Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 1997 24; 929-935
Methods for minimizing the errors in mandibular model
mounting on an articulator
p. A D R I E N & J . S C H O U V E R * Nancy and Metz, France
SUMMARY The study examines the errors that occur
in mandibular mounting on a hinge-axis articulator
using impression wax and an arbitrary hinge axis.
The transfer of the model positions on the articulator
was anaJysed mathematically. The error varied
considerably as a function of the real hinge axis
Introduction
Building a mandibular model on a hinge-axis locator
is a delicate operation. Even when it is done carefully
and accurately, there are frequently differences
between the position of the actual occlusion and
those of the articulalor models. If the modelling is
done using an arbitrary hinge axis, the use of wax
to record the inter-maxiliary relationships, or the
placing of any other material between the occlusal
surfaces, can lead to an altered hinge axis localization.
This difference was calculated by Weinberg in 1959
for one specific case, but several groups have examined
the nature of the hinge axis and its influence on the
use of articulators (McCoUum, 1939; Jankelson, 1955;
Cohen, 1956; Borgh & Posselt, 1958; Page, 1958).
Weinberg analysed the clinical consequences of an
arbitrary localization of the hinge axis. The present
study extends the work of Weinberg (1959) to
minimize the occlusion error in the preparation of
prostheses.
Materials and methods
Model building on the articulator
The maxillary mgdel was mounted using an arbitrary
1997 Blackwel! Science Lid
localization. It was influenced by the orientation of
the occlusion plane and especially by the thickness of
the impression wax. Analysis of the results provided
clinical conclusions that help minimize localization
errors.
localization and transfer angle. In centric occlusion,
the movement of the condyles is a pure rotation
around the patient's real hinge axis {McCollum &
Stuart, 1955; Posselt, 1968; Ingervall, Helklmo &
Carlsson, 1971; Ziebert fr Knap, 1973; Preston, 1979;
Beard & Clayton, 1981). Consider a point E, a vertex
of a mandibular cusp, that comes into contact with
a point Cp (patient contact) of a maxillary occlusal
surface. E and Cp become confounded under centric
occlusion. The bite occlusion was recorded by placing
a sheet of wax in between the occluding teeth. The
trajectory of E from the time it touched the wax
until contacting Cp was given by a circular arc of
centre O (patient's real rotation axis) (Fig. 1).
Recording wax was used to prepare the mandibular
models. The model was first fixed to the lower limb
of the articulator, then the wax was removed. The
articulator was again closed by a rotation around the
arbitrary hinge axis O'. Point E contacted a point Ca
(articular contact). This was different from Cp because
the arbitrary centre of articular rotation was not that
of the patient (Fig. 2). The difference between the
contact point Ca on the articulator and the point Cp
in the patient's mouth is the model error demonstrated
by Weinberg (1959). /
929
930 P. ADRIEN & J. SCHOUVER

Real hinge axis

Fig. 1. Trajectory of a mandibular cusp during occlusion.

t Z

Fig. 3. Principle of the mathematical resolution.

used, as the coordinates of the articulator contact Ca

were readily measurable. To sum up, the calculations
O : Real axis were carried out in the following order: (i) calculation
O': Arbitrary axis
of E from Ca in the articulator system; (ii) transfer of E
to the patient system; (iii) calculation of the patient
Fig. 2. Difference in closing for real and arbitrary hinge axes. contact Cp; and (iv) calculation of the difference
Ca - Cp.
Calculations
Relative positions of the hinge axis. Several workers have Mathematical treatment
shown that the real hinge axis O lies within a 5 mm
Geometric model of displacement of a point on the mandible
radius circle concentric to O' when an arbitrary facial
The movement of Ca towards E, as with that of Cp
arc of localization is used (Beck, 1960; Lauritzen &
towards E (i.e. calculation of the points E and Cp) is in
Bodner, 1961; Lavigne & Spirgi, 1972; Slavicek &
essence the problem of determining the intersection
Lugner, 1982). The distance Ca - Cp was calculated for
point between a straight line D and a circle C (Fig. 3).
all the real hinge axis positions O lying 5 mm around
If R is the radius of the circle C; z is the intersection of
the arbitrary axis O'.
the straight line D with the circle C and b is intersection
Reference systems for calculation. There are two reference of D with the axis of Z then we have the following
systems (Fig. 2): one is the 'patient' system based on O,
summary of equations:
in which E is calculated from Cp and the other is the
for the straight line T>: Z = ax + b
'articulator' system based on O' in which Ca is calculated
for the circle of centre O: Z^ = R^ - X^
from E.
With a the slope of D and b the distance Ob, the
Method of calculation. Two procedures can be used intersection point / is given by the equations
leading to the same result. The first one consists in
calculating Ca from Cp. In the other, the reasoning is Z; — a Aj -\ 1.2 — n2 _ y2

reversed and the position of the point on the articulator and

is transferred to the patient. This is the procedure we Xj(a^ + 1) + / + b'^ -R^ ^ 0

1997 Blackwell Science Ltd, Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 24; 929-935

 MANDIBULAR MODEL MOUNTING ERRORS 931

z Calculation ofCp in the patient system. Parameter values:

0' X
a = -t
b = Oc = Oe - ec
with:
c 'Oe ^ Z^ + X
W
_
ec = m'Ca = cosco
Ca
and
e

^^ /m

Fig. 4. Parameters arising in the different equations.

T Results
All the calculations were done on a microcomputer
using specific software written in Turbo Pascal (Adrien
& Schouver, 1990). All result data are to four decimal
places, as were those of Weinberg (1959), and we used
the same numerical values as Weinberg:
Which has the general form AX^ + BZ + C, with
1 Contact position Ca: Z = 50 mm and Z = 32 mm
A = €?• + \ 2 Orientation of the horizontal occlusion plane: co = 0°
B = 2ab 3 Wax thickness: W = 3 mm

for which the roots are Variations of Weinberg's error as a function of

the hinge axis position
-B ± A/B^ - 4AC -B ± Figure 5 shows the change in error with the position
X= or Z =
2A 2A of the real axis on a 5 mm radius circle around 0', the
arbitrary hinge axis. The line passing through 0 ' and
If B^ - 4:AC is positive, there are two roots. The the 0° position of the real axis was related to the upper
positive root X is used to obtain: arm of the articulator. The ordinate gives the value of
the localization error (in mm). The localization error
-B + -4AC varied from zero to 0-3850 mm, depending on the
2A position of the real hinge axis, as shown by two almost
identical curves. There were two extreme values,
Zj = AXj + B 0-3850 mm for a real hinge axis position of 50-9°, and
Values of the parameters in the above equations (Fig. 4) 0-3460 mm for an angle of 240-0°. The error was zero
Calculation of E in the articulator system for angles of 145-6° and 325-6°. These two values are
situated on the straight line connecting the centre of
a — -tgo) rotation of the articulator and the midpoint of the chord
b = O'e = O'c + ce joining the mandibular and maxillary contact points (E
with: and Ca). Two sectors of the real hinge axis position
gave rise to a localization error exceeding 0-2 mm; they
O'c = Zca + ^ca X
are 355-110° and 185-295° (shaded values).
W
ce = Cam' = -"
cosco Incidence of the occlusion plane orientation
and The localization error was calculated for four occlusal
~ + plane values, 0°, 10°, 20° and 30°, and for a wax

1997 Blackwell Science Ltd, Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 24; 929-935

932 P. ADRIEN & J. SCHOUVER
110
120
130
140
150
Fig. 5. Location error for different hinge axis positions.
thickness of 3 mm. The error became smaller as the
angle of the occlusal plane increased (Fig. 6). This is
because its slope approaches that of the straight line
defined by the hinge axis and the tooth contact
examined. A variation of 30° in the occlusion plane
gave a maximum error difference of 0-1295 mm for a
wax thickness of 3 mm. This difference became
0-0416 mm when the wax thickness was reduced to
1 mm. The occlusion plane has relatively little influence
on the localization error and was not proportional to
its inclination (Table 1).
Effect of wax thickness
A total of three wax thicknesses, 1, 2 and 3 mm, were
examined: (Fig. 7). Using an occlusion plane of 10°
and a hinge angle of 51°, the maximum error was
0-3120 mm with a wax thickness of 3 mm. It was no
50-9'
20°
10°
Upper arm of X
o 0°
355° the articulator
350°
more than 0-1032 mm when the wax thickness was
1 mm, giving a difference of 0-2088 mm. Variations of
the localization error were essentially proportional to
the wax thickness (Table 1).
Discussion
Weinberg (1959) examined the specific case of a cusp
vertex placed 50 mm in front of and 32 mm below the
hinge axis of the articulator. The real hinge axis was
situated 5 mm in front on a plane horizontal to the
arbitrary axis. The occlusion plane was at 0° and the
impression wax was 3 mm thick and the calculated error
was 0-1934 mm. Using the same values, we obtained an
error of 0-2274 mm. The difference is due to the fact that
Weinberg (1959) constructed a first reference system to
calculate the patient contact Cp and a second one to
1997 Blackwell Science Ltd, Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 24; 929-935
 MANDIBULAR MODEL MOUNTING ERRORS 933

Occlusal plane :0'

120, Occlusal plane:

130

140
Occlusal plane:20'
150

160 Occlusal plane

200

210

220 .20°

230 310°
240 300°
240-4° 250 290°
260 280°
270

Fig. 6. Location error for different occlusion plane orientations.

Table 1. Location error as a function of the wax thickness and This study has provided three main conclusions.
occlusion plane orientation
1. An error in the orientation of the occlusion plane
has only a small incidence on the mandible localization
Occlusion plane (degrees)
model. A difference in orientation of 10° can increase
V^ax thickness (mm) 0 10 20 30 the error by maximally 0-0730 mm with a wax 3 mm
thick, and by only 0-0235 for wax 1 mm thick.
0-1267 0-1032 0-0906 0-0851 2. When the real hinge axis is located at 5 mm (limit
0-2550 0-2072 0-1817 0-1702 value) from the arbitrary hinge axis of the articulator
0-3850 0-3120 0-2731 0-2555
and the wax is 3 mm thick, only positions 355-110°
and 185-295° cause errors greater than 0-2 mm in the
calculate the articular contact Ca. He compared the two localization of the mandibular model. As the real axis
points in a third reference system constructed from F, position is random, it is clinically impossible to estimate
which he arbitrarily declared to be common to the two the size of the error due to an arbitrary determination
preceding ones. This is not true mathematically. Studies of the hinge axis.
of other cusp vertices or other dentitions would give 3. The impression wax for recording the relationships
different numerical values. All results should not be under centric occlusion causes an error that is directly
considered as references, but simply as giving an order proportional to its thickness, and this is a major factor
of magnitude. in the localization error. A 1 mm change in wax

1997 Blackwell Science Ltd, Journal of Oral Rehahilitation 24; 929-935

934 P. ADRIEN & J. SCHOUVER
115
120
125
130
135
230
235
240
245
250 255
285
Fig. 7. Location error for different wax thicknesses.
thickness may cause an extra error of 0-130 mm. This
parameter is directly linked to the operator and is the
only truly controllable one.
Clinical consequences
The localization on the real hinge axis articulator avoids
the error due to the use of wax for recording inter-
maxillary relationships. When the hinge axis is
determined arbitrarily, a localization without wax avoids
localization error. But this requires that the maximal
cusp contact occurs with a centred axis and that the
position of the models is reproducible and stable. In all
other cases, impression wax must be used. Thus, in
order to minimize the error, it is important to use a
facial arc of localization and transfer in order to obtain
an occlusion plane as close as possible to that of the
patient. Second, the wax used to take the centred
impression should be as thin as possible between the
wax thickness = 3 mm
wax thickness = 2mm
wax thickness = 1mm
Upper arm of
the articulator
310
305
300
295
290
back molars. But this wax must not be punctured so as
to avoid all distorting contacts. It must also retain its
qualities of rigidity and optimal fidelity. A preliminary
occlusal analysis before any inter-maxillary recording is
thus needed to eliminate the pre-contacts that could
prevent the production of accurate wax impressions.
References
ADRIEN, P. & SCHOUVER, J. (1990) Etude de la trajectoire des faces
occlusales mandibulaires sur articulateur semi-adaptable par
simulation mathematique en fonction de la programmation des
determinants de I'occlusion. Etude experimentale metrologique. These
de y cycle pour le Doctorat en Sciences Odontologiques,
Nancy, France.
BEARD, C.C. & CLAYTON, J.A. (1981) Study on the validity of the
terminal hinge axis. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 46, 185.
BECK. H.O. (1960) Selection of an articulator and jaw registration.
Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 5, 878.
BoRGH, O. & PossELT, U. (1958) Hinge axis registration: experiment
on the articulator. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 8, 35.
1997 Blackwell Science Ltd, Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 24; 929-935
 MANDIBULAR MODEL MOUNTING ERRORS 935

COHEN, R. (1956) The relationship of anterior guidance to condylar
guidance in mandibular movement. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry,
6, 758.
INGERVALL, B., HELKIMO, M . & CARLSSON, G, E. (1971) Recording of
the retruded position of the mandihle Vi'ith application of varying
external pressure to the lower jaw in man. Archives of Oral
Biology, 16, 1165.
JANKELSON, B. (1955) Physiology of human dental occlusion.
Journal of American Dental Association, 50, 664.
LAURITZEN, A. & BODNER, G.H. (1961) Variations in localisation of
arbitrary and true hinge axis points. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry,
11, 224.
LAVIGNE, J. & SPIRGI, M . (1972) Etude du mouvement d'ouverture
mandibulaire en retrusion. Schweizer Monatsschrift fur
Zahnmedizin, 82, 671.
McCoLLUM, B.B. (1939) Fundamentals involved in prescribing
restorative dental remedies. Dental Items Interest, 6 1 , 522, 641,
724, 852, 942.
McCoLLUM, B.B. &• STUART, Ch.E. (1955) A research report, (ed. Ch. Correspondence: Dr Pascal Adrien, 29, Rue de la Salle, 54000
F. STUART), Ventura, CA.
PAGE, H.L. (1958) Some confusing concepts in articulation. Dental
Digest, 64 (71), 120.
PossELT, U. (1968) Physiology of occlusion and rehabilitation (ed. C. O.
Davis), 2nd edn. Philadelphia. : ; \
PRESTON, J . D . (1979) A reassessment of the mandibular transverse
horizontal axis theory. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 41, 605.
SLAVICEK, R. & LUGNER, P. (1982) Rapport entre l'articulateur
semi-adaptable et la relation anatomique cranienne. Analyse
mathematique et mecanique. Cahiers de Prothese, 37, 137; 38,
133:39,127.
WEINBERG, L.A. (1959) The transverse hinge axis: real or imaginary.
Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 9, 755.
ZiERBERT, G.J. & KNAP, E.J. (1973) Effect of jaw guidance on
retruded stroke as recorded in the sagittal plan. Journal of
Prosthetic Dentistry, 42, 262. .
Nancy, France.

© 1997 Blackwell Science Ltd, Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 24; 929-935