Authors :
Dr.K. Anusha Ravindra; Dr. Malathi Dayalan
Volume/Issue :
Volume 8 - 2023, Issue 2 - February
Google Scholar :
https://bit.ly/3IIfn9N
Scribd :
https://bit.ly/3KPh1uH
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7691914
Abstract :
The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare
stress distribution, deformation and retentive force of
three different partial denture framework in two
removable partial denture designs.
Materials & Methodology:
CBCT images of Kennedy’s class I & II
mandibular arches were converted to STL file.
HYPERMESH 10 software was used to convert 3D
images into numerical models. Geometric model of the
Kennedy’s class I & II frameworks were created using
ANSYS 18 software and then was inserted in the bone
model. Material properties of titanium alloy, acetal
resin and PEEK was taken from the standard
textbooks. The models were then transferred through
the solid works stimulation program for finite element
analysis to evaluate stress distribution, retention and
deformation forces. A vertical force of 120N was
applied on the occlusal surface of the teeth.
Results:
The stresses induced on the residual ridges in
Kennedy’s class I for titanium, acetal resin & Peek
frame work was 5.08056Mpa, 5.08032Mpa
&5.07888Mpa respectively and on primary abutment
teeth was 1.75897Mpa, 2.43683Mpa & 2.34344Mpa
respectively. The stresses induced on to the class I
framework for titanium, acetal resin & PEEK was
30.4465Mpa, 10.2463Mpa &8.28491Mpa respectively.
The stresses induced on the residual ridges in
Kennedy’s class II for titanium, acetal resin & PEEK
frame work was 4.50508Mpa, 3.45925Mpa &
3.53304Mpa respectively and on primary abutment was
1.9083Mpa, 2.52222Mpa &2.48319Mpa respectively.
The stresses induced on to the class II framework for
titanium, acetal resin & PEEK was 28.5811Mpa,
11.0531Mpa & 9.03564Mpa respectively. The retentive
force for titanium, acetal resin & PEEK clasps was
1615.9N, 335N &1260.1N respectively in Kennedy’s
class I framework. The retentive force for titanium,
acetal resin & PEEK clasps was 1721.4N, 310.5N &
1155.4N respectively in Kennedy’s class II framework.
The deformation force for class I titanium, acetal resin
&PEEK clasps, was 0.009087mm, 0.00933mm &
0.009355mm respectively. The deformation force for
class II titanium, acetal resin & PEEK clasps
was0.004304mm, 0.004896mm & 0.004628mm
respectively.
Conclusion:
No significant difference between the von mises
stress on the residual ridge was observed in Kennedy’s
class I for all the three frameworks.Von mises stress on
residual ridge from titanium framework was slightly
higher when compared to acetal resin and PEEK
frameworks for Kennedy’s class II.Von mises stress on
the primary abutment teeth was the highest in Acetal
resin framework and the least in titanium framework
for both Kennedy’s class I & II. Retention force was
highest in titanium clasp and least in acetal resin clasp
in both Kennedy’s class I & II. Deformation was highest
in acetal resin clasp and least in titanium clasp in both
Kennedy’s class I & II.
Keywords :
Removable Partial Denture, Finite Element Analysis, Titanium, Acetal Resin, PEEK, Stress Distribution, Deformation, Retention.
The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare
stress distribution, deformation and retentive force of
three different partial denture framework in two
removable partial denture designs.
Materials & Methodology:
CBCT images of Kennedy’s class I & II
mandibular arches were converted to STL file.
HYPERMESH 10 software was used to convert 3D
images into numerical models. Geometric model of the
Kennedy’s class I & II frameworks were created using
ANSYS 18 software and then was inserted in the bone
model. Material properties of titanium alloy, acetal
resin and PEEK was taken from the standard
textbooks. The models were then transferred through
the solid works stimulation program for finite element
analysis to evaluate stress distribution, retention and
deformation forces. A vertical force of 120N was
applied on the occlusal surface of the teeth.
Results:
The stresses induced on the residual ridges in
Kennedy’s class I for titanium, acetal resin & Peek
frame work was 5.08056Mpa, 5.08032Mpa
&5.07888Mpa respectively and on primary abutment
teeth was 1.75897Mpa, 2.43683Mpa & 2.34344Mpa
respectively. The stresses induced on to the class I
framework for titanium, acetal resin & PEEK was
30.4465Mpa, 10.2463Mpa &8.28491Mpa respectively.
The stresses induced on the residual ridges in
Kennedy’s class II for titanium, acetal resin & PEEK
frame work was 4.50508Mpa, 3.45925Mpa &
3.53304Mpa respectively and on primary abutment was
1.9083Mpa, 2.52222Mpa &2.48319Mpa respectively.
The stresses induced on to the class II framework for
titanium, acetal resin & PEEK was 28.5811Mpa,
11.0531Mpa & 9.03564Mpa respectively. The retentive
force for titanium, acetal resin & PEEK clasps was
1615.9N, 335N &1260.1N respectively in Kennedy’s
class I framework. The retentive force for titanium,
acetal resin & PEEK clasps was 1721.4N, 310.5N &
1155.4N respectively in Kennedy’s class II framework.
The deformation force for class I titanium, acetal resin
&PEEK clasps, was 0.009087mm, 0.00933mm &
0.009355mm respectively. The deformation force for
class II titanium, acetal resin & PEEK clasps
was0.004304mm, 0.004896mm & 0.004628mm
respectively.
Conclusion:
No significant difference between the von mises
stress on the residual ridge was observed in Kennedy’s
class I for all the three frameworks.Von mises stress on
residual ridge from titanium framework was slightly
higher when compared to acetal resin and PEEK
frameworks for Kennedy’s class II.Von mises stress on
the primary abutment teeth was the highest in Acetal
resin framework and the least in titanium framework
for both Kennedy’s class I & II. Retention force was
highest in titanium clasp and least in acetal resin clasp
in both Kennedy’s class I & II. Deformation was highest
in acetal resin clasp and least in titanium clasp in both
Kennedy’s class I & II.
Keywords :
Removable Partial Denture, Finite Element Analysis, Titanium, Acetal Resin, PEEK, Stress Distribution, Deformation, Retention.
