ORIGINAL ARTICLE

A numerical simulation of tooth movement

produced by molar uprighting spring
Yukio Kojima,a Toshihiro Mizuno,b and Hisao Fukuic
Nagoya and Atsugi, Japan

Introduction: Uprighting a tipped molar by using an uprighting spring is a fundamental orthodontic treatment
technique. However, mechanical analyses have not been carried out for molar uprighting, and the
mechanism of tooth movement has not been clarified. The purposes of this article were to clarify these
mechanisms and to demonstrate the usefulness of mechanical simulations by which the effects of many
factors on tooth movement can be estimated quantitatively. Methods: A 3-dimensional finite element
method was used to simulate the uprighting of a second molar with a molar uprighting spring. The effects of
a retainer and spring-arm bending on the tooth movements were shown quantitatively. Results: The retainer
was useful to reduce the movement of anchor teeth. The same effect could be achieved by bending the
spring arm in the lingual direction, but the molar was greatly rotated in the occlusal plane and was tipped in
the buccal direction. Conclusions: The usefulness of a mechanical simulation method to predict orthodontic
tooth movement in clinical situations was demonstrated. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;132:630-8)

O
ne of the most fundamental orthodontic tech-
niques is to upright a tipped molar by using an
uprighting spring.1,2 In this technique, a ca-
nine and the premolars as the anchor teeth are con-
nected with a wire. To strengthen the anchorage, the
canine and the premolar of the treated side are con-
nected with a lingual retainer to those teeth of the
opposite side.1 Furthermore, the arm of the uprighting
spring is bent toward the lingual side to prevent buccal
movement of the anchor teeth and lingual movement of
the molar.1 Such wire bending has been used in many
orthodontic tooth movements.3-5
However, mechanical analyses have not been car-
ried out for molar uprighting. The mechanism of tooth
movement has not been clarified. Also, the effects of
the retainer and the bent spring arm on tooth movement
have not been clarified. The main purpose of this article
was to clarify these effects. By using a previously
proposed method,6,7 the movements of the molar and
the anchor teeth produced by an uprighting spring were
calculated. Another purpose was to demonstrate the
usefulness of such mechanical simulations, by which
a
Associate professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Nagoya Institute
of Technology, Nagoya, Japan.
b
Research assistant, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Kanagawa Insti-
tute of Technology, Atsugi, Japan.
c
Professor, Department of Dental Materials Science, School of Dentistry,
Aichi-Gakuin University, Nagoya, Japan.
Reprint requests to: Yukio Kojima, Nagoya Institute of Technology, “Shikumi”
College, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Gokiso-cho, Showaku-ku,
Nagoya, 466-8555, Japan; e-mail, kojima.yukio@nitech.ac.jp.
Submitted, April 2005; revised and accepted, July 2005.
0889-5406/$32.00
Copyright © 2007 by the American Association of Orthodontists.
doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.07.035
630
the effects of many factors on tooth movement can be
estimated quantitatively.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Tooth element and orthodontic tooth movement
When the force falls below 1 or 2 N, it can be
assumed that the teeth and the alveolar bone are
undeformable, rigid bodies.8 At this level of force, the
initial tooth movement is produced by deformation of
the periodontal ligament (PDL). In addition, the PDL is
assumed to be a homogeneous elastic film with uniform
thickness. Under these assumptions, the action of the
PDL is the same as an elastic spring. In other words, a
tooth supported by the PDL can be represented by a
spring element in a 3-dimensional (3D) finite element
analysis.8 This spring element will be called the “tooth
element.” By using the surface model of any tooth, the
stiffness matrix of the tooth element can be calculated
easily. The calculation method for tooth elements is
shown in the Appendix (1). In this study, the surface
models of the molar and the anchor teeth were made
based on a dental study model (Nissin Dental Products,
Kyoto, Japan). The surface models were divided into
small triangular regions as finely as possible. The
number of small regions for each tooth was about 2000.
It was further assumed that the thickness of the PDL
was 0.2 mm, Young’s modulus was E ⫽ 0.2 MPa, and
Poisson’s ratio was ␯ ⫽ 0.47. With these values, the
labiolingual and axial mobility values of the maxillary
first premolar calculated by using the tooth element
were about 15 and 8 ␮m per newton, respectively.
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Volume 132, Number 5
Fig 1. Uprighting of the left second molar by using an
uprighting spring with a helical loop. Brackets and
anchor wire are ligated firmly to prevent sliding.
These values were about the same as those measured by
Goto.9
The tooth moved as a result of absorption and
apposition of the alveolar bone, which was assumed to
occur in the normal direction on the outer surface of the
PDL. Also, it was assumed that the amount of bone
remodeling was in proportion to mean stress, ␴m, in the
PDL. The amount of absorption (␮m) per unit of stress
(kPa) and unit of time (day) was denoted by a coeffi-
cient, C (␮m/kPa/day). This coefficient was assumed to
be the same for all teeth. Under these assumptions, the
orthodontic tooth movement, ⌬U, for a small time
increment, ⌬T, can be calculated as shown in the
Appendix (2).6
Calculation model
Figure 1 shows a mandibular left second molar
uprighted with an uprighting spring. This molar is
tipped 30° in the sagittal plane. The mandibular left
canine and the first and second premolars were used as
anchor teeth. These teeth were connected by using a
0.016-in square wire made of stainless steel. Its
Young’s modulus and Poisson’s ratio were assumed to
be 200 GPa and 0.3, respectively. This wire will be
called the “anchor wire.” Edgewise brackets with a
3-mm width were bonded to the anchor teeth. These
brackets and the wire were ligated firmly to prevent
sliding. Any relative movement between the bracket
and the anchor wire is virtually impossible. For a
patient with a retainer, the left canine and first premolar
Kojima, Mizuno, and Fukui 631
Fig 2. Three-dimensional finite element model for Fig-
ure 1. Wires are divided by the 3D elastic beam element
and the nodes at the tooth are connected to the tooth
elements.
were connected to the right ones. The retainer was
made with 0.04-in stainless steel round wire, which was
bonded to the teeth at the lingual tubercle.
The uprighting spring was made with 0.016-in
stainless steel square wire and was incorporated with a
helical loop having a 2-mm diameter. The posterior end
of the spring was fixed to the edgewise tube with a
4-mm width. The spring has a straight arm 22 mm in
length that is parallel to the length of the molar bracket
in the parasagittal plane and is projected anteriorly to
lie passively 12 mm gingival to the anchor wire
between the mandibular left premolars (Fig 1, initial
position shown by broken line). To activate the spring,
the anterior end of the spring arm was hooked to the
anchor wire between the left first and second premolars.
For the calculations of the bending effect of the spring
arm on tooth movement, the arm of the spring was bent
toward the lingual side at the anterior end of the
edgewise tube. Seven simulations were carried out by
changing the angle of spring arm, ␤, from 5° to 35°. But
only a result of ␤ ⫽ 25° is used here to demonstrate the
effects of bending on tooth movement.
Finite element procedure
Figure 2 shows the 3D finite element model for
Figure 1. The wires were divided into 3D elastic beam
elements. Each element is indicated by a line with
nodes at both ends. It was assumed that the wire in the
bracket slot was not deformed, so the thickness of the
element in the bracket was considered to be much
greater. The nodes at the bracket positions or bonding
positions were connected to the tooth element node.
Since the tooth element is a single node element, the
tooth element can be connected to a beam node without
632 Kojima, Mizuno, and Fukui American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
November 2007

an increase in the total number of nodes. The left canine

and the first premolar were connected to the retainer at
the lingual tubercle by using rigid beam elements. A
link element was used to activate the uprighting spring,
by which the anterior end of the spring arm was
constrained so as to contact the anchor wire. This link
element can transmit only the vertical and buccolingual
forces from the spring end to the anchor wire. The total
number of nodes in this model was only 74, making
calculations possible on a personal computer.
The nodal displacements at time T are calculated by
using the finite element model (Fig 2), and the stress Fig 3. Position of teeth and distribution of mean stress
distributions in the PDL of each tooth are calculated by in the PDL at an early stage (CT ⫽ 25 ␮m/kPa), without
using the tooth elements. Then the orthodontic tooth the retainer and spring-arm bending. Initial position of
movement ⌬U for each tooth is calculated by the the teeth and passive position of the spring are indi-
cated by hidden red lines. Compressive stress acted on
method shown in the Appendix (2). The wire nodes
the upper buccal surface and tensile stress acted on the
connected to the tooth elements move by ⌬U. By
lower buccal surface in the canine and the premolars.
repeating the procedure described above, the tooth This stress distribution produced a tipping movement.
positions can be calculated for any amount of time. We
developed a computer program of the finite element
method including this procedure.
As indicated in the Appendix (2), both the absorp-
tion of the alveolar bone and tooth movement are
controlled by a parameter, CT. CT is the product of the
bone absorption coefficient C (␮m/kPa/day) and time T
(day), and so the unit of CT becomes ␮m/kPa. At
present, because the value of C is uncertain, CT is used
to indicate the progress of tooth movement.

RESULTS
Without both the retainer and spring-arm bending
When hooking the anterior end of the spring arm to
the anchor wire, an upward force of 0.66 N was
necessary. This eruptive force and the moment tending
to upright (0.66 N · 22 mm ⫽ 15 N · mm) acted on the
second molar. The reaction force, an intrusive force of
0.66 N, acted on the anchor wire. With the uprighting
of the second molar, the initial elastic deformation of
the spring gradually returned to its original state, and
the forces acting on the teeth gradually decreased.
Figure 3 shows the teeth at an early stage of tooth
movement (CT ⫽ 25 ␮m/kPa). This figure is based on
the results of our calculations. The position of the teeth
and the configuration of the wires were calculated by Fig 4. Position of teeth after sufficient time elapsed (CT ⫽
using the finite element model (Fig 2). The stress 500 ␮m/kPa), without the retainer and spring-arm bend-
distribution in the PDL of the teeth was calculated by ing. Initial position of the teeth and passive position of the
using each surface model. Both results are shown spring are indicated by hidden red lines. a, Occlusal view:
together in Figure 3. The beam elements (anchor wire anchor teeth moved in the buccal direction. b, Sagittal
and spring) and brackets are represented by rectangular view: anchor teeth intruded and tipped.
blocks. The distribution of mean stress, ␴m, in the PDL
is indicated by color contours. The initial position of Figure 3, the force acting on the anchor wire was 0.5 N.
the teeth and the passive position of the spring are On the buccal surface of the anchor teeth, a compres-
represented by hidden red lines. At the stage shown in sive stress was produced in the upper area with a tensile
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics Kojima, Mizuno, and Fukui 633
Volume 132, Number 5

Fig 5. Position of teeth and distribution of mean stress

in the PDL at an early stage (CT ⫽ 25 ␮m/kPa), with the
retainer, but without spring-arm bending. Initial position
of the teeth and passive position of the spring are
indicated by hidden red lines. By using the retainer,
stress in the canine and premolars decreased in com-
parison with Figure 3 (without the retainer).

stress in the lower area. This stress distribution was due

to the tipping movement of the anchor teeth. On the
distal surface of the second molar, compressive stress
was produced in the upper area with tensile stress in the
lower area. The opposite stresses were produced on the
mesial surface.
Figure 4 shows the position of the teeth after a
sufficient amount of time has elapsed (CT ⫽ 500
␮m/kPa). At CT ⫽ 500 ␮m/kPa, the initial elastic
deformation of the spring has almost returned to its
original state so that the intrusive force acting on the
anchor wire and the eruptive force acting on the molar
became 0.01 N. In the sagittal view (Fig 4, b), the molar
rotated 22° and uprigthed. The center of rotation moved
upward about 0.6 mm. In the buccolingual direction,
the molar tipped slightly; ie, the tipping angle remained
within 1°. In the occlusal view (Fig 4, a), the rotational
Fig 6. Position of teeth after sufficient time elapsed
angle of the molar was small (␣ ⫽ 1.2°). The anchor
(CT ⫽ 500 ␮m/kPa), with the retainer, but without
teeth intruded 1.3 mm and moved 1.1 mm in the buccal spring-arm bending. Initial position of the teeth and
direction. As a result, the anchor teeth tipped 6° in the passive position of the spring are indicated by hidden
buccal direction. red lines. a, Occlusal view: by using the retainer, buccal
movement of the left anchor teeth decreased in com-
Effects of the retainer
parison with Figure 4, a (without the retainer). b, Sagittal
Figure 5 shows the stress distribution in the PDL at view: by using the retainer, intrusion and tipping of the
CT ⫽ 25 ␮m/kPa, when the left canine and the first left anchor teeth were decreased in comparison with
premolar are connected to the right ones with the Figure 4, b (without the retainer).
retainer. The stress distribution on the second molar
was similar to that without the retainer (Fig 3). On the tooth movements were less than those when the retainer
buccal surface of the anchor teeth, a low compressive was not used (Fig 4). In the sagittal view, the second
stress was produced over almost the entire region. molar rotated 22°, and the center of rotation moved
Figure 6 shows the position of the teeth at CT ⫽ upward about 0.6 mm. The tipping angle in the
500 ␮m/kPa. The anchor teeth intruded 0.7 mm and buccolingual direction remained within 1°. The move-
moved 0.3 mm in the buccal direction. As a result, the ment of the molar was the same as without the retainer
anchor teeth tipped 2° in the buccal direction. These (Fig 4).
634 Kojima, Mizuno, and Fukui
Fig 7. Position of teeth and distribution of mean stress
in the PDL at an early stage (CT ⫽ 25 ␮m/kPa), without
the retainer, but with spring-arm bending. Initial position
of the teeth and passive position of the spring are
indicated by hidden red lines. With the bending of
spring arm, stresses in the canine and premolars de-
creased in comparison with Figure 3 (without bending).
Stress in the second molar increased due to a lingual
force produced by spring-arm bending.
Effects of the bending angle in the spring arm
To demonstrate the effects of bending on tooth
movement, we introduced a case where the spring arm
was bent, ␤ ⫽ 25°, toward the lingual side before
activation. When the end of the arm was hooked to the
anchor wire, a force in the buccal direction of 0.42 N
was necessary. The reactional force of 0.42 N acted
on the anchor wire in the lingual direction. Figure 7
shows the stress distribution in the PDL at CT ⫽ 25
␮m/kPa. The stress distribution on the root of the
anchor teeth was similar to that with the retainer (Fig
5). On the buccal surface of the second molar, high
compressive stress was produced in the upper mesial
region and high tensile stress was produced in the lower
distal region.
Figure 8 shows the position of teeth at CT ⫽ 500
␮m/kPa. The anchor teeth intruded 0.9 mm and moved
0.1 mm in the buccal direction. As a result, the anchor
teeth tipped 1° in the buccal direction. These amounts
of tooth movement were smaller than those without the
retainer (Fig 4). In the sagittal view, the molar rotated
24°, and the center of rotation moved upward about 0.8
mm; this was about the same as without the retainer
(Fig 4). However, in the occlusal view, the second
molar rotated, ␣ ⫽ 21°. Furthermore, in the sagittal
view, the molar tipped 6° in the buccolingual direction.
Figure 9 shows the rotational angle of the second
molar in the occlusal plane, ␣, and the buccal move-
ment of the anchor teeth, ␦, when changing the bending
angle of the spring arm, ␤. The angles ␣ and ␤, and the
movement ␦, were defined as shown in Figure 8, a.
With or without the retainer, when increasing ␤, ␦
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
November 2007
Fig 8. Position of teeth after sufficient time elapsed (CT ⫽
500 ␮m/kPa), without the retainer, but with spring-arm
bending. Initial position of the teeth and passive position
of the spring are indicated by hidden red lines. a, Occlusal
view: by spring-arm bending, buccal movement of the
anchor teeth decreased in comparison with Figure 4, a
(without bending). Rotation of the second molar became
pronounced. b, Sagittal view: by spring-arm bending,
intrusion and tipping of the anchor teeth decreased in
comparison with Figure 4, b (without bending). Buccal
tipping of the second molar became pronounced.
decreased and ␣ increased. The magnitude of ␦ with the
retainer was about one fourth of that without the
retainer. The relationship between ␤ and ␣ in both
cases (with and without the retainer) was about the
same.
DISCUSSION
Finite element methods have been used to calculate
stress in the PDL under initial tooth movement.10-15
Recently, long-term orthodontic tooth movements for a
single tooth were calculated.16,17 However, for clinical
situations when many teeth are connected with a wire
and moved at the same time, simulations of long-term
tooth movement have not been reported. In our re-
search, such simulations were accomplished by using 2
calculation techniques. The first technique is the calcu-
lation method of the tooth moving force, ⌬R, which is
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Volume 132, Number 5
a method relating the local action of bone remodeling to
the global movement of the tooth. By using ⌬R, the
amount and direction of the orthodontic tooth move-
ment, ⌬U, can be calculated. The second technique is
the tooth element, which enables the calculation to be
executed on a personal computer. Only simple assump-
tions were adopted as a first step for simulations of this
nature because including uncertain factors in the calcu-
lation would only complicate the method and the
results. The assumptions used in this method are
discussed below.
Teeth and alveolar bone were assumed to be rigid
bodies. We confirmed this assumption with calculations
before the simulation.8 The stress distribution in the
PDL calculated with this assumption was compared
with that calculated by using the finite element method
in which the tooth and the alveolar bone were elastic
bodies. Both stress distributions agreed closely, when
Young’s modulus of the PDL was assumed to be 0.2
MPa.
The PDL has a fiber structure and anisotropy.
Furthermore, the stress-strain relationship is nonlin-
ear.18 The thickness of the PDL varies at different
positions in the root.19 These factors are included in
recent calculations of the stress distribution in the
PDL20,21; however, it has not been clarified how these
factors affect orthodontic tooth movement. Therefore, it
was assumed that the PDL was a linear elastic film and
that its thickness was the same in all teeth.
For the bone remodeling law describing the rela-
tionship between absorption (apposition) of the alveo-
lar bone and mechanical stimulus, various formulas can
be assumed. However, experimental data required for
this calculation were not found. Therefore, it was
simply assumed for purposes of calculation that the
absorption rate was proportional to the mean stress in
the PDL.
The parameter C—the amount of absorption of the
alveolar bone per unit of stress and unit of time—is also
uncertain. In the study by Ziegler and Ingervall,22 a
canine was retracted by a force of 2 N and moved about
5 mm in 100 days; then C is estimated at about 10
␮m/kPa per day. In addition, the data of Lee23 suggest
that C is 1 to 8 ␮m/kPa per day. However, these values
for C are not reliable, since the exact amounts of stress
in the PDL were not estimated in these experiments.24
For these reasons, we used the parameter CT to indicate
the progress of tooth movements. If the value of C is
defined, CT can be converted to real time T. The final
position of the tooth does not depend on C when CT
becomes a sufficiently large value and the wire returns
to its initial shape.
Kojima, Mizuno, and Fukui 635
Fig 9. Buccal movement of the anchor teeth, ␦, and
rotational angle of the second molar, ␣, when changing
the bending angle of spring arm, ␤. Buccal movement ␦
with the retainer was less than that without the retainer.
Buccal movement ␦ decreased with an increase in ␤
and became 0 at ␤ ⫽ 28°. Rotational angle ␣ increased
with an increase in ␤.
Tooth movement produced by molar
uprighting spring
In the anchor teeth, the position of the intrusive
force was located away from the center of resistance to
the buccal side, and a moment tending to produce
buccal crown movement was produced. By this mo-
ment, on the buccal surface of the anchor teeth,
compressive stress was produced in the upper area with
tensile stress in the lower area (Fig 3). This stress
distribution produced the tipping movement of the
anchor teeth. The center of the tipping—ie, the center
of rotation of the buccal crown movement—is located
on the border between the compressive and tensile
stresses. Its position was about one third of the root
length from the apex. By this analysis, the mechanism
of anchor tooth movement was clarified and the amount
of movement shown quantitatively. In Figure 4, the
second molar, initially tipped 30°, was uprighted by
22°; then the anchor teeth moved 1.1 mm in the buccal
direction and tipped 6°. If the upright spring is reacti-
vated and the second molar is completely uprighted
(30°), the movement and tipping of the anchor teeth
would be 1.5 mm and 8°, respectively. We have no data
to know whether this amount of anchor tooth move-
ment becomes a problem in clinical situations.
On the other hand, the molar did not tip in the
buccolingual direction. As shown in Figure 4, a, a
straight line, LC, extending from the loading point, L,
parallel to the mesiodistal line of the second molar,
passed close to the center of the second molar. In this
case, the moment tending to move the molar crown in
636 Kojima, Mizuno, and Fukui
the buccolingual direction was not produced, so the
molar did not tip in that direction. Buccolingual tipping
of the second molar depends on the loading position, L,
and not on the bracket position, B. As a result of this
calculation, buccolingual tipping of the second molar is
not a problem.
Effects of the retainer
When the left canine and the first premolar were
connected to the right ones by the retainer, the right
teeth supported part of the intrusive force acting on the
anchor wire. The stress acting on the left anchor teeth
(Fig 5) was less than that without the retainer (Fig 3).
Also, the buccal movement and the tipping angle of the
anchor teeth (Fig 6) was only about one third of that
without the retainer (Fig 4). On the other hand, the
movement of the molar (Fig 6) was similar to that
without the retainer (Fig 4). Thus, the effects of the
retainer, recommended for clinical treatments,1 were
confirmed quantitatively. When the root length of the
anchor teeth is shorter, the retainer will be especially
useful in preventing movement of the anchor teeth.
Effects of bending the spring arm
When the spring arm was bent toward the lingual
side before activation, the initial activation produced a
force tending to move the anchor teeth in the lingual
direction. This force produced a moment in the oppo-
site direction of that produced by the intrusive force.
These moments canceled each other out, and the stress
of the anchor teeth (Fig 7) became less than that
without wire bending (Fig 3). The movement of the
anchor teeth became smaller (Fig 8) than that without
bending (Fig 4). The buccal movement of the anchor
teeth, ␦, became 0 at the bending angle of ␤ ⫽ 28°
(Fig 9).
On the other hand, the initial activation of the
spring produced a force tending to move the second
molar in the buccal direction. This force produced a
moment tending to rotate the molar in the occlusal
plane. This force and moment produced stress distribu-
tion on the buccal surface of the molar; ie, compressive
stress in the upper mesial area and tensile stress in the
lower distal area (Fig 7). This stress distribution rotated
the molar in the occlusal plane and moved the crown in
the buccal direction. The rotational angle of the molar,
␣, reached about 70% of the bending angle of the
spring arm, ␤ (Fig 9). These movements are unfavor-
able for molar uprighting. However, when an initially
rotated molar is being corrected, this technique can be
used to advantage.
The tooth movements shown here are considered
from a mechanical point of view. However, calculated
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
November 2007
results are necessary to make quantitative comparisons
with experimental results. When calculated results do
not agree with experimental results, we will examine
the assumptions and improve the calculation method.
Since tooth movements under clinical conditions can be
simulated by this method, the simulation results can be
compared directly with the clinical results. However,
the data required for the calculation could not be found
in previous studies. Hence, confirmation of the tooth
movements predicted by our results must be left for the
future.
CONCLUSIONS
The 3D finite element method was used to simulate
uprighting of the second molar with a molar uprighting
spring. The effects of a retainer and spring-arm bending
on the tooth movements were shown quantitatively.
The retainer was useful in reducing the movement of
the anchor teeth. The same effects could be achieved by
bending the spring arm in the lingual direction, but this
greatly rotated the molar in the occlusal plane and
tipped it in the buccal direction. The usefulness of such
mechanical simulations to predict orthodontic tooth
movement in clinical situations was demonstrated.
REFERENCES
1. Proffit WR. Contemporary orthodontics. St Louis: Mosby; 1986.
2. Williams JK, Cook PA, Isaacson KF, Thom AR. Fixed orthodon-
tic appliances—principles and practice. Oxford: Butterworth-
Heinemann; 1995.
3. Mulligan TF. Common sense mechanics. J Clin Orthod 1979;13:
588-94, 676-83, 762-6, 808-15; and 1980;14:53-7, 98-103,
180-9, 265-72, 336-42, 412-6, 481-8, 546-53, 637-47, 716-23,
788-95.
4. Burstone CJ, Koenig HA. Creative wire bending—the force
system from step and V bends. Am J Orthod Dentfacial Orthop
1988;93:59-67.
5. Siatkowski RE. Force system analysis of V-bend sliding mechan-
ics. J Clin Orthod 1994:28:539-46.
6. Kojima Y, Fukui H. A numerical analysis of tooth movement by
orthodontic forces. J Jpn Soc Dent Mat Device 2002;21:40-8.
7. Kojima Y, Fukui H. Numerical simulation of canine retraction by
sliding mechanics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2004;127:
542-51.
8. Kojima Y, Takano S, Fukui H, Mizutani N, Hasegawa J. A
simple method for calculating the initial tooth mobility and stress
distribution in the periodontal ligament. J Jpn Soc Dent Mat
Device 1999;18:210-6.
9. Goto T. Experimental study on the physiological mobility of the
tooth. Shikwa Gakuho 1971;71:1415-44.
10. Tanne K, Sakuda M, Burstone CJ. Three-dimensional finite
element analysis for stress in the periodontal tissue by orthodon-
tic forces. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1987;92:499-505.
11. Jeon PD, Turley PK, Moon HB, Ting K. Analysis of stress in the
periodontium of the maxillary first molar with a three-dimen-
sional finite element method. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop
1999;115:267-74.
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics Kojima, Mizuno, and Fukui 637
Volume 132, Number 5

12. Chang YI, Shin SJ, Baek SH. Three-dimensional finite element
analysis in distal en masse movement of the maxillary dentition
with the multiloop edgewise archwire. Eur J Orthod 2004;26:
339-45.
13. Jeon PD, Turley PK, Ting K. Three-dimensional finite element
analysis of stress in the periodontal ligament of the maxillary first
molar with simulated bone loss. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop
2001;119:498-504.
14. Puente MI, Galban L, Cobo JM. Initial stress differences between
tipping and torque movements. A three-dimensional finite ele-
ment analysis. Eur J Orthod 1996;18:329-39.
15. Isacson RJ, Lindauer SJ, Conley P. Responses of 3-dimensional
arch wires to vertical v-bends: comparisons with existing 2-di-
mensional data in the lateral view. Semin Orthod 1995;1:57-63.
16. Bourauel C, Vollmer D, Jager A. Application of bone remodeling
theories in the simulation of orthodontic tooth movements. J
Orofac Orthop 2000;61:266-79.
17. Schneider J, Geiger M, Sander FG. Numerical experiments on
long-time orthodontic tooth movement. Am J Orthod Dentofacial
Orthop 2002;121:257-65.
18. Toms SR, Lemons JE, Bartolucci AA, Eberhardt AW. Nonlinear
stress-strain behavior of periodontal ligament under orthodontic
loading. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2002;122:174-9.
19. Coolidge ED. The thickness of the human periodontal mem-
brane. J Am Dent Assoc Dent Cos 1937;24:1260-70. Fig A1. Surface model of tooth used to calculate the
20. Qian H, Chen J, Katona TR. The influence of PDL principal
tooth element. The PDL over the root is divided in
fibers in a 3-dimensional analysis of orthodontic tooth move-
ment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001;120:272-9.
small triangular regions where stresses are defined as
21. Toms SR, Eberhardt AW. A nonlinear finite element analysis of shown.
the periodontal ligament under orthodontic tooth loading. Am J
Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;123:657-65.
22. Ziegler P, Ingervall B. A clinical study of maxillary canine within the PDL, and ␶2 and ␶3 are shearing stresses
retraction with a retraction spring and with sliding mechanics. acting on the inner and outer surfaces of the PDL.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1989;95:99-106. The stiffness matrix of the tooth element shows the
23. Lee BW. Relationship between tooth-movement rate and esti-
relationship between the displacements of the tooth
mated pressure applied. J Dent Res 1965;44:1053.
24. Ren Y, Maltha JC, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM. Optimum force and the forces applied to the tooth. It is calculated by
magnitude for orthodontic tooth movement: a systematic litera- the procedure below.
ture review. Angle Orthod 2003;73:86-92. The position vector of the small triangular region i
from the loading position is denoted by ri. A local
APPENDIX coordinate of 1, 2, and 3 is defined in each region, and
1. Calculation of the stiffness matrix of tooth unit vectors n1i, n2i and n3i are defined along the 1, 2,
elements8 and 3 axes, as shown in Figure A1. Considering a rigid
motion of the tooth, translation u ⫽ (ux, uy, uz) and
The surface model of the tooth used in the calcula-
rotation ␪ ⫽ ( ␪x, ␪y, ␪z), the displacement vector at i
tion is shown Figure A1. As an example, a mandibular
can be written as
canine is shown. The tooth element for any tooth can be
calculated by the same procedure. d ⫽ u ⫹ ␪ ⫻ ri (A-1)
The thickness of the PDL is denoted by t. The
inner surface of the PDL is bonded to the dentin, and Then the average strains in the region i are assumed
the outer surface is bonded to the alveolar bone. The to be
PDL is divided into small triangular regions, as
␧1i ⫽ d · n1i ⁄ t, ␥2i ⫽ d · n2i ⁄ t, ␥3i ⫽ d · n3i ⁄ t (A-2)
shown in Figure A1. These regions are not the
elements used in the finite element method. In Figure where ε1i is the normal strain, and ␥2i, and ␥3i are the
A1, the surface of the tooth crown is divided into shearing strains. The deformation of the PDL along
small triangular regions, but these regions are not the tangential directions is constrained by the alveolar
necessary for calculation. Only triangular regions bone and the root of the tooth; ie, normal strains in
over the PDL are necessary. The stresses in each these directions are assumed to be 0, ε2i ⫽ ε3i ⫽ 0.
small region were assumed as shown in Figure A1, The stresses in the small region i are obtained from
where ␴1, ␴2, and ␴3 are normal stresses acting the stress-strain relations as
638 Kojima, Mizuno, and Fukui American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
November 2007

␴1i ⫽ E
␧1i, ␴2i ⫽ ␴3i ⫽ ␯␴1i ⁄ (1 ⫺ ␯), ␶2i ⫽ G␥2i, given a unit displacement, ux⫽ 1. Each tooth element
has 1 node, and its degree of freedom is 6 (3 transla-
␶3i ⫽ G␥3i (A-3) tions and 3 rotations).
E(1 ⫹ ␯) E
E
⫽ , G⫽ 2. Calculation of orthodontic tooth movement6
(1 ⫹ ␯)(1 ⫺ 2␯) 2(1 ⫹ ␯)
where E is Young’s modulus and ␯ is Poisson’s ratio Denoting the mean stress acting in small region i by
of the PDL. ␴mi (⫽(␴1i ⫹ ␴2i ⫹ ␴3i)/3), the amount of bone
By multiplying the area of the small region Ai by absorption in a small time increment, ⌬T, is ⫺C ␴
these stresses, the force vector ⌬pi for each small mi⌬T, where C is the amount of absorption per unit of

region i is stress and unit of time. Absorption occurs at ␴mi ⬍0

(compressive stress), and apposition occurs at ␴mi ⬎0
⌬pi ⫽ (␶1in1i ⫹ ␶2in2i ⫹ ␶3in3i)Ai (A-4)
(tensile stress). The normal strain in the PDL produced
Summing up, ⌬pi over the PDL, the total force by this action can be written as ⌬ε1i ⫽ ⫺C ␴mi⌬T/t. At
vector P ⫽ (Px, Py, Pz), and the total moment vector M this time, the corresponding normal elastic stress
⫽ (Mz, My, Mz) applying to the tooth at the loading
position becomes ⌬␴li ⫽ E ' ⌬␧li ⫽ ⫺E ' C␴mi⌬T ⁄ t (A-6)
N N is produced in the PDL. This stress acts on the surface
P⫽ 兺 ⌬p ,
i⫽1
i M⫽ 兺r ⫻ ⌬p
i⫽1
i i of the root and moves the tooth. The forces ⌬q ⫽ (qx,
qy, qz) and the moments ⌬m ⫽ (mx, my, mz) moving the
where N is the number of the small regions over the
tooth are calculated by taking the sum of ␴1i over the
root.
PDL as
The relationship between the displacement (rota- N N
tion) UT ⫽ [u, ␪] of the tooth and the force (moment)
applying to the tooth FT ⫽ [P, M] where the superscript
⌬q ⫽ 兺 ⌬␴ n A ,
i⫽1
1i 1i i ⌬m⫽ 兺r ⫻ ⌬␴ n A
i⫽1
i 1i 1i i

T is the transpose of matrix, can be written as KU ⫽ F. (A-7)

The matrix K is the stiffness matrix of the tooth
element. Each element Kij of K can be calculated as the
forces produced by a unit of displacement. For exam-
ple, K11, K21, K31, K41, K51, and K61 are equal to Px, Py,
Pz, Mx, My, and Mz, respectively, when the tooth is
The tooth movement produced by bone remodel-
ing during ⌬T, denoted by ⌬U, can be calculated by
substituting the tooth-moving force ⌬RT ⫽ [⌬q, ⌬m] into
K⌬U ⫽ ⌬R, where K is the stiffness matrix of the tooth
element.