness, particularly since teeth sel-
Fig. 97 Oft-center bend produces same wire/
dom respond in an exact fashion. bracket relationship as a straight wire in rela-
Basically, we deal with various tion to a malocclusion.
wire/ bracket relationships created by
the malocclusion, archwire bends, or
both. For practical reasons, I prefer to
attain bracket alignment regardless of
the force systems produced in the
process. Once this is accomplished,
desirable force systems can be attained
by placing bends at specific points
along the archwire. In other words, we
then determine what we want by creat-
ing our own relationships. We have
already seen this accomplished during
our discussion on vertical forces and
tipback bends.
So, to get a further insight as to the Fig. 98 Step bend produces the same wire/
force systems created by wire/ bracket bracket relationship as a straight wire in rela-
tion to a malocclusion.

266 JCO/ APRIL 1980

 ©1980 JCO, Inc. May not be distributed without permission. www.jco-online.com
relationships, let us consider the varia-
tions. If we begin by using a constant
interbracket width (any width) and a
center bend, it can be seen in Figure 96
that the relationship can be created by
the bend in the wire or by the malocclu-
sion. In either case, the force system is
the same. As already said, I prefer align-
ing the brackets and then determining
my own systems by placing the bends
where needed. If we now look at Figure
97, we can see that the bend has been
moved off center, but still remains iden-
tical to the relationship created by the
malocclusion . Again, in either case the
force system is the same. Finally, in
Figure 98 we see that two off-center
bends have been placed, the second
being inverted, but placed equidistant
from the bracket. Yet the relationship is
no different than the one produced by
the malocclusion and a straight wire, so
the force systems are identical. Now, if
we go back and look at Figures 96, 97,
and 98, and concentrate on the angu-
lated brackets only, we can see what
caused the change in the wire/ bracket
relationships. The bracket on the left in
each case remained constant in an-
gular relationship with the archwire,
while the bracket on the right was slow-
ly rotated clockwise. Therefore, we can
readily accomplish the same by placing
bends instead , once the brackets have
been aligned.
Thus far, we have been talking
about center and off-center bends only
and, therefore, only need be concerned
with Figures 96 and 97. But, for the sake
of discussion, and so that later we can
prove that the force systems we have so
far discussed in these two bends are
really the case, let us become familiar
with Figure 98. After all, everything that
lies between the relationships in Fig-
ures 96 and 98 is merely a transitioning
of force systems.
In my graduate school days, Dr.
VOLUME XIV NUMBER 4
MULLIGAN
Charles Burstone referred to Figure 96
as a symmetric bend relationship . I
have adopted the term center bend or
gable bend . He referred to Figure 97 as
an asymmetric bend and Figure 98 as a
step relationship. I refer to the asymme-
tric bend as an off-center bend. Since
the step relationship has its place in
mechanics, but because I seldom utilize
it (purposely), you will not hear me refer
to this relationship in my discussion of
Common Sense Mechanics as it per-
tains to clinical treatment.
If we can see what forces and mo-
ments MUST exist in the two extremes
under discussion (Figs. 96 and 98) , then
we can accept the systems that exist "in
between". If you are really interested in
every detail, please refer to the pub-
lished material I have mentioned.
Center Bend Force System
Let us begin to determine the
forces and moments present in the two
extremes of the wire/bracket relation-
ships - the center bend and the step-
by applying the requirements for static
equilibrium . Once we can prove these
systems are present, by necessity, we
can resume our discussion of mecha-
nics on a practical level. But it is only
fair that you see, first , what occurs
technically.
Looking at Figure 99, a center
bend , we can see that forces must be
applied at four separate points for wire/
bracket engagement. Since three re-
quirements (previously discussed)
MUST be met and ARE met to establish
the static equilibrium that will and
DOES exist, we can go through each
step in order. Let us start by "assuming"
all four forces are equal. We don't know,
yet, if they are, but we must start some-
where. Only when all three require-
ments of static equilibrium are met, will
we have discovered what the actual
267
 ©1980 JCO, Inc. May not be distributed without permission. www.jco-online.com
COMMON SENSE MECHANICS
r
A
t
o
Fig. 99 Center bend producing wire/bracket
relationships that satisfy requirements of static
equilibrium.
B Since Forces A and B produce a
Fig. 100 A. Forces A and B in Figure 99 produce
a clockwise moment, Forces C and 0 produce a
counterclockwise moment. B. Tooth move-
ment, resulting from deactivation of the force
systems, is counterclockwise from Forces A
and B, and clockwise from Forces C and D.
forces are. We are not interested in any
actual figures, but only relative magni-
tudes.
If all four forces (activational) are
equal, then the first requirement for
static equilibrium is fulfilled. That is, the
sum of the vertical forces must equal
zero . Since there are no horizontal
forces necessary to engage the wire
268
into the brackets, the second require-
ment is automatically fulfilled . That is,
the sum of the horizontal forces must
equal zero. Since the third requirement
says that the sum of all the moments,
measured from ANY point must also
equal zero, let us choose the center
point for convenience (Fig. 99).
Now we will determine the mo-
ments produced around this point by
each force (line of force) acting at a
perpendicular distance to such point.
Force A produces a clockwise moment
(activational) , equal and opposite to the
magnitude of the counterclockwise
moment produced by Force D. Now,
Force B produces a counterclockwise
moment smaller in magnitude, because
it acts at a smaller distance from this
point. Force C, acting at the same dis-
tance, produces the same magnitude,
but the moment is clockwise. When we
add the four moments produced a-
round this point, the sum is zero. There-
fore, we have met all three requirements
for static equilibrium , and the orginally
"assumed" forces are proven to be cor-
rect. So, we can now determine the ac-
tivational force system at each bracket.
couple (pure moment) which is clock-
wise, and since Forces C and D pro-
duce a counterclockwise couple (Fig.
100A), we have now arrived at the net
activational force system - two mo-
ments, equal and opposite in magni-
tude. Tooth movement occurs as the
result of deactivation, as in Figure 100B.
From now on we can refer to this sys-
tem when we discuss the center bend
and know that it must exist in order to
conform with the requirements of static
equilibrium.
Step Bend Force System
Now, if we go to the step relation-
ship, which is the other extreme under
JCO I APRIL 1980
 ©1980 JCO, Inc. May not be distributed without permission. www.jco-online.com

MULLIGAN

B
B D o
1 1 ~

1 ic iA
A
r
c
A B

Fig. 101 A. Step bend force system, with all four forces equal, does not satisfy the requirements of static
equilibrium. B. Step bend force system, with Forces A and 0 less than Forces Band C, does satisfy the
requirements of static equilibrium.

discussion, we will go through the same
analysis, again using aligned brackets
with the bends placed in the wire (Fig.
101 A) . Since we must start somewhere,
we will again "assume" that the four ac-
tivational forces shown are equal. If so,
the sum of the vertical forces equals
zero and the first requirement for static
equilibrium has been fulfilled. Next, the
horizontal forces equal zero because
there are none, so the second require-
ment is, likewise, fulfilled . All that re-
mains now is to determine that all the
moments produced around a common
point also equal zero; the third and final
requirement. Using the same center
point, we can readily see that Force A
produces a clockwise moment, the
same as that produced by Force D.
Both are clockwise and both are equal
in magnitude. However, although the
moments produced by Forces Band C
are equal to each other and counter-
clockwise, they are smaller in magni-
tude than Forces A and D, because they
are produced at smaller distances.
Therefore, the sum of the moments
does not equal zero. Since ALL THREE
requirements are not fulfilled , the origi-
nal assumption that all activational
forces were equal was incorrect.
Figure 101 B shows the ONLY sys-
tem that meets all three requirements.
First, although Forces A and D (equal)
are smaller than Forces Band C (e-
qual), the sum of the vertical forces can
be seen to equal zero. The horizon-
tal sum remains zero, as there are no
horizontal forces . But, the third require-
ment is finally met, because Force A
and Force D each produce clockwise
moments equal in magnitude and op-
posite in direction to the counterclock-
wise moments produced by Forces B
and C. In spite of the fact that Forces B
and C act at smaller distances, balance
is maintained due to their greater mag-
nitudes of force. The important thing to
realize is that the net activational forces
at each bracket are unequal, unlike the
center bend. If we now take the forces
in Figure 101 B, which have been proven

VOLUME XIV NUMBER 4 269

 ©1980 JCO, Inc. May not be distributed without permission. www.jco-online.com

COMMON SENSE MECHANICS

! A
i i B
!
Fig. 102 A. Forces A and B in Figure 101B produce a clockwise moment; Forces C and D also produce a
clockwise moment. B. Clockwise moments result in counterclockwise tooth movement.

to be correct, we can analyze the indivi- Clinical Demonstrations

dual brackets for the net activational
force system . Forces A and B produce a
clockwise moment at the left bracket
and a net force, as shown in Fig. 102A.
At the right bracket, Forces C and 0
form a clockwise moment also, with the
magnitudes being the same, as well as a
net force equal and opposite to the
force at the left bracket. Now that the
net activational system has been de-
termined at each bracket, simple rever-
sal (Fig. 102B) gives the force system
acting on the teeth (deactivation) .
Variations between these two ex-
tremes were shown during the discus-
sion of tipback bends and will be shown
in the next articles dealing with extrac-
tion mechanics. It will be seen that as
the wire/ bracket relationship (between
the center and step configurations) un-
dergoes angular change relative to
the archwire, clockwise moments will
transition to zero and , if the relationship
change continues beyond the zero
point , finally become counterclock-
wise. All of this simply means that there
is "Law and Order" to all of this. It is my
desire that this can be useful in an
everyday practice.
If you look ONLY at the two teeth
mentioned, Figure 103 illustrates vari-
ous center bend relationships pro-
duced by the malocclusion itself. Ante-
rior-posterior relationship must also be
considered, as demonstrated in Figure
103 with full wire/ bracket engagement,
such as with a rectangular wire.
Figure 104 illustrates step relation-
ships when applying the same ap-
proach. The single off-center bend (as
opposed to the step bend which actual-
ly contains two off-center bends) has
already been demonstrated many
times. Figure 105 shows a rotated cen-
tral incisor. A wire tied only into the two
central incisors would automatically
create the off-center relationship. But,
to keep matters simple, all of the rela-
tionships mentioned and formed by the
malocclusion are, for the most part, dis-
regarded in obtaining INITIAL bracket
alignment. In some cases, however, it
would be foolish to disregard them.
The force system in the single off-
center bend lies somewhere in between
the center bend and step relationships,
depending on the EXACT wire/ bracket

270 JCO / APRIL 1980

 ©1980 JCO, Inc. May not be distributed without permission. www.jco-online.com

MULLIGAN

Fig. 103 Various center bend relationships pro- Fig. 104 Various step bend relationships pro-
duced by malocclusions. duced by malocclusions.

VOLUME XIV NUMBER 4 271

 ©1980 JCO, Inc. May not be distributed without permission. www.jco-online.com

COMMON SENSE MECHANICS

angular relationship (Fig. 106). In spite

Fig. 105 A wire tied into rotated central incisors
would create off-center relationship.
of the fact that using a constant bend,
as already discussed, with variable in-
terbracket distances produces mo-
ments that vary, as seen in Figure 106B,
the complication is taken out of it by
utilizing the differential in the system , as
demonstrated with use of the tipback
bend in overbite correction, and as will
be demonstrated in extraction treat-
ment for anchorage control.

Summary
Do not let this portion of the series
on Common Sense Mechanics drive
you away. It was presented to help you
appreciate the need for deriving that
which can be modified and made useful
in a busy practice. As you will see, the
application will not be complex, but
A rather quite simple.

(TO BE CONTINUED)

1 c
1
Fig. 106 A. Center bend relationship. B. 011-
center bend relationship. C. Step bend rela-
tionship.

272 JCO/ APRIL 1980