You are on page 1of 18

“AN EVALUTION OF THE STRESS DISTRIBUTION IN SCREW RETAINED

IMPLANTS OF DIFFERENT CROWN IMPLANT RATIOS IN DIFFERENT BONE
DENSITIES UNDER VARIOUS LOADS-A THREE DIMENSIONAL FINITE ELEMENT
ANALYSIS."
ABSTRACT:
Background: Studies on stress distribution around screw retained implants in different bone
densities are limited. In clinical situations crowns of different heights are placed on the implants,
and the effect of varying crown implant ratio on the bone is not understood properly.
Aim: To evaluate and compare the stress distribution in retention screws and prosthetic platform
in two different screw retained implants for different crown heights under various occlusal loads
using three dimensional finite element study.
Materials And Methods: In this invitro study the stress distribution was evaluated and
compared between three different crown heights retained on implants with two different lengths
by using finite element analysis.
Results: For crown height of 7.5 mm, in D2 bone density when vertical load of 200N was
applied, the maximum stress concentration was 1780N/ cm2, for oblique load of 100N it was
2936N/ cm2respectively and in D3 bone density when vertical load of 200N was applied, the
maximum stress concentration was 1820N/ cm2, for oblique load of 100N it was 3477N/ cm 2
respectively. When the crown height is increased to 10mm, the maximum stress concentration in
D2 bone was 1875N/ cm2for vertical load, 4015N/ cm2 for oblique load and in D3 bone the
maximum stress concentration was 2123N/ cm2 for vertical load and 4236N/ cm2 for oblique
load. In case of titanium screws for crown height of 7.5 mm, when vertical load was applied,
stress concentration was 1603 N/ cm2 where as for titanium alloy screw it was 1820N/ cm 2. In
case of 10 mm crown height stress concentration was 1904N/ cm2 for titanium screw and 2123N/

Mechanical stresses may have a negative effect on the surrounding bone leading to bone resorption. from 7. For 10 mm crown height stress concentration was 4236N/ cm 2 for titanium screw. vonmisess stresses INTRODUCTION: Amongst other factors. . KEY WORDS: Endosseous implants. When an implant is occlusally loaded. Hence. and the load transmitted to the bone at various regions. Stress concentration was less and stress distribution was better in commercially pure titanium screw than in titanium alloy screw. Occlusal forces affect the bone surrounding an oral implant. Additional bone resorption seems to be related to micro-movements at the abutment-implant interface and occlusal loading. prognosis of dental Implant is based on the various loads applied during function on the prosthetic part. With the increase in the height of crown (i. After implant insertion and its subsequent initial loading. Conclusion: Stress concentration was less and stress distribution was better in D2 bone density than in D3 bone density.5mm to 10mm) stress concentration and stress distribution also increased. 4663N/ cm2 for titanium alloy screw.e.cm2 for titanium alloy screw. load applied is an important factor in evaluating the prognosis. crestal bone undergoes remodelling and resorption. the stress will be transferred to the bone with the highest stress at the coronal portion of the bone. The mechanism of bone resorption is presently attributed to a biologic width re-establishment that follows a chronic bacterial inflammation of the implant/abutment connection.5 mm crown height stress concentration were 3155N/ cm2 for titanium screw 3477N/ cm2 for titanium alloy screw. In case of oblique loading for 7.

Nellore. Mesh generation . and the effect of varying crown implant ratio on the bone is not understood properly. andra pradesh. Hence. In clinical situations crowns of different heights are placed on the implants. Modelling of implant c. Modelling of crowns 2. Construction of geometric models a. The acquired data from different sources were subjected to finite element procedure at CAD technical solutions. FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING 1. I. Modelling of screws e. India under the following methodology. considering the factors mentioned above.Studies on stress distribution around screw retained implants in different bone densities are limited. a three dimensional finite element analysis was designed to evaluate stress distribution in screw retained implants of different crown implant ratios in different bone qualities under various loads. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study conducted and evaluated in narayana dental college and hospital. Vijayawada . retained on implants with two different heights under various load applications by using finite element analysis.FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING II.FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS I. Modelling of abutments d. Modelling of bone b. In this invitro study the stress distribution was evaluated and compared between two different crown heights.

5mm. Application of loads 6.3. It consists of micro threads along with internal conical connection with a “V” shaped thread pattern. The data acquisition was obtained from manufacturers and implant was built to the required dimensions using Catia software.14. 22mm height. FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING 1. It was positioned halfway between the mesio. 1. the data obtained through CT scan at the Mandibular posterior region was fed into computer to create a numeric model of bone segment. b) Modelling of implant: A three dimensional model of Nobel Biocare implant was generated with dimensions of 3.5mm diameter and 10 mm length with a crest module of 1.Construction of geometric models a) Modelling of bone: For the construction of geometric model of bone. Specifying material properties 4.49 mm of width. height of 22mm. The segment of bone D2 type (Table/Figure 1A) consists of cancellous bone surrounded by2 mm thick cortical layer. Applying boundary conditions 5.14. Evaluation procedure.48 mm of width and D3 type bone (Table/Figure 1B) surrounded by 1mm cortical layer.distal segment of the mandible representing mandibular first molar region (Table/Figure-2) c) Modelling of abutment: .

Burlington. and 2.6B. each element having nodes and control points. .Newzealand) was used as screw retained prosthesis.1 mm width was generated (Table/Figure-3) d)Modelling of screw: Screws of two different materials .. 3D models of implants in the bone were generated. (Table/Figure-5B). 9. All ceramic crown(Cercon. 3D models of meshing in the bone were generated. During meshing some approximations were done due to difficulty in meshing. (Table/Figure7A.7C. first one with the dimensions of 7.190.7B.5mm cervico-occlusal length. (Table/Figure-6A. Meshing was done by giving a meshing command to the software.Mesh generation The geometry of implant. .3mm mesiodistal diameter. 4. abutment.7D).5 mm buccolingual width and 2 mm of occlusal and lateral wall thickness (Table/Figure-5A).66 mm buccolingual width and 2 mm of occlusal and lateral wall thickness.youngs modulus of this crown is 70000Mpa. Second superstructure was designed with the dimensions of 10mm cervico-occlusal length. Meshing divides the body into infinite number of elements. Titanium alloy (Ti alloy) (Table/Figure-4B) each with 10mm height and 2mm width were generated . screw and crown was tetra meshed due to complexity of design by using Solid185 element programme.3mm diameter. 12. 13.Implant abutments of 5mm height.poisons ratio is 0. Screw retained prosthesis was designed on the implant.6C. 10mm mesiodistal diameter.Dentsply.Commercially pure titanium(CpTi)(Table/Figure-4A). 2. e) Modelling of crown: .6D).

abutment. Specifying material properties The material properties of cortical. The elastic parameters for all the components were obtained from the literature. implant . 7.5_D3 10_D3 Nodes Elements Nodes Elements Nodes Elements Nodes Elements 1. screw Crown Full model 8650 57134 5007 39725 10633 59117 6305 41023 8648 56832 5007 39464 10633 60206 6305 41625 3.5_D2 10_D2 7.They were modeled isotropically due to unavailability of sufficient . abutment Implant 15254 8266 15254 8266 15254 8266 15254 8266 6. homogenous and isotropic. Bone Implant Implant 15254 19549 8266 11521 15254 19547 8266 11521 15254 19547 8266 11521 15254 19547 8266 11521 5.no Name 7. cancellous bone. cancellous bone and screw retained implants with abutments were presumed to be linearly elastic. Although cortical bone has anisotropic material characteristics and posses regional stiffness variation.The total number of elements and nodes are presented in the table below Number of nodes and elements: s. 4. homogenous and isotropic . Two types of bone densities were modeled by varying the elastic modulus of compact bone and cancellous bone. screw and crown were incorporated for the accurate analysis and interpretation of the program. they were presumed to be linearly elastic. The cortical bone. Bone Cancellous 23601 14780 23599 14780 28201 17653 29255 18274 3. Cortical 13229 7241 13227 7241 8500 4107 8999 4349 2.TheYoungs Modulus and Poisson’s ratio of all the materials were incorporated in the previously generated models.

A total static load of 100 N [ 50 N each on lingual cusps] was applied in oblique direction. Evaluation procedure : The components modeled through Finite element modeling i. MATERIAL PROPERTIES: MATERIAL CORTICAL BONE CANCELLOUS BONE COMMERCIALLY PURE YOUNGS MODULUS(Mpa) 13700 1100 110000 POISSONS RATIO 0.data and difficulty in establishing the principal axis of anisotropy. 5.30 0.8B) 6. two different densities of bone D2 and D3.30 0. (Table/Figure-8A.190 4.e.33 TITANIUM TITANIUM ALLOY CROWN (ZIRCONIA) 114000 70000 0. These aspects make the achieve more realistic representation of clinical situation. with two different crown heights and two different screw materials were generated . The material properties of different components modeled in this study are illustrated in table below. Application of loads : A total static load of 200 N [50 N each on buccal& lingual cusps]was applied in vertical direction . Applying boundary conditions Both anterior and posterior bone boundary regions are constrained and omitting support at the bottom permitted bending of the model.3 0.

(Table/Figure-9A. RESULTS: Vonmises stresses were measured in screw. The following results were obtained through finite element procedure: When vertical load of 200N was applied the maximum stress concentration in D2& D3 bone density for crown height of 7.9C.9F..9I. solver and results were displayed by post processor of finite element analysis (ANSYS)in the form of color code maps using VON MISES STRESS ANALYSIS.on to the implant model at the mandibular first molar region.9J. They were subjected to 200N axial loads on the buccal and lingual cusps in vertical direction and 100N of oblique load on the lingual cusps in oblique direction and further analysis was carried out.9L. Minimum values of von Mises stress is denoted by blue color.9D.e. greenish yellow and yellowish red in the ascending order of stress distribution. FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS Different models were analyzed by processor i.9O. von Mises stress are commonly reported in FEA studies to summarise the overall stress state at a point. green.9P) VON MISES STRESS values are defined as the beginning of deformation for ductile materials. Maximum values of von Mises stress is denoted by red color.9H. Metallic implant failure occurs when von mises stress values exceed the yield strength of an implant material.implant and bone region. In between values are represented by bluish green. Therefore they are important for interpreting the stresses occurring within the implant material.9B.5 mm was 1780 N/cm2 & 1820 N/cm2 respectively.9N. Vonmises stresses were maximum in the in the implant–bone interface in relation to body of the implant.9E.9G. and also within the facial and lingual areas of cortical bone in the body of mandibleand middle threads of the screw.9M. .9K. Stress distribution in the finite element model comes in numerical values and in color coding.

For 10 mm crown height stress concentration was 4236N/ cm2 for titanium screw.5 mm crown height stress concentration were 3155N/ cm 2 for titanium screw 3477N/ cm2 for titanium alloy screw.When oblique load of 100N was applied the stress concentration in D2 & D3bone density for crown height of 7. In case of 10 mm crown height stress concentration was 1904N/ cm2 for titanium screw and 2123N/ cm2 for titanium alloy screw. (Table/Figure-9) In case of titanium screws for crown height of 7. When oblique load of 100N was applied the stress concentration in D2 & D3 bone density for crown height of 10 mm was 4015N/cm2 and 4236N/cm2 respectively.5 mm. When vertical load of 200N was applied the stress concentration in D2 & D3 bone density for crown height of 10 mm was 1875 N/cm2 and 2123 N/cm2 respectively. stress concentration was 1603 N/ cm2 where as for titanium alloy screw it was 1820N/ cm 2. surgical approach. Compact bone quality will ensure better implant stability and better condition for successful implant. 4663N/ cm2 for titanium alloy screw. (Table/Figure-10) DISCUSSION: The density of available bone in an edentulous site is a determining factor in treatment planning. implant design. In case of oblique loading for 7.1 Zarb and Schmitt stated that bone structure is the most important factor in selecting the most favorable treatment outcome in implant dentistry.3 .2.5 mm was 2936N/cm2 & 3477 N /cm2 respectively. healing time and initial progressive bone loading during prosthetic reconstruction. Young’s modulus of compact bone is ten times larger than that of cancellous bone. when vertical load was applied.

Occlusal factors become important in posterior region with high crown to implant ratio. stress distribution for different crown-implant ratios was placed in different bone densities was analyzed.The crown implant ratio was established as a biomechanical variable that may have negative influence on dental implants and bone tissue. the % increase in stress was 10. when the crown height was increased by 2. regardless of implant design and bone density.. . Only increased crestal bone and implant contact may decrease stress distribution. In the present study. which is the most commonly missing teeth in oral cavity. in D2 bone density.4 The optimum ratio is 0. and when crown height increased to 10mm.7.5mm. for 7. the stress was 1875 N/cm2. implant length is not an effective method to overcome the effect of the crown height.75%. When crown height was increased by 2.5mm crown height in D2 bone the stress was 2936N/cm2. The effects of implant length on implant survival has been evaluated in many studies. 9.The concept that crown –implant ratio should not exceed the guidelines established for natural teeth has not been documented. 5.11 The literature indicates that under non-axial forces.5mm. in D2 bone density. Unfavourable crown implant ratio may result in excessive off axis load that will increase the tendency to load the prosthetic stack and cervical supporting bone. the % in stress was 29.5:1 and upto 1:1 still regarded as clinically acceptable. 6 Shorter implant results in a higher crown-implant ratio in most cases. 5. and an increase in crown-implant ratio will increase the to stress concentration.10. A design factor that is closely related to the crown implant ratio is implant length. All FEA models represent mandibular molars. when crown height was 10mm. In case of oblique loading (100N). Therefore. D2 is the most commonly occurring bone density in mandibular posterior region.8 Most forces applied to the osseointegrated implant are concentrated in the crestal bone.34%. the stress was 4015N/cm2.

the % increase in stress was 12. Therefore. The authors concluded that when the force is axial.5mm crown height. stress concentration was more with the application of oblique load than in the application of vertical load in both 7. in D3 bone density. in D3 bone density. non axial forces are magnified in direct relationship to the crown height.65%. So when crown height was increased by 2. According to this study. crown height space does not increase stress to the bone. From the results. The stress concentration in prosthetic screws was also in the same pattern: . In case of oblique loading (100N). the % increase in stress in D3 bone was more in oblique loading when compared to vertical loading.5mm and vertical load of 200N.Therefore. the stress was 2123N/cm2.5mm.83%. and when crown height increased to 10mm. the %increase in stress in D2 bone was more in oblique loading when compared to vertical loading. the stress was 3477N/cm2.5mm.and when crown height was 10mm.. the stress was 4236N/cm2.5mm & 10mm height of crowns.with a crown height of 7. the stress concentration was more in D3 bone density than D2 bone density. The results of the present study coincide with the study conducted by Nissan et al 5. when the crown height was increased by 2. Results of this study show. However. The results of the present study coincide with the study conducted by Holems and Loftus 12.So that the stress distribution will be more in D2 bone density than D3 both under the application of vertical and oblique load. The authors concluded that the placement of implants in type 1 bone quality resulted in less micromotion and reduced stress concentration. the % in stress was 21.maximum stress observed was 1820N/cm2 in D3bone density. for D3 bone density for 7.

6 When it comes to prosthetic screw materials. E) In case of crown height of 7. the stress concentration was 1546N/cm2 for oblique loading (100N). in titanium alloy screws. in titanium alloy screws. . the stress concentration was 2824N/cm2 for oblique loading (100N). the stress concentration was 2353N/cm2 for oblique loading (100N). B) In case of crown height of 7. the stress concentration was 1012N/cm2 for vertical loading (200N). the stress concentration was 1416N/cm2 for vertical loading (200N). the stress concentration was 1932N/cm2 for oblique loading (100N).5mm. emphasizing the strength potential of increasing the concentration of tension in the implant and bone in oblique loading. G) In case of crown height of 10mm. in titanium screws. This result may be supported by the theoretical analysis of Rangert et al 13. H) In case of crown height of 10mm. D) In case of crown height of 10mm.5mm. in titanium alloy screws. According to S.5mm.5mm.A) In case of crown height of 7.D Moraes et al 4under axial loading. F) In case of crown height of 7. in titanium screws.31N/cm2 for vertical loading (200N).L. in titanium alloy screws. C) In case of crown height of 10mm. in titanium screws. suggests that the moment caused by the oblique forces is more severe. the stress concentration was 809. there was no significant increase in stress concentration in screw with increase in crown height however under oblique loads there was a significant increase in stress concentrations in screw with increase in crown height. in titanium screws. the stress distribution was 1215N/cm2 for vertical loading (200N).

The stress distribution pattern was observed in the form of colour coding bands. . they were subjected to FE analysis using ANSYS software. The type of alloy of the prosthetic screw is also an important consideration in designing a prosthesis that should not be overlooked.5mm and 10mm respectively. Further studies have to becarried out clinically to evaluate the effect of stress in different crown-implant ratios under functional load. the following conclusions are made Stress distribution was more in vertical loading than oblique loading in both crown heights of 7. the clinician should consider the height of the crown. When planning for implant prosthesis. duration which is usually observed clinically has not been taken into consideration to evaluate stress distribution pattern. (ii) This study has been conducted on computer generated models with different properties incorporated into the models. After loading.The stress concentration was more in titanium alloy screw than in commercially pure titanium screw in the crown heights of 7.stress distribution was more in D2 bone density than in D3 . Cyclic loading. Within the parameters and limitations – of this finite element study. stress distribution was observed only under static load. type of occlusal load on the prosthesis are also important for favourable stress distribution. (i) In the present study. the quality of the bone.so that the distribution was more in commercially pure ttitanium screw than in titanium alloy screw. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION: This study was conducted to evaluate stress distribution in different crown – implant ratios and under different loading conditioning in different bone densities.5mm and 10mm. Limitations of this study are: .

J Oral Rehabil 1995. Influence of bone quality on the stress distribution. Priel I. Eskitascioglu G. The effect of crown/implant ratio and crown height space on stress distribution in unsplinted implant supporting restorations.Clin Oral Implants Res. J Prosthet Dent 2007. 4.98:1-5. 1997 Feb. Schulte J. Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering. 5. Flores AM. Gross M. 2015. An in vitro experiment. Kanitani H.bone density and it was also seen in commercially pure titanium screws than in titatinium alloy screw.22:661-71. Chaushu G. Schmitt A. 6. Pellizzer EP. Kawamoto N. Implant prosthodontic treatment options for the edentulous patient. REFERENCES: 1.93:227-34.69:1934-1939. Santiago JF Jr. 3.18(7):689-96. Matsumoto N. . Nissan J. Renouard F. Verri FR.8(1):18-22. 2. Kiliçarslan MA. Clin Oral Implants Res 2006 Oct. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2011. Moraes SL. Crown-to-implant ratios of single tooth implant-supported restorations. Weed M. Ghelfan O. Turhan F. Silva JV. J Prosthet Dent 2005.17 Suppl 2:35-51. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of stress distribution in retention screws of different crown-implant ratios. Nisand D. 7. Gross O. Zarb GA . Wigianto R. Sevimay M. Ichikawa T. Impact of implant length and diameter on survival rates. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of the effect of different bone quality on stress distribution in an implant-supported crown.

Short implants. et al. Short dental implants in posterior partial edentulism: A multicenter retrospective 6-year case series study.Part 2.15(2):113-21. Implant Dent 2006 Jun. Goodcare CJ. FIGURE LEGENDS: TABLE/ FIGURE-1A. TABLE/ FIGURE-5A. Misch CE. Iplikcioglu H.8. TABLE/ FIGURE-6A. MODELLING OF SCREW(commercially pure titanium). Bernardes SR.21(1):86-93. MODELLING OF ABUTMENT. 3D MODEL OF THE IMPLANT PLACEMENT IN D3 BONE OF CROWN HEIGHT 7. 4B. . 3D MODEL OF THE IMPLANT PLACEMENT IN D2 BONEOF CROWN HEIGHT 10 MM. D2 BONE. Steigenga J. J Dent 2002 Jan. 5B. J Periodontol 2006. MODELLING OF CROWN (10mm). Comparative evaluation of the effect of diameter. 10. TABLE/ FIGURE-3. length and number of implants supporting three-unit fixed partial prostheses on stress distribution in the bone. MODELLING OF SCREW (titanium alloy).5 MM. MODELLING OF IMPLANT. 9. TABLE/ FIGURE-2.5mm). Misch CE. Barboza E. 77:1340. TABLE/ FIGURE-4A. 6B. Fones D. D3 BONE.30(1):41-6. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006 Jan-Feb. et al. Consensus conference panel report: Crownheight space guidelines for implant dentistry. 3D MODEL OF THE IMPLANT PLACEMENT IN D2 BONE OF CROWN HEIGHT 7. 11.et al. Das Neves FD. 6C. Finley JM. 1B. Akca K.5 MM. MODELING OF CROWN (7.An analysis of longitudinal studies.

3D MODEL OF MESH GENERATION IN D3 BONE OF CROWN HEIGHT 10 MM. SHOWING MAXIMUM STRESS CONCENTRATION APPLICATION OF OBLIQUE LOAD IN D2 BONE OF CROWN HEIGHT 10 MM. SHOWING MAXIMUM STRESS CONCENTRATION BY APPLICATION OF VERTICAL LOAD IN D2BONE OF CROWN HEIGHT 7.5 MM.5 MM. 7C. SHOWING 3D MODEL OF MESH GENERATION IN D2 BONE OF CROWN HEIGHT 10 MM. 7D.5 MM CROWN HEIGHT. SHOWING MAXIMUM STRESS CONCENTRATION BY APPLICATION OF VERTICAL LOAD IN D3 BONE OF CROWN HEIGHT10 MM. SHOWING MAXIMUM STRESS CONCENTRATION APPLICATION OF OBLIQUE LOAD IN D2 BONE OF CROWN HEIGHT 7. 9D.6D. 7B. SHOWING MAXIMUM STRESS CONCENTRATION BY APPLICATION OF VERTICAL LOAD IN D2BONE OF CROWN HEIGHT 10 MM.5 MM. 3D MODEL OF MESH GENERATION IN D3 BONE OF CROWN HEIGHT 7.5 MM. . 3D MODEL OF THE MESH GENERATION IN D2 BONE OF CROWN HEIGHT 7. TABLE/ FIGURE-9A. 9F. 9E. SHOWING MAXIMUM STRESS CONCENTRATION BY APPLICATION OF VERTICAL LOAD IN D3 BONE OF 7. 9B. TABLE/ FIGURE:7A. 3D MODEL OF THE IMPLANT PLACEMENT IN D3 BONE OF CROWN HEIGHT 10 MM. 9C.

SHOWING MAXIMUM STRESS CONCENTRATION BY APPLICATION OF VERTICAL LOAD IN TITANIUM SCREW WITH CROWN HEIGHT OF 7. 9K. SHOWING MAXIMUM STRESS CONCENTRATION APPLICATION OF OBLIQUE LOAD IN TITANIUM SCREW WITH CROWN HEIGHT 10 MM. 9N. 9I. SHOWING MAXIMUM STRESS CONCENTRATION APPLICATION OF OBLIQUE LOAD IN D3 BONE OF CROWN HEIGHT 10 MM. 9L. SHOWING MAXIMUM STRESS CONCENTRATION BY APPLICATION OF VERTICAL LOAD IN TITANIUM ALLOY SCREW WITH CROWN HEIGHT OF 7. SHOWING MAXIMUM STRESS CONCENTRATION BY APPLICATION OF OBLIQUE LOAD IN TITANIUM ALLOY SCREW WITH CROWN HEIGHT OF 10 MM. 9J. SHOWING MAXIMUM STRESS CONCENTRATION APPLICATION OF OBLIQUE LOAD IN D3 BONE OF CROWN HEIGHT 7.5 MM. SHOWING MAXIMUM STRESS CONCENTRATION BY APPLICATION OF VERTICAL LOAD IN TITANIUM ALLOY SCREW WITH CROWN HEIGHT OF 10 MM.5 MM.5 MM. SHOWING MAXIMUM STRESS CONCENTRATION BY APPLICATION OF OBLIQUE LOAD IN TITANIUM ALLOY SCREW WITH CROWN HEIGHT OF 7. SHOWING MAXIMUM STRESS CONCENTRATION APPLICATION OF VERTICAL LOAD IN TITANIUM SCREWWITH CROWN HEIGHT 10 MM. SHOWING MAXIMUM STRESS CONCENTRATION BY APPLICATION OF OBLIQUE LOAD IN TITANIUM SCREW WITH CROWN HEIGHT OF 7. . 9H. 9O.9G. 9P.5 MM. 9M.5 MM.

.TABLE/ FIGURE-10: COMPARISON OF THE VALUES OF MAXIMUM STRESS CONCENTRATION IN DIFFERENT BONE DENSITIES IN DIFFERENT CROWN HEIGHTS UNDER DIFFERENT LOAD APPLICATION. TABLE/ FIGURE-11: VALUES OF MAXIMUM STRESS CONCENTRATION IN UNDER DIFFERENT LOAD APPLICATION ON DIFFERENT SCREW MATERIALS.