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

net/publication/261296467

FORCE DISTRIBUTION ON DENTURE-SUPPORTING TISSUES BY FINITE

ELEMENT ANALYSIS

Conference Paper · May 2005

CITATIONS READS

0 130

2 authors:

Sanja Panchevska Gjorgi Kokalanov

Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje
10 PUBLICATIONS   66 CITATIONS    11 PUBLICATIONS   5 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Gjorgi Kokalanov on 03 April 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 FORCE DISTRIBUTION ON DENTURE-SUPPORTING TISSUES BY FINITE
ELEMENT ANALYSIS

Pancevska Sanja, Kokalanov Gorgi*

Dental clinicl centar “St. Pantelejmon” – Skopje,
Faculty of civil engineering – Skopje*

ABSTRACT
The force distribution on denture-supporting tissues, abutment teeth and alveolar
mucosa, was evaluated by using the finite elements analysis (FEA). For the purposes of this
study, a 3D model of a bilaterally terminal edentulous mandible with border teeth 44; 33 and a
Removable Partial Denture was made. The RPD was loaded unilaterally and bilaterally by
occlusal force with range of values from 5 to 250N. Non-linear FEA was used to examine the
force distribution. The results indicate that there were some differences in the distribution of
force on abutment teeth and alveolar mucosa. The differences depended on the force
magnitude and the loading place.

Key words: finite element analysis, occlusal forces, removable partial denture

INTRODUCTION
The forces that occure in the oral cavity are transmited, through the basis of the
denture, on the mucosa, the periost, and the bone. Part of this load is transmited, by the
occlusal rests, denture clasps and attachments, to the abutment teeth and there paradontal
tissue, and through the mucosa on the residual alveolare ridge.
A well planned partial denture provides an opportunity to avoid overloading of the
supporting tissues, thus avoiding pathological changes.

AIM
In this study, an attempt was made to create a 3D model of bilaterally terminal
edentulous mandible and a removable partial denture as solution for this condition.
The aim of this study is to use the prepared model to examine the proportional
distribution of occlusal forces on the supporting tissues, abutment teeth and the mucosa.

1


MATERIALS AND METHOD
In order to achieve the aim of our research, it was necessary to create a three-
dimensional (3D) computer model of a lower partially edentulous jaw or the Kennedy Class I.
The KaVo EWL Study Model UK 17 (Fig. 1) was used as the basis for the 3D model. It is a
model of bilaterally terminal edentulous mandible with border teeth 44,33.
The computer model was then used to prepare a metal framework with sublingual
major connector (measuring 4 by 2 mm). Interdental rests desined for the abutment teeth
44,43 and 32,33 were directlu tied to the sublingual bar. Acrylic resin saddles were modeled
on the metal framework placed in the space between the mucosa and the provisional
prosthetic plane, drawn out in advance on the 3D model. (fig. 2)
To complete the analysis that we set as a goal for this survey, we used the method of
finite element analysis. This method consists of physical discretization of space. The
continuum is divided in elements with finite dimensions, connected at discrete points, i.e.
nodes. For the purposes of our research, that continuum is the model of bilaterally terminal
edentulous mandible (the teeth, the residual alveolar ridge covered with mucosa) and the
removable partial denture with all its elements. The discretization was conducted with three-
dimensional finite elements of quadrilateral shape. Figure 3 shows a quadrilateral solid
element with its nodes.
The short saddle was represented with 1350 elements and 1815 nodes; the long saddle
had 1530 elements and 2057 nodes. (Fig.4)
To secure the free movement of the terminal saddles, as well as to provide some space
between the saddle and the mucosa, filled with saliva, elastic springs were installed (Fig 5).
The establishing of finite element model and its analysis were based on the SOFISTIC
software package.( Fig.6)
The survey applied non-linear analysis of the distribution of force and loads caused by
the force applied. For such models, of utmost importance is to predict the material
characteristics of the installed elements precisely. For the physical characteristics of the living
tissues, but also for the reconstructive materials, the data literature were used, as shown on
Table 1.

2


The load was simulated with vertical forces ranging from 5-250N, applied on different
segments of the prosthetic saddles. The time of activity of the occlusal forces was not taken
into consideration as a factor for analysis in our survey. The unilateral force impact was tested
for the short and the long saddle, as well as the simultaneous bilateral force impact on both
saddles (Fig 7). The long and the short saddles were divided into thirds – mesial, middle and
distal. The distal sections of the saddles were not exposed to force action. Nine different
points of loading were made for every different range of force.

RESULTS AND DISCUSION

The analysis of the values of the force distributed on the denture-supporting tissues,
abutment teeth and the alveolar mucosa, is presented in percentages on a table.
The tables refer to selected applied forces – small, medium and maximal border-line
forces, i.e. such forces that cause variations in the distribution on the supporting tissues. The
forces distributed on the abutment teeth and in the middle of the alveolar ridge, the ridge
points, were taken as referent values, having in mind that previous findings show that the only
statically correct is the load in the middle of the alveolar ridge.(tab. 2,3,4,5)
With all nine types of load, significant differences were registered in the total
distributed force on the abutments teeth, depending whether the load was caused by smaller or
greater force. In all tests, the greatest force on the abutment teeth was distributed in cases of
application of small loading force, in the 5 to 8N range. As the loading force increases, the
distributed force on the teeth gradually decreases. The decrease is especially prominent when
the applied force exceeds 23N. When impacted by forces greater than 58N, the distributed
force stabilizes at 2%, i.e. 1% and that value remains constant, regardless of the further
increase in the loads. With all unilateral loads, the total distributed force on the teeth is bigger
on the side from which the pressure is coming, especially in the cases of pressure on the
mesial sections.
When loaded with small forces, the distributed force on the abutment teeth differs
depending on the location and the side that suffers the pressure. The greatest percentage of
force on abutment teeth located on the side that suffers the pressure is distributed in cases of
unilateral load of mesial third of the short seddle.

3
 The distributed force for the teeth located on the opposite site from the loaded point,
when loaded with small force, ranges from 1 to 5 percent, with the highest values registered
on loading of the mesial third of the long seddle. When applying greater force, no force is
distributed to the teeth on the opposite side from the load points.
Most balanced distribution of force for the abutment teeth is registered with bilateral
loads. The distributed force varies, depending on the impact force and the length of the
prosthetic saddle. In general, with bilateral pressure, the least force is distributed on the
abutment teeth in cases of loading on the middle third of the boath seddles.
It is important to note that with the increase of the loading force, the distribution of
force moves toward the mucosa.
The force distributed on the mucosa shows variations in terms of the location, the side
and the strength of the pressure force. One significant feature is that, for unilateral loading of
the mesial segments, no force is distributed on the distal segment, even in cases of bilateral
loading.
When loaded with forces up to 23N, the distributed force on the mucosa varies
depending on the location where the force is applied. Thus, in cases of unilateral force on the
mesial, accompanied by simultaneous load on the mesial and middle sections of the short and
the long saddle, the distributed force is the strongest on the spot where the force is applied
(the mesial third). When applying force on the middle sections, the greatest force is
distributed on the distal sections, and the smallest force is registered with the mesial third.
For all unilateral impacts, the distributed force on the mucosa stabilizes at loading
forces over 23N and remains almost constant at greater forces.
At bilateral loads, the force is distributed on all supporting tissues, except for the cases
of mesial section loads, in which case there is no force distributed on the distal section of the
long saddle. The force is distributed most evenly in cases of bilateral simultaneous loads on
the mesial and middle thirds. The differences in the applied force distribution on the
supporting tissues of the short and the long saddle are small and can amount to 5%.
One characteristic shared for all types of loads is that in the beginning, at smaller loads
of up to 8N, the distribution of forces varies, and at forces over 23N the distribution stabilizes
rapidly to approximately constant values, all the way to the maximum applied force.
With the bilateral loads of forces greater than 23N, the largest percentage of the force
is distributed at the point in which the force is applied, similarly to the unilateral loads, and

4
the values are almost equivalent for both saddles. We can note that the force distributed to the
midline thirds, at simultaneous bilateral loads of the mesial and the middle sections, remains
equal for the both denture saddles at 18%.
On the basis of results, we could conclude that at simultaneous bilateral loads on the
mesial and the middle section of the denture saddles there is the most even distribution of
total force on all supporting elements.

CONCLUSIONS
Although we deal here with results achieved through mathematical model with
constant elements of predefined dimensions, they emphasize, nonetheless, the importance of
bilateral mastication for the distribution of the oclusal force. The results emphasize the need
to recommend simultaneous bilateral mastication to the patients with removable partial
dentures with distal free saddles.

1. The magnitude of the force distributed on the abutment teeth depends on the
magnitude of the applied force and the point of impact.
2. The distributed force and the pressure on the alveolar mucosa are greatest at the
impact point.
3. The most even distribution of load on the alveolar mucosa occurs at simultaneous
bilateral loading of the mesial and middle thirds of the saddles.

REFERENCES

1. Augereau D et al. Contraintes et deplacements dentaires en prothese adjointe partiale

– Analyse per la methode des elements finis. Les chiers de prothese 1997; No 98: 98-
100.

2. Bartacova S, Suchanek J, Miculka J, Vanek J. Computer simulation of bone tissue

response to a partial removable dentires fitted to a lower jow. Scripta Medica (Brno)
2003; 76(1): 21-28.

5
3. Blagojevic O. Bioelektricni potencijal zvacne musculature I pritisak zvakanja u
rehabilitacii parcijalne bezzubnosti. Doktorska disertacija Sarajevo 1982.

4. Browning JD, Jameson WE, Stewart CD, Mc Garah HE and Eric JD. Effect of
position loading of three removable partial denture clasp assemblies on movement of
abutment teeth. J Prosth Dent 1986; 55(3): 347-351.

5. Farah JW, Craig RG and Meroueh KA. Finite element analysis of mandibular model. J
Oral Rehabil 1988; 15: 615-24.

6. Gladilin E, Zarchow S, Deuflahard P and Hage H-C. A non-liner elastic soft tissue
model for craniofacial surgery simulations. ESAIM; 2002

7. Huebner KH and Thorton EA. The finite element method for engineers. 2nd Edition,
John Wiley and Sons 1982, New York.

8. Iton H, Caputo AA, Wylie R and Berg T. Effects of periodontal support and fixed
splinting on load transfer by removable partial dentures. J Prosth Dent 1998; 79(4):
465-71.

9. Keeve E, Girod S, Kikinis R and Girod B. Deformable modeling of facial tissue for
craniofacial surgery simulation: Computer Aided Surgery 1998; 3(5): 228-238.

10. Kokalanov G. Aplicationof joint elements of Finite Element Analysis of embankment

dams. Conference “Contact Mechanic 95”, Ferrara, Italy, 1995.

11. Kidd W and Daly C. The biological and mechanical effects of stress on oral mucosa. J
Prosth Dent 1982; 47(3): 317-29.

12. Papavasiliou G et al. Three-demensional finite element analysis of stress-distribution

around single tooth implants as a function of bony support prosthesis type and loading
during function. J Prosth Dent 1996: 76(6): 633-40

6
 13. Sato Y, Abe Y, Okane H and Tsuga K. Finite element analysis of stress relaxation in
soft denture liner. J Oral Rehabil 2000; 27: 660-663.

14. Takayama Y et al. The dynamic behavior of lower complete denture during unilateral
loads: analysis using the finite element method. J of Oral Rehabil 2001; 28: 1064-74.

15. Veleski D. Evaluacija na dzvakopritisokot i reakcijata na potpornite tkiva na subtotalni

protezi, (doktorska disertacija) Skopje 1988.

16. Vujosevic Lj. I suradnici. Stomatoloski materijali, Medicinska knjiga, Beograd, 1997.

17. Wo Chun-Ho et al. Stress in denture-supporting tissue by finite element analysis. New
Tai pei Journal of Medicine 2001; Sep, pp: 233-38.

18. Yamashita S, Saki S Hatch JP, Rugh JD. Relationshop between oral function and
occlusal support in denture wearers. J of Oral Rehabil 2000; 27: 881-886.

FIGURES AND TABLES:

Fig.1 KaVo EWL Study Model UK 17

7
Fig.2 Metal framework

Fig. 3 quadrilateral solid element

Fig. 4 denture seddles

8
K1 K2

Fig. 5 Elastic springs

Fig.6 FE model

Fig. 7 Unilateral loading of the short seddle

9
 Young’s Poisson’s
Modulus Ratio
(MPa)
Tooth 10 000 0.30
Periodontal ligament 100 1.45
Mocosa ( 1mm) 50 0.40
Cortical bone 13 700 0.30
Cancellous bone 7 930 0.30
Co- Cr cast 225 000 0.30
Acrylic resin 2 000 0.31
Acrylic teeh 3 000 0.33

Table 1. Physical characteristics of living tissues and reconstructive materials used in the
EFA

mesial short middle short mesial short mesial long middle long mesial long
seddle seddle and seddle seddle seddle and seddle
middle middle
44;43 32;33 44;43 32;33 44;43 32;33 44;43 32;33 44;43 32;33 44;43 32;33
8N 22% 1% 17% 0% 9% 1% 5% 11% 1% 13% 2% 9%
23N 5% 1% 5% 0% 5% 1% 3% 7% 0% 2% 1% 5%
58N 4% 0% 2% 0% 3% 0% 1% 3% 0% 1% 0% 2%
133N 3% 0% 1% 0% 2% 0% 1% 2% 0% 1% 0% 1%
201N 3% 0% 1% 0% 2% 0% 1% 2% 0% 1% 0% 1%

Table 2. Distribution of force on abutment teeth during unilateral loading

Mesial short Middle short mesial and

and long and long and middle
seddle seddle short long
seddle
44;43 32;33 44;43 32;33 44;43 32;33
8N 20% 13% 17% 9% 21% 13%
23N 6% 4% 4% 2% 5% 3%
58N 3% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1%
133N 2% 1% 1% 0% 1% 1%
201N 2% 1% 1% 0% 1% 1%

Table 3. Distribution of force on abutment teeth during bilateral loading

10
 mesial/ short medial/ short mesial and mesial/ long medial/ long mesial and
seddle seddle middle/ short seddle seddle middle/ long
seddle seddle
m/3 md/3 d/3 m/3 md/3 d/3 m/3 md/3 d/3 m/3 md/3 m/3 md/3 m/3 md/3 d/3
d/3 d/3
8N 68% 9% 0% 9% 31% 43% 72% 18% 0% 75% 9% 0% 9% 25% 52% 36% 29% 24%
23N 68% 26% 0% 47% 19% 29% 50% 33% 11% 74% 16% 0% 22% 34% 42% 44% 34% 16%
58N 68% 28% 0% 28% 39% 29% 53% 35% 9% 71% 25% 0% 24% 34% 41% 45% 35% 18%
133N 69% 28% 0% 29% 39% 31% 52% 36% 10% 70% 27% 0% 25% 34% 40% 45% 35% 19%
201N 69% 28% 0% 29% 39% 31% 53% 35% 10% 69% 28% 0% 25% 34% 40% 45% 35% 19%

Table 4. Distribution of force on alveolar mucosa during unilateral loading

(m/3 – mesial third; md/3 – middle third; d/3 – distal third)

mesial/ short and mesial/ short and medial/ short and medial/ short and mesial and middle/ mesial and
long seddle long seddle long seddle long seddle short and long middle/ short and
seddle long seddle
short seddle long seddle short seddle long seddle short seddle long seddle
m/3 md/3 d/3 m/3 md/3 d/3 m/3 md/3 d/3 m/3 md/ d/3 m/3 md/3 d/3 m/3 md/3 d/3
8N 1% 13% 29% 0% 4% 27% 24% 14% 2% 16% 9% 1% 34% 1% 0% 32% 0% 0%
23N 11% 20% 17% 11% 21% 14% 26% 17% 5% 21% 16% 7% 36% 10% 0% 37% 7% 0%
58N 14% 19% 16% 14% 21% 13% 27% 18% 5% 22% 17% 8% 34% 13% 0% 36% 12% 0%
133N 14% 20% 15% 15% 22% 13% 25% 18% 5% 23% 18% 9% 34% 14% 0% 36% 13% 0%
201N 14% 19% 15% 16% 22% 13% 25% 18% 5% 23% 18% 9% 34% 14% 0% 36% 13% 0%

Table 5. Distribution of force on alveolar mucosa during bilateral loading

11

View publication stats