OUTLINE

• The FEA of the 3.5 mm Bicon Implant-Abutment-

Bone system under central occlusal loads

• Mechanics of the Tapered Interference Fit in a 3.5

mm Bicon Implant
 WHAT IS A DENTAL IMPLANT?
 Dental implant is an artificial titanium fixture
(similar to those used in orthopedics)
which is placed surgically into the jaw bone to
substitute for a missing tooth and its root(s).
 Surgical Procedure

STEP 1: INITIAL SURGERY

STEP 2: OSSEOINTEGRATION PERIOD
STEP 3: ABUTMENT CONNECTION
STEP 4: FINAL PROSTHETIC RESTORATION

Success Rates
lower jaw, front – 90 – 95%
lower jaw, back – 85 – 90%
upper jaw, front – 85 – 95%
upper jaw, back – 65 – 85%
 History of Dental Implants

In 1952, Professor Per-Ingvar Branemark,

a Swedish surgeon, while conducting research
into the healing patterns of bone tissue,
accidentally discovered that when pure titanium
comes into direct contact with the living bone
tissue, the two literally grow together to form a
permanent biological adhesion. He named this
phenomenon "osseointegration".
 First Implant Design by Branemark

All the implant designs are obtained by the

modification of existing designs.

John Brunski
 Comparison of Implant Systems

ITI

Bicon
Astra Tech.
 OUTLINE

• The FEA of the 3.5 mm Bicon Implant-Abutment-

Bone system under central occlusal loads

• Mechanics of the Tapered Interference Fit in a 3.5

mm Bicon Implant
 The FEA of the 3.5 mm Bicon
Implant-Abutment-Bone system under
central occlusal loads

Assumptions:

• Analyses were linear, static and assumed that materials

were elastic, isotropic and homogenous.

• 100% osseointegration is assumed between bone and

implant. Bone and implant are assumed to be perfectly
bonded.

• The stresses in the bone due to the interference fit between

implant and abutment is assumed to be relaxed after the
insertion of the abutment.
V
Finite Element Model
H

 29117 Solid 45 Brick Elements (32000 limit)

 Symmetry boundary conditions on two cross-sections

and fixed in all dofs from the bottom of the bone.
 RESULTS
 Effect of bone’s elastic modulus on the overall
stress distribution: Different finite element analyses
are run by varying bone mechanical properties
surrounding the implant. (1-16 GPa)

The properties of the bone depends on the location in

the jaw, the gender and age of the patient.
 Force: Vertical 100 N  Force: Vertical 100 N
 Bone Modulus: 16 GPa  Bone Modulus: 1 GPa

 Force: Lateral 20 N  Force: Lateral 20 N

 Bone Modulus: 16 GPa  Bone Modulus: 1 GPa
• Both the stress distribution and the stress levels
are effected significantly as the bone modulus is
varied.
• CT scan data may be a good source for obtaining
patient dependent implant designs.
 Maximum vertical and lateral load carrying capacity of
the bone:
The failure limit of the bone due to fatigue is 29 MPa.
[Evans et al.]

 Force: Vertical 920 N  Force: Lateral 40 N

 Bone Modulus: 10 GPa  Bone Modulus: 10 GPa
Lateral loads cause approximately 25 times higher
stresses in the bone than the vertical loads.
 OUTLINE

• The FEA of the 3.5 mm Bicon Implant-Abutment-

Bone system under central occlusal loads

• Mechanics of the Tapered Interference Fit in a 3.5

mm Bicon Implant
 Mechanics of the Tapered Interference Fit
in a 3.5 mm Bicon Implant

 Perfectly elastic large displacement non-linear contact

finite element analysis for different insertion depths.

 Elastic-plastic large displacement non-linear contact

finite element analysis for different insertion depths.
 Finite Element Model

 Different implant-abutment assemblies are performed

for 0.002”, 0.004”, 0.006”, 0.008” and 0.010” insertion
depths.

 Axisymmetric model is used.

 100% osseointegration is assumed between bone and

implant. Bone and implant are assumed to be perfectly
bonded.

 Bone is assumed to be elastic, isotropic and homogenous

with a Young’s modulus of 10 GPa.
 Perfectly elastic large displacement non-linear
contact finite element analysis for different
insertion depths.
Perfectly Elastic Finite Element Results
500000
450000 Interference depth: 0.002 in

Contact Pressure (P) psi

400000 Interference depth: 0.004 in
350000 Interference depth: 0.006 in
300000
250000
200000
150000
100000
50000
0
0.47 0.49 0.51 0.53 0.55 0.57 0.59
Vertical Position

 Contact pressure increases linearly with insertion

depth.
After 0.004” insertion depth, it is seen that plastic
deformation occurs in the implant.
An elastic-plastic model is needed.
Yield Strength of Ti-6Al-4V 139,236 Psi
 Elastic-plastic large displacement non-linear
contact finite element analysis for different
insertion depths
Bilinear Isotropic Hardening Model
Stress
(MPA)

% Strain
 Contact Pressure Distribution for Different
Insertion Depths
Elastic-Plastic Finite Element Results
300000
Interference depth: 0.004 in

Contact Pressure (P) psi

250000 Interference depth: 0.006 in
Interference depth: 0.008 in
200000 Interference depth: 0.010 in

150000

100000

50000

0
0.45 0.47 0.49 0.51 0.53 0.55 0.57 0.59
Vertical Position

 Contact pressure increases non-linearly with larger

insertion depths.
Von Mises Stress Distribution in the Implant Yield Strength of Ti-6Al-4V 139,236 Psi
Von Mises Stress Distribution in the Bone
Yield Strength of Bone 8,702 Psi
 FUTURE WORK

 Comparison of different implant designs in

terms of stress distribution in the bone due to
occlusal loads.

 Modeling non-homogenous bone material

properties by incorporating with CT scan data.

 Comparison of different implant-abutment

interfaces