FRICTIONAL MECHANICS

Presented By:

DR. Soi Chakraborty

J.R. - II
 CONTENTS
•Introduction
•Concept of Friction
•Biomechanics of frictional mechanics
•Variables affecting frictional resistance during
sliding tooth movement
•Methods of space closure in sliding mechanics
•New Advancements
•Conclusion
•References
Introduction
Space closure is an important step in fixed orthodontic
mechanotherapy.

Orthodontic tooth movement during space closure is achieved

through 2 types of mechanics :

Frictional / Sliding Frictionless / Loop

Mechanics Mechanics
• The attractiveness of Sliding mechanics is its clinical simplicity.

• Regardless of its simplicity, however, the efficiency of sliding mechanics may

be compromised due to effects of friction.

• Some of the applied force is dissipated as friction and the remainder is

transferred to supporting structures of the teeth to mediate tooth
movement.
 CONCEPT OF FRICTION
DEFINITION :
Friction is defined as a force that retards or resists therelative motion of
two objects in contact, and its direction is tangential to the common
boundary of the two surfaces in contact.

FRICTION

STATIC

STATIC KINECTIC
 As two surfaces in contact slide against each other, two components of total
force arise:
frictional force component (f) and
normal force component (N) perpendicular to the contacting surfaces and
to the frictional force component.
• Amontons & Coulombs derived 2 Laws of Friction according to this :

1. Frictional force (f) is proportional to the normal force (N) multiplied by the
coefficient of friction ()

f =  N.

2. Frictional force (f) is independent of the apparent area of contact between

two sliding surfaces.

The frictional coefficient depends on the surface roughness of

the combination of the materials involved.
 The Stick-Slip Phenomenon
• Proffit et al considers frictional resistance in orthodontic
appliance to be multifactorial, with asperities
(microscopic irregularities) as a contributing factor.
• At low speeds a “Stick - slip phenomenon” may occur as enough force
builds up to shear the junctions and a jump occurs, then the surfaces stick
again until enough force again builds to break them.

A single stick-slip cycle involves a stick state associated with elastic loading
of the system, followed by a sudden slip corresponding to stress relaxation.
 COMPONENTS OF RESISTANCE TO SLIDING (RS)

According to Kusy and Whitley:

1st component – classical friction (FR) –is a product of co

–efficient of friction (µ) and normal force.
• 2nd component – Binding
• Passive configuration -

RS= FR

• Active configuration
• RS= FR+ Bi
 Bracket
Wire
width
size

Slot size
 3. Notching

Observed mechanical damage to an archwire that occurs during later

stages of binding which manifests itself as recognizable defects of
varying number, pattern and severity.
VARIABLES AFFECTING FRICTIONAL RESISTANCE
DURING SLIDING TOOTH MOVEMENT
PHYSICAL FACTORS
1. Arch wire

a)Material
b)cross sectional
c)stiffness
d)surface texture
a)
b)
c)
Material & Surface texture
Cross sectional shape and size
Stiffness

2. Bracket
d) Material
e) Manufacturing process (cast or sintered SS)
f) Slot width & depth
g) Design of the bracket – Single / Double width
3. Ligation of archwire to bracket
a) Ligature wires
b) Elastomerics
c) Method of ligation
 
4. Orthodontic appliance
a) Inter-bracket distance
b) Force application
c) Level of bracket slot between adjacent teeth
 BIOLOGICAL FACTORS

1. Saliva
2. Plaque
3. Corrosion
 
1.
ARCHWIRE
A) EFFECT OF ARCH WIRE MATERIAL

Co-efficient of friction and surface roughness

Kusy et al used laser spectroscopy to study surface roughness of

orthodontic wires .

SS < Co/Cr < TMA < NiTi

Kusy and Whiteley - Coefficient of friction.

SS < Co/Cr < Niti < TMA

 B) CROSS- SECTIONAL SHAPE/SIZE

With round wires, the bracket slot can “ bite” into the wire at one point causing an indentation in the wire.

With rectangular wire the force is distributed over a larger area resulting in less pressure & therefore less resistance to movement.
ROLE OF WIRE STIFFNESS AND CLEARANCE:
Doubling the diameter of round wire supported at one end results in the
stiffness  a factor of 16 with strength  8 times and range  by half.

Doubling the diameter of an arch wire supported between two brackets

would also  the stiffness as a fourth power function.

The  interbracket span of the wire over the extraction site  stiffness of
the wire . This has a greater chance of deflecting the wire, resulting in
binding.
2.BRACKE
TS
A) MATERIAL:
1. Stainless Steel Brackets :
• One of the lowest frictional force values amongst the
available bracket materials.
Kapila et al.

Mean frictional forces with conventional cast stainless steel

brackets ranges between 40-336 g.

Sintered vs casted SS Brackets

Sintered SS brackets(RMO Mini Taurus) brackets is

approx 40% - 45% less than friction of conventional cast
stainless steel brackets (Vaughan et al)
 2) CERAMIC BRACKETS :

Ceramic brackets, demonstrated significantly higher frictional forces than with

SS brackets.(Pratten et al, Dickson et al)

Highly magnified views

have revealed numerous
generalized small
indentations in the ceramic
bracket slot while the SS
bracket appeared relatively
smooth.
MONOCRYSTALLINE CERAMIC BRACKET

Inspire

POLYCRYSTALLINE ALUMINA CERAMIC BRACKETS

MXi (TP ORTHODONTICS)

3) ZIRCONIA BRACKETS :

Frictional coefficients of Zirconia brackets = poly crystalline alumina

brackets in both dry and wet states (Keith et al , 1994).

4) PLASTIC BRACKETS :

In an attempt to create an esthetic bracket with lower frictional

resistance and easier debonding features than the ceramics.
A variety of new ceramic-reinforced plastic brackets with or
without metal slot inserts have been introduced.
Lower frictional resistance than ceramic bracket.

Plastic brackets can deform because of compression from ligation

and thus binding of the wire, and higher frictional resistances were
recorded than stainless steel brackets
• Michael et al (2004 EJO):

Highest To Lowest Friction

1. polycarbonate
2. polycrystalline ceramic
3. monocrystalline ceramic
4. ceramic reinforced composite without metal slot insert
5. stainless steel
6. ceramic reinforced composite with the metal slot insert.
C) Effect of bracket width on friction
D) EFFECT OF 2nd &
3rd ORDER ON
FRICTION:
3. LIGATION OF ARCHWIRE TO BRACKET
EFFECT OF LIGATION TECHNIQUE ON
FRICTION:

• Elastomeric modules:

• Stainless steel ligatures:

 ELASTOMERIC LIGATURES

• Frictional forces - 50 to 150 g.

• Elastomeric ligatures consists of polyurethane polymers that are subject

to permanent deformation with time and they also deteriorate in moist
environment as a result of slow hydrolysis.

• frictional forces generated by elastomeric modules decrease during a 3–4

week period with a concurrent decrease in failure load strength.(50-70%)

• A reduction in frictional force can be obtained by stretching an

elastomeric ligature to double its initial diameter or by lubrication.
 Ligation technique:

The figure-8 pattern,

produces significantly
greater friction when
compared with figure-O
pattern. (70% to 220%
depending on the wire
dimensions) (Sims, AJO 93)
 SS
LIGATURES
• 0 up to 300 g.
• Lightly ligated stainless steel ligatures produced lower friction
than conventional elastomeric ligatures.
• Stainless steel ligatures applied to plastic brackets generated
more frictional forces than elastomeric modules probably
because of deformation of the slot of the brackets causing
archwire binding.
• Edwards et al : Compared the effect of 4 ligation techniques.
-    E modules tied conventionally and in figure 8 pattern.
-    Stainless steel ligatures.
-    Teflon coated ligatures.

• static frictional resistance greatest in figure of 8 emodules

• Teflon coated ligatures produce lowest friction
 BRACKET DESIGN: To limit force of ligation

• Edgelok bracket (Ormco) – 1972

• Mobi- lock
• Speed bracket (Strite industries) - 1980
• Activa bracket (A company) – 1986
• Time - 1995
• Damon – 1996
• In Ovation
Shivapuja et al

• Self ligating brackets displayed significantly lower level of

friction both static and dynamic as compared to conventional
ligating system.

Cacciafesta V. et al in a study demonstrated that

• Stainless steel self ligating brackets generated

significantly lower static and kinetic frictional forces than
both conventional stainless steel.
A) EFFECT OF SALIVA ON FRICTIONAL RESISTANCE :

It has been suggested that saliva or a saliva substitute serves as

an excellent lubricant in the sliding of the bracket along the
wire.

Baker et al. using an artificial saliva substitute found a 15% to

19% reduction in friction.
Kusy et al. found that saliva could have lubricous as well as
adhesive behavior depending on which archwire bracket
combination was under consideration.
The stainless steel wires showed an adhesive
behavior with saliva and a resultant increase in the
coefficient of friction in the wet state.

The kinetic coefficients of friction of the Beta- TI

archwires in the wet state on the other hand were
50% of the values in the dry state.
B) INFLUENCE OF CORROSION ON FRICTION

Corrosion products formed at the archwire / Bracket interface increases friction.

• Corrosion of SS, niti, coated niti, titanium orthodontic wires were studied and
it was concluded that-

• Titanium wires are the most inert wires to be used in a corrosive environment.
It is the material of choice in Ni hypersensitivity patients.

• EPOXY coating effectively lowers the corrosive potential of NITI.

• STAINLESS STEEL is also susceptible to corrosion resulting in surface pitting.

Recycling of stainless steel brackets results in accumulation of corrosion
products and increases the frictional resistance.
METHODS OF SPACE CLOSURE IN SLIDING
MECHANICS
1. COIL SRINGS:

A. STAINLESS STEEL
B. NITI

2. ELASTOMERIC CHAINS OR POWER CHAIN

3. ELASTIC MODULE WITH LIGATURE

 1. COIL SPRINGS(1931)
• Various materials used are Stainless steel, Co-Cr alloy, Ni Ti.

• Arnold and Cunnigham-

0.010” SS white wire coiled to 0.040” diameter.

They advocated activating the spring 2 to 3mm but not greater

than 3mm, with the next adjustment not occurring until six weeks
later or until no amount of activation remains.
• Bell found that as the size of the
lumen of the spring was increased,
lighter forces were required to
displace it.

Springs with larger lumen sizes and

smaller wire sizes are indicated for
orthodontic use because of their more
constant force application.
 Stainless steel coil spring
Till 1930’s – precious metals were used in dentistry

Advantage is easy to apply, but have high Load Deflection

Rate as compare to NiTi, so as during space closure, some
force degradation occurs due to lessening activation.
 NiTi close coil spring
• The advent of the japenese nickel
titanium archwires led to the introduction
of the nickel titanium coil springs.

• produced more consistent force

• Samuels et al (1998) described optimum

force for space closure with this spring –
150 gm
• Two sizes are available i.e. 9 mm & 12 mm size.
• Springs should not be extending beyond manufactures
recommendation (22mm for 9 mm spring, 36 mm for 12 mm
springs).
• It delivers constant force till it reaches the terminal end of
deactivation stage.
• Can be easily placed & removed without archwire removal.
• Don't need reactivation at each appointment.
• Patient cooperation not needed.

One of the disadvantages is relatively unhygienic as compared to

elastic system.
 2. ELASTICS AND ELASTOMERIC
CHAINS
• Rubber elastics, nylon covered latex threads, elastomeric chains, and
elastomeric modules are extensively used in orthodontics for applying forces
for canine retraction, diastema closure, rotation correction.

• The elastomeric chains are made from synthetic rubber polymers, which are
capable of large elastic deformations due to their patterns of folded or kinked
molecular chains at rest. When extended, they unfold in an ordered linear
fashion.
• Configurations
• Short filament chain
• Long filament chain
• Advantages:
• Inexpensive
• Relatively hygienic
• Easily applied without arch wire removal

• Disadvantages:
• Absorb water & saliva.
• Permanent staining after few days in oral cavity
• Swell due to the filling of voids in the rubber matrix by fluids and
bacterial debris.
• Stretching - breakdown of internal bonds leading to permanent
deformation
• Force degradation- variable force levels-↓effectiveness
• When E-chain first applied produces 300- 350 gms of force but lose 50- 70% of
initial force during 1st day and at 3 weeks retain 30-40% of original force.

• pre- stretching of E-chain (Andreason and Bishara)

• Chains stored in air retained more force(70-75%) as compared to

those in- vivo(43- 52%). Kuster et al

• Rapid extention of e-chain resulted in greater initial force level but

more force loss after 1 week . Kovatch et al
• Hooks of .024 " stainless steel or .028 " brass are soldered to the U & L arch
wires.

• Force required for space closure is delivered by elastic "tiebacks". Elastic

module stretched by 2-3mm (to twice its normal length) delivers 0.5 - 1.5mm
of space closure per month (100- 150 g force).
• The tiebacks are replaced every four to six weeks.
• There are 2 methods of placing active tie backs with elastic modules

• Type 1: active tiebacks (distal module)

• Type 2 active tieback (mesial module)
• Type 1 active tieback:
• Type 2 active tieback:
Advantages of Tiebacks over other methods:
• Power chain - has variable force levels.
- Difficult to keep clean

• Elastic bands- Applied by patient, inconsistent results due to

cooperation factor.

• Stainless steel coil spring- deliver excessive force ,unhygienic

 DISADVANTAGE
1. Rapid mesial movement of the upper molars can allow the palatal
cusps to hang down, resulting in functional interferences, and rapid
movement of the lower molars causes "rolling in“.
NEW ADVANCEMENTS
NEW SLICK ELASTOMERIC MODULE SYSTEM Metafasix
technology (TP orthodontics)

Reduced friction by upto 60% .

Like a passive self ligating it

forms a fourth wall and allows
the archwires to slide freely in
the slot while transmitting its full
force to the teeth.
 BIOFORCE
• BioForce is the only single strand, superelastic orthodontic arch wire
that provides forces that range gradually from 80 grams in the central
to 320 grams at the molars: specific biologically determined forces to
move specific teeth.

• 78% less friction than NiTi.

Accel (Cerum Ortho Organizers)
• It has tooth coloured plastic material over NiTi which is crack
and strain resistant.
• Over plastic coating is a neutral Silicone layer which enhances its
lesser friction mechanism
• On recent study in 2011 it has been found that it has 38% lesser
friction than the Low friction Bioforce Ion Guard wires.
 CONCLUSION
It is impossible to calculate the required force magnitude
for every patient because there are many variables like
different tooth sizes and inclinations, different arch sizes
which affect the length of wire spans.

But clear understanding of friction is required to achieve a

tooth movement.
1.
2.
3.
4.
6.
7.
8.
Nanda, R.: Biomechanics and Esthetic Strategies in Clinical Orthodontics, Elsevier Saunders, St. Louis, 2005, p.188-213.
W R. Proffit, Contemporary Orthodontics; 6th Edition, Mosby publication,
Richard P. McLaughlin, John C. Bennett and Hugo Trevisi: systemized orthodontic treatment mechanics; mosby publications; 2001; p 249-263.
Nikolai rj , Bioengeenering analysis of orthodontic mechanics; Lea and Febiger, phildalphia 1985, p 402-405
Angolkar et al; force degradation of closed coil springs; an in vitro evaluation; AJO-DO 102; 1992; p 127-133.
Tripolt H, Burstone CJ, Bantleon P, Manschiebel W. Force characteristics of nickel-titanium tension coil springs. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999 May;115(5):498-507.
Samuels RH, Rudge SJ, Mair LH. A clinical study of space closure with nickel-titanium closed coil springs and an elastic module. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998 Jul;114(1):73-9.
REFERENCES